World Bank Calls for Flexible Service Delivery as Conflict Deepens Across 26 Fragile Nations

The World Bank has urged governments and development partners to adopt flexible, conflict-sensitive service delivery strategies for 26 countries facing prolonged conflict, emphasizing locally tailored solutions over standardized development models. Its new framework highlights rivalry, fragmentation and scarcity as the biggest barriers to public services, while calling for stronger institutions, better donor coordination and responsible private-sector participation to build long-term resilience.

The World Bank Group (WBG) has called for a major rethink in how governments and development agencies deliver essential public services in countries affected by prolonged conflict and violence, arguing that traditional development models often fail in environments where institutions have been weakened by years of insecurity and political instability. In its latest operational note, the Bank says countries facing long-running crises need flexible, locally tailored approaches rather than one-size-fits-all solutions. The guidance draws on the World Bank's Service Delivery in Protracted Conflict and Violence (PCV) Research Program and identifies 26 countries that meet its definition of PCV based on Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) violence data and the presence of Humanitarian Response Plans. The report is aimed at helping policymakers, development partners and private-sector stakeholders improve service delivery while balancing immediate humanitarian needs with long-term institutional recovery.

Three challenges driving service delivery failures

The report finds that service delivery in conflict-affected countries is shaped by three persistent challenges: rivalry, fragmentation and scarcity. Rivalry arises when governments, armed groups, political factions or other actors compete for control and legitimacy through public services such as healthcare, education, water and social protection. Instead of serving citizens equally, these services often become political tools, affecting who receives assistance and who is left behind.

Fragmentation creates another layer of complexity. Multiple providers, including governments, NGOs, humanitarian agencies, faith-based organizations, community groups and private companies, frequently operate side by side with overlapping responsibilities and limited coordination. While this may help maintain services in the short term, it often weakens accountability, creates duplication, and delays long-term institution-building.

Scarcity further limits progress. Years of conflict reduce government revenues, damage infrastructure, disrupt supply chains and drive away skilled workers. Shortages of teachers, healthcare professionals, engineers, equipment, and financing have become routine, while inflation, insecurity, and market disruptions make service delivery even more difficult. The World Bank notes that scarcity is not always caused by economic conditions alone but is sometimes driven by political exclusion, restricted access or deliberate disruption.

A practical roadmap for governments and development partners

To address these challenges, the World Bank proposes a three-step framework that begins with understanding local conditions before designing projects. Instead of relying only on national statistics, governments and development partners are encouraged to assess local conflict patterns, territorial control, institutional capacity, social trust and political dynamics. Community feedback and local knowledge should complement official data to provide a more accurate picture of conditions on the ground.

The second step is to define realistic development goals based on the country's situation. The report argues that in highly fragile settings, success may simply mean preventing essential services from collapsing rather than rapidly expanding coverage or improving quality. It identifies three key objectives that should guide all interventions: effectiveness, do no harm, and potential to last.

Effectiveness focuses on maintaining basic services during crises, restoring damaged infrastructure and gradually expanding access as conditions improve. The "do no harm" principle emphasizes protecting beneficiaries, avoiding political capture of services, reducing exclusion and ensuring that aid does not worsen local tensions. The third objective encourages governments and donors to strengthen national institutions, promote local ownership and build systems capable of functioning independently over time rather than relying indefinitely on external support.

Why the findings matter for policy and development financing

For governments, the report highlights the need to move beyond uniform national planning and adopt flexible policies that reflect local realities. Different regions within the same country may require different delivery models depending on security conditions, governance capacity and institutional strength. Better coordination between central governments, local authorities and humanitarian organizations is also essential to avoid duplication and improve public accountability.

For international development partners, the report reinforces the importance of combining humanitarian assistance with long-term development planning. Instead of creating separate systems, donors are encouraged to align investments with national priorities wherever possible, strengthen local institutions and regularly reassess projects as conflict conditions evolve. Shared information platforms, coordinated financing and stronger collaboration among aid agencies could improve efficiency while reducing operational risks.

The guidance also encourages greater investment in institutional resilience. Rather than focusing only on rebuilding physical infrastructure, governments and donors should support planning systems, budgeting, procurement, monitoring and community participation, ensuring that public institutions can continue functioning even during periods of instability.

Private sector has opportunities, but risks remain high

The report also identifies opportunities for private-sector participation in conflict-affected countries. Businesses involved in logistics, healthcare, education, construction, digital technology, telecommunications, renewable energy and infrastructure rehabilitation can help maintain essential services where government capacity is limited. Domestic companies and community-based enterprises, in particular, can play an important role in strengthening local supply chains and supporting economic recovery.

However, the World Bank cautions that operating in fragile environments carries significant risks. Businesses may face disrupted supply chains, inflation, delayed government payments, weak regulatory systems, security concerns and political interference. Companies are therefore encouraged to work closely with governments, development partners and local communities while maintaining transparent business practices and supporting institutional capacity rather than creating parallel systems.

Looking ahead, the World Bank concludes that rebuilding public services in conflict-affected countries requires continuous adaptation rather than fixed project designs. Development programs should include contingency plans, regular reviews of changing political and security conditions, and clear strategies for managing trade-offs between speed, effectiveness and long-term sustainability. By combining conflict-sensitive planning with stronger institutions, coordinated financing and greater local ownership, governments, development agencies and private investors can improve service delivery while laying the foundation for more resilient and inclusive development in some of the world's most fragile economies.