News & Events Event Reports

Unleashing the Potential of Local Governments in Coastal West Africa in a Whole-of-Society Approach to Rehabilitation and Reintegration

Publication Date:

14/04/2026

Content Type:

Event Reports

Share:

Tags:

AccraCoastal West AfricaRehabilitation and Reintegration

Summary

On 14 – 15 April 2026, the Strong Cities Network organised a regional workshop on Unleashing the Potential of Local Governments in Coastal West Africa in a Whole-of-Society Approach to Rehabilitation and Reintegration in Accra (Ghana). Supported by the Federal Foreign Office of Germany, as part of a new Strong Cities project on Strengthening the Role of Municipalities in Rehabilitation and Reintegration (R&R) Efforts Across Coastal West Africa, the two-day event brought together over 50 participants, including mayors, municipal officials, national government representatives, international partners and civil society organisations (CSOs), from across the region and beyond (Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Germany, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, and Senegal). The workshop provided a platform to explore how local governments across coastal West Africa are responding to evolving threats and strengthening prevention, reintegration and resilience in increasingly complex environments.

In plenary and breakout discussions, participants shared experiences from across the region, reflecting on emerging challenges linked to displacement, cross-border dynamics and socio-economic pressures. Discussions focused on how R&R can be strengthened at the local level, how municipalities can be better integrated into national frameworks and how to link R&R with broader prevention and resilience-building efforts. Across sessions, participants highlighted the importance of community trust, coordination across actors and sustained investment in local systems.

Opening remarks emphasised both preparedness and the central role of local actors. General Thimothy Ba-Taa-Banah, Director at the National Counter Terrorism Fusion Centre, Ghana, stressed that his country is proactively preparing for potential spillover effects of terrorism in the region, underlining that “the issue that brought us together here is of great importance.” He highlighted the importance of strengthening the social contract between citizens and the state, noting that early warning and prevention depend on trust and communication at the local level. In this context, he emphasised the critical role of mayors, describing them as “presidents at the grassroots level” who coordinate local responses and inform national action.

H.E. Frederik Landshöft, Ambassador of Germany to Ghana, reinforced the importance of acting early while coastal countries remain in a prevention phase. Drawing on his engagement with municipalities across Ghana, he emphasised that “real life happens locally” and that cities are where resilience is built or undermined. He noted that while pressures linked to violent extremism are increasing, there remains an opportunity to invest in prevention, highlighting that long-term stability depends not only on security responses but on successful reintegration and strong community cohesion.

These perspectives were echoed by Mutaru Mumuni, Executive Director of the West Africa Centre for Countering Extremism (WACCE), who highlighted the growing pressure on coastal states and the importance of strengthening locally led prevention approaches. Zouhair Racheha, Director of MENA and West Africa, Strong Cities Network, introduced the project and shared early findings of the mapping the network conducted on the role of cities in R&R in West Africa. He further emphasised the need to institutionalise the role of municipalities within national frameworks for R&R, ensuring that local government officials and mayors are equipped to respond to evolving risks.

Key Findings

• Across discussions, R&R was consistently framed as a process shaped by local dynamics, including community perceptions, levels of trust and the capacity of local institutions to respond. While national and international frameworks provide important guidance, their effectiveness depends on how they are translated into practice at the community level.

• Participants also noted wide variation in R&R approaches across the region. In some contexts, more structured processes are taking shape; in others, responses remain less formalised or are implemented on an ad hoc basis. Across all contexts, community reintegration was often identified as the least developed stage, with gaps in psychosocial and other long-term support, follow-up and monitoring after individuals return.

• A further cross-cutting finding was the importance of linking reintegration with broader efforts to strengthen prevention and resilience. Discussions pointed to the role of livelihood support, social cohesion initiatives and local governance strengthening in addressing underlying drivers of vulnerability and supporting more sustainable reintegration outcomes.

Threats & Key Challenges

Regional Dynamics Across Coastal West Africa are Becoming More Complex and Interconnected, Placing New Pressures on Local Authorities

Participants described a shifting and increasingly interconnected risk environment across coastal West Africa. Drawing on inputs from a representative of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), discussions highlighted how cross-border organised crime, climate-related pressures and intercommunal tensions, among other challenges, are converging and reshaping local dynamics, particularly in border areas.

This evolving landscape was also discussed in relation to broader regional dynamics. Several speakers, including in opening remarks, referred to instability in the Sahel and the possibility of spillover effects into coastal states, underscoring the importance of early preparedness and localised responses while space for prevention remains open.

This dynamic was also reflected in discussions from northern border districts in Ghana, where local authorities described increasing pressures linked to cross-border movement and changing community dynamics. Participants from across the region, including Côte d’Ivoire and Benin, further highlighted the diversity of local experiences and approaches in responding to these evolving risks.

These pressures are not occurring in isolation. Mobility across porous borders, driven by trade, displacement and in some cases illicit activity, is interacting with local grievances, including competition over land and natural resources. Participants referred to tensions involving settled and mobile populations, including pressures linked to cattle movement and access to farmland, as well as broader communal tensions that can be sharpened by insecurity and weak state presence. UNDP’s contribution also pointed to the way these pressures intersect with weak service provision, limited state reach in remote areas and changing local political leadership, all of which affect how municipalities respond.

Municipal representatives also pointed to the growing impact of displacement, with communities increasingly absorbing populations arriving from neighbouring countries affected by instability. These movements are often integrated directly into host communities rather than managed through camp-based arrangements, creating both opportunities for inclusion and challenges related to service delivery, social cohesion and perceptions of security. This dynamic was echoed in experiences shared from northern Ghana and from north-east Nigeria, where practitioners reflected on the need to support both returnees and host communities in order to reduce tension and manage expectations.

At the same time, discussions highlighted emerging pressures in urban areas, where rapid population growth, youth unemployment, limited economic opportunities, petty crime, gang activity and social fragmentation are contributing to feelings of marginalisation and exclusion. In Wa Municipality (Ghana), for example, these pressures were described not as separate from security concerns but as part of the wider local context shaping vulnerability and resilience. While not always directly linked to violent extremism, participants discussed these dynamics as factors that can deepen local fragility over time if not addressed.

Across discussions, there was a shared recognition that many municipalities in coastal West Africa are encountering these dynamics relatively recently and are still in the process of adapting. As a result, local authorities are often responding to complex and evolving risks while operating within existing institutional frameworks that were not designed to address these challenges.

Key Themes

1. While Frameworks for Rehabilitation & Reintegration Exist in Some Contexts, Their Implementation Remains Uneven & Often Fragmented

Against this evolving backdrop, participants reflected on how existing R&R frameworks are being applied across the region. A range of national strategies, legal provisions and programme-based interventions are in place, informed by broader global and regional approaches to disarmament, demobilisation, reintegration (DDR) and prevention of violent extremism (PVE). Inputs from partners, including UNDP and the African Union Counter Terrorism Center (AUCTC), highlighted that these frameworks promote integrated approaches combining security, development and social reintegration components. However, discussions made clear that implementation remains uneven and is often shaped by context-specific factors.

In some settings, more structured systems are emerging. Nigeria was repeatedly referenced in this regard. Contributions from UNODC and from IOM pointed to defined pathways that include screening, categorisation, prosecution, rehabilitation and reintegration, supported through mechanisms such as Joint Investigation Centres, Operation Safe Corridor and community-based reintegration support. These examples illustrated how more systematised approaches can support coordination and clarity across actors.

In other contexts, however, participants described a more uneven picture. In Ghana, for instance, discussions highlighted that although several legal and policy instruments are relevant to R&R, there is no single unified framework specifically governing rehabilitation and reintegration. Instead, responses draw on a patchwork of constitutional, security, local governance and disaster-related provisions, alongside project-based interventions and informal practice. This was discussed not only as a technical gap, but as part of a broader challenge of moving from prevention-oriented systems towards more explicit preparedness, including those involving municipalities, for reintegration scenarios.

The workshop also surfaced important examples of how frameworks are being interpreted and adapted in different contexts. Contributions from Benin described a more explicit legal role for mayors and local authorities in security governance, including through local security planning, local committees and decentralised responsibilities linked to monitoring and reintegration. At the same time, discussions highlighted that even where such mandates exist, implementation at the municipal level remains uneven, with gaps in resources, clarity of roles and operational capacity limiting the ability of local governments to fully deliver on these responsibilities.

Presentations from Morocco pointed to another model, in which rehabilitation and reintegration efforts have been developed and institutionalised through the Mohammed VI Foundation for the Reintegration of Detainees, including psychosocial support, family engagement, vocational support and tailored work with women and children linked to detainees or former detainees. These approaches echo lessons highlighted in previous Strong Cities engagements, including the Tangier workshop on R&R, which underscored the importance of linking structured national systems with locally grounded implementation. Together, these examples reinforced that while more structured approaches do exist, they differ significantly in form, scope and institutional ownership, and continue to face challenges in translating national frameworks into effective local delivery.

This variation in implementation was repeatedly identified as a defining feature of R&R efforts across the region. Reintegration was frequently described as the least developed stage of the process. While screening, detention, prosecution or rehabilitation may be more clearly defined in some contexts, longer-term support, follow-up, community acceptance and monitoring after return remain significantly weaker. Discussions suggested that this is where national systems most often lose coherence and where local actors are left to absorb the consequences. While civil society organisations are often recognised and engaged as key actors in supporting reintegration at the community level, the role of municipal governments remains less clearly defined and less consistently institutionalised within these processes. As a result, local authorities are frequently expected to manage the practical realities of reintegration without corresponding mandates, resources or integration into formal systems.

2. Local Governments are Already at the Frontline of R&R but Remain Insufficiently Empowered and Capacitated to Fulfil This Role Effectively

Within these uneven systems, the often-untapped role of local governments emerged as a central theme across discussions. Municipalities are often the first point of interaction for individuals returning to communities and can play a key role in managing service delivery, coordinating responses and addressing local tensions. As participants noted, local authorities are critical not only because they are physically closest to communities, but because they are often the institutions expected to translate national policy into local practice.

Yet a persistent gap was identified between this responsibility and the level of authority, resourcing and institutional support available to local governments. Mutaru Mumuni (WACCE) highlighted that many countries in the region are decentralised in structure but remain centralised in practice, with key decisions still taken from the centre and local actors left to manage implementation, but without having had a voice in the development of the relevant policies. This point was reinforced across several sessions, including by municipal participants who described how local authorities are expected to respond to complex challenges without dedicated financing, specialised tools or clear referral pathways.

Research presented by the AUCTC added another important dimension to this discussion. In baseline work conducted in border communities in Ghana, Benin, Côte d’Ivoire and Burkina Faso, local government institutions were not identified as among the most trusted actors by communities in the event of a violent extremism or terrorism-related security issue. Religious institutions and traditional leaders ranked higher, and local authorities were comparatively less visible in this space. Participants interpreted this not only as a trust issue, but also as evidence that the role of local government in this field remains insufficiently understood and insufficiently institutionalised.

At the same time, the workshop offered several examples of municipalities beginning to define a clearer role for themselves. In Wa Municipality (Ghana), Alhaji Nurah Issah Danwanna, Metropolitan Chief Executive, described efforts to develop a more integrated local approach through peace committees, early warning mechanisms, engagement with traditional authorities and youth-focused initiatives addressing vulnerability, unemployment and local tensions, reflecting an approach that connects reintegration with broader local governance and prevention efforts. The presentation also highlighted the role of the Wa Metropolitan Security Council (MUSEC) as a coordination platform linking security, prevention and community-level response. Similarly, discussions from Benin pointed to formal legal responsibilities assigned to mayors and local officials in relation to community safety and post-prison release monitoring, suggesting that where mandates are clearer, local leadership can be more effectively activated.

Taken together, these discussions pointed not only to the importance of local governments, but also to the risk of overburdening them rhetorically without matching that recognition with real institutional support. Participants repeatedly returned to the need to embed municipalities more clearly within national R&R systems, with clearer roles, stronger coordination channels and greater access to resources.

3. Reintegration Outcomes are Shaped at the Community Level, Where Trust, Perceptions & Social Cohesion Determine Success

Discussions further highlighted that the effectiveness of local government responses is closely tied to dynamics at the community level. Across the workshop, reintegration was described less as an administrative process than as a social one, shaped by trust, stigma, memory of violence, and the ability of communities to absorb and accept returning individuals. Participants also noted that reintegration does not always take place in individuals’ communities of origin, with some returnees relocating to new areas, which can introduce additional challenges related to acceptance, identity and social cohesion.

Municipal representatives noted that fear, misinformation and prior experiences of insecurity can significantly affect community attitudes. In some cases, communities fear infiltration; in others, social stigma is attached not only to returnees themselves but also to their families. This came through clearly in reflections from both municipal leaders and practitioners working on rehabilitation and reintegration. Some city officials identified stigma as one of the most persistent barriers to local reintegration efforts. They shared that overcoming this stigma requires sustained dialogue and community sensitisation rather than one-off interventions.

Discussions also highlighted the importance of how reintegration processes are perceived within communities. Reflections from Nigeria, including in relation to Operation Safe Corridor, pointed to concerns that some victims and community members may perceive support provided to former associates of extremist groups as unfair, particularly in contexts where affected communities themselves continue to face significant hardship and limited support. Participants noted that these perceptions can undermine trust, fuel resentment and complicate reintegration efforts if not addressed through transparent communication, community engagement and broader support to affected populations.

