|
Methodology
It
was originally planned that the gap-consistency-conflict analysis of NDP2
chapters would be carried out as part of phase 4 of the DANCED Project,
and that this process would take place between July and August 2000. However,
the screening process was delayed by the slow submission of chapters to
the NPCS by line ministries and a number of problems in scheduling meetings
of the review committee. The result was that the screening process ran
well into October and was not as thoroughly executed as had been hoped.
It was not clear to the partners in the DANCED Project at the end of the
screening of chapters, to what extent environment and sustainable development
issues would indeed be incorporated into NDP2. It was therefore decided
to support a national workshop being held in November by the NPCS, which
would further refine the NDP2 chapters. Following the workshop, the DANCED
Project was requested by the NPCS to provide additional assistance through
a further review of key chapters and the direct writing of additions and
amendments into these chapters.
The
gap-consistency-conflict analysis has therefore taken place over three
separate phases of an overall review process of NDP2 chapters. This section
will consider the methodology used and estimated impact of each phase
of this process.
Phase 1. Review
of key NDP2 Chapters for Environment and Sustainability Issues
Methodology
The
following methodology was developed for this phase of the review process:
i) A team of Namibian
and Namibian-based consultants was hired to carry out the review process
under the leadership of a Namibian team leader. Each consultant had broad
experience in a number of development sectors and covered a group of chapters
comprising related sectors or cross-cutting topics. The reviewers were
asked to provide comments on chapters for submission to a Chapter Screening
Committee established by the NPCS. This committee had a schedule of meetings
at which comments would be provided to the line ministries responsible
for drafting the chapters. The screening committee was expected by the
NPCS to analyse the chapters in terms of :
a) compliance of draft chapters with guidelines for
preparing sector chapters
b) technical soundness
c) consistency
between sectoral and national policies
d) comments
made on chapters by NPCS planners and other experts (e.g. the DANCED project
reviewers)
ii) Each reviewer
was given 1,5 days to carry out the following (An annotated format for
the review of chapters is contained in Annexe 1):
a) review and analyse
the draft chapters for consistent and coherent coverage of the relevant
cross-cutting issues in the chapter’s objectives , priorities and
(Output: a short note citing pages and paragraphs which need amending/additions
to fully address the relevant cross-cutting issues in the sector, and
any missed priorities, for submission to the NPCS)
b) point out any
inconsistencies or areas where sectoral approaches (within clusters
of related chapters) are in conflict with each other (Output: a short
note outlining the inconsistencies in the relevant chapters, and suggestions
on better/more appropriate approaches, for submission to the NPCS)
c) hold a meeting
with the relevant NPCS planners responsible for chapter review to discuss
results of the review and analyses (this was later amended to require
the reviewers to attend the screening committee meetings so that they
could provide comments directly to the line ministries rather than through
the NPCS planners)
iii) The reviewers
were expected to be guided in their work by the results of the participatory
processes carried out earlier in the DANCED Project. In particular they
were expected to analyse the chapters against the prioritised cross-cutting
issues that needed to be addressed in NDP2, the shared national vision
for sustainable development and the major threats to sustainable development
in Namibia (see Annexe 2.)
iv) A second round
of screening across the main clusters of chapters was envisaged to pinpoint
any gross inconsistencies in proposed approaches/ strategies to address
the prioritised cross-cutting issues. A small workshop was to be held
with the reviewers to identify these inconsistencies or missed priorities
and the results of the workshop would be brought to the attention of the
NPCS.
Implementation
The
implementation of this process did not run as smoothly as anticipated.
The screening process was heavily delayed by the slow submission of chapters
to the NPCS by line ministries. This resulted in problems in scheduling
meetings of the NPCS Screening Committee. The committee meetings were
often rescheduled at short notice and some chapters were only received
for review a day or two before they were due to be screened. As a result,
the DANCED consultants were not always available to attend the screening
meetings. In some cases they were unable to review certain chapters in
time to submit written comments to the screening committee ready for the
review meeting for those chapters.
For
the most part, the reviewers were able to use the material generated by
previous phases of the DANCED Project to guide the review of their chapters.
This was important as the material had been developed during workshops
and consultations that involved a range of stakeholders including government
officials responsible for chapters and NPCS planners. This meant there
should have been a degree of consensus about the key issues that reviewers
would address. Problems arose not so much in the methodology being used
for reviewing chapters, but in the methodology for ensuring that comments
would be incorporated.
