This study seeks to analyse and explain how innovation works in emergency communicable disease re... more This study seeks to analyse and explain how innovation works in emergency communicable disease responses. It does so through use of the concept of an innovation ecosystem, the set of factors and actors that come together in ways that might foster or inhibit effective innovation processes. It looks at innovations across the range of activities involved in communicable disease responses in emergencies, and seeks to better understand the ecosystem by reviewing both positive examples, where innovations have emerged and been successful, and more challenging examples, where innovations have not happened, or where they have not been successful. By looking across such contrasting examples, the study aims for a rounded picture of innovation in emergency disease responses, highlighting both the strengths and the weaknesses in the system. There have been some notable successes, amongst them the development of new diagnostics for TB, or new approaches to prevention, for disease surveillance, and treatment and management. There have been successful innovations within crisis responses, such as the response to polio outbreaks in Syria. But there are also notable failures include ineffective utilization of innovations in rapid responses such as Ebola in West Africa, and cholera in Haiti. The study reveals an innovation ecosystem that is good in certain parts, and at certain times, but which is heavily reliant on a number of critical internal actors, and on external capacities and resources. Moreover, the ecosystem is far from systematic, and is not always well suited to the nature and dynamics of emergency work.
This report comes at a time when the international humanitarian community is facing unprecedented... more This report comes at a time when the international humanitarian community is facing unprecedented challenges that are growing in scale, scope and complexity. There is growing awareness of the need for transformational change in what humanitarian actors do and how they do it, to maintain relevance, reputation and impact. This report focuses on new and growing efforts to achieve such change through humanitarian innovation.
This study was commissioned in preparation for the Montreux XIII Donor Conference in November 201... more This study was commissioned in preparation for the Montreux XIII Donor Conference in November 2014. It aims to provide a forward-looking overview of the evolving problems the international humanitarian sector is facing and to suggest potential collective responses to them. The paper first sets humanitarian assistance challenges in a wider context of global trends and issues. Part 2 reviews the broader contexts in which humanitarian action takes place. It presents an overview of the changing global landscape and how this is in different ways challenging, constraining and stretching the humanitarian system. Part 3 switches from the focus on context and needs to look at recent trends in humanitarian response. As well as examining the financial allocation, scope and distribution of aid, it looks across the wider network of actors now involved in humanitarian efforts and explores what this means for the current humanitarian assistance modus operandi. It also reviews key trends and patterns in effectiveness and reform efforts. Part 4 presents an illustrative overview of the evolving nature of such needs by introducing four differentiated models of the interface between the international community, host governments and affected populations that are apparent when looking across the crises of the past 10 years. It reviews some of the lessons from and challenges arising in the international humanitarian sector response to each model. Using existing data, it illustrates some of the key trends in official donor financing across these different models. Part 5 concludes the paper by summarising the key challenges for consideration by participants at the Montreux XIII Conference. The overall purpose of the paper is to inform and support productive and action-oriented dialogue and discussions at the Montreux XIII Conference. It is also hoped that the meeting will be able to contribute to and inform discussions leading up to the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016.
Environmental disruption, mass urbanization and the runaway globalization of trade and transport ... more Environmental disruption, mass urbanization and the runaway globalization of trade and transport have created ideal conditions for infectious diseases to emerge and spread around the world. As SARS, influenza and Ebola have illustrated, disease can no be longer easily contained. Rapid spill-overs from local into regional and global crises reveal major gaps in the global system for dealing with infectious diseases, including a lack of new treatments for some of the world’s biggest pathogenic killers, the rise of antibiotic resistance globally, and insufficient coordination in global health. In response, a number of global solution networks have emerged that address failures of systems, of institutions and of markets. Often inspired or initiated by existing global health actors, these networks have brought together new configurations of public, private, civil and citizen groups to address both emerging and long-standing challenges. At their most ambitious, they aim to change the rules of the global health game—opening up governance structures, sharing knowledge and science, developing new products, creating markets—all with the ultimate aim of preventing and treating diseases, and saving lives. These networks have emerged in an ad-hoc and opportunistic fashion. More strategic thinking and investment are needed to build networking competencies and to identify opportunities for international institutions to best leverage new forms of collaboration and partnership.
The contemporary global community is increasingly interdependent and confronted with systemic ris... more The contemporary global community is increasingly interdependent and confronted with systemic risks posed by the actions and interactions of actors existing beneath the level of formal institutions, often operating outside effective governance structures. Frequently, these actors are human agents, such as rogue traders or aggressive financial innovators, terrorists, groups of dissidents, or unauthorized sources of sensitive or secret information about government or private sector activities. In other instances, influential “actors” take the form of climate change, communications technologies, or socioeconomic globalization. Although these individual forces may be small relative to state governments or international institutions, or may operate on long time scales, the changes they catalyze can pose significant challenges to the analysis and practice of international relations through the operation of complex feedbacks and interactions of individual agents and interconnected systems. We call these challenges “femtorisks,” and emphasize their importance for two reasons. First, in isolation, they may be inconsequential and semiautonomous; but when embedded in complex adaptive systems, characterized by individual agents able to change, learn from experience, and pursue their own agendas, the strategic interaction between actors can propel systems down paths of increasing, even global, instability. Second, because their influence stems from complex interactions at interfaces of multiple systems (e.g., social, financial, political, technological, ecological, etc.), femtorisks challenge standard approaches to risk assessment, as higher-order consequences cascade across the boundaries of socially constructed complex systems. We argue that new approaches to assessing and managing systemic risk in international relations are required, inspired by principles of evolutionary theory and development of resilient ecological systems.
