ABOUT THIS ISSUE Accountability in Public Interest ver the past decade, he last two years has been a camps for displaced people O accountability for civil Tparticularly painful time for unwittingly aided some of the society organizations (CSOs) agencies who conduct humanitarian militias who were perpetrating the operating in the space of operations and has shone an intense killings. This led to much soul- humanitarian action has spotlight on the need for these searching on the part of the aid consistently increased. However, agencies to address issues of agencies and a commitment to this accountability has been governance, accountability and rigorous procedures that guard against largely top-down and meant to safeguarding much more misguided disaster aid from then on. represent accountability of the professionally. While agencies CSOs towards the donors and clearly see more urgent priorities at More recently, more salacious national governments. Little times of major disasters, they ignore episodes associated with progress has been made on these issues at their peril, and at the humanitarian NGOs has come to the accountability to the intended peril of those they aim to help: as fore. On 9 February 2018, the front- beneficiaries of these well as aiming to do good, they need page headline of the UK newspaper humanitarian programmes on to avoid doing harm. The Times read: 'Top Oxfam Staff Paid whose behest such organizations Haiti Survivors for Sex'. Since then, operate. Real accountability For NGOs who are widely seen as the British media has been peppered implies being held responsible "saviours" of disaster-stricken people, with accusations of sexual towards not only funders and exploitation and harassment by staff donors on how money is spent this is a difficult lesson. But the of UK charities working in but also for actions undertaken giving public, journalists, funding towards all stakeholders: institutions and even governments international aid, leading to DFID beneficiaries, communities, who are quick to praise those NGOs (UK's official aid agency), the partners (being governmental or that are quick off the mark in statutory oversight body (the implementing partners), as well bringing immediate help to those in Charity Commission) and a UK as the environment. need, are all fickle admirers. parliamentary committee all conducting investigations on what This issue of Southasiadisasters.net While the story of "charities' magic" has been depicted as a failure of is titled “Accountability is in is one the world wants to hear when safeguarding in the sector. This has Everybody's Interest” and we are all still reeling from the news by no means been restricted to UK highlights the importance of not and images of disasters, very soon agencies, and the tsunami of concern only top-down but bottom-up and the thirst for new stories becomes about the issue has embraced lateral accountability for evident, particularly amongst agencies from many different humanitarian organizations and journalists. A fresh angle is often countries, as well as UN agencies, in CSOs. The articles in this issue taken whereby there is a focus upon a tidal wave similar to that generated cover a broad range of sub- accounts of NGO bungling, by the #MeToo movement. themes related to accountability supplying the wrong sort of aid or and depict how it can lead to paying too much for it, slow For NGOs, the level of outrage can social innovation, resilience, delivery, spending too much on at times seem unfair and sustainability of development administration and other flaws that disproportionate to the problems outcomes and community erode the benefits for those to be exposed. If safeguarding processes ownership. This issue also helped and in more recent times the have in the past been under- introduces the readers to the new flaws exposed have been of a more resourced, this may well owe greatly concepts like dynamic sinister nature. to the constant scrutiny about accountability. Most importantly, overhead expenses to which NGOs this issue underscores the fact that A key turning point was the are exposed or the challenges of real and meaningful accountability humanitarian programmes NGOs almost instantly assembling teams is more than audited reports, as and the UN ran in response to the of perhaps hundreds of people in it implies a constant dialogue with crisis of genocide and famine in major relief operations. a diverse range of stakeholders, Rwanda and the surrounding area in including those typically the late 90s, where it came to be Yet a change in culture and practice excluded and marginalised. recognised that a failing to consider is needed. NGOs need to – Kshitij Gupta political issues in the running of demonstrate their duty of care to the

2 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 staff and communities they work of Dynamic Accountability — a what you are doing; listen to with to prevent further harm. Taking systemic approach to CSO people; and enable people to measures to safeguard and adapting accountability based on meaningful influence decisions or have their governance to truly integrate engagement with all stakeholder in views and concerns taken accountability practices into the an inclusive, participatory and on- seriously. everyday are now necessities and going mode of working, designed • Elodie Le Grand goes further to organisations and networks have to ensure that CSO's adapt to the explore how multi-stakeholder been established to support and needs of stakeholders. For agencies approaches to accountability can strengthen such integration of working in humanitarian operations contribute to social innovation, accountability practices into the civil this means, crucially, ensuring as well as avoid problems, as society sector. accountability to those stricken by the community representatives disasters — who are inevitably at so engaged will bring their Over 240 agencies engaged in their most vulnerable. well-grounded ideas, as well as disaster response have developed evidence relating to programme and committed to the Core What do accountability issues imply implementation, to the table. Humanitarian Standard – a 9-point for NGOs who respond to disasters? • Mukunda Upadhyay and Animesh charter of commitments to high To what extent are these changes in Prakash share an example of standards of quality and culture and practice occurring? At addressing governance accountability in humanitarian what levels can we find evidence of challenges in a water assistance. Similarly, a group of civil society adapting to these times management operation in the mostly large international NGOs of intense scrutiny and what can be Mahakali River Basin. This have formed Accountable Now – a done to facilitate this change further? programme shows the global platform that has developed This special issue of the journal importance of taking cultural a framework of commitments for provides a wealth of insights into issues into account and using high standards of civil society these issues and practical participatory as well as rights- accountability. Comprising information about to address them, based approaches; this lesson organisations working in particularly in the context of disaster applies as much to advocacy as environmental, development, response operations. well as operations. human rights, anti-corruption and • Jeremy Sandbrook emphasises the • Ezgi Akarsu underlines the other fields, Accountable Now is very real risk of corruption importance of installing a well- supported by a Berlin-based arising in disaster-response structured feedback and secretariat and its Members submit operations, explains why this is complaints mechanism at the regular reports to Accountable all too likely, and sets out a outset of operations. Such a Now's Independent Review Panel, of realistic strategy for minimising mechanism should be easy to which I am Chair, to provide these risks, in particular through access, well-explained to assurance that they are complying strong community potential users and open to all with the 12 Accountability involvement. He draws many nature of complaints. Her Commitments or are taking lessons from an actual (but article sets out the key features meaningful action to do so. unnamed) case study. of such a mechanism. • Erika Baranda sets out how NGOs • Daniel Stevens complements and As civil society organisations (CSOs) can and should involve their adds to the above through have come to assume greater local partners and other local drawing on his organisation's prominence in many developing stakeholders in the experience in their Nepal countries, several national CSO accountability processes. She earthquake response networks have sought to develop sets out the key elements of a programme. Their highly-used similar standards of accountability dynamic accountability feedback mechanism strongly and governance as well as devise approach and the challenges improved beneficiary targeting, appropriate mechanisms to ensure entailed. programme quality, problem- these standards are upheld. • Kai Hopkins delves into what solving and trust-building and Accountable Now has worked with should be expected of identified incidents of staff these networks to develop the Global accountability mechanisms in misconduct, including by their Standard for CSO Accountability. situations of stark power- partners. imbalance, as in disaster • Jocelyn Condon examines how A core ingredient both of situations, in order to maximise transparency and accountability Accountable Now and the Global resilience. The maxim she are addressed in the "Grand Standard is promotion of the concept suggests should be: tell people Bargain" — a framework for

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 3 improving humanitarian aid is more important than ever for research approaches for agreed amongst 50 donor CSOs to truly commit to gathering this data and gives countries and major aid rigorous accountability, examples of this in practice. organisations. While this ensuring strong accountability • The final article by Esther included a commitment to using to communities and other local Smitheram presents a case study inclusive and participatory stakeholders, not just to donors. of stakeholder engagement (or approaches, the experience over She draws operational lessons the lack of it) in the its first two years revealed that from Accountable Now's humanitarian response to the this is not usually the case in "Resilient Roots Initiative". Rohingya refugee crisis in practice. A wide group of NGOs • Hannah Wheatley assess how the Bangladesh. While many is now challenging the Bargain's SDG Goal 16 (on inclusion, problems follow from agencies' membership to live up to the justice and institutional failing to consult or work with rhetoric and use high standards accountability) can be the Rohingyas themselves, the of participation. operationalised and the data article draws lessons from one • The article by Isabelle Büchner needed if progress regarding to NGO that put resilience and emphasises that — due to the this goal is to be tracked in a community engagement at the increasingly hostile stance of meaningful way. She heart of their planning. governments towards civil emphasises the involvement of – John Clark, society in many countries — it communities and participatory Accountable Now

COMMUNITY LED ACCOUNTABILITY The Role of Community in Reducing Corruption Risk During a Disaster

hen it comes to disaster context in which they operate; with unable to match the pace of its W response, no conversation is the speed of response a critical factor fundraising machine (now seen by complete without a discussion of in the intervention's success. In most many NGOs as a means of tapping fraud and corruption. While cases, the level and focus of international into new donors). This, coupled with corruption risk levels within attention given to disasters — pressures, (usually exerted by larger humanitarian relief operations are particularly humanitarian ones — institutional donors) for NGOs to directly impacted by its combined with an expectation that spend and account for funds as environmental context, the nature of NGOs respond immediately, are key quickly as possible — regardless of the intervention itself (the complex drivers behind this. The problem the complexities on the ground — system by which it is designed and here is that this additional focus does further fuels a focus on schedule delivered, the actors involved, and not translate into increased scrutiny (speed) over quality (planning). If the type of disaster being responded being placed on the intervention this happens, accountability quickly to) is just as important. And it is itself. becomes secondary to the actual through understanding the factors crises itself. that undermine accountability when This need to respond as quickly as NGOs respond to such crises, that we possible can result in a humanitarian As the intervention's primary task can begin to identify possible risk intervention becoming schedule is to source and deliver relief items mitigation strategies, such as focused. Not only are NGOs forced as quickly as possible, the risk of community involvement. to compete with other actors in corruption is increased. Not only is sourcing relief items at reasonable less time spent on ensuring the What is it that makes disaster relief prices before they are driven up by intervention is appropriately efforts so corruption prone? a lack of supply and/or speculators designed, but the need for speed can So why are humanitarian relief and hoarders moving into the result in staff viewing standard interventions more corruption- market, but unrealistic expectations checks and balances (such as those prone than other types of held by some donors also play a part. built into the procurement process) interventions carried out by NGOs? In this context, the speed of an NGOs as impediments to the project's The answer to this lies in the unique relief operations on the ground are overall success. The more it

4 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 Copyright: International Rice Research Institute, 2016. Institute, Rice Research International Copyright: becomes schedule-driven, the more humanitarian relief operation (HRO) exist. Additionally, those likely it will be that standard undertaken by a large NGO beneficiaries who had in fact financial and operating controls, put highlights a number of factors raised received relief items were coerced in place for normal operations, are above. Audited three times via two into confirming that they had reduced and/or bypassed altogether. external financial and an external received their full eight months' project audit and included as part of worth of relief items, even though In such cases, facilitation payments a broader capacity audit (which most had not. Part of the scheme's (or other forms of minor corruption) found that the project was "well overall 'success' can be attributed to needed before a permit is issued, or planned and executed"), no collusion between staff members at essential relief items are cleared by irregularities were identified, with different levels within the customs, can become the norm. In the project auditors verifying that all organisation, enabling them to such instances, the behaviour of staff relief items had been physically maintain (or at least influence) end- is rationalised by arguing that the distributed to beneficiaries. to-end control over the whole of the 'good' of ensuring that much needed HRO. relief items are delivered to The reality, however, proved very beneficiaries as quickly as possible, different, with a forensic audit The fraud scheme's design and outweighs the 'wrong' associated carried out six months after the architecture have been outlined in with making such payments project ended, finding that in excess Figure 1, which maps the various regardless of the fact that the action of $172,000 had been stolen by (corruption) elements used, against is in fact corrupt. project staff. Staff had not only by- the HRO's various project phases. passed financial and operational Case study of fraud in a disaster relief processes and procedures which The key question in all of this is: project enabled contracts to be awarded to could the fraud scheme have been The following case study of a fraud companies owned by them, but one prevented, and if so how? The answer scheme within an actual in three beneficiaries didn't actually lies in analysing what element was

