Search

In 2009, high-income countries committed in the Copenhagen Accords to mobilize US$100 billion a year by 2020 in climate finance for low- and middle-income countries. Oxfam reported on the progress of this commitment in 2016, 2018 and 2020. This year’s report finds that high-income countries have not only failed to deliver on their commitment, but also – as in previous years – generous accounting practices have allowed them to overstate the level of support they have actually provided. Moreover, much of the finance has been provided as loans, which means that it risks increasing the debt burden of the countries it is supposed to help., This paper calls on high-income countries to accelerate the mobilization and provision of climate finance, and to make up the shortfall from previous years, in a way that is equitable and just. High-income countries must provide finance that is transparent, with genuine accountability mechanisms, and that allows for far more local ownership and responsiveness to the needs of communities it is intended to reach. People on the frontlines of the climate crisis must have the funding they were promised for adaptation and mitigation, and to address the loss and damage they are already experiencing as a result of climate impacts., En 2009, les pays à revenu élevé se sont engagés par le biais de l’Accord de Copenhague à mobiliser 100 milliards de dollars par an avant 2020 dans le cadre du financement climat pour les pays à revenu faible et intermédiaire. Oxfam a rendu compte de la progression dans la réalisation de cet engagement en 2016, 2018 et 2020. Cette dernière édition du rapport révèle que les pays à revenu élevé ont non seulement manqué à leur engagement, mais ils ont, au cours des années précédentes, recouru à des pratiques comptables généreuses leur ayant permis de surestimer le niveau de soutien qu’ils apportent en réalité. De plus, une grande partie des financements ont été fournis sous forme de prêts, au risque d’augmenter le poids de la dette des pays qu’ils sont censés aider., Ce rapport appelle les pays à revenu élevé à accélérer la mobilisation et la fourniture des financements climat ainsi qu’à compenser les lacunes des années précédentes, de manière équitable et juste. Les pays à revenu élevé doivent fournir des financements transparents, s’articulant autour de véritables mécanismes de redevabilité, pour une plus grande appropriation locale et une bien meilleure réactivité aux besoins des communautés visées. Les populations se trouvant en première ligne de la crise climatique doivent impérativement recevoir le financement promis afin de faire face à l’adaptation et à l’atténuation et compenser les pertes et dommages découlant déjà des impacts climatiques.

The triple nexus (H-D-P) approach aims to challenge a linear and sequential intervention logic. Humanitarian aid, development programmes and peacebuilding programmes must be implemented simultaneously to address the systemic inequalities and weaknesses that keep people in poverty and make them vulnerable. This paradigm shift requires major transformations in both the humanitarian and development sectors. These case studies show how some of Oxfam's interventions are adapting to and incorporating this new logic.

As 2020 draws to a close, the economic devastation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic shows no sign of abating. Without urgent action, global poverty and inequality will deepen dramatically. Hundreds of millions of people have already lost their jobs, gone further into debt or skipped meals for months. Research by Oxfam and Development Pathways shows that over 2 billion people have had no support from their governments in their time of need. Our analysis shows that none of the social protection support to those who are unemployed, elderly people, children and families provided in low- and middle-income countries has been adequate to meet basic needs. 41% of that government support was only a one-off payment and almost all government support has now stopped., Decades of social policy focused on tiny levels of means-tested support have left most countries completely unprepared for the COVID-19 economic crisis. Yet, countries such as South Africa and Bolivia have shown that a universal approach to social protection is affordable, and that it has a profound impact on reducing inequality and protecting those who need it most., In addition to the full paper and executive summary, an Excel file with the data analysed by Oxfam and Development Pathways is available to download on this page, along with an annex on the crisis in Latin America and the Caribbean.

