Amid systemic disruption and the unraveling of traditional aid paradigms, a transformative form of leadership is emerging from the Global South. Rooted in Indigenous knowledge, communal values, and contextual intelligence, this leadership model challenges entrenched power asymmetries and redefines humanitarian effectiveness. It does not seek to replicate Northern models, but instead cultivates authentic, regionally grounded responses shaped by collective wisdom and mutual accountability. This new leadership embraces complexity, fosters North-South symbiosis, and prepares for an increasingly multipolar humanitarian landscape. In doing so, it offers not only adaptation—but the foundation for a more just, inclusive, and sustainable future for humanitarian action.
OpenStreetMap emerges as a crucial tool in addressing the humanitarian crisis in Sudan, where traditional aid efforts overlook peripheral communities and critical infrastructure remains unmapped. Hernández highlights how this participatory mapping platform can help bridge visibility gaps, allowing local actors to contribute vital geographic data. The article envisions four possible futures shaped by the intensity of conflict and access to open mapping tools: (1) High conflict with minimal access leads to continued invisibility of rural communities; (2) Low conflict with limited access risks long-term neglect of peripheral areas; (3) High conflict with ample access could enhance response coordination despite violence; and (4) Low conflict with broad mapping use enables inclusive recovery.
In light of recent geopolitical shifts, the humanitarian sector is experiencing significant changes. The « To Each Their Playing Field » scenario from The Future of Aid: INGOs in 2030 report anticipates a fragmented humanitarian landscape, with decentralized responses and diverse actors beyond traditional INGOs. To remain relevant, INGOs must accelerate localization efforts, empowering regional partners and redefining their value propositions. This transformation is crucial to effectively navigate the complexities of a multipolar world and continue delivering impactful humanitarian assistance.
Building on the success of the Future of Aid: INGOs in 2030 report, IARAN and CHL start the launching of this new study to explore transformative pathways for aid by 2040. With a focus on digitalization, disaster resilience, and decolonizing aid, the project will provide foresight scenarios and a toolkit for systemic transformation. Guided by a dedicated Steering Committee and using methodologies like La Prospective and Causal Layered Analysis, it empowers actors to navigate change collaboratively.
Two years of huge emergency after huge emergency - from the Covid-19 pandemic’s various variants to evacuations from Afghanistan and a series of storms battering the UK - our people are tired, yet the need for humanitarian aid continues to grow. And then the Ukraine crisis boiled over.
We have always struggled to plan for the many uncertainties the future may bring, but the massive disruptions of the last couple of years made us realise that grappling with uncertainty is not an option.
The British Red Cross’s Strategic Insight and Foresight team has been developing a way to rapidly construct scenarios about the future, helping our teams get a sense of likely people’s short-term and longer-term humanitarian needs, as well as the potential ripple effects caused by a crisis.
$1 spent in preparedness saves $7 in humanitarian response (1). Humanitarians working in disaster preparedness, early warning, and resilience building have all heard this before. Though it may satisfy public and private donors for reasons of accountability and a no-regrets approach to programming, we need to push past this statistic. What is the true value of pre-empting the future when working in humanitarian response?
The growth in the humanitarian sector to include private companies as partners and implementers challenges the notion that organizations working in the humanitarian sector must be driven by the humanitarian imperative alone. The inclusion of commercial firms whose fundamental purpose is to make a profit necessitates an examination of the consequences when the humanitarian imperative is but one of many motivations.
In an effort to gain a deeper understanding of the practical realities that either foster or inhibit participation and the assumptions that underscore “capacity development” approaches, this paper examines a capacity development approach that was co-designed by the Regional Humanitarian Analyst at Save the Children East Africa Regional Office and the Project Director for the IRC-UoN Partnership for Education in Emergencies.
