To ensure that the output of the dialogues can be co-ordinated into meaningful guidance, it is proposed that the debates centre round a number of key topics.  Topic guide 2 outlines some suggested topics. These can be summarised:

• Process and participation - Successful approaches (and why). What has not worked. What is acceptable. Correlation between process and success.

• Institutions & Integration - extent to which issues have been addressed holistically. Institutional capacity. Integration with national planning, policy development and decision making processes. Legal frameworks.

• Technical - extent of knowledge and understanding of the state of resources, and the social and cultural context. Monitoring progress.

• Political and policy - commitment and constituency. Policy changes.

• Role of donors - extent of their involvement. what assistance and approaches have worked/not worked.

Different groups of stakeholders will be involved at various points in the dialogue. The stakeholders are likely to be representative of government, civil society and the private sector. It may be necessary to pay particular attention to the participation of vulnerable, poor, and minority groups, as well as ensure that participation issues around gender and traditional authorities are not undermined.

The consultation exercises will be facilitated and reported on by the lead organisations/teams. However a country may also decide that different members of the steering committee participate in the consultation exercises to take advantage of the opportunity it presents for feedback and communication.

The representation on the Steering Committee will include a broad cross-section of representatives from government, civil society and the private sector and the donor.  The Committee will be made up of people able to influence the strategy work within their organisations and are able to assume a role for the longer term donor-partner collaborations.

Topic

Issues to be explored

Political and institutional enabling conditions

Is there political commitment to the objectives, processes, plans and budget requirements of all strategic initiatives concerned with SD? In what political fora? Is the political commitment partisan or broad-church? What are the sticking points?

Is it clear where responsibilities lie for building on existing strategies and their activities, for formulating new strategies where relevant, for implementing them, and for monitoring them? Do the institutions concerned have sufficient rights, resources and effective relationships to undertake this? [The 4Rs]

Is there effective co-ordination:

• between these institutions?

• between strategic initiatives e.g. NCS, social action plans, etc.?

• between these institutions and those central to planning and investment?

• between institutions and donors?

How do national local and regional strategies relate to each other and how do existing strategies link into the planning and decision making systems?

What cross-boundary issues have been considered?

Quality of analysis

Is there adequate understanding of the state of resources, trends in their quality and quantity, and the pressures upon them?

Is there adequate analysis of the state of the main sectors and livelihood systems, their interactions with resources (as above), and consequent winners and losers?

Has full use been made of existing studies on poverty and environment, and  the opportunity taken to strengthen the body of knowledge in concerned areas?

Quality of participation

Is there continuing identification and participation of concerned stakeholders - including government, civil society and market players at different levels, and representatives of global environmental interests - in strategy preparation, planning, implementation, monitoring and review? Do the fora and mechanisms suit the stakeholders? Does representation meet acceptable criteria of identity-with-group and accountability-to-group?

Have pro-active mechanisms been used to engage otherwise-marginalised stakeholders in the above processes - such as women and landless poor groups

What role did public awareness campaigns have in encouraging stakeholder involvement in the process and how has the process strengthened people’s participation in, and influence over, the decision making process?

How were difficulties and problems addressed and consensus reached.

Quality of policies and plans

Have clear policies, plans, principles, standards and/or targets been derived from the strategy, in forms which can best elicit positive responses from those various institutions (government, market and civil society) which are supposed to implement the strategy?

Are there systems for defining priorities in environmental, economic and social terms, so as to keep the number of strategy objectives (at any one time) manageable? And are these systems compatible with those for analysis and participation?

Have opportunities for win-win activities supporting poverty alleviation, economic growth and environmental conservation been well-defined with those institutions best placed to act on them? For example, have conservation and poverty alleviation strategies been brought together?

Are there systems for addressing the hard trade-offs - identifying them, debating them, planning action or compensating for the costs of inaction?

Has there been early and tactical implementation of promising initiatives which will both help build support for the strategy process and test its principles and ideas?

Effectiveness of regulations and incentives

Do fiscal and regulatory frameworks internalise social and environmental costs in order to correct for market failure, and open doors to best-practice investment?

Are these frameworks efficiently monitored and enforced, by government or private bodies as appropriate?

Have measures been included to ensure compliance with international environmental and human rights agreements? 

Are measures taken to increase public awareness of sustainable development and thus encourage the development of consumer- or civil society-driven incentives?

Nssd process management and effectiveness of capacity

What key factors assisted the development of the strategy (e.g. a past strategy; public pressure; government commitment) and what were the key issues to resolve (land tenure; resource depletion; poverty)?

From what perspective has the process been driven (environmental, economic, interdisciplinary)?

What tools/methodologies were useful in enhancing understanding (e.g. poverty assessments; SEA). How is progress being monitored?

Is capacity being efficiently and equitably utilised, and improved, to:

• develop strategies with strong local ownership?

• co-ordinate existing sectoral or issues-based strategies to improve their coherence and efficiency in achieving SD?

• encourage institutions to make their responses to relevant strategies?

• implement strategy-related activities, in a way which is consistent with the broader strategy goals ?

• monitor the impact of strategic processes and activities?

• maintain the ‘big picture’ of strategy evolution?

• review and continuous improvement of the strategy?

Evidence of Impact 

What areas do stakeholder believe are being influenced - positively or negatively - by the strategy?

• ecological processes conserved?

• biodiversity conserved?

• resource quantity/productivity maintained?

• economic efficiency improved?

• poverty and inequity reduced?

• pollution prevented?

• human health improved?

• culture conserved?

Donors 

What has been the role of donors in these processes and was their role useful? Is there effective co-ordination between government and donors?