Mitchell, D F 2017 NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, stability 2000–2014: A Provincial-Level Dataset. Stability: International Journal of Security & Development, 6(1): 5, pp. 1–18, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/sta.497

RESEARCH ARTICLE NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014: A Provincial-Level Dataset David F. Mitchell

This article introduces a new provincial-level dataset on non-governmental ­organizations (NGOs) in Afghanistan. The data—which are freely available for download—provide information on the locations and sectors of activity of 891 international and local (Afghan) NGOs that operated in the country between 2000 and 2014. A summary and visualization of the data is presented in the article ­following a brief historical overview of NGOs in Afghanistan. Links to download the full dataset are provided in the conclusion.

The importance of non-governmental NGOs are defined here as ­independent, ­organizations (NGOs) operating in conflict nonprofit organizations engaged in zones has expanded significantly in recent ­humanitarian, development, human rights, decades. However, information on the distri- or advocacy work. These organizations are bution of NGO activity in these regions has a subset of the broader nonprofit sector been scarce—an issue that both scholars and that engages specifically in international practitioners have highlighted in recent years development. This definition of NGOs (Galway, Corbett & Zeng 2012; Hammond excludes professional­ associations, com- 2008; Schreter & Harmer 2013; Sheik et al. mercial entities, for-profit development 2000). The dataset introduced in this ­article companies, nonprofit research institu- helps resolve this issue in the context of tions (e.g. ­universities and think tanks), all Afghanistan by providing information on the United Nations personnel, governmental­ sectors of activity and provinces of operation aid organizations (e.g. United States of 891 international and local (Afghan) NGOs Agency for International Development and between 2000 and 2014. German Technical Cooperation Agency), It is important to acknowledge that there inter-­governmental aid organizations (e.g. is no agreed upon definition of an NGO. International Organization for Migration), Taken literally, an NGO ‘could describe and hybrid organizations (e.g. the just about anything from social groups International Committee of the Red Cross). like Mensa to educational institutions like This article is divided into two sections. Harvard University to for-profit firms like The first is a brief historical overview of Wal-Mart’ (Werker & Ahmed 2008: 74). NGOs in Afghanistan and the second pro- vides a summary and visualization of the data being introduced. Links to ­download Kansas State University, US the full dataset are provided in the [email protected] conclusion. Art. 5, page 2 of 18 Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014

A Brief History of NGOs in substantial funding from international organ- Afghanistan izations and governments such as the United NGOs have played an important role in States Agency for International Development Afghan society since the Soviet invasion in (USAID), UN High Commissioner for Refugees December 1979 (ACBAR 2014: 31). During (UNHCR), and World Food Program (WFP) the initial stages of the Soviet-Afghan War, (Oliker et al. 2004: 34). The ­growing num- humanitarian workers provided food, medi- ber of organizations and activities resulted cal care, and shelter to Afghan refugees in the formation of multiple NGO coordi- who had fled to Pakistan. However, NGOs nation bodies to increase professionalism were required to register and coordinate and accountability within the ­community their activities with the mujahedeen’s seven (ACBAR 2014: 31; Atmar & Goodhand 2002: party alliance based in Peshawar (Atmar & 24). The most noteworthy of these is the Goodhand 2002: 19). The refugee camps Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan Relief became a rear base for the Mujahedeen, and Development (ACBAR), founded in 1988 and were viewed by many as the non-lethal and still active today. component of aid to the Afghan resistance Although NGOs enjoyed relative ­freedom of (Goodhand 2002: 842). Pakistan was home action between 1990 and 1995, this changed to 80,000 Afghan refugees in 1979—a figure after the Taliban solidified control of the that drastically increased to 750,000 the fol- country. Several organizations were forced to lowing year and to nearly 4 million by 1984 retreat to Pakistan during the Taliban period (Runion 2007: 111). (1996–2001), while those that remained had By the early 1980s, organizations had significant restrictions placed on their activi- started to implement cross-border programs ties. Consistent with their broader constraints in Afghanistan to address the basic needs of on women’s rights, the Taliban ­government the population, but these were limited to issued an edict banning all females from areas which were not under Soviet control working for NGOs (McDonald 2000), a move (ACBAR 2014: 31). Although the ­government that severely ­limited Afghan women’s access allowed a small number of local NGOs to to humanitarian relief. Organizations were operate in Kabul on a restricted basis, inter- also restricted from providing assistance to national NGOs were banned from the coun- females, including a total ban on education try (West 2001: 62). During the war, NGOs for girls. strictly focused on providing ­emergency The Taliban further prohibited NGOs from assistance including food distribution, engaging in “political” activity, which they medical care, and shelter (ACBAR 2014: 31). believed posed a threat to their strict Islamic However, many organizations expanded vision of society. Although a few advocacy their activities after Soviet withdrawal in organizations attempted to work in the 1988 to include the sectors of education, ­sectors of human rights and ­peacebuilding infrastructure, vocational training, and mine during this period, the vast majority of clearance. NGOs also began working in NGOs focused their efforts on relief pro- regions of Afghanistan previously off-limits grams. A report by the Organization for due to Soviet control. Eastern Afghanistan Economic Co-Operation and Development was the primary recipient of assistance at (OECD 2002: 5) noted that the aid commu- this time because of security concerns and nity during the Taliban period was ‘stuck in the close proximity to Peshawar (Goodhand the dilemma of a development crisis and a 2002: 842). human rights crisis’. The Afghan government ratified a law in Although several NGOs claimed to be January 1990 that formally allowed NGOs ­committed to the promotion of human rights, to operate within the country (Rubin 1995: conflict resolution, and peacebuilding,­ this 167–168; West 2001: 62). NGOs soon received was rarely put into action under Taliban rule. Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014 Art. 5, page 3 of 18

