Appeals & Response Plans
- Tropical Cyclone Luban - Oct 2018
- Somalia: Polio Outbreak - Aug 2018
- Tropical Cyclone Mekunu - May 2018
- Tropical Cyclone Sagar - May 2018
- Somalia: Flash Floods - Apr 2018
- Somalia: Measles Outbreak - Dec 2016
- Somalia: Floods - May 2016
- Somalia: Cholera Outbreak - Apr 2016
- Tropical Cyclone Megh - Nov 2015
- Tropical Cyclone Chapala - Nov 2015
Maps & Infographics
Most read reports
- Integrated food security, nutrition, health, WASH and livelihoods response to the drought in Somalia
- Enhancing the Somali Livestock Trade (ESOLT)
- Constraints and Complexities of Information Analysis in Humanitarian Emergencies: Evidence from Somalia
- Same Tune, New Key: Al Shabaab Adapts in the Face of Increased Military Pressure
- 11 mothers from one village in Somalia die giving birth in one week
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.
Many humanitarian organisations work in active conflict zones under direct threat of violence. This significantly constrains their operations, and makes it difficult to deliver the aid people need. We looked at two questions: how many aid agencies are able to get access to the most dangerous places? And how do access constraints affect ‘humanitarian coverage’ – the degree to which people in need are being reached by the aid system?
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.
Donors and implementing organizations are alarmed by the gap between humanitarian needs in today’s most acute crises and the apparently diminishing access to populations in need. The total number of attacks against humanitarian aid workers has risen starkly over the past decade, and humanitarians face myriad barriers when trying to deliver assistance.