In several protracted conflict situations, the UN and the members of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the OECD have adopted what is known as a ‘triple-nexus’ approach. In a formal definition of ‘the triple nexus’ and ‘the nexus’ approach, the DAC states:
The triple-nexus approach implicitly recognizes the requirement for humanitarian operations to be based not only on an assessment of emergency humanitarian needs, but also on the requirement to seize opportunities to promote peace, and to support the resilience of national and local institutional capacities.
However, some humanitarian organizations insist on the separation of the humanitarian objective of preserving lives and dignity above all other priorities, and these actors worry that close association with peacebuilding and developmental efforts may compromise their impartiality and neutrality.
Furthermore, current financing models for applying the triple-nexus approach in failed or fragile states mean that peacebuilding and development programmes are likely to remain seriously underfunded, with the vast bulk of resources going to support urgent humanitarian programmes.
Conflict analysis, the principles and the triple nexus
An analysis of the overall political context, as proposed above, is of particular importance when considering the adoption of a triple-nexus approach in situations where an armed conflict is still ongoing.
Supporters of the nexus approach in protracted armed conflict, point to the value of peacebuilding and development expertise in helping humanitarian organizations to shape their programmes in ways that not only meet urgent needs, but also contribute to resolving local conflicts and promoting the resilience of local communities, services and structures. Such initiatives can also inform the operationalization of the humanitarian principles in ways that are conflict sensitive and respectful of commitments to minimize the negative consequences of humanitarian action.
Opponents of such an approach argue that the overriding consideration in humanitarian emergencies is to save lives and meet the immediate needs for food, shelter and medical care of the civilian population, and that other considerations must be secondary. However, all humanitarian aid demonstrably influences the dynamics of conflict, and it is critical to take this impact into account in all activity.
As a result, there is a risk that humanitarian actors and their operations may become a part of the conflict itself. The extent to which this may be problematic in any given context is precisely the kind of question that a conflict analysis would address. In some contexts, the triple-nexus approach is playing a key role in improving collaboration between peacebuilding, humanitarian and development actors, and should be encouraged wherever the conflict analysis identifies potential benefits. This will require a systematic and regular review and updating of conflict analyses, and the readiness of donors both to finance this work and to support the peacebuilding initiatives that may emerge from these processes.
