Conference summary: a platform for · PDF fileMr Floris Faber Mission East Operations Director...

RedR / Humanitarian Futures Programme Conference 3 December 2009

Hard realities and future necessities:

the role of the private sector in humanitarian efforts

Conference summary: a platform for collaboration

Hard realities and future necessities: the role of the private sector in humanitarian efforts

Conference Summary ‐ a platform for collaboration

2

The case for cooperation

“Coordination, cooperation, has been perhaps the thing that

has most struck me on my travels. And I would say, on the ba‐

sis that I represent a number of charities, many of whom are

specialists in a field which are all aiming to do the same thing ‐

which is to benefit the people at the end of natural and man‐

made disasters ‐ and part of my travels and observations would

be, that we could all do a lot better if we were a bit more

joined up in our approach and response.”

“The underlying feature, in the link with the private sector, is

that these people are volunteers from the private sector ‐ when

we talk about the contribution of the private sector, it has been

considerable because volunteers so often have come from the

private sector and still are. And it’s that connection which has

been hugely important in growing the network of support, not

just in countries where NGOs are based but in the countries

where they go to. Encouraging private sector volunteers ‐ spe‐

cialist knowledge volunteers ‐ in country, brings in the private

sector in the earliest possible stages, so that is part of our pri‐

vate sector cooperation, that is part of our private sector link.

They support the volunteers, they allow them to go, and for

many of those with professional specialist backgrounds, that is

quite a contribution for the private sector to do already.”

Taken from the Conferenceoverview speech

by HRH The Princess Royal

Foreword



3

Delegates

Name Organisation Job title

Sir Mike Aaronson University of Surrey Visiting Lecturer

Mr John Adlam DFID CHASE Advisory Group Head and Deputy Team Leader

Ms Birthe Anders King's College London MPhil/PhD Candidate

Air Commodore Stephen Anderton G4S Risk Management Adviser

Ms Katy Attfield Independent Consultant

Ms Lamia Ayadi Humanitarian Forum Consultant/Secretariat Coordinator

Mr Daniel Baker Accenture Development Partnerships

Ms Laura Barneby King's College London MA Student

Ms Victoria Batchelor Arup Consultant, International Development

Mr Greg Baxter Booz & Company Partner

Ms Sultana Begum Concern Worldwide ‐ UK Humanitarian Officer

Ms. Alexandra Bevis

Mr Vijay Bhardwaj ECHO Head of Unit for Budget, Audit, IRM and Management

Mr Tim Bishop CARE International ‐ UK Head of Private Sector Engagement

Ms Emily Bishop Women's Refugee Commission Network and Workshop Consultant

Mr Richard Blewitt Help Age International CEO

Mrs Sarah Bradford RedR UK Communications Manager

Lieutenant‐Colonel Jonathan Brasher The Military Stabilisation Support Group (MSSG)

Commander

Mr John Broad Structural Engineer (Retired)

Mr Ebe Brons Centre for Safety and Development Director

Ms Sula Bruce Aid International Development Forum (AIDF)

Director

Ms Joanne Burke Humanitarian Futures Programme, KCL Partnerships Manager

Ms Fiona Campbell Merlin Head of Policy

Mr Julian P Carter RedR Member

Ms Katharine Collett RedR UK Trustee

Mr. Bruce Clarke Tearfund Afghanistan Appeals Officer

Major General Tim Cross HISG UK Office

Mr John Damerell International Federation of Red Cross and Red Cresent Societies (IFRC)

Project Manager

Ms Brittany Damora Overseas Development Institute Research Assistant

Col. Mike Davidson RedR UK Vice‐President

Ms Sally Derrick Airbus UK In‐Service Repair

Mr Michael Dickson The Happold Trust Chairman

Mr Richard Dietrich Roughton Group Shelter Coordinator

Mr Martin Drewry Health Unlimited Director

Ms Anne Durrant RedR UK Fundraising and Communications Director

Ms Tara Bajracharya RedR UK Learning and Clusters Programme Officer

Mrs. Catherine Carter

Lady Duncan‐Sandys



4

Delegates continued...

