GPPi publishes paper on inequities of humanitarian assistance

GPPi has released a new discussion paper on humanitarian inequity, a problem that results from donors’ limited capacity to respond to the needs of different countries, population groups and sectors. In the paper, GPPi researchers Andrea Binder, Kai Koddenbrock and András Horváth reflect on why some crises receive attention while others do not, and suggest that uneven resource distribution is inevitable. They proceed to outline concrete paths for Germany to address these inequalities. The research conducted for this paper was funded by the German Foreign Office.

For two decades there has been growing concern in international humanitarian assistance with ​“forgotten crises” and ​“underfunded sectors.” These terms were conceived as an advocacy tool to help mobilize funds and awareness. They have helped to raise the profile of humanitarian actors and direct attention to overlooked places and people.

But the authors suggest abandoning these terms, as they inadvertently dilute a sober analysis of the underlying reasons for such unequal distributions. Crises, it is argued, are not simply forgotten. They result from the necessary prioritization of some issues. In choosing where to concentrate finite financial and political means to address global needs, moral decisions are at play. Humanitarians will not always even out imbalances in distribution, but may accept disparities as unavoidable results.

The authors show that humanitarian actors tend to base the distribution of their financial and political means on one of two normative principles: duty-based distribution, which prioritizes responding to the greatest needs, or results-based distribution, which strives to reduce overall needs and thus takes into account practical factors such as media attention, interests and cost-effectiveness. The first approach focuses on individual but deep-reaching solutions, whereas the second path aims for a broader impact.

Based on this discussion, the authors propose three possible courses of action for the German Foreign Office. They outline different implications that choosing a duty-based or results-based approach would have on Germany’s humanitarian performance and its ability to shape the humanitarian discourse internationally. The paper also highlights the importance of assuring independence of humanitarian NGOs in Germany, as their decisions also shape the upcoming reform of German humanitarian assistance.

Read the executive summary and download the full paper: Reflections on the Inequities of Humanitarian Assistance.