Visit the AfricaFocus
Country Pages

Algeria
Angola
Benin
Botswana
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cameroon
Cape Verde
Central Afr. Rep.
Chad
Comoros
Congo (Brazzaville)
Congo (Kinshasa)
Côte d'Ivoire
Djibouti
Egypt
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Gabon
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Kenya
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Madagascar
Malawi
Mali
Mauritania
Mauritius
Morocco
Mozambique
Namibia
Niger
Nigeria
Rwanda
São Tomé
Senegal
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Somalia
South Africa
South Sudan
Sudan
Swaziland
Tanzania
Togo
Tunisia
Uganda
Western Sahara
Zambia
Zimbabwe

Print this page

Africa: Discrimination in Humanitarian Response

AfricaFocus Bulletin
May 15, 2005 (050515)
(Reposted from sources cited below)

Editor's Note

"Let us agree on one fundamental issue. A human life has the same value wherever he or she is born. There should be the same attention to northern Uganda as to northern Iraq, the same attention to the Congo as there was to Kosovo, and that is not the case today." - Jan Egeland, United Nations Under Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs

Speaking to a closed-door session of the United Nations Security Council and to a private briefing for journalists, both on May 10, Mr Egeland warned that a majority of UN humanitarian activities in Africa were underfunded. Asked whether this reflected bias, he spoke of a "built-in discrimination." Even in the well-publicized case of Darfur, where an April donors' conference generated $4.5 billion in pledges, most pledges have not yet been converted into cash. There is still an immediate shortfall of $350 million for the estimated needs in Darfur. In other cases, such as in northern Uganda and the Horn of Africa, breaks in the food pipeline are predicted in June unless more resources come in quickly.

The UN's consolidated appeals process was designed precisely to avoid such problems, by coordinating estimates of need and donor response with advance planning. However, such appeals still depend on mobilizing voluntary contributions rather than on assessments of obligatory payments from those countries able to pay. The response therefore depends on media attention and other political priorities in rich countries. Even though the coordinated appeals have been restricted to the most urgent needs, and scaled down to increase the chances of response, systematic shortfalls are continuing. Only the best publicized appeals, such as that for response to the Marburg outbreak in Angola and the Indian Ocean tsunami, are evoking responses that come close to meeting the needs.

The Consolidated Humanitarian Appeal for 2005 was first issued in November 2004. This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains a report from the UN's Integrated Regional Information Networks on Mr. Egeland's speech last week, a summary of the financial response to consolidated appeals as of mid-May, 2005, and excerpts from the Consolidated Humanitarian Appeal released last November.

For earlier AfricaFocus Bulletins on this topic, see http://www.africafocus.org/docs03/un0311.php
Africa: Humanitarian Double Standard

http://www.africafocus.org/docs04/wa0411.php
West Africa: Humanitarian Appeal

http://www.africafocus.org/docs05/tsun0502.php
Africa: Tsunami Side Effects

++++++++++++++++++++++end editor's note+++++++++++++++++++++++

Africa: Too little funding too late costing millions of lives

United Nations IRIN
http://www.irinnews.org

Johannesburg, 11 May (IRIN)

The United Nations humanitarian chief, Jan Egeland, has issued a strong appeal to the donor community to focus more attention on humanitarian crises across Africa, warning that without a speedy response million of lives will be lost.

In a statement to the UN Security Council on Tuesday, Egeland said, "news on the funding front is bad across the board". Of the 14 current appeals for Africa, eight have received less than 20 percent and, with the exception of a small flash appeal for Angola, none has received more than 40 percent, he noted.

Donor response to critical humanitarian needs was often inadequate and unpredictable, he added.

"Too many people are dying because too little funding is available, or because it arrives too late in the year," commented the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator.

In 2005 the UN has so far received just 6 percent of the $23.6 million needed for the Central African Republic, 8 percent of the $164.5 million requested for Somalia, 10 percent of the $157 million required in Eritrea and just 22 percent of the $201 million appeal to meet needs in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Egeland, who is also the head of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), highlighted that although some $4.5 billion was pledged for Sudan at a donor conference in Oslo last month, the UN still faced an immediate shortfall of $350 million for humanitarian needs in Darfur alone, and $900 million for Sudan as a whole.

Funding constraints were also severely hampering humanitarian operations in Southern Africa, where consecutive poor harvests have resulted in acute food shortages in a number of countries. The UN World Food Programme's regional operations, which target over 5.5 million beneficiaries in Southern Africa, have received only 15 percent of the necessary funding.

