ReliefWeb

Question Based on a sample of high value protracted complex emergency humanitarian appeals and responses please provide information on: (i) the factors that contribute to the sums requested and the coverage of appeals; (ii) characteristics of how the appeal sums and their coverage changed over time as the crises evolved.

Contents

1. Overview
2. Contributing factors and changes over time
3. Case studies
4. Data sources
5. References
6. Overview

This rapid review identifies some of the political economy factors which affect funding decisions in protracted complex humanitarian emergencies. These are usually understood as ‘a multifaceted humanitarian crisis in a country, region or society where there is total or considerable breakdown of authority resulting from internal or external conflict and which requires a multi-sectoral, international response that goes beyond the mandate or capacity of any single agency and/or the ongoing United Nations country programme’ (Inter-Agency Standing Committee 1994, cited in OCHA 2002).

While there is plenty of information available on the amounts requested and given, broken down by donor agencies, countries, sources, and occasionally sectors, there is much less publically available information on how and why donors arrive at these specific amounts. It is likely that these discussions remain internal to funding agencies. Most available literature examines the impact of programmes, or provides data on value of disbursements, rather than the reasons behind the decisions. In general, the literature does not comment much on which sectors or groups receive funding, but provides a higher-level overview of total sums and country-level funding. This makes it difficult to establish which, if any, demographics leverage more or less funding.

It is possible to derive some key factors from the available literature. Most of these apply both to original appeal sums and in stimulating changes in existing funding. There is no clear divide between these two categories, especially in protracted crisis situations, where agencies can work on an issue for a long time.

The determining factors are:

• Needs-based allocation: This is a core principle of humanitarian assistance. All funders use needs assessments in their original funding allocations, and many changes to funding are preceded by needs assessments.

• Tipping points: Most protracted crises receive a steady and/or low level of funding but experience sudden increases in funding flows if a particular incident or need rapidly escalates the situation.

• Geopolitical concerns: Different crises receive different amounts of funding depending on their strategic importance to donor countries.

• Resilience: There is a general global shift towards more funding for resilience rather than emergency response in protracted crises. This can cause funding changes during a crisis, when opportunities to develop resilience become available.

• Media and public interest: A high level of interest usually stimulates funding, but complex and protracted emergencies rarely draw the necessary public and media interest.

• Sector priority: Certain sectors receive more funding as they are perceived as life-saving. Some are continually under-funded.

• Absorptive capacity: Funders usually work with local implementing partners and these are only able to absorb and use a certain amount of funds.

The paper outlines a number of case studies and provides links to a few websites which keep up-to-date statistics on funding.

An overview of the main funding mechanisms for protracted crises can be found in a previous Helpdesk report: ‘Multi-Year Funding to Humanitarian Organisations in Protracted Crises’ (Walton, 2011).