SUDAN HUMANITARIAN CRISES ANALYSIS 2018 DECEMBER 2018

Transcription

1 SUDAN HUMANITARIAN CRISES ANALYSIS 2018 DECEMBER 2018 Each year, Sida conducts a humanitarian allocation exercise in which a large part of its humanitarian budget is allocated to emergencies worldwide. This allocation takes place in the beginning of the year as to ensure predictability for humanitarian organisations and to allow for best possible operational planning. In an effort to truly adhere to the humanitarian principles, Sida bases its allocation decisions on a number of objective indicators and parameters of which the most important are related to the number of affected people, vulnerability of affected people and level of funding in previous years. One of the indicators is also related to forgotten crises in order to ensure sufficient funding to low profile crises. Besides this initial allocation, another part of the humanitarian budget is set aside as an emergency reserve for sudden onset emergencies and deteriorating humanitarian situations. This reserve allows Sida to quickly allocate funding to any humanitarian situation throughout the year, including additional funding to Sudan. For 2018, the Sudan crisis is allocated an initial 110 million Swedish Krone (MSEK). Towards the end of 2017, Sudan entered into an economic crisis which has kept the country in a negative downward spiral since. Close monitoring of the situation in Sudan will continue throughout the year for potential additional funding or amendments. 1. CRISIS OVERVIEW 1.1. Type of Crisis/ Disaster Sudan continues to face two major overlapping challenges; one related to internal large-scale population displacement triggered by conflict, and another related to climatic and socio-cultural conditions leading to high levels of food insecurity and malnutrition. In addition, a third and growing challenge is increasing influx of South Sudanese refugees. 5.8 million people are estimated to be in need of humanitarian assistance in 2018; an increase from 4.8 million people in The increase is explained by emerged needs in newly accessible areas in Jebel Marra, and the Two Areas (South Kordofan and Blue Nile). 1 The currency exchange fluctuations, import restrictions and removal of wheat subsidies have had immediate implications on, among other things, food security. Though this impacts vulnerable populations hard the effects and numbers are still developing. Conflict The long conflict in Sudan is rooted in competition over land and resources. Due to unilateral ceasefires by the Government of Sudan and armed groups in 2017, the level of violence and displacement has decreased significantly. In Darfur, however, some people are entering their 15 th year of displacement. Widespread prevalence of gender-based violence (GBV) shows no sign of abating, and impunity is close to endemic. Violence in Jebel Marra in Central Darfur and other parts of Darfur has been intermittent throughout the year, leading to at least 9,700 newly displaced civilians. Conflict in South Kordofan and Blue Nile continues to have serious humanitarian consequences. In total, 2.1 million in Darfur and 227,000 in the Two Areas are estimated to be internally displaced. In addition, the UN estimates a further 500,000 people displaced in host communities and settlements in Darfur, whereas armed groups approximate 545,000 people displaced in areas under opposition control in South Kordofan and Blue Nile, which are largely inaccessible to humanitarian actors. 2 The ongoing crisis in South Sudan has resulted in an increased influx of South Sudanese refugees during 2017, with more than new arrivals (as of 31 October 2017) in primarily White Nile, East Darfur, South Darfur, South Kordofan and West Kordofan. In total, an estimated 453,000 South Sudanese refugees have sought protection in Sudan since December A majority of the refugees reside out of 1 Draft of 2018 Humanitarian Needs Overview 2 Draft of 2018 Humanitarian Needs Overview 1

2 camp in areas not previously covered by response and with minimal infrastructure. Over 155,000 primarily Eritrean and Ethiopian refugees are also living in a protracted situation in eastern Sudan. With an additional 200,000 South Sudanese refugees anticipated to arrive in 2018, Sudan will host 1.2 million refugees and asylum seekers in need of humanitarian assistance by the end of The acute watery diarrhoea (AWD) outbreak continued to spread throughout 2017, worsened by a weak health system and poor WASH facilities. As of October 2017, more than suspected AWD cases have been reported, including an estimated 800 associated deaths. Towards the end of the year a decreasing trend in number of new cases has been observed. Natural Disaster Sudan is prone to floods and drought, which exacerbate the humanitarian situation and further drive displacement, food insecurity and related emergency needs. During 2017, Sudan had an above-average rainfall, with the exception of areas in Kassala, Gadaref and North Darfur, and the agricultural production increased from last