 Hi everyone and welcome to our Taste to lecture from wherever you are, however early or late it may be. So as Laura said, I'm Mike Jennings and I'm based in the Department of Development Studies, one of the global top five departments for the study of global development and humanitarianism. So what I'm going to do this evening is just to give a Taste to lecture, which is a short example of how we discuss issues and topics in our programme. So I'll speak for 25, 30 minutes and then leave plenty of time for questions. And I'm going to be talking about humanitarian aid, the support that we give to people in need in the midst of crisis. Now of course when we're confronted with suffering, it's a natural instinct to want to respond in any way we can and doing nothing. Many feel is simply unacceptable. When asked about the humanitarian response during the Ethiopian famine in the mid 1980s, Bob Geldof defends it on the principle that if even one life was saved or if only one life was saved, it would still be worth it to save that life. But the issue is that responding to complex emergencies and crises, particularly those that are focused around conflict, is difficult. You know, how can humanitarian actors ensure that they give an access to all sides, no matter where the suffering is, no matter which side they happen to be on. How can they ensure that the aid they give is only going to be used by those in need, and not by the military by the government by other forces and other actors. And how of course can humanitarian workers be protected from violence in extremely violent contexts. But there's another question that I think has asked a lot less. And that's whether humanitarian organizations, despite their best intentions are actually causing harm during their interventions as a result of the way that they're operating. So, I suppose to come back to the point that's often made by Bob Geldof, if one life was saved but at the cost of many lives, does that still remain acceptable. So what I want to do in this lecture, let me be clear is not to suggest that humanitarian activity, inevitably causes harm is always problematic and shouldn't take place. But what I want to do is to challenge some of the assumptions that it is always and inherently good that it is always good to go in, and no matter what is done provided one life is saved. That makes the whole effort the whole endeavor worthwhile. Now, because getting access to people in the midst of conflict or crisis is so difficult. The core humanitarian principles has emerged over the past 150 years or so since the creation of the Red Cross to ensure that humanitarian actors can reach those in need of assistance and do so without being blocked or attacked and so on. And so these core principles are firstly humanity the idea that human suffering must be addressed wherever it is no matter which side. People happen to be on. And it's based on the principle of need whoever needs it should receive it should be based on impartiality the second core principle that it shouldn't be given according to any criteria based on nationality race gender religious belief class or political opinions purely on need. Humanitarian actors must not take sides and critically must not be perceived must not be believed to take sides by those actors engaged in the crisis or in the conflict. And they're at neither can the aid support intentionally or otherwise one side or another. And finally independence for humanitarian organizations is absolutely critical that they're seen to operate autonomously that they're not linked to any political economic or military actor engaged in that conflict or who has an interest in that conflict. Now of course no one suggests that these principles are easy in practice, and they've led to some critical failures, quite famously during the second world war the Red Cross has been criticized for and actually has apologized for failing to report and tell the world about what was going on in the concentration camps, and both the Red Cross and medicine frontier and other humanitarians have been criticized for failing during the Rwandan genocide in 1994 to call it what it was a genocide but rather presenting it as a conflict between two sides, apportioning no blame to the government, which was responsible for almost the entirety of the violence. But despite some of the problems and the acknowledged problems within the humanitarian sector, they are seen as essential for building trust and for gaining access. So it's critical that humanitarian agencies are seen to adhere to these principles if they're to operate in conflict zones. So various sides will let them in will understand what their job is, and will give them access to those people who need assistance. And of course it can help protect the humanitarian organizations and their work as their staff and the facilities that they run the clinics the hospitals the feeding stations and so on from attack because they're seen as being impartial catering to all no matter what side they're on. Now what I want to do is to suggest not that these are poor or bad or always have bad outcomes but to suggest that actually engaging in emergencies, because it is so deeply political because it is so difficult. Sometimes harm can be caused, even when humanitarian actors are adhering to the principles and some might argue that actually a blind adherence to the principles can make sometimes can sometimes make this harm, even worse. So, to return to the Ethiopian example that I briefly mentioned at the start. For many people of my generation in particular, the response to the Ethiopian famine of 1984 to five was a moment of great global awakening. It was inspired by a series of news reports by the journalist Michael Burke and the camera, the cameraman Mohammed Amin, which described describe what was happening as a biblical famine caused by a catastrophic collapse in food production. And the live aid concerts that followed just those concerts alone raised $127 million, which is about $400 million in today's money, which at the time was one of the largest amounts ever raised by a single appeal across 24 hours and humanitarian actors NGOs and other organizations flooded into the country to provide relief. But the problem was that this wasn't a famine that was caused by food shortage this was a famine that was caused by a government prosecuting a war against people in the north of the country. Using famine using the