Attachments
The humanitarian sector has been progressing towards more locally led humanitarian action since the World Humanitarian Summit held in 2016. The evidence base around what works with respect to locally led approaches has expanded, and tools are increasingly being used to guide the measurement of progress of localisation (Tamdeen Youth Foundation et al, 2022; NGO Resource Centre et al, 2023). However, while appetites have grown to improve the impact measurement of locally led response, evidence is largely anecdotal and context specific. Frameworks to measure the impacts of locally led action remain limited compared to frameworks that measure progress in the implementation of localisation (HAG, CoLAB and GLOW Consultants, 2023).
Locally led action is more than an intervention modality and it is arguably more complex than cash-based assistance and anticipatory action, yet those frustrated by a lack of progress in locally led action may find stronger impact measures to be useful in prompting the sector to finally live up to the commitments made in 2016.
This raises a number of questions: What impact study or studies can be carried out on a complex topic such as locally led action? Would such studies provide meaningful, robust and useful evidence or would they define locally led action too narrowly and technically? Is it even conceptually or practically possible to deliver evidence-based findings on the comparative performance of international and local/national actors? This paper explores these questions.