Abstract This introductory article presents the key methodological and interpretative themes that stand at the core of the special issue ‘Humanitarianism in Times of Democratic Transition: Perspectives from Southern Europe’, which links the political experience of democratic transitions in Spain, Portugal and Greece with new forms of humanitarianism and human rights activism. In doing so, it questions the interconnectedness of multiple Southern European humanitarian actors in short- and long-term processes of democratic consolidation. The original studies in this special issue shed light on the multifaceted experiences of transitional humanitarianism . Political shifts intersect with transnational labour solidarity, decolonisation and refugee integration, and the global rise of non-governmental organisations and their role in modelling democracy abroad. The studies thus provide new and cross-disciplinary lenses to understand how Southern European transitions shaped and were shaped by transnational humanitarian initiatives.
This article analyses the complexities of post-war humanitarian assistance to Greece that took the form of child placement. It humanises the 1970s human rights discourse by studying a case of Greek-to-American adoption and interrogates humanitarian interventions by tracing the tensions among the protagonists, who were situated at unequal levels of power. It shows how a growing resistance that contested Cold War interventions could only find its rightful place after the mid-1974 return of democracy to Greece. After the demise of the Greek dictatorship, a birth father finally benefited from the international human rights discourse that the regime’s oppression had prompted. This post-1974 democratic momentum introduced a revisionist perspective on ‘humanitarian’ adoptions. The article places child adoptions within the political, economic and ideological landscapes of the post-war era, while also attending to the human experience and agency of those who found themselves entangled in a new, Westernising system of providing care to minors. Thus, this study’s engagement with the post-dictatorship era lays bare contested legacies of older, low-bar adoption practices. It further contributes to ongoing debates about the role of international humanitarian aid, cross-border family formation, and ‘modern’ expertise in shaping the trajectories of nations and individuals in the aftermath of crisis.
This article observes the evolution of humanitarianism and human rights in Greece after the transition to a democratic regime in the Metapolitefsi starting in the summer of 1974. It contextualises the emerging Greek post-dictatorial solidarity initiatives for Cyprus as part of a wider democratisation process. Two landmark events pave the way to an analysis of the intersection of humanitarianism with polity change. For one, the coup of the junta regime and the following partition of Cyprus triggered a wave of Greek humanitarian aid for the Cypriot Government and the Greek Cypriot refugees in a show of spontaneous civil solidarity. In parallel, the recent experience of dictatorial torture and enduring political repression propelled figures and organisations active in the anti-dictatorial struggle to raise awareness of political detainees, prompting an international outcry against the infringement of human rights in Cyprus. Thus, at a second level, the article aims to understand the many parallel acts of sensibilisation towards human rights for both political detainees and refugees implemented in Greece at the beginning of the Metapolitefsi era. In the long run, humanitarianism for Cyprus formed a terrain to search for a post-dictatorial ‘national self’ and for political transnational solidarity.
Humanitarian negotiations have gained increased attention in recent years in the practitioner and scholarly fields alike. The attention has so far mostly been directed at negotiations in situations of armed conflict. Here, we approach the question of how humanitarians negotiate for access to rescue lives in a situation that is not one of armed conflict, but the EU’s external borders, where migrants risk their lives in their attempts to cross the Mediterranean to reach Europe. As NGO-led rescue operations are seen with suspicion, accused of facilitating migration to Europe, their operating space is severely reduced. How do they negotiate in distress situations at sea to obtain access to European harbours to disembark the rescued? What ethical dilemmas arise and how do they approach these? Following interviews with officials from various non-governmental organisations (NGOs) conducting Search and Rescue (SAR) at sea in the area between Libya and Italy, we find that most of our interlocutors see the overarching situation as a ‘non-dilemma’ (i.e. to rescue is a must). Yet, in what is a severely restricted negotiating space, we still identify how some concerns are and need to be weighed against others and how the SAR NGOs find ways to approach these.