destruction of food sources deliberately to undermine the rebellion and to reassert its own authority. So what then was the consequence of the mass humanitarian effort to bring food aid into the country, which undoubtedly did save lives known is denying that many, many lives were saved by the actions of those humanitarian agencies. But it's also true that because food was being brought into the country the government was able to direct some of it. Some of its spending that it otherwise would have had to spend on food towards the military so it allowed it to reestablish the strength of its military in prosecuting the war, the government also diverted some of the stocks, the food stocks to supply its own soldiers. So, in a very real sense, the food aid the other humanitarian assistance was allowing the government to continue to prosecute a war that it was in the process of losing. And perhaps most egregiously, humanitarian actors supported through their aid, a government implemented resettlement policy. It was extensively about taking people from the famine, ridden north and moving them to more productive areas, but was actually a government policy that was deliberately designed to take people who might support the rebel forces and move them elsewhere in other words to undermine the, the ability of the other sides to create war, or to prosecute that war. So, clearly, regardless of the intentions, they weren't impartial they weren't neutral in effect they were taking a side, not that they wanted to, but that was the outcome of the way that humanitarian aid was delivered. Now were the humanitarian actors aware of this well if they weren't shouldn't they be surely being neutral means actively making sure that you're being so. Just saying you're not favoring aside, if your actual practice does so is surely not within the spirit of the principles. But if they were aware and actually we know that many NGOs and humanitarian actors were aware of what was going on. Is it ethical to present the famine in the ways that they did on news reports in the appeals for donations. And how could they justify participating in a resettlement campaign that itself led to a considerable number of deaths. And of course, this is not something that is particular to one crisis. Another humanitarian action is that bringing any resource into a conflict setting makes that resource part of the crisis economy. And these can sustain the crisis by allowing sides to keep fighting, and it can create new crises by encouraging new conflicts over the control of those new resources. Earlier for example, when food aid was brought in in 1993, much of it was distributed through the warlords that were fighting amongst themselves at that time. Now humanitarian organizations argued perhaps understandably perhaps correctly that this was the only realistic way of getting food to those in need. But the consequence was still that it reinforced the power and authority of the warlords over the communities in which they were based, and then doing so perpetuated the conflict. In Syria to one of the most challenging and dangerous of emergencies that we've had in modern times. We can also see how humanitarian food aid has been used by all sides. So, the government has insisted that food aid within its own controlled areas have been channeled through government controlled organizations. And that allows it to be seen to be fulfilling its well for obligations to be seen to be acting the way that state should be in providing food for its citizens undermining opposition, and also allowing it to spend divert resources to its military. And the government in limiting access to rebel held areas to opposition held areas, the government has also led to those oppositions being undermined to have protests and demonstrations against them because of the hunger that's growing in some of those areas. And supplies have been diverted from civilians to the military and all side, the Islamic State for example demanded that it supervised all relief activities. And more than that it actually demanded that one third of food aid would be distributed in boxes that had the ISIS, the Islamic State logo on it in order that they could take credit, rather than humanitarian actors. So I think there's a real question to be asked about the balance between the potential for albeit unintended harm caused by humanitarian organizations against the assistance that they can actually provide. And then there's also the question about whether humanitarian organizations are asking this question sufficiently robustly and transparently. Another example. So in July 1999 1994, the Rwandan patriotic front defeated the genocidal government of Rwanda. And as the RPF swept towards Kigali around 2 million people mostly Hutus fled the country fearing reprisals for the genocide even though the RPF had issued many public declarations that it wouldn't seek to take revenge. And within the space of about four days over 850,000 people descended on a small town in then Zaire now Democratic Republic of Congo, a town called Goma. And it led to one of the largest humanitarian responses up till that point so around 150 to 200 organizations swept in to provide relief around $1.5 billion was spent on operations over the course of the year. And just to put that in context, very little was actually spent in Rwanda by humanitarian organizations on the people who had suffered genocide. All of this was going to these camps outside and I explain why that's problematic in a minute. And it also received a huge amount of interest from the media led to campaigns by humanitarian organizations asking for donations and a clear link made in those campaigns a fraudulent link as it happens that those who had suffered genocide were now suffering as refugees. And the reason that is fraudulent is because these people were not those who had suffered from the genocide or those being the targets and the victims of genocide. Some of those in the camps possibly many had been active participants in the genocide, the camps were dominated by the Hutu militia who had led the genocide. And critics suggest that the resources that were brought into the camp, and the fact that humanitarian organizations worked through the Hutu militias in order to maintain control in order to distribute those resources to those in need, allowed those militias to assert control over people sometimes brutally to reassert their stability and even to rearm