Episode 4: Rethinking Humanitarianism

Jessica Alexander is the editor of The New Humanitarian’s Rethinking Humanitarianism series. She is also a humanitarian aid worker with experience working in operations, evaluations, and policy. She has worked in Rwanda, Sudan, Haiti and other countries. Currently she teacher humanitarian affairs at numerous universities and has authored various policy papers, mainstream articles and a book entitled: “Chasing Chaos: My Decade In and Out of Humanitarian Aid.” She joins us from Geneva, Switzerland.

She speak to us about:

• questioning her role in humanitarian work as an American woman

• the intention for and content of the Rethinking Humanitarianism series

• grand claims to change vs. limitations within the sector

• localisation and anti-racism

• reactionary changes vs. a systemic overhaul

• the younger, incoming generation of aid workers - and much more!

Transcript

Intro: We make some of these grand promises for change over time. But in actuality, very little has changed. And we haven't really made the kind of structural changes that I think many recognize are necessary if we are going to live up to some of the values that we ascribe to. It's still a very western dominated model. It's a charity-driven model. We've been sort of tweaking at the margins, I think, but haven't addressed some of the more structural issues that get at the roots or the heart of some of the reasons why people remain in crisis today.

Safa: Welcome back to The Rethinking Development Podcast. My name is Safa, and I'm your host. Thank you for joining me as we speak with and learn from practitioners of all career stages and organizational affiliations around the world. In our conversations, we aim to rethink ethical behavior and best practices through the lived experiences and personal reflections of different practitioners. Today, we have a special episode in collaboration with The New Humanitarian. I'm joined today by Jessica Alexander. Jessica is the editor of The New Humanitarian's Rethinking Humanitarianism series. Jessica is also a humanitarian aid professional herself, with experience working in operations, evaluation and policy. She has worked in Rwanda, Sudan, Haiti, and other countries. Currently, she teaches humanitarian affairs at numerous universities, and has also written various policy papers, mainstream articles, and a book entitled "Chasing Chaos: My Decade In and Out of Humanitarian Aid." Jessica, thank you so much for speaking with us today.

Jessica: Thank you. Thanks so much for having me.

Safa: Just to give our listeners more of a background in terms of your own positionality and how you first started working in the sector, can you just share a bit more about what motivated you to become a humanitarian aid worker and how you got started yourself?

Jessica: Sure. I mean, I get this question a lot, mostly from my students who themselves are trying to enter the humanitarian field, which I think is more competitive today than it was when I started out about 20 years ago. I graduated university and really was on a completely different trajectory. I was working in marketing in New York City, and through a confluence of personal life events, as well as always sort of a desire to work abroad, I left that world of the private sector and decided to leap into this world of humanitarianism, really starting actually in the development sphere, working with an organization based out of New York City that was doing very grassroots local work with organizations across the world, but really on a very small scale basis. And so that's where I got my start as kind of a very young 20 something; that was my foray into this field and realized quite soon that I needed some professional backing and accreditation to move forward. And so I went and got a Master's in both Humanitarian Affairs and Public Health. And from then sort of the rest is history and got my first internship overseas, and then sort of made my way across the globe, and in different crises to where I am today, which is sitting in Geneva.

Safa: You mentioned you started 20 years ago, and over the years, you've had different deployments, different roles and positions - overall, just generally thinking about some of the ethical challenges maybe you faced or observed, could you speak to those a bit in terms of what were some of the issues that you either dealt with or you saw others dealing with that made you realize or think that okay, things have to be rethought?

