# EUR-Lex - 52011SC0709 - EN

*|*

# 52011SC0709

**COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER [...] /* SEC/2011/0709 final */**

			*

			*

Contents

1........ Policy. 3

1.1........ Disaster
response capacity. 3

1.2........ European
Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps (EVHAC) 4

1.3........ Mid-term
review of Consensus action plan. 4

1.4........ Food
assistance and Food Aid Convention. 5

1.5........ Good
Humanitarian Donorship. 5

1.6........ Thematic
policies. 6

1.7........ Aid
effectiveness. 10

1.8........ Civil protection policy. 12

2........ Interinstitutional
relations and cooperation with other donors and partners 12

2.1........ Council
Working Group on Humanitarian Aid and Food Aid (COHAFA) 12

2.2........ Council
Working Group on Civil Protection (PROCIV) 13

2.3........ Cooperation with other EU
institutions, donors and partners. 13

3........ Implementation
of humanitarian aid and civil protection in 2010. 15

3.1........ A needs-based
approach. 15

3.2........ Top 10
humanitarian crises in terms of funding allocations. 16

3.3........ Africa. 16

3.4........ Middle East and
Mediterranean. 32

3.5........ Caucasus. 35

3.6........ Asia. 36

3.7........ Latin America, the
Caribbean and the Pacific. 50

3.8........ Worldwide. 56

3.9........ Disaster
preparedness activities, including DIPECHO.. 57

3.10...... Linking relief,
rehabilitation and development (LRRD) 59

3.11...... Civil protection. 62

3.12...... Case studies on launching humanitarian aid
and civil protection. 66

4........ Aid management 68

4.1........ Aid delivery
methods. 69

4.2........ Coordination of
humanitarian funds. 70

4.3........ Evaluations. 73

4.4........ Control of the use
of funds. 75

4.5........ Visibility of aid
and communication. 77

4.6........ Security and
safety issues. 79

4.7........ Training initiative — NOHA.. 80

5........ Annexes 82

5.1........ Introduction
to financial tables. 82

5.2........ Financial tables. 83

1. 
Policy

The
year 2010 was marked by the creation of a new portfolio in the Commission
specifically devoted to international cooperation, humanitarian aid and crisis
response and of a new Directorate-General for Humanitarian Aid and Civil
Protection under the responsibility of Commissioner Kristalina Georgieva. This
decision was taken against the background of the increasing number, frequency
and intensity of natural disasters and the disastrous effects of armed
conflicts on civilians. While humanitarian aid brings a budget of about € 800
million, strong expertise and an international network of field-based experts
to the portfolio, civil protection can mobilise Member States’ professional and
specialised assets in the event of an emergency either within or outside the
EU. The objective of creating this new portfolio was to exploit synergies
between the two instruments, maximise complementarity and reinforce the crisis
response capacity and the coherence of EU response operations.

Throughout 2010, the
Directorate-General for Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (DG ECHO) devoted
considerable efforts to making this merger a success. The results can be
considered to be positive: a stronger DG, better equipped to respond to crises,
has been created (as was demonstrated in the case of the Pakistan floods, where
both instruments were used together). These achievements will be further
strengthened and consolidated in 2011.

1.1. 
Disaster response capacity

A Communication to
strengthen the EU’s disaster response capacity was adopted on 26 October[1]. The underlying idea is that Europe needs to move away from an ad hoc
response to one which is pre-planned, predictable and immediate. At present,
the deployment of EU civil protection assets is based on voluntary offers of
assistance but, in situations where every hour counts, Europe needs a system
that can guarantee that key
assets can be mobilised swiftly and deployed instantly.

In order to respond to
the above-mentioned challenges, the Communication proposes developing a
European Emergency Response Capacity (comprising, inter alia, reference
scenarios, mapping of Member States’ civil protection assets, transportation arrangements and a voluntary pool of Member States’ resources on
standby for participation in a European response) and a new Emergency
Response Centre. The latter will serve as a platform to provide
a more effective EU response whenever and wherever a disaster strikes. It will
collect real-time information on disasters, monitor hazards, prepare scenarios
for different types of disasters, work with Member States to map available
assets and coordinate the EU’s disaster response efforts. It will also have
direct links with civil protection and humanitarian aid authorities in Member
States, allowing it to process all in-kind assistance and ensuring a fully
joined-up approach to disaster response.

On 14 December the
General Affairs Council adopted very supportive Conclusions on the
Communication which enshrine all the key ideas. Throughout 2011 the European
Commission will need to translate the Conclusions into concrete legislative
proposals.

1.2. 
European Voluntary
Humanitarian Aid Corps (EVHAC)

The Lisbon Treaty
provides for the establishment of a European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps
(EVHAC).

The first stocktaking
and review phase that took place in 2010 allowed the Commission to obtain a
broad overview of the current situation of volunteering. All relevant
stakeholders were consulted through a range of bilateral meetings, surveys,
interviews and a dedicated conference on 30 September. Despite a good number of
existing volunteering schemes, some gaps were identified, including: (i)
identification and selection of volunteers; (ii) training (including the
development of common standards, good practices and modules); (iii) deployment
of volunteers in the right place and at the right time.

Alongside needs, some
conditions for the EVHAC to make a positive contribution to humanitarian aid
operations have also been identified: (a) avoiding duplication by
supporting/complementing existing voluntary organisations; (b) considering the
professionalisation of the humanitarian sector; (c) taking into account
security concerns (mainly for inexperienced volunteers); (d) supporting the
development of local capacities/volunteering; (e) avoiding diversion of
operational humanitarian aid budgets.

A Commission
Communication to the European Parliament and the Council presenting the current
situation of volunteering and the options to be further analysed was adopted on
23 November[2].

A € 1 million
budget has been allocated for a preparatory action in 2011. This will
support the Commission in the process leading up to the establishment of a
European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps through further consultation
(conferences, workshops) and through the implementation of pilot actions aimed
at selecting, training and deploying EU volunteers.

1.3. 
Mid-term review of Consensus
action plan

In 2010, the Commission
continued to ensure that the European Consensus principles and commitments are
pursued throughout the EU’s humanitarian aid approach — in both policy
development and operational response.

As provided for in the
Consensus adopted in 2007, a comprehensive ‘mid-term review’ of the Consensus
Action Plan was conducted during 2010 in close liaison with EU Member States,
humanitarian partner organisations and the European Parliament. The review
represented an opportunity to take stock of the achievements so far in applying
a common vision of humanitarian aid as set out by the Consensus. It also provided
a clear focus on priorities as we look toward the future. The mid-term review
showed that, over the past three years, the EU has made significant
contributions and worked together to strengthen the humanitarian response. But
there remains scope for further efforts in order to promote aid effectiveness
in the humanitarian sphere; to strengthen the EU’s voice (advocacy, promotion
of fundamental humanitarian principles, international humanitarian law and
humanitarian access) and reach out to emerging donors; and to further emphasise
policy coherence, including a better understanding of the Consensus and the
principled humanitarian approach among other relevant EU actors.

The outcome of this
review was outlined in a Commission Communication[3] on the mid-term
review of the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid Action Plan — implementing
effective, principled EU humanitarian action, adopted on 8 December together
with a report on implementation progress so far, set out in the accompanying
Commission Staff Working Document[4].

1.4. 
Food assistance and Food Aid
Convention

Following an extensive
consultation process with stakeholders, the Commission adopted its Humanitarian
Food Assistance Policy[5],
which was subsequently endorsed by Member States in Council Conclusions. The
main aim is to provide food assistance to the most vulnerable crisis-affected
people in the most efficient and effective way. To this end, the policy
promotes the best mix of assistance tools to deliver the most appropriate
response in a given humanitarian context. The distribution of food items may be
the best response to a crisis where food is not available in sufficient
quantities. However, in many situations the problem is rather the vulnerable
people’s access to safe and nutritious food. In such cases, the most efficient
response includes the provision of cash and vouchers to beneficiaries, which
also helps to uphold their dignity and may have a positive impact on the local
market. In this vein, cash-based assistance was implemented for instance after
the massive natural disasters in Haiti and Pakistan that occurred in 2010.

Global interest in
addressing malnutrition increased in 2010, recognizing that the problem has to
be tackled in a comprehensive manner, from both the humanitarian and development
angles, and applying a multi-sectoral approach (health, food security, water
and sanitation...).

DG ECHO prepared an
Interim Position Paper on Nutrition and is further developing its
nutrition policy, at the same time maintaining close co-operation with more
development-oriented Commission services – for instance contributing to the DG
DEVCO led Reference Document "Addressing Under-nutrition in External
Assistance". DG ECHO addressed acute malnutrition through
comprehensive action for instance in Niger, thus helping to avert a new major
nutrition crisis.

In 2010, on behalf of
the European Union, DG ECHO took part in several informal meetings of the
Members of the Food Aid Committee on the renegotiation of the Food Aid
Convention 1999 (FAC). In December 2010, FAC Members collectively agreed to
start the formal renegotiation process in which DG ECHO negotiates on behalf of
the European Union. The aim is to turn the Food Aid Convention into a
meaningful instrument that will facilitate the provision of effective,
appropriate and adequate food assistance responses, consistent with the
European humanitarian food assistance policy and best practices.

1.5. 
Good Humanitarian Donorship

The Commission
continued to play an active part in the Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD)
initiative[6],
focusing in particular on issues related to needs assessment, on partnership
and on support to GHD ‘newcomers’ in integrating effectively into the network
of GHD donors. On the latter, the EU led an exchange on the European Consensus
on Humanitarian Aid and on the DG ECHO partnership approach and budget
allocation procedures, before successfully handing over facilitation of the GHD
newcomers sessions (renamed SHARE) to Estonia. Accountability, monitoring and
evaluation in humanitarian action were the focus of the annual high-level
meeting of GHD, and the EU was invited to share its considerable experience in
this area. Brazil became the 37th member of GHD in 2010.

In fulfilment of a
commitment made under the European Consensus Action Plan, considerable progress
was made by the Commission (DG ECHO) toward finalising a statement of
implementation on the 23 GHD principles and good practices, which was
transmitted to GHD donor colleagues for an opportunity to review before
finalisation.

1.6. 
Thematic policies
1.6.1. 
Disaster risk reduction
(DRR)

The Commission has been pursuing an integrated approach
to disaster risk reduction both within the EU and in relations with developing
countries (see Section 3.11). The political framework for EU policy in this
field was set by two Communications adopted as a package in February 2009[7]
— one covering EU Member States and the other developing countries, both
endorsed by Council Conclusions.

In relation to the Communication on the EU strategy for
Supporting DRR in developing countries the Council welcomed the Implementation
Plan prepared by a EU Steering Group (Composed of Member States and the
Commission) for the period 2011 – 2014. This Plan foresees application of aid
effectiveness principles in DRR, including increased coordination and
cooperation between humanitarian and development actors within and outside the
EU.

Exploiting the synergies between internal and external
action on issues such as improving the knowledge base, risk assessment or
encouraging financing of disaster risk reduction is a key part of this
approach. The importance of disaster preparedness is clearly recognised in DG
ECHO’s mandate and in the European Consensus for Humanitarian Aid adopted in
2007. In 1996, the Commission launched a specific programme devoted to disaster
preparedness, ‘DIPECHO’. The programme relies on community-based pilot projects
in disaster-prone regions of the world, and has proven extremely successful,
not least because in addition to its impact on DRR it provides DG ECHO with a
partner base in often remote areas that can be activated rapidly once disaster
strikes.

Disaster preparedness
helps to save lives, speeds up recovery and soften the impact of future
hazards; it proves that people are far from helpless but can face hazards with
the appropriate local knowledge, practice and response mechanisms. The
activities funded are easily replicable, focus on local partners, fully
integrate vulnerable groups in the decision-making process, work with existing
community associations, include local government representatives and integrate
coherently innovative technologies into local situations.

Disaster preparedness also has a central place in the 23
principles for Good Humanitarian Donorship agreed in 2003 in Stockholm by
leading humanitarian donors, including the Commission.

Throughout 2010, DG ECHO policy work on disaster risk
reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA) continued.

In the framework of the EU policy and strategy in this
field (DRR in developing countries) and of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA)
DG ECHO has finalised its own coherent strategic approach to DRR and has
started drafting guidelines for its implementation.

In 2010, the Commission, through DG ECHO, invested
increased resources in DRR activities (disaster preparedness projects
such as DIPECHO as well as other DRR activities such as drought and epidemic
preparedness, DRR capacity building, etc.) aimed at helping communities and
relevant institutions to prepare for, and reduce, the impact of natural disasters
as well as strengthening the coping capacities at all levels in disaster-prone
regions.

In total, DIPECHO
action plans and DRR activities integrated into the humanitarian response
(i.e. the earthquake in Haiti, floods in Pakistan, droughts in the Greater
Horn of Africa, the Sahel region, Bolivia, Djibouti; epidemics in Congo,
Haiti, Malawi, Zimbabwe, etc.) reached more than 35 million beneficiaries
in regions prone to natural disasters with funding of about € 82 million[8].

The Commission also
promoted knowledge about climate change adaptation — of which DRR is one of the
main components — at national, regional and local level, further integrated DRR
elements into the emergency response (applying the principle of building back better) and strengthened its
activity in advocacy, coordination, capacity building and dissemination of good
practices.

The reduction of
vulnerability and building resilience to extreme events has become a priority
in the immediate and short term. This prioritisation helps to avoid
humanitarian and economic losses, as well as secure development gains and
provide a more sustainable basis for other adaptation action over the long
term.

The Commission also
completed its internal assessment on the humanitarian impact of climate change,
continued its reflection on the role and approach of humanitarian actors in the
field of CCA, and started to study how to develop synergies between disaster
risk reduction and adaptation to climate change in its operations.

Likewise, DG ECHO consolidated its relations and strategic
dialogue with and its financial support to the UNISDR[9] for the
implementation of its biannual plan under the Hyogo Framework for Action.

1.6.2. 
Civil-military relations

A growing number of
actors, other than traditional humanitarian organisations, are being mobilised
in crisis response. ‘Comprehensive’ policies for crisis response are gaining
political momentum in many organisations. Some of the provisions in the Lisbon
Treaty, including the creation of the European External Action Service (EEAS),
aim to contribute to a more coherent EU approach to foreign affairs issues.
NATO announced in 2010 the development of a ‘comprehensive approach’
doctrine, encompassing both military and civilian components. This changing
political and institutional environment led the Commission to consider ways and
means for early and regular interaction and coordination in order to preserve
vital specificities of humanitarian action, while allowing more coherent
responses when appropriate. Thus outreach, interaction and coordination with
key civilian, military and political actors, including from the newly created
crisis management structures of the EEAS, became increasingly important.

In 2010, increased attention to the above-mentioned issues
led the Commission to create a full-time position to follow coordination policy
issues with other actors responding to crises, with special emphasis on
civil-military coordination. The
Commission also adopted a Communication on EU disaster response capacity[10] which touches on questions of civil-military
relations, including compliance with the UN Guidelines on the use of Military
and Civil Defence Assets in international disaster relief (Oslo Guidelines),
endorsed by the EU inter alia in the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid.

Regarding operational
implementation of the above approach during the devastating floods affecting
Pakistan, there was smooth cooperation between the Commission and the EU
Movement Planning Cell of the EU Military Staff. The arrangements for access to Member States’ military assets
to support EU disaster response[11]
were successfully tested and the EU
Movement Planning Cell contributed to the EU Air Bridge by providing three
military chartered planes.

Besides the above, work
was taken forward in the relevant working groups of the exercise on
‘civil-military synergies in capability development’ under the Common Security
and Defence Policy (CSDP). The Commission also continued to contribute to
enhancing civil-military coordination by funding the activities of the United
Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) in the
civil-military coordination field. Activities included training events,
large-scale multilateral military exercises to disseminate the existing UN
Civil-Military Coordination Guidelines (‘MCDA[12]
Guidelines’ on the use of military and civil defence assets in complex
emergencies and ‘Oslo Guidelines’ for international disaster relief) and
deployment of civil-military coordination staff in crises such as during the Pakistan
flooding.

1.6.3. 
International humanitarian
law (IHL)

The scope and
principles of IHL are codified by international legal instruments (Geneva and
Hague Conventions), but there are serious problems with respect, compliance and
enforcement directly linked to shrinking of the humanitarian space (access,
protection) that is crucial for the work of humanitarian actors.

The 2007 Consensus on
Humanitarian Aid highlights the need to preserve humanitarian space to ensure
access to vulnerable populations and the safety and security of humanitarian
personnel. It reaffirms the EU’s commitment to upholding and promoting
fundamental humanitarian principles. It also commits the EU to strongly and
consistently advocating compliance with international law, including IHL, human
rights law and refugee law.

Even if compliance with
IHL is above all a Member State responsibility, the Commission/DG ECHO is
engaged in the promotion of IHL and the defence of humanitarian principles and
humanitarian space through adopting an operational case-by-case approach and
financing a number of related geographic and thematic actions, focusing on
those parts of IHL where it has most potential added value and leverage, e.g.
humanitarian space, access, protection of civilians/humanitarian workers.

Finally, DG ECHO
organised an awareness-raising campaign on the occasion of World
Humanitarian Day on 19 August 2010, covering IHL and other related issues. The
campaign mainly focused on the security of aid workers, who are increasingly
victims of incidents. In 2009 alone, 276 aid workers were kidnapped, wounded or
killed[13].

1.6.4. 
Health

Health was the second sector of activity (13.4 %)
after food aid in 2010, accounting for around a sixth of DG ECHO’s total
operational expenditure, in line with the fact that excess mortality and
morbidity are central criteria for any type of humanitarian assistance.

The health experts in DG ECHO participated in the two
consultation rounds aimed at producing a new SPHERE Handbook[14] — Humanitarian
Charter and Minimum Standards for Disaster Response, to be published in 2011,
updating the widely used 2004 edition.

With key partners, DG ECHO health experts monitored
implementation of the humanitarian reform in the health sector in Chad, the
Democratic Republic of Congo and Zimbabwe, and in addition to the planned
monitoring missions, cluster deployments in Haiti and Pakistan were closely
followed.

DG ECHO is systematically part of the Global Health Cluster
strategic working group (led by the WHO[15]).

At the annual Anopheles working group meeting in September,
a list of indicators measuring the effectiveness of DG ECHO-funded medical
programmes was agreed. Further work is ongoing to measure the efficiency of
operations through the costs observed per result study (unit costs). On the technical
development side, a technical issues paper on malaria prevention advocating the
use of long-lasting insecticide-treated bed nets was finalised.

1.6.5    Gender

The Commission actively pursued its policy work on the gender
dimension of humanitarian aid, following the recommendations of the gender
review, the results of which were presented and discussed with partner agencies
in November 2009 and with EU Member States in COHAFA in April 2010. Both Member
States and stakeholders encouraged the Commission to highlight its policy work
on gender issues, including gender integration, sexual and gender-based
violence and sexual exploitation and abuse in humanitarian crises.

These consultations helped the Commission to identify a
number of key matters to be further discussed in the forthcoming policy
document. It also showed the need to better track lessons learnt from its own
programmes in order to produce a strong gender policy illustrated with
meaningful case studies. In 2010, the Commission therefore developed an issues
paper on the gender dimension of humanitarian aid with an attached
questionnaire, to explore the views and experience of the Commission’s
humanitarian aid staff in approaching and dealing with gender issues.
Consultations on the issues paper are to take place in early 2011.

Work was also started on the issue of sexual exploitation
and abuse with a view to reinforcing the Commission’s strategies and
involvement in the global fight against such crimes in humanitarian settings.

Internal work and information sharing on gender issues was
likewise strengthened. DG ECHO reinforced its gender working group,
organised sessions on sexual and gender-based violence and gender integration
in two of its regional seminars, and held information lunch sessions for its
Brussels-based staff on sexual exploitation and abuse and on reproductive
health in humanitarian crises.

Finally, the Commission/DG ECHO contributed to the
development of an Action Plan on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in
Development[16]
to implement the comprehensive approach to UN Security Council Resolutions 1325
and 1820 on Women, Peace and Security, not least through support for the
development of indicators to measure progress (adopted by the Council in July)
and for the development of the external aid part of the new Commission’s
strategy for gender equality[17]
(adopted in September).

1.7. 
Aid effectiveness
1.7.1. 
Needs assessment

The Commission continued to actively engage in debates on
setting up better coordinated, more coherent common needs assessment. The
Commission took part in the work of the UN IASC Needs Assessment Task Force
(NATF) and contributed to a number of concrete activities, e.g. roll-out of the
‘humanitarian dashboard’ for needs assessments. The EU updated the Member
States on the Common Methodological Framework for Needs Assessment in the
relevant Council Working Group (COHAFA meeting on 12 February). In view of the
leading role DG ECHO is playing in needs assessment, in particular promoting
the joint/common needs assessment approach being developed by the UN, an
Initial Needs Assessment Checklist (INAC) was drawn up for the use of field and
HQ staff. The INAC tries to fill an existing gap: the collection of data during
the first few days after a sudden-onset crisis (but in principle no later than
the first three days). The tool also includes inputs from the EU civil
protection analysis, a first result of the integration of the civil protection
units within DG ECHO’s overall needs assessment operational activities.

As every year, DG ECHO conducted a comparative analysis of
countries to identify those whose population is likely to suffer more than
others in the event of a humanitarian disaster. The global evaluation, namely
the Global Needs Assessment — GNA (which measures the vulnerability and crisis
index) and the Forgotten Crisis Assessment — FCA (which identifies severe,
protracted humanitarian crisis situations where affected populations are
receiving no or not enough international aid) were published and presented to
COHAFA on 7 October.

1.7.2. 
Capacity building

The overall rationale
is that capacity building investments in the global humanitarian system lead to
more rapid and more cost-effective humanitarian responses, allowing better and
broader humanitarian coverage.

The Commission/DG
ECHO’s commitment to engage in the capacity building approach was given in the
European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid. In the Consensus the Member States and
the Commission’s partners agreed that supporting the development of the
collective global capacity to respond to humanitarian crises is one of the
fundamental tenets of the EU approach[18].
Further, the Action Plan following the EU Consensus on Humanitarian Aid commits
the EU to ‘... explore how to enhance support to capacity building, including
in the cluster approach and provisions for reinforcing local capacity ... and to
promote a multi-donor approach to capacity building’[19]. Also, through the
endorsement of the Good Humanitarian Donorship Principle, DG ECHO agreed to ‘allocate
funding to strengthen capacities for response’[20].

For 2010 and 2011,
€ 15 million is available for funding humanitarian capacity building. This
is primarily aimed at:

– 
humanitarian coordination,
supporting the overall humanitarian coordination structures and specific
cluster coordination structures, including support in the increasingly
important area of civil-military coordination through UNOCHA;

– 
continued support to ensure
more consistent use of joint/common needs assessments;

– 
logistics support, mainly
through the UN World Food Programme (WFP), for building up and running
strategic humanitarian response hubs with pre-positioned relief items, and
greater capacity to deploy appropriate personnel to coordinate and execute
cluster operations;

– 
gender, through support to
the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) together with the UN High Commissioner for
Refugees (UNHCR) and UNICEF for joint action to build the knowledge and
capacity of field humanitarian actors to address sexual and gender-based
violence in a coordinated way;

– 
emergency preparedness,
disaster risk reduction and early warning, for example through the UNISDR, for strengthening partnerships to expedite
implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA);

– 
coordination in the food and
nutrition sectors, not least through establishment of the new
emergency food security and nutrition policy, and clusters.

1.8. 
Civil protection policy

In
2010 the European Civil Protection Mechanism was transferred to DG ECHO and
merged with humanitarian aid in an attempt to exploit synergies and enhance the
coherence of EU response operations. Options to further strengthen the EU’s
disaster response capacity were also assessed and culminated in the adoption of
a Communication on 26 October 2010[21] and Council Conclusions on 14 December 2010.

In parallel to reinforcing the EU’s response to disasters,
DG ECHO continued to work in the fields of prevention and preparedness.
Emphasis was placed on preventive measures (the costs of prevention are always
considerably lower than those linked to remediation) and on the development of
training courses and exercises. Lessons learnt meetings were organised for the
numerous disasters that occurred in 2010.

The Commission/DG ECHO is also implementing a series of
activities to give effect to the EU framework on the prevention of disasters
contained in the Communication adopted in February 2009. In this context the
Commission issued a guidance paper on national risk assessment and mapping for
disaster management, which was developed in close cooperation with national
authorities. The Commission is doing its utmost to improve its knowledge base
on disasters and encourage effective and greater investment in disaster
prevention.

