No abstract

Local actors are promoted as important agents in the humanitarian sector's latest reform efforts. Opinions on the exact meaning and the best means of implementing localisation differ, however. Applying an interface perspective, this paper analyses how the Rohingya response in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh, became an arena of contestation, competition, and sometimes convergence among different actors in relation to localisation. It shows how misconceptions and divergent understandings of localisation and the best methods of achieving it were prevalent and hampered the joint endeavours of international and local humanitarian bodies. Although both sides sought common ground, conflicting views, interests, and perceptions of 'self' and 'other' stood in the way. A lack of trust between international and local organisations intensified divisions. The paper argues, therefore, that the humanitarian sector needs to engage in trust-building between the various entities involved in humanitarian response if localisation is to be realised, including addressing underlying structural and systemic issues of (neo)colonialism, racism, and classism.

Mediation is considered an effective and peaceful tool for the resolution of conflicts and has become an important instrument in international peacemaking. Interest in mediation has surged in recent years both at the international and regional level. In line with the discussions of local ownership in peacebuilding literature and practice, there is also an increased call for including local 'insider mediators' in peace processes. So far, scholars have paid little attention to the role of insider mediators in peacemaking. To gain a better understanding of their actual and potential role in peace processes, a systematic analysis of the phenomenon of insider mediation is therefore indispensible.

No abstract

No abstract