There are 2,312 occurrences of affected population in the HE Corpus. This number increases to 2,398 occurrences when variants, e.g. affected civilian population, are included in the total count.
Affected population and its variants occur mostly in documents published in Europe, followed by North America, Asia and Africa. Overall, the top five contributors in terms of occurrences are NGO, IGO, RC, C/B and Project organisations.
NGO documents provide most occurrences, primarily from activity reports published in Europe and Africa. Occurrences from IGO are the second most important in number, irrespective of document type. Most IGO general documents were published in North America, whereas activity reports from the same organisation type were published in Europe.
In third place, documents from RC are mostly activity reports and general documents, both kinds published in Europe for the most part. Project provides a substantial portion of occurrences with two isolated but large contributions from general documents in 2011 and 2018. Finally, C/B generates a considerable number of occurrences from European general documents, albeit rather minor compared to top contributors.
is a group of people
affected by a common single phenomenon or multiple phenomena
in need of survival supplies, nutrition, services, shelter
provided with humanitarian assistance
who may participate in specific areas of its own humanitarian response
who may be accessed by humanitarian actors
for whom access may be limited by restrictions, infrastructural issues, insecurity, etc.
who engage in specific activities to increase access
to whom humanitarian actors seek to be more accountable by implementing specific measures
Although no explicit definitions were found for affected population, a great number of occurrences provides enough definitional contexts to piece together its conceptualisation.
Affected population is understood in two general senses:
as a recipient of humanitarian assistance, or
as an agent in humanitarian response.
The former sense presupposes a passive role in humanitarian responses, whereas the latter entails agency in the process of assisting itself. This is connected to the concept of participation of affected population, which is discussed in the Collocations section. Other approaches were also identified in contexts dealing with situations of displacement, human rights and risk assessment.
When understood as a patient, it appears in contexts describing specific responses or the humanitarian system as a whole. Although affected populations are explicitly referred to as beneficiaries or recipients of aid, most examples present this concept in opposition to humanitarian actors or donors, amongst other synonyms.
The following excerpts illustrate affected population as a patient:
The tsunami event has allowed us a glimpse of what it looks like when the givers and recipients of aid (Western publics and affected populations) are centre-stage and call the shots – putting pressure on the actors in the middle (governments and aid agencies) to do the job right.
The humanitarian system is thus defined as the network of interconnected institutional and operational entities through which humanitarian assistance is provided when local and national resources are insufficient to meet the needs of the affected population.
Some of the key challenges result from unequal access to technologies among both affected populations and humanitarians.
When understood as an agent, affected population is described as a stakeholder, responder or actor in humanitarian response. These cases are found in contexts discussing consultation processes in which affected populations are involved, together with generalisations about the active role of affected populations in humanitarian response. This approach presents affected population on the same level as governments, NGOs and other humanitarian organisations.
The following excerpts illustrate affected population as an agent:
Interventions therefore need to support and complement the efforts of affected populations who are usually the first and main responders.
Actors involved in the response are consulted (the affected population, national government, local authorities, the military, local NGOs, international donors, the UN, the Red Cross/Red Crescent and INGOs), fostering increased learning and accountability across the humanitarian system.
Humanitarian aid effectiveness and the impact of humanitarian assistance is a key question for all of the stakeholders involved in humanitarian assistance, including partner governments, donors, implementing agencies and the affected population.
Two significant conceptualisations were observed in contexts describing situations of displacement. On the one hand, affected population is understood in opposition to host community or host population. On the other hand, it can also be understood as an umbrella concept for both displaced population and hosting population, i.e. populations affected by displacement as a whole.
The two following excerpts illustrate these two opposing approaches:
Even where such abuses are not intended to uproot those targeted, they have led to massive displacement, with the affected populations seeking refuge in camps or with host communities in safer parts of the country.
