response innovations for somalia emergencies (rise ......innovation as a vehicle for dramatically...

1

Response Innovations for Somalia Emergencies

(RISE) Baseline Study Report

March 2018

2

This RISE Baseline Report was made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the responsibility of the Response Innovation for Somalia Emergencies (RISE) program and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.

3

Summary

Despite the ever-increasing disasters and humanitarian crises, existing humanitarian tools and services have not resulted in new, better, more efficient, faster and more appropriate solutions to reduce the impact of disasters. As a result, many humanitarian actors and donors are looking to innovation as a vehicle for dramatically improving the efficiency and effectiveness of humanitarian response. In order for the humanitarian community to harness the prospects of innovation, there is need to better understand which factors can enable relevant humanitarian innovation while ensuring inclusiveness and localization.

The Response Innovation for Somalia Emergencies (RISE) program, funded by USAID’s Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA) is led by the George Washington University’s Institute for Disaster & Fragility Resilience (GW/IDFR) and brings together Benadir University and SomReP to test and implement the Response Innovation Lab (RIL) to improve stakeholders’ understanding of humanitarian innovation in Somalia. The USAID/OFDA funded RISE program will test and implement the Response Innovation Lab in Somalia to improve stakeholders’ understanding of humanitarian innovation in the following knowledge blocks:

● Common understanding and definition of humanitarian innovations in Somali context. ● Increased knowledge of factors and conditions that enable affected Somali community

voices to drive the humanitarian innovation design process. ● Increased knowledge of factors and conditions that lead to successful and failed

humanitarian innovations in Somali context. ● Increased knowledge of factors and conditions to scale innovations using the

MatchMaker in Somalia.

The RISE baseline study addresses three objectives: a) to contribute to improved understanding of humanitarian innovation by Humanitarian actors in Somalia (Sector/strategic learning), b) to contribute to relevant and effective design and delivery of RISE interventions (formative research), and c) to determine benchmark data points for key indicators at the start of program implementation, which will be used to establish the magnitude of change at the end of program implementation.

Data were collected from two stakeholders workshops-one in Nairobi and the other in Mogadishu- using a survey that was completed by 55 humanitarian and innovation actors working on Somalia programs.

Key findings:

1. Common understanding and definition of humanitarian innovations in Somali context.

Definition of Humanitarian innovation: 90% of the respondents felt that noted that innovation is important to their humanitarian work and the RISE stakeholder understanding of humanitarian innovation is in line with the globally used definition (Obrecht and Warner, 2016): an iterative process that identifies, adjusts and diffuses ideas for improving humanitarian action. RISE Stakeholders agree on the attributes of iterative reflection and improvement in humanitarian action. However, RISE stakeholders suggest more nuances that emphasize that humanitarian

4

innovation has to bring about improvements and positive impacts in the well-being of disaster affected communities, solving problems, addressing needs, doing more with less, and empowering communities.

Other notions reflected in stakeholder definitions include: Dealing with complexity, creating new opportunities, Empowering communities, Application of evidence in design, Iterativeness, Radical shifts, Replicability, Solutions that are simple/easy to apply, and Involving the application of technology.

2. Increased knowledge of factors and conditions that enable affected Somali community voices to drive the humanitarian innovation process.

Perceived extent of beneficiary inclusion: Less than 30% of RISE stakeholders believe that to a great extent that innovations are driven by priorities of affected communities in Somalia. Aid organizations are however noting the need for direct involvement by beneficiaries in decision-making about interventions. One example is the guidelines for cash interventions in Somalia published in partnership with EU and USAID. It is noted that there is a shift from “paternalistic approaches to aid used in the past where assistance was provided based on assumed needs and available goods rather than specific needs of the population” and a move towards a contextual understanding of beneficiary needs and “allowing beneficiaries increased control over aid flows”1. Such an approach is intended to increase empowerment and dignity of affected communities. Such a shift indicated a clear need to increasing involve affected decisions about interventions, yet these initial results from the RISE survey show that over 70% of stakeholders think that priorities of affected communities are in fact not driving innovations in Somalia.

3. Increased knowledge of factors and conditions that lead to successful and failed humanitarian innovations in Somali context.

Factors that are key to successful humanitarian innovation: We asked stakeholders to review a range of humanitarian innovations in Somalia over the past 5 years to identify key factors that facilitate successful humanitarian innovation in Somalia. Some of these include:

• Operational Access-access to information, people and resources necessary to develop the innovation.

• Private Sector involvement-innovations that present a compelling business case and are attractive to private investors are more likely to succeed. This has been true with mobile telephones, mobile money (e.g., M-PESA in Kenya2), etc.

• Systems thinking-innovators’ sensitivity to the fact that humanitarian challenges are very interconnected, hence avoiding working in silos.

1 Dunn, S. (2010). Guidelines for Cash Interventions in Somalia: An initiative of Horn Relief as the Chair of the Cash Working Group of the Food Security and Economic Development Sectoral Committee and the IASC Agriculture and Livelihoods Cluster for Somalia http://www.cashlearning.org/downloads/guidelinescashinterventionsinsomaliaseptember2010.pdf 2 Alexandre, C. (2010). 10 Things You Thought You Knew about M-PESA. http://www.cgap.org/blog/10-things-you-thought-you-knew-about-m-pesa

5

• Involvement of Government- Governments set the overall direction for their jurisdictions. Involvement of governments at different levels promotes relevance and sustainability of innovations.

• Strong Social Cohesion among members of communities, clans, diaspora, private etc.

4. Increased knowledge of factors and conditions to scale innovations using the Matchmaker in Somalia.

Involvement in humanitarian innovation partnerships: Less than a half of the RISE stakeholders are currently involved in humanitarian innovation partnerships. This finding is very important for RISE since it aims to increase the percentage of actors involved in humanitarian innovation collaborations.

Externally based stakeholders are more involved in humanitarian innovations than the Somalia based stakeholders. This finding strengthens the recommendation to create more convenings as this will afford Somali based stakeholders more opportunity to exchange information, knowledge, experiences and perspectives with international actors which seem to have more experience with humanitarian innovation (HI) partnerships. The assumption is that increasing interactions with a wider range of actors both inside of Somalia as well as those externally will allow more engagement in exploring possible collaborations around HI. Partnerships take time to develop and in Somalia there has been a general feeling that local actors are not fully engaged in program design and development at the strategic level. Such engagement is necessary to build strong partnerships.

Key humanitarian innovation actors in Somalia: The baseline study shows that it is from national or international organizations and NGOs where stakeholders are most likely to have learned about innovations, where most innovations are happening or being used. A few stakeholders report innovations being used at community level, and other places like schools. Private sectors, universities, and government departments were not frequently mentioned among humanitarian innovation actors. According to past research, it is common for people directly affected by disasters to be excluded from information processing and the response decision making that affects their lives (Mulder, et al, 2016)3. The limited participation of local institutions in humanitarian innovation only serves to perpetuate the low community involvement. This highlights the need to empower local stakeholders and strengthen their participation in humanitarian innovation.

Capacity to deliver humanitarian innovation: While most of the RISE stakeholders agree that innovation is important (98%), many stakeholders (56%) believe that there is not sufficient capacity among humanitarian actors to deliver innovation in Somalia. This will lead stakeholders to not invest the time and resources to look for and promote innovations. This apparent lack of capacity is an opportunity for RISE to provide insight into the gaps related to humanitarian innovation (HI) capacity for humanitarian actors to consider when designing innovation related

3 http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2053951716662054

6

projects. Likewise, there is need to capture voices of both local and international actors who are operating in this emerging space of HI and these efforts will help to strengthen the humanitarian innovation ecosystem in Somalia.

Somalia-based stakeholders are more optimistic about existing capacity than those based outside of Somalia. There is therefore a need for RISE partners to tap into this optimism and apparent capacity by working very closely with local actors in addition to stakeholders working outside of Somalia. There is an opportunity to better understand this perceived lack of capacity and how to strengthen existing capacity.

Perception of enabling environment: 50% of the stakeholders believe that there is no enabling environment. Somalia based stakeholders are more optimistic about the existing collaborative environment than stakeholders based outside of Somalia. This seems to support the idea of convenings and MatchMaker in order to create that enabling environment for further interaction between local and international actors specifically around how to create a sustainable enabling environment for co-creation of solutions.

