Methodology and definitions

What is humanitarian assistance?

Humanitarian assistance is intended to save lives, alleviate suffering and maintain human dignity during and after human-made crises and disasters associated with natural hazards, as well as to prevent and strengthen preparedness for when such situations occur. Humanitarian assistance should be governed by the key humanitarian principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence. These are the fundamental principles of the international Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, which are reaffirmed in UN General Assembly resolutions and enshrined in numerous humanitarian standards and guidelines.

In this report, when used in the context of financing data, international humanitarian assistance refers to the financial resources for humanitarian action spent outside the donor country. Our calculations of international humanitarian assistance are based on what donors and organisations report as such and do not include other types of financing to address the causes and impacts of crises, which we refer to as crisis-related financing.

There is no universal obligation or system for reporting expenditure on international, or indeed domestic, humanitarian assistance. The main reporting platforms for international humanitarian assistance are the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and the Financial Tracking Service (FTS) of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). OECD DAC members are obligated to report their humanitarian assistance to the DAC systems as part of their official development assistance (ODA), in accordance with definitions set out by the DAC. ^[1] Some other governments and most major multilateral organisations, including several of the largest private philanthropic foundations, also voluntarily report to the DAC.

The FTS is open to all humanitarian donors and implementing agencies to voluntarily report contributions of internationally provided humanitarian assistance according to a set of inclusion criteria determined by the Inter-Agency Standing Committee. ^[2]

The analysis of international humanitarian assistance in this report draws largely on data reported to the FTS and the OECD DAC. Between these two sources, there is variation in inclusion criteria for humanitarian assistance, as well as volumes reported, so we aim to consistently explain and cite the data sources used. In this report, we have compared the preliminary DAC and FTS data on humanitarian funding by donor in 2023 to capture the most comprehensive data possible, as explained in more detail below. We include humanitarian funding reported to FTS that has been provided by OECD DAC members to countries not eligible for ODA. We also use other sources to calculate international humanitarian assistance, including reports from UN agencies and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) on private humanitarian funding and data from the Central Emergency Response Fund on contributions from public donors; data sources and methodologies for these are also clearly marked and explained.

Anticipatory action

Humanitarian financing to anticipatory action initiatives is not systematically collected in the usual data sources, such as OECD DAC or FTS. Our estimates of funding for anticipatory action are based on data collected by the Anticipation Hub, which compiles two datasets. One dataset details how much funding is available to active Anticipatory Action frameworks, while the other dataset details how much is disbursed when the framework is activated. The data collected in 2023 is more comprehensive than that for 2022 due to a different data collection method. We adapted the dataset on active frameworks by the Anticipation Hub by adding to it frameworks that according to their separate dataset on activations were active for that country, year, hazard and coordinating agency.

Cash

Our global estimate of humanitarian assistance provided in the form of cash and vouchers in 2023 is based on data collected from 32 organisations by the CALP Network and supplemented with FTS data. For 2023, 90% of the total global value of humanitarian cash and voucher assistance (CVA) is based on survey data, whilst the other 10% is FTS data that supplements the survey data for organisations who did not provide data to CALP in 2023. The methodology used is based on our methods devised for previous reports, which can be found here . ^[3] This methodology has since been enhanced with the adoption of machine learning to identify CVA related funding in funding flow or project descriptions in FTS or the HPC Project Module.

Channels of delivery

We use ‘channels of delivery’ to describe the first and subsequent levels of organisations receiving funding for the delivery of humanitarian assistance – multilateral agencies, NGOs (both international and local/national), the public sector and the international Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement – whether they deliver the assistance themselves or pass it on to partner organisations.

Country and region naming conventions

Country and region naming conventions used throughout this report are based on those used by the OECD DAC or the UN. Region naming conventions are based on those used by the OECD. The conventions used do not reflect a political position of Development Initiatives.

Deflators

Where appropriate in performing analyses of financial trends, we adjust for inflation by applying deflators in constant 2022 prices by source location of the funding. We use US$ gross domestic product deflators from the OECD DAC for DAC members and EU institutions and calculate deflators from the International Monetary Fund World Economic Outlook April 2024 data for other countries. In the limited cases where data was missing from both of these sources, we estimate deflators based on the historical average real and nominal growth of gross domestic product based in US$. For financial flows that have a multilateral source, we deflate using the ODA-weighted average DAC deflator from the OECD.

Exchange rates

To convert original currency values into US$ values, we use exchange rates from the OECD DAC for currencies of DAC members. UN operational exchange rates are used by UN OCHA FTS.

