Emerging Lessons

Over 150 countries are engaged in the NCSA process and about a third of these reached the final stages or completed the NCSA by mid 2007. The GSP interacted with most of these countries, either directly in workshops or at least via email and telephone, exchanging views and lessons on the country-driven process, results and impacts, and receiving self-evaluation progress reports from NCSA teams periodically. 35 completed NCSA action plans have so far been analyzed in detail by independent reviewers using standard criteria concerning the quality of the process and results achieved. In addition to this direct technical assistance, monitoring and analytical work with NCSA teams in countries, the GSP has reviewed the broad range of studies and policy papers on capacity development that have been prepared under the GEF and other international development assistance initiatives over the past decade, from which much can be learned (refer to the Publications on Capacity Development section of the website). Two sets of lessons are presented here. The first set is concerned with strengthening the NCSA process itself, recognizing that many countries are still in the midst of their NCSAs and require additional technical and methodological guidance in areas such as how to organize the enabling activity, conduct rigorous capacity needs assessments and prepare an effective national capacity action plan as a final output.   The second set of lessons is aimed at supporting the substantive purpose of the NCSA, which is to strengthen countries' capacities for the management of global environmental issues.

1. Systematic organization of the NCSA process To be successful, the NCSA should be well-planned and organized around a purpose that is understood and agreed by national stakeholders. The process and its outcomes need to be part of the institutional system of governance and management.   The NCSA aims to analyse and address a country's capacity issues at different levels and across multiple sectors or focal areas. Many country teams report that they find the NCSA process complicated and confusing; in all but a few cases, the exercise has taken longer than planned. Some have struggled to complete the process systematically or rigorously. In a number of cases, the multiple-step process did not proceed smoothly, breaking down in particular between the analysis of capacity needs and the preparation of an action plan. The reviews of completed NCSAs conclude that the more successful cases followed a systematic process that was well planned, led, coordinated, understood and supported. These NCSAs were strengthened by participants having agreed a clear strategic purpose and a work programme that included substantial efforts in stakeholder consultation, desk studies, expert review, complex analysis and priority setting.

Stakeholder Engagement- Institutional Coordination, Leadership & Participation There should be a designated lead agency for the NCSA, with good capacities for facilitating multi-stakeholder engagement in the capacity assessment and capacity development strategy. The extent of stakeholder participation should be kept optimal - to achieve adequate understanding, inputs and support for the action plan, while relying primarily on previous extensive consultative processes, including especially other national assessments, enabling activities and strategic planning.    75% of the reviews comment positively on the way in which NCSA implementation was organized with the country's institutions. These NCSAs worked effectively with multiple government agencies and key stakeholders, by facilitating their understanding of and participation in the technicalities of the capacity assessment and planning process. It is not good practice for these stakeholders to be simply involved in supervising and coordinating execution of a small project. Political leadership, finding champions and good communications to adequately promote and position the NCSA are all mentioned as factors for a successful process and outcome.   Various countries established a management structure around a designated lead agency supported with steering committees and technical working groups. Most NCSA steering committees included a broad range of line ministries and agencies at national and sub-national levels, and many involved national academic bodies. Conversely, inclusion of private sector representatives or NGOs in steering committees was reported in only few cases. Unfortunately, only a few countries made reference to using existing national coordination mechanisms such as cross-sectoral committees or commissions, for steering their NCSA.    Extensive consultation was a feature of many of the completed NCSAs, seeking to gain diverse inputs to the needs assessment and planning exercise, and to secure stakeholder interest and commitment to subsequent capacity development. The NCSA teams employed an impressive variety of consultation techniques. However, both realism and good organization are also required; in a number of cases, the attempt to conduct "country-wide" consultations was an overwhelming commitment for the small NCSA team, and is unlikely to have improved the quality of the results significantly.

Information Management in the NCSA Sharing information and understanding are crucial aspects of enabling activities. It is useful for the extensive information collected through the NCSA process to be compiled into a country profile, as a perpetual national database linked to the country's planning system for environmental management programmes and projects.   The NCSA process is complex, dealing with a broad range of issues and involving diverse institutions, consultative processes, data-gathering and analyses. As in any public planning exercise, it is important to adequately record the results obtained. In order to handle the volume and diversity of inputs from respondents, it is good practice for the NCSA team to prepare in advance for the data-handling and processing that will be required, and to devise a transparent mechanism for the resolution of multiple and conflicting views into a coherent strategy. Stakeholders' inputs should be documented and in due course the NCSA team should report back to respondents on how these were assimilated into final databases and plans.   An important way in which the NCSA Enabling Activity can itself be used to build capacity in country - see also below - is by producing and disseminating information materials. Many NCSA teams report that increased information exchange and networking beyond the government sector were among the good practices they adopted. A number of NCSAs developed their own communications strategies and used them throughout the process to target a diversity of selected audiences with suitable products, events and media. This proved an effective means of strengthening engagement in the initiative. Several NCSAs produced informative and educational materials on substantive matters of concern, in addition to more simple publicity for the project. Useful outputs from many of the completed NCSAs are Web-based resource materials; these can be used to develop a national environmental database to serve longer term needs for capacity development in environmental management.

Building Capacity during the NCSA The NCSA itself is an Enabling Activity, and should be used to develop capacity in the country's system  or 'enabling environment'.   Half of the reviews commented that the NCSA process itself had been an important opportunity to strengthen capacities in the country's institutions and overall system. The NCSAs that were successful in this regard made initial assessments of the capacities needed to undertake each stage of the NCSA exercise, and organised ways to address those needs during the course of the project.   Reported examples of such CD actions include the following:

Briefings to politicians and community leaders. Dissemination of public information on the NCSA, MEAs and environmental management; using Web-sites in many cases. Commissioned studies of key issues encountered through the NCSA and CD planning. Strengthened policies and procedures for steering committee and working group processes, to enhance inter-institutional coordination. Development of project team members' competencies in management, assessment-planning methodology, and technical issues in focal areas. Briefing and training sessions for subsequent implementation of the CD strategy.

Preparation of an effective NCSA Action Plan   Each of the NCSAs reviewed prepared an action plan in one form or another as the end-product of the process. The best examples of NCSA action plans are structured as a broad strategic framework with a hierarchy of objectives - a logical framework approach - and containing some detailed actionable proposals. They are well-presented, succinct and carefully edited documents. They connect with other national plans.   In completing the NCSA, the team should seek formal endorsement of the capacity development plan and should hand-over responsibility for its subsequent implementation. These concluding tasks appear to have been handled well by some of the NCSAs. Several NCSA projects suffered from not having included sufficient time or resources for endorsement and hand-over to be completed.   The action plan itself should outline how its implementation and further development will be managed. It is good practice to specify the main organizational arrangements for managing the envisaged capacity development programme, including proposals for a lead agency and key stakeholders to be engaged in the continuing process. The majority of the completed action plans do include some or all elements of an implementation strategy with reasonable levels of detail. The most complete versions take the form of a business plan, designed to support the capacity development strategy or action programme, with important elements including the following: Supervision, management and coordination arrangements; financing. Connections to other relevant programmes and projects that are current or planned. Timelines; Monitoring and evaluation; Periodic review and development.   The reviews of completed NCSAs concluded that in general the quality of the action plans does not do justice to the good and intensive consultative and analytical work undertaken during hte NCSA. Even though the majority of NCSAs organised thorough assessments and compiled the necessary detailed information, more than half of the action plans were rated less than satisfactory by the reviewers, in terms of structure, presentation and/or content. Contributory factors appear to have been shortages of time, commitment or the necessary skills. In many cases loss of direction was a factor also, between the thematic assessments stage and a cross-cutting analysis focusing too narrowly on common operational capacities. In completing the Enabling Activity, it is important for the NCSA team to prepare an action plan that will be acted upon and achieve its objectives. The plan needs to convey clearly the overall goal of country capacity development for priority aspects of environmental management, and the strategy proposed to reach it. The action plan itself should outline how its implementation and further development will be managed.

Exemplary Features of NCSA Action Plans prepared to date   +     A complete, stand-alone document. +     Succinct, with lengthy details consigned to annexes or ancillary reports. +        Attractive, comprehensible and highly-usable. +     Clear status, endorsed as government policy. +     An executive summary version. +     Overall structure clearly linked to national environment and development plans. +     Hierarchy of strategic objectives and linked components with nested actions. +     Use of a logical framework of objectives and indicators for series of linked components. +     Short-term action proposals presented in sufficient detail; medium- and longer-term in outline only. +     Implementation strategy and 'business plan' covering institutional arrangements, management supervision and coordination, scheduling, financing, communicating, monitoring and evaluating; review, revision and up-dating.

2. Lessons for enhancing Country Capacity Capacities in a Managerial System The generic capacities required for any management system to function relate to (1) stakeholder engagement; (2) information & knowledge; (3) planning and policy development; (4) organization and implementation; and (5) monitoring and evaluation. Effective capacity development requires a reasonably-complete set of these capacities to be created, forming a functional system to underpin the management strategies for specific environmental issues.   The NCSA is concerned with a country's system of formal and informal institutional mechanisms that govern the management of environmental issues. This system comprises an inter-connected set of capacities held by relevant stakeholder institutions or groups. These form the "enabling environment" or foundation that underpins the management of a substantive issue.   The NCSA process entails developing a detailed understanding of the functioning and interconnection of these capacities, in order to diagnose the particular strengths and weaknesses in the country's environmental management system, and to prescribe actions to address the critical needs.   Based on this lesson, the following approach is recommended for developing and implementing the NCSA action plan:

Review the country's strategic priority environmental issues and management strategies, drawing on and integrating existing national assessments and plans. Determine the capacity needs to effectively implement the management strategy for each priority issue, using the model system of five capacities. Plan and implement a package of capacity development actions as an integral part of each priority management strategy. Identify common capacity needs across several management strategies, and seek opportunities for collaborative actions targeting specific capacities.

Capacity development requires substantive objectives In order to be managed effectively, the NCSA and subsequent capacity development actions should be aimed towards substantive objectives, to strengthen management of specific global environment issues.   The substantive objectives for capacity development under the GEF are determined from the strategic priorities selected by the country, together with the GEF and other partners, in each of the relevant focal areas. The NCSA process involves confirming the country's substantive strategic priorities; determining the capacities needed to manage them effectively; and developing a suitable plan of action. To confirm the focal area objectives that are a priority for the country, it is important for the NCSA to be guided by the MEAs and prior Enabling Activities and focal area projects.   Capacity development as a "stand-alone" action outside the context of a substantive programme or project is aimed only at building capacity for its own sake, rather than to address a substantive need. For the purpose of the GEF and the NCSA, it is not sufficient to diagnose an operational weakness in the country's administration or implementation of an MEA (or across a group of MEAs). The NCSA should analyze the environmental consequences of that weakness and the environmental benefits to be achieved by addressing that issue. These should form the substantive objectives of the subsequent capacity development actions. It is important to retain the logical connection between the set of proposed capacity actions and the planned higher objective: each should be specified in the CD action plan in some form of logical framework with targets and indicators.

Connecting the NCSA with other Enabling Activities It is good practicefor the NCSA to review, connect with and build upon the results of other EAs; this can facilitate high quality diagnosis of needs across the range of substantive issues; and enable an integrated planning process to be followed.   Prior to the NCSA, the majority of countries have prepared numerous assessments, reports and strategies relevant to specific focal areas and MEAs, and to broader national environmental management and sustainable development agendas. Most EAs are country-driven exercises involving a good balance of technical expertise and consultative process. In some cases, such as the National Communications to the UNFCCC, the EA includes a capacity needs assessment, which can thus feed straight into the NCSA for validation and integration.   The important lesson is for the NCSA to review, connect with and build upon the results of other EAs; and not to simply repeat their assessments. Applying this lesson enables the NCSA to devote its limited resources to the main task of analysing the capacity constraints that underlie the priority issues identified by the other EAs. The whole series of EAs can be used as the foundation for integrated country planning and programming.

Cross-cutting Objectives and Synergies The NCSA is concerned with the substantive issues in each of the GEF focal areas and MEAs that are important to the country, and not solely with cross-cutting capacity issues.   Throughout the period of the NCSA programme, countries have been encouraged to increase efficacy and cost-efficiency through actions that create benefits under more than one of the MEAs. Such a strategy is justified because there are overlaps in the scopes of the MEAs, and there are mutual advantages - synergies - in tackling selected "cross-cutting" issues so as to serve multiple objectives. However, the pursuit of cross-cutting objectives has caused a number of difficulties for the NCSAs in many countries. The problem centres on confusion over what "cross-cutting" means and whether this is all that the NCSA is concerned with.     "Cross-cutting" refers to issues that are relevant to more than one MEA, focal area or sector. This encompasses a range of types of issues, both substantive and operational. The term has tended to be used loosely in the GEF and NCSA programme, so that for example "cross-cutting capacity development" may refer either to capacity development to strengthen management of a substantive cross-cutting issue, or to developing a cross-cutting capacity such as an MEA coordination committee.   The GSP recommends NCSAs to be as clear and precise as possible on this issue. In view of the difficulties this issue has caused the NCSA programme, the GSP provides the following guidance notes on "cross-cutting":

The NCSA is concerned with the country's effective management of global environmental issues, not just efficient operation of the MEAs. The NCSA thematic assessments confirm priority substantive issues and capacity needs in each focal area, and these should be carried forward into the action plan. The cross-cutting analysis should identify substantive areas of concern for more than one MEA or focal area; each of these results should also be used in the development of the action plan. Thus the action plan may specify CD actions relevant to single MEAs and others relevant to multiple MEAs; it is not concerned only with cross-cutting issues. Any NCSA follow-up capacity development action should focus on a substantive, i.e. environmental objective. This will enable the CD action to be managed (designed, implemented, evaluated) effectively, and to achieve its intended purpose. The action plan should consider each of  the country's substantive priority issues, relevant to both single and multiple MEAs. Substantive cross-cutting and synergetic actions should be given particular attention; nevertheless, it may be more important, urgent or practicable for the country to address a substantive issue relevant to only one MEA.

Integrated National Environment Planning & Mainstreaming The NCSA has significant potential to contribute to integrated national planning and country programming across the range of MEA focal areas. The NCSA and capacity development under the GEF should also be used to strengthen the links between capacity development, environmental management and sustainable development.   The GEF Strategic Approach and Operational Guidelines for the NCSA emphasise that developing capacities for global environmental action is closely related to and must be integrated with on-going initiatives to enhance capacities for broader environmental managements and for sustainable development in general. An important lesson is that capacity development strategies and actions need to be designed as integral parts of country programmes and enhanced regular projects. For this to occur a mechanism is required to enable each focal area programme and project to take into account the findings of the NCSA and the proposed follow-up CD action strategies.   The analysis of completed NCSAs shows that several countries are achieving good outcomes in this regard, by using the NCSA to either prepare or re-instate a national framework for environmental management, which aims to integrate the various focal area strategies that exist in most developing countries, most being products of the broad series of national enabling activities that international donors have supported. Re-instatement is relatively easy in countries that have prepared earlier national environmental management strategies or action plans (NEMS, NEAP).   It is good practice for the national planning framework to be structured around a series of focal area strategic priorities, which form the plan's higher level objectives. The purpose of the NCSA is to underpin each of the focal area management strategies with a package of capacity development actions. Preparing country strategies that integrate Enabling Activities, regular projects and capacity development in this way would facilitate the aims of national agencies, partners and donors to move away from project actions towards country-led programmes. Many of the NCSAs completed to date refer also to and promote linkages between environmental management and national development planning, poverty reduction strategies, sustainable development and national Millennium Development Goal (MDG) strategies.

Each Project should have a Capacity Development Strategy   Under the Strategic Approach, each GEF project can be an opportunity to catalyze capacity development in part of the country's environmental management system. Projects need to focus primarily on developing the capacity of the country system, by enabling stakeholder organizations to devise, test and sustain the most appropriate solutions to the environmental issues being targeted.   The fundamental purpose of GEF support is to assist programme countries to develop their capacities to better manage global environmental issues. The GEF Strategic Approach is first to enable a country to assess its capacity needs and prepare a plan of capacity development actions; and second, for the country to implement the plan and organize effective capacity development. Each NCSA Enabling Activity is an opportunity for a country to determine - through consultation and expert analysis - which capacities need to be developed in order to better manage the environmental issues it faces.   The challenge for future capacity development support under the GEF is to progressively transform regular projects, away from being interventions to trial and demonstrate technical solutions, towards being catalytic partnerships in developing the capacities of country stakeholders. This will require close collaboration in country programme development between those concerned with the NCSA and other Enabling Activities, focal area programmes and the GEF-country dialogues.