The value of NSSDs as a development tool

At best an NSSD would involve a democratic process of consultation and debate with inputs from a wide range of stakeholders involving the government, private sector, civil society and the media. It could lead not only towards sustainable development, but produce greater national consensus and empower the poor in the process.    Because both rich and poor countries alike were, in theory, committed to formulating NSSDs, the concept could not so easily be portrayed as a condition that the North is imposing on the South (in contrast, perhaps, to the World Bank’s Poverty Reduction Strategies).   Moreover, by explicitly aiming to integrate both poverty and environmental agendas the NSSD potentially presents a much more holistic and comprehensive approach to development than other processes.

However, the impediments that need to be surmounted to make this a reality are many.

Obstacles to be overcome 

Adequate participation also requires sufficient time and good dissemination of accurate information about how to participate.   At present the aim of NSSDs and methodologies for achieving them appear vague, to many, and incentives for participation are limited.    There is also limited information to help with the planning, review and monitoring of NSSD processes.

A major potential problem for governments is ‘strategy overload’: the multiplicity of development planning frameworks, donor demands and competing priorities mean that NSSDs may not get the attention they merit.    Or, attempts to formulate NSSDs could duplicate or exclude other efforts upon which they might be built.   Either is likely to reduce civil society participation in NSSD processes and undermine local ownership of the result.

Governments may also be unwilling to set up genuine participatory exercises either because they do not have experience with them or because donors often demand such strategies without considering the time and money required to conduct them well. 

While lack of skills, capacity, money and information may be problematic, donors have caused further problems in some cases by filling key sustainable development posts with non-nationals (eg. in Bolivia). 

Established sectoral planning splits also make it hard to co-ordinate planning across government.

A significant problem is that there is no institutional champion for the NSSD processes, nor money attached to NSSDs. Key donors such as the World Bank and IMF are promoting their own development planning processes, such as Poverty Reduction Strategies and similar plans and appear, therefore, to lack commitment to NSSDs.

While official thinking on NSSDs seems to focus on reform of domestic policies, economic globalisation has meant that development outcomes in one country are increasingly determined by economic policies pursued in others. High consumption in industrialised countries not only undermines sustainability in these countries but also results in damaging resource exploitation in developing countries through unfair patterns of international trade and investment. Similarly, greenhouse gas emissions in one part of the world can have economic and environmental impacts in other regions by accelerating global climate change.   International policy processes, such as trade negotiations and rules, also determine a country’s sustainable development prospects. 

Unless NSSDs can accommodate these global processes and carry some weight in international negotiations, they may increasingly appear irrelevant.   So, links to organisations like the World Trade Organisation or UNCTAD will be important, as will consideration of how Multilateral Environmental Agreements and other existing international commitments can be implemented.

Overcoming the obstacles

Participants identified a number of general approaches to help overcome some of these obstacles.

Firstly, it was felt important to press for ‘strategy convergence’ to avoid strategy overload and many of the problems associated with the multiplicity of development planning processes.

It was felt that we should also try to ensure that NSSDs are not exclusive processes but build on past processes and policies.   DFID clarified that this was indeed their aim. 

It was suggested that existing experiences of country development frameworks should be evaluated so that others can learn from them.   The EU/DAC pilot project with several developing countries was aiming, in part, to do this. 

There was felt to be an urgent need to developing methodologies for participation in NSSDs and for monitoring their implementation.    It was also vital to obtain clarification on how NSSD processes could be funded and on the status of NSSD commitments.  Equally important was to ensure adequate dissemination of information in countries so that civil society actors and others were aware of the NSSD concept, in order to promote it and to participate in the process.

Donors should support capacity building and provide critical resources. Reform of institutional structures to increase co-ordination and communication is vital.

More research and discussion was needed on several issues including:

• the impacts of developed country consumption on developing countries (sometimes called "footprints").
• the impact of national processes (such as elections) on the ability of civil society to participate in NSSD processes and on the government commitment to the resultant NSSD if elections lead to a change in governing party.
• how to integrate international, national and local processes and policies in an NSSD.

Northern NGOs should promote wider awareness about NSSD processes and the key issues at stake, among their own staff and among their partners. NGO involvement would be particularly helpful in facilitating multi-stakeholder consultations and more participatory modes of decision-making. 

Northern NGOs should consider helping to build the capacity of southern NGOs to engage in NSSD processes i.e. through training, exchanges, information-sharing.  Southern groups, however, need to speak for themselves. 

NGOs can build bridges between government agencies and grassroots levels and help international communication.  NGOs can raise the level of debate about that issue. We need to work in partnership on these issues. 

Next steps

Workshop participants identified a number of practical next steps for NGOs to increase knowledge about NSSDs over the next year or so.

• The DEG will produce a full report of the workshop, distribute it to all participants, and try to have it placed on the NSSD website (see below)
• The DEG will establish an e-mail list for those NGOs which want to share information on NSSDs on an ongoing basis.
• BOND will be encouraged to hold training/information dissemination activities on these processes.
• The workshop organisers will send a letter to the UK Government's Globalisation White Paper consultation team, expressing the widely-felt concern about the global policies and processes which may obstruct national sustainable development planning.
• The DEG will convene a meeting in a year's time will be held to review progress. 
• A discussion paper on civil society involvement in NSSDs will be produced to demystify the process from a Civil Society viewpoint.
• The NSSD website (www.nssd.net) is available as a tool for sharing information. 
• A review of civil Society involvement in the UK NSSD will be undertaken and the opportunities through the UK round-table on sustainable development examined. 
• The DEG will produce a resource list on NSSD information, publications and websites. 
• Further co-ordination of policy research work would be helpful, eg similar to the assessment of the sustainability aspects of trade done by WWF-UK.