1 / 45

Day 1

Regional Meeting of RBEC Deputy Resident Representatives Istanbul, 15-18 December Summary points (draft). Day 1. Financial Crisis: Implications and Issues. Government or private sector as driving force (but how about non income dimensions during crisis?)

moanna
Télécharger la présentation

Day 1

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Regional Meeting of RBEC Deputy Resident Representatives Istanbul, 15-18 DecemberSummary points (draft)

  2. Day 1

  3. Financial Crisis: Implications and Issues • Government or private sector as driving force (but how about non income dimensions during crisis?) • Aid-coordination & Harmonization likely to become more fragmented in the future? • Impact on semi-closed economies – affected, through food prices, exports etc. • How will frozen conflicts be affected? • China and Central Asia: scope of impact now and in the future? • Bigger (and new) role of the state

  4. Financial Crisis: UNDP role • Home work to do: analysis of numbers and understanding of macro economic trends – Ben working on training for RBEC • Globally – Kemal is one of the prominent experts on this subject – can we use this better in our work? • Human development dimensions of the financial crises are our top concern. • Need to build up our capacity / expertise to respond to crisis implications (conflict, governance, vulnerable groups, etc.) • Support to new role of the state (mitigation in addition to regulation) • WB, IMF and UNDP relationship: new challenges and opportunities

  5. RM and Delivery: key regional issues • Delivery and RM figures: • Delivery growth slowing down: 2008 decline (in real terms). • Exchange rate fluctuations: changing impact on RM/delivery • XB income: on average 3.5, which is below corporate requirements • New HQ “tax” on income above 7% to cover corporate initiatives? • Quality vsQuantity: • Quality of procurement important for quality of the programme • Pragmatic approach needed to balance reality of the need for RM with small high impact projects • Need for better planning /budgeting and pipeline management as a repository of development ideas on which RM efforts should base themselves.

  6. RM and Delivery: key regional issues 2 • Donor relationships: • EC main donor - need to use the “EU expertise” in Brussels and NY • Need to increase government C/S, and voluntary contributions / GLOC, on which the Region not doing well • Private foundations as potential source of funding, e.g Bill Gates etc • RBEC new potential donors for global UNDP: Turkey, Russia • Delivering as one – important factor for many bi-lateral donors

  7. RM /Delivery: lessons from the field • Tajikistan: • Capacity of CO and project staff, especially in procurement • Banking system under-developed • High turn over of national staff • Lack of suppliers of specific goods and services. • Ukraine: • Transaction costs high with private sector and small contributors • Municipalities – best national partner • Programmeimplementation capacity – important value of UNDP • RM and delivery cannot be the ultimate indicators of success • Seed money capacity very important for RM, including with EU • Serbia: Context – Content – Commitment – Capacity

  8. Atlas Upgrade and IPSAS • Reason for upgrade: going back to initial version of ATLAS to comply with IPSAS. No major changes for COs in ‘09. • In 2010 - changes related to IPSAS: moving away from cash-based to accrual (for expenses) and contract (for revenue) based system • Negative impact on delivery in 2010-11! • Risk management: clarity needed on donor agreements with conditionality (e.g. EU), as well as risk-based classification of donors • Capacity: • Country Office Assessment will determine if and how much additional capacity is needed (regional / sub-regional support?) • Training: there will be additional resources for training in 2009. • Reclassification /functional review: new function called revenue management + division of labor b/w programme and finance

  9. Security • All COS in RBEC are MOSS compliant • New Regional Security Advisor starting in January 2009 in Bratislava • Three new local security associates (Moldova, Belarus and Kazakhstan) • The responsibility of the security for UNDP falls under the DRR while the security focal point of the CO is usually the Operations Manager • Need for enhanced training on security for DRRs

  10. Procurement • Proposal to separate approval and advisory roles of the Regional CPO (similar to HQ) • Regional Procurement Advisor to focus on supporting COs with large / complex procurement cases • Deputy Director – approval function (Threshold? Appeal procedures?) A range of issues / concerns related to procurement collected by HQ and will be discussed in a separate session on Thu

