COAST Resource Centre

Experts suggested thinking about other alternatives instead of considering repatriation as the only solution to the Rohingya crisis. Along with this, they also urged the government to take the effective initiative to highlight the present situation and future risks of the Rohingya crisis to the intellectuals and thinkers of different countries. On 13 June 2019 the daily Samakal and COAST Trust organized a roundtable discussion titled ‘Human Dignity of Rohingya: Bangladesh Perspectives’. Speakers’ opinion and suggestions are mentioned in brief click here

VANGO, PIANGO and Humanitarian Advisory Group would like to thank the many people who have contributed to this baselining process. This includes local, national and international actors in Vanuatu and the region, and communities who participated in the research. We also thank Alice Obrecht from ALNAP and Stephen Close at the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade for their input into the paper. Details report click here

Thanks to the research advisory group of the Accelerating Localisation through Partnerships consortium for guiding the research: Victor Arokoyo (Christian Aid Nigeria), Jane Backhurst (Christian Aid UK), Saw Mar Taw Gyi (Christian Aid Myanmar), Lizz Harrison and Carol Hatchett (Christian Aid UK), Alexandra Panaite (ActionAid UK), Malish John Peter (CARE South Sudan), Charlie Rowley (Oxfam GB), Hast Bahadur Sunar (Tearfund Nepal). Thanks also to other staff in the Accelerating Localisation through Partnerships consortium for review and feedback, including Simone Di Vicenz (Christian Aid UK), Inge Groenewegen (Christian Aid UK), Rajan Khosla (Christian Aid Myanmar), Frédérique Lahoux (CARE International), Paul Johnston (Tearfund UK), Michael Mosselmans (Christian Aid UK), Katherine Nightingale (CARE International UK), Christina Schmalenbach (Oxfam GB), Anne Street (CAFOD). This report is a summary of the longer research report (available on request) with thanks to Christina Schmalenbach. Click here

In humanitarian emergencies where access is limited and risk is high, people’s ability to obtain vital assistance often depends on partnerships between national and international aid organizations. In recent years, driven by the Syrian conflict in particular, significantly larger portions of international humanitarian aid have been implemented with and through national and local entities. In addition, the localization commitments of the Grand Bargain call for more support and a greater share of resources to go to these local actors for the sake of better outcomes. At the same time, humanitarians face countervailing pressures that complicate and disincentivize partnering. These come in the form of intensifying financial scrutiny, legal constraints, and punitive repercussions for losses in what are highly volatile and high. risk environments. The collision between the increased needs and stated will. for partnering and the growing risk aversion in the sector has distorted national. international partnership dynamics, resulting in greater risks, hindrances and inefficiencies for humanitarian response. [Global Report] [Good Practice and Recommendation for Humanitarian Actors]

Much of my professional work takes place in two sectors of international cooperation: relief work and peacebuilding, mostly in violent crises. Yet when it comes to atmospheres of trust and equitable collaborations between external and internal actors, they feel like very different universes. The prevailing mood in relief work is distrust; the prevailing effort in peacebuilding is trust. This has significant impact on the ability to form genuine partnerships. Why these stark differences? Details report click here

This is important report from HPG ODI one of the prominent policy researcher group in humanitarian world, in respect of Rohingya response they suggested three important issues (i) participation of Rohingya refugees in the matter related to them which is quite absent now, (ii) localization of humanitarian relief, they have positively criticize CCNF mobilization and (iii) campaign for making Mayanmar junta accountable. [Click here for report]