Jessica: Well, I mean, I think that was a slow evolution for me, both personally and professionally. I think, like many people who started out in this career, you go into it very wide-eyed, optimistic with a lot of faith that this sector and what you can offer will will bring change, and will do what this profession, what this industry is based on: alleviating suffering. And I think I got a real dose of reality, you know, starting in my first deployment when I realized not only me as an individual, but the organization that I was working for, you know, was one very small actor within a myriad of other actors who are working towards the same goals, but also, you know, trying to solve challenges that we didn't have resources necessarily that match those needs. And so it was constantly, you know, a reckoning with: one, this desire to, you know, quote, do good, and too really promote and work towards the values that I signed up for when I went into this profession, and kind of the reality that there are limits to what I and the the sector as a whole could achieve. And I think, you know, that's something that has stuck with me, throughout my career. I very quickly became more realistic about what we could achieve. And overtime, I've gone through phases of burnout, disillusionment, resentment, but ultimately have landed in this place now, where, you know, I still very much believe in the values of humanitarianism. It's why I still work in it; it's why I still think about it, write about it, and engage with it, because, you know, I believe in it. But I think overtime, I have become more aware of some of those structural issues that we are grappling with today, but have been so since I started my career 20 years ago, and before that, obviously.

Safa: You mentioned the goals of alleviating suffering, or quote unquote, doing good and still being committed to that. You know, you've also have a 'hat' of being a writer and using writing and storytelling as a way to have impact, raise awareness, talk about these issues. Could you speak to the ways in which you've used writing as a way to process or deal with or just as a way to think about doing this type of work?

Jessica: I think that's a great question, because it touches on something that I and I think many of my colleagues have really struggled with, which is what value do I add, when I go into these places? You know, do I bring any more capacity than someone there could bring when there are people on the ground who are very well-qualified to do the work. And so I found that one of the ways that I can bring most value is through writing or through teaching. And I felt, when I was starting out in the sector, that I lacked a voice of reality about some of these challenges. And especially from a female perspective, the books that I read about it were either policy books, or they were ones written by men. And so that was one of the reasons that prompted me to write my book in the first place, was because I wanted to give a voice to the realities of life as an aid worker. I would come home from many of my deployments, and faced with: one, reverse culture shock of like how do I now, you know, kind of assimilate back into my normal life, which became more and more challenging, which is why, you know, I kept going overseas. But then also just some of the preconceptions or the misunderstandings that people, very well-intentioned people, smart people, informed people had about humanitarian aid. And so I felt like I could do a service not only to a general audience who didn't know much about the sector, but also to people like myself, who were going into the sector, by writing about my personal experiences and what it was like starting out and the challenges and the realities that I was facing on the ground. You know, people would say stuff like, oh, you're like a young Mother Teresa, you're like Angelina Jolie and I said, stop it, wait a minute, you know, this white savior complex is a myth. And you know, what it actually means to be an aid worker?

Safa: Could you speak more towards that phrasing of a white savior complex is a myth, or that there was a discrepancy between what other people thought you were doing and what you were actually doing in terms of humanitarian aid work? Jessica Sure. I mean, I think, you know, one of the stories that comes to mind and is something that the sector is grappling with today with localization. You know, why bring someone like me to a place like Darfur, who doesn't speak Arabic, I don't know anything really about the culture or the history aside from what I've learned in graduate school in New York City, to employ me to run a displaced persons camp. Right? I relied on, you know, a group of smart, informed, locally grounded colleagues who really ran the show. And my job was to report back to headquarters, was to report back to senior staff in Khartoum, to report to our donors about what was going on and how the grant funding was being used, etc. But day to day, I mean, they were the ones who were actually running the show. And so this idea that I alone am working to solve problems is really a myth. I mean, it depended all on local staff. Not only that, I mean, the things that we were doing were so small in comparison to what the needs were. Sure we were keeping people alive in very, very basic conditions in these camps. But I mean, it was only a drop in the bucket in terms of what their needs were. Many of the times, you know, what we were doing was not what was needed. And that was, you know, quite obvious given, you know, half the time, we would see what we had distributed being sold in the market the very next day. And so, you know, having those conversations with people back at home, when I would return, was something that I think opened their eyes to what the role of a western, young woman going into these places was and the limits of what our sector could achieve.

Safa: So over the years, as you were working in different contexts, you know, your own identity as an American woman, how did you kind of reconcile that with the work you were doing? Or did it hinder your work in any way? Or did it open up doors for you in some ways? You know, over the years, how have you reflected on your identity as you continue to work?