Rieff (2002: 249–250) believes these claims (IAM) and Serve International—and arrested were ‘pure rhetoric, designed, it seemed, to several of their employees. These NGOs were make aid workers, their donors, and the gen- then ordered to close their offices and leave eral public feel better’. Writing shortly before the country (Salahuddin 2001). the fall of the Taliban in 2001, Atmar and Although a limited number of international Goodhand (2002: 62–63) observed that the workers continued to operate in Afghanistan perception that aid had shifted toward greater in 2001, virtually all relocated to Pakistan political action was false. Rather, the vast following the 11 September 2001 attacks majority of funding provided to Afghanistan in anticipation of retaliatory military action went to life saving, relief programs. (Oliker et al. 2004: 37). Most international The Taliban government was wary of organizations transferred their projects to advocacy NGOs engaged in political activ- local Afghan employees at this time. The ity, but they were especially suspicious of flight of these organizations in September international organizations because of their 2001, coupled with the mass exodus of NGOs predominantly Western origin. In 1998, from Afghanistan over the previous six years, 38 international NGOs were expelled from meant that the primary distribution network the country, while many others withdrew for humanitarian assistance was essentially because of the harsh restrictions imposed nonfunctional once Operation Enduring on their activities (Josselin & Wallace 2001: Freedom (OEF) commenced on 7 October 10; Monshipouri 2003: 140; West 2001: (Oliker et al. 2004: 26). In response to the 131). In 1997 Oxfam suspended a water- need for assistance, the US military began supply project in Logar Province to protest to build its own systems for aid delivery. the Taliban’s policies toward women (Oxfam Simultaneously engaging in relief and devel- 1997). In addition to Taliban expulsions and opment operations during major combat voluntary ­withdrawals from the country, operations was a unique endeavor for military NGO ­financers also called for disengagement­ forces, as civil affairs units typically did not during this period. Following US air- enter the theater until the post-conflict phase strikes in 1998 in retaliation­ for the East (Oliker et al. 2004: 48). However, a shortage African embassy bombings, the European of NGOs in Afghanistan in late 2001 meant Commission’s Humanitarian Aid and Civil that the US military was one of the few enti- Protection Department (ECHO) ceased assis- ties capable of providing humanitarian relief tance to NGOs in Afghanistan while the to conflict-ridden areas of the country. United Kingdom ruled that any international­ The US civil affairs mission began in NGO sending expatriate staff to the country­ December 2001 with the creation of the would automatically be ­disqualified from Combined Joint Civil-Military Operations ­government funding (Atmar 2001: 2; Task Force (CJCMOTF) in Kabul (Neumann, Marsden 2009: 93). Mundey & Mikolashek 2005: 32). Coalition The Taliban was particularly restrictive on Humanitarian Liaison Cells (CHLCs) and international organizations adhering to the Joint Regional Teams (JRTs) were formed Christian faith. However, crackdowns did to provide relief to Afghan communities not become commonplace until 2001 (prior in need (Neumann, Mundey & Mikolashek to the US-led invasion). For example, in 2005; Stewart 2004; Wright et al. 2010). August 2001, 16 national and 8 international These were the precursors to the Provincial employees of Shelter Now International Reconstruction Team (PRT) initiative, which were arrested by the Taliban for distributing took the lead in military development opera- ‘Christian propaganda’ (Guardian 2001). In a tions in 2003.1 NGOs began a piecemeal separate instance a month later, the Taliban return to Afghanistan in late 2001 and raided the offices of two Christian organi- early 2002 as the security situation allowed zations—International Assistance Mission (Wright et al. 2010: 194). Art. 5, page 4 of 18 Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014

