Good Humanitarian Donorship Principles in Practice: Assessing humanitarian assistance to internally displaced persons in Sudan and Sri Lanka

This one-page document presents 23 principles of humanitarian donorship that were endorsed in Stockholm in 2003 by Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, the European Commission, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States. They include three principles defining humanitarian action, seven general principles, four funding principles, six principles on promoting standards, and three principles on learning and accountability.

The Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) initiative, widely embraced by Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donor governments in 2003, sought to reaffirm the centrality of the core humanitarian principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence in the financing of humanitarian assistance. It reinforced the importance of saving lives and alleviating suffering wherever it is found, delivering relief according to need and without discrimination among recipients, refraining from taking sides and conserving the autonomy of humanitarian action from political, economic, military and other interests. In order to put this initiative into practice, a set of 23 principles was formulated that emphasised general principles of good practice, particularly in terms of financing, promoting standards and enhancing implementation, learning and accountability.

Since initiating the GHD project, DAC donor governments have made various attempts to establish pilot projects and examine the extent to which GHD is being rolled out at the country level. As part of this process, this study was commissioned by OFDA in 2008 to explore how GHD and its implementation by donors was affecting humanitarian responses to the needs of internally displaced persons (IDPs) and communities affected by displacement. Sri Lanka and Sudan were chosen as case studies as both countries suffer from extensive internal displacement, and very significant donor resources have been invested to mitigate the consequences of human suffering. Populations in both countries have suffered multiple and inter-linked phases of displacement, and both countries rely heavily on international assistance to respond to humanitarian needs (emergency relief, longer-term care and maintenance and return and reintegration).

The severity of these humanitarian and displacement crises reinforce the need for appropriate and principled donor approaches that are able to tackle the consequent complexity of supporting and assisting those in need. The research for this study was carried out in two phases. Phase one consisted of an initial desk review of the literature and some telephone consultations with key stakeholders in mid-2008. These helped establish some of the main issues and questions to be explored during the second phase of field research, carried out in October 2008. In Sri Lanka, interviews were conducted in the capital Colombo and in the districts of Trincomalee, Batticaloa, Puttalam and (by telephone) Vavuniya.

In Sudan, the two main areas of focus were Darfur and Abyei, although the broader dynamics of humanitarian financing for IDPs in both the north and south of Sudan have informed the findings of the study.