alessandracasazza posted this 02 March 2011
The Learning Network on Capacity Development (LenCD) - From Kigali to Busan
Between the 10th and the 12th of February 2011, more than 60 capacity development practitioners and partners representing organizations from the North and the South, met in Kigali, Rwanda, for the LenCD Partners’ meeting. Amongst the key objectives of the meeting was the definition of the strategic direction of the network and agreement on a work-plan to bring forward the network’s key initiatives. (For more detailed information on the event, see: http://sites.google.com/site/lencdorg/kigali-assembly)
As capacity development is emerging as a major political and technical theme in the High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (HLF4) - which will take place in Busan, Korea, between the 29th of November and 1st of December 2011 - most discussions around different LenCD work streams converged towards the need and strategic interest to focus the network’s energies on the Busan event. Most importantly, Kigali was critical in building momentum amongst partners for promoting continued support to an ongoing process, aimed at moving the capacity development (CD) debate into a Southern space. Central to this process, which has been led and supported by the OECD/DAC, in partnership with the CD Alliance (a Southern-led partnership forum to discuss capacity priorities and challenges as articulated in the AAA) is a series of perspective papers, which have reviewed progress made by donors and partner countries on specific capacity development commitments made in Paris and in Accra (for more information on this, see: https://sites.google.com/site/lencdorg/aid-effectiveness).
The picture that is emerging from this review process indicates that progress made so far on the CD agenda are still slow and the impact of CD initiatives still unsatisfactory. Building on this review and its evidence, a two-day “Workshop on Capacity Development: From Concepts to Implementation”, organised in Cairo (28 and 29 March 2011) by the CD Alliance - with support from the OECD and JICA - will discuss how to translate the lessons and good practice on capacity development into action, and will agree on key messages and actionable recommendations for Busan. The Cairo workshop is critical as it creates a space for Southern partners to voice their perspectives on how to accelerate CD progress in areas that are considered high priority, and to bring pragmatic and actionable recommendations to the HLF4. As articulated in the AAA, country systems represent one of such priority areas.
Some key messages emerging from the review process-perspective papers
Here below are some messages that have been distilled by the review of CD specific commitments made in Paris and Accra, which are relevant to this discussion form. In this context country systems are considered a ‘sector’ writ large.
The starting point of this review is the implicit recognition given in the Paris Declaration (PD) and Accra Agenda for Action (AAA) to the need of integrating CD principles and priorities into national, sub-national, sector and thematic strategies, and of encouraging the development and use of country systems (i.e. procurement, financial management, results, statistics, and information systems).
Sectors as strategic entry points for CD interventions - From a review of CD practice at sector level it has emerged that progress in integrating CD at the sector level are still slow. Nevertheless, the proliferation of sectoral plans and strategies offers opportunities for integrating CD initiatives and critical entry points for CD strategies. A critical message here is that CD strategies have to be included within sectors’ plans at a very early stage, and form integral part of sectoral strategies and plans (i.e. not just a mere identification/check-list of TC interventions or CD activities).
Multi-stakeholders approach – More often than not, when referring to sectors/country systems, the tendency is that of limiting the analysis to those government actors and agencies that, within a government structure, form a sector. However, it is critical to recognise that there is a multitude of other actors, government and non-government ones, that make up a sector and that contribute to deliver on sectors’ agendas and plans. CD strategies at the sectoral/system level need to be inclusive and consider all actors within a specific sector.
Systemic approach to CD strategies - The ‘convenience’ of approaching CD at the sectoral level (i.e. sectors are primary entry points for CD strategies; they offer a contained and defined space for CD interventions without the fragmentations typical of the project approach) needs to be balanced by the consideration that sectors exists within a system of other public sector institutions. CD strategies at sector level and in support of country systems need to consider the interconnectedness between agencies and sectors and the impact that the performance of central agencies has on sectors and national systems (i.e. decentralization processes, budgeting, planning, human resource management…).
A shift from CD for AE to AE for CD – the implementation of the AE agenda and principles promotes sector capacity and the use of country systems. Increased use of country systems, in turns, promotes greater ownership and accountability, and stimulates demand for system performance. The AE agenda and the focus on sectors/systems help to move away from a projectised approach to development cooperation and CD, and avoid the distortionary effects of fragmented aid (i.e. a more projectised approach to development cooperation); they promote the use of SWAPS and coordination of CD interventions.
The above mentioned messages have implications for partner countries and donors, which are embodied in a series of practical recommendations for changing the CD practice on the ground. (For more detailed information, please go to: https://sites.google.com/site/lencdorg/aid-effectiveness).
From discussions on the above– and other – messages in Kigali, the following considerations emerged:
While a sector focus is good, there are risks; i) failing to take account of / or influence broader systemic constraints ii) creating silos that discourage learning across sectors.
Despite commitment to working through country systems and to improving them, they are still not being used as a matter of default.
Capacity assessments provide an entry point and basis for the formulation of any CD strategy. To avoid a sector silo, a capacity assessment needs to take account of cross-cutting public administration functions (PFM, strategic planning, managing for results) that run across sectors as well as key systemic issues such as leadership and management.
Capacity assessment should be multi-stakeholder and should be used as a tool for periodic monitoring and review of progress including effectiveness of CD support.