However, many NGO activities during 2005: 10). Afghan President Hamid Karzai this period were constrained by the UN. supported these initiatives, claiming in a UN-funded NGOs are often required to take January 2003 interview that he would ‘like to guidance on security and movements from concentrate more on removing the causes of the Office of the UN Security Coordinator humanitarian difficulties rather than treating (UNSECOORD) as a condition for acquir- the symptoms’ (IRIN 2003). ing insurance for their organizations, and Although the size and scope of NGO activ- several international NGOs that reentered ity expanded during the years following the Afghanistan were initially restricted by the US-led invasion, Afghanistan soon became the UN to operating in less hostile regions of the most volatile country in the world for humani- country (Oliker et al. 2004: 54–55). Although tarians to operate in following the resurgence their physical presence was largely restricted of the Taliban (see Humanitarian Outcomes in 2001 and early 2002, several NGOs 2017). Nonetheless, as is detailed in the follow- expanded the scope of their projects at this ing section, the total number of NGOs active in time. Multiple organizations began to couple Afghanistan continued to increase year-to-year their traditional relief activities with broader in spite of the deteriorating security situation. development initiatives and advocacy work (ACBAR 2014: 32). These included govern- Description and Summary of Data ance, conflict resolution, human rights, and The following section provides a visual peacebuilding—actions that many NGOs ­overview and summary of the dataset. In an were restricted from engaging in during the effort to enhance existing information on Taliban era. As some have noted (Rieff 2002: NGOs in Afghanistan, data on NGO activi- 250–251), the NGO community would not ties and locations were collected and coded have expanded into these sectors of activity through research and correspondence if not for the US-led invasion of Afghanistan with organizations operating in the field. and toppling of the Taliban regime. Although the Afghan government ­publishes The shift to greater political action and a registration list of organizations, the list advocacy work by NGOs in Afghanistan was includes only limited information. For exam- also donor-driven. In an effort to help rebuild ple, only 315 organizations are listed in the the country, governments and international most recent publicly-available registration organizations increased funds for projects list (Afghanistan Ministry of Economy 2015). related to nation-building. In the early stages Research also revealed that many of these of the conflict, the Asian Development Bank organizations were local contractors or ‘for- (ADB), United Nations Development Program profit’ firms that did not fit the definition pre- (UNDP), and World Bank conducted a joint sented in the introduction. Moreover, simply needs assessment in Afghanistan. In part, this because an organization is registered with the report called for a ‘moderate scaling up of NGO government does not necessarily mean they programs, while achieving a phased change are active in the field. Furthermore, directo- in the role of NGOs from implementing agen- ries such as ACBAR’s NGO Profiles and the cies to facilitators of participatory community Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit’s development, clearly accountable to govern- (AREU) A to Z Guide to Afghanistan Assistance, ment and/or communities’ (ADB, UNDP while useful, also provide information for & World Bank 2002: 19). Similarly, USAID only a portion of NGOs in the country. claimed that it would ‘work with Afghan Using these publications as a starting­ point, NGOs to help build a dynamic Afghan civil an online search using Google, Facebook, society that can hold policy makers account- LinkedIn, Twitter, and LexisNexis was then con- able, promote democratic principles, and ducted to identify additional organizations. engage as full partners with the government­ Information was collected on approximately and the private sector in the economic and 1,200 NGOs that operated in Afghanistan political development of Afghanistan’ (USAID between 2000 and 2014, followed by a review Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014 Art. 5, page 5 of 18 of each organization’s website and social Table 1 provides the number of NGOs media pages to determine the years and prov- operative in Afghanistan by year and nation- inces in which they worked, along with their ality between 2000 and 2014. The lowest sectors of activity. To enhance the reliability number of organizations active in a given year and validity of the data, e-mails were sent and was 158 in 2000 and the highest was 701 in phone calls were made to each organization 2012. The nationality of 828 of the 891 NGOs for confirmation.2 Data collection began in in the dataset were identified. As Figure 1 mid-2015 and took approximately six months highlights, 478 of those 828 ­organizations to complete. A total of 891 international and were local (58 percent) and 350 were local NGOs made the final list. ­international (42 percent). Figure 2 reveals

Table 1: NGOs Active by Year, 2000–2014.

Total NGOs International NGOs Local NGOs N/A 2000 158 53 103 2 2001 210 90 116 4 2002 359 188 164 7 2003 397 215 176 6 2004 432 229 197 6 2005 451 234 212 5 2006 480 241 233 6 2007 528 252 268 8 2008 544 255 279 10 2009 583 263 305 15 2010 640 272 341 27 2011 686 269 372 45 2012 701 268 388 45 2013 606 262 337 7 2014 617 263 347 7

Figure 1: NGOs by Nationality, 2000–2014*. Art. 5, page 6 of 18 Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014

