EN    EN EN 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 1.7.2009 
SEC(2009)825 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
accompanying the 
Report from the Commission  
Directorate-General for Humanitarian Aid – ECHO 
Annual Report 2008 
[COM(2009)290 final] 
EN    EN TABLE OF CONTENTS 
Part I Special Topics .......................................................................................................... .... 3 
Part II General programming principles................................................................................ 15 Part III Country-by-country overview.................................................................................... 17 1. ACP Countries ........................................................................................................... 19 2. Eastern Europe, Russian Federation, Southern Caucasus, Central Asia, 
including Mongolia .................................................................................................... 51 
3. Mediterranean and Middle East ................................................................................. 56 4. Asia ........................................................................................................................ .... 61 
5. Latin America and Cuba ............................................................................................ 79 6. Disaster preparedness activ ities (including dipecho)................................................. 86 
PART IV.- Policy issues ........................................................................................................ .. 96 
PART V. - Relations with stakeholders ................................................................................... 98 PART VI. - Other Issues ........................................................................................................ 100 
PART VII. - Evaluations and outside assessments ................................................................ 105 PART VIII. - Financial tables ................................................................................................ 10 7 
PART IX. - List of acronyms ................................................................................................. 139  
EN 3   EN PART I SPECIAL TOPICS  
1.1. The Top 10 humanitarian cri ses in terms of funding 

EN 4   EN 1. Sudan 
The Darfur region (Sudan) is considered the worst humanitarian situation in the 
world and consequently the international humanitarian ai d effort is enormous. The 
lives of millions of people depend on external aid. In 2008, €167 millions were 
allocated to cover humanitarian and food aid needs. 
2. Palestinian territories, in cluding refugees in Lebanon 
The serious humanitarian situation did not show any improvement throughout 2008, 
in spite of the resumption of the structural  assistance to the Palestinian Authority in 
December 2007. In addition to the political s ituation, the most vulnerable segments 
of the Palestinian population in  the West Bank of Gaza were  affected by two climate 
elements, frost and drought. A funding of €82.8 million was allocated, to help cover 
the needs 
3. Democratic Republic of Congo The country has posed a sign ificant challenge to humanitarian organisations over a 
number of years with recu rrent outbreaks of fighting in the Eastern causing hundreds 
of thousands of people to flee their home s. The funding allocated in 2008 reached a 
total amount of €45.5 million to cove r humanitarian and food needs. 
4. Burma/Myanmar (Nargis) In early May 2008, Cyclone Nargis passed over Burma (Myanmar) hitting the 
Irrawaddy delta, after forming in the Bay of Bengal, causing the death or disappearance of more than 100 000 people and 2.5 millions of victims out of 50 
millions of inhabitants. DG ECHO responded wi th a series of decisions for a total of 
€39 million. 
5. Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran €36.3 million was addressed to vulnerable people affected by crises and natural 
disasters in Afghanista n, Iran and Pakistan. .  
EN 5   EN 6. Somalia 
The humanitarian crisis in Somalia has furt her deteriorated since the beginning of the 
year, affecting 43% of the en tire population of the country1. Given the scope of the 
crisis, almost half of the aid (€46 milli on) has been allocated to food assistance 
programmes, which includes general distributio n of food rations in the most critical 
areas.  
7. Chad The operations funded in 2008 covered two area s: the East where Sudanese refugees 
and Chadian IDPs are located and the Sout h which hosts refugees from the Central 
African Republic. The aid totalling €30 m illion is multi-sectoral, covering among 
other sectors water and sanitation, hea lth, nutrition, food aid and food security, 
primary education, shelter and th e humanitarian air service.  
8. Drought preparedness programme Giving the deterioration in terms of ch ronic and structural drought related 
emergencies, DG ECHO has embarked on a new approach which intends to address the drought related needs within a short-me dium term perspective with focus on 
water, human/animal health and livelihood support in the huge arid and semi-arid 
areas inhabited by pastoralist and agro-pas toralist communities. A total funding of 
€30 million was allocated to respond to these needs. 
9. Iraq (crisis) Assistance to the victims of the Iraqi crisis , whether inside or out side Iraq, has been 
stepped up in 2008. DG ECHO allocated €30 million to respond to the needs of 
refugees, mainly in Syria and Jordan and to a lesser extent in Lebanon and Turkey, 
and to the needs of the displaced  and local population inside Iraq 
10. Zimbabwe The general objective in 2008 was to mitig ate the effects of the socio-economic 
breakdown on the deteriorating situati on of vulnerable groups. Humanitarian 
operations (for €25 million) were funded in the areas of emergency household food 
security and agriculture, water and sanitati on and integrated assistance to the most 
vulnerable population. 
                                                
 
1 According the Food Security Analysis Unit Somalia 
EN 6   EN 1.2. Two case Studies on the launching of humanitarian aid 
1. Myanmar – Cyclone Nargis 
Context 
Myanmar is the largest country in mainland S outh-East Asia with a population of 51.5 million 
of people. Floods occur regularly and the country  is prone to cyclones,  landslides, earthquakes 
and drought. On 2nd-3rd May 2008, Cyclone Nargis struck Myanmar, sweeping through the 
Ayeyarwady delta region and the country's main city, Yangon. 2.4 million people were affected and many lost their livelihoods (fishing, farming, casual labouring). 140,000 people 
were killed. Cyclone Nargis is the worst na tural disaster in the history of Myanmar. 
(map) 
EN 7   EN Chronology of Events 
3rd May - ECHO Yangon Head of Office reports that  Yangon is severely affected by the 
cyclone with fallen trees and r oofs destroyed. Electricity a nd water supply is interrupted. 
There is no news from other areas in the count ry, presumably worse affected than Yangon.  
4th May  - The Ministry of Social Welfare announces 10.000 deaths and thousands of 
wounded. Due to travel restrictions for foreigne rs, aid agencies start deploying national staff 
to assess the situation in affected areas. The ECHO field expert contacts partners with 
presence in the Ayeyarwady delta, but they ha ve not yet received any updates from their 
teams in the field.  
5th May  - As the ECHO expert does not yet have a travel permit, the local ECHO Programme 
Assistant travels to South D agon Township (Yangon Division) to assess damages and needs. 
A Primary Emergency Decision is launched. DG ECHO meets with 10 partners who started 
to assess the situation and to  distribute relief items. On ly organisations having a 
Memorandum of Understanding signed with the aut horities are able to wo rk in the affected 
areas. Since travel authorisati ons for international staff are necessary to leave the capital 
(and they are not being granted), the organisa tion of relief becomes very difficult.  
8th May  - Ten clusters are activated by the United Nations. The Disaster Coordination 
Centre is established at the UNDP2 compound to centralise information. However, only a few 
agencies have supplied the system with th e necessary input. DG ECHO's staff from 
neighbouring countries arrived to assist th e ECHO expert in Yangon: the Health and Water 
Sanitation & Health (WASH) experts and the Regional Information Officer from ECHO's 
Regional Support Office in Bangkok, the R apid Response Coordinator from ECHO's New 
Delhi Office and the Food Security Expert from  the EC Delegation in Bangladesh. All experts 
have been granted a visa for 3 days. A 5-day extension is given but restricted to Yangon. 
ECHO experts are blocked in Yangon. The local ECHO Programme Assistant goes to Labutta 
Township to assess the situation in the delta. As the Government is still not issuing visas for 
aid workers, a parallel cluster syst em is being set up in Bangkok.  
9th May  - A United Nations Flash appeal of $110 mi llion for 6 months is launched. The 
number of people affected by the cyclone is now estimated at 1.2-1.9 million, with 63.000- 
100.000 people dead or missing. Limited humanitarian  aid is arriving. The main obstacles 
are visa and travel restrictions and insufficien t levels of relief authorised by the Government 
of Myanmar to enter the count ry. The first official donor  meeting is organised and an 
UNDAC team arrives. DG ECHO is part of the team through its' Regional Disaster Response 
Coordinator.  
13th May  - An extraordinary General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC) is 
convened by the French Presidency to discu ss the situation in Burma/Myanmar. EU Member 
States approve Commissioner Michel 's trip into the country.  
15th May  - European Commissioner Louis Michel a rrives in Yangon and meets the Ministers 
of Planning, Social Welfare and Health. Monito ring and Informati on Centre (MIC) is 
deployed to Yangon. They use DG ECHO facili ties and joint Sit Reps are prepared. MIC and 
DG ECHO start working together to identify th e destinations for the water treatment plants 
                                                 
2 United Nations Development Programme 
EN 8   EN made available by the EU Member States through MIC. This equipment will be used to 
support the operation of ECHO partners. At a meeting with its partners in Yangon ECHO 
announces a new Emergency and Food Aid Decision.  
17th May  - The ECHO Head of Office is finally abl e to visit the most affected area by 
helicopter in a 1-day visit or ganised by the Government for the representatives of the 
international community. ECHO exp erts continue to assess some of the townships of Yangon 
Division, where it is possible to travel. 
21st May  - MIC team leaves Myanmar. 
24th May  - Access to the affected areas for interna tional staff, as well as importation of relief 
goods is expected to be granted in the n ext few days. ECHO Rapid Response Programme 
Assistant from Bangkok join s the ECHO team in Yangon. Y angon is a seething mass of 
humanitarian workers blocked in the town without access to the affected areas. 
25th May  – An ASEAN3 UN Pledging conference is con vened into Yangon. Donors remain 
cautious with their commitments. Main conditi on for further assistance remains unhindered 
humanitarian access to the affected area.  
27th May  - ECHO is granted authorisation for 3 teams of experts to travel to the field. Each 
team are deployed to a different area of the delta during 3 days.  
1st week of June  - The ECHO teams deployed from B angkok and New Delhi are replaced by 
the Emergency Response team from Bangkok. U nder international pressure, access to the 
delta finally becomes possible for all humanitarian  organisations. In June, the Tripartite Core 
Group (ASEAN, Myanmar Government and the UN) launches the idea of the Post Nargis Joint Assessment (PONJA).  
DG ECHO response to Cyclone Nargis 
The Post Nargis Joint Assessment (PONJA) c onducted in July 2008 revealed overall losses 
and damages estimated at $4 billio n. The UN revised its' Flash Appeal
4 on 10th July 2008 of 
€481.8 million. Four Decisions amounting to a total of €39 million were adopted by the 
European Commission between May and Dece mber 2008: Primary Emergency Decision: 
€2 million, Emergency Decision: €10 million, Food Aid: €5 million, Ad Hoc Decision: 
€22 million (including €5 million for food aid/ security). The Commission funding for the 
initial emergency phase benefitt ed 1.4 million people in seven sect ors: shelter, food, water, 
sanitation, health, nutrition, prot ection and logistics. The Ad Hoc decision of €22 million will 
provide early recovery and livelihood suppor t for up to 850,000 persons and food aid and 
short-term food security support for up to 500,000 pe rsons. The principal focus is on shelter, 
water/sanitation, and health/nutrition. 
Other EC funding in Myanmar 
DG ECHO has financed activities for the conf lict affected population inside Myanmar since 
1992, and the Burmese refugee camps in Thailand since 1995. A new €18.5 million Global Plan for 2009 has been adopted providing protec tion, water/ sanitation, health, nutrition and 
                                                
 
3 The Association of Southeast Asian Nations or ASEAN 
4 Myanmar Tropical Cyclone Nargis  Revised Appeal, 10 July 2008 
EN 9   EN food. In 2007, DG RELEX and DG AIDCO produ ced the first Multi -Annual Indicative 
Programme for Myanmar for the period 2007-2010 (€32 million). Funds have been allocated 
to the Three Diseases Fund fo r tuberculosis, malaria and HIV-Aids (and to a primary 
education programme. In addition, several EC th ematic budget lines such as Aid to Uprooted 
People, Non-state actors address mid-term  needs. DG RELEX/AIDCO 2008 support of 
€6 million through the Food Security Thematic Funding, mainly targeting the Ayeyarwady delta, will complement DG ECHO's operation. This amount together with an additional 
€24.4 million under the Food facility will be spen t through a Livelihood and Food Security 
Trust Fund which is planned to extend to other parts of the c ountry. There is therefore a good 
opportunity for 'Linking Relief Rehabilitati on and Development' (LRRD) activities. 
Aid provided by other donors 
The revised UN Flash Appeal of $477,077,946 had been  financed at 65% as of 27th January 
2009. According to the 14-points system, th e EU Member States provided €102,671,793 to 
Myanmar in 2008. 
Follow up/recommendations 
• A meeting with all ECHO partners should be  organised a couple of months after the 
disaster to share information on the human itarian situation, project experience and 
questions related to implementation. Material for a "lessons learned" exercise could be 
generated, using for instance a questionnaire. 
• The absence of DRR measures in the disaster  area significantly increased the damage and 
loss of life. However, it was difficult to integrate DRR measures into the majority of 
projects, since they addressed mainly emergency needs. In the cases where emergency repair of houses, health centres, schools and water and sanitation systems were at stake, 
partners were advised to include DRR components. Furt her examination on how to 
mainstream DRR into emergency response is needed. 
• Due to travel restrictions, the first ECHO technical assistants' assessment mission took 
place 26 days after the cyclone. The crucial role of national staff in this type of situation 
has to be stressed. 
• Financing the WFP-EMOP has allowed WFP to expand its presence in the delta where it 
played a fundamental umbrella role and wher e an active dialogue wa s set up with local 
authorities. The WFP also acted as aid recipien t for the arrival of cargo from abroad and 
destined to, at the time, unreg istered organisations. The othe r WFP "Special operation" co-
financed by ECHO - logistical support to agencies active in the Delta - provided 
fundamental support in a complicated political/ logistical context.  
• Coordination with Monitoring and Informati on Centre (MIC) at field level was good. MIC 
had to work through ECHO partners due to lack  of access to the affect ed area. They were 
based at the ECHO office. MIC sent a team which could be very much complementary to 
ECHO but working procedures, mandates, objec tives and limits were not clearly spelled 
out. Joint Situation Report s (Sit Reps) were achieved. 
EN 10   EN Other Issues 
Given the fact that cyclone Nargis has highlight ed Myanmar's extreme vulnerability to natural 
disasters and the need need better and more organised disaster prep aredness, DRR measures 
have been integrated in all relevant actions  in the latest DG ECHO funding decision. The 
comparative example of Bangladesh, hit by the even more severe cyclone SIDR in 2007, shows that where DRR activities were in place, the death toll was 50 times less than in the area hit by cyclone Nargis, with a similar geogr aphical setting. The post cyclone period is the 
best time to begin raising awaren ess and integrating di saster risk reduction into early recovery 
actions. 
As a consequence of the efforts of Commi ssioner Louis Michel, Sir John Holmes and UN 
Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon and other prom inent figures in late May, the humanitarian 
space was finally opened up, which shows that the international community can indeed achieve a break-through by strictly adhering to the humanitarian principles  of impartiality and 
neutrality even in such a comp lex disaster response such as the one in Myanmar. This became 
however only possible with involving ASEAN in to the main coordination structure, the 
Tripartite Core Group (TCG). 
EN 11   EN 2. Georgia crisis 
Context 
The start of the short (7th to  12th August) but vi olent conflict in S outh Ossetia between 
Georgia and Russia took the world by surprise , in the middle of the Olympic Summer Games, 
although tensions about the breakaway region be tween the two countries were already rising 
from some months beforehand. 
 
DG ECHO's response 
Despite this, ECHO's deployment was swift, wi th one Technical Assistant on site two days 
after the start of the war and in fact before several implementing partners. The deployment proved also adequate in size in view of the needs and the limited access to conflict areas, with 
three Technical Assistants on s ite during the emergency phase of  the international response. 
The profile of the team also  corresponded well to the needs required during th e first phase 
(protection, shelter, Non-Food items) and the rotation between the experts took place 
smoothly.  
In Brussels, the permanence system worked efficiently and allowed the adoption of a 
€1 million Primary Emergency Decision on Sunda y 10th August, i.e. three days after the 
conflict began. Here again, the si ze and profile of the team in  charge of the response was 
adequate, given the fact that the crisis wa s the only major one whic h took place during the 
summer. 
DG ECHO's financial response to this highly poli ticized crisis which at tracted a lot of donors' 
attention, including EU Member States, proved appropriate in  volume and pertinent in the 
timeline: after the Primary Em ergency Decision of 10th Augus t, two other decisions were 
adopted by the Commission in the course of 2008. An emergency decision of €5 million was 
EN 12   EN adopted afterwards (on 22nd August) in order to cope with the i mmediate needs of the 
133,500 people displaced by the conflict as well as  the most vulnerable population staying in 
South Ossetia and in needs of protecti on, unexploded ordnance (UXO) removal, food, 
household kitchen and hygiene k its and psychosocial support. Fi nally a third (ad hoc) decision 
worth €2 million was approved on 4th December in order to respond to the needs in food and firewood for the returnees as well as to ensure  the winterization of the collective centres 
hosting the long-term IDPs. 
The Commission's response to the crisis was a well coordinated exercise in which DG ECHO 
played a prominent role. On the ground the EC  Delegation in Geor gia provided effective 
support to ECHO experts. The cooperation between the services on site was excellent. After 
the arrival of the DG Environment (DG ENV) Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC) on 
16th August, DG ECHO and the MIC teams work ed in a complementary and synchronized 
way, notably through joint situation reports.  
Before the MIC team's arrival, DG ECHO's e xperts had started to send detailed situation 
reports which were dispatched to the Commission's services, as well as the Member States, the Council and the Parliament. DG ECHO situat ion reports and the jo int situatio n reports 
helped to provide Brussels Headquarters and Memb er States with consolidated information on 
needs and on the activities of Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection services and the 
Delegation. The reports were also  useful in passing messages to Member States regarding the 
needs, the coordination of in-k ind assistance, the concerns a bout human rights violations in 
South Ossetia and the relatively  slow deployment of United Na tions agencies in the buffer 
zone. 
In Brussels, the coordination wa s equally good during the first phase of the response with 
Commission's coordination meetin gs chaired by DG Relex with the participation of the 
Secretariat General. There wa s also a good exchange of information between DG ENV and 
DG ECHO on the principle of depl oyment of the MIC team, the working methods as well as 
the sectors of intervention to avoid, such as war surgery and medicine s. DG ECHO actively 
participated in Councils' meetings where the sw ift and effective EC hu manitarian assistance 
was recognized. 
Finally in terms of visibility for the Co mmission, DG ECHO's swift reaction attracted a 
noticeable interest from the international medi a, both on site and in Brussels. In Georgia, 
DG ECHO deployed its Regi onal Information Officer (RIO) to Georgia as well as one APTN 
(Associated Press Television News) personne l. This provided good visibility to the 
commission in general through the distribution by APTN as well as Europe-by-satellite (EbS) 
of three news reports about the Commission’s hu manitarian activities to  more than 400 main 
news channels around the world and dozens of inte rviews of the RIO with international mass 
media. 
EN 13   EN 1.3. The European consensus and its related action plan 
In recent years, humanitarian aid has change d significantly, reflecting, among other things, 
the changing character of conflicts. Nowadays, these are more often fought inside countries 
by irregular forces. The number of internally  displaced people con tinues to increase, 
international humanitarian law is often negl ected by warring partie s and there are more 
attacks on relief workers. Natural disasters also tend to occur more frequently and are more devastating in their effects - partly as a result of climate change. In parallel to this, there are 
more and new actors engaged in  providing humanitarian assistance, with different agendas 
and modus operandi, further incr easing the need for coordination. 
Against this background of a more complex and difficult humanitarian environment, an 
international reform effort, led by the Un ited Nations, is underway to make the global 
humanitarian aid effort more effective. The European Union - taking the Member States and 
the European Commission together - as the world's largest international humanitarian aid donor has a particular responsibility in spearh eading this international endeavour. There 
should be a fresh impetus given to a collectiv e EU approach in dealing with contemporary 
challenges in humanitarian aid. 
Opinion polling highlights the so lidarity of EU citizens with  the world's most vulnerable 
communities - and also shows that they favour a common European approach in humanitarian 
aid. 
Following these considerations and a wide-r anging consultation of Member States and 
humanitarian organisations, the signing of the European Consensus
5 on Humanitarian Aid  
by the Presidents of the Council, the European  Parliament and the Eu ropean Commission in 
December 2007 is a considerable step forward for the European Union which has finally given itself a common set of values, principl es and objectives intended to strengthen the 
coherence of its overall human itarian action. Significantly, the Consensus stresses the 
importance of the principle of di versity of the implementing partners and, as such, recognises 
that each of these bodies has co mparative advantages in the res ponse to specific situations or 
circumstances. 
The European Consensus underlines the European Union's commitment to upholding and 
promoting the fundamental humanitarian principl es of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and 
independence and to advocating strongly for th e respect of Interna tional Law, including 
International Humanitarian Law, Human Right s Law and Refugee Law. The objective of EU 
humanitarian aid is to provide  a needs-based emergency res ponse aimed at preserving life, 
preventing and alleviating human suffering and maintaining human dignity wherever the need 
arises if governments and local actors ar e overwhelmed, unable or unwilling to act. 
The Consensus was followed by the adoption of an action plan  in May 2008
6. The purpose of 
this Action Plan is to set out a series of  practical actions for the European Union's 
humanitarian donors that taken together form th e EU's substantive agenda for implementing a 
more closely co-ordinated approach. The overall aim is to ensure that the European Union 
                                                 
5 OJ C 25 – 30/1/2008 
6 SEC(2008)1991 
EN 14   EN maximises the effectiveness of its contribution to the collective international humanitarian 
response. 
In order to facilitate the impl ementation of the action plan, related actions have been grouped 
together into six 'action areas': 
• area one: advocacy, promotion of humanitari an principles and international law, 
• area two: implementing qua lity aid approaches; 
• area three: reinforcing capacities to respond; 
• area four: strengthening partnership; 
• area five: enhancing cohere nce and coordination and 
• area six: the aid continuum. 
More detail on the European consensus and th e related action plan is available at the 
following address: http://ec.europa.eu/echo/ policies/consensus_en.htm  
EN 15   EN PART II G ENERAL PROGRAMMING PRINCIPLES  
DG ECHO provides a ssistance to populations with the greatest humanitarian needs, 
irrespective of origin, re ligion or political creed. 
For a number of years, DG ECHO has been us ing a two-pronged approach to identify the 
population with high priority humanitarian needs. The first approach is the evaluation of the 
needs undertaken in the field by experts and ge ographical units. In addition to the immediate 
reports about crisis areas, analyses are carried out  to provide information on specific needs. At 
the same time, a comparative analysis is c onducted to identify those countries which may 
require humanitarian assistance. This global analysis has two dimensions: 
– the Global Needs Assessment (GNA)7 based on national indicators, classes more than 140 
countries according to the existence of a recent cr isis (natural disaster or conflict, including 
the weight of displaced people or refug ees on the population) and the degree of 
vulnerability of the population, incorporating various indica tors (e.g. human development 
index, mortality of children under 5). 
– the Forgotten Crisis Assessment (FCA) attempts to identify serious humanitarian crises in 
which populations affected do not recei ve sufficient international aid.  
The GNA and FCA are important tools for ensuri ng coherence in the allocation of resources 
among the various countries accord ing to their respective needs and independent of any type 
of pressure. 
As a result of the GNA exercise, 15 countries or  territories have been identified for the 2008 
exercise as being particularly vulnerable to existing crises, of which 11 in sub-Saharan Africa 
(Angola, Central African Republic , Chad, Congo R.D., Côte d'Ivoire, Djibouti, Mozambique, 
Somalia, Sudan, Uganda and Zimbabwe), the others being Afghan istan, East Timor, 
Chechnya and Yemen.  
These high vulnerable areas received a tota l of €322 million or 84%  of the initial budget 
allocated to geographical decisions, under the humanitarian aid budget line. 
As a result of the 2008 FCA exercise, the foll owing crises were cla ssified as "forgotten 
crises":  
– Sahrawi refugees in Algeria; 
– Chechnya and the neighbouri ng republics affected;  
– Populations affected by conflicts in India; 
– Bhutanese refugees as well as continuing in stability and security concerns in a post-
conflict situation in Nepal;  
                                                 
7 The methodology used and the results for 2008 are available at the following internet address 
http://ec.europa.eu/echo/inform ation/strategy/index_en.htm   
EN 16   EN – Crisis caused by the conflict in Burma/Myan mar: population intern ally displaced or 
refugees in neighbouring countries, 
– Populations affected by th e conflict in Colombia; 
– Populations affected by the conf lict in Abkhazia (Georgia);  
– Populations affected by food insecurity in the Nusa Tengarra Timur in Indonesia; and  
– Populations affected by the crisis in Haiti.  
These forgotten crises received 11%8of the budget covering the geographical decisions. 
Except for Abkhazia, these crises had already been  identified as "forgotten crises" in previous 
years. 
                                                 
8 €41.5 million on €386 million of geographic decisions 
EN 17   EN PART III C OUNTRY -BY-COUNTRY OVERVIEW  
This synopsis of EC funded hum anitarian operations is presented on a geographical basis, 
organised around the six regions of the worl d where DG ECHO funds humanitarian actions. 
Each of these geographical sections has the sa me structure to permit parallel reading:  
(1) Each section starts with an overview of the funding per country (region) and/or per 
humanitarian crisis in which DG ECHO has in tervened. For all type s of interventions, 
humanitarian aid is implemented thr ough Commission funding decisions and grant 
agreements with partners, w ho implement the specific human itarian operations in the 
field. The overview tables provide the amount  of funding decisions taken for that year. 
(2) For each of the countries (regions) a descri ption is given of the humanitarian needs 
that were identified, the ma in objectives and achievement s and, where a pplicable, the 
transition between emergency and development "LRRD9". 
This country-by-country overvie w includes all countries/crise s for which funding decisions 
were adopted in 2008 and also those for which funding was made available in previous years 
but the implementation was still on-going in 2008. 
In sections III.6 and VI.3 further information is provided on two type s of horizontal funding: 
disaster preparedness activities undertaken in 2008 in order to reduce both vulnerability and 
exposure of people to risks and disasters as well as to reduce the economic costs of such 
disasters and, capacity building actions financed in 2008 with a view to improving the 
institutional capacities of partne r humanitarian organisations in some specific areas, so that 
these organisations are better able to res pond quickly and efficiently to emergencies. 
The figures in this chapter are given to provi de general overview and/ or to illustrate the 
content of the chapter. Exhaustive financia l information will be found in Chapter VIII. 
The map on the next page resumes the geog raphical areas of DG ECHO's humanitarian 
interventions in 200810. 
                                                 
9 Linking relief, rehabilitation and development 
10 At the level of contracts signed in 2008 
 
EN 18   EN 

 
EN 19   EN 1. ACP Countries 
In 2008, humanitarian and food aid interventions were funded in 38 countries in Africa, the 
Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP), through the a doption of 34 funding decisions for a total of 
€547 million, which represents 59% of the total budget committed by DG ECHO and 435 
grant agreements for a total amount of €51411 million. 
1.1. A FRICA  
The first ten countries/areas in terms of humanitarian and food ai d provided were in order in 
2008: Sudan, the Democratic Republic of C ongo (DRC), Horn of Africa, Somalia, Chad, 
Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Uganda , Burundi and Liberia. 
In addition to continued assistance provided to vulnerable populations in  countries affected by 
ongoing humanitarian crises, funding was provided in  response to natural disasters: cyclone 
Ivan in Madagascar, flooding in  Namibia, recurrent epidemic s in West Africa including 
cholera in Guinea Bissau, hurricanes Hanna, Gust av and Ike and tropical storm Fay in the 
Caribbean region. 
Furthermore, DG ECHO supported drought prepare dness activities in the Greater Horn of 
Africa (Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethi opia, Kenya, Sudan and Uganda), and funded an ECHO Flight 
service for humanitarian operators in DRC and for emergency interventions in other areas.  
In 2008 as in previous years, Africa was by far the region which received most of EC 
humanitarian aid funding, around 59% of th e final budget (€936.6 million). The main 
areas/countries of interven tion are listed below (*): 
HUM.AID FOOD AID TOTAL
SUDAN & CHAD 98 000 000 99 000 000 197 000 000
Sudan 81 000 000 86 000 000 167 000 000
Chad 17 000 000 13 000 000 30 000 000
HORN of AFRICA 78 297 000 89 600 000 167 897 000
Djibouti * 1 400 000 1 400 000
Eritrea 4 000 000 4 000 000
Ethiopia * 4 000 000 35 700 000 39 700 000
Kenya * 5 500 000 18 000 000 23 500 000
Somalia * 20 797 000 23 000 000 43 797 000
Uganda * 14 000 000 11 500 000 25 500 000
Regional Drought Preparedness Programme 30 000 000 30 000 000Country/RegionFunding Decisions adopted in 2008
 
                                                 
11 Humanitarian aid budget line €253 million; Food aid budget line €244 million, Dipecho €5 million and 
EDF €12 million 
 
EN 20   EN * including the country allocation from the Horn of Africa region al decision (food aid - 
€40.6M). 
HUM.AID FOOD AID TOTAL
CENTRAL & SOUTHERN AFRICA, INDIAN OCEAN 79 650 000 41 550 000 121 200 000
Burundi 11 136 775 5 500 000 16 636 775
Cameroon 2 000 000 2 000 000
Central African Republic 7 800 000 7 800 000
Democratic Republic of Congo 30 000 000 15 550 000 45 550 000
Echo-Flight 8 000 000 8 000 000
Madagascar 1 500 000 1 500 000
Namibia  350 000  350 000
Tanzania 8 863 225 2 000 000 10 863 225
Zimbabwe 10 000 000 15 000 000 25 000 000
Regional South East Africa 3 500 000 3 500 000
WEST AFRICA 26 100 000 13 000 000 39 100 000
Guinea (Conakry) 1 300 000 1 300 000
Guinea Bissau  500 000  500 000
Liberia 15 600 000 1 000 000 16 600 000
Mauritania/Senegal 2 000 000 2 000 000
Sahel 5 000 000 10 700 000 15 700 000
Regional West Africa 3 000 000 3 000 000Country/RegionFunding Decisions adopted in 2008
 
Total (1) 282 047 000 243 150 000 525 197 000
 
(*) Dipecho programmes excluded from these tables– refer to part III.6.  
1.1.1. Sudan and Chad 
Sudan  remained the main crisis for DG ECHO. The humanitarian situation in Darfur 
remained dramatic with 4,500,000 people affect ed, including around 250,000 newly displaced 
in 2008. Maintaining an adequate humanitarian re sponse was a challenge also because of lack 
of protection for civilians and humanitarians, with  access at its lowest point in the last 5 years 
because of insecurity and administrative impedi ments. In the South and transitional areas, the 
political and security equilibrium remained precarious. DG ECHO funded actions aimed at reducing excess mortality and morbidity am ong highly vulnerable  populations, IDPs
12 in 
particular, through integrated assistance in th e sectors of food assist ance, health, nutrition, 
water and environmental sanitation, emerge ncy preparedness and response, household food 
security, as well as by providing financial suppo rt to common services  including humanitarian 
aid transportation. 
In Chad , assistance focussed on IDP and refugee camps  in the East (Sudanese) and the South 
(Central African), as well as on vulnerable local populations. A multidimensional 
                                                 
12 Internally Displaced Persons 
 
EN 21   EN international presence was deployed with the ob jective to secure the camps and protect the 
civilians. A general mass return of IDPs ha s not happened in 2008 a nd the overall context 
remains volatile and unstable. 
a) Sudan 
Humanitarian needs 
The conflict continued in Darfur with widesp read armed confrontat ions, clashes between 
rebel factions and inter-tribal fighting, causi ng large displacements and forcing humanitarian 
organizations to limit or suspend operations. Afte r more than five years of protracted crisis, 
the humanitarian situation remained dramatic with 4,500,000 affected people. Of these, more 
than 2,500,000 were living in overcrowded camps and settlements, 50,000 were Chadians refugees and the rest were nomads and those from rural communities, all of them depending 
on international assistance in te rms of food aid, health, nutritio n, water and sanitation, shelter, 
and emergency support. Maintaining an ade quate humanitarian re sponse represented a 
challenge because of the magnitude of th e crisis, ongoing displacements (around 250,000 
newly displaced in 2008), but also because of the lack of protection for civilians and the 
humanitarian community in this region where In ternational Humanitarian Law is constantly 
violated. Access to people  in need was at its lowest point since 2003 because of insecurity and 
administrative obstacles. 
The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) si gned in January 2005, putting an end to the 
20-years civil war between the North and the South, was positive. However the political and security equilibrium remains precarious in Sout hern Sudan and the transitional areas, leading 
to regular fighting's and insecurity. Since the CPA an estimated 2,00,000 of refugees and 
IDPs started returning to area s where nutrition, health, water a nd sanitation and public health 
and hygiene continue to be so urce of major concern, thus ge nerating further humanitarian 
needs. Sudan is also regularly affected by severe natural disast ers such as floods and droughts, 
as well as by a series of disease outbreaks.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
DG ECHO's engagement in Sudan has increased since the eruption of th e Darfur crisis in 
2003 that remains one of the biggest and most wo rrying humanitarian situa tions in the world. 
In parallel, with the signature of the Comp rehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), DG ECHO's 
support to Southern Sudan and the transitiona l areas started focusi ng on the return and 
reinstallation of hundreds of thousands of peop le in areas totally lacking basic services, 
whereas steadily phasing out from the IDP camps around Khartoum. DG ECHO has engaged 
in strengthening the preparedness and response to outbreaks of diseases such as yellow fever, 
meningitis, cholera and hemorrhagic fever, as well as to the floods and droughts, regularly affecting most of the regions of Sudan. Si nce 2007, DG ECHO sharply increased its support 
to food aid, emergency food security and live lihood assistance in Sudan and particularly in 
Darfur where food assistance repres ents two third of the internati onal aid. In the last 5 years, 
large parts of Sudan required a co ntinued substantial level of e ngagement to assist the most 
vulnerable populations. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements  
The main objective was to reduce excess mortality and morbidity among highly vulnerable 
populations in Sudan through integrated assist ance. In addition, DG ECHO support aimed at 
 
EN 22   EN improving humanitarian and operational enviro nments through support to special mandates, 
as well as common services including the huma nitarian air service. The main sectors of 
intervention were food aid, health and nutrition, water and environmental sanitation, 
emergency preparedness and response, househol d food security and op erational support. The 
approach has been flexible enough to allow an  immediate response to every new emergency. 
DG ECHO continued covering the w hole territory with a neutra l approach and according to 
needs in strict respect of internationally rec ognised humanitarian principles. Sudan benefited 
from €70 million programmed fo r general assistance, alongside with €72 million from two 
separate global food aid decisions to addre ss food aid and emergency food security needs. 
Two additional ad hoc decisions, of respectivel y €14 million for food assist ance in Darfur and 
€11 million for common services, have been m obilised in December 2008 to be able to 
respond to increasing needs mostly in 2009.  
LRRD13 – possible exit strategy of the sector and/or country 
DG ECHO continued to assist Sudanese population in need, affected by conflict and natural 
disasters, whenever alarming huma nitarian indicators appeared. Th anks to the stabilisation of 
the situation in the North and in certain part s of Southern Sudan and transitional areas, 
rehabilitation and sustainable development a ssistance are gradually taking over and building 
upon the relief work provided for decades. DG ECHO has been able to d ecrease its support to 
operations while identifying bridging operations . If LRRD possibiliti es have increased, 
mostly in the food security sector, needs for basic services are so overwhelming that both 
humanitarian and development assistance will ha ve to go hand in hand for the long term in 
Southern Sudan and the transitional areas. However, in the coming year, efforts to link humanitarian aid with development actions of the Commission will be hampered by the 
suspension of the 10th EDF, because the revi sed Cotonou Agreement will likely not be 
ratified if it refers to the International Criminal Court. 
b) Chad 
Humanitarian needs 
From April 2003 to end 2008, some 265,00014Sudanese refugees from Darfur poured into the 
Eastern Chadian frontier, an area that has suffered from decades of civil conflict. This politically and economically marginalised re gion suffers from chronic food insecurity and 
lack of necessary resources and capacity to acc ommodate large numbers of displaced people, 
and the Sudanese refugees are completely depe ndent on international aid. Furthermore, since 
2006, about 180,000 people have been internally disp laced in South-east of  Chad at the border 
with Darfur most of which have be en displaced in 2007, and more than 36,300
15 Chadians 
have found refuge in Darfur. Th ese displacements are the result of an armed conflict between 
the government and rebel groups, including th e attack on N’Djamena in February 2008, 
incursions by neighbouring Sudanese militia, growing violence between different communities and increased level of banditry. In addition, the S outhern provinces are hosting 
some 18,000 refugees from the Central Africa n Republic since 2003, a number that rose to 
56,000
16 in 2008. The deployment of a multidimensional international presence, composed of 
                                                 
13 Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development 
14 UNHCR, September 2008 
15 UNHCR, June 2007 
16 UNHCR, September 2008 
 
