Paper details
| Paper authors | Alexander Gaus, Julia Steets |
| In panel on | Using Evaluation Evidence to Guide a Structured "Humanitarian Reset" |
| Paper presenter(s) will be presenting |
In-Person / |
Abstract
The Global Public Policy Institute (GPPi) has conducted evaluations in the humanitarian sector for over a decade, supporting international organizations, donors, and other partners in strengthening the effectiveness, accountability, and localization of aid efforts. These goals have gained renewed urgency in light of current reforms in the aid sector. This paper draws on GPPi’s evaluation insights and findings to offer a set of lessons with direct relevance to reshaping the humanitarian system. We propose that any reform should build on existing evidence on what works, what does not, and why.
One example stems from the the Inter-Agency Humanitarian Evaluation (IAHE) of the Somalia response. We found that while humanitarian assistance successfully saved lives, it also exposed critical inefficiencies: overly complex coordination structures, limited engagement of affected communities, and underutilized potential of country-based pooled funds (CBPFs). These findings offer concrete guidance for current reform discussions.
Many of the reform ideas shaping today’s debates have been around for years – already articulated during initiatives like the Grand Bargain – but have yet to be meaningfully implemented. In addition to synthesizing evaluation lessons on substantive priorities for reform, the paper will discuss evaluation insights on political and systemic factors that could hinder or support implementing these priorities.
