Donor scores: Japan
Japan dropped one position in the HRI rankings, to 19th. It best ranking by pillar was in Pillar 5 (Learning and accountability), where it moved from 17th to 12th, followed by a 13th place in Pillar 2 (Prevention, risk reduction and recovery). In Pillar 1 (Responding to needs), Japan ranked 17th, and in Pillar 3 (Working with humanitarian partners) it was placed 19th among its peers. Its worst ranking was in Pillar 4 (Protection and international law), where it ranked 20th. Japan was 18th among donors for generosity and burden sharing.
By indicator, Japan ranked 1st for monitoring adherence to quality standards, equitable distribution of funding against level of crisis and vulnerability, 5th for strengthening humanitarian response capacity, 6th for supporting monitoring and evaluation, and for supporting the transition between relief, early recovery and development, and 7th for indicators on adapting to changing needs and respecting the roles of the different components of the humanitarian sector. Japan also scored well for equitable funding across crises, and funding to forgotten emergencies and those with low media coverage. For the timeliness of funding to sudden onset disasters, however, Japan ranked lowest of all donors, at 23rd. It scored only slightly higher for the implementation of refugee law (22nd), respect for human rights law (21st), funding UN coordination mechanisms (21st), un-earmarked funding (21st) and funding IFRC and ICRC appeals (21st). For all crises studied, Japan scored below the donor average, with the exception of Afghanistan, where it rated well above the donor average.