Programming sustainable local development a handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

PROGRAMMING SUSTAINABLE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT A HANDBOOK FOR EASTERN EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA

Commun i t y lG

ov

e

rn

Share Long-Ter d m Vi sion

Lo c a

n me t

Pla ne tE a

ives ent ns Inc ulatio g Re

h rt

Pr i vat e Se c t o r

Coverphotos: UNDP in Europe and Central Asia ISBN 978-92-95092-74-7

PROGRAMMING SUSTAINABLE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT A HANDBOOK FOR EASTERN EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA

UNDP RBEC November 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements v Foreword vi Abbreviations viii

ii

What Is the Purpose of this Handbook?

ix

1. Why Sustainable Local Development for UNDP?

1

1.1 What Is Sustainable Local Development?

1.2 What Are the Challenges to Sustainable Local Development in Eastern Europe and Central Asia?

1.3 What Is UNDP’s Comparative Advantage in Sustainable Local Development?

1 5 7

2. How to Set Up a Sustainable Local Development Programme

11

2.1. How to Conduct a Framing Analysis

Analysis of policy framework for sustainable local development

Analysis of political, administrative and fiscal decentralization

Analysis of vulnerable groups and local power relations among stakeholders

Identifying potential champions of sustainable local development

Putting it together and validation 2.2. How to Formulate the Project Concept

Identify entry points and expected results

Scaling-up strategies 2.3. How to Promote Collective Action for Sustainable Local Development

Innovative and effective management

Local economic development

Sustainable resource management

Inclusive service delivery

Self-Assessment Tool for Sustainable Local Development (SAT4SLD)

11 12 17 21 24 25 27 27 27 36 38 40 42 44 45

3. Management Recommendations and Project Document

49

3.1. Management for Sustainable Local Development

Selecting an implementing partner and implementation modality

Options for management structures 3.2. How to Mobilize Resources 3.3. How to Draw up a Monitoring Framework 3.4. What Are the Risks and Challenges?

Ownership

Institutional capacities

Financial capacity and resource use

49 49 50 54 55 60 60 62 63

4. Conclusions and Role of Senior Management

65

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

List of Figures Figure 1: Concept of a Sustainable Local Development System Figure 2: Actors and capitals within a sustainable local development system.

Figure 3: Collective action for sustainable local development Figure 4: Visual representation of self-assessment results Figure 5: Horizontal programme: schematic representation Figure 6: Practice-led programme: schematic representation Figure 7: UNDP’s current practices and entry points for sustainable local development List of Tables Table 1: Good governance principles in relation to universal sustainable development goals Table 2: National sustainable development strategies of Europe and CIS countries Table 3: Matching national goals with universal sustainable local development goals (example based on Ukraine post-2015 national consultations) Table 4: National legislation and corresponding local responsibilities related to sustainable development Table 5: Comparison of local self-government competencies Table 6: Europe and CIS country combined rankings on political and administrative decentralization Table 7: Europe and CIS country rankings on fiscal decentralization index Table 8: Framework for analysis of local government fiscal empowerment Table 9: Examples of stakeholders for sustainable local development Table 10: Matching UNDP/UN programming entry points with national sustainable development goals- Ukraine Table 11: Sample outputs (results) for sustainable local development Table 12: Sample multi-dimensional rating systems Table 13: Sources of local co-financing or in-kind contributions Table 14: Sustainable local development domains Table 15: Comparison of NIM and DIM modalities for sustainable local development programming Table 16: Examples of innovative methods of data collection Table 17: Sample outputs and indicators for the sustainable local development programme

2 5 37 47 51 52 67 3 12 13 14 16 18 19 20 23 28 31 33 35 46 50 56 57

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

iii

List of Boxes Box 1: Using ICA for sustainable local development Box 2: Learning from failures: Why participation doesn’t always happen Box 3: Joining forces to enhance gender equality - Georgia Box 4: Programmatic politics for scaling up energy efficiency - Croatia Box 5: Scaling up by securing meso-level partnerships - Ukraine Box 6: IMC for energy efficiency – the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Box 7: Social Media for Innovative Local Empowerment (SMILE) - Kosovo Box 8: Adaptive strategies – Armenia Box 9: Rural development through collective action in multi-ethnic communities – Crimea, Ukraine Box 10: Partnership for improving confidence and economic viability – Bosnia Box 11: Creating new vocations for hard-to-employ people – Bulgaria Box 12: Green Business Growth – Denmark Box 13: Creating incentives for sustainable resource management – Kyrgyzstan Box 14: Business support to increase resource efficiency – UK Box 15: Involving stakeholders in the project design process: the Wider Europe: Aid for Trade

project (operating in Central Asia, the South Caucasus and the Western CIS) Box 16: One-stop services for all – Uzbekistan Box 17: Improved access to social services – Moldova Box 18: Horizontal cross-practice programme for common goals –Georgia Box 19: Unified delivery mechanism for local implementation of vertical programmes –Tajikistan Box 20: Tips for selecting entry points

22 24 30 34 36 38 39 39 40 40 40 41 42 43 44 45 45 53 54 66

References 70

iv

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Acknowledgements Many people contributed to this handbook. I would first like to thank Annie Demirjian, Democratic Governance Practice Leader for the UNDP Regional Bureau for Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States (RBEC), who supported a broad vision for sustainable local development and reached out to her peers in the Energy and Environment, Poverty Reduction, Conflict Prevention and Recovery, Capacity Development, and Knowledge and Innovation practices to create the intellectual exchange necessary to produce this handbook.

Two people contributed most significantly to writing the handbook. Natia Natsvlishvili, Governance Team Leader at UNDP Georgia, worked on the first version in 2012. Zhanna Pilving, Governance Programme Officer at the UNDP Bratislava Regional Centre (BRC), helped bring the handbook to a successful conclusion.

I would like to thank the many colleagues in UNDP Country Offices and at the BRC who took the time to provide substantive inputs, comments and best practices: Kurtmolla Abdulganiyev, Ainur Baimyrza, Azizkhon Bakhadirov, Amila Selmanagic Bajrovic, Klelija Balta, Maria Zuniga Barrientos, Francesco Checchi, Elena Danilova-Cross, Santeri Eriksson, Danièle Gelz, Lana Grbic, Nicholas Hercules, Daniar Ibragimov, Valeria Ieseanu, Andrey Ivanov, Boran Ivanoski, Sunanda Jain, Nicolas Jarraud, Anna Kaplina, Mao Kawada, Jaroslav Kling, Yusuf Kurbonkhojaev, Michaela Lednova, Marc Liberati, Henrieta Martonakova, Tania Mihu, Vladimir Mikhalev, Gulbahor Nematova, Igor Palandzic, Mihail Peleah, Oksana Remiga, Joern Rieken, Daniel Roessler, Mihail Roscovan, Purusottam Man Shrestha, Albert Soer, Dudley Tarlton, Jana Trost, Alexandru Ursul, Baibek Usubaliev, Emiliana Zhivkova and Maria Zlatareva. Nina Maršálek provided very competent research for all sections of the handbook.

Special recognition goes to the participants of the sustainable local development blogging contest: Zakiya Abdurazakova, Narghiza Alikulova, Babken Babayan, Stanislav Bitiev, Pascale Bonzom, Stamatios Christopoulos, Nicholas Hercules, Marc Liberati, Anvar Meliboev, Toni Poposvski, Milica Begovic Radojevic, Komila Rakhimova, Hovhannes Sarajyan, Sevara Sharapova, Juerg Staudenmann, Essi Ulander and Olena Ursu. Their stories and insights greatly enriched this handbook.

The handbook gained a very practical bent through feedback from peer reviewers: Milica Begovic, Pascale Bonzom, Daniela Carrington, Gabriela Fischerova, Michaela Lednova, Nick Maddock, Sheila Marnie, Vahagn Muradyan, Gulbahor Nematova, Toni Popovski, Lorna Qesteri, Oksana Remiga, Marina Ten, Sanjar Tursaliev, and Aziza Umarova. A final peer review was performed by Robert Bernardo (UNDP BRC), Professor Grace Guerrero Zurita (Universidad Católica del Ecuador), and Valeria Ieseanu (UNDP Moldova).

My thanks also go to Peter Serenyi, Editorial Specialist at the UNDP BRC, for advising on the production process and Catherine Rowles Holm for editing.

Clare Romanik Lead Author

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

v

Foreword FOreword What we do today about sustainable development and how we manage our natural resources will have consequences for generations to come. We are making policy choices today that will affect our communities and our lives, and even more so the lives of our children and grandchildren. Creating policies that address broad development perspectives and complex interactions in the social, economic and environmental spheres makes sustainable development different and more difficult than other policy challenges.

In the past several years, the region of Europe and Central Asia, including Turkey, has made considerable progress in developing and implementing sustainable development policies. Decision makers and legislators, concerned with global and local developments, have made advances in putting sustainable development on the legislative agenda. At the same time, integrating national policies and programmes at the sub-national and local levels has lagged behind. Drawing attention to the local level has demanded that our strategies, tools and instruments for enhancing sustainable development be analytical, evidenced-based, innovative and robust.

This was the main impetus for reviewing UNDP’s sustainable local development projects of the past 20 years and developing the first toolkit, Programming Handbook for Sustainable Local Development in Eastern Europe & Central Asia. The Democratic Governance (DG) Team of the Bratislava Regional Centre initiated the idea of developing a handbook and assessment tool in 2010. The DG team, working with the UNDP Country Offices, first collected the body of knowledge from the field, reviewed the case studies, piloted the assessment tool and documented lessons learned. All of these represent the collective work of the Handbook.

In an effort to make the Handbook regionally specific and practically oriented, approximately 10 pilots were conducted using the Self-Assessment Tool for Sustainable Local Development, and the results and assessments incorporated into the Handbook. In Ukraine, two districts (raiony) are using the tool, and have

vi

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

incorporated outcomes into their Strategic Plan. The tool is also being used to strengthen the capacities of the Vardar planning region in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. In addition, in Uzbekistan, the Academy for Public Administration has studied the initial implementation of the tool in two cities and it is now incorporating the Handbook’s methodology into the teaching curricula. As part of these pilots, the Handbook has already been used for strategic planning, capacity building and educational purposes.

Developing effective and equitable sustainable development initiatives at the national and local levels will require tremendous efforts on the part of decision makers, development practitioners and citizens. UNDP believes that the implementation of sustainable local development initiatives - to find local solutions to local/national problems - is the greatest challenge of our communities. It will require the efforts of all – citizens and their institutions - with robust, practical and effective tools.

We found initiating the groundwork for sustainable local development to be challenging; however, UNDP Country Offices and the local communities they serve are ready for the challenge. There is a large need to experiment with new, innovative approaches to address sustainable local development initiatives and hopefully scale up the work both at the sub-national and national levels.

As you can see from our list of acknowledgements, the production of this Handbook has demanded the work and devotion of many people during the drafting, peer review and editing phases. We are tremendously grateful to everyone who collected the field information, tested the tools, shared their perspectives and skills through comments, feedback and advice, to make this Handbook into the dynamic and rich instrument of knowledge that it is.

Annie Demirjian Practice Leader Democratic Governance Team

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

vii

Abbreviations ARR BRC CBA CBO CIS CO CSO DIM DRR EU ICA ICLEI IMC JISB MDG NGO NIM PIU RBEC RRF SRHR SAT4SLD SLD SME UK UN UNDAF UNDG UNDP UNEP UNFPA UNICEF UNJP US USD WWF

viii

Assistant Resident Representative Bratislava Regional Centre Community Based Approach Community-based Organizations Commonwealth of Independent States Country Office Civil Society Organization Direct Implementation Modality Disaster Risk Reduction or Deputy Resident Representative European Union Institutional and Context Analysis International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives Inter-municipal Cooperation Joint Information Service Bureau Millennium Development Goals Non-governmental Organization National Implementation Modality Programme Implementation Unit Regional Bureau for Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States Results and Resources Framework Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights Self-Assessment Tool for Sustainable Local Development Sustainable Local Development Small and Medium-sized Enterprises United Kingdom United Nations United Nations Development Assistant Framework United Nations Development Group United Nations Development Programme United Nations Environment Programme United Nations Population Fund United Nations Children’s Fund United Nations Joint Programme United States of America United States dollars World Wildlife Fund

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

What Is the Purpose of This Handbook?

This handbook provides practical guidance to UNDP Country Offices (COs) in Europe and the CIS region on establishing sustainable local development as a pillar of their programming. It also aims to stimulate policy and programming discussion on sustainable development. Concrete cases, mostly from UNDP RBEC experience, and good practices from other countries well advanced in implementing local sustainable development initiatives are used to illustrate the messages provided therein and provide additional practical demonstrations.

The handbook and its annexes provide programming and management recommendations based on examples and cases from the work of UNDP and others.

Chapter 1 defines sustainable local development in the context of Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and explains UNDP’s comparative advantage in sustainable local development programming. Chapter 2 lays out a methodological guidance for setting up a sustainable local development programme. Chapter 3 provides management recommendations. Chapter 4 identifies key roles for the CO senior management and explains options that COs can take to initiate sustainable local development programming.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

ix

1. Why Sustainable Local Development for UNDP?

1.1 What Is Sustainable Local Development?

Sustainable development, as defined by the 1987 Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development “Our Common Future”,1 has two important elements: • “meeting the needs of the present [generation] without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” and • “meeting the basic needs of all and extending to all the opportunity to fulfill their aspirations for a better life”.

A series of global conferences, from the original 1992 Earth Summit2 and 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development3 to the 2012 Rio+20 Earth Summit,4 have reiterated the social, economic, and environmental dimensions of sustainability. The definition from the Rio +20 outcome document “The Future We Want” broadens the aims to reducing inequalities for a more equitable social development in balance with natural resource management and ecosystem conservation.5 Helen Clark’s speech to the Commonwealth Local Government Forum Conference 20136 highlights three important roles of local government in sustainable development: • engaging citizens in decision making; • helping to deliver results shaped by local realities; • taking integrated problem-solving approaches.

Here we propose integrated problem-solving approaches for four universal goals of sustainable local development that are based on current global discussions to define sustainable development goals, including the Report of the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda: • • • •

safeguard fair distribution and efficient use of public and natural resources; generate new jobs and ensure equal opportunity for employment; ensure equal access to quality public services; promote honest and responsive government.

An honest and responsive government is both a means and a goal. Achievement of the other goals requires capacitated and inclusive governance structures and processes that are able to build consensus in communities and support partnerships with the private sector and civil society organizations (CSOs). “The Future We Want” states that democracy, good governance and the rule of law create the enabling environment for sustainable development and effective governance at local, sub-national, national, regional and global levels means including the voice of all. It also acknowledges the progress made by local and sub-national authorities in engaging citizens and stakeholders and providing them with information on the three dimensions of sustainable development. Similarly, coordination of local and national development strategies, a transparent flow of information, and allowing each stakeholder to play an active role in design, implementation and monitoring of policies and plans were highlighted as factors for achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDG).7 Figure 1 below presents the four universal goals within the concept of a sustainable local development system.

1 2 3 4 5 6

“Our Common Future” (1987), World Commission on Environment and Development.

UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) (1992), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

The World Summit on Sustainable Development (2002), Johannesburg, South Africa.

UN Conference on Sustainable Development, Rio+20 Earth Summit (2012), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

UN (2012), “The Future We Want”, paragraph 4. Available online at: http://www.uncsd2012.org/thefuturewewant.html Helen Clark, speech at Commonwealth Local Government Forum Conference 2013, 16 May 2013. Accessed at: http://www.undp.org/content/ undp/en/home/presscenter/speeches/2013/05/16/helen-clark-speech-at-commonwealth-local-government-forum-conference-2013-/ 7 UNDP (2010), What will it take to achieve the Millennium Development Goals? An International Assessment.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

1

Figure 1: Concept of a Sustainable Local Development System

Shared Long-Term Vision

Community

Private Sector

Human + Social capital

Financial capital + Know-how

Sustainable Local Development Goals • Fair distribution and efficient use of public and natural resources • Equal access to quality public services • Employment generaftion and equal job opportunities

Inclusion Transparency

• Honest and responsive government

Incentives Regulations

Local Government Physical + Institutional capital

Planet Earth N at u ra l C a p i ta l At the local level, good governance creates the enabling environment for sustainable development through the principles set out in Table 1.

2

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Table 1: Good governance principles in relation to universal sustainable development goals

Good Governance Principle

Universal Sustainable Development Goal

Long-term vision Bringing an ecosystems (or closed loop) approach to resource use, whether in the public or private sector. In accounting terms, it means spending the “income” not the “principal” of the earth’s natural capital so that ecosystems do no lose the ability to replenish themselves. It implies a re-thinking of production processes for minimization of waste or re-use of waste for energy or other useful purposes.

Fair and efficient use of public and natural resources

Transparent decision making Creating integrity in governance systems through clear and open processes, particularly on decisions on how public resources are used and distributed.

Public resources include land, forests, fresh water, extraction fees, tax revenues, and infrastructure such as buildings, roads and energy and water distribution systems. It requires an active citizenry and civil society to make use of access to public information and hold government leaders accountable for their decisions.

Honest and responsive government

Incentives and regulation It governments’ role to institute legal regulations and for civil society in partnership with private sector to foster moral incentives that create a corporate social responsibility as a check against short-sighted or discriminatory behaviour. At the same time, the profit-making incentives that drive innovation and allow companies to expand their job force must not be undermined by governmental regulation and bureaucracy.

New jobs and equal opportunity for employment

Inclusion and empowerment This requires a proactive approach to including vulnerable populations in decision making and ensuring that they have equal access to public services by understanding their specific accessibility challenges, which may be due to physical characteristics or social or economic conditions.

Equal access to quality public services

The best approach to moving towards these goals is through collective action among local actors. Collective action “requires the capacity of stakeholders (including citizens, state actors and others) to engage with each other (either collaboratively or in contestation)”.8 This means joining the efforts and resources of entrepreneurs and businesses, active communities and CSOs, and local authorities. This cannot happen without trust between the groups and confidence of the groups in their own ability. Complex challenges cannot be resolved through technological solutions alone. On a global scale, the best example is climate change. At the local level, there are numerous challenges that are best resolved through collective action and it is local governments that have the convening power to bring public, private, and nongovernmental stakeholders together, as well as to interface with other tiers of government.

