https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0349-4443
![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Local ownership is one of the popular paradigms of Western development aid. It involves giving more effective control of the design and implementation of development aid to local actors in aid-receiving countries, including governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and local communities. This article contrasts the understanding of local ownership as a top-down process triggered by donors, with an alternative, bottom-up ownership, which emerges spontaneously on the ground. By looking at the case of a local NGO in post-Soviet Tajikistan, the article analyses practices which reveal how the NGO actively takes ownership of development aid through everyday work. This includes fundraising, structuring relations with other organizations competing for donor funding, selecting calls for proposals from NGOs and writing grant applications. Each of these activities involves negotiations of the goals and scope of development work, against parameters imposed by donors. By means of example, the article questions the application of the local ownership paradigm in development work.
Acknowledgements
The author is thankful to two anonymous reviewers, Rick Fawn, Philipp Lottholz, Malika Bahovadinova and Isaac Scarborough for their comments on earlier drafts of this article, as well as to the NGO which supported this collaborative research.
Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Interviews
1. A former employee of Change, 10 August 2016
2. A foreign intern at Change, 10 August 2016
3. A foreign intern at Change, 15 August 2016
4. A former intern at Change, 16 August 2016
5. An employee of Change, 27 October 2016 and 3 March 2017
6. A former employee of Change, 8 November 2016 and 2 February 2017
7. An employee of Change, 9 November 2016 and 3 April 2017
8. An employee of Change, 10 November 2016 and 3 March 2017
9. A former employee of Change, 17 November 2016
10. An employee of Change, 7 December 2016
11. An employee of Change, 9 December 2016
12. An employee of Change, 5 January 2016
13. A former employee of Change, 12 December 2016
14. A member of the Tajik Association of NGOs, 16 and 22 February 2017
15. An employee of Change, 5 January 2017
16. A former employee of Change, 9 February 2017
ORCID
Karolina Kluczewska http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0349-4443
Notes
1. The name of the Tajik NGO and all names of employees were changed.
2. See Heathershaw (Citation2009) and Kluczewska (Citation2018) for a more detailed description of different phases of development aid in Tajikistan.
3. For an overview of traditional, communal forms of civil society (such as neighbouring socio-territorial units mahalla, teahouses or communal work hashar) see Freizer (Citation2005). During the Soviet times, Tajikistan was exposed to state-led civil society, such as the youth organisation Komsomol. Other, more recent forms of civil society, which remain unnoticed by donors, include for example charity practices (kori khar), often related to the post-Soviet Islamic revival in Tajikistan.
4. For an analysis of project implementation at Tajik NGOs and localisation of donors’ ideas on the ground see Kluczewska (Citation2019).
5. Endorsements to the Paris Declaration and the Accra Agenda for Action (AAA). Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness/countriesterritoriesandendorsementstotheparisdeclarationandaaa.htm
6. EU – Tajikistan Relations. Factsheets. 3 October. Retrieved from https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage_en/4078/EU-Tajikistan%20relations
7. Our Work. In-depth. UNDP Tajikistan. Retrieved from http://www.tj.undp.org/content/tajikistan/en/home/ourwork/democraticgovernance/in_depth/
8. Tajikistan – Country Profile. USAID. Retrieved from https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1861/Tajikistan%20Country%20Profile%202016.pdf
9. As a result of Soviet drawing of borders in the region in the early twentieth century, post-Soviet Central Asian states offer a mosaic of different ethno-regional groups living within the borders of single states. According to the 2010 Census, 84% of the population in Tajikistan are ethnic Tajiks, 12% Uzbek, are Kyrgyz and 0.5% are Russians. It is very common that people are bilingual or trilingual.