Humanitarian Response Review
Share by EmailThe Humanitarian Emergency Response Review is due to report shortly. The review process was launched in summer last year;
Lord Ashdown of Norton-sub-Hamdon will lead a taskforce of humanitarian experts from inside and outside government to review all aspects of how the UK Government responds to disasters and works with the international community to speed up the delivery of aid.
The review is launched six months after the devastating earthquake in Haiti which claimed more than 230,000 lives. It will look into how the UK – already considered one of the best countries at humanitarian deployments – can build on its strengths in responding impartially to humanitarian needs and help ensure future disaster responses can be better prepared and coordinated.
The review will also look at how the UK can best work with international bodies and UN agencies in emergency situations to ensure that the global response to disasters improves.
Andrew Mitchell is no left wing yoghurt knitting museli muncher and the Government obviously see the strategic value of overseas aid, linking it more closely with security and foreign policy objectives is absolute common sense.
This new taskforce will look at the UK’s system to ensure we are at the forefront of disaster response efforts. I want us to be the model for other countries. The taskforce will be pushing for much-needed improvements in how international operations are managed.
The emergency response review will focus on:
Ensuring value for money and impact: With the number and complexity of disasters expected to double over the next ten years, it will help ensure value for money and effective impact on the ground.
Skills and expertise: The taskforce will look at how DFID can ensure our own humanitarian experts can use their skills to strengthen the leadership of the international system, such as how DFID seconds staff to UN posts and what training we provide.
An international review of humanitarian professionals around the world (in 2005) identified a potential lack of experts in critical sectors such as protection, shelter and early disaster recovery.
Coordination with UN, humanitarian organisations and the private sectorto ensure that the UK is helping to make international efforts more efficient, effective and well-coordinated. The National Audit Office report into the Asian Tsunami found that monitoring undertaken by DFID showed delays were occurring in implementing some international projects and this meant that unspent grants were being held back from people in need.
Delivery of aid: DFID has delivered 860 tonnes of non-food aid from its stocks in the UK and Dubai in the past 6 months. The review will test how well this system is set up and make sure the right material and equipment is in the right place at the right time.
Coordination with the rest of government: The Taskforce will investigate how DFID should coordinate with the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign and Commonwealth office to share resources where appropriate.
Technology: the review will look at how to maximise the use of new technologies such as mobile phone, satellite mapping and food innovations.
For example, in Haiti, Columbia University and the Karolinska Institute were able to analyse mobile phone data provided by the telephone company Digicel to map the migration patterns of displaced people following the earthquake in Haiti and discovered that 22% of the population had left Port-au-Prince by the end of January.
This is an interesting shift in emphasis, under the previous government and with the full blessing of Saint Bono and Geldoff resources were channelled into development, the old teach a man to fish argument, but linking this worthy approach to the other foreign policy goals has proven to be difficult.
I think we have all balked at helping India with developing education for its poor whilst they have a nuclear weapons and space programme, it is simple displacement activity and is not sustainable, especially given that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Ministry of Defence are facing such hardship.
Instead of this, hopefully, the review will recommend a greater emphasis be placed on the emergency response phase because it is in this phase the visibility of a nation doing good deeds is greater and arguably, the benefit to the UK.
In the Future of… naval series I suggested a series of measures to bolster the MoD and DFiD’s role in disaster response and how this could link in with the goal of developing regional security, providing better early intelligence of threats to allow us to act sooner and as I finish the RAF series will expand this as well.
When I move onto the Army series, this humanitarian response and developing regional security theme will continue.
I think this will signal an important shift in the slow but pragmatic realignment of overseas development/assistance with realistic security and foreign policy objectives.
Let’s see what it recommends, especially the MoD’s involvement.
Category: Business and Politics
About the Author (Author Profile)
Think Defence hopes to start sensible conversations about UK defence issues, no agenda or no campaign but there might be one or two posts on containers, bridges and mexeflotes!Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
“Instead of this, hopefully, the review will recommend a greater emphasis be placed on the emergency response phase because it is in this phase the visibility of a nation doing good deeds is greater and arguably, the benefit to the UK.”