OCHA's Chief of the Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP), Toby Lanzer, said the level of funding at this stage in the year was especially worrying.

"Donors have traditionally been slow off the mark when it comes to making contributions, but we are now already in the month of May and so far CAP 2005 funding stands at just 24 percent. Without immediate funding, the consequences are dire. Underfunding of programmes means people cannot get fed, the WHO [World Health Organisation] cannot assist people to confront HIV/AIDS, and children will continue to be excluded from going to school," Lanzer explained to IRIN.

He added that at a 2003 meeting in Stockholm, donors had said they would aim to provide funding for emergencies earlier, but there had been little progress towards reaching this commitment.

"We have planned to follow up with donors," Lanzer said, "to gauge what the problem areas are, and how we can work better to ensure that more funding is provided, especially for critical emergencies."

Consolidated Appeals 2005

Summary of Requirements and Pledges/Contributions by affected country/region

as of 15-May-2005

[Extract: for full data, in formatted table format, see http://www.reliefweb.int/fts]

Appeal	Revised requirements USD	Commitments/Contributions/Carryover USD (Note: This figure excludes announced pledges that are not binding commitments.)	% Covered
Angola Marburg VHF Flash Appeal 2005	3,503,000	2,822,466	81%
Burundi 2005	134,171,865	21,687,751	16%
Central African Republic 2005	23,610,439	1,430,954	6%
Chad 2005	204,417,653	56,562,185	28%
Chechnya and Neighbouring Republics (RF) 2005	59,444,073	7,960,373	13%
Cote d'Ivoire 2005	39,366,057	3,871,620	10%
Democratic Republic of Congo 2005	200,999,132	44,532,567	22%
Djibouti Drought Flash Appeal 2005	7,494,198	0	0%
Eritrea 2005	157,151,179	16,040,161	10%
Great Lakes Region 2005	103,195,070	34,644,232	34%
Guinea 2005	43,743,004	6,778,318	15%
Guyana Flash Appeal 2005	2,975,000	607,890	20%
Indian Ocean Earthquake-Tsunami Flash Appeal 2005	1,105,183,633	881,354,360	80%
occupied Palestinian territory 2005	302,501,889	84,548,570	28%
Republic of Congo 2005	21,960,437	4,219,981	19%
Somalia 2005	164,463,170	12,718,505	8%
Sudan - Humanitarian & Recovery Components of the 2005 Work Plan	1,530,536,405	426,518,041	28%
Uganda 2005	157,686,167	53,547,736	34%
West Africa 2005	190,258,786	30,302,516	16%
Grand Total	4,452,661,157	1,690,148,226	38%

Consolidated Humanitarian Appeal 2005
November 2004

[Excerpts. Full text of the appeal, more detail about individual country appeals, and up-to-date financial tracking are all available on http://www.reliefweb.int]

Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP)

The CAP is much more than an appeal for money. It is an inclusive and coordinated programme cycle of:

• strategic planning leading to a Common Humanitarian Action Plan (CHAP);
• resource mobilisation (leading to a Consolidated Appeal or a Flash Appeal);
• coordinated programme implementation;
• joint monitoring and evaluation;
• revision, if necessary; and
• reporting on results.

The CHAP is a strategic plan for humanitarian response in a given country or region and includes the following elements:

• a common analysis of the context in which humanitarian action takes place;
• an assessment of needs;
• best, worst, and most likely scenarios;
• stakeholder analysis, i.e. who does what and where;
• a clear statement of longer-term objectives and goals;
• prioritised response plans; and
• a framework for monitoring the strategy and revising it if necessary.

The Humanitarian Coordinator is responsible for the annual preparation of the consolidated appeal document. The document is launched globally each November to enhance advocacy and resource mobilisation. An update, known as the Mid-Year Review, is presented to donors in June of each year.

Donors provide resources to appealing agencies directly in response to project proposals. The Financial Tracking Service (FTS), managed by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), is a database of donor contributions and can be found on www.reliefweb.int/fts In sum, the CAP is about how the aid community collaborates to provide civilians in need the best protection and assistance available, on time.

Appeal by the Secretary-General

This Humanitarian Appeal asks the international community to help some 26 million people in their struggle to survive 14 mostly forgotten emergencies in Africa, Europe and the Middle East. Without your voices speaking out about these crises, and without your tangible support for the victims, these fellow human beings will continue to endure tremendous suffering. Your assistance can transform their grim prospects into a more hopeful future.