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 5 missing from the HRO's overall staff were indeed competent, they and 4 in Figure 1). In addition, they design – involvement of the local were not trustworthy, and colluded were never informed of its overall community/beneficiaries. to by-pass and undermine the NGO's duration or the quantity (or type) of internal control system thereby items that were to be distributed to The missing link – Community enabling them to defraud the each individual every month. This Involvement organisation. The question here is negated the possibility of them As is the case with most NGOs, the would a higher level of community voicing concerns, cutting the NGO project relied on three key involvement have changed the off from an essential (external) accountability mechanisms: its outcome? accountability mechanism. existing internal control system, competent and trustworthy staff, and Apart from receiving some of the As an external accountability an independent external audit. relief items owed (Phase 6 in Figure mechanism, community Detecting just 4% of frauds external 1), beneficiaries (and the broader involvement is essential to reducing audits play little value in reducing community) had not been involved an HRO's corruption risk. The more corruption risk. While the project in the project planning (see Phase 1 resilient a community is, the more able they are to actively engage with an NGO, and by doing so increase overall accountability. To be successful though requires three components: active participation, the provision of information, and a feedback and complaints mechanism. A proactive process combining all three will not only empower a community but increase accountability by ensuring that: the real needs are properly identified (the planning phase); there is awareness of what quantity and type of relief items are to be distributed, and who they are to be distributed to (the distribution phase); beneficiaries and communities have the ability to raise concerns should they feel irregularities may be taking place.

Had appropriate mechanisms been put in place for each of the elements outlined above, beneficiaries and the community (as a whole) would not only have known what their individual entitlements were but have had the means to alert the NGO of any concerns or irregularities associated with the HRO. While it may not have been enough to prevent this particular fraud, it would have significantly reduced the risk of it happening by acting as a key external accountability mechanism. – Jeremy Sandbrook, CEO Integritas360

6 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 NEW PARADIGM OF ACCOUNTABILITY Dynamic Accountability, A Stakeholder- driven Approach to Accountability

hen CSOs are imbued with new efforts run the risk of not fully power dynamics change through Wthe trust of people and acknowledging the power dynamics time and become more adaptive to organiations to pursue shared outside and within CSOs, preventing enhance impact and trust. But what objectives and expectations, CSOs from generating lasting does this process actually entail? accountability of CSOs becomes a change and trust of the people is yet necessary foundation to sustain and to be fully regained.4 A broader understanding of the legitimise this trust. stakeholders Dynamic Accountability as a systemic Similar to down-ward However, in the current context of approach to accountability accountability, Dynamic civic space, which it is eroding all Built on previous efforts, several Accountability focusses on over the world1, exacerbated by the CSOs have been promoting a new redressing the power imbalances. failings of CSOs themselves2, a lot approach to accountability that However, it goes a step beyond: it of questions have been raised against acknowledges existing power considers a broader set of the trust and accountability of CSOs. dynamics and aims to shift them stakeholders from both inside and This leads to a call to reconsider how towards benefitting their wide range outside of the organisation. If the CSOs are practising accountability, of stakeholders. Restless staff of an organisation does not feel addressing power dynamics and Development was the first to name their input is considered in the advocating for systemic change. it: Dynamic Accountability. decision-making process, they will perceive little value in being Previous efforts to regain trust Dynamic Accountability is a engaged or accountable to partners through accountability systemic approach to CSO and the people they work for and There have been several efforts from accountability that is grounded with. Understanding the interplay CSOs to regain the trust of people in processes of meaningful between stakeholders internally and organisations but so far, they engagement with all stakeholders (board members, management, staff, have not been enough. CSOs have that is inclusive, participatory and volunteers) and externally traditionally been accountable to and continuously practised.5 (donors, government, partners and donors and governments through people), the organisation can upward accountability mechanisms It is about creating a provide a comprehensive such as fiscal and legal requirements. transformational relationship perspective on how accountability However, this kind of accountability between all stakeholders and CSOs can become a lever for change. prioritises the demands of donors where a more horizontal and mutual and government over those of the standard of accountability is Meaningful engagement as an people they work for and with. In established. By acknowledging its organisation-wide practice response to this, many CSOs have accountability to a diversity of Dynamic Accountability incorporates begun to focus on redressing power stakeholders, CSOs can develop meaningful stakeholder engagement imbalances to become more different relationships with each one throughout the organisation. By downwardly accountable.3 Yet these of them, have a better grasp of how practising this, CSOs not only engage 1 CIVICUS. "State of civil society report 2019: The year in review 2019". (2019) https://www.civicus.org/documents/ reports-and-publications/SOCS/2019/state-of-civil-society-report-2019_executive-summary.pdf 2 Robert Booth. "Charities need to stop slide in public trust warns regulator." Published on The Guardian (2018). https:// www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/03/charities-need-stop-slide-public-trust-warns-regulator 3 Crack. "INGO Accountability Deficits: The Imperatives for Further Reform" (2013). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ abs/10.1080/14747731.2013.786253 4 Edelman. "Trust Barometer. Global Report" (2014, 2019). https://www.edelman.com/sites/g/files/aatuss191/files/ 2019-02/ 2019_Edelman_Trust_Barometer_Global_Report_2.pdf?utm_source=website&utm_medium=global_report&utm_campaign=downloads 5 https://www.edelman.com/research/2014-edelman-trust-barometer Baranda & Büchner. "Dynamic Accountability" (2019) http://www.csostandard.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ Dynamic-Accountability-Online-Version.pdf

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 7 Copyright: Accountable Now, 2019. with their stakeholders by including and relationship with ensure effective transparency their voices in decision-making stakeholders as a means to and openness. processes but together they also establish shared goals and • At the programmatic level, establish how it can be meaningful expectations. CSOs would become more for both sides. Meaningful • Reflective learning: CSOs adaptive and would have to stakeholder engagement can be constantly reflect and draw adjust their objectives, activities, understood as: lessons on how to improve and budgets to clearly address • Transparency and openness: engagement with stakeholders, stakeholder needs. The information on the work of how this will affect work and • By including the voices of CSOs is shared with how fundamental change can different stakeholders, at the stakeholders in a way that can continue to be advocated for. strategic level, CSOs would be easily understood. It is easily become better at setting long- accessible and feedback can be Practising Dynamic Accountability term, strategic goals. provided so as to hold the CSO Incorporating Dynamic • Staff and volunteers need to be to account. Accountability throughout CSOs trained and therefore • Active listening and responsive means any organisational empowered to meaningfully decision-making: CSOs actively transformation will take time and engage with stakeholders at seek to listen to stakeholders and effort. Yet the rewards make are different levels. are open to constructive worth it: CSOs will have the criticism. Decisions are made to potential to be more responsive, The organisational changes needed reflect this criticism and adaptive, resilient and impactful. should be built on current practices, conversations are had with Going beyond the project level and with the aim of mainstreaming stakeholders to make them incorporating Dynamic Dynamic Accountability beyond the aware of changes. Accountability into a CSO’s daily project level. By practising Dynamic • Meaningful participation at all work will require the ownership Accountability, CSOs become more levels: Stakeholders have an from management, staff, and responsive and effective by active role in different areas and volunteers in all areas. understanding better how their work levels of the organisation, such affects other stakeholders. This as at the programme, advocacy The practical implications of fully strengthens resilience by nurturing and strategy levels. They adopting Dynamic Accountability partnerships with different exercise varying degrees of are yet to be fully understood, but stakeholders, and it builds trust by influence in different areas. there are some foreseeable changes establishing an adaptive set of shared • Continuous dialogue and within the organisations. For example: goals and expectations between building relationships: CSOs • CSOs would need to invest more CSOs and their stakeholders. engage in an on-going dialogue resources in communication to – Erika Baranda, Accountable Now

8 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 ACCOUNTABILITY FOR DRR Accountability and Resilience: A Marriage Made in Disasters

ccountability is a word that communities able to address the listening to those we are trying to Agets bandied around a lot, but challenges they face on their own. support, we can get a good sense of what does it really mean? There are Ultimately, accountability what the intended beneficiaries think many definitions but accountability contributes to the resilience of the of our work and the ways we are is sometimes presented as a trilogy:1 organisation that does the listening trying to help them. Moreover, it is 1. giving account (telling people and to the resilience of the people a relatively cheap and what you are doing); they aim to support — making it a straightforward — as this simple 2. taking account (listening to real win-win. Feedback 1012 guide outlines. Once people); you know how people view your 3. being held to account (giving Take, for example, the work of services, you can use their people a chance to influence Keystone Accountability and Ground perspective to do a better job. decisions or have their views Truth Solutions: the former Organisations are only truly and concerns taken seriously); organisation with a focus on accountable if they use the views of development, the latter on those they are trying to help to shape This is all well and good, but in the humanitarian emergencies and what they deliver and how. In this context of unequal power relations protracted crises. Keystone sense, being accountable through there is a missing piece — how do Accountability helps organisations listening systematically — regularly these accountability processes result use feedback to improve how they and repeatedly asking constituents in change that is central to true support people. They work in about key aspects of our work — and accountability? Listening to people domestic non-profit settings, mainly adjusting to feedback ensures we are without any follow-up action may in the US and UK, but predominately providing the most relevant services actually make matters worse and support development organisations in the best way possible. For an real accountability is about listening globally. Ground Truth Solutions, organisation, knowing this, and so you can help people leverage their which has adapted Keystone's being able to demonstrate it, is own skills and expertise to solve the approach to leverage feedback from incredibly powerful. The outside problems they face. This has been people affected by crisis is currently world is always asking for evidence practised within development work operational in many humanitarian that we are meeting pressing needs, for some years now and though this emergencies and protracted crises that we are delivering what people is not a revolutionary concept, it has around the world. Both organisations actually want, and that we are begun to gain ground in the share similar principles and beginning to change their lives in humanitarian space, demonstrating approaches, and each sets a strong the process. Feedback through that there are a host of reasons why example of how accountability accountability mechanisms is a great accountability has become not only strengthens organisations to way to do that. the right thing to do but also the withstand financial shocks, build bright thing to do. strong partnerships and ensure If we look at organisation 'resilience' effective programming: ultimately, as being able to secure funding, win For now, let's limit the value contributing to heightened contracts and establish effective proposition to just one area; the resilience. partnerships in the long-term relationship between being through relevant and quality service accountable — as defined by By firstly looking at the provision — then feedback clearly listening and acting upon feedback organisational level, we can begin becomes a useful tool. At Keystone, — with resilience. Why resilience? to understand how accountability two particular projects provide a Well, resilience is actually what we and resilience are linked: if we, as clear example of the relationship are all trying to achieve — stronger CSOs, develop systematic means of between accountability and