The methods of complex systems research are increasingly being used and valued by international d... more The methods of complex systems research are increasingly being used and valued by international development organisations. These approaches enable a shift away from existing tools and business processes that reinforce a focus on static, simple and linear problems. The evidence is that these methods can help development partners better navigate the complex, dynamic realities they face on a day-to-day basis. This Working Paper summarises the findings of a series of small-scale pilots of selected complex systems methods in DFID’s wealth creation work. The pilots contributed to improved analysis and understanding of a range of wicked problems, and generated tangible findings that were directly utilised in corporate and programmatic decisions. They played a significant role in the design of two large programmes, and provided the evidence base for a root and branch review of DFID processes. The Working Paper concludes that there are considerable opportunities for doing more programming using these methods, with real potential for enhancing development decision-making in the face of wicked problems.
There is a very extensive literature on innovation management with the earliest papers dating bac... more There is a very extensive literature on innovation management with the earliest papers dating back to around 1910. With a focus on ecosystem approaches to innovation, the strategy we have taken in this literature review is to move from some basic concepts on innovation management to an understanding of current best practice and then on to new approaches that are emerging in the context of a changing technological and market landscape.
This report is the second in a series of outputs from the DFID-funded project on the mapping of t... more This report is the second in a series of outputs from the DFID-funded project on the mapping of the Humanitarian Innovation Ecosystem. The project aims to deepen our understanding of just how the humanitarian innovation ecosystem operates in practice and to make recommendations as to how it might be improved to operator in a more efficient and effective manner. In the preceding report (Management, Innovation Ecosystems and Humanitarian Innovation: Literature Review for the Humanitarian Innovation Ecosystem Research Project) the CENTRIM research team explored the key themes in the innovation management literature in order to identify the challenges for those in the humanitarian sector who are seeking to improve the innovation ecosystem. In this complementary report we attempt to generate a qualitative view from an informed sample of individuals who had expert knowledge of the role and nature of innovation and innovation management within the humanitarian aid sector. It was also designed to help develop and test the evolving systems framework that will be used in the five in-depth case studies which will examine the ecosystem in specific sub-sectors of the humanitarian innovation ecosystem. Informants included senior staff in donor organisations, governmental and international agencies, NGOs, as well as management consultants, academics and private sector suppliers. By design, the sample can be described as informed rather than statistically representative. The semi-structured interviews employed a questionnaire based upon six principal components thought to be important in developing a systems map of the humanitarian innovation ecosystem. These include Resources, Roles, Relationships, Rules, Routines, and Results – collectively referred to as the six ‘Rs’. Observations (of which there were between around 1,500 from 46 in-depth interviews) received for each of the components are summarised by sections in the report. (For the purposes of this report we extended our six Rs model to include to further ‘Rs’ – Restrictions and Recommendations.) The interviewees were invited to participate in the study under conditions of anonymity and we have liberally used direct quotes from out sample in order to convey their strength of feeling and so as to reduce the likelihood of misrepresenting their views. It should be emphasised that both the views expressed and the recommendations put forth are those of the interviewees and do not necessary represent the views either of the sponsors of this project nor of the researchers.
Adopting resilience as our core approach to tackling disasters means identifying where different ... more Adopting resilience as our core approach to tackling disasters means identifying where different areas of our work can complement and enhance one another. This includes disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation, social protection, working in fragile contexts and humanitarian preparedness and response. We will start by focusing on the key challenges: the need for common analysis that supports a coherent approach to risk; financing mechanisms that allow early, predictable and sustained commitments; early warning systems that lead to early action; political commitment among governments in countries at risk of disasters and donor agencies; and a stronger interface between development and humanitarian actors. Disaster resilience draws together several strands of DFID’s work, and in the wake of the ongoing global financial crisis has become a concern at the highest level. Increasing efforts are being made in social protection, disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation, aiming to build the resilience of poor and vulnerable communities in developing countries. There is increasing attention being paid to issues such as the resilience of macroeconomic growth2 and ‘crisis-proofing’ progress towards the MDGs3. At the same time, there has been a growing interest in how principles of resilience can be employed in conflict-affected and fragile states.4 This Approach Paper is intended to inform the next phase of DFID’s work on resilience to both natural and man-made disasters,5 by providing a starting point for discussion within the Department and with our partners. Although the focus is on disasters, this is part of a wider process to mainstream resilience across all of DFID’s work which is being led by Policy Division. The paper begins with an outline of what resilience is and sets out a framework to improve understanding of the different elements to be considered in building resilience through DFID’s country operations. It then looks at a range of existing DFID resilience interventions at country and regional levels. The paper concludes by providing suggestions for what DFID can do to strengthen its work in this area and how it can provide strategic leadership across the international system.
This report is an independent evaluation of SDC‘s work in fragile and conflict affected states. T... more This report is an independent evaluation of SDC‘s work in fragile and conflict affected states. The evaluation considers in particular the performance of instruments; analysis, flexibility and adaptability; complementary of SDC and Swiss instruments and SDC‘s role in the wider system. It does not directly address the performance of non-SDC elements of the Swiss government engagement in fragile states, but does look at how well SDC works with these other entities. The scope is multi-sector, addressing all of the instruments being used by SDC.
In February 2011, a remarkable meeting took place at the Santa Fe Institute (SFI) in Santa Fe, N... more In February 2011, a remarkable meeting took place at the Santa Fe Institute (SFI) in Santa Fe, New Mexico. SFI, one of the world’s preeminent academic and research institutions, has pioneered the use of concepts developed in studying complex adaptive systems to address environmental, technological, biological, economic and political challenges. In collaboration with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), SFI brought together a group of policy-makers, academics, development experts, scientists, and Afghan tribal and business leaders. The task was ambitious: to develop new ways of thinking about and working in conflict-affected countries, with a special focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan. The participants had diverse interests, from how to shift to a long-term sustainable development approaches in such countries to how to better counter violent insurgency movements. The work by SFI and others on complexity and emergence in the context of conflict, behavioral dynamics, policy making, strategy formulation and sustainable development served as a framework for these important discussions, enabling participants to explore ways to bridge the gap between foreign policy decision-making process and a more innovative, scientific approach.
