COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT [] Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council Annual Report on the European Union's Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection Policies and their Implementation in 2011
Date: 2012-09-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU financing, civil defence, food aid, humanitarian aid, interinstitutional relations

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 6.9.2012  
SWD(2012) 254 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

[] 

Accompanying the document 

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council 

Annual Report on the European Union's Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection 
Policies and their Implementation in 2011 

{COM(2012) 489 final}

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
CONTENTS 

1. 

POLICY ......................................................................................................................... 3 

1.1.  Disaster response capacity ................................................................................. 3 
1.2.  Voluntary Corps (EVHAC)................................................................................ 3 
1.3.  Food assistance, nutrition and Food Aid Convention ........................................ 4 
1.4.  Civil protection policy........................................................................................ 5 
1.5.  Good Humanitarian Donorship .......................................................................... 5 
1.6.  Thematic policies ............................................................................................... 6 
1.7.  Aid effectiveness .............................................................................................. 10 

2. 

INTERINSTITUTIONAL RELATIONS AND COOPERATION WITH OTHER DONORS AND 
PARTNERS................................................................................................................... 11 

2.1.  Council Working Group on Humanitarian Aid and Food Aid (COHAFA)..... 11 
2.2.  Council Working Group on Civil Protection (PROCIV) ................................. 12 
2.3.  Cooperation with other EU institutions, donors and partners .......................... 12 

3. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF HUMANITARIAN AID AND CIVIL PROTECTION IN 2011.......... 13 

3.1.  A needs-based approach................................................................................... 13 
3.2.  Top 10 humanitarian crises in terms of funding allocations ............................ 15 
3.3.  Sub-Saharan Africa .......................................................................................... 16 
3.4.  Middle East and Mediterranean ....................................................................... 26 
3.5.  Asia and the Pacific.......................................................................................... 32 
3.6.  Latin America and Caribbean .......................................................................... 45 
3.7.  Worldwide intervention tools........................................................................... 52 
3.8.  Disaster preparedness activities, including DIPECHO .................................... 55 
3.9.  Transition and Resilience ................................................................................. 56 
3.10.  Civil protection................................................................................................. 57 
3.11.  Case studies on launching assistance (humanitarian aid, disaster preparedness 

and civil protection) ......................................................................................... 63 

4. 

AID MANAGEMENT..................................................................................................... 69 

4.1.  Aid delivery methods ....................................................................................... 69 
4.2.  Coordination of humanitarian funds ................................................................ 71 
4.3.  Evaluations ....................................................................................................... 74 
4.4.  Control of the use of funds............................................................................... 75 
4.5.  Visibility of aid and communication................................................................ 77 
4.6.  Security and Security of Operations................................................................. 79 
4.7.  Training initiative — NOHA ........................................................................... 80 

2 

 
 
 
 
1. 

POLICY 

Disaster response capacity 

1.1. 
Following the adoption of the Disaster Response Communication1, which was welcomed by 
the General Affairs Council2, the Commission launched work in 2011 on further developing 
the  European  disaster  response  capacity.  The  Communication  also  paved  the  way  for  the 
Commission's  legislative  proposal  on  the  review  of  Union  Civil  Protection  Mechanism, 
adopted in December 2011.  

In the field of civil protection response, the overall objective is to move away from the current 
system  relying  on  ad  hoc  offers  of  assistance  to  a  pre-planned,  predictable  and  immediate 
system. At present, the deployment of EU civil protection assets is based purely on voluntary 
and ad hoc offers of assistance by Member Sates, but in situations where every hour counts 
Europe  needs  a  system  that  can  ensure  the  availability  of  some  key  assets,  which  can  be 
deployed  instantly  and  which  meet  the  agreed  quality  criteria.  The  Commission's  proposal 
therefore provides for the development a European Emergency Response Capacity in the form 
of a voluntary pool of Member States assets on standby for operations under the Mechanism. 
Furthermore,  it  is  proposed  that  a  24/7  Emergency  Response  Centre  (ERC)  based  on  the 
current MIC will serve as a platform to provide a more effective, efficient and coherent EU 
response whenever and wherever a disaster strikes. For this purpose the ERC will collect real-
time information on disasters, monitor hazards, lead work on preparing the contingency plans 
and coordinate the Union's disaster response efforts. It will have direct links with both civil 
protection and humanitarian aid authorities in Member States, allowing a better coordination 
of  all  in-kind  assistance  and  humanitarian  funding,  and  thus  ensuring  a  fully  joined-up 
approach to European disaster response. 

1.2. 

 Voluntary Corps (EVHAC) 

Work  has  continued  in  earnest  on  the  Voluntary  Corps::  2011  was  the  year  of  DG ECHO’s 
first  25  pilot  volunteers  sent  to  14  countries  worldwide  from  Haiti  to  Indonesia,  from 
Mozambique to Tajikistan - and there are 60 more waiting in the wings for deployment early 
2012. And it was the year of a mood-shift within the sector: the online public consultation run 
between February and May 2011 showed an overwhelming support for the Corps with over 
80% agreeing that the Corps will make a positive contribution to the humanitarian sector.  

After all, no such European-wide programme exists and humanitarian organisations report a 
sore lack of suitable human resources to deliver on their missions in the current period of an 
increasing number, intensity and protraction of crises. At the same time, the European Year of 
Volunteering 2011 highlighted once again that Europeans have volunteering in their DNA: an 
estimated 100 million Europeans do it and when asked where volunteering makes the biggest 
difference, 'humanitarian aid' comes first in the responses with 34%. This concept laid down 
in the Lisbon Treaty3 is thus a positive response to what European citizens aspire to.  

1   COM(2010) 600 final, SEC(2010) 1243 and 1242. 
2   14 December 2010 Conclusions of the General Affairs Council (Council conclusions on the Communication 
from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council - Towards a stronger European disaster 
response: the role of civil protection and humanitarian assistance).   

3   Article 214.5 TFEU 

 
 
                                                 
However,  the  Commission  has  understood  the  messages  from  its  humanitarian  partners. 
Rigorous  selection  and  thorough  preparation  and  training  of  volunteers  are  key  to  ensure 
professionalism of humanitarian aid. Security of the volunteers is paramount. And the Corps 
needs to add real value to the local capacities to have a lasting impact. In this spirit DG ECHO 
has set aside €1 million in 2011 for a first phase  of pilot projects. Commissioner Georgieva 
launched  them  in  June  in  Budapest  conveying  her  conviction  that  the  Corps  will  become  a 
programme  to  build  the  next  generation  of  leaders  in  the  humanitarian  sector.  Save  the 
Children, the French Red Cross and Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO) have been selected 
to run the first three 15-months projects that focus on disaster preparedness and post disaster 
recovery activities. For a second phase of pilot projects in 2012, DG ECHO has announced its 
intention to include disaster response and civil protection as eligible activities to learn what 
added value the Corps can have in these areas.  

The  work  towards  the  key  element  in  this  process  has  equally  started.  In  2012,  the 
Commission  will  propose  a  Regulation  to  be  adopted  by  the  Council  and  the  European 
Parliament concerning the establishment of the Voluntary Corps with an indicative financial 
allocation  of  €210 million  under  the  Multiannual  Financial  Framework  2014-2020.   The 
Commission  has  launched  a  thorough  Impact  Assessment  exercise  in  2011  in  order  to 
compare  different  options  of  how  the  Corps  could  look  like  and  to  be  sure  that  the 
Commission chooses the most cost effective one with the highest impact. 

Last  but  certainly  not  least:  DG ECHO  is  committed  to  finding  an  attractive  name  for  the 
Voluntary Corps. The exercise to coin a catchy name has started and will include in 2012 a 
public online forum to involve the European public 

More up-to-date information can be found on http://ec.europa.eu/echo/aid/voluntarycorps_en.htm 
and on 
http://ec.europa.eu/echo/media/videos/index_en.htm?file=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dWjCD
qtaF0#evhac-budapest-0620114  

Food assistance, nutrition and Food Aid Convention  

1.3. 
In  2011,  the  further  roll-out  of  the  Humanitarian  Food  Assistance  Policy5,  adopted  by  the 
Commission and endorsed by Member States in Council Conclusions in 2010, continued. The 
main  aim  is  to  provide  food  assistance  to  the  most  vulnerable  crisis-affected  people  in  the 
most efficient and effective way. To this end, this policy promotes the best mix of assistance 
tools in order to deliver the most appropriate response in a given humanitarian context. For 
instance,  in  situations  where  safe  and  nutritious  food  is  actually  available  but  vulnerable 
people do not have access to it, the most efficient response is likely to include the distribution 
of cash or vouchers to beneficiaries. In this vein, cash-based assistance was implemented in 
response to e.g. the floods in Pakistan and South East Asia. At the same time, this reflects the 
momentum  cash  transfers  have  gained  within  the  humanitarian  community.  DG ECHO  was 
proactive throughout 2011 in promoting  corresponding  good  practices and programming. In 
this respect, it supported, for instance, initiatives such as the "Cash Learning Partnership" (a 
consortium of six aid organizations) and "Cash For Change" (WFP initiative) .  

In the Sahel and Horn of Africa regions, where there are protracted food crises exacerbated by 
cyclical  shocks,  DG ECHO  continued  to  work  closely  with  the  Directorate-General  for 
Development and Cooperation - EuropeAid (DG DEVCO). Thereby, the methodology of the 

4   DG ECHO's movie on the launch of the pilot projects on 17 June 2011 in Budapest 
5  COM(2010) 126, SEC(2010) 374. 

4 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
"Joint Humanitarian Development Framework" was used, allowing a better understanding of 
the immediate, underlying and basic causes of the food crises. This has paved the way for the 
design  in  2012  of  a  "joint  programme",  where  humanitarian  and  developmental  actions  are 
aligned with a common goal and where the multiple and inter-related causes of the food crises 
will be addressed in a consistent manner by humanitarian and/or development instruments. 

The  problem  of  under-nutrition  attracted  increasing  interest  in  2011.  Thereby  it  was 
recognised  that  for  sustainable  solutions,  the  issue  has  to  be  addressed  through  a  multi-
sectoral approach  (food  security, water/sanitation, health ..) and from both the  humanitarian 
and development angles. 

DG ECHO  continued  the  further  development  of  its  approach  towards  under-nutrition  in 
emergencies.  At  the  same  time,  it  maintained  close  co-operation  with  more  development-
oriented Commission services and contributed for instance to the DG DEVCO-led Reference 
Document "Addressing Under-nutrition in External Assistance". DG ECHO addressed acute 
malnutrition  through  comprehensive  action  for  instance  in  drought-stricken  the  Kenya, 
Somalia and Ethiopia. 

In  2011,  DG ECHO  negotiated  for  the  Commission,  on  behalf  of  the  Union,  the  new  Food 
Assistance  Convention  which  will  replace  the  Food  Aid  Convention  1999.  The  new  Food 
Assistance Convention will facilitate the provision of effective, appropriate and adequate food 
assistance  responses,  consistent  with  best  practices  and  the  European  Humanitarian  Food 
Assistance Policy. 

1.4. 

Civil protection policy 

On 20 December 2011 the Commission  adopted  a proposal to the European Parliament and 
the  Council  on  the  review  of  Union  civil  protection  legislation6.  The  proposal  aims  to 
reinforce  the  Mechanism  in  face  of  the  future  challenges  by  closer  linking  its  different 
elements  (prevention,  preparedness  and  response)  into  a  more  coherent  whole  and  by 
strengthening  the  prevention  and  preparedness  elements,  as  well  as  disaster  response.  The 
related  impact  assessment  assessed  different  options  to  support  and  complement  Member 
States'  disaster  risk  management  actions  by  a  coherent  EU  prevention  policy  framework. 
Several policy options were studied and compared using quantitative and qualitative analysis. 
The options included Commission guidelines on minimum national prevention standards and 
on national disaster risk management plans (RMPs), different levels of EU co-funding, plus 
the setting of a date for completion of RMPs by MS. The options and results were consulted 
with a wide range of stakeholders and formed the basis of the legislative proposal. 

In  the  fields  of  prevention  and  preparedness,  more  emphasis  was  placed  on  preventive 
measures  (the  costs  of  prevention  are  always  considerably  lower  than  those  linked  to 
remediation)  and  on  the  development  of  training  courses  and  simulation  exercises.  Lessons 
learnt meetings were organised for the numerous disasters that occurred in 2011. 

1.5. 

Good Humanitarian Donorship 

The  Commission  continued  to  play  an  active  part  in  the  Good  Humanitarian  Donorship 
(GHD)  initiative,  focusing  in  particular  on  efforts  towards  a  common  needs  assessment 
system. The Commission liaised with the IASC7 Needs Assessment Task Force on behalf of 

6 COM(2011) 934 final, adopted on 20.12.2011. 
7    Inter-Agency Committee Task Force 

5 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
the  GHD.  At  field  level,  DG ECHO  chaired  the  GHD  groups  in  Democratic  Republic  of 
Congo and in the occupied Palestinian territory throughout the year. 

Under  the  Swiss  GHD  chairmanship  in  2010-11,  GHD  focused  on  issues  related  to  the 
protection  of  civilians,  the  safety  and  security  of  humanitarian  workers  as  well  on  quality 
standards  in  humanitarian  action.  In  2011,  Mexico  and  Liechtenstein  officially  joined  the 
GHD, now comprising 39 members.  

1.6. 

Thematic policies  

1.6.1.  Disaster Risk Reduction 

Throughout 2011, the Commission, building on its humanitarian experience, has multiplied its 
efforts  to  reduce  vulnerability  and  increase  resilience  of  the  populations  living  in  high-risk 
regions  in  the  world.  It  has  further  integrated  disaster  risk  reduction  into  its  humanitarian 
activities,  from  the  early  phase  of  disaster  planning  to  disaster  response  and  recovery  while 
strengthening its work in the community-based preparedness sector, advocacy, coordination, 
capacity-building and dissemination of good practices.  

The Commission has also strengthened the coordination and improved the synergies between 
its  Disaster  Risk  Reduction  (DRR)  initiatives  within  and  outside  the  EU  creating,  thus,  the 
conditions  for  setting  up  a  consistent,  effective,  and  strategic  DRR  framework  within  the 
current EU policy.  

Benefitting from the learning and experience DG ECHO has acquired with regards to DRR8, 
and  given  the  international  and  EU  commitments  on  DRR  and  Climate  Change  Adaptation 
(CCA),  the  Commission  started  to  develop  a  comprehensive  DRR  policy  which  also 
encompasses adequate references to adaptation concepts.  

This policy guidance for DRR is an important element in the development of an overall EU 
strategy  for  resilience,  providing  missing  baseline  data  for  existing  DRR  funding  in 
humanitarian  aid  while  establishing  best  practice  in  disaster  risk  reduction  and  positioning 
longstanding  Commission-funded  programmes,  such  as  DIPECHO9,  in  the  context  of 
resilience-building strategies overall. 

Finally,  DG ECHO  has  also  started  the  reinforcement  of  its  human  resource  knowledge, 
organisational and management capacities for an improved DRR integration across its actions 
through the development of a training policy that will be completed in 2012. 

1.6.2. 

 Civil-military relations 

The increasing intensity, frequency and complexity of natural or man-made emergencies has 
led to a growing number of actors in crisis response, besides traditional humanitarian and civil 
protection  organisations.  Furthermore,  the  adoption  of  "integrated"  or  "comprehensive" 
approaches,  as  well  as  "stabilisation"  strategies  to  tackle  conflicts  have  challenged  existing 
in  civil-military  coordination.  Effective  civil-military 
mechanisms  and  experiences 

8   Since the mid 1990s, DG ECHO has significantly contributed to international DRR efforts. Over the past 10 
years, DG ECHO has invested more than €356 million in direct DRR actions (this includes both Dipecho and 
other disaster preparedness actions funded by DG ECHO Humanitarian Budget). 

9   DIPECHO programmes launched by DG ECHO in 1996, focuses on preparedness and small scale mitigation 

and works with a philosophy based on community level and participatory approach.   

6 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
coordination is thus becoming an essential element for the humanitarian community in many 
emergencies.  

The  above  environment,  coupled  with  the  administrative  reorganisation  following  the 
establishment  of  the  European  External  Action Service  (EEAS),  led  to  a  natural  increase  in 
the interaction of DG ECHO with the work of the EEAS Crisis Management structures. More 
leverage,  regular  outreach,  interaction  and  coordination  with  key  civilian,  military  and 
political  actors  allowed  the  Commission  to  preserve  the  vital  specificities  of  humanitarian 
assistance,  while  at  the  same  time  contributing  to  mutual  understanding  and  synergies  with 
other actors and to the coherence of the EU external action when appropriate. 

In 2011, the interaction between DG ECHO and crisis management actors brought a number 
of positive results: 

•  The  planning  and  conduct  of  the  military  operation  EUFOR  Libya,  the  first  EU  CSDP 
(Common  Security  and  Defence  Policy)  operation  in  support  of  the  humanitarian 
community was a positive example of the cooperative model that the Commission wishes 
to  replicate  as  a  standard  practice  –namely,  timely  involvement  of  the  European  in  the 
early stages of the definition of the CMC (Crisis Management Concept) and other planning 
documents until the activation of the CSDP operation and its deployment on the ground. 
The  non-activation  of  EUFOR  Libya  should  not  be  seen  as  a  failure.  The  Operational 
Headquarters  in  Rome  were  set-up  but  full  activation  of  the  operation  was  made 
conditional to needs identified by humanitarian organisations on the ground, as well as to 
the respect of humanitarian principles and the UN Guidelines on the use of Military Assets 
in complex emergencies (MCDA Guidelines). Indeed, designed as a measure of last resort, 
neither  OCHA10  nor  the  humanitarian  organisations  active  in  Libya  did  consider  that  the 
situation  evolved  in  a  way  to  warrant  a  direct  military  assistance  for  the  provision  of 
humanitarian  aid.  The  fact  that  EUFOR  Libya  was  ready  to  be  launched  at  any  time  in 
strict  respect  and  support  of  the  humanitarian  community  and  its  principles  was  highly 
welcomed.  

•  The coordination arrangements between DG ECHO and the Movement and Planning Cell 
of  the  EU  Military  Staff  to  mobilise  military  assets  in  support  of  Community  civil 
protection operations were once more successfully put into practice during the evacuation 
of thousands of third country nationals stranded at the border in Tunisia during the height 
of the Libyan crisis. For the first time, the Movement and Planning Cell of the EU Military 
Staff collocated with the ECHO's Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC). This proved 
to be a valuable innovation that improved coordination and efficiency. 

•  DG ECHO was, for the first time, associated to the planning and conduct of an EU civil-
military  exercise  organised  by  the  EEAS  crisis  management  structures:  CME11  (Crisis 
Management  Exercise  2011).  It  contributed  to  mutual  understanding  of  each  other 
mechanisms  and  specificities,  as  well  as  to  improving  the  culture  of  coordination  during 
the  planning  phase  of  CSDP  actions.  The  Commission  hopes  that  this  will  be  continued 
and reflected also in future real crisis management situations. 

•  DG ECHO  followed  closely  developments  of 

joint  Qatari/Turkish/Dominican 
HOPEFOR  initiative  to  enhance  the  effectiveness  and  coordination  of  the  use  of  MCDA 
for  natural  disaster  response  and  participated  in  the  International  Conference  in  Doha  in 

the 

10   United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs 

7 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
November  2011  where  the  Qatar  Government  announced  the  establishment  of  a  civil-
military  coordination  Centre  of  Excellence  based  in  Doha  to  serve  the  Middle  East  and 
West Asia. 

Finally, the Commission continued to contribute to enhancing civil-military coordination by 
funding the activities of UNOCHA in the civil-military coordination field, including training 
events,  large-scale  multilateral  military  exercises  and  the  dissemination  of  the  existing  UN 
Civil-Military Coordination Guidelines (‘MCDA Guidelines’ on the use of military and civil 
defence assets in complex emergencies and ‘Oslo Guidelines’ for international disaster relief). 

1.6.3. 

International humanitarian law (IHL) and Humanitarian Space 

Strengthened  advocacy  on  IHL,  humanitarian  principles  and  humanitarian  space  was  an 
important  achievement  in  2011.  Exchanges  with  and  outreach  to  key  humanitarian  actors, 
donors and key actors within the European Union have given those issues more visibility. On 
many  occasions  Commissioner  Georgieva  raised  her  concerns  regarding  the  lack  of  respect 
for IHL and the obligations falling on warring parties involved in various armed conflicts, in 
particular vis-à-vis civilian populations.  

in 

involved 

the  preparation  of 

the  EU  pledges  for 

the 
DG ECHO  was  actively 
31st International  Conference  of  the  Red  Cross/Red  Crescent  Movement  (28  November-
1 December  2011).  The  main  objective  of  the  Conference  was  to  strengthen  IHL  and 
humanitarian action by focusing on four areas: (1) Strengthening legal protection for victims 
of  armed  conflicts;  (2)  Strengthening  Disaster  Law;  (3)  Strengthening  local  humanitarian 
action and (4) Addressing barriers to health care. The Conference gave a mandate to ICRC11 
to conduct consultations on possible ways to ensure that IHL remains practical and relevant in 
two  areas:  providing  legal  protection  to  all  persons  deprived  of  their  liberty  in  relation  to 
armed conflict and ensuring; effectiveness of mechanisms of compliance with IHL. 

DG ECHO  has  also  contributed  to  the  organisation  of  the  EU  Annual  Forum  on  Human 
Rights,  which  was  focused  this  year  on  "how  to  boost  the  EU  Guidelines  for  promoting 
compliance  with  IHL".  Participants  highlighted  that  to  enhance  humanitarian  access,  a 
humanitarian  diplomacy  was  needed.  They  also  recognised  the  relevance  of  strengthening 
IHL  dissemination  outside  the  EU,  in  particular  to  armed  non-State  actors  who  have  often 
become main actors in contemporary armed conflict situations, 

Under  the  DG ECHO  Grant  Facility  (2010-2011), more than 120 humanitarian workers and 
policy-makers have been trained in IHL. Two IHL-related projects have been launched under 
the new Enhanced Response Capacity funding: the first one, implemented by the Norwegian 
Refugee  Council  in  consortium  with  the  Overseas  Development  Institute  (ODI),  aims  at 
identifying  how  humanitarian  principles  are  applied  in  practice  by  NGOs,  agencies  and 
donors, with the view to strengthen their operationalisation. The second project, implemented 
by the Swiss Foundation for Mine Action and Geneva Call will provide training in IHL and 
related  humanitarian  norms  to  armed  non  State  actors  and  civil  society  organisations  in 
selected countries, promoting compliance with international norms and principles and hereby 
contributing to the protection of civilians.  

In  order  to  better  steer  its  advocacy  and  its  interventions  in  situations  of  restricted 
humanitarian access, DG ECHO has commissioned a review and evaluation of humanitarian 

11   International Committee of the Red Cross 

8 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
access  strategies  in  EU-funded  humanitarian  interventions,  which  will  be  finalised  by  April 
2012. 

A general concern for the unimpeded delivery of humanitarian aid by the European Union is 
arising as counterterrorism legislations are now having a significant impact on humanitarian 
action.  These  legislations  include  provisions  that  criminalize  the  transfer  of  resources  to 
terrorist  groups  or  individuals,  irrespective  of  the  humanitarian  character  of  such  actions  or 
the absence of any intention to support terrorist acts. This issue  has started being addressed 
with discussions within the EU and key partners, and importantly with the US because of the 
latter's far-reaching anti-terrorism legislation and its extraterritorial application.  

1.6.4.  Gender  

Following  the  2010  Issues  Paper  on  the  gender  dimension  of  humanitarian  aid  and  the 
recommendations  of  the  2009  Gender  Review,  DG ECHO  developed  last  year  a  Gender 
Policy  for  Humanitarian  Aid,  complemented  by  an  Action  Plan,  which  shall  be  adopted  in 
early 2012. 

The  principal  objective  of  a  gender  approach  to  humanitarian  aid,  as  defined  in  the  above 
mentioned  policy,  is  "to  ensure  the  quality,  impact,  efficacy,  relevance  and  efficiency  of 
humanitarian  actions,  by  developing  and  implementing  responses  sensitive  to  social 
vulnerabilities  and  mindful  of  the  different  cultural  backgrounds,  capacities,  coping 
mechanisms  and  contributions  of  women,  girls,  boys,  men  and  other  gender  groups,  and 
adapted  to  fulfilling  their  basic  and  specific  needs".  The  policy  develops  a  framework  for 
action concerning gender integration, gender-focused actions and capacity building.  

The Action Plan of the Gender Policy for Humanitarian Aid proposes concrete steps aimed at 
fully  integrating  a  gender  dimension  in  EU  humanitarian  aid  and  defines  measurable  and 
time-bound  objectives  as  well  as  the  necessary  actions  to  reach  them.  Among  these,  is  the 
development and adoption of a Gender Marker. 

The  adoption  of  the  Equal  Opportunities  Action  Plan,  establishing  recruitment  targets  for 
staff, including in management positions, was a step forward towards the promotion of gender 
balance in DG ECHO. The Plan also commits to improving work-life balance. Furthermore, it 
determines the drafting of a Code of Conduct for field staff, including specific provisions on 
sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA). 

In  2011,  Commissioner  Georgieva  met  on  numerous  occasions  with  partners  engaged  in 
fostering gender equality, such as UN Women and the UN Special Representative on Sexual 
Violence in Conflict. 

For the first time, ECHO's Gender Working Group (GWG) met in its full capacity, bringing 
together  headquarters  staff  and  field  experts  to  discuss  gender  policy  development  efforts, 
practical  tools  for  making  EU  humanitarian  aid  more  gender-sensitive  and  ways  to  better 
integrate sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) into programming. The two-day meeting 
was also an opportunity for exchanges of information and best practices with external actors, 
including the IASC Gender Standby Capacity (GenCap) and DG DEVCO.   

Finally, DG ECHO actively participated in networking and coordination meetings of several 
EU  gender-related  inter-service  working  groups.  DG ECHO  also  contributed  to  the 
negotiations  of  the  Memorandum  of  Understanding  between  the  EU  and  UN  Women.  The 

9 

 
 
 
 
in 
Commission  continued  supporting  capacity  building  projects  related 
humanitarian settings, namely to address SGBV, and has engaged in discussions with partner 
organisations in view of potentially financing new capacity building initiatives. 

to  gender 

1.7. 

Aid effectiveness 

1.7.1.  Needs assessment 

Since  early  2009,  the  issue  of  needs  assessment  has  gained  importance  in  inter-agency 
discussions and is now on the agenda of the main humanitarian aid donors and partners. 

The  IASC  Needs  Assessment  Task  Force  (NATF)  has  approved  a  series  of  guidance 
documents  and  tools  designed  to  support  a  coordinated  approach  to  assessments  in 
emergencies  including  operational  guidance,  humanitarian  indicators,  Multi-Cluster  Initial 
and Rapid Assessment methodology and the Humanitarian Dashboard.  

In  2011  DG ECHO  has  continued  to  support  the  rolling-out  of  the  Needs  Assessment 
Dashboard (including through dedicated capacity building funding), with a view to strengthen 
capacities  and  inter-agency  collaboration  on  this  issue.  All  donors  have  fully  subscribed  to 
these objectives. 

Given the challenges in implementing the tools developed by NATF, donors decided to fund 
ACAPS (Assessment Capacity Project) aimed to support the Needs Assessment process at the 
field  level  through  training,  development  of  a  roaster  of  experts  and  deployment  of  needs 
assessment experts. 

Donors  agreed  on  the  need  to  continue  to  support  the  work  towards  common/joint  needs 
assessment.  DG ECHO  is  in  particular  working  with  other  donors  for  making  sure  that  the 
NATF  Work  Plan  is  implemented  under  the  overall  lead  of  OCHA,  and  with  the  support 
provided through the ACAPS project.   

1.7.2.  Capacity building 

Global capacity building provides for a better and broader humanitarian coverage through a 
more  rapid  and  cost  effective  humanitarian  response.  It  is  achieved  primarily  through  the 
strengthening  of  the  global  humanitarian  system.  This  is  consistent  with  DG ECHO's 
commitment  in  the  European  Consensus  on  Humanitarian  Aid,  and  the  Good  Humanitarian 
Donorship Principles. 

For 2011 and 2012, €24 million has been allocated fo r global humanitarian capacity building. 
This  funding  is  engaged  to  improve  the  promotion  of  the  humanitarian  principles  that 
underpin why we provide humanitarian aid, and with a view to improving access and respect 
for  humanitarian  assistance.  It  also  provides  the  practical  measures  to  improve  the  global 
delivery in humanitarian responses. In all cases, this is done through the global humanitarian 
system and in particular the clusters for their respective sectors. This include e.g.: 

• 

In Logistics, rapid global helicopter deployment through the UN World Food Programme 
(WFP)  both  to  accelerate  and  extend  the  vital  initial  phase  of  humanitarian  responses. 
This is combined with International Federation of the Red Cross/Crescent (IFRC) which 
led improvement  of  the  global  information management  of  what  stocks are available to 
improve the speed and cost of providing aid. 

10 

 
 
 
 
• 

In  Water,  Sanitation  and  Hygiene  (WASH),  improving  the  capacities  and  articulation 
between non-governmental organisations and UN agencies in the Shelter Cluster in order 
to provide rapid response teams and to rapidly follow-through on their work to improve 
responses to sudden onset and large scale emergencies. 

