Pathways Towards Effective Locally Led Development Co-operation

4. Promoting collaboration and equitable partnership mechanisms

Abstract

This chapter addresses the constraints and enablers to promoting collaboration and equitable partnership mechanisms. It first discusses the challenges with current partnership approaches and highlights the role of enabling environments in ensuring that local actors' knowledge and expertise are valued, and power imbalances are addressed to promote trust and reciprocity. It then identifies three enablers for building equitable partnerships, namely i) creating space for mutual listening and local agency, ii) establishing equitable, diverse, and impactful partnerships – from triangular co-operation to recognising and facilitating the central role of local coalitions, the private sector, and local governments – and iii) partnering for tailored and mutual capacity strengthening and sharing. For each enabler, the chapter identifies existing good practices.

Contextual influences and constraints

Partnerships are a cornerstone for advancing locally led development and require members of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) to provide an enabling environment wherein the varied resources and comparative advantages of local actors is properly understood. The principles for effective development co-operation provide a framework for more equal, inclusive and empowered partnerships, committing convening partners to development partnerships that are inclusive, and recognise the different and complementary roles of all actors (Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation, n.d.[1]). This requires that structural power imbalances are acknowledged and addressed, biases around local knowledge and capacities overcome, and partnerships are informed by core values (such as trust, humility, respect, transparency, mutuality, reciprocity) and core behaviours and practices (including mutual accountability and responsibility, co-creation, shared visions) (Peace Direct, 2023[2]; Kuloba-Warria and Tomlinson, 2023[3]). It also requires a systematic change in understanding, mindsets, and behaviour, open communication,1 and the reframing of development co-operation as a mutual relationship rather than a project-based transaction.

Tokenism should be avoided and there is responsibility for DAC members to promote and enable whole-of-society approaches that encompass the heterogeneity of local actors. Local community, local government and national government priorities may be difficult to reconcile, particularly when marginalised groups have different needs and views from their national governments. Elites can also have disproportionate influence over community decisions, greater representation in government, and greater access to development actors, including by speaking the same language. One local organisation is not a legitimate voice for an entire population of affected people. Funding a few local actors, especially if these actors are merely executing international partner programmes, does not ensure that the response is crafted by, and for, individuals. Inviting one local organisation to an international conference does not guarantee that all local concerns are now being heard. Fostering partnerships with local networks, multi-stakeholder coalitions, and networks of networks, allows funding partners to reach or engage with a broader and more diverse range of civil society and representatives of affected communities. This approach mitigates the risk of tokenism, and supports pathways towards strengthening the inclusivity and effectiveness of development initiatives, whilst acknowledging that the entire breadth of voices may not be captured. Furthermore, the development co‑operation principle of inclusive partnerships, should be balanced with the focus on results principle (including timeliness and cost-effectiveness), and country ownership principle (including authority over the development agenda).

However, the absence of clear definitions and understanding of partnerships – including equitable partnerships – and of guiding principles has fostered ambiguity and misunderstanding. For example, partnerships can be perceived as transactional, project-based, and technical rather than mutually beneficial and transformative. Global North actors have been identified as “using” local actors as subcontractors for implementing externally designed interventions (i.e., solely implementing partners rather than decision‑making partners) rather than “fostering genuine collaboration and partnership within the local context” and with limited consideration to partner transitions to local leadership (Peace Direct, 2023[4]). Indeed, partnerships can often end up reinforcing existing power dynamics, leaving little space for local agency and decision making. The OECD DAC Recommendation on Enabling Civil Society in Development Co-operation and Humanitarian Assistance2 (OECD, 2021[5]) is therefore a significant milestone for global partnership commitments, with growing momentum through commitments, projects and campaigns to shift power in partnerships.3 Whilst research suggests that more can be done to enable genuine partners that appropriately leverage local actor knowledge, capabilities and agency (OECD, 2020[6]), and are founded on shared values including trust, questions also remain on enabling locally led development whilst partnering with international intermediaries and rethinking roles. There is, however, growing consensus that equitable partnerships, which require significant upfront investment (of resources and time), enable locally led development by “creating ways of engagement where partners recognise, respect, and therefore align each other’s strengths to achieve the best and most effective development outcomes” (Kuloba-Warria and Tomlinson, 2023[3]).

The emerging evidence base further highlights that equitable partnerships are a critical enabler for valuing local knowledge and capacity sharing, which is fundamental for local actor agency in locally led development co-operation.4 Shifting power towards more equitable partnerships and facilitating local actor agency in collaborations and decision-making also means valuing and strengthening the diverse knowledge and capacities of all actors across the humanitarian and development landscape (OECD, 2024[7]). Partnership practices that reshape power dynamics will create more equitable spaces for local actor agency and can contribute towards addressing critical capacity strengthening challenges often driven by funding modalities. These include top-down, short-term, one-size fits all, unidirectional, siloed, unsustainable and project-based approaches to capacity strengthening, gaps in the sharing of knowledge, data, and analysis, and differing views on what is considered valuable knowledge and necessary capacity. DAC members are responding to these challenges by adopting new partnership modalities and collaboration mechanisms, and forging new constellations of partnerships, which reshape power dynamics in partnerships across the system and ultimately support local actor agency. In some politically constrained contexts, findings suggest that developing these partnerships is particularly important, but challenging to sustain,5 unless the civil society is strong, organised and well structured, as is in the context of Colombia, where it is therefore easier to establish long-term partnerships with these actors.

Enablers

Good practices that DAC members are implementing in relation to collaboration and partnership mechanisms to enable locally led development co-operation focus on: i) creating space for mutual listening and local actor agency in framing, design and relationship building; ii) establishing more equitable, diverse and impactful partnerships; and iii) partnering for tailored, mutual and locally led capacity strengthening and sharing.

Table 4.1. Enablers: Collaboration and partnership mechanisms

ENABLERS	GOOD PRACTICES	EXAMPLES
Creating space for mutual listening and local agency in framing, design and relationship building	✓ Creating space for local actor agency as a basis for partnership ✓ Supporting triangular approaches to build South-South communities of practice, share experience and co-create solutions ✓ Leveraging current good practices on triangular co-operation ✓ Creating dedicated partnership platforms and collect feedback on partner health ✓ Building strong and long-term partnerships that strengthen systems, processes and reflect local ambitions and goals ✓ Accompanying local organisations through partnership transitions	USAID: Listening locally and Communities of Practice for Effective Partnerships (COPE)
Establishing more equitable, diverse, and impactful partnerships	✓ Establishing policy commitments and strategies that address equitable partnerships ✓ Mobilising and influencing international intermediaries ✓ Supporting local government co-operation partnerships ✓ Mapping local actors and diversifying partnerships ✓ Investing in partnerships with private sector actors and local innovators ✓ Working with local intermediaries ✓ Reshaping support and partnering with local researchers ✓ Changing the narrative through peer-to-peer networks and triangular co-operation	Foundations: Local Coalition Accelerator
Partnering for tailored, mutual, and locally led capacity strengthening and sharing	✓ Developing a principled and tailored approach to capacity strengthening and sharing ✓ Responding to local priorities and providing tailored capacity strengthening for all actors ✓ Assessing capacity as a whole and supporting systemic changes ✓ Facilitating peer-learning exchanges, visits and knowledge banks ✓ Ensuring capacity strengthening and sharing through long-term, core and flexible funding	Canada: Women’s Voice and Leadership Programme

Creating space for mutual listening and local agency in framing, design and relationship building

Creating space for local actor agency is a basis for genuine partnerships. DAC members are starting to step back and listen to local actors and create space for them to frame discussions, identify priorities and build relationships.6 For example, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is encouraging greater listening to diverse local actors to understand local priorities, needs and innovative ideas for shaping their communities. In 2019, USAID launched a listening process along the Dominican/Haitian Border with approximately 3 000 community members, using the Locally Led Development Spectrum (USAID, n.d.[8]) as a common framework for understanding how USAID could expand their engagement, form deeper relationships with communities, and lay the groundwork for future locally led partnerships. Similarly, in some contexts, local actors are creating their own space for framing agendas. In Colombia, the national government is leading important efforts towards a more efficient and effective subnational and local co-ordination of development co-operation.7 The first territorial roundtable, The Pacific Roundtable – Chocó Chapter, was held shortly after the peer learning country deep dive, and provided space for the Government, Mayors and development partners to discuss high-impact development projects in the region.8 Elsewhere, DAC members are creating space and allocating resources for national or subnational dialogue on locally led development as a foundation for building relationships and partnerships with local actors in partner countries. For example, Australia prioritises investment in relationship building with local actors to allow better dialogue and idea exchange, and promote local actor agency in proposing alternative strategies, designs and approaches (DFAT, 2024[9]). Similarly, to increase engagement with communities, the Global Development Assistance partnership (USAID and Aga Khan Foundation), which prioritises the financial sustainability of Kenyan civil society and fosters locally led development at the county level, facilitated the formation of Local Development Organisations with communities, the private sector and local government at the centre to provide a collaborative space to address citizen priorities (Aga Khan Foundation, 2023[10]). Moving forward, the Local 2030 Coalition,9 including the Local 2030 hubs around the world, could provide an opportunity to enhance and reinforce partnerships to boost locally led development by facilitating the exchange of perspectives, experiences, and lessons from a multi-level perspective.