... however, the community interaction strategy which was designed for this specific project ensured timely provision of lifesaving nutrition services for acutely malnourished children (boys and girls), pregnant and lactating women in the affected population (off-camp IDPs and hosting communities) ...
Other anecdotal conceptualisations were extracted from two contexts; one looks at affected population from a human rights perspective, whilst the other touches on the risk and need assessment process of humanitarian response. However marginal, these contexts show that affected population is subject to a great deal of conceptual variation. In particular, one of the following examples provides an explicit challenge to conceptualising affected population as a patient.
... relevant protection activities do not take place in a legal void; affected populations are rights-holders and not merely beneficiaries of charitable action; and national authorities have the primary responsibility as duty-bearers to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights of all persons under their jurisdiction.
'All-of-society' engagement through networks [is] the process to strengthen resilience starts at the local level with an understanding of risks, needs and priorities from the perspective of the primary risk-bearers i.e., affected populations.
Affected population can be conceptualised differently depending on the context.
In contexts dealing with the humanitarian system and responses, it is understood as either a patient (i.e. recipient of humanitarian assistance) or as an agent (i.e. actor involved in humanitarian assistance). Contexts describing affected population as a patient were mainly obtained from RC, NGO and C/B documents, all of which were published in Europe or Asia. Contexts describing affected population as an agent were obtained from C/B, State, NGO, IGO, Project and RC documents, all of which were published in Europe or Oceania.
Contexts describing situations of displacement present affected population in opposition to host community. However, affected population is also understood as an umbrella concept for both displaced and host populations. These contexts were obtained from IGO, NGO and Project documents published in Europe, Africa and Asia.
Other cases extracted are anecdotal but illustrative of the gradient nature of this concept. To learn more, please refer to the Collocation section, which contains an analysis of participation of affected population.
Based on demonym
affected Palestinian population
affected Malagasy population
affected Yemeni population
affected Guinean population
affected Andean population
affected Eritrea population
Based on role in humanitarian response
community-led affected population
Based on humanitarian coverage
accessible affected population
Based on relationship to a place
affected local population
affected urban population
affected resident population
affected indigenous population
Based on age
affected elderly population
young affected population
Based on relevance
key affected population
broad affected population
Based on relationship to displacement
camp affected population
displacement affected population
non-displaced affected population
affected host population
non-internally displaced person
(non-IDP)
internally displaced person (IDP)
returnee
Based on affecting phenomena
See next section
General phenomena
crisis-affected population
emergency-affected population
population affected by adversity
Disease/impairment
HIV-affected population
TB-affected population
AWD-affected population
cholera-affected population
disability affected population
population affected by terminal disease
population affected by leprosy
population affected by epidemic outbreaks
Environmental phenomena
disaster-affected population
cyclone-affected population
drought-affected population
earthquake-affected population
flood-affected population
typhoon-affected population
storm-affected population
tsunami-affected population
climate change affected population
population affected by natural disasters
population affected by extreme weather conditions
Human conflict
conflict-affected population
non-conflict affected population
violence-affected population
war-affected population
[land]mine-affected population
population affected by armed conflict
population affected by urban violence
population affected by tribal violence
population affected by ERW
Economic activity
mining-affected population
Displacement
displacement-affected population
Scarcity
famine-affected population
drought-affected population
population affected by food insecurity
population affected by high prices
population affected by poverty
population affected by hunger
population affected by food shortage
Linguistic analysis shows that populations can be affected by natural phenomena, man-made phenomena and their corollaries, i.e. scarcity and displacement.
Specific phenomena affecting populations were obtained from 447 contexts, primarily extracted from documents issued by the following organisation types (and subtypes) in order of relevance: NGO (NGO_Int), IGO (UN_OPA, IGO_Reg) and RC (RCNS, ICRC). In terms of geographical distribution, these contexts were mostly found in documents from Europe, followed by North America, Asia and Africa. Activity reports generated 298 occurrences, followed by General documents and Strategy documents with 97 and 55 occurrences, respectively.
