2 Introduction

2.1 New challenges

Humanitarian crises are increasing in number and complexity. The international community is increasingly facing situations where fragile states are affected by conflicts and natural disasters at the same time.

In the period from 1990 to 2005, bilateral humanitarian assistance worldwide was increased by a factor of five – from USD 1.4 billion to USD 7.1 billion – according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Norway’s humanitarian assistance has also increased significantly in the same period, and is now over NOK 4 billion. But despite the size of the humanitarian budgets, the resources available are insufficient to meet the growing needs. 1

The primary responsibility for protecting people from the impacts of conflicts and disasters rests with the national authorities. They have an obligation to safeguard the livelihoods of vulnerable groups and ensure that fundamental human rights are respected. This responsibility is set out in the international human rights conventions.

However, international humanitarian assistance is necessary to save lives, provide protection and assist vulnerable groups that the national authorities are unable or unwilling to help. But emergency relief is a last resort, when everything else has failed. And by the time a humanitarian crisis is a fact, a great deal has failed. Essentially, humanitarian crises reflect the fundamental problems many developing countries are facing: poverty, war and conflict, weak institutions, poor governance and over-exploitation of natural resources.

In addition, the international development system is fragmented. It is better at providing emergency relief than preventing crises, and it is not good at rebuilding robust societies after a conflict or a natural disaster. This also applies to Norwegian development actors.

We know that it is better to take a precautionary approach and prevent humanitarian crises from arising. However, it is easier to find funding and attract political attention when disaster has already struck. Another problem is that the coordination of emergency relief and long-term development cooperation is weak. This is an area where there is a clear potential for improvement.

Thus, in the Government’s view, Norwegian and international development efforts need to be reorganised, and stronger focus needs to be given to risk reduction and preparedness, in order to respond to the following risk factors:

• The climate is changing : 2007 may prove to be the warmest year since systematic records began some 150 years ago. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), environmental and climate change could force 150 million more people to flee their homes by 2050.

• Settlement patterns are changing : By the end of 2007, more people will be living in urban than rural areas. Migration, urbanisation and the growth of slums in already vulnerable areas is increasing the risk of humanitarian crises. 2

• The nature of crises is changing : Complex crises are affecting fragile states where governance and administrative capacity are weak. As a result, new crises are arising that affect the civilian population, particularly women, children and young people.

These risk factors have contributed to the increase in the number of humanitarian crises, and this trend will continue unless we strengthen resilience at individual and societal level and learn from the experience of states and other actors that have sought to prevent such crises. Moreover, violent conflict can be a direct cause of environmental and climate change and increased migration. These factors can further destabilise fragile states and form a breeding ground for new conflicts.

Source OECD/DAC 2007

2.2 The purpose of this white paper

Risk reduction produces results. In October 2007, China evacuated around 1.4 million people in the southeastern parts of the country in response to the typhoon Krosa . The typhoon caused floods and serious material damage, but no fatalities were reported. Hurricanes Dean and Felix , which hit the Caribbean and Central America respectively in August 2007, showed what good planning, early warning systems and rapid response could achieve; there was very little loss of life. The tsunami warnings in South Asia in September 2007 demonstrated that the early warning systems are working, and that the local population know what to do in the event of a subsea earthquake. We are also seeing the results of long-term efforts to promote peace and reconciliation and to ban weapons with unacceptable humanitarian consequences such as landmines and cluster munitions.

Today, the international community has experience, resources and technology that can make a difference. Increasingly accurate risk and vulnerability analyses have given us a considerable capacity to predict where natural disasters will strike. A good deal of information is also available on political developments in fragile states.

What is missing is a long-term political and economic perspective, which is necessary to reduce vulnerability in many more of the countries that are most at risk. We also need a greater willingness to act. Risk reduction, preparedness, emergency relief and reconstruction are primarily the responsibility of national authorities, but international organisations and donor countries like Norway can play an important role in these efforts by providing both expertise and funding. The Government therefore intends to strengthen Norway’s efforts to prevent humanitarian crises.

The new risk factors mean that we have to think along new lines in both foreign policy and development policy. Long-term measures to reduce vulnerability to humanitarian crises are first and foremost a development policy concern, but there is also an interface with key areas of foreign policy. Norway’s international development cooperation should focus more on risk reduction, including strengthening local emergency response capacity. We must also increase our ability to meet acute humanitarian needs through international preparedness systems, flexible financial mechanisms and rapid response. It is moreover important to increase the effectiveness of reconstruction efforts in the critical phase following a humanitarian crisis, which will in turn give more effective risk reduction. This will require closer coordination of policy instruments and budgets.

We therefore need a more integrated policy for Norway’s efforts to prevent humanitarian crises. Which areas and partners should be given priority? How should the relevant embassies approach this issue at country level? How can international cooperation be improved? In brief, how and where can Norway make a difference?

The purpose of this white paper is to discuss these issues and outline the Government’s priorities for future efforts, on the basis of the risk factors set out above (section 1.1). This document should be regarded as a step towards the development of a more coordinated approach to emergency relief, transitional assistance and long-term development cooperation.