guns and other weapons were being shipped in under the cover of humanitarian aid of course nothing to do with the humanitarian agencies, but nevertheless the vast influx of resources did provide cover to allow themselves to to rearm. And of course that contributed to the long lasting instability and conflict in that region that has led to the deaths of what, certainly more than three possibly probably more than 5 million people over the past couple of decades. And this was deeply worrying and this isn't just an external analysis people recognize this at the time so Kevin Watkins who was working for Oxfam reporting on what Oxfam was doing and thinking about reflecting on their activity. Talked about the fact that they were delivering aid through the people who had committed to genocide in Rwanda, calling this you know a grave abuse of international assistance. The equivalent of medicine some frontier Ronnie brawman goes further the humanitarian intervention, he says, far from representing a bulwark against evil was in fact one of its appendages that's an incredibly strong statement to write. But the response has been seen as an instance where the humanitarian community got it badly wrong and got their priorities badly wrong in where aid was being delivered where it wasn't and the ways in which he was being delivered. So actually one of the problems is that human humanitarian organizations survive on donations they need income in order to carry on existing. And these emergencies can often be used if they're presented in the right way to boost their profile, and therefore to boost their funds. The Mills for example talks about the fact that they're the perfect opportunity to raise funds for the immediate emergency but also long term funds that keep them going. Terry, you know talks about how Rwanda provided a show of suffering in which the enemy was the virus and the savior was humanitarian aid. To ask ourselves is this just a particularly a unique example of extremely poor behavior, extremely bad practice, or can we see elements of this perhaps not to the same extent, but nevertheless similar outcomes and similar processes in other emergencies and many would argue that we can. And humanitarian responses can also cause harm through the way that they're implemented. So the response to the Haiti earthquake in 2010 was, you know, another of those watershed moments the largest one humanitarian response up until that point $5 billion was spent in the first few months alone and vastly more over the next 18 months. But it was also seen and it's been, you know, evaluated and is used within the humanitarian sector as an example where things went wrong where the response actually not only didn't necessarily do as much good as it should have done but perhaps in some cases, actively caused harm. And this was due to simple, simply poor practice in many cases. So communication between the various organizations was incredibly weak. There's very little coordination which led to replication of efforts. Lots of organizations working in some areas leaving other areas devoid of any response and under supply of resources in some areas, because people simply weren't talking about what they were doing and where they were doing. There was weak engagement with local communities, the major meetings between the major humanitarian donors will all held in English. How do you justify that in a French speaking country of course that excludes local population. And those these are the populations that are going to have to rebuild reconstruct they need to be front and center at any of any humanitarian response. Many of the incoming humanitarian organizations had become because like everyone they were incredibly moved and wanted to act and respond to the suffering they saw on television. But that didn't mean they actually had the skills or the resources and many didn't have the skills or the resources or the experience for dealing with an emergency on this scale. Some organizations didn't even come with enough resources to provide for their own food and their own housing, which meant that some of the incoming aid that was meant to go to those people who had just been through this terrible earthquake had to be diverted to support the humanitarian actors. Again, that's that seems to me to be fairly dreadful in terms of practice, but perhaps even worse, particularly from a health perspective. Volunteers can come in as they can in many of these vulnerable contexts and work without necessarily needing to prove or demonstrate they have the credentials to do so. And whilst this might not matter for some functions. If we're talking about medical practice if we're talking about people practicing medicine and health interventions who don't aren't necessarily qualified to do so. That would be completely illegal in any global North country so why would we suddenly find it acceptable just because we're talking about the midst of an emergency. And again, we might say that the example of Haiti is particularly egregious but it certainly isn't unique. These aspects are common across many humanitarian responses. And the consequences for vulnerable people can be both catastrophic and also incredibly disempowering people don't lose their rights, people don't lose the right to good treatment to effective responses simply because they're suffering through an emergency. But in those contexts it's all too easy for the humanitarian organizations to use their power to control everything and to exclude local organizations local individuals and local communities from their decision making. And I think this speaks to the final things I want to talk about in relation to humanitarian actors, which is the issue of power and debates around decolonization and humanitarianism, and the extent to which humanitarian principles are perhaps being used, not by all organizations, not by all individuals, and certainly perhaps not deliberately, but nevertheless are they being used to exclude others and to defend the power of humanitarian actors. We need to focus more on the do we need when we focus on the intentions and the values of humanitarian organizations and say well I like them because they reflect the values and intentions that I have. Are we in doing so ignoring the experiences of the affected populations. What value are we placing on the experience that they have of working with these humanitarian organizations and critically how are humanitarian organizations held accountable for their actions. Let's be clear, there are many who see problems within the humanitarian sector who see problems of racism and coloniality within the formal humanitarian sector. And many of you will know that last year around 1000 staff within MSF accused their own organization of being institutionally racist, calling on the organization the leadership of the organization to take action to engage with ideas and issues around power and decolonization and racism in order to make responses better. So under the cover of the need to respond to suffering and the sense that we in the global north must be the ones to do it is humanitarian embedded in a kind of a white saviorism complex. And does that enable approach approaches which are perhaps racist perhaps disempowering and perhaps create new pathways of vulnerability, not always, not inevitably, but in enough occasions at enough times to mean that this isn't just a one off and needs to be taken seriously. So look, it's hard, perhaps impossible to look at the world, look at suffering in the world and not to want to respond and I'm absolutely not saying that we shouldn't respond. What I am saying is that we can't assume that just because humanitarian organizations have good and honorable intentions that this means they're not causing harm. And we can't excuse harm that those actors cause on the basis of their good intentions. We don't accept a defensive good intentions when we're talking about serious harm that has been committed by for profit companies or by governments. And the fact that we may admire the values of workers for humanitarian organizations, their dedication, is that good enough doesn't that prioritize our feelings, our privilege, our experiences over the lives and experiences of those who are in the midst of great and have suffered additional harm. So how can the humanitarian principles be used in ways that lessen vulnerability and power communities and develop to their aspirations. It isn't about saying humanitarian is bad or should be abandoned, but about how it can be structured in new ways in fairer ways in much more equitable ways that preserve the human dignity of all and protect against additional harm. This is really what we're thinking about when we're talking about these issues in development study and all issues no matter what the topic happens to be it's about challenging and questioning assumptions, trying to look beneath the surface to see if we can uncover perhaps the reality of what's going on. And to try and take a look not from the perspective top down organizations and what organizations and policymakers think is happening think they're doing, but actually how it's experienced by people on the ground and how that experience can help us improve can help us create the good change that of course we all want to see. So I'll leave this up. You may want to take some of those. But what I'm going to do now is I'm going to open this up to questions so you can either ask me questions about the things that I've been specifically talking about or of course you can ask me questions about the program. And so if you can put them into the Q&A box, then I'll be able to answer them. I'm just going to go through them in order I apologize if you put in a question and I don't get to you. But towards the end I'll put in my email address and I'm always very happy to carry on with these conversations afterwards. So Amana and I'll apologize in advance for any mispronunciations of names of names. So Amana has asked if I could talk about career assistance for students, especially for international students. Yeah, that's a really good question. You know, all of our students are wanting or most of our students are wanting to work in the global developmental humanitarian sector. Now, I don't know what your experiences of careers offices are in your institutions of your first degree. In my first degree institution, they were kind of fairly standard they assumed everyone was going to go into, you know, work for accountancy firms or marketing firms and they didn't really, they weren't very imaginative. We're really lucky that so as we have a really creative, interesting careers office that gets our students and knows exactly what they want to do. And with the department we put on a lot of collaborative events and we work closely with careers in order to provide advice and skills and opportunities for networking for our students. Networking is probably one of the most important things you can do whilst you're a student and the careers office and the department and jointly we put on networking events. We also make use of our alumni, for example, and bring them in so they can talk about their experiences of how they transitioned from studies to a job. The careers office also have information about internships and volunteering opportunities as well as running fairs with potential employers, bringing students and those employees together and offering lots of advice on, you know, how you can sell yourself approach organizations. And of course, they understand that most of our students are a very large proportion of our students are international. So they're oriented towards meeting the needs of our students, many of whom wherever they come from are going to be wanting to work and end up working in countries other than their home countries. So there's plenty of support on careers. You can actually have a look at our website. We have more information about careers and transitioning to careers on our website. Instituto says that in regards to Haiti, I'd highlight a number of reported abuses committed by minister agents. Yeah, look, there was an awful lot that was going on by, you know, many different actors there and I'm certainly not suggesting that humanitarian humanitarian actors were uniquely poor in their practice. Although I think that there is a significant gap, perhaps sometimes between the proclaimed values and ways of working with humanitarian actors suggest that they have in the actual realities. For those who've been in the UK or in the UK a few years ago when we heard about some of the things that happened with Oxfam leading NGO in Haiti, particularly around the use of sex workers and engaging with sex workers. The real surprise for those who work in humanitarianism was that this was, you know, one of the first times that such things have become public, not that they were going on, that was no real