Figure 2: NGOs Active by Year, 2000–2014. that international NGOs were the majority million people), Nangarhar (1.5 million during the first five years after the invasion, ­people), and Balkh (1.3 million people) are but local NGOs made up the bulk of organi- three of the four most populated provinces zations in the pre-invasion period and after in the country, while relatively few people 2006. There was a consistent annual increase live in Nuristan (146,000 people), Paktika in NGOs until 2011–2012, after which the (428,000 people), and Zabul (299,000 number slightly dropped. This coincides ­people) (ACSO 2015). with the withdrawal of US troops from the Figure 4 and Figure 5 map the local and ­country beginning in June 2011. international NGO presence respectively. The Figure 3 maps the NGO presence total number of local NGOs operative in each ­throughout Afghanistan during the 2000 to province per year is detailed in Table 3 and 2014 period. The total number of NGOs oper- the total number of international NGOs is ative in each province per year is detailed in detailed in Table 4. Table 2.3 On average, each individual NGO A review of projects carried out by NGOs was active in five different provinces. The revealed 24 frequent sectors of activity. province of Kabul had the most ­organizations Figure 6 provides the number of organi- active within its borders during the period zations active in each of these sectors. with a high of 492 in a given year, followed Education (primary and secondary) was by Nangarhar with a high of 194 and Balkh the most popular with 424 NGOs active with a high of 182. The provinces with the in the sector, followed by health and voca- fewest NGOs were Nuristan with a high of tional training with 376 NGOs and 276 33 in a given year and Paktika and Zabul, NGOs respectively. The sectors with the both with highs of 37, and as expected, least engagement were energy with 9 NGOs NGO presence­ was found to be significantly­ active in the sector and animal health with related to provincial population. Kabul (4.2 12 NGOs. Of the 891 NGOs identified in Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014 Art. 5, page 7 of 18

Figure 3: Map of Total NGO Presence, 2000–2014. the dataset, only 191 were single-mandate or peacebuilding agenda. Others have cat- while 700 engaged in ­multi-sectoral activity. egorized organizations as minimalists—those On average, an ­individual NGO operative in seeking to alleviate suffering—and consequen- Afghanistan was found to be simultaneously tialists—those wanting to improve the human active in three different sectors. NGO-specific condition through social transformation information is available in the dataset. (Calhoun 2008: 73–74). Barnett and Snyder As noted in the previous section, a shift (2008: 145–146) differentiate humanitarian toward more politically-oriented advocacy action into apolitical and political categories. work by NGOs was observed following the They define apolitical humanitarian activities US-led invasion. However, although several as those not intended to alter governance scholars and practitioners have attempted arrangements that are assumed to be the to categorize aid activity in recent years cause of suffering, and political activities as (Atmar & Goodhand 2002; Barnett 2011; those that are intended to do so. Barnett & Snyder 2008; Calhoun 2008; Fast This article has divided the sectors of NGO 2014; Goodhand 2006; Leader 2000; Weiss activity presented in Figure 6 into separate­ 1999) there is no agreed upon definition of “apolitical” and “political” categories to what constitutes an “advocacy” or “political” further assess NGO action in Afghanistan. NGO. For example, Atmar and Goodhand Guided by the aforementioned conceptual- (2002: 11) distinguish between organizations izations, political NGOs are operationalized working in conflict and working on conflict. here as those working in the sectors of con- While the former refers to NGOs engaged flict resolution, governance, human rights, in a principled (independent, impartial, and peacebuilding, and women’s rights, while neutral) approach to delivering aid, the lat- apolitical NGOs are operationalized as those ter refers to those with a conflict reduction not working in these sectors of activity.4 Art. 5, page 8 of 18 Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014 (Contd.) 71 46 70 96 47 48 73 69 58 58 75 64 56 94 86 100 154 156 103 455 51 71 71 95 67 96 44 46 59 59 70 96 66 49 62 98 77 148 152 444 81 52 80 46 47 88 60 62 70 73 54 73 99 77 101 106 182 105 166 488 74 91 51 49 78 40 49 89 67 60 67 72 70 94 70 151 173 102 100 492 81 41 61 61 67 85 35 43 80 54 50 58 94 67 46 52 84 151 130 472 74 74 61 51 81 33 32 40 66 46 40 52 54 44 47 73 57 114 133 445 62 30 50 68 25 34 44 63 39 34 44 85 49 40 43 57 50 117 106 422 61 41 71 30 48 66 27 34 30 29 42 83 47 45 48 59 57 118 106 420 51 17 31 41 76 27 43 95 54 30 37 54 33 26 92 32 36 47 43 376 74 15 81 42 24 38 45 27 30 52 30 25 30 68 33 28 36 40 39 357 10 31 31 43 25 32 86 43 28 28 48 28 24 79 27 65 25 36 35 331 – 74 19 19 32 26 33 24 22 44 25 20 69 23 60 20 23 32 29 300 – 27 25 27 69 40 27 23 45 27 23 70 26 57 27 23 23 29 35 263 – 15 12 13 18 12 13 17 13 13 12 16 15 17 21 36 30 37 35 141 8 8 9 – 12 13 13 11 12 12 12 13 15 10 19 25 27 29 30 106 Total NGOs by Province per Year, 2000–2014. NGOs by Province per Year, Total Badakhshan Badghis Baghlan Balkh Bamyan Daykundi Farah Faryab Ghazni Ghor Helmand Herat Jowzjan Kabul Kandahar Kapisa Khost Kunar Kunduz Laghman Table 2: Table Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014 Art. 5, page 9 of 18 51 63 40 32 37 66 49 93 70 70 47 68 37 172 2014 91 57 42 27 33 57 44 68 54 72 46 69 34 168 2013 81 73 42 33 37 54 50 72 55 82 49 36 194 102 2012 76 72 42 32 37 53 48 70 49 52 77 35 101 187 2011 41 31 62 36 26 33 49 82 60 38 69 42 68 162 2010 51 31 31 71 31 25 43 38 50 60 35 56 26 151 2009 51 21 25 25 39 32 62 40 26 50 24 55 24 147 2008 51 51 23 22 32 47 25 65 38 25 20 58 20 150 2007 41 19 21 17 51 17 20 23 29 22 53 34 45 120 2006 18 19 41 17 18 36 20 23 30 20 50 29 46 114 2005 18 16 16 17 17 13 15 34 26 46 22 37 44 115 2004 9 – 15 12 13 11 13 27 97 26 38 20 32 36 2003 – 16 13 19 14 14 17 39 29 47 26 29 42 102 2002 9 8 9 9 – 21 15 11 12 15 10 57 26 30 2001 7 8 7 9 8 8 7 9 – 17 14 19 47 25 2000 Logar Nangarhar Nimroz Nuristan Paktika Paktya Panjshir Parwan Samangan Sar-e Pul Takhar Uruzgan Wardak Zabul Art. 5, page 10 of 18 Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014

