| Dokumendiregister | Riigikogu |
| Viit | 1-2/26-341/1 |
| Registreeritud | 29.05.2026 |
| Sünkroonitud | 29.05.2026 |
| Liik | EL dokument |
| Funktsioon | |
| Sari | |
| Toimik | Ühisteatis - SWD(2026) 312, SWD(2026) 313, SWD(2026) 314, JOIN(2026) 25 |
| Juurdepääsupiirang | Avalik |
| Adressaat | |
| Saabumis/saatmisviis | |
| Vastutaja | |
| Originaal | Ava uues aknas |
EN EN
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
HIGH REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNION FOR
FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND SECURITY POLICY
Brussels, 27.5.2026
JOIN(2026) 25 final
JOINT COMMUNICATION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE
COUNCIL
Defending values, driving reform, delivering impact: the EU's humanitarian action in a
shifting global order
{SWD(2026) 312 final} - {SWD(2026) 313 final} - {SWD(2026) 314 final}
1
Introduction
Humanitarian aid (1) saves lives, alleviates suffering and reflects the European Union’s
founding values of humanity, peace and solidarity. Since 1992, the EU has remained
committed to provide humanitarian aid in line with international humanitarian principles of
humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence, as enshrined in Article 214(2) of the
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Regulation on Humanitarian Aid (1996)
(2) and the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid (2007) (3). While not an objective in
itself, humanitarian assistance also strengthens human security and the protection of human
rights and helps mitigate wider regional and global consequences of conflicts and disasters,
thereby supporting a more secure and stable global environment in line with the EU’s core
values and interests (4).
Today, the global humanitarian system is at breaking point. Proliferation of conflicts and
climate-related disasters are driving humanitarian needs to record levels, while financial
resources and operational space are shrinking. Conflicts and natural hazards affect more people
and countries than ever since the end of the Cold War (5). There are currently around 130
conflicts worldwide, more than double the number just 15 years ago (6) – and they account for
around 70% of global humanitarian needs. In parallel, climate change and environmental
degradation are increasing the frequency of natural hazards, disproportionately impacting the
most fragile contexts where communities are least able to cope. This leads to displacement,
food insecurity, water scarcity, epidemic outbreaks and the collapse of livelihoods, undermining
development gains and increasing global instability.
As a result, humanitarian needs are rising. The number of people forcibly displaced or
seeking asylum has doubled over the past decade, reaching 117.3 million in 2025 (7). Around
20% of all children worldwide – around half a billion – are living in or fleeing conflict zones.
Sexual and gender-based violence, including conflict-related sexual violence, continues to
rise and the number of people experiencing acute hunger is reaching catastrophic levels (8). The
UN estimates that in 2026, 239 million people worldwide are in need of humanitarian assistance
– up from 31 million in 2006.
Humanitarian actors struggle to address this wave of growing needs and operate in
increasingly dangerous and difficult conditions. International humanitarian law is being
disregarded, while accountability of the perpetrators remains limited. Humanitarian actors are
often being denied access to deliver aid, facing increasing insecurity, administrative
obstructions, levies and political interference that delay, divert or condition assistance.
Deliberate attacks on humanitarian personnel have grown exponentially and attacks against
1 ‘Humanitarian aid’ and ‘humanitarian assistance’ are used interchangeably in this document. 2 Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/96 concerning humanitarian aid. 3 Joint Declaration on the European consensus on humanitarian aid. Official Journal of the European Union,
2008/C 25/01, 30 January 2008. 4 Article 3(5) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) 5 European Commission: Disaster Risk Management Knowledge Centre, ‘INFORM Severity Facts and Figures’.
Joint Research Centre, accessed 30 April 2026, https://drmkc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/inform-index/INFORM-
Severity/Severity-Facts-Figures. 6 International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Appeal 2026: Overview, Geneva, 2026,
https://www.icrc.org/sites/default/files/2026-02/ICRC-Appeals-2026-Overview.pdf. 7 The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), Mid-Year Trends 2025, Copenhagen, 2025,
www.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/2025-11/mid-year-trends-report-2025.pdf. 8 Global Network Against Food Crises, 2026 Global report on food crises, Rome, 2026,
https://doi.org/10.4060/cd9424en.
2
health facilities doubled between 2023 and 2024 (9). Vulnerable and marginalised groups at
risk of discrimination are disproportionately affected, while efforts to ensure inclusion,
accessibility, and gender-sensitive humanitarian responses are increasingly challenged.
Moreover, a surge in disinformation is undermining humanitarian action (10).
In the last year, the system has been put under additional strain due to major policy decisions
and drastic funding cuts, notably by the United States and some other major donors. This has
forced humanitarian organisations to dramatically prioritise operations, reaching only a fraction
of those in need (11). In addition, assistance is increasingly influenced by political or ideological
considerations rather than guided by the humanitarian principles of humanity and impartiality,
undermining the foundations that underpin the international humanitarian system.
These developments make the reform of the multilateral humanitarian system both urgent and
unavoidable. The UN Humanitarian Reset, launched in March 2025, seeks to strengthen
collective humanitarian action, boost efficiency, shift power and resources closer to crises-
affected populations and protect principled action. As a leading and principled partner, the EU
is resolutely supporting these efforts for a more resilient humanitarian system, fit for the future.
Moreover, the EU will continue to champion the multilateral system, support the United
Nations Charter and the UN80 Initiative as the broader UN reform process, to ensure the UN
remains effective, cost-efficient and responsive (12).
Together, the EU and its Member States remain reliable and predictable donors, providing
the largest share of global humanitarian funding (34% in 2025) (13). The EU will continue
to provide needs-based, inclusive and non-discriminatory assistance (14) to save lives and
preserve human dignity. The support will continue to be delivered through its long-standing
humanitarian partners, in particularly the UN, Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, and
international non-governmental organisations, drawing on their respective strengths.
At the same time, the EU is rapidly adapting to shifting realities and positioning itself as a driver
of reform. It aims to do so in a collective, Team Europe approach (15), increasing EU impact
along three core pillars (16) to provide concrete solutions and deliver principled, high-quality
aid and protection to millions of people in need:
1. Protect: Upholding humanitarian principles, defending international humanitarian law
and ensuring that humanitarian organisations can operate effectively, by developing a
9 Humanitarian Outcomes, Aid Worker Security Report 2025 – Defenceless: Aid worker security amid the
humanitarian funding collapse, London, 2025, https://www.humanitarianoutcomes.org/AWSR_2025. 10 2026 Annual Disaster Report by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies 11 The humanitarian appeal for 2026 comes to USD 23 billion for life-saving aid for 87 million of the total 239
million people in need. 12 European Council, ‘European Council Meeting Conclusions’, EUCO 1/26, Brussels, 19 March 2026. 13 UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), ‘Humanitarian aid contributions’, Financial
tracking service, accessed 30 April 2026, https://fts.unocha.org/. 14 Food and nutrition, health, shelter, water and sanitation (WASH), protection and education in emergencies, while
ensuring gender, age and disability mainstreaming and conflict sensitivity, see European Commission: DG ECHO,
‘Thematic Policies Annex’, https://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/funding/hip2026/thematic_policies_annex_2026.pdf 15 Team Europe consists of the EU, the 27 EU Member States, the European Investment Bank (EIB) and the
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). The Team Europe approach focuses on cooperation
and coordination among these entities to increase the effectiveness and impact of their external actions. 16 These pillars of action were identified following thorough consultations with stakeholders. A call for evidence
was conducted between December 2025 and January 2026, resulting in 55 contributions. Details are available here:
European Commission website, ‘Communication on humanitarian aid’, https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-
regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/16012-Communication-on-humanitarian-aid_en
3
strategic approach to humanitarian diplomacy, protecting aid workers and civilians and
placing affected people at the heart of the response.
2. Perform: Strengthening cost-effective and resilient delivery of humanitarian aid by
reforming supply chains, maximising the value of the EU humanitarian funding and
supporting systemic functions that enable humanitarian aid delivery.
3. Partner: Working more closely with development, peace and diplomatic actors along
the humanitarian-development-peace (HDP) nexus, strengthen partnerships with
international financial institutions (IFIs) and the private sector to address fragility,
increase resilience and disaster preparedness, promote durable solutions and hence
reduce humanitarian needs and support of the EU’s strategic objectives.
This Joint Communication outlines the EU’s strategic priorities and key actions across these
three pillars. Three accompanying Staff Working Documents further develop the work on the
following central aspects of the Joint Communication: A strategic approach to EU humanitarian
diplomacy (17); Humanitarian Supply Chains (18) and an Integrated Approach to Fragility (19).
1. Protect: people, principles and safe humanitarian action
When the basic principles of humanity are being contested, the EU stands firm in its
commitment to protect international humanitarian law, humanitarian principles, humanitarian
personnel and, first and foremost, affected people. The current context calls for a new strategic
approach to humanitarian diplomacy, one that defends humanitarian space and principles
while bolstering people-centred, safe, and inclusive humanitarian assistance.
1.1. Stepping up humanitarian diplomacy
In a global context marked by a high number of conflicts and increasingly challenged
multilateral institutions, determined action to defend international humanitarian law and
principled humanitarian space has never been more urgent. Therefore, the EU will increase the
effectiveness of its humanitarian diplomacy, leveraging humanitarian, political, economic,
security or diplomatic instruments. Official EU representatives will engage decision-makers,
parties to armed conflicts and their sponsors or influencers, to help prevent, mitigate and resolve
humanitarian crises, improve parties’ compliance with international humanitarian law and
foster greater alignment with international humanitarian principles and objectives.
EU humanitarian diplomacy is grounded on the following key principles and values:
- it is an integral part of the EU’s external action and foreign policy and is reflected
systematically in its diplomatic interventions and negotiations;
- it adheres to the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and
independence, making every effort to avoid unintended harm. It should also be conflict-
sensitive, gender-sensitive and situationally aware;
- it aims to maximise EU coordination and a Team Europe approach, leveraging the
distinct mandates of EU Special Representatives and relevant Special Envoys, Common
Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions and operations, the Commission, the
High Representative and Member States, while systematically integrating real-time
insights, including those gained from the EU’s presence on the ground;
17 SWD 2026 (312) 18 SWD 2026 (314) 19 SWD 2026 (313)
4
- it ensures meaningful involvement and participation of local organisations and
community voices, including organisations representing women, persons with
disabilities, the older persons, youth LGBTIQ+ persons, persons belonging to
minorities, and other vulnerable groups at risk of discrimination. It places the specific
needs and vulnerabilities of populations affected by conflict at the centre through a
differentiated and inclusive approach;
- it builds on strategic alliances with organisations and donors committed to improving
the operational coordination of humanitarian diplomacy and achieving common
humanitarian objectives. This includes regional and bilateral partnerships, participation
in multilateral forums, and support to the International Committee of the Red Cross
(ICRC) and the implementation of its Global initiative on IHL (20);
- it adapts to specific contexts and circumstances, is grounded in rigorous evidence,
including through regular contact with key humanitarian actors, and is carried out
publicly or discreetly.
While humanitarian diplomacy may serve a wide range of humanitarian outcomes, its focus is
on a number of key thematic priorities:
- preventing violations of, and supporting compliance with, international humanitarian
law and human rights law and promoting strong accountability;
- upholding support for the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure during
armed conflict, with a particular focus on the people most at risk. This includes taking
into account the needs of specific groups, such as persons with disabilities (21);
- using all available instruments to prevent and end grave violations against children,
protect their rights and wellbeing, and promote the right to education and quality
learning, in conflict zones. This includes encouraging countries to endorse international
instruments and commitments concerning the protection of conflict-affected children;
- in light of widespread restrictions of humanitarian access, defending and expanding
humanitarian space and preventing humanitarian action from being politicised,
including by countering disinformation. This includes facilitating the removal of
bureaucratic impediments, addressing security restrictions, and other actions to allow
all humanitarian actors to operate;
- ensuring the safety of humanitarian and medical staff, including accountability for
attacks targeting them;
- preventing, mitigating and responding to sexual and gender-based violence in
emergencies and conflicts;
- considering humanitarian priorities in peace-building, mediation and conflict
resolution efforts.
Key actions
The Commission, in cooperation with the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and
Security Policy, within the exercise of its functions, and, where appropriate, with the support
of EU Special Representatives (22), will:
20 International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), ‘Global Initiative to Galvanize Political Commitment to
International Humanitarian Law’, https://www.icrc.org/en/global-initiative-international-humanitarian-law. 21 In line with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) 22 EEAS, ‘EU Special Representatives’, European Union website, 12 September 2025, accessed 30 April 2026,
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eu-special-representatives_en.
5
• strengthen institutional cohesion for effective humanitarian diplomacy
o boost the EU’s capacity for coordinated humanitarian diplomacy through a
strategic approach, developed around the key objectives and principles set out
above and adapted to the specific situation of each crisis. This entails
strengthening institutional mechanisms for coordination, regular internal
dialogue, as well as joint planning, monitoring and evaluation processes. Such
coordination will be facilitated, where appropriate, by humanitarian diplomacy
focal points, within existing resources;
o strengthen the Team Europe approach on humanitarian diplomacy through
strategic coordination with EU Member States. This entails developing common
messages and proposing joint actions in key crisis situations where violations of
international humanitarian law and restricted access are present.
• leverage diplomatic tools for maximum impact
o champion efforts to advocate against violations of international humanitarian
law and restrictions on humanitarian access in political and security dialogues,
human rights dialogues and diplomatic demarches between EU representatives
and countries or stakeholders involved in or impacted by conflict;
o reinforce strategic communication efforts and strengthen the tools of
humanitarian diplomacy, while countering information manipulation;
o facilitate the development of shared assessments and advocacy messages by
humanitarian partners and the diplomatic community regarding complex
humanitarian contexts, including through a dedicated donor group on
humanitarian diplomacy and access;
o strengthen strategic alliances with key states and multilateral organisations
and reinforce support for the UN’s role in humanitarian diplomacy, including
within the UN80 process, Humanitarian Reset and the Global Initiative to
Galvanize Political Commitment to International Humanitarian Law.
• invest in the sustainability of EU humanitarian diplomacy
o launch a training programme to improve the skills and knowledge of EU
diplomats and other staff in the field of humanitarian diplomacy;
o financially support humanitarian diplomacy to strengthen the tools available
to humanitarian actors to support humanitarian diplomacy. This includes local
actors’ capacity to negotiate the necessary humanitarian access and the collection
and analysis of reliable data on violations of international humanitarian law that
are essential for supporting fact-based diplomacy, countering information
manipulation, including disinformation, and promoting accountability.
1.2. Protection of humanitarian personnel
Violence against humanitarian workers has reached unprecedented levels. In 2025, 334
persons were killed, 192 injured, 109 kidnapped and 45 unlawfully arrested (23), the vast
majority of whom were national staff members. Information manipulation, including
disinformation, as well as hate speech targeting humanitarian organisations and medical
personnel are on the rise (24), often escalating into access restrictions and security threats on the
ground. In some cases, humanitarian personnel and organisations are criminalised and face
23 Humanitarian Outcomes, Aid Worker Security Report 2025 – Defenseless: Aid worker security amid the
humanitarian funding collapse, London, 2025, https://humanitarianoutcomes.org/AWSR_2025 24 UN Resolution 2730 (2024) Adopted by the Security Council at its 9634th meeting, on 24 May 2024, p 3
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4049572
6
prosecution, detention or legal impediments. Efforts to protect humanitarian personnel are
also impacted by the growing funding gap. Guaranteeing the safety and security of humanitarian
personnel and ensuring awareness of duty of care responsibilities have never been more critical.
The EU is a committed advocate for the safety and security of humanitarian personnel, as
highlighted by its leadership on the annual UN General Assembly resolution on the protection
of humanitarian and UN personnel. The EU and its Member States made corresponding
commitments at the 34th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
and have joined the Australian initiative (25) to strengthen the protection of humanitarian
personnel.
The EU will step up its commitment to strengthen protection and security in humanitarian
operations. To prevent security incidents, the EU will use humanitarian diplomacy tools as
outlined in the previous section to persuade host governments or de facto authorities to provide
guarantees of safe passage. The EU will also invest in capacity building and training in
security risk management and in increasing humanitarian organisations’ awareness of duty of
care responsibilities, including through dedicated funding and support to the development of
common minimum-security standards.
The EU will also promote better operational security coordination and cooperation among
humanitarian organisations, through platforms such as Saving Lives Together (SLT) (26). It will
advocate for UN, Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, and civil society partners to bolster
their security capacities, pool their resources and develop joint initiatives, including on risk
assessment and contingency planning.
Where it has not been possible to mitigate threats, the well-being and recovery of humanitarian
personnel are a key priority. The Protect Aid Workers (PAW) mechanism (27) provides financial
and psychological support for staff who have experienced a critical incident while on duty.
The EU also stands ready to act on newer threats to humanitarian organisations and civilians
and is constantly reviewing and modernising its own capacity to monitor, detect and respond to
information manipulation, including disinformation, supporting its humanitarian partners in
their efforts to guarantee the integrity of information.
Key actions
The Commission will:
• strengthen the prevention of security incidents by supporting capacity building and
training programmes, in particular for local humanitarian personnel;
• spearhead the development of common minimum-security standards across the
humanitarian community, ensuring that all humanitarian personnel, in particular local
personnel, are equipped with the knowledge and tools necessary to operate safely;
• step up operational support for humanitarian personnel, including through increased
security cooperation and coordination via platforms such as Saving Lives Together and
by making sure that critical security data are more widely available;
25 Minister for Foreign Affairs of Australia, ‘Declaration for the Protection of Humanitarian Personnel’, 22
September 2025, accessed on 30 April 2026, https://www.foreignminister.gov.au/minister/penny-wong/media-
release/declaration-protection-humanitarian-personnel 26 Global Interagency Security Forum (GISF), ‘Saving Lives Together’, GIFS website, London, 2026, accessed
on 30 April 2026, https://gisf.ngo/themes/coordination-for-hsrm/saving-lives-together/ 27 Protect Aid Workers, ‘Providing rapid support for aid workers at risk – A rapid-response mechanism for aid
workers’, Protect Aid Workers website, accessed 30 April 2026, https://protectaidworkers.org/
7
• improve care forvictims and survivors of attacks on humanitarian personnel by turning
the Protect Aid Workers mechanism into a global programme;
• ensure that partner organisations combat sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment,
foster accountability and safe working environments for all staff, including local
staff, and promote initiatives to collect harmonised data to better understand such risks.
1.3. A people-centred, locally led, protection-driven and inclusive humanitarian response
In every crisis, community members are the first responders. People and their local
structures help one another through networks that start at home and often stretch across the
globe. This aid is essential for people’s survival. The EU’s commitment to accountability to
affected populations places communities affected by crises at the centre of the decisions and
processes that impact them. Recognising affected people’s coping capacities and diverse needs
helps ensure that the assistance provided is relevant and sustainable.
Making the participatory approach a reality helps ensuring that assistance is channelled to
affected communities in the most meaningful way and thereby helps build trust in the
humanitarian system. The EU will provide stronger incentives to enable systematic
community-based engagement. It will also support area-based coordination to address
people’s needs in a comprehensive manner, moving beyond sector-specific entry points towards
a more integrated humanitarian response.
Local respondersplay a crucial role in humanitarian action. The Commission's guidance of
2023 on promoting equitable partnerships with local responders (28) initiated a positive
trend in the sector. Significant progress has been achieved since then, raising the share of EU
humanitarian funding to local actors from 6% to 11% by the end of 2024. In 2025, the
Commission further strengthened its ambition with a new localisation roadmap committing
to deliver 25% of its funding as directly as possible to local actors by 2027, in line with the EU
Financial Regulation. The Commission will also look for opportunities to boost the capacity of
local actors and their role in international decision-making bodies.
Protection helps ensure the safety, dignity and rights of people affected by crises. It is central
to the EU’s humanitarian action: all humanitarian actors need to engage in a coordinated way
to reduce affected people’s exposure to the risk of violence, deprivation and abuse.
Children are entitled to special protection under international human rights and humanitarian
law. The dire situation of children affected by humanitarian crises, the unprecedented levels of
violations against their integrity, wellbeing and rights (25% increase in recent years) (29), and
the lack of respect for the special protection to which they are entitled, call for specific attention.
The EU is committed to preventing, mitigating and reducing violence, abuse, neglect, and
all other specific threats that children face in humanitarian contexts, including by
supporting education in emergencies (30), and ensuring that children rights, including the best
interests of the child, guide all humanitarian interventions.
28 European Commission: DG ECHO, Guidance Note: Promoting Equitable Partnerships with Local Responders
in Humanitarian Settings, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2023,
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2795/653711. 29 United Nations: Human Rights Council, ‘Children in armed conflict – Report of the Special Representative of
the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict’, A/HRC/61/37, 23 December 2025,
https://docs.un.org/en/A/HRC/61/37. 30 COM (2018) 304 final.
8
Equality considerations are often overlooked in crises. Women and girls, alongside with
LGBTIQ+ persons, continue to be those primarily affected by sexual and gender-based
violence, including conflict-related sexual violence. They are also at greater risk of forced
marriage and trafficking in crises. Persons with disabilities are also disproportionately
affected, encountering compounded barriers to accessing assistance. To address specific
contexts and needs, adopting a survivor-centred approach is key, and the Commission will
provide policy guidance on this matter. Vulnerable groups also provide a valuable contribution
as first and local responders in humanitarian contexts and identifying their specific needs and
priorities for additional support can increase the effectiveness of interventions.
Gender mainstreaming and the inclusion of sexual and reproductive health in humanitarian
projects are being undermined at an alarming rate, threatening vital progress for fostering
equitable and prosperous societies. The EU will strengthen its engagement on sexual and
reproductive health and the fight against gender-based violence, including by launching the
SHIELD (Sexual and Reproductive Health in Emergencies and Life in Dignity) programme
(31). The EU will also champion advocacy on equality considerations in strategic discussions
with other donors and in all relevant forums, including the governing bodies of UN agencies.