surprise to anyone. And suddenly, you know, a crisis and emergency context, because of the huge power differentials means that all kinds of abuse are going on by all kinds of different actors they're incredibly difficult environments of course to work in. Okay, so someone is asking for the research of international development program. How many students will so as take for this year. Yeah, so we don't really have a set number of how many students we have the research and international development is not exclusively but often used by those who want to go on and do a PhD. So the numbers actually vary quite considerably. So it kind of averages somewhere between 15 and 20 students but sometimes it's a bit more sometimes it's a bit less. But if you meet the criteria for it we will make you an offer. So that is the criteria we don't kind of have a cut off number whereby we say we're not going to accept any more people on this program and we have a pretty good idea of how many people are going to want to do each program each year within a band. So if you're worried that you might not be accepted. Please don't. If you've met a criteria you will be made an offer. I'm just going through. I'm going to come back to your next one Institute to just because I'm going to give other people a chance to speak but hopefully I'll come back to that one if we have time. Okay so Charlotte is asking good question about when module enrollment happens for programs starting in September. Laura may be able to answer this better than me I think it starts happening over summer is that right Laura. Yes that's right so the registry will get in touch with you over the summer and to let you know the exact sort of timetable for your enrollment, but generally module enrollment will happen as part of your overall enrollment process just towards the end of September. I should say that, you know, you can find details of all of our modules online so if you go to the program that you're taking, and you, or you will be taking and you click on the structure. Then, if you can see all of the modules and each of those has a link so you'll be able to click on that link and it will give you a brief outline of what what is looked at in that particular module. So for sure about what module to take. Just get in touch with that module convener the person who runs that module their name will be on it their email will be there. And you can just ask them for more details to see if it's the kind of thing that you want to take. There is also an op you know when you get to so as once you've enrolled there is you know you have about a week if you want to change your mind and change to another module if you have about a week to be able to do that. So I would always recommend that you do sign up over summer, but there is an opportunity the only limitation on that is if it's a in a classroom whether a limited numbers then there may need to be limits put on it. But any questions about modules you may have just get in touch and someone will be able to tell you about their module. George has asked about examples of things that you may deal with in your job after development studies. This is absolutely impossible to answer I'm afraid because our students gone to do such amazingly diverse things so most are going on to work in the global development or humanitarian sector in a whole different range of functions. So let's see on our website the type of jobs that our students go on to do. And what I would want to emphasize is that our students come to us because they want to make a good difference in the world they want to create social change. And what our programs can do is to help you find that place where you can make the change you want to in the area that you want to in the way that you want to, and know what it is you're doing and know and be able to understand what the likely outcome of the things that you're are. So we don't, there isn't a kind of a, you know, these are the kind of things you'll be doing other than most of our students will be working in the global development or humanitarian sector. So it's the kind of roles you would expect there be it for international organizations like the UN or national donors or NGOs and other charities and so on. So really if you look at the website actually you know not all of our students go into global development some go into journalism or government even to kind of private sector and banking. So it's it's about the skills that our programs provide and one of those core skills I think is cultural intelligence. You know one of the, and this links back to the so as idea that we look at things through a contextual lens. And to become increasingly important for employers I think that people understand that you can't simply replicate the same idea the same policy the same approach in country after country or region after region that you need to understand the context in which you're engaging. So for anyone, whatever sector you're working in, whether it's global development humanitarianism or anything else, having that deep contextual cultural intelligence is going to be really important to those are some of the skills that our students develop whilst they're here. Okay there's a question about scholarship opportunities go to the scholarship webpage on the website that outlines all of the scholarships that are available to you. Do so as soon as you can because some have deadlines that will be coming up. So it's also worth checking back because if any new scholarship opportunity comes in whether internal so as or external that we found out about. It will be advertised on that page if you go to the so as website types scholarships in the search box it should take you to the section and that will give you all the information we have we do have so as scholarships. So, you know do apply for them have a look, check out the deadline and make sure that you do apply. So just a question about the practical skills and experience. So I've answered that in part I guess about the cultural intelligence the contextual knowledge. You know we do also, you know have modules that engage with more practical tools and skills in relation to development and humanitarianism. So really the key skills what are what employers are most interested in, as well as the cultural intelligence is your analytical ability. I mean you can teach someone how to do a particular technique, how to develop how to write a project proposal, for