Aid worker narratives reveal discontent within the humanitarian sector

International aid workers deliver crucial assistance to populations in crisis situations, but their voices are largely absent from the public discourse about issues confronting the humanitarian sector.

A new study coauthored by Yale anthropologist Catherine Panter-Brick presents evidence of discontent among these workers, revealing how hard it is to navigate the influence of power and privilege in the humanitarian sector while doing life-saving work.

For the study, Panter-Brick and two co-authors analyzed the “Secret Aid Worker” series, published in The Guardian newspaper between 2015 and 2018. The series, which was composed of 95 anonymous, first-person essays by international aid workers recounting their experiences in the field, is the largest body of publicly available data about the experiences of aid workers.

“These are first-hand narratives — a form of storytelling that has proved a very popular read with aid workers, because they convey the ‘dark secrets’ of humanitarian work and systems of power,” said senior author Panter-Brick, the Bruce A. and Davi-Ellen Chabner Professor of Anthropology, Health, and Global Affairs at the Yale Jackson School of Global Affairs and Yale’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences. “They are a rare form of data: a very public discourse of discontent, and a sign of changing times. They put the spotlight on power and privilege wielded in the humanitarian sector. And they allow us to reflect on the power of public narratives for catalyzing change.”

The study is published in the January 2025 issue of the journal Disasters. Hannah Strohmeier, a postdoctoral researcher at the Center for Global Health at Charité — Universitätsmedizin Berlin, and Unni Karunakara, a senior fellow at the Global Health Partnership at Yale Law School and former international president of Doctors Without Borders — an organization that provides medical aid to people living in conflict zones, disaster areas, and other crisis situations — are co-authors of the study.

“For humanitarian action to remain both relevant and principled, it must engage with the growing discourses of discontent,” said Karunakara. “As highlighted in the narratives we studied, there is a powerful call for greater accountability, equity, and justice within the sector. Humanitarian systems must evolve, shifting power dynamics to address these demands and ensure that aid is not just delivered, but delivered with dignity and in a manner that truly responds to the needs and voices of the affected populations.”

The researchers’ analysis identified the series’ primary themes: the personal challenges of humanitarian life; characterizations of donors and other stakeholders; and systemic challenges within the humanitarian sector.

In describing their personal challenges, aid workers often reported the toll their work exacts on their mental and physical health. They wrote of confronting the depth of human suffering and enduring the daily hardships associated with working in emergency settings. They described struggling with the difficulties of sustaining relationships with friends and family back home, and of maintaining a healthy work-life balance. Many expressed humbleness regarding their contributions to alleviating human suffering.

“You wonder why I keep doing it,” an aid worker shared in 2015. “The answer is simple, because now it’s personal. I’ve come to terms with the fact that my ability to affect world injustice is minimal.  I know this. Still, the least I can do is try.”

In the series, the analysis found, the aid workers portrayed their interactions with stakeholders in the humanitarian sector, including fellow aid workers, aid organizations and international donors, and the local authorities and beneficiaries of aid in host countries. Their judgments were often raw and harsh, the researchers noted.

In writing about systemic issues plaguing the humanitarian sector, the aid workers decried limited career-building opportunities; ineffectiveness and inefficiency inherent in their work; a lack of safety and duty of care; and encounters with racism and colonial attitudes.

Some described benefiting from “white privilege” in relation to their colleagues who were from the countries where they were working.

“In recent years, calls for decolonization and anti-racism have loomed large in humanitarian public fora,” said Strohmeier. “However, the impacts of power imbalances and discrimination on the critical theme of staff health remain underestimated and too often absent from organizational discourse and action, continuing to affect the well-being of many aid workers.”

The essayists were especially scathing toward donors, who they often characterized as wielding undue influence over spending, the researchers noted.

“These tales highlight the biggest problem that the humanitarian community faces in aid delivery: donors,” wrote an aid worker. “They all apply their own rules to how money can be spent, according to their own priorities. Rules are drawn up by bureaucrats in Washington, Brussels, London and elsewhere, with limited consideration to the needs on the ground.”

Taken together, the narratives in the series reveal the cultural, historical, and moral landscape of humanitarian work, the researchers said. The narratives also planted the seeds of change concerning the issues they collectively raised, such as institutional accountability, coloniality, racism, and sexism, the researchers added.

“These public narratives shed light on what humanitarian work looks like on the front lines, from the perspective of international aid workers who work in challenging situations to address unmet needs. Aid workers have always pushed back against the politicization of aid when it comes to care for humanity,” said Panter-Brick.

See full story here.