Involvement in humanitarian innovation forums: Less than a half of the stakeholders are currently involved in humanitarian innovations forums or convenings other than RISE. This need provides RISE an opportunity to provide such needed forums for collaboration and learning. RISE also needs to collaborate with existing forums to increase efficiency.

Access to data needed for humanitarian innovation: A very small percentage of stakeholders (7.3%) always have access to data needed for innovations. The rest have access sometimes, rarely or no access at all. According to a recent ALNAP (2016) study, data is a key issue in humanitarian innovation. The study revealed that the lack of pre-existing data on the performance of current humanitarian practices, it very hard to demonstrate the improvements an innovation could have offered. Therefore, access to data appears to be a priority area as regards strengthening humanitarian innovation in Somalia.

7

1. Report introduction

If necessity is the mother of invention, then the aid industry should be frothing with ideas and gearing up to showcase new products and processes when humanitarians gather to start work on redesigning the overwhelmed and

outdated system …” The Guardian4 (May 10, 2016)

RISE seeks to contribute to transformational change in how humanitarian stakeholders prepare and respond to disasters in Somalia by increasing knowledge of the ecosystem of actors and factors shaping innovation within the humanitarian sector.

The USAID/OFDA funded RISE program will test and implement the Response Innovation Lab in Somalia to improve stakeholders’ understanding of humanitarian innovation in the following knowledge blocks:

● Common understanding and definition of humanitarian innovations in Somali context. ● Increased knowledge of factors and conditions that enable affected Somali community

voices to drive the humanitarian innovation design process. ● Increased knowledge of factors and conditions that lead to successful and failed

humanitarian innovations in Somali context. ● Increased knowledge of factors and conditions to scale innovations using the

MatchMaker in Somalia.

These knowledge blocks will be addressed by measuring, evaluating, and learning from the implementation of three RIL components:

1. Humanitarian innovation ecosystem infrastructure: RISE will develop humanitarian innovation ecosystem infrastructure (including a map and database) for collaborative response problem solving and innovations among humanitarian actors in Somalia

2. Stakeholder convening: RISE will create a platform for increased involvement of local and external humanitarian innovation actors; and

3. MatchMaker: Through the MatchMaker mechanism, RISE will identify and match successful (implemented, scaled), context-relevant, innovative solutions to humanitarian response challenges in Somalia.

RISE implementers include The George Washington University’s Institute for Disaster and Fragility Resilience (GW/IDFR), Somali Disaster Resilience Institute (SDRI), Somalia Resilience Program (SomReP), as well as the global Response Innovation Lab.

4 https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/may/10/innovation-overwhelmed-humanitarian-system-private-sector

8

2. Aims of the baseline study

In addition to addressing the above knowledge blocks, the baseline study aims to measure key program outcome indicators as the basis for gauging change by the end of program implementation. These indicators include:

• Percent of actors who attest to increased involvement in other opportunities (forums and partnerships) to engage in response innovation. This indicator tracks the number of humanitarian actors (RISE stakeholders) that engage in new humanitarian innovation forums outside of RISE. RISE aims to increase appreciation for innovations as well as demand for forums related to humanitarian innovation. Representatives of humanitarian organizations targeted and engaged by RISE are surveyed at baseline and end line to document specifically which and how many partnerships and forums on humanitarian innovations they are participating in outside of RISE.

• Percent of humanitarian actors that express positive perceptions of and understanding of the (potential) relevance of innovation in humanitarian response. This indicator aims to track the level of appreciation and understanding of the necessity of innovation in humanitarian response.

3. Methods and Sources of data

The primary vehicle for gathering baseline study data were two RISE workshops (see annex 3 RISE Convening agenda) whose objectives were to identify and prioritize challenges in Somalia’s humanitarian sector, and to map the ecosystem of expertise and experience, which can begin to address those challenges.

The first workshop took place in Nairobi and was attended by 48 participants. The Second workshop took place in Mogadishu and was attended by 38 participants. The workshops played a dual role of convening stakeholders for Humanitarian Innovations discussions as well as collating data for the RISE baseline study. Qualitative data were collected during workshop discussions. In addition, participants completed a survey. The total number of actors that completed the survey is 55 (see annex 4 for the list of institutions represented in the survey). A copy of the RISE baseline survey is attached in annex 5.

4. Findings The findings are discussed according to the four knowledge blocks: Common understanding and definition of humanitarian innovations in Somali context, Increased knowledge of factors and conditions that enable affected Somali community voices to drive the humanitarian innovation design process; Increased knowledge of factors and conditions that lead to successful and failed humanitarian innovations in Somali context, as well as increased knowledge of factors and conditions to scale innovations using the MatchMaker in Somalia.

9

4.1. Creating a common understanding of humanitarian innovation

This part of the study explores meanings that humanitarian stakeholders attach to innovation, the attributes prioritized in defining humanitarian innovation (HI), and their perception of the importance of HI.

Words don't have definitions, only uses

John Wilson, Thinking with Concepts

A common definition has been provided by Obrecht and Warner (2016)5, who define Humanitarian innovation (HI) as an iterative process that identifies, adjusts and diffuses ideas for improving humanitarian action. RISE seeks to create a shared understanding of what HI is, and what it’s for, what it can do. This is because Innovation needs to be intentional, and requires investment of resources. Therefore, having a shared understanding of HI among humanitarian actors and stakeholders is key to mobilizing the strategic investments needed for HI. Obrecht and Warner (2016) have cautioned that while successful innovation could sometimes be shaped by serendipitous events or factors, “…there are clear choices organizations and teams can make to improve their culture for innovation and increase the likelihood of serendipity occurring (pp. 12).

The baseline survey asked humanitarian actors to define innovation in their own words. As shown in figure 1, most of the definitions provided reflect the following notions:

● Resulting in improved well-being, impact, and more effective programs ● Creativity, thinking outside of the box, new ideas ● Involving cost effective/efficient interventions (doing more with less) ● Solving problems

Other notions reflected in stakeholder definitions include:

● Dealing with Complexity, ● Creating new opportunities, ● Empowering communities, ● Application of evidence in design, ● Iterativeness, ● Radical shifts, ● Replicability,

5 Obrecht, A. and T. Warner, A. (2016) ‘Summary: More than just luck: Innovation in humanitarian action’. HIF/ALNAP Study. London: ALNAP/ODI.

10

● Solutions that are simple/easy to apply, and ● Involving the application of technology.

Figure 1: Definitions of humanitarian innovation (HI)

Some definitions alluding to creativity, thinking outside of the box, new ideas include:

● Humanitarian innovation are new ideas, which change the condition of humanitarian activities today.

● New ways of doing things that result in quality work, effective use of resources and maximum benefit.

● Innovation is creativity-new ideas that add social value which could improve the effectiveness of aid programs and well-being of the affected communities

● Responding to field challenges by coming up with new or existing models/strategies/products/services that solve a problem or create opportunities.

● An attempt to introduce new tools, methodologies, resources etc. to achieve goals that have proven to be a challenge for standard methods

● Having different ideas that could add value to the individuals/community.

Some definitions alluding to solving of problems/meeting community needs include:

● Developing new ideas to address existing or recurring issues/problems that can be owned by people/communities, preparing them to address the issues/problems by themselves.

11

● Using a new approach or technology to tackle complex humanitarian challenges. ● Humanitarian programming that is simple, highly impactful, cost-effective, easy to

replicate and implement. ● Any humanitarian innovation must be empowering the community and should always

ensure improvement of the community capacity to respond to their needs and must be built on participatory approaches.

● Enabling communities to find sustainable and agreeable solutions that fit their needs. ● Solutions that are suitable for the target beneficiaries, which help them to respond to

their needs. They do not have to be different always; they just need to be simple, accessible and effective.

Definitions that allude to the notion of results, interventions that are more effective and leading to improved well-being and impact include:

● Innovation is creativity-a new idea that adds social value that can improve the effectiveness of programs and well-being of the affected communities.

● An iterative process seeking to improve program implementation at a multitude of levels. ● Seeking to address the dispensation of humanitarian work in a more efficient and

effective way. Finding better ways to serve the communities.

