1|— Towards Sustainable Platform for Generating Humanitarian Innovation —Summary Report

March 2016
HIF Organizing Committee
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Japan (MoFA), Japan Platform(JPF), Japan CSO Coalition for DRR (JCC-DRR),
Japan NGO Center for International Cooperation (JANIC), Tohoku Gakuin University

2|

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
According to World Humanitarian Summit Synthesis Report (October 15, 2015), current human sufferingfrom the impacts of armed conflicts and disasters has reached staggering levels. Over 60 million people,
half of them children, have been displaced due to conflict, and 218 million people each year are affectedby natural hazards.
When such crisis strike, businesses are also often disrupted, and even with business continuity plans inplace, experience shows many negative consequences will emerge. Workforce will be affected, supply
chain will be dysfunctional, and economic loss for closing-down of local businesses can be immense.
WHS synthesis report also highlighted that annual losses from natural disasters exceed $300 billion, and$14.3 trillion, 13% of the world’s GDP, is being lost due to ongoing conflict. These threats are not only
affecting humanitarian community, but it is also hurting the growth of business sector in today’s
globalized economy. This is definitely one of the strong reasons why private sector should beconsidered as part of WHS ambition of ‘One Humanity: Shared Responsibility’.
On March 13th 2016, first ever Humanitarian Innovation Forum (HIF) in Japan was held in Sendai,bringing 108 participants from both humanitarian and business sector; organized by Japan CSO Coalition
for DRR (JCC-DRR), Japan Platform (JPF), Japan NGO Center for International Cooperation (JANIC),
Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA), Tohoku Gakuin University, with support from Japan International
Cooperation Agency (JICA), Japan Quality and Accountability Network (JQAN), OCHA Kobe office, as wellas Sendai City government. The forum also received immense technical support from PWC Consulting
throughout the planning, implementation, and follow-up process.
Conceptualization of HIF in Japan started with the problem statement; while the constant creation andapplication of innovative solutions in humanitarian sector is needed, proactive investments and actions
to enable this are limited. During WHS consultation process, following elements were highlighted as
requirements for constant creation of innovative solutions: Better problem identification and priority setting on issues with the greatest humanitarian
relevance and potential impact, as defined by those affected by crisis
 Better engagement with innovators inside and outside of the humanitarian sector
 Sustained investments in innovation efforts
 Enhanced innovation management processes, including better use of evidence, evaluations,information management and the best available processes, skills and expertise.
Actual planning process of HIF started with a hypothesis that if above challenges are addressed, thensustainable platform for creation of humanitarian innovation becomes possible. Thus, HIF process inJapan focused on capturing lessons learnt towards concrete methodology that will lead to therealization of constant creation of innovative solutions. The team is also looking into establishing multistakeholder innovation fund for this purpose.

3|

HIF utilized both case presentations as well as group discussions as methodology. For case presenters,
following companies/organizations presented existing innovation practices: Teijin Frontier Co. Ltd
 Toray Industries, Inc. / Operation Blessing Japan
 NPO Asu-he-no-kibou (literal translation is ‘Hope for Tomorrow’) Kesennuma Shinkin Bank / Planet Finance Japan Japan International Cooperation Agency
For discussion sessions, the participants were divided into 4 themes: DRR, WASH, Build Back Better, andProtection. These themes were selected based on criteria such as actual needs on the ground, themesthat Japanese know-hows and technology can contribute, have existing innovative cases to learn from,and finally being the themes that require innovative solutions. Organizing committee prepared problem
analysis papers for each themes, and presented to the participants before the discussion sessions.
Throughout the preparation of HIF, it was apparent that the language, objective, and culture ofhumanitarians and business community are completely different, and there is a need to unite under acommon vision. The ambition of WHS is in fact a great opportunity to establish such shared vision, andonce such unity is created, it will make it easier for each sides to understand each other. And when suchmutual understanding and respect are created, it will be easier to explore how specific collaboration cantake place for a specific purpose, bringing in strengths from all sectors towards the common goal. Of
course, ideas that are generated through such process need to be incubated, and people who will
perform such incubator’s role should have good understanding of local needs as well as business minds.