Mr John Dyson King's College London MA Student

Mr Michael Elliott Water & Sanitation Engineer

Mr Floris Faber Mission East Operations Director

Mr . Nigel Fine

Mr Christopher Finucane Humanitarian Policy Director

Mr Timothy Foster RedR UK Trustee

Mr Mervyn Frost King's College London Head of War Studies Deaprtment

Mr Pete Garret British Red Cross Operations Manager – Relief

Mr Brendan Gormley Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) Executive Director

Ms Lola Gostelow Humanitarian Consultant

Mr David Gould Independent Consultant

Mr Peter Goulding RedR UK Former Trustee

Mr PJ Greeves RedR UK Trustee

Ms Daphne Guthrie ICE Manager International Development

Mr Nick Guttmann Christian Aid Head of Humanitarian Division

Mr Mark Hammersley Aid Workers Network Director

Mr. Evan Hancock

Ms. Vickie Hawkins MSF UK Head, Programme Unit

Mr Gino Henry RedR UK Trustee

Mr Terry Hill Arup Chair of the Transport Market

Prof. Brian Hobbs University of Glamorgan Pro Vice‐Chancellor (Research)

Mr Robert Hodgson RedR UK Chair

Miss Lucy Hodgson Independent Consultant

Ms. Marta Hofstrom RedR UK Fundraising Development Officer

Mr. Guy Holloway BRAC UK Programme Officer

Ms. Rachel Houghton Emergency Capacity Building Project Sector Partnerships Project Manager

Mr. Thomas How Merlin Head of Logistics

Ms. Laura Hudson British Red Cross Policy & Learning Support Officer

Ms. Sara Hylton King's College London MA Student

Ms. Kristine Jenson RedR UK International Programmes Officer

Mr. Jamille Jinnah C for C Ltd Director

Mr. Alan Johnson RedR Member

Ms. Ruchira Joshi Price Waterhouse Coopers Manager, Sustainability and Climate Change

Mr. Shailesh Kataria Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)

Director, RICS Disaster Management Commis‐sion

Mr. Toby Kent Price Waterhouse Coopers Assistant Director, Sustainability and Climate Change

Ms. Sarah Kent RESET Founder Member

Ms. Basia Kwiatkowska Independent Consultant Independent Consultant

Mr. Andrew Lamb Engineers Without Borders UK CEO

Ms Sushanthy Gobalakrishnan RedR UK

Mr Toby Gould RedR UK Cluster Programmes Coordinator

Ms. Eva Halper



5


Ms. Esther Laurence Humanitarian Futures Programme‐ King's College London

Administrator

Mr. Hin‐Yan Liu King's College London Research Student

Mr. Sean Lowrie Humanitarian Futures Programme‐ King's College London

Independent Consultant

Ms. Ellen Martin Overseas Development Institute Research Officer

Mr. Robert McAdam RedR Member

Mr. Daniel McAvoy University of East Anglia Lecturer in International Development

Mrs. Cheryl McDonald RedR UK Cluster Projects Coordinator

Mr. Mark McKeown Children In Crisis CEO

Ms. Catherine McMenamin ORC Worldwide Global Consultant

Mr. Andrew McNab Scott Wilson Director for Sustainable Development

Mr. Nicholas Mellor Merlin Co‐founder

Ms. Carolyn Miller Merlin Chief Executive

Mr Thomas Moat Humanitarian Futures Programme‐ King's College London

Intern

Miss. Eva Modvig RedR UK Communications Officer

Ms. Jane Moore RedR UK Trustee

Ms. Sarah Morrison Little John Partner

Ms. Jacqui Morrissey Help the Aged Head of International

Mr. Ben Nicholson Tearfund Country Representative – Zimbabwe

Ms. Rosie Oglesby Humanitarian Futures Programme ‐ King's College London

Senior Project Coordinator

Mr. Moustafa Osman Islamic Relief (IR) UK Head of Humanitarian Department

Dr. Preeti Patel King's College London Lecturer, War Studies

Mr. Mark Pelling King's College London Reader in Geography

Mr. Ian Piper Independent Consultant

Mr. Jonathan Potter People in Aid Executive Director

Mr. Adam Poulter CARE International ‐ UK Head of Humanitarian Emergencies

Mr. David Price Capita Symonds Infrastructure & Regeneration Associate

Ms. Jebi Rahman BRAC UK Programme Officer

Major Mani Rai The Military Stabilisation Support Group (MSSG)

Mr. Greg Ramm Save the Children UK Director of Global Programmes

Mr. Bob Reed WEDC Senior Programme Manager

Mr. Steve Rickatson Humanitarian Futures Programme‐ King's College London

Administration Assistant

Mr. Jeff Riley King's College London Careers Advisor

Squadron Leader Lisa Rose The Military Stabilisation Support Group (MSSG)

Mr. Nick Roseveare BOND CEO

Ms. Catherine Russ RedR UK Learning and Development Programmes Director

Mr. Dominic Ryan King's College London

Mr Simon Morrow RedR UK Member

Ms. Rose Papararo RedR UK Corporate Relations Manager

Mr. David Rouane RedR UK Finance Director



6


Mr. Robert Sadleir King's College London

Ms. Frances Sagala C for C Ltd

Ms. Laura Sandys Open Democracy Non‐executive Director

Ms. Eeva Sarkkinen BOND Membership and Networks Office

Mr. Derk Segaar United Nations Office for the Coordi‐nation of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)

