Inter-connection

Definition

How does humanitarian action take account of the medium and longer term, and how does it connect with development and peacebuilding?

Inter-connection refers to the need to ensure that: a) short-term humanitarian action is designed, planned and implemented to take into account medium- and longer-term considerations; and b) humanitarian action connects appropriately to development and peacebuilding.^[1]

Note, ALNAP’s 2006 EHA guide refers to connectedness. This is now replaced with the more commonly used term ‘inter-connection’, which can be more easily translated.

Explanation of definition

This criterion is specific to EHA, and it has two dimensions.

First, there is a temporal dimension. Humanitarian programmes are often short-term in their planning, funding and implementation. Use this criterion to evaluate if the medium and longer term are considered too.

For example, where humanitarian actors provide free relief services, do they also consider the impact on the medium- and longer-term provision of such services? This is especially important if medium- and longer-term provision are based on a cost-recovery model. This could affect services ranging from education and health to veterinary services and the provision of livestock drugs. Another example is how humanitarian actors engage with existing community institutions and processes. Where local committees are established to oversee targeting of humanitarian assistance, do they consider the medium-term implications of these new local structures replacing, duplicating or even ignoring existing structures? What are the medium- and longer-term implications of international humanitarian actors paying the salaries of public-sector health workers? To what extent is humanitarian action maintaining and strengthening the resilience of households, communities and institutions or undermining it?

Second, there is a relational dimension. Humanitarian action is rarely implemented alone, but instead alongside other development, human rights and peacebuilding work. What is the connection between different actors and their programming?

This dimension is particularly important when evaluating international humanitarian actors who make the strongest distinction between different types of action. Evaluate inter-connection to analyse environmental issues too. Has humanitarian action been informed by, and has it connected with, development actors engaged in environmental policy and programming – for example in the siting and management of IDP or refugee camps? Are environmental considerations of forest and water resources and potential degradation considered alongside factors such as security? How do international humanitarian actors engage with local stakeholders, who tend to be multi-dimensional and less likely to distinguish between humanitarian, development and other types of action, instead pivoting between modes of action according to changes in context and needs (McCommon et al, 2021; Buchanan-Smith, 2024).

When to select inter-connection

Inter-connection is particularly relevant when looking at the bigger picture, beyond meeting immediate needs. As so many humanitarian crises are protracted, the temporal dimension is key. This is especially true if little or no international development programming is in place, and if international humanitarian action fills gaps. Evaluate inter-connection to explore if humanitarian actors consider medium-term implications and the wider context.

Apply this criterion to evaluate the humanitarian, development and peacebuilding nexus. Consider if humanitarian programming reflects nexus ways of working, and whether action is underpinned by robust contextual analysis to guide what is appropriate.

The extent to which international humanitarian actors invest in knowledge exchange and support national actors fits under inter-connection. This is key to promoting locally led humanitarian action (see Chapter 11). Are international and national humanitarian actors supporting and developing civil society capacity with a longer-term perspective? Is the partnership simply contractual, focused on delivery in the short term? Do international actors recognise the multi-dimensional and multi-mandate nature of national NGOs?

How inter-connection relates to other criteria

Inter-connection relates closely to effectiveness and impact, both of which may be enhanced or compromised by temporal and relational aspects. Effectiveness may be improved by humanitarian actors drawing on the knowledge and experience of development actors, and by connecting to existing structures and systems. For example, in new and large IDP settlements, engagement between humanitarian actors and those with long-term knowledge of and responsibility for water and sanitation management can ensure effective and sustainable service provision (see Box 3 below). On the other hand, failing to plan for an exit strategy to transition from free water services in a crisis to a cost-recovery model could compromise the medium- to longer-term impact of water provision.

A narrow view of crises as discrete emergencies – rather than recurring cycles of seasonal shocks or repeated displacement – can overlook historical memory and long-term local knowledge. By relying solely on project reports or data collected during a narrow window, your analysis may bias institutional timelines and erase valuable insights from those with lived experience across generations.

Be attentive to the ways communities affected by crisis situate humanitarian assistance within historical narratives. Do these narratives account for how trust, fatigue or hope have accumulated over time? Explore how humanitarian assistance has affected the community’s ability to imagine and shape their own futures – not just whether they have ‘transitioned’ effectively from relief to recovery.