EN 23   EN the European peace keeping operation in Chad and Central African Republic (EUFOR) and 
the United Nations Mission in the Central African Republic and Chad (MIaNURCAT I) was 
authorised by the UNSC17 resolution 1778, with a mandate  ending mid-March 2009. These 
deployments should contribute to  the securitisation of the ca mps and to the protection of 
civilians. However, a general mass return of IDPs has not happened in 2008 and the overall 
context remains volatile and unstable. Du ring the first ten months of 2008, UNOCHA18 
reported 124 security incidents against humanitarian organisations in the East. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
DG ECHO is supporting relief operations in Eastern Chad since September 2003 when an 
emergency decision was taken to assist the firs t refugees coming from Darfur. With the rising 
number of refugees, IDPs, and host communities affected by the Darfur conflict, the Chadian conflict and insecurity, DG ECHO remained and increased its support to  Eastern Chad. In 
parallel, in 2005, DG ECHO starte d assisting refugees coming to Southern Chad, fleeing 
insecurity in Central African  Republic. Projects aimed at pr omoting economic security and 
maintaining nutritional levels have been ca rried out in and outside camps and where 
vulnerability of local populations is very high. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
Through its operational partners, DG ECHO main tained multi-sector a ssistance to refugees 
and IDPs in camps of Eastern and Southern Chad, supporting food aid, food security, health 
and nutrition, water and sanitati on and protection operations, as well as shelter and non food 
items distributions. Although most needs of the local Chadian population are not linked to the 
presence of refugees and IDPs, the increase d pressure on natural resources in regions 
structurally weak and under developed made food security, health, nutrition, water and 
sanitation projects necessary to mitigate tension between refugees, IDPs and local population, as well as addressing most critical needs.  
A Global Plan of €17 million and €13 million from  the food aid decision were adopted in 
2008 to address needs in health, nutrition, food aid, food security, protection, education, water 
and sanitation through programmes delivered  by UN agencies, NGOs and the Red Cross 
Movement.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
With a view to facilitating the link between relief, rehabilitation and development, pre-
rehabilitation operations have been carried out in the South of Chad where partner's 
organisations are putting an exit strategy in  place. Discussions with other relevant 
Commission's services have intensified with a view to further promote LRRD through the 
various complementary initiatives and instrume nts available in Southern Chad. However any 
attempt to develop sustainability of the operations and LRRD is at stake if conflict and related insecurity in the sub-region last.  
                                                
 
17 United Nations Security Council  
18 UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs 
 
EN 24   EN 1.1.2. Horn of Africa 
A total amount of €167.9 million was allocated to th e countries/areas of the Horn of Africa.  
In Kenya , DG ECHO responded to the humanitarian  emergency caused by the post-election 
turmoil and consequent displacement of more than 500,000 people. As early as 10th January 
2008, emergency assistance was provided to disp laced people in the form of shelter, 
protection, food, water, sanitation and non-f ood items. Following th is emergency, DG ECHO 
continued providing support to population affect ed by the post-election violence by allocating 
funds for provision of vouchers and cash to respond to immediate ne eds and to support the 
rapid rebuilding of livelihoods. Distribution of vouche rs and cash has facilitated the quick 
recovery of over 20,000 households or 120,000 people who make a living from agriculture or 
other sectors. A continuous res ponse to the high leve l of chronic malnutrition rates in the 
North-East - mainly through health/nutrition an d water/sanitation interventions - had been 
provided throughout 2008. In ar id and semi-arid lands, DG ECHO had supported the World 
Food Programme Emergency Operation benefiting severely drought affected populations with 
targeted food aid. DG ECHO assisted as well Soma li refugees with food aid in Dadaab camps, 
which faced a drastically growing refug ee influx in the second half of 2008. 
Food security situation seriously dete riorated in large areas of Ethiopia , with 6.4 million 
people in need of emergency food assistance es timated by the Government towards the end of 
2008. DG ECHO responded in a substantial way, c onsiderably increasing its initial food 
assistance allocation. DG ECHO's funded interv entions aimed at protecting and restoring 
livelihoods, as well as at contributing to sust ain nutrition, health, water and sanitation, 
agricultural recovery an d drought preparedness. 
Eritrea  continued to face the challe nge of years of chronic drought , desertification, lack of 
access to safe water and poor infrastructure. De spite the lack of relia ble data, malnutrition 
rates remain far above the commonly accepted emergency thresholds. DG ECHO intervened in health/nutrition and water/sanitation sectors.  Despite an overall difficult environment due 
to administrative constraints and difficulties to access some areas of the country, the few partners still operating in Eritrea have maintained an acceptable, though far from ideal, 
implementing capacity. Regular monitoring remained difficult. 
Humanitarian needs remained overwhelming in Somalia
, a country afflicted by 18 years of 
open ended conflict and instabil ity, where the overall situati on is aggravated  and compounded 
by worsening cyclical droughts, floods, and epid emic outbreaks. In 2008 the country faced its 
worst insecurity situation si nce the early 1990s. This resu lted in some 1,300,000 IDPs, the 
vast majority of whom were newly displaced due to the conflict in Mogadishu. Besides IDPs, 
1,900,000 people remained affected by the crisis, in need of human itarian assistance. 
Therefore, combined IDPs and other affected  population, some 45% - a 77% increase in the 
course of 2008 - of the tota l estimated population of Somalia  depended on international 
humanitarian aid at the end of 2008. DG EC HO responded by continuing to focus on the 
sectors of health, including support to wa r wounded people, water and sanitation, food 
security, and distribution of non food items, showing a good capacity to respond to real time 
increases in need for intervention/ 
In Uganda , albeit cautious, process of  IDPs' return continued in the North-central region. 
450,000 people, however, continued to live in camps in the Acholi region. The Karamoja 
region was faced with the third consecutive year of erratic rainfall, a situation exacerbated by 
 
EN 25   EN insecurity in particular. This has resulted in malnutrition rates close or above the emergency 
threshold and it is expected further deterior ate. DG ECHO supported 5 major hospitals and 
several health centres in the Acholi region, as  well as operation and maintenance of water 
systems in camps. DG ECHO also assisted ID Ps to increase self -reliance through livelihood 
security programmes and income generation activ ities. Food aid was also distributed in the 
north-central region, as well as in flood and dr ought affected parts of the country. Protection 
and psychosocial/reintegration assistance was also provided. 
A number of humanitarian interventions were supported by DG ECHO under the Regional 
Drought initiative  assisting up to 12 million pastoralists and/or agro-pastoralists leaving in 
arid and semi-arid lands of Horn of Africa. These operations focused in particular on drought 
preparedness including support to water, an imal health, better management of natural 
resources and early warning systems.  
Eritrea 
Humanitarian needs 
The situation of no peace – no war with its neighbour, Ethiopia, has continuously led to 
decline in many sectors: live lihoods, health, food security, engendering greater levels of 
poverty. Eritrea has faced challenges posed by years of chronic drought, desertification and 
poor infrastructure. Economic decline has led to worrying humanitari an indicators. Although 
these have not been accurately measured for th ree years, malnutrition rates remain far above 
the commonly accepted emergency thresholds  and admissions in specialised feeding 
programmes is high. The lack of access to safe water, conseque nces of successive years of 
drought, insufficient rains, lack  of water points and weak maintenance, are directly 
responsible for the worrying water-borne dise ase morbidity rates commonly found in rural 
areas. Losses of livestock have commonly been re ported over the past year s, leading to asset 
depletion and reduced resilience on the part of the rural communities to cope with harsh periods. An estimated 40% of the Eritrean population relies on liv estock as its main source of 
income. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years  
A total amount of €21.6 million has been allocated to Eritrea from 2004 to 2008. Following 
the 1998-2000 war with Ethiopia, the country ha s been affected by several droughts and a 
continuous decline in livelihoods due to the economic crisis. DG ECHO interventions have 
progressively shifted from a water and sanita tion support to a more co mprehensive strategy 
including health, nutrition and pr otection, with an increasing fo cus on nutrition. At the same 
time, the implementing capacity has continued to decrease due to logistical and administrative 
constraints affecting all part ners, accompanied by the progr essive reduction of NGOs. 
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
A funding decision adopted in 2008 of €4 million from the humanitarian aid budget aid 
budget, running for 15 months, has been imp lemented. Despite an overall difficult 
environment due to administrative constraints a nd Government policies, partners have been 
able to maintain an acceptable implementi ng capacity. DG ECHO's strategy was to provide 
support to civilian population trying to overcome the human itarian consequences in a 
protracted deep crisis context. DG ECHO interv entions targeted two main sectors, health - 
including nutrition - and water and sanitation. Approximately 50,000 children under the age 
 
EN 26   EN of 5 and pregnant and lactating women recei ved nutritional cares, including 3,000 severely 
malnourished children that have recovered or are in the process of recovering. More than 
200,000 persons have had the opportunity to receiv e primary and/or secondary health care in 
remote rural areas of the country. More than 130,000 people benefited from livelihood support, mainly in the agricu ltural sector. The access to wa ter and sanitation of 40,000 people 
has been improved. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
In the current context a comprehensive LRRD  is difficult to apply. However DG ECHO's 
funded projects are financed on the EDF, especia lly in the nutrition a nd water and sanitation 
sectors.  
Ethiopia 
Humanitarian needs 
The food security situation seriously deteriorated  in 2008 in large areas of the country despite 
an earlier estimation of increase in food production in the Meher19 season of 2007 compared 
to 2006. The major causes of food insecurity were: (1) less production in the Meher of 2008 
than expected; (2) failu re of rains implying crop production  loss. Moreover, in pastoralist 
areas, problem of pasture, water availability  and animal disease ou tbreak caused massive 
livestock deaths, migration, and consumption of w ild foods as well as cl osure of schools; (3) 
high food price raises and a general inflatio n limited access to food and (4) inter-ethnic 
conflicts over resources were re ported in many parts of the c ountry particularly related to 
water and pasture. Conflict in the Ogaden, in Somali Regional State, continued to constrain 
humanitarian access and military operations resu lted in movement restrictions and trade 
embargo. Serious shortages of food and basic survival and goods were also reported.  
The synergy of the factors list ed above intensified rapidly deteriorating the humanitarian 
situation in the country. The food shortages also caused unprecedented low levels of the 
national grain reserve in the coun try. The consequences were ma nifested by severe increase in 
child malnutrition. High prevalence of kwashi orkor and the case of severely acutely 
malnourished adults was also reported, whic h was not seen since 2003. A country wide 
Humanitarian Requirements document was issued  by the Government of Ethiopia in April 
and revised twice (June and Oct ober). Initially the number of people in need of emergency 
food assistance was estimated to be 2.2 million in  April and grew to 6.4 million in October. 
Including the Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP) beneficiar ies, this numbe r is believed 
was between 12 and 13 million. The crises affect ed both pastoralist lowland and agricultural 
highland areas of the country. The eastern half  of the country including Somali, eastern and 
south-eastern Oromia, most parts of SNNPR,  eastern Amhara, pocket areas of Tigray, 
Benishangul Gumuz, Afar, Gambella and Harari  regions were affected. Successively through 
the year, DG ECHO enlarged its support with the aim to provide humanitarian aid in favour of 
the most vulnerable population affected by clim atic hazards and local conflicts, mainly in 
food aid, nutrition, food security, health, wate r and sanitation and protection sectors. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years  
                                                 
19 Meher  is the long rainy season (i.e., mid June to mid September) in most highlands of Ethiopia where 
90 to 95% of overall annual production comes from. 
 
EN 27   EN From 2004 to 2008, DG ECHO has allocated €76.2 million to Ethiopia out of which €39.7 
million in 2008. The allocation was stepwise, made in response to the deteriorating 
humanitarian situation in the country.  
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
DG ECHO carried out five financial deci sions in 2008 for a budget of €4 million for 
humanitarian aid and €35.7 million from th e food aid budget. Another €5.9 million was 
funded through the Drought Preparedness decision in the Horn of Africa. The aim of the 
decisions was to alleviate the suffering of vul nerable people victimized by food shortages, 
malnutrition, epidemics and water born diseases as a result of natural hazards. The support assisted people to sustain themselves and pr otect their livelihood asse ts. It also provided 
support to people who needed input to reconstitu te themselves through agricultural recovery 
initiatives. Spatially, the major beneficiary re gions were Southern Nations nationalities and 
Peoples Region, Somali Regional State (SRS), Oromya, Amhara and Tigray. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
The smooth linkage between Relief, Rehabilitation and Development has been ensured in all 
DG ECHO supported projects. Activities impl emented by DG ECHO part ners are closely 
linked with lasting agencies that will takeove r when the short duration humanitarian actors 
leave the area. Local capacity is built par ticularly on the management of emergency 
situations. DG ECHO is closely working with  the Rural Development and Food Security 
Section of the EC Delegation where development funds should be used also to cover chronic 
requirements. 
Kenya 
Humanitarian needs 
The humanitarian situation deteriorated signifi cantly in 2008 due to the post election violence, 
a drought and a Somali refugee influx. Following the announcement of the election results in 
December 2007, violence erupted resulting in the death of an estimated 1,300 persons and displacement of at least half a million people. Following a political settlement and the creation of a coalition Government, the situation stabi lised. Most IDPs returned in their places of 
origin, although several thousands remained in transit sites or have resettled. The weather 
conditions in most of the arid and semi-arid la nds have not been favourable. The food security 
and water situation in most of Northern Kenya deteriorated with more than one million people 
severely affected. More than 66,000 newly arrived Somali refugees  were registered in Dadaab 
camps in 2008. Existing refugee camps are ope rating far above their capacity, increasing 
stress on refugees and agencies providing assistance.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years  
From 2004 to 2008, DG ECHO has allocated €47.4 million to Kenya but the needs for 
humanitarian aid have never been as high as in 2008, with several crises simultaneously 
affecting large numbers of people. In 2008, DG ECHO allocated €2.3 million, excluding 
ECHO flight operations, to assist the post elec tion violence IDPs and to help with the rapid 
recovery of those who have returned, to nutriti on projects in North Eastern Province and to 
World Food Programme Emergency Operation in the arid and semi-arid lands. In addition 
 
EN 28   EN DG ECHO contributed to the WFP refugee operati on in support of Somali refugees in Dadaab 
camps.  
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
Efficient and rapid multi-sec toral assistance was provide d to the 500,000 IDPs at the 
beginning of the year. The humanitarian situatio n in IDP sites was rapidly stabilised and the 
impact of a major humanitarian crisis was qui ckly mitigated. More than 100,000 former IDPs 
are benefiting from an early recovery interv ention and are assisted  in rebuilding their 
livelihood through a voucher base d programme. Nutrition projec ts have contributed to 
stabilise the nutritional situation in North East ern Province and progress have been registered 
in the treatment a nd the prevention of acute malnutrition.  
The nutritional situation in many districts re mains however unsatisfactory with malnutrition 
rates far above commonly accepted humanitari an thresholds. The World Food Programme 
(WFP) emergency operation addressed the urgent needs of 1.4 million people, mainly in the 
arid and semi arid lands affected by drought  and poor rains. More than 230,000 refugees in 
the three camps near Dadaab received  a full food aid ra tion through out 2008. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Following the return of the majority of post election violence related IDPs, DG ECHO 
contributed to the early r ecovery of 20,000 households with  voucher based interventions. 
Several longer term interventions have now b een initiated by various actors and DG ECHO is 
not considering allocatin g more resources to the post elect ion violence affected population. 
The 2008 short rains have performed below averag e in many parts of the country and the food 
security and water situation is  deteriorating. Several contribu ting factors to the currently 
deteriorating food availability and accessibili ty situation are noted. While development 
interventions aiming at mitigating the impact  of droughts and high food prices are on-going, 
the relief needs are unfortunately growing, esp ecially in the arid a nd semi-arid lands. The 
influx of refugees from Somalia is sadly not expected to stop and refugee related 
humanitarian needs are increasing.  
Somalia 
Humanitarian needs 
For the past 18 years Somalia has remained a c ountry of open ended conflict and instability 
with overwhelming humanitarian needs that  are aggravated and compounded by worsening 
cyclical droughts, floods and various epidemic  outbreaks. Somalia has just faced its worst 
insecurity situation since the early 1990s as a result of increased conflict and fighting between 
the Ethiopian National Defence Force (ENDF)/Somali Transitional Federal Parliament and 
Government (TFG) and the Armed Opposition Groups; political tens ion over the current 
Djibouti Agreement and increased criminality the targeting of humanitarian aid workers and increased sea piracy which had the affect of  compromising the delivery of aid shipments by 
sea. This has resulted in over 1,300,000 IDPs in Somalia today representing 18% of the 
population. 900,000 of these are newly displaced due  to the conflict in Mogadishu which has 
been ongoing since mid 2007. Impacts of these disp lacements are particul arly felt over Lower 
Shabelle and the central regions where host comm unities have been already severely stressed 
by successive poor rain failures. IDP populati ons fleeing Mogadishu have only served to 
 
EN 29   EN increase the pressure on these vulnerable ho st communities, exhausti ng water sources, food, 
fuel, health infrastructure and accommodation.  
Besides the 1,300,000 IDPs, there are also 1,900,000 pe ople affected by the crisis and who are 
in a humanitarian emergency or acute food a nd livelihood crisis, re presenting 27% of the 
population, living in both urban and rural areas. Combined th e IDPs and affected local 
population totalling 3,200,000 people represent 45% of the Soma lia total population and an 
increase of 77% since January 2008.  
In addition to the massive consequence of the conflict, the overall situation of Somalia is 
deteriorating at an accelerated pace due to dramatic food prices in flation; a continuing 
currency devaluation20; and persistent drought stricken regions  of Central, Hiran as a result of 
largely poor and failed rains for several consecutive seasons preventing communities for 
achieving any recovery. These f actors still severely undermine economic activity contributing 
to the overall deterioration in the humanitarian situation. Repeat ed security incidents against 
humanitarian community such as kidnapping threats, harassment, roadside bombs and 
administrative interference and hindrances place d a burden on humanitarians and restricted 
their ability to operate. The main humanitari an needs identified were shelter and non food 
relief items, health and nutrition, emergenc y food assistance, wate r and sanitation, and 
coordination. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
Each year, from 2004 to 2008, the Commission  has increased its humanitarian support for 
Somalia aid for a total amount of €93.3 million21. In 2008 alone, following the escalation of 
the conflict and IDP displacement from Mogadishu as well as the overall intensification of the 
humanitarian crisis, the Comm ission has progressively adjust ed its aid by adopting several 
humanitarian aid decisions, for a total of  €43.8 million. The principal objective of aid 
remained the same thro ughout all the period: " to assist the victims of insecurity and climatic 
hazards in Somalia ". The main sectors of intervention in response to the needs were in health, 
water and sanitation, food s ecurity and non food items.  
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
As indicated above, in 2008 a total of €45.8 million was allocated. These funds focused 
support on health care, nutrition, water and sa nitation, food security, food aid, multi-sector 
support in favour of the new IDP caseloads, co -ordination and drought preparedness. These 
have, over the past year, been able to impact  the lives of approx. 3 million Somalis. The year 
                                                 
20 Markets in southern Somalia have been in disarray due to the prolonged conflict, rising global food and 
fuel prices, political instability, and uncontrolled and excessive printing of the Somali Shilling for most of the past year While the shilling lost value by 55% from Jan '08 to Oct '08 in the main Bakara market 
of Mogadishu, it has remained relatively stable compared to the USD over the last few months 
devaluing by only 4% from September 2008 (SoSh34,000) to October 2008 (Sosh35,225). However the shilling value is still about half its value compared to the five year average. Similar trends are observed 
in all other southern Somalia markets. The Somaliland Shilling has remained relatively stable, although 
it lost value slightly from SlSh 6,000 per dollar in January 2008 to SlSh 6,250 in October 2008, 
representing a depreciation of 4%. While prices of  imported commodities such as rice, sugar, cooking 
oil and petrol have increased significantly in all markets from January 2008 to October 2008, prices generally remained stable over the last few months  and have in many cases even declined. However 
imported commodity prices remain high, even if at lower levels compared to last year 
21 Regional decisions not included 
 
EN 30   EN started with an estimated popul ation in need of 1,800,000 people  which was increased by 77% 
to 3,200,000.  
The above number reflects DG ECHO’s ability to  have responded to r eal time increases in 
need for intervention. Beneficiary figures are very  hard to calculate accurately and some of 
the beneficiaries benefited from one and several of the same sectors; however, what can be 
clearly accounted for is that access to h ealth care was ensured for approx. 973,500 Somalis 
focusing on primary health care, including both in  patient and out patient , specialised mother-
and-child health care, paediatr ics and emergency war surgery22 as well as curative nutrition 
interventions. In terms of  food security, supported interventi ons were able to reach hundreds 
of people through a number of different components including su pport to reinforcing 
emergency veterinary services in response to outbreaks of livestock diseases threatening the 
loss of pastoralist livestock herds across the cent ral and south of Somalia as well as close to 
the border regions of Kenya in orde r to ensure that morbidity rate of critical livestock diseases 
would not exceed 20% and mortality rates ke pt below the normal 20% thus contributing 
significantly to ensuing th e protecting people's livest ock herds and livelihoods.  
In food aid , 597,562 IDPs and host communities have been  supported with food aid purchased 
though Somali traders in 2008 focused on central Somali and in Mogadishu, as well as the 
Afgoye corridor complimenting the other activiti es mentioned above. One key programme is 
also the wet feeding programme in Mogadi shu providing roughly 75,000 cooked meals a day. 
Water and sanitation , a sector of vital importance in So malia, have directly assisted 822,926 
beneficiaries with improved acce ss to water (i.e. through rehabi litation of water points and 
ground surface dams) and hygiene. A major drought  affected the central regions in 2008, 
however, through the ICRC and other agencies, DG ECHO s upported the delivery of in 
excess of 2,300,000 litres of water a day for a 4 months period.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
LRRD is currently a major challenge for the EC as a whole, not least because of the different 
geographic coverage of EC De legation and DG ECHO in program ming but also because of 
the high levels of insecurity that characterise Somalia. Nevertheless, the EC Delegation remains firmly committed to Somalia and especially in the Rural Development and Social Services sectors. 
Uganda 
Humanitarian needs 
Since 1986 a protracted violent conflict between the Govern ment of Uganda (GoU) and the 
Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) has continued in  the north-central regi on of the country. The 
majority of the population in this area had been  forced to abandon their homes, many as early 
as 1996, resulting in some 1.5 million interna lly displaced persons residing in camps 
throughout the regions of Acholi, Teso, an d Lango in 2002. The cessation of hostilities 
agreement in 2006 and the promising Juba peace process resulted in the commencement of the return process for displaced communitie s. By the end of 2008 displacement was 
considered to have ended in Lango, and to be  very close to ending in Teso (some camps 
remain due to fear of Karimojong raiding).  
                                                
 
22 ICRC alone has treated 2,612 war wounded in Mogadishu 
 
EN 31   EN In the Acholi region however, where the displ acement has been more prolonged and suffering 
more intense, some 450,000 persons continued to live in camps. It is to be seen if the delays in 
the signing the final peace agreement and the UPDF (Ugandan armed forces) attack on LRA 
bases in DR Congo in December 2008, follo wed by massacres of the local Congolese 
populations, spell the end of the peace proces s and the resumption of hostilities within 
Uganda's borders.  
The return process remains very cautious in  Acholi, particularly amongst those communities 
living close to the borders of Sudan and DR Co ngo. The Karamoja region has been faced with 
the third consecutive year of erratic rainfall in 2008, and the situation is exacerbated by insecurity due to a gun culture that produces  violent cattle raiding, and GoU's forceful 
disarmament programme. Ongoing livestock dis ease including outbreaks of goats plague 
(PPR) for shoats and Contagious Bovine Pleuro-Pneumonia (CBPP) for cattle further 
undermine the coping capacities of the local popul ation. The last round of nutrition surveys 
for Karamoja from September 2008 show an overall average GAM
23 rate of 9.5%, while the 
districts of Moroto and Koti do register above the emergenc y threshold of 10%. Given the 
negligible harvest of 2008, most humanitarian acto rs assume that the nutritional situation will 
only degrade further during 2009 and WFP will be targeting some 950,000 persons in 
Karamoja through their emergency operations. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years  
Since 2004, DG ECHO has greatly c ontributed to the provision of  a continuous and effective 
relief response in the conflict-affected areas of  the north-central region; the response to basic 
needs such as water and sanitation, health, non food items, and food security as well as 
protection and coordination, have been scaled-u p significantly over the years and extended to 
the region of Karamoja also. Humanitarian acce ss, due to insecurity, had been an important 
constraint until 2006. The assistance provided by DG ECHO has evolved from camp services 
and psychosocial and re-integration assistance, to include assistan ce for the return process. In 
response to the worsening of the humanitari an crisis, DG ECHO funded €101.1 million for 
the 5-year period (2004-2008). 
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
DG ECHO’s strategy for 2008 included three specific objectives:  
(1) in the framework of the current Internally  Displaced People return and transitional 
phase, provide adequate support and assistance to returnees, while c ontinuing to assist 
the most vulnerable population in Internally Displaced People camps;  
(2) strengthen the management and coordi nation of humanitarian response among 
multilateral and bilateral agencies and non governmental agencies in Uganda; and 
(3) maintain a technical capacity in the field to assess needs,  appraise project proposals 
and to co-ordinate and monitor th e implementation of operations.  
The following sectors were focused on:  
                                                 
23 Global Acute Nutrition 
 
EN 32   EN a) Health: Support to hospitals and Health Cent res, including support to  Village Health Teams 
for health education and dise ase surveillance; HIV/AIDS a nd malaria prevention components 
were integrated into all health care programs and mainstreamed into food security and water 
and sanitation programs; condom distribution in  return areas through Village Health Teams 
and Response to Hepatitis E epidemic was sup ported, including deployme nt of medical staff 
in targeted HCs;  
b) Water and Sanitation: Continued operation an d maintenance of water systems in camps and 
increased focus on rehabilitation and construc tion of water systems in return areas; 
construction of family based and institutional latrines have been supported as well as integration of hygiene promotion across all water and sanitation programs;  
c) Food security: DG ECHO has continued to reduce dependence on food aid by increasing 
self-reliance of IDPs through livelihood secu rity programmes and income generating 
activities;  
d) Food Aid: IDPs, flood-affected  and drought-affected people were  assisted with food aid in 
2008. Mother and Child Health and Nutritio n programmes continued in 2008 and over 
330,000 beneficiaries (newborns, pregnant and lact ating mothers) have been assisted with 
supplementary food rations and  
e) Protection and psychosocial/r eintegration assistance: extrem ely vulnerable children and 
women received assistance and adolescents were  provided with psychosocial support through 
Interpersonal Therapy for Groups (IPTG). 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Achievements included operati ons under the 9th EDF Northe rn Uganda Rehabilitation 
Programme (NUREP); two projects specifically targeting conflict-aff ected districts in 
northern Uganda under the EC Water Facility ; a €4 million project on 'vouchers for work' 
under the food security budget line, gradually moving northwa rds from Lango region in 2007 
to south Gulu and Pader distri cts in 2008/09 to replace DG ECHO financed free hand-out of 
vouchers.  
The next steps will be carried out under th e 10th EDF programmes, €20 million Northern 
Uganda - Agricultural Livelihoods Recove ry Programme (ALRP) and the €15 million 
Karamoja Livelihoods Programme (KALIP). 
Regional Drought Preparedness  
Humanitarian needs 
Approximately 15 million pastoralists are at risk  of morbidity and mortality in the Greater 
Horn of Africa (GHA). Because of the specific na ture of nomadic pastoralists and its linkages 
with natural resource and land management, the n eeds arise as a result of environmental and 
institutional policy failures. One of the most important traditional coping mechanisms for nomadic communities, the opportunistic use of natu ral resources, or the ab ility to move with 
herds to areas with better pasture and water du ring periods of stress, has been progressively 
eroded.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years  
 
EN 33   EN The €15 million decision adopted in 2006 was the first one adopted by the Commission to 
mitigate the effects of the recurrent drought in the Horn of Africa. Evaluation of impact of this 
kind of preventive approach was very successful and DG ECHO decided to continue and reinforce the regional drought initiative with a new allocation in 2008. The on-going 
humanitarian interventions, funded under this  drought decision, focus on better management 
of natural resources, early warning syst ems and support to water and livestock. 
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
An 18-month funding decision was adopted in January 2008 for an amount of €30 million had 
been entirely committed. 2008 saw the drought pr eparedness and drought response projects 
being implemented in 4 countries (Ethiopia, Ke nya, Uganda and cross-bo rder interventions to 
Somalia). Projects were not implemented in Er itrea due to restricted access and Djibouti did 
not benefit from funding as previous activitie s have been continued by development partners. 
Up to 12,000,000 pastoralists and/or agro-pastora lists have been targeted, directly and 
indirectly, by operations funded through this Decision. DG ECHO has embarked on a new approach as far as addressing drought issues  in the Greater Horn of Arica (GHA) is 
concerned, given the continuing deterioration in terms of ch ronic and structural drought 
related emergencies.  
This approach intends to address the drought related needs within a short-medium term 
perspective developed in the framework of  a Regional Drought Decision (RDD) for the 
countries of the Horn of Africa,  with focus on water, animal health, human health, livelihood 
support; preparedness and coordina tion. In line with the decision's objectives, the emphasis 
was put on the Drought Cycle Management (DCM) approach as well as on close monitoring. 
As drought cycles are now much  more frequent (shorter cy cles of 2-3 years are now 
commonplace), there is little time for recovery in order to rebu ild resilience and capital (in 
terms of animal numbers). 
The Drought Cycle Management (DCM) uses this phenomenon and promotes community 
based knowledge in drought prep aredness, local resilience an d Early Warning Systems (EWS) 
in order to deliver the right re sponse at the right phase of th e drought cycle. Activities funded 
under the previous drought decision of 2006 had a substantial positive impact on reducing the negative effects of the 2008 drought.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
LRRD was intensified with EC Delegations on th e 9th and 10th EDF. Concrete examples are 
the Delegation Kenya Drought Management Initi ative (DMI) designed jointly with ECHO 
Regional Support Offices (RSO) expertise. This initiative is taking over previous DG ECHO 
funded activities in North Western Kenya, wh ile also attempting to strengthen the 
Government of Kenya/World Bank supported Dr ought Contingency Fund. In Uganda, the EC 
Delegation is preparing a €15 million longer  term intervention that will link up with 
DG ECHO interventions under previous and curr ent Regional Drought initiatives. The DGs 
DEV/AIDCO-led Horn of Africa Initiative (EC-HoAI), which began its preliminary work 
during 2007 and continued it through 2008, is s eeking complementarities between projects 
financed in the Horn of Africa through their different instruments (10th EDF, EC-HoAI, 
ECHO RDP).  
1.1.3. Central Africa, Southe rn Africa and Indian Ocean 
 
EN 34   EN The insecurity and comp lex crisis in Burundi  as a result of 10 years of civil war, population 
displacements, and an ever precarious security situation has now given way to a criminality 
linked to a lack of opportunity for the populatio n and to the disarmament process which has 
yet to produce the expected results. Furthermore, the c ountry hosted three camps of 
Congolese refugees. ECHO provided assistance to IDPs , returnees, refugees and vulnerable 
host communities, covering the health/nutrition sector, de livering food aid, promoting 
sanitation and funding protecti on activities, with focus on ch ildren, adolescen ts and women, 
and within a LRRD perspective as much as possible. 
In the Central African Republic , ECHO continued to support 200,000 people who had been 
displaced as a consequence of the action of dom estic and foreign rebel groups and banditry in 
the North. ECHO assisted IDPs, refugees, retu rnees and vulnerable host communities with an 
integrated package including wa ter and sanitation, food securi ty, education,  health and 
protection activities. In order to better asse ss needs and monitor interventions, ECHO opened 
an office in Bangui in July 2008. 
Contrasting needs in the Democratic Republic of Congo  where, on one hand, some one 
million IDPs were assisted to return home and regain self-sufficiency, whilst on the other hand renewed conflict in North Kivu uprooted an estimated 250,000 people who were thrown 
in urgent need of medical ca re, water, food and shelter. Vi olence against women and children 
remained a major problem, particularly in the East. DG ECHO c ontributed to contain 
mortality and morbidity rates and to support the resettlement and stabilization process. 
ECHO Flight
 was maintained in order to serve human itarian operators in DRC essentially. It 
was also used for emergency operations elsewhere (e.g. in Kenya). 
Tanzania  continued to host the la rgest refugee population on the African continent, almost 
entirely dependent on international aid. However, in the course of the year the repatriation of 
Burundian and Congolese accelerated, leavin g some 150,000 refugees whose return will 
largely, though not exclusively, depend on devel opments in their countries of origin. The 
Government of Tanzania maintains its object ive to close all camps. Whilst maintaining a 
certain degree of assistance for camps care and maintenance, DG ECHO focused more on interventions aimed at facilita ting the repatriation process. 
The socio-economic collapse in Zimbabwe
 was further compounded by problems common to 
Southern Africa, like high rates of HIV/AIDS, declining soil productivity and erratic rainfall. 
Whilst pre- and post-electoral violence, in cluding a Government suspension of NGO field 
operations, marked the first half of the year, the last quarter was characterized by a massive 
cholera epidemic, still not under control as the year ended, which is the most obvious 
symptom of the collapse of the public health structures. The epidemic also spread to South Africa, where part of the Limpopo province was declared a disaster area, with more limited 
cases recorded in Botswana, Mozambique a nd Zambia. Against this background, DG ECHO's 
main focus was on public health interventions, including water and sanitation, essential medicines, and cholera treatment  and control, as well as on f ood aid and food security, with a 
particular emphasis on the link between both. 
Emergency decisions were adopted in res ponse to floods and/or cyclones affecting 
Madagascar and Namibia
, whilst an ongoing decision was adap ted to take account of flooding 
in Mozambique. An emergency decision was also  adopted after heavy fighting in Chad and 
the Central African Republic led to an influx of 15,000 refugees into Cameroon.  
 
EN 35   EN The return of some 20,000 Congolese to D RC was assisted from two camps in Zambia .  
Finally, the first disaster preparedness (D IPECHO) programme in  sub-Saharan Africa  was 
launched, covering Madagascar, Malawi, Mozamb ique and the Comoros. DIPECHO projects 
aim to prepare, and reinforce the capacities of, vulnerable local populations affected by 
natural disasters. 
Burundi and Tanzania 
Humanitarian needs 
In view of the close links between the two c ountries in terms of humanitarian needs, ECHO 
took the decision in 2008 to co mbine Burundi and Tanzania in one Global Plan, and to run 
field operations in both countries  from Bujumbura. At the same time, ECHO's office in Dar-
el-Salaam was closed, leaving a small field office in Kigoma. Tanzania continues to host the 
largest refugee population on the African con tinent. The refugees are almost entirely 
dependent on humanitarian aid for survival.  
At the beginning of 2008, an estimated 205,000 ref ugees remained in Tanzania, of whom are 
Burundians, Congolese and people of mixed origins.  Whilst repatriation to their countries of 
origin is underway, th eir humanitarian needs whilst in Tanz ania include food, water, shelter, 
protection and health care. 
The insecurity and complex crisis  in Burundi as a re sult of 10 years of civil war, population 
displacements, and an ever precarious security situation has now given way to a criminality 
linked to a lack of opportunity for the populatio n and to the disarmament process which has 
yet to produce the expected results.  
Though a major repatriation exercise has been undertaken, living conditi ons for populations 
remain difficult. Burundi also hosts three camps for more than 17,000 Congolese refugees, 
with an additional 13,000 register ed refugees living in urban areas. This group needs care and 
maintenance support. The country is also vuln erable to effects of regional pressures and 
instability. In Tanzania, the vast majority of  the registered Burundi an refugees from 1993 
have been repatriated, leaving 45,000 in Mtabila  camp to be repatriated by the end of 2009. 
The refugees from 1972 are for the majority of them in the process of naturalisation, leaving 
27,000 to be repatriated by end 2009.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
As Burundi has emerged from conflict, the as sistance required has evolved in a corresponding 
manner from life saving emergency humanitarian  aid to rehabilitation and development. 
Chronic poverty independent of the conflict has le ft, and will for the foreseeable future leave, 
many Burundians in a very vulnerable position. The return of refugees, though positive, has 
added to this vulnerability and implied a contin uing need for Humanitarian assistance despite 
growing development aid support.  
Humanitarian objectives and achievements  
The principal objective is to contain mort ality and morbidity rates among the targeted 
population groups emergency thresholds and to  support the resettlement and stabilisation 
process where possible through appropriate in tegrated activities. DG ECHO’s intervention 
 
EN 36   EN strategy for 2008 was focused in the sectors of : water, sanitation, health, nutrition, housing, 
protection and transport and impr oving conditions for the repatria tion of refugees. Vulnerable 
groups in Burundi have also been targeted (unaccompanied minors, the disabled and the 
elderly) and above all repatria tion programmes have been financed in Tanzania, which have 
achieved the desired objectives - namely, vol untary return in safety and in dignity. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
In 2008, some water and sanitation activities previously financed by DG ECHO have been 
taken over by the Delegation's "Water Facility" programme and the Belgium cooperation. 
The constructive, ongoing and wide-ranging dialogue between DG ECHO, the Head of 
Delegation and representatives of DG DEV24 and DG AIDCO25, which has resulted in several 
new multi-sector programmes in the health, post-conflict rural development and food security sectors. 
Cameroon 
Humanitarian needs 
At the beginning of 2008, a coalition of three Chadian rebel groups tried to overthrow the 
Chadian government. Heavy combat took place in N'djamena, causing flight of around 15,000 
people towards the country. In addition, the nu mber of Central Afri can refugees (mostly 
Mbororos pastoralists) fleeing the attacks of armed bandits ("coupeurs de route") in the 
Central African Republic had been  increasing over the last months of 2007. With the joint 
arrival of the Chadians and the increase of Central African refugees, the Government of 
Cameroon and humanitarian agencies already pr esent in the country, were no longer in a 
position to provide sufficient assistance to refugees. The most urgent needs were identified in the sectors of water and sanitation, food aid, non-f ood items, health and shelter. In the light of 
these events, DG ECHO mobilised €2 million in an emergency decision. 
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
The objective of DG ECHO strategy  was to provide emergency relief assistance to refugees 
and vulnerable host communities. Chadian refug ees benefitted from water and sanitation 
activities, health serv ices, distribution of non-food items a nd protection activit ies. Most of 
these refugees went back to Chad once the si tuation had calmed down and order had been 
restored. Central African ref ugees received food aid rations , non-food items kits and had 
access to preventive and curative primary hea lth care, to potable water and protection 
activities. The host population also benefitted fr om humanitarian assistance, notably in the 
sectors of health and water and sanitation. 
                                                
 
24 Directorate-General for Development – DG DEV 
25 EuropeAid Cooperation – DG AIDCO 
 
EN 37   EN Central African Republic 
Humanitarian needs 
At the end of 2006, the northwest and northeast of  the country were severely affected by the 
increasing fighting between government forces and rebels. This violent ac tivity, together with 
the increase in the number of bandits ("coupeurs de  route") attacks, led to the displacement of 
more than 200,000 people, provoking a humanitarian  crisis. The most urgent needs were 
identified in the sectors of health, water and sanitation, food security, non-food items, 
education and protection.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
DG ECHO intervened in the country in 2003 an d 2004 through the adoption of two decisions 
targeting needs in the health sector. DG ECHO resumed its presence in Central African Republic in mid-2007 by funding operations fo r a total amount €8 million providing 
multisectoral humanitarian assistance. In the light  of the increasingly fragile situation in the 
country, DG ECHO decided to re main involved in Central African Republic, mobilising a 
further €7.8 million to cover the period September 2008 until December 2009 and opening an office in Bangui in July 2008. Humanitarian assi stance continues to address the most pressing 
humanitarian needs but in the meantime, and wh ere possible, tries to link with the incoming 
development programmes. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements  
The objective of DG ECHO's strategy was to provide assistance to displaced people, refugees, 
returnees and vulnerable host comm unities affected by the conflict in order to reduce excess 
mortality and to promote stabilisation and resettlement. Gradual improvements can be 
observed. DG ECHO contributed to the provision of access to basic health services, water of 
good quality, education and improved quality s eeds. These activitie s and the increased 
presence of humanitarian organisations en hanced the protection of conflict-affected 
communities. Thus, and after nearly two years of displacement, many IDPs were able to 
return to their villages on  a more permanent basis: at  the beginning of 2008 197,000 people 
were still displaced, whilst in October 2008, the number of IDPs was estimated at 108,000. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
DG ECHO has, to the extent possible, focused its intervention in areas and sectors identified 
by DG Development's strategy. In 2008, it proved  possible to hand over some operations to 
longer-term funding. The LRRD strategy in food security sector is being smoothly 
implemented. In 2008, the EC Delegation committe d a first tranche of €5 million from the 
FSTP (Food Security Thematic Programme). In addition €3 million from the "Programme 
d'Accompagnement et de Stabi lisation" was allocated to a nor th east region and allowed the 
transfer of a water and sanitation ope ration initially financed by DG ECHO. 
 