  11. Human Resources: new HR Strategy • Quarry will change in 2Q of 2009 • Specific management/leaderships skills sets - supporting placement of women in management jobs • New competency framework will be the cornerstone of all HR processes and will help clarify job profiles • Country Directors: possibly 2 more posts in addition to existing 3. Ambitious initial idea of 100% coverage not realized. No decision if to convert current DRR positions to CDs • Contractual reform in Jan 2010 – likely – one contractual modality with 3 types – continuous, intermediate and short term. • Pools of staff: will start with CD, then DRR and OM. Will be based on CRG recommendation + assessment (similar to RC). • Career development center being set up in LRC – will focus on counseling on e.g. cross-practice moves

  12. ERBM • Potential for monitoring and advocacy – high-impact presentation to Government, donors, etc. • Quality is key: • Balanced scorecard will have a respective indicator • One person per HQ cluster will be assigned to monitor and assess quality. • Project staff can contribute meaningfully to input of info to development workplans • Quality of info in Atlas is key for reliability • Challenges: • Difference of concepts among UN agencies (outcomes, outputs etc.) • “Stealing” ideas by others vs. sharing our knowledge products?

  13. Knowledge Management • KM not a new initiative, but there is a new drive in BDP to really make it work – in an organic way relevant in the web 2.0 world • Teamworks principle: Sharing information before gathering it! • Has important implications for our ability to support east-east cooperation – giving an opportunity for knowledge exchanges • How do we extend our KM network to non-UNDP users? RBEC is promoting open access, but it may go live closed corporately given security concerns

  14. Day 2

  15. RBEC Practice Architecture • Concept of Practices: non bureaucratic response to a structure that is required to connect substance from various parts of the organisation to advance/move forward learning and innovation • Key principles/elements: • We are multiyear • We bring finances, human and intellectual capital • We do Organizational capacity building • Success of our client (governments) is our success • RBEC when meeting clients: • Scaling up = more money? Not really true for a knowledge professional organization… • “Rocket science consulting” = need to package our products better • We are often overpricing our development services

  16. Practices: Poverty • Why? • Absolute poverty is still an issue in the region (highest in CIS) • Post-transition inequality is very high • Need for dynamic response to financial crisis • How? Approx 600 active projects (USD104 million project budget) • Future priorities / Emerging issues: • Human Development and Social Inclusion (RHDR) • Cross-practice cooperation: e.g. what does trade in EU mean for poor people or who are the poor people from a democratic governance perspective. • Financial crisis and micro finance, SME, employment creation

  17. Practices: Energy & Environment Context: • Progress on HD is threatened by climate change (water, food, etc.) • Central Asia in one of climate risk hot spots in the world. • The global economy is loosing more USD from the disappearance of forests than through the financial crisis (RBEC - largest stocks) • UNDP largest EE actor in the region (larger than WB etc). for 2008 Challenges: • Need to diversify funding sources from GEF (MDGC, EC, bilateral, PEI) • New set of skills are required; need for training • High staff turnover (e.g. on carbon finance) how to replace • Need to better understand business model based on cost recovery

  18. Practices: HIV / AIDS • Context: 1.5 mil people living with HIV/AIDS in RBEC - the only region where prevalence is increasing • Regional HDR “Living with HIV/AIDS” launched on 10 Dec 2008: • misinformation, lack of knowledge, fear, prejudice, stigma still characterize the region, resulting in sub-optimal national responses leading to faster spread of HIV despite greater resources spent • AIDS stigma prevents active engagement in society through impact in quality of healthcare, education, employment, etc. • HIV/AIDS practice (a full practice!): team in Moscow collocated with UNAIDS, 50 members, 30 projects, $82 million in CO portfolio value. • Emerging issues/priorities: • Use work on HIV as an entry point to strengthen health sector overall • Focus on cross practice cooperation • Sub-regional partnerships • Work on Mobile populations

