Introduction

This chapter reviews practical experience of strategic planning, and demonstrates that successful approaches share certain characteristics. It confirms that the principles outlined in Box 2 provide a good basis for success when put into practice. Challenges to be faced include the need to move away from a top-down approach and an emphasis on a product, and the need to institutionalise a process approach which includes implementation arrangements and iterative learning.

Establishing long-term vision, setting priorities and achieving integration

Vision for the future

Strategic planning frameworks are more likely to be successful when they have a long-term vision of sustainable development with transparent objectives, and include clear priorities upon which stakeholders agree. A vision should evolve from national and sub-national aspirations, taking into account those of socially-marginalised groups and it should relate to regional and international realities. The borders of modern states may include, and cut across, culturally distinct peoples who have different traditions and live in particular environments(e.g. forest Indians). Scenario planning techniques can help to identify options for debate. But most existing strategies have been developed as a short-term response to current (and even past) problems and to global and development agency concerns. Only a few strategies have been prepared as a means of setting a course for the country to achieve a vision of a sustainable future - say one generation ahead (e.g. Box 6). Nevertheless, any longer term vision needs to embed shorter-term steps. For example, while poverty reduction strategies are operationalised in terms of a series of shorter time periods, they are to be based on a longer-term vision based on the principles of the Comprehensive Development Framework.

Integration and making trade-offs

Experience shows that strategies work best when they are developed in line with a comprehensive and integrated consideration of economic, social, environmental and institutional issues. But such integration has been weak in most past strategies. For example, environment has frequently been dealt with as a sector, and poverty has been treated as a social policy issue, rather than both being considered as cross-cutting concerns. The recent CDF and PRSPs have sought to address this. The CDF argues for greater integration of social and environmental issues. PRSPs advocate a holistic approach, particularly addressing social policy issues, and, more recently, also demonstrating movement to ensure that environmental issues are integrated into the process.

Past strategies have not effectively dealt with trade-offs because the methods remain poorly-developed and the necessary skills and/or political will have been lacking. At best, this has resulted in ‘shopping lists’ of ideas and project proposals without a direct influence on either governmental or private sector investment at any level. One notable exception is Ghana where a proportion of the national budget is assigned to the District Assemblies Common Fund and disbursed to districts to implement district development plans developed in conformity with Ghana’s Vision 2020 (see Box 13).

Ownership of strategies

In many countries there is a significant problem of lack of ownership of strategies. Reasons include weak government leadership, time pressures, the need to respond to external requirements, development agencies wanting their own processes and identifiable projects, lack of transparency and accountability, and limited capacity to engage in the process. Most strategic planning frameworks are perceived to be exclusively those of government, or to be a rationalisation for external interventions. There is little sense of commitment by stakeholders in the private sector and civil society. In some cases, discontent with national processes has led stakeholders to develop their own parallel strategies (Box 7).

Many country planning frameworks are externally-driven as a consequence of conditionality and time pressure and are therefore seen as being owned by development agencies. This can result in a lack of co-ordination between different frameworks, and a tendency for responsibilities to be left to a particular government institution. These are often ministries of environment when environment and natural resources issues are the focus, and ministries of finance where budget support is involved. This can result in a lack of policy coherence and the alienation of others who might also have legitimate interests or could make important contributions. In order to increase country ownership it is crucial to build on strategies that already exist and to ensure the continued development and improvement of such strategies through monitoring and evaluation.

Long term commitment

The importance of high level political commitment

High-level political commitment is a prerequisite for an effective strategy. It is necessary for policy and institutional changes. In some cases, strategy development has been commanded by the Head of State or the Prime Minister. For example, Zambia’s National Conservation Strategy and Ghana’s Vision 2020 were both the ideas of the respective Presidents. Such commitment also needs to be long-term, and should therefore involve longer-term stakeholders such as the range of political parties and younger generations of commentators and decision-makers. Otherwise, there is the danger that an incoming government will see a particular strategy as representing the views or policies of its predecessor and so will either ignore it or even initiate a new strategy process more in line with its own thinking (see Box 8).

The need for a central co-ordinating body

To ensure commitment across government, it is preferable for the co-ordination of a strategic process to be the responsibility of the office of the Prime Minister or President, or of a ministry with central authority - such as the finance or economic planning ministry. In this way, the strategy has exposure as a serious and mainstream government initiative and links to important policies and procedures are strengthened. This approach helps to overcome institutional rivalries and inertia.

