Ühisteatis - SWD(2026) 312, SWD(2026) 313, SWD(2026) 314, JOIN(2026) 25

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.