On February 22 and 23, 2024 the Humanitarian Action Initiative hosted a conference on the Power and Politics of Localization, which was generously funded by the Hewlett Foundation. In 2016, leaders at the World Humanitarian Summit committed to make humanitarian action as “local as possible, as international as necessary.” This policy commitment, known as localization, aspires to radically transform conventional models of humanitarian and development assistance where donors and international actors hold a great deal of power and influence in shaping humanitarian and development programming. 

In its aspirational form, localization centers communities and seeks to shift decision-making power and resources to the local actors who implement, provide and are affected by humanitarian and development assistance. However, localization is not a panacea or a magic bullet. Structural transformation is difficult and rife with political and power struggles at the global, national, and local levels. The Power and Politics of Localization conference was organized to shed light on the politics, promises, progress and pitfalls of localization to produce more nuanced understandings of what localization is, how it works, how it might transform the humanitarian system or conversely further retrench inequality and hierarchy. 

Jennifer Joel, Hewlett Foundation

Maryam Z. Deloffre, Director of the Humanitarian Action Initiative, and Jennifer Joel of the Hewlett Foundation, welcomed attendees with opening remarks. Research panels considered various dimensions and aspects of localization from assessing the performance and impact of institutional reforms in the areas of capacity-building, coordination, financing and partnerships; to analyzing the political economy of humanitarian and development assistance to identify how market dynamics and domestic and global politics constrain the ability to reform; to considering the role of the state as both an ally and adversary in humanitarian partnerships; and to examining cases of successful South-South cooperation, locally-led programming, locally-generated knowledge, indicators, and expertise, and localized supply-chains.  

A highlight of the conference was a Keynote Policy Roundtable, hosted by Dean Alyssa Ayres, and featuring Loyce Pace, Assistant Secretary of Global Affairs, Department of Health and Human Services, Richard Santos (BA ’85) President and CEO, Church World Service, A. Rani Parker (Ph.D. ’04) CEO, Business-Community Synergies, LLC, and Jeremy Konyndyk, President, Refugees International. Panelists drew on their extensive and diverse experiences working in global health, humanitarian and refugee assistance, and development. While each of the panelists noted the real structural and political barriers to reforming the system, they also shared positive examples of partnerships and locally-led programs. Santos detailed how CWS makes longer-term commitments where they progressively taper off involvement as local partners build capacity. Pace noted how the Centers for Disease Control’s locally employed staff was able to draw on long-standing relationships and networks to mobilize effective responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Parker explained how community engagement and inductive approaches to assessing community interests mitigates conflict. Konyndyk noted how a lack of political will impedes reforms but top-down directives, such as PEPFAR, catalyze and sustain bottom-up processes. 

Watch the recording. 

Together the research panels generated lively and engaging discussions amongst academics, practitioners, and students. A few themes and avenues for future research emerged:

• A considerable amount of disagreement exists around the meaning of “local.” These definitions have implications for the definition of policy problems and solutions, how we measure progress, and who is involved in the delivery of humanitarian and development assistance. How local is local?
• What is localization intended to accomplish? How will we know if we have successfully localized? Research presented at the conference showed how humanitarian organizations can successfully meet the operational targets and metrics of localization yet still maintain the status quo.
• Where does localization fit within the larger gamut of development policies? What is the end goal? 
• What does a political model of localization look like? To what extent is localization a resistance and social justice movement? How might localization be a powerful tool to achieve something more?