Cracks in the machine: is the humanitarian system fit for purpose? (Peter Walker, Tufts)
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
1 gostou•840 visualizações
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Semelhante a Cracks in the machine: is the humanitarian system fit for purpose? (Peter Walker, Tufts)
Semelhante a Cracks in the machine: is the humanitarian system fit for purpose? (Peter Walker, Tufts) (20)
Mais de ALNAP
Mais de ALNAP (20)
Cracks in the machine: is the humanitarian system fit for purpose? (Peter Walker, Tufts)
- 1. Humanitarian System 1
- 2. Six deadly glitches in the system 1. Starting models 2. Does evidence matter 3. Compliance 4. State avoiding 5. Emergency 6. Market seduction 2
- 3. 1: Poor starting models Afghanistan is post Taliban non-conflict Darfur is Islamic Arab raiders V Non Islamic Settled villagers 3
- 4. 2: Does evidence matter? Data Analysis Impartiality Response “Without data and analysis there is no impartiality” 4
- 5. Evidence Fit to Context Proven model Evidence Driven Feedback Monitoring
- 6. Sex and Age 1. Collecting & using data is good! But …. 2. Virtually no collection in Phase I & II 3. Education & Shelter do better 4. When collected , little used 5. Where used, demonstrable difference 6
- 7. Why? • Evidence doesn’t matter • Donors and cluster leaders not interested • Don’t believe it is possible • Collecting evidence makes us accountable 7
- 8. Does Needs Assessment matter? We have always done it this way Needs Assessment Disaster Programming Political calculus Cash flow needs 8
- 9. What you Measure is What you Get Input Process Output Outcome Impact 9
- 10. Why don’t you collect? • “We report against deliverables. Our HQ and donors only want to hear success.” • “Donors and cluster leaders are not interested” • “Collecting evidence makes us accountable and open to risk.” 10
- 11. 3: Quality & Compliance • Standards & Systems • Flexibility, Context
- 12. Counter-Bureaucracy Risk & Quality Compliance “The demands of [compliance] are now so intrusive that they have distorted, misdirected, and disfigured USAID‘s development practice to such a degree that it is compromising U.S. national security objectives 12 and challenging established principles of good development practice.”
- 13. 4:Not all states are bad Relief Dev’ Host State Host State Avoiding Enhancing 13
- 14. Managing risk and response is normal • National Disaster Response Law • New partnerships • Citizen expectations • Quality assurance expectations 14
- 15. 5: Emergency? Column1 10% 20% >8 years 4-8 years 70% <4 years 15 Source: Development Initiatives 2011
- 16. Chronic crisis 1990, 2010 Sudan Ethiopia Somalia Angola Mozambique 16
- 17. 6 Show me the money • Gov Pakistan. 1.5 million people via Visa • Horn of Africa 600,000 via cash through Hawala 17
- 18. Normal Abnormal Evidence Anecdote Risk transfer Interventionist Agile Powerful 18
Notas do Editor
- It can tie in incorrect models, which have momentum and are difficult to challenge
- At the core of humanitarian action is a belief that it should be needs-driven, and only needs-driven. The challenge is that to be impartial one has to have a good understanding of what the needs are. Another challenge is that to prioritize assistance requires one to have a good understanding of the needs across a whole population, and thus the ability to identify the most urgent cases.
- In this we increasingly need to be driven by evidence. Evidence that creats and verifies models upon which we base our interventions. Evidence to adjust those models to context. Evidence to monitor and adjust our programming.
- SO, lets do a reality check.
- We asked why data was not gathered, analyzed and used.
- We asked why data was not gathered, analyzed and used.
- Abnormal > NormalAnecdote > EvidenceInterventionist > EmpoweringObjective driven > Goal driven