Reducing the humanitarian financing gap: review of progress since the report of the High-Level Panel on Humanitarian Financing

In January 2016, the United Nations Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on Humanitarian Financing (HLP) published its report Too important to fail – addressing the humanitarian financing gap, which formed the basis for the Grand Bargain negotiations in early 2016.

Besides the Grand Bargain, the HLP made recommendations under two other pillars:

Shrinking needs by bringing development financing into crisis situations; it also referenced reducing conflict but did not make specific recommendations.
Broadening the resource base, including bringing in new donors and the private sector.

Five years on, this report seeks to identify, assess and analyse initiatives taken in the spirit of the HLP’s recommendations under these two pillars, and to identify possible links with progress on the Grand Bargain.

Key messages

The key recommendations from the HLP in 2016 continue to be valid and even more relevant today. Needs measured by inter-agency appeals have doubled since then, and conflicts have persisted in Syria and Yemen, and flared up in new areas, with little optimism for a reduction in conflict globally.
The HLP’s solutions to the ‘financing gap’ between humanitarian need and resourcing therefore continue to be relevant. In hindsight this was clearly a long-term agenda, that required a strategy, focus and leadership to drive it forward, rather than one that could be achieved within five years.
Progress on ‘reducing need’ is greater than perceived, particularly relating to the humanitarian–development–peace nexus and risk-informed anticipatory action; but this progress is uneven, fragmented and not at scale.
There has been a disappointing lack of progress on widening the resource base of the existing humanitarian system through partnerships with new/emerging bilateral donors, the private sector or Islamic social finance.
Consistent, high-level leadership supported by broad coalitions, such as on anticipatory action, has helped drive progress in some areas. However, the lack of a dedicated structure to follow up on the HLP’s recommendations has meant overall progress is challenging to measure.
There are opportunities to make further progress on the HLP recommendations, particularly on financing development approaches in crisis, but a focused approach has the greatest likelihood of impact in the short term given the demands on the humanitarian system and current limited appetite for ambitious reform. This narrow approach should make stronger connections to existing fora and be complementary to the Grand Bargain in its next iteration.
While a more focused approach is recommended in the short term, there is a need for a more ambitious future vision to strengthen the global system for responding to crisis, including through the humanitarian system, but also through scaling up development approaches in crises and financing crisis responses more predictably.

ODI

Trending:

Trending

Our Programmes

ODI

Browse

More

Search

Newsletter

Follow ODI

Authors

Barnaby Willitts-King

Alexandra Spencer

Explore similar content

Participation and inclusion in the Rohingya refugee response in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh: ‘We never speak first’

The Call to Action on Protection from Gender-Based Violence in Emergencies: an assessment of the role of collective approaches

Local humanitarian action during Covid-19: findings from a diary study