  19. Practices: Democratic Governance • Main focus areas: public administration reform and anti-corruption, human rights and access to justice, local governance and decentralization organized into 3 regional CoPs • Facilitating a number of external professional networks in the region; bridging global and CO levels; • CO support as overarching priority • Request for support to parliamentary programmes; currently being supported from the global level; could also be linked to the emerging donors agenda • Cross-practice cooperation with BCPR on access to justice

  20. Practices: Capacity Development • Cross-cutting practice; facilitates access to 3 global thematic groups: national aid effectiveness, local service delivery and PPP, national implementation and procurement • Addressing public institution implementation capacity through a systematic approach to CD that includes the enabling environment, organizational and individual levels • Need for corporate dialogue on cooperation with EC on CD, opportunities for resource mobilization • Effort to make progress on measurement of CD • Cooperation with UNCT follows a demand-driven approach, including support to UNDAF preparation

  21. Practices: Conflict Prevention and Recovery • BCPR provides leadership on crisis issues and provides CO support, including technical advisory services, immediate crisis response and catalytic funding • TRAC 3 funding limited to coordination, needs assessment and design of early recovery frameworks; TTF funding available through appraisal process • Other services: SURGE, technical support in CPR areas, ExpRes consultant roster, BCPR/UNV Rapid Deployment Facility • Bureau targets for 2009: comprehensive, integrated CPR programmes: Tajikistan; knowledge management and production of relevant knowledge products; under-served outcomes: (restoring) local level governance capacities • BCPR Regional team to be moved to Bratislava • Cooperation between DRR team and climate change team

  22. Practices: Gender • All key instruments are on RBEC’s website, including Regional Gender Equality Strategy • Recommended external network: www.iKnowpolitics.org • Istanbul meeting on Gender and Governance concluded that UNDP needs to do more on gender • Next year, a full time Gender Advisor will join Bratislava

  23. Day 3

  24. Working with EU: update from Brussels Office Resources: • Contributions from EU in 2008 – 250 million Euro (mainly post crisis situations, Afghanistan, Iraq, Congo). • RBEC – 14% of total EU contributions for period 2003-07 (based on number of contracts signed). Projections for 2008: 73 million Euro • Key area: Democratic Governance (especially Border Management) Key Challenges: • Perception of UNDP as slow, bureaucratic, inefficient • Visibility (raised by European Parliament , Joint visibility guidelines) • Accountability: • Ongoing debate on access to UNDP audits; verification missions agreed upon and draft TOR established • UNDP supposed to provide list of beneficiaries, contractors for contracts equal and above 100,000 Euro

  25. Working with the EU: discussion issues • Contracting process – how is contracting impacted by the accession status of respective countries? – If countries are far away from accession easier it is to obtain EU contributions • EC verification: TOR/guidelines for EC verification mission will be finalized/approved by controller end of 2008 • In the context of the European Neighborhood policy potential focus for UNDP will be in the field of capacity development for the management of funds for general budget support. • In this connection a Reference Kit will be distributed in due course defining the role of UNDP in managing budget support initiatives. • Discrepancy between GMS level negotiated in the FAFA (at the level of “up to 7%”) versus GMS level decided at UNDP Board level calling for 7%.

  26. Working with the EU: Ukraine • Diverse and large portfolio of EC contracts (3 out of 4 CO clusters) • Since cooperation started with the EC, 17 contracts of total value of 80mn EUR have been signed (9 shared with Belarus and Moldova). • CO used border management (e.g. EUBAM) to expand UNDP activities in the other areas (e.g. Community Based Approach to Local Development). • Transparency: • EC wants more information on project implementation. • EC participates in project Board and monitoring. This can be useful e.g. monitoring mission recommendations are important to UNDP. • UNDP has agreed to a certain transparency in the project process e.g. offering additional financial updates on rate of implementation • Accountability: EC insists that tax returns be credited back to project and UNDP needs to be more transparent on this – e.g. which budget line. • Future strategy: continue ongoing activities, expand in energy and environment, possibly at the regional level.