2. 
Interinstitutional relations and
cooperation with other donors and partners
2.1. 
Council Working Group on
Humanitarian Aid and Food Aid (COHAFA)

The
work of COHAFA, successfully launched under the Czech Presidency at the start
of 2009, continued under the Spanish and Belgian Presidencies in 2010. Having a
dedicated forum for regular policy exchange among Member States and Commission
experts represents a qualitative leap in the development of a more coherent and
coordinated EU approach to humanitarian policy and action.

Throughout
the year, the working group, which brings together representatives from EU
capitals, met 13 times, one of which exclusively in response to a sudden-onset
emergency (Pakistan in August). The incoming EU Presidencies, in cooperation
with the Commission, established a work plan covering specific humanitarian
crises (e.g. Haiti, Pakistan, the Gaza war, Sudan/Darfur, DR Congo, Colombia —
to name but a few), sectoral topics (e.g. the Food Aid Convention, WFP,
Mid-term review of the Consensus on Humanitarian Aid Action Plan, European
Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps), and coordination on specific issues (e.g. UN
needs assessment work, ECOSOC[22]).

In
its first two years of work, COHAFA has established itself as the point of
reference for questions on humanitarian aid in the Council. Input is provided
on a regular basis to other groups, and, via these groups, to the PSC[23], Coreper[24] and the Foreign
Affairs or General Affairs Councils (for instance, on the humanitarian
situation in Sudan, on which Council conclusions were adopted). Discussions
took place within COHAFA on the possible extension/renewal of the Food Aid
Convention, with the Commission obtaining a mandate in November 2010 to
renegotiate the Convention on behalf of the EU (see Section 1.4).

On
a strategic level, COHAFA has allowed the European Union to increase the
coherence of the Commission’s and Member States’ humanitarian aid activities:
there is an annual exchange on individual humanitarian aid policies and budgets
(this took place in several stages at the beginning of 2010), policies
formulated by the Commission are often referred to or reproduced by Member
States, individual EU donor activities in specific crises are better
coordinated and EU positions on specific issues are discussed ahead of
international meetings. On a day-to-day basis, the work of the group was
facilitated by the Commission’s initiative to distribute widely its situation
reports on specific humanitarian crises, which have quickly become a major
source of information for a wide audience of stakeholders inside and outside
Europe.

Under
the Belgian Presidency COHAFA undertook to review its mandate, which was
considered to provide a good basis for the future work of the group. However,
in the course of this review it was also felt that COHAFA should adopt new
working methods with a view to improving the visibility, outputs, results and
impact of its work even further.

2.2. 
Council Working Group on
Civil Protection (PROCIV)

PROCIV is the Council
working group that deals with civil protection policy for the Justice and Home
Affairs Council. In 2010 it met nine times. Debates covered the full range of
civil protection policy and operational issues: response, preparedness and
prevention, including discussions on the major disasters that occurred in 2010.

A specific focus of
the working group was discussing and agreeing on five sets of Council
conclusions that were subsequently adopted as ‘I’/‘A’ items by the Council.
These Conclusions call on Member States and the Commission to step up existing
actions and also to take new measures to strengthen disaster management in the
EU.

The subjects covered
during the Spanish Presidency were prevention of forest fires (Council document
number 7788/10), psychosocial support in the event of emergencies (9838/10) and
use of the Civil Protection Mechanism in major events (9837/10).

During the Belgian
Presidency conclusions were adopted on host nation support (15874/10) and
innovative solutions for financing disaster prevention (14971/10).

2.3. 
Cooperation with other EU
institutions, donors and partners

Following the elections to the European Parliament in June
2009, the inauguration of a new College of Commissioners and the integration of
civil protection into DG ECHO, the main activities focused on following the
day-to-day work of the newly constituted committees (mainly DEVE[25]/AFET[26] and ENVI[27] for civil protection matters). DG ECHO worked
closely with the members of the DEVE Committee, in particular to raise
awareness of and interest in humanitarian issues, and assisted Parliament staff
in organising several field missions. Several meetings with the new Chair of
the DEVE Committee (Ms Eva Joly) and the new standing Humanitarian Rapporteur
(Ms Michele Striffler) were held to discuss humanitarian policy and operational
issues. DG ECHO was also in close contact with the DEVE and ENVI Committees on
matters related to disaster response.

Commissioner Georgieva
regularly attended EP Committees (DEVE and ENVI) to conduct the ‘structured
dialogue’ with the European Parliament in the areas of her portfolio. These
occasions were used to brief Parliament about current and future policy
initiatives and priorities, in the field of both humanitarian aid and civil
protection, and to inform Parliament about the Commission’s response to
specific crises.

Throughout the year
Commissioner Georgieva visited a number of EU capitals to meet her counterparts
in the field of humanitarian aid and civil protection. The purpose of these
visits was to present her newly created portfolio and to exchange views on her
policy priorities and issues of concern to Member States.

Commissioner
Georgieva regularly attended meetings of the Foreign and General Affairs
Councils for discussions within her portfolio either on specific crises or on
policy initiatives such as a stronger European disaster response.

The Commissioner also
undertook a number of field missions both within and outside Europe (e.g.
Hungary (red sludge accident) and Haiti).

Throughout the year, DG ECHO and Commissioner Georgieva
also maintained regular contact with relevant international organisations, in
particular the UN and the Red Cross Movement, on policy development and
operational issues. Regular meetings were also held in Brussels with key
partners. Special emphasis was placed on close cooperation with the UN
Emergency Relief Coordinator, Mr John Holmes, and his successor, Mrs Valerie
Amos.

DG ECHO took part in UN and Red Cross Movement related
meetings and processes, mainly in New York, Geneva and Rome, in close liaison
with the relevant EU Delegations. Through active participation in the OCHA and
ICRC Donor Support Groups, and through its permanent observer status at WFP
Executive Board meetings and in the UNHCR’s Executive Committee, DG ECHO
provided inputs to strategic decision making and guidance at these
organisations.

DG ECHO continued to promote EU-coordinated positions,
resolutions and statements in UN bodies reflecting Commission policy.

Throughout the year, DG
ECHO had contacts with non-EU donors, both at operational level in the field
and at policy level at headquarters. These included a strategic dialogue with
the United States in October and other meetings with other key and
non-traditional donors.

Specific GHD newcomers’
sessions with humanitarian aid departments from the ‘EU 12’ Member States were
held alongside regular bilateral discussions — thereby reinforcing EU
coordination in humanitarian aid.

3. 
Implementation of humanitarian aid and
civil protection in 2010
3.1. 
A needs-based approach

The EU provides
assistance to populations with the greatest humanitarian needs, irrespective of
origin, religion or political creed.

For a number of years,
ECHO has been using a two-pronged approach to identify countries whose
humanitarian needs should be given high priority. The first approach is the
needs evaluation undertaken in the field by experts and geographical units. In
addition to the immediate reports on crisis areas, analyses are carried out to
provide information on specific needs. At the same time, a comparative analysis
is conducted to identify those countries which may require humanitarian
assistance. This analysis has two dimensions:

– 
the Global Needs Assessment[28], based on national
indicators, classes more than 140 countries according to the occurrence of a
recent crisis (natural disaster or conflict, including the weight of displaced
people or refugees on the population) and the degree of vulnerability of the population,
incorporating various indicators (e.g. human development index, mortality of
children under five);

– 
the Forgotten Crisis
Assessment attempts to identify serious humanitarian crises where the people
affected do not receive sufficient international aid and/or media coverage.

These are important
tools for ensuring coherence in allocating resources among countries according
to their needs, independently of any type of pressure.

Using this method, the
Commission identified 39 countries or territories in crisis in 2010. Out of
these, 16 were classed as ‘extremely vulnerable’: 13 were in sub-Saharan Africa
(including Chad, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Kenya,
Somalia, Sudan, Uganda and Zimbabwe). 58 % of the initial geographical
budget was allocated to the 16 most vulnerable countries.

Approximately 17 %
of the geographical budget allocation was channelled to 12 ‘forgotten
crisis’ situations in 2010[29]:

– 
the Lao Hmong minority in Thailand;

– 
the Rohingya refugees and
the Chittagong Hill Tracts crisis in Bangladesh;

– 
the inter-ethnic conflict in
Burma/Myanmar and the related Burmese refugee situation in Thailand;

– 
the populations affected by
the internal armed conflict in Colombia;

– 
the conflict in the north of
Yemen and the refugees from the Horn of Africa;

– 
the Sahrawi refugees
in Algeria;

– 
the populations affected by
regional conflicts in India (Kashmir, north-east India, Naxalite
affected regions);

– 
the populations affected by
the internal armed conflict in the Central African Republic;

– 
the Somali refugee crisis in
Kenya;

– 
the Mindanao crisis in the Philippines;

– 
the Bhutanese refugees in Nepal;

– 
the crisis in the Sahel
region (mainly Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania and Niger), which is
suffering from a continuing series of external shocks (poor rains, political
instability, high food prices, epidemics, etc.), aggravating an already fragile
situation but not attracting the attention of the media.

3.2. 
Top 10 humanitarian crises
in terms of funding allocations

EU humanitarian funding
in 2010 for the top ten recipients was € 674 million, or 68 % of the
total operational budget resources allocated to countries and regions. Out of
the top 10 amount, 47 % was earmarked for countries in Africa.

*
Chad includes € 10 million earmarked for assistance to the Sahelian part
of the country.

3.3. 
Africa

In 2010, humanitarian
and food operations were funded through 31 decisions worth a total of € 468.55
million, or 42 % of the total budget managed by DG ECHO.

The main region funded
was Sudan, Chad and Central Africa, which received 54 % of the amount
allocated to Africa.

Funding in response to
natural disasters was made available for the drought in Sahel, the floods in
Burkina Faso and a polio epidemic in the Republic of the Congo.

DG ECHO implemented
drought preparedness activities in the Greater Horn of Africa and funded ECHO
Flight, a service for humanitarian operators in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo, the Republic of the Congo and Kenya.

3.3.1. 
Sudan and Chad, Central
Africa

The region of Sudan, Chad and Central Africa has
by far the largest concentration of humanitarian activities in the world. This
is partly a reflection of the sheer scale of need: for example, millions of
people in Sudan are affected by conflict, displacement and natural disasters.
It is also an indication of the complexity and recurrent nature of crises in
these countries. Many of the crises cut across national boundaries, for
example, the Darfur-Chad dynamic and the Lord’s Resistance Army’s attacks in
South Sudan, the Central African Republic and north-eastern DRC. Many crises
occur in situations where the State’s presence and basic facilities are very
weak, or even non-existent.

Conflict is the major factor creating
humanitarian crises in this region, displacing people from their homes, preventing
them from enjoying a stable lifestyle and from earning their livelihoods and
denying them access to basic services. But conflict also hinders the
effectiveness of the humanitarian response. Organisations are frequently unable
to work, or are prevented from working to capacity. On top of this, there is
often administrative interference from central and local authorities who are
suspicious of independent humanitarian aid, and wanting to exercise a degree of
control over it.

All this takes place against a background of
extremely weak infrastructure, which creates serious logistical challenges for
humanitarian agencies, and appalling poverty. Four of the countries in the
region (Central African Republic, Chad, Burundi, DR Congo) figure in the bottom
10 of the UN’s Human Development Index[30].

Nevertheless, DG ECHO was able to administer
effective humanitarian projects through its partners and to reach around
ten million people in serious and urgent need in 2010.

Sudan

In 2010 DG ECHO’s intervention in Sudan remained one of its
largest — supporting the delivery of humanitarian aid to 6 million IDPs,
refugees, returnees, host communities and nomads across Sudan. In Darfur,
1.9 million people remain displaced in camps; 2 million are affected by
conflict; and there are 40 000 refugees from Chad. During 2010 the number
of affected people increased, with intertribal clashes and clashes between
rebels and government forces displacing a further 300 000 people. In South
Sudan the humanitarian situation remained critical, with 2 million people
in need of food assistance. During the year 900 people were killed and 215 000
displaced due to tribal clashes and attacks by the Lord’s Resistance Army
(LRA). Seasonal flooding affected 140 000 people and malnutrition remained
a major concern, with acute malnutrition affecting 50 000 children. In the
10 weeks prior to the referendum of 9 January 2011 close to 150 000 people
returned to South Sudan. All are dependent on some form of humanitarian
assistance to cover basic needs. With the potential for instability as a result
of the referendum process, DG ECHO proactively supported the contingency
efforts of its partners by allocating additional funds for the procurement,
transport and pre-positioning of essential humanitarian commodities including
food.

Three main objectives were targeted in 2010: addressing
life-saving needs, supporting emergency preparedness and response (EP&R)
mechanisms and providing common services. The EU funded basic life-saving
services and food aid to the most vulnerable populations in Darfur, South
Sudan, Eastern Sudan and the Transitional Areas. Humanitarian space became
extremely restricted in Darfur in 2010, as result of heightened insecurity,
with regular kidnappings and harassment of humanitarian actors. In particular,
access to Jebel Mara has been non-existent since February 2010. Humanitarian
operations by partners working under extremely difficult conditions are
therefore largely limited to the camps and to occasional activities in rural
areas, with consequences on the quantity and quality of aid delivered. In South
Sudan, Eastern Sudan and the Transitional Areas life-saving services and
EP&R were prioritised in areas affected by conflict, flooding, disease
outbreaks, high levels of malnutrition and areas of high return. This has
proven particularly successful in South Sudan, with most partners including
EP&R components in their operations. Throughout the country DG ECHO
supported the provision of food aid to food-insecure populations.

Through its support for common services such as air
transport, coordination, logistic services and security assessments, DG ECHO
helped to ensure a safer environment for effective and principled delivery of
humanitarian aid. The worrying developments in Darfur led DG ECHO to scale
up advocacy, information and communication activities.

Out of the € 131 million allocated to Sudan, general
food distributions represented the largest single component in terms of both
overall funding (42.7 %) and coverage, with 3.8 million beneficiaries in
Darfur and 2.5 million in South Sudan. Life-saving activities (43.9 %)
were supported in the sectors of health, water, sanitation and hygiene,
shelter, non-food items and nutrition. Substantial support was given to
EP&R (6.8 %) and common services (6.8 %). Overall DG ECHO
maintained a flexible approach to allow an immediate response to new
emergencies on the basis of identified needs.

Commissioner
Kristalina Georgieva undertook a 4-day mission to Sudan in June 2010, visiting
Khartoum, Darfur-Nyala and Juba.  This first mission to a protracted conflcit
area gave added impetus to a number of ongoing issues, which she subsequently
followed up, including the development of civil-military relationships, the
problems of shrinking humanitarian space and more particularly access and
insecurity, contingency planning and the transition from humanitarian to
development assistance.

Chad

In 2010 Chad faced many humanitarian challenges:
the protracted crisis in Eastern and Southern Chad affected 500 000 vulnerable
people, including 255 000 Sudanese refugees, 64 000 Central African
Republic refugees, 171 000 IDPs and their host populations; the food and
nutrition crisis in the Sahel belt affected 1.6 million people and floods and a
cholera epidemic hit 150 000 and 6 300 people respectively.

In response to these crises, the Commission allocated
a total budget of € 38 million, of which € 10 million to address the
needs in the Sahel region of Chad.

In the East humanitarian space was significantly
restricted by poor levels of security. The withdrawal of the MINURCAT
peacekeeping force, together with banditry and impunity, hampered humanitarian
operations and thwarted return efforts by limiting access to beneficiaries and
reducing the number of partners on the ground. Nevertheless, it was possible to
ensure satisfactory coverage of the humanitarian needs of the refugees, IDPs
and host populations in the areas of intervention. Care and maintenance
programmes were implemented with a special focus on beneficiary
self-sufficiency. Multi-sectoral assistance was provided in the areas of water
and sanitation, health, nutrition, food aid and food security, shelter,
essential goods, humanitarian air services and the environment.

In the South of the country coverage of the
humanitarian needs was also satisfactory, and refugees were generally able to
reach self-sufficiency as a consequence of humanitarian aid linking in with
longer-term development programmes.

In the Sahel belt, despite initial difficulties,
the humanitarian response to the food crisis succeeded in saving many lives and
reducing its impact on household economies and coping mechanisms. Operations
mainly focused on nutrition, health (in relation to malnutrition) and food
security.

At country-wide level the health Early Warning
System (EWARS) allowed timely warning and response to the meningitis, measles
and cholera epidemics that occurred in 2010.

Burundi and Tanzania

In 2010 the Commission
allocated a total budget of € 15 million to Tanzania and Burundi.
DG ECHO’s intervention in Tanzania assisted the 37 000
Burundian and 61 000 Congolese refugees in the North-West along the
Burundian border, while in Burundi DG ECHO focused mainly on the 30 000
Congolese refugees and on specific vulnerable groups. In view of the close
links between the two countries in terms of humanitarian needs, DG ECHO now
administers field operations in both countries from Bujumbura.

The principal objective was to limit mortality
and morbidity rates in the target population and to support the resettlement
and stabilisation process. Throughout 2010 repatriation of refugees was
extremely low and the refugee population remained at much the same level. The
camp populations in both Burundi and Tanzania are almost entirely dependent on
external assistance and need integrated humanitarian aid (food, water and
sanitation, healthcare, nutrition, shelter, protection). Returnees to Burundi
require, during and immediately after the repatriation process, the same level
of assistance, plus transport facilities. DG ECHO provided integrated
assistance to 130 000 refugees. In Burundi specific vulnerable groups such
as children under five, pregnant and lactating mothers, returnees, unaccompanied
minors, the disabled and the elderly were assisted through water and
sanitation, health, nutrition and food security actions. Around 20 000
severely malnourished children under five and 750 000 vulnerable people
were helped.

DG ECHO continued to pursue its phasing out from
Burundi thanks to a successful LRRD strategy with development actors, not least
the European Development Fund (see Section 3.10 on LRRD).

Central African Republic (CAR)

In 2010 conflict levels once again increased as a result of
the faltering disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) process, the
postponement of the elections to January 2011, the resumption of activities by
certain rebel movements and the expansion of LRA attacks. The overall humanitarian
context of the CAR remains complex, with shifting pockets
in both conflict and post-conflict situations, against a background of chronic poverty, high levels of
malnutrition, structural collapse, absence of infrastructure and lack of basic
services. The North-West was calm throughout the year, but the North-East
continued to be troubled by fighting between rebel groups and government forces
and by cross-border insecurity with Chad and Sudan. The entire Eastern part of
the country was hit by a wave of attacks by the LRA. In the South-West, half of
the DRC refugees who had fled from violence in Equateur Province at the end of
2009 were finally settled in a camp. The
most urgent needs were in the sectors of water and sanitation, food security,
health, non-food items, protection and logistical support. DG ECHO succeeded in
meeting its objective of providing assistance to displaced people, refugees,
returnees and vulnerable groups affected by the conflict in order to promote
stabilisation and resettlement. However, the humanitarian response in the CAR is hampered by security
constraints and serious logistical problems, which limit access to the needs
areas.

In response to the forgotten crisis, DG ECHO’s approach was sufficiently flexible to respond
immediately to the evolving situation and to maintain multi-sectoral assistance
to 100 000 IDPs and returnees,
20 000 refugees, 110 000
people in the three main urban centres in the South-East affected by the LRA attacks and several hundred
thousand of the vulnerable host population, with a total budget of € 7.8
million. DG ECHO has enhanced access by encouraging the presence of
humanitarian agencies in the most critical areas, through supporting
humanitarian logistics services and promoting coordination.

Republic of the Congo

The influx of more than 100 000 refugees from Equateur
Province in the DRC at the end of 2009 destabilised the already fragile
humanitarian situation in La Likouala Province in the North-East of the
Republic of the Congo. The pressure on the local populations justified an
urgent intervention to avoid a serious deterioration of the humanitarian
situation. Water and sanitation projects, food distribution and coordination
were urgently needed. Logistics remains the main problem in accessing the area,
since the refugees are spread along more than 500 km of the Ubangui river.
Delivering humanitarian aid in time was therefore a challenge that many
humanitarian actors faced in the early months of the intervention.

Many of the refugees were hosted by the local population,
but around 40 % are developing their own coping mechanism in order to
survive in their new environment, while still maintaining strong links with
their former home areas on the other side of the river in the DRC.

Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)

The DRC is still far from returning to complete
peace and stability. Despite some improvements in the humanitarian situation in
the East, mostly in parts of North Kivu and Province Orientale, more than one
million IDPs are still unable to return home and regain self-sufficiency.

The situation in the Eastern region, especially
Province Orientale and North and South Kivu, continues to give serious cause
for concern because of the major military engagement which has been taking
place since early 2009 between the Congolese armed forces and their allies and
rebel armed groups (including the LRA).

There are still 250 000 IDPs in Equateur province and
more than 100 000 refugees in neighbouring countries (Republic of the
Congo and CAR), as a result of the ethnic conflict which started at the end of
2009. The situation remains difficult (in terms of access and security) and it
is still not clear when and how this situation can be resolved.

In Katanga the assisted repatriation of
Congolese refugees from Zambia finished at the end of 2010, and there was a
virtual standstill in repatriation from Tanzania owing to the increased levels
of insecurity in the areas to which refugees are returning.

In a country which is among the world’s neediest, DG ECHO’s
response strategy (€ 46.95 million) focused on the problematic surrounding
IDPs in conflict situations and on protection-related issues. 65 % of DG
ECHO funding was allocated to the North-East, North and South Kivu and Haut and
Bas Uele. Across the country as a whole, DG ECHO assisted more than one
million beneficiaries in 2010 through the provision of multi-sectoral
humanitarian aid and food assistance. The issue of sexual violence continued to
be integrated within all health programmes and some more specialised projects.

The working environment in the DRC is extremely
difficult: logistics are a constant challenge due to the lack of basic
infrastructure. Security in the zones where DG ECHO operates has also become
more and more problematic, with an ever-increasing number of restricted areas
and an increase in security incidents involving humanitarian workers.

DG ECHO has reinforced the coordination of humanitarian aid
by supporting the role of OCHA and the cluster system in the DRC and the Good
Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) group. DG ECHO is fully involved in the
annual process led by the UN Humanitarian Coordinator to formulate humanitarian
strategy and a new Humanitarian Action Plan. The GHD initiative in the DRC
continues to foster active cooperation among donors. It is extremely relevant,
in view of the growing number of funding instruments and programmes in place in
the Eastern part of the country, including those being implemented at the
initiative of the Congolese authorities. DG ECHO plays an active part in this
process.

ECHO Flight

In a
number of countries there is no
safe and reliable means of transport between the supply and personnel entry
points and the main humanitarian destinations because of logistical and security-related access problems. Overland travel is dangerous and time consuming,
or even impossible. DG ECHO
therefore continued to implement a flight service focusing on Central Africa
(the DRC and neighbouring areas) and Kenya, with a view to facilitating the implementation of humanitarian
and post-emergency development projects in difficult areas. The ECHO Flight operation provided an
efficient, reliable and safe service to enable secure and accountable
implementation of humanitarian projects in remote, otherwise inaccessible,
regions.

This was satisfactorily achieved using three
aircraft operating a mixture of fixed and flexible schedules as well as ad hoc
tasking for special operations such as the polio outbreak in the Republic of
Congo and cargo transport to the Haut and Bas Uélé regions of the DRC. ECHO
Flight enables humanitarian NGOs to reduce their inventory stockpiles at field
locations, which often run the risk of confiscation or theft by armed bandits
or local militias, and improves the quality of humanitarian operations, since
supervisory visits can be conducted more frequently. In addition, having an
airborne stand-by evacuation capacity is an essential condition for continuing
project implementation for many agencies. In 2010 ECHO Flight transported 15 684 passengers and 383
tonnes of humanitarian cargo.

Monitoring and coordination with other
humanitarian air services to avoid any duplication and competition with safe,
viable commercial airlines was enhanced in 2010 with the recruitment of a
second Technical Assistant based in Nairobi.

3.3.2. 
Horn of Africa

In 2010, conflicts and displacement combined
with drought exacerbated humanitarian and food needs. Epidemics (Ethiopia,
Uganda) also contributed to increased vulnerability of people.

The Commission allocated € 96 million to
respond to these crises affecting the region, or 20 % of the total
allocation to Africa.

- The Disaster Risk Reduction Programme in the Horn of
Africa relates to humanitarian aid in Djibouti (€ 0.6 million), Ethiopia
(€ 8.9 million), Kenya (€ 6.3 million), Somalia (€ 0.7 million)
and Uganda (€ 3.5 million).

Djibouti

In January FEWSNET (the
Famine Early Warning System Network) launched a food security alert
highlighting the deterioration of the situation due to a drop in cash transfers
and the continuing low rainfall predictions. As pastoralists had already lost
50-70 percent of their livestock in late 2008 due to drought and because
recovery was so slow, the ability of households to absorb further livestock
losses was very limited. A rapid nutritional assessment using the Middle Upper
Arm Circumference (MUAC) method, carried out as part of the inter-agency
assessment in March, found a rate of 20 % of children with a MUAC below
125 mm and 6 % of children with a MUAC of 115 mm, indicating a potentially
very critical nutritional situation.

