Transcript IPSAS Preparedness

Geographical focus & characteristics
• eastern Hungary and Slovakia,
• Carpathian Eco-Region
•
•
•
•
Economically least developed
Disadvantaged groups (Roma community)
Valuable natural habitats (wetlands)
Ecological problems (municipal wastewater,
industrial pollution)
Programming areas
• Environment
• Local development
• Social inclusion
• Approach
– look at interactions
– community mobilization to improve participatory
planning
– socio-economic development considering services of
natural ecosystems
Strategy
• Stakeholder involvement – horizontal and
vertical
• Interventions at local level – TA / capacity
development / mobilization
• Micro-grant – demonstrations
• Policy mainstreaming / Lobbying
Social inclusion and regional development
Cserehat Programme (2005-2010)
Activities:
• Human capacity building with the assistance of external coaches that primarily affects the
most disadvantaged communities, with special emphasis on the Roma
• Foundation and operation of the Cserehat Social Development Resource Centres (SDRC),
which became local development supporting institutions.
• Grant scheme for local micro-projects (up to USD 10.000)
• Consequently, generation of macro-projects aiming at integrated development based on
local partnership with an aim to tap available structural and other funds
Results:
• local communities mobilized
• UNDP micro-projects (in 90% of the local communities) implemented
• A broad network of 1200 local development partners connected
• One third of the 103 winning local micro-projects are attributable to Roma organizations,
groups or other organizations targeting the Roma with their projects
• Resource centre established and functioning
• More than 1000 people involved in in-come generation activities (60% Roma) over period
of 12 months; 78% got long-term or part-time job (48% Roma)
• Active project participants: 1340 prs/69% Roma
• Established self-help groups: 61/ 90% Roma
• Partnership-based local flagship projects generated and elaborated
• Programme methodology and results communicated and mainstreamed into the national
programme for 33 most disadvantaged regions
Social inclusion and environment
• Water
• Biodiversity (natural habitats – wetlands)
• Socio-economic development
– agricultural commodities matching the natural
conditions
– Market/trade for „regional“ products
– Tourism
Social inclusion and environment
Laborec-Uh project (2007-2012)
Activities:
• Establishment of multi-sector cooperation network involving groups that originally represent
opposite/conflicting interests (water managers, farmers, municipalities, environmentalists) –
using participatory approach for the development of River Sub-Basin Management Plan
• Implementation of pilot land and water management initiatives that are based on ecological
functions of natural ecosystems
–
Wetland restoration – water retention areas and areas for extensive agriculture
•
–
•
conversion of arable land into wetlands, improving BD value of degradated habitats, improving hydrological
conditions of degradated habitats
Introducing traditional / alternative agricultural commodities (mangalica pigs, technical hemp, fishponds, re-introducing cattle) - support in business plan development, processing facilities and marketing
Mobilization of local community (passive community, no awareness on rural development)
–
–
–
–
Work with schools - through children involvement increase their parents awareness of public issues
Civic Association established to coordinate local initiatives
Micro-grant aiming at community development and cooperation
Participation in development planning
Results:
• River Sub-Basin Management Plan (Cierna voda as tributary of Laborec / Bodrog / Tisa)
• Restoration of wetlands
• Small ecologically sustainable enterprises
• Integrated Local Sustainable Development Plan that provides for replication of pilot
initiatives
Social inclusion and environment
Tisza Oxbows project (2006-2009 ) – support to 6 pilot sites
Activities:
•
Establishment of mechanism to support local initiatives – (active Local Action Groups - civic
associations)
• Alliance for Living Tisza established, Local Action Plan developed, to ensure sustainability of the Alliance,
sustainability based on business support activities and projects
• Living Tisza trade mark introduced, support provided in marketing and distribution of local products
•
•
Providing scientific background for integrated landscape management through harmonization of
monitoring systems, lanscape-change historic research and developeing guides for invasive species
management and Integrated Holistic Floodplain Management
