By Arbie Baguios (ALNAP, October 2021 - May 2022)

Localisation Re-imagined

(Sub)topics: localisation; state-led solutions; local non-state actors; monoculture in humanitarian action; resources; local agency; local ways of being; power; instrumental localisation; decentralising localisation; progressive localisation; effectiveness.

In his six-part essay series, Arbie Baguios, founder and researcher at Aid Re-imagined, examines the conceptualisations of localisation, as well as elaborates on the three dimensions and the three types of localisation.

Baguios starts off by discussing how the more radical/transformative conceptualisation of localisation seems to have been lost. Baguios advocates for shifting our emphasis from localising the sector towards supporting local solutions, including 'fertilising the soil of state-led humanitarian solutions' and 'regenerating the polyculture of humanitarianism'.

According to Baguios, there are three dimensions of localisation which differentiate localisation that genuinely supports local solutions from one that localises the sector: 1) resources (quality, quantity, and access); 2) agency, or 'the ability of national/local actors to identify their problems and priorities, and design or implement their solutions'; and 3) ways of being, i.e. 'whether there is respect for [local actors'] being in and understanding of the world'.

These three dimensions characterise the power dynamic in localisation, which, in turn, determines the localisation type: instrumental, decentralising, or progressive. Within the instrumental localisation, mostly only (financial) resources are transferred, while agency remains limited and there is little respect for the local ways of being. Decentralising localisation is reflected by 'a transfer or resources and a reduction, to a certain extent, on the encroachment of local actors' agency'. Finally, progressive localisation is characterised by a significant amount of resources transferred, the non-encroachment on the local actors' agency, and the respect to the local actors' ways of being.

Baguios challenges the perceived tension between the effectiveness and ethics in humanitarian action and invites us to consider 'a more expensive view of effectiveness' – one that includes the role of various state and non-state actors, as well as the local priorities that go beyond the development-humanitarian divide. Additionally, progressive localisation asks us to look at the bigger picture and recognise that actors or incentives not formerly labelled as 'humanitarian' can also help solve humanitarian problems.

By Oheneba A. Boateng (Front. Polit. Sci., September 2021)

Building Africa’s Homegrown Humanitarian Systems: Restoration as an Alternative to Localisation

Article length: 16 pages.

(Sub)topics: Africa; homegrown; localisation; erosion; restoration.

In this research article, Oheneba A. Boateng problematises 'localisation' as a troubled concept that has been applied in the past to help erode the homegrown African humanitarian initiatives. Instead, he proposes an alternative concept of 'restoration'.

According to Boateng, there are two fundamental obstacles to the current localisation agenda: the lack of clear definition of localisation and the lack of its historicisation.

Boateng underlines that the term 'localisation' implies that 'the ideas to be localised are imported; they do not originate from the receiving context' (p. 3). Furthermore, he argues that this term is historically inaccurate to capture the process of building homegrown structures as the bases of humanitarian action: 'since 1960s there have been homegrown African processes that got eroded partially through processes of localisation in the original meaning of the term' (p. 2). The latter was especially evident in the UN and INGOs running Africa's refugee camps. Boateng sums up: 'If localisation is taken to mean the process through which international actors adapt their operations to local contexts, [...] this process has already happened over the past six decades' (p. 9).

Boateng therefore proposes a concept of restoration of the homegrown evolution that was eroded. It should have the following components: 1) host state leadership; 2) the change of broader underlying principle from humanitarianism to that of self-determination; 3) a conducive environment for their own NGOs to emerge and thrive created by the state; 4) the international actors' reflection of their 'erosion footprint' and phasing out the relationship of subcontracting; 5) rediscovering physical territory by both homegrown and international actors; 6) pursuit of growth by the African actors by finding synergies with other restoration processes across the continent; 7) caring about the politics of the state and thus helping create a conducive political environment for restoration.

By Rights CoLAB and WASCI (March 2021)

Fostering Equitable North-South Civil Society Partnerships: Voices from the South

Article length: 15 pages.

(Sub)topics: INGOs; CSOs; global south; partnerships; collaboration; decision-making; structures and practices.

This RINGO* report is based on a survey conducted in Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, Middle East, South America, and Oceania from August to November 2020. It captures the concerns of global south civil society actors and their relationship with INGOs in four key areas: partnerships, collaborations, decision making, structures and practices.

The perspectives were shared by 609 global south civil society organisations (CSOs), 84% of whom collaborate with INGOs. 85% of the global south CSOs stated that the relationship was not mutually beneficial. 

With regard to partnerships, global south CSOs notice that INGOs tend to exhibit controlling and patronising behaviours. Covid-19 has also negatively affected INGOs and global south CSOs partnerships due to denied grant opportunities, restricted travelling, as well as reduced communication and funding. Regarding decision-making, 65% of the CSOs confirmed that their engagement with INGOs was based on a bottom-up approach or as equal partners; however, significant power imbalances were also underlined by global south CSOs. As for structures and practices, INGOs tend to neglect local institutional contexts (capacities, structures, and overall organisational sustainability), and Western defined systems and models form the basis for project implementation. 86% of the global south NGOs indicated that these structures had a negative impact on the efficiency and sustainability of their work.

