Just finished facilitating a panel for #HCBerlin with these incredibly smart women

@HebaJournalist
@anitakatt
@Lili_Assaba

We talked about, among others,

-how far we've come
-origins and resistance to 'decolonising'
-practical changes to take https://twitter.com/L_Zechner/status/1320779923947139073

There was a point about the need to re-imagine the future of aid workers and NGOs.

The in the room: many people will have to find other careers!

But another way is for INGOs to be intermediaries that channel resources to local organisations/movements.

Localisation came up.

INGOs must devolve decision-making, transfer flexible funding, and plan exit.

Localisation often means "as local as possible, as int'l as necessary" - but does this reconcile with decolonisation?

I argue there is a difference epistemically.

I think localisation accepts continued existence of international aid-as-we-know-it.

Decolonisation, for me, goes beyond this:

it's what @Lili_Assaba calls as the "undoing of harm" caused by past actions of those in power!

I also think there is a difference in terms of timeframe:

Localisation is a laudable goal in the next 5, 10, 15 years.

True decolonisation, for me, is a longer outcome - perhaps beyond our lifetime - that cannot be mapped on a gantt chart.

Of course, as @HebaJournalist mentioned, we don't have to wait for a complete overhaul of the system to do something.

We can talk small steps towards it.

I believe this too!

But does decolonisation imply a total independence – a kind of "Brexit" – of the Global South from international aid+systems?

@anitakatt says no. She said there are forces that try to sever solidarity between North & South – decolonisation should not be part of that.

I whole-agree!

Aid-as-we-know-it needs to end.

But

I believe in our common humanity.
I believe in a borderless world.
I believe in our shared stewardship of this planet.

To decolonise means to re-imagine our relations equitably & in justice so we can collectively thrive.