Food Security in Complex Emergencies: Enhancing Food System Resilience

This paper explores linkages between food security and crisis in different contexts, outlining the policy and institutional conditions needed to manage food security during a crisis and to rebuild the resilience of food systems in periods of relative peace. The paper reviews experiences over the past decade of countries in protracted crisis and draws lessons for national and international policy. It assesses the different alternatives on offer in fragile countries to address, for example, the disruption of institutional mechanisms and the decreasing level of support offered by international donors with respect to longer-term expectations. It proposes a Twin Track Approach to enhance food security resilience through specific policies for protracted crises that link immediate hunger relief interventions with a long-term strategy for sustainable growth. Finally, the article analyses policy options and the implications for both short- and longer-term responses vis-à-vis the three dimensions of food security: availability; access; and stability.     

Book Reviews

Books reviewed:
Tim Dyson, Population and Food: Global Trends and Future Prospects
R. S. J. Sparks, M. I. Bursik, S. N. Carey, J. S. Gilbert, L. S. Glaze, H. Sigurdsson and A. W. Woods, Volcanic Plumes
Jasper Becker, Hungry Ghosts: Mao's Secret Famine
Dali L. Yang, Calamity and Reform in China: State, Rural Society and Institutional Change Since the Great Leap Forward     

Still falling short: protection and partnerships in the Lebanon emergency response

The Israeli–Hezbollah conflict in the summer of 2006, although brief, had a lasting impact on the region and prompted an intense humanitarian response. The conflict raised challenging questions for the United Nations (UN) about how to assist a middle‐income yet extremely vulnerable population in a context where global and local relations are highly politicised. This paper focuses on two key questions that emerged from the humanitarian response. First, how can humanitarian agencies, and particularly the UN, improve the protection of civilians, and was what they did in Lebanon enough? Second, how can humanitarian agencies create partnerships with local actors and still remain true to core humanitarian principles when local actors are fiercely divided along confessional lines and influenced by external actors, and when some, such as Hezbollah, are parties to the conflict? This paper argues that despite the importance of protection and partnerships to the humanitarian response, their role in the UN emergency response still falls short.     

Privatisation and outsourcing in wartime: the humanitarian challenges

The tendency today to privatise many activities hitherto considered the exclusive preserve of the state has given rise to sharp debate. The specific nature of humanitarian emergencies elucidates in particularly stark contrast some of the main challenges connected to the privatisation and outsourcing of essential public services, such as the provision of drinking water and health care. Privatising the realms of defence and security, which are at the very core of state prerogative, raises several legal and humanitarian concerns. This article focuses on the roles and responsibilities of the various parties involved in armed conflicts, especially those of private companies engaged in security, intelligence and interrogation work, and in the provision of water supply and health services. It highlights the need for humanitarian and development actors to grasp better the potential risks and opportunities related to privatisation and outsourcing with a view to supplying effective protection and assistance to communities affected by war.     

Climate engineering and human rights

ABSTRACT

In this Forum, three scholars discuss how climate engineering will pose novel human rights challenges, and may well force reconsideration of how human rights are applied as a guide to action. Following a short introduction, the first section introduces three competing approaches to human rights, arguing views which emphasize fairness or attempt to maximize satisfaction are more promising than one viewing human rights as inviolable ‘side-constraints’. The second section draws lessons from climate migration that are relevant for climate engineering in terms of incorporating a human rights approach to duties, rights, and participation. The final section compares the ‘needs-based’ and ‘rights-based’ approaches to humanitarian work in the face of climate change and climate engineering, raising concerns for duty-bearers and right-holders. The Forum’s conclusion draws together points of overlap and suggests a path forward for policy and research on this topic.     

The humanitarian common logistic operating picture: a solution to the inter‐agency coordination challenge

Although significant progress has been made in developing the practice of humanitarian logistics, further improvements in efficiency and effectiveness have the potential to save lives and reduce suffering. This paper explores how the military/emergency services’ concept of a common operating picture (COP) can be adapted to the humanitarian logistics context, and analyses a practical and proven approach to addressing the key challenge of inter‐agency coordination and decision‐making. Successful adaptation could provide the mechanism through which predicted and actual demands, together with the location and status of material in transit, are captured, evaluated, and presented in real time as the basis for enhanced decision‐making between actors in the humanitarian supply network. Through the introduction of a humanitarian logistics COP and its linkages to national disaster management systems, local communities and countries affected by disasters and emergencies will be better placed to oversee and manage their response activities.     

Depolarising the 'Broadened' and 'Back-to-basics' Relief Models

Prompted by the calls in recent years to link relief practice to peace-building, development, or both, several conferences and papers have recently mounted a strong critique, seeing these 'broadenings' of relief as 'eroding' or 'corrupting' core humanitarian principles and playing into neo-isolationist agendas to slash humanitarianism. This paper argues that whereas these critiques have important goals in mind when they encourage a concentration on the basics of relief, there has been a loss of subtlety in the ensuing debate. Considering each element of the debate in turn, the paper argues that there is more common ground between 'new' and 'old', 'broadened' and 'basics' relief than at first appears. In concluding, it is argued that further research on key questions, and an openness to hear all perspectives will get us further than entrenched positions and rallying cries.     

Humanitarian action and military intervention: temptations and possibilities

Although the war in Liberia in July 2003 claimed hundreds of lives, the international community was reluctant to intervene. In this article, the author debates the question: does international military intervention equal protection of populations? The role of humanitarian organisations in military intervention is considered. Aid organisations cannot call for deployment of a protection force without renouncing their autonomy or appealing to references outside their own practices. Such organisations provide victims with vital assistance and contribute to ensuring that their fate becomes a stake in political debate by exposing the violence that engulfs them, without substituting their own voices for those of the victims. The political content of humanitarian action is also outlined and military intervention in the context of genocide is discussed. The author concludes that the latter is one of the rare situations in which humanitarian actors can consider calling for an armed intervention without renouncing their own logic.     

Matching response to context in complex political emergencies: 'relief', 'development', 'peace-building' or something in-between?

There is an ongoing debate over the value and pitfalls of the policy and practice of 'linking relief and development' or 'developmental relief' in aid responses to complex political emergencies (CPEs). Driven by concerns about relief creating dependence, sometimes doing harm and failing to address root causes of emergencies despite its high cost, pursuit of both relief and development has become a dominant paradigm among international aid agencies in CPEs as in 'natural' disasters. In CPEs a third objective of 'peace-building' has emerged, along with the logic that development can itself help prevent or resolve conflict and sustain peace. However, this broadening of relief objectives in ongoing CPEs has recently been criticised on a number of counts, central concerns being that it leads to a dilution of commitment to core humanitarian principles and is overly optimistic. This paper addresses these issues in the light of two of the CPEs studied by the COPE project: Eritrea and Somalia/Somaliland. It is argued that the debate has so far suffered from lack of clarity about what we mean by 'relief', 'development' and, for that matter, 'rehabilitation' and 'peace-building'. The wide spectrum of possible aid outcomes does not divide neatly into these categories. The relief-development divide is not always as clear-cut, technically or politically, as the critics claim. Moreover such distinctions, constructed from the point of view of aid programmers, are often of little relevance to the concerns of intended beneficiaries. Second, there has been insufficient attention to context: rather than attempting to generalise within and across CPE cases, a more productive approach would be to examine more closely the conditions under which forms of aid other than basic life support can fruitfully be pursued. This leads to consideration of collective agency capacity to respond effectively to diverse needs in different and changing circumstances.     

Global factors shaping the future of food aid: the implications for WFP

Food aid is a key component of a humanitarian response but its use in other programming contexts is subject to numerous criticisms. Even in humanitarian emergencies food aid is often late, unreliable and out of proportion to other elements of the response. Three major factors will shape the future of food aid. First, mechanisms of food aid governance are being reviewed and may undergo major changes—particularly the Food Aid Convention now that hopes have diminished for an Agreement on Agriculture at the World Trade Organisation. The second significant factor is donor agency trends. Overall levels of food aid have dropped fairly steadily in recent decades and there are several discernible trends in resource allocation, procurement and the use of food aid. The third factor is an emerging body of best practice that will define acceptable standards of food aid programming in the future.