Prof. Paul Sherlock OBE Oxfam GB Senior Humanitarian Representative

Mr. Lewis Sida Independent Consultant

Mr. Benoit Silve Institut Bioforce General Director

Mrs. Anne Slamen‐McCann Independent Consultant

Mr. Ian Smout Water Engineering and Development Centre (WEDC)

Principal Programme

Ms. Frances Stevenson MBE Médecins Sans Frontières Interna‐tional

Board Member

Ms. Andrea Stewart Emergency Capacity Building Project Communications Manager

Ms. Annie Street ActionAid International Project Manager

Ms. Marieke Stroink Centre for Safety and Development

Mr. Melvin Tebbutt RedR UK Trustee

Ms. Julie Thomas King's College London

Ms. Sandrine Tiller British Red Cross Humanitarian Policy Adviser

Ms. Justine Tordoff RedR UK HR Director

Mr. John Tracey‐White Royal Institution of Chartered Survey‐ors (RICS)

Build Action Projects Coordinator

Ms. Ruchi Tripathi Concern Worldwide ‐ UK Head of Policy and Campaigns

Miss. Natalie Tuck RedR UK Communications Volunteer

Ms. Clare Twelvetrees PAWS Head of Secretariat

Ms. Emma Visman Humanitarian Futures Programme ‐ King's College London

Mrs. Frieda Von Gyer Kings College Hospitals, London Practice Development Nurse

Mr. Mark Waddington Warchild ‐ UK CEO

Mr. Chris Weeks DHL Director, Humanitarian Affairs, Deutsche Post DHL

Mr. Mike Wisheart World Vision UK Associate Director, Collaboration and Partnering

Mr. Mike Wooldridge BBC World Affairs Correspondent

Ms. Ruth Wooldridge Paliative Care Works

Mr Roger Yates Plan International Director of Disasters and Humanitarian Response

Mr. Perry Seymour RedR UK

Mr. Chris Sidell RedR UK

Colonel Marty Slade

Mr. Bruce Spires RedR UK Learning Programme Officer

Mr. Ian Steed



7

Agenda

09:00 ‐ 09:50 Registration and Coffee

09:50 ‐ 09.55 Welcome and House Keeping

09.55 ‐ 10.00 Arrival and entrance of HRH The Princess Royal

10:00 ‐ 10:10 Welcome by Professor Richard Trainor, Principal, King’s College London

10:10 ‐ 10:20 Welcome by Mr. Martin McCann, Chief Executive, RedR

10:20 ‐ 10:50 Key note address:

New Dimensions of Collaboration and the Corporate Sector

Sir John Holmes, UN Emergency Relief Coordinator

10:50 ‐ 11:00

Conference overview: Is there a Place for the Private Sector?

HRH The Princess Royal, RedR President

11:00 ‐ 11:10

Round up and thank you

Dr. Randolph Kent, Director, Humanitarian Futures Programme, King’s College London

11:10 ‐ 11:40 Coffee Break

11:40 ‐ 13:10 Panel 1:

Chair:

Speakers:

The Corporate‐Humanitarian Record to Date

Professor Denise Lievesley, Head of School of Social Science and Public Policy, King’s College London

Professor Alyson Warhurst, Warwick Business School and Founding Director, Maplecroft

Mr. Rolando Tomasini, Programme Manager, Humanitarian Research Group, INSEAD

Mr. Ben Ramalingam, Head of Research and Development, ALNAP

13:10 ‐ 14:10 Lunch

14:10 ‐ 15:40 Panel 2:

Chair: Speakers:

Practice and Future Possibilities

Ms. Ekaette Ikpe, Research Associate, King’s College London Conflict, Security and Development Group

Ms. Jo da Silva, Director, International Development, Arup

Mr.Will Day, Sustainability Advisor, PriceWaterhouse Coopers

Mr. Marc Dubois, Executive Director, Médecins sans Frontières UK

15.40 ‐ 16.10 Coffee break

16.10 ‐ 17.20 Panel 3:

Chair:

Speakers:

From the Perspective of Local Players

Mr. Rudolph von Bernuth, Director, Alliance Cooperation in Emergencies, Save the Children Alliance

Mr. Les Baillie, Chairman, Safaricom Foundation

Mr. Hugo Slim, Director, C for C Ltd

Reflections Mr. Martin McCann and Dr. Randolph Kent


Conference Summary ‐ a platform for collaboration 8

Foreword 2

Delegate list 3

Agenda 7

Contents 8

Introduction: can we step up together? 9

1. Who are we? 10

The private sector

The humanitarian sector

2. The state of engagement 11

Limited collaboration to date

Motivations for involvement

3. Patterns of change 12

Humanitarian business and...