•  For  Shelter,  the  engagement  of  satellite  mapping  technology  coordinated  with  the 
Commission's  Joint  Research  Centre  (JRC)  to  assist  the  Shelter  Cluster  with  needs 
assessment in large scale emergencies.  

•  For  Food  Assistance,  improving  cost-effectiveness  through  scaling  up  the  use  of 
measures  such  as  food  vouchers  rather  than  the  importing  of  bulk  food  over  long 
distances;  and  for  Nutrition,  setting  improved  international  standards  on  how  best  to 
manage acute malnutrition. 

2. 

INTERINSTITUTIONAL  RELATIONS  AND  COOPERATION  WITH  OTHER  DONORS  AND 
PARTNERS 

2.1. 

Council Working Group on Humanitarian Aid and Food Aid (COHAFA) 

The  work  of  COHAFA,  successfully  launched  at  the  start  of  2009,  continued  under  the 
rotating Hungarian and Polish EU Presidencies in 2011. Having a dedicated forum for regular 
policy exchange by Member States and the Commission experts represents a qualitative jump 
in the evolution of a more coherent and co-ordinated EU approach to humanitarian policy and 
action. 

Throughout  the year,  the working group, which brings together mostly representatives from 
EU  capitals,  met  17  times  out  of  which  twice  exclusively  in  response  to  a  sudden  onset 
emergency  (in  Libya  in  March,  Horn  of  Africa  in  July).  There  were  also  two  informal 
meetings of COHAFA in Budapest and Warsaw allowing for an informal exchange of views 
on topics of strategic importance for the work of the working party. 

In  its  first  three  years  of  work,  COHAFA  has  made  progress  in  establishing  itself  as  the 
Council point of reference for questions on humanitarian aid. Input is provided on a regular 
basis  to  other  geographical  groups,  and,  via  these  groups,  to  PSC12,  COREPER13  and  the 
Foreign Affairs or General Affairs Councils.  

On a strategic level, COHAFA has allowed the European Union to increase the coherence of 
the Commission and Member States’ humanitarian aid activities: there is an annual exchange 
on individual humanitarian aid policies and budgets  (this  took  place  in  several  stages  at  the 
beginning of 2011), policies produced by the Commission are often referred to or repeated by 
Member States, individual EU donor activities in specific crises are better coordinated and EU 
positions  on  specific  issues  are  discussed  ahead  of  international  meetings.  On  a  day-to-day 
basis, the work of the group was facilitated by the Commission’s initiative to spread widely 
its  situation  reports  on  specific  humanitarian  crises  and  other  information  products  like 
Factsheets, which have quickly become one major source of information for a wide audience 
of stakeholders. 

12   Political and Security Committee  
13   Permanent Representatives Committee 

11 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Under the Belgian Presidency of the EU, COHAFA undertook to review its mandate, which 
was  considered  to  provide  a  good  basis  for  the  future  work  of  the  group.  However,  in  the 
course  of  this  review  it  was  also  felt  that  COHAFA  should  follow  new  working  methods 
aimed  at  improving  visibility,  outputs,  results  and  impact  of  its  work  even  further.  This 
renewed working methods were endorsed in January 2011 and since then COHAFA has made 
efforts of better linking its work with the one of other Council bodies (geographical working 
parties but also the working parties on development cooperation and civil protection). 

2.2. 

Council Working Group on Civil Protection (PROCIV) 

PROCIV is the Council working group that deals with civil protection policy for the Justice 
and Home Affairs Council. Meetings occurred 9 times in 2011, covering the full range of civil 
protection  policy  and  operational  issues:  response,  preparedness  and  prevention,  risk 
assessment, including discussions on the major disasters that occurred in 2011.  

A  specific  focus  of  the  working  group  was  discussing  and  agreeing  on  3  sets  of  Council 
conclusions that were subsequently adopted as I/A items14 by the Council. These Conclusions 
call on Member States and the Commission to step up existing actions and also to take new 
measures to strengthen disaster management in the EU.  

The  subjects  covered  during  the  Presidency  were  "Integrated  Flood  Management"  (Council 
document  number  9241/11),  and  "Further  Developing  Risk  Assessment  for  Disaster 
Management within the European Union" (Council document number 8068/11).  

During the Polish EU Presidency conclusions were adopted on: "Integrated approach to more 
effective risk, emergency and crisis communication" (Council document number 17122/11).  

2.3. 

Cooperation with other EU institutions, donors and partners 

The  main  activities  focussed  on  following  the  day-to-day  work  of  the  main  European 
Parliament  committees  of  interest  for  the  work  of  DG ECHO  (mainly  DEVE15/AFET16  and 
ENVI17  for  civil  protection  matters).  DG ECHO  worked  closely  with  the  members  of  the 
DEVE  Committee  in  particular  to  raise  awareness  and  interest  in  humanitarian  issues  and 
assisted  the  Parliament's  services  in  organizing  several  field  missions.  Meetings  with  the 
Chair  of  the  DEVE  Committee  (Ms  Eva  Joly),  the  standing  Humanitarian  Rapporteur  (Ms 
Michele  Striffler)  and  other  Members  were  held  to  discuss  humanitarian  policy  and 
operational issues. 

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

Throughout the year Commissioner Georgieva visited a greater number of EU capitals to meet 
her counterparts in the field of humanitarian aid and civil protection. The purposes of these 

14 "I" point means points for information; "A" points where the decision can be made without debate and is often 
on a subject outside the detailed responsibility of the particular group of ministers. 
15  European Parliament Committee on Development 
16  European Parliament Committee on Foreign Affairs 
17  European Parliament Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety 

12 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
visits were the presentation of her newly created portfolio as well as an exchange of views on 
her policy priorities and issues of concern to Member States. Particular emphasis was put on 
contacts with Member States holding or about to hold the rotating Presidency in the Council. 

Commissioner  Georgieva  did  regularly  attend  meetings  of  the  Council  of  Ministers 
(Foreign/Development  and  General  Affairs  Councils)  for  discussions  within  her  portfolio 
either on specific crisis or on policy initiatives such as a stronger European disaster response 
or linking relief with reconstruction and development. The Commissioner did also carry out a 
number of field missions outside of Europe (e.g. Horn of Africa, Myanmar, South-East Asia). 

Throughout  the  year,  DG ECHO  and  Commissioner  Georgieva  maintained  regular  contact 
with relevant international organisations, in particular the UN and the Red Cross Movement, 
on policy development and operational issues. Regular meetings were held with key partners. 
Special  emphasis  was  placed  on  close  cooperation  with  the  UN  Emergency  Relief 
Coordinator Valerie Amos, notably on the "transformative agenda" which the IASC agreed in 
2011 to further strengthen the  international humanitarian system in the areas of Leadership, 
Coordination,  Accountability,  Global  Capacity  for  Preparedness  as  well  as  Advocacy  and 
Communications. 

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

Throughout  the  year  DG ECHO  had  contacts  with  non-EU  donors  both  at  operational  level 
and in the field and at policy level at HQ. These included a strategic dialogue with the US in 
November and other meetings with other key and non-traditional donors.  

DG ECHO  contributed  to  an  outreach  forum  in  Budapest,  co-organised  by  Hungary  and 
OCHA in October for senior level officials from 18 countries of Central and Eastern Europe.  

3. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF HUMANITARIAN AID AND CIVIL PROTECTION IN 2011 

3.1. 

A needs-based approach 

In line with the Treaty, the Humanitarian Aid Regulation and the Consensus, the Commission, 
through DG ECHO, is committed to delivering aid to populations affected by natural or man-
made disasters solely on the basis of need. In order to establish its priorities for intervention 
DG ECHO follows a three-pronged approach: 

(cid:131)  This first relies on the specific country/region evaluation of needs conducted by ECHO 
field experts and the respective geographical units of DG ECHO. This analysis by experts 
not  only  provides  a  first  hand  account  of  crisis  areas,  it  also  gives  an  insight  into  the 
nature and the severity of needs. DG ECHO field  experts  conduct such assessments for 
every  crisis,  as  objectively  as  possible  and  in  close  cooperation  with  the  Commission's 
implementing partners.  

13 

 
 
 
 
(cid:131)  For  DG ECHO's  single  largest  aid  sector  –  food  assistance/nutrition  -  a  specific  food 
insecurity  needs  assessment  is  carried  out  in  the  countries/regions  with  food 
assistance/nutrition  interventions.  The  specific  needs-based  analysis  is  reinforced  with 
reports  from  field  mission,  nutrition  and  food  indicators,  an  assessment  of  the  potential 
funding  from  other  donors  and  the  possible  capacity  and  access  limitations  faced  by 
implementing  partners.  The  sectoral  analysis  is  validated  by  and  dovetailed  with  the 
global needs assessment established by DG ECHO. 

(cid:131) 

In  parallel,  a  global  evaluation  is  carried  out  centrally,  which  compares  countries,  in 
order  to  identify  the  priority  areas  for  DG ECHO  interventions.  This  global  evaluation 
has  two  dimensions:  the  global  needs  assessment  (GNA)  which  categorises  139 
developing countries that have recently experienced a crisis (caused by conflict, natural 
disaster, or the presence of a large number of refugees or displaced people) and the extent 
to  which  their  populations  are  vulnerable  (derived  from  national  indicators)  and  the 
forgotten crisis assessment (FCA). Both the GNA and the FCA are invaluable tools in 
determining impartially and independently where the Commission's aid is most likely to 
be  necessary.  They  also  facilitate  ensuring  parity  and  consistency  in  the  allocation  of 
resources  across  continents  and  countries.  The  methodology  and  results  for  these 
assessments are explained in further detail in the next sections.  

In the final calibration of allocations, other considerations such as access restrictions or lack 
of  handling  capacity  in  the  field  are  also  be  borne  in  mind.  Throughout  this  exercise 
DG ECHO actively communicates and co-ordinates with other relevant actors (humanitarian 
aid  organisations,  EU  Member  States  and  other  donors).  DG ECHO  is  amongst  the  first 
among  the  donor  community  to  establish  and  share  detailed  assessments  and  budgetary 
allocations for the countries/crises in which it intervenes for the year ahead. DG ECHO also 
seeks to engage actively in dialogue throughout the year with other donors, both at HQ and in 
the  field,  on  funding  intentions  in  different  crises,  not  least  in  the  context  of  the  Good 
Humanitarian Donorship initiative. 

Following the trend over the last three years, more than half of DG ECHO’s budget is spent 
on countries which the Global Needs Assessment identifies as extremely vulnerable. In 2011, 
DG  ECHO  identified  22  extremely  vulnerable  countries  or  territories  which  received 
humanitarian aid and food assistance worth 65 % of the final budget dedicated to operations 
in countries and regions. Where allocations are made for aid in countries identified as being of 
medium or low priority, this may be because they experience disasters after the publication of 
the needs assessment.  

Using the FCA methodology, DG ECHO identified 10 crises in 12 countries as ‘forgotten’ for 
the purposes of allocating 2011 funding. This classification is understood to mean the regions 
have been exposed to protracted crisis situations, resulting from conflict; the cumulative effect 
of  recurring  natural  disasters;  or  a  combination  of  both.  Very  low  media  coverage,  lack  of 
donor  interest  and  lack  of  political  commitment  to  solve  the  crisis  mean  a  lack  of 
humanitarian intervention. Forgotten crises often involve minorities, or specific groups within 
a  country  which  is  not  necessarily  considered  as  being  in  crisis.  This  is  why  national 
indicators used to define the vulnerability index or the level of public aid may not reflect the 
specific situation of the cohorts that DG ECHO may pinpoint as being in need of aid. 

14 

 
 
 
 
Among  the  ten  crises  identified  as  priorities  for  2011,  nine  had  already  been  identified  as 
forgotten in 2010: 

–  Rohingya refugees and the Chittagong Hill Tracts crisis in Bangladesh;  
–  Inter-ethnic conflict in Burma (Myanmar);  
–  The related Burmese refugee situation in Thailand;  
–  Civilians affected by internal armed conflict in Colombia; 
–  The conflict in the north of Yemen as well as the refugees from the Horn of Africa; 
–  Sahrawi refugees in Algeria;  
–  Internal armed conflict in Central African Republic; 
–  Bhutanese refugees in Nepal; 
–  Civilians  affected  by  regional  conflicts  in  India  (Kashmir,  north-east  India,  Naxalite 

movement). 

–  Areas  of  Central  African  Republic,  Democratic  Republic  of  the  Congo  and  South 
Sudan affected by the presence of the Lord's Resistance Army: a newly-identified regional 
forgotten  crisis:  a  continued  series  of  brutal  attacks  has  caused  massive  population 
displacements  and  has  thus  aggravated  the  situation  of  people  who  were  already  highly 
vulnerable,  without  attracting  sufficient  media  or  donor  attention  –  media  attention  has 
focused much more on efforts to defeat the LRA rather than on the victims of their attacks. 

3.2. 

Top 10 humanitarian crises in terms of funding allocations 

EU humanitarian funding in 2011 for the top ten recipients was €663 m illion, or 66% of the 
total operational budget resources allocated to countries and regions18.  

s
o
r
u
e
n
o

i
l
l
i

m

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

Sudan 

Pakistan

Somalia

North Africa
(Libyan
crisis)

West Africa
(Ivorian
crisis)

Ethiopia

Kenya

Democratic
Republic of
Congo

Occupied
Palestinian
Territory

Sahel
(excluding
Chad)

Humanitarian aid

Food Aid

European Development Funds

18   Based on final amounts of Humanitarian aid, Food aid and European Development Funds 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
3.3. 

Sub-Saharan Africa 

In 2011, humanitarian aid and food assistance operations were funded for a total amount of 
€556.5  million,  or  48%  of  the  total  budget  mana ged  by  DG ECHO.  The  main  areas  funded 
were Sudan and South Sudan, countries affected by the severe drought in the Horn of Africa, 
R.D. Congo, Sahel and Côte d'Ivoire which received 85% of the amount allocated to Africa.  

The  EU  continued  to  fund  ECHO-Flight,  a  service  for  humanitarian  operators  in  the 
Democratic Republic of Congo, the Republic of Congo and Kenya. 

3.3.1. 

Sudan/South Sudan and Chad, Central Africa 

Sudan and South Sudan   

In 2011 DG ECHO delivered humanitarian aid to over 5 million Internally Displaced People 
(IDPs),  refugees,  returnees,  host  communities  and  nomads  in  Sudan  and  South  Sudan.  In 
Darfur serious protection and security issues remain, with over 2.5 million people still reliant 
on humanitarian assistance, including 1.9 million IDPs, 80,000 people recently displaced by 
violence,  40,000  refugees  from  Chad,  and  500,000  residents  and  nomads.  However,  access 
constraints  because  of  administrative  impediments  and  insecurity  seriously  reduced  the 
presence  of  humanitarian  actors  on  the  ground.  The  extremely  difficult  conditions  under 
which partners have been working inevitably affects the quantity and quality of aid delivered. 
The  outbreak  of  conflict  in  mid-2011  in  South  Kordofan  and  Blue  Nile  States  has  affected 
500,000  people,  on  top  of  the  50,000  refugees  who  fled  to  South  Sudan  and  the  37,000 
refugees who fled to Ethiopia. With very few exceptions, the government has denied access to 
international  organisations  to  assess  the  situation,  carry  out  humanitarian  activities  and 
replenish  diminishing  stocks,  despite  continuous  advocacy  efforts.  The  situation  is  of  grave 
concern,  but  the  lack  of  first  hand  information  makes  it  difficult  to  know  the  extent  and 
severity of the situation. Disputes in the Abyei area have left 100,000 people displaced. The 
East  continues  to  have  some  of  the  worst  malnutrition  indicators  in  the  region,  and  hosts 
88,000  Eritrean  refugees.  The  humanitarian  situation  in  South  Sudan,  which  became  an 
independent country during 2011, worsened with 330,000 conflict-related  IDPs, inter-ethnic 
clashes,  deteriorated  food  security,  high  malnutrition  rates  and  epidemic  outbreaks. 
Integrating  the  357,000  people  who  have  returned  from  Sudan  since  30  October  2010  is 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
proving a massive challenge for many areas and is putting pressure on basic services which 
were already scarce.  

Five  main  objectives  were  targeted  in  2011:  (1)  providing  life-saving  services  to  the  most 
vulnerable populations in Darfur, South Sudan, Eastern Sudan and the Transitional Areas; (2) 
supporting  emergency  preparedness  and  response  (EP&R)  mechanisms  in  areas  of  South 
Sudan  and  Eastern  Sudan  affected  by  conflict,  flooding,  disease  outbreaks,  high  levels  of 
malnutrition and areas of high return – this has proved to be particularly successful in South 
Sudan, with most partners including EP&R components in their interventions, allowing them 
to  respond  to  new  emergencies;  (3)  providing  food  aid  to  highly  food-insecure  populations 
throughout Sudan and South Sudan; (4) supporting common services such as air transport, co-
ordination, logistic services and security assessments – in this way DG ECHO has helped to 
ensure a safer environment for the effective and principled delivery of humanitarian aid and 
(5) advocacy, information and communication activities to secure better access and working 
conditions for humanitarian agencies.  

Out  of  the  allocation  to  Sudan  and  South  Sudan,  general  food  distributions  represented  the 
largest  single  element  both  in  terms  of  overall  funding  and  coverage,  with  3.7  million 
beneficiaries  in  Sudan  and  one  million  in  South  Sudan.  Life-saving  activities  (29%)  were 
supported in the sectors of health, water, sanitation and hygiene, shelter, non food items (NFI) 
and nutrition. Substantial support was given to EP&R (25%) and common services (4.5%).  

Chad 

In 2011 DG ECHO assisted 2.2 million people in response to four major humanitarian crises 
in the country: (1) refugees and IDPs from the conflict in the East and South; (2) the nutrition 
and  food  security  crisis  created  by  the  drought  in  the  Sahel  belt;  (3)  the  influx  of  tens  of 
thousands  of  returning  migrants  from  Libya;  and  (4)  response  to  the  unprecedentedly  large 
cholera outbreak.  

In  the  East  priority  continued  to  be  the  provision  of  life-saving  services  (health,  nutrition, 
food  security,  water/sanitation,  shelter  and  NFIs)  to  267,000  Sudanese  refugees,  131,000 
IDPs, 50,000 returnees and their host communities, whilst aiming to bring these populations 
into self-reliance in the medium term. In the South, given the positive results of LRRD19 and 
the  engagement  of  EU  development  funds,  DG ECHO  has  progressively  disengaged  from 
assistance  to  the  64,000  Central  African  refugees,  providing  only  targeted  assistance  to  the 
most vulnerable in camps and to new arrivals.  

In the Sahel belt nutrition, livelihood and food security support were provided to 1.6 million 
food-insecure  people.  Signs  of  recovery  were  being  reported,  but  then  in  September  a  new 
food crisis broke out due to harvest failure. Without international aid the poorest households 
will be at risk of facing an important food deficit (hunger gap) earlier in the year. The overall 
economic  situation  in  Chad  has  also  been  badly  hit  by  the  Libyan  crisis:  returnees  coming 
back  and  putting  additional  pressure  on  vulnerable  populations,  loss  of  remittances  from 
Chadians working in Libya, and the drying up of the supply of various products from Libya at 
advantageous prices. Over 85,000 Chadian returnees from Libya were supported through the 
provision of transport, health, food, water and protection services.  

19   Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development 

17 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
At  national  level  DG ECHO  continued  to  promote  humanitarian  coordination  and  support 
common  transport  services.  Support  to  Emergency  Preparedness  and  Response  enabled  a 
timely  response  to  the  meningitis,  measles  and  cholera  epidemics  that  hit  more  than  30,000 
people in 2011.  

Burundi and Tanzania 

In  2011,  DG ECHO  assisted  391,000  people  in  Burundi  and  Tanzania  affected  by 
displacement  and  conflict.  The  focus  in  Burundi  was  on  multi-sectoral  assistance  to  21,000 
Congolese refugees in three camps, protection activities for a further 20,000 and finalisation 
of LRRD in the health and nutrition sectors. Primary and secondary healthcare was provided 
to  225,000  people  and  emergency  nutrition  for  25,000  children  under  5.  The  design  and 
implementation of an LRRD strategy in close collaboration with the EU Delegation and other 
development  actors  has  enabled  DG ECHO  to  withdraw  from  all  sectors  other  than  the 
specific  support  to  refugees  in  camps  and  assistance  for  repatriation  and  reintegration. 
Refugees have been unwilling to return to Burundi, so repatriation levels have been low. The 
basic needs of the few who did return from Tanzania were covered in the initial period after 
return.  

In  Tanzania,  food,  health,  water,  education  and  protection  support  was  given  to  the  37,000 
Burundian refugees in Mtablia camp and the 63,000 Congolese in Nyarugusu camp. Funding 
was  also  given  to  maintain  the  logistical  capacity  to  support  the  voluntary  repatriation  of 
refugees to Burundi and DRC, even though repatriation levels from the camps fell to a very 
low level, due to the security situation in DRC and an unwillingness to move on the part of 
the Burundians. In May the Tanzanian government announced its intention to close Mtabila 
camp by the end of 2011 and repatriate its residents to Burundi. After considerable advocacy 
efforts,  in  which  DG ECHO  fully  participated,  this  deadline  was  postponed  to  the  end  of 
2012,  and  the  EU  funded  an  in-depth  individual  interview  exercise,  conducted  jointly  by 
UNHCR and the Tanzanian government, to identify which of the Mtabila residents were still 
in need of international protection. 

Central African Republic (CAR) 

The  overall  humanitarian  context  of  CAR  remains  complex,  with  a  shifting  canvas  of  both 
conflict and post-conflict situations, against a background of chronic poverty, high levels of 
malnutrition, structural collapse, absence of infrastructure and lack of basic services. During 
the  year,  conflict  levels  once  again  increased  as  a  result  of  the  faltering  Disarmament, 
Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) process, the resumption of activities by certain rebel 
movements, cross-border insecurity with Chad and Sudan/South Sudan and LRA attacks. The 
North and the North-East are the areas most affected by fighting between rebel groups – the 
pattern is often unpredictable, with alliances and ceasefires quickly being agreed and broken – 
while the South-East is the area targeted by the LRA. CAR is designated by DG ECHO as a 
forgotten  crisis  and  remains  a  highly  volatile  context,  with  significant  access  and  security 
constraints.  

In  2011  DG ECHO  provided  assistance  and  relief  to  255,000  vulnerable  people,  including 
IDPs, refugees and local people in the most difficult regions of CAR in terms of security and 
access,  namely  the  Central  North,  North-East  and  South-East  of  the  country.  Funding  was 
used to tackle the consequences of population movements, conflicts between rebel groups and 
LRA  attacks.  The  main  sectors  of  intervention  related  to  access  to  safe  drinking  water, 
sanitation facilities and hygiene related assistance, access to basic health care, protection, and 

18 

 
 
 
 
provision  of  seeds  and  tools  and  NFIs.  DG ECHO  also  supported  the  rehabilitation  of 
infrastructures,  humanitarian  coordination  (via  OCHA)  and  the  humanitarian  air  transport 
service (UNHAS). In September 2011 additional funds were made available to respond to an 
outbreak of cholera. 

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) 

Despite some improvements in the humanitarian situation in parts of the East of the country 
(North Kivu and Province Orientale), more than one million IDPs in DRC have been newly 
displaced or are still unable to return home and regain self-sufficiency. In South Kivu parts of 
North  Kivu  and  Haut  and  Bas  Uélé  (Orientale),  security  continues  to  be  disrupted  by  the 
conflicts between numerous armed groups and with the Congolese army (FARDC), generally 
with the objective of gaining or maintaining control over natural resources. Violence against 
civilians  is  perpetrated  with  almost  complete  impunity,  causing  repeated  cycles  of 
displacement. In Haut and Bas Uélé less than 100 fighters from the Lord's Resistance Army 
(LRA)  have  created  such  a  climate  of  terror  that  250,000  people  remain  displaced.  The 
working environment in DRC is extremely difficult: logistics are a constant challenge due to 
the lack of basic infrastructure. Security in some of the zones where DG ECHO operates has 
become  more  and  more  problematic,  with  an  increasing  number  of  restricted  areas  and  a 
substantial number of attacks on humanitarian workers. 

In Equateur province there is now only a residual caseload of IDPs, with many spontaneous 
returns of refugees from Republic of Congo. Unless the security situation changes, this trend 
is likely to continue in 2012. However, infrastructure and access to basic services remain very 
limited in this province. In Kasai Occidental there was a big increase in arrivals of economic 
migrants  deported  from  Angola:  50,000  to  80,000  people,  including  families,  women  and 
unaccompanied children. As well as putting the local population under pressure and affecting 
access  to  basic  services  such  as  health  care,  there  are  serious  protection  concerns  for  these 
people. After having monitored the situation and assisted some partners in 2011, DG ECHO 
will increase its assistance in 2012 to Congolese deported from Angola into Kasai Occidental. 
In  2011  DG ECHO  launched  also  a  substantial  new  nutrition  response  in  non-conflict  areas 
(the Kasais and Bandundu), to address severe malnutrition problems that have been identified 
by  several  surveys  over  the  past  three  years.  This  response  is  complementary  to  actions  of 
other humanitarian donors and of food security development programmes. 

In  a  country  at  the  very  bottom  of  the  Human  Development  Index,  DG ECHO's  response 
strategy  focused  on  the  consequences  of  conflict-induced  displacement  and  on  protection-
related issues. 51% of the funding was allocated to the North East, North and South-Kivu and 
Haut and Bas-Uele. In 2011, across the country as a whole, DG ECHO assisted more than two 
million  people.  The  issues  arising  from  sexual  and  gender-based  violence  continued  to  be 
integrated into all health programmes, as well as there being some more specialised projects 
assisting survivors. Surveillance and response to recurrent epidemics in DRC (mainly cholera 
and measles) and contingency planning were also part of the 2011 programmes.  

DG ECHO  has  strengthened  the  coordination  of  humanitarian  aid  by  supporting  the  role  of 
OCHA and the cluster system in DRC and the Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) group, 
which continues to foster active co-operation among donors. It is extremely relevant, in view 
of the growing number of funding instruments and programmes in place in the Eastern part of 
the country, including those being implemented on the initiative of the Congolese authorities.  

ECHO Flight 

19 

 
 
 
 
Because of the  logistical and security-related access problems in  a number  of countries, the 
Commission implements a flight service focusing on DRC and its neighbouring areas and in 
Kenya. ECHO Flight provides an efficient and reliable service to enable safe and accountable 
implementation of humanitarian projects and post-emergency development projects in remote 
regions, which would otherwise be inaccessible. The service is closely coordinated with other 
humanitarian  air  services  and  avoids  duplication  and  competition  with  safe,  viable 
commercial airlines. The drought in the Horn of Africa and the insecurity in DRC in 2011 led 
to partners asking for an increased level of service. Therefore, DG ECHO increased the flight 
frequency  and  the  number  of  destinations  in  some  regions  and  reorganised  the  routes  in 
others.  In  2011  a  fourth  aircraft  was  brought  into  service  in  order  to  respond  to  the  global 
increase in flight hours.  

A mix of fixed and flexible schedules as well as ad-hoc tasking for special operations 
such as the polio outbreak in Republic of Congo and cargo transport to the Haut and 
Bas Uélé regions of DRC is offered to partners. ECHO Flight enables humanitarian 
NGOs to reduce their inventory stockpiles at field locations, which often run the risk 
of theft by armed bandits or local militias, and increases the quality of humanitarian 
operations  since  supervisory  visits  can  be  conducted  more  frequently.  In  addition, 
having  an  airborne  stand-by  evacuation  capacity  is  for  many  agencies  an  essential 
condition for continuing projects implementation. In 2011 ECHO Flight transported 
more  than  18,826  passengers  and  376.5  tonnes  of  humanitarian  cargo,  all  from 
recognised  international  organisations  implementing  humanitarian  and,  to  a  smaller 
extent, development projects.  

Republic of Congo 

In the course of 2011 the situation of the 100,000 refugees that had fled over the Ubangi River 
from the Equateur Province, the country turned into a care and maintenance situation where 
people developed coping mechanisms and re-established strong links with their former home 
areas.  Therefore,  DG ECHO  ended  its  humanitarian  assistance  in  the  first  half  of  2011  and 
focused  instead  on  improving  the  basic  social  services  in  the  areas  of  return.  In  parallel, 
DG ECHO also made an urgent response to a polio epidemic that killed more than 200 people 
and  affected  more  than  500  others  mainly  in  the  Pointe  Noire  area.  A  rapid  humanitarian 
intervention  involving  several  actors  was  quickly  launched  in  order  to  efficiently  stop  the 
propagation of this epidemic. 

