* Any views expressed in this opinion piece are those of the author and not of Thomson Reuters Foundation.
The “accountability question” has long done the rounds in the humanitarian sector. Since 1996, when the Joint Evaluation of the International Response to the Genocide in Rwanda was published, a number of initiatives have been developed to improve both the way humanitarian agencies operate, and their accountability.
At the end of 2011, ActionAid became a full member of the Humanitarian Accountability Partnership (HAP International), the humanitarian sector’s first international self-regulatory body. We’re delighted to be making a public commitment to strengthening the quality of our accountability during emergency responses.
But what is accountability? And why is it important? Who are we accountable to, and for what purpose? And more importantly, how can we ensure accountability in the midst of a humanitarian emergency?
Broadly speaking, accountability can be understood as an obligation on the part of decision makers or those with power to account for the use of that power. Accountability is usually regarded as being about compliance and counting - assigning performance indicators and reporting back. But fundamentally, it is about civilizing power.
At ActionAid, we make a distinction between accountability as a political process and accountability as a management tool. We believe that our primary stakeholders in a humanitarian context are the people who are affected by disasters. But as experience from humanitarian responses shows (post-earthquake Haiti being a case in point), the process of delivering aid to those in need often ignores or undermines local capacity, and can leave disaster-hit communities further disenfranchised by the very efforts which aim to help them survive and recover. Delivering “downward accountability” (the term given to accountability focused on those affected by disasters, as opposed to “upward accountability” – the traditional concept of accounting to donors) is therefore a core component of all our emergency responses. By seeking to empower communities to demand quality and effective humanitarian interventions, accountability by default becomes a political project.
In the aftermath of the 2004 Asian tsunami ActionAid supported communities to come together to audit our programmes – providing training on finance and accounting so they could identify for themselves their entitlements and monitor the flow of funds. At Public Hearings we brought together community members, ActionAid staff, partners, government officials, members of religious institutions, media and academics, amongst others, to collectively analyse programme plans and budgets, and to identify successes and areas for improvement. Right now, in Kenya, we’re using mobile phone technology to provide communities affected by the drought and food crisis with vital information, and to act as a channel through which they can report complaints and issues of concern to our staff.
But the mechanisms and processes developed to achieve accountability to people affected by disasters are not only for the purpose of accountability as an end in itself. They also enable affected communities to become active participants in leading emergency response and recovery efforts. And further to that, they act as long-term strategic tools to empower people living in poverty and exclusion to claim their rights.
By engaging people affected by disasters in the process of their own recovery, enabling them to complain, to suggest, to request information, to feed back, to voice their concerns and receive redress, – to really articulate what it is they need to be able to rebuild their own lives and to lead that process - we hope that communities can gain the confidence and skills to demand transparency and accountability not only from ActionAid, but from other NGOs and government too.
At the same time, we recognise the crucial importance of what can be referred to as management accountability. Disaster situations are ripe for the mismanagement and misappropriation of funds and resources. Through their control over essential goods and services - such as food, medical supplies and shelter – non-governmental organisations exercise significant power. That’s why it’s critical that we have in place the systems and processes to be able to monitor our interventions and ensure that the money we are spending and the services we are delivering are appropriate, effective, and demonstrate real value for money.
In ActionAid’s experience, the rights of poor and excluded groups are violated and denied more so in disasters than at any other time. In the chaos and confusion that so often marks the first few days and weeks following an emergency, delivering accountability can be seen as an unnecessary add-on. But the benefits of doing so - for disaster-affected communities, donors, and humanitarian agencies alike - are evident.
Of course, none of this is easy. At ActionAid we continue to strive to achieve the highest standards in all our emergency responses. Our membership of HAP is another step in this challenging but vital process, and one that we look forward to embarking upon.