Other attributes of prioritized in defining humanitarian innovation Humanitarian actors were asked to identify attributes of humanitarian innovation that they would prioritize from a list. As shown in figure 2, actors appear to attach almost the same amount of importance to the attributes:

● Doing something different at a sector, system or country level ● Seeking improvement for the sector, system or country level ● Doing something different at a community level ● Requiring an iterative process to understand whether the idea works, as well as why and

how Other attributes mentioned include taking risks, involvement of community members, and combinations of other attributes already mentioned. Obrecht and Warner (2016)6 have suggested “The key difference between standard programming and innovation lies in doing something differently with the aim of improvement at a system or sector level, where adaptation and invention require a uniquely iterative process.” (p.3). In contrast to Obrecht and Warner’s assertion, RISE stakeholders suggest that innovation is applied not just at the systems or sector level, but also at the community level.

In summary, the RISE stakeholder understanding of humanitarian innovation is not very different from that provided by Obrecht and Warner: an iterative process that identifies adjusts and diffuses ideas for improving humanitarian action.

6 Obrecht, A. and T. Warner, A. (2016) ‘Summary: More than just luck: Innovation in humanitarian action’. HIF/ALNAP Study. London: ALNAP/ODI.

12

RISE Stakeholders agree on the attributes of iterative reflection and improvement in humanitarian action.

However, RISE stakeholders suggest more nuances that emphasize that humanitarian innovation has to bring about improvements and positive impacts in the well-being of disaster affected communities, solving problems, addressing needs, doing more with less, and empowering communities.

Figure 2: Which attributes would you prioritize in defining humanitarian innovation?

How important is innovation to humanitarian assistance? There is no doubt that innovation can be important to humanitarian work. One of the key messages about humanitarian innovation has been that: “Innovation processes have the potential to stimulate positive change: successful innovations can capture the humanitarian imagination, and provide new ways of delivering assistance to those who need it most. Instead of asking, ‘ what went wrong ?’, and aiming for incremental improvements in delivery of aid, innovation demands new ways of thinking and the boldness to answer more searching questions, such as ‘ how are things currently done, and is this the best way to do them ?’ (Ramalingam, Scriven and Foley, 2009: 3)7.

However, with the increasing emphasis and focus on innovation today, it is important to question whether humanitarian actors think that innovation can make a difference. The RISE baseline tried to get a better understanding of stakeholders’ perceptions of the importance of innovation in humanitarian work.

7 Innovations in international humanitarian action –Chapter 3: ALNAP's 8th Review of Humanitarian Action, https://www.alnap.org/system/files/content/resource/files/main/alnap-rha-2009.pdf

58.18% 58.18%52.73%

58.18%

10.91%

Doingsomethingdifferentatasector,systemorcountry

level

Seekingimprovementforthesector,system

orcountrylevel

Doingsomethingdifferentata

communitylevel

RequiringaniteraHveprocesstounderstand

whethertheideaworks,aswellaswhy

andhow.

Other(pleasespecify)0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

13

As shown in figure 3 more than 90% of the stakeholders believe that innovation is very important to humanitarian work.

Figure 3: In your view, how important is innovation to humanitarian work?

Perceived importance by workplace location Data show that there are no major differences in perception of importance of innovation between stakeholders based in Somalia and those based outside of Somalia-mostly Kenya.

Figure 4: How important is humanitarian innovation (by workplace location)

90.91%

7.27%0.00% 1.82%

Veryimportant Somewhatimportant

Notimportant Amnotsure0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

14

Perceived capacity to deliver successful humanitarian innovation It is important to understand capacity to deliver humanitarian innovation especially because innovation is different from and more sophisticated than standard programming. For example, “while standard programming is based on a robust understanding of the expected causal pathway and theories of change for the improvement a program is going to bring about, innovation programming is seldom based on a known causal pathway. Innovation projects can construct a general theory of change but the assumptions are more conjectural, making the theory much more like a hypothesis. Innovation relies on an explicit emphasis on learning and readjustment because so little is known about whether, how and why an idea for improvement might work (Obrecht, Warner and Dillon, 2017:7)8.

While most stakeholders agree that innovation is important (figures 3 and 4), most stakeholder believe that there is not sufficient capacity among humanitarian actors to deliver innovation in Somalia (see figure 5). This apparent lack of capacity is an opportunity for RISE to strengthen the humanitarian innovation ecosystem in Somalia.

Figure 5: To what extent are humanitarian actors equipped or capable to deliver successful humanitarian innovation?

Perceived capacity by workplace location Figure 6 shows that Somalia-based stakeholders are more optimistic about existing capacity than those based outside of Somalia do. There is therefore a need for humanitarian actors to tap into this optimism and apparent capacity by working very closely with local actors in addition to the external actors.

8 Obrecht, A. with Warner, A. and Dillon, N. (2017) ‘Working paper: Evaluating humanitarian innovation’ HIF/ ALNAP Working Paper. London: ODI/ALNAP.

43.64%40.00%

16.36%

Toagreatextent Toaminorextent Amnotsure0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

45.00%

50.00%

15

Figure 6: Perceived capacity to deliver innovation-by workplace location

Initial findings seem to indicate that actors in Somalia feel that there is capacity to deliver innovation “to a great extent” whereas RISE stakeholders based outside of Somalia do not express the same degree of confidence. One explanation could be that events branded as “innovation” events have only recently been held in Mogadishu by humanitarian and development partners and RISE stakeholders in Somalia may be expressing a sense of optimism about new opportunities and possibilities for new partnerships. Whereas in Nairobi, where the other initial RISE convening was held, “innovation” events are common and initial excitement about the possibilities of innovation may have shifted into an acknowledgement of the realities of doing innovation in complex humanitarian settings. In subsequent convenings it will be important to delve deeper into understanding the nuances between these differences in perception. Likewise, there is an opportunity to better understand this perceived lack of capacity and how to strengthen capacity.

4.2. Increased knowledge of factors and conditions that enable affected Somali community voices to inform the humanitarian innovation process.

This part of the study explores the extent to which community voices inform humanitarian innovation in Somalia, and how greater community involvement can be achieved.

Inclusion of communities in the innovation process Inclusion of affected people is considered a major precondition for innovation success. Not every innovation in humanitarian action will involve affected people—some innovations are targeted more at improving internal processes or coordination amongst humanitarian actors. However, for those that do involve affected people, either directly or indirectly, demonstrating how the rights

16

and interests of affected people are respected in an innovation process ought to be a minimum standard (HIF/ALNAP 2017 study).

Figure 7 shows that RISE stakeholders believe that to a moderate degree innovations are driven by priorities of affected communities in Somalia. However, there is room for improvement as less than 30% believe that involvement of affected communities is to a great extent driven by the priorities of affected communities. As this is a vital precondition for innovation success (also one of the most valued by RISE stakeholders), inclusion of affected communities will need to be a major priority for RISE’ convening discussions.

Figure 7: To what extent are innovations driven by priorities of affected people?

Perceived involvement of local communities by workplace location According to figure 8, there does not appear to be a significant difference in the perspectives of Somalia based and externally based stakeholders.

5.45%

25.45%

36.36%

21.82%

10.91%

Notatall Toaminorextent Toamoderateextent

Toagreatextent Idon’tknow0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

17

Figure 8: To what extent are innovations driven by priorities of affected people (by workplace location)?

RISE Stakeholders were asked to suggest ways in which greater involvement of communities in humanitarian innovation could be realized. Suggestions provided include:

● Involving affected communities in developing solutions ● Community consultation aimed at empowering our communities ● Communities should be included in forums and meetings where innovations are being

discussed ● Genuine, on the ground interaction with communities ● Longer project cycles to allow community engagement and decentralized decision

making ● Stimulating demand and use of evidence by communities ● Ensuring that meetings are organized in venues and in a style that is accessible to

community members ● Inclusion of the private sector, diaspora engagement, religious leaders.