Jessica: Yeah, no, again, an excellent question. And one that's very pertinent for today, where I think we're all sort of reckoning with, you know, what our role is delivering aid as a western, you know, American woman. For me, I kind of, you know, I stopped going to some of these places for a shift in both professional and personal priorities, and also a recognition that I was best served doing things that could be done from headquarters. So working on writing, doing evaluations, policy work; that was where I felt most comfortable. Even now, because of COVID, for example, there have been instances where, you know, work that was supposed to be done by me or a colleague flying over to some of these places, well, that no longer is possible. And so, you know, it's forcing local actors to be doing this kind of work, which I applaud, and I think is the right way that we should have been doing it anyway. And that it took COVID to make us shift in that way, I hope is something that will stay. It's something that the sector had been working towards for a while, but it was more rhetorical than actual practicality. Now, they're being forced to do it just because of the realities of travel restrictions. And I hope that's something that if and once these restrictions lift, that will stay and be part of how the humanitarian system actually shifts.

Safa: Could you speak to us a bit about your role with The New Humanitarian? And how did this idea for this Rethinking Humanitarianism series come up? And how has it manifested?

Jessica: Sure. So The New Humanitarian rebranded itself this year from IRIN news, and they were first going to name it "The Humanitarian" and they changed it to "The New Humanitarian." And that was an intentional choice to be a platform for really thinking and engaging and a discourse on what humanitarianism should be at this time. And so with that name came a commitment to examine, you know, new actors, new mindsets, new approaches. And so even before The Rethinking Humanitarianism series, there was this proactive decision by the editorial team to have this space to, you know, think about how humanitarians are delivering today and for the future. And The Rethinking Humanitarianism series is a tool that we're using to have those conversations. So what does alleviating suffering mean in 2020? And a platform to really question some of the basic assumptions behind aid and a forum and a space to really do that and engage conversations around this moment. And when I first was brought on board, it was before COVID happened. And so it was a completely different mentality. We were aiming to kind of just think back about 25 years since IRIN was started. So you know, we were looking back on the world's response to crises over this last quarter century, asking questions about whether aid had delivered on promises, and you know, what would the future look like? Well, then COVID happened, and then Black Lives Matter movement happened. And so it's this really fascinating time to think through some of these issues, as aid is, you know, the priorities and the focus shifts, which really forced this global reckoning with some of these long standing power imbalances. You know, we're really reckoning with how the role of humanitarianism is changing and asking some really tough questions. And so it's a really, as I said, fascinating time to be in this space and having and engaging with thought leaders, as this moment in history transpires.

Safa: So the series can be divided into past, present and future in terms of the structure or the timelines. When it comes to looking at the past, whether that's taking it from World War II and establishment of the UN and Bretton Woods agencies, or just looking at some of the other historical events that have occurred over the past decade, could you speak to maybe some of the important stories or some of the important themes that have been included in the series in terms of looking at the past?

