Risk thresholds in humanitarian assistance
Every organisation has a level of risk beyond which it will not send staff. Very few have written it down, and fewer still apply the one they have.
What a risk threshold is
A risk threshold is a stated point at which the organisation will stop, change the plan, or accept a different way of working. It is not the same as a risk assessment. An assessment describes what the risk is; a threshold states what the organisation will do when the assessment reaches a given level.
Thresholds can be expressed in several ways, and the choice matters more than it appears. An absolute rule is easy to apply and impossible to calibrate: no movement after dark, in any context, for any reason. A relative rule is more useful and harder to operate: no movement after dark unless the country director and the security focal point agree that the purpose justifies it and record why. The second creates accountability. The first creates evasion, because a rule that cannot be followed sensibly will be worked around.
Who sets the threshold
This is the question organisations avoid. If the threshold is set by the security function, the operational manager who wants to deliver a programme will treat it as an obstacle and escalate around it. If it is set by the operational manager, it will be set at the level that allows the programme to proceed. Neither is a threshold; both are a negotiation in which the outcome depends on who is more persistent.
The guidance places the decision with the manager who owns the programme and the resources, on the basis that they also own the consequences, and requires the security adviser to provide the assessment that the decision is made against. The decision, and the reasoning, are recorded.
Why thresholds drift
- Gradual change is not noticed. A context rarely deteriorates in a single step. Each individual worsening looks manageable against the one before, and the cumulative distance from the original standard goes unremarked.
- The programme becomes the justification. Once a programme is established, staff are recruited, and communities depend on it, the argument for continuing acquires weight independent of the risk.
- Acceptance becomes invisible. A risk accepted once is usually accepted again without a new decision, because nobody revisits a decision that has already been taken.
- Different thresholds apply to different staff. In practice, national staff are often expected to accept risk that would trigger a withdrawal for international staff. Where that happens, the organisation has two thresholds and has not acknowledged either.
What makes a threshold work
It is written down and dated. It names the person who can vary it and the circumstances in which they may. It states what happens when it is reached, which is usually a specific action rather than a general instruction to review. It is reviewed on a schedule as well as after incidents, so that gradual change is caught. And it applies to everyone the organisation deploys, with any difference between national and international staff stated openly rather than emerging from practice.
Related
Practical guidance and research on the security of humanitarian staff, for the organisations that send them.