The participation of local and national actors in humanitarian coordination structures

Engaging local and national actors (L/NAs) is critical to the success of humanitarian action. L/NAs are often the first responders and at the heart of humanitarian response. They provide an invaluable understanding of local challenges and potential solutions, and they can mobilize local networks and offer greater access to affected populations. Hence they contribute to a more effective, efficient and sustainable humanitarian response with enhanced AAP. L/NAs often work across the humanitarian-development-peace nexus to support affected communities in preparedness, response and recovery, and after international actors withdraw. The participation and leadership of L/NAs in humanitarian response mechanisms is key to ensuring a response is adapted to the local context. This continued to be a focus of IASC partners in 2022, especially after the adoption of the IASC Guidance on strengthening participation, representation and leadership of local and national actors in IASC humanitarian coordination mechanisms in July 2021.

Progress was tracked through the annual mapping of IASC coordination structures covering 29 humanitarian operations during 2021, with more than 2,400 coordination structures mapped at national and subnational levels. Overall, the data shows a strong level of participation across humanitarian coordination structures, but more remains to be done in terms of facilitating L/NAs’ leadership of these structures.

Percentage of clusters, sectors, Areas of Responsibilities with local/national actors in leadership roles globally

Percentage of total members who are local/national actors globally

L/NAs participated in many humanitarian coordination mechanisms at both the national and the operational level. They were present in 80 per cent of Humanitarian Country Teams (HCTs) and accounted for 9 per cent of overall HCT membership globally, up from 7 per cent in 2020. During 2021, HCTs in Burkina Faso, Haiti, Honduras, Lebanon and OPT added or increased the number of national NGOs among their members.

L/NAs participated in 33 per cent of ICCGs – a slight increase from 31 per cent in 2020. Globally, L/NAs constituted 3 per cent of total ICCG membership in 2021 (down from 6 per cent in 2020).

Across national-level clusters, sectors and areas of responsibility (AoRs), L/NAs’ membership remained on par with 2020 at around 48 per cent of the total 17,902 members globally in 2021.

Leadership of clusters, sectors and AoRs includes various roles, such as lead, co-lead and co-chair. These leadership roles provide an opportunity for L/NAs to directly impact decisions, including on the scope and direction of needs assessments, prioritization for response plans, funding allocations and advocacy. In 2021, 37 per cent of clusters, sectors and AoRs and 36 per cent of technical working groups (TWGs) had an L/NA in a leadership role. At the same time, 90 per cent of cluster strategic advisory groups included L/NAs, up from 83 per cent in 2020. At the subnational level, 38 per cent of clusters, sectors and AoRs had an LNA in a leadership role, up from 34 per cent in 2020.

Providing opportunities for leadership roles is not enough – the environment also needs to be conducive to encourage meaningful contributions and cultivate a shared sense of ownership. One avenue to achieve this is through the use of national, local and/or official languages in the meetings or working processes of coordination structures. The use of official languages increased slightly in 2021 – 78 per cent of clusters at the national level (compared to 74 per cent in 2020) and 89 per cent at subnational levels reported using an official or local language of the country of operation. In addition, at the national level, translation capacity was provided at least half of the time by 22 per cent of clusters and sectors.

References

  1. According to IASC guidance, this category includes the following entities where represented: national and local authorities, national NGOs and consortiums, national Red Cross/Crescent Societies, and national private sector.
  2. The coordination-mapping exercise will be available through the IASC website shortly. The coordination mapping includes Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, CAR, Chad, Colombia, DR Congo, Ethiopia, Haiti, Honduras, Iraq, Lebanon (HCT/ICCG data only), Libya, Madagascar, Mali, Mozambique, Myanmar, Niger, Nigeria, OPT, Philippines, (HCT/ICCG data only), Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria (Damascus, regional, Gaziantep), Ukraine, Venezuela, Yemen, Zimbabwe.
  3. Presence or participation in a coordination mechanism denotes attendance at meetings, partaking in assessments, workshops, etc. Membership denotes being a formal constituent of a group and being involved in decisions about governance, providing directions for assessments and plans, etc.
  4. Please note that ICCG membership largely reflects cluster leadership – if in a given country there are no local actors leading clusters, sectors or AoRs, then likely there will be no NNGO members within the ICCG unless the ICCG decides to allocate a specific seat to L/NNGOs.