Host families are vital in the lives of displaced people, assisting in meeting basic needs, safety and providing a sense of belonging. However, refugee host family practices in humanitarian contexts are underexplored, despite their prevalence. It is even more rarely acknowledged that refugee hosts are often themselves displaced – a relationship I call ‘refugee–refugee hosting’. In this paper, I draw on qualitative research with Sudanese refugees living in such arrangements in Amman, Jordan to show that refugee–refugee hosting is a form of everyday humanitarianism, a daily and informal act, enacted by and for refugees, supporting their needs in crisis contexts. Recognising hosting as a humanitarian act challenges the social, geographic and power distances inherent in existing understandings of the humanitarian system. The paper concludes with reflections on the implications of recognising refugee–refugee hosting as a form of humanitarianism.
Scholarship on humanitarian work relations often overlooks the logisticians and related supply chain personnel who strategically plan how to procure, stock and deliver aid to those affected by man-made and natural disasters. Drawing on interviews with ethnographic observations with this critical group of workers, this article shows how centring their backstage labour and workplace experiences expands and disrupts dominant constructions of humanitarianism’s scope and effects. Specifically, it demonstrates how logisticians make visible humanitarian dynamics that unfold beyond crisis contexts, and how their roles expose ongoing contestation over what kinds of labour are recognised as ‘humanitarian’ work within and across organisations. We argue that more ‘supply chain humanitarianism’, worker-centred approaches are necessary for updating understandings of the mechanisms and patterns that situate humanitarian aid as both a driver and mitigator of conflict and inequality.
What remains of home when walls are gone, paths erased and sacred trees destroyed? This article examines displacement in Benue State, Nigeria, tracing how internally displaced persons reconstruct erased landscapes through memory. Drawing on immersive ethnography, including oral histories, participatory mapping and architectural recall exercises in Naka, Abagena and Daudu camps, I demonstrate how elders, women and youth collectively sustain vernacular memoryscapes of compounds, shrines and kinship geographies lost to conflict. These practices challenge humanitarian logics that reduce displacement to camp grids, rendering villages and homes invisible. Memoryscapes operate as living archives and forms of testimony, preserving architectural heritage, articulating belonging and asserting dignity amid marginalisation. Through foregrounding displaced persons as custodians of cultural knowledge and spatial resilience, the paper contributes to debates on humanitarian governance, post-displacement futures and the politics of evidence. It shows that effective responses require engagement with memory and cultural infrastructures alongside material shelter to support survival, continuity and justice.
Initiatives for reform have been a fixture of the international humanitarian system for decades. Increasing interest in such initiatives on the part of scholars has shed light on the evolution and functions of various reform processes; however, histories remain limited and often concentrated on a handful of prominent episodes. This article recovers the history of the Independent Commission on International Humanitarian Issues, which started work in 1983 and published its final report in 1988. In tension with a shift during this period towards understanding ‘humanitarian’ issues as related to relief work, the Commission promoted an expansionist, humanist reform agenda which sought to address environmental, social and political problems as inherently interconnected. The article traces the background, context and work of the Commission, which has largely been left out of histories of reform of the humanitarian system. It argues that the Commission was ultimately displaced by more technical reforms sponsored within the United Nations and that its poor fit with the increasingly specialised and technocratic approaches of the humanitarian system has contributed to its neglect by later reformers and humanitarian studies.
This paper interrogates the evolving politics of humanitarian neutrality at a discursive – rather than operational – level, through an analytical review of aid organisations’ responses to two major conflicts in the Middle East: Syria (2011–24) and Gaza (2023–present). Drawing on predominant humanitarian discourse, including fundraising appeals, media statements and official communications, the study explores how neutrality has shifted from cautious detachment in Syria to a more vocal, maximalist framing in Gaza. While humanitarian narratives during the Syrian conflict often avoided naming the government as a perpetrator – even in the face of mass atrocities – humanitarian discourse on Gaza has increasingly identified Israel as an aggressor and invoked legal terminology, including ‘genocide’. This discursive shift is attributed to intensified grass-roots mobilisation, broader alignment with the Palestinian cause, and shifting geopolitical dynamics challenging the moral viability of neutral language. Despite this transformation in public-facing discourse, institutional practices often remain constrained by donor politics and bureaucratic limitations, raising questions about the gap between narrative and action. The Gaza moment reflects a broader crisis in humanitarian legitimacy, where neutrality is no longer a universally accepted ethical stance but a contested position under growing public scrutiny. The analysis contributes to critical debates on the role of humanitarian discourse in shaping moral and political engagement during conflict.