The Commission adopted
an emergency decision allocating € 2 million with the specific objective
of providing humanitarian food and nutrition assistance to the most vulnerable
populations affected by drought. Support was provided to the WFP, UNICEF and
FAO for food aid, nutrition and livelihood support. Under the WFP’s Protracted
Relief and Rehabilitation Operation 60 000 persons received general food
distribution, 12 000 received supplementary feeding, and a further 27 000
were involved in food-for-work activities. Furthermore, some 13 613
children were targeted under the integrated management of acute malnutrition
programme, and some 8 000 lactating and pregnant women under the promotion
of infant and young child feeding practices programme. In terms of emergency
food security, 200 000 livestock belonging to some 12 000 households
were targeted for vaccination and some 250 of the worst affected households
benefited from restocking.

Ethiopia

The year 2010 started
with heightened humanitarian needs owing to the spillover effects of the 2008
and 2009 drought, but favourable rainfall conditions later in the year led to
an improved food security situation in most parts of the country. As a consequence,
Ethiopia reached almost 20 million tonnes of agricultural production in 2010,
an increase of 10 % on the previous year. Subsequently, a steady reduction
in the number of people in need of food assistance was reported. According to
the Humanitarian Requirement Document jointly released in January by the
Ethiopian government and humanitarian organisations, there were 5.2 million
beneficiaries in the country. This figure was revised in November to 2.3
million beneficiaries. However, approximately 410 000 hectares of wheat
land was affected by yellow rust, causing pockets of food insecurity. In
addition, the La Niña climatic event, which affected the Greater Horn of Africa
in the last quarter of the year, had and is still having a negative effect in the
pastoral communities of southern Ethiopia. Floods affected a large part of
Ethiopia and were one of the major humanitarian concerns in 2010. In the Amhara
region alone reports indicated that over 400 000 people were affected and
17 000 displaced from several areas. By contrast, epidemics of acute
diarrhoea were substantially reduced compared to 2009.

The Commission
allocated € 15 million to Ethiopia in 2010, and it is estimated that
overall about 2.8 million people benefited from the various operations supported
by DG ECHO in the country.

Under the Global Plan,
the Humanitarian Aid budget aimed to improve the humanitarian situation of the
disasters-affected population through the provision of
multi-sector assistance. The food aid budget was more focused on providing
appropriate and adequate humanitarian food assistance, including food aid,
nutritional support and short-term food security and livelihood support. The
Regional Drought Decision aimed to alleviate the impact of drought (current
drought as well as frequent drought cycles) on targeted vulnerable local
communities through improved response and preparedness activities.

Security in most of the
highland areas of the country is considered stable. However, parts of the
pastoral areas have security problems, often related to resources as well as
inter-ethnic/inter-clan clashes. The situation in the Somali region is further
complicated by the ongoing confrontation between the
Ethiopian government and various armed groups. As a result, movements in the region,
particularly in the Ogaden area, are highly restricted and several attacks
against humanitarian agencies were reported. Access problems are also sometimes
exacerbated by the reluctance of the authorities to support the actions of
humanitarian partners, owing to mistrust resulting in bitter scrutiny,
especially in some specific sectors such as nutrition.

Kenya

Following two good
rainy seasons the food security situation in Kenya gradually improved in 2010,
although after several consecutive crises populations living in the arid
districts remain very vulnerable. Some recovery has been achieved but after a
high level of asset depletion during the 2008/2009 drought, a full recovery
will take years and might never be achieved for many. Malnutrition remained
above emergency thresholds in most of the northern part of the country
throughout the year. Poor development, the weak health system, conflict over
resources, and other governance issues continually affect the health and
nutrition of children in the marginalised areas.

The three Dadaab
refugee camps, built to accommodate 90 000 people in the early 1990s,
hosted 303 000 at the end of 2010, with a total of 65 200 new
arrivals registered in the past year. In addition, over 25 000 refugees
were registered in Kakuma camp, Turkana, and in Nairobi. The existing Dadaab
camps operated far above their capacity, putting increased stress on refugees
and the agencies providing assistance. The refugee protection situation in
North-Eastern Province is a growing concern, as repeatedly documented by human
rights organisations. The numbers of refugees increased, with the result that
the Dadaab camps are the biggest refugee camp operation in the world. The
refugee situation is mainly due to the state of affairs in Somalia. Local
integration as a durable solution is officially very limited in Kenya.
Resettlement to third countries does not exceed 10 000 cases a year.
Repatriation is not an option for the foreseeable future in view of the current
context. An exit from this refugee operation seems unlikely in the coming
years.

The total allocation
for Kenya in 2010 was € 18 million, of which € 13 million for
operations in refugee camps. DG ECHO had two main objectives: supporting
refugees and contributing to the improvement of nutrition services in the arid
lands. Assistance was provided to the refugees in the Dadaab camps in vital
sectors such as food, water, health and sanitation. DG ECHO also contributed
significantly to the decongestion of these camps with strong financial support
to the UNHCR for extending one of the camps. DG ECHO participated in the
roll-out and implementation of the recently approved Integrated Management of
Acute Malnutrition guidelines. More than 350 000 children and pregnant or
lactating women were provided with specialised assistance. Advocacy efforts
were stepped up to encourage the Government of Kenya and its development
partners to engage more in nutrition in the arid and semi-arid lands of the
country.

Close coordination
among all EU departments continued. Linkages with the Water Facility were
reinforced. Coordination with the EDF-supported Drought Management Initiative
was sustained.

Somalia

Humanitarian needs remained overwhelming in Somalia, a
country afflicted by 20 years of conflict and instability, where the overall
situation is aggravated and compounded by natural disasters (persistent
cyclical droughts in the Central and Northern regions, floods, and epidemic
outbreaks), undermined livelihoods, high commodity prices and eroded coping
strategies. According to the latest FSNAU (Food Security and Nutrition Analysis
Unit) estimates, 2 million people were in need of humanitarian assistance.

The Djibouti peace process has not yet produced any
reconciliation between the Transitional Federal Government and the Al
Shaabab/Armed Opposition Groups and, as a result, thousands of civilians in and
around Mogadishu are caught by the impact of renewed hostilities. Continuous
conflict in the South and Central regions and in Puntland displaced additional
families throughout the year. The number of IDPs increased to 1.46 million. The
largest increase in displaced population figures was reported from the
outskirts of Mogadishu. In Puntland, IDPs were threatened with (forced)
relocation and deportation.

Adverse climatic conditions greatly affected the water
sources and reserve for the Somali community. It is also anticipated that the
climatic event La Niña will cause reduced local food supply and incomes, which
would exacerbate food insecurity. Many households remain indebted and have
become ‘pastoralist drop-outs’, concentrated on the outskirts of towns
throughout the regions, being entirely dependent on handouts and relief. With
one in six children acutely malnourished and one in twenty-two severely
malnourished in South-Central Somalia, the nutrition situation remains one of
the worst in the world.

In response to this humanitarian crisis the Commission
allocated a total budget of € 35 million to Somalia in 2010. The main
sectors addressed were healthcare, nutrition, water and sanitation, food
security, temporary shelters, coordination, protection and drought
preparedness/response. Commission support in Somalia reached an estimated three
million people. In the health sector, Commission support focused on primary healthcare,
specialised mother and child healthcare, paediatrics and emergency war surgery
as well as curative nutrition operations. Regarding food security, there were
several components programmed, including the reinforcement of emergency
veterinary services, delivery of seeds and tools, cash-based assistance (i.e.
cash for work or unconditional cash) and other livelihood initiatives. One key
life-saving programme was the wet feeding programme in Mogadishu, which
continued to provide roughly 75 000 cooked meals a day. Water and
sanitation, a sector of vital importance in Somalia, included improved access
to water and hygiene. Most of the assistance has in the past been focused on
the Central and South regions, where the large majority of the needs are still
concentrated. However, because of the drought in the pastoral Central-North
regions and an increased influx of IDPs to other areas of the North, Commission
support continued to include assistance to the most vulnerable people of
Puntland and Somaliland.

The reduction in the number of incidents directed at
humanitarian personnel or assets was clearly linked to the reduced UN and NGO
presence in South Somalia, where access for international staff remained highly
restricted. Fighting for control of territory and the targeting of humanitarian
assets and staff frequently prevented access to affected populations or
interrupted assistance activities in different locations. In the course of the
year a total of seven humanitarian agencies operating in the Central-South regions
were expelled by armed opposition groups. Increased pressure and unacceptable
requests from these groups triggered the suspension of aid operations in some
cases. Despite this, the Commission sought ways to improve the delivery of aid
in Somalia, including through rigorous selection of partners and programmes.

Uganda

As of January 2010 more
than one million persons were still classified as Internally Displaced Persons
(IDPs) in the Acholi region of north-central Uganda: 20 % living in IDP
camps, 16 % living in transit sites, and the rest having returned to their
villages of origin but not yet considered to have attained a durable solution.
Of the original 251 IDP camps, 110 were yet to be phased out and officially
closed.

The Karamoja region
faced a fourth consecutive year of below-average rainfall in 2009 and the
situation was exacerbated by insecurity due to a prevailing culture of cattle
raiding and the Government of Uganda’s still incomplete disarmament programme.
Although restrictions of movement had, to some degree, been lessened, the
livelihoods of the population remained precarious.

DG ECHO’s Global Plan
for 2010 (€ 6 million) included three specific objectives: (1) to improve
the humanitarian situation of the IDPs of the Acholi region by providing camp
phase-out and reintegration support; (2) to save and preserve life by ensuring
food assistance to the IDPs of the Acholi region; (3) to continue strengthening
management and coordination of the humanitarian response among multilateral and
bilateral agencies and non-governmental agencies in Uganda.

Support was provided to
the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the Norwegian Refugee
Council under the first objective, to the WFP under the second objective, and
to the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs under the third
objective. In all 4 000 households considered to be extremely vulnerable
were helped to attain a durable solution with shelter and latrine construction
and provided with essential household items. A total of 97 transitional
classrooms together with sanitation facilities were built in schools around the
Acholi region and safe water provision was ensured in return areas by
rehabilitating or constructing some 53 boreholes with incorporated hand pumps
and protecting 72 spring sources. Protection monitoring and advocacy was
undertaken for the whole of the IDP population to ensure that the durable
solutions envisaged were voluntary. In all 99 721 extremely vulnerable
IDPs received food aid until July 2010 when the general food distribution
programme was terminated as planned.

Regional action in the Horn of Africa — Disaster
preparedness

At the beginning of the year, about 12 million people
living in the arid and semi-arid lands (ASAL) of the Horn of Africa were in the
initial phase of recovery from significant humanitarian needs, caused not only
by the severe drought of 2009, but mostly by continuously eroded coping
capacities as a result of recurrent drought exposure, deficient development and
the inadequacy of disaster risk reduction policies and strategies, among other
aspects. The population living in arid areas relies mostly on subsistence
livestock keeping and/or agro-pastoralism and depends on the use of existing
natural resources and/or the ability to move with their herds to areas with
more water and better pasture. The effects of climate change — rising
temperatures and increasingly erratic rainfall — have a serious impact on their
livelihoods. The combination of restricted access to natural resources,
inadequate resource management and a rise in the population in most of the
region has increased the competition for scare resources and exacerbated
resources-based conflicts. High levels of malnutrition in children, above WHO
emergency thresholds, prevailed in many parts of the arid lands throughout the
year and significant numbers of people remained food-aid dependent.

Facing the above context, in 2010 DG ECHO continued to
support operations aimed at reducing the impact of disasters (mainly droughts)
on the vulnerable populations inhabiting the ASAL of the Horn of Africa. A € 20
million Drought Cycle Management decision was adopted in mid-2010 to support
appropriate preparedness and mitigation measures, with the aim of reducing the
vulnerability of the population living in arid areas to the effects of drought.
The pilot disaster risk reduction (DRR) operations, supported within this
framework, are meant to strengthen the coping capacities of the vulnerable
communities, but also to pave the way for development stakeholders to embrace
effective strategies for reducing the negative impacts of drought, based on
best practices and lessons learnt from humanitarian actions.

Since 2008, the Commission has supported drought
preparedness operations in the Horn of Africa region (mainly Ethiopia, Kenya,
Uganda, Somalia and Djibouti) with a total of € 60 million, pursuing
the objective of preparing vulnerable — mostly pastoralist and semi-pastoralist
— populations for droughts, which recurrently plague the ASAL. Activities
supported in 2010 were kept in line with the Drought Cycle Management approach,
promoting community-based preparedness and disaster risk management fitting
with the added value of DG ECHO’s involvement (focus on the most vulnerable
people, support to humanitarian partners). Up to 12 million pastoralists
and/or agro-pastoralists were targeted — directly and indirectly — by
DG ECHO disaster/drought risk reduction funding in the Horn of Africa
spread over 18 months (July 2010-December 2011).

Poor security and limited access to target populations
constrained the implementation of some activities in 2010. Some security
constraints were encountered in Ethiopia’s Southern and Ogaden regions, in
North-Eastern Kenya and in the Karamoja region of Uganda, requiring
DG ECHO to choose very carefully the places and types of intervention it
could support for implementing DRR activities.

DG ECHO (in cooperation with other EU instruments)
continued during the year to work towards setting the conditions for the pilot
projects to be scaled up appropriately, as well as assuring their
sustainability. The involvement of partners such as the FAO and the UN ISDR, as
well as NGOs pursuing their efforts in terms of awareness and advocacy for DRR
in the Horn of Africa, was essential in this respect, as these partners are
working in both humanitarian and development contexts. The DRR actions
contributed also to improving the quality and adequacy of the humanitarian
response, through sharing of practices and lessons learnt in drought cycle
management, as seen by the positive proactiveness of the humanitarian
stakeholders in the initial response to the deterioration of the drought
situation in the Horn of Africa towards the end of 2010.

3.3.3. 
West Africa

West Africa is one of
the poorest and most underdeveloped regions in the world. Three quarters of the
population live in rural areas and rely mainly on subsistence agriculture. Food
production in the Sahel still relies mainly on erratic rainfall and livestock
is reared in harsh environmental conditions aggravated by climate change
(droughts, floods).

Sahel and coastal
States

A total of 58 million
people live in five Sahel countries (Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania and
Niger). Over 14 % of the 1 524 000 children under five years of
age in these countries are considered to be at risk of acute malnutrition. Of
these, over 250 000 children are considered to suffer from severe acute
malnutrition (SAM) and are thus in an immediate life-threatening situation.

In 2010, with a budget
of € 43 million, the principal objective of DG ECHO’s strategy was to
respond to the major food crisis threatening the region as a result of the poor
harvests following the erratic rains during the 2009/2010 agricultural season
and to achieve a sustainable reduction in acute malnutrition and in infant and
maternal mortality rates.

Lessons learned from
the 2005 nutritional crises in Niger and Mali were very important in providing
indicators for a road map to deal with acute under-nutrition in the Sahel.
Particular efforts have been made to avoid stand-alone humanitarian feeding
centres and to encourage the integration of humanitarian action into the
national health system and local structures.

Experience during the
year demonstrated that progress has been made in increasing the involvement of
governments and development donors in the fight against malnutrition. Current systems
are not able to cope with the shock of a large-scale additional crisis and
humanitarian aid is still necessary.

DG ECHO’s Sahel
strategy is built around the LRRD objective of positioning food and nutrition
security at the centre of government policies and development aid programming.
In 2010, the Commission funded operations in response to acute levels of
malnutrition and to help those affected by the food crisis. During the year,
funding in the five countries of the Sahel supported direct treatment of more
than 300 000 children for acute malnutrition with 11 million other
beneficiaries helped through food-related assistance.

DG ECHO successfully
spearheaded the implementation of routine rapid nutrition surveys using the
SMART methodology to improve access to reliable baseline information. This has
now become a standard tool in West Africa. DG ECHO has continued to support
Household Economy Analysis (HEA) in the region.

In addition to the
funds allocated to the fight against malnutrition, DG ECHO adopted an emergency
decision (€ 2 million) in July in response to the severe floods in Burkina
Faso which caused massive damage to homes and rural infrastructure, and a
further emergency decision allowed DG ECHO to contribute to the needs of over
400 000 people affected by the floods in Benin (€ 1.55 million).

Ivory Coast

With the current
post-electoral crisis since November 2010, ethnic resentment and violence
resumed very quickly in this area and led to large-scale population
displacement (some 16 000 persons fled the ongoing fighting in the western
part of Ivory Coast).

Whereas the political
situation is at a stalemate, food and commodities prices rose sharply and
access to food for the vulnerable populations is becoming hampered. Protection
of civilians has become a major concern. An emergency decision allocating € 5
million to aid for the victims of the crisis was approved in December.

The security situation
for international humanitarian workers has deteriorated, with regular
harassment from supporters of former President Gbagbo. Withdrawal of
non-essential staff has weakened the capacity of the humanitarian community to
respond to the crisis in the country. Many of DG ECHO’s humanitarian partners
are sending emergency assessment teams in early 2011 to carry out needs
assessments and design an appropriate response.

Liberia

Since the end of the
conflict in Liberia, humanitarian needs in the country have evolved greatly.
Major efforts have been made to improve access to basic services and to provide
support to restore livelihoods. However, significant challenges remain:
continued substitution by aid agencies and lack of qualified human resources
still constitute the main feature of the public sector. The situation in the
water and sanitation sector has improved, but a lot remains to be done in
numerous rural communities as well as in urban areas, especially Monrovia,
where regular cholera outbreaks occur; finally, food insecurity is still
prevalent in numerous counties although efforts have been made to improve the
situation.

In addition, since
November 2010, the government and aid agencies have had to respond to a new
caseload of Ivorian refugees seeking asylum in the remote eastern part of
Liberia. Over 25 000 refugees are in need of multi-sector assistance.

In 2010, the focus was
partly on continuing to support livelihoods at community level through food
assistance and water and sanitation operations. In the health sector, the
objective was to continue providing support, including a malnutrition project
in Monrovia, and to attempt to secure the basis for a proper handover of DG
ECHO’s support. € 9.95 million was allocated to support vulnerable
Liberian populations in 2010.

Despite difficulties
encountered in the field due to the lack of adequate government structures,
some significant progress has been made: the EDF will as a priority take over
the funding of previous DG ECHO-supported operations in the health sector in
early 2011 and the nutrition programme will be integrated into Ministry of
Health structures. Creation of a National Water Resource and Sanitation Board
in 2010 makes it possible to start a real LRRD process in this sector.

Sierra Leone

Despite two successful elections since the end of the civil
war in 2001, Sierra Leone still faces major challenges in development and good
governance. Progress in rehabilitating the economy and building up basic health
and education services has been slow. Access to healthcare in Sierra Leone has
been constrained by a complex mix of factors, including limited availability of
staff and drugs, traditional beliefs, lack of transport and affordability. The
authorities have a limited capacity to deal with health problems, resulting in
one of the highest maternal mortality ratios in the world and an infant under
five mortality rate of 194/1 000 live births.

In order to address the
high mortality in the vulnerable population, free access to primary healthcare
for children under five, pregnant women and lactating mothers was introduced on
27 April by the government. But the regular free provision of essential drugs
to the vulnerable population (children under five and pregnant and lactating
mothers) will be delayed until after early 2011. In the meantime the rapid increase in the number of treated
children for malnutrition had serious implications for the supply and funding
of ready-to-use-therapeutic feeding (RUTF). DG ECHO therefore committed € 6.6
million from Sierra Leone’s 10th EDF allocation to support the provision of essential drugs and therapeutic
feeding in an emergency mode.

3.3.4. 
Southern Africa, Indian
Ocean

The total amount of
funding for this region in 2010 was € 31.7 million.

Malawi

In 2010, DG ECHO provided funding to the tune of € 1.5
million from EDF funds to support an emergency mass measles vaccination
campaign with the intention of containing and controlling a serious epidemic
outbreak of the disease in the south and centre of the country. By the time
emergency operations ended in October, Commission funding had supported the
vaccination of more than 1 250 000 children between the ages of 6
months and 15 years, as well as the treatment of thousands of cases.

Zambia

In the light of the continued stabilisation of the conflict
in the south-east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, DG ECHO provided € 1.2
million from EDF funds in 2010 to continue its support for the voluntary
repatriation of Congolese refugees from camps in Zambia. This final phase saw a
further 7 000 refugees repatriated.

Zimbabwe

The general objective in 2010 was to mitigate the effects
of socio-economic breakdown on the deteriorating situation of vulnerable groups
and contribute to the delivery of basic social services to the population. In
January, an ad hoc decision was adopted in order to contribute € 2 million
(EDF funds) to the procurement and distribution of essential medicines and
medical supplies. The early part of the year was marked by a huge measles
epidemic, which triggered the adoption in April of an emergency decision
allocating € 1 million to support a mass vaccination campaign.
Humanitarian operations were further funded in the areas of health, water and
sanitation (following an integrated public health approach) and emergency
household food security and livelihoods. All the activities included HIV/AIDS
prevention components. An amount of € 15 million was made available for
funding such operations. In October, an inter-service mission was carried out
to identify the third phase of a short-term strategy of support, focusing on
health, education, food security and governance, and overall on the LRRD
approach.

Regional action
in southern Africa — DIPECHO

A second Disaster Preparedness (DIPECHO) Action Plan for
south-east Africa and the south-west Indian Ocean was launched in 2010 for an
amount of € 6 million funded from the Disaster preparedness budget line. A
total of 17 grants are being implemented over an 18-month period in the
Comoros, Madagascar, Malawi and Mozambique. The actions aim to increase
resilience and decrease the vulnerability of local communities and institutions
by supporting strategies that enhance their capacities and enable them to
better prepare for, mitigate and respond adequately to natural disasters. The
areas chosen for this second action plan are among the most vulnerable in the
region to recurring natural disasters.

In view of the initial lessons learned from DIPECHO
operations during the implementation of the first Action Plan, it was decided
to make available an amount of € 5 million from the main humanitarian
aid budget line in order to support complementary and parallel pilot food
security operations focusing on disaster risk reduction. Actions under this
innovative approach commenced in Madagascar, Malawi and Mozambique in August,
with first indications pointing to wholehearted enthusiasm of the beneficiary
communities and successful outcomes.

3.4. 
Middle East and Mediterranean

DG ECHO continued to be involved in preserving the dignity
of its beneficiaries in the Middle East and Mediterranean region in 2010. Some
of the longest running humanitarian crises in the world persist in this region,
including the plight of the Sahrawi refugees in Algeria, living in camps in the
Sahara desert under extremely harsh conditions.

Palestinian
population in the occupied Palestinian territory and Lebanon

The Israeli military
operation against the Flotilla sailing to Gaza in May 2010 and the
international uproar that it caused led to the Israeli Government’s decision on
20 June to loosen up the access regime of the Gaza Strip. However, changes on
the ground in terms of access (humanitarian and commercial) have been very
limited. The announcement in December by the Israeli Government of new measures
to facilitate exports out of Gaza was a welcome development, but at the end of
the year levels of exports were still far below pre-blockade levels.

The living conditions
of the Gaza population have severely deteriorated since the blockade was
imposed by the Israeli authorities after the Hamas’s coup against Fatah in the
Gaza Strip in June 2007. In 2010, the blockade continued to paralyse the
private sector and to drive many Palestinians into unemployment and poverty. It
also continued to prevent urgently needed reconstruction work from progressing
and to hamper the economic recovery which was crucial after the Israeli
military offensive ‘Cast Lead’ ending in January 2009.

In the West Bank,
the burden of the Separation Barrier and of the 500 physical obstacles
seriously impeding the movement of the Palestinian population has been
compounded by increasing settler violence. The Israeli decision not to extend
the partial and temporary moratorium on the construction of settlements has
further aggravated Palestinians’ already dire living situation. In Area C of
the West Bank, more than 350 structures were demolished by the Israeli
authorities, causing the displacement of about 500 people, including around 250
children.

Restrictions on freedom of movement imposed by Israeli
authorities have continued to impact the lives of Palestinians: economic growth
is still impaired, and people’s access to education, employment, healthcare and
other services is still heavily disrupted. At the same time, settlers’
violence, confiscation of land, forced evictions, house demolitions and
displacements went on uninterrupted in 2010. Humanitarian aid in these areas
focuses on basic needs such as food assistance, water supply, health and
sanitation, as well as protection and psychosocial activities.

In 2010, evictions and
house demolitions were a growing concern for Palestinian communities living in East
Jerusalem and more and more
Palestinian families run the risk of displacement or eviction.

Living conditions for most Palestinian refugees in Lebanon
are very precarious. With two thirds of them living in UNRWA camps or unofficial
gatherings scattered across the country, they have limited access to basic
services. Palestinian refugees remain highly dependent on external assistance
for the provision of healthcare, and humanitarian food assistance in the Nahr
El Bared Camp, where the entire population has been displaced, is still an
acute need.