Aid organizations have been noting the need for more direct involvement by beneficiaries in decision-making about interventions. The guidelines for cash interventions in Somalia published in partnership with EU and USAID is one pertinent example. Agencies are striving to shift from “paternalistic approaches” towards an approach that is more driven by community voices9. The

9 Dunn, S. (2010). Guidelines for Cash Interventions in Somalia: An initiative of Horn Relief as the Chair of the Cash Working Group of the Food Security and Economic Development Sectoral Committee and the IASC

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%Notatall

Toaminorextent

ToamoderateextentToagreatextent

Idon’tknow

BasedinSomalia(N=27)

BasedoutsideofSomalia(e.g.MostlyKenya.N=26)

18

suggestions from RISE stakeholders seem to be aligned with such an approach specifically note that community engagement and genuine, on the ground interaction should even have as an aim community empowerment. While initial results from the RISE survey show that over 70% of stakeholders think that priorities of affected communities are in fact not driving innovations in Somalia, these suggestions from RISE stakeholders suggest there are pathways for improvement for implementing partners to consider. In subsequent convenings, RISE will explore this more deeply and work to better understand the suggestion of greater inclusion of the private sector, diaspora engagement, and religious leaders.

4.3. Increased knowledge of factors and conditions that lead to successful and failed humanitarian innovations in Somali context

This part of the study discusses attributes of a successful innovation process, and factors that facilitate or hinder success of HI.

Attributes of a successful humanitarian innovation process In addition to defining innovation, stakeholders identified and prioritized attributes of a successful innovation process, including:

● Iteration-continuously making revisions in processes and products ● Community engagement and participation ● Replicability ● Scalability ● Diffusion (including dissemination of information about innovations) ● Inclusiveness ● Openness –allowing other stakeholders to easily and freely access the innovation and

learn from it.

As shown in figure 9, Community engagement and participation as well as Openness –allowing other stakeholders to easily and freely access the innovation and learn from it, were among the most valued attributes.

Besides the above, stakeholders identified other attributes of a successful humanitarian innovation process. These include: Reference to and alignment with sustainable development goal, mutual accountability, Organizational flexibility to change, Funding for piloting innovation projects, readiness to accept and learn from failure and sharing the lessons, responsiveness to problem areas, a sustainability mindset-where humanitarian actors are ready to work themselves out of the job, constant engagement with peers for review and adaptation, working with research institutions, risk taking culture as well as clarifying the meaning of humanitarian innovation, why it's different from standard programming and how it could work in the Somalia context.

Agriculture and Livelihoods Cluster for Somalia http://www.cashlearning.org/downloads/guidelinescashinterventionsinsomaliaseptember2010.pdf

19

Figure 9: What to you are important attributes of a successful humanitarian innovation process?

Attributes of a successful humanitarian innovation process by workplace location

Figure 10 compares attributes Somalia-based stakeholders with those based outside of Somalia. Both groups agree on community participation and openness. The externally based stakeholders are more likely to prioritize iteration, replicability, inclusiveness and diffusion than Somalia-based stakeholders are. The Somalia based stakeholders are more likely to prioritize scalability than externally based stakeholders are.

These findings show that while the two groups of stakeholders are work on Somalia programs, their perception of the existing humanitarian innovation situation in Somalia may not be the same. Since the aim of RISE is to create a strong innovation ecosystem in Somalia, it will be necessary to organize more convenings where the two stakeholder groups interact and share perspectives.

20

Figure 10: Attributes of a successful humanitarian innovation process by workplace location

Drivers of humanitarian innovation success According to a study by ALNAP in partnership with ELRHA’s Humanitarian Innovation Fund (HIF), successful innovation is gauged by how much of the following conditions it delivers:

● Consolidated learning and evidence: There is new knowledge generated or an enhanced evidence base around the area the innovation is intended to address, or around the performance of the innovation itself.

● An improved solution for humanitarian action: The innovation offers a measurable, comparative improvement in effectiveness, quality, or efficiency over current approaches to the problem addressed by the innovation.

● Wide adoption of an improved solution: The innovation is taken to scale and used by others to improve humanitarian performance.

During two RISE stakeholder workshops, humanitarian actors were asked about factors that favor or hinder success of humanitarian innovations in Somalia. An example of the questions used as discussion starters for this topic is shown in the box below:

PleaseshareanexampleofahumanitarianinnovationyouknowinsubSaharanAfricathatyouthinkisorhasbeensuccessful.Suggestwhatqualifiesitasasuccessandfactorsthatmighthavefacilitatedthesuccess.

21

Examples of Successful innovation in Somalia include: Solar use in WASH project is proving to be a success because it’s cost effective, sustainable and been built on public-private sector partnerships. An example of these is the solar-powered shallow wells in Somaliland (by CARE International). Communities use solar panels to charge phones, levy fees and use the income to maintain the system. In addition, community-based pump operators are trained to maintain the system. ● Village savings and loans associations. Savings were used to provide first line access to

food and water in emergencies. ● Cash transfers in emergency response ● Local seed varieties linked to local market systems ● Mobile technology in Somalia-comprehensive coverage, and phone ownership. These

platforms facilitate mobile money transfers, mobile and real-time data collection, and beneficiary registration, among others.

● Saving groups-encouraging private sector growth and leveraging the mobile money tools Examples of unsuccessful innovations: ● Kitchen gardens in Somalia had potential to address food security and nutrition especially

in urban area where land is scarce. But this failed because of lack of water for the much- needed irrigation. The approach had worked in another community especially for households that had water tanks.

● Watershed/resource management is inconsistent, inappropriate and unsustainable ● Failure to link early warning to appropriate early action consistently and a harmonized

manner. The 2016 ALNAP/HIF study on Successful humanitarian innovation identified 7 conditions necessary for successful humanitarian innovation, which were termed: “the success factors”. These include: 1) collaborating with others, 2) Organizing an innovation process, 3) Generating and integrating evidence, 4) Engaging with end users and gatekeepers, 5) Resourcing an innovation, 6) Managing risk and accountability, and 7) Creating a culture for innovation. These seven factors are mirrored in what the RISE study identified drivers of successful humanitarian innovation in Somalia (see table 1).

However, there are interesting differences in how the RISE study unpacks these success factors. For example, one success factor identified by the ALNAP study is “engaging with end users and gatekeepers” (How innovating teams relate to the end users and gatekeepers relevant to their innovation, both to elicit input for the innovation and to influence to encourage uptake). Yet according to the RISE study, “engaging with end users and gatekeepers” also refers to: Community ownership and participation, Innovators’ sensitivity to the fact that humanitarian challenges are very interconnected, hence avoiding to work in silos (systems thinking), Involvement of Government, operational Access, private sector involvement, and strong social cohesion among members of communities, clans and diaspora.

22

Table 1: Success factors for humanitarian innovation (HI)

Factors identified in the ALNAP study

Description Factors identified from the RISE study

Collaborating with others

How an innovating team collaborates with other actors to innovate

• Capacity for collaboration and cross-fertilization • Greater capacity for engaging communities ● Greater transparency with other actors ● Networking - linking with other innovators

Organizing an innovation process

How an innovation manager or innovating team plans the innovation process and manages it in a timely manner

● Availability of time and time management (Limited time horizon hinders success)

● Efficient Logistics management ● Efficient management of contracts

Generating and integrating evidence

The generation of information that can be used to support the various parts of an innovation process

● Use of learning from previous innovation processes (what works)

● Understanding context and market ● Better in targeting ● Failure to learn from what does work ● Understanding of the social context ● Leveraging existing local solutions – understand

indigenous knowledge of existing problems, needs and assets

Engaging with end users and gatekeepers

How innovating teams relate to the end users and gatekeepers relevant to their innovation, both to elicit input for the innovation and to influence to encourage uptake

● Systems thinking-innovators’ sensitivity to the fact that humanitarian challenges are very interconnected, hence avoiding working in silos.

● Involvement of Government- Governments set the overall direction for their jurisdictions. Involvement of governments at different levels promotes relevance and sustainability of innovations.

● Operational Access-access to information, people and resources necessary to develop the innovation.

● Private Sector involvement-innovations that present a compelling business case and are attractive to private investors are more likely to succeed. This has been true with mobile telephones, mobile money, etc.

● Strong Social Cohesion among members of communities, clans, diaspora, private etc.

● Community ownership and participation - accept what will change their lives.

Resourcing an innovation

How an innovation process is financially supported

● Availability of funding ● Efficient management of funds ● Cost of maintenance and use of innovations

Managing risk How an innovating

team thinks about the risks posed to the innovation’s success as well as those posed by

● Risk appetite – how far would an actor or investor go to take risk of failure.

