DOCSLIB.ORG

Global Humanitarian Funding in 2011: Totals Per Appealing Agency

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Global Humanitarian Funding in 2011: Totals Per Appealing Agency Global humanitarian funding in 2011: Totals per appealing agency Report as of 27-September-2021 http://fts.unocha.org (Table ref: R31) Compiled by OCHA on the basis of information provided by donors and recipient organizations. Implementing agency Funding % of Grand Outstanding USD Total pledges USD World Food Programme 3,568,310,928 26.4% 26,239,894 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees 1,514,529,297 11.2% 62,000,000 United Nations Children's Fund 972,357,832 7.2% 2,746,385 International Committee of the Red Cross 775,453,064 5.7% 0 Various Recipients (details not yet provided) 699,179,747 5.2% 993,422,027 Japanese Red Cross Society 525,941,774 3.9% 17,611,546 United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine 389,024,218 2.9% 0 Refugees in the Near East International Organization for Migration 324,707,664 2.4% 0 Food & Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 278,966,737 2.1% 2,728,512 Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs 241,777,519 1.8% 0 Bilateral (affected government) 206,707,567 1.5% 9,886,364 NGOs (details not yet provided) 196,904,555 1.5% 0 World Health Organization 187,303,108 1.4% 0 Save the Children 165,975,532 1.2% 8,675,000 Oxfam/Community Aid Abroad/Intermon/Novib 151,883,377 1.1% 0 Médecins sans Frontières 136,474,031 1.0% 0 Catholic Relief Services 125,556,094 0.9% 2,100,000 Norwegian Refugee Council 122,548,395 0.9% 0 Action Contre la Faim 120,256,713 0.9% 0 International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent 116,713,447 0.9% 682,128 Societies Disasters Emergency Committee (UK) 114,151,943 0.8% 0 ACT Alliance 94,726,854 0.7% 1,061,079 Swiss Development Cooperation/Swiss Humanitarian Aid 86,184,395 0.6% 0 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit 82,597,235 0.6% 0 CARE International 74,836,426 0.6% 500,000 International Rescue Committee 69,845,171 0.5% 1,900,000 Emergency Response Fund (OCHA) 68,528,785 0.5% 0 Turkish Red Crescent Society 61,445,077 0.5% 0 Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development 61,115,610 0.5% 0 Danish Refugee Council 55,943,379 0.4% 0 International Medical Corps 54,749,694 0.4% 2,300,000 Chemonics International Inc. 53,692,889 0.4% 0 Concern Worldwide 52,983,924 0.4% 0 UN Agencies, NGOs and/or Red Cross (details not yet 49,230,217 0.4% 4,000,000 provided) Solidarités International 43,325,904 0.3% 0 Deutsche Welthungerhilfe e.V. (German Agro Action) 41,601,300 0.3% 0 United Nations Mine Action Service 41,124,219 0.3% 0 Central Emergency Response Fund 39,064,913 0.3% 0 Caritas Germany (DCV) 38,136,458 0.3% 25,000 World Vision International 36,630,219 0.3% 0 United Nations Development Programme 36,470,757 0.3% 0 Red Crescent Society of the United Arab Emirates 35,617,661 0.3% 0 Norwegian People's Aid 35,216,343 0.3% 0 Medical Emergency Relief International 34,028,201 0.3% 0 Cooperazione Internazionale - COOPI 29,393,218 0.2% 0 Common Humanitarian Fund 29,351,623 0.2% 0 Samenwerkende Hulporganisaties 28,228,503 0.2% 0 Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) 27,635,475 0.2% 0 GOAL 26,082,196 0.2% 0 Norwegian Red Cross 25,796,287 0.2% 0 United Nations Population Fund 25,774,524 0.2% 0 United Nations Office for Project Services 25,717,021 0.2% 0 United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN- 25,589,322 0.2% 0 HABITAT) Cooperative Housing Foundation International 25,265,646 0.2% 0 Premiere Urgence 24,278,746 0.2% 0 Terre des Hommes International 23,224,007 0.2% 0 Mercy Corps 21,920,766 0.2% 2,500,000 French Red Cross 21,459,450 0.2% 0 Handicap International 20,813,805 0.2% 0 Médecins du Monde 20,683,808 0.2% 0 MEDAIR 20,089,911 0.1% 584,032 Help - Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe e.V. 19,869,973 0.1% 0 Adventist Development and Relief Agency 18,108,691 0.1% 304,587 Islamic Relief Worldwide 15,692,667 0.1% 175,000 TEARFUND 15,689,738 0.1% 0 Danish Red Cross 15,364,978 0.1% 0 German Red Cross 15,213,401 0.1% 0 Promoting Recovery in