Updated 5 March, 2004

Resource Book
Key Documents
Reference Area
The Project
Country Area
About NSSD
Home > Start > Country Area > Workshops > First Planning Workshop

  First Planning Workshop

Report of the first planning workshop held in Arusha, Tanzania, and the supplementary first planning workshop held in London
Main report  view as PDF
Annex 1 & 2: participants
Annex 3 to 7: country dialogue work plans
Compte rendu du premier atelier de planification ouvrir PDF
en français
Diálogos entre Donantes y Países en Desarrollo sobre Estrategias Nacionales de Desarrollo Sostenible, de la OCDE/CAD Ver en PDF
en español

OECD/DAC Donor-Developing Country Dialogues on National Strategies for Sustainable Development

DRAFT: 31 May 2000





1.    Introduction to the Combined Report

This is a combined report covering (a) the First Planning Workshop held in Arusha, Tanzania on 4-7 April, 2000 and (b) a Supplementary First Planning Workshop for those countries and individuals unable to attend the Arusha meeting, held near London on 9-10 May 2000.

The Arusha workshop brought together country teams from Tanzania, Thailand and Bolivia (dialogue countries), a representative from IUCN Pakistan (a parallel learning country), members of the DAC Task Force on nssds, three resource persons with expertise in national strategies for sustainable development (nssds), and staff from the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) (the coordinating organisation) and the Natural Resources Institute (NRI). The UNDP/ GEF Cross Border Biodiversity Project (based in Arusha) provided local logistical support (see Appendix 1 for list of participants).

The London workshop was a smaller event and of shorter duration. It brought together representatives from Burkina Faso and Nepal (dialogue countries) and from Ghana (a parallel learning country), several members of the DAC Task Force on nssds, a resource person from Senegal, and IIED (see Appendix 2 for list of participants).

Namibia (also a parallel learning country) was not able to attend either workshop and will be visited separately by DFID and IIED in early June 2000.

This report provides a summary of the two workshops, highlighting the key conclusions and recommendations. It will be posted on the project website www.nri.org\NSSD - later to be transferred to www.nssd.net, together with copies of the papers, project documents and overheads presented at the two workshops.

2.    Objective of the Workshops

The objective of the workshops was to develop a common approach to the project, agree ways of working and a timetable, exchange views on proposals for country dialogues and develop a sound basis for networking.

3.    Arusha Workshop and Pledges of Support

The workshop was officially opened by the Permanent Secretary of Tanzania’s National Planning Commission, Mr Charles Mutalemwa (on behalf of the Minister for Planning), who stressed the importance of the dialogue initiative and pledged the support of the Tanzanian government. A letter from the Bolivian Minister for Sustainable Development was presented expressing formal support for the initiative.

4.    Background and Objectives of the Project

At both workshops, representatives from the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the European Commission’s Development Directorate (the agencies leading the DAC Task Force on nssds) presented the background and objectives of the project, and the roles of the different participants:

4.1    Responding to nssd targets through a partnership approach

It was noted that Agenda 21, agreed at the Earth Summit in 1992, called on all countries to prepare a national strategy for sustainable development (nssd). Five years later, at a Special Session of the UN General Assembly, a target date of 2002 was set for all countries to have introduced such strategies. In the run up to this event, the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) - a forum which brings donors together to harmonise policy – agreed its Shaping the 21st Century policy document which set a target of 2005 for nssds to be in the process of implementation in all countries, and made a commitment to support developing countries in the formulation and implementation of nssds.  However, no official interpretation of what nssds are, or how to develop and implement them, has been given to assist countries in meeting these targets and commitments, and there is a risk that the targets could result in the production of nssd documents that are poorly implemented, as has often been the case with previous approaches.

The DAC Working Party on Environment (WP/ENV) therefore decided to develop guidance for donor agencies on how best to support nssds, and appointed a Task Force on nssds for this purpose in June 1998. The Task Force identified the need for guidance to be developed in partnership with developing countries, through consultations and dialogues in a number of countries.

In parallel to the WP/ENV initiative, the DAC high level meeting in May 1999 defined an nssd as “a strategic and participatory process of analysis, debate, capacity strengthening, planning and action towards sustainable development”. It also noted that an nssd is not necessarily a new strategic process, but can be developed by incorporating sustainable development principles into key existing policy and strategic planning processes.

