Appeals & Response Plans
Maps & Infographics
Headlines (last 30 days)
- DFID: More than five million Afghans will receive emergency life-saving UK aid. 17 Jun 2019
- UNICEF: Afghanistan sees three-fold increase in attacks on schools in one year – UNICEF. 28 May 2019
Most read reports
- IOM: Returns to Afghanistan in 2018: Joint IOM-UNHCR Summary Report [EN/Dari/Pashto]. 25 Jun 2019
- IOM: Return of Undocumented Afghans - Weekly Situation Report (16-22 June 2019). 25 Jun 2019
- OCHA: Afghanistan: Integrated Drought Response, May 2019. 24 Jun 2019
- DFID: Helpdesk Report: K4D - Agriculture in Afghanistan – economic sustainability and subsector viability. 24 Jun 2019
- HNI: Support to victims of Gender Based Violence (GBV) in Afghanistan. 25 Jun 2019
This paper seeks to provide an overview of the operational challenges and emerging good practices in negotiations on humanitarian access with non-state armed groups (NSAGs) during humanitarian responses in high-risk countries. It draws primarily on research conducted for Secure Access in Volatile Environments (SAVE), a three-year research programme (2013–2016) exploring the question of how to deliver a high-quality humanitarian response amid high levels of insecurity.
In insecure environments, where humanitarian staff have limited opportunities for face-to-face interactions with communities, achieving accountability to affected populations is more complex and often requires a mix of approaches. Community feedback mechanisms can be a valuable tool to strengthen community engagement and to improve the quality of humanitarian programming.
In contexts where humanitarian organisations and communities are exposed to violence and insecurity, there are significant challenges not only in ensuring access to assistance, but also in assessing its reach and effectiveness. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) is critical for understanding the performance of aid, ensuring accountability to affected populations and donors, and allowing effective continuation of programmes amid insecurity.
In conflict situations, such as those in Afghanistan and Somalia, simple communication technologies can help researchers and humanitarian organisations collect more accurate data on the effects of humanitarian aid. Electronic surveys taken with smartphones, for example, can automatically assess collected data and prevent implausible responses from being entered. This toolkit weighs the benefits – and the risks – of technology used in aid and development.