The commitment and capacity of local actors and the abundance or deficiency of local assets are the basis of sustainable local development. There are seven forms of local assets (capital): natural, physical, institutional, social, human, know-how, and financial. Natural resources (natural capital) include the air, water, minerals, energy resources, forests, urban green areas and developed, agricultural, and pastoral lands. In the figure below, natural capital – what planet Earth gives us – is presented as the foundation for developing all other assets. The other assets of the locality are placed in the figure next to the main

8 Lister, S., UNDP Oslo Governance Centre (2012), “Democratic Governance and Sustainable Human Development: moving beyond ‘business as usual’”.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

3

actor group to which it is most closely (but not exclusively) identified: local government, community, and private sector. The local government, together with central government, builds the infrastructure (physical capital) that is needed for public services and mobility and maintains cultural heritage. Local government must develop its institutional capacity (institutional capital) for planning and management of the local system. The community, including CSOs and local media, encourages residents to be active in public affairs and builds trust across groups (social capital). People in the community aim to be healthy, educated, and have relevant skills for the labour market (human capital). The private sector develops and transfers appropriate technology (know-how capital) and invests in production (financial capital).

Planet Earth

Actors and Produced Capitals

Goal

Figure 2: Actors and capitals within a sustainable local development system.

Collective Action

Community

Local Government

Private Sector

Human + Social Capital

Physical + Institutional Capital

Financial Capital + Know-How

Natural Capital

Natural Capital

Natural Capital

Having a common understanding of the sustainable local development system will help UNDP create programming to strengthen these local assets in an integrated manner. As we will discuss later on, this can be accomplished by joining or making links across separate programming threads to create a sustainable local development programme,

4

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

1.2 What Are the Challenges to Sustainable Local Development in Eastern Europe and Central Asia?

There are four major challenges to sustainable local development in this region: Unfinished governance reforms. Implementing sustainable development at the local level requires a certain level of devolution of authority to local governments and a credible mandate to govern so that they are empowered to work with their community on addressing priority issues, and yet very few countries in the region have taken significant steps towards decentralization. In Eastern Europe, decentralization exists from the legal perspective, but local governments are still severely constrained by their limited resources (budget and property), lack of staff capacities and in many cases by the very small population sizes of the jurisdictions, known as fragmentation. This inhibits their ability to specify policy goals, introduce efficient and computerized operations or manage land use, physical planning and investment efficiently.

Increasing socioeconomic and gender inequality. This region has experienced deterioration of the social conditions of vulnerable segments of its population and a widening of the income gaps between rich and poor.9 The 2012 UN report “From Transition to Transformation: Sustainable and Inclusive Development in Europe and Central Asia” highlights growing inequalities found in the access to health, housing and education. This is the only region worldwide with a rising HIV infection rate.

Rural regions and monotowns have suffered disproportionately from the collapse of large industries and the deterioration of public service infrastructure. The result is a huge decline in their physical and human capital. Decreased opportunities in these regions have fueled massive migration and the rates will inevitably increase further, thus imposing a heavier burden on sustainable urban development. Persistent labour migration impedes the growth of productive capacities in the place of origin.

Gender inequality is present in both the economic and social sectors. Strong gender stereotypes still prevail in the region. Continuing challenges are equal access of women and men to economic resources, including equal pay, and equal access to decision-making positions both at local and national levels.

Frozen or simmering conflicts. These are often rooted in irredentism – unresolved land disputes among different ethnic groups. The potential for conflict applies within countries and sub-regions. The region has suffered from frequent internal or border conflicts and holds continuous potential for conflict because of multiethnic communities and land disputes. A growing army of young unemployed people10 may also be a cause of internal conflict and, at the very least, is a source of instability. Possible large volume returns from international migration may also be a source of dissatisfaction and conflict unless attended carefully.

Resource depletion and environmental degradation. This has posed yet another set of major challenges to the region.11 Even though the region has demonstrated a declining rate of carbon emissions, it has yet to put in place advanced systems of energy efficiency and renewable energy management and reduce its consumption of fossil fuels.12 Ecosystem services and biodiversity continue to be depleted and degraded. Twenty years after the beginning of transition this region still has some of the most carbon intensive and energy inefficient economies in the world. Additionally, forest degradation, limited waste management systems, especially for hazardous waste, acidification, the Aral Sea catastrophe and frequent droughts, pesticides, petro-chemical plants and melting glaciers present severe environmental challenges.

9 UN (2012), “From Transition to Transformation; Sustainable and Inclusive Development in Europe and Central Asia”, New York and Geneva, P.14 10 International Labour Organization; http://laborsta.ilo.org/sti/DATA_FILES/TABLE_PDF/UNE_YTH_RT_EN.pdf (Cited 08/08/2012) 11 United Nations (2012), From Transition to Transformation; Sustainable and Inclusive Development in Europe and Central Asia, New York and Geneva, P.3. Available online at: http://www.unep.org/roe/Portals/139/Moscow/From-Transition-to-Transformation.pdf 12 Ibid. P.9.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

5

Huge natural resources in the region, including natural oil and gas, coal, gold, uranium, bauxite, copper and tin make mining an important economic factor, although local communities suffer disproportionately from the adverse environmental and health effects of the mining industry. Central Asia in particular, but also some Eastern European countries, have immense fossil fuel energy reserves and great potential for discovering more, but also significant capacity for energy production from hydropower, wind and solar sources. Countries with a coastline, like Croatia and Albania also have potential to establish an offshore wind sector, while Ukraine and Bosnia have huge potential resources for biomass production.

Areas in the Caucasus-region and the mountains of Central Asia are biodiversity hot-spots nominated by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF)13 for their diversity of species, which warrants better protection of those areas and, together with a rich cultural heritage, could offer an opportunity for the development of sustainable tourism. In the agricultural sector, Central Asia has the chance not only to meet its national needs but also to become an even more important player in world agricultural markets. After overcoming environmental damage from improper irrigation and poor grazing management, and with the creation of new markets, increasing productivity and development of more business-oriented farming, Central Asia has the potential to expand already existing markets for cotton, wheat, livestock, fruit and vegetables and to introduce even more commodities.

Continuing the status quo will most likely prove disastrous for the region with an estimated decline in the Human Development Index in the range of 8-15 percent by 2050 through the deterioration of agriculture production, growing food insecurity and malnutrition, reduced access to clean water and sanitation, deforestation, land degradation and acceleration of natural disasters.14 The region has already suffered extensively from extreme and volatile weather conditions with periods of heat and cold hitting large areas; water scarcity is on the rise; production has been declining and food prices have been rising recently.

These challenges will require a certain level of self-organization and flexible management so that local actors can adapt to these complex challenges and promote sustainable local development.

1.3 What Is UNDP’s Comparative Advantage in Sustainable Local Development?

UNDP is one of the major UN agencies working in the field of sustainable development. Because of its on-the-ground presence and decades of supporting local governance, community-driven development and area-based development, UNDP is a natural leader for work in the area of sustainable local development. In sustainable local development actors must be capacitated to play their individual roles and also to participate in collective action. Collective action requires confidence of the community (in its diverse manifestations), confidence of the local government staff, including the ability to work with colleagues from different disciplines and with the community, efficient partnership with the private sector, and trust in local leadership that enables the participants to act together more effectively to pursue shared objectives.

In other words, there must be social capital or social networks that facilitate mutually beneficial collective action. A 2011 assessment of RBEC local development projects revealed that developing this trust, confidence and social capital was a major result of many UNDP projects in the region.15 The concept of community-driven development came about in the 1990s just when grassroots environmental groups and participatory planning was being promoted by Local Agenda 21 from the original Rio summit of 1992.16 A decade later, more than 6,000 local governments in 113 countries worldwide were involved in Local Agenda 21 activities and almost 4,000 had developed local action plans covering priority issues, such as natural resource management, air quality, water resources management, energy management and 13 WWF: http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/where_we_work/project/projects/index.cfm?uProjectID=GE0026&source=ge (Cited 08/02/2012) 14 UN (2012), “From Transition to Transformation; Sustainable and Inclusive Development in Europe and Central Asia”, New York and Geneva, P.14 15 UNDP BRC (2011). Assessment of UNDP Local Development Projects in Europe and the CIS 16 UN (1992). Agenda 21. The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio. Section 1, Chapter 8; Available online at: http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/ agenda21/res_agenda21_08.shtml

6

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

transportation. European municipalities noted improvements in addressing public awareness, waste reduction, biodiversity, increased inter-departmental cooperation and public consultation processes. However, while full participation by stakeholder groups was typical in high-income countries, it was rare in low-income countries.17 These results of Local Agenda 21 point to the need for development actors such as UNDP to support participatory planning and community-driven development to ensure that all local actors are involved in and benefit from sustainable development. For example, the UN’s human rights-based approach18 to local development emphasizes empowering the most marginalized people to participate in decisions over their present and future, as well as their right to enjoy equal opportunities for development.

A second distinguishing factor of UNDP’s capacity to support sustainable local development is that UNDP has programming expertise in all areas related to sustainable development – poverty reduction and social protection, energy and environment, civil society and private sector development, anti-corruption and integrity systems, gender equality, disaster risk reduction, conflict prevention, community empowerment and a human rights-based approach to development . The challenge is how to bring together these now separate programming threads under the umbrella of sustainable human development at the local level.

By having on-the-ground programming in the governance, economic, social and environmental sphere, UNDP is well-placed to identify “triple wins” – that is, jobs, social benefits, and environmental restoration – in policies, plans and actions. Such synergies should be sought out and pursued. When these synergies cannot be found, local development must ensure that improvements in one area at least will not diminish the community’s assets in another area. Too often, the benefits of an intervention or investment are emphasized or exaggerated and potential negative effects are not well understood. Examples of when the different spheres of sustainable development may conflict include: • when a renewable resource is used in an unsustainable manner – forests are overharvested, pastures are overgrazed, lakes are overfished – to bring in quick income; • when major new infrastructure such as highways are built in locations that cut through the heart of established communities, eliminate green areas, require the razing of cultural buildings, or increase vulnerability to natural disasters; • when incentives and public investments supporting one economic sector or type of job over another threaten the livelihoods of women or vulnerable populations.

Figuring out these potential positive and negative impacts across sectors takes concentrated efforts by local leaders (including local government, community leaders, private sector, civil society and environmental champions) and by UNDP staff working with those leaders.

Finally, UNDP’s reputation as a neutral player that can bring experience and advice from many countries makes national governments more receptive to its policy advice. UNDP recognizes that there is no simple template for public administration reform and decentralization, and each country will choose a different place on the continuum of centralization-decentralization. Taking into consideration the local context, UNDP can help national governments in their gradual shifting of the centre of decision making to create a multi-level and multi-actor form of governance, which is part of the enabling environment for sustainable local development. UNDP can also help expose communities to innovations and good practices from different countries so they can select which ones are most appropriate for the local/national context. In addition to bringing experience of good practices, UNDP can facilitate a direct and sustained transfer of experience among local actors in different countries, for example through the ART Global Initiative (Articulation of Territorial and Thematic Networks of Cooperation for Human Development).

17 ICLEI (2002). Local Governments Response to Agenda 21: Summary Report of Local Agenda 21 with Regional Focus http://www.iclei.org/documents/Global/la21summary.pdf 18 Relevant references: http://hrbaportal.org/the-un-and-hrba http://www.undg.org/index.cfm?P=221

8

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

In sum, UNDP’s comparative advantage in sustainable local development comes from: • local governance/local development programming that is a basis for collective action among local stakeholders and empowering the most vulnerable groups; • breadth of expertise to identify and implement where triple wins are possible, and to have an understanding of how an intervention in one area can have an unintended impact in another area; • its reputation as a neutral player that can support country-led public administration reform and decentralization; • universal presence on the ground, ability to facilitate west-east and east-east decentralized cooperation among sub-national governments, and access to professional networks and various international experiences in the area of sustainable development.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

9

2. How to Set Up a Sustainable Local Development Programme

2. How to Set Up a Sustainable Local Development Programme Sustainable local development is a multi-dimensional and multi-stakeholder process. The design of such an initiative needs a programmatic approach that accounts for all related aspects from the environmental, economic, social and governance areas. This chapter provides hands-on, practical advice for designing a programme that covers these different dimensions in an integrated manner.

This chapter will present a methodological approach for starting sustainable local development programming through: • framing analysis for analyzing the country’s policy context for sustainable local development; • project concept to articulate outputs and entry points that build on UNDP and other UN programming resources, and a programming approach with strategies for scaling up; • examples of collective action for sustainable local development programmes.

The recommendations provided here are grounded in examples of supporting sustainable local development. Most of the examples are from UNDP programming, but other examples are drawn from the EU and other countries. Lessons are also drawn from cases of unsuccessful attempts at supporting sustainable local development.

2.1. How to Conduct A Framing Analysis This stage will guide the UNDP team in conducting a tailor-made analysis of the country’s readiness to address sustainable local development. The framing analysis should review relevant legislation and strategies, the country’s level of decentralization and fiscal empowerment of local governments, and local power dynamics. To the extent possible, the analysis should also investigate whether governance principles are upheld in the country: a long-term vision with respect to socio-economic development and natural resource management; inclusion and transparency in decision making, and incentives and regulation for local initiatives, whether it is in local governments, local business or local civil society. Consultation of recent relevant reports or analytical papers, especially those containing data and empirical evidence, might prove valuable. The outcomes of the analysis should ideally be summarized in a background paper on the enabling environment for sustainable local development in the respective country, which will guide the next programming stage and serve as a critical input for the design of specific UNDP interventions. The resulting background paper could (and should) be used for advocacy purposes to ensure buy-in from the main stakeholders.

Issues to consider: • What is the national and local enabling policy framework in support of sustainable development?

• Does the country have adequate political and administrative decentralization to motivate and enable the local governments to be responsive to the needs of the local population?

• Are the local governments in the country fiscally empowered?

• What are the main stakeholders for sustainable local development and their power relations?

• Which groups are vulnerable to being excluded from jobs, housing, land or public services?

• Who are the potential champions for sustainable local development?

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

11

Framing Analysis Step 1: Analysis of policy framework for sustainable local development The UNDP team should first examine if there is a coherent policy framework supporting sustainable development. “To ensure sustainability, initiatives must be owned by the respective country and the locality hence being part of the national and local development strategies.”19 Table 2 provides examples of existing sustainable development strategies for Europe and CIS countries; in cases where these do not exist other strategies can be used as reference points, including the Poverty Reduction Strategy or Low Emission Development Strategy (e.g. Kazakhstan, Kosovo20, Moldova).

Table 2: National sustainable development strategies of Europe and CIS countries

Armenia

Government of the Republic of Armenia (2008). Sustainable Development Programme. http://www.drrgateway.net/sites/default/files/Armenia%20Sustainable%20Development%20 Program_eng_2008%5B1%5D.10.30.pdf

Azerbaijan

State Programme on Poverty Reduction and Sustainable Development in the Republic of Azerbaijan for 2008-2015. http://www.cled.az/pdf/others/Azerbaijan%20Poverty%20 Program%20for%202008-2015.pdf

Belarus

National Strategy for Sustainable Development for the Period to 2020 of the Republic of Belarus (2004) http://un.by/pdf/OON_sMall.pdf

Croatia

The Ministry of Environmental Protection, Physical Planning and Construction (2009).

Strategy for Sustainable Development of the Republic of Croatia http://www.mzopu.hr/doc/Strategy_for_Sustainable_Development.pdf

Kyrgyzstan

Sustainable Development Strategy for 2013-2017

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

National Strategy for Sustainable Development in the Republic of Macedonia (2008). http://www.moepp.gov.mk/WBStorage/Files/NSSD%201%20EN.pdf

Moldova

National Strategy for Sustainable Development. In collaboration with UNDP. http://www.undp.md/publications/doc/RAPORT_21.pdf

Montenegro

Ministry of Tourism and Environmental Protection (2007). National Strategy for Sustainable Development of Montenegro. In collaboration with UNDP and United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/Montenegro_National%20Strategy%20of%20 Sustainable%20Development%20of%20Montenegro.pdf

Serbia

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister for European Integration. National Sustainable Development Strategy. In collaboration with UNDP. http://www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natlinfo/countr/serbia/nsds_serbia.pdf

Information on existing strategies could be complemented by the results of the national discussions on post-2015 sustainable development goals that took place in Albania, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Montenegro, Serbia, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan and Ukraine. Sustainable development goals from national strategies or post-2015 development discussions can be mapped to the

19 UNDP (draft, September 2012), “Integrated Local Governance and Local Development: A Strategy Paper”.

20 Hereinafter, should be understood in full compliance with UN Security Council Resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo.

12

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

four main goals of sustainable local development explained in Chapter 1. Table 3 presents the example of priority areas that emerged from Ukraine’s discussions on the future they would like post-2015.

Table 3: Matching national goals with universal sustainable local development goals (example based on Ukraine post-2015 national consultations)

Universal sustainable local development goals

Related national sustainable development goals (Ukraine)

Honest and responsive government

Efficient and honest authorities as a pre-requisite for realizing the post-2015 development agenda.

Developed infrastructure to overcome territorial inequality.

Equal access to quality public services

Equality of opportunities and social justice: building an equitable, socially inclusive society where exclusion and marginalization are impossible.

Efficient health care and life-long good health.

Accessible and quality education: intellectual development and labour market competitiveness.

Employment generation and equal job opportunities

Decent work: promoting human development and the realization of human potential.

Modern economy: shaping an innovative development model.

Fair distribution and efficient use of public and natural resources

Healthy environment: preserving and developing ecological potential of territories.

The analysis should continue with a review of national legislation that corresponds to the country’s sustainable development strategy or emerging sustainable development agenda. The UNDP team should identify the responsibilities of local governments (and local businesses, if possible) outlined in the selected sector legislation. Local authorities are key players in sustainable development because of the basic services provided at the local level and the enabling environment they create for livelihoods. Local authorities usually support public service delivery in the areas of education, health, drinking water, sanitation, and social protection; they also may be responsible for implementing land management, energy efficiency, and supporting the development of vocational skills and labour markets as well as transport and agricultural infrastructure.

An example of sector legislation which is likely to be the partial responsibility of local government is the country’s law on energy or energy efficiency (e.g. Energy Efficiency Act of Bulgaria, Law on Energy Conservation and Enhancement of Energy Efficiency of Kazakhstan). Table 4 is a guide to possible local responsibilities in corresponding national legislation. Naturally, the actual set of laws will differ from country to country and the UNDP team can focus on sectors emphasized in the country’s sustainable development agenda.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

13

Table 4: National legislation and corresponding local responsibilities related to sustainable development

National Legislation

Illustrative Local Responsibilities

Law on energy

Creation of energy efficiency programmes or plans that may include renovation of public service buildings, measures for optimizing energy use for buildings, water supply and public lighting, and running energy efficiency information centres; Regulation or market incentives to introduce/upgrade equipment to metre and regulate consumption of gas, water and heat energy in the residential sector; Reduction of tax rates for enterprises that invest in energy efficiency measures; Improvement of the attractiveness of using public transport/walking/bicycling; Use of economically attainable local deposits of fossil fuel, secondary energy resources, alternative and renewable energy resources and ensuring the development of domestic decentralized sources of electricity and heat generation.

