How can we move from “panacea” to real operational reality?

©UN PHOTO / Marco Dormino , Haiti, A rescuer holds the hand of a survivor of a school collapse.

We often talk about “localizing” aid as an ideal solution for bringing funding closer to the communities concerned, and giving them back control over their future. But in reality, this ambition comes up against a cumbersome and costly chain of accountability: from citizens to states, from states to donors, from donors to international NGOs, and finally at the very end to local organizations, which are often fragile and poorly structured.

At the 2016 World Humanitarian Summit, the Grand Bargain initiative set a clear goal: to ensure that at least 25% of humanitarian aid is allocated as directly as possible to local actors by 2020. The idea was to reduce intermediate costs and improve aid effectiveness.

©WHsummit World Humanitarian Summit May 2016 Istanbul Turkey

Standards such as the Sphere Handbook also stress the importance of centering decisions on affected communities, and of strengthening both local involvement and accountability. In practice, however, they remain unclear as to how to proceed, how to simplify procedures and how to empower local players.

As for the Core Humanitarian Standard, it too calls for support for local capacities and accountability to communities, while acknowledging that such good intentions all too often come up against the complex realities on the ground.

I’ve seen it all with my own eyes.

In 2000, in the Gnagna region of Burkina Faso, I joined a team where half-yearly reports and training workshops sometimes took longer than the intervention itself. Meanwhile, our village partners had no accounting system in place, and no staff trained in monitoring and evaluation.

In 2004, with MSF in Sudan, at the height of the Darfur emergency, the administrative procedures of the HAC, UN, donors and NGOs could delay an intervention by several weeks or even months. In the meantime, IDPs were dying of dehydration, or creating their own emergency response to immediately meet the vital needs of their neighbors, with an invisible chain of solidarity.

©Doctors Without Borders, Darfur North Sudan

2005, with the 9ᵉ EDF in Côte d’Ivoire, each disbursement for the emergency program passed from Brussels to the local delegation, then to the State (CONFED), then to the international NGO, then to an umbrella organization, before finally reaching the farmers’ groups. The result? Six months of waiting and dozens of pages of reports and audits for each tranche of funding, totally sidestepping the constraints of the seasonal crop calendar.

Still in 2020 in Mali, an EU resilience program Despite a solid method, the multiplication of reports and bridging mechanisms (clusters, donors, consortium), and despite the establishment of a unified monitoring platform, cumbersome procedures have further slowed down each phase of implementation, and the State is absent from the appropriation and continuity of achievements.

These few examples are only a sample of a much wider experience. They simply show that localization is not just a matter of funding percentages: it’s above all a delicate balance between administrative simplification, shared monitoring tools and strengthening local skills.

Vaccination of livestock ©Hamada (Wandey) AG AHMED

For localization to become a sustainable reality, it is urgent to :
1. Alleviate accountability requirements Harmonize and mutualize expectations between donors, clusters and partners to free up valuable time for field work.
2. Invest genuinely in local capabilities Not just in money, but also in know-how, management and tools, right from the project design stage.
3. Test and deploy innovative technological solutions Blockchain, digital money transfers, collaborative platforms: all levers to fluidify flows and guarantee greater transparency.
4. Building trust The true measure of localization is the ability of local players and communities to make their own decisions, to manage funds themselves, and to be accountable and transparent.
5. Ensuring sustainability Any action can only endure if it is part of a framework of local ownership: either via a structured community system, or through a state mechanism capable of absorbing and sustaining the gains made. Any action that does not come under the heading of “life saving” must be designed to guarantee this prerequisite of ownership. This means, of course, that the time required to prepare and formulate a proposal needs to be extended, with specific funding and dedicated resources that go beyond a simple “proposal writer”.

Rethinking every link in the design and accountability chain, from the taxpayer to the village cell, is the only way to move localization from a mere slogan to a concrete, sustainable transformation driven by the players themselves.

Hamada AG AHMED

 

Hamada AG AHMED

Expert in Humanitarian/Development Programs and Contextual Analyst.