The need to involve all ministries

In the past, a particular ministry has often initiated discussion on a strategy. There has rarely been effective engagement with other line ministries to build cross-government support, and seldom has the issue been introduced in cabinet so as to gain broader political commitment at an early stage. Experience shows that when lead responsibility for a strategy lies within a particular line ministry (especially where it controls the process and budget), this creates a perception that the strategy is a project of that ministry or a sectoral matter. This results in limited involvement and co-operation from other ministries.

In all countries, major development decisions tend to be taken by ministries responsible for finance and for economic planning, and their major stakeholders such as banks and corporations. To date, sustainable development has usually been made the responsibility of environment ministries which have limited influence in government, and have therefore not been seen as of interest in other sectors. At best, this has enabled the formation of a community or network concerned only with environmental policy. At worst, this undermines progress towards sustainable development through lack of integration in other sectors.

For key finance and economic stakeholders to become major participants in a strategy, there must be high-level commitment and relevant economic and risk analyses available. In some countries, this has been enhanced on a regular basis by linking strategies to budget processes (see Box 9).

Commitment of the private sector and civil society is very important

It is important to secure the commitment of the private sector and civil society. Informal movements (citizens’ groups, professional networks, etc.) can be used to build political support and commitment, and to achieve coherence between stakeholders’ positions and policies. Many community-based and civil society organisations are more aware than line ministries of problems resulting from decisions taken by central government. In Thailand, for example, many such organisations have become environmental watchdogs with a continuous commitment to monitor new and existing projects for compliance with rules and regulations. This has led to better feasibility and impact studies, public hearings and the cancellation of some projects with adverse impacts.

In response to the challenge of globalisation, the private sector is addressing its role in fostering sustainable development, e.g. through the work of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development and initiatives such as the new UN-Private Sector Global Compact on responsible business behaviour. In recent years there has been some engagement of the domestic private sector in strategic planning processes, but there are few cases where the international private sector has been involved. Given that financial flows to developing countries through private investment now dwarf official development assistance, this is a challenge that needs to be addressed in developing and implementing strategies for sustainable development.

The commitment and involvement of the private sector and civil society is dependent on how well the strategy responds to the motivations of these groups and on what incentives they have to engage in the strategy process. Thus, in designing a strategic process, stakeholder analysis should be employed at an early stage (Box 10). This can provide important information on the motivations and interests of stakeholders; the means they use to secure their interests; the pressures on them to change and the constraints to making changes.

Private sector involvement is more productive if the strategy process is open to voluntary and market-based instruments, balanced with regulatory and fiscal instruments. The private sector operates in a competitive environment, so a key challenge is to create an environment in which competition is not just about the lowest price of goods and services but is also concerned with improving social, economic and environmental conditions. To engage effectively with the private sector requires dialogue about their concerns in order to understand the constraints they face to be innovative and to invest, and the factors that are likely to bring about improved ways of working. In Pakistan, since 1996, the Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry has supported a programme of audits of a wide range of industrial units to examine how compliance can be achieved with National Environmental Quality Standards (NEQS) – designed to promote effective pollution control, and to carry forward recommendations in the National Conservation Strategy. The constraints and opportunities identified enabled industry to negotiate revised, and more achievable, NEQS with the Environmental Protection Agency in 1999.

Multi-stakeholder approaches are conducive to generating sustainability principles and standards for different business sectors – which can then be applied to this range of instruments. Likewise, the involvement of civil society implies an openness to the broad livelihood and ethical concerns of different groups. The strategy process must be designed to accommodate the diversity of views and ideas that this will give rise to, in order to maintain commitment. The importance of wide and effective participation for all of this is considered below.

Ensuring effective participation

Broad participation in strategic planning is necessary for ensuring commitment, as discussed above, and for ensuring that key information is brought into the planning process. Very extensive participation is however neither possible nor necessarily desirable - it would be extremely costly. There are many potential sectors, groups and levels for participation that need to be involved. Their willingness to participate will depend on whether they are convinced that their views will be considered and on their ability to engage (e.g. it takes time and costs money to prepare for and attend meetings). Issues of representativeness, sampling and appropriate degrees of participation are important. A balance needs to be struck between involving as wide a range of participants as possible to forge a broad-based and durable consensus; and avoiding overloading the facilitating and managerial capacities of those leading the strategy process. The more well-developed and representative the existing participation mechanisms, the more cost-effective they are likely to be. If managerial capacities are weak and participatory mechanisms are poor, the number of participants can be limited at first - but this should be increased with the development and reiteration of specific strategy tasks.