Implementation of pilot land management initiatives that are based on ecological functions of natural
ecosystems – micro-grant for:
• Wetland restoration – water retention areas and areas for extensive agriculture
• Introducing traditional / alternative agricultural commodities (traditional breed stock, planting traditional trees and
plants and invasive species management, fish management in lakes and temporary river branches)
• processing and marketing of local products (jam, dry fruit, vegetal-oil production facilities, marketing and building a
shop for products, honey production, small slaughterhouses)
•
Mainstreaming local experience in national policy – lobbying
Results:
•
Alliance for Living Tisza established, local action groups strengthened, local interests recognized at
national level
•
Integrated Local Sustainable Development Plan that provides for replication of pilot initiatives and is
based on the scientific background of Integrated Holistic Floodplain Management
•
Restoration of wetlands
•
Small ecologically sustainable enterprises
Lessons-learnt - general
• Plan, implement, monitor and adjust, allowing for flexibility within regions
and along the process; however main principles remain unchanged;
• Predictability of external support helps but the clear time-lines
and exit strategy needs to be communicated from the outset to avoid
the culture of ‘dependency’;
• Minimum co-financing requirement is not a deterring factor if not required
at the large scale; it increases ownership and builds in the sustainability;
• Local leaders with an authority to reconcile interest of all sectors and groups
- trust factor very important
• Potential of voluntarism remains largely unexplored, especially in the former
communist countries
• Large infrastructure/structural projects too detached from the day-to-day life
of communities – do not bring the community mobilization/activation results;
Lessons-learnt - wetland restoration
•
River (sub)Basin Management Plan – wetland restoration identified as
measure to achieve „good quality“ of water
– individual localities identified and negotiated with owners/users
•
Strong stakeholders cooperation
– expertise on hydrology
– expertise on ecosystems/BD,
– water management authority,
– land owners/farmers
•
Land fragmentation (ownership)
•
Resistance of farmers – economics prevails
– agri-environmental subsidies do not support conversion of arable land
into grasslands in lowlands (not even in floodplain areas)
Lessons-learnt – social inclusion
•
•
Project design - TA adjusted to preparedness of local community to absorb
external assistance
– Community development and mobilisation – building capacities – local
product marketing
Microgrant scheme to support local demonstrations
– tangible but relatively small interventions (2,000-5,000 USD)
– Well targeted, clear and simple conditions
– Simple application process, locally managed
•
One approach doesn’t fit all; what has worked in one region might not work
in another even though they share common borders and are in proximity;
•
Additional effort and instruments need to be deployed to reach
out to marginalized communities; communication on its own is not enough
to secure their ‘voice’ in planning for and participation in regional
development;
Lessons-learnt – social inclusion cont.
• Trust-building initiatives might be needed as a pre-condition to any involvement
of marginalized communities into the area-based planning
• Start with small scale activities, build in trust, enforce communication and only
then scale up
• Segregated Roma settlements – different approach as different set of issues
to be addressed
• Ensure both Roma and non-Roma can benefit equally and have same access
to project activities/services
• Initiatives targeting Roma communities only are not recommended
Recommendations
• Identify and use joint economic motivation for conflict prevention and
Roma/non-Roma reconciliation
• Build in couching/community mobilization methodology into the
programs addressing environmental and regional planning issues
• Continuous and systematic community/couching/activation of specific
communities at least for the period of 3 years to bring about impact
• Municipality (or other local government structures) to be on board from the
very beginning
• Integrated and inclusive approach is preferable; Roma-focused projects do
not seem to work in the long term (potential to create more harm)
• Micro-grant schemes to pilot ideas/initiatives bring very good and tangible
results (Euro 2-10.000 max)
Thank you…
[email protected]
http://www.cserehat.hu
http://www.laborecuh.sk
http://europeandcis.undp.org/kosiceproject
http://www.elotiszaert.hu