GHA-Report-2010.pdf - Global Humanitarian Assistance

More documents

Recommendations

Info

FIGURE 9: INCREASE IN UN INCOME FROM PRIVATE SOURCES FOR HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE 101 US$ MILLION 31 43 34 48 2007 2008 15 8 2 0 1 WFP UNICEF UNHCR UNRWA FAO Please note that WFP figures for 2007 and 2008 are not comparable since a change of reporting system occurred in that period. Source: Development Initiatives analysis based on financial information provided by UN Study Set; FTS data has been used to complete UNRWA figures for operations outside Palestine Although the proportion of humanitarian funding coming from private sources for the UN accounted for an average of only 2% of the total humanitarian income for 2007 and 2008, it has doubled in volume over the same period. The increase in the share of private funding has however risen by only 0.5% since the volume of government funding has kept a similar pace of growth. (See Figure 9.) Considerable variations can be observed between the different UN agencies. UNICEF accounted for the largest share of private funding with over 12% in 2008, while FAO showed the lowest proportion with 0.1% in the same year. UNICEF humanitarian income from private sources is raised through 36 national committees, which support its work through fundraising, advocacy and education in their home countries. This structure gives UNICEF a physical presence in the richest countries of the world. In 2005, the year of Indian Ocean earthquake-tsunami, national committees and offices around the world raised US$324 million from the general public to support humanitarian programmes. THE INTERNATIONAL RED CROSS AND RED CRESCENT MOVEMENT The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) is perhaps the largest world disaster response organisation with an unmatched global presence, with a unique network of 186 national societies and therefore a presence in almost every country in world. The IFRC’s funding patterns place it closer to the NGO group than to the United Nations we have examined. In 2008 it raised 65.5% of its humanitarian income from private sources, US$181 million. But while other delivery agencies receive private funding mainly from individuals, charities, and private companies and corporations, it is, in fact, the national societies that provide the larger share of IFRC funding both from private and government sources. The IFRC’s federal body, the Secretariat, raises very limited funding directly. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has quite a different pattern of funding. Over 90% of ICRC financing comes from government donors and the European Commission, and a mere 2%-3% comes from private sources. This places the ICRC closer to the group of UN agencies than to NGOs. National Red Cross and Red Crescent societies are big players with an average share of 5% of the total income. In monetary terms private funding amounted to US$26.3 million in 2009, US$32.7 million in 2008 and US$18.6 million in 2007. These amounts are a very small percentage of the total $3.7 billion that ICRC has raised over the last four years. (See Figure 10, 11 & 12.) The fundraising mechanism within the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, made up of the IFRC, ICRC and national societies is a very complex one. While the ICRC raises the bulk of its income directly from their government donors, the IFRC and national societies follow a different and intricate funding path. When it comes to the income from government sources, both raise money directly from government donors – or one may raise it on behalf of the other. Some government 64
FIGURE 10: ICRC SHARE OF HUMANITARIAN INCOME PER FUNDING SOURCE WITH TOTAL FUNDING 2006 88.7% 2.1% 8.6% 0.6% US$753m 2007 91% 2.2% 6.1% 0.7% US$840m 2008 91.2% 3.1% 4.6% 1.0% US$1.0bn 2009 92% 2.4% 4.8% 0.8% US$1.0bn 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Government funding Private funding National societies Other public funding Source: Development Initiatives analysis based on ICRC annual reports donors’ financing mechanisms for humanitarian assistance may favour international over national organisations, or vice versa. This may mean that in certain cases the IFRC may be better placed to receive humanitarian funding than the national society of the donor country. If that is the case, the IFRC can raise the money and then pass it on to the national society. The opposite also occurs and government financing for humanitarian assistance can be received by a national society and then donated to the IFRC. Some donors may make generous donations to both their national society and the IFRC. FIGURE 11 AND FIGURE 12: IFRC DISTRIBUTION OF PRIVATE FUNDING SOURCES AND OF GOVERNMENT FUNDING SOURCES, RESPECTIVELY, 2008 US$0.04m US$1.9m US$2.7m US$31.5m US$186.2m US$68.8m Total income from individuals Total income from private foundations Total income from companies and corporations Total private income from national societies From governments From governments through national societies Source: Development Initiatives analysis based on financial information provided by IFRC 65
