Humanitarian aid organisations operate in a distinct space compared to most global businesses. Unlike for-profit ventures, their primary goal isn’t financial gain, but delivering critical assistance in crisis zones. This exposes their staff to a heightened level of security risks, often with limited resources. 

While large corporations and government entities might have established security protocols and regular audits, aid organisations often lack such structures. This can be attributed to the perception of neutrality – a belief that their focus on aiding civilians shields them from harm. However, the reality is that humanitarian workers can be targeted in conflict zones due to various factors, making robust security risk management crucial for their safety.  

The world of humanitarian work is one of inherent risk. Navigating conflict zones, disaster areas, and volatile environments exposes aid workers to a constant threat of violence, kidnapping, and other security breaches. This article explores the evolution of security risk management (SRM) in Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and humanitarian organisations over the past three decades (1994-2024), highlighting key incidents that have served as stark wake-up calls and ultimately led to a more robust approach to staff safety, or duty of care. 

The Early Days: A Reactive Approach (1994-2003)

In the 1990’s the NGO sector was largely reactive. NGOs often lacked dedicated security protocols and relied on a sense of trust and basic precautions. A 1994 UN Agency report examining operations in the former Yugoslavia found a flawed culture and said:

“Risk-takers were viewed as courageous, while staff more concerned about security were derided for their timidity or cowardice. The sense that staff might be putting other colleagues at risk, particularly local personnel who would follow regardless of the dangers, was often not nearly as strong as the sense of setting an example of bravery.” 

The 1994 Rwandan genocide, however, served as a brutal reminder of the proximity to the conflict aid workers were. The concept of neutrality also began to be questioned. Médecins Sans Frontières lost over 200 local staff in the genocide. Perhaps more shockingly, some local staff even colluded in or co-authored killings.

However, it was not until the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 that the industry began a rapid transformation. A particularly devastating event was the August 19, 2003, bombing of the UN headquarters in Baghdad, which killed 22 UN staff members and injured many more. This attack was a precursor to many more incidents of deliberate violence against aid workers.

In 2006, Margaret Hassan a CARE International worker, was kidnapped and subsequently murdered in Iraq. Her high-profile case exposed the dangers faced by female aid workers in conflict zones and the inadequacy of existing security measures.

The Rise of Professionalised Security (2003-2012)

In the aftermath of Hassan’s death, a paradigm shift began. NGOs increasingly recognised their duty of care obligations and invested in professional security expertise. Security risk assessments became commonplace, and organisations started providing staff with comprehensive security training programs. These programs covered topics like situational awareness, hostile environment training (HET), and kidnapping prevention.

This period also saw the rise of specialised security companies catering specifically to the needs of NGOs. These companies offered a range of services, including threat assessments, close protection (bodyguards), and emergency response planning. NGOs began to prioritise staff safety during mission planning, with security considerations playing a more prominent role in project design and implementation.

The Deadly Decade: Evolving Threats and the Need for Adaption (2012-2022)

The past decade has been marked by a surge in violence against aid workers. The Syrian Civil War, the rise of extremist groups like ISIS, and the increasing complexity of conflict zones have all contributed to this dangerous environment.  

The pressing need for this was highlighted by the case of Steve Dennis, a Canadian humanitarian who was abducted in Dadaab, Somalia while working for the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) in 2012. Following his release, Steve began questioning the NRC risk management procedures and in 2015, In 2015, won a precedent-setting legal victory in the Norwegian courts. Authorities determined that the risks were foreseeable, and the NRC was found to be grossly negligent in terms of understanding and managing these risks by key decision-makers. 

The humanitarian sector paid attention and the major aid agencies began further professionalizing their approach to duty of care. 

At the same time a steady mounting of casualties from around the world spurred further advancements in security protocols. In 2011, The United Nations publishes a study outlining ways organisations can maintain operations in high-risk places, emphasising the need to focus on risk acceptance and realization that risk aversion was a nonstarter.  

NGOs began to prioritise localised security expertise, recognising the value of understanding the specific threats and cultural nuances of each operating environment. This has however led to many challenges regarding remote management.  

During this period, technology also played an increasingly important role, with communication tools and tracking devices becoming essential for staff safety. 

The Future of Duty of Care: A Multi-Faceted Approach (2023-2024 and Beyond)

Looking ahead, the concept of duty of care is expanding to encompass not just physical safety but also psychological wellbeing, sexual harassment prevention, and ensuring a safe and secure working environment for all staff members.

The landscape of security risk management in the NGO sector is likely to be shaped by several key trends and areas that need particular attention are:

Mental Health and Wellbeing

The psychological impact of working in high-stress environments is gaining more recognition. NGOs are placing greater emphasis on staff mental health and wellbeing programs, including access to counselling and psychological support. 

