Report 2_CoU Understanding Risk_2014_FINAL

!

Understanding Risk in Uruzgan

A"study"of"perceptions"and"responses"to"the"risks"of"delivering""aid"and"development"in"a"highly"insecure"province"of"Afghanistan!

!

!

David!Sims!

!

!

June"2014"

" "

!

!!

Understanding!Risk!in!Uruzgan! ! Page!ii!

About"Save"the"Children"in"Afghanistan"

Save!the!Children!is!the!world’s!leading!independent!children’s!rights!organisation,!with!members!in!

30!countries!and!operational!programs!in!more!than!120.!We!fight!for!children’s!rights!and!deliver!

immediate!and!lasting!improvements!to!children’s!lives!worldwide.!Save!the!Children!has!worked!in!

Afghanistan! since! 1976! and! is! currently!working!with! the! Afghan!Government,! local! partners! and!

communities! to!deliver! lifeLchanging!programs! to!Afghan!children! in! the!areas!of! child!protection,!

health,!nutrition,!education,!child!rights!and!emergency!response.!!!

The"Children"of"Uruzgan"program"

Save! the! Children! is! delivering! an! ambitious! fourLyear! health! and! education! program! in! one! of!

Afghanistan’s! poorest! provinces! –! Uruzgan.! The! “Children! of! Uruzgan”! program! is! a! partnership!

between!Save!the!children,!local!NGOs,!and!the!governments!of!Australia!and!Afghanistan.!The!goal!

is!to!enhance!access,!quality!and!use!of!health!and!education!services!for!children!and!families!in!all!

districts.!There!is!a!specific!focus!on!reaching!remote!and!underserved!communities!and!improving!

education!and!health!outcomes!for!women!and!girls.!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

©!Save!the!Children,!June!2014.!This!publication!is!copyright,!but!may!be!reproduced!by!any!method!

without!fee!or!prior!permission!for!teaching!purposes,!but!not!for!resale.!For!copying! in!any!other!

circumstances,! prior! written! permission!must! be! obtained! from! the! publisher,! and! a! fee!may! be!

payable.!

Cover!photo:!The!doctor!in!charge!of!the!CoULsupported!drug!treatment!centre!in!Tirin!Kot,!Uruzgan!

province,!Afghanistan.!By!Philip!Hulcome.!

!

Written!by!David!Sims,!former!Humanitarian!Manager,!Save!the!Children!Australia.!

Edited!by!Jay!Lamey,!Program!Support!and!Communications!Manager,!Children!of!Uruzgan.!

!

This! publication!was! produced! under! the! Children! of! Uruzgan! program,! funded! by! the! Australian!

government! through! the!Department!of! Foreign!Affairs! and!Trade! (DFAT).! The!views!expressed! in!

this!report!are!those!of!Save!the!Children!and!do!not!necessarily!reflect!the!views!of!the!Australian!

government!on!the!subject!matter.!

!

!!

Understanding!Risk!in!Uruzgan! ! Page!iii!

Table"of"Contents"

!

Executive!Summary!...............................................................................................................................!1!

1.! Introduction!...................................................................................................................................!5!

2.! Methodology!..................................................................................................................................!7!

3.! The!CoU!Program!and!Context!.......................................................................................................!8!

3.1! Insecurity!in!Uruzgan!...............................................................................................................!8!

3.2! Save!the!Children!in!Uruzgan!...................................................................................................!8!

3.3! Save!the!Children’s!Security!Framework!..................................................................................!9!

4.! Findings:!Risk!Perception!and!Response!......................................................................................!11!

4.1! Implementing!projects!at!the!community!level!.....................................................................!11!

4.2! Managing!the!program!..........................................................................................................!15!

5.! Analysis:!Divergent!Practice!and!Common!Themes!.....................................................................!19!

5.1! Divergent!practice!..................................................................................................................!19!

5.2! Common!themes!....................................................................................................................!20!

6.! Conclusion!....................................................................................................................................!22!

References!...........................................................................................................................................!23!

Annex!1:!Mental!model!of!risk!perception!by!LNP!staff!......................................................................!24!

Annex!2:!Mental!model!of!risk!perception!by!program!managers!and!security!experts!....................!25!

Annex!3:!Map!of!CoU!education!and!health!activities!in!Uruzgan!provinces!......................................!26!

" "

Acronyms"

NGO! NonLgovernment!organisation!

CoU! Children!of!Uruzgan!

ANSF! Afghan!National!Security!Forces!!

AOG! ArmedLopposition!group!

IED! Improvised!explosive!device!

LNP! Local!Uruzgani,!nonLUruzgani!national!and!partner!

ISAF!! International!Security!Assistance!Force!

ANA! Afghan!National!Army!

ANSO! Afghanistan!NGO!Safety!Office!

IMF! International!military!forces!

!

!

!!

Understanding!Risk!in!Uruzgan! ! Page!1!

Executive"Summary"

The! current! security! situation! and! future! uncertainties! pose! considerable! challenges! for!

international! and! local! nonLgovernment! organisations! (NGOs)! operating! in! Afghanistan.! While! all!

postL2014! scenarios! are! speculative,! most! NGOs! expect! there! to! be! a! “continued! escalation! of!

violent! conflict.”1! Identifying! effective!ways! to! operate! in! an! increasingly! insecure! environment! is!

therefore!a!key!challenge!for!NGOs!that!are!working!in!the!country.!

This! has! been! a! focus! for! Save! the! Children!when! implementing! the! “Children! of!Uruzgan”! (CoU)!

program.! Funded! by! Australian! Aid,! the! program! aims! to! enhance! the! accessibility! and! quality! of!

basic!health!and!education!services!for!300,000!people!in!the!seven!districts!of!Uruzgan.!However,!

the! province! is! a! highly! insecure! operational! environment! that! is! “largely! inaccessible! to!

international! and! nonLlocal! staff”2! and! CoU! has! therefore! had! to! develop! a! variety! of! remote!

management!practices.!

This!trend!is!reflected!elsewhere!too,!with!humanitarian!actors! increasingly!using!remote!methods!

to! operate! in! insecure! environments.!However,! a! variety! of! reports! have! noted! potential! dangers!

and!pitfalls! associated!with! the!use!of! remote! implementation!and!monitoring! approaches.! These!

should!be!strategically!planned!rather!than!an!adLhoc!response!to!a!deteriorating!security!situation.!

Otherwise,!risks!inherent!to!local!staff!may!not!be!properly!considered.!!

Save!the!Children!was!aware!of!these!issues!from!the!inception!of!the!CoU!project!and!has!sought!to!

address!them!by!integrating!remote!management!across!the!project!management!cycle.!This!study!

aims! to! complement! existing! research! by! seeking! to! understand! how!managerial! and! operational!

staff! from! Save! the! Children! and! partner! organisations! perceive! risk! and! how! this! subsequently!

affects!decisionLmaking.!Although!the!focus!of!the!study!is!on!Uruzgan!province,!it!is!hoped!that!the!

good!practices!identified!can!be!of!use!to!organisations!operating!in!similar!insecure!environments.!

Primary!data!was!collected!through!17!key!informant!interviews!in!Australia!and!Afghanistan!during!

February!and!March!2014.!Informants!included!Afghan!and!international!staff,!based!in!both!Kabul!

and!Tirin!Kot,!from!Save!the!Children!as!well!as!partner!organisations.!Analysis!of!Save!the!Children!

policies!and!procedures!as!well!as!external!secondary!sources!was!also!conducted.!!

Insecurity! in!Uruzgan! is! driven!by! two!main! factors.! First,! the!province! experiences! active! conflict!

between! the! Afghan! National! Security! Forces! (ANSF)! and! armedLopposition! groups! (AOGs).!

Insurgents! regularly! deploy! improvised! explosive! devices! (IEDs)! and! illegal! checkpoints.! A! second!

major! source! of! insecurity! comes! from! inter! and! intraLtribal! fighting! and! family! feuds,! which! are!

often!linked!to!competition!for!power!and!resources!and!can!also!be!influenced!by!whether!a!tribe!is!

considered!as!supporting!the!government!or!AOGs.!

CoU!operates!widely!in!Uruzgan,!often!in!areas!beyond!government!control.!Central!to!its!ability!to!

do! this! is! the!careful! implementation!of!a! community!acceptance!strategy.!This! involves!extensive!

dialogue!with!community!leaders!and!the!funding!of!smallLscale!projects,!such!as!a!borehole,!which!

are!introduced!prior!to!offering!health!and!education!services.!Nevertheless,!access!is!often!limited!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1"Humanitarian"Policy"Group,"“Talking"to"the"other"side:"Humanitarian"engagement"with"the"Taliban"in"Afghanistan”"2"Save"the"Children,"“Access"Restricted:"A"review"of"remote"monitoring"practices"in"Uruzgan"Province”"(November"2012)."

!

!!


to! local! staff,! and! CoU! maintains! offices! in! six! districts! of! Uruzgan! to! facilitate! localised!

implementation!and!oversight.!!

Additionally,!there!is!a!main!coordinating!office!in!Tirin!Kot,!while!senior!country!management!and!

expatriates!are!mostly!based! in!Kabul.!A!dedicated!safety!and!security!manager! is!based!Tirin!Kot,!

supported!by! a! national!manager! in! Kabul! and!experts! based!outside!Afghanistan.! There! is! also! a!

Safety!and!Security!Plan! for!Uruzgan,!which! is!covered!by!an!AfghanistanLspecific!security!strategy!

and!a!global!Save!the!Children!Quality!Framework!containing!safety!and!security!standards.!!!

The!results!of!this!study!have!been!organised!into!six!categories!and!within!these,!perceptions!have!

been!divided!into!two!respondent!categories:!1)! local!Uruzgani,!nonLUruzgani!national!and!partner!

(LNP)!staff,!all!of!whom!are!Afghan,!and!2)!expatriate!and!Afghan!program!managers!and!security!

experts.!A!summary!of!key!findings!is!as!follows:!

1)"Contextual"factors"that"influence"perceptions"of"risk""

LNP! staff! identified! a! limited! number! of! contextual! drivers! of! insecurity.! Primarily! these! were!

governmentLAOG!conflict!and!tribal!dynamics,!with!factors!such!as!poverty,!isolation,!low!education!

levels!and!relationships!based!on!tribal!affiliations!seen!as!underlying!causes.!The!illegal!drugs!trade!

was!the!only!additional!factor!identified!by!program!managers!and!security!experts.!However,!all!in!

this! group! framed! their! answers!within! seasonal! periods,! noting! springtime! and!poppy! harvest! as!

particularly!dangerous!periods,!whereas!LNP!staff!did!not—they!generally!perceived!risk!over!much!

more!immediate!timeframes.!

2)"Risks"impacting"on"staff"safety"and"programming""

LNP!staff!identified!IEDs!as!their!main!risk,!although!this!was!perceived!to!be!accidental!as!opposed!

to! targeted.! The! risk! of! being! falsely! accused! of! supporting! a! particular! group! was! another! key!

concern,!which!could!also!heighten!the!existing!risk!of!being!killed!or!kidnapped!at!a!checkpoint!or!

after!a!community!has!informed!AOGs!of!their!whereabouts.!NonLUruzgani!nationals!placed!greater!

emphasis! on! this! than! staff! drawn! from! local! communities.! In! addition! to! these! factors,! program!

manager!and!security!experts!were!also!concerned!with!the!program!or! its!staff!being!deliberately!

targeted,! either! due! to! accusations! of! tribal! bias! or! for! economic! gain.! This! group! also! noted! the!

potential! risk! of! this! to! the! overall! program,! especially! since! it! relies! heavily! on! community!

acceptance.!Accusations!of!fraud!or!mismanagement!were!also!a!concern,!which!would!likely!stem!

from!tribal!dynamics!or!local!powerLbrokers!seeking!to!gain!from!the!program.!

3)"Factors"that"increase"perceptions"of"risk"(resulting"in"staff"feeling"less"safe)"

It!was!the! indiscriminate!and!hidden!nature!of! IEDs!that!made!staff!cite!them!as!the!greatest!risk.!

“At!least!when!stopped!by!AOGs!you!will!have!the!opportunity!to!explain!yourself,”!said!one!of!the!

respondents.!Afghan!staff!from!outside!Uruzgan!felt!that!outsider!status!as!well!as!higher!positions!

exposed!them!to!extra!risk.!Local!staff!disagreed!somewhat,!generally!believing!that!“If!the!area! is!

safe!for!me,!it!is!safe!for!anyone.”!However,!this!was!somewhat!contradicted!by!the!emphasis!placed!

on!the!knowledge!of!local!customs,!language!and!dress!as!a!risk!mitigation!strategy.!!

Whereas!LNP!staff!said!security!had! improved! in!Uruzgan,!program!managers!and!security!experts!

viewed!it!more!as!volatile!and!varying!by!area.!They!also!placed!greater!emphasis!on!the!withdrawal!

of!foreign!troops!but!were!unsure! if!this!will!have!a!positive!or!negative! impact!beyond!2014.!This!

!

!!


again! demonstrates! that! managerial! and! operational! staff! tended! to! consider! risk! over! different!

timeframes,!with!program!managers! taking!a! longerLterm!view!while!staff! in! the! field! focussed!on!

shortLterm!issues.!It!is!also!evident!that!program!managers!and!security!experts!tended!to!frame!risk!

from!an!organisational!or!programmatic!perspective!while!LNP!staff!framed!risk!from!an!individual!

or!activityLbased!perspective.!

4)"Factors"that"decrease"perceptions"of"risk"(resulting"in"staff"feeling"safer)"

All!LNP!staff!attributed!the!improving!security!situation!to!the!current!police!chief!increasing!control!

in!areas!previously!held!by!AOGs,!an!increased!number!of!government!checkpoints!and!a!reduction!

in! IEDs.!They!also!emphasised! that!community!acceptance!made!them!feel! safer!while!conducting!

their! work.! Program! managers! and! security! experts! agreed! strongly! on! the! importance! of!

community! acceptance! for! reducing! risk.! Additionally,! this! group! noted! the! importance! of! having!

effective!managerial!staff!with!good!contextual!knowledge!and!the!ability!to!form!and!manage!all!of!

the! necessary! relationships.! Similarly,! there! was! a! high! level! of! trust! between! managerial! and!

operational!staff,!including!the!security!department.!

5)"Strategies"for"mitigating"risks"

As! discussed! above,! all! staff! viewed! community! acceptance! as! the! most! important! strategy! to!

mitigate! risks! and! noted! that! communities! could! provide! important! information! about! safety! and!

security,! although! this! was! limited! in! its! scope.! Information! from! communities! was! therefore!

complemented!by!the!security!department,!which!has!access!to!a!broader!information!network!and!

trends!analysis.!LNP!staff!also!emphasised!the!importance!of!respecting!local!culture,!maintaining!a!

low! profile! and! not! staying! too! long! in! one! place.! Local! staff! also! avoided! explicitly! telling!

communities! that! the!program! funds!were! from!a! foreign! source,!due! to!a! generalised!distrust!of!

foreign!entities.!Instead,!they!emphasised!the!focus!of!the!program!on!helping!children.!

Program!managers!and!security!experts!focussed!on!reducing!both!the!likelihood!and!the!impact!of!

an! incident.! They! sought! to!mitigate! risks! by! achieving! community! acceptance! through! equitable!

distribution! between! tribes,! implementation! of! protective! measures! and! ensuring! a! response!

capacity.! This! required!working! at! the! provincial! and! district! level! as! well! as! considering! physical!

infrastructure,!systems!and!processes.!This!perspective!differed!from!LNP!staff,!who!were!focussed!

on!avoiding! risks!and!achieving!acceptance!within! individual! communities.!Program!managers!and!

security! experts! also!used! a!broader!network!of! information! sources! to!understand! the!operating!

environment! and! enable! geographic! and! seasonal! comparisons! to! be! made.! This! group! also!

emphasised! the! need! for! trend! analysis,! which! can! be! used! to! plan! activities! and! strengthen!

procedures!that!support!operations.!

6)"Factors"that"influence"what"is"deemed"an"acceptable"risk"

All!LNP!staff!said!that!IEDs!and!the!possibility!of!being!killed!or!kidnapped!by!AOGs!were!“the!risks!of!

living!in!Afghanistan.”!One!staffLmember!said!that!while!there!is!risk!inherent!in!working!for!an!NGO,!

“it’s! less! risky! than! working! for! the! government! and! better! than! running! your! own! business.”!

However,!staff!still!actively!seek!out!and!triangulate!information!from!a!range!of!local!sources!before!

making!decisions.!They!often!also!cited!the!importance!or!urgency!of!activities!as!a!factor!influencing!

their!decisionLmaking.!For!example,!health!partners!agreed!that!if!an!outbreak!of!measles!occurred!

they!would!travel!at!a!time!when!they!would!likely!cancel!a!trip!for!less!critical!activities.!Staff!said!

!

!!


they!were!afforded!flexibility!to!make!their!own!decisions!and!all!cited!examples!of!when!they!had!

decided!not!to!travel!or!implement!an!activity!because!they!deemed!the!risk!too!great.!

Program!managers! and! security! experts! were! also! required! to! strike! a! balance! between! defining!

acceptable!risk!and!delivering!program!objectives.!As!stated!by!one!manager,!“We!err!on!the!side!of!

caution!but!at! the!same!time!we!need! to! try!and!reach! the!most!underserved!communities.”!This!

was!done!by!trusting!the!decisions!of!operational!staff,!accepting!advice!from!security!experts!and!

acting! on! ideas! from! staff! on! how! to! improve! security.! Formal! systems! were! complemented! by!

regular!informal!discussions,!all!of!which!aimed!to!support!individual!decisionLmaking.!!

The! flexibility! afforded! by! Australian! Aid! as! the! CoU! donor! in! terms! of! program! delivery! and!

parameters!for!achieving!results!was!considered!a!major!contributing!factor!in!empowering!staff!to!

decide! what! was! deemed! acceptable! risk.! If! acceptance! could! not! be! gained! within! a! particular!

community,!staff!would!seek!other!areas!that!had!similar!levels!of!need!and!were!willing!to!engage!

with! the!program.!Managers!also!gave!examples!of! communities! that!heard!about! the!benefits!of!

the!program!and!approached!CoU! for! support.! This! enabled! the!expansion!of! the!program!but! to!

respond! in!these!situations!requires!a!very!flexible!approach.!Australian!Aid!has!provided!Save!the!

Children! with! the! scope! to! alter! or! extend! program! activities! when! opportunities! arise! that! are!

within!the!boundaries!of!acceptable!risk.!!!

Analysis:"Divergent"practice"and"common"themes"

It!is!evident!from!this!study!that!different!groups!of!staff!approach!the!risks!of!operating!in!Uruzgan!

in!divergent!yet!complementary!ways.!The!period!of!time!over!which!operational!staff!perceived!risk!

was!much!shorter!than!that!of!managerial!staff.!Operational!staff!also!viewed!risk!from!an!activityL

based! perspective! whereas! managerial! staff! had! a! broader! programmatic! perspective.! This!

divergence!reflects!different!roles!and!responsibilities!as!well!as!a!staffLmember’s!proximity!to!risk!

and!the!information!sources!they!access.!!

Staff! consistently! identified! three! factors! that! support! the! safe! and! secure! delivery! of! the! CoU!

program:! trust,! flexibility! and! dialogue.! This! is! apparent! at! all! levels! of! the! relationship! chain:!

between!Australian!Aid!and!Save!the!Children,!between!KabulLbased!program!and!security!staff!and!

those!in!the!provincial!office!in!Tirin!Kot,!between!Tirin!KotLbased!and!local!staff!in!the!districts,!and!

between!local!staff!and!communities.!!

!

An!appreciation!of!the!divergent!approaches!used!by!staff!as!well!as!the!common!themes!of!trust,!

flexibility! and! dialogue! could! help! inform! future! program! planning! by! Save! the! Children! in!

Afghanistan.!Additionally,!with!careful!consideration!and!a!strong!understanding!of!the!local!context,!

they!could!also!potentially!be!used!as!a!framework!to!inform!strategic!planning!and!implementation!

by!agencies!conducting!humanitarian!operations!in!other!insecure!environments.!! !

!

!!


1. Introduction"

The! current! security! situation! and! future! uncertainties! pose! considerable! challenges! for!

international! and! local! nonLgovernment! organisations! (NGOs)! operating! in! Afghanistan.! Last! year!

(2013)! was! reported! as! the! most! violent! in! Afghanistan! since! 2001! and! the! number! of! NGO!

casualties,! either! targeted! or! as! collateral! victims,! has! been! increasing! since! around! 2006.3! The!

transition! of! responsibility! from! the! International! Security! Assistance! Force! (ISAF)! to! the! Afghan!

National!Army!(ANA)!and!national!and!local!police!forces!has!been!taking!place!from!2011!to!2014!

and! the! impacts! of! this! are! not! yet! clear.4! Additionally,! Afghanistan’s! national! election! process! in!

2014! is! adding! to! an! already! high! level! of! uncertainty! among! NGOs! as! to! what! the! postL2014!

operating!environment!will!look!like.!

While!all!postL2014!scenarios!are!speculative,!most!NGOs!consider!the!most!likely!scenario!to!be!one!

in!which! there! is! a! “continued!escalation!of! violent! conflict”5! and! in!which! “security!deterioration!

and! general! disorder! will! affect! the! work! of! the! NGOs.”6! However,! although! this!may! result! in! a!

reduction!in!activities,!few!envisage!ceasing!operations!completely.7!As!such,!identifying!approaches!

for!operating!in!an!increasingly!insecure!environment!represents!a!key!challenge!for!NGOs.!!

According! to! Gherardo! Pontrandolfi,! the! head! of! the! International! Committee! of! the! Red! Cross!

delegation!in!Afghanistan:!