The main recommendation from the global south CSOs is that INGOs should re-cast themselves as co-implementers and funders of projects, as facilitators, instead of directly engaging in project implementation.

*The Re-imagining INGO (RINGO) initiative is a project by RightsCoLAB designed to foster a re-examination of the purpose, roles, and delivery mechanisms of international NGOs and the impact on the global civil society ecosystem. It aims at capturing the views and engaging the wider groups of civil societies in the global south that have worked with international NGOs.

By Tania Cheung and Maya Sethi, Start Network (Start Network, 17/05/2022)

How local and national organisations are resisting tokenism in the humanitarian system

This blog article provides an overview of a recent discussion between representatives of locally led Hubs supported by Start Network on issues of power in the humanitarian system and within their Hubs. This discussion drew on the Power Cube concept.

The authors of this blog article, Tania Cheung and Maya Sethi, elaborate on the spacial dimension of the cube, which refers to the potential spaces for participation and action, and the problem of tokenism: 'When local actors invest precious and limited time and energy into initiatives only not to be heard, they can feel even more disempowered than before. It also allows initiatives to claim to be locally led or have involved local actors when in truth these actors have had little influence.' The answer to that can be creating your own space – within or outside of the system.

By Nick van Praag, Director and Founder, Ground Truth Solutions (The New Humanitarian, 19/04/2022)

Affected people are mostly missing from the localisation debate. Let’s change that.

In this article, Nick van Praag argues that 'if we are to put affected people at the centre, the goal of the so-called "participation revolution", they should have a say in who gets to implement aid programmes'. Van Praag notes that the localisation debate largely ignores the fact that affected people are subject to neo-colonial attitudes and behaviours. According to van Praag, 'neglecting affected peoples' views on localisation reflects a broader tendency to ignore their perspective in the design and implementation of humanitarian aid programmes'.

By Howard Mollett, Head of Humanitarian Policy at CAFOD (Charter4Change, 24/03/2022)

What would "as local as possible, as international as necessary" look like in Ukraine?

In this blog article, Howard Mollett discusses how donors, UN agencies, and INGOs can best reinforce local responders in Ukraine. He argues that donors and international agencies should fund the emergency appeals launched by local NGOs themselves, as opposed to 'expecting them to waste time applying through international funding processes'. The support must also be transparent and as flexible as possible; the capacity of local groups should be reinforced, not undermined, by international agencies scaling up; and coordination processes should enable roles of local NGOs and host government authorities.

By Sudhanshu S. Singh, Founder of Humanitarian Aid International (CDA, 03/2021)

If you want to support, vacate the space

In this blog article, Sudhanshu S. Singh discusses the colonial nature of the North-led aid architecture as well as the exploitative aspects of the ‘localisation’ process. Singh is unequivocal:

'Local actors like me, actively engaged in the localisation processes nationally and globally, feel compelled to believe that this global reform process has consumed a significant amount of time of ours, without yielding any results. Local actors like us keep getting invitations to join various global platforms as these platforms need to justify being inclusive of local actors. What have we got in return other than frustration, hostility, humiliation and marginalisation within our own context? We keep getting on these platforms on a pro-bono basis, while the Northern counterparts get handsomely paid for the same. Isn’t it about time to start valuing time investment of local actors?'

A podcast episode with Anna Alboth, Polish activist with Grupa Granica and the Minority Rights Group, and Christine Goyer, Poland representative of UNHCR (22/12/2021)

Rethinking Humanitarianism: Are volunteers the new face of humanitarian border aid response?

In this podcast episode focusing on the Poland-Belarus border, host Heba Aly asks why volunteers are providing aid in spaces where we might be expecting large humanitarian agencies to take the lead. What does it say about the changing face of humanitarianism as well as the limitations of traditional aid agencies when confronted with politicised migration responses? How does it relate to the push in the sector for localisation of humanitarian response?

Polish activist Anna Alboth points out that the work that the volunteers are doing should be done by the state and by big international humanitarian organisations. While the Polish government is trying to disturb the work of the activists, the big organisations are not directly engaging on the border. Alboth tells that big organisations use the argument of needing government permissions to enter the designated emergency zone. However, there is a lot to do outside of the zone. 'And when we start this topic with them, they just stop answering.'

Alboth shares: 'I don't have a lot of hopes in big international humanitarian organisations. [...] We, as activists, what we are doing from August on, we are trying to finish this crisis [...]. What I see in the work of all these big international organisations, is that they live from the crisis; their existence wouldn't be there, if there wouldn't be crisis.'

Christine Goyer, Poland representative of UNHCR, notes that in its dialogue with the authorities UNHCR is putting pressure on the authorities to respond as they have the capacity. According to Goyer, it is not an easy discussion because Poland has taken a very firm stance; however, the dialogue has to continue.