Zimbabwe 14,830,000 0.1% 0 DAC Aviation International 14,084,507 0.1% 0 American Red Cross 13,353,092 0.1% 108,146,908 Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights 13,200,738 0.1% 0 Relief International 12,433,263 0.1% 57,877 HALO Trust 12,315,858 0.1% 0 Malteser International 12,205,795 0.1% 0 Plan International 11,865,219 0.1% 0 Danish De-mining Group 11,256,953 0.1% 0 World Bank 10,817,397 0.1% 0 Counterpart International 10,544,300 0.1% 0 ZOA 10,438,151 0.1% 0 American Refugee Committee 10,350,453 0.1% 450,000 Horn Relief 10,017,486 0.1% 0 Kuwait Red Crescent Society 10,000,000 0.1% 0 Agricultural Cooperative Development International and 9,338,400 0.1% 0 Volunteers in Overseas Cooperative Assistance Africare 9,200,835 0.1% 0 International Relief and Development 8,995,937 0.1% 0 International Strategy for Disaster Reduction 8,610,067 0.1% 0 Innovasjon Norge 8,143,293 0.1% 0 Samaritan's Purse 7,634,419 0.1% 0 United Nations Department of Safety and Security 7,557,399 0.1% 0 Belgian Red Cross 7,374,296 0.1% 0 UN Agencies (details not yet provided) 7,320,142 0.1% 0 Oxfam Intermon 7,316,287 0.1% 0 ActionAid 6,752,285 0.0% 0 Johanniter Unfallhilfe e.V. 6,597,245 0.0% 0 New Zealand Red Cross 6,589,096 0.0% 0 Mines Advisory Group 6,538,884 0.0% 0 Oxfam Italia 6,489,988 0.0% 0 Health And Nutrition Development Society 6,250,000 0.0% 0 Global Facility for Disaster Risk Reduction 5,969,752 0.0% 0 Medico International 5,962,900 0.0% 0 INTERSOS Humanitarian Aid Organization 5,937,675 0.0% 0 International Resources Group 5,863,985 0.0% 0 Norsk senter for menneskerettigheter 5,755,110 0.0% 0 HelpAge International 5,351,244 0.0% 0 European Commission 5,343,253 0.0% 0 World Concern 5,330,460 0.0% 0 Muslim Aid 5,169,661 0.0% 0 Fondation Suisse pour le Déminage 5,059,593 0.0% 0 Mission Aviation Fellowship 5,057,054 0.0% 0 International Catholic Migration Commission 4,907,892 0.0% 0 Vétérinaire sans Frontieres 4,857,592 0.0% 0 World Relief 4,766,006 0.0% 0 WorldFish 4,737,825 0.0% 0 World Vision Sudan 4,654,320 0.0% 0 Norwegian Aid Committee 4,611,006 0.0% 0 NIRAS 4,606,207 0.0% 0 Reach out Foundation for Human Development 4,594,878 0.0% 0 Food for the Hungry 4,367,049 0.0% 0 Gruppo Volontariato Civile 4,336,944 0.0% 0 Triangle Génération Humanitaire 4,300,618 0.0% 0 Netherlands Red Cross 4,245,863 0.0% 0 Swedish Red Cross 4,146,341 0.0% 0 Comitato Internationale per lo Sviluppo dei Popoli 4,138,320 0.0% 0 Comitato di Coordinamento delle Organizzazione per il 4,123,928 0.0% 0 Servizio Volontario Médecins du Monde Belgium 4,000,947 0.0% 0 Pan American Development Foundation 4,000,000 0.0% 0 International Institute for Democracy and Electoral 3,997,838 0.0% 0 Assistance - International IDEA International Aid Services 3,858,339 0.0% 0 Air Serv International 3,850,000 0.0% 0 Aide Médicale Internationale 3,769,451 0.0% 0 Associazione Volontari per il Servizio Internazionale 3,673,827 0.0% 0 United Nations Humanitarian Response Depot 3,513,357 0.0% 0 Pact Inc. 3,500,000 0.0% 0 Helen Keller International 3,477,169 0.0% 0 Partners in Health 3,231,766 0.0% 0 Stichting Vluchteling 3,194,491 0.0% 0 YME Foundation 3,108,722 0.0% 0 Trocaire 3,090,875 0.0% 0 Aga Khan Foundation 2,911,095 0.0% 0 Catholic Organisation for Relief and Development Aid 2,884,202 0.0% 0 African Rescue Committee 2,815,803 0.0% 0 Solidar 2,762,109 0.0% 0 Technisches Hilfswerk (THW) 2,741,972 0.0% 0 Cooperazione E Sviluppo - CESVI 2,741,733 0.0% 0 International Emergency and Development Aid 2,699,268 0.0% 0 Plan Sweden 2,679,408 0.0% 0 ACT Alliance / Christian Aid 2,576,578 0.0% 0 Arbeiter-Samariter-Bund Deutschland e.V 2,567,852 0.0% 0 Practical Action (formerly Intermediate Technology 2,393,068 0.0% 0 Development Group) Mine Action Group 2,390,129 0.0% 0 Afghanaid 2,387,399 0.0% 0 Development Initiatives Access Link 2,374,353 0.0% 0 Hilfswerk Austria International 2,372,235 0.0% 0 Eid Charity 2,352,345 0.0% 0 UN Agencies and NGOs (details not yet provided) 2,341,309 0.0% 0 Praktisk Solidarites 2,297,232 0.0% 0 Temporary International Presence in Hebron 2,235,510 0.0% 0 Tromsø Mineskadesenter/Tromsoe Mine Victim 2,233,185 0.0% 0 Resource Center International Campaign to Ban Landmines 2,206,105 0.0% 0 Solidarites-France 2,167,116 0.0% 0 Japan Society 2,166,498 0.0% 0 Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining 2,155,068 0.0% 0 Information Management and Mine Action Programs 2,103,824 0.0% 0 Swiss Red Cross 2,103,538 0.0% 0 Fondation Hirondelle 2,056,307 0.0% 0 National Relief Committee 2,025,996 0.0% 0 International Civil Defense Organisation 2,000,000 0.0% 0 Center for Victims of Torture 1,999,253 0.0% 0 Humanitarian Accountability Partnership International 1,946,127 0.0% 0 National Society for Earthquake Technology 1,934,553 0.0% 0 Kindernothilfe e.V.