example. But it's much harder to teach people how to analyze it have to think critically about it to know which questions you need to ask in order to make sure that it works and it's that critical ability. And that I guess, for me, from what our employees tell us, it would be one of the core skills that you get from this so of course there are the practical elements. There's the deep knowledge about development theory development practice and development policy and an understanding of what development is what it could be what it should be and so on. And it's that critical analytical ability that marks you out as someone who is a thinking practitioner, rather than someone who just does what they're told or does what everyone else does because that's the way that it's always been done. Okay, so, Mariana, I'm deliberately not mentioning complimentary compliments but you know comments but you know thanks for them I do appreciate them. But I don't want to sound big headed but so thanks for the comment but you're asking about can you discuss case studies from your own background along lectures. Absolutely. Probably about half of our students are coming with some kind of experience, working in the sector, and many others will have experiences just drawn from day to day life in across a whole range of different countries. The reason that our tutorial discussions work really well is because students bring those experiences. And of course you can refer to them in your work. If you have particular interests, you can follow those up in the further reading that you do around the particular topics. So yeah, we actively encourage what we want students to do is to bring those experiences to talk about them, particularly when they contradict something that the lecturers said or something that you've read in the literature, because that's really nice to have some. Well okay the literature the academic literature says this but in my experience, this is what happens. That's where you get really dynamic, interesting conversations that advance everyone's learning and what makes it so satisfying for us as lecturers to teach these modules because we're also learning through our interactions with you and with our other students. Okay. Right, so someone has asked if I'd recommend this program for someone who's already studied international development. You know, I think there's an extent to which you'll have to look at the structure and see whether you think that this is repeating the things that you have already studied. I think the only thing that I can say is that we do have quite a lot of students on our program who have studied international development at undergraduate level and still come on to do a masters. And it's not necessarily that unusual if you think about it you know someone who's done a politics degree may well go on to do a masters in politics. You know the expectation is that when you get to masters level you're doing it at a deeper level, you're perhaps engaging in different sets of learning through options, and so on. But do take a look at the detail of the structure. And if it isn't sufficient if it doesn't really answer your question, get in touch with the program convener and perhaps talk about it with them. And that should give you a clearer idea. Okay, so Andrea is asking about alternative institutional frameworks for humanitarian aid and are there any projects I can point to now, perhaps not necessarily projects but I think there are an awful lot of debates that are going on. A person I would actually recommend is Mark DuBois, that's M-A-R-C, first name, second name, D-U-B-O-I-S. So he's actually, he's linked to our department but he's writing some really interesting things, former president of MSF, but writing some really interesting things about power, coloniality, racism within humanitarianism. And if you've worked in the sector you will be aware of things like the Sphere Project, which is an attempt to increase accountability of humanitarian organizations and ensure that they better meet both the human rights and the actual needs of those suffering. So that's quite an interesting thing to look at a set of standards to look at and also read some of the debates about that. You can always provide anyone with all kinds of different readings. So if you're interested in reading in a particular area, look up on the website, see which member of staff works on that area. Or you can just email me and I'll pass it on. And we can always try and think of interesting things for you to look at. So get in touch for that. While I'm here, I'm just going to, in the chat box, because I know some of you may have to go, I've put my email in there as well. So I'm going to carry on answering as many questions as I can. Right, sorry, because it keeps moving as I'm just trying to get where I am now. Okay, so someone is asking about an extra language. So yes, actually, we can, we have what's called an open option. And what that means is that in addition to the core, so that the development studies modules that you need to take as part of your degree, you can take one option outside of our department. And that can be in whatever you want provided it's it's open, opened by the other departments. So many people use that for a language. Many people use that to look at a particular country or a particular region, their history of their politics. Some people do things like music or art. So that really allows you to shape your degree and gain additional knowledge as you want to and certainly learning a language is a possibility I did my masters at so as and I, I did a language, and I benefited tremendously from doing that. Yeah, something from a Lisa on the actual things that I was talking about asking whether humanitarian organizations work in a logic of charity and they create relationships of dependence instead of empowering populations to improve their situations. Yeah, good point, at least, and I think that is one of the strong critiques of humanitarian sectors. They necessarily do that deliberately but that may be one of the inadvertent consequences of the way that they act and their approaches that they take. And I suppose I was that's really what I meant when I was talking about the idea of white saviorism. And there is that profound narrative. Again, it can be quite difficult for humanity. I mean no one is pretending that it's easy for them. So there can be a degree of sympathy. And one of the, because