Solidarity as innovation
Localization is not the same as locally-led development. This point has been made clear by multiple speakers on webinars I’ve joined and talks I’ve listened to over the past few months, as well as comments noted in reports.
My understanding of the statement is this:
Localization centers the [changing] practices of international actors, primarily donors and INGOs, while locally-led development should be about centering the voices, agendas, needs, and resources of local actors, a term that variously includes communities where project work takes place, community-based organisations, civil society organisations, other local and national NGOs, and sometimes also local government and private sector stakeholders.
Put another way, the question is not how should an organization localize, but rather, what does a local actor want from that organization?
One particular pain point is that conversations about localization and locally-led development are primarily taking place in Global North (Global Minority) circles without participation by the actors who are the subject of the conversation. Frustration and anger seem perfectly valid responses to being talked about instead of engaged with, particularly when the whole point of the conversation is how to shift power to those not in the room.
Were I not sitting in my very privileged position, I imagine I too would be, to lapse into colloquial Australian for a second, pissed as a cut snake.
The call is of course very simple: Listen first. Act second. Why does this seem to be such a difficult concept to put into practice?
As I’ve been trying to find resources that center the voices of the Global Majority — which are harder to come across than you might think — I’ve been keeping notes about what specifically is being asked of international actors by local ones.
Much has been said about necessary structural changes to address problems such as overly burdensome reporting requirements, unequal risk sharing, lack of direct access to donors and global funding opportunities, lack of financial support for local NGO capacity building, Western-defined models for monitoring and evaluation and log frames, where and by whom funding and project priorities are set, and more.
What I’ve been more interested in lately are the requests that are less quantitative, less able to be tracked by indicators and project metrics. These include:
· Come to the work with an open mind and an open heart
· Build a partnership based on balanced power relations
· Be prepared to co-learn and co-design in community partnership
· Show that you value and respect local organizations’ skills, expertise, time, and resources (including non-financial ones) just as much as you would your own
· Enter into relationships with local actors as equal partners, not subcontractors
· Advocate for and amplify the voices of local actors
· Help build stronger networks and collaborations
· Aim to support local actors rather than take over from them
I think these actions speak to a much more important requirement for any development work than a quantifiable theory of change: come with an intention of solidarity.
Specifically, I feel that some of what might be missing — part of the reason why it is proving so hard to listen before acting — is that development work is approached as something to be done, rather than a process by which we are in community with each other. Community as a verb, rather than a noun. What do I mean by that?
In the development space, “community” usually refers to a group of people living in close proximity, where a project or effort is to take place. We also refer to a “community of practice”, by which we mean a group of people who share a common concern, topic of interest, and who often share resources and knowledge.
By contrast, when we are in community with others, we are accountable to each other in a much deeper way than if we simply make a commitment to work in partnership. To be in community with someone is to enter into a relationship committed to mutual trust, respect, and agency. It is a fellowship imbued with responsibility.
Get Rebecca Gianotti’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
When work develops from such a relationship, it cannot help but be built on equal power relations, equal voices, and concern that both partners’ needs will be met.
To put a specific face to this discussion:
A couple of weeks ago, hundreds of water and WASH sector professionals gathered at the World Water Week conference in Stockholm, Sweden. Certainly, a large and impactful community of practice, so many people who care deeply about critical issues facing our planet and each other, coming together to discuss these issues and what we can do about them.
The theme of the conference was Innovative Solutions. I’ve been thinking about that word, innovation: the action or process of innovating; a new method, idea, or product. Innovate: to make changes in something established, the English word coming from the Latin verb innovare: in = into, novare = make new.
What are we making new in this world today? What needs to change in the systems, structures, ways of thinking and living that we have established?
In summarizing six key takeaways from the conference, organisers noted that one key theme was learning from Indigenous Peoples, valuing Indigenous knowledge, and the importance of values such as reciprocity, respect, and relations. While I haven’t yet been able to watch all of the six sessions centered on Indigenous voices, I would argue that the sessions I have watched used far stronger language.
They called for: real inclusion of Indigenous voices in collaborative action; partnerships that are effective because they are built on true understanding of, engagement with, and respect for local values and beliefs; ways to provide participation for everyone within a community; respect and recognition for the ways that Indigenous peoples have been stewards for land, water and country; recognition that Indigenous knowledge is Indigenous science and afforded equal respect to Western knowledge; and more.
Two comments in particular have been running in a loop in my head. One was a call to “come live with us” if you truly want to engage with us on our lands. The other was that “nobody is safe” from the impacts of climate change, diminishing resources, and calamities such as the COVID-19 pandemic that affect us all, albeit to differing extents. Both comments, in essence, asking us to be in community with each other.
Perhaps one of the key conference takeaways was that we need innovation not towards words like localization, but towards a commitment to solidarity and fellowship.
What could it look like for development actors to be in community with the people and groups they aim to support? How does a community of practice, defined by profession, be in community with a community defined by geography or other local identity?
For those of us who are actors within the development space, how do we get from where we are now — still struggling to grapple with historic legacies and current constraints — to a future predicated on mutual respect, agency, and a fully realised sense of community?
That would be a true innovation.
Note: The following is not a complete list of all the resources I’ve utilized in thinking about this post, but provide opportunities to hear directly from voices in the Global Majority:
Devex webinar, How far has USAID gotten toward localization, 16th May 2023.
Devex Pro webinar, The Chiefs of Party edition, 29th June 2023.
Devex Pro webinar, How to put your money where your mouth is on localization, 14th July 2023.
Devex Pro webinar, The INGO CEO roundtable, 17th July 2023.
H+S Davidson Trust, Increasing impact in international development, September 2022.
Humentum, NNGO voices: leader perspectives on locally-led development, June 2023.
Movement for Community Led Development call, Tools to strengthen community organizations, 31st May 2023.
Movement for Community Led Development call, Can communities rescue the SDGs?, 26th July 2023.
OpenDemocracy, An open letter to international NGOs who are looking to ‘localise’ their operations, 8th March 2020.
Peace Direct, The nine roles that intermediaries can play in international cooperation, January 2023.
Rights CoLab and WACSI, Fostering equitable north-south civil society partnerships, March 2021.
