Not to be eclipsed. How local non-governmental organisations should fly their own flag

Empowerment of local or indigenous non-governmental organisations is a widely applauded ideal. But when charismatic NGOs based in the global North work alongside them they can easily feel overshadowed. Some researchers argue that prevailing power relations and structures 'systematically disempower ' indigenous NGOs. Collaborative Oxford Brookes University/Refugee Studies Programme Oxford University investigations into relief programmes for Mozambican refugees in Malawi and Zimbabwe, set out to reveal the nature and causes of this imbalance. The study report suggests ways and means to 'level the playing-field' by emphasising unique strengths arising from local knowledge and presence.

Many would argue that Northern NGOs wield comparative advantage over local agencies in that they:

• can count on greater managerial efficiency and effectiveness
• have more experience and better networks, so can mobilise funds, stockpiles and equipment faster
• respond more readily to demands for accountability and financial probity.

There is, moreover, a relative paucity of resources and expertise among indigenous NGOs which means that donors must turn to Northern NGOs for certain kinds of service. But the research in hand shows that this so-called 'comparative advantage' is not the only factor that accounts for their extra leverage. Major constraints on indigenous NGOs have roots in underlying power structures that value technocratic and operational skills common among Northern NGOs, over the kinds of skills that local NGOs may have to offer. The study report argues that a basic lack of trust underpins these values.

Other contributing factors the case studies highlight include the political and managerial interests of government officials and the international refugee relief agencies. These interest groups tend to discourage further development of locally self-reliant host country responses once an emergency or conflict has passed. Those indigenous organisations that have proved best able to compete on level terms with Northern NGOs, were those that capitalised on unique strengths, such as:

• a sound understanding of local issues and how to marshall a grassroots response to them
• greater cultural sensitivity to the needs and customary perceptions of local communities
• greater cost-effectiveness deriving from their local availability and rapid responsiveness.

These same more successful agencies also set a high priority on professional development, with special emphasis on managerial capacity and organisational structure. They had learned that building competence in these areas tended to reassure Northern counterparts. More specifically, they:

• improved the quality of reports
• familiarised themselves with the use and meaning of the donor's vocabulary
• carefully selected professional field staff
• espoused accountability, co-ordination and supervision.

It may take several years to 'upgrade' capacity in these respects. Other factors or assets flagged in the report as liable to help raise the profile and capacity of indigenous NGOs were:

• Negotiating power. Directors need good negotiation skills, strengthened by an intimate understanding of local conditions and needs.
• Control of transport and delivery services. It is vital to be able to control delivery of project material to (for example) refugee sites and guarantee that field staff can get regular access.
• Links with local powers-that-be. Membership of local NGO boards should reflect a cross section of community, corporate, religious and other interests, giving field directors a secure power base.
• Locally appropriate strategies. Many indigenous NGOs mimic the approaches and agendas of Northern NGOs rather than create and promote distinctive aims and methods of their own.

Source(s):
Indigenous NGOs and Refugee Assistance: Some lessons from Malawi and Zimbabwe. Development in Practice, Vol.6, No.1, by R. Zetter (1996)

Funded by: Not Known

id21 Research Highlight: 22-October-1998

Further Information:
Professor Roger Zetter
School of Planning
Oxford Brookes University
Oxford OX1 0PB
UK

Tel: +44 (0)1865 4839235
Fax: +44 (0)1865 483559
Contact the contributor: rwzetter@brookes.ac.uk

Oxford Brookes University, School of Planning