Providing social assistance and humanitarian relief: The case for embracing uncertainty. (9th April 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Caravani, Matteo; Lind, Jeremy; Sabates‐Wheeler, Rachel; Scoones, Ian
• Is Part Of: Development policy review. Volume 40:Number 5(2022)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2022-04-09
• Subjects: conflict -- disaster response -- humanitarian relief -- risk -- social assistance -- uncertainty; Developing countries -- Economic policy -- Periodicals; Economic assistance -- Developing countries -- Periodicals; Technical assistance -- Developing countries -- Periodicals; 338.91
• DOI: 10.1111/dpr.12613
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0950-6764

Abstract

Summary: Motivation: Social assistance, humanitarian relief, and disaster response increasingly overlap, especially where recurrent crises and persistent conflicts prevail. In such situations, distinctions between risk and uncertainty become especially important. It is critical for policy and practice to shift from focusing on risk assessment and management to embracing uncertainty. Purpose: The article assesses the appropriateness of two approaches to social assistance and humanitarian relief where crises recur and conflicts persist: risk assessment and management; and embracing uncertainty and ignorance. Methods and approach: The article reviews different approaches to social assistance, humanitarian relief, and disaster response, and asks how they are framed. It draws on experiences from programmes offering social assistance, humanitarian relief, and disaster response, highlighting the professional, bureaucratic, and institutional features that influence programme design and functioning. These are compared with "high‐reliability" approaches deployed in other critical infrastructure—such as water and energy supply. Findings: Mainstream approaches focus on risk assessment and management, assuming predictability and stability. This is problematic, especially in settings of crisis and conflict where there may be no functioning delivery system for social assistance and relief. The article highlights alternatives to the mainstream risk‐focused approaches, which emphasize learning, collaboration, adaptation, and flexibility. Such approaches must build on embedded practices of moral economy, collective action, and mutual care and be supported through professional and institutional capacities that generate reliability. Policy implications: The article suggests a new agenda for the intersection of social assistance, humanitarian relief, and disaster response, which makes uncertainty the focus for rethinking responses at scale, especially in settings affected by crisis and conflict.