... business like humanitarians?

Common ground and complementarily

4. Enduring challenges 14

Persistent divisions

Further barriers

5. Options for the future 15

Partnership working and the mixed model

Managing donations better

Mutual benefit from innovations

More options for sharing risk, credit and investment

6. First steps forward 17

Contents



9

Can we step up together?

There is a growing global demand for humanitarian assis‐tance. Increasing numbers of people are being abused, in‐jured, killed or deprived of their health, homes, livelihoods and schools as a result of conflict and of disasters triggered by natural events such as earthquakes and floods. The ef‐fects of shortages and variability in resources, including wa‐ter and affordable food, are widespread – and all of these have greatest impact on the poorest and most vulnerable. Many millions of people live without adequate basic ser‐vices, in states with largely absent public provision, and cer‐tainly no insurance cover.

This vulnerability seems likely only to increase in the com‐ing decades, and the effects of climate change are very likely to compound rising environmental and socio‐economic stresses. The one certainty is that the number and potency of humanitarian crises will continue to increase significantly, as will the need for urgent humanitarian relief. What is the best way to meet these needs? Preparedness and risk reduc‐tion are clearly important, but so is immediate, life‐saving assistance. The private sector is already contributing to hu‐manitarian efforts, and there are encouraging examples of innovation and collaboration between traditional humani‐tarian actors – INGOs, NGOs, and multilateral and govern‐mental agencies – and the private sector.

To meet present and future humanitarian needs, however, much more collaboration and more innovation will be re‐quired. The few current examples, exceptional though they are, of successful cooperation between private and humani‐tarian actors lead us to believe that there is a largely unreal‐ised potential to achieve more by working together. There are marked differences between for‐profit and humanitarian work, although the boundary seems to be shifting in several ways. Are there areas of overlap, of common interest, and are there complementary skills that could increase both the quality and reach of humanitarian efforts?

This report summarises the one‐day conference we jointly held in December 2009. Ten different speakers contributed from diverse perspectives: humanitarian NGOs, the United Nations, multinational corporations, academia, policy and research, and specialist commercial companies working to develop essential services or rebuild post‐conflict econo‐mies. There are diverging views of course but also clear agreement on the growing humanitarian need. Further, there was consensus on the value of working together, and a wealth of examples and ideas about how this could be done.

We think that this constitutes a significant step towards real‐ising the future necessity of a larger, more effective and more mixed humanitarian system.

This report aims to distil the critical debates and key learn‐ing from the conference. We thank all of the speakers and other participants, and hope that the five themes that follow here will contribute to an agenda for change and represent useful signposts for where to go next.

Randolph Kent, Humanitarian Futures Programme ,

Martin McCann, RedR UK

Introduction



10

The private or ‘corporate’ sector, and the humanitarian sec‐tor, yes – but who is included in these broad groupings? The answer depends partly on whom you ask. Several important questions, and agreement in many areas, emerge from the assembled views at the conference.

The private sector

The private sector already contributes to humanitarian ac‐tivity, and perhaps the most visible collaborations are those involving multinational corporations. However, the private sector includes more than multinationals. Small businesses in crisis‐affected areas, for example, are consistently at the forefront of saving lives and protecting livelihoods during and after emergencies of all kinds, especially in the most life‐threatening early stages.

In Darfur, when the humanitarian emergency started in 2003/04, private households were the first to help those in greatest need; it was late 2004 before the formal humanitar‐ian sector got involved. Local businesses, small and medium‐size enterprises and national companies are perhaps best able to contribute ‘private‐sector’ abilities in the villages, towns and regions where they are rooted and which they know better than any outsider could. Yet small businesses and local enterprises are usually disregarded in discussions of private‐sector collaboration, and they have no links with formal aid and humanitarian organisations.

In this summary, ‘corporate sector’ refers to commercial, for‐profit enterprises of all sizes.

The humanitarian sector

Humanitarian endeavours and organisations define them‐selves by the fundamental principle of impartiality: assis‐tance should go to those most in need, regardless of who or where they are. Traditionally, humanitarian aid is defined as meeting only urgent and immediate needs. There is a strong argument in favour of retaining this narrow definition, espe‐cially because this maximises access for humanitarians to conflict areas.

Increasingly, humanitarian effort is being defined more widely, as extending to include longer‐term support, to work in slow‐onset crises such as famines, and even to recovery and rehabilitation activities, sometimes long after a sudden

crisis. Divisions between ‘development’ and ‘humanitarian’ work have in so many ways exacerbated vulnerability to crisis threats, and we must actively promote the relationship between them if the impact of such threats is to be reduced. In a very practical sense, the distinction between the two is becoming increasingly blurred, and many programmes now do not fit into the separate categories of either relief or de‐velopment aid. Is disaster‐risk reduction and increasing re‐silience not the ideal, just as prevention is better than cure? Even those in favour of the narrowest definition of ‘humanitarian’ agree here.

