U.S. Humanitarian Aid is average in generosity, poor in addressing Human Rights.
Sweden, Norway and Denmark Receive Top Ranking.
Austria, Portugal and Greece Rank Last.

The world’s wealthiest countries do not apply recognized best practices for humanitarian aid, according to the “Humanitarian Response Index 2008,” a new report released today by the international non-profit organization DARA (Development Assistance Research Associates). The United States — the world’s largest provider of humanitarian aid by volume — ranks only 15 out of 23 donors for overall humanitarian performance. As a result of donor practices, such as not providing aid in an impartial or timely manner, countless people affected by natural disasters, epidemics, and war have not received the assistance they vitally needed.

“We can and must do better. We have the resources, the knowledge and the capabilities to do so. The millions of people affected by crises deserve as much“. Kofi Annan’s view on HRI 2008.

In 2008, natural and man-made disasters have combined with the global financial crisis, food shortages, high fuel prices, and the continuing impact of climate change to put the world’s most vulnerable people at great risk, according to DARA. Millions of people are still dealing with the aftermath of earthquakes that rocked China, in which 40 million were killed, injured or displaced. When a cyclone ravaged Myanmar, 100,000 people lost their lives and another 2 million lost their homes. More than 4 million people continue to live in dire poverty in war-torn Sudan. Violent conflict in recent days in the Democratic Republic of the Congo has left thousands of innocent civilians dead.

Despite $8 billion invested in humanitarian relief intervention in 2007, the report argues that wealthy nations do not always act in accordance with “Good Humanitarian Donorship” or GHD, a set of guiding principles and practices agreed upon in 2005 by the Organization of Economic Cooperation’s  Development Assistance Committee (OECD/DAC), which includes the United States.

Referring to the Humanitarian Response Index, the economist Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, says that “humanitarian assistance is essential for the survival and recovery of hundreds of millions of people affected by conflict and disaster – and needs an urgent overhaul.”

“Though humanitarian emergencies are on the rise, wealthy governments continue to fail to meet their commitments to finance and support efforts that could effectively help the world’s poorest tackle the challenges brought on by massive increases in the price of food stuffs, amongst other crises,” says Sachs. “The rich governments of Europe and the US have mobilized roughly $3 trillion to bail out the global financial sector in the past month alone, yet they continue to sideline their own commitments to support humanitarian action and effective long-term development strategies that can end poverty and better prepare the poor to cope with future crises.”

Silvia Hidalgo, DARA’s Executive Director and co-founder, says that “Aid is not about generosity, it’s a question of responsibility.”

“We developed the index as a way of holding governments accountable to the principles they agreed to,” Hidalgo says. “We’re not just talking about numbers and bureaucracy – we’re using this tool in the hope of preventing needless deaths and rebuilding the lives of people whose world has fallen apart. Today, more than ever, as the financial crisis threatens to reduce humanitarian funding, we must make sure that future humanitarian aid is distributed in the most effective manner possible.”

To develop the donor rankings, DARA teams conducted field research on the ground in 11 countries that experienced crisis in 2007-2008, where they interviewed representatives of more than 350 humanitarian organizations and collected 1,400 questionnaires from agency staff. DARA also pulled quantitative data from different sources, including the OECD and UN agencies. By combining this qualitative and quantitative information, DARA measured each donor country according to 58 indicators that aim to capture the essence of the GHD best practices.

Key findings from the HRI 2008:

• The top three donor countries remained the same from the 2007 HRI index: Sweden, Norway and Denmark. Each of these countries received a number of first-place rankings for the 58 indicators.
• The bottom quarter of the index is occupied by France, Austria, Italy, Portugal, and Greece. These countries received generally poor evaluations from agencies in the field.
• The United States remained in the lower half of the ranking, at 15 out of 23, pulled down by below-average scores for providing aid with “neutrality” and supporting long-term development and a next-to-last score (before Greece) for upholding international humanitarian law and human rights law.

The report calls for wealthy countries to do more to help the victims of disasters by:

• Providing aid in an impartial manner, instead of according to political, economic, or security agendas.
• Strengthening the capacity of the humanitarian system to respond to future crises, including at the local level.
• More accurately assessing humanitarian needs, so that aid reaches those who need it most, when they need it.
• Linking relief efforts with long-term development strategies for more lasting impact.

“President-elect Barack Obama has expressed his desire to re-establish the United States’ moral standing in the world,” said Ms. Hidalgo. “American leadership in the field of humanitarian relief would improve the perception that people around the world have of the United States and would also inspire other donor countries to do their best on behalf of the world’s least fortunate.”

Link to HRI 2008 website

Humanitarian Response Index 2008: Measuring Commitment to Best Practice