This article explores the insurmountable challenge of calculating the costs of humanitarian interventions for water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) provision in Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan. The inquiry into levels of spending on WASH was stymied by an absence of data on where humanitarian funding is channelled and to what end, despite adherence by responsible UN entities to the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI). While some financial data can be found through internet searches and by combing through reports uploaded to the IATI portal, it is patchy, carelessly tagged and with huge variations in levels of disaggregation. The article demonstrates how the international community is poorly placed to transition to a more sustainable and resource-efficient refugee response in Jordan or learn from errors, account for spending in meaningful ways and use data to improve performance and plan for future crises.
Sexual harassment, exploitation and abuse (SHEA) by civilian humanitarian aid workers is a severely understudied phenomenon with devastating effects on local communities and individuals. Humanitarian actors have attempted to address the problem with the implementation of zero-tolerance policies and improved reporting mechanisms. This qualitative study investigates the outcomes of using pedagogies based in experiential and personal narratives on men’s thinking about patriarchy as a tool of primary prevention within Plan International, an aid and development organisation. Findings suggest that the experience of sharing stories makes staff aware of the ways in which patriarchal beliefs contradict their values. This dissonance leads men to change their behaviours at work and at home, as well as to challenge their colleagues’ attitudes on homophobia and sexism. This pedagogical approach reduces the localisation burden of the workshop; however, local knowledge remains critical. The findings suggest ways forward in the broader sector’s approach to localisation.
This paper critically examines the uses and limitations of humanitarian language in addressing the ongoing atrocities and right violations in Gaza and the European borderlands. Drawing on Toni Morrison's notion of ‘oppressive language’, it demonstrates how humanitarian frames and terminology limit our understanding and action by erasing power and history, misrecognising the political agency and rights of Palestinians and refugees, and diverting attention from more just and transformative responses. Ultimately, it highlights the complicity of humanitarian actors in perpetuating and normalising the systems of violence and oppression they aim to challenge or mitigate. The paper concludes by exploring alternative vocabularies and advocating for a politics of refusal.
The war in Gaza reveals a profound transformation in the humanitarian sector. While Joël Glasman sees it as a breaking point, Michaël Neuman believes that Gaza is instead the culmination of a process that has already begun: the criminalisation of the enemy, political hardening, and a gradual shift away from the liberal framework. Both agree that non-governmental organisations (NGOs), traditionally supported by Western democracies, are seeing these alliances crumble as they face a loss of legitimacy and resources on the ground. Faced with these changes, NGOs are being called upon to radically rethink their role, their functioning and their autonomy.
Quantitative information plays an important role in humanitarian analysis. Indeed, humanitarian information systems have built substantive standards and procedures and have invested significantly in cultivating analyst skill in collecting, analysing and integrating quantitative data into acute food insecurity and other humanitarian analyses, while also developing robust measures to cross-check its validity, reliability and representativeness. However, qualitative information also plays an important role in the analyses that feed into humanitarian information systems. Collecting and considering such evidence can be at least as systematic as methods used for representative quantitative data. But guidance for gathering, analysing, cross-checking and integrating this broader range of evidence into analyses that support humanitarian decision-making continues to lag, hampering the effective functioning of an important facet of the humanitarian response infrastructure. This paper highlights the role of qualitative data, proposing approaches for addressing the real and perceived challenges of gathering and analysing data using qualitative methods with the objective of sparking demand for the development of a more structured and standardised means of integrating these methods into humanitarian analyses to support more holistic, accurate, effective and impactful humanitarian responses.
This interview with Alex de Waal, conducted by Miriam Bradley, followed his Landmark Lecture at the Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute at the University of Manchester on 18 February 2025. de Waal’s Landmark Lecture drew upon a dataset of historic and contemporary famines, compiled with the intent of showing the major patterns in the incidence, lethality and causes of famines over the last 150 years. The lecture pointed to the massive decline in famines in the later part of the twentieth century, associated with demographic, epidemiological, economic and above all, political factors, including the expansion of the scale and reach of liberal humanitarianism. de Waal also noted with concern that the last decade has seen a sharp reversal of this progress, notably an eclipse of humanitarian norms.
