Posts with the tag
“Localisation”

Turning words into action: Why International NGOs should prioritise sustainability through localisation and self-governance

20th June 2025 by Dr. Dereje Wordofa

International non-governmental organisations (INGOs) are often headquartered in the Global North and operating from a position of superiority despite funds raised in the name of communities in need. These top-down models, however well-meaning, often side-lined local realities, leadership and joint stewardship of resources. Now, with aid receding, the limits of this approach are increasingly exposed. The INGOs that failed to develop national capacity are leaving communities unprepared and vulnerable.

Localisation in humanitarian action and social development has been a focal point of global discourse for over a decade, yet substantive progress remains limited. Initiatives like the Grand Bargain have sought to drive ‘power shifts’ within the humanitarian aid system, but “localisation” often remains a vague buzzword. The approach —whether it prioritises shifting power, enhancing accountability, or balancing incremental versus transformative change—remains a critical challenge.

Genuine self-governance demand empowering national actors to lead, requiring INGOs to relinquish control over resources and decision-making while encouraging trust and humility to support context-specific solutions. Despite the push by the most senior leaders of some of the largest INGOs  through projects like Pledge for Change, scepticism about the financial and programmatic capacities of national actors often perpetuates power imbalances, undermining the spirit of the initiative.

Why localisation?

The lessons suggest that localisation strengthens local capacity, reduces dependency, and ensures more relevant, effective responses while redirecting resources to support national systems with intent of long-term sustainability. Localisation must evolve as an independent agenda, unshackled from being a means to bridging financing austerity. The agenda requires experimental spaces where national actors can innovate, fail, and learn without excessive oversight or a focus solely on cost efficiency.

By embracing brave, context-driven approaches, anchored in local jurisdictions and de-emphasising perceived risks, international and national actors jointly can co-create a transformative framework that prioritises local leadership and build genuine partnerships. In this regard, the experience of SOS Children’s Villages which is the world’s largest NGO focused on supporting children and young people without parental care, or at risk of losing it, offers a path to localisation, self-governance and sustainability.

Founded 76 years ago in post-war Austria, it now operates in 137 countries and territories. The impact of its work worldwide is well documented. Recognising the heavy financial dependence on European donors, SOS Children’s Villages began a significant shift in 2012, launching Sustainable Path Initiative (SPI). This involved localising governance with more responsibilities, building domestic fundraising infrastructure, and gradually reducing dependency on international transfer of funds.

Without casting divergent views on theory and practice, the SPI was not cosmetic. It required structural reform, direct investment, patience, and committed leadership from European members, especially the largest funders, the 18 Promoting and Supporting Associations.

Today, all national management positions worldwide are held by citizens of the nation in which SOS Children’s Villages operate. Expatriates are no longer appointed and deployed to national leadership roles. National governance structures now exist in 110 countries to provide oversights and accountability. While national governance practices have a varied degree of effectiveness, those self-governing members enjoy full rights, including voting rights at the General Assembly of the global federation.

Image of participants in a lecture hall at the 2023 General Assembly of SOS Children's Villages International
2023 General Assembly of SOS Children’s Villages International

Transitioning to self-governance and localisation

The transition to self-governance has been uneven, and daunting particularly in Africa, where institutional weaknesses, legal constraints, and entrenched aid dependency persist. Of the 137 associations, 24 have yet to localise their governance systems. The federation and its Secretariat are committed to advancing the financial self-sufficiency and self-governance of all its members. At least 12 national associations are currently developing local governance frameworks to be finalised within the coming two years.

Over the last decade, over 33 national associations have reached financial self-sufficiency, including a recent one that now raises its own funds through local donors, partnerships, and collaborations with local government. These associations remain part of the global federation, bound by a shared vision, brand and commitment to promote, protect and defend the rights of children and young people. They operate with autonomy but commit to collective accountability to the federation’s norms and standards.

Development ideals like inclusion, equity and empowerment must be matched by concrete reforms. Ambitions alone are not enough; sustainability must be treated as a moral and strategic imperative. To remain relevant, INGOs must therefore undergo a profound transformation. This is not about organisational survival. It is about doing development differently, and better. At the core of this systemic reform are three imperatives:

  • Shift power: Genuinely transferring ownership of programs, decision-making, and leadership to national actors is essential. This includes relinquishing control, reforming governance structures, and embracing accountability to those closest to the challenges.
  • Build financial self-sufficiency: This needs investing in helping local partners cultivate domestic resource mobilisation; through philanthropy, corporate partnerships, social enterprises, and government collaboration. National fundraising ecosystems, though nascent in many contexts.
  • Foster local resilience: Self-sufficiency is not the absence of support; it is the presence of capacity. INGOs should serve as facilitators of knowledge exchange, skill-building, and systems strengthening. This requires time, patience, partnership, and humility.

It is essential that this shift is planned, paced, and participatory. Replacing financial subsidies overnight is neither feasible nor just. But failing to begin the transition is a negligence of responsibility. Localisation and financial sustainability are not just valuable; they are strategic necessities.

Why SPI?

The SPI case of SOS Children’s Villages demonstrates what’s possible when INGOs invest in local leadership and trust national capacity. It recognises Global South actors as co-architects of sustainability, not mere implementers of agreed projects. Most members, though some struggle, increase income and reserves for financial stability. Localisation shifts mindsets, redefines relationships, builds local confidence, and enhances resource use with local stewardship. It nurtures trust with communities, governments, donors, and partners who value empowerment.