AG AHMED Hamada (aka “Wandey”) is a French-Malian expert in humanitarian management, contextual analysis and development program coordination. He holds a Master’s degree in Humanitarian Management and Development Action from the University of Paris 12 (UPEC) and a diploma from the Bioforce Institute in Lyon, and has over twenty years’ experience in emergency aid, resilience and local capacity building, both in the field and at the headquarters of leading international organizations.

After initial missions in Central Africa and the Sahel with several international organizations, he successively held strategic positions as Head of Mission, notably for the French Red Cross, before taking up the position of Head of the West Africa Desk, where he oversaw humanitarian and development operations in several Sahelian countries. He led the implementation of integrated programs combining health, nutrition, food security, climate change adaptation and early recovery.

He served as Crisis Analytics Team Leader at Mercy Corps, leading a humanitarian analysis and operational research unit covering the central Sahel (including Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso). In this role, he coordinated the production of strategic analytical reports, based on mixed methodologies, to inform humanitarian responses in complex and unstable environments.

In 2019, he joins Groupe URD in Mali as coordinator of the KEY program, funded by the European Development Fund, where he supports Malian authorities and technical partners on strategic planning, results-based management and capacity building with a strong focus on practice analysis and operational agility.

A committed analyst, he is interested in the structural dynamics and weak signals affecting vulnerable populations. He has led several prospective studies, the most recent of which focuses on the forgotten human and environmental heritage of Lake Faguibine, in collaboration with AFD. He advocates an integrated approach combining local knowledge, foresight tools and scientific data to strengthen resilience and territorial governance in fragile areas.

Articles by Hamada Ag Ahmed previously published in Défis Humanitaires :

The resilience of populations and the importance of (very localised) governance in the Sahel.

Tomatoes put to the test

 

 

Humanitarian and geopolitics overview.

Meeting of heads of state and government in London to support Volodymyr Zelenky after his altercation with Donald Trump on February 28 at the White House © European Union, 2025

With this issue 100 of the online magazine Défis Humanitaires, we want to celebrate with our readers this milestone of good editorial hope. Since February 2018, we have been seeking to promote humanitarianism in its geopolitical environment, noting that humanity is at once one and diverse, universal and multiple, with its peoples and their countries.

This is all the more true given that 300 million human beings are in danger for want of help, and 2 billion men, women and children are living in destitution and uncertainty. Yet humanitarian aid, which has already begun to decline, is in danger of falling even further. The future looks more uncertain and dangerous than ever.

Understanding and anticipating events is a prerequisite for effective action. Humanitarian action is a positive response to cruel events. To understand where we are today and where we’re going, let’s take a brief look at the 4 periods that have marked humanitarianism since the 1980s, and draw some useful lessons from them.

Humanitarianism where we come from, 1980-1989.

Contemporary humanitarianism emerged in the 1980s, during the Cold War, when the world was divided into two antagonistic blocs, East and West, the USSR and the USA, and their allies in NATO and the Warsaw Pact. The real wars were fought on the periphery, in what was then known as the Third World. This is where contemporary humanitarianism was born, and where it based its legitimacy and development on field action, often crossing borders without visas to reach populations in danger. At the time, I was involved in this adventure of solidarity in Afghanistan, which also applied to Cambodia and Ethiopia. We created a new model that became a benchmark.

Distribution of briquettes in Kamianka, December 27, 2024. Solidarités International

A world disappears, 1989-2001.

The fall of the Berlin Wall and the disappearance of the USSR in 1989-1991, after a brief period of euphoria and universal peace, ushered in a new era with the first Gulf War and UN Resolution 688 to protect the Kurds of Iraq. Then the break-up of the former Yugoslavia and the war in Bosnia, and the genocide in Rwanda established humanitarian action as an essential international policy, leading to the creation in 1992 of DG ECHO, the European Union’s and the Commission’s humanitarian instrument. Faced with urgent and far-reaching needs, the humanitarian community expanded rapidly, particularly NGOs, which established themselves as a major player in crises.

The turning point of September 11, 2001.

The next turning point came on September 11, 2001, with the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York by the terrorist organization Al Qaeda. We remember George W. Bush’s doctrine of pre-emptive war against terrorism, and the UN Resolution authorizing the United States to intervene in Afghanistan, where it remained for 20 years, with the inglorious end that we know. We remember the American intervention in Iraq to “democratize the Middle East”, which was based on false allegations and had dramatic consequences.