This Appeal has great humanitarian value. Through the inclusive and strategic Consolidated Appeals Process, it offers the best available assistance, driven by a rigorous assessment of need. The $1.7 billion required translates into $65 per person a relatively small amount considering that in each case, a life is at stake. Indeed, in recent years countless lives have been saved by strong donor response to such appeals.

Contributions under this Appeal are an investment in our common future. Humanitarian aid can reduce strife and enhance security. It can help nations achieve the Millennium Development Goals, and thereby prevent future emergencies. Given early, it can be very cost effective, since the economic and social fallout of disasters and complex emergencies only rise over time.

+++++++++

Introduction

In 2005, the United Nations agencies and their non-governmental partners - some 104 organisations in total - seek US$ 1.7 billion to meet the basic survival and protection needs of 26 million people struck by major emergencies. From Chad to Chechnya, the Great Lakes to Guinea, the humanitarian community has united under one umbrella to lay out a framework for action that will save lives and alleviate suffering for those living in the world's most desperate crisis areas.

Consolidated Appeals for 2005 show that 26 million people in 14 crisis situations worldwide need urgent help. Their names may be unknown, their lives hidden from our view, but they are the faces of our future as a global community. Theirs are the faces of the very young and the elderly, the pregnant, the malnourished, the maimed. They are our neighbours, our fellow human beings. And like all neighbours in distress, they need our help a hand-up, not a hand-out, so they can build lives of dignity in a 21st Century that is so cruelly out of balance between those who enjoy the right to survive, and those who do not.

Financial requirements for Consolidated Appeals in 2005 are significantly less than in the preceding years. Several crises have resolved to the point where humanitarian appeals are no longer necessary. Further, stricter prioritisation of proposed responses has reduced the average amount per appeal. This shows that humanitarian agencies are acting on their responsibility to use limited resources in the most efficient ways possible, and where they are needed most.

Millions of people in need draw upon the help of kin and community. They also depend on the foresight and generosity of the citizens of donor countries for a day's meal, a sip of clean water, life-saving malaria treatment for a child, or shelter for the night. If we take away all the jargon, this is what the Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) is all about: extending a lifeline of humanity and hope to the world's weak and dispossessed and making sure they get the best available protection and assistance, on time.

+++++++

The importance of early funding

Early funding not only avoids suffering and loss of life, but also assures better value for the donors' money. Humanitarian action is more cost-effective if begun early, before the humanitarian situation and operating environment further deteriorate. For example, emergency vaccination in conflict zones where normal provision of vaccination has been disrupted can stem the spread of infectious, lifethreatening diseases such as measles and meningitis diseases that are cheaper and easier to prevent than to treat. Unchecked spread of diseases also requires a larger investment in vaccination later to bring epidemics under control. The halt of polio vaccination in northern Nigeria in late 2003 caused the spread of infection to 12 countries, but four of these Chad, C“te d'Ivoire, Sudan, and Burkina Faso, all of which are affected by conflict have not managed to bring the infection under control. In response, the 2005 Consolidated Appeals seek funds for emergency polio (and other) vaccination in West Africa.

Similarly, the current locust invasion of West Africa might not have reached crisis proportions had previous alerts succeeded in mobilising donors to support timely locust control programmes. This critical shortage in funding delayed spraying efforts, with the result that West Africa now faces significant crop damage and will require substantial food assistance as well as a much more widespread spraying programme, costing exponentially more than the initial funding request of US$ 9 million in March 2004.

Darfur (Sudan) is another example where more timely funding would have saved not just lives but also resources. Between September 2003, when the Darfur crisis started to become acute, and the end of December 2003, about US$ 46 million was pledged for Darfur and Chad. However, not until August 2004 did funding for Chad and Darfur attain 50% of requirements. Although funding was not the only constraint, the failure to achieve full funding early on resulted in steep increases in the eventual cost of operations: most notably, the onset of rains in June required expensive air transport of food, instead of cheaper ground transport.

In 2004, contributions received by the end of the first quarter (January-March) equalled only 12% of the requirements of Consolidated Appeals as launched in November 2003. In other words, as of 31 March 2004, four and a half months after the the Secretary-General had launched the Humanitarian Appeal 2004, barely a tenth of required funds had been pledged.

In sum, earlier funding enables immediate action, which significantly saves lives and programme costs in the long run.

AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin, or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about reposted material, please contact directly the original source mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see http://www.africafocus.org