Key actions
The Commission will:
• deliver 25% of its humanitarian funding as directly as possible to local actors by 2027;
• support decentralised coordination structures that promote local leadership, in
particular area-based coordination. Integrated, cross-sectoral planning should become the
norm, with strong referral mechanisms to specialised services as required;
• systematically ensure that affected communities are included in the design, delivery
and monitoring of assistance and strive to address their needs and aspirations;
• steer work towards dismantling the remaining barriers for local responders to play a
greater role in humanitarian action through capacity strengthening and training, easing
the administrative burden for local actors and expanding the funding to locally led
humanitarian pooled funds;
• strengthen advocacy and support for the protection sector, including child protection,
and continue to place protection at the centre of humanitarian action;
• increase its support to people affected by sexual and reproductive health and fight
against sexual and gender-based violence, including conflict related sexual violence;
• update its thematic policy document on gender (32).
2. Perform: Enhancing efficiency and boosting the cost-effectiveness of humanitarian
action for greater impact
Against the background of increasing needs and budgetary constraints, maximum cost-
effectiveness can only be achieved if affected communities, humanitarian actors and donors
work together to build impactful responses to crises. There is considerable scope for reducing
inefficiencies in the current funding model and the EU will incentivise change to this end. The
31 COM (2026) 113 final, page 20-21 32 European Commission, DG ECHO, Gender – Different Needs, Adapted Assistance, DG ECHO Thematic
Policy Document n° 6, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2013,
https://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/policies/sectoral/gender_thematic_policy_document_en.pdf.
9
EU has identified three main priorities: reforming the humanitarian supply chain, maximising
the value of EU humanitarian funding and supporting collective enabling services.
2.1. Reforming Humanitarian Strategic Supply Chains
Humanitarian supply chains are critical for humanitarian operations. They should ensure that
communities in need receive the right relief items, of the right quality, at the right time, in the
right location and at the right cost. However, the current supply chain model is no longer suited
to the scale of the needs. Over time, humanitarian organisations have developed parallel,
disconnected supply chains, leading to fragmentation and unnecessary duplication, for instance
when they compete to procure the same relief items or operate separate fleets and warehouses.
This reduces efficiency and effectiveness and ultimately lessens the impact of humanitarian aid.
To address these challenges, in 2024, the Commission launched the Humanitarian Leadership
Group on Supply Chain (HLGSC), bringing together donors, the UN, the Red Cross and Red
Crescent Movement, non-governmental organisations, the private sector and academia. This
group agreed on a shared vision for a new humanitarian supply chain model – a more
collaborative and coherent network that boosts impact through the interdependent principles of
better alignment, interoperability, and data exchange, as well as a more systematic use of joined-
up platforms and operations. The overarching goal is a system that works better for people –
delivering assistance faster and more predictably, and in ways that are more cost-efficient and
strengthen local capacities and resilience, in line with the humanitarian principles.
The HLGSC drive for reform has been reflected in complementary initiatives, notably the UN
joint initiative to establish a more integrated humanitarian supply chain system as part of the
UN80 reform process or in the framework of G7. These efforts should be further pursued as
they constitute a key building block of the overall reform of humanitarian supply chains. The
Commission will continue to closely follow and encourage these processes.
Reforming and upgrading the supply chain model offers a significant opportunity for efficiency
gains and unlocking resources for people in need. A paradigm shift is needed whereby supply
chain functions should be recognised as strategic enablers of humanitarian impact. This whole-
of-system process, centred around collaboration, pooling of resources and sharing of capacities,
should address, in line with the HLGSC, the following interdependent issues:
- procurement needs to be integrated into operation design from the outset to improve
efficiency, impact and financial management, notably through mutual recognition of
procurement decisions and joint procurement between humanitarian organisations;
- environmental sustainability needs to be embedded in humanitarian action, along with
a shift from short-term cost minimisation to long-term value optimisation, notably by
reducing greenhouse gas emissions e.g. by favouring local renewable energy solutions,
improving lifecycle assessments and green product specifications, responsible waste
management, and supporting circular economy measures;
- digital systems, including AI solutions, need to become part of an interoperable
ecosystem with governance frameworks based on common open standards, adapted to
local capacities and accompanied by appropriate data protection safeguards;
- preparedness should become the norm, based on a common framework anchored in
local capacities and actors’ participation in planning, supported by forecasting and pre-
positioning while ensuring the uptake and scaling of innovative solutions;
- localisation of sustainable supply chains requires international humanitarian actors to
gradually transfer authority, resources and decision-making to local actors, while
strengthening local markets.
10
Making this model a reality depends on several enabling conditions:
- integrating supply chain considerations into the strategic and operational decision-
making of humanitarian organisations;
- strengthening collaboration among donors to promote better alignment of compliance
and regulatory approaches, as well as funding priorities;
- fostering innovative financing mechanisms to secure long-term investments and
recognising supply chain costs, including for digitalisation and the environment, as
essential programme expenses;
- involving the private sector in co-designing and supporting the system-wide
transformation; and - further strengthening professionalisation to secure a highly skilled workforce.
The Commission will drive this process, working closely with the EU Member States and,
where relevant, non-EU donors. It will also integrate the new supply chain model into the way
its own humanitarian aid is managed and funded, providing clear guidance and appropriate
support for its partners. The EU’s field presence will also help to promote these efforts.
Key actions
The Commission will:
• launch a Humanitarian Supply Chain Charter – a voluntary, multi-stakeholder,
collaborative framework – open for signature by humanitarian stakeholders, including
donors, to speed up the implementation of the reform. The Charter will set out specific
commitments and collective accountability, and it will be supported by a platform acting
as a technical secretariat and coordination hub;
• allocate appropriate financial resources to support the implementation of the supply
chain reform, including the work of the HLGSC, by gradually setting funding conditions
for project selection. This will help humanitarian organisations operate more efficiently,
unlocking resources to assist people in need. Field-level implementation will be
promoted, starting with pilot countries;
• set up a recognition framework with clear eligibility criteria and minimum standards
for Humanitarian Procurement Centres that partners and EU Member States may use
for simpler and more efficient procurement;
• closely coordinate with EU Member Statesand non-EU donors to foster administrative
simplification,operational synergies and the alignment of funding priorities and
financing modalities.
2.2. Transformative humanitarian financing and simplification
At a time when funding cuts are overstretching humanitarian actors, the EU as a responsible
and committed humanitarian donor, must help in a way that incentivises efficiency and reduces
administrative burden. The EU will continue to make full use of the flexibility afforded by its
existing funding toolbox, including by using crisis modifiers (33) and Programmatic
33 The main goal of the crisis modifier is to allow for a rapid and effective response to emerging crises within the
context of an ongoing humanitarian action. European Commission, DG ECHO Partners website, accessed 30
April 2026, www.dgecho-partners-helpdesk.eu/ngo/actions-implementation/crisis-modifier
11
Partnerships (34), and encouraging collaboration between partners and consortia. Besides this,
transformative funding and intervention types that encourage efficiency, as described below,
will be prioritised and scaled up.
Funding delivered through local actors empowers them and improves the timeliness, cost-
efficiency, and sustainability of the response. Providing support through anticipatory action
enables partners to act early, helping communities at risk before a shock, thereby reducing its
impact, saving lives and livelihoods and supporting climate and environmental resilience.
Cash assistance has consistently shown to have a much higher cost-efficiency ratio than in-
kind assistance, as it reaches more people with the same amount of funding, while addressing
several sectoral needs. Affected people also prefer cash assistance as it recognises their agency,
choice and dignity. Cash also supports the local economy, contributing to building long-term
resilience. The EU will continue to prioritise multipurpose cash assistance and advocate for its
use at system level.
Moving from annual funding to multiyear contracts improves the predictability of the
response, brings efficiency gains and economies of scale and provides the opportunity for more
strategic engagement with partner organisations. It also helps connect humanitarian timeframes
with development and peace interventions and supports transitions to more systemic responses
and eventual humanitarian exit. In protracted crises, multiyear funding should become default.
Unearmarked or softly earmarked funding allows for more flexible responses and provides
more readily available options for partners to adapt to changing circumstances. In addition to
increasing the scale of larger multi-donor or regional actions, the EU will also consider greater
contributions to a wide range of pooled funds, such as country-based pooled funds (CBPFs) or
the Disaster Response Emergency Fund (DREF), where these offer a comparative advantage.
Compliance with humanitarian principles, well defined performance parameters, inclusive
governance, robust oversight, control and accountability, contribution to localisation efforts,
and EU visibility will also apply to contributions to such funds.
To ease administrative burden, the EU will look at ways to simplify reporting requirements
for its partners, in line with international commitments and the EU’s simplification agenda. This
includes modernising the Commission’s grant management by putting in place interoperable
digital systems. This transition will enhance transparency and improve the traceability of EU
funds, while safeguarding the operational flexibility.
Key actions
The Commission will:
• scale up the use of transformative modalities (flexible and predictable multiyear
funding, cash assistance, a wide range of pooled funds, anticipatory action and support
for local actors) to constitute at least two thirds of its humanitarian funding;
• substantially increase the share of multiyear funding in protracted crises;
• promote a Team Europe approach to country-based pooled funds, strengthening EU
coordination in the CBPF governance forums for greater collective EU impact;
34 European Commission: DG ECHO, ‘Working with DG ECHO programmatic partnership 2021-2027’, European
Commission website, accessed 30 April 2026, www.dgecho-partners-helpdesk.eu/programmatic-
partnership/programmatic-partnership
12
• together with interested Member States, implement a Common Donor Approach to cash
assistance (35) and advocate more for cash assistance as the default modality in
humanitarian response;
• further simplify the grant management architecture.
2.3. Enabling principled humanitarian delivery through collaborative data initiatives
Collective services that enable humanitarian aid delivery are paramount to ensuring
effective, coordinated and high-quality aid based on evidence. The EU has traditionally
supported many of the system-wide initiatives that advance this work, such as the INFORM
tools (36). In the face of severe cuts, which threatened the ability of these services to continue
operating, the EU increased its investment in this area in 2025 by 50% to a total of EUR 150
million. It will remain committed to funding enabling services, including data and evidence,
security and access (37), logistics and coordination.
Reliable data is the bedrock of humanitarian response as it helps to identify needs and their
severity and to measure impact. The current system of data gathering and analysis has been
developed by many different actors, making it complex and difficult to navigate the data
landscape. It is necessary to improve the disaggregation (by sex, age and disability), coverage,
reliability and comparability of data, making it open source by default. By investing in data
quality and interoperability and strengthening analytical and reporting tools, including by
leveraging the ethical use of AI, earth observation and modelling tools (including relevant
satellite services, such as the Copernicus programme), the EU will improve evidence-based
decision-making and enable faster, more coordinated and effective responses across crises.
Sharing data on people receiving assistance and on service availability safely and responsibly
among humanitarian organisations is essential. This practice has already led to significant cost
savings (38) by preventing the duplication of assistance and gaps in response. Data sharing
agreements between organisations remain, however, elusive and where they do exist on a global
level, they are often not implemented on the ground.
The EU supports open-source technology, federated systems and decentralised governance. In
recent years, it has supported several pilot projects on safe data sharing by means of vetted
technologies. The EU will promote this trend and insist on safe data sharing, as it leads to a
more transparent and coherent humanitarian response.
Key actions
The Commission will:
35 CALP Network, ‘Common Donor Approach to Humanitarian Cash Assistance, CALP Network website, 25
September 2025, accessed 30 April 2026, https://www.calpnetwork.org/publication/common-donor-approach-to-
humanitarian-cash-assistance-2025/ 36 INFORM is a set of tools developed by and for the humanitarian community for shared analysis based on vetted
system-wide data. For more information, see European Commission: Joint Research Centre, ‘INFORM’, accessed
30 April 2026, https://drmkc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/inform-index/. 37 See Section 1.2. and 2.1. 38 EUR 250 million saved in Ukraine, Ukraine Cash Working Group, ‘Ukraine CWG Data Management – Systems
and Governance Assessment July 2025’, OCHA, 23 July 2025, accessed 30 April 2026,
https://reliefweb.int/report/ukraine/ukraine-cwg-data-management-systems-and-governance-assessment-report-
july-2025250 million saved in Ukraine
13
• develop a new global programme for multisectoral needs assessments, fostering closer
cooperation between actors and reducing fragmentation. This will ensure that key data on
people’s needs is comparable across contexts, inclusive and accessible to all;
• request the use of safe data sharing agreements between partners to reduce duplication
and increase the effectiveness of the response. Safe data sharing between organisations
will be included as a condition for funding;
• enhance the humanitarian aid sector’s use of Copernicus and INFORM to guide
humanitarian aid actions;
• continue to promote interoperable digital systems and common data standards across
the humanitarian funding life cycle to reduce fragmentation and improve traceability.
3. Partner: Harnessing alliances to support those in need
The extent of the humanitarian system’s crisis cannot be addressed by humanitarian actors
alone. The full spectrum of actions across the humanitarian-development-peace nexus must be
used and the deepening of strategic alliances with a wide range of actors is needed to reduce
increasing humanitarian needs and address crises in a sustainable manner. The Commission will
focus on strengthening these ties through joint work on addressing fragility and increasing
resilience, and by working more closely with a wider range of partners, such as the private
sector. Deepening the impact of a Team Europe approach in this area is also crucial.
3.1. Integrated approach to fragility
Globally, fragility (39) is on the rise, fuelling insecurity and disrupting development progress
worldwide, with its spillover effects potentially affecting the EU’s security and prosperity.
Across key regions, fragility can be instrumentalised by hostile actors for geopolitical gain. Not
addressing fragile contexts in a comprehensive way risks further undermining global norms,
including human rights and IHL. Moreover, fragility threatens international peace, security and
stability, impacts livelihoods and access to basic services, exacerbates existing vulnerabilities
to the impacts of climate change and environmental degradation, disrupts markets, supply
chains and economic security, and exacerbates challenges linked to displacement and migration.
Addressing the root causes of fragility is therefore both an act of solidarity and an urgent and
strategic necessity for the EU and the international community. The EU’s objectives in those
contexts include reducing human suffering and tackling the causes of fragility in order to end
poverty, dependency on aid, climate-related vulnerability and supporting sustainable
development. Furthermore, the EU promotes human rights, democracy and the rule of law,
gender equality, inclusion, youth empowerment and an enabling environment for civil society.
Long-term, strategic interventions in fragile situations are essential for building resilience,
anticipating crises and disasters, preventing conflicts, and fostering sustainable peace, stability
and security.
The EU and its Member States have been present in fragile contexts for decades and are
uniquely positioned to leverage their comprehensive toolbox to foster peace, stability and
resilience. The EU has been instrumental in supporting states’ governing structures and
economic growth and helping them achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
39 Fragility is the combination of exposure to risk and insufficient coping capacity of the state, system and/or
communities to manage, absorb or mitigate those risks, OECD, States of Fragility, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2025,
https://doi.org/10.1787/81982370-en
14
At the same time, to address the evolving geopolitical realities and multidimensional
challenges of fragility in an effective manner, the EU must recalibrate its interventions and
optimise its strategies to remain a reliable partner while supporting those furthest behind and
achieving greater impact. This Joint Communication therefore builds on existing tools to set
out an EU integrated approach to fragility – a strategic framework for strengthening EU
engagement in those contexts. It is guided by the following principles and priorities:
• Staying engaged, while ensuring context-specific and conflict-sensitive responses
(do no harm)
The EU reaffirms its commitment to stay engaged in all contexts affected by high and
extremely high levels of fragility, including those that are complex or politically estranged, in
line with EU interests. This will be done through a flexible, adaptive and conflict-sensitive
approach, tailoring engagement to the needs of affected partner countries and their populations
in a differentiated approach, while pursuing the EU’s own strategic objectives.
• Pursuing a multidimensional approach to resilience and sustainability
Addressing the causes of fragility requires a multidimensional approach that takes into account
societal, economic, political, security and environmental factors. The EU will prioritise
approaches with transformative potential to foster long-term sustainable development and
peace. Drawing on its comprehensive toolbox, thematic priorities include, inter alia: a) human
development and building resilience; b) economic development by fostering an enabling
environment for investment and strengthening cooperation with international financial
institutions; c) adapting to and mitigating the impacts of climate change, environmental
degradation and water scarcity; d) strengthening human rights, democracy and the rule of law;
as well as e) conflict prevention, mediation, stabilisation, peace-building and security. The focus
will be on the groups in the most vulnerable situations, including women, children, and youth,
older persons, persons with disabilities, persons belonging to minorities, refugees, forcibly
displaced people and returnees, and their financial inclusion.
• Strengthening the Team Europe approach and Strategic Partnerships within a
humanitarian-development-peace nexus approach
By strengthening the human-development-peace nexus, the EU will better articulate
complementary approaches and interventions, to more effectively anticipate, prepare for,
and respond to crises. Leveraging the flexibilities of the upcoming Global Europe Instrument,
the EU will actively step up the use of innovative and flexible financing mechanisms to attract
more private funding, while empowering the local private sector. It will also step up work with
international financial institutions, including the European Investment Bank, and EU Member
States’ development banks to promote investments that enable economic resilience in fragile
settings and the structural reduction of humanitarian needs.
In all these efforts, the EU will promote a Team Europe approach, which is essential for
ensuring a visible, unified and coordinated stance to addressing fragility. The EU will also
deepen coordination and cooperation with other partners and actors, including at local level,
such as civil society, the private sector, and key organisations such as the UN, the Red Cross
and Red Crescent Movement and regional organisations.
Key actions
The Commission, in cooperation with the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and
Security Policy, within the exercise of its functions, will implement an EU integrated
15
approach to fragility through smarter and more collaborative approaches with a
particular focus on extremely fragile contexts. This includes:
• developing joint analyses, highlighting the understanding of local dynamics, specific
risks and conflict and climate related drivers;
• developing adaptable and agile fragility frameworks in all extremely fragile
contexts, based on prior experience and replacing the currently tested Nexus
Collaboration Frameworks to ensure increased agility and building on relevant
analytical frameworks. These will outline a common understanding of priorities and
actions required across the humanitarian-development-peace nexus to ensure more
impactful engagement on the ground;
• seeking improved integration of humanitarian-development-peace actions through
sequenced, complementary, or joint funding to maximise impact, including in
rapidly evolving contexts; using all available flexibility procedures to facilitate
adaptative response to crises;
• identifying fragility focal points in relevant EU Delegations and DG ECHO offices,
based on existing resources, to support common understanding and drive the
implementation of the approach at country level;
• organising regular exchanges with key stakeholders, such as implementing partners,
central and local authorities, the UN, international financial institutions, and civil
society, while continuing coordination with EU Member States;
• developing and reinforcing partnerships with third countries and regional
organisations to address fragile contexts and ensure financial support, notably with
the aim to ensure stability, security, and sustainable development, in the EU’s
neighbourhood and other strategic regions;
• stepping up coordination, in a Team Europe approach, within governing bodies of
multilateral organisations;
• conducting joint monitoring more systematically and, where possible, in
cooperation with EU Member States;
• organising regular interservice updates on implementation and achievements to
track progress;
• strengthening targeted investment in institutional capacities and knowledge
management of EU staff and ensure periodic review of progress/achievements;
• strengthening strategic communication to counter information manipulation,
including disinformation, and, where relevant, hybrid threats;
• proposing an independent evaluation of results under this approach after three years.
3.2. Working with the private sector and non-traditional actors in humanitarian response
Bridging the humanitarian funding gap will require harnessing the resources, situational
expertise and comparative advantages of a broader range of actors outside the traditional
humanitarian field, including the private sector, philanthropic organisations, a broader
range of donors and the wider public.
The private sector is an important partner that can bring technical expertise, innovation and
access to technologies such as AI, as well as funding. It can contribute to durable solutions at
local level by strengthening market resilience and creating economic opportunities for affected
populations. In fragile settings, micro-enterprises, small businesses and the informal sector play
a central role. They should be empowered to help build resilience in the long term.
16
As these frontline businesses are the most credit-constrained, incentives such as de-risking
instruments, technical assistance and improved investment data, should be developed to
encourage international and national finance providers to improve their access to capital.
Building on several successful humanitarian blended finance pilot projects, the EU will
continue to support such initiatives as part of its commitment to promoting durable solutions
and enabling humanitarian actors to exit where conditions permit.
The EU will also lead the debate within the humanitarian sector on scaling up private sector
engagement in humanitarian and fragile contexts. This includes addressing obstacles to
access to finance and financial inclusion, as well as scaling up partnerships between private and
humanitarian actors in areas such as logistics and technology or access to basic public services.
Data-driven AI technologies are progressively transforming the humanitarian field. The EU
will work with traditional partners and other actors to find ways to use AI to enhance
humanitarian aid while reducing risks across the crisis cycle.
Besides private sector engagement, working with non-traditional donors and building on
complementarities is important. The EU already has strong partnerships with many
international actors, such as the African Union, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and
the Gulf Cooperation Council states. It will now strategically identify areas for strengthened
cooperation on humanitarian aid and disaster risk management.
Eurobarometer surveys have consistently revealed strong popular support for EU humanitarian
assistance. In 2024, 91% of respondents considered it important that the EU funds humanitarian
aid (40). Such support cannot be taken for granted and may be undermined by a rising tide of
information manipulation, including disinformation. The EU will continue to strengthen its
engagement with EU citizens and transparently promote humanitarian action.
Key actions
The Commission will:
• develop, in cooperation with the World Economic Forum, a global platform for
engagement with the private sector in humanitarian settings to discuss the investment
environment, donorship and philanthropy, ethics and partnerships;
• scale up funding for projects that support private sector involvement in protracted
humanitarian contexts, while coordinating these efforts with development actors;
• adopt a policy framework for engagement of new donors and actors in humanitarian
responses. This framework will identify concrete areas and priority regions in which to
cooperate with different actors;
• strengthen engagement with EU citizens, for example through communication
campaigns or targeted ad hoc dialogues.
3.3. Delivering through a Team Europe approach
Together, the EU and its Member States provide the largest share of humanitarian funding
worldwide. In line with the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid, they share a firm
commitment to humanitarian principles and needs-based assistance and to a multilateral, rules-
40 European Commission: DG COMM, Special Eurobarometer 542 – EU humanitarian aid, Publications Office
of the European Union, 2024, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2795/369550.
17
based system. In planning and operational terms, stronger alignment between the EU and its
Member States would result in an even greater impact and amplify their collective voice.
In the current environment, where resources are scarce, the implementing partners supported
by the EU and its Member States would benefit from more harmonised donor requirements,
which would enable them to make considerable savings.
