The Journal of Humanitarian Affairs is an exciting, new open access journal
hosted jointly by The Humanitarian Affairs Team at Save the Children UK, and
Centre de Réflexion sur l’Action et les Savoirs Humanitaires MSF (Paris) and the
Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute at the University of Manchester. It
will contribute to current thinking around humanitarian governance, policy and
practice with academic rigour and political courage. The journal will challenge
contributors and readers to think critically about humanitarian issues that are
often approached from reductionist assumptions about what experience and
evidence mean. It will cover contemporary, historical, methodological and
applied subject matters and will bring together studies, debates and literature
reviews. The journal will engage with these through diverse online content,
including peer reviewed articles, expert interviews, policy analyses, literature
reviews and ‘spotlight’ features. Our rationale can be summed up as
follows: the sector is growing and is facing severe ethical and practical
challenges. The Journal of Humanitarian Affairs will provide a space for serious
and inter-disciplinary academic and practitioner exchanges on pressing issues of
international interest. The journal aims to be a home and platform for
leading thinkers on humanitarian affairs, a place where ideas are floated,
controversies are aired and new research is published and scrutinised. Areas in
which submissions will be considered include humanitarian financing, migrations
and responses, the history of humanitarian aid, failed humanitarian
interventions, media representations of humanitarianism, the changing landscape
of humanitarianism, the response of states to foreign interventions and critical
debates on concepts such as resilience or security.
compréhension dans la trilogie: acceptabilité, protection et
dissuasion?’ 1 ) gave me
the justification I needed to apply. I ultimately got an interview, after
resubmitting my application and calling a few people I knew at MdM.
When I started, my job description was as follows: monitor the risks and threats to
project teams in countries where MdM was working; provide methodological and
technical support for writing, finalising and setting up
T.K. Ralebitso-Senior, T.J.U. Thompson, and H.E. Carney
In the mid-1990s, the crime scene toolkit was revolutionised by the introduction of
DNA-based analyses such as the polymerase chain reaction, low copy number DNA analysis,
short-tandem repeat typing, pulse-field gel electrophoresis and variable number tandem
repeat. Since then, methodological advances in other disciplines, especially molecular
microbial ecology, can now be adapted for cutting-edge applications in forensic contexts.
Despite several studies and discussions, there is, however, currently very little evidence
of these techniques adoption at the contemporary crime scene. Consequently, this article
discusses some of the popular omics and their current and potential exploitations in the
forensic ecogenomics of body decomposition in a crime scene. Thus, together with published
supportive findings and discourse, knowledge gaps are identified. These then justify the
need for more comprehensive, directed, concerted and global research towards
state-of-the-art microecophysiology method application and/or adaptation for subsequent
successful exploitations in this additional context of microbial forensics.
The case of the management of the dead related to COVID-19
This article studies one of the humanitarian challenges caused by the COVID-19 crisis: the dignified handling of the mortal remains of individuals that have died from COVID-19 in Muslim contexts. It illustrates the discussion with examples from Sunni Muslim-majority states when relevant, such as Egypt, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Morocco and Pakistan, and examples from English-speaking non-Muslim majority states such as the United Kingdom, the United States of America, Canada and Australia as well as Sri Lanka. The article finds that the case of the management of dead bodies of people who have died from COVID-19 has shown that the creativity and flexibility enshrined in the Islamic law-making logic and methodology, on the one hand, and the cooperation between Muslim jurists and specialised medical and forensic experts, on the other, have contributed to saving people’s lives and mitigating the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in Muslim contexts.
James Baldwin might be imagined as reaching his greatest level of popularity within this current decade. With the growth of social media activist movements like Black Lives Matter, which captures and catalyzes off a Baldwinian rage, and the publishing of works directly evoking Baldwin, his voice appears more pronounced between the years of 2013 and 2015. Scholars in Baldwin studies, along with strangers who were turned into witnesses of his literary oeuvre, have contributed to this renewed interest in Baldwin, or at least have been able to sharpen the significance of the phenomenon. Publications and performances highlight Baldwin’s work and how it prefigured developments in critical race and queer theories, while also demonstrating Baldwin’s critique as both prophetic and “disturbingly” contemporary. Emerging largely from Baldwin’s timelessness in social and political discourse, and from the need to conjure a figure to demystify the absurd American landscape, these interventions in Baldwin studies follow distinct trends. This essay examines the 2013–15 trends from four vantages: an examination of a return, with revision, to popular work by Baldwin; identifying Baldwin’s work as a contributor to theoretical and critical methodology; Baldwin and intertextuality or intervocality; and a new frontier in Baldwin studies.
Readers and critics alike, for the past sixty years, generally agree that Baldwin is a
major African-American writer. What they do not agree on is why. Because of his artistic
and intellectual complexity, Baldwin’s work resists easy categorization and Baldwin
scholarship, consequently, spans the critical horizon. This essay provides an overview of
the three major periods of Baldwin scholarship. 1963–73 is a period that begins with the
publication of The Fire Next Time and sees Baldwin grace the cover of Time magazine. This
period ends with Time declaring Baldwin too passé to publish an interview with him and
with critics questioning his relevance. The second period, 1974–87, finds critics
attempting to rehabilitate Baldwin’s reputation and work, especially as scholars begin to
codify the African-American literary canon in anthologies and American universities.
Finally, scholarship in the period after Baldwin’s death takes the opportunity to
challenge common assumptions and silences surrounding Baldwin’s work. Armed with the
methodologies of cultural studies and the critical insights of queer theory, critics set
the stage for the current Baldwin renaissance.
monitoring approach, or whether a more discerning one is warranted.
This paper draws on an analysis of scholarly literature, policy documents, media and
social media. The analysis is also informed by interviews with 32 individuals, who
were predominantly healthcare workers and representatives of organisations active in
the medical-humanitarian response in northern Syria. Interviews were conducted in
the period January to June 2017, mostly in the
Lessons Learned for Engagement in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States
South Sudan ( Sorbo et al. , 2016 ). Given the wide range of humanitarian and development activity in the country, at the outset of this study it was assumed that many more evaluations have been published, but innovative methods would be required to identify them. Due to the challenges of identifying and tracking evaluation reports, this article presents methodological reflection and learning regarding how systematic reviews and syntheses of this nature can be conducted. The article begins with a detailed outline of the methods, specifying which approaches worked
activities to the DPRK, which has varied depending on the political climate. In recent years, the international humanitarian system has been subject to restrictions in the form of unilateral and United Nations Security Council (UNSC) sanctions. As of 2017, Americans must also apply for US government permission for DPRK travel.
This paper goes beyond the policy of sanctions exemptions and asks how sanctions are affecting humanitarian work in practice. The following subsection reviews the methodology used in the research. A literature review rounds out the introduction
shares with the
reader the experience of going through the severe security checks at detention centres,
facing apprehensive asylum seekers waiting for their legal status to be resolved and
meeting optimistic resettled individuals in Australia. In her interviews, Leung explores
the emergent dynamic in the user–technology dyad that takes place in restrictive
environments, such as detention centres.
Having set the conceptual and methodological foundations of her work in the introductory