Box 4.1. Building deep relationships with coalitions of local actors in the Pacific: Experience from Australia

The Balance of Power Programme is a multi-country initiative aiming to contribute to women’s increased representation as leaders. The programme design recognises that local actors are best positioned to understand culturally embedded norms, attitudes and behaviours related to leadership legitimacy, and that local actors are the most skilled in navigating the “under the iceberg enablers and blockers of the local context to identify and maximise entry points and drivers for change” (DFAT, 2024[9]). The programme is led by Pacific Islanders, with all activities guided by their ongoing political economic analysis and their access to formal and informal networks and avenues of influence. It is not perceived to be a foreign project interfering in sensitive cultural and political issues but through its access to power bases and networks within each operating environment, it has established strong relationships across national and subnational governments, churches, traditional chiefs, the media and regional institutions to increase focus on influencing social norms. It is convening and strengthening these coalitions of local actors, who are now stimulating demand for and making changes in thinking and practice around women’s rights to leadership, framing discussions and designing activities.

Source: DFAT (2024[9]), DFAT Guidance Note: Locally Led Development, https://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/dfat-guidance-note-locally-led-development.pdf.

Supporting triangular approaches to build South-South communities of practice contributes to sharing experience and co-creating solutions. Larger local actors can also elevate the visibility of other local actors using their positionality, networks and access to build relationships and weave new engagements between local actors. USAID’s Communities of Practice for Effective Partnerships supports the development of organic South-South communities of practice for local organisations to strengthen their capacities in applying systems thinking approaches to community development challenges (USAID, n.d.[11]).10 Through the community of practice, local organisations from eight countries across Asia and Latin America have come together to support each other, and learn by sharing knowledge, tools, approaches, experience, and work together to co-create solutions. For example, the South‑South Co‑operation supported in Colombia by the community of practice includes a Toolbox with resources to formulate co-operation projects, and a Knowledge Management Hub, which includes short courses for officials from the Global South on topics to support country-to-country knowledge exchange.

Leveraging current good practices on triangular co-operation can provide additional inspiration, as most trilateral partnerships are locally led and incorporate and share local knowledge, expertise and technology through the facilitation of a third partner. For instance, Brazil works with many DAC members in sharing its expertise on tropical agriculture as well as its successful domestic programmes, such as Bolsa Familia and Fome Zero to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, with partners in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. Similarly, India draws on the wealth of solutions created by its vibrant civil society organisations, including for women’s economic empowerment, to engage in triangular initiatives that support neighbouring countries and contributions further afield (OECD/IsDB, 2023[12]). Finally, Rwanda aims to scale up its local innovations through triangular partnerships and has created a platform to share its homegrown solutions, for example related to post-conflict reconstruction.11

Creating dedicated partnership platforms and collecting regular feedback provide useful information on partnership health. Funding partners are increasingly supporting spaces where different actors can connect and learn about partnership possibilities, thereby increasing transparency and accessibility of funding, and facilitating the establishment of connections between funders and Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), leading to an increase in direct giving. For example, Work with USAID12 is an online platform that offers technical solutions to help navigate barriers to partnerships and create connections and learning spaces among local and international partners. It offers self-assessment tools and other resources in multiple languages, including a training series for organisations on how national and local partners can partner with USAID. Likewise, Trócaire’s Global Hub on Partnership and Localisation based in Nairobi, is the technical unit, funded in part by Ireland, and has a global mandate to help drive the evolution of Trócaire’s partnership model to one that embraces the principles of locally led development. It has developed an inclusive approach to improving the quality of its partnerships. Its local partners share survey feedback every two years on ongoing partners, with results treated confidentially.13 These are complemented by Global South platforms, primarily supported by foundations, including CSO Platform Africa14 (a central hub for finding CSOs, data, and actionable insights) and Kujalink,15 an online platform initiative by Adeso, which seeks to facilitate direct funding and partner access to local and national CSOs based in the Global South.

Building strong, long-term partnerships strengthen systems and processes, and reflect the ambitions and goals of local partners. The quality of partnerships is as important as the longevity of partnerships. Quality partnerships support increased local actor agency to collaboratively frame, design, plan, deliver, learn, and reflect. This means creating space in which partners learn together, accompany each other, and develop collectively (Conducive Space for Peace, 2023[13]). Good practices are shifting the approach from one-off training and short-term project support to creating long-term partnerships that grow in strength and trust over time and are founded on direct, core, flexible and long-term financial support to local knowledge providers and holders, and shared decisions on resource allocations (see Chapter 3). This facilitates local actor investment in staff and systems to ensure self-sustaining capacity strengthening and sharing that is sustainable and evolves beyond the intervention. For example, Iceland has established three-year framework agreements with its key partner CSOs to ensure more stable and strategic partnerships that support institutional and financial capacity strengthening, based on mutual trust, continuous dialogue and accountability founded on long-term, non-earmarked funds (OECD, 2023[14]). These give CSOs flexibility in meeting priorities and help strengthen their institutional and financial capacities. Likewise, in 2016, the Netherlands launched its Dialogue and Dissent policy framework to support CSOs in partner countries in their political capacity to lobby and advocate (Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2014[15]). Programme monitoring highlighted promising results whilst confirming the importance of strategic partnerships with flexible and long-term funding to build trust, innovation, and time for social transformation (OECD, 2022[16]).Similarly, Australia partners with governments through its Partnerships for Social Protection programme16 in the Pacific Island Countries and Timor-Leste, and is designing and strengthening national social protection systems through long-term support, networking, learning and knowledge-sharing across the region, grounded in local experience and evidence. Further, the Australia-Pacific Partnership Platform17 demonstrates the effectiveness of long-term support for local organisations and provides on-demand services to partners to ensure responsiveness and flexibility to emerging needs and requests for support.

Box 4.2. Providing long-term support to subnational governments in Burkina Faso: Experience from Switzerland

The Swiss Agency for Development and Co-operation (SDC) programme in Burkina Faso showcases how a sustained long-term approach (SDC has been present since 1974), combined with supporting decentralisation, has led to a de facto locally led approach. As identified in an external evaluation, supporting subnational governance has been Switzerland’s primary approach to sustaining engagement in fragile and conflict affected contexts. In Burkina Faso, SDC has been able to continue its operations by directly funding and working with local and regional authorities and local CSOs, despite the political instability caused by the two military coups of 2022. An external evaluation identified high levels of local relevance and alignment with the needs and rights of local target groups in its governance portfolio, via a “people-centred approach” in its subnational governance work that balances engagement with duty bearers and rights holders.

Source: OECD (2024[17]), Peer learning on Locally led development – DAC members deep dive: Switzerland, https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD(2024)26/en/pdf; OECD (2024[18]) Valuing and Sharing Local Knowledge and Capacity: Practical approaches for enabling locally led development co-operation, https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD(2024)28/en/pdf.