Figure 4: Map of Local NGO Presence, 2000–2014.

Figure 5: Map of International NGO Presence, 2000–2014. Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014 Art. 5, page 11 of 18 31 41 41 63 33 45 94 60 35 47 53 99 53 72 38 36 50 60 66 250 (Contd.) 41 31 60 33 46 95 60 26 35 49 56 44 95 50 65 39 43 63 57 242 51 62 38 55 65 32 35 55 69 47 45 49 67 47 36 63 55 107 102 266 51 56 36 55 60 30 37 68 44 44 94 48 65 47 35 50 60 53 101 264 51 31 47 29 42 83 27 34 42 60 36 35 77 38 58 43 37 53 45 249 21 31 31 39 39 72 43 24 29 34 47 29 29 66 48 33 28 45 39 231 19 19 31 33 30 64 38 25 28 44 24 24 59 27 46 30 27 27 33 212 31 21 31 34 20 70 38 20 25 27 54 23 63 26 46 30 33 36 39 213 15 12 19 17 16 24 26 50 27 20 23 42 49 39 20 20 27 25 28 180 IS 19 14 10 18 17 16 14 16 16 21 23 46 24 37 44 32 22 26 167 8 16 13 19 15 17 16 11 15 14 18 17 40 24 20 32 40 32 24 150 9 9 – 10 11 31 15 16 12 14 13 12 10 13 11 19 27 34 29 130 – 11 12 13 19 18 13 14 15 12 17 14 11 11 35 29 35 29 22 116 5 5 8 8 8 9 8 7 8 7 8 – 13 21 12 14 22 23 79 22 4 5 6 8 7 6 8 6 8 9 8 7 – IS 10 21 19 21 13 73 Local NGOs by Province per Year, 2000–2014. Local NGOs by Province per Year, Badakhshan Badghis Baghlan Balkh Bamyan Daykundi Farah Faryab Ghazni Ghor Helmand Herat Jowzjan Kabul Kandahar Kapisa Khost Kunar Kunduz Laghman Table 3: Table Art. 5, page 12 of 18 Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014 31 43 24 26 47 32 64 47 35 43 33 45 29 116 2014 31 21 40 23 40 28 62 47 36 43 32 45 27 109 2013 53 33 24 27 37 35 69 50 35 49 36 53 30 123 2012 50 33 24 26 37 35 68 52 34 47 39 49 30 119 2011 17 41 41 31 45 27 23 36 29 52 26 43 25 102 2010 16 21 31 39 97 23 28 26 43 32 20 27 36 20 2009 18 13 18 21 17 18 37 92 24 39 25 26 20 34 2008 16 15 31 17 17 16 16 35 98 22 40 25 26 38 2007 13 13 15 19 15 21 14 19 13 31 14 76 26 27 2006 13 12 15 13 17 12 16 14 15 23 70 20 24 28 2005 12 11 10 18 11 21 13 11 14 11 13 23 70 27 2004 9 4 8 6 9 9 – 16 15 15 11 21 11 56 2003 9 6 7 9 – 14 15 15 10 13 26 60 27 25 2002 5 2 7 7 6 6 6 8 – 17 12 14 18 39 2001 5 2 5 6 6 4 5 7 – 13 11 13 16 36 2000 Logar Nangarhar Nimroz Nuristan Paktika Paktya Panjshir Parwan Samangan Sar-e Pul Takhar Uruzgan Wardak Zabul Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014 Art. 5, page 13 of 18 13 16 12 17 17 17 21 37 25 60 36 26 56 22 32 26 20 34 20 200 (Contd.) 13 21 11 11 15 17 15 18 19 35 62 37 22 56 20 32 27 35 20 198 13 10 16 21 13 21 18 18 14 39 22 69 38 23 60 32 26 35 20 198 12 41 10 10 21 18 12 19 16 16 15 38 20 68 22 52 32 25 33 207 8 8 11 18 18 17 13 15 15 31 16 32 23 65 34 50 20 35 24 210 8 9 11 21 61 17 18 16 10 21 21 16 16 18 34 32 45 33 28 207 6 9 9 11 16 19 15 17 19 13 16 19 20 30 24 29 52 45 39 203 9 7 7 10 17 14 17 16 16 16 14 14 18 27 46 28 42 37 23 201 6 8 12 17 10 14 12 14 16 16 11 14 15 27 22 27 45 42 37 192 9 8 5 10 15 41 21 13 13 12 16 17 12 14 19 13 23 36 36 189 2 8 8 12 13 19 13 15 11 16 16 11 13 19 11 27 46 38 34 177 8 7 8 9 – 10 15 18 10 16 11 14 10 21 10 22 43 34 32 166 9 8 9 – 15 12 14 21 10 14 11 31 14 10 12 18 13 34 27 143 9 6 5 5 4 5 5 7 5 6 4 4 8 9 7 – 14 14 12 60 7 3 2 7 3 5 4 5 5 4 9 3 8 4 4 7 3 6 – 33 International NGOs by Province per Year, 2000–2014. International NGOs by Province per Year, Badakhshan Badghis Baghlan Balkh Bamyan Daykundi Farah Faryab Ghazni Ghor Helmand Herat Jowzjan Kabul Kandahar Kapisa Khost Kunar Kunduz Laghman Table 4: Table Art. 5, page 14 of 18 Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014 9 8 8 11 19 17 16 14 20 56 29 23 27 23 2014 7 9 7 17 10 17 15 21 18 14 59 29 29 24 2013 8 8 9 5 18 16 21 19 13 15 63 30 30 24 2012 8 7 4 61 10 15 13 31 18 14 12 20 26 26 2011 8 9 5 16 10 13 19 12 10 12 58 28 26 25 2010 7 9 8 5 12 10 15 18 11 12 53 27 25 20 2009 6 8 8 9 4 5 14 14 11 15 21 53 22 24 2008 6 7 8 4 3 8 15 10 15 13 50 25 25 20 2007 6 6 8 7 7 4 2 15 10 13 44 20 26 26 2006 6 6 8 7 3 2 7 13 10 12 17 44 26 25 2005 6 5 6 8 6 9 6 2 2 11 16 44 25 23 2004 6 5 4 9 7 2 2 – 11 41 11 14 23 23 2003 7 6 5 9 7 5 4 – 13 11 19 17 40 20 2002 4 4 5 2 3 4 6 9 3 2 – 16 12 12 2001 4 9 2 5 2 3 6 3 2 4 2 9 2 – 2000 Logar Nangarhar Nimroz Nuristan Paktika Paktya Panjshir Parwan Samangan Sar-e Pul Takhar Uruzgan Wardak Zabul Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014 Art. 5, page 15 of 18

Using these operational definitions, peacebuilding, and/or women’s rights. This the data reveal that 595 (67 percent) of finding reveals that there was a considerable the NGOs that were active in Afghanistan overlap between apolitical and political NGO between 2000 and 2014 were apolitical, activity in Afghanistan during the period while 296 (33 percent) were political. This is under analysis. highlighted in Figure 7. Furthermore, of the 296 political NGOs, 215 (73 percent) were Conclusion simultaneously engaged in apolitical sectors Previous information on international and of activity, while only 81 (27 percent) were local NGO activity in Afghanistan has been solely working in the political sectors of gov- limited and scarce, especially at the subna- ernance, conflict resolution, human rights, tional-level. The dataset introduced in this

Figure 6: NGOs by Sector of Activity, 2000–2014.

