Article: Lessons From Yemen’s Nexus Approach

Reframing Due Diligence Through Local Leadership: Lessons from Yemen’s Nexus Approach

In complex and conflict-affected contexts such as Yemen, due diligence is both essential and deeply contested. While it is designed to ensure accountability, transparency, and responsible use of funds, in practice it often becomes a rigid, compliance-heavy process that places disproportionate burdens on local actors. For national organizations working on the frontlines, due diligence can unintentionally reinforce power imbalances, limit operational flexibility, and undermine the very localisation commitments that the international system seeks to advance.

The experience of the Abs Development Organization for Woman and Child (ADO), alongside the Yemen Nexus Initiative, offers a practical perspective on how due diligence can be reimagined—not as a gatekeeping tool, but as a foundation for equitable, trust-based partnerships.

The challenge: compliance in a complex reality

Yemen presents one of the most challenging operational environments globally: Organizations must navigate fragmented authorities, economic collapse, banking restrictions, and heightened community vulnerabilities—all while delivering life-saving assistance. In this context, standardised due diligence approaches—often designed for stable environments—can fall short.

Local organizations are frequently required to meet extensive compliance requirements without being given corresponding decision-making power, adequate overhead coverage, or flexibility to adapt to rapidly changing conditions. In some cases, due diligence processes focus more on risk transfer than risk sharing, shifting the burden of financial, operational, and reputational risk almost entirely onto local partners.

This creates a fundamental tension: how can local actors remain compliant while also being responsive, adaptive, and community-driven?

A shift towards partnership-based due diligence

Through its programming and advocacy, ADO has sought to bridge this gap by promoting a more balanced and context-sensitive approach. Working across humanitarian, development, and peacebuilding interventions, ADO has engaged with multiple international partners and donors to advocate for due diligence models that reflect operational realities.

A key lesson is that due diligence should not be treated as a one-time assessment or a static checklist. Instead, it should be understood as a continuous, relational process—one that evolves alongside the partnership. This includes recognising the institutional capacity of local organizations, investing in systems strengthening, and allowing space for dialogue when challenges arise.

For example, in contexts where procurement markets are limited or heavily constrained, strict interpretations of competitive tendering may not always be feasible or appropriate. Similarly, delays in financial transfers due to banking restrictions can create significant risks with suppliers and communities—issues that cannot be addressed through compliance measures alone. In such cases, flexibility, communication, and shared problem-solving become critical.

The role of the Due Diligence CoP

Participation in the ICVA hosted Due Diligence Community of Practice (CoP) has been instrumental in advancing this thinking. The CoP provides a rare and valuable space where practitioners—both international and local—can openly discuss real operational dilemmas, exchange experiences, and reflect on how due diligence frameworks function in practice.

For ADO, the CoP has contributed in three key ways:

First, it has enabled us to learn from other contexts, highlighting that many of the challenges faced in Yemen are not unique, but part of broader systemic issues. Second, it has provided us with access to tools and approaches that support more adaptive and risk-informed programming. Third, and perhaps most importantly, it has created a platform to elevate local perspectives and influence ongoing discussions around due diligence reform.

Being part of the CoP has reinforced the importance of moving beyond compliance as an end in itself, towards due diligence as a means to strengthen partnerships and improve outcomes for communities.

Key learning: from risk transfer to risk sharing

One of the most critical insights from this experience is the need to shift from risk transfer to risk sharing. Effective due diligence should recognise that risk is inherent in humanitarian and development work—particularly in fragile contexts—and that managing this risk requires collaboration, not unilateral control.

This includes:

• Establishing open and non-punitive communication channels where challenges can be raised early
• Ensuring that local partners are involved in decision-making processes, not only implementation
• Providing adequate and predictable funding, including coverage for core operational costs
• Adapting compliance requirements to context, rather than applying universal standards rigidly

At the same time, local organizations also have a responsibility to strengthen internal systems, uphold accountability standards, and engage transparently with partners and communities.

What works—and what still needs to change

Encouragingly, there are examples of partnerships where due diligence has been applied in a more flexible and principled manner, leading to better outcomes and stronger trust. These experiences demonstrate that change is possible when there is mutual respect and a willingness to adapt.

However, significant challenges remain. Power imbalances between international and local actors continue to shape how due diligence is applied. Inconsistent donor requirements, short-term funding cycles, and limited recognition of local leadership all contribute to a system that often prioritises control over impact.

Looking forward

Reframing due diligence is not about lowering standards—it is about making them more relevant, fair, and effective. For donors, INGOs, and practitioners, this means recognising that localisation cannot be achieved without rethinking how risk, accountability, and partnership are defined and operationalised.

The experience from Yemen shows that when local actors are trusted, supported, and meaningfully engaged, they are not only capable of meeting due diligence requirements—they are essential to delivering sustainable, context-driven solutions.

Due diligence, when done right, should enable this—not stand in its way.