  27. Working with the EU: Albania • Variety of projects funded by the EC: mine action, Kukes development initiative, cross border tourist promotion, trade and FDI promotion. • Regional development a mutual priority – e.g. National Strategy for Development and Integration was developed with UNDP support. An EC-UNDP dialogue on how to support the strategy in part helped develop a framework for implementing IPA funding. This project will be precursor to accession funds. • The key to success is continuous dialogue e.g. EC involvement in Project Board meetings. In 2007, EC requested UNDP input into its annual progress report. This was a good opportunity. • EC has also had a lot of inputs into the One UN programme and EC integration is also one of the priority areas within that. EC has proposed an unearmarked contribution which is unprecedented.

  28. Working with the EU: Georgia • Positioning: • EC is an important partner. Since 2000 CO had two or three projects which are 20% of delivery, allowing UNDP to work in new areas • UNDP is still considered an NGO in Georgia. It is also often considered as a partner of last resort. • UNDP Georgia coordinates EC-funded sub-regional projects • TRAC is important and as Georgia moves to middle income country status this may affect our ability to co-finance projects with the EC. • Operational issues: need for EC specific solutions • conflicting rules and regulations (internal controls frameworks and EC policies), including on such issues as retroactive starting date • hiring ALDs in preparation for a project but HQ needs first a signed agreement. This means the offices looses 3-5 months. • EC delegation is not always aware of cooperation tools e.g. the FAFA.

  29. Thematic CafésEU Cluster: social inclusion Need to look beyond the strict EU dimension of social inclusion and link it to Human Development. Possible areas of UNDP focus: • monitoring, e.g. on the implementation of national action plans. This is difficult for the EC and nationally – for political reasons. • statistical data and reporting specific the dimensions of the issue in our region – inter alia tool for advocacy & innovative activities • employment (e.g. JOBS centre in Bulgaria): increasing focus on social economy and social enterprises. • education needs to be an area of focus for diversity and tolerance. • beyond the Roma: gender and gender equality. Youth issues. • micro networks: partnerships at the local level • impact of the financial crisis will be critical: bankruptcies, increase in subsistence agriculture, etc.

  30. Thematic CafésEU Cluster: environment • EC - important future partner for cooperation on environment.  Areas for possible future UNDP focus: • Climate change mitigation - needs to be better served. • Water governance – priority for 2009 in some countries (Cyprus) • National energy efficiency efforts (audits, technical assistance) in the building sector – a low hanging fruit (linked to economic governance, e.g. energy savings, employment opportunities). • National Adaptation Strategic Plans and subsequent strategies • Technical assistance on renewable energy. + Environment as part of Romania’s new partnership with UNDP + looking beyond GEF to other potential sources funding e.g. EC. + how can we link climate change to rural development? + how can we integrate gender dimensions into climate change?

  31. Thematic CafésCentral Asian Cluster: SME, trade facilitation, FDI promotion Support to SME development • Turkmenistan: conference on microfinance in Feb 2009 • GSB programme is expanding to Central Asia (funded by TIKA).  COs support the initiative and require support from BRC (Pascale). • Next Cluster meeting should focus on SME Development Promotion of FDI • Focus: policy level – legislation change, capacity building, and development of FDI promotion strategy for the selected regions. • In KYR, private sector role in uranium tailings rehabilitation. Trade Facilitation • Richard’s analysis, Giuseppe and Jacek’s concept notes as basis • Need to verify / consult with EC and CAREC • BRC to provide info on TF proposal sent to Finish Government.

  32. Thematic CafésCentral Asian Cluster: social inclusion • BRC will develop a Learning/training for programme country office staff on basic concept and definitions of Social Inclusion and its relationships to HD and Poverty Reduction. • BRC will consult with other agencies (eg. UNICEF, ILO) to synchronize terminology. • CO will be engaged in developing the regional HDR on Social Inclusion.

