So...I'm not fully in sync with this. We have the ideas-& I've seen great ones from @poole_lydia, @DeganAli @akrishnan23 @bkumpf & many others. What we don't have is a system capable of embracing the adaptation, because it's a system built upon a series of falsehoods, which/2 https://twitter.com/newhumanitarian/status/1322166617023926273

creates a kind of deep moral corruption. The first is the what: It is not a system in any coherent way - it's a loose agglomeration of entities with differing roles & the groups we call the 'system' aren't even really that 'humanitarian' (whatever that may mean?). Second, is /2

the what of 'humanitarian': this is a financing category that primarily refers to the flexibility of the funds rather than either (i) the reality of the people who are in need (who...do not draw distinctions b/w hum & dev); or (ii) a moral principle of allocation on the basis /3

of need. Because as we all know, we do not allocate on need alone. Politics & guilt drive allocations & the world remains unprepared to offer the basic assurance to all its citizens that irrespective of where you are, we have your back if you need it. We could, but...we value /4

billionaires more. The third is the what of response: do we respond only to short-term measures or also to the longer-term needs? there are so few strictly humanitarian organizations that do not also do development. Perhaps that's a better reflection of what people need? /5

or perhaps it's because we follow the money & struggle to say no?. So the bottom line is a system that is not financed or functional as a system; that doesn't generate revenue, so is dependent on whim; that is not owned or led by anyone; whose underlying principles are suspect /6

& which operates in a strange world where the original animating forces (US & UK) have largely retreated from the world. Yet, despite this...shitshow...there are committed, brilliant, humble people (some!) trying to drive new ideas & models & respect, for example, the /7

imperative to genuinely decolonise the system - to set it free from its origins & imperial strictures & put it & its genuinely valuable knowledge at the service of the people who need it. How do you reform this? HEre, I'm more w/ @poole_lydia - someone ( @UNOCHA) needs to take /8

responsibility & risk. They need to be backed to the hilt by donors willing to renounce their power (I was in those WHS consultation sessions...) & willing to (1) Invest in network enablers ( @NEAR_Network @StartNetwork @calpnetwork & its new strategy, @H2H_network, @ADRRN1 /9

& more global south actors; (2) Invest in managing the transition. Task the formal ML system with being a system builder (just...change some of the folks first because the arrogance problem is real).; Make knowledge transfer a real thing - there is actually valuable expertise /10

in humanitarian orgs that could be codified & transferred, if we prioritised resources to learning about what is known with that specific intent; (3) Look to building the operating system for a new global response architecture - one that provides a small measure of humanity /11

always insufficient, to situations that should not exist. (4) Invest in the ethics. The lack of ethical reflection - especially on the digital adaptation of the system - is striking. The best way to constrain out negative futures as we face a digital, global, networked reality/12

is to make the ethics robust & honest. I'd add (5) Invest in innovation for impact at scale. There's too much small stuff & not enough real stuff & it's frittering scarce resources (blockchain!). @HebaJournalist & @JeremyKonyndyk are doing great stuff here (though I'm /13

scarred by UNDP Area-based coordination!); @poole_lydia's ideas are right; @akrishnan23 & I wrote a piece on approaches to this here: https://www.globaldashboard.org/2020/06/16/a-world-in-which-many-worlds-fit/...@arbiebaguios is thinking a lot, & many ppl system-adjacent (e.g. @PantheaLee) are pushing. But who will actually *pay* for those /14

efforts & ensure that they are not led & restricted by the powers that brought us the...Grand Bargain? Who will invest in the system that is not a system? Who will willingly shrink in order to make space for others to grow and replace them? What are the *incentives* for that?