Hence, in complementarity to the Team Europe approach proposed throughout this Joint
Communication, the EU will promote harmonised and interoperable funding processes at
Team Europe level. Notably, a better digital alignment would make it possible to pool Team
Europe resources in a more impactful and coherent way. It would also improve humanitarian
outcomes and Team Europe visibility, while reducing the administrative burden on partners.
Key actions
The Commission will:
• in complementarity with its simplification effort on grant management,significantly
simplify its non-regulatory requirements, including its humanitarian policy guidelines
and reporting requirements. These simplified procedures can serve as a common basis for
Team Europe funding approaches;
• with the objective of being ready for the next Multiannual Financial Framework (2028-
2034), work towards a certification framework for humanitarian NGOs that more EU
Member States can cross-rely on, benefiting both EU Member States and partners;
• throughout the humanitarian funding life cycle and in the area of emergency response
portfolios, explore with EU Member States additional synergies, common approaches,
shared modalities, and coordination structures to pool EU resources in a more
impactful way. This could include coordination of stockpiling initiatives and joint
responses using ReliefEU;
• discuss with EU Member States options for development of a common platform for
submitting and sharing of harmonised funding proposals, to be used as a flexible one-
stop shop for submitting proposals which could be picked up by different Team Europe
actors, depending on priorities;
• work with EU Member States to explore shared digital reporting frameworks.
Conclusion
For decades, EU humanitarian action has proved its value by providing a principled, needs-
based and predictable response. Many survivors of crises can testify to this. By helping to
mitigate the effects of humanitarian crises and addressing fragility, it also contributes to a more
secure and stable environment, including in the EU’s wider neighbourhood. With this Joint
Communication, the EU reaffirms its commitment to solidarity with those in direct need.
The EU will continue to promote and defend principled humanitarian assistance and
international humanitarian lawin its external action and at international level. The EU aspires
to drive a positive change in humanitarian aid, for the benefit of those affected and the
overall humanitarian community, making it more resilient, efficient and future proof. To
tackle the urgency of the current situation, the Commission, in close cooperation with the EU
High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, where relevant, will move forward
on the outlined actions with great resolve. It will take stock of the implementation of this Joint
Communication in 2028.
EN EN
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
HIGH REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNION FOR
FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND SECURITY POLICY
Brussels, 27.5.2026
SWD(2026) 312 final
JOINT STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT
a strategic approach to EU humanitarian diplomacy
Accompanying the document
JOINT COMMUNICATION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE
COUNCIL
Defending values, driving reform, delivering impact: the EU's humanitarian action in a
shifting global order
{JOIN(2026) 25 final} - {SWD(2026) 313 final} - {SWD(2026) 314 final}
1
Introduction: A (humanitarian) world in disarray: the case for diplomatic tools to
address humanitarian challenges
International law, including international humanitarian law and human rights law, provides a
comprehensive framework for the protection of civilians in conflicts and crises. Yet
humanitarian organisations are witnessing alarming developments (1). Around 70% of
humanitarian needs now arise out of armed conflicts which have become more intense, harder
to solve and more protracted.
The high number of conflicts is coupled with severe violations of international humanitarian
law and human rights. These include attacks on civilians, the destruction of homes, hospitals,
schools, water systems, energy infrastructure and the natural environment, forced
disappearances, the deliberate use of starvation as a weapon of war, grave violations of
children’s rights, and sexual and gender-based violence. Widespread dehumanising narratives
as well as information manipulation, including disinformation, further erode respect for
international humanitarian law and the perception of humanitarian action. Indiscriminate
bombings of civilians further undermine trust in countries’ capacity and willingness to protect
human rights and dignity. The use of drones and AI-enabled targeting systems is also
increasingly reshaping modern warfare, with severe consequences for civilian populations.
Moreover, there is a disproportionate and intersecting impact of conflicts on women, children,
and other persons in situations of vulnerability who often face compounded barriers to
protection, assistance and participation.
Accessing people in need of humanitarian aid is a key challenge across conflicts, particularly
due to political considerations or conflict dynamics. Such limitations include restrictions on
movement, bureaucratic and administrative impediments, and the instrumentalisation of aid for
strategic, military or political purposes. Beyond the targeting of civilians that are the
beneficiaries of aid, there is a disturbing practice of deliberate targeting of aid workers, who
are essential for delivering principled aid. The surge in attacks against humanitarian and
medical staff, with over 380 humanitarian workers reportedly killedin 2024 (2), poignantly
illustrates an environment where international humanitarian law and the impartiality and
neutrality of humanitarian action are increasingly being undermined.
As part of its diplomatic engagement, and in keeping with its foundational Treaties, the EU has
long been committed to promoting the principles of the United Nations Charter, ensuring
respect for international humanitarian law, and safeguarding principled humanitarian action.
Humanitarian diplomacy is thus an essential component of the EU’s toolbox. In a global context
of protracted conflicts and increasingly challenged multilateral institutions, obstacles to
humanitarian action also require political solutions. Diplomatic engagement can prevent
conflict escalation, ensure or restore humanitarian access, support dialogue, facilitate ceasefires
and find political solutions to wars or other outbursts of violence. It also promotes awareness
of and respect for international humanitarian law, reducing the harm to civilian populations and
advocating for accountability for violations. In this context, the EU’s humanitarian diplomacy
is defined as follows:
EU humanitarian diplomacy is the use of humanitarian, political, economic, security or
1 International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), ICRC president: Humanity is failing under our collective
watch, statement 19.06.2025, https://www.icrc.org/en/statement/icrc-president-humanity-failing-under-our-
collective-watch, and ICRC, Annual Report 2024 Overview, June 2025,
https://library.icrc.org/library/docs/DOC/icrc-annual-report-2024-overview.pdf. 2 Humanitarian Outcomes, Aid Worker Security Report – Figures at a Glance 2025, August 2025,
https://humanitarianoutcomes.org/publications/figures-glance-2025.
2
diplomatic instruments by official EU representatives to engage decision-makers, parties
to armed conflicts and their sponsors or influencers, help prevent, mitigate and resolve
humanitarian crises, to improve compliance with international humanitarian law
(including by granting humanitarian actors rapid and unimpeded access) and support
greater alignment with international humanitarian principles and objectives, as defined
by the humanitarian community and in the interest of people in need.
Humanitarian diplomacy is at the heart of the EU’s external action and foreign policy. It goes
hand in hand with EU diplomatic engagement to support dialogue and contribute to mediation
and peacebuilding efforts.
In line with the Joint Communication ‘Defending values, driving reform, delivering impact:
the EU humanitarian action in a shifting global order’(3), this joint Staff Working Document
further outlines the EU’s new strategic approach to humanitarian diplomacy. It also sets out
how the EU will adapt its diplomatic engagement to evolving conflict dynamics, use the full
range of tools and channels at its disposal, strengthen coordination and increase impact by
joining forces, including through a Team Europe approach. The joint Staff Working Document
aims to develop further actions that address civilian harm and make humanitarian operations
worldwide more effective. Whilst the focus is on humanitarian needs arising from human-made
disasters, humanitarian diplomacy may address all types of crises, including those caused by
natural hazards.
1. An EU humanitarian diplomacy grounded in principles and values
As the Joint Communication outlines, the EU’s humanitarian diplomacy is guided by the key
EU values and principles of diplomatic engagement. These include respect for human dignity,
the provision of life-saving assistance, protection of and accountability for all individuals
affected by crises, and a commitment to upholding a rules-based multilateral order.
1.1. Key principles
- Humanitarian diplomacy is an integral part of the EU’s external action and
foreign policy. Humanitarian concerns must be systematically reflected in EU
diplomatic negotiations, international agreements, regional, multilateral and bilateral
dialogues, and during dialogues on human rights. A comprehensive approach ensures
alignment between humanitarian objectives and broader diplomatic interventions. It
also ensures consistent messaging and shared decision-making processes.
- Adhering to international humanitarian principles and avoiding doing harm.
Humanitarian diplomacy is guided by the humanitarian principles of humanity,
neutrality, impartiality and independence. Maintaining a principled approach is
essential for avoiding the instrumentalisation of aid and counteracting situations that
compromise humanitarian efforts, also within the scope of the EU’s external action.
- Humanitarian diplomatic engagement must be conflict-sensitive, gender-sensitive and
situationally aware. It should be carefully calibrated to avoid unintended negative
consequences, such as misplaced messaging that could undermine credibility or restrict
access to affected populations.
- Strengthening EU coordination and a Team Europe approach. Humanitarian
diplomacy works best and is most consistent when key stakeholders work in a concerted
way, reinforcing each other’s messages. To increase the impact of EU humanitarian
diplomacy, cohesive internal coordination is essential. This involves leveraging the
3 JOIN (2026) 25
3
distinct mandates of EU Special Representatives (EUSRs) and relevant Special Envoys,
Commission departments, the European External Action Service (EEAS) and EU
Member States through a Team Europe approach. The process should systematically
integrate real-time field-level insights, including those provided by EU Delegations and
field offices of the Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian
Aid Operations (DG ECHO), with EU Delegations at international organisation acting
as coordination hubs for EU cooperation with the UN.
- Meaningful involvement of local organisations and community voices. The
inclusion of voices and expertise from conflict- or disaster-affected populations is
crucial for humanitarian diplomacy. This includes investing in relations with local
leaders, civil society and influencers – including women and youth – incorporating
community-driven negotiations into high-level diplomacy, when appropriate and in line
with a ‘do-no-harm’ approach, and supporting the expertise of local partners and
community-led protection and advocacy. Efforts should ensure the inclusive and safe
participation of underrepresented groups, addressing barriers to their meaningful
engagement.
- Building on partnerships and effective alliances. EU humanitarian diplomacy
strategically leveragesregional and bilateral partnerships, as well as the EU’s combined
weight, to better address the global conflict situations and promote common
humanitarian objectives. Joint engagement facilitates delivering the right message from
the appropriate actor, with strategies tailored to each situation.
- Ensuring a situation-specific and evidence-based response. There is no one-size-
fits-all for humanitarian diplomacy. The EU’s humanitarian diplomatic engagement is
tailored to each context in order to effectively respond to evolving conflict or disaster
dynamics and the challenges faced by affected populations and humanitarian actors.
Depending on the situation and objectives, humanitarian diplomacy may be carried out
publicly or discreetly, depending on circumstances. Visibility requires cautious risk
management and should be weighed against the value of discreet diplomacy, as political
statements in a humanitarian context can lead to the politicisation of aid, undermine the
neutrality of humanitarian action, put operators and beneficiaries in jeopardy, fuel
polarisation and thereby reduce humanitarian access.
- EU humanitarian diplomacy must be grounded in rigorous, evidence-based situational
analysis, including an in-depth understanding of conflict dynamics, and ensure that the
appropriate actors are engaged in delivering the correct messages. It is essential to
maintain regular contact with key humanitarian organisations, such as the International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and their
International Federation, United Nations agencies, in particular the United Nations
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), international non-
governmental organisations, and local organisations. This ensures that EU
humanitarian diplomacy remains aligned with operational realities and focused on the
needs of conflict-affected populations.
- Differentiated approach and inclusion. This includes a commitment to equality, non-
discrimination and accessibility, in line with the EU’s obligations under international
human rights law. Humanitarian diplomacy needs to adopt an inclusive and
intersectional approach, addressing the specific needs and vulnerabilities of conflict- or
disaster-affected populations and recognising the compounded risks faced by women,
children, older persons, persons with disabilities, persons belonging to minorities,
refugees, internally displaced people, LGBTIQ+ persons, and individuals from
4
marginalised communities.
1.2. Thematic priorities of EU humanitarian diplomacy
In line with EU values and priorities and as outlined in the Joint Communication, the EU’s
efforts should focus on the following thematic priorities:
(1) Promote compliance with United Nations Charter principles and particularly with
international humanitarian law. Respect for international law in general, and
particularly with international humanitarian law, is critical for ensuring the protection of
civilians affected by conflicts. This is also a long-standing EU commitment, as
highlighted in the EU Guidelines on Promoting Compliance with IHL (4) and the EU’s
consolidated pledges at the 34th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent (5), and as evidenced by the EU’s support for the Global Initiative to Galvanize
Political Commitment to International Humanitarian Law (6). EU humanitarian
diplomacy aims to prevent international humanitarian law violations, support compliance
with international humanitarian law and respect for human rights law and promotes a
strong accountability framework. This includes advocating for compliance with
international humanitarian law throughout the EU’s diplomatic engagements with state
and non-state actors, and advocating for political, diplomatic and normative strategies to
hold perpetrators accountable.
(2) Protect civilians and civilian infrastructure. Civilians, especially the most vulnerable,
are forced to endure the catastrophic consequences of armed conflict. More than 100 000
civilians were killed in armed conflicts in 2025 (7). Densely populated towns and cities
have become chief battlegrounds. Civilians are regularly targeted, sometimes
systematically and deliberately. Starvation and rape are increasingly used as weapons of
war. Civilian infrastructure, such as hospitals, schools, water and energy infrastructure,
is often destroyed, leaving millions without life-saving services, damaging the
environment, and causing widespread displacement.
The EU humanitarian diplomacy strategy will continue to support the protection of
civilians and their livelihoods during armed conflict, with a particular focus on those
most at risk. In diplomatic engagements or mediation efforts with parties to a conflict
or influential stakeholders in this field, EU institutions’ departments should consistently
advocate for the protection of civilians and access to essential humanitarian assistance.
This requires an inclusive approach that takes into account the diversity of civilian
populations and recognises that exposure to harm and specific needs are influenced by
age, gender, disability, ethnicity, religious background, sexual orientation, gender
identity, sex characteristics, migration status and other identity markers. Particular
attention should be given to ensuring accessibility of services, infrastructure and
4 Updated European Union Guidelines on promoting compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL),
Official Journal of the EU, C 303, 15.12.2009, pp. 12-17). 5 Pledges on (1) Strengthening compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL) through its promotion,
dissemination and implementation; (2) Ratification and Endorsement of IHL instruments; (3) Fighting impunity
of serious violations of IHL and other core international crimes at the national and international level, available
at the website of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies/International Committee
of the Red Cross, https://rcrcconference.org/about/pledges/. 6 ICRC, Global Initiative to Galvanize Political Commitment to International Humanitarian Law,
https://www.icrc.org/en/global-initiative-international-humanitarian-law. 7 Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, War Watch – IHL in Focus Report, 1
July 2024 to 31 December 2025, 2.02.2026, https://www.geneva-academy.ch/wp-
content/uploads/2026/01/WarWATCH-IHL-in-Focus-Report-2024-25.pdf.
5
information, including for persons with disabilities and older persons, in line with
universal design principles and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (UNCRPD). The Commission services and the EEAS should also support
efforts to clarify, strengthen and promote the legal and policy frameworks for the
protection of civilians and to counter narratives that portray civilian harm as
unavoidable or acceptable in modern warfare.
- Protect children in armed conflict. In times of conflict, children are invariably among
the most vulnerable. They represent a disproportionate percentage of civilian casualties,
both in terms of immediate deaths and serious injuries, and long-term impacts. Children
with disabilities are particularly at risk of exclusion and barriers to accessing education,
healthcare, and essential services, and require targeted attention. However, focusing on
children’s best interests, alongside those of other vulnerable groups (including their
access to services and protection), can offer compelling arguments for initiating de-
escalation and stabilisation. Even in deeply polarised conflicts, parties may find
common ground on children’s access to healthcare, nutrition, education and safety. This
shared concern can be leveraged to create practical opportunities to step up mediation
efforts, facilitate access negotiations, deliver ceasefire dividends or establish local
protection arrangements that benefit wider civilian populations. It can also help de-
escalate tension in specific contexts.
EU humanitarian diplomacy aims to better protect children by encouraging countries to
endorse international instruments and commitments concerning the protection of
conflict-affected children. Based on the EU guidelines on Children and Armed Conflict
(8), EU humanitarian diplomacy aims to prevent and end grave violations against
children’s rights by advocating for child-centric interpretations of international
humanitarian law and child-sensitive frameworks for military and humanitarian
operations. The Commission services and the EEAS continue to promote the right to
education and quality learning in conflict zones and to ensure humanitarian access in
the interests of serving children’s needs.
- Enable humanitarian access. The fact that humanitarian access is being refused and
politicised is a major concern. Some parties to conflicts refuse civilian access to life-
saving assistance or refuse humanitarian actors’ access to civilians in need as a
bargaining chip to advance political and military agendas, thereby weaponising
humanitarian aid and breaching the obligations of parties to a conflict under
international humanitarian law. In line with the EU’s pledge on Unblocking and
facilitating humanitarian access (9), EU humanitarian diplomacy aims to defend and
expand the humanitarian space. This includes engaging with host governments at
various levels, parties to conflicts (including non-state armed groups) or their external
backers to preserve, enable or restore humanitarian access, prevent humanitarian action
from being politicised and to ensure that humanitarian principles are respected. It also
entails facilitating the removal of bureaucratic and administrative impediments,
addressing security restrictions, countering narratives that undermine humanitarian
presence, including disinformation, and advocating for the protection of humanitarian
space, including through humanitarian exemptions and derogations in sanctions and
8 European External Action Service, EU Guidelines on Children and Armed Conflict, 24.06.2024,
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eu-guidelines-children-and-armed-conflict-2024_en. 9 See pledge on Unblocking and facilitating humanitarian access, available at the website of the International
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies/International Committee of the Red Cross,
https://rcrcconference.org/about/pledges/.
6
counter-terrorism measures.
- Address conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence. Conflicts and crises
make structural gender inequalities worse and intensify gender-based violence.
Conflict-related sexual violence rose sharply in 2024 (10), increasing by 25% compared
to the previous year. Sexual violence is categorically proscribed internationally and
may constitute a war crime, a crime against humanity, the crime of torture, or an
element in slavery or even genocide. Accordingly,EU humanitarian diplomacy will
prioritise the prevention and response to sexual and gender-based violence in
emergencies, as stated in the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid, the 2026 EU
Gender Equality Strategy (11), and LGBTIQ+ Strategy (12).
- Protect humanitarian staff and volunteer staff. Violence against humanitarian staff
has escalated dramatically: 2024 was the deadliest year ever recorded. From 2022 to
2024, the number of major attacks on humanitarian staff worldwide almost doubled
from 444 to 816 (13). National and locally recruited humanitarian staff and volunteers
are particularly vulnerable and deliberately targeted, including women and staff from
marginalised communities, who may face additional risks of discrimination or targeted
violence. The EU is a steadfast advocate for the safety and security of humanitarian
staff. This is demonstrated through continued and strengthened EU leadership on the
annual UN General Assembly resolution on the protection of humanitarian and UN
staff, and through support for the Protect Aid Workers initiative. The EU’s
humanitarian diplomacy aims to ensure that the safety of humanitarian and medical
staff, including accountability for attacks targeting them, remains a priority in
diplomatic engagement and in negotiations with parties to a conflict, their sponsors and
other decision-makers. The EU’s humanitarian diplomacy should also build on
evidence-based protection policies, supported by robust, disaggregated data collection
on incidents, and such protection policies will be consistently raised in bilateral
discussions and multilateral forums. The EU will continue to reinforce these
commitments, for example through its association to the Declaration for the Protection
of Humanitarian Personnel (14).
- Link conflict prevention, mediation and peacebuilding. Robust conflict analysis is
central to effective humanitarian diplomacy, enabling more informed, timely, and
impactful engagement. Peace mediation covers a wide range of activities, from
mediating between leaders of parties to a conflict and facilitating community dialogues
to supporting local ceasefire negotiations. The EEAS Peace Mediation Guidelines (15),
updated and expanded in 2023,accompany the EU Concept on Peace Mediation and
provide guidance on how to operationalise EU peace mediation, including in relation
to the role and contributions of young peacebuilders. It is essential not to link
humanitarian issues to political or security discussions, and even less to make such
10 United Nations, Annual Report of the Secretary-General on conflict-related sexual violence, 27.08. 2025,
https://www.un.org/sexualviolenceinconflict/digital-library/reports/sg-reports/. 11 Gender Equality Strategy 2026-2030, COM/2026/113 final 12 Union of Equality - LGBTIQ+ Strategy 2026-2030, COM/2025/725 final 13 Aid Worker Security Database (AWSD), Aid Worker Security Report – Figures at a Glance 2025, August
2025, https://humanitarianoutcomes.org/publications/figures-glance-2025. 14 Minister for Foreign Affairs Australia, Declaration for the Protection of Humanitarian Personnel, 22.09.2025,
https://www.foreignminister.gov.au/minister/penny-wong/media-release/declaration-protection-humanitarian-
personnel. 15 European External Action Service, Peace Mediation Guidelines, 24.05.24,
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eeas-peace-mediation-guidelines_en.
7
discussions conditional on their being resolved, but engaging in dialogue that includes
both humanitarian and political objectives does not compromise core humanitarian
principles. On the contrary, placing humanitarian priorities at the centre of
peacebuilding efforts ensures that compliance with international humanitarian law,
including humanitarian access, is not sidelined in favour of other priorities.
Negotiations, outreach, and mediation processes can lead to increased humanitarian
access or humanitarian pauses, and/or clarify arrangements for delivery, security
guarantees, and monitoring. Conversely, humanitarian priorities can also serve as the
starting point for confidence-building measures and engaging in dialogue with armed
groups or national defence forces, and may pave the way for negotiations and mediation
on ceasefire arrangements and more durable peace agreements.
2. The EU’s existing instruments and commitments to humanitarian diplomacy
EU humanitarian diplomacy is a shared endeavour. EU actors engage with a broad range of
interlocutors – including state and non-state actors, whether it be parties to a conflict, decision-
makers or other actors of influence to promote the achievement of humanitarian objectives.
The EU uses a wide range of measures to support humanitarian outcomes. These include
political and diplomatic engagement, operational activities, and working with independent
media in the EU and in relevant regions.
- Strategic communication and public advocacy,including high-level media
statements, social media posts or active participation in high-level events, are important
ways of drawing more attention to humanitarian crises, mobilising support for
humanitarian access and exerting pressure for international humanitarian law
compliance. They can also generate public and normative accountability towards
international humanitarian law. The EU Special Representative (EUSR) for Human
Rights uses well balanced internal and external communication on international
humanitarian law.
In 2025 the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and
the Commissioner for Crisis Management issued a large number of statements,
often in immediate response to particular events, calling on parties to a conflict
to respect international humanitarian law and condemning violations (16). In
August 2025, following yet another large-scale Russian attack in Ukraine, the
High Representative strongly condemned Russia’s ongoing assaults on
civilians and civilian infrastructure and underlined the disregard for
international law and grave international humanitarian law violations, calling
for accountability.
- Coordination in multilateral forums. Coordination with partners (like-minded
donors and other relevant parties) at multilateral forums, particularly in the UN system,
contributes to reinforcing joint advocacy, passing coordinated public messages and
showing political support for humanitarian resolutions. EU Delegations at international
organisations, such as those in New York and Geneva, play a key role in coordinating
common EU positions and advancing key priorities, including in relation to human
rights and international humanitarian law.
16 Council of the European Union: General Secretariat of the Council, Working party on public international law
(COJUR), Report on the EU guidelines on promoting compliance with international humanitarian law –
January 2024 - December 2024, 2025, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2860/5554652.
8
- Diplomatic démarches. EU diplomatic engagement on the ground, including at high
level, also plays an important part in addressing humanitarian concerns with decision-
makers and parties to a conflict, including armed groups or de facto administrative or
governmental authorities. Field-level engagement and information sharing ensures that
the EU’s humanitarian diplomacy addresses the most relevant concerns and is
supported by up-to-date conflict and political analyses.
In response to the escalating conflict in the eastern Democratic Republic of the
Congo (DRC) and dwindling resources, the EU Special Representative for the
Great Lakes region and the European Commission launched a humanitarian
diplomacy platform in May 2025. This platform brings together EU Member
States, like-minded countries, stakeholders (including international non-
governmental organisations (INGOs), non-governmental organisations
(NGOs) and the UN) and EU Delegations, for evidence-based agenda-setting
and impactful political messaging. The platform’s recommendations have
already informed EU efforts to secure humanitarian access and basic services
delivery in non-government-controlled zones.
Commissioner Lahbib undertook a mission to the DRC, Burundi and Rwanda
in February 2026, where she met with all parties to the conflict, advocated for
the respect for international humanitarian law, and secured certain
commitments from relevant authorities to facilitate humanitarian access.
Ongoing monitoring and high-level engagement will help amplify messages
and ensure accountability.
In July 2025, Gaza Humanitarian Aid Negotiations took place with the Israeli
authorities, led by the Commission and the High Representative for Foreign
Affairs and Security Policy represented by the EUSR for the Middle East Peace
Process, to increase the level of humanitarian aid for Gaza as all border
crossings were closed. At the time, the negotiations resulted in an
understanding to increase aid delivery in six main areas, including
humanitarian aid trucks’ entry, the opening of all border crossing points, entry
of fuel at scale, the security and safety of humanitarian workers, structural
works on basic infrastructure and access for humanitarian workers.
At the end of 2025, due to the clashes and escalation of warfare between
Afghanistan and Pakistan, the borders between the two countries were closed.
Humanitarian cargo intended for Afghanistan was therefore stuck on the
Pakistani side, with a backlog in Karachi port. Thanks to humanitarian
diplomacy by the Commission and its partners, the Government of Pakistan
created a humanitarian corridor for a limited period for the cargo to pass
through.
- Political and human rights dialogues and consultations. The EU engages in regular
structured diplomatic dialogues with third countries to promote EU foreign policy,
strengthen partnerships and address global challenges (security, economic cooperation
and human rights). Such dialogues can also address humanitarian diplomacy concerns,
including the promotion of humanitarian principles and international humanitarian law
(17). These dialogues can cover regional cooperation, such as summits with regional
17 European External Action Service, Revised EU Guidelines on Human Rights Dialogues with Partner/Third
Countries, 2021, https://www.eeas.europa.eu/sites/default/files/human_rights_dialogue_guidelines_0.pdf.
9
blocks, for example the African Union, the Gulf Cooperation Council, the Association
of Southeast Asian Nations or Latin American and Caribbean States, or bilateral
summits with countries such as Canada, China or the US. With African, Caribbean, and
Pacific Group of States (ACP) countries, annual partnership dialogues provide a
political platform to discuss bilateral, regional and global issues using a Team Europe
approach. Promoting compliance with international humanitarian law is also a core task
of the mandate of the EU Special Representative for Human Rights who can play a
constructive role in unblocking challenging situations.
Formal human rights dialogues are conducted with around 60 partner countries
and regional groupings worldwide, including with countries in Central Asia,
South-East Asia, Africa, the Caribbean, the Pacific or the Middle East.
Exchanges can focus on a wide range of human rights topics covering civil and
political as well as economic, social and cultural rights, and international
humanitarian law matters where relevant.
- Advancing humanitarian concerns through peace mediation and stabilisation.
Acknowledging the potential contribution of humanitarian action and mediation to
peacebuilding, the EU is committed to supporting synergies between peace mediation,
conflict prevention, stabilisation, and humanitarian efforts, while strengthening
compliance with international humanitarian law and improving humanitarian civil-
military coordination. It engages in peace mediation as part of its foreign and preventive
diplomacy, driven by its commitment to promoting international peace and security and
upholding the principles and norms of international law, as outlined in the EU Concept
on Peace Mediation (18). The EU has also developed a Concept on Stabilisation to
ensure that support to communities is sequenced and delivered in a manner that
underpins emerging peace processes, including, where appropriate, through
humanitarian aid. Moreover, engaging in dialogue with parties to a conflict to address
critical humanitarian concerns can lead to the establishment of dialogue channels that
could be used by mediators to address security and political issues.
Since the armed conflict started in Sudan in April 2023, repeated attacks on
critical infrastructure, such as water and electricity networks, hospitals, and
treatment facilities, have had devastating humanitarian consequences, leading
to severe shortages, collapsing health systems, and rapid population
displacement. Under the leadership of the EU Special Representative for the
Horn of Africa, an initiative on the protection of critical infrastructure was
launched, aiming to promote international humanitarian law through a concrete
mechanism amidst the ongoing armed conflict. A draft Memorandum of
Understanding, that is being discussed with both belligerents, reaffirms the
prohibition of attacks against essential civilian infrastructure. The
Memorandum of Understanding also establishes a humanitarian dialogue
platform and a mechanism of international guarantors. As a result, a shared
understanding has emerged on priority categories of infrastructure, marking the
tangible building of trust in the absence of active peace talks.
- EU Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions. Through the 21
18 Council of the European Union, General Secretariat of the Council, Concept on EU Peace Mediation,
11.12.2020, https://www.eeas.europa.eu/sites/default/files/st13951.en20.pdf.
10
ongoing EU Common Security and Defence Policy missions and operations, the EU
provides a central contribution to conflict prevention, crisis management and
international peacekeeping. The missions provide the EU with a flexible operational
tool to respond to complex international challenges and their operations contribute to
promoting and advancing human security, the respect of and compliance with
international humanitarian and human rights law, and the protection of civilians in all
conflict situations. Missions and operations promote human rights and gender equality
and systematically mainstream a human right and gender perspective in all planning
and activities. CSDP missions provide training on human rights and international
humanitarian law and contribute to ensuring that actors deployed in zones experiencing
humanitarian challenges are fully aware of their obligations under international and
national law. CSDP missions are also involved in conflict prevention, peacekeeping and
crisis response to military advice, capacity-building and post-conflict stabilisation. The
EU CSDP missions and operations are included in the EU’s objectives to deliver on
Women, Peace and Security, Children and Armed Conflict and Youth, Peace and
Security.
The European Union Advisory Mission Ukraine (EUAM) has given advice on
legislative initiatives and amendments in compliance with international
humanitarian law and strengthened the case-building capacities of prosecutors
and investigators.
The EU Capacity Building Mission Sahel Mali (the EU civilian mission in
Mali) has provided the Malian internal security forces assistance and strategic
advice, including on human rights and international humanitarian law. In 2024,
168 training sessions were given to over 3 100 trainees.
- Support Track 2 and Track 3 humanitarian diplomacy (19). The EU supports
indirect humanitarian engagement by other actors, including NGOs. These initiatives
should complement or support formal diplomatic engagement, for example, by bringing
in technical and specialised humanitarian expertise or maintaining communication
channels, which can be restricted or entail political risks. This approach builds on
partnerships with intermediaries to promote compliance with international
humanitarian law, raise awareness among non-state armed groups, negotiate localised
humanitarian access and build trust. While reducing political exposure, Track 2 or Track
3 diplomacy opens pathways to areas that might otherwise remain inaccessible and
create entry points for formal negotiations and related EU mediation efforts (Track 1).
In several contexts, the EU has provided political, technical and financial
support for the engagement of conflict-affected civilian stakeholders. At Track
2 level, the EU has worked on the protection of critical infrastructure in
partnership with neutral humanitarian organisations, such as the International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) or the Geneva Call.
At Track 3 levels, EU-supported dialogue with community leaders, armed
19 While Track 1 diplomacy refers to top leadership political engagement, Track 2 and 3 diplomacy refer to more
indirect, non-official diplomatic engagement at different levels. Track 2 includes middle-range leadership: mid-
level NGOs and government organisations, as well as leaders in sectors such as education, business, agriculture
and health, serving important connections between the top and grassroots levels. Track 3 includes grassroots
leadership: those involved in local communities, members of indigenous NGOs carrying out relief projects, health
officials and refugee camp leaders, representing those most affected by a conflict’s impact. See also: EEAS, Peace
Mediation Guidelines, 24.05.24, https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eeas-peace-mediation-guidelines_en.
11
groups, religious leaders and local representatives has helped to prevent
conflicts from escalating, while building consensus around contentious issues.
For example, humanitarian actors have worked with Islamic scholars and
religious leaders to identify common ground between international
humanitarian law and Islamic law, thereby strengthening the legitimacy of
international humanitarian law in relevant contexts. One key outcome is the
recognition of the prohibition of child recruitment under both international
humanitarian law and Islamic law, strengthening advocacy to protect children
in armed conflict. On this basis, in Mali and Nigeria, targeted initiatives have
been implemented to prevent, and respond to, child recruitment by engaging
authorities, weapon bearers and religious and community leaders.
- Leveraging partnerships, alliances and coordination with non-EU actors. EU
coordination in response to a crisis – involving non-EU countries and donors, regional
organisations, humanitarian coordinators, UN agencies, civil society, etc. – has helped
to facilitate agreements or joint commitments that promote the achievement of shared
humanitarian objectives, such as strengthening compliance with international
humanitarian law and respect for human rights. This includes supporting OCHA’s
central role in humanitarian diplomacy and the new Collaborative Humanitarian
Diplomacy Initiative of UN agencies. Bringing together diverse groups of donors,
including cross-regional groups of countries, can also help solidify political messaging,
strengthen field-based evidence, and boost credibility.
In the Joint Statement of the first EU-Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Summit
(16 October 2024), leaders emphasised the importance of adhering to
international humanitarian law in various contexts, including in Gaza and
Ukraine, as well as the importance of safeguarding humanitarian space,
protecting civilians, as well as providing access to healthcare.
Building on the success of the EU-Gulf Cooperation Council Summit, the EU
has also leveraged its bilateral partnerships with individual Gulf states. This
resulted, for example, in the organisation of a joint EU-Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia high-level event on humanitarian diplomacy in the Middle East, in the
margins of the UN General Assembly high-level week in September 2025 and
in the signature of an Administrative Arrangement between the Commission’s
Emergency Response Coordination Centre and the GCC Regional Emergency
Management Centre. Further cooperation will be explored under Strategic
Partnership Agreements (20).
International humanitarian law advocacy has also been coordinated with
Canada, Australia, the UK, Japan and the Republic of Korea in the context of
consultations on human rights.
- Providing resources to support humanitarian diplomacy. The EU has a long-
standing track record of providing financial support for initiatives that facilitate data-
driven humanitarian diplomacy. In a context where narratives around armed conflicts
are increasingly influenced or deliberately distorted by information manipulation and
disinformation, these initiatives help diplomatic and humanitarian actors shape public
20 Joint Communication on a “Strategic Partnership with the Gulf”, JOIN/2022/13 final.
12
discourse and effectively influence the behaviour of duty bearers during armed conflict.
The EU supported the Diakonia International Humanitarian Law Centre to
promote the use of international humanitarian law as a tool for advocacy and
diplomacy. The Centre’s international humanitarian law advisory helpdesk
provides timely, evidence-based legal assessments, while the Stockholm
Manual on Conducting International Humanitarian Law Assessments and
Advocacy is a useful tool for formulating and conveying effective international
humanitarian law messages. The EU also supports Save the Children
Netherlands to lead efforts on advocacy for humanitarian access for children.
3. Stepping up EU humanitarian diplomacy in the current geopolitical context
In a context of growing geopolitical fragmentation, well-coordinated diplomatic initiatives
have become all the more important. The multitude of EU stakeholders and tools offers many
entry points and opportunities to advance humanitarian efforts. At the same time, more
diplomatic stakeholders also require closer coordination to avoid divergent diplomatic
initiatives that could overlap or undermine the expected outcome. Effective diplomatic efforts
also require long-term commitment, alongside consistent follow-up monitoring of diplomatic
initiatives and sustained engagement. In line with the Joint Communication, further efforts will
be made to intensify humanitarian diplomacy.
3.1. Structures and processes – strengthening institutional cohesion for effective
humanitarian diplomacy
In line with the Joint Communication, the EU’s institutional coordination mechanisms will
be further strengthened to support cohesive and effective humanitarian diplomatic
engagement. This will strengthen the possibilities for operations on the ground to shape the
EU’s humanitarian diplomatic engagement. It will also ensure that diplomats have timely
and accurate information to guide diplomatic actions. Coordination mechanisms will also
ensure that humanitarian concerns shape political strategies, security dialogues and conflict
mediation. Regular internal dialogues on humanitarian diplomacyshould be convened to
strengthen the link between humanitarian expertise on the ground and political actions. This
includes regular coordination and information-sharing between EU institutions and their
representatives at the field level to set humanitarian objectives and clarify their respective
roles and responsibilities, and thus, ensure a unified voice across the EU’s engagement.
- The EU will strengthen internal coordination between all relevant humanitarian and
political actors at field level and headquarters to strengthen synergies between peace
mediation, conflict prevention and humanitarian efforts.
- Focal points on humanitarian diplomacy, based on existing resources,may help
coordinate diplomatic efforts in specific crises and bridge the gap between field
operations and political strategy. At country or regional levels, and especially in active
crises, the establishment of one, or a group of, designated humanitarian diplomacy focal
point(s) at field level will be considered. These focal points from Commission services,
the EEAS and Delegations should convene regular meetings with the diplomatic
community or humanitarian partners to share analyses, set joint humanitarian
diplomacy priorities, and prepare collective messaging and concerted actions (for
example, by introducing a standing humanitarian session in Special Envoys’ meetings,
and holding consultations with humanitarian and diplomatic/political representatives).
EU Member States’ embassies should be closely involved in these efforts to maximise
their potential impact.
13
- A strengthened Team Europe approach would further enhance the EU’s leadership in
the global humanitarian system. Commission services, the EEAS, EU Delegations and
EUSR/CSDP missions will work in a coordinated manner with EU Member States to
promote concerted diplomatic efforts, including the development of humanitarian
strategies at field level, or when advocating for political support or steering consensus-
building processes in the Council. Promoting a Team Europe approach in diplomatic
engagements by EU Member States could improve concerted messaging on
humanitarian aid.
- Joint planning and embedding humanitarian diplomacy at political levels ensures
that humanitarian concerns are incorporated into diplomatic planning initiatives, for
more consistent messaging. This also ensures that diplomatic efforts do not undermine
the humanitarian space.
- Monitoring and evaluating the EU’s diplomatic efforts should be integrated into
existing workflows. Tracking milestones, as well as the outcomes of diplomatic
initiatives is crucial for them to be sustainable, efficient and accountable. It also ensures
that the EU’s strategies are adapted and respond to developments on the ground.
Feedback loops, debriefings and outcome mapping help build institutional knowledge
and capacity by learning from past diplomatic actions and assessing which tools are
effective and why.
3.2. Methods and tools – leveraging diplomatic tools for maximum impact
- The EU will actively advocate for incorporating discussions on violations of
international humanitarian law and restrictions on humanitarian access into Political
and Security Dialogues, Human Rights Dialogues and diplomatic démarches
between EU representatives and countries or stakeholders involved in or impacted by
conflict.
- The EU will improve its strategic communication efforts and tools to increase
visibility and public engagement and address potential information manipulation and
disinformation. To do this, it should embed strategic communication in the Political
Frameworks for Crisis Approach (PFCAs) (21). By facilitating the sharing of relevant
data based on a needs-driven approach, the services will more systematically promote
transparent communication channels, enabling the dissemination of evidence-based
narratives and coordinated, effective responses. These efforts will be supported by the
existing regulatory framework, notably the Digital Services Act (DSA) (22), and other
applicable instruments, such as the Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference
(FIMI) toolbox (23), to address the challenge, which will inform and guide efforts to
mitigate information manipulation, including disinformation. As announced in the
Democracy Shield (24), the Commission services and the EEAS are developing actions,
which will facilitate coordination among relevant authorities to ensure swift reactions
to large-scale and potentially transnational information operations, including a DSA
21 PFCAs set out the conceptual framework for the EU’s approach to a particular crisis. Building on an inclusive
methodology, they describe a common understanding of a crisis and outline possible EU short- to long-term
engagement strategies. 22 Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 23 Information Integrity and Countering Foreign Information Manipulation & Interference (FIMI) website,
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/information-integrity-and-countering-foreign-information-manipulation-
interference-fimi_en. 24 Joint Communication on the European Democracy Shield: Empowering Strong and Resilient Democracies,
JOIN(2025)791 final.
14
incidents and crisis protocol and the EU Blueprint to Counter FIMI and disinformation.
By doing so, the EU will bolster its legitimacy and influence with key stakeholders,
thereby enhancing its legal and strategic standing in crises. The Commission services
and the EEAS will also use the EU’s annual report on international humanitarian law
as a way of conveying key assessments and messages relevant for humanitarian
diplomacy.
- Reinforcing strategic alliances with partners, key countries and multilateral
organisations is also key. Strategic alliances increase potential leverage, strengthen
diplomatic ties and networks, and create potential entry points. This entails working
with key horizontal partners (key third states, other regional organisations), both on the
ground and within universal/multilateral circles or working more systematically with
multilateral forums and UN agencies to increase influence, legitimacy and access in
particularly difficult political environments. It also includes strengthened cooperation
between EU Delegations and UN human rights presences on the ground in support of
shared humanitarian objectives. Collaborative efforts increase pressure by aligning
diplomatic messaging, joint agenda setting, and pooling political weight to achieve
humanitarian outcomes. The Commission services and the EEAS will also support the
humanitarian diplomacy work strand in the UN80 reform process, including protecting
principled action as part of the UN Humanitarian Reset, and strengthen outreach to the
supporters of parties to conflicts, where feasible, or to influential regional states or
organisations, where this may be more effective. Increased support for the Global
Initiative to Galvanize Political Commitment to International Humanitarian Law will
also be envisaged.
- A donor group — grounded in a Team Europe approach but open to other like-minded
donors — will be established under the joint leadership of the EU and any other
interested donors to facilitate structured exchanges on key issues such as humanitarian
diplomacy, access constraints, geographical priorities, funding allocations and political
perspectives. The ultimate objective would be to improve the coherence and
rationalisation of financial support, promote common approaches and, where
appropriate, leverage political and diplomatic influence to iron out access-related
difficulties. The Commission services and the EEAS also aim to improve the dialogue
with humanitarian partners on the ground to shape diplomatic efforts. While
respecting the neutrality of humanitarian workers, making room for dialogue (e.g.
through targeted consultations, workshops) and promoting the flow of information
supports diplomatic efforts to address the most urgent and fast-changing situations.
3.3. Investing in the sustainability of EU humanitarian diplomacy
The EU will further adapt its training programmes to systematically and comprehensively
integrate humanitarian diplomacy and international humanitarian law into staff training.
This will equip EU staff at all levels with the skills and understanding to effectively address
humanitarian challenges and make links to conflict prevention, mediation and
peacebuildingthrough diplomatic efforts.
The Commission services and the EEAS will also continue to support to partners for
mediation and humanitarian diplomacy initiatives. Through targeted financial support,
the Commission aims to empower programmes that bolster the advocacy for international
humanitarian law compliance, improve negotiation and mediation capabilities, facilitate
humanitarian access and ensure that humanitarian aid reaches communities in need
effectively, and enhance understanding of the interplay between humanitarian and peace
mediation. This includes supporting partners to develop and improve the tools and
15
capacities of humanitarian actors to engage in humanitarian diplomacy.
Conclusion
Effective humanitarian diplomacy requires bringing together humanitarian, political and
diplomatic considerations, stakeholders and tools. This joint Staff Working Document
underscores the EU’s multifaceted approach to humanitarian diplomacy, based on humanitarian
principles and a commitment to addressing humanitarian challenges in a rapidly changing
world through cooperation and closer coordination, including in a Team Europe approach. This
includes a strengthened commitment to equality, non-discrimination, disability inclusion and
accessibility, ensuring that no one is left behind in humanitarian action. By promoting
collaborative partnerships and improving institutional coordination and capacity building, the
EU will be able to systematically integrate humanitarian considerations into its diplomatic
endeavours. Through this new, strengthened integrated approach, EU humanitarian diplomacy
will continue to uphold a rules-based multilateral order and to support needs-based, and
principled humanitarian aid, while making progress on achieving shared global objectives
amidst the complexities of current conflicts.
EN EN
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Brussels, 27.5.2026
SWD(2026) 314 final
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT
on Humanitarian Supply Chains
Accompanying the document
JOINT COMMUNICATION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE
COUNCIL
Defending values, driving reform, delivering impact: the EU's humanitarian action in a
shifting global order
{JOIN(2026) 25 final} - {SWD(2026) 312 final} - {SWD(2026) 313 final}
Introduction
Humanitarian supply chains are the backbone of humanitarian assistance, accounting for a
large part of humanitarian spending. In the current context of reduced humanitarian funding,
more cost-effective supply chains will help to save more lives. As highlighted in the Joint
Communication ‘Defending values, driving reform, delivering impact: the EU humanitarian
action in a shifting global order’, a new model of humanitarian supply chains is therefore
necessary. The EU is committed to bringing forward this reform to make humanitarian supply
chains more efficient, effective, environmentally sustainable and resilient.
Humanitarian supply chains ensure that communities in need have access to the right relief
items, of the right quality, at the right time, in the right place and at the right cost. In operational
terms, humanitarian supply chains encompass the end-to-end system that sources,
procures, transports, stores, and delivers relief goods and services to crisis-affected
populations. Their performance directly shapes the timeliness, scale, cost-effectiveness,
relevance, and environmental footprint of humanitarian action.
Humanitarian supply chains form a complex, multi-actor ecosystem rather than a linear
pipeline. They operate through distinct streams reflecting the market conditions relevant to
delivering specific relief goods and services. Across these diverse supply chains there are,
nevertheless, common structural features that define the current supply chain model.
The operating environment of humanitarian supply chains has become increasingly
complex and volatile. Climate change-related and other natural disasters are growing in
frequency and severity. Protracted conflicts and geopolitical tensions disrupt trade routes,
markets, and regulatory regimes. Inflationary pressures affect transport and commodity
markets. These dynamics are exposing structural fragilities within the current supply chain
system. Amid soaring needs and diminishing funding, the existing supply chain model is no
longer adequate.
Over time, humanitarian organisations have developed largely parallel supply chains
leading to fragmentation and unnecessary duplication, thus constraining operational
efficiency. This is reflected in uncoordinated procurement processes, incompatible digital
systems, limited visibility over aggregate demand, as well as parallel warehousing and
transport arrangements. Siloed and reactive approaches slow delivery, reduce efficiency and
limit local actors’ capacity to respond.
The diversity of the humanitarian system reflects differences in mandates, expertise and
comparative advantages. This helps to ensure the coverage and resilience of the system.
However, this plurality does not preclude alignment, interoperability and coordinated
governance where collective efficiency can be achieved. Improving coherence means breaking
down structural barriers. These include policy misalignment, operational fragmentation,
insufficient collaboration and accountability mechanisms, rigid funding and compliance
frameworks, as well as the limited visibility and comparability of data.
Humanitarian supply chains account for an estimated 60–80% of total humanitarian
spending worldwide, from procurement to final delivery (1). Optimising this expenditure leads
to efficiency gains that unlock resources that can increase the impact of humanitarian aid for
1 European Commission, Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations
(ECHO) Thematic Policy Document: Humanitarian Logistics Policy, 2022
https://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/policies/sectoral/humanitarian_logistics_thematic_policy_document_en.pdf
affected populations. Humanitarian organisations have until now made valuable efforts to
improve the functioning of supply chains. Well-designed initiatives to improve cooperation
have, however, often struggled to reach critical mass or achieve systemic interoperability.
Isolated gains do not substitute coordinated transformation. Without reform, financial and
operational pressures are likely to continue to erode the capacity of the humanitarian aid system
to respond effectively.
Reforming the supply chain model offers a significant opportunity to increase cost-
effectiveness, security of supply, environmental sustainability and resilience. The
transformation needed is not a technical adjustment but a paradigm shift: supply chain
functions should be recognised as strategic enablers of humanitarian impact rather than as mere
support services.
In this context, in December 2024, the European Commission launched the Humanitarian
Leadership Group on Supply Chain (HLGSC), gathering donors, UN agencies, the Red
Cross and Red Crescent Movement, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), private sector
representatives and academia to advance a more strategic and collaborative approach to supply
chains (2).
The discussions in the HLGSC resulted in increased recognition of the need to reform the
humanitarian supply chain system, as reflected also in global processes such as the
Humanitarian Reset and the UN80 Initiative. Recognising supply chains as one of the
strongest levers for value for money, these initiatives aim to move towards streamlined and
harmonised humanitarian supply chains, common and shared services, joined-up data and
flexible funding. Joined-up humanitarian procurement across - and beyond - the UN system
has the potential for major cost savings as well as efficiency gains and should be pursued
further. In particular, building on the Humanitarian Compact, the UN is advancing a joint
initiative led by its Department of Operational Support, the World Food Programme, and
UNICEF to establish a more integrated humanitarian supply chain system that is faster, more
predictable, and closer to affected populations (3).
In line with the Joint Communication, this Staff Working Document further develops this new
vision for the humanitarian supply chain model, including the key features and objectives of
the reform process, as well as the EU’s actions to support it.
The reform process presented in this document reflects the outcome of the work done in the
context of the HLGSC on the basis of the shared recognition of the need for an urgent change.
Bringing this reform successfully forward is a collective endeavour and responsibility of
the humanitarian stakeholders.
1. A new vision for the supply chain model
There is a need to move from largely disconnected supply chains to a functionally integrated
network that is capable of delivering greater impact. The HLGSC, launched by the European
Commission, endorsed a vision for a new working model for humanitarian supply chains: a
2 Humanitarian Leadership Group on Supply Chain: Conclusions of the High-Level Conference on Supply
Chain, 10 December 2025; https://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/partners/high_level_conference_final_conclusions.pdf
Report on Thematic Workshops,
https://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/partners/report_on_the_outcome_of_the_supply_chain_thematic_workshop.pdf 3 United Nations, UN80 Initiative - Shifting Paradigms: United to Deliver. Report of the Secretary-General,
2025https://www.un.org/un80-initiative/sites/default/files/2025-09/UN80_WS3-1_250921_1238.pdf
collaborative and coherent network, multiplying impact through alignment, interoperability,
and use of data, and maximising the use of joined-up platforms and coordinated operations.
The overarching goal of the new model is a system that works better for people - delivering
assistance faster and more predictably, and in ways that strengthen local capacities and
resilience, in line with the principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality, and independence.
The main elements of the new model developed by the HLGSC and the measures for its
implementation are explained below.
1.1. Overall architecture: a network model
A network architecture would allow humanitarian organisations to remain autonomous while
integrating selected supply chain functions where this generates measurable added value.
Coordination would focus on core supply chain components such as procurement contracting
(including framework and long-term agreements), transport contracting, market analysis,
logistics arrangements, demand planning, data analysis and market intelligence.
The HLGSCconcluded thatreforming humanitarian supply chains should be a whole-of-
system process. This means balancing the value of pluralism among humanitarian actors,
regardless of their size, with the need for greater integration, while respecting diverse
mandates, roles and capabilities, and the specific contexts of humanitarian operations. In such
a collaborative network model, collective accountability is central to ensure that relief goods
and services reach final beneficiaries in a safe manner.
1.2. Principles
The new collaborative network model rests on three interdependent principles: alignment,
interoperability and structured use of data.
- Alignment across policy frameworks, operational practices, digital standards and
accountability mechanisms is a precondition for effective collaboration and enhanced
collective accountability. Policy alignment reduces inconsistencies in procurement
rules, environmental sustainability criteria and compliance requirements that currently
limit coordinated planning. Harmonised approaches in areas such as product
specifications and quality standards (where appropriate) and performance metrics
enable the interchangeability of goods and aggregation of demand. The development of
common key performance indicators (KPIs), common reporting taxonomies and
mutually recognised procedures further enhances transparency and accountability.
Greater alignment would contribute to the overall simplification efforts promoted by
the European Commission.
- Interoperability, which is made possible by alignment, enables heterogeneous supply
chains to function as a collaborative network at both strategic and operational levels.
This reduces the need for uniform technological platforms, while facilitating them
considerably in key instances. Functional connectivity is achieved through open and
shared data standards, interfaces and agreed taxonomies. As a result, organisations can
aggregate demand, improve forecasting, increase inventory visibility and coordinate
transport planning.
- Structured use of data, notably shared metrics and harmonised datasets, enables
performance benchmarking, improve visibility of stocks and bottlenecks (e.g. supplier
shortages or customs issues), and support predictive modelling and anticipatory action.
Data becomes a strategic asset supporting evidence-based decision-making and
resource optimisation at network level.
These principles reinforce one another: alignment facilitates interoperability;
interoperability enables structured data exchange; and the structured use of data enhances
decision-making.
This collaborative network approach also strengthens resilience and security of supply. It
supports regional production capacity and supply chains, improved stockpiling strategies, the
mapping of critical dependency, and coordinated risk management. Potential disruptions
affecting one node can be planned for and mitigated notably through alternative supplies, and
where applicable, through shared stocks or coordinated surge capacity. Coordinated demand
reduces exposure to market volatility. A collective visibility enhances risk management and
compliance oversight. Measures promoted by the EU to strengthen security of supply in the
international humanitarian context are also compatible with the requirements of the EU internal
market and the EU’s strategic autonomy.
The need for humanitarian aid, which is particularly acute in fragile contexts, cannot be
addressed without a functioning supply chain (4). Yet, supply chains can quickly be disrupted
in fragile contexts, thus creating a vicious circle worsening the vulnerability of people in need,
including by increasing the risks of diversion of aid in the procurement and delivery of relief
items. A more efficient, effective, environmentally sustainable and resilient supply chain
system can make a significant contribution to addressing the various aspects of fragility
including by supporting the functioning of local markets and their ability to withstand shocks.
Better preparedness of the supply chain, with greater focus on localisation, is key to
strengthening resilience, including by ensuring proximity to needs and by empowering local
actors.
1.3. Collaboration as the default way of working
Wherever possible, collaboration should become the default way of managing humanitarian
supply chains. Collaboration may take several forms. These include mutualisation of resources
and procurement functions, joint and interoperable contracting mechanisms, shared services,
pooling of logistics assets such as warehousing and transport, and mutual recognition across
supply and logistics systems. Moving from ad hoc cooperation to structured collaboration
enables a greater scale of operations, reduces duplication and strengthens collective resilience.
The collaborative model is multi-actor by design. It brings together humanitarian,
development, private sector and academic actors, and the media as strategic partners, at
global, regional and national levels, through common efforts and collective accountability.
- Humanitarian organisations (UN, Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, local and
international non-governmental organisations) are the key operational actors in the
system, in full respect of their specific nature, role and mandate. In a networked model,
they can strengthen complementarity, thus increasing the cost-effectiveness of their
operations.
- Donors have a critical role to play in reforming supply chains. Collaboration between
donors should be strengthened to promote greater alignment as regards compliance and
regulatory approaches, as well as funding priorities to support supply chain reform.
4 Staff Working Document on An Integrated Approach to Fragility, SWD (2026) 313
Donors can reduce fragmentation and incentivise collective approaches through the
alignment of compliance frameworks, the harmonisation of reporting requirements
(where legally feasible), and by integrating supply chain considerations into funding
instruments, including investments in strategic capacity and digital at both
organisational and network levels.
- The private sector is a strategic partner beyond contract transactions and should be
engaged in co-designing system-wide transformation, in full respect of humanitarian
principles. The humanitarian supply chain uses private sector supply chains for a large
proportion of its work. This engagement should go beyond funding. There is scope to
expand the role that private philanthropy plays, notably in supporting the development
of expertise, technological investments and systems.
- Academia contributes to evidence-gathering, benchmarking methodologies, predictive
modelling, and independent performance assessments, thereby strengthening collective
learning and accountability.
In line with the people-centred and inclusive humanitarian response advocated for in the Joint
Communication, the inclusion of affected communities in the implementation of the new
supply chain model would improve the way aid is planned, delivered and monitored, with a
view to better addressing affected communities’ diverse needs.
In this context, the press, media and influencers play a role in depicting humanitarian crises
and prevent them from being forgotten. Information manipulation, including disinformation, is
also part of the communication challenge which needs to be carefully analysed.
1.4. Enabling conditions
Making this vision a reality depends on several enabling conditions.
Supply chain considerations should be integrated into the strategic and planning decision-
making of humanitarian organisations, and should be embedded in organisational planning,
budgeting and governance processes, rather than being treated solely as support functions.
Professionalisation is essential to securing the highly skilled and adaptive workforce needed
to advance the reform of humanitarian supply chains. Competency frameworks, sector-wide
performance indicators, and the structured development of people’s skills improve capacity and
accountability.
Supply chain reform requires flexible and inclusive funding models, where supply chain
costs, including those related to digitalisation and environmental sustainability, are recognised
as essential programme expenses. Innovative and financially sustainable fundingmechanisms
should move towards greater predictability, and to multiannual structures that support long-
term investment, and should be aligned with preparedness and localisation objectives. Greater
resilience can be promoted by basing financing on forecasts, and by making the costs of
preparing the humanitarian response eligible for funding. At the same time, duplication and
administrative burdens can be reduced by harmonising compliance requirements across
different donors. The operational expression of this vision lies in joined-up approaches and
coordinated platforms. Humanitarian stakeholders operating within a collaborative network
will be better positioned to deliver assistance more rapidly, predictably and efficiently, thus
reaching more people with available resources.
International humanitarian law requires that parties to a conflict allow the unimpeded passage
of humanitarian relief. However, in contexts where access constraints and attacks on
humanitarian actors are increasing, humanitarian diplomacy has a key role to play in ensuring
that humanitarian supply chains can work effectively to bring assistance to people in need (5),
for example by helping to enhance cooperation on emerging operational and administrative
barriers, such as preventing entry of essential humanitarian items.
2. Transforming the humanitarian supply chain
Five core areas have been identified to transform the current model of humanitarian supply
chains: procurement, environmental sustainability, digitalisation, preparedness and
localisation. In line with the HLGSC work, reform should address all these aspects, as well as
their interdependencies. This process will require concerted efforts from humanitarian
stakeholders, according to their respective role and mandate. The EU has already been
supporting this transformation across various areas, including through dialogue with
humanitarian stakeholders and by means of financial assistance. The Commission has made
EUR 35 million available so far to support strategic and joint approaches to humanitarian
supply chains, especially common services, shared services, and joint procurement, focusing
on initiatives that have the potential to increase cost-effectiveness and are scalable.
2.1. Procurement
Procurement is the largest financial component of humanitarian supply chains. It therefore
offers significant leverage to improve efficiency and financial management, as well as the
impact of humanitarian programmes. In many contexts, however, procurement is
predominantly focused on purchasing rather than shaping markets or contributing strategically
to operation design.
Regulatory divergence and complex donor compliance frameworks can lead to duplicate
assessments and repeated audits of suppliers. This increases administrative burdens and may
slow down responses. Moreover, short-term funding cycles and compartmentalised planning
may weaken long-term supplier engagement and limit investment in preparedness.
Repositioning supply chains as a strategic function within the governance of an organisation
allows unlocking its full potential. Procurement should be integrated into strategic and
operational decision-making, supported by appropriate performance indicators, including
gender responsiveness and embedded in operation design from the outset.
System-wide cooperation -through mutual recognition, the structured exchange of
information and greater alignment of compliance frameworks - can streamline processes and
responses. Strategic category management, harmonised specifications and shared market
intelligence enhance organisations’ purchasing leverage and promote market stability. Joint
frameworks and contract piggybacking reduce duplication of tenders and generate economies
of scale (6). Initiatives on joint procurement between humanitarian organisations or joint
procurement procedures play an important role. Standardised specifications for relief items can
improve quality control and promote the interchangeability of items. They also provide an
opportunity to embed environmental requirements in procurement because economies of scale
can make more environmentally sustainable items cheaper.
5 Staff Working Document ‘A strategic approach to EU Humanitarian Diplomacy’; SWD (2026) 312 6 Contract ‘piggybacking’ allows an entity to use or rely on another entity’s policies, procedures, system contracts,
and related operational mechanisms for the implementation of activities, without further evaluation checks or
approvals being required, to the greatest extent practicable.
Procurement reform is closely interconnected with environmental sustainability, digitalisation,
preparedness and localisation. Its effectiveness depends on context-sensitive approaches that
strengthen local markets while enabling collective efficiency. Local procurement is a key
strategy for strengthening humanitarian supply chains. Sourcing goods and services locally or
regionally can speed up delivery, reduce transport costs and emissions, and improve the
relevance of the assistance provided to affected communities. It can also strengthen local
markets and suppliers, thereby enhancing the economic recovery of affected communities, and
building more resilient systems capable of responding to future crises.
The First Humanitarian Cooperative
The Humanitarian Logistics Cooperative, known as ‘Hulo’, was launched in 2021 by the
logistics directors of nine leading humanitarian aid organisations. Hulo aims to enhance
connections and solidarity between humanitarian logistics stakeholders and improve
performance by pooling logistics and supply chain resources, notably joint procurement.
Hulo has grown to 19 members (7) and is present in seven countries. It works with members
and external participants – over 100 local and international organisations – to increase the
impact of humanitarian aid. Since the beginning of 2023, the Commission has contributed to
supporting Hulo with an amount of approximately EUR 8 900 000.
Hulo’s joint procurement initiatives help all willing organisations to jointly identify the best
approach towards a given market. By combining procurement expertise and purchasing
power, Hulo’s coordinated approach generates savings, increases the quality of procurement,
and streamlines procurement processes for all participating organisations, in line with the
‘coopetition’ (8) model.
2.2. Environmental sustainability
Environmental sustainability should be integrated across humanitarian supply chains,
shifting from short-term cost minimisation to long-term value optimisation. As humanitarian
actors operate at the frontline of environment and climate-related crises, minimising
environmental harm avoids contributing to local pollution or resource depletion, and reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, particularly in communities already highly vulnerable to
environmental stress.
A substantial share of humanitarian emissions (estimates suggest up to 75%) is linked to supply
chains. Within that, the majority of emissions can be attributed to procurement. Only when
upstream emissions (Scope 3 emissions) are included in the calculation of a carbon footprint
does the proportion of emissions coming from supply chains become apparent (9). Therefore,
7 ACTED, Action contre la Faim / Action Against Hunger, Bioport, CARE International, Fleet Forum, French Red
Cross, Handicap International / Humanity & Inclusion, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent
Societies, INTERSOS, International Rescue Committee, Médecins du Monde, Mercy Corps, Norwegian Refugee
Council, Oxfam Intermón, Plan International, Première Urgence Internationale, Save the Children International,
Solidarités International, Welthungerhilfe. 8 ‘Coopetition’ is a model in which humanitarian actors cooperate in a supply chain by pooling resources to
improve efficiency and reach, while remaining institutionally independent and competing for funding and
visibility. 9 Under the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, emissions are classified as Scope 1 (direct emissions from owned or
controlled assets), Scope 2 (indirect emissions from purchased energy), and Scope 3 (all other value-chain
emissions). In humanitarian supply chains, Scope 3 (including outsourced transport, procurement, and waste)
typically represents the largest share of the carbon footprint and is therefore central to sustainable preparedness
and response planning.
HLGSC called for measuring organisational-level emissions using standardised carbon
accounting methodologies, in line with recognised international standards, including for Scope
1, 2 and 3 emissions.
Several barriers are hindering progress. These include inconsistent metrics, incentive structures
that prioritise immediate purchase cost over lifecycle impact, insufficient planning, and limited
alignment across institutions. Addressing these constraints requires clearer guidance on cost
eligibility, alignment of financing, and sustained commitment from leaders.
Environmental considerations should be integrated across the entire lifecycle of goods and
services, from sourcing and production to transport, warehousing, use and disposal. Lifecycle
assessments and green product specifications should guide procurement decisions, enabling
the selection of products and suppliers with a lower environmental impact. Engaging with
suppliers, especially local suppliers, can contribute to promoting innovation and supporting
more environmentally sustainable local procurement.
While most environmental impacts come from procurement, transport and logistics also offer
significant opportunities for improvement. Modal optimisation – prioritising sea freight where
feasible – together with strengthening the pre-positioning and mutualisation of
warehousing and transport assets can reduce emissions while containing costs. Sustainable
energy solutions for field operations and storage facilities further enhance both environmental
performance and operational resilience. In addition, as regards the waste produced by
humanitarian responses, recognising – as the EU does – that sustainable waste management
is an eligible programme expenditure helps ensure that waste management is not sidelined in
emergencies. In that context, particular attention needs to be paid to circular economy measures
and waste reduction at the source, notably by reducing packaging and making it as
sustainable as possible.
Environmental and social sustainability should not be viewed as competing with humanitarian
effectiveness. Sustainable logistics and optimised supply chains can generate cost savings
while lowering environmental and social impact. Moreover, environmentally sustainable
procurement that stimulates local markets supports the localisation and resilience of affected
communities, reducing dependence on long-distance transport.
Grounded in standardised measurement, lifecycle integration and operational optimisation,
environmental reform strengthens both environmental performance and humanitarian impact.
Environmental sustainability in humanitarian supply chains: the WREC Coalition
(10)
The WREC Coalition works to reduce the environmental impact of humanitarian supply
chains while strengthening their resilience, cost-effectiveness, and long-term sustainability.
Since becoming operational in 2021, WREC has focused on practical, field-based
approaches. Since 2022, the EU has supported WREC with total funding of EUR 2 160 000.
The coalition addresses the circular economy and reverse logistics, sustainable procurement,
waste management, and decarbonisation. It convenes technical experts from partner
10 WREC Coalition: Waste management and measuring, reverse logistics, environmentally sustainable
procurement and transport, and circular economy. Coordinated by the Environmental Sustainability Team of the
Global Logistics Cluster, the WREC Coalition brings together the Danish Refugee Council, the International
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Save the Children International, the World Food Programme,
and a broader network of humanitarian, private sector and academic partners.
organisations and offers tailored advice, capacity-building and practical tools. Key
achievements include mapping waste management and recycling infrastructure in 69
countries, launching a Lifecycle Assessment Resource Hub, and creating an Environmentally
Sustainable Humanitarian Logistics online course. WREC plans to further expand training
courses, strengthen the coordination of country-level logistics, update green procurement
resources, publish a guide to circular warehousing, and promote collective waste and reverse
logistics solutions.
2.3. Digitalisation
Digital transformation is not an end in itself, but it is a powerful means to enhance the efficiency
of EU humanitarian aid. It is a structural enabler of reforming humanitarian supply chains
to cope with the challenges and seize the opportunities of the rapid developments in
digitalisation and artificial intelligence (AI). It supports better visibility, analysis, connectivity
and performance monitoring, thus directly enhancing efficiency, transparency and
accountability. It also acts as a multiplier for cost-effectiveness by facilitating and streamlining
better forecasting, procurement processes, use of inventory, decision-making and, ultimately,
humanitarian responses – at both organisational and system levels. The advent of AI will
generate even greater efficiency and cost-effectiveness, provided that the underlying ecosystem
facilitates its adoption and use.
Despite the progress in many organisations, the current digital ecosystem remains fragmented.
Siloed tools, inconsistent data standards and limited interoperability prevent the aggregation of
information across organisations, constrain predictive planning and reduce visibility over
stocks and transport capacity. Moreover, there is currently very limited sharing of information
between organisations on digital transition at organisational and operational levels. This reform
requires a transition from fragmented, proprietary tools to an interoperable, accessible and
inclusive digital ecosystem based on open, fit-for-purpose standards. Shared frameworks
should enable the structured exchange of data, informed decision-making and predictive tools
that improve preparedness and operational planning. Interoperability - as functional
connectivity across heterogeneous systems - remains the key objective. These measures would
support the progressive establishment of an interoperable humanitarian digital ecosystem. This
implies functional connectivity between funding systems, operational platforms and reporting
tools.
In advancing digital transformation, due attention needs to be paid to the fact that information
on humanitarian aid can be sensitive, as regards both relief items (e.g. stock inventory,
warehousing, routing, delivery points) and beneficiaries. Data protection is, therefore, a critical
issue. While digital systems improve efficiency, targeting, and transparency, they may also be
at risk of security breaches and misuse for non-humanitarian purposes, including biases and
disinformation. Data protection assessments and risk mitigation measures are important tools
to address those risks. Personal data need to be processed in compliance with all the applicable
data protection legislation.At the same time, moving towards greater interoperability between
digital systems may be challenging due to differences between in data protection regulations.
Digital governance frameworks, including clear standards for data structures, security
protocols and performance metrics, are, therefore, essential. Cybersecurity safeguards should
be embedded from the outset. To ensure inclusive access, digital tools should be adapted to
local capacities and accompanied by appropriate data protection safeguards.
Digital infrastructure should be treated as a core operational capacity rather than a project-
based overhead. It should be supported by sustained, multiannual investment. There is also a
strong link between the private sector and digitalisation efforts. Digital transformation would
benefit from a greater engagement with technology and digital service providers in designing
innovative, user-centred solutions that respond to operational realities. In addition, where
humanitarian actors rely on private sector systems and infrastructure, there is significant
untapped potential to adapt off-the-shelf products and promote structured dialogues between
users and providers to ensure these products are fit for purpose.
Pharmaceutical Information Management System (PIMS)
PIMS is the Pharmaceutical Information Management System of the International Medical
Corps (IMC). The PIMS software was developed by the IMC to manage the last mile of the
supply chain for pharmaceutical products in humanitarian contexts. This is an innovative
digital tool that enables efficiency gains.
Since mid-2025, the Commission has provided funding of EUR 2 000 000 for PIMS, which
is being used or is to be used across600 locations operated by humanitarian partners in
Ethiopia, Somalia, South Sudan and Sudan. IMC equips these partners with a digital
infrastructure which helps strengthen coordination, reduce inefficiencies and improve the
performance of the supply chain. PIMS allows partners to manage the entire supply chain
from procurement planning to distribution to recipients.
2.4. Preparedness
A strategic approach to supply chain preparedness should become a system norm, anchored
in local capacities and supported by forecasting, scenario planning, structured pre-positioning
and shared data. Preparedness at local level should be the overriding objective, with regional
or global levels responding as necessary to needs and shocks that cannot be addressed locally.
The supply chain represents a pragmatic entry point to support preparedness and localisation,
enabling integration into local frameworks rather than setting up parallel systems. Local actors’
participation in work to ensure the preparedness of humanitarian supply chains is key, because
it allows access to data on assets in case of emergencies. The shift required is from a reactive
international response to proactive, local, risk-informed models embedded within planning and
governance frameworks.
Ensuring preparedness in supply chains is constrained by unclear definitions of roles across
local, national and international actors, fragmented coordination and short-term financing.
Preparedness activities are often insufficiently integrated within national, regional and local
disaster management, logistics platforms and supply actors, sometimes within the same
agencies. This limits the sustainability, efficiency and effectiveness of preparedness. Actors in
the supply chain need to be integrated into preparedness planning to ensure that logistical
constraints are integrated into and addressed by planning.
A coherent approach requires voluntary frameworks that clarify responsibilities, align risk
analyses and enable the maturity of the system to be monitored over time. Integration with
national as well as regional and local structures can guide coordinated investments in
infrastructure, workforce development and supplier capacity, strengthening preparedness while
reducing reliance on parallel international mechanisms.
ReliefEU stockpiles and the UNHRD
To be better prepared to respond to emergencies, and provide in-kind support to partners, the
Commission has developed ReliefEU stockpiles in cooperation with the United Nations
Humanitarian Response Depots (UNHRD). Since 2022, the Commission has provided
EUR 37 500 000 in funding to support, via the UNHRD, the consolidation of its regional
humanitarian stockpiles hosted in Brindisi, Dubai, Panama and Kuala Lumpur. Regional pre-
positioning aims to provide rapid deployment of aid to affected areas as soon as there is an
operational gap or an identified need.
The World Food Programme has been managing the United Nations Humanitarian Response
Depots network since 2000 with the mandate to pre-position relief and survival items and
provide rapid mobilisation services to countries affected by natural hazards or complex
emergencies on behalf of the humanitarian community. The network is part of the World
Food Programme’s common services and service provision platforms and is central to the
World Food Programme’s emergency preparedness activities. The presence of over 30
partners holding their emergency stocks in the same United Nations Humanitarian Response
Depots offers opportunities to coordinate procurement, joint dispatching, loan and borrow
schemes, and overall for a more effective and efficient use of pre-positioned supplies when
responding to emergencies.
Preparedness and localisation are mutually reinforcing. Preparedness strengthens national
capacity to anticipate and decide on the scale of response, while localisation ensures that
preparedness is anchored in local realities rather than operating externally. A coordinated
transformation would contribute to ensuring that humanitarian supply chains are locally led,
anticipatory and informed by data.
2.5. Localisation
Localisation of supply chains entails the progressive transfer of authority, resources and
decision-making to national and local actors, with international support complementing and
reinforcing national systems. Structural barriers - including limited access to funding, to data
and governance processes, and to risk-transfer models - continue to constrain local leadership.
Advancing localisation demands clearer governance arrangements, co-designed systems, and
inclusive financing and risk-sharing mechanisms that reinforce sustainability and autonomy,
while maintaining interoperability. Reform priorities should include multiannual and forecast-
based financing, alignment with national strategies, the leveraging of existing coordination
platforms, and investment in interoperable, ethically governed data systems co-developed with
national and local actors.
By strengthening local preparedness, the international humanitarian organisations will be able
to move progressively to a role of complementary support. This approach aims to ensure that
affected communities also play a role in making the supply chains more efficient, effective,
sustainable and resilient. With a move to more localised supply chains, the focus should also
be on building up the capacity of local suppliers to minimise the environmental footprint of
their production processes and the items produced.
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies – Disaster Response
Emergency Fund (DREF)
The Commission has supported the Disaster Response Emergency Fund, a fund dedicated to
providing direct and flexible funding to Red Cross and Red Crescent national societies to
support their responses to small and medium-sized disasters. Since 2019, the Commission
has contributed EUR 65 000 000 to the Disaster Response Emergency Fund. In 2025, the
Commission’s contribution Disaster Response Emergency Fund was EUR 17 500 000,
providing support to over 50 national societies.
The Commission’s support enables locally led responses to complex and underfunded crises.
This helps strengthen capacities and promotes local leadership in supply chain
management for emergency responses. The DREF is a particularly powerful tool for
localisation as 82% of all the funding allocated is directly transferred to and implemented by
local actors.
3. Actions to advance the transformation of the humanitarian supply chain system
Implementing the reform of humanitarian supply chains requires connecting and leveraging
existing structures and initiatives while fostering cross-sector collaboration, in a pragmatic and
context-sensitive way.
In line with the Joint Communication, the European Commission will drive this shift in the
humanitarian supply chain system, working closely with the EU Member States in a Team
Europe approach. This will be done by strategically engaging with humanitarian stakeholders,
integrating the new supply chain model into the Commission’s funding operational priorities,
fostering the knowledge and use of existing funding opportunities, strengthening
implementation on the ground and closely coordinating with other donors.
3.1.Establishing a Humanitarian Supply Chain Charter
Building upon the work done in the context of the HLGSC, the Commission will launch a
Humanitarian Supply Chain Charter. The Charter will serve as a strategic, voluntary, multi-
stakeholder framework based on a shared vision to guide the supply chain reform process. It
should consolidate the principles necessary to achieve alignment and interoperability within
the supply chain system. It should define roles, responsibilities, and collaboration between the
various stakeholders, and set clear objectives. It should aim to connect fragmented efforts,
bridge preparedness and response, and strengthen collective efforts to build accountable,
coherent, locally led, and resilient humanitarian supply chains.
Drawing on the participatory process developed by the HLGSC, the Charter should cover a
range of actions across the main areas of supply chains, for example by:
- integrating procurement in operation design from the outset to improve efficiency,
impact and financial management, notably through mutual recognition of
procurement decisions, and joint procurement between humanitarian organisations;
- embedding environmental sustainability, notably by reducing greenhouse gas
emissions, improving lifecycle assessments and green product specifications, and
supporting, as appropriate, circular economy measures and responsible waste
management;
- advancing digitalisation and the use of AI-tested tools, moving towards an
interoperable ecosystem with governance frameworks, based on common, open
standards, adapted to local capacities and accompanied by appropriate data
protection safeguards.
- fostering preparedness as a norm based on a common framework, anchored in local
capacities and actors’ participation in planning, and supported by forecasting and
pre-positioning while ensuring the uptake and scaling of innovative solutions;
- advancing localisation of supply chains, by promoting the progressive transfer of
resources and decision-making from international humanitarian actors to local ones,
while strengthening local markets.
The Charter would include commitments tailored to the roles and mandates of both
humanitarian organisations and donors. The Charter would be open to signature by
humanitarian stakeholders.
A platform supporting the Charter should act as a technical secretariat and coordination
hub facilitating knowledge sharing, technical advice, collective monitoring and periodic
reporting. The Commission will contribute to supporting the Charter and its platform.
3.2.Leveraging EU funding to promote a new supply chain model
The structural reform of humanitarian supply chains requires targeted adjustments not only at
strategic level but also at operational and funding level. Planning and funding mechanisms
should enable collaboration as the default way of working, strengthen preparedness and
enhance overall efficiency, while preserving transparency, competition and compliance
standards.
The Commission will integrate the new supply chain model into the way its humanitarian aid
is planned, managed and funded. In particular, it will support the implementation of the new
model by allocating appropriate financial resources and by gradually setting funding
conditions for project selection, prioritising joined-up approaches, with a viewto fostering
more efficient, sustainable and collaborative supply chains. This will help humanitarian
organisations operate in a more efficient way, unlocking resources to assist people in need.
The Commission will continue to provide funding to support the work of the HLGSC. It
will also make targeted funding available for additional strategic supply chain initiatives that
strengthen joint ways of working.
Funding conditions for project selection should be gradually set to encourage collaboration
on supply chain functions as a default way of working, unless a justified exception applies.
These conditions should remain proportionate and context-sensitive, ensuring they support
rather than constrain operational delivery.
Prioritisation may include projects that propose joint procurement between humanitarian
organisations, delegated procurement arrangements, the sharing of transport fleets and
storage, harmonised market assessments, and other collaborative practices between
partners. This would allow, for example, one organisation to lead procurement processes on
behalf of others, reducing duplication of tenders and supplier assessments. Where appropriate,
funding conditions could also address other features of the supply chains, such as encouraging
the sharing of data and the use of standardised data formats, participation in shared logistics
and information coordination platforms, compliance with interoperability standards, and
engagement in mutual recognition frameworks.
3.3.Facilitating collaboration on procurement
The Commission will also work towards a recognition framework for Humanitarian
Procurement Centres (11).This framework would establish clear eligibility criteria and
minimum standards relating to governance, procurement integrity, transparency, financial
controls, ethical sourcing, environmental performance, EU procurement principles, applicable
financial rules and internationally accepted humanitarian standards. The framework would aim
to foster mutual confidence between recognised procurement centres, humanitarian
organisations and donors, by strengthening the reliability, complementarity and collective
efficiency of existing capacities within a coherent networked model.
3.4.Fostering awareness of existing opportunities
It is important to ensure that humanitarian organisations are adequately informed of the funding
opportunities available in relation to supply chains. Under the current rules, supply chain costs
may be recognised as operational costs where they are demonstrated to be operationally
critical to the implementation of the action. This may include environmental and
digitalisation costs, as well as investments in preparedness, such as the pre-positioning of
relief items or maintaining pre-constituted stocks.
3.5.Ensuring and supporting implementation in the field
The Commission will also support the operational implementation of the new humanitarian
supply chain model through its substantial field network, beginning with pilot countries. Field
staff will work with partners locally to ensure coordination and joint models, encouraging the
use of existing collaborative mechanisms, and establishing ways of working and lessons learnt
that can later be transferred to other countries and regions. This approach would help partners
to explore joint procurement opportunities and share information on dedicated platforms. This
will be supported by targeted training for Commission staff to give them a deeper
understanding of the strategic bottlenecks and opportunities that can emerge in the field, enable
them to gather evidence, and give them the tools to anticipate such issues, as well as to support
coordination and collaboration of partners at an early stage.
3.6.Closer coordination with Member States and non-EU donors
The Commission will closely coordinate with EU Member States and, where relevant, with
non-EU donors to promote synergies to reduce administrative complexities and align
operational strategies and funding priorities.
3.6.1. Promoting administrative simplification
Enhanced donor coordination can reduce administrative complexity for partners by
encouraging greater alignment on compliance requirements, reporting formats and audit
approaches, while fully respecting the applicable legal frameworks. Structured dialogue on
procurement and logistics policies may facilitate mutual recognition of standards, coordinated
market engagement and improved predictability for suppliers.
11 Humanitarian procurement centres (HPCs) are non-profit organisations specialising in the procurement of
supplies and services necessary for the delivery of humanitarian aid and related technical assistance, supply
purchasing or logistics services. There is no contractual relationship between the Commission and an HPC. The
recognition of an organisation as an HPC does not constitute an assurance with respect to the HPC’s compliance
with contractual obligations towards third parties.
The Commission allows partners to use simplified procurement procedures up to relatively
high thresholds, below which competitive procurement procedures (such as open calls for
tender) are not required. However, other donors set lower thresholds. Partners often adopt these
lower thresholds as their standard practice to avoid the risk of non-compliance with rules of
those donors, particularly in the context of actions funded by several donors. Aligning towards
a more flexible approach would facilitate aggregation of demand and joint contracting,
particularly in high-volume, standardised categories.
Administrative simplification can also be supported by allowing digital copies of supporting
documentation and digital validation signatures as standard practice. This would streamline
processes and reduce delays, particularly in remote or crisis-affected environments. Digital
validation mechanisms should comply with recognised legal and cybersecurity standards.
3.6.2. Fostering operational synergies and alignment of funding priorities
Operational synergies with Member States should also be pursued, particularly for pre-
positioning of stocks, contingency planning, data sharing and the use of common services.
Building on the positive experience under ReliefEU, the Commission will continue to promote
closer alignment of stockpiling strategies and regional hub investments, and to foster transport
arrangements that can reduce duplication and optimise resource allocation. Pre-positioning of
stocks should be coordinated through existing and recognised platforms to avoid parallel
inventories and inefficient distribution of reserves.
Finally, the EU will promote exchanges on funding priorities and financing approaches,
including multiannual approaches, expenditure on preparedness and forecast-based financing
mechanisms. Greater convergence in these areas can strengthen system-wide resilience and
provide incentives for collaborative supply chain models.
Conclusion
Humanitarian supply chains are key to the effectiveness of humanitarian action. By working
together across organisations, sectors and geographical areas, the humanitarian community can
transform supply chains from fragmented mechanisms into an integrated network that delivers
greater value to all affected populations. This approach will advance reforms through closer
collaboration and collective accountability, strengthening resilience and safeguarding
humanitarian principles. It will also contribute to ensuring that humanitarian assistance is
delivered in an inclusive, equitable and accessible manner. This will enhance the efficiency
and effectiveness of aid delivery.
As a leading humanitarian actor, the EU will continue to promote an inclusive process of reform
of the humanitarian supply chain system. The package of measures outlined above has as its
strategic objective the creation of a collaborative, interoperable, preparedness-oriented and
visible humanitarian supply chain network. The adjustments necessary to reach this goal will
enable collective efficiency and resilience while safeguarding accountability.
Beyond the opportunities offered by these measures, a strategic approach to supply chains
could pave the way for a new working model, rooted in genuine coordination between
humanitarian partners, public and private donors, and local actors, and in cooperation with the
private sector, academia and the media. Through collective efforts, an efficient humanitarian
supply chain will prove indispensable to meeting the challenges of an increasingly complex
world.
EN EN
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Brussels, 27.5.2026
SWD(2026) 313 final
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT
on an Integrated Approach to Fragility
Accompanying the document
JOINT COMMUNICATION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE
COUNCIL
Defending values, driving reform, delivering impact: the EU's humanitarian action in a
shifting global order
{JOIN(2026) 25 final} - {SWD(2026) 312 final} - {SWD(2026) 314 final}
1
Introduction
Globally, fragility is on the rise, fuelling insecurity and disrupting development progress
worldwide. Around 2 billion people – 25% of the global population – live in highly fragile
situations which are also home to 72% of those living in extreme poverty. By 2040, over 90%
of the world’s extreme poor are expected to live in highly or extremely fragile situations (1).
Today, the vast majority of the 239 million people in urgent need of humanitarian aid already
live in such situations (2). About 117.3 million people had been forcibly displaced worldwide
as of mid-2025 due to conflict, persecution, violence or human rights violations. Children and
young people are among the most affected: 27% lack education, jobs or training, and they make
up 40% of all forcibly displaced people (3). Fragility also disproportionately affects groups in
situations of vulnerability, who often face compounded and intersecting forms of
discrimination and barriers to accessing protection and basic services. Almost 40% of the
highly and extremely fragile situations are characterised by conflict. In addition, over 75% of
contexts with high or extreme levels of fragility, progress towards the Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs) is stagnating or reversing (4) while official development assistance (ODA)
worldwide is projected to decline further (5).
In this increasingly polarised geopolitical landscape, competing actors instrumentalise
fragility, making the world less safe. This endangers global norms, including human rights and
international humanitarian law. Fragility also threatens international security and stability,
affects access to basic services and livelihoods, disrupts markets, supply chains and economic
security and exacerbates displacement and migration problems. Addressing the causes of
fragility is therefore both an act of solidarity and an urgent and strategic necessity for both the
EU and the world.
The European Union is uniquely placed to leverage its political, economic, security and
diplomatic tools in support of peace, stability and resilience in fragile situations. To effectively
address the evolving geopolitical realities and multidimensional aspects of fragility, the EU
must recalibrate its engagement and optimise its strategies in order to remain a reliable partner
and have a greater impact, by responding to the needs of local populations and doing what is
required to achieve the EU’s strategic objectives.
This Commission Staff Working Document (SWD) accompanies the Joint Communication
’Defending values, driving reform, delivering impact: the EU’s humanitarian action in a
shifting global order’ (6), which describes the key features of the EU’s integrated approach
to fragility and its implementation. The integrated approach focuses on addressing the causes
of fragility – particularly in highly and extremely fragile situations – by strengthening
resilience, stability, peace and sustainable development, while continuing to respond to
immediate humanitarian needs. The Staff Working Document operationalises this approach,
which reflects EU’s strategic objectives, interests, values and principles, as stated in the Joint
Communication. It also outlines a Team Europe approach to fragility, and ways of
strengthening collaboration with a broad range of stakeholders, notably international financial
1 OECD, States of Fragility, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1787/81982370-en, p. 46. 2 United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Global Humanitarian Overview 2026, 2025,
https://www.unocha.org/publications/report/world/global-humanitarian-overview-2026-enesfr. 3 UNHCR, Global Trends, 2025, https://www.unhcr.org/global-trends. 4 OECD, States of Fragility, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1787/81982370-en, p. 54. 5 OECD, Cuts in official development assistance: OECD projections for 2025 and the near term. OECD Policy
Briefs, No. 26, 2025, OECD Publishing, Paris,https://doi.org/10.1787/8c530629-en. 6 JOIN (2026) 25
2
institutions (IFIs), the private sector, local actors and civil society, the UN, non-governmental
organisations and other partners.
The integrated approach draws on existing EU policy commitments, Council conclusions and
European Parliament texts, as well as past implementation experience, lessons learnt and
feedback from extensive dialogues with stakeholders and partners (7).
1. Navigating fragility: unpacking complex vulnerabilities
This section explains the complexities of fragile situations, outlining their key characteristics
and impacts, which are the result of deeply interconnected causes and effects.
1.1. Key characteristics of fragility
The EU’s integrated approach to fragility, as presented and defined in the Joint Communication,
is based on the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD’s)
definition of and framework for analysing fragility (8). The OECD framework focuses on the
capacity of a community, system or state to anticipate, mitigate and manage risks,
vulnerabilities and emerging threats, as well as the impact of crises such as armed conflict or
natural hazards.
Fragility is multidimensional. It is commonly analysed in terms of six dimensions –
economic, human, environmental, political, security and societal – requiring context-specific
and differentiated approaches (9).
Fragility is not confined to country level. It can also emerge at regional level, or in cross-
border and subnational settings. Pockets of fragility are often characterised by acute poverty,
environmental fragility and localised violence (10). However, they are often overlooked as
national economic growth continues to rise (11).
Fragility is not synonymous with armed conflict. However, highly fragile situations are very
often characterised by conflict or risk of tipping over into it. Today, the number of armed
conflicts is at its highest since the end of the Cold War (12). According to the OECD, of the 61
situations characterised by high and extreme fragility, 24 are characterised by armed conflict
and eight are in a state of war (13).
7 These include, among others, the Commission’s Communication The EU’s humanitarian action: new challenges,
same principles, COM (2021) 110 final, the Commission’s Joint Communication The Global Gateway, JOIN
(2021) 30 final, theCouncil conclusions Strengthening resilience in partner countries through EU external action,
(EUCO 11777/25), the Council conclusions Addressing the humanitarian funding gap, (EUCO 9598/23), and the
Council conclusions The EU’s renewed partnership with least developed countries, (EUCO 9336/22), as well as
the European Parliament’s resolution on Humanitarian aid in a time of polycrisis – reaffirming our principles for
a more effective and ambitious response to humanitarian crises, (2025/2085 (INI)), Joint Communication The
Pact for the Mediterranean. One Sea, One Pact, One Future; JOIN(2025)26 final. On implementation experience,
for instance, Commission Staff Working Document Evaluation: Comprehensive evaluation of the European
Commission’s humanitarian aid 2017-2022, SWD (2026) 63 final. 8 OECD, States of Fragility, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264267213-en. 9 OECD, States of Fragility, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1787/81982370-en, pp. 22, 50. 10 OECD, States of Fragility, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1787/81982370-en, p. 13. 11 World Bank Group, Fragility, Conflict, and Violence in Middle-income Countries. Washington, D.C., 2022,
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/099648312122229402. 12 Institute for Economics & Peace, Global Peace Index 2025, Sydney, 2025. 13 OECD, States of Fragility, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1787/81982370-en, p. 12.
3
Fragility is increasingly expanding beyond low-income countries. More middle-income
(34) than low-income countries (26) are experiencing high and extreme fragility, as a result of,
among other things, conflict spillover, subnational violence, weak institutions and debt distress.
‘Estranged’, ‘constrained’ or ‘complex’ situations (14) are particularly challenging, due to deep
levels of fragility and the fact that political relations between the ruling authorities and the EU
and other international partners are extremely difficult and complex.
Key terms
Fragility: The combination of exposure to risk and insufficient coping capacity of the state,
system and/or communities to manage, absorb or mitigate those risks. Fragility can lead to
negative outcomes including violence, the breakdown of institutions, displacement,
humanitarian crises or other emergencies (15).
Resilience: The ability of an individual, a household, a community, a country or a region to
withstand, to adapt, and to quickly recover from stresses and shocks (16).
1.2. Main drivers and consequences of fragility
Fragile situations are often characterised by cycles of instability and vulnerability. Highly and
extremely fragile situations and communities are characterised by particular challenges in
terms of access to basic services, such as education, healthcare, food security, clean water,
sanitation and social protection. Limited access to these vital services worsens poverty and
aggravates humanitarian needs. Fragility also undermines progress towards reaching the
Sustainable Development Goals. For instance, food and nutrition insecurity both fuel and result
from systemic fragility. Nearly 300 million people suffered from acute hunger in 2024, and
lived in areas where violence destroys food systems, mass displacement strips away livelihoods
and collapsing infrastructure traps populations in cycles of hunger and instability. This puts
immense pressure on the people affected and on their governments.
Fragility is associated with democratic backsliding. Over 50% of highly fragile countries
became more autocratic between 2019 and 2023 (17), further concentrating power, fuelling
corruption and undermining state effectiveness. The erosion of trust enables exploitation by
non-state groups and leaves room for organised crime and terrorism, threatening local and
global security. The rise of autocracies in fragile situations further undermines human rights,
gender equality, disability inclusion and the rule of law, thus threatening the EU’s partnerships
with these countries.
Political and economic fragility often go hand in hand, creating vicious cycles that lead to
instability, low investment and high inflation. Weak institutions and rising public debt heighten
the risks for private sector investments, reducing fiscal revenue and driving up borrowing costs
14 Within the context of this Staff Working Document, the Commission considers this to include countries in which
the ruling authorities have unconstitutionally obtained or retained power; states under comprehensive international
sanctions for serious human rights abuses, acts of external aggression or egregious levels of political corruption;
transitional situations, in which national authorities are internationally recognized as an interim measure pending
the establishment of, or return to, constitutional order; and contested electoral situations. 15 OECD, States of Fragility, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264267213-en, p. 21. 16 COM (2012) 586 final. 17 OECD, States of Fragility, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1787/81982370-en, p. 59.
4
on financial markets. Lack of access to basic services, unemployment and inequality result in
adverse coping mechanisms such as irregular migration, child labour, and child and forced
marriage, and increase the risk of sexual and gender-based violence against women and
LGBTIQ+ persons, or radicalisation as well as disability discrimination and exclusion. In areas
such as the Sahel, terrorism and radicalisation are fuelled by entrenched poverty, governance
deficits, corruption and the lack of economic opportunities for young people. Illicit mining and
flows of raw materials such as gold and cobalt also play a role in determining the political
economy of fragility and conflict, while geopolitical competition intensifies fragility.Regional
powers and armed groups exploit conflict-affected areas, polarising competition and
jeopardising access to critical resources and supply chains, while using them for their own
financing. Highly fragile contexts are particularly susceptible to the impacts of cybersecurity
threats, the proliferation of information manipulation, including disinformation, transnational
crime and various types of trafficking.
Environmental degradation and climate change increase fragility. Climate change in
particular multiplies risks, while intensifying conflicts over resources. The majority of
countries most vulnerable to climate change also face high levels of fragility or conflict (18).
Many of these contexts also face catastrophic shocks and slow-onset events leading to
biodiversity loss, epidemics, increased water scarcity, drought, food insecurity, migration and
forced displacement, increasing competition and conflicts over limited natural resources.
Demographic pressures and poorly managed urbanisation further exacerbate instability. Rapid
urbanisation in fragile regions leads to overcrowded slums, poor services and infrastructure,
and hotspots for social unrest and organised crime, while aggravating inequalities and health-
related crises.
Conflict and post-conflict situations exacerbate fragility, mutually reinforcing each other.
Prolonged violence disrupts essential services, displaces populations and creates insecurity,
fractures social cohesion, creating fertile ground for further instability and cycles of violence.
In countries such as Somalia, unresolved conflicts amplify fragility, with weak state capacity
and limited access to resources fuelling grievances and recruitment by armed groups,
particularly of young people. Subnational conflicts in middle-income countries have also led
to twice as many deaths as those in low-income countries over the last decade (19). They have
also led to an increase in the number of persons with disabilities.
Fragility and forced displacement form yet another self-perpetuating cycle. Over half of
the world’s refugees come from extremely fragile countries such as Afghanistan, Haiti, Syria
and Sudan, while 64% are hosted in fragile situations. At the same time, affected host
communities have to contend with strained resources, social tensions and deepened fragility,
hampering their ability to integrate and support displaced populations. Up to 70% of asylum
seekers in the EU come from fragile situations.
The consequences of fragility are therefore multiple, for affected populations, partner countries
and the EU.Crises around the world cause immense suffering, trigger displacement and
undermine political and economic security, including for the EU.
18 World Bank Group, Empowering Fragile States, Washington, D.C., 2024, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/
en/doc/4d9f3d42dedc0bb5eb452fbf887ec0c5-0410012024/related/Empowering-Fragile-States.pdf. 19 World Bank Group, Fragility, Conflict, and Violence in Middle-income Countries. Washington, D.C., 2022,
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/099648312122229402.
5
2. Addressing fragility: current EU priorities, policies and lessons learnt
2.1. The EU’s main objectives in fragile situations
As the Joint Communication reiterates, the EU remains firmly committed to helping people in
need, as well as preserving peace, preventing conflicts and strengthening international security.
It aims to reduce human suffering and to tackle the causes of fragility in order to end poverty,
dependency on aid and climate-related vulnerability and support sustainable development. It
promotes human rights, democracy and the rule of law, gender equality, inclusion, youth
empowerment and an enabling environment for civil society and strengthens human security.
The EU is determined to increase the efficiency, impact, visibility and leverage their external
policies in fragile situations. It recognises that long-term, strategic intervention in fragile
situations is essential for building resilience, anticipating crises, preventing conflicts, and
ensuring sustainable peace, stability and security. Moving beyond donor-beneficiary
relationships, the EU will pursue more equal and long-term partnerships to address shared
priorities.
2.2. Existing EU efforts to intervene, and tools for intervening, in fragile situations
The EU plays a major part in addressing fragility through its long-standing humanitarian and
development support, peace and stabilisation efforts. The EU also has a comprehensive toolbox
for addressing fragility, which includes political dialogue, diplomatic tools, the provision of the
full range of financial and technical support – encompassing grants, financial contributions,
macroeconomic assistance, and trade – and support for ensuring security through the
deployment of Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions.
2.2.1. EU development cooperation and international partnerships
The Commission addresses sustainable development and global challenges through
international partnerships that promote values and interests, supporting peace, prosperity,
sustainable growth, stability and resilience in partner countries and the EU. A diverse set of
financial modalities tailored and combined to address specific needs allows for impactful
interventions. These include grants, budget support (such as state and resilience building
contracts), EU trust funds (20), as well as loans, guarantees and blended finance.
The Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global
Europe (NDICI-GE) Regulation, including the European Fund for Sustainable Development
Plus (EFSD+), promotes public and private investments worldwide. It applies a human rights-
based approach and contributes to Official Development Assistance and to the reduction of
inequalities.
The NDICI-GE country and regional programmes have played a crucial role in addressing
fragility, including in crisis-affected countries. For example, the Peaceful and Resilient
Borderlands programmes prevent instability and mitigate the impacts of conflict in fragile
border areas across Africa, targeting West Africa, including the Sahel, the Lake Chad Basin,
the Horn of Africa, the Great Lakes and Southern Africa.
Country programmes and Team Europe initiatives under NDICI-GE have operationalised the
humanitarian-development-peace (HDP) nexus across different regions, with good practices
20 Such as the European Union Trust Fund for stability and addressing the causes of irregular migration and
displaced persons in Africa (EUTF for Africa).
6
identified in Burkina Faso, the Central African Republic, Ethiopia, Haiti, Mozambique, the
Philippines, Somalia, Afghanistan and Yemen. The resilience component of the NDICI’s rapid
response pillar has been an additional tool for responding in situations affected by high levels
of fragility (for example Pakistan, Haiti, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Chad, South
Sudan and the Central African Republic).
Technical assistance and thematic support programmes are also essential for building the
capacity of civil society organisations and partner countries’ authorities, by helping to create
enabling environments. The Commission further addresses fragility through its various
multilateral engagements. Regarding health, for example, the Commission is a major financial
contributor to Gavi, the Global Fund, the World Health Organisation Universal Health
Coverage Partnership, the Global Polio Eradication Initiative and the Pandemic Fund, all of
which tailor their approaches to fragile situations.
The Global Gateway strategy reflects a change in the Commission’s approach to international
partnerships. Since its launch in 2021, it has mobilised over EUR 300 billion in investments.
In line with the 2030 Agenda, it serves the needs of partner countries with EU strategic
interests, advancing the EU’s geopolitical role. Learning from previous interventions, the
initiative now also addresses the specific needs of fragile situations. Its 360° approach
integrates democratic values and high standards, good governance and transparency, equal
partnerships, green and clean initiatives, security focused investments, and investments
catalysing the private sector to create an enabling environment for EU investments and business
opportunities, particularly in fragile situations where risks are higher and state capacities
weaker. Global Gateway investments in countries affected by fragility need to be context- and
conflict-sensitive and adhere to the ‘do no harm’ principle, by supporting collaboration with
civil society, local communities and the private sector to strengthen governance and promote
peace. They therefore link long‑term, sustainable infrastructure and economic development
with broader EU objectives related to prevention, peacebuilding and resilience in fragile
situations. In two thirds of fragile situations and about half of all situations with extremely high
levels of fragility, Global Gateway investments are used to address the causes of fragility.
2.2.2. EU humanitarian aid
EU humanitarian aid is delivered according to humanitarian principles. Funding is non-
programmable and allocated annually, while projects may last several years. Priorities for every
situation are identified in Humanitarian Implementation Plans (HIPs) and funding is disbursed
through a pool of strictly vetted humanitarian organisations (21).
Each Humanitarian Implementation Plan identifies areas and sectors where the humanitarian-
development-peace nexus has the most potential. It also includes a Disaster Preparedness
budget line. To track progress, the Commission introduced the Resilience Marker to assess the
level of sustainability in interventions. As a result, a great majority of funded interventions
integrate resilience considerations, including systematic analysis of structural risks and
vulnerabilities, the strengthening of local preparedness, as well as stronger linkages between
humanitarian activities and development interventions.
The Commission has been scaling up multiannual financing which, in protracted conflict
situations, has strong potential to facilitate nexus collaboration with people and organisations
21 The overview of DG ECHO partners and the process of certification is explained here: European Commission,
‘Working with DG ECHO as an NGO partner 2021-2027’, European Commission website, accessed 30 April
2026, https://www.dgecho-partners-helpdesk.eu/ngo/humanitarian-partnership-2021-2027/how-to-become-a-
partner.
7
involved in development and peace. Prioritising actions that are conducive to equitable
partnerships with, and capacity building of, local actors also helps strengthen sustainability and
community-based resilience. As outlined in the Joint Communication, the Commission intends
to make greater use of transformative modalities, such as flexible and multiannual funding with
clear exit strategies, cash assistance, anticipatory action, innovative blended finance, digital
tools, country-based pooled funds, area-based coordination and support for local actors, to
strengthen predictability, increase efficiency and help design transitions to more systemic
actions.
Where conditions call for transition to long-term development interventions and to facilitate
exit strategies, the Commission supports more sustainable interventions. This can include legal
assistance regarding housing, land and property rights, support for primary health structures
and education, food and livelihood systems, and water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH)
infrastructure. Catalytic funding that mobilises funding from development banks and the
private sector has been tested, particularly for technical assistance to international finance and
private investment initiatives (22). Links between the humanitarian response and social
protection systems have also been successfully developed in several cases, to enable social
protection systems to better respond to shocks and support the populations affected (23).
3.2.3.EU conflict prevention and peacebuilding
The EU’s role in addressing the causes of conflict is at the heart of a preventive approach
to fragility and efforts to support sustainable peace. The EU’s approach to conflict prevention
and peacebuilding covers a broad spectrum of activities at all stages of a conflict, from
prevention to crisis management in order to contribute to sustainable peace. This includes
tackling root causes, applying conflict sensitivity, focusing on prevention and early warning
systems, ensuring inclusion of traditionally marginalised communities, enhancing the
implementation of the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) and the Youth, Peace and Security
agendas and local ownership with institutional backing, when appropriate.
Conflict prevention and early warning tools enable the EU to identify risks associated with
proposed actions, as well as appropriate mitigation measures. EU carries out conflict analysis
systematically, and since 2020, Conflict Analysis screenings have been conducted in over 60
countries to meet the NDICI requirement for fragile and conflict-affected states and are part of
a broad EU early warning system and conflict analysis toolkit (24), providing for a conflict
sensitive lens to the implementation of foreign policy tools.
The non-programmable NDICI-Global Europe Rapid Response Pillar on Crisis Response and
Conflict Prevention has been instrumental in providing flexibility for the Commission’s rapid
response, with targeted peace and stability actions at local and regional levels. As an example,
crisis response for Syria in 2025 allowed the EU to adapt to the new challenges and support
the country in an evolving and volatile situation in the areas of mine action to facilitate the safe
return of internally displaced people and refugees and the protection of civilians. The EU also
22 European Commission, Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations
(ECHO), DG ECHO pilot initiative on blended finance for humanitarian aid – Lessons learned, Publications
Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2024, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2795/36240. 23 European Commission, Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations
(ECHO), Shock-responsive social safety nets. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2025,
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2795/358856. 24 SWD (2023) 295 final.
8
engaged on dialogue to promote an inclusive political transition and strengthen independent
media and counter misinformation.
Actions under the NDICI’s thematic peace, stability and conflict prevention programme have
empowered individuals and communities to build bridges across divides and strengthen the
capacity of civil society organisations. They also made it possible for the Commission to work
with regional and global actors on matters as diverse as cyber threats, radicalisation, terrorism
and transnational organised crime.
Peacebuilding encompasses a broad spectrum of interconnected activities, ranging from
high-level political engagement to grassroots initiatives. This includes support for political
dialogue, diplomacy, judicial and security sector reforms, as well as peace mediation efforts.
In Colombia, for example, the EU played a key role in implementing the 2016 peace agreement
via the EU Trust Fund for Colombia, which aimed to reintegrate ex-combatants, revive rural
economies, and strengthen governance. Additionally, the EU provides complementary support
to transitional justice mechanisms to ensure justice remains an integral component of the
broader peace process. In addition, the European Peace Facility (EPF) implements EU actions
with security, military and defence implications under the Common Foreign and Security
Policy (CFSP) including assistance and equipment according to the needs of EU partners.
2.3. Main lessons learnt from recent EU engagements in fragile situations
Between 2021 and 2024, the EU’s Official Development Assistance for situations with high or
extreme levels of fragility remained broadly stable. However, its relative share in terms of
overall EU ODA declined over the same period, from 35% to 26%, mainly due to increased
support for Ukraine.
Between 2021 and 2024, the Commission disbursed over EUR 11 billion of ODA to
countries the OECD regarded as highly and extremely fragile, split roughly equally
between humanitarian and development funding. Regarding the latter, in addition to the EUR
5.3 billion that come from bilateral envelopes covering fragile countries, a significant
proportion of funding for regional and global programmes also covers fragile situations.
The EU also strengthened the coherence of its engagement in line with the 2017 Council
Conclusions on operationalising the humanitarian-development-peace nexus, and identified six
pilot countries (Chad, Iraq, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan and Uganda) to implement its approach.
This was followed, later on, by its intervening in other fragile situations, with nexus
collaboration frameworks established in Ethiopia, Afghanistan and Pakistan (25).
These efforts were closely monitored, with studies and evaluations done to understand their
impact (26). Key lessons learnt include the following:
25 As a member of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC), the EU is also committed to
implementing the 2019 DAC Recommendation on the HDP nexus, which further consolidates its policy
framework by introducing common principles and standards for joined‑up analysis, planning and financing,
emphasising joined-up prioritisation, prevention and risk‑informed programming, and closer collaboration with
national and local actors in support of humanitarian, development and peace efforts. 26 For instance, ECDPM / Particip, HDP Nexus: Challenges and Opportunities for its Implementation, 2022,
https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-05/eu-hdp-nexus-study-final-report-nov-
2022_en.pdf ;Joint Research Centre, From fragility to resilience through the lens of climate and mobility,
Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2026, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/4931905.
9
- Taking the multiple dimensions of fragility as the strategic entry point for adopting
context-specific responses has a greater impact, where humanitarian, political and
programmatic approaches are aligned. The EU’s principled humanitarian engagement
is considered its key added value compared to other actors.
- The implementation of the humanitarian-development-peace nexus still lacks
consistency across all fragile situations. Systematic and joint analysis of risks, needs,
vulnerabilities and structural causes of crisis and conflict, alongside complementary
financing, needs to be strengthened. This includes ensuring that joint analyses inform
intervention design and that clear frameworks for collaboration are put in place,
including stronger integration of the peace component. The implementation of such
frameworks in several pilot countries has produced tangible results, but upscaling
efforts has often proven difficult. There is a pressing need for the humanitarian-
development-peace nexus approach to reflect the expanding role of private sector
development.
- Flexible approaches across various instruments can provide options for a swifter
response to fast-evolving situations, ensuring a transition from humanitarian aid to
development and peace actions. Attention must also be paid to strategic, impactful
and effective approaches that prioritise long-term resilience, strengthen coordination,
and ensure sustainable solutions to address the causes of fragility.
- Given the extent of EU engagement in fragile situations, the EU and EU Member States
need to further strengthen coherence in Team Europe approaches. Beyond privileging
a Team Europe approach as a preferred delivery method, the EU also needs to
continue to seek alliances with other key actors, such as the UN and strengthen its
alliances with international financial institutions.
3. Strengthening EU engagement in fragile situations – a strategic framework
3.1.Foundations of EU engagement: strategic principles and priorities
As the Joint Communication and several other policy commitments (27) state, the EU’s
intervention in fragile situations is rooted in complementary values and interests. The
promotion of human rights, equality, the rule of law and the protection of the international
rules-based order, and the EU’s strategic objectives are key principles guiding the EU’s
engagement in external action.
In today’s volatile geopolitical context, the EU is also strengthening strategic partnerships
that advance shared interests. These include supporting global peace and stability, economic
security and strategic autonomy, addressing irregular migration and forced displacement,
promoting human development, respecting human rights, making citizens more secure, and
promoting global public goods, climate resilience and gender equality.
This Staff Working Document focuses on highly and extremely fragile situations, as classified
by the OECD (28). In line with the Joint Communication, the Staff Working Document further
develops the key principles of and priorities for the EU’s engagement in these most fragile
situations.
27See footnote 7, page 3. 28 OECD, States of Fragility, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1787/81982370-en.
10
3.1.1. Staying engaged, while ensuring context-specific and conflict-sensitive responses
(do no harm)
As a global actor, the EUcontinues to engage with all highly and extremely fragile situations
by drawing on the wide array of tools it has at its disposal, including humanitarian aid,
international partnerships, diplomacy, conflict prevention, peacebuilding, and stabilisation
tools, as well as civilian and military CSDP missions. The EU’s engagement is conflict-
sensitive and adheres to the ‘do no harm’ principle.
The EU’s engagement in fragile situations aims to ensure a flexible and adaptive approach
to address the causes of fragility, grounded in quality data, evidence-based context analysis and
on-the-ground expertise, supported by modern technology and inclusive consultations. Using
a differentiated and context-specific approach, the EU tailors its engagement to the needs of
affected partner countries and their populations, while pursuing its own strategic interests.
Principled and needs-based humanitarian assistance is delivered to people affected by conflicts
and natural hazards regardless of a country’s political situation.
Remaining engaged in ‘complex’, ‘estranged’ and politically ‘constrained’ situations, in
line with EU interests, is a necessity, notably where disengagement leads to higher costs, the
loss of development gains, and increased instability. Calibrated efforts continue to be made to
better understand local dynamics, address grievances, build trust, and support diplomatic and
political dialogues. Collaboration with local actors, including civil society organisations, young
people, community leaders or women’s rights and women-led organisations, is crucial for
sustainable and conflict-sensitive interventions, especially where relations with governments
are not conducive.