Law on environment

Preparing local environment action plans/resource management laws; Conducting strategic environmental assessments as part of local planning decisions; Management and protection of sub-national/urban parks, wetlands, areas of biological diversity.

Law on waste management

Establishment of ecologically sound, integrated solid waste management collection and disposal programmes; Programmes for promoting waste reduction, re-use and recycling in commercial and residential sectors.

Law on agriculture

Plans for mechanizing local agricultural and fishery industries; Promoting the introduction of renewable energy and efficient water management in local agricultural and fishery industries; Maintaining farmers’ markets; Regulation of farming and fishery operations; Attraction of foreign investment, promotion of competitiveness in organic production.

14

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

National Legislation

Illustrative Local Responsibilities

Law on disaster risk reduction

Plans for disaster prevention and management in the locality; Provision of fire services, ambulance services, emergency medical services; Ensuring compliance with building codes and construction requirements, including with relation to flood plain areas.

Land use act

Adopt local land-use management plan and/or spatial plans; Encourage development of public amenities and affordable housing; Designation of areas for built development and protection; Enforce transparent usage of public lands; Encourage density of development to optimize public transit and non-vehicle transport.

Law on social economy

Promotion of association-based economic initiatives and community-based safety nets such as producer or consumer cooperatives, mutual associations, charities, community organizations, women’s self-help groups, social enterprises.

Law on public access to information

Providing information to the public on local spending (budget, salaries, and contracts); Making information on deliberations and decisions of the local council accessible to the public ; Publishing tender results.

Source: Compiled from various legislation and “UNDP Governance Assessment of Local Action for Climate Change”, (2013).

Table 4 reflects tasks or responsibilities delegated to local governments through sector legislation, often without additional resources assigned to support implementation. These new tasks are placed on top of the local government competencies (functions) laid out in the country’s local government law. The UNDP team should next review the local government competencies in light of the country’s sustainable development agenda. Which aspects of the country’s sustainable development agenda are entrusted to local governments for implementation? Is there a legal expectation that implementation of the functions will follow the principles of social inclusion and environmental sustainability? In Table 5 we can see that both the Netherlands and Kyrgyzstan have health competencies, but the former specifically includes community mental health. Similarly, in the Netherlands the competency related to transport includes cycle paths to encourage non-motorized transport. In the United Kingdom (UK) and Germany, the local governments are expected to promote renewable energy through their spatial planning.21 This is not to say that the local governments in Kyrgyzstan should be expected to carry out their competencies in the same comprehensive manner as in the Netherlands, the UK or Germany given their significantly lower financial and institutional capacity. But with the assistance of UNDP, local governments in Eastern Europe and Central Asia could begin to implement their competencies with greater environmental sustainability and social inclusion.

21 UK Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004), “Planning for Renewable Energy: A Companion Guide to Planning Policy Statement 22”. Also, German Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development (2011), “Renewable energy resources: a future regional planning task”.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

15

Table 5: Comparison of local self-government competencies

COMPETENCE

THE NETHERLANDS

KYRGYZSTAN

Water supply sewage and waste

Waste collection and management; shared responsibility for water supply and sewage.

Provision of drinking water, sewage and communal sanitation systems.

Education

Overall responsibility for youth policy, school premises, school transport and a teaching support policy; provision of at least one state school in the municipality.

Maintenance and financing of public educational institutions; ensuring accessibility and quality.

Health

Community health services (pediatric care, environmental health, socio-medical advice, sanitary inspections, medical screening, epidemiology, health education, community mental health).

Maintenance and financing of public health institutions.

Social services

Facilities for unemployed; employment and (financial) support for disabled people; care and support for elderly people; support for social clubs, day care centres.

Approval and supervision of programmes of social and economic development; social protection of population.

Police and fire

Firefighters; police

Physical planning and land property management

Town plans and planning permission; development of zoning plans; issuing of construction permits.

Management of municipal property; utilization of land owned by the community; establishment of rules of land use and construction.

Roads and transport

Local roads/cycle paths/footpaths; local parking; car and bicycle parks; organisation and sometimes running of urban public transport.

Maintenance of municipal roads and communication; street lighting.

Culture and sports

Financing of theatres, art exhibitions, museums and local libraries.

Maintenance of historical monuments and traditions; creation of conditions for leisure activities for children and young people; local libraries; sports and leisure centres.

Environment green areas

Link building permits to environmental permits.

Tree planting; functioning of parks; cemeteries.

Economic development

Economic development activities sometimes co-financed by the state; implementation of labour market reintegration policies.

Development of social and economic programmes.

Sources: Association of Netherlands Municipalities (VNG) (2008), “Local Government in the Netherlands�, The Hague; INTRAC, Decentralisation in Kyrgyzstan.

16

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Questions to guide the analysis: • What are the national strategies or policies most closely related to and supportive of sustainable (local) development?

• What are the top sustainable development priorities outlined in these documents?

• What are the country’s emerging sustainable development priorities?

• What are the local government responsibilities under national sector legislation related to the country’s sustainable development agenda?

• What are the local government functions under the country’s law on local government and how do these relate to the country’s sustainable development priorities?

• What are the gaps in comparison to national strategic priorities and/or other countries, both in terms of functions and principles of environmental sustainability and social inclusion?

• How is local transparent decision making enshrined in legislation and procedures?

Framing analysis step 2: Analysis of political, administrative and fiscal decentralization Without adequate political, administrative and fiscal decentralization local governments will have neither the means nor the motivation to play the important roles outlined in Chapter 1. The extent to which local authorities can promote sustainable local development will depend not only on the responsibilities and functions entrusted to them, but also on their level of fiscal empowerment and on the existence of credible democratic processes that empower people to hold local authorities accountable. The main argument for local self-government is that local authorities better understand the concerns of local residents and thus are best positioned to make decisions that respond to the needs of residents. Political and administrative decentralization motivate local governments to respond to the needs and aspirations of the local population while fiscal decentralization provides the means to this end.

Political decentralization means that local leaders are elected (with recall provisions effective) and that there are mechanisms for direct citizen participation, such as referenda. It is especially important if the local executive is an appointed position that the elected local council provide real oversight and control over policy (in setting policy direction and not merely approving budgets or strategies in pro forma manner).

Administrative decentralization means that the local government has the ability to hire, fire and set terms of reference for local government employment, has the freedom to contract out responsibilities and create public-private partnerships, and is able to regulate local activities by passing by-laws. In short, administrative decentralization means that there is self-organization at the local level. This is necessary for sustainable development because it creates resilience, as the community is able to adapt structures and respond quickly when changes or shocks to the system occur.22 For example, the community can organize immediate recovery efforts after a natural disaster, or can create a multi-agency coordinating council to work on juvenile delinquency and unemployment. In a more decentralized system, information can be gathered quickly and acted upon without the need to consult higher level entities that typically have a low level of interest in a community’s problems or potential.

22 Folke, C. (2006), Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp. 253-267.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

17

In the framing analysis the UNDP team should assess the country’s political and administrative decentralization. Table 6 provides a comparison across the countries of Eastern Europe and Central Asia based on the combined rankings for political and administrative decentralization. According to World Bank analysis on decentralization globally (182 countries), the countries of Central Asia have politically and administratively highly centralized forms of local government. The Western Balkan countries are more politically and administratively decentralized, with the exception of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. 23 Table 6: Europe and CIS country combined rankings on political and administrative decentralization

High level of P-A decentralization

Moderate level of P-A decentralization

Low level of P-A decentralization

Highly centralized (political/administrative)

Bulgaria (35) Bosnia and Herzegovina (42) Montenegro (45) Ukraine (71) Serbia (83) Azerbaijan (94) Croatia (95)

Moldova (103) Kosovo (107) Russian Federation (127) Uzbekistan (132) Albania (134) Armenia (134) Georgia (137)

Turkey (152) Cyprus (167) the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (168) Belarus (170)

Turkmenistan (229) Kazakhstan (232) Kyrgyz Republic (234) Tajikistan (249)

Source: The World Bank (2012). Note that data used are from 2004-2008 so may not reflect recent changes.

23 Maksym Ivanyna, Anwar Shah, “How Close Is Your Government to Its People? Worldwide Indicators on Localization and Decentralization”, The World Bank, 2012. Definitions of political, administrative and fiscal decentralization used in the handbook are adapted from this publication.

Available online at: http://elibrary.worldbank.org/content/workingpaper/10.1596/1813-9450-6138 World Bank Policy Paper.

18

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Next in the framing analysis, the UNDP team should analyze the extent to which local governments are fiscally empowered. This means having an adequate fiscal base from local taxes and fees and central government transfers or tax revenue sharing. More specifically, it means having autonomy in rate and base setting for local revenues; transparency, predictability and unconditionality of higher level transfers; a degree of self-financing of local expenditure; control over organizing municipal and social services; autonomy in local planning and local procurement, and higher level government assistance for capital finance.

In the 2012 World Bank paper “How Close is Your Government?” countries around the world were ranked according to indicators for fiscal decentralization, with great variation in ranking of countries in the ECIS region. While Table 7 can be informative, the reader should be cautioned that data used were from 20042008 as these were available globally and some proxy indicators needed to be used.

Table 7: Europe and CIS country rankings on fiscal decentralization index

Europe and CIS Country Rankings on Fiscal Decentralization Index 11

Georgia

60

Croatia

109

fYR of Macedonia

14

Bosnia and Herzegovina

69

Kazakhstan

110

Kosovo

23

Serbia

75

Ukraine

112

Moldova

26

Albania

95

Cyprus

114

Uzbekistan

50

Armenia

91

Belarus

115

Turkmenistan

51

Turkey

92

Tajikistan

123

Montenegro

58

Azerbaijan

94

Kyrgyz Republic

Source: The World Bank (2012). Note that data used are from 2004-2008 so may not reflect recent changes.

The analysis of fiscal empowerment can be best performed through the lens of the individual local government competencies and the new tasks and responsibilities given to them through sector legislation (information collected in Step 1). This analysis should answer two questions: • Does the local government have discretionary financial, planning and procurement power with respect to the competency/task (e.g. set water tariffs or teacher wages, create investment plans, procure equipment, collect fees)?

• Does the local government have sufficient resources and/or financial transfers from the central government to perform this competency/task? In the case that the local government is dependent on central government transfers, are these stable from year to year and is there a transparent funding mechanism? Does the local government have capacity to access external funding (e.g. EU funds, capital markets, concessions) for infrastructure that is required for this competency?

The conclusions should be supported by sample local government finance data (e.g. from larger-smaller/ poorer–richer municipalities). The analysis can focus on those competencies and tasks related to the country’s sustainable development agenda.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

19

Table 8: Framework for analysis of local government fiscal empowerment

COMPETENCE

Fiscal support and control at national level

Fiscal responsibilities and capacity of local self-government

Water supply and sewage

Anti-monopoly agency establishes range for water tariff.

Water department procures equipment, plans capital rehabilitation and collects fees.

Ministry provides funding for capital investments, but does not have a tranparent funding mechanism.

Council approves tariff (within range).

(example) Own sources are not available for infrastructure upgrades.

Transfers received for capital investments are not adequate for upgrading systems.

Municipal waste Education Health Social services Police and fire (public safety) Physical planning and land / property management Roads and transport Culture and sports Environment/green areas Economic development Energy (new responsibility)

In sum, the analysis of fiscal empowerment should answer whether local governments have access to financial resources and instruments to enable them to perform their core functions and new responsibilities.

20

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

24

Questions to guide the analysis: • Are local leaders elected?

• Do local councils have mechanisms to exercise effective control over the executive branch?24 • Do mechanisms for direct citizen participation exist in law and are they used in practice?

• Does the local government have the ability to hire, fire and set terms for local government employees and create new structures?

• Can the local government enter into public-private partnerships or formal inter-municipal cooperation agreements with other local governments for service delivery, investments, etc.?

• For their core functions and new tasks, do local governments have discretionary financial, planning and procurement power?

• Do local governments receive predictable and transparent financial transfers that match the responsibilities they have been given, including for maintaining, extending or rehabilitating infrastructure?

• Are there new local government functions or responsibilities (e.g. in the field of energy) for which they require additional central government support?

• Can the local council pass by-laws to regulate local activities and to stimulate economic development?

• Do local governments have autonomy in local planning and local procurement that can be used to promote local economic development (i.e. incentives or support for local businesses)?

Framing Analysis Step 3: Analysis of vulnerable groups and local power relations among stakeholders The next step in the framing analysis is to shed light on the informal rules that define the relations among local actors. Local power relations are in the context of national systems and structures (including those created by government, economy, culture and traditions), which establish the incentives and constraints of different actors in society. According to the UNDP methodology for institutional and context analysis (ICA),25 these incentives and constraints should be sorted out to ensure that UNDP is realistic in designing programming. The ICA questions and main principles, presented in the Box 1, could be useful in analyzing the local power relations among stakeholders.

24 According to the Council of Europe Charter for Local Self-Government, it is more important for the council members to be elected than the executive head to be elected, but the council must have real influence over the executive branch. http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/122.htm 25 Institutional and Context Analysis: Guidance Note. UNDP, 2012. Available online at: http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/Democratic%20Governance/OGC/UNDP_Institutional%20and%20Context%20Analysis.pdf

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

21

Box 1: Using ICA for sustainable local development • Development requires a change in power relations and/or incentive systems. Groups establish systems that protect their privileges. Expect actors to support changes in the socioeconomic and political order only when it does not threaten their own privileges. Many development interventions seek exactly such change. Ask: Over history, under what conditions have these societal actors made strides forward in human development?

• The powerful reward their supporters before anyone else. ICA focuses on the logic of political survival. Those in power must reward those who put them there before they can reward anyone else. Ask: On whom do the powerful rely to keep them in power?

• All actors in society have interests and incentives. Rather than assume that everyone in society “wants development”, ICA assumes that some actors face incentives that potentially create conflict between their private and public interests. Broad groups (such as civil society or industrialists) often have opposing interests, as do groups within those categories. Some interests will be more easily discernible and will make more sense to outsiders than others. These include interests such as perpetuating the gender status quo, which may appear irrational or even harmful, but reflects deeply held views and emotions. Rather than enquiring about “political will”, we should instead ask: What incentives exist for major actors to put public interests over their private interests?

• Resources shape incentives. Sources of revenue shape the incentives of power holders to be more responsive to some groups than others. Ask: On what resources do the powerful depend, and how does the UN country team’s presence affect this?

• But all stakeholders in society have constraints. The mere presence of an incentive does not mean an ability to act on that incentive. Traditions and institutions, both formal and informal, shape actors’ ability to act on their incentives. Ask: What are the constraints on the power of key actors, and are there important informal rules that shape the nature of development?

For the purposes of sustainable local development, the ICA will focus on how the political or socioeconomic system may create a monopoly of the local government by the local elite or other decisionmaking practices that create unequal power positions and a narrow basis for decision making. Among the stakeholders for sustainable local development (Table 9) which groups have access to decision making?

Within the government group, are local authorities subordinate to regional authorities? Are funding decisions made in a transparent manner and according to published criteria? What is the real influence of the council? Are representatives of civil society consulted in decision making? To what extent can civil society monitor the performance of local government? What is the gender balance within and across groups? The ICA methodology recommends grouping the stakeholders into those with more or less power, as well as those with more or less interest in the project’s objectives.

22

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Table 9: Examples of stakeholders for sustainable local development

GOVERNMENT

COMMUNITY

PRIVATE SECTOR

Local council

Community-based organizations, self-help groups, community leaders, youth groups.

Business organization membership (e.g. chamber of commerce).

Executive branch/local government departments

Professional and religious associations.

Financial institutions including microfinance organizations.

Regional authorities

Vulnerable populations and their advocacy groups, local community service organizations.

Large and small businesses.

Local offices of national ministries

Local media and academia.

Training institutions/vocational education institutions.

ENVIRONMENT Actors from government, private sector and civil society with environmental interests and knowledge: local utility providers, resource user associations (farmers, hunters, fishermen, tourism operators), energy producers (existing and potential), local environmental NGOs and environmental specialists from regional academic institutions.

For sustainable local development, the ICA should identify vulnerable groups as well as those who are typically left out of decision making. For example, these may be people such as immigrants, who are excluded from official registries, or people who are living on land which they do not own. Without analysis of the local power relations there is a risk that donor interventions will perpetuate exclusion because they do not understand the participation barriers faced by local people due to any number of characteristics such as language, ethnicity, gender, age, or socio-economic position. These power relations are often reinforced through distribution of land assets or use rights. The impact analysis of three capacity development projects underlines the importance of stakeholder inclusion and the evaluation of the concrete needs of people with less power.26 In one of these projects the selection of capacity building activities and participants was done by managers (administrative directors, on the recommendation of higher authorities) and not by the direct stakeholders (head teachers). As a result, most of the teachers in rural areas in need of training were left without any training at all, while the selected teachers benefited from paid foreign trips and expensive training courses abroad.

26 Akram, S. (2008), “Human Resource Development through Foreign Aided Projects in Azad Kashmir�, National University of Modern Languages Islamabad, Pakistan. Available online at: http://prr.hec.gov.pk/Thesis/264S.pdf

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

23

Box 2: Learning from failures: Why participation doesn’t always happen A recent analysis of the failure of two Global Environmental Fund (GEF) projects implemented by the World Bank, UNDP and UNEP in Turkey (in sites of high biodiversity value) highlights the low level of local decision making as well as inequalities in gender and socio-economic status as the main factors behind the projects’ failure. The GEF projects intended to use participatory planning mechanisms for natural resource management and the creation of environmentally-friendly livelihoods, while empowering disadvantaged groups such as women. Instead, in Köprülü Kanyon conservation efforts were circumvented by those with political connections (the patronage-client network), while there was no investment in infrastructure to help the local population. In Sultan Sazlığı (Sultan’s marshes) the livelihoods of the landless reed cutters continued to be undercut by the diversion of water for irrigation to the benefit of already wealthy farmers.

