• About us
  • GSDRC Publications
  • Research Helpdesk
  • E-Bulletin
  • Privacy policy

GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Governance
    • Democracy & elections
    • Public sector management
    • Security & justice
    • Service delivery
    • State-society relations
  • Social Development
    • Gender
    • Inequalities & exclusion
    • Social protection
    • Poverty & wellbeing
  • Humanitarian Issues
    • Humanitarian financing
    • Humanitarian response
    • Recovery & reconstruction
    • Refugees/IDPs
    • Risk & resilience
  • Conflict
    • Conflict analysis
    • Conflict prevention
    • Conflict response
    • Conflict sensitivity
    • Impacts of conflict
    • Peacebuilding
  • Development Pressures
    • Climate change
    • Food security
    • Fragility
    • Migration & diaspora
    • Population growth
    • Urbanisation
  • Approaches
    • Complexity & systems thinking
    • Institutions & social norms
    • PEA / Thinking & working politically
    • Results-based approaches
    • Theories of change
  • Aid Instruments
    • Budget support & SWAps
    • Capacity building
    • Civil society partnerships
    • Multilateral aid
    • Private sector partnerships
    • Technical assistance
  • M&E
    • Indicators
    • Learning
    • M&E approaches
Home»GSDRC Publications»Cost-Effectiveness in Humanitarian Work: the Promotion of International Humanitarian Law

Cost-Effectiveness in Humanitarian Work: the Promotion of International Humanitarian Law

Helpdesk Report
  • Huma Haider
December 2018

Question

What evidence is there on the cost-effectiveness of initiatives to promote compliance with international humanitarian law?

Summary

Lack of compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL), which can result in unlawful deaths, destruction and impediments to humanitarian relief operations, is a tremendous humanitarian
challenge (Akande and Gillard, 2017; Kremte, 2017; Pejic, 2016). In order to achieve the main goal of IHL – to protect persons affected by violence and minimise human suffering – the mere existence of law is not sufficient. It must be coupled with a strong compliance system (Kremte, 2017). Compliance requires a multifaceted effort involving a range of activities by a diverse group of
actors. They include prevention activities, such as the adoption of domestic legislation implementing IHL treaty obligations, training of armed forces and appointment of legal advisers to the armed forces, and teaching and dissemination of IHL to the general public (Kremte, 2017). They also include ‘naming and shaming’ violators; and mechanisms and procedures for determining individual criminal responsibility for alleged violations of IHL, such as the creation of international or hybrid courts and tribunals or proceedings before domestic courts (Pejic, 2016).

This rapid literature review reveals a significant gap in evidence on the cost-efficiency of efforts to promote compliance with international humanitarian law. This has yet to be an area of research.
The only relevant studies that could be found focus on the cost-efficiency of international criminal justice, comparing the costs of international courts, hybrid courts, and domestic courts. While
international criminal tribunals are considered to be more costly overall, this is due to their greater complexity. They are not more costly than the most similar domestic trials or hybrid trials when
evaluated on a per-day basis. This is considered to be a better way to measure cost-effectiveness. The effectiveness of international criminal law (ICL) also depends on whether it fulfils the various
aims of ICL (e.g. justice for victims, accountability, deterrence, reconciliation).

Given the lack of research on the cost-effectiveness of other initiatives related to IHL compliance, their general effectiveness is explored in this helpdesk report. Research on the dissemination of IHL, such as educational programmes and training for the military and civilians reveal an overall increase in scholarship on IHL, in terms of educational tools, research, publications and outreach. This has the potential to impact on compliance should those receiving education and training end up in positions of authority and decision-making. Research in this area does not examine issues of cost-effectiveness, however. It is also challenging to determine general effectiveness, due to difficulties with attribution (e.g. whether a course on IHL in peace-time prevents violations of IHL during wartime). Research on monitoring and exposure of IHL violations also have the potential to contribute to the promotion of compliance with IHL. Deeds of Commitment, a monitoring and verification mechanism directed at armed non-state actors, for example, can be effective in ensuring improved compliance with IHL. Advancements in social media can allow for more widespread and rapid monitoring and exposure of violations and abuses. In addition, national IHL committees can help in promoting the dissemination of IHL and monitoring of violations of and compliance with IHL. The integration of these committees in high levels of government can contribute to the greater promotion of and compliance with IHL. Studies on ‘naming and shaming’ violators of IHL find that in some cases, this strategy can be linked to improvements in compliance with IHL and human rights practice. Sanctions may be implemented alongside ‘naming and shaming’, however, the need to monitor sanctions can make it a costly IHL initiative.

file type icon See Full Report [582.03KB]

Enquirer:

  • DFID

Suggested citation

Haider, H. (2018). Cost-effectiveness in humanitarian work: the promotion of international humanitarian law. K4D Helpdesk Report. Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies

Related Content

Cost-Effectiveness in Humanitarian Work: Preparedness, Pre-financing and Early Action
Helpdesk Report
2018
Cost-Effectiveness in Humanitarian Aid and Development: Resilience Programming
Helpdesk Report
2018
Cost-Effectiveness in Humanitarian Aid: Localisation Programming
Helpdesk Report
2018
Using Zakat for international development
Helpdesk Report
2017
birminghamids hcri

gro.crdsg@seiriuqne Feedback Disclaimer

Outputs supported by FCDO are © Crown Copyright 2023; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2023; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2023
Connect with us: facebooktwitter

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2023; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2023; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2023