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Report 2019
    ANNUAL REPORT 2019 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31 DECEMBER 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. ACRONYMS ........................................................................................................................................... 3 II. INSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT INFORMATION ............................................. 4 Organisational Structure ....................................................................................................................... 4 Rhodes University Governance & Management Organogram in 2019 ................................................ 4 1. ANNUAL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT OF THE APP ..................................................... 5 1.1 Background .................................................................................................................................. 5 2. REPORT BY THE CHAIRPERSON OF COUNCIL ................................................................................. 9 3. COUNCIL STATEMENT ON GOVERNANCE ...................................................................................... 10 3.1 Statutory Governance Information ............................................................................................. 10 3.2 Composition of Council .............................................................................................................. 11 3.3 Summary of Attendance at Meetings of Council and Committees of Council ............................ 11 3.4 Major Statements/decisions of council ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Institute for Water Research Director’S Report
    Institute for Water Research IWR ANNUAL REPORT 2019 Land & Water protection for using ecosystem services Sustainable Complex Social-Ecological Systems Social-Ecological Complex Sustainable System adaptive capacity Resource enable + Services High level SDG outcomes Relationships Activity / Sustainable Development & Activities Outcomes Goals (SDGs) The cover diagram puts SDG 6 at the centre of IWR water related domains. The biophysical world above supports water for society below. Linked to: SDG 15 Life on Land; SDG 13 Climate Action; SDG 16 Peace, Justice and strong institutions; SDG 3 Good health and wellbeing; SDG 11 sustainable cities and communities and SDG 12 Responsible consumption and production. The workshop will use an ARUA Water CoE SDG model where SDG 6 is the centre of transgressive action, and links it to other SDGs. This SDG6 (Water and sanitation)-centred model has been adopted by the ARUA Water Centre. The landscape water resources cycle involves three key SGDs: i) SDG 13 - Climate Action, ii) SDG 15 - Life on Land and iii) SDG 16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions. Strong ethical institutions are the basis of sound natural resource management that is responsive to climate change, and other global changes. That responsiveness depends on a capacity for ADAPTATION. So, Land (SDG 16) and Water (SDG 6) are linked to Climate Action (SDG 15) through Adaptation; and are supported by SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) through Policy and both formal & participatory Governance (Red broken-line Circle). Together, this suite of SDGS (6,3,15,16) provides a research & research capacity development focus on Land and Water (catchment) Protection for using Ecosystem Services, supported by Human/System Adaptive Capacity.