the principle of neutrality means no engagement in politics. There are those that say, as soon as you engage in reconstruction and rebuilding that actually becomes political because it moves into the territory of development. Because development is political. Therefore, that means that humanitarian organizations shouldn't be engaged in that they should simply be about, you know, the sticking plaster at a time of need. Personally, but this is a personal view I'm not entirely convinced by that I think the idea that humanitarian emergency is a not political or can be engaged in without politics coming into it is is a nonsense. I think it's a myth that's convenient. But it does create some of these these problems around that. Okay. Okay, so a good question from Veronica asking about whether we take experience into account when people are applying, particularly if they don't quite meet the academic grades that we're asking for. Absolutely. It's really important to us that, you know, we look at the full application the full person. So if you kind of meet our criteria then that's, you know, that that's fine you send that in. And that's, you know, it's a very easy decision. But if you know that you don't what we then are looking for is, you know, why is it that you want to take a program and why what gives us what can give us confidence that you will do well in this program. We want people to take it we want people to pass. So, is there anything else that you can tell us about yourself and your past that might give us that confidence, even if you haven't got the academic grades that we might not we might normally ask for. So make sure you put that in your personal statement make sure you explain why you think this course is appropriate for you and you are appropriate for our programs. So the past taking people who haven't even got a first degree. Never mind the grade to get from the first degree because they've had really good experience of working in a day to day environment in development. So do make sure you do that don't assume that we won't make you an offer. Get in touch and if you want you can always get in touch with the admissions officer informally before you put in your application just to have a chat with them to see whether they think it's worth you applying. Just make sure in your personal statement that you make all of your experience really clear. So we have the information that we need to make a decision. So anyone else who's in that situation you know please do bear that in mind don't assume that you won't get an offer. Try us let us know tell us about yourself and then we'll see. Amira is asking whether there are examples where anthropological factors of beneficiaries are taken into account by humanitarian actors. I don't quite understand the question I'm sorry, but I get I think you're probably asking about whether humanitarian actors are engaging with kind of culture that the local cultures and local traditions. Yes, that's certainly true humanitarian agencies have certainly got a lot better at that. Not always perfectly sometimes it's learning. If you're interested in that there's some really interesting things about the response to Ebola from a few years ago where the more successful interventions were those that worked with cultural expectations and cultural behaviors rather than simply trying to ban them. Of course it's been really important over the past year in relation to covert and also thinking about, you know, for example after the tsunami in Muslim countries many women wanted the humanitarian agencies to provide them with headscarf so they would feel comfortable going out into public spaces and at first many humanitarian agencies were reluctant to do that because it didn't seem to fit within their expectations of what humanitarian aid looked like, but gradually they understood that actually this was really important. So, you know, if that's the question you're asking yeah there are some quite good examples of that it's not perfect. There are always examples of bad practice but there is a recognition. I think amongst humanitarian actors that this is really important for effective and sustainable and lasting responses. Have I still got time and I'm aware that I'm over time can I carry on going. Yeah, we've got about five minutes. Okay, I'll try and get through I may not get through them all but as I say you've got my email address and very happy to carry this carry on these conversations. I haven't fully answered your question. Get in touch and let me know. Okay, so Andrea talking about the media's role and how can we good question how can we portray suffering place in places in need of aid in a dignified way. Yeah, it's a really difficult question, and you can clearly see differences. You know if you go back to the way that missionaries in the late 19th century were presenting suffering in Africa and elsewhere. There is developed a language of what we expect. And he carries on until the 1980s. In the 1990s many and Joe started to understand that the imagery was deeply problematic and started to try and make amends, and to do things in more interesting ways now. I think, I think we're all aware that it's not been entirely successful in development perhaps it's been slightly easier but in emergencies there are still the people still resort to the kind of the classic cliches of the suffering child. And there's an extent to which those things are of course true, but it does give a one sided picture, it does give a does and perpetuate narratives and kind of the Orientalism of looking at, at suffering in the global south. And I think the problem is that also then contributes to the kind of glorification of the global north as the place that comes in and saves the rest of the world so yeah it's deeply problematic. And Joe's are trying to grapple with this as are others, but I'm not sure some are more successful than others, but it does remain problematic and I think also news reports. Also, perhaps need to give more thought about this some news outlets are better than others and balance out kind of the images of suffering with, you know, stories of other things that are going on. You know, just as an one example perhaps you know, we've been talking a lot about what the global north, how the global north can respond better in relation to covert in supporting covert in the global south. What we're hearing a lot less of is how the global north can learn from