By strategically cultivating national capacity for self-governance and prioritising community interests, humanitarian and development actors can move from aid to agency, charity to empowerment, and dependency to dignity, strengthening a global solidarity based not on transaction, but on trust.


This article is being published on behalf of SOS Children’s Villages International. The Centre would like to thank Dr. Dereje Wordofa for his valuable insights and contribution. 

All images courtesy of SOS Children’s Villages International. Pictured in the blog banner: Illustrative map showing the 138 countries and territories where SOS Children’s Villages operates (last updated 2022).  

    Dr. Dereje Wordofa

    President

    SOS Children’s Villages International

    Dr. Dereje Wordofa is the President of SOS Children’s Villages International. Previously he served as assistant secretary-general and deputy executive director of the United Nations Population Fund; as head of regional policy at Oxfam; and as deputy program director of Save the Children UK.


    Re-powering the system

    22nd July 2021 by Wolfgang Jamann

    Power Shift, Localisation and Decolonising Aid, have become strong trends, and also buzzwords in the current debate around a more legitimate and impactful aid system.

    The push for more resources and decision-making power has most prominently launched at the World Humanitarian Forum in 2016, and was linked to pledges to increase the appalling low percentages of aid funding to local actors, both by donors and international civil societies organisations (ICSOs). Breakthroughs of this ‘Grand Bargain’ are yet to be seen, despite continued commitment to strengthening local Civil Society, recently confirmed by a strong OECD policy document.

    Civil Society itself is struggling with implementation. The ambition has worked itself into a number of narratives on how the ‘system’ should change, how power needs to be shifted, how International ICSOs need to be re-imagined.

    Not all of these narratives are positive. Nationalistic Governments in India or parts of Africa have hijacked the ‘localisation’ ambition to keep foreign CSOs at bay and discredit them as foreign agents. Even in the US and the UK localisation has become a different meaning – using foreign aid to help disaster victims at home. The recent drastic cuts by British FCDO show the trend.

    Looking at the traditional ‘Power Holders’ in the aid system, donors, bilateral agencies and ICSOs, many, if not all, will agree that ‘localisation’ is a good thing, though. It strengthens the consideration of local contexts, vulnerabilities and capacities, true partnerships, inclusive decision-making etc. Many are talking about, and implementing, changing funding patterns, with promising developments linked to the increasingly localised COVID-19 responses.

    International civil society organisations have, generally, a rather positive narrative on localisation that includes many past achievements they seem to have made over the last 30 years. Many have grown into confederations, with strong local chapters, and a huge armada of local staff, increasingly in leadership positions. Many will defend their business models as inclusive, decentralised, and addressing the local contexts.

    The challenge comes with scrutinising whether these models are good enough. Are power imbalances being addressed, and radically changing? The Centre works with a number of ambitious ICSOs who have started putting local actors (people we work with, partners, primary actors) into the centre of decision-making processes. These are ‘Governance’ discussions in the wider sense, i.e. putting processes and structures to the test – are they designed, capable and fit for greater inclusion?

    It’s an exciting journey which has no easy answers – different ways of inclusivity are being chased, and different power dimensions are being addressed – in Big ‘G’ Governance (structures, decision-making protocols, voting rights) and small ‘g’ governance issues, like relationship building, information flow, accountability and transparency, ‘expertise talks vs. money talks’, physical points of decision-making.

    Who and what helps and blocks? Facilitators and blockers of power shifts are often not the same people / entities. You need almost tactical approaches (actors mapping, power analysis, finding sponsors etc.). A very good idea is to link the governance as much as possible to the intent and mandate of the organisation.

    A quick insight from an initiative many have heard about, could be helpful with focus. The West Africa Civil Society Institute WACSI has just published a survey of about 500 local CSOs about their perception on how partnerships play out. The results were almost surprisingly positive, with lots of appreciation of LCSO / ICSO partnerships, many of which do consider local contexts. But a few critical issues arose: Decision-making is uneven and not mutually beneficial, ICSOs are expected to be facilitators not implementers, more consideration of local capacities, not necessarily funders.

    A recent ‘Hard Talk’ event between ICSOs, partners, donors and critical friends touched upon those dimensions and showed the potential for change, but the need for more intense dialogue between groups that have different expectations of each other. One of the biggest challenges comes from inherent ‘colonial’ structures of the aid system, which can only be addressed in an intersectional way, not overlooking discriminatory practices, and engaging in an open exchange and the willingness to learn from each other. A window seems to have opened to turn an outdated aid system onto its feet, and let power go to the people and their institutions, which have been ‘recipients’ of philanthropy, goodwill but bad practices for too long.

    Wolfgang Jamann

    Executive Director

    International Civil Society Centre

    Dr. Wolfgang Jamann is Executive Director of the International Civil Society Centre. Until January 2018 he was Secretary General and CEO of CARE International (Geneva). Before that he led NGO Deutsche Welthungerhilfe and the Alliance 2015, a partnership of 7 European aid organisations. From 2004-2009 he was CEO & Board member of CARE Deutschland-Luxemburg and President of the CARE Foundation. Previously, he worked for World Vision International as a regional representative in East Africa (Kenya) & Head of Humanitarian Assistance at WV Germany. After his Ph.D. dissertation in 1990 he started his career in development work at the German Foundation for International Development, later for the UNDP in Zambia. As a researcher and academic, he has published books and articles on East & Southeast Asia contributing to international studies on complex humanitarian emergencies and conflict management.