Author(s)
Catherine-Lune Grayson (ICRC)
You recently co-led the process that led to the Climate and Environment Charter for Humanitarian Organizations. First of all, could you tell us about how environmental and climatic issues are taken into account within ICRC?
Only a few years ago, beyond the protection of the natural environment by International Humanitarian Law, it was still difficult to talk about these issues at ICRC. However, in the field, practices were often being adapted, particularly in relation to water and agriculture projects. As such, climate and environmental risks were included long before it was agreed that these should be systematically taken into account when designing a response.
Climate and environmental issues began to be discussed more two or three years ago, when they were integrated into the institutional strategy. Initially, we often heard: “But, this has nothing to do with ICRC’s mandate!” I think that one of the things that helped us to change this perception was the experience of our colleagues who work with people who are victims of armed conflicts and who see the extent to which their day to day lives are affected by climate and environmental risks. We then carried out some research that confirmed that these risks are at the heart of the difficulties that people face1. Climate risks and environmental considerations do not frame our response, but in practice, if we don’t take them into account, we cannot meet people’s needs appropriately. There has therefore been a clear change. Today, no one really questions the relevance of these issues to our work.
How difficult was the consultation process that preceded the drawing up of the Charter?
The consultation process was a pleasure because of the level of interest and enthusiasm. If we had launched the same discussion five years ago, it would have been much more difficult. We have reached a point where it is clearly accepted that humanitarian organisations have a role to play in the response to the climate and environment crises, both by adapting their programmes and by limiting their own environmental impact. The process involved a huge amount of work, but it was also the project that gave me the most energy at a time when having to communicate online made everything a bit tiresome.
What was the idea behind the Charter?
The Charter was developed because it had become clear that humanitarian organisations need to play a role in relation to the climatic and environmental crisis, both to help people to adapt to how the climate and the environment are changing, and to improve the environmental sustainability of humanitarian projects. It was also clear that a collective response was needed, in line with the ‘Statement of Commitment’ by the Réseau Environnement Humanitaire (REH) and the Environmental Pact by Médecins Sans Frontières2. We were also inspired by the process that led to the Code of Conduct in 1994 as it involved bringing the humanitarian sector together around shared fundamental principles. This is what we wanted to do: establish a number of core principles to guide humanitarian action at all levels. We wanted to use language that was appropriate for all kinds of organisations: small local organisations, big international NGOs, the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, or UN agencies.
Can you describe the process that led to the creation of the Charter?
To develop the content of the Charter, we first formed an Advisory Committee. When I say ‘we’, I refer to the ICRC and the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (FICR). This committee was made up of nineteen people including representatives of a certain number of humanitarian organisations and climate and environmental experts. We began discussions to agree on the main elements that should be included the Charter. Once we had a satisfactory draft to nurture a broader conversation with the humanitarian sector, we organised local, regional, and global consultations among humanitarian organisations from December 2020 to March 2021. The idea was to listen to the views of a range of organisations of varying size, capacity, and mandate and to integrate these views into the Charter. There was a remarkable level of participation. We received contributions from just over 150 organisations, which was extremely useful. We produced a document summarising all the contributions gathered and the amendments made in the light of these comments.
Organisations have been able to sign the Charter since 21 May and there are already almost a hundred fifty signatories, including Groupe URD. Several local organisations, major international NGOs like Islamic Relief, CONCERN, the Norwegian Refugee Council, IRC, CARE and ACTED, and many Red Cross and Red Crescent National Societies have signed it. Some organisations have also already established targets to measure their implementation of the Charter.
I should point out that there is no Red Cross Red Crescent emblem on the Charter or on the website except where we are mentioned as signatories. We see the Charter as a service rendered to the humanitarian community. It doesn’t belong to us – it belongs to the humanitarian community. Which also explains why we conducted the process with an Advisory Committee. Of course, we feel that we have an important role to play as a Movement when it comes to mobilising the humanitarian sector, but we didn’t want it to be Red Cross product. We wanted it to be a project supported by the whole humanitarian community. That is also why the consultation process was so important.
Could you outline the content of the Charter?
