When negotiating for access, programming or protection, humanitarian practitioners experience ethical dilemmas of where to draw their red lines and how to justify non-ideal compromises. As exemplified by the recent Taliban ban on women aid workers, questions of culture are often central to these dilemmas. Should humanitarians insist on universal standards of humanity and impartiality, or are these relative to their cultural contexts? Who are represented and consulted, how do the negotiating parties behave, and according to which procedures and principles? These questions also pertain to the organizational culture of humanitarian agencies: How do they deal with ethical dilemmas, and how do they approach humanitarian negotiations?
In this online roundtable discussion, the contributors share both theoretical and empirical reflections on these questions and their interconnections with other dimensions like gender, in the current political climate.
The roundtable was moderated by Kristoffer Lidén (PRIO) and Kristina Roepstorff (PRIO). Contributors are:
- Andrew Cunningham, Independent Researcher
- Ashley Jackson, Centre on Armed Groups
- Ayse Bala Akal, PRIO
- Nigel Timmins, Humanitarian Outcomes
- Paul Harvey, Humanitarian Outcomes
- Sulagna Maitra, University College Dublin
The roundtable was recorded 24 October 2024. A transcribed and edited version is published by Humanitarian Alternatives.