The humanitarian dynamic will grow out of necessity, and will soon be stimulated by the Arab Spring, which will degenerate into civil war in Syria. We remember the Serval operation in Mali in January 2013, against jihadist groups, then in Burkina Faso and Niger. During this period, humanitarian action emerged as one of the essential components of any solution, along with its other security, diplomatic and political aspects. It was at this time that the concept of the Humanitarian-Development Nexus was born and flourished, to which the word peace was soon added.

BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, in October 2024, attended by the UN Secretary-General. The world is reshaping itself! ©Agency brics-russia2024.

Sequel or change of era?

In an article entitled “From geopolitics to humanitarianism” published in Défis Humanitaires on July 24, 2019, I posed the question of whether this period was a continuation of what had gone before or whether, on the contrary, it heralded a new geopolitical and humanitarian cycle. A question all the more necessary given that Donald Trump had been elected in 2016, Vladimir Putin had been re-elected in 2018 as had Erdogan, the Turkish president, and Xi Jinping had been elected president for life of the People’s Republic of China in the same year.

To this question we now have the answer, which is the main focus of this editorial for the 100th issue of Humanitarian Challenges.

From Putin to Trump, or the great leap into the unknown!

The tipping point begins with Russia’s attack on Ukraine on February 24, 2022, and is confirmed with the election of Donald Trump, who takes office on January 22, 2025. Throughout the Cold War and beyond, war had been frozen in Europe. For more than 3 years, the war in Ukraine has meant that borders have been called into question, and the countries of the European continent, which had been slumbering, are rearming because of the threat of a possible extension of a conflict with the Baltic States and Poland, with the risk of a domino effect with NATO member countries.

This is the moment chosen by Donald Trump to propose that Canada become the 51st state of the USA, to invite Greenland to come under his control, to regain control of the Panama Canal and to seek to impose peace on Ukraine with Vladimir Putin’s Russia, while threatening that country and its allies in Europe with abandonment if they do not comply within a week!

Vladimir Putin & Donald Trump in Helsinki July 2018. (Image Credit Kremlin.ru via Wikimedia Commons)

The turning point that history will remember is here, and it’s here to stay. Possible challenges to borders, geopolitical deregulation, the law of survival of the fittest, the race for access to natural resources, the risk of confrontation that could spiral out of control, the weakening of the UN and paralysis of the Security Council.

And what can we say about the undermining of the Climate Agreement, the struggle for control of space, information conceived as a battlefield – the list is long, foreshadowing this change of era.
In this poisonous climate, the guarantee of freedom and independence for some countries, and of power and neo-empire for others, is leading to an exponential increase in defense budgets.

In the latest “Eurobarometer” survey, 66% of people rank protecting people as their top priority. The economy and industry came next (36%), followed by energy resources (27%).

The need for security has just led countries such as Poland, Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia to decide on March 18, in a joint declaration, to withdraw from the Ottawa Treaty banning anti-personnel mines, ratified by 164 states!

As in previous periods, this will have a major impact on the humanitarian sector!

What about humanitarian aid?

Not only are humanitarian needs still with us, but they are set to increase, both because of the vulnerabilities that are flourishing (conflict, poverty, climate, water resources, demographics in Africa) and because of the drastic decline in resources.

The Trump administration’s dislocation of USAID and freeze on funded programs has caused, despite exemptions, a veritable cataclysm in humanitarian and development aid. All the more so as this shock was preceded by a sharp drop in official development assistance from many European Union and OECD member countries.

The main trend seems to be as follows: a rapid decline in funding, restricted or even inaccessible general access to populations in danger, with a retreat from International Humanitarian Law, more violence against civilians considered as protagonists and stakes in wars, politicization and criticism of humanitarian aid.