Discussion of the WP/ENV initiative began with a Donor - Developing Country Scoping Workshop, held in Sunningdale, UK, in November 1998, to discuss the approach and key themes relating to nssds (see DAC/WP/ENV, Room Document WP(19)1). The workshop endorsed the need for a process of in-country dialogues to learn from experience with nssds and examine the role of donors in supporting nssds. Four key themes were identified:

  • nssds can take the form of a range of different strategies and plans and are characterised by a focus on processes
  • nssds should integrate sustainable development into key economic, social and private sector planning processes;
  • there should be broad stakeholder participation in the development and implementation of nssds;
  • nssds could act as an umbrella for other environment and development planning processes to improve coordination and reduce duplication (see also Detailed Project Description).


4.2    Objectives of the project

The following objectives were confirmed:
  • to elaborate good practice for donor agencies to support nssd processes in developing countries (the main objective for donor agencies); and
  • to improve international understanding of how to develop and implement nssds.

It was stressed that the purpose of the country dialogues is not to initiate new planning processes, but to learn from those that already exist. However, it is hoped that the dialogues will also make a substantive contribution to nssd processes in developing countries. It is also hoped that they will enable the identification of indicators to monitor progress towards successful sustainable development strategies, and generate a better understanding of what constitutes a nssd.

A representative from the OECD/DAC emphasised the significance of the dialogue process, since, for the first time, policy guidance for the DAC is being developed in partnership with developing countries. The country dialogues are extremely important because the outputs will be used to develop policy guidance for donor agencies. The guidance will be presented to OECD Ministers of Development Cooperation in mid-2001 and, if adopted, may influence key actors such as the UN and the World Bank.

4.3    Roles of participants in the nssd dialogue project


These were confirmed as:

  • In-country lead institutions/teams: to coordinate and implement the dialogues in each country, working closely with governments.
  • In-country steering committees: to meet several times and provide a forum for a broader range of stakeholders to have an input into shaping the dialogues.
  • IIED: to coordinate the project, ensure consistency of approach and adherence to the timetable, develop draft guidance, and assist with the administration of funds.
  • DAC Task Force: to listen and learn (the guidance will be informed by the dialogues), to assist IIED, secure and release funds, and provide feedback to the DAC WP/ENV and other donors and financial institutions (e.g. IMF, World Bank).

5.    Background paper on nssds

At the Arusha workshop, IIED presented a background paper on nssds highlighting some of the problems with previous approaches (e.g. environment-driven, weak links to decision-making and investment, weak participation and implementation), and identifying key challenges for the future. The text of this paper (“National Strategies for Sustainable Development: the Challenge Ahead” by Barry Dalal-Clayton and Steve Bass, draft 17/3/2000) is available on the project website and CD ROM.

6.    Sharing perspectives on the value of nssds

Presentations were made at each workshop on experience of nssds and related issues in participating countries:


In developing Thailand’s 8th National Economic and Social Development Plan, stakeholders from all levels of society (including the grassroots) were allowed to participate in the planning process. Previous development plans had been very top-down and did not achieve national objectives. The new planning approach, adopted in the wake of an economic crisis, seeks to gain public acceptability to improve implementation. It has added value by generating useful information, creating a new paradigm of ‘people centred development’, strengthening the role and responsibility of civil society in the national development process, empowering local communities to address their own problems, and improving cooperation amongst stakeholders.


Ghana’s Vision 20:20 provides a conceptual framework for sustainable development over a 25-year period (1996-2020) and is being implemented through successive five-year development plans. It is the product of extensive consultations involving all stakeholders, resulting in consensus around long and medium term goals. The approach to planning is human-centred, integrated, participatory, decentralised and long-term. One of the strengths of this approach is the extent of use of new coordination mechanisms, such as quarterly meetings to review government-donor activities, which allow problems to be identified early and all stakeholders to intervene to resolve issues. Similarly, sector partner groups have been set up under the Comprehensive Development Framework (CDF) to review project implementation and institutional and policy reforms. However, there are a number of constraints to implementation: weak institutional capacity at district level, very sectoral monitoring and evaluation, limited analysis at district level, and the difficulty of fiscal decentralisation and accountability at decentralised level.