Very much agreed Admin.
Boss,
Looking forward to the report too. Not sure if DFID is the place for the capability, although it would give the department many more “teeth” with which to do what really is a hugely important job, i.e. the parts of what they do that don’t subsidise the Indian military-industrial complex. (If you want to do that, just buy some LCA Naval for the QEs and call it an offset
At some level, both strategic and philosophical, I worry about shunting everything to do with strategic management of uncertainty and the “frictions” of an unstable world that’s not the “Hulk smash!” end of military action into a government department, rather than viewing it as a holistic thing that includes DFID, some military ops, an actual working diplomatic corps, the BBC, NGOs, and mechanisms stretched right out to a more positive conception of British national vitality and more active citizenship at home to try and drum up a better class of politicians at home (credit where it’s due — if you uncouple the process from private monies, Carswell’s push for constituency primaries was a move in the right direction. For once taking an American idea and *improving* on it, instead of — in the words of Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett — taking out the one thing that worked and keeping the rest!) But someone needs to “do” HA/DR with state-level capabilities on the non military side. This is a big boost in the right direction if it’s a good report. As some of us were talking about in the Open Thread, maybe they could lay hold of RFA Fort George and put her to good use? Magnificent resource for this kind of stuff.
Get that phrase JBT picked out circulating round the interwebs. It’s a good un.
Which phrase, you have caught me off guard?
http://m.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2011/mar/28/britain-losing-influence-humanitarian-crises?cat=global-development&type=article
A joint Disaster Response Group based around RFA vessels and RA(A?)F transports,with Army (TA?) Engineers and Medical units attached? Run by their different services but under the direction and funded by the DfID?
If we tie in the idea of the Forward Presence Ship/Squadrons, they could provide the C4I3 “on scene”, before and after the Joint Group arrives, as well as coordinating FCO, NGO’s, UN, etc.
I’m feeling the need to write up a proposal and start harassing people…
JBT,
The block quote from your first comment, above.
GJ,
That’s what Liberal reformers have done since, well, there were any. Go to it.
well it must’ve worked after the earthquake in pakistan as the royal engineers just went straight got to all the places the NGO’s couldn’t get to (nearly everywhere) and promptly won the wilkinson sword of peace for their efforts
some links here;
http://mod.uk/DefenceInternet/PictureViewers/InPicturesRoyalEngineersBuildWinterSheltersInPakistan.htm
http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/VBOL-6JLK35?OpenDocument
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Documents/publications1/HERR.pdf
paul g,
Nice point.
Gareth,
Cheers for the link.
@ Jackstaff – Working on proposal as I type; might be cheeky and ask TD to look over it.
Some JHSV vessels under RFA or RN command would do nicely in this and several other roles.
Gareth,
Follow that instinct for cheek. The report does have some interesting ounce-of-prevention bits, but really provides for no allocated and organised resources of the kind we’ve all talked about here.
Mark,
Yup. Ask ACC about it and he can provide you with the hyperlink for a tidy design from Rolls-Royce. While it would mean costs of new build JHSV is a good longer-term goal for immediate response. (Well, that and airships …
@ All
I need to find some cheap helicopters and pilots for the Disaster Response Group; at the moment its looking like the retired SeaKings, as they will be operating off ships and transportable by transport aircraft folding rotors are a good thing.
Has anybody got any other ideas?
I could only read the leading in part of this Washington Post article of yesterday, and the photo did not show the wing/ engines make up, but this should be the “biggy” Antonov:
“Huge pumps heading to damaged reactors in Japan
A massive Russian cargo plane roared into Atlanta on Friday to pick up one of the world’s largest concrete pumps, which has been retrofitted to pour water on a Japanese nuclear power plant stricken by an earthquake and tsunami. (April 8)”
- so all kinds of assets should be planned for, and pre-contracted, even if they might only be used once in 20 years