First of all, collaborative approaches are based on relationships. Thus, they are reinforcing populations resilience. They are also based on local initiatives to fulfill unmatched need and enable disruptive answers. Furthermore, they do not necessarily need huge financing, since they are based on recycling of funds (inside communities), in opposition with traditional assistance approaches. They even allow revenue generation, although they do not guarantee fair share of revenues. Thus, collaborative approaches are sustainable, opened toward change of practices, in a very different way of emergency responses. Finally, they do not stigmatise affected populations, since they are directly part of the process, as contributor (see for example http://singa.fr).
NB: This section is inspired by Flore Berlingen paper in revue Humanitaire n°41, pp. 46 à 50, Défense et illustration de l’économie collaborative
It is still a challenge to identify which commons can be shared in humanitarians actions…
During an interview with Michel Bauwens (founder of the P2P foundation, and author of numerous books and articles, specialists of commons), he recommended me to leave behind what I had been taught, in terms of organisations or processes, and to think in terms of commons. Indeed, as opposed to flows of goods or money, collaborative approaches are based around commons, whether knowledge (such as Wikipedia), or resources.
However, it is still a challenge to identify which commons can be shared in humanitarian actions.
It is clear that knowhow is key in many cases, will it be how to grow vegetables (as in the example given in HORIZONTAL LEARNING Engaging freedom’s possibilities, by Doug Reeler, 18 pages, 2005, or how to take care for former prostitutes, willing to find another way of living (to be published), or how to deal with mentalities using theater in Egypt (see http://www.la-croix.com/Archives/2015-01-27/En-Egypte-le-theatre-contre-les-prejuges-2015-01-27-1273622 ).
Logistic resources also seem an obvious possible topic, although they refer to much, from my point of view, to traditional humanitarian action, including delivery of goods or services, and to few involvement of local populations.
Well, this has still to be searched, possibly involving locals to avoid possible western bias…. To be followed.