Attachments
Climate change is a threat multiplier, exacerbating and compounding needs in places where vulnerabilities are highest and where humanitarians are already stretched. Of the 15 most climate exposed of vulnerable countries in 2022, 12 already had humanitarian country plans and Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) allocations.
From drought-affected Afghanistan, famine-like parts of Somalia and the Horn of Africa, to historic flooding in Pakistan and global heatwaves, the humanitarian system is unaccustomed to such a widespread and rapid succession of crises. And it will only get worse – the impacts of climate change are anticipated to lead to skyrocketing humanitarian costs exceeding US$ 20bn per year.
Despite the increasing prevalence of disasters, there is uneven awareness across the sector about the nature, scale and type of crises that climate change will bring and confusion about the different response options. A recent mapping by Groupe URD found many humanitarian actors are simply unaware of the need to take climate into account in their programming with increasingly evident gaps in adapting technical areas such as WASH, shelter, food security and a sector-wide lag in understanding the skills and guidance needed to adjust.
What is clear is that the climate crisis will greatly increase the scale of need, due to an increased quantity and intensity of disasters, even further stretching a system struggling to keep up with the current pace of disasters and rising needs. It is also expected to change the nature of crises, as less common natural hazards, such as heatwaves, become more common, while others, such as typhoons, begin acting in new and less predictable ways.
But what makes the climate crisis a real game-changer are the ways it will directly confront the overall business model of international humanitarian action, which at its core functions on the basis of voluntary financial contributions to Global North-based organisations to respond post hoc to the impacts of crises. Aid’s model will be challenged practically and normatively:
-As the Global North is more impacted by climate crises, the tendency to address needs at home as opposed to abroad may increase, as was seen with COVID-19, reducing humanitarian spend.
- Normatively, the framing of assistance to disaster affected countries will increasingly be framed as one of justice and reparations by developed countries, with funds directed to national governments for managing and responding to disasters.
-The need for integrated approaches to risk and disaster and emphasis on resilience will necessitate greater emphasis on the capacity, leadership and governance of local actors.
- The rising case for addressing the potential impacts of disasters before they occur challenges a response-oriented model.
It is unlikely the global political community will consider a Global North-led humanitarian response mechanism to be the primary way in which it addresses the impacts of cascading perma-crises arising from the climate emergency – in the face of increased scale of need and the changing nature of crises, humanitarian actors will need to find different ways to support people affected by crisis.