EN 38   EN Democratic Republic of Congo 
Humanitarian needs 
Despite successful elections the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has not returned to 
complete peace and stability. Some areas, such as Katanga and South Kivu enjoyed calmer times to the extent of allowing the return of re fugees and internally displaced people, but in 
North Kivu renewed conflict has caused sufferi ng and more displacement of populations. 
There have also been a series of epidemic out breaks; most notably of cholera. There have 
been contrasting differences in the needs to be met. On the one hand, some one million displaced people have been assisted to retu rn home and regain their self-sufficiency. 
Essentially this has required the re-establishme nt of basic social serv ices and food security. 
On the other hand, some 250,000 people were uprooted  by the relapse into conflict in North 
Kivu since August 2008 and were in  urgent need of medical care,  water, food and shelter. The 
Haut Uélé district has also  been the scene of displace ments of vulnerable populations 
following the attacks by the Uganda-based Lord 's Resistance Army. Violence against women 
and children has remained a particular problem  in DRC, particularly emphasized in conflict 
zones. The legal aspects aside, victims ha ve required urgent medical and psychological 
assistance. DG ECHO will continue to target the most vulnerable, particularly women and 
children in whatever sector of intervention. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
Humanitarian needs have been in direct correlati on with the conflict. At the height of fighting 
(1996-2003), development aid was suspended an d DG ECHO had a significant programme 
covering the whole country. With the various  peace accords the ma jor fighting subsided, 
alleviating humanitarian needs and allowing de velopment aid to resume. This has enabled 
DG ECHO to reduce its level of assistance, but not  entirely as intermittent conflict persisted 
in the East, perpetuating the need for emergency assistance.  
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
The principal objective of DG ECHO's strategy was to contain the mortality and morbidity 
rates among targeted population groups within emergency thre sholds and to support the 
resettlement and stabilization process where possible. In order to achieve this, DG ECHO 
developed a Global Plan for €30 million a nd attributed €15.55 million for food aid.  
In terms of impact, an increasing number of  partners have shown by local surveys that 
malnutrition levels and mortality rates have decreased. In most areas, these rates are now 
below emergency levels. They remain directly linked to the security environment and poverty 
levels.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
DG ECHO has continued to hand over health pr ogrammes to development partners in those 
areas that have stabilised. However, in Nort h Kivu the process was re versed with several 
health districts having to turn temporarily back to DG ECHO for extra support to face the 
increased needs. Despite the elections, Governme nt services have been slow to return, but 
development funds are now visible, even in  the east, where they now exceed emergency 
funds.  
 
EN 39   EN ECHO Flight 
Humanitarian needs 
The humanitarian needs in the Democratic Rep ublic of Congo (DRC), as well as the logistic 
difficulties of operating there, are highlighted in  the section above. In DRC, there is no safe 
and reliable linkage between th e supply and personnel entry point s and the main humanitarian 
destinations. Overland travel is dangerous a nd time consuming, or even impossible due to 
security constraints or absence of infrastruc ture. Following the improvement in the security 
situation in DRC, DG ECHO has, also in geog raphic terms, expanded its commitment in the 
country. This has created an additional need for air transport. The use of ECHO Flight 
services enables humanitarian NGOs to reduce i nventory stockpiles at field locations which 
often run the risk of confiscation or theft by ar med bandits or local militia. It also increases 
the quality of humanitarian operations as superv isory visits can be conducted more frequently. 
In addition, an airborne stand-by evacuation cap acity remains for many agencies a sine qua 
non for continuing project implementation. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
The principal objective of the funding was to f acilitate the implemen tation of humanitarian 
and post-emergency development projects in difficult or inaccessible areas. The specific 
objectives were: (1) to provide safe, reliable, efficient and cost-effective humanitarian air 
transport capacity and (2) to create a technical assistance capacity in the field, to assess needs, 
appraise operational proposals and to coor dinate and monitor the implementation of 
operations. 
After a tender process, DG ECHO entered into  a service agreement with DAC Aviation, a 
commercial operator, to provide suitable aircraft and operate a safe and reliable hub and spoke 
service to meet the objectives. This was achieve d using three aircraft op erating a mixture of a 
fixed and a flexible schedule.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
There are no current plans to hand over this operation to DG DEV/delegation but this may 
become a possibility.  
Madagascar 
Humanitarian needs 
Madagascar is a country with an extremely high level of chr onic vulnerability affecting a 
large proportion of the population. This vulnera bility is compounded by the effects of the 
various climatic phenomena such as erratic rainfall patterns, cyclones, floods and drought. 
Floods and cyclones were a major problem in the first part of 2008. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
A €1.5 million emergency funding decision, adopt ed in March 2008 provided support to 
vulnerable populations affected by cyclone Ivan and resultant fl ooding in the north-east of the 
country. DG ECHO-funded interventions were  followed up by food security interventions 
funded from the food aid budget li ne later in the year, to o ffset the loss of harvests.  
 
EN 40   EN Namibia 
Humanitarian needs 
Namibia has the highest GINI co-efficient – a meas ure of income inequal ity – in the world. In 
March/April 2008, the northern provinces of Na mibia were affected by the most severe 
flooding in 50 years, which caused th e displacement of 60,000 people. 
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
A €350,000 emergency funding decision was adopted in April 2008 to s upport to emergency 
relief, water and sanitation, and he alth interventions. In view of the loss of harvests during the 
flooding, DG ECHO mobilised funding from the food aid budget line later in the year to 
support food security interventions  for flood-affected populations. 
Zimbabwe 
Humanitarian needs 
In 2008, Zimbabwe continued to be immersed in  a profound crisis aff ecting all economic and 
social sectors. Whilst pre- a nd post-electoral violence, includ ing a Government suspension of 
NGO field operations, marked the first half of th e year, the last quarter was characterized by a 
massive cholera epidemic, still not under contro l as the year ended, which is the most obvious 
symptom of the collapse of the public health structures. The epidemic also spread to South Africa, where part of the Limpopo province was declared a disaster area, with more limited 
cases recorded in Botswana, Mozambique a nd Zambia. Against this background, DG ECHO's 
main focus was on public health interventions, including water and sanitation, essential medicines, and cholera treatment and control,  as well as on food aid and food security. The 
socio-economic collapse is further compounded by problems common to the Southern African 
sub-region – high rates of pe ople infected and affected by HIV/AIDS, declining soil 
productivity and erratic rainfall. UN World F ood Programme was providing food assistance to 
almost 3 million people. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
The levels of humanitarian funding have remained  fairly steady over the la st five years, from 
€15 million in 2004 and 2005, to €12 million in 2006 and €30.2 million in 2007. Though 
efforts have been made to try to gradually reduce assistance in 2006 and 2007, when an initial 
allocation of €8 million was made as a result of th e deterioration in the humanitarian situation 
in Zimbabwe, levels of funding have had to be increased. The initial allocation for 2007 was 
increased by €7.2 million, with the objective of changing the focus of DG ECHO's strategy to 
support for the health/public health sector. Additionally, €15 millions were added on the food 
aid budget line. Finally, €25 million were a llocated in for 2008, including €15 million from 
the food aid budget line. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
The principal objective of 2008 humanitarian in terventions was to mitigate the impact of 
socio-economic breakdown in Zimbabwe by rein forcing the access of vulnerable populations 
to basic essential services. The Global Plan ad opted in July 2008 consolidated the change in 
DG ECHO's strategy, and reinforced the focus on health and public health interventions. A 
 
EN 41   EN much stronger emphasis was placed on the link between food aid and food security 
interventions with a view to breaking th e cycle of dependen ce on the former. The 
humanitarian situation, particularly in the health and public health sector, continues to deteriorate, with no indication of prospects fo r improvement in 2009 in absence of a political 
solution. It seems, however, high ly probable that needs will increase in the course of 2009. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Though the 10th EDF provides an allocation of f unding for Zimbabwe, it seems unlikely that 
the Country Strategy Paper will be signed, as  development cooperation remains suspended by 
the Council Decision of 18th February 2002. EC financial support is re-oriented to 
programmes in direct benefit of  the Zimbabwean population, soci al sectors, democratisation, 
respect for human rights and the rule of law. It is  therefore not possible at  this stage to engage 
in a comprehensive LRRD process in Zimbabwe in absence of an improvement and stabilization of the political situation. 
1.1.4. West Africa 
In Liberia , DG ECHO focussed its support on access to basic services, to provide support to 
restart farming activities, and to foster re-i ntegration. Good progress wa s registered in terms 
of LRRD in the food security sector. 
DG ECHO's engagement was substantial in Sahel , where interventions aimed at addressing 
the causes of acute malnutrition ranged fro m therapeutic and supplementary feeding 
programmes to measures aimed at improve access to primary healthcare and clean water and activities to strengthen coping mechanisms and protect livelihoods. Par ticular attention was 
devoted to promoting LRRD and achieving integr ation of the nutritional care into the national 
health systems. 
Besides the programme of fi ght against malnutrition, DG EC HO financed in Mauritania
 a 
repatriation operation of ove r 20,000 former refugees.  
Activities were also funded in Guinea, Togo and Côte d'Ivoire  aiming at treating acute 
malnutrition. 
Emergency response was provided to the cholera epidemic in Guinea Bissau,  whereas 
vaccination campaigns were funded in  Liberia, Nigeria and Niger. 
Liberia 
Humanitarian needs 
Since the end of the conflict in Liberia, hum anitarian needs in the country have evolved 
greatly. Important efforts have been made to  improve access to basic services, to provide 
support to restart farming activi ties and to foster re-integrati on. However, challenges were 
important and the situation in th e country is still very difficu lt: full substitution remains the 
main characteristic of the health sector despite all the efforts of a committed MoH26, the 
situation in water and sanitation sector has improved in areas of return but a lot remains to be 
done in numerous rural communities as well as in urban areas especially Monrovia, where 
                                                 
26 Ministry of Health 
 
EN 42   EN regular cholera outbreaks occur and finally, food insecurity is still prevalent in numerous 
counties though efforts have been made to improve the situation.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
Humanitarian aid has evolved from direct suppor t to repatriation of bot h IDPs and refugees 
and the attempt to resume access to  basic services, to activities more focused on reintegration 
and restoration of livelihoods.  
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
In 2008, the focus has been on initiating the resumi ng of livelihoods at  community level 
through food assistance and water and sanitation interventions. In health sector, the objective 
was to continue the provision of support and to attempt to secure the basis for a proper hand 
over of DG ECHO's support. More than €16 million, including €1 million for food aid, was 
allocated in support of vulne rable Liberian populations. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
The main features of DG ECHO 's funding in 2008 were support for mainly ongoing partners 
to consolidate previous interven tions and to mainstream the targ eting of the 'forgotten' most 
vulnerable into the development agenda within the maximum potential cont ract duration of 18 
months. Despite the difficulties encountered in the field some improvement can be noted:  
(1) in the health sector, ongoing discussions are taking place to secure a link between DG 
ECHO supported interven tions and the EDF;  
(2) the LRRD strategy in the Food security sector has been completed and DG ECHO 
should be able to phase out from this sector; and  
(3) in the water and sanitation sector, DG ECHO contributed to a consortium of five 
NGOs which defined a 5 years strategy suppor ted by various donors. This intervention 
enabled the mainstreaming of remaining hum anitarian needs into a five years plan 
whose global objective is geared towards development.  
Mauritania 
Humanitarian needs 
Following his election to the Presidency of Ma uritania in 2007, Sidi Ould Cheikh Abdallahi 
gave a speech on the Refugee day aimed at pu tting an end to the “refugee problem and turn 
the page on this episode of internal conflicts”.  He referred to the expu lsion of approximately 
60,000 Mauritanians who, as a resu lt of the border conflict a nd subsequent ethnic tensions 
between Mauritania and Senegal in April 198 9, sought refuge in Senegal and Mali. The 
President's speech opened the door for repatriati on and thousands of evacuees expressed their 
will to go back to their country. The return of  an expected 20,000 former refugees raised the 
issue of assisting the repatriation process. There were manifest needs in terms of protection as 
well as basic humanitarian assistance. DG EC HO launched a €2 million ad-hoc decision. The 
fund's bulk was granted to UNCHR who, after signing a tripartite agreement with the 
Government of Mauritania and the refugees' representatives, launched the repatriation. 
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
 
EN 43   EN Throughout the year, DG ECHO supported a €1.5 million UNCHR-run operation which 
managed to repatriate over 5,000 former refug ees. They were provid ed with integrated 
assistance: not only broad humanitarian as sistance (food and non food items, shelter and 
sanitation) but also transport and protection assistance. Furthe rmore, it was envisaged to 
facilitate reintegration through the promotion of  income generating activities. Previsions had 
anticipated a far higher number of returnees  but the military coup of summer 2008 changed 
the political scene and had a negative impact on the refugees and their trust in the new 
government's alleged engagement of re specting the Tripartite Agreement. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Following the military putsch and the consequent coming into force of Art 96 of the 
Agreement, the majority of Official Deve lopment Assistance between the EC and the 
Government of Mauritania was suspended excep ted ongoing contracts, humanitarian aid and 
direct support to populations. As  a consequence, the EC Dele gation in Nouakchott approved a 
project of direct assistance to the repatriates and the host communities. Lengthy negotiations between DG ECHO and the Delegation and other Commission's services allowed avoiding 
any overlapping between DG ECHO and Delega tion-funded projects. The Delegation will 
therefore support an operation focused on strengthening food s ecurity, generating sources of 
revenues and carrying out an advocacy and information campaign.  
The Sahel region 
Humanitarian needs 
Lessons learned from the nutritional crisis in  2005 in Niger and Mali and profound concern 
over the continued very high Global Acute Mal nutrition rates throughout Sahel led to the 
reinforcement of the 2007 Sahel Global Plan with an extra €15.7 m illion (€10.7 million from 
the food aid budget and €5 million from the human itarian aid budget). The principal objective 
remains a sustainable reduction in acute malnutri tion and infant and maternal mortality rates 
in 5 Sahel countries (Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali , Mauritania and Niger), as well as in the 
Sahelian zones of neighbouring countries which ha ve also been affected by malnutrition rates 
well beyond the emergency threshold of 10%, with peaks of over 20% in some areas. 
UNICEF estimate that 4 million children until the age of 5 years suffer from chronic under 
nutrition with under nutrition being held responsi ble for over 50% of all child deaths. This 
translates into the harsh calculation that half  (300,000) of the 600,000 children that die before 
reaching 5 years of age in the Sahel do so from  malnutrition or related causes. Infant and 
maternal mortality rates in the Sahel are amongst the worst in the world. Unless the Sahel 
countries are provided with massive and sustaine d support in their fight against malnutrition 
there is no chance that they will achieve pr ogress towards the Millennium Development 
Goals.  
The root causes of acute malnutrition are multi-sector and therefore action to deal with it 
needed also to be multi-sector. DG ECHO responde d to this enormous "silent" emergency by 
different types of interventions: screening a nd treatment of malnouris hed children, assistance 
to promote food security, livelihoods protectio n, access to clean water, as well as advocacy 
and awareness raising activities to mainstream  nutrition into devel opment policies (LRRD). 
An integrated approach involving both humanita rian and development aid instruments has 
been actively encouraged. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years  
 
EN 44   EN Experience with activities to re spond to the 2005 nutritional crisis in Niger and Mali provided 
DG ECHO with good indicators for a road map to deal with the similar problems in the other 
countries of the Western Sahel region in 2008. In  Niger, hundreds of thousands of children 
have been treated in more than 800 feeding cen tres. Modern nutritional protocols, approaches 
and products especially the new RUTF (ready to use therapeutic  foods) were introduced and 
become nationally adopted. To facilitate access to basic health services, the Government 
decreed a waiver of h ealthcare user fees fo r the under-fives and pregnant and lactating 
women. 
Efforts to integrate the humanitarian response to the 2005 crisis into local structures and 
systems were emphasised from 2007. Humanitarian agencies worked to reinforce capacity of 
local health structures to take charge of the caseloa d of mal-nourished children. 
This will take time as decades of inadequate i nvestment in health infrastructure, a massive 
shortage of trained personnel and scarce st ocks of essential medicines and equipment 
necessitate a dedicated and sustained level of  development assistance before humanitarian 
agencies can withdraw. The delivery of this de velopment assistance is taking longer than had 
been hoped for. Much work has also gone into trying to improve the functioning of early 
warning analysis and response systems. The failu re of these systems into which much aid had 
been invested over the past years to provide ade quate data on the extent of the 2005 crisis was 
a particular disappointment. 
A particular effort is now been made to co-relate early warning information from the health 
system with the food security data. The fact that national pr otocols on the identification and 
treatment of nutrition ha ve now been agreed in all Sahel states is a major step forward. 
 
EN 45   EN Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
• In Niger: 
DG ECHO has supported operations providing nutritional treatment and access to health care 
for children under five, benefiting over 900,000 ch ildren and mothers mostly in the southern 
regions. DG ECHO partners are working closely with government services to facilitate the 
integration of these essential services in to the healthcare system. DG ECHO supported 
action/research initiatives into the use of "r eady-to-use" therapeutic  foods and encouraged 
new strategic thinking to improve action in th e combat against acute malnutrition. Activities 
to protect the livelihoods of nearly 1 million pe ople to enable them to cope better with the 
hungry season and with the rise in world food prices were supported. 
• In Burkina Faso 
DG ECHO supported operations providing nutritiona l treatment and access to health care for 
children under five benef iting 60,000 children and over 15,000 pregnant women. 10,000 
families have been helped with livelihood protection. 
• In Mali 
DG ECHO supported operations providing nutritiona l treatment and access to health care for 
children under five benefitting over 30,000 people. Complementary actions to promote food 
security and access to drinking water have also been carried out in areas with high rates of acute malnutrition. 
• In Mauritania. 
DG ECHO supported operations providing nutritiona l treatment and access to health care for 
children under five and women suffering from  malnutrition. In 2008, a nutritional survey 
supported by DG ECHO confirmed the incidence of acute malnutrition in the south of the 
country had reached alert levels. Efforts were co ncentrated on the integr ation of the treatment 
of malnutrition in national st ructures in the south of th e country. At the same time, 
complementary interventions to improve access to drinking water were carried out. 
• At regional level,  
DG ECHO supported UNICE F in updating the protocols fo r treating malnutrition and 
provided training for medical sta ff in Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso and Mauritania. DG ECHO is 
also supporting cross-border initiatives to raise awareness and educate people about 
nutrition-related matters using local languages.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country  
Malnutrition can only be dealt with in a sustai nable way through an integrated and articulated 
aid strategy involving all aid instruments. DG ECHO's Sahel strategy was therefore designed 
from the onset as an LRRD strategy invol ving all the Commission' s humanitarian and 
development aid instruments. To promote cl ose integration with other Commission aid 
services DG ECHO opened antennae within the EC Delegations in Ni amey, Niger and in 
Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. A considerable effort  was made to ensure the inclusion of 
humanitarian concerns such as malnutrition and high infant and maternal mortality rates in the 
 
EN 46   EN 10th EDF Country Strategy Papers (CSP) and National Indicative Progr ammes (NIP) for the 
Sahel. While the main focus of the 10th ED F programmes is on general budget support which 
makes it difficult to specify part icular issues, there is referenc e to the need for EDF funding to 
improve nutritional security and help reduce the unacceptably high levels of infant and 
maternal mortality caused by malnutrition. DG ECHO is working wi th other Commission 
services to see to what extent the performan ce indicators in budget support can be fine-tuned 
to monitor progress towards a re duction in malnutrition. DG ECHO has also had contacts with 
World Bank offices in the Sahel on the same issues. 
Epidemics (regional) 
Humanitarian Needs 
West African countries are highly vulnerable to communicable diseases because their 
structural weakness, poverty, l ack of basic sanita tion facilities, low hygiene standards and 
malnutrition. Some of these countries are st ill struggling with the aftermath of conflict 
situation. They are par ticularly prone to epidemics of C holera, Meningitis, Lassa and Yellow 
Fever and Hepatitis E. The region is also seeing an increased risk of avian influenza epidemic 
with confirmed animal cases in Niger, Ivory Coast, Burkina Faso, Benin, Ghana and Nigeria 
where the first human case was confirmed in January 2007. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
In March 2008, following a series of associated Measles and Me ningitis epidemics in Niger 
and Nigeria along with a Yellow fever outbreak in Liberia, DG ECHO launched a €1 million 
emergency humanitarian aid decision to respond to various epidemics. 
In August 2008, DG ECHO responded to the Chol era emergency in Guinea Bissau with a 
€500,000 Emergency Humanita rian Aid Decision. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Most African countries still ne ed external support to respon d in a timely manner and/or to 
prevent recurrent epidemics. Outbreak detecti on and control intervention have been improved 
in certain countries mainly due  to better epidemic  surveillance and Ea rly Warning Systems 
but, the availability of donor support has been  reduced and Governments contingency plans 
are rare or not sufficiently funded. Health systems still have neither the capacity to absorb the 
increased number of patients, nor the resour ces to respond to the epidemics using public 
health measures. Certain epidemics require a high level of expertise which is not available at 
the country level. As such, the recurrent health  emergencies in most of the African countries 
need considerable and sustaina ble efforts in terms of coor dination, including information 
management, of technical support and of resource mobilization. 
1.2.  CARIBBEAN  
Rapid response was provided during the hurri cane season to about 250,0 00 people affected in 
Haiti, Cuba, the Bahamas, Turks and Caicos, and Jamaica , through the provision of food, non-
food items, water, sanitation, health, shelter,  as well as emergency rehabilitation and 
livelihoods. 
 
EN 47   EN By 2008, humanitarian needs were so great in Haiti  that DG ECHO's response was substantial 
and it included food aid, nutritional assistance, as  well as interventions in the health, water 
and sanitation sectors. In addition to the ra pid response mentioned above for the Caribbean 
region, Haiti benefited from a dedicated emer gency response with assistance included food, 
non-food items, water, sanita tion, shelter, health, and emergency communication. 
Following severe floods which affected Suriname  mid-2008, DG ECHO provided assistance 
to the victims in the sectors of food aid and food security.  
Funding covered the following issues / countries: 
HUM.AID FOOD AID TOTAL
CARIBBEAN 10 250 000 11 400 000 21 650 000
Haiti 5 000 000 11 000 000 16 000 000
Suriname  400 000  400 000
Regional Caribbean 5 250 000 5 250 000Country/RegionFunding Decisions adopted in 2008
 
(*) Dipecho programmes excluded from these tables– refer to part III.6.  
Caribbean Region 
Humanitarian needs 
The Caribbean region is prone to  frequent natural disasters, especially hurricanes and floods. 
The region's vulnerability is accentuated by hi gh population density, fast  demographic growth 
and great poverty. This results in communities with few coping capacities in the event of disaster. In 2008, DG ECHO continued to provide  community-based Disaster Preparedness, 
through its DIPECHO programme, as well as Em ergency Relief, Food Aid and Multi-sectoral 
Humanitarian Aid. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
Since 2004, DG ECHO has provided all types of humanitarian aid, as described above. In 
2008, the new features were a larg e amount of Emergency Relief, due to the severity of the 
hurricane season, and a large amount of Food Aid, due to increased malnutrition in Haiti and 
Suriname. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
The objective of providing a rapid response to  disasters was met, via a regional funding 
decision. During the 2008 Atlantic hurricane se ason, the Caribbean was affected by Tropical 
Storm Fay, Hurricanes Gustav, Hanna and Ike,  all of which emerged within one month, 
aggravating the damage caused by each previous hurricane and resulting in considerable loss 
of life and enormous suffering. Thousands of people lost their homes and livelihoods, and 
damage to crops was great. Numerous roads and bridges were dest royed, whilst extensive 
flooding prevented access to many regions. An  Emergency decision for €5 million was 
adopted on 14th October 2008 for the Caribbean  region, responding to Hurricane Gustav and 
subsequent storms: €2.7 million allocated to Ha iti, €2 million to Cuba and €300,000 to the 
Bahamas, Turks and Caicos Islands and Jamai ca. Emergency relief and recovery assistance 
 
EN 48   EN were provided for 250,000 hurricane victims in the sectors of food, non-food items, water and 
sanitation, health, shelter, emergency rehabilita tion and livelihoods. Anothe r regional decision 
was adopted in 2008 (€250,000) in order to provid e technical assistance for all humanitarian 
aid operations in the Caribbean region. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
After the above mentioned hurricanes, some Eur opean Development Funds  were allocated to 
rehabilitation in the Bahamas, Turks and Caicos Islands, Haiti and Jamaica. 
Haiti 
Humanitarian needs 
Haiti was a "Forgotten crisis" for DG ECHO in  2008 and a Pilot country for the new multi-
service, inter-institutional "Fragile s ituation" initiative. In 2007, a DG ECHO-funded 
evaluation had already revealed  under-5 mortality of 86/1,000 a nd National acute malnutrition 
of over 9%, with entire Departments at 12-18%.  Most people do not have access to clean 
water, sanitation or health services. In Apri l 2008 there were riots due to the problem of 
sharply rising food and fuel pr ices, known as "La vie chère". Haiti imports over 50% of its 
food (over 80% of its rice) and sharp price rises meant that pe ople could not afford to feed 
themselves and their families. The Prime Minister was forced to resign and the government was in disarray for 5 months. Finally, an im petus was created by the emergency needs brought 
by the hurricanes, described above, leading to inauguration of a new government on 
5th September 2008. Vast needs remained to be faced by the new government. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
For several years DG ECHO responded to catastr ophes and crises in Haiti, but was not pro-
active. By 2008 humanitarian needs were so  great that this changed and DG ECHO 
implemented three Food Aid decisions and an ad -hoc decision in Haiti, as well as emergency 
response and disaster preparedness. Moreover, the Commission decided to re-open an ECHO 
office in Haiti
27 and to schedule Global Plan funding for 2009. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
DG ECHO's strategy in Haiti is to reduce mal nutrition and mortality through Multi-sectoral 
humanitarian aid, as well as responding to Di sasters and undertaking Disaster preparedness 
operations. €1 million is allocated to Haiti under 6th DIPECHO Action Plan in the Caribbean 
(€4 million, 2007-9). Food assistance is part of  the multi-sectoral strategy, including Food 
Security (agricultural inputs and livelihoods), Community Ther apeutic Care and Malnutrition 
programmes, as well as basic Food Aid. 
In 2008, €8 million was allocated to Haiti via Ad hoc funding decisions (€3 million for 
Health, Water and Sanitation and €5 million from 2 Food Aid decisions). During the 
hurricane season, Haiti was severely affected  by Tropical Storm Fay, Hurricanes Gustav, 
Hanna and Ike. In addition to the regional Emergency decision mentioned above, a primary 
emergency decision (€2 million) was adopted in  response to Hurricane Hanna. Eight out of 
ten departments were severely affected and approximately one million people required 
                                                 
27 There had been one between 1993 and 1998 
 
EN 49   EN assistance, which was provided in the sector s of food, non-food items, water and sanitation, 
health, shelter and emergency communications. Finally, an emergency food aid decision (€6 
million) was adopted to provide nutritiona l assistance for recovery in Haiti. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
In above-mentioned operations, there were LRRD components such as rehabilitation of 
sewage systems and donation of water equi pment. DG ECHO worked closely with other 
Commission services, undertaki ng Disaster prevention and Risk reduction programmes in the 
region. DG ECHO also collaborate d closely with DG Environment's Monitoring Information 
Centre, which sent an expert mission to Ha iti through the Community Civil Protection 
Mechanism. Its main focus was assessment of the most urgent technical assistance needed in order to repair bridges damaged or destroyed by hurricane Hanna. 
Suriname 
Humanitarian needs 
At the end of May 2008 heavy rains caused seri ous flooding in the southern provinces of 
Suriname, destroying crops, homes and live lihoods and a DG ECHO assessment mission 
showed the need for urgent assistance to flood  victims, in the sect ors of Food Aid and Food 
Security. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
DG ECHO had not been i nvolved in Suriname since 2006 when there was an Emergency 
decision for flood response. 
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
DG ECHO provided urgent relief for approxim ately 3,000 families, with an allocation of 
€400,000 on food aid.  
LRRD 
In the above operation, sustainability shoul d be achieved via capac ity-building of the 
Suriname Red Cross, but classic LRRD was not present. 
1.3 P ACIFIC  
In the Pacific, 2008 was for the most part a relatively calm year and no assistance from 
DG ECHO was required. 
Humanitarian needs 
Pacific is notorious for its earthquakes, vol canic eruptions, tsunami s and floods. However, 
2008 was for the most part a relatively calm year and no country re quested international 
assistance from DG ECHO. In December 2008 a se ries of tidal waves and floods affected 
Papua New Guinea, Marshall Islands and the Fi ji. This prompted an evaluation mission of 
DG ECHO Rapid Response Coor dinator, whose recommendati ons were consequently 
followed up by DG ECHO in the early days of 2009. 
 
EN 50   EN Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
The last DG ECHO intervention dates back to 2007 when emergency humanitarian operations 
were funded to respond to an earthquake and the following tsunami in the Solomon Islands. 
DG ECHO provided a rapid respons e leading to an Emergency decision (€550,000) to assist 
5,000 people in the sectors of she lter, health, water, sanitation, education and relief items. 
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
DG ECHO continued to monitor the humanitarian situation in the Pacific region primarily 
through the active presence in the region of the Rapid Res ponse Coordinator from the 
Regional Support Office in Bangkok who supervis es the Pacific countries through missions 
and ensures continuous coordination with EC Delegations, DG ECHO pa rtners (International 
Organizations and NGOs), as well as with other major stakeholders and donors like the 
Australian and New Zealand Governments.  
LRRD - possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Coordination with development actors is ensure d both at field and Headquarters level, where 
the situation in the Pacific was subject of re gular meetings and exch anges of information 
amongst several Commission services, in pa rticular DG Development and EuropeAid 
Cooperation Office together with th e Monitoring Information Centre. 
 
EN 51   EN 2. Eastern Europe, Russian Federation, Sout hern Caucasus, Central Asia, including 
Mongolia 
The situation in this geographical region is characterised by an overall positive evolution of 
the protracted crises that requi red a Commission humanitarian in tervention in the past years, 
allowing for an exit strategy expressed in: a reduction of the size of the humanitarian aid 
programme (phasing down –for example in th e Caucasus), an end of humanitarian aid 
(phasing out –like in Tajikistan) as well as a process of hand-over to development-oriented 
instruments (LRRD- in Georgia and Tajikistan). 
At the same time, the region remains vulnerable to hazards to which national structures do not 
always have a sufficient response capacity a nd which the more vulnerable segments of the 
population don’t have the coping mechanisms to overcome. In those cases, DG ECHO stands 
ready to intervene on the basis of humanitarian needs assessments (as was the case in the Republic of Moldova in 2007). 
Funding in this geographical region was to provi de humanitarian assistance in the following 
countries / areas (*): 
HUM.AID FOOD AID TOTAL
EUROPE, CAUCASUS & CENTRAL ASIA 20 450 000 20 450 000
Caucasus (Chechnya crisis) 11 000 000 11 000 000
Georgia 8 000 000 8 000 000
Moldova, Republic of  700 000  700 000
Tajikistan  750 000  750 000Country/RegionFunding Decisions adopted in 2008
 
(*) Dipecho programmes excluded from these tables– refer to part III.6.  
Northern Caucasus 
Humanitarian needs 
Reconstruction in Chechnya, once a Republic enti rely destroyed by two devastating conflicts, 
continues in full swing. However, its benefits are not yet perceived by the majority of the 
population which has not yet recovered the asse ts lost during the two wars and are kept 
destitute due to the lack  of job opportunities.  
While food insecurity is currently  only affecting the most vulne rable groups of the population, 
high levels of poverty and unemployment persist a nd have largely shifted to rural areas. 90% 
of the population in Chechnya and 61% in Ingushetia live under subsistence level (as 
compared to 17.8% Russian Federation average) . Unemployment in Chechnya affects over 
60% of the population.  
 
EN 52   EN Basic shelter needs still requir e support in order to promote th e return of the Internally 
Displaced People (IDP) and refugee populations . Around 20,000 private houses are still to be 
reconstructed according to recent estimates.  
And, last but not least, the need for Protecti on is paramount due to the poor observance of 
Rule of Law and Human Rights in the region. Though the security situation in Chechnya has 
significantly improved for the civ ilian population, the conditions in the rest of the region have 
steadily deteriorated in the last few years, notably in Ingushetia, but with no noticeable 
humanitarian impact yet. The entire region remains highly unstable. Human rights organisations continue to report severe violations of human ri ghts, notably abductions, torture 
and fabricated judiciary cases. 
The situation for the Chechen refugees hosted in  Azerbaijan did not change in 2008 and they 
remain a forgotten and under-assisted caseloa d with significant protection problems and no 
durable solutions are in sight, which has justified a continued support from DG ECHO. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last five years 
The Commission has been supporting victims in the Northern Caucasus since the beginning of 
the Chechen conflict. Five years ago, the humanitarian assistance provided by DG ECHO was 
covering most humanitarian sectors including food aid, non food items, water and sanitation 
and medical activities. From 2004, funding has reached €112 million.  
In 2008, DG ECHO adopted a phasing-out strategy for its assistance to the victims of the 
Chechen conflict as a result of the soci o-economic improvements and the successful 
implementation of reconstruction and rehabilitation pr ojects. This phasing out is concretely 
translated into a reduction of  funding and a focus on sectors and areas where needs remain.  
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
With a total budget of €11 million, the European Commission still remains the main donor in 
the region. In 2008, DG ECHO has refocused its effo rts on four main sect ors, i.e. protection 
(including for Internally Displaced Persons (IDP s) in Ingushetia and Dagestan and for the 
refugees from Chechnya hosted in Azerbaijan w ho represent forgotten caseloads), shelter for 
those still displaced within Chechnya, live lihood support activities and health notably 
healthcare for mother and child and handicapped people.  
Difficulties to enter Chechnya continues to rema in a concern for several DG ECHO partners, 
less for security reasons than because of the Russian Authorities' administrative procedures 
(e.g. stricter rules on visa). 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
The 2009 funding decision is foreseen in the pers pective of a continue d phasing out strategy. 
Over the last two years, the local authoritie s have started investi ng in reconstruction and 
rehabilitation of basic infrastr uctures and social services. Ho wever, the benefits of these 
investments do not always reach the most vulne rable groups of the population. The federal 
government opposes foreign external development aid. 
In addition, under the Special Programme fo r Northern Caucasus (Tacis) a €20 million 
reconstruction programme for social services  and private sector development has been 
financed and is implemented by the Delegation of the European Commission to Russia since 
 
EN 53   EN 2006. Since then the health systems of the th ree republics in the North Caucasus have 
received considerable help from the Europ ean Commission through contribution agreements 
with UNICEF and WHO and in 2008 this progra mme was completed by the conclusion of an 
agreement with the EBRD for job creation through private sector development and SME support through the banking sector. 
Southern Caucasus (Georgia) 
Humanitarian needs 
DG ECHO’s original strategy of gradually handing  over of its activities in the region had to be 
modified accordingly to new needs which arose as a result of the armed conflict between Georgia and 
the Russian Federation in August 2008.  
Tens of thousands of civilians fled th e fighting. Some 102,800 of  the estimated 133,500 
persons displaced in Georgia have now been able  to return home according to official figures 
provided by the Georgian government. Howeve r, the humanitarian needs of the IDPs, 
returnees and affected populati on in areas of shelter, prot ection, food and non food items 
distribution and psychosocial support remain persistent.  
Even if not directly involved in the armed conflict mentioned above, humanitarian needs 
remained in Abkhazia due to the unresolved conflict with Ge orgia and the international 
isolation of this de-fac to independent republic. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last five years 
Before the armed conflict erupted last summ er, DG ECHO's assistance was focusing on the 
remaining needs of the frozen conflict in Abkha zia. The main activities implemented refer to 
livelihood support activi ties and shelter. 
Following the conflict, DG ECHO adjusted its inte rvention and strategy to address the new 
acute needs that emerged 
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
To address the most urgent humanitarian ne eds of IDPs, returnee s and affected local 
population, DG ECHO has provided a total of  €8 million in 2008, aiming to achieve 
protection and provide assistance to the most vulnerable ones.  
The main needs addressed have been: shelte r, protection, non food it ems distribution and 
psychosocial support.Three different financial deci sions were adopted in this context: Primary 
Emergency (€1 million), Emergency (€5 million) and Ad Hoc decision (€2 million). 
Under the Ad Hoc decision, DG ECHO also con tinues funding activities aimed at improving 
living conditions for the most vulnerable segmen ts of the population in Abkhazia and help 
them regain a minimum of self-sufficiency: f ood security/income generation projects and the 
improvement of shelter conditi ons, especially for returnees. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
 
EN 54   EN New instruments will be put in place. Once implementation is underway, this should allow 
DG ECHO to phase out from Abkhazia for instance, provi ded the situation does not 
deteriorate.  
• EC Instrument for Stability . EC has allocated €15M to re spond to the needs under the UN 
Flash Appeal. The main projects funded ar e: winterisation/hous ing support and early 
recovery of IDPs livelihoods. 
• Under the European Neighbourhood Partnership Instrument  (ENPI), the EC (EuropeAid) 
continues to fund an ongoing rehabilitation programme for the conflict areas with €6 
million for 2008, the focus for that year's c ontribution being on the Georgian-Ossetian 
conflict zone, supporting IDPs and confiden ce building measures. Following the 2008 
conflict, it was decided that priority should be given to the needs of the new IDPs. The 
contents of this programme are currently under preparation. 
• The major ENPI contribution however c onsists of two targeted budget support 
programmes adopted in 2008, one of €10 m illion already disbursed in 2008, and a 
complement of €51,5 million, to support Georgia' s IDPs Action Plan. The aim is to assist 
the Government of Georgia via the Munici pal Development Fund, to improve the living 
conditions of IDPs by providing durable housin g solutions (construction of new houses in 
new settlements). 
Republic of Moldova  
Humanitarian needs 
In 2007, the Republic of Moldova was hit by a se vere drought, which affected 80% of the 
country. The drought inflicted serious damage to th e agricultural sector an d in particular was a 
harsh blow for the most vulnerable small farmers who depend on livestock and home gardens.  
An assessment undertaken by the Food and Agri culture Organisation (FAO), the World Food 
Programme (WFP) and DG ECHO after the DG ECHO intervention in 2007 concluded that 
another intervention would be n eeded in 2008 to tackle the eff ect of the drought for the most 
vulnerable small-scale households. The conclu sions were that, as the estimated 2007 wheat 
harvest would reach only 44% of that of the pr evious year and a mere 28% for sunflower and 
27% for corn, the returns on land leased by  the majority of small holders would be 
dramatically reduced, thus comp romising the next sewing season.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last five years 
A decision of €3 million was taken in 2007 whic h consisted of distribution of fodder, 
feedstuff for cows, pigs, sheep, goats and poultry. 15,000 rural vuln erable households 
benefited from this assistance. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
The objective of DG ECHO funding in the Repub lic of Moldova in 2008 (€700,000) has been 
to address the remaining humanitarian need s resulting from the 2007 drought by covering the 
basic food needs of the most vulnerable rura l households affected through the provision of 
agricultural inputs. Through the project, approximately 87,600 vulnerable small-scale 
households in the most affected sectors of Central, Southern, Northern, Gagauzia and 
Transnistria regions have been  able to plant 0.5 ha of mai ze on time, with good quality seed, 
thereby improving their f ood security situation. 
 