The author concludes that the country’s overall paternalistic governance modality (e.g. top-down policy formation and implementation that does not allow space to civil society and is reluctant to increase local autonomy) translated into a weak state-society relationship and an insufficient basis for collective action at the local level. While the design of the projects was good, participation did not happen because of the lack of trust by the local population in such mechanisms. With regard to natural resource use, there are often conflicting interests among local groups and if these coincide with strong power (often land-based) inequalities among these groups, participatory mechanisms without sufficient empowerment of the disadvantaged groups can perpetuate these inequalities. In the cases described above, individuals with livelihoods aligned with the state’s priority sectors, such as agriculture and tourism, had much stronger positions.

Questions to guide the analysis: • Have vulnerable groups been defined in the country (based on assessments by international human rights and social inclusion review bodies)? What particular forms of discrimination and exclusion do they face in access to jobs, housing, land or public services? Are the vulnerable groups spatially concentrated? Are there differences between men and women or boys and girls?

• What are the stakeholder groups for sustainable local development and what is their relative influence in decision making?

• Are there unequal power relations at the local level – especially tied to control over assets such as land or other natural resources? Is there a political monopoly by local elites that could inhibit participatory decision-making? Is there potential for conflict over resources?

Framing Analysis Step 4: Identifying potential champions of sustainable local development The framing analysis should also identify which actors and institutions can be influential for promoting sustainable local development. These are not the same actors or local partners who are responsible for implementing the project. Rather, these are actors who are seen as leaders nationally and who are champions of either local governance or sustainable development. For example, local governance champions may come from parliament, presidential administration, relevant ministries, think tanks, or may be particularly articulate local leaders. Of course, if there is a local government association, they should be included. In determining who can be sustainable local development champions, the UNDP team should consider their position, knowledge base, resources, networks and ability to promote the sustainable local development agenda.

24

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

These stakeholders should be involved in the project design at a strategic level. Influential supporters of the initiative should be closely engaged to strengthen their ownership and ensure that their resources are fully available for promoting the programme’s objectives. The analysis should not ignore the fact that there could also be influential opponents that may perceive the project as a threat to their status. Through dialogue the benefits of the programme should be demonstrated in their context with the aim of converting opponents into supporters. At a minimum, the position of influential opponents should be neutralized.

Questions to guide the analysis: • At national level, what are the institutions and who are the individuals with the greatest interest in and capacity to support local governance and sustainable local development?

• Does the local government association have sustainable development as a priority area?

• Which local government leaders are willing to promote sustainable development and innovative practices?

Framing Analysis Step 5: Putting it together and validation The background paper should put together the various elements of the framing analysis. It should be used for discussion with influential stakeholders before developing a project concept and will establish the sustainable development policy framework and determine whether inadequate political, administrative and fiscal decentralization is a stumbling block for the implementation of the country’s sustainable development agenda.

If local governments are not fiscally empowered or if their competencies do not incorporate the principles of environmental sustainability and social inclusion, the background paper can present possible solutions, such as: • • • •

creating larger-sized local governments for a stronger fiscal base; creating mechanisms for tapping into the private sector; joining forces with other local governments through inter-municipal cooperation; giving greater autonomy to local governments in planning or procurement to promote small local businesses and life-cycle approaches; • creating a dedicated national fund to support the implementation of new tasks assigned through sector legislation.

The background paper should also propose ways to empower specific local stakeholders: • • • • • •

strengthening the role of the local council in sustainable development planning; encouraging more gender balance in decision-making roles and bodies; making the needs of vulnerable populations known to local decision makers; involving citizens in the design of service delivery; establishing public-private dialogue; increasing farmers’ access to soil and climate information.

During the validation process, these possible solutions can be discussed among influential stakeholders, including the sustainable local development champions.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

25

Proposed structure of the background paper • Sustainable development priorities and champions: national policy framework in support of honest and responsive government, equal access to quality public services, employment generation and equal job opportunity, and fair distribution and use of public and natural resources.

• Policy and practice in support of sustainable local development, assets and lacunae: - level of decentralization and fiscal empowerment, including local autonomy to provide appropriate incentives to local businesses; cooperation among local governments; - competencies matrix of local and sub-national governments, including new responsibilities, and assessed adequacy of local financial basis and central transfers; - close analysis of local informal rules and influence (based on ICA) with regard to the relative power of local actors, including women, vulnerable populations, CSOs, small businesses or farmers, and local councils.

• Proposals for country-led actions to: - increase local autonomy and accountability so that local authorities have the motivation to engage citizens in decision making and provide integrated problem-solving approaches tailored to local realities; - increase local capacities (institutional and financial) in support of implementing the country’s sustainable development agenda; - empower local actors, including women, young people and vulnerable populations to ensure that no one is left behind.

The background paper resulting from the framing analysis should be shared with the stakeholders as widely as possible. Potential champions of a sustainable local development programme should be given the opportunity to give their input with a view to encouraging their commitment to the proposed programme.

26

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

2.2. How to Formulate The Project Concept This section builds on the previous analysis and explains how to use the results to design a credible and results-oriented sustainable local development programme. First to be discussed is the selection of entry points and outputs based on the country’s goals, UNDP programming at the local level, and opportunities for UN joint programming. Further inspiration can be drawn from the almost 50 case studies of UNDP programming, UN joint programming, and initiatives of other organizations related to each of the entry points, which can be found in Annex 2. Second to be discussed are appropriate policy areas to ensure that scaling up is part of the project design.

Issues to consider: • UNDP is not starting from scratch. Given the country’s situation and existing UNDP programming, which entry points will be the best next step for the country’s transformation to sustainable local development?

• What programming at the local level has produced possible entry points?

• Which other UN agencies should be part of helping the country to develop a holistic approach to achieving its sustainable development goals?

• How will the project build in support from national and meso-level processes and institutions for the local initiatives?

• How will local leaders commit to sustainable development principles?

• Will policy reforms be necessary to clarify functions or mandate, or to establish new funds or other fiscal arrangements to ensure adequate national support for local initiatives?

Concept Note Consideration No. 1: Identify entry points and expected results It may be pragmatic to begin the process of project design through consideration and selection of several possible entry points before articulating outputs that encompass these entry points. Taking the country’s sustainable development priorities outlined in the framing analysis, the UNDP team can map potential programming entry points. The example in Table 10 uses the sustainable development goals articulated in Ukraine’s national discussions on post-2015 development. The entry points included are those relevant for programming at the local level and are categorized according to Ukraine’s sustainable development goals and the four main goals of sustainable local development: honest and responsive government, equal access to quality public services, employment generation and equal job opportunity, and fair distribution and efficient use of public and natural resources.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

27

Table 10: Matching UNDP/UN programming entry points with national sustainable development goals- Ukraine

Universal sustainable local development goals

National sustainable development goals

UNDP/UN programming entry points

Honest and responsive government

Efficient and honest authorities as a pre-requisite for realizing the post-2015 development agenda.

• Proactive government.

• Citizen participation (continuous public dialogue to determine goals, and ways to achieve them).

• Capacity development (improve management efficiency and skills of staff ).

• Transparency (simplify procedures and provide wide access to information and decision-making processes).

• Develop anti-corruption measures.

• Decentralization/regional development (transforming relations between central and local authorities with respect to infrastructure funding).

• Public-private partnerships.

• Local planning (restoring social, utility and cultural infrastructure in regions).

Developed infrastructure to overcome territorial inequality.

Equal access to quality public services

Equality of opportunities and social justice: building an equitable, socially inclusive society where exclusion and marginalization are impossible.

Efficient health care and life-long good health.

Accessible, good-quality education: intellectual development and labour market competitiveness.

Employment generation and equal job opportunity

Decent work: promoting human development and realizing human potential.

Modern economy: shaping an innovative development model.

Fair distribution and efficient use of public and natural resources

Healthy environment: preserving and developing ecological potential of territories.

• Social inclusion of vulnerable groups.

• Integration of minorities.

• Social service delivery through non-state structures.

• Social protection.

• Healthy lifestyles.

• Public/community health care.

• Life-long education and vocational training.

• Quality management of education systems.

• Small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) development.

• Active labour market initiatives, especially for younger and elderly people, including vocational education and training.

• Economic development focused on innovative technologies and labour- and knowledge-intensive industries.

• Social enterprises (employment of vulnerable populations).

• Promote modern renewable and alternative energy technologies.

• Resource efficiency in industry, agricultural production, and housing and utility services.

• Promote green economy principles, including green tourism.

• Preserve forests, water resources and biodiversity.

• Production and consumption of bio-products.

•

28

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Entry points should also address the gaps and assets identified in the framing analysis and should build on local government competencies and responsibilities through existing institutional processes, procedures and systems.

Which entry points will strengthen local autonomy and accountability, increase local capacities and empower local actors?

• If local governments are responsible for procurement, then programming may aim to improve it in terms of transparency, sustainability and support to small local businesses.

• If the local government’s competency includes strategic planning for socio-economic development this is a possible entry point for incorporating sustainability and social inclusion principles.

• If local governments have new tasks assigned by sector legislation (e.g. creation of a local energy efficiency plan), but insufficient capacity and resources, then programming may help the national government to create a targeted fund and training to support the local governments in these new tasks.

• If local council members do not know how to engage the public – including the most vulnerable groups – or do not know how to create and monitor policy goals for the executive branch, this is another entry point.

In the second part of section 2.2 policy measures that will reinforce and/or capacitate activities at the local level to improve opportunities for scaling up of activities will be discussed.

Projects that have created a basis for collective action among local stakeholders may be considered as entry points for sustainable development programming. These may include programming in local governance, local development and area-based development. Other work that may have built a basis for sustainable development among local stakeholders could include the areas of energy efficiency, an ecosystems-based approach to biodiversity, and work with farmers and SMEs. In prioritizing entry points, UNDP should also consider at what levels it has an established reputation and networks among the local government, private sector and civil society. Is this strongest at the level of the community, local self-government (i.e., municipality), or district or regional-level administration? Another question is whether the project will work in some or all regions of the country.

Even if the intention is to cover all regions eventually, current and former project staff members should be interviewed to assess in which regions there is greater local commitment and capacity.

In examining possible entry points, UNDP should consider opportunities for formal and nonformal means of cooperation with other UN agencies. At a minimum, sharing offices in the regions strengthens cost and operational efficiency and can bring the opportunity of further sharing experience, cooperation and goodwill by improving day-to-day communication. Other forms of informal cooperation include organizing joint events and joint advocacy efforts to maximize the impact, while being cost effective.

Being honest about the additional administrative and coordination burden involved, senior management should also consider UN joint programming. If the framing analysis identifies priority areas for which UNDP does not have particular expertise, and if there is a good track record of cooperation with other agencies on resource mobilization and project implementation, then joint programming should be seriously considered. In particular, the resident agencies, such as the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), and UNWOMEN bring relevant complementary expertise of a very specific and necessary nature.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

29

Box 3: Joining forces to enhance gender equality - Georgia UNDP, through the “Enhance Gender Equality in Georgia” project, partnered with UNWOMEN and UNFPA to promote gender equality and women’s empowerment through capacity building at all levels. This United Nations Joint Programme (UNJP) is managed using the pass-through modality, with UNDP serving as the administrative agent. The agencies have the distinct priority to address projects within the framework of the UNJP. For example, UNWOMEN works on domestic violence, UNFPA on sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), UNDP on political and economic empowerment.

The steering committee meets twice a year, while the respective staff members of the participating agencies meet more regularly, once or twice a month. Each agency has a programme implementation unit (PIU) and the UNDP-recruited manager of its component has a coordination function. The PIUs share the joint premise, which has significantly improved information-sharing and coordination. This project design fostered a genuine spirit of joint programming resulting in complementary activities, real synergies, joint advocacy and, in general, enhanced results.

The UNJP has also successfully coped with the emerging operational challenges, such as the use of a common premise. A tripartite memorandum of understanding has been signed on the use of joint premise, which spells out the obligations of each agency. Before launching activities, the agencies made a decision to design a common programme logo and other visibility materials. This has resolved the visibility risks. As a result, it can be concluded that spending sufficient time on resolving a number of small details among the agencies in the beginning enhances operational efficiency and saves considerable time later on.

UN joint programming provides the most direct and powerful mechanism for fostering cooperation and triggering synergies within UN agencies’ interventions. UN joint programming guidelines are designed by the UN Development Group and define the framework, scope, format and procedures for cooperation.27 There are three distinct types of fund management modalities for the UN joint programme: parallel fund

27 UNDG: http://www.undg.org/content/programming_reference_guide_%28undaf%29

30

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

management, pooled fund management, and pass-through fund management.28 UN agencies frequently face a diverse range of issues while engaging in joint programming that may range from resistance at the senior level to the simple operational aspects. Some practical recommendations for UN joint programming are found in Annex 1.

The next step is to craft outputs (results) that encompass the selected entry points. Illustrative outputs including those from UNDP programmes in the region are provided in Table 11. Sample indicators for each of the illustrative outputs are found in Table 17 (Chapter 3). One project may have multiple level results – for example, impact, outcome, outputs – reflecting different thematic priorities, or choose separate outputs focusing on what will be achieved and how it will be achieved (i.e. focusing on capacities and political commitment).

Table 11: Sample outputs (results) for sustainable local development

Outputs focusing on what needs to be achieved

Outputs focusing on how the objectives will be achieved

Decentralized system of sustainable management of local resources established, providing opportunities to local communities to engage in decision making on managing land, forest, water and other natural resources.

Strengthened local capacities to manage energy and environmental resources in a sustainable manner and ensure equitable access to these resources.

Access to business development services, legal counselling and financial institutions increased for farmers, agricultural enterprises, start-ups and other SMEs in the programme regions.

Institutionalized political commitment to sustainable development through local/regional development strategies that respect human rights, gender equality, environmental sustainability and participatory decision-making.

Small farmers can access information about experience in sustainable farming and also access markets, contributing to decreased poverty and enhanced livelihood opportunities in rural areas.

Strengthened capacities of local CSOs, volunteer organizations, media and especially women-led organizations to participate in local decision making, build partnerships and manage/evaluate projects.

Increased opportunities for women and employment through targeted business support services and active labour market policies, including labour market-responsive vocational skills.

Institutionalized political commitment to gender equality through gender budgeting and other policies or mechanisms to ensure gender representation in decision making.

Strengthened capacities of citizens and civil society to co-design public services and monitor service delivery to ensure greater accessibility.

Concept Note Consideration No. 2: Scaling-up strategies29 An eye to scaling up should begin with the design of sustainable local development programming. How will a local initiative be supported in the long-term by local actors, and national and meso-level institutions? For example, will local actors support the activities through their own budget and in-kind resources?

Will national institutions adopt sustainable local development objectives and provide support through policy reforms or new fiscal arrangements? Will there be a need to create a special targeted division within a ministry to strengthen the capacity of local governments? How can the sustainable development objectives be included in political programmes?

28 All details of the UNJP, including guidelines, standards, forms, templates and agreements can be found here http://www.undg.org/index. cfm?P=1614 and http://www.undg.org/index.cfm?P=240 29 Some of the discussions in this section come from UNDP Guidance Note “Scaling Up Development Programmes”, September 2012.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

31

Define/consolidate national-level sustainable local development objectives To make it easier to attract national support for sustainable local development activities, the project can include a component for defining common sustainable local development objectives within the country.

In addition to helping form an agenda of national partners, this process will create a common language among the local actors in different parts of the country on sustainable local development. This common language will help in sharing and replicating experiences throughout the country. If done correctly (in a consultative manner), this will take considerable time, so it is advisable to pursue this in parallel with activities working directly with local governments on sustainable development self-assessment, strategic planning and implementing action plans. In fact, the process will be iterative – as local governments become more aware of what sustainable development means in their own community they will be able to contribute to national dialogue on sustainable local development objectives.

These common objectives should encompass social, economic and environmental goals. Beyond that, sectors that align with the national priorities may be specified. Table 12 provides two examples of rating systems that are composite measures of sustainable development objectives. The OECD Better Life Index is a standard used to compare well-being in the areas of material living condition and quality of life. The OECD index uses national statistics and thus does not show geographic disparities within a country. The STAR Community Rating System was developed by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI/Local Governments for Sustainability) together with the National League of Cities and the US Green Building Council for use in the United States. The STAR system is meant to be used by municipalities and encourages the municipalities to create indicators for which data can be collected so that they can monitor performance in the seven goal areas.

32

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Table 12: Sample multi-dimensional rating systems3031

OECD Better Life Index (ranked nationally)30 Jobs (employment rate – disaggregated by gender and age, long-term unemployment rate, disparities in earnings, job security).

STAR (USA) Community Rating System31

Economy and Jobs: Create equitably shared prosperity and access to quality jobs.

Work-Life Balance (employees working long hours, time devoted to leisure and personal care).

Education (educational attainment, years in education, students’ skills, disaggregated by gender).

Community (time spent in volunteer activities, social support networks).

Health (life expectancy, chronic diseases, tobacco consumption, obesity, self-reported health).

Education, Arts and Community: Empower vibrant, educated, connected and diverse communities.

Health and Safety: Strengthen communities to be healthy, resilient, and safe places for residents and businesses.

Safety (assault rate, homicide rate).

Housing (rooms per person, dwellings with basic facilities, housing expenditures – including utility fees – as a share of the household budget).

Environment (air pollution, water quality).

Built Environment: Achieve livability, choice, and access for all where people live, work, and play.

Climate and Energy: Reduce climate impacts through adaptation and mitigation efforts and increase resource efficiency.

Natural Systems: Protect and restore the natural resource base upon which life depends.

Citizen Engagement (trust in political institutions, voter turnout, consultation on rule making).

Income (household net-adjusted disposable income, household financial wealth, extent to which income distribution is unequal).

Equity and Empowerment: Ensure equity, inclusion and access to opportunity for all citizens.

After suitable deliberation among local governments and relevant national counterparts, the common objectives should be adopted as the guiding framework for the local governments to pursue sustainable local development in the country. If there is a local government association, the member local governments can adopt the objectives. Endorsement of the objectives by the most relevant ministry would also be important for creating a long-term basis for cooperation with UNDP on the issue of sustainable local development. Note that these objectives should be fairly broad to allow for individual approaches and priorities to emerge in different localities.

Foster specific goals for local leaders When a local leader makes a firm commitment to a policy goal with clear and measurable targets, there is a better chance for it to be achieved. For example, the European Covenant of Mayors has a very specific set of activities and targets that are to be met, including creation of a sustainable energy action plan. UNDP

30 http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/. In addition to the indicators in Table 12, the index also includes life satisfaction, which is a personal subjective measure of well-being.

