UCL Global Disability Research Group
Humanitarian Disaster Relief:
Disability and the New Sphere
Guidelines
Dr Maria Kett
Leonard Cheshire Disability and Inclusive
Development Centre,
UCL
(m.kett@ucl.ac.uk)
11th February 2010
Slide 1
Disability & Humanitarian Emergencies
•
•
•
•
•
UN estimates that 25% of the entire
population is adversely affected in
one way or another as a result of
disability
An estimated 3.5 million refugees
and internally displaced people live
with disabilities in refugee camps
and urban slums (WRC).
Armed conflict will be 8th most
common cause of disability
worldwide by 2020 (WHO)
10% of an affected population will
develop serious psychological
trauma
Disability + poverty = less coping
capacities
Slide 2
Disability Inclusion…
“Disability is the result of the
interaction between an impairment
limiting or altering a person’s
capacities and that person’s
environment”
(UNCRP)
In emergencies there are structural
changes that can affect this :
–
–
–
–
–
Physical environment/infrastructure
Political decisions
Loss of social support networks
Poverty
Lack of knowledge/information
Slide 3
UNCRPD
Article 11 - Situations of risk and humanitarian emergencies:
“States Parties shall take, in accordance with their obligations under
international law, including international humanitarian law and
international human rights law, all necessary measures to ensure the
protection and safety of persons with disabilities in situations of risk,
including situations of armed conflict, humanitarian emergencies and
the occurrence of natural disasters.”
Slide 4
Assumptions about persons with disabilities (1)
• That they require specialist care
• That specialist care/adaptations
are expensive
• They will be covered by general
aid distributions
Slide 5
Assumptions about persons with disabilities (2)
• They cannot help other people
• They’re waiting to be helped
• They’re unable to work
Slide 6
Variety of Standards and Guidelines Available
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SPHERE (and INEE companion
standards)
IASC Guidelines)
UNHCR handbook
ICRC Professional Standards for
Protection Work
ALNAP Participation by Crisisaffected Populations In
humanitarian action
HAP 2007 standards
NGO-specific and/or context
specific Guidelines/Toolkits (e.g. HI,
Women’s Refugee Commission)
Slide 7
So where are we with inclusion in current humanitarian
practice?
“There is little if any consideration of issues relating
to disability in the recent literature or in the
evaluations reviewed, and it seems that this is
another mainstreaming challenge struggling to
receive sufficient attention”
(ALNAP 2010, The State of the Humanitarian System: 47)
Slide 8
Sphere 2004
“The groups most frequently at risk in disasters are women, children, older
people, disabled people and people living with HIV/AIDS. In certain contexts
people may also become vulnerable by reason of ethnic origin, religious or
political affiliation, or displacement….Specific vulnerabilities influence people’s
ability to cope and survive in a disaster, and those most at risk should be
identified in each context….
Special care must be taken to protect and provide for all affected groups in a
non-discriminatory manner and according to their specific needs. However it
should be remembered that disaster-affected populations posses, and
acquire, skills and capacities of their own to cope, and these should be
recognised and supported.”
(Sphere 2004:27)
Slide 9
What are the crosscutting issues and why should they be
addresses in relief and recovery efforts?
•
•
•
•
•
•
Age (older adults, children)
Gender
Disability
Protection
HIV/AIDS
Environment/climate
change/DRR
• Psychosocial
• Education
Slide 10
Vulnerability
•
•
•
What is vulnerability and how to
apply it to disability?
Vulnerability can be compounded
by many factors (vulnerabilities),
including:
– Gender
– Age
– Underlying health conditions
– Location
– Status (e.g. minority group,
combatants…)
What about capacities and
resilience?
Slide 11
The Challenges…
• How to set standards without
pre-existing bench
markers/indicators?
• How to quantify (some)thing
inherently difficult to measure,
e.g. rights, inclusion,
participation…?
• How to increase collaboration
across cross-cutting issues?
Slide 12
Sphere
Project
TheThe
Sphere
Project
What is Sphere?
http://www.sphereproject.org/
Right to Slide
life13
with dignity
Sphere
Project
TheThe
Sphere
Project
Brief History
 Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in
Disaster Response.
 After the Rwanda crisis, pressure to perform up to
expectations has grown.
 Trial version 1998, first edition 2000, second edition
2004
 Low cost edition 2007.
Next handbook due 2010.
 First Sphere “Companion module” (2008): INEE
Education in Emergencies and Chronic Crises and Early
Reconstruction Handbook
Right to Slide
life14
with dignity
Sphere
Project
TheThe
Sphere
Project
Rationale for a New Edition
 The Sphere Handbook a ‘living’ document: regularly
updated
Respond to / reflect changes in the context
 Improve accessibility
 Update indicators & guidance notes
 Enhance linkages
 Iron out problems
Right to Slide
life15
with dignity
Introduction
What is Sphere?
The Code
of Conduct
The Humanitarian
Charter
Standards common
to all sectors
Water Supply, Sanitation
and Hygiene Promotion
Each Chapter includes
• Minimum standards
Food Security, Nutrition
and Food Aid
• Key indicators
Shelter, Settlement
and Non-Food items
• Guidance notes
Health Services
Slide 16
2004
Edition
Sphere
Project
TheThe
Sphere
Project
What is being revised?
Humanitarian Charter
Common Standards
Technical Standards
Cross-cutting issues: Children, Disability, DRR,
Gender, Older people, Protection, Psychosocial,
HIV/AIDS
Emerging issues (including: Conflict sensitivity;
Early Recovery; Urban settings; CIVMIL relations;
CCCM; Cash transfers )
Right to Slide
life17
with dignity
Sphere
Project
TheThe
Sphere
Project
Challenges
 The project is better known for technical content than
for the Humanitarian Charter. Some donors focus on
this too, while ‘opting out’ of the rights based approach.
Ensuring visibility of cross-cutting issues
 Strong advocacy is required at field level to reaffirm
the importance of the Humanitarian Charter.
 Adoption of Sphere by UN agencies and governments
 Keeping Sphere relevant.
Right to Slide
life18
with dignity
Criticisms of the Sphere Project
1. A consensus?
2. ‘universalising’
3. Technocratic
4. ‘consumerist’
5. Lack of protection focus
6. No basis in IL
7. No compliance monitoring
8. Duty of who?
9. Quality assurance
Slide 19
Sphere Project Responses
• Revision – including
protection focus
• Participation
• Consultation
• Consensus
• Translation
• Sphere India
Slide 20
Disability Revision Process
•
•
•
•
Working Group:
members from specialist academic
research centre's, INGOs; disability
INGOs; Disabled People’s
International; DPOs and IFRC, from
Peru, Kenya, India, Europe and
North America
Peer Group:
Over 30 members globally
Revision workshops:
In Sierra Leone, India, Kenya plus
across agencies (e.g. World Vision)
Public review (via web)
Slide 21
Recommendations (General)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
All new initiatives to produce guidelines, tools or standards should include
disability issues through the participation of disability organisations as well as
disabled persons organisations
Ensure that persons with disabilities are well represented in the relief process
and monitor their participation, decision making powers and access to all
relief activities including complaint mechanisms.
Sphere must reflect UNCRPD
Terminology must reflect UNCRPD
Need to move away from over-emphasis on vulnerabilities
Improve mainstreaming of cross-cutting issues– with specific targeting when
needed
Indicators of inclusion
Disaggregated data
Links with other cross-cutting issues – where are similarities – e.g.
Assessment, participation, representation…
Re-emphasis non-discrimination (HC)
Slide 22
Recommendations (Specific)
Slide 23
Questions?
Thank You!
Slide 24