Example: Implementing the humanitarian-development-peace nexus in politically
constrained situations
Since the Taliban took over in 2021, all EU actions in Afghanistan have been guided by the
Foreign Affairs Council conclusions of 2021 and 2023. These underline the EU’s
commitment to stand by the Afghan people, set out benchmarks for technical engagement,
and reaffirm the continued delivery of assistance in a principled way, with the full, equal and
meaningful participation of women throughout the entire aid delivery process. As the Taliban
regime remains unrecognised, all assistance is delivered through international and non-
governmental organisations, without support for or legitimisation of the authorities.
Since 2021, the Commission has provided approximately EUR 1.9 billion in support to the
people of Afghanistan, in the form of humanitarian assistance covering health, nutrition,
water and sanitation, food security, cash for work and protection, in complementarity with
basic needs and livelihoods assistance. The latter focuses on strengthening medium- to
longer-term perspectives and improving access to income-generation opportunities,
especially for women. This included enhancing access to markets and finance, strengthening
value chains and ultimately contributing to socio-economic stability, social cohesion and
climate resilience. Overall, assistance is delivered in a principled way, with a clear focus on
the most vulnerable people, including women and girls, persons with disabilities, minorities,
host communities, internally displaced people and the millions of Afghans recently forced to
return from Iran and Pakistan.
To ensure strong coordination, Commission services and the EEAS have agreed on a nexus
collaboration framework. The EU’s presence in the country has enabled it to play a leading
11
coordination role among key stakeholders, including EU Member States, international
donors, the UN and international financial institutions. It has also made it possible to
maintain the space necessary to continue advocating for human rights, including women’s
and girls’ rights, in technical engagement with the de facto authorities.
3.1.2. Pursuing a multidimensional approach to resilience and sustainability
As outlined in the Joint Communication, addressing the causes of fragility requires a
multidimensional approach, taking into account societal, economic, political, security and
environmental factors. This section elaborates on how all these factors feature in the overall
EU response.
In fragile situations, the EU does not just respond, it also aims to transform the situation. It
strengthens the resilience of people, communities, partner governments and institutions by
(re)building capacities to anticipate, prevent, prepare for and mitigate crises, disasters and
conflicts. Wherever feasible, it also prioritises approaches with transformative potential to
support long-term sustainable development and peace to eradicate the causes of fragility.
Central to this approach is maximising, wherever possible, the ownership and political will
of partner governments. Local voices, especially women, young people, minorities, and
marginalised groups, must be able to shape decisions that affect their lives.
Adopting a human rights-based approach, EU interventions prioritise human development,
investing in human capital and building community resilience as a key entry point for further
engagement. This includes ensuring access to inclusive and quality basic services such as
education, health, food security, water and sanitation, nutrition and social protection, reaching
those who need them most: women, children, young people and forcibly displaced people.
Recent, nascent political initiatives like the Global Health Resilience Initiative (29) aim to
address the need to strengthen health systems, improve prevention, preparedness and response
to health threats, diversify global supply chains of health products, support a more transparent
and equitable global health architecture, and build societal resilience, including by fighting
mis- and dis-information at the global, regional and country level. Against a backdrop of
shifting geopolitical developments, the interlinked priorities underpinned by the Global Health
Resilience Initiative show the way forward for a multidimensional approach to health
resilience.
Without decent jobs and fair incomes, fragility deepens, making investment in economic
development crucial for lifting people out of poverty. This includes supporting conditions for
decent and stable livelihoods, income opportunities, inclusive economic growth, and reducing
public debt and youth unemployment. In this context, Global Gateway investments link
infrastructure, regulatory frameworks, skills and economic opportunities to enable countries to
go from being aid-dependent to being self-sustaining economies. In many fragile situations,
however, the main investment constraint is upstream, notably in the limited availability of
bankable project pipelines and capable local partners, as well as enabling the development of
policy and regulatory frameworks. Improving project preparation, technical assistance and
institutional capacity is therefore critical for sustainable investment.
Climate change is a global challenge, with fragile countries on the frontlines. Building climate
resilience and integrating disaster preparedness, anticipatory action and disaster risk
management are critical for addressing the compounding impacts of climate change,
29 COM(2026) 197 final
12
environmental degradation and natural disasters in fragile situations. Commission services
continue to invest in anticipatory action, linking early warning and rapid response
mechanisms, to reduce the impacts of disasters while investing in climate adaptation,
ecosystem restoration, provision of basic water infrustructure and quality water (30), and
inclusive access to climate finance. They also continue to promote actions which apply ‘climate
resilience by design’, integrating climate considerations from the outset of their external
engagements.
Example: Climate resilience for displacement-affected communities in Sub-Saharan
Africa (Team Europe Initiative RE2CLID)
In Sub-Saharan Africa, the Commission is addressing the compounded challenges of climate
change, environmental degradation and forced displacement through the RE2CLID
programme. It adopts a humanitarian-development-peace nexus approach to building
resilience among displacement-affected communities, living in areas at risk of natural
hazards or other adverse effects of climate change and environmental degradation. By
focusing on two high-risk regions – the Lake Tanganyika basin (DRC, Burundi and
Tanzania) and the Southern Africa/South-West Indian Ocean cyclone basin (Malawi,
Madagascar, Mozambique, Mauritius, the Seychelles and Comoros) – the programme aims
to prevent, minimise and resolve climate-induced displacement while supporting disaster
forecasts and management systems, sustainable natural resource management and resilience
and self-reliance of affected communities. By being in line with African Union strategies,
the EU Green Deal, and the Global Compact on Refugees, RE2CLID strengthens regional
cooperation. It also contributes to the Team Europe Initiative on Climate Change Adaptation
and Resilience in Africa.
The programme strengthens early warning systems, disaster risk management and natural
resource governance by ensuring inclusive, gender-responsive and conflict-sensitive
solutions. It supports climate-resilient livelihoods, such as agroecology, sustainable water
management and ecosystem restoration, while improving access to basic services, social
protection and sustainable solutions for displaced populations.
Fragility thrives where governance fails. The EU has a long track record of strengthening
human rights, democracy and the rule of law, building on the EU Action Plan for Human
Rights and Democracy (2020-2027) and targeted actions in support of inclusive, transparent,
independent and accountable public institutions. In this regard, capacities must be built at all
levels, with civil society, women, young people, and businesses playing a critical role as leaders
and agents of change. The Commission’s interventions balance capacity-building support for
partner governments with support and resilience-building measures for local structures and
communities.
Peace is not just the absence of war. To promote mutual trust, stability and peace in highly
fragile situations and to prevent further conflict spillovers, the Commission’s interventions in
other areas need to better link up with conflict prevention, mediation, stabilisation,
peacebuilding and security actions. Extreme fragility is often linked to a weakened or non-
existent social contract and distrust between groups, and frequently also between the population
30 Communication on European Water Resilience Strategy; COM(2025) 280 final
13
and the state. This requires dialogue, notably through local structures, and peacebuilding in all
types of interventions, for instance through the EU’s inclusive approach to peace mediation.
Applying a ‘do no harm’ approach by mainstreaming conflict-sensitive disaster risk
management and climate-proofing investments also mitigates the risks of natural resources-
based conflicts and displacement. This also includes promoting international humanitarian law,
including through humanitarian diplomacy (31).
Refugees, forcibly or internally displaced people and returnees are among the most
vulnerable groups. To build pathways out of poverty, the Commission advances the economic
and financial inclusion of refugees and displaced people, supports refugee entrepreneurship,
and promotes private investments in displacement-affected situations (32). To this end, the
Commission strengthens cooperation with the private sector and works closely with
development finance institutions to help with the de-risking and tailoring private investments.
Through humanitarian aid, it also supports displaced populations in accessing shelter,
protection, food, healthcare and education, including through multi-purpose cash transfers, and
strengthens cooperation with NGOs and UN agencies for local expertise and advocacy. The
Commission also envisages supporting digital solutions, for instance for mobile remittances
and e-documentation, to bridge gaps for forcibly displaced people, migrants and returnees.
These can help maximising the positive impact of remittances, which contribute to peace and
stability by reducing the appeal of violence, promoting investment and transmitting positive
social norms. Lastly, the EU focuses on strategic partnerships with host governments to drive
policy reforms on workers’ rights, documentation and business registration, to create an
enabling environment for investments and to remove barriers to financial inclusion.
Example: A comprehensive response to the Syrian refugee crisis in Jordan
In response to the Syrian refugee crisis, Commission services have taken coordinated action,
leveraging the respective instruments to obtain significant results. In Jordan, this means the
transition from emergency aid to long-term development support through the
implementation of the Joint Humanitarian and Development Framework (JHDF). This nexus
approach makes it possible to increasingly direct EU funding towards building the resilience
of the population and directly supporting Jordan’s government. Looking ahead to the 2026-
2027 period, the Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid
Operations (DG ECHO) has finalised the transition of its emergency education support to
the Directorate-General for the Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf (DG MENA), to
enable the provision of comprehensive support in this sector. DG MENA will therefore
continue its educational initiatives, focusing on system strengthening, including budgetary
support, as part of the integration process. In line with the nexus approach, cash assistance
is fully incorporated into DG MENA’s social protection programmes, making them more
sustainable. Civil documentation, making for better protection and enabling voluntary
returns, and healthcare, including sexual and reproductive healthcare services in camps and
urban settings, are areas where DG ECHO and DG MENA work in concert with each other,
together with the Service for Foreign Policy Instruments. Through these targeted,
31 Joint Staff Working Document: A strategic approach to EU Humanitarian Diplomacy, SWD (2026) (312 32 Successful examples of such types of engagement have been documented by the Joint Research Centre, From
fragility to resilience through the lens of climate and mobility, Publications Office of the European Union,
Luxembourg, 2026, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/4931905.
14
collaborative interventions, the EU continues to bring about lasting change for refugees and
vulnerable populations.
3.1.3. Strengthening the Team Europe approach and strategic partnerships as part of a
humanitarian-development-peace (HDP) nexus approach
In situations with high and extreme fragility, it is essential to learn from past interventions
in order to strengthen the humanitarian-development-peace nexus. By better articulating
complementary approaches and interventions, the EU, in line with a Team Europe approach,
can effectively anticipate, prepare for and respond to crises by addressing both immediate
humanitarian needs and the causes of fragility. Given the increasingly protracted nature of
crises, this requires a calibrated approach, which can include scaling up structural development
interventions, as well as peacebuilding and conflict prevention to reduce dependency on
humanitarian aid.
Example: Implementing collaborative frameworks in Ethiopia
In Ethiopia, the EU, together with EU Member States, have developed a Team Europe
humanitarian-development-peace nexus collaboration framework to support integrated
responses to humanitarian, development and peace challenges that lead to fragility and
sustain cycles of recurrent needs.
With a test case in the Somali region, the collaboration framework outlines shared tools and
objectives, including geographical humanitarian-development-peace nexus profiles and
common monitoring systems that ensure mutual accountability. This humanitarian-
development-peace nexus-informed territorial coordination model acts as a mechanism to
translate resilience priorities into structured economic opportunities. Addressing persistent
challenges regarding, for instance, the promotion of stability and the prevention of conflict,
and unlocking the region’s economic potential in terms of livestock, water resources and
untapped value chains, the model provides the investment readiness that Global Gateway
requires. This is done through the delineation of clear institutional roles to reduce
fragmentation, strengthen coordination and territorial planning, and put in place predictable
service systems that enable sequenced, long-term investments. Ultimately, the framework
provides what is needed to shift from mere coordination towards structured, humanitarian-
development-peace area-based delivery.
Addressing fragility therefore demands looking beyond public finance-based grants and into
new, flexible financing models. The Commission is actively stepping up the use of innovative
and flexible financing mechanisms, in a Team Europe approach, with a view to crowding in
more private funding, while empowering the local private sector. By leveraging public funds
to catalyse private capital – while ensuring clear, complementary roles – the Commission can
embed investments and private-sector engagement in a more stable, reform-driven framework.
Like other interventions, these need to be conflict-sensitive, support enhanced due diligence
practices of the private sector and harness the knowledge and expertise of national and local
stakeholders, including civil society organisations, in order to have an impact. Focus is also put
15
on modelsand approaches that make financial inclusion possible and empower the most
vulnerable populations, such as people affected by humanitarian crises, internally displaced
people or refugees, and priority groups such as young people and women, including as peace
facilitators and mediators.
In addition to improving coordination with EU Member States, in a Team Europe approach,
the EU continues to support partnerships with international financial institutions (IFIs),
including the European Investment Bank (EIB), civil society, the private sector, philanthropic
organisations, and key organisations active in fragile situations such as the UN, the Red Cross
and Red Crescent Movement, and international non-governmental organisations. The EU also
continues to deepen cooperation with regional organisations such as the African Union (AU),
the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) or the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). In line with the Communication on a strategic partnership
with the Gulf (33), the EU is actively exploring avenues of triangular cooperation with the Gulf
countries, in particular in fragile situations such as the Middle East or Afghanistan. A structured
cooperation with Gulf countries will also be pursued under the Strategic Partnerhip Agreements
(SPA) to be negotiated.
3.2. Operationalising future engagement: smart and collaborative approaches
33 JOIN(2022) 13 final
Example: Innovative risk-sharing instruments
NASIRA (Plus) shows how innovative risk-sharing instruments can support private sector
development and financial inclusion in fragile situations. Through portfolio guarantees
provided to local financial institutions by means of the Dutch Entrepreneurial Development
Bank under the European Fund for Sustainable Development Plus (EFSD+), it helps de-risk
lending in environments where financial markets are often shallow and perceived risks high.
Under the EFSD+, NASIRA has successfully strengthened the lending capacity of local
financial intermediaries to micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) through a EUR
100 million guarantee, helping promote sustainable investments in partner countries and
reaching underserved entrepreneurs in challenging market environments, before closing its
investment period in 2024. Building on this success, NASIRA (Plus) (EUR 265 million) was
launched under the EFSD+ with a geographical focus on Asia and Pacific, Latin America
and the Caribbean, Sub-Saharan Africa, Eastern European Neighbourhood countries,
Southern European Neighbourhood countries and Türkiye. Similarly, NASIRA (Plus) aims
to provide portfolio guarantees to local private-sector financial institutions, leveraging
private capital to expand access to finance for MSMEs with higher risk profiles, particularly
those run by women, young people, migrants, marginalised groups, and rural businesses,
including those operating in the least developed countries and in fragile situations. By de-
risking lending to these vulnerable groups, NASIRA (Plus) supports private sector
development, financial inclusion and economic resilience in fragile markets, paving the way
for further innovative instruments.
16
The EU’s success in highly fragile situations depends on strong and clear operational processes,
adequate human and financial resources, and agile coordination. This requires sustained
investments in staff skills and up-to-date expertise for it to have a lasting impact. Given the
dynamic and volatile nature of such environments, regular monitoring focused on results,
continuous learning and adaptive review processes is crucial for ensuring timely, more
efficient, more systematic and proportionate responses. In line with the Joint Communication,
this section provides more detailed information on tools and methods that the Commission
services and the EEAS will adopt to strengthen their impact in extremely fragile situations.
3.2.1. From analysis to action: joint context assessment and planning
For situations characterised by high or extreme fragility, the EU can draw on a number of
existing tools and working methods. Joint analyses of political and socio-economic
dynamics highlight specific conflict risks and causes of conflict, including those driven by
climate change. These analyses can be based on existing situation analyses and data, such as
the Human Rights and Democracy Country analyses, Conflict Analysis Screening, Structural
Country Assessments or other types of EU conflict analysis, complemented by dynamic
foresight or scenario tools where necessary34. Needs assessments, resilience assessments,
political economy analysis and security analyses, stabilisation and assessment plans or
programme-specific conflict sensitivity assessments can also be used (35).Where appropriate,
subnational or cross-border fragile situations can be taken into consideration, accounting
for localised pockets of fragility within more stable national situations.
Joint analyses give a shared understanding of the situation to EU actors across the board,
highlighting humanitarian needs, development opportunities and avenues for conflict
prevention and peacebuilding. They also help to flag main risks and sensitivities relevant to the
achievement of the EU’s regional objectives.
Adaptable and agile fragility frameworks will be developed for all extremely fragile
situations, based on prior experiences with and replacing currently tested nexus collaboration
frameworks to ensure increased agility. Building on relevant analytical work, these frameworks
will establish a common understanding among the Commission services and EEAS of priorities
and actions required across the humanitarian-development-peace nexus spectrum for more
impactful engagement on the ground. They will provide useful input for the Commission’s
interventions. They will also inform the EU’s political, economic and security dialogues with
the countries concerned. To ensure they remain relevant to the situations at hand, they will be
reviewed periodically or if the situation changes significantly. This will also feed into conflict
prevention and peacebuilding efforts, as well as the EU’s political dialogue with the countries
concerned, to better leverage its engagement with its partners.
These fragility frameworks will consist of:
- the consolidation of existing EU analyses and needs assessments and country and
regional strategies to help establish a common understanding among EU Delegations,
DG ECHO field offices and all relevant Commission services and the EEAS. This will
increase coherence and complementarity, while ensuring better coordination;
34 For more information on these, see SWD (2023) 295 final. 35 A good example is the Gaza Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment, a joint assessment effort by the EU, UN,
and World Bank. It evaluates damages, economic losses, and recovery needs across sectors, guiding both early
recovery and long-term reconstruction in Gaza.
17
- periodic review (or ad-hoc in case of significant changes) to ensure situational
relevance.
The EU and EU Member States will seek improved integration of humanitarian-
development-peace actions through sequenced, complementary or joint funding to maximise
impact. Crisis modifiers will continue to be embedded in humanitarian responses. Using all
the available flexibility in procedures will facilitate immediate, adaptive responses to crises.
Adequate decision procedures can also be put in place to quickly react to situations of
transitions from conflict, paving the way for humanitarian exit strategies.
The EU will continue to consistently include EU Member States in analytical work, share
results with them and encourage them to join the EU in scaling up implementation to strengthen
policy coherence, financial impact and efficiency. The EU will also leverage its deep contextual
expertise to better inform, help reduce and where possible break down barriers preventing the
European private sector or investment partners from engaging in these settings in a conflict-
sensitive way.
3.2.2. Coherence and coordination: strengthening internal and external partnerships
Existing or, where needed, dedicated coordination structures and platforms for dialogue will
guide the process at country level (or where relevant at subnational level), linking all EU actors
present in each situation. EU Delegations are at the centre of these coordination efforts and will
strengthen cooperation and synergies with DG ECHO field offices, including in politically
estranged situations. The Commission services and EEAS will identify focal points for
fragility, based on existing resources, in relevant EU Delegations, and in ECHO field offices.
At country level, Heads of Delegation and senior delegation staff could regularly organise
structured exchanges with EU Member States to share context analyses, coordinate ongoing
activities in a Team Europe approach and discuss recommendations regarding priority
measures. Heads of CSDP missions could also contribute if appropriate. Without prejudice to
humanitarian principles, DG ECHO field offices will be associated with and contribute to these
discussions. In conflict settings with fewer staff present on the ground, alternative models of
coordination, with a larger role for regional units or for headquarters can be considered on a
case-by-case basis.
Coordination with EU Member States will continue to be complemented by regular exchanges
with key stakeholders, such as implementing partners, central and local authorities, the United
Nations, and civil society. In line with EU priorities, a special focus will be on young people
and women and people with disabilities. Existing networks and consultation mechanisms, such
as civil society roadmaps, youth sounding boards and Youth Policy Dialogues, ensure inclusive,
actionable dialogue. Closer cooperation among different implementing partners to ensure
complementarity and synergies in their response will continue to be encouraged.
The EU will also develop and reinforce partnerships with third countries and regional
organisations to address fragile contexts and ensure financial support notably with the aim to
ensure stability, security and sustainable development in the EU’s neighbourhood and other
strategic regions.
Building on the 2021 Joint Communication Strengthening the EU’s contribution to rules-based
multilateralism (36), the EU will continue to strengthen coordination, in a Team Europe
approach, within the governing bodies of multilateral institutions, such as international
development banks, international financial institutions, and other international organisations
36 JOIN (2021) 3 final.
18
and global funds to increase the coherence of approaches in highly and extremely fragile
situations.
3.2.3. Adaptive management: monitoring progress, learning and accountability
Monitoring, evaluation, accountability and learning will ensure a relevant and effective
response, making it possible to adjust approaches based on evidence, including on the basis of
potential exit strategies. To ensure that EU engagement remains responsive and effective in
highly volatile situations, joint monitoring, and, where possible, in close cooperation with EU
Member States, needs to be done more systematically, so that adaptations take place in good
time.
A strong focus on results and adaptive learning will enable the EU to refine its mix of
instruments, assess progress in addressing the causes of fragility, and uphold the ‘do no harm’
principle. Building on existing coordination efforts, progress will be tracked through regular
interservice updates on implementation and achievements with all relevant services at the
appropriate level. Strategic national, regional and HQ discussions with relevant stakeholders,
such as EU Member States, UN agencies, partner governments, civil society and business
sector representatives, on shared priorities in extremely fragile situations, will help to further
improve coherence and complementarity and make strategic adjustments possible.
3.2.4. Ensuring long-term impact: sustainability and institutional capacity
To strengthen the EU’s long-term impact in fragile situations, targeted investments in strong
institutional capacities and knowledge management are essential. This includes empowering
and supporting staff in EU delegations, DG ECHO field offices and EU headquarters, by
informing them of the specificities of fragile situations, such as conflict sensitivity,
humanitarian-development-peace nexus approaches, and situation-specific analysis,
intervention design and monitoring.
The EU continues to leverage its existing network of EU Delegations and DG ECHO field
offices, alongside closer collaboration with EU Member States and implementing partners, to
improve fragility-related interventions. EU Delegations, DG ECHO field offices and, where
necessary, partners, will be able to benefit from tailored, on-demand support on fragility-
related topics, including on joint analysis and designing conflict-sensitive interventions. This
support will be provided through peer learning, staff training, on-demand expert assistance,
and better knowledge sharing, beginning with EU Member States, especially when modalities
change.
Strategic communication and narrative development will also be prioritised to counter
information manipulation, including disinformation and where relevant, hybrid threats while
strengthening the value of EU partnerships and promoting the EU’s core principles, with EU
Delegations playing a key role in promoting innovative approaches to tackle this challenge.
The Commission will propose an independent evaluation of results under this approach after
three years.