The Foreign Office of the UK said they would use local institutions and groups to send help as far away as possible. It’s not a new idea to try to focus on local charity work instead of getting help from around the world.
Before the civil war hit her home, Tsega Girma was a trader who sold things in her area. As a big act of duty to her people, she sold everything she owned to feed hungry kids in her area. After that, Tsega asked people who had left Tigray for money. During the worst parts of the war, this charity fed over 20,000 kids every day. The program still feeds about 5,000 kids every day, even after the war.
Tsega said, “This is emergency work,” and he added, “We’re just trying to keep them alive.” She spoke out about how the food is all bought locally and cooked by volunteers in an empty library.
A quarter of the money that the US Agency for International Development gets will come from “local partners,” and at least half of their projects will be run by local organizations.
Because of travel restrictions during COVID-19, aid groups turned to local partners more. This idea of localizing aid caught on quickly. “A few years ago, localization was a crazy idea,” said Amy Croome, who works as a policy advisor for NGOs. These days, everyone does it. According to a study, just over 2% of donor money goes to local groups. This shows how useful this could be.
The head of Shining Hope for Communities, Kennedy Odede, said that this method of aid still has a “colonial mindset.” Odede said, “They think that if they have enough money, they can just walk into a community and fix the problem. But that’s not how you make change.”
Now that there is more strife and climate change than ever before, there aren’t many places where money can be given or taken. A UN official in charge of relief work spoke out, saying, “International aid groups are competing with local NGOs at a time when they are short on money, so they are not likely to help them.” They do not wish to give up their money.