EN 55   EN LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
The provision of humanitarian aid was needed due to the pa rticular acuteness of the 2007 
drought. DG ECHO's mandate ended after the s econd decision. Efforts should now focus on 
supporting Moldovan coping mechanisms towards climatic hazard by adequate structural 
reforms of agricultural techniques. 
Tajikistan 
Humanitarian needs 
The Commission has provided humanitarian ai d to Tajikistan since 1994 to answer the 
humanitarian needs resulting from the civil wa r. In 2003, a three-year phasing down strategy 
was defined, which led to the ending of the programming in September 2007. Today, the 
humanitarian needs still requiring response ar e those resulting from the frequent natural 
disasters affecting the country. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last five years  
The Commission has been providing humanitari an aid to Tajikistan for total funding of 
€20.1 million since 2004.  
In 2003 a three-year phasing out strategy was deci ded and effectively put in place resulting in 
completing DG ECHO humanitarian  aid while support in disast er preparedness continued 
through the DIPECHO Action Plans. 
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
At the beginning of 2008, Tajikistan experienced a cold wave reportedly the coldest in 25 
years, which affected about 2 million people. In addition to suffering from the cold, a large part of the population did not have anymore acce ss to drinkable water and electricity supply. 
Moreover, large quantities of seeds and agricultur al assets have been destroyed by the frost. 
To support the most affected populati on, DG ECHO mobilised €750,000 to provide 
humanitarian assistance to over 60,000 vulnerable people. 
In addition, DG ECHO continues to remain act ive in Tajikistan through its DIPECHO Action 
Plan for Central Asia, monitoring closely the natu ral disasters continuing to affect the country. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
With the end of DG ECHO funding, some of these interventions, in partic ular in the health 
and food sectors were accepted for financin g by other European Commission cooperation 
instruments. 
 
EN 56   EN 3. Mediterranean and Middle East 
In 2008, DG ECHO continued its large-scale in tervention in response to the humanitarian 
needs of the Palestinian populations affected by  the crisis, both in the occupied Palestinian 
territories as well as in  neighbouring countries.  
In addition, increased humanitarian needs linked to the crisis in Iraq prompted a humanitarian 
response inside Iraq as well as in neighbouri ng countries, host to a la rge refugee caseload.  
The response to man-made disasters continued in the region with the pr ovision of assistance 
to the Sahrawi refugees in Al geria, and with a small-scale response to Yemen affected by 
crisis and storm.  
Funding in these regions aimed at providing humanitarian assistance in respect of the 
following crises (*): 
HUM.AID FOOD AID TOTAL
MEDITERRANEAN & MIDDLE EAST 62 100 000 62 760 000 124 860 000
Palestinian Territories 25 500 000 47 760 000 73 260 000
Palestinian Refugees in Lebanon 9 500 000 9 500 000
Iraq Crisis (including Syria) 20 000 000 10 000 000 30 000 000
Yemen 2 100 000 2 100 000
Western Sahara 5 000 000 5 000 000 10 000 000Country/RegionFunding Decisions adopted in 2008
 
(*) Dipecho programmes excluded from these tables– refer to part III.6.  
Occupied Palestinian Territories (W est Bank and Gaza Strip), Lebanon, 
Jordan and Syria (Palestinian crisis) 
Humanitarian needs 
After eight years of conflict following the start of  the second intifada, the humanitarian crisis 
in the occupied Palestinian territories con tinued in 2008, within th e context of unceasing 
fragmentation and isolation of the West Bank and the continued blockade of the Gaza Strip. 
The most recent round of negotia tions initiated at the Annapo lis conference of November 
2007 has so far failed to provide so lutions to long-disputed issues  between the State of Israel 
and the Palestinian Authority. In the mean time, daily violence continued, both between 
Palestinians and Israeli Defence Forces as well as between Pa lestinian factions. IIn addition, 
the Gaza blockade progressively suffocated the St rip, up to the outbreak of the Israeli strikes 
on 27th December; further to protracted launches of mortars from Gaza based Hamas linked 
factions. Furthermore, the growing dependency on international aid and the unremitting deterioration of the socio-economic situation of the Palestinian popul ation both contribute 
substantially to the complexity of this protracted crisis. 
The context in Lebanon is larg ely influenced by the situation in the occupied Palestinian 
territories, with a sens e of despair and resentment also  largely widespread amongst the 
 
EN 57   EN Palestinian refugee population. As for the Nahr el  Bared Camp (NBC) crisis that started in 
April 2007, the degree of destitution for the vast majority of refugee families displaced from 
NBC remained very high in 2008. Families still found themselves in overcrowded and substandard housing with limited access to ba sic services and liv elihoods opportunities. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last five years 
The Commission has been providing humanitari an aid to the Palestinian population in and 
outside the occupied Palestinia n territories since the outbreak of the second Intifada. A total 
amount of €366 million has been  made available since 2004.  
As reflected in the table, the aid provided ha s kept up with developments on the ground, such 
as the steady aggravation of th e crisis, the contributions of other donors to cover different 
types of needs, upsurges of humanitarian need s (e. g. increased humanitarian needs due to the 
suspension of other forms of assistance follo wing the Hamas' victory in the Palestinian 
Legislative Council elections in January 2006, the Nahr el Bared crisis in Lebanon Palestinian 
Refugee camps) and DG ECHO’s ow n assessment of the needs and that of other organisations 
as well as implementing conditions on the ground.  
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
The European Commission made €82.7 available million for humanitarian operations 
benefiting Palestinians in the Palestinian territory, and Palestin e refugees in Lebanon 
including the victims of the conflict in a nd around the Nahr el Bared refugee camp.  
The bulk of the funds, €73.3 million, went to oper ations in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip 
in the following sectors: f ood assistance; health; water a nd sanitation; cash-for-work; 
protection; psycho-social support , and co-ordination. Various projects were  aimed at coping 
with the humanitarian consequences of the economic, fiscal and social crisis of 2008. A 
substantial part of th e funds went to operations target ing beneficiaries affected by the 
construction of the barrier on Palestinian la nd in the West Bank. As opposed to previous 
years' programmes, operations in the Gaza Strip represented the majority  of funding with 56% 
of the budget for the whole occu pied Palestinian territory. 
For Palestinian refugees in Lebanon (€9.5 m illion), DG ECHO helped to improve the quality 
of secondary health services provided by the hospitals managed by the Palestinian Red 
Crescent Society to the most vulnerable Palestinian refugees  and by improving access to the 
basic humanitarian right of clean water supp ly resources (Southern Lebanon). As for the 
situation in the Nahr el Bared camp, relief effort s have mitigated some of the worst impacts of 
the 2007 crisis, ensuring access to shelter, food, water and sanitation, basic infrastructures, 
health needs (including psycho-so cial support) and other services  for the affected families.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
In view of the overall political context, L RRD was only a partial option in some limited 
sectors for the Palestinian territory in 2008. Fo r this purpose, full co-ordination was ensured 
with more development-oriented Community instruments and funding, particularly in the 
food, water and sanitation as well as health s ectors. Consistency and complementarity with 
operations in favour of Palestinian refugees in Jordan, Lebanon and Syria funded under other 
budget lines were also ensured. 
 
EN 58   EN Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon (Iraqi crisis)  
Humanitarian needs  
Since the 2003 war and the fall of the Hussein regime, the Republic of Iraq has been faced 
with a dire security situation characterized by sectarian violence an d an ongoing asymmetric 
warfare. In particular, Iraq suffered from signi ficant instability, where clashes between Sunni 
and Shi'a communities as well as among the Shi'ites continue unabated. Violent deaths are a daily occurrence, and although attacks on the Multi-National Force Iraq (MNFI) and bomb 
explosions have been reduced since the second half of 2007, there are several violent deaths 
per day. This unremitting violence inside Iraq has led to continued mass internal and external displacement affecting much of the surroundi ng region. A significant  proportion of the 
internally displaced a nd of the refugees (306,000 have been  registered by UNHCR at the end 
of 2008) has run out of resour ces, leaving them and their host communities increasingly 
vulnerable, and the arrival of refugees in ne ighbouring countries, notably Syria and Jordan, 
has put a significant strain on th e infrastructure of host countries  and on the provision of basic 
services such as water, sanitation, health, a nd education. However the reduction in violence 
witnessed in Iraq in 2008 led to the return of  their areas of origin of 25,000 refugees and 
190,000 internally displaced people. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last five years 
In response to a growing protection crisis and increasing humanitarian needs inside Iraq, and a 
major refugee crisis in neighbouring count ries, DG ECHO allocated since 2007 €47.8 million 
for the Iraqi crisis.  
This is the first re-engagement of the Commis sions' humanitarian aid department with Iraq 
since the phase out of its operations in Iraq following the 2003 Iraq war (for which more than 
€100 million were allocated).  
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
To address the most urgent humanitarian need s of Iraqi refugees in  the Iraq neighbouring 
countries, notably Jordan and Syria, the Comm ission has provided a to tal of €14 million in 
2008, aiming to achieve protection and provide a ssistance to the most vulnerable refugees.  
These funds have contributed to finance the provision of basic health and psychosocial 
support, as well as social and education services , including the distribu tion of food (in Syria) 
and basic household items. 
The population of Iraq and notably  Internally Displaced Persons  (IDPs) have been assisted 
through a support worth €11 million, implemented notably by the International Committee of 
the Red Crescent (ICRC), to cover protecti on and water and sani tation activities.  
In addition, the ICRC received a €5 million alloca tion for food and seeds to respond to the 
needs of the most vulnerable rural populations affected by the severe drought of the 
2007/2008 winter and IDPs displa ced within governorates.  
It has to be noted that, while  there are significant humanitarian needs, there are also 
significant impediments to the delivery of humanita rian aid inside Iraq, i.e. severe security 
 
EN 59   EN concerns and problems of access, that prev ent the Commission from allocating funds 
commensurate to the level of needs. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Given the overall volatile situati on in Iraq, and the lack of perspe ctive on the refugee situation 
in neighbouring countries, LRRD wa s not an option for the Iraqi crisis in 2008. However, full 
co-ordination and consistency was ensured w ith more development-oriented Community 
instruments and funding, and should the secur ity conditions continue to improve, LRRD 
could become a reality in the coming two years.  
Algeria – Sahrawi refugees 
Humanitarian needs 
The living conditions of the Sahrawi refugees, w ho have lived for the past 30 years in camps 
in the desert in the South-Western Algeri an region of Tindouf, remain difficult and the 
caseload continues to substantia lly depend on international human itarian assistance to cover 
basic needs in all sectors (food, health, water an d sanitation, shelter, hygiene, education). The 
main issue of concern is the nutritional stat us of the refugees, notably under-fives and 
pregnant and lactating women, with high levels of anaemia and chronic malnutrition. Few 
institutional donors provide humanitarian aid in  this context which, according to DG ECHO’s 
classification, still amounts to a forgotten crisis. In contrast to  this limited institutional donor 
interest, there is a large support from Europe an civil society orga nisations and regional 
authorities (mostly from Spain and Italy), wh ich increases the volume of assistance received 
by the refugees but also rais es coordination challenges.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last five years 
The Commission has been providing  humanitarian aid to the Sahrawi refugees since the early 
1990s. Between 2004 and 2008, a total funding of €48 millions was allocated. 
The funding levels reflect both the relative stability of the crisis , and the contribution of other 
donors to cover different types of needs, ups urges of humanitarian needs (such as the 
February 2006 floods). In addition, the conditions particular to this crisis (hostile natural 
environment, prolonged dependency on assistance, di fficulty to retain qua lified local staff in 
the basic public services , limited number of donors, lack of LRRD perspective) have led to a 
significant emphasis on improving th e quality of aid interventions  in key sectors, such as 
water and sanitation, food/nutrition and health, through the involvement of sectoral experts 
from the Regional Support office.  
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
In 2008, humanitarian assistance allocations re mained at the same level of 2007 and was 
provided from two sources: €5 million were a llocated under the second food aid decision of 
2008 to provide for basic food assistance (throu gh the World Food programme) and for fresh 
food to complement and diversify the food intake  of refugees especial ly on micro-nutrients 
and vitamins. Another €5 million of humanitarian  aid were approved in October 2008 to cover 
other basic needs of refugees such as water, sanitation, health, nutrition hygiene and shelter.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
 
EN 60   EN Although LRRD is not applicable in the circumst ances prevailing in the refugee camps, there 
are successful attempts to link DG ECHO-funding to that from other instruments and other 
donors. Within the Commission, EuropeAid Cooper ation Office is funding a project under the 
“NGO co-financing” programme whic h provides for veterinary se rvices in the camps, thus 
supporting the main local coping mechanism fo r the refugees, and complementing existing 
food assistance. There is also a good L RRD dynamic between DG ECHO and the support 
provided by the Spanish Cooperation, in a 3- year framework, in th e health sector.  
Yemen 
Humanitarian needs 
Yemen is a country with a great degree of vul nerability due to the widespread poverty, low 
human development indicators, and a history of humanitarian  crises, both man-made and 
resulting from natural disasters. Armed clashe s between government forces and followers of 
the Believing Youth movement continued during all the year 2008 in the North of the country. 
Mid 2008, about 100,000 civilians were forced to  flee the Saada region. Yemen is also 
hosting a sizeable refugee populatio n from the Horn of Africa (notably from Somalia and 
Ethiopia with 50,000 new refugees in 2008). Fina lly, Yemen was hit by a tropical storm in 
October.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last five years  
The assistance in the last five years amount s to €8.62 million. An independent evaluation 
conducted in 2005 recommended that a gradual pha se-out from Yemen takes place, as the 
humanitarian aid interventions were reachin g the limit of addressing more long-term 
development needs. This was completed in 2007 and since that time, DG ECHO interventions 
address only needs resulting from spec ific crises and natural disasters.  
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
For the year 2008, although no funds were in itially budgeted, DG ECHO had to prepare 
financial decisions totalising €2.1 million. 
The first decision concerns provision of human itarian aid to the internally displaced people 
affected by the conflict in the North of the c ountry. €1 million was mobilised to provide basic 
items, food and surgical services. The second decision of €600,000 provided immediate relief 
assistance to the affected popula tion by the tropical storm in th e Eastern part of the country. 
The third decision of €500,000 was taken at the e nd of the year aiming at reinforcing the 
shelter capacity of the refugee camp in Kharaz and in Ahwar, as the number of new Somalis and Ethiopian (Oromos) arrivals incr eased all along 2008 (over 50,000 persons).  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
The assistance provided in the past years was very much an LRRD intervention and linkages 
were sought with the authori ties as well as other donors incl uding other services of the 
Commission. The phasing-out from Yemen can be considered as having been completed in 
2007, although new relatively short term operations were still necessary fo r specific crises in 
2008. 
 
EN 61   EN 4. Asia 
In 2008, humanitarian and food aid interventions were funded in 20 countries in Asia, through 
the adoption of 32 funding decisions for a total amount of €158.3 million28 which represented 
17% of the total budget committed by DG ECHO. 
EC humanitarian assistance was provided and/or implemented in the following countries (*) 
HUM.AID FOOD AID TOTAL
SOUTH ASIA 64 850 000 29 407 000 94 257 000
Afghanistan/Pakistan /Iran 26 500 000 9 800 000 36 300 000
Bangladesh 10 500 000 10 001 000 20 501 000
India 2 850 000 3 140 000 5 990 000
Nepal 4 500 000 3 466 000 7 966 000
Inde/Nepal 4 500 000 4 500 000
Sri Lanka 16 000 000 3 000 000 19 000 000
SOUTH EAST & EAST ASIA 44 000 000 10 000 000 54 000 000
Burma/Myanmar (Nargis) 29 000 000 10 000 000 39 000 000
China 2 000 000 2 000 000
East Timor 2 000 000 2 000 000
Indonesia 2 000 000 2 000 000
Philippines 6 500 000 6 500 000
Vietnam/Laos 2 500 000 2 500 000Country/RegionFunding Decisions adopted in 2008
Total (1) 108 850 000 39 407 000 148 257 000
 
(*) Dipecho programmes excluded from these tables– refer to part III.6; 
4.1. S OUTH AND SOUTH WESTERN ASIA 
The region is characterised by instability an d open conflicts (Afgha nistan, Pakistan, Sri 
Lanka) and the year 2008 saw an accentuation of  tensions and violence. Consequently the 
number of people in need of humanitarian assistance increased, particularly in Sri Lanka, 
where over 350,000 people were displaced by the esca lation of the conflict  in the Vanni and a 
further 300,000 people in the north remain extremely vulnerable. 
In Afghanistan the intensification of the conflict is hampering efforts to promote the return of 
refugees and increasing the numbers of the in ternally displaced in need of humanitarian 
assistance. A further consequence of increased  violence is lack of humanitarian access to 
some of the most vulnerable people, a co mmon source of problems during 2008 in the two 
above countries. 
                                                 
28 Of which €108.9M was on the humanitarian aid budget line; €39.4M on food aid budget line and €10M 
on Dipecho budget line - see section on Dipecho activities. 
 
EN 62   EN In Pakistan humanitarian access has also been  severely constrained due to the violence, 
notably in North West Frontier Province. 
And in the three countries humanitarian actors have too often been the direct targets and 
victims of this violence. 
In August a breach in the embankment of the Ko shi river, when the river was flowing at its 
highest due to the monsoon, caused massive floodi ng in South East Nepa l and in the Indian 
State of Bihar, affecting over 33 million people. At the height of the crisis, an estimated over 4 million people were displaced. While most have now returned to their villages, the destruction in terms of housing, so cial infrastructure and agricult ural land, will take years to 
recover. 
Afghanistan (including Afghan refugees in Pakistan and Iran) 
Humanitarian needs 
The main groups with substantial humanitarian  needs in 2008 were the over 350,000 refugees 
who returned from Pakistan and Iran, the de ported illegal Afghans from Iran, the battle 
affected Internally Displaced People (IDP s) within Afghanistan, the host communities 
receiving these returnees and the high food insecure populations affected by many years of 
drought, the last one being in 2008, and by the gl obal rise in food prices. The needs of the 
returnees and IDPs incl uded transport and resettl ement support, as well  as food, shelter and 
water and sanitation for the most vulnerable such as female headed households. With over 5 million refugees and displaced people having returned since 2002, many of these and their 
host communities have required continuing s upport to avoid a major humanitarian crisis, 
particularly in the sector of water and sanita tion where Afghanistan has some of the worst 
global indicators. A further si gnificant area for humanitari an support was protection, 
especially in the south of Afghanistan and food assistance for th e highly food insecure 
population.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
DG ECHO has funded projects ad dressing the needs of vulnerable people affected by the 
consequences of the Afghan conflict and natural hazards since 1992. Between 2003 and 2008, 
DG ECHO has spent €197 million including €15.8 million from the food aid budget line. 
The main intervention targeted the needs of the over 5 million returnees, IDPs and the most 
vulnerable host communities. Assistance to the vi ctims of natural disast ers, notably of the 
severe drought that affected Afghanistan in  2008, was also provided. Water and sanitation, 
food, shelter, protection, basic livelihood, securi ty advice and humanitarian flights were the 
main sectors of activity. Activities in the health sector were taken over by the EC Delegation 
in a successful LRRD exercise in 2004. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
DG ECHO’s strategy for 2008 was focused on assis ting the return of refugees and IDPs and 
ensuring basic livelihood support for the most vul nerable and for their host communities. In 
parallel, DG ECHO worked with DG RELEX and UNHCR to attain durable solutions for the 
Afghan populations remaining in Pakistan and Iran, preparing for the time when they would 
cease to be considered as refugees. 
 
EN 63   EN DG ECHO under its Global Plan funded €25 million of humanitarian aid for victims of the 
Afghan crisis, covering the registration and trans portation of refugees from Pakistan and Iran 
to Afghanistan, as well as continuing support for the most vulnerabl e of the remaining 
refugees. Shelter together with water and sani tation were the main sectors of intervention 
within Afghanistan. Responses to  localised disasters were made  with an increasing emphasis 
on building up local capacity. All pr ojects were implemented with full respect to the key issue 
of gender. Protection assistance was provide d, notably through continued support to both 
UNHCR and ICRC in their respective protection mandate roles. Given the constraints of 
security and geography, support to security adviso ry services for aid agencies in Afghanistan, 
and to a subsidised humanitarian flight service was maintained. 
€9.8 million from the global food aid decision wa s allocated to Afghanistan in order to 
respond to the consequences of the 2008 drought that was coming after almost three years of 
recurrent drought. Access to food and clean wate r supplies, as well as food security were 
improved for the most vulnerable populations, with  a particular focus on disabled persons and 
female headed households. Food assistance to battl e affected IDPs in th e South of the country 
was also provided. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Close coordination is taking place on LRRD matters between DG ECHO and DG RELEX and 
EuropeAid Cooperation Office, with a view to ensuring the mutual co mpatibility of their 
programmes and a handover wherever possible as it  has been the case for health programmes 
in 2004. Regarding assistance to refugees in Pa kistan and Iran, DG ECHO  closely coordinated 
with the EC Delegation (through the Uprooted Pe ople budget line) so that a clear distinction 
of funding between strict humanitarian and more  developmental actions was respected, while 
in Afghanistan assistance has remained focused on the pockets of greatest need.  
In the food sector, a comprehensive LRRD st rategy between DG ECHO's food assistance and 
the EuropeAid's Food Security Thematic Pr ogramming was designed and implemented in 
2008. 
Pakistan  
Humanitarian needs 
Pakistan is subject to frequent  natural disasters, notably in  2008 these were flooding in the 
North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and an  earthquake in Balouchistan. The main 
humanitarian needs in 2008 were, however, in favour of displaced population due to conflict. This was notably in NWFP and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) with 
estimated numbers of displaced fluctuating between 100,000 and 400,000 people. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
While initially involved mainly in relation to the Afghan refugee crisis (assistance to Afghan 
refugees in Pakistani soil), humanitarian aid had become increasingly engaged in responding 
to natural disasters, although local capacity for such respons e has also been increasing 
significantly since the 2005 earthquake. Now hu manitarian aid acto rs are increasingly 
concerned with the consequences  of conflict within Pakistan. 
 
EN 64   EN Humanitarian Objectives and Achievements  
To assist those displaced by conflict during th e latter half of the year, €1.5 million was 
allocated to ICRC to assist 60,000 displaced. This  included an initial food ration, shelter, and 
domestic items as well as medical and water and sanitation support for displaced and host 
communities. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
With little prospect for an early end to the conflic ts in Pakistan, and major constraints such as 
security and access, LRRD efforts are focused more on coordinating responses to the ongoing 
needs. 
Bangladesh 
Humanitarian needs 
Bangladesh, the world's most densely populated  country, is highly vulnerable to natural 
disasters, in particular ear thquakes, floods and cyclones. This vulnerability is being 
exacerbated by climate change factors. In 2008, four humanitarian crises have been dealt by 
DG ECHO. 
The total amount of 2008 funding decisions for Bangladesh was €20.5 million broken down 
below in needs covered. 
After completion in 2007 of the immediate emer gency relief programmes in response to the 
SIDR cyclone that severely hit the country in November 2007 affecting close to 9 million 
people and destroying more than 500,000 h ouses, food stocks, livelihoods and basic 
infrastructures, DG ECHO funded additiona l emergency programs in 2008 to address 
continuing basic shelter needs (€9 million) and food aid/short term early recovery programs 
(€8 million).  
In addition, an estimated 10,000 Rohingya (Musli m minority from Burma/Myanmar's Arakan 
State) undocumented refugees who used to live in overcrowded and appalling conditions in a 
makeshift camp in Teknaf, without access to dr inkable water or adequate sanitation were 
moved to a new site with DG ECHO suppor t. Humanitarian assistance through a €351,000 
emergency food aid distribution/Cash for Wo rk program (under food aid budget line) was 
released to respond to a food crisis caused by cholera outbreak and heavy monsoon during the 
transfer of Rohingya refug ees to the new location. 
Bamboo flowering in the Chittagong Hill Tracts region led to the multiplication of rodents 
and consequent crop destruction. In an area where food insecurity  is already very high, this 
led to a food crisis which DG ECHO addre ssed through emergency food aid programs 
totalling €1,6 million (under the food aid budget line). 
Heavy monsoon downpour end of September combin ed with heavy water flow coming from 
upstream India rivers, resulted in waterlog floo ding in Jessore and Shat khira Districts in the 
South-West region of Bangladesh. It is esti mated that the floods have affected over 196,000 
people and around 80,000 had been displaced and were living in appalling conditions in 
makeshift shelters or under the open sky. DG ECHO provided €1.5 million to address urgent needs in the areas of food security, emerge ncy water and sanitation activities, livelihood 
 
EN 65   EN restoration and shelter. Some di saster preparedness measures had also been included in the 
operations, as much as was possible in the context of an emergency intervention. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
In 2004, ECHO also provided humanitarian assist ance to the people of Chittagong Hill Tracts, 
who were victims of communal violence.  
DG ECHO intervened in Bangladesh whenever a natural disaster exceeding the local coping 
capacity struck the country. In 2004 and 2006, the country was hit by  severe floods where 
DG ECHO provided food rations, safe drinking water and emergency items. 2007 was a 
particular harsh year with tw o spells of monsoon floods in August and September displacing 
millions of people. Then, cyclone SIDR h it the country on 15th November 2007 where 
DG ECHO responded through a primary emergenc y decision and two emergency decisions 
totalling €8.4 million. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
With the latest €5 million allocation in favour of SIDR cyclone victims, DG ECHO responded 
as much as possible to the large outstandi ng humanitarian needs in the shelter sector. 
DG ECHO has also quickl y addressed the emergency humanitarian needs arising from floods 
as well as the food security crisis. 
Finally, DG ECHO succeeded to move the 10,000 Rohingya undocumented refugees to a 
decent site where they can live with some dignity and basic services.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
In Bangladesh LRRD in sectors of food secur ity and disaster prepar edness/disaster risk 
reduction are particularly important, as structural issues in these sectors contribute directly to 
the humanitarian crises cause d by sudden onset disasters. 
Close coordination is ensured with the DG for Ex ternal Relations Stability Instrument and EC 
Delegation, so as to link the emergency inte rventions of DG ECHO with the longer term 
interventions of the European Commission. Fo r example, the Stabili ty Instrument has 
allocated €13 million to cyclone affected areas  thus ensuring effective LRRD with DG ECHO 
interventions. 
Active collaboration with EC Delegation has facilitated the granting of a site for the 
relocation of Rohingya refugees, and close coordination is maintained between DG ECHO 
and the EC Delegation/EuropeAid/DG RELEX who are supporting two official camps for 
documented Rohingya refugees. 
 
EN 66   EN India 
Humanitarian needs 
After a relative lull in 2007, violence in Jammu  and Kashmir flared up again in the summer 
2008. Access to some of the victims was impo ssible at times and remains restricted. 
In the Southern part of Chhattisgarh State,  Naxalite (Maoist)-related violence remains 
significant and the population (mainly tribal peop le and scheduled castes) are caught in the 
conflict. Some areas are totally inaccessible and in general the region is acutely lacking in basic social services, as it is practically impossibl e to hire doctors or teac hers to work in such 
a risky environment. Tens of thousands are displaced as a consequence of the fighting. 
Bamboo flowering in Mizoram caused a massive  increase in the numbers of rodents who 
proceeded to eat the standing crops and stocked seed s. Villagers turned to other alternatives to 
feed their families, but over time these became depleted. Like in Bangladesh, a silent crisis 
followed because of the rat infestation. 
In August the Koshi River broke through an embankment (in Nepal), destroying crops, 
houses, livestock and social infrastructure. As the river flows south into the Ganges, soon the 
Indian State of Bihar was flooded. Over 33 million people in Bihar were affected. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
Since 2004 DG ECHO has funded projects addr essing the needs of conflict-affected 
populations in Jammu and Kashmir to the t une of €8 million. 2007 was the first year of 
DG ECHO intervention in Chhatt isgarh and so far this assistance has added up to €1.5 
million. 
India is prone to natural di sasters and DG ECHO provided human itarian assistance to the 
victims of a series of these in the past 5 years, including the 2004 South Asia Tsunami, the 
2005 Kashmir earthquake, and monsoon flooding in 2004, 2006 and 2007. In 2008 assistance 
was provided to the victims of the Mizoram ra t plague and the victims of the Koshi River 
flooding. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
In 2008, DG ECHO allocated a total amount of  €6 million to India of which €2.9 million in 
humanitarian aid and €3.1 million in food aid. An  emergency decision has also been adopted 
to respond to the floods in the State of Biha r affecting India and Nepal (€ 4.5 million)  
In the context of the conflict in Kashmir,  approximately 40,000 people received psychosocial 
support and protection, includi ng children in orphanages. In Chhattisgarh, 20,000 people 
benefited from curative and preventive basic healthcare services  and 7,500 internally 
displaced families benefited from improved water and sanitation. 
DG ECHO continued also to fina nce projects in shelter and the provision of water and 
sanitation to the Sri Lankan refug ees living in camps in Tamil Nadu. 
 
EN 67   EN LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
In Jammu and Kashmir, past DG ECHO suppor t for non-formal education and child 
protection are is being continued by EuropeAid and the EC Delegation. 
In Chhattisgarh a State Partne rship Programme has been sign ed between the EC Delegation 
and the State authorities, aiming at the equita ble delivery of and access to quality health and 
education services, as well as improved fore st-based tribal livelihoods, through governance, 
institutional reform and capacity development at  state and at decentra lized levels. It is 
expected that this programme will be a valuab le vehicle for linking relief and rehabilitation, 
and will ultimately allow DG ECHO to exit from this crisis. 
Nepal 
Humanitarian needs 
Nepal is one of the world’s poorest countries and remains the scene of two forgotten 
humanitarian crises. 
The violent conflict initiated by Maoist rebe ls in 1996 cost over 13,000 lives and although it 
was formally brought to an end with the signature of the Peace Agreement in November 2006, the country is still suffering from its conse quences, marked by high volatility and frequent 
spates of violence.  
Against this poor socio-economic background and po litical instability, th e toll of the 10-year 
conflict is still heavy.  The conflict isolated populations in the worst affected areas and 
disrupted trade and agricultu ral activities; it destroyed water supply systems and 
communications infrastructure. Most of the community drinking water systems constructed 
during the 1980s and 1990s are no t working effectively. Health  posts are not functioning 
properly and still suffer from a lack of tr ained personnel, hygiene,  medicines and waste 
treatment equipment and systems. The Nepalese au thorities have not been  able to give support 
to communities due to budget cuts and security concerns. 
A second forgotten crisis ha s trapped over 103,000 refugees , including 22,000 children, who 
were expelled from Bhutan between 1990 and 1992. Since then they have been stuck in seven camps in the south-east of Nepal, accepted by  neither Nepal nor Bhutan and are totally 
dependent on external aid. In the absence of a political solution, the United Sates and other 
countries have offered a resettlement op tions and 7,000 refugees could leave in 2008. 
The 2008 monsoon season caused severe flooding in the Terai plains , destroying crops, 
houses, livestock and infrastructu re. Main region affected have  been the Kailali district and 
the Saptari and Sunsari district that were flooded after the br ake in the embankment of the 
Koshi River. Over 200,000 people were affected. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
Since 2004, DG ECHO has provided close to €32 m illion of humanitarian and food aid for the 
refugees and for victims of the armed conflict. 
Nepal is prone to natural disasters and DG ECHO provided humanitarian assistance to the 
victims of monsoon flooding in 2007 and 2008, as  well as to victims of drought in 2006. 
 
EN 68   EN Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
In 2008 populations living in the most affected areas by the conflict continued to benefit from 
protection activities, with particular emphasi s on support to internally displaced people. 
Primary and reproductive health care was provided to  over 300,000 people in the mid- and far- 
west regions. Also, 18,250 people benefited from the construction of drinking water systems 
and latrines. 
Food aid was distributed to 103,000  Bhutanese refugees, represen ting a third of their annual 
requirements. DG ECHO also supported a supplementary food ration programme for 
vulnerable refugees (malnourished children under five, pregnant women and nursing mothers, 
tuberculosis patients a nd elderly sick people). 
DG ECHO approved €2.4 million in humanitarian aid for the flood victims, including 
provisions for emergency shelter, food rati ons and clothing. In addition to this, the 
Commission also financed disa ster preparedness projects. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
The contribution to the Bhutanese refugees’ food needs is complemented by support from 
EuropeAid Co-operation Offi ce for UNHCR’s management activ ities in the camps. 2008 
brought fresh hopes in terms of a possible solution to  this crisis through resettlement in third 
countries, from which the refugees can continue to  lobby to return to Bhutan. It is foreseen 
that a majority will opt for the resettlement option, thus significantly reducing the number of 
those requiring continuing assistance. However, gi ven the size of the caseload, it will take at 
least 5 years to complete the process. During that time political efforts will be maintained to lobby for a solution for those not ab le or willing to relocate, incl uding for a return to Bhutan 
and the possibility for others to settle legally in Nepal. 
DG ECHO is also carefully mon itoring the evolution of the soci o-political situation. It is 
hoped that socio-economic development will be made possible through progressive political 
stability, enabling the development partners to  occupy their natural space and, consequently, 
allowing DG ECHO to close down its operations linked to the conflict. 
Sri Lanka 
Humanitarian needs 
In January 2008 the Government of Sri Lanka abrogated the 2002 ceasef ire agreement with 
the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)  and launched a major assault on Tamil held 
territory in the north of the country. By the e nd of the year, the army made significant gains 
and over 300,000 civilians had been forced to fl ee from shelling and aerial bombardment and 
move eastwards into a LTTE controlled district. Due to repeated displacement, access 
restrictions and disruption to livelihood caused by the fighting, almost all of the displaced are 
dependent on humanitarian aid.  
Relief assistance was being provided to the di splaced by ECHO funded partners and other 
humanitarian agencies, but in September 2008 the government ordered all INGOs and UN 
agencies working in the Vanni to relocate their humanitarian and development operations 
outside the conflict area for s ecurity reasons. The International Committee of the Red Cross 
(ICRC) was the only organization allowed to remain present and continued limited relief 
 
EN 69   EN assistance and protection ac tivities. After pressure from international agencies, the 
government also agreed to the establishm ent of WFP humanitarian convoys but due to 
security and other restrictions these convoys have only been able to supply around 50% of 
food needs. At the end of the year, heavy monsoon rains exacerbated the problem and in 
addition to food, there were also urgent needs fo r shelter materials, medical supplies and other 
essential items. 
While focus on humanitarian needs in 2008 has been in the Vanni, a further 500,000 IDPs and 
locally vulnerable population in Jaffna and other di stricts of the north a nd east were still in 
need of humanitarian assistance followi ng earlier stages of the conflict.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
Since 2003 the Commission has provided over €64 million of humanitarian assistance and 
over €43 million in response to the tsunami. Related tsunami projects ended mid 2007 and 
focus has now returned to the escalating conflict in the north. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
In 2008 DG ECHO provided €19 million in emergenc y relief assistance to over 800,000 IDPs 
and conflict affected population in Sri Lanka and 30,000 Sri Lankan refugees living in camps 
in Tamil Nadu, India. This included an emer gency decision for €2 million specifically for 
IDPs in the Vanni.  
Main sectors of intervention were protection, food aid and food security, shelter and non food 
relief items, water and sanitation, coordination and security. In Tamil Nadu the focus was on 
water and sanitation.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
In terms of LRRD, DG ECHO works closely w ith other Commission services to link with 
programmes which complement and go beyond DG ECHO emergency interventions by concentrating on the medium term needs of re turnee IDPs and host communities in Sri Lanka. 
 
