Programs for Innovation in Humanitarian Assistance

Overview of programs promoting innovations in Humanitarian Assistance

August 2015

Overview of Research Products

Innovation Projects Overview and Insights

Success strategies and bottlenecks (Case studies)

Humanitarian Innovation Programs

Overview and Insights

The research provides an overview of programs promoting innovation in humanitarian assistance. These programs facilitate innovation in

the humanitarian domain through various activities such as knowledge sharing, lobbying, project execution, matchmaking, agenda setting,

communication, funding or operating as think tank. The lead operation, status and main activities are indicated for each program included

in the research. Insight is provided into main operators, the activities focused on most and those activities which thus far receive limited

attention.

Success strategies and bottlenecks

Inventory of Humanitarian Principles for Innovation

Steering Committee Questions

What are your first thought concerning the main findings?

Are there insights or experiences in regard to innovation projects in humanitarian assistance which are not reflected in these findings?

What do you think the implications of these findings will be for the development of the Coalition?

Main Findings (1/3)

The humanitarian sector worldwide is confronted with an increasing demand for humanitarian aid and emergency response services. In the last 10 years the number of people affected by crises has almost doubled and the cost of international humanitarian assistance has tripled. The needs and conditions of people affected by these crises have also changed. Over the recent years, there is a growing recognition that, in many cases, traditional humanitarian assistance tools, services and models would need to better reflect these changing emergency contexts. 1. Amount of programs The research suggests that there is quite a substantive number of programs worldwide which seek to facilitate innovation in the humanitarian domain. The research includes a non-exhaustive list which already includes 39 programs in total. The innovation challenges the humanitarian domain is facing can therefore not be due to a lack of innovation facilitating programs worldwide. 2. Main program objectives The listed programs vary widely in scope and effectiveness. The programs reviewed almost all conduct a variety of activities concurrently. The research indicated that most programs offer funding to further innovation in the humanitarian domain. Their mission statement often refers to an effort to alleviate a lack of stable funding as a innovation barrier. Aside from financing, knowledge sharing between stakeholders is a common activity found. 3. Program objective The research indicates that overall the programs seeking to facilitate innovation in the humanitarian domain do not often engage in agenda setting, communication and lobbying activities. This could be due to the fragmented nature of the field; organizations with limited financial or political influence will have difficulty gaining support from others on their agenda. The limited amount of focus on lobbying and communication seems surprising due to the missed opportunity for good publicity as well as agenda setting and influencing to further innovation in the sector.

4

Main Findings (2/3)

4. Main program activities The research indicates that whilst there are a variety of programs, most of these programs focus on a specific aspect of innovation, humanitarian domain or activity. The findings suggest that many programs are almost exclusively focused on academic research (e.g. Oxford Humanitarian Innovation Project). In addition, programs are often almost exclusively focused on one organization (e.g. UNHCR innovation initiative). And many programs are almost exclusively focused on a single line of innovation (e.g. CARE Early Warning System). 5. Program activity gaps The research indicates that a limited amount of innovation programs focus on facilitating applied innovation for the entire sector. In line with this finding, only a limited amount of programs focus on facilitating innovation for multiple organizations; instead focusing on facilitating innovation for one particular organization. Also, a limited amount of programs systematically promote innovation in the sector, instead focus is given to a particular project (e.g., the ELRAH Humanitarian Exchange Language, while identified as a program by Betts & Bloom, is just one innovation project).

6. Program approach

It appears that almost none of the programs adopts a comprehensive approach, nor has it become apparent that meta- level coordination occurs on these programs. The only truly comprehensive innovation program to date is the Humanitarian Innovation Fund (HIF) as it employs various activities and is funded by multiple governments. Still, HIF is quite traditional in its government-funded approach, not explicitly striving for equal value creation for all its stakeholders.

5

Main Findings (3/3)

7. Ecosystem The system of programs is not as clear-cut as the overview of programs (slide 10 – 13) suggests. Rather, the programs operate in an ecosystem, in which the various programs are intertwined. Often, they will share knowledge; sometimes, they will fund each other (e.g. the IKEA foundation funding the UNHCR innovation initiative). 8. Program stakeholders The programs reviewed are most often multi-stakeholder programs with a wide variety of lead operators including government agencies, united nations agencies, universities, foundations, NGO’s and business enterprises. Although no segment is left behind (e.g. government, knowledge institutes, NGO’s and businesses), the (equal) value created for all stakeholders involved is not always clearly definable. 9. Program partnerships In the vast majority of cases, programs are essentially lead by one party. While these programs may recruit partners (e.g. the IKEA foundation supporting the UNHCR program), the research provides little examples of equal partnerships. Lead operators include:

Governments (e.g. USA - USAID, UK - DFID, EU - ECHO, NL – MoFA, etc.) UN agencies (e.g. UNHRC, Unicef, World Food Program) Universities (e.g. Oxford, Harvard, MIT) NGOs (e.g. ICRC, Medecins Sans Frontieres, Mercy Corps) Companies (e.g. IKEA, Spark)

6

Study & Method

Objectives, data collection and analysis of this overview

8

Objectives

Research question: Identify existing programs which try

to promote innovations (innovation projects) in Humanitarian Aid. List examples* of these programs.