1 Interagency Standing Committee. "Accountability to Affected Populations: A brief overview". https:// interagencystandingcommittee.org/system/files/iasc_aap_psea_2_pager_for_hc.pdf 2 Feedback Labs. "Feedback 101". https://feedbacklabs.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Feedback-101.pdf

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 9 resilience; one global, and one in the on?) and at a programme level (are gone. Moreover, local skills, United Kingdom. What became clear we making a difference through experience, insight and knowledge through working on these projects, quality and relevant services?) are often outweigh that of the is that there is an appetite for simple helping to furnish organisations with humanitarian agencies and need to and effective ways to ensure that what they need in order to be: a). be involved for any programming service delivery is relevant and of learning entities, maximising to be really successful. This is where high quality. Moreover, opportunities and their own accountability — the process of organisations recognise the need to performance in real time; and b) listening and responding — plays a be able to demonstrate this to the organisations that can demonstrate critical role because it provides the outside world. It goes beyond this commitment to agile basis by which to incorporate the simply demonstrating that you are responsiveness and iterative views of affected people so that aid changing lives. They want to improvement to funders. can ultimately help people to help demonstrate that they are constantly themselves. These views make it striving to improve, — and the on- To illustrate further how easier to understand the culture, the going process of accountability can, accountability and resilience are community dynamics, what has if done properly, do this. inextricably linked, let us look at the worked before, and what is needed intended beneficiaries in the context now. Furthermore, it is through the Resilience is a long-term game and of humanitarian action. In the same on-going and systematic collection its impossible to say what impact way that true accountability must of these views that agencies can being accountable is going to have ensure there is a response to what ensure they are responding to for these organisations. Early results people say, it must also recognise changing need and circumstances on suggest that the inclusion of primary that neither humanitarian agencies a regular basis. constituent (i.e. those who nor affected people operate or live organisations aim to assist) voice at in a vacuum. Life existed before the With an increasing focus on climate both a strategic level (are these the humanitarian caravan rolled into change and its impact upon type of issues we should be focusing town, and will do so long after it is communities, Ground Truth

Copyright: Russell Watkins, 2017.

10 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 Solutions (GTS) increasingly focuses through and, eventually change the With more protracted or 'chronic' on preparedness and pre-emptive way we operate. How much more crises, the distinction between adaption. Accountability plays a effective might aid agencies be if all humanitarian and development is critical role in both the before and of them systematically tracked and often blurry, and actors from both during phases — understanding and responded to feedback on such sides must think about how their strengthening local climate trigger questions? Moreover, might it add approaches contribute to life beyond signals and ensuring all programmes another layer of public direct service delivery. This is what understand what communities will accountability if agencies published 'resilience' at the community level need moving forward. By their the findings on their websites? After means - how can people look after nature, climate-related disasters all, if we really want to contribute themselves and others in their recur, and agencies need to know that to people's lives, we must empower community once humanitarians they are helping people prepare for, them beyond just the lifecycle of have moved on. and effectively mitigate against programmes. possible future recurrences. Being Accountability is not a silver bullet accountable allows them to do this. Of course, all of this needs to be done and there is plenty that can stand in To aid our assessment of how well properly and not just involve a chat the way of good intentions. Even if we are contributing to resilience, to a local leader — communities are accountability is put into practice and GTS regularly asks communities complicated, their nuances are deep done well, there are obstacles to how about the extent to which and their needs vary. But without successful it can be. That said, the programmes are helping people to true accountability, without an active process of listening and responding support themselves in the future. voice, not only will humanitarian properly can contribute to resilience Sadly, in many settings the scores agencies fail to support affected at multiple levels. The trick is to are low, but that doesn't mean it people today, but they cannot figure out how to deliver shouldn't be an area of focus, and empower communities and accountability in your context. we should use this feedback to think contribute to their lives in the future. – Kai Hopkins, Ground Truth Solutions

ACCOUNTABILITY FOR IMPACT Accountability as a Trigger for Social Innovation

or civil society organisations, Faccountability implies being held responsible towards not only funders and donors on how money is spent but also for actions undertaken towards all stakeholders: beneficiaries, communities, partners (being governmental or implementing partners), as well as the environment. Accountability is more than audited reports, it implies a constant dialogue with a diverse range of stakeholders, including those typically excluded and marginalised. Copyright: Jessica Lea, 2014. When addressing social or environmental problems or root causes of problems they face through diversifying stakeholders challenges, civil society and the potential solutions to resolve and including traditionally organisations need to move towards them. Improving and strengthening marginalised and excluded groups ensuring they consider the accountability mechanisms and of individuals during perceptions of communities on the processes within an organisation implementation of a project or

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 11 programme, allows for a broader "Social innovation refers to the modifying how we conduct and deeper understanding of creation, development, adoption, and operations in a more sustainable problems and their impact. Through integration of new and renewed way requires new ideas, new ways this facilitation of participation of all concepts, systems, and practices that of thinking. This requires constant members of the community, their put people and planet first." improvement, therefore innovation. effectiveness is strengthened, By consolidating accountability, discussions are triggered, risks and – Center for Social Innovation organisations open the door to constraints are discussed, new ideas innovative and creative efforts to and perspectives are raised, level of fulfilment of civil, political, reduce emissions, resources needed weighted and decided upon. People economic, social and cultural rights and pollution: by strengthening are empowered to contribute to the and their capacity to act freely. The accountability within one solution. The potential for social political and economic system in organisation, consulting employees, change is unleashed. place affects capacities for adaptation, volunteers and suppliers, the such as the provision of access to organisation's capacities for risk We can see the impact this social resources, training, information and reduction and adaptation are innovation has upon CSO so forth. However, marginalised heightened. effectiveness during a response to communities or groups of natural hazards and disasters: the individuals are often not consulted It is through taking the time to effects of such hazards and disasters when deciding on and implementing consider all stakeholders, engaging, are not evenly distributed among a solutions that reduce risk. discussing, questioning and population as the recurrence and listening, that impact seekers are intensity of these impacts depend Climate change increases the actually implementing accountability upon levels of exposure, recurrence and intensity of natural first hand. As such, by engaging vulnerabilities and capacities for hazards. As such, including the your organisation in a path towards adaptation. Poorer communities or natural environment as a better accountability to a variety of marginalised individuals are often stakeholder is of the utmost stakeholders, you can unleash more exposed to the impacts of importance especially as with it potential for real change and trigger disasters, as they mostly live in areas being a "silent" stakeholder: the a new way of finding solutions to where infrastructure is deficient or environment is easily and often contemporary problems: social non-existent. Their vulnerability is overlooked. However, by evaluating innovation on disaster risk reduction inherently linked to the ways in the potential environmental impacts and increased resilience. which they interact with their of projects, devising ways of – Elodie Le Grand, President and CEO environment for their livelihood, the supplying goods and services, and of Consentia, Social Responsibility Inc.

ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSBOUNDARY EWS Understanding Cultural Sustainability in the Context of Transboundary Water Governance The Case of the Mahakali River Basin

he traditional models of as an integral component of the Governance, this could be referred T sustainability that are entirely natural ecosystem and to to as the recognition and built upon ecological and economic conceptualise this, we need to mobilisation of the riparian way of frameworks face severe challenges include our own way of life as a life as the basis of formulation, in securing the livelihood of people cardinal building block of management and execution of water- as they often do not address the sustainability. Thus, culture which is related policies. perceived and community needs in not only diverse but also ever- general. Sustainable development changing, needs recognition if The revolutionary action plan of the can only be ensured if every day governance is to achieve sustainable United Nations, Agenda 211, speaks experiences of people are considered goals. In the context of Water of community participation and local

1 United Nations Conference on Environment & Development Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992, https:// sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf 12 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 governance in ensuring sustainable development. It is a breakthrough approach for redefining modern sustainable development governance. In Chapter 18 of Agenda 21, the significance of transboundary water resources is being emphasised strongly with special focus on the mobilisation of riparian resources and the need for an effective coordination between the states in the areas of Integrated Water Resources Development and Management, Water Resource Assessment, sanitation and drinking water, impacts of climate change on water and protection of aquatic eco- systems. It also acknowledges the Copyright: Mahakali naadi hjlihjil.jpg by Embedded Data Bot, licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0. significant importance of various indigenous practices and cultural strengthen the mechanism of Tanakpur in Uttarakhand enjoys knowledge in the sustainable accountability in the context of easy movement and flow of development framework and gradual Water Governance. This sense of information especially in those areas incorporation of environmentally- civic space that riparian where livelihood and marriage friendly technologies in the national communities have been preserving surpass administrative limitations. and sub-national culture. through traditions and customs Culture here unites community and should be used as a guiding path in nourishes dialogue on various Transparency in Transboundary Water helping governments and civil issues of common interest, among Governance: Role of Culture society formulate better policies which, water-related issues are of Transparency in the flow of related to transboundary water pertinent importance. information is one of the basic rights. pillars on which comprehensive Where there are no cultural water governance stands. In the Countries which share the same exchanges in the basin however, transboundary context, it requires river often share similar cultures and flow of information particularly on the participation of communities take part in related economic, social water governance is often clouded united through a process of dialogue. and cultural activities. A classic and mixed with myths on the nature Culture has a significant role to play example of this can be observed in of the river Mahakali and the in this as transparency requires a the context of the Mahakali River challenges the basin faces in general. continuous community-to- which flows through India and This creates a challenge in ensuring community dialogue through Nepal. The river is present in transparency and accountability as proper networks and support from popular cultural traditions in both far as the flow of information and the civil society sector. In this countries and even its origin and dialogue is concerned. Thus, amidst regard, it is very important to hydrological characteristics has been the promising sustainable spaces understand that sustainability of associated with myths and stories facilitated by cultural harmony, grey cultural values is not only pertinent that are shared by communities on spaces are created which have been in sensitizing the community on both sides of the border. hindering the scope of effective some critical issues but that it is also Additionally, communities on both water governance by concerned cardinal in advocacy strategies. In sides are engaged in shared stakeholders. That is why a the context of water availability, economic and livelihood pursuits: in comprehensive cultural early warning systems and water some cases, crop seeds are brought sustainability framework which can quality, such transparency helps from one side of the border and then enable flawless transparency on transboundary communities share sown in another. Connections information related to early warning common water resources in a non- between neighbouring communities systems, water availability and discriminative and democratic often transcend the economy and water quality is important for manner. People's general sense of enter the personal and family life ensuring stability and sustainability. civic space has a tremendous through marriage: the everyday life Oxfam India and its partners have potential to ensure transparency and in the border of Banbasa and high regards for cultural values and

