Aid spending on humanitarian response, governance and security

I’m going to the Humanitarian Policy Group meeting on the humanitarian system and humanitarian space on Friday – so thought I’d put some quick figures together on aid to conflict-affected and fragile states; and on aid spent on humanitarian response, governance and security. The data behind these graphs can be found in this Excel file (also available from the Datastore). The original was in PowerPoint, available to download with notes in this PDF.)

How much aid is spent in conflict-affected states?

Definition of conflict-affected: based on Uppsala conflict data programme’s reporting of conflict incidence plus presence of a UN mandated multilateral peacekeeping force (i.e. the number of countries receiving the aid in the graph above varies each year). 33 recipients of aid were defined as conflict-affected in 2009.

How much humanitarian aid is spent in conflict-affected states?

How much humanitarian aid is spent in fragile states (2009)?

43 of the 145 countries receiving humanitarian aid in 2009 were classified as fragile.

Each top 10 recipient of humanitarian aid in 2009, was classified as ‘fragile’.

Definition of fragile state: characterised by widespread extreme poverty, most off-track in relation to MDGs and commonly caught in or emerging from violence and conflict. Our list here is based on definitions and lists compiled by World Bank (Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA) 2008), Brookings Institution (Index of State Weakness in the Developing World 2009) and Carleton University (Country Indicators for Foreign Policy (CFIP) index 2008).

What was aid spent on in 2009?

By ‘aid’ we mean official development assistance (ODA) expenditure as reported to the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC)

‘Other’ ODA =US$55.4 billion and here includes: transport and storage; communications; business, banking and financial services; forestry, fishing and industry; core support to NGOs; refugees in donor countries; etc.

Health includes population and reproductive health. If you take this out, Health expenditure = US$8.2bn

The humanitarian aid figure quoted here is the gross disbursement as reported to the CRS.

Governance and security accounted for 12.5% of aid expenditure in 2009

Governance and security = US$16.6bn, includes: conflict, peace and security (US$3.6 billion) and government and civil society (US$13 billion)

‘Other’ ODA =US$55.4 billion

Health includes population and reproductive health (half the overall US$16bn).

Top 10 recipients of governance, security and humanitarian aid in 2009

Governance and security includes: conflict prevention and government and civil society.

All these statements can be made!:

When debt relief is excluded, seven of the top 10 recipients of total ODA are also top 10 recipients of ODA for government and civil society and conflict resolution combined: Afghanistan; Palestine/OPT; Tanzania; Pakistan; Iraq; Sudan; and DRC.

Six top 10 recipients of humanitarian ODA are also top 10 recipients of ODA for government and civil society and conflict resolution combined:  Sudan; Palestine/OPT; Afghanistan; Pakistan; DRC; and Iraq.

Seven of the top 10 recipients of ODA for government and civil society and conflict resolution combined are also top 10 recipients of total ODA excluding debt relief: Afghanistan; Iraq; Palestine/OPT; Sudan; Pakistan; DRC; and Tanzania.

Six of the top 10 recipients of ODA for government and civil society and conflict resolution combined are also top 10 recipients of humanitarian ODA: Afghanistan; Iraq; Palestine/OPT; Sudan; Pakistan; and DRC.

Afghanistan received over US$1.3 billion in government/civil society aid in 2009 …

… and was the largest recipient of aid expenditure on conflict prevention …

… and six of the top 10 governance and security recipients were also top humanitarian priorities

Six top 10 recipients of humanitarian ODA are also top 10 recipients of ODA for government and civil society and conflict resolution combined:  Sudan; Palestine/OPT; Afghanistan; Pakistan; DRC; and Iraq.

Aid expenditure on governance and security is growing

‘Other’ ODA =US$55.4 billion

Health includes population and reproductive health. If you take this out, Health expenditure = US$8.2bn

The humanitarian aid figure quoted here is the gross disbursement as reported to the CRS.

What does ‘government and civil society’ aid include?

What does aid spent on ‘conflict, peace and security’ include?

But official development assistance (ODA) is only part of the picture

Between 2002 and 2010, the United States has appropriated US$52 billion in ‘Reconstruction assistance’ for Afghanistan – not all of this counts as official development assistance (ODA). US$19 billion has gone through state and USAID, of which some goes to security activities that are non-ODA eligible.

US$33 billion has been spent through the US Department of Defense (DoD), of which US$28 billion on training for Afghan security forces and counter-narcotics operations.

[Note:

ODA cannot be used to fund military equipment, services or debt relief. It cannot

fund security expenditure related to paramilitary functions or anti terrorism. It

cannot fund mine clearance if the objective is not developmental.

If the military are used to deliver humanitarian aid, limited additional costs can

be counted as ODA. To be additional, costs must be incurred over and above the

costs of keeping personnel on base in the donor country and take account of any

compensation received from the UN for the use of military services.

Within UN approved peace operations some activities in the post confl ict

phase can count as ODA. These include human rights, election monitoring,

rehabilitation of demobilised soldiers, advice on economic stabilisation,

demobilisation of soldiers and weapons disposal. Within these activities funding

must not go to the armed forces or for military capacity building. It has to be used

to increase democratic control or for civil society engagement.]

What is global expenditure on UN department of peacekeeping missions?

Source: GHA Report 2010, Development Initiatives, based on SIPRI Multilateral Peace Operations database