Since the December 1988 earthquake in Armenia and especially after Armenia's independence in 1991, there has been an enormous outpouring of aid to Armenia: at least 50 large and small Diaspora organizations or groups around the world have been involved in philanthropic activities in Armenia. While many Armenian organizations and individuals have supported humanitarian projects or assistance in Armenia, the overall picture and direction of assistance is not always clear: what is the long term purpose of humanitarian assistance; what projects are selected, by whom and why; what is the measure of success; how sustainable are the humanitarian projects undertaken. The list of issues that can be raised is long. The answers necessitate a comprehensive long term assessment of Armenia's needs as well as the Diaspora's financial and human capacities.
This report is not an exhaustive or complete survey of all organizations or individuals who have lent assistance to Armenia in the last decade. Nor does it provide a comprehensive analysis of the issues involved. Instead and as a first step, the report simply outlines the key issues pertaining to humanitarian assistance in Armenia in the hope that the conference organizers might commission a more comprehensive study following the conference. Given time constraints, the report focuses on 14 large organizations so as to give, to the extent possible, some concrete quantitative and qualitative data for analysis and recommendations.
Assistance ranging from $10,000 to $100,000 each, by over two dozen other Diaspora organizations are not included in this report, due to logistical difficulties in collecting the precise amounts of contributions. Such donations, should be considered in any future assessment or report.
Social welfare projects
These include assistance to orphans, pensioners, refugees, war victims and economically disadvantaged sector of society, and during national emergencies, the general population (e.g., Operation Winter Rescue in 1993 and Winter Fuel Project in 1994).
While most government-to-government assistance has focused on amelioration and creation of infrastructure, Diaspora organizations, along with non-Armenian NGOs, have played an important role in providing short-term to mid-range assistance to relatively smaller sector of society whose lives might otherwise have been more difficult.
Health sector
This includes providing medical supplies, equipment and medicine, improvement of medical care in Armenia, staff and experts training, sustained consultation and visits by Diaspora doctors and building of new medical facilities.
In addition to critical surgeries and medical care provided by a large number of Diaspora doctors and medical experts on voluntary basis, Diaspora organizations and experts have greatly contributed to the improvement and modernization of Armenia's medical care system. While contributing to existing state medical institutions, new and most advanced medical facilities have been established by Diaspora physicians and organizations.
Education
This includes assistance (funds, computers, literature, and teaching material) mostly to higher educational institutions (universities and technical schools) and salary subsidies to scientists and teachers. Most notable is the establishment of the American University of Armenia. Assistance to elementary and secondary schools are minimal over the last decade as a whole, however, in the last few years there is growing interest in and assistance to `public' schools in Armenia, including renovation of buildings, amelioration of infrastructure, and creation of better educational environment.
Cultural projects
These include assistance to writers, musicians, artists and group performers and facilitation of exposure to Diasporan and international audiences.
Religious
This includes renovation and building of churches, providing religious literature, education and training, youth summer camps, and evangelical ministries.
Technical assistance
Numerous groups of professionals and experts have visited Armenia to
provide expertise, consultations and assistance methodologies to
various sectors, especially in the areas of agriculture, energy,
environment and technology. Since the earthquake dozens of expert
groups have conducted surveys and studies in Armenia for the benefit
of the government and institutions. It is virtually impossible to
estimate the dollar amount for these services.
Non-Armenian Humanitarian Assistance
Starting in 1992, Armenia received large-scale humanitarian assistance
from international donor countries and organizations. Assistance in
this period was conditioned by the post-independence social hardships,
economic transition and transportation and energy blockade. However,
not all assistance in the early years after independence was
registered by the Ministry of Statistics and if recorded, their value
was not calculated. For example, in 1992 the US humanitarian
assistance package alone amounted to some $84 million.
In 1994 estimates of the Department of Statistics put the value of
cargo imports of humanitarian assistance to Armenia at $71.3 million
(excluding 270,000 tons of wheat).
In 1995, a peak year, humanitarian assistance reached $151.3 million,
the two major donors being the United States and the European Union.
It was only in the fall of 1996 that the Ministry of Statistics
started to systematically register the size and value of humanitarian
assistance intended for direct relief for the vulnerable segment of
the population.
Based on government figures for January 1998 to June 1999, Armenian
and non-Armenian organizations and NGOs sent over $82 million-worth of
aid (41.1 billion Drams) to Armenia in 1998 (30 percent less than
1997). 62.2 percent of the humanitarian aid was received by
charitable, religious and non-profit organizations; 37.8 percent by
various ministries and state institutions. Of the total volume of
assistance, 20 percent was sent from the United States (largely by the
Los Angeles-based United Armenian Fund).