The Commission provided € 58 million for
humanitarian operations benefiting Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian
territory and in Lebanon.

A total of € 51 million was devoted to
operations in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. 62 % of the
response directly supported the population of Gaza. In the protection sector,
the Commission paid particular attention to the prevention of violations of
international humanitarian law. The working environment in both the Gaza Strip
and the West Bank, where restricted access continues to shrink humanitarian
space, remains volatile. In the occupied Palestinian territory, close and
effective coordination was maintained with other donors to ensure that humanitarian
assistance and other programmes complement each other, in particular Pegase.

For Palestinian refugees in Lebanon (€ 7
million), a significant part of the EU humanitarian aid supported the Nahr El
Bard population through in-cash or in-kind food assistance, rental subsidies
and shelter rehabilitation activities.

Iraqi crisis

Since the 2003 war,
Iraq has been faced with a dire security situation characterised by sectarian
violence and ongoing asymmetric warfare, particularly after the attack on the
Holy Shrine at Samara in February 2006. However, since the middle of 2007, with
the military surge of the Multi-National Force Iraq (MNF-I) against insurgents
and militias (Sadr city in April-May 2008, Dyala governorate in July-August),
the number of violent incidents in Iraq has fallen.

The total number of
Iraqi civilians and security force personnel killed in violence in 2010 was
higher than the previous year. A total of 3 605 Iraqi civilians, police
and army personnel were killed last year — 124 more than the 3 481 who
were killed in 2009. However, violence in both years was still far lower than
in the past.

Nevertheless, Iraq
remains a very dangerous country where civilians are killed on a daily basis.
Humanitarian access is of prime concern as some areas remain inaccessible due
to continued violence. The neighbouring countries, Syria and Jordan, are
struggling to cope with a high number of refugees: 139 000
UNHCR-registered in Syria and 31 000 in Jordan as of October, and an
unknown number of unregistered refugees.

In 2010, DG ECHO
provided humanitarian assistance to the vulnerable population of Iraq and to
the Iraqi refugees living in neighbouring countries for an amount of € 18
million. The Decision included a significant protection component as well as
activities in the fields of health and psychosocial support, water and
sanitation and direct assistance (cash, non-food items — NFIs). The strategy
followed recommendations made by an external evaluation conducted at the end of
2009.

The most vulnerable
groups, especially the internally displaced in Iraq, cannot be easily reached
by humanitarian assistance. Massive displacements do not take place any more in
Iraq and the few displacements are due to attacks targeting minorities. Insecurity has limited the population’s mobility
and access to basic services and has severely damaged public infrastructure.
Reconstruction efforts, although substantial, are severely hindered by continued
violence resulting in high levels
of unemployment, a steady decline of basic services and a significant
deterioration of the health and education sectors.

Coordination with other donors remains good, with regular
meetings between DG ECHO and the Member States and the United States in Amman
and Damascus, while coordination in Iraq is limited by the security issue.

Yemen

The limited resources
of Yemen, one of the poorest countries in the Arab world, have been stretched
by the conflict with the Al Houthi movement in the north, the continuous influx
of refugees from the Horn of Africa, the disturbances in the south, the fight
against terrorism and growing socio-economic difficulties.

According to the UNHCR,
about 200 000 people were registered as displaced persons following the
clashes in the north at the end of the year. However, the total affected
population could reach one million. At the same period of time, following the
large migration flows during the year, the number of refugees reached 250 000
persons, all in need of humanitarian aid. In addition, the country suffers from
a high level of malnutrition which undermines the survival of young children.
The 2011 OCHA consolidated appeal was launched for a total amount of $ 225
million, aiming mainly to fund operations in the food and nutrition sectors for
the IDPs and the refugee population.

The Commission adopted
a financial decision of € 10 million. 85 % of this amount was used
for operations in Northern Yemen in the following sectors: water supply,
sanitation and hygiene (WASH), food distribution, primary health service and
coordination, the rest having been allocated for supporting urban and camp
refugees in the Southern part of the country. Work in Northern Yemen is still
hampered by insecurity and the recurrent difficulty in gaining access to areas
under the control of the Al Houthis in the North. A recent mission by
Commissioner Georgieva and UNHCR High Commissioner Guterres addressed the
access problem and opened a window of opportunity, with the Houthis signing a
declaration on humanitarian access as requested by the mission.

DG ECHO has funded OCHA coordination activities in order to
improve the needs analysis and the efficiency of the aid provided and to
advocate the mobilisation of additional funding and access to all the
population affected by the different conflicts. A risk management component has
also been supported to enhance humanitarian NGO security.

Sahrawi refugees
(Algeria)

Since 1975, tens of
thousands of Sahrawi refugees have been hosted by Algeria in camps situated in
the South-Western region of Tindouf. The living conditions of the Sahrawi
refugees, who have been living in these camps for more than 30 years, are
extremely difficult. Refugees depend completely on humanitarian aid to meet
their basic needs: food, health, water/sanitation, shelter, hygiene and
education.

According
to the needs identified by the World Food Programme (WFP), 125 000 basic
food rations equivalent to 2 100 kcal/ration/day need to be provided to
the refugees each month. Given the arid environment of the Sahrawi camps, water
is the refugees’ main need. It is supplied through wells and boreholes, and
treated, stored and distributed through water trucks and a tube distribution
network connected to tap stands. The immediate objective is to guarantee 15
litres per day per person. The tube distribution network needs to be expanded
as the limitations of the water trucking system are numerous: irregularity of
water supply, especially in summer, due to the high maintenance requirements of
the tanker trucks, which are old and in bad condition; insufficiency of the
quantity of water supplied; risk of contamination of the water during transport
and storage even though the water quality is adequate at source.

Sanitation is a key
concern, particularly in communal facilities such as schools and health
centres. The situation varies from one facility to the other, with some schools
having no functioning latrines and others having latrines in need of
rehabilitation and maintenance.

The health system,
which is composed of dispensaries and regional hospitals, has two weaknesses:
(1) an ongoing lack of resources and a dependency on international aid for the
supply of consumables, drugs and vaccines; (2) structural problems inherent in
running a health system, such as difficulties in keeping qualified staff
(particularly doctors and nurses). Because of climate conditions, particularly
sand storms, tents have a limited lifespan of approximately five years (if they
are good quality), and must therefore be regularly replaced. There is also a
need for new tents for newly formed families.

The bulk of the
operations funded by the 2009 financing decisions were implemented in 2010.
These concerned general food and fresh products distribution, new warehouse
building, water and sanitation actions, distribution of hygiene kits, provision
of essential drugs and medical waste management.

Both on the ground and
at headquarters, the Commission liaises very closely with other donors,
particularly the Spanish, Italian, Swiss and Swedish development agencies, and
the UN agencies. This involves examining the overall strategy, sector
priorities and funding by the various partners. There is also coordination by
sector on the ground to improve consistency and to avoid overlapping.

3.5. 
Caucasus

In 2010, DG ECHO
managed a total of € 2 million for humanitarian operations in Chechnya.

The armed conflicts in
Chechnya in 1994-96 and 1999-2001 left thousands of civilians killed, hundreds
of thousands wounded, over 270 000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) in
neighbouring republics, over 100 000 refugees abroad, towns and villages
levelled to the ground and the socio-economic infrastructure completely
destroyed. Even if it is difficult to obtain exact figures, it is estimated
that there are still some 30 000 IDPs in Chechnya, 8 000 IDPs in
Ingushetia, 3 800 IDPs in Dagestan and 1 300 refugees in Azerbaijan.
In addition, the number of war-affected vulnerable households within Chechnya
who are still homeless and waiting for assistance to rebuild their houses
stands at around 20 000.

All humanitarian needs,
except those related to protection, are now covered. With a budget of € 2
million, the EU humanitarian operation focused on the protection needs of the
vulnerable population, including IDPs and returnees. It encompassed livelihood
support and temporary shelter activities when it was deemed necessary to
complement the protection activities.

The situation remains tense, and the number of violent
incidents continued to rise in 2010.

3.6. 
Asia

In 2010, humanitarian
and food assistance operations were funded in 20 countries in Asia, for a total
of € 281 million, representing 25 % of the total budget managed by DG
ECHO.

EU humanitarian
assistance was provided and implemented in the following regions:

3.6.1. 
Central and South-West Asia

DG ECHO has been
present in Central Asia since 1993, initially to provide assistance in the wake
of the civil war in Tajikistan and later to respond to natural disasters and
support disaster preparedness projects through DIPECHO. Central Asia is
politically volatile and is prone to numerous types of natural disasters including
floods, landslides and mudslides, drought, earthquakes and avalanches and
severe floods.

In Afghanistan and
Pakistan, the humanitarian crises are twofold: on the one hand, the ‘Afghan’
crisis affects not only Afghanistan but also Iran and Pakistan, where almost
four million Afghan refugees are still living; on the other hand, Pakistan is
affected by a twin-faceted crisis with still more than 1.2 million people
displaced by the conflict and almost 20 million affected by major flooding as
from July 2010. In Afghanistan the deterioration in security and the
consequences of extensive military operations, aggravated by years of drought,
increasing flooding and recurrent small-scale disasters such as earthquakes,
caused a sharp increase in humanitarian needs in 2010 which is likely to
continue this year with more than 335 000 IDPs. In Pakistan, during the
summer of 2010, an area of the country stretching from the Chinese border in
the north to the Arabian Sea in the south was hit by the worst floods in living
memory, leaving millions of people in dire need of humanitarian assistance.
Both countries are very prone to natural disasters.

Afghanistan (including Afghan refugees in Pakistan and
Iran)

The main groups with substantial humanitarian needs in 2010
were the over 335 000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) within
Afghanistan affected by the conflict, as well as refugees returning from
Pakistan and Iran. Host communities receiving these returnees are also
beneficiaries of the programmes. The highly food-insecure population affected
by recurrent natural disasters, including many years of drought and the recent
severe flooding in the north and east, have been benefiting from assistance
too. The needs of the returnees and IDPs included protection, transport and resettlement
support, plus food, shelter, and water/sanitation for the most vulnerable such
as female-headed households. Another significant area of humanitarian support
remains protection and food assistance for the most vulnerable population
affected by natural disasters.

The focus in 2010 was on assisting the IDPs and the return
of refugees and providing basic livelihood support for the most vulnerable
returnees and for their host communities. Vulnerable people affected by natural
disasters such as floods and earthquakes were also supported by DG ECHO in
2010.

Under its 2010 Global Plan, the EU provided funding
totalling € 36 million, including € 25.4 million in support for
refugees and returnees, covering registration and transportation of refugees
from Pakistan and Iran to Afghanistan, support for reintegration plus aid for
the most vulnerable of the remaining refugees in both countries. Protection
assistance was provided, among others through the UNHCR and the ICRC in line
with their respective protection mandates. Shelter, together with
water/sanitation, was the other most important area of activity within
Afghanistan. Responses to localised natural disasters were supported in
northern and eastern regions of the country. Given the constraints of security
and geography, support for security advisory services as well as coordination
for aid agencies in Afghanistan and for a subsidised humanitarian flight
service was maintained at a level of € 4.6 million. A total of € 6 million
in food assistance was allocated to Afghanistan in order to respond to the food
insecurity linked to years of recurrent drought followed by serious flooding in
2009 and 2010.

Along with various other actors, the Commission continued
to advocate the need to respect basic humanitarian principles and international
humanitarian law. The overall security situation in Afghanistan remains
volatile and extremely unpredictable. Abductions of humanitarian aid workers
have increased over the last few years. This seriously restricts humanitarian
access. DG ECHO’s 2010 portfolio of projects was selected on that basis.
Projects funded must meet conditions where implementation and monitoring of
activities can be performed by partners and by DG ECHO.

Pakistan

Three humanitarian
challenges confronted Pakistan in 2010: devastating floods; the needs of the
conflict-affected population — the displaced, returnees and those remaining in
their areas of origin; and the remaining Afghan refugees.

During the summer of
2010 the country was hit by unprecedented floods, the worst in living memory in
Pakistan. Around 18 million people were affected, 1.7 million homes damaged or
destroyed, and 1 985 people killed[31]. The agricultural
heartland of the country was devastated and there was very significant damage
to public and private infrastructure.

At the same time,
displacement of conflict-affected civilians continued throughout 2010. The
fighting between militant groups and Pakistan’s security forces, which started
in 2007, continued to affect Baluchistan, the Federally Administered Tribal
Areas (FATA) and Khyber Pahtunkhwa Province (KPK[32]). The Pakistani
Army military operations triggered displacements in the FATA. In addition,
pockets of resistance and instability remained in Buner, Swat, Upper and Lower
Dir in KPK despite the heavy military presence. Night-time curfews and military
checkpoints were still in place to some degree. Around 1.2 million civilians in
conflict areas are affected.

Pakistan continues to
host a sizeable population of Afghan refugees, despite the considerable return
movement to Afghanistan over the last 10 years.

In 2010, the Commission
allocated € 150 million in relief assistance to respond to immediate and
basic needs of the population affected by the floods and by the internal
conflict (IDPs, returnees). Part of the population in the North was affected by
both disasters. This included: (1) support for emergency food assistance,
managed by several actors including INGOs and the WFP, (2) support for the
ICRC’s protection activities and distribution of food and other essentials
(NFIs) to IDPs, returnees and the flood-affected population; (3) support for
the provision of protection, shelter and NFIs to flood- and conflict-affected
IDPs by the UNHCR and shelter by the IOM; (4) provision of healthcare by
medical INGOs and the WHO and its partners; (5) support for INGO partners to
provide water, sanitation and hygiene. Support for the coordination of
humanitarian assistance was channelled through UNOCHA and for logistics through
the WFP. Awareness-raising on mine risks was also channelled through some very
specialised INGOs. Disaster risk reduction was encouraged in the flood
response.

Throughout the year,
the Commission, along with various other actors, continued to advocate the need
to respect basic humanitarian principles and international humanitarian law, in
particular for humanitarian space and access for humanitarian workers,
protection of civilians, voluntary and safe return for IDPs and the right to
assistance based on needs rather than officially vetted registration status.
Access to some areas was difficult and sometimes not possible for expatriates.
The overall security situation in Pakistan remained volatile and extremely
unpredictable. Humanitarian aid workers face serious risks to their lives and
have also paid a big price in the form of stress.

Kyrgyzstan

The inter-ethnic violence that erupted in Kyrgyzstan in
June triggered a rapid emergency response (€ 5 million) to assist some 300 000
internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Kyrgyzstan and some 75 000 refugees
who had fled to Uzbekistan. Commissioner
Georgieva visited the country on 3 and 4 July to discuss the situation with the
provisional government and to get a first-hand view of the humanitarian needs
in the South. As the refugees
returned home within weeks after the conflict, humanitarian efforts have
concentrated on providing protection and emergency aid as well as transitional
shelter to returnees and IDPs in the south of Kyrgyzstan.

In Kyrgyzstan, DG ECHO
allocated emergency aid to the WFP for distributing food rations, to the ICRC
for protection and distribution of food rations, household items and cash for
work activities, to MSF-Suisse for providing free medical care, to ACTED for
providing free legal aid and cash for work, and to the UNHCR for providing
shelter, clothes and other essential non-food items. An ECHO field mission in
December confirmed that needs (shelter, food, protection, health) are
adequately covered for now. The EU continues to monitor the situation closely
and is ready to assist should there be a need for further humanitarian aid to
the civilian population. In responding to the
crisis, maps developed under the Fifth DIPECHO for disaster preparedness were
extensively used for all humanitarian operations by both NGOs and UN agencies.

Regional action in Central Asia — DIPECHO

DG ECHO continues to support disaster preparedness in
Central Asia through the Sixth DIPECHO Action Plan (€ 7.295 million). The
ECHO office in Tajikistan coordinates with the EU delegations and actively
participates in meetings with DIPECHO partners.

Central Asia is particularly exposed to natural disasters
such as landslides, avalanches, floods, earthquakes, drought and melting
glaciers. Moreover, the Centre for Research on the Epidemic of Disasters (CRED)
records that nearly 3 million people were affected by hydro-meteorological
disasters in Tajikistan in 2008.

The geographic nature of the region (developing mountain
ranges combined with frequent earthquakes), and the fact that a large part of
its territory is covered by mountains, expose the region to a number of
potential natural disasters. Furthermore, climate change has become an
important factor in the sharp increase in the occurrence of small- and
medium-scale disasters. The tendency of the population to settle in valleys and
along riverbanks also makes them more vulnerable to disasters such as floods,
mudflows and landslides.

In addition, the construction of very large infrastructure
(dams), the presence of polluting industries and radioactive waste dumped in
the region all increase the risk of and vulnerability to disaster. These
factors highlight the need to alert local authorities and communities to the
risks of potential industrial and natural disasters.

Following the Hyogo Framework for Action launched at the
World Disaster Reduction Conference in Kobe in January 2005, the Central Asian
region drafted its Disaster Reduction Strategic Framework. This has been done
with the support of the United Nations’ International Strategy for Disaster
Reduction (UNISDR), now present in the region. While Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and
Kyrgyzstan have already adopted their National Disaster Reduction plans,
Tajikistan and Turkmenistan are still in the preparation process.

The strategic logic of the Sixth DIPECHO Action Plan (€ 7.3
million) follows on from the previous action plans, with a focus on
multi-country and regional operations consistent with the Priorities for Action
identified in the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 (HFA): ‘Building the
Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters’. Its aim is to support
the five Central Asian countries (Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan,
Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan) in the implementation of their action plan.
Afghanistan is also covered with a cross-border pilot action.

In 2010 the DIPECHO programme addressed both the risks of
large-scale disasters and the expected impact of accumulated recurrent small-
and medium-scale natural events on the most vulnerable populations. DG ECHO
continued to reach national actors and communities at risk through partner
NGOs, the Red Cross family and international organisations.

3.6.2. 
Central South Asia

The region is marked by
instability and conflicts but is also prone to disasters. Access for partners
remains restricted (Sri Lanka) or impossible, preventing assistance from
reaching beneficiaries (India).

Bangladesh

Bangladesh, the world’s
most densely populated country, is highly vulnerable to natural disasters, in
particular floods, cyclones and earthquakes, a vulnerability exacerbated by
climate change. The year 2010 was no exception for Bangladeshi people, who had
to face two ongoing natural disasters, one new natural disaster and a
protracted crisis.

Cyclone Aila had hit the south-western coast of the country
on 25 May 2009, affecting over 4 million people and displacing over 1 million.
As a result of insufficient embankment repair/reconstruction before the 2010
monsoon, over 100 000 people spent the year stranded on embankments, with
huge needs in terms of access to water and sanitation, food security and
livelihood opportunities. Consequently, DG ECHO allocated a further € 8
million to these victims and, wherever the situation allowed, restoration of
livelihood and reconstruction of shelters was initiated.

Food insecurity in the
Chittagong Hill Tracts is still heavily impacted by the rodent crisis, i.e. an
explosion of the rodent population causing extensive damage to very fragile
subsistence farming systems. DG ECHO funded food assistance to the most
vulnerable victims of this crisis.

In April 2010, a flash flood submerged the majority of
crops in the six north-eastern districts of Bangladesh, known as the Haor, just
a few weeks before the annual rice harvest was due to commence, in a region
highly dependent on this single annual crop. In all 1.7 million people have
been severely affected by the disaster and, with insufficient coping capacities
and no alternative subsistence means, are facing an acute crisis which has
serious detrimental impact on their nutritional status. DG ECHO support to
victims of the Haor flash floods took place in two steps. A first allocation (€ 3
million) was made available to fill the food gap and respond to the acute needs
identified. In the light of the deteriorating situation and the absence of
other donors, extra funding (€ 7 million) was decided, with the aim of
covering additional severely affected people during the lean season, to avoid
further deterioration of their food security situation until the next paddy
harvest is due.

The protracted crisis
affecting the unregistered Rohingya refugees worsened during 2010, as a result
of humanitarian access restrictions. The situation is directly impacting the
humanitarian situation of undocumented refugees through a sharp increase in the
malnutrition rate, well above emergency thresholds. Despite access problems,
support to the two unofficial settlements continued in 2010, albeit at a lower
pace, and provided basic humanitarian assistance (healthcare, therapeutic
feeding, safe water and sanitary conditions, protection and security) to
unregistered Rohingyas settled in these camps. Due to restricted humanitarian
access, most of the programmes had to be downgraded and focused on pure
life-saving activities. A recent nutritional survey indicates that the
malnutrition rate in one of the unofficial settlements increased to an alarming
level during this period.

India

The conflict opposing
Maoist fighters (Naxals) and security forces intensified in 2010. Chhattisgarh,
in particular its southernmost district, is one of the worst affected areas and
the population (mainly tribal people and scheduled castes) are caught between
the conflicting parties. Some areas are totally inaccessible and in general the
region is acutely lacking in basic social services, as it is practically
impossible to hire doctors or teachers to work in such a risky environment.
Tens of thousands are displaced as a consequence of the fighting and this
number is increasing due to a recent escalation of hostilities. Several
independent reports point to continued serious human rights violations,
including the use of child soldiers. In 2010 some 74 000 people benefited
from curative and preventive basic healthcare services with DG ECHO’s financial
support, which amounted to € 1.4 million.

Continued violence in
Jammu and Kashmir remained a matter of serious concern, given its serious
humanitarian consequences for the civilian population. During the spring
and summer several popular demonstrations were organised to protest against the
killing of civilians by armed forces. These led to further clashes and more
victims, thus fuelling a cycle of violence that only abated in October. Access
to some of the victims was impossible at times and remains restricted. With DG
ECHO’s € 2 million assistance, approximately 28 500 people received
psychosocial support and protection, including children in orphanages and
specialised services for people living with disabilities.

The 2010 monsoon season
registered rainfall below average; some areas were affected by drought, while
serious flooding occurred in other places. DG ECHO constantly monitored the
situation, with particular attention to minorities and other marginalised
groups.

India is graduating out
of aid and therefore just a few donors remain active. In general DG ECHO
is the only external donor operating in the humanitarian contexts in which it
is active in India.

Nepal/Bhutan

The conflict opposing Maoist rebels and the Royal Army cost
13 000 lives and although it ended in 2006 the country still suffers from
its consequences, being marked by high volatility and frequent spates of
violence. The conflict isolated populations and disrupted trade and
agricultural activities; it destroyed water supply systems and communications
infrastructure. Health posts do not function properly and lack trained
personnel, hygiene, medicines and waste treatment equipment and systems. The
Nepalese authorities are still not able to provide basic services to remote
communities due to the unstable political situation. With Commission funding,
amounting to € 1.5 million, primary and reproductive healthcare was
extended to 100 000 people; 32 250 people benefited from water and
sanitation systems and 250 000 people from mine-related services.

At the end of 2010 there were still 73 000 Bhutanese
refugees of Nepali origin living in seven camps. These refugees are victims of
a forgotten crisis and have been living in these camps since 1992, accepted by neither Nepal nor Bhutan, and fully
dependent on external aid. In the absence of a political solution, the United
Sates and other countries have offered resettlement options and since 2008 more
than 40 000 refugees have been resettled. DG ECHO has been providing food
aid to the refugees remaining in the camps. In 2010 this assistance amounted to
€ 1.5 million.

DG ECHO’s assistance to the Bhutanese refugees is
supplemented with support from EuropeAid for the UNHCR’s camp management. The
resettlement programme brought fresh hopes for a possible solution. It is
expected that most refugees will opt for resettlement, but given the size of
the caseload it will take close to five years to complete the process. During
that time political efforts will be kept up to lobby for a solution for those
not able or willing to relocate, including return to Bhutan and the possibility
for others to settle legally in Nepal.

In 2010, more than 2.7 million people living in the mid-
and far-western hilly areas were still considered as food unsecure by the World
Food Programme. Among these people 471 600 were considered to be severely
or highly food unsecure. DG ECHO constantly monitors this situation.

Although there is no major risk for humanitarian staff,
some operations were delayed by blockades stemming from political instability.
Access to hilly areas, most affected by drought and floods, is very difficult
and some villages can only be reached by helicopter.

Sri Lanka

The humanitarian
situation in Sri Lanka evolved significantly in 2010. Returning some 300 000
IDPs to their places of origin ranked high on the agenda and was pursued
swiftly by the government of Sri Lanka and the wider aid community. To date, 75 %
of the IDPs have returned to their place of origin while the remainder continue
to live with host families or in IDP camps. The high level of contamination
with unexploded ordnance (UXO) and anti-personnel mines in the Vanni has
hampered the return process significantly.

The objectives set by
DG ECHO for 2010 sought to support the return process by supplying the unmet
needs of highly vulnerable returning individuals in terms of protection,
humanitarian demining, shelter, food assistance and health. With its budget (€ 10
million), the Commission stands out as one of the most engaged humanitarian aid
donors.