Areas affected by the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) presence 

LRA attacks range over an extensive part of North East DRC (Haut and Bas-Uélé), Eastern 
CAR  and  the  southern  part  of  South  Sudan  (Western  Equatoria),  and  cause  massive 
displacement levels throughout this area. In 2011, this was designated as a forgotten crisis by 
DG ECHO.  In  order  to  raise  awareness  of  the  crisis  and  to  improve  the  coherence  of  the 
humanitarian  response,  a  two-day  Humanitarian  Round  Table  was  held  in  Nairobi  in  April 
2011,  bringing  for  the  first  time  together  fifty  key  humanitarian  actors  from  these  three 
countries and from Uganda, where the LRA originated. A series of detailed recommendations 
were produced and are being applied in the field. Among these, a key point is the need for a 
central  humanitarian  focal  point  for  LRA-affected  areas  and  the  importance  of  more  cross-
border humanitarian responses to the crisis. 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
3.3.2.  Horn of Africa 

In  2011,  a  major  humanitarian  crisis  developed  in  the  Horn  of  Africa  consisting  of  a 
combination  of  high  food  prices,  failed  rains  seasons,  increased  population  displacements 
mainly  caused  by  ongoing  violent  conflict  in  Somalia,  and  restricted  humanitarian  access, 
leading  to  a  rapid  deterioration  of  the  food  security  and  nutritional  status  of  vulnerable 
populations, further aggravated by underlying poverty and reduced coping capacities. In the 
second  half  of  2011,  more  than  13  million  people  were  affected  by  the  crisis.  DG ECHO 
responded  by  mobilizing  more  than  €181  million  to   assist  the  most  vulnerable  population 
groups in the region. 

Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for the Horn of Africa 

Humanitarian Aid 

Food Aid 

2 000 000
23 500 000
13 900 000
31 900 000   

12 360 000
21 770 000
45 100 000

3 000 000   

EDF 

 600 000
15 000 000
12 200 000

Total 

2 600 000
50 860 000
47 870 000
77 000 000
3 000 000

82 230 000

71 300 000

27 800 000

181 330 000

Djibouti 
Ethiopia 
Kenya 
Somalia 
Uganda 

TOTAL 

Djibouti 

Food  insecurity  also  continued  to  persist  in  all  pastoral  livelihood  zones  as  well  as  in  poor 
urban  areas  of  Djibouti.  In  2011  the  EU  funded  activities  to  support  nutrition  programmes, 
food assistance, as well as a smaller caseload of refugees mainly from Somalia.   

Ethiopia 

In Ethiopia, the drought affected some 4.5 million people, mainly in need of food assistance 
and water. In addition, there was a rapid upsurge of Somali refugees into Dolo Ado areas of 
the Somali Regional State of Ethiopia, and an increase in the influx of Sudanese refugees in 
the  western  parts  of  Benishangul-Gumuz  Regional  State.  Whereas  the  former  was  mainly 
caused by conflict, drought and famine in Somalia, the latter was due to military operations in 
the Blue Nile Region of the Sudan. The total number of refugees in Dolo Ado Camps reached 
140,000  at  the  end  of  the  year  and  the  registered  number  of  Sudanese  refugees  was  over 
23,000.  

DG ECHO  focused  its  operations  on  the  support  of  vulnerable  population  groups  in  the 
sectors  of  health,  food  assistance  (including  food  aid,  nutritional  support,  short-term  food 
security and livelihood support), and water/sanitation. Access as well as humanitarian space 
remained  constrained.  In  Somali  Regional  State  and  Gambella,  some  areas  were  only 
sporadically accessible.  

Eritrea 

In  Eritrea,  by  contrast,  the  Government  continued  to  deny  possibilities  for  independent 
humanitarian  needs  assessment  and  project  implementation  in  accordance  with  relevant 
standards.  

21 

 
 
 
 
  
  
  
 
Kenya 

Also  Kenya  faced  a  severe  humanitarian  crisis  mainly  due  to  the  drought,  with  the  highest 
malnutrition rates of the last decade recorded in some areas of the arid lands. In 2011, some 
3.75  million  people  suffered  from  food  insecurity.  Moreover,  a  massive  influx  from  Somali 
people  fleeing  conflict  and  famine  led  to  a  severe  refugee  crisis,  and  resulting  in  the  camp 
Dadaab in North-Eastern Kenya growing into the biggest refugee camp in the world, with a 
population of close to 500,000 people. In addition, over 23,000 new refugees were registered 
in  Kakuma  camp,  Turkana,  and  in  Nairobi.  The  protection  of  refugees  in  the  North-Eastern 
Province  has  become  of  increasing  concern  over  the  year.  Also  the  security  situation  has 
deteriorated  considerably  since  October  2011,  leading  to  temporary  suspensions  of  key 
humanitarian operations in around Dadaab refugee camps.  

The  allocation  for  Kenya  in  2011  was  used  to  support  refugees  (food,  water,  health  and 
sanitation and protection) and contribute to the improvement of food and nutrition security in 
the arid lands. In addition, more than 200,000 children and pregnant or lactating women were 
provided with specialized assistance. Moreover, specific Disaster Risk Reduction programmes 
were implemented accompanied with advocacy efforts to encourage relevant actors to further 
enhance  their  engagement  strengthening  the  resilience  of  vulnerable  populations  in  the  arid 
and semi-arid lands.  

Somalia  

This country represented the epicentre of the crisis. In mid-2011, famine was declared in six 
areas of the country and the number of people in urgent need of humanitarian assistance grew 
to  four  million,  most  of  which  in  the  southern  part  of  the  country  under  the  control  of  Al 
Shaabab/Armed  Opposition  Groups.  The  number  of  people  at  risk  of  starvation  rose  to 
750,000.  Continuous  conflict,  mainly  in  the  South  and  Central  regions,  and  also  involving 
military forces of neighboring countries, led to additional displacements. The number of IDPs 
increased to 1.46 million, the number of Somali refugees in neighbouring contries to almost 
one million. 

Fighting  for  control  of  territory  and  the  targeting  of  humanitarian  assets  and  staff  has 
continued to considerably restrict the implementation of humanitarian actions. In November, 
16  humanitarian  agencies  operating  in  the  Central-South  regions  were  expelled  by  armed 
opposition groups. Key life saving programmes were severely affected.  

DG ECHO  supported  a  large  variety  of  humanitarian  interventions  in  health  care,  nutrition, 
food security, water/sanitation, with a focus on newly displaced persons and drought response 
initiatives. In view of the rapid deterioration of the humanitarian situation over the year, the 
Commission  increased  its  initial  2011  allocation  for  Somalia,  reaching  an  estimated  1.8 
million people.  

While  sustained  aid  contributed  to  push  back  famine  in  most  parts  of  south  and  central 
Somalia,  and  despite  favourable  short  rain  season  at  the  end  of  2011,  millions  of  people 
remained in a severe food security and nutrition crisis.  

Uganda  

The  country  being  only  marginally  affected  by  the  Horn  of  Africa  crisis,  DG ECHO 
interventions remained mainly limited to the strengthening of the integrated management of 

22 

 
 
 
 
the  acute  malnutrition  and  to  reinforce  the  primary  health  care  in  the  Karamoja,  and  to  the 
support of the IDP return process in the Acholi region. While DG ECHO's office in Uganda 
was closed in late 2011, the ECHO Regional Office in Nairobi will continue to monitor the 
situation. 

Throughout the year 2011, the implementation of the 2010 DG ECHO programme on disaster 
risk  reduction  (DRR)  aimed  at  the  strengthening  of  the  resilience  of  vulnerable  population 
groups continued, and contributed to improve the capacities of targeted communities at risk to 
better prepare and protect themselves against natural hazards such as drought.  

An evaluation conducted in 2010 and 2011 concluded that there are substantial funding and 
strategic  gaps  for  paving  the  transition  to  development,  and  recommended  a  number  of 
operational measures in this regard. 

3.3.3.  West Africa  

West  Africa  is  one  of  the  poorest  and  most  under-developed  regions  of  the  world.  The 
Commission allocated €104 million 20 to this region. Most part of the population lives in rural 
areas and relies mainly on subsistence agriculture. Food production in the Sahel relies mainly 
on  erratic  rainfall  and  livestock  is  reared  to  harsh  environmental  conditions  aggravated  by 
climate changes. 

Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for W est Africa

Sahel 
West Africa (Ivorian crisis)
Liberia

TOTAL 

Sahel and coastal States 

Humanitarian Aid

Food Aid

Total

17 300 000
55 000 000
5 000 000

77 300 000

26 700 000

44 000 000
55 000 000
5 000 000

26 700 000

104 000 000

Acute  malnutrition  rates  in  the  Sahel  zone  of  West  Africa  (Burkina  Faso,  Chad,  Mali, 
Mauritania and Niger) remained persistently above internationally recognized alert thresholds, 
with  some  1.5  million  children  under  5  years  of  age  suffering  from  malnutrition.  Food  and 
nutrition insecurity is due mainly to under-investment in agriculture and food production, high 
demographic  growth,  high  illiteracy  rates  especially  amongst  females,  low  access  to  basic 
heath  care  and  clean  water  and  poor  governance.  The  region  is  in  the  front  line  of  climate 
change and victim to international food price movements. The current local systems are not 
able to cope with the shock of a large-scale additional crisis.  

Although the generally good harvest in 2010 provided more food security to many vulnerable 
households, in 2011 there were production losses in some areas caused by heavy flooding and 
crop pests. An important factor aggravating the already worse situation in 2011 has been the 
spill-over  from  the  crises  in  Côte  d’Ivoire  and  Libya  which  have  led  to  the  mass  return  of 
migrant-workers to their Sahel countries of origin, greatly reducing remittances to dependent 
local economies. Threats and attacks by extremist groups have continued to seriously reduce 
humanitarian  assessments  and  access  to  those  in  need.  Kidnappings  of  expatriates  remained 

20  This  amount  do  not  include  the  funding  to  the  sahelian  part  of  Chad  (see  under  Sudan,  South  Sudan  and 

Chad) 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
an increasing  risk.  A surge  in violent incidents in Nigeria attributed to Boko Haram was of 
additional concern. 

DG ECHO action in the Sahel was focused on reducing acute malnutrition of children under-5 
and  pregnant  and  nursing  women  in  a  sustainable  way,  and  to  support  for  the  post-crisis 
livelihoods recovery of the victims of last year's food crisis. Support focused on treating the 
most at risk children (over 200,000 severely malnourished children were treated in 2011), and 
on raising awareness of the multi-sector causes of acute malnutrition.  

DG ECHO's  strategy  continued  to  include  the  objective  of  positioning  the  fight  against 
malnutrition at the centre of government policies and development aid programming. Further 
progress was made in establishing a dialogue with governments and development partners on 
the  need  for  long-term,  sustainable  policies  and  programmes  to  tackle  malnutrition  in  a 
structured way and to encourage the integration of humanitarian action into the national health 
system.  DG ECHO  also  continued  to  support  the  implementation  of  routine  rapid  nutrition 
surveys  to  improve  access  to  reliable  baseline  information  and  to  support  the  Household 
Economy  Analysis  (HEA)  all  over  the  region  to  constantly  get  accurate  levels  of  acute 
malnutrition and information on poorest households. 

In addition to the funds allocated to the fight against malnutrition, an emergency decision was 
adopted in response to the growing food crisis which is expected to cause a massive lack of 
food in 2012. The cause is again low food production as a result of the poor harvest following 
erratic rains during the 2011/2012 agricultural season and rapidly rising food prices.  

Côte d'Ivoire 

Côte  d'Ivoire  suffered  major  humanitarian  consequences  of  the  post-election  crisis,  which 
affected  1.5  million  people  in  Abidjan  and  the  Western  regions  and  led  200,000  people  to 
seek refuge in Liberia, Ghana and Togo.   

In Côte d’Ivoire, medical assistance was provided to the war-wounded victims, with access to 
health facilities, food and clean water/sanitation for the displaced, shelter for those who have 
lost  or  who  have  had  to  flee  their  homes,  protection  for  the  most  vulnerable,  especially 
women  and  children  victims  of  abuse,  eventually  support  to  the  LRRD  transition  to  longer 
term aid and the resumption of basic services. 

While the security situation had already improved on most of the territory upon the election of 
President  Alassane  Ouattara  and  the  creation  of  his  government,  a  very  high  level  of 
insecurity  persisted  which caused  disarray in government  services,  hampered  movements of 
aid workers and negatively impacted on the provision of humanitarian assistance.  

Medical  structures  were  disrupted  by  violence,  shortage  of  drugs,  disruptions  in  supply, 
transport  and  security  constraints,  departure  of  staff  and  were  not  able  to  cope  with  the 
number of victims. Sanitary conditions deteriorated quickly, with electricity cuts in the North, 
destruction  in  the  West,  water  cuts  and  limited  access  to  safe  water.  DG ECHO’s  partners 
provided emergency assistance to the displaced and victims of violence, and supported health 
structures, including vaccination campaigns to prevent the outbreak of contagious diseases.  

The  crisis  also  had  an  immediate  negative  impact  on  late  harvesting  and  commercial  food 
traffic,  resulting  in  increased  food  prices  which  left  hundreds  of  thousands  in  a  situation  of 
food insecurity. DG ECHO initially provided emergency food assistance to cover immediate 

24 

 
 
 
 
needs  and  assisted  households,  especially  among  returnees,  to  restore  their  agricultural 
production or other income generating activities. 

Ivorian refugees in Liberia, Ghana, Togo 

In Liberia, Ghana and Togo, DG ECHO supported shelter and care programmes for Ivoirian 
refugees  accommodated  in  campsites  and  host  families,  despite  the  challenge  of  access  and 
insecurity.  Protection  issues  were  a  concern  in  areas  close  to  the  border  or  the  region  of 
fighting. 

A Tripartite Agreement was signed in August 2011 with Liberia and Côte d'Ivoire to establish 
the  repatriation  modalities  for  Ivorian  refugees.  It  is  foreseen  that  the  majority  of  the 
population displaced had spontaneously returned home by the end of the year. A similar trend 
was seen in parts of the western region with an estimated 100,000 spontaneous returns (out of 
200,000)  from  neighbouring  countries.  DG ECHO  assisted  the  voluntary  repatriation  and 
reinstallation process with the restoration of basic services and livelihood mechanisms as well 
as measures to protect civilians. 

Liberia  

In  2011,  the  overall  situation  remained  difficult  in  Liberia,  due  to  a  dysfunctional  public 
sector lacking qualified human resources and with relevant services provided by international 
aid agencies. This situation  continued to  cause humanitarian  needs  notably  in the sectors of 
health,  nutrition,  as  well  as  in  water/sanitation,  where  the  situation  remained  critical  in 
numerous  rural  communities  as  well  as  in  urban  areas,  especially  Monrovia,  where  regular 
cholera outbreaks occur.  

In order to address this situation, DG ECHO contributed to the provision of safe water, safe 
human waste disposal and health education. DG ECHO also supported paediatric services in 
two hospitals in Monrovia, as well as the rehabilitation and operation of 53 health facilities. In 
the  course  of  2011,  these  latter  programs  were  successfully  handed  over  to  development 
donors. The government and aid agencies also had to respond to an influx of up to 180,000 
Ivorian refugees seeking asylum in the remote eastern part of Liberia. (see also Côte d'Ivoire). 

3.3.4. 

Southern Africa 

The funding for this region in 2011 was €10  million, totally dedicated to Zimbabwe. 

Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for Southern Africa  

Humanitarian Aid 

Total 

10 000 000

10 000 000

10 000 000

10 000 000

Zimbabwe 

TOTAL  

Zimbabwe 

The  humanitarian  situation  in  Zimbabwe  further  stabilized  in  2011,  enabling  DG ECHO  to 
continue its approach of gradually phasing out its assistance to the country, and to reduce its 
allocation. The assistance included emergency assistance for newly displaced, returnees and 
deportees.  DG ECHO  also  remained  one  of  the  largest  donors  in  the  areas  of  health, 
water/sanitation  in  Zimbabwe,  promoting  an  integrated  public  health  approach  aimed  at 
tackling  potential  epidemics  like  cholera,  measles  or  typhoid.  Significant  investments  were 

25 

 
 
 
 
  
made  in  disease  surveillance  and  early  warning  systems  as  well  as  in  emergency  treatment 
facilities to be used during outbreaks. DG ECHO has also engaged in improvement of urban 
water  supply  facilities  of  the  areas  more  at  risk  and  supported  food  security  interventions 
aimed  at  improving  diet  diversity  and  additional  sources  of  income  for  the  most  vulnerable 
segments of the population. 

An evaluation of the response to the cholera epidemics in Zimbabwe was carried out in 2011. 
taken,  and 
The  evaluation  highlighted 
recommended that further efforts should be made during the transition process to consolidate 
the Health institutions progress achieved during the cholera crisis. 

the  urgency  measures 

the  effectiveness  of 

Regional action in Southern Africa - Disaster Risk Reduction 

Although  spared  from  major  disasters  in  2011,  the  Southern  African  region  remained 
extremely vulnerable to natural events, in particular tropical cyclones and floods. In the first 
part of 2011, DG ECHO assisted in alleviating the effects of cyclone Bingiza as well as of the 
floods  in  Madagascar  and  Northern  Namibia.  Moreover,  the  second  Disaster  Preparedness 
(DIPECHO) Action Plan for South-East Africa and the South-West Indian Ocean, launched in 
2010  was  completed  successfully,  with  actions  focussing  on  decreasing  the  vulnerability  of 
local  communities  and  enhancing  relevant  capacities  of  local  institutions  (through  i.e. 
improved  early  warning  systems,  shelter,  as  well  as  better  grains  and  seeds'  production  and 
storage).  

The evaluation on disaster preparedness and disaster risk reduction actions in Southern Africa 
and  the  Indian  Ocean  finalised  in  January  2012  concluded  that  DIPECHO  strategies  in 
Southern Africa addressed the needs of regions and communities particularly exposed to the 
selected priority hazards, and was effective in preparing communities for a local response to 
disasters. However, ensuring the replication of successful projects at other levels, as well as 
the sustainability of the efforts, would require a more strategic approach at country level, with 
a reinforced partnership of DRR and development actors. 

3.4.  Middle East and Mediterranean 

3.4.1.  Middle East 

DG ECHO  continued  to  be  involved  in  preserving  the  dignity  of  its  beneficiaries  in  the 
Middle  East  region  in  2011.  Apart  from  the  Palestinian,  Iraqi  and  Yemen  crises,  the 
Commission also closely monitored the humanitarian situation in Syria since the start of the 
civil  unrest  in  March  2011.  The  Commission  prepared  a  contingency  planning  in  view  of  a 
possible intervention in Syria in case the humanitarian situation further deteriorates. 

Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for the Middle East 

Occupied Palestinian Territory
Palestinian refugees in Lebanon
Iraq Crisis
Yemen
TOTAL 

Humanitarian Aid

Food Aid

Total

19 500 000
4 591 103
10 000 000
25 000 000
59 091 103

26 500 000
1 200 000

27 700 000

46 000 000
5 791 103
10 000 000
25 000 000
86 791 103

Palestinian population in the occupied Palestinian territory and refugees in Lebanon 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
2011  was  marked  by  significant  political  developments  in  the  region  and  in  the  occupied 
Palestinian  territory  (oPt).  These  included  the  start  of  reconciliation  talks  between  the  two 
main Palestinian political factions, Fatah and Hamas, in May, the Palestine application for full 
membership  at  the  United  Nations  in  September,  and  a  subsequent  campaign  to  join 
individual UN organisations (Palestine became member of UNESCO in October). Israel and 
Hamas agreed on a prisoner swap for the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, held prisoner by Hamas 
since June 2006, in exchange for 1,027 Palestinian prisoners. However, the stalemate in direct 
negotiations  between  Israel  and  the  Palestinian  Liberation  Organisation  prevented  any 
political progress. 

There  have  been  some  positive  trends  on  the  ground  such  as  the  Palestinian  National 
Development Plan for 2011-2013 and some economic growth in Gaza, albeit starting from a 
very low base. However, these trends are considered unsustainable as long as the main aspects 
of the Israeli occupation remain in place: the blockade imposed on Gaza since 2007 placing 
severe  restrictions  on  movements  of  people  and  goods  on  land,  air  and  sea;  restrictions  on 
access and movements between Gaza and the West Bank, and within the West Bank to areas 
located behind the Barrier, the Jordan Valley, and to land in the vicinity of Israeli settlements.   

Consequently,  the  situation  of  the  vulnerable  Palestinians  has  not  fundamentally  changed. 
Day-to-day life in Gaza, in Area C of the West Bank and in East Jerusalem continued to be 
characterised by serious protection and human rights issues, and by limited access to essential 
services  and  to  livelihood  opportunities.  In  addition  to  its  impact  on  economic  and  social 
development, the situation of occupation continued to fuel violence with an increase by 30% 
of civilian casualties in Gaza and the West Bank compared to 2010. There was also a rise in 
demolitions, forced evictions, and a 40% increase in the number of settler attacks resulting in 
casualties,  property  and  livelihood  damage  targeting  in  particular  Bedouins  and  herder 
communities in Area C. 

Commissioner  Georgieva  visited  these  communities  in  May  2011.  She  subsequently  raised 
the  issues  of  Bedouin  communities  and  demolitions  with  Israeli  Defence  Minister  Ehud 
Barak.  Concern  was  expressed  about  the  dependence  of  the  populations  on  humanitarian 
assistance and the urgency of offering them more sustainable solutions. 

Operations in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip were also funded, including the response to 
the 2011 drought that threatened the livelihoods of many of the herding communities in the 
West Bank. 54% of the total allocation supported directly the population of Gaza. In addition 
to  humanitarian  actions  with  a  direct  impact  on  people's  living  conditions,  the  Commission 
paid  particular  attention  to  the  prevention  of  violations  of  international  humanitarian  law. 
Close  and  effective  coordination  was  maintained  with  other  donors  to  ensure  that 
humanitarian assistance and other programmes complement each other, in particular Pegase21. 

In Lebanon, 2011 was marked by political tensions around the formation of a government that 
translated into security incidents, notably attacks on UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Forces) 
and  incidents  along  the  Lebanese  and  Israel  blue  line  border.  Refugee  camps  across  the 
country witnessed military and civil unrest, including security threats against UNWRA. Since 
March  2011,  more  than  5,000  people  displaced  from  Syria  arrived  in  Northern  Lebanon, 
many  of  them  staying  with  relatives.  Relief  efforts  were  coordinated  by  the  High  Relief 
Commission and UNHCR and largely supported by international NGOs. 

21  EU mechanism for support to Palestinians 

27 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Living conditions for most Palestinian refugees in Lebanon remain precarious. Two thirds are 
living  in  UNRWA  camps  or  unofficial  settlements  across  the  country  and  are  highly 
dependent on external assistance for their basic services. In 2011 the EU funded humanitarian 
operations benefitting Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territory and in Lebanon.  

Support  to  Palestinian  refugees  in  Lebanon  was  almost  fully  disbursed  to  UNRWA  and 
INGOS22  for  very  urgent  shelter  rehabilitation,  access  to  clean  water/sanitation,  healthcare 
including secondary care for the most vulnerable, psychological support and legal protection.  
Food  assistance  and  shelter  rental  subsidies  were  provided  specifically  to  the  Nahr  El  Bard 
displaced population. 

Iraqi crisis 

Since the 2006 bombing of the Al-Askari mosque in Samarra that triggered sectarian violence 
to a level that forced 1.6 million persons to flee their homes, bringing the post-2003 internally 
displaced population to more than 2.8 million people, some partial returns took place in 2011. 
The International Organisation for Migration (IOM) estimates that approximately 1.3 million 
people remain displaced inside Iraq. In addition, many Iraqis have left the country and as of 
November 2011, the UNHCR was referring to more than 177, 000 registered Iraqi refugees in 
the region.  

Meanwhile the security situation has not improved since the parliamentary election in March 
2010  and  insurgencies,  high  criminality  in  Baghdad,  and  killings  in  the  Northern/Central 
governorates  as  well  as  in  the  so-called  Disputed  Areas,  have  remained  at  a  level  which 
continue  to  affect  development  efforts.  US  troops  withdrew  from  the  country  in  December 
2011. It is still unclear what exact impact this move will have on the overall security situation 
of the country although the beginning of 2012 has witnessed an increase in sectarian violence. 
December  2011  was  also  the  deadline  set  by  the  Government  of  Iraq  for  the  closure  of  the 
Ashraf Camp hosting some 3,400 members of the Iranian opposition movement, the People's 
Mujahidin  Organisation  of  Iran  (PMOI).  Given  the  highly  political  nature  of  the  issue  and 
taking  into  consideration  that  the  core  concern  is  more  a  Human  Rights  issue  than  a 
humanitarian issue, it is considered that there are other more suitable tools to contribute than 
the  humanitarian  budget  line.  It  is  expected  that  the  registration  of  the  residents  and  the 
relocation to Camp Liberty will take place early 2012. 

As a consequence, inside Iraq, large pockets of vulnerable civilians in remote areas are unable 
to  access  basic  services  such  as  safe  water  or  quality  health  care.  The  on-going  sectarian 
violence  is  hindering  the  capacity  of  the  local  authorities  to  provide  services.  Refugees  in 
neighbouring countries have limited access to the labour market or social services and are in 
need for cash to pay for rent and healthcare. The situation is particularly critical for chronic 
patients  (diabetes,  hypertension)  and  tertiary  health  care.  Psychological  problems  are  also 
widespread,  ranging  from  mild  depression  to  severe  mental  health  issues  for  persons  who 
have  witnessed  or  have  been  directly  affected  by  violent  incidents.  In  Lebanon,  protection 
issues are prevalent. This is due to the fact that Lebanon does not recognize Iraqis as refugees. 
They are not granted special status and are treated as migrants.   

In  response  to  these  needs,  DG ECHO  provided  humanitarian  assistance  to  the  vulnerable 
population  of  Iraq  and  to  the  Iraqi  refugees  living  in  neighbouring  countries.  DG ECHO 
response  included  a  significant  protection  component  as  well  as  activities  in  the  fields  of 

22  International non-governmental organisation 

28 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
health and psychosocial support, water/sanitation and direct assistance (cash, non-food items). 
Most  of  the  programmes  focus  on  support  to  refugees  in  Jordan,  Lebanon  and  Syria.  The 
brutal repression of the civil unrest in Syria since March 2011 has had direct repercussions on 
the  living  conditions  of  the  112,000  Iraqi  refugees  living  there,  in  particular  on  the 
psychological  status  of  people  who  had  crossed  the  border  in  search  of  a  protective 
environment and found themselves trapped in a country facing increased violence, triggering 
painfully  familiar  reminisencences  of  the  past.  Inside  Iraq,  insecurity  has  limited  the 
population’s  mobility  and  access  to  basic  services  as  well  as  the  possibility  for  most  aid 
agencies  to  access  and  respond  to  needs.  Support  inside  Iraq  focussed  mainly  on 
water/sanitation and protection activities in the most affected areas (Disputed territories and 
rural Baghdad).  

Yemen 

Conflict in North Yemen as well as the influx of refugees from the Horn of Africa remained 
on the list of forgotten crises in 2011. 

The  political  and  humanitarian  situation  continued  to  seriously  deteriorate  during  the  year. 
Yemen  faced  a  complex  emergency  with  widespread  conflict-driven  displacements  and  a 
slow-onset  crisis  in  food  security  and  malnutrition.  In  the  North,  the  vast  majority  of  long-
term IDPs (316,000 at the end of 2011) remained displaced due to the situation of insecurity, 
damaged  homes,  lack  of  livelihood  opportunities  and  poor  basic  services.  In  the  South, 
continuous fighting between security forces and Islamic militants resulted in the displacement 
of 150,000 people. There was also an increase in the influx of migrants, refugees (93,760 in 
2011) and asylum seekers from the Horn of Africa, driven by conflict and famine. 

Civil unrest, involving high levels of violence, severely disrupted the delivery of basic social 
services,  exacerbating  widespread  and  chronic  vulnerabilities.  Despite  the  signature  of  the 
Transition  Agreement  by  President  Saleh  on  23  November  2011,  the  political  and  security 
situation  remains  very  fragile,  as  some  opposition  groups  did  not  sign  this  Agreement.  The 
country's fragmentation also continued, governmental control being limited to a small part of 
the  territory,  and  the  rest  being  controlled  by  local  tribes,  the  Al  Houthis  in  the  North  and 
Islamist militants in the South. 

Weak  economic  growth,  a  growing  trade  deficit  and  an  unstable  national  currency  exposed 
the population to rising global food and fuel prices. Recent nutritional surveys performed by 
UNICEF  have  shown  alarming  rates  of  malnutrition  in  several  governorates,  Global  Acute 
Malnutrition levels of over 30% and Severe Acute Malnutrition levels of more than 10%, both 
being more than the threshold for emergencies as set by the World Health Organisation. 

The  2011  OCHA  Consolidated  Appeal  was  increased  to  a  total  amount  of  $290  million, 
mainly  to  fund  operations  in  the  food  and  nutrition  sectors  for  the  IDPs  and  refugee 
population.  

In  view  of  the  deterioration  of  the  humanitarian  situation  and  the  growing  needs  in  the 
country,  the  Commission  intervened  to  provide  support  to  the  additional  number  of  people 
affected  by  the  ongoing  conflict  and  the  food  insecurity  crisis.  Operations  managed  by 
DG ECHO  concerned  provision  of  relief  (including  food  distribution,  fight  against 
malnutrition, cash distribution) to IDPs, to refugees and to the population affected by the high 
level of malnutrition. 

29 

 
 
 
 
The EU funded the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in order to 
improve  the  needs  analysis  and  the  efficiency  of  the  aid  provided  and  to  advocate  for  the 
mobilisation of additional funding and access to all those affected by the different conflicts. A 
risk management component was also supported to enhance humanitarian NGO security. 

3.4.2. 