Managing! the! fine! balance! between! taking! action! –! with! the! inherent! danger! of! being! in! the!wrong! place! at! the! wrong! time! or,! worse,! becoming! a! direct! target! –! and! operating! from! a!distance,! by! "remote! control,"! is! a! challenge! for! all! those! involved! in! humanitarian! work! in!conflict!zones.8!!

Managing!this!fine!balance!has!been!a!focus!for!Save!the!Children!when!implementing!the!“Children!

of!Uruzgan”!(CoU)!program.!Funded!by!Australian!Aid,!the!program!aims!to!enhance!the!accessibility!

and! quality! of! basic! health! and! education! services! for! 300,000! people! in! the! seven! districts! of!

Uruzgan.!The!province!has!development!indicators!far!below!the!national!average!and!need!for!such!

programming!is!high.!However,!the!province!is!also!a!highly!insecure!operational!environment!that!is!

“largely!inaccessible!to!international!and!nonLlocal!staff.”9!!!

In! light!of! this,! in!2012!Save!the!Children!commissioned!a!study! into!remote!monitoring!practices,!

which!aimed!to! increase!understanding!of! the!challenges!of!using! remote!monitoring!strategies! in!

Uruzgan.!The!research!identified!that!remote!monitoring!requires!“a!heavier!than!usual!reliance!on!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!3"Afghanistan"NGO"Security"Office,"“Quarterly"Data"Report"–"Q4"2013”"(December"2013)."4!International"Crisis"Group,"“Afghanistan’s"Insurgency"after"the"Transition”"(May"2014).!5"Humanitarian"Policy"Group,"“Talking"to"the"other"side:"Humanitarian"engagement"with"the"Taliban"in"Afghanistan”"(December"2012)."6"Afghanistan"Public"Policy"Research"Organisation,"“Transition"and"NonXGovernment"Organisations"in"Afghanistan:"An"assessment"and"prospects”"(January"2014)."7"Afghanistan"Public"Policy"Research"Organisation,"“Transition"and"NonXGovernment"Organisations"in"Afghanistan.”"8"International"Committee"of"the"Red"Cross,"“Striking"the"balance"between"staying"involved"and"staying"safe”"(February"2014).""9"Save"the"Children,"“Access"Restricted:"A"review"of"remote"monitoring"practices"in"Uruzgan"Province”"(November"2012)."

!

!!


community!groups! (shuras)! as!well! as! community!or!district! level! staff! and/or!volunteers!who!are!

local!to,!and!work!in,!the!districts.”10!!

Humanitarian! actors! operating! in! insecure! environments! are! increasingly! using! such! approaches.!

However,! despite! their! potential! to! enable! aid! agencies! to! reach! vulnerable! groups! in! need! of!

assistance,! the! use! of! remote! implementation! and!monitoring! approaches! should! be! strategically!

planned!rather!than!an!adLhoc!response!to!a!deteriorating!security!situation.11!Previous!research!in!

Somalia! found! that! some! agencies! using! remote! management! overlooked! the! specific! risks! that!

“national!and!local!workers!may!face!owing!to!their!particular!ethnic,!religious!or!other! identity!or!

affiliations! or! resulting! from! their! position! as! agency! representatives! and! gatekeepers.”12! Another!

study! in!South!Sudan!and!Afghanistan!found!that!other! factors!which!might!encourage!riskLtaking,!

including!financial!motivations,!are!often!overlooked.13!!

Save!the!Children!was!aware!of!these!issues!from!the!inception!of!the!CoU!program!and!has!sought!

to!address!them!by!integrating!remote!management!across!the!project!management!cycle.!Program!

design!has!been!aligned!with!a!security!strategy!based!on!acceptance,!funds!have!been!allocated!to!

local! partners! for! improving! their! security! management,! and! monitoring! has! been! designed! to!

enable! remote! verification.! However,! in! preparation! for! a! period! in!which! programme! delivery! in!

Afghanistan! may! require! a! greater! reliance! on! remote! management,! it! is! essential! to! further!

understand!how!staff!understand!and!respond!to!risk.!!

This! study! aims! to! complement! the! remoteLmanagement! research! by! seeking! to! understand! how!

staff! from! Save! the! Children! and! partner! organisations! perceive! risk! and! how! this! subsequently!

affects! decisionLmaking.! Comparisons! will! be! made! between! staff! responsible! for! program! and!

security!management! in!order!to! identify!where!and!why!perceptions!differ!and!whether!common!

themes!exist.!Although!the!focus!of!the!study!is!on!Uruzgan!province,!it!is!hoped!that!good!practices!

will!be!identified!that!can!also!be!used!by!organisations!operating!in!similar!insecure!environments.!

! "

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!10"Save"the"Children,"“Access"Restricted.”"11!Humanitarian"Policy"Group,"“Paradoxes"of"Presence:"Risk"Management"and"aid"culture"in"challenging"

environments”"(March"2013),"page"22.!12"Humanitarian"Policy"Group,"“Humanitarian"Space"in"Somalia:"A"rare"commodity”"(April"2012)."13"Humanitarian"Policy"Group,"“Paradoxes"of"Presence,”"page"22."

!

!!


2. Methodology"

The! objective! of! the! study! is! to! generate! an! understanding! of! the! risks! that! CoU! program! staff!

believe!pose!the!greatest!threat!to!their!safety!and!security.!It!is!not!intended!as!an!evaluation!of!the!

Save!the!Children!safety!and!security!framework!or!practices.!Key!avenues!for!enquiry!are:!

• What! factors! influence! perceptions! of! risk! and! consequent! behaviour! amongst! different!

groups!of!staff?!

• In!what!way!do!perceptions!differ!between!different!groups!of!staff!and!why?!

• How!does!divergence!of!perception!influence!the!effectiveness!of!risk!management?!

• Can!common!themes!be!identified!that!can!support!risk!management!more!broadly?!

Data!was!primarily! collected! through!17! key! informant! interviews! in!Australia! and! in!Afghanistan,!

during!visits!to!Tirin!Kot!and!Kabul!between!23!February!and!11!March!2014.!These!involved:!

• Ten! semiLstructured! interviews!with!Uruzgani! and! nonLUruzgani! national! staff! responsible!

for!implementing!at!the!community!level.!

• One! semiLstructured! focus! group! discussion! with! an! attendee! from! three! of! the! partner!

organisations!responsible!for!implementing!CoU!projects!at!the!community!level.!

• Two!semiLstructured!interviews!with!staff!based!in!Uruzgan!and!responsible!for!operational!

and!security!management!for!the!CoU!program!

• Three!semiLstructured!interviews!with!staff!based!in!Kabul!and!responsible!for!program!and!

security!management,!both!countryLwide!and!for!the!CoU!program!

• One!semiLstructured!interview!with!a!staffLmember!based!in!Melbourne!and!responsible!for!

managing!organisational!risk!and!supporting!security!management!of!the!CoU!program!!

Purposive!sampling!was!used!to!identify!participants!to!take!part!in!the!research.!This!approach!was!

used! to! ensure! participants! with! the! relevant! experience! and! technical! knowledge! of! operations,!

program! and! security! management! were! selected,! providing! a! broad! and! varied! sample! group!

between!which!comparisons!could!be!made.!Interviews!were!either!conducted!in!English!or!Pashto!

via!a!translator.!The!questions!were!checked!with!security!experts!and!Pashto!translators!to!ensure!

the!appropriateness!of!questions!and!language.!All!interviewees!gave!informed!oral!consent.!

However,!no!interviews!were!undertaken!with!local!female!staff,!all!of!whom!were!on!fieldLtrips!in!

remote!districts!while! the!researcher!was! in!Tirin!Kot.!This! represents!a!gap! in! the!current!study’s!

findings!and!could!be!an!area!for!further!investigation.!!

A!groundedLtheory!approach!to!data!analysis!was!undertaken.!Open!coding!of!interview!transcripts!

was! initially! undertaken! and! entered! into! an! Excel! spreadsheet.! To! identify! themes! and! links!

between!concepts,!axial!and!selective!coding!was!undertaken!and!visually!represented!through!the!

development!of! two!mental!models:! one!of! local,! national! and!partner! (LNP)! staff! responsible! for!

program! delivery! and! one! of! national! and! expatriate! staff! responsible! for! program! and! security!

management.!These!are!attached!as!Annex!1!and!2.!

" !

!

!!


3. The"CoU"Program"and"Context"

3.1! Insecurity!in!Uruzgan!!

Uruzgan!is!a!province!in!southern!Afghanistan.!The!capital,!Tirin!Kot,!has!an!estimated!population!of!

90,000! but! the! majority! of! the! 395,000! population! live! in! rural! areas! and! are! considered! poor,!

minimally! educated! and! highly! conservative.14! Uruzgan! is! ringed! by! three! of! 2013’s! most! violent!

provinces! (Kandahar,! Helmand! and! Ghazni)! and! has! a! volatile! security! situation.! The! Afghanistan!

NGO!Safety!Office!(ANSO)!classed!the!province!as!“highly!insecure,”!with!an!average!rate!of!just!over!

one!armedLopposition!group!(AOG)!attack!per!day.15!

!!

Insecurity! in! the! province! is! driven! by! two! main! factors.! First,! the! province! experiences! active!

conflict!between!the!Afghan!national!security!forces!(ANSF)!and!TalibanLled!AOGs.!Until!recently!the!

ANSF,! who! are! responsible! for! maintaining! security! in! Uruzgan,! were! supported! by! international!

military! forces! (IMF).! Therefore,! insurgents!have!used! improvised!explosive!devices! (IEDs)! as! their!

weapon!of!choice!to!avoid!direct!combat!against!a!force!with!superior!firepower.!Insurgents!also!use!

illegal!checkpoints!to!conduct!assassinations!or!kidnappings!of!government!officials,!proLgovernment!

elders! and!NGO!workers! as!well! as! intimidation! tactics! to! coerce! local! populations! into! providing!

support.!A! second!major! source!of! insecurity! comes! from! inter!and! intraLtribal! fighting!and! family!

feuds.!These!are!often! linked!to! individuals!seeking!to!consolidate!power!and!tribes!competing!for!

limited! resources! and! can! also! be! influenced! by! whether! a! tribe! is! considered! as! supporting! the!

government!or!AOGs.!Additionally,! the!withdrawal! of! IMF! from!Uruzgan! in! 2013! and! the!national!

elections!in!2014!have!added!further!complexity!to!an!already!volatile!security!context.16!

!

However,! there! have! been! recent! indications! of! an! improvement! in! security.! The! Liaison! Office!

reported! that! only! 50! percent! of! the! province!was! under! government! control! in! 2010.17! This! had!

increased! to!about!55L65!percent!by! the!end!of!2011!and!an!estimated!80!percent!by! the!end!of!

2013.18! Additionally,! ANSO! data! highlights! a! nine! percent! decrease! in! AOG! attacks! between! 2011!

and!2013.19!!

3.2! Save!the!Children!in!Uruzgan!!

Despite!the!challenging!operating!environment,!Save!the!Children! is!successfully! implementing!the!

