Nigeria

Key strategic elements

Improving the efficiency of the response

Humanitarian funding globally and in Nigeria is declining at the same time as needs are either static or increasing. Compared to 2023, funding for the humanitarian response in north-east Nigeria saw a increase of 14 percent. Indications are that funding will continue on its downward trajectory in 2025. This means that there are less resources available per person affected. In order to maintain the operation at the same level a number of issues needs to be addressed:

• Better understanding the needs of the people affected to tailor the response to these needs and make certain the appropriateness of the response, potentially reducing wastage;
• Improved targeting and prioritization to ensure that scarce resources are allocated to those with the most severe and immediate needs;
  Improved boundary setting to ensure that the focus is on life-saving or life-sustaining activities, and that required development action is clearly identified;
• Improved efficiency of humanitarian delivery to ensure that scarce resources are put to the best possible use;
• Better linkages with development activities to ensure that these reduce vulnerability and the number of people in need of humanitarian assistance;
• A shift from a reactive to a proactive humanitarian response, leveraging better collaboration with development actors towards disaster risk reduction, but also towards a greater emphasis on anticipatory action;
• Greater government leadership, coordination and resources to ensure the sustainability of humanitarian interventions; and
• Finding alternative sources of funding, including leveraging more government resources.

In the 2024 Humanitarian Response Plan, it was stated that it is no longer ‘business as usual’ given the change in the funding environment. The newly appointed Emergency Relief Coordinator in 2024, called for ruthlessness in pursuing innovation and greater efficiency at the Global Humanitarian Overview. Change is slow to happen and there is often resistance to change. Strengthening local leadership and ownership continues to be challenging if humanitarian partners are in competition for scarce funding. At the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016 a target was set for putting local partners as first responders – 25 percent of humanitarian assistance to be undertaken by local partners – to be achieved by 2021. Today, we are woefully short of this target as only between 4 and 5 percent of aid is directly implemented by local partners.

Strengthening local leadership has great potential for efficiency gains, not only reducing the cost of humanitarian operations, but also ensuring a lasting footprint for humanitarian organizations. Funding local partners directly also reduces transaction costs – i.e., the loss of value from funding them or other partners through a number of conduits. Further efficiency gains may be realized by shifting to cash or vouchers where this is possible, reducing the need for procurement, warehousing, transport, etc. This also potentially empowers affected people by giving them a choice in how they use resources. There may also be efficiency gains through anticipatory action, where early action enabling people to stay safe will reduce the need for a humanitarian response during and after a predictable disaster. Making sure that this can be realized will require a change in mindset and concerted efforts from all humanitarian partners. It will require increased transparency and accountability to shift this around.

In the present HNRP, the cost-per-beneficiary has increased from $210 to $246 and is the highest in the West and Central Africa region, meaning that there is ample scope for improving efficiency.

A shift to a proactive rather than a reactive approach has several components. Anticipatory action makes up around 5 percent of the response. Early action will not only potentially save lives and reduce suffering, but it will also be more cost-efficient, saving scarce resources. Ultimately, however, closer collaboration between humanitarian and development partners through measures such as disaster risk management and reduction will be the key to reducing vulnerability. Similarly, restoration of basic services such as health care and improving systems is needed to sustainably address disease outbreaks.

The ongoing efforts to provide solutions for internally displaced people will help reduce overall needs and improve the focus of the operation. In this regard, it may be important to better balance the provision of shelter with other key elements of solutions, such
as livelihoods, basic services, peacebuilding and social integration.

Strengthening local leadership

The Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) in Nigeria has committed to channeling 10 per cent of its operational resources through local and national civil society organizations (CSOs), acknowledging that these organizations are the backbone of the humanitarian response in the BAY states, particularly in conflict- affected areas. Throughout 2024, substantial progress has been made in strengthening local ownership and leadership of CSOs. The aim in 2025 is to further reduce transaction costs, improve operational efficiency, and enhance accountability to affected people. Currently between 4 and 5 per cent of the operation is delivered directly through local partners, compared to 1.2 per cent globally.

"CSOs understand our struggles because they live with us every day. They are not just service providers but members of our community, sharing our challenges and hopes. Their presence ensures faster, more trusted, and culturally sensitive responses. When they lead, we feel heard, and the assistance truly reaches those who need it most,". This sentiment was expressed by a community member during consultations in Yobe, emphasizing the indispensable role of CSOs in humanitarian efforts.

To adapt to the evolving context in parts of the BAY states and address the significant reduction in funding, the humanitarian response must become more efficient, innovative, and responsive to people's needs and priorities. The aim is to build a resilient and sustainable network of CSOs capable of leading humanitarian responses and driving development in north-east Nigeria, in collaboration with federal, state, and local governments. Key priorities include helping CSOs to mobilise resources, strengthening their capacities, fostering equitable partnerships, and ensuring their meaningful participation in coordination and decision-making forums.

Differentiated response across the BAY states

Recognizing that the needs and contexts of the BAY states vary, the plan will promote a differentiated approach based on the needs and risk analysis for each state. People consistently prioritize immediate needs such as food, water, and shelter, highlighting the widespread severity of the crisis. As part of the severity analysis of humanitarian needs, there are clear indications reflected in the boundary exercise that it is more appropriate to pursue development approaches in some areas, including solutions for internally displaced people.

In LGAs with severity levels 1 and 2, predominantly in Adamawa and Yobe and stable areas of Borno, it is envisaged that development efforts should address needs and longer-term development rather than short-term humanitarian interventions should be the focus. Likewise, in other areas efforts should be aimed at restoring basic services and livelihoods. It seems clear that decisions that IDPs make are determined by two key factors: security and economic opportunities. Addressing these two concerns will be the key to the durability of interventions. In LGAs in Borno, like Ngala, Kala/ Balge, Bama and Monguno, residents emphasize the severe scarcity of water and lack of functional water points, while also expressing a desperate need for economic stability and livelihood opportunities, notably time-sensitive emergency agriculture support.

People with disabilities urgently require basic necessities and specialized support, feeling particularly marginalized and in need of immediate assistance. Returnees struggle with unmet basic needs, with families unable to provide adequate food and shelter. In Adamawa, areas like Lamurde, Michika and Numan reflect a similar plight, with an added emphasis on the desire for long-term economic empowerment alongside immediate relief. In Yobe, clean water remains a significant concern, and vulnerable groups continue to face hardships.

"It's not just about aid; it's about adapting support to fit the real needs of people in each community," explained a community member in Numan, Adamawa, highlighting the importance of nuanced approaches to humanitarian and development efforts.

In many areas, development and recovery-focused efforts are more appropriate than traditional humanitarian aid. This means prioritizing solutions for IDPs, building resilience and livelihoods, ensuring protection under the rule of law, enhancing social protection, and investing in basic services, rather than relying solely on humanitarian interventions.