Humanitarian supplies and goods sent to Armenia constituted 9.1
percent of all imports to Armenia in 1998. In the first four months of
1999, humanitarian assistance was at 13.5 billion Drams, 8.1 percent
of all imports in 1999. The Customs Department of Armenia (which
started keeping computerized records starting in 1996), reports that
in the first six months of 1999, about $35.6 million-worth of
humanitarian goods and supplies were imported to Armenia; $82.1
million in 1998; $117.2 million in 1997; and $81.2 million in 1996.
In 1998, almost half of the assistance (49.7 percent) was for the
agricultural sector (mostly wheat and fertilizers); 16.1 percent (2.5
billion Drams) for the health care sector; 8.1 percent for educational
and scientific purposes; and 10.8 percent (1.7 billion Drams) for the
social sector. A large portion of the aid included advanced computers
and management tools and technologies and medical equipment which,
according to a government report, has had significant impact on
modernization of the economy and development processes.
In 1998, various countries implemented over $25 million-worth of
projects (12.8 billion Drams), 72.2 percent of which came from the
government of Japan. Some 34 percent of the aid was for realization of
various economic and development projects; 13 percent for the energy
sector; 15 percent the health care sector; 17 percent construction
projects; 4 percent agriculture; 4 percent for education.
In the first quarter of 1999, half of the humanitarian assistance was
in the health care sector (10.5 billion Drams) and one-third for
agriculture. About one billion Drams was for construction and supply
of computers and a large amount of second-hand clothing (160 tons),
toys and sports equipment.
During the 18 month period reported by the government (January
1998-June 1999), the Japanese government provided about 30 percent of
the total aid, United Methodist COR 6.2 percent, 10.1 percent the US
government, 4.2 percent Catholic Relief Services, 3.9 percent German
organizations, 3.8 percent Norwegian Refugee Commission, 2.4 percent
Save the Children.
According to a report prepared by the government's Humanitarian
Assistance Commission in 1998 non-Armenian organizations implemented
$25 million-worth of projects in Armenia. In another report the
Commission provides the breakdown of various humanitarian projects and
sponsoring organizations as follows: American Red Cross (33 percent),
UAF (19 percent), AGBU (11 percent), UN (9 percent), FAR (4 percent),
AMAA (4 percent), French MSF (3 percent) and others.
Record Keeping
Both in Armenia and the Diaspora, until a few years ago there were no
systematic processes to count the aggregate flow of assistance to
Armenia. It is only in recent years that the government of Armenia
(starting in 1996) and the Diaspora organizations have started to keep
detailed count of their activities and donations. Most `in kind'
(goods, supplies and equipment acquired without paying for them)
assistance provided at the beginning of the decade are either not
recorded or segregated or do not have estimates of value. This is the
case especially with non-Armenian sources of funds or supplies. Thus,
the amount in this report does not reflect the total or `real' amount
of assistance sent by Diaspora organizations to Armenia since 1989.
Double counting
Double counting is another problem. As Armenian organizations have
cooperated in certain projects or contributed to a specific program,
the amount of assistance has been reported by the donor organizations,
the receiving organization and sometimes by the end beneficiaries (for
example, the Winter Fuel Project). This survey has paid a particular
attention to detect double counting and the figures provided reflect
the contributions of each organization, and avoids double counting, at
least for major projects. Indeed, this report is the first attempt to
calculate Diaspora assistance to Armenia in the last decade and the
total figures present the minimum amount that has been allocated.
Difficulties
Virtually all organizations surveyed here, reported logistical and
administrative difficulties in providing assistance in Armenia.
`Working in Armenia is not easy. It taxes your patience everyday,'
said one executive. From customs officials who expect favors to
disorganized (and corrupt) civil servants, each organization has
experienced unnecessary delays and bureaucratic hurdles.
It should be noted that there is a large decline of bribe-seeking
personnel at the airport, not necessarily because of the changes of
personnel, but because over the years Diaspora organizations have
categorically refused to give bribes to anyone and have firmly upheld
certain ethical standards.
There are improvements in the ways the government has handled
aid-related issues in the last decade. However, the `improvements'
introduced by the government instead of enhancing the work of
aid-organizations have actually increase bureaucracy. For example, in
recent years, as several organizations have complained, clearing
humanitarian assistance from the airport has become much more time
consuming due to the amount of added paperwork needed from various
state agencies.
Relief versus Development
There is no consensus among the Diaspora aid-providing organizations
whether assistance efforts should shift from Relief to Development.
While in recent years there is a growing trend toward development,
some organizations believe that the population in Armenia is still in
need of relief assistance for at least another decade, if not
more. They argue that humanitarian assistance needs to continue while
engaging in longer-term development projects. The switch from
humanitarian assistance to development projects should be gradual and
on a slower pace. For example, according government data, there are
still 230,000 most vulnerable families in Armenia who receive family
allowances. This is about 26 percent of the total of 812,000 families
officially counted in Armenia.