 Mediterranean 

DG ECHO  continued  to  be  involved  in  preserving  the  dignity  of  its  beneficiaries  in  the 
Mediterranean  region  in  2011.  Some  of  the  world's  longest  running  humanitarian  crises 
persist in this region, including the plight of the Sahrawi refugees in Algeria, living in camps 
in  the  Sahara  desert  under  extremely  harsh  conditions.  DG ECHO  also  intervened  in  new 
crises such as the Libyan conflict. A total funding of €69 million was allocated to these crises. 

Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for Mediterranean

Western Sahara
North Africa (Libyan crisis)
TOTAL 

Sahrawi refugees (Algeria) 

Humanitarian Aid

Food Aid

Total

4 000 000
60 000 000
64 000 000

5 000 000

5 000 000

9 000 000
60 000 000
69 000 000

Since 1975, tens of thousands of Sahrawi refugees have been hosted by Algeria in four camps 
in the South-Western region of Tindouf (El Aaiun, Awserd, Smara and Dakhla). The presence 
of the refugees is the result of the conflict between Morocco and the Polisario Front over the 
former Spanish colony of Western Sahara following Spain's withdrawal in 1975.  

In  1991,  Morocco  and  the  Polisario  Front  agreed  to  a  United  Nations  Security  Council 
conflict settlement plan, which proposed a cease-fire and set up the United Nations Mission 
for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) with a mandate to organise a referendum 
for self-determination. 

The living conditions of the Sahrawi refugees, who have been living in these camps for more 
than 35 years, are extremely difficult. They depend completely on humanitarian aid to meet 
their basic needs: food, health, water/sanitation, shelter, hygiene and education. The status of 
Sahrawi refugees remained on the list of forgotten crises for 2011. 

Humanitarian assistance to the Sahrawi refugees continued in 2011, partially through the 2010 
financing decision and the 2011 allocation. Operations concerned food distribution, fresh food 
and  tent  distributions,  medicine  distribution  as  well  as  water  supply,  sanitation  and  hygiene 
item distribution. 

On 22 October 2011, three European humanitarian workers were abducted in the camps by a 
dissident branch of AQIM (Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb) and were not yet liberated by 
the end of 2011. Although international humanitarian staff was evacuated just after this event 
for  several  weeks,  the  relief  distribution  was  not  interrupted  in  the  camps.  Following  this 
abduction, security in the camps has been reinforced by DG ECHO and its partners. One of 
the potential consequences of this kidnapping is the limitation of access to the camps and the 
difficulty to carry out monitoring. 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
North Africa (Libyan crisis)   
On  17  February  2011,  major  political  protests  began  in  Libya  against  the  Gaddafi 
government.  By  late  February,  the  country  descended  rapidly  into  chaos  with  most  of  the 
Northern  Libyan  cities  joining  in  the  revolt.  In  view  of  the  escalating  situation,  the  United 
Nations Security Council adopted two resolutions (1970 on 26 February 2011, and 1973 on 
17  March  2011)  imposing  a  sanctions  regime,  including  an  arms  embargo,  freezing  of  the 
assets of  the  leaders of the Gaddafi  government, and a non-fly zone. The  installation of the 
non-fly  zone  was  followed  by  the  start  of  air  strikes,  carried  out  by  forces  from  a  wide 
international coalition.  

Since the very beginning of the crisis in Libya, the main objective of DG ECHO's intervention 
has been to assist and protect the Libyan population from the effect of the armed conflict and 
to provide the necessary assistance to those directly confronted by the fighting and/or living in 
areas  under  siege,  as  well  as  to  protect  and  assist  vulnerable  groups  such  as  Internally 
Displaced  Persons  (IDP),  Third  Country  Nationals  (TCN)  and  Libyan  refugees  in 
neighbouring countries. DG ECHO has been at the forefront of the humanitarian response to 
the  Libyan  crisis.  It  was  the  first  donor  on  the  ground  both  in  East  and  West  Libya,  which 
allowed  a  close  follow-up  of  the  humanitarian  situation  and  a  swift  response  to  the  rapidly 
evolving needs. 

In  the  first  stage,  right  after  the  onset  of  hostilities,  which  caused  a  massive  outflow  of 
migrant  workers,  the  priority  was  to  provide  funding  to  ensure  that  the  immediate  needs  of 
those  who  had  crossed  the  border  were  covered,  people  of  concern  were  assisted,  and  that 
migrants who were stranded could be repatriated. DG ECHO deployed its humanitarian and 
civil protection experts to the Libyan borders (Tunisia, Egypt, Algeria, Chad) as soon as the 
needs arose. A total of 56,000 Third Country Nationals were repatriated with the assistance of 
DG ECHO humanitarian partners and EU Member States' assets coordinated by the EU Civil 
Protection  Mechanism  and  co-financed  by  the  EU  budget.  More  than  90,000  refugees 
stranded  at  the  borders  received  water,  food,  shelter  and  medical  assistance.  DG ECHO 
supported  also  the  Tunisian  families  who  despite  their  rather  limited  financial  resources 
hosted the largest part of the Libyan refugees. 

As access to larger parts of the country became possible, DG ECHO-supported aid started to 
address  the  needs  also  of  the  populations  inside  Libya.  Since  the  onset  of  the  crisis,  the 
European Union was advocating for unimpeded access for humanitarian workers to the entire 
territory of the country as well as for delivery of aid in an independent and neutral way both 
in  the  East  and  the  West  of  Libya,  regardless  of  people's  affiliations.  Great  importance  was 
given to the protection of the civilian population and the provision of medical support to the 
Libyan  health  sector  and  in  particular  to  the  war-wounded.  Thanks  to  the  efforts  of 
DG ECHO-supported partners more than 9,000 detainees were visited across Libya and more 
than 130,000 Internally Displaced Persons were provided with assistance, in particular some 
70,000 who originate from minority groups. 

As hostilities ceased and international efforts rapidly shifted towards rebuilding of the Libyan 
nation,  DG ECHO  continued  addressing  the  remaining  pockets  of  humanitarian  need  across 
the country. Therefore, DG ECHO priorities for the post-conflict period were defined as mine 
clearance  to  allow  physical  return  and  restart  of  the  economic  activities,  and  protection  of 
those  who  were  perceived  as  having  been  on  the  wrong  side  of  the  revolution  in  order  to 
ensure  their  survival  but  also  to  possibly  facilitate  reconciliation.  The  EU  funded 
humanitarian  mine  clearance  activities  and  mine  risk  education.  As  part  of  protection 
activities  psychosocial  support  is  a  crucial  element  aiming  to  help  heal  the  scars  of  war.  A 

31 

 
 
 
 
special focus is given to children as one of the most vulnerable groups that have suffered from 
the crisis. Child friendly spaces were equipped and staffed in different Libyan cities (Tripoli, 
Misrata, Sirte etc.)  in order to provide a supportive  environment and psychosocial activities 
for children affected by the conflict.  

Although  the  humanitarian  situation  has  significantly  improved  and  the  humanitarian  needs 
are  mainly  covered,  DG ECHO  will  continue  in  2012  to  closely  monitor  the  situation  in 
Libya.  

3.4.3.  Caucasus 

Chechnya crisis 

2011 saw the phasing out of ECHO's presence and funding in the framework of the Chechnya 
crises  which  triggered  the  displacement  of  thousand  of  civilians  during  the  1994-1996  and 
1999-2001  armed  conflicts.  With  the  budget  allocated  in  2010,  the  last  EU  humanitarian 
intervention  focused  on  the  protection  needs  of  the  vulnerable  population  and  its  activities 
came  to  an  end  in  September  2011.  It  also  encompassed  livelihood  support  and  temporary 
shelter activities.  

Despite  a  true  and  solid  improvement  in  Chechnya,  the  number  of  security  incidents 
continued  to  rise  in  2011  in  the  neighbouring  autonomous  republics  of  Dagestan  and 
Kabardino-Balkaria. The main challenges are the inability of protection agencies to carry out 
their  mandates  to  defend  civilians  from  human  rights  violations  as  well  as  the  spread  of 
violent incidents targeting law enforcement officials.  

South Caucasus 

The  situation  of  Georgian  IDPs  from  the  August  2008  conflict  has  been  stabilised.  Basic 
needs are covered and rehabilitation projects are in place. In South Ossetia, the needs are well 
covered  by  the  Russian  Ministry  for  Civil  Defence,  Emergencies  and  Elimination  of 
Consequences of Natural Disasters. Tensions at the administrative borderline between South 
Ossetia and Georgia proper have nevertheless been constant. 

Implementation of the DIPECHO South Caucasus interventions, funded under a 2009 Action 
plan was finalised by mid-2011. This regional programme (covering Georgia, Azerbaijan and 
Armenia) contributed to the awareness raising on disaster risk reduction through the education 
system  and  ensuring  preparedness  at  community  level.  All  stakeholders,  partners,  local 
communities and national administrations, have requested to continue the project. 

3.5. 

Asia and the Pacific 

In 2011, humanitarian aid and food assistance operations were provided in about 20 countries 
in Asia and the Pacific region for a total of €238 million, representing 21% of the total budget 
managed by DG ECHO. 

3.5.1.  Central and South-West Asia 

3.5.1.1.  Central Asia 

DG ECHO has been present in Central Asia since 1993, initially to provide assistance in the 
wake  of  the  civil  war  in  Tajikistan  and  later  to  respond  to  natural  disasters  and  to  support 

32 

 
 
 
 
disaster  preparedness  projects  through  DIPECHO  in  the  five  countries  of  Central  Asia 
(Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan). 

As a region, Central Asia is highly exposed to natural disasters, e.g. earthquakes, landslides, 
floods, mudflows, droughts, avalanches and extreme temperatures. The region is also volatile 
politically,  as  exemplified  by  the  inter-ethnic  violence  that  erupted  in  Kyrgyzstan  in  June 
2010 in which several hundred people were killed, some 300,000 people displaced and with 
serious destruction of property. 

In 2011, on top of monitoring very closely the situation through the Office for Central Asia in 
Dushanbe  (Tajikistan),  DG ECHO  provided  support  through  the  Disaster  Relief  Emergency 
Fund  (DREF)  managed  by  the  IFRC  to  victims  of  the  floods  in  Kazakhstan  in  April  and 
floods  in  Tajikistan  in  June.  Under  the  financing  decision  for  small-scale  humanitarian 
response to disasters, DG ECHO also contributed in support to victims of  the earthquake in 
Kyrgyzstan in July 2011.  

The 2010 DIPECHO projects were also mostly implemented throughout 2011 and came to an 
end only in autumn 2011. 

3.5.1.2.  South-West Asia 

Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for Central and South West Asia 

Afghanistan   
Pakistan 
TOTAL 

Humanitarian Aid 
28 000 000
66 500 000
94 500 000

Food Aid 
6 500 000 
26 000 000 
32 500 000 

Total 
34 500 000
92 500 000
127 000 000

In  Afghanistan  and  Pakistan,  the  humanitarian  crises  are  twofold:  first,  the  'Afghan'  crisis 
affects  not  only  Afghanistan  but  also  Iran  and  Pakistan,  where  almost  three  million  Afghan 
refugees are still living; second, Pakistan is affected by a twin-faceted crisis with still almost 
one million people displaced by the conflict and 6 million affected in 2011 by major floods in 
Sindh and Baluchistan. 

In  Afghanistan,  the  deterioration  of  security  and  the  consequences  of  extensive  military 
operations,  aggravated  by  years  of  drought,  increasing  flooding  and  recurrent  small-scale 
disasters such as earthquakes, resulted in significant levels of humanitarian needs in 2011.  

In Pakistan, following the worst floods in living memory in 2010 affecting almost 20 million 
people, the monsoon rains created another emergency again in 2011, severely affecting Sindh, 
parts of Baluchistan and South Punjab. This second major natural disaster within 2 years has 
exacerbated  the  situation  of  many  communities  that  were  still  recovering  from  the  2010 
floods. Once again, Pakistan is confronting the humanitarian consequences of both conflicts 
(in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas) and natural disasters.  

33 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Afghanistan  

Humanitarian needs increased in 2011. They were mainly related to the consequences of the 
on-going conflict. The number of war-induced IDPs increased by 45% compared to 2010. The 
total  number  of  IDPs  by  30  November  2011  reached  around  454,000  individuals  of  which 
185,000  were  war  induced  cases.  Afghan  refugees  who  returned  from  Pakistan  and  Iran 
benefitted  also  from  assistance.  Finally,  the  highly  food-insecure  population  affected  by 
recurrent natural disasters, including 2011 year's drought in the North and North-East of the 
country and the 2010 severe flooding in the central highlands and East, received also support.  

Considering  the  above  needs,  the  focus  in  2011  was  on  assisting  IDPs  and  the  return  of 
refugees  both  providing  the  latter  with  a  cash  allowance  and  ensuring  basic  livelihood 
support.  Considering  access  difficulties  for  humanitarian  organisations  in  many  parts  of  the 
country, IDP needs remained largely uncovered.  

Under the 2011 Humanitarian Implementation Plan for the Afghan crisis, the EU funded i.e. 
registration and transportation of refugees from Pakistan and Iran to Afghanistan, support to 
reintegration  plus  aid  for  the  most  vulnerable  of  the  remaining  refugees  in  both  countries. 
Protection  assistance  in  Afghanistan  was  provided,  notably  through  UNHCR  and  ICRC  in 
their respective protection mandate roles. Shelter, together with water/sanitation, was another 
significant area of activity within Afghanistan. Given high security constraints and a difficult 
geographical configuration, support for security advisory services as well as for coordination 
of aid agencies and for a subsidised humanitarian flight service was maintained. In 2011, food 
assistance budget line was mobilised, mainly for cash-based projects but also for a support of 
the food security and agriculture cluster and the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification 
tool (IPC) via funding of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). Afghanistan being a 
natural  disaster  prone  country,  mainstreaming  of  Disaster  Risk  Reduction  is  essential  in  all 
funded projects. 

Along  with  various  other  players,  the  Commission  has  continued  to  advocate  the  need  to 
respect  basic  humanitarian  principles  and  International  Humanitarian  Law,  in  particular  for 
humanitarian access and protection of civilians in a country where the line between military, 
private and civilian intervention is blurred, putting at risk the lives of humanitarian workers, 
the smooth implementation of projects and the beneficiaries themselves. The overall security 
situation  in  Afghanistan  remains  volatile  and  extremely  unpredictable.  Abductions  of 
humanitarian  aid  workers  remain  a  threat.  This  seriously  restricts  humanitarian  access. 
DG ECHO's 2011 portfolio of projects was selected on that basis. DG ECHO only managed 
projects that met conditions where partners and DG ECHO could perform implementation and 
monitoring of activities as well. 

Pakistan 

Multiple humanitarian challenges confronted Pakistan in 2011: on-going humanitarian needs 
from the devastating floods of 2010 and the new emergency engendered by the 2011 floods; 
the needs of the conflict- affected population, both those displaced, those who have returned 
and those remaining in their areas of origin; and the remaining 1.7 million Afghan refugees.  

Without having had a chance to recover from the devastating floods of 2010 (which affected 
almost  20  million  people,  damaged  or  destroyed  1.7  million  homes,  killed  1,985  people, 
devastated  the  agricultural  heartland  of  the  country  and  created  unprecedented  damage  to 

34 

 
 
 
 
public and private infrastructure), parts of Pakistan (in particular Sindh, Baluchistan and parts 
of South Punjab) were again affected by very serious flooding, in autumn 2011.  

At the same time, displacement of conflict-affected civilians continued in 2011. The fighting 
between  militant  groups  and  Pakistan's  security  forces,  which  started  in  2007,  continues  to 
affect Baluchistan, the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and Khyber Pahtunkhwa 
Province (KPK). Since March 2011, major displacements have taken place in Mohmand and 
Kurram  agencies  of  FATA,  and  further  displacements  in  a  number  of  other  locations.  It  is 
estimated that one million people remain displaced in FATA and KPK.  

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

Part  of  the  2010  emergency  interventions  were  still  ongoing  in  2011,  when  again  it  was 
necessary for DG ECHO to intervene with a large allocation to cover ongoing relief assistance 
from the 2010 floods, new needs created as a result of the 2011 floods and the needs of the 
conflict affected, including IDPs and people returning to their area of origin.  

Humanitarian  assistance  to  Pakistan  includes  (1)  support  for  emergency  food  assistance, 
managed by several actors including INGOs regrouped in an Alliance and WFP (2) support 
for the ICRC’s protection activities and distribution of food and other essentials NFIs mainly 
to  IDPs  and  people  returning;  (3)  support  for  provision  of  protection,  shelter  and  NFIs  by 
UNHCR to flood and conflict-affected IDPs and shelter by IOM; (4) provision of health care 
by medical INGOs; (5) support for INGO partners to provide water, sanitation and hygiene. 
Support  for  co-ordination  of  humanitarian  assistance  was  channelled  through  UNOCHA.  
Disaster Risk Reduction continued to be strongly encouraged in all interventions. In addition, 
through the DIPECHO Action Plan for South Asia, projects were funded to help enable local 
communities  and  institutions  to  better  prepare  for  and  respond  to  natural  disasters,  thereby 
increasing resilience and reducing vulnerability.  

Throughout  the  year,  the  Commission,  along  with  various  other  players,  continued  to 
advocate  for  the  respect  of  humanitarian  principles  and  International  Humanitarian  Law,  in 
particular for humanitarian space and access for humanitarian workers, protection of civilians, 
voluntary and safe return for IDPs and the right to assistance based on the needs of the most 
vulnerable  rather  than  official  registration  status.  Access  to  some  areas  was  difficult  and 
sometimes not possible for expatriates. The overall security situation in Pakistan remains very 
volatile  and  extremely  unpredictable.  Humanitarian  aid  workers  face  serious  risks  to  their 
lives and have also paid a high price in the form of stress.  

3.5.2.  Central South Asia 

In 2011, the EU funded humanitarian aid and food assistance in response to protracted needs 
and crises as well as to new emergencies in South Asia. Funding was also made available for 
DIPECHO  actions  in  South  Asia  (including  Afghanistan  and  Pakistan),  totalling  €53.8 
million. 

35 

 
 
 
 
Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for Central South Asia

Bangladesh
India
Nepal
Sri Lanka
South Asia
Total

Humanitarian Aid

Food Aid

Dipecho

11 000 000
6 400 000

13 000 000

10 000 000
 200 000
1 200 000

30 400 000

11 400 000

12 000 000
12 000 000

Total
21 000 000
6 600 000
1 200 000
13 000 000
12 000 000
53 800 000

In Bangladesh, destitute people who, two years after cyclone Aila, were still displaced or had 
not been able to recover yet, were assisted. The year's monsoon season generated more than 
one  million  new  victims,  to  whom  food,  water/sanitation, as well as shelter, were provided. 
Despite  access  restrictions  and  a  difficult  overall  working  environment,  the  unregistered 
Rohingya refugees in the South-East continued to receive assistance. 

In  India,  actions  were  funded  to  support  the  victims  of  continued  violence  in  Jammu  and 
Kashmir,  as  well  as  people  affected  by  and  displaced  as  a  consequence  of  the  Naxalite 
conflict in Chhattisgarh. Emergency interventions were also funded in order to support flood- 
affected people, in particular marginalised groups. 

In Nepal, refugees from Bhutan still living in camps continued to receive regular food rations. 
Emergency assistance was also provided in response to fires affecting two of the camps. 

In Sri Lanka, two and a half year after the end of the civil war, IDPs and vulnerable returnees 
received shelter, food, physical rehabilitation and mental health support, as well as still much 
needed protection. Emergency aid was provided to people affected by floods in the Northern 
and Eastern regions. 

Bangladesh 

Bangladesh,  the  world's  most  densely  populated  country,  is  highly  vulnerable  to  natural 
disasters,  in  particular  floods,  cyclones  and  earthquakes,  a  vulnerability  exacerbated  by 
climate  change.  2011  was  not  an  exception  for  Bangladeshi  people  who  had  to  face  the 
outstanding  impact  of  a  long-standing  natural  disaster,  one  new  natural  disaster  and  a 
protracted crisis. 

Cyclone  Aila  hit  the  South-western  coast  of  the  country  on  25  May  2009,  affecting  over 
4 million  people  and  displacing  over  one  million.  For  more  than  two  years,  an  estimated 
230,000 people continued to be displaced from their homes by the after effects of the cyclone, 
being acutely affected for their daily survival. Consequently, DG ECHO managed actions to 
support the early recovery phase of the returnee population and continued assisting a residual 
caseload of 50,000 people whose conditions to recover had not yet been met. 

The scale of the third spell of the 2011 monsoon has affected an estimated one million people, 
displaced  some  200,000  in  the  south  west  region  of  the  country  and  led  to  serious  water 
logging  with  significant  loss  of  livelihoods,  and  house  destruction.  Funds  were  allocated  to 
respond  to  acute  emergency  needs  of  people  displaced  in  the  sectors  of  food  assistance, 
water/sanitation and shelter. 

The protracted crisis affecting the unregistered Rohingya refugees continued to be challenging 
during  2011,  as  a  result  of  humanitarian  access  restrictions  and  a  difficult  local  working 
environment.  One  of  DG ECHO's  partners  even  decided  to  pull  out,  as  working  conditions 
became  untenable.  The  situation  is  directly  impacting  the  humanitarian  situation  of 

36 

 
 
 
 
 
undocumented  refugees,  which  has  further  deteriorated  since  then.  Despite  these  problems, 
DG ECHO support to the two unofficial settlements continued in 2011, through the provision 
of  basic  humanitarian  assistance  (health  care,  therapeutic  feeding,  safe  water  and  sanitary 
conditions, protection and security) to unregistered Rohingyas living in these camps. Recent 
nutritional  surveys  indicate  that  malnutrition  rates  in  the  settlements  and  among  host 
communities  are  beyond  emergency  threshold.  The  case  of  the  Rohingya  refugees  and  the 
Chittagong  Hill  Tracts  crisis  are  designated  as  being  a  forgotten  crisis,  according  to 
DG ECHO's analysis.  

India 

The Naxalite conflict, which involves opposing Maoist fighters (Naxals) and security forces, 
continued affecting 7 States. Chhattisgarh, in particular its southernmost districts, is the worst 
affected  area  and  the  population  (mainly  tribal  people  and  scheduled  castes)  are  caught 
between the conflicting parties. Some areas are totally inaccessible to outsiders and in general 
the  region  is  acutely  lacking  in  basic  social  services,  as  the  authorities  find  it  practically 
impossible to hire doctors or teachers to work in such a risky environment. Tens of thousands 
people  are  displaced,  both  inside  and  outside  the  State,  as  a  consequence  of  the  fighting. 
Several independent reports point to continued serious human rights violations, including the 
use  of  child  soldiers.  With  the  EU  financial  support,  some  95,000  people  benefitted  from 
curative  and  preventive  basic  healthcare  services  in  Chhattisgarh,  while  over  13,000  IDPs 
received emergency assistance in the neighbouring State of Andhra Pradesh.  

Continued  violence  in  Jammu  and  Kashmir  remained  a  matter  of  serious  concern,  given  its 
ongoing serious humanitarian consequences for the civilian population. The underlying cause 
of  the  conflict  remains  unchanged,  and  there  is  little  room  for  optimism.  Funds  made 
available  allowed  approximately  16,000  people  to  receive  psychosocial  support  and 
protection,  including  children  in  orphanages  and  specialised  services  for  people  living  with 
disabilities. These regional conflicts affecting civilians continue to be recognised as being a 
forgotten crisis, according DG ECHO's analysis. 

The country was also affected by serious flooding in the second half of the monsoon season, 
due to a combination of heavy rainfall, breaches in embankments and release of accumulated 
water  in  reservoirs.  The  most  seriously  affected  States  were  Odisha,  West  Bengal,  Uttar 
Pradesh and Assam. DG ECHO supported the rehabilitation of damaged housing and drinking 
water systems and the recovery of livelihoods through cash transfers. This assistance, which 
will  run  into  2012,  will  benefit  approximately  to  126,000  flood-affected  people,  with 
particular attention to marginalised groups. 

At  the  very  end  of  the  year,  Cyclone  Thane  swept  into  southern  India,  causing  extensive 
damage to housing, communications and electricity systems, and widespread areas of standing 
crops.  An  EU  funding  allowed  to  undertake  emergency  repair  of  housing,  and  to  enhance 
access  to  income  and  food  through  cash  transfers.  The  assistance  benefits  over  25,000 
cyclone-affected people in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry. 

As  India  increases  its  capacity  to  manage  its  own  development,  few  international  donors 
remain  active.  DG ECHO  is  the  only  external  donor  providing  significant  funding  in  the 
humanitarian contexts in which it intervenes. 

37 

 
 
 
 
 
Nepal 

The peace agreement signed between the Government of Nepal and the Maoist rebel in 2006 
ended  the  10  years  conflict  which  cost  13,000  lives  and  had  two  major  objectives:  to 
promulgate a new constitution and to bring the Maoist in the mainstream politics. Both remain 
unfinished tasks. Local governance is setting in and the security situation has improved. The 
monsoon season was relatively calm, claiming 77 lives which was much less than in previous 
years.  With  good  monsoon  rain,  the  summer  crop  production  was  up  by  14%,  resulting  in 
fewer food insecure districts. In such a context, DG ECHO completed in 2011 its phasing out 
of  post  conflict  humanitarian  assistance,  as  remaining  needs  are  now  better  addressed  by 
development  stakeholders.  The  Commission  however  remained  engaged  in  addressing  the 
needs of refugees from Bhutan and in Disaster Risk Reduction interventions. 

At  the  end  of  2011,  there  were  still  55,000  Bhutanese  refugees  of  Nepali  origin,  living  in 
camps since 1992, accepted by neither Nepal nor Bhutan, and fully dependent on external aid. 
Bhutanese refugees in Nepal remain on the list of forgotten crises established by DG ECHO. 
In the absence of a political solution, the United Sates and other countries offered resettlement 
options,  and  since  2008  more  than  58,000  refugees  have  been  resettled.  The  resettlement 
programme  brought  fresh  hopes  for  a  possible  solution.  DG  ECHO  has  been  providing 
substantial  contributions  to  the  regular  food  aid  distributions  to  refugees  in  camps  by  the 
World  Food  Programme.  In  2011  this  assistance  was  complemented  by  support  from  the 
Commission's  other departments  for  UNHCR’s  camp  management and basic  services to  the 
refugees. It is expected that a majority of refugees will opt for resettlement. However, around 
13,000  refugees  have  not  expressed  their  desire  to  be  resettled,  or  cannot  be  resettled. 
UNHCR  estimates  that  by  2015  there  will  be  a  residual  caseload  of  10-12,000  refugees, 
whom the Government of Nepal might be willing to integrate.   

In  response  to  major  fires  in  two  refugee  camps  in  March,  DG  ECHO  managed  UNHCR 
project to assist the 5,300 refugees affected. In response to an earthquake that struck Eastern 
Nepal  in  September,  DG  ECHO  intervened  through  the  related  IFRC's  Disaster  Relief 
Emergency Fund operation. 

In terms of access constraints and security, although there is no major risk for humanitarian 
staff, some operations were delayed by blockades stemming from political instability. Access 
to hilly areas, most affected by landslides, is always very difficult and some villages can only 
be reached by helicopter. 

Sri Lanka  

More than two years after the end of the conflict (May 2009) the national economy has picked 
up and a series of elections have confirmed the firm control of the ruling party at all political 
representative levels. The country is presenting a picture of an Asian economic boom backed 
up with a strong confident public stance and ambitious planning for the future. However, this 
picture does not include necessarily the former war affected areas, where serious humanitarian 
needs still prevail.  

Despite  the  implementation  of  large-scale  infrastructure  works  such  as  roads,  schools, 
electricity  and  telecom  networks,  the  population  returning  from  IDP  camps  to  their  home 
areas continue to face serious hardship. The large majority of the original 300.000 IDPs from 

38 

 
 
 
 
the  last  conflict  phase  have  returned  to  their  places  of  origin.  Some  50,000  IDPs23  are  still 
living in camps or with host families. These people, as well as recent returnees face important 
needs, which DG ECHO has helped to address, making it one of the largest single donors for 
humanitarian  aid.  The  objectives  set  by  DG  ECHO  sought  to  support  the  return  process  by 
supplying the unmet needs of highly vulnerable returning individuals in terms of protection, 
humanitarian  demining,  shelter,  food  assistance,  physical  rehabilitation  for  persons  with 
disabilities, and mental health support.  

Protection concerns prevail, especially with a high proportion of returning families headed by 
women  and  the  destruction  of  the  social  fabric.  Gender-based  violence  (domestic  violence, 
child abuse) is on the rise. These factors, combined with the sustained military presence and 
weak  civilian  structures,  have  created  a  fragile  situation  where  the  vulnerability  of  those 
already deemed most vulnerable is exacerbated further. In DG ECHO’s strategy for Sri Lanka 
protection is a guiding operational pillar. Therefore, funding was made available to UNHCR 
for raising the awareness of protection needs among a number of key stakeholders in the areas 
of  return,  thus  working  towards  improving  the  general  protection  environment.  With  a 
number  of  humanitarian  actors  still  present,  and  development  activities  on  the  rise, 
coordination  is  key  to  ensure  that  aid  is  delivered  effectively  to  those  most  in  need.  By 
supporting  the  work  of  OCHA,  ECHO  has  sought  to  ensure  that  coordination  arrangements 
remain in place as we have entered the LRRD transition phase.  

