Cross-Country Collaboration in Cash Assistance: Worthwhile or wasted effort?

Humanitarian programmes are largely conceived and designed within the confines of one country’s borders. This remains true in Sudan’s escalating humanitarian crisis – even though it impacts at least five neighbouring countries. Cash and voucher assistance (CVA) is one of the tools that humanitarian actors are using to deliver life-saving assistance in Sudan and in countries hosting displaced Sudanese people. Could cross-country collaboration by aid practitioners help to unlock some of the barriers and help deliver better aid to the populations in crisis?

A regional crisis

The latest crisis in Sudan began in April 2023 when clashes between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces escalated. Since then, it has evolved into a major regional humanitarian emergency. OCHA estimates that 26 million people – over half the population in Sudan – face a food security crisis. Famine conditions were confirmed in one IDP camp in North Darfur and the risk of famine spreading remains high. As of June 2024, more than 10 million people were forced to flee their homes; at least 1.8 million of those displaced people fled to the Central African Republic, Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia and South Sudan. Many of these countries face pre-existing humanitarian crises, which are now being exacerbated by the Sudan conflict.

Amidst the turmoil, markets in Sudan have been tested but remain active. The Sudan crisis impacts neighbouring countries. While cross-border trade continues, the direction of trade has been reversed with Sudan importing commodities from countries to which it previously exported. Trade routes in South Sudan have shifted away from Sudan towards Ethiopia, Kenya, and Uganda. Although liquidity challenges persist, humanitarian actors have devised  innovative ways to deliver CVA to populations in crisis. In fact, amidst the numerous access challenges, CVA remains the most promising modality to avert famine in the wake of access constraints.

Can a regional lens enable more effective people-centred aid?

Three observations from the Sudan response demonstrate how a regional perspective can enhance the effectiveness of CVA in crises with multi-country impacts:

1. Bridging humanitarian contexts through active listening

Humanitarians need to be resourceful to deliver CVA in challenging contexts.  Active listening and gathering of information in one country can help the response in neighbouring countries. For example, a commercial markets analysis by the Sudan Cash Consortium, generated insights into market functionality in difficult to access areas by examining trends not only in Sudan but also in neighbouring countries. Another way active listening could be leveraged in such a context is by changing the way we listen to displaced populations. Understanding the experiences – particularly of those displaced across borders – could help enhance service delivery both in their current location and the areas they have departed from. With the right platforms, country operations could share vital information and data, thereby improving situational awareness and facilitating problem-solving. World Vision’s Good Enough Context Analysis for Rapid Response (GECARR) in Democratic Republic of Congo and Burundi are examples of how this approach has been used in other contexts to inform the design of inter-agency actions. 

2. Engaging with the latest thinking on route-based programming:

Some actors in the region have begun exploring cross-border payment solutions amid massive population movements. Emerging ideas on CVA in contexts of human mobility emphasize that responses must shift from a country-focus to a route-based approach enabling assistance provision at different points along their journeys. This approach would require strong collaboration among actors across countries to develop coordinated programmes. Collaboration between the Cash Working Groups (CWG) and other coordination bodies across countries would be crucial for designing, implementing, and delivering cohesive and aligned programmes. It may also necessitate coordination across private sector entities to support digital communications, payments services, and infrastructure that works across borders and spans multiple countries.

3. Sharing real time learning and good practices

The ongoing crisis in Sudan has impacted several countries in the region. In each of these countries, humanitarian organizations are working to provide assistance to refugees, often facing similar challenges such as restricted access, limited financial infrastructure, and insufficient funding. With so much to address and the urgency of the situation exchange of learning can be deprioritized amidst delivering CVA to hard-to-reach people, yet, sharing real-time learning can significantly improve responses. For instance, lessons from local response rooms and Group Cash Transfers in Sudan are valuable for other hard-to-reach areas in neighbouring countries. Moreover, sharing existing tools and practices from more advanced CWGs and adapting them to local contexts can save time and resources. With a regional lens and strong coordination, innovative solutions can be shared and adapted across countries as the crisis evolves rather than after the fact.

How can we make this happen?

We posed the question to CWG leads and co-leads in a recent workshop. The discussion highlighted a couple of opportunities and dilemmas as follows:

1. Strengthening coordination and exchange between CWGs.

CWGs leads in East and Southern Africa recognize the potential benefits of learning and coordinating between the different countries for CVA. They reflected that it would require a dedicated space and time to engage regularly and to remain open-minded to collaboration and improvement. However, pursuing this avenue would require significant prioritization efforts and self-organization on the CWG leads’ part, considering they are already overstretched managing a considerable number of other responsibility.

2. Utilizing regional CVA coordination structures.

The leads also pointed to the East Africa Regional CWG as the mechanism through which national CWGs could be mobilized to collaborate with and learn from each other. On the other hand, regional CWGs are not set up to be responsible for operational coordination and have limited capacity to coordinate CWGs. They also sit outside the formal cash coordination model making them ill equipped for the task. As the IASC cash coordination model is premised on national coordination, rather than a regional lens, an alternative could be the global to support country level cash coordination technically and in terms of capacity with the overall aim of improving the quality and effectiveness of cash coordination.

Collaboration between CWGs is a good starting point, but to achieve effective cross-country collaboration, a comprehensive approach is needed including joint identification of the critical elements to tackle and coordinated implementation of agreed solutions across countries for all sectors and modalities. This would require a holistic approach with mechanisms for technical discussions on leveraging perspectives and learning, and agreeing on arrangements for information sharing. This perspective aligns with the findings of a report published by IECAH on regional coordination mechanisms in response to mixed movements in the Americas region. The report, while highlighting similar challenges recommends the development of a comprehensive strategy to address the needs and protect the rights of migrants and refugees at each stage of their journeys with a working group to address its implementation and monitoring. Furthermore, the report emphasizes the need for mechanisms that facilitate technical discussions, incorporate diverse perspectives, and consolidate learnings across regions.

Final thoughts

The ongoing humanitarian crisis in Sudan underscores the urgent need for integrated approaches to aid that transcend national borders. A regional perspective could significantly enhance the effectiveness of CVA in the following ways:

• Insights from active listening in one country can enhance responses in other countries
• Cross-country coordination can improve support for populations on the move
• Sharing real-time lessons can boost response effectiveness across crises

On the other hand, existing coordination structures are not well equipped to engage regionally, and further reflection is needed to realize the benefits of cross-country working without adding to the many layers of coordination. In the Americas region for instance, this study recommended progressively adjusting existing coordination mechanisms into a unified system to align with the realities of human mobility. This approach may not be applicable to other regions given the unique dynamics of population movements in LAC but one thing is for sure – reimagining coordination to incorporate cross-country aspects could be pivotal. Whether this is done by enhancing existing mechanisms or fully reorganizing them is a shift worth considering.

What do you think? What other compelling benefits do you see for cross-country coordination and collaboration? And, in what ways could these benefits be leveraged responsibly? Give us your feedback.

 

Main image: Families fled Khartoum with nothing but a bag of few belongings. They found shelter in public buildings such as schools, crammed in classroom. NRC was the first aid agency to distribute cash assistance to families in White Nile, so they can cover their more urgent needs. ©Ahmed Omer/NRC/2023.