Paper details
| Paper authors | Ian D. Plaskett, Dr Mayumi Fuchi |
| In panel on | ‘Real’ Humanitarian Governance: Accountability, Advocacy, and Alternatives |
| Paper presenter(s) will be presenting |
|
Abstract
Drawing on research findings from both Sudan and South Sudan, this paper critically examines how seemingly rigorous protection, and safeguarding mechanisms often fail to deliver on their humanitarian promises to crisis-affected communities, especially in relation to protection from sexual exploitation and abuse (PSEA). It demonstrates that current systems – widely framed as technically robust – mask deeper structural issues that sustain racial, gendered and colonial power imbalances.
Using anonymised institutional practices observed in both contexts as illustrative examples, we demonstrate how compliance-driven approaches aimed at managing organisational risk and reputation frequently take precedence over appropriately listening to and engaging with beneficiaries or empowering local actors, which silences voices and sidelines local agency. The result is an “illusion of rigour” – frameworks that satisfy bureaucratic requirements yet remain empty promises on the ground for those they intend to protect.
The paper proposes that meaningful change requires a fundamental reimagining of PSEA approaches, grounding them in anti-racist, decolonial and feminist principles that genuinely shift power, support local agency, and centre beneficiary and survivors’ voices. In asking what happens when protection practices and discourses fail, we conclude by outlining a transformative vision for future practice—one that prioritises justice, accountability, and locally meaningful forms of protection.
