Network theory and Humanitarian Action

Network Theory in Humanitarian ActionNada Yehiya, Karolin Etterer,

Alfonso, Maximiliano, Rahat and Shakeb

INTRODUCTION

• Two very different articles in form and substance

• Could we see any application to the humanitarian field?

• Are they complementary?

Voluntary associations and social network structure

A model of Humanitarian assistance coordination

Article 4 Voluntary Associations and Social Network

Structure:Why Organizational Location and Type Are

Important(Glanville, Jennifer L. 2004)

The debate

How does membership in associations influence

individual persons' social networks?

membership increases density and decreases diversity?

membership increases diversity and bridges different segments of society?

→ dependence on characteristics of the association?

The idea of the article

Associations differ in terms of their

Location: Neighborhood vs. External organization

Type:Expressive organization for socializinginstrumental organization for achieving a specific goal

The use of network theory

Survey asking for membership in associations of different types, characteristics of the most important contacts of responders and if these contacts also know each other

Statistical analysis how these personal networks differ from statistically expected networks depending on memebership in certain types of associations

The Results

Membership in internal and/or expressive associations results in denser and less divers networks

External organizations: no effect on density, but increased diversity

Instrumental organizations: no effect on density, mixed results on diversity

Organizational type and location and Humanitarian

ActionSocial Network(connection between individual)

Internal Org.

ExternalOrg.

ExpressiveOrg

Instrumental

Voluntary association

NeighborhoodTsunami (Indonesia)Mosque network

BorderlessMental health

Socialization(Church /Islam related networks)

Achieve a goalUN, INGO, IRC, CBOs, etc

Social network

DensityRelations

Diversity

Density DiversityCoordination

Applying the article's framework:participatory approach and the resulting

beneficiary networks

Application of this article in humanitarian action:

- investigation how different participatory approaches promote different networks among the participating beneficiaries

- this knowledge allows implementing a participatoryapproach, which results in more dense or diverse a beneficiary network

Article 11

“Toward a Descriptive Model of Humanitarian Assistance

Coordination”(Stephenson, Max Jr. 2006)

An alternate view to conceptualize humanitarian relief coordination at both the strategic and operating scales of analysis.

The operating environment of humanitarian assistance is best conceived as an interorganizational social network or regime

But the structure of actors and the strategic and operating environments - “the setting” - does not encourage organizational coordination and may, indeed, actively discourage it”

Organizational setting: Reluctant Partners operating amidst Diffuse Authority

WFP – UNHCR –UNICEF –WHO >> UN OCHA (No Power over !)UN humanitarian aid network interventions lack a single

steerperson with operative hierarchical control.

Elements of a descriptive network model of HA

Strategic Structure of Operating Environment + Operating Level Factors + Boundary-Spanning Claims

Aut

hority

in th

is o

rgan

izat

iona

l

cont

ext i

s

“non

cent

raliz

ed”

and

mul

tior

gani

zation

al.

Exploring humanitarian network dynamics in this way help us to chart the

similarities and differences among them and thereby, over time, possibly

develop a typology of types of network forms that recur.

Distinction between coordination by hierarchical control (or command) & that by consensus.

A consensus approach ---- generates shared ownership, enlisting the entire

community in the humanitarian effort..

Hierarchical control - Command element provides clearer lines of authority and

accountability

Is coordination even possible without more centralized authority and even if so, worth the cost? Yes . - by building a sufficient density of common claims and formal and informal ties to create an ongoing social network of organizational action.

Information sharingStakeholder learning dialogues.

Shared organizational Norms

The networks that operate in the humanitarian aid environment are dynamic and evolutionary.

In crisis this network of humanitarian actors must create its own power to act without the strategic supervisory claim of a single strong coordinating agent and must develop commonly the “power to” act collectively at the operational scale.

Applying network theory on Humanitarian Assistance coordination

Number of nodes in the graph representing humanitarian stakeholders

Number of lines representing the relations among different stakeholders

The graph shows that humanitarian network is not an ego centric network; most of the points (stakeholders) are interconnected, without any particular focal points.

Humanitarian stakeholders are reluctant partners, anddon’t operate according to hieratical authorities

Thus; Humanitarian organizations network is notconsidered as a centralized social network, which

makes itless robust and more vulnerable to threats of disruption

Building sufficient density of common claims amonghumanitarian organizations could enhance networkRobustness and efficiency (slide 44)

Toward a Descriptive Model of Humanitarian Assistance Coordination-Stephenson, 2006

Power over Power to

If the humanitarian actors’ society lacks a hierarchy of command and control; the problems of governance shouldn’t be reduced to who has authority over who instead governance should be converted from commanding to creating the capacity to act and empower to accomplish collective goals

The article highlighted how it’s important for humanitarian organizations’ efficiency as a network to convert NGO’s social highly centralized power of individual actors into a power as agents strategies (slide 45)


In emergency situations humanitarian actors must develop together the power to act collectively; By avoiding conflicting goals and opportunism, also by enhancing effective leadership and organizational strategy (Stephenson, P46)

Improving the operational capacity of each organization by building the capacity of its employees on 3 different levels; Individual level, group level and subordinate level

Enhancing effective leadership, organizational strategy and internal operational capacity reflect on how it’s important to have multilayered analytical approach of understanding humanitarian networks


The author suggested that a trusted stakeholder should work on encouraging the rest of actors to tackle common challenges and establish common claims

ICRC: not saddled by bureaucracy as UN + operate in different crisis + maintain Humanitarian principles

For its structural position the author recommended ICRC; nodes that are well connected in general have high social capital(slide 43)


Different: One on personal and other on organizations network

One focuses on application of network theory as a method and the other on its application in HA

Coordination in HA: diversity of actors: challenge is to make it dense

Enhancing coordination: enhanced communication, informal/formal network

Comparison between the Two Articles

QUESTION FOR DISCUSSION

• How could an organization’s connectedness in an organizational network influence its members’ personal networks?

If I am a member in an organization that is very well connected to other organizations might I have a different personal network than if I were member in an organization with few ties to other organizations?

Education

Network theory and Humanitarian Action