PLAN UK'S RESPONSE TO THE

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT SELECT COMMITTEE'S CALL FOR EVIDENCE ON

HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE TO NATURAL DISASTERS

 

Introduction

 

1.1. Plan is an international child centred development organisation committed to promoting the rights of children worldwide. We operate from our head office in UK in 62 countries across the world, including 46 countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Plan UK welcomes the opportunity to give evidence to the International Development Select Committee.

 

2.2. In answering the questions posed by the Committee, Plan has a number of recommendations about how and why humanitarian response to natural disasters could and should be improved. These are described in more detail below, but cover:

a)a) Linkages between humanitarian action and longer-term development work;

b)b) The role of children in humanitarian action, particularly the need to recognise and build on their innate common sense and their capacities, and to ensure the protection of their rights and dignity;

c)c) The need to reduce vulnerability of the poor to disasters;

d)d) The increasing impact of climate change on humanitarian need;

e)e) The importance of providing a robust protection framework, including the needs of internally displaced people and an examination of the complexities of working with the military; and

f)f) The need for DFID to further advocate for greater coordination among humanitarian actors.

 

3.3. The impact of humanitarian intervention can fundamentally undermine long-term development, so it is vital that this does not happen. Plan develops long-lasting programmes in communities and is often the first agency to respond in the many low profile disasters that affect communities through its commitment to local and children's involvement in programmes. Plan has also coordinated effective responses to recent high profiler disaster, the South Asian Tsunami and the Kashmir earthquake. As a highly experienced development agency that responds to emergency situations worldwide, Plan is particularly concerned about the interactions between short-term relief and longer-term development. This experience has enabled us to analyse and develop a new approach to disasters programming.

 

4.4. The International Development Select Committee has itself acknowledged that "Prospects for development are inextricably linked to the prospects for children in developing countries - their health, their education, their sense of social involvement."[1] Plan UK believes that this principle should apply both in emergencies and in long-term development. In our experience, children and young people have a vital role to play in preparing for and responding to disasters.

 

5.5. Plan commends both DFID's new Humanitarian Policy and its Disaster Risk Reduction policy[2]. We are especially pleased that DFID has emphasised Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) as a core part of its humanitarian strategy, and that DFID has made a commitment to a target of spending 10% of all humanitarian funds on DRR. We agree that the identification of social protection and safety nets as a key tool for reaching the most vulnerable in chronic emergencies, and particularly as a potential alternative to food aid are important priorities, as is the prioritisation of quality, needs-based humanitarian action based on well-informed needs assessments and the focus on forgotten emergencies.

 

6.6. Plan wishes to note from the outset that arguably, there are no natural disasters. There are natural hazards and man-made hazards and there are vulnerable populations; brought together they lead to emergencies requiring humanitarian responses. Our reason for suggesting that emergencies and disasters are man-made is partly tactical and partly semantic. If not man-made, disasters are deemed natural, and that then confuses the way disasters are responded to. The IDC is encouraged to adopt the standard UN definitions of disasters.[3]

 

Vulnerability and Disaster Preparedness

 

7.7. Poverty and vulnerability are intertwined and mutually reinforcing. Children, because they are still developing and are dependant on adults for their survival are especially vulnerable. Poverty impacts upon the children in a household the greatest and children are most affected by shocks like disasters. Poverty reduction needs to start from an analysis of vulnerability and risk. Responses such as comprehensive social protection strategies - a package of social insurance, free education and health care, and income generation - should be an important part of both donor and national government policy not only to protect the most vulnerable, in particular children, from destitution but to provide a means of raising themselves out of poverty[4].

 

8.8. Despite their vulnerability, children are almost invisible in emergency planning. This issue goes to the heart of the Committee's questions "How do donors ensure that humanitarian assistance is delivered equitably (in terms of gender, ethnicity, age, caste and so on), and "What can be done to ensure that humanitarian assistance is pro-poor and does not exacerbate inequalities?" While all members of society suffer from the impact of emergencies, it is accepted that children are among the most vulnerable groups. Plan's experiences in Asia have shown that children often form more than 1/3 of the death toll from disaster[5]. The protection of children's rights is at the heart of Plan's work, and these rights are shattered in emergency situations: for example, children in temporary shelters are vulnerable to abuse, exploitation and trafficking. In Pakistan since the October 2005 earthquake, Plan has worked with a number of other INGOs to advocate for not placing vulnerable children in institutions or orphanages. The fact that elements of the international community still implement such policies illustrates the need for greater understanding of protecting the rights of children in emergencies.