31 http://www.icleiusa.org/sustainability/star-community-index

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

33

Croatia created a similar initiative by which mayors signed an energy charter, by which they were making a public commitment to policies supporting energy efficiency. Such public commitment can help foster and secure political will for sustainable local development. It is typical for mayors to make such public commitments, but if other local government leaders were to join in (for example, from business and civil society or the local council) the impact could be even greater. In governance terms, this is called programmatic politics. Programmatic politics involve commitments to goals that will benefit the wider community.

The opposite of programmatic politics is “clientelistic politics”, in which politicians may have patronage networks or serve narrow groups more than the common good.32

Box 4: Programmatic politics for scaling up energy efficiency - Croatia In UNDP’s Energy Management Systems Project, political leadership for energy efficiency was created at the national and local levels. The embodiment of the local government leader’s political commitment was the Energy Charter signed by 147 Croatian cities. The project created a tool for energy data gathering and analysis, provided technical support for energy audits, and educated 5,000 people on energy management and efficient energy use. But more than 140 investment projects may not have materialized without the critical element of political, programmatic commitment to these goals, supported through strategic energy planning and formalized in the Energy Charter. Later on, the Croatian Government covered 80% of the project funding, an indicator of the national government’s commitment to energy efficiency.

Explore national funds and territorial pacts It is probable that some kind of national funding mechanism needs to be created or adapted to support the sustainable local development objectives agreed upon. An existing national fund could create new eligibility criteria related to sustainable local development. The Finnish Innovation Fund Sitra provides project funding to local governments and local actor groups for activities that promote social well-being and are based on ecological sustainability. Sitra has provided funding to a number of local governments to support a community spirit, public sector management, social enterprises, organic and local food, and self-produced energy.

32 Lister, S., UNDP Oslo Governance Centre (2012), “Democratic Governance and Sustainable Human Development: moving beyond ‘business as usual’”.

34

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Instead of, or in combination with, a central funding body, the government could create territorial pacts to provide financial support and policy coordination between central and local government. In some EU countries territorial pacts are used to support implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy and its seven flagship initiatives. The territorial pacts give a territorial dimension and local ownership to implementation of national reform programmes by identifying obstacles particular to each region and then customizing the national targets to the needs and capacities of the particular region. Financial and governance provisions ensure coordination and support to synchronize the policy agendas of the various tiers of government in order to meet the targets.33 Initiate meso-level partnerships and local co-financing Identifying specific sources of local co-financing for the project will ensure that there is ownership of the project. It also facilitates scaling up because when project costs are shared there are more resources for replication. In the initiation/preparatory phase when objectives are being set, it is important to secure local co-financing from local actors as well as meso-level actors. One of the most important resources for sustainable local development programming lies with the government counterparts, as these goals will align with their development priorities. By requesting local co-financing, it will create a strong sense of ownership with the local actors and increase the chances of sustainability of the interventions. It can also improve the perspectives for effective mobilization of resources from a third partner.

Table 13: Sources of local co-financing or in-kind contributions

Government

Private Sector

Civil Society

Budget of local government, premises.

Associations (particularly for collection of data).

Use of civil society networks, such as social media and communitybased organizations for grassroots mobilization.

Budget of sub-national government or national government, premises.

Corporate Social Responsibility (e.g. companies contribute with their expert knowledge, materials, financing etc.).

Civil society as shareholder/joint owner (e.g. for renewable energy projects).

Inter-municipal agreements whereby budget support is joined from 2 or more municipalities.

Academic institutions for premises, research support.

Concluding co-financing agreements with local actors for technical assistance, versus physical investments, is not an easy exercise due to the limited financial base of most local and regional authorities compared to that of the state. From the start, expectations should be set with regard to input from the local authorities or other local actors in terms of premises, human resources and finances.

In the case of UNDP’s programming in Ukraine (Box 5), rules were set out from the start of the project whereby the district and regional level of government would have to contribute to the soft part of project implementation and contribute funds for particular community investment projects. This enabled the project to stretch funds and also to create strong commitment among national partners.

33 The EU, Committee of the Regions (2011), “Territorial Pacts: Making the Most of Europe 2020 through Partnership�. Available online at: https:// portal.cor.europa.eu/europe2020/news/Documents/Territorial%20Pacts%20Brochure%20for%20the%20WEB.pdf

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

35

Box 5: Scaling up by securing meso-level partnerships - Ukraine The Community-Based Approach (CBA) Programme in Ukraine has worked on scaling up support to community-led initiatives based on a multilevel approach. From one perspective, CBA has created multilateral partnerships among local communities (empowered and registered as community-based organizations), local authorities and businesses. This ensures local ability to sustain and extend the development results. At the same time, to create strong links along the various levels of government and institutional sustainability for these initiatives, CBA required that district and regional level governments make specific institutional and financial commitments to the process (e.g. district level planning committees that involved first tier local government). Finally, CBA partner local governments actively and regularly reported on the process and its progress to their community. This increased transparency and accountability to the community and also had the effect of inspiring neighbouring communities.

Implementation of the first phase of the CBA project raised the question of the legal and policy-level impediments to sustainable community-led local development. General recommendations on the necessary reforms were developed, and working groups are currently in the process of moving this forward by proposing a set of concrete actions for the Government of Ukraine to advance decentralization and people-centred development. The above-mentioned activities are expected to provide a sound basis to convince the national authorities to consider internalizing the CBA methodology. In addition, UNDP Ukraine supported the Academy of Municipal Management in developing the training course entitled “Sustainable Development of Society”, which has now been introduced in twelve partner universities in ten regions of Ukraine. This means that the project’s efforts at capacity development do not stop with the project, but are fully integrated into the education of future local leaders.

2.3. How to Promote Collective Action for Sustainable Local Development Collective action is voluntary coordinated activity for the benefit of the common interests of many individual actors or institutions. Many of the challenges of sustainable local development are complex.

Without collective action, individual actors and institutions may act in their own short-term interest to the detriment of the common interest. While local government should attempt to stimulate and coordinate collective action by engaging citizens and the private sector in solving community issues, it should not play a coercive role. Rather, local authorities should promote – within their own administration and within civil society and the private sector – environmentally sustainable practices and inclusive approaches to socio-economic development. To take advantage of the potential of collective action, local government needs the capacity to plan along multiple dimensions to take advantage of synergies and strengths within the community.

For UNDP, a sustainable local development programme should be built around two or more of the following areas of collective action: • • • •

innovative and effective management; local economic development; sustainable resource management; inclusive service delivery .

All of these aim at achieving the sustainable local development goals presented in Chapter 1. The figure below also illustrates how collective action is supported by the principles of long-term vision, incentives, regulation, inclusion, empowerment and transparent decision making.

36

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Figure 3: Collective action for sustainable local development

Principles

Transparent Decision Making

Long-Term Vision

Collective Action

Sustainable Resource Management

Innovative & Effective Management

Goals Empowerment & Inclusion

Fair & Efficient Use Of Resources

Honest & Responsive Government

Inclusive Service Delivery

Incentives & Regulations

Local Economic Development Equal Access To Quality Public Services

Sustainable Local Development

Employment & Equal Job Opportunities

Issues to consider: • How does the local government need to modernize its management approach so that it can collaborate effectively and lead in sustainable development?

• How can the local government encourage and connect the private sector in green growth initiatives, including new employment opportunities?

• What are the roles that private sector, CSOs and local government can play in supporting sustainable resource management?

• How can public services reach a greater portion of the population, including vulnerable groups?

• How can local stakeholders create a common vision for sustainable development and carry out that vision through collective action?

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

37

Collective Action 1: Innovative and effective management Innovative and effective management will help in achieving the goal of honest and responsive government.

A sustainable local development programme must include elements of institutional capacity building with regard to the local government in order to improve internal management and create a more open approach to working with citizens and the private sector. This means strengthening cross-jurisdictional cooperation and cooperation between local government and civil society or businesses. Two specific areas that UNDP can support are inter-municipal cooperation (IMC) and public-private or social partnerships.

Through IMC arrangements, municipalities (or other levels of sub-national government) can unite their human, technical, physical or financial resources to deliver services or improve planning. Urban areas and their hinterlands have natural economic links, so it makes sense to have joint investment promotion strategies or to create a joint economic development district to share tax revenues for investments in infrastructure that address their joint issues. Rural areas may not have the resources to fund social infrastructure, such as secondary schools and hospitals, nor the level of demand for services that require specialized expertise. Cross-jurisdictional cooperation is also necessary because administrative boundaries differ from natural boundaries for watersheds and environmental factors, such as air pollution or contamination of water resources from mining and industrial activities. Protecting the migration routes of animals is another area in which jurisdictions should cooperate. IMC has been used for regional and rural development, environmental protection services, social and child protection, tax administration and solid waste management, ecosystems management, forest management, sustainable tourism, agricultural advisory services, and green public procurement. In the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (see Box 6) IMC has been used to share resources among municipalities to improve public service delivery, tax management and new competencies, such as energy efficiency.

Box 6: IMC for energy efficiency – the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Under the regional programme Think Globally Develop Locally, twelve municipalities in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia are using IMC to comply with the national legislation requiring them to create the Three-Year Programme and Annual Action Plan on Energy Efficiency. Using coaching and learning-by-doing techniques, the participating municipalities conducted walk-through audits of their public buildings and entered data on energy consumption into a database administered by the local government association. They are also learning about modelling of energy efficient measures to inform their decision making on energy efficient investments. They jointly hired a specialist responsible for the implementation of energy management and agreed to outsource some functions to a local NGO. In parallel, the municipalities are conducting a joint social marketing campaign to raise the awareness of young people about energy efficiency.

The local government needs to establish regular dialogue with the private sector and community representatives to demonstrate transparency and engage them in strategic decisions. UNDP may consider how to help local authorities to create feedback loops with their community so that they can monitor trends in the community’s perception of the problem and, in the process, discuss solutions. While 38

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

some local governments look to mobile solutions for creating better communication channels, other methods such as photo stories can relate more qualitative information from the community. Innovative online platforms connect local councils and organizations with innovators and ideas and therefore foster communications between the stakeholders and offer space to interact.34

Box 7: Social Media for Innovative Local Empowerment (SMILE) - Kosovo At the local policy level, the project promotes information and communication technologies (ICTs), including social media, to widen the outreach capacities of two selected municipalities, make them more responsive to young people’s needs and increase their dialogue with young women and men. At the grassroots level, this project supports CSOs in using ICTs, including social media-based platforms and mobile phone technologies, to strengthen the voice and participation of young women and men in decision making and governance monitoring, thus contributing to more transparency and accountability.

Taking this one step further, the local government can involve volunteers and leaders from the community in planning and management processes. For example, the local government may want to involve community leaders in early warning systems to detect potential conflicts, hazards, or degradation of resources. The local government may also wish to build the capacity of local civil society organizations (CSOs) so that they can cooperate more effectively with each other and perform duties as service providers, for example in the sphere of social services.

Box 8: Adaptive strategies – Armenia The regional UNDP project Capacity Building for Climate Risk Management supported a national project in Armenia focused on disaster risk reduction. The disaster and climate risk vulnerability was assessed as high in the four participating regions, but challenges highlighted in the capacity assessment included poor cooperation among government structures and resistance in the community (which is made up mostly of refugees) to any initiative that did not provide immediate benefit. The creative approach used was a photo story contest, which revealed hazards through the eyes of the community members. Having created a better common understanding of the challenge, farmers, bankers and loan organizations were interested in new solutions such as anti-hail nets to protect vineyards. In another community, they successfully installed retaining walls on riverbanks to ensure protection from floods and mudflow.

When the local government opens itself to new ways of working with the community, it will find that the resources contributed by the community will increase. In the case of the UNDP project in Crimea, local champions were used to reach out to the broader community for greater impact and sustainability of results (see Box 9).

34 http://wearefuturegov.com/case-study/simpl-challenges/

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

39

Box 9: Rural development through collective action in multi-ethnic communities – Crimea, Ukraine Through the Crimea Integrated Development Programme (Ukraine), the different ethnic groups and cultures in the Crimean peninsula developed mutual trust and improved communication by implementing 420 community projects. Parent communities worked on 82 projects and contributed to greater tolerance in rural schools. Local champions secured participation of other community members to create broad-based participation. Using this approach of collective action, it evolved from a simple community project to focus on long-term development, even spawning the creation of the Crimean Rural Development Agency and strengthening 33 agricultural cooperatives.

Collective Action 2: Local economic development Local economic development should be promoted to achieve the goal of employment generation and equal job opportunities. The focus is on promoting green growth and showing that economic development can be compatible with principles of environmental sustainability and social inclusion.

In promoting local economic development for sustainable development, UNDP should ensure that livelihood opportunities are strengthened for vulnerable groups such as returnees, minorities, old and young people that find it more difficult to find employment or start businesses. UNDP’s work in Bosnia has emphasized re-integration of returnees as part of the country’s economic recovery (See Box 10), while UNDP Bulgaria created a new vocation for unemployed people over the age of 50 (See Box 11). The recent UNDP publication “Green Jobs for Women and Youth: What Can Local Governments Do?” looks specifically at what local government can do to ensure women and young people have access to jobs that are decent and do not harm the environment.35

Box 10: Partnership for improving confidence and economic viability – Bosnia For the multiethnic communities of Upper Drina in Bosnia and Herzegovina, socio-economic recovery depended on empowering the community and creating partnership opportunities among the various stakeholders. Important tools for establishing social trust were constant dialogue and visibility through the media. Through their involvement in the strategic planning process and training on financial issues, the community and local government staff became more confident. As a result, the five local governments improved their credit rating and eight CSOs were able to raise funds externally. Returnees and other vulnerable groups received business start-up grants to become sheep farmers.

Box 11: Creating new vocations for hard-to-employ people – Bulgaria The project Social Services for New Employment was able to tackle the lack of community-based social services by providing training to registered unemployed people over the age of 50 through NGOs and creating jobs for them as social assistants. As a result of the success of the pilot project in selected local municipalities the national government developed secondary legislation for community-based social services, including instructions for operational organization of the social assistant – now a registered vocation in Bulgaria – and household assistance services. Special vocational training for social assistants is now incorporated into the national vocational education system.

35 UNDP (2013). Green Jobs for Women and Youth. What Can Local Governments Do? http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/

home/librarypage/poverty-reduction/participatory_localdevelopment/green-jobs-for-women-and-youth--what-can-localgovernaments-do-/

40

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Local economic development has roles for local government, businesses and even CSOs in providing infrastructure, training, operating and support services for local businesses and connecting them to the local labour market. One example of a project that combines environmental issues with economic development is being implemented by Danish municipalities (see Box 12). The municipalities are working together to train master craftsmen involved in home rehabilitation so that they are skilled in applying appropriate energy efficiency technology.

Box 12: Green Business Growth – Denmark This is a public-private partnership between three Danish municipalities and 14 businesses from the production, consultancy, entrepreneurship, finance and education sector. The local initiative targets small businesses, in particular master craftsmen, who are being retrained in the techniques of energysaving renovation. Interested SMEs are offered a full support package designed to provide them with skills for undertaking energy-saving renovation and for marketing their services. Green Business Growth aims to create 300 new, green jobs over the 2010-2013 period within businesses promoting energy efficiency in existing buildings.

The private sector is a key stakeholder and an important partner in sustainable local development because it can contribute management and technological know-how and financial investment. Municipalities should be encouraged to partner with the private sector to provide services and develop the territory. The Public-Private Partnerships for Urban Environment in Nepal works with 13 municipalities, with each municipality forming partnerships with the private sector both for small and large investments.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

41

The focus of these partnerships ranges from a biogas plant at a wholesale fruit and vegetable market, park management, community composting, landscaping roadsides, bus terminal and traffic management, and beautification and maintenance of an entrance gate to the city to larger projects for street lighting, housing, water supplies, and integrated solid waste management.36 In many cases, a private sector partner can simultaneously partner with many neighbouring municipalities, particularly when large-scale investment in infrastructure is involved.

Collective Action 3: Sustainable resource management Sustainable resource management will help the locality to achieve the goal of fair distribution and efficient use of public and natural resources. One of the overlooked assets of local communities is natural capital. This includes the air we breathe, our drinking water, water for fish and recreation, open spaces and green areas, and renewable energy resources. It can also include special kinds of resources such as mineral water, hot springs or areas important for tourism. Minerals are another important form of natural capital, but generally are managed by national governments. One of the principles of sustainable resource management is to ensure that natural capital is not run down. Natural resources should be used in a way that allows for their renewal.

Changing incentives and regulations may be needed to create a long-term vision for sustainable resource management. For example, procurement rules may need to be amended to consider lifecycle costs in tenders. The local government needs incentives in its budgeting system for resource efficiency. This means a multi-year budgeting system that allows savings from resource efficiency to be retained at the local level. Where resources are extracted without thought to the long-term benefits for the community, there must be a re-distribution of the benefits of the natural resources to those who can benefit from the resources and have the know-how and incentives to preserve and enhance them, as the example below illustrates.

Box 13: Creating incentives for sustainable resource management – Kyrgyzstan The Sustainable Mountain Pasture Management project in Kyrgyzstan aimed to prevent land degradation from overgrazing, while supporting livelihoods. After awareness raising and capacity building campaigns, it put in place a local Pasture Users’ Association which assigned pasture areas to members of the project for a fee. Revenues were used for local restoration projects and also for improving veterinary services, bridges, shipyards and creating solar stations. Members’ incentives changed: through being obliged to pay for grazing rights they realized that this was an ecological service not to be overused. At the same time, the members saw the benefits of the revenue from their fees..

Long-term resource management is a collective responsibility, with each local actor having an important role to play. The local government can ensure ample green areas through spatial plans and zoning rules, organize transport modalities to encourage public transit and biking, implement energy efficiency measures in buildings and service delivery, self-produce energy, and educate businesses and citizens about what they can do to improve the environment. Citizens can participate in waste reduction exercises and conserve water and energy. Business can rationalize resource use in their production and distribution operations. However, small business often do not know how to do this or may not understand the financial benefits, so they can be supported through advisory support on rational resource use (see Box 14).

Similarly, small scale farmers often are not aware of sustainable agricultural technologies and techniques.

36 The global programme on Public-Private Partnerships for Sustainable Development is a resource in this area. http://www.undp.org/content/ undp/en/home/ourwork/capacitybuilding/focus_areas/focus_area_details4/pppsd.html

42

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Box 14: Business support to increase resource efficiency – UK The British NGO ENWORKS supports business of all sizes and sectors in achieving environmentally sustainable business practice and therefore to reduce their costs. Business support ranges from on-site reviews, ongoing support with implementing improvements, access to bespoke online software, training and networking events and information services, always tailored to individual business needs and lasts for weeks, months or even years. ENWORKS’ local advisors help businesses to reduce energy, water and material use, to manage waste, review design specifications and to improve process efficiency.

Online software assists businesses in monitoring their economic and environmental impact. From 2007 to 2013, ENWORKS provided assistance to 1,150 businesses, leveraged 10.6 million private sector investments and created 987 jobs. ENWORKS’ business support is part of the “Solutions for Business” package, a group of publicly funded business support products and services designed to help businesses start and grow.

Sustainable resource management cannot happen without education, awareness-raising and transparency. Local government staff members need to understand how to integrate environmental sustainability, disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation into infrastructure planning. Civil society needs to have access to information on polluters and on contracts for exploitation of local resources such as hot springs, mineral waters or tourism sites.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

43

Collective Action 4: Inclusive service delivery Inclusive service delivery will help to achieve the goal of equal access to quality public services. The interests of all groups (women, minorities, young people, vulnerable people, disabled people, etc.) need to be taken into consideration and integrated into the programme design. The framing analysis will have identified local power imbalances that can inhibit full participation by all stakeholders. To mitigate this, appropriate engagement strategies can be defined for those stakeholders with high interest but low power.

Experience shows that meetings with individual groups may be needed to allow them to vocalize their interests. An example is working with students who say little when their teachers are present, but become engaged and innovative when the professors leave.

One part of the engagement strategy is to involve stakeholders with the highest interest but least power in the project design process, as was done in the Aid for Trade project described in Box 15.

Box 15: Involving stakeholders in the project design process: the Wider Europe: Aid for Trade project (operating in Central Asia, the South Caucasus and the Western CIS) Aid for Trade has largely been shaped by involving stakeholders in the design process. The project started with conducting participatory situation assessments on the ground and recruited experts who examined the local context, focusing on three client groups: the private sector, CSOs (business/farmers/thematic associations) and local government structures. During stakeholder meetings to validate the findings, stakeholders were offered the possibility to decide on the topic of their training courses for the next stage. As a result, participants received training courses on standards, business skills and negotiation skills. The involvement of stakeholders has become a regular practice and a working model in the project: local people are consulted about their impressions of the project activities, so that their concerns can be heard and understood, and the solutions to their problems are included in the project as much as possible. A committee composed of UNDP, members of civil society, experts and local government assesses proposals for business ideas to be supported by project financing. The committee members are collectively able to assess not only whether the proposal is a viable business idea, but also whether the individual presenting the proposal has the necessary business skills and drive. By engaging local stakeholders, Aid for Trade has ensured that project activities are appropriate and sustainable.

Within the local context, one of the most relevant objectives is to make local authorities more aware of the needs of the most vulnerable groups at the outset, and to provide services that are accessible to all, regardless of age, gender, disability, socio-economic position, or where the person lives. An example of this is a vulnerability assessment survey conducted in Moldova, which clearly identified the vulnerable populations. The UNDP Local Governance Support Project in Uzbekistan ensured that the city’s new one-stopshop would be accessible to people with disabilities. To take this one step further, UNDP can encourage local governments to engage citizens in designing and monitoring service delivery to ensure that these are provided equitably and meet the needs of the population.

44

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Box 16: One-stop services for all – Uzbekistan The project, Public Services One-Stop Shop, was developed and aimed at piloting delivery of administrative services in a single place in cities of Uzbekistan. Officials carried out comprehensive needs assessments and undertook a study tour in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City in order to learn from their Viet Namese counterparts about how one-stop-shops can provide more efficient services. UNDP offered assistance in putting integrated information systems in place. Apart from helping to improve the efficiency of services it ensured that facilities for the One-Stop-Shop would be accessible to all groups, including people with disabilities. The project trained staff to manage the One-Stop-Shop, and conducted an outreach campaign to convince the public to use it. Based on the success of the OneStop-Shop to date, Uzbekistan’s cabinet of ministers has made a commitment to replicate the project across the country.

Box 17: Improved access to social services – Moldova In Moldova UN Women has helped to introduce the Joint Information Service Bureau (JISB) for improved access to social services. JISB brings together nine services focusing on employment, the labour market and social protection, providing guidance and advice and thus addressing challenges at the local level. One aspect of the service delivery innovation was increasing efficiency, convenience and transparency with a “one-stop-shop” or “one window” located in an easily accessible and visible place in the building of the rayon council and/or rayon administration premises (with operational costs fully covered by local sources including rayon council). JISB sittings take place once a week, providing the opportunity for the local population to benefit from its coordinated services in the areas of employment, social protection, SME development, land cadastre, agriculture and so on. To ensure its effective functioning, memorandums of understanding were signed between service providers, and rayon administration. By meeting up, the service providers become familiar with each other’s work and were able to take a more holistic view of clients and identify complementary services (e.g. active labour market services for those receiving social benefits). Another service delivery innovation of the JISB is mobile visits to villages, coordinated with local village leaders, which are especially beneficial for women and rural populations unable to travel to the rayon centre, including the disabled or those who care for the disabled.

Self-Assessment Tool for Sustainable Local Development (SAT4SLD) UNDP BRC developed the SAT4SLD to help local actors in assessing their current situation and defining areas where collective action can help achieve the locality’s sustainable development goals that reflect national goals and local priorities. SAT4SLD was designed in line with UN principles, including a human rights-based approach to development. SAT4SLD equally considers the environmental sustainability, governance, economic development and social inclusion aspects of sustainable development, including gender equality and empowerment of vulnerable groups.

The three steps of the SAT4SLD analytics can be carried out alongside development or updating of a locality’s strategic plan, helping the local actors to answer these key questions: • Situation analysis answers: Today, how are we - local government, community (and those representing community such as CSOs and media), private sector, natural resource users/protectors — safeguarding an honest and responsive government, promoting fair and efficient use of local resources, generating employment, and ensuring equal access to jobs and quality public services?

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

45

• Problem identification answers: How can we work together more effectively to improve quality of life in our locality today and for future generations? Do we have the commitment, capacity and means to achieve what we want?

• Asset-based monitoring answers: How can we take stock of our assets and how can we enhance these assets for future development in our locality?

SAT4SLD generates dialogue among local counterparts on delivering on the country’s sustainable development goals at the local level while at the same time identifying local priorities. Led by local expert facilitators (e.g. in Ukraine from the regional universities) the self-assessment process has different groups and sub-groups of stakeholders respond to questions corresponding to their “domains” (see table below).

Participants in self-assessment should represent local government, civil society groups, local media, business associations, business owners, environmental NGOs or experts and resource users, such as farmers.

There should also be gender and demographic balance.

Table 14: Sustainable local development domains

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

COMMUNITY

PRIVATE SECTOR

ENVIRONMENT

Basic and social services

CSO landscape

Business landscape

Natural resource management

Planning, infrastructure investment and land development

Gender equality

Business support services

Disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation

Financial management and procurement

Social cohesion

Labour

Sustainable agriculture

Administrative and support services

Voice and participation

Business integration

Sustainable energy

Results of the self-assessment are presented in the situation analysis as a basis for formulating or adapting sustainable development goals and identifying collective actions to address those goals. The results of the self-assessment can be depicted visually and compared with national or local averages (See Figure 3 below).

The SAT4SLD methodology has already been piloted and tested in Uzbekistan, Ukraine and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in different contexts to support strategic planning of large cities, districts and inter-municipal planning regions. The lessons learned through the tool implementation are included in the methodology.

46

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Figure 4: Visual representation of self-assessment results

Local results compared to national average CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANISATIONS LANDSCAPE BASIC AND SOCIAL SERVICES PLANNING, INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT and LAND DEVELOPMENT

4,0 3,5 3,0

GENDER EQUALITY SOCIAL COHESION

2,5 2,0

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND PROCUREMENT

VOICE and PARTICIPATION

1,5 1,0 0,5

ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT SERVICES

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

0,0

BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES

SUSTAINABLE ENERGY

DISASTER RISK REDUCTION and CLIMATE ADAPTATION

BUSINESS INTEGRATION BUSINESS LANDSCAPE

SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE Labour

Municipal Average

Natonal Average

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

47

3. Management Recommendations and Project Document

3. Management Recommendations and Project Document This chapter provides guidance on managing and monitoring a sustainable local development programme. First, recommendations are provided for selecting an implementing partner, implementation modality, management structure and resource mobilization strategy. Next, the construction of a monitoring framework is explained, with recommendations for innovative forms of citizen-collected data. Finally, risks and challenges are presented according to ownership, institutional capacities and financial capacity and resource use.

Issues to consider: • Is there an appropriate national implementing partner for covering multi-sectoral interventions?

• Which management structure is most appropriate?

• How can the program structure provide flexibility in uncertain funding environments?

• How to set up an appropriate monitoring framework? How can stakeholders be engaged in data collection?

• What are the programmatic risks based on lack of ownership or capacity among national or local stakeholders, or lack of financial resources?

3.1. Management for Sustainable Local Development Selecting an implementing partner and implementation modality Which implementation modality and implementing partner is right for the programme? Under the national implementation modality (NIM), a government institution, UN organization, intergovernmental organization, or CSO can serve as an implementing partner, as appropriate. Under direct implementation modality (DIM) a UN agency is the implementing partner. Table 15 provides the main comparative advantages of NIM and DIM implementation modalities with respect to sustainable local development (SLD) programming. The NIM modality has the advantage that it encourages national leadership, ownership and capacity development. However, selecting an implementing partner for sustainable local development programming is challenging because there will be multiple objectives that may not correspond to a single national government counterpart. While having the local government as a partner makes sense for implementing local activities, it is not practical for policy level work. Where there is a ministry of local government or ministry of regional development these are the most logical counterparts. In some countries the ministry of economic development and trade has responsibility for socio-economic development planning at the local and district level and thus makes for a suitable partner.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

49

Table 15: Comparison of NIM and DIM modalities for sustainable local development programming

Options under NIM

Options under DIM

The local government may serve as implementing partner and commit to reach the programme goals that are under its responsibilities.

Resolves the challenge of selecting an appropriate implementing partner, given that programme goals will be multi-sectoral and require actions at different government levels.

But the local government cannot serve as an implementing partner for outputs that go beyond the immediate competencies of the local authorities.

At the national level, programme goals may cut across several ministries.

Possible options: A higher national authority, i.e. prime minister’s office, may serve as implementing partner or the local government association may serve as implementing partner.

But there could be limited national ownership and impact on strengthening institutional capacity.

Possible options: Even under DIM modality, ownership can be fostered through a commitment of government partners to specific responsibilities. Government can be expected to contribute at least part-time staff to project implementation.

Competition among local governments to participate in the project will ensure local ownership.

Alternatively, separate but cooperative projects could be established with different partners.

Options for management structures It is important that the country office (CO) capitalize on its existing capacities and structures,

before attempting to build new structures for SLD programming. The decision on the internal management structure for the programme will be critical. UNDP internal rules and regulations provide two choices for internal programme management: horizontal programme or practice-led programme. A third option is a hybrid of these two choices.

50

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Horizontal programme The horizontal programme has a common outcome, while each participating practice has its individual output with assigned resources and activities. Each output corresponds to a new project ID in the UNDP project management system Atlas; the project IDs are connected to the same award37 (see example from Georgia below).

Programme staff from different practices will be designated to ensure the quality of the relevant programme outputs and will be responsible for the monitoring and reporting of its respective achievements.

This ensures a clear division of tasks and responsibilities among CO colleagues.

Figure 5: Horizontal programme – schematic representation

Sustainable Local Development Programme

DG

ED

EE

CPR

DG – Democratic Governance; ED – Economic Development EE – Energy and Environment; CPR – Crisis Prevention and Recovery The advantage of this modality is that there are clear lines of responsibility for implementation and fund management, as each practice has distinct and separate responsibilities, and there are no overlapping areas of responsibility. Additionally, while implementation of the output rests with the respective practice, the designated CO staff will feel clear ownership, commitment and dedication to reaching their specific outputs.

Risks to horizontal programme structure: • lack of coordination and miscommunication among the various practices. The separate outputs may risk turning into isolated projects owned by one single practice. This may challenge the unity and integrity of the programme; • unequal decision-making power among the practices should certain components receive generous external funding; • sustainable local development may not be equal priority for each practice involved; • additional administrative burden.

In the case of a horizontal programme structure, high-level coordination is crucial, so the Deputy Resident Representative (DRR) should be involved in designing and forming consensus on the work plan. In addition to this, clear coordination mechanisms should be introduced among the practices. Regular formal (weekly) and informal meetings within the CO with participation of the relevant CO and project staff need to be established in addition to meetings of the common project board.

Introducing special mechanisms to support frequent communication (e.g. integrated work plan discussions) are critical to ensure genuine coordination and coherence as the programme goes on.

37 In terms of their relation with the CPAP, these outputs may either contribute to the same CPAP Outcome, or each output may

have its corresponding Outcome in the Country Programme Action Plan.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

51

If the programme is started anew instead of building directly on existing projects, then it may be advisable to set up a single PIU.38 The PIU should consist of professional staff with technical expertise accountable to the respective progamme officers from each practice and an overall programme coordinator, who will take responsibility for the coherence and integrity of the entire programme through regular coordination of all priorities. The coordinator, who typically is the UNDP Assistant Resident Representative (ARR), will be accountable for coordinated implementation of the agreed programme workplan and alert CO senior management immediately upon the risks of any uncoordinated action. If the SLD programme is established on the basis of the existing projects with active PIUs, then daily coordination should be introduced among the different PIUs. Taking into account all pros and cons, the horizontal programme structure is justified in the case of large programmes, if the various practices and their respective outputs make a roughly equal contribution to the outcome(s) of the programme.

Practice-led programme If the SLD programme has a predominant focus within one practice area (i.e. poverty) complemented by elements from the other thematic areas (i.e. governance and energy) establishment of the (so-called) “practice-led programme” may be warranted. This would mean designation of the major practice as a lead practice with full programmatic and financial accountability for the entire programme, while other related practices are responsible for adequate planning of their specific activities in the workplan and for providing technical guidance during implementation of their activities. Therefore, the programme workplan should be set up in cooperation with and with the agreement of all practices, but accountability for its management is designated to the lead practice. Responsibility for financial and operational approval also rests with the lead practice.

Figure 6: Practice-led programme: schematic representation

Sustainable Local Development Programme

Support Practice Lead Practice Support Practice

The major advantage of a practice-led programme is that clear responsibility rests with the lead practice. The lead practice is fully accountable for achieving the programme outputs and delivering programme finances. The PIU, including the programme manager, is responsible to the lead practice; however, the PIU staff may receive technical guidance from other practices.

38 More insight on PIUs can be found in UNDP publication “Capacity Development in Action, Review of Capacity Development Facilities” https:// undp.unteamworks.org/file/261666/download/282826, page 28).

52

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Risks to practice-led structure: • Support practices may lack motivation and commitment to contribute to the implementation of this programme on a regular basis.

• If the lead staff from the lead practice takes another position, the programme may have difficulty in adjusting.

The practice-led programme is recommended when the SLD programme has one dimension that is dominant and other dimensions are supporting this main dimension.

In the case of the practice-led programme structure, the CO senior management may establish professional incentive mechanisms for the staff of other practices to contribute time to programme implementation. For example, contributions can be acknowledged in the individual’s performance management document. These contributions must be anticipated and included in the work plan that is endorsed by the DRR. The CO senior management may also extend special acknowledgment (i.e. certificate, learning grant, etc.) to all support practice staff involved in the programme implementation or introduce adequate recognition through the process of performance evaluation.

Box 18: Horizontal cross-practice programme for common goals –Georgia The FOSTER project was initiated in 2008 to respond to the post-conflict needs in the conflictaffected areas and the needs of the local people in Georgia. Immediately after the end of the hostilities UNDP Georgia CO deployed the multifunctional team of professionals in the region (including two steering committee staff seconded from ongoing projects, two international consultants and representative of all practices). The team, consisting of the governance, economic development and crisis prevention specialists met with virtually all stakeholders, including local governments, CSOs, international organizations and local people. As a result, a comprehensive programme of action was put together, consisting of three major elements: • strengthening local governments; • supporting basic livelihoods; • strengthening community security.

Many different professionals were involved in the implementation of the programme and it was decided from the very beginning that colleagues from different practices would oversee implementation of the different components. Hence a practice-led programme was set up with leadership from the Crisis Prevention and Recovery portfolio. Democratic Governance and Economic practices played a supportive role. The programme workplan was designed with the participation of all colleagues, with the staff from supporting practices having a decisive voice in terms of the technical solution of respective components. The programme manager was made accountable to the CPR practice, and each component had its coordinator who received technical guidance from relevant practice. This approach proved effective in addressing multiple problems in a coordinated, effective and efficient manner and in helping conflict-affected people to rapidly resolve a wide range of problems.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

53

Box 19: Unified delivery mechanism for local implementation of vertical programmes –Tajikistan Tajikistan’s Communities Programme, focusing on capacity building and economic development, implemented a novel method of programme implementation drawing upon its capacities established at field office level. In particular, the programme provides support at the local level to any other programme that operates at the national level and does not have the local level resources. In practice, cooperation may be of a formal or informal nature. In the formal case, two programmes sign a memorandum of understanding, spelling out concrete services and the budget. Monitoring of the field-level actions are also undertaken by the Communities Programme, while it is also entitled to receive services from the national level programmes in the same way, i.e. resort to the technical or advocacy experience of national programmes. This programmatic approach has brought numerous benefits, such as implementation of local activities with limited delays, lower overhead costs and minimized duplication and maximized coordination within the UNDP.

3.2. How to Mobilize Resources The CO should use the framing analysis and project concept to communicate the strategic vision to potential donors and local champions in order to achieve buy-in and stimulate resource mobilization efforts. If a donor demonstrates interest, the donor should be invited to contribute to the programme design and as such strengthen the partnership terms. The office should be ready to go a long way in resource mobilization efforts, as it is very difficult to find resources for large programmes. Most of the donors usually hold to their strategic priorities and are not open to discussing more comprehensive programmes that involve areas outside their immediate mandate. However, donors may be willing to support separate elements of the programme that fall within their priorities. The programme design should accommodate the priorities of the various donors by using a modular approach that easily allows separate funding streams for various outputs and activities.

The CO may consider launching the programme with its core resources, or expanding an existing project into the sphere of SLD programming, since it is easier to convince donors to contribute to ongoing programmes and share the already established success. This, though, implies engaging in an extensive resource mobilization campaign once the programme is set up and making efforts to fill the resource gaps on a permanent basis. The work plan and budget should incorporate one full-time position to communicate results and facilitate resource mobilization.

