As someone who’s been deeply engaged in community engagement and localization work, I couldn’t help but be drawn to the discussions on locally led development during the Annual Arab Foundations Forum (AFF) Meeting. The buzz around this concept was palpable—exciting to witness, but not without its complexities. The exhilaration came from hearing participants champion the idea of power-sharing with local actors. It felt like a collective ‘aha!’ moment—a recognition that true progress hinges on collaboration. However, as the discussions deepened, practical challenges emerged. As a participant from a local Egyptian NGO rightfully noted, donors (and may I add international NGOs) need to reconsider how they refer to their local partners. Too often, they are labelled as ‘implementing’ partners, demoting them to mere executors of decisions made by distant experts. This label inherently strips them of any decision-making power.

I’ve encountered this scenario many times in my work within the Syrian context and cross-border assistance. In many instances, projects are designed by INGOs in neighbouring countries following strict donor requirements, often with minimal input from local partners or the communities they aim to serve. Local partners often find themselves categorised as mere ‘implementers,’ while communities are typically consulted through various assessments but rarely granted any substantial decision-making authority.

Even in countries no longer facing emergency situations, the overarching control held by INGOs and donors persists, eroding the sense of ownership among local actors and fostering a dependency dynamic. Given the surging interest in localisation, it becomes imperative to engage in more in-depth conversations about power-sharing. Such discussions would have been an exciting avenue to explore with fellow attendees, and the topic certainly merits a dedicated panel discussion of its own.

The discourse on empowerment is not an easy one. Perhaps easy in principle, but how much will is there to truly empower? Are local partners willing to share decision-making power with local communities? Are donors and international NGOs willing to share power with local counterparts? A fellow attendee further raised a valid point about the ethics and difficulties of engaging local actors or leaders with a reputation for corruption. It raised a perplexing question: How do you empower local communities while preventing entrenched corruption?

These insights shed light on the need for a different approach to localisation – one that recognizes and works with local realities yet without romanticization. This is where the Bridging Peoples localization framework proves invaluable. It lays out three main pillars of successful localization:

1. Effectiveness: the sound technical design of an intervention, which is commonly the main focus of most organisations.
2. Local legitimacy: the legitimacy of people leading the work and processes from local stakeholders’ perspective, a key factor tied to their integrity and credibility.
3. Downwards accountability: the awareness of community members of the initiative and their ability to hold decision-makers into account.

Source: Bridging Peoples

As I reflect on the dynamic discussions at the Annual AFF Meeting and the pressing need for authentic power-sharing, it’s clear that our path toward localisation is only just beginning.

Sarah Moharram, Bridging Peoples