Abstract

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: This study conceptualizes the international humanitarian system as a complex adaptive system (CAS), analyzing its reformist evolution in response to dynamically changing global conditions – from the 1990s to contemporary polycrises.

THE RESEARCH PROBLEM AND METHODS: The research examines the adaptive capacity of the global humanitarian system to contemporary crises through a hybrid hierarchical-networked governance model, combining Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) theory with institutional analysis. It poses three RQs: responses to exogenous factors, institutional reforms addressing endogenous barriers, and the effectiveness of “coordinated positioning” (CAS, Seybolt, 2009). The methodology relies on a systematic literature review and sector reports (especially ALNAP/HPG), focusing on external factors, environment, and structure.

THE PROCESS OF ARGUMENTATION: The argumentation unfolds systematically through interconnected stages. It begins by framing the polycrisis context with empirical data on escalating humanitarian needs, then conceptualizes the system as a Complex Adaptive System (CAS) with hybrid hierarchical-networked governance. The analysis traces key reforms – from 1991 UNGA structures and 2005 Cluster Approach to the 2016 triad (Agenda for Humanity, Grand Bargain, HDP Nexus). The 2025 US aid cuts (USAID dismantled) expose structural flaws – centralized/fragmented power and failed localization.

RESEARCH RESULTS: The global humanitarian system responds to exogenous factors with incremental operational reforms (coordination, funding quality, localisation, Nexus), bypassing power structures (centralized/fragmented architecture) and economic mechanisms.

CONCLUSIONS, INNOVATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The dominant hierarchical-networked governance model hinders effective “­coordinated positioning” – establishing strategic priorities adequate to changing conditions (ALNAP/SOHS reports). The system grows organizationally and financially but fails to keep pace with accelerating environmental changes. Recommendations: renegotiate humanitarianism’s place in the global social contract, political will for fundamental redesign (purpose, structure, legitimacy), and dismantling power structures – otherwise risking marginalization amid contemporary polycrises.