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 13 through its regional programme dialogue is being facilitated, whilst making as well as help them connect Transboundary Rivers of South Asia on the other, stakeholders like the to other stakeholders. Most (TROSA), it has been trying to play government, private sector and the importantly, this embraces the very the role of a facilitator in ensuring larger civil society are made aware basic principles of cultural continuous community-to- of water stewardship. sustainability for accountability community dialogue so that culture wherein the community's right to can truly be a pillar for effective This unique platform is one of the govern the river shall be realized transboundary water governance. foundation pillars on which through the use of friendly dialogues for formulating water- technology. TROSA endeavours to What is Accountability and related dialogues for the welfare of use citizen science as a tool to Responsibility in the context of the riparian communities are built. connect transboundary cultures to Transboundary River Governance? What is being limited by converge and come together. What Whoever is using water in any form administrative borders is being happens upstream influences the is accountable for it irrespective of eased by culture by developing riparian lives in the downstream and political, socio-economic, legal or positive narratives on the various when cultures living across the basin administrative status. A farmer basin related issues and concerns. are not connected, negative myths growing crops in the field is as This platform advocates for policy- with its hydra-headed implications accountable as a factory owner who level intervention in formulating co- of cultural disharmony finds a is using the crops to prepare operative community approaches in visible entrance to community life. agricultural based products for securing water rights of the TROSA, through its advocacy communities that consume those transboundary riparian communities mechanism, not only is diminishing products. Water either from the and thereby assisting the government such disharmony but also is surface or from the ground is used and civil society in ensuring connecting people with people, directly or indirectly in many ways transformation through advocacy. thereby ensuring riparian justice and and so it is the inherent freedom from hegemonic responsibility of every citizen to Citizen science and Cultural governance. Technology's primary ensure that the river eco-system is Sustainability aim in this context is not to create being conserved and protected. Thus, TROSA's citizen-science approach highly sophisticated databases but sovereign states, corporates, civil provides the community with the rather to use the community's sense society and the community at large tools to analyse water stewardship of space for advocacy and policy should join hands together to ensure in its simplest form: connecting level change. that no human activity acts as a transboundary cultures. It is the catalyst for destruction. Under the science of the people, for the people Sustainable Development without ambit of TROSA, such critical issues and by the people wherein the the involvement of people in are being addressed through community is given exposure to decision-making processes may community sensitisation and understand and check surface and prove to be a mere textual advocacy so that policies emerge groundwater quality in adventure. The very definition of from the ground and reach to the transboundary riparian areas. In this sustainability implies inclusivity policy table so that governance can approach, transboundary with pragmatic approaches and with become more effective and communities are provided technical the recognition of culture as a accountable. support to analyse the quality of significant component in the water they are drinking by the use sustainable development Under TROSA, the Mahakali of scientific tools. This is carried out framework, communities have Advocacy is an intensive and through community managed water witnessed positive change. In the comprehensive deductive exercise quality data, generated through an context of transboundary water which emphasises the importance of extensive and continuous process of governance, such approaches as culture as an important actor of collection of real-time information TROSA and Makhali Advocacy could transboundary water governance. It from the surface and from the revolutionise the very mode of facilitates dialogue between ground on important parameters intervention to ensure a sustainable transboundary cultures and it is like total dissolve solutes, pH, biological and democratic water resource exploring the visible and invisible oxygen demand, among others. management. nature of accountability in water – Mukunda Upadhyay, Programme governance to create a basis for This exercise, if done on a continuous Office-Disaster Risk Reduction, Oxfam engagement of the community in basis, will provide communities an India, and Animesh Prakash, Asst. accountability processes. On the one understanding of how to strengthen Manager and TROSA Lead, Oxfam hand, a community-to-community leadership for informed decision- India Humanitarian Hub, Oxfam India

14 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 ACCOUNTABILITY FOR CSOs Feedback and Complaints Mechanisms Learnings from International Civil Society Organisations

ntroduction Why is a feedback and complaints The feedback and complaints IOur understanding of mechanism important? mechanisms discussed in this article accountability has evolved over the With many CSOs putting their key are general, organisation-wide years, from a static, transparency- stakeholders at the heart of their mechanisms which allow for the and finance-focused compliance programming, strategy, and provision of feedback at any time, exercise towards a more dynamic advocacy work, and an increasing relating to any issue. Other methods approach focused on power shifts focus on participation and dialogue, of collecting feedback, such as and stakeholder-driven work. This it is crucial to have strong feedback surveys, focus group discussions, or approach — referred to as Dynamic mechanisms in place. At the same community meetings, which Accountability and explained in a time, in the wake of a number of actively seek to include peoples' previous article in this journal, scandals to hit the sector in recent opinions and requests in specific ‘Dynamic Accountability, A Stakeholder- years, there is increased external decision-making processes or driven Approach to Accountability’ — pressure to have appropriate programmes, are beyond the scope is grounded in inclusive, mechanisms to submit complaints or of this article. participatory, and continuously report inappropriate behaviour or practiced processes of meaningful incidents. Feedback or complaint? engagement with all stakeholders1. When discussing these mechanisms, Key to this, and indeed the For CIVICUS, "having well-designed it is important to define the minimum requirement for and responsive mechanisms for difference between feedback and Accountable Now's members — 26 handling external and internal complaints. Feedback is any type of of the world's leading international feedback will improve the quality input about an organisation's work, civil society organisations (CSOs) — of [our] work, enhance trust and positive or negative, and could is having in place an effective confidence of stakeholders, identify include suggestions for feedback and complaints areas of work which need improvement. Complaints are a mechanism. strengthening, and ensure that we subset of feedback, expressing learn from feedback".2 dissatisfaction about an organisation's (and/or its staff members') work or actions.

Key features of a good feedback or complaints mechanism What are the hallmarks of a good feedback or complaints mechanism? Several Accountable Now members have been discussing this question in a peer advice group, and there is broad agreement on a number of key elements.

Firstly, the mechanism should be underpinned by a policy which is clear and easy to read, and defines the kind of issues that can be raised, Copyright: Accountable Now, 2019. with reference to other relevant

1 This includes the people an organisation works for and with, partner organisations, local communities, the CSO's staff, donors, and governments. 2 CIVICUS 2015/16 accountability report, pg. 12.

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 15 policies that the organisation can be more than just one mechanism. respond, to ensure that the held to account against such as their There may be separate policies and organisation has understood them code of conduct or safeguarding submission channels for internal and correctly and that the response to policy. The organisation should also external stakeholders, and for their feedback is in line with what clarify what is not covered by the different issues such as fraud and the person envisaged. Even if the mechanism, e.g. objections to an corruption or safeguarding. If this is feedback or request received is organisation's advocacy work the case, organisations must strive beyond the scope of the organisation because it does not align with the to explain clearly how their different or cannot be implemented for some complainant's personal beliefs. The policies and submission mechanisms reason, this should be explained. If policy should include information interact, and users should be able to organisations are not able to respond about the process and timeline for easily identify the channel they meaningfully to the feedback they dealing with submissions, including should be using. Some organisations receive, the very trust they are trying an avenue for appeal if the initial simplify their processes by allowing to build through these mechanisms resolution process is not satisfactory. all feedback and concerns to be will be compromised. It should be publicly available, at a submitted through a single minimum easily locatable on the mechanism. A final consideration is how we organisation's website. communicate more broadly about Simply having a feedback the complaints we receive. The recent There should be a dedicated mechanism in place may not be scandals in the sector have led to submission channel, separate to enough to prompt submissions. Or increased interest around the channels for general enquiries such submissions may not reflect peoples' number of serious incident reports as an info@ email address. Online true thoughts — particularly in received by CSOs. While for the submission should be possible at a cultures where courtesy bias may most part organisations do not minimum, either through a form on lead to hesitancy to express negative release the number of complaints the organisation's website or via a feedback. It is therefore crucial to they receive, Accountable Now dedicated email address. Where promote the mechanism broadly, encourages CSOs to provide an needed, offline mechanisms such as explain what people stand to gain overview of the number and broad a feedback box, phone line, or in- from providing their feedback, and nature of complaints and whether person submission of feedback be clear that complaints are they were resolved. This top-level should be made available - this is welcomed. This may need to be information is unlikely to endanger particularly important where done several times before it has the the privacy of those involved and is stakeholders do not have easy access desired effect, but if people can see a good way to track the number and to the internet or are not tech-savvy. that an organisation welcomes all types of incidents over time. It is key sorts of feedback — and will act to to stress that a low number of The mechanism should be accessible respond — they are more likely to reported incidents is not necessarily and appropriate for the user. In voice their opinions. a positive — particularly in large addition to offline submission of organisations, it could indicate that feedback and complaints, the Responding to and reporting on the complaints mechanisms in place mechanism should be available in feedback and complaints are not effective or fit for purpose. languages spoken by key It is crucial that organisations are stakeholders and provisions should able to respond in a timely and Whilst it may be daunting to be made for certain groups, such as meaningful manner to submissions. disclose the number of incident verbal submission for those who are This means acknowledging receipt reports CSOs receive, we have seen illiterate or have difficulty writing, of feedback or a complaint, that transparency, acknowledgement or child-friendly mechanisms which providing information about next of challenges and failures, and most use simpler language. steps, and informing people about importantly demonstrating what has the outcome - what has been done been learned and what changes have What else do we need to consider? with their feedback, or in the case of been implemented as a result, is the Each of the above factors needs to complaints, what steps are being best course of action in the long be taken into account when taken to respond to, rectify, and term. designing a feedback or complaints learn from the situation. People – Ezgi Akarsu, mechanism. But often CSOs have should also be given the chance to Accountable Now

