The effectiveness of humanitarian diplomatic engagement mechanisms in enhancing sustainable community livelihoods in Nairobi (Kenya) and Bujumbura (Burundi)

Paul Kahuria Njema; Elijah Onyango Standslause Odhiambo; Ferdinand Nabiswa Makhanu

doi:10.51867/AQSSR.3.4.55

Authors

Paul Kahuria Njema Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kenya Author https://orcid.org/0009-0008-5729-5918
Elijah Onyango Standslause Odhiambo Masinde Muliro University of Science & Technology Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4048-3962
Ferdinand Nabiswa Makhanu Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kenya Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0671-7825

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51867/AQSSR.3.4.55

Keywords:

Humanitarian Diplomatic Engagement, Mechanisms, Sustainable Community Livelihoods

Abstract

Humanitarian Diplomacy (HD) plays a critical role in enhancing community livelihoods, particularly in regions facing socio-economic vulnerabilities. It has emerged as a crucial tool in advancing humanitarian objectives globally and has evolved over time, reflecting changes in the global humanitarian landscape. Thus, despite increasing humanitarian interventions in Kenya and Burundi, there is limited empirical evidence on how humanitarian diplomacy contributes to sustainable community livelihoods. Consequently, the effectiveness of diplomatic engagement in enhancing resilience, socio-economic well-being, and long-term development remains insufficiently understood and documented. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of humanitarian diplomatic engagement mechanisms in enhancing sustainable community livelihoods in Kenya and Burundi. The study was underpinned by liberal institutionalism theory, as well as sustainable livelihood framework. The study employed a comparative cross-sectional explanatory sequential mixed-methods design. The target population entailed government agencies and organizations, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), donor agencies, community leaders and local government. The study used both proportionate stratified random sampling and purposive sampling for the key informants. Out of 200 respondents, the study sampled 179 respondents. This way, purposive and stratified sampling techniques were used to ensure a diverse representative of participants in the study area and both the qualitative and quantitative tools of analysis were applied to the responses depending on the type of measurement and information obtained from primary and secondary sources. The study utilized both primary and secondary data collection instruments. Primary instruments were semi-structured questionnaires and interviews while secondary instrument included journals, books and humanitarian briefs. Data was analyzed using quantitative and qualitative analyses, SPSS version 24 and Nvivo version 15. Data was presented using tables, pie charts and bar graphs as well as thematic interpretation. On the mechanisms, the study found that 70.95% cumulatively agreed that social protection programmes and community well-being are effective. Overall, the study concludes the study concludes that humanitarian diplomatic engagement is not merely a mechanism for securing humanitarian access but also an instrument for facilitating community resilience and sustainable livelihoods. The study recommends an integrated programming of immediate relief with long-term development rather than approaching humanitarian activities and development as separate entities. This can be achieved through community participation and improving environmental and infrastructure integration. Additionally, both governments, humanitarian agencies and development partners should establish coordinated and context-based livelihood partnerships.

References

Akpinar, P. (2013). Turkey's peacebuilding in Somalia: The limits of humanitarian diplomacy. Turkish Studies, 14(4), 735-757.

https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2013.863448

Barnett, M. (2011). Empire of humanity: A history of humanitarianism. Cornell University Press.

Boswell, A. (2026). As the Horn of Africa nears boiling point, time for urgent diplomacy. International Crisis Group. https://www.crisisgroup.org/cmt/africa/horn-africa/horn-africa-nears-boiling-point-time-urgent-diplomacy

Catley, A., Lind, J., & Scoones, I. (2016). The futures of pastoralism in the Horn of Africa: Pathways of growth and change. Revue Scientifique et Technique (International Office of Epizootics), 35(2), 389-403.

https://doi.org/10.20506/rst.35.2.2524

Chambers, R., & Conway, G. (1992). Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practical concepts for the 21st century (IDS Discussion Paper 296). Institute of Development Studies.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

De Lauri, A. (2018). Humanitarian diplomacy: A new research agenda (CMI Brief No. 2018:4). Chr. Michelsen Institute. https://www.cmi.no/publications/6536-humanitarian-diplomacy-a-new-research-agenda

Dewan, T. H. (2015). Societal impacts and vulnerability to floods in Bangladesh and Nepal. Weather and Climate Extremes, 7, 36-42.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2014.11.001

Fiott, D. (2018). Humanitarian diplomacy. In G. Martel (Ed.), The encyclopedia of diplomacy (pp. 1-10). Wiley-Blackwell.