To facilitate resource mobilization and implementation, it is recommended that the programme be designed in a modular form, whereby, while still respecting the integrity of the programme, its elements can easily be implemented separately. While a holistic vision should guide sustainable local development programming, for pragmatic reasons a modular approach may be necessary. The modular approach accommodates the varied availability of funding for specific components and also the preparedness of the central and local government partners to implement activities. In the likely case that a donor prefers to support one component of the programme, it should be possible to implement it as such. In such cases respecting the integrity of sustainable local development would require that the remaining components also be covered to a certain extent. In cases where external resources cannot sufficiently cover the programme as a whole, the office should complement the donor resources with its core resources, if available, in order to address sustainable local development in a genuinely comprehensive manner.

Annex 1 provides a list of donor organizations that are supporting programming in areas relevant to sustainable local development.

54

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

3.3. How to Draw up a Monitoring Framework As the UNDP “Handbook on planning monitoring and evaluating for development results�39 provides a wealth of advice on processes and resources for proper design and implementation of monitoring and evaluation measures, this section only makes the following five recommendations regarding sustainable local development programming: 1. Create a common programme results and resources framework (RRF), even if components fall under different practice areas. The combination of the identified outputs should lead to the common outcome. Thus, the development of the RRF will be a team effort.

2. Establish a monitoring system at the planning stage. Local offices should be prepared to adapt it to address programming realities, as this will probably be a complex programme with multiple objectives and diverse stakeholders. The programme management team should use monitoring to determine whether there should be revisions to the programme, its RRF, indicators, targets, or outputs.

3. Create an efficient data collection system that is based on the indicators identified in the monitoring system. The identified indicators will have their own different data requirements, which will call for different data collection methodologies. Specialized surveys require significant resources and the engagement of consultants with expertise in sampling, but if organized in the beginning and end of the programme cycle, can provide solid evidence of change. Local stakeholders and partners can be engaged to conduct simple surveys within their territory and to collect primary data, such as the number of residents in a village, livestock, etc.

4. Complement quantitative data with qualitative information. The SAT4SLD can be used by the local government and other local actors to collect primary qualitative data in a structured manner.

Local stakeholders have welcomed SAT4SLD because they do not have broad information from local stakeholders on which to base strategic planning. UNDP can support the local government in developing a local system of basic data collection, maintenance and dissemination that will benefit the programme as well as the region/municipality. Other relevant methods for collecting qualitative data include interviews or focus group discussions.

An innovative form of qualitative information is blog posts written by project beneficiaries or project implementers. These are intended to solicit information or feedback as well as provide regular updates of project activities in a more engaging manner than the rather formal progress report format. In addition to text, images and movie clips can be uploaded to the website to better tell the story of the project. UNDP has been piloting use of blog reporting for many projects in ECIS using the online Akvo platform: www.akvo.org. Samples of project blogs can also be found in Annex 2 following the case studies. Akvo calls this real simple reporting.

5. Collect first-hand information (self-reporting) from citizens using information technology applications or communication technologies. The concrete methods and solutions of soliciting data depend on a specific context, such as the problem surveyed or penetration of the internet/ mobile communications in the area. Yet, these methods share the same essential element – it is essential to establish appropriate incentives to motivate people to respond to questions or participate in the process. This method has been successfully applied on various occasions, (such as corruption reporting in India, Fix My Street in Georgia (a website through which users can report potholes, broken street lights and similar problems with streets and roads to their local council or related organization and see what reports have already been made), electoral violation reporting in Kyrgyzstan and so on, as illustrated in Table 16). However, this is still rather experimental, and whilst the method is valid for measuring perceptions and attitudes, it relies upon active, self-selected citizens, and hence has limitations to generate representative data and statistics.

39 For fuller recommendations, please refer to UNDP (2009). Handbook on planning, monitoring and evaluating for development

results, p. 8. Available online at: http://web.undp.org/evaluation/handbook/

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

55

Table 16: Examples of innovative methods of data collection

Description

Web-site

Ipaidabribe.com is an Indian website where citizens are encouraged to post their experiences with paying bribes to obtain services from authorities. Over 20,000 posts have already been published on the website.

http://ipaidabribe.com/

At international level, reportbribery.org collects reports on corruption in 37 countries and gives links to the respective country contacts.

http://reportbribery.org/

The Ushahidi platform is a free online tool for information collection, visualization and interactive mapping in order to easily crowdsource information using multiple channels, including SMS, email, Twitter and the web. The platform is used in multiple variations, ranging from migration to report floods, constitutional rights and freedom, electoral violations, etc.

http://ushahidi.com

Electby is an Ushahidi-based platform for monitoring electoral violations in Belarus. Citizens can report violations by phone, twitter or directly on the website.

56

http://electby.org

This Georgian website, maintained by Transparency International Georgia, offers the opportunity to report a problem (e.g. potholes, excessive rubbish, etc.) online, which will then be sent to the city authorities. This service is available in six cities in Georgia. Fixmystreet already exists in several countries around the globe.

http://fixmystreet.ge/

For two months citizens of Vienna in Austria had the chance to post their ideas and opinions on topics like “behaviour on public transport”, “young and old”, “Speaking German – speaking other languages”, “Clean City” and “Public Space for everybody”. Those discussions are aimed to improve the living situation in a multicultural environment. Results will be published in the “Vienna Charta” in collaboration with the local authorities and the private sector.

https://charta.wien.gv.at/

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Table 17: Sample outputs and indicators for the sustainable local development programme

Impact (example): Enhanced human development enjoyed equally by all groups of society, including women, marginalized and vulnerable communities Outcome: To be selected from the United Nations Development Assistant Framework (UNDAF)/CPAP as appropriate Sample Outputs

Sample indicators

National and local policies and institutional mechanisms to provide vulnerable farmers with the labour marketresponsive vocational skills, practical experience in sustainable farming and access to markets, contributing to decreased poverty and enhanced livelihood opportunities in rural areas.

• Market responsive vocational training opportunities established and available for all, including vulnerable and marginalized (yes/no).

• Number and proportion of vocational training graduates employed after completion of the courses (gender disaggregated).

• Number and proportion of poor and vulnerable among the course graduates (gender disaggregated).

• Number of labour-market responsive courses offered by the vocational education institutions.

• Agriculture extension service established and available, including for the most vulnerable and marginalized farmers (yes/no).

• Number of courses and consultations by agriculture extension service to raise farmer’s awareness on sustainable farming principles.

• Number of farmers using the extension service and satisfied by its services (gender disaggregated).

• Proportion of farmers reported introducing sustainable farming practices into routine farming (gender disaggregated).

• Reputation of the extension service (poor/fair/good).

• Number of consultations by extension service on access to market.

• Number and proportion of farmers reporting to have improved their access to market after counselling.

• Increase in income of rural population in programme regions.

• Decrease in poverty rate in programme regions.

• Decrease of Gini coefficient in programme regions.

Policy and institutional systems strengthened to facilitate access to business development services, legal counselling and financial institutions for farmers, agriculture enterprises, start-ups and other SMEs in the programme regions.

• Number of business consultancy centres available in the regions, providing business and legal advice to poor and vulnerable people.

• Number and proportion of daily consultations to poor and vulnerable people.

• Number of business plans designed with the support of the centres and proportion funded.

• Number of microfinance/credit institution available in the region (serving the regional population).

• Amount and proportion of credit to agricultural activities by microfinance/finance institutions in the programme region (gender disaggregated recipients).

• Amount and proportion of credit to start-up enterprises by microfinance/finance institutions in the programme region (gender disaggregated recipients).

• Credit repayment rate for agriculture credit and start-up enterprises (gender disaggregated).

Employment and income generation opportunities enhanced for poor and vulnerable people in programme regions.

• Number and quality of employment counselling services available in the regions.

• Number of daily counselling sessions for the unemployed delivered by the special services (gender disaggregated).

• Market responsive vocational training opportunities established and available for all, including vulnerable and marginalized people (yes/no).

• Number and proportion of vocational training graduates employed after completion of courses (gender disaggregated).

• Number and proportion of poor and vulnerable among course graduates (gender disaggregated).

• Number of labour market responsive courses offered by vocational education institutions.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

57

Impact (example): Enhanced human development enjoyed equally by all groups of society, including women, marginalized and vulnerable communities Outcome: To be selected from the United Nations Development Assistant Framework (UNDAF)/CPAP as appropriate

58

Sample Outputs

Sample indicators

Decentralized system of sustainable management of local resources established, providing opportunities to local communities to engage in decision making on managing land, forest, water and other natural resources.

• Amount of local assets (land/forest/water) under the competency of local governments.

• Number of local/regional development plans designed with sustainable environmental management in mind.

• Proportion of local expenditure allocated to environment- and energy- related programmes.

• Electrification rate of the local population.

• Number and proportion of households using heating systems on renewable energy.

• Number of active environment/energy NGOs/CBOs at the local level.

• Number and effect of population awareness-raising campaigns to educate communities on sustainable resource management practices.

• Extent of engagement of (number of consultations with) local communities in decision making regarding natural resource management.

• Number of community initiatives on sustainable resource management and proportion considered and implemented.

Strengthened local capacities to manage energy and environmental resources in a sustainable manner and ensure equal and sustainable access to resources to all.

• The number and percentage of local officials responsible for the environment/ energy area.

• The number of professionally certified environment/energy staff or consultants engaged during respective decision-making procedures.

• Quality of local environment/energy programmes.

• Proportion of local expenditure allocated to environment- and energy- related programmes.

• Number and quality of environment/energy services available to communities (i.e. waste management, waste water treatment, pasture management etc.).

• Percentage of the households with access to safe water and sanitation services.

Strengthened capacities of local authorities to plan, implement, monitor and evaluate service delivery in a participatory, equitable, responsive and accountable manner.

• Availability and quality of systemic, continuous and comprehensive capacity development mechanism for local authorities.

• Number and proportion of local officials who receive needs-based training.

• Amount of local revenues and expenditures.

• Transparency of budget revenues and expenditures/transparency of the procurement system.

• Number of mechanisms of direct communication between citizens and the government established in a normative manner and enforced.

• Amount of feedback collected from citizens and amount of feedback that is used by local authorities.

• Number of e-governance systems introduced in local decision making.

• Assessment of local governance systems and services by local population.

• Perception of corruption at the local level (perception of accountability and transparency).

Increased capacities for local and regional authorities to develop, implement and monitor sustainable local/ regional development strategies that respect the human rights-based approach, gender equality and participatory decision-making.

• Number of sustainable regional/local development plans designed and adopted.

• Number of public consultations organized and amount of media coverage on regional/local development strategies.

• Number and proportion of the recommendations from public consultations taken into account.

• Proportion of women contributing actively to discussions of the development plans.

• Proportion of activities in the development plans with secure funding.

• Proportion of regions regularly allocating resources and implementing and monitoring sustainable regional development plans.

• Proportion of local CSOs and private businesses participating in discussion and implementation of regional/local development plans.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Impact (example): Enhanced human development enjoyed equally by all groups of society, including women, marginalized and vulnerable communities Outcome: To be selected from the United Nations Development Assistant Framework (UNDAF)/CPAP as appropriate Sample Outputs

Sample indicators

Strengthened capacities of local CSOs, volunteer organizations, media, and especially women-led organizations, participating in local decisionmaking, building partnerships and managing/evaluating projects.

• Number and quality of capacity development opportunities available in the region for CSOs and other target groups (gender disaggregated).

• Number and budget of projects implemented by the local CSOs (gender disaggregated).

• Number of civil society contributions (proposal, ideas, critics) to the local budget discussions or any other decision making processes and proportion of the proposals accepted.

• Availability of independent and objective local media (number of independent media sources TV/print/electronic).

• Amount of local budget resources allocated for strengthening the voluntary sector in the region (gender disaggregated).

Strengthened capacities of local authorities to respect gender equality, pursue gender budgeting and implement gender-responsive policies, providing increased opportunities for women and employment and income generation.

• Percentage of male/female ratio at the local governments overall and in management positions.

• Existence of a gender focal point within local government.

• Proportion of local programmes with gender-sensitivity analysis.

• Proportion of official local data available in gender-disaggregated form.

• Gender budgeting institutionalized at local level (yes/no).

• Number of services promoting the employment of women (kindergartens, business consultation centres, etc.).

• Employment rate of women.

• Income of households headed by women.

• Official list of women managers in local governments (roster of qualified women candidates disaggregated by sector and experience).

• Inclusive and equal recruitment policy based on open and fair competition principles.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

59

3.4. What Are the Risks and Challenges?

This section anticipates and analyzes certain risks and challenges that may threaten sustainable local development programmes. It defines the programmatic and operational risks and suggests possible mitigation measures. It needs to be acknowledged here that this chapter does not intend to exhaust all possible risks and challenges pertinent to sustainable local development. It merely provides an overview of the most important or most influential risks and challenges, while, a wide range of other risks specific to the locality will need to be identified by any new programme. This chapter does not concentrate on a myriad of risks that can be classified as strictly external, such as the global financial crisis, the volatility of commodity prices or regional instability. Yet, any of these risks and their implications do indeed warrant due consideration and analysis before embarking on this complex journey towards supporting sustainable local development.

Ownership Political instability A tumultuous political context is a major impediment to any development process. Political instability brings uncertainly to the development priorities of the country, impedes long-term planning and creates an unhealthy atmosphere in the civil service, often associated with frequent reorganization, changes and lack of ownership. It harms the incentive and motivation of the stakeholders to pursue a long-term sustainable development agenda, and to serve as a responsible partner for the proposed programme.

While it is by no means possible for any organization to fully avert risks, it is still feasible to mitigate the impact of political instability and find ways to operate. It is important to build close professional relations with the authorities involved and ensure the engagement of national counterparts at each stage of programme design and implementation, thus strengthening their ownership. Even if all critical government counterparts have been changed, the managers of the programme should ensure that there is an unimpeded connection with the authorities through additional efforts to rebuild relations and regain confidence.

Lack of inter-governmental cooperation or manifestation of inter-governmental disputes at local level Sustainable development cannot be achieved in isolation. However, political differences among authorities can hinder sustainable development. Not only may cooperation be lacking between the different territorial units, but disagreements may be manifested within the same administrative structure, if, for instance the elected council and the elected mayor have different political affiliations. Thus it is crucial to foster a spirit of sustainable development beyond local political differences and expand inter-regional, municipal, communal cooperation. UNDP has, in some cases, to be prepared to serve as a mediator for the completion of a particular project.

Lack of local awareness and ownership Awareness and ownership of the local sustainable development agenda by national counterparts and local communities will largely shape its effectiveness, therefore, this has to be addressed as an urgent priority. The involvement of senior counterparts will generally bring greater results, hence senior political appointees and executives should be immediately targeted with the awareness and engagement agenda.

It is equally important that national counterparts are involved and, the situation permitting, actively involved in programmatic activities.

Lack of readiness for decentralization This challenge is specific to the sustainable local development agenda, as how much power to delegate to the local level hinges upon the national policy and strategic decisions. More empowered local 60

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

counterparts imply a better local development environment. However, central authorities sometimes prefer to maintain control over decision making and thus allow only the issues of marginal importance to be settled at the local level.

The level of decentralization is directly related to the availability of entitlement, particularly to the land and other major local resources. Lack of property rights to land impedes the local incentives to manage the eco-system in a sustainable and responsible manner. It is desirable that the community or local authorities, be responsible, accountable and empowered to manage local assets.

Therefore, advocacy and support to decentralization should be made part of any local sustainable development programme to the extent possible. It is imperative to empower local authorities, both politically and operationally, to ensure that they genuinely assume charge for local development and take responsible and effective decisions.

Societal divides based on ethnicity, gender, class, etc.

Each community consists of groups with different backgrounds, traditions and interests. Society’s diversity, even though it is an asset, may pose some challenges unless the interests of all groups are taken adequately into consideration. Sustainable local development is about providing equitable opportunities to the representatives of all groups, therefore consideration of all interests and securing everyone’s ownership should be included in the strategic and implementation priorities of the programme. The risks of intracommunity conflicts should be considered and all possible measures taken to avert any source of potential tension.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

61

Institutional capacities Rent-seeking by corrupt officials Instances of corrupt individuals occur in all societies. UNDP should be prepared to face and confront the challenges associated with rent-seeking and corruption. If need be, it should be reiterated as frequently as necessary that UNDP respects the highest standards of integrity and expects the same from all counterparts with no exceptions.

A specific example: local corruption can be precisely detected when analyzing the licensing system for using local natural resources, and the systems regulating the operation of local businesses. Deficiencies in the local licensing and permits system, if observed, can be the first indicators of improper management practices. Therefore, streamlining the licensing and permits system at local, and potentially at national, levels does shrink corruption opportunities to the minimum. Moreover, the right legislative and enforcement mechanisms for licenses and permits help to introduce the systems of responsive environmental management and help to advance business development.

Lack of knowledge and capacity Lack of capacity overall, significantly hinders responsive decision-making and implementation and in such contexts progress is not easy. Therefore, UNDP should be prepared to take upon associated challenges associated and plan its interventions accordingly. This will entail embarking on the capacity development path, starting with capacity assessment and continuing with capacity development, as appropriate, covering all the necessary ranges.

It is essential that capacity development be made an integral part of the interventions and be mainstreamed in all its activities. Capacity development should aim at enhancing independent and responsible decision-making, planning and implementation at the local level. While working hand-in hand with the authorities and communities, any action pre-empting capacity substitution should be strictly avoided.

Rather, support should concentrate solely on equipping the authorities and communities with the tools, mechanisms and knowledge to carry out their functions independently and pursue endogenous processes of further self-education and development.

Limited cooperation among different counterparts Sustainable local development is a complex and comprehensive goal, requiring close partnership and cooperation amongst all stakeholders, including government, civil society, communities, the private sector and international organizations. Sometimes cooperation between all the relevant stakeholders is limited. In such situations UNDP may take on the responsibility of awareness raising and confidence building among the stakeholders, through individual and collective advocacy, coordinated actions and regular communication. An informal network of all beneficiaries may be formed and maintained to direct collective action towards sustainable local development.

Furthermore, it is possible to observe poor horizontal and vertical linkages within the governments themselves, such as lack of communication within the different departments of the same agency, between the representative and executive bodies of the local governments, or between national and local governments. Such an environment is a direct precondition for failure, and thus requires an immediate response from all relevant stakeholders, whether the senior management of the agency, senior politicians and executives at the local level, or other senior government officials at national levels, in order to resolve the existing disagreements and strengthen communication channels.

