The CoP on Inclusive Communication started in April 2022 and ended in January 2026. During this time, the community achieved a great deal. Together with its members, the CoP organised a wide range of learning sessions exploring what inclusive communication means in practice within development cooperation. These exchanges resulted in three Future Briefs on Communication in Development Cooperation. Alongside this, a smaller working group developed ten guiding principles for inclusive communication, as well as a shared glossary — practical tools designed to support organisations in reflecting on and improving their communication practices.
Case Study: Musicians Without Borders
A concrete example of how these tools have been applied in practice was shared by Wendy Hassler-Forest, Program Manager Western Balkans at Musicians Without Borders. Founded in 1999, Musicians Without Borders is a compact international organisation that uses music as a tool for peacebuilding and social change. Its mission is to harness the power of music to bridge divides, connect communities, and support healing in contexts affected by conflict and injustice. The organisation envisions a world in which music brings people together across divisions and strengthens those striving for a more just future.
Their way of working is firmly rooted in partnership and inclusion. Projects are initiated only at the invitation of local partners, co-created from the outset, and based on equal cooperation and two-way knowledge exchange. They prioritise creating inclusive, safe, and welcoming environments, while also strengthening partners’ capacities. Working primarily in post-conflict settings and with communities experiencing forced migration, the organisation’s demand-driven approach embeds the principles of inclusive communication deeply in its daily practice. It was therefore a telling moment when the finance officer introduced the inclusive communication guide internally, using it as a catalyst to rethink and adjust organisational communication.
Implementing Inclusive Communication in Practice
Wendy reflected on how inclusive communication has been implemented within her organisation. She explained that the whole organisation wanted to be more inclusive. As they are a small organisation, they picked up where they could. In this way, they have reviewed almost all communications over the past 2 years. There was no project formed, but when it came time to write a proposal or an annual report, they got together and discussed the different options. One example is the frequent use of the term “resilience”. You want people to become more resilient, but sometimes that backfires, leaving them overlooked. While often, people have no choice but to be resilient. She advocated for more descriptive language, such as “people fleeing war or persecution,” to better reflect lived realities. Annette Scarpitta echoed this concern, noting that an emphasis on resilience can sometimes obscure the structural challenges communities face.
Wendy explained that the glossary was very useful because it explained the difficulties with some words quite well and, at the same time, offered various alternatives. Although she also admitted that there is an ongoing challenge of balancing respectful, inclusive language with donors’ expectations and the conventions of external communication. This tension was also evident in participant evaluations, where careful wording is essential to avoid disempowering narratives while still gathering meaningful feedback.
Language, Power, and Development Communication
These reflections sparked discussion among participants about the complexities of applying inclusive communication principles externally, especially when addressing sensitive topics or navigating established donor terminology. The importance of conscious language choices — and the impact they can have — emerged as a recurring theme.
Several participants shared their experiences with language used in development contexts. One highlighted the need to move away from terms such as “charity” in public communications, as these can unintentionally reinforce stereotypes about local communities. One participant emphasised music as a universal language, while also pointing to the necessity of adapting words and framing to different cultural contexts. Someone else added that grant applications often require a delicate balance between using donor language and avoiding jargon that obscures meaning or agency.
Other examples
Participants are also using the guide in their organisations. One member has integrated inclusive communication in their programme, fostering greater awareness and reflection among participants. acknowledged the challenge of maintaining language consistency across regions, while also recognising how much awareness has grown over time. Another member explained that their website is going to be renewed and that inclusive communications is being used for the texts.
The exchange underscored a shared understanding: inclusive communication is not a fixed endpoint, but an ongoing practice of listening, learning, and adjusting — one that will continue beyond the formal closure of the Community of Practice.
How do we go further?
Although the Learning & Innovation Programme ends and, with that, the Inclusive Communications CoP, Partos still believes in its importance. We will still be focused on Inclusive Communications, just not in the form of a Community in Practice.
We ensure that the resources from Inclusive Communication remain accessible after the closure of the Communities of Practice. Also, we are working on a clearer, more structured landing page to improve access to these resources.
If you want more information or have anything to share, please feel free!
