MSF - OCP's Global Environmental Footprint Initiative
Building MSF OCP environmental roadmap
Many missions have multiple OC's with coordination offices and accommodation in the same city. Unnecessary duplicity and underutilization of staff, goods, and services is likely to be MSF's top waste generator. There is no real reason why these offices and staff houses spaces shouldnt be shared.
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
2 comments
Conversation with Francesca
agree, it will also help to reduce costs and budgets. but for this we should also push for a multi-year plan. one year plan and, consequently, budget limit our visibility and too often a decision taken today is no more adapted next year because we are adding/cutting activities there fore we need more/less space...
A multi-year plan would be great. When it comes to Coordination, I dont think there will be a huge effect on space requirements year to year unless we have many OCs and all of a sudden 2-3 leave the country. For operations, at least (HoM and Med is not my competency), the idea is not to have multiple FinCo/LogCo/HRCo/SupplyCo for each OC sharing offices, but that one FinCo or one LogCo and their teams, for example, serve all OCs. The bigger issue is harmonizing systems and practices. Having bigger or smaller teams in the field will not necessarily have a huge impact on the team at Coordination. It could on housing / warehousing / vehicles...which is still manageably with annual budgeting...still in every case MSF would save money and reduce waste. I just came from Nigeria, which has 6 OCs...yearly savings there could easily surpass 1 million euro with all sorts of bonus eco benefits...
Add your comment
Sign in with your account or sign up to add your comment.
Loading comments ...