Disaster response in an urban environment presents a wide variety of challenges. Humanitarian org... more Disaster response in an urban environment presents a wide variety of challenges. Humanitarian organisations often have more experience of disaster response in rural settings, and local authorities and community organisations may have little experience of planning and executing large-scale activities in response and recovery. This paper draws on experience from the responses to number of urban disasters, including earthquake responses in Bam (Iran); Bhuj (India), Izmit (Turkey), and Kobe (Japan); storm and hurricane in Gonaives (Haiti) and New Orleans (United States), and conflict responses in Angola and Mostar (Bosnia-Herzegovina). The paper highlights key lessons to guide local authorities, national governments, international agencies, the private sector, learning centres and community organisations in approaching the specific challenges of addressing and responding to disaster risks in urban environments.
1 3 -ALNAP Review of Humanitarian Action 2 Critics of humanitarian aid, many from within the sect... more 1 3 -ALNAP Review of Humanitarian Action 2 Critics of humanitarian aid, many from within the sector, complain that humanitarian evaluations and other learning exercises repeatedly highlight the same problems and shortcomings, and 'tell us nothing new'. The fact that evaluations don't capture novelty and ideas does not mean that the humanitarian endeavour is lacking an innovative spirit. The motivation to extend assistance to those affected by conflict or natural calamity has driven individuals to extreme lengths -and led to considerable ingenuity and perseverance.
1 1 -ALNAP Review of Humanitarian Action 2 This study looks at the current status of performance ... more 1 1 -ALNAP Review of Humanitarian Action 2 This study looks at the current status of performance approaches in the humanitarian system, in the context of the evolution and use of performance in other sectors. It summarises experiences and potential benefits for the humanitarian sector, and offers recommendations for next steps.
On 27 December 2008, in response to continued rocket fire from Gaza on southern Israel, Israeli f... more On 27 December 2008, in response to continued rocket fire from Gaza on southern Israel, Israeli forces launched “Operation Cast Lead” - a combined land and air military operation in the Gaza Strip. As well as causing damage to infrastructure and buildings, this operation had a considerable human cost. According to OCHA the operation has left 1,336 Palestinians dead, including an estimated 430 children and 110 women; 5,450 Palestinians injured, including 1,870 children and 800 women. Israel declared a unilateral ceasefire on 17 January, which was put into effect on 18 January, and Hamas and other Palestinian factions also declared a ceasefire later the same day. This ended the fighting, although several attacks have occurred and a number of rockets have been launched. The following weeks have seen the deployment of a substantial humanitarian effort, with appeals from the Disasters Emergency Committee in the UK, and the Gaza Flash Appeal from the UN which totalled some $686m. This lessons paper aims to distil key lessons for senior and mid-level managers in operational settings, as well as those staff working to support relief efforts from a regional / HQ level. It draws on the findings of a desk review, including evaluation reports in the ALNAP Evaluation Reports Database, and an extensive telephone-based research process with key international and national actors working in Gaza and Jerusalem. While attempts were made to look at other comparable crises, the point was made at numerous times that there was no comparable situation. However, there are some partial parallels to the conditions facing agencies – for example, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Lebanon - and wherever possible, these have been drawn upon. The fifteen lessons covered in this paper are divided into four sections. These sections each relate to specific areas of agency work, and while they have been separated for ease of reading, it is important to highlight that in complex settings, each of these areas are interconnected and, done effectively, should be mutually reinforcing. The majority of these lessons focus on humanitarian concerns, although attention is also paid to recovery and reconstruction issues.
This study seeks to analyse and explain how innovation works in emergency communicable disease re... more This study seeks to analyse and explain how innovation works in emergency communicable disease responses. It does so through use of the concept of an innovation ecosystem, the set of factors and actors that come together in ways that might foster or inhibit effective innovation processes. It looks at innovations across the range of activities involved in communicable disease responses in emergencies, and seeks to better understand the ecosystem by reviewing both positive examples, where innovations have emerged and been successful, and more challenging examples, where innovations have not happened, or where they have not been successful. By looking across such contrasting examples, the study aims for a rounded picture of innovation in emergency disease responses, highlighting both the strengths and the weaknesses in the system. There have been some notable successes, amongst them the development of new diagnostics for TB, or new approaches to prevention, for disease surveillance, and treatment and management. There have been successful innovations within crisis responses, such as the response to polio outbreaks in Syria. But there are also notable failures include ineffective utilization of innovations in rapid responses such as Ebola in West Africa, and cholera in Haiti. The study reveals an innovation ecosystem that is good in certain parts, and at certain times, but which is heavily reliant on a number of critical internal actors, and on external capacities and resources. Moreover, the ecosystem is far from systematic, and is not always well suited to the nature and dynamics of emergency work.
This report comes at a time when the international humanitarian community is facing unprecedented... more This report comes at a time when the international humanitarian community is facing unprecedented challenges that are growing in scale, scope and complexity. There is growing awareness of the need for transformational change in what humanitarian actors do and how they do it, to maintain relevance, reputation and impact. This report focuses on new and growing efforts to achieve such change through humanitarian innovation.
This study was commissioned in preparation for the Montreux XIII Donor Conference in November 201... more This study was commissioned in preparation for the Montreux XIII Donor Conference in November 2014. It aims to provide a forward-looking overview of the evolving problems the international humanitarian sector is facing and to suggest potential collective responses to them. The paper first sets humanitarian assistance challenges in a wider context of global trends and issues. Part 2 reviews the broader contexts in which humanitarian action takes place. It presents an overview of the changing global landscape and how this is in different ways challenging, constraining and stretching the humanitarian system. Part 3 switches from the focus on context and needs to look at recent trends in humanitarian response. As well as examining the financial allocation, scope and distribution of aid, it looks across the wider network of actors now involved in humanitarian efforts and explores what this means for the current humanitarian assistance modus operandi. It also reviews key trends and patterns in effectiveness and reform efforts. Part 4 presents an illustrative overview of the evolving nature of such needs by introducing four differentiated models of the interface between the international community, host governments and affected populations that are apparent when looking across the crises of the past 10 years. It reviews some of the lessons from and challenges arising in the international humanitarian sector response to each model. Using existing data, it illustrates some of the key trends in official donor financing across these different models. Part 5 concludes the paper by summarising the key challenges for consideration by participants at the Montreux XIII Conference. The overall purpose of the paper is to inform and support productive and action-oriented dialogue and discussions at the Montreux XIII Conference. It is also hoped that the meeting will be able to contribute to and inform discussions leading up to the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016.
Environmental disruption, mass urbanization and the runaway globalization of trade and transport ... more Environmental disruption, mass urbanization and the runaway globalization of trade and transport have created ideal conditions for infectious diseases to emerge and spread around the world. As SARS, influenza and Ebola have illustrated, disease can no be longer easily contained. Rapid spill-overs from local into regional and global crises reveal major gaps in the global system for dealing with infectious diseases, including a lack of new treatments for some of the world’s biggest pathogenic killers, the rise of antibiotic resistance globally, and insufficient coordination in global health. In response, a number of global solution networks have emerged that address failures of systems, of institutions and of markets. Often inspired or initiated by existing global health actors, these networks have brought together new configurations of public, private, civil and citizen groups to address both emerging and long-standing challenges. At their most ambitious, they aim to change the rules of the global health game—opening up governance structures, sharing knowledge and science, developing new products, creating markets—all with the ultimate aim of preventing and treating diseases, and saving lives. These networks have emerged in an ad-hoc and opportunistic fashion. More strategic thinking and investment are needed to build networking competencies and to identify opportunities for international institutions to best leverage new forms of collaboration and partnership.
The contemporary global community is increasingly interdependent and confronted with systemic ris... more The contemporary global community is increasingly interdependent and confronted with systemic risks posed by the actions and interactions of actors existing beneath the level of formal institutions, often operating outside effective governance structures. Frequently, these actors are human agents, such as rogue traders or aggressive financial innovators, terrorists, groups of dissidents, or unauthorized sources of sensitive or secret information about government or private sector activities. In other instances, influential “actors” take the form of climate change, communications technologies, or socioeconomic globalization. Although these individual forces may be small relative to state governments or international institutions, or may operate on long time scales, the changes they catalyze can pose significant challenges to the analysis and practice of international relations through the operation of complex feedbacks and interactions of individual agents and interconnected systems. We call these challenges “femtorisks,” and emphasize their importance for two reasons. First, in isolation, they may be inconsequential and semiautonomous; but when embedded in complex adaptive systems, characterized by individual agents able to change, learn from experience, and pursue their own agendas, the strategic interaction between actors can propel systems down paths of increasing, even global, instability. Second, because their influence stems from complex interactions at interfaces of multiple systems (e.g., social, financial, political, technological, ecological, etc.), femtorisks challenge standard approaches to risk assessment, as higher-order consequences cascade across the boundaries of socially constructed complex systems. We argue that new approaches to assessing and managing systemic risk in international relations are required, inspired by principles of evolutionary theory and development of resilient ecological systems.
The methods of complex systems research are increasingly being used and valued by international d... more The methods of complex systems research are increasingly being used and valued by international development organisations. These approaches enable a shift away from existing tools and business processes that reinforce a focus on static, simple and linear problems. The evidence is that these methods can help development partners better navigate the complex, dynamic realities they face on a day-to-day basis. This Working Paper summarises the findings of a series of small-scale pilots of selected complex systems methods in DFID’s wealth creation work. The pilots contributed to improved analysis and understanding of a range of wicked problems, and generated tangible findings that were directly utilised in corporate and programmatic decisions. They played a significant role in the design of two large programmes, and provided the evidence base for a root and branch review of DFID processes. The Working Paper concludes that there are considerable opportunities for doing more programming using these methods, with real potential for enhancing development decision-making in the face of wicked problems.
There is a very extensive literature on innovation management with the earliest papers dating bac... more There is a very extensive literature on innovation management with the earliest papers dating back to around 1910. With a focus on ecosystem approaches to innovation, the strategy we have taken in this literature review is to move from some basic concepts on innovation management to an understanding of current best practice and then on to new approaches that are emerging in the context of a changing technological and market landscape.
This report is the second in a series of outputs from the DFID-funded project on the mapping of t... more This report is the second in a series of outputs from the DFID-funded project on the mapping of the Humanitarian Innovation Ecosystem. The project aims to deepen our understanding of just how the humanitarian innovation ecosystem operates in practice and to make recommendations as to how it might be improved to operator in a more efficient and effective manner. In the preceding report (Management, Innovation Ecosystems and Humanitarian Innovation: Literature Review for the Humanitarian Innovation Ecosystem Research Project) the CENTRIM research team explored the key themes in the innovation management literature in order to identify the challenges for those in the humanitarian sector who are seeking to improve the innovation ecosystem. In this complementary report we attempt to generate a qualitative view from an informed sample of individuals who had expert knowledge of the role and nature of innovation and innovation management within the humanitarian aid sector. It was also designed to help develop and test the evolving systems framework that will be used in the five in-depth case studies which will examine the ecosystem in specific sub-sectors of the humanitarian innovation ecosystem. Informants included senior staff in donor organisations, governmental and international agencies, NGOs, as well as management consultants, academics and private sector suppliers. By design, the sample can be described as informed rather than statistically representative. The semi-structured interviews employed a questionnaire based upon six principal components thought to be important in developing a systems map of the humanitarian innovation ecosystem. These include Resources, Roles, Relationships, Rules, Routines, and Results – collectively referred to as the six ‘Rs’. Observations (of which there were between around 1,500 from 46 in-depth interviews) received for each of the components are summarised by sections in the report. (For the purposes of this report we extended our six Rs model to include to further ‘Rs’ – Restrictions and Recommendations.) The interviewees were invited to participate in the study under conditions of anonymity and we have liberally used direct quotes from out sample in order to convey their strength of feeling and so as to reduce the likelihood of misrepresenting their views. It should be emphasised that both the views expressed and the recommendations put forth are those of the interviewees and do not necessary represent the views either of the sponsors of this project nor of the researchers.
Adopting resilience as our core approach to tackling disasters means identifying where different ... more Adopting resilience as our core approach to tackling disasters means identifying where different areas of our work can complement and enhance one another. This includes disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation, social protection, working in fragile contexts and humanitarian preparedness and response. We will start by focusing on the key challenges: the need for common analysis that supports a coherent approach to risk; financing mechanisms that allow early, predictable and sustained commitments; early warning systems that lead to early action; political commitment among governments in countries at risk of disasters and donor agencies; and a stronger interface between development and humanitarian actors. Disaster resilience draws together several strands of DFID’s work, and in the wake of the ongoing global financial crisis has become a concern at the highest level. Increasing efforts are being made in social protection, disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation, aiming to build the resilience of poor and vulnerable communities in developing countries. There is increasing attention being paid to issues such as the resilience of macroeconomic growth2 and ‘crisis-proofing’ progress towards the MDGs3. At the same time, there has been a growing interest in how principles of resilience can be employed in conflict-affected and fragile states.4 This Approach Paper is intended to inform the next phase of DFID’s work on resilience to both natural and man-made disasters,5 by providing a starting point for discussion within the Department and with our partners. Although the focus is on disasters, this is part of a wider process to mainstream resilience across all of DFID’s work which is being led by Policy Division. The paper begins with an outline of what resilience is and sets out a framework to improve understanding of the different elements to be considered in building resilience through DFID’s country operations. It then looks at a range of existing DFID resilience interventions at country and regional levels. The paper concludes by providing suggestions for what DFID can do to strengthen its work in this area and how it can provide strategic leadership across the international system.
This report is an independent evaluation of SDC‘s work in fragile and conflict affected states. T... more This report is an independent evaluation of SDC‘s work in fragile and conflict affected states. The evaluation considers in particular the performance of instruments; analysis, flexibility and adaptability; complementary of SDC and Swiss instruments and SDC‘s role in the wider system. It does not directly address the performance of non-SDC elements of the Swiss government engagement in fragile states, but does look at how well SDC works with these other entities. The scope is multi-sector, addressing all of the instruments being used by SDC.
In February 2011, a remarkable meeting took place at the Santa Fe Institute (SFI) in Santa Fe, N... more In February 2011, a remarkable meeting took place at the Santa Fe Institute (SFI) in Santa Fe, New Mexico. SFI, one of the world’s preeminent academic and research institutions, has pioneered the use of concepts developed in studying complex adaptive systems to address environmental, technological, biological, economic and political challenges. In collaboration with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), SFI brought together a group of policy-makers, academics, development experts, scientists, and Afghan tribal and business leaders. The task was ambitious: to develop new ways of thinking about and working in conflict-affected countries, with a special focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan. The participants had diverse interests, from how to shift to a long-term sustainable development approaches in such countries to how to better counter violent insurgency movements. The work by SFI and others on complexity and emergence in the context of conflict, behavioral dynamics, policy making, strategy formulation and sustainable development served as a framework for these important discussions, enabling participants to explore ways to bridge the gap between foreign policy decision-making process and a more innovative, scientific approach.
Disaster response in an urban environment presents a wide variety of challenges. Humanitarian org... more Disaster response in an urban environment presents a wide variety of challenges. Humanitarian organisations often have more experience of disaster response in rural settings, and local authorities and community organisations may have little experience of planning and executing large-scale activities in response and recovery. This paper draws on experience from the responses to number of urban disasters, including earthquake responses in Bam (Iran); Bhuj (India), Izmit (Turkey), and Kobe (Japan); storm and hurricane in Gonaives (Haiti) and New Orleans (United States), and conflict responses in Angola and Mostar (Bosnia-Herzegovina). The paper highlights key lessons to guide local authorities, national governments, international agencies, the private sector, learning centres and community organisations in approaching the specific challenges of addressing and responding to disaster risks in urban environments.
1 3 -ALNAP Review of Humanitarian Action 2 Critics of humanitarian aid, many from within the sect... more 1 3 -ALNAP Review of Humanitarian Action 2 Critics of humanitarian aid, many from within the sector, complain that humanitarian evaluations and other learning exercises repeatedly highlight the same problems and shortcomings, and 'tell us nothing new'. The fact that evaluations don't capture novelty and ideas does not mean that the humanitarian endeavour is lacking an innovative spirit. The motivation to extend assistance to those affected by conflict or natural calamity has driven individuals to extreme lengths -and led to considerable ingenuity and perseverance.
1 1 -ALNAP Review of Humanitarian Action 2 This study looks at the current status of performance ... more 1 1 -ALNAP Review of Humanitarian Action 2 This study looks at the current status of performance approaches in the humanitarian system, in the context of the evolution and use of performance in other sectors. It summarises experiences and potential benefits for the humanitarian sector, and offers recommendations for next steps.
