Humanitarian practice fit for the digital age


  • Ivana Jurko Humanitech, Australian Red Cross



blockchain, digital innovation, biometrics, localisation


This essay seeks to examine some of the implications of advanced digital technologies on the humanitarian sector. It first situates data and technology-driven transformations in the broader context of humanitarian innovation and reform. It outlines how the increasing scale and complexity of humanitarian needs and operating environments has led to experimentation with new tools and approaches, business models and organisational roles in the sector. These innovations are occurring against the background of the localisation agenda, competition from the private sector, collapsing trust in institutions, and increased scrutiny of charities. The essay then highlights how technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning, biometrics, and blockchain are increasing the capacity of the sector to improve humanitarian outcomes for people in crisis through new functionalities and services, greater insights into emerging vulnerabilities and risks, and enhanced organisational performance. Conversely, the essay then explores how these tools and systems are introducing a host of potential harms by exposing vulnerable people and communities to new forms of intrusion, insecurity, and inequality. This includes issues of data protection, cyber security, inherent biases in technological tools, and the reality of the digital divide and exclusion. Lastly, the essay outlines an emerging critical research agenda and active policy debates about responsible, ethical and inclusive design, use and regulation of technology in humanitarian contexts.


Metrics Loading ...


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

  • Ivana Jurko, Humanitech, Australian Red Cross

    Ivana Jurko is a co-founder of Humanitech at Australian Red Cross, where she leads the evidence and influence team. She is also a PhD candidate at RMIT University, exploring the humanitarian implications of frontier technologies. 


Accenture. (2017). Blockchain for Good: 4 Guidelines for Transforming Social Innovation Organisations. Accenture.

Ada Lovelace Institute. (2020). COVID-19 rapid evidence review.

Aly, H. (2020). This global pandemic could transform humanitarianism forever. Here’s how. The New Humanitarian.

Australian Government. (2020). National blockchain roadmap. Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources.

Ayobi, Y., Black, A., Kenni, L., Nakabea, R., & Sutton, K. (2017). Going Local: Achieveing a more appropriate and fit-for-purpose humanitarian ecosystem in the Pacific. Australian Red Cross.

Bennett, C., Currion, P., DuBois, M., & Zaman, T. (2018). Constructive deconstruction: Imagining alternative humanitarian action.

Bennett, C., & Foley, M. (2016). Time to let go: Remaking humanitarian action for the modern era. Overseas Development Institute Humanitarian Policy Group.

Bernholz, L. (2018). Philanthropy and digital civil society: Blueprint 2019; the annual industry forecast. Stanford University, & Center for Social Innovation.

Bisri,M. B. F. (2016). Comparative study on inter-organizational cooperation in disaster situations and impact on humanitarian aid operations. Journal of International Humanitarian Action, 1(1), 8.

Blakstad,S., Melkun, C., & Shreeves, R. (2020). The Next Generation Humanitarian Distributed Platform (p. 50). Danish Red Cross, Mercy Corps, hiveonline.

Bogle, A. (2019). For refugees, your eyes and your fingerprints now act as your passport. Is that safe? ABC News.

Bourne, S. (2019). User-Centred Design and Humanitarian Adaptiveness. ALNAP.

Casey, M. & Vigna, P. (2018). The truth machine: The blockchain and the future of everything (First edition.). St. Martin’s Press, New York.

Catalini, C., & Gans, J. S. (2019). Some Simple Economics of the Blockchain. NBER Working Paper No. 22952

Charancle, J. M. B., & Lucchi, E. (2018). Incorporating the principle of “Do No Harm”: How to take action without causing harm. Reflections on a review of Humanity & Inclusion’s practices [Project Evaluation]. Humanity & Inclusion and F3E.

CHD. (2021). Introducing the Humanitarian Data and Trust Initiative – The Centre for Humanitarian Data.

Collinson, S. (2016). Constructive deconstruction: Making sense of the international humanitarian system [HPG Working Paper]. Humanitarian Policy Group, Overseas Development Institute.,

G., & Fast, L. (2019). Blockchain and distributed ledger technologies in the humanitarian sector. Humanitarian Policy Group, Overseas Development Institute.