Bolivia has introduced economic and social reforms over the last ten years, including a law on public participation and a law on decentralisation. Following these reforms, and in view of continuing poverty problems, the government has adopted a new approach to planning, based on dialogue, participation and consensus. The results of this new approach have been effective in the fight against drug trafficking. A National Dialogue process to agree a programme for poverty reduction was held in 1997, and another National Dialogue to develop a Poverty Reduction Strategy is planned for July 2000. A Ministry for Sustainable Development has been established, which incorporates four ministries concerned with development planning and environment, and consultative groups have been set up to improve coordination between the government and international cooperation.


Following the preparation of a prospectus for a National Conservation Strategy (NCS) in 1983, the process to develop the NCS started in 1985 and was completed in 1988 when the NCS (“Building on Success”) was endorsed by the government. Implementation began in 1989 and focused on three key areas: environmental planning and assessment (particularly concerning law, pollution control and national heritage conservation); environmental education; and public information. In response to IMF requirements, the National Environmental Policy and Action Plan (NEPAP) was prepared in 1993. Stimulated by Danish interest, efforts have been made integrate environment and development through environmental strategies and policies for several sectors: forestry, industry and water resources. The 8th Five Year Plan (1992-1997) made an effort to bring past experience together into a separate chapter on the environment. All of the above mentioned initiatives were filtered in the preparation of the 9th Five Year Plan (1997-2002). IUCN-Nepal helped to draft a chapter on “Objectives of environment and natural resource management” in the plan. A mid-term review of the Plan is to be carried out in 2000. In 1997, an NCS implementation review was undertaken (through a workshop and theme panels) and produced a range of broad recommendations extending beyond the NCS itself. Swiss SDC also conducted an external review of the NCS. In 1998, the National Planning Commission convened a meeting on how to update the NCS into a comprehensive strategy reflecting current needs. Current ideas on nssd approaches in Nepal centre on: income generation and poverty alleviation; model demonstration projects; and coordination.

Burkina Faso

Burkina Faso is a dominantly rural country where economic growth is very dependent on agriculture. The government prepares regular Five Year development plans and currently the main economic development objective is fighting poverty. This is supported by sectoral policies but their preparation lacks consultation and they are not clearly articulated with each other. The government has signed the main Rio conventions but these are proving difficult to implement. There is therefore an urgent need for a framework to provide harmonisation and a holistic approach. The National Council for Management of the Environment (CONAGESE) was established in 1995 by law, based at the Ministry for Environment and Water and chaired by the Prime Minister. CONAGESE is in effect a framework for consultation which promotes the principles of environmental conservation and sustainability within development. It has responsibility for a range OF activities including the programme against desertification. Government departments, civil society and the private sector make proposals for CONAGESE activities.

An external review of the past activities of CONAGESE and other technical ministries active in the rural sector by OECD/Club du Sahel and CILSS, and subsequent discussions with Burkina Faso officials, has shown that effective co-ordination of development and co-operation policies is a key challenge involving several dimensions:

  • Improved information about existing policies;
  • Improved relationships between policies and the projects and programme portfolio;
  • Long-term involvement of representatives of rural communities (locally-elected officials or farmers’ unions) to develop their capacity to participate effectively in the policy debate.

An initiative has been launched to harmonise planning and to integrate environmental issues in development planning in a participatory manner. This initiative aims to test a prototype planning approach to integrate global and transnational priorities in existing sectoral planning frameworks. It is hoped that this will result in: the main players in sustainable development in the country reaching consensus on an nssd approach; CONAGESE being better perceived at the national level as the coordinator of environmental management; a clearer definition of institutional roles at the highest level; and a revised national environmental action plan.

The process envisages several phases and steps (see Appendix 6) and is scheduled to conclude in February 2001 with a methodological document containing new proposals for planning and policy integration.


A process to develop a National Conservation Strategy (NCS) was initiated in 1988. Following UNCED, it was renamed the National Conservation Strategy for Sustainable Development (NCSSD). A draft was approved by the National Environmental Management Council (NEMC) in 1994 but has never been effectively implemented. A National Environmental Action Plan prepared by a World Bank consultant was approved by the President, also in 1994. It too has remained a shelf document. Lack of implementation has, in part, been due to overlapping institutional mandates for environmental issues and inter-institutional rivalries. The Institutional and Legal Framework for Environmental Management Project is currently seeking to address these issues. Tanzania is currently developing a Poverty Reduction Strategy.