Frequent words that accompany a term are known as collocates. A given term and its collocates form collocations. These can be extracted automatically based on statistics and curated manually to explore interactions with concepts.
Comparisons over time between organisation types with the greatest contribution (IGO, NGO, RC, C/B and Project) proves to be meaningful. Below is an histogram for the top yearly collocation for each of the five organisations with the greatest contribution as well as across all organisation types.
Overall, accountability is the top collocate with affected population in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2012, 2014, 2016. Interestingly, APP—the acronym for accountability to affected populations— is the top collocation for 2019 and the second highest for the 2005-2019 period. Other top collocates include individual, access, unpredictable, appraise, responder, surveying, flash and preference.
Likewise, accountability dominates IGO documents between 2011 and 2019. Other top IGO collocates include need, benefit and unpredictable.
Top collocates in NGO documents are more varied, but again accountability tops 2011 and 2016. Mentions of the Indian state of Punjab account for the collocate with the highest score, followed by flash, flood, resilience, distribution, relief, vulnerable, effort and access in order of relevance.
In RC documents, the highest overall collocation is responder, which peaks in 2013, closely followed by flood in 2014 and 2016. Other top RC collocations include ability, accountability, ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross), access and need.
C/B documents generated 6 top collocations, of which APP has the highest score in 2019, followed by accountability in 2011. With considerably lower scores, access and need also feature but are negligible.
Although Project documents contribute with a great amount of occurrences for affected populations, they are limited to 2011 and 2018. Understandably, the top two Project collocates —appraise and preference— constitute outliers, given that Project documents deal with fieldwork activities rather than theorising about affected populations themselves.
Organisation subcorpora present unique and shared collocations with other organisation types. Unique collocations allow to discover what a particular organisation type says about affected populations that others do not.
Top unique collocates for NGO include inconceivable, off-camp, self-sufficiency, ENN (Emergency Nutrition Network), Amran, harsh, proximity, Rakhine, flash and holistic.
IGO documents feature people-centric, gFSC (global Food Security Cluster), unpredictable, threaten, timely, accountable, Egypt, negotiation, behaviour and disseminate.
RC unique collocates with the highest scores are proviso, segment, responder, NRCS (National Red Cross Society), parallel, rest, communicate, root, input and safe.
Documents from Project contain the following top unique collocates: appraise, preference, acceptable, implication, guidance, exposure, percentage, unable, threat and inform.
The only unique collocates for C/B are neutrality, deal, contact, put, act, individual and result.
NGO, IGO and RC coincide in that they include mentions to:
specific organisations (ENN, gFSC and NRCS)
safety (harsh, threaten, safe); and
nature of situations: (flash, unpredictable, parallel)
NGO and IGO present collocates that refer to approaches to delivering assistance (holistic, people-centric, timely) as well as references to locations (off-camp, proximity, Amran, Rachine, Egypt). RC and IGO contain collocates associated with communication such as negotiation, disseminate and communicate. In addition to the aforementioned categories, Project also features distinct collocates suggesting a closer fieldwork contact with affected populations, as evidenced by appraise, implication and exposure. Similarly, C/B generates a distinct set of unique collocates that exemplify key concerns in relation to the humanitarian system, e.g. neutrality as well as its characteristic business focus on action-outcome, e.g. deal, act, contact and result.
For a visualisation with all collocates and greater filtering control, please click here.
Shared collocations allow to discover matching elements with organisations talk about affected populations. These constitutes intersections between subcorpora.
Top collocates shared by 2 organisation types are AAP (accountability to affected populations) (IGO+C/B), flood (NGO+RC), involvement (Project+NGO), drought (NGO+IGO), ability (RC+Project) and IDP (internally displaced person) (NGO+IGO)
Top collocates shared by 3 organisation types include dignity (IGO+NGO+Project), assist, vulnerable (IGO+RC+NGO), participation (IGO+NGO+Project), emergency and crisis (IGO+RC+NGO).