Figure 7: Apolitical and Political NGOs, 2000–2014. Art. 5, page 16 of 18 Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014 article helps to fill this gap by providing infor- resolution, governance, human rights, mation on 891 NGOs that were active in the peacebuilding, and women’s rights country between 2000 and 2014. It is hoped were largely agreed upon as being con- that the data and information presented will sistent with how “political” activity has be of use to academics, practitioners, and been conceptually defined in extant policymakers working on issues pertaining literature. to international development. The author 5 HDX is managed by the United encourages the dissemination and use of Nations Office for the Coordination of the data for research purposes, and requests Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Launched that this article be cited as the source of in July 2014, the goal of HDX is to make information. The complete dataset with humanitarian data easy to find and use provincial- and NGO-specific information is for analysis. available for download at the Humanitarian Data Exchange (HDX)5 website: https://data. References humdata.org/dataset/afghanistan-ngo-pres- Afghanistan Central Statistics Organiza- ence-between-the-years-2000-and-2014. tion (ACSO) 2015 Afghanistan ­Statistical Yearbook, 2014–2015. Kabul: ACSO. Competing Interests Available at: http://www.cso.gov.af/ The author has no competing interests to en/page/1500/4722/2014-2015 [last declare. accessed 1 January 2017] Afghanistan Ministry of Economy 2015 Notes NGO Department: Public Data. ­Available at: 1 Several NGOs were critical of the PRT ini- http://ngos.moec.gov.af/Public/Default. tiative in Afghanistan, claiming that the aspx [last accessed 4 October 2016]. mixture of military and humanitarian Afghanistan Research and Evaluation operations had a negative impact on their Unit (AREU) 2002–2015 A to Z Guides security. However, recent empirical stud- to ­Assistance in Afghanistan. Kabul: ies have called into question the ­validity ­Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit. of this argument (see Mitchell 2015). Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan 2 Of the NGOs that were contacted, 54 per- Relief (ACBAR) 2014 The ACBAR Guide cent did not respond, 20 percent were no for NGOs: A Comprehensive Guide for longer active, 17 percent provided confir- NGOs in Afghanistan. 3rd ed. Kabul: mation, 8 percent of messages bounced, ACBAR. Available at: http://www.acbar. and one percent refused to provide a org/upload/1459866254994.pdf [last response because of security concerns. accessed 4 October 2016]. 3 Daykundi and Panjshir provinces were Asian Development Bank (ADB), United first established in 2004. Hence, Table 2, Nations Development ­Program (UNDP), Table 3, and Table 4 do not include data and World Bank 2002 ­Afghanistan: for these provinces prior to this period. preliminary needs assessment for 4 The author acknowledges the somewhat ­recovery and reconstruction. Available contentious debate surrounding how to at: http://reliefweb.int/report/afghani- define “apolitical” and “political” NGO stan/afghanistan-preliminary-­needs- activity. Discussions with academics, assessment-recovery-and-reconstruction humanitarians, and colleagues revealed [last accessed 4 October 2016]. little agreement on how certain sec- Atmar, H and Goodhand, J 2002 Aid, con- tors should be classified—specifically flict and peacebuilding in Afghanistan: education, legal aid, and media—which what lessons can be learned? Available at: many believed could fall into either cat- http://reliefweb.int/report/afghanistan/ egory. However, the sectors of conflict aid-conflict-and-peacebuilding-afghan- Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014 Art. 5, page 17 of 18

