* Any views expressed in this opinion piece are those of the author and not of Thomson Reuters Foundation.
Op-ed from Oxfam's humanitarian director, Jane Cocking
Jane Cocking is Oxfam's humanitarian director. Her comments are in response to Oxfam's report Crises in a New World Order
In September 2009, an earthquake hit Sumatra, Indonesia. Shortly afterwards, the first Oxfam staff arrived. They found thousands of people whose homes had been damaged or destroyed already living in shelters made from tarpaulins pre-positioned by Oxfam, and distributed by local organisations in the disaster’s immediate aftermath.
Such local action will be the future of humanitarian aid. In a world where multiple ‘mega-disasters’, like the earthquake in Haiti and floods in Pakistan, have almost overwhelmed the international system’s ability to respond, a new model is emerging. It values local NGO and civil society partners more than ever before. Their local knowledge and proximity to events makes them key to providing efficient and effective humanitarian responses, which can meet future demand. It also recognises the vital role of national governments and local authorities.
In much of the world, Oxfam’s aid increasingly flows through local organisations. In countries where conflict and instability make it too difficult for international NGOs to operate, such as Somalia, working with local partners is the only way to reach populations that are in critical need of continued support. The delivery of aid by local groups can also strengthen communities and build local resilience.
This marks a shift in the delivery of humanitarian aid that Oxfam welcomes wholeheartedly, but it is seismic and brings with it ethical and practical challenges.
The capacity of crisis-affected countries is enormously varied. Some states are increasingly effective in preparing for and responding to emergencies, conscious of their responsibilities to their citizens, and willing to meet them. In Bangladesh, for example, the government provided more than half of the response to 2009’s cyclone Aila, with 37 per cent coming from international NGOs like Oxfam, and nine per cent from the UN.
In almost every region however, there are governments that are not prepared, lacking the capacity or political will – or both – to meet the humanitarian demands of crisis-affected populations. The combination of effective state structures and active NGOs and civil society groups is too often absent in countries vulnerable to disasters.
The challenge for international NGOs is to build capacity among local organisations, offering them the technical and financial support that they need to deliver rapid and high-quality emergency responses; and at the same time encourage states and support states to fulfil their responsibilities to assist their own citizens in emergencies.
Significantly, this is a long-term project, and it does not free humanitarian agencies from having to act fast when disasters strike now.
In December, tropical storm Sendong killed more than 1,000 people in the Philippines. Prompted by typhoon Ketsana two years earlier, the government had been doing a lot to improve its disaster response. Oxfam, in parallel, had seen itself increasingly as a supporter of local NGOs. But when Sendong struck the island of Mindanao, the local government was unprepared, and we found ourselves having to do more than we had planned.
The work of international NGOs remains as vital as ever. In some places they will respond with their own operations for years to come. Yet, their contribution will be increasingly measured by how they complement and contribute to the efforts of partner organisations operating in crisis-affected countries. The greatest challenge will be to do that while responding to the new crises that will not wait for local capacity to be built up.
