CONTENTS 

1. INTRODUCTION 

2. ISSUES 

2.1. Analysis of the issues at stake 

2.2. Outputs, tool development and identifying good practices 

3. METHODOLOGY 

3.1. Actions involved in the process 

3.2.Methodology for the desk study 

3.3. Selection of the case studies 

4. TIME FRAME 

5. CONCLUSION *

 

The role of 'affected populations' in respect of their own survival is one of the most difficult and challenging issues facing the humanitarian world. Often referred to (in particular in the Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief), in reality the participation of beneficiaries in humanitarian action remains elusive and, for the most part, extremely limited – for both good and bad reasons.

• The concept of 'participation' carries several key development-related imperatives, but application to humanitarian action is far from easy, and may be impossible or potentially dangerous for both field actors and humanitarian principles.

• If the literature on participation is well established in the 'development world', few references exist of recorded experiences, guidelines, and training modules in relation to the 'humanitarian sector'.

Yet, several evaluations have highlighted many positive elements resulting from enhanced participation by affected populations: from sharper analysis and more adapted programming, to more effective implementation and increased accountability in project management.

The Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action (ALNAP) has commissioned Groupe URD to take forward the Global Study on Consultation with and Participation by Beneficiaries and Affected Populations in the Process of Planning, Managing, Monitoring and Evaluating Humanitarian Programmes to:

From the outset, the issue has been central to Groupe URD's research which it has addressed from various angles and in various contexts - eg, 'Partnership in Turbulence' a critical analysis in several emergency operations of participation of affected populations through local organisations. It is this experience, together with the wealth of information and ideas produced by earlier theoretical studies, field based practical research, network debates and evaluations, that Groupe URD brings to the Global Study.

Groupe URD’s work and approach is not academic per se, but deeply rooted in its Charter to 'help improve humanitarian practices'.

In undertaking the Global Study on consultation and participation, Groupe URD will seek to deliver operational clarification of the issues; tools and guidance for action and decision-making; and a strategy for their promotion under ALNAP auspices.

In the last few decades, while humanitarian aid has been booming, it has also been challenged. One of the most important criticisms made relates to the perception that the humanitarian sector is very much a Western-based system, functioning along top-down lines of power with an extremely limited 'listening capacity'. For good and bad reasons, conceptual and operational responsibility remains in NGO hands.

The issue of beneficiary consultation and participation in the context of humanitarian action has been raised in several fora and scrutinised in a number of articles and books. Yet, little is known on its real impact in the field. While 'bad practices' are regularly identified and criticised, 'good practices' still need to be identified and promoted. The concept of 'best practice' however, is not seen by Groupe URD as relevant given that a practice is best in relation to a context, not 'per se'.

One of the first questions is 'participation of who?'

• Individual beneficiaries: with or without age, sex and social disaggregation and targeting? On the basis of what level of knowledge of the social fabric of concerned societies? Through what kind of sampling? How can manipulation be avoided?
• Local institutions: what kind of institution (traditional, post-socialist formation, recreated as part of a structural adjustment, newly formed to benefit from the aid money)? How do they link with the structures emanating from the actors of violence?
• The use of participatory methods within aid organisations themselves is also a critical issue. Is it possible to use 'participatory mechanisms' with the affected populations through the project cycle if the organisation does not use this approach for its own internal operations?

The second question at hand is 'participation, what for?'

• Is it just to make NGOs' work easier? (facilitate needs assessment and targeting, decrease the cost of a project by having a 'cost-sharing mechanism with the beneficiaries', limit project costs by having a cheap locally-based implementing agent ?)
• Is it to decrease the level of insecurity to which expatriates are increasingly exposed (by having 'local implementing partners')?
• Is it to pay 'lip service' to a paragraph requested by donors in the project formulation?
• Or, is it coming from genuine ethical consideration that these processes of consultation and participation can considerably improve the short and longer-term impact of humanitarian action? Indeed, many experiences show that interventions or projects based on proper consultation mechanisms and involving the targeted population not as mere beneficiaries but as 'actors in their fate' have been very successful.

The third question is of course 'how ?'

• One key issue is the respect of humanitarian principles in participatory processes: Should field efficiency in programme delivery overshadow the principles of independence and impartiality? What should be done when participation leads to discrimination against certain participants? How can we ensure that the 'participation and consultation imperative' does not enable certain groups to manipulate aid for their sole benefit? How can classical targeting processes based on the vulnerability of individuals be reconciled with frequently observed collective strategies for group survival?
• Another one is how to ensure that people engaged and participating in the aid process will not themselves be targets of human rights violations and stigmatised as the result of their participation? There is indeed a key 'protection issue' to take into account in the 'how' participation and consultation can be made operational.

This Global Study will end up with three main outputs :

• A series of field reports (operational) and Individual Study Monographs. They should comprise : a) analysis of the historical and social context, b) analysis of the crisis and of the role of aid, c) identification and analysis of participatory experiences with their impact and constraints, d) a reflection of the relations between these practices and the context, to help determine 'domains of validity' of the various experiences.

