Responding to protracted crises – the NMPACT model Sara Pantuliano 25th September 2008

Aid in protracted crises Protracted crises: persistent nature of emergency and protracted instability Inadequacy of traditional humanitarian approaches Role of aid in conflict Review of assessment models and programming and monitoring systems Political analysis as overriding priority Accidental, conflict-aggravating effects of relief - Anderson has emphasized how aid offered in the context of a conflict must necessarily become part of that conflict’s broad context. It does so because of its material and its symbolic dimensions: in almost all conflicts, economic, material resources are at stake. Aid to some degree represents a valuable economic resource and can enter into the war-calculus in different ways. Relief (but also development) assistance can aggravate the tensions and divisions which underlie (violent) conflict. Ferguson suggests that far too frequently, aid managers ignore and duck the politics of their interventions, preferring to concentrate on ‘technical’ issues – a better irrigation system, a sturdier variety of wheat – over political ones. Aid has thus acquired a systemic blindness to the possible political co-option of its project efforts and resources. Uvin argues that ‘aid managers need to face up to the political nature of all aid’. Examples from Rwanda and Burundi. Sudan experience: Need for a politically informed approach for donors and aid actors. Need for co-ordinated and comprehensive approach that will make optimal use of a range of existing policy instruments and enhance their complementarity. Problem with short term thinking, short term mandates and short term funding. Need for agreed strategic priorities and systematic conflict analysis. The emphasis should shift from a piecemeal, project-focused approach, to one that concentrates on developing strategies, processes and linkages. Need for donors to promote transitional forms of assistance that do not fall under ‘pure’ relief or ‘pure’ development budget lines; need for in-depth regional or country level expertise; reward internal learning and analysis; develop greater tolerance for risk taking.

‘Political humanitarianism’ A politically informed humanitarian (and development) action requires: Political economy analysis linked to livelihoods analysis (power/vulnerability) Historical analysis Understanding of the identity discourse Examination of perceptions/concerns/ fears of excluded groups

The context Nuba Mountains conflict (land, exclusion, widespread violation of human rights; massive displacement and peace villages) GOS/SPLM areas: blockade (economic isolation as a war strategy; violation of humanitarian principles). Impact of the conflict on livelihoods (resilience, vibrant gathered foods market). Humanitarian/recovery operation in GOS areas. NGOs in OLS areas (NNRDO: food security strategy: welfare and no widespread distribution of food aid). Peace villages and role of aid. UNDP…

ARS Kadugli – the success story… Support to ‘sustainable solutions’ for IDPs. Unwitting cooperation with forced displacement strategies. Livelihoods supported: Nuba sharecropping on Nuba land the ownership of which had been illegitimately transferred to Baggara or other pro-GOS groups. OLS Review: ‘disturbing ignorance of local realities’ (1996). 1999: NetAid prize (peace farms)! Change of leadership in the UN: 2000 NMP process (later NMPACT). Dedicated resources to analysis and programme development.

The NMPACT model -1 Ethical framework (principles of engagement) Do ‘least’ harm Learn about/address needs and disparities (equity focus) Local ownership (Partners’ Fora) Protection of human rights and sources of livelihoods Joint political analysis, learning & advocacy Dedicated co-ordination structure Cross-line focus Flexibility (adapt responses to emerging realities)

The NMPACT model - 2

The NMPACT model - 3

Contact: Sara Pantuliano (s.pantuliano@odi.org.uk) www.odi.org.uk/hpg