Funding for local and national actors

Our analysis of funding to local and national actors in Figures 2.1 and 2.2 (Chapter 2) is based on FTS data alongside data from UN OCHA country-based pooled funds (CBPFs) data hub, the Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) data hub, and UNHCR partner budget information. Figure 2.1 and the associated analysis focuses on funding from all donors, whereas Figure 2.2 and the associated analysis focuses on funding from just Grand Bargain donors.

Classification of organisation type (e.g. national NGOs, UN agencies etc.) is taken from FTS. This differs to Global Humanitarian Assistance reports where DI manually coded FTS data by organisation type. This change is due to improvements in organisation type data in FTS that mean that our own manual coding is no longer needed. Data from the CBPF data hub uses the funds’ own classifications of recipients

This change in methodology also means that we now have updated data for previous years in FTS. Therefore, the numbers shown in Chapter 2 may differ from previous DI reports.

International humanitarian assistance

Our estimate of total international humanitarian assistance is the sum of that from private donors and from public donors (i.e. government donors and EU institutions) – see Figure 1.1, (Chapter 1). Our calculation of international humanitarian assistance from government donors is the sum of:

• ‘Official’ humanitarian assistance (OECD DAC donors)
• International humanitarian assistance from OECD DAC donors to countries not eligible for ODA from the FTS
• International humanitarian assistance from donors outside the OECD DAC using data from the FTS.

Our ‘official’ humanitarian assistance calculation comprises:

• The bilateral humanitarian expenditure of OECD DAC members, as reported to the OECD DAC database under Table 1
• The multilateral humanitarian assistance of OECD DAC members.

The multilateral humanitarian assistance of OECD DAC members consists of three elements.

• The unearmarked ODA contributions of DAC members to 10 key multilateral agencies engaged in humanitarian response: the Food and Agriculture Organization, IOM, the UN Development Programme, UNFPA, UNHCR, UN OCHA, UNICEF, UNRWA, WFP and WHO, as reported to the OECD DAC under Table 2a and the CRS. We do not include all ODA to the Food and Agriculture Organization, IOM, the UN Development Programme, UNFPA, UNICEF, WHO and WFP but apply a percentage to take into account that these agencies also have a ‘development’ mandate. These shares are calculated using data on humanitarian expenditure as a proportion of the total received directly from each multilateral agency.
• The ODA contributions of DAC members to some other multilateral organisations (beyond those already listed) that, although not primarily humanitarian-oriented, do report a level of humanitarian aid to OECD DAC Table 2a. We do not include all reported ODA to these multilateral organisations but just the humanitarian share of this.
• Contributions to the UN Central Emergency Response Fund that are not reported under DAC members’ bilateral humanitarian assistance. We take this data directly from the UN Central Emergency Response Fund website.

When presenting the international humanitarian assistance of individual OECD DAC countries that contribute to the EU budget, we show in Figure 1.2 (Chapter 1) an imputed calculation of their humanitarian assistance channelled through the EU institutions, based on their ODA contributions to the EU institutions. We do not include this in our total international humanitarian assistance and response calculations or in our ranking of donor contributions to avoid double counting, given the EU institutions are also presented as a donor separately.

Our estimate for official humanitarian assistance in 2023 compares preliminary data by donor between DAC and FTS to reflect the most comprehensive data available. Where humanitarian assistance reported to FTS was greater than official humanitarian assistance based on DAC data as defined above, we used FTS data. Where humanitarian assistance reported to FTS was greater than bilateral humanitarian assistance based on DAC data only, we used FTS data plus imputed multilateral humanitarian assistance based on DAC data. Otherwise, we used an estimate of official humanitarian assistance based on DAC data only. In individual cases, judgment was used to determine which data source to use. For our analysis of funding by donor on FTS we used the flow year for paid contributions and the destination usage year for commitments to try and capture funding in the year it was or expected to be disbursed. FTS data was downloaded on 17 July 2024.

Türkiye is captured and shaded differently in Figure 1.2 (Chapter 1) because the humanitarian assistance that it voluntarily reports to the DAC largely comprises expenditure on hosting Syrian refugees within Türkiye. We do not include Türkiye’s spending on Syrian refugees in Türkiye in our total international humanitarian assistance and response calculations elsewhere in the report, as these include only amounts directed internationally by donors.

People in need of assistance

The number of ‘people in need’ referred to in the report is taken from UN OCHA’s Global Humanitarian Overview series. In previous reports, estimates were drawn from OCHA’s Humanitarian Programme Cycle, and also supplemented by INFORM/ACAPS. Thus, the numbers used in this report are not directly comparable to those used in previous reports published by Development Initiatives.