● Perception of safety in communities (can limit access to users)

● Reframing failure-as an inevitable part of iterative

23

the innovation to other stakeholders

learning and innovation.

Creating a culture for innovation

The background norms and practices within an organization that support the skills and activities needed for successful innovation

● Intra-organizational resistance to change ● Inflexibility with programming ● Dependence on geographical proximity as

influencer of collaboration

The RISE study seems to show some evidence of factors for innovation success that fall along the general categories of factors identified in the ALNAP study. One particular success factor stands out for the RISE stakeholders as the critical importance of engaging with communities for HI. Both RISE stakeholders inside and outside of Somalia prioritized this need.

4.4.Conditions of scaling out innovations in Somalia

The part of the study discusses conditions that will influence the scaling out of innovations in Somalia, both by RISE and by other Humanitarian actors. The conditions discussed include Intra-and inter organizational collaboration and forums on innovations, existence of an enabling environment, access to data for designing innovations, and the major actors in the current humanitarian innovation ecosystem in Somalia.

Intra and inter-organizational collaboration Collaboration has been highlighted as a key precondition for innovation success. Innovation involves multiple actors, all of whom can change as an innovation process unfolds. For example, the ALNAP/HIF study on Success of Humanitarian innovation highlights that Innovating teams benefit from taking a strategic approach to collaboration and assigning specific time and resources to managing these relationships.

The RISE baseline aimed to get a sense of how much humanitarian actors collaborate, especially when they encounter a challenge for which there is no known solution.

Figure 11 shows that stakeholders are almost as likely to reach out to people outside of their organizations as they are to people with their organizations. Stakeholders are more likely to reach out to people with in the country or location or work than they are to those outside the country. One opportunity this provides for RISE is that of an apparent positive inter and intra-organizational collaborative atmosphere. Geographical proximity appears to be an important influencer of collaboration. This implies the need to strengthen networking opportunities with Somalia, and to be intentional in engaging perspectives of stakeholders outside of Somalia.

24

Figure 11: Who do you interact with when you have a complex/intractable/ (solution hasn't emerged) challenge in carrying out humanitarian action in Somalia?

Other sources of support/knowledge that were mentioned include: communities, research institutions, professional networks and communities of practice, relevant government line ministries as well as private sector actors.

Perception of an enabling environment for innovation collaboration Figure 12 shows that about a half of the stakeholders believe that there is an enabling environment/space for innovators and humanitarian actors as to collaborate in Somalia. About a half of the stakeholders believe that there is no enabling environment. One explanation could be that events branded as “innovation” events have only recently been held in Mogadishu by humanitarian and development partners and RISE stakeholders in Somalia may be expressing a sense of optimism about new opportunities and possibilities for new partnerships. Whereas in Nairobi, where the other initial RISE convening was held, “innovation” events are common and initial excitement about the possibilities of innovation may have shifted into an acknowledgement of the realities of doing innovation in complex humanitarian settings. In subsequent convenings it will be important to delve deeper into understanding the nuances between these differences in perception.

83.64%

74.55%

60.00%

43.64%

10.91%

PeoplewithinmyorganizaHon

PeopleoutsideofmyorganizaHon

WithinthecountrywhereI

work

OutsideofthecountrywhereI

work

Other(pleasespecify)

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

25

Figure 12: Is there an enabling environment/space for innovators and humanitarian actors as to collaborate in Somalia?

Perception of enabling environment by workplace location

Figure 13 shows that Somalia based stakeholders are more optimistic about the existing collaborative environment than stakeholders based outside of Somalia. This could be because the Somalia based stakeholders are more familiar with the local innovation environment than external stakeholders are.

Figure 13: Perception of enabling environment by workplace location

56.36%

43.64%

Yes No0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

26

Current involvement in innovation partnerships Figure 14 shows that less than a half of the RISE stakeholders are currently involved in humanitarian innovation partnerships. This finding is very important for RISE since it aims to increase the percentage of actors involved in humanitarian innovation.

Figure 14: Are you involved in partnerships that have to do with humanitarian innovation, other than RISE?

Innovation partnerships by workplace location Figure 15 shows that externally based stakeholders are more involved in humanitarian innovations than the Somalia based stakeholders. This finding strengthens the recommendation to create more convenings that all both groups of stakeholders to exchange information, knowledge, experiences and perspectives.

Figure 15: Involvement in innovation partnerships by workplace location

49.09%

50.91%

Yes No48.00%

48.50%

49.00%

49.50%

50.00%

50.50%

51.00%

51.50%

27

Involvement in humanitarian innovation forums and convenings Similar to partnerships, less than a half of the stakeholders are currently involved in humanitarian innovations forums or convenings other than RISE (see figure 16). This is a need that provides RISE an opportunity to provide such needed forums for collaboration and learning. RISE also needs to collaborate with existing forums to increase efficiency.

The forums mentioned include:

● Innovate for Somalia ● Humanitarian policy and coordination forums ● SomReP ● CDP (Centre for Peace and Democracy) ● Mogadishu hub (Global Shapers) ● SIMAC (Somalia Interagency Mapping and Coordination group) ● CARE USA ● STREAM ● IRise ● HPPP (Driven by OCHA Kenya and other private sector players MasterCard/Equity

Bank ● ReDSS (The Regional Durable Solutions Secretariat) ● MSF Innovation Days ● PSI demand creation innovation/labs ● Techfugees ● Innovation Lab (UNDP Som) ● SomReP technical working group

Figure 16: Involvement in humanitarian innovation forums and convenings

32.73%

67.27%

Yes No0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

28

Access to data needed to design innovations in Somalia Availability of and access to data is a key issue in humanitarian innovation. Without data on the performance of current humanitarian practices, it very hard to demonstrate the improvements an innovation could have offered.

“Withoutreliabledata,wecannotknowwhoisinneed,whatchallengestheyface,whatsupportcanassistthemandwhetherinterventionsaremakingadifference”Onehumanity:sharedresponsibility”–UNSecretaryGeneral,January201610

Figure 17 shows that a very small percentage of stakeholders (7.3%) always have access to data needed for innovations. The rest have access sometimes, rarely or no access at all. Therefore, access to data appears to be a priority area as regards strengthening humanitarian innovation in Somalia.

Figure 17: In your view, to what extent do innovators and humanitarian actors have access to data needed to design innovations in Somalia?

Access to data by workplace location Figure 18 suggests that while there is no significant difference in access to data between the Somalia and externally based stakeholders, the Somalia based stakeholders appear to have less access to data than their externally based counterparts do.

10 Cited in Development Initiatives, 2017, Implementing and monitoring the Grand Bargain commitment on Transparency. http://devinit.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Baseline-report_-implementing-and-monitoring-the-Grand-Bargain-commitment-on-transparency.pdf

7.27%

50.91%

27.27%

1.82%

12.73%

Always SomeHmes Rarely Notatall Idon’tknow0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

29

Figure 18: Access to data by workplace location

Actors driving and using humanitarian innovations in Somalia In the RISE baseline survey, stakeholders were asked to think of all humanitarian innovations they might have learned about in Somalia within the past 5 years. For each innovation, stakeholders mentioned:

● Where they learned about the innovation ● The level at which the innovation was happening when they learned about it ● Who was using the innovation

Figure 19 shows that for the first ranked set of innovations (see annex 1); it is at national or international organizations and NGOs where stakeholders are most likely to have learned about innovations, where most innovations are happening or being used. A few stakeholders report innovations being used at community level, and other places like schools. There is no evidence of government or university innovation hubs outside of the USAID supported Resilience Innovation Hub at Benadir University. The initial findings reveal this as a gap. It is worth noting that government institutions in Somalia are either weak or nonexistent in some cases. This may explain why NGOs are most visible divers of innovation. There is a thus a need to strengthen those new hubs that are emerging and to delve deeper to find out how to best strengthen such innovation spaces that have the potential to address humanitarian challenges. The planned RISE convenings with SomaliREN will be critically important to explore these issues.

30

Figure 19: Drivers and users of innovations (first category)

Figure 20 shows that for the second ranked category of innovations (see annex 2); government innovation hubs were most frequently highlighted innovation users. However, national and international organizations and NGOS were most likely to be the source of information pertaining to innovations. As noted earlier in this report, there appears to be a gap in the participation and capacity of local Somali institutions in HI. Therefore, the planned RISE convenings with SomaliREN will be critically important to explore these issues.

