A better response to humanitarian crises

The year 2018 ends much as it began with a sad reminder of the fragility of communities facing crises. The volcanic tsunami of Krakatoa in Indonesia, following earthquakes and earlier tsunamis there, reminds us of the unprecedented changes, challenges and opportunities that we are facing.

Our world is hurting due to a globalisation of fragility, with the world less peaceful due in part to the rise of conflicts within states, the rise of terrorism, and increasing levels of criminality. The picture gets more complex with the changing nature of armed conflict – the rise of internal conflict within states, and the rise of terrorism (including lone actor terrorism) which can occur anywhere. The battlefields of today are not defined by geography but are in our streets, our hospitals, our schools, and our places of worship.

Add to that the fact that the number of displaced people and refugees is the highest since the end of the Second World War. It stood at 66 million at the end of 2016, up by 10.3 million in just one year. We also see it in the growing numbers of people alienated economically and socially within their own societies who are on the periphery, people who are voiceless and vulnerable. Other factors affecting societies include a rise of mental illness, of non-communicable diseases, in the rising national disparities between rich and poor, men and women, rural and urban communities, and even between generations. The consequences of climate change are becoming ever more apparent with unprecedented floods, heatwaves, and droughts.

The globalisation of fragility can be seen through a fragility matrix of underpinning issues. One one side of the matrix, you have the search for social identity (particularly in multicultural populations with mixed identities), accountability (where it’s no longer clear who is in charge) and security (where new ideologies of nationalism have emerged based on sectarian and tribal interests).

These three foundational issues will then intersect with key strategic issues such as people, cities and resources (today’s 50% urbanisation will reach 60-70% by 2030), income inequality (half the world’s population – over 3.5 billion – still live on less than US$3 a day, and climate change (not just increasing global temperature, but ancillary effects such as water supply and food scarcity).

In addressing this complex matrix, we need to be aware of a number of future limiting factors. Firstly, the financing the management and resolution of these global challenges will continue to be a source of concern. The gap between humanitarian and development needs continues to grow, and yet is still reliant on a few traditional sources of funding amidst reduced public budgets and support for aid. UN estimates suggest that developing countries will need more than $2.5 trillion a year to achieve planned development goals by 2030 and that the vast majority of these funds will have to come from nongovernmental, independent, or private sources. How do we mobilise these alternate sources of capital?

One such instrument is Islamic Finance and Islamic Social Finance with assets, globally estimated at $2.5 trillion annually. The potential for zakat, sadaqah, waqf and sukuk lie in addressing the needs and demands. Emerging financing models provide a much wider and more uniquely operated and distributed pool for developing countries. They range from equity-based crowdfunding campaigns to smart remittances, impact investment and mobile money to FinTech applications such as Blockchain and cryptocurrencies, which can provide a part of the solution to address the financing gap and to disrupt traditional finance players.

Second, the future of participation dictates that communities change the way they engage with social, humanitarian, and development causes. As people increasingly live horizontal, connected lives (whereas governments and large institutions function vertically), traditional linear approaches of information sharing become disrupted as emerging technologies democratize information access, participation and agency. For example, during disaster responses many citizen-led groups, coordinated and amplified by social media, self-mobilised and responded to people’s needs independent of formal institutions and often more effectively. How do we engage with and connect to communities wanting to respond and participate? Clearly there has been a shift in power, decision making, and information sharing and distrust of large institutions will need to be overcome.

Finally, the future of technology is transforming how people live and work, with broad implications for community support and development. Machine learning and other technological advancements can help forecast disasters and crises and provide stronger sources for analysis and insight. But there is a risk that benefits will not be felt by all and the digital divide can create further inequality and exclusion. Artificial intelligence algorithms that might further perpetuate inequality and data privacy are already forcing humanitarian organisations to re-think how they handle the data. And as development sector operations and structures increasingly rely on digital platforms, we will face greater risks in protecting that data and our operational mechanisms.

These problems are not infinite, but require a different type of thinking and approach for us to consider going into 2019. We will need to stop solving 21st century problems with 19th century solutions.

This was originally published on the Concordia Insights