How localization efforts are ‘missing the mark’ — and what to do next

Are current attempts at localization falling short? The answer appears to be yes, according to development professionals consulted for a new report published this week. The report, from global nonprofit Humentum, is called “From Operations to Outcomes: A Policy Blueprint for Locally-Led Development,” and is based on responses from more than 2,000 global humanitarian and development professionals from over 100 countries. At an event to share the findings of that consultation process, more than 100 of those professionals were asked, “In terms of true locally driven development, how would you describe the sector as it exists today?” “Missing the mark” was one of the most common responses. Other terms which appear in a word cloud in the report based on poll answers included “slow,” “difficult,” “patronizing,” “labyrinth,” and “blah blah.” The transfer of power and resources from funders and international NGOs to locally led organizations was one of the core talking points of the development sector, even before a landmark speech from Samantha Power, administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, in 2021, where she made a commitment to spend 25% of all funding with locally led organizations. However, the report finds that there is a long way to go and highlights the need for “concrete policy and practice changes that move the sector from talk to action.” It also finds a belief that there is now more scope for change than in the past. And it makes a handful of recommendations — based on the views of the development community — about what those concrete changes might look like. That change depends on funders, INGOs, and local organizations working in harmony, said Cynthia Smith, director of government affairs and advocacy at Humentum, and one of the report’s authors. She highlighted a small number of key recommendations in the report, one of which was that it was vital for INGOs and funders to build partnerships with local organizations. “Treating them more as equals more as peers, less as subordinate — that is one key thing,” she said. Another key issue was that a change in development practice will not come without changes in the rules. One key area is risk and compliance regimes, which are often designed in such a way that they favor INGOs and contractors. Smith said it was time to dismantle some of the myths around local organizations — that they were more likely to be a risk of fraud or mismanagement. And she said it was time to shift from compliance practices designed largely to punish those who got things wrong. “It’s nearly uniformly said among donors and some INGOs that it's more risky to work with local partners — that they don't know what they're doing or whatever,” she said. “That's just not proven. There isn't evidence to back that up.” Finally, she said, change would not come without changes in funding practice. She said more money needed to be allocated to smaller-scale funding, which was distributed at a local level, based on priorities set by local organizations. She gave the example of the Inter-American Foundation, which makes small grants throughout the Americas. Altogether, said Smith, there were clear ways in which the model needed to change to make localization work. “It needs to be more responsive,” she said. “It needs to be less punitive, more trust-based, and more partnership focused.”