• 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»Humanitarian response to the post-election violence in Kenya in 2007/8

Humanitarian response to the post-election violence in Kenya in 2007/8

Helpdesk Report
  • Becky Carter
December 2012

Question

What are the main conclusions/lessons/recommendations from reviews and evaluations of the humanitarian response to the post-election violence in Kenya 2007/8?

Summary

Findings cover different aspects of the humanitarian response, including the overall response (preparedness, coordination), integration of protection concerns, early recovery programmes, funding approaches and instruments and security for humanitarian organisations.

The main conclusions and lessons learned on the overall humanitarian response are that:

  • None of the actors involved were prepared for the extent and intensity of the violence and the resulting humanitarian emergency. A key lesson is that the new Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) guidelines for contingency planning should be used.
  • There was a lack of a clear policy and institutional framework for the initial coordination. The situation improved when the Kenyan government designated leads. The Kenyan Red Cross Society’s role as lead implementing agency was appreciated.
  • The cluster approach adopted to strengthen the coordination is thought to have worked well, but with key lessons learned including the importance of i) supporting national structures first and foremost; ii) incorporating all partners; iii) strengthening field-Nairobi coordination; and iv) improving inter-cluster coordination.
  • Faith-based organisations and technology both played important roles in the response.

The humanitarian response to the widespread displacement was effective in delivering life-saving assistance to internally displaced persons (IDPs) and other affected populations where they were registered and accessible, although there was still much that needed to be done to meet internationally accepted standards for camp conditions. Displaced people outside the camp did not receive the same standard of humanitarian response and had different needs. Finding voluntary and ‘durable’ solutions was important, and this required taking into account the underlying causes of the crisis, tackling broader socio-political reforms and working with Kenya’s national protection institutions. The perception that assistance was disproportionately targeted at one community eroded the conditions for healing and reconciliation.

Other lessons learned and recommendations include:

  • The need to improve integration of protection issues in the humanitarian response
  • The positive experience of cash based early recovery programmes
  • The importance of rapid, timely, flexible, longer-term and more predictable funding

file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • DFID

Related Content

Donor Support to Electoral Cycles
Helpdesk Report
2021
Donor support for post-conflict elections
Helpdesk Report
2017
Religious leaders and the prevention of electoral violence
Helpdesk Report
2016
Voluntary voter registration
Helpdesk Report
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