Contents x
    3.2.3 Sector or Cluster – Emergency Food Security Coordination Options
    • 15 Dec 2023
    • 3 Minutes to read
    • Print
    • Dark
      Light
    Contents

    3.2.3 Sector or Cluster – Emergency Food Security Coordination Options

    • Updated on 15 Dec 2023
    • 3 Minutes to read
    • Print
    • Dark
      Light
    Article summary

    National governments are ultimately responsible for providing humanitarian assistance to people under their jurisdiction. The specific coordination mechanism in a humanitarian emergency is therefore, as mentioned, determined by the context and scale of need and the capacity of governments to provide and coordinate humanitarian assistance. It is also often a political decision. 

    Government-Led Emergency Sector Coordination

    Where coordination capacity is adequate, the emergency response is led by the government and government-led sector coordination mechanisms (for example, a ‘food security sector’) will support the designated government bodies. The lifespan of emergency sector coordination is defined by government policies or declarations.

    When the coordination is led by the government, and when there are no formally activated clusters, international humanitarian support generally aims to augment the national capacity under a ‘sector coordination’ response – but will still be underpinned by the overall principles of the cluster approach.

    Food Security Sector Coordination

    A food security sector, as a ‘non-IASC coordination system’, functions in similar ways to a cluster structure but with two fundamental differences:

    1) The leadership differs: In the case of government-led ‘sector coordination’, the government has the responsibility for coordination (with the CLAs playing only a supporting role) and is accountable for the quality of the response. (Note: this is different from UNHCR led coordination mechanisms that also uses the term ‘sector’ – see 4.2.2)

    2) The CLAs do not have the responsibility as Provider of Last Resort.

    IASC Cluster-Led Emergency Coordination

    As mentioned, IASC may formally activate clusters as part of an international emergency response, based on a request from the national government or HC/HCT. This will be based on an analysis of humanitarian needs, existing coordination mechanisms and capacity to respond in line with humanitarian principles on the ground. However, even when a government is able to lead and coordinate a response, additional international coordination capacity may be valuable. 

    The principal difference between the cluster approach and other sector coordination mechanisms is that, in the cluster system, the CLAs have clearly defined responsibilities and accountabilities. They are responsible for ensuring a functioning cluster coordination mechanism; for identifying gaps in humanitarian response in their sector, and for taking action to fill them (see Provider of Last Resort in 3.3.2). IASC cluster coordination is a temporary solution and efforts should be made as soon as appropriate to hand over coordination to the relevant authorities (due consideration must be given to ensure the neutrality of host governments, and the potential need for capacity strengthening on humanitarian principles) – see also 3.8.  

    Comparison of Sector and Cluster Coordination according to the Context:

    Coordination MechanismEmergency PhaseRecovery Phase

    Sector:

    Government coordination capacity is adequate  

    Government provides leadership. International partners may reinforce the government’s coordination capacity.

    Government leadership continues. Humanitarian coordination structures may transition to recovery and to development structures. Inter-national actors withdraw or support recovery and help to prepare for future crises.

    Cluster: 

    Government coordination capacity is limited or constrained

    Clusters are activated where needed. Where appropriate and possible, co-leadership with government bodies and NGO partners is strongly encouraged.

    Clusters are de-activated or devolve to national emergency or recovery and development coordination structures, where appropriate and possible. Government coordination is strengthened, where appropriate and possible.

    Source: Adapted from the Cluster Coordination Reference Module (IASC, 2015), p 7.  

    Food Security Coordination Structure for Preparedness

    Depending on the context, in countries where early warning systems indicate a potential need for coordinated interagency humanitarian support, FAO and WFP may consider establishing a country-level coordination structure for preparedness (for example, the FSC in Bangladesh and in the Pacific). In countries with no formal FSC, non-cluster coordination solutions can be agreed upon by the HCT and the government (e.g. food security sector working groups).

    Sector vs Cluster - what does this mean for the Coordinator? 

    In practical terms, generally, all core functions and tasks remain the same for a Food Security Sector Coordinator when working under a government-led coordination structure. The key day to day functions, responsibilities and activities of the coordination team are similar but the overarching responsibility for coordination will differ. Often, sector meetings will be held at government offices and the coordination team may play more of a supporting/secretariat role.  

    In disaster-prone countries, sectoral food security coordination mechanisms often exist prior to a crisis and the introduction of the cluster approach may not dramatically change the day-to-day work of sector coordination.  

    Example of Government-led emergency sector coordination: In Lebanon, the Food Security Sector Working Group is led by the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Social Affairs. 

    Resources: See the Reference Module for Cluster Coordination at Country Level (IASC, 2015), pp. 7 and 43 for more details on ‘clusters’ vs ‘sectors’.

    Was this article helpful?
    What's Next