 

9.9. Plan's post-tsunami research has analysed the impact of the disaster and subsequent relief effort on children's rights[6], and found that in many cases there has been little improvement even 12 months afterwards. The impact of disasters on children in terms of mental trauma, physical distress and increased poverty is long-term, and can continue to impact on them into their adult lives. Consultation with children in Thailand, India, Indonesia and Sri Lanka found again and again that on top of the immense trauma created by the tsunami, children felt disempowered and ignored by the response that followed. One child in Tamil Nadu said: "Children are not satisfied by the manner in which aid was distributed, as many that were rich benefited but the poor suffered."

 

10.10. This research followed Plan's earlier calls for the rights of children to be respected in the aftermath of disasters.[7] A fundamental cause of this is a failure of those responding to disasters to enable children to participate in the design and operation of programmes, a right enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child. There is a need for a culture change among the international relief community, recognising that participation in such circumstances is not an additional burden, but provides a solid foundation for effective programmes. Clearly there is a need to balance participation with the need to act quickly and effectively. However, given what we know about the relatively small impact of international aid in comparison to locally-led efforts, the international community needs to recognise that treating "local ownership" and "participation" as founding principles rather than jargon to pay lip service to could transform the impact of humanitarian aid. Plan has positive and extensive experiences of local participation in emergency responses, including a highly participatory relief programme in El Salvador - funded by DFID - in the aftermath of Hurricane Stan in October 2005.[8]

 

11.11. The capacity of children is great and often underestimated, both before and after disasters. Plan's research has shown that children as young as nine were involved in supporting their families and relatives throughout the post-tsunami period, helping to clean away debris, cook food, support other vulnerable groups such as older people, give first aid, and identify and trace separated families, among other activities[9]. Children are also highly sensitive to inequalities in aid provision, potentially enabling better management of disaster responses. This capacity can be drawn upon not only after disasters, but beforehand as well.

 

12.12. In Plan's experience, children have a significant role to play in disaster preparedness and risk reduction. They have the capacity and the will to be involved, and can be easily reached and organised through school networks[10]. Plan's disaster preparedness work in El Salvador has centred around the training of youth disaster preparedness committees, an approach that has been highly successful. After Hurricane Stan, these groups of young people were able to provide leadership and guidance to their communities, organising evacuations and camps, gathering information and identifying and supporting the most vulnerable. The process has been immensely empowering, with communities now placing great faith and trust in the capacities of these young people.

 

Development and Humanitarian Assistance

13. The potentially negative impact of relief and humanitarian assistance on development processes and indigenous capacity, both at the community and the national level, is widely understood. Plan recognises that much of the discussion around "sustainable development" has failed to significantly alter the nature of humanitarian action on the ground. This responds directly to the question "To what extent do humanitarian responses to natural disasters undermine or enhance resilience and the ability of people to cope with future disasters?" Our 70 years experience of community development confirms that sustainable humanitarianism and a developmental approach to humanitarian efforts is a valid and viable strategy. Sustainable humanitarianism supports rather than undermines the aims of long-term development. Unfortunately, there are numerous examples of how the impact of humanitarian intervention can fundamentally undermine long-term development. If poorly delivered, humanitarian assistance can create greater need through exacerbating conflict, for example. Traditional humanitarian action still tends to be predicated on one-way transfer of goods and power, and can be a real threat to local and national governance systems. Clear and simple best practices for minimising these unintended impacts still prove elusive, and DFID should be commended for the work they have done in supporting the identification of such practices.

14. Plan's recent DFID-funded programme in Guatemala - after the floods and landslides caused by Hurricane Stan in 2005 - clearly demonstrates the benefits of taking developmental approaches to relief. Plan placed the municipal authorities at the centre of our response from the outset, supporting them to gather information, coordinate with the national government, distribute relief supplies and plan rehabilitation programmes. The proof of the effectiveness of this approach could be seen in the reaction of a community when Plan attempted to circumvent the consultation systems we had established in order to respond rapidly to an urgently identified need for sleeping materials. Rather than welcoming the support, members of the community were angry that they had not been fully consulted. Enabling communities to have a keener sense of their rights in this way can have immense long-term impact.

15. In Plan's experience, it is local efforts that have the biggest impact in providing relief, particularly in the initial stages. Initial coordination efforts by international agencies should note this and be sure not to undermine or replace local efforts. In response to the Pakistan earthquake, the UN system established structures in parallel to existing authority structures and undermined their role. After the South East Asia tsunami, the rush by international agencies to coordinate their work, marginalised local action with local people's voices not heard in coordination meetings[11].