Specifically for
humanitarian demining, actions funded by the Commission in 2010 facilitated the
safe return of almost 30 000 former IDPs to their place of origin. As
humanitarian demining organisations predominantly hire locals for demining
activities, a secondary impact of this work is the employment opportunities
that these organisations offer, which help returnee families meet their needs
independently of external assistance. It is also an important means by which
returnees re-appropriate their place of origin, from which people had been
displaced for years, and in some cases decades.

An additional focus of
EC-funded actions in the areas of return has been multi-sector operations,
which included shelter, livelihood and food assistance components. Through
three NGO partners, DG ECHO was able to build transitional shelters and
provide livelihood support through food assistance to almost 40 000 people
in the areas of return. Another important area of activity has been health.
Through two DG ECHO partners, healthcare for persons with disabilities was
ensured, either through physiotherapy or by funding the construction of an
operating theatre that allowed complex surgeries to be performed.

Protection concerns
prevail, especially with a high proportion of returning families headed by women.
This factor, combined with the sustained military presence and the limited
income-generating activities available, has created a fragile situation where
the vulnerability of those already deemed most vulnerable is exacerbated
further. Throughout DG ECHO’s strategy in Sri Lanka, protection is a
guiding operational pillar. The EU funded the UNHCR for raising the awareness
of protection needs among a number of key stakeholders in the areas of return,
thus working towards improving the general protection environment. With a
number of humanitarian actors still present, and development activities on the
rise, coordination is key to ensure that aid is delivered effectively to those
most in need. Through the work of OCHA, DG ECHO has sought to ensure that
coordination arrangements remain in place as we enter a critical LRRD
transition phase.

The security situation has remained stable
since the end of the conflict and the main safety risk incurred by partners is
the prevalence of mines and UXO in the areas of return. Access for DG ECHO
partners remains restricted, although the general trend shows improvements.
There is also room for improvement in terms of coordination with development
actors.

3.6.3. 
South-East and East Asia

The region is one of the most disaster-prone in the world
and in 2010 numerous countries were, once again, severely affected by natural
disasters.

In October 2010 the Philippines were hit by typhoon Megi, which caused widespread
destruction in Luzon Island. At the same time, cyclone Giri made landfall in
Rakhine State in Burma/Myanmar, while in Vietnam and in the Philippines strong
rains caused widespread flooding with huge damage and a great number of
casualties in the Central and Southern Provinces. In response to these severe
climatic events, DG ECHO launched a regional operation. China and the DPRK were
also affected by floods in 2010, to which DG ECHO responded by contributing to
the IFRC Disaster Relief Emergency Fund.

Indonesia was hit by two main geological events. On 25
October, a 7.7 Richter scale magnitude earthquake struck the Mentawai islands,
off the western coast of Sumatra, triggering a tsunami. Only a few hours later,
Mount Merapi in Central Java erupted, triggering a mass evacuation. DG ECHO
responded promptly to both of these disasters.

In the Philippines, DG ECHO continued addressing the
humanitarian needs of people affected by the armed conflict in Mindanao. Assistance
was provided to displaced persons still living in evacuation centres, in
makeshift shelters and with host families. The IDP return process was also
supported.

Laos continued to face food shortages as a consequence of
the 2009 Ketsana floods and DG ECHO decided to support the provision of
rice to 100 000 people, thus bridging the gap until the next harvest.

Following an acute watery diarrhoea (AWD)/cholera outbreak
in Cambodia, Laos and the Burmese refugee camps in Thailand, a funding decision
was adopted for emergency measures to save lives and contain the outbreak.

In Burma/Myanmar the
humanitarian situation, especially in Northern Rakhine State and along the
eastern border, continued to be of concern and clashes between ethnic groups
and the Burmese army escalated after the elections in November, causing large
displacements into Thailand. Aung San Suu Kyi was finally released after 15
years under house arrest. It is uncertain how this event will impact the
political and humanitarian situation in the country.

In Mongolia the winter
of 2009-2010 was exceptionally cold and the country was affected by a disaster
known as ‘Dzud’, arising from continuous heavy snowfall combined with extreme
cold and preceded by dry summers, resulting in insufficient grazing pastures
and massive loss of livestock. As a third of the 2.7 million population of
Mongolia are nomadic herders who depend on livestock for a living, the
humanitarian impact was significant.

In 2010 the Seventh DIPECHO Action Plan for South-East Asia
was adopted with a budget of € 10 million allocated to Laos, Cambodia,
Vietnam, Burma/Myanmar, the Philippines, Indonesia, East Timor and Thailand
over the next two years to help communities prepare for disasters (see also
Section 3.9 on disaster preparedness activities).

Myanmar (Burma)

Myanmar (Burma) is
facing a protracted crisis due to the conflict between the Burmese army and
ethnic armed groups, giving rise to increasing political and military tensions.

In 2010 the
humanitarian situation in Northern Rakhine State remained a particular concern
as the Muslim Rohingya population (approx. 700 000 persons), living mostly
in three townships, are permanent victims of segregation, discrimination, abuse
and human rights violations by the authorities. Deprivation of citizenship has
served to justify arbitrary treatment and coercive measures. The situation is
politically rooted and has turned into an acute humanitarian situation. The
other area of concern to DG ECHO is Eastern Burma/Myanmar, where the
displacement of some 470 000 persons has created considerable humanitarian
needs. Ongoing military operations, compounded by the remoteness of the area,
leave the ethnic minority population vulnerable to threats and abuse.
Protection is a priority. Government policy to cut support to the ethnic armed
groups has worsened living conditions for the civilian population. Health,
water, sanitation, shelter and livelihoods are some of the sectors with major
needs.

In 2010 the Commission
continued to provide humanitarian assistance to vulnerable populations affected
by the conflict for a total amount of € 9.25 million. Activities focused
on the ethnic minorities living in the Eastern border areas and on the
stateless Rohingya population in Northern Rakhine State. Key sectors of
assistance included protection, food aid, nutrition, primary healthcare and
water and sanitation. Support for information and data management, through the
Myanmar Information Management Office (MIMU), was added as a new component.

Limited access is a
characteristic of almost all aid programmes in Myanmar. Despite government
constraints (visas, travel authorisations, etc.) programmes and activities can
still be implemented and direct access to the beneficiaries, although not
always permanent, is possible. Likewise, with lengthy administrative
preparations, programmes can be monitored. The main humanitarian agencies of
the UN system are present, as are the IOM and 63 INGOs.

Thailand

The conflict and the
poor economic situation in Myanmar have resulted in a huge influx of its
citizens into Thailand. An estimated three million Burmese reside in Thailand,
including approximately 140 000 ethnic Karen refugees living in nine
refugee camps along the Thai-Myanmar border. The Karen refugees still have
strong links with Myanmar and some of them are involved in the Karen Liberation
Army/Karen National Union (KNLA/KNU) political and military rebel movements.
Humanitarian needs in the refugee camps in Thailand relate to food security and
livelihood, water, sanitation, health, protection and finding sustainable
solutions. There is also a need to re-launch the refugee screening and
registration process. After decades of existence of the Burmese refugee camps a
different type of response and assistance is now required. Donors agree that it
is imperative to move from hand-outs towards sustainable solutions which
include livelihood alternatives. This transition is particularly important
because refugees have become totally aid-dependent after such a long period of
encampment. In this process, the Five-year Strategic Plan drawn up by the
Committee for the Coordination of Services to Displaced Persons in Thailand
(CCSDPT) and the UNHCR represents an important step forward. The Plan will
provide a basis for dialogue with the Thai Government on finding durable
solutions for the refuges by providing them with an alternative to expand their
self-reliance.

In 2010 DG ECHO
continued to support the gradual shift from humanitarian aid to the permanent
camps towards a livelihood and self-reliance approach, with other Commission
funding such as the AUP (Aid to Uprooted People) budget becoming increasingly
important. Nevertheless, DG ECHO remained one of the biggest donors to the
camps with an allocation of € 8 million for food aid, primary healthcare
and WASH activities.

Regular meetings are held at field level with the EU
Delegation in Bangkok and with other donors in Thailand supporting the Burmese
camps in order to discuss issues related to camp management, targeting and the
need to ensure that humanitarian principles are respected in the camps. In
December DG ECHO field staff took part in a Heads of Mission field visit to one
of the refugee camps.

Following the elections in Burma/Myanmar in November,
fighting along the border with Thailand increased and by the end of the year up
to 20 000 people had fled into Thailand, where they settled in temporary
sites under Thai authority or went into hiding. Most of these people went back
as the situation calmed down. The UNHCR played an important role in
coordinating the relief response to these new influxes.

The year saw some of the worst flooding in 30 years
affecting large parts of Thailand. Continuous
heavy rains in August caused floods affecting 922 villages in 16 provinces,
mostly in the rural, mountainous north and north-east of Thailand. Flooding was
also reported in some central and eastern provinces. Close to 1.5 million
people were affected. In response to the floods, the IFRC intervened to cover unmet humanitarian needs, targeting
10 000 vulnerable people living in evacuation centres, in inundated homes
and isolated by the floods. Emergency kits were provided for two months.

Cambodia, Laos
and Vietnam

Vietnam, one of the world’s most disaster-prone countries,
has over the years developed good coping mechanisms to prepare for and mitigate
the impact of natural hazards. Even so, local capacity can be exhausted when
disasters exceed their normal intensity. This was the case in October and
November, when strong rains caused widespread flooding with huge damage and a
great number of casualties in the Central and Southern Provinces of the
country. More than 2 million people were affected and almost 200 people died in
Ha Tinh, Quang Tri, Thua Thien Hue, Nghe An, Quang Binh, Phu Yen, Khanh Hoa and
Ninh Thuan. Tens of thousands of households had their food stocks and basic
assets severely depleted.

In Laos and Cambodia, the prevalence of major disasters is
considered medium to low, but it is the overall vulnerability of these
countries that create relatively high risks for communities when disasters
occur. Food insecurity is an endemic problem, particularly in Laos where the
humanitarian situation one year after the floods caused by the September 2009
Ketsana typhoon remains extremely precarious, particularly in the Southern
Provinces where rice crops in 2010 were severely affected. A UNICEF survey,
released in June, showed severe to critical global acute malnutrition rates in the
Ketsana-affected Southern Provinces. An epidemic of acute watery diarrhoea
(AWD)/cholera broke out in both countries in August/September, affecting more
severely the two bordering provinces of Attapeu and Rattanakiri with more than
2 200 cases reported and 42 deaths. In June an ad hoc financing decision
of € 1 million was adopted to help Ketsana-stricken populations in
the Southern Provinces of Laos to bridge the food gap until the next harvest.
The WFP was tasked to provide rice to almost 100 000 beneficiaries.

Following the AWD/cholera outbreak in Cambodia, Laos and
the refugee camps at the Thai border with Burma/Myanmar, a € 1 million
emergency funding decision was adopted for measures to save lives and contain
the outbreak. Two humanitarian operations were initiated with the objective of
contributing to improved hygiene and health conditions through the provision of
safe drinking water, sanitation and health measures and
education/awareness-raising activities.

Indonesia

In 2010, two main geological events hit Indonesia, causing
significant humanitarian needs. On 25 October, a 7.7 Richter scale magnitude
earthquake struck the Mentawai islands, off the western coast of Sumatra,
triggering a tsunami. Only a few hours later, Mount Merapi in Central Java
erupted, triggering a mass evacuation which intensified in the following days
as the volcanic activity continued.

The earthquake/tsunami in Mentawai killed 431 and displaced 15 000 people. The hot gas and ash from the volcano killed more
than 300 people and forced around 400 000 to evacuate their homes, making
it Merapi’s worst eruption in a century. In Mentawai, needs assessment and
relief activities were hindered for several days by adverse weather conditions
that caused access problems. Aid coordination then became a challenge, due to
the large number of relief organisations on the ground and difficult logistics.
In the Merapi area, the situation remained fluid for weeks, with new eruptions
causing further displacements and forced relocation of evacuation centres as
the danger zone expanded. Relief operations required continuous adjustments.

The humanitarian needs
caused by these massive displacements mostly related to emergency shelter,
water, food supplies, relief items, medical assistance and psychological
support. No official request for international assistance was made by
Indonesia, but various international donors offered support (totalling USD 5 322 084)
when the national coping capacity, already under strain due to climatic events,
appeared overstretched. On 27 October the Commission adopted a primary
emergency decision of € 1.5 million, which allowed five projects to be
funded in the areas of shelter, water and sanitation, basic necessities,
health, transport, communication and logistics, and including risk awareness
and disaster preparedness measures, providing assistance to some 40 000
beneficiaries.

Mongolia

The winter of 2009-2010 was exceptionally cold in Mongolia,
causing a significant number of people to freeze to death. The country
experienced a disaster known as ‘Dzud’, a phenomenon arising from continuous
heavy snowfall combined with extreme cold and preceded by dry summers,
resulting in insufficient grazing pastures and massive loss of livestock. As
one third of the 2.7 million population of Mongolia are nomadic herders who
depend entirely on livestock for a living, the impact was significant. In
January 2010 the Government of Mongolia appealed for international assistance,
which is coordinated by the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA),
together with the Ministries of Agriculture, Education and Health. By the end
of April, 15 of Mongolia’s 21 provinces, inhabited by 770 000 people, were
declared disaster zones, and another four provinces were seriously affected.
More than 7.8 million animals (mainly goats and sheep, but also horses, cows
and camels), representing 17 % of total numbers, had died in the space of
four months due to the cold and the lack of fodder. Over 500 000
inhabitants of the disaster zones were considered at risk of food insecurity.
In addition, thousands of people were forced to migrate to urban centres,
mainly to Ulaanbaatar (the capital), requiring assistance with water,
sanitation, health and livelihoods. Protection was required for the children of
some destitute herders, involved in illegal mining activities.

In May, an amount of € 2 million was allocated to
victims of the Dzud, to improve their food security, livelihood and health
status. Assistance was provided to 40 000 beneficiaries, including food
aid, fodder supplies/storage, animal husbandry training, support to
schoolchildren away from home, vocational training and social/health care for
urban migrants, basic relief items, hygiene, water and sanitation. Disaster
preparedness/risk reduction was mainstreamed into most activities.

The LRRD process is underway, as the Dzud is a recurrent
problem, linked to economic and social structures requiring long-term
strategies. Mongolia is a vast country, with few roads and an extreme climate,
so difficulties had to be overcome to gain access to beneficiaries.

Philippines

In the Philippines DG ECHO continued addressing the
humanitarian needs of people affected by the armed conflict in Mindanao. At the
end of 2009, about 300 000 people were still displaced as a result of
renewed clashes between the Government of the Philippines and the MILF (Moro
Islamic Liberation Front). In the first six months of 2010, the security
situation started to improve along with progress in the peace talks between the
parties, and with the ceasefire supervised by a Joint Coordinating Committee
for the Cessation of Hostilities and by an International Monitoring Team, under
Malaysian command.

Through an ad hoc decision allocating € 5 million
adopted in January, DG ECHO continued to provide assistance to displaced persons still
living in evacuation centres, in makeshift shelters and with host families, and
supported the IDP return process. DG ECHO
funded projects providing
integrated life-saving assistance (€ 2 million for shelter, health, water
and sanitation, coordination), food assistance and livelihood recovery (€ 3
million). At the end of 2010 the number of people still displaced (partly due
to clan-related violence) did not exceed 25 000, which confirmed the
relevance of phasing out humanitarian aid in favour of longer-term instruments.

In parallel, DG ECHO kept addressing the outstanding needs
generated by the devastating tropical storms and
typhoons of September/October 2009 (Ketsana, Parma, Mirinae), which had
affected 9 million people in the north and centre of the country, and whose
consequences on livelihoods were later compounded by the effects of El Niño. A
follow-up financing decision of € 4 million was adopted in June 2010,
funding projects covering the humanitarian needs related to shelter and
livelihoods and assisting over 200 000 vulnerable people.

Regional action
in South-East Asia

The start of the
typhoon season in South-East Asia was particularly destructive in 2010, causing
major humanitarian needs all over the region. In response to these adverse weather conditions affecting
the region, especially Burma (Myanmar), Vietnam and the Philippines, an
emergency decision allocating € 7 million was adopted.

On 18 October the Philippines were hit by category 5 typhoon Megi, which caused
widespread destruction in Luzon Island. The Commission funded relief projects
for a total of € 2.6 million out of the € 7 million allocated by the
decision. This operation aimed to address the gaps identified in the national
humanitarian response by supporting shelter rehabilitation and repair of water
and sanitation facilities for the most isolated communities (approximately 40 000
people), short-term food rations and non-food items, early recovery of
livelihoods and disaster preparedness measures through training of disaster
management officers in the use of life-saving communication equipment.

On 22 October, cyclone
Giri, a category 4 cyclone, struck the Rakhine coast of Burma/Myanmar. The
most affected areas were Myebon, Kyaukphyu, Pauktaw and Minbya townships. The
authorities confirmed 45 deaths and 260 000 people affected. According to
UNDP figures 102 000 people were made homeless and 20 380 houses were
destroyed. The allocation of € 3 million (out of the € 7 million) to
cyclone Giri-affected areas benefited 250 000 vulnerable people and
allowed the urgent distribution of food and non-food items, basic shelters,
primary healthcare and water and sanitation.

Torrential rains also affected Vietnam, bringing flooding and ensuing
landslides in five central provinces. The amount allocated (€ 1.4 million
out of the € 7 million total) addressed the urgent humanitarian needs of
over 100 000 persons in the central provinces of Vietnam in the sectors of
shelters, water and sanitation, non-food relief items and livelihood recovery.

Regional action in South-East Asia — DIPECHO

In terms of
natural hazards, South-East Asia is particularly exposed to floods, flash floods,
typhoons, cyclones, earthquakes, tsunamis and tidal surges, landslides,
droughts, forest fires and volcanic eruptions.

Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam are among the top
ten countries worst hit by natural disasters, in particular earthquakes, floods
and typhoons. The socio-economic impact of natural disasters is considerable,
in particular for the poorest and most isolated populations. However, losses
could be largely mitigated or avoided by simple preventive measures. The
Seventh DIPECHO for the region targets up 2 million people with funding of € 10
million.

Over the past few decades, the typology of disasters has
changed in South-East Asia due mainly to man-made causes such as widespread
deforestation, illegal land use and the absence of law enforcement, which
contribute to aggravating the effects of an increasingly erratic meteorological
cycle. The vulnerability profile is also changing, with increased urban
migration and erosion of traditional coping mechanisms, including decreased
resistance to potential pandemics.

In parallel, all South-East Asian Governments have
expressed commitment to the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action
2005-2015 (HFA): ‘Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to
Disasters’. Cambodia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam and Burma/Myanmar
have developed or are in the process of developing disaster risk reduction
strategies and legal frameworks and action plans. Implementation of the HFA
will remain the reference for DG ECHO, and the Seventh DIPECHO Action Plan will
enhance reporting against the HFA priorities and indicators. Partners will be
requested to include this element in their proposals.

The Seventh DIPECHO Action Plan (€ 10 million) targets
up to two million people among the most vulnerable local communities,
institutions and organisations, decision makers and the general public in the
targeted countries and regions (Burma/Myanmar, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, the
Philippines and Vietnam). Measures to support the coping capacities of the most
marginalised populations living in small and medium-sized urban centres are
also encouraged. In addition to the specified target populations, additional
beneficiaries will be reached through public information campaigns.

Whereas under the Sixth DIPECHO Action Plan for South-East
Asia, Burma/Myanmar was not directly targeted, the devastation caused in May
2008 by cyclone Nargis and the lack of adequate preparedness measures,
contributing to the death toll of about 144 000 people, made the
government and communities more receptive to disaster preparedness. This is the
reason why this Action Plan will also support individual projects in
Burma/Myanmar.

3.7. 
Latin America, the Caribbean and the Pacific

These regions are
recurrently affected by natural hazards such as floods, hurricanes, droughts,
cold waves, landslides, volcanic eruptions or earthquakes.

The year began with
probably the most severe disaster to have hit the region in terms of lives lost
— the devastating earthquake that hit Haiti on 12 January. An estimated 230 000
people were killed and more than 2 million were displaced out of a total
population of 9.8 million. DG ECHO’s response to the massive needs was
quick and significant. One month later the region was again hit by a massive
earthquake which occurred in Chile on 27 February. It was the fifth most
powerful earthquake on record and triggered a tsunami, affecting more than two
million people and killing more than 400.

The 2010 hurricane
season particularly affected Central America and the Caribbean. Tropical storm Agatha in Guatemala, El Salvador
and Honduras and hurricane Tomas in the Caribbean required humanitarian
assistance. The phenomena of El Niño and La Niña led to warming and cooling in
the eastern and central Pacific respectively and caused floods and droughts.
This phenomenon led to drought in many Central American countries but
particularly affected Guatemala, which required food assistance so as to address
the nutritional situation of the most vulnerable. Heavy rains caused floods and
landslides in the highlands of southern Peru, affecting more than 190 000
people. At the end of the year, the Bolivian region of El Chaco was still
facing the consequences of a third consecutive year of drought, which had led
to a critical situation in terms of access to water for agriculture, livestock
and human consumption. Floods caused huge damage in Colombia in 2010, as almost
2.3 million people were affected by the rainy season countrywide. DG ECHO
responded to all these situations throughout the year.

DG ECHO’s humanitarian
assistance to victims of Colombia’s prolonged internal conflict continued in
2010, including support to IDPs, rural populations facing restriction of movement
and limited access to basic goods and services, and Colombians in need of
protection who had fled to neighbouring countries.

Epidemics also affected
the region during 2010. Outbreaks of dengue and leptospirosis required
assistance. In October, a cholera epidemic started in the valley of the
Artibonite, in Haiti, quickly spreading to other departments. By the end of the
year, 3 573 people had died from cholera, out of 160 929 cases seen.
DG ECHO also responded very quickly to the cholera epidemic in Haiti and
contributed to control of the disease in the Dominican Republic and the rest of
the Caribbean.

In view of the
recurrent nature of natural disasters and their humanitarian impact,
DG ECHO’s disaster preparedness programme (DIPECHO) continued in the
respective regions, i.e. Central America, South America and the Caribbean,
focusing on improving the capacities of communities at risk and on institutions
involved in disaster risk reduction/disaster management, so as to enable them
to better prepare for and protect themselves against natural disasters.

Linking relief,
rehabilitation and development (LRRD) was considered in all operations funded,
by developing a strategy that goes beyond the mere distribution of assets to
beneficiaries and systematically integrates components to increase the
durability of the response and the reinforcement of local disaster preparedness
capacities. The involvement of local and national institutions in the
definition of priorities and formulation of projects is encouraged. Moreover, DG ECHO
works closely with all EU Delegations in the region and at headquarters level,
sharing information, carrying out joint monitoring missions and facilitating
opportunities for complementarity.

3.7.1. 
Latin America

Latin America is a
region prone to natural disasters; it was hit by tropical storm Agatha, the
tsunami in Chile, heavy rains and drought.

Central America
(Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama)

DG ECHO actions in
Central America focused in 2010 on responding to the emergency needs caused by
tropical storm Agatha in Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras. A primary
emergency decision allocating € 3 million was adopted and a total of 206 260
people benefited from DG ECHO-funded operations.

This was supplemented
by another decision allocating € 1 million to Guatemala, adopted at the
end of the year with the aim of responding to the effects of the series of
natural disasters which occurred throughout 2010 (Pacaya volcano eruption,
tropical storm Agatha, tropical depression 11-E, etc.) and had substantially
eroded the coping capacity of the most vulnerable populations. Harvest losses
seriously affected subsistence farmers, while opportunities to work as day
labourers on bigger farms diminished because of the floods.

As far as disaster
preparedness is concerned, implementation of the Sixth DIPECHO Action Plan for
Central America came to an end with 24 actions implemented. The Seventh DIPECHO
Action Plan (€ 10 million) was launched and 22 actions have been financed.
For more detail on this programme, see Section 3.9.

Regional action in Central America — DIPECHO

Central America is one of the most disaster-prone regions
in the world, in terms of recurrence of disasters, their severity and scope.
There are frequent floods, flash floods, cyclones, landslides, earthquakes,
volcanic eruptions, drought and forest fires.

Local communities are particularly vulnerable to all these
disasters, and the losses they cause are significant in both social and
economic terms. The capacities of Central American countries to cope with
disasters are insufficient and international assistance is needed to support
preparedness and small-scale mitigation actions.