CoU! program! across! all! seven! districts! of! Uruzgan.! Since! its! inception! in! 2011,! the! program! has!

reached!an!estimated!200,000!beneficiaries!with!community,!health!and!education!activities,20!often!

operating! in! areas! beyond! government! control.! Broad! access! has! been! achieved! through! the!

implementation!of!a!community!acceptance!strategy.!This!involves!extensive!dialogue!with!religious!

leaders!and!community!elders!and!the!funding!of!smallLscale!community!based!projects,!such!as!the!

drilling!of!a!borehole,!which!are!introduced!prior!to!offering!health!and!education!services.!Although!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!14"Feinstein"International"Centre,"“Briefing"Note:"Winning"Hearts"and"Minds"in"Uruzgan"Province”"(August"2012)."15"Afghanistan"NGO"Security"Office,"“Quarterly"Data"Report"–"Q4"2013”"(December"2013)."16"The"Liaison"Office,"“18"months"after"the"Dutch/"Australian"Leadership"Handover”"(April"2012)."17"The"Liaison"Office,"“Three"years"later:"A"socio"political"assessment"of"Uruzgan"province:"2006X2009”"(Sep"2009)."""18"Interview"with"staffXmember"(March"2014)."19"Afghanistan"NGO"Security"Office,"“Quarterly"Data"Report"–"Q4"2013”"(December"2013)."20"Save"the"Children,"“Children"of"Uruzgan:"MidXterm"achievements"of"delivering"health"and"education"services"in"Uruzgan"Province,"Afghanistan”"(January"2014).!

!

!!


the! community! acceptance! strategy! enables! Save! the! Children! to! gain! access! to! underLserved!

communities,!this!access!is!often!limited!to!local!Uruzgani!staff!due!to!security!concerns.!

!

The! CoU! program! is! managed! by! an! international! Chief! of! Party! based! in! Kabul! and! an! Afghan!

Deputy!Chief!of!Party!based! in!Uruzgan.!Both!are!dedicated!solely! to! the!delivery!of! the!program.!

Other!staff!from!the!Afghanistan!country!office!and!Save!the!Children!Australia!provide!managerial!

and!technical!support!to!the!program.!Save!the!Children!has!a!provincial!office!in!Tirin!Kot!as!well!as!

offices! in! each! district,! through!which! staff! from!within! target! communities! have! been! recruited.!

Including! partner! organisations! and! other! externalLsupported! staff! and! volunteers,! there! are! over!

1,500!people!who!work!on!the!CoU!program.!

!

A!map!of!CoU!project!locations!is!attached!as!an!Annex!3.!More!information!on!the!program!can!be!

found!on!the!CoU!website:!www.childrenofuruzgan.org.au!

3.3! Save!the!Children’s!Security!Framework!

Global"and"national"

The!acceptance!strategy!applied!in!Uruzgan!aligns!closely!with!Save!the!Children’s!global!approach!

to!security!management!in!which!acceptance!is!a!core!premise!to!being!able!to!operate!safely!and!

securely.!As!stated!by!Jasmine!Whitbread,!chief!executive!officer!for!Save!the!Children!International,!

“Safety!and!security!management!is!mission!critical!to!Save!the!Children!–!it!means!we!can!reach!the!

hardest! to! reach! children! while! living! up! to! our! duty! of! care! to! our! people.”21! However,! the!

organisation!also!recognises!that!“there!are!many!variables!beyond!the!control!of!Save!the!Children!

impacting! the!welfare! of! staff,! and! it! is! not! possible! to! eliminate! all! the! risks! associated!with! the!

work! that! we! do! in! the! places! where! we! work.”22! As! such,! the! organisation! has! committed! to!

“minimising! safety! and! security! risks! to! staff! and! ensuring! staff! are! given! training,! support,! and!

information! to! reduce! their! risk! of! exposure! while! maximising! the! impact! of! our! programs! for!

children!and!families.”23!To!achieve!this!the!organisation!focuses!on!gaining!acceptance!for!Save!the!

Children’s! work! through! developing! relationships! with! beneficiaries,! local! authorities,! belligerent!

groups!and!other!stakeholders.!

!

Save!the!Children’s!global!commitment!is!applied!at!the!country!level!through!the!implementation!of!

the!Save!the!Children’s!Quality!Framework,!which!includes!eight!safety!and!security!standards!that!

all! country! programs! must! apply.! In! accordance! with! the! Quality! Framework,! and! due! to! being!

categorised!as!a!very!high! threat!environment,! the!Afghanistan!country!office!has! recruited!a! fullL

time! Safety! and! Security! Director! to!manage! safety! and! security! across! all! operations! in! country.!

Security!experts!based!in!regional!Save!the!Children!offices!provide!technical!advice.!The!safety!and!

security!management! system! is! articulated! in! the! Afghanistan! Country! Office! Safety! and! Security!

Management! Plan,! which! defines! potential! threats! in! Afghanistan! and! “policies! and! procedures!

established! to! reduce! staff! exposures! to! those! threats.”24! The!plan! is! shared!with!a! core!group!of!

staff!responsible!for!security!management!and!key!policies!are!translated!and!shared!with!all!staff.!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!21"Save"the"Children,"“Global"Safety"and"Security”"(internal"OneNet"document)."22"Kamran"Saeed"and"Tanja"Mahl,"“Health,"Safety"and"Security”"(Save"the"Children,"December"2013)."23"Ibid."24"Save"the"Children,"“Afghanistan"Country"Office"Safety"and"Security"Management"Plan,”"page"6."

!

!!


In"Uruzgan"

To!complement! this!system,!a!safety!and!security!plan!has!been!developed!for!Uruzgan,!based!on!

International!Organization!of!Standards!(ISO)!31000:2009!risk!management!standards.!Mirroring!the!

country!plan!in!its!structure,!the!Uruzgan!plan!explicitly!states!that!retaining!community!acceptance!

is!key!to!delivering!programs.!There!is!also!a!fullLtime!safety!and!security!manager!based!in!Uruzgan,!

who!is!supported!by!the!national!manager!based!in!Kabul.!!

!

In!terms!of!security!management,!CoU!program!staff!are!divided!into!three!groups:!local!Uruzganis,!

nonLUruzgani! nationals,! and! expatriates! (however,! this! report! generally! groups! the! responses! of!

local! Uruzganis! and! nonLUruzgani! nationals! together! but! does! distinguish! between! them! when!

necessary).!Each!group!is!deemed!to!be!exposed!to!a!different!level!of!risk,!which!is!reflected!in!the!

safety!and!security!framework!as!well!as!in!their!roles:!

!

• Local!Uruzgani!staff!are!based!in!the!district!offices!and!spend!the!majority!of!their!time!in!

the!communities,!directly!implementing!projects.!!

• NonLUruzgani!national!staff!are!mainly!management!staff!based! in!Tirin!Kot!and!spend!the!

majority!of!their!time!coordinating!activities!from!the!provincial!office.!!

• Expatriate!staff!are!mainly!based!in!Kabul!and!providing!remote!management!and!strategic!

direction!while!also!ensuring!compliance!with!the!security!framework.!!

!

Threat! levels! in! different! locations! and! consequent! responses! differ! depending! on!which! group! a!

staffLmember! comes! from.! Access! to! some! districts! is! only! possible! for! local! staff,! with! some!

restrictions!for!nonLUruzgani!nationals!and!substantial!restrictions!for!expatriates.!!

!

!

!

!

" !

!

!!


4. Findings:"Risk"Perception"and"Response"

This!chapter!presents!an!overview!of!the!findings!of!what!factors!influence!the!perception!of!risk!by!

different!groups!of!staff!and!how!this!impacts!on!their!decisionLmaking.!A!description!is!provided!of!

how! staff! responsible! for! implementation! at! the! community! level! perceive! risk.! This! includes! the!

perceptions!of!local,!nonLUruzgani!and!partner!(LNP)!staff,!all!of!whom!are!Afghan.!This!is!followed!

by!a!comparison!with!expatriate!and!Afghan!program!managers!and!security!experts.!A!number!of!

key!differences!have!been!identified!and!the!influencing!factors!explored.!To!help!understanding,!a!

mental!model!has!been!developed!that!visually!represents!each!group’s!perception!of!risk!(Annexes!

1!and!2).!

Findings!have!been!grouped!under!six!reoccurring!themes:!

• Contextual! factors! that! influence!perceptions!of! risk:!Elements! in! the!external!environment!

that! influenced!perceptions!of!risk!(positively!or!negatively)!within!which!the!CoU!program!

was!being!implemented.!

• Risks! impacting! on! staff! safety! and! programming! (potentially! leading! to! death,! injury,!kidnapping,!and!loss!of!access,!assets!or!reputation):!Factors!linked!to!the!formal!definition!

of!risk!as!“the!likelihood!and!potential!impact!of!encountering!a!threat”!with!a!threat!being!

considered!“a!danger!in!the!operating!environment.”25!!

• Factors!that!increase!perceptions!of!risk!(resulting!in!staff!feeling!less!safe).!

• Factors!that!decrease!perceptions!of!risk!(resulting!in!staff!feeling!safer).!

• Strategies! for!mitigating! risks:! Formal!elements!of! the!security!plan! that! staff! identified!as!

reducing! their! exposure! to! risk! as! well! as! informal! approaches! that! they! had! developed!

through!their!experience.!

• Factors! that! influence! what! is! deemed! an! acceptable! risk:! Information! related! to! what!

motivated!staff!to!accept!the!risks!identified!previously!and!continue!to!implement!activities!

and!what!change! in! the!operating!environment!would!result! in!stopping!activities!because!

the!level!of!risk!was!deemed!to!high.!!

4.1! Implementing!projects!at!the!community!level:!Perceptions!of!risk!by!local,!national!and!partner!staff!!

Contextual"factors"that"influence"perceptions"of"risk"

LNP!staff! identified!a! limited!number!of!contextual!drivers!of! insecurity.!All! staff! identified!conflict!

between!AOGs!and!the!government!along!with!tribal!politics!and!power!dynamics!as!major!causes!of!

insecurity,! and!were!often! seen!as! linked! to!whether! a! tribe! supported! the! government!or!AOGs.!

One! staffLmember! from! each! group! mentioned! that! AOGs! from! neighbouring! countries! can! also!

have! a! destabilising! effect! on! the! province.! Environmental! factors! influencing! safety! and! security!

were! identified!as! low!education! levels,!extreme!poverty,! relationships!based!on! tribal!affiliations,!

and!limited!exposure!to!other!cultures.!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!25"Humanitarian"Practice"Network,"“Good"Practice"Review:"Operational"Security"Management"in"Violent"Environments,”"Number"8"(new"edition),"December"2010,"page"xviii."

!

!!


Risks"impacting"on"staff"safety"and"programming"(potentially"leading"to"death,"injury,"kidnapping,"and"loss"of"access,"assets"or"reputation)"

All!LNP!staff!identified!the!accidental!triggering!of!an!IED!as!the!main!risk!to!their!security,!for!which!

the! consequences! were! considered! to! be! death! or! injury.! This! was! followed! by! the! risk! of! being!

accused! of! supporting! the! government,! tribal! favouritism! or! supporting! foreign! forces,! which!

subsequently!would!result!in!killing,!kidnapping!or!a!lack!of!access!to!communities.!The!risk!of!being!

killed!or!kidnapped!could!either!occur!when!stopped!at! illegal!checkpoints!or!after!suspicions!have!

arisen!within!a!community!and!AOGs!made!aware!of!their!location.!