Top collates shared by 4 organisation types include actor (C/B+IGO+NGO+Project), reach (C/B+IGO+NGO+RC), ensure (C/B+IGO+NGO+Project), key, response and provide (C/B+IGO+NGO+RC).
Finally, all organisation types selected for analysis coincide with the following collocates in order of relevance: accountability, need, access, assistance, humanitarian and local.
Verb collocates are useful in determining key relations between concepts. On the left is a diagram that represents verbs of which affected population is the subject (in green) and the object (in pink).
At first sight, affected population collocates with verbs more frequently as an object than as a subject, which clearly underpins its prevalent passive conceptualisation, e.g. humanitarian actors assist, support, serve, protect, help and address affected populations. This is also confirmed by some of the verbs of which affected population can be their subject , e.g. need, face and remain. Other verbs in this category are used to describe affected populations, e.g. be and have, as well as describing their actions vaguely, e.g. do and work.
Definitional Contexts section discusses that affected population is increasingly being conceptualised as an agent in the sense that affected populations can also participate in their own assistance. Three verbs appear to instantiate this phenomenon: empower, involve and include.
Collocational analysis reveals that the top key associated concepts are accountability, participation or involvement, need, access and assistance, which are examined in the following sections. Other key concepts include dignity, vulnerability, self-sufficiency and neutrality.
With a total of 146 occurrences, accountability to affected populations is the most frequent and relevant compound expression. Even thought contexts were obtained from documents published in every year, 2011 saw a nine-fold explosion of occurrences compared to the previous year. The period between 2011 and 2019 accounts for nearly 90% of all occurrences. Being the top collocation for 2007, 2008 and 2009, accountability to affected populations was a concern that gained considerable attention after 2011. Numerous occurrences of its acronym —AAP— indicate that the concept has solidified quite recently.
By and large, when organisations refer to AAP, they do so to point out that:
(a) it is something that should be improved, increased or strengthened;
(b) it is topical;
(c) they work towards it;
(d) they are committed to it;
(e) they take general or specific measures to increase it;
(f) there is no common understanding of what it means; and
(g) they research it and/or have specific research questions.
To better understand the evolution of AAP over time, all contexts were classified into 8 statement categories based on what organisations say about it:
(i) General measure
(ii) Specific measure
(iii) Current affair
(iv) Research
(v) Ethical basis
(vi) Humanitarian concept
(vii) Explicit definition
(viii) Other
Contexts classified as Other mostly include statements merely claiming that a given organisation works towards AAP, as well as other marginal cases.
Below is an histogram of the evolution of AAP as a concept. The statement classification detailed above allows to represent how AAP develops from vague mentions to more specific and defined mentions. Please hover over each bar section to reveal more details about each mention. Other filters are also available to look at distributions by region, document type and organisation type.
In 2011, APP began to attract attention as evidenced by a dramatic increase in occurrences. Documents published in this year contain the two first mentions pointing out that AAP is an ill-defined concept. It was not until 2015 that a progressive increase surpasses values for 2011.
Mentions of conceptual vagueness reappeared in 2015 and 2016. The greatest number of occurrences were obtained from documents published in 2018, when a change in proportion of statement categories can be observed. 2018 saw the only explicit definition of AAP as well as a considerable increase of occurrences classified as Ethical basis.
2019 also experiences a change in proportion, with most statements being Specific measures and Ethical bases. It also ceased to be referred to as a cross-cutting issue or key current challenge.
Linguist analysis suggests that AAP crystallised as a concept in 2018. This is when its first definition appeared, and the greatest number of organisations claimed their adherence to AAP as a principle.
For the humanitarian system to be accountable everyone within that system must have a common understanding of what accountability to affected populations means.
Accountability to affected populations (AAP) is generally understood as an active commitment by humanitarian organisations to be held to account by the people they seek to assist for the quality and effectiveness of their humanitarian action.