Experiences from north-east Nigeria helped deepen this point. IOM’s presentations on the Borno context highlighted that reintegration efforts are more effective when they support both returnees and host communities, combining psychosocial support, livelihoods assistance and community engagement. Lessons shared from implementation emphasised that joint support can reduce tensions, strengthen social cohesion and improve the chances of acceptance.

The role of traditional and religious leaders was also emphasised, with participants noting their importance in shaping local perceptions and supporting acceptance. Findings referenced during the workshop, including from the AUCTC, reinforced that these actors often hold higher levels of trust within communities and can play a critical role in mediating reintegration processes.

4. Linking Reintegration With Broader Prevention & Resilience Efforts is Critical to Addressing Underlying Drivers of Vulnerability

Participants emphasised that R&R should not be treated in isolation. Instead, discussions pointed to the importance of linking R&R with broader prevention and resilience-building efforts, recognising that reintegration outcomes are shaped by the wider social, economic and governance environment.

UNDP’s contribution was particularly clear on this point, highlighting work in Ghana that connects prevention to livelihoods, social cohesion, local governance, citizen–security dialogue and early warning. This framing resonated with municipal officials, who repeatedly pointed to youth exclusion, weak economic prospects and social tensions as part of the wider environment within which reintegration takes place.

Some representatives of local authorities described how prevention and reintegration are approached in an integrated way, including through youth-focused initiatives, community engagement, and efforts to strengthen trust between communities and local institutions. These experiences underscored the importance of embedding reintegration within broader local governance and development priorities.

This also came through in examples from Nigeria. IOM’s lessons learned stressed the importance of integrated and participatory approaches, combining MHPSS, livelihoods and social activities, while also building local systems and referral pathways that can outlast individual projects.

Contributions also pointed to the role of community-based funding mechanisms, including those supported by the Global Community Engagement and Resilience Fund (GCERF), in enabling locally led initiatives focused on prevention, social cohesion and reintegration support. These mechanisms, which have at times overlooked the role of local governments, were seen as important in supporting flexible, context-specific responses that are rooted in local realities.

Across discussions, there was a shared recognition that linking reintegration to broader prevention efforts is not only beneficial but necessary to address underlying drivers of vulnerability and to ensure that reintegration contributes to longer-term resilience.

5. Linking Reintegration With Broader Prevention & Resilience Efforts is Critical to Addressing Underlying Drivers of Vulnerability

Participants highlighted the importance of improving coordination across actors and levels of governance. Fragmentation, limited information-sharing and weak monitoring systems were identified as key challenges affecting the coherence and effectiveness of rehabilitation and reintegration efforts.

These challenges were visible across different contexts. In more structured systems such as Nigeria, participants noted that coordination across justice, security, rehabilitation and community-based actors remains complex, particularly in ensuring continuity beyond formal programme stages. While institutional mechanisms exist, maintaining alignment across actors and over time was identified as an ongoing challenge. In other contexts, the challenge was more basic: they often lacked access to the information, tools or coordination structures needed to play an effective role, limiting their ability to respond to reintegration processes in a consistent and informed manner.

Reflections from a representative of the City of Berlin (Germany), which leads a whole-of-city R&R coordination platform, added a comparative perspective, reinforcing the importance of sustained coordination and dedicated roles to connect different institutions over time. Meanwhile, IOM presentations highlighted the importance of data systems, feedback loops and real-time follow-up in adapting programmes and understanding what happens after return. Across discussions, it became clear that better coordination is not simply an administrative improvement; it is central to whether reintegration efforts are credible, continuous and capable of responding to local realities.

Next Steps

Building on the discussions in Accra, participants identified a set of priorities to strengthen rehabilitation and reintegration efforts across coastal West Africa. These reflect shared challenges across municipalities and will inform the development of a Strong Cities Network Action Agenda for local governments on R&R for Coastal West Africa.

