Menu ENN Search

Issue 17 Editorial

Dear readers,

Ethical considerations figure prominently in this issue of Field Exchange. A field article written by Dr. Eva Grabosch tackles the problem of providing sustained resources for the treatment of severe malnutrition in countries with chronic nutritional situations. Working in local hospitals in Guinea and Malawi, Dr Grabosch describes how previous feeding programmes supported by international agencies relied on expensive 'therapeutic' foods which could no longer be provided by the local health service once the agency had moved on. She describes how negotiations with the hospital authorities resulted in a small budget being set aside to provide for cheap local foods, using innovative recipes (one involving peanut milk and the other a mixture of milk powder, corn flour and oil) to provide a therapeutic-type milk. Although not ideal in terms of treatment of severe malnutrition, they proved an effective nutritional compromise. Whilst not explicitly addressed, the article does raise an issue regarding the ethics of international agencies implementing a type of programme which cannot be sustained once the agency chooses to withdraw. It also highlights the dilemma of how far nutritional standards should be compromised, without truly knowing the risks we are taking on beneficiaries' behalf until they happen.

Ethical issues are raised in a more head-on fashion by a letter and two research pieces summarised in this edition. Firstly, an article in the Lancet argues that very little attention has been devoted to the relationship between external human rights contexts and the ethics of human research. The authors attempt to provide guidance on how to determine human rights conditions in a given region and whether, or under what circumstances, studies in regions with few human and political rights are appropriate. The paper describes how human rights and political considerations might affect the risks and benefits of research in a number of contexts. For example, research into the health effects of rights violations may be inherently risky, as breaches of confidentiality could lead to retaliatory measures on those who provide information. Research findings could also increase risk of violations if, for example, the existence of a health condition or health practices can be used to stigmatise the population. A major recommendation in the paper is that researchers must learn about background human rights conditions as a pre-condition to conducting the research and assess all risks to both researchers and target groups alike.

A second summarised research paper deals with the disparities in service provision between refugees in Tanzania and the host population. Ethical issues around the evident gross inequalities are hard to ignore. The large refugee population resides next to subsistence farmers who have typically very low income and relatively high malnutrition, morbidity and mortality rates. Poor farming practices are a major constraint to food production, coupled with poor road infrastructure and inadequate marketing systems. The proximity to refugee camps has influenced the prices of the local foodstuff and led to deteriorating security and destruction of the natural environment. While donors continue to provide support for the refugee operation, the Government of Tanzania bears the main responsibility for hosting the 500,000 refugees.

The health and nutrition situation in the refugeeaffected areas, unlike the refugee camps, is a significant public health problem. Malaria, pneumonia and diarrhoea are the leading causes of mortality and morbidity. Mortality and malnutrition rates amongst the host population are almost three times higher than amongst the refugees (maternal mortality is almost ten times higher). This is, in large measure, due to the camp services provided which are not available to the host population. These include micronutrient supplementation, supplementary feeding, malaria control measures, water and sanitation programmes and parasite control for children.

We also have a letter by nutritionist, Charlotte Dufour, about the ethics of using ready to use therapeutic foods (RUTFs) in current emergency feeding programmes. Charlotte is concerned about the widespread use of RUTF in Afghanistan from where she has just returned. She raises a number of ethical questions, e.g. is it ethical to distribute a (very expensive) product for which the protocol is not yet fully tested and approved, and the efficiency of which is not proven outside the TFC? How can we deal with the commercial interests lying behind the distribution of RUTFs. She ends by posing the question 'what can be done to ensure these new products are "properly" used until research yields more results'?

Ethical challenges often foment ideology. In the humanitarian aid world, ideology can be seductive especially when it provides clear solutions for programmatic problems whose complexity defeats most of us. Nutritionists and others working in the emergency food and nutrition sector are not immune. The dangers of ideologies are that that they can lead to formulaic and unthinking behaviour which is inappropriate where programme success depends to some degree on beneficiary behaviour. It could, for example, be argued that Community Managed Targeting (CMT), which has risen swiftly up the agency agenda in recent years, is in danger of becoming an 'ideology'. CMT has been envisaged as a simple way to empower communities during general food distributions and limit targeting responsibility of implementing agencies. This approach is currently being imported into the emergency response in Malawi on a large scale. Yet, in some countries and communities, CMT has simply not worked as 'the community', for a variety of reasons, do not want to exclude households from food distributions.

An example of this is described by an article in this issue of Field Exchange which, written by ACF staff, charts the implementation of CMT in Indonesia for war affected IDPs. After implementing the targeting programme over several weeks, ACF could see that the process worked fairly well on the Moslem side, whereas the results were less satisfactory on the Christian side. The focus groups (local committees responsible for targeting) identified 60% of the population as beneficiary families on the Moslem side, whereas this figure was as high as 90% in the Christians enclaves.

