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

GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Governance
    • Democracy & elections
  • Social Development
    • Social protection
  • Humanitarian Issues
    • Humanitarian financing
    • Humanitarian response
  • Conflict
    • Conflict analysis
    • Conflict prevention
    • Conflict response
    • Conflict sensitivity
    • Impacts of conflict
  • Development Pressures
    • Climate change
    • Food security
    • Fragility
  • Approaches
    • Complexity & systems thinking
  • Aid Instruments
    • Budget support & SWAps
    • Capacity building
    • Civil society partnerships
  • M&E
    • Indicators
    • Learning
    • M&E approaches
Home»GSDRC Publications»Funding appeals for complex humanitarian emergencies

Funding appeals for complex humanitarian emergencies

Helpdesk Report
  • Evie Browne
May 2014

Question

Based on a sample of high value protracted complex emergency humanitarian appeals and responses please provide information on: (i) the factors that contribute to the sums requested and the coverage of appeals; (ii) characteristics of how the appeal sums and their coverage changed over time as the crises evolved.

Summary

Key findings: It is possible to derive some key factors from the available literature:

  • Needs-based allocation: This is a core principle of humanitarian assistance. All funders use needs assessments in their original funding allocations, and many changes to funding are preceded by needs assessments.
  • Tipping points: Most protracted crises receive a steady and/or low level of funding but experience sudden increases in funding flows if a particular incident or need rapidly escalates the situation.
  • Geopolitical concerns: Different crises receive different amounts of funding depending on their strategic importance to donor countries.
  • Resilience: There is a general global shift towards more funding for resilience rather than emergency response in protracted crises. This can cause funding changes during a crisis, when opportunities to develop resilience become available.
  • Media and public interest: A high level of interest usually stimulates funding, but complex and protracted emergencies rarely draw the necessary public and media interest.
  • Sector priority: Certain sectors receive more funding as they are perceived as life-saving. Some are continually under-funded.
  • Absorptive capacity: Funders usually work with local implementing partners and these are only able to absorb and use a certain amount of funds.

file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • DFID

Related Content

Coping mechanisms in South Sudan in relation to different types of shock
Helpdesk Report
2020
Maternal, Newborn and Child Health in Emergency Settings
Helpdesk Report
2018
Humanitarian contingency plans for military operations
Helpdesk Report
2016
Acceptance strategies in conflict
E-Learning
2015
birminghamids hcri

gro.crdsg@seiriuqne Feedback Disclaimer

Outputs supported by FCDO are © Crown Copyright 2022; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2022; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2022
Connect with us: facebooktwitter

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2022; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2022; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2022