Accompanying local organisations through partnership transitions can help transferring responsibility and ownership to local actors. Transition refers to the transfer of responsibility and ownership of an organisation, project, or activity from an international to a local organisation or network. “Transitions are responsible when jointly led, planned, and gradual”, which ensures sustainability (USAID, 2022[19]). There are emerging examples whereby DAC members are revisiting their approaches to partnership transitions, with the opportunity to establish clear strategies and goals for increasing local actor agency, and to ensure that their international partners follow suit. Through the Stopping As Success: Locally Led Transitions in Development (SAS+) learning project, USAID aims to equip local organisations with good transition practices, enabling development partnerships to be more locally led, transitions to be more effective and sustainable for local people, and development practitioners to be more responsive to local dynamics (USAID, 2022[19]). For example, SAS+ supported transition workshops and the co-development and implementation of a transition plan in Nigeria. To promote partnership evolution, Switzerland is also supporting an increasing number of projects where partner country CSOs take over the lead role with time. Whilst the initial phase of these projects is contracted with provider-country/international CSOs who subcontract, subsequent phases support the leadership of partner-country CSOs, who might then subcontract international CSOs for specific functions. Similarly, in a multi-phased project funded by Germany, the Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC) played the role of the intermediary, but with the strategy that this role would be temporary. GPPAC and its local partner then jointly identified which capacities would have to be strengthened to allow for the local partner to take over whilst also strengthening their legitimacy, self-confidence and facilitating direct engagement with Germany. Using this approach, approximately 90% of funding was utilised at the local level for local implementation. The local partner is now being funded directly by Germany, with no support from GPPAC (Kantowitz, Van Beijnum and Poiré, 2022[20]).

Establishing more equitable, diverse, and impactful partnerships

Partnership policy commitments and strategies can specifically address equitable partnerships. Equitable partnerships are a major element of international commitments18 and the subject of recent review, reform, and practical guidance (Mercy Corps, 2011[21]). Partnerships based on equitable19 and ethical principles and practices have been identified by several DAC members as an important enabler for locally led development. The development of partnership strategies can provide an opportunity to rethink collaborations and provide concrete principled commitments creating space for local agency in partnership modalities. For example, Sweden’sGuiding Principles for the Swedish International Development Co‑operation Agency's (Sida) Engagement with and Support to Civil Society recognises the vital contribution of civil society and the importance of creating an enabling society. It commits to five key principles, which include exploring the various roles of civil society within their context; supporting civil society in its own right; providing effective support; supporting civil society partners’ efforts to strengthen their own development effectives; and engaging in continuous dialogue. The accompanying guidance explains the rationale behind each principle and provides advice on translating these into action (Sida, 2019[22]). Similarly, USAID’s Local Capacity Strengthening Policy includes principles for equitable partnerships in local capacity strengthening (see Box 4.7). Whilst it is important to note the efficiency, impact and sustainability gains from equitable forms of partnership, they can bring costs – including additional time and resources (for translation, travel, convening and dialogue, capacity sharing) and it is important these are budgeted for at the start of project planning (The Share Trust; Warande Advisory Centre, 2022[23]).

Box 4.3. Updating partnership policies to influence Belgian Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs)

Belgium’s Partnership Policy is being updated and includes a commitment to guaranteeing the ability of an organisation to maintain relationships with partners based on trust and mutual learning. It includes a set of requirements for Belgian NGOs to guide their partnerships with community-based actors. Belgian NGOs are first screened for their capacity and quality management systems (to be able to receive funding for five-year programmes for which they have significant autonomy). Their own partnership policy is one of the domains that is screened, to ensure consistency with the evolving vision relating to partnerships in the sector and at international level, which place greater emphasis on universality. Belgium’s goal is to establish balanced relationships, with mutual contributions, and facilitate the implementation of a common agenda. Reference to “partner capacity building strategy” has been removed given connotations with “unilateral approaches.”

Key criteria reviewed during screening include: the establishment, formalisation, and maintenance of partnerships based on equality and learning, as well as definitions and the implementation of a common agenda. Documents that are analysed include: i) the organisation’s standard template for partnership agreements/MoU; ii) documents containing the list of partners; and iii) documents describing the organisation’s partnership policy, in particular the involvement of partners in the common agenda. MoU or partnership agreements must include specified elements, including common objectives, mutual commitments, common visions for mutual capacity strengthening, local takeover and sustainability of activities, and transfer of assets.

Source: OECD (2024[18]) Valuing and Sharing Local Knowledge and Capacity: Practical approaches for enabling locally led development co-operation, https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD(2024)28/en/pdf.

Mobilising and influencing international intermediaries (including multilaterals) can accelerate the move towards more locally led practices. Internal policy commitments and strategies can inform corresponding partnerships by DAC member partners. DAC members are starting to build on commitments made by International Non-Governmental Organisations (INGOs)20 and leverage their role as convener to embed locally led development principles in the structure of partnerships between international intermediaries and local actors, drawing upon existing guidance.21 Peace Direct has identified nine roles that INGOs can play in international co-operation, which move beyond INGOs as conduits for funding organisations in the Global South. These include interpreter, knowledge broker and producer; trainer, coach, and co-learner convenor; connector and ecosystem builder; advocate and amplifier; watchdog; critical friend; and sidekick (Peace Direct, 2023[2]). DAC members, however, face a range of challenges in tracking the extent to which international partners are enabling locally led development.22 Therefore, more systematic application of equitable partnership principles for locally led development – including contracts with international intermediaries – is being adopted to influence and shape multilateral intermediary channels and their partnership agreements with local actors. For example, through Ireland’s Civil Society Partnership (ICSP), Irish Aid encourages a shift in CSO practices to shared learning, mutuality, and the co-development of solutions. One of the benchmarks for each ICSP partner organisation is that it develops a locally led development policy, which is proving to be a key entry point to improve the quality of partnerships between intermediaries and local actors to advance the locally led development agenda (OECD, 2024[24]). Other DAC members identified earlier, including Belgium, the United States and Switzerland, are similarly leveraging their direct partnerships with international and multilateral intermediaries to shift behaviours to enable locally led development (OECD, 2024[25]).

Box 4.4. Developing Fair Partnership Principles to influence international intermediaries: Experience from Switzerland

Switzerland has led efforts to influence and shape multilateral intermediary channels and contractual relations between international and local humanitarian actors as co-convener of the Grand Bargain localisation workstream and in its role as co-chair of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Country-Based Pooled Funding Mechanism working group. For example, in Ukraine, eight Fair Partnership Principles have been integrated into contracts with intermediaries. These include: i) alignment of goals of international and local partners; ii) duty of care to ensure local partner staff receive training and equipment; iii) full cost coverage including full expenses and a fair share of the costs of leadership, programme management, financial administration, premises; iv) volunteer stipends to cover living costs; v) capacity-strengthening budget to support local actor planning, fundraising and implementation of its own strategies and activities; vi) alignment on humanitarian principles including impartiality, neutrality and partnering with local actors who adopt and adhere to these and safeguarding; vii) simple grant application and reporting processes adapted to the ability of the partner and size of the grant; and viii) participation and promotion of local partners in co‑ordination meetings, donor discussions, and the crediting of local partner work and contributions. Following integration into intermediary contracts, these have been rolled out across humanitarian sub-contracts in Ukraine, with emerging results including, for example, local and national protection NGOs, supported with enhanced project and organisational management capacities.

Source: OECD (2024[17]), Peer learning on Locally led development – DAC members deep dive: Switzerland, https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD(2024)26/en/pdf.

A commonly overlooked aspect of locally led development is support provided by multiple DAC members (not necessarily managed by Headquarters), to establish partnerships with local governments, including municipalities. For example, the European Commission has joined forces with local and regional government associations to boost sustainable development. It has signed framework partnership agreements with five global associations of local authorities, which recognise the contribution of local and sub-regional governments in the design and implementation of policies, in particular for making cities and settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. The agreements provide an opportunity to strengthen the voice of local government, enhance engagement in decentralised co-operation, improve current practices through efficiency and innovation, and raise awareness and strengthen capacities (European Commission, 2022[26]). Similarly, France, through its External Action of Local Authorities brings together French and local authorities in partner countries to carry out decentralised co-operation projects in all areas of local public action (Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs, n.d.[27]). Finally, the Municipal International Co-operation is a dashboard of approaches and practices to provide local governments with the tools to determine the best approaches for international co‑operation, ranging from city-to-city partnerships, to international co-operation with the private sector, and short-term expertise exchanges. For example, city-to-city partnerships aim for substantive co‑operation where a strategy is developed together around specific policy themes that both municipalities and cities are working on (e.g., waste management, local economic development, digitisation of the population register, citizen participation). It does not work toward one predetermined solution through transfer of resources or technical know-how and instead supports collaboration on locally embedded solutions that create a win-win for the various partners. “The municipality of Mol (Belgium) describes the double win of their city-to-city partnership with Santo Tomás (Nicaragua) as follows: ‘the partnership is not an end in itself, but a model, a way to make both the municipal administration and the population aware of global relations and the role they can play locally. The city-to-city partnership is, as it were, the peg on which municipal global policy can be hung. Because of the partnership, complicated global challenges can be translated very concretely into the day-to-day realities that people are confronted with’[…]” (VVSG, 2023[28]).