Where relations between government and civil society are good, the conditions for effective strategies for sustainable development are good. The converse is also true. It is vital that the interaction between government and non-governmental groups is strengthened. Also central to the pursuit of sustainability is the need to strengthen a country’s democratic institutions and the role of elected bodies, particularly parliamentary assemblies.

Participation of stakeholders should take place throughout the strategy process in defining objectives, analysing problems, implementing programmes and learning from experiences. Whilst this is well established in theory and in rhetoric, experience with existing country-level strategic planning frameworks shows that practice still lags behind. The formulation of most national strategies remains dominantly top-down (Box 11) or suffers from problems with participation. Despite these obstacles, there are signs of progress in many countries, e.g. multi-stakeholder partnerships (Box 17) and special efforts to involve particular groups (Box 12).

Community-based and bottom-up approaches

The last 20 years have seen an explosion in community-based, participatory development approaches and supporting tools (e.g. participatory rural appraisal). In order to support such approaches so that local authorities, communities and businesses can play an effective role in strategies for sustainable development, it is important to learn from successful local sustainable development initiatives and promote replication where relevant. Such initiatives have usually been most successful when they have supported local capacity utilisation and development, stakeholder organisation, information and education. The trend towards decentralisation offers an opportunity to link national strategy processes to community-based participatory approaches (Boxes 13 and 14).

Balancing top-down and bottom-up approaches

Conventionally, governments have been resistant to opening up policy- and decision-making to enable participation by stakeholders at all levels (Box 11). But the many failed top-down planning decisions testify to the need for a judicious balance of both top-down and bottom-up approaches. Strategies need to consider which issues can only be addressed at a national and central level, and which can be addressed more locally. It is often only at the level of a district that a people-centred approach to sustainable development becomes truly evident - for at this level, decisions are taken daily by individuals and groups of people that affect their livelihoods, health and often their survival. Individuals and communities are best placed to identify local trends, challenges, problems and needs, and to agree their own priorities and preferences and determine what skills and capacities are lacking. Hence, some strategies are now beginning to concentrate different issues at the most appropriate level (e.g. the approach followed by the Ministry of Planning in Bangladesh in the early 1990s to develop the Participatory Perspective Plan, or the emerging ‘hierarchy’ of strategies in Pakistan – Box 14). A combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches is emerging in district planning in some countries. For example, in Tanzania, ward planning in Rungwe District involves top-down decisions on certain matters (e.g. setting ward bank rates) but stakeholder participation on other aspects of development, e.g. education, agricultural production and communication.

Strategies need to consider which mechanisms can achieve this balance between top-down and bottom-up approaches. The new planning systems in a number of countries provide examples of how decentralisation can contribute to this (Boxes 13 and 14). Such balance needs to be accompanied and supported by mechanisms which ensure good dialogue, on-going monitoring information flow and learning within and between all levels.

Balance between use of expertise and need for a participatory approach

The development of strategies requires technical inputs for many key tasks, e.g. gathering and analysing baseline data, statistical assessments, economic projections, etc. But technical expertise alone cannot address all the issues nor provide access to all necessary and useful information. Much of this is held by individuals and communities. Furthermore, most key issues will need to be considered and debated by a wide range of stakeholder groups if a vision for development in the future is to be agreed that enjoys the support of society as a whole, and if consensus is be reached on how to address important challenges.

There is, therefore, a clear role for both technical inputs by individual experts and the broader involvement of many people in participatory exercises - but at the same time not overburdening these people. It is very important that a balance be struck between these two approaches.

The necessary skills and capacities are usually in short supply in developing countries and those which exist are often already heavily committed and over stretched. So capacity-building and empowerment should be critical components of strategy processes themselves.

Effective participation and the costs involved

The costs of participation depends on various factors:

• The types and numbers of participants, their location, and the opportunity costs of their participation. Many stakeholders will be able to engage through their existing jobs and roles. Others will need to take time from their livelihood activities (e.g. those in civil society and particularly those from local communities where involvement can mean, for example, time lost to harvesting crops). Women may find it particularly difficult to engage in participatory processes due to the multiplicity of tasks they perform. So ways of compensating for this or for providing assistance may need to be found if they are to participate effectively. The example of New Zealand is outlined in Box 12.

• Time requirements - it takes time to establish trust, especially at some local levels; and a framework within which people may be encouraged to collaborate with outsiders. It has often taken between 18 months and five years to set up and undertake the more comprehensive participation exercises associated with national strategies.

