Report: International and local/diaspora actors in the Syria response – A diverging set of systems?
Overseas Development Institute – Humanitarian Policy Group – HPG Working Paper Eva Svoboda and Sara Pantuliano
March 2015 :: 31 pages ISBN: 978 1 909464 91 9
Pdf: http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/9523.pdf

Executive Summary
The conflict in Syria – coming amid a slew of large-scale emergencies in the Central African Republic and South Sudan, alongside the Ebola crisis in West Africa – has posed particular challenges for humanitarian response in its scale and complexity. Five years since the first demonstrations against the government prospects for an end to the fighting seem as elusive as ever. As the Emergency Relief Coordinator, Valerie Amos, put it in December 2014: ‘In many parts of Syria the level of violence has worsened, with civilians continuing to pay heavily with loss of life, serious injuries, psychological trauma, ongoing and recurring displacement and massive damage to property and infrastructure’.1

At the end of 2014 the UN launched its largest appeal yet, asking for $8.4 billion to cover not only urgent humanitarian needs, but also funding for development projects. Securing that funding will be difficult: in 2014 the UN received only half of the amount it had requested from donors, and there is little to suggest that this latest appeal will fare much better.

The formal humanitarian system has struggled with issues of access and protection in a conflict marked by widespread and deliberate disregard for civilians. Violations include unlawful killings, arbitrary arrest and detention, hostage-taking, sexual and gender-based violence and sieges. While the responsibility to protect civilians rests primarily with the warring parties, the belligerents’ only aim seems to be to win the war at any cost. Although humanitarian organisations have a responsibility to remind the parties of their obligations and address the consequences of violations, information on protection is difficult to obtain and is neither centralised nor sufficiently analysed. Protection agencies are geographically separated and dispersed in different countries, and communication and coordination between them is weak.

The lack of physical presence of international aid agencies has shone a spotlight onto what is commonly called the ‘local response’: groups and organisations that do not belong to the formal
or traditional humanitarian sector of the UN, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and international NGOs. This is a diverse category, comprising professional bodies (often medical groups) that existed prior to the conflict, charities, networks of anti-government and community activists, diaspora organisations, coordination networks and fighting groups that also provide relief. These groups have almost inadvertently filled the gap left by the limited international presence, providing both assistance and protection – even if the majority of these groups neither see themselves as protection actors nor use the term.

According to the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), around 600 to 700 ‘local’ groups have been created since the start of the conflict. Much of their work is not necessarily captured by any coordination mechanism within the formal humanitarian sector, and yet they are playing a vital role in responding to needs that would only be met inadequately or not all. Challenges in accessing populations in need by the formal humanitarian system have made partnerships an essential tool in the Syria response. However, the conflict has confirmed what others have shown before: that the formal humanitarian sector finds it extremely difficult to establish genuine, inclusive partnerships.2 Instead, local/diaspora groups are often seen as mere service providers, rather than genuine counterparts. Making genuine partnerships work will require flexibility and adaptability from traditional donors and international aid agencies. This does not mean doing away with all procedures and standards, but rather adapting them as far as possible to the realities on the ground.

There is an assumption that the challenges faced by the formal humanitarian system are fundamentally different from those faced by local/diaspora groups. Yet access, insecurity, funding and the effects of counter-terrorism legislation are issues that all aid agencies are grappling with. Focusing on differences rather than recognising similarities encourages the belief that local and international aid agencies cannot work together, and discourages them from exploring how they could. As needs in Syria far outweigh what each individual organisation can do, it is time to explore how forces can be combined, while also recognising that there will be instances where international aid agencies and local/diaspora groups will operate separately.
1 See https://docs.unocha.org/sites/dms/Documents/15%20December%202014%20USG%20SecCo%20statement%20 on%20Syria.pdf
2 See https://docs.unocha.org/sites/dms/Documents/WHS%20 Concept%20Note.pdf

.

Syrian community provides aid where UN struggles to reach – new report
ODI Press Release – 13th March, 2015
Syrian community provides aid where UN struggles to reach – new report
As the Syria conflict enters its fifth year, the growth of 600-700 diaspora and local aid groups has ‘filled the gap’ left by the limited presence of struggling international aid agencies, providing both assistance and protection to Syrians says a new report launched today by UK-based think tank the Overseas Development Institute (ODI).
With funds to the aid response totalling approximately US $4.8 billion since the conflict began, Syria is the biggest humanitarian crisis in the world. But these local groups struggle from a lack of money, and inflexible systems which make it hard for donors to fund them directly – despite having access to beleaguered populations.
“Armed groups in Syria are often more willing to negotiate access with local and diaspora groups than international aid agencies as they share personal and tribal contacts and often come from the same communities,” said Eva Svoboda, researcher from the ODI’s Humanitarian Policy Group and author of the report ‘International and local/diaspora actors in the Syria response’…