Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T17:42:54.501Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Sphere Project: Next Steps in Moving Toward a Rights-Based Approach to Humanitarian Assistance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Helen Ouyang ,
Michael VanRooyen  and
Sofia Gruskin
Helen Ouyang*
Affiliation:
Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA Division of International Health and Humanitarian Programs, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA Department of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Michael VanRooyen
Affiliation:
Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA Division of International Health and Humanitarian Programs, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Sofia Gruskin
Affiliation:
Program on International Health and Human Rights, Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
*
Department of Emergency Medicine75 Francis StreetNeville House, Floor 2Boston, Massachusetts 02115USA E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since the Sphere Project was launched in 1997, it has sought to integrate principles of human rights norms with adherence to technical standards. While the Sphere Handbook has evolved as both a field tool and a resource for articulating human rights, it does not fully offer a rights-based approach to humanitarian assistance. In the handbook's current edition, its Humanitarian Charter asserts and affirms human rights principles, but the technical Minimum Standards Section that follows has yet to truly embody a rightsbased approach; that is, it does not clarify how to operationalize human rights in the field, particularly with respect to the health sector. Using human rights documents, the Sphere documents, and existing, published literature in the field of humanitarian practice and human rights, this article provides critical commentary and suggests how strengthening the link between rights and standards, as well as rhetoric and action, can advance the Sphere Project beyond its current applicability as a handbook of technical standards in the field to operationalizing an effective rights-based approach to humanitarian aid.

Keywords

human rightshumanitarian assistanceSphere project
Type
Special Report
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 24 , Issue 3 , June 2009 , pp. 147 - 152
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Walker, P, Purdin, SL: Birthing Sphere. Disasters 2004;28(2):100–111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Dufour, C, Geoffroy, V, Maury, H, Grunewald, F: Rights, standards and quality in a complex humanitarian space: Is Sphere the right tool? Disasters 2004;28(2):124–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.The Sphere Project: Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Disaster Response. Geneva: The Sphere Project, 2004Google Scholar
4.International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966.Google Scholar
5.International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966.Google Scholar
6.International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 1969.Google Scholar
7.The four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their two Additional Protocols of 1977.Google Scholar
8.Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 and the Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, 1967.Google Scholar
9.Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1984.Google Scholar
10. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide 1948.Google Scholar
11. Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989.Google Scholar
12. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, 1979.Google Scholar
13. Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, 1960.Google Scholar
14. Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, 1998.Google Scholar
15.Universal Declaration of Human Rights: UN General Assembly Resolution 217A(III). 10 Dec 1948. 25 + Human Rights Documents. New York: Center for the Study of Human Rights, Columbia University. 2001, pp 5–8.Google Scholar
16.Griekspoor, A, Collins, S: Raising standards in emergency relief: How useful are Sphere minimum standards for humanitarian assistance? BMJ 2001;323: 740–742.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Van Dyke, M, Waldman, R: The Sphere Project Evaluation Report. Center for Global Health and Economic Development. New York: Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 2004 pp 10–12.Google Scholar
18.Darcy, J: Locating responsibility: The Sphere Humanitarian Charter and its rationale. Disasters 2004;28(2):112–123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: UN General Assembly Resolution 2200A(XXI). 16 Dec 1966. 25+ Human Rights Documents. New York: Center for the Study of Human Rights, Columbia University. 2001, pp 9–15.Google Scholar
20.OECD: Principles for Effective Aid. Development Assistance Manual. Paris: OECD, 1992.Google Scholar
21.Waisbord, S: When training is insufficient: reflections on capacity development in health promotion in Peru. Health Promot Int 2006;21(3):230–237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Buse, K: Keeping a tight grip on the reins: donor control over aid coordination and management in Bangladesh. Health Policy Plan 1999;14(3):219–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Lautze, S, Leaning, J, Raven-Roberts, A, Kent, R, Mazurana, D: Assistance, protection, and governance networks in complex emergencies. Lancet 2004;364(9451):2134–2141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24. The right to the highest attainable standard of health: 11/08/2000. E/C.12/2000/4, CESCR General Comment 14. 04 July 2000.Google Scholar
25.World Health Organization: 25 Questions & Answers on Health & Human Rights. Geneva: World Health Organization, July 2002.Google Scholar
26.Moser, C, Moser, A: Moving Ahead with Human Rights: Assessment of the Operationalisation of the Human Rights Based Approach in UNICEF Programming in 2002. New York: UNICEF, 2003.Google Scholar
27.Humanitarian Accountability Practice: A human rights approach during emergencies. Rights and results. Available at http://www.hapinternational.org. Accessed 20 September 2008.Google Scholar
28.Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action. Available at http://www.alnap.org. Accessed 20 September 2008.Google Scholar