Technological Advancements

Advancements in technology; risk assessment software, real-time threat monitoring and artificial intelligence are likely to play a bigger role in security risk management.  These tools can provide NGOs with a more comprehensive understanding of potential threats and allow for more targeted mitigation strategies. Better working practices and processes can also be streamlined to help over stretched humanitarians.  

Cybersecurity

As NGOs become increasingly reliant on technology, cybersecurity threats are becoming a growing concern. Organisations are investing in robust cybersecurity measures to protect sensitive data and staff communications. 

Conclusion: A Never-ending Journey

The journey towards ensuring the safety of aid workers is a continuous one. Currently with conflicts in the Middle East and Africa raging, the casualty count is frighteningly high. As of April 30, the UN reported that 254 aid workers had been killed in Gaza since October 7, 2023, with UNRWA personnel accounting for 188 of these fatalities.

NGOs and humanitarian organisations must remain vigilant, constantly adapting their security protocols to the ever-evolving threat landscape. By learning from past tragedies and embracing new technologies and approaches, these organisations can better fulfil their duty of care and ensure that their staff can continue their vital work in a safe and secure environment.

Protect your NGO with RiskPal’s comprehensive risk management services. As security threats evolve, our risk assessment software helps you adapt, ensuring the highest duty of care for your personnel. Learn more about how RiskPal can support your organisation’s risk management efforts at RiskPal or contact us for more information.

In the complex and often perilous world of humanitarian aid, ensuring the safety and security of personnel is paramount. Organisations like Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) operate in some of the world’s most volatile regions, facing myriad challenges that require robust risk management strategies.

In this interview, we speak with Mike White, a seasoned operational professional who began his journey with MSF in 2004. Mike shares his experiences and insights from his extensive career, highlighting the evolution of security protocols and the critical role of logisticians in maintaining the safety of MSF operations. Join us as we delve into Mike’s career path, from cataloguing VHS tapes in Toronto to managing complex logistics in East Africa and security in high-risk areas such as South Sudan, Ethiopia, Northern Nigeria, and Haiti. 

Read the full interview and gain valuable knowledge on the intricacies of risk management in humanitarian work and learn practical strategies for ensuring safety in challenging environments, making this interview essential reading for anyone involved in or aspiring to join the field of humanitarian aid. 

The Challenges of Humanitarian Work

RiskPal: Can you tell us about your career path with MSF?

Mike: Sure, I started with MSF in Toronto in 2004. I was working in television commercial production but was looking for a change. So, I knocked on the door of MSF Canada to see if they needed any office volunteers, which changed my life forever.

Believe it or not, my first task was cataloguing VHS tapes, a hodgepodge of news clips and field videos. Gratefully, I quickly got the opportunity to move around the office.By 2007, I was ready for my first overseas deployment. I was sent to Southern Sudan (now South Sudan) as a logistician, and it was the start of numerous deployments to humanitarian emergencies and HQ assignments. 

RiskPal: What did your role entail?

Mike: Logisticians are a hardy lot. We worked 18 hours a day for nine months under very challenging circumstances. In Pieri, where I was based, we slept in a tukul (mud hut) without electricity or plumbing. We maintained generators, construction, transportation, HR, finance, and medical supplies. It was pretty overwhelming. Did I mention the snakes, spiders and bats? There were so many bats.

Being part of an MSF “log” team entailed numerous critical security and safety responsibilities. We participated in regular risk assessments to identify potential threats and vulnerabilities. We developed and implemented risk mitigation strategies and contingency plans. Enforcing security protocols and standard operating procedures (SOPs) was a crucial part of our role, as was maintaining communication systems for reliable and timely information exchange. We ensured all team members were equipped with and trained to use communication devices, implementing communication protocols for regular check-ins and emergencies. In 2007, we were still using satellite phones, Bgans, HF and VHF radios, including Qmacs, especially for outreach teams or in case we needed to make a “bush run.” Our team was also responsible for securing physical premises, including offices, clinics, and storage facilities with guards, fences, and locks.

I lived in South Sudan for over three years and visited the country regularly between 2007 and 2020. To put the context of South Sudan in perspective, every hospital where I worked between 2007 and 2014 was attacked. Some hospitals, including Pieri, were attacked more than once. South Sudan remains one of the most dangerous places for aid workers, especially South Sudanese humanitarians, to work.

RiskPal: How has MSF’s approach to safety and security changed over the years?

Mike: MSF tends to operate in volatile regions, so safety has to be a primary consideration when providing humanitarian assistance while minimising harm to patients and personnel. Over time, due to increased violence and complexities, MSF has adopted a more professional approach, including employing Security Focal Points. There are clear protocols for risk assessment and secure movement of staff working in high-risk areas.

