Advances in new technology in low-income countries mean there is growing interest in how technology can best serve humanitarian responses. Technology is felt to have potential to detect needs earlier, enable greater scale and speed of responses, enhance specificity of resource transfers to match needs and increase accountability while reducing opportunities for corruption and diversion. However, despite generally positive experiences with these technologies, they are not being adopted systematically in humanitarian programming in areas where systems and solutions do exist.
The researchers examined new technologies that can be applied to achieve various objectives within the cash transfer project management cycle: (i) delivering e-payments; (ii) communication with beneficiaries and field staff; (iii) data gathering; and (iv) data management. The study discusses in detail electronic payment systems, the use of mobile phones for text and voice communication, and digital data gathering tools. For each, the study outlines current use, examines benefits experienced and issues faced by the recipient and the agency and highlights key lessons learned.
Potential benefits and risks of using new technologies regarding cost-effectiveness and accountability:
- Cost effectiveness: Many of the technologies examined by this study have high initial costs, but significant cost-efficiencies over time compared to the recurrent costs of manual operations. However, the short-term horizon of humanitarian funding cycles may not capture the extent of these advantages.
- Accountability: Electronic payment and registration systems can provide a clear audit trail from funding to recipients, although technological solutions do not completely prevent errors or corruption. New technologies can also increase accountability to recipients by facilitating two-way communication and improving information flows.
Constraints to wider adoption of new technology can be:
- Technological: limitations in agent coverage and cash flow for e-payments systems; gaps in mobile network coverage; difficulties in technical integration with existing systems; and error rates of biometric technology.
- Financial: lack of resources for investment in new technologies; lack of a business case to justify the expansion of services by the private sector into remote areas.
- Institutional: lack of awareness about new technologies within humanitarian agencies and limited resources and capacity to adopt new ways of working; low capacity of private sector actors to scale-up; and low levels of recipient literacy and education.
- Operational: limited time and resources to research, cost and select an appropriate technological solution, negotiate contracts, set up and test new systems, and train staff.
- Political: agencies’ concerns regarding data protection issues and the risks of involving private sector actors, and unwillingness to share technological innovations.
- Attitudinal: senior decision-makers may perceive new technologies as being too risky or expensive.
- Legislative: varied national regulatory environments; lack of clear policies on data protection; proprietary concerns around custom-designed solutions.
Humanitarian stakeholders should work together to improve the technological environment. This could involve collaborating with service providers, supporting the extension of existing mobile networks and branchless banking systems, and using existing solutions instead of developing parallel ones. Humanitarian actors should also support the development of cross-mobile network interfaces and advocate nationally and globally for improvements in the regulatory environment.
Developing the capacity of stakeholders to use new technology for humanitarian response is critical. In addition, humanitarian stakeholders need to formalise and improve new ways of working in order to improve coordination, increase influence and realise economies of scale. Agencies should move towards consolidating experience with technological solutions and developing a ‘tool box’ of standard approaches, and invest in overcoming internal barriers to adopting new technologies. Donors should create incentive structures for the private sector to develop technology platforms that meet humanitarian needs, and finance the adoption of compatible technological solutions by aid agencies working together. In particular:
- In areas where mobile connectivity and technological solutions already exist, agencies and donors could develop standard approaches to support systematic adoption of new technology to improve programme efficiency and effectiveness.
- In areas where emergencies are chronic or recurrent, new financing models could be developed before the next crisis to support preparedness frameworks.
- When an area with limited infrastructure/technology is hit by a sudden onset disaster, it is not the right time to adopt new ways of working or try out new technology. However, progress toward network connectivity and the use of new technology could be pursued where possible.