EN 70   EN 4.2. S OUTH EAST AND EAST ASIA  
The region is extremely exposed to natural disa sters but 2008 was a particularly bad year: in 
May cyclone Nargis struck the Ayeyarwady delta region and Yangon city in Burma/Myanmar, affecting up to 2.4 million peopl e, and in Sichuan province in China, a 
devastating earthquake affected 45 million peop le. In addition to these two major events, 
Vietnam and Lao People's Democratic Republic saw the landfall of tropical storm Kammuri 
and subsequent flooding.  
The political scene was dominated by the turmoil in Thailand and massive demonstrations, 
which eventually resulted in a change of G overnment. Given the political stalemate in 
Burma/Myanmar, refugees living in Thailand c ontinued to be a priority for DG ECHO. The 
year 2008 saw the freezing of relations between the two Koreas and South Korea did not send its usual food and fertiliser aid into the No rth. However, as a long-term food security 
approach better addresses the prob lem, DG ECHO did not intervene. 
The Philippines saw an escalation in the conflict between the Government and the armed 
opposition groups, the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), leavi ng numerous people displaced. In  East Nusa Tenggara/Eastern 
Indonesia (NTT) the nutritional stat us of vulnerable groups con tinued to deteriorate causing 
ECHO to intervene, and in Timor Leste support to  the return and integr ation process of IDPs 
continued.  
In 2008, the Sixth DIPECHO Action Plan for Sout h East Asia was adopted benefitting up to 
1,675,000 people. 
Burma/Myanmar 
Humanitarian needs 
The protracted crisis  in Burma/Myanmar, ruled by a military regime since 1962, is 
characterised by ongoing low-intensity conflic t between the Army and non-ceasefire ethnic 
groups. This is however not the only reason causi ng internal displacement which is also due 
to land confiscation for natural resources, teak rubber and bio-fu el plantations and livelihood 
vulnerability-induced displacement (migrati on). The ethnic conflict resulted in 150,000 
Burmese refugees in refugee camps in Thailand and 28,000 mainly Rohingyas in Bangladesh. Many thousands of Rohingyas and other ethnic minorities are looking for jobs as illegal 
migrants in Southern Thailand, Malaysia  or as far as the Gulf countries.  
Although about 236,000 Muslim Rohingya s returned into Northern Rakhine State (NRS) from 
Bangladesh, they live in a preca rious situation and require human itarian assistance. According 
to the Thailand-Burma Border Consortium (TBBC) in 2007 there were 503,000 IDPs in 
Eastern Burma/Myanmar. Out of these, 99,000 were hiding, 109,000 in relocation sites and 
295,000 in ceasefire areas. Access to these groups is very difficult for the international 
humanitarian community, while many IDPs have already integrated into their new villages. 
These vulnerable groups live in extreme poverty, where basic services such as health and 
education are absent. Infectious diseases, lik e malaria, tuberculosis  and HIV/AIDS, make 
them even more vulnerable. Soaring fuel and rice prices early 2008 had a negative impact on 
the general humanitarian situation in Burma/ Myanmar. The rodent crisis also affecting 
 
EN 71   EN Bangladesh and Mizoram, India has spelt over in to Chin state by destroying paddy fields and 
grain stocks. The overall impact of  this latter crisis is still unknown due to the absence of any 
comprehensive food security assessment.  
On 2nd -3rd May 2008, cyclone Nargis  struck Burma/Myanma r, sweeping through the 
Irrawaddy (Ayeyarwady) delta region and the country's main city, Yangon. Strong winds 
compounded by a high tidal surge flattened many villages and several townships were 95% 
destroyed. An estimated 2.4 million people have been affected and many have lost their 
livelihoods (fishing, rice producti on etc.). Almost 140,000 people ha ve been killed or remain 
missing.  
The Irrawaddy delta is a heavily  populated area of 7,35 million people – the most populous of 
Myanmar's states and divisions, with an averag e population density of 4 66 persons per square 
mile. It is the main rice producing area of  the country. Before th e devastating cyclone, 
international humanitarian community did not have access to this pa rt of the country.  
Because of the political situation, unde r the EU Common Position only humanitarian 
assistance can be implemented.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
Since 2004, DG ECHO allocated €70.9 million to provide assistance for vulnerable 
populations in Burma/Myanmar affect ed by the protracted crisis.  
To respond to the immense humanitarian needs after cycl one Nargis in 2008, DG ECHO 
allocated €39 million. Relief activities in the cy clone-affected Irrawaddy delta will continue 
until early 2010.  
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
In 2008, DG ECHO’s activities in Burma/Myanma r continued to be based on the following 
sectors: protection, health, water and sanitati on, nutrition and food aid. Due to the worsening 
humanitarian situation it became necessary to  increase DG ECHO's contribution to nutrition 
and become involved again in f ood assistance in NRS. DG ECHO ga ve priority to  the highly 
vulnerable border groups, notably  to those living in remote ru ral areas on the borders with 
Bangladesh, India, China and Th ailand, those lacking access to ba sic social services or those 
suffering discrimination on ethnic  (Mon and Karen minorities) or religious grounds (the 
Muslim Rohingyas in NRS). 
After cyclone Nargis hit the Irrawaddy delta, DG ECHO deployed its humanitarian experts 
quickly to reinforce its field office in Yangon. €2 million was made available without delay to 
respond to the immediate need s under a primary emergency decision. An additional €15 
million was allocated still in May 2008 to meet urgent relief and food needs. The proper use 
of the funding could only be guaranteed af ter humanitarian access was granted to the 
international community by the Government of the Union of Myanmar. In December 2008, 
the Commission approved further €22 million to cover still unmet relief needs in remote parts 
of the Delta. Sectors of interv ention are: shelter, water and sanitation, primary health care, 
food assistance and nutriti on, early recovery and di saster risk reduction.  
 
EN 72   EN LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Given the current EU Common Position, LRRD ca nnot be fully applied in Burma/Myanmar, 
but good coordination exists with the Aid to Uprooted People action managed by EuropeAid 
to complement humanitarian activities ac tivities and avoid duplic ation. For example a 
nutrition programme in Northern Rakhine St ate is complemented  by a food security 
programme funded through this budget line. In  2007, EuropeAid launched a Food Security 
Thematic Programme of €8 million for four years – providing further opportunities for 
LRRD. Funds are also allocated to the "Three Diseases Fund" for tuberculosis, malaria and 
HIV-AIDS through the first ever approved Multi-Indi cative Programme (MIP) for 
Burma/Myanmar (€18 million over four years). Given the large scale of needs in the health sector, DG ECHO still needs to provide complementary funding.  
In November 2008 a dialogue has started between the Eu ropean Commission and the 
Government of the Union of Myanmar on Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). A 
political and financial commitment from the gove rnment on improving health indicators could 
facilitate DG ECHO's exit from this sector.  
With the last financing decision which will end on 31/05/2010, there is a good potential for 
LRRD in the cyclone-affected Irrawaddy delt a with DG ECHO addressing the most urgent 
early recovery needs, while long-term instrume nts can facilitate the setting up of a livelihood 
and food security trust fund. 
Thailand 
Humanitarian needs 
The number of Burmese refugees along the Th ailand-Burma border has increased from 
10,000 in 1984 to 153,000 in 2006. In 2006 the resettlement of Burmese refugees into third countries started resulting in the most skilled ones leaving first the camps. Due to the 
resettlement process the number of regist ered refugees by UNHCR has decreased to 116,997, 
while TBBC feeding figures report about 135,623 refugees. Unfortunately, the number of 
camp populations does not follow the same decr easing trend as new "entries" occupy the 
"vacant" shelters of those left. As camp populations are not allowed to leave the camps officially and look for job outside the camp, these are entirely dependent on external 
assistance. It is important to highlight that th ere are about 1.5-2 million illegal migrants from 
Burma/Myanmar alone living in Thailand.  
Resettlement options are, not the most popular among refugees who would prefer returning to 
Burma/Myanmar one day or integrating into Thai society. The majority of these refugees have 
now been living in the camps for over 20 years,  where they are subject to a number of 
significant restrictions and abuses and their quality  of life is very precarious. On top of basic 
humanitarian needs (shelter, food, health care, water and sanitation), social and psychological 
problems are increasing, as well as violence  within the camps and trafficking outside. 
The international community has a double task in  this context: provis ion of humanitarian 
assistance for the Burmese refugees in camps in Thailand, while thro ugh a reinforced donor 
coordination and enhanced stra tegic dialogue it needs to continue advocating to the Royal 
Thai Government (RTG) for durable solutio ns, opening up the camps and facilitating the 
integration of refugees into Thai society. Th e European Commission plays an active role in 
this regard. Involving the RTG is not only the ta sk of the donor community but also the UN 
 
EN 73   EN and the INGOs providing services there. The pol itical turmoil in Th ailand in 2008 did, 
however, not favour this process.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
Given the political stalemate in Burma/Myanma r, refugees living in Thailand received 
extensive support from DG ECHO in the form of  food, health and water and sanitation. In 
2009 DG ECHO will start with the gradual downscaling of its contribution for the Burmese 
refugee camps in Thailand.  
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
In 2008, DG ECHO continued the provision of esse ntial food items and cooking fuel, health 
care and water and sanitation through its partner organisati ons. Assistance reached camp 
populations in six ca mps out of nine.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Given the circumstances, LRRD cannot be fu lly applied to refugee camps in Thailand. 
However good coordination exists with the EC instrument for Aid to Uprooted People to 
complement humanitarian aid and avoid duplica tion particularly in health and water and 
sanitation. Both in Brussels and Bangkok, DG ECHO has been advocating to other donors to 
urge the RTG to find durable solutions for one of  the world's oldest refugee caseloads, while 
also calling for better burden-s haring among donors. The Europ ean Commission is the largest 
donor for Burmese refugees in Thailand.  
China 
Humanitarian needs 
The devastating earthquake of 8.0 magnitude of the Richter s cale on 12th May 2008 affected 
some 45 million people, killing an estimated  90,000 and leaving five million homeless in 
Sichuan province. This tremor was followed by several hundreds of aftershocks, some of 
them being stronger than 5.6 on the Richter scal e. The Chinese author ities organised very 
quickly the immediate emergency efforts, wh ile also allowing the deployment of foreign 
search and rescue teams. 84,000 people were  rescued, 1.5 million evacuated and 4.3 million 
injured treated. International aid was also authorized.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
In recent years DG ECHO did not intervene in China taking into account the country's 
response capacities.  
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
Given the enormous extent of the disaster a nd the huge number of pe ople affected, DG ECHO 
decided to allocate €2 million to provide imme diate assistance through the Netherlands Red 
Cross. 8,511 tents were purchased an d distributed within 2 months.  
Timor-Leste 
 
EN 74   EN Humanitarian needs 
The main humanitarian issue the country has b een facing since 2006 is  civil unrest. At the 
beginning of 2008 there were an estimated 100 000 registered displaced people: 30,000 people in IDPs camps and 70,000 persons with host families in Dili. In spring 2006, riots and fierce demonstrations took place in Dili after a larg e dismissal of soldiers from the army. In a 
country which has experienced instability since its 1999 referendum for independence, tensions increased quickly, leading to an outbreak of violence forcing around 150,000 people 
to leave their homes.  
To address the IDPs issues and more broadly early recovery challenges in a comprehensive 
and coordinated manner, the recently elected Government of Timor Leste adopted the National Recovery Strategy (NRS) in January  2008. The NRS allocates $35 million for IDPs' 
return package for a maximum amount of $4500 per family. This return p ackage is to be spent 
on building materials depending on the IDPs vul nerability. 2008 can be characterised by the 
massive return of IDPs (70,000 from host families and 20,000 from IDP camps). By end of 2008, only 10,000 remained in camps. This process can be interpreted as a success but the situation remains complex. 
Disputes over land ownership, perceived fear from further violence on return and limited 
economic opportunities prevent thos e who are still remaining in the camps at the end of 2008 
from return. The value of the NRS incentives will  most likely compel most  of the displaced to 
seek alternative arrangements in the coming m onths. Overall the volatility of the security 
situation remains of concern a nd 2009 will be an indicator of success for the reintegration in 
the medium term. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
Since the country became independent in 2002, DG ECHO has provided €14 million in 
emergency assistance to the most vulnerable vi ctims of violence and in response to alarming 
levels of malnutrition. The f ood aid and supplementary feedi ng programmes were phased out 
in 2006 when long term programs tackling the caus es of malnutrition have  been put in place 
by the Commission. Since June 2006, following the outbreak of violence, the Commission has 
provided relief assistance to the IDPs fo r a total amount of €8 million. DG ECHO 
interventions have progressively shifted in 2008 from relief assi stance in the IDPs camps to a 
more comprehensive strategy to focus on the return of IDPs.  
Humanitarian objectives and achievements  
In 2008, DG ECHO mainly targeted IDPs. DG EC HO adopted a €2 million ad-hoc decision 
on 22 May 2008, focusing its intervention on th e support to return and integration of 
estimated 30,000 IDPs in the camps at the end of 2007. DG ECHO strategy is to provide 
multi-sector assistance to the population affect ed by the crisis, with access to water and 
sanitation in the camps and transitional shelte rs, camp management, protection and transport 
of IDPs, return monitori ng, food aid rations for the returnees, health and child protection. The 
five projects funded unde r the last decision will be comp leted between February and July 
2009. If there is no further outbreak of violence, this last decision is foreseen to be the phase-
out decision for DG ECHO, by filling the gap duri ng this transitional period for the return of 
IDPs.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country  
 
EN 75   EN DG ECHO's interventions are coordinated with the newly established EC delegation in Dili 
and with other stakeholders present in the count ry, such as Member States and other donors.  
With the significant return of  IDPs in the last six months  of 2008, DG ECHO has reinforced 
its LRRD strategy with other services of the Commission. The phase-out planned after mid-
2009 will coincide with the implementation of the actions supported by the Instrument for Stability (IfS) which started at the end of 2008. One component  of the IfS programme will 
aim at improving social and economic conditions within communities for the reintegration of 
IDPs. This will complement the DG ECHO funded projects.  
The EC delegation is focusing its attention on IDP return and food insecurity. It is 
contributing to this process through various f unding instruments/programs  (IfS, Food Security 
thematic programme, Water Facility, Rural De velopment Programme in 9th and 10th EDF 
etc). 
Indonesia 
Humanitarian needs 
Large humanitarian needs are regularly caused by recurrent natural disast ers, Indonesia being 
located in one of the most disaster-prone region s in the world - the so-called ‘ring of fire’ - 
where there is a particularly high vulnerab ility to earthquakes, floods and landslides.  
In June 2008, East Nusa Tenggara/Eastern In donesia (NTT) provincia l government reported 
23 deaths of children under five due to ma lnutrition since January  2008, which was also 
confirmed by DG ECHO partners. After cons ecutive droughts from 2002 to 2007, the food 
security situation in NTT has been on the edge  of emergency thresholds. This downward trend 
was verified by a nutritional su rvey undertaken by Care/Church World Service/HKI at the end 
of 2007. Household food insecurity, environmen tal conditions, inadequa te care and feeding 
practices, poor access to safe drinking water and insufficient maternal and child health 
services have been identif ied as major underlying cause s of malnutrition among young 
children. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years  
This period was marked by the ea rthquake and tsunami which de vastated Aceh and Northern 
Sumatran coasts on 26th December 2004. Fo r this crisis only, DG ECHO disbursed an 
amount of close to €60 million with projects ru nning from 26th December 2004 to 30th June 
2007.  
Other smaller crises were addressed by DG ECHO during the years 2003-2008: displacement 
due to ethnic violence, drought and malnutrition, epidemics, earthquakes, smaller tsunamis, 
and in May 2006, the destructiv e earthquake that hit the c ity of Yogyakarta and the 
surrounding areas. The total contribution of DG ECHO to Indonesia excluding the tsunami 
response was €21.9 million.  
DG ECHO intervened already in 2005 with €2 m illion to help vulnera ble population affected 
by natural disasters and malnutrition in Papua and Nusa Tenggara Timur (NTT).  
 
EN 76   EN Humanitarian objectives and achievements  
In October 2008, DG ECHO adopted a €2 million ad-hoc decision, to improve household and 
community resilience in order to cope with the disaster-prone environment and prevent 
degradation of the nutri tional status of vulnerable groups in NTT. 
The present intervention aims at supporting ve ry vulnerable families undergoing acute food 
and livelihood crisis, restoring their coping cap acities while trying to introducing positive and 
sustainable behaviour changes.  This should avoid the total exhaustion of these people's 
capacities to face the recurrent, small-scale na tural disasters - such as floods, landslides, 
earthquakes, pest infestation and drought - that affect them.  
Projects are mainly focusing on the reinforc ement of livelihoods through seeds distribution 
and capacity-building, access to clean water an d irrigation, promoti on of good care practices 
for infants and mainstreaming of disaster preparedness.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country  
In Aceh and Nias, as well as in Yogyakarta  rehabilitation and reco very programmes funded 
under a Multi Donor Trust co-chaired by the EC are ongoing.  
For the food insecurity in NTT a comprehensive LRRD is difficult to be implemented under 
the 2007-2013 CSP as food security has not been  foreseen as a sector of intervention. 
However, DG ECHO funded project s are being coordinated with  the interventions supported 
by Aid to Uprooted people for West Timor and by the Multi donor su pport facility funded 
also by the Dutch and Danish Government. Nevertheless, DG ECHO will continue advocating 
to longer term instrument and other donors on the serious food insecuri ty situation NTT has 
been facing. Indonesia was not selected as  a beneficiary under the Food facility.  
North Korea (Democratic People' s Republic of Korea - DPRK) 
Humanitarian needs 
The protracted humanitarian crisis in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) is 
caused by a combination of the continuing dec line of the economy and the inability of the 
Government to effectively address the situat ion with appropriate development measures. 
There remain still considerable needs, particul arly in food production, health and sanitation, in 
the various parts of the country which are of a structural na ture and therefore can be addressed 
best by longer term instru ments in a sustainable way. 
2008 saw the deadlock of the 6- Party Talks (6PT) a nd freezing relations  between the two 
Koreas. Although energy aid for DPRK conti nued being delivered under the 6PT, South 
Korea did not send its usual annual food and fertiliser aid into the North.  
In mid-May DPRK requested food aid from WFP due to the destru ctions caused by the 
August 2007 floods, soaring food and fuel prices in  the international mark ets to be able to 
feed its most vulnerable populations. Four US-b ased organisations and WFP were provided an 
unusually good access to undertake rapid food securi ty assessments in the country. European 
NGOs constituting the so-called EUPS structure were not invited to join this exercise despite 
their long years of expe rience and knowledge.  
 
EN 77   EN The findings of the assessment were not new to  the Commission and also confirmed that the 
current long-term food security approach addr esses better the country's  needs. EU Member 
States also share this view, although the food security situation remains fragile.  
The United States pledged 500,000 MT  of food aid to be distri buted by four United States' 
NGOs and WFP. In September WFP also la unched a $503 million EMOP for 18 months to 
tackle DPRK's chronic food insecurity and prevent that the situation would turn really severe.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
Between 2004 and 2007, €40.6 million29 have been provided for humanitarian assistance by 
DG ECHO. This assistance has b een allocated to cover the imme diate needs of flood-affected 
populations, to address food/nutri tional problems, improve access to water as well as health 
care.  
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
In the first half of 2008 DG ECHO  partners completed their heal th and water and sanitation as 
well as flood emergency projects in DPRK. The ve ry specific structure of EU resident NGOs, 
the European Union Programme Support (EUPS), continues to function well. All parties (DG 
ECHO, NGOs and the North Korean authorities) concerned adhered to the modus operandi of 
this arrangement. The co-ordination of this structure was handed over to EuropeAid when DG 
ECHO closed its field office on 14th Ma y 2008 and exited from the country.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Due to the nuclear standoff triggered in the autumn of 2002 and aggravated by the DPRK's 
nuclear test in October 2006, the internationa l community has been reluctant to finance 
development programmes. In line with UN S ecurity Council - Resolution 1718, the EU also 
introduced restrictive measures against DPRK. This  framework also limits  the possibilities of 
co-operation with DPRK which is restrict ed only to humanitarian assistance.  
DG ECHO's advocacy activities proved to be succe ssful: in addition to food security projects 
financed under the Food Security LRRD Th ematic Programme, DG Eu ropeAid could also 
launch a financing decision under DCI Special Measures: "Foste r the Dialogue Process with 
the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (D PRK) through support to Health, Water and 
Sanitation and Institutional Stre ngthening for 2008". This latter  instrument complemented by 
the possibilities provided under food security will enable that the vast knowledge and lessons 
learnt accumulated in health and in water and sanitation over the years will be taken on board by other services, also ensuring institutiona l memory. DG ECHO shared the external 
evaluation on its approach in DPRK in 2004-2007 with DG EuropeAi d as well as other 
relevant external evaluations.  
                                                
 
29 €16.7 million (2004), €13.7 million (2005), €8 million (2006) and €2 million (2007) 
 
EN 78   EN Philippines 
Humanitarian needs 
With the armed upheaval of the conflict betw een the Government of the Philippines (GoP) 
and the main armed opposition groups, the Moro  National Liberation Front (MNLF) and the 
Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), DG ECHO ha d to intervene to provide assistance for 
displaced populations living in evacuation centr es, makeshift shelters and with host families 
in Mindanao. About 375,000 people became displaced. Living conditions in evacuation 
centres and displacement sites do not meet SPHE RE standards and basic services were not 
provided either.  
The humanitarian situation of the conflict-aff ected people was from time to time aggravated 
by recurrent flooding. The security situation in  the conflict zone has also deteriorated. 
The recent conflict in Mindanao became quickly a forgotten crisis as it did not attract any 
international media attention, while the Governme nt aimed at downplaying the severity of the 
situation. Humanitarian agencies also face difficulties in raising funds to respond.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
DG ECHO's interventions in Philippines over the last 5 years focused on the response to 
displacement due to th e internal conflict a ffecting Mindanao and to  response to natural 
disasters. DG ECHO supporte d conflict-affected populati ons between 1997 and 2005 for 
€7 million with the last contribution of €500,000 in 2005 for conflict-affected populations.  
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
To respond to the increasing humanitarian need s, DG ECHO in 2008 allo cated a total of €6.5 
million through two financing decisions to help  conflict-affected popul ations. Sectors of 
intervention were food aid, distribution of non-food items, emergency water and sanitation, 
primary health care and improvement of evacuation centres.  
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
There is a close co-operation with the EC Dele gation in Manila which has conflict-prevention 
projects in Mindanao.  
Vietnam and Laos 
Humanitarian needs 
While the prevalence of general hazards and major disasters in Lao PDR is considered 
medium to low as compared to other Asian countr ies, it is the acute vulnerability that causes 
relatively high risks for communities when disast ers occur. As far as Vietnam is concerned, 
this country has over the year s developed good coping mechanisms  to counter the impact of 
natural disasters. Even so, however, local capac ity can be exhausted when disasters such as 
heavy rains and typhoons exceed their normal in tensity. This was again the case in 2008, a 
year marked by repeated episodes of extensiv e flooding, which overstretched local resources 
for relief and rehabilitation.  
 
EN 79   EN On 8th August 2008 tropical st orm Kammuri hit the coasta l areas of Vietnam and 
subsequently weakened into a tropical depression that produced extremely heavy rains and flooding in the northern and north-central provin ces of Lai Chau, Dien Bien, Yen Bai, Thai 
Nguyen, Phu Tho, Quang Ninh, Ha Giang, Bac Ca n, Tuyen Quang and Lang Son. In the same 
event Lao PDR also experienced heavy rain fall, causing the Mekong River and many of its 
tributaries to flood their banks. Worst affected  were the northern and central provinces of 
Bokeo, Luang Prabang, Khammuan, Luang Namtha , Bolikamxay and the capital of Vientiane. 
In Vietnam the floods and landslides cut major highway and rail links to the region bordering 
southern China and destroyed telephone and elec tricity lines, killing more than 150 people 
and affecting more than 93,000 persons, mainly belonging to poor ethnic minorities who depended on agriculture and aquaculture for th eir livelihood. In Lao PDR landslides killed six 
people and affected more than 204,000 people.  Flood water inunda ted large areas of 
agricultural land, destroyed crops, and damage d homes and infrastructure, leading the 
Government of Lao PDR to appeal for international assistance.  
Against this background, the most urgent need s were food assistance, water and sanitation, 
health, basic school materi als and livelihood support. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
DG ECHO's response to natural disasters in  Vietnam and Laos has been traditionally 
commensurate to the circumstances. While its  contribution was limited to €1.4 million for 
flooding and typhoons in Vietnam over the peri od 2002-2006, the increase in climate-related 
hazards over the past two years has led DG ECHO to intervene three times: twice in response 
to typhoon Lekima (October 2007) for a total am ount of €3 million and once in response to 
storm Kammuri (August 2008), for an amount of €1.5 million. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
The €1.5 million emergency decision adopted by DG ECHO to address the consequences of 
storm Kammuri and subsequent floods had the objective to provide immediate assistance to 
the victims to quickly restore livelihoods and coping capacities and assist families and children to go back to normal life. Three em ergency operations were conducted in Vietnam 
under this financing decision and two in Laos. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Recovery is supported by the central and local governments of Vietnam and Laos. The 
continued presence of the DIPECHO programme in the affected regions intends to contribute 
to the dissemination of typhoon/floods prepare dness best practices and consolidate their 
adoption by national authorities and incor poration into the re levant legislation. 
5. Latin America and Cuba 
Many of the countries in Latin America and Cuba  are recurrently affected by natural hazards 
such as floods, hurricanes, droughts, cold wave s, landslides, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes. 
DG ECHO was called on to respond to an array of  disaster events in 2008 – floods in Bolivia, 
Ecuador, Guatemala and Honduras, three subsequent  hurricanes in Cuba, cold waves in Peru 
and Bolivia, drought in Paraguay and Honduras. In addition, emergency actions in response to 
 
EN 80   EN natural disasters which affected Latin Ameri ca in 2007 continued notably the Peru earthquake 
and hurricane Felix in Nicaragua.  
Given the frequency of natural disasters in the re gion and the fact that they often concern only 
a relatively small number of  people but create serious human itarian emergency needs among 
them, a funding decision was launched to respond to small-scale disasters in the region. In the 
same vein, an epidemics decision was prepared potentially benefitting ten countries in Latin 
America and the Caribbean, selected on the basi s of their vulnerability and frequency of 
outbreaks, to better prepare them fo r epidemics and respond to outbreaks. 
Apart from the response to natural disaster s, DG ECHO's humanitarian assistance to the 
victims of Colombia's prolonged internal c onflict continued in 2008,  including support for 
IDPs, rural population facing rest riction of movement and access to basic goods and services, 
and Colombians in need of protection who fl ed to neighbouring countries. In the framework 
of the Global Plan Colombia 2008, a response to the floods was provided, which affected a 
large part of Colombia in the last trimester of the year.  
In Latin America, DG ECHO continued to work  closely with other programmes and donors to 
ensure the transition to longer-term development. 
The EC Humanitarian Assistance in this part of the world was, in 2008, mainly used to cover 
humanitarian needs created by the internal co nflict in Colombia and to respond to natural 
disasters throughout the region (*). 
HUM.AID FOOD AID TOTAL
LATIN AMERICA 20 070 000 4 000 000 24 070 000
Bolivia 2 000 000 1 000 000 3 000 000
Colombia 12 000 000  500 000 12 500 000
Ecuador 1 500 000  500 000 2 000 000
Honduras 1 000 000 1 000 000
Honduras/Guatemala 1 170 000 1 170 000
Peru 1 000 000 1 000 000
Paraguay 1 400 000 1 400 000
Regional Latin America 2 000 000 2 000 000Country/RegionFunding Decisions adopted in 2008
 
(*) Dipecho programmes excluded from th ese tables– refer to part III.6. 
5.1. C ENTRAL AMERICA (GUATEMALA , HONDURAS , NICARAGUA )  
Humanitarian needs 
Central America is one of the mo st disaster-prone regions of th e world. More than 80% of the 
area is at high risk of earthquakes, volcanoes,  flooding, landslides and hurricanes. Every year, 
Central America is badly affect ed by tropical storms, heavy rains and floods, particularly 
during the hurricane season (July to November). 
 
EN 81   EN In 2008, a tropical depression caused heavy floods, affecting all Central American countries 
but particularly Honduras and Guatemala. Prev iously, a drought had affected the south of 
Honduras.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last five years  
From 2004 to 2007, a total of €16.8 million was allo cated to Central America. This amount 
included notably the response to hurricane St an in Guatemala and El Salvador and to 
hurricane Felix in Nicaragua. In 2008, total allocation to Central America was €2.2 million. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
In 2008, DG ECHO action in Central America focused on responding to the emergency needs 
caused by Tropical Depression No. 16 in H onduras and Guatemala and by the drought in 
Honduras. An emergency decision of €1.17 million wa s adopted to assist the most vulnerable 
population in Honduras and Guatemala affected by the floods and landslides caused by the 
Tropical Depression. A total of 35,000 people benefitted from DG ECHO-funded operations. 
Five projects were financed, covering wate r and sanitation, basic health services, food 
assistance and disaster preparedness activities. 
In response to the drought in southern Hondur as, €1 million was allocated from the food aid 
budget line to improve the nutritional situation of  the most vulnerable population and enhance 
small-scale farmer households’ resilience in the drought-affected southern part of the country. 
DG ECHO also continued its monitoring of ac tions in response to hurricane Felix in 
Nicaragua.  
LRRD – possibly exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
The strong links with the EC Delegation and other Commission se rvices were reinforced in 
Nicaragua after hurricane Felix. With the aim of  bridging the gap between emergency relief 
and reconstruction, DG ECHO actively contri buted to preparing a proposal under the 
Instrument for Stability (€7.5 million). Activ ities build upon ECHO operations and focus on 
the water and sanitation and early recovery. LRRD has also been incorporated in the planning 
for the financial instruments in the new C ountry Strategy Paper 2007-2013. In the case of 
Honduras, a close dialogue between DG ECHO , the EC Delegation and EuropeAid was 
maintained to explore avenues for LRRD thr ough the Food Facility/Food Security Thematic 
Budget Line. 
 
EN 82   EN 5.2. C UBA 
Humanitarian needs 
Cuba is prone to disasters,  particularly to hurricanes. The hurricane season 2008 was 
especially difficult for the country, with three hurricanes making landfall in less than three 
months. In addition, in Augus t 2008, two tropical storms had already caused flooding on the 
island. Loss of life was largely avoided thanks  to the renowned preparedness capacity of 
Cuba. Ahead of the three hurricanes, more than 4.2 million people were evacuated. In addition, measures were taken to protect agriculture, livestock and fishing sectors. However, 
despite all preparedness efforts undertaken, th e three hurricanes caused major damage to 
houses, agriculture, infrastructure,  education and health care in stitutions. Hurricanes damaged 
more than 500,000 houses, thus affecting some 18 per cent of the total population. More than 
169,000 hectares of crop land were damaged by th e two first hurricanes alone, affecting over 
700,000 tons of food and, thus, severely impacti ng food production and food security. This is 
the more significant because Cuba typically ha s already to import some 80 per cent of the 
required foodstuffs. In addition, hurricanes caused severe damage to education and health care 
institutions. 
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last five years  
From 2004 to 2007, €1 million was allocated to hurricane response.  
Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
In response to hurricanes Gustav  and Ike, which made landfall at the end of August and in 
early September 2008, €2 million were allocated from a regional funding decision to Cuba. 
The offer of EC humanitarian assistan ce was accepted once EC-Cuba cooperation was 
officially resumed in October 2008.  Five actions were funded in  the most affected provinces, 
focusing on emergency rehabilitation of shelter and health care institutions as well as on basic 
agricultural recovery  and the distribution of non-food items. 
LRRD – possibly exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
During an inter-service mission in November 2008, the foundations were laid for LRRD with 
the Instrument for Stability and the Food Faci lity/Food Security Thema tic Programme, taking 
over basic agricultural recovery  activities from DG ECHO. 
5.3. S
OUTH AMERICA (EXCEPT COLOMBIA ) 
Humanitarian needs 
South America is among the most disaster-prone  regions of the world, exposed to panoply of 
natural hazards due to its geography, geology and climate. The phenomena of "El Niño" and 
"La Niña", attributed to warming/cooling in  the eastern and central Pacific, are causing 
regular floods and droughts. The Andean region is  particularly vulnerabl e to earthquakes - the 
last major one, causing significant loss of human life and physical damage, occurred in Peru 
in August 2007 - and many volcanoes are still active.  The vulnerability of  the people most at 
risk of natural disasters continued to increase  over the past decades, and climate change has 
further aggravated the situati on. The year 2008 was representativ e in this rega rd with an 
 
EN 83   EN increasing number of hazards occurring th roughout the year, often affecting isolated 
vulnerable communities with little institutional or donor presence.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last five years  
From 2004 to 2007, more than €15 million was a llocated to South America, mainly in 
response to floods. In 2008, the allocation to South America in response to disasters 
(excluding Colombia) totalled €7.4 million. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
DG ECHO responded to the humanitarian needs aris ing from the floods in Bolivia in early 
2008, which generated damage to crops, houses and infrastructure. DG ECHO adopted an 
emergency decision of €2 million to meet the most  urgent needs of the victims, in terms of 
food assistance, short term f ood security and livelihood s upport, Provision of temporary 
shelters and emergency rehabilitation of schools, water, and sanitation and hygiene 
promotion. As those affected are highly vulne rable to such events, DG ECHO's response 
included building the communities capacity to respond to disaster. Approximately 206,375 people were assisted through th e Commission's humanitarian aid. 
In Ecuador, the annual rai ny season was seriously worsen ed by the "La Niña" phenomenon, 
and the country experienced hea vy and continuous rainfall in the first few months of 2008.  
Floods affected 14 provinces, which represents  more than 50% of the territory. DG ECHO 
adopted an emergency decision of €1.5 million to assist the most affected populations, 
focusing on food assistance, short term food security and livelihood support, water, sanitation 
and hygiene promotion, emergency rehabilita tion of schools, and health. Disaster 
preparedness was integrated into the respons e, focusing on activities such as community 
preparedness, capacity building and public awareness. Approxima tely 103,590 people were 
assisted. Moreover, € 500,000 were allo cated under the food aid budget line. 
A particularly cold spell of weather in 2008 badly affected subsistence and alpaca farmers 
living over 3,500 metres in the Peruvian and Boliv ian Andes. Erratic clim atic patterns at the 
beginning of the year, combined with crop and animal diseases, and increased food prices seriously affected the livelihoods  of the most vulnerable populat ions, resulted in what could 
be described as "a silent disaster" which was unfolding as seeds became scarce, natural 
pastures were affected, and animals were  dying from malnutr ition and respiratory 
complications as a result of the cold wave.  
DG ECHO's intervention (€1 million for each co untry, funded under the food aid budget line) 
aimed to improve overall food availability thro ugh the production of local food crops from 
improved planting materials a nd reducing alpaca mortality. 
In Paraguay, a particularly severe and prol onged drought in the Chaco region, placing 
vulnerable populations at risk b ecause of the lack of a secure  supply and storage of clean 
water, and causing subsistence crops to fail and chronic malnutrition. DG ECHO adopted an 
emergency decision of €1.4 million to respond to the humanitarian needs, focusing on restoring basic access to water,  sanitation and hygiene and stre ngthening resilience to future 
climatic shocks. 
 
EN 84   EN LRRD – possibly exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
DG ECHO continued to actively explore avenues for LRRD with the EC delegations in the 
region and DG RELEX, seeking ways to undert ake activities in the framework of the 
corresponding country strategy pape rs or thematic budget lines.  
5.4. C OLOMBIA (INCLUDING COLOMBIANS IN NEED OF PROTECTION IN ECUADOR , 
VENEZUELA AND PANAMA ) 
Humanitarian needs 
For more than 40 years Colombia  has suffered from an internal  conflict, involving different 
actors (government, guerrilla, former param ilitary groups who have formed new splinter 
groups). As a result, more than 300,000 people have been displace d in 2008 alone. In 
cumulative terms (and depending on the source), between 2.5 and 4.1 million people have been displaced since 1985. In addition, UNHCR estimates that more than 500,000 
Colombians are refugees or in a refugee-like situation. Most of them have fled the conflict to 
neighbouring countries (Ecuador, Venezuela a nd Panama). Due to the conflict, rural 
communities often have to face restricted access to  basic goods and services. This has a direct 
negative impact on their livelihood as they are for instance prevented from cultivating their 
fields or going to markets. Furthermore, their access to public health se rvices is very limited.  
Most Colombians newly arriving in the neig hbouring countries need  emergency assistance 
such as food, water and sanitation immediately after arrival. Subseq uently, they require 
assistance to know their rights and the steps to take in  the refugee registra tion process, and to 
foster their integration. Colombia  is also vulnerable to natural disasters, particularly floods, 
earthquakes and vol canic eruptions.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last five years  
From 2004 to 2007, ECHO allocated a total of  €44 million to improve the humanitarian 
situation of victims of the Colombian conflic t both in Colombia itse lf and in neighbouring 
countries (Ecuador, Venezuela, Panama). Further €1.5 million was allocated for flood 
emergency response.  
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
€12.5 million was allocated to support the Colo mbian population affected by the armed 
conflict, of which €500,000 unde r the food aid budget line. So me 70,000 people received 
assistance (food and not-food items) via the ICRC during their firs t three months of 
displacement. In addition, more than 40,000 new ID Ps (less than 12 months of displacement), 
confined or blocked populations and, to some extent, host communities received humanitarian post-emergency assistance includ ing improved shelter, distribu tion of non-food items, access 
to basic services (primary health care, water and sanitation) and psyc hosocial assistance. DG 
ECHO continued to concentrate on the more re mote rural areas, where state institutions are 
generally not present or government assistan ce is not sufficient. Protection of children 
continued to be a priority for DG ECHO in Colombia. More than 7,500 IDP children 
benefitted from specific protection measures. In addition, humanitarian assistance was provided to vulnerable conflict-affected people who were seriously affected by floods in the 
last quarter of the year.  
 
