{"title":"反恐和人道主义行动:英国国际非政府组织自2015年以来的应对措施。","authors":"Sam Nadel, Oliver Walton","doi":"10.1111/disa.12603","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>There has been growing awareness in recent years of the wide-ranging negative impacts that counter-terrorism measures and sanctions impose on humanitarian action. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with the staff of international non-governmental organisations (INGOs), this paper examines these impacts on INGOs based in the United Kingdom. This is a context where a particularly complex array of laws, policies, and regulatory regimes have emerged alongside an increasingly hostile political and media setting for INGOs, creating an environment characterised by uncertainty. The paper shows that counter-terrorism measures and sanctions are leading INGOs to adopt more conservative approaches to partnership in areas controlled by proscribed groups, undermining broader commitments to the localisation agenda. The analysis reveals that perceptions of risk within INGOs vary considerably, but that despite this, INGOs have developed strategies to reduce the impacts of counter-terrorism measures, which over time, have led to improved coordination, and in some instances, a willingness to push back against regulations.</p>","PeriodicalId":48088,"journal":{"name":"Disasters","volume":"48 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/disa.12603","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Counter-terrorism and humanitarian action: UK INGO responses since 2015\",\"authors\":\"Sam Nadel, Oliver Walton\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/disa.12603\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>There has been growing awareness in recent years of the wide-ranging negative impacts that counter-terrorism measures and sanctions impose on humanitarian action. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with the staff of international non-governmental organisations (INGOs), this paper examines these impacts on INGOs based in the United Kingdom. This is a context where a particularly complex array of laws, policies, and regulatory regimes have emerged alongside an increasingly hostile political and media setting for INGOs, creating an environment characterised by uncertainty. The paper shows that counter-terrorism measures and sanctions are leading INGOs to adopt more conservative approaches to partnership in areas controlled by proscribed groups, undermining broader commitments to the localisation agenda. The analysis reveals that perceptions of risk within INGOs vary considerably, but that despite this, INGOs have developed strategies to reduce the impacts of counter-terrorism measures, which over time, have led to improved coordination, and in some instances, a willingness to push back against regulations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48088,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Disasters\",\"volume\":\"48 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/disa.12603\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Disasters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/disa.12603\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Disasters","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/disa.12603","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Counter-terrorism and humanitarian action: UK INGO responses since 2015
There has been growing awareness in recent years of the wide-ranging negative impacts that counter-terrorism measures and sanctions impose on humanitarian action. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with the staff of international non-governmental organisations (INGOs), this paper examines these impacts on INGOs based in the United Kingdom. This is a context where a particularly complex array of laws, policies, and regulatory regimes have emerged alongside an increasingly hostile political and media setting for INGOs, creating an environment characterised by uncertainty. The paper shows that counter-terrorism measures and sanctions are leading INGOs to adopt more conservative approaches to partnership in areas controlled by proscribed groups, undermining broader commitments to the localisation agenda. The analysis reveals that perceptions of risk within INGOs vary considerably, but that despite this, INGOs have developed strategies to reduce the impacts of counter-terrorism measures, which over time, have led to improved coordination, and in some instances, a willingness to push back against regulations.
期刊介绍:
Disasters is a major, peer-reviewed quarterly journal reporting on all aspects of disaster studies, policy and management. It provides a forum for academics, policymakers and practitioners to publish high-quality research and practice concerning natural catastrophes, anthropogenic disasters, complex political emergencies and protracted crises around the world. The journal promotes the interchange of ideas and experience, maintaining a balance between field reports, case study articles of general interest and academic papers. Disasters: Is the leading journal in the field of disasters, protracted crises and complex emergencies Influences disaster prevention, mitigation and response policies and practices Adopts a world-wide geographical perspective Contains a mix of academic papers and field studies Promotes the interchange of ideas between practitioners, policy-makers and academics.