year s poor harvest caused by El Niño. Climate variation is expected to have increasingly dire consequences in both the short and long term. About 4.8 million people are estimated to live at crisis or emergency levels of food insecurity (Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) categories 3 and 4), mainly caused by disruption of livelihoods due to displacement, climate change and environmental degradation. Rising prices, as well as difficulties to access arable lands and lack of transport infrastructure also play a role. 2.8 million children below 5 years, 16 percent, are suffering from acute malnutrition, including 647,000 suffering from its more severe form. 11 out of 18 states have malnutrition prevalence above the emergency threshold per WHO standards, in particular high in North Darfur and Red Sea. Widespread floods and flash floods are common during the rainy season in Sudan, caused by exceptionally heavy rains and overflowing of the Nile River and its tributaries. Damage to villages and agricultural land poses a serious threat and increase the risk for long-term food insecurity as well as heighten the vulnerability to shocks. In 2017, heavy rains and flooding affected over 99,000 people and destroyed more than 19,000 houses. Most affected states are White Nile, South Darfur, North Kordofan, Al Gezira and Sennar. On average, floods affect approximately 200,000 people in Sudan each year Geographical areas and affected population The majority of humanitarian needs in Sudan stem from conflict-induced displacement. The affected population includes 2.3 million Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), 1.2 million refugees and more than 300,000 returnees as well as 1.95 million vulnerable residents. 3 New and protracted displacement disrupts livelihoods and erodes community resilience, and IDPs are further vulnerable due to reduced access to natural resources and chronic shortage of basic services. Refugees in emergency and protracted situations remain largely dependent on humanitarian assistance, and hosting capacities and existing camps are overstretched. Host communities often face the same risks and vulnerabilities as displaced people. As the security situation shows signs of improving, Sudanese returnees from Chad and IDPs have returned to a situation of unsolved land issues and lack of access to basic services and natural resources in Darfur Critical Assumptions, risks and threats With stagnated peace processes, there is little sign of political progress in The split of Sudan People's Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N) into two fractions is a complicating factor with an increasing risk of escalation in violence. Further, it remains unclear how the UNSC decision to reduce UNAMID military and police capacity will affect the safety and security of both civilians and aid workers. The conflict and food insecurity in South Sudan is likely to drive further displacement into Sudan. This, in combination with underfunding, will likely deteriorate the situation for displaced people as well as for host communities. The risks for humanitarian operations in Sudan are multiple, related to general insecurity and limited capacity due to underfunding. There is also a large need for the international community to commit to early recovery 3 Draft of 2018 HNO 2

3 efforts and, in some areas, sustainable and long-term development initiatives to complement and/or build on many years of humanitarian engagement. Furthermore, the risk of corruption is significant. Systemic corruption is present in all sectors and all levels of government, with Sudan ranking 170 out of 176 on the list of Transparency International Strategic Objectives and Priorities of the Country Humanitarian Response Plan In 2017, Sudan for the first time developed a Multi-Year Humanitarian Strategy (MYHS) , representing a commitment by the international humanitarian community and the Government of Sudan to deliver a more appropriate humanitarian response to both emergency and long-term needs across the country, in line with humanitarian principles. The strategy will be complemented with annual operational plans including objectives and budgets. Last year s delay of the Humanitarian Needs Overview (HNO) and Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP) constituted an impediment for humanitarian actors, and the aim for 2018 is a more timely strategic planning process. The 2018 HNO and HRP are yet to be launched, still pending discussions with the Government of Sudan concerning figures of some target groups. Meanwhile, donors and implementing partners are left with the 2017 HRP strategic objectives and figures. These objectives have been Populations affected by natural or man-made disasters receive timely assistance during and in the aftermath of the shock. Displaced populations, refugees, returnees and host communities meet their basic needs and/or access essential basic services while increasing their self-reliance. Vulnerable residents in targeted areas have improved nutrition status and increased resilience. 