Donor Fatigue
There is general donor fatigue in virtually all Diaspora
communities. As reflected in the large percentage of non-Armenian
grants received by Armenian organizations surveyed here (at times as
high as 90 percent), over the years financial contributions by
Diasporan communities have steadily declined, relying more on large
individual donations. For example, the average number of regular,
annual donors of the three large US Armenian organizations surveyed in
this report is 7,000 Armenians (with an average $100 donation). All
organizations acknowledge that their communities have much larger
resources but have not contributed enough and tend to contribute less
and less. It should be noted that many Diasporans send assistance to
Armenia through individual channels, directly or indirectly, or
through smaller groups or for small, one-time projects.
One executive surveyed noted: `If people trust they give more and
regularly, you have to be transparent, accountable, reporting
honestly, preserve integrity in operations and maintain a personal
relationship with your donors.'
Needs assessment
In the last decade each Diaspora organization has adopted different
methodologies of assessing humanitarian needs in Armenia. Sometimes
they have responded to government or institutional request, at times
they have done their own assessment through their internal channels
and at times they have `shopped' for projects. Other than the
established projects - for example in the health care sector -
assistance is mostly determined by the size of the organizations'
purse. A well-planned and comprehensive needs assessment mechanism
would better serve the humanitarian needs of Armenia and avoid
duplication of efforts, and most important, would avoid distribution
of assistance to all layers of the population instead of the most
needy. For example, the population in the northern part of Armenia,
in the earthquake zone, is poorer than the population in other urban
areas of the country. People lacking sufficient education are also
more vulnerable, together with pensioners and the disabled.
Legal
The government of Armenia needs to develop clear laws concerning
humanitarian aid and establish proper procedures of administration.
Currently there is lack of consistency and proper regulations. All
organizations believe that humanitarian aid should be tax exempt as it
discourages and demoralizes assistance efforts. Creating clear laws,
procedures and methodologies should not mean increase of bureaucracy
and paperwork. Procedures should be practical, logical and least time
consuming.
Humanitarian Assistance
It is highly recommended that the government of Armenia maintains a
balance between humanitarian assistance and the need for Diaspora
investments. Declaring that Armenia does not need humanitarian aid but
investments would give the wrong public impression and could affect
allocation of much needed humanitarian assistance. Economic
investments should be simultaneous with or complementing humanitarian
needs. Indeed the future of Armenia is investments, but at least for
the next decade, humanitarian needs should not be overlooked.
Armenian and non-Armenian organizations have reported that the
government has not paid due attention to the growing poverty in
Armenia. While projects to create microeconomic stability and
development have been instituted, social welfare issues have been
overlooked. According to aid organizations, the government's position
regarding humanitarian assistance could affect future plans, volume
and orientation of donor organizations and institutions.
Future Focus
One of the main areas of focus for future assistance for the Diaspora
organization is Education (other than organizations which are
dedicated to exclusive sectors, such as health care). Most
organizations believe that gradually, as dire humanitarian needs
decrease, they would concentrated on improving the educational system
in Armenia and concern themselves with the education of the young
generation. Already, some organizations are phasing out their various
projects to engage in the educational sphere, such as building
schools, providing teaching material, teachers training, etc.
In the coming years, it is likely that humanitarian assistance from
non-Armenian sources will gradually decline. As one UN report put it,
`Only grave humanitarian situations caused by wars or elements of
nature is regarded urgent for the international community. The grave
humanitarian situation, caused in Armenia by large-scale poverty is
typical of many underdeveloped countries.'
As the number of economically disadvantaged and disaster-ridden
countries increase around the world, the role of the Diaspora
organizations will become more critical in providing sustained
assistance to the vulnerable segment of Armenian society.
Database
It is highly recommended that the government or an independent agency
or organization set up a comprehensive database of humanitarian
assistance needs to better manage and coordinate assistance and draw
qualified assessment and analysis of needs. (The UNDP and OCHA have
already started a donor database.) All donor Armenian and non-Armenian
organizations, international governmental agencies and NGOs should
cooperate by providing relevant information and assistance.
In conclusion, over the last decade Diaspora organizations have played
a significant role in providing assistance to Armenia and have gained
valuable experience in the process, which should be taken into account
when addressing improvements to the current `system.' There is
positive qualitative change, however difficult to quantify, between
the early years of the decade and recent years in the way the
government of Armenia has handled and facilitated humanitarian
assistance. There are still major problems (legal, administrative,
logistical) that need to be addressed by the government together with
donor organizations. Over the years, the exposure and engagement of
Armenian government, ministry and customs officials with Diaspora
organizations in particular and the international donor community in
general have had a positive impact on improving the aid allocation,
importation and distribution system in Armenia. And it is hoped that
interest by this Conference will be the beginning of a more
transparent and systematic process of public and detailed accounting,
study, analysis and planning of humanitarian assistance to Armenia.
List Of Organizations Surveyed:
III. Perspective
IV. Problems
V. Recommendations
Conclusion