In the first months of the year, intermittent rains in Northern and Eastern Sri Lanka, combined 
with some of the heaviest rainfall in one century resulted in significant flooding and affected 
close to one million people. Over 130,000 people have been displaced to makeshift camps or 
host families whilst access to the affected population was further complicated by rising water 
levels. DG ECHO responded by contributing to the recovery of the flood-affected people in 
the region of Batticaloa in the East of the country. 

The  security  situation  has  remained  stable  since  the  end  of  the  conflict  and  the  main  safety 
risk incurred by partners is the prevalence of mines and UXO in the areas of return. Access to 
the  areas  of  concern  for  DG ECHO  partners  and  donors  has  improved.  There  is  room  for 
further improvement in terms of coordination among the aid actors. 

Regional action in South Asia (including Afghanistan and Pakistan) - DIPECHO 

Given  the  humanitarian  impact  of  recurrent  natural  disasters  in  the  region,  DG ECHO's 
disaster  preparedness  programme  (DIPECHO)  continued  in  South  Asia  focusing  on 
improving the capacities of communities  at risk and on institutions involved in disaster risk 
reduction/disaster management, with the aim to enable them to better prepare for and protect 
themselves  against natural  disasters.  In 2011 the 6th  DIPECHO  Action  Plan  for  South  Asia, 
whose  duration  runs  until  the  end  of  2012,  was  launched  for  actions  currently  being 
implemented in Afghanistan, Bhutan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.  

3.5.3. 

South-East Asia  

South East Asia figures among the most hazard prone regions in the world, in terms of scale, 
recurrence and severity of disasters. In 2011, many countries in the region, including the best-
prepared country Japan, were affected by numerous disasters and the cost incurred in disaster 
damage was the highest ever recorded.  

23   UNHCR data 

39 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
The total funded allocated to this region was €55.3 million.  

Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for South East  Asia

Myanmar (Burma) / Thailand
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK)
Japan
Philippines
South East Asia
Total

Humanitarian Aid

Food Aid

16 000 000

10 000 000
3 000 000
10 000 000
39 000 000

6 250 000
10 000 000

16 250 000

Total
22 250 000
10 000 000
10 000 000
3 000 000
10 000 000
55 250 000

In  March,  a  9.0  magnitude  earthquake  slammed  the  North-East  coast  of  Japan  triggering  a 
devastating  tsunami  on  the  Pacific  coast.  Thanks  to  the  early  warning  system  and  well-
prepared  communities  and  local  capacities,  90%  of  the  habitants  in  the  affected  areas  were 
able to evacuate in time. Nevertheless, the magnitude and severity of the disaster claimed over 
20,000 deaths and contributed to significant economic losses. 

Five major tropical storms struck the Philippines, resulting in widespread damage to property 
and many casualties. In December, several communities in Mindanao were affected by flash 
floods caused by tropical storm Washi. In September/October, two powerful typhoons (Nesat 
and Nalgae) struck, causing devastation on the island of Luzon. In June and July typhoons had 
already  unleashed  floods  on  Luzon  Island  and  in  the  southern  region  of  Mindanao  (an  area 
also  wracked  by  internal  conflict).  Vietnam,  Laos  and  Cambodia  were  also  affected  by 
unseasonably strong rains, with floods causing destruction to life and property in the second 
half  of  the  year.  DG ECHO  had  already  responded  to  severe  floods  in  Lao  PDR  earlier  in 
2011,  via  the  small-scale  response  decision  and  via  IFRC's  DREF  operation.  At  the  end  of 
2011, a response to a malaria epidemic in Attapeu province was provided via the Epidemics 
decision. Thailand saw the worst flooding in 50 years, affecting more than 5 million people, 
damaging vast areas of agricultural land and industry and inundating most surrounding areas 
of Bangkok. Flash floods also occurred in Magway division in Burma/Myanmar. 

In Indonesia, the consequences of the earthquake and ensuing tsunami that struck the remote 
Mentawai  islands  off  the  western  coast  of  Sumatra  in  October  2010,  displacing  20,000 
individuals, continued to be felt in 2011. 

Political change was seen in Burma/Myanmar following the national elections in November 
2010.  270  political  prisoners  were  released,  media  and  internet  censorship  was  eased,  there 
was an improved dialogue between the Government and the opposition and new peace deals 
were  struck  with  ethnic  groups.  The  humanitarian  situation,  however,  did  not  improve 
significantly  in  the  remote  border  areas  and  renewed  conflict  in  Kachin  State  in  June  2011 
saw the displacement of 30,000 people. Commissioner Kristalina Georgieva visited the region 
twice  in  2011  covering  Burma/Myanmar,  Thailand  and  Indonesia,  where  she  met  the 
ASEAN24  Secretary  General  to  discuss  closer  cooperation  on  disaster  response  and 
preparedness.  Her  repeated  calls  for  improved  humanitarian  access  in  Burma/Myanmar  and 
the  need  to  find  durable  solutions  to  the  Burmese  Refugee  situation  in  Thailand  were 
appreciated by all stakeholders. During 2011 DG ECHO and its partners continued to provide 
assistance to IDPs in Burma/Myanmar and to the most vulnerable of the muslim community 
(Rohingyas) in  Northern Rakine State.  Furthermore, recovery assistance  was maintained for 
the victims of Cyclone GIRI which had hit the country in 2010.  

24   Association of Southeast Asian Nations 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Burma/Myanmar 

In  2011,  despite  political  changes  in  the  country  following  the  elections  in  late  2010  and  a 
new nominally civilian government in place, the characteristics of the protracted crisis did not 
change  significantly.  Although  new  cease-fire  agreements  were  reached  and  peace  talks 
started with several ethnic armed groups, fighting with the Kachin Independence Army, one 
of the largest armed groups in the country, resumed in June 2011.  

In  the  northern  part  of  Rakhine  State  (NRS),  living  conditions  of  the  muslim  population 
(Rohingyas)  remained  precarious  with  hardly  any  positive  change  in  2011.  Segregation  and 
discrimination  did  not  recede  with  the  population  still  deprived  of  citizenship.  In  2011,  no 
political  solution  was  proposed  by  the  government.  With  DG ECHO  support  to  NRS,  more 
than  27,500  malnourished  children  under  5  were  treated,  142,000  people  benefitted  from 
primary  health  care,  120,000  people  received  protection  assistance  and  87,000  food 
assistance.  In  southern  Rakhine  State,  following  cyclone  GIRI's  landfall  in  October  2010, 
shelter and recovery programmes continued in 2011. 64,000 people received adapted shelter 
assistance and 70,000 farmer or fishermen households received livelihood support. Some of 
these programmes may eventually be supported by longer term funding under the Livelihood 
Trust Fund (LIFT) to which the Commission (DEVCO) is an important donor.  

In  response  to  the  flash  floods  in  Magway  division  which  affected  30,000  people  in  4 
townships, DG ECHO responded with relief assistance targeting 18,000 people considered to 
be the most vulnerable.  

The situation of  the  500,000  internally displaced people  along the  eastern  borders remained 
unchanged  in  2011.  Humanitarian  needs  of  the  population  affected  by  the  protracted  low 
intensity conflict situation were addressed by DG ECHO in the health and protection sectors. 
55,000 people received basic health care and 54,000 benefitted from protection activities.  

In  Kachin  State  fighting  between  KIA/KIO  and  government  forces  started  in  June  and 
continued  throughout  the  year.  An  estimated  30,000  people  were  displaced  and  most  were 
supported by local religious groups. Only limited humanitarian access has been granted and 
negotiations  are  ongoing  with  the  government  to  allow  humanitarian  aid  to  victims  on  both 
sides  of  the  conflict.  DG ECHO  is  ready  to  provide  assistance,  provided  that  acceptable 
access conditions and monitoring possibilities exist.  

The constraints and limitations in implementing aid programmes in Burma/Myanmar did not 
significantly  change  in  2011  and  partners  faced  lengthy  procedures  to  obtain  MoUs  and 
visas/travel  authorisations.  ECHO  access  to  beneficiaries  was  nevertheless  usually  possible 
(with  the  notable  exception  of  Kachin  non-government  controlled  area),  allowing  for 
monitoring and follow-up. 

Commissioner Kristalina Georgieva visited Burma/Myanmar in September 2011, calling for 
improved  humanitarian  access,  in  particular  in  Kachin  State,  improved  conditions  for  the 
muslim population in NRS, and UNHCR involvement in any future return of refugees from 
Thailand, which should only take place when conditions in Burma/Myanmar are right and in 
full respect of international humanitarian principles. 

41 

 
 
 
 
Thailand 

The conflict and poor economic situation in Burma/Myanmar has resulted in a huge influx of 
its  citizens  into  Thailand.  An  estimated  3  million  people  from  Burma/Myanmar  reside  in 
Thailand,  of  whom  approximately  140,000  ethnic  Karen  refugees  are  living  in  9  refugee 
camps along the Thai-Myanmar border. The refugees are dependent on external aid for their 
survival. In 2011 UNHCR played an important role in coordinating the relief response to the 
new influx.  

Since  2005,  more  than  77,000  refugees  have  been  resettled  from  the  refugee  camps  in 
Thailand to third countries. However, not all refugees are willing or eligible for resettlement, 
thus requiring alternative durable solutions. There is also a need to resume the screening and 
registration process of refugees, to determine the number of genuine refugees. However, the 
process was delayed due to the floods in the second half of 2011, which diverted most local 
capacity and resources to the emergency response. 

In 2011 DG ECHO continued to encourage the gradual shift from humanitarian aid in favour 
of a livelihood and self-reliance approach, with other Commission funding such as the AUP 
(Aid  to  Uprooted  People)  budget  becoming  increasingly  important.  The  EU  remained  an 
important  donor,  with  interventions  in  the  sectors  of  food  aid,  health  care,  water/sanitation, 
livelihoods and protection. 100,000 refugees benefitted from its assistance. 

Commissioner Kristalina Georgieva visited Thailand in March and September 2011, including 
to  Mae  La  camp.  In  her  meetings  with  high-level  Thai  authorities,  the  Commissioner 
emphasised  the  EU's  commitment  to  continue  to  work  for  sustainable  solutions  for  the 
refugees in Thailand.  

The external evaluation on the Burmese Refugee Camps finalised in 2011 concluded that the 
new  Commission  strategy  had  succeeded  in  shifting  the  approach  of  most  aid  stakeholders 
from emergency to sustainable activities. Thailand also experienced during the second half of 
2011 the worst floods in 50 years. Provinces located along the Chao Phraya river and Mekong 
river basin, including Bangkok, were most severely affected by inundation of 1-2 meters of 
flood  waters  for  months.  Over  300  deaths  were  reported  and  over  2  million  people  were 
displaced. In response to the floods, the EU funded projects with IFRC and Save the Children-
UK, targeting 116,000 affected people living in evacuation centres and in inundated homes. 
The funding was part of a humanitarian funding decision to support flood emergency response 
in South East Asia. 

North Korea (Democratic People's Republic of Korea - DPRK) 

In 2011 DPRK faced severe food  shortages  due  to  a  combination of  several  factors, mainly 
harsh  winter  conditions,  absence  of  international  aid  and  poor  food  import  capacities.  As  a 
result,  food  rations  distributed  by  the  centrally  managed  Public  Distribution  System  to  16 
million urban dwellers dramatically reduced, and malnutrition rates increased among the most 
vulnerable people (namely children under five years old and pregnant and lactating women). 
The EU mobilised funds for a one-off emergency intervention to bridge the critical food gap 
during  the  2011  season.  A  food  relief  programme  implemented  by  WFP  and  a  Save  the 
Children  therapeutic  feeding  programme  targeting  the  most  vulnerable  in  the  four  northern 
and north eastern provinces was implemented. Complementary funds were allocated for non-

42 

 
 
 
 
 
food items in response to the floods in the Southern areas of the country. Although the DPRK 
authorities  have  been  more  forthcoming  in  providing  access  to  data  and  to  affected  areas, 
operating conditions continue to remain a challenge in this country. 

Japan 

Japan  is  one  of  the  best-prepared  countries  to  cope  with  disasters,  but  the  magnitude  and 
severity of the earthquake which struck on the 11th of March and the subsequent tsunami and 
nuclear  incident  at  Fukushima  rendered  the  country  in  need  of  international  assistance.  The 
North-eastern  coastal  city  of  Miyako  in  Iwate  Prefecture  and  the  city  of  Sendai  in  Miyagi 
prefecture  were  the  closest  to  the  earthquake's  epicentre  and  were  largely  destroyed.  The 
death  and  missing  toll  reached  28,550.  About  250,000  people  were  evacuated  to  more  than 
2,000 evacuation centres. According to the Japanese government, 14,413 houses were totally 
destroyed  and  another  98,466  houses  were  damaged.  Several  thousand  families  in  Miyagi, 
Iwate,  and  Fukushima  prefectures  were  displaced  by  the  tsunami.  Commissioner  Georgieva 
visited  Japan  two  weeks  after  the  disaster.  On  25  March,  the  Commissioner  met  with  the 
President of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) and 
the  President  of  the  Japanese  Red  Cross  (JRC),  to  show  EU  solidarity  with  Japan  through 
humanitarian assistance and in-kind relief items from EU Member States, coordinated by the 
Civil  Protection  mechanism.  The  Commissioner  visited  affected  populations  living  in 
temporary shelters in the coastal area.  

Funds  were  channelled  through  IFRC  to  support  JRC  in  distributing  basic  household 
appliances  to  evacuees  and  other  affected  people.  Out  of  the  70,000  household  benefitting 
from  JRC  assistance,  EU  funds  targeted  8,000  families  in  the  most  affected  provinces  of 
Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima. The total financial contribution from the EU and its Member 
States reached more than €17 million. These funds  provided food and shelter, health care and 
relief to thousands of Japanese people affected by the disaster. 

The Philippines 

Tropical  storm  Washi  was  the  last  major  disaster  hitting  the  country  in  2011.  On  17-18 
December, 13 provinces of northern Mindanao, and particularly the cities of Cagayan de Oro 
and Iligan, were affected by devastating floods which claimed 1,257 lives, injured 6,000 and 
displaced  430,000.  More  than  1.14  million  people  were  affected.  The  EU  immediately 
allocated 
for  primary  emergency  humanitarian  operations  (debris  clean-up, 
rehabilitation,  food  assistance,  NFIs,  shelter  support,  coordination  and  management  of 
evacuation  centres,  water/sanitation  activities,  psychological  support  and  protection).  The 
Civil  Protection  Mechanism  was  activated  to  co-ordinate  offers  of  assistance  from 
Participating States.  

funds 

Indonesia 

In Indonesia, the consequences of the 7.7 Richter Scale earthquake and tsunami that struck the 
remote  Mentawai  islands  off  the  western  coast  of  Sumatra  on  25  October  2010,  displacing 
20,000 individuals, continued to be felt in 2011. Lack of adequate hygiene and health services 
contributed  to  the  susceptibility  to  potential  diseases,  particularly  in  relocation  areas. 
DG ECHO  supported  two  actions  aiming  to  ensure  preparedness  and  control  of  epidemics. 
Both were financed under the worldwide intervention on epidemics. 

43 

 
 
 
 
 
Regional Action in South East Asia - Flood Response  

Five  countries  in  South  East  Asia  (the  Philippines,  Cambodia,  Vietnam,  Lao  PDR  and 
Thailand)  were  affected  by  successive  tropical  storms  (Tropical  Storm  Haima,  Nock-ten  in 
July, Tropical Depression Haitang in August and Typhoon Nesat and Nalgae in September) 
and continuous heavy rainfalls. As a result, all countries experienced cumulated flooding from 
July  to  December  2011  causing  major  human  losses  (over  1,000  deaths,  over  11  million 
people affected, and over 250,000 displaced across the region), as well as substantial damage 
to  infrastructure,  houses,  livelihood  assets,  agricultural  land,  schools  and  public  buildings. 
DG ECHO  experts  were  deployed  to  conduct  assessment  missions  in  all  affected  countries. 
EU  mobilised  humanitarian  funding  to  support  these  five  countries.  Between  one  and  1.5 
million of people benefitted from the humanitarian operations funded with this budget. 

In the Philippines, 4.5 million people were affected and over one million people were initially 
displaced. Emergency needs related to health (mobile clinics and support to health structures), 
water/sanitation  and  emergency  livelihood.  Many  affected  areas  were  inaccessible  due  to 
damaged  infrastructures.  In  Thailand,  the  2011  floods  affected  5.1  million  people.  Over 
20,000  houses  were  damaged  and  the  harvest  on  1.6  million  hectares  was  destroyed. 
According  to  the  World  Bank,  the  cost  of  the damage  was  estimated  at  approximately  $  45 
billion.  EU  allocated  funds  to  assist  some  116,000  people,  including  migrants,  with  family 
kits,  food,  water,  medicine,  shelter  and  boats  for  evacuations  and  distribution  of  aid.  In 
Cambodia,  17  out  of  24  provinces  were  affected  by  the  floods  and  flash  floods  since  mid-
August. Three quarters of Cambodia's land area was submerged for months. Immediate needs 
were food, water, sanitation, shelter, health care, seeds and tools. Over 160,000 people were 
assisted  with  humanitarian  aid.  The  Mekong  delta  in  Vietnam  faced  the  worst  floods  in 
decades.  The  most  affected  provinces  were  Dong  Thap  and  An  Giang  in  the  south  and 
assistance was provided for shelter, food aid, livelihood support, water, sanitation and hygiene 
kits.  In  Lao  PDR,  flooding  occurred  in  12  out  of  16  provinces  and  the  most  affected  were 
Vientiane,  Khammouane  and  Bolikhamxay.  A  thorough  assessment  of  the  losses  will  be 
carried  out  early  2012  but  initial  relief  assistance  was  provided  end  of  2011  for  livelihood 
support, water, sanitation, NFIs, food, and disaster preparedness.  

Regional action in South-East Asia - DIPECHO 

Implementation  of  the  7th  DIPECHO  Action  Plan  for  South  East  Asia  continued  in  2011 
benefitting  Laos,  Cambodia,  Vietnam,  the  Philippines,  Indonesia,  Burma/Myanmar  and 
Thailand.  Regional  programmes  included  WHO25's  Safe  Hospitals  Campaign,  IFRC's 
programme for strengthening the National Red Cross Societies in the region, and support to 
the ASEAN Secretariat through Oxfam's project of improving civil society's knowledge about 
disaster preparedness and disaster risk reduction.  

Regional action with the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) 

The  Commission  is  keen  to  engage  in  closer  cooperation  in  regional  disaster  management 
with  the  ASEAN.  The  legally-binding  ASEAN  Agreement  on  Disaster  Management  and 
Emergency  Response  (AADMER)  is  a  good  example  of  a  consensual  approach  among 
countries for reducing the impact of disasters and helping one another. Since 2010, ASEAN 
has  started  updating  the  ASEAN  Regional  Programme  on  Disaster  Management  by 
translating  it  into  a  Work  Programme  2010–2015,  in  line  with  the  ratification  of  the 

25   World Health Organisation 

44 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
AADMER  and  the  Hyogo  Framework  of  Action.  Mutual  commitment  to  reinforce  joint 
disaster  response  and  risk  reduction  was  confirmed  by  the  EU  and  ASEAN  in  Jakarta  in 
September  2011.  DG ECHO  recognised  the  need  to  support  the  implementation  of  the 
AADMER  work  programme  and  funding  was  provided  to  Oxfam  under  the  7th  DIPECHO 
Action  Plan  for  2010-2011  to  facilitate  the  regional  civil  society’s  dialogue  with  ASEAN. 
Another example of the active partnership between the Commission and ASEAN in disaster 
risk reduction is the high-level response exercise held in Manado, Indonesia, in March 2011.  

3.5.4.  Pacific 

The Commission's involvement in the funding of humanitarian assistance is regular, but less 
frequent  than  in  other  parts  of  the  world.  Other  very  active  donors  i.e.  Australia  and  New 
Zealand have the tradition of responding swiftly to disasters occurring in the region.  

Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for the Pacific region
Food Aid

Humanitarian Aid

Pacific region
TOTAL

Dipecho

2 300 000
2 300 000

Total
2 300 000
2 300 000

In 2011 the Pacific region was spared from the impact of major disasters. Even the tsunami 
generated by the massive earthquake which occurred in March off the coast of Japan caused 
only limited damage to Pacific island countries when it moved from the north to the south of 
the Pacific Ocean. 

Nevertheless,  populations  in  the  Pacific  remain  exposed  to  natural  hazards  of  hydro-
meteorological  and  geological  origin  which  renders  DG  ECHO's  support  to  disaster  risk 
reduction very relevant. This support seeks to increase the resilience of local communities to 
natural  disasters  but  also  helps  to  improve  the  response  preparedness  by  enhancing  the 
capacity of key humanitarian agencies, in particular the Red Cross and UN OCHA.  

Regional action in the Pacific - DIPECHO and DRR  

Following a successful pilot project in 2010 the  first  DIPECHO  Action  Plan  for  the  Pacific 
was launched in 2011, covering Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea, i.e. those 
countries  which  combine  highest  risk  with  limited  coping  capacity.  On  a  local  level, 
implementing  partners  will  promote  community  based  solutions  so  that  the  various  island 
communities can address the challenges posed by natural disasters with sustainable actions.  

3.6. 

Latin America and Caribbean 

During  2011,  DG ECHO  continued  to  support  the  devastating  effects  of  the  2010  Haiti 
earthquake where an estimated 230,000 people were killed and over 2 million were displaced 
out of a total population of 9.8 million. Interventions included facilitation of safe exit of IDPs 
from  camps  through  provision  of  housing  options  and  revitalization  of  services  in  areas  of 
return  or  resettlement  while  providing  basic  services  in  camps.  At  the  end  of  2011,  the 
number  of  IDPs  had  decreased  by  66%  compared  to  July  2010,  with  an  estimated  519,164 
individuals still living in camps across the areas affected by the earthquake.  

The  2011  hurricane  season  was  active,  particularly  affecting  Central  America  and  the 
Caribbean.  Tropical  Depression  12-E  in  Guatemala,  El  Salvador,  Honduras  and  Nicaragua 
affected  approximately  2.6  million  people,  causing  damage  and  losses  amounting  to  almost 

45 

 
 
 
 
 
US$1.9  billion.  In  terms  of  damage,  and  when  compared  to  Hurricane  Mitch  in  1998,  the 
losses caused by this Depression have been qualified as worse and more devastating. In the 
Caribbean,  Hurricane  Irene  affected  the  Bahamas  and  Tropical  Storm  Ophelia  affected 
Dominica with more than 1,300 people in need of emergency support. 

The 2010-2011 rainy season showed well the vulnerabilities of the South American countries 
to natural disasters, as entire neighbourhoods in large cities such as La Paz, Caracas and Rio 
de Janeiro were washed away by mega landslides and flash floods. Also, in more remote areas 
the impact of the rainy season was felt, with the Peruvian Amazonia (Ucayali province) facing 
severe flooding, affecting tens of thousands of people. 

DG ECHO's  humanitarian  assistance  to  victims  of  Colombia's  prolonged  internal  conflict 
continued throughout 2011, including support to IDPs, rural populations facing restriction of 
movement  and  access  to  basic  goods  and  services,  as  well  as  to  Colombians  in  need  of 
protection who fled to neighbouring countries, particularly Ecuador and Venezuela.  

Cholera continued to affect the island of Hispaniola. In Haiti, by December 2011, a total of 
515,699 cholera cases were registered nationwide while 6,749 people were reported to have 
died  from  the  disease.  In  the  Dominican  Republic,  there  were  360  suspected  deaths,  out  of 
21,432 reported cases. Dengue outbreaks also affected Peru and Bolivia in 2011.  

With  a  view  to  the  recurrent  nature  of  natural  hazards  and  their  humanitarian  impact, 
DG ECHO's  disaster  preparedness  programme  (DIPECHO)  continued  in  the  respective 
regions, i.e. Central America, South America and the Caribbean.  

Articulation  between  preparedness  and  response  components  is  being  strengthened  through 
systematic mainstreaming of DRR in all response operations. Furthermore, supporting DRR 
actions that complement previous emergency projects went a step further in the region with 
the  Drought  Management  initiative,  launched  by  DG ECHO  in  2011.  This  initiative  is 
designed to look for more sustainable solutions and improve local capacities to face periods of 
drought in Central America's "Dry Corridor" and the Paraguayan and Bolivian Chaco, where 
EU has funded emergency projects in response to drought on a recurrent basis during the past 
years.  

Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for Latin America

Central America
Central and South America
South America
Colombia
Peru
TOTAL 

Humanitarian Aid

Food Aid

Dipecho

Total

4 000 000

11 000 000
2 000 000
17 000 000

5 000 000

1 000 000

12 000 000

6 000 000

12 000 000

4 000 000
5 000 000
12 000 000
12 000 000
2 000 000
35 000 000

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

Central America is one of the most disaster-prone areas in the world, in terms of recurrence, 
severity and scope of disasters, and it is particularly exposed to cyclones, floods, landslides, 
earthquakes,  drought,  forest  fires  and  volcanic  eruptions,  which  are  combined  with  high 
vulnerability rates. The recently published Global Climate Risk Index reveals that Honduras 
was  one  of  the  three  most  affected  countries  in  the  world  by  extreme  weather  events  from 
1990-2008, and Nicaragua is the fifth most affected in the world. 

46 

 
 
 
 
 
In  2011,  DG ECHO  actions  in  Central  America  focused  on  the  response  to  the  emergency 
needs  caused  in  the  month  of  October  by  the  Tropical  Depression  12-E  in  Guatemala, 
El Salvador, Honduras and Nicaragua. This event affected approximately 2.6 million people 
and causing damage and losses of almost $1.9 billion. In total, 117 people died and, in terms 
of damage and losses this crisis has been qualified as worse than Hurricane Mitch in 1998. As 
a result, an Emergency Decision was adopted and a total of 100,000 people benefitted from 
nine  EU-funded  operations.  This  decision  complemented  a  previous  one  for  Guatemala, 
adopted  at  the  end  of  2010,  in  response  to  a  series  of  natural  disasters  that  occurred 
throughout  2010  (including  Pacaya  volcano  eruption,  Tropical  Storm  Agatha,  and  Tropical 
Depression  11-E).  These  events  had  substantially  eroded  the  coping  capacity  of  the  most 
vulnerable populations, and led to significant harvest losses that seriously affected subsistence 
farmers, while opportunities to work as day labourers on bigger farms diminished due to the 
floods. 

Using  other  funding  instruments,  the  Small  Scale  Response  and  the  IFRC's  Disaster  Relief 
Emergency  Fund  (DREF),  five  interventions  were  carried  out  in  the  region  to  respond  to 
floods affecting Guatemala, Costa Rica and Nicaragua, and earthquakes in Guatemala, and to 
cover the humanitarian gaps in these humanitarian crises. 

The  security  situation  worsened  in  2011  and  the  main  safety  risks  incurred  by  partners  are 
related to violent crimes. Access is sometimes compromised due to the high presence of drug-
trafficking or youth groups  (maras). The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes in its 
first-ever Global Study on Homicide released in October 2011, reported that the world's most 
dangerous countries — ranked by 2010 murder rates per 100,000 inhabitants — are Honduras 
(82.1); El Salvador (66); Côte d'Ivoire (56.9); Jamaica (52.1); Venezuela (49); Belize (41.7); 
and Guatemala (41.4). Three Central American countries are rated among the most dangerous 
countries in the world.  

South America (except Colombia) 

The rainy season between 2010 and 2011 highlighted the vulnerabilities of South American 
countries to natural hazards, as entire neighbourhoods from macro cities as La Paz, Caracas 
and  Rio de Janeiro  were  washed away by mega landslides and flash  floods. These disasters 
happened because of the practice of building houses on inappropriate land and without proper 
construction techniques and materials. In Rio de Janeiro alone, more than 800 casualties were 
registered in the floods/landslides of early 2011. Far from the urban settings, in areas of the 
Peruvian  Amazonia  (Ucayali  province),  severe  flooding  caused  by  extreme  precipitation 
levels were the worst in 50 years and severely affected tens of thousands of people. 

DG ECHO implemented seven projects to respond to the disasters caused by the rainy season 
2010/11 in Peru, Venezuela, Bolivia and Brazil. In Venezuela and Brazil, small scale projects 
have  proven  to  be  well  adapted  to  the  South  American  context  by  filling  the  gap  of  unmet 
humanitarian  needs,  complementing  the  local  and  national  response,  serving  as  a  pulling 
effect  for  other  donors  and  setting  appropriate  standards  of  humanitarian  operations  which 
were afterwards replicated by other stakeholders. In the case of the floods in Ucayali (Peru), 
operations met basic needs and allowed affected indigenous  people (largely unsupported by 
their  authorities,  due  to  a  combination  of  lack  of  capacity  and  isolation  of  the  affected 
communities) to restart subsistence agricultural production as soon as possible. 

47 

 
 
 
 
In addition, DG ECHO supported some small scale operations in response to disasters such as 
the  cold  waves  in  Chile  and  Bolivia,  the  effects  of  the  ashes  coming  from  the  Puyehue 
volcano  eruption  in  Patagonia,  hailstorm  in  Paraguay  and  the  dengue  outbreak  in  Peru  and 
Bolivia.  

DG ECHO  continued  to  advocate  for  common  approaches  and  increased  synergies  among 
partners,  trying  to  multiply  the  impact  of  the  operations  and  ensure  coherence  in  the  same 
responses  or  programmes.  To  this  effect,  consortia  and  alliances  between  implementing 
partners have led to a lower number of grant agreements while the number of partners in the 
region has increased. 