Especially when working with those outside the humanitar‐ian sector, traditional humanitarian actors need to be clear about what sort of collaboration they are willing to pursue. There is wide recognition of the tendency of humanitarian NGOs to accept funding from corporate donors but there are still those who do so while ‘holding their noses’ in disap‐proval and distaste. Is this pragmatism or hypocrisy? Only some will say, but everybody knows, that humanitarians are not always guided solely by their own stated principles. It is important to understand the values and principles of others while at the same time maintaining one’s own values. For example, the achievements of Save the Children UK in work with women and girls in Afghanistan were possible only be‐cause of the dialogue established with Taliban authorities.

1. Who are we?

‘It is the private sector that saved the people in Darfur’

Marc DuBois, Chief Executive, Médecins san Frontières UK



11

Should humanitarian work be carried out only by the public or third sectors? The corporate sector has always contrib‐uted, even if that contribution is ‘a drop’ in the ocean of hu‐manitarian need, and far less than community and state con‐tributions. To date, humanitarians and the corporate sector have regularly been compared to oil and water: fundamen‐tally different and impossible to mix. Those in the corporate sector feel that humanitarians have regarded them with dis‐dain, as amoral, fickle and unreliable – at best, a ‘cash cow’ to be milked, and, at worst, a threat to strictly humanitarian work.

Limited collaboration to date

Corporate‐sector involvement has traditionally been greater in development work than in humanitarian relief efforts, though both have generally been at minimal levels. The small amount of joint working in the humanitarian sector has been occasional, sporadic and short term, usually lasting only for a single emergency. Corporate donors have tended to contribute goods in kind in preference to cash. It is hard to be sure exactly what and how much has been donated, because there are no comparable accounts for donations, especially of commodities and services rather than cash. The role of small and local businesses is rarely even acknowl‐edged. There have been some spectacularly unsuccessful collaborations, with some corporations donating utterly in‐appropriate goods that are unfit or unwanted, such as low‐calorie slimming foods to famine areas.

There are at the same time a number of examples of high‐profile and successful collaborations, especially in the area of logistics: TNT has been working with the World Food Pro‐gramme and delivered the first food aid to Banda Aceh after the Indian Ocean tsunami. The partnership between the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) and DHL is working well in dealing with surge capacity for humanitarian cargo. Private corporations raised US$2 billion for the tsunami relief effort – a considerable achievement – but it now seems likely that this increased involvement was an exception and is not yet a continuing trend at any signifi‐

cant scale. Corporate‐sector representatives agree that lev‐els of involvement could be considerably greater – and will need to be, in order to help to meet growing humanitarian needs.

Motivations for involvement

That said, the traditional humanitarian sector is becoming increasingly keen to involve the corporate sector in humani‐tarian work, despite considerable continuing ethical con‐cerns. Humanitarians are acutely aware that they need to increase the capacity of the system, and quickly. There are some areas in which the corporate sector has considerable comparative advantage and expertise: the capacity to keep skilled people and other resources ‘on standby’ for example, and the ability to invest in research and development for technical innovations.

Corporations identify various reasons for their involvement in humanitarian work, including:

direct commercial benefit, from the sale of more products or services

benefit to reputation, including through the use of corporate branding

enhanced knowledge through the experience of working in new areas

a desire, or perceived need, to reflect the interests and concerns of employees

the desire to protect employees living or working in a crisis‐affected area

a concern to ‘put something back’, for no direct reward.

Overall, to date, there has been little sustained effort from the corporate sector to understand the complexities of the humanitarian sector, or from humanitarians to articulate the needs and gaps that they would like the corporate sector to fill. There have been too few forums like this where the two parties can meet and discuss the options, despite the pre‐vailing assumption that the two sides in the longer term will most probably have to work together as we face a mounting toll of disasters.

2. The state of engagement

‘We’re living in a world that is increasingly difficult to

live in; disasters are on the increase: I am in no doubt

that climate change is happening… and its affecting

poor and vulnerable people’

Jo da Silva, Director, International Development, ARUP

‘The private sector and humanitarians should be

natural allies: both rewarding innovation and

creativity, speed, being in the right place at the right

time, and getting the job done against the odds’

Sir John Holmes, UN Emergency Relief Coordinator



12

Just as humanitarian needs are changing – qualitatively as well as quantitatively, given the effects of new kinds of con‐flicts, forced displacement and rapid urbanisation – both the corporate and humanitarian sectors are also shifting boundaries and changing focus to some extent. Is there an opportunity here to reconceptualise the relationship be‐tween humanitarian and for‐profit work?

