Institutional Humanitarianism

We have already covered a lot of ground, and I am hopeful that you have enjoyed what you read so far. I introduced you to the basics of convergence theory. Then I guided you on how to go about understanding the implications of this massive modern global phenomenon by discussing the role of evolution and how it affects the different perspectives that humanitarians and survivors have of disasters. Now it is time to dive into deeper waters. For many years, they have instilled in us, and we have all (including humanitarians) bought into the idea that humanitarian decisions are objectively made and based on the needs of the people and the circumstances created by the disaster event. This is far from true. If post-disaster decisions were objectively and exclusively based on local needs, all humanitarians worldwide would make the same decisions. That is certainly not the case. The “needs” of the people are nothing but another piece of information used to make decisions. It is filtered and processed like other information, such as geopolitical interests, funding restrictions, and changes in domestic legislation.