4|

HIF Japan 2016 has produced many lessons along with innovative solutions in each selected themes.
The lessons include: Promoting understanding from both humanitarian and business sectors on issues and norms ineach respective sector
 Analyze the issues on the ground accurately, and translate them into business language andframework
 Strengthen facilitation function for multi-sector discussions
 Strategic matching for well thought-out discussion team composition
 Think of finance schemes that can fund feasible innovation ideas
As future plan for organizing committee of HIF will take following actions: Incubation: establish working groups to turn ideas into practice (as per expansion image as
indicated in a diagram below), and ensure appropriate finance scheme is used/created.
 Coordination: conduct HIF every year in Japan, and plan smaller scale mini-forums focusing on
specific themes Governance: as an official governance structure of HIF process, strategic team will be establishedwithin JPF, and consider setting up innovation seed fund within JPF
At WHS, there is an endeavor to create Global Alliance on Humanitarian Innovation (GAHI), and it indeed
will be a great push towards more solidarity and unity from different stakeholders under a shared visionof WHS. The movement such as HIF in Japan can be regionalized through regional networks such as
Asian Disaster Reduction and Response Network (ADRRN), and such regional initiatives should link wellwith the proposed global level alliance. WHS is a great opportunity for all of us to create such strong
linkage between local, national, regional, and global levels; making it a truly global effort to tackle ourunprecedented challenges in the world today.

5|

PROGRAM
I. Opening Remarks
Representing the organizing committee of HIF, Mr. Hirota (photo: left), Director for Humanitarian
Assistance and Emergency Relief Division of Ministry of Foreign Affairs Japan explained the staggeringlevel of humanitarian needs in the current world, the importance of solution-oriented ambition that weshare towards WHS, and the priority areas for Japanese government. Mr. Ohashi, Chair of Japan CSO
Coalition for DRR (JCC-DRR) also echoed Mr. Hirota’s remark by indicating that HIF is truly a historic
event for many sectors to gather under the common objective.

II. Keynote Speech
Keynote speech was delivered by Mr.
Arima, Chair of both Japan Platform (JPF)
and Global Compact Network Japan. Mr.
Arima stressed that companies should
think that humanitarian crisis should not be
outside of their concern, and they should
think from adding further value to theircurrent business in more proactive manner,instead of merely risk mitigation approach.
He has asked all participants to change themind-sets and proactively lead the changes
in the humanitarian sector.

6|III. Presentation on Proceeding of the Day
HIF proceedings were explained by Mr.
Kitagawa, Director at PWC Consulting. First,
Mr. Kitagawa stressed that shared Empathy isnecessary to create linkage between
humanitarian and business stakeholders, andsuch linkage is a starting point for any
discussion on cooperation (as indicated in the
diagram below).

Furthermore, if we are serious about establishing a sustainable platform that links humanitarian needs
and businesses for Creating Shared Value (CSV), there are many elements that we need to consider, andsuch have been summarized in the diagram below.

7|

Based on above understanding, proceeding of HIF was explained to the participants as follows:
A) First, the participants will have a discussion on the actual needs on the ground (based on analysis
done by the organizing committee of HIF)
B) Discussion on possible solutions will follow
C) On possible solutions, possibilities of turning them into business activities will be discussed
D) Discussion session will conclude with determining key action plans

IV. Case Presentations
There are existing innovation examples in the themes selected for HIF, and 5 cases have beenpresented.
Case 1: Teijin Frontier Co. Ltd, Mr. Takahisa Kishimoto ‘Solutions for Fire Risks during Mega
Earthquakes in Aged Society: Fire Extinguishing Curtains’
Teijin, being a leading company on textiles,
developed a non-flammable curtain with fire
extinguishing function. As Japan is facing megaearthquakes and associated fire disasters, suchproduct will enable aged-society to have moreevacuation lead time, and will improve initial fire
extinguishing rate. This product called‘Pullshelter’ is a result of Teijin’s pursuit towards
further disaster risk reduction.

Case 2: Toray Industries, Inc., Ms. Mariko Kanamori / Operation Blessing Japan (OBJ), Mr. Donald
Thomson ‘Turning Sea Water into Potable Water with Trayscue in the Philippines’
Toray Industries provided potable water creation
machine called Torayscue to OBJ’s response to
Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines. It uses special
filters developed by Toray, and the machine isable to remove virus, microorganisms, salinity,
heavy metal, and other organic matters. The
devise is able to produce safe drinking water invarious environment, and this collaborative
project, not only it provided safe drinking water
to disaster affected communities in thePhilippines, but it also enhanced Toray
employees’ awareness on social issues.

