Aller au contenu principal

Environmental footprint of humanitarian assistance-scoping review

Pays
Monde
Sources
Groupe URD
Date de publication
Origine
Voir l'original

Samantha Brangeon / Frances Crowley

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Humanitarian assistance, by its very definition focuses its attention on people affected by conflict and disasters, looking in particular at their needs related to health, food, shelter and education (JEU, 2014). Subsequently, impacts on the environment - either related to the disaster itself, or to the ensuing humanitarian activity – are often viewed as secondary to the humanitarian imperative. This has led to the repeated occurrence of environmental degradation and destruction, which can impede the recovery of affected and vulnerable populations and host communities who depend on natural resources for their livelihoods, with negative and long-term impacts on their lives, and on ecological systems as a whole (ibid.).

There is growing recognition and awareness of the importance of addressing the environmental impacts of humanitarian aid, as well as the need for environmental protection and sustainability to be considered in humanitarian responses. Donors have a critical role to play to make change happen (JEU, 2014.). Recognising this,
DG ECHO commissioned this study to take stock of the organisation’s position and practices on this issue, with a view to identifying areas where it can change its own ways of working towards a greater alignment with environmental protection, and at the same time, influencing its partners to do the same. Such environmental mainstreaming within DG ECHO is also very timely, given the European Commission’s priority to deliver on the European Green Deal in both EU internal and external policies and actions.

The subject of environmental protection and reducing the sector’s environmental footprint, so-called “greening”, is extremely broad, with many key elements to consider. There are both operational and programmatic approaches; discussions range from the greening of offices (e.g. banning of single-use plastics, recycling of assets etc.) to what types of seeds to distribute in livelihoods programmes. The issues involved are multi-dimensional, ranging from the global (e.g CO2 emissions) to the local (e.g. water table depletion), with impacts that can be direct or indirect (e.g. suppliers’ standards), and short- or long-term. Environmental issues can be cross-sector, as is the case for logistics, the supply chain and cash transfer programmes, or they can be sector-specific (Shelter, WASH, Health, etc.). As such, it is important to acknowledge this breadth, and adopt a multi-pronged approach to addressing environmental protection, whilst also giving both the research and its recommendations certain parameters and priorities.

Another important consideration (and risk) is the frequent conflation of environmental protection and/or sustainable development with climate change adaptation/climate resilience. Whilst it is essential to consider these concepts in relation to each other, given how inextricably linked they are, climate resilience is only one element of environmental protection, which should also include thinking around biodiversity protection, regeneration and nature-based solutions. There is a tendency for organisations to use the term ‘climate change’ as a synonym for environmental issues (LSE, 2020)1 , and to focus mainly on resilience building and adaptation to climate change.

Reflecting this emphasis, many INGOs have staff tasked with working on climate change. It is often harder to find job descriptions and roles that include environmental protection (ibid.). An important role for DG ECHO could be to encourage more holistic, systems-thinking, which recognises the links between environmental degradation, the humanitarian sector’s environmental footprint, climate change and sustainable development.

DG ECHO can also take a greater lead in requiring humanitarian actors to integrate prevention, preparedness and disaster risk reduction into their responses and linking relief to rehabilitation and sustainable development. This can be achieved by working more closely with other EC Services, particularly DG DEVCO, DG ENV, DG CLIMA and DG RTD. A great deal of knowledge and expertise, and a large number of systems and tools, could be harnessed by creating platforms and forums for cross- DG learning.
The systems and processes used by DG ECHO to manage its partner relationships and grants also offer significant entry points to bring about greater environmental consideration in partner programmes. The Humanitarian Implementation Plan (HIP) and its technical annexes (HIPTAs) would also be good entry points to support DG ECHO’s partners’ internal reflexion on how to take environmental issues into consideration, which has already begun with the 2020 HIPs and HIPTAs. The Framework Partnership Agreement and the Single Form are both under review in 2020, providing an opportunity for both to include environmental criteria or some kind of ‘green’ audit. In the case of the Single Form, recommendations from partners and DG ECHO staff included the possibility of embedding the use of a screening tool such as the NEAT+2 , which allows humanitarian actors to quickly identify issues of environmental concern before designing longer-term emergency or recovery interventions. A decision needs to be reached as to whether DG ECHO should add another marker – an environmental marker – to its requirements. An alternative would be to revise the Resilience Marker, currently included in the Single Form, to better reflect preparedness in humanitarian actions as well as measuring the environmental dimension of ECHO-funded humanitarian actions. This proposal would also support the more holistic approach discussed above, by bringing together preparedness and adaptive programmatic aims (present in resilience work), as well operational elements of environmental mainstreaming.

