Paper details

Paper authors	Geoffrey Pinnock
In panel on	Resilience: Blurring the Humanitarian and Development Boundary
Paper presenter(s) will be presenting	In-Person / Online

Abstract

While much of the current wave of ‘Humanitarian-Development Nexus’ and ‘New Way of Working’ discourse has focused on improving (state-led) development outcomes, the implications for humanitarian action appear less certain. This paper argues that a working nexus would include active measures to safeguard the distinct comparative advantages of each.

An international context characterized by pressure on norms of international law, human rights and incentives to ‘instrumentalise’ assistance should indicate a moment to re-enforce principles and efficacy of humanitarian action. Operationally, a working nexus would be ‘fit for purpose’ within the contexts of restricted civil freedoms, corruption and conflict that are the rule, rather than the exception for most international humanitarian assistance.

In this context the HDN and NWoW frameworks arguably still leave too much room for interpretation as to what is practically meant by ‘joining-up’ humanitarian and development action. Work is required beyond a rhetorical intention to uphold principles and efficacy of humanitarian assistance within collective outcomes - a working nexus should describe how. Existing commitments to accountability to affected populations, transparency and humanitarian standards may all present opportunities in this regard.

Development and humanitarian outcomes can and should be improved. The case that doing so necessitates a ‘blurring’ of the humanitarian imperative remains unproven, however, and risks unintended consequences. More can be done to clarify in practical terms how a working nexus will improve complementarity while truly ensuring no-one is left behind, even where durable solutions for people remain contested or elusive.

Back