In 2009, high-income countries promised to provide $100bn a year in climate finance to low- and middle-income countries by 2020. They have failed to keep this promise. Their official reports claim that the climate finance they provided and mobilized reached $83.3bn in 2020, but Oxfam estimates the real value was only around a third of that reported., Immediate action is needed to restore trust in the $100bn goal and ensure that the provision of climate finance is fair and robust. For too long, most high-income countries have persisted in counting the wrong things in the wrong way. There are too many loans, too much debt, too few grants, too little for adaptation, and too much dishonest and misleading accounting., This paper sets out recommendations for action at COP27 and beyond to rectify these issues, restore trust in climate finance and stop the world’s poorest climate-vulnerable countries and communities being short-changed of the climate finance they urgently need, and to which they are entitled., En 2009, les pays à revenu élevé se sont engagés à verser 100 milliards de dollars par an de financement climat aux pays à revenu faible et intermédiaire d’ici 2020. Ils n’ont pas atteint cet objectif. Leurs rapports officiels affirment que le financement climat fourni et mobilisé a atteint 83,3 milliards de dollars en 2020, mais Oxfam estime que la valeur du financement climat effectivement fourni n’a représenté qu’un tiers environ du montant déclaré., Une action immédiate est nécessaire pour restaurer la confiance dans l’objectif des 100 milliards de dollars et pour veiller à ce que le financement climat soit équitable et solide. La plupart des pays à revenu élevé ont trop longtemps continué de comptabiliser des éléments inappropriés de façon incorrecte. Il y a trop de prêts, trop de dettes, trop peu de subventions, trop peu pour l’adaptation, et trop de comptabilité malhonnête et trompeuse., Ce rapport formule des recommandations d’action pour la COP27 et au-delà en vue de corriger ces problèmes, de restaurer la confiance dans le financement climat et d’éviter que les pays et les communautés les plus pauvres du monde, vulnérables sur le plan climatique, soient privés du financement climat dont ils ont besoin de toute urgence et auquel ils ont droit.

The world has entered a new and dangerous era of climate change impacts, causing huge loss and damage and driving up inequality in the world’s poorest countries and communities that have contributed least to the climate crisis. New research by Oxfam estimates that funding requirements for UN humanitarian appeals linked to extreme weather are eight times higher than they were 20 years ago, and over the past five years nearly half of appeal requirements have gone unmet. Funding for emergency humanitarian response is piecemeal and painfully inadequate, as is broader support to address loss and damage such as rebuilding homes and vital infrastructure., Scaled-up financial support from governments, corporations and individuals most responsible for causing the climate crisis, and most able to pay, is an immediate necessity. A new finance facility must be created to help ensure that finance to address loss and damage is accessible and sustained, is additional to adaptation, mitigation and ODA commitments, and is delivered in accordance with the principles of climate justice.

New analysis shows the economic crisis caused by Coronavirus could push over half a billion people into poverty unless urgent and dramatic action is taken. This virus affects us all, even princes and prime ministers. But the equality ends there. By exploiting the extreme inequalities between rich and poor people, rich and poor nations and between women and men, unchecked this crisis will cause immense suffering., We can only beat this virus through coming together as one. Developing countries must act to protect their people, and demand action from rich nations to support them. Rich country governments must massively upscale their help – led by the G20. This paper lays out an Economic Rescue Plan For All that meets the scale of the crisis, mobilizing at least $2.5 trillion dollars to tackle the pandemic and prevent global economic collapse. It prioritizes helping people directly: giving cash grants to all who need them. An immediate suspension of the debt payments of poor countries, combined with a one-off economic stimulus by the IMF and an increase in aid and taxes, can pay for this., The key points of the ‘Economic Rescue Plan For All’ would be, 1. To provide cash grants for all who need them. All workers suffering a loss of income must have access to some form of income replacement, be it a wage subsidy, unemployment benefit, sick pay or other benefits., 2. Bail out businesses responsibly. The stimulus packages announced in response to the pandemic must not make the same mistakes as were made in the 2008 financial crisis. Instead, bailout money must go into the hands of the most vulnerable people – workers and small businesses who are the least prepared to cope., 3. Suspend and cancel debts. Cancelling debt payments is the fastest way to keep money in countries and to free up resources to tackle the urgent health, social and economic crises resulting from the global pandemic., 4. Issue Special Drawing Rights. The G20 should immediately propose an emergency issuance of $1 trillion in SDRs., 5. Increase aid now. Donors should provide immediate emergency support to limit the outbreak and save lives, both through multilateral bodies like the World Health Organization that are responsible for managing the global response and directly to developing countries., 6. Adopt emergency solidarity taxes. Governments must make use of extraordinary measures to tax those who can afford to be taxed, in order to fund the global health package and the global economic relief measures.