31

Figure 20: Drivers and users of innovation (category 2/second ranked)

In general the findings from the RISE baseline indicate that innovation that is happening in Somalia has not yet diffused. RISE stakeholders mostly found out about innovations from national and international organizations and NGOs. Additionally, the innovations that RISE stakeholders reported were happening in communities and/or were mainly in use by local governments and/or innovation hubs. This is more evidence that the innovations have not yet reached diffusion level and that there is a gap related to sharing of learnings about innovation. This is a need to further explore the role of universities to share knowledge related to innovation.

32

5. Conclusions and recommendations

The baseline study has generated important findings regarding the four knowledge blocks: Stakeholders’ understanding of HI, factors and conditions that enable affected Somali community voices to drive the humanitarian innovation design process; factors and conditions that lead to successful and failed humanitarian innovations in Somali context, as well as increased knowledge of factors and conditions to scale innovations using the MatchMaker in Somalia.

• The study shows that the definition of HI needs to emphasize the need to bring about improvements and positive impacts in the well-being of disaster affected communities, solving problems, addressing needs, doing more with less, and empowering communities.

• Stakeholders agree on the vitality of HI as more than 90% of the stakeholders believe that innovation is very important to humanitarian work.

• Whereas aid organizations have emphasized the need for direct involvement by beneficiaries in decision-making about interventions, initial results from the RISE survey show that over 70% of stakeholders think that priorities of affected communities are in fact not driving innovations in Somalia. There is therefore a lot of room for improvement. There a clear need to increasing involve affected decisions about interventions

• The study also shows that externally based stakeholders are more involved in humanitarian innovations than the Somalia based stakeholders. Therefore there is need to create more convenings as this will afford Somali based stakeholders more opportunity to exchange information, knowledge, experiences and perspectives with international actors which seem to have more experience with HI partnerships. It is expected that increasing interactions with a wider range of actors both inside of Somalia as well as those externally will allow more engagement in exploring possible collaborations around HI. Partnerships take time to develop and in Somalia there has been a general feeling that local actors are not fully engaged in program design and development at the strategic level. Such engagement is necessary to build strong partnerships.

• The study reveals a gap in the capacity of humanitarian actors to drive and implement innovation. This is an opportunity for RISE to provide insight into the gaps related to humanitarian innovation (HI) capacity for implementing partners (IP) to consider when designing innovation related projects.

• Likewise there is need to capture voices of both local and international actors who are operating in this emerging space of HI and these efforts will help to strengthen the humanitarian innovation ecosystem in Somalia.

• Somalia based stakeholders are more optimistic about the existing collaborative environment than stakeholders based outside of Somalia. This seems to support the idea of convenings and MatchMaker in order to create that enabling environment for further interaction between local and international actors specifically around how to create a sustainable enabling environment for co-creation of solutions. .

• A very small percentage of stakeholders (7.3%) always have access to data needed for innovations. The rest have access sometimes, rarely or no access at all. Since data is vital for effective and relevant innovation, access to data appears to be a priority area as regards strengthening humanitarian innovation in Somalia.

33

These lessons will guide RISE partners to carefully plan the Convenings and MatchMaker activities in a manner that builds local capacity and international collaboration. RISE partners will also distribute the baseline study findings widely as is called for in the RISE Branding and Marking plan. This will increase awareness among humanitarian actors in Somalia and hence contribute to a stronger humanitarian innovation ecosystem.

34

Annex 1: List of first ranked innovations

Caafinet (For-profit healthcare network which aims to facilitate better health outcomes with overall reduced morbidity and mortality in Somalia. All Health facilities that join the network will be identifiable through the Caafinet brand)

Commercial Destocking (The removal and sale livestock from the rangelands, which would otherwise have died due to drought).

Community based shock triggered mechanisms

Crisis modifier (Funding mechanism designed to support a timely response to crises by implementing partners who are already operational on the ground and running development projects.)

District Health Information Systems

iRise (iRise is the first co-working space in Mogadishu. It was founded by a team of likeminded individual on the premise of transforming Somalia into a silicon horn. Headquartered in Mogadishu, iRise is space for Somali innovators, techies and aspiring entrepreneurs.)

Love army for Somalia - social media personalities, influencers, and athletes sending “an outpouring of love and support to people suffering from drought and famine in Somalia11”

Mobile money (EVC Plus, Somtel Money, E-dahab, Telsom Zaad)

ReDSS (The Regional Durable Solutions Secretariat (ReDSS) was created in March 2015 with the aim of maintaining a focused momentum and stakeholder engagement in the search of durable solutions for displacement affected communities in East and Horn of Africa. It comprises 12 NGOs: ACTED, CARE International, Concern Worldwide, DRC, IRC, INTERSOS, Mercy Corps, NRC, OXFAM, RCK, Save the Children and World Vision, with DRC, IRC and NRC forming the steering committee).

SCOPE online platform (SCOPE is WFP’s beneficiary and transfer management platform that supports the WFP programme intervention cycle from beginning to end. The SCOPE platform is a webbased application used for beneficiary registrations, intervention setups, distribution planning, transfers and distribution reporting. SCOPE currently supports all WFP transfer modalities: in kind, voucher and cash for a variety of project activities. The platform can be used in many ways depending on the specific needs of the country and the type of delivery mechanism required.)

11American Refugee Committee (n.d.) http://arcrelief.org/love-army-somalia/

35

SMS vaccination alert

Solar energy to raise income for water project

Transplanting sorghum

TVET prog. UNICEF/YEP (Technical and Vocational Education and Training is education and training which provides knowledge and skills for employment. TVET uses formal, non-formal and informal learning. TVET is recognized to be a crucial vehicle for social equity, inclusion and sustainable development.)

36

Annex 2: Second ranked innovations (SDRI/SomReP team to elaborate)

BRiCS A humanitarian Consortium that takes a holistic approach to supporting Somali communities in developing their capacity to resist and absorb minor shocks without undermining their ability to move out of poverty.

Caawi Walal A group of young Somalis who launched a campaign to help millions of Somali families suffering from the drought and the famine

37

Annex 3: RISE Nairobi convening agenda

Agenda Somalia Response Innovation Lab

Identifying Challenges & Mapping Somalia’s Innovation Ecosystem

Purpose:

Borne out of the need for new approaches to familiar challenges in the humanitarian sector, the Somalia Response Innovation Lab works in disaster areas to identify and scale up new ideas to build better disaster responses. The Somalia Response Innovation Lab creates value through connection, and takes a problem-focused approach to innovation.

This first convening of the Lab also marks the initial kick-off of the Response Innovation for Somalia Emergencies (RISE) project, a study aimed at contributing to transformational change in the humanitarian sector. The convening represents a critical opportunity for all participants eager to catalyse innovation in this context.

The primary objectives of the day are to identify and prioritise challenges in the humanitarian sector, and to map the ecosystem of expertise and experience, which can begin to address those challenges.

Participants: Actors engaged in and/or interested in humanitarian innovation in the Somali context

Location: Jacaranda Hotel, Woodvale Close, Westlands, Nairobi

Date: Monday, February 26, 2018

Start time: 9.00am Finish time: 1.30pm

Time Session theme Key questions Group arrangement Who

9.00am Registration &

write on our Innovation Wall

Let us know you’re here, grab a cup of tea or coffee, and find your seat!

Have a look at our Innovation Wall and draw/write your response!

Plenary N/A

38

9.15am Welcome & Introductions

Why are we all here today? What is the Somali Response Innovation Lab and why

is it different? What do we want to accomplish together?

Andrew will welcome everyone. Carly will introduce what we will be doing today.

Let’s get to know each other. What brings us together? (ThinkCards)

Participants will be asked to formally introduce themselves within their small

groups, using the ThinkCards.

Plenary & Small Group

Depending upon the

number of participants, we

will split into small groups

for this introductory/icebreaker activity. Otherwise, we will do this in

pairs.

SomReP, ThinkPlace

9.40am Baseline

Individually, please respond to the questions of the baseline survey. Participants will be given 20 minutes to respond to the survey.

