Looking into the mirror-perspectives on barriers to localisation.

Recent talks around catalysing local-led development and the necessary power-shifts have often centred around how funders can navigate "risks" associated with localisation-aka, how do they ensure that local actors do not engage in "fraud" "corruption" that they indeed "make a difference" in the communities that they "identify" to serve, and other arguments that focus on what they fear as "risky business". The relationship between funders and local/national actors has for too long been characterised by mistrust, control and bias. In trying to "feel" better about the choices they make on who they "give" to, I have seen organisations have to justify their proximity to issues and communities, been forced to divert their time and resources to prove they are worthy, have been worthy and will continue to be worthy of the funding and/or even capacity support, it is indeed often painful to witness the struggle local/national organisations go through.

I believe it is time, that these narratives and experiences stop. I want to advocate for a refocus from the local actors to the funders. This article documents some the progressive thinking from this particular funding community. They have faced the mirror and are asking themselves useful and progressive questions. An extract from the article states that:

"Donors can create obstacles for partners which equate to poor development practices, wasted time, energy and resources which results in replicating conventional, one-size-fits-all approaches, a lack of focus on learning and long-term impact collection, and poor-quality solutions to tackle systemic and complex change."

This sums up the need for swift and dynamic shifts that will lead to effective support for local-led development. This self interrogation and reflection coupled with innovative and creative actions around the lessons being learnt can lead to culture and mindset shifts that in my mind are currently the true impediments to localisation at this point. In a conversation last week with some critical allies of this movement, someone said that in 2022, "those who believe this (localisation) know it to be true, those who do not will not be persuaded by evidence" granted, this is one perspective, but it is a telling one. It is also a truth. After all, if you count the numerous conversations, platforms, movements, articles, research, initiatives, etc that have taken momentum in the last three years or so, with the power-shift movement, then surely, we can now stop convincing folks that localisation is the way to go, and start asking the right people, why this is still up for debate. It is indeed time to shift focus from where the index finger is pointing and follow the trail made by the other three.

The image above that summarises what truly blocks program success should give serious impetus to the need to shift the conversation.

Enjoy that article, and do let me know what you think, it is time to hear from the funders, what do YOU need to do, that does not involve telling "them/us" what they/we need to do... what is in your sphere of control that will advance localisation? It should also not be seen as a "bold" move, and instead, the right way to conduct the business of giving to local and national socio-economic development of global south countries. I would also welcome highlights on what other efforts donors are making-because I know they exist, we just need to keep the faith that we shall indeed meet halfway soon.