In 2014, after unprecedented destruction and suffering in Gaza, international donors pledged $3.5bn and a change in approach. Six months later, reconstruction and recovery have barely begun, there has been no accountability for violations of international law, and Gaza remains cut off from the West Bank., This AIDA briefing paper outlines an achievable course of action to address the root causes of the recurrent conflict and put international engagement with Gaza back on the right course.

The effectiveness of international aid, both in meeting urgent needs and in tackling entrenched poverty, is being undermined in some of the world’s poorest places. While effective aid has helped save lives, protect rights and build livelihoods, some donors’ military and security interests have skewed global aid spending; and amidst conflict, disasters and political instability have too often led to uncoordinated, unsustainable, expensive and even dangerous aid projects. Skewed aid policies and practices threaten to undermine a decade of government donors’ international commitments to effective, needs-focussed international aid. This paper sets out how these commitments are being disregarded, and how this trend can be reversed.

The horrifying chemical weapons attacks in Damascus in August 2013 led to ill-advised plans for a US military intervention and a flurry of diplomatic activity. Ultimately it prompted international leadership on the Syria crisis that had been sorely lacking for so long. With long-awaited peace talks due to resume in Geneva in November, this new momentum has the potential to turn into a breakthrough only if urgent and immediate action is taken on aid and efforts are made to stop the bloodshed., This paper details Oxfam’s call for action from the international community on, first, aid, and then on the fundamental imperative to stop the bloodshed and take steps towards a just, sustainable peace in Syria.

As key governments and institutions from the region and the wider Islamic and Western world gather in London on 23 February 2012 to review their approach to the crisis in Somalia, this paper highlights the need for more effective international engagement with the country’s ongoing humanitarian emergency. More than six months after the UN declared a famine, over 31 per cent of the population remains in urgent need of assistance, an escalation of the conflict is still forcing thousands of civilians from their homes, and expulsions and insecurity are making it increasingly difficult for aid agencies to reach those in need. While responsibility for this situation lies first and foremost with Somali warring factions, the international community has also been at fault. Policies focused more on international security concerns than on the needs, interests, and wishes of the Somali people have inadvertently fuelled both the conflict and the humanitarian crisis. An internationally backed escalation of regional military intervention since late 2011 presents grave risks for the civilian population and their access to assistance, which foreign governments and multilateral institutions have been slow to respond to. A dangerous conflation of humanitarian assistance with international security and state-building initiatives in Somalia, including counter-terrorism efforts, has fed perceptions among opposition groups that aid agencies are proxies of Western governments, further shrinking humanitarian space. It is unclear how long the current period of intense conflict across much of southern Somalia will continue. But we do know that as long as it does, the food crisis will persist in the affected areas. If millions of people in need are to benefit fully from the aid efforts of Somali civil society and international agencies, more systematic account must be taken of the humanitarian fallout of regional and international political and security initiatives. More coherent strategies are needed from regional, Western and Islamic stakeholders, focused on supporting inclusive Somali-led reconciliation and peace-building, while scaling up efforts to increase humanitarian access and coordination, and to build Somali resilience to future shocks.

In 2010, vast humanitarian crises from Haiti to Pakistan almost overwhelmed the international system’s ability to respond. Despite years of reform, UN agencies, donors, and international NGOs (INGOs) struggled to cope. In 2011, Somalia yet again saw a response too little and too late, driven by media attention, not a timely, impartial assessment of human needs. At the same time, humanitarian action is needed now more than ever. The growing number of vulnerable people, the rise in disasters, and the failure to put most fragile states on the path to development, will significantly increase needs. Western-based donors, INGOs and the UN provide only part of the answer. Already, new donors and NGOs from around the world provide a significant share of humanitarian aid. Future humanitarian action will rely on them, and on the governments and civil society of crisis-affected countries even more. The UN and INGOs will be vital, but their contribution will increasingly be measured by how well they complement and support the efforts of others, and encourage every humanitarian actor to uphold humanitarian principles.

