Digitizing, Data and Development: What Follows a Humanitarian Information Center?
Joe Crowley, David Saunders Afghanistan Information Management Service Kabul, Afghanistan
Background “One casualty of the war in Afghanistan has been data.” ---Jim Bever, USAID The value of Humanitarian Information Centers (HICs) is widely recognized in the arena of international disaster response and post-conflict assistance. In the past several years HICs have proven their worth in numerous settings including Bosnia, Afghanistan, Liberia, Sierra Leone, the Occupied Palestinian Territories, North Korea, and currently Sudan. Indeed, aid workers have come to expect the presence of an HIC and will make it their first stop upon arrival in a new country. Products such as maps, Who is Doing What Where databases (WDWW), demographic data, and even telephone directories or meeting schedules are standard items expected to be available at any HIC. Past successes and current demands have necessitated plans to establish HICs in all countries where the United Nations are actively coordinating humanitarian affairs. This bodes well for the future of GIS and information management in complex emergencies and will be welcome news among those responsible for national surveys, assessments, program planning, monitoring and evaluation, or even people who just need a good road map. Although the HIC is a necessary and popular service in the emergency phase, its role in development is less clear. Typically, when the international response has run its course after a year, the media turns its attention to the latest events unfolding in a new region. Funding tapers off and aid workers pack up and leave for the next disaster. Hopefully their departure signals a new beginning for the government and citizens of the host country. Donor assistance and programming assumes a new development focus rather than just meeting immediate humanitarian needs. These development goals can take a variety of forms such as capacity building, improved access to education and health care, Millinium Development Goals (MDGs), good governance, infrastructure rehabilitation, and professional training. All of these development activities require information to evaluate needs, design programs, and measure success. This information is typically the same type of baseline data gathered during the emergency response phase and made available at an HIC. Likewise the equipment and skills necessary to manage and analyze the data often already exist within the HIC. This makes the HIC a rare and valuable commodity to development professionals who are often handicapped by the paucity of information management capacity in country.
The fate of an HIC after the emergency often depends upon the unique dynamics of the situation. Previous HICs have evolved into NGOs, been partially handed over to government after several weeks of intensive training, or they have continued to function as HICs, but at a decreased level of funding and activity. Among all HICs, the Afghanistan Information Management Service (AIMS) has developed the greatest degree of autonomy and has evolved into a full-fledged capacity building institution supporting a wide variety of development activities. It has managed to implement a new development mandate by building upon its success as an HIC, while seeking new partners and projects in order to develop information management capacity in Afghanistan. The lessons learned at AIMS can be used to help other HICs manage the transition from emergency to development while avoiding many of the pitfalls that may limit its effectiveness, or end the project all together. Government Relations If an HIC is to succeed as a development entity it must continue to meet the needs of the development community while at the same time securing a place for itself in an often chaotic and volatile environment. During the emergency an HIC will operate under the protection of the UN mission, usually as a project of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). However, during the transition to development that protection may no longer be available, and new allies must be sought. An effective strategy is to align the project with key donors and government departments that will offer financial and political support for at least several years. Good government relations cannot be underestimated in the development environment. Although the government may be dysfunctional or nonexistent in an emergency, it will quickly assume authority with the departure of a large international mission. The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) is the logical parent organization for a transitioning HIC. Typically under UNDP development projects must partner with government in order to be funded and continue working in country. This partnership should ensure capacity building and transfer of knowledge to the appropriate government body. Choosing the most appropriate government partner(s) can often be like navigating a minefield. The HIC must cultivate good relations early on and involve the government as much as possible. Initially there will be a variety of shifting alliances and political positioning among prominent ministries as they jockey for power and funding in the incipient government. Two logical partners for HICs are the national mapping and/or statistics office. Both of these have a need for the cartographic, analytic and information management skills of the HIC. However, these departments are usually found under the wing of a larger ministry, or exist as independent entities. Partnering with them may be logical for capacity building, but not for political survival. It may be best to form a relationship with a larger more powerful ministry such as Planning, Urban and Rural Development, or Finance. These ministries will be able to provide the political umbrella needed for an HIC to carry on building capacity in multiple departments including Cartography and Statistics. Otherwise there is a serious risk of the resources of an HIC being diverted to suit a single need, or worse yet to be picked apart for its hardware and offices supplies.