• A Practitioner Handbook. The development world has already produced numerous methodological tools: PRRA, the 'problem tree', the Venn Diagram, to quote but a few. Some are also being explored in the humanitarian field – eg, 'proportional piling for participatory decision-making on resource allocation'. How many similar empirical tools exist and how much do we know about them and their applicability? Has their use been evaluated and are results available? If yes, what do they say? If no, this is an area to be explored further in the Global Study on Consultation and Participation – eg, what is their applicability when access to the field is limited? What is their applicability when local structures are either dismantled by the conflict or have gone underground to survive? How can they be used in contexts where everything can be turned into war or political propaganda? This information and relevant practical advice will be extracted from the individual case studies.

• An Overview Report. This will take the form of a published book comprising an edited version of the Individual Study Monographs, with a introductory chapter presenting the key issues and lessons learned, and completed by a chapter on 'Recommendations'.

It is crucial that practical solutions are offered in the light of the context-specific field experiences of the various stakeholders and on the 'eagle’s view' offered by a more theoretical approach. As a relatively new subject, the Global Study process should be dynamic in nature and open to the possibility of additional issues and outputs, in close consultation with the ALNAP Global Study Steering Group.

To keep ALNAP Members and the humanitarian community informed and engaged in the Global Study, a special website will be created for the duration to allow:

• ALNAP members rapid information flows (in close consultation with the Steering group);
• the creation of a database on participation for eventual inclusion on the ALNAP website; and
• an active debate on participatory issues by stakeholders, through a forum and listservs.

This will be complemented with field-based mini-seminars and feedback session at the beginning, during and end of each field study.

The overall methodology will comprise seven "sets of action" :

At a later stage, a 7th Action might be considered.

A desk review will be finalised taking into account INTRAC's preliminary work and will encompass the following four elements:

• a review of existing HQ policies through a consultation of a selected cross-section of the humanitarian aid community (NGO, UN, Donors, certain governments of affected countries)
• a review of the participatory tools used in the development world;
• a review of evaluation reports, project documents and other sources, on positive and negative experiences with participatory methods tested in humanitarian interventions; and
• a review of the anglophone, francophone and Spanish literature on the subject.

This should result in the identification of a set of hypotheses to be confirmed or refuted in the field, which will serve as a guidance for the field studies.

This should result in the identification of a set of hypotheses, to be confirmed or refuted in the field, to guide the field studies.

To elaborate this work, the URD team will:

• review the literature and extensively consult the NET;
• network with NGOs and other actors to identify and collect information; and
• organise a 'mini-workshop' with the field teams to validate or adapt the Research Protocol elaborated and piloted in Sri Lanka by INTRAC, both in terms of objectives and methods.

An experienced researcher with an earlier involvement in the field of research on consultation and participation in humanitarian action will assist the Project Director for this phase.

It is crucial that the case studies cover a wide range of situations and a diversity that includes both socio-cultural systems and disaster dynamics. Given that 'acute emergencies' are difficult to predict, that protracted crises or complex emergencies are well represented by the current selection, and that rehabilitation/early phases of reconstruction are increasingly present in the humanitarian agenda, it is very important to select the sample carefully.

Although the research is not academic per se, it must be rigorous, and the following set of tools will be used:

• analytical tools from the field of social sciences;
• communication tools used for group dynamics; and
• experience gathering and interview.

The Sri Lanka piloted Research Protocol will form the basis of URD's methodology. As the research is on participatory methods, it might itself have to be 'very participatory'. The typical series of semi-structured, open-ended interviews will alternate with focus group meetings and small workshops at the field level. Key informants will be identified to try to understand the constraints that might make participatory processes difficult or dangerous (social structures, conflict dynamics, etc.). This will be done in a targeted manner, taking into account gender and ethnic issues.

Identification of consultation and participation mechanisms, the way they have been perceived by the population and the constraints that affect them and their results will be analysed through a multi-entry/multi-stakeholder grid.

A brief review shows that, among the key themes identified in inter-agency debates are:

• participation and food-aid programmes;
• participation and camp management issues;
• participation and housing/reconstruction programmes;
• participation and health management;
• participation and protection/human rights issues;
• participation and gender and child issues.

        4.     TIME FRAME

The consultation and participation of affected populations and their institutions at different stages of humanitarian action is central to many of the dilemmas of humanitarian work, and key to these dilemmas are issues of quality of response, ownership of the processes and multiple accountabilities between the various stakeholders.

If the rationale for promoting consultation with and participation by beneficiaries and affected populations is now better understood by the humanitarian community, the 'how to do it?', 'when to do it?' and 'when to be cautious?' remains in need of clarification - eg, How can we respond to an emergency and foster development? How can the risks of negative socio-economic side effects be limited? How can we design tailor-made programmes that better respond to the needs of affected people? How can a better understanding of the rationales of perpetrators help reduce security risks? How can we avoid being manipulated by parties to a conflict?

As part of this process, existing 'development' consultation and participation tools will also need to be reviewed, in order to increase our understanding of their 'strengths' and 'weaknesses' in situations of turbulence and danger or when time is a constraint (acute emergency). Little work has been done to assess the applicability, or even the appropriateness, of development tools in the context of humanitarian action.

The Global Study aims to develop practical tools and methods to be presented in a user-friendly format through the Practitioner Handbook, but also seeks to shed light on the political, ethical and deontological dimensions to consultation and participation. In complementing the Practitioner Handbook with the 5 individual country case study Monographs and an Overview Book the Global Study looks to respond to the multiple needs of its diverse audience - all those engaged directly or indirectly in humanitarian action.