Attachments
Localisation is a ubiquitous term within the aid system to refer to an ambitious and broad ranging policy agenda meant to correct historical exclusion of local actors by increasing their power and funding in humanitarian response. It has been a bumpy road localising the aid system despite high-level rhetoric and commitments.
Localisation requires international organisations to confront a heady mix of complex challenges including their internal risk thresholds, partnering processes and systems, and fiduciary growth demands. In practice, localisation may put international organisations at odds with their own incentive structures and success measures, in a climate of stiff competition over scarce resources.
Donors face other hurdles, ranging from legislative restrictions, to risk appetites, to the impossibility of vetting and funding hundreds of smaller organisations and their own accountability to taxpayers.
Many local groups, however, are becoming vocal and assertive in demanding power and independence. And the international system is taking steps to correct its exclusionary nature.
Disappointingly, much of the change is yet to be felt on the ground – in recent emergencies such as Ukraine and Pakistan – and ongoing inequalities persist. But the intention for reform is there, and progress – slow as it may be – is being made with new policies, changes to funding practices, on the ground pilots and tough internal conversations about changing aid’s business model.
There is still little generalisable and empirical evidence pointing to how to shift the system to be more locally led. What is certain is that it requires strong political will from donors and humanitarian actors. Importantly, the humanitarian sector is still unclear, and has yet to develop consistent analysis and understanding about the intended outcomes and the ultimate impacts of localisation.