Jessica: So the story that I personally wrote was really about looking at past historical turning points over the past 25 years of the humanitarian sector, and what moments have brought change. And I started with Rwanda, because that was when IRIN was formed, so we were looking back over 25 years and tried to chart a trajectory of change over time, linked to different crises. Because, you know, one of the themes of my piece is that, you know, crises really are moments of change, and they force you to really step back and rethink some of the operating models or the assumptions on which you were working. And there have been big changes over time for the sector. The sector has grown financially in terms of the number of people, the number of organizations. It's more insecure than, you know, it was 25 years ago. The needs have grown; you have these ongoing, protracted crises that, you know, continue year on year out, which don't get resolved. With climate change, there's more needs that are coming as a result of natural hazards. The sector is also professionalized; we've become more bureaucratic over time; there are more standards on which we, you know, ascribe to; and that has both positives, but also some negatives, you know, and part of my piece was asking the question of whether that was a good thing. There are also more women in the sector; there is more, you know, a recognition around greater accountability. And I think a push to actually do that, I think more rhetorical than reality. But at least there's an acknowledgement, much more so than when I started out about the need to be more accountable. And so you know, there are a lot of changes that have happened over the past 25 years, and one of the pieces that will be coming out next, we'll actually be looking at some of those changes over the past 25 years, how different the sector looks than it did, you know, back in '94, when we were dealing with Rwanda, and conflicts in Bosnia. But the other conclusion is that, you know, we make some of these grand promises for change over time, but in actuality, very little has changed. And we haven't really made the kind of structural changes that I think many recognize are necessary, if we are going to live up to some of the values that we ascribe to. It's still a very western dominated model. It's a charity-driven model. We've been sort of tweaking at the margins, I think, but haven't addressed some of the more structural issues that get at the roots or the heart of some of the reasons why people remain in crisis today. I mean, there are these pressing and recurring ethical issues that people are talking about now. The need to undo the colonial shackles of humanitarian assistance, this power imbalance that exists, questions around what will a global recession mean for aid and operations? With less funding, we'll need to reprioritize. What are the priorities of the humanitarian sector now? What will a shrink back look like? What does this mean, for concepts like localization? We're still very far from achieving those commitments, those lofty commitments that we made around the Grand Bargain. You know, will we stop talking about it and actually do it? And what does that actually mean? What will that mean, for the long run? How have we really exposed the limits of humanitarianism? You know, some of the challenges that we're seeing today are really linked to structural weaknesses. And you know, they're not really things that humanitarians can fix. But will this finally push a breakdown of these artificial silos that we put up around humanitarianism and development that we constantly talk about? It's also making us rethink some of the bread and butter services and whether they're still relevant. People in some of these contexts are asking for social justice, for functioning institutions. They're not wanting the usual bags of rice or plastic sheeting. You know, can we really make a shift in this way? Is this what we were set up to do? And is this something that we're going to take on? And one of the things that it's also exposed and I think we've been really focused on COVID, but you know, the climate crisis hasn't gone away. And its exposed this week investment in preparedness, and it's something that, you know, has always been extremely weak within the humanitarian sector, a look at risk reduction, and how do we be more anticipatory in our approach instead of reactionary? And so it's really forced us to ask those questions: are we ready to shift the model? Again, going back to this question around these artificial silos that exist between humanitarianism and development, you know, are we going to invest more in prevention and risk reduction, and this sort of forced us to look at it, to fund it, to program it differently?

Safa: You mentioned that you spoke with many different people in the process of writing your own piece. Could you share if they were open to speaking honestly, speaking critically? Or did you find that there was kind of a fear or maybe a worry to speak critically in terms of what they've experienced or their organizations?

Jessica: Absolutely not. I mean, I think this is a very self-critical industry. And that's one of the reasons why I love it. It is that we're constantly self-examining. People are very open to having a frank discussion. People are open to criticism, at least the ones that I spoke to. And again, it was a self-selected group of people, but open to really asking the tough questions and reckoning with some of the ways that we work that we really do need to rethink. And so I think people are very much open and wanting to engage in these questions and see this as a moment of opportunity. You know, as I said, past crises have led to some changes. And I think, you know, people were open to discussing what those are. So for example, the cluster system, that was a big change that happened as a result of failures to coordinate, to have leadership after the the tsunami and failures out of the Darfur crisis. And, you know, that's just one example that people pointed to as a change, but they're very reactionary, right? They are changes that happened as a result of some failure or a criticism that has come externally. And that's forced a shakeup within the system to say: Okay, we've got to kind of change the way that we work. But again, it hasn't really done much on the ground, sure, we've become more coordinated, we've become more professional, but at the end of the day, you know, the needs are still growing. Our system keeps growing to try to meet those, but are we really solving problems? Or is this the right model? Are we doing the same things, but you know, needs are only growing? Are we still able to, to rise to the occasion to meet the needs? And I will say that the response to the series has been phenomenal in terms of the engagement of readers and how it has influenced different policy conversations, both within different NGOs and think tanks and academia. So you know, I think it's made us aware, or it's made me more aware of the appetite, the huge appetite within the humanitarian sector to be engaging with these conversations, and hopefully a new provocative way that will make change.

