State of the Humanitarian System 2022 | Briefing: Armed conflict

A printer friendly PDF version of this briefing is available for you to download from the sidebar.

Summary 

Armed conflicts, which are on the rise, have a close relationship with humanitarian need. Syria and Yemen, both dominated by protracted conflicts, were the two largest humanitarian crises throughout the study period, and in 2021 the largest populations in need were in Ethiopia, Yemen, DRC and Afghanistan. Although most humanitarian responses are in conflict-affected countries, humanitarians continue to struggle to gain access to the most affected communities as well as to understand their own effect on conflict dynamics.

Conflicts are contributing to increasing humanitarian needs 

• In the decade to 2020, the number of armed conflicts more than doubled, from 82 to 175. 
• In 2021 conflict-induced internal displacement reached its highest level in a decade, with 14.4 million people driven away from their homes. The numbers of refugees also reached a record 27.1 million, as new displacements added to protracted displacements. 
• Of 30 humanitarian response plans in 2021, 27 were for countries with active conflicts and there were a further eight refugee response plans to support people fleeing conflict. 
• In terms of the amount required per person, the three most expensive crises by far in 2021 – Libya, Iraq and Syria – were all situations of active conflict, where access to affected populations was highly constrained. 
• Protracted conflict dominated the humanitarian caseload. Yemen and Syria were the two largest recipients of humanitarian assistance between 2018 and 2021, receiving between one-third and one-fifth of all humanitarian assistance each year. In 2021 armed conflict in Syria entered its second decade and in Yemen, its seventh year.  
• in the absence of political solutions to conflict, and of development approaches to support people’s welfare in protracted conflict settings, the majority of humanitarian resources – 80% of country-allocable funding in the study period – continue to be directed to chronic complex crises.

Armed conflicts drive and exacerbate hunger 

• The countries at greatest risk of famine between 2018 and 2021 were Yemen, South Sudan, Nigeria, Afghanistan and Ethiopia. All were experiencing violent conflict.  
• Over 2018–2021, state and non-state armed groups restricted access to food in conflicts in Myanmar, Syria, Ethiopia, South Sudan and Yemen. 
• Famine declarations have been politicised by governments in several conflict-affected countries, delaying and hindering response:  the experience in South Sudan reflects wider challenges of famine response in conflicts. 
• There is evidence that intentional starvation is being used as a tool in some conflicts, which led in 2018 to the UN Security Council passing UNSC Resolution 2417 prohibiting the use of starvation as a method of warfare.

Humanitarians are struggling to reach many conflict-affected communities 

• Attacks on aid workers rose by 54% between 2017 and 2020. In 2020, national staff represented 95% of the victims of these attacks. Cases of targeted violence against humanitarians increased sharply in Syria, DRC, South Sudan, Ethiopia and Mali, and declined notably in Afghanistan. (Please also see Briefing Note on the Shrinking Space for Principled Humanitarian Action). 
• In many conflict-affected countries, people living in areas controlled by non-state actors are less well-served by humanitarian aid. For example, in Yemen, access to Houthi-controlled areas is extremely difficult. In Syria, humanitarian access to areas outside the government’s control is highly restricted, with Russia and China using their vetoes at the UN Security Council to close three out of the four original UN-mandated border crossings serving north-western Syria. International counter-terrorism regulations also inhibit humanitarian reach to certain populations. 
• Humanitarian agencies have found it hard to react to major escalations in conflict. In Afghanistan, many had no preparedness plan in place for the withdrawal of US troops and were caught out by the speed of the Taliban takeover. In Ethiopia, the system struggled to quickly and adequately respond to the conflict in Tigray to which its long-standing state partner was a party.

There is little evidence of how humanitarian aid affects conflicts 

• Humanitarian agencies and evaluations do not routinely consider the impacts of their presence and resources on conflict dynamics, and there is room for improvement on conflict sensitivity. 
• Previous studies claiming that humanitarian aid negatively affects peace were based on data from 1946 or earlier. More recent evaluations and reviews suggest that aid has reduced the incidence of and potential for conflict. 

Notes: 

Please also see Briefing Note on the Shrinking Space for Principled Humanitarian Action. 

About ALNAP’s State of the Humanitarian System report 

Humanitarian action can be a lifeline to people experiencing the worst that conflict and disaster can inflict. For over a decade, ALNAP’s State of the Humanitarian System report (SOHS) has provided a unique, evidence‑based understanding of the system and how well it works for affected people. Based on a huge body of evidence including exclusive research with crisis-affected people and practitioners, SOHS addresses key questions about performance and effectiveness in areas such as hunger and mortality reduction, as well as giving a comprehensive picture of funding, resource flows, staffing and organisations. Consultations with people affected by crises were central to the research from the outset, and shaped the focus of the report. This edition of the SOHS looks at the period from January 2018 to December 2021 - a period that encompassed the global COVID-19 pandemic as well as multiple armed conflicts - and draws comparisons with previous editions to take the long view on trends, accomplishments and challenges in the humanitarian system.