Cortis, N., Lee, I., Reeve, R., & Simnett, R. (2014). Australian Charities Involved Overseas 2014. Centre for Social Impact and Social Policy Research Centre, UNSW.

Currion, P. (2016, July 11). Slave to the algorithm. The New Humanitarian.

Currion, P. (2018). Network humanitarianism [HPG Working Paper]. Humanitarian Policy Group, Overseas Development Institute.

Currion, P. (2020). Decolonising aid, again. The New Humanitarian.

DevInit. (2020). Global Humanitarian Assistance Report 2019: Executive summary. Development Initiatives.

DuBois, M. (2018). The new humanitarian basics (‘Constructive Deconstruction: Imagining Alternative Humanitarian Action) [HPG Working Paper]. Humanitarian Policy Group, Overseas Development Institute.

Duffield, M. (2013). Disaster-Resilience in the Network Age Access-Denial and the Rise of Cyber-Humanitarianism. DIIS Working Paper.

Duffield, M. (2016). The resilience of the ruins: Towards a critique of digital humanitarianism. Resilience, 4(3), 147–165.

Edelman. (2020). 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer.

Fowler, A. (1992). Decentralisation for international NGOs. Development in Practice, 2(2), 121–124.

Galen, D., El-Baz, B., Brand, N., Kimura, I., Bucherle, L., Wharton, K., Davis, R., Lee, J., & Do, N. (2018). Blockchain for Social Impact: Moving Beyond the Hype. Stanford Centre for Social Innovation.

GSMA. (2017). Blockchain for Development: Emerging Opportunities for Mobile, Identity and Aid.

Hallwright, J., & Carnaby, E. (2019). Complexities of Implementation: Oxfam Australia’s Experience in Piloting Blockchain. Frontiers in Blockchain, 2.

Hayes, A. (2019). The Socio-Technological Lives of Bitcoin. Theory, Culture & Society, 36(4), 49–72.

HIP. (2019). DIGID - Dignified Identities in cash programming. Humanitarian Innovation Platform.

IARAN. (2017). Future of Aid: INGOs in 2030. Inter Agency Research and Analysis Network.

IASC,& UN OCHA. (2020). The Grand Bargain (Official website).

ICRC. (2019, October 18). Facilitating innovation, ensuring protection: The ICRC Biometrics Policy. Humanitarian Law & Policy Blog.

ICRC & Privacy International. (2018). The Humanitarian Metadata Problem—Doing No Harm in the Digital Era. ICRC & Privacy International.

IFRC. (2019). Strategy 2030: The Seven Transformations. Solferino Academy.

IFRC. (2020). Strategy 2030 Update Report – Visions for the Organization. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.

Jacobsen, K. L. (2015). The Politics of Humanitarian Technology: Good Intentions, Unintended Consequences and Insecurity. Taylor and Francis.

Kaurin, D. (2019). Data Protection and Digital Agency for Refugees. [WRC Research Paper No. 12] Centre for International Governance Innovation.

Kuo, E. (2020). Our 2020 Impact Report. Impact Investment Group.

Latonero, M. (2018, April). Big Data Analytics and Human Rights. In Land, M. & Aronson, J. (Eds) New Technologies for Human Rights Law and Practice. Cambridge University Press.

Latonero, M. (2019, 19 July). Stop Surveillance Humanitarianism. New York Times.

Madianou, M. (2019). Technocolonialism: Digital innovation and data practices in the humanitarian response to refugee crises. Social Media and Society, 5(3), 1–13.

Mays, R. E. (2018). Toward Better Design of Humanitarian ICT: A Social Agency-Centered Framework of Humanitarian Information Needs. University of Washington.

Meier, P. (2015). Digital Humanitarians: How “Big Data” is Changing the Face of Humanitarian Response. Taylor and Francis Press.

Meier, P. (2020, February 19). Technology for Good is Broken. Here’s How We’re Trying to Fix It. IRevolutions.