Page 3:
GHA REPORT 2010
Page 7 and 8:
GLOBAL TRENDS Humanitarian interven
Page 9 and 10:
DONORS AND RECIPIENTS: AN INCREASIN
Page 11 and 12:
FIGURE 4: GOVERNMENT CONTRIBUTIONS
Page 13 and 14:
PRIORITIES COUNTRIES IN CONFLICT Hu
Page 15 and 16:
that are rather difficult to attrib
Page 17 and 18: DOMESTIC RESPONSE It is absolutely
Page 19: GOVERNMENTS Government donors and t
Page 23 and 24: FIGURE 2: DAC DONOR CONTRIBUTIONS T
Page 25 and 26: FIGURE 5: SHARES OF HUMANITARIAN AI
Page 27 and 28: FIGURE 7: CHANNELS OF HUMANITARIAN
Page 29 and 30: TABLE 1: COUNTRIES FEATURING AS TOP
Page 31 and 32: Together, the top 10 recipients of
Page 33 and 34: FIGURE 1: A BREAKDOWN OF DAC DONORS
Page 35 and 36: TABLE 3: TOP NON-DAC DONORS IN EACH
Page 37 and 38: FIGURE 13: TOP 10 RECIPIENTS OF NON
Page 39 and 40: TABLE 2: GOVERNMENT DONOR FUNDING T
Page 41 and 42: GOVERNMENT DONOR PRIORITIES, PATTER
Page 43 and 44: FIGURE 18: SECTORAL EXPENDITURE AS
Page 45: TABLE 6: DAC AND NON-DAC DONOR SUPP
Page 49 and 50: FINANCING MECHANISMS Until 2005 the
Page 51 and 52: FIGURE 2: TOP 10 DONORS TO HUMANITA
Page 53 and 54: On the one hand it could be said th
Page 55 and 56: two former funds were established i
Page 57 and 58: Sudan Sudan witnessed ongoing confl
Page 59 and 60: TABLE 6: MATRIX OF IN-COUNTRY FINAN
Page 61: WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF HUMANITARIAN
Page 64 and 65: DELIVERING HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE
Page 66 and 67: 2006-2008, the remainder funded lar
Page 70 and 71: DELIVERY AGENCY RECIPIENTS If we ex
Page 72 and 73: TABLE 2: TOP TEN RECIPIENTS OF HUMA
Page 74 and 75: DOMESTIC RESPONSE: TIMELINE FOLLOWI
Page 76 and 77: WHAT DO WE MEAN BY ‘DOMESTIC RESP
Page 78 and 79: Government leadership in natural di
Page 80 and 81: THE GENERAL PUBLIC The act of givin
Page 82 and 83: Bangladesh Bangladesh is a country
Page 85 and 86: Uganda Plagued by conflict between
Page 87: efore external support started reac
Page 90 and 91: CONFLICT AND AID States affected by
Page 92 and 93: Unsurprisingly the countries with h
Page 94 and 95: 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Page 96 and 97: internally displaced people (IDPs),
Page 98 and 99: FIGURE 6: ODA FROM OECD DAC DONORS
Page 100 and 101: The OECD DAC’s eligibility criter
Page 102 and 103: THE MILITARY AS A HUMANITARIAN ACTO
Page 104 and 105: FIGURE 9: US AID CHANNELLED THROUGH
Page 106 and 107: 102
Page 108 and 109: WHAT DO WE KNOW NOW ABOUT FUNDING A
Page 110 and 111: as being people in need of immediat
Page 112 and 113: million more for DRC in 2009 compar
Page 114 and 115: THE UN CONSOLIDATED APPEALS PROCESS
Page 116 and 117: FIGURE 6: APPEAL FUNDING AS SHARE O
Page 118 and 119:
The appeal in DRC has undergone fur
Page 120 and 121:
Whilst giving is commendable in res
Page 122 and 123:
appeals in 2005 saw a 76.5% increas
Page 124 and 125:
120
Page 126 and 127:
THE FUTURE OF HUMANITARIAN AID? HUM
Page 128 and 129:
FIGURE 3: HUMANITARIAN AID FROM GOV
Page 130 and 131:
Somalia and DPRK). Another 10 recei
Page 132 and 133:
128
Page 134 and 135:
WHY IS COUNTING HUMANITARIAN AID SO
Page 136 and 137:
the capacity of certain sets of act
Page 138 and 139:
While providing coverage of contrib
Page 140 and 141:
US$ DATA SOURCE INTERNATIONAL NGOS
Page 142 and 143:
SPECIFIC NOTES ON FTS USE IN GHA RE
Page 144 and 145:
DAC-reported humanitarian aid inclu
Page 146 and 147:
BASIC CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS Cent
Page 148 and 149:
Multilateral ODA Organisation for E
Page 150 and 151:
IATI ICRC IFRC IfS IMC IMF INGO IRC
Page 152 and 153:
REFERENCE TABLES TABLE 1: TOP 30 RE
Page 154 and 155:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS THANK YOU The Glob
Page 156:
GHA Report 2010 presents the very l
show all

GHA-Report-2010.pdf - Global Humanitarian Assistance

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?