Efforts  were  made  to  increase  integration  of  projects  with  local  and  national  systems  and 
strategies in order to increase the possibilities of local ownership, handing over and scaling-up 
of  the  good  practices  developed  by  ECHO  partners  in  the  region  for  more  than  12  years. 
Examples  include  the  Letter  of  Intent  signed  between  DG ECHO  and  the  Government  of 
Chile establishing a dialogue on  DRR, the support to  bottom-up based  regulations for DRR 
laws in Ecuador, Paraguay and Peru, the country-wide replication of DIPECHO experiences 
by the National Civil Protection in Argentina.  

In  the  same  way,  DG ECHO  prioritised  increased  coordination  with  other  donors  and 
international  initiatives,  launching  a  Technical  Group  of  Humanitarian  and  DRR  donors  in 
Ecuador  and  Peru.  A  principal  objective  is  that  the  DIPECHO  consultative  process  should 
become  a  fully  open  DRR  consultative  process  led  by  Disaster  Risk  Management  (DRM) 
national systems and integrating other donors and stakeholders.  

DG ECHO and EU Delegations are working to include DRR as one of the priorities in local 
thematic  lines,  which  gives  room  for  reinforcing  LRRD  and  sustainability  of  the 
Commission's funded projects by supporting municipalities and local institutions. An example 
is  the  Drought  Management  initiative,  designed  to  seek  more  sustainable  solutions  and 
improve  capacities  to  face  the  droughts  in  the  Paraguayan  and  Bolivian  Chaco,  where 
DG ECHO  has  funded  emergency  response  projects  on  a  recurrent  basis  during  the  last  10 
years. 

Articulation  between  response  and  preparedness  is  being  strengthened  through  systematic 
mainstreaming of DRR in all response operations and supporting DRR actions at the exit of 
emergency  projects,  taking  advantage  of  the  public  awareness  raised  by  the  disaster  and 
filling the preparedness gaps identified during the response.  

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

Internal  armed  conflict  in  Colombia  continued  in  2011  and  remains  on  the  list  of  forgotten 
crises established by DG ECHO. Despite the killing of the FARC leader in November 2011, 
there  are  no  clear  prospects  for  a  negotiated  solution  to  the  armed  conflict  or  an  incipient 
military victory. Massive and individual displacements, confinement of civilians and weapon 
contamination  continued  to  be  major  consequences  of  the  conflict  in  Colombia  in  2011.  In 
cumulative  terms  (and  depending  on  the  source),  between  3.7  and  5.2  million  people  have 
been displaced in Colombia. Restrictions imposed by armed groups on mobility and access to 
basic services continued during 2011, mostly in remote rural communities where DG ECHO 
and the main humanitarian organizations intend to concentrate their efforts. According to the 

48 

 
 
 
 
United  Nations  High  Commissioner  for  Refugees  (UNHCR),  around  400,00026  Colombians 
are refugees or live in a refugee-like situation in Ecuador, Venezuela and Panamá. 

Despite  the  sophisticated  Colombian  legal  protection  system  (including  the  endorsement  of 
the victims law in June 2011) and the substantial allocations by the Colombian government to 
emergency  aid  in  2011,  there  is  a  clear  added  value  for  international,  independent 
humanitarian  aid  to  fill  gaps,  particularly  in  those  remote  rural  areas,  where  the  population 
often has to face restrictions of movement and lack of access to basic goods and services. 

Afro-Colombian  and  indigenous  communities  have  been  particularly  affected  by  the  armed 
conflict. In the neighbouring countries, protection (notably refugee-status determination) and 
emergency  assistance  for  new  arrivals  remain  the  most  important  humanitarian  issues  to 
address. Protection for asylum seekers and refugees in Venezuela and Ecuador are of serious 
concern. 

Colombia is highly prone to natural disasters; in particular floods caused enormous damage in 
2010  and  2011.  Around  4.3  million27  people  were  affected  by  the  rains  in  2010  and  2011; 
despite  significant  efforts  made  by  national  and  local  authorities  to  respond  to  the 
humanitarian  needs  created  by  floods  and  landslides,  the  national  capacities  were 
overwhelmed by the magnitude of the disaster.  

DG ECHO  supported  the  Colombian  population  affected  by  the  conflict  and  the  emergency 
provoked  by  the  heavy  rainy  season  in  2011.  Around  200,000  people  were  assisted  by 
DG ECHO  in  the  framework  of  the  Humanitarian  Implementation  Plan  for  Colombia  2011 
(including IDPs and affected populations in Colombia by armed conflict and/or recent floods: 
asylum seekers and refugees in Ecuador and Venezuela).  

Protection  has  been  the  main  objective  of  DG ECHO's  intervention  in  Colombia  in  the  past 
years.  DG ECHO  continued  to  concentrate  humanitarian  operations  in  remote  rural  areas, 
where State institutions  are  generally  not present  or government assistance is not sufficient. 
The  protection  of  children,  women  and  minorities  continued  to  be  a  priority.  DG ECHO 
assistance was intended to cover those humanitarian emergency needs not – or not sufficiently 
-  covered  by  the  aid  provided  by  the  Colombian  government,  and  ensure  humanitarian 
protection  as  much  as  possible.  Additionally,  DG ECHO  conducted  a  wide  consultation 
process to define its strategy for 2012 and technical workshops were organised by DG ECHO 
with its partners in December 2011 in order to increase impact of operations in 2012.  

Regional action in Central and South America  

As  far  as  Disaster  Risk  Reduction  is  concerned  the  implementation  of  the  7th  DIPECHO 
Action  Plan  for  Central  America  was  ongoing  in  2011  with  22  actions  implemented.  The 
programme  addressed  both  the  risks  of  large-scale  disasters  and  the  expected  impact  of 
recurrent  small  –  and  medium  scale  –  natural  events  on  the  most  vulnerable  populations. 
Urban  risks  have  also  been  addressed  with  more  than  half  of  the  projects  working  on  the 
resilient cities campaign. There has been an increase in coordination between partners which 
has  led  to  more  exchange  of  methodologies  and  development  of  common  approaches  when 
coordinating with National Systems for Disaster Risk Reduction, leading to a higher impact.  

26   UNHCR global appeal 2012-13. 
27   According  to  Unidad  Nacional  para  la  Gestión  del  Riesgo  de  Desastres,  Presidencia  de  la  Republica  de 

Colombia. 

49 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
The 7th DIPECHO Action Plan for South America, covering 2011 and 2012 started in April 
2011.  23  projects  are  being  implemented  in  nine  countries  until  the  end  of  2012  (Peru, 
Bolivia,  Ecuador,  Colombia,  Venezuela,  Paraguay,  Chile,  Argentina  and  Brazil)  to  increase 
the preparedness and resilience of communities and institutions to face natural disasters.   

In addition to the activities funded under DIPECHO, a Drought Management Programme was 
launched in 2011; covering both Central and South America. The programme whose objective 
is to strengthen the resilience of vulnerable communities living in drought-affected areas will 
continue until end of 2012.   

In  terms  of  LRRD,  collaboration  has  been  developed  with  the  EU  Delegations  in  the 
framework of specific programmes. In addition, some tools developed by DIPECHO partners 
have  now  been  completely  absorbed  and  appropriated  at  national  level  e.g.:  Early  Warning 
Systems  for  landslides,  Guidelines  for  training  on  different  topics.  With  other  donors, 
DG ECHO  is  leading  the  Technical  Groups  of  Donors  in  Honduras  and  Nicaragua  and  this 
has  allowed  opportunities  for  LRRD,  especially  with  Swiss  Cooperation,  USAID/OFDA28 
and the IADB29 and World Bank. In 2012, DG ECHO will concentrate on establishing similar 
spaces in Guatemala and El Salvador. 

3.6.1.  Caribbean 

Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for the Caribbean region

Humanitarian Aid

Food Aid

Dipecho

EDF

Total

25 000 000

11 000 000

25 000 000

11 000 000

8 000 000
8 000 000

1 030 000

1 030 000

36 000 000
1 030 000
8 000 000
45 030 000

Haiti
St Lucia
Caribbean
TOTAL 

Haiti 

In  2011,  the  EU  allocated  funds  to  the  cholera  and  earthquake  response  to  provide  further 
support  to  people  affected  by  the  January  2010  earthquake  and  the  cholera  epidemic  that 
started in October  2010.  Interventions included facilitation of safe  exit of IDPs  from  camps 
through provision of housing options such as T-shelters, rental subsidies and house repairs in 
neighborhoods  of  origin  or  new  locations,  combined  with  support  to  basic  livelihoods  and 
rehabilitation of water, sanitation and primary health care structures. Residual support to basic 
services in camps was also provided with a view to handing them over to local authorities. At 
the end of 2011, the number of displaced had decreased by 66% compared to July 2010, with 
an  estimated  519,164  individuals  still  living  in  camps  across  the  areas  affected  by  the 
earthquake. 

Hygiene promotion, access to safe water/sanitation and support to Cholera Treatment Centers 
and Units (CTC and CTUs), capacity building of national health staff and strengthening of an 
epidemiological surveillance and alert system were the components of DG ECHO's strategy to 
fight cholera. By December, a total of 515,699 cholera cases were registered nationwide while 
6,749 people were reported to have died from the disease. The number of new cholera cases 
per  month  declined  to  300  compared  to  1,100  in  June  2011.  At  1.3%,  the  cumulative  case 

28   Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance  
29   Inter American Development Bank 

50 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
fatality rate is at its lowest since the first outbreak and dropped from 2.4% in November 2010 
but is still above the 1% internationally recommended threshold.  

Complementary  funds  secured  the  implementation  of  an  exit  strategy  from  the  2009 
DG ECHO  Global  Plan  which  was  temporarily  interrupted  due  to  the  earthquake. 
Interventions  focused  on  the  fight  against  malnutrition  and  improved  access  to  mother  and 
child  health  care  services.  The  EU  also  funded  partners  to  strengthen  and  capacity  build 
human  resources  of  the  MSPP30  and  departmental  health  structures  with  the  objective  of 
integrating the prevention and treatment of malnutrition into health services.   

Disaster  Risk  Reduction  was  also  focused  in  order  to  support  capacity  development  of 
communities, the DPC31 and the Haitian Red Cross to prepare for and respond to multi-hazard 
disasters with the objective of increasing the resilience of the population and the government 
when faced with natural hazards.  

In 2011, Haiti was spared from major natural hazards. Since May, a newly elected President is 
in  office  and  in  October  a  Prime  Minister  was  nominated.  In  October,  the  Security  Council 
extended the mandate of MINUSTAH32 for another year with 7,340 troops and a police force 
of  3,240  contributing  to  relative  security  and  stability  in  the  country.  Reconstruction  efforts 
gained momentum in the second half of 2011. 

Throughout  2011,  DG ECHO  placed  particular  emphasis  on  LRRD  initiatives  in  the 
reconstruction, water/sanitation, health, food assistance and DRR sectors.  

A real time evaluation of the intervention was carried out between November 2010 and April 
2011.  Amongst  other  conclusions,  the  evaluation  recommended  continuing  the  phasing 
strategy throughout 2011 and 2012, as well as reinforcing the LRRD components, as well as 
the  DRR  structures  in  Haiti.  The  objective  should  be  to  place  DRR  at  the  heart  of 
development policies in the country. 

St. Lucia 

Emergency  response  to  Hurricane  Tomas  in  Saint  Lucia  was  implemented.  Through  its 
partners,  DG ECHO  provided  assistance  to  more  than  34,000  people,  covering  shelter, 
water/sanitation and livelihood interventions.  

Regional action in the Caribbean (except Haiti) 

The 2011 Atlantic hurricane season was active. A total of 19 cyclone formations affected the 
region;  six  of  them  evolved  to  hurricane  category.  DG ECHO  continually  monitored  the 
situation and provided support for the emergency response to Hurricane Irene (Bahamas) and 
Tropical  Storm  Ophelia  (Dominica),  which  directly  affected  more  than  1,300  people. 
DG ECHO contributed to IFRC's Disaster Relief Emergency Fund (DREF) and, in addition, a 
Small  Scale  Disaster  Response  intervention  was  financed  in  Dominican  Republic  to  benefit 
500 families affected by the water level increase of Lake Enriquillo. The communities settled 
around the lake were at risk of food insecurity/malnutrition and by a compromised capacity to 
manage their livelihoods. 

30   Ministry of Public Health and Populations 
31   Direction de la Protection Civile/civil protection agency of the Haitian government 
32   Mission des Nations Unis pour la Stabilisation d’Haiti 

51 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Epidemics  continued  to  affect  the  region  in  2011.  The  cholera  outbreak  in  the  Dominican 
Republic  is  reported  to  have  caused  more  than  360  deaths,  of  21,432  cases.  DG ECHO 
contributed  to  control  of  the  disease  supporting  actions  in  communities  with  active 
transmission, which benefitted more than 200,000 people. 

Following  the  Haiti  earthquake,  support  to  people  in  need  of  protection  and  hosting 
communities in Dominican Republic was provided by UNHCR. 

Regional action in the Caribbean - DIPECHO 

Disaster  preparedness  actions  in  the  region  continued  to  be  funded  through  the  DIPECHO 
Action Plan 2011-2012. Implementation of eleven projects started in 2011 and will continue 
in 2012 (three regional projects, three projects in the Dominican Republic, one in Jamaica and 
four  in  Haiti).  Through  this  programme,  the  most  vulnerable  communities  were  prepared  to 
face  disasters,  benefitting  more  than  145,000  people  in  the  Caribbean  (except  Haiti  where 
DRR action was funded through country specific allocations). 

3.7.  Worldwide intervention tools 

In 2008, DG ECHO decided to launch pilot decisions to complement its Emergency tool box 
and  to  evaluate  them  after  one  year  of  implementation.  Three  types  of  pilot  decisions  were 
taken:  for  epidemics,  small-scale  disasters  and  a  contribution  to  the  IFRC's  Disaster  Relief 
Emergency Fund (DREF). The initial objectives were: 

-  Response to smaller crisis without increasing DG ECHO administrative burden 
-  Access to crisis in remote areas or for which it is difficult to respond within 72 hours. 
-  Better preparation for "predictable" crisis based on past experience. 
-  Increased DG ECHO visibility. 

The 3 instruments increase the image of DG ECHO as quality donor and meet at least two of 
the  Principles  and  Good  Practice  of  Humanitarian  Donorship,  i.e.  n°8  "Strengthen  the 
capacity  of  affected  countries  and  local  communities  to  prevent,  prepare  for,  mitigate  and 
respond  to  humanitarian  crises"  and  principle  n°11  "...necessity  of  dynamics  and  flexible 
response  to  changing  needs  in  humanitarian  crisis,  strive  to  ensure  predictability  and 
flexibility in funding ...". 

In  order  to  be  able  to  intervene  in  new  ‘small-  scale’  crises,  funding  decisions  with  a 
worldwide scope were adopted in 2011: 

Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for worldwide intervention tools

Disaster Relief Emergency Fund (DREF)
Epidemics
TOTAL 

Humanitarian Aid

Total

3 000 000
6 500 000
9 500 000

3 000 000
6 500 000
9 500 000

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

Vulnerable  people  in  third  countries  throughout  the  world  are  affected  by  disasters,  such  as 
floods,  landslides,  cyclones,  tsunamis,  drought,  fires,  cold  waves,  earthquakes,  volcanic 
eruptions,  epidemics,  food  insecurity,  population  movements  and  civil  unrest.  Relief  is 
required,  as  well  as  preparedness  for  imminent  disasters,  in  the  context  of  small-scale 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
emergencies  for  which  an  appeal  is  unlikely  to  be  launched.  Most  small-scale  emergencies 
(sometimes  no  more  than  100,000  people  are  affected) are responded to at local or national 
level.  The  Red  Cross  and  Red  Crescent  National  Societies,  supported  by  the  International 
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), are often best placed to provide 
an  immediate  response,  being  rooted  in  the  local  community  and  mobilising  community 
members as volunteers. 

DG ECHO ensured a quick reaction capacity to many small-scale disasters in 2011, by means 
of  an  earmarked  contribution  to  IFRC's  DREF  and  a  rapid  response  was  provided  via  35 
operations.  Life-saving  assistance  and  relief  were  brought  to  over  1,5  million  victims  of 
floods, cyclones/hurricanes/storms, earthquakes, epidemics, civil unrest and other small-scale 
disasters. Health operations included a strong preparedness component, with prompt reaction 
to  disease  outbreaks  preventing  a  full-scale  epidemic.  Capacity-building  of  local  staff  and 
volunteers  of  many  Red  Cross/Crescent  National  Societies  also  enhanced  disaster 
preparedness. 

3.7.2.  Epidemics  

Epidemic  outbreaks  pose  major  risks  notably  to  the  world’s  poorest  populations.  The 
vaccination coverage in developing countries is generally low and the risk of transmission of 
infections  enhanced.  Poverty,  lack  of  basic  sanitation  facilities,  low  hygienic  standards  and 
malnutrition  in  post-emergency  or  structurally  weak  countries  increase  the  vulnerability  to 
communicable diseases. A timely response to epidemic outbreaks, combined with appropriate 
preparedness action, can help save thousands of lives. 

In  2011,  EU  funds  allowed  to  reduce  the  impact  of  epidemics  on  vulnerable  people  in 
developing  countries  and  to  support  preparedness  and  emergency  response  operations  to 
address outbreaks of communicable diseases, especially cholera, meningitis and yellow fever, 
with a specific focus on Africa, assisting an estimated 3.6 million individuals. 

3.7.3. 

Small-Scale Response Instrument 

Small-scale  disasters  often  occur  in  remote  or  isolated  areas,  rarely  trigger  a  declaration  of 
emergency and usually do not figure prominently in the news despite the serious humanitarian 
needs they create locally. National response to disasters in larger disasters, even in countries 
with relatively developed disaster management capacities, may leave gaps of uncovered needs 
- often related to social inequality, isolation, under-reporting of events, inadequate capacity at 
local level - where only a limited humanitarian intervention is needed. 

In order to allow a rapid response to those disasters where the number of affected people is 
low,  and  to  strengthen  the  capacity  of  affected  communities  to  withstand  future  disasters, 
DG ECHO  uses  the  Small  Scale  Response  instrument.  At  least  one  of  the  two  following 
criteria for intervention must be fulfilled: 

•  extent of damage: the number of affected people is less than 50,000; 
•  unmet  needs  (gaps  left  by  ongoing  assistance),  where  an  intervention  limited  to  a 

maximum amount of €200,000 per disaster is  sufficient to cover unmet needs. 

53 

 
 
 
 
The Small Scale Response instrument was used in 201133 to provide assistance in cases such 
as:  landslide-affected  populations  in  La  Paz,  Bolivia;  flood  response  and  preparedness  in 
India, Laos, Gambia, Colombia; emergency assistance to victims of Tropical Depressions in 
Nicaragua  and  Bangladesh;  assistance  to  earthquake-affected  populations  in  southern 
Kyrgyzstan  and  in  Chile;  assistance  to  cyclone-affected  populations  in  Madagascar; 
emergency  interventions  and  disaster  management  for  fire  affected  families  in  camps  in 
Nepal. 

33   On funds made available in 2010 

54 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
3.8. 

Disaster preparedness activities, including DIPECHO 

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

Since  launching  the  DIPECHO  programmes  (as  from  1996),  the  Commission  has  invested 
 264 million in the associated action plans. 

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

In  2011,  disaster  preparedness  activities  managed  by  DG  ECHO  allowed  about  12  million 
beneficiaries to be reached.  

Disaster Preparedness Activities 1996-2011

Region 

Southern Africa
Southern Caucasus/Eastern Europe
Central Asia
South Asia
South-East Asia
Central America
South America
Caribbean
Pacific
Other 
Other - Capacity-building

Total DIPECHO programmes

Drought preparedness (on the HA budget)

Pilot disaster preparedness programme (Peru)

Mainstreaming activities*

Funding
1996-2010

Funding 2011

Funding 
1996-2011

11.735.000
4.703.357
29.670.000
31.753.043
41.680.000
42.480.000
36.227.663
25.178.156
1.500.000
4.245.381
200.000

12.000.000

12.000.000
8.000.000
2.300.000
183.013
117.639

11 735 000
4 703 357
29 670 000
43 753 043
41 680 000
42 480 000
48 227 663
33 178 156
3 800 000
4 428 394
 317 639

229 372 600

34 600 652

263 973 252

90 000 000

2.000.000

pm

pm

90 000 000

2 000 000

Total disaster preparedness activities

301 372 600

34 600 652

355 973 252

Details concerning the actions implemented in 2011 are included in Sections 3.3 to 3.7 above 
under the regional sections concerned. 

DG  ECHO's  contribution  to  disaster  preparedness  goes  well  beyond  the  DIPECHO 
programme  as  many  of  its  major  humanitarian  financing  decisions  include  disaster 
preparedness or mitigation of disaster impacts as an objective. Even post-disaster emergency 
responses often have a risk reduction element.  

55 

 
 
 
 
€
 
In 2011, this was the case in the following regions/countries: 

–  Africa: Sudan/South Sudan, Uganda, Djibouti, Ethiopia, The Gambia and Côte d'Ivoire;  

–  Asia: Afghanistan, Philippines; 

–  Latin America: Paraguay, Bolivia and Guatemala;  

–  Caribbean/Pacific: Haiti, Cook islands, Micronesia and Fiji. 

3.9. 

Transition and Resilience 

There  is  a  growing  need  to  improve  synergies  between  humanitarian  aid  and  development 
policies. Disasters destroy gains from development cooperation while they place an increased 
pressure on humanitarian aid budgets. The transition from relief to development – especially 
in conflict affected countries and complex crises– is often neither quick nor linear. Numerous 
international  actors  in  the  areas  of  humanitarian  aid,  recovery,  development,  peace  keeping 
etc. work side by side for several years (such as in Afghanistan or in the Democratic Republic 
of Congo), though they act still in isolation. 

This  makes  proper  articulation  and  close  coordination  critical,  starting  from  the  needs 
assessment through to actual implementation of operations, so as to ensure better consistency 
and to lay the foundations for a sustainable development process. 

There is a compelling case for greater humanitarian-development interaction: Their common 
objective  should  be  to  increase  the  resilience  of  vulnerable  populations  in  order  to  reduce 
vulnerability  and  to  avoid  that  humanitarian  emergencies  turn  into  protracted  crises. 
Adaptation to climate change and natural Disaster Risk Reduction strategies should become a 
joint  priority  objective,  as  well  as  recovery  and  transition  between  relief,  rehabilitation  and 
development. 

Coordination  (both  at  political  and  operational  level)  is  an  essential  element  to  ensure  a 
timely, efficient  and  effective  delivery of our humanitarian and  development aid and use of 
budgetary resources. The Commission is currently developing concrete tools and approaches 
("Joint Humanitarian and Development Framework") aimed at ensuring proper coordination 
and consistency between different EU instruments and interventions in transition contexts.  

While the LRRD approach has long been debated mostly from an aid architecture perspective 
(how to link instruments), the debate on resilience was initiated in 2011 and will be pursued to 
provide  an  opportunity  to  address  those  important  challenges  from  the  objectives  to  be 
achieved  ("building  resilience")  and  not  from  the  possible  means  to  be  mobilised 
(humanitarian funds on the one hand, development funds on the other hand). The assumption 
is that starting from this common goal, Humanitarian Aid and Development Aid together will 
do better.  

In  2011,  DG ECHO  has  been  engaged  at  different  levels  to  translate  this  thinking  into 
practical  considerations.  DG ECHO  has  actively  participated  in  the  drafting  of  the  new 
financial instruments for development, making sure that transition/resilience issues would be 
taken into account and factored in the new Regulations. The draft Regulations does provide 
more opportunities than the current ones to tackle effectively those challenges. DG ECHO has 
also  been  actively  engaged  (with  DEVCO  and  EEAS)  in  the  development  and  testing  of  a 
common  ECHO-DEVCO-EEAS  methodology  ("Joint  Humanitarian  and  Development 
Framework")  for  defining  strategic  priorities,  designing  joint  strategic  "programmes" 

56 

 
 
 
 
addressing the basic, underlying and immediate causes leading to fragility and vulnerability of 
a population affected by a crisis.  Several approaches developed at country levels were based 
on improved working relationships between ECHO DEVCO and EEAS and the development 
of a common approach. 

Below, an example of the approach developed on transition from DG ECHO DRR action plan 
in Kenya to Development EU funded DRR programme: 

The  dialogue  with  the  EU  Delegation  since  2006  has  led  to  the  elaboration  and  implementation  of  two 
development drought risk reduction programmes34; including a call for proposal to NGOs early 2012, allowing a 
handover between DG ECHO and the EU Delegation on community based DRR and livelihoods assets protection 
activities  in  the  country.  Articulated  around  3  main  components,  the  design  of  these  two  EC  development 
programmes  has  been  optimal  to  create  conditions  for  a  positive  change  regarding  drought  management  in 
Kenya. These components are: 

a) a support to community based activities, generating lessons learnt to feed the technical assistance;  
b) a technical assistance embedded into the national institution in charge of the management of drought and  
c) a financial support to the activities and the functioning of this national institution. 

The DG ECHO funded Drought Risk Reduction action plans have performed their testing and laboratory roles and 
shared evidences from the DRR pilot operations supported by DG ECHO so that the Kenya Rural Development 
Programme (KRDP) could integrate them. For example, a stronger emphasis is now given to the setting up of 
DRR  mechanisms  at  community  level,  correcting  therefore  a  crucial  gap  in  the  national  drought  management 
system in place up to now.  

The design of these two EC development programmes has allowed the EU Delegation to have a political dialogue 
with  the  Government  of  Kenya  regarding  drought  management  in  the  country,  pushing  and  advocating  for 
institutional  change  to  increase  the  effectiveness  of  the  national  system:  creation  of  a  Drought  Management 
Authority, setting up of a National Drought Contingency Fund. It has certainly contributed to the recent approval of 
the creation of the national Drought Management Authority.  

3.10.  Civil protection 

Financing of civil protection activities in 2011 reached the levels as specified below: 

Table - Breakdown of funding (commitments) for Civil Protection

Civil Protection inside the EU
Civil Protection outside the EU
TOTAL 

3.10.1.  Prevention 

Amount 
16 543 559
13 978 904
30 522 463

The Commission developed a number of activities to fully implement the EU framework for 
the prevention of disasters35. 

34  Drought Management Initiative (DMI - 2007-2011) and its following phase, the Kenya Rural Development 

Programme (KRDP - starting in 2012) 

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

57 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Following  the  adoption  by  the  Commission  in  December  2010  of  a  guidance  paper  on 
national risk assessment and mapping for disaster management, developed together with the 
national  authorities  of  the  Member  States36,  the  Council  adopted  Conclusions  on  further 
developing  risk  assessment  for  disaster  management  within  the  European  Union37.  Member 
States were invited to develop national risk assessment processes, in the context of which they 
would make use of those guidelines. In particular, Member States are invited to provide the 
Commission with a description of the process, methodology, methods, and non-sensitive data 
used for national risk assessment. Several meetings have taken place with Member States and 
interested stakeholders to facilitate this process.  

Before the end of 2012, the Commission, using the available national risk analysis, and taking 
into  account  the  future  impact  of  climate  change  and  the  need  for  climate  adaptation,  will 
prepare a cross-sectoral overview of the major natural and man-made risks faced by the EU.  

The Commission is also working towards improving its knowledge base on disasters.  

Actions were developed with the European Environment Agency (EEA) to encourage better 
information,  public  accessibility,  and  comparability  of  disaster  data,  such  as  information  on 
the costs of disasters. The Agency issued in January 2011 a report assessing the occurrence 
and  impacts  of  disasters  in  Europe  for  the  period  1998-2009  and  meetings  have  been 
organised with private and public stakeholders. 

The  Commission  has  also  started  collecting  information  in  the  framework  of  an  18-month 
disaster  prevention  good  practice  programme,  focussing  on  specific  disasters  (earthquakes, 
tsunamis, floods, storms, droughts and heat waves) and horizontal measures (such as planning 
and  infrastructure  design).  The  programme  will  lead  to  the  adoption  of  EU  guidelines  on 
minimum standards for disaster prevention before the end of 2012. 

The results of this work will be integrated in the adaptation to the Climate Change Clearing 
House Mechanism that will become operational in 2012.  

The Commission is also encouraging effective and greater investment in disaster prevention38: 
a requirement to disaster (and climate) proofed infrastructure investments has been introduced 
in  the  proposals  for  cohesion  policy  2014-2020,  adopted  in  October  2011.    Conditionality 
provisions on risk prevention and risk management have also been introduced to maximise the 
effectiveness of the interventions.  

The  Commission  has  started  discussions  with  the  insurance  industry  to  explore  ways  to 
encourage  increased  use  of  disaster  insurance  policies  with  risk-based  premiums.  The 
Commission  hosted  in  October  2011  a  conference  "Prevention  and  Insurance  of  Natural 
Catastrophes"39, bringing together policy makers, regulators, consumers, experts representing 
re/insurance industry, re/insurance intermediaries, loss adjusters as well as academia. 

36  Commission  Staff  Working  Paper  —  Risk  Assessment  and  Mapping  Guidelines  for  Disaster  Management 

(SEC(2010) 1626, 21.12.2010). 