Hydro-meteorological events have been predominant in recent
years, with floods affecting more than 2.2 million people since 1990. Over the
same period, more than 5 million people have been hit by windstorms, most
notoriously by hurricanes Mitch[33],
Stan and Felix in 1998, 2005 and 2007 respectively. Hydro-meteorological events
are responsible for 82 % of the total loss of human life caused by all
types of disasters over the period 1990-2009 in the region[34]. Geological events
and, more specifically, earthquakes generate the most significant economic
losses. For example, the two earthquakes which hit El Salvador in 2001 affected
a total of 1.5 million people[35].
Finally, deforestation is a frequent problem, and events such as the El
Niño phenomenon aggravate its consequences. The drought induced by El
Niño in 1997-1998 caused losses of forests (due to fires) corresponding
to four years of deforestation[36].

The Seventh DIPECHO Action Plan (€ 10 million) will
target the most vulnerable local communities and their institutions involved in
risk reduction in El Salvador, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and
Panama. Furthermore, regional programming could take into account the whole of
Central America.

It is estimated that approximately 800 000 people benefit directly from the Seventh Action Plan.

South America
(except Colombia)

One of the most
powerful earthquakes in history and a subsequent tsunami hit Chile on
27 February, affecting more than two million people and killing more than
400. The Commission disbursed € 3 million through a primary emergency
decision to assist 75 000 people, mainly by supporting healthcare and
shelter.

Commissioner Georgieva travelled to Chile to visit the
areas most affected by the earthquake and tsunami and observe the work of
European humanitarian and civil protection experts on the ground. During her
field visit she met representatives of ECHO partners working in the area,
visited the Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC) base-camp in Penco, Concepción,
and had bilateral contacts with Chilean authorities in the region. Commissioner
Georgieva’s visit coincided with the inauguration of President Sebastián Piñera
in Valparaíso on 11 March and she represented President Barroso at the
ceremony.

Heavy rains caused
floods and landslides in the highlands of southern Peru, affecting more than
190 000 people, devastating harvests and destroying the homes of more than
33 000 in the poorest part of the country. The Commission disbursed € 2
million to help 72 000 vulnerable people affected by the disaster to
restore their destroyed livelihoods and houses.

At the end of the year,
the Bolivian region of El Chaco was still facing the consequences of a third
consecutive year of drought, which had led to a critical situation in terms of
access to water for agriculture, livestock and human consumption. Agricultural
losses were reported to be higher than 90 %. Through an ad hoc decision
allocating € 1.5 million, DG ECHO helped vulnerable indigenous
families to recover their livelihoods and access to water as well as to
increase their resilience to droughts.

Furthermore, three projects were funded in South America in
2010 to cover some remaining humanitarian gaps following the earthquake in
Chile, respond to the floods in Venezuela and support the victims of the
landslides in Bolivia.

The strategy adopted by
DG ECHO in 2010 has been to frame a common approach and strategy together with
its partners for each emergency so that all projects fit together and share
objectives and results, thus multiplying the impact of the funding decision and
ensuring coherence between DG ECHO-funded projects in the same response. This
was the case in the response to the Peru floods and Bolivia drought.

As far as disaster preparedness is concerned,
implementation of the Sixth DIPECHO Action Plan for South America came to an
end in the last quarter of 2010.

Colombia
(including Colombians in need of international protection in Ecuador and
Venezuela)

Internal armed conflict
in Colombia continued in 2010. Despite government military advances over
illegal armed groups, massive and individual displacements, confinement of
civilians and weapon contamination continued to be major consequences of the
conflict in Colombia. While the government reported decreasing levels of forced
displacements in 2010, humanitarian needs remained a cause of concern,
particularly in rural zones affected by armed confrontations and in border
zones. In cumulative terms (and depending on the source), between 3.5[37] and 4.9 million[38] people have been
displaced since 1984. And the phenomenon of confined, or blocked, communities
persists[39]. According to the UNHCR, around 500 000[40] Colombians are
refugees or live in a refugee-like situation in Ecuador, Venezuela and Panama.

Despite a sophisticated
legal protection system and substantial allocations by the Colombian government[41], there are
significant gaps in humanitarian assistance and protection, particularly during
the time immediately following displacement and in remote rural areas, where
the population often has to face restrictions of movement and lack of access to
basic goods and services.

Women, children and
Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities are particularly vulnerable. The
blurring of civil and military lines has triggered a reduction of humanitarian
space in Colombia. In the neighbouring countries, protection (in particular
refugee-status determination) and emergency assistance for new arrivals remain
the most important humanitarian issues to be addressed.

In addition, Colombia
is vulnerable to natural disasters; floods in particular caused huge damage in
2010. Almost 2.3 million[42]
people were affected by the rainy season countrywide; despite the efforts of
the Colombian government to respond to the humanitarian needs, national
capacity was overwhelmed. An appeal for humanitarian assistance was made to the
international community and the private sector on 23 November.

Funding of € 14
million was allocated to support the Colombian population affected by the
conflict and the emergency provoked by the heavy rainy season in 2010. Around
198 000 people were assisted by DG ECHO under the Global Plan for Colombia
2010 (IDPs and affected populations in Colombia: 123 000; asylum seekers
and refugees in Ecuador and Venezuela: 38 000; Colombians affected by
recent floods: 37 000).

Protection has been the
main objective of DG ECHO’s operation in Colombia. DG ECHO continued to
concentrate humanitarian operations in remote rural areas, where state
institutions are generally not present or government assistance is not
sufficient. The protection of children, women and minorities continued to be a
priority. DG ECHO assistance was intended to cover those humanitarian emergency
needs not — sufficiently — covered by the aid provided by the Colombian
government, and ensure humanitarian protection as much as possible.

In
line with Colombia’s policy of ‘democratic security’, a presidential directive
was issued in March 2009, seeking the ‘alignment’ of armed forces and civilian
state entities. As a result of this directive, an increasing number of mixed
civil-military brigades have been organised, blurring civil and military lines
and therefore further limiting the humanitarian space of government agencies in
2009 and 2010. Respecting the humanitarian principle of independence, DG ECHO
partners have refused to participate in these mixed brigades.

3.7.2. 
Caribbean

Haiti

On 12 January an
earthquake of magnitude 7.0 on the Richter scale struck Haiti’s capital
Port-au-Prince and the surrounding areas. An estimated 230 000 people were
killed and more than 2 million people were displaced out of a total population
of 9.8 million. The humanitarian situation was compounded by the already high
level of poverty in Haiti and the regular occurrence of natural disasters, and
the fact that the state was severely hit, with the presidential palace and most
of the ministries destroyed, further reducing the weak capacity of the
government to respond to such a massive disaster.

Commissioner Georgieva
travelled to Haiti in early March to visit the areas most affected by the
earthquake. During her field visit she visited humanitarian projects and
displacement camps, met representatives of ECHO partners working in
Port-au-Prince, flew over the devastated cities of Léogâne and Jacmel and held
high-level meetings with the Humanitarian Coordinator and the Canadian Armed
Forces and Ambassador. She then joined Catherine Ashton for a meeting with
President Préval and Prime Minister Bellerive.

In October, a cholera
epidemic started in the valley of the Artibonite, quickly spreading to other
departments. It was compounded by hurricane Tomas in early November, which
brought heavy rains and disturbed the provision of water and healthcare during
a short period. At the end of the year, 3 573 people had died of cholera,
out of 160 929 cases seen and 90 076 hospitalised, representing a 2.2 %
lethality rate. This was an improvement on the 10 % rate at the beginning
of the epidemic but was still significantly above the 1 % internationally
recommended threshold.

DG ECHO’s response to
the earthquake was quick and significant. A total of € 122 million was
allocated to respond to the massive needs in the sectors of shelter, food, water/sanitation/hygiene,
health, coordination/logistics and to enhance disaster risk reduction, which
was also mainstreamed in the whole response operation. The Commission financed
projects not only in Port-au-Prince, targeting populations in camps and staying
in tents close to their damaged homes, but also in the rest of the country,
where significant numbers of displaced people sought refuge in the aftermath of
the earthquake, staying with relatives and host families and thereby depleting
their already scarce resources. In addition to the 2010 funding, funds
remaining from the 2009 Global Plan (€ 8 million) were reallocated to the
response to the earthquake.

DG ECHO also responded
very quickly to the cholera epidemic, focusing on the health sector to save lives
through medical treatment, the provision of clean water and adequate
sanitation, and support for epidemiological surveillance and logistics.

Haiti remains a fragile
democracy, where crime rates are high. Political unrest due to the electoral
process at the end of the year is hampering the delivery of humanitarian
assistance in some areas.

3.7.3. 
Pacific

Given the remote location of the region (as observed from
Europe) and the presence of very active donors in the South Pacific, i.e.
Australia and New Zealand, who have a tradition of responding swiftly to
disasters in the region, the Commission’s involvement in the funding of
humanitarian assistance is regular, but less frequent than in other parts of
the world.

Implementation of a pilot disaster preparedness programme (DIPECHO)
continued in Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands, strengthening the resilience of
communities to natural disasters. Some 9 400 people benefited directly
from this programme, which also includes a component in support of
strengthening disaster response capacity in the South Pacific region.

A financing decision was adopted towards the end of 2010,
to provide support for building regional capacity in disaster preparedness and
climate change adaptation in the Pacific region. Actions are being developed in
the context of existing regional and national Disaster Risk Reduction
frameworks, including National Disaster Management structures. Activities
include capacity-building of organisations with a disaster risk reduction
mandate; institutional linkages and advocacy, targeting institutions involved
in disaster management/disaster risk reduction, including contingency planning;
development and dissemination of standardised tools and systems for
Information, Education and Communication; stock-building of emergency and
relief items at local level; reinforcing the early response capacity of
local actors and institutions in disaster-prone areas by providing rescue and
first aid equipment plus training activities; piloting, documentation and
promotion of “climate change adaptation – disaster preparedness” integrated
approaches.

3.8. 
Worldwide

In order to be able to
intervene in new ‘small-scale’ crises three funding decisions with a worldwide
scope were adopted in 2010:

3.8.1. 
Epidemics

Epidemic outbreaks pose
major risks to the world’s poorest populations, because they are less able to respond to shocks of all kinds. The
vaccination coverage in developing countries is generally low and the risk of
transmission of infections is thus enhanced. Poverty, lack of basic sanitation
facilities, low hygienic standards and malnutrition in post-emergency or
structurally weak countries increase the vulnerability to communicable
diseases. Populations already affected by natural and man-made disasters are
particularly vulnerable. A timely and adequate response to epidemic outbreaks,
combined with appropriate preparedness action, can help save thousands of
lives.

In 2010, the Commission
allocated € 10 million from its humanitarian aid budget to reducing the
impact of epidemics on vulnerable people in developing countries and supporting
emergency operations to address outbreaks of communicable diseases. These funds
will help an estimated 3 600 000 individuals living in areas at high
risk of epidemics to receive proper protection against diseases. Populations in
these countries are exposed to great risks to their health, lives and
livelihoods. National resources to fight epidemics are often exhausted, causing
major, even regional, emergencies.

The Commission
assistance is driven by two objectives: preparedness — including surveillance,
early warning systems, prevention, planning and stockpiling — and the capacity
to respond effectively to the outbreaks. In that regard, the funding will
emphasise the pre-positioning and provision of effective emergency items such
as medical supplies and water and sanitation products.

3.8.2. 
Small-scale response

Small-scale disasters
often occur in remote or isolated areas, rarely trigger a declaration of
emergency and do not usually figure prominently in the news despite the serious
humanitarian needs they create locally.

In 2010, the Commission
allocated € 8 million from its humanitarian budget to provide small- scale
assistance for disaster preparedness and relief to victims of natural or
man-made disasters throughout the globe. This allocation will facilitate
appropriate emergency response funding where the local response is
insufficient, be it to small-scale disasters or disasters of a somewhat larger
scale where there are unmet humanitarian needs, and for which a small-scale
operation is adequate. It will be the tool to allow a rapid response to those disasters
where the number of affected people is low, or the unmet needs are not
significant enough to launch a specific decision.

At least one
of the following two criteria must be fulfilled:

– 
extent of damage: the number
of affected people is less than 50 000;

– 
unmet needs (gaps left by
ongoing assistance), where an operation limited to a maximum amount of € 200 000
per disaster is sufficient to cover unmet needs.

As for other
DG ECHO operations, funds are channelled through NGOs, international
organisations including the United Nations (UN agencies) and Member States’
specialised agencies.

3.8.3. 
The IFRC’s Disaster Relief
Emergency Fund (DREF)

Vulnerable people in
non-EU countries throughout the world are affected by disasters, such as
floods, landslides, cyclones, tsunamis, drought, fires, cold waves,
earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, epidemics, food insecurity, population
movements and civil unrest. Relief is required, as well as preparedness for
imminent disasters, in the context of small-scale emergencies for which an
appeal is unlikely to be launched. Most small-scale emergencies (sometimes no
more than 100 000 people are affected) are responded to at local or
national level. The Red Cross and Red Crescent National Societies, supported by
the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC),
are often best placed to provide an immediate response, being rooted in the
local community and mobilising community members as volunteers.

DG ECHO ensured that it had the capacity to react quickly
to many small-scale disasters in 2010, by means of an earmarked contribution to
the IFRC’s DREF. The 2010 Decision contributing to the DREF was used so
effectively that the original allocation was doubled, bringing DG ECHO’s
support to € 3 million. A rapid response was provided via 37 operations,
bringing life-saving assistance and relief to victims of floods, landslides,
cyclones, epidemics, civil unrest and other small-scale disasters. Preparedness
for imminent disasters was supported, and the disaster preparedness capacities
of Red Cross National Societies were enhanced.

3.9. 
Disaster preparedness
activities, including DIPECHO

The EU’s main
contribution to the global disaster risk reduction effort remains the DIPECHO
programme, which targets highly vulnerable communities living in seven of the
most disaster-prone regions in the world. In DG ECHO terminology, this is
called the ‘community-based approach’.

Since launching the
DIPECHO programmes (1996-2010), the Commission has invested € 300 million
in the associated action plans.

Besides the DIPECHO
action plans, mainstreaming activities contribute also to disaster
preparedness. The effort is based on activities related to the following
sectors: infrastructure support, capacity building and training, advocacy and
public awareness, small-scale mitigation, mapping and data computerisation,
early warning systems, education, facilitation and coordination, institutional
strengthening and climate change adaptation activities.

In 2010, disaster
preparedness activities managed by DG ECHO allowed about 28 million
beneficiaries to be reached.

Details concerning the
actions implemented in 2010 are included in Sections 3.3 to 3.7 above under the
regional sections concerned.

DG ECHO’s contribution
to disaster preparedness goes well beyond the DIPECHO programme as many of its
major humanitarian financing decisions include disaster preparedness or
mitigation of disaster impacts as an objective. Even post-disaster emergency
responses often have a risk reduction element. In 2010, this was the case in
the following regions/countries:

– 
Africa: Sudan, Chad, DR
Congo, Kenya, Somalia, South Africa;

– 
Asia: Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Bangladesh, India, South-East Asia;

– 
Latin America: Central
America, South America, Haiti.

3.10. 
Linking relief, rehabilitation
and development (LRRD)

In 2010, following
rising demand from countries providing external assistance in transition
contexts, LRRD issues received increased attention from humanitarian and
development actors.

The growing complexity
and duration of crises led to a situation where numerous international actors
in the areas of humanitarian aid, recovery, development and peacekeeping have
been working side by side, making proper interlinking and close coordination
(from needs assessment through to actual implementation of operations)
critical.

While managing transition and LRRD has proven to be a
challenge for country desk officers and personnel in the field in different
contexts (such as in Haiti and Pakistan), DG ECHO
has been working on ensuring improved coordination and consistency at policy
and operational level.

In order to improve coordination, a shared analysis of the
needs of beneficiary populations is fundamental. For this reason, DG ECHO has
been involved in the Post Disaster Needs Assessments (PDNA) approach led by the
EU, the UN Development Programme (UNDP) and the World Bank (in Haiti). There is
still a need to ensure consistency between operations in transition contexts
and the outcomes of such exercises.

From a humanitarian
perspective, the integration of humanitarian-related activities (such as
activities aimed at prevention and risk reduction) into the development agenda
is a fundamental step towards the reduction of vulnerability of disaster-prone
countries and regions.

DG ECHO has also been
engaged (with the Commission services in charge of development) in the
development of Joint Framework aimed at ensuring coherence between humanitarian
and development operations addressing different levels of vulnerabilities in
transition contexts, while respecting the different principles, decision-making
processes and implementation methods.

The DG ECHO Office in Ethiopia
constantly works with the EU Delegation (in particular the Rural Development
and Food Security Section) and other donors in order to pursue LRRD.
Nevertheless, the level of success in this regard is not as such considered
impressive due to the different natures of the funding instruments.
The Humanitarian Donors Coordination Group, in which DG ECHO plays a key role,
was consolidated in 2010. Among the humanitarian donors those involved are OFDA[43], the DFID[44], the Dutch Embassy
and OCHA’s Humanitarian Response Fund (HRF)[45].
In the Humanitarian Donors Coordination Group the humanitarian situation in the
country is discussed as input for the decisions to be taken by the individual
donor. Attempts are made to avoid double funding and geographic overlap, and
the implementation capacity of potential partners is also discussed.

DG ECHO pursued its phasing out from Burundi
thanks to a successful LRRD strategy with development actors, not least the
European Development Fund. The
constructive, ongoing and wide-ranging dialogue between DG ECHO, the EU
Delegation and other Commission departments has resulted in several new
multi-sectoral programmes in the health, post-conflict rural development and
food security sectors. Coordination on LRRD and other matters is also being
pursued with other development players, including the DFID, the CTB, Swiss and
German Cooperation, the World Bank and GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and
Immunisation). Ongoing and enhanced synergy between these programmes has made
it possible to progressively reduce humanitarian aid to Burundians in health,
food security and water and sanitation.

South Sudan, with its post-conflict context characterised
both by urgent humanitarian needs and by structural deficiencies requiring the
engagement of development actors, has a high potential for successful links
between relief, recovery and development efforts. The process is, however, fraught
with obstacles, linked to the sheer magnitude of development needs, a
significant lack of local capacity, insecurity and slow disbursement of
funding. However, DG ECHO continues to support the transition towards
development, for example by insisting on the quality and sustainability of the
operations funded, the inclusion of capacity building components and advocacy.

In 2010 the Commission
made distinct progress in improving the complementarity between development
assistance and humanitarian aid in Southern Sudan. As a consequence of its
non-ratification of the revised Cotonou Agreement, Sudan is ineligible for
funding from the 10th EDF, which risked compromising the LRRD process.
Eventually, two measures were adopted to address this potential gap: firstly, € 15
million from the Instrument for Stability (IfS) was mobilised, out of which € 8.15
million was allocated for funding basic services. Secondly, € 150 million
of decommitted money from the 9th EDF was made available for programmes in
Sudan. Activities funded or to be funded by these measures complement the
operations of DG ECHO in Southern Sudan, and all departments concerned are
working closely together to ensure as many synergies as possible.

Much effort was put in
2010 into encouraging improved coordination with other Commission departments
and other donors present in the Sahel. NGO partners were
encouraged to work more closely together and their willingness and ability to
do this was taken into consideration in funding decisions. The interlinking of
aid instruments in a coherent and coordinated LRRD aid strategy for addressing
nutrition issues is a priority goal. DG ECHO actively participated in the many
recent initiatives on nutrition promoted by major institutional donors,
including EU Member States, the UN family, the World Bank and US aid agencies.

Under the Peace,
Recovery and Development Plan (PRDP)[46]
for northern Uganda, development partners are expected to align
their programmes under key thematic areas. The Commission launched programmes
under the 9th and 10th EDF that could follow up DG ECHO’s operations in
the country, such as NUREP[47],
ALREP[48]
(Food Security Thematic Programme), KALIP[49],
the Water Facility programme and vocational training in northern Uganda under
the Non-state Actors budget line for the years 2009 and 2010.

DG ECHO has been
funding humanitarian operations in Zimbabwe since 2002, mainly in
the food security and water and sanitation sectors until late 2007. At that
time, DG ECHO’s assistance strategy was refocused to take account of the
serious deterioration in the public health sector, where a two-pronged approach
sought to tackle health emergencies, on the one hand, and mitigate the collapse
and signal the recovery of the delivery of basic services to the population, on
the other. This approach was designed to be coherent with, and complementary
to, the strategy of the EU Delegation, with both entities coming together in
funding the provision of essential medicines. The Water Emergency Response Unit
and Health Emergency Response Unit (WERU and HERU) set up during the massive
cholera outbreak of 2008/2009 now provide national coverage, and have been
integrated into the cluster system.

In terms of food
security, DG ECHO’s LRRD strategy of advocating scaling down massive food
distributions in favour of food security actions, and reinforcing the
complementarities with the EU Delegation and other donors’ food security
projects, has borne fruit to the extent that DG ECHO will no longer support
food security/livelihoods actions as of mid-2011.

As the situation in the
country has moved from emergency to transition, DG ECHO participated in
inter-service missions to shape the Commission’s Short-Term Strategy for
Zimbabwe (now in its third phase), itself reflecting the priorities of the
Short-Term Economic Recovery Plan (STERP) established in February 2008 by the
then new Government of National Unity. The STS fully pursues the link between
relief, rehabilitation and development.

The LRRD strategy has
also been applied to humanitarian coordination mechanisms, with clusters being
established (and supported by DG ECHO), and moving steadily away from a pure
humanitarian towards a programmatic, quasi-developmental approach. This is
evidenced in the fact that the latest Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) is,
rightly in view of the circumstances, much more a transitional than a
humanitarian instrument. A further step should be the disappearance of the CAP
in Zimbabwe altogether, in favour of a government-led process.

In the current context,
DG ECHO’s strategy has also to maintain an emphasis on including potential
development donors in order to have them take over as of 2011-2012, in order to
allow DG ECHO to establish a proper exit strategy. The trigger for moving
forward in the transition process will be the holding of free, fair and
peaceful elections in Zimbabwe (now planned for 2011), which in turn would
undoubtedly encourage donors to release substantial long-term funding.

In the Horn of Africa, LRRD efforts were
stepped up steadily, including cooperation with OFDA and the DFID in Kenya and
Ethiopia and with the EU Delegation in Kenya as regards their Drought
Management Initiative and supporting, jointly with the Government of Kenya and
the World Bank, the Drought Contingency Fund. In Uganda, the
DG ECHO-supported drought preparedness actions are closely coordinated
with the EU Delegation’s Karamoja Livelihoods Programme (KALIP) with a view to
phasing out the humanitarian support.

3.11. 
Civil protection

3.11.1. Prevention

The Commission engaged
in a number of activities to fully implement the EU framework for the
prevention of disasters[50].
Within this framework, on 21 December the Commission issued a guidance paper on
national risk assessment and mapping for disaster management, which was
developed together with the national authorities of the Member States[51]. The guidelines
focus on the processes and methods of risk assessment as carried out within the
broader framework of risk management and risk mitigation and are based on a
multi-hazard and multi-risk approach, covering in principle all natural and
man-made disasters. They also propose definitions of the most important terms,
based on ISO and UN/ISDR terminology. In addition, definitions for the major
impact categories are proposed. Strong emphasis is put on using empirical
quantitative methods as far as possible. It is now expected that Member States
will further develop national risk management processes, in the context of
which they would make use of those guidelines. On the basis of information to be
provided by Member States by the end of 2011, the Commission will in 2012
produce an overview of the major risks faced by the EU.

The Commission is also
working towards improving its knowledge base on disasters and encouraging
effective and greater investment in disaster prevention. With regard to
disaster prevention, the following issues were identified as deserving further
consideration[52]:

· effective use of EU funding for preventing
disasters;

· introducing conditionality in EU funding —
linking the level of funding to Member States to prevention measures being in
place;

· greater use of disaster insurance policies with
risk-based premiums for households, the public sector, business and
agriculture; possibility of insurance pooling;

· exploring the possible use of insurance-linked
securities (catastrophe bonds) and other alternative risk transfer instruments
in the European context to raise additional finance on the international
capital markets and thus reduce the costs of insurance.

Actions were also
developed with the European Environment Agency (EEA) to encourage better
information and comparability of disaster data, such as information on the
costs of disasters. The results of this work will contribute to development of
the adaptation to climate change Clearing House Mechanism.

The Commission is also
actively ensuring linkages with the initiatives developed by the United
Nations’ International Strategy for Disaster Reduction secretariat (UN/ISDR)
implementing the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA). The Commission took part in
and contributed to the annual meeting of European national platforms and HFA
focal points, the ‘European Forum for Disaster Risk Reduction’. Synergies are
ensured with the ongoing work at EU level.

In 2010 the Civil Protection Financial Instrument financed,
on the basis of an annual call for proposals for prevention projects, nine
projects in the area of prevention. The projects will be implemented in 2011
and 2012, with a total EU contribution of € 2.8 million (75 %
cofinancing rate). Three prevention projects were successfully completed in
2010, with the focus on the following areas: (1) prevention of fires; (2)
linking civil protection and planning for preventing disasters in Europe and
(3) prevention of natural risks in the Mediterranean region, with a focus on
seismic risks.

