ABSTRACT
This chapter presents South Sudan as a challenging case in realizing links between relief and development under the conditions of a fragile peace. It examines key donors’ (the US, the EU and Japan) approaches and motivations to realize the relief-to-development continuum in South Sudan since the 1990s through the 2013 crisis. This comparative analysis shows that donors have implemented some ‘more-than-relief programs’ over the past 20 years. The US and EU implemented relief-oriented rehabilitation programs, while Japan delved into a more development-oriented approach. Aside from addressing people's needs, other motivations are shaped by political intentions, organizational changes of donors, and mandates. In humanitarian crisis management, it is difficult to be purely ‘people-centric’ as the relief-to-development continuum approaches need to balance the ‘political nature’ of aid. The chapter concludes that realizing demand-driven relief for development assistance by bilateral donors is not an easy task, but donors should seek out ways to ensure that aid meets the needs of the people and protects the dignity of those who suffer the most.
