| |
| |
|
|
|
Shelter & Displacement
The strengthening of efforts to provide humanitarian relief is a truly global concern. A recent report from the Office of United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, titled 'Strengthening of the coordination of emergency humanitarian assistance of the United Nations', has identified a number of worrying gaps in relief response.
One of the key areas identified, along with expected problems such as adequate water, sanitation and healthcare, is that of provision of suitable shelter, with many of the camps set up to aid displaced groups sorely lacking in any management structure or indeed protection for their inhabitants.
|
Suggested ways in which to achieve this include the establishment of more formalised approaches to coordination amongst the various United Nations (UN) agencies and partners, with those states most heavily involved in the UN calling for more predictable, efficient and effective humanitarian action, greater accountability, capacity building and technical expertise to fill in the gaps in critical sectors and common services.
The UN's General Assembly has continued to explore ways in which to strengthen the international community's response capacity to provide humanitarian relief, building on existing arrangements and ongoing initiatives. One potential route forward, as described during the Economic and Social Council and General Assembly among other studies, considers a number of potential approaches:
a) Mapping the response capacities of national, regional and international actors
b) Strengthening response capacities, with particular focus on human resources
c) Applying benchmarks to measure performance
d) Improving inter-agency coordination
e) Plugging the gaps in the key areas of focus, including water, sanitation and healthcare, shelter and camp management
|
Humanitarian Response Review (HRR)
One of the main recommendations of the Humanitarian Response Review (HRR) recommended assigning responsibilities by sector to lead organisations and developing clusters of relevant partners to develop preparedness and response capacity.
In 2005, the key members of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) agreed to establish cluster leads in nine key areas. These were further broken down in various groups:
|
|
|
Clusters dealing with service provision
a) Logistics, chaired by the UN's World Food Programme (WFP)
b) Emergency Telecommunications, chaired by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) as process owner, with the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) serving as the common data communications service provider and the WFP as the common security telecommunications service provider.
Clusters dealing with relief and assistance to beneficiaries
c) Emergency Shelter, chaired by UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
d) Health, chaired by the World Health Organisation (WHO)
e) Nutrition, chaired by UNICEF
f) Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene, chaired by UNICEF
Clusters covering cross-cutting issues
g) Early Recovery, chaired by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
h) Camp Coordination and Camp Management, chaired by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) (for Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) as a result of conflict) and by the International Organisation for Migration (for natural disasters)
i) Protection, chaired by UNHCR (for conflict-generated IDPs).
Due to the varying nature of the clusters, the scope and range of activities proposed by the different clusters also vary, having been presented in the appeal in the manner best suiting each.
The cluster approach
The cluster approach has been adopted in order to improve the predictability, timeliness, and effectiveness of humanitarian response, paving the way for recovery. It also aims to strengthen leadership and accountability in certain key sectors where gaps have been affected, addressing the repeated requests of the General Assembly for a more predictable, effective and accountable inter-agency response to the protection and assistance needs of those who have been internally displaced.
This approach effectively represents a substantial strengthening of the 'collaborative response' with the additional benefits of predictable and accountable leads, expected in turn to enhance partnerships and complementary relationships among UN agencies and non-government organisations (NGOs) such as the Red Cross and Oxfam.
There are two levels on which the cluster approach operates. At the global level, the approach will build up capacity in the nine key 'gap' areas through the development of improved surge capacity, ensuring consistent access to appropriately trained technical expertise and enhanced material stockpiles, and securing the increased engagement of all relevant humanitarian partners.
|
 |
|
Cluster leadership functions at the global level
a) Up-to-date assessments of the overall needs for human, financial, and institutional capacity
b) Reviews of currently available capacities and means for their use
c) Links with other clusters, including preparedness and long-term planning, standards, best practice, advocacy, and resource mobilisation
d) Taking action to ensure that required capacities and mechanisms exist, including rosters for surge capacity and stockpiles
e) Training and system development at the local, national, regional, and international levels |
Designated Global Cluster Leads are accountable to the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC) for ensuring predictable and effective inter-agency preparedness and response within the concerned sectors or areas of activity.
At the field level, the cluster approach will strengthen the coordination and response capacity by mobilising clusters of humanitarian agencies (UN and other NGOs) to respond in particular sectors or areas of activity, each cluster having a clearly designated and accountable lead, as agreed by the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC) and the Country Team.
To enhance predictability, the field-level cluster lead will normally be in line with the cluster lead arrangements at the global level. These measures will ensure enhanced partnerships between UN-Red Cross/Red Crescent-NGOs on the ground, improved strategic field-level coordination and prioritisation, and will introduce measurable accountability from the operational partners to the Humanitarian Coordinators.
Cluster lead functions at the field level
a) Predictable action in the cluster for analysis of needs, addressing priorities, and identifying gaps
b) Securing and following up on commitments from the cluster to respond to needs and fill gaps
c) Acting as provider of last resort
d) Sustaining mechanisms for assessing the performance of the cluster and individual participants
In sum, the cluster approach represents a critical step forward in enhancing the ability of the Emergency Relief Coordinator (globally) and the HCs (on the ground) to manage humanitarian response effectively.
The approach introduces predictability and accountability into sector responses that have often been ineffective. Accountability is a key feature of the cluster approach: under the system, the HC – with the support of OCHA – retains overall responsibility for ensuring the effectiveness of humanitarian response and remains accountable to the ERC.
Meanwhile, cluster leads at the field level – in addition to their normal agency responsibilities – are accountable to the Humanitarian Coordinators for ensuring effective and timely assessment and response in their respective clusters, and for acting as providers of last resort. In addition, cluster leads have mutual obligations to interact with each other and coordinate to address cross-cutting issues.
The present appeal covers only the costs of implementing the cluster approach at the global level in 2006. While all organisations are maximising resources already at their disposal, clusters leads and cluster partners have recognised the need for varying levels of additional resources to fulfil their cluster obligations in order to ensure that effective response capacity exists in the identified areas.
These additional needs are outlined in the present document, which seeks $39,689,256 from January to December 2006. Funding should be channelled directly to the respective agency appealing for funds. Costs associated with implementing the approach at the field level will be incorporated into revisions of the relevant consolidated appeals, and into flash appeals issued for new emergencies. A mid-year review of this appeal will measure progress against work objectives and resource mobilisation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
