Is Localisation Just Another Form of Tokenism?

By Cara-Marie Findlay, Principal

Is Localisation Just Another Form of Tokenism?

Localisation seems to be one of the latest buzzwords in the field of Development. And as is the case with many other terms—for example, “participatory”, and even “Development” itself—there is no standard definition.

In order to properly define the ideal of localisation, one should consider when and how localisation made it to the international Development agenda.

USAID Administrator, Samantha Power, was sworn into office as the 19th Administrator of USAID on May 3, 2021. On 4th of November 2021, Administrator Power gave a speech at George Town University, in which she said:

“…if we truly want to make aid inclusive, local voices need to be at the center of everything we do.”

However, Administrator Power’s comment is not the first time, a prominent figure in the field has spoken on this need.

At the 2016 World Humanitarian Summit, then UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon stated that Development, and humanitarian action on a whole should be:

“as local as possible, [and] as international as necessary.”

Ideally, the localisation of Development would look like a shift in funding, power, and responsibilities of Development efforts towards more “grassroots” and other community-based organisations (CBOs). Thus, community members would be the decision-makers of the programs and services that support the needs they have identified; and they would be consulted at every stage of the project, from design through implementation.

Unfortunately, simply talking about the need for localisation is not enough to make it a reality.

Numerous practitioners in the Global South have spoken about the need for more equitable treatment within the Development and aid industries for years (the decolonisation of Development), before localisation ever made it to international agendas.

But when does the “good idea” of localisation become just another form of tokenism (a symbolic gesture meant more to deflect criticism than to actually accomplish a goal)?

Maha Shuayb makes a good case that the localisation agenda could simply be “a convenient response to increasing calls for the [Development and] aid sector to decolonise.”

Unless we decolonise Development and deal with its extractive practices and its colonial heritage, the ideal of localisation will never be realised.

Local Community Media and New Media Technologies

BY ZIPPORAH ORBISI, CAPM

QUALITY ENGINEER AND CONSULTANT

Local Community Media and New Media Technologies

Since the turn of the millennium, technology has steadily been ushering in a new world order. One where distance is of no consequence and seconds are being commodified as soon as we wake up.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has found its way into our everyday lives, shaping our perspectives  through monitoring what we view, look up, and read online.  It creeps into our homes disguised as a form of mass media that feels very personal and even community-spirited. 

The world wide web articles and information shaping our lives through AI could be written and informed by people thousands of miles away, with no real connection to the media being portrayed, or its effects on your household. And sometimes the human connection is several times removed, because it is AI data mining software created by people that is actually feeding data to another other AI software that is doing the writing on a particular subject that comes to the top of your social media feed or search results.  

Although the effects of this mass media are physically harmless, its long-term effects could prove quite crippling. (Here’s one example). When a person is being fed an angle of  “knowledge” without having all the information or being given all sides of the arguments or truths, it can sway, lead, and separate the masses. The power of such media in the hands (or in the case of AI, algorithms) of distant and often faceless hosts is quite a scary reality.

Conversely, community media—media that is owned and controlled by the community in response to local needs (Langlois & Dubois, 2005, p.7)—helps to create true awareness, togetherness, and communal citizenship on a micro level. 

When you listen to your local radio, the voices that call out your 5 o’clock rush hour traffic information feel like those of your distant family. There is a certain level of  comfort and trust that comes from the voices of the newscasters that you hear on a daily basis, or the authors that you read daily in your local Sentinel. 

Community media is a platform that comes with a responsibility to families, local businesses, and friends. Many of our community media hosts can even be seen  in-person weekly visiting the local Farmers Market or shopping for home supplies at a neighborhood home improvement store, without your local paparazzi (which in today's world, even a 10-year-old with a smartphone qualifies as). 

Nostalgically speaking, I remember my daily excitement to see chief meteorologist Tom Terry come on and forecast my week with a smile. 

Those days have gone for many children due to new media technologies. We have AI home assistants to tell us the weather before we are even fully out of bed now, and phones that usher our way through traffic. 

The convenience of new media technologies pulls at the heartstrings and wallets of humanity.  What we once thought of as distant, futuristic AI technologies is today actually deeply ingrained  into the lives of people living in the Global North, all using the tactic of convenience. 

This tactic is giving way to the new world of mass media, one that doesn't even rely on 24-hour coverage from cable media giants like BBC, CNN, or MSNBC. 

Community media is suffering at the hands of this new technology, and becoming a dying fashion of sorts. 