Mapping local actors and diversifying partnerships is particularly important in contexts where access for international actors, including the UN, are constrained and where DAC members are therefore unable to rely on international partnerships. DAC members often work with a small pool of provider-country/international CSOs due to their proximity and long-standing trust relations, even where there are no legal or regulatory restrictions applying to the provision of funds to partner country CSOs or other actors and given the complexities of ending long-term partnerships (OECD, 2024[17])(Switzerland, forthcoming). Mapping, including leveraging the knowledge of local intermediaries or local governments (as in the case of Nepal), can elevate the visibility of local actors and is recognised as a fundamental first step to identifying new partners. In Colombia, the strong, active, and structured civil society (including networks and think tanks) facilitates the identification of strategic partners for DAC members in project design and delivery. Several DAC initiatives are also helping to diversify local partners. For example, in conflict and fragile contexts, Hungary directly funds local faith-based organisations, who possess intimate knowledge of the social and cultural dynamics of a given area, and who can reach some of the most impacted populations. By starting with small amounts and carefully assessing proposals and vetting partners, Hungary can manage risks and increase support over time, whilst providing opportunities to support peaceful coexistence and religious tolerance amongst diverse communities (OECD, 2022[29]). Similarly, USAID’s New Partnership Initiative23 expands opportunities for new, non-traditional, and local partners to work with USAID to strengthen local leadership, capacity and accountability. It cultivates innovative partnerships and encourages new sources of funding to sustain partnership and scale impact. Re‑launched in 2019, it aims to diversify USAID’s partnerships and change how the Agency partners. The USAID Administrator Samantha Power highlighted in Congressional testimony that the quality of the Agency’s partnership represents “the essence of whether the development will be sustained over time” (USAID, n.d.[30]) In addition to catalysing over USD 1 billion in USAID awards that foster diverse partnerships and locally led development, the initiative also guided the development of the Work with USAID platform, noted previously, which helps streamline access to USAID information, resources and partnership opportunities. Finally, France’s Support Fund for Feminist Organisations is focused on identifying new voices and partners.24

Box 4.5. Building relationships with local actors in Myanmar where INGO access is blocked: Experience from the United Kingdom

In Myanmar, the United Kingdom works with local organisations to identify tailored approaches to support the needs of families forced to flee their homes due to conflict. Two and a half years after the 2021 military coup, more than 2 million people have fled their homes, and the number in need of support has escalated from 1 million before the coup to 18 million. Whilst the military is blocking formal access for the United Nations and INGOs, the United Kingdom has been providing support primarily through local partners to meet the emergency needs of around 600 000 people affected by the conflict. The work is built on the relationships developed with networks of local civil society partners. The Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) has invested in strengthening the capacity of local organisations and networks; developing tailored funding instruments and allowing partners to respond adaptively; and establishing platforms to help local and international partners communicate meaningfully. Through engagement with community networks, the United Kingdom is apprised of the shifting context, new partnerships opportunities, and is more responsive to changing community priorities and risks.

Source: FCDO (2023[31]), International Development in a Contested World: Ending Extreme Poverty and Tackling Climate Change A White Paper on International Development, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/international-development-in-a-contested-world-ending-extreme-poverty-and-tackling-climate-change.

Investing in partnerships with private sector actors can support locally led development, as discussed in the Kampala Principles on Effective Private Sector Engagement in Development Co-operation (Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation, 2019[32]). This is achieved by offering expertise (e.g., local business partners can provide training and mentorship for local actors) and enhancing scalability, innovation, flexibility, efficiency and sustainability. For example, Spain’s Huruma Fund25 leverages private sector investment to provide microfinancing and training for smallholder and marginalised farmers including women producers. It is increasingly harnessing this flexibility to establish direct funding partnerships with a range of local actors (OECD, 2022[33]). Similarly, the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) fosters partnerships which focus on the co-operation between the Swiss private sector and local producers, by providing space for local actors to collaboratively identify their own solutions. For example, in Peru, Swiss private sector support is increasing agriculture productivity in coffee, cocoa, sugar and banana value chains in partner countries, to help scale locally led development. An emerging lesson is that financial and technical co-operation integral to private sector partnerships promotes longer-term impact (OECD, 2022[34]). In Colombia, through the Swiss Responsible Gold Project, including the private sector, strategic partnerships have improved co-operation and community ownership. Similarly, France has been mobilising impact financing for African micro, small and medium enterprises, through its African Investment and Business Support Facility (FISEA+),26 which is able to support sectors that have traditionally less access to finance, such as agriculture, microfinance, education, and health (OECD, 2024[35]).

Investing in partnerships with local innovators and relevant institutions from local innovation ecosystems can unfold impact at scale. Local innovators can be social entrepreneurs, grassroot problem-solvers, activists as well as public servants. Dedicated support for local innovation requires engagement with private and public sector partners, as well as CSOs and individual innovators. For specific solutions to unfold impact at scale, funders need to understand the local context, enabling and constraining factors, and invest in strengthening local ecosystems. The United Kingdom FCDO, for example, seeks to strengthen innovation and research systems through the Research and Innovation Systems for Africa.27 The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland also collaborates with various ministry partners from Botswana, Namibia, Tanzania, South Africa and Zambia to strengthen local innovation ecosystems, and scale local social enterprises. Both programmes also focus on strengthening local government capabilities to better support innovation and research efforts. The process of translating individual innovation and the related accumulation of knowledge into institutional capacity was identified as dependent on getting the right mix of people involved in the process: influential leaders, technical experts and network builders. This ensures that the innovation process itself can be a means of enhancing collaboration and consensus.

Working with local intermediary partners can connect and amplify locally led initiatives. Recognition of the untapped potential and capacities of intermediary actors is providing some funding partners (primarily philanthropic) to revisit traditional restrictive roles (i.e., local actors confined to implementing roles) and support a change in roles. “Flipping the model” and using local actor intermediaries has the dual benefit of supporting locally led development but also improving the effectiveness (e.g., timeliness, responsiveness, inclusion), sustainability, and cost efficiency of humanitarian and development co-operation. Local and national organisations, networks and coalitions can serve as convenors, connectors, and amplifiers of locally led initiatives and can serve as fiscal agents (fundraisers and direct donors), managing a pool of flexible funding that can be quickly and easily accessed by network members with minimal administrative reviews and requirements, whilst increasing access to grassroots organisations and community-based organisations given their proximity to communities. Partner country local intermediaries can also bring to the table experience, expertise in community mobilisation, contextual knowledge, access to diverse networks and communities, and can work more effectively across the nexus, and pivot to response more quickly (OECD, 2024[7]; The Share Trust and Warande Advisory Centre, 2023[36]). For example, in Myanmar, the Myanmar Local Intermediary Actors Network not only channels money to smaller civil society groups but partners, mentors, and coaches smaller organisations; helping partners to grow on their own terms (Mayanmar Local Intermediary Actors Network, 2022[37]). Other examples exist including the Prospera International Network of Women’s Funds,28 the Civil Society Innovation Initiative,29 the Change Fund,30 and the Local Coalition Accelerator31 (see Box 4.6).

Box 4.6. Supporting local intermediaries through the Local Coalition Accelerator Model: Experience from foundations

The Local Coalition Accelerator (LCA) brings together coalitions of diverse local and national organisations. The intention is to overcome due diligence issues, and funding partner aversions to managing multiple small contracts, thus increasing direct access to bilateral funding. These Coalitions in turn provide peer-to-peer capacity sharing and partner with community structures (including Self Help Groups), as they co-design and implement holistic, evidence-based programming at scale to address systemic, multi-sectoral problems. The LCA model provides technical and financial support over three to five years to coalitions of CSOs, which create a shared governance system, design Joint Action Plans based on community priorities, and ultimately become independent to manage funding directly from funding partners. The model was initiated by The Share Trust and Warande Advisory Centre and is currently being implemented in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Kenya, Nigeria and Uganda with funding from multiple foundations. The Coalitions are also being used to pivot rapidly to humanitarian response, during a crisis, for example with support from the Start network in Bangladesh (most recently to support the floods resulting from Cyclone Remal in May), and in Nigeria, the Coalitions are supporting smaller CSOs to access country pooled funds.