EN 85   EN DG ECHO also financed projects  in Ecuador, Venezuela and Pana ma to assist the victims of 
the Colombian conflict who have fled to those neighbouring countr ies. With DG ECHO 
funding, UNHCR continued to improve the prot ection framework for asylum seekers by 
strengthening the national institutions invol ved in the reception, registration, documentation, 
assistance and integration of re fugees. Protection and support services were provided for more 
than 45,000 Colombians to cover basic food, nut rition, shelter, healt h, water and sanitation 
and educational needs and helping the refugees  in the reception, registration, documentation, 
assistance and integration process.  
LRRD – possibly exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
Close regular contact is maintained with th e EC Delegation to seek LRRD. Linking was 
sought via the budget line Uprooted  Peoples, which started implement ation of its last projects, 
and other thematic budget lines, via the institu tional support the Commission provided to state 
assistance mechanisms in order to improve the quality of the government’s assistance and via 
the Instrument for Stability. Furthermore, DG ECHO partners were asked to involve state 
sectoral institutions to the largest extent pos sible with a view to handing over operations to 
them in the future. 
 
EN 86   EN 6. Disaster preparedness activi ties (including Dipecho) 
Humanitarian needs 
There has been a considerable rise in the numbe r and intensity of disasters over the last few 
decades partly due to climate change. In ma ny developing countries, population growth, poor 
governance, increasing impoverishment, poor management of natural resources and 
consequently depletion and degradation of soil ar e factors that have contributed to increased 
risks and vulnerabilities. Disast ers such as earthquakes, floods , landslides, drought, wildfires, 
tropical cyclones and associated storm surges, tsunami and volcanic eruptions claim a heavy toll in terms of the loss of human lives, dest ruction of economic and social infrastructure, not 
to mention a negative impact on already fragile ecosystems.  
Furthermore, in some parts of the world, natural disasters are a recurrent phenomenon that can 
have severe impacts on fragile livelihoods. In some regions disasters seem to be more 
frequent and vulnerable people tend to face more risks and have less time to recuperate their 
livelihoods in between disasters.  This draws attention to the value of preparedness in any 
disaster management policy and strategy. DG ECHO's existing programme to support 
community-based disaster preparedness projects , DIPECHO, covers seve n regions worldwide, 
specifically South-East Africa (i ncluding South-West Indian Ocean), Central America, South 
America, the Caribbean, Central Asia, South Asia, and South-East Asia.  
All seven regions are highly prone to hazards that have devastat ing consequences for the lives 
and livelihoods of thousands of people. South Ea st Africa is a region ex posed to a wide range 
of natural disasters such as floods, cyclones and volcanic eruptions; in Central and South 
America the main disasters ar e recurrent floods, landslides, ear thquakes, volcanic eruptions, 
storms, hurricanes and droughts; in the Caribb ean the recurrence of tropical storms, floods 
and volcano eruptions cause regular  humanitarian crises; and in Central, South and South-East 
Asia floods, typhoons/cyclones, landslides, droughts, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic 
eruptions and forest fires undermin e already fragile livelihoods.  
DIPECHO targets the most vulnerable groups in  these regions and in localities where the 
coping mechanisms are particularly weak both in terms of local resources and the capabilities 
of national disaster re sponse mechanisms. In all of thes e regions, initiatives on disaster 
preparedness and prevention are emerging at national and region al levels, but they tend to 
suffer from a lack of resources and the ca pacity to reach out to the populations and 
communities most at risk. Coordination betw een national governments is often not very 
advanced or is limited to exchanges of vi ews and knowledge or establishment of early-
warning systems that are not always adap ted to disaster prone areas with limited 
infrastructure. 
Humanitarian objectives and achievements 
The global objective of DG ECHO's  disaster preparedness activ ities is to strengthen the 
preparedness capacities of the most vulnerable co mmunities so that they can better face future 
disasters. This contributes to reducing the impact of disa sters and hence the need for 
humanitarian aid in the aftermath of future  disaster. Disaster preparedness projects and 
preparedness components integrated in relief  interventions are mostly implemented in 
countries with prevalent core humanitarian ne eds but in some countries, DG ECHO's sole 
 
EN 87   EN presence is DIPECHO interventions. However, when a disaster strike s, DIPECHO has proven 
to be a crucial first response instrument as it has allowed communities to be better prepared and to respond by themselves providing basic relie f and first aid in the critical first hours 
and/or days following a disaster when national or external aid we re not yet avai lable. Due to 
DIPECHO funding, the vulnerable communities can directly benefit from early warning 
systems, tested evacuation plans, on-the-spot tr aining in first aid and search and rescue etc. 
that increase the local coping capacities. 
DIPECHO Action Plans are implemented at three levels: 
(1) the main focus is put at community level, where they enhance the capacities of local 
communities at risk and of lo cal authorities, through ac tivities such as training, 
awareness-raising, setting up early warning systems and risk mapping; 
(2) at national level, where activities stre ngthen the capacity of national disaster 
management services and help to produce and disseminate maps/contingency plans; and 
(3) at regional level, where cooperation and coordination of disaster preparedness 
activities is encouraged, in particular th rough the exchange and dissemination of data, 
knowledge and good practices. 
LRRD – possible exit strategy of  the sector and/or country 
It is internationally recognise d that efficient Disaster Risk  Reduction (DRR) requires a longer 
term engagement by development stakeholde rs and national authorities. DG ECHO's 
contribution to global DRR efforts - consisting ma inly of fostering a preparedness culture and 
investing in community-based preparedness m easures - is one contribution among several 
required. Hence, DG ECHO's programming work  is combined with continuous advocacy 
efforts at headquarters level and in the seven regions targeted by DIPECHO to encourage 
development stakeholders to invest in D RR. DG ECHO continues to encourage other 
Commission services, such as DG for Extern al Relations, DG Development and EuropeAid 
Co-operation Office, EU Member States, other donors, local authorities and NGOs to build on 
DIPECHO lessons and best practices. 
DG ECHO has been improving the coordination of its DRR interventions with the other 
services of the Commission and has achieved good results in certain regions. Nonetheless 
DG ECHO will continue its advocacy to enco urage the integration of DRR and notably 
relevant preparedness aspects in longer term sector  programmes such as  education, health, 
environment, and food security.  
As a general observation, high levels of complementarity be tween DIPECHO action plans and 
development projects can be seen as a challenge in terms of th e difference in approaches by 
different actors: DG ECHO's short-term comm unity-based approach versus macro-level 
approach applied by most donors. Even in thos e countries where DRR is recognised as a 
national development priority, interventions th at benefit the most vulnerable groups do not 
always receive attention. This  is an important challenge for the DIPECHO programme in the 
years to come, but a necessary condition for subs tantial contributions by the EC to the Hyogo 
Framework for Action 2005-2015. 
 
EN 88   EN The funding provided by DG ECHO for DIPECHO Disaster Preparedness projects in seven 
disaster prone regions is shown in the table below. The table below provides the cumulative 
funding from 1998 until 2007 as well as the funding decision s adopted in 2008. 
 
EN 89   EN It has to be borne in mind when looking at  this table that each "DIPECHO" region only 
benefits from a budgetary allocatio n every two years, given the f act that the duration of these 
types of actions are typically 12-15 months. 
Disaster Preparedness Funding 1998-2008 
  Funding 
1998-2007 Funding 
2008 Funding 
1998-2008 
Southern Africa/Indian 
Ocean  5.000.000 5.000.000 
Caribbean 16.975.000   16.975.000 
Central America 22.480.000 10.000.000 32.480.000 
South America 23.740.000   23.740.000 
Central Asia 15.050.000 7.325.000 22.375.000 
South Asia 19.200.000   19.200.000 
South East Asia 21.680.000 10.000.000 31.680.000 
TOTAL DIPECHO 119.125.000 32.325.000 151.450.000 
Drought preparedness (1) 10.000.000 30.000.000 40.000.000 
TOTAL Disaster 
preparedness activities 129.125.000 62.325.000 191.450.000 
(1) the Drought preparedness programme is mentioned under 6.8 and fu rther described under 
ACP countries  
6.1.  SOUTHERN AFRICA AND INDIAN OCEAN (MADAGASCAR , MALAWI , MOZAMBIQUE , 
COMOROS ) 
Humanitarian needs 
The south-east African and south-west Indian Ocean region is exposed to a wide range of 
natural disasters, such as floods, cyclones, and volcanic eruptions. The exposure to natural 
hazards, combined with socioeconomic factor s such as high population density, extreme 
poverty and, in much of southern Africa, a hi gh incidence of HIV a nd AIDS, increases the 
potential impact of disasters. Due to thei r extreme poverty, these vulnerable population 
groups have a very low capacity to recover from  losses. Furthermore, the current capacity in 
the south-east African and south-west Indian Oc ean region to cope with  disasters is limited, 
and support from the international community is  needed, to promote preparedness activities, 
mitigation projects and early warning systems.  
Evolution of humanitarian aid in the last 5 years 
Not applicable, first DIPECHO action plan in this region 
 
EN 90   EN Humanitarian objectives an d achievements in 2008 
A decision for €5 million was adopted in July 2008 – the first of its kind in sub-Saharan 
Africa - followed by a call for ex pressions of interest to conduct disaster preparedness actions 
in Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique and the Co moros, the countries of the region most 
susceptible to natural disasters. The principa l objective is to reduce the impact of future 
disasters in the south-east African and s outh-west Indian Ocean region, by preparing 
vulnerable populations in the areas most affect ed by recurrent natural hazards, with the 
specific objective of supporting strategies that enable local communities and institutions to 
better prepare for, mitigate and respond adequate ly to natural disasters, by enhancing their 
capacities to respond, thereby increasing resilie nce and decreasing vulner ability. As a result of 
the evaluation of the call for expressions of in terest, funding was provide d to 17 actions in the 
region starting on 1st October 2008. 
6.2. C ARIBBEAN  
Over the period 1997-2007, six DIPECHO action pl ans were implemented in the Caribbean 
region, which represents a DG ECHO investment  of €16.9 million in disaster preparedness. 
The last action plan was launche d in September and runs unt il February 2009. Whilst over the 
years thematic and geographic consideratio ns have slightly changed, the Caribbean 
DIPECHO programme remained mostly focused on natural events of hydro-meteorological 
origin. However, other phenomena such as drought  and earthquakes are also going to be taken 
into consideration. The decision of expanding th ematic priorities came as the resu lt of an 
analysis based on the following criteria: recurren ce of the natural event; level of exposition to 
the most recurrent hazard in terms of popula tion and economic value at risk; institutional 
response capacity; governments' priorities. 
The focus of the last action plan was kept on the most vulnerable communities facing risks 
deriving from natural disasters. The main s ector of interventions included the following 
activities: awareness raising among communities on disaster related issues; organization of 
Community Emergency and Disaster Respons e Committees; creation of functional teams 
responsible for the prep aration and the implementation of immediate responsive action in case 
of disaster; training of community members and staff of public instit utions; elaboration of 
community emergency plans and evacuation r oute maps; installation of community early 
warning systems.  
The hurricane season of 2008 demonstrated trag ically the Caribbean region’s exposure and 
vulnerability to disasters. Hurri canes and tropical storms devast ated parts of Haiti and Cuba 
(three hurricanes made landfall on Cuba in less than three months) and also caused important 
damage in Jamaica, the Cayman Islands an d Turks and Caicos. Hurricanes, floods and 
mudslides claimed more than 800 lives in th e region with Haiti particularly affected. 
Moreover, some 114 people perished in fl oods caused by Tropical Storm Noel in the 
Dominican Republic, Haiti and Jamaica in Nove mber 2007. In Suriname in June 2008, severe 
flooding occurred, causing tremendous damage  to inland communities. Earthquakes and 
droughts are also frequent in ce rtain areas of the region, espe cially in Cuba and Haiti. 
 
EN 91   EN DIPECHO funded projects tend to focus on local communities and leave more ambitious 
efforts of institutional strengthening at nationa l level to development donors. The impact of 
the top-bottom approach, mainly based on instituti onal strengthening will take a long time to 
affect community needs and also faces unpredic table political risks. Therefore, programmes 
that directly support communities and their basic organizations, i.e. bottom-up approach, have 
proven to be the better way for immediate rein forcement of coping and resilience capacities. 
However, strengthening synergies be tween DG ECHO and programmes funded by 
development donors remains a priority, as high lighted by the last ev aluation of DIPECHO 
programme in 2004. 
6.3. C ENTRAL AMERICA  
Central America is particularly exposed to na tural disasters such as volcanoes, earthquakes, 
hurricanes, tropical storms, and landslides. The losses and destruction th at result from these 
disasters are significant from a social and econom ic point of view and reduce the development 
potential of the region. Furthermore, Centra l America experiences frequent small-scale 
disasters affecting relatively few communities, where donors are unlikely to intervene due to 
the limited scale of the event, but which have a considerable negative impact on the livelihoods of those affected. Thes e events, as well as large-scal e disasters such as hurricane 
Mitch in 1998, Stan in 2005 and Felix in 2007, hi ghlight the increasing need for disaster 
preparedness activities in the region, and the significance of community-based disaster risk 
reduction efforts. Such efforts enable the comm unities at risk to lessen the impact of the 
disasters and prepare themselves for when natural disasters occur.  
A Fifth DIPECHO Action Plan for Central America was implemented in 2007 and 2008. An 
amount of €7,5 million was allocated to improve the capacities of communities at risk to 
better prepare for and protect themselves agains t natural disasters in six countries in the 
region: El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Ni caragua, Costa Rica and Panama, the latter two 
countries being covered onl y by regional projects.  
The strategy for the Sixth Action Plan wa s defined in collaboration with the main 
stakeholders in each country through four na tional consultative meetings and one regional 
consultative meeting, an analysis  of existing legislation, donor activities in Di saster Risk 
Reduction (DRR) and the curren t/planned national DRR strategi es and the recommendations 
from the external evaluation carried out  in 2007. The funding decision for the Sixth 
DIPECHO Action Plan, for an amount of €10 million, was adopted in March 2008 and will be 
implemented until February 2010. It will support st rategies that enable local communities and 
institutions to better prepare for, mitigate an d respond to natural disasters by enhancing their 
capacities to cope and respond, thereby increasi ng resilience and reducing vulnerability in 
Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala,  Honduras, Costa Rica and Panama. 
 
EN 92   EN 6.4. S OUTH AMERICA  
South America is among the most disaster-pro ne regions of the world, exposed to a panoply 
of natural hazards due to its geography, geology a nd climate. Capacity to  cope varies greatly 
across the region and even within-country. Since 1999, five DIPECHO Action Plans have 
been implemented, with the main focus being on the Andean Community. The lessons learnt 
from the implementation of these five DIPECHO Action Plans and from the repeated and recurrent disasters in the region, whether large or small-scale, ha ve confirmed the need to put 
into place efficient early warning systems, enforce building codes, prepare communities to react in the first hours of a disaster, train pe ople, organise awareness campaigns, mitigate the 
impact of disasters and carry out advocacy towa rds all relevant stake holders. These types of 
activities are carried out in the framework of  the projects financed under, DIPECHO.  
The Fifth Action Plan for South America wa s launched in the last quarter of 2007 and 
implementation continued throughout 2008. An amount of €6,5 million was allocated, and twenty projects were funded: in Bolivia, Co lombia, Ecuador, Peru, Venezuela; two cross-
border projects (Bolivia-Peru an d Argentina; Bolivia-Paraguay)  and two regional projects. A 
specific emphasis was put on re gional cooperation, exchange  of information, capacity 
building and training and advocac y at national and regional level. Very good coordination 
mechanisms and joint initiatives have emerged at  national level, often at the initiative of the 
DIPECHO partners. Such efforts will be furthe r encouraged and supported in the framework 
of the Sixth Action Plan as they are perceived as  being very good practices  notably in the field 
of advocacy towards the author ities and the donor community. 
To take stock of the lessons learned from the Fifth Action Plan and prepare the ground for the 
Sixth Action Plan, an extensive consultation proc ess was organised in th e last quarter of 2008: 
national workshops took place in Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Paraguay, Venezuela and a regional consultative mee ting in Peru. This process involved over 440 
Disaster Risk Reduction experts representing more  than 250 different institutions (national, 
regional, local authorities, Non Government al Organisations (NGOs), UN agencies, Red 
Cross family, regional organisations, academia etc.). The conclusions of the consultative 
process will provide the basis for the implementation of th e Sixth Action Plan. The funding 
decision, for an amount of €10 milli on, was adopted in December.  
6.5. C
ENTRAL ASIA 
Central Asia is particularly exposed to natura l disasters such as landslides, avalanches, floods, 
earthquakes and drought. The losses and destruc tion that result from these disasters are 
considerably high from a social and economic  point of view, reducing the development 
potential of the poorer countries  and specific provinces of th e region where la rge proportions 
of the population live in remote areas. This si tuation highlights the ap propriateness to invest 
in community-based disaster preparedness and response capacity.  
In 2008, the Commission adopted and launched its 5th DIPECHO (Disaster Preparedness 
ECHO) for Central Asia for an amount of €7.32 5 million which covers the five Central Asia 
countries (Kazakhstan, Kirghizstan, Tajik istan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan). 
 
EN 93   EN Experience has once more demonstrated that duri ng natural disasters (for instance, last years' 
earthquakes in Tajikistan and in  Kyrgyzstan), casualties and damages can considerably be 
reduced thanks to good disast er preparedness activities. 
 
EN 94   EN 6.6. S OUTH ASIA 
In 2008, the implementation of the fourth Action Plan launched on the 2007 budget did 
continue. Beneficiary countries of these Disa ster Preparedness activities were Afghanistan, 
Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal and for th e regional component Bhutan as well. This 
represents a total of €7.5 million and 25 projects, most of them in favor of India, Nepal and 
Bangladesh, reaching over 3 million most vulnerable beneficiaries exposed to reoccurring natural disasters. Due to the nature of the naturals disasters that regularly hit South Asia, multi-hazard approach has been widely us ed although many activities focused on the 
preparedness to floods, amongst others, setting up of community based early warning systems 
- increasing their capaci ties in better prepar edness for response. Earthquake disaster 
preparedness was also addressed by majority of partners in the region. This decision also 
aimed to improve advocacy for Disaster Risk Reduction measures. Regi onal co-operation was 
also encouraged with ECHO’s support to two regional initiatives seeking more coordination 
and synergies among the regional stakeholders in Disaster Risk Re duction. Moreover a new 
hazard has been identified in the framework of this Action Plan: with the global warming the GLOF
30 phenomena needs to be addressed and th e Action Plan contributed to exchange 
experiences in order to find so lutions. In 2009 it is planned to launch the fifth Action Plan for 
a total amount of €10 million. 
6.7. S OUTH EAST ASIA 
South East Asia is one of the mo st disaster-prone regions in th e world, particularly exposed to 
natural disasters such as fl oods, flash floods, cyclones, typ hoons, landslides, earthquakes, 
tsunamis, droughts, forest fires and volcano er uptions. The capacities of South East Asian 
countries to cope with disasters are insufficient considering the gr eat impact of di saster events 
on the population. In many instances, the losses could be largely mitigated or avoided by simple preventive measures. In 2008 the Sixt h DIPECHO Action Plan for South East Asia 
was adopted for an amount of €10 million. The programme targets Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao 
PDR, the Philippines, Timor Leste, Vietnam, as well as Burma/Myanmar and Thailand through regional initiatives. By December 2008, 30 projects had been approved, including 4 
Regional initiatives, benefitting an estimat ed 1,675,000 people. The DIPECHO programme in 
South East Asia will continue to address both the risks of large scale disasters, as well as the expected impact of the accumu lation of recurrent, small and medium-scale natural events 
through enhancing better emergency preparedne ss, while encouraging innovative actions and 
joint initiatives 
                                                
 
30 Glacier Lake Outburst Floods 
 
EN 95   EN 6.8. D ROUGHT PREPAREDNESS PROGRAMME IN THE HORN OF AFRICA  
The decision of €10 million adopted in 2006 was the first one adopted by the Commission to 
mitigate the effects of the recurrent drought in the Horn of Africa. The evaluation of the 
impact of this kind of preventive approach wa s very successful and DG ECHO has decided to 
continue and reinforce the regional drought in itiative with €30 million allocated in 2008 for 
18 months. The on-going humanitarian inte rventions, funded under this drought decision, 
focus on better management of natural resources,  early warning systems and support to water 
and livestock. 
For more information on the drought preparedne ss programme in the Horn of Africa, see the 
Horn of Africa section.  
 
EN 96   EN PART  IV. P OLICY ISSUES  
Throughout 2008, DG ECHO’s policy agen da was largely driven by the European  
Consensus  on Humanitarian  Aid31 of December  2007. It order to implement the 
commitments made by the EU in the C onsensus, the Commission developed a Consensus 
Action Plan32 for the years 2008-2013. This action plan was adopted in May and endorsed by 
the Council in July. 
As part of the implementation of the action plan, a conference on  International 
Humanitarian Law (IHL) was held at the European Parliament in September 2008. The 
objective of this conference was to raise awareness of IHL viol ations and explore, in the 
framework of the European Consensus on Human itarian Aid, ways to better promote respect 
of IHL at the level of  the European Union. The conferen ce provided a major impetus for a 
further implementation of the IHL gui delines of 2005, work that is ongoing. 
The Consensus is firmly based on the " Good  Humanitarian  Donorship "(GHD) initiative  of 
2003 and with the signature of the Consensus the number of countries adhering to GHD was 
considerably enlarged and now includes all EU  member states. The Initiative is based on a 
catalogue of 23 principles that provide agreed  guidance to international humanitarian donors 
and state actors such as the military and civ il protection forces. In 2008, DG ECHO agreed to 
co-chair the GHD initiative  together with the Netherlands based on a streamlined 
programme of activities that addresses major international policy issues such as the assessment of needs by various humanitarian actors. 
In order to improve the quality  of its assistance, the Consensus Action Plan foresees policy 
work in a number of areas. Theref ore, DG ECHO is working with relevant partners on a range 
of policy issues including food assistance, protection, gender, HIV- AIDS and disaster 
preparedness. 
In 2008, a number of these initiatives came to fru ition and others were initiated. For instance, 
a staff working paper on children in humanitarian crises  was approved by the college as 
part of a package entitled "A  Special Place for Children in External Action". The ensuing 
Council conclusions contain specific reference to humanitarian action. Implementation sheets 
that will guide the implementation of th e policy are being developed. DG ECHO also 
finalised guidelines on tackling the HIV/AIDS  pandemic in emergency situations , after 
consultation of a wide range of partners. Checklis ts are currently being developed to facilitate 
implementation of these guidelines. A thir d set of funding guide lines concerns the use of cash 
and vouchers in emergencies . They will allow DG ECHO to consider more systematically 
cash and vouchers as delivery options for the assistance projects it finances. 
2008 also saw advances in  the formulation of protection guidelines  that should be finalised 
soon. Policy work on gender issues  was also initiated, starting w ith a review of best policies 
and practices among donors and various humanitarian  agencies. In reacti on to the increasing 
number of hydro-meteorological disasters , DG ECHO has also commenced analytical work 
about this issue. 
                                                
 
31 OJ C 25 – 30/1/2008 
32 SEC(2008)1991 – May 2008 
 
EN 97   EN Finally, in order to increase the efficiency a nd effectiveness of its capacity building activities 
for NGOs and international humanitarian or ganisations, DG ECHO created a working group 
to develop a coherent capacity building policy . First elements of a more needs-driven 
approach to capacity building were already us ed in the consultatio n and design process 
leading to substantive programmes for NGO s (€1.8 million) and a large number if 
international organisations (€27 million). 
DG ECHO continued to provide  political and financial support for the cluster approach  that 
has been established through th e UN-instigated humanitarian reform. The cluster approach 
aims at clarifying the division of labour among or ganisations, and better  defining their roles 
and responsibilities in order to  identify and plug response gaps  in the overall humanitarian 
effort. DG ECHO has used its bilateral di alogues with humanitari an organisations, 
international meetings and its Delegations in Geneva and New York to  advocate for increased 
accountability of UN-agencies  and other organisations. 
At the level of the Commission, the College  adopted in March 2008 a communication on 
"Reinforcing the Union's Disaster Response Capacity " to which several Commission 
services, including DG ECHO, contributed. The Communication’s purpose is to respond to 
the increasing number of disaster response ch allenges, whether they arise from natural 
disasters or man-made crises. The activities fore seen should reinforce the Union's capacity to 
provide a coherent respons e to disasters in its own territory and in third countries. In this 
context and in the framework of the implem entation of the Consensus Action Plan, DG 
ECHO launched a study  on international humanitarian logistics response capacities  that 
will be finalised in 2009. 
 
EN 98   EN PART  V. R ELATIONS WITH STAKEHOLDERS  
1. EU Institutions and Member States 
As in previous years, DG ECHO pursued an active relationship with other Institutions, 
Member States and Internati onal Organisations and continue d to promote the respect for 
international humanitarian law and humanita rian principles (humanity, impartiality, non-
discrimination and neutrality), particularly in relation to developments under the Common 
Foreign and Security Policy. It ensured also th at the necessity to re spect the humanitarian 
space during emergencies has duly been taken in to account in the European and international 
debate. 
In 2008, the work and consultations leading to the Consensus Action Plan represented a key 
process for DG ECHO's active interaction with the European Parliament and the Council on 
humanitarian issues. In this context, DG ECHO  contributed to the Hearing organised on 29th 
January 2008 by the European Parliament Committee on Devel opment as a follow-up to the 
Consensus.  
At the Community institutional level , DG ECHO continued to be active throughout 2008. It 
participated actively in discussions on the ex tension of the mandate of the Council Working 
Group on Food Aid, which has been renamed the Working Group on Humanitarian Aid 
and Food Aid (COHAFA ). The Council decided that this extension of the mandate should 
come into effect as of January 2009. 
DG ECHO also maintained close contacts with other  Commission services  in particular with 
DG Environment – civil protection and DG Exte rnal Relations as fa r crisis response is 
concerned. Good coordination between these se rvices ensured an effective Commission 
response to a number of disasters, in particular to the devastating effects of cyclone Nargis in 
Burma/Myanmar. Close contacts with other Co mmission services where also maintained or 
developed on the various policy issues DG ECHO was working on. 
With regard to Member States , six regular monthly meetings of the Humanitarian Aid 
Committee (HAC)  were organised as well as two informal meetings that took place in 
Brdo/Slovenia and Marseilles/France. In addi tion, DG ECHO organised consultations with 
Member States on the Consensus Action Plan a nd was actively involved in the discussions 
leading to the establishment of COHAFA. 
In relation to the European Parliament , DG ECHO continued to monitor, in particular, the 
work of the DEVE Committee and to further cons olidate the relations with the Humanitarian 
"Rapporteur".  In 2008, the EP Development Committee was requested to exercise the right of 
scrutiny using the urgency procedure on 6 oc casions to allow the Commission to respond 
swiftly to the pressing humanitari an needs arising in particular  from the food aid crisis and 
cyclone Nargis. The EP Development Committee replied favourably to all the 6 requests. 
 
EN 99   EN 2. International organisations and non-EU major donors 
On the international front and in order to ensure a strategic and trustworthy dialogue 
between DG ECHO and UN-agencies, NGOs and the Red Cross Movement (ICRC and 
IFRC), yearly high-level Strategic Partnership Dialogues  (SPDs) are organised with each 
organisation. The SPDs represent an opportuni ty for DG ECHO to exchange views on key 
issues and developments with its main partners. 
DG ECHO participates actively in the OC HA and ICRC Donor S upport Groups through 
which main donors provide strategic advice to the organisations. Acti vities include regular 
meetings in Geneva and New York, as well as pa rticipation in yearly high-level international 
conferences and field missions. A high level me eting between P. Zangl, DG ECHO’s Director 
General, and Sir John Holmes, the UN’s Emer gency Response Coordinator and Head of 
OCHA, took place in July 2008. This meeting was followed up by technical level meetings 
between DG ECHO and OCHA in Brussels, which we re, in particular, related to an exchange 
of expertise on programming and needs assessments. 
In 2008, an evaluation of DG ECHO support to internati onal organisations to  strengthen their 
response capacities (thematic f unding programmes) was carried out . This led to some changes 
in the approach and the launch of a new fundi ng decision for what is now called capacity 
building programmes for international organisations. 
In the framework of its relations with non-EU major donors , DG ECHO maintained contacts 
with the US Administration (USAID33 and PRM34) in particular through regular 
videoconferences, addressing general policy issues  and humanitarian operations in specific 
countries with a view to en suring a coherent and comple mentary response. A strategic 
programming dialogue with the US Ad ministration took place in April. 
DG ECHO also contributed to  negotiations with Brazil c oncerning the inclusion of 
humanitarian elements in the Joint Action Plan  with that country which was finalised in 
December. 
                                                 
33 United States Agency for International Development (USAID) 
34 Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration - US (PRM) 
 
EN 100   EN PART  VI. O THER ISSUES  
1. Experts in the field 
In order to meet the target of 150 experts defi ned in the post-tsunami action plan of January 
2005, DG ECHO pursued its consolidation in the recruitment of field experts, aiming at 
organising multi-sectoral rapid response team s assisted by about 50 locally employed 
programme assistants. This allows DG ECHO to  rapidly dispatch its  field experts and 
programme assistants to new crisis situations to carry out humanitarian  needs assessments and 
participate in the coordination of hu manitarian activities in the field. 
In 2008, experts were recruited in the contex t of the reinforcement of Regional Support 
Offices, to work in new country offices or to reinforce existing ones. At the end of the year, 
98 experts were under contract s and 5 recruitment procedur es were ongoing. This number 
fluctuates slightly with the closure or downsiz ing of certain offices and the reinforcement of 
others according to needs. 
2. Security issues 
The security of humanitarian pe rsonnel in the field is a growi ng concern for all humanitarian 
bodies. During the past year, there were a si gnificant number of vi olent acts directly 
committed against humanitarian aid workers. In particular, the number of incidents involving 
national/local NGO staff increased compared to those involving international staff. These 
security incidents continued to undermine the operational efficiency and effectiveness of humanitarian partners. In this context, DG EC HO pursued its efforts aiming at improving the 
overall security of humanitarian assistance personnel  - be it DG ECHO personnel or staff 
from implementing partners - in order to take  account of increasingly volatile and insecure 
environments in which most huma nitarian personnel are working. 
DG ECHO has established its own comprehensiv e security policy, taking into account the 
specificity of humanitarian aid delivery.  
The security coordinator  in place provided advice and support on a wide range of security-
related issues (e.g. protective security measur es for existing and new ECHO facilities and 
residences, security plans for ECHO field offi ces in high risk areas, etc.) and a permanence 
ensured continual 24/7/365 support during secur ity/crisis situations. DG ECHO also promoted 
and disseminated the ECHO security review s among its FPA partners and continued to 
advocate for greater cooperati on on security-related issues. 
Finally, to respond to the grow ing security threats directly  involving humanitarian aid 
workers, DG ECHO set up a Security Cell  in the last quarter of 2008 which will need to be 
consolidated in 2009. 
 
EN 101   EN 3. Capacity building35 
Capacity building is covere d by article 4 of the Council Regulation (EC) n° 1257/96 on 
humanitarian aid. While remaining crisis-orien ted and answering primar ily to the needs of 
populations that are victims of humanitarian disasters and co nflicts, DG ECHO also finances, 
to a limited extent, the reinforcement of  the core capacities of its partners.  
The Commission's commitment to working closel y with internationa l institutions in 
improving the global humanitarian response capac ity when providing huma nitarian assistance 
is demonstrated through its capacity buildi ng programme. Funding allo cations have helped 
aid organisations such as the UN agencies and the Red Cross/Crescent movement to strengthen their response capac ity in humanitarian crises 
A new approach has been developed for the period 2007/2008, centring thematic funding 
around a common theme which is the support to th e humanitarian reform, in particular the 
cluster approach and coordination. 
As regards NGOs, the equivalent of thematic funding is the Grant Facility . Based on article 4 
of Council Regulation n° 1257/199 6, the Grant Facility was es tablished by DG ECHO during 
the Nineties in order to finance capacity build ing of non governmental  partner organisations 
on the most relevant humanitarian aid issues.  
In 2008, an evaluation took place  of DG ECHO's Thematic Funding and Grant Facility. The 
purpose of this evaluation was to look into the relevance of both Thematic Funding and Grant 
Facility, their achievements and lessons-learned , which will feed into DG ECHO's reflexion 
as to how to develop a possible fu ture capacity building approach.  
The evaluation concluded that Th ematic Funding is a highly rele vant tool for strengthening 
the capacities of DG ECHO's UN /Red Cross partners to respond to emergencies in a timely, 
effective and predictable way. It has enabled DG  ECHO to play a more strategic role and 
build stronger relations  with its partners.  
Even though more modest in scope, the Grant Faci lity has also been highly relevant for DG 
ECHO's NGOs partners and the projects ex amined have achieved results and impact. 
Thematic Funding is a unique capacity building instrument. No other donor has an approach 
which establishes a coherence and synergy between global, institutional and operational 
levels. Thematic Funding should be seen as high quality earmarked funding for building the 
capacity of DG ECHO's partners. This repres ents a comparative advantage over those donors 
whose capacity building is rooted in the provi sion of un-earmarked fund ing. There are strong 
expectations among partners that DG ECHO as th e largest EU humanita rian aid donor will 
continue distributing to developi ng the capacities of its partners. 
The main recommendations for both tools are the following: 
• DG ECHO should continue providing capaci ty building support to its partners, 
                                                
 
35 Previously called Thematic funding and Grant Facility 
 
EN 102   EN • DG ECHO should open access to Thematic Funding to  all of its partners  and integrate both 
tools through a phased approach, which would enable DG ECHO  to prepare the 
management of the consolidated mechanism and for a consultation with NGOs to take 
place, 
• DG ECHO should develop a five-y ear strategy whilst respecti ng the current 18/24 months 
implementation period and offer its partners th e possibility of receiving follow-up funding 
within the five-year period and 
• DG ECHO should take advantage of the proposed EU Council's Working Party on 
Humanitarian Aid and Food Aid to facilitate  the discussion on how DG ECHO's capacity 
building instrument can add value to the other EU donors' funding modalities, discuss 
capacity building priorities, and identify Memb er States interested  in supporting multi-
donor projects. 
The challenge for a third generation of Thema tic Funding and Grant Faci lity, over the period 
2009-2014 is to develop, adopt and implement a mo re systematic capacity  building strategy in 
respect of its partners. This would not only strengthen the capacity of its partners and the 
political credibility of DG ECHO with the intern ational donor community, but  also facilitate a 
more effective utilisation of inte rnal DG ECHO human resource capacity.  
Detail of this evaluation can be  found on DG ECHO's Internet page 
http://ec.europa.eu/echo/polic ies/evaluation/thematic_en.htm.  
 