Another important factor in partnering with government is forming good relations as early as possible. As soon as the HIC is staffed and operational, it should seek out government partners, offer introductory training, develop projects with government secondments, and share its vision of information management with key political allies. There is always a long period of mutual suspicion and distrust that must be overcome at the earliest possible stage. The early involvement of government will not guarantee success, but will at least show transparency and good faith. It will also help to build the necessary pool of talent among nationals who will be needed for the plethora of forthcoming development projects. Assuming the HIC is able to link with relative ministries or government departments, there must also be a focus on higher levels of cooperation. All work should be conducted with an eye toward sustainability and replication by government. This is especially true when employing practical and appropriate solutions to technical problems. For example, standard software and hardware should always be used rather than expensive custom applications that will require international expertise and maintenance. Another practical way of building trust at an early stage is to help the government in seeking funding and developing workplans. Although donors may be eager to finance large infrastructure and agricultural projects, they often overlook the information management component needed for reporting or future evaluation. Large line ministries may also be the focus of donor’s attention, rather than the smaller mapping or statistics departments. By building an information management or mapping component into large national scale proposals, the HIC can empower its partners to manage their resources while beginning to liaise with donors and plan for their future. Organizational Culture The organizational culture of an HIC is by nature very different from information management activities supporting development. The focus of the project is on rapid deployment, high impact, integration of standard products, and meeting the immediate needs of the emergency. Most aspects of the project are geared toward a six-month time line, with little consideration given to what may follow, or the possibility of extending the mandate. This is perhaps a necessary component of the response phase, but does not exclude planning for the shift to development and the unique challenges that scenario may offer. A long-term strategy for survival must involve UNDP and government immediately. Negotiations for handover, project documents, staff, and financial support must all be secured well before the expiration date of the HIC. Merely extending staff contracts, or accessing unspent project funds is not a strategy for development. The project must also have a vision of where it is going with goals and milestones to mark progress. What form will the HIC assume – NGO, UN, government? The unique political landscape will usually dictate the structure. Likewise, long-term commitments for funding and staff are an absolute must for the vision to become a reality. The need for continuity often outweighs all technical or program considerations. It is important that the key staff are well-known and trusted in local circles, and have a keen understanding of the information management issues in country. All of these considerations are contingent upon a clear exit strategy from OCHA to UNDP. Donors, government, and UN must be in agreement on how the project will
function, who will be responsible, and what results are expected. Although there will be a clear moment of transition based on project documents and funding, management policy within the HIC should start preparing well in advance. This is possible by seconding UNDP staff into the HIC before handover. They would allow the HIC to continue its work, but also prepare all the necessary procedures and start to implement development strategies. An effective philosophy of management is also crucial to success. A laissezfaire attitude is inappropriate in development and will achieve nothing. Likewise, the reactive style of an emergency response is equally ineffective in that there will an overextension of resources with no visible progress or results. Instead there should be a clear directive toward working with key partners on projects beneficial to the government and the development community in general. The goals should be realistic and attainable, but also demonstrate clear results in a reasonable time frame. Simple transparent reporting structures are also an important tool for managing the development of the project and give everyone a clear picture of progress. Typical business tools such as account management, Gantt charts, quarterly and annual reports, activity matrices, SWOT assessments, and management meetings, enable the staff to manage their time, chart progress, and give the government and donors a clear assessment of progress. Another threat to stability is the loss of national staff to other agencies, or private business. The staff of an HIC have a very unusual and selective skill set and will find their services in demand. Another facet of good management is to make the job and the benefits appealing enough for staff to stay. Although it may not be possible to compete on a purely financial level, it is quite easy to create a clear structure or progression around job titles, responsibilities, and salary, so that staff know exactly where they are, and what they need to do to move up. Long-term contracts will give them the security to work toward their goals and will alleviate the desire for job hunting. Likewise a dedicated training budget with time and travel allotment will add tremendous incentive, especially the younger technical members who are always seeking to add new skills and certifications to their credentials. Although this is a relatively simple strategy toward retaining staff it is surprisingly absent in the post-conflict/development world. In addition, an effective organizational culture will include the attention to customer services for which HICs have an excellent reputation. The continuous compliments from customers, and a pleasant, comfortable office will greatly enhance the moral and give the staff a feeling of ownership. It would be beneficial but perhaps not feasible to institute these policies within the HIC. However, when a clear mandate for development has been established, it should be accompanied by an equally clear shift in priorities along with a more purposeful, focused approach toward achieving project goals. Technological Bridge Perhaps one of the most exciting aspects of guiding an HIC toward development is the positive influence the HICs achievements can have. The HIC will become a technological bridge to the new government, built upon the information management and standards work it has acheived. The HIC is in a unique position to promote standards across government and agencies thereby allowing the exchange of data and preparing the
