Citizen aid, social media and brokerage after disaster

Abstract

In a crisis, aid providers deliver humanitarian relief across a hierarchy of organisations where influence and capacity map to their scale of operations (Fouksman, 2016; Mercer & Green, 2015). On the front lines of crises, 'citizen aid' is what small, local and informal groups offer to fellow citizens. These citizen aid groups are well-networked in place and tend to work through longstanding personal relationships (Fechter, in press; Sanchez et al., 2016). In the Philippines, citizen aid groups frequently support their activities by documenting their work with photos of beneficiaries to solicit donations from within the country and around the world across social media platforms (Bonacker et al, 2017.) This paper builds on recent debates on brokerage (Lindquist, 2015) to examine a case of citizen aid in the relief effort after Typhoon Haiyan (2013-2017). We demonstrate how social media has produced new forms of brokerage shaped by circulating images online. This kind of brokerage produced a layered network of brokers that both shaped citizen aid efforts and created new channels for localising aid, enhancing the control of citizen groups in the global Southern over humanitarian aid.

Beyond the professionalized nongovernmental organization: Life‐history narratives of grassroots philanthropic leaders in Africa

“…They practice "expressive accountability" as they focus on the relational values of caring and helping (Knutsen & Brower, 2010). Formal mechanisms are not considered required (Fechter, 2019;McKay & Perez, 2019;Yarrow, 2011), and such a notion aligns with scholars who argue that there is a risk of "too much" formal accountability reporting which can result in less desirable outcomes and hinder nonprofit organizations' creativity (e.g., Ebrahim, 2003).…”

“…These relationships help to resist the "professionalizing drivers" found in the aid industry (Taithe, 2019(Taithe, , p. 1781. For example, AEC does not garner accountability through traditional reporting mechanisms but rather through relationships and personal trust (see also, Fechter, 2019;Taithe, 2019;Appe & Telch, 2020;McKay & Perez, 2019). Indeed, the AEC leaders prioritize what could be called "relational accountability" which is beyond formal reporting and managerial practices in aid exchanges (see Moncrieffe, 2011).…”

A review of social media use during disaster response and recovery phases

“…Findings showcased that individuals with high social capital could use social media to secure the resources needed to recover from the effects of a disaster, but that more vulnerable and disenfranchised populations were less able to do so [81]. Notwithstanding, research also showed that social media allowed unconventional stakeholders to become prominent actors in the relief and recovery dynamics that played out between local communities and global supporters of these efforts [82].…”

“…• Social media could also assist in developing a sense of community and increase members' ability to manage their own recovery processes after a disaster event [78][79][80][81]. Additionally, unconventional stakeholders could become prominent disaster recovery actors with the help of social media [82].…”

“…• Social media allows for unexpected and unconventional actors to emerge as prominent stakeholders in the relief, recovery, and reconstruction processes. Emergency managers should strive to identify them and include them in planning and reconstruction functions [82]. • Apart from sharing recovery-related information [36,75,76] and identifying existing needs of affected populations [74], emergency managers can also use social media to ask questions, answer questions, and involve the community in different decisionmaking processes throughout the recovery period.…”