Localization Performance Measurement Baselining in Yemen 2022

 The localization Baseline Report

The deteriorating situation in Yemen and international donors’ inability to fulfil financial commitments made to resolve the humanitarian crisis led a group of local civic organisations to take additional steps to improve the effectiveness of humanitarian action. One priority included influencing international actors to support the localisation of humanitarian action and reinforce the role of local actors. As a result, a network of Yemeni CSOs, led by Tamdeen Youth Foundation, introduced an initiative to localise humanitarian action in Yemen. ITAR for Social Development was chosen as the advisory agency to carry out localisation baseline research in Yemen. This report provides an in-depth analysis of localisation in the current humanitarian response in Yemen, and serves as a baseline for future responses, including adapting the localisation measurement approach used in some Pacific region countries as a joint measurement framework. The report consists of seven main pillars: Partnerships, Funding, Capacity Strengthening, Coordination and Complementarity, Policy Influence, Leadership, and Participation.

Localisation in Yemen

Despite the devastating impacts of the ongoing war, famine, and economic insecurity, local/national CSOs continue to offer ongoing support to multiple crises, given their closeness to the community and affected groups, and their understanding of political, cultural, and social dynamics. Moreover, they continue to directly contribute to Yemen’s need for humanitarian assistance and peace. They have adopted a set of vital principles to achieve lasting peace, such as defending human rights, equality, community welfare, and the rejection of violence and extremism.

However, localisation and changing power dynamics in the Yemen humanitarian response remain a significant challenge, particularly as international actors – such as international non-governmental organisations (INGOs) and the UN – are given access to significantly more resources than their local/national counterparts. In 2021, the Yemen Humanitarian Fund was able to allocate $109 million for life-saving activities, out of which international NGOs received $54.1 million (49 per cent), UN agencies received $24 million (22 per cent), the Red Crescent received $4.3 (5 per cent) million and local actors received $26.7 million(24 per cent).[1] This imbalance of financial resources, and the preference of donors to work primarily with international actors has created a closed system for financial, strategic, and programmatic decision-making that excludes active engagement of local and national actors. Most collaborations between international and local/national actors tend to be top-down with international actors benefitting from the insights of local/national actors on local needs and feedback on project effectiveness.[2] This indicates that a more extractive relationship is place, one that also limits mutual accountability and accountability to affected people. Many national NGOs in Yemen appear to be particularly vulnerable to threats, intimidation, and the predatory behaviour of authorities on both sides of the conflict. Yemeni civil society was reported to be relatively inexperienced at working with international partners and within humanitarian coordination structures.[3]

At the heart of the localization agenda is the recognition of a power imbalance between national and international actors. NGOs regularly perceive themselves to be at a structural disadvantage, due primarily to the dependence of national actors on their international counterparts for resources and technical support. Frequent and often impactful interventions by international representatives, i.e. 'technical experts', was also reported as a factor that limited national engagement, confidence, and leadership. These dynamics were compounded in countries like Yemen where donors were not located in the country of operation. Local NGOs therefore had no direct access to institutional donors and often relied instead on UN agencies and INGOs to pass along messages and advocate on their behalf, adding to their perceived dependency on international actors.[4]

While localisation is becoming even more integral to ensuring aid is effectively and efficiently provided to affected communities in a way that places them at the centre of planning and delivery, it is also seen as an important course corrective measure to address power imbalances in the system. In Yemen, there is increasing recognition of a need to embrace and apply localisation more robustly, driven by the growing resolve by civil society to create a more locally-led response model. As other country contexts have shown, making progress on localisation remains a challenge that requires systematic change in attitudes, practices, and systems. Having an understanding of the status of the localisation in the country and opportunities for making progress can create much needed momentum for both targeted advocacy and collective action.

Summary of Key Findings

This research found evidence of performance status in the current humanitarian response in Yemen; that progress is limited, however. Following are the key findings using a localisation framework and indicators. Progress is defined here as either having no evidence, minimal evidence, moderate evidence, and strong evidence.

Partnership

There is moderate evidence that partnerships are based on equitable and ethical partnership practices. There is minimal evidence of long-term strategic partnerships that aim to build systems and processes reflecting the ambitions and objectives of the local/national partner. Additionally, there is minimal evidence that local actors have equitable decision-making or equal leadership opportunities.

Leadership
There is minimal evidence that international actors support and promote national leadership. There is also minimal evidence that local and national actors are taking the lead or effectively influencing the decision-making process. Lastly, there is minimal evidence that the existing coordination systems are accessible to local/national actors.

Coordination and Integration

Minimal evidence was found of active and effective participation in coordination platforms by national actors, or that there is an established financing plan to support a national coordination mechanism. Additionally, there is minimal evidence of partnerships that are built based on complementary criteria, i.e. a comprehensive analysis of specific strengths, weaknesses and gaps.

Participation

There is moderate evidence of increased opportunities for communities to support in program design, development, implementation, and a participatory approach to evaluation.

Impact of Policy/Advocacy/Vision

There is minimal evidence of the availability of existing policy guidance that is inclusive of local/national voices, and there is minimal evidence of the influence of local and national actors on key donor programmes and strategic priorities.

Capacity

There is minimal evidence of existing strategies to support the capacity of national and local actors. There is minimal evidence of the availability of contextualized tools, criteria, and policies in Arabic, the local language.

Financing

There is minimal evidence that local/national organizations increasingly receive direct funding.

Looking Ahead – Key Steps, Opportunities and Recommendations

The findings of this baseline report suggest that the progress of localization in the current humanitarian response in Yemen is lagging. However, there are some opportunities to capitalize on the meaningful participation of local actors in the leadership and decision-making process while strongly engaging in collective advocacy and policy efforts. Based on the findings of the response baseline assessment in Yemen, it is recommended to take actions in the following four areas to move forward with work on localization:

1.      Support a dedicated structure to facilitate and monitor the localisation process;

2.      Promote localization in existing response and coordination mechanisms;

3.      Increase opportunities for local and national actors to respond more effectively

4.      Ensure more adequate and relevant initiatives of capacity sharing