International development work is increasingly shaped by pressure on large Global North–based NGOs to localise their operations and decision-making. However, localisation is not simply a technical process of shifting responsibilities or adapting programmes to local contexts. It also exposes deeper organisational contradictions around power, identity, and coherence that can slow or distort change if left unaddressed.
A long-term study of the German NGO Viva con Agua (VCA) traces how these challenges unfolded over 15 years as the organisation expanded from Hamburg to Uganda. Drawing on extensive interviews, observations, and documents, the research shows that localisation required VCA not only to rethink its activities and administrative practices, but also to confront fundamental questions about who the organisation is, what it stands for, and how its core values translate across contexts.
VCA’s roots in Hamburg’s activist and creative culture initially helped it connect with partners in Uganda, where shared values around inclusiveness and civic engagement supported early collaboration. Yet cultural alignment alone proved insufficient, as some technical solutions and programme designs failed to match local social norms and realities. These early misalignments revealed the limits of transferring approaches without deeper contextual understanding.
In response, VCA developed locally resonant, participatory initiatives that improved engagement and knowledge sharing within communities. While these efforts increased impact, they also intensified internal tensions about decision-making authority, autonomy of local teams, and the boundaries of organisational identity. The organisation faced overlapping pressures to scale globally while adapting locally, and to evolve its identity without losing continuity.
The study highlights how these tensions formed an interconnected dynamic rather than isolated problems, meaning that progress in one area often sharpened challenges in another. To move forward, VCA gradually stretched its organisational identity by integrating Ugandan staff into strategic roles, supporting locally driven initiatives, and allowing new expressions of its core values to emerge. At the same time, it increasingly contextualised its programmes by redesigning activities to align with local knowledge, incentives, and social practices.
Everyday changes in working routines, communication, and field practices further reinforced this shift, fostering more horizontal relationships and trust between teams in Germany and Uganda. The formal registration of the Ugandan chapter marked a significant step toward decentralised decision-making, while ongoing dialogue helped maintain shared values across the organisation.
Overall, VCA’s experience illustrates that localisation in development work cannot be separated from organisational identity work. Successfully adapting to local contexts requires NGOs to actively manage internal contradictions and continuously renegotiate who they are as organisations. Rather than offering a universal model, the case provides broader insights into how development actors can navigate complexity, decentralise responsibly, and evolve without losing coherence.