16. It is important that DFID establishes comprehensive ways of measuring the impact of its humanitarian work in the context of its overall goal of poverty reduction and achieving the MDGs. This responds directly to the Committee's question "How effectively do DFID and other development actors analyse the risks to their development programmes posed by natural disasters?" Plan believes that DFID should articulate more clearly how they plan to manage the acknowledged risk that poorly planned assistance, including humanitarian aid, can undermine the formation of effective states. A substantial body of research shows that aid can replace or undermine local governance structures, particularly in fragile states that so often suffer from chronic emergencies. This is also especially important in relation to DFID's increased commitment to Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and social protection. As DFID's new DRR Policy clearly states, disasters should be a 'core development concern'[12]. With DFID committing greatly increased funds to DRR work, it is more vital than ever that the impact of this work is closely measured and monitored. Plan would also be particularly interested to see more details of DFID's approach to social protection, including the role of social welfare as a long-term alternative to food aid. Plan's work has shown the value of comprehensive social protection programmes encompassing a whole range of activities aimed at arresting the cycle of vulnerability to shocks and disasters[13].

17. There is evidence that climate related disasters are increasing in intensity and impact, yet climate change is not given sufficient or coherently joined-up attention across the UK Government. This concern responds to the question "In what planning is DFID engaging to take account of the key threats to their humanitarian programmes, including HIV/AIDS, avian flu and the extreme climatic events which are likely to occur with greater frequency as a result of climate change?" Plan calls for a clearer articulation from DFID on how it will work with other parts of the UK Government to ensure policy coherence against the increasing threat that climate change brings. Given the amount of money that DFID - CHASE will spend on communities suffering from the effects of climate change, DFID's humanitarian efforts should clearly identify the UK's role in mitigation work.

Initial Disaster Response and International Humanitarian System

18. The structures of the current international humanitarian system leaves significant room for improvement concerning IDPs. Plan's work in countries such as Colombia, Guinea and Pakistan has given us first-hand experience of providing assistance and protection offered to IDPs. IDPs form an enormous group of people, many of them children, whose needs and rights are not fully understood. Since responsibility for IDPs falls between the mandates of several UN agencies, we are convinced that the institutional structures of the current international humanitarian system leaves significant room for improvement.

 

19. Concerning the role of the military, any loss of 'real or perceived neutrality' can lead to security threats and potential targeting for humanitarian actors. There is a strong emphasis on the role of the military in providing humanitarian assistance in DFID's Humanitarian Policy. Plan UK supports this position, having worked closely with the military in responding to both the Tsunami and the South Asia earthquake, and seeing first hand the value that they can add.

 

20. Plan UK applauds DFID's efforts to support initiatives such as the Good Humanitarian Donorship. However we believe that coordination between and among donors and all humanitarian actors is 'work in progress'; there should be no let up in efforts to improve coordination before during and after emergencies.

 

Recommendations

21. Plan UK urges the International Development Select Committee to call on DFID to:

 

·· develop rigorous approaches to ensure that children's capacity is utilised and their voices heard in humanitarian responses. Minimum standards around children's rights should be a part of the Sphere standards;

·· work with organisations like Plan to ensure that the Sphere standards become an accountability tool for communities to be able to claim their rights from external actors, rather than a checklist for INGOs;

·· encourage learning among the military and civilian actors engaged in humanitarianism;

 

·· clearly acknowledge that the loss of 'real or perceived neutrality' can lead to security threats and potential targeting of humanitarian actors and recognise the challenges of humanitarian actors maintaining their neutrality if they are increasingly part of the planning of military operations;

 

·· re-emphasise the need for greater coordination among donors, particularly between EU and non-EU donors; and

 

·· prioritise coordinated efforts to monitor the quality of humanitarian responses in future. The achievements of the Tsunami Evaluation Committee should not be a unique exercise, but seen as the way forward for accountability.

 

For more information about this submission, please contact either Feyi Rodway, Plan UK's Policy and Advocacy Adviser at [e-mail]

---

[1] HIV/AIDS: The Impact of Social and Economic Development, International Development Select Committee Report, 2001

[2] Plan UK works with a number of leading international development and humanitarian agencies - Action Aid, Christian Aid, Tearfund, Red Cross and Practical Action - which have all received funding from DFID to develop and implement disaster risk reduction programmes.

[3] See: http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/lib-terminology-eng%20home.htm

[4] Ending Child Poverty and Securing Child Rights: The Role of Social Protection, Plan UK, October 2004

[5] Little Green Disaster Book, Plan International, April 2005.

[6] Children and the Tsunami, Plan International, December 2005

[7] After the Cameras Have Gone, Plan International, October 2005

[8] The affected communities (and particularly children) identified priorities and managed relief funds.

[9] Children and the Tsunami, Plan International, December 2005

[10] After the Cameras Have Gone, Plan International, October 2005

[11] Children and the Tsunami

[12] Disaster Risk Reduction: A Development Concern, DFID, January 2005

[13] Ending Child Poverty & Securing Child Rights: The Role of Social Protection, Plan UK, October 2005