Creating dependency on foreign aid International support to sustainable local development, if designed inadequately, may inadvertently have

62

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

the consequence of cultivating a culture of dependency on foreign aid. This may be warranted in cases where development programmes are run in isolation, disregard the national ownership principles and provide systematic capacity substitution. Therefore, it is critical to ensure leadership of the national/local counterparts from the very start of programme design and throughout the entire cycle, up to evaluating its impact. National counterparts should be challenged to find their own capacities and resources to take over the achievements of the programmes after a few years of consistent support. Local men and women have to be empowered enough to be able to realize their rights and drive the development process forward on their own.

Overcoming traditional behaviour Each society nourishes certain traditional norms and knowledge and it may not always be easy to break the cycle of traditional thinking and implementation even if coming with strong arguments and benefits.

It is simply not easy for societies to accept changes to their usual manner of operation (e.g. harvesting, construction practices etc). Introduction of new technologies, methods and activities, requiring changes of behaviour should be a long-term ambition to be approached in a gradual manner. Existing knowledge should be taken into consideration as much as possible, and the proposed new approach built upon the existing wisdom. It will always help to introduce demonstration sites (e.g. for new methods of harvesting) and spread the word about the proposed new methods through the existing local champions of change.

Financial capacity and resource use Lack of resources SLD programmes need a sustainable follow-up and scale-up to demonstrate their impact. The limited financial capacity of national counterparts may pose a challenge to the scaling up of the progamme results. With this in mind, national and local counterparts could make efforts to identify sufficient resources from the very beginning of the programme. The programme may also introduce an element of strengthening national capacities for resource mobilization and use, to enable counterparts to streamline their budgeting efforts or draw on available resources, for example, from EU or other sources.

Operational risks (pertinent to the UNDP implemented programmes) Any UNDP programme, especially such a complex one, may be subject to various operational risks, such as internal cooperation and coordination of staff, availability of qualified personnel to monitor the programmes, availability of competent consultants, availability of sufficient financial resources and so on. This handbook will not focus on the common operational risks of the programmes, as it is firmly believed that each CO has its own unique knowledge of existing risks.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

63

4. CONCLUSIONS AND ROLE OF SENIOR MANAGEMENT

4. CONCLUSIONS AND ROLE OF SENIOR MANAGEMENT This handbook proposes integrated problem-solving approaches for four universal goals of sustainable local development based on current global discussions to define sustainable development goals, including the Report of the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda. The goals are the following: • • • •

safeguard fair distribution and efficient use of public and natural resources; generate new jobs and ensure equal opportunity for employment; ensure equal access to quality public services; promote honest and responsive government.

UNDP has significant comparative advantage in implementing sustainable local development programming, which is derived from: • local governance/local development programming that is a basis for collective action among local stakeholders and empowering the most vulnerable groups; • breadth of expertise (from ongoing programming in governance, economic, social and environmental spheres) to identify and implement where triple wins are possible, and to have an understanding of how an intervention in one area can have an unintended impact in another area; • its reputation as a neutral player that can support country-led public administration reform and decentralization; • universal presence on the ground, ability to facilitate west-east and east-east decentralized cooperation among sub-national governments, and access to professional networks and various international experiences in the area of sustainable development.

UNDP COs may choose to integrate sustainability principles into existing local governance or local development programming by using the SAT4SLD. SAT4SLD is a flexible companion to subnational strategic planning processes that connects national priorities to actions on the ground. SAT4SLD is a people-centred ranking system whereby local actors (local government, community, private sector, natural resource users/protectors) evaluate the current situation according to the 16 SAT4SLD domains and develop consensus on priority areas. SAT4SLD introduces environmental sustainability and social inclusion into core UNDP programming on local governance and local (economic) development. It encourages local governments to use its convening power to bring together the knowledge and resources of public, private, and non-governmental stakeholders and to organize collective action that addresses the locality’s long-term sustainable development goals.

Four areas of collective action elaborated through the SAT4SLD process are: • • • •

innovative and effective management; local economic development; sustainable resource management; inclusive service delivery.

UNDP COs may initiate comprehensive new programmes beginning with an analysis of the policy context for sustainable local development. The handbook outlines the steps for conducting a framing analysis that reviews the country’s relevant legislation and strategies, the level of decentralization and fiscal empowerment, and local power dynamics. The resulting background paper summarizes sustainable development priorities and local champions, and the assets and gaps in current policy and practice. It also helps the CO to critically evaluate relevant programmes and map potential entry points according to the country’s sustainable development goals. It may focus on country-led actions to:

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

65

• strengthen local autonomy and accountability so that local authorities have motivation to engage citizens in decision-making, provide appropriate incentives to local businesses and cooperate with other local governments, • increase local capacities in support of implementing the country’s sustainable development agenda; • empower local actors, such as women, young people, local councils, small businesses, farmers, and vulnerable populations.

The background paper and the project concept should be used for advocacy purposes to ensure buy-in from main stakeholders, including central and local government counterparts and development partners.

By incorporating “quick wins” at the local level into the project design and implementation positive changes at the local level might inform and influence the policy changes at the national level.

If initiating a new programme, UNDP should not support small and isolated sustainable local development initiatives; from the start a strategy for scaling up should be incorporated into the programme design. This may include defining multi-sectoral sustainable local development objectives to be adopted (and adapted) by all of the country’s local governments. Local leaders should be encouraged to make a firm commitment to a specific goal with clear and measurable targets. National funds and possibly territorial pacts can be used to provide central government support to these initiatives in a transparent and strategic manner. At the same time, meso-level partnerships and local co-financing should be established from the start to ensure financial and institutional sustainability.

As a third option, UNDP COs may also choose to create sustainable local development programming from existing projects in the portfolio of any of the major UNDP practices. Figure 6 below presents UNDP project areas that can be entry points for sustainable local development. Annex 2 provides 48 case studies of UNDP projects and initiatives from other institutions in the economic, environmental, social and governance spheres that promote sustainable local development.

UNDP should consider which of its counterparts may be the local sustainable development champions. UNDP can and should support national counterparts in coordinating public administration/ decentralization reform with other sector reforms (e.g. regional development, education etc.) to achieve the country’s sustainable development goals. With which national and local counterparts does UNDP have an established reputation and networks among the government, private sector and civil society?

Box 20: Tips for selecting entry points • Identify areas for sustainable local development based on the country’s sustainable development goals, new national commitments, and what has been tried in neighbouring countries. Map potential programming entry points based on the country’s sustainable development goals.

• Interview project staff members to identify which current entry points have helped create a basis for collective action: confidence of local actors (local authorities, private sector and community) in their capacities and trust between the local actors. Is this strongest at the level of the community, local self-government, or district or regional-level administration?

• Find out which UN agencies are active in the regions and can bring complementary expertise. Plot current interventions by UNDP and other UN agencies on a map of the country to help identify where cooperation can be created.

• Select entry points based on the potential for empowering local actors and increasing local capacity, autonomy and accountability.

• Identify existing institutional processes, procedures and systems to which entry points can be tied.

For example, are there regional (sub-national) or local level strategies that can be updated using sustainable development principles? Are there existing local government functions that can be made more responsive to citizens, socially inclusive, environmentally sustainable and supportive of job growth?

66

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Figure 7: UNDP’s current practices and entry points for sustainable local development

Poverty Reduction & Job Creation

Energy & Environment • Energy efficiency & local energy management1 • Local and off-grid renewable energy production2 • Community-based natural resource management • Waste management3 • Water management systems • Disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation • Biodiversity • Green public procurement & infrastructure investment

• • • • • • • • • •

SME development Social protection Microfinance Vocational education Sustainable tourism Business enabling environment Sustainable construction Transport & personal mobility Social enterprises Public-private partnerships

Good Governance / Local Governance • Resilient local and regional planning • Citizen participation • Decentralization • Transparency & accountability • Integration of minorities • Crisis prevention and post-­conflict recovery • Government finances • Social inclusion • Knowledge brokerage4 • Capacity development • Indicators for sustainability • Interactive IT spatial platforms • Inter-­municipal cooperation

Social Sector & Civil Society • Gender equality • Empowerment of local vulnerable communities • Legal advisory services • Social entrepreneurship • Social services • Education • Culture • Sustainable consumption • Preventive health • Social cohesion • Migration and returnees • Social marketing and awareness raising

Innovations 1) 2) 3) 4)

For public buildings, private houses, transportation, community energy saving programmes, etc.

Micro, small, and medium-scale hydro, ground heat, geothermal, photovoltaic, solar thermal, biomass, combined heat-power Waste reduction/ separation, recycling, waste water management, etc.

Linking academia, policy makers and CSOs for sustainable local development

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

67

First and foremost, sustainable local development programming requires ownership and multidisciplinary team efforts from the CO side. It requires changes in the modus operandi, adaptation of internal communication channels and consensus-building. The entire office is expected to work as one team on the same project/programme, which is rarely the case at the moment. UNDP should base its programming approach on the CO capacity in relation to the country’s sustainable development goals.

Does the CO have the financial resources to create new capacity in this area or should it rely on creating stronger networks among staff and projects working at the local level?

Given the complex, multi-dimensional nature of sustainable local development, there is a clear role for CO senior management to set objectives, create incentives for working across practices, direct the collective efforts towards the common target and minimize management risks. The senior management takes ultimate responsibility for the success of these efforts and consequently of the programme overall. Based on the national and local context, the management should: • define goals that the CO wants to achieve with regard to sustainable local development; • ensure that all relevant projects (regardless of practice) are contributing to the same local development goals; • coordinate their (capacity) development activities and programmes; • avoid duplication while enhancing integration and complementarities.

In forming teams for sustainable local development solutions, senior management should find a way to ensure that the unique contributions from each practice are recognized. Teams will have a defined role for each member so there is a clear division of the tasks and responsibilities. For example, a multi-practice task-force chaired by a senior staff-member might be established to take responsibility for design of the programme and monitoring of its implementation. Alternatively, one or two staff members may be designated to take the lead but with a special responsibility to consult and engage other colleagues throughout the cycle. Different team compositions may be required, depending on specific tasks and the senior management should consider various team-work modalities based on staff resources and programme needs.

68

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

References Akbulut, B. (2011). “State Hegemony and Sustainable Development: A Political Economy Analysis of Two Local Experiences in Turkey.” University of Massachusetts – Amherst Akram, S. (2008). “Human Resource Development through Foreign Aided Projects in Azad, Kashmir”, National University of Modern Languages Islamabad, Pakistan Assembly of European Regions (2012). “Rio+20 Declaration of Regions. Regions are leading the way in green economy” Association of Netherlands Municipalities (VNG) (2008). “Local Government in the Netherlands”, The Hague Balakireva, O.M. for UN in Ukraine (2013). “National Consultations on the Post-2015 Development Agenda: Ukraine” Brainerd, E. for UNDP (2010). “Human Development in Eastern Europe and the CIS Since 1990” Centre for Social and Economic Research (2008) “The economic aspects of the energy sector in CIS countries. European Economy. Economic Papers. 327 Clark, H. speech at Commonwealth Local Government Forum Conference 2013, 16 May 2013.

Accessed at: http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/speeches/2013/05/16/ helen-clark-speech-at-commonwealth-local-government-forum-conference-2013-/ Commission of the European Communities (2005). “Draft Declaration on Guiding Principles for Sustainable Development” Council of Europe (1985). Charter for Local Self-Government Council of Europe, Congress of Local and Regional Authorities (1997). “Resolution 54 on sustainable development at local and regional levels” Council of the European Union (2006). “Renewed EU Sustainable Development Strategy” Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP) (2012). “Public Procurement of Energy Efficient Products: Lessons from Around the World“. Technical Report 003/12 European Commission (2013). “Local Authorities in partner countries for enhanced governance and more effective development outcomes. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions”.

European Commission (2009). “Regions 2020. The Climate Change Challenge for European Regions” European Commission (2009). “Review of the European Union Strategy for Sustainable Development” EU (2012). “Handbook for Local and Regional Authorities: Delivering on the Europe 2020 Strategy” EU, Committee of the Regions (2012). “Building a European Culture of Multilevel Governance: Follow-up to the Committee of the Regions’ White Paper” EU, Committee of the Regions (2011). “Territorial Pacts: Making the Most of Europe 2020 through Partnership” Eurostat. “Sustainable Development Indicators (SDIs)”

70

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

European Commission (2012). “From Policy to Action: An Outline of EU External Aid for Sustainable Development” European Environmental Agency (EEA) (2007). “The pan-European environment: glimpses into an uncertain future”, EEA Report 4/2007 Folke, C. (2006). “Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses”. Global Environmental Change. Volume 16, Issue 3, pp. 253-267.

FutureGov (2013). http://wearefuturegov.com/case-study/simpl-challenges/ German Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development (2011). “Renewable energy resources: a future regional planning task”.

Global Forum on Local Development (2010). “Pursuing the MDGs through Local Government. Kampala, Uganda” Hartmann, A., Linn, J. (2008). “Scaling Up. A Framework and Lessons for Development Effectiveness from Literature and Practice” Wolfensohn Center for Development ICLEI (2012). “Local Sustainability 2012. Taking stock and moving forward” ICLEI – USA (2012). “STAR Community Index” ICLEI (2002). “Local Governments Response to Agenda 21: Summary Report of Local Agenda 21 with Regional Focus” International Fund for Agricultural Development. “Annotated Example of a Project Logframe Matrix: A Guide for Project M&E” INTRAC. “Decentralisation in Kyrgyzstan” Ivanyna, M., Shah, A. (2012). “How Close Is Your Government to Its People? Worldwide Indicators on Localization and Decentralization” World Bank Linn, J. (2010). “Scaling Up Development Interventions: An Exploratory Review of UNDP’s Country Program inTajikistan” Lister, S. (2012). “Democratic Governance and Sustainable Human Development: Moving beyond ‘business as usual’” UNDP Oslo Governance Centre OECD (2013). Better Life Index. http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/ OECD (2001). “The Well-Being of Nations: The Role of Human and Social Capital”.

Ostrom, E. (2004). “Collective Action and Property Rights for Sustainable Development” International Food Policy Research Institute Sustainable Development Commission (2010). “The Future is Local. Empowering communities to improve their neighbourhoods”.

UK Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004). “Planning for Renewable Energy: A Companion Guide to Planning Policy Statement 22” UN (2013). “A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies Through Sustainable Development” Report of the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda UN (2012). “The Future We Want”. (June) UN (2012). “Sustainable Energy for all. A Global Action Agenda. Pathways for Concerted Action toward Sustainable Energy for All”.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

71

UN (2012). “From Transition to Transformation: Sustainable and Inclusive Development in Europe and Central Asia” UN (2011). “Results-based management Handbook” UN (2011). “Trends in Sustainable Development – Chemicals, Mining, Transport, Waste Management 2010 – 2011” UN (2011). “Trends in Sustainable Development – Towards Sustainable Consumption and Production 2010 – 2011 UN (2010). “Local Governance and Climate Change: A Discussion Note. (December) UN (2007). “Indicators of Sustainable Development: Guidelines and Methodologies.” Third edition UN (1992). “Agenda 21: The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio” UN (1987). “Report on the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future/ The Brundtland Report” UN Committee for Development Policy (2012). “The United Nations Development Strategy beyond 2015” UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) (1992). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil UN Conference on Sustainable Development, Rio+20 Earth Summit (2012), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2011). “Keeping track of our changing environment: From Rio to Rio+20” UN Development Group (2011). “Programming Reference Guide” UNDP (2013). “Governance Assessment of Local Action for Climate Change” UNDP (2013). “Green Jobs for Women and Youth. What Can Local Governments Do?” UNDP (2012). “Capacity Development in Action: Review of Capacity Development Facilities” (July) UNDP (2012). “Integrated Local Governance and Local Development: A Strategy Paper” (draft, September) UNDP (2012). “Opportunities for Roma Inclusion”. Development and Transition, special issue, 19/2012 UNDP (2012). “Powerful Synergies. Gender Equality, Economic Development and Environmental Sustainability” UNDP (2012). “The Power of Local Action. Lessons from 10 Years of the Equator Prize” UNDP (2012). “The Power of Local Action. Learning from Communities on the Frontline of Sustainable Development” UNDP (2012). “Scaling Up Development Programmes: A Guidance Note”, (September) UNDP (2011). “Living with HIV in Eastern Europe and the CIS” UNDP (2011). “Supporting Transformational Change. Case Studies of Sustained and Successful Development Cooperation” UNDP (2010). “Enhancing Women’s Political Participation: A Policy Note for Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States” UNDP (2010). “Measuring Capacity” UNDP (2010). “User Guide, Municipal Service Delivery Capacity Assessment: Turkey and the Western Balkans”

72

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

UNDP (2010). “What will it take to achieve the Millennium Development Goals? An International Assessment” UNDP (2009). “Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results” UNDP (2009). “Primer on Rights-Based Local Development Planning”, (November) UNDP (2006). “Practice Note: Capacity Development” UNDP BRC (2011). “Assessment of UNDP Local Development Projects in Europe and the CIS” UNDP, European Research Network (EMES) (2008). Social Enterprise: A new model for poverty reduction and employment generation. An examination of the concept and practice in Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States UNDP Oslo Governance Centre (2012). “Institutional and Context Analysis: Guidance Note” UNEP, ICLEI (2003). “Tourism and Local Agenda 21. The Role of Local Authorities in Sustainable Tourism” UNESCO (2002). “Education for Sustainability. From Rio to Johannesburg: Lessons learnt from a decade of commitment” UNIFEM. “A framework for linking output and outcomes budgeting and gender responsive budgets” UNISDR (2013). “Making Cities Resilient: A Toolkit for Local Governments” UN System Staff College. “Barriers to Team Success” UN System in Ukraine (2013). “National Report, Post-2015 Ukraine: The Future We Want,” (Kyiv) University of Central Asia (2011). “Central Asia. From Rio 1992 to 2012 and beyond: Sustainable Mountain Development” UNODC, European Union. “Examples of Completed Vocational Education Project Logframes, Budgets and Workplans. Project Objective, Outcomes and Outputs” World Bank (2012). “Lights Out? – The Outlook for Energy in Eastern Europe and Central Asia and Energy Reform in Romania” World Bank. “MDF Tool: Indicators” World Bank (2011). “The Jobs Crisis. Household and Government Responses to the Great Recession in Eastern Europe and Central Asia” World Summit on Sustainable Development (2002). Johannesburg, South Africa.

Programming Sustainable Local Development: A Handbook for Eastern Europe and Central Asia

73

UNDP Bratislava Regional Centre Grosslingova 35, Bratislava 81109 Slovakia Tel: +421 2 59337 111 Fax: +421 2 59337 450 http://europeandcis.undp.org