On 27 December 2008, in response to continued rocket fire from Gaza on southern Israel, Israeli f... more On 27 December 2008, in response to continued rocket fire from Gaza on southern Israel, Israeli forces launched “Operation Cast Lead” - a combined land and air military operation in the Gaza Strip. As well as causing damage to infrastructure and buildings, this operation had a considerable human cost. According to OCHA the operation has left 1,336 Palestinians dead, including an estimated 430 children and 110 women; 5,450 Palestinians injured, including 1,870 children and 800 women. Israel declared a unilateral ceasefire on 17 January, which was put into effect on 18 January, and Hamas and other Palestinian factions also declared a ceasefire later the same day. This ended the fighting, although several attacks have occurred and a number of rockets have been launched. The following weeks have seen the deployment of a substantial humanitarian effort, with appeals from the Disasters Emergency Committee in the UK, and the Gaza Flash Appeal from the UN which totalled some $686m. This lessons paper aims to distil key lessons for senior and mid-level managers in operational settings, as well as those staff working to support relief efforts from a regional / HQ level. It draws on the findings of a desk review, including evaluation reports in the ALNAP Evaluation Reports Database, and an extensive telephone-based research process with key international and national actors working in Gaza and Jerusalem. While attempts were made to look at other comparable crises, the point was made at numerous times that there was no comparable situation. However, there are some partial parallels to the conditions facing agencies – for example, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Lebanon - and wherever possible, these have been drawn upon. The fifteen lessons covered in this paper are divided into four sections. These sections each relate to specific areas of agency work, and while they have been separated for ease of reading, it is important to highlight that in complex settings, each of these areas are interconnected and, done effectively, should be mutually reinforcing. The majority of these lessons focus on humanitarian concerns, although attention is also paid to recovery and reconstruction issues.
Uploads
Papers by Ben Ramalingam
By looking across such contrasting examples, the study aims for a rounded picture of innovation in emergency disease responses, highlighting both the strengths and the weaknesses in the system. There have been some notable successes, amongst them the development of new diagnostics for TB, or new approaches to prevention, for disease surveillance, and treatment and management. There have been successful innovations within crisis responses, such as the response to polio outbreaks in Syria. But there are also notable failures include ineffective utilization of innovations in rapid responses such as Ebola in West Africa, and cholera in Haiti.
The study reveals an innovation ecosystem that is good in certain parts, and at certain times, but which is heavily reliant on a number of critical internal actors, and on external capacities and resources. Moreover, the ecosystem is far from systematic, and is not always well suited to the nature and dynamics of emergency work.
of the need for transformational change in what humanitarian actors do and how they do it, to maintain relevance, reputation and impact. This report focuses on new and growing efforts to achieve such change through humanitarian innovation.
The paper first sets humanitarian assistance challenges in a wider context of global trends and issues. Part 2 reviews the broader contexts in which humanitarian action takes place. It presents an overview of the changing global landscape and how this is in different ways challenging, constraining and stretching the humanitarian system.
Part 3 switches from the focus on context and needs to look at recent trends in humanitarian response. As well as examining the financial allocation, scope and distribution of aid, it looks across the wider network of actors now involved in humanitarian efforts and explores what this means for the current humanitarian assistance modus operandi. It also reviews key trends and patterns in effectiveness and reform efforts.
Part 4 presents an illustrative overview of the evolving nature of such needs by introducing four differentiated models of the interface between the international community, host governments and affected populations that are apparent when looking across the crises of the past 10 years. It reviews some of the lessons from and challenges arising in the international humanitarian sector response to each model. Using existing data, it illustrates some of the key trends in official donor financing across these different models.
Part 5 concludes the paper by summarising the key challenges for consideration by participants at the Montreux XIII Conference.
The overall purpose of the paper is to inform and support productive and action-oriented dialogue and discussions at the Montreux XIII Conference. It is also hoped that the meeting will be able to contribute to and inform discussions leading up to the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016.
In response, a number of global solution networks have emerged that address failures of systems, of institutions and of markets. Often inspired or initiated by existing global health actors, these networks have brought together new configurations of public, private, civil and citizen groups to address both emerging and long-standing challenges. At their most ambitious, they aim to change the rules of the global health game—opening
up governance structures, sharing knowledge and science, developing new products, creating markets—all with the ultimate aim of preventing and treating diseases, and saving lives.
These networks have emerged in an ad-hoc and opportunistic fashion. More strategic thinking and investment are needed to build networking competencies and to identify opportunities for international institutions to best leverage new forms of collaboration and partnership.
secret information about government or private sector activities. In other instances, influential “actors” take the form of climate change, communications technologies, or socioeconomic globalization. Although these individual forces may be small relative to state governments or international institutions, or may operate on long time scales, the changes they catalyze can pose significant challenges to the analysis and practice of international relations through the operation of complex feedbacks and interactions of individual agents and interconnected systems. We call these challenges “femtorisks,” and emphasize their importance for two reasons. First, in isolation, they may be inconsequential and semiautonomous; but when embedded in complex adaptive systems, characterized by individual agents able to change, learn from experience, and pursue their own agendas, the strategic interaction between actors can propel systems down paths of increasing, even global, instability. Second, because their influence stems from complex interactions at interfaces of multiple systems (e.g., social, financial, political, technological, ecological, etc.), femtorisks challenge standard approaches to risk assessment, as higher-order consequences cascade across the boundaries of socially constructed complex systems. We argue that new approaches to assessing and managing systemic risk in international relations are required, inspired by principles of evolutionary theory and development of resilient ecological systems.
landscape.
In this complementary report we attempt to generate a qualitative view from an informed sample of individuals who had expert knowledge of the role and nature of innovation and innovation management within the humanitarian aid sector. It was also designed to help develop and test the evolving systems framework that will be used in the five in-depth case studies which will examine the ecosystem in specific sub-sectors of the humanitarian innovation ecosystem.
Informants included senior staff in donor organisations, governmental and international agencies, NGOs, as well as management consultants, academics and private sector suppliers. By design, the sample can be described as informed rather than statistically representative. The semi-structured interviews employed a questionnaire based upon six principal components thought to be important in developing a systems map of the humanitarian innovation ecosystem. These include Resources, Roles, Relationships, Rules, Routines, and Results – collectively referred to as the six ‘Rs’. Observations (of which there were between around 1,500 from 46 in-depth interviews) received for each of the components are summarised by sections in the report. (For the purposes of this report we extended our six Rs model to include to further ‘Rs’ – Restrictions and Recommendations.)