While media and communication skills are essential, finding people who also have strong coordination and participatory engagement skills and wider knowledge of accountability to affected populations and related feedback mechanisms is difficult.
Organisations speculate about and describe several ways to increase AAP. Here is a list of measures abstracted from 78 contexts:
Advocacy Work
Auditing
Better Communication
Better Coordination
Community Engagement
Complaint Mechanisms
Consulting with Experts
Creating Codes, Protocols and Practices
Donor Pressure
Feedback Mechanisms
Institutionalisation
Localising Response
Modifying Codes, Protocols and Practices
Real Time Evaluation
Referral Mechanisms
Training Locals
There are few contexts that explicitly state why AAP is a desired goal.
Broadly, AAP is considered a part of programme quality, which means that poor AAP causes low quality response. In the pursuit of better humanitarian response, organisations research AAP, as shown by the following research questions found in selected contexts:
How can AAP be improved by specific measures in development projects?
How do NGOs perceive AAP?
What is the relationship with AAP, devolving responsibility to local actors and monitoring?
How do organisations operationalise AAP?
What is the relationship between AAP and protection?
How can AAP be balanced with local leadership and humanitarian standards?
With a total 91 occurrences, access to affected population is mainly found in IGO, NGO, RC and C/B documents published in Europe followed by North America between 2008 and 2018. Clearly, it appears to be an area of concern for organisations as evidenced by the following contexts:
Aid agencies operating in Yemen report that their ability to access affected populations is constrained despite unprecedented levels of humanitarian funding.
Across many of the countries in which we work, Concern and our partners continue to experience extremely significant challenges as a result of conflict and displacement, including: restricted access to affected populations, disruption of programme activity and surges of pressure on our programmes' capacity.
The impartiality of aid risks being compromised if humanitarian actors have access to only part of an affected population, or can only have limited or inconsistent interaction with the affected population.
The principal challenge to the response will be the limited and unpredictable access to affected populations in the North West Frontier Province and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, where fighting is ongoing.
Organisations identify several causes that limit access to affected populations, which can be classified into 8 categories:
Impediments by Conflict Parties
government restrictions
restrictions imposed by armed groups
censorship
lack of cooperation from authorities
legal and practical barriers
Infrastructural Issues
poor infrastructure
damaged infrastructure
non-existent infrastructure
General Insecurity
insecurity
security concerns
fighting
inability to access affected populations from key belligerents
Targeted Attacks
threats to humanitarians
targeting of humanitarian assets
criminally motivated attacks against humanitarian actors
Neutrality Issues
association with a political or military agenda
pressure for UN structural integration
lack of real o perceived neutrality
Logistics Issues
lack of technical resources
lack of financial resources
Gaining and maintaining access to affected populations requires that organisations engage in activities. Contextual analysis generated a list of 6 types of activity:
Advocacy Work
dialogue with authorities at all levels
lobbying state and non-state actors
Engaging Local Organisations
working closely with local structures
establishing a presence and forging relations
utilising local civil society organisations (CSO)
structured engagement with relevant actors
relying on local and national NGOs
Innovation
innovative methods
remote management
Negotiation with Conflict Parties
dialogue will all players and groups
acting as a neutral intermediary
negotiating with parties to conflict and/or government actors
Principled Activities
principled engagement
adherence to humanitarian principles
Reputation Management
distancing from the UN
Collocational analysis identified 202 occurrences of need in documents containing affected population. These were obtained primarily from general documents and activity reports issued by NGO, IGO, RC and Project organisations in Europe, North America and Asia.