Humanitarian business and...

Some from the corporate sector argue that it is a matter of enlightened self‐interest for commercial enterprises to en‐gage with humanitarian issues. Business is now truly global. Not only is our cocoa from Ghana, our tea from Kenya and our coffee from Uganda, but businesses are increasingly dis‐persed, diverse and in some ways increasingly vulnerable to supply‐chain bottlenecks or changing consumer opinion. The great majority of organisations operating in any area of instability or emergency will be directly and adversely af‐fected by disruption to their production or markets. The cor‐porate sector, it is argued, has to be ‘part of the solution’, not least in order to protect its own stability and growth.

The political geography of businesses of all scales is also changing, most notably because of the rise of newly power‐ful economies such as Brazil, Russia, India and China, the Philippines, Mexico and others. Many of the world’s fastest‐growing economies, although often also marked by great poverty, are among the most risk‐prone, in both humanitar‐ian and business terms. Disasters caused by natural hazards in 2008, for example, caused greatest financial losses in rich countries including the USA, but the greatest proportions of losses to GDP were in poor countries such as Bangladesh, Mozambique and Haiti. The food‐price rises of 2008 caused especially severe problems in, among others, Egypt, Camer‐oon and Haiti. Combining several dimensions of risk, to iden‐tify overall risk ‘hotspots’, generates a list including India, Somalia and – Haiti.

Given these economic and political connections, it is argued that the newer and growing economies, the ‘risky’ places, are also those with the most potential for economic growth and the most potential to save the world from economic crisis. Humanitarian work is essential to save lives today, and also to avoid problems in future that pose clear security and po‐litical risks. So at a time when the corporate sector is feeling most risk‐averse, it would benefit from contributing to man‐aging these risks responsibly. This is beginning to happen, in some places, and the business view of risk is becoming broader and longer‐term. If business creates a proper envi‐

ronment in which to flourish, it is argued, this in turn will also benefit the most vulnerable people.

Proactive companies are analysing this risk, and understand the need – the business case – to adapt. Resource insecurity leads to migration and conflict; widespread corruption and violent criminality in addition lead to social and economic instability, as well as humanitarian crises. Engagement by the corporate sector in humanitarian efforts is also seen as part of the new corporate social responsibility, which in‐cludes protecting employees and working successfully in environments at risk. Some argue that business motives are nowadays increasingly mixed, are not always based solely on maximising short‐term profit. One view is that markets can contribute here if they value the businesses that are the most sustainable and have most economic value, rather than being the most profitable.

... business like humanitarians?

There is general agreement that humanitarian organisations are becoming more professional, more rigorous and more analytical. There is some disagreement, however, about whether or not this is a good thing. The recent proliferation of humanitarian codes, standards and guidelines is generally seen as part of a positive evolution or maturing, but is also regarded with dismay by some in the sector. The concern here is not that commercial organisations are ‘taking over’ humanitarian work but that the humanitarian system is it‐self adopting characteristics of the corporate sector, such as increased concern with accountability, reporting and meas‐uring performance and effectiveness.

Some argue that humanitarians can only benefit, and benefit those in need of assistance, by drawing from business prac‐tice in terms of maximising value for money, and focusing more on ‘customer satisfaction’. For others, market forces and the aim of making a profit are inappropriate models for humanitarian work. Meanwhile, there is a small but growing number of hybrid endeavours apparently avoiding this di‐chotomy. Water and Sanitation for the Urban Poor (WASUP), for example, is a company working as a mix of NGOs and businesses. Some traditional humanitarians have expressed concern that commercial companies are benefiting from this endeavour to meet basic human needs. For example, Unile‐ver has increased sales of soap to poor people in some areas. Is this a sad case of profiteering, or is it one in which every‐one benefits? A case of market failure and lacking state pro‐vision of basic services is being addressed; poor urban com‐munities get better sanitation and water supply; and sales of

3. Patterns of change



13

commercial products increase while also contributing to improved hygiene. It seems that there are no losers here.

Common ground and complementarity

The corporate and humanitarian sectors share an interest in risk analysis and in managing uncertainty, and in creative and cost‐effective approaches to problems. Most representa‐tives of both sides state that they would like to develop stronger, longer‐term and sustainable relationships between the sectors, and that partnership working is critical. Both sides agree that they want relationships based on more than ‘just money’. Humanitarians would like to develop more for‐mal partnerships, so that collaborations can be strategic, systematic and scalable, and more than a simple donation of time or resources. They would like more support for risk‐reduction and for slow‐onset as well as sudden disasters, and help with technical and other kinds of research and in‐novation. There is a strong desire for a change in focus to ‘vulnerability rather than catastrophe’, as so much more could be achieved to prevent disasters happening.