The interviewees were invited to participate in the study under conditions of anonymity and we have liberally used direct quotes from out sample in order to convey their strength of feeling and so as to reduce the likelihood of misrepresenting their views. It should be emphasised that both the views expressed and the recommendations put forth are those of the interviewees and do not necessary represent the views either of the sponsors of this project nor of the researchers.
Disaster resilience draws together several strands of DFID’s work, and in the wake of the ongoing global financial crisis has become a concern at the highest level. Increasing efforts are being made in social protection, disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation, aiming to build the resilience of poor and vulnerable communities in developing countries. There is increasing attention being paid to issues such as the resilience of macroeconomic growth2 and ‘crisis-proofing’ progress towards the MDGs3. At the same time, there has been a growing interest in how principles of resilience can be employed in conflict-affected and fragile states.4
This Approach Paper is intended to inform the next phase of DFID’s work on resilience to both natural and man-made disasters,5 by providing a starting point for discussion within the Department and with our partners. Although the focus is on disasters, this is part of a wider process to mainstream resilience across all of DFID’s work which is being led by Policy Division.
The paper begins with an outline of what resilience is and sets out a framework to improve understanding of the different elements to be considered in building resilience through DFID’s country operations. It then looks at a range of existing DFID resilience interventions at country and regional levels. The paper concludes by providing suggestions for what DFID can do to strengthen its work in this area and how it can provide strategic leadership across the international system.
This paper draws on experience from the responses to number of urban disasters, including earthquake responses in Bam (Iran); Bhuj (India), Izmit (Turkey), and Kobe (Japan); storm and hurricane in Gonaives (Haiti) and New Orleans (United States), and conflict responses in Angola and Mostar (Bosnia-Herzegovina). The paper highlights key lessons to guide local authorities, national governments, international agencies, the private sector, learning centres and community organisations in approaching the specific challenges of addressing and responding to disaster risks in urban environments.
As well as causing damage to infrastructure and buildings, this operation had a considerable human cost. According to OCHA the operation has left 1,336 Palestinians dead, including an estimated 430 children and 110 women; 5,450 Palestinians injured, including 1,870 children and 800 women.
Israel declared a unilateral ceasefire on 17 January, which was put into effect on 18 January, and Hamas and other Palestinian factions also declared a ceasefire later the same day. This ended the fighting, although several attacks have occurred and a number of rockets have been launched. The following weeks have seen the deployment of a substantial humanitarian effort, with appeals from the Disasters Emergency Committee in the UK, and the Gaza Flash Appeal from the UN which totalled some $686m.
This lessons paper aims to distil key lessons for senior and mid-level managers in operational settings, as well as those staff working to support relief efforts from a regional / HQ level. It draws on the findings of a desk review, including evaluation reports in the ALNAP Evaluation Reports Database, and an extensive telephone-based research process with key international and national actors working in Gaza and Jerusalem.
While attempts were made to look at other comparable crises, the point was made at numerous times that there was no comparable situation. However, there are some partial parallels to the conditions facing agencies – for example, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Lebanon - and wherever possible, these have been drawn upon.
The fifteen lessons covered in this paper are divided into four sections. These sections each relate to specific areas of agency work, and while they have been separated for ease of reading, it is important to highlight that in complex settings, each of these areas are interconnected and, done effectively, should be mutually reinforcing. The majority of these lessons focus on humanitarian concerns, although attention is also paid to recovery and reconstruction issues.
By looking across such contrasting examples, the study aims for a rounded picture of innovation in emergency disease responses, highlighting both the strengths and the weaknesses in the system. There have been some notable successes, amongst them the development of new diagnostics for TB, or new approaches to prevention, for disease surveillance, and treatment and management. There have been successful innovations within crisis responses, such as the response to polio outbreaks in Syria. But there are also notable failures include ineffective utilization of innovations in rapid responses such as Ebola in West Africa, and cholera in Haiti.
The study reveals an innovation ecosystem that is good in certain parts, and at certain times, but which is heavily reliant on a number of critical internal actors, and on external capacities and resources. Moreover, the ecosystem is far from systematic, and is not always well suited to the nature and dynamics of emergency work.
of the need for transformational change in what humanitarian actors do and how they do it, to maintain relevance, reputation and impact. This report focuses on new and growing efforts to achieve such change through humanitarian innovation.
The paper first sets humanitarian assistance challenges in a wider context of global trends and issues. Part 2 reviews the broader contexts in which humanitarian action takes place. It presents an overview of the changing global landscape and how this is in different ways challenging, constraining and stretching the humanitarian system.
Part 3 switches from the focus on context and needs to look at recent trends in humanitarian response. As well as examining the financial allocation, scope and distribution of aid, it looks across the wider network of actors now involved in humanitarian efforts and explores what this means for the current humanitarian assistance modus operandi. It also reviews key trends and patterns in effectiveness and reform efforts.
Part 4 presents an illustrative overview of the evolving nature of such needs by introducing four differentiated models of the interface between the international community, host governments and affected populations that are apparent when looking across the crises of the past 10 years. It reviews some of the lessons from and challenges arising in the international humanitarian sector response to each model. Using existing data, it illustrates some of the key trends in official donor financing across these different models.
Part 5 concludes the paper by summarising the key challenges for consideration by participants at the Montreux XIII Conference.
The overall purpose of the paper is to inform and support productive and action-oriented dialogue and discussions at the Montreux XIII Conference. It is also hoped that the meeting will be able to contribute to and inform discussions leading up to the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016.