EN 103   EN 4. Finance and Audit  
DG ECHO has formal systems for regularly mo nitoring financial information and providing 
adequate management information. Specific financ ial indicators have be en incorporated into 
an overall scoreboard. Detailed financial information and on the systems in place to coordinate humanitarian aid with other key play ers and on the control of the use of funds can 
be found in the financ ial report published at:
 http://ec.europa.eu/echo/f unding/key_figures/echo_en.htm
  
5. Communication and information 
Regarding its communication strategy, DG ECHO  undertook a range of actions in pursuit of 
its broad objective to boost understanding in Europe and developing countries of the 
concrete contribution made by humanitarian aid to the EU commitment of solidarity with 
developing countries. The EU is collectively the world's la rgest humanitarian donor. As the 
leading relief funder in the Union, the Commissi on has a leadership role in communicating 
the values that underlie European aid.  
Within the EU, there is a high level of support for humanitarian action at European level. 
While public awareness of the Commission's work  in this area has increased, many Europeans 
still have only a limited knowledge  of the subject. The delivery of relief strikes a chord with 
most people and therefore presents an opport unity for the Commission to 'connect' positively 
with citizens. 
With regard to printed publications,  leaflets on the Humanitarian Aid Consensus, on the Horn 
of Africa, Food Aid, Disaster Preparedness, youth brochure reprint with new design on 
solidarity dedicated to the young people, photo- books, postcards and calendar were printed. 
Audiovisual items  were produced such as reports/images  featuring DG ECHO in crisis zones.  
Other communication products  included press releases, witness accounts published on the 
DG ECHO website, new country-specifi c web sections, editorial feat ures in four airlines in-
flight magazines, an Annual Review  and a range of other publications. 
Joint communications with ma jor institutional partners  were carried out such as (1) WHO: 
operational contract for the Palestinian territ ories; (2) EMDH: Monitoring of exhibition on 
humanitarian action in Lebanon in Berlaymont  and Charlemagne; (3) ACF: Emergency food 
aid simulation in Paris on World Food Day; (4 ) Handicap Internationa l: Joint stand on de-
mining at humanitarian village linked to the Cinéma des Vérités in Paris.  
Other events  were also organised, such as (1) Inte grated awareness-raising campaigns in 
Austria, Cyprus, Denmark and UK, Youth action in Slovakia implemented in the first quarter 
of the year; (2) Participation in EuropeAid Cooperation Offi ce “May 9th” schools campaign 
in Romania, Germany and Sweden; (3) talks on EC Humanitarian aid (v isiting groups or in 
the context of the Communication Plan of Action with ICRC) a nd (4) Increased participation 
in major humanitarian events, fairs and exhibi tion in European cities (Salon des Solidarités-
Paris, Development Days, Stand at Annual Partners conference). 
6. Training initiative 
 
EN 104   EN DG ECHO continued to support the Network on  Humanitarian Assistance (NOHA), which 
offers a one-year multi-disciplinary post-gr aduate diploma with seven universities 
participating across Europe36 with the backing of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), 
inter-governmental organisati ons (IGOs) and other actors of the humanitarian relief 
community. 
This European Master's Degree was created in 1 993 as result of concerted efforts on the part 
of the Network on Humanitarian Assistance  (NOHA) Universities, working in close 
collaboration with two Directorates-Gener al of the European Commission: DG for 
Humanitarian Aid (ECHO) and DG for Educatio n and Culture. The initiative was a response 
to a growing need for higher educational qualifications speci fically suited to addressing 
complex humanitarian emergencies. 
The objectives followed by this training are: – To pool academic resources and cultural tradit ions in order to accommodate a diversity of 
individual, academic and employment n eeds in the field of humanitarian action, 
– To provide the academic and professional pr ofiles and competencies for high personnel 
working in the field of inte rnational humanitarian action, 
– To train a team of professionals in the fiel d of humanitarian action who are able to share 
their experiences world-wide and to foster European potential of innovation and social and 
economic development, 
– To contribute to the qualit y and visibility of European  higher education through the 
implementation of a well-defined joint ma sters programme offered by and in seven 
universities which responds to an academic  and professional profile in a common 
framework of comparable and compatible quali fications which describes qualifications in 
terms of profile, learning outcomes, competences, workload and level (comparable level of intellectual academic endeavour) and 
– To become a world quality reference educat ion and training system in the field of 
humanitarian action offering a programme opened to the pa rticipation of third-country 
graduate students and scholars which involve s mobility between the institutions of the 
NOHA Network and leads to the award of Jo int Degree Master in Humanitarian Action. 
– More information on this programme is available at http://www.nohanet.org
  
                                                 
36 Université Catholique de Louvain - Belgium, Un iversité Paul Cézanne Aix-Marseille III (UPCAM) - 
France, Ruhr-Universität Bochum - Germany, University College of Dublin - Ireland, Universidad de 
Deusto - Spain, University of Uppsala - Sweden  and University of Groningen - The Netherlands 
 
EN 105   EN PART  VII. E VALUATIONS AND OUTSIDE ASSESSMENTS  
1. Evaluations 
In terms of evaluations , DG ECHO has an evaluation progra mme that covers the evaluation 
of operations, partnership and thematic issues . The function focuses on ex-post, ex-ante and 
real time evaluations of operations (usually where more than €50 million of funds had been 
committed or which had not been evaluated for three years or more as far as the ex-post evaluations are concerned, and depending on operational prioriti es for the others) and on 
reviews/studies on sectoral issues. The sta ffing involved in the management of these 
evaluation activities is  of 4 staff members. The budget al located to evaluations was of 
€1.8 million. 
In 2008, 15 evaluations and reviews we re finalised and/or launched:  
• Thematic issues
: DIPECHO interventions in Centra l America, South Asia, Caribbean; 
thematic funding, disaster risk reduction mainstreami ng, food aid, regional drought 
decisions, monitoring, gender and unit cost approach; 
• Country operations : Real time in Sahel (West Africa), North Korea (DPRK), Zimbabwe 
and Colombia and  
• Partners : UNRWA (joint evaluation with Germ an Ministry of Foreign Affairs). 
These evaluations globally confirm the a ppropriateness and relevance of DG ECHO funded 
projects and of the metho dology for needs assessment.  
The evaluation reports are widely distributed and discussed in depth with the stakeholders as 
they provide an important contributio n to DG ECHO's operational strategy.  
More details on these evaluations are on DG ECHO’s internet site 
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/ec ho/evaluation/index_en.htm. 
2. Outside assessments 
In recent years, there were 2 outside assessments which touched upon the performance of 
DG ECHO as a humanitarian donor: 
– The DAC Peer Review37, conducted in 2007, was overall very positive in respect of the 
added value of the humanitarian assistance pr ovided by the Community in relation to its 
member states and of the overall donor  performance of DG ECHO. Its main 
recommendations related to the need to in crease DG ECHO's influence on humanitarian 
international policies and to address the si gnificant under-funding of the DG ECHO's base 
budget.  
                                                 
37 The Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD-DAC) within the Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development 
 
EN 106   EN The DAC Peer Review report is available in the OECD website "Review of the Development 
Co-operation Policies and Programmes of the European Community"38. 
– DARA, an independent organisation committed to improving the quality of development 
and humanitarian organisations through eval uation, made a comparative assessment in 
2007 and in 2008 on the adherence of humanita rian donors to the indicators of "good 
humanitarian Donorship". In this compara tive analysis, the European Commission was 
ranked in the 5th place overall amongst the 23 main governmental donors, in both years. 
The results are available on DARA's website http://www.daraint.org/ web_en/dara1.html  
                                                 
38 http://www.oecd.org/document/48/0,3343,en_2649_201185_39758640_1_1_1_1,00.html 
 
EN 107   EN PART  VIII. F INANCIAL TABLES  
1. DG ECHO budget and decisions for Huma nitarian aid 1993 - 2008 (in '000) 
TOTAL
Food Total BUDGET
Aid Em. Aid Res. Other (Com Appr. )
1993 171.400 209.000 136.010 516.410 90.180 606.590 604.800 99,7%
1994 266.000 212.000 21.200 499.200 263.770 762.970 764.100 100,1%
1995 256.000 254.500 132.000 642.500 46.455 688.955 694.100 100,7%
1996 321.500 324.000 13.970 659.470 10.380 669.850 656.700 98,0%
1997 315.100 0 122.720 437.820 7.420 445.240 441.600 99,2%
1998 325.100 150.000 5.113 480.213 37.387 517.600 517.642 100,0%
1999 330.850 346.000 50.000 726.850 83.432 810.282 812.910 100,3%
2000 471.050 (2) 0 21.410 492.460 2.850 495.310 491.715 99,3%
2001 473.000 40.000 10.000 523.000 20.750 543.750 543.704 100,0%
2002 441.845 80.000 0 521.845 17.475 539.320 537.790 99,7%
2003 441.690 100.000 44.910 586.600 14.105 600.705 600.349  99,9%
2004 490.000 0 28.184 518.184 52.228 570.412 570.342  100,0%
2005 495.500 130.000 5.156 630.656 23.170 653.826 652.499  99,8%
2006 495.729 140.000 7.561 643.290 28.060 671.350 671.007  99,9%
2007 514.400 217.760 0 8.854 741.014 28.200 769.214 768.530 99,9%
2008 528.020 223.251 177.000 10.477 938.748 0 938.748 936.642 99,8%
TOTAL 1993-2008 6.337.184 441.011 2.162.500 617.565 9.558.260 725.862 10.284.122 10.264.430 99,8%
AVERAGE
YEARS 1993-2008 396.074 220.506 135.156 38.598 597.391 45.366 642.758 641.527 99,8%
AVERAGE
LAST 5 YEARS 504.730 220.506 89.400 12.046 694.378 26.332 720.710 719.804 99,9%
(1) Total of chapter B7-21 (lines 210A,210,214,217,219) - As of 01.01.2004 (23.0104 & 23.0201 & 23.0202)ReinforcementsBUDGET COMMISSION  (1)
(2) Part of the emergency reserve was transferred to the budget line B7-210. The emergency reserve (line B7-910) was reduced fr om 346 MEUR in 1999 to 203 MEUR in 2000 and the budget in chapter B7-21 was 
increased by 140 MEUR. It is important to note that the budget was not increased - it was only an increase of the chapiter B7-2 1 (humanitarin aid) with a corresponding decrease in the chapter B7-91 (emergency aid 
reserve)Implemen-
tation
rateCOMMITTED 
FUNDSLOME
(EDF)YEAR Humanitarian 
Aid
 
EN 108   EN 2. DG ECHO's finalised  contracts 1998-2008* 
Number of finalised contracts 1998-2008 (*)
1206 1202 1214
1119
891 87892688510861148 1134
0200400600800100012001400
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
 
* Includes grant agreements for humanitarian  aid and contracts for support expenditure 
(audits, evaluations, information)  and for technical assistance. 
** Includes contracts from financial year N and any contract from previous financial 
years but signed in financial year N. 
 
EN 109   EN 3. Geographical breakdown of funding decisions 2002-2008 – Global overview 
Country/Region 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
Africa, Caribbean, Pacific 199.450.000 227.785.000 301.555.000 247.71 6.500 322.060.000 422.760.000 551.847.000
All Africa 2.000.000
SUDAN & CHAD 18.175.000 24.000.000 103.000.000 59.000.000 111.500.000 140.950.000 197.000.000
Chad 175.000 2.000.000 12.000.000 14.000.000 14.500.000 30.500.000 30.000.000
Sudan 18.000.000 22.000.000 91.000.000 45.000.000 97.000.000 110.450.000 167.000.000
HORN of AFRICA 26.520.000 28.200.000 48.088.000 40.120.000 64.050.000 77.000.000 167.897.000
Djibouti (1)1.400.000
Eritrea 1.750.000 1.300.000 1.000.000 4.620.000 6.000.000 6.000.000 4.000.000
Ethiopia (1)7.750.000 2.000.000 6.998.000 4.500.000 5.000.000 20.000.000 39.700.000
Kenya (1)2.500.000 3.850.000 2.000.000 9.050.000 9.000.000 23.500.000
Somalia (1)4.500.000 9.000.000 9.150.000 9.000.000 10.000.000 18.000.000 43.797.000
Uganda (1)2.120.000 8.000.000 18.620.000 14.000.000 19.000.000 24.000.000 25.500.000
Regional Drought Decision 15.000.000 30.000.000
Echo-Flight (2)7.900.000 7.900.000 8.470.000 6.000.000 
(1) Amounts in 2008 include the country allocation from the Horn of Africa regional decision (food aid - €40.6M) 
(2) Echo-flight was used mostly for Air Operations in the Horn of Africa but as of 2001 also for Air Operations in Central Afri ca. From 2006, it is only used in Central Africa. For 
the years 2001-2003 a detailed breakdown by region was not available in the funding decision and the breakdown for these years is therefore indicative 
 
EN 110   EN Country/Region 2002 2003 2 004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN AFRICA, INDIAN 
OCEAN132.900.000 140.500.000 107.690.000 98.75 0.000 103.250.000 139.900.000 126.200.000
Angola 12.000.000 8.900.000 8.8 00.000 2.000.000 3.000.000
Cameroon 2.000.000
Central African Republic 1.000.000 470.000 8.000.000 7.800.000
Congo-Brazzaville 4.000.000 2.000.000 2.000.000
Congo (Dem. Rep.) 38.100.000 44.000.000 40.000.000 38.000. 000 43.000.000 42.500.000 45.550.000
Gabon 300.000 24.000.000
Madagascar 1.000.000 2.000.000 500. 000 5.380.833 1.500.000
Malawi 1.500.000 5.000.000
Mozambique / Botswana 2.000.000 7.000.000
Namibia 100.000 1.000.000 350.000
Zambia 3.000.000 5.000.000 2.000.000 3.500.000 2.200.000 2.000.000
Zimbabwe 2.000.000 13.000.000 15.000.000 15.000. 000 12.000.000 30.200.000 25.000.000
Regional Burundi / Tanzanie 44.500.000 15.000.000 33.890.000 30.500. 000 33.050.000 31.500.000 27.500.000
Reg.Southern Africa (Lesotho/Swaziland) 30.000.000 25.000.000 2.0 00.000 1.750.000 5.819.167
Regional South East Africa 3.500.000
Regional Great Lakes 1.000.000
DIPECHO South East Africa 5.000.000
Echo-Flight  (1) 500.000 500.000 530.000 500.000 7.000.000 7.500.000 8.000.000 
 
EN 111   EN Country/Region 2002 2003 2 004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
WEST AFRICA 21.250.000 31.185.000 25.300. 000 38.550.000 41.650.000 46.600.000 39.100.000
Benin 1.050.000
Burkina Faso 600.000
Guinea  1.300.000
Guinea Bissau 1.000.000 500.000
Liberia / Ivory Coast / Nigeria 20.500.000 29.740.000 25.300.000 29.200. 000 26.500.000 19.100.000 16.600.000
Mali / Niger / Mauritania 845.000 8.300.000 12.000.000 2.000.000
Senegal 750.000
Regional Sahel 25.500.000 15.700.000
Regional West Africa (incl Epidemics) 2.150.000 2.000.000 3.000.000
CARIBBEAN 605.000 3.900.000 17.477.000 11. 296.500 1.610.000 15.760.000 21.650.000
Bahamas 480.000
Comoros 1.100.000
Dominican Republic 205.000 1.600.000 250.000 250.000
Grenada 2.250.000
Haiti 400.000 11.197.000 160.00 0 4.500.000 16.000.000
Jamaica 1.200.000
Papua New Guinea 200.000
St Vincent & Grenadines 750.000
Suriname 700.000 400.000
Regional Caribbean 1.400.000 6.496.500 500.00 0 7.260.000 5.000.000
DIPECHO Caribbean 2.500.000 3.500.000 4.000.000
PACIFIC 550.000
Solomon Island 550.000 
 
EN 112   EN Country/Region 2002 2003 2 004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
Eastern Europe, NIS, 
Mediterranean, Middle East147.430.000 194.141.261 93.205.000 87.587.000 183.950.000 124.897.118 152.635.000
MEDITERRANEAN & MIDDLE EAST 63.930.000 144.281.261 48.855.000 48.887.000 144.900.000 99.090.000 124.860.000
Algeria 2.000.000
Iraq crisis 13.000.000 97.138.761 17.800.000 30.000.000
Morocco 975.000
Palestinian Territories 35.000.000 38.000.000 37.350.000 34.000.000 84.000.000 60.000.000 73.260.000
Palestinian refugees                  (Lebanon, 
Jordan, Syria)2.576.000 50.000.000 10.300.000 9.500.000
Yemen 1.590.000 2.000.000 2.530.000 3.000.000 990.000 2.100.000
Western Sahara (Sahrawi) 14.340.000 5.142.500 8.000.000 9.311.000 10.900.000 10.000.000 10.000.000
EUROPE, CAUCASUS & CENTRAL ASIA 40.500.000 42.200.000 44.350.000 38.700.000 39.050.000 25.807.118 27.775.000
Caucasus (Chechnya crisis) 28.000.000 26.000.000 28.500.000 26.300.000 26.000.000 20.807.118 11.000.000
Georgia 1.800.000 2.200.000 4.000.000 2.000.000 2.000.000 2.000.000 8.000.000
Moldova, Republic of 3.000.000 700.000
Mongolia 700.000 1.000.000 1.000.000 900.000
Tajikistan 10.000.000 10.000.000 8.350.000 6.000.000 5.000.000 750.000
DIPECHO Central Asia 3.000.000 2.500.000 3.500.000 6.050.000 7.325.000
WESTERN BALKANS 43.000.000 7.660.000
FRY - Serbie 37.000.000 7.660.000
FRY - Kosovo 2.000.000
fyROM 3.000.000
Regional 1.000.000 
 
EN 113   EN Country/Region 2002 2003 2 004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
Asia, Latin America 165.615.000 133.560.000 134.523.630 267.44 5.370 118.491.305 157.365.678 192.327.000
Tsunami 169.630 122.830.370
SOUTH ASIA 90.229.000 73.889.000 67.284.000 84.000.000 56.300.000 87.555.000 94.257.000
Afghanistan / Iran / Pakistan 73.254.000 55.839.000 42.821.000 68.000.000 23.500.000 27.000.000 36.300.000
Bangladesh 5.763.000 9.925.000 20.501.000
India 5.000.000 2.650.000 3.000.000 6.000.000 2.630.000 5.990.000
Nepal / Bhutan 3.675.000 4.000.000 4.000.000 6.000.000 7.800.000 6.000.000 7.966.000
Sri Lanka 8.300.000 8.100.000 6.500.000 4.000.000 12.000.000 15.000.000 19.000.000
Regional (India, Nepal, Bangladesh) 800.000 19.500.000 4.500.000
DIPECHO South Asia 2.500.000 5.200.000 6.000.000 7.000.000 7.500.000
SOUTH EAST & EAST ASIA 47.740.000 45.560.000 48.870.000 38.415.000 37.591.305 29.745.695 64.000.000
Burma / Myanmar / Thailand 8.965.000 11.560.000 19.720.000 16.500.000 15.700.000 19.000.000 39.000.000
Cambodia 5.500.000 4.000.000 3.500.000 2.000.000
China 4.450.000 4.800.000 2.000.000 2.000.000
East Timor 1.935.000 2.000.000 250.000 2.500.000 3.000.000 3.000.000 2.000.000
Indonesia 3.540.000 3.500.000 3.500.000 2.000.000 9.867.000 1.600.000 2.000.000
Laos 1.130.000 1.700.000 1.500.000 1.200.000
North Korea 21.025.000 17.000.000 16.750.000 13.715.000 8.000.000 2.000.000
Philippines 1.000.000 1.650.000 500.000 564.305 2.145.695 6.500.000
Vietnam 1.195.000 460.000 2.000.000
Vietnam / Laos 2.500.000
DIPECHO South East Asia 10.000.000 
 
EN 114   EN Country/Region 2002 2003 2 004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
LATIN AMERICA 27.646.000 14.111.000 18.200.000 22.200.000 24.600.000 40.064.983 34.070.000
Bolivia 1.000.000 1.000.000 3.000.000
Colombia 9.200.000 8.000.000 8.500.000 12.000.000 12.000.000 13.000.000 12.500.000
Cuba 600.000 1.000.000
Ecuador 1.000.000 2.000.000
Guatemala 2.600.000
Honduras 500.000 1.000.000
Honduras/Guatemala 1.170.000
Nicaragua 6.000.000
Paraguay 1.500.000 1.400.000
Peru 10.064.983 1.000.000
Regional Central America 6.028.000 520.000 5.700.000 2.000.000
Regional South America 3.818.000 1.591.000 2.700.000 2.000.000
DIPECHO - Andean Communities 1.640.000 4.000.000 4.500.000 6.500.000
DIPECHO - South East and Central America 6.360.000 6.000.000 6.000.000 1.500.000 10.000.000 
 
EN 115   EN Country/Region 2002 2003 2 004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
 
EN 116   EN    CAPACITY BUILDING 11.700.000 23.196.000 19.430.000 20.500.000 19.500 .000 27.500.000 2.534.000
Protection of refugees (UNHCR) 11.700.000 11.000.000 5.000.000 4.000.000
Humanitarian Information systems (OCHA) 1.200.000 4.000.000 4.000. 000 3.000.000 3.500.000
Protection of victims of armed conflicts 
(ICRC)10.000.000 4.000.000 3.000.000
Protection of children and women (UNICEF) 996.000 2.000.000 1.800.000 1.500.000
Preparedness and response capacity to 
hum.crises (UNICEF)5.430.000 4.200.000 4.500.000
Humanitarian logistic capacities - Response 
Depot Network (WFP)4.300.000
Emergency Shelter Cluster (UNHCR) 900.000
Response to Natural Disasters (IFRC) 3.500.000 4.000.000
Support Health Emergencies (WHO) 3.500.000 4.000.000 4.300.000
Assessing Emergency Needs in food 
security (WFP)4.500.000 3.500.000 4.500.000 2.534.000
DREF DECISION 2.000.000
GRANTS AND SERVICES 1.000.000 1.400.000 2.300.000
OTHER EXPENDITURE 13.595.000 21.666.000 21.628. 000 29.250.000 26.005.667 34.607.038 32.998.941
Experts 8.000.000 12.037.000 13.500.000 18.750. 000 14.350.000 20.500.000 19.670.000
Regional Imprest Accounts /            Regional 
offices1.025.000 4.880.000 1.800.000 4.000. 000 4.650.000 4.900.000 5.330.000
Support Expenditure                       (audit, 
evaluation, information,...)4.570.000 4.749.000 6.328.000 6.500. 000 6.188.894 8.900.262 7.812.327
Use of re-assigned revenue 816.773 306.776 186.614
BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION        
2002-2008537.790.000 600.348.261 570.341.630 652. 498.870 671.006.972 768.529.834 936.641.941
 
 
EN 117   EN 4. Funding decisions for humanitarian ai d in 2008 (by country/area in decision) 
Country/sub-region Decisions in € C ountry/sub-region Decisions in €
AFRICA, CARIBBEAN, PACIFI C 546.847.000 ASIA 148.257.000
Burundi 16.636.775 Afghanistan/Pakistan/Iran 36.300.000Chad 30.000.000 Bangladesh 20.501.000Cameroun 2.000.000 China 2.000.000Central African Republic 7.800.000 East Timor 2.000.000Congo (Democratic Republic) 53.550.000 India 5.990.000Djibouti 1.400.000 India/Nepal 4.500.000Eritrea 4.000.000 Indonesia 2.000.000Ethiopia 39.700.000 Myanmar/Burma 39.000.000Guinea  1.300.000 Nepal 7.966.000Guinea Bissau 500.000 Philippines 6.500.000Haiti 16.000.000 Sri Lanka 19.000.000Kenya 23.500.000 Vietnam/Laos 2.500.000Liberia 16.600.000Madagascar 1.500.000 LATIN AMERICA 24.070.000
Mauritania/Senegal 2.000.000 Bolivia 3.000.000Namibia 350.000 Colombia 12.500.000Sahel 15.700.000 Ecuador 2.000.000
Somalia 43.797.000 Honduras 1.000.000
Sudan 167.000.000 Honduras/Guatemala 1.170.000Suriname 400.000 Paraguay 1.400.000Tanzania 10.863.225 Peru 1.000.000Uganda 25.500.000 Regional Latin America 2.000.000Zimbabwe 25.000.000Regional West Africa 3.000.000 DIPECHO 32.325.000
Regional Caribbean 5.250.000 Central America 10.000.000
Regional South East Africa 3.500.000 Central Asia 7.325.000
Regional Drought Preparedness 30.000.000 South East Asia 10.000.000
South East Africa 5.000.000
EASTERN EUROPE / NIS 20.450.000Georgia 8.000.000 Capacity Building 2.534.000
Moldova, Republic of 700.000 Assessmen t & analysis of hum. Needs 2.534.000
Northern Caucasus (Chechnya crisis) 11.000.000Tajikistan 750.000 Other funding 29.300.000
Technical assistance 25.000.000
MIDDLE EAST/NORTH AFRICA 124.860.000 DREF Decision 2.000.000
Western Sahara (Sahrawi) 10.000.000 Grants and Services 2.300.000
Iraq crisis 30.000.000
Middle East (Palestinian population) 73.260.000Middle East (Lebanon) 9.500.000
Yemen 2.100.000
Total ECHO funding 2008 928.643.000
 
 
EN 118   EN 5. Partners in DG ECHO's humanitarian assistance 
5.1. Partners categories DG ECHO does not implement assistance programme s itself. It is a donor who implements its 
mission by funding Community huma nitarian actions through partners  which have signed 
either the Framework Partnership Agreem ent (FPA) such as European NGOs and 
International Organisations (Red Cross fa mily) or the Financia l and Administrative 
Framework Agreement (FAFA) for the UN agencies. 
The relative share of these 3 categories of partners is illustrated below: 
Int. Org.
10%
NGO
44%UN
46%
 
Over the last five years there has been a d ecrease in NGO funding against an increase of UN 
funding as shown in the picture below. 
62%
53%
52%
47%
44%
29%
34%
37%
42%
46%
9%
12%
11%
11%
10%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%
NGO UN Int.Org.Funding by category of partner (2004-2008)
[with food aid as from 2007]
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
The figures given from 2007 are, however, not en tirely comparable with previous years; given 
the integration of the food aid budget line. Food aid is largely implemented by a small number 
of UN and International Orga nisations and less by NGOs. 
 
EN 119   EN 5.2. Contracts by Category and Nationality of Partners 2008 
Contracts signed with NGOs are summarised belo w, ranked by nationality of partner in the 
table below. The two next tables show a repart ition of contracts signed with UN agencies and 
International Organisations. 
Nationality of partner Total % ALL % NGO
United Kingdom 103.069.857 11,77% 27,01%
France 78.531.287 8,97% 20,58%
Germany 39.769.525 4,54% 10,42%
The Netherlands 26.399.004 3,01% 6,92%
Spain 26.020.543 2,97% 6,82%
Denmark 22.851.704 2,61% 5,99%
Italy 20.579.441 2,35% 5,39%
Ireland 12.216.555 1,39% 3,20%
Belgium 9.094.770 1,04% 2,38%
Austria 7.405.619 0,85% 1,94%
Other countries 35.594.088 4,06% 9,33%
SUBTOTAL NGOS* 381.532.391 43,57% 100,00%
International (IO, UN) 494.218.772 56,43%
GRAND TOTAL 875.751.163 100,00% 
UN AgencyAmount 
Contract%
FAO 26.355.614 3,01%
OCHA 7.335.000 0,84%
PAHO 1.890.000 0,22%UNCHS - HABITAT 349.783 0,04%UNDP-PNUD 5.743.316 0,66%UNFPA 330.000 0,04%
UNHCR 53.545.034 6,11%
UNICEF 32.572.031 3,72%UNRWA 38.000.000 4,34%WFP-PAM 228.034.945 26,04%
WHO 10.239.849 1,17%
TOTAL 404.395.572 46,19%International 
Organisations Amount 
Contract%
Red Cross (ICRC) 78.865.000 9,01%
Red Cross (IFRC) 3.827.000 0,44%
International Organization 
for Migration6.777.927 0,77%
Mekong River Commission 353.273 0,04%
TOTAL 89.823.200 10,26%
 
EN 120   EN 5.3. List of contracts for humanita rian aid operations by partner 
CONTRACTS FOR HUMANITARI AN OPERATIONS IN 2008  
Partner's short name ABAC key Partner's 
category 
code Partner's long name Amount 
Contract % 
ACF - FRA 6000054039 NGO ACTION CONTRE LA FAIM, (FR) 21.105.663 2,41% 
ACH- ESP 6000056743 NGO ACCION CONTRA EL HAMBRE, (ESP) 8.964.874 1,02% 
ACP 6000055731 NGO ASAMBLEA DE COOPERACION POR LA PAZ, (E) 830.771 0,09% 
ACSUR - MADRID 6000055754 NGO Asociación para la Coope ración con el Sur ¿LAS 
SEGOVIAS¿ 375.000 0,04% 
ACTED 6000055547 NGO AGENCE D'AIDE A LA COOPERATION 
TECHNIQUE ET AU DEVELOPPEMENT, (FR) 7.924.869 0,90% 
ACTIONAID 6000055953 NGO ACTIONAID 5.179.056 0,59% 
ADRA - DEU 6000053698 NGO Adventistische Entwickl ungs- und Katastrophenhilfe 
e.V. 3.588.000 0,41% 
ADRA - DK 6000057779 NGO ADVENTIST DEVELOPMENT AND RELIEF 
AGENCY - DENMARK 957.000 0,11% 
AGA KHAN 6000055954 NGO AGA KHAN FOUNDATION (United Kingdom) 958.036 0,11% 
AMI - FRA 6000055590 NGO AIDE MEDICALE INTERNATIONALE, (FR) 3.825.249 0,44% 
ASB - DEU 6000053398 NGO ARBEITER-SAMARITER-BUND DEUTSCHLAND 
e.V. 1.200.288 0,14% 
ASF-BELGIUM 6000074230 NGO Aviation sans Frontières Belgique/Piloten zonder 
Grenzen België 653.334 0,07% 
 
EN 121   EN Partner's short name ABAC key Partner's 
category 
code Partner's long name Amount 
Contract % 
AVSI 6000056014 NGO ASSOCIAZIONE VOLONTARI PER IL SERVIZIO 
INTERNAZIONALE (ITA) 4.161.930 0,48% 
AYUDA EN ACCIÓN 6000084697 NGO AYUDA EN ACCIÓN, (E) 200.000 0,02% 
BBC-TRUST 6000074339 NGO BBC World Service Trust 530.254 0,06% 
CAFOD 6000059489 NGO CATHOLIC AGENCY FOR OVERSEAS 
DEVELOPMENT (GBR) 1.040.025 0,12% 
CAM 6000068308 NGO COMITE D'AIDE MEDICALE 810.000 0,09% 
CARE - AUT 6000054941 NGO CARE ÖSTERREICH - VEREIN FÜR 
ENTWICKLUNGSZUSAMMENARBEIT UND 
HUMANITÄRE HILFE 5.805.619 0,66% 
CARE - DEU 6000054038 NGO CARE INTERNATIONAL DEUTSCHLAND E.V. 
(DEU) 1.480.724 0,17% 
CARE - FR 6000054722 NGO CARE FRANCE, (FR) 5.635.575 0,64% 
CARE NEDERLAND (FORMER DRA) 6000055823 NGO Stichting CARE Nederland 1.399.298 0,16% 
CARE - UK 6000055956 NGO CARE INTERNATIONAL UK 7.275.451 0,83% 
CARITAS - BEL 6000055022 NGO CARITAS INTERNATIONAL 749.275 0,09% 
CARITAS - CZE 6000119111 NGO CHARITA CESKA REPUBLIKA 320.000 0,04% 
CARITAS - DEU 6000055305 NGO DEUTSCHER CARITASVERBAND e.V, (DEU) 5.120.187 0,58% 
CARITAS - FRA 6000055573 NGO CARITAS FRANCE - SECOURS CATHOLIQUE, (FR) 300.000 0,03% 
CARITAS - LUX 6000056898 NGO FONDATION CARITAS LUXEMBOURG 350.000 0,04% 
 
EN 122   EN Partner's short name ABAC key Partner's 
category 
code Partner's long name Amount 
Contract % 
CHRISTIAN AID - UK 6000059497 NGO CHRISTIAN AID (GBR) 2.527.268 0,29% 
CHURCH OF SWEDEN AID 6000060233 NGO LUTHERHJÄLPEN(SWE) 198.000 0,02% 
CISP 6000055971 NGO COMITATO INTERNAZIONALE PER LO 
SVILUPPO DEI POPOLI (ITA) 1.965.000 0,22% 
CONCERN UNIVERSAL 6000055957 NGO CONCERN UNIVERSAL (GBR) 141.145 0,02% 
CONCERN WORLDWIDE 6000057507 NGO CONCERN WORLDWIDE, (IRL) 6.794.998 0,78% 
COOPI 6000055976 NGO COOPERAZIONE INTERNAZIONALE (ITA) 9.797.382 1,12% 
CORDAID 6000055816 NGO CATHOLIC ORGANISATION FOR RELIEF AND 
DEVELOPMENT AID (NLD) 6.331.402 0,72% 
COSV - MILAN 6000055963 NGO COMITATO DI COORDINAMENTO DELLE 
ORGANIZZAZIONI PER IL SERVIZIO 
VOLONTARIO (ITA) 920.846 0,11% 
CRIC 6000055955 NGO CENTRO REGIONALE D INTERVENTO PER LA 
COOPERAZIONE (ITA) 1.230.000 0,14% 
CROIX-ROUGE - AUT 6000058971 NGO OESTERREICHISCHES ROTES KREUZ (CROIX 
ROUGE), (AUT) 700.000 0,08% 
CROIX-ROUGE - DEU 6000055102 NGO DEUTSCHES ROTES KREUZ, (DEU) 2.055.269 0,23% 
CROIX-ROUGE - DNK 6000058807 NGO DANSK RODE KORS, (DNK) 2.796.683 0,32% 
CROIX-ROUGE - ESP 6000056766 NGO CRUZ ROJA ESPAÑOLA, (E) 5.218.435 0,60% 
CROIX-ROUGE - FIN 6000056709 NGO SUOMEN PUNAINEN RI STI (CROIX ROUGE 
FINLANDAISE) 2.232.000 0,25% 
 
EN 123   EN Partner's short name ABAC key Partner's 
category 
code Partner's long name Amount 
Contract % 
CROIX-ROUGE - FRA 6000000646 NGO CROIX-ROUGE FRANCAISE 4.864.707 0,56% 
CROIX-ROUGE - NLD 6000055722 NGO HET NEDERLANDSE RODE KRUIS (NLD) 4.825.926 0,55% 
CROIX-ROUGE - NOR 6000057646 NGO NORGES RODE KORS (NORWEGIAN RED CROSS) 500.000 0,06% 
CROIX-ROUGE - SWE 6000060228 NGO SVENSKA RÖDA KORSET 977.966 0,11% 
DAC AVIATION INTL 6000176094 SUP DAC Aviation International Limited 8.000.000 0,91% 
DANCHURCHAID - DNK 6000058809 NGO FOLKEKIRKENS NODHJAELP, (FKN) 7.900.850 0,90% 
DIAKONIE 6000055019 NGO DIAKONISCHES WERK der Evangelischen Kirche in 
Deutschland (DEU) 1.150.000 0,13% 
DIE JOHANNITER, (DEU) 6000055229 NGO JOHANNITER-UNFALL-HILFE e.V. (DEU) 155.000 0,02% 
DRC 6000058798 NGO DANSK FLYGTNINGEHJAELP 9.541.588 1,09% 
DWF 6000068952 NGO Development Workshop France 520.000 0,06% 
EMDH 6000055538 NGO ENFANTS DU MONDE - DROITS DE L'HOMME 506.525 0,06% 
FAO 6000055556 UN UNITED NATIONS - FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 
ORGANIZATION 26.355.614 3,01% 
FSD__573 6000062750 NGO Fondation Suisse de Déminage (FSD) 400.000 0,05% 
GERMAN AGRO ACTION 6000055234 NGO DEUTSCHE WELTHUNGERHILFE e.V. 11.999.394 1,37% 
GOAL 6000057512 NGO GOAL, (IRL) 5.181.557 0,59% 
GTZ 6000057485 GOV DEUTSCHE GESELLSCHAFT FÜR TECHNISCHE 
ZUSAMMENARBEIT 350.000 0,04% 
 
EN 124   EN Partner's short name ABAC key Partner's 
category 
code Partner's long name Amount 
Contract % 
HALO TRUST 6000055959 NGO THE HALO TRUST (GBR) 500.000 0,06% 
HAMMER FORUM 6000055011 NGO HAMMER FORUM e.V. 300.000 0,03% 
HANDICAP (FR) 6000055532 NGO HANDICAP INTERNATIONAL (FR) 2.698.589 0,31% 
HEALTH NET TPO 6000055825 NGO HEALTHNET INTERNATIONAL 
TRANSCULTURAL PSYCHOSOCIAL 
ORGANIZATION (NLD) 260.545 0,03% 
HELP 6000055223 NGO HELP- HILFE ZUR SELBSTHILFE E.V. (DEU) 4.749.297 0,54% 
ICCO 6000055831 NGO Interkerkelijke Organisatie voor 
Ontwikkelingssamenwerking 297.508 0,03% 
ICMC 6000062768 NGO THE INTERNATIONAL CATHOLIC MIGRATION 
COMMISSION (CHE) 855.000 0,10% 
ICRC-CICR 6000055654 IO COMITE INTERNATIONAL DE LA CROIX-ROUGE 
(CICR) 78.865.000 9,01% 
IFRC-FICR 6000055660 IO FEDERATION INTERNATIONALE DES SOCIETES 
DE LA CROIX-ROUGE ET DU CROISSANT ROUGE 3.827.000 0,44% 
IMC UK 6000099796 NGO International Medical Corps UK 1.898.912 0,22% 
INTERMON 6000056746 NGO INTERMON OXFAM, (E) 3.584.000 0,41% 
IOCC - GR 6000057875 NGO INTERNATIONAL ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN 
CHARITIES 250.000 0,03% 
IOM 6000055563 IO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR 
MIGRATION (INT) 6.777.927 0,77% 
IRC - UK 6000055964 NGO International Rescue Committee UK 11.670.139 1,33% 
 
EN 125   EN Partner's short name ABAC key Partner's 
category 
code Partner's long name Amount 
Contract % 
IRD 6000264239 NGO Islamic Relief Humanitäre Organisation in Deutschland 
e.V. 329.550 0,04% 
ISLAMIC RELIEF 6000055965 NGO ISLAMIC RELIEF WORLDWIDE 4.324.599 0,49% 
MADERA-FR 6000055608 NGO MISSION D'AIDE AU DEVELOPPEMENT DES 
ECONOMIES RURALES  1.594.466 0,18% 
MALTESER HILFSDIENST 6000054029 NGO MALTESER HILFSDIENST e.V., (DEU) 3.392.008 0,39% 
MAPACT 6000250301 NGO MapAction 10.500 0,00% 
MC 6000255607 NGO Malaria Consortium 203.903 0,02% 
MDM - ESP 6000056756 NGO MEDICOS DEL MUNDO ESPAÑA 124.333 0,01% 
MDM - FRA 6000055581 NGO MEDECINS DU MONDE 6.120.100 0,70% 
MEDAIR CH 6000067397 NGO Medair 3.386.946 0,39% 
MEDAIR UK 6000055972 NGO MEDAIR UK (GBR) 750.000 0,09% 
MEDICO INTERNATIONAL 6000055225 NGO MEDICO INTERNATIONAL, (DEU) 349.808 0,04% 
MEKONG RIVER COMMISSION 6000100128 IO Mekong River Commission 353.273 0,04% 
MERCY CORPS SCOTLAND 6000055399 NGO MERCY CORPS SCOTLAND (GBR) 2.357.639 0,27% 
MERLIN 6000071402 NGO MEDICAL EMERGE NCY RELIEF 
INTERNATIONAL (GBR) 10.898.689 1,24% 
MISSION OST - DNK 6000057764 NGO MISSION OST 1.268.960 0,14% 
 