This article explores ‘everyday humanitarianism’, as evidenced by the efforts of local Tanzanians in the Kigoma region to support refugees and irregular migrants. Over the years, Kigoma has become a refuge for many Burundians and Congolese fleeing conflict and violence. While some have official refugee status, others lack proper documentation, making their lives precarious. Due to political tensions regarding refugees and migrants, Tanzanians may face criminalisation for assisting them. Despite this legal risk, some Tanzanians continue to engage in helping activities, such as providing short-term hosting or a safe place to stay, travel support, food, and work referrals, among other forms of assistance. Their willingness to engage in what we term ‘everyday humanitarian practices’ is influenced by personal experiences, socio-cultural and moral obligations, and religious values. While they often presented their motivations as purely altruistic, subtle expectations of gratitude occasionally threaded through their narratives. We suggest that the lens of ‘gifting’ offers a way to understand the relationships between emotion, generosity and mutual expectations embedded in ‘everyday humanitarian practices’ within an adversarial and vulnerable context.
Initiated in response to crises, humanitarian projects are intended to be limited in duration and closed once the situation stabilises. There has been discussion about humanitarian organisations’ responsibilities and accountability in how projects are closed. How these processes are viewed by individuals living in communities affected by humanitarian crises has received less attention. We conducted a qualitative study to explore perceptions and experiences of people living in six communities in the Philippines where humanitarian projects were closed. We worked with an Advisory Board and conducted interviews and focus groups with community members and local stakeholders. There were between nine and thirty-one participants per community, totalling 101 participants overall. We analysed the data using constant comparative techniques and identified elements of project closure that were especially valued by participants: transparency of plans and processes, collaboration with local leaders, participation of community members, sustainability, continuity and monitoring, fairness and preservation of relationships, and preparedness. Foregrounding community perspectives shifts the focus from organisational departure to the ongoing concerns and realities for people living in these communities and how they experience processes of crisis response and recovery. It can help identify opportunities to enhance people-centred approaches to humanitarian aid during and beyond the closure of projects.
The Western humanitarian sector is undergoing a profound decline driven by financial retrenchment, internal dysfunction and a failure of imagination, exacerbated by a technocratic system that prioritises institutional survival over moral purpose. As donor funding collapses and traditional models become obsolete, true humanitarianism must be reimagined through anti-systemic solidarity with diasporas, grassroots movements and marginalised communities. The future lies not in reforming the current system, but in creatively and compassionately building a new, inclusive framework that centres human dignity and collective empathy.
Inaccessible conflict-ridden contexts necessitating humanitarian programming from afar are onerous operational landscapes. Although local staff usually carry the burden of coordinating and implementing projects amid risk-laden environments, their encounters with safety and security risks are scantly heard and researched. By bringing everyday experiences with humanitarianism in conflict to the forefront, the paper investigates humanitarian action in practice, taking ‘western’-funded and led humanitarian projects in opposition-held Syria as a sample. It interrogates remote humanitarian programming and the perils of the ethically teetering praxis of Duty of Care associated with it and empirically puts the problematically overlooked tradition of ‘Risk Dumping’ on the front line. Sharing local voices from, and lived experiences in Syria and neighbouring countries including the author's, the paper explores the frailty of safety and security measures for locals in the Syria response and exposes the blatant absence of ethical and financial accountability towards those actualising internationally funded projects.
During forced displacement following war or disasters, foreign states often implement measures to either provide aid and services to displaced people in receiving countries, or allow for refugee resettlement to a third country. In the Middle East context, presently ridden by overlapping human-made conflicts, ‘Southern’ states have mostly engaged with aid provision in indirect ways, financing pre-existing programmes or entities which have already been operating on the ground. In addition, they often opt to provide resettlement opportunities in their own territory. This article specifically explores the role of Brazil in refugee and migrant reception, in the framework of unclear policies and lack of concrete support, which weaken its resettlement system. Based on one-to-one interviews conducted in February and May 2019 in Beirut with Syrian nationals who intended to resettle in Brazil, and with representatives of the Brazilian Consulate-General, the article explores the potential and paradoxes of Brazil’s humanitarian schemes. We argue that aiding refugees cannot involve crossroads-based strategies involving either resettlement or aid provision. Considering the role of political geography in producing the imagination of life in Brazil, the article shows how the country’s eligibility measures for resettlement are understood, contested and/or welcomed by refugees from Syria and Brazilian citizens themselves.
