Where is the evidence on localisation of humanitarian aid? A new interactive map of country-specific research

70 studies. 37 countries.

Localisation of humanitarian aid has been one of the most prominent themes in humanitarian policy since 2016. It will likely remain so, as the discussions are already underway on how the Grand Bargain will evolve beyond 2026.

Over the past decade, there has been a substantial body of work on localisation, including its implementation, progress, politics, and barriers. But that literature is dispersed across academic, policy, and operational sources and is not always easy to navigate by country.

This map began with a simple question: what does the country-specific evidence on localisation actually look like? Its purpose is to make existing country-specific research on localisation easier to find, view, and use.

The map covers 70 studies across 37 countries, drawing on academic, policy and operational research published between 2006 and 2026. Clicking on a country opens the list of publications currently included in the dataset.

[embed]

What the map shows

The darker-shaded countries are those for which more studies are currently included in the dataset. In the current version, Ukraine, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and South Sudan stand out. Other countries have fewer entries, and some are not yet represented.

The map shows the studies currently identified and included in this dataset. It does not, by itself, explain why some contexts appear more heavily represented than others, nor does it support strong conclusions about where localisation is more or less advanced in practice.

Limitations

This is a first version of a living resource, and two limitations are worth noting.

First, the absence of shading for a country does not necessarily mean the absence of relevant research, debate, or practice. It may reflect the current limits of the dataset and the stage this mapping work has reached so far.

Second, the dataset focuses deliberately on country-specific studies. The rich body of comparative, global, and conceptual literature on localisation sits outside that scope and is therefore not represented here.

If you work on localisation in a context not yet covered, or know of studies I have missed, I would welcome suggestions. The map will be updated as the dataset develops.

For the conceptual framing behind localisation as a reform agenda, and why distinguishing it from locally led action matters, see my recent Humanitarian Practice Network article, *Beyond definitional ambiguity: locally led action as baseline, localisation as reform*.