Of locals and insiders

Abstract

Purpose Through the case of the response to the 2017 Mocoa mudslide, the purpose of this paper is to contribute to a deeper understanding of why and how humanitarian response should be locally led, particularly in more complex contexts such as those affected by conflict. Design/methodology/approach The study draws on qualitative data collected during a four-month period in 2017, with a focus on the immediate April 2017 emergency phase which presented the largest diversity of local, national and international actors. Findings The study has found that competing legitimacy claims between the state and non-state response blocs led to tensions and confrontations between disaster response actors and consequently a problematic response process and outcome. The institutional map that was plotted based on locally perceived actor legitimacies indicates a local state-led response would have better served the broader goals of humanitarian support, development and peacebuilding. Practical implications These findings have significant implications for the understanding of how the locally led response should be understood. Better alignment with local needs and feasibilities requires a differential outlook on what is to be understood as “local.” This study puts forward the insider/outsider lens as a tool to identify the actors who possess local trust and legitimacy and are thus best suited to bridge the elements of the humanitarian-development-peacebuilding triple nexus. Originality/value This study gives a voice to state actors, which was largely absent in previous studies.

Humanitarian response by grassroots associations during a military conflict

“…A growing body of literature regarding humanitarian operations in conflict zones has presented several case studies on the immediate need for local humanitarian interventions (Aburas et al , 2018; Duclos et al , 2019; Kuipers et al , 2019). These case studies reflect local actors’ roles in providing humanitarian assistance (mostly medical services), as the risk to international organizations is high during conflicts.…”

“…A small number of studies have investigated the realities of localization in practice, particularly in conflict-affected settings of humanitarian response (Pincock et al , 2021), despite difficulties in access, security risks and the impact of conflict on local data collection and information systems (Elkahlout and Elgibali, 2020). A growing research agenda on localization in conflict settings has emerged, so empirical studies have examined a range of issues, such as negotiating humanitarian access with armed groups in Eastern DRC (James, 2022), knowledge production by local NGOs in the Central African Republic (Piquard, 2022) and disaster management in conflict-affected contexts, such as the humanitarian response to a mudslide in Colombia (Kuipers et al , 2019). Nevertheless, scant research exists at the intersection of localization and aid distribution in the acute phase of a conflict.…”

“…In the literature, such grassroots responses are an understudied, underused modality (Kuipers et al , 2019; Sheppard et al , 2013). Nonetheless, locals are almost invariably the first responders at the center of relief operations (Elkahlout and Elgibali, 2020).…”

“…Nonetheless, locals are almost invariably the first responders at the center of relief operations (Elkahlout and Elgibali, 2020). Emerging evidence has lauded the advantages of local, ad hoc , grassroots movements providing rapid, cost-effective and efficient responses (Bennett et al , 2016; Cullen Dunn and Kaliszewska, 2023; Donini and Maxwell, 2013), better alignment with local needs (Kuipers et al , 2019), frontline experience and knowledge locally (Norton and Gibson, 2019) and resiliency (Cullen Dunn and Kaliszewska, 2023). Nevertheless, informal, nonaffiliated humanitarian operations that are well-intended can lead to issues in the delivery of humanitarian aid, such as inappropriate last-mile distribution and wasted resources (Hosseini et al , 2023), volunteer burnout, low financial resources and inexperience in fundraising (Stoddard et al , 2022).…”

Frictions of implementing EU humanitarian aid in Greece (2016–2019)—the Emergency Support Instrument and its practical ramifications

“…One main reason for the failure of localization processes is the standardized operational culture in "Aidland", in which the inclusion of the context-i.e., the local socioeconomic, political, and cultural structures-is often ignored, even though this is repeatedly demanded in current debates on localization and decolonization (Dany 2014;Hindmann and Fechter 2011;Schuller 2016). Another related problem is who is subsumed under the notion of "local" and thus fulfills the necessary (formal) requirements to continue the established projects in the interests of the donor (Kuipers et al 2020;Roepstorff 2019;Titeca and de Herdt 2011).…”