Search results
Sönke Kunkel (SK): First of all, thank you for taking the time for this interview and thanks for the lively tour through its exhibit! I was wondering if you could perhaps first say a few words about the museum itself: How did it get started and what is it doing? Rainer Schlösser (RS): Well, like many German Red Cross Museums, we started out with a small collection and a small room, in 2000, and then, over time, gradually expanded. In 2007, we were granted the opportunity to extend the museum to a number of rooms on the first floor, and since 2012 we have
humanitarian organisations to shift from working on the periphery of conflicts to the heart of them. Yugoslavia, Chechnya, Rwanda and the entire Great Lakes region of Africa became particularly high-risk areas for aid workers. It was during the intervention in Somalia in 1992 that the interface between security, operational procedures and humanitarian principles became central for MdM. The political and security climate at the time confined NGOs to urban centres across
-resourced settings is rapid; however, for that acute period, ‘normal’ is suspended. One area which is illustrative of such acute stress on a healthcare system is documentation. In ordinary circumstances, whether paper or electronic health records are adopted, there is felt to be sufficient time to produce adequate documentation. In a crisis situation, the documentation drops in priority. First and most appropriate, this is because clinical care takes more attention. Second, however, it is often connected to
them effectively in the lead of defining MSF’s actions. However, all sections initially agreed on the strategy elaborated in SRP1. When the Ministry of Health called for ‘partners’ to position themselves, MSF proposed to take the lead in case management, or the care of Ebola patients. The intention of this choice was not explicitly documented at the time, but in later interviews MSF staff described their ambitions as being ‘to relieve suffering
restricted ( BOND, 2003 ). At the same time, despite agency growth and extensive efforts to professionalise relief work, there was little commensurate increase in effectiveness ( Fiori et al ., 2016 ). Growing risk aversion and recourse to remote management, moreover, created problems of distancing and loss of familiarity ( Healy and Tiller, 2014 ). Distracted by debt-fuelled uncertainty, rather than an indignant citizenry, Western publics now present as so many disillusioned, ironic spectators ( Chouliaraki, 2013 ). Diplomatic influence has also
that were negotiated over time and in response to rapidly changing conditions on the ground. A comparative approach allowed us to develop an analysis of the formation, negotiation and rejection of the legitimacy of local, national and international actors and interventions that had different implications for the duration of the epidemic and the effectiveness of the response in Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone. There were significant regional and national differences in local
Sudan does not feature strongly in the database. The three reports it contains on South Sudan focus on refugee assistance programmes outside of the country. At the time of querying the database (February 2018), it was updated to 2015. The low number of results for evaluation reports was surprising, because the database included evaluation reports from 3ie, ALNAP, DANIDA, DFID, government websites, IFAD, MEASURE, Norad, OECD, SIDA, UNAIDS, UNEG, UNICEF, USAID and the World Bank. The academic literature identified in the database was also limited for South Sudan
This is the second general issue of the Journal of Humanitarian Affairs , following in the wake of two themed issues on Extreme Violence, and Gender and Humanitarianism respectively. It comes at a time when COVID-19 has resulted in rising global inequalities, including those based on gender, and the spectre of famine has returned to public consciousness – for example, in northern Ethiopia. Gender and violence – the latter of a more indirect form – both feature in this issue, as do
collectively from a long battle within the American establishment, in which the military has, for the time being, gained the upper hand over civil servants and career politicians, with their cosmopolitan project of liberal order and rules-based global governance, initiated after the Second World War and expanded after the Cold War. If this victory is consolidated, it will bring an end to the American messianism of the twentieth century, with its division of the world between ‘good’ and ‘evil’, its globalising imperative to reorganise the world through the
Humanitarian innovation emerged as a recognised field with the launch of a research programme by ALNAP in 2008; it was clear at the time that the sector was ready for the systematic approach to innovation proposed by the final review ( Ramalingam et al. , 2009 ). Ben Ramalingam has said that ‘none of us in the team have ever had a recommendation become such a tangible reality in so short a time’ ( ODI, 2010 ), including, most tangibly, the creation of the Humanitarian Innovation