Global Burden of Armed Violence - The Geneva Declaration on ...

138 <strong>Armed</strong> violence and aid workers
GLOBAL BURDEN <strong>of</strong> ARMED VIOLENCE
Legend:
Ambush (44%)
Murder (not in vehicle)
(25%)
Car/truck bombing
(9%)
Landmine (9%)
Anti-aircraft attack
(8%)
Aerial bombardment
(5%)
Source:
Fast and Rowley (2008)
Legend:
En route to field
activities (61%)
NGO central <strong>of</strong>fice
(11%)
NGO sub-<strong>of</strong>fice (6%)
Personal residence
(8%)
Other/don’t know (14%)
Source:
Fast and Rowley (2008)
Aid workers provide humanitarian assistance to
millions <strong>of</strong> people around the world. <strong>The</strong>y are a
group specifically exposed to armed violence,
because most <strong>of</strong> their work occurs in conflict or
post-conflict environments. In this context, the
organizations involved in humanitarian assist-
ance find themselves weighing difficult choices
between interrupting life-saving relief activities and
safeguarding the security <strong>of</strong> their staff. <strong>Violence</strong>
against aid workers has captured the attention <strong>of</strong>
the media, and various researchers have set out
to develop a better understanding <strong>of</strong> the dynam-
ics <strong>of</strong> this type <strong>of</strong> armed violence.
Figure 7.4 Types <strong>of</strong> fatal attacks against aid
workers, 1997–2003
Figure 7.5 Location <strong>of</strong> intentional violence cases
against aid workers, 2002–05
Intentional armed violence is one <strong>of</strong> the leading
causes <strong>of</strong> death for aid workers around the world.
A recent estimate by researchers at Johns Hopkins
University estimated the violent death rate <strong>of</strong> relief
personnel at 60 per 100,000 aid workers per year
(Fast and Rowley, 2008). This figure—higher than
the intentional homicide rate for almost all countries—shows
that aid workers face a high risk <strong>of</strong>
victimization. Although international and local
personnel regularly face various threats to their
health and well-being, research points to the role
<strong>of</strong> arms availability and misuse as a critical risk
factor (Buchanan and Muggah, 2005; Beasley,
Buchanan, and Muggah, 2003) (see Figure 7.4).
It is difficult to predict with certainty regional or
country-level risks. Nevertheless, it appears that
Africa remains the site <strong>of</strong> most relief worker deaths
and injuries. While intentional violence is a threat
to aid workers, criminality and other manifestations
<strong>of</strong> routine interpersonal violence also impact
on morbidity, stress, and mental health. <strong>The</strong> most
dangerous activity for aid workers is travelling
between sites (home and <strong>of</strong>fice), while road
ambushes—<strong>of</strong>ten involving the use weapons—
are the most frequently reported type <strong>of</strong> armed
violence (see Figure 7.5). Finally, national (and
not international) staff bear the largest brunt <strong>of</strong>
intentional violence, particularly drivers, guards,
and those working directly in the field (Fast and
Rowley, 2008).
<strong>The</strong> present evidence base does not necessarily
suggest that the overall incidence <strong>of</strong> intentional
violence is increasing, but rather that it has
kept pace with the expansion in the number <strong>of</strong>
humanitarian personnel working on the ground.
Nevertheless, there is a need to enhance monitoring
<strong>of</strong> these trends in order to develop a better
understanding <strong>of</strong> the risks aid workers face in
specific countries. Aid worker deaths have not
been fully incorporated into the global cost <strong>of</strong>