In response, a number of global solution networks have emerged that address failures of systems, of institutions and of markets. Often inspired or initiated by existing global health actors, these networks have brought together new configurations of public, private, civil and citizen groups to address both emerging and long-standing challenges. At their most ambitious, they aim to change the rules of the global health game—opening
up governance structures, sharing knowledge and science, developing new products, creating markets—all with the ultimate aim of preventing and treating diseases, and saving lives.
These networks have emerged in an ad-hoc and opportunistic fashion. More strategic thinking and investment are needed to build networking competencies and to identify opportunities for international institutions to best leverage new forms of collaboration and partnership.
secret information about government or private sector activities. In other instances, influential “actors” take the form of climate change, communications technologies, or socioeconomic globalization. Although these individual forces may be small relative to state governments or international institutions, or may operate on long time scales, the changes they catalyze can pose significant challenges to the analysis and practice of international relations through the operation of complex feedbacks and interactions of individual agents and interconnected systems. We call these challenges “femtorisks,” and emphasize their importance for two reasons. First, in isolation, they may be inconsequential and semiautonomous; but when embedded in complex adaptive systems, characterized by individual agents able to change, learn from experience, and pursue their own agendas, the strategic interaction between actors can propel systems down paths of increasing, even global, instability. Second, because their influence stems from complex interactions at interfaces of multiple systems (e.g., social, financial, political, technological, ecological, etc.), femtorisks challenge standard approaches to risk assessment, as higher-order consequences cascade across the boundaries of socially constructed complex systems. We argue that new approaches to assessing and managing systemic risk in international relations are required, inspired by principles of evolutionary theory and development of resilient ecological systems.
landscape.
In this complementary report we attempt to generate a qualitative view from an informed sample of individuals who had expert knowledge of the role and nature of innovation and innovation management within the humanitarian aid sector. It was also designed to help develop and test the evolving systems framework that will be used in the five in-depth case studies which will examine the ecosystem in specific sub-sectors of the humanitarian innovation ecosystem.
Informants included senior staff in donor organisations, governmental and international agencies, NGOs, as well as management consultants, academics and private sector suppliers. By design, the sample can be described as informed rather than statistically representative. The semi-structured interviews employed a questionnaire based upon six principal components thought to be important in developing a systems map of the humanitarian innovation ecosystem. These include Resources, Roles, Relationships, Rules, Routines, and Results – collectively referred to as the six ‘Rs’. Observations (of which there were between around 1,500 from 46 in-depth interviews) received for each of the components are summarised by sections in the report. (For the purposes of this report we extended our six Rs model to include to further ‘Rs’ – Restrictions and Recommendations.)
The interviewees were invited to participate in the study under conditions of anonymity and we have liberally used direct quotes from out sample in order to convey their strength of feeling and so as to reduce the likelihood of misrepresenting their views. It should be emphasised that both the views expressed and the recommendations put forth are those of the interviewees and do not necessary represent the views either of the sponsors of this project nor of the researchers.
Disaster resilience draws together several strands of DFID’s work, and in the wake of the ongoing global financial crisis has become a concern at the highest level. Increasing efforts are being made in social protection, disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation, aiming to build the resilience of poor and vulnerable communities in developing countries. There is increasing attention being paid to issues such as the resilience of macroeconomic growth2 and ‘crisis-proofing’ progress towards the MDGs3. At the same time, there has been a growing interest in how principles of resilience can be employed in conflict-affected and fragile states.4
This Approach Paper is intended to inform the next phase of DFID’s work on resilience to both natural and man-made disasters,5 by providing a starting point for discussion within the Department and with our partners. Although the focus is on disasters, this is part of a wider process to mainstream resilience across all of DFID’s work which is being led by Policy Division.
The paper begins with an outline of what resilience is and sets out a framework to improve understanding of the different elements to be considered in building resilience through DFID’s country operations. It then looks at a range of existing DFID resilience interventions at country and regional levels. The paper concludes by providing suggestions for what DFID can do to strengthen its work in this area and how it can provide strategic leadership across the international system.
This paper draws on experience from the responses to number of urban disasters, including earthquake responses in Bam (Iran); Bhuj (India), Izmit (Turkey), and Kobe (Japan); storm and hurricane in Gonaives (Haiti) and New Orleans (United States), and conflict responses in Angola and Mostar (Bosnia-Herzegovina). The paper highlights key lessons to guide local authorities, national governments, international agencies, the private sector, learning centres and community organisations in approaching the specific challenges of addressing and responding to disaster risks in urban environments.
As well as causing damage to infrastructure and buildings, this operation had a considerable human cost. According to OCHA the operation has left 1,336 Palestinians dead, including an estimated 430 children and 110 women; 5,450 Palestinians injured, including 1,870 children and 800 women.
Israel declared a unilateral ceasefire on 17 January, which was put into effect on 18 January, and Hamas and other Palestinian factions also declared a ceasefire later the same day. This ended the fighting, although several attacks have occurred and a number of rockets have been launched. The following weeks have seen the deployment of a substantial humanitarian effort, with appeals from the Disasters Emergency Committee in the UK, and the Gaza Flash Appeal from the UN which totalled some $686m.
This lessons paper aims to distil key lessons for senior and mid-level managers in operational settings, as well as those staff working to support relief efforts from a regional / HQ level. It draws on the findings of a desk review, including evaluation reports in the ALNAP Evaluation Reports Database, and an extensive telephone-based research process with key international and national actors working in Gaza and Jerusalem.
While attempts were made to look at other comparable crises, the point was made at numerous times that there was no comparable situation. However, there are some partial parallels to the conditions facing agencies – for example, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Lebanon - and wherever possible, these have been drawn upon.
The fifteen lessons covered in this paper are divided into four sections. These sections each relate to specific areas of agency work, and while they have been separated for ease of reading, it is important to highlight that in complex settings, each of these areas are interconnected and, done effectively, should be mutually reinforcing. The majority of these lessons focus on humanitarian concerns, although attention is also paid to recovery and reconstruction issues.