Paper short abstract:

This chapter focuses on the contributions of feminism(s) to humanitarian action, with an emphasis on the potential of humanitarian advocacy and social mobilization to rethink the role of affected populations. To illustrate this, Colombia is presented as a case study.

Paper long abstract:

Colombia is a case of overlapping and converging conditions: humanitarian crises originating from different causes, the persistence of armed conflict, and an elusive post conflict situation. Despite so, it is also a country with a significant tradition of social mobilization, activism, and resistance, with the potential of contributing with valuable insights, practices, and experiences to rethink humanitarian action as it has traditionally been conceived, especially from the perspective of feminism. The complexity of the Colombian humanitarian arena represents an opportunity to interrogate how feminist and humanitarian approaches can coexist, especially in relation to the role of crisis affected populations. Hence, one of the key elements of this research is the strategies and initiatives of Colombian affected women (and other populations) and feminist organizations amidst high-risk contexts and humanitarian crises, whereby I avoid replicating patterns of victimization, passiveness, lack of agency, or mistrust, which have long dominated humanitarian action. To the contrary, I seek to broaden the understanding of affected populations beyond the “aid recipients” framework, as I recognize that they employ different strategies to advocate, claim and negotiate their rights and needs within a humanitarian context. Lastly, I aim at understanding how humanitarian action can be done differently if feminist approaches are incorporated into the humanitarian realm. By doing so, notions around, power, ethics, hierarchies, and patterns of -patriarchal- dominance embedded in the humanitarian system can be challenged and interrogated.

Paper short abstract:

We bring a feminist perspective situated in the twin locality of a critical post-colonial approach and the experience of working with Asylum applicants in Greece to the study of how the intersection of gender, nation, race and sexuality works discursively in granting Asylum Decisions.

Paper long abstract:

This paper examines the intersection of gender, the nation-race nexus and sexuality as it is articulated, and productive, at the discursive site of Asylum Decisions regarding the international protection of African women in Greece. The “securitization” of the borders of the European Union unfolds as a gendered and multi-faceted project of maximum interest to its member nation-states. We focus on Asylum Decisions issued in response to applications submitted by women from Africa from 2015 onwards. In 2019, 3603 asylum requests were submitted from Congo alone in Greece (Greek Asylum Service, 2019). The justification for granting or refusing international protection, of different levels, is provided from the caseworker within the Asylum Decision document.

This paper reports on research using discourse analysis for a focused in-depth study of three asylum request decisions, one in-depth interview of another recognized refugee and Greek media discourse regarding abused refugee women, including the high-visibility cases of Nadia Murad and Malala Yousafzai. The contextualized analysis of this material identifies and traces larger political forces that are at play within individual Asylum-Application Decisions. The paper argues that disparate nationalisms work in conjunction with the Evaluation Criteria of the European Union to produce a normative Asylum-meriting woman from Africa. Features we find to be key are a specific expression of emotional pain and trauma within the application narrative, and information illustrative of prior reverence for European democratic values. A question is raised as to the weight given to reports of gender-based violence.

Paper short abstract:

This paper seeks to explore the literature about participatory approaches in humanitarian research, with a focus on Colombia, DRC, and Pakistan. It asks what participatory practices are in place, how these align with feminist approaches, and how they lead to changes in humanitarian action.

Paper long abstract:

Doing participatory research with people directly affected by humanitarian crises is becoming more common in humanitarian research and action. Similarly to specific marginalized groups, more humanitarian workers and organizations have been advocating for people’s participation and engagement in designing programs and interventions, as well as involving them in research about their needs in humanitarian situations. In the last years, participatory approaches have also been part of the discussions and practices of localisation and accountability within the humanitarian arena, and this participation can take different forms; from information exchange to public involvement and decision-making negotiations (Hilhorst et al. 2021a: 368-69; Ormel et al. 2020: 1-2; Carruth 2018).

Participatory approaches usually align with feminist critics about unequal (gendered) power relations and extractivist practices in the research processes and outcomes. But these can still be reproduced within participatory methodologies, especially when participatory approaches are adopted in one phase of the project but not integrated more carefully throughout implementation. More research is needed to understand how to work directly with the people most affected by injustices and/or by humanitarian crises, without reproducing the same power relations that create them in the first place. For this, this paper seeks to explore the available literature about participatory approaches to gender and sexuality in humanitarian research, with a special focus on Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Pakistan. It asks what participatory practices are already in place, how these align with feminist approaches, and how they lead to changes in decision making and implementation of humanitarian action.

Paper short abstract:

This paper explores the potentials of feminist ethics of care as a moral framework to address some of the challenges of humanitarianism in a manner that affirms the centrality of meeting human ‘needs’ while not taking for granted that such actions always play out in fields of power and politics.

Paper long abstract:

Multiple forms of crises in contemporary times have given way to the growth of a complex international system designed to fulfil a specific imperative: to preserve life and alleviate human suffering. The emphasis on ‘saving lives’ and meeting the needs of the most vulnerable shows how modern humanitarianism is shaped by discourses of benevolence towards distant/vulnerable others in the name of a perceived common humanity. While the purpose of humanitarian action is propelled by the need to provide (apolitical) care to crisis-affected populations, it has not always produced positive or desirable results. Of particular interest is how care discourses employed in humanitarian action has produced specific representations of its ‘subjects of care’: the passive (often feminized) vulnerable victim in need of saving. Moreover, such representations have consequently created hierarchies of victimhood and suffering, whether wittingly or unwittingly. Belying claims to impartiality, provision of aid/care has often led to the inclusion of some and the exclusion of others. More concerning is how such care discourses intertwine with colonialist discourses. These critiques underscore how, far from being apolitical, dominant ideologies and ethics in humanitarian practice tend to articulate existing global political and economic orders. This paper explores the potentials of feminist ethics of care as a moral framework to help address some of the challenges of humanitarianism in a manner that affirms the centrality of meeting human ‘needs’ in contexts of crisis while not taking for granted the fact that such actions always already play out in fields of power and politics.