foundation for a government MIS. HIC resources are also valuable to many sectors and will have an important role in a variety of projects, analyses, and planning. The promotion of standards and the adoption of standard data sets can leverage the HIC assets so that organizations may also access products such as shape files, Remote Sensing material, demographic data, and technical expertise. One of the most important aspects of a technological bridge within an HIC is the potential for training. If the HIC is to build capacity in government, one key element will be training. The HIC will have both national and international GIS and databases experts among their staff. It may decide to use national staff in order to offer specific technical training in the local language. It may also use national staff to target students, and identify, arrange and evaluate other technical training courses for its key government partners. Likewise, specific courses may be designed for partners that use local examples and material for instruction. Once government employees demonstrate a minimum standard of competency they may return to the ministry with their new skills, or be seconded into the HIC (or other agency) office to work on their government-specific projects. The focus on training means that government staff will receive the direct technical benefits of the HIC, in preparation for eventual self-sufficiency. By default, an HIC becomes a focal point for technology and data management because of its unique mandate and skills, and also because of the lack of capacity in country. Many organizations and government departments will seek advice from the HIC on a range of issues from IT assesments, to hardware procurement, software licensing, in addition to training and professional skill development. The HIC will find itself in an excellent position to offer advice that will have a positive effect on its mandate, while building a good foundation for all future MIS activities. In the case of software the HIC may be able to act as a middle-man for government and negotiate multi-user licenses with updates or donations. It may also advise the government against expensive one-off applications that may not be appropriate for a developing country. In addition the HIC may also find itself providing IT support for the incipient government. Although this should be discouraged in the long run, it helps in building trust and confidence with government and guarantees the government will get a good start with their MIS systems. Using the HIC as a technological bridge will minimize duplication and maximize results when building the information management capacity of the new government. By becoming the focal point for IM issues the HIC will be informed about data exercises, software, hardware, databases, and future plans regarding their implementation. It will be in a position to shape opinion and policy about the IM and help prioritize the needs of the government. The Changing Nature of Data and Information When preparing an HIC for transition to development, it must be remembered that the timeline can be short. The life span of an HIC is typically 6 months to 1 year (although the needs may vary with the situation). This provides very little time in which to migrate the HIC, let alone keep up with all the pressing needs of the day. However, it must be remembered that a MIS is also an important component of emergencies as well as development (although they tend to be more ad-hoc and demand-driven). If they are
structured for compatibility and transition there need not be a difficult period of functionality or usability with the onset of development. During the emergency phase there will be numerous field surveys and data gathering exercises conducted by a variety of actors. The HIC will advise on standard data sets, location information, methodology, and data management. By influencing the data collection process, the HIC is actually helping to define data standards. The data gathered will become the baseline information for the country and used to formulate future development activities, as well as being compatable among all users. Since the HIC adds continuity through to the development phase there is a guarantee that the emergency data standards will match the development data standards. This is crucial not only for the immediate comparison of data, but also for mapping trends over time, and as a platform for a government MIS. HICs are currently deployed with many standard products already available and populated with data, so the product development time is reduced after the initial project set-up. If these products were modified to accommodate development needs, it would facilitate a more seamless transition (examples include standardized coding for development, industry, donors, sectors and metrics, etc…). This would make standard products such as the WDWW, survey of surveys, and data repositories, function just as well in development as it does in emergencies. Likewise, the new data coming in should be standardized in a similar manner, thereby facilitating its use for development. It must be remembered that funding drops off quickly for nation-wide inventory surveys, assessments, and analysis. It is crucial to ensure that the opportunities available during the emergency are not wasted due to incompatible data, or faulty IM systems. The HIC must be seen to be adapting to the new data needs, while fulfilling its duties to government. Otherwise it will be considered a relic of the emergency phase and its influence will be diluted. By keeping an eye toward development needs during the emergency, an HIC can prepare for the transition and be ready for the IM needs of the government as it becomes responsible for national programming and funding. Another positive influence the HIC can have is the promotion of metadata. The focus on immediate delivery dominates information collection and the metadata is often overlooked, or lost in the confusion. An HIC can effectively promote the importance of metadata through its own data sets, and through its cross-cutting work with other organizations. Although metadata may be forgotten in the emergency, it becomes much more crucial to development as follow-up programming and long range planning is based on those initial exercises. Conclusion The importance and successes of the HICs are well known in the aid community. That they should continue in their mandate, and be supported for deployment in future UN missions is a foregone conclusion. What is less clear is the role an HIC can have after the emergency, and how can it most effectively use its resources to achieve development goals. By drawing on the experience of AIMS there are several areas of importance that must be addressed if the HIC is to successfully transition to development. These include: Good Government Relations, Organization Culture, the HIC as a Technological Bridge, and The Changing Nature of Data.
Although there are many recommendations within each of these areas they are all similar in the sense that they maximize the existing skills and assets of the HIC while making sure it is properly positioned in the development environment. An HIC must be ready to shift to long term plans and deliverables more compatible with development work, rather than maintaining an “emergency attitude”. It must also assume a flexible approach to projects and partners that will benefit government, and build capacity. These examples may not be appropriate for every HIC or every emergency. However, it is necessary to understand the dynamics of transition so that appropriate decisions may be made regarding the future of the HIC. The shift to development is both a specific moment in time (based on funding, project documents and mandates), and a gradual evolution of attitude and work. An HIC must be ready to meet these two aspects of transition if it is to survive the emergency and not only provide its services to the development community, but also act as a model of effectiveness and excellence for the government.
For more information contact: joecrowley@hotmail.com davidsaunders@undp.org www.aims.org.af