Mothers with their children wait at the MSF clinic in the Zamzam camp, 15 km from El Fasher, North Darfur. MSF

Let’s face it, this is a historic step backwards for humanitarian action. Although we started from scratch almost 50 years ago, we’ve been making progress ever since, but for the first time we’re taking a step backwards at a time when we were already struggling to meet the vital needs of populations in danger. The head of a humanitarian NGO recently told me that for his organization, this was a 10-year step backwards! The majority of humanitarian NGOs are having to reluctantly and urgently lay off some of their staff. The UN and its agencies are planning to regroup into 4 large entities, and even to relocate to cut costs.

If the humanitarian aid budget almost doubled between 2012 and 2021, it then briefly stagnated, and now it has been falling since 2023, and will increase and accelerate in 2025. What will happen next? Will there be a reaction, a halt, a stabilization at the very least, or, on the contrary, will the downward slide continue, and to what extent?

And yet, if the shock is conducive to the search for an alternative model, we don’t see a replacement solution on the scale. In any case, we need to acquire more influence and, ultimately, more audacity and imagination to invent the future.

A new mobilization in these changing times.

For the sake of completeness, we need to add to the geopolitics of conflicts, those of more numerous catastrophes and the risk of major epidemics.

How can we act in the face of rising extremes when civilian populations are seen as war targets and treated as enemies to be annihilated? This is the case in Gaza with the use of the weapon of hunger against an entire population; it’s the case in Ukraine with the systematic bombing of towns and villages and civilian infrastructures; it’s the case in the civil war in Sudan. This is the dehumanization of total war, in the face of which humanitarian aid must do everything in its power to fulfill its mission in spite of everything!

I can also see the growing debate between the national priority of security and international aid in its various forms. One is not incompatible with the other. I believe that we can be proud of our own identity, while believing that others can also be proud of their own nationality, while feeling concerned by the misfortune of others by providing them, as partners, with aid, skills, tools and knowledge useful for their development, and also learning from them. A country grows by making these choices of effective and respectful solidarity. This in no way prevents us from promoting the interests of our own people.

This is also why I believe that the ideological and partisan politicization of humanitarian aid will lead to its weakening. Let’s not fall into this trap. Humanitarian aid is indisputable when it is carried out within the framework of its principles of humanity, impartiality, independence and neutrality.
At a time when security is becoming a priority for public opinion and their countries, human security must be associated with it, all the more so as the insecurity of populations fleeing war, disaster and epidemics destabilizes their neighbors from near and far, through a domino effect that will eventually impact us too if we do nothing.

More concretely, there are deadlines that are as much at stake. This is the case in France, with the Finance Bill for 2025 and 2026. Political leaders must, at the very least, stabilize humanitarian and development budgets, or even revitalize them in the spirit of the recent Presidential Council for International Partnerships. Similarly, the 4th European Humanitarian Forum on May 19 and 20 in Brussels should be an opportunity to strengthen DG ECHO’s humanitarian aid, rather than diluting and weakening it. Finally, the Conference on Financing for Development in Seville next June could be the occasion for a new impetus, as well as a demanding “aggiornamento” (updating) to improve efficiency for populations and optimize private initiative for all.

We’ll be back in touch with you in early June with issue 101 of Défis Humanitaires.

Défis Humanitaires, with you.

One hundred editions since February 2018, 152 different authors of articles and interviews whom I’d like to thank here for their contribution, a growing increase in the number of readers, in France of course but also in order in the USA, Burkina Faso, Canada, Belgium, Mali, Switzerland, Senegal, the UK and Cameroon for the first 10. The most widely-read articles focus on humanitarian thinking, the humanitarian-development Nexus, funding and salaries, demographics and philanthropy.

In this chaotic and dangerous international context, Défis Humanitaires, a free and independent magazine, is more topical than ever, and we have many projects to propose to you. I therefore invite you to answer the questionnaire enclosed in this issue, which will be very useful to us, as well as to testify “A vos plumes” for Défis Humanitaires. We’ll be publishing these testimonials in our next issue in June.

Finally, with issue 100, Défis Humanitaires aims to evolve into an information medium with greater visibility and smoother navigation. To achieve this, your support (donate) will be decisive to better inform, alert and mobilize. This has never been as useful as it is today. If we don’t act, we’ll go backwards!

I’d like to thank you personally for your support and for this mutual commitment, which strengthens humanitarianism.

Alain Boinet.

I invite you to read these interviews and articles published in the edition :