Needs of affected populations can be classified into 6 categories:
Organisations provide affected populations with:
Survival
basic survival needs
early recover needs
immediate survival needs
Nutrition
critical hunger needs
food security needs
food needs
water needs
Facilities
shelter needs
housing needs
settlement needs
Non-food Items (NFI)
blanket needs
bedding needs
household items specific needs
Services
education needs
income needs
stigma reduction needs
healthcare needs
treatment needs
Unspecific
relief
aid
support
humanitarian assistance
Nutrition
safe drinking water
food items
nutritional supplements
Non-food Items (NFI)
medical supplies
hygiene supplies
basic drugs
clothing
bedding
blankets
Services
healthcare services
psychosocial services (PSS)
satellite communication
WASH services
Facilities
shelter
healthcare facilities
sanitation facilities
toilet facilities
water tanks
water pumps
cover cisterns
WASH facilities
temporary learning spaces
Information
life-saving information
training
technical support
information on services
information on humanitarian organisations
Collocational analysis reveals that organisations discuss, report on, and theorise about the role of affected populations in humanitarian responses. For the most part, contexts including participation of affected populations, together with synonymous expressions, were extracted from NGO, Project, Net and IGO documents published in Europe and North America. Over half of all occurrences, out of a total of 76, were found in publications between 2014 and 2019. However, it is worth mentioning that nearly a quarter was obtained from documents in 2011. This suggests that participation of affected populations is a relatively recent concern.
The participation and consultation of affected populations during the implementation of humanitarian programmes is of primary importance, but it is also a very sensitive issue.
The full participation of the affected population and coordination with national and local authorities is essential to achieve this across all sectors.
The involvement of national actors and affected populations in the coordination and provision of humanitarian response is necessary to ensure that humanitarian actors can respond adequately to real needs and protect the dignity of the affected population.
As discussed in the Definitional Contexts section, the degree of involvement of an affected population in its own humanitarian assistance is clearly associated with whether it is perceived as either a patient or an agent. Several contexts indicate that participation of affected populations is essential and necessary to respond adequately to their real needs, but remains a sensitive issue.
A 2019 Strategy document from a European NGO was the only publication found to contain an explicit definition for participation of affected populations as well as a detailed typology of seven degrees of participation:
The Participation Handbook includes a typology of participation (adapted from Jules Pretty 1995), which distinguishes seven degrees of involvement of affected populations in humanitarian responses.
The affected population is informed of what is going to happen or what has occurred.
The affected population provides information in response to questions, but it has no influence over the process because survey results are not shared and their accuracy is not verified.
The affected population is asked for its perspective on a given subject, but it has no decision-making powers and no guarantee that its views will be considered.
The affected population supplies some of the materials and/or labour needed to operationalise an intervention, in exchange for a payment in cash or kind from the aid organisation.
The affected population supplies some of the materials, cash and/or labour needed to operationalise an intervention. This includes cost-recovery mechanisms.
The affected population participates in the analysis of needs and in programme conception, and has decision-making powers.
The affected population takes the initiative, acting independently of external organisations or institutions. Although it may call on external bodies to support its initiatives, the project is conceived and run by the community; it is the aid organisation that participates in the population’s projects.
Evidently, this typology substantiates the idea of affected population as a concept situated on a continuum between its role as a patient or as an agent in the humanitarian process. The degree of participation can be measured by looking at those areas of humanitarian assistance in which an affected population is involved. Although the excerpt above specifies keys areas of involvement for each degree of participation, a contextual analysis of all selected occurrences was conducted to get a wider picture.
Contexts containing participation of affected populations or variants are diverse in nature. They can be categorised into six types of statement:
explicit definitions: contexts containing definitions for participation of affected populations
mission statements: contexts describing objectives and principles of particular organisations
guidelines: contexts describing how to proceed in particular scenarios of humanitarian assistance
desiderata: contexts describing ideal or desired situations
reporting statements: contexts describing specific situations of humanitarian assistance
theorising statements: contexts containing abstractions and reflections on the concept of participation of affected populations
Out of a total of 76 contexts, 35 contain unspecific mentions of participation of affected population or synonymous expressions. With a varying degree of specificity and as found in all specific contexts, an affected population can be involved in the following areas of humanitarian response:
Assessment
Construction
Consultation
Coordination
Decision-making
Design
Development
Evaluation
Facility Guarding
Facility Maintenance
Facility Management
Implementation
Monitoring
Planning
Provision
Representation
Supply of Information
Testing
The visualisation on the left shows the most frequent nouns that collocate with affected. It is no surprise that these are collective terms (e.g. community, family, household, etc.) and geographical terms (e.g. area, country, district, etc), as well as individual terms (e.g. resident, person, farmer, etc.).