istan-what-lessons-can-be-learned [last and Weiss, T G (eds.). ­Humanitarianism accessed 4 October 2016]. in Question: Politics, Power, Ethics. Ithaca Atmar, M H 2001 The politicisation of and London: Cornell University Press, humanitarian aid and its consequences 172–195. for Afghans. Humanitarian Exchange. Humanitarian Outcomes 2017 Aid worker September: 2–3. security database. Available at: https:// Barnett, M 2011 Empire of Humanity: A aidworkersecurity.org/ [last accessed 3 ­History of Humanitarianism. Ithaca and January 2017]. London: Cornell University Press. Integrated Regional Information­ ­Networks Barnett, M and Snyder, J 2008 The grand (IRIN) 2003 ­Interview with Afghan strategies of humanitarianism. In: ­President Hamid ­Karzai. Available at: http:// Michael, B and Weiss, T G (eds.). Humani- www.irinnews.org/q-and/2003/01/28/ tarianism in Question: Politics, Power, Eth- interview-afghan-president-hamid-karzai ics. Ithaca and London: Cornell University [last accessed 4 October 2016]. Press, 143–171. Josselin, D and Wallace, W 2001 Non-state Calhoun, C 2008 The imperative to reduce actors in world politics: a framework. In: suffering: Charity, progress, and emer- Daphné, J and William, W, (eds.). Non- gencies in the field of humanitarian state actors in world politics. New York: action. In: Michael, B and Weiss, T G (eds.). Palgrave Publishers. DOI: https://doi. Humanitarianism in Question: Politics, org/10.1057/9781403900906_1 Power, Ethics. Ithaca and London: Cornell Leader, N 2000 The politics of principle: University Press, 73–97. The principles of humanitarian action in Fast, L 2014 Aid in danger: The perils and practice. London: Overseas Development ­promise of humanitarianism. Philadelphia: Institute. ­University of Pennsylvania Press. DOI: Marsden, P 2009 Afghanistan: aid, armies https://doi.org/10.9783/9780812209631 and empires. New York: I.B. Tauris. Galway, L P, Corbett, K K and Zeng, L McDonald, S 2000 Taleban ban women 2012 Where are the NGOs and why? from working for aid groups. Available at: The distribution of health and devel- http://www.rawa.org/ban-wo.htm [last opment NGOs in Bolivia. Globalization accessed 4 October 2016]. and Health, 8(38). DOI: https://doi. Mitchell, D F 2015 Blurred lines? Provincial org/10.1186/1744-8603-8-38 reconstruction teams and NGO insecu- Goodhand, J 2002 Aiding violence or build- rity in Afghanistan, 2010–2011. Stability:­ ing peace? The role of international aid International Journal of Security and in Afghanistan. Third World ­Quarterly, Development, 4(1): 1–18. DOI: https:// 23(5): 837–859. DOI: https://doi. doi.org/10.5334/sta.ev org/10.1080/0143659022000028620 Monshipouri, M 2003 NGOs and peace- Goodhand, J 2006 Aiding peace? The role building in Afghanistan. In: Carey, H F of NGOs in armed conflict. Boulder, CO: and Richmond, O P (eds.). Mitigating Con- Lynne Rienner Publishers. DOI: https:// flict: The Role of NGOs. London: Frank doi.org/10.3362/9781780441467 Cass Publishers, 138–155. DOI: https:// Guardian 2001 Freed aid workers describe doi.org/10.4324/9780203503898.ch9 Taliban jail rescue. Available at: http:// Neumann, B F, Mundey, L and Mikolashek,­ J www.theguardian.com/world/2001/ 2005 The United States army in ­Afghanistan: nov/16/afghanistan.terrorism16 [last operation enduring freedom: March accessed 4 October 2016]. 2002–April 2005. Washington, DC: US Hammond, L 2008 The power of holding Army Center of Military History. humanitarianism hostage and the myth Oliker, O, Kauzlarich, R, Dobbins, J, of protective principles. In: Michael, B ­Basseuner, K W, Sampler, D L, McGinn, Art. 5, page 18 of 18 Mitchell: NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014