  33. Thematic CafésCentral Asian Cluster: social inclusion • BRC will develop a Learning/training for programme country office staff on basic concept and definitions of Social Inclusion and its relationships to HD and Poverty Reduction. • BRC will consult with other agencies (eg. UNICEF, ILO) to synchronize terminology. • CO will be engaged in developing the regional HDR on Social Inclusion.

  34. Thematic CafésWestern Balkans Cluster: local governance • Clear link with Social Inclusion: ensuring effective access to local public services by socially excluded and vulnerable groups • 3 key areas across the 3 branches of government: a) Policy Planning Support: capacity development, EU accession, Social Inclusion (Mont/Kos); IPA submission planning for local governance (Alb); Aid Coordination (Kos); Regional Economic Development (FYR Mac); Evidence based MDG Monitoring (Serb/FYR Mac/Alb/Kos) b) Quality of Service Delivery: Enhance Capacity of absorption (Mac); Capacity Assessment of local public service delivery (BRC/Croatia); Inter-municipal Cooperation (Kos); Art GOLD (Serb/Kos) • Accountability: Quality oversight of local governance by central government (Serb); Audit Support (Serb); decentralization (Kos) • Request to HQ: regional programme with stronger ownership by COs/Governments (BRC)+ firm position advocating for the need of political will for reform(NY)

  35. Thematic CafésWestern Balkans Cluster: social inclusion • WB countries have evolved in their thinking on Social Inclusion: presently at different levels of the same continuum • Concept of Social Enterprise emerged as a new dimension • Broadening EU concept of social inclusion to include the dimensions of human development, post-conflict social cohesion, inclusive growth and targeted interventions for vulnerable groups. • The dialogue with national counterparts and EU: emphasize facilitating EU accession success thresholds. • Impact of the current financial crisis: HQ support required in: • Analysis of Remittance flows • Policy impact of increased number of Returnees • Quick impact projects to deal with increased unemployment • Support to national counterparts to deal with less government budgetary resources for social inclusion.

  36. Thematic CafésWestern CIS and Caucasus: local governance and regional development • Strategically important for all cluster countries to work on local level because of pockets of poverty and lack of capacity of the local authorities • Different entry points: AZE and BEL are focusing on communities at the local level • Others working with both local authorities and civil society • Developing institutional capacity to deliver service irrespectively of degree of interest to decentralization • Different pipelines for the areas where BRC’s support is needed but commonality discussed is to get regional knowledge fair organized

  37. Thematic CafésWestern CIS and Caucasus: poverty and social inclusion • Strategically important to update results of the last year’s discussion and Strategy by reflecting new realities of economic and financial crisis • How to do it – assessment of impact on HD focusing on possible scenarios given unpredictable nature of the related events – support from BRC is a key to success • Knowledge product is to be used as evidence based argument to adjust programming perhaps coming up with new ideas (national, local and regional level) – remittances is a sample • Pushing pipe-line at the local and national level finding how it impacts social inclusion – monitoring impact on human development

  38. Thematic CafésNext Steps (plenary discussion ) • 1-2 pagers from Practice leaders to update RBEC strategy • Keep active on advocacy: social inclusion • Cross fertilization of practice areas • Need for improved monitoring, better methodological work, quicker forms of assessments • Integrating HIV/AIDS into Social Inclusion agenda of COs • Move from conceptual work to programme interventions • Capacity Building, need for improved definitions internally and with institutions: social inclusion, trade facilitation, micro-finance • Response to financial crisis: quick interventions focused on • Technical assistance to facilitate thinking on reaction • Intensified Monitoring on social issues/rapid assessment • integrate programmes on vulnerable groups/employment generation