Source: OECD (2024[38]), Supporting local intermediaries through the Local Coalition Accelerator Model, https://oe.cd/5GT; OECD (2024[18]) Valuing and Sharing Local Knowledge and Capacity: Practical approaches for enabling locally led development co-operation, https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD%282024%2928/en/pdf.

Reshaping support and partnering with local researchers allows local actors to frame research priorities around local needs and questions. This ensures research initiatives are driven by, and responsive to, the communities they serve, guarding against extractive processes, and fostering genuine collaboration and the empowerment of local voices. Examples of joint research include France’s partnership between the Institute Pasteur and the Institute of Research for Development (IRD);32 and Canada’s International Development Research Centre (IDRC) programme Climate Change Adaptation in Africa.33 IDRC is a Canadian crown corporation and offers many examples of how Canada can support local capacity in ways that are responsive and sustainable. For example, the Science Granting Councils Initiative34 in sub-Saharan Africa, led by IDRC and South Africa’s national Science Foundation, with funding from the United Kingdom, Sweden, Norway, and Germany, applies a systems approach, using peer-learning, networking, and customised technical support, as well as by funding research through and alongside granting councils. The initiative contributes to a transformation of the research landscape by focusing on a countries’ ability to target demand-driven national priorities. Similarly, Sweden has established long-standing partnerships with local research and learning partners in Ethiopia. Finally, the Netherlands and Australia have supported significant research in collaboration with the International Women’s Development Agency, and with the guidance of 35 Pacific Island women leaders. This collaboration helped identify key elements of more supportive, equitable, and decolonised models of engagement between Global South women’s rights movements and the Global North (OECD, 2024[7]).

Peer-to-peer networks and triangular co-operation35 can help change the narrative of partnerships. This means re-defining the way that knowledge is produced by sharing and scaling-up knowledge from the pivotal partner (and possibly the beneficiary) and supporting circular knowledge exchange, knowledge co‑production, and triangular co-operation (OECD, 2018[39]). By co-designing and implementing projects, the partners create mutual understanding for their respective co-operation systems and break up traditional divides between North-South and South-South co-operation, which can lead to a change of the overall development co‑operation. Triangular co-operation is based on the principle that all partners learn and share experience in a project. For example, the Indian model of triangular co-operation focuses on leveraging the strengths of India’s diverse landscape of CSOs (OECD, 2024[7]). It also means decentralising the co-operation and network architecture. For example, OECD analysis of triangular co‑operation projects recorded from 2000-22, found that 45% involve partners beyond the national government level (OECD/IsDB, 2023[12]). Similarly, Ireland’s emphasis on mutual learning, knowledge exchange and supporting strong local networks such as intelligence-sharing forums (including with other development co-operation partners) in Viet Nam, Cambodia and Laos, contributes to finding new solutions and ways of operating in challenging contexts. Germany’s position paper on triangular co-operation36 challenges the traditional narrative of how to partner with Global South agencies, governments and private sector partners and rethinks the way that knowledge is produced, shared and scaled-up from the pivotal partner (OECD, 2022[40]). Japan mobilises South-South and triangular co-operation as an approach to deepening relationships among countries, building trust and co-creating solutions that are well adapted to the context of developing countries. For example, the Asia-Africa Knowledge Co-Creation Programme37 enabled Asian and African countries to share experience and knowledge and the Kizuna Project38 disseminates Chilean experience throughout Latin America and the Caribbean region (OECD, 2020[41]).

Partnering for tailored, mutual, and locally led capacity strengthening and sharing

Developing a principled approach to capacity strengthening and sharing paves the way for mutual respect and reciprocity. However, evidence and experience reveal that the time and resource demands of capacity strengthening approaches need to be accounted for at the beginning of planning. For example, USAID’s Local Capacity Strengthening Policy (see Box 4.7) is grounded in a commitment to partnerships based on mutual respect and reciprocity and through which local actors from all backgrounds and cultures have their voices heard, exercise their unique capacities, lead their country’s development, and frame capacity strengthening based on locally defined priorities.

Box 4.7. Developing a Local Capacity Strengthening Policy: Experience from USAID

The Local Capacity Strengthening (LCS) policy establishes an agency-wide vision based on a shared commitment to seven mutually reinforcing principles, informed by a robust evidence base and a rigorous consultation process, which prioritises the engagement and feedback of local actors and organisations.

Principles for effective programming of local capacity strengthening:

• Start with the local system

• Strengthen diverse capacities through diverse approaches

• Plan for and measure performance improvement in collaboration with local partners.

Principles for equitable partnerships in local capacity strengthening:

• Align capacity strengthening with local priorities

• Appreciate and build on existing capacities

• Be mindful of and mitigate the unintended consequences of support for local capacity

• Practice mutuality with local partners.

USAID has also developed an internal implementation plan and publicly shared the Implementation Updates (see 2023 and 2024), which was also based on local consultation and feedback. Publicly sharing the implementation updates promotes transparency and accountability with local actors as it outlines USAID’s plans and key actions, notably to: i) institutionalise accountability of USAID leadership, as a key enabler of successful implementation; ii) prioritise accountability of USAID to stakeholders, including regular engagements by the LCS team and an Annual Learning and Feedback Forum; iii) integrate effective LCS practice into the programme cycle; and iv) develop tools and resources to support operationalisation. Annually, a virtual multi-day Learning & Feedback forum is hosted to continue to seek feedback and insight to inform implementation of the LCS Policy. Using the feedback from ongoing and annual gatherings, USAID updates the implementation plan and shares it with the community through the Implementation Updates to create a positive feedback loop.

Source: USAID (2022[42]), Local Capacity Strengthening Policy, https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2022-10/LCS-Policy-2022-10-17.pdf.

Organisational capacity strengthening should respond to local priorities and be tailored. However, capacity strengthening efforts have traditionally focused on Global North priorities (e.g., financial risk concerns), or are geared to a specific project, rather than promoting holistic, long‑term, organisational strengthening, and resilience. Further, local actors have highlighted the significant local capacities within their communities, which can often be overlooked by international actors, whilst also highlighting that capacity strengthening is not just about local actor capacity but also DAC member capacity, which necessitates two-way capacity sharing. Successful capacity sharing therefore centres on supporting local actors to identify their strengths and assets, and leverage and enhance these to perform roles and have relationships that shape a local system in a way that meets their aspirations, goals, and needs. More recent DAC member approaches are therefore starting by mutually agreeing on whose capacity to strengthen (i.e., DAC member or local actor), identifying what to strengthen, and setting expectations on how the prioritised capacity sharing will impact the performance of the organisation, not just the individuals directly engaged. This approach requires a significant investment of time, trust, and presence up front to create consensus on the capacity sharing needs. It may require higher levels of decentralisation (involving multiple capacity strengthening providers), and it should be continually adjusted as the needs evolve (OECD, 2024[18]). For example, Switzerland has been moving away from a deficit approach – identifying capacity gaps – to responding to local actors’ own capacity priorities.

Box 4.8. Responding to local priorities and existing capabilities of the youth: Experience from USAID

The USAID Positive Youth Development Framework engages youth within their communities in a manner that recognises and builds upon youth’s assets and skills; ensures young people are recognised as agents of their own development and that local capacity strengthening for youth supports them to exercise their power to shape change; and involves co-creation and co-design of programmes and decision-making on local capacity strengthening activities.

Source: USAID (n.d[43]) Unsolicited Solutions for Locally Led Development, https://www.usaid.gov/local-faith-and-transformative-partnerships/unsolicited-solutions-for-locally-led-development.

Assessing capacity as a whole and supporting systemic changes in capacities to enable scaling means moving beyond a traditionally narrow focus, notably on financial risk, to a more nuanced approach. This involves working with local actors to understand: i) different levels of capacity (e.g., institutional, organisational, individual); ii) types of competencies (e.g., hard skills, such as technical, logistical, and managerial; and soft skills, such as building relationships, trust, and legitimacy); iii) temporal and functional elements (e.g., strengthening, applying, maintaining capacity); and iv) delivery capacities (e.g., competency, capability, and performance) (Slater, 2024[44]). The Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs demonstrates holistic approaches through initiatives such as the Voice for Change Partnership,39 where they engage diverse stakeholders, including local and national governments, to strengthen entire systems rather than focusing solely on local communities (OECD, 2023[45]). Similarly, the United Kingdom, through the National Health Sector Support Programme in Nepal, works with diverse partners including the Nepalese government and local health authorities to strengthen the health system comprehensively.

