By Mr. Mandeep S. Tiwana, Secretary General, CIVICUS, Mr. Luca De Fraia, Deputy Secretary-General, ActionAid Italy and Ms. Nurgul Dzhanaeva, President of the Forum of Women’s NGOs of Kyrgyzstan
Country ownership is needed for sustainable development. Yet the civic space is closing.
At a time when the world faces multiple intersecting crises such as violent conflict, rising inequality, climate vulnerability and reversals of hard-won gains on gender justice and human rights, effective development co-operation has never been more important. Closing civic space and declining trust in institutions are accentuating these challenges.
The latest monitoring results from the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation’s (GPEDC) Making Development Co-operation More Effective 2026 Progress Report highlight that much more must be done to ensure that civil society organisations are genuinely empowered as development partners, including through enabling civic space conditions and meaningful opportunities to participate in decision-making.
These concerns are well captured in the Sustainable Development Goals Report 2026, which highlights the increasingly deadly risks faced by human rights defenders: between 2015 and 2024, at least 5,307 defenders, journalists and trade unionists were killed. According to the CIVICUS Monitor, only 76 countries and territories have enabling or somewhat enabling civic space conditions.
As governments and development partners develop their own approaches to implementing a whole-of-society approach, involving CSOs in consultations and informing them of decisions is not enough; they must be meaningfully engaged throughout the decision-making process.
Evidence of inclusion is growing, but partnership remains elusive.
The GPEDC report provides evidence of progress. Across participating countries, governments are engaging a broad range of stakeholders in the formulation of national development plans. More than 90 per cent reported involving CSOs, the private sector, parliaments, subnational governments and development partners in shaping development priorities. This signals growing recognition that sustainable development cannot be delivered by national governments alone.
There are also examples of countries moving beyond consultation in development planning towards more participatory approaches, where stakeholders help co-create development priorities rather than simply react to pre-determined agendas. In countries facing fragility, governments reported involving CSOs in assessments that help shape national priorities, acknowledging the unique knowledge and community connections that civil society brings. Such efforts demonstrate that inclusive development is not only possible—it is essential.
These findings point out that participation principles enshrined in Agenda 2030 and the GPEDC's commitments to country and local ownership and inclusive partnerships are on the implementation track. They also tell that many governments understand that development strategies are stronger when informed by the voices of citizens and communities. However, the GPEDC report also reveals a persistent gap between participation on paper and participation in reality.
While several country governments report high levels of engagement, more than 70 per cent of CSOs surveyed indicated that consultations were of limited quality. Too often, civil society is invited into discussions after key decisions have already been made. Meetings may be held, comments may be collected, but meaningful influence over policy outcomes remains uncertain.
The lesson is clear: consultation alone is not enough. Sustainable development results require genuine partnership.
This means engaging CSOs from the earliest stages of policy design, creating structured and predictable dialogue mechanisms, and ensuring that feedback is visibly reflected in final decisions. It means treating civil society not as an implementation contractor or a stakeholder to be managed, but as a development actor in its own right.
The missing ingredient: an enabling environment for civil society
The report also highlights another uncomfortable reality: perceptions of the enabling environment differ sharply between governments, development partners and CSOs themselves. While many governments assess the environment for civil society positively, CSOs report significant concerns regarding legal protections and opportunities for meaningful dialogue.
Particularly worrying is the finding that legal protections for organisations working with vulnerable and marginalised communities are considered effective in only a quarter of participating countries and insufficient in nearly half.
Development partners have a critical role to play here. The report shows that CSOs expect stronger and more consistent advocacy from development partners for the space in which they operate. Too often, support for civil society remains confined to project funding, while broader challenges affecting civic space go unaddressed.
Funding itself remains a major concern. More than 80 per cent of CSOs reported that development partner funding either primarily reflects donor priorities or remains insufficiently aligned with civil society's own agendas. Localisation and locally led development have become defining themes of international development discourse, but the monitoring results suggest that practice has not yet caught up with ambition.
If development partners are serious about supporting locally led development, they must move beyond short-term project financing towards more core funding that provides more predictable, flexible and long-term support. Funding should strengthen local organisations' ability to pursue their own priorities, build institutional resilience and invest in accountability to the communities they serve.
Leaving no one behind means reaching those furthest behind
Perhaps the most important message emerging from the report concerns the commitment to leave no one behind.
While governments and development partners are prioritizing sustainable development for their population, some of the most marginalised and harder-to-reach groups remain largely invisible within development planning and policy frameworks. Indigenous peoples, ethnic minorities, internally displaced persons, refugees, stateless populations and LGBTIQ+ communities receive significantly less attention.
These are often the very groups facing the greatest barriers to participation and representation. If development co-operation is to fulfil its promise, these communities must move from the margins to the centre of development decision-making.
Civil society organisations are uniquely positioned to help make this happen. They work directly with communities that are often excluded from formal political processes. They provide services, generate evidence, defend rights and amplify voices that might otherwise go unheard. Yet they can only play this role effectively if they are adequately supported, funded and protected.
The report's findings on data reinforce this point. Only 12 per cent of countries reported high availability of the disaggregated data needed to track progress for those most at risk of being left behind. Data on migration status, ethnicity and Indigenous identity remain particularly limited. Without better data, invisible populations remain hidden. Governments, development partners and civil society must therefore work together to strengthen national statistical systems, improve data collection and ensure that communities themselves participate in defining what progress looks like.
The GPEDC monitoring results remind us that effective development co-operation is ultimately about relationships and meaningful partnerships. It is about trust, mutual accountability and shared ownership. The encouraging levels of stakeholder engagement recorded in this report show that the foundations exist. The challenge now is to build on those foundations and move from consultation to co-creation, from participation to partnership, and from inclusion as a principle to inclusion as a lived reality.
Civil society stands ready to play its part. The question is whether governments and development partners are prepared to fully embrace civil society as an equal partner in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.
The answer to that question will determine whether we truly succeed in leaving no one behind.
