190 likes | 320 Views
Capacity Development. A framework for collective action. Recognition of a problem. Development community is spending at least $15 billion a year on CD Two big questions about this: Is it well spent? (Evidence says “ not always ” ) Can we do more/ more effectively? How do we scale up?.
E N D
Capacity Development A framework for collective action
Recognition of a problem • Development community is spending at least $15 billion a year on CD • Two big questions about this: • Is it well spent? (Evidence says “not always”) • Can we do more/ more effectively? How do we scale up?
The CD debate • What works? • How to measure results? • How to fund? • How to harmonize donor support? • How to prioritize, links to broader development goals? • How to sequence actions?
What works? • Driven by local demand, leadership, ownership and built on what exists • Monitored and followed by interested parties for as long as it takes • Integrated within other development objectives and programs • Focus on functional capabilities • Governance is a make or break issue
Lessons from Shanghai conference 2004 • Capacity is frequently bigger constraint than money in scaling up poverty reduction • Shortcuts to CD are rare. Typical timeframe is 10-20 years. Shortcutting requires simplified designs, decision-making processes • Shortcutting has operational implications • Strong preference for South-South learning; need to promote local "leadership" institutions • Rich body of evidence on approaches to scaling up -- cases should be exploited and applied
How to measure? • Two existing tools for country comparisons/ broad overviews • WBI Global Governance Indicators • CPIA • Specific indicators at the project level • Most focus on implementation rather than progress towards broader capacities • Need to develop tools to access capacity relative to specific goals, e.g., DAC public finance CD approach, which defines required capabilities
CPIA aims • Quality of policies and institutional framework: extent it supports sustainable growth, poverty reduction, and effective use of ODA • Policies and institutions versus outcomes: elements within country control, not actual outcomes (i.e., growth rates, which are not always under country’s control) • Policy actions and implementation: Actual policies, not promises or intentions • Weakness: fails to assess implementation capacity
Measuring and monitoring: ESW, TA and other products • QAG data • Project data: AISs, etc.
Institutional incentives • Using examples such as environmental mainstreams: how to make sure capacity is considered at every step of the way? • Giving value to contributions to capacity: in personnel evaluations (OPEs), career paths • Institutional structures that reflect capacity as both technical and cross cutting issue
How to harmonize? • Defining an agreed country-led definition of priorities--and a clear program of actions and instruments--will help clear up this problem
Elements of a more strategic approach • Differentiating among three levels of clients • Middle income countries • Low income countries • LICUS • Helping each group define differentiated instruments linked to broader development agenda
Capacity “at the core” of development processes • MICs: country systems, specific technical issues, MDG goals • PRS countries: specific actions linked to PRS priorities and results agenda • LICUS: opportunistic approaches focused on promoting reform/change agenda, leadership
For PRS: Programmatic Approaches • Define needs based on priorities • Define sequenced actions, inputs, timeline • Financing mechanism • What public policy levers can be deployed, links to broader development agenda • Integrating all this into PRS • A much sharper focus on “how to” beyond goals and financing
Way forward: a select group of countries • Action-oriented game plan • Business model • Put this forward to donors and clients