Armed violence is the greatest threat facing Iraqis, but the population is also experiencing another kind of crisis of an alarming scale and severity. Eight million people are in urgent need of emergency aid; that figure includes over two million who are displaced within the country, and more than two million refugees. Many more are living in poverty, without basic services, and increasingly threatened by disease and malnutrition. Despite the constraints imposed by violence, the government of Iraq, the United Nations, and international donors can do more to deliver humanitarian assistance to reduce unnecessary suffering. If people’s basic needs are left unattended, this will only serve to further destabilise the country.

The number of people in need as a result of the conflict in Syria continues to rise, but the international aid response has failed to keep up. The donor conference in London on 4 February 2016 is another opportunity to reverse that trend and put Syrian civilians first. Oxfam is calling for rich states to commit to fully funding this year’s Syria crisis response appeal and to resettle 10 percent of all registered Syrian refugees by the end of 2016., Oxfam has developed indicators to determine the fair level of commitment that each wealthy country should make to the appeals in 2016 to alleviate the suffering of those affected by the Syria crisis.

The arrival of tens of thousands of Syrians to Europe’s borders and the shocking deaths of women, children and men on their perilous journey has been a sharp reminder to the international community of the tragedy engulfing the people of Syria. Syrians put themselves and their families at so much risk only out of sheer desperation., The international community has failed so far to address the spiralling catastrophe in Syria. This briefing calls for urgent and immediate action by the international community to deal with this deepening crisis: to fully fund the aid response; to offer refuge to those who have fled Syria, including through resettlement of a fair share of the refugee population; to halt the transfer of arms and ammunition and to revive concerted efforts towards a resolution of the crisis.

Oxfam has calculated that nearly half of the world’s top donors didn’t give their fair share of aid to the Syria crisis in 2014, based on the size of their economies., The numbers of people in need as a result of the conflict in Syria continues to rise, but the international humanitarian response has not kept pace. Now, in 2015 aid actors estimate that $8.7bn is needed to support 18 million people in Syria and neighbouring countries. Based on the size of rich countries’ economies, Oxfam has determined what an equitable share of the required funds would look like for each donor state. So far, for 2015, only the UK has pledged its ‘fair share’ ahead of the Kuwait donor conference on 31 March 2015, and overall appeals are only 9.8% funded. The donor conference is an opportunity to reverse this shortfall. Failure to do so will have a devastating effect on millions of civilians in Syria and its neighbouring countries., Oxfam has developed indicators to help guide the fair level of commitment that each wealthy country should make in 2015 to alleviate the suffering of those affected by the Syria crisis: The level of funding each country makes available for the humanitarian response, relative to the size of their economy (based on gross national income); The number of Syrian refugees each country has helped to find safety through offers of resettlement or other forms of humanitarian protection, again based on the size of the economy.

The human cost of Syria’s conflict has risen beyond all expectations. There are already more than 1.3 million Syrian refugees in neighbouring countries. Inside Syria itself, 6.8 million people struggle in urgent need of assistance., This briefing describes how, as the numbers grow, the money to help some of those refugees and displaced people is running out. UN appeals have received only half of the funding they sought – to help far fewer people than they now need to assist. And Oxfam’s humanitarian programme is struggling with insufficient funds to help as much as it needs to, despite the generosity of its supporters and the public., The world has failed to find common purpose to end Syria’s brutal conflict. Shamefully, it has also failed to provide enough aid to help the conflict’s most vulnerable victims. Without a massive increase in aid now, and secured funding for long-term aid, millions of Syrians will miss out on the food, water, shelter and medical care that they desperately need., Donor governments – in the region and the OECD – must urgently give more aid now, and be ready to give more in the longer term as, tragically, the needs increase.