Organisations like MSF are fortunate to employ hundreds of local staff at the field level, who bring invaluable, lifelong knowledge to context analysis. Therefore, any safety and security plan should involve collaborative and participatory planning. This approach ensures the incorporation of diverse perspectives, thorough analysis of the security landscape, and identification of the main threats.

Key decision makers, like programme, country, and security managers, will also be involved in formulating SOPs, which dictate behaviours in the field. The critical point is that context analysis, identifying the security risks and developing mitigation strategies are collaborative. And, of course, risk assessment is a huge part of it.

RiskPal: How does MSF plan movements?

Mike: Road movements are an excellent example of risk assessment in almost every humanitarian crisis. In regions like South Sudan, Eastern Ethiopia, and Northern Nigeria, where I worked, we focused on security and safety to decide whether and how to travel by road.

On the security side, we assess the likelihood of being attacked by bandits or encountering other hostile actors and whether we can maintain communications and monitoring during the journey.

Safety considerations include ensuring that the vehicle is adequately serviced, in good working condition, and equipped with emergency and medical supplies. Additionally, we ensure that the driver is well-trained and that passengers are briefed on safety protocols and emergency procedures.

We conduct thorough threat assessments to identify potential risks such as banditry and conflict zones, plan routes to avoid high-risk areas, and identify alternative routes. Reliable communication systems like satellite phones and HF/VHF radios are essential for regular check-ins and real-time vehicle location monitoring. All these issues are reviewed at the field, capital, and HQ levels, and the green light is only given if all factors are determined to be within an acceptable risk level.

RiskPal: Did it ever go wrong?

Mike: Yes, unfortunately, it did.

In one particularly tragic event in South Sudan in 2013, a convoy of Land Cruisers travelling from Bor to the capital, Juba, was attacked by unknown gunmen. Our two vehicles were riddled with bullets, resulting in the devastating death of one of our drivers and the wounding of another.

No matter how robust your risk mitigation strategies are, there’s usually residual risk. The job of senior managers is to determine if the residue risk is acceptable. These types of critical incidents never leave you. The Post-Incident Analysis is a crucial step in reviewing and learning from a critical incident, aiming to prevent similar occurrences in the future. Ultimately, there’s little that can be done to stop gunmen from attacking unarmed humanitarian vehicles on a major roadway in the middle of the afternoon.

RiskPal: What are the biggest challenges to risk management in NGOs today?

Mike: The most significant challenges to risk management in NGOs today are complex, reflecting the increasing danger in regions with high threat levels like the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Sudan, and Myanmar. The list of insecure environments for aid workers and journalists is growing, with humanitarian crises often marked by violence and politicisation of aid.

Today’s reality seriously challenges my 2004 assumption that aid workers are protected due to their humanitarian role. Humanitarians face unprecedented levels of hostility, including harassment, attacks, and kidnappings. What’s happening in Gaza today is a textbook example of the deliberate and devastating targeting of humanitarians to manipulate or deter aid efforts.

Managing the health and well-being of aid workers is another constant concern. Illnesses, injuries, and cumulative stress affect teams regardless of their environment. Ensuring staff are prepared, aware, and supported with effective health policies is crucial for managing safety and security.

Despite having fifteen years of experience with MSF, I burned out in 2020 during one of my easier operational roles. This highlights cumulative stress’s pervasive and insidious nature, its impact on even seasoned professionals, and how it reduces productivity and potentially responsible decision-making.

RiskPal: Do you think technology can make people safer in the field?

Mike: Yes, technology can enhance field safety for aid workers and journalists.

• Online training modules provide essential knowledge on security protocols, first aid, and situational awareness.
• Telemedicine offers remote medical consultations, providing immediate support for health issues.
• Early warning systems alert users to threats like conflicts, natural disasters, or disease outbreaks, helping them avoid high-risk areas.
• GPS and tracking devices enable real-time location monitoring.
• Risk management platforms offer tools for comprehensive risk assessment, planning, real-time updates on emerging threats, and integrated communication for better information sharing.

These technologies significantly enhance organisations’ duty of care, ensuring a safer and more secure environment. However, technology should not replace human collaboration and communication. Over-reliance on technology can lead to losing critical human insights and personal connections, which are vital in complex operational environments. 

Leveraging RiskPal for Strategic Risk Management

Strategic risk management is crucial for the success and safety of humanitarian missions. RiskPal is a leading risk assessment software which provides NGOs and humanitarian organisations with the tools they need to navigate complex and hazardous environments.

RiskPal offers customisable risk assessment templates, a vast library of built-in safety guidance, and detailed country profiles, empowering organisations to make informed decisions. Additionally, with integrated collaboration and approvals, we streamline the risk assessment process, ensuring operational efficiency and a safer working environment for aid workers.

Learn more about how RiskPal’s risk management software can support your organisation’s risk management efforts at RiskPal or contact us for more information.