Disasters—whether so called ‘natural’ disasters or conflict related crises—are a growing challenge. Their impacts have a profound impact on development outcomes since disasters at best mitigate against development gains, and more commonly lead to development losses, particularly for people living in poverty. Yet while disasters are often treated as exceptional events, they in fact highlight failures in our development pathways—and expose the humanitarian and development system as unfit to respond adequately to these challenges. This paper reflects on the ways of thinking and incentives that shape the behaviour that leads to the perpetuation of this siloed and reactionary system and argues that there is a need to re-frame disasters as contextual factors rather than exceptional events within the development framework. Additionally, there is a need to support leaders who collaborate, instead of working to achieve individual success for their department or institution, and to strengthen accountability to make the development and humanitarian system more effective in supporting disaster affected and at-risk communities.

This article invites readers to consider a new form of humanitarianism that has emerged out of people’s resistance to military atrocities—called Resistance Humanitarianism—with a particular focus on the crisis in Myanmar. In that country, Resistance Humanitarians are challenging traditional aid actors because their operational presence and coverage can go deep inside the hardest-hit areas, which are usually inaccessible to the large INGOs and UN. This gives Resistance Humanitarians significant operational advantages, particularly the acceptance of the population, access, and data that reflects ground realities. Meanwhile, most international aid actors continue to try and gain access to affected communities through Myanmar’s oppressive and illegitimate military junta, constraining their ability to reach those most affected by crisis and potentially aiding the junta’s violent cause. The paper suggests that this vertical, top-down, ‘neutral’ approach to aid access taken by many international actors may deepen the conflict, as it pushes people away from their determination for a systematic end to injustice. The paper also argues for the urgent need to critically rethink the humanitarian approach for the Myanmar conflict, and suggests a new type of aid architecture—a locally-led, horizontally-constructed ecosystem that builds on and supports people and organisations on the ground and prioritises inclusivity, diversity and collaboration at its heart. If the aim of external international actors is to build resilience, they must rethink their approach and support military-avoiding Resistance Humanitarianism.

This article examines the opportunities and challenges of integrating cultural competency into humanitarian assistance. While it is imperative for humanitarian organisations and workers to fully understand and consider ethnocultural dynamics and diversity in the communities they serve and plan their work accordingly, cultural competency is still deprioritised and overlooked when planning and implementing a humanitarian assistance response. The article goes through the evolution of cultural competency concepts and how far humanitarian assistance responses throughout the years have succeeded in working effectively in multicultural contexts, exploring their commitments to cultural competency in the face of competing priorities, limited resources, centralised decision-making, tight schedules and the urgency to deliver services at once. The challenges of integrating cultural competency into humanitarian assistance are further elaborated, and key actionable recommendations are drawn to guide organisational practice.

This paper critically analyses the scope of leadership in Nepal at the local government level when tackling the wider impacts of COVID-19, with a particular focus on health service delivery in line with World Health Organisation (WHO) frameworks. In-depth interviews with 66 representatives from local governments (LG) in the Madhesh and Sudurpaschim provinces were conducted, along with analysis of routine data from health management information systems. We found that Maternal Child Health (MCH) services at local health institutions were largely unimpacted, stocks of essential medicine were available, and the LGs exhibited determination and capability in getting to grips with the crisis, despite inadequate knowledge and resources. Nevertheless, there was sizeable shrinkage in the utilisation of services, which triggered public health concerns of a different nature, the LGs were inadequately prepared in regards to the capacity and availability of human resources, and there were explicit gaps in terms of coordination among all three tiers of government and a lack of role clarity that delayed the response to the pandemic at the local level. Our recommendations include continued investment in local MCH services, capacity building for local leaders with a focus on human resource management in emergency contexts, and the simplification of public procurement processes, particularly during crises, enabling LGs and other local actors to expediate procurement and improve response times.

Humanitarian action is built on trust. Without it, humanitarian organisations cannot reach or respond to the needs of the most vulnerable, including many migrants. Yet, little is known about who migrants trust and why, as well as how this affects migrants' ability and willingness to seek and access humanitarian assistance and protection. This paper explores the findings of a large multi-sited research project conducted by the Red Cross Red Crescent Global Migration Lab across 15 countries to gather insights into migrants’ perceptions of, and trust in, humanitarian action. The rationale for the project has been that humanitarian organisations can better build (and, where necessary, repair) trust with migrants by listening and responding to their thoughts, fears, doubts, and concerns about their situations and the assistance and protection they receive. In this paper, we draw attention to three key lessons: first, the importance of increasing knowledge and awareness of humanitarian organisations and the services they provide; second, the importance of upholding the humanitarian principle of independence in migration programming; and third, the critical role that frontline staff and volunteers play in building and maintaining migrants’ trust.

Drawing on Michel Foucault’s philosophical theory of a power triangle, this paper explores the relational dynamics between International Non-Governmental Organisations (INGOs), the United Nations (UN), and sovereign states. It reflects on the emergence of multilateral aid after World War Two and how aid became institutionalised and professionalised, resulting in a relational dynamic between INGOs, the UN and Western governments that is akin to a parent and child. The paper then considers how different actors in humanitarianism occupy different power types, and the impact this will have on the relevance of INGOs in the future. It concludes with a proposition for repositioning and rethinking INGOs in the next era of aid, as part of a reidentification of their role in humanitarianism.

This article shows how the theoretical approach of ‘the practice turn’ can be useful when studying humanitarian diplomacy in international relations. The research argues that the social position of organisations influences the implementation of their humanitarian diplomacy. The article uses, as a central example, the case of international non governmental organisations (INGOs) providing humanitarian aid to North Korea. To paint a picture of the field of humanitarian aid in North Korea, this research uses multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) to analyse around 2,000 pieces of qualitative information. The research shows that the field is made up of three groups of INGOs. We will present their social characteristics and their impact on the humanitarian aid sector in North Korea.

COVID-19 stretched health systems worldwide, but its deepest impacts were disproportionately felt across certain population segments. In the Philippines, a low-middle income country with one of the longest pandemic-induced lockdowns, the most marginalised communities suffered the most, and had little agency to afford and access care. Socioeconomic barriers, compounded by the misallocation of limited resources and the militarisation and overall mismanagement of the response, widened inequities, and resulted in poorer health outcomes for these groups. In an attempt to redress this, the Office of the Vice President of the Philippines sought to fill gaps in health delivery and access by launching Bayanihan E-Konsulta (BEK), a free telemedicine platform for indigent Filipinos. Through a Facebook messenger service that ran on free data, patients were given the opportunity to consult with health professionals regarding their medical concerns at no cost. Relevant social services, such as prescription delivery, laboratory assistance, and food and financial aid, were also streamlined in the platform. Recognising limitations in funding, the program banked on the mobilisation of health professionals and volunteers, and relied on capacity building initiatives and the establishment of inter-agency collaborations. Institutional credibility, intersectoral collaboration, and effective management of team dynamics were identified as enabling factors for the program's effectiveness. Transparency attracted partnerships, and trust in leadership inspired solidarity, volunteerism, and continued service. Inclusivity in different project stages improved engagement and encouraged shared participation and accountability, allowing for resilience and sustained action. Overall, BEK stands as a successful example of a low-cost public/private/volunteer health response in a time of crisis. This paper discusses the critical challenges, considerations, and the iterations to the service implemented by the BEK team, providing insights for public health leaders and other low-to-middle income countries when tailoring responses to future public health emergencies.