37   Council  Conclusions  on  further  developing  risk  assessment  for  disaster  management  within  the  European 

Union  

38  See, inter alia, the Council Conclusions of 8 November 2010 on Innovative Solutions for Financing Disaster 

Prevention. 

39    http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/insurance/natural-catastrophes_en.htm 

58 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
The  Commission  is  also  actively  ensuring  linkages  with  the  initiatives  developed  by  the 
United  Nations’  International  Strategy  for  Disaster  Reduction  Secretariat  (UNISDR) 
implementing  the  Hyogo  Framework  for  Action  (HFA).  The  Commission  took  part  in  and 
contributed  to  the  third  session  of  the  global  platform  for  disaster  risk  reduction  and  to  the 
annual meeting of European national platforms and HFA focal points, the "European Forum 
for Disaster Risk Reduction". Synergies are ensured with the ongoing work at EU level. 

In 2011 the Civil Protection Financial Instrument financed, on the basis of an annual call for 
proposals  for  prevention  projects,  5  projects  in  the  area  of  prevention.  The  projects  will  be 
implemented in 2012 and 2013 (country of coordinating beneficiary indicated): 

o  Urban disaster prevention (Italy); 
o  Assessment of Risk Evaluations (UK); 
o  Hazard Assesments (Spain); 
o  Tsunami Early Warning (Greece); 
o  Prevention Strategy for the Baltic Sea region (Sweden). 

3.10.2.  Preparedness  

Preparedness  activities  seek  to  contribute  to  reaching  a  state  of  readiness  and  capability  of 
human  and  material  means  enabling  them  to  ensure  an  effective  rapid  response  to  an 
emergency,  obtained  as  a  result  of  action  taken  in  advance40.  Early  Warning  Systems, 
modules  and  the  Civil  Protection  Mechanism’s  training  programme  are  essential  parts  of 
those  activities.  In  addition,  the  Commission  gave  financial  support  to  a  number  of 
preparedness cooperation projects. 

a)  Several Early Warning Systems were financially supported in 2011, including: 

  EFAS  (European  Floods  Alert  System),  which  provides  early  warning  of  floods  in 
Europe. The system is developed by the Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC).  
  EFFIS (European Forest Fire Information System), covering the EU and neighbouring 
countries, which monitors and predicts forest fires in Europe (fire forecasts up to six 
days  ahead).  The  system,  which  is  also  a  JRC  product,  is  able  to  assess  the  damage 
following a forest fire.  

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

b)  Member  States  are  to  identify  in  advance  modules41  that  might  be  available  for 
intervention or could be established at very short notice and dispatched, generally within 
12 hours following a request for assistance. As civil protection modules should be capable 
of  working  self-sufficiently  for  a  given  period  of  time,  general  requirements  for  self-
sufficiency and, where appropriate, specific requirements that may vary according to the 
type of intervention or the type of module concerned are established at EU level so that 

40  See Article 4 of the Mechanism Recast. 
41  ‘Module’ means a self-sufficient and autonomous predefined task- and needs-driven arrangement of Member 
States’ capabilities or a mobile operational team of the Member States representing a combination of human 
and material means, that can be described in terms of its capacity for intervention or by the task(s) it is able to 
undertake (Article 3(5) of the Mechanism Recast). 

59 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Participating States know in advance the features to be met by the modules they offer on a 
voluntary basis for participating in an EU civil protection assistance intervention42.  

In 2010, those requirements were partially changed with respect to the "Aerial forest fire 
fighting  using  airplanes"  and  "Field  hospital"  modules43.  In  addition,  recent  civil 
protection operations demonstrated the need to add and implement four new types of civil 
protection modules to reinforce the civil protection rapid response capability, namely the 
"Ground  forest  fire  fighting",  "Ground  forest  fire  fighting  using  vehicles",  "Flood 
containment" and "Flood rescue using boats" modules44.  

As of 31 December 2011, Participating States had registered in the Mechanism’s Common 
Emergency  Communication  and  Information  System  (CECIS)  136  modules,  such  as 
Water  purification,  Aerial  forest  fire  fighting  using  airplanes  or  field  hospitals,  and  8 
TAST (Technical Assistance and Support Teams). 

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

  Training  courses:  in  2011,  891  persons  took  part  in  the  12  types  of  training  courses 
offered  by  selected  civil  protection  organisations.  Altogether  49  courses  were 
organised  in  2011  and  offered  to  eligible  personnel  from  Participating  States’  civil 
protection  organisations  and  UN  personnel.  The  experts  participating  in  the  training 
programme can become part of EU Civil Protection Teams deployed in the event of an 
emergency within and outside the EU (52 experts deployed in 2011).  

  Exercises:  in  2011,  9  grant  agreements  related  to  full-scale  exercises  were 
implemented and followed-up. Furthermore, 5 exercises were selected in the call for 
proposal for Civil Protection Full-Scale exercises launched in 2011. The exercises will 
focus on the following areas: a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear (CBRN), 
tidal wave, marine pollution, floods and terrorist attack.  

  Exercises with modules: in 2011, 5 contracts related to exercises for Civil Protection 
modules and TAST were implemented and followed up. Four table-top exercises and 
four field exercises took also place in 2011, with the total participation of about 500 
participants. 

  Preparedness projects: in 2011 the Civil Protection Financial Instrument financed four 
preparedness  projects  in  the  following  areas  (country  of  coordinating  beneficiary 
indicated): creation of a team for evacuation of citizens (Germany), evacuation in case 

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

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

44  Ibid. 

60 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
of a nuclear incident (Slovenia), cave rescueing awareness raising (Slovenia) and oil 
polluted shore line cleanup (Malta). 

3.10.3.  The civil protection response 
In 2011, the Commission's Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC) was dealing with 2745 
disasters  inside  and  outside  EU.  This  includes  an  explosion  and  power  shortage  in  Cyprus; 
earthquake, tsunami and nuclear accident in Fukushima power plant in Japan; evacuation of 
EU  citizens  and  repatriation  of  third  country  nationals  from  Libya/Tunisia,  as  well  as 
coordinating the European response to other requests for international assistance with regard 
to disasters worldwide. The European Civil Protection Mechanism was six times on a close 
monitoring  phase  and  three  times  on  a  pre-alert  phase.  It  was  activated  4  times  in  order  to 
respond  to  emergencies  within  the  EU  and  14  times  for  emergencies  occurring  outside  EU 
borders.  

In order to provide adequate response: 

o  A total of 52 experts were dispatched inside and outside the EU within the framework of 9 

missions of experts mandated in an assessment and coordination team. 

o  9 MIC Liaison officers were dispatched on emergencies. 
o  46 transports requests were awarded. 

In terms of disasters, it should be noted that 2011 was heavily plagued by floods, forest fires 
and  civil  unrest.  Also  noteworthy  were  the  requests  for  assistance  received  as  a  result  of 
volcano  eruptions,  tropical  storms,  earthquakes,  a  nuclear  incident  following  the  earthquake 
and tsunami in Japan. Worth to be noted that there is a new type of emergencies: space debris. 

In terms of evaluation, the effectiveness of civil protection scheme has been assessed at the 
end of 2010. The results of the evaluation are positive on the MIC providing useful services, 
relevant  to  Participating  States  when  civil  protection  assistance  interventions  are  deployed 
within or outside the EU. The training courses have proved to be a valuable asset in terms of 
preparing  national  experts  for  civil  protection  assistance  interventions,  thus  improving  the 
overall response capability of the Mechanism. The modular approach met with great interest 
and success  among  Participating  States, and should be further developed, including through 
specialised exercises and the development of standard operating procedures. 

3.10.4.  International cooperation 

a) 

Candidate Countries & Potential Candidates 

A Commission Decision approving a Memorandum of Understanding on the participation of 
the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in the Civil Protection Financial Instrument and 
the  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  was  adopted  on  15.2.201146.  The  country  will  become  the 
32nd State to participate in the Mechanism after the internal ratification of the Memorandum 
of Understanding has been completed and the agreement enters into force, which is expected 
to take place before the end of 2012. 

In  December  2010,  DG  ECHO  launched  a  programme  for  civil  protection  cooperation  with 
the candidate countries and potential candidates financed through the EU Instrument for Pre-

45   Of which 18 requests for assistance (4 within and 14 outside EU), 3 pre-alerts and 6 monitoring 
46   C(2011) 862 final 

61 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Accession Assistance (IPA). The beneficiaries are Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, 
the  former  Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia,  Montenegro,  Serbia,  Kosovo47  under  UNSCR 
1244/99  and  Turkey.  The  Programme  has  a  budget  of  €4  million  and  an  implementation 
period of 2 years. 

The overall objective of the programme is to bring the beneficiary countries closer to the EU 
Civil  Protection  Mechanism  and  to  contribute  to  the  development  of  their  civil  protection 
capacities. To this end, activities were organised  in 2011  such as trainings on  international 
disaster  relief  operations  for  up  to  60  experts  in  the  field  of  civil  protection;  one  table  top 
exercise  and  one  regional  field  exercise  in  Slovenia  with  earthquake  scenario  where  7 
intervention teams from the region and 40 observers participated; one high-level workshop 
on the European Civil Protection Mechanism.  

b) 

Southern partnership 

The Prevention, Preparedness and Response to Natural and Man-made Disasters Programme 
(PPRD  South)  contributes  to  the  development  in  partner  countries  of  stronger  prevention, 
preparedness  and  response  capacities  in  civil  protection.  It  also  aims  to  bring  the 
Mediterranean  Partner  Countries  progressively  closer  to  the  European  Civil  Protection 
Mechanism. 

Funded by the European Union, PPRD South started in March 2009 and will run until 2012. It 
provides a framework for reviewing existing civil protection/disaster management capacities 
and  legislative  framework,  the  preparation  of  a  regional  Risk  Atlas,  capacity  building 
measures,  increased  cooperation  with  the  EU  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  and  the 
organisation of technical assistance activities. 

PPRD South is managed by a consortium led by the Italian Department for Civil Protection 
and  includes  the  Civil  Protection  Authorities  of  France,  Egypt  and  Algeria  and  the  UN 
International  Strategy  for  Disaster  Reduction  (UNISDR).  The  Programme's  beneficiary 
countries  are  Jordan,  Lebanon,  Morocco,  Syria,  the  Palestinian  Authority,  Tunisia,  Turkey, 
Israel,  Albania,  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina,  Croatia  and  Montenegro.  Mauritania  and  Libya 
participate as observers.  

c) 

Other third countries 

Chile  -  The  Commission  and  the  Chilean  Government,  through  the  Chilean  National 
Emergency Office (ONEMI), signed on 25th November 2011 a letter of intent on cooperation 
in Disaster Management. Both parties recognize that prevention, mitigation and preparedness 
are the most effective way to respond to the increasing threat posed by disasters and agree to 
cooperate  in  a  view  to  promote  the  mainstreaming  of  disaster  risk  reduction  and  climate 
change adaptation in related sectors and institutions. The parties identified a number of areas 
for possible cooperation, among them the exchange of best practices on disaster preparedness 
and mitigation with local communities in disaster prone areas, the exchange of know-how and 
practices in risk mapping and risk assessment, the share of information and lessons learned on 
emergencies. 

United  States  -  The  Commission  and  the  Department  of  Homeland  Security,  the  Federal 
Emergency  Management  Agency  (FEMA)  signed  on  16  November  2011  an  administrative 

47 This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ 

Opinion on the Kosovo Declaration of Independence. 

62 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
arrangement to create a framework for information sharing and knowledge exchange to foster 
coordination  in  disaster  management.  Their  respective  actions  are  detailed  in  a  workplan 
agreed between the parties along the needs and priorities identified. The information sharing 
will concern risk assessment and mapping, lessons learned (and implemented) from disasters, 
prevention  measures,  scenario  planning  and  exercising,  with  particular  attention  to  mega 
disasters (low probability – high impact).  

International  organizations  -  In  October  2004,  the  Commission  and  UNOCHA  agreed  on  a 
system of close cooperation and coordination in disaster response (Joint Standard Operating 
Procedures for coordination in disaster response). The EU works closely with UN experts to 
ensure  that  European  assistance  is  effectively  integrated  into  the  overall  relief  effort 
coordinated by the UN. During the response to an emergency, information is exchanged both 
at the headquarters level as well as in the field. As far as disaster preparedness is concerned, 
the  Commission  works  very  closely  with  UNOCHA  on  the  development  of  training 
programmes.  UN  representatives  are  invited  to  the  Commission's  civil  protection  training 
courses and exercises and vice versa. This is important to ensure that EU and UN experts can 
work well together. The EU and the UN have taken part in several joint missions. Missions 
can  take  different  forms,  such  as  a  joint  assessment  by  a  combined  EU  and  UN  team,  or  a 
team of EU experts integrated into a UN team.  

The Joint UNEP48/OCHA Environment Unit integrated into the Emergency Services Branch 
of  UNOCHA,  is  the  United  Nations  mechanism  for  mobilizing  and  coordinating  the 
international  response  to  environmental  emergencies.  Following  the  signing  of  an  informal 
cooperation  paper  in  December  2005,  there  have  been  a  number  of  emergencies  where  the 
European Civil Protection Mechanism and the Joint UNEP/OCHA Environment Unit worked 
together, pooling expertise in environmental emergencies and maximizing the overall impact 
of the assistance provided to a disaster-stricken country. These emergencies have included an 
oil  spill  off  the  Lebanese  coast  in  July  2006;  the  chemical  spill  in  the  Côte  d'Ivoire  in 
September 2006; and a joint environmental emergency mission in March 2010 to Ukraine to 
evaluate the risk of a dam break and pollution in a former mining area. 

3.11.  Case  studies  on  launching  assistance  (humanitarian  aid,  disaster  preparedness 

and civil protection) 

3.11.1.  Conflict in Libya -  joined Humanitarian aid and Civil Protection assistance 

Humanitarian  assistance  to  besieged  cities  (Sirte,  Bani  Wallid)  -  All  along  the  conflict  in  Libya, 
the cities of Sirte and Bani Wallid suffered heavy shelling. For the population of Sirte it was extremely 
difficult to leave the city and it had to face day by day an increasingly difficult humanitarian situation. 
Quite rapidly shortages of water, electricity, hygiene items and food started to be reported. Ibn Sina, 
the only hospital in Sirte, was quickly overwhelmed as a result of the ongoing fighting and it had to 
operate  in  extremely  difficult  circumstances  with  shortages  of  oxygen, drinking  water,  food  and  life 
saving  drugs.  While  fighting  was  ongoing,  DG ECHO  partners  (ICRC,  UNICEF,  ACTED,  Mercy 
Corps,  WFP)  developed  contingency  planning  and  stockpiled  emergency  relief  items  (food,  water, 
NFI)  to  provide  emergency  aid  to  the  affected  populations  as  soon  as  they  became  accessible.  The 
coordination between humanitarian agencies was facilitated by DG ECHO’s support to a humanitarian 
hub in Misrata. As Sirte fell, the priority became to ensure for those who had fled the hostilities a safe 
return in a town heavily contaminated with unexploded ordnances. Ever since the aggravation of the 
situation in Sirte, DG ECHO had been anticipating this need and had advocated for the necessity to 
rapidly deploy Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) teams and Mine Risk Education teams. As early 

48   United Nations Environment Programme - www.unep.org 

63 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
as mid-October, DG ECHO decided to reinforce its support for humanitarian mine clearance actions. 
At the occasion, Commissioner Kristalina Georgieva stated that: "One of the major threats to civilians 
remains the residues of war. Despite the cessation of the fighting, unexploded ammunition and mines 
are still claiming victims, especially children. This additional funding will assist the Libyan people to 
reduce the risk of fatalities and injury". 

Repatriation of Third Country Nationals - During the conflict, Tunisia, Egypt and Niger were faced 
a  sudden  influx  of  Tunisian  and  Egyptian  returnees,  along  with  Libyan  and  third  country  nationals, 
who  were  seeking  to  escape  violence.  At  least  77,000  persons  crossed  the  border  from  Libya  into 
Tunisia in a few days. The Tunisian army set up a transit camp at the Ras-Ajdir crossing point. The 
camp could accommodate 800 people. Basic services such as food and medical care were provided. A 
similar  reception  camp  had  been  established  at  the  Egyptian  border  but  assistance  was  availed 
exclusively  to  Egyptian  returnees.  An  estimated  5,000  to  7,000  Third  Country  Nationals  (non-
Egyptians  and  non-Libyans)  were  stranded  at  the  compound  of  the  Egypt-Libya  border,  requiring 
urgent evacuation assistance. On 28 February, IOM started the first five of ten air rotations to support 
the  evacuation  from  Djerba  (Tunisia)  of  nearly  2,000  stranded  migrants.  A  ferry  had  departed  with 
1,500 stranded Egyptian migrants back to their country. Despite these efforts, the overcrowding at the 
borders  was  worsening  by  the  hour.  A  coordination  and  assessment  team  consisting  of  6  members 
arrived in Djerba in the evening of 3rd March 2011. A second team  was deployed to Tunisia in the 
evening  of 12/4/2011.  All  in  all,  the  MIC  helped  in coordinating the  provision  of  in-kind  assistance 
provided by the participating States to the Mechanism and facilitated the evacuation of nationals and 
third country nationals by co-funding 30 requests for transport assistance. 

3.11.2.  Rapid Response to populations' movements (D.R. Congo) 

DRC is one of the biggest protracted crises in the world: the country is still affected by regular and 
violent fighting on its Eastern part with ongoing population displacements. The challenge is to address 
the needs in a adequate and timely manner, in a volatile insecurity and logistically context.One of the 
reported success stories in eastern DRC is the Rapid Response to Movements of Population, RRMP. 
This  inter-agency  mechanism  co-led  by  OCHA  and  UNICEF,  includes  phases  of  contingency 
preparation  (including  pre-positioning  of  aid  supplies  and  identification  of  experimented  operational 
partners),  humanitarian  surveillance  system  through  alert  networks,  as  well  as  dedicated  and  pre-
financed  response  in  water/sanitation,  education  and  non  food  items.  This  programme  was  initially 
launched in 2004 but it has been continuously adapted. DG ECHO is one of the main donors of this 
initiative  (€  20  million  since  2005).  In  2011 49,  the  mechanism  assessed  the  needs  of  more  than  2.3 
million  persons  and  supported  one  million  beneficiaries  -  all  affected  by  population  movements  – 
including  internally  displaced  persons  (IDPs),  returnees  and  host  communities.  Implementation  is 
done  through  numerous  NGOs  including  AVSI,  Save  the  Children,  IRC,  NRC,  Solidarités  in  three 
provinces  (North  and  South  Kivu  and  in  the  Orientale  province).  The  RRMP  programme  has 
developed a multi-sector assessment (MSA) tool, which scores every crisis situation against a set of 
commonly agreed indicators; leading to a total vulnerability score, which when exceeded triggers an 
RRMP response. In 2011, 230 assessments were done and shared. MSA results are accessible online 
and  via  clusters  and  are  often  used  by  the  wider  humanitarian  community  to  prioritise  other 
interventions. They are often used to reinforce programming decision making by donors, ensuring that 
adequate  targeting  in  the  areas  of  highest  need.  This  innovative  model  allows,  in  a  challenging  and 
volatile  context,  a  better  needs-focused  emergency  response  programme  and  helps  to  improve  the 
speed,  quality  and  coverage  of  emergency  response.  Its  limitation  is  that  the  emergency  response  is 
time-bound  and  that  needs  remaining  after  the  RRMP  response  are  not  always  easily  taken  over  by 
other projects. 

49   Compilation of results from the beginning of RRMP 2011 on February 1st to the end of November 2011  

64 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
3.11.3.  Mogadishu's lifesaving soup kitchens 

Long  cues  form  at  a  wet  feeding  centre  in  Wadajir  district  of  Mogadishu.  Everyday,  about  five 
thousand people collect food here, for most, the only meal of the day. This is one of the 18 kitchens 
operated by a local organisation called SAACID, which means "to help" in the local Somali language. 
The wet feeding programme is funded by several donors, including the Humanitarian Aid department 
of the Commission. The Head of Somalia Office at the Commission, observes that Somalia is one of 
the  most  difficult  contexts  to  work  in  for  humanitarian  aid  workers.  Militants  have  declared 
humanitarian  aid  workers  legitimate  targets,  making  delivery  of  aid  extremely  difficult.  Inside 
Mogadishu, displaced people fleeing conflict and drought in the rural areas are braving the long and 
difficult  journey  only  to  starve  in  the  city.  The  soup  kitchens  are  the  only  source  of  food  for  many 
families.  About  80,000  hot  meals  are  served  across  the  city  everyday  for  six  days  a  week.  Moving 
supplies  to  the  centres  is  filled  with  challenges.  Numerous  roadblocks  manned  by  different  militias 
who  often  impose  random  'taxation'  pose  the  biggest  problem.  But  this  lifeline  has  come  under 
increasing  threat.  SAACID  is  one  of  the  agencies  ordered  to  stop  operations  in  the  November  2011 
announcement issued by the al-Shebaab. Residents such as Habiba Mohamed Ali do not know where 
to turn to. Habiba has no income or other source of nutrition. Without this food centre, she fears that 
her family will starve and die. 

3.11.4.  Essential Medicines Programme in Zimbabwe50 

Harare: 20 January, 2011 - Every four months, Henry Gwiranenzira, a Pharmaceutical  Technician 
from Saint Albert’s Mission hospital, located in Mount Darwin, 200 km North East of Harare, arrives 
at  the  NatPharm  Warehouse  in  Harare  to  collect  much  needed  vital  and  essential  medicines  for  the 
district hospital and its twelve surrounding rural primary health care facilities. This time he has come 
to  collect  the  Primary  Health  Care  Packs  (PHCP),  which  are  pre-packaged  medicine  kits,  each 
containing  41  different  vital  medicines  and  supplies  which  are  set  to  support  400  patients  for  a 
month."Before we started receiving the PHCP, the situation was bad,” he says. “Due to the shortage 
of essential supplies, patients were forced to buy their own medicines. This resulted in many of them 
being turned away without treatment". "People in the rural areas were the most affected during this 
time.  Most  of  them  did  not  have  money  as  they  could  not  afford  to  visit  private  institutions  for  the 
fulfilment  of  their  prescriptions.  This  resulted  in  many  of  them  dying  from  easily  preventable 
illnesses".  Since  the  introduction  of  the  Primary  Health  Care  Packs  under  the  Emergency  Vital 
Medicines  Support  for  Zimbabwe,  which  receives  continued  support  from  the  Commission,  at  least 
95% of the 1,300 health facilities in Zimbabwe now have more than 80% stock of vital and essential 
medicines. To date, the Commission through DG ECHO has contributed towards the procurement of 
essential  medicines,  as  well  as  providing  significant  technical  support  in  the  management  of  these 
medicines.The effects of the unstable political and economic situation in Zimbabwe, which escalated 
in  2008,  resulted  in  a  chronic  shortage  in  the  supply  of  drugs  and  medical  supplies  throughout  the 
country.  Health  facilities  such  as    Saint  Albert’s  Mission  hospital,  which  sees  over  5,000  patients  a 
year, as well as providing outreach services for the surrounding rural clinics, operated with only 27% 
stock levels of the required essential drugs.“The PHCP’s have made a huge difference in the lives of 
the  most  vulnerable  populations”  says  UNICEF  Representative,  Dr.  Peter  Salama.  “Thanks  to  this 
commitment by the Commission, the most disadvantaged communities have equitable access to quality 
healthcare and treatment”.As the economic situation continues to stabilize in Zimbabwe, the support 
to the health sector being given by the Commission is going a long way to ensure that Henry brings 
the  necessary  medical  supplies  for  the  patients  at  St  Albert  Mission  Hospital  and  the  surrounding 
areas. 

50   © UNICEF - Elizabeth Mupfumira  

65 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
3.11.5.  Small  Scale  Response  mechanism  to  a  mega  landslide  in  La  Paz  (Bolivia)  on  26 

February 2011  

In December 2010, the municipal authorities of La Paz (Bolivia) warned that certain neighbourhoods 
of the city were about to collapse due  to imminent  landslides. Defective housing, sewage  and water 
networks, together with the intensity of the rains, had started to move the ground on which thousands 
of people were living. A state of emergency was declared and it was decided to immediately relocate 
at  least  one  hundred  families  to  a  safer  place  in  order  to  avoid  a  catastrophe.  At  that  moment,  the 
Municipality  of  La  Paz  did  not  have  the  means  to  manage  the  evacuation  and  requested  help  from 
DG ECHO's partners. OXFAM GB, in association with the Bolivian NGO FUNDEPCO, applied for 
the EU funds through the Small Scale Response mechanism51, and this allowed them to react quickly 
and  start  the  installation  of  transitional  housing  jointly  with  the  Municipality  in  order  to  host  the 
potentially affected families. The small-scale project included the construction of transitional housing, 
sanitary modules and the sensitisation of people about the risks to which they were exposed in order to 
facilitate the evacuation. 

On  26  February  2011,  just  one  day  after  starting  the  installation  of  families  in  the  newly  created 
transitional campsites, a mega landslide destroyed more than 1,000 houses in the area targeted by the 
project and a whole part of the town disappeared. No casualties were registered because all inhabitants 
of the affected area had been previously evacuated. DG ECHO partners were obliged to accelerate the 
construction of facilities, combining efforts with the Municipality and other organisations in order to 
respond effectively and rapidly to cover the needs of the 5,446 people affected by the landslide. While 
transitional  shelter  was  being  built,  hundreds  of  tents,  which  had  been  stocked  by  local  institutions 
from  previous  DG ECHO  interventions  in  Bolivia,  were  installed  quickly  and  people  were  able  to 
sleep under a roof immediately after the disaster happened. Moved by reports of the incident, several 
institutions  and  donors  contributed  with  additional  funding,  doubling  the  funds  initially  provided  by 
the Commission This allowed the immediate needs of the affected people to be met. In addition, the 
transitional housing and sanitary modules established by OXFAM and FUNDEPCO were taken as a 
reference  by  the  Municipality  to  scale  it  up.  These  modules  are  removable  and  reusable  for  future 
emergencies.  

This  experience  helped  DG ECHO  partners  to  identify  the  gaps  in  terms  of  DRR  and  to  define  a 
DIPECHO project which is now being implemented in La Paz to improve the response capacities and 
reduce the risks of people suffering from the effects of natural hazards in the most vulnerable parts of 
the  city.  It  demonstrates  how  well-timed  anticipatory  actions  can  help  ensure  that  local  authorities 
make good decisions in moments of crisis; the importance of disaster preparedness in responding more 
effectively;  when  capacity  exists,  response  can  be  timely.  It  also  shows  to  what  extent  permanent 
contact and exchange between DG ECHO and its implementing partners in the field can definitively 
help to save lives and reduce losses. 

3.11.6.  Disaster preparedness, a life saving investiment for communities in El Salvador 

Between 10 and 20 October 2011, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua were under the 
destructive influence of Tropical Depression 12-E (TD12E) and this led to several days of intensive 
rainfall, causing great damages. Precipitation registered in the region surpassed the rainfall average for 
this  period  of  the  year  by  200%  to  300%  and  levels  registered  in  El  Salvador  were  higher  than 
historical  levels  registered  from  previous  disasters  such  as  Hurricane  Mitch  (1998),  Tropical  Storm 
IDA (2009) or Tropical Storm Agatha (2010). Such event had not occurred during the past forty years. 
In El Salvador, the damages are equivalent to $ 840 Million, 4% of the GDP. 

TD  12E  also  showed  that  disaster  preparedness  saves  lives.  Many  communities  reacted  in  a  timely 
manner  and  evacuated  its  neighbours,  thus  contributing  to  avoid  more  deaths.  The  testimonies  from 
residents of areas where ECHO's Disaster Preparedness projects were being implemented showed the 

51   See Worldwide intervention tools under 3.7. 

66 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
extent  to  which  these  programmes  are  having  an  extremely  positive  effect  in  areas  affected  by  the 
Depression,  helping  communities  get  organized  and  making  live  saving  decisions  like  evacuating 
residents on time. In Caserío San Antonio, Comasagua municipality, where DG ECHO implemented a 
disaster preparedness project in 2009, the evacuation following TD 12E was carried out successfully, 
and allowed to save 350 people from the floods.  

A  testimony  from  a  different  municipality  gives  another  such  example.  "ECHO's  Disaster 
Preparedness  project  has  improved  the  capacities  of  the  local  Civil  Protection  Committee  and  they 
are  applying  what  they  have  learned",  said  Félix  Franco,  local  Civil  Protection  Committee's 
coordinator at Caserío Los Marroquines, Cojupeque municipality. "When the rains started on October 
11th,  the  Commission  got  together,  coordinated  the  monitoring  or  risk  areas  and  decided  the 
evacuation of 14 families. They also coordinated with the local authorities to get supplies to the school 
centre that was going to host these evacuated families. So we can observe an increase in the capacities 
and we see how, when a concrete threat comes, they have been able to evaluate the risk and propose 
concrete actions".  

3.11.7.  Civil protection intervention during forest fires in Greece 

In August 2011, Greece was faced with more than 60 forest fires, out of which 7 major ones. As forest 
fires  risk  was  also  running  very  high  in  other  parts  of  Southern  Europe,  it  was  difficult  for 
Participating  States  to  provide  mutual  assistance.  As  a  result,  Greece  activated  the  Civil  Protection 
Mechanism on 25 August 2011 and made an urgent request for three aerial forest fire fighting (AFFF) 
modules  consisting  of  two  planes  each.  In  the  meantime,  the  MIC  also  received  a  request  for 
assistance  from  Albania,  which  was  also  facing  forest  fires  and  was  equally  requesting  aerial  fire-
fighting support. 