    [Show full text]
  • Engagement and Research in Response to COVID-19
    Engagement and Research in Response to COVID-19 Introduction: The information contained in this report was compiled from inputs received directly from public universities (on request of the USAf Office) from 31 March to 29 April. In addition to this report, USAf has produced Research and Emergency Teaching and Learning During the COVID-19 Era reports. The former chronicles universities’ extensive research contribution to the fight against COVID-19, while the latter is self- explanatory. Name of institution Engagement in support of Government Engagement Outcomes and other entities in their response to COVID-19 (realised or anticipated) Cape Peninsula University CPUT engaged various entities towards collaboration in the development and of Technology manufacturing of protective gear for use by frontline health personnel and the broader public. The engaged entities were: • The Department of Trade and Industry’s CTFL Masterplan and Industrial Face masks for public use; Face masks Policy Action Plan Team and the manufacturing industry, towards the and shields for medical personnel, and design of facial masks ventilators for use in public hospitals • The provincial government of the Western Cape; UWC’s Dental Department; WITS, UCT and Groote Schuur Hospital towards the development of N95 facial protective gear; ventilators and protocols for testing those ventilators. Central University of CUT’s Centre for Rapid Prototyping and Manufacturing (CRPM), the Product Non-invasive ventilators, oxygen Technology Development Technology Station (PDTS), the Centre on Quality of Health and connectors and splitters, mouth Living (CQHL), and CUT Innovation Services (CUTis) has been engaging the Free pieces/masks, ventilation helmets, 1 State provincial Departments of Health and Education, and the private sector shields as well as sanitisers in aid of towards the development of hospital equipment and protective gear for public use.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study of the Gift of the Givers
    A CASE STUDY OF THE GIFT OF THE GIVERS Responding to the May 2008 Xenophobic attacks: A CASE STUDY OF THE GIFT OF THE GIVERS by Ashwin Desai Ashwin Desai, University of Johannesburg, Centre for Sociological Research 1 Responding to the May 2008 Xenophobic attacks: A CASE STUDY OF THE GIFT OF THE GIVERS by Ashwin Desai Part I: Executive summary ............................................................... 1 Problems and recommendations ..................................................................................................... 2 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Part II: The beginnings .................................................................... 4 The Context ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Life in the Camps .................................................................................................................................... 8 Part III: Voices from the camps ......................................................11 Volunteers ...............................................................................................................................................14 Coalitions .................................................................................................................................................18 Part IV: Typologies of CSOs ..........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Marikana and the Subaltern the Politics of Specificity
    SPECIAL ARTICLE Marikana and the Subaltern The Politics of Specificity Camalita Naicker This article addresses recent debates around the strikes lmost three years have passed since the Marikana and the massacre of the mine workers at South Africa’s Massacre in South Africa. The strike wave along the “Platinum belt” is now the longest strike in South Lonmin Platinum Mine in Marikana from 2012 onwards. A Africa’s history. It argues that there is a failure to delve deeper into the The families of the men who lost their lives during the strike culture of people who come from Mpondoland in the as well as community members in the Nkaneng shack settle- Eastern Cape of South Africa and to link culture to the ment in Marikana want government and London Mining (Lon- min) to construct a memorial site at the koppie, the place of political in the way workers’ actions have been reported the massacre. It is not unusual for people to honour their dead and understood. Culture has been used as a way to and to acknowledge the place at which they died, especially in explain away an aberration rather than exploring the use such extreme circumstances. of cultural political tools within the strike. The article However, this process is complicated for the people at Mari- kana who are frequently told by their local government offi - offers an analysis which takes seriously the political cials, and traditional leaders, that they must erect memorials implications of culture. in the Eastern Cape Province from where they come. They tell them that this land is for the Tswana people, and not for the amaXhosa.