Individual

GW

10.20am Defining the RISE project

Presentation and video Why is innovation relevant to the Somali context? What challenge are we solving with this model? What’s our vision of success? What do we know works and what do we know does not work? Deb will provide a few words on the RISE project. What are its primary objectives? What is its vision of success? How will the various partners work together? Prof. Delmar offer a few words on why this model of innovation is important to the Somali context. How will the Lab function in practice? How will we remain connected and strategically engaged?

Plenary

SomReP, GW, SDRI,

ThinkPlace

39

10.40am

Understanding Humanitarian Innovation in this Context

What is it? What do we know works and what do we know doesn’t? First, the participants will be asked to individually write down (on a Post-It) the humanitarian innovations they’ve seen that have been successful, and those that haven’t. These Post-Its will be put up on the wall and clustered to reveal any themes or patterns. Second, the participants will be asked to get back into their small groups and discuss what kind of people, resources, etc. enable innovation versus which ones disable innovation. We want participants to establish what an “enabling environment for innovation” looks like. What enables successful innovation in this context? What inhibits innovation in this context?

Small Group

This will start

as an individual activity, and move into a

small group/pair activity.

ThinkPlace

11.10-11.25am Tea Break

DEFINING OUR CHALLENGES, TOGETHER

11.25am Identifying our Challenges

Activity and reflection on identifying the key challenges and how the lab is building a pathway for addressing them. What programmatic challenges seem to recur in your work? Consider challenges related to delivery, to communications, to networking, to community engagement, to relationship management, to data management, etc. “I need to know…” “I wish I had a solution for…” “A big challenge for my organisation is…” “A recurring issue in my work is…” Clustering & Ranking activity Participants are asked to identify specific challenges in their work as they relate to various themes (e.g. networking, service delivery, communication). These challenges will be grouped by theme, and as a group we will rank them. From here, we will identify which 2-3 challenges seem like the most prominent.

Plenary

This will

primarily be a facilitated clustering/

discussion with the whole

group.

ThinkPlace

40

11.55pm Introducing the Matchmaker Service

How is the Somali Response Innovation Lab already building a pathway for you to raise your needs and identify solutions that address them?

Plenary

SomReP

MAPPING OUR ECOSYSTEM

12.15pm Mapping our Innovation Ecosystem

Now that we’ve identified the most prominent challenges in our work, let’s ‘zoom out’ and consider the broader ecosystem in which we work. Who are your friends and allies in innovation? Together, let’s co-create a map that displays our collective access to knowledge, experience, infrastructure, capital, and markets. Think across local, regional, and global levels.

(1) Review the existing Ecosystem Map.

(2) Stations - Are there any actors you would add? Consider the last five organisations you have turned to in a time of need. Are there any other changes you would suggest to the map?

Participants will be introduced to the idea of an Ecosystem Map and what we want to accomplish by constructing one. They will then be provided with the draft map (SomReP) and asked to review it. They will be asked to document any suggestions, additions, edits, etc.

Plenary

This will

primarily be an individual

exercise that will lead into a

wider group discussion.

ThinkPlace

12.25pm What does this Map Mean to You?

How can this tool be used to improve our work? How might you use it? This will be one of the most important portions of the day, as Carly (ThinkPlace) facilitates a discussion around how the tool might be used. Participants will be asked to create a ‘user story’ about how they might apply it in their own organisation.

Plenary

This will primarily be a

facilitated discussion

followed by an individual activity.

ThinkPlace

41

12.45pm Reflection

What did we achieve today? What was surprising? What was uncomfortable? What can you expect from RISE in the future?

Small Group ThinkPlace

12:.55pm Close What are our next steps from here?

Plenary SomReP

1.00-1:30pm Lunch

42

Annex 4: RISE Mogadishu convening agenda

Agenda Mapping Somalia’s Innovation Ecosystem

Innovate for Somalia & Response Innovation for Somalia Emergencies

Description: “Mapping Somalia’s Innovation Ecosystem” is jointly held by Innovate for Somalia (Federal Government of Somalia Ministry of Planning, Investment and Economic Development and the United Nations Development Programme) and Response Innovation for Somalia Emergencies (RISE) (Somali Disaster Resilience Institute (SDRI) and SomReP).

We seek to bring together actors engaged in innovation in Somalia to map stakeholders and challenges, and begin to identify a pathway to build out the innovation ecosystem to better support innovation.

The objectives of the day are to share knowledge of innovations, identify and prioritise humanitarian challenges which present an opportunity for innovative new approaches, to map the broader ecosystem of expertise and experience engaged in innovation in Somalia, and to discuss identified gaps in the ecosystem (such as financing for innovations).

The Federal Government of Somalia and the United Nations Development Programme in Somalia have launched the project “Innovate for Somalia,” enabling Somali youth to develop innovative local solutions to tackle development challenges and build social and economic ventures.

Response Innovation for Somalia Emergencies (RISE) is a research project focusing the use of innovation to improve emergency response and resilience programmes, implemented by The George Washington University’s Institute for Disaster and Fragility Resilience, the Somali Disaster Resilience Institute, SomReP, and the Response Innovation Lab, with support from the Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA).

Participants: Actors engaged in and/or interested in innovation in Somalia.

Location: MIA Hangar (International Conference Hall)

Date: Monday, March 5, 2018

Start time: 8.30am Finish time: 2.30pm

43

Time Session Theme Key Questions Group

Arrangement Who

8:30a Registration Check in and find your seat.

Meet other Innovators, read our Innovation Wall, and draw/write your response.

Plenary UNDP, SDRI, SomRep

9:00a

Why are we all here today? What do we want to accomplish together?

What is the role of innovation in Somalia? What is Innovate for Somalia? What is the RISE project

and why is it different?

Federal Government of Somalia, UNDP, SDRI

9:30 Defining RISE research project & survey

What is the scope of RISE as a research project?

Individually, please respond to the questions of the baseline survey?

Plenary

Individual

SDRI

10:00 Understanding Humanitarian Innovation in Somalia

Small group introductions: share your favorite innovation.

Do you think it’s successful / unsuccessful? (continuum)? Why? What factors enable

successful innovation in this context? What inhibits innovation in this context?

Share a few examples.

10:30 – 10:45

Break

10:45 Identifying our Challenges

Activity and reflection on identifying the key challenges, to guide RISE project work.

What challenges are we interested in with the RISE project? What programmatic challenges seem to recur in your work? What problems does your organisation have around humanitarian response?

Clustering & Ranking Activity

Small group & Plenary

SDRI/ SomReP

11:30 Mapping our Innovation Ecosystem

Now that we’ve identified the most prominent challenges in our work, let’s ‘zoom out’ and consider the broader innovation ecosystem.

Who are your friends and allies in innovation? Together, let’s co-create a map that displays our

Small Group SDRI/ SomReP

44

collective access to knowledge experience, infrastructure, capital, and markets. Think across local, regional, and global levels.

(1) Review draft of Ecosystem Map. (2) Stations – Are there actors you would add?

Who do you work with? Consider the organizations involved in successful/unsuccessful innovation exercise. Are there any other changes you would suggest to the map?

12:15 Lunch

13:15 Gaps in the Ecosystem

We need a healthy ecosystem for innovation to flourish. Looking at our ecosystem mapping exercise, where are the gaps?

One of the main challenges facing Somalia innovators is access to finance. What are the barriers? What can we do to overcome them?

Plenary Roundtable

UNDP

14:15 Reflection What did we achieve today? What was surprising? What was uncomfortable?

Small Group SDRI, Federal Government

14:30 Close What are our next steps?