Analyse the overlap and any white spots of these programs: the extent to which programs provide comprehensive support to projects.

Program vs project: A project is an individual initiative

for improvement (e.g. the Community Shelters project)

A program is an effort to create the right conditions for projects (e.g. the Humanitarian Innovation Fund)

Scan

Data: The list is constructed primarily

based on the overview by Betts & Bloom (2014, link) for OCHA.

Their overview has been supplemented with other relevant programs relevant, while their least relevant examples have been left out.

Scope: Programs cannot be easily defined

or delineated. There is no one-size-fits-all answer to what a program is.

The distinction between programs can be thin. For example, programs will collaborate or fund each other.

Analysis

Information: Each of the programs is analysed

using openly available information.

For each program we list the lead operator, status, financers and main activities (see next slide).

In our conclusion, extent to which programs provide comprehensive support to projects.

Order of presentation: Generally, very relevant (i.e. large

impactful, similar to the proposed Coalition) programs are presented somewhat ahead of others.

Still, the overview is not a ranking. They do not stand in a finite order.

* Although an exhaustive list is not possible (as there can be no delineating definition), the objective is to include the most important programs which resemble the proposed Coalition most.

Possible activities for programs to promote Innovation

9

Knowledge sharing

Promoting the exchange of information between various stakeholders so they can learn from their mutual experiences and lessons learned.

Project execution

Assisting innovations in the execution of their projects by providing project leadership and/or resources to the individual projects.

Match making

Connecting the stakeholders for successful humanitarian innovation and bringing them together (not necessarily physical).

The way in which programs promote innovation can facilitate innovation projects

Providing financial support to innovation projects or to other programs, often via the provision of grants, loans or subsidies to provide (starting) capital.

Financing

Transferring theoretical knowledge and practical expertise about Humanitarian Innovation from experts to individual innovation projects.

Think tank

Lobbying

Supporting innovation by attaining commitment from important stakeholders, persuading them to align their policies with those of innovators.

Agenda setting

Setting the priorities for humanitarian innovation, highlighting on which topics and domains innovators should focus first.

Communications

Attracting attention from (mass) media and the general public to specific innovation projects through PR activities

Programs for Innovation in the Humanitarian Sector (1/4)

10

Lead Operator Program Name Summary Kn

ow

led

ge s

har

ing

Lob

bin

g

Pro

ject

exe

cuti

on

Age

nd

a se

ttin

g

Co

mm

un

icat

ion

s

Mat

ch m

arki

ng

Fin

anci

ng

Thin

k ta

nk

Status Financed by:

ELRHA Humanitarian Innovation Fund Broadest program: fund, workgroups, network

X X X X Ongoing UK, Swe, Can govs

Oxford Uni Humanitarian Innovation Project Academic Research on H. innovation X Ongoing Oxford, its donors

Unicef Innovation fund Fund for innovations within Unicef X X Ongoing UN

UNHCR Innovation initiative Fund, labs & network within UNHCR X X X X Ongoing UN, IKEA

Mercy Corps Social Ventures Expert teams & funding for MC projects X X

Ongoing MC, USAID, Skoll fdn

ICRC Global Partnersh for H. Impact and Inn A.k.a. Innovation initiative. Within ICRC

X X X Ongoing ICRC, IMD, Philips

Internews Center for Innovation and Learning Projects, e.g. Gargaar, media after disasters X X X X Ongoing EU, NL gov; IKEA

Harvard Humanitarian Initiative (HHI) Education & Research on H. innovation X X Ongoing US gov, Harvard

Unicef Innovation labs Incubation Accelerators. Linked with fund. X X Ongoing UN

Deloitte Humanitarian Innovation Program Pro bono work on innovative projects X X Ongoing Deloitte

Note: A list of abbreviations can be found on slide 14

As suggested by Betts, A. & Bloom, L. (2014). Humanitarian Innovation: The State of the Art. OCHA Policy and Studies Series 009. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs: Link

Programs for Innovation in the Humanitarian Sector (2/4)