The Charter is made up of seven commitments, two of which represent the backbone of the Charter. There is a hierarchy between the first two commitments. The first commitment has to do with adapting projects so that they help people affected by crises adapt to climate and environmental changes. The second concerns maximising the environmental sustainability of our operations. Then there are four commitments related to the way that we work to achieve our objectives. They focus on the idea of working closely with local communities and recognising their leadership, on the need to increase our own capacity and knowledge and to collaborate within the humanitarian community, and beyond, notably with climate experts and development actors. They also cover the need to use our influence to mobilise much more significant climate action. The last commitment has to do with the definition of targets to measure the implementation of the Charter.
We had a lot of discussions, notably one in connection with the Humanitarian Environment Network (REH) on the question, ‘Should the Charter include numerical targets?’ In the end, we decided not to include these because we wanted to include a variety of organisations, both small and large. Even objectives like ‘reducing greenhouse gas emissions to a predetermined level’ would be very difficult for certain organisations to adopt. This decision was made based on the comments that we received during the consultation process.
I should mention here that organisations are expected to adopt ambitious commitments. For example, when the ICRC adopted the Charter, we began by adopting three targets that are almost symbolic, and which will be complemented by other, intermediary targets. The first of these three targets is a commitment to factor climate and environmental risks in all our programmes by 2025. The second is a commitment to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2030 compared to 2018, and the third concerns disseminating the rules of International Humanitarian Law related to the protection of the environment. The idea is very much to translate commitments into practice.
What are the next steps for the Charter?
We have developed a document that puts the commitments from the Charter into more concrete terms and actions and provides a list of resources that can help to implement it, as well as some considerations on acceptable targets in relation to the Charter commitments. We are currently in talks with several organisations to go a little further and develop implementation standards.
We also had an Advisory Committee meeting where the members volunteered to continue working with us. We are very happy because we are currently looking at the support needed to implement the Charter, and what this means in terms of links with other groups, such as the REH, or the creation of other communities of practice. The views of the Advisory Committee will be very useful.
In terms of dissemination, just before the COP 26, along with all the signatories of the Charter, we will release a statement highlighting our commitment to take these issues into consideration, and to do more to adapt programmes to the climate risks and environmental degradation.
What are the links between the Charter and the REH’s Statement of Commitment?
These documents both came to be in similar ways: both stem from the recognition that the climate and environmental emergency is having serious humanitarian consequences, and that humanitarian or aid organisations therefore need to adapt their practices. Both recognise the importance of collective action to cope with the crisis. In both cases, the commitments have to do with integrating climate and environmental risks into humanitarian programmes and reducing our environmental and climate footprint. I think that both documents are based on a very similar approach and are complementary.
However, there are two differences. On the one hand, the REH’s Statement of Commitment includes a target for reducing greenhouse gases, in contrast to the Charter, which leaves it to signatories to determine their level of ambition, depending on their capacity. And the Charter is open to all humanitarian organisations, not only international ones, or the members of a given network. This means that small local NGOs from all over the world have also signed the Charter and have committed themselves to respecting its principles.
Do you think it is more difficult for certain NGOs to respect their commitments than for others? (issues of size, mandate, administrative structure, financial resources, etc.)
The Charter suggests that organisations should define their targets themselves within a year of signing, precisely so that each organisation is able to adopt objectives that correspond to their capacity. These targets can be a long-term objective, but they can also be intermediary, leading to a longer-term target. For example, an initial objective might be to determine what the organisation’s greenhouse gas emissions are. This might then be followed up with a numerical target for reducing emissions. An organisation might also decide to train a proportion of its staff, before establishing the objective of integrating climatic and environmental risks into its programmes.
That said, the size of an organisation and the resources that it has at its disposal can influence its capacity to respect ambitious commitments. That is why the Charter insists on the need for us to work together, because we recognise that without support to develop tools and training courses, the implementation of the Charter may be more difficult for small organisations. Also, one of the points that was underlined repeatedly during the consultations was the importance of donor support for the implementation of the Charter. That is why there is an explicit reference to this in the last commitment related to the development of targets. But it is not only a financial issue: the Charter requires a change in mentality, which will then lead to a change in our way of working. This does not always have financial implications.
For more information on the Climate and Environment Charter for Humanitarian Organizations: