The Importance of Coordination and Partnership
Disasters and emergencies often have far-reaching impacts, affecting multiple facets of community life and requiring a coordinated, multi-sectoral response. Whether responding to a sudden-onset crisis like a flood or a slow-burning emergency such as drought, effective coordination and strategic partnerships are essential for delivering an integrated Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) emergency response.
Strong cross-sectoral collaboration enables humanitarian actors to pool resources, align priorities, and leverage complementary skills and expertise. This collaborative approach is crucial for addressing the complex, interconnected needs of crisis-affected populations – from ensuring access to safe water and sanitation, to promoting hygiene behaviors that prevent disease outbreaks, to supporting the psychosocial wellbeing of vulnerable groups.
By working together, WASH practitioners, health professionals, child protection specialists, community leaders, and other key stakeholders can provide holistic, tailored assistance that truly meets the diverse needs of women, men, girls, and boys. Fostering this kind of cross-sectoral integration is not only best practice, but a necessity for saving lives and safeguarding human dignity in the face of emergencies.
Coordinating for Effectiveness
Coordination is the foundation upon which an integrated WASH emergency response is built. Without effective coordination mechanisms that bring together the right actors, it is nearly impossible to achieve the level of alignment, information sharing, and joint planning required for a cohesive, high-impact intervention.
Inclusive Coordination Across Sectors and Levels
Emergencies rarely respect sectoral boundaries, affecting multiple domains ranging from health and education to livelihoods and protection. As such, emergency coordination must transcend siloed approaches, engaging a diverse array of government ministries, local authorities, and other stakeholders.
Country experiences have shown the value of establishing cross-sectoral coordination platforms that enable joint problem-solving and resource mobilization. For example, in Sierra Leone during the COVID-19 response, the Ministry of Defence led overall coordination, while the Ministry of Information and Communication spearheaded risk communications, and the Ministry of Welfare managed the psychosocial support pillar. This inclusive, multi-stakeholder approach helped to identify and mitigate the wide-ranging effects of public health measures on different aspects of community life.
In addition to cross-sectoral coordination, vertical integration between national and subnational levels is crucial. Local authorities are often best positioned to understand community needs and coordinate frontline service delivery. However, their efforts require support and alignment from the national level, through channels for information sharing, resource allocation, and joint planning.
Experience from countries like Ethiopia and Sierra Leone highlights how effective national-local coordination can accelerate emergency response and ensure equitable, contextually appropriate assistance reaches the most vulnerable populations. Conversely, gaps in vertical coordination, such as overcentralized decision-making or unclear communication pathways, have contributed to delays, duplication, and uneven geographic coverage in WASH emergency programming.
Engaging External Stakeholders
Beyond coordinating across government, humanitarian actors must also forge strategic partnerships with a range of external stakeholders, from civil society organizations and religious leaders to research institutions and the private sector.
Community engagement is particularly vital, as local leaders, volunteers, and affected populations themselves possess invaluable knowledge and networks that can strengthen the relevance and impact of emergency WASH interventions. For instance, in Ethiopia, India, and Sierra Leone, local authorities collaborated with civil society groups and community members to disseminate crucial COVID-19 prevention messages, while volunteers provided hands-on support like mask production and community kitchen management.
Partnerships with research institutions and universities can also bolster emergency preparedness and response, as seen in Ethiopia’s establishment of a national COVID-19 research consortium. These academic and technical partners offered crucial guidance, evidence, and operational support to government counterparts managing the crisis.
Coordinating with the private sector is another key strategy, whether sourcing essential WASH supplies, leveraging communication channels, or expanding service delivery capacity. In Ethiopia and Kenya, for example, governments worked closely with manufacturers to boost local production of critical items like personal protective equipment and hygiene products.
Finally, development partners – including bilateral and multilateral donors, international NGOs, and humanitarian agencies – play a central role in funding, technical expertise, and on-the-ground support for emergency WASH programs. However, their contributions are most effective when channeled through established coordination mechanisms that promote alignment, information sharing, and a division of responsibilities.
Ensuring Gender Equity
Emergencies often exacerbate existing gender inequalities, with women and girls facing heightened vulnerabilities and barriers to accessing critical services. Coordination efforts must therefore prioritize the inclusive representation and meaningful participation of women, girls, and marginalized gender groups.
Unfortunately, data from countries like Kenya, Pakistan, and Uganda suggests that women remain underrepresented in many emergency coordination structures, occupying fewer leadership positions and wielding less influence over decision-making. This gender imbalance can undermine the ability of WASH responses to adequately meet the distinct needs of women, girls, and non-binary individuals.
To address this gap, humanitarian actors must intentionally amplify the voices of diverse gender groups within coordination platforms, proactively seeking their input on program design, implementation, and monitoring. Embedding gender-responsive approaches and dedicated outreach to women’s organizations can help ensure emergency WASH initiatives are accessible, inclusive, and accountable to all members of crisis-affected communities.
Structuring Coordination for Impact
Beyond inclusive representation, the structural features of coordination bodies and mechanisms also shape their effectiveness in driving an integrated WASH emergency response.
Availability of Coordination Platforms
The availability of regular, well-functioning coordination fora is a foundational requirement. These platforms enable diverse stakeholders to come together, share information, mobilize resources, and align their activities – all critical for ensuring a cohesive, coordinated response.
Country examples illustrate the value of coordination structures at both national and subnational levels. In Ethiopia, the Public Health Emergency Operations Centre (PHEOC) at the federal level, along with regional-level PHEOCs, provided crucial hubs for joint planning, resource allocation, and information exchange during the COVID-19 pandemic. Similarly, in Kenya, the County Steering Groups and Disaster Management Committees served as important coordination mechanisms, facilitating partner alignment and the mobilization of emergency supplies and services.
Conversely, the absence or inconsistent functioning of such platforms can severely undermine coordination, as seen in parts of Ethiopia and Nepal where subnational coordination bodies were lacking or irregular. This contributed to gaps, duplication, and poor information flows between different levels of government and with external actors.
Roles, Mandates, and Authority
Coordination bodies must also have clearly defined roles, adequate mandates, and sufficient authority to convene stakeholders and ensure aligned action. Overlapping or ambiguous responsibilities between different coordinating entities can create confusion, frustrate collaboration, and hinder effective decision-making.
Ethiopia’s experience with the National Disaster Risk Management Commission (NDRMC) illustrates how structural changes can impact a coordination body’s ability to fulfil its mandate. When the NDRMC was absorbed into the Ministry of Peace, its autonomous status and direct relationship with higher-level government leadership were diminished. This reduced the NDRMC’s convening power and influence over other ministries, compromising its capacity to promote disaster risk management mainstreaming and coordinate emergency preparedness and response.
Elsewhere, coordination bodies have faced challenges due to insufficient authority, as seen in Kenya where the National Drought Management Authority could not compel line ministries to implement agreed actions. Clarifying roles, responsibilities, and decision-making powers is thus essential for empowering coordination mechanisms to drive integrated, cross-sectoral WASH emergency programming.
Ongoing, Adaptive Coordination
Effective coordination is not a one-time event, but an iterative, adaptive process that spans the entire emergency management cycle – from preparedness, to response, to recovery. Coordination structures that function on a continuous basis, rather than activating only during crises, are better positioned to facilitate anticipatory planning, institutional learning, and the strengthening of local capacities.
Experience from countries like Kenya and Pakistan demonstrates how coordination bodies that remain dormant outside of emergencies struggle to mount a timely, cohesive response when disasters strike. Conversely, Ethiopia’s use of the PHEOC structure (previously activated for Ebola) enabled rapid coordination during the COVID-19 outbreak, leveraging existing relationships, systems, and operational know-how.
Maintaining ongoing coordination also supports the integration of emergency WASH programming with longer-term development efforts, helping to strengthen national and local systems, build community resilience, and lay the foundation for sustainable recovery. This more holistic, adaptive approach to coordination is essential for transcending the humanitarian-development divide and fostering truly integrated WASH emergency response.
Bolstering Coordination Capacities
Effective coordination requires more than just structural arrangements – it also depends on the capacities of the organizations and individuals responsible for driving it. Gaps in technical expertise, human resources, funding, and communication infrastructure can severely constrain the ability of coordination bodies to fulfill their mandate.
Technical and Human Resource Capacities
Country experiences highlight the influence of staffing and skills on the functionality of coordination mechanisms, particularly at the subnational level. In Nepal, for example, the limited capacity and high turnover of personnel assigned to the National Reconstruction Authority undermined its ability to liaise effectively with line ministries and local governments.
Similarly, in Ethiopia, the National Disaster Risk Management Commission struggled to engage other sectors due to insufficient trained staff, as well as the departure of experienced personnel. Weaknesses in technical expertise, especially for emerging threats like COVID-19, further hindered the Commission’s coordination role.
Building the technical and managerial capacities of coordination bodies is thus essential, ensuring they possess the right blend of skills in areas like emergency management, multisectoral programming, and stakeholder engagement. Fostering stable, well-trained staffing – through measures like dedicated career paths and incentives – can also enhance the sustainability and institutional memory of coordination efforts.
Funding and Infrastructure
Adequate resourcing is another critical success factor. Coordination requires dedicated funding for activities like regular meetings, information management systems, and capacity development initiatives. Insufficient budgets, as seen in Kenya and South Sudan, can undermine the functionality of coordination mechanisms and limit their ability to convene stakeholders and facilitate joint planning.
Investments in communication infrastructure are equally important, as coordination relies heavily on the timely, accurate exchange of information. Gaps in technologies like reliable internet, mobile networks, and data management platforms have constrained coordination in contexts like Ethiopia, Nepal, and South Sudan, hampering the ability of actors at different levels to stay connected and aligned.
Addressing resource gaps and strengthening institutional capacities must therefore be a priority for humanitarian actors seeking to enhance the coordination of integrated WASH emergency response. Providing targeted, sustained support to coordination bodies can help ensure they have the necessary means and expertise to drive cohesive, cross-sectoral programming that meets the diverse needs of crisis-affected populations.
Fostering a Culture of Collaboration
Ultimately, effective coordination and partnership are not just about structural arrangements or capacities – they also depend on creating an enabling environment characterized by political will, trust, and a shared commitment to collaboration.
High-Level Political Leadership
Strong political leadership and high-level government support are essential ingredients for fostering cross-sectoral coordination and aligning stakeholder action. Country experiences demonstrate how the active engagement and oversight of senior government officials, such as heads of state, prime ministers, and ministers, can catalyze coordinated emergency response efforts.
In Rwanda and Ethiopia, for example, the direct involvement of national leaders in COVID-19 coordination mechanisms helped to promote collaboration across government sectors, align development partner support, and ensure a unified, government-led approach. Conversely, gaps in political leadership and commitment, as seen in parts of Ethiopia and Kenya, contributed to coordination challenges, uneven response, and insufficient resources for WASH emergency programming.
Beyond providing high-level direction, political leaders can also help to resolve tensions and mitigate the influence of vested interests that can undermine coordination. In contexts where coordination is hindered by factors like intergovernmental rivalries or the manipulation of information, the strategic intervention of senior officials can play a crucial role in breaking down barriers and fostering a culture of collaboration.
Incentives for Coordination
Coordination also depends on cultivating the right individual and organizational incentives. When stakeholders perceive coordination as a burden rather than a benefit, it becomes difficult to secure their meaningful engagement and sustained commitment.
For example, in Ethiopia, tensions between government ministries over early warning data and resource allocations reduced the transparency and accuracy of information, hampering the effectiveness of coordination for emergency preparedness and response. Aligning incentives around the shared objective of meeting community needs, rather than protecting individual interests, is thus essential for nurturing a collaborative mindset.
Strategies like performance-based metrics, joint budgeting, and co-located programming can help to reinforce the value of coordination, encouraging stakeholders to prioritize alignment, information sharing, and collective problem-solving. Likewise, building a culture of continuous learning – where coordination bodies systematically capture and apply lessons from past emergencies – can strengthen the motivation and capacity of actors to work together effectively.
Conclusion: Charting a Path Toward Integrated WASH Emergency Response
Fostering effective coordination and strategic partnerships is not a luxury, but a necessity for delivering integrated, impactful WASH emergency programming that truly meets the complex, intersecting needs of crisis-affected communities. By embracing inclusive, adaptive coordination structures, investing in institutional capacities, and cultivating a culture of collaboration, humanitarian actors can unlock the full potential of cross-sectoral integration to save lives, restore dignity, and build community resilience in the face of emergencies.
This integrated, coordinated approach is particularly vital given the compounding, multifaceted nature of many of today’s crises – from climate-induced disasters to disease outbreaks to protracted conflicts. In an increasingly complex, interconnected world, the ability to transcend sectoral silos and harness the collective strengths of diverse stakeholders will be a key determinant of humanitarian success.
At Joint Action for Water, we are committed to supporting this collaborative vision, working alongside governments, civil society, and the private sector to foster the coordination, partnerships, and holistic solutions needed to safeguard access to safe water, sanitation, and hygiene for all. By embracing the power of cross-sectoral integration, we can ensure no one is left behind when emergencies strike.