Facilitating peer learning exchanges, visits, and knowledge banks address local needs. DAC members have actively contributed to facilitating peer learning and investing in platforms that draw on collective knowledge, enhance capability and experience exchange, and respond to demands from partner countries for specific thematic areas of expertise. This includes exchange visits, which have significant benefits and can create opportunities for learning not always anticipated by experts or training partners. Further, Norway’s Knowledge Bank40 aims to strengthen and co-ordinate technical co-operation with partner countries. It facilitates knowledge and experience sharing by drawing on the collective knowledge of more than 30 Norwegian public institutions, along with multilateral institutions, and CSOs to strengthen the capacity of partner country public institutions. The focus is on learning through exchange of experience, and the Knowledge Bank has helped share capacities across government agencies and in Norad. Further examples include: i) the USAID’s Global Development Lab,41 a platform that enables knowledge sharing on a range of topics, including locally led development, among USAID staff, partners and other stakeholders; ii) Australia’s Knowledge Sector Initiative in Indonesia,42 which facilitates knowledge sharing and peer learning amongst government agencies, CSOs, and researchers; iii) the Swedish Programme for information and communication technologies43; iv) DFAT’s Knowledge Hub,44 which brings together practitioners, policymakers and researchers to exchange on Humanitarian Action and disaster risk reduction and v) the Pacific Data Hub45 that aims to deliver the most comprehensive collection of data and information about the Pacific and for the Pacific. Socialising these knowledge banks amongst diverse local actors is important, given that these can be underutilised.

Capacity strengthening needs to be a continuous process, particularly given the changing development and humanitarian landscape. This relies on sustainable funding and the provision of core support, as well as better coverage of overhead or indirect costs (see Chapter 3). It further requires elevating the importance of strengthening long-term capacity as a strategic priority, as is the case for Canada’s Women’s Voice and Leadership Programme (WVL).46 A fundamental, driving principle is that women’s and LGBTQI+ organisations are provided with flexible funding to develop their organisation’s capacities according to their own strategic priorities. A further approach, that can be adopted by DAC members including smaller organisations, is supporting the outsourcing of services, including capacity strengthening, to local partners to ensure more sustainable and long-term solutions. USAID identifies that, where possible, it should partner with existing capacity strengthening providers and support their capacity to be sustainable service providers, whilst avoiding designing activities that undermine existing capacity strengthening providers. This requires an inventory of the local capacity strengthening market for key services including reach of existing providers (e.g., NGOs, individual trainers, networks, coalitions, universities, research centres, government agencies, management consulting or accounting firms, local social enterprise and the private sector) and the market prices, scale, location and quality of these services (USAID, 2023[46]).

Box 4.9. Supporting permanent positions in government ministries in the Pacific: Experience from Australia

A further modality for sustainable capacity strengthening of local actors is to create and initially fund new positions in government ministries, providing ongoing mentoring and support until the post is absorbed as permanent capacity and funded by the government agency two to three years after. This has successfully been implemented in the Pacific through the Governance for Resilience Programme (Gov4Res)¹ funded by Australia, the United Kingdom, South Korea, New Zealand, and Sweden. Several positions (new climate and disaster resilience posts) have been successfully absorbed in the central planning and finance functions and sectoral ministries (women, environment, agriculture) in Fiji, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, and Tonga.

Note: 1. Formerly the Pacific Risk Resilience Programme.

Source: UNDP, (2024[47])Gov4Res, https://www.undp.org/pacific/gov4res; OECD (2024[18]) Valuing and Sharing Local Knowledge and Capacity: Practical approaches for enabling locally led development co-operation, https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD(2024)28/en/pdf.

Some DAC members are developing new approaches to ensure sustained capacity sharing. Denmark, the European Union (EU), and Switzerland are supporting the Tanzania Foundation for Civil Society,47 an independent Tanzanian NGO that provides grants and capacity-strengthening services to CSOs. Equally, the United Kingdom is supporting the Mechanism for Civil Society Support48 in Mozambique, a foundation for providing grants and capacity strengthening in the long-term to local CSOs. Further, Austria is supporting local partners to provide institutional capacity strengthening to local authorities in Moldova, helping them to understand the importance of preserving wetland ecosystems, and to develop the legislative package to set up a national park in its biologically diverse Lower Dniester wetland, internationally recognised under the Ramsar Convention (OECD, 2023[48]). Australia is enhancing local actors' capacities through "localisation-ready support hubs" designed to achieve compliance and foster a local market for consultancies and project management, similar to the private sector's approach to incubating local businesses. These hubs offer tailored support, including financial management, procurement, safeguarding, and risk assessment (DFAT, 2024[9]). Finally, Sida’s funded Kosovo Civil Society Resource Centre49 contributes to strengthening other CSOs in Kosovo by conducting regular training modules on governance, advocacy, participation in policy-making, project and financial management, and reporting (Pedersen and Rusi, 2019[49]).

References

[10] Aga Khan Foundation (2023), Enhancing Locally Led Development in Kenya, https://usaidlearninglab.org/system/files/2023-08/daisy_rono.pdf.

[13] Conducive Space for Peace (2023), Learning Note: Innovative Practices – Changing the International System to Better Enable Local Leadership, https://www.conducivespace.org/2023/05/23/learning-note-innovative-practices-changing-the-international-system-to-better-enable-local-leadership/.

[9] DFAT (2024), DFAT Guidance Note: Locally Led Development, Department of Foreing Affaires and Trade, https://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/dfat-guidance-note-locally-led-development.pdf.

[26] European Commission (2022), Commission Joins Forces with Local and Regional Government Associations to Boost Sustainable Development, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_5395.

[31] FCDO (2023), International Development in a Contested World: Ending Extreme Poverty and Tackling Climate Change A White Paper on International Development, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/international-development-in-a-contested-world-ending-extreme-poverty-and-tackling-climate-change.

[32] Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (2019), Kampala Principles on Effective Private Sector Engagement in Development Co-operation, https://web-archive.oecd.org/2019-10-21/524269-Kampala-Principles-on-effective-private-sector-engagement-development-cooperation.pdf.

[1] Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (n.d.), The Effectiveness Principles, https://www.effectivecooperation.org/landing-page/effectiveness-principles (accessed on 29 June 2024).

[20] Kantowitz, R., M. Van Beijnum and M. Poiré (2022), Shifting the Power Balance: Effective Options for Financing Local Peacebuilding, https://www.gppac.net/files/2022-04/GPPAC%20Report%20...Financing%20Local%20Peacebuilding_V2-1.pdf.

[3] Kuloba-Warria, C. and B. Tomlinson (2023), Implications of the Istanbul Principles and the DAC CSO Recommendations on Enabling Civil Society for ICSOs, CSO Partnership for Development Effectiveness, SIDA, https://csopartnership.org/resource/implications-of-istanbul-principles-and-dac-recommendations-on-enabling-civil-society/.

[37] Mayanmar Local Intermediary Actors Network (2022), Positioning Paper on Localisation and Intermediary Role by Myanmar Civil Society, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5fc4fd249698b02c7f3acfe9/t/62344b7805620407528b354a/1647594360696/Myanmar+Positioning+Paper+on+Localization+and+Intermediary+role+by+CSO+31+January+2022+-+Eng.pdf.

[21] Mercy Corps (2011), Local Partnerships: A Guide for Partnering With Civil Society, Business and Government Groups, https://www.mercycorps.org/sites/default/files/2020-01/mclocalpartnershipsguide.pdf.

[27] Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs (n.d.), External Action of Local Authorities, https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/politique-etrangere-de-la-france/action-exterieure-des-collectivites-territoriales/#:~:text=la%20coop%C3%A9ration%20d%C3%A9centralis%C3%A9e%20%3F-,Qu'est%2Dce%20que%20l'action%20ext%C3%A9rieure%20des%20collectivit%C3%A9s (accessed on 18 July 2024).

[15] Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2014), Policy framework: “Dialogue and Dissent” : Strategic Partnerships for Lobbying and Advocacy, Government of the Netherlands, https://www.government.nl/topics/grant-programmes/documents/regulations/2014/05/13/policy-framework-dialogue-and-dissent.

[35] OECD (2024), An Independent Investment Facility Enables France to Mobilise Impact Financing for African MSMEs, Development Co-operation TIPS – Tools, Insights, Practices, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/development-co-operation-tips-tools-insights-practices_be69e0cf-en/an-independent-investment-facility-enables-france-to-mobilise-impact-financing-for-african-msmes_26b77aac-en.html.