  39. UNDP Resources: trends, partnership and implications for RBEC • UN Reform important for RM strategy, e.g. UNDP administers a $3,3 bil portfolio of MDTFs and “Joint Programmes” on behalf of the UN • Local resources are growing ($934 mil in 2000 to $1,265 mil in 2007); • New EU member states increase ODA (Poland from $14 to $297 mil; Czech Republic from $45 to $161 mil; Slovak Republic from $7 to $55 mil in 2002-2006); • Knowledge hubs as a new modality for UNDP in donor countries (specially in new EU Member States). Other countries considering new modality for UNDP are for instance: Korea, Israel, China, India; • Spain’s MDGTF very important to improve the cooperation between donor countries (specially new donor countries); • Non-core Instruments are very important (list of potential modalities: Partnership Agreements, Framework Agreements, MOU’s, Cost-sharing, Trust Funds, Multi-Donor Trust Funds, Joint Programmes where UNDP is acting as Administrative Agent for the UN System).

  40. Day 4

  41. UNDP in MICs: key issues 1 • Limited internal capacity to facilitate this process – we still are and are perceived more as project implementers, not facilitators • Regional facilitation of this process – Open Society HQ as a model • Optional model: Mentoring by somebody who had experience • We are not oriented to look at our countries as a resource – big culture change we have to make; this year we have to try practice it • COs need to help countries to reflect their experience, to connect EU and non-EU –no other players can facilitate this process. • How do we become better in knowing governments’ priorities? • Transition: reengineer the entire institution system • Interest in UNDP innovative ‘know-how’/solution from ‘old’ EU countries • Why would a government be interested in UNDP managing its ODA? Distinction b/w what we do and what we can support them to do • What kind of knowledge products we could create and sell regionally?

  42. UNDP in MICs: key issues 2 • Legal basis: SBAA – is a living document, it can serve for a long time • Is the local presence necessary? How do we organize it, role of BRC? • Adjusting CO’s business model – innovative/experience exchange is completely different model, not profitable • Exchange of experience need recourses • Using European structural funds – a big risk to become a shadow; • Nothing will happen without regional funds • Corporate constrains: no clear vision and distinction inside UNDP – between BP, BDP etc • Care of our staff- one year to prepare changes – how to incorporate personal interest into change process? • To create regional cooperation and to become an important part of the network.

  43. Emerging Donors: Romania as donor • The New Cooperation Model-The Government of Romania and UNDP • We are trying to come up with the new cooperation model. • Romania sees itself as a potential donor • Unique historical geopolitical interest in UN • Proposed Cooperation Model: to make Romania good and resposnsible donor by the year 2015 : • Country program :Aid efectivnes and relevance or Romania international development, National capacities for contrintuins • Proposed programme Facilitation of specific Romanian ODA prgrams, 2 ContributionGlobal Public good • Financial projections : The total Government resources that are necessary for this scenario of UN operation is: 2,000,000 • Romania wants UN international presences in the country

  44. Emerging Donors: Moldova as recipient • Moldova: poorest country in Europe with slowing economy as of 2006. Graduation from low income countries to MIC. Strategic goal: Gradual integration to EU • Lessons / Challenges: • Delays • Involvement of the CO is still questionable since Romania CO is leading this process • UNDP: providing framework how to build capacity to become a donor and leave it to the country to develop its own unique model • Role of civil society: involve NGOs as much as • Visibility, making sure its known that its Romanian DOA • Could this model be expended to other countries

  45. Closing Remarks • The strategy will need to be adjusted, shortened, have a tactical annex. Regional presence is just emerging • If we make Capacity Development our flagship product – we need to work on building the capacity –capacity of BRC Practices to deliver + strengthen emerging donor practice (senior advisors) • Ambitious vision should build on financial sustainability of the offices: our delivery and RM targets should be as ambitious as our vision is • Key regional priorities (topics) for 2009-2010: • Response to the financial crisis • Social Inclusion RHDR. RHDR – what will the topic be in 2 years? • Decentralization and regional development + Websites: need to make them exciting, not just compliant + 2009 will be the year of climate change –funding opportunities + Partnering with the EU and positioning better vis-à-vis the World Bank

More Related