Safa: So you mentioned some of the ways in which changes have happened, even if they've been reactionary, or they've kind of been tinkering at the edges, and that there's really a bigger need for more structural changes, systemic changes. When it comes to naming those, what are some of the approaches you used, whether that's including writers from different backgrounds in the series, or just trying to bring different lenses to look at issues? Could you speak to that process of how you kind of structured the series to speak to the different issues that exist?

Jessica: Sure. I mean, you should see the list of of ideas for the series before COVID, before Black Lives Matter to now today, which you know, the list of article ideas has changed and has shifted to reflect some of these changes and the discussions that are happening. But absolutely, I mean, we're trying to get a diverse array of people to comment on these issues. And the webinar that Heba, the director, hosted a few months back, I mean, really showed, you know, a diverse group of individuals from all different backgrounds in terms of, some were members of the NGO community, some were writers, thinkers, so trying to bring together a diversity of opinions and backgrounds to talk about these things. And also, the topics on which we are writing. We're always trying to make sure that it is touching upon this moment and that it is challenging people to think about these things in a new and different way, not just the same blah, blah, the humanitarian sector needs to change this way, but really trying to push it further and say: Okay, how? We've heard this before, you know, what should the future of aid look like and how do we actually get there? It's not enough anymore to just say: we need to be more accountable. Well, what does that mean, especially today? So trying to invite people who can speak to those issues and the urgency of this moment.

Safa: Mhmm, absolutely. In terms of really answering the questions, in terms of really giving tangible insights or ideas about how can rethinking happen, how can structural change happen, are there articles or you know, some examples you have that maybe come to mind in terms of the content in the series answering the questions of how, how can we rethink, how can we structurally change, for example?

Jessica: One of the things that we have in the pipeline for the series is called "The Future of Aid." And we asked experts to kind of give us their visions of the future of aid, what are their priority issues? What are some things that need to be in this vision that this moment demands for rethinking of humanitarianism, and some of the big buckets that we'll be writing about, or that people, you know, organically wrote about, and that we will be including in this part of the series are around, you know, preventing conflict and respect for international humanitarian law. You know, these protracted conflicts go on and on, and they're expensive, if you look at how much money is spent in Yemen today, compared to 25 years ago. I mean, in one country alone, you have the entire humanitarian budget from 1995. Now, of course, there's inflation, but it just shows how expensive it's gotten. And year after year, we're working in some of these conflict settings that don't get resolved. So preventing conflict was one of the buckets of this future of aid series. Decolonization of the sector - one of the things that one of our contributors has said was, we don't necessarily need to wait for this systematic overhaul, which may or may not come, you know, there's a lot of talk about it now. But you know, there are small incremental things that we can do to start being better and working at a smaller scale to decolonize the sector. And one of those ways is, you know, engaging community, local collaboration mechanisms, local innovation, promoting those kinds of local ways of working, new delivery mechanisms. So whether it's the use of cash, which has exponentially increased over the last years, the State of the World Cash Report shows, I think a doubling of the use of cash over the last three years in the sector. Links to the private sector and recognizing them also as an actor within this humanitarian space. And as I mentioned, this shift to a more anticipatory approach, one that get the ahead of events before they become crises, which, you know, we have the technology, we have the ability to do, it's just whether we can put our money where our mouth is in that regard.

Safa: Mm hmm. You mentioned that a lot of the articles have had a really overwhelming response from readers. Could you maybe speak to what are some of the themes or the issues that the audience really, really engaged with? Or also, on the other hand, have there been readers who have written into say: Oh, I don't agree with this, or like, you know, nothing needs to be changed, it's going well, or there has been great progress or, you know, the different opinions that exist?