2. IN COUNTRY HUMANITARIAN CAPACITIES 2.1. National and local capacities and constraints Government: The Sudanese government agency in charge of humanitarian affairs is the Humanitarian Aid Commission (HAC), represented both at federal and state levels. Centrally HAC is coordinating body under the Ministry of Security and Social Development, reporting directly to the vice president and also chairing the Higher Committee for Humanitarian Aid. Several governmental bodies such as HAC, National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS), MoFA and local authorities, are all decision-makers with a considerable impact on humanitarian action. There has been progress in the last year. As part of the negotiations with the US on lifting sanctions, the Government of Sudan showed willingness to solve humanitarian operational constraints by improving the humanitarian access. Despite these improvements, Sudan s support to humanitarian response remains based on a relatively restrictive regulatory framework. In the coming year, Sudanese efforts to be excluded from the list of countries that act as state sponsors of terrorism, as well as managing migration flows and political dialogue with the EU, could continue to provide leverage. Civil Society: The Government of Sudan has had a long-term focus on nationalizing all humanitarian interventions through the so-called Sudanisation Plan, which has yet to be realized. In 2017, 186 international and national humanitarian organizations were operating in Sudan, with 77 being partners to the HRP. A majority of the organizations were operating in, but not exclusively, Darfur. Among these, 57 are UN agencies and INGOs, and 108 are NNGOs. Number of humanitarian staff working for UN agencies and INGOs has been decreasing from 17,700 to 4,200 in the last eight years, and today 97 percent of them are national. With changes in the regulatory framework of HAC and with increased access, a more robust civil society could potentially be developed; efforts are however needed to strengthen the capacity of national staff and organizations. 3

4 2.2. International operational capacities and constraints Leadership and Coordination: The Humanitarian Country Team led by a Humanitarian Coordinator is the highest country-level coordination platform. Comprising of UN agencies, national and international non-government partners and the Red Cross/Red Crescent movement, it provides policy and strategic guidance. An Inter-Sector Coordination Group brings together all IASC Sectors to coordinate operational issues and ensure coherence. Sweden participates in the Donor Coordination Group and its working group, as well as the Advisory Board of the Sudan Humanitarian Fund (SHF). On the Government side, a National Mechanism committee, comprising HAC and line ministries, coordinates the response. In line with the MYHS, the UN is currently in the process of reviewing the humanitarian coordination structure at different levels in Sudan. The aim is to make recommendations in order to enhance coordination and align the structure with the important objectives regarding the humanitarian-development nexus and New Ways of Working. There is consensus among donors that though the humanitarian coordination structure is wellfunctioning, it is increasingly weakened by the lack of coordination on early recovery and long-term development. Humanitarian Agencies: The operational capacity of humanitarian partners is closely linked to sustained access, the ability to maintain necessary staff where the needs are largest, as well as funding. Overall, presence and scope of activities of international actors, especially INGOs, are shrinking due to reduction in funding. A current challenge for UN agencies and other humanitarian actors is to scale up response to address the emerging needs adequately in line with the significantly improved access, and in order to respond to the positive results from advocacy International and Regional assistance The Sudan HRP has persistently been underfunded by an average of 44 percent between 2012 and By 31 December, the 2017 HRP was 45.5 percent funded. The gap is projected to increase coming years as humanitarian needs have continued to rise. The US, UK and ECHO remain the three dominant donors. Nontraditional donors such as Qatar and Japan and, to a degree, Saudi Arabia have become increasingly visible in the humanitarian response, however outside traditional coordination structures. The funding level of the Sudan Humanitarian Fund (SHF) has consistently decreased in the last few years, shrinking the funding available to NGOs. Final contributions for 2017 reached USD38.6 million. SHF has by sheer necessity and with donor approval adjusted to also cover needs for early recovery Access Situation New directives from HAC on procedures and guidelines for humanitarian action have been in force for almost a year. As a result, significant improvements in access were observed during 2017, including to previously inaccessible areas in