The spotlight is on financing to address crisis, vulnerability and risk as never before. This is for two reasons – the urgent challenge of attempting to meet rising humanitarian needs with limited resources, and the unique opportunities to find solutions presented by a suite of global processes in 2015 and 2016. The Global Humanitarian Assistance (GHA) Report 2015 provides the evidence to understand the former and to inform the latter.
The GHA Report 2015 shows that poverty and vulnerability to crises are intrinsically linked and that international humanitarian assistance continues to go predominantly to long-term recipients. This emphasises the need to build resilience, address the underlying causes of crisis and meet the long-term needs of people affected by crisis. For this to happen, a shared responsibility between humanitarian, development, climate change and other actors is critical as is the mobilisation of other resources beyond humanitarian assistance.
Key findings of the report include:
- International humanitarian assistance rose for a second year running to a record US$24.5 billion in 2014. All of 2013’s largest donors gave more in 2014, and many gave their largest amounts. Despite this rise, funding was not sufficient to meet needs. In response to the scale of need in 2014, UN-coordinated humanitarian appeals requested the highest amount of funding to date – a total of US$19.5 billion – yet a record US$7.5 billion of requirements went unmet.
- 2013 saw a shift in the geography of displacement – with more people displaced now in the Middle East than in Africa. As a result, Gulf donors rose in prominence, and Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) became the 6th and 15th largest government donors, respectively.
- Two thirds (66%) of international humanitarian assistance continues to go to long-term recipients such as Syria, Somalia and Pakistan, as crises are protracted or disasters recur in the same places year on year.
- An estimated 93% of people living in extreme poverty (defined as less than US$1.25 a day) are in countries that are either fragile or environmentally vulnerable or both, emphasising the need to address the underlying causes of crises.
- Domestic response and capacities often play an important role in best meeting needs and reducing the need for international finance, as case studies of Turkey and Mexico show.
- Of total international humanitarian assistance, only 0.2% went directly to local and national NGOs and 3.1% to the governments of affected states.
The report uses unique methodologies to gather and analyse data to provide the most up-to-date and comprehensive picture of global humanitarian financing. It includes in-depth analysis of international financing to national and local actors, as well as wider resource flows to the most crisis-affected, fragile and environmentally vulnerable countries.
We have produced this report annually since 2000, to present a shared and independent evidence base for anyone engaged in providing, using, receiving and understanding assistance in crisis settings. In a year when financing for crisis preparedness and response is under scrutiny as never before, our report provides the data to inform discussion, which we hope will deliver change.
We are hosting an event with online streaming options for an international audience in London on 6 July 2015 to discuss the implications of the report’s findings on the future of humanitarian financing. Find out more and register.
All of the data contained within this report is available to download from our GHA website. We are always pleased to hear from you, so do share with us your feedback. You can also join the discussion on twitter #GHA2015.