Ukraine belongs to the most landmine contaminated countries in the world. Therefore, humanitarian mine action (HMA) is an important area of work for Ukraine’s humanitarian protection cluster. In Ukraine, landmine contamination produces gendered insecurities and vulnerabilities. Casualties are predominantly men, while the affected population has a high proportion of vulnerable people, including women, the elderly, displaced and the disabled.  This study investigates which strategies were applied by organisations in the Ukraine’s mine action sub-cluster in order to respond to gendered insecurities and vulnerabilities to landmine contamination and by empowering vulnerable groups through their programmes. It is based on semi-structured interviews with representatives of HMA operators and international organisations in Ukraine. The main findings are that HMA operators in Ukraine considered gender and diversity to reach marginalised groups for operational purposes, such as internally displaced people (IDPs) and the elderly, by conducting household visits and deploying diverse teams. While operators adopted an evidence-based approach to explosive ordnance risk education (EORE), programmes predominantly focused on children, despite the largest at-risk group being adult men. More than in operations, gender mainstreaming was visible in operators’ efforts to offer equal employment opportunities in the HMA sector, supporting the affected population socio-economically. However, for meaningful participation in decision making in the sector, more time and continuous effort is required to help women advance even further into senior roles of impact.  Challenges to adequately mainstream gender were the lack of a centralised information management system and difficulties accessing the affected population. Particularly since early 2020, gender mainstreaming in community interaction has been severely limited due to COVID-19 related contact restrictions. Technological solutions were identified as the main opportunity for continued community interaction and EORE amid these access restrictions.

There is always competition between regions when it comes to their needs after facing a conflict, disaster, or long-term crisis. Donors allocating ODA or Humanitarian Assistance must decide to whom they want to allocate their support. While the literature broadly identifies the motivation for sending allocation to specific recipients and not to others, it has not yet researched the processes of the opposite, the reduction or break-off of aid allocation. This thesis researches the topic at the level of Humanitarian Mine Action (HMA). The question focuses on donors of bilateral HMA allocation and their motives of decision-making, when under financial pressure and forced to shorten their overall HMA budget. Using a most-different in-depth case study based on two steps on the cases of Australia and Germany, the question is researched, if the donors base their decisions and priorities on the needs of people when they have to reduce HMA budgets. The findings show that HMA rarely is documented separately and mostly connected either with ODA or Humanitarian Assistance. To get clear answers about the thoughts and motivations of decision-makers when it comes to the reduction or cut of HMA allocation, deeper research including interviews is needed.