Agenda

General Assembly

Bridging the Gap Between Relief and Development

by
Vivi Suveiu

With the explosion of ethnic conflicts during the past decade, the subject of the coordination between relief and development has surfaced as a major topic of discussion among donor nations and receiving countries. During the last year’s Washington Round Table, this discussion centered on bridging the gap between humanitarian assistance and long term development, especially in post-conflict situations.

The gap between relief and development is created once humanitarian agencies leave the troubled area after the initial crisis has subsided. Little work is done to start a base of development in the post-emergency region, leaving it up to the incoming development agencies to find a way to transfer from immediate post-emergency to long-term sustainable development. Refugee flows, funding delays from donor nations, and unclear responsibilities are major contributors to this gap. The gap is harmful in that lack of stability for development may cause another crisis situation and the loss of civilians’ and aid workers’ lives, as well as loss of time, money, resources, and patience among donor countries.

Major global actors such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, the European Union, the United States, Canada are among the primary donors. Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo, are examples of recipient nations to which aid from donor nations is applied. The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), other agencies and a host of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) use donor contributions and work with the recipient nation’s government to provide humanitarian relief or promote long-term development.

United Nations development agencies, such as UNDP, use mechanisms such as the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) and Common Country Assessments (CCAs) as tools to begin the process of poverty reduction and sustainable development. However, because of the gap many recipient nations do not have the resources to take ownership of their own development process.

A number of factors complicate this process. Donor countries often delay funding unless they can see significant progress. Delays in funding tax UN development agencies as well as the countries themselves, who may start to give up hope. Recipient countries also share part of the blame because of unstable governments who abuse international aid. Poor judgment on behalf of a recipient nation’s leaders can lead to the mishandling of funds.

Since little to no base of development exists for development agencies to work with once they come to a recipient nation, the creation of sustainable development is difficult. It is also hindered by the lack of coordination under Resident Directors at the field level. In fact, “cooperation among. . .representatives of other organizations in the UN system, the Bretton Woods institutions and officials of the host governments has not always been optimal.”  Coordination issues exist not only among UN agencies, but between those agencies and the recipient nations. there are times, when, because of frustration over delays in funding or simply because host governments feel that the UN is intruding on their national sovereignty, they will begin to mount projects on their own, without consulting the UN agencies already there.

Adding to the complexity of the gap is the huge flow of refugees returning from exile to their former homelands where they often find little infrastructure to maintain a peaceful and healthy existence. Examples from Bosnia and Rwanda show the problem of re-integrating large flows of refugees into their homeland, where they place demands on the already limited resources and threaten long-term stability.

On the development side, donors are wary of starting a post-conflict fund because of the uncertain climate of recipient nations. Donors need to be convinced of improvements in recipient nations’ political situations (i.e. a peaceful progression towards democratization) in order to continue or increase aid. Funding continues to be controversial for donor nations, since many wonder which nations and/or agencies will be the ones to implement projects. Many donors also voice concern with the lack of coordination with project timing and funding, citing the fact that many government budgets administer funding for humanitarian projects separately.

Funding is not only slow because of government bureaucracies but also because of the fact that relief and development agencies depend on voluntary financing for projects. The political interests of donors often get priority over humanitarian interests due to the weighted voting principle of the IMF and the World Bank. Politics is also important in the recipient nations. Many governments apply to a variety of sources for development assistance, leading to competition and lack of coordination.

Another significant problem results from what is sometimes termed the CNN factor. Humanitarian emergencies often receive extensive media coverage. The combination of publicity and the desire to alleviate human suffering lead to extensive voluntary contributions while the emergency exists, but reduced levels of funding when the emergency subsides or the news media shifts coverage to a new crisis.

Thus, even where humanitarian agencies work with their development partners to try and ensure a smooth hand-off from emergency relief to development, the resources necessary to carry out a smooth transition are simply not there--what emerges is a gap between relief and development.

Summary

The gap is the period between immediate post-conflict and the initiation of development programs. Major contributors to this gap have been lack of coordination between relief and development agencies, as well as lack of coordination amongst organizations in the UN system, development mechanisms, and host governments. Lack of funding by donor nations also causes delays in the implementation of projects, which further delays sustainable development. The question before this body is how to overcome the gap in order to prevent the reversion to conflict and promote sustainable development.

Questions for Further Considerations

1. How can the UN encourage timely allocation/distribution of funds from donor countries, especially to those situations that receive less public attention once emergencies have passed? 
2. What can the UN do to ensure the appropriate handling of funds once they have been allocated to recipient countries? 
3. What can be done to increase the cooperation between relief and development agencies? 
4. How can resources be increased to ensure the existence of funds needed for development after relief efforts have ended? 
5. What is the Brookings Process and how is it attempting to deal with the issue of "Bridging the Gap?"