While
some line ministries were receptive of comments and suggestions for improvements,
others were defensive of their chapters and less willing to make suggested
changes that would better incorporate environment and sustainable development
concerns and links. The process used during the screening meetings did
not always provide adequate opportunity for substantive issues to be raised
and debated properly. The criteria intended for the discussion of chapters
[sub-section i) a) above] were not applied and most of the meetings focused
on editorial issues of structure of the chapters, grammar, spelling, etc.
The
proposed workshop to hold a second round of screening across the clusters
of chapters [sub-section iv) above] was not held because the initial screening
process went on into October instead of being completed by August as scheduled.
It was not possible to mobilise the consultants and NPCS officials for
this workshop because of the delay.
Phase
2. National Workshop to Review NDP2 Chapters
Methodology
Following
the review of NDP2 chapters by the Screening Committee and DANCED reviewers,
the NPCS held a national workshop with the following objectives:
i) To inform and involve relevant stakeholders
in the broad review of the individual draft chapters of NDP2 on the basis
of the agreed framework of development objectives, macroeconomic and financial
setting for NDP2
ii) To seek effective contributions from
the participants to further improve on the draft chapters to NDP2
The
workshop was attended by government officials, particularly those tasked
with drafting chapters, consultants advising line ministries, representatives
of NGOs and CBOs. The workshop discussed the NDP2 framework chapters and
the cross-cutting chapters in plenary and then broke into groups to discuss
clusters of chapters. The DANCED Project was requested by the NPCS to
provide facilitators for the four group discussions: the natural resources
cluster, the economic cluster, the social cluster and the public sector
cluster. The project also provided four Namibian consultants to participate
in the group sessions, particularly with respect to environment and sustainable
development issues. Because the process of accepting the comments of
DANCED consultants on sector chapters had not been clear in the screening
phase, it was decided to support the workshop as an additional opportunity
for incorporating environmental and sustainable development issues in
NDP2.
The
aim of the group sessions was to present each chapter briefly, and discuss
its contents with relevant stakeholders including the authors of the chapters.
The following process was established for the working groups:
i) Discuss the Sector
Mission Statements of all chapters in the cluster and check these for
consistency with the framework chapters (National Development Objectives
and Strategies)
ii) Carry out a chapter
by chapter review of each chapter’s Objectives, Targets, Strategies
and Private Sector Investment Programme (PSIP). The aim was to analyse
whether the objectives relate to the overall NDP2 objectives, whether
the targets cover/relate to all the objectives, whether the strategies
are appropriately designed to achieve the objectives and whether the PSIP
fully captures the objectives, targets and strategies.
iii) Pay particular attention in the review
to special concerns such as poverty reduction, employment creation, environmental
and sustainable development aspects
Implementation
Insufficient
time was available during the national workshop to follow the adopted
methodology adequately. Only one of the working groups compared the Sector
Mission Statements within the clusters and none of them discussed the
PSIP. While a large number of participants had been involved in the previous
phases of the development of NDP2 (the cluster and inter-cluster workshops),
there was a significant number of new participants who needed to be brought
up to date with the process. As a result they tended to cover ground already
dealt with by previous activities. However, a number of useful comments
were made regarding most chapters and the workshop proved useful in further
identifying key environmental sustainable development issues and links
between sectors. All of the consultants asked to attend the working group
sessions on behalf of the DANCED project were involved in the subsequent
final review of chapters, providing useful continuity.
Phase
3. Improvement of key NDP2 chapters in terms of Environment and Sustainable
Development Coverage
Methodology
In
this phase it was agreed by the NPCS that the DANCED Project would provide
consultants to carry out a final review of key NDP2 chapters. The DANCED
input formed part of a larger effort to consolidate NDP2 being coordinated
by a team of EU consultants working in the NPCS. The DANCED consultants
were asked to carry out the following:
i) Review the results
of the screening work done previously by DANCED consultants, as well as
other relevant project reports
ii) Write directly
into the chapters any recommended revisions (whether additional text,
changes in current information, drawing attention to missed priorities
or strategies etc.).
iii) Write directly
into the chapters any major environment or sustainable development issues
that have been overlooked iv) Discuss the proposed changes with
the relevant authors/officials of the line ministries concerned and the
NPCS with a view to reaching agreement to the changes proposed in the
chapters.
The
consultants were allocated one day for chapters previously screened by
DANCED consultants and 1,5 days for those chapters that had not been screened
earlier.
Implementation
By
January 23, 2001, the DANCED consultants had completed their final review
of NDP2 Chapters. It appears that to a large extent, their comments will
have been incorporated into the final version of the National Development
Plan. However, the publication of the plan will be delayed further because
ministries are being slow to submit final versions of their chapters.
|