[25] OECD (2024), From Global to Local: Multilateral Actors and The Pivot to Locally Led Development, OECD ONE Members and Partners Database, https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD(2024)23/en/pdf.

[24] OECD (2024), Peer Learning on Locally Led Development – DAC Members Deep Dive: Ireland, OECD ONE Members and Partners Database, https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD(2024)25/en/pdf.

[17] OECD (2024), Peer Learning on Locally Led Development – DAC Members Deep Dive: Switzerland, OECD ONE Members and Partners Database, https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD(2024)26/en/pdf.

[7] OECD (2024), Shifting Power with Partners: Toolkit for Implementing the DAC Recommendation on Enabling Civil Society in Development Co-operation and Humanitarian Assistance, Best Practices in Development Co-operation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7987e8db-en.

[38] OECD (2024), Supporting local intermediaries through the Local Coalition Accelerator Model, Development Co-operation TIPS – Tools, Insights, Practices, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/development-co-operation-tips-tools-insights-practices_be69e0cf-en/supporting-local-intermediaries-through-the-local-coalition-accelerator-model_bf059d1c-en.html.

[18] OECD (2024), Valuing and Sharing Local Knowledge and Capacity: Practical approaches for enabling locally led development co-operation, OECD ONE Members and Partners Database, https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD(2024)28/en/pdf.

[48] OECD (2023), Austria’s Beneficial Support for Biodiversity Conservation in Moldova, Development Co-operation TIPS – Tools, Insights, Practices, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/development-co-operation-tips-tools-insights-practices_be69e0cf-en/austria-s-beneficial-support-for-biodiversity-conservation-in-moldova_7d69c4f8-en.html.

[14] OECD (2023), Iceland’s Strategic Partnerships Strengthen Civil Society Capacity, Development Co-operation TIPS – Tools, Insights, Practices, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/development-co-operation-tips-tools-insights-practices_be69e0cf-en/iceland-s-strategic-partnerships-strengthen-civil-society-capacity_94c9ef42-en.html.

[45] OECD (2023), OECD Development Co-operation Peer Reviews: Netherlands 2023, OECD Development Co-operation Peer Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/67b0a326-en.

[29] OECD (2022), Hungary Engages with Local Faith-based Organisations in Fragile Contexts, Development Co-operation TIPS – Tools, Insights, Practices, https://www.oecd.org/development-cooperation-learning/practices/hungary-engages-with-local-faith-based-organisations-in-fragile-contexts-2d11cfe2.

[34] OECD (2022), Investing in Multi-Partner Funds (United Nations and International Funding Institutions), Development Co-operation TIPS – Tools, Insights, Practices, https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/view/?ref=1171_1171937-02mtbisxdc&title=Investing-in-multi-partner-funds.

[16] OECD (2022), Netherlands’ Strategic Partnerships To Strengthen Civil Society Advocacy Capacity, Development Co-operation TIPS – Tools, Insights, Practices, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/development-co-operation-tips-tools-insights-practices_be69e0cf-en/netherlands-strategic-partnerships-to-strengthen-civil-society-advocacy-capacity_68164dc7-en.html.

[33] OECD (2022), Spain’s Huruma Fund: Attracting Private Investment for Smallholder Agriculture, Development co-operation TIPs – Tools, Insights, Practices, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/development-co-operation-tips-tools-insights-practices_be69e0cf-en/spain-s-huruma-fund-attracting-private-investment-for-smallholder-agriculture_04e5851b-en.html.

[40] OECD (2022), Triangular Co-operation in German Development Co-operation, Development Co-operation TIPS – Tools, Insights, Practices, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2021/03/development-co-operation-tips-tools-insights-practices_d307b396/triangular-co-operation-in-german-development-co-operation_f1c7ba30.html.

[5] OECD (2021), DAC Recommendation on Enabling Civil Society in Development Co-operation and Humanitarian, OECD/LEGAL/5021, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/Instrument%20s/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-5021.

[6] OECD (2020), Development Assistance Committee Members and Civil Society, The Development Dimension, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/51eb6df1-en.

[41] OECD (2020), OECD Development Co-operation Peer Reviews: Japan 2020, OECD Development Co-operation Peer Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b2229106-en.

[39] OECD (2018), Triangular Co-operation: Why Does it Matter?, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/global-perspectives-on-triangular-co-operation_29e2cbc0-en/support-materials.html.

[12] OECD/IsDB (2023), Global Perspectives on Triangular Co-operation, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/29e2cbc0-en.

[2] Peace Direct (2023), The Nine Roles that Intermediaries can Play in International Co-operation, https://www.peacedirect.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/The-nine-roles-that-intermediaries-can-play-in-international-cooperation-2.pdf.

[4] Peace Direct (2023), Transforming Partnerships in International Cooperation: A Practical Resource for Civil Society, Donors, INGOs and Intermediaries, Peace Direct, https://www.peacedirect.org/transforming-partnerships.

[49] Pedersen, F. and S. Rusi (2019), Midterm review of the Sida: Core Support to KCSF, https://cdn.sida.se/publications/files/sida62262en-midterm-review-of-the-sida-core-support-to-kcsf.pdf.

[22] Sida (2019), Guiding Principles for Sida’s Engagement with and Support to Civil Society, https://cdn.sida.se/publications/files/sida62235en-guiding-principles-for-sidas-engagement-with-and-support-to-civil-society-version-without-examples.pdf.

[44] Slater, R. (2024), Using a ‘Capacity Cube’ Analysis to Understand Social Protection Delivery in Crises, Institute of Development Studies, https://www.ids.ac.uk/opinions/using-a-capacity-cube-analysis-to-understand-social-protection-delivery-in-crises/.

[36] The Share Trust and Warande Advisory Centre (2023), Local Coalition Accelerator: Shifting Power, Process and Funding, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5b2110247c93271263b5073a/t/641756ddae8f9d30c86d9136/1679251168184/LCA+Summary-+March+2023.pdf.

[23] The Share Trust; Warande Advisory Centre (2022), Passing the Buck: The Economics of Localising International Assistance, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5b2110247c93271263b5073a/t/63754f2bbf586431bd28fac0/1668632366491/Passing+the+Buck_Full+Report.pdf.

[47] UNDP (2024), Government for Resilient Development in the Pacific, United Nations Development Programme, https://www.undp.org/pacific/gov4res.

[46] USAID (2023), Local Capacity Strengthening Policy: Implementation Updates, https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2023-08/LCS%20Policy%20Public%20Implementation%20Updates_2023-08_FINAL.pdf.

[42] USAID (2022), Local Capacity Strengthening Policy, https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2022-10/LCS-Policy-2022-10-17.pdf.

[19] USAID (2022), Locally Led Development Research: Stopping As Success (Fact Sheet), https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/Stopping%20as%20Success%20%28SAS%2B%29%20-%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf.

[8] USAID (n.d.), Listening Locally: Community Engagement Along the Dominican-Haitian Border, https://usaidlearninglab.org/system/files/resource/files/lld_example_-_lld_in_listening_2_pager_-_usaid_dominican_republic.pdf.

[11] USAID (n.d.), Locally Led Development Research: Communities of Practice for Effective Partnerships, https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/Communities%20of%20Practice%20for%20Effective%20Partnerships%20%28COPE%29%20-%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf.

[30] USAID (n.d.), New Partnership Initiative, https://www.usaid.gov/npi#:~:text=As%20USAID%20Administrator%20Samantha%20Power,collaboration%20with%20new%2C%20nontraditional%2C%20and (accessed on 19 August 2024).

[43] USAID (n.d), Unsolicited Solutions for Locally Led Development (US4LLD), https://www.usaid.gov/local-faith-and-transformative-partnerships/unsolicited-solutions-for-locally-led-development (accessed on 29 May 2024).

[28] VVSG (2023), Municipal International Cooperation: Approaches and Practices, Dashboard, https://platforma-dev.eu/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/231012_keuzemenu_EN_finaal.pdf.

Notes

← 1.  For more information on open communication see: https://www.partos.nl/nieuws/inclusive-communication-guide-for-international-cooperation/.

← 2.  DAC Recommendation on Enabling Civil Society in Development Co-operation and Humanitarian Assistance provides guidance to DAC members and other providers on working with civil society actors and include a commitment to “support more equitable partnerships between provider country and/or international CSOs and partner country CSOs they work with, in which the comparative advantages of each type of CSO are appropriately drawn from.” They build on past commitments, including the World Summit for Social Development (1995), which referenced building a “culture of cooperation and partnership”; and the Istanbul principles, which advocated for providers to “pursue equitable partnerships and solidarity” (2021).

