Reflections on the Humanitarian Congress Berlin 2023

This story was written by Katharina Bucsits, Madeline Ewbank and Christos Tsampoulatidis

The topic for the 25th Annual Humanitarian Congress in Berlin (HC Berlin) this October was “Out of Sight, Out of Mind? Unveiling Attention and Neglect in Humanitarian Action and Global Health.” The congress was an opportunity to hear professionals and experts from the field grapple with many of the same questions covered in Master of Disaster Management core coursework at the University of Copenhagen. Three students studying Disaster Risk Management - Katharina Bucsits, Madeline Ewbank and Christos Tsampoulatidis - attended HC Berlin in-person and share their takeaways on key themes below.

Challenges of humanitarian work are multi-faceted and interact in a complex manner. The humanitarian funding gap - a major topic of the Congress reflects international neglect for a specific crisis. It can be argued that certain emergencies have not received neither the public attention nor the funding required to mitigate their impact on human suffering. This can create a vicious cycle where neglect and low funding perpetually reinforce each other, rendering more people vulnerable to present or future crises that might be even more hidden from the public eye.

The theme of Neglected Crises was an overarching one in the Congress’ proceedings - and was accompanied by reflections on whether these categorizations can have a transformative effect or not. While there might not be one single answer to these questions, one thing is for certain; that humanitarian workers and their organizations are deeply concerned about the impact of neglected crises and low funding. Taking departure from this all-encompassing challenge, our reflections will focus on specific themes explored during the Humanitarian Congress 2023. 

Localization & Decolonization

Keynote speeches at HC Berlin reiterated the gravity of decolonizing humanitarian aid and global health to better serve affected populations in neglected and severely underfunded humanitarian crises. In later sessions, speakers working in crisis contexts labeled as “forgotten” and “neglected” pointed out that these categorizations themselves implicate the colonial power dynamics that produce our perception of humanitarian neglect. While high-income donor country governments and media outlets may withhold funding, political will and media attention from many crises worldwide, the crises are certainly not forgotten by those directly impacted, as humanitarians and journalists from within affected communities continue to lead much of the long term, transformative work in complex humanitarian emergencies.

During the second day of HC Berlin, a dedicated panel session explored these themes in more depth. Leaders of locally-based organizations in Lebanon, Chad and the Philippines provided case studies illustrating the ways in which the power dynamics that characterize the international humanitarian system harm their organizations and the affected communities they serve, as well as success stories of programming that could have a wider impact with more durable funding and support. The panel proposed the following recommendations as solutions for pushing the localization agenda beyond “capacity building”:

1. Establish a donor accountability mechanism that standardizes more fair and inclusive approaches to local partnership, such that the practices of subcontracting and poaching local NGO staff to work on UN/INGO projects are no longer accepted as the norm.
2. Involve local NGOs in decision-making around the strategic planning, coordination and management of the response, not just in implementation.
3. Remove unnecessary barriers in the funding process, including accepting submissions written in local languages.
4. Prioritize the distribution aid rather than concentrating it in easier-to-access areas.
5. Trust local actors; the negative perception of local actors as less professional or less accountable than their UN/INGO counterparts is rooted in inequality.

In keeping with the second recommendation to expand local NGO staff involvement in decision-making and strategy for the humanitarian sector, we would love to see similar conference events incorporate more local actors on panels across the board-- not just on topics specific to localization. Representation in these spaces is a small step toward fulfilling this commitment to raise the visibility and voices of local leadership.

Challenges and Opportunities of Technology

A topical subject was the integration of emerging technologies in humanitarian work. Indeed, AI, big data and biometric information are increasingly utilized by both crisis-affected populations and humanitarian workers alike. It is an issue of much debate; possibilities to both increase efficiency but also perpetuate existing structural inequalities coexist. In the lively conversation that ensued in the Congress, many aspects of the “digital dilemma” were addressed.

To begin with, the ramifications of this vast integration of technology in humanitarian work are perhaps not fully known yet and more research certainly needs to be conducted in that regard. As was underlined, social discrimination by inadequate protection of beneficiaries’ data is an actual risk that needs to be accounted for. It became apparent that humanitarians need to find a way to safeguard impartiality in the digital realm. A compelling example was the manner by which biometric information from native Kenyan citizens eventually led to them being at risk of statelessness - underlining the potential direct impact such data can have on livelihoods.

On the other hand, there is a case to be made for more efficient outreach opportunities to beneficiaries. Instead of being left to the community - and its gatekeepers - to identify the most vulnerable of its members to refer to humanitarian mechanisms, they could be properly and perhaps more objectively identified through data processing that can quantify their needs.

There is not one simple answer to these dilemmas. Throughout the Congress, there was an almost universal admission for the need for a comprehensive regulatory framework around new technologies in humanitarian work. This could lead to an interrogation of both sides of the argument against the actual challenges of the field and allow them to develop and mature. 

Conflict and structural injustice

Addressing the war in Ukraine in this year’s Humanitarian Congress was unavoidable. War is a ruinous process and – as highlighted – perpetuates structural injustices. Ukraine is an illustrative case example on how conflict can create barriers to access to medicines for marginalized populations, as well as expose already vulnerable populations such as sex workers to higher risks of HIV. Moreover, historical social injustices, as is the case of the discrimination of the Roma people in Ukraine, seem to be accelerated because of the conflict. 

The speakers examined these outcomes through the lens of vulnerability – and how this concept is constructed as a narrative and a humanitarian criterion. Indeed, it can be argued that these populations have not been the most visible in humanitarian response to the conflict; this does not negate their vulnerability, but rather reflects their marginalization and lack of representation. Thus, it can be maintained that overwhelming international support to a crisis does not automatically bring the most marginalized to the forefront of the response – as conflict serves to push them and their needs even further back in the social sphere. 

One can argue that this is really the challenge that humanitarians face; to maintain impartiality and neutrality in an emotionally charged public discourse and advocate for the most neglected and non-prioritized persons amidst conflict and instability.

Fatal side effects: Historical gendering in medical science, practice and drugs 

In today's times, it is un-negotiable to closely examine the topic of gender in various areas. That's why the talk on the topic "Fatal side effects: Historical gendering in medical science, practice, and drugs" was very interesting and shed light on an area that may not be consciously recognized. It addressed how barriers arise for female doctors due to tools designed for male hands and a neglect of physical differences in general. 

Socio-cultural power structures were also discussed, and the talk highlighted the existing gaps, especially in the fields of medical education, drug development, and healthcare, and how much more much can be done to fill these gaps.

The content presented by Dr. Sitra Nuredin was especially eye-opening. She provided the audience with insights into her experiences as a doctor and how the perception of male and female patients differs, as well as the challenges that arise when she clarifies that she is not a nurse but a trained physician with extensive knowledge.

The talk concluded by highlighting that this gender gap not only occurs among male and female doctors and their work but also in the treatment of male and female patients and their treatment outcomes. How a person's pain is perceived or taken seriously can determine whether a person lives or dies, and this must be given greater importance in our healthcare system today.

Conclusion

It is evident that the humanitarian field is an ever evolving one. The  realities of conflict, climate change and increased protection needs shape a demanding landscape for humanitarians. What is hopeful is that these challenges are recognized and serve to encourage humanitarians to adapt and evolve.  It is inspiring that such initiatives as HC Berlin are addressing these challenges and provide a much needed space for reflection.

Topics