Although community-based media pales in comparison to new media technologies in terms of reach, because community media  caters to a smaller audience, the platform that it offers  many marginalized and developing communities has a major impact. Community-based media gives way to grassroots start-ups, shines a light on local social and political heroes, and helps to facilitate youth empowerment and education for sustainable growth.

In the field of Development sustainability is key. We cannot truly progress if the goals are not able to be met and amplified by the community itself. Particularly in marginalized and underserved communities, the use of community-based media is a crucial way to advocate for change and engage those who are affected the most.

The Loaded Language of Development

Our Principal Consultant was featured on the She Table Talk with Sarah Oseki podcast. You can listen to the episode below. If you enjoy the episode please leave a review of the podcast here.

By Cara-Marie Findlay

FHG Founder and Principal Consultant

The Loaded Language of Development

Certain words elicit specific emotional responses. For example, a word like “failure” can conjure up feelings of fear or extreme disappointment. Words and phrases that include this additional emotional dimension are often referred to as “loaded language.” 

Confusion—an inability to clearly understand and/or to act upon that understanding or intelligence—is also an emotional response. 

One reason people around the world feel disempowered (deprived of opportunities to exert influence over their life and circumstances) is because many of the subjects related to their lives leave them feeling confused. 

In addition, many (if not most) of the systems and institutions that “run the world” and are engaged in Development activities, seem to be hidden away from the eyes (and access) of everyday individuals. These same institutions and systems are often cloaked in language that isn’t easily decoded.  

© BRUCIE ROSCH

On top of that, many of the words and phrases that make up the specialized language of Development are loaded not only with an emotional dimension, but also inherent bias. 

As Robtel Neajai Pailey states, “Even the geospatial terms we employ [in international development] reek of [what she calls] ‘the white gaze,’” (Pailey, 2020, p.734).

For example, referring to nations, regions or societies as:

Developed vs. Developing

First World vs. Third World 

High income vs. Low income 

Industrial vs. Agrarian

Modern vs. Traditional 

Not only do these opposites “suggest both a hierarchy and a value judgment [i.e. which qualities are esteemed and which are belittled]” (McEwan, 2018, p. 17) they are also misleading. 

For example, to say some nations are developed and others are developing, suggests that developed nations “have arrived.” However, even today, whole communities and ethnic groups in so-called developed nations are still being marginalized. 

The truth is that every nation is developing on some level. 

In other instances, how a term is used today gives no indication of its history.

For example, the terms First World and Third World date back to the time of the Cold World. First World was used to refer to those countries who were on the side of the US and its allies, Second World referred to those countries on the side of the Soviet and its allies, and Third World referred to those countries that sought a third way to develop their societies and economies separate from the United States and Russia. Of course, that is not what people mean when they use the term Third World today, which is often linked to images of poverty.

Furthermore using terms like Modern vs. Traditional implies that tradition cannot be modern, or that to be modern one must do away with tradition altogether. 

And to say High Income vs Low Income, assumes that there are not high income families and individuals in countries with lower Gross Domestic Product (GDP) or low income families and individuals in countries with higher Gross Domestic Product.

Moreover, economic indicators alone cannot capture the complex relationships between the key issues of human development, including: life expectancy, quality education, access to opportunities, social justice, and levels of happiness and contentment. 

The United States Nations’ Human Development Index, the Center for Partnership Studies’ Social Wealth Index, the concept of Embodied Economics, and the World Happiness Report are all alternate tools that were created to better capture a composite of those complex relationships related to development.

At Findlay House Global, we are decoding the loaded language of Development to ensure that the activities, discussions, and planning related to development (at all levels—local, state, national, regional and global) is accessible to everyone, especially those who have been traditionally marginalized. Everyone should be aware of “the sociocultural conditions that shape one’s life,” especially those conditions that lead to disempowerment; as well as “the possibility of their transformation” (Svensson, 2018, p. 11).

Here are few of our posts related to unpacking the loaded language of Development.

RESOURCES

• Here’s Why and How Findlay House Global uses the terms Global North and Global South

• What are remittances?

• What is Communicating for Social Change?

REFERENCES

McEwan, C. (2018). Postcolonialism, Decoloniality and Development (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Pailey, R.N. (2020). De‐centring the ‘White Gaze’ of Development. Development and Change, 51: 729-745.

Svensson J. (2018) Empowerment as Development: An Outline of an Analytical Concept for the Study of ICTs in the Global South. In: Servaes J. (eds) Handbook of Communication for Development and Social Change. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7035-8_43-1