The teams were unable to explain the disparity in compliance with targeting aims between the two communities. Nor was it possible to attribute the difference to level of food vulnerability of the two communities (as shown later on by a Post Distribution Monitoring which also attempted to establish levels of food dependency). The authors suggest that more "sociological" explanations of differences between the two communities seem apposite. For example, "psychological" vulnerability, the different notions of solidarity / community spirit and social-economic differences due to histories of colonisation and transmigration.

This case study confirms what we should already know. CMT may work in some situations but we can't always predict whether it will work. The complexity of factors determining human behaviour in any given situation can never be fully understood - especially by 'outsiders'. Much as we would like clear-cut and easy answers to the enormous challenges faced during humanitarian work, the reality is probably that we are destined to implement programmes with a considerable degree of uncertainty about whether what we are doing is going to work - especially where social factors are concerned. Ultimately, this may not be such a bad thing if it keeps us alive to the need to react to local circumstances and to remain flexible in our thinking. In short, our methodologies should never become ideologies.

(Editor)

More like this

FEX: Human rights, politics and ethics

Summary of published paper1 A recent article in the Lancet argues that very little attention has been devoted to the relationship between external human rights contexts and the...

en-net: Ethical approval in multi-country study

ENN in collaboration with a number of agencies are conducting an observational study on defaulting from emergency supplementary feeding programmes. The study will take place...

FEX: When is a system not a system? Challenges to improved humanitarian action in food crises

Summary of symposium presentation Austen Davis, the General Director of MSF Holland made a presentation on 'Challenges to Improved Humanitarian action in Food Crises' at the...

FEX: Self-Targeting in Ambon, Indonesia “To be or not to be community minded”

By Carole Lambert Carole Lambert has been a Food Security Officer with Action Contre la Faim for the past four years, actively involved in programmes in the Ivory Coast,...

FEX: The Nutrition Situation of Refugees and Displaced Persons

Summary of the ACC/SCN Refugee chapter by Jane Wallace The quarterly 'Reports on the Nutrition Situation of Refugees and Displaced Populations' (RNIS) are compiled and...

FEX: Ethical research in conflict situations

Summary of published research1 A recent article in 'Global Public Health' asserts that issues of power and consent, confidentiality, risks to researchers, and potential harm to...

FEX: The right to nutrition

Summary of unpublished paper Urban Jonsson, (the UNICEF regional Director for Eastern and Southern Africa) presented a paper on 'The Right to Nutritional Status in Conflict...

FEX: Ethics of use of ready-to-use-therapeutic foods

Dear Editor, I have been following the debate on the ethics surrounding the research on Community Therapeutic Care (CTC) and Ready to Use Therapeutic Foods (RUTFs), and was...

FEX: Introduction (Special Supplement 1)

Glossary ACF Action Contre la Faim BMI Body Mass Index CMT Community Managed Targeting CSB Corn Soya Blend DFID Department for International Development FFW Food...

FEX: The potential role of local academia in protracted crises – the example of the American University of Beirut

By Amelia Reese Masterson, Hala Ghattas and Fouad M Fouad Amelia Reese Masterson was a Visiting Fellow at the Center for Research on Population and Health at the American...

FEX: MSF initiative of proactive data sharing

Summary of article1 Location: Global What we know: Data sharing in humanitarian contexts is important to build evidence but has practical and ethical challenges. What this...

en-net: SQUEAC - Weighted boosters and barriers

I have tried to check different SQUEAC investigation reports. I am observing inconsistencies in weighing and scoring system. Regardless of the number of boosters and barriers,...

FEX: Combining two livelihood assessment approaches in Burundi

Summary of assessment report1 Team members participate in a group session on mapping This article summarises the food security aspects of an innovative study by CARE,...

FEX: Conclusions to 'Targeting Food Aid in Emergencies' (Special Supplement 1)

The operational contexts for 'within geographical area targeting' are limited This supplement has focused on targeting food aid in emergencies within geographical areas....

FEX: Delivery of Social Protection Programmes in Kenya

By Clemensia Mwiti and Nupur Kukrety Clemensia Mwiti is a Humanitarian Support Professional (HSP) in Emergency Food Security and Livelihoods. Nupur Kukrety is the Social...

FEX: Distributing food (Special Supplement 1)

Food may be distributed in many different ways but the method of distribution will, to a large extent, depend on the eligible groups and the method for identifying them....

en-net: Two weeks course Health in Emergencies in Large Populations 2017 - open for application

The Health Emergencies in Large Populations (HELP) course is offered by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in joint collaboration with the International...

FEX: Letter on Field Exchange quality control, by André Renzaho

Dear Field Exchange A need for quality control, consistency and diligence for articles published in Field Exchange. As an experienced practitioner and trainer in refugee...

FEX: Malnutrition on Political Grounds

By Hadas Ziv Based in Israel, Hadas Ziv works for the organisation Physicians for Human Rights - Israel, and is Project Director for the Occupied Territories. The last three...

Close

Reference this page

Issue 17 Editorial. Field Exchange 17, November 2002. p1. www.ennonline.net/fex/17/fromtheeditor