By Andrew Thompson and Mike Aaronson, University of Oxford (06/07/2023)
Article length: 35 pages
Keywords: INGOs; future; internal and external challenges; legacy; legitimacy
This report comes from the three-year (2019-2023) INGOs and the Long Humanitarian Century research programme, based at the University of Oxford. The programme involved an expert group of NGO practitioners, academic researchers, and policymakers to consider the past, present, and future of INGOs. Part of it was a survey
of more than fifty leaders of diverse INGOs. This report discusses the turning point that the INGOs currently find themselves at, including the external and internal challenges they are facing. It also offers visions for the future and identifies the key questions that each INGO needs to address going forward.
The world today looks very different from when most of the large INGOs were founded. The external challenges INGOs face, as discussed by authors, are 1) the changing geopolitical environment, including the roles of China, India, and Russia, and the doubts regarding the "universality" of West-derived humanitarian models; 2) technological developments, with their risks and opportunities; 3) the repercussions of the Covid-19 pandemic, including the exacerbated inequalities across the world; 4) the new social movements being able to mobilise support in a more speedy and agile way than INGOs; and 5) the climate crisis, with its large-scale effects and its implications for the aid sector.
At the same time, INGOs face challenges internal to their sector and organisations: 1) localisation, which implies shifting power from the Global North to the Global South; 2) concerns about donor funding (and their expectations and demands), as well as the persistent growth narrative and the reluctance to shrink; 3) the consequences of the “humanitarian marketplace”, including bloated internal infrastructures and seeing peers as competitors; 4) the need to question their current role within the relief-development spectrum, given the scarce funding and the diversity of aid organisations; 5) the demands of institutional compliance and risk management, largely following the 9/11 as well as recent INGO scandals; and 6) the governance structures, especially the business mindset of the boards and the lack of diversity at all levels of leadership. Due to these challenges, many INGO leaders admitted feeling consumed in the day-to-day and “stuck”, with the risk that these internal issues might distract the organisations from the external challenges to which they need to respond.
Looking into the future, the authors underline that legacy for INGOs means more than just the founding ideas and values; it includes the cumulative effects of past decisions taken within an organisation, some of them pragmatic and having little to do with its founding values. However, it is possible for INGOs to refocus on their original values, if needed. The authors also discuss INGOs’ legitimacy
and note that it comes from a strong relationship with their supporters, their local partners, and the people they serve. Finally, although there have always been geopolitical upheavals, large-scale problems like climate change are new. This calls for humility, as well as ambition and willingness to reach out to new partners and look for new solutions. To figure this out at an organisational level, the authors offer sets of key questions 1) for INGO executives and their boards, 2) for donor governments, and 3) for UN agencies and other international institutions.
|