J G, Dziedzic, M J, Grissom, A, Pirnie, among humanitarian workers. British B, Bensahel, N and Guven, A I 2004 ­Medical Journal, 321: 166–168. DOI: https:// Aid during conflict: interaction between doi.org/10.1136/bmj.321.7254.166 ­military and civilian assistance providers in Stewart, R W 2004 The United States army Afghanistan, September 2001–June 2002. in Afghanistan: Operation enduring Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. ­freedom: October 2001–March 2002. Organization for Economic Co-Operation Washington, DC: US Army Center of and Development (OECD) 2002 the Military­ History. limits and scope for the use of develop- United States Agency for International ment assistance incentives and disincen- Development (USAID) 2005 tives for influencing conflict situations: USAID/Afghanistan strategic plan: case study: Afghanistan (1999). 2005–2010. Available at: http://pdf. Rieff, D 2002 A Bed for the Night: usaid.gov/pdf_docs/Pdacf119.pdf [last ­Humanitarianism in Crisis. New York: Simon accessed 4 ­October 2016]. and Schuster. Weiss, T G 1999 Principles, politics, and Rubin, B R 1995 The fragmentation of humanitarian action. Ethics and Interna- Afghanistan: state formation and collapse tional Affairs, 13(1): 1–22. DOI: https://doi. in the international system. New Haven: org/10.1111/j.1747-7093.1999.tb00322.x Yale University Press. Werker, E and Ahmed, F Z 2008 What do non- Runion, M L 2007 The History of ­Afghanistan. governmental organizations do? ­Journal of Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Economic Perspectives, 22(2): 73–92. DOI: Salahuddin, S 2001 Christian aid workers https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.22.2.73 quit Afghanistan. Reuters, 1 September. West, K 2001 Agents of altruism: The expan- Schreter, L and Harmer, A 2013 Delivering sion of humanitarian NGOs in Rwanda aid in highly insecure environments: a crit- and Afghanistan. Burlington, VT: Ashgate. ical review of the literature, 2007–2012. Wright, D P, Bird, J R, Clay, S E, Connors, P Available at: http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/pdf/ W, Farquhar, S C, Garcia, L C and Van outputs/Hum_Response/60995-Deliv- Wey, D F 2010 A different kind of war: The ering_aid_in_highly_insecure_environ- United States army in operation enduring ments_final_report.pdf [last accessed 4 freedom: October 2001–September 2005. October 2016]. Fort Leavenworth, KS: Combat Studies Sheik, M, Gutierrez, M I, Bolton, P, Spiegel, P, Institute Press, US Army Combined Arms Thieren, M and Burnham, G 2000 Deaths Center.

How to cite this article: Mitchell, D F 2017 NGO Presence and Activity in Afghanistan, 2000–2014: A Provincial-Level Dataset. Stability: International Journal of Security & Development, 6(1): 5, pp. 1–18, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/sta.497

Submitted: 04 October 2016 Accepted: 02 May 2017 Published: 13 June 2017

Copyright: © 2017 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Stability: International Journal of Security & Development is a OPEN ACCESS peer-reviewed open access journal published by Ubiquity Press.