Information You Can Use: A Bi-monthly Service for the UN and Civil Society
Volume 2, Issue 1, January - February 2005

NGLS INTERVIEWS WORLD VISION INTERNATIONAL
January 2005

NGLS: Could you describe in a few words World Vision's traditional role in emergency relief situations? List the main areas - food, housing, rebuilding, etc. - in which you are providing assistance to the tsunami victims in South Asia? Has this differed in anyway from your traditional role?

WV: Typically World Vision is a generalist humanitarian NGO, covering most sectors, but with a special emphasis on food distribution, child protection, shelter, and non-food items (tarps, cooking utensils, soap, etc.). Typically World Vision does not lead on health or in the water/sanitation sector, but we still carry out activities in those sectors. With tsunami victims in South Asia, of course, the nature of our assistance is country-specific and it has also changed as the crisis moves from the initial phase into more of a mid- to long-term phase. In the first week, our focus was on things like drinking water, temporary shelter, clothing, medical care, and safely disposing of dead bodies to prevent disease. In the thirty-day phase, we organised eighteen separate airlifts which delivered tents, medicines, survival kits, food, clothing, hygiene items, water, and water purification equipment to the worst-affected areas. During that phase there was also a lot of assessment going on of long-term need, and we started setting up centres for housing large numbers of people, and responding to psycho-social needs, creating child-friendly spaces in those centres. In the 90-day phase, we are focusing on long-term planning for economic recovery, infrastructure re-building, and community rehabilitation.

NGLS: What are some of the challenges faced by your organization in your relief efforts for the tsunami?

WV: The magnitude of the crisis is beyond anything the world has seen before, and hopefully will never see again. World Vision typically responds to two or three "global killer" disasters every year; a major sudden-onset natural disaster that kills around 20,000 people. This was many times larger, affecting so many countries, most of whose citizens are very poor to begin with. So far we have assisted about 500,000 people in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India and Thailand. The bulk of this work was carried out by over 800 national staff and volunteers providing immediate relief in the earlier stages of the response, and subsequently by over 100 international staff deployed throughout the region. Our staff on the ground has been working continuously since 26 December, often without much sense of the broader effort in the region, because their tasks are overwhelming. Some of our local staff has been hosting survivors in their own homes even while they assist the relief effort professionally. Coordinating all of this is probably the biggest challenge, along with making sure it synchronises with our existing activities in those countries. We just created this week a new structure to coordinate all of these activities from Singapore.

NGLS: How would you describe your relationship with the governments of the affected countries?

WV: Well-established and cooperative. The majority of our assistance has been focused on Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India and Thailand - countries where World Vision has worked for decades. The national authorities in all these countries have worked very hard to facilitate the massive influx of humanitarian actors, for which we are grateful.

NGLS:Typically, how much time is needed for an organization like World Vision to get involved in relief efforts for an emergency situation?

WV: 72 hours, usually less. In several cases our national staff was on the scene and providing assistance within a few hours of the first waves hitting.

NGLS: Do you feel the timeframe for response for NGOs is different based on whether the crisis is man made or related to natural causes?

WV: No. Some crises have a more distinct beginning than others, and some natural disasters happen in the midst of "man-made" ones. On the one hand, we have had major humanitarian response programmes in the last few years that took months to phase in: drought-induced food shortages in Southern Africa and the Horn of Africa, which are "slow onset" natural disasters. They are still deadly, but just not all in one day. We also respond to natural disasters that are in the middle of a man-made one: the Nyiragongo volcano eruption near Goma (Democratic Republic of Congo) several years ago is another example. On the other hand, there is no question the poverty (man-made) in the tsunami-countries made people much more vulnerable. The timeframe of our response is probably as dependent on the "CNN effect" (public attention) as anything else. But regardless of how clear-cut the distinction, or how widely the media coverage is - when rapid onset disasters occur, World Vision's response window is 72 hours or less.

NGLS: What is World Vision doing to maintain a high level of transparency and accountability in the way it manages contributions?

WV: We already have strong accountability measures; the vast majority of our assistance globally - about 80% - comes from private donors who are rightly very particular about where their donations go, and they expect that we will - and we do - track every penny. For the 20% of our total revenues that come from government grants, there are also very clear accountability mechanisms. Notwithstanding all of that, we are aware that individual donors and donor governments will be watching this crisis more closely than others because the amounts of assistance mobilised are unprecedented. World Vision has taken great care to communicate with our supporters in the last month about how we are assisting people.

NGLS: Have any major challenges arisen from the influx of donations? If so, what are some of the adjustments that your organization has had to make over the last month?