Key points

A number of key points emerged during discussions:
  • The value added of nssds: In Bangladesh, the participatory approach adopted in the formulation of the National Environment Management Act added value because it engaged the lower tiers of government (who are usually not consulted), enabled the identification of development as well as environment priorities and resulted in the government’s acceptance of the need for wide public consultation, facilitated through NGOs. Participation strengthens the links between thinking and acting (otherwise thinking is done at national level, while action is at local level).
  • The role of donors: In Bolivia, framework agreements with donor agencies mean that the next government will have to continue with the policies and approaches currently in place. In Thailand, the UN helps to bring experience from other countries and is examining the meaning of sustainable development in terms of action at local level.
  • Donors should act as facilitators and respond to developing country requests. Donor pilot initiatives which create common playing fields can serve to improve understanding of the perspectives of different stakeholders and strengthen collaboration between them.
    Analysing nssds: it would be useful to start by examining the factors that characterise unsustainable development (see DFID key sheet on nssds). For example, economic inequality is underpinned by inadequate financial systems and inequitable land tenure, whilst social instability is caused by poor governance (e.g. corruption and abuse of power) and high unemployment. This will then provide a framework for assessing the effectiveness of national development processes in tackling these bottlenecks or constraints to sustainable development.
  • Nssds need to be politically viable to be sustainable: political viability is important to enable and sustain sustainable development policies and improve their efficiency. This means integrating such policies with those development priorities which have strong political consensus, and securing government commitment to decentralisation, localisation and democratisation.

7.    Methodologies for analysing nssds

7.1    Methodological approaches

At each workshop, IIED presented a paper ‘Analysing nssds: Some Methodologies’ setting out a possible approach for analysing strategic planning processes and their contribution to sustainable development. Such analysis requires an assessment of processes or systems, and what they are achieving, rather than looking only at impacts based on existing sustainable development indicators – since it will take time for impacts to become apparent (and since nssds are all about process).

Approaches will need to vary from country to country depending on the subject of analysis – some countries have developed nssds, some have not, while others have many different existing plans and strategies. It is therefore useful to use principles to analyse nssd processes (e.g. participation which enhances the quality of information and generates public ownership).

Drawing on international experience, the paper presents a possible framework for analysis (successfully tested in a recent review of Pakistan’s National Conservation Strategy – see next section) with five broad categories: the context of nssds (political, economic etc); the actors; integrating mechanisms (including other initiatives such as CDF and PRSP which may be ore sustainable in the long term); process characteristics; and impacts. The specific processes and issues that are important will be different depending on the country, but the framework can be used as a starting point for analysis.

In discussion, it was suggested that an nssd could be seen as an evolving system of institutions and processes that deal with sustainable development, and that the best way to see if strategies adjust to changing contexts is to consult sectoral focus groups. The information that emerges will depend on the maturity of the strategic planning process. Where an nssd is not in place, the analysis should provide useful information on the effective institutions and processes on which to base such a strategy. Analysis of an nssd process that is in its early stages should illutrate how to conduct an nssd, and analysis of older (longer-standing) nssds can illustrate how to adapt and improve nssds.

7.2    Pakistan’s experience of NCS mid-term review


In Arusha, Asif Zaidi of IUCN-Pakistan presented Pakistan’s recent experience of undertaking a mid-term review of the National Conservation Strategy. The objectives were: to assess progress since the adoption of the NCS in 1991; to analyse and collate lessons; and to formulate recommendations for the adjustment of the NCS as a strategic guideline for sustainable development in Pakistan. The review was conducted in two phases over a period of 12 months: data collection conducted internally (11 months), and an external review led by an international panel (1 month).


8.    Topic guides for country dialogues


The original project proposal set out a phased approach involving:

(a) A status review conducted by the lead organisation/team to build a map of existing strategic processes including key stakeholders, groups and institutions, based on interviews/consultations with key stakeholders (including government, NGOs and the private sector) (1-2 months); and

(b) A dialogue phase involving the participation of a broader range of stakeholders, including a 2/3- day national round table, possibly preceded by smaller events (3-5 months).

However, the approach in each dialogue country is a matter for local decision and, during workshop and other discussions, it has been suggested that the two elements might be best be undertaken in parallel or merged rather than be carried out in sequence.

