Sida's Contributions to Humanitarian Mine Action

3 Implementation ChannelsOver the past decade, a number of channels for the implementation of Humanitarian Mine Actionhave emerged. Because of its legitimacy in providing humanitarian assistance and in mobilizing fundsand other resources, the UN assumed a central role as the implementation channel for mine action,most notably through establishing national Mine Action Centres (MACs). However, since the end of1999, there has been broad consensus that MACs as both implementers and coordinating bodies havelargely been a failure; in this chapter, we briefly cover the critique that has led to this consensus. Asidefrom the UN, there are currently at least two main forms of implementation channels in mine action.Owing in large part to their ability to employ a rapid and flexible approach to the problem of mines,international and national nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have developed as a key implementationchannel. A second channel is that of existing governmental institutions. More specifically, themilitaries of national governments have increasingly taken a more active role in mine action, a movethat stems in large part from their technical proficiency and capacities in the field. In addition, thereare alternatives to the NGO and government channels, the most prominent of these being commercialcompanies.Following a conceptual clarification of what we mean by implementation channels, we examine therelative merits of different channels. First, we briefly explore the criticisms aimed at MACs as implementers.Second, we examine country programmes of two of the largest NGOs currently in mine action,Mines Advisory Group (MAG) in Iraqi Kurdistan and Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) in Angola. Third,we look at Nicaragua, where the Nicaraguan Government – with support from the Organization ofAmerican States (OAS) and the Inter-American Defence Board (IADB) – has assumed primary responsibilityfor coordinating HMA efforts and where the military has assumed responsibility for the implementationof demining. Fourth, we assess the utility and implications of alternatives to the NGO and governmentchannels. We conclude with a comparison of the relative merits of each approach.Conceptualizing implementation channelsIn the simplest terms, an implementation channel can be conceptualized as the collective body oforganizations that put a given policy into effect. Such a definition is of course broad and can includeeverything from donor agencies and international bodies to on-the-ground organizations. In thefollowing, we employ a narrower conceptualization of implementation channels, restricting the definitionto include only those organizations that specifically implement Humanitarian Mine Action at thefield level.Sida’s roleIn terms of implementing HMA, the prime concern for Sida is the need to create sustainable nationalcapacities, equipped to deal with the problem in the long term. 1 Sida suggests that there should be amove away from the dominant role UN-led Mine Action Centres have had in the implementation ofHMA, towards existing institutions such as rescue services, civil defence, the police or the militaryassuming a larger role in the implementation of HMA. 2 This is based on arguments regarding sustain-1Preliminär redogörelse för och analys av det samlade svenska stödet till olika former av minverksomheter samt underlag för preliminär inriktning avfortsatt stöd, Sida, 28 June 2000.p. 32Interestingly, this has also become the profile of Sida’s cooperation with various Swedish capacities, where various branchesof the military, as well as the Swedish Rescue Services Agency (SRSA) are central actors. See Chapter 5.26 Sida’s CONTRIBUTION TO HUMANITARIAN MINE ACTION – Sida EVALUATION 01/06