Members of the corporate sector say that there is much de‐sire and willingness to help with humanitarian work at both the individual and corporate levels. Rather than only donat‐ing money, and in preference to implementing humanitarian programmes themselves, influential members of the corpo‐rate sector would like to play an enabling role, to fill gaps as needed, and to help to build local capacity. Businesses can offer cash, commodities and personnel. They have skills and expertise in risk analysis, strategy and long‐term planning, and in making good use of resources and focusing evaluation on the views of the end user – the customer (or beneficiary). Both sides agree that they need more strategic partnership models, and more collaboration at the meta‐level.

The Safaricom Foundation, part of the Safaricom telecommu‐nications corporation, has developed a strategic partnership with the Kenya Red Cross. This encompasses donations, fundraising via mobile‐phone and giving staff members paid leave to work on improving Red Cross IT capability. Safari‐com’s M‐PESA money‐transfer system uses a text‐messaging service via mobile phone without the need for a bank ac‐count, and was developed as a commercial service. Concern Worldwide, having problems distributing food aid to dis‐persed recipients in Western Kenya, successfully worked with Safaricom to use the M‐PESA system to make secure cash transfers, directly to numerous individual recipients.



14

Despite examples of successful collaboration between the humanitarian and corporate sectors, and despite the very definite changes within each sector, there remains consider‐able mutual suspicion and distrust between them.

Persistent divisions

Those in the corporate sector are aware that some humani‐tarians remain sceptical about the commercial motivation of the corporate sector and its alleged ‘desire to make money out of human suffering’. Indeed, the corporate sector is in‐disputably part of the ‘war sector’. In Eastern DRC today, mercenary, competitive corporations are armed and vicious and literally seek ‘market advantage at the point of a gun’. However, it is also true that many in the corporate sector are working to stabilise conflict areas or to rebuild economies after the devastation of conflict and disaster.

Business people, in turn, continue to question humanitari‐ans’ understanding of the bigger picture. For example, in Myanmar, after the devastation of Cyclone Nargis, was it wise to pressure businesses to divest? One immediate result was a huge increase in the numbers of women and girls working in prostitution, having lost their other employment. Members of the corporate sector are also well aware that some humanitarians see them only as a source of funding, and express irritation at those who ‘turn up only when they want money’. Furthermore, members of the corporate sector are inclined to refuse any help when they know that they are seen as undesirable partners.

Further barriers

Some companies and others in the corporate sector are in‐terested in supporting humanitarian work, as requested, but simply do not know how to do this. Where is the entry point, and who among the numerous humanitarian actors is the one to approach? Some members of the corporate sector and others have suggested that there is a real lack of understand‐ing between the sectors but that this is based more on igno‐rance than on grievance. There is a need for what has been described as ‘a platform’ that will be the basis of a meeting of minds as well as a means to establish entry points.

There is a fundamental distinction between a rationale based on profit and one based on the humanitarian, in re‐sponse to need. Yet neither of these rationales exists in per‐fect isolation. Given the transformation of the traditional humanitarian sector, it is no longer a question of the corpo‐rate sector supporting the humanitarian sector but rather that the corporate sector is likely to become a critical com‐

ponent of the humanitarian system. Just as the relationship between NGOs and the UN has changed dramatically in re‐cent years, and as there is reduced tolerance of animosity between development and relief, we need now a shift in hu‐manitarians’ perceptions of the corporate sector.

4. Enduring challenges



15

The humanitarian sector has come a long way in a few dec‐ades. And yet, we need it to save more lives and protect hu‐man dignity more effectively. In doing this, we cannot ignore the benefits of business methods, expertise and resources. Attitudes are shifting in this direction, and we have estab‐lished a platform, a base from which we can begin, and can continue critical discussion to explore some key ideas fur‐ther. The main question now is, ‘How can we go faster?’

Partnership working and the mixed model

The corporate and humanitarian sectors agree on the need for partnership working, focusing more on shared aims and areas of common interest.

Working together, each side can identify areas of relative strength and decide who does what best, looking at how each can add value in emergencies and other work.

Humanitarians need to engage strategically with the corporate sector; careful partnership broker‐ing will be important, based on mutual learning, respect and risk‐sharing.

The corporate and humanitarian sectors can con‐tribute to developing local, regional and national preparedness, and providing increased support for building resilience (such as through reforesta‐tion, early‐warning systems and flood protec‐tion).

Will a multinational corporation, one day, coordi‐nate an array of NGO, state and non‐state actors?

Is there scope for a trilateral partnership, be‐tween civil society, businesses and the public sec‐tor?

Managing donations better

Cash is increasingly becoming accepted as the preferred form of donation, because it is the most flexible.