Following a recent trend amongst humanitarian organisations to put in place environmental policies, DG ECHO could both develop a stand-alone environmental policy/guidelines and green existing thematic policies (e.g. relating to Shelter, WASH, Health, Cash etc.). This would provide the DG with the necessary statement and commitment to environmental protection that it is currently lacking. Greening thematic policies was also widely supported, and a major opportunity lies in greening the forthcoming logistics policy (already under discussion and agreement within the Capacities and Operational Support division in Brussels), since the humanitarian logistics and supply chain represent such a cross-cutting entry point for reducing the environmental footprint of humanitarian aid.

Putting in place a focal point/environmental expert in Brussels, whose sole focus is the intersection of humanitarian aid and environmental protection, was also seen by partners and experts as an essential first step. Similarly to other cross-cutting issues, an internal task force/community of practice could also be established to enhance mainstreaming of environmental issues across policies/operations, coordinated by the appointed focal point. Though it could be argued that including environmental activities in all job descriptions would be preferable to having a focal point, as one interviewee put it, ‘If it is everyone’s job, then it is nobody’s job’. For both DG ECHO and its partners, the question of resources and investment is a central concern in terms of moving towards greater environmental awareness and more sustainable programming. Although there are some instances where costs may in fact be reduced (e.g. moving to more online training and video conferencing instead of staff travel), environmental mainstreaming will require initial investments.

Another crucial process in working towards a greener sector and a reduced environmental footprint is to undertake office-level greening, both in the field and in headquarters, for example, through banning single use plastics, reducing the number of international flights and using renewable energy. Taking steps to adapt internal day to day activities and ways of working can offer quick wins, whilst ensuring coherence with the rolling-out of environmental activities in humanitarian programmes. For DG ECHO such steps would help maintain credibility if environmental requirements are placed on their partners; there are already bold plans underway to carry out a more systematic greening of DG ECHO’s field offices. This process also offers an opportunity to bring about the necessary shift in mind-set that needs to take place for each individual in order for there to be both awareness and then action related to environmental safe-guarding.

Perhaps the greatest opportunity in terms of reducing negative environmental impacts lies in the way in which greening activities frequently dovetail with the cost efficiency agenda driven by the Grand Bargain - principally concerning logistics and the supply chain. This agenda has seen the development of key strategies to optimise the supply chain for better, smarter, and more efficient aid delivery. These include greater disaster preparedness, prepositioning of stock, pooling of resources, localisation and reverse logistics, all of which can also have environmental benefits. A “greened” logistics policy, where this synergy is made explicit, as well as support to the development of a “greened” logistics standard , are two key ways in which DG ECHO can have a major impact in reducing its environmental footprint.

Integrating environmental issues across sectors is another effective way of addressing environmental concerns and there are multiple technical adaptations possible and many considerations to take into account. To give an example from the Cash sector, multi-purpose cash modalities present interesting complexities, challenges and opportunities in addressing environmental impacts (LSE, 2018). Since cash has been championed by the humanitarian community in recent years, efforts should be made to ensure this form of assistance is used in a way that takes into account any potential negative environmental impacts.

As a global leader in humanitarian funding, DG ECHO is in a position to make a hugely significant impact in terms of how its partners and its own staff uphold the ‘Do No Harm’ principle in relation to the environment and those whose lives depend on it. There is a willingness within the sector, as well as institutionally, to make the radical changes that are so urgently needed to reduce our environmental footprint, and it is the moment for DG ECHO and other humanitarian donors to harness this momentum Humanitarian donors have a key role to play in making this shift towards a greener sector.