Abstract
BackgroundConducting ethical and rigorous research to measure the effectiveness of humanitarian programs is urgently needed given the global level of displacement and conflict, yet traditional approaches to evaluation research may be too slow and disruptive for acute humanitarian settings. The current case study utilizes an experience of implementing a mixed methods evaluation conducted between March–August 2018 in northern Raqqa Governorate, Syria. The key research objectives were to examine the influence of an unconditional, three-month cash transfer program on household basic needs and women’s wellbeing, including experiences of violence. This setting was selected for the research as it shared many aspects of an acute emergency within a protracted conflict given its recent opening of access to humanitarian aid programming following the withdrawal of ISIS as well as influxes of internally displaced persons fleeing airstrikes and fighting in Raqqa City in late 2017.DiscussionThe current case study was scientifically important as the use of cash assistance in emergencies has increased exponentially in recent years. Yet, little is still known about how cash assistance designed to help households meet their basic needs may also influence women’s overall wellbeing in the home. Challenges of conducting the research included selecting an emergency site appropriate for research, implementing an evaluation that would not delay or disrupt critical cash assistance programming, and measurement of sensitive violence against women outcomes. Four strategies were identified to meet the challenges of conducting an evaluation in such a setting, which included: (1) developing clear decision-making criteria for assessing feasibility; (2) frontloading processes to reduce time lag in launching research; (3) integrating the research approach within programming; and (4) closely collaborating with practitioners throughout the study, especially for research on sensitive topics like violence against women. ConclusionsAdvance consideration of these factors through a pre-positioning process will allow for timely, ethical, and rigorous research to be implemented in the immediate aftermath of a crisis. Such studies should be prioritized to ensure the highest effectiveness and efficiency of humanitarian aid for populations grappling with acute emergencies.
Highlights
Conducting ethical and rigorous research to measure the effectiveness of humanitarian programs is urgently needed given the global level of displacement and conflict, yet traditional approaches to evaluation research may be too slow and disruptive for acute humanitarian settings
Without rigorous and ethical evaluation research conducted in acute emergency settings, the humanitarian field, at best, may unwittingly divert resources from more effective or efficient programming models to meet the needs of the populations, and, at worst, unintentionally create harm or exacerbate risks amongst those affected by conflict and disaster
We demonstrate that it is possible to conduct ethical and rigorous research in acute emergencies and draw on a recent experience of evaluating the potential effect of a cash assistance program on women’s experiences of violence and wellbeing in Raqqa Governorate, Syria, conducted by the International Rescue Committee (IRC), an international humanitarian aid organization
Summary
Conducting ethical and rigorous research to measure the effectiveness of humanitarian programs is urgently needed given the global level of displacement and conflict, yet traditional approaches to evaluation research may be too slow and disruptive for acute humanitarian settings. The key research objectives were to examine the influence of an unconditional, threemonth cash transfer program on household basic needs and women’s wellbeing, including experiences of violence This setting was selected for the research as it shared many aspects of an acute emergency within a protracted conflict given its recent opening of access to humanitarian aid programming following the withdrawal of ISIS as well as influxes of internally displaced persons fleeing airstrikes and fighting in Raqqa City in late 2017. While consensus has largely been reached about the importance of conducting rigorous needs assessments in acute emergencies, equivalent support for evaluations has lagged This may be because the way research is traditionally done is too slow and disruptive for these settings and, at times, too opaque for practitioners focused on meeting the needs of affected populations. Without rigorous and ethical evaluation research conducted in acute emergency settings, the humanitarian field, at best, may unwittingly divert resources from more effective or efficient programming models to meet the needs of the populations, and, at worst, unintentionally create harm or exacerbate risks amongst those affected by conflict and disaster
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