A number of risk reduction processes have already been established, and we will build further on these. 3 Norway has expertise in several relevant areas, which we intend to develop further. But we also have to address more directly the political and systematic challenges that we are facing – both in Norway and in other countries.

The Government has developed a three-part strategy for this work:

• Within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, we will improve coordination between emergency relief and long-term development, focusing particularly on the reconstruction phase, cutting across budget lines and divisions of responsibility. Norad will play an important role in strengthening Norwegian expertise in this area in close dialogue with the Ministry and external experts.

• We will establish long-term strategic partnerships with national authorities, the UN system, international financial institutions, NGOs and other expertise on risk reduction measures in the most vulnerable countries, based on the principle of subsidiarity 4 and with the clear aim of strengthening the resilience of local communities and vulnerable groups to humanitarian crises.

• We will support South-South cooperation on knowledge generation and exchange of experience, to promote the dissemination of knowledge at regional level. Countries such as Bangladesh, China, Vietnam and Cuba have important knowledge and experience of risk reduction that could benefit others.

This white paper does not review every aspect of Norway’s risk reduction efforts. 5 The new challenges described in section 1.1 are such that additional efforts are needed to reduce vulnerability, including on the part of Norway. Norway should strengthen its engagement in the security of vulnerable people, which is the main focus of this document.

2.3 Main priorities

In the Government’s view, local risk reduction, local capacity to cope with disasters and active local participation are the most important tools in risk reduction and emergency response efforts. The people we wish to help must themselves have a key role. The authorities, the private sector and civil society all have important parts to play as well. The participation of a wide range of social groups is of crucial importance. Strengthening local risk reduction and emergency response capacity is the Government’s main priority.

Local and national authorities, international organisations and donor countries have an obligation to facilitate local participation and the realisation of fundamental human rights through risk reduction and humanitarian efforts. We must also help to ensure that the countries with long experience of humanitarian crises and risk reduction efforts share the lessons they have learned with others, for example in a regional context. These efforts will not only increase resilience but also improve livelihoods.

Local ownership is vital, but not always sufficient, to improve risk reduction efforts. For example, environmental and climate change has regional and global dimensions that require extensive knowledge of their impacts and international action to address them. Better coordination of international efforts is also necessary if risk reduction is to play an important role in combating poverty, particularly in the reconstruction phase. Norway’s participation in the management of international organisations and institutions also provides important opportunities to promote our risk reduction policy.

The Government wishes Norway to build long-term partnerships with relevant actors at bilateral, regional and international level on risk reduction and preparedness. Priority will be given to the partners that are situated closest to existing and potential humanitarian crises, particularly partners in the increasing number of fragile states. We must also improve the coordination of these partnerships.

The types of action and partnerships that are most appropriate will vary from country to country and between different areas. Norway’s efforts will be tailored to what we consider to be the main causes of increased vulnerability. Chapters 3 to 5 discuss the different types of partnerships in more detail.

2.4 Two main perspectives

In its policy platform, the Government highlights the importance it attaches to the Millennium Development Goals, combating poverty and efforts to achieve sustainable development, and the key role of environmental efforts in this context. The Government sets out its intention to promote a democratic legal order, human rights and gender equality. It states that Norway is to have a clear profile as a nation of peace, and that it will intensify Norwegian efforts to prevent, reduce and resolve conflicts.

The policy platform thus sets out important guidelines for efforts to prevent humanitarian crises. Conflicts and natural disasters cause extensive loss of life and violations of fundamental human rights. In addition to destroying people’s livelihoods they damage a country’s business sector and critical infrastructure, including political structures. It is the poorest countries and the most vulnerable groups that are hardest hit by humanitarian crises.

The first main perspective of this white paper is the humanitarian imperative: risk reduction efforts must be based on the obligation to save lives, relieve suffering and protect people in a crisis. Risk reduction efforts are also a natural starting point for fulfilling the requirements of this imperative, since they are targeted to strengthen the resilience of vulnerable people, local communities and states to crisis. Such efforts should be based on the different resources and potential vulnerability of different groups, including indigenous peoples, women and men.

The second main perspective is that risk reduction is vital for poverty reduction and sustainable development. Without risk reduction efforts, it will be far more difficult to meet the MDGs, particularly the target of halving the proportion of people living in extreme poverty by 2015.

These perspectives will form the basis for Norway’s risk reduction efforts. The humanitarian imperative and the MDGs indicate the main thrust of our policy for addressing the global challenges, which will require better coordination and integration of our efforts. The Government will seek to encourage our various partners to follow this approach and thus help to promote a new international agenda.

The Government has analysed the key risk factors that increase vulnerability to humanitarian crises (Chapter 2), and considers it important to focus on the potential for social and economic development that risk reduction measures and successful reconstruction efforts represent. This is particularly important in countries where the risk factors constitute a threat to sustainable development. The Government has therefore proposed that increased funding is made available for these efforts via the national budget.

Source Ministry of Foreign Affairs