EN 126   EN Partner's short name ABAC key Partner's 
category 
code Partner's long name Amount 
Contract % 
MPDL 6000055749 NGO MOVIMIENTO POR LA PAZ, EL DESARME Y LA 
LIBERTAD, (E) 739.352 0,08% 
MSF - BEL 6000002431 NGO MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES 
BELGIQUE/ARTSEN ZONDER GRENZEN 
BELGIE(BEL) 3.300.000 0,38% 
MSF - CHE 6000057526 NGO MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES - SUISSE (CH) 4.897.163 0,56% 
MSF - ESP 6000056751 NGO MEDICOS SIN FRONTERAS, (E) 2.782.480 0,32% 
MSF - FRA 6000055577 NGO MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES (F) 1.400.000 0,16% 
MSF - LUX 6000056908 NGO MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES (LUX) 240.000 0,03% 
MSF - NLD 6000054030 NGO ARTSEN ZONDER GRENZEN (NLD) 5.449.000 0,62% 
MUSLIMAID 6000238558 NGO Muslim Aid 1.764.986 0,20% 
NORWEGIAN PEOPLE'S AID 6000057635 NGO NORSK FOLKEHJELP (NOR) 949.900 0,11% 
NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL 6000057638 NGO NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL (NOR) 6.331.015 0,72% 
NOVIB 6000055196 NGO Nederlandse Organisatie voor 
Ontwikkelingssamenwerking 279.459 0,03% 
OCHA 6000067546 UN UNITED NATIONS, OFFICE FOR THE 
COORDINATION OF HUMANITARIAN AFFAIRS 7.335.000 0,84% 
OIKOS 6000100137 NGO OIKOS - COOPERAÇÃO E DESENVOLVIMENTO 1.714.331 0,20% 
OXFAM - BEL 6000062792 NGO OXFAM-Solidarite(it), (BEL) 2.487.400 0,28% 
OXFAM - UK 6000055981 NGO OXFAM (GB) 24.923.401 2,85% 
 
EN 127   EN Partner's short name ABAC key Partner's 
category 
code Partner's long name Amount 
Contract % 
PAHO 6000067529 UN UNITED NATIONS - PAN AMERICAN HEALTH 
ORGANIZATION 1.890.000 0,22% 
PEOPLE IN NEED 6000056658 NGO Clovek v tísni, o.p.s. 579.698 0,07% 
PLAN INTERNATIONAL UK 6000057475 NGO PLAN INTERNATIONAL (UK) 1.573.576 0,18% 
PMU INTERLIFE 6000060221 NGO PMU INTERLIFE/PINGST FFS 1.050.000 0,12% 
POLISH HUMANITARIAN 
ORGANISATION 6000056007 NGO Polska Akcja Humanitarna 290.000 0,03% 
PREMIERE URGENCE 6000055612 NGO PREMIERE URGENCE, (FR) 4.879.178 0,56% 
PSF - FRA/CLERMONT-FERRAND 6000053712 NGO PHARMACIENS SANS FRONTIERES COMITE 
INTERNATIONAL 2.252.642 0,26% 
PTM 6000055727 NGO PTM-mundubat, (E) 1.750.000 0,20% 
PUNTO SUD 6000142912 NGO punto.sud 100.000 0,01% 
REDR 6000063967 NGO RedR - Engineers for Disaster Relief 336.757 0,04% 
RI-UK 6000198146 NGO Relief International-UK 349.999 0,04% 
SAVE THE CHILDREN - NLD 6000055914 NGO SAVE THE CHILDREN (NLD) 4.106.669 0,47% 
SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 6000057469 NGO THE SAVE THE CHILDREN FUND (GBR) 15.565.966 1,78% 
SCD-RB 6000061869 NGO Red Barnet 386.623 0,04% 
SI 6000056745 NGO SOLIDARIDAD INTERNACIONAL, (E) 550.000 0,06% 
SOLIDARITES 6000055549 NGO SOLIDARITES, (FR) 10.743.479 1,23% 
 
EN 128   EN Partner's short name ABAC key Partner's 
category 
code Partner's long name Amount 
Contract % 
SOS KINDERDORF INT. 6000055201 NGO SOS-KINDERDORF INTERNATIONAL (AUT) 900.000 0,10% 
STCH 6000196970 NGO Fundación Save The Children 901.298 0,10% 
TEARFUND - UK 6000057468 NGO TEARFUND (GBR) 3.421.633 0,39% 
TERRE DES HOMMES - CHE 6000057524 NGO TERRE DES HOMMES-CHE 2.072.069 0,24% 
TERRE DES HOMMES (TDH) - ITA 6000057918 NGO FONDAZIONE TERRE DES HOMMES ITALIA 
ONLUS 1.654.286 0,19% 
TRIANGLE 6000055141 NGO TRIANGLE Génération Humanitaire, (FR) 3.251.975 0,37% 
TROCAIRE 6000057559 NGO Trocaire, (IRL) 240.000 0,03% 
TSF, FRANCE 6000055567 NGO TELECOMS SANS FRONTIERES 98.270 0,01% 
UCODEP__298 6000060459 NGO Unity and Cooperation for Development of Peoples 749.997 0,09% 
UNCHS - HABITAT 6000068998 UN United Nations Human Settlements Programme 349.783 0,04% 
UNDP-PNUD 6000055554 UN UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME 5.743.316 0,66% 
UNFPA 6000055534 UN UNITED NATIONS POPULATION FUND 330.000 0,04% 
UNHCR 6000055529 UN UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR 
REFUGEES - BELGIUM 53.545.034 6,11% 
UNICEF 6000055643 UN UNICEF 32.572.031 3,72% 
UNRWA 6000067513 UN UNITED NATIONS RELIEF  AND WORKS AGENCY 
FOR PALESTINE REFUGEES IN NEAR EAST 38.000.000 4,34% 
 
EN 129   EN Partner's short name ABAC key Partner's 
category 
code Partner's long name Amount 
Contract % 
VOICE ASBL 6000108161 NGO VOLUNTARY ORGANISATIONS IN 
COOPERATION IN EMERGENCIES 185.774 0,02% 
VSF - BE 6000055036 NGO Vétérinaires Sans Frontières-  Belgique - Dierenartsen 
Zonder Grenzen - Belgie um 1.718.987 0,20% 
VSF G 6000118639 NGO Tierärzte ohne Grenzen e.V. 1.700.000 0,19% 
WA-UK 6000073643 NGO Welfare Association 300.000 0,03% 
WFP-PAM 6000067587 UN WORLD FOOD PROGRAM 228.034.945 26,04% 
WHO 6000053109 UN WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION - 
ORGANISATION MONDIA LE DE LA SANTE 10.239.849 1,17% 
WORLD VISION DEU 6000053871 NGO WORLD VISION, (DEU) 1.850.000 0,21% 
WORLD VISION - UK 6000055982 NGO WORLD VISION - UK 4.567.922 0,52% 
ZOA 6000054025 NGO ZOA-Vluchtelingenzorg 3.449.197 0,39% 
TOTAL  875.751.163 100,00% 
 
 
EN 130   EN 5.4. List of contracts for humanitarian  aid operations – Top 25 partners 
CONTRACTS FOR HUMANIT ARIAN OPERATIONS IN 2008 - TOP 25 PARTNERS 
HOPE SHORT 
NAME LE KEY PARTNERS LONG NAME FPA  
Cat. Amount % Cumul  
% 
WFP-PAM 6000067587 W ORLD FOOD PROGRAM  UN 228.034.945 26,04% 26,04% 
ICRC-CICR 6000055654 C OMITE INTERNATIONAL DE LA CROIX -ROUGE CICR) IO 78.865.000 9,01% 35,04% 
UNHCR 6000055529 U NITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR REFUGEES – BELGIUM  UN 53.545.034 6,11% 41,16% 
UNRWA 6000067513 UNITED NATIONS RELIEF AND WORKS AGENCY FOR PALESTINE REFUGEES IN 
NEAR EAST UN 38.000.000 4,34% 45,50% 
UNICEF 6000055643 U NICEF  UN 32.572.031 3,72% 49,22% 
FAO 6000055556 UNITED  NATIONS  – FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION  UN 26.355.614 3,01% 52,23% 
OXFAM - UK 6000055981 O XFAM (GB) NGO 24.923.401 2,85% 55,07% 
ACF - FRA 6000054039 A CTION CONTRE LA FAIM (FR) NGO 21.105.663 2,41% 57,48% 
SAVE THE 
CHILDREN - UK 6000057469 T HE SAVE THE CHILDREN FUND (GBR) NGO 15.565.966 1,78% 59,26% 
GERMAN AGRO 
ACTION 6000055234 D EUTSCHE WELTHUNGERHILFE E .V. NGO 11.999.394 1,37% 60,63% 
IRC - UK 6000055964 I NTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE UK NGO 11.670.139 1,33% 61,96% 
MERLIN 6000071402 M EDIAL EMERGENCY RELIEF INTERNATIONAL (GBR) NGO 10.898.689 1,24% 63,21% 
SOLIDARITES 6000055549 S OLIDARITES , (FR) NGO 10.743.479 1,23% 64,43% 
WHO 6000053109 W ORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION – ORGANISATION MONDIALE DE LA SANTE  UN 10.239.849 1,17% 65,60% 
COOPI 6000055976 C OOPERAZIONE INTERNAZIONALE (ITA) NGO 9.797.382 1,12% 66,72% 
 
EN 131   EN HOPE SHORT 
NAME LE KEY PARTNERS LONG NAME FPA  
Cat. Amount % Cumul  
% 
DRC 6000058798 D ANSK FLYGTNINGEHJAELP  NGO 9.541.588 1,09% 67,81% 
ACH- ESP 6000056743 A CCION CONTRA EL HAMBRE (ESP) NGO 8.964.874 1,02% 68,83% 
DAC AVIATION 
INTL 6000176094 DAC  AVIATION INTERNATIONAL LIMITED  SUP 8.000.000 0,91% 69,75% 
ACTED 6000055547 AGENCE D 'AIDE A LA COOPERATION TECHNIQUE ET AU DEVELOPPEMENT , 
(FR) NGO 7.924.869 0,90% 70,65% 
DANCHURCHAID - 
DNK 6000058809 F OLKEKIRKENS NODHJAELP , (FKN) NGO 7.900.850 0,90% 71,56% 
OCHA 6000067546 UNITED NATIONS , OFFICE FOR THE COORDINATION OF HUMANITARIAN 
AFFAIRS  UN 7.335.000 0,84% 72,39% 
CARE - UK 6000055956 C ARE INTERNATIONAL , UK NGO 7.275.451 0,83% 73,22% 
CONCERN 
WORLDWIDE 6000057507 C ONCERN WORLDWIDE , (IRL) NGO 6.794.998 0,78% 74,00% 
IOM 6000055563 I NTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MIGRATION (INT)   IO 6.777.927 0,77% 74,77% 
CORDAID 6000055816 C ATHOLIC ORGANIZATION FOR RELIEF AND DEVELOPMENT AID (NLD) NGO 6.331.402 0,72% 75,50% 
 
EN 132   EN 5.5. List of contracts for humanitarian aid operations in 2008 - by country and partners 
AFGHANISTAN 32.508.702 BOLIVI A 3.150.000
UNHCR 6.700.000 FAO 1.000.000
ICRC-CICR 6.100.000 STCH 660.000DRC 2.484.958 OXFAM - UK 640.000ACF - FRA 1.764.774 WFP-PAM 270.000MADERA-FR 1.594.466 PLAN IN TERNATIONAL UK 250.000
ZOA 1.449.197 ACH- ESP 180.000
CARE - UK 1.355.460 COOPI 150.000
NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL 1.200.000 BURKINA FASO 6.100.621
ACTIONAID 1.130.731 ACF - FRA 1.630.627
SOLIDARITES 1.096.979 FAO 1.500.000IRC - UK 1.000.000 WFP-PAM 1.000.000GERMAN AGRO ACTION 860.000 MSF - FRA 850.000MEDAIR CH 810.372 SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 719.994
ACTED 750.842 INTERMON 400.000PEOPLE IN NEED 579.698 BURUNDI 16.679.275
AGA KHAN 508.036 UNHCR 4.500.000
MISSION OST - DNK 468.960 WFP-PAM 4.000.000
FAO 355.769 CARITAS - DEU 1.750.000
CARITAS - DEU 350. 000 AVSI 1.400.000
RI-UK 349.999 CORDAID 1.000.000UNDP-PNUD 349.458 FAO 1.000.000IMC UK 348.912 ICRC-CICR 800.000TEARFUND - UK 290.632 SOLIDARITES 780.000NOVIB 279.459 IMC UK 500.000OXFAM - UK 200.000 UNICEF 500.000BBC-TRUST 130.000 CARITAS - BEL 249.275
ALGERI
A 12.196.685 CROIX-ROUGE - DEU 200.000
WFP-PAM 5.600.000 CAMBODI A 2.729.929
PTM 1.750.000 DANCHURCHAID - DNK 500.000
OXFAM - BEL 1.330.000 ZOA 450.000
TRIANGLE 1.250.000 WHO 395.920UNHCR 1.100.000 MEKONG RIVER COMMISSION 353.273CROIX-ROUGE - ESP 430.000 CROIX-ROUGE - DNK 349.594WHO 300.000 UNDP-PNUD 346.361MPDL 212.352 ACTIONAID 334.781MDM - ESP 124.333 CAMEROON 2.000.000
UNICEF 100.000 UNHCR 1.000.000
AZERBAIJAN 1.170.000 WFP-PAM 500.000
UNHCR 670.000 CROIX-ROUGE - FRA 455.000DRC 500.000 MDM - FRA 45.000
BANGLADESH 25.057.815 CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC 4.791.000
WFP-PAM 7.150.000 WFP-PAM 1.000.000
CONCERN WORLDWIDE 3.537.005 SOLIDARITES 791.000DANCHURCHAID - DNK 2.450.000 ACTED 720.000SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 2.360.000 ACF - FRA 700.000ISLAMIC RELIEF 2.199.119 UNICEF 500.000MUSLIMAID 1.764.986 IRC - UK 450.000CARE - UK 1.047.071 AMI - FRA 430.000ACF - FRA 1.009.937 OCHA 200.000WORLD VISION - UK 940.000 CENTRAL AMERIC
A 1.420.000
SOLIDARITES 800.000 UNICEF 545.000
MSF - NLD 500.000 PAHO 440.000
ACTIONAID 450.857 IFRC-FICR 435.000
CHRISTIAN AID - UK 358.840
CARITAS - DEU 340.000
HANDICAP (FR) 150.000PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008 PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008
 
 
EN 133   EN CHAD 31.373.851 WFP-PAM 11.947.000
UNHCR 8.915.034 UNHCR 3.500.000WFP-PAM 8.500.000 UNICEF 2.500.000ICRC-CICR 3.300.000 SOLIDARITES 2.285.000COOPI 1.682.831 MALTESER HILFSDIENST 2.218.990
ACF - FRA 1.304.890 IOM 1.856.924
IRC - UK 1.164.301 PREMIERE URGENCE 1.633.513INTERMON 1.120.000 MERLIN 1.457.660HELP 729.847 OCHA 1.250.000PREMIERE URGENCE 628.700 IRC - UK 736.073ACTED 601.583 MSF - BEL 700.000CARE - FR 587.447 PMU INTERLIFE 640.000
SOLIDARITES 510.000 NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL 616.053
OCHA 500.000 TEARFUND - UK 585.000UNICEF 500.000 OXFAM - BEL 438.000WHO 500.000 MDM - FRA 383.400OXFAM - UK 494.521 MSF - ESP 330.000ASF-BELGIUM 334.697 MEDAIR CH 328.936
CHIN
A 2.000.000 MSF - NLD 326.000
CROIX-ROUGE - NLD 2.000.000 COSTA RIC A 495.000
COLOMBI A 10.327.670 OCH A 495.000
ICRC-CICR 3.500.000 COTE D'IVOIRE 580.000
UNHCR 900.000 ACF - FRA 580.000WFP-PAM 750.000 CUB
A 2.000.000
DIAKONIE 650.000 OIKOS 510.000
SI 550.000 GERMAN AGRO ACTION 500.000
CROIX-ROUGE - NLD 500.000 IFRC-FICR 410.000ACH- ESP 400.000 PAHO 400.000MDM - FRA 400.000 CISP 180.000CROIX-ROUGE - FRA 350.000 DJIBOUTI 4.071.596
OXFAM - UK 350.000 FAO 2.671.596CROIX-ROUGE - ESP 300.000 WFP-PAM 1.000.000
OCHA 300.000 MSF - CHE 400.000
MPDL 250.000 DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1.064.206
SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 250.000 CROIX-ROUGE - ESP 583.435MERCY CORPS SCOTLAND 249.670 INTERMON 400.000PAHO 230.000 ACP 80.771NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL 200.000 EAST TIMOR 2.407.546
CHURCH OF SWEDEN AID 198.000 IOM 863.709
COMOROS 346.397 PLAN INTERNATIONAL UK 373.000
CROIX-ROUGE - FRA 346.397 TRIANGLE 350.000CONGO, DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF 53.974.756 CONCERN WORLDWIDE 300.837
DAC AVIATION INTL 8.000.000 UNDP-PNUD 300.000ICRC-CICR 3.065.000 WFP-PAM 220.000AMI - FRA 2.000.000 ECUADOR 2.850.000
ACTED 1.780.000 UNHCR 850.000
ACH- ESP 1.250.000 WFP-PAM 500.000
FAO 946.498 CARITAS - DEU 300.000COOPI 799.876 COOPI 300.000AVSI 782.195 CROIX-ROUGE - ESP 300.000CARITAS - BEL 500.000 CRIC 250.000DIAKONIE 500.000 INTERMON 250.000
ASF-BELGIUM 318.637 PAHO 100.000
CARITAS - FRA 300.000PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008 PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008
 
 
EN 134   EN EL SALVADOR 1.955.000 GUINEA BISSAU 400.000
CROIX-ROUGE - ESP 450.000 MSF - ESP 400.000CARE - FR 425.000 HAITI 15.119.332
OXFAM - BEL 390.000 OXFAM - UK 3.347.610
OIKOS 345.000 WFP-PAM 2.650.000
PLAN INTERNATIONAL UK 345.000 ACTED 1.080.241
ERITRE
A 4.650.130 MSF - NLD 1.000.000
ICRC-CICR 1.700.000 PSF - FRA/CLERMONT-FERRAND 998.550UNICEF 900.000 FAO 939.895WHO 900.000 ACF - FRA 832.973OXFAM - UK 650.130 TERRE DES HOMMES - CHE 672.069
MDM - FRA 500.000 CARE - FR 669.940
ETHIOPI
A 48.576.919 CROIX-ROUGE - ESP 600.000
WFP-PAM 20.000.000 PAHO 500.000ACF - FRA 3.343.115 MDM - FRA 370.000UNICEF 3.000.000 AVSI 316.693FAO 2.275.200 MSF - FRA 300.000CROIX-ROUGE - FIN 2.000.000 UNICEF 300.000
MSF - BEL 2.000.000 CONCERN WORLDWIDE 284.361
OXFAM - UK 2.000.000 CHRISTIAN AID - UK 214.000SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 1.813.604 TSF, FRANCE 43.000GERMAN AGRO ACTION 1.620.000 HONDURAS 3.585.000
GOAL 1.250.000 WFP-PAM 1.000.000DANCHURCHAID - DNK 1.200.000 GOAL 820.000
MDM - FRA 1.140.000 DANCHURCHAID - DNK 415.000
ICRC-CICR 1.000.000 ASB - DEU 385.000MERLIN 1.000.000 UNDP-PNUD 345.000MSF - ESP 1.000.000 PAHO 220.000CARITAS - DEU 725.000 AYUDA EN ACCIÓN 200.000
CROIX-ROUGE - AUT 700.000 OIKOS 200.000
IRC - UK 660.000 INDI
A 15.706.166
ADRA - DEU 650.000 ACTIONAID 2.349.021WORLD VISION - UK 600.000 SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 2.147.201COOPI 400.000 ADRA - DEU 1.808.000OCHA 200.000 CHRISTIAN AID - UK 1.285.868
GEORGI
A 7.500.000 OXFAM - UK 1.250.577
WFP-PAM 3.000.000 CARE - UK 1.045.268ICRC-CICR 1.000.000 ICRC-CICR 1.000.000
DRC 700.000 CARITAS - DEU 955.187
UNHCR 600.000 UNICEF 913.580CARE - AUT 500.000 ACTED 782.604HALO TRUST 500.000 DANCHURCHAID - DNK 550.000NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL 400.000 CONCERN WORLDWIDE 543.428SAVE THE CHILDREN - NLD 300 .000 MSF - NLD 268.000
WORLD VISION DEU 300.000 HANDICAP (FR) 249.289
PREMIERE URGENCE 200.000 GERMAN AGRO ACTION 204.313GUATEMAL
A 2.265.000 MSF - ESP 178.830
ACH- ESP 550.000 MALTESER HILFSDIENST 175.000COOPI 420.000 INDONESI
A 3.964.614
CROIX-ROUGE - NLD 405.000 OXFAM - UK 625.359
OXFAM - UK 350.000 WFP-PAM 600.000
WFP-PAM 300.000 FAO 548.500
TROCAIRE 240.000 ACF - FRA 520.268GUINE
A 1.300.000 CROIX-ROUGE - DNK 505.622
UNICEF 750.000 CARE NEDERLAND (FORMER DRA) 350.000
WFP-PAM 550.000 CROIX-ROUGE - DEU 302.182
SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 297.395
ASB - DEU 215.288PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008 PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008
 
 
EN 135   EN IRAN 750.000 HANDICAP (FR) 214.300
UNHCR 750.000 ACH- ESP 210.783
IRAQ 19.150.000 ISLAMIC RELIEF 99.984
ICRC-CICR 13.000.000 LIBERIA 18.144.951
UNHCR 5.300.000 OXFAM - UK 3.300.000
OCHA 600.000 MERLIN 1.660.655
PREMIERE URGENCE 250.000 ICRC-CICR 1.500.000
JAMAICA 300.000 WFP-PAM 1.500.000
IFRC-FICR 300.000 ACF - FRA 1.348.500
JORDAN 1.545.000 DRC 1.250.000
CARE - AUT 1.000.000 GERMAN AGRO ACTION 1.000.000
CROIX-ROUGE - FRA 545.000 IRC - UK 1.000.000
KAZAKHSTAN 390.000 UNICEF 990.000
OCHA 390.000 SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 790.000
KENYA 36.776.212 SOLIDARITES 670.000
WFP-PAM 11.500.000 MDM - FRA 600.000CORDAID 3.574.541 UNHCR 550.000
COOPI 2.800.000 ADRA - DK 500.000
CARE - UK 2.642.093 TEARFUND - UK 500.000
OXFAM - UK 2.021.623 MSF - CHE 450.796
ACH- ESP 1.900.000 PMU INTERLIFE 410.000GERMAN AGRO ACTION 1.761.950 WHO 125.000
VSF - BE 1.718.987 MADAGASCAR 5.177.795
SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 1.514.207 CARE - FR 2.378.188
ICRC-CICR 1.500.000 WFP-PAM 500.000
UNICEF 1.500.000 UNICEF 475.000
CAFOD 1.040.025 MEDAIR CH 450.000
MERLIN 752.786 MDM - FRA 417.000
WORLD VISION - UK 750.000 FAO 360.139ISLAMIC RELIEF 700.000 CROIX-ROUGE - FRA 299.960
CROIX-ROUGE - DNK 450.000 ICCO 297.508
WORLD VISION DEU 350.000 MALAWI 630.009
PLAN INTERNATIONAL UK 300.000 GOAL 275.728
KYRGYSTAN 600.000 CHRISTIAN AID - UK 177.606
IOM 300.000 COOPI 176.675UNDP-PNUD 300.000 MALI 1.500.000
LAOS 1.084.050 UNICEF 1.000.000
CROIX-ROUGE - FRA 515.050 WFP-PAM 500.000
IFRC-FICR 369.000 MAURITANIA 1.849.800
WFP-PAM 200.000 UNHCR 1.500.000
LATIN AMERICA 300.000 UNICEF 349.800
IFRC-FICR 300.000 MOLDOVA, REPUBLIC OF 700.000
LEBANON 9.402.104 UNDP-PNUD 700.000
UNDP-PNUD 2.309.497 MOZAMBIQUE 3.139.134
NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL 2.054.962 OIKOS 659.331
PREMIERE URGENCE 1.466.965 UNHCR 500.000MERCY CORPS SCOTLAND 807.969 INTERMON 350.000
ACTED 732.829 UNCHS - HABITAT 349.783
SCD-RB 386.623 UNDP-PNUD 348.000IRD 329.550 CONCERN WORLDWIDE 343.357
CROIX-ROUGE - NLD 288.804 GERMAN AGRO ACTION 308.356
MPDL 277.000 OXFAM - UK 280.307
OXFAM - UK 222.838PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008 PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008
 
 
EN 136   EN MYANMAR 25.275.756 PAKISTAN 2.250.000
WFP-PAM 11.942.630 ICRC-CICR 1.500.000
MSF - CHE 1.500.000 UNHCR 750.000
ACF - FRA 1.492.370 PALESTINIAN TERRITORY, OCCUPIED 75.165.505
GERMAN AGRO ACTION 1.304.310 UNRWA 37.500.000MERLIN 1.290.310 WFP-PAM 9.100.000SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 1.200.000 CARE - AUT 3.495.600IFRC-FICR 800.000 WHO 3.000.000WORLD VISION - UK 800.000 ICRC-CICR 2.900.000
TERRE DES HOMMES (TDH) - ITA 769.286 ACH- ESP 2.315.188
AMI - FRA 645.249 CISP 1.785.000MALTESER HILFSDIENST 545.000 OXFAM - UK 1.520.000CROIX-ROUGE - FRA 540.000 MERCY CORPS SCOTLAND 1.300.000CARE - DEU 535.000 MDM - FRA 1.013.000ICRC-CICR 500.000 COOPI 1.000.000ACTIONAID 414.576 CARE - FR 985.000
ADRA - DEU 380.000 CROIX-ROUGE - DNK 900.000
EMDH 356.525 TERRE DES HOMMES (TDH) - ITA 885.000MDM - FRA 250.000 ACP 750.000MAPACT 10.500 UCODEP__298 749.997
NAMIBI
A 1.249.966 PREMIERE URGENCE 700.000
CROIX-ROUGE - SWE 977.966 SAVE THE CHILDREN - NLD 700.000UNICEF 272.000 CRIC 650.000
NEPAL 9.355.359 ACTED 550.000
WFP-PAM 4.227.195 UNICEF 430.000CARE - AUT 810.019 SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 378.982ICRC-CICR 700.000 MEDICO INTERNATIONAL 349.808MERLIN 550.000 HANDICAP (FR) 335.000MSF - NLD 500.000 OXFAM - BEL 329.400MISSION OST - DNK 450.000 WA-UK 300.000
NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL 410.000 MERLIN 298.530
IRC - UK 350.000 POLISH HUMANITARIAN ORGANISATION 290.000UNFPA 330.000 IOCC - GR 250.000OXFAM - UK 328.145 TERRE DES HOMMES - CHE 250.000HANDICAP (FR) 320.000 DIE JOHANNITER, (DEU) 155.000SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 200.000 PANAM
A 210.000
UNICEF 180.000 UNHCR 120.000
NICARAGU A 2.400.000 UNDP-PNUD 90.000
CARE - FR 590.000 PARAGUAY 1.400.000
GERMAN AGRO ACTION 410.000 INTERMON 564.000ACSUR - MADRID 375.000 COOPI 418.000CROIX-ROUGE - ESP 375.000 CROIX-ROUGE - FIN 232.000CRIC 330.000 STCH 141.000
OXFAM - UK 320.000 UNDP-PNUD 45.000NIGER 8.109.389 PERU 1.000.000
BBC-TRUST 400.254 FAO 1.000.000HELP 1.960.332 PHILIPPINES 8.274.835
MSF - CHE 1.740.000 WFP-PAM 3.900.000FAO 1.500.000 ICRC-CICR 1.500.000CROIX-ROUGE - FRA 973.300 IOM 600.000MSF - BEL 600.000 ACH- ESP 471.743
SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 499.733 CARE NEDERLAND (FORMER DRA) 420.000
MSF - ESP 380.500 OXFAM - UK 352.577TSF, FRANCE 55.270 GTZ 350.000NIGERI
A 490.000 CHRISTIAN AID - UK 290.954
MSF - FRA 250.000 CROIX-ROUGE - DEU 289.263
MSF - NLD 240.000 STCH 100.298PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008 PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008
 
 
EN 137   EN RUSSI A 9.325.648 SUDAN 161.290.857
DRC 2.135.648 WFP-PAM 78.400.120
IRC - UK 1.400.000 ICRC-CICR 13.000.000
UNHCR 1.400.000 UNICEF 7.965.926FAO 700.000 UNHCR 4.200.000ACF - FRA 550.000 MERLIN 3.888.748HELP 500.000 OXFAM - UK 3.842.063IMC UK 500.000 FAO 3.500.000WFP-PAM 400.000 WHO 3.058.929
CARITAS - CZE 320.000 ACF - FRA 2.918.453
HANDICAP (FR) 320.000 SOLIDARITES 2.750.000HAMMER FORUM 300.000 OCHA 2.550.000
UNICEF 300.000 SAVE THE CHILDREN - NLD 2.506.669
MDM - FRA 250.000 IRC - UK 2.300.000
UNDP-PNUD 250.000 TEARFUND - UK 2.046.001
SENEGAL 1.086.050 CORDAID 1.756.861
WHO 1.086.050 TRIANGLE 1.651.975
SOMALI
A 36.375.409 IOM 1.500.000
ICRC-CICR 14.000.000 PSF - FRA/CLERMONT-FERRAND 1.254.092WFP-PAM 7.000.000 CARE - UK 1.185.559ACF - FRA 2.564.020 GOAL 1.180.000UNICEF 2.000.000 MSF - NLD 1.000.000DRC 1.220.980 SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 1.000.000SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 1.201.300 MEDAIR CH 997.637
SOLIDARITES 1.060.500 GERMAN AGRO ACTION 990.000
ISLAMIC RELIEF 925.496 DANCHURCHAID - DNK 985.850SOS KINDERDORF INT. 900.000 CROIX-ROUGE - DEU 963.824VSF G 900.000 NORWEGIAN PEOPLE'S AID 949.900COOPI 850.000 COSV - MILAN 920.846
ADRA - DEU 750.000 CAM 810.000
FAO 700.000 MSF - CHE 806.367
IRC - UK 637.416 COOPI 800.000
CONCERN WORLDWIDE 636.399 VSF G 800.000CARE NEDERLAND (FORMER DRA) 629.298 AMI - FRA 750.000NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL 400.000 CONCERN WORLDWIDE 749.611
SRI LANK
A 14.800.002 ACH- ESP 687.160
ICRC-CICR 3.500.000 AVSI 663.042WFP-PAM 2.000.000 WORLD VISION DEU 600.000
ZOA 1.550.000 IMC UK 550.000
DRC 1.250.002 CROIX-ROUGE - NOR 500.000UNHCR 1.000.000 HANDICAP (FR) 500.000NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL 800.000 INTERMON 500.000GERMAN AGRO ACTION 700.000 MDM - FRA 500.000ASB - DEU 600.000 ADRA - DK 457.000OXFAM - UK 500.000 MALTESER HILFSDIENST 453.018
CARE - DEU 400.000 ISLAMIC RELIEF 400.000
FSD__573 400.000 TERRE DES HOMMES - CHE 400.000HANDICAP (FR) 400.000 REDR 336.757IOM 400.000 IFRC-FICR 300.000OCHA 400.000 HEALTH NET TPO 260.545
ACTED 300.000 MC 203.903
CROIX-ROUGE - DEU 300.000
SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 300.000PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008 PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008
 
 
EN 138   EN SURINAME 400.000 VENEZUEL A 500.000
IFRC-FICR 400.000 NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL 250.000
SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC 7.705.000 UNHCR 250.000
WFP-PAM 5.000.000 VIET NAM 4.127.264
ICMC 855.000 CROIX-ROUGE - FRA 840.000TERRE DES HOMMES - CHE 750.000 SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 613.545ICRC-CICR 600.000 CARE - DEU 545.724UNRWA 500.000 DWF 520.000
TAJIKISTAN 6.244.987 ACTIONAID 499.090
CROIX-ROUGE - NLD 1.349.987 ACTED 346.770
UNICEF 995.000 CROIX-ROUGE - NLD 282.135GERMAN AGRO ACTION 600.000 CROIX-ROUGE - ESP 180.000SAVE THE CHILDREN - NLD 600.000 EMDH 150.000AGA KHAN 450.000 OXFAM - UK 150.000UNDP-PNUD 360.000 YEMEN 1.600.000
CARITAS - LUX 350.000 ICRC-CICR 1.000.000
MISSION OST - DNK 350.000 OXFAM - UK 350.000
OXFAM - UK 330.000 UNHCR 250.000ACTED 280.000 ZAMBI
A 1.597.294
CHRISTIAN AID - UK 200.000 IOM 1.257.294WHO 200.000 UNHCR 340.000FAO 180.000 ZIMBABWE 25.160.980
TANZANI
A 10.755.725 WFP-PAM 7.000.000
UNHCR 5.900.000 FAO 4.687.017CROIX-ROUGE - ESP 2.000.000 UNICEF 3.100.000WFP-PAM 2.000.000 GERMAN AGRO ACTION 1.740.465UNICEF 855.725 HELP 1.559.118
TOGO 650.000 WORLD VISION - UK 1.477.922
UNICEF 650.000 MSF - NLD 1.300.000
UGAND
A 29.263.950 ICRC-CICR 700.000
WFP-PAM 11.185.000 GOAL 655.829UNHCR 2.000.000 CROIX-ROUGE - DNK 591.467DANCHURCHAID - DNK 1.800.000 ACF - FRA 545.736IRC - UK 1.772.349 IFRC-FICR 513.000ICRC-CICR 1.500.000 MSF - ESP 493.150OXFAM - UK 1.317.651 PLAN INTERNATIONAL UK 305.576
ACH- ESP 1.000.000 MDM - FRA 251.700
AVSI 1.000.000 MSF - LUX 240.000FAO 1.000.000 GRANT FACILITY 986.918
GOAL 1.000.000 IRC - UK 200.000UNICEF 1.000.000 VOICE ASBL 185.774MEDAIR CH 800.000 OXFAM - UK 180.000
MEDAIR UK 750.000 SAVE THE CHILDREN - UK 180.000
CARITAS - DEU 700.000 CONCERN UNIVERSAL 141.145WHO 673.950 PUNTO SUD 100.000WORLD VISION DEU 600.000 THEMATIC FUNDING 2.534.000
OCHA 450.000 FAO 1.491.000CONCERN WORLDWIDE 400.000 WFP-PAM 1.043.000
MSF - NLD 315.000 UNSPECIFIED 200.004
UZBEKISTAN 210.000HANDICAP (FR) 210.000 TOTAL CONTRACTS 2008 875.751.163PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008 PARTNERS BY COUNTRY in 2008
 
 
EN 139   EN PART  IX. L IST OF ACRONYMS  
ACTED AGENCE D'AIDE A LA  COOPERATION TECHNIQUE ET 
AU DEVELOPPEMENT 
CSP COUNTRY STRATEGY PAPER (EDF) DIPECHO/DPP DG ECHO’S DI SASTER PREPAREDNESS AND 
PREVENTION PROGRAMME 
DRC DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO DRR DISASTER RISK REDUCTION  DG ECHO HUMANITARIAN AID DIRECTORATE-GENERAL 
EDF  EUROPEAN DEVELOPMENT FUND  ESDP EUROPEAN SECURITY AND DEFENCE POLICY EU EUROPEAN UNION EUMS MILITARY STAFF OF THE EUROPEAN UNION FAFA THE EC/UN FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE 
FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT 
FPA FRAMEWORK PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (BETWEEN 
DG ECHO AND ITS OPERATIONAL PARTNERS)  
GAM GLOBAL ACUTE MALNUTRITION GHD GOOD HUMANITARIAN DONORSHIP HOLIS HUMANITARIAN OFFICE LOCAL INFORMATION 
SYSTEM 
ICRC INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS IDP INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS IFRC INTERNATIONAL FED ERATION OF RED CROSS AND 
RED CRESCENT SOCIETIES 
IHL INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW INGO INTERNATIONAL NON-GOVERNMENTAL 
ORGANISATION 
IOM  INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION FOR MIGRATION 
 
EN 140   EN LRRD LINKING RELIEF,  REHABILITATION AND 
DEVELOPMENT 
MCDA MILITARY AND CIVIL DEFENCE ASSETS MIC MONITORING AND INFORMATION CENTRE MSF MÉDECINS SANS FRONTIÈRES NOHA NETWORK ON HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE NGO NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATION OFDA OFFICE OF U.S. FOREIGN DISASTER ASSISTANCE SITREP SITUATION REPORT SPD STRATEGIC PLANNING DIALOGUE SPP STRATEGIC PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING  TCG TRIPARTITE CORE GROUP UN-CHS-
HABITAT UNITED NATIONS CENTRE FOR HUMAN 
SETTLEMENTS - HABITAT (UNCHS) 
UNDP UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME UNESCAP UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMISSION FOR ASIA AND THE PACIFIC 
UN-FAO UNITED NATIONS - FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 
ORGANIZATION 
UNFPA UNITED NATIONS POPULATION FUND UNHCR UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR 
REFUGEES 
UNICEF UNITED NATIONS CHILDREN’S FUND UNOCHA UNITED NATIONS - OFFICE FOR THE 
COORDINATION OF HU MANITARIAN AFFAIRS 
UN-PAHO UNITED NATIONS - PAN AMERICAN HEALTH 
ORGANISATION 
UNRWA UNITED NATIONS - RELIEF AND WORKS AGENCY 
FOR PALESTINE REFUGEES IN THE NEAR EAST 
UN-WFP UNITED NATIONS - WORLD FOOD PROGRAMME 
 
EN 141   EN UN-WHO UNITED NATIONS -WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION 
UXO UNEXPLODED ORDNANCE WASH WATER, SANITATION AND HEALTH