16 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 IMPACT OF ACCOUNTABILITY MACHANISMS FromFrom DisasterDisaster ReliefRelief toto ResilientResilient CivilCivil SocietySociety TheThe ContributionContribution ofof FeedbackFeedback andand ResponseResponse SystemsSystems inin NepalNepal Copyright: Asia Development Bank, 2015. Asia Development Copyright: his article briefly explores World Vision's emergency response • Contribute to availability, T World Vision International programme, conducted in July 2015, quality and quantity of inputs Nepal's (WVIN) experience of the it was noted that out of all these (training materials, agro inputs) value of feedback and response accountability practices, building • Increase the quality of activity systems in both enhancing the feedback and response systems was and inputs and timeliness effectiveness of an international the most challenging and in related to infrastructure NGO response to the 2015 Nepal particular ensuring a response to construction work (including earthquakes, and then in the longer complaints was difficult given time resolving the case of labourers term to enable it and its partner constraints and limited experience of not paid for WVIN funded NGOs to be more relevant and these kinds of systems by field staff. construction work) resilient in an era of decentralized Steps were then taken to expand • Identifying where increased governance. access to feedback and complaint monitoring was needed mechanisms (such as the • Building trust and WVIN began implementing long- introduction of toll-free hotlines ), understanding of World term development programmes in which gave community members Vision's role 2001, including a number that were different options for providing • Highlighting staff misconduct affected by earthquakes in April and feedback (face-to-face with staff, (this primarily related to the May in 2015. With the widespread, including at dedicated help-desks, conduct of implementing detrimental impact these suggestion boxes, or by e-mail or partners) and ensuring a timely earthquakes had upon Nepal, WVIN phone). Additionally, the recording response, in line with the Staff expanded its operations, eventually of feedback and complaints became Code of Conduct and specific reaching over half a million affected more systematic due to the use of policies that build on that, such people with livelihoods, health, an open-source data collection tool . as the Child and Adult shelter and infrastructure through Between October 2015 and Safeguarding Policy. WASH, education, child protection September 2016, a total of 5,476 and DRR programmes. pieces of feedback were recorded Having seen the benefits of feedback from the earthquake response and response systems in its In line with World Vision's programming locations with the earthquake response programming, Programme Accountability most common mechanisms used WVIN decided to introduce similarly Framework, WVIN's response and being help-desks that enabled face- systematic systems across its wider, programmes incorporated 1) to-face interaction with World Vision longer-term programming, starting information provision, 2) consulting staff. Internal analysis suggested that with a few pilot locations. A study communities, 3) promoting responding to this feedback had by the action research and advisory participation and 4) collecting and better enabled World Vision to: organization, CDA, in 2016 helped acting on feedback and complaints. • Select the right beneficiaries for identify where there had been In an initial, real-time evaluation of delivery of inputs and services progress and where particular December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 17 attention needed to be paid. With was perceived as a 'compliance' transaction costs and additional the government requiring all exercise and a relatively burden for both the government and international NGO programming to burdensome one as it required staff development partners". be implemented through local time to ensure each piece of feedback NGOs, one of their main was responded to. Over time, Civil society, in all its complexity observations of CDA was the however, they reported seeing the and diversity, may not be the most challenge of ensuring that World value, particularly in increasing trust efficient way of implementing Vision's commitment to collecting levels in the community. Even if standardised development and acting on feedback and sometimes they had to communicate interventions. If local level civil complaints was operationalised by that responding to the feedback society is to retain its relevance then implementing partners. would be outside the scope of the it will need to play to its strengths, programme, the very process of which are its ability to listen, After making it a requirement for reporting back (and so being understand and be responsive to the all partners in World Vision accountable) to the communities perspectives of those who are programmes to systematically contributed to increased trust. One supposed to be the beneficiaries of collect and act upon feedback and of the NGOs had taken the step of development cooperation. complaints, in late 2018 a follow-up, extending a feedback and response Embracing the discipline of feedback internal study was conducted to see system into other projects funded by and response systems will both the extent of progress made in this other donors, even if those donors increase the relevance, and area. Results showed the were not requiring it. This then went effectiveness, of their projects and requirement was fulfilled as a result beyond 'compliance' and suggested contribute to increasing the agency of the inclusion of 'responsiveness that they saw the intrinsic benefits of marginalized groups. And to feedback' as a key partner of collecting and acting on feedback international NGOs can contribute to performance indicator, with and complaints. those practices in a way that facilitation made by the use of a structures their partnership centralised feedback register that For the legitimacy of international agreements, incentivizing enabled tracking of responses and and local NGOs is being questioned responsiveness to feedback and whether they were done in the globally, and Nepal is no exception. working with local civil society in agreed time period. As one commentator argued that promoting the value of there is a 'lot to ponder' around the development with people at the Interviews with two World Vision's activities of international NGOs: "Aid centre. local partner NGOs revealed that scattered in many smaller projects – Daniel Stevens, initially responsiveness to feedback has caused fragmentation with high World Vision International

ACCOUNTABILITY FOR PARTICIPATION Rethinking the Participation Revolution The Grand Bargain, the Asia-Pacific Region and why CSO-driven Accountability is Key ack in May 2016, the Grand have resulted. The bargain details 10 Whilst undoubtedly a critical BBargain was released. Signed by workstreams under which 51 moment concerning the manner in 18 donor countries and 16 major aid commitments sit. Among the most which we conceive of and respond organisations, it set out an agreed interesting and ambitious of the to humanitarian crises, it is perhaps set of commitments for more workstreams created under the both self-aware and somewhat efficient, effective delivery of bargain was workstream 6, which set telling that humanitarian actors humanitarian aid that aims "to get out a plan for "a participation needed to be reminded and more into the hands of people in revolution". The vision of recommit to the importance of need"1. Since this time, membership workstream 6 was that, by the end placing the people we seek to serve of the bargain has increased from 34 of 2017, analysis and consideration at the centre of our work. to more than 50. Two annual of inputs from affected communities Nonetheless, the commitment is progress reports have been released should form part of all admirable at face value. It speaks to and many roundtables, workshops, humanitarian response plans2. the need to include affected peoples summits, standing committees, 1 https://www.agendaforhumanity.org/initiatives/3861 steering groups and infographics 2 ICVA, "The grand bargain: everything you need to know". p.11

18 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 and communities in our decisions, "a common platform for sharing and argument to dedicate time and ensure their participation and analysing data to strengthen resources into feedback and feedback is sought and that we are decision-making, transparency, accountability mechanisms when creating environments that foster accountability and limit duplication". they could be spent on other, more trust, transparency and substantive and tangible forms of accountability. But how have these Initially, it made perfect sense for relief. The result, as the 2018 report commitments brought about change the Grand Bargain to focus on the notes, is that 80% of affected for the people we support, and largest and most established actors populations surveyed felt that their where are we going from here? of the humanitarian system to views were not being taken into facilitate fast agreement on how to account in the aid they received. This In the 2017 report, reporting under act on the crucial issues at hand. But unfortunate reality means relief is workstream 6 showed that we hadn't presently it can be seen that the misdirected, misunderstands the done well: in June 2017 it was success of these commitments is in nature of the needs at hand, that reported that less than half of fact contingent on the action of funds could have been spent better members had invested in feedback governments, and NGOs. In fact, this and that ultimately, scarce resources mechanisms. Even less could show was a specific finding of the 2017 have been wasted. substantive progress against report. The 2018 report notes that measures for coordinated although many signatories report Whenever our organisations fail to approaches, communication or that they have participatory place the people that they wish to community engagement3. mechanisms in place, it is not clear benefit at the centre of the work they that these are used consistently at the undertake, although surface level In 2018 we did better, sort of: the country-level. issues may appear to have been 2018 report noted that a lot more addressed, unhelpful power members had reported actions The challenge at hand is thus two- dynamics are consistently reinforced, against workstream 6, resulting in a fold. Any humanitarian emergency the localisation agenda is high number of activities to enhance is by its very nature urgent and undermined and a static, 'tokenistic' policies, programs and staff training overwhelming. In the immediate accountability is all we can hope to on accountability to affected face of such need, it is entirely achieve. This is particularly relevant populations4. Yet, the report further defensible for organisations to 'dive in South Asia and the Pacific, where noted that it was now not clear straight in' - meaning well-meaning the Australian Council for whether these actions had actually plans for affected population input International Development (ACFID) resulted in the transformation of instantly become a 'nice to do' rather and its network are often completely accountability and participation we than essential activity. Secondly, in reliant on the permissions and wish to see, and whether this environment, it's even more support of local Government and humanitarian programs were difficult to mount a convincing local NGOs for the success of their actually becoming more 'demand- driven' at all.

Understandably, it seems that the bulk of the activities undertaken in this workstream have focused their attention on activities that fall within their direct control, that is those that involve policy revision, technological enhancement, staff capacity and so on. However, one of the key commitments that is failing to be addressed in these activities is the stated commitment to "develop common standards and a coordinated approach for

community engagement" as well as Humanitarian Summit, 2015. World Copyright:

3 Derzsi-Horvath, Steets, Ruppert. "Independent Grand Bargain Report". 2017 https://www.gppi.net/media/ Horvath__Steets__Ruppert__2017__Independent_Grand_Bargain_Report.PDF 4 Hough, Poole. "Grand Bargain Annual Independent Report 2018". 2018. https://www.agendaforhumanity.org/sites/default/ files/resources/2018/Jun/Grand%20Bargain%20annual%20independent%20report%202018_full.pdf

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 19 interventions, and yet often fail to at hand. By driving accountability reference point with which to align. recognise the criticality of local for our work, the Global Standard In drafting the Global Standard, the voices in the processes they design partnership has borne a standard partners worked to ensure it is and undertake. This apparent failure that is accessible to any organisation applicable across different areas of to take a more dynamic approach to and capacity level, and never fully work and acknowledges the needs our accountability is undermining attained. In practice, this means that of a breadth of organisations and our capacity to be effective and a local NGO just starting out on its contexts. In doing so, the Global preventing us from harnessing transparency, accountability and Standard also purposefully already scarce resources to their full effectiveness journey can jump into strengthens common principles capacity. the commitments in their own way, across existing accountability reframing the manner in which they standards and codes, giving strength It is this need to address the urgent conceive of a stakeholder. They to the global movement for effective issue of genuine engagement with could pick out one commitment and CSOs and dynamic accountability. our stakeholders, and the ability to its key actions and begin their develop agile organisations that journey there. ACFID is a partner to the Global adapt and respond to these needs Standard. We believe that strong that drove the development of the Concurrently, an experienced and civil society is at the heart of Dynamic Accountability concept, well-resourced NGO operating in powerful and effective action on the and the Global Standard . The multiple countries may be issues that affect our region most Global Standard is a new standard interrogating the accountability of acutely, such as climate change, for Civil Society effectiveness their work by evaluating their resilience and disaster risk reduction. developed by 9 project partners organisation against each of the key And further, that through from around the globe. Constructed actions the Global Standard sets, empowering the organisations that around 12 Commitments to updating feedback mechanisms, and our members partner with in the transform accountability, it brings then seeking out peer-review of their Pacific and across Asia to improve, together key elements from a wide self-assessment. The 'dynamic' part prove and demonstrate their range of existing standards into one of the accountability tells us that effectiveness, our collective voice comprehensive and integrated both of these approaches are valid and action is strengthened too. document. Informed particularly by and that the accountability journey Adopting the Global Standard at the Core Humanitarian Standard and will constantly shift and change. every level of a humanitarian the Istanbul Principles for CSO Rather than compliance with the response is key to delivering on the Development Effectiveness, the standards being the indicator of participation revolution sought Global Standard complements these success, partners to the global through the Grand Bargain. In many standards by integrating the standard seek out this truly dynamic cases, the missing piece of the puzzle Dynamic Accountability concept. state as the ultimate goal. In seeking is undertaking this foundation work With this approach comes a number to create a movement of at the local level that will have a of unique features that serve to both organisations worldwide that foster lasting impact. harmonise the disparities of existing a culture of accountability and standards, and increase its people-driven work, the Global As humanitarian responses become accessibility and relevance to achieve Standard has not prescribed one increasingly protracted, the grey area greater outcomes. fixed way to adopt the standard. This between where humanitarian means that any organisation in any response ends and development The Global Standard speaks to both country can start the accountability begins also widens. In this context, the work of an international and a journey at the most suitable point. the need for effective and prepared domestic civil society actor. This The point, in fact, is to get started. humanitarian actors at every level framing sets it apart from many who are responsive to the needs and existing humanitarian standards, The Global Standard has also been voices of affected populations as which are framed around the crafted to suit use as a reference their highest priority has never been implicit assumption that the Standard. This means it is not more important. The Global implementing organisation is intended to replace existing Standard offers an opportunity for coming in from outside the country. standards currently used by various organisations to map the journey, By developing a common standard standard-managing organisations regardless of where that journey capable of speaking to both contexts, and their members around the starts. The imperative is to begin it the Global Standard has established world, but rather where a pre- now. itself as both accessible and existing standard is in place, the – Jocelyn Condon, Australian Council adaptable to address the challenges Global Standard can be used a for International Development (ACFID)