    [Show full text]
  • 500 Most Influential Muslims of 2009
    THE 500 MOST INFLUENTIAL MUSLIMS = 2009 first edition - 2009 THE 500 MOST INFLUENTIAL MUSLIMS IN THE WORLD = 2009 first edition (1M) - 2009 Chief Editors Prof John Esposito and Prof Ibrahim Kalin Edited and Prepared by Ed Marques, Usra Ghazi Designed by Salam Almoghraby Consultants Dr Hamza Abed al Karim Hammad, Siti Sarah Muwahidah With thanks to Omar Edaibat, Usma Farman, Dalal Hisham Jebril, Hamza Jilani, Szonja Ludvig, Adel Rayan, Mohammad Husni Naghawi and Mosaic Network, UK. all photos copyright of reuters except where stated All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner without the prior consent of the publisher. © the royal islamic strategic studies centre, 2009 أ �� ة � � ن ة � �ش� ة الم�م��لك�� ا �ل� ر د ��ة�� ا ل�ها �مة�� ة � � � أ ة � ة ة � � ن ة �� ا �ل� ���د ا �ل�د �ى د ا � � ال�مك� �� ا �ل� ل�ط� �� ر م أ ة ع ر ن و ة (2009/9/4068) ة � � ن � � � ة �ة ن ن ة � ن ن � � ّ ن � ن ن ة�����ح�م� ال�م�أ ��ل� كل� �م� ال�م��س�أ � ���� ا ��لها �ل� ���� �ع ن م�حة� � �م�ط��ه�� � �ل� ���ه�� �ه�� ا ال�م�ط��� �ل و أ �ل و وة وة � أ أوى و ة نأر ن � أ ة ���ة ة � � ن ة � ة � ة ن � . �ع� ر ا �ةى د ا �ر � الم ك��ن �� ا �ل�و ل�ط�ة�� ا �و ا �ةى ن��ه�� �ح �ل�و�مة�� ا �ر�ى ISBN 978-9957-428-37-2 املركز امللكي للبحوث والدراسات اﻹسﻻمية )مبدأ( the royal islamic strategic studies centre The Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding Edmund A.
    [Show full text]
  • Sizing the Field
    Introduction / Pg 3 Introducing a New Frame for Trends in African Philanthropy Areas of Focus for Future African Philanthropy / Pg 7 / Pg 24 Research / Pg 32 THE FIELD SIZING SIZING THE FIELD FRAMEWORKS FOR A NEW NARRAtiVE OF AfRICAN PhilAnthROPY April 2013 This report was produced for the African Grantmakers Network (AGN) by Dalberg Research and Dalberg Global Development Advisors. The AGN committee that guided the production of the report included Halima Mahomed and Bhekinkosi Moyo from TrustAfrica. The production of the report was managed by the Southern Africa Trust. © 2013 African Grantmakers Network PRefACE Africa’s people share deep-rooted values of social solidarity, human dignity, and inter-personal connectedness. This corresponds to the Western notion of philanthropy – the desire to promote the wellbeing of others or, put simply, ‘to love people’. But in the past, we have had philanthropy done to us as Africans with little recognition that there is a vast field of philanthropic practice alive and active in Africa. The field is growing. And it is changing, with the rapid emergence of structured forms of strategic philanthropy by wealthy Africans, the success of channels for collective giving to social causes amongst increasingly urbanized communities with reduced connections to rural roots, a growing recognition of community- based practices of social solidarity, and the emergence of African associations of philanthropists, grantmakers, and other social investors. The recent economic downturn in the parts of the world that were traditionally seen as the sources of philanthropic giving coincides with good levels of sustained economic growth in Africa. Along with the extreme inequalities that this has generated, it has also propelled the emergence of the African middle class and a growing pool of super-rich African men and women – many of whom are attentive to their social responsibilities and want to somehow ‘give back’ to the communities from which they emerged.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study of Gift of the Givers Foundation in South Africa
    ISLAMIC INSTITUTION OF CHARITY AND INTERNATIONAL DISASTER RELIEF: A CASE STUDY OF GIFT OF THE GIVERS FOUNDATION IN SOUTH AFRICA Submitted by Abdalla Khair Gabralla In fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Arts in Religion and Social Transformation in the School of Religion and Theology, Faculty of Humanities, Development, and Social Sciences at the University of KwaZulu-Natal Supervisor: Professor Abul Fadl Mohsin Ebrahim Co-Supervisor: Professor Sultan Khan NOVEMBER 2009 DECLARATION Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master Arts, in the Graduate Programme in the School of Religion and Theology, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa I declare that this dissertation is my own unaided work. All citations, References and borrowed texts have been duly acknowledged. I confirm that an external editor was used and that my Supervisor was informed of the identity and details of my editor. It is being submitted for the degree of Master of Arts in the Faculty of Humanities, Development and Social Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. None of the present work has been submitted previously for any degree or examination in any other University. Abdalla Khair Gabralla Student name Geoff Walters Editor 12 March 2010 Date ii ABSTRACT The study of faith-based giving, development and engagement with human catastrophe is only beginning to be identified and researched by social scientists and other disciplines. Almost all faiths in the world impress upon their adherents to serve and engage in humanitarian aid causes. Some faiths prescribe and proscribe through divine teachings on how adherents should go about participating in humanitarian aid causes and set certain constraints and parameters for its fulfilment as a religious act and duty.
