Seven Years into the Rohingya Crisis: Progress in Localization?

It has been seven years since the world witnessed the beginning of the Rohingya humanitarian crisis. In August 2017, a brutal military crackdown in Myanmar’s Rakhine State forced more than 700,000 Rohingya people to flee to neighboring Bangladesh, seeking safety in Cox’s Bazar. The world responded with one of the largest humanitarian operations ever undertaken, driven by international organizations and supported by numerous local actors. As of the latest data from June 2024, there are approximately 984,591 Rohingya refugees living in Bangladesh. However, as the crisis has become protracted, the conversation has shifted towards “localization” — empowering local actors to take a lead in the humanitarian response. But how much progress has really been made?

Understanding Localization in the Humanitarian Context

Localization in humanitarian aid refers to the commitment to shift power, resources, and decision-making to local and national organizations that are closer to the communities they serve. It stems from the belief that local actors, with their deep understanding of cultural and contextual nuances, are best positioned to deliver effective and sustainable humanitarian assistance.

The Grand Bargain, an agreement between some of the world’s largest donors and humanitarian agencies launched at the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016, emphasized localization as a key priority. It set a target of channeling 25% of global humanitarian funding to local and national responders by 2020. Yet, years into the Rohingya crisis, the effectiveness of localization remains questionable.

Progress in Localization within the Rohingya Humanitarian Response

Bangladesh’s response to the Rohingya crisis has seen some advances in localization, especially through collaboration between international and local NGOs. NGO Platform and Cox’s Bazar CSO NGO Forum (CCNF), have played a vital role in advocacy and service delivery. The establishment of the Localization Task Force, co-chaired by the government and the United Nations, also reflects a commitment to strengthening local participation.

Despite these efforts, the reality on the ground indicates that localization remains more a concept than a practice. International organizations still dominate decision-making, with local actors often relegated to implementing roles. Funding flows continue to favor international organizations, limiting the capacity of local groups to fully engage in strategic planning and response management.

Challenges Hindering True Localization

Several barriers prevent meaningful localization in the Rohingya response:

1. Resource Allocation: Despite the Grand Bargain commitment, local actors receive only a fraction of the funding compared to international organizations. Financial constraints severely limit their ability to scale operations and build organizational capacity.
2. Power Imbalance: The decision-making hierarchy is still heavily skewed towards international actors. Local organizations are often included as “partners” but lack a significant voice in major strategic decisions.
3. Capacity Gaps: There are ongoing concerns regarding the capacity of local actors to manage large-scale operations. International agencies argue that local NGOs require more training, systems development, and accountability measures before they can take on greater leadership roles.
4. Bureaucratic Barriers: Government regulations and operational restrictions add another layer of complexity. International agencies often have better access to permits, resources, and networks, leaving local actors constrained by red tape.

The Way Forward: Strengthening Localization

For localization to become more than just rhetoric, concrete steps are necessary:

1. Redirecting Funding: Donors should prioritize direct funding to local and national organizations. This requires simplifying funding mechanisms and ensuring that local actors are not simply subcontractors.
2. Capacity Building: International organizations should invest in strengthening the institutional capacity of local NGOs through skills development, leadership training, and infrastructure support. Building long-term resilience rather than just project-based capacity is crucial.
3. Inclusive Decision-Making: Localization cannot be achieved without a seat at the decision-making table. Governance structures need to be redefined to give local actors equal influence in planning and strategy.
4. Accountability and Trust: Fostering trust between international and local organizations is essential. This can be achieved by developing transparent accountability mechanisms that recognize and respect local expertise.

Conclusion: Has Localization Truly Taken Root?

Seven years into the Rohingya humanitarian crisis, the journey towards localization remains fraught with challenges. While there has been progress, the process has been slow, with limited power, capacity and resources in the hand of Local NGOs. For localization to succeed, it requires more than lip service; it demands a genuine commitment to shifting power and resources, nurturing local capacities, and reimagining humanitarian governance.

As the crisis enters its eighth year, it is imperative to accelerate localization efforts to ensure that the Rohingya community receives assistance that is not only timely and relevant but also sustainable and community-led. True localization is not just about better responses — it is about justice, dignity, and the right to self-determination for the communities most affected by crisis.