The principles, and impartiality in particular, should be the starting point for prioritisation: those ‘most in need’ should be the priority. There is also significant diversity in the understanding of what this means. In principle, this should ensure that everyone is covered, provided there is coordination to achieve this; however, this is not currently the case. Instead, the assumption is that humanitarian actors share a common definition of the principles, when in fact most organisations’ understanding, interpretation and application of said principles stem from their respective mandates (and are further skewed by politics). In the rare case where the diversity of perspectives is acknowledged and serves complementarity, it is by chance rather than by design. The question thus remains: is the system capable of achieving this by design?

In the lead-up to our anniversary, join us as we look back on previous work, highlighting the lessons and recommendations that past pieces have brought up and exploring any outcomes, follow-up, or lack thereof. This message on prioritisation is but one of many components of our retrospective; you can find the full series here.