20 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 IMPROVING CSOs’ IMPACT THROUGH ACCOUNTABILITY Achieving More Trust, Legitimacy and Resilience for Civil Society What is Needed to Make Accountability Practices Work: Learnings from the Resilient Roots initiative ecent times have seen an organisation works for and letting Even if the feedback can't be R alarming rise of government, them speak about why an implemented, they explain to their private sector and media measures organisation's work is valuable to primary constituents why this is the that restrict and close spaces for civil them can be a direct proof of the case. This gives their primary society to do their work. Many CSO's legitimacy to exist in this space. constituents the chance to discuss government bodies have started to with the organisation whether the use a narrative that de-legitimizes The Resilient Roots initiative2 aims to response is sufficient to them and (and even demonizes) CSOs, framing test the following hypothesis: CSOs provide follow up feedback. them as foreign agents that aim to that are more accountable and undermine national sovereignty. responsive to their primary This article outlines some of the Under the gaze of transparency and constituents are more resilient lessons learned half-way through accountability, government officials against threats to their civic space. this pilot phase about what primary argue for tighter regulation, requiring In the realm of this initiative, 14 constituent accountability3 means in from foreign-funded organizations organisations from diverse countries practice and how to achieve that they seek approval from official and contexts roll out innovative increased trust and active engagement. institutions, demanding income and accountability experiments over a asset declarations of CSO leaders and 12-month period. These pilot Creating awareness is the basis raising the bar for reporting projects explore how public support When beginning their accountability obligations on internal and trust in CSOs can be improved pilot project, many of the accountability and governance. by practising accountability to their participating organisations faced the primary constituents. This means problem that their primary However, the declining trust in they aim to establish a meaningful constituents were not aware of what CSOs does not only stem from the dialogue with those groups that their organisation does or had restrictive or manipulative CSOs exist to support or represent misconceptions about it - which makes government policies but is also due and increase their engagement in being accountable to them all the to the way CSOs most commonly CSO decision-making. They do that more difficult. This is especially a practice accountability. The typical by establishing mechanisms that problem for advocacy organisations, means through which CSOs allow them to collect feedback on where the primary constituents demonstrate their accountability — their work, their expectations and the could consist of fractions of the such as compliance with regulatory challenges they face directly from whole population of a country requirements and donor reporting their primary constituents. This without direct contact to them. The — are unlikely to be sufficient to feedback is used to drive Poverty Reduction Forum Trust convince sceptical voices. Many organisational decision-making. But (PRFT), an organisation fighting organisations have started to realize just implementing the feedback is not poverty in Zimbabwe, faced this that their most important advocates enough to build trust and be challenge in particular because their are the people they aim to represent, accountable. The Resilient Roots primary constituents are people or who are increasingly being called pilots establish a dialogue with their living in rather rural areas all over "primary constituents".1 Building trust primary constituents by feeding Zimbabwe. Their approach to with this group can be essential back the information on what conquering this challenge was to put when their work is under scrutiny. changes have or will be made and together a community advisory Having the backing of the people an respond to any kind of feedback. committee that raises awareness for 1 Büchner, Prinz. "Debunking the myths around primary constituent accountability." 2018. https://www.civicus.org/ index.php/media-resources/news/blog/3444-resilient-roots-debunking-the-myths-around-primary-constituent-accountability 2 The initiative is coordinated by CIVICUS and funded by the Ford Foundation. Technical and strategic support is provided by Keystone Accountability and Accountable Now, along with our regional partner for Latin America, Instituto de Comunicación y Desarrollo (ICD). The two-year pilot phase will run until the end of 2019. 3 https://www.civicus.org/index.php/media-resources/news/blog/3444-resilient-roots-debunking-the-myths-around- primary-constituent-accountability

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 21 the organisations, clarifies With this, some mechanisms are Another dimension of this challenge misconceptions, and collects feedback more sustainable than others: CSOs is the possible lack of knowledge within their own communities. In should ask themselves what and skills on how to collect, this way, they ensure that even the mechanism could be continuously implement, and respond to feedback. most remote and arguably "less practised, which will depend on Staff members need training on how involved" constituents of their many factors within the individual to do this the right way. Opening organisation have a voice that is heard. organisation. However, the initiative oneself up to being criticised and also calls on donors to understand maybe receiving feedback can be But for organisations providing the value of such mechanisms and hard to respond to and staff services, this can be a problem if allow for extra funding to be built members need to feel supported some of their primary constituents into the budgets they provide for throughout this process. are not in direct contact with the certain projects or programmes. organisation. For Projet Jeune Leader Lastly what's important is that (PJL), a youth organisation running Adapt to the context accountability isn't just practised on sexual and reproductive health Primary constituents who are the outside. Organisations that have education programmes in schools in unwilling or unable to provide great practices of being accountable Madagascar it was important to show feedback to the organisation may be and establishing a continuous their accountability to the parents of an indication that the CSO is dialogue with their primary the young people they are working currently not using an appropriate constituents but miss to do the same with. Many parents, however, accountability mechanism. For the with their staff, won't be successful especially the ones living in rather Resilient Roots pilots, it was in the long run. Trust needs to be rural areas and with no direct contact extremely important to design their established through accountability with the school their children attend, mechanism based on the context mechanisms inside and out. were not aware that this programme they are working in and the different existed. Their solution was to constituents they are working with. Looking forward produce a printed newsletter that For example, the women's rights Practising accountability to achieve explained what PJL does. The organisation FemPlatz from Serbia immediate effects can be done in students were asked to take the couldn't conduct community very simple ways. However, to truly newsletter home to their parents and meetings in some areas, because achieve effective accountability that discuss with them what they are many would be afraid to attend such strengthens an organisation, CSOs learning in school. The newsletter a public event. Discussing women's shouldn't stop there. Accountability also has a blank page that the parents rights is a sensitive topic for many is part of a process that needs to can use for feedback and the young of their primary constituents. constantly adapt to the complexity people then bring it back to school. Keeping that in mind they organised of changing spaces around and more informal meetings called within an organisation. To whom Continuous iteration is key "Coffee with a friend" at the house accountability is practised and how When organisations start to engage of one of the women they are can look very different. From the their primary constituents through working with and invited other experience of the Resilient Roots collection, implementation and women from the neighbourhood. initiative, accountability works best responding to feedback, many when it is practised in a way that organisations fall into the trap of Staff need to be on board allows a CSO to build mutual making this a one-time exercise. Yet Many organisations had difficulties relationships encouraging a close collecting feedback should be done to convince their staff about the engagement from all of their in a way that allows for meaningful necessity of this approach. Their staff different stakeholders. While CSOs dialogue, builds meaningful members felt that it was too much should not forget the other relationships and in the long run of an effort on top of their already stakeholders they need to be trust between the CSO and its full schedules and felt uneasy about accountable to — especially the staff primary constituents. Early on in the the danger of getting criticized for of an organisation who are Resilient Roots initiative, pilot their work. Bringing staff on board responsible to implement the organisations began asking and making them feel comfortable mechanisms —, organisations should themselves how they can integrate about getting feedback on their not forget to always put primary their accountability mechanisms of work can take time but it is essential constituents at the heart of their collecting and feeding back the for the success of such an approach. work and efforts. actions that have or will be taken, If feedback from primary – Isabelle Büchner, in a continuous manner, even after constituents is collected, the staff Accountable Now the special funding from the need to feel comfortable to work Resilient Roots initiative has stopped. with the suggestions they receive.

22 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 ACCOUNTABILITY SURVEY AND FINDINGS Filling the Gap on Sustainable Development Goal 16: Inclusive and Responsive Decision- Making Indicator Data

n July 2019, countries will meet proportion of the national 1) How confident are you in your Iduring the High-Level Political population, which is typically a own ability to participate in Forum (HLPF) to review progress on larger geographic area than most politics? (Select one) the Sustainable Development Goals organisations operate. Despite these Not at all confident (SDGs). 193 countries adopted the difficulties, civil society can A little confident SDGs and the integrated agenda to contribute to the SDG dialogue and Quite confident end poverty, protect the planet and help hold decision-makers Very confident ensure that all people enjoy peace accountable to their commitment Completely confident and prosperity. 230 indicators help towards the goals. One example of track progress and whether countries this is the 2018 SPEAK! Campaign, 2) How much would you say the are keeping their commitment which brought together 36 political system in [country] towards the goals. There has been organisations in 22 countries to allows people like you to "have progress, but challenges remain, collect 581 responses to indicator a say" in what the government particularly on SDG16: Promote just, SDG 16.7.2 regarding responsive, does? (Select one) peaceful, and inclusive societies, with no inclusive, participatory, and A great deal data available for 12 of its 23 representative decision-making at all A lot indicators1. Civil society can help fill levels. Some these data gaps and they are Very little particularly useful to "raise the flag" SPEAK! for SDG16 Indicator Data Not at all when official sources of data miss SPEAK!3 is a campaign supported by or mask progress, violations or CIVICUS4 that engages civil society The first question measured an inequalities between groups, to raise awareness, break down individual's ability to participate, especially at the local level2. barriers and build global solidarity. and the second question addressed The SPEAK! events in the different whether the structural issues of Because the SDGs have seventeen countries were diverse and being able to participate such as goals covering people, planet, addressed such issues as corruption, restrictions to holding decision- prosperity, peace and partnerships, menstrual health, combating hate making positions or adequate most civil society organisations are speech, perception of immigrant ability to influence decision-making already working towards communities and interreligious bodies. An additional non-official accomplishing the SDGs in some way marriages to mention a few. The open-ended qualitative question was and there is a vested interest in SDG 16.7.2 indicator on inclusive and also asked to add context and helping monitoring SDG progress. responsive decision-making was of potentially highlight positive Yet despite these aligned interests, interest to the diverse range of the inclusive decision-making practices most organisation's data cannot be organisations. and opportunities that could be used for SDG monitoring because expanded. their methodology or scope differs The official proposed questions to Can you describe a place or from the official SDG indicator measure this indicator are the time when you were able methodology. For example, many of following two quantitative to influence decision-making the SDG indicators ask for the questions – in your community?

1 Ritchie, Roser, Mispy, Ortiz-Ospina. "Measuring progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals." SDG-Tracker.org, website (2018). Accessed on April 13, 2019 at https://sdg-tracker.org/peace-justice. 2 Jonathan Gray, Danny Lämmerhirt and Liliana Bounegru. "Changing What Counts." CIVICUS.org website (2017). Accessed on April 15, 2019 at http://civicus.org/thedatashift/learning-zone-2/research/changing-what-counts/. 3 https://www.togetherwespeak.org/ 4 https://civicus.org/

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 23 The collected data followed official coordinate efforts to measure possibility to influence the political quantitative data methodology as progress. The regional trends report system. Still, the open-ended well as complimentary qualitative has been submitted to the SDG16+ qualitative questions allowed us to data to contextualize the responses report and is currently being see that many individuals found for each community and the prepared for the United Nation's ways and spaces in their families and responses were used to find regional High-Level Political Forum for July communities to influence decision- trends. Furthermore, the experience 2019 where countries participate in makers. Not all organisers using the proposed SDG16.7.2 a Voluntary National Review of participated and particularly in the indicator questions was provided to indicators, which will include SDG16. Middle East and North Africa the UN Statistics Division/IAEG- (MENA) region, the questions were SDGs for its consideration of moving Findings considered "too political" to ask. Yet the indicator from Tier III to Tier II Despite the different contexts one organiser in Iraq who initially status. Tier III status means that organisations were working in, the showed concern but went ahead there is no agreed methodology for responses presented more with the questions reported being measurement are available. This is similarities than differences. Most of pleasantly surprised at the fruitful particularly problematic for SDG16 the participants were confident in and enthusiastic nature of the because 7 of its 23 indicators have their own ability to participate in discussions. This was the common been listed as Tier III. This status politics, but many also mentioned report from the organisers that the hinders the ability to collect and that their country allows little questions were a way of opening up

Background CIVICUS is a global alliance of civil society organisations and activists dedicated to strengthening citizen action and civil society throughout the world. It is an alliance of 7000+ members in 160 countries. CIVICUS advocates, convenes and publishes regular research on civil society. CIVICUS launched the DataShift initiative to build the capacity and confidence of civil society organisations to produce and use citizen-generated data. Citizen-generated data is data that people or their organisations produce to directly monitor, demand or drive change on issues that affect them. It is sharing experiences from this support to build capacity on citizen-generated data across the world and is seeking to inform and influence global policy processes on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the data revolution for sustainable development. CIVICUS believes raising civil society's awareness of and engagement with the SDGs and particularly SDG16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions can support organisations' ability to align as well as find allies and resources for their collective work improving the possibility to reach the SDG targets.