Especially when giving cash, corporate‐sector donors will have questions about who receives it and how they are going to spend it.

Face‐to‐face contacts for developing partnerships with interested business donors are recom‐mended.

For humanitarian organisations also, a bridging or brokering organisation might be useful to ad‐vise on the process and to let agencies know when a donation is coming.

The other recommended form of donation is through secondment. (For example, Hindustan construction in India has placed personnel with Oxfam to help in Bangladesh during emergen‐cies.) Secondment has the advantage of also pro‐viding a link with the source organisation.

Mutual benefit from innovations

Innovation in products or processes is a key area of collaboration to date and for the future, and can be an ideal entry point for the corporate sec‐tor into humanitarian efforts.

There is consensus from the full range of humani‐tarians that technical innovations developed in or with the corporate sector can be very beneficial. For example, the rapid diagnostic test (RDT) for malaria has revolutionised practice by delivering a result in only 30 minutes.

The use of community therapeutic feeding, some‐times involving new and commercially produced products, is another example of a positive innova‐tion with considerable impact.

A corporate partner has recently developed new temperature‐sensitive vaccine labelling, and will market this worldwide for profit, but at a much‐reduced price to poor countries.

More options for sharing risk, credit and

investment

We need to find new ways to share risk; only 4 per cent of all weather‐related losses in poor countries carry some kind of insurance.

There are already some positive experiments in this area, such as insurance for drought in Ethio‐pia.

Innovative mechanisms for protecting people such as micro‐finance and micro‐insurance war‐rant further investigation.

The corporate sector could also help with finance and credit, which is normally very expensive fol‐lowing conflict or disaster for example.

5. Options for the future



16

Recovery after conflict or disaster can be greatly aided by investment of all kinds. Innovative com‐mercial companies, such as CforC, are working to attract capital into post‐conflict states to enable rebuilding for peace.

The humanitarian sector is changing and growing, and this already involves the engagement of corporate organisations. In future, we need to work more closely together to develop and improve this collaboration. There is considerable poten‐tial for the use of new technology including electronic and online working, and for more collaboration between scien‐tists and policy‐makers. Overall, closer partnership for stronger and more systematic joint working will benefit both sectors and those in need of humanitarian assistance.



17

There are many initiatives seeking ways to promote closer col‐

laboration between the corporate and humanitarian sectors.

The 3 December 2009 conference should be seen in this wider

context. Both RedR and the Humanitarian Futures Programme

are pleased and indeed excited to play a role in this essential

search for effective collaboration.

As suggested above in Section 5, Options for the future, the

conference resulted in a series of findings and recommenda‐

tions that could enhance collaboration. From the perspective of

RedR and HFP, the next immediate actions will involve at least

three very practical steps to begin to address some of the key

messages that emerged from December’s conference.

The first step will be to identify a set of indicative cases that

clearly demonstrate potential ‘best practices‘ for future col‐

laboration. This initiative has already begun to be developed in

a joint project by the Overseas Development Institute’s Hu‐

manitarian Policy Group, the France‐based management insti‐

tute, INSEAD, KCL’s Humanitarian Futures Programme and

World Vision International. RedR will be contributing to this

initiative.

A proposed second step is to hold a series of workshops that

will test the utility of the sorts of issues raised in the joint study.

Depending upon available resources, the series of workshops

would be held in the United Kingdom and at least four other

locations, including Asia, North and South America and Africa.

Finally, the third step in this effort would be to bring together

the lessons, advice and perspectives emanating from the series

of workshops in a ‘guide to corporate–humanitarian collabora‐

tion’. This will be shared with those undertaking related initia‐

tives such as the UN’s Global Compact and the World Economic

Forum. It is hoped that the results of this process will not only

strengthen the overall approach to corporate–humanitarian

collaboration, but also provide a shared platform for all related

initiatives.

6. First steps forward

If you would like more information about the Humanitarian Futures Programme, please contact our offices on +44 (0)20 7848 2869, and speak to one of our HFP team members. Or contact us at : [email protected], or go to our website at www.humanitarianfutures.org

For further information about RedR, please contact us on +44 (0) 20 7840 6000, email [email protected] or visit www.redr.org.uk

Cover and Foreword images are copyright RedR UK, taken by Max Attenborough. Contents images are stock photos purchased from istock.com

Please contact RedR for permission to reproduce this document and its contents.

To download a copy, please go to either the HFP or RedR website noted above.

mailto:[email protected]�

http://www.redr.org.uk/�

Conference summary: a platform for · PDF fileMr Floris Faber Mission East Operations Director...

Documents

Transcript of Conference summary: a platform for · PDF fileMr Floris Faber Mission East Operations Director...