Risks!were!clearly! linked!to!contextual!drivers!and!environmental! factors.!Staff!believed!that!AOGs!

only! used! IEDs! to! target! government,!military! or! police! targets.! No! staff! feared! being! specifically!

targeted!by!an!IED.!However,!being!mistaken!for!a!government!employee!could!lead!to!this!result.!

This!was!exacerbated!by! the!belief! that!AOGs!do!not!always!distinguish!between!NGOs!and!other!

targets,!which!was!linked!to!low!education!levels!among!AOGs.!

Health!partners!also!said!that!parties!to!the!conflict!would!sometimes!occupy!facilities,!which!could!

result!in!violence!or!harassment!towards!staff.!This!is!an!issue!that!has!also!been!noted!by!Medecins!

Sans!Frontieres! in!other!areas!of!Afghanistan26!and!was!highlighted!by!a!recent!attack!on!IMF!who!

were! attempting! to! visit! a! clinic! in! Kandahar,!which! resulted! in! the!destruction!of! the! facility! and!

injuries!to!staff.27!!

A! risk!was! seen! to!come! from!being!accused!of! supporting! the!government,! foreign! forces!or!one!

tribe! over! another.! This! was! a! secondary! issue! for! many! Uruzgani! staff! whereas! nonLUruzgani!

national!staff!placed!a!greater!emphasis!on!it.!

Factors"that"increase"perception"of"risk"

All!LNP!staff!identified!the!indiscriminate!nature!of!IEDs!and!the!challenges!in!locating!them!as!being!

the!main!reasons!for!why!they!presented!the!biggest!risk!to!their!safety!and!security.!Furthermore,!

staff!felt!that!there!was!little!they!could!do!if!they!came!into!contact!with!an!IED.!As!noted!by!one!

staffLmember,!“At!least!when!stopped!by!AOGs!you!will!have!the!opportunity!to!explain!yourself;!an!

IED!doesn’t!give!you!that!chance.”!The!challenge!of!locating!IEDs!was!exacerbated!by!the!belief!that!

AOGs!would!falsely!claim!to!have!planted!them!to! intimidate! local!populations!and!project!power.!

Some!staff!also! identified!regular!travel!on!unsealed!roads,!on!which! IEDs!were!easily!planted!and!

concealed,!as!making!them!feel!less!safe.!

The! danger! of! being! accused! of! supporting! one! tribe! over! another! stemmed! from! tribal! power!

dynamics! and! competition! for! resources,! which! linked! back! to! extreme! poverty.! Additionally,! an!

immediate!suspicion!of!outsiders!was!linked!back!to!the!low!education!levels!and!limited!exposure!

to!other!cultures,!especially!in!remote!areas.!!

For!nonLUruzgani!national!staff,!being!viewed!as!an!outsider!or!as!a! target! for!kidnap!due!to!their!

status! influenced! their!perception!of! risk.!They! felt! that!Uruzgani! staff!had!better! local!knowledge!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!26"Medecins"Sans"Frontieres,"“Between"Rhetoric"and"Reality:"The"Ongoing"Struggle"to"Access"Health"Care"in"Afghanistan”"(February"2014).!27"Khaama"press,"“Kandahar"car"bombing"leaves"5"dead,"39"others"injured,”"11"May"2014,"www.khaama.com/deadlyXcarXbombingXrocksXsouthernXkandaharXprovinceX8057."

!

!!


and,!thanks!to!family!connections,!would!be!able!to!present!an!alternative!reason!for!their!presence!

in!an!area,!if!questioned.!However,!local!staff!perceived!risks!to!be!similar!for!all!staff!regardless!of!

whether!they!were!local,!national!or!expatriate.!The!general!consensus!was,!“If!the!area!is!safe!for!

me,! it! is! safe! for! anyone.”! Although! this! was! regularly! stated,! it! was! often! contradicted! during!

discussions!of!mitigation!strategies!that!emphasised!knowledge!of! local!customs,! language!(dialect!

and!accent)!and!dress.!

Factors"that"decrease"perceptions"of"risk"

All!LNP!staff!perceived!that!security!had!improved!over!the!second!half!of!2013.!Although!opinions!

differed!on!the!exact!timeframe!over!which!improvements!had!occurred!(some!stating!that!security!

had! improved! over! the! last! two!months,! while! others! felt! it! had! been! improving! for! up! to! eight!

months),! all! attributed! the! improvements! to! the! current! police! chief! increasing! control! in! areas!

previously!held!by!AOGs,!an!increased!number!of!government!checkpoints!and!a!reduction!in!IEDs.!

The!drawdown!of! foreign! troops!was! rarely!mentioned!although!one!participant! thought! that! the!

closure! of! ISAF! district! bases!would! result! in! a! reduction! in! the! number! of! IED! attacks.! Increased!

government!control!was!cited!as!why!travel! to!previously! insecure!Uruzgani!districts!of!Charchino,!

Gizab!and!Khaz!Uruzgan!was!now!acceptable.!!

Alongside!government!control,!all!LNP!staff!emphasised!that!community!acceptance!made!them!feel!

safer!while! conducting! their!work! in! the! community.!Building! trust!was!emphasised!by!all! staff! as!

lowering! a! community’s! suspicion! of! outsiders! and! the! risk! of! being! accused! of! supporting! a!

particular!group.!!

Strategies"for"mitigating"risks"

Community! acceptance! resulted! in! the! exchange! of! information! that! supported! operational!

decisionLmaking.! This! was! emphasised! by! all! LNP! staff! as! their! main! strategy! used! to! reduce!

exposure!to!all!risks!faced.!Information!from!communities!was!complemented!by!advice!provided!by!

Save! the! Children! security! staff! who! were! seen! to! have! a! broader! information! network.! After!

authorisation! to! travel!was! received! from! the! security!department,! a! final! check!would! always!be!

made!with!a!community!member!prior!to!departure.!

Information!received!from!the!community!would!often!be!crossLchecked!with!information!provided!

by!the!security!department!in!daily!and!weekly!incident!reports!as!well!as!through!discussions!with!

the!security!officer.!Further!information!was!sought!from!local!and!online!media!but!these!were!not!

considered!key!sources.!Information!provided!by!communities!was!considered!a!valuable!and!highly!

trusted!source!by!all!LNP!staff,!closely!followed!by!the!advice!and!technical!assistance!provided!by!

the!security!department.!These!two!sources!were!considered!as!the!main!influencers!of!operational!

decisionLmaking.!

All!LNP!staff!spoke!of!the!need!to!gain!acceptance!through!community!mobilisation,!which!involves!

the!implementation!of!smallLscale!community!development!projects,!the!training!of!mullahs!and!the!

presentation!of! the!potential!benefits!of!health!and!education!programming!to!community!elders.!

All!LNP!staff!also!spoke!of!the!need!to!empower!communities!to!take!ownership!of!projects.!!

Local! staff! considered!acceptance!as!a!way! to! reduce! the! likelihood!of!an! incident!occurring.!Staff!

discussed!this! in!relation!to!avoiding!accusations!being!made!against!them!and!having! information!

!

!!


on! areas! in! which! hostile! AOGs! were! operating.! All! local! staff! strongly! emphasised! the! need! to!

respect!culture,!language!and!forms!of!dress!as!a!means!of!gaining!acceptance.!This!was!also!a!way!

of! reducing! their! visibility! and! avoiding! identification! as! an!outsider! or! as! an!NGO!or! government!

worker.! Further! tactics! implemented! by! nonLUruzgani! staff! included! moving! quickly! through!

communities,!“never!staying!longer!than!thirty!minutes!and!not!carrying!modern!phones,!checklists!

or!notebooks.”!Additionally,!all! LNP!staff! said! that! they!did!not!make!explicit! reference! to! funding!

from!Australia.! This!was!not! linked! to!Australia’s!military!presence! in!Afghanistan!but!was! related!

more!to!a!general!suspicion!of!outsiders.!As!one!staffLmember!noted,!“Even!if!the!donor’s!military!

was! not! fighting! in! Afghanistan,! I! would! still! avoid! telling! the! community! that! the! funds! were!

foreign.”!

Avoiding!roads!on!which!an!IED!had!recently!detonated!was!cited!as!the!main!way!of!mitigating!risks!

from!IEDs.!There!was!a!general!consensus!that!an!IED!would!result!in!a!one!or!twoLday!delay!as!they!

checked!with! the!community!and! security!department!and!waited! for! the!police! to! clear! the!area!

and! for! other! traffic! to! resume! travelling! along! the! route.!Only! one! staffLmember!mentioned! the!

proactive!tactic!of!walking!into!certain!areas!rather!than!travelling!in!a!vehicle!that!would!be!more!

likely!to!trigger!a!pressureLplate!IED!due!to!its!weight.!!!!!

Factors"that"influence"what"is"deemed"an"acceptable"risk""

All!LNP!staff!stated!that!IEDs!and!the!possibility!of!being!killed!or!kidnapped!by!AOGs!were!“the!risks!

of! living! in!Afghanistan.”!One!staffLmember!said!that!while!there! is! risk! inherent! in!working! for!an!

NGO,!“it’s!less!risky!than!working!for!the!government!and!better!than!running!your!own!business.”!

Although! this! suggests!a! fatalistic!attitude,!other! factors! influencing!decisionLmaking! show!a!more!

nuanced!approach!to!what!constitutes!acceptable!risk.!!

As!previously!discussed,! staff!would!actively! seek!out!and! triangulate! information! from!a! range!of!

local! sources! before! making! decisions.! However,! staff! would! often! also! cite! the! importance! or!

urgency!of!activities!as!a!factor!influencing!their!decisions.!For!example,!health!staff!agreed!that!if!an!

outbreak!of!measles!occurred!they!would!travel!at!a! time!when!they!would! likely!cancel!a! trip! for!

less!critical!activities.!!

Local!staff!continuously!emphasised!that!the!advice!of!trusted!contacts!within!the!community!was!

the!most!important!factor!for!deciding!what!was!considered!acceptable.!They!would!halt!activities!if!

a!trusted!community!member!told!an!LNP!staffLmember!that!their!activities!would!put!them!at!risk.!

Additionally,!while! it!was! recognised! that! a! higher! level! of! risk!would! need! to! be! accepted!when!

initially! engaging! with! a! community,! all! staff! stated! that! they! mitigated! the! risks! related! to! this!

period! by! only! undertaking! limited! mobilisation! activities! until! community! acceptance! had! been!

achieved.!

During!the!research,!LNP!staff!were!probed!as!to!whether!they!ever!felt!pressured!to!compromise!

personal! security! to! achieve! programmatic! targets.! Many! staff! stated! that! they! were! sometimes!

concerned! for! their! personal! safety! (especially! national! staff)! but! all! felt! empowered! to! make!

decisions!regarding!acceptable!risk.!All!staff!stated!that!they!were!afforded!flexibility!to!make!their!

own!decisions!and!all!cited!examples!of!when!they!had!decided!not!to!travel!to!a!particular!location!

or!implement!a!certain!activity!because!they!deemed!the!risk!too!great.!!