    [Show full text]
  • Giving & Solidarity
    giving & solidarity title.pdf 2007/10/03 11:08:08 AM giving & solidarity C M Y CM MY CY CMY K Free download from www.hsrcpress.ac.za resource flows for poverty alleviation and development in South Africa edited by Adam Habib & Brij Maharaj Published by HSRC Press Private Bag X9182, Cape Town, 8000, South Africa www.hsrcpress.ac.za First published 2008 ISBN 978-0-7969-2201-4 © 2008 Human Sciences Research Council The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Human Sciences Research Council (‘the Council’) or indicate that the Council endorses the views of the authors. In quoting from this publication, readers are advised to attribute the source of the information to the individual author concerned and not to the Council. CopyedIting: Vaun Cornell typeSetting: Nimblemouse CoveR desigN: Farm Design Print maNagemeNt: comPress Distributed in Africa by Blue Weaver tel: +27 (0) 21 701 4477 Fax: +27 (0) 21 701 7302 Free download from www.hsrcpress.ac.za www.oneworldbooks.com Distributed in Europe and the United Kingdom by Eurospan Distribution Services (EDS) tel: +44 (0) 20 7240 0856 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7379 0609 www.eurospanbookstore.com Distributed in North America by Independent Publishers Group (IPG) Call toll-free: (800) 888 4741 Fax: +1 (312) 337 5985 www.ipgbook.com Contents Tables 5 Figures 7 Preface 9 Acronyms and abbreviations 15 1 Giving, development and poverty alleviation 17 Adam Habib, Brij Maharaj and Annsilla Nyar 2 A nation of givers? Results from a national
    [Show full text]
  • Ubuntu474-06-05-2021
    Issue 474 | 6 May 2021 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙ PRESIDENT RAMAPHOSA PARTICIPATES IN ROUNDTABLE ON PANDEMIC PREPAREDNESS On Tuesday, 4 May 2021, President Cyril Ramaphosa participated in the Friends of Multilateralism’s roundtable on the work of the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response. This virtual gathering of heads of state was co-chaired by the Helen Clark and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. The panel was established in July 2020 by the World Health Organisation’s Director-General. It is charged with understanding the chronology of the pandemic, national and international actions and responses to alerts and transmission warnings, distilling lessons and making evidence-based recommendations. The panel has since its first meeting in September 2020 been collecting and analysing evidence to build upon the lessons from previous epidemics and pandemics; establishing an authoritative chronology of how COVID-19 became a global pandemic; understanding the wider health and socio- economic impacts of the pandemic and identifying gaps in the international system that need to be filled to strengthen pandemic preparedness and response. The panel has largely concluded the analysis phase, and is currently in the stage of developing and refining recommendations. These recommendations aim to stop outbreaks before they become pandemics; and should that not be possible, ensure a pandemic does not cause a global socio-economic crisis. Addressing the panel, President Ramaphosa said: “While the pandemic has highlighted the value of partnership, it has also demonstrated the damaging effects of unilateral action and unequal access to resources. We cannot hope to overcome this pandemic for as long as richer countries have most of the world’s supply of vaccines to the exclusion and the detriment of poorer countries.
    [Show full text]