Citation

James E. Disasters 2015; 40(2): 185-206.

Affiliation

Co-Founder/Director, Field Ready, Moffett Field, California, United States.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/disa.12140

PMID

26283645

Abstract

Criticisms lodged at humanitarian relief often include the belief that professionalisation is needed. The problems associated with humanitarianism would end, it is assumed, if the delivery of aid, and relief workers themselves, were more professional and 'business like'. To explore this further, the paper asks what comprises a profession, and offers four criteria: 1) specialisation of knowledge; 2) establishment of the profession as a livelihood; 3) organisation and institutionalisation; and 4) legitimacy and authority. A model for understanding professionalisation, as developed by the author, is then presented. The analysis compares six other professions against the same criteria to argue that the humanitarian community already constitutes a profession. Finally, three potential downsides of professionalisation are offered: the distance of the relief worker from the beneficiary, barriers to entry into the humanitarian sector, and adding to risk aversion and a decline in innovation. Based on these findings, professionalisation should be approached with some caution.

Language: en