The MIC called for an urgent audio conference with all Participating States concerned. Following this, 
two  AFFF  modules  were  provided  by  Spain  and  France  through  a  project  financed  under  the 
preparatory action on an EU Rapid Response Capability.  

Moreover,  through  a  cascade  scheme,  another  AFFF  module  was  kept  on  standby  in  France  for 
possible deployment in Italy. This allowed Italy to send two more planes to Greece, thus covering the 
Greek request in full. The latter two airplanes first assisted Albania in fighting forest fires on their way 
to Greece. 

The MIC also deployed a liaison officer to Greece to ensure a smooth liaison on the ground between 
Greece, the assisting modules and the MIC.  

3.11.8.  Civil protection response to the earthquake in Japan  

An earthquake of 8.8 magnitude, depth 24.4 km hit the North Eastern part of Japan on 11 March 2011. 
That  was  one  of  the  biggest  earthquakes  ever  recorded  in  history.  Several  aftershocks  of  6  on  the 
Richter  scale  occurred  and  a  Pacific  wide  tsunami  warning  was  sent  out  with  warnings  of  up  to  10 
meter  waves.  Damage  in  Japan  was  extensive  merely  due  to  the  tsunami  than  the  earthquake.  An 
explosion  followed  by  a  fire  took  place  in  the  nuclear  plant  in  Fukushima  prefecture,  leading  to 
problems with the cooling system and concerns about possible radioactive leakage. 

Japan  activated  the  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  on  11  March  2011.  A  MIC  liaison  officer  was 
deployed  to  Tokyo  to  liaise  with  the  EU  Delegation  and  prepare  the  ground  for  an  eventual 
deployment of a EUCP Team. One humanitarian expert from DG ECHO joined the UNDAC mission. 
The  needs  identified  by  Japan  were  blankets,  mattresses,  bottles  of  mineral  water,  poly water  tanks, 
food and temporary toilets. Japan accepted a EUCP Team to coordinate the incoming assistance. An 
EU Civil Protection team of 17 people (including assessment and coordination experts) left for Japan 
on 18 March 2011. 

67 

 
 
 
 
On  24  March,  the  Commissioner  for  Humanitarian  Aid,  International  Cooperation  and  Crisis 
Response,  Kristalina  Georgieva  travelled  to  Japan  to  discuss  the  national  relief  effort  with  the 
Japanese authorities and partner organisations and to explore needs for further assistance. 

A  total  of  400  tons  of  in-kind  assistance  has  been  channelled  through  the  EU  Civil  Protection 
Mechanism  with  flights  coordinated  by  the  MIC.  Distribution  was  to  Fukushima,  Ibaraki,  Miyagi, 
Tochigi  and  Yamagata  Prefectures.  11  Participating  States  contributed:  Austria,  Bulgaria,  Denmark, 
Finland, France, Hungary, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Sweden and the United Kingdom.   

68 

 
 
 
 
4. 

AID MANAGEMENT   

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

4.1. 

Aid delivery methods 

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

4.1.1.  Experts in the field 

One  strength  and  comparative  advantage  of  DG  ECHO  is  its  worldwide  network  of  field 
offices  allowing  an  up-to-date  analysis  of  existing  and  forecast  needs  in  a  given  country  or 
region,  contributing  to  the  development  of  intervention  strategies  and  policy  development, 
providing  technical  support  to  ECHO  funded  operations,  ensuring  adequate  monitoring  of 
these interventions and facilitating donor's coordination at field level. 

The allocation of budget to the field offices as well as the opening of new offices in a region 
or  inside  a  country  depends  on  the  assessed  needs  and  the  humanitarian  situation. 
Accordingly,  the  size  and  type  of  offices  and  the  number  of  experts  mandated  in  the  field 
varies from one location to another.  

By  the  end  of  2011,  140  international  experts  and  330  local  staff  were  in  place  in  44  field 
offices located over 38 countries. 

A few openings and closures of ECHO offices have taken place during 2011, mainly in North 
and West Africa. Following the Libya crisis, few temporary offices were opened to allow the 
smooth support of the ECHO operations in the area: 

(cid:131)  Marsa Matrouh, Egypt – opening 09/03/2011, closure 22/05/2011 
(cid:131)  Zarzis, Tunisia – opening 05/03/2011, closure 15/10/2011 
(cid:131)  Benghazi, Libya – opening 18/04/2011, closure 07/11/2011 
(cid:131)  Tripoli, Libya – opening 29/08/2011, tentative closure date by the end of March 2012 or 

mid April 2012 

In January 2011 the ECHO office in Sana'a, Yemen, was officially opened and in November, 
the one in Kampala, Uganda, was definitely closed. In West Africa, two offices were opened 
in 2011: 

(cid:131)  Bamako, Mali – the decision to open it was taken in July 2011 although the recruitment 

of staff is still ongoing 

(cid:131)  Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire – The ECHO Imprest Account was authorised on 01/08/2011, the 

same date as started the TA's contract. 

69 

 
 
 
 
4.1.2.  Relations with partners 

In the field of Humanitarian aid, the Commission implements its mandate mainly by funding 
partners  ranging  from  non-governmental  organisations,  United  Nations  agencies,  other 
international  organisations  such  as  the  International  Committee  of  the  Red  Cross  and  the 
International  Federation  of  the  Red  Cross  and  the  Red  Crescent  Societies,  to  specialised 
agencies of EU Member States. 

The  number  of  partners  is  about  200.  The  diversity  of  partners  is  important  for  the 
Commission  since  it  guarantees  a  high  level  of  flexibility,  quality  and  it  allows 
comprehensive coverage of an ever-growing list of needs in different parts of the world and in 
increasingly complex situations.  

In 2011 the relative share of these organisations in the funding provided by DG ECHO was 
NGOs: 50 %, UN organisations: 36 % and international organisations: 14 %.  

The  graph  below  provides  an  overview  of  the  funding  by  category  of  partners  over  the  last 
three years: 

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Funding by category of partners (2009-2011)

%
0
5

%
0
5

%
7
4

%
9
3

%
9
3

%
6
3

NGO

2009

UN

2010

%
4
1

%
4
1

%
1
1

IO

2011

Relations  between  DG ECHO  and  its  implementing  partners  are  governed  by  Partnership 
Agreements, which define the respective roles and responsibilities in humanitarian operations 
financed  by  the  European  Union.  The  Framework  Partnership  Agreements  govern  relations 
with  both  non-governmental  organisations  (NGOs)  and  international  organisations  (IOs).  In 
the case of United Nations agencies, the Financial and Administrative Framework Agreement 
between  the  Commission  and  the  UN  (FAFA)  governs  the  relations  between  them  in  the 
domain of humanitarian aid. 

70 

 
 
 
 
 
The notion of partnership is underpinned by a permanent dialogue on operational, policy and 
administrative  issues  with  the  various  types  of  partners.  The  Partnership  Agreements  are 
revised every 4/5 years. The next revision will take place in 201352.  

Any humanitarian organisation which meets the eligibity critera set out in the Regulation on 
Humantarian Aid can submit an application for partnership. To be recognised as a partner by 
DG ECHO,  the  organisations  have  to  demonstrate  non  profit  making  status,  their 
establishment  in  an  EU  Member  State,  their  professionalism,  financial  standing,  respect  for 
humanitarian principles, experience and capacity to implement humanitarian aid operations in 
urgent situations. In 2011, around 20 organisations submitted an application.  

Further  information  on  these  Agreements  is  available  on  DG ECHO’s  website  at 
http://ec.europa.eu/echo/partners/index_en.htm.  

4.2. 

Coordination of humanitarian funds 

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

•  Coordination  with  Member  States  is  ensured  through  consultation/meetings  with  their 
representatives  in  the  Humanitarian  Aid  Committee  (HAC)  which  gives  an  opinion,  in 
conformity  with  the  Humanitarian  Aid  Regulation,  on  all  funding  decisions  exceeding 
€2 million 53  before  being  adopted  by  the  Commission.  In  addition  exchanges  of  specific 
crisis situations feature regularly in the agenda of COHAFA. 

•  other EU-services are consulted on funding decisions, prior to their approval and through 

various co-ordination meetings, in particular on LRRD54 issues; 

•  Contacts  at  field  and  headquarters'  level  are  held  regularly  with  major  partners,  in 
particular  United  Nations  organisations  and  other  International  Organisations  such  as  the 
ICRC and the IFRC; 

•  Coordination  with  NGOs  is  ensured  through  a  dedicated  network  (VOICE)  and 

organisation of annual conference with partners  

•  An IT application has  been  developed to collect humanitarian aid contributions  from  EU 
and Members States (EDRIS, formerly called 14-points application). This database, which 
is  accessible  by  anyone,  gives  the  global  EU  (EU  +  Member  States)  humanitarian 
assistance  provided  by  year  and  country.  The  system  is  linked  to  the  Financial  Tracking 
System (FTS) of OCHA55.  

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

52   With respect to UN Partners, the review will not deal with the FAFA itself – which is a Commission-wide 
agreement – but will address any issues arising out of other legal documents governing the working relations 
between those Partners and DG ECHO (such as General Conditions). 
€10 million for emergency actions  

53 
54  Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development. 

71 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
In 2011, humanitarian aid contributions totalling €2,875 million  were reported in DG ECHO’s 
EDRIS, of which 60 % were from Member States and 40 % from EU funds. 

Member 
States 60%

EU 
40%

EU Huma-
nitarian 
aid; 65%

EU 
Food 
aid; 
26%

EU disaster 
preparedness; 
3%

EU Civil 
protection; 3%

EU Technical 
assistance; 4%

Looking at the geographic breakdown of the total EU + MS funding in 2011, the largest part 
went to African countries – 44% (compared to 37% and 47% in 2010 and 2009 respectively), 
13% to Middle East, 10% to Central Asia. 

The  21%  classified  as  "not  specified"  stands  for  contributions  allocated  to  unspecified 
countries, meaning mainly to UN agencies and other humanitarian aid activities.  

0,29%

1,95%

2,72%

6%

10,21%

13,26%

21,51%

44,02%

Africa

Worldwide
Middle East & Mediterranean
Central Asia

South Asia
Caribbean & Pacific
Latin America

Europe, Caucasus 

Geographical breakdown of MS and EU humanitarian aid contributions 

55  United Nations Office for the coordination of Humanitarian Aid. 

72 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                         
Overall,  largely  the  same  countries  benefited  from  humanitarian  aid  funded  by  the  Member 
States  and  from  the  EU56.  The  severe  drought  that  affected  the  Horn  of  Africa  counted  for 
16%  of  the  total  aid  (EU  +  Member  States)  provided  during  the  year.  Beside  this,  the  two 
complex crises dating back to previous years (Sudan/South Sudan and DR Congo) accounted 
for 15% of the EU assistance (EU+MS).  

Member States

EU

€

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
n

i

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

A

I
L
A
M
O
S

H
T
U
O
S

/

N
A
D
U
S

N
A
D
U
S

.

R

.

D

,

O
G
N
O
C

F
O

N
A
T
S
K
A
P

I

N
A
T
S

I

N
A
H
G
F
A

A
Y
B

I
L

T
P
O

Top10 beneficiaries 

A

I

I

P
O
H
T
E

A
Y
N
E
K

E
R
O
V

I

I
'

D
E
T
O
C

Some  33%  of  the  top  10  funding  went  to  African  countries  in  2011,  the  balance  going  to 
Pakistan, Afghanistan, occupied Palestinian territory and Libya. 

Member States

EU

1.200

1.000

€

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
n

i

800

600

400

200

0

Africa

Central Asia

Middle East & Medit.

Top 10 beneficiaries – regional breakdown of MS and EU humanitarian aid contributions 

56 To be compared with graph in section 3.2. 

73 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
4.3. 

Evaluations   

DG ECHO's  mandate  to  evaluate  is  defined  by  the  provisions  included  in  the  Financial 
Regulation  and  its  Implementing  Rules.  It  is  also  an  obligation  set  in  the  Commission's 
evaluation standards. Additionally, as regards specifically humanitarian interventions, Article 
18  of  the  Humanitarian  Aid  Regulation  requires  the  Commission  to  "regularly  assess 
humanitarian  aid  operations  financed  by  the  Community  in  order  to  establish  whether  they 
have  achieved  their  objectives  and  to  produce  guidelines  for  improving  the  effectiveness  of 
subsequent operations".  

Each  year,  an  indicative  Evaluation  Plan  is  established  after  a  consultative  process  within 
DG ECHO.  The  Evaluation  Plan  is  shared  with  the  Humanitarian  Aid  Committee  (HAC). 
This programme is flexible and can be adapted to include evaluations not foreseen initially, in 
response to particular events or changing circumstances. Evaluations can cover not only the 
assessment  of  individual  Commission-funded  operations,  but  also  thematic  issues  and 
partnerships.  

These evaluations are almost always carried out by independent consultants selected through 
a specific procurement procedure. 

4.3.1.  The 2011 work programme   

The Evaluation programme for 2011 included 18 evaluations and studies, plus the possibility 
of  carrying  out  a  number  of  evaluations  of  certain  interventions  depending  on  the  access 
conditions to those areas. Given the flexible nature of the planning and new priorities during 
the year, new evaluations were decided on the basis of the needs identified, while other were 
postponed  or  suspended.  Moreover,  a  number  of  studies  ongoing  at  the  beginning  of  2011 
were concluded during the year. 

In total, in 2011, 7 evaluations and evaluation-related studies were concluded, five of which 
had been launched in 2010:  

•  EVHAC Review 2010, 
•  Study on DG ECHO's ‘Costs Observed for Results’ Approach, 
•  Evaluation  and  Strategy  Orientation  of  DG ECHO-Funded  Health  Sector  Activities  in 

Burmese Refugee Camps in Thailand (2004-2009), 

•  Impact Assessment for the EVHAC, 
•  Real-time Evaluation of Humanitarian Action Supported by DG ECHO in Haiti, 
•  Evaluation of DG ECHO's Action in Uganda, 
•  Evaluation  of  DG ECHO’s  Action  in  the  Water/sanitation/Public  Health  Sector  in 

Zimbabwe. 

12 evaluations or studies were launched, but not finalised, in 2011: 

•  Evaluation of DG ECHO's Action in URBAN Settings, 
•  Evaluation of DG ECHO's Actions in the Livelihoods Sector, 
•  Evaluation of DG ECHO's Disaster Preparedness and Disaster Risk Reduction Actions in 

Southern Africa & the Indian Ocean, 

•  Evaluation of DG ECHO's Intervention in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and Lebanon, 
•  Need  Analysis,  Review  and  Design  of  DG ECHO's  Training  in  Disaster  Risk  Reduction 

and Climate Change Adaptation, 

74 

 
 
 
 
•  Impact assessment for the modernisation of the EU Humanitarian Aid legislation (HAR), 
•  Review of Existing Practices to Ensure Participation of Disaster-Affected Communities in 

Humanitarian Aid Operations, 

•  Evaluation  and  Review  of  Humanitarian  Access  Strategies  in  DG ECHO-Funded 

Interventions, 

•  Evaluation  of  DG ECHO's  Legal  Framework  for  Funding  Humanitarian  Actions  (FPA 

2008), 

•  Evaluation of the Civil Protection Mechanism and the CP Financial Instrument 2007-2009, 
•  Evaluation of DG ECHO's Fleet Management, 
•  Evaluation of DIPECHO South America. 

4.3.2.  Results of some evaluations finalised in 2011 

The evaluations and reviews concluded in 2011 confirmed that, in general terms, DG ECHO's 
actions  in  the  field  of  Humanitarian  Aid  contributed  to  an  effective  implementation  of  the 
DG's objectives. Results of evaluations in countries are included in sections 3.3 to 3.7 under 
the countries concerned and in section 3.9.3 on civil protection. 

During 2011, DG ECHO launched mechanisms for reinforcing the follow-up of the use made 
of  conclusions  and  recommendations  from  the  evaluations.  The  aim  is  to  enhance  the 
integration of evaluation lessons into the management and decision-making of Humanitarian 
and  Civil  Protection  activities  and,  therefore,  contribute  to  increase  the  effectiveness  and 
positive impact of DG ECHO interventions. 

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

4.4. 

Control of the use of funds 

4.4.1. 

Internal control 

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

•  Strict  selection  and  quality  control  mechanisms  for  partners  under  the  Framework 
Partnership  Agreement  (FPA)  signed  with  NGOs  and  international  organisations57  that 
specify  the  financial  credentials  and  expertise  required  of  implementing  partners, 
combined with both regular and ad hoc assessments of FPA partners in order to ensure that 
these requirements are met continuously. Financial management and control requirements 
for  UN  bodies  are  laid  down  in  the  EU-UN  Financial  Administrative  Framework 
Agreement (FAFA).  

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

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

57  Mainly the IFRC, ICRC and IOM. 

75 

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

•  Project monitoring by a network of field experts (technical assistants) worldwide. These 
specialists  are  based  in  the  field  in  order  to  facilitate  operations  funded  by  the  EU, 
regardless of where, and maximise their impact. They closely monitor projects and write 
regular  reports.  In  order  to  enhance  the  rapid  reaction  capacity  and  monitoring  of 
operations,  the  number  of  field  experts  has  gradually  been  increased  in  recent  years. 
Currently about 130 field experts are based in the various field offices.  

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

•  An  obligation  on  the  partners  to  provide  reports  after  the  end  of  the  operations  to 

substantiate their expenses. 

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

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

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

In 2011, a budget of €1.8 million for contracts with  external auditors was allocated to audits. 
In terms of work carried out, 46 audits were performed at headquarters; 44 field audits were 
finalised  on  projects  under  way;  9  field  office  audits  were  carried  out,  2  humanitarian 
procurement  centres  were  assessed  and  7  audits  of  grant  recipients  of  the  Civil  Protection 
mechanism took place; 

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

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

DG ECHO  also  has  an  Internal  Audit  Capability  (IAC),  which  provides  independent, 
objective assurance and consulting services designed to add value and improve the operations 
of  the  Department.  The  IAC  helps  the  Director  General  to  accomplish  its  objectives  by 

76 

 
 
 
 
bringing a systematic, disciplined approach in order to evaluate and make recommendations 
for improving the effectiveness of risk management, control, and governance processes. 

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

4.4.2.  External control 

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

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

The task of the Internal Audit Service is to audit the internal control systems that exist within 
the Commission. In 2011, the IAS conducted a performance audit on DG ECHO's operational 
activities. The IAS audit objective was to assess, amongst others, DG ECHO's preparedness to 
meet the needs of populations affected by disasters, the investment in Disaster Risk Reduction 
(DRR) and disaster preparedness, the rapidity and flexibility of procedures, the quality of the 
aid delivered, the visibility and communication policies and the sustainability of the aid. The 
final report was issued on 12 December 2011, endorsing the ECHO's internal control systems 
as effective. The report includes a series of observations and recommendation (none of them 
which  were  critical)  on  how  to  improve  the  set-up  of  our  operations.  Two  of  the  7 
recommendations  issued  were  considered  very  important.  Firstly,  IAS  recommends  DG 
ECHO  and  DEVCO  to  prepare  a  common  strategy  on  LRRD58/transition  that  serves  as  the 
baseline  for  preparing  individual  country  strategies.  Secondly,  it  considers  that  DG  ECHO 
should conclude its work on the development of a methodology and the appropriate tools for 
mainstreaming DRR into its emergency response. 

The  Court  of  Auditors  audits  the  EU’s  finances.  Its  observations  and  recommendations  are 
published  in  its  annual  report  and  in  special  reports  to  the  European  Parliament  and  the 
European Council. For the 2010 financial year and its related 2010 annual report, the Court 
did not find a material level of errors in DG ECHO transactions. The Court did not assessed in 
2010 DG ECHO's monitoring and supervisory systems (this will be performed in 2011). 

4.5. 

Visibility of aid and communication 

The  broad  objective  of  DG ECHO’s  communication  work  is  to  raise  awareness  and 
understanding  for  its  humaitarian  aid  and  civil  protection  policies  and  activities  within  the 
European Union and beyond and to promote the role of the EU as the leading global donor in 
humanitarian  aid  as  a  concrete  expression  of  its  solidarity  with  the  world’s  most  vulnerable 
people.  

The  high  profile  and  rapidly  moving  environment  of  humanitarian  aid  means  that  media-
oriented activities are a vital part of the communication strategy. An example of this was the 

58 Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development 

77 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
deployment of DG ECHO communication officers in major crisis situations such as in Libya 
and during the drought and food crisis in the Horn of Africa. They handled the media on the 
ground and were able to highlight the EU relief efforts. 

Throughout the year, a variety of communication products were produced with an emphasis 
on  web-based  tools  and  audiovisual.  The  website  of  the  Commissioner  for  International 
Cooperation,  Humanitarian  Aid  and  Crisis  Response  (http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-
2014/georgieva/index_en.htm) and that of DG ECHO (http://ec.europa.eu/echo/index_en.htm) 
were  revamped  by  pursuing  a  more  interactive  approach.  The  presence  in  social  media,  in 
particular Facebook, was further strenghtened with more than 10,000 people following ECHO 
and nearly 15,000 following the Commissioner. More than a dozen video documentaries and 
video clips on humanitarian crises and the EU response (such as in Libya, Pakistan, Horn of 
Africa,  Chad,  Sudan/South  Sudan)  and  on  specific  topics  (such  as  the  European  Voluntary 
Humanitarian Aid Corps, disaster risk reduction, World Humanitarian Day and World Food 
Day) were produced and disseminated. 

Other  communication  products  included  press  releases;  (photo)  stories  from  the  field,  eye-
witness  accounts,  as well as updated leaflets and publications on humanitarian aid and civil 
protection.  

To  ensure  the  visibility  of  EU  aid,  DG ECHO  reinforced  its  dialogue  with  partner 
organisations in the area of communication and continued to advise them on communication 
activities  funded  under  operational  financing  agreements.  Related  expenditure  under 
operational visibility budget lines was also monitored.  

In  addition,  2011  was  the  second  year  of  implementation  of  a  new  approach  based  on  less 
grant  funding  in  operations  and  more  direct  communication  work  through  a  Commission 
Decision on the financing of public awareness, information and communication actions in the 
humanitarian field. The following joint communication actions were carried out in 2011:  

(1) "Professional  football against hunger" –  the  Commission's humanitarian aid department 
joined  the  awareness  campaign  which  is  run  by  the  Association  of  European  Professional 
Football Leagues (EPFL) and the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). The aim is 
to address the humanitarian issue of hunger and to raise awareness of the role of the EU and 
FAO  in  restoring  the  self  reliance  of  hungry  people.  Actions  included  joint  field  visits  with 
famous  footballers,  public  events  and  production  of  media  materials.  The  campaign  was 
launched at the Soccerex59 fair in the UK in March. For the Commission, it is the appeal of 
football  and  its  power  to  sensitize  public  opinion  and  engage  with  massive  audiences  that 
makes "Professional football against hunger" so appealing. The campaign – and participating 
footballers like Baggio, Hristo Stoichkov and Patrick Vieira – help keeping the hunger issue 
high on the global agenda.  

(2)  Appointment  of  Malian-born  singers  Amadou  &  Mariam  as  WFP  Ambassadors  Against 
Hunger for the European Union. The singers have a global following and a proven history of 
charitable  work  for  the  fight  against  hunger.  As  Ambassadors,  they  raised  awareness  and 
visibility  for  the  partnership  between  the  World  Food  Programme  and  the  Commission's 
Humanitarian  Aid.  Activities  in  2011  included,  among  others,  a  media  trip  to  Haiti  with 
musicians, a concert in Rome (where they were joined on stage by WFP's Executive Director 
and  Commissioner  Georgieva),  as  well  as  concerts  in  Berlin,  Malmö,  Ferrara  and  Brussels 

59  

http://www.soccerex.com/ 

78 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
and a European media tour, three video news releases and a social media campaign. On World 
Food  Day,  Amadou  &  Mariam  released  a  donated  song  dedicated  'against  hunger'  called 
"Labendela", together with a documentary-style video on the issue. 

(3) The Finnish Red Cross organised an awareness campaign called "Not forgetting the silent" 
by  producing  a  12-page  illustrated  supplement  in  Finland's  largest  newspaper  Helsingin 
Sanomat  highlighting  their  partnership  with  the  Commission,  which  reached  around  20 
percent of the population. The campaign also included various events around the country in 
the  framework  of  Europe  Day,  an  information  stand  with  interactive  sessions  at  the  World 
Village Festival in Helsinki in May and a high level humanitarian conference in Helsinki in 
June with Commissioner Georgieva as the keynote speaker. 

(4) Social media campaign targeting young Europeans (aged from 18 to 24) designed by the 
Danish  Refugee  Council  (DRC)  and  called  "The  city  that  should  not  exist".  It  consisted  of 
several parts including a Facebook page which hosted an internet game as well as testimonies 
about  humanitarian  work  in  refugee  camps  with  DRC  and  other  humanitarian  aid 
organisations contributing (videos, photos, testimonies etc.).  

(5) Interactive multimedia exhibition “La Scienza dell’Emergenza” on the practical fruits of 
the  partnership  between  the  Commission's  Humanitarian  Aid  and  CEVSI,  plus  associated 
media  events  in  northern  Italy  (Milan,  Bergamo)  and  Ljubljana/Slovenia.  The  activity  had 
started in 2010 and ran till June 2011. 

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

4.6. 

Security and Security of Operations 

2011 was a particularly demanding year for DG ECHO in terms of staff safety and security 
challenges. DG ECHO and its humanitarian and civil protection partners had to increasingly 
operate  in  some  of  most  insecure  and  highly  complex  security  environments  in  the  world. 
While  there  may  have  been  a  slight  down  turn  in  overall  number  of  recorded  incidents 
affecting  aid  workers  compared  to  previous  years,  the  number  of  kidnappings  continued  to 
rise dramatically as did the number of incidents involving national aid workers. The majority 
of incidents continued to be concentrated in a small number of highly volatile environments 
such  as  Afghanistan,  Somalia,  Sudan/South  Sudan,  and  Pakistan.  An  additional  worrying 
trend was the fact that many of the tactics used against aid workers were increasingly lethal 
and more sophisticated. 

During  the  reporting  period,  DG  ECHO  continued  to  enhance  its  internal  security 
management  procedures  by  further  developing  its  risk  management  approach  to  security 
challenges.  This  allowed  for  a  more  rapid  deployment  of  both  humanitarian  evaluation  and 
civil protection monitoring teams at the outset of the Arab Spring and Horn of Africa crises. 
DG  ECHO  organised  a  number of  hostile  environment training courses  for its humanitarian 
and civil protection staff tasked to undertake missions to crisis regions. ECHO's network of 
Regional  Field  Security  Officers  was  enlarged  and  now  has  officers  based  in  Amman, 
Bangkok, Bogota, Nairobi and Dakar.  

79 

 
 
 
 
In 2011, DG ECHO's efforts to improve the safety and security of its staff operating in high-
risk  environments  was  greatly  facilitated  by  the  exceptional  advice  and  support  it  received 
from a wide-range of security correspondents such as UN Department for Safety and Security 
(UNDSS) and others. 

DG  ECHO  also  continued  to  provide  partners  with  financial  support  for  a  wide-range  of 
capacity building measures to enhance their security management. In particular, it supported 
the actions of a number of NGO security platforms in such locations as Afghanistan, Pakistan, 
Gaza and Yemen. By funding flight support services such as ECHO Flight60 and UNHAS it 
played a crucial role in providing safer access for partners to high-risk areas which would be 
otherwise inaccessible due to security constraints. 

During the year, DG ECHO also played an active part in the discussion on safety and security 
of humanitarian  partners as part of the Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) initiative61. It 
continued  to  be  closely  associated  with  the  efforts  to  refine  the  UN  Saving  Lives  Together 
framework,  designed  to  improve  security  collaboration  between  the  UN  and  NGOs.  It 
provided input for a number of policy documents and academic papers related to aid worker 
safety and security. The Director-General chaired the presentation of the UN's Annual Report 
on the Safety and Security of UN and Associated Personnel. ECHO also played an active role 
in  facilitating  the  2011  UN  General  Assembly's  Resolution  on  the  Safety  and  Security  of 
Humanitarian Personnel and Protection of UN Personnel. 

At  the  ECHO  Annual  Partners'  Conference,  Commissioner  Georgieva  highlighted  the 
importance  she  attributes  to  improving  the  safety  and  security  of  partners.  She  reassured 
partners that she will continue to advocate for greater security for aid workers and ensure that 
ECHO continues to support related capacity building initiatives. 

4.7. 

Training initiative — NOHA 

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

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

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

60   For more information about ECHO Flight, see point 3.3.1.  
61   For more information about GHD, see point 1.5. 

80 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
related issues. This is the Thematic Network of Humanitarian Development Studies of which 
NOHA is the starting point and the core component. 

The objectives pursued by this training are to: 

–  pool  academic  resources  and  cultural  traditions  in  order  to  accommodate  diverse 

individual, academic and employment needs in the field of humanitarian action; 

–  provide the academic and professional profiles and skills for personnel working in the field 

of international humanitarian action; 

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

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

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

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

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

information  on 

training 

this 

81