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118885154.dipl0123

Ghio, D., Goujon, A., Natale, F., et al. (2023). Assessing populations exposed to climate change: A focus on Africa in a global context. Population and Environment, 45, Article 28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-023-00439-y

Ghosh, A. (2018). Recipe of a disaster: Peripheral lives in the epicentre of changing climate. In Sustainability conflicts in coastal India (pp. 35-66). Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63892-8_2

Hallegatte, S., & Rozenberg, J. (2017). Climate change through a poverty lens. Nature Climate Change, 7(4), 250-256. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3253

International Labour Organization. (2021). Turning prosopis into green jobs in Kenya. https://www.ilo.org/resource/article/turning-prosopis-green-jobs-kenya

Keohane, R. O. (1984). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton University Press.

Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S., Jr. (1977). Power and interdependence: World politics in transition. Little, Brown.

Kimaiyo, J., Okoth, S., & Orengo, M. (2026, June 22). Restoration's success goes beyond counting trees. World Resources Institute. https://www.wri.org/insights/restorations-success-goes-beyond-counting-trees

Kovba, D. M. (2020). The humanitarian dimension of diplomacy: The problem of categorization and analysis. Herald of KRSU, 20(11), 170-173.

Mengisteab, K. (2017). Institutional fragmentation in Africa and its implications. In Traditional institutions in contemporary African governance (pp. 1-13). Routledge.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315227948-1

Minear, L., & Smith, H. (2007). Humanitarian diplomacy: Practitioners and their craft. United Nations University Press.

Minko, E. A. (2025a). Humanitarian action in Africa: Confronting challenges and advancing diplomacy. China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies, 11(2), 129-149. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2377740025500071

Minko, E. A. (2025b). The role of humanitarian diplomacy in negotiating access and ensuring protection in conflict zones. African Centre for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes. https://www.accord.org.za/analysis/humanitarian-diplomacy-in-conflict-resolution-bridging-gaps-between-local-needs-and-global-agendas-in-africa/

Nyabicha, O. (2024, February 14). Kenya's humanitarian diplomacy practice. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4759048

Ouma, M. (2016). Radicalization and militarization of refugees as a challenge to international security. Journal of Science, Technology, Education and Management, 7(1-2), 153-167.

Schewe, J., Heinke, J., Gerten, D., Haddeland, I., Arnell, W., Clark, D. B., Dankers, R., Eisner, S., Fekete, B., Colón-González, F. J., Gosling, S. N., Kim, H., Liu, X., Masaki, Y., Portmann, F. T., Satoh, Y., Stacke, T., Tang, Q., Wada, Y., ... Kabat, P. (2014). Multi-model assessment of water scarcity under climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(9), 3245-3250. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1222460110

Setrana, M. B., & Adzande, P. (2022). Farmer-pastoralist interactions and resource-based conflicts in Africa: Drivers, actors, and pathways to conflict transformation and peacebuilding. African Studies Review, 65(2), 399-403.

https://doi.org/10.1017/asr.2022.45

Suckall, N., Stringer, L. C., & Tompkins, E. L. (2015). Presenting triple-wins? Assessing projects that deliver adaptation, mitigation and development co-benefits in rural sub-Saharan Africa. Ambio, 44(1), 34-41.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0520-0

Turunen, S. (2020). Humanitarian diplomatic practice. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 15, 466.

https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-BJA10008

United Nations Environment Programme. (2021). Becoming #GenerationRestoration: Ecosystem restoration for people, nature and climate. https://www.unep.org/resources/ecosystem-restoration-people-nature-climate

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2021, June 18). Figures at a glance. https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/figures-at-a-glance.html

United Republic of Tanzania, Ministry of Finance and Planning. (2025). National vision 2050: Pathways to sustainable economic transformation.

Vujcic, J. A., & Joseph, M. L. (2018). Efficacy and effectiveness of water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions in emergencies in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review. Waterlines, 37(1), 31-65.

https://doi.org/10.3362/1756-3488.17-00016