3.11.2. Preparedness

Preparedness activities
seek to contribute to reaching a state of readiness and capability of human and
material means enabling them to ensure an effective rapid response to an
emergency, obtained as a result of action taken in advance[53]. Early Warning
Systems, modules and the Civil Protection Mechanism’s training programme are
essential parts of those activities. In addition, the Commission gave financial
support to a number of preparedness cooperation projects.

(1) Several Early
Warning Systems were financially supported in 2010, including:

· EFAS (European Floods Alert System), which
provides early warning of floods in Europe. The system is developed by the
European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC).

· EFFIS (European Forest Fire Information System),
covering the EU and neighbouring countries, which monitors and predicts forest
fires in Europe (fire forecasts up to six days ahead). The system, which is
also a JRC product, is able to assess the damage following a forest fire.

· The Global Disaster Alert and Coordination
System (GDACS), which provides a worldwide warning for earthquakes, tsunamis,
hurricanes and volcanic eruptions. It also serves as a coordination tool during
emergencies and provides an automatic analysis of an event.

(2) Member States are
to identify in advance modules[54]
that might be available for intervention or could be established at very short
notice and dispatched, generally within 12 hours following a request for
assistance. As civil protection modules should be capable of working
self-sufficiently for a given period of time, general requirements for
self-sufficiency and, where appropriate, specific requirements that may vary
according to the type of intervention or the type of module concerned are
established at EU level so that Participating States know in advance the
features to be met by the modules they offer on a voluntary basis for
participating in an EU civil protection assistance intervention[55]. In 2010, those
requirements were partially changed with respect to the ‘Aerial forest fire
fighting using airplanes’ and ‘Field hospital’ modules[56]. In addition,
recent civil protection operations demonstrated the need to add and implement
four new types of civil protection modules to reinforce the civil protection
rapid response capability, namely the ‘Ground forest fire fighting’, ‘Ground
forest fire fighting using vehicles’, ‘Flood containment’ and ‘Flood rescue
using boats’ modules[57].

As of 31 December,
participating States had registered in the Mechanism’s Common Emergency
Communication and Information System (CECIS) 17 different modules, such as
Water purification, Aerial forest fire fighting using airplanes and Field hospitals.

(3) The Mechanism’s training
programme aims to enhance the coordination of civil protection
assistance intervention by ensuring compatibility and complementarity between
the intervention teams and modules, and by improving the competence of the experts
to be deployed on-site as members of an EU assessment and coordination team.
The programme comprises joint courses and exercises (including exercises
involving modules) and an exchange system whereby individuals may be seconded
to other Member States.

· Training courses

In 2010 873 persons
took part in the 12 types of training courses offered by selected civil
protection organisations. Altogether 49 courses were organised in 2010. These types of training courses are offered to
eligible personnel from Participating States’ civil protection organisations
and UN personnel. The experts participating in the training programme can
become part of EU Civil Protection Teams deployed in the event of an emergency
within and outside the EU (42 experts deployed in 2010).

· Exercises

In 2010, four exercises
were successfully completed. The exercises focused on flood, earthquake,
hazardous material and terrorist attack scenarios. Two new full-scale exercises were selected which focused on
the following areas: a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear (CBRN)
accident affecting public places and a passenger sea line accident.

· Exercises with modules

One table-top and two
field exercises took place in 2010 and were supplemented by five basic courses
on modules that are part of the training programme, with the total
participation of 126 participants.

(4) In 2010, the Civil
Protection Financial Instrument financed three preparedness projects
in the following areas:

· Water pollution on the boundary between Bulgaria
and Greece;

· Legal conditions for the provision of disaster
assistance in the EU and selected Member States;

· Improvement of the Meteoalarm early warning
system for 30 European countries, by extending the forecast period to five days
and including rain and flood warnings.

3.11.3. The civil protection response

In 2010 the European
Civil Protection Mechanism was activated 12 times in order to respond to
emergencies within the EU[58]
and 20 times for emergencies occurring outside EU borders[59]. Although the
total number of activations was in line with that of 2009, 2010 will be
remembered as a year in which the world experienced a series of particularly
devastating disasters. On a global scale the Mechanism was called upon to react
to two of the worst natural disasters in recent decades, i.e. the Haiti
earthquake and the Pakistan floods, and in response to the explosion of the
Deepwater Horizon drilling well in the Gulf of Mexico, which resulted in the
most environmentally damaging oil spill on record. Europe and its immediate
neighbours were also severely affected, with the Mechanism being activated for
numerous tragic events ranging from the alkali sludge incident that damaged flora/fauna and
agricultural land in Hungary,
through flash floods and severe storms in Western Europe, large-scale floods in
Central Europe, volcanic ash clouds, to unprecedented forest fires in Russia.

Given the large number
of major emergencies, 2010 is the year in which the Monitoring and Information
Centre (MIC) deployed the highest number of experts. Overall, a total of 83
experts were deployed with 48 being sent on mission and 35 participating in
exercises.

In terms of disasters, it should be noted that 2010 was
heavily plagued by floods (14 activations) and forest fires (6 activations).
Also noteworthy were the requests for assistance received as a result of
earthquakes (2 activations), oil spills (2 activations), heavy snowfall (2
activations), environmental disasters (1 activation) and volcanic eruptions (1
activation).

More information on the
2010 activations can be found in the overview below:

3.12. 
Case studies on launching
humanitarian aid and civil protection
3.12.1. Humanitarian aid — Sudan

With a size three times
that of Switzerland, Jonglei state is the biggest of the ten states in Southern
Sudan, and is prone to inter- and intra-tribal clashes such as cattle raiding
or clan fighting, resulting every year in thousands of people being displaced.

After the general
elections in April 2010 another conflict erupted in Jonglei. Fighting between
two parties both claiming the post of Governor in Jonglei resulted in a large
number of IDPs.

Khorfulus Boma, a small
village by the river in northern Jonglei, was reported to have received the
highest number of displaced persons, 6 246 people. Medair, an NGO working
in Southern Sudan since 1992, conducted a needs assessment in the water and
sanitation sector, which was reported to be the predominant concern. With only
one safe water point (a manual filtration system), the local population mainly
used untreated river water. Medair’s assessment revealed that the most
appropriate system to serve a large number of people with good and safe
drinking water would be a SWAT (surface water treatment) system using the
nearby river. The system could be set up quickly and operated by the local
population after only three weeks of training. As a result of this rapid
reaction both local residents and people displaced by the conflict gained
access to safe drinking water, which significantly reduced their vulnerability
to water-borne diseases.

Medair, with the support
of DG ECHO, aids victims of man-made and natural disasters in Southern Sudan by
providing medical assistance and access to water and sanitation services. In
2010 alone Medair helped 166 541 people through 18 rapid response actions
across ten states of Southern Sudan.

3.12.2. Humanitarian aid — floods in Pakistan

In the course of the
2010 monsoon season, Pakistan experienced the worst floods in living memory.
Heavy rainfall, flash floods and riverine floods combined to create a moving body
of water equal in dimension to the land mass of the United Kingdom. The floods
affected 84 out of a total of 121 districts in Pakistan and almost 20 million
people — about 10 % of the total population, devastating villages from the
Himalayas to the Arabian Sea. Occurring only a year after a massive population
displacement described as the most significant in the region since partition in
1947, which had already resulted in almost 3 million people displaced, the
floods were classed on 6 August as the worst natural disaster in Pakistan’s
63-year history by Prime Minister Gilani, who appealed for international help.

The international humanitarian system had never
had to deal with a disaster on that scale before. The Commission was able
to react swiftly and with sufficient expertise thanks to the early deployment
of 14 humanitarian experts, very soon followed by civil protection experts in
charge of preparing the arrival of in-kind assistance from the EU Member
States. In total, € 150 million was made available for humanitarian aid
and almost € 12 million worth of in-kind assistance transported by the
coordinated civil protection mechanism.

Bearing in mind the scale of the needs and the
number of people affected, the priority was to respond immediately to the basic
needs of the population. The main sectors of humanitarian intervention were:
food assistance, water and sanitation including hygiene education, health
services and nutrition, shelter and distribution of non-food items (NFIs).
Protection of the population had to be taken into account in all operations,
bearing in mind the fragile security context of most of the areas and the
conflict situation in the northern parts of Pakistan. Coordination and support
for logistics was also crucial. The response was balanced across sectors and
took into account the most pressing needs, other donors’ operations and the
need to balance the geographic coverage between the North and the South. A
strong focus was given to food assistance with cash–based assistance whenever
possible and appropriate.

This disaster has, once more, confirmed the
pertinence of and need to include disaster risk reduction in humanitarian aid
and development cooperation in countries that are highly prone to natural disasters
such as Pakistan.

3.12.3. Humanitarian aid — Bolivia: support to
drought-affected communities in Chaco region

In October, the EU
allocated € 1.5 million to provide humanitarian assistance to the most
vulnerable people affected by droughts in the Bolivian Chaco. This drought
response is multi-sectoral and is expected to help at least 25 000
beneficiaries among the most vulnerable people in the affected region. Drought
response in Bolivia combines several elements, highlighting the need to
intervene with a multi-sector approach in slow disaster-affected environments
and the importance of mainstreaming disaster risk reduction measures in all
activities so as to improve the communities’ resilience to future events.

This area had been
experiencing record high temperatures and longer than average periods without
rainfall for three consecutive years since 2008. The cumulative impact of
drought reached its most critical level in the 2010 dry season and was
seriously affecting the human population, livestock and agricultural activity,
generating emergency humanitarian and recovery needs. The humanitarian response
in such contexts requires an integrated approach in order to reduce
communities’ vulnerability in a sustainable manner. Humanitarian and recovery
needs in terms of safe water access, food and livelihood were addressed in such
a way as to ensure an appropriate balance between short-term emergency
distributions and mid-term resilience support. Measures in the following
sectors were designed in an integrated manner:

– 
Water: delivery of water trucking, water catchment
rehabilitation, water storage facilities and water management training with
communities and authorities;

– 
Food: staple commodities for the human population;

– 
Livelihood support: distribution of seeds together with
rehabilitation of soils and improvement of production and post-harvesting
practices as well as distribution of vitamins, salts, veterinary treatments and
water, in order to prevent high losses in food security sources;

– 
Disaster risk reduction (DRR): apart from the
DRR impact of several sector activities listed above, the design also includes
DRR-specific activities, such as training of communities and authorities in
basic DRR skills, coordination support and advocacy. ECHO partners plan to
provide at the end of the intervention a methodological proposal for
communities, authorities and aid agencies based on best practices compiled
during the humanitarian response.

The DG ECHO intervention
in Bolivia is also promoting particularly intense coordination among ECHO
implementing partners (FAO, ACF-S, COOPI). Analysis of the crisis, needs
assessments and design of the humanitarian response were undertaken in close
collaboration among the partners and with DG ECHO. A common logical framework
was developed. The result of this emphasis on early coordination is optimal
distribution of geographic areas, sector activities and responsibilities,
ensuring the best use of each partner’s added value. Technical leadership was
established on the basis of capacities and previous experience. Operational
links among partners when established from the outset underpin constant
dialogue and collaboration for the benefit of the most vulnerable populations.

3.12.4. Civil protection — Pakistan floods

The 2010 monsoon floods
in Pakistan represented a natural disaster of unprecedented intensity and
impact. Moreover, they affected a country with a fragile economy, ravaged by
internal conflicts and characterised by insecurity which, in 2009 alone, caused
the displacement of 3 million people.

Notwithstanding the
difficult context, the European Civil Protection Mechanism responded rapidly,
coherently and effectively. A seven-member EU Civil Protection team was
deployed to Islamabad and became immediately operational thanks to excellent
cooperation with the ECHO office on site, which provided administrative and
transport support. Among other things, the team coordinated the arrival
of assistance by identifying consignees and ensuring that it reached the final
destination. The several hundred tonnes of civil protection assistance deployed
by 18 of the States participating in the Mechanism represented a valuable and
highly needed contribution to the overall relief effort in line with identified
needs (assistance included water purification tablets/units, water distribution
equipment, field hospitals, emergency health kits, medical supplies, non-food
items (NFIs), shelter items, high energy food supplements and power
generators).

In terms of transport,
the Mechanism offered rapid transport solutions and established an air bridge
to deliver assistance to Pakistan. Of the 14 flights arranged, 11 were
facilitated through the MIC and cofinanced by the Commission Civil Protection
Instrument, while the remaining 3 were made possible by close collaboration with
the EU Movement Planning Cell (EU Military Staff — EUMS), in line with the 2006
cooperation agreements and international (in particular Oslo) guidelines.
Overall, transport arrangements functioned well and cooperation with the EUMS
showed that they are an important partner for the future.

In addition to the generous
and rapid provision of civil protection assistance, the Pakistan floods
also highlighted the complementarities that exist between the Civil
Protection Mechanism and the humanitarian aid branch of DG ECHO. The
fruitful collaboration with humanitarian aid colleagues, at both headquarter
and field level, was undoubtedly one of the keys to success. The
integration of humanitarian aid and civil protection under the same political
and administrative leadership not only provided benefits in terms of financing,
coordination and implementation of the EU’s overall response but also
significantly improved the flow and exchange of information among relevant
actors.

3.12.5. Civil protection — Poland floods

In May Poland
activated the European Civil Protection Mechanism in order to respond to floods
caused by heavy rainfall and the consequent swelling of the Vistula, Oder and
Warta river basins. The EU civil protection response was swift with over 55 pumps, 22
expert teams and 300 rescuers being deployed by eight European countries. The
emergency also saw the successful deployment of an EU-cofinanced multinational
high capacity pumping module (Balt Flood Combat Module) developed
by Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania under the Preparatory Action for an EU Rapid
Response Capability. Interaction among team members was good and the three high
capacity pumps which make up the module were positioned in various areas
affected by flooding along the Vistula River. Operations lasted almost 13 days
with approximately 295 Olympic-size swimming pools of flood water being
removed.

Besides
providing operational support, the Monitoring and Information Centre also
deployed a Liaison Officer to facilitate coordination of assistance on the ground.
The MIC Liaison Officer contributed, inter alia, to the preparation of flood
forecast maps using a web-based application powered by the Commission’s Joint
Research Centre (DG JRC) and was involved in a rapid flood situation
assessment, mainly in the Swietokrzyskie region.

The Polish
floods are an example of an effective response operation in which the needs
of an affected country are fully met. The assistance provided via the EU
Civil Protection Mechanism was essential to pump flood water back to river
streams, evacuate and relocate the population at risk and monitor, repair and
reinforce river banks. The excellent outcome of this response operation is also
to be attributed to Poland as they provided excellent host nation support and
made sure that international teams and assistance were used effectively and
appropriately.

4. 
Aid management

Humanitarian aid is
often delivered in an emergency and/or situations where access to beneficiaries
is difficult due to logistical or security constraints. To make sure that the
best use is made of public funds under these circumstances, the Commission
pursues an active relationship with its stakeholders and has put in place
various monitoring and coordination mechanisms. Some of their key features are
described below.

4.1. 
Aid delivery methods

The EU is the only
humanitarian donor to have a worldwide network of field experts who play a key
role in assessing humanitarian needs and monitoring EU-funded operations. The
aid itself is implemented by a limited number of humanitarian organisations,
which have both the financial and the operational capacity to manage emergency
operations in often difficult circumstances.

4.1.1. 
Experts in the field

The Commission manages
its humanitarian activities from its headquarters in Brussels via a network of
more than 40 field offices all over the world.

In order to meet the
target set by the post-tsunami action plan of January 2005, the Commission has
consolidated its network of field experts with the aim of organising
multi-sectoral rapid response teams. This allows it to dispatch its field
experts and programme assistants rapidly in response to new crises to carry out
humanitarian needs assessments and help coordinate humanitarian activities in
the field.

By the end of 2010,
more than 100 experts and 300 local staff were in place in 44 field offices.
New field offices had been opened in Port au Prince (Haiti) and Gaza, the
office in Islamabad (Pakistan) had been reopened, the existing regional office
in Bangkok (Thailand) had been extended and activities in the Beirut and Moscow
offices had been reduced.

4.1.2. 
Relations with partners

The Commission does not
intervene directly on the ground, but implements its mandate by funding about
200 partners ranging from non-governmental organisations, United Nations
agencies, other international organisations such as the International Committee
of the Red Cross and the International Federation of the Red Cross and the Red
Crescent Societies, to specialised agencies of EU Member States.

Having a diverse range
of partners is important for the Commission since it allows comprehensive
coverage of an ever-growing list of needs in different parts of the world and
in increasingly complex situations. Grants and contributions are decided on the
basis of the best proposals covering the needs of the most vulnerable
beneficiaries.

Relations between
DG ECHO and its implementing partners are governed by Framework
Partnership Agreements (FPAs), which define the respective roles and
responsibilities in humanitarian operations financed by the European Union. The
FPAs govern relations with both non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and
international organisations (IOs).

In the case of United
Nations agencies, the Financial and Administrative Framework Agreement between
the Commission and the UN (FAFA) governs the relations between them in the
domain of humanitarian aid.

Further information on
these Agreements is available on DG ECHO’s website at http://EU.europa.eu/echo/about/actors/partners_en.htm.

There are mainly
three types of partners: international organisations, UN agencies and NGOs. In
2010 the relative share of these organisations in the funding provided by DG
ECHO was NGOs: 50 %, UN organisations: 39 % and international
organisations: 11 %. The graph below provides an overview of the funding
by category of partners over the last three years:

The share of funding that went to NGOs increased
from 44 % in 2008 to 50 % in 2010, whereas over the same time period
the share of funding taken by the UN decreased from 46 % to 39 %. In
2008 the percentage of funding allocated to the UN was particularly high due to
the food crisis, for which operations were mainly implemented by UN partners
(WFP). The 2010 figures are again in line with figures before the food crisis.

The top 10 partners receive over 50 % of DG
ECHO funding for humanitarian operations[60].

4.2. 
Coordination of humanitarian
funds

Various mechanisms are in place to ensure that the
humanitarian funds provided by DG ECHO are coordinated with those of other
humanitarian actors involved in responses:

· Coordination with Member States is
ensured through regular meetings with their representatives in the Humanitarian
Aid Committee (HAC), which gives an opinion, in conformity with the
Humanitarian Aid Regulation, on all funding decisions exceeding € 2 million[61] before they are
adopted by the Commission. In addition, exchanges of information on specific
crisis situations feature regularly on the agenda of COHAFA.

· Other EU departments are consulted on funding decisions, prior to their
approval and through various coordination meetings, in particular on LRRD[62] issues.

· Contacts at field and headquarters level take
place regularly with major partners, in particular United Nations agencies
and other international organisations such as the ICRC and the IFRC.

· Coordination with NGOs is ensured through
a dedicated network (VOICE) and the organisation of an annual conference with
partners.

· An IT application has been developed to
collect data on humanitarian aid funding by the EU and Member States (called
the 14-points application). This database[63],
which is accessible to anyone[64],
gives the total EU (EU + Member States) humanitarian assistance provided by
year and country. The system is linked to the Financial Tracking System (FTS)
of OCHA[65].

The core objective of the 14-points application
is to cover all humanitarian aid contributions, whichever government department
is responsible for them. The definition of what constitutes humanitarian aid —
and therefore should be reported — is a difficult question and Member States
have developed their own working definitions.

In
2010, humanitarian aid contributions totalling € 2 756 million were reported in DG ECHO’s 14-points
application, of which 60 % were from Member States and 40 % from EU
funds.

Looking at the geographic breakdown of the total
EU + MS funding in 2010, the largest share went to African countries — 37 %
(against 47 % in 2009), 18 % to Central Asia and 12 % to the
Caribbean & the Pacific. This reflects the high level of contribution to
the two mega-disasters that hit Pakistan and Haiti. Contributions to the Middle
East & the Mediterranean represent 3 %, South Asia 4 % and Latin
America 2 %. The 20 % classified as ‘not specified’ stands for
contributions allocated to unspecified countries, meaning mainly to UN agencies
and other humanitarian aid activities.

Geographic breakdown of MS and EU humanitarian aid contributions

Overall, largely the same countries benefited
from humanitarian aid from the Member States and from the EU. The two
mega-disasters that occurred in 2010 (Pakistan and Haiti) are the main
recipients of EU assistance (EU + MS), representing 26 % of the aid
provided during the year. Beside this, the two complex crises dating back to
previous years (Sudan and DR Congo) accounted for 15 % of the EU
assistance (EU + MS).

Top 10 beneficiaries

Some 45 % of the top 10 funding went to
African countries in 2010, with the balance going to Pakistan, Haiti,
Afghanistan and the occupied Palestinian territory.

Top 10 beneficiaries — geographic breakdown of MS and EU
humanitarian aid contributions

4.3. 
Evaluations  
4.3.1. 
The 2010 work programme

Each
year, an indicative Evaluation Programme is established after a consultative
process within DG ECHO and with the Humanitarian Aid Committee. This programme
is flexible and can be adapted to include evaluations not scheduled in the
initial programme, in response to particular events or changing circumstances.

DG ECHO’s mandate to
evaluate is set out in Article 18 of the Humanitarian Aid Regulation, which
requires the Commission to ‘regularly assess humanitarian aid operations
financed by the [European Union] in order to establish whether they have
achieved their objectives and to produce guidelines for improving the
effectiveness of subsequent operations’.

These evaluations are
carried out by independent consultants placed on a list drawn up following a
call for expressions of interest (CEI) and valid for three years. In 2010 the
former CEI list expired and a new call for expressions of interest for the
database of evaluation contractors was prepared and launched in March. The
Evaluation sector is receiving proposals in response to that call that are
immediately assessed and responded to. A set of FAQs was published on the DG ECHO
website for guidance. At the end of 2010 the CEI list of eligible consulting
firms already included 18 members.

Evaluations
can cover not only reviews of Commission-funded operations,
but also thematic issues and partnerships. It is
intended to increase the level of coordination with other Commission
departments, Member States and other major donors.

The
evaluations and reviews concluded in 2010 confirmed that, in general terms,
DG ECHO’s actions in the field of humanitarian aid contributed to
effective implementation of the DG’s objectives. The evaluation programme for
2010 included 17 evaluations and studies. However, in the light of the
prioritisation given to unplanned evaluations/reviews linked to the Commission
Work Programme (namely the evaluation of civil protection, the real-time
evaluation of Haiti and the European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps — EVHAC
review) in the first part of the year, the Evaluation sector had to
re-prioritise the programme in line with DG ECHO’s evolving needs.

In
2010, 17[66]
evaluations, reviews and follow-up
contracts were finalised or launched:

– 
Twelve evaluations: Iraqi
crisis, air transport, Nepal, Burmese refugee camps in Thailand, Sahel, Kenya,
Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda and
Zimbabwe, plus two that were not
initially planned and were added in line with operational needs: real-time
evaluation in Haiti and civil protection evaluation.

– 
Three reviews/studies with a core focus on DG ECHO’s policy
development priorities: air
transport at field level, the unit
cost approach and the European
Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps (EVHAC) review.

– 
Two follow-up contracts: air transport and the EVHAC.

4.3.2. 
Results of some evaluations
finalised in 2010

- The Evaluation of
the provision of air transport in support of humanitarian operations
concluded that each service has its advantages and disadvantages, which will be
more or less significant according to the context. In particular, the ECHO
Flight service remains effective, highly regarded, visible and relatively
cost-efficient.

- According to the Evaluation
of DG ECHO’s assistance to vulnerable groups affected by the crisis in the
Central African Republic during the period 2007–2010, DG ECHO
performed well in responding to the humanitarian needs. Its operations remained
flexible to a changing situation in all areas of the country and its support
allowed partner organisations to respond on the basis of need, within their
capabilities.

- The Evaluation of
DG ECHO’s actions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo identified the
major impact of DG ECHO’s activity in this conflict area and made operational
recommendations for the improvement of protection-oriented activities.

- The Evaluation of
DG ECHO’s action in response to the Iraqi crisis (2007–2009) showed a
positive balance as regards the handling of refugees’ needs in Syria and
Jordan.

- DG ECHO’s activities
were found to contribute to the protection of the lives and good health of
malnourished individuals, as well as to the protection of livelihoods of
vulnerable households, according to the Evaluation of DG ECHO’s funded
actions in Kenya (2008-2009), although the report recommended that it place
a greater focus on water provision, animal feed and seed distribution.

- Finally, the Evaluation
of DG ECHO’s action in Nepal concluded that sectoral approaches were
generally appropriate, effective and efficient in water and sanitation, health
and disaster risk reduction, but the move towards more development activities
creates increasing challenges for partners working with DG ECHO.

