Cameroon country study: humanitarian financing task team output IV

This country case study report contributes to a wider policy study commissioned by the Inter Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Humanitarian Financing Task Team and contributes to their 2018-19 work plan objective to “Contribute to aid effectiveness through more effective humanitarian-development funding flows and mechanisms”. The study is co-led by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC). An Advisory Committee also provides strategic guidance to the study and includes FAO, NRC, UNDP, OCHA, the Word Bank, the OECD, ICVA and the UN Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office (MPTFO).

The study documents the extent to which predictable, multi-year, flexible financing is made available at country level and seeks to understand the ways in which funding matches collective outcomes or Interoperable Humanitarian and Development Plan financial requirements (also referred to as ‘common planning priorities’) through a series of country studies in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Chad, the Central African Republic (CAR), Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Ukraine.

Cameroon was considered to be an interesting context for considering funding across the nexus in that it is an overall relatively stable lower middle-income country, but with a deteriorating economic and governance situation, and rapidly growing humanitarian crisis. In this context, opportunities exist for international actors to target interventions to prevent further deterioration of the situation, however, both domestic and international actors re currently struggling to adapt existing models and approaches, and to mobilise adequate resources.

A research mission was carried out in Yaoundé, Cameroon, from February 24th – March 1st 2019, hosted by UN OCHA and at the invitation of the UN Resident / Humanitarian Coordinator (RCHC). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with (see Annex 1 for a full list of actors consulted) in accordance with the agreed research methodology. It should be noted that a number of key donors to the context (including Korea and Germany) did not respond to requests for interviews and their perspectives therefore are not included. Documentary research and analysis of major public and private financing flows which could in principle contribute to Cameroon’s humanitarian, recovery, development and peacebuilding challenges supports the country-level qualitative interview research and is provided in Annex 2.