Mercy Corp. (2017). A Revolution in Trust: Distributed Ledger Technology in Relief & Development. Mercy Corp.

Morozov, E. (2013). To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism. PublicAffairs.

NetHope. (2018). Blockchain for Development: Moving from Hype to Reality. NetHope Solutions Center.

O’Dwyer, R. (2018). Blockchain Just Isn’t As Radical As You Want It To Be. Longreads.

Parker, B. (2020). Frontières needs ‘radical change’ on racism: MSF president. The New Humanitarian.

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating Shared Value: How to reinvent capitalism—And unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Business Review.

Rahman, Z. (2019, July 8). Digital ID: Where do we go from here? The Engine Room.

Rahman, Z., Verhaert, P., & Nyst, C. (2018). Biometrics in the Humanitarian Sector. Oxfam.

Rauchs, M., Glidden, A., Gordon, B., Pieters, G. C., Recanatini, M., Rostand, F., Vagneur, K., & Zhang, B. Z. (2018). Distributed Ledger Technology Systems: A Conceptual Framework (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 3230013). Social Science Research Network. (2019, February 8). Open Letter to WFP re: Palantir Agreement. Responsible Data.

Sandvik, K. B. (2017). Now is the time to deliver: Looking for humanitarian innovation’s theory of change. Journal of International Humanitarian Action, 2(1), 8.

Sandvik, K. B., Gabrielsen Jumbert, M., Karlsrud, J., & Kaufmann, M. (2014). Humanitarian technology: A critical research agenda. International Review of the Red Cross, 96(893), 219–242.

Sandvik, K. B., Jacobsen, K. L., & McDonald, S. M. (2017). Do no harm: A taxonomy of the challenges of humanitarian experimentation. International Review of the Red Cross, 99(904), 319–344.

Santosdiaz, R. (2020). Implementation of the new global platform for blockchain-based community currencies to boost cash transfer aid: In-depth with the Red Cross and its partners. The FinTech Times.

Seibert,K. (2017). Australian charities are well regulated, but changes are needed to cut red tape. The Conversation.

Seybolt, T. (2009). Harmonizing the Humanitarian Aid Network: Adaptive Change in a Complex System. International Studies Quarterly, 53, 1027–1050.

Smart, J. (2017). Collective impact: Evidence and implications for practice. Child Family Community Australia, CFCA Paper No. 45.

Start Network. (2017). Start Network’s vision for the future of humanitarian action. Start Network.

Sustania, The Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, & Coinify. (2017). Hack the future of aid. Sustainia, The Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Coinify.

Tapscott, D., & Tapscott, A. (2016). Blockchain Revolution: How the Technology Behind Bitcoin Is Changing Money, Business, and the World. Portfolio.

TNH. (2020). The West’s humanitarian reckoning. The New Humanitarian.

UNHCR. (2020). The importance of digital identity in humanitarian contexts. UNHCR Blog.

Veen, M. V. D. (2020). Rcrc digital consultation 2: data protection & data responsibility. 510.Global.

WaterAid US. (2020). Donate cryptocurrency.

WEF. (2017). The Future of Humanitarian Response (Annual Meeting). World Economic Forum.

WEF. (2019). Civil Society in the Fourth Industrial Revolution: Preparation and Response. World Economic Forum.

Werbach, K. (2018). The Blockchain and the New Architecture of Trust. The MIT Press.

Werbach, K. (Ed.). (2020). After the Digital Tornado: Networks, Algorithms, Humanity. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge Core.

WFP. (2020). Building Blocks.

World Bank Group. (2021). ID4D Data: Global Identification Challenge by the Numbers.

Young, L., & Jurko, I. (2020). Future of Vulnerability: Humanity in the Digital Age. Humanitech, Australian Red Cross.

A woman with a black top and hair in a ponytail faces sideways. Her eyes are closed and a red light casts a web-like light on her face.







How to Cite

“Humanitarian practice fit for the digital age” (2022) The Humanitarian Leader, p. Working Paper 026, June 2022. doi:10.21153/thl2022art1615.