← 3.  Movements to catalyse change and shift power within partnerships include the Pledge for Change, (https://pledgeforchange2030.org/); the #Shift the Power movement, (https://globalfundcommunityfoundations.org/); Peace Direct’s Transforming Partnerships in International Cooperation, (https://www.peacedirect.org/transforming-partnerships/); the NEAR movement, (https://www.near.ngo/); and the Re Imagining the INGO and the Role of Global Civil Society (RINGO) project (https://rightscolab.org/ringo/).

← 4.  See for example: https://csopartnership.org/resource/implications-of-istanbul-principles-and-dac-recommendations-on-enabling-civil-society/.

← 5.  For example, sustaining partnerships and long-term capacity strengthening/sharing were identified by DAC members in Ethiopia as particularly challenging given the politically constrained contexts together with a need for improved coherence, complementarity, and collaboration across humanitarian, development, and peace actors working on shared objectives.

← 6.  Some practitioners have questioned whether the partnership paradigm is in fact the best route for pursuing locally led development. An alternative is for development co-operation providers to “step back” and create space for local actor agency. See https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/6uew8, https://www.kcl.ac.uk/political-economy/assets/the-decision-mapping-tool.pdf, www.odi.org/en/publications/why-arent-we-there-yet-understanding-and-addressing-donor-barriers-to-localisation-in-climate-adaptation. The peer learning findings suggest a combination is needed.

← 7.  For example, in 2019, the Colombian government created the National System of International Co-operation as a mechanism to foster and articulate collaboration between government entities, NGOs and the private sector, which is reported to be enabling locally led development by encouraging the meaningful participation of community actors in all regions of the country. For more information, see: apccolombia.gov.co/sites/default/files/2021-01/Documento ENCI inglés.pdf.

← 8.  For more information on the Pacific Roundtable Chocó Chapter see: https://www.cancilleria.gov.co/newsroom/news/instalacion-mesa-pacifico-capitulo-choco-sistema-nacional-cooperacion-internacional.

← 9.  For more information on Local 2030: Localizing the SDGs, see: https://www.local2030.org/about-us.php.

← 10.  The prime partner is in the Philippines, and it is facilitated by USAID and a US-based learning partner involving 17 member institutions in Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean.

← 11.  For more information on the Rwandan platform, see: https://www.rgb.rw/1/home-grown-solutions.

← 12.  For further information on Work with USAID, see: https://www.workwithusaid.gov/.

← 13.  Other partnership assessment tools, including focus on power, dignity, and equity, can support entities assess their own policies and ways of working. For example, the Netherlands has used the Partos Power Awareness Tool (https://www.partos.nl/publicatie/the-power-awareness-tool/) within the Institute for Multiparty Democracy.

← 14. For more information on CSO Platform Africa, see: https://www.csoplatform.africa/.

← 15.  For more information on Kujalink, see: https://kujalink.org/.

← 16.  For more information on Partnerships for Social Protection programme, see: https://p4sp.org/what-we-do/.

← 17.  For more information on Australia-Pacific Partnership Platform, see: https://partnershipsplatform.org/.

← 18.  For example, the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (https://www.effectivecooperation.org/) launched in 2012 includes an emphasis on building better, more inclusive partnerships as does the OECD DAC Recommendation on Enabling Civil Society in Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Assistance (2021); and equitable and principled partnerships are an outcome pillar of Grand Bargain 2.0 (https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/sites/default/files/migrated/2021-07/%28EN%29%20Grand%20Bargain%202.0%20Framework.pdf).

← 19.  For further clarity on what is meant by “equitable”, see: https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/954f357e-ae94-4991-a193-b5adafdace23/The%20Equity%20Index%20Definitions%20paper_Final.pdf.

← 20.  To date, 13 INGOs have signed the Pledge4Change (https://pledgeforchange2030.org/pledges/), which includes “equitable partnerships” in its first pledge for change.

← 21.  See for example the Global Mentoring Initiative’s Critical Self-Awareness and Conversation Guide at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58256bc615d5db852592fe40/t/666fd517cc6e8369a9332e9f/1718605080713/GMI+2024+Donor+conversations+with+intermediaries.pdf.

← 22.  In 2021, 28 percent of gross bilateral ODA was channelled through multilateral organisations (earmarked contributions) and 17 percent core multilateral allocations.

← 23.  For USAID’S New Partnership Initiative, see: https://www.usaid.gov/npi.

← 24. For more information on France’s Support Fund for Feminist Organisations, see: https://www.afd.fr/fr/fonds-de-soutien-aux-organisations-feministes-fsof.

← 25. For information on Spain’s Huruma Fund, see: https://fondohuruma.com/en/.

← 26.  For further information on the African Investment and Business Support Facility (FISEA+), see: https://www.proparco.fr/en/actualites/choose-africa-launches-fisea-facility-new-eur-210m-investment-capacity-african-msmes.

← 27.  For the Research and Innovation Systems for Africa, see: https://www.risa-fund.org/.

← 28.  For Prospera International Network of Women’s Funds, see: https://prospera-inwf.org/.

← 29.  Also known as Innovation for Change (I4C), a multi-donor network developed through extensive co-creation processes with local actors, supported by USAID, SIDA, the Aga Khan Foundation, and the Open Society Foundation. For more information, see: https://usaidlearninglab.org/resources/civil-society-innovation-initiative-greater-internet-freedom-projects-case-study-locally.

← 30.  For the Change Fund, see: https://www.near.ngo/the-change-fund.

← 31.  For the Local Coalition Accelerator, see: https://thesharetrust.org/local-coalition-accelerator.

← 32.  For more information on the Institute Pasteur and the Institute of Research for Development (IRD), see: https://www.pasteur.fr/en/strengthening-ties-between-ird-and-institut-pasteur?language=fr.

← 33.  For Canada’s work on Climate Change Adaptation in Africa, see: https://climate-change.canada.ca/finance/details.aspx?id=394.

← 34.  For further information on the Science Granting Councils Initiative, see: https://sgciafrica.org/.

← 35.  Triangular co-operation is when multi-stakeholders work together to co-create flexible, cost-effective, and innovation solutions. This comprises a combination of three roles, which may revolve throughout the implementation of the initiative, notably: i) the beneficiary partner, who seeks to tackle a specific development challenge; ii) the pivotal partner, with proven experience in the issue, shares resources, knowledge, and expertise; and iii) the facilitating partner, who helps to connect the beneficiary and the pivotal partners, supporting their collaboration financially and technically.

← 36.  For Germany’s approach to triangular co-operation, see: https://www.bmz.de/en/ministry/working-approach/triangular-cooperation.

← 37.  For more information on the Asia-Africa Knowledge Co-Creation Programme, see: https://www.ilec.or.jp/en/activities/resource/14541/.

← 38.  For more information on the Kizuna Project, see: https://www.agci.cl/index.php/kizuna.

← 39.  For more information on the Dutch Voice for Change Partnership, see: https://www.snv.org/project/voice-change-partnership-v4cp.

← 40.  See Norad’s knowledge bank at: https://www.norad.no/en/front/the-knowledge-bank/.

← 41.  For more information on USAID’s Global Development Lab, see: https://usaidlearninglab.org/.

← 42.  See Australia’s Knowledge Sector Initiative in Indonesia at: https://www.ksi-indonesia.org/en.

← 43.  For the Swedish Programme for information and communication technologies, see: https://www.sida.se/en/publications/the-swedish-program-for-ict-in-developing-regions-spider.

← 44.  For more information on DFAT’s knowledge hub, see: https://australianhumanitarianpartnership.org/.

← 45.  See the Pacific Data Hub at: https://pacificdata.org/.

← 46.  For more information on Canada’s Women’s Voice and Leadership Programme, see: https://www.international.gc.ca/world-monde/issues_development-enjeux_developpement/gender_equality-egalite_des_genres/wvl_projects-projets_vlf.aspx?lang=eng.

← 47.  For the Tanzania Foundation for Civil Society, see: https://thefoundation.or.tz/.

← 48.  For the UK Mechanism for Civil Society Support, see: https://devtracker.fcdo.gov.uk/programme/GB-1-204265/summary.

← 49.  For more information on the Kosovo Civil Society Resource Centre, see: https://tacso.eu/resource-center/kosovo/.