More detail on the
evaluations carried out can be found on DG ECHO’s website: http://ec.europa.eu/echo/policies/evaluation/introduction_en.htm.

4.4. 
Control of the use of funds
4.4.1. 
Internal control

Correct implementation
of EU-funded operations is ensured by several layers of checks at
various stages of the project cycle for humanitarian operations. The main
aspects of the control strategy developed by the Commission, the supervision and
monitoring procedures and the ex-ante and ex-post controls are described below
and comprise:

· Strict selection and quality control mechanisms
for partners under the
Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA) signed with NGOs and international
organisations[67]
that specify the financial credentials and expertise required of implementing
partners, combined with both regular and ad hoc assessments of FPA partners in
order to ensure that these requirements are met continuously. Financial
management and control requirements for UN bodies are laid down in the EU-UN
Financial Administrative Framework Agreement (FAFA).

· Strictly needs-based systems for identifying
the actions to be funded. These needs assessments are carried out by the
partner organisations and cross-checked/monitored by DG ECHO’s technical
assistants on the ground.

· Ex-ante controls on the selection
of projects and before the signature of contracts.

· Day-to-day monitoring of progress of projects.
Each grant and contribution agreement is monitored by the desk and field expert
and the outcome is recorded on a project appraisal worksheet (‘fichop’).

· Project monitoring by a network of field experts (technical assistants) worldwide. These
specialists are based in the field in order to facilitate operations funded by
the EU, regardless of where, and maximise their impact. They closely monitor
projects and write regular reports. In order to enhance the rapid reaction
capacity and monitoring of operations, the number of field experts has
gradually been increased in recent years. Currently about 100 field experts are
based in the various field offices.

· Regular field visits to projects by
geographic desks, auditors and management.

· An obligation on the partners to provide reports
after the end of the operations to substantiate their expenses.

· A thorough analysis of these reports and
checks on eligible expenditure by both the operational and financial desk
officers. Various procedures, such as check-lists and double checking, have
been set up to ensure that all financial transactions are in line with the
financial rules, comply with sound financial management and are recorded
correctly in the accounting system. Expenditure which is not sufficiently
substantiated in final reports is disallowed and deducted from the final payment.

· Approximately ten evaluations are
undertaken on average each year, focusing on major country operations (i.e.
operations that receive funding totalling about € 50 million and have
not been evaluated in the last three years), partners and thematic issues. The
results of these evaluations can be found on DG ECHO’s website at http://ec.europa.eu/echo/policies/evaluation/introduction_en.htm
(see also Section 4.3).

· EU-funded activities implemented by external
partners and contractors are subject to a financial audit. The audit
strategy is based on a twin-track approach: audits are performed both at
partners’ headquarters on a cyclical basis for finalised projects and in the
field for ongoing projects.

In 2010, a budget of € 2.2 million for
contracts with external auditors was allocated to audits. In terms of work
carried out, 62 audits were performed at headquarters; 45 field audits were
finalised on projects under way; 4 field office audits were carried out and 5
humanitarian procurement centres were assessed.

Audit recommendations
are a valuable channel for feedback for improvements to partners’ reporting
systems. Furthermore, audit findings on the eligibility of expenditures are
analysed by Commission officials and appropriate follow-up action is taken,
such as recovery of funds.

The working
arrangements for audits performed by DG ECHO are available on the internet at http://ec.europa.eu/echo/funding/audit_en.htm
to inform partners about what they can expect from audits as well as what the
audit team expects from its partners.

DG ECHO also has an Internal Audit and Advice sector
(IAC), which provides independent, objective assurance and consulting services
designed to add value and improve the operations of the DG. The IAC helps the
DG accomplish its objectives by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach in
order to evaluate and make recommendations for improving the effectiveness of
risk management, control, and governance processes.

The checks listed above
should not be seen in isolation. Each of them contributes to providing overall reasonable assurance on the
legality and regularity of the transactions.

4.4.2. 
External control

Every year, the
European Parliament and the Council give their opinion on the discharge of past
budgets. To this end, the specialised committees of the budget authority
exercise control over financial management in EU bodies and organise yearly
hearings with the Commissioners concerned. All Commission departments are
accountable to the European Parliament and the Council, among other things in
annual reports giving details of their activities. Their budget management is
also continuously audited by the European Court of Auditors, which reports to
the budget authority.

The Commission’s
operations and its financial management in the field of humanitarian assistance
are audited by its Internal Audit Service (IAS) and by the Court of Auditors.

The task of the
Internal Audit Service is to audit the internal control systems that exist
within the Commission. In its 2009 Internal Audit Report, the IAS reported on
the financial management of food assistance. In 2010, the IAS also audited DG
ECHO’s compliance with payment deadlines. The IAS endorsed the internal control
systems audited, issuing recommendations on the need to improve management of
the deadlines for the acceptance of final reports submitted late and the
management of suspensions.

The Court of Auditors
audits the EU’s finances. Its observations and recommendations are published in
its annual report and in special reports to the European Parliament and the
European Council. For the 2009 financial year, the Court concluded in its
annual report that all the key internal controls of the Commission in relation
to humanitarian aid were effective and did not find a material level of errors
in DG ECHO transactions. The Court also issued a special report in October 2009
on ‘EU assistance implemented through United Nations (UN) organisations:
decision-making and monitoring’. The main messages are directed to EuropeAid
and there are no major concerns specifically referring to DG ECHO. This report
recommends (i) translating procedures for the selection of UN partners into
practical criteria, (ii) carrying out a formal appraisal of alternative aid
delivery mechanisms, (iii) collecting adequate information on the efficiency
and the achievements of the projects funded through the UN, and (iv) improving
the UN’s access to supporting documentation.

4.5. 
Visibility of aid and
communication

The broad objective of DG ECHO’s communication work is
to boost understanding, in Europe and in countries where Commission-funded
humanitarian operations are implemented, of the concrete contribution made by
humanitarian aid to the EU commitment of solidarity with the world’s most
vulnerable people. The high profile and rapidly moving environment of
humanitarian aid means that media-oriented activities are central to the
strategy. An example of this was the immediate deployment of DG ECHO
communication officers in major crisis situations such as the Haiti earthquake
and the Pakistan floods. They handled the media on the spot and were able to
highlight the EU relief efforts. They were also joined by film crews working
for Europe by Satellite, ensuring broad dissemination of film material.

An EU-wide survey in
2010 showed that EU citizens strongly support action at European level to help
crisis victims: eight out of ten citizens (79 %) think it is important
that the EU funds humanitarian aid outside its borders (Special Eurobarometer
343 on humanitarian aid). This policy therefore presents an ongoing opportunity
for the Commission to ‘connect’ positively with citizens. Communicating effectively
with young people who are generally more receptive could have longer-term
humanitarian benefits.

A number of print
publications were produced. These included a trilingual brochure Looking at
Humanitarian Aid (in English, French and Spanish); a leaflet Protecting
the Humanitarian Space; and reprints of existing leaflets, in particular DG ECHO
at a Glance in numerous language versions. There was continued demand for
such information products, in particular for the comic book: 173 185
copies in five language versions (Dutch, English, French, German and Italian)
were requested and distributed up to the end of the year, mainly thanks to
strong demand from school teachers.

Other communication
products included: video clips on humanitarian crises and the EU response, 22
of which were produced in-house and published e.g. on EUTube; press releases;
eye-witness accounts, stories from the field and country-specific web sections
placed on the DG ECHO section of the Commission website on the Europa
server. A website (http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/georgieva/index_en.htm)
and social media (blog, facebook, twitter[68]) were created for the new Commissioner for
International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response and quickly
became the third most popular Commissioner’s website.

A staggering 14 million
people were reached by a cinema spot campaign in Denmark, Germany and Spain in
January and February (3.4 million in Denmark, 7.2 million in Germany and 3.5
million in Spain), thanks to the blockbuster Avatar, to which the ECHO
spot was linked. An additional 14 million cinema-goers in France and Italy saw
the UNHCR/European Commission Humanitarian Aid spot (2.5 million in France and
11.5 million in Italy) between January and May.

To ensure the
visibility of EU aid, DG ECHO continued to advise relief partner organisations
on communication activities funded under operational financing agreements.
Related expenditure under operational visibility budget lines was also
monitored. In addition, 2010 was the first year of implementation of a new
approach based on less grant funding in operations and more direct
communication work to be undertaken or monitored by the information and
communication unit. This was achieved by using a € 1 million Commission
Decision on the financing of public awareness, information and communication
actions in the humanitarian field, which was adopted in December 2009.
DG ECHO received 37 proposals from partners for joint communication
actions, out of which six proposals were selected. Two of the proposed actions
have already been completed, and the remainder are planned for implementation
in the first half of 2011. The two joint communication actions carried out in
2010 were: (1) an interactive multimedia exhibition ‘La Scienza dell’Emergenza’
plus associated media events in northern Italy, organised by CEVSI; (2) ‘Le
banquet de la faim’ — public awareness-raising events in 28 French cities,
including a central event at the Eiffel Tower in Paris on World Food Day. The
latter provided very good publicity for the cause as well as for the organisers
Action Contre la Faim and European Commission Humanitarian Aid. ‘Le banquet de la faim’ also won the ‘Grand Prix Stratégies
des relations publiques 2010’ in France in the category ‘Campagnes d’intérêt
général’.

Other public events
organised by DG ECHO’s information and communication unit in 2010 include:

· ‘Don’t shoot! I’m a humanitarian worker’,
a media campaign focusing on the safety and security of aid workers on the
occasion of World Humanitarian Day on 19 August. The campaign included, among
other activities, an op-ed article by Commissioner Georgieva, published by
several dozen prestigious newspapers and media outlets in 25 EU Member States
and throughout the world.

· Humanitarian Movie Days (‘Bewegende Bilder’)
with school screenings in Austria (Vienna) and Germany (Berlin, Cologne,
Hamburg), attended by 6 208 people.

· The world’s largest postcard to show solidarity
with Haiti — a communication action mainly with schools in southern France (to
be completed in 2011).

· ‘Humanitarian Maze/Night at the Museums’ in
Bucharest, Romania. The Maze was awarded the Gold Award of Excellence for the
best Public Sector Communication by the entire Romanian PR Industry in October
2010.

Participation in public events not directly organised by DG
ECHO, such as the European Development Days, provided further opportunities for
communication and visibility. The presence of the Commissioner attracts
substantial media attention at such events.

4.6. 
Security and safety issues

Humanitarian aid
organisations operate in difficult environments, typified by unpredictability,
volatility, insecurity and problems with gaining access to the people affected.
These conditions combined with the fact that operations are carried out by
third parties (DG ECHO’s partners) make achievement of policy objectives a
challenging task. This explains why security is a high priority for the
Commission.

During 2010, a
significant number of violent acts were committed, directly or indirectly,
against humanitarian aid workers. In particular, there has been an upward trend
in the number of incidents involving national/local NGO staff. These security
incidents continued to undermine the operational efficiency and effectiveness
of humanitarian partners. This more insecure environment also affected DG ECHO
staff in the field, who fell victim, although unharmed, in several cases,
notably in Quito and in Nyala. DG ECHO continues to deploy on a permanent basis
in high-risk countries/areas, such as Pakistan and Yemen.

During constant
monitoring of the security situation in places where DG ECHO carries out its
activities, more than 60 security alerts were launched and appropriate security
arrangements to mitigate the threats were proposed. Security-related
information held by Commission departments and external security partners was
accessed and duly disseminated to relevant actors.

In this context, the
Commission continued its efforts to improve the overall security of
humanitarian aid personnel — be they Commission or partners’ staff in the field
— in order to adapt to an increasingly volatile and insecure environment. The
Commission has established its own comprehensive security policy, taking into
account the specifics of delivery of humanitarian aid.

To respond to the
growing security threats, the Commission set up a security team for
DG ECHO at the end of 2008. The overall purpose is to develop and
implement the security policies and procedures for relevant staff at
headquarters and in the field, within the Commission’s security framework.

Internal procedures to
improve security aspects of missions involving DG ECHO staff in the field have
been established, including the adoption of a list of high-risk countries,
which is updated periodically, and a compilation of all security instructions
to create standard security protocols (ongoing).

Cooperation and
coordination with other Commission departments, other EU institutions and
leading stakeholders is also essential in order to deliver effective security
solutions. On security-related issues, relations within the Commission and with
the Security office of the Council, the UNDSS[69],
the ICRC and NGOs’ security set-ups are therefore primarily the responsibility
of the security team.

Finally, specific
security plans were produced during the year for all DG ECHO Offices in the
field. The security coordinator provided advice and support on a wide range of
issues such as protective security measures, and security plans for field
offices in high-risk areas. A permanently manned security system ensured
non-stop 24/7/365 support for security crises. The Commission also promoted its
security arrangements in seminars and fora organised by international organisations
and NGOs.

4.7. 
Training initiative — NOHA

The EU finances
networks and training in the humanitarian field. One example is NOHA, the first
network of universities at European level active in developing education on
humanitarian action. It seeks greater professionalism among humanitarian
workers by providing a solid intellectual grounding and developing sound
concepts and principles that will, in turn, lead to ‘good practice’. It also
contributes to greater awareness of humanitarian issues among the broader
public and policy-makers. It has been a model for other quality networks.

The NOHA Master’s
programme is an inter-university, multidisciplinary postgraduate programme
launched in 1993 that provides high-quality education and professional skills
for personnel working or intending to work in the area of international
humanitarian assistance. NOHA takes an interdisciplinary approach, linking
theory, practice, participatory learning and case-based analyses.

NOHA was developed
jointly by the Commission and the universities concerned under the auspices of
the Socrates/Erasmus programme. The NOHA Master’s programme is the first of its
kind in the world, bringing together seven universities from all over Europe.
The strong commitment of the NOHA Universities is extended through a broader
network of associates in each of the EU countries and at the broader level of
83 European Faculties dealing with related issues. This is the Thematic Network
of Humanitarian Development Studies of which NOHA is the starting point and the
core component.

The objectives pursued
by this training are to:

– 
pool academic resources and
cultural traditions in order to accommodate diverse individual, academic and
employment needs in the field of humanitarian action;

– 
provide the academic and
professional profiles and skills for personnel working in the field of
international humanitarian action;

– 
train a team of
professionals in the field of humanitarian action who are able to share their
experience world-wide and harness Europe’s potential for innovation and social
and economic development;

– 
contribute to the quality
and visibility of higher education in Europe by implementing a well-defined
joint Master’s programme in seven universities which corresponds to an academic
and professional profile within a common framework of comparable and compatible
qualifications in terms of profile, learning outcomes, skills, workload and
level (comparable level of intellectual academic endeavour); and

– 
become a world reference as
a quality education and training system in the field of humanitarian action
offering a programme open to graduates and scholars from non-EU countries which
allows mobility between the institutions in the NOHA network and leads to a
joint Master’s degree in humanitarian action.

With experience and a
track record extending over more than ten years, NOHA has become a
driving-force in the constant search for quality in the training of
humanitarian personnel, and a concrete example of European solidarity and
response to situations of complex emergencies all around the world.

Administration and
organisation of the NOHA programme are entirely in the hands of the
universities participating. Further information on this training is available
at http://www.nohanet.org.

5. 
Annexes   
5.1. 
Introduction to financial
tables

DG ECHO implements
the part of the EU’s annual general budget
that is allocated to humanitarian aid and, as from 2010, to civil protection.
Over the last three years, an average of € 1 billion per year has been
committed to humanitarian aid.

Sources of funds for
humanitarian assistance

On the whole, the
Commission has two sources of funding for humanitarian assistance:

· The general EU budget. Humanitarian aid
falls under Title 23 of the budget, which is divided into the following lines:

– the main one that covers humanitarian
operations;

– a line which has covered food aid activities since 1 January 2007;

– a line that covers operational support and disaster preparedness operations;

– as from 2010, new lines covering civil
protection under DG ECHO’s responsibility; and

– lines for support expenditure (humanitarian aid
and civil protection).

· The European Development Fund, which is
used for humanitarian aid operations in ACP countries.

To be able to respond
rapidly to specific aid requirements created by events that could not have been
foreseen when the budget was established, the Commission may also call on an
Emergency Aid Reserve (Title 40). To mobilise this Reserve, a trilateral
agreement between the Commission, the Council and Parliament has to be
obtained. In the case of ACP countries, the Commission also draws on financial
resources available under the European Development Fund (EDF), which has an
allocation for emergency and humanitarian aid.

In recent years, the
humanitarian assistance budget has systematically been topped up, either by the
Emergency Aid Reserve, or by transfers from other budget lines under the
‘external aid’ heading or, in the case of ACP countries, by using resources
from the European Development Fund (‘B’ allocation), ranging over a ten-year
period from € 71 million in 2001 to € 301 million in 2010.

In practice, the
Commission applies the same principles and guidelines to aid financed from the
EDF and aid from the general budget. It uses the Framework Partnership
Agreement for operations funded from either source.

5.2. 
Financial tables

I         DG ECHO budget
over the years 1993-2010

II       Graph on DG ECHO budget over the years 1993-2010

III      Budget for humanitarian aid and civil protection
over the years 1993-2010

IV      Contracts and
funding decisions

V       Sectoral breakdown
of activities

VI      Global geographic
breakdown of funding 2004-2010

VII     Geographic
breakdown of funding 2004-2010

VIII   Implementing
partners:

(a) Humanitarian
aid contracts by main category and nationality of partners

(b) Contracts for
humanitarian aid operations, by partner

(c) Contracts for
humanitarian aid operations, top 25 partners

(d) Contracts for humanitarian aid operations, by
beneficiary country and implementing partner

IX.     Consolidated report
on EU funding for humanitarian aid in 2010 
          (European Commission and Member States)

(a) Breakdown by
beneficiary country

(b) Breakdown by
donor

[1]               COM(2010) 600 final, SEC(2010) 1243 and 1242.

[2]               COM(2010) 683 final.

[3]               COM(2010) 722.

[4]               SEC(2010) 1505.

[5]               COM(2010) 126, SEC(2010) 374.

[6]               The 23 GHD ‘principles and good practices’ were
adopted in 2003 and have now been endorsed by 37 donors, who work together as a
network to advance good donor practice in humanitarian action.

[7]               COM(2009) 82 and COM(2009) 84.

[8]               Of which € 33 million was
funded from the budget line for disaster preparedness (23.0203) and € 49 million
from mainstreaming activities.

[9]               United Nations International
Strategy for Disaster Reduction.

[10]             COM(2010) 600 and SEC(2010) 1242 and 1243.

[11]             The documents were developed by the Council. See the
General Framework for the use of Member States’ military and military chartered
transportation assets and ESDP coordination tools in support of EU disaster
response, and Military support to EU disaster response — identification and
coordination of available assets and capabilities (documents 8976/06,
6644/4/04, 9462/3 REV3 and 14540/06 + COR1).

[12]             Military and Civil Defence Assets.

[13]             http://www.aidworkersecurity.org.

[14]             http://www.sphereproject.org/.

[15]             World Health Organisation.

[16]             COM(2010) 265, 8.3.2010.

[17]             COM(2010) 491, 21.9.2010.

[18]             As adopted by the Council, EP and Commission on 18
December (OJ C 25, 30.1.2008, p. 1).

[19]             Commission Staff Working Document ‘European Consensus
on Humanitarian Aid — Action Plan’ SEC(2008) 1991, 29.5.2008.

[20]             GHD principle 18, but also principle 8 on strengthening
the capacity of affected countries and local communities and principle 10 to
support and promote the central and unique role of the UN.

[21]             See footnote 1, supra.

[22]             United Nations Economic and Social Committee.

[23]             Political and Security Committee.

[24]             Permanent Representatives Committee.

[25]             European Parliament Committee on Development.

[26]             European Parliament Committee on Foreign Affairs.

[27]             European Parliament Committee on Environment, Public
Health and Food Security.

[28]             The methodology used and the results for 2009 are
available at:                
http://EU.europa.eu/echo/information/strategy/index_en.htm.

[29]             The first seven in the list
were also identified as forgotten crises [?]in
2009 and the last five have been identified as forgotten crises since
2010. The last one in the list (Sahel) is considered as having been forgotten,
even if the Forgotten Crisis Assessment (FCA) methodology is not fully
applicable in this case.

[30]             http://hdr.undp.org.

[31]             Source: GoP (NDMA, PDMA, GBDMA).

[32]             Formerly NWFP — North-West Frontier Province.

[33]             Hurricane
Mitch is a benchmark in Central America’s recent disaster history.

[34]             Source:
CRED (Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters).

[35]             DG ECHO
responded to these earthquakes through three decisions totalling € 10 500 000.

[36]             According
to the CCAD (Comisión Centroamericana para el Ambiente y el Desarrollo), the
losses of forests in Central America during 1997-1998 amount to 1.5 million
hectares.

[37]             According to Acción Social, the number of IDPs
officially registered is 3 551 106, up to 10 Nov 2010.

[38]             The Colombian NGO Consultoría para los Derechos Humanos y
el Desplazamiento — CODHES estimates 4 915 579 IDPs for the period 1984-2009.

[39]             According to the study ‘Población confinada en
Colombia’ OCHA, 2010.

[40]             As of January 2010, the UNHCR counted 454 088 Colombian refugees and asylum seekers.

[41]             Estimated at COP 1.5 billion by the GoC in 2010 (Acción
Social, press release on 5 Jan 2011).

[42]             According to official data (Dirección de Gestion del
Riesgo, Ministry of Home Affairs and Justice), 2 234 154 people have
been affected by the floods (update on 11 Jan 2011).

[43]             US Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance.

[44]             UK Department for International Development.

[45]             The HRF obtains funding from the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United
Kingdom.

[46]             http://www.prdp.org.ug/index.php.

[47]             Northern Uganda Recovery Programme.

[48]             Agricultural Livelihoods Recovery Programme.

[49]             Karamoja Livelihoods Programme.

[50]             See Commission Communication on a Community approach on
the prevention of natural and man-made disasters (COM(2009) 82 final,
23.2.2009) and Council Conclusions of 30 November 2009 on a Community framework
on disaster prevention within the EU.

[51]             Commission Staff Working Paper — Risk Assessment and
Mapping Guidelines for Disaster Management (SEC(2010) 1626, 21.12.2010).

[52]             See, inter alia, the Council Conclusions of 8 November
2010 on Innovative Solutions for Financing Disaster Prevention.

[53]             See Article 4 of the Mechanism Recast.

[54]             ‘Module’ means a self-sufficient and autonomous
predefined task- and needs-driven arrangement of Member States’ capabilities or
a mobile operational team of the Member States representing a combination of
human and material means, that can be described in terms of its capacity for
intervention or by the task(s) it is able to undertake (Article 3(5) of the
Mechanism Recast).

[55]             Commission Decision 2004/277/EC, Euratom of 29 December
2003 as regards rules for the implementation of Council Decision 2007/779/EC,
Euratom establishing a Community civil protection mechanism (OJ L 87,
25.3.2004, p. 20), as amended by Decision 2008/73/EC, Euratom of 20 December
2007 (OJ L 20, 24.1.2008, p. 23).

[56]             Commission Decision 2010/481/EU, Euratom of 29 July
2010 amending Decision 2004/277/EC, Euratom as regards rules for the
implementation of Council Decision 2007/779/EC, Euratom establishing a
Community civil protection mechanism (OJ L 236, 7.9.2010, p. 5).

[57]             Ibid.

[58]             The alkali sludge accident in Hungary; floods
in Hungary, Poland and Romania; forest fires in France and Portugal (3
emergencies); rescue for potholers in France; snowfall in the UK
and the Netherlands; torrential rain in Malta.

[59]             The cholera outbreak in Haiti; earthquake
in Haiti and Chile; floods in Albania (2 emergencies), Benin, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Colombia, Montenegro, Moldova, Pakistan, Tajikistan and Ukraine; forest
fires in Israel and Russia; oil spill in the United States and Cuba
(to counter the after-effects of the US oil spill); potential dam collapse
in Ukraine; tropical storm in Guatemala; volcanic eruption in
Iceland.

[60]             The top 10 partners are: WFP, UNHCR, ICRC, Unicef, Save
the Children UK, Oxfam UK, IFRC, FAO, UNRWA, ACTED.

[61]             € 10 million for emergency actions.

[62]             Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development.

[63]             Available since 1 January 2003.

[64]             Weblink: https://webgate.EU.europa.eu/hac

[65]             United Nations Office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Aid.

[66]             The air transport exercise included an evaluation of DG
ECHO activities and also a study on the topic with a broader perspective. This
two-pronged exercise was covered by just one contract.

[67]             Mainly the IFRC, ICRC and IOM.

[68]             http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/georgieva;
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Kristalina-Georgieva/120452521322623;
http://twitter.com/k_georgieva.

[69]             United Nations Department of Safety and Security.