Jessica: Sure. I mean, I think the racism in aid is one that we received a ton of feedback on. And it really struck a nerve, because those pieces have called out something that is sort of hush hush within the sector. But you know, people have written in to express their own experience of racism in aid, you know, if they are personally working in the sector, or overall, that our system and the structures themselves, you know, are racist, and promote this, again, post-colonial model that needs to be undone. So a lot of support, and kudos for highlighting that issue, writing about it so frankly and openly and exposing some of the things that exist. I think, a recent article around questioning whether humanitarians need to be neutral has gotten a lot of traction and feedback and questioning around these basic principles of humanitarianism on which we were founded. And readers are reacting to that as well. You know, my pieces as well, the long read on changes in the humanitarian sector, I mean, I think a lot of people applauded it for calling out that, you know, we claim to change, we make these statements of change, you know, the Grand Bargain, the Transformative Agenda, these very lofty commitments, but at the end of the day, they haven't really changed much over time.

Safa: That sentiment of there being kind of grand claims to change, but that it hasn't happened or the money has not been put towards these ideas or these plans. When you think about this moment we're in and the conversations that are happening, in terms of the content in the rethinking humanitarianism series or just the conversations that are happening by a variety of different organizations, practitioners - we're also having it on the podcast, you know, there are so many different spaces and people who are having these conversations - personally, you know, looking at that whole ecosystem, do you feel hopeful? Do you think that this is different than past times when similar conversations were had? What are your own kind of sentiments around is this going to lead somewhere completely new? Is rethinking really going to happen tangibly?

Jessica: Yeah, that's a great question. I mean, one that I tried to stay optimistic about. I think we are seeing certain changes happen just because circumstances are dictating that and whether they remain after COVID, I don't know. And those changes have been, you know, both positive and negative. I think, as countries kind of deal with their own weaknesses and they grapple with how to deal with COVID, as I mentioned, you know, there may be less funding available for humanitarian actors, and will this force, you know, a reprioritization? There's often talk about bloat within the sector and a need to trim the fat and go back to basics. Will this force that and will that be a good thing? Will that be a bad thing? I mean, when I talk about the need for preparedness, and the focus on disaster risk reduction, well, that's something that always is underfunded. Will that be even more so as a result of some of these budget constraints, I don't know. But, you know, I do think that as one person mentioned in one of the interviews: the genie is out of the bottle, and it's going to be impossible to kind of stuff it back in if and when things return to quote unquote 'normal' after COVID. I think we've opened up a discussion around, you know, what it means to be subsidiary, complimentary. These concepts and terms that were more in policy papers and at global level discussions, you know, are now actual truths in some of these places that we used to, you know, parachute into that we're not anymore. And so will that, you know, will that carry on? Will we be able to return back to the way that we were operating before in some of these contexts? I don't know. And so, I am hopeful, because I do think this moment is different from past turning points, and that it's affecting the whole globe. And a lot of people have said, you know, this is sort of the the test case for climate change, as you know, that will impact all of us. And so, you know, the lessons that we're learning now, I think we will have to apply to what we'll be experiencing going forward with climate change.

Safa: In thinking about the people who are participating in these conversations, a lot of the perspectives are from practitioners who have been working in this sector for decades, for many years; they have a lot of experience, and they kind of look back and speak from a place of having kind of been in the trenches for a long time. But when it comes to the perspective of young people, people who just entered, younger professionals, or the students that you work with, what are some of the opinions that you share with them, or things that you think they should hear? Or maybe they have also shared things with you that make you feel like if this is the future generation, some of the ideas that they have, or the values they believe in are positive? Or what are the perspectives that you think younger people are bringing to these conversations?

