Area Based Development in the SEE and CIS

1. Area Based Development in the SEE and CIS

2. 27 ABD programmes supported by UNDP • 48% conflict-related • 30% poverty related • Components: • Basic infrastructure & services – 100% • Local economic development – 74% • Community empowerment – 67% • Public administration reform – 63% • Social development & assistance – 44% • Conflict prevention & tolerance – 41% • Policy & institutional reform – 33% • 70% have 4 or more components (integrated)

3. Legitimacy Equalization Fairness and Equity Existing spending Commitments Adequacy, Stability and Predictability of LG Revenues Local Governance “Equip municipalities with the administrative capacity to perform their functions efficiently” “Fostering employment opportunities” Infrastructure Economic Development “Seeking capital accumulation.” “Seeking economic growth.” “Poverty is rather not technical nor economic but a Business Energy Environment & Finance Agriculture Forestry Road & Housing Development Health & Education Water & Sanitation social and political problem.” (Kanshik Basu, 1999) Gender Equity & Mainstreaming “Empowering women and marginalized people!” Civil Society and Citizen Participation “Mobilization!” A typical ABD in the SEE- CIS

4. Causes of conflicts • The “tyranny of the single cause” has been rejected • Conflict is multi-dimensional, multi-level and multi-stakeholder • Main factors of conflict: • Structural • Political • Economic/social • Cultural/perceptual • Environmental

5. Conflict characteristics/conditions

6. Nature & factors of conflict in ECIS • Globally No. of internal conflicts 3 times more than interstate wars (1950s - early 1990s) • In ECIS 32 armed conflicts between 1955 and 2004 (23 took place after 1990 and 11 in the WBs - most were local) • Factors of conflict in ECIS • Arbitrary drawing of borders • Federal states favoring an ethnic group • Use of ethnic identity for political mobilization • Triple transition: democratization, marketization & nation-state building leading to the creation of weak states with many conflict characteristics

7. ABD and conflict literature • ABD is well positioned to respond to the multi-dimensional nature of conflict • Its integrated character, its flexibility and long-term approach allow for addressing a whole range of issues in a holistic and effective way • ABD is particularly suited to do so at the sub-national level • It may only be partially suited to deal with structural, national and cross-border factors of conflict (further discussed below)

8. Key achievements of ABD programs in the region • Governance & political representation • Economic development • Improvement in public services • Reduction in inequalities • The how is more important than the what: • Inclusiveness, non-discrimination, participation, transparency & accountability • Single multi-donor programme was an example of donor coordination • Project presence catalyzed other initiatives (ensured continued focus on the regions)

9. Limitations of ABD • Internal contradictions in ABD • Necessity to make tradeoffs the nature and depth of which depends on the context • Integration vs. lack of integration (missing macro picture) • Local focus vs. lack of focus • Broad partnerships/regional focus vs. context-specific approach • Donor support vs. dependency

10. Integration vs. lack of integration • Integration potential under-utilized • Supra-national/national levels missing • Concentration on an area for reasons of manageability detracts attention from the broader context • Intervention often seen as a self-standing endeavor • Even at local level key conflict characteristics only partially addressed i.e. local economic development

11. Local focus vs. lack of focus • Local perspective is a factor of success • Inappropriately applied integrated approach • Attempt to deal with a broad range of issues superficially without a coherent strategy in mind to address key problems • Visibility trap: concentration on most visible and easy-to-implement activities • Need for a balance between visible actions and actions that contribute to systemic change

12. Regional vs. specific context focus • ABD a good platform for broad partnership and coordination among several donors, local authorities, NGOs, the private sector and central government • But the broad partnership is difficult to manage and there are several examples of poor coordination • The regional approach is commendable but it should maintain the local perspective (conflict and development characteristics differ among municipalities)

13. Donor support vs. dependency, I • Donor support necessary and beneficial but can lead to dependency on external support • Lack of a well thought-out strategic operational framework linked to national policy processes such as PAR & decentralization • An abrupt withdrawal of donors can contribute to escalation of conflict

14. Donor support vs. dependency, II • Donor involvement can reduce government commitment in the region, reduce the urgency of systemic change and substitute for inefficient government policies and insufficient budget support • Perception of preferential treatment of certain areas • Tendency to implement short-term interventions when long-term engagement is required

15. Conclusions • ABD is effective in addressing social, economic and governance related factors at local & regional levels • But the typical design of ABD does not include structural, national and cross-border factors of conflict • ABD therefore does not capture the conflict characteristics in their full complexity • ABD has the potential to more effectively address conflict and contribute to sustainable peace & development by striking a better balance between inclusiveness and manageability

16. Recommendations, I • ABD must move towards an even more integrated and multi-level approach • Interventions should be identified through developmental and conflict analysis and take place within a well coordinated strategic and operational framework • At local/regional level, the approach should be more integrative & respond to as many conflict factors as possible • National level factors should be also integrated to the extent possible • Cross-border or national factors which cannot be included in the initiative should be understood and taken into consideration as context characteristics at design stage

17. Recommendations, II • In order not to undermine manageability some of the conflict factors can be addressed through parallel but well coordinated activities • Some complex and politically sensitive cross-border and national level issues should be addressed through advocacy and policy advice • The recommended approach will require a much broader partnership supporting ONE strategy led by the legitimate political authorities and linking all activities and partners