• Strengthen the positioning of local governments within national R&R systems
  Discussions consistently pointed to a disconnect between the role municipalities should play and the level of authority and support they receive. Addressing this will require clearer mandates, stronger alignment between national frameworks and local implementation, targeted capacity building for municipal actors, and more structured mechanisms for coordination and input from local authorities into policy processes.
• Address gaps in reintegration as the least developed stage of R&R
  Across contexts, reintegration remains the weakest component of existing approaches, particularly beyond initial return. Strengthening this stage will require more sustained support at community level, clearer referral pathways and improved monitoring and follow-up mechanisms to ensure continuity over time. This will also depend on more effectively leveraging the role of local governments, which are best placed to support community-level processes, coordinate actors and sustain reintegration efforts over the longer term.
• Prioritise community-based approaches that build trust and enable acceptance
  Reintegration outcomes depend on how communities perceive and receive returning individuals. This points to the importance of sustained engagement, including with traditional and religious leaders, and approaches that support both returnees and host communities in order to reduce stigma and strengthen social cohesion. Local governments play a critical role in convening these processes, facilitating dialogue and ensuring that community-based efforts are connected to broader local governance and service delivery systems.
• Embed R&R within broader prevention and resilience-building efforts
  Participants highlighted that reintegration cannot be addressed in isolation from the wider conditions shaping vulnerability. Strengthening linkages with livelihoods, youth engagement, and local governance initiatives will be critical to ensuring that R&R contributes to longer-term stability.
• Improve coordination, information-sharing and learning across systems
  Fragmentation across actors and levels of governance continues to limit effectiveness. Strengthening coordination mechanisms, improving data systems and supporting ongoing peer exchange between municipalities will be key to ensuring more coherent and adaptive responses.

Next Steps

The discussions in Accra highlighted that coastal West Africa remains at an important juncture. While pressures linked to regional instability are increasing, participants emphasised that there is still scope for early, locally grounded action to shape how these dynamics unfold.

Across the workshop, there was a clear recognition that R&R is not only a technical or national security issue, but a reflection of how states and communities manage trust, inclusion and social cohesion. Municipalities are where these dynamics are most visible, and where responses are ultimately tested in practice. Realising this potential, however, will require sustained investment in the capacity of local governments, alongside clearer roles and stronger integration within national systems.

Finally, the workshop underscored the importance of continued regional exchange, enabling municipalities to share experiences and learn from different approaches to reintegration and prevention. Strengthening these connections will be key to building more adaptive and locally grounded responses across the region.

Additional Resources

• Strong Cities Mapping on the Overlooked Role of African Cities in Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism, Strong Cities Network (2022)
• Strengthening the role of cities in Coastal West Africa to address hate, extremism and polarisation through enhanced National-Local Cooperation, Strong Cities Network (October 2023)
• Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Returnees from Syria and Iraq: Ten Lessons from the Berlin Experience for Local Governments, Strong Cities Network (Updated October 2024) 
• Unleashing the Potential of Moroccan Cities in Supporting a Whole-of-Society Approach to Rehabilitation and Reintegration, Strong Cities Network (June 2025)
• National-Local Cooperation Toolkit, Global Counterterrorism Forum, Strong Cities Network (September 2023)
• Countering Hate Speech in Times of Crisis: Considerations for Mayors and Local Governments, Strong Cities Network (December 2024)
• Managing Migration: City-Led Approaches for Being an Inclusive, Welcoming and Socially-Cohesive City, Strong Cities Network (December 2024)
• City-Led Prevention of Hate, Extremism and Polarisation: Leveraging Local Youth Councils, Strong Cities Network (December 2024)
• City-Led Youth Engagement in Addressing Hate, Extremism and Polarisation: Ten Recommendations for Cities, Strong Cities Network (December 2024)
• Creating Safe, Cohesive and Resilient Cities through Urban Planning & Design: Ten Considerations for Mayors and Local Governments, Strong Cities Network (December 2024)
• National-Local Cooperation: A Pillar of City-Led Prevention of Hate, Extremism and Polarisation – A Practice Update, Strong Cities Network (December 2024)
• Global Crises, Local Impacts Initiative, Strong Cities Network (2024)
• A Guide for Cities: Preventing Hate, Extremism & Polarisation, Strong Cities Network (Updated April 2024)
• A Guide for Mayors: Preventing and Responding to Hate, Extremism & Polarisation, Strong Cities Network (Updated March 2025)
• A Guide for City-Led Response, Strong Cities Network (May 2024)
• Constructing UNESCO Media and Information Literacy Cities, Operational Guidelines (May 2024)
• City Spotlights Library, Strong Cities Network

Partners and Donors

Contact Information

For more information on this event and the Strong Cities MENA Regional Hub, please contact [email protected]

News & EVENTS

Stay up to date with recent news, articles and event reports

News & Events

Looking for something in our Resource Hub?

Or explore all resources

Nominated for Best Animated Short at Cannes

Watch now

Join US

Looking to become a Strong City?

Get in touch