8|Case 3: NPO Asu-he-no-kibou, Mr. Shiro Nakamura ‘Challenge of Onagawa Town – Build Back Betterwith Diversity’
After the Great Eastern Earthquake and Tsunami
in 2011, Onagawa Town in Miyagi Prefecture put
up a slogan ‘A town that generates the mostnumber of new start-ups’. With this, the town
aims to increase active population, including
attracting outside resources. Mr. Nakamura’s
NPO assists Onagawa Town in the fields ofbusiness start-ups, trial immigration, andoperation of Onagawa Futures Center. They areaiming for multi-sectoral approach to buildingback better to depopulation issues.
Case 4: Kesennuma Shinkin Bank, Mr. Eiji Fujimura / Planet Finance Japan, Mr. Masataka Nakamura‘Economic Recovery Initiative Sanriku Recovery Tomodachi Fund’
Kesennuma Shinkin Bank and Planet FinanceJapan established microfinance scheme for
economic recovery in Kesennuma. The
established fund supports business start-ups, reemployment, and recovery loans. So far the fundhas assisted 423 companies. The case is a goodcollaborative example between financial sector
and NGO based on the identified recovery needsin the affected areas.

Case 5: Japan International Cooperation Agency, Mr. Takeharu Nakagawa ‘ODA Support for
Collaboration with Private Sector’
JICA is increasing its support to private sector in
addition to technical assistance, grants, and loans
it provides with Japan7s ODA. JICA currently
conducts matching of developing countries’
needs and resources owned by small andmedium enterprises in Japan. There are various
financing schemes to allow such cooperation, andspecific examples have been presented. JICA
fully endorses the objective of HIF, and expressed
its support for future collaboration.

9|

V. Problem Analysis
Specific issues identified and researched for each of HIF’s
themes have been presented by Mr. Hozumi of Association
for Aid and Relief. The themes, as explained earlier, havebeen selected based on below criteria:
 High level of needs on the ground Japanese know-hows and technology can contribute Innovative cases to learn from exist
 Challenging, but those requiring innovative solutions
Below table summarizes the key issues identified in eachtheme, which led to the further discussion sessions.
Theme
Disaster Risk Reduction

Issues≫ Increase in natural disasters in frequency and economic loss
≫ More than 200 million people affected every year
≫ Systematic response at outset of disasters (including rapid multistakeholders and multi-sectoral needs assessment that are shared with all
real-time) is required≫ Minimizing human and material losses towards future risks is essential

WASH≫ Access to safe drinking water is still limited≫ Awareness on good hygiene practices is also limited in many parts of theworld≫ Technological solutions that work well with local culture and existing
practices is needed≫ Creative ideas of changing behaviors and habits are required

Build Back Better≫ What does it really mean to build back better ?
≫ Do we target recovery of community first, or infrastructure?
≫ Community resilience is pre-requisite and it needs to be enhanced≫ Economic opportunities post-disasters need to be secured withincreased employment opportunities

Protection≫ More than 60 million displaced due to conflict and instability≫ 1 out of 120 people in the world is displaced≫ Diverse types of needs should be captured and addressed≫ Consideration should be given to both displaced and host communities

10 |VI. Discussion Sessions and Presentations of Results
Based on key issues identified in each theme, allparticipants were divided into specific thematic groups.
Each group further dug down deep into the issues
identified in their theme, and for each issues, possible
solutions have been discussed. Then, these possible
solutions were put on table for discussion on whether
turning such ideas into business is really possible. The
discussion session ended with each group coming up withspecific action plan.
The presentation session of discussion results wasmoderated by Mr. Matsumoto of Earthmedia.
Below table summarizes the key results presented by each thematic groups:
Theme 1: DRR
Issues further
discussed









