DECEMBER 2020

HUMANITARIAN ACCESS OVERVIEW

A snapshot of the most challenging contexts

Four new countries – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Eswatini, and Vietnam

have entered the ranking since the last ACAPS Humanitarian Access

report, released in July 2020

Where are the biggest access constraints?

4

countries with extreme access constraints

ERITREA

LIBYA

SYRIA

YEMEN

17

countries with high access constraints

AZERBAIJAN

BURKINA FASO

CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC (CAR)

CHAD

COLOMBIA

DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA (DPRK)

HONDURAS

INDIA

IRAN

LEBANON

MOZAMBIQUE

NICARAGUA

NIGER

PAKISTAN

SUDAN

TURKEY

UKRAINE


13

countries with veryhigh access constraints

AFGHANISTAN

BANGLADESH

CAMEROON

DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO (DRC)

ETHIOPIA

IRAQ

MALI

MYANMAR

NIGERIA

PALESTINE

SOMALIA

SOUTH SUDAN

VENEZUELA

The most affected indicators in the last six months are 'restrictions and obstruction of access

to services and assistance' and 'physicals constraints in the environment'

Our analysts scored each context on nine variables in order to rank and

compare humanitarian access worldwide. 

How are the access levels being calculated?

Our methodology groups 9 indicators under 3 dimensions:

PILLAR 1:  Access of people in need to humanitarian aid

• Denial of existence of humanitarian needs or entitlements to assistance

• Restriction and obstruction of access to services and assistance

PILLAR 2: Access of humanitarian actors to affected population

• Impediments to enter the country (bureaucratic and administrative). 

• Restriction of movement within the country (impediments to freedom of movement and/or administrative restrictions)

• Interference into implementation of humanitarian activities

• Violence against humanitarian personnel, facilities, and assets

PILLAR 3: Security and physical constraints

• Ongoing insecurity or hostilities affecting humanitarian assistance

• Presence of landmines, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), explosive remnants of war (ERW), and unexploded ordnance (UXOs)

• Physical constraints in the environment (obstacles related to terrain, climate, lack of infrastructure, etc.).

Each indicator is scored on a 0 to 3 scale.

Where there is no information for a specific indicator, it is logged as "Information Gap".

The overall access score by country is ranked

according to the following scale:

5 - Extreme access constraints

4 - Very high access constraints

3 - High access constraints 

2 - Moderate access constraints 

1 - Low access constraints 

0 - No significant access constraints

Contact

Claudia Manili

Mixed Methods Analyst

cm@acaps.org