BTC Field Interventions ‘Projects and SWAp: a contradiction?’

1. What do we want? Accompany countries in developing harmoniously the three pillars of society in order to achieve greater well-being for the citizens they serve Government Civil societyPrivate sector Development support

2. Una estrategia doblemente anclada? Rectoria del Gobierno Probar politicas nacionales Retroalimentacion Hacia la administracion Espacios de discusion, Medios y elecciones Politicas, reglas, y regulaciones Del gobierno Capacidad de aprender de la experiencia, de las criticas constructivas y adaptarse a un medio en cambio Capacidad de analisis, priorizacion y formulacion de politicas Capacidad de traducir las experiencias locales en propuestas estrategicas Capacidad de operacionalizar las politicas nacionales en contextos locales

3. What do we see? In a ‘fragile state’…. ‘Fragile’ refers to the restricted capacity of governments to learn from actual field situations –Lack of skills (individual level) –Lack of communication lines and information flow (institutional level) –Authoritarian attitude and inability to listen (political level) ‘Fragile’ refers to the restricted capacity of the operational level to provide evidence-based feedback to the government –Lack of skills (individual level) –Lack of communication channels (institutional level) –Weak democratic culture (political level)

Double Anchorage and Objectives of BTC Interventions Local Policy Implementation Government Policy Local partners supported by project TA Local Capacity Building Local Objectives Central Objectives Rationalised Policy and Capacity Building Policy Dialogue Critical alignment

4. What do we propose? a portfolio-approach Normative and Regulating Role of the Government Testing National Policy at the Operational Level Feedback through administration, political parties, civil society, democratic elections, etc Rules and regulations for government services, laws, etc Role and challenge of (sector) budget support Role and challenge of ‘project’ support

Starting Bottom-up or from the Central Level? Institutional support Budget support ‘new style project‘ aid ? ? Operational level 'Trickle-down' or 'Capitalisation' ? political level Active processes

5. What are the consequences for BTC interventions? Shift from ‘project’ to ‘program’ A project is a linear process that executes in a limited time frame a number of pre-planned activities that will solve the initial problems Projects are conceived in isolation from other donors or national policy (H & A problem) Classical projects deny the complexity of the system in which they act Projects ‘new style ~ Programs adopt a sector-wide view which is merely common sense

‘Projects’ are Part of a Complex System Socio-Economic and Political Environment (macro) The Sector (meso) The ‘Project’ (micro) Start from a global view on the sector Only long-term commitments are relevant Interaction and networking with all stakeholders

‘Project new style’ with Sector-wide Impact Objectives Policy dialogue based on field experience with the local partner in the driving seat  Critically Aligned rather than « pilot » Project implementation Local system functions better System’s research Capacity development ‘Lessons learned’ of local experiences Increase local expertise and capacity ‘Emancipation’ of the operational level Impact on national policy Country-wide impact “Service delivery” responding to immediate needs BUT focus on processes + results not on inputs

Policy Dialogue Effective policy dialogue mainly concerns day-to-day application of policies. An incremental process which requires: – Knowledge of the system from WITHIN – Longer term involvement in accompanying the system – Confidence and trust-building (on demand partner) – Field knowledge and link (but not necessarily linked to 1 project)

6. What are the consequences for Technical Assistance? Transformational skills For this aim, more need for longer term ‘transformational’ skills, compared to specific ‘transactional’ skills: – Broad competence in system’s thinking and critical analysis based on explicit models, and (action)-research on the system (sector) in which he/she acts – Soft interpersonal skills in process and change management: negotiation/ facilitation/ coaching/ flexibility to listen and respond to others views and changing context/ networking

Position and Cost of Technical Assistance Classical (economical) viewModern view TA as manager of a projectTA as facilitator within a system Transactional costTransformational cost Direct overhead cost in relation to specific (project) outputs Investment cost to support organisation’s sustainable capacity to deliver its main outputs in future Avoided cost (avoid non pertinent investments through technical dialogue) Linked to a specific project and donor Not necessarily linked to 1 project or donor

7. Portfolio-approach in the light of the Paris Declaration More ownership: ownership at national level is one thing, ownership at operational level an other More (critical) alignment: alignment to national policies is one thing, alignment to field needs an other More harmonization? Use of country-owned processes/procedures depending on readiness both at national and donor level More result-oriented: double focus by improving capacities for better service delivery and by striving at more field-adapted national policies More accountability: not only at national but also at local level

Projects and SWAp: ‘the perfect marriage’