Jebel Marra, South Kordofan and Blue Nile. This has enabled re-establishing of presence. Fewer and fewer issues with travel permits occur, but there are still occasional problems with regard to technical agreements sometimes mainly due to a lack of capacity on behalf of Sudanese authorities. Areas where non-state armed groups are active are excluded from the guidelines and remain largely inaccessible, with likely severe humanitarian needs yet to be confirmed. Despite these improvements, the operational environment for humanitarian actors continues to be challenging, primarily due to lack of capacity and constant bureaucratic impediments. The arbitrary, and sometimes lengthy, process of receiving all documents needed to implement interventions increases the inability to efficiently and timely deliver humanitarian assistance and to monitor programme implementation, as well as assess and address the humanitarian needs of people in a comprehensive manner. 4

5 3. SIDAs HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE PLAN 3.1. The role of Sida In 2017, the SHF continued to be the major recipient of Sida s humanitarian funding in Sudan, constituting approximately 65 percent of the initial allocation. UNHCR remained the second biggest recipient, followed by UNHAS, Swedish Red Cross, Swedish Mission Council, Save the Children Sweden, ICRC and OCHA. Overall, the initial allocation for Sudan was 90 MSEK, a slight decrease compared to the amount allocated to Sudan in Throughout the year two additional allocation processes were conducted, in which Sudan was allocated an additional 30 MSEK distributed equally to the SHF, ICRC and UNHAS. Three Rapid Response Mechanism (RRM) projects were supported in 2017, with the aim of addressing sudden onset humanitarian needs in Sudan; caused by, for example, the AWD outbreak Response Priorities 2018 Humanitarian Focus: The focus of Sida s humanitarian support will be in line with the priorities of the MYHS The MYHS will continue to address urgent, life-saving needs to stabilise or reduce mortality and morbidity. At the same time, Sudan also faces other humanitarian needs for which medium to longer term development work can break the cycle of vulnerability, in particular when addressing protracted displacement, significant rates of acute malnutrition and food insecurity. However, the HRP has yet to be launched, but adjustments can be made if needed during the Sida humanitarian Mid-Year Allocation process. The humanitarian situation in Sudan has simultaneously improved and deteriorated during With increased access, it has partly become apparent that there are broad early recovery needs among vulnerable groups. On the other hand, the increasing numbers of South Sudanese refugees, the acute water diarrhoea outbreak, as well as the continued high prevalence of malnutrition will continue to require a multi-sectoral humanitarian response. It is likely that Sudan, in 2018, will continue to face sudden-onset emergency situations and new displacements in the short term, brought on both by climate variation and conflict. Humanitarian access will likely continue to be difficult, in particular in parts of Darfur and the Two Areas Partners An increased initial humanitarian funding allocated to Sudan in 2018, 110 MSEK in comparison to 90 MSEK for the previous year, has allowed for an expansion of strategic partners. Amplified consideration of the humanitarian-development nexus has also guided the selection of strategic partners. International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC): Following a period of limited possibility to operate, ICRC has since late 2017 been able to resume its work in Sudan. Considering the important role of ICRC in conflicts, Sida should accordingly scales up its support to the organization. UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA): OCHA plays a crucial role in Sudan, being the main coordinating body, communicating and collaborating with the authorities and supporting humanitarian partners. Save the Children Sweden (SCS): Children affected by the fighting that occurred last year in the Jebel Marra area, particularly those displaced, remain exposed to various protection risks such as exposure to violence (including GBV). The objective of the SCS project is to protect girls and boys affected by conflict in North and Central Darfur through preventative and remedial interventions. Sudan Humanitarian Fund (SHF): Sweden has been supporting the Country-Based Pooled Fund in Sudan since its creation. The SHF continues to be an important and strategic partner allowing for funds to be quickly disbursed and allocated when humanitarian needs are present or emerging. Swedish Mission Council (SMC): International Aid Services (IAS) is the implementing partner of SMC in Sudan. Following the recommendation of the 2016 external evaluation, a 3-year programme has been 5