the global south. You know, some of the things that have been done in sub Saharan Africa for example been far ahead of what's been going on in the UK and much of Europe, North America. In Senegal, they had a track and trace system far before we did, you know, a working one far before we had a similar app in the UK Rwanda has been making use of drones of robots in South Africa they've been making extensive use of chatbots to answer people's questions. All of the kind of things that you know we haven't really been doing in the global north. So it's not just about the way that they're represented perhaps but it's also about the way we engage with people across different regions and do so in ways that recognize their own expertise their own powers their own successes. Arguably something we, well, we haven't certainly haven't done in covert. Yeah, so. Sorry, I'm really not gonna be able to pronounce this properly but I'll give it a go is it snigdha or snigdha has asked about the, is there a way for humanitarian organizations to work without negotiating with local power forces. You know that's a really difficult question that I can only suggest that you take the humanitarian module, because that will answer it far better and it will probably take a whole module if not a whole program to answer that. Then I can it is really difficult, because these situations are so complex. So I think it's very rare that organizations can go in without any kind of negotiation. And then they try and keep as much distance as they can. I think equally problematic and this is, for example in Afghanistan, where NGO some NGOs have been working alongside the foreign military as part of the global alliance, the global alliance forces that have been operating there. And that is really worrying. You know so when you have like save the children Australia who have been not quite embedded in the Australian army but working alongside them, and therefore seem to be participating or willing participants in the foreign occupation. So on the one hand, they would argue, but we have no other way of meet of reaching those people in those remotest of remote villages. But on the other hand, they are perhaps they are supporting a deeply problematic conflict and they are supporting a particular side in doing so. So there may well be ways I think it's incredibly difficult. Which is my way of just saying it's very complicated. And I'm not sure took me a long time to get that does the. So someone's asking about whether the course provides practical experience. So we do have modules where we teach you practical tools. Development practice, where you learn about the tools and the techniques that are used in global development by global development organizations or humanitarian organizations. For people doing the dissertations there is absolutely no requirement to do fieldwork, because many of our students simply can't. However, that said, many of our students do do some kind of fieldwork and of course that can give them practical experience, particularly in research. And then of course, many of our students are also undertaking internships or volunteering for relevant organizations so that gives you those kind of experiences as well so I guess it's a combination of all of those kind of things. Okay, so a question from Nadine. I think this is probably the last question I'm going to be able to ask so you know anyone else please do get in touch with me separately. So this is asking about the, the online program the MSE humanitarian online programs and the humanitarianism aid and conflict program. So, I know this year has been a bit strange so effectively all of our teaching has been online. But obviously, as with everyone we're hoping things go back to more normal from September. So we do have online programs which are only taught online. And we have our on campus programs. So they have slightly different structures. They have, you know, they cover many of the many of the same areas in terms of the, the curriculum, but not entirely the same. So it's not that they're exactly the same program but they're designed you know some people don't want to come to us and we'll want to learn at a distance and some will want to come it's not quite that simple. So I think it's the best thing there to do is to look at the structure and see which of the programs best suits you if, and many people, especially if they're working full time they may not actually be able to come and study in those cases are online programs either through in humanitarianism or in international aid or in environment if you look at setup CEDEP it's part of the department they offer pro online distance learning programs and environment. They're a really good option for those people who can't for whatever reason come to so as you know they're really good degrees. They are slightly different. They are sort of equally good in terms of the quality and in terms of their reputation. So it's it's worth having a look, but as with all things have a look at the structure to see and the way that it works just to see which one works best for you. It's much easier for example if you're doing a full time job to do an online degree, rather than to do a part time on campus degree. Because the amount of time that you need to spend learning makes it difficult, if not impossible to combine with a full time job, but the online programs are designed for those who are working full time. So they can be able to complete them. So I begin in touch with a convener of the distance program and the campus program. If you have any specific questions and they'll be able to explain it in much more detail. Thanks everyone for your comments and now I'm not been able to answer them all. Please do get in touch over any questions either about the things I've talked about today, or about any of our programs. You don't have to get in touch with me directly you can get in touch with the conveners of the of the program to which you've applied or the conveners of modules, or you can just get in touch with me and if I can't answer the question I'll know who to pass it on to. I hope you enjoyed that I hope you found it useful. Hope it gave you a flavor of how we teach at so as and how we engage with issues and and how we think about that kind of critical questioning but positive hope analysis and I really look forward to seeing you all in late September, October, for the start of the next academic year. Thanks everyone.