11

Lead Operator Program Name Summary Kn

ow

led

ge s

har

ing

Lob

bin

g

Pro

ject

exe

cuti

on

Age

nd

a se

ttin

g

Co

mm

un

icat

ion

s

Mat

ch m

arki

ng

Fin

anci

ng

Thin

k ta

nk

Status Financed by:

ECHO NOHA network Education on 10 universities on H. innovation. X Ongoing EU

MIT International Dev.Innovation Network Acamic research program, linking researchers

X X Ongoing MIT, US gov

Vodafone Fdn Mobile for good Supports communications in disaster areas X X Ongoing Vodafone

Singularity Uni Innovation Partnership Program Think Tank, partly on Humanitarian aid X X

Ongoing Member companies

DFID Research and Evidence Division Department of DFID commissioning research X X Ongoing UK gov

Standford Uni Center for Innovation in Global Health Research in Healthcare, including H. care

X X X Ongoing Stanford & donors

Techbridge Supply Chain Non-profit consultancy & technology for NGOs

X X X Ongoing

Companies, e.g. UPS

Google Google.org Foundation, including some projects on H. aid X X X Ongoing Google

Philips Philips Foundation Supporting other H. innovation programs X X Started Philips

Spark Rebuilding Fragile States Program, still to be started X Start-up NL gov, Rabobank

As suggested by Betts, A. & Bloom, L. (2014). Humanitarian Innovation: The State of the Art. OCHA Policy and Studies Series 009. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs: Link

Note: A list of abbreviations can be found on slide 14

Programs for Innovation in the Humanitarian Sector (3/4)

12

Lead Operator Program Name Summary Kn

ow

led

ge s

har

ing

Lob

bin

g

Pro

ject

exe

cuti

on

Age

nd

a se

ttin

g

Co

mm

un

icat

ion

s

Mat

ch m

arki

ng

Fin

anci

ng

Thin

k ta

nk

Status Financed by:

OCHA H. Research and Innovation Grant Grants for academics. Currently closed X Closed UN

MSF Innovation Fund Funding medicine research, also H. care X X Closed MSF

USAID & DFID Humanitarian Innovation Initiative Grants program. Closed since early 2014 X Closed US gov, UK gov

UNHCR UNHCR ideas Open, Yammer-like platform for ideas. Closed X X X Closed UN

IKEA IKEA Foundation Broad funding program X N/a IKEA

Gates Fdn. Innovation Fund, no own programs X N/a Mr. & Mrs. Gates

Oxfam Open innovation Oxfam internal workshops on innovation X N/a Individuals

WFP Cooperating Partners’ Innovation Fund

Program which seemingly never really took off

X N/a UN

UN foundation Accelerator Charity. No program; some innovative projects

X X N/a Individuals

Norwegian RC Innovation An organization responsible for projects X N/a Nor gov

As suggested by Betts, A. & Bloom, L. (2014). Humanitarian Innovation: The State of the Art. OCHA Policy and Studies Series 009. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs: Link

Note: A list of abbreviations can be found on slide 14

Programs for Innovation in the Humanitarian Sector (4/4)

13

Lead Operator Program Name Summary Kn

ow

led

ge s

har

ing

Lob

bin

g

Pro

ject

exe

cuti

on

Age

nd

a se

ttin

g

Co

mm

un

icat

ion

s

Mat

ch m

arki

ng

Fin

anci

ng

Thin

k ta

nk

Status Financed by:

DHL / OCHA Disaster Response Teams In fact a single project (on supply chain) X N/a DHL Logistics

ELRAH Humanitarian Exchange Language In fact a single project (on data exchange) X N/a UN

Luxemburg emergency.lu In fact a single project (on satellite connectivity)

X N/a Lux gov, companies

CARE Digital Early Warning Program In fact a single project (on alerts to fishermen) X N/a UK gov, EU

WorldVision Last Mile Mobile Solutions In fact a single project (on mobility) X X N/a WV, individuals

ECHO Financing decisions (HIP) Grant program, but little focus on innovation X N/a EU

FEMA Innovation teams Internal team, only for US X N/a US gov

Kickstarter. Kickstarter Crowd funding platform X X N/a The crowd

WHS summit Innovation grants No info foud N/a UN

As suggested by Betts, A. & Bloom, L. (2014). Humanitarian Innovation: The State of the Art. OCHA Policy and Studies Series 009. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs: Link

Note: A list of abbreviations can be found on slide 14

A.k.a. = Also known as Fdn. = Foundation Gov. = Government H. = Humanitarian HIP = Humanitarian Implementation Plan Inn. = Innovation MC = Mercy Corps MSF = Medecins Sans Frontieres N/a = Not applicable Partnersh. = Partnerships RC = Refugee Council (i.e. Norwegian Refugee Council) Uni. = University WHS = World Humanitarian Summit

List of abbreviations

14

15