• Specialist skill requirements. Skills in participatory enquiry, communications, education and media activities are all essential in order to establish the right linkages and ensure quality of participation and communications.

• Communication requirements. The many institutions and individuals engaging in debate will need to have access to and understand key information important to the issue(s) being discussed. This requires communication through the medium appropriate to the groups in question (telecommunications, mass or traditional media, various fora) which have cost implications.

However, the costs of participation, whilst initially high, can reduce with each iteration of the strategy as the scope, purpose and methodologies for participation of each group become clearer and better focused.

Analysis

Strategies should be built on analysis of key issues and the forces behind them, the actual or potential short- and long-term impacts of approaches to deal with them, and policy and institutional frameworks. Analysis of links between local and national levels, and between national and global concerns is of particular importance. Such strategic analysis is necessary to develop ideas for policy and institutional reforms and should be backed by effective communication with stakeholders.

As an example, integrating environmental and social analysis upstream into strategic planning processes presents opportunities for improving the sustainability of and coherence of development plans and policies. This will encourage consideration of the long-term implications (such as the potential environmental and social impacts of macro-economic policy change, and vice versa). Similarly, factoring the costs of environmental damage on the economy into GDP estimates and forecasts, and adjusting policy accordingly, may result in more realistic targets and in improved sustainability of long term development strategies.

Technical capacity and methodological skills are required for such analysis, and for long-term planning. In practice, these skills tend to be lacking and many existing strategies are based on inadequate or weak analysis. When successive strategies duplicate or overlap with existing ones, there is usually little time and demand for analysis – and thus old analysis tends to be recycled, especially as participation exercises are usually organised after analysis and therefore cannot define what issues need to be examined. A further constraint to good analysis is that baseline data is often unreliable or lacking. This may be because the data concerns matters for which accountability has not been sought until recently, and thus monitoring systems do not exist.

Convergence, complementarity, coherence and co-ordination between country frameworks at all levels

Currently, there is insufficient convergence between different planning frameworks at both national and decentralised levels as well as in different sectors. This is not surprising, as these frameworks are often based on fundamental differences in the roles and mandates of institutions, power bases, concepts, ideologies and funding. Therefore, these frameworks have different intentions, interests and scopes for planning. There is a need to strengthen convergence as multiple strategies risk duplication, competition and the waste of scarce administrative and intellectual resources.

It is not feasible to merge all frameworks. But it is feasible to work towards complementarity and coherence so that different strategic planning frameworks are mutually supportive. Greater adherence to the principles outlined in Box 2 provides a way of achieving this. Convergence could be enhanced by government (in partnership with key stakeholders in the private sector and civil society, as well as with development agencies) developing and maintaining a matrix framework of all the existing and new strategic planning processes in a country (national. sub-national, local, responses to international commitments, etc.), highlighting linkages, differences and relationships between them, and thus focusing attention on what needs to be done for complementarity. The Comprehensive Development Framework aims to promote this approach. Such an instrument would help to ensure that new planning frameworks build on what already exists and create links between frameworks.

Where such links have been made and strategies have built on what exists, progress has been good, and vice versa – as evidenced by different experiences of developing poverty reduction strategies (Box 15).

Those responsible for strategy development need to take account of both past and existing strategies undertaken by different departments or agencies of government. There is a need to create mechanisms for co-ordination between sectors and coherence between both sectors and strategies. This requires governments and others to introduce improved institutional procedures and practices supported by appropriate management systems, and systems for effective conflict management and resolution. Great improvement in this area in local authorities has been achieved through Local Agenda 21s (Box 5) which national governments can learn from and seek to emulate.

 

Box 15. Building on what exists: links between Poverty Reduction Strategies and other strategic planning processes Uganda The Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper was based on a revision of its 1997 Poverty Eradication Action Plan. It also drew on other existing strategic assessment work including a Poverty Status Report, a Participatory Poverty Assessment and a Plan for the Modernisation of Agriculture. This increased country ownership of the strategy. Bolivia The Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan was developed through a highly participatory process which ensured an emphasis on poverty alleviation through economic activities related to the sustainable use of biodiversity. Following lobbying from the Minister for Sustainable Development in the Economic Policy Council, this strategy has now been incorporated as part of the Poverty Reduction Strategy. Burkina Faso When the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) was developed, efforts were made to incorporate its orientations into existing sectoral policies, plans and reform programmes (e.g basic education and health). This integration needs to continue, particularly to ensure that sectoral policies and plans specifically address the linkages between poverty and environment, and define indicators to track these linkages. The process of integration could have been strengthened by drawing on the country’s National Action Programme to combat desertification (NAP).The NAP was developed in a participatory manner, with nearly 50,000 people involved in its development, and was based on considerable analysis. But those responsible for the NAP were not involved in the PRS process, and the experience and lessons from undertaking the NAP were not drawn into the PRSP process. The updating of the PRSP provides an opportunity to address this. In developing this guidance, development agencies supported a dialogue process in Burkina Faso which played a catalytic role in fostering this convergence of frameworks. The participatory processes involved ensured that recommendations to government reflected the views of different national stakeholders. These include proposals for the development of a sustainable development strategy for the country to be prepared not as a document with new policy assessments but rather as an umbrella for the main legal instruments, principles for intervention and institutional reforms. In this way, the strategy would aim to ensure sustained growth that takes into account social, political, cultural and environmental concerns such as: Sustainable human development. Equity in the distribution of the benefits of growth. Transparency in the management of public affairs and the provisions of help. Efficiency and sustainability of development programmes. Reinforcement of capacities at the national level. The dialogue proposed measures for improving the PRS which are being used as a reference framework by the Ministry of Economy and Finance: To present the PRSP more widely as the only framework which the co-operation programmes of development assistance agencies should follow. To make the PRSP more widely available and to prepare shorter and more simple versions. To update the PRSP, with a view to integrating all sectoral plans within a single framework. This will involve close collaboration between all the ministries, the private sector and civil society so as to ensure harmonisation and coherence among existing or planned co-ordination mechanisms, indicators, and mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation. To generate new financial resources for the national budget to implement the strategy. Ghana In contrast to the above cases, a domestic poverty eradication strategy had been prepared in Ghana. This was subsequently transformed into an interim PRSP. The preparation of the full PRSP is being undertaken as part of the preparation of the Second Medium-Term Development Plan to implement Ghana’s Vision 2020. This plan will also incorporate the core development objectives of Ghana’s Comprehensive Development Framework (developed through separate institutional arrangements) and the UN Development Assistance Framework. The convergence of these strategic planning processes attests to the common principles that underpin them.

Regional issues

Only in a very few cases have past country-level strategies included any analysis of their impacts on neighbouring countries (or vice versa). There is a need for co-ordination between neighbouring countries and for regional approaches to address, for example, the concerns of indigenous peoples where they are located across international borders. Regional co-ordination and management is also important when a number of countries share natural resources and eco-systems (e.g. a river basin or watershed). The Andean Biodiversity Strategy developed by several South American countries provides a shared regional vision and identifies common interests.

National issues

A number of policy issues are clearly a national responsibility of central government (finance, trade, foreign policy,etc.), and they also have a strong bearing on shaping a country’s sustainable development. Yet such truly national issues are rarely considered in strategies for sustainable development (if discussed, they are seldom articulated in strategy documents). Furthermore, those departments responsible for such policies seldom play central roles in strategy processes as key stakeholders. An exception is the case of Ghana’s Vision 2020 where such national issues were explicitly considered and the responsible ministries have all been heavily involved in developing the medium-term policy frameworks to operationalise the vision. As Box 14 shows, national issues will become a central focus for the next phase in Pakistan’s National Conservation Strategy.

The importance of decentralisation

Decentralisation offers an effective mechanism for the convergence of different planning frameworks. Integration can often be more successfully achieved through bottom-up demand rather than top-down reorganisation. Strong local institutions, accessible information, fora to allow debate, and consensus/conflict management mechanisms can all forge integrated solutions. Hence there is an imperative to link top-down and bottom-up approaches.

Decentralisation offers strong opportunities for more detailed planning to translate strategy visions in practice at local levels. This needs to be accompanied by:

• The transfer of financial resources and empowerment to raise such resources locally.
• Capacity-building (e.g. this is a key component of Tanzania’s Local Government Reform Programme, 2000-2003).
• Clear delineation of government roles in planning, financial management, etc., at various hierarchical levels.
• Comprehensive legislation and administrative actions to bring about integration of the decentralised offices of government agencies into local administrative structures.
• Co-ordination of development agency support at local levels.

Strategy management systems and capacity

Supporting management capacity at all levels

An effective strategy for sustainable development requires good management. It must provide co-ordination, leadership, administration and financial control, harnessing skills and capacities and ensuring adherence to timetables. The roles, responsibilities and relationships between the different key participants in strategy processes must be clