1 / 12

Key Mission Findings

Key Mission Findings. by Guido Santini, FAO/UN-Water,. Maputo, 26 – 30 January 2009. Organizations met. UN agencies: UNICEF, FAO, WHO, UN-Habitat, WB, UNDP Government: DNA (DAR, DES, GPC, DGRH), SINAS, CRA, MINAG (DNSA, DEH) Donors:

zagiri
Télécharger la présentation

Key Mission Findings

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. Key Mission Findings by Guido Santini, FAO/UN-Water, Maputo, 26 – 30 January 2009

  2. Organizations met • UN agencies: • UNICEF, FAO, WHO, UN-Habitat, WB, UNDP • Government: • DNA (DAR, DES, GPC, DGRH), SINAS, CRA, MINAG (DNSA, DEH) • Donors: • WSP, Royal Netherlands Embassy, DfID, SDC, MCC, CIDA, Italian Cooperation, Austrian Cooperation, SIDA, JICA, EU • NGOs: • IRD, Samaritan’s Purse, Oxfam, World Vision

  3. Overview of coordination mechanismsin the water sector • There are several coordination mechanisms in place in the water sector that gather UN agencies, Donors, NGOs under Government leadership • Several mechanisms in the WSS sub-sector are in place (GAS, SWAP, etc.) and seem to work well in coordination with Donors and NGOs. • The GAS and the Emergency cluster are perceived to be effective among the different development partners and the Government • There is a joint UN programme focusing on Climate Change, with a water resource management component (under FAO lead). • There are several joint strategies/plans with water components: PARPA, NAPA, UNDAF, WB water res. Strat., etc.

  4. Key challenges in coordination • There is a general agreement that the UN action in the entire water sector is rather fragmented • It is general opinion that there is room for strengthening the coordination in the Water Management sub-sector. Particular emphasis has been given to the Transboundary river basin issues where the UN has comparative advantage. • Water sub-sectors (WSS, AWM, IWRM, etc) seems to be considered as separate spheres. Actors involved in the different areas do not have interagency mechanisms to share information and knowledge to coordinate their action.

  5. Strengthening the coordination…...different views...(1) • Most of the actorsrecognized the need for strengthening the coordination and showed their willingness to contribute to a general harmonization in the sector • UN partners highlighted: • the need for improving coordination of the UNCT for fund raising in the water sector. • the need of support to develop a joint programme focusing on WM and WSS • the need to have a formal mechanism to exchange information

  6. Strengthening the coordination…...different views...(2) • Donors raised the fact that: • There should be an effort for simplification in responsibilities among UN partners in the sub-sectors (WSS, AWM, River basin management, emergencies, etc). • Specific UN agencies should take a leading role in a sub-sector. • Government emphasized: • The need to enhance coordination of water-related indicators development and monitoring process. • The need of support to strengthen the coordination among partners al sub-national level (Provinces) • NGOs highlighted that there should be the room for a larger participation of the NGOs group in coordination mechanisms

  7. Key challenges for UN-Water • Most of the country actors don’t know what UN-Water is and what it does • In general, actors have not a clear idea on how this initiative could support the UNCT • Some country actors have a negative preconception on the utility of the mechanism • Some perceive the initiative as a “top-down” mechanism which would not target the real needs of the country • Some perceive it as mechanism that will bring extra-work with no clear benefits • Some showed a general mistrust on the capacity of the UN, as system, to get organized and deliver a coordinated action Is UN-Water initiative really in line with country needs? What is the current added value?

  8. ...Country actors’ views for a potential role of UN-Water at country level • The establishment of a UN-Water team (through UNDG) at country level could play a strategic role: • To facilitate dialogue and exchange of knowledge among partners in the sector and with UN-Water at global level • To strongly promote at country level the UN-Water benefits in the different spheres • To advocate for raising the awareness on water-related issues at country level • To provide the UNCT with targeted technical assistance

  9. Possible in-country future steps UNCT would be willing to establish through UNDG: • an in-country technical working group encompassing all the water sector, providing technical advice as required (participants from all UN agencies dealing with water), link with UN-Water Secretariat and the other TFs. • an in-country formal mechanism through to share knowledge and information on water-related issues among the UN agencies (e.g. ODAMoz, etc), link with UN-Water Secretariat and the other TFs

  10. Possible follow up of this mission • It is general opinion that a in-depth mapping of the water sector as whole in the country would benefit all the actors (WSS, WM) • who is doing what and where • focus on the role of UN • build on the ongoing initiatives

  11. Next steps for the Country Level TF(as requested by the UNCT) • Provide financial support for local consultants to carry out and in-depth mapping of the Water sector • Possibly provide technical backstopping for this mapping process (through emails, info sharing, etc.) • Possibly organize other in-country missions to help to follow up with the recommendations (not necessarily paid by UN-Water)

  12. Conclusions • Despite a general skepticism, the UNCT and other partners really appreciated this exercise • They perceived the benefits of this exercise and appreciated the possibility to brainstorm on water-related issues in a different way • They showed a clear commitment to engage themselves to strengthen the coordination in the sector • UN-Water must make a stronger effort to promote the initiative and its outputs at country level

More Related