Private funding

We request financial information directly from humanitarian delivery agencies (including NGOs, multilateral agencies and the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement) on their income to create a standardised dataset on private humanitarian funding received by them. Where direct data collection is not possible, we use publicly available annual reports and audited accounts. The dataset in each year may differ in terms of which organisations are included. For the most recent year, our dataset includes: ^[4]

• A large sample of NGOs that form part of representative NGO alliances and umbrella organisations such as Save the Children International, and several large international NGOs operating independently
• Private contributions to IOM, UNHCR, UNICEF, and WFP
• The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Our private funding calculation comprises an estimate of total private humanitarian income for all NGOs, and the private humanitarian income reported by UN agencies, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the International Committee of the Red Cross. To estimate the total private humanitarian income of NGOs globally, we calculate the annual proportion that the NGOs in our dataset represent of NGOs reporting to UN OCHA FTS. The total private humanitarian income reported to us by the NGOs in our dataset is then scaled up accordingly.

Data is collected annually, and new data for previous years may be added retrospectively.

Projections

The projections in Chapter 1 provide an indicative picture of what might happen to humanitarian funding in 2024. Unpredictable global events, year-on-year variation in when funding is received, and other factors create a degree of uncertainty in these projections. However, the figures represent our ‘best guess’ at the time of writing.

Our projections for humanitarian financing in 2024 (both total international humanitarian assistance, and financing to UN-coordinated appeals) follow a similar approach. Both are based on how much funding has been received to the end of August 2024, and how much has usually been received by August in previous years (2017–2023) based on Global Humanitarian Overview Monthly Updates or equivalent reports.

We use a triangular distribution to generate a range of possible outcomes with lower and upper bound points drawn from historical precedent. The central estimate is a weighted average of how much was received by the end of August 2023, and the median percentage received by the same time in the years 2017 and 2022. This balance ensures that both recent trends and longer-term patterns are considered.

This method assumes that the pace of humanitarian funding for the remainder of the year will match that of previous years. The projections also do not account for potential escalations in existing crises, which could prompt higher-than-expected donor contributions.

Protracted crisis

Our definition of protracted crisis includes contexts with five or more consecutive years of UN-coordinated appeals, as of the year of analysis. The types of appeals and response plans used to determine this classification are outlined in ‘UN-coordinated appeals’.

We have chosen this approach to give an indication of the contexts that have consistently, for a number of years, experienced humanitarian needs at a scale that requires an international humanitarian response. Those needs can be limited to specific geographical regions or populations (such as forcibly displaced people).

The analysis in Figure 1.4 has two units of analysis. In the first instance, it examines ‘countries’ as the unit of analysis for response plans that target people within a country’s recognised borders. These tend to be Humanitarian Response Plans, Flash Appeals, and other types of appeals. In the second instance, ‘regional crises’ are the unit of analysis for response plans that are regional in nature and target people in countries affected by the ‘source’ crisis. For example, the Rohingya JRP and Syria 3RP are considered as protracted crises as these plans have existed for five or more years.

Rounding

There may be minor discrepancies in some of the totals in our charts and infographics, and between those in the text, because of rounding.

UN-coordinated appeals

We use this term to describe all humanitarian response plans and appeals wholly or jointly coordinated by UN OCHA or UNHCR, including humanitarian response plans, flash appeals, joint response plans, regional refugee response plans and other plans. We use data from UN OCHA FTS and UNHCR for our financial analysis of UN-coordinated appeals in Figure 1.3 and Figure 1.4 (Chapter 1). Data for UN-coordinated plans was downloaded on 19 July 2024, and 2024 funding requirements were updated on 2 October 2024 to account for the most recent developments.

Data sources

Inter-Agency Standing Committee

Grand Bargain Self-Reports

https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/grand-bargain-official-website/grand-bargain-self-reporting-cycle-2024

International Monetary Fund

World Economic Outlook Database

https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

OECD Creditor Reporting System

https://stats.oecd.org/

OECD Data Explorer – (Deflators and Members' total use of the multilateral system

https://data-explorer.oecd.org/

OECD DAC Preliminary 2023 Data

https://webfs.oecd.org/oda/DataCollection/Resources/2023-preliminary-data.xlsx

Syria Regional Refugee and Resilience Plan

3RP Financial Dashboards

https://www.3rpsyriacrisis.org/dashboards/

UN High Commissioner for Refugees

Refugee funding tracker

https://refugee-funding-tracker.org

UNHCR partner data

http://data.unhcr.org

UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

Central Emergency Response Fund Data Hub

https://cerf.data.unocha.org/

Financial Tracking Service

https://fts.unocha.org

Country Based Pooled Funds Data Hub

https://cbpf.data.unocha.org/

Humanitarian Programme Cycle API

https://api.hpc.tools/docs/v2/

Global Humanitarian Overview Reports

https://reliefweb.int/topics/global-humanitarian-overview

World Bank

Gross National Income

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.MKTP.CD