Thought provoking article - thank you.

Is there such a thing as the humanitarian system? When looking at systems, then the illusions and allusions to elements in the humanitarian system reflect on open and closed elements within this system.

Funding being a critical ingredient and how organisations market their unique value porpostitons to different calls to action for different possible donors.

Deliberately keep writing humanitarian system whereas the article uses capitals for this term. Then devalues the survivor citizen community led crisis response by placing this as 'picture of sclr' Why? Conscious or subconscious bias? Pandering to the powerful and influenctial stakeholders ALNAP is writing for in terms of audience (and its own fiscal wellbeing)?

In this age where lip-service is being paid to inclusion, localisation and other such terms, then surely we need to look again at how the industry works. Fore humanitarian and development is an industry and requires analysis in this light.

This is alluded to with the quote of how key actors in the industry portray people - the manner we work with, grant power to, people speaks volumes in how the industry, specific organisations, work to market their product and services.

Taking a different perspective changes what we do and how we do it because it offers fresh thinking as to why bureaucracies do what they do.

It changes how we look at self organisation and the beauty of how people inherently will help each other - until the scale and scope of crises becomes overpowering.

Perhaps we now need far more normative work from the Leviathans of Aid (deliberate capitals) and far less more of the same even when tweaked with the latest tech gadgetry?