An Agenda for a Dignified and Sustainable Rohingya Refugee Response in Bangladesh identify their organisational strengths, gaps and needs.281 This demonstrates the need to establish more equitable partnerships that are ‘as local as possible, as international as necessary’. 282 While progress on localisation is difficult to measure, the JRP 2020 included a few proxy indicators to track advances in localisation such as “Number of national non-governmental organisations active in the Sector (receiving funds, regularly participating in meetings, reporting to 4W)” and “Number of Government and National NGO staff engaged in capacity sharing”283 Similarly, as explained in preceding sections, the role and capacity of Rohingya refugees as key stakeholders in the response remains under-explored. The humanitarian community’s engagement with Rohingya CSOs remains limited in the current climate. Rohingya CSOs are not able to register, receive direct funds or distribute aid. Humanitarian agencies conduct many consultations with Rohingya, but refugees are not systematically made aware of how their feedback has informed or reformed humanitarian programming. They are also not able to participate in humanitarian policy and decision-making fora. 5.2.2.3 Promoting a whole-of-society approach: Complementarity of humanitarian action. The complex humanitarian arena of the Rohingya refugee response in Cox’s Bazar requires a broader understanding of humanitarian capacity and pursuing localisation objectives beyond the binaries of local and international. The needs of affected communities will be effectively addressed within a sustainable policy framework only if diverse capacities are harnessed and optimised. Complementarity may be defined as an outcome where all capacities at all levels – local, national, regional, international – are harnessed and combined in such a way to support the best humanitarian outcomes for affected communities.284 The Rohingya refugee response is situated within a restrictive policy environment amidst the interplay of a number of state and non-state stakeholders with different roles and agendas. Whether a whole-of-society approach is effectively implemented in humanitarian action will be measured by the extent to which these actors interact and collaborate with each other. The Government’s contradictory policy approach towards Rohingya, which on one hand, seeks to shelter and extend humanitarian assistance, while on the other, discourages any planning to secure their access to rights, by pushing for early repatriation, impacts prospects for coordination and complementarity.285 Despite valid criticisms from local actors regarding inequitable partnerships with international agencies, it is important to recognise the centrality of partnerships in delivering the Rohingya refugee response. The implementation of the JRP is predicated upon the partnership between UN agencies, international and Bangladeshi NGOs. The Bangladesh experience shows that all actors will need to 281 Wake and Bryant, supra n. 174. Ibid, p.22 283 JRP 2020, supra n. 64, p. 38 284 Veronique Barbelet, Rethinking capacity and complementarity for a more local humanitarian action, HPG, October 2019, p.5, available at http://www.w.cib-uclg.org/sites/default/files/odi__rethinking_capacity_and_complementarity_for_a_more_local_humanitarian_action_0.pdf 285 Wake and Bryant, supra n. 174, p. 23. 282 Act for Peace / May 2021 61