Iasc cluster approach evaluation, 2nd phase april 2010

Executive Summary
Introduction
Method
Background
Findings
Conclusions
Recommendations

---

42
Stronger partnership 
between the UN and  
other international 
humanitarian actors
  5 Findings: Direct results and activities
57
   This chapter presents findings relating to the direct results of cluster activities. They 
include aspects relevant to relationships, e.g. on partnership and accountability, 
as  well  as  activities,  including  information  sharing,  the  coordination  of  needs 
assessments and strengthening of coherence.
  5.1 Stronger partnership
58
   
This section covers the relationship between UN agencies and international NGOs, 
as well as the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, whereas relationships to 
national and local authorities, as well as national and local NGOs are discussed 
below because they relate more directly to the quality of humanitarian response 
(section  6.4).  When  the  IASC  initially  launched  its  humanitarian  reform, 
partnership  was  not  identified  as  a  central  element.  Following  strong  criticism 
from non-UN organizations that saw humanitarian reform as a top-down, UN-
centered endeavor, partnership was later added as a fourth pillar. It builds on the 
Principles of Partnership developed by the Global Humanitarian Platform.
41
 
59
   The introduction of the cluster approach has strengthened partnership between UN agencies 
and  international  NGOs,  as  well  as  relationships  among  international  NGOs.  Risks 
to  partnership  arise  where  clusters  take  an  active  role  in  deciding  about  the  allocation  of 
resources and where clusters are too closely associated with peacekeeping forces or political 
actors involved in the conflict.
60
   Initially, many NGOs and other humanitarian actors resisted the cluster approach, 
interpreting  it  as  UN-centered.
42
  Since  then,  however,  much  has  changed  and 
the  evaluation  team  encountered  hardly  any  humanitarian  organization  in  the 
case study countries and none via the survey
43
 with a fundamental or principled 
opposition against the cluster approach.
44
 This greater level of acceptance of the 
cluster approach is reflected in a relatively high overall level of participation and 
commitment,  including  among  “observers”  such  as  Médecins  Sans  Frontières 
(MSF)  and  the  International  Committee  of  the  Red  Cross  (ICRC).  In  several  
 
41   Partnership is an agreement between various parties to work together to achieve common goals. It implies 
a relationship at eye-level. The Global Humanitarian Platform defined the five principles of partnership as 
equality, transparency, result-oriented approach, responsibility and complementarity (Global Humanitarian 
Platform, 2007). 
42   The IASC interim self assessment (2006), for example, mentions “tensions arising from efforts to implement 
the cluster approach” (IASC 2006, p. 6), and phase 1 of this evaluation found that “the clusters are still 
largely perceived as a UN-centric initiative” (Stoddard, Harmer et al., 2008, p. 19).
43  See Annex 6.
44   This finding is confirmed by the recent report of the NGOs and Humanitarian Reform Project. Based on five 
mapping study countries (Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan and Sudan), it found 
that “The level of engagement of NGOs with the cluster mechanism depends on a number of factors. Chief of 
these is the perception of the value added by the cluster.” (NGOs and Humanitarian Reform Project, 2009, p. 24)