This report present summaries of the Global Study activities and studies to date and related findings. These include the first four case studies (Sri Lanka, Colombia, Afghanistan and eastern DRC) and an initial review of anglophone literature.

The role of the "population in need" in its own survival is one of the most difficult and challenging facing the humanitarian world. Often referred to (in particular in the Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief), the participation of beneficiaries in humanitarian action remains elusive and most of the time extremely limited. Among the reasons for this:

• If the concept of "consultation" seems apparently to be relatively simple, "'participation"' carries several key development-related imperatives related to transformation and emporwement. The application of these concepts to humanitarian action is far from easy, and may be impossible or even potentially dangerous for humanitariaa actors and principles.

• If the literature on participation is well established in the "development world", only a few references exist in terms of recorded experiences, guidelines, and training modules in the "humanitarian sector".

Yet several evaluations have highlighted many positive elements resulting from enhanced participation of the affected populations: from more refined analysis and more adapted programming, to more effective implementation and increased accountability of the project cycle management (what about empowerment and capacity building?). The operational perspective (whose?) derives from the hypothesis, so often but not always demonstrated, that the injection of the views, hopes, expressed needs, responsibilities, capacities and strategies of the beneficiaries and affected populations throughout the crisis response management cycle goes a long way to improving humanitarian response.

• The Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action (ALNAP) commissioned the Global Study in 2001 to: assess current consultation & participation practice in a range of emergency contexts;

• identify examples of good practice;

• identify gaps or inadequacies in current practice and contributing factors;
• improve understanding of participation and consultation practice within the 5 contexts ;
• produce and disseminate the findings of 5 context case studies as monographs;
• produce and disseminate a published overview report;
• prepare a provisional Handbook of Good Practice; and,
• identify possible Phase 2 activities for testing and further developing the Handbook.

To achieve these objectives, URD is undertaking a series of steps :

Pierson Ntata, URD/Global Study Senior Researcher, undertook the initial anglophone literature review. Among the many very interesting points arising the following deserve to be underlined :

• it is not easy to define "consultation and participation", given the many different cultural, political and operational connotations;
• one of the overarching conclusion is that consultation is probably a form, stage or level of participation but it doesn't equate with participation;
• it is equally difficult to state "who should participate" : each and every individual ? community based organisations ? local elites, local NGO ? The politics of 'participation' is a complex issue;
• if there is acceptance that "consultation and participation" are theoretically "good things", there are different views as to why;
• are there cases or situations where consultation or participation would be either impossible or detrimental to the survival or security of the affected populations?
• a lot of question marks on how to "do" participation and consultation in a meaningful manner can be identified, many of them originating from the "emergency to development" debate.

The hispanic and francophone literature reviews are currently ongoing.

The case studies were launched with the Sri Lanka pilot followed by Colombia, Afghanistan, Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, with Angola currently underway. The following table presents the diversity of characteristic now covered by the Global Study :

Table 2 allows for two levels of crisis since in several of the studies it was possible to study if the conjunction of two crises and whether the resulting complexity affected participatory practices, where these existed.

The final case study – the second of the two sudden-onset natural disasters – has yet to be identified. URD is establishing a roster of possible team leaders and secondees to be able to cover the next large scale sudden-onset natural disaster.

Two URD workshops enabled the appointed case study team members to meet with the Global Study Steering Group following the Sri Lanka pilot, a synergetic system to allowed feedback and exchange between the different study teams and guidance from the Steering Group.

The completion of the field work (Angola and the second sudden-onset disaster) is expected to take place in the coming months. The Country Monographs on each of the case studies are currently being drafted and will be published as they are completed.

At the same time, exploratory work for the preparation of the Practioner Handbook is being done. The Handbook will be finalised in early spring for presentation at the April 2003 ALNAP Biannual.

The Overview book will also be prepared spring 2003.

The challenges of conducting a research project across such a diverse range of contexts, and on an issue as complex and subtle as the participation of affected populations in humanitarian action, are great. The initial findings of the first case studies, though, are rich and very interesting, as reflected by the enthusiasm of the research teams on their return from the field.

This work is being made possible by the dedication of the team leaders and their colleagues in the team, by the time made available to them by agency staff, many of them ALNAP members, despite their often overcrowed schedules, and by the hospitality and interest shown on the issue by the affected populations. Yet the interest in the Global Study has varied significantly between the different countries, according to the different steps along the much contested "continuum", and among the different publics or stakeholders;

There is clearly little evidence of good practice. Agency's that embrace the notional concept of participation and consultation have in most instance a long way to travel in respect of practice. The human resources with appropriate skills and experience in social sciences and communication are in most cases missing and the high staff turn over with the expatriate dramatically affects the chance for proper consultation and partipation. In addition, the level of constraints is considerable – organisation cultures, security, donor presures, etc….

A certain number of specific issues may be stated here :

• the economy of participation and the balance of power between stakeholders is a central issue;
• participation cannot be considered as a "quick-fix" for quality, but there is no doubt either that, provided participation is seen in a sensible and careful manner, it can go a long way in that direction, improving also upward and downward accountability.

More challenging yet than the research is putting participation of affected populations into practice in humanitarian interventions. But at a time where the international aid community is engaged in a series of protracted emergencies and acute crises against a background of ongoing poverty, and where the profound links between relief and development are being recognised, the participation of affected populations can in no way be ignored. Investing in this issue is key to improving the ethical and practical appropriateness , as well as the efficiency, of humanitarian programmes.

La Fontaine des Marins,

October 12^th, 2002

François Grünewald

Global Study Project Director