This year’s GHA Report examines how international assistance has responded to the scale of recent global humanitarian crisis, with sections covering funding (response to need, donors and recipients, areas of expenditure and channels of delivery), recent emergencies, and action to strengthen response. It also features a number of ‘in focus’ reports, each providing an overview of current issues such as new and emerging donors, the crisis in Syria, and lessons learnt from the 2011 Horn of Africa food crisis.
Trends and messages that emerge include the increasingly important role of non-traditional donors, growing levels of unmet humanitarian need, and the importance of transparency and access to reliable information. The report emphasises the need for greater investment in disaster prevention and preparedness and for humanitarian and development actors to work more closely in building resilience. It highlights the importance of predictable long-term financing in situations of chronic need and also identifies efforts and initiatives to improve the efficiency of humanitarian assistance (including key principles, standards and accountability frameworks, the role of technology, and the use of cash transfer schemes).
Key findings:
- 2012 was the “year of recurring disasters”, which repeatedly hit places characterised by the intersection of chronic poverty, conflict and exposure to regular shocks and stresses. There were none of the ‘mega-disasters’, in terms of fatalities, on the scale of previous years, such as the Japanese tsunami in 2011 or the Haiti earthquake in 2010.
- In 2012, 76 million people were targeted by the UN as needing humanitarian assistance – compared with 93 million people in 2011 – and many more will have been affected by smaller-scale disasters.
- The international humanitarian response fell by 8% from US$19.4 billion in 2011 to US$17.9 billion in 2012, with assistance provided by governments falling by 6% from US$13.8 billion to US$12.9 billion. The reduction in humanitarian assistance was most marked for members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC), with a fall of 11% from 2011.
- Despite fewer people targeted as needing humanitarian assistance in 2012, the requirements for the United Nations (UN) Consolidated Appeal Process (CAP) remained similar to the 2011 level. Only 62.7% of these needs were funded, making 2012 the year when the smallest proportion of needs were met for over a decade. However, the difference between the best-funded and worst-funded CAP appeals remains wide – from 86% to 38%.
- Humanitarian assistance from most donors fell and from some it fell dramatically: Spain reduced its humanitarian assistance by half, Japan by 38% and the United States by 11%. Because the United States is such a large donor, this translated to a fall of US$483 million. However, the United States remained the largest donor of humanitarian assistance by volume, providing US$3.8 billion in 2012 – 29% of all humanitarian assistance from governments. Luxemburg and Sweden were the most generous DAC donors as a proportion of their gross national income (GNI), providing 0.16% and 0.14% respectively. Turkey was the fourth largest government donor of humanitarian assistance in 2012, contributing over US$1 billion – 0.13% of its national wealth.
- Official development assistance (ODA) and ODA-like flows from non-DAC donors continued to rise, and their contribution to humanitarian assistance increased to US$1.4 billion, thanks mainly to Turkey’s contribution. In 2011 (the most recent year for which data are available) private giving fell by 10% but, at US$5.7 billion, it remained significantly higher than in 2009, the year before the large 2010 peak.
- In addition to the resources allocated to international humanitarian assistance, many countries contributed by hosting refugees, among them some of the world’s poorest economies. For example, Pakistan hosted over 1.7 million refugees in 2011, Iran 886,468, Syria 755,454 and Kenya 566,487.
- Domestic governments appeared to be taking a much stronger role in response to crises, especially natural disasters, within their own borders. China and India were home to a reported 78% of all people affected by disasters between 2002 and 2011, but received very little international humanitarian assistance.
- Pakistan, Somalia, and West Bank and Gaza Strip received the largest amount of international humanitarian assistance in 2011, the most recent year for which comprehensive data are available.
- For the past five years, just over half of all humanitarian assistance has been channelled through multilateral organisations and funds, and nearly a quarter through NGOs. In 2012 4.9% of humanitarian assistance was channelled via pooled funds: 2.4% via the Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) and, at country level, 2.1% via common humanitarian funds (CHFs) and 0.5% through emergency response funds (ERFs).