GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»GSDRC Publications»Remote management of projects in fragile states

Remote management of projects in fragile states

Helpdesk Report
  • Siân Herbert
April 2013

Question

Provide examples of successful remote management of projects in fragile state settings.

Summary

This report examines examples of the use of remote management of projects in fragile and conflict affected states (FCAS). Remotely-managed projects are the primary mode of practice for many development actors in countries where security risks are high.

  • The use of remote management in development cooperation has increased significantly in recent years, with projects in many locations including: Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Syria, Angola, Sri Lanka, Uganda, Chechnya, and Pakistan;
  • Remote management is generally considered a temporary measure which should be used only as a last resort;
  • However, as security risks have remained high in certain countries, remote management has become a standard and semi-permanent approach;
  • There are different forms and degrees of remote management of projects which entail different configurations of decision making and implementation;
  • Key factors that can foster success in remote management projects include: acceptance of activities by local communities; effective staff recruitment, training and retention; flexibility in programming and budgeting; proximity to beneficiaries; visibility; mobility; and effective preparation for fast changing environments;
  • The majority of the literature reviewed expressed serious reservations about the remote management approach, supporting the overarching principle that this is an approach which should be temporary and a last choice resort;
  • Some literature recognises the benefits of a remote management approach in terms of training local staff, improving the understanding of local contexts and needs, and improving local accountability.

file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • DFID

Related Content

Doing research in fragile contexts
Literature Review
2019
Social Safety Nets in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States
Helpdesk Report
2019
Approaches to remote monitoring in fragile states
Helpdesk Report
2017
Organised crime, violence and development
Topic Guide
2016

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2025; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2025; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2025

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".