At each workshop, DFID presented a draft topic guide (see ‘Topic Guides for Status Reviews and Dialogues’) with possible issues to be considered during the status review (Topic Guide 1) and dialogues (Topic Guide 2). The guide was originally developed for a similar exercise in Uganda to determine the extent to which policies, plans and processes take account of sustainable development issues. The basic format is essentially the same as the analytical framework proposed by IIED (see section 7 above) with Topic Guide 1 covering the context, actors and integrating institutions, and Topic Guide 2 covering processes and impacts.

In Arusha, working groups considered which additional questions and topics should be included in the topic guides, which ones should be excluded, and what methodologies might be employed to address these questions. At the London workshop, participants discussed the topic guides in plenary and suggested some revisions, The following general comments were made:

  • The topic guide questions should be used as a basis for discussion, rather than just providing yes/no answers. The status reviews should begin to ask questions about process issues and the role of donors, and should provide the basis for identifying specific issues, stakeholders and methodologies for the dialogues.
  • It may not be possible to review all existing strategy processes within the scope of the project. Strategies should be prioritised according to their potential or actual contribution towards sustainable development, and their potential to yield interesting lessons. Defining characteristics of selected strategies should be that they are cross-sectoral, people-centred and participatory. As far as possible, the strategies discussed should be applicable across national, sub-national and local levels
  • The work should be undertaken by a multi-stakeholder group to ensure that the project is not too closely associated with any sector/stakeholder.
  • The methodologies used should be: participatory (therefore lead teams require this capacity); credible (all stakeholders should be consulted) and transparent.
  • Capturing the viewpoints of all stakeholders is essential and represents a significant challenge. A combination of approaches may be required (stakeholder workshops, questionnaires, structured interviews, focus group discussions, participatory techniques, traditional village forums, stakeholder analysis, conflict resolution, use of the media).
  • Lessons learned should be both positive and negative.
  • The final output for the country should be a short report, two-thirds of which should focus on future priorities. The process adopted during the dialogues should continue after the DAC guidance is produced.
  • It may be necessary to make a distinction between strategy and planning processes in the DAC guidance.
  • The two topic guides should be merged into a single document and combined with guidance on methodologies for nssd analysis.

Note: In the light of specific suggestions made at both workshops, the issues covered in the two topic guides and in the presentations of methodologies for nssd analysis are now being revised and merged into a single, more user-friendly document intend as a ‘prompt’ for analysis and debate. This will be circulated to all project participants and placed on the website.

9.    Communications strategy for the project

Workshop participants discussed the need for a communications strategy for the project. The dialogues will only be possible if participants are well informed. At present, there is very little awareness about the project in the dialogue countries, and it will be important to market and propagate the initiative in the initial phase. The DAC Task Force should help to raise awareness amongst donor agencies (e.g. DFID has recently visited the World Bank and UNDP to discuss the initiative).

It was agreed that it was important to ensure a multiplier effect, so that other countries learn from the process. In addition, it will be important to link up with other countries that have initiated similar reviews.

One mechanism to promote communication and learning is a proposed project website (see next sub-section) but it was agreed that other means of communication need to be explored, such as the preparatory consultations in advance of the Rio +10 conference.

9.1    Prototype project website


With funding from DFID, IIED and the Natural Resources Institute (NRI) have developed a prototype website for the project and this was demonstrated to workshop participants. The website provides the architecture for holding: detailed information about the project, participating countries, organisations and individuals and the on-going dialogues; the texts of a wealth of documents on nssds and closely-related issues as well as documents from participating countries and other organisations; and hyperlinks to a wide range of useful related websites including those in participating countries. The basic structure of the website is as follows:

Country area:
  - contacts
  - project details
Reference area:
  - sustainable development
  - the project
  - key documents
  - tools
Discussion area:
  - general topics
  - country topics
  - draft project documents


The prototype website with project information and the texts of a wide range of key nssd documents is contained on a CD Rom which is available to project participants. 

During discussion, several issues arose:


  • Control and access of the website information (which is now no longer an entirely private site) – all participants will be able to send information and materials to be posted on the website. IIED/NRI will only be concerned with matters such as relevance of content, correct formatting, consistency of style, eliminating viruses, etc.
  • The distribution and frequency of distribution of the CD-ROM in the dialogue team countries and other constituencies – probably quarterly.
  • Participants stressed their need for the information contained in the website and CD-ROM.
  • It was agreed that the information would be varied and span from policy to methodologies as well as contact details.
  • The participants also agreed with the proposal for a e-mail discussion list (now set up as nssd@egroups.com).
  • There was also some discussion centred on the hidden costs of information technology (which are now well known) but that there are also high costs of searching for information whose accessibility is poor.
  • The two workshops agreed that the website provided a very useful and important resource and urged that it be developed further and opened to public access. DFID has offered to support the further development and maintenance of the website during the life of the project. The website is now open to access on www.nri.org\NSSD and will in due course be transferred to www.nssd.net.


10.    Country dialogue work plans

During the two workshops, dialogue country teams presented their proposed approaches to the dialogues and their proposed workplans. Brief details are provided in appendices:

Appendix 3    Thailand

Appendix 4    Tanzania

Appendix 5    Bolivia

Appendix 6    Burkina Faso

Appendix 7    Nepal


11.    Conclusions and next steps

11.1    Timetable

A mid-term review workshop will be held in October 2000 in Thailand, after the status review phase, and a final workshop in February 2001 in Bolivia.
Draft guidance must be ready in time for the meeting of the DAC WP/ENV in February 2001. This means that IIED will have to work in parallel with the country teams to draw lessons from the country dialogues throughout the dialogue phase, and prepare a first draft of the guidance in time for the February workshop.
An annotated outline of the guidance should be developed at the October workshop on the basis of the status reviews.

Efforts should focus on producing draft policy guidance for the DAC High Level Meeting in May 2001, and work on the detailed technical document (the sourcebook) should continue beyond May 2001.

11.2    Workshop objectives

Mid term review workshop in Thailand (October 2000): to review the results of the status reviews and progress with the dialogues; and to consider the annotated outline for the guidance on nssds and agree on key points for its further elaboration.

Final workshop in Bolivia (Feb 2001): to present the findings of the dialogues, discuss key lessons and refine the draft guidance prepared by IIED in consultation with the country teams.

11.3    Information and communication

The proposed website should be made operational, funds should be allocated for translation and key documents translated into Spanish and French. It would be useful to provide a glossary of key terms.

A progress report will be prepared for the DAC WP/ENV meeting in June 2000.

11.4    Initiating the country dialogues

Country teams will need to submit revised work plans (including the schedule, costs, personnel details) to IIED as soon as possible so that contracts and terms of reference for lead teams can be agreed.
IIED will need to discuss the sequence of tasks and the methodology for each dialogue with the country teams and help to develop the analytical framework so that common issues are addressed and common lessons can be drawn.
Countries are encouraged to hold an initial planning meetings as soon as possible to discuss the approach, and to build wider awareness of and support for the initiative. Where possible,IIED will attend.
IIED will maintain constant contact with the country teams throughout the project.


11.5    Drawing lessons from parallel learning countries


The final report of the mid-term review of Pakistan’s NCS will be placed on the project website.
A regional workshop will be organised by IUCN in Nepal for South and South-East Asian countries to present the results of the mid-term review of the Pakistan NCS as both an information-sharing and training event. IIED will take part.
Once the mid-term review is finalised, it is hoped that this will lead to the development of a NCS II (as a nssd) and IUCN may hold a roundtable for this purpose. In developing this nssd, Pakistan will wish to benefit from the learning deriving from the DAC initiative.

IUCN Pakistan would be willing to second a person to Nepal to facilitate mutual exchange on NCS analysis.


A visit will be made to Namibia by IIED and DFID in early June 2000 to discuss options for linkage.
Capacity 21:    Ndey Njie (UNDP Capacity 21) will help to maintain links with Capacity 21 initiatives by providing documentation and attending the mid-term and final workshops.


11.6    Feedback on workshops

Participants made several suggestions for future workshops:

key documents should be translated in advance, and good translation services should be provided during the workshops;
the second and third workshops should be longer than 2.5 days and involve more group discussions;
resource persons should be used more effectively (not only as chairs); and
easy access to a computer and more than one printer would be very useful



The following documents are available for viewing or download as Acrobat PDF files
Annex 1 and 2 Lists of participants in the Arusha and London workshops
Annex 3 to 7
Country dialogue work plans
Bolivia    (updated 26th July)





© NSSD 2003  
NSSD.net Home
Top of Page