!

!!


The!level!of!empowerment!afforded!to!staff!not!only!increased!perceptions!of!security!but!in!some!

circumstances! led! to! increased! program! activity.! In! one! example,! the! security! department! had!

authorised!travel!to!only!one!community!when!the!original!movement!request!had!been!to!visit!two.!

After!visiting!the!first!community!and!discussing!the!security!situation!with!elders,!staff!felt!that!they!

could!safely!visit! the!next!community.!They!were!empowered!to!capitalise!on!the!opportunity!and!

complete!activities!in!the!second!village.!

All! staff! linked! the! decisionLmaking! flexibility! they! were! afforded! back! to! provincial! leadership! in!

Uruzgan,! which! consistently! emphasised! the! application! of! the! relevant! safety! and! security!

procedures! while! also! empowering! staff! to! take! responsibility! for! decisions! regarding! their! own!

safety.!!

4.2! Managing! the!program:!Perceptions!of! risk!by!expatriate!and!national!managers!and!security!experts!!

Contextual"factors"that"influence"perceptions"of"risk""

The! illegal!drugs!trade!was!the!only!additional! factor! identified!by!program!managers!and!security!

experts.!However,!all!in!this!group!framed!their!answers!within!seasonal!periods!whereas!LNP!staff!

did!not.!Program!managers!and!security!experts!highlighted!a!drop!in!AOG!activity!during!the!winter!

season!and!an!increase!during!the!“spring!offensive.”!The!poppy!harvest!was!also!considered!a!key!

period!regarding!security.!!

Risks"impacting"on"staff"safety"and"programming"(potentially"leading"to"death,"injury,"kidnapping,"and"loss"of"access,"assets"or"reputation)"

As!with!LNP!staff,!program!managers!and!security!experts!recognised!the!risk!of!collateral!injury!and!

death.!However,!they!were!also!concerned!with!program!staff!being!deliberately!targeted,!which!the!

LNP!staff!had!not!perceived!to!be!a!significant!risk.!When!considering!the!possible!reasons!for!being!

targeted,! program! managers! and! security! experts! emphasised! tribal! politics! and! local! power!

dynamics.! The! reasons! for! the! difference! in! perception! between! the! two! groups! are! twofold.!

Program! managers! and! security! experts! focussed! on! the! impact! it! could! have! on! the! individual,!

program! and! organisation!whereas! LNP! staff! focussed! on! the! likelihood! of! an! incident! occurring.!

They! noted! that! targeting! by!AOGs! could! result! in! a! staffLmember! being! killed! or! kidnapped,! and!

would!likely!result!in!an!immediate!delay!to!programming!as!well!as!indicating!a!loss!of!community!

acceptance.! Given! that! community! acceptance! represents! Save! the! Children’s! core! approach! to!

gaining! access! to! communities! and! implementing! its! programs! safely! and! securely,! a! death! or!

kidnapping!could!result!in!Save!the!Children!having!to!review!its!capacity!to!continue!operations!in!

certain!areas.!!

Program!managers!also! identified!the!danger!of!being!falsely!accused!of! financial!mismanagement!

and! the! reputational! risk! this! posed! for! Save! the! Children.! This!was! linked! to! the! risks! associated!

with!tribal!politics!and!local!power!dynamics.!Program!managers!felt!that!they!were!often!perceived!

by!external!stakeholders!as!having!financial!decisionLmaking!power!and!that!accusations!would!likely!

come! from! local!powerLbrokers! seeking! to! financially!benefit! from! the!program! (discussed! further!

below).!Consideration!was!again!given! to! seasonal!periods!during!which! the! level! and! type!of! risk!

would!change.!For!example,!during!the!poppy!harvest! it!was! identified!that!the!prevalence!of! IEDs!

!

!!


would!increase!as!those!undertaking!the!harvest!sought!to!restrict!movements.!Additionally,!the!risk!

of!being!caught!in!crossfire!between!Afghan!forces!and!AOGs!was!identified!by!one!security!expert!

as!a!risk,!the!likelihood!of!which!would!increase!during!the!spring!offensive.!

Factors"that"increase"perceptions"of"risk""

While!local!and!national!staff!considered!that!the!security!situation!had!improved!in!Uruzgan,!most!

program! managers! and! security! experts! classed! the! environment! as! “volatile! and! the! security!

situation! as! fluid.”! They! believed! that! security! and! access! had! improved! in! some! areas! but!

deteriorated!in!others!and!that!this!had!changed!over!time.!Their!perceptions!were!seemingly!more!

nuanced!than!that!of!the!LNP!staff,!factoring!in!broader!timelines!and!making!greater!comparisons!

between! geographic! areas.! Additionally,! program!managers! and! security! experts! placed! a! greater!

emphasis!on!considering!the!potential! impact!that!the!drawdown!of!foreign!troops!would!have!on!

the!province,!although!they!were!unsure!whether!it!would!have!a!positive!or!a!negative!influence!on!

security.! However,! the! fact! that! this! issue! was! being! considered! by! all! program! managers! and!

security!experts!but!was! rarely!mentioned!by!LNP!staff! further!highlights! the!different! factors!and!

timeframes!that!the!two!groups!were!taking!into!account.!

It! is! also! evident! that! program! managers! and! security! experts! tended! to! frame! risk! from! an!

organisational! or! programmatic! perspective! while! LNP! staff! framed! risk! from! an! individual! or!

activityLbased!perspective.!The!factors!influencing!their!perception!therefore!differed.!For!example,!

all! program!managers! and! security! experts! believed! that! the! CoU! program’s! status! as! the! largest!

development!program! in!Uruzgan!drew!unwanted!attention! from!external!stakeholders!seeking!to!

benefit! financially!from!the!program.!As!stated!by!one!staffLmember,!“In!Uruzgan!everyone!knows!

everyone’s!business!and!there!are!high!expectations!for!the!project.”!

Factors"that"decrease"perceptions"of"risk""

As! with! LNP! staff,! program!managers! and! security! experts! considered! community! acceptance! as!

particularly!important!for!security.!Similarly,!trust!was!also!considered!important,!not!only!between!

Save! the! Children! and! the! community! but! also! within! Save! the! Children! and! with! the! donor.! An!

emphasis!was!placed!on!having!managerial!staff!in!Uruzgan!with!a!strong!contextual!knowledge!and!

who! were! trusted! to! build! appropriate! relationships,! operate! with! integrity,! ensure! transparency!

and!make!appropriate!decisions.!!

Additionally,! program! managers! had! trust! in! the! security! department’s! technical! expertise! to!

implement! appropriate! security! procedures! and! provide! advice! and! information! necessary! for!

decisionLmaking.!Similarly,!there!was!a!high!level!of!trust!between!managerial!and!operational!staff.!

As!previously!discussed,!operational! staff! felt!entrusted! to!make!decisions!while!managers! trusted!

them! to!maintain! community! acceptance! and! share! important! information.! Additionally,! program!

managers!perceived! that! the!strategy! to! recruit!districtLbased!staff!and! to!establish!district!offices!

increased!community!acceptance!as!well!as!providing!for!a!trusted!information!source.!

Strategies"for"mitigating"risks""

Program!managers!and!security!experts!focussed!on!reducing!both!the!likelihood!and!the!impact!of!

an! incident.! They! sought! to!mitigate! risks! by! achieving! community! acceptance! through! equitable!

distribution! between! tribes,! implementation! of! protective! measures! and! ensuring! a! response!

!

!!


capacity.! This! required!working! at! the! provincial! and! district! level! as! well! as! considering! physical!

infrastructure,!systems!and!processes.!This!perspective!differed!from!LNP!staff,!who!were!focussed!

on!avoiding!risks!and!achieving!acceptance!within!individual!communities.!

Program!managers!also!sought!to!influence!wider!audiences,!giving!examples!of!using!local!radio!to!

deliver!messages!about!Save!the!Children’s!values!and!to!conduct!talkLback!sessions!with!religious!

leaders! who! would! discuss! issues! such! as! girls’! education.! Program! managers! also! periodically!

arranged! for! larger! meetings! with! members! of! multiple! communities! to! gauge! and! improve!

acceptance.!

Unlike!LNP!staff,! security!experts!also!considered!response!capacity.!For!example,! security!experts!

identified!that!in!the!event!of!a!staff!member!being!kidnapped,!“the!quicker!negotiations!begin!the!

more! likely!the!hostage!will!be!released!unharmed.”!As!such,!procedures!have!been! introduced!to!

ensure! the! relevant! communications! equipment! is! carried! in! vehicles! and! crisis! management!

systems!are!developed.!

Program! managers! and! security! experts! also! used! a! broader! network! of! information! sources! to!

understand! the! operating! environment.! This! included! information! from! confidential! and! sensitive!

sources!and!which!enabled!geographical!and!seasonal!comparisons!to!be!made.!All!emphasised!the!

need!for!trend!analysis,!which!can!be!used!to!plan!activities!and!strengthen!procedures!that!support!

operations.!For!example,!analysis!shows!that!most!IED!incidents!occur!early!in!the!morning!or!late!in!

the! afternoon! (especially! in! the! summer)! and! travel! restrictions! have! been! set! accordingly.! Thus,!

while!LNP!staff!did!not!identify!this!as!a!mitigating!strategy,! it! is!reflected!in!their!conduct!through!

the!safety!and!security!procedures!that!are!applied!by!operational!staff.!

Factors"that"influence"what"is"deemed"an"acceptable"risk"

Program! managers! and! security! experts! were! required! to! strike! a! balance! between! defining!

acceptable!risk!and!delivering!program!objectives.!As!stated!by!one!manager,!“We!err!on!the!side!of!

caution!but!at!the!same!time!we!need!to!try!and!reach!the!most!underserved!communities.”!

This!balance!was!achieved!by!trusting!the!decisions!made!by!operational!staff,!accepting!advice!from!

security! experts! and! acting! on! ideas! from! staff! on! how! to! improve! security.! This! extended! to!

supporting!partner!organisations!financially!to!improve!their!security.!Related!to!this!approach!was!a!

clear! message! from! program! managers! to! LNP! staff! that! “we! don’t! skimp! on! community!

mobilisation.!It!takes!as!long!as!necessary.”28!The!mobilisation!process!is!“explicit!and!frontloaded”

29!

and!no!additional!activities!take!place!until!acceptance!has!been!achieved.!This!was!communicated!

regularly!and!was!mentioned!as!a!mitigation!strategy!by!LNP!staff.!

Program!managers! and! security! experts! often!mentioned! that! acceptable! risk!was! determined! by!

the!individual!with!formal!systems!and!informal!dialogue!provided!to!support!their!decisionLmaking.!

Travel! authorisation! by! the! security! officer! and! regular! email,! SMS! and! telephone! calls! to! inform!

staff!of!historical!incidents!were!described!as!formal!systems.!Additionally,!the!security!officer!would!

informally!share!any!rumours!or!unverified!information!about!an!area!with!relevant!staff.!This!was!

done! informally! so! as! to! not! raise! concerns! among! other! staff.! The! security! officer! would! also!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!28"Interview"with"program"manager"(March"2014)."29"Interview"with"program"manager"(March"2014).!

!

!!


provide!trend!analysis!at!monthly!meetings!and!informally!emphasise!relevant!security!procedures!

that!mitigate! risks.! These! systems! supported!decisionLmaking! about! travel! but! any!decision! about!

whether!community!acceptance!had!been!achieved!resided!solely!with!staff!onLtheLground!there.!!

A!security!coordination!network!has!been!established!and!brings!together!NGOs!and!partners!each!

month! to! discuss! security! in! Uruzgan.! This! was! considered! another! important! way! to! assess!

acceptable! risk.! The!meetings! provide! an! opportunity! to! understand! other! actors’! perceptions! of!

risks,!enabling!comparisons!and!benchmarking!of!what!others!consider!acceptable.!!

The! flexibility! afforded! by! Australian! Aid! as! the! CoU! donor! was! considered! a! major! contributing!

factor!in!empowering!staff!to!decide!what!was!deemed!acceptable!risk.!If!acceptance!could!not!be!

gained!within!a!particular!community,!staff!would!seek!other!areas!that!had!similar! levels!of!need!

and! were! willing! to! engage! with! Save! the! Children.! Program! managers! also! gave! examples! of!

communities! that!heard!about! the!benefits!of! the!program!and!approached!Save! the!Children! for!

support.!This!“pull!model”!of!implementation!enabled!the!expansion!of!the!program!but!to!respond!

in!these!situations!requires!a!very!flexible!approach.!The!Australian!Aid!program!has!provided!Save!

the!Children!with! the! required! flexibility! to! expand! the! scope!of! the!program!when!opportunities!

arise!that!are!within!the!boundaries!of!acceptable!risk.!!!

" "

!

!!


5. Analysis:"Divergent"Practice"and"Common"Themes"

It!is!evident!from!this!study!that!different!groups!of!staff!approach!the!risks!of!operating!in!Uruzgan!

differently.! An! enhanced! understanding! of! where! perceptions! converge! and! diverge! has! been!

developed!using!mental!models.!The!reasons!why!perceptions!differ!have!also!been!explored!and!a!

series!of!reoccurring!themes!that!influence!security!in!Uruzgan!can!be!identified.!

5.1! Divergent!practice!

Divergent! practices! that! influence! security! management! in! Uruzgan! were! identified! through! the!

mapping!of!different!staff’s!mental!models.!The!key!areas!of!divergence!identified!during!the!study!

are!represented!in!this!diagram:!!

!

Summary!of!divergent!practices!between!operational!and!managerial!staff!!

"

The! period! of! time! over! which! operational! staff! perceived! risk! was! much! shorter! than! that! of!

managerial! staff.! Operational! staff! also! viewed! risk! from! an! activityLbased! perspective! whereas!

managerial! staff! had! a! broader! programmatic! perspective.! This! divergence! reflects! the! different!

roles!and!responsibilities!of!staff!as!well!as!the!context!within!which!they!operate.!Operational!staff!

needed!to!be!reactive,!implementing!activities!as!the!security!situation!allowed.!Managerial!staff,!on!

the! other! hand,! focussed! on! longerLterm! planning! and! used! trend! analysis! to! influence! security!

management.! They! also!used! this! information! to! inform! logistical! and! financial! planning,! ensuring!

that! operational! staff! had! the! resources! required! to! implement! activities! when! data! indicated! a!

period!in!which!the!risk!to!staff!would!likely!decrease.!!

The! divergence! between! the! two! groups!was! also! reflective! of! the! information! sources! that! each!

group!could!access! in!their!different! locations.!Excessive!enquiries!by!operational!staff!within! local!

communities!would!likely!raise!suspicions!that!staff!were!working!for!the!foreign!military!or!Afghan!

government.! Therefore,! operational! staff! were! restricted! in! the! information! they! could! collate.!

Additionally,!much!of!the!information!gathered!at!the!local!level!was!geographically!and!time!bound,!

limiting! its! value! for! longerLterm! programmatic! decisionLmaking.! However,! such! information!

OPERATIONAL!Short-term!

Activity focus!

MANAGERIAL!Long-term!

Programmatic focus!

!

!!


requires! minimal! analysis! and! can! be! used! immediately! to! influence! operational! decisions.! This!

promotes!flexibility,!enabling!staff!to!make!timely!decisions!in!a!fluid!operational!environment.!!

Conversely,! program!managers! and! security! experts! in! Tirin! Kot! and! Kabul! who! were,! to! varying!

degrees,!removed!from!the!threats!faced!by!operational!staff,!could!access!a!broader!network!from!

which! to! collate! information.!Able! to!engage!with!multiple! stakeholders,! they! could!undertake! inL

depth!research!and!analysis!and!collect!sensitive!information!without!raising!suspicions!or!risk!being!

found! with! sensitive! data.! This! allowed! for! broader! geographic! and! seasonal! comparisons! to! be!

made,! which! not! only! influence! operational! decisionLmaking! but! also! the! introduction! of! certain!

security! measures.! However,! collating! and! analysing! such! data! takes! time! and! often! requires!

interpretation! by! security! experts! to! be! of! use.! Therefore,! such! information! supports! longerLterm!

planning!and!systems!strengthening!as!opposed!to!dayLtoLday!decisionLmaking.!

5.2! Common!themes!

Respondents! consistently! identified! three! themes! as! critical! factors! that! influence! the! safe! and!

secure!delivery!of! the!CoU!program:! trust,! flexibility! and!dialogue.!These! themes!are! interLrelated!

and!mutually!supporting,!as!shown!in!the!following!diagram.!

!

Critical!factors!influencing!safety!and!security!identified!by!all!staff!

"

!

A!high! level!of! trust!needs! to!exist!between!operational! staff!and!communities! for!activities! to!be!

implemented! there.! This!was! achieved! through! extensive! dialogue! between! operational! staff! and!

religious!leaders!and!community!elders,!after!which!the!resultant!exchange!of!information!improved!

dayLtoLday!decisionLmaking.!Additionally,!gaining!acceptance! required!a! flexible!approach.!Starting!

community!mobilisation!activities!was!no!guarantee!that!subsequent!health!and!education!activities!

would!be! implemented.! Staff!would! therefore!have! to! be!prepared! to! change! format,! timeframe,!

communication!channels!and!resourcing!depending!on!a!communities’!level!of!engagement.!!

!

Building!trust!through!dialogue!at!the!community!level!and!being!able!to!take!a!flexible!operational!

approaches! also! required! all! other! relationships! between! stakeholders! to! be! based! on! the! these!

Trust!

Dialogue!Flexibility!

!

!!


themes.! Formal! and! informal! communication! channels! ensured! a! high! level! of! dialogue! between!

operational! staff! and! security! experts.! High! levels! of! trust! also! existed! between!managerial! staff,!

security!experts!and!operational!staff,!who!were!entrusted!to!make!their!own!operational!decisions.!

However,! there!were!occasions!when!security!experts!would!be!required!to!make!decisions!based!

on! sensitive! information! that! they! could! not! share! with! operational! staff.! Therefore,! operational!

staff!were!required!to!trust!security!experts!to!sometimes!make!decisions!on!their!behalf.!Security!

experts! also! needed! to! be! flexible,! adapting! their! activities! to! emphasise! particular! issues! at!

heightened! periods! of! risk! or! to! liaise! directly! with! certain! staff! to! devise! alternate! plans! as! the!

security!situation!warranted.!

!

The!need!to!constantly!adapt!to!the!security!situation! in!Uruzgan!also!requires!a!flexible!approach!

from!the!donor,!Australian!Aid.!Rather!than!set!rigid!quantifiable!targets,!Australian!Aid!engaged!in!

extensive!dialogue!with!Save!the!Children!in!order!to!better!understand!the!context!in!Uruzgan!and!

reach! a! common! understanding! on!what! could! realistically! be! achieved.! Allowing! for! flexibility! in!

program!delivery!requires!a!high!level!of!trust!between!Australian!Aid!and!Save!the!Children,!which!

is! maintained! through! ongoing! dialogue! and! information! sharing.! In! many! respects,! it! is! the!

contractual! flexibility!achieved!between!Australian!Aid!and!Save!the!Children!that!has!enabled!the!

flexibility!at!the!operational!level!that!in!turn!supports!security!management!in!Uruzgan.!!!

! !

!

!!


6. Conclusion"

Delivering!aid!in!a!safe!and!secure!manner!in!Uruzgan!is!extremely!difficult!but!the!staff!of!the!CoU!

program! have! been! able! to! overcome! many! challenges! to! successfully! reach! some! of! the! most!

remote! and! vulnerable! children! in! Afghanistan.! Much! of! this! success! must! be! attributed! to! the!

dedication! of! all! those! involved! in! the! project.! However,! the! study! has! also! identified! certain!

approaches!that!contribute!positively!to!security!management!throughout!the!program.!

Uruzgan! represents! a! highly! fluid! operational! environment! and! the! security! situation! can! change!

with!little!or!no!warning.!It!is!evident!from!the!study!that!successfully!delivering!aid!in!Uruzgan!has!

required! two! divergent! yet! complementary! functions! to! be! fulfilled!within! the! CoU! program:! one!

focussed!on! shortLterm!activityLbased! goals! and! the!other! focussed!on! longerLterm!programmatic!

planning.!The!shortLterm!approach!taken!by!operational!staff!enables!them!flexibility!to!respond!to!

the!changing!environment!when!implementing!activities.!Managerial!staff,!working!more!remotely,!

are!able! to!gather!data! from!a!broad! range!and!sources!without! increasing! their!exposure! to! risk.!

This! enables! seasonal! trends! to! be! used! that! positively! contribute! to! security! management! and!

planning.! Giving! attention! to! these! distinct! roles! and! perspectives! during! planning! and!

implementation!could!help!maintain!a!cohesive!and!comprehensive!approach!to!safety!and!security.!!

It!was!also!evident!that!the!presence!of!trust,!dialogue!and!flexibility!has!been!essential!in!enabling!

the!safe!and!secure!delivery!of!the!CoU!programme.!This!is!the!case!at!all!levels!of!the!relationship!

chain:! between!Australian!Aid! and! Save! the! Children,! between! KabulLbased! program! and! security!

staff! and! those! in! the! provincial! office! in! Tirin! Kot,! between! Tirin! KotLbased! and! local! staff! in! the!

districts,!and!between!local!staff!and!communities.!These!themes!were!clearly!interLlinked,!with!the!

presence!of!one!factor!supporting!and!enhancing!the!role!of!the!other!two.!Therefore,!the!themes!of!

trust,! dialogue! and! flexibility! could! be! considered! in! future! when! undertaking! actor! mapping!

exercises!or!evaluating!an!existing!or!new!relationship!for!the!program.!!

