Localisation Across the Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Whilst the relation between local and global levels has been a long-standing concern of humanitarian, development, and peace efforts, in recent years the term “localisation” has become a major issue in the humanitarian sector whilst peacebuilding scholarship has taken a “local turn.” This article analyses the concept of localisation across the three parts of the triple nexus—humanitarian, development, and peace. It traces the long-standing concern with the local in each of these domains, considering similarities and differences in their engagement with the local and counter-veiling trends towards universalisation, before proceeding to frame four challenges common to localisation across all forms of conflict response: defining the local, valuing local capacity, maintaining political will, and multi-scalar conflict response.

Related collections

Most cited references 88

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Saving liberal peacebuilding

ROLAND PARIS (2010)

0 comments Cited 82 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The international humanitarian system and the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunamis.

John Cosgrave, John Laird Telford (2007)

The December 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunamis were an exceptional event. So too was the scale of the response, particularly the level of international funding. Unprecedented donations meant that for once, an international emergency response was largely free of financial constraints. This removal of the funding constraint facilitated observation of the capacity and quality of international disaster aid. The Tsunami Evaluation Coalition conducted five independent thematic assessments in 2005-an impact study was planned, but never implemented. The five evaluations were supported by 44 sub-studies. Based on this work, this paper compares international disaster response objectives, principles and standards with actual performance. It reaches conclusions on four salient aspects: funding; capacity and quality; recovery; and ownership. It ends by proposing a fundamental reorientation of international disaster response approaches that would root them in concepts of sustainable disaster risk reduction and recovery, based on local and national ownership of these processes.