People can be grouped based on numerous criteria. For this reason, population may have countless synonyms as it means "a particular group or type of people living in a place". (Oxford English Dictionary, 2019). Metonymically, groups of people may also be referred to by the place they inhabit. This is why region, district and state appear too in the visualisation.
Depending on the context, all these expressions have the potential to be synonymous with affected population.
This is provided by working directly with the affected communities who are not receiving aid or not receiving sufficient aid from the Burma Government or INGOs.
The program aims to help save lives, livelihoods and assets, and alleviate the suffering of affected people .
Through this project, Sungi was able to provide food assistance to 6,000 households benefiting about 46200 affected populations whereas five medical camps were arranged in the affected union councils providing affectees access to the basic health facilities at their nearest point; six links roads were cleared and 170 houses were rehabilitated which lay in their proximity communities.
Objectives • Assess, monitor and analyse the humanitarian risks and conditions of affected populations , including drought victims , IDPs, returnees and the urban destitute.
Only in this way - and my thanks go in particular to the work of NGOs such as 'Geneva Call' - will we be able to improve the situations of affected populations and prevent new victims.
If humanitarian organisations focus on assisting affected populations, it is hardly surprising that there is only 1 occurrence of unaffected population and no occurrences of non-affected population.
Non-affected has 15 occurrences in collocation with area, household, country, prefecture and region. Unaffected has 63 occurrences in collocation with area, neighbour, building, temple, dwelling, governorate, household, flow, district, population and region. As can be seen, they are mostly geographical and building-related concepts, although some are also people-related.
The strategy also aims to anticipate and prevent cholera transmission to unaffected populations at immediate risk, which are identified via the analysis of previous outbreak patterns and cross-border collaboration.
In situations of displacement, affected populations may be understood as the opposite of host community or host population. As explained in the Definitional Contexts section, affected population may also be understood as an umbrella concept for displaced populations and host populations. However, it is more often used as an antonym (29 occurrences as an antonym vs. 3 occurrences as a parent concept).
Host populations are often impacted by directly affected populations, for example by sharing communal services such as schools, or acting as host families.
The program aims to help save lives, livelihoods and assets, and alleviate the suffering of affected people.
When describing the humanitarian system, affected populations may be perceived as an opposite of humanitarian actor.
Some of the key challenges result from unequal access to technologies among both affected populations and humanitarians.
This challenge will require a greater level of partnership and cooperation between humanitarian and development agencies, and between these actors and affected populations, national and local governments, new private sector responders and the military.
This chart represents the distribution of affected population between 2005 and 2019. Please toggle between Region, Organisation type and Document type to learn more about its evolution over time.
Affected population increased sharply in 2011 with occurrences obtained mostly European general documents from Project mainly, followed by NGO and C/B. From 2011 onwards, there is a more even distribution by Document type dominated by NGO, IGO and RC.
Below is another chart with data obtained from the Google Books corpus. Please scroll down to find out more.
This shows trends for affected population and its plural form in the vast Google Books corpus, which gives you a general idea of the evolution of the term in English books between 1800 and 2008. Values are expressed as a percentage of the total corpus instead of occurrences.
Please note that this is not a domain-specific corpus. However, it provides an overview of affected population across domains.
Affected population increased steadily until 1997. It peaked in 2002 and plateaued briefly until 2004 to finally plummet to pre-1950 values.
You can add your feedback on this LAR and say whether you need us to expand the information on any section by filling in a brief form.