International IWRM Conference Donor Coordination Session 2-3 Roundtables 2 & 3

International IWRM Conference Donor Coordination Session 2-3Roundtables 2 & 3 As reported by Dann Sklarew 8 December 2004

Table 2: Ownership of Coordination • National IWRM plans must be owned by countries, even when not direct owners or managers of funds. • Need to harmonize IWRM philosophies and approaches of donors to clarify and simplify donors’ IWRM expectations from countries • In countries with non-representative or corrupt governance issues, donors may need to work through NGOs, where goal should be to work as close to the people as possible.

Table 3: Do we know the mechanisms for support from donors? ¥€$

Table 3: Mechanisms • Need common mechanism across partners • Need to customize approach to account for cultural understanding and sensitivity • Need continuity among donors over time, • e.g., when handoff required from those supporting planning to those supporting implementation.

Table 3: Mechanisms (cont’d) • Consider National-level facilitator (though not always available), e.g., GWP (or Indonesian or Senegalese WP) • Consider sharing information starting at projects’ conceptual phase (I.e. before implementation) • Consider highly inclusive Annual IWRM Reviews at national scale (e.g., Uganda) • Consider country-tailored communication vs. cooperation vs. coordination in context of IWDRM:. Integrated Water Donor Resources Management

International IWRM Conference Donor Coordination Session 2-3 Roundtables 2 & 3