Paper details

Paper authors	Daniel Coyle
In panel on	After the 'revolution' - where next for participation and accountability in humanitarian action?
Paper presenter(s) will be presenting	In-Person / Online

Abstract

Drawing from theory from historical institutionalism, this paper will frame the development of the humanitarian sector as a path dependency with a remarkable degree of resilience to change despite widespread calls for reforms. In this light, the reason why the Grand Bargain failed to create a critical juncture despite significant cleavages within the sector is explained. Agreement over the need for a “revolution” does not actually produce them. Many of the underlying structural dynamics that have driven the development of the current apparatus remain unchanged and technocratic mindsets tread along similar paths. The responsibility for the revolution has been given to the same institutions and elites who produce and continually reinforce its current state through historical path dependent practices. What hope is there for greater accountability and change within this space? What conditions could produce a critical juncture in the sector and what to do in the meantime? This paper explores processes and actions by individuals within this space that could disrupt or resist the existing state of humanitarian affairs until an actual critical juncture occurs but also acknowledges these “acts of resistance” are seemingly unable to bring about a larger reform.

Back