 Over the last 30 years, we have seen a formidable boom on the humanitarian market. And there is a paradox because over the last 30 years, we have seen a decrease in the number and intensity of armed conflicts. We may have seen actually an increase of recorded disasters, but this has not been paralleled by an increase in the number of people hit by disaster. So this paradox means that humanitarian responses have become a foreign policy instrument by default to compensate for a lack of political resolve to address conflict. Over the last 30 years, we have seen a lot of research to better understand the economics of war, the economics of disasters and terrorism. And this is a great untapped potential that we can draw from to improve humanitarian responses today. My research focuses on exploring the economic dimensions and the political economy dynamics of war and disaster and of humanitarian action. If we better take into consideration the incentives of those coming to the negotiation tables in order to improve humanitarian outcomes, we can reduce the number and intensity of war crimes. And we can also improve access of relief organizations to the field by working on the incentives, but also by adding a dimension which is widely neglected, which is drawing on behavioral economics to understand also what are the mental models and the social norms that constrain the behavior of combatants. And if we do that, there are better chances that going to the negotiation table will produce less war crimes and more chances for peace. Over the next 30 years, we will see the potential of humanitarian economics helping us to better understand complex chronic emergencies and respond to them. One example, disaster prevention is not popular. Despite the fact that we know that it is cost effective, that investing $1 in disaster prevention can save up to $7 or $8 in disaster relief after the disaster has struck, it is not very popular because of political economic constraints. We see now the insurance industry and the financial markets coming up with risk link securities, coming up with disaster risk reduction. And this will be a game changer by providing many incentives to invest much more in prevention. By investing more in prevention, we can not only save money, but we can save lives and we can avoid unnecessary suffering.