Aid & development, explained.
Pallets bound for Papua New Guinea following the landslide in Enga province in May (DFAT)
The effort is laudable, and a step in the right direction, with more ambition and local engagement needed.
Subscribe to The Informer for monthly expert analysis, and to Events for advance notice of visiting world leaders and distinguished guests.
You may unsubscribe from Lowy Institute newsletters at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
Can Australia’s new Humanitarian Policy deliver?Can Australia’s new Humanitarian Policy deliver?
Australia has just released its long anticipated Humanitarian Policy that aims to shape a world “where humanitarian assistance is needed far less often”. It is a welcome initiative, but to achieve its priorities, more whole-of-community engagement and ambition is required.
Around the world, political and environmental crises are taking an ever-increasing toll on lives, livelihoods and even national viability. In addition, the death toll last year for humanitarian workers was the worst on record, and this year it is likely to be even more dire.
The impacts of climate change are mounting globally, while resources are falling short. Pacific Island countries are receiving less than 7% of what they need for climate mitigation and adaptation, so regional vulnerabilities are increasing, according to a presentation by Coral Pasisi, Director of the Climate Program, at the 2023 Pacific Community annual meeting.
Political and climate crises demand urgent action. So, for Australia to set clear priorities for humanitarian action in the region and the world is laudable.
Pacific neighbours often say that success depends on “working with us, not for us”.
The first priority set out by the Australian policy is building readiness and preparedness for shocks.
More resources are helpful but must reach those most in need. Naomi Brooks, the humanitarian lead for the Australian Council for International Development (ACFID) notes that Australia’s humanitarian fund has not increased since 2018. And a recent Australian parliamentary Committee report warned about “shrinking civic space”. Without targeted action, resilience and readiness suffer.
This policy and others increase commitment to resourcing and local action, but often through the same models used in the past. “Working primarily with major international entities that leads to unintentional exclusion of relevant local actors critical for community resilience,” as Chris Govers, Head of International Programs at Habitat for Humanity Australia, put it. This policy commits to local leadership but will need to find ways to engage civil society more effectively.
Success requires a bit more innovation. For example, attention to non-economic loss and damage that affects communities, such as food insecurity, threats to human well-being, and biodiversity loss, according to the Humanitarian Action Group. More could also be done to harness technologies to underpin locally driven predictive analytics, rapid assessment and knowledge networking.
The second priority is responding to disasters by delivering support to crisis-affected populations. Australia plays a critical role in the Pacific region as the first responder, but with disasters increasing and intensifying, more hands are needed, and less competition.
Pacific neighbours often say that success depends on “working with us, not for us”. A useful step in Australia’s region would be to act on the proposed Pacific multinational military cooperation initiative endorsed this year by the South Pacific Defence Minister’s Meeting for more effective and collaborative humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. Success will depend on co-design, Pacific leadership and, importantly, inclusion of civilian-centred humanitarian expertise.
The last priority in the new policy is to take practical steps to strengthen adherence to international humanitarian law. Just how Australia can reverse the current “disregard for international law” is unclear. Global action needs to impose high costs on those breaching their humanitarian obligations, but frequently international institutions and nations have proved reluctant to take action that could compromise economic interests or stir-up political sensitivities.
To make a start, Australia has initiated a much-needed new “Declaration on the Protection of Humanitarian Personnel” along with Brazil, Colombia, Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, Sierra Leone, Switzerland and the United Kingdom to provide better protection for those working in conflict zones. Surprisingly, missing from the list of supporters are the top three heavy weights for humanitarian assistance – the United States, the European Union and Germany. Let’s hope their support is forthcoming.
Leadership and principled humanitarian action are commendable, but policies are ultimately judged on their achievements. This Australian Humanitarian Policy is timely and valuable, but to succeed it needs higher ambition and concerted action from all of us.
About the author
Meg Keen
Dr Meg Keen is a Nonresident Fellow in the Pacific Islands Program at the Lowy Institute.
The most-pressing world events explained by Lowy Institute experts and global contributors, in your inbox, every Thursday.
You may unsubscribe from The Interpreter at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