Possible solutions
identified

Understanding real time situation at disaster on-set
 Internet system is likely to be down, and on-time information isdifficult to obtain from disaster affected areas
 And even when information starts to flow in, due to overload of
information from various sources, it is difficult to determine theaccurate picture of the affected sites
Infrastructure Road infrastructure on soft ground is likely to be damaged, and wholetransportation infrastructure will be cut off
Secondary disasters Temporary shelters for affected population is usually less thanrequired Due to improper medical and hygiene environment in the affectedareas, secondary disasters such as outbreak of disease and maltreatedinjuries cause further issues
Everyday preparedness
 Roles of each stakeholder is not properly determined and duplicationof aid happens Awareness on possible disaster risk is still low and preparedness levelis far below what’s required
Understanding real time situation at disaster on-set
 Mobile WIFI, portable antennas
 Communication network that replaces internet
 Information collection through mobile application
Infrastructure Repairing concrete roads
 Delivery methods using drones

11 |






Issues whenturning them intobusinessKey action plansTheme 2: WASH
Issues further
discussedUsing Fulvic acid and improve soil condition while reducing risks oflandslides
Secondary disasters
 Compact shelter/tents that utilizes locally available materials Portable lights that powers with water battery
Everyday preparedness
 Risk simulation using IT, and analyze past disaster damage trends
 Ensuring every community has its hazard maps and everyone
understanding the contents
 Link analysis of past examples to education / awareness materials
Marketing and scale Specific needs should be identified in detail where portable shelter
becomes useful If marketed as only ‘emergency shelter’ then it may not be attractive
business It is difficult to determine the inventory costs for companies for suchproducts
Partnership Whether necessary support can be obtained from local communities,
governments, UN, military, etc.
Marketing and scale Create list of available products that could be used in humanitarian
sector (product catalogue) for further publicity and utilization
discussion
 Transfer stock-aid (pre-categorization and grouping of necessary
items) methodology to companies
 Reduce the production cost by selecting production time (e.g. once ayear) with pre-determined process
Partnership With product catalogue, liaise with local communities, schools,
religious institutions, governments, militaries, UN for possible
cooperation
 Strategic partnership with outdoor product companies for sustainablebusiness model

Infrastructure Limited facilities for water purification leading to limited quantity ofclean drinking water Technology to maintain such water purification facility is still limited
Behavioral habit Unhygienic practice – e.g. not washing hands
 Limited understanding of good hygiene practice Some cultural barriers for effective hygiene practices

12 |Possible solutions
identifiedOne product package with two rooms (e.g. one for clean water, and theother for nutrition) – by separating, it could be stocked long term

Issues whenturning them intobusinessMarketing Specific needs on the ground is needed to determine what to contain(water with powder milk, fermented beans, etc.) and who is requiring(government, aid agencies, medical companies, etc.)
 Counterfeit risks – similar products that undermine safety quality
 Legal framework in target locations
 Product concept – whether to be used as emergency stocks, or for
immediate relief items, etc.
Scale
 Production and logistics needs to be built up
Partnership Who to partner from target locations (companies, aid organizations?)
Marketing Further provision of information on needs on the ground from NGOs
to companies, including some legal information in each respective
locations Companies then can make pilot products and consider various
business models
Partnership Determine who could be possible partners from the target countries
 Build up supply chain for the business model Coordinate with the governments from target countries
Key action plansTheme 3: Build Back Better
Issues further
 Issues that solution image is relatively clear
discussed
 Limitation in human resource at local government in recovery phase Rebuilding of houses particularly for elderly Limited transportation facilities for displaced population
 Limited entertainment, enjoyment in life for affected population
 Utilization of talents of elderly female Limited access to finance mechanism for small enterprises
 Difficulty in identifying variety of recovery needs and to link them withpossible solutions
 Developing methodology for business start-up feasibility checks
 Increasing branding value of locally made products Scenario mapping after the assistance phases out