WV: The influx of donations at one or two points overwhelmed our systems in the first few days. We have received about US$200m in tsunami aid so far. We plan to work in all these countries in the long-term, and so we continue to encourage donations. It will take decades to rebuild these decimated communities. Our biggest challenge is ensuring that we integrate our tsunami response into our existing programmes in all the affected communities. We are taking great care to make sure our relief efforts do not totally overwhelm existing development programmes. In the background, however, there is a growing sense of dread among aid agencies that public support for the other equally-needy humanitarian crises in other parts of the world will decline. So far we have not seen any evidence of this, but there are anecdotal reports of people saying that "no one was to blame, that's why I'm giving to the tsunami." Even though a Sudanese villager in Darfur may experience just as bleak circumstances, and just as much beyond their control, I fear that some people somehow see tsunami victims as more 'innocent'. World Vision is a Christian organisation, and as such we inherit a spiritual tradition that sees God placing special value on the poor and suffering, regardless of their circumstance. In our worldview there is no concept of a "culpable" victim in Sudan versus an "innocent" victim of the tsunami. They are equally loved by God and as such have the right to be protected and receive assistance. To put it another way, the pledges of assistance to the tsunami have exceeded US$3 billion, which is nearly one tenth of what all governments give annually to aid everywhere. History seems to suggest we should be very worried that governments will reallocate their existing aid commitments to respond to this special crisis. But we cannot afford to slow the progress toward the MDGs or pause our battle against HIV/AIDS. We need to be very vigilant that governments find the funds for their unprecedented generosity from newfound sources.

NGLS: How would you describe the coordination efforts between NGOs currently involved in providing humanitarian assistance for the tsunami victims?

WV: A colleague of mine working in Indonesia described the coordination efforts as
"gentle chaos". We have found it unhelpful when an influx of unknown - and apparently inexperienced - agencies attempt to do things on their own. The large established agencies all know how to work within established inter-agency coordination mechanisms; we do this all over the world. But the 'briefcase' NGOs (to put it charitably) often behave as cavalier mavericks and can endanger their own safety as well as of those they are trying to help. The UN (see question 10) has done the best it can do, but if smaller NGOs choose to go their own way, there's little that the UN or the larger NGOs can do.

NGLS: How would you rate the quality of aid earmarked so far for the relief operation?

WV: Varied. As often happens in a disaster, there is a mismatch between what people elsewhere are willing to donate (often inappropriate) and what people really need. I read a story in early January about how a well-meaning European country had shipped bread to Sri Lanka. Apart from the exorbitant costs involved in shipping food that has a very short shelf life, it was also a very culturally inappropriate donation. Thankfully, the public is getting the message that it's most effective to donate cash so that appropriate goods can be purchased locally and hopefully boost local economies. The aid community has congratulated itself about the fact that major disease outbreaks (like cholera) were prevented, despite the significant public health risk of massive numbers of dead bodies. But as is usually the case, the local communities should take the majority of the credit. In Aceh, for instance, the local communities already had a high standard of public hygiene (i.e. boiling all drinking water), and it has served them well in preventing disease outbreaks.

NGLS: In what capacity have NGOs connected with the UN relief effort? How is this partnership progressing?

WV: The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) was initially overwhelmed - - like everyone else - by the scale of the crisis. OCHA has made major strides forward in getting a handle on coordination, especially once donor countries agreed to fold their own ad hoc coordination efforts under the UN's umbrella in mid-January. UNICEF has provided superb leadership on the protection of children. While there were some initial concerns that children in Sri Lanka and Indonesia might have been forcibly abducted amidst the chaos and either offered for adoption or captured into commercial sexual exploitation, UNICEF quickly brought together a group of agencies on separated children to disseminate guidelines and provide information. There are problem areas too; we have observed that UNHCR is allowing armed escorts in their vehicles in Indonesia. World Vision does not permit this practice and the UN's own inter-agency guidelines advise against this.

NGLS: How would you describe the views of NGOs vis-à-vis the UN coordination efforts in this emergency situation?

WV: Not impressive in the first phase but has made rapid progress and is evolving quickly, though there are still a few problem areas (see above). NGOs applaud the UN as it has taken a lead role in many sectors (like UNICEF with child protection). The UN has also identified the biggest needs right now as water/sanitation. The challenge will be to coordinate donors in the medium- to long-term to avoid duplication.

NGLS: The UN last week launched comprehensive plans for a global early warning system to reduce the death tolls created by natural hazards. The plan includes speedy transmission of data and training of populations at risks. Do you foresee World Vision and the NGO community playing an active role in this early warning system?

WV: Hopefully - it's a long-term challenge to create networks where NGOs can interact on early warning information. If there is an effective system established, we would certainly play an appropriate part in it.

NGLS: What do you believe to be some of the important lessons learned by the UN and other NGOs throughout this crisis? How will these lessons be incorporated into your work programme?

WV: It's too early yet for our own early warning exercise, which will unfold in the coming months. What affected communities need are:
· access to reliable early warning information;
· sturdier housing, and road infrastructure to mitigate against future disasters; and
· better national disaster planning, coupled with more robust telecommunications to enable an efficient first phase response.

It is important to bear in mind, however, that in most of the affected areas, the disaster hit communities are already affected by poverty. Poverty made this tsunami much more deadly than it would have been otherwise. We can point to other examples: Iran's earthquake last year killed tens of thousands of people whereas California's earthquake in the 90s was identical on the Richter scale but killed fewer than 100 people. The UN and NGOs must keep up the battle against poverty if we have any hope of averting disasters of the magnitude of the tsunami.

BACK