6 approved in 2017, which will provide IAS with the opportunity to increase the level of sustainability in their WASH activities. UN Humanitarian Air Service (UNHAS): Limited infrastructure, vast distances and high road insecurity make air transport the most efficient mode of transport in Sudan. UNHAS continues to be severely underfunded and is only eligible to receive funding from the Humanitarian Fund when critical gaps need to be addressed. UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR): Unearmarked funding to UNHCR will allow for the organization to respond to sectors such as Protection, Emergency shelter and Refugee multi-sector that historically have been heavily underfunded in Sudan. Islamic Relief (IR): The IR project is in line with the MYHS. The two-year project will provide immediate lifesaving services while addressing long-term displacement in Nertiti, Central Darfur. Church of Sweden (CoS): In line with the MYHS, the two-year project applied for will enable to better respond to the increasing needs of the South Sudanese refugees in South Kordofan and South Darfur localities through an integrated Health/Nutrition, Emergency Shelter and WASH services. A second project is proposed to enable vulnerable households to receive cash contributions, with the main aim of increasing the level of food security. World Food Programme (WFP): In view of the continuing challenges in Sudan, WFP will adapt its portfolio to life-changing interventions while maintaining life-saving activities and a strong emergency-response capacity Strategic Funding in Protracted Crises The humanitarian crisis in Sudan stems from factors ranging from natural disasters to conflict, where many regions of the country have suffered for decades. As a consequence, needs range from sudden on-set emergency to the longer term, sometimes both in the same locality. A three-year programme, initiated in 2017, of the IAS WASH was found by an external evaluation to enable a focus on reaching outcomes that will help in bridging the humanitarian/development divide within the WASH sector in Sudan. To further build on the MYHS, two additional multi-year projects, through the Church of Sweden and Islamic Relief, are proposed to be included in the 2018 allocation. These projects will be in line with the strategic outcomes laid down in the MYHS and are to be implemented within the remaining time-frame of the strategy ( ) Synergies with Long-term Development Assistance Sudan has long been considered a strictly humanitarian context. Each emergency has traditionally been met by a short-term humanitarian response albeit a response with increasingly less funds made available. As a result, a paradox exists where humanitarian funds have begun to cover also early recovery efforts in an attempt to meet needs in a protracted crisis, all the while still failing to properly address needs beyond the short term. Sudan is currently a pilot country for the UN New Way of Working (NWOW). This, in combination with a new five-year development strategy in place by early 2018, provides Sida with opportunity to put the humanitarian development nexus to the test. There are areas, within nutrition and health for instance, where both a short and a medium to longer term focus is needed, sometimes in the same geographic context and sometimes in different parts of Sudan. 6

7 Recommended partner for Sida support SIDA s HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE TO SUDAN IN 2018 Sector/focus of work (incl. integrated or multi sectorial programming) If Multi-year support 4 (indicate category A or C) CoS CASH 4 CoS/NCA* ICRC WASH, Health, Nutrition, Emergency Shelter IHL, Protection, Food Security, Health IR WASH, Health, Resilience A OCHA Coordination 2 SCS Child protection 4 SHF Multi-sector 57 SMC/IAS** WASH Multi-year proposal approved in 2017 UNHAS Logistics 5 UNICEF Child protection, Emergency education, WASH 10 Protection, Emergency UNHCR Shelter, Refugee multi- 5 sector WFP Food, Livelihoods 10 A Proposed amount (MSEK) 3.5 (2018) 2.3 (2019) 8 5 (2018) 5 (2019) 4 (2018) 4 (2019) TOTAL (2018) * From the South Sudan Crisis allocation. For additional information, please see HCA for the South Sudan Crisis. ** Not part of the 2018 allocation for Sudan Key References: Draft Sudan Humanitarian Needs Overview, 2017 Draft Sudan HRP, 2018 Sudan Multi-Year Humanitarian Strategy (MYHS) Sida supports multi-year humanitarian interventions with one of the following purposes: A. Humanitarian assistance in protracted crises, in line with multi-year Humanitarian Response Plan (only in contexts with multi-year humanitarian planning) B. Transition/phase out of humanitarian assistance (handing over to development and national/local actors according to a proposed plan within a specific time-frame). C. Humanitarian assistance in specifically hard-to-reach areas. Based on the observation that in many of today s humanitarian contexts, few actors tend to have access to those with the greatest needs, Sida would like to encourage partners to build strong and durable relations with concerned stakeholders in a view to facilitate swift and efficient access also to areas considered more challenging to reach. 7