Jessica: Yeah, well, I think some of the assumptions that, you know, I or people of my generation had before, you know, are being undone and I think that's a healthy thing. And I think, you know, this next generation of new humanitarians, I mean, the concepts of inclusion and diversity, those are just kind of part of the day to day discourse within that generation, and something that I think they're bringing fresh eyes to the sector, and, and also, you know, helping to expose some of these underpinning biases that have existed and really talking about them in a more open way. So I think that's a really good thing. And I think, you know, they're also reckoning with the fact of like, well, what value do I bring, you know, going overseas? And, you know, I talk to students a lot, who really are passionate about these issues and want to get involved and what it means for them in their career that, you know, in this moment, like, we're really focusing on hiring local staff, and what can they can do in their own backyard as opposed to the need to go overseas to do some of that work and what this moment has exposed is that, you know, all of us are vulnerable. And so there's a role to play on these issues of social justice on you know, responding to crises that you may be more local than needing to go overseas to do that work. But sometimes I feel like a hypocrite saying that because, you know, that was how I built my career. And so it's coming from someone who, you know, has done that, it feels a bit disingenuous, if I'm being honest about, you know, the past 20 years of my work in humanitarianism, because that is what I did. I've shifted that today, but that's how I started out and got experience. And so there is a double standard, you know, in that, on the one hand, people are investing in getting professional degrees in humanitarian affairs, but at the same time, it's shifting to say, actually, wait a second, you know, you may not be needed as much overseas as perhaps in your own backyard. And so having that conversation openly about, again, what we started talking about at the beginning of this interview, about you know, what value, what role can you play that adds value? And really being honest and thinking critically about, well, if there's someone there who can do this better then, you know, then where can I best fit within this whole ecosystem of humanitarian system?

Safa: Those questions are really important questions for everyone to think about. And also kind of reminds me of in some other sectors, for example, I know some CEOs in the world of sports or people in the world of theater and arts, who are in positions of power, they may be CEOs or directors and their interpretation of what they can do in terms of being more anti-racist, or addressing the power imbalances they have in their sector - their answer to that is resigning. Resigning so that someone else, people of color, people who normally have not been part of the leadership in terms of their sector, their organization, can instead be invited to take up positions of leadership.

Jessica: There is a real shift within the sector to one, feminize, to make sure that women have more of a leadership position in many of these organizations. And to decolonize, to really ask like, do I really need to hire an American to come over and do this job when I can hire someone from here who can do it just as well, probably better, because they're from here and know the context. I mean, all of those arguments, which we've heard time and again, you know, more and more organizations are actually doing that. And there's now deliberate policies to hire more women from the South and promote them. And I think that message is very clear within the human resources of many of these big UN organizations. There are deliberate attempts to diversify. Now, whether that translates really into a redistribution of power is another thing. But I think it's important that we're taking steps in the right direction.

Safa: That's just one way, one element of it, but there are other ways of going about redistributing power and other important elements to think about at the same time.

Jessica: I mean I think we could probably talk for another three hours about these issues, which is why the series is such an exciting space to have this kind of dialogues, to have discourse around this moment and the future of aid and what it means. Safa Absolutely. Jessica, thank you so much for speaking with us. And speaking towards the Rethinking Humanitarianism series. I invite and encourage all our listeners to go on The New Humanitarian website and have a read or maybe if you want to pitch a story, maybe you can pitch one to Jessica or the team. But thank you, Jessica.

Jessica: Thank you for your questions. Thank you for the opportunity, and I really enjoyed our talk.

Safa: Likewise, it was wonderful to hear from you and learn from you. So thank you.

Thank you also to our listeners, we invite you to join in on the conversation. You can do this in a couple of different ways.

Number one, you can send us a short voice message sharing one specific ethical issue you have faced you work. You can visit our website and hit the send us a voice message button for more details.

Or number two, you can email us a short letter to your younger self sharing what you wish you had known when you first started working in the sector or tips about some of the things you have learned over the years.

You can also keep up to date with our latest episodes and offerings by signing up for a newsletter, listening and subscribing to our podcasts on your preferred podcast player and following us on social media.

On our website, you can find a donation link where you can choose either a one time donation or reoccurring monthly donation option to help us cover our production costs.

Thank you again for tuning in. I look forward to continuing this conversation with you all next time. Until then, take care.