This! study! has! provided! an! enhanced! understanding! of! how! staff! implementing! the! Children! of!

Uruzgan!program!understand!and! respond! to!perceived! risk.! This! can!help! inform! future!program!

planning! undertaken! by! Save! the! Children! in! Afghanistan.! It! is! also! envisaged! that,! with! careful!

consideration! and! a! strong! understanding! of! the! context,! the! key! findings! and! common! themes!

outlined!above!could!be!applied!more!broadly!in!other!insecure!environments.! "

!

!!


References"

Afghanistan!NGO!Security!Office,!“Quarterly!Data!Report!–!Q4!2013”!(December!2013).!

!

Afghanistan!Public!Policy!Research!Organisation,!“Transition!and!NonLGovernment!Organisations!in!

Afghanistan:!An!assessment!and!prospects”!(January!2014).!

!

Feinstein!International!Centre,!“Briefing!Note:!Winning!Hearts!and!Minds!in!Uruzgan!Province”!

(August!2012).!

!

Humanitarian!Policy!Group,!“Humanitarian!Space!in!Somalia:!A!rare!commodity”!(April!2012).!

!

Humanitarian!Policy!Group,!“Paradoxes!of!Presence:!Risk!Management!and!aid!culture!in!challenging!

environments”!(March!2013).!

!

Humanitarian!Policy!Group,!“Talking!to!the!Other!Side:!Humanitarian!engagement!with!the!Taliban!

in!Afghanistan”!(December!2012).!

!

International!Committee!of!the!Red!Cross,!“Striking!the!balance!between!staying!involved!and!

staying!safe”!(February!2014).!!

!

International!Crisis!Group,!“Afghanistan’s!Insurgency!after!the!Transition”!(May!2014).!"Kamran!Saeed!and!Tanja!Mahl,!“Health,!Safety!and!Security”!(Save!the!Children,!December!2013).!

!

Khaama!press,!“Kandahar!car!bombing!leaves!5!dead,!39!others!injured,”!11!May!2014,!

www.khaama.com/deadlyLcarLbombingLrocksLsouthernLkandaharLprovinceL8057.!

!

The!Liaison!Office,!“18!months!after!the!Dutch/!Australian!Leadership!Handover”!(April!2012).!

!

The!Liaison!Office,!“Three!Years!Later:!A!socio!political!assessment!of!Uruzgan!province:!2006L2009”!

(September!2009).!!!

!

Medecins!Sans!Frontieres,!“Between!Rhetoric!and!Reality:!The!Ongoing!Struggle!to!Access!Health!

Care!in!Afghanistan”!(February!2014).!

!

Save!the!Children,!“Access!Restricted:!A!review!of!remote!monitoring!practices!in!Uruzgan!Province”!

(November!2012).!

!

Save!the!Children,!“Children!of!Uruzgan:!MidLterm!achievements!of!delivering!health!and!education!

services!in!Uruzgan!Province,!Afghanistan”!(January!2014).!

!

Save!the!Children,!“Global!Safety!and!Security”!(internal!OneNet!document).!

!

UNOCHA,!“Policy!and!Studies!series!2011!–!Safety!and!Security!for!National!Humanitarian!Workers”!

(2011).!

!

! !

!!!Understanding!Risk!in!U

ruzgan!!

!!

!!

!!!!!!!!Page!24!

Annex%1:%Mental%m

odel%of%risk%perception%by%local%Uruzgani,%non=U

ruzgani%national%and%partner%staff%

%!!!!

CONTEXTU

AL*ISSUES*

*!!!!!!!!!!!

KEY*

!**!!!!!!!!!!

RISK*

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FACTORS*TH

AT*INCREASE*

PERCEPTIONS*O

F*RISK*

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FACTORS*TH

AT*DECREASE*

PERCEPTIONS*O

F*RISK*

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MITIG

ATION*STRATEG

IES*

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FACTORS*TH

AT*INFLU

ENCE*

ACCEPTABILITY*OF*RISK*

*Accidental!triggering!of!an!IED

Being!accused!of!supporting!the!governm

ent

Being!accused!of!supporting!foreign!forces

Being!accused!of!tribal!favouritism

Conflict!between!

government!and!AO

G Difficulty!locating!IED

s

IEDs!are!indiscriminate

Regular!travel!on!unsealed!roads!

Drawdow

n!of!foreign!troops/reduced!IED!attacks

Engage!community!regarding!

situation/rumors!and!historical!

incidents!prior!to!travel!

Seek!authorization!and!advice!from!

security!department!(recheck!data!

with!com

munity)!

Only!travel!to!areas!w

here!local!com

munity!are!m

oving!

Walk!into!som

e!areas!to!avoid!triggering!pressureGplate!IEDs!!

Tribal!politics!G!support!for!governm

ent!or!AOG

High!poverty!levels!

Low!education!levels!

RelationshipGbased!culture!Tribal!com

petition!for!resources!!

Suspicion!of!outsiders!G!especially!in!rem

ote!com

munities!!

!Challenge!of!explaining!objectives!of!CO

U!

Limited!exposure!to!other!

cultures!

Increased!government!

control!and!checkpoints!

Targeting!by!AO

G!or!

denial!of!access

Use!local!m

edia/social!media!to!

gather!data!and!cross!check!!

Able!to!explain!objectives!when!stopped!(w

hen!com

pared!with!

indiscriminate!risk!of!IEDs)!

High!level!of!trust!and!

acceptance!achieved!with!

some!com

munities!

AOGs!do!not!distinguish!

between!different!

organisations!or!military!

forces!!

Decrease!visibility!and!increase!acceptance!through!dress,!language!and!culture!

Empow

ered!to!make!

decisions!by!Save!the!Children!m

anagement!

Avoiding!making!explicit!m

ention!of!foreign!donor!

Reduce!movem

ents!

Recruitment!of!districtGlevel!staff!

Acceptance!that!these!are!the!risks!of!w

orking!in!Afghanistan!

Lack!of!alternative!opportunities!for!w

ork!

Importance!of!program

ming!

High!level!of!trust!in!

technical!capacity!of!security!departm

ent!

Not!sharing!details!regarding!

movem

ents!!

Need!to!verify!the!level!of!

work!being!undertaken!

Community!m

obilisation!and!developm

ent!G!empow

erment!of!

communities!and!engagem

ent!of!elders!and!religious!leaders!!

Seek!feedback!from!com

munity!

and!apply!this!

More!IED

!incidents!than!kidnapping!

Use!of!

clinics!by!parties!to!the!conflict!

Do!not!use!notebooks,!cameras!or!

checklists!

Move!quickly!through!com

munities!

Neighboring!countries!AO

G

Illegal!checkpoints!

Community!

suspicions/!alerting!AO

G!!

AOG!false!claim

s!of!IEDs!

Being!considered!an!outsider!by!com

munities!

Target!for!kidnap!and!ransom

!due!to!perceived!status!and!value!

Targetted!harassm

ent!and!violence

Lack!of!legitimate!

alternative!reasons!for!being!in!the!area!

Reduced!number!of!IED

s!

Strong!leadership!ensuring!that!staff!are!em

powered!to!

make!decisions!but!also!

apply!security!procedures!!

NonGU

ruzgani!national!and!partner!staff!perception!!

Local!Uruzgani,!nonG

Uruzgani!national!and!

partner!staff!perception!

Key!risks

Influencing!factor!


ruzgan!!

!!

!!

!!!!!!!!Page!25!

Annex%2:%Mental%m

odel%of%risk%perception%by%program%m

anagers%and%security%experts%

!!!!!!

CONTEXTU

AL*ISSUES*

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!*

!!!!!!!!

RISK**

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FACTORS*TH

AT*INCREASE*

PERCEPTIONS*O

F*RISK*

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FACTORS*TH

AT*DECREASE*

PERCEPTIONS*O

F*RISK*

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MITIG

ATION*STRATEG

IES*

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FACTORS*TH

AT*INFLU

ENCE*

ACCEPTABILITY*OF*RISK*

*

Being!accused!of!tribal!favouritism

Targeting!by!AO

G!or!

loss!of!acceptance

Never!skim

p!on!community!

engagement!–!allow

!for!as!long!as!necessary!

Err!on!the!side!of!caution!but!constantly!seek!to!reach!the!underserved!

Focus!on!a!“pull!from!

community”!rather!than!a!

“push!from!SC”!strategy!for!

expanding!operations!

Listen!to!staff,!implem

ent!ideas!w

here!possible!and!trust!judgem

ent!

Political/tribal!dynamics!at!

local!and!national!level!

Engaging!with!expatriates!

increases!risk!to!local!and!national!staff!

Development!of!security!

coordination!network!to!

share!information!

Separation!of!duties!between!staff!

in!Uruzgan!and!Kabul!

Avoiding!undertaking!high!value!construction!projects!

Those!in!power!seeking!to!

influence!program!to!their!

advantage!

Limited!capacity!of!Afghan!

forces!to!maintain!security!

at!the!provincial!level!

Illegal!drugs!trade!

Seasonal!trends!

Conservative!religious!culture!

Being!accused!of!financial!mism

anagePment

Loss!of!reputation!–!access/!funding

Caught!in!crossfire!or!denial!of!access

Operating!in!

areas!not!controlled!by!governm

ent

Cultural!insensitivity

Increased!IEDs!during!opium!

harvest!

Increased!fighting!during!spring!offensive!

Corruption!and!poor!governance!

Historical!mism

anagement!

of!development!projects!

Stigma!of!

working!for!

an!iNGO

WellPknow

n!program!

Risks!change!depending!on!status/locations!(office/road/!com

munity)!

High!levels!of!trust!within!

organisation!between!

managerial!and!operational!

staff!!Managerial!staff!w

ith!contextual!know

ledge!and!strong!leadership!skills!!Operational!staff!w

ith!contextual!know

ledge!and!understanding!of!the!im

portance!of!acceptance!

!

Using!m

ultiple!information!and!

intelligence!sources!and!ensuring!careful!inform

ation!managem

ent!

Multiple!channels!for!

communicating!m

essages!regarding!acceptance!and!overcom

ing!conservatism!(radio/!

mullahs)!

Thorough!recruitment!process!for!

staff!

Ensuring!balance!and!equitable!distribution!of!projects!across!tribes!

Opening!of!district!offices!

and!recruitment!of!local!

staff!Im

plementation!of!low

!visibility!protection!m

easures!! Crisis!m

anagement!and!rapid!

response!to!an!incident!!Creating!forum

s!for!community!

engagement!and!feedback!

!Safety!and!security!procedures!related!to!risks!dependent!on!status!or!location!

Fragility!of!community!

acceptance!

Withdraw

al!of!foreign!troops!

Flexible!approach!to!program

ming!

!

High!levels!of!community!

acceptance!and!trust!!


ruzgan!!

!!

!!

!!!!!!!!Page!26!

Annex%3:%Map%of%CoU

%education%and%health%activities%in%Uruzgan%province%

%%

Date post:	13-Feb-2017
Category:	Documents
Upload:	david-sims
View:	113 times
Download:	3 times

Report 2_CoU Understanding Risk_2014_FINAL

Documents