Depoliticising disaster response in a politically saturated context: the case of the 2016–19 droughts in Zimbabwe

Abstract

Responding to disasters triggered by natural hazards is a deeply political process, but it is usually presented by practitioners as an apolitical endeavour. This is striking when disasters occur in authoritarian and politically highly polarised conflict‐affected settings. Although the literature provides leads as to why and how humanitarians depoliticise aid, there has been little empirical research on the implications of depoliticisation, especially at the community level. Based on qualitative fieldwork that focused on the drought responses that overlapped with the 2016–19 sociopolitical crises in Zimbabwe, this paper details the practices, motivations, and implications of humanitarian depoliticisation. It differentiates between strategic, coerced, and routine managerial depoliticisation, and argues that, in an authoritarian conflict‐affected setting, depoliticisation strategically allows state and non‐state actors to defuse sensitive issues and actor relations and to remain safe. However, depoliticisation can also have implications for information management, monitoring, accountability, and protection, and thus ultimately for upholding humanitarian principles.

The ‘conflict paradox’: humanitarian access, localisation, and (dis)empowerment in Myanmar, Somalia, and Somaliland

“…Although these critiques usually centre on the development sector, they remain pertinent to humanitarian action. Operational contexts are often deeply politicised, yet humanitarian actors can seek to depoliticise their responses (Desportes and Moyo-Nyoni, 2022). NGOs are also criticised for marginalising and ignoring the roles and responsibilities of the state (Harvey, 2013).…”

Advancing “no natural disasters” with care: risks and strategies to address disasters as political phenomena in conflict zones

“…Furthermore, strict adherence to neutrality and impartiality may inadvertently narrow the scope of humanitarian action, overlooking the agency and perspectives of crisis-affected communities—essential components for comprehensive disaster and conflict risk reduction and effective mitigation strategies. The depoliticised system can, therefore, be seen as a trap, especially in relation to the use of the principles (see Desportes and Moyo-Nyoni, 2022).…”

“…Moreover, opposition from political actors seeking to maintain power can obstruct peacebuilding and human rights work, perpetuating conflicts and impeding positive change. Understanding and navigating the political landscape is crucial to mitigating these risks and fostering effective peacebuilding and human rights efforts in complex conflict environments (Desportes and Moyo-Nyoni, 2022; Lange and Quinn, 2003).…”

“…By adhering to these principles, humanitarian actors aim to minimise or conceal the politics and politicisation of their actions and prioritise the well-being of affected populations (Desportes and Moyo-Nyoni, 2022;Hilhorst et al, 2019). These principles, along with the general depoliticisation strategy, seek to establish a secure environment for delivering assistance, navigating complex political landscapes and facilitating access to vulnerable communities (Labbe, 2015;Weiss, 1999).…”

Assessing Progress in Reducing the Number of Disaster-affected People: Insights from Zimbabwe

“…Damaged dwellings are houses or housing units with minor damage, not structural or architectural, and which may continue to be habitable, although they may require repair and/or cleaning.Destroyed dwellings include houses or housing units that have been levelled, buried, collapsed, washed away or damaged to the extent that they are no longer habitable, or must be rebuilt.Livelihoods are productive assets and activities required for securing a means of living, on a sustainable basis, with dignity.Source: UNISDR 2017:[19][20][21][39][40] …”