Paper details

Paper authors	Louisa Seferis
In panel on	More than (Buzz)Words: Participation in Humanitarian Practice
Paper presenter(s) will be presenting	In-Person / Online

Abstract

“The problem with participation is that the theory is written so well that the practice does not work.”*

Many humanitarian actors feel “genuine” participation is not possible when urgent action is needed, and thus programmes often do not move beyond the consultation phase to a true shift in power over decision-making. What types of participation have and could work in emergencies? How can we move beyond consultation and co-design responses?

This paper will provide examples from the field to overlay existing frameworks of degrees and intensity of participation with the urgency of response, leveraging relationships and trust between aid recipients and providers. Cash programming is discussed as a potential catalyst for participation, by balancing affected people’s preferences and priorities with contextual dynamics (e.g. markets) and humanitarian standards – processes that encourage exchanges with communities beyond consultation.

*Key informant interview, March 2018, for the paper “Participatory Monitoring for Cash Programs in Emergency Response,” by Kathryn Johnson. The research for that work was conducted through an extensive desk review and key informant interviews. The case study for the report was a monitoring pilot for cash programs in Ethiopia in partnership with the Danish Refugee Council as part of the Enhanced Response Capacity Consortium. For the full report, please email katyjohnso@gmail.com.

Back