From crisis to reform: Aid cuts, food insecurity, and the role of local actors in Kenya and South Sudan

Prioritise support to partnerships that place LNAs at the centre of leadership and decision-making. Engage international or national intermediary agencies only if they demonstrate strong, measurable commitments to equitable partnership principles.

This includes:

• LNA involvement in all stages of programme design and implementation.

• Regular partnership health assessments and 360-degree reviews involving donors, intermediaries and local partners.

• Fair and consistent overhead cost allocations to LNAs.

• Adopting ‘due diligence passporting’ to streamline local partner vetting processes.

• Adopting the ‘prime switch’ model, whereby international agencies develop clear roadmaps to transition grant and programme leadership to local partners—gradually shifting into technical advisory roles or fully exiting.

Globally, only 3% of humanitarian food assistance is allocated to agriculture, despite its central role in livelihoods and resilience for crisis-affected communities—particularly in contexts such as South Sudan and Kenya. In these settings, agriculture remains the primary source of income and food security for vulnerable populations.

To enhance the effectiveness of both development-oriented and emergency agricultural interventions, it is essential to adopt agroecology-based approaches. Agroecology prioritises locally led, context-specific methods that reduce dependency on imported agricultural inputs and humanitarian assistance. It promotes resilient, sustainable food production systems grounded in traditional knowledge and farmer-led innovation.

Critically, this requires establishing an enabling policy environment, including regulatory frameworks that recognise and support farmer-managed seed systems and agroecological transformation. Such an approach not only enhances local food sovereignty but also contributes to long-term recovery and the transition from humanitarian relief to sustainable development

As international coordination and assessment capacity declines, lessons from investments in LNAs co-leading clusters in South Sudan, and the Kenyan government’s capacity in early warning, social protection, and related systems, offer valuable entry points.

Aid flows remain misaligned with need. In South Sudan, per capita food sector humanitarian assistance declined from $143 in 2020 to $90 in 2023, despite a 20% increase in the number of people facing acute food insecurity (AFI). Over the same period, the severity of food insecurity, measured by the Food Insecurity Gap (FIG), rose from 23% to 29%. In Kenya, the number of people facing AFI nearly tripled between 2020 and 2023, and the FIG increased from 4% to 13%. Despite this, per capita spending fluctuated. In 2024, the severity of food insecurity remained significantly higher in South Sudan (FIG of 25%) than in Kenya (FIG of 4%). Yet both received equal per capita humanitarian food assistance of $100—highlighting the continued underfunding of South Sudan’s hunger response.

These trends underscore the urgent need for aid allocations to be guided by robust, context-specific crisis analyses, underpinned by strong data systems. However, recent funding cuts have weakened key initiatives such as Famine Early Warning Systems Network and LNA-led assessments. This calls for renewed efforts to strengthen complementarity and solidarity between international agencies and LNAs. International data systems must be restructured to improve efficiency, equity, and effectiveness by fostering partnerships with LNAs—recognising and strengthening their role in ensuring that aid decisions are grounded in locally informed, evidence-based assessments. In Kenya and South Sudan, LNAs are embedded in affected communities and are leading the delivery of life-saving assistance in remote, high-risk areas often beyond the reach of international actors. They should be prioritised in funding allocations. Longer-term investments are also needed to support communities in holding governments accountable for ensuring food and nutrition security, and to advocate for needs-based, predictable donor funding.

Follow the example of USAID by adopting formal funding targets to drive accountability and track progress on local leadership. These targets must apply to both direct and intermediary-managed funding channels and be backed by robust, transparent reporting systems that clearly track the flow of funds from donors through every intermediary to the final local and national actors.