The 17 officially noted Sustainable Development Goals (chart courtesy of UNDP).

24 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 Each SDG has its own targets and indicators. A target is a specific objective that will help to achieve the goal. An indicator is a way to measure if the goals are being met. The example below shows one target and two indicators for SGD 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions. the discussion on how participants minorities, unconcerned with could make decision-making more "I once held positions as youth's opinions, built on private inclusive and responsive in their president, medical community interests, and sectarian. Several own communities. development service (Medical respondents said they are scared to CDS), during my National talk about politics. Positive examples In Africa, surveys were completed Youth Service Corps (NYSC) cited of political participation were from nine countries: Ethiopia, in Ebonyi state. During my mainly from outside the traditional Liberia, Togo, Uganda, Gambia, tenure, we were able to world of politics - for example Cameroon, Nigeria, South Sudan and pressure the local government through education, teaching or other Zambia. Many of the examples of chairman to provide employment, or civil society. being able to influence decision- Handwashing facilities in all makers were through engaging in primary/secondary schools Again, in Latin America, there were church groups, student associations within Afikpo-North LGA, more similarities than difference and unions, and local community Ebonyin state." with the other regions. Yet more organisations. There were additional – Reported through 2018 SPEAK! than in other regions, participants examples of being able to influence Campaign from Nigeria considered voting as the principal family members, reporting crimes way of "having a say" in politics. and influencing a crowd to take a Some others also mentioned that thief to the police instead of protests; travelling between Syria they knew that there existed conducting mob violence. and Turkey and participating in the different "initiatives to participate labour market and in civil society and contribute as citizens" but they In MENA, there were similar Across the MENA region, many considered them ineffective. Many examples of influencing decision- respondents actively declared that participants also mentioned that makers with a few variations. In the their country had given them no citizen mobilization and protests can view of Syrian women, lived meaningful chance to participate in change government decisions and experiences of political participation the political system. In Iraq that "although it is difficult to included: choosing to marry or especially, there were very negative participate in a direct way, people divorce; personal and family perceptions of the political system, could always influence the debate". decisions, especially about education; which was described as corrupt, The principle obstacles towards participating in anti-government unrepresentative of women and inclusive decision making were:

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 25 Copyright: United Nations Organization, 2016. corruption, "the irrelevance of the Conclusion Examples include a businessman in topics that are subject to public In this SPEAK! SDG16 example, South Africa advocating the local participation" add the fact that "only organizations across the globe council for a girl's youth sports team a minority can participate in coordinated their effort amongst to get access to playing fields, which politics". In general, decision-making themselves and using official they had been consistently denied remained connected to the local indicator data methodology were use. And a female-based youth level. When participants were asked able to participate in the national group in Tanzania investigating the to describe a place or time when they dialogue happening with SDG16. In collection and use of trash collection were able to influence decision- the process, they had a meaningful fees in their neighbourhood. Civil making in a positive way, most of dialogue about how to make society organised the workshops, but them expressed they were able to decision-making inclusive and by putting people as the agents to participate and change, "little aspects responsive in their own collect the data, analyse the data, the or decisions in their neighbourhoods communities. The SPEAK! success people have been empowered by and communities", they expressed around inclusive and responsive being given the opportunity to go "helping others" as a way of decision-making inspired civil past participating and begin doing. participation; "teaching"; societies to hold entire workshops Right now, we see many small steps "participating in student unions"; dedicated to having people come being taken. We look forward to "taking part in environment together to collect, analyse and find seeing how those small steps assemblies", anti-corruption protests, solutions on SDG16.7.2. These multiple as civil society takes the "talking about abortion", "in women people-powered workshop5 have lead in coordinating opportunities organisations" and using the media resulted in greater local action to for people to start "doing data" and as a way of expressing themselves. influence decision-making. the benefits to more inclusive and responsive decision-making. – Hannah Wheatley, 5 shttps://www.fabriders.net/participatory-sdg-indicators/ The Data Shift Initiative, CIVICUS

26 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 CASE STUDY IN ACCOUNTABILITY Engaging Stakeholders to Increase Resilience: Rohingya Refugee Crisis

n the wake of the 2017 genocide Mukti Cox's Bazar, they worked on improvement in health and peaceful Iin Rakhine State, Myanmar, more building strong relationships with behaviour (Promising Practices, 5). than 700,000 Rohingya people fled the refugee and the local into Bangladesh, crossing the border community, and over this time, were Seven years of strengthening in what soon became the world's the only organisation providing community ownership meant the fastest-growing refugee crisis education for children in the organisation was well placed to (UNHCR, 1). These arrivals added to makeshift Kutupalong camp. respond to the crisis in August 2017. thousands of Rohingya who had fled To identify needs and gaps in oppression over decades, making a A government ban on INGO services, over 5,000 homes in Cox's total number of 920,900 refugees in provision in the unofficial camps Bazar were canvassed, followed by the Cox's Bazar area (SEG, 2). resulted in the organisation training zones covering 30,000 households in the refugee community to provide the Kutupalong- Balukhali camp. This humanitarian crisis is protracted. education themselves, from 2010. Refugees not only face malnutrition, Tacit agreement from authorities This example of community-led disease, a lack of water, sanitation was gained by building low-profile education programmes are not the and other basic services, but schools onto the side of existing only example of how community- landslides and floods from frequent dwellings and training refugees to involvement in the area led to monsoon weather provide an teach. Schools were maintained by greater resilience: considerable time additional threatening risk. 'School Management Committees' was spent working with the refugee (SMCs) from the community, who community to establish how basic In the Kutupalong - Balukhali camp were responsible for upkeep and needs could best be met. When their there is an average of 10.7 square ensuring the wider community 200 latrines and 34 tube wells were metres of usable space per person, shaped the direction of the built, they were in suitable areas to compared to the recommended programme. avoid contamination and built to a international standard of 45 square minimum depth of 10 rings per metres per person (Human Rights This created a culture of resilience latrine and 700 ft per well. In each Watch, 3). With flimsy shelters built where, in spite of many challenges block of the camp where facilities over the mud-clad hilly terrain, the (cyclones, floods, political unrest, were built, a 'WASH Committee' was risk of landslides is significant, with government restrictions) 2,700 established, consisting of 10 high population density increasing children received a quality members from the refugee vulnerability. education, with a noted community (Children on the Edge,

Compounding these conditions, many aid agencies rushed in with little consultation, building shallow tube wells and badly placed latrines in their haste to meet donor expectations. Consequently, many water supplies dried up or became contaminated (Children on the Edge, 4).

The benefit of community-owned work Children on the Edge (a UK based INGO) had been working with the Rohingya refugee community on the border for eight years. Partnering with local organisation Copyright: European Union, 2018. Union, European Copyright:

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 27 6). These committees are responsible When these rains intensified, 110 Refugee Crisis. Bangladesh. for the maintenance and use of the Centres built by other agencies were UNHCR, Oct 2017 facilities, either making repairs damaged by landslides and 70 were 2. Strategic Executive Group. Mid themselves or contacting Mukti to damaged by flooding (ISCG, 9), not Term Review. JOINT RESPONSE report problems. They took one of the 75 Centres built by PLAN FOR ROHINGYA decisions on various elements, Children on the Edge was destroyed HUMANITARIAN CRISIS. electing to have spilt chamber wells and 8,200 children continued to Bangladesh, March – Dec 2018 keeping washing and drinking water receive education in a safe place, 3. Human Rights Watch. Bangladesh separate and requesting locks for with trained refugee and Bangla Is Not My country – The Plight Of latrines to ensure women's safety. teachers. These teachers were not Rohingya Refugees From Myanmar. only trained to teach about flood USA, 2018 Committee member Naeem said response but, having seen health 4. Children on the Edge. COTE "Before people would come and improve in the original programme Rohingya Response – February build a well or a latrine and then (Promising Practices, 10), were 2018 Field Update. United they leave. They don't talk to us. We equipped with First Aid skills and Kingdom, Feb 2018 don't know who they are. They just basic hygiene and sanitation 5. Smitheram, Esther. Standing in hang up their sign and leave when knowledge, countering the rise of the Gap for Rohingya Refugee it is finished. But these people talk waterborne diseases and minor Children – A Community Approach to us. We know who they are" ailments. Like the original project, to Making Education Possible. (Children on the Edge, 7). School Management Committees Promising Practices in Refugee were established to maintain and Education. Save the Children, Within weeks, many people were shape the work. UNHCR, Pearson, 2017. walking for over half an hour to 6. Children on the Edge. COTE reach these wells because of the Child councils are also formed at Rohingya Response – February purity of the water. Local expertise each Centre, where refugee children 2018 Field Update. United ensured proper depth and placement, represent the views of their peers, Kingdom, Feb 2018 so facilities were not affected by the influence the direction of the work 7. Children on the Edge. Children heavy rains. Hussein, another and are responsible for on the Edge Rohingya Refugee committee member said, "We keep communicating learning about Crisis – 2018 Field Report. United them very clean. The roof was safety and protection (i.e. trafficking Kingdom, Jan 2019 damaged during a storm, but I was prevention, health and sanitation) 8. Children on the Edge. COTE able to fix it. Everyone here is happy, back to their communities. Piloted Rohingya Response – July 2018 we have the best water in the block. in Cox's Bazar Learning Centres, Field Update. United Kingdom, When it rains, many of the wells Child Councils have not only July 2018 have a brown colour water, but ours influenced the running of the schools 9. Inter Sector Coordination Group is clean, it never changes colour" but introduced better health and (ISCG). Situation Report – (Children on the Edge, 8). hygiene practices, vegetable Rohingya Refugee Crisis. Cox's growing techniques in their local Bazar. 16th August 2018. Once the humanitarian response was areas and campaigned against child 10. Smitheram, Esther. Standing in completed, Children on the Edge marriage (Children on the Edge, 11). the Gap for Rohingya Refugee turned their attention to consistent Children – A Community Approach provision of education for children Community ownership allowed to Making Education Possible. in the camps and, with the same children's education and protection Promising Practices in Refugee focus on community ownership, set to thrive for eight years in an Education. Save the Children, about constructing 75 Learning extremely volatile environment. UNHCR, Pearson, 2017. Centres. With community Now these policies have been 11. Children on the Edge. 'Child involvement, this meant having replicated through a larger council 'Play-days' create colour and access to local knowledge: Learning undertaking, it is hoped that fun in their schools and communities' Centres were placed on high ground, communities will see similar strong – www.childrenontheedge.org/ built with semi-permanent materials results. lateststories/child-council-play- for flexibility if the refugees moved days-create-colour-and-fun-in- on, but with concrete floors to References their-schools-and-communities, survive the rains. 1. Mr. Grandi, Filippo, Lowcock, 2017. Mark & Lacy Swing, William. – Esther Smitheram, Joint Statement on the Rohingya Children on the Edge

28 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY Rosie the Robot: Social Accountability One Tweet at a Time

ivil society organizations C (CSOs) across the world are increasing being restricted to operate freely due to the challenges of legitimacy, accountability and transparency. The CIVICUS State of Civil Society Report 2018 reports an alarming rise of government measures that restrict and close space for the civil society to exercise core civic freedoms, to advance citizens' rights and to hold governments accountable.