Annex 5: List of Organizations represented in the survey

45

• ACTED/STREAM (Somalia Resilience Action Consortium ) • ACTION AGAINST HUNGER • ADRA (Adventist Development and Relief Agency) • ARC (American Refugee Council ) • BRCIS (Building Resilient Communities in Somalia) • Caafinet • CARE • Catholic Relief Services • COOPI (Cooperazione Internazionale) • DAAQ SOM HYDROPONIC • Dairy Innovation Camp • DFID (The Department for International Development) • DRC (Danish Refugee Council ) • FAO (The Food and Agriculture Organization) • Federal Ministry of Health • Hormuud Telecom Foundation • ICVA (International Council of Voluntary Agencies) • KAAH RELIEF DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION • Mercy Corps • MERCY CORPS • Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and

Disaster Management • MOPIED • MSF (OCBA) • MSF Spain • Oxfam • PSI (Population Service International ) • Samuel Hall • SCI (Service Civil International ) • SDRI (Somali Disaster Resilience

Institute ) • SomReP World Vision • SomReP/ Care international • Sote Hub • UNDP Somalia • USAID • WFP Somalia • World vision • World Vision Somalia

Annex 6: Copy of the RISE baseline survey

Response Innovation for Somalia Emergencies (RISE)

46

BASELINE STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE Introduction Dear Sir or Madam, as a key stakeholder in Humanitarian action, we request you to take part in this survey. With this survey, RISE partners are taking stock of the current situation with regard to humanitarian innovation in Somalia. The findings from this survey will help the RISE program to implement activities more effectively. All information you provide will be treated with utmost confidentiality. We would therefore like to request you answer the questions as completely and frankly as you can. We thank you in advance for your time in answering the survey. About your organizational affiliation: 1. Name of Organization: 2. Work Location (City and country): 3. Job title: 4. Please think of all humanitarian innovations you may have learned about in Somalia within the past 5 years. Please fill in as many as you can. For the questions you can just insert the letter of the response option. Response options: (a) Individual Innovators, (b) Communities, (c) Community based organizations, (d) national and International NGOs/organizations, (e) National/central Government bodies, (f) Local governments, (g) Local innovation hubs, (h) Universities, (i) Other (please specify) Innovation 1 (Please specify)

From what source did you learn about the innovation?

Where was this innovation happening when you heard about it?

Who was using the innovation?

Innovation 2 (Please specify)






47











5. In your view, how important is innovation to humanitarian work?

Very important

Somewhat important

Not important

Am not sure

6. To what extent are humanitarian actors equipped or capable to deliver successful humanitarian innovation?

To a great extent

To a minor extent

Am not sure

7. What to you are important attributes of a successful humanitarian innovation process? (please tick where applicable)

Not important Somewhat important Very important

Iteration-continuously making revisions in processes and products

Community engagement and participation

Replicability

Scalability

Diffusion (including dissemination of information about innovations)

Inclusiveness

48

Openness –allowing other stakeholders to easily and freely access the innovation and learn from it.

Other (please specify)

8. Who do you interact with when you have a complex/intractable/ (solution hasn't emerged) challenge in carrying out humanitarian action in Somalia? (tick all that apply)

People within my organization

People outside of my organization

Within the country where I work

Outside of the country where I work


9. Which of the following attributes would you prioritize in defining humanitarian innovation? (tick all that apply)

Doing something different at a sector, system or country level

Seeking improvement for the sector, system or country level

Doing something different at a community level

Requiring an iterative process to understand whether the idea works, as well as why and how.


10. How would you define humanitarian innovation in your own words?

11. Is there an enabling environment/space for innovators and humanitarian actors as to collaborate in Somalia?

Yes

No

Please explain.

12. Are you involved in partnerships that have to do with humanitarian innovation, other than RISE?

Yes

No

13. If yes, please specify name, location of partners and focus of partnership:

Partnership 1 / Name of Partner

49

Location

Focus of Partnership


Location



Location



Location



Location


14. Are you involved in forums or convenings that have to do with humanitarian innovation, other than RISE?

Yes

No

15. If yes, please specify name, location of forum and innovation theme or sector:

Name of Forum 1

Location

Innovation theme / Sector

Name of Forum 2

Location


Name of Forum 3

Location

50


Name of Forum 4

Location


Name of Forum 5

Location


16. In your view, to what extent are innovations driven by priorities of affected Somali communities?

Not at all

To a minor extent

To a moderate extent

17. In what ways could greater involvement of communities in humanitarian innovation be realized?

18. In your view, to what extent do innovators and humanitarian actors have access to data needed to design innovations in Somalia?

Always

Sometimes

Rarely

Not at all

I don’t know

Please explain.

Thanks very much.

Annex 7: Participants in Nairobi Convening

NAME ORGANIZATION Winfred Mbusya ACTED

51

Luiz Carmago ADRA Solomon Ngari Australia DFAT Perrine Piton BRCiS Abdullahi Iman CARE Martin Ombima COOPI Alex Woelkers CRS Mark Agoya DFID Suleiman Ahmed DRC Natalie Topa DRC Leonardi Ugo FAO Julius Mburu FAO Julius Mwangi FAO Marco Rotelli ICVA Deborah Bryant IDFR Richard Crothers IRC Vivian Marcelino ITC Geneva Katherine Schlinder ITC Geneva Michael Wagner Mercy Corps Ana Santos MSF Anne Jansen MSF Helen Bishop OXFAM Rachel James PSI Dr. Benjamin Hounsell Samuel Hall Elijah Kipkech Save the Children Prof. Abdirisak Dalmar SDRI Nimo Bashow Kahiya SDRI Zahra Ahmed SDRI Shukry Haji SDRI Mohamed Osman SDRI Jochen Schmidt SomReP Andrew Lanyon SomReP Sabina Kamau SomReP Joy Andati SomReP Mercy Wahome SomReP Sacha Robehmed SomReP John Kyalo SomReP Caroline Kiwara SomReP

52

Anne Hoelscher SomReP Sandra Ndung’u SomReP Nayla Mohamed Sote Hub Carlyn James Thinkplace Kezia Kuria UNDP Stephen Gudz USAID Ruby Khan WFP Keith Diniz WFP/RBN Patricia Gimode World Vision EARO Debebe Dawit WVUS

Annex 8: Participants in Mogadishu Convening

NAME ORGANIZATION

Mohamed Hared ACF Mohamed A Mohamed ARC Dr. Mohamed H. Halawe ARC Dr. Mohamed Abdullahi Awale CAAFINET Nawaal Mohamed Yusuf Dairy Innovation Camp Fahad Abdullahi Ali Yabarow Dairy Innovation Camp

Mariam Saed Mohamed Dairy Innovation Camp Osman Mohamoud Addow Dairy Innovation Camp Zakaria Ibrahim Issack Dairy Innovation Camp / Benadir University Yahya Shoole Federal Ministry of Health (FMOH) Mohamed Abdi Ahmed Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Ahmed Abukar Al Wahab Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Safia Abdisalam Mohamed Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Abdullahi Hassan Awale Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Abdullahi Mohamed Abdihur Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Najme Mohamed Hassan Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Bishaar Abdisalam Mohamed Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Abdullahi Mohamed Noor Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Ayan Abdulkadir Hassan Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Harun Hasan Abdirahm Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Nuradin Mohamed Mohamud Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Farhan Hussein Abdi Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Abdikafi Ichalif Abdi Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Abdinasir Omar Mohamed Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Abdirahman Mohamed Dirie Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Alrashid Yusuf Osman Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Kamal Sadik Ahmed Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Ahmed Abdullahi Haji Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia) Osman Hussein Hashi Future Ready (UNDP Innovate for Somalia)

53

Abdullahi Nur Osman Hormuud Telecom Foundation Badra Yusuf Ali IIL Naima Farah Awad iRise Hub Awil Osman Abdi iRise Hub Mohamed Hassan Mercy Corps Nehemieh Ngira Mercy Corps Jimaale Ahmed MOPIED Hussein Ismail MOPIED Abdullahi Alas MOPIED Bashir Said Hassan Protection cluster / DRC Mohamed Osman SDRI Mustaf Ibrahim Adan SDRI Mohamed Abdullahi Hussein SDRI Aasiya Mohamed Mohamud SDRI Ahmed Mohamed Hussein SDRI Dr. Mohamed Ahmed Omar SDRI Nimo Bashow Kahiya SDRI Shukry Haji SDRI Faaiza Abdullahi Isse SDRI Graduate Student Farah Mohamud Aden SDRI Graduate Student Dahir Mohamed Dahir SDRI Graduate Student Abubakar Ahmed Mohamed SDRI Graduate Student Mustafa Othman Shaqodoon Osman Abdi Aadar SomReP Sacha Robehmed SomReP Marina Petrovic UNDP Sherif El Tokali UNDP George Conway UNDP Mohamud Mohamed Ibrahim World Vision Somalia

response innovations for somalia emergencies (rise ......innovation as a vehicle for dramatically...

Documents