Attachments
The subject matter of this lessons learning review is the Strengthening Movement Coordination and Cooperation (SMCC) initiative. SMCC aims to improve the way Movement partners work together and enhance coordination and cooperation, especially in response to medium to large-scale emergencies. The SMCC initiative is anchored in the Statutes of the Movement which affirm that all partners shall cooperate with each other according to their roles defined by their respective mandates. The roles and responsibilities, as well as the interaction between Movement partners are therefore defined by the Seville Agreement 2.0.
The six SMCC Priority areas may be summarised as:
1. Ensuring Movement-wide consistent data management
2. Pursuing the development of the interoperability of systems
3. Understanding and utilizing the capacities of Movement components
4. Ensuring Movement readiness for response by employing existing SMCC tools
5. Promoting complementary domestic and international response
6. Enhancing the scalability of the response
Efforts to work together better as a Movement are not new. The process to strengthen coordination and cooperation within the Movement gained significant momentum in 2013, with the adoption of Resolution 4 at the Council of Delegates (CoD) in Sydney, Australia. This launched a comprehensive and inclusive Movement-wide consultation process in 2014–2015, with the participation of over 140 National Societies (NSs).
The results of the consultations and ensuing recommendations were presented to the 2015 CoD in a progress report1 which identified the necessity of enhanced Movement coordination in humanitarian crises and a strong willingness among Movement components to work together to fulfil the Movement`s common goals. This positive momentum and spirit are reflected in Resolution 12 , which was adopted by consensus at the CoD in 2015 and tasked the Movement with implementing the SMCC Plan of Action (PoA) for 2015–2017.3
By 2017, the initiative had gained significant momentum, improving the Movement’s capacity for efficient large-scale emergency responses. Directly supported by over 40 NSs, implementation of SMCC has initiated a gradual change process and fostered a positive “SMCC spirit” among Movement components, positioning the Movement on the “front foot” in the evolving humanitarian ecosystem.4 A significant achievement has been the development of the SMCC Toolkit5 endorsed by CoD resolutions in 2013, 2015, 2017 and 2019, and its subsequent incorporation into the Seville Agreement 2.0 - thereby institutionalising the use of SMCC tools.
From the onset of SMCC in 2013, mainly anecdotal evidence has been gathered from the implementation of Movement coordination in operations and it has been difficult to measure the results of the initiative. Subsequently, it was agreed to gain more substantive evidence of what is working and what is hampering Movement coordination through learning lessons from two main Movement operational responses - Ukraine (a conflict response) and Pakistan (a disaster response) - which have either started after and/or continued after the adoption of the new normative framework, the Seville Agreement 2.0.
The purpose of the review was to highlight best practices and identify challenges of Movement coordination in large-scale emergencies and to inform areas for improvement. The specific review objectives were to:
▪ Assess the extent to which Movement components are fulfilling their commitments to SMCC in emergency operations and across the SMCC initiative.
▪ Identify whether the SMCC Ambitions are relevant and how they have been fulfilled in both selected emergencies.
▪ Identify key SMCC enablers and challenges at country, regional and headquarters levels.
▪ Assess the relevance of SMCC guidance and tools used to support Movement coordination.
▪ Propose recommendations for strengthening SMCC implementation in current and future responses to crises.
The review was commissioned by Members of the Steering Committee of the SMCC process. The primary audience for this review is the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) leadership and senior management, leadership of NSs involved in the response contexts, plus the Movement as a whole as signatories to the SMCC initiative. The review will contribute to informing and framing the way forward for Movement coordination in future large-scale emergencies and be used to report on SMCC implementation during the current CoD period.
The review was conducted between June and November 2023 by an independent external consultant. The review method combined a literature review with sixty-one (61) semistructured interviews (ICRC 12 female, 15 male; IFRC 9 female, 13 male; Partner National Society (PNS) 2 female, 5 male; Host National Society (HNS) staff, 1 female, 4 male). SMCC country case studies were developed for both contexts.
The countries selected for the review in terms of a Movement Coordination context were very different in type. Ukraine exhibited Movement Coordination in its fullest form, with a complex intertwining of the HNS, IFRC, ICRC and PNSs, whereas Pakistan was a context exhibiting primarily Membership Coordination (HNS, IFRC and PNSs) with very limited ICRC engagement other than in its exclusive geographical area of operation (and was thus not representative of a collective response context). In Ukraine, SMCC tools and processes were employed extensively (benefiting from being an original SMCC laboratory since 2016), whereas in Pakistan few tools or processes were employed.