There are some technological breakthroughs in the field of big data and artificial intelligence that seek to change the status quo. Operação Serenata de Amor, a To allow people to visualize and has proven to be more efficient and flagship project on artificial make sense of the data that Rosie effective. intelligence for social control of generates, another A.I. bot called public administration is one such Jarbas was created. In this bot's Rosie also forced members of initiative. Started by a group of civic website, users can browse congress Congress to explain themselves and hackers in Brazil, this initiative is an member's expenses and get details correct their behavior. Public open project that uses data science about each one of the suspicions. It pressure can be more influential than to monitor public spending and is the starting point to validate a an arrest, especially if the alternative sharing information in a way suspicion. By combining Rosie and is a lengthy and expensive court case accessible to everyone. Serenata has Jarbas, and making open data more that uses public funds. Second, using created Rosie: an artificial intelligence meaningful and accessible, the a social media platform to gather bot that analyzes Brazilian congress initiative made room for journalists people around the open data itself, members' expenses while they are to browse data and find their own through an automated platform, has in office to empower citizen stories. the potential to transfer power to the demands for social accountability. citizens and for them to take Fostering social accountability advantage of a pre-built space to Rosie has been quite a success with through the use of artificial hold their representatives the citizens of Brazil. She currently intelligence and social media has accountable. has over 40,000 followers on Twitter been highly beneficial for Brazil. and communicates with citizens in Firstly, it has greatly brought down Openness, transparency and an accessible and easy to the cost of pursuing corruption cases building an engaged community comprehend way. This popularity in the country through the nationwide were big reasons why was possible because Rosie wasn't traditional route of courts and the initiative was so successful. The all about computer programming attorney general's office. In the success of Rosie and Jarbas should and coding alone. A lot of traditional way, the pace of the be a case study in how artificial journalists, marketing people, proceedings is slow and the costs can intelligence and big data can be used designers and communicators were go as high up US $ 15,000. Taking to foster greater social also part of this initiative and helped the problem to Twitter in a accountability. in creating a lasting and meaningful transparent way - by using an open- Source: https://blogs.worldbank.org/ engagement with the general public source robot with neutral language governance/rosie-robot-social-accountability- one-tweet- of Brazil. and factual data - was a solution that time?cid=ECR_FB_worldbank_EN_EXT

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 29 CONCLUSION Accountability is in Everybody's Interest

A. Context provided by such organizations can education outcomes and the often be life-saving if it is delivered general quality of life in our Over the last decade, accountability on-time. Operating in such cities. AIDMI recognized this for non-governmental organizations challenging contexts can relegate threat and decided to partner operating in humanitarian action accountability on the back burner. with University of Birmingham has consistently increased. Second, there is also a view that the and Indian Institute of Humanitarian organizations and humanitarian actions of such Technology (IIT) Delhi to work NGOs have come under immense organizations should be beyond on system's approach to air pressure from donors and national accountability because they are pollution'. governments alike to open doing good for society at-large in themselves up for greater scrutiny. most complex context. Moreover, AIDMI's role in this project was While this type of top-down relief operations are generally ad- that of community-based accountability is on the rise, little hoc in nature which need to be organization that would capture progress has been made on executed in a short span of time. the true impact of air pollution accountability to the intended Given the limited time frame, all on the most exposed citizens of beneficiaries of these humanitarian organizational resources are directed cities like Delhi and programmes on whose behest such towards providing succor to the Ahmedabad. This experience organizations operate. Further, the needy and not on being accountable. taught a real lesson in notion of lateral accountability is accountability. It became almost completely lost in debates The above two attitudes to apparent that the most exposed where most discussions revolve accountability are quite common in persons (street vendors, slum around up-ward and down-ward the field of humanitarian actions, dwellers, urban poor) to air accountability. particularly in disaster risk pollution do not have recourse reduction, conflict situations and of making their voices heard to While financial and procedural climate change adaptation. the government on pollutions. accountability are extremely Therefore, there is little important, they need to be B. AIDMI Experience accountability in this area and complemented with accountabilities who is accountable to whom to citizens especially those affected The All India Disaster Mitigation across time and space or by humanitarian crises. While the Institute (AIDMI) has worked locations is a big challenge. global humanitarian system has extensively with crisis affected gradually opened itself to the idea populations as well as the • Accountability to Heat Wave of 'Accountability to Affected humanitarian organizations that Affected People Populations' (AAP) yet there is still work to provide relief to such a lot of ground to be covered for populations. Based on AIDMI work, The accountability index on heat real and meaningful accountability we have the following observations waves has improved a lot. The to take place. categorized according to specific National Disaster Management themes: Authority (NDMA) has The slow progress of bottom-up recognized that heat waves pose accountability for humanitarian • Accountability to Citizens a disproportionate risk to the organizations can be attributed to the Affected by Polluted Air poor and street dwelling people following reasons. Firstly, ensuring as compared to their rich accountability in times of India's ambient air pollution counterparts. Consequently, humanitarian crises can be and air quality has been the institutional measures such as challenging. The first priority of cause of a lot of alarm and hand- Heat Wave Action Plan have humanitarian organizations is to wringing. As India's cities choke been devised and implemented rescue and provide relief and with smog, there are long term by city governments to protect rehabilitation to a crisis affected ramifications that can affect their citizens. Extensive population. In short, the aid public health, investment, awareness building campaigns

30 southasiadisasters.net December 2019 and sensitization efforts have Studies, Sussex, to understand their families that accountability also borne fruit. Early warning different perspectives on this concerns were largely met by is issued and disseminated in uncertainty at different levels. In the humanitarian agency but media (local news, electrical terms of accountability, there there is scope for improvement hoardings and SMS) to reach out was little evidence to suggest as well. Children need to be masses. All this became that the voices of communities empowered in humanitarian possible only because the Plan at the bottom level were settings to express their needs holds specific authorities considered by policy makers at more freely to humanitarian and responsible to take certain the top level in formulating government entities. And actions in case of possible Heat policies and legislations. Taking children can only be empowered Wave. into account traditional when family and schools are knowledge and know-how, prepared to be accountable to • Accountability to Vulnerable including options to protect the children. Citizens Facing Climate livelihoods of citizens in Uncertainties shaping policies and plans is • Accountability to Disaster one way of being accountable Affected Population Climate uncertainties refer to to those who are directly the uncertainty about the extent affected by climate change. AIDMI was invited by a of climate change impact on an consortium of eminent area or population. Scientists, • Accountability to Children humanitarian agencies to carry policy makers and local out a study funded by the communities are all active AIDMI was recently involved START Network on stakeholders in any dialogue on with evaluating World Vision Accountability to Affected climate uncertainty. AIDMI India's work on Mental Health Populations in Odisha, Kerala pioneered three roundtable and Psycho Social Support and Assam. This study spread discussions on Climate (MHPSS) to children who were across 3 states and assessed the Uncertainty organized by the affected by the 2018 Kerala accountability mechanisms in Norwegian Council of Research Floods. In that assessment, it was place during the relief phase of and Institute of Development reported by the children and humanitarian operations Photo: AIDMI.

December 2019 southasiadisasters.net 31 undertaken by various NGOs in C. Bottom up Accountability capturing the voices of all responding to floods and stakeholders to design a fair cyclones. This study highlighted After elaborating on AIDMI's humanitarian system. Thus, how participation of affected experience of working on emerging capturing women's voices for communities especially women areas of accountability in accountability is critical. and poor citizens in designing humanitarian action, the following Without women's leadership, relief programmes is essential points about bottom-up accountability is only half for ensuring accountability. accountability must be made: achieved. • Day-to-day accountability is far • Accountability in the end must • Accountability to People more important than occasional remove poverty and not give us without Social Protection accountability to a big project accounts of poverty. If the or organisation. This means that system is accountable but brings AIDMI review for key donors accountability cannot be an ad- no change in the conditions of of social protection hoc exercise. It must be the poor that accountability is arrangements for disaster embedded in the humanitarian of limited use or value to the recovery in Asia Pacific shows system and accountability poor or us. that accountability can be outcomes should be tied to • Informality of and in limited and confined to a humanitarian outcomes. accountability is an unexplored specific target group. Delivery • Accountability must transform area leading to leaving out a of goods is one thing but how structures and not offer mere large number of poor affected goods are delivered and within accounts. Procedural, technical people. As over 89% of what period is also important. and financial accountability workforce in India is in the Producing excel sheets should never trump informal economy it is containing beneficiary details transformation of accountability important to see that informal and goods distributed is not of humanitarian structure. ways, tools, ideas, concepts, and enough. Accountability must • Women's leadership in holding pedagogy of accountability is enhance social protection to the power structures accountable is celebrated and not by-passed or poor. important. In its essence, over-looked. accountability is about – Mihir R. Bhatt

Editorial Advisors: Anoja Seneviratne Dr. Ian Davis Director (Mitigation Research & Visiting Professor, Kyoto University, Japan; Lund University, Development), Disaster Management Centre of Sweden and Oxford Brookes University, United Kingdom and Government of Sri Lanka Honorary Visiting Professor; Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT), Europe Denis Nkala Regional Coordinator, South-South Mihir R. Bhatt Cooperation and Country Support (Asia- All India Disaster Mitigation Institute, India Pacific), United Nations Development Dr. Prabodh Dhar Chakrabarti Programme, New York Lead Consultant of UNDP in India and Myanmar, and G. Padmanabhan Formerly Secretary NDMA and Executive Director NIDM Former Emergency Analyst, UNDP Dr. Satchit Balsari, MD, MPH Assistant Professor, Harvard FXB Center for Health and Human Rights, Boston, USA

AIDMI is delighted to receive generous support of Accountable Now towards this issue. This special edition was organized by Accountable Now, with Ms. Bethany Spendlove Keeley as editor of the submitted articles.

ALL INDIA DISASTER MITIGATION INSTITUTE 411 Sakar Five, Behind Old Natraj Cinema, Near Mithakhali Railway Crossing, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad–380 009 India. Tele/Fax: +91-79-2658 2962 32 E-mail: [email protected], Website:southasiadisasters.net http://www.aidmi.org, www.southasiadisasters.net December 2019