13 |



Possible solutions
identified1







Theme 4: Protection
Issues further
discussed

Possible solutions
identified1



Issues that solution image is not clear Depopulation – especially youths immigrating to capital/large cities Difficulty of displaced family members to reunite – given various
livelihoods by each family members
 Linking recovery with rural development
 Strengthening relationship between displaced population and hostcommunities including addressing communal issues
 Resistance from those who fear the change due to reconstruction
process
 Relationship between insiders and outsiders (particularly whenoutside resources are pulled in to reconstruction process) Sharing values across various stakeholders throughout reconstruction
phase including understanding among aid providers what are actuallyrequired on the ground Difficulty in selling products due to reputation caused by the disaster(e.g. agricultural products from communities affected by nuclear
disaster)
Limited access to finance mechanism for small enterprises
 Utilization of local financial institutions
 Developing microfinance schemes required for business recovery
Limited entertainment, enjoyment in life for affected population
 Utilize festival culture Attract outside population for tourism with disaster risk awarenessraising, education and sharing experiences Marche / local market revitalization
Rebuilding of houses particularly for elderly Package temporary shelter designs based on local climate and make iteasier and cheaper to build by taking out unnecessary functions

Difficulties in identification of actual needs of vulnerable people (e.g. amother with a child with disability having difficulty to receive aid fromdesignated relief item distribution centers)
Sometimes, affected population cannot asses their current situation
objectively (e.g. female community members who were in charge of meal
preparation had no rest for 2 months continuously, but no one proposed
to rotate shift to take enough rest for continuity)
Seek for technological solutions to identify untold needs to address themwith appropriate assistance Using global positioning function embedded in each smartphones
 Using health-check devises that can be monitored from distanceFor this theme, issues identified have been too diverse which made it extremely difficult to find solutions for each,so the discussion group have focused on 3 issues for discussion on possible solutions. Furthermore, time ran out to
discuss ‘Issues when turning them into business’ and ‘Key action plans’.

14 |




Issues whenturning them intobusinessKey action plansUsing devise to measure brain wave to determine emotional stress
Using IC card with personal information (and possibly debit card
function for cash assistance) for each refugees and ensure crossborder utilization scheme (this way, mass movement )Marketing and scale Matching of proposed technological solution with identified needs onthe ground (as many of these are not told to the interviewers)
 Possible application of proposed solutions would differ based on thesize of disasters
Partnership Protection of personal information and coordination with authorities
in charge
 Joint development of solutions with local authorities by matchingpossible needs with technological solutions
Marketing NGO side would further brief companies on the need of vulnerable
population at the time of crisis
 Companies then can match the potential product / technology withanalyzed needs
Partnership Coordinate with local authority for possible joint venture Consider membership based service provision (and diversify services
to be provided) if addressing personal information protection is too
difficult Provide data analysis / protection capacity

VII. Regionalizing HIF
Executive Committee and secretariat staff of Asian Disaster
Reduction and Response Network (ADRRN) participated HIF
in Japan, and Dr. Manu Gupta, Chair of ADRRN, indicatedthat ADRRN would work together to regionalize suchhumanitarian innovation work in other parts of Asia. English
speaking participants held separate discussion group on how
HIF can be brought forward to other countries in Asia.
Collaboration in this regard has started towards WHS andbeyond.

15 |VIII. Closing Remarks
In closing, Mr. Sasaki (photo: left), Special Adviser to the President of Tohoku Gakuin University, has
expressed its full support to HIF indicating that ‘the university is always open and such initiative iswelcome anytime’. Professor Nagai (photo: right) of Toyo Gakuen University, and a board member ofJapan Platform, expressed his sincere thanks to the organizing members as well as those who supported
day and night, particularly technical advisers from PWC Consulting, for successful completion of HIF in
Sendai.

LESSONS LEARNT AND FUTURE PLAN
Through preparation and execution of HIF, the organizing committee learnt many lessons, and thecommittee believe that some of such lessons learnt are applicable to other countries who are
considering to maximize the impact of humanitarian interventions. Below are the major lessons out ofmany that we have learnt.
 Establish common vision shared by both NGOs and Corporates
One of the reasons why it is normally difficult to establish common working grounds between
humanitarian and business sectors is that the vision and mandate of each are completely different. The
former being non-profit, and the latter being for-profit. However, despite such differences, there is aneed for a sense of ‘common vision, common profit’. While doing so, one needs to keep in mind (as inbelow diagram) to balance between social benefits that humanitarians pursue, and the economic
benefits that businesses pursue. When such optimal balance is maintained, each side would be able tomaximize the resources each can provide on the table, and such working relationship can becomesustainable.

16 | Promote understanding from each side on issues and norms in each respective sector
Normally, there isn’t much interaction between NGOs and private companies, and even if there weresome, it is not enough to create mutual understanding of each other’s differences. This difficulty isobserved even when NGO’s fundraising / public relations departments and companies’ CSR departments
meet, so if it comes to other departments such as program / research and development, it makes it evenharder for both sides to understand each other.
In HIF, when both sides were presented with common issues to solve by communicating each other inthe same room, vast amount of knowledge and ideas were generated despite the limited timeframe.
The participants also indicated that ‘if such opportunities are provided more, we are sure that moreinnovative collaborative cases will be generated’. Therefore, such platform where NGOs and companies
can interact need to be a sustainable one, instead of one-off event. This surely will lead to further
generation and application of innovative solutions to existing problems.


Analyze the issues on the ground accurately, and translate them into business language andframework
NGOs live and breathe social issues on the ground, so understanding the background and how various
problems interact with each other are not too difficult to understand. However, for companies, suchproblems are not the ones they are dealing on daily basis, and it may not be as straight forward as it isfor NGO staff. For example, even if they are told ‘there are issues on water’, it is not so easy forcompanies to figure out what exactly are the problems and what could be the way forward.
In such case, it is important for NGOs side to analyze precisely what exactly in water is the problem(quality, source, transportation, storage, maintenance, awareness/education, etc.) and present whatsort of elements are required to actually solve the root causes. That way, it would be easier for17 |companies to present ideas and possible solutions. Such analysis is a process of ‘translating the issues
for mutual understanding’.
 Strengthen facilitation function for discussions
Methodology utilized at HIF had clear discussion framework by appropriate facilitators, and that
contributed significantly to the quality of outputs from the discussion sessions. In order to continue toapply such discussion framework, it is essential that facilitation team consists of people who understandeach sides (non-profit and for-profit). And we strongly recommend to hire some professionals to theteam to ensure such function.
In HIF, major NGO networks in Japan (such as JCC-DRR, JPF, JANIC) took the lead in problem
identification and analysis, and 3 study seminars were held with companies before HIF in partnershipwith Global Compact Network Japan and PWC Consulting.
 Strategic matching for well thought-out discussion team composition
In HIF, participants were divided into the theme of their interest, but there was a possibility that suchallocation of participants in each theme can be done more strategically. Specifically, if pre-research canbe done on resources each participant and organizations bring to the table in advance and database ofsuch is constructed for easy referencing, then the probability of generating more innovative solutions
would increase. This could be another function of organizing committee.
 Think of finance schemes that can fund feasible ideas
Although HIF process generated many ideas as possible solutions to the existing problems, money
always becomes an issue for the actual implementation. in HIF, agencies that can finance, such as JICA,
also participated, but if the financing scheme can be created in advance, speed of turning ideas into
practice could be much shortened. Therefore, the organizing committee of HIF strongly recommend toestablish a fund that can complement HIF process.
 Future plans
The outcome of HIF and the lessons learnt will be presented at WHS, and the organizing committee of
HIF commit to contribute to the launch of Global Alliance for Humanitarian Innovation (GAHI) in its
functions and directions.
As per HIF process in Japan, following will be priority action plan: Incubation: establish working groups to turn ideas into practice (as per expansion image as
indicated in a diagram below), and ensure appropriate finance scheme is used/created.
 Coordination: conduct HIF every year in Japan, and plan smaller scale mini-forums focusing on
specific themes Governance: as an official governance structure of HIF process, strategic team will be establishedwithin JPF, and consider setting up innovation seed fund within JPF

18 |ANNEX: HUMANITARIAN INNOVATION FORUM ORGANIZING COMMITTEE
名前
Ms. Yuko Shibata
Mr. Naoya Hirano
Mr. Shusai Nagai
Mr. Hiroaki Ishii
Mr. Takehiro Hozumi
Mr. Jun Matsumoto
Mr. Aoi Horiuchi
Mr. Toshihisa Toyoda
Ms. Masako Benimura
Mr. Takeshi Komino

団体
Japan Platform
Japan Platform
Japan Platform・Toyo Gakuen University
Japan Association for Refugees
Association for Aid and Relief Japan
Earthmedia
Japan NGO Center for International Cooperation
IV Japan・Former Kobe University
Miyagi Center for Recovery Cooperation
CWS Japan / JCC-DRR / ADRRN