Dr Maria Kett Leonard Cheshire Disability and Inclusive Development Centre UCL - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Dr Maria Kett Leonard Cheshire Disability and Inclusive Development Centre UCL PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Dr Maria Kett Leonard Cheshire Disability and Inclusive Development Centre UCL

play fullscreen
1 / 18
Dr Maria Kett Leonard Cheshire Disability and Inclusive Development Centre UCL
Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Dr Maria Kett Leonard Cheshire Disability and Inclusive Development Centre UCL

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Disability in Conflict and Emergencies“Reaching the Most Vulnerable”Disability and Disasters: the next 10 years? Dr Maria Kett Leonard Cheshire Disability and Inclusive Development Centre UCL 30th May – 1st June 2011 Oslo, Norway Slide 1

  2. Slide 2

  3. UNCRPD Article 11 - Situations of risk and humanitarian emergencies: “States parties shall take, in accordance with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, all necessary measures to ensure the protection and safety of persons with disabilities in situations of risk, including situations of armed conflict, humanitarian emergencies and the occurrence of natural disasters.” “In general, the needs of persons with disabilities are often overlooked by disaster planners and they have little or no input into disaster risk reduction planning.” (Kett and Twigg 2007) [this exclusion is mainly the result of] “inappropriate policies or simple neglect” (IASC Operational Guidelines on Human Rights and Natural Disasters)

  4. Gaps in humanitarian performance management The views and opinions of key stakeholders - especially beneficiaries and affected populations - are underutilised There is considerable scope for improving analysis of how contexts affect and can constrain performance. There need to be more consideration of organisational capacities, especially in terms of capacity strengthening, partnerships and innovation; There is a lack of focus on impact and outcomes (ALNAP 2010) Disabled people and their organisations (DPOs) were rarely consulted or included in decision that impacted on their lives; Analyses of how and why disabled people were excluded and what their specific vulnerabilities are was lacking; DPOs were rarely given the opportunities, or resources, to develop their capacities, There is almost no evidence of the impact of any of the interventions on the lives of disabled people.

  5. ALNAP 2010 “Regarding the crosscutting issues of illness, age, gender and disability, there is an evident tendency within the humanitarian system towards sudden bursts of attention to particular issues, such as that given to HIV/AIDS in the early 2000s or to gender mainstreaming in the 1990s, followed by a relative lull. Several interviewees noted that it was a challenge to maintain sufficient attention within organisations on these issues that need to be mainstreamed.”

  6. DFID Review 2011 “The humanitarian system is poorly equipped to ensure an equitable response for the most vulnerable. Whilst issues specific to children, age, old people, women and those with disability are widely written about, there are few mechanisms to deal with them.” Slide 6

  7. DFID Review 2011 cont… “There is no formal platform for collective engagement on specific issues, and there is little if any disaggregated data on needs and impact on vulnerable groups. A lot of the evidence base is anecdotal, picked up by someone who was aware of the needs of vulnerable groups while doing something else.” (DFID Humanitarian Emergency Response Review 2011)

  8. How does the humanitarian sector compare to the development sector? • Inclusion in mainstream programmes? • Cross cutting issues – including vulnerability • Indicators

  9. Measuring Vulnerability • Where the challenges lie is in assessing the impact of [these] standards – that is, measuring equality and inclusion; agreeing on internationally acceptable standards and indicators; and turning these standards into legislation. Photo: M.Kett. Children mapping vulnerability in Darfur

  10. Vulnerabilities and Capacities Assessments Initial well-being, strength and resilience 2. Livelihood resilience 3. Self-protection 4. Social protection. 5. Social capital (Cannon 2000)

  11. Sphere 2011 • Core standards (including: people-centred humanitarian response; coordination and collaboration; assessment; design and response; performance, transparency and learning; aid worker performance); • Protection principles; • Water supply, sanitation and hygiene promotion; • Food security and nutrition; • Shelter, settlement and non-food items; • Health Action Slide 11

  12. Sphere Project: Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Disaster Response (new edition 2011) Key moral principle: “the shared belief of humanitarian agencies that all people affected by disaster and armed conflict have a right to receive assistance and protection to ensure the basic conditions for life with dignity” (http://www.sphereproject.org/ ) Recognition that: “some people may be particularly vulnerable to abuse and adverse discrimination due to factors such as age, gender, illness or disability, and may require special measures of protection and assistance” Participatory approach: “The participation of disaster-affected people –adults and children, males and females, vulnerable and socially excluded groups –at all stages of a response is consistent with human rights and the obligations of the Humanitarian Charter.”

  13. The Revision Process • Working Group and peer group consultations (including global list servers) • Consultation workshops (including India, Uganda and Sierra Leone) • Technical as well as practical input • Focus on UNCRPD – rights based Photo – M.Kett. Sphere consultation Orissa, India Slide 13

  14. Achievements • Earlier and stronger mainstreaming of cross-cutting issues • Expanded understanding of vulnerabilities and capacities • Promotion of more integrated assessments • Rights-based language and approach Slide 14

  15. Sphere Challenges: • Lack of global indicators • Lack of awareness • Earlier inclusion of all cross-cutting issues? • Links across other cross-cutting issues (e.g. psychosocial and mental health) • Language • Access Slide 15

  16. More challenges… No single agreed definition of “disability” Many local understandings of who is disabled and what constitutes disability Little internationally comparable data (higher-income countries tend to have higher rates of registered disabled)

  17. What still needs to be done? • Mechanisms to better assess complexities of vulnerabilities and capacities (e.g. Common needs assessments, guidelines, resources – including targeted funding?) • Mechanisms to measure impact of interventions • Disaggregated data • Working groups and sub groups at cluster level • Capacity building (e.g. secondment of disability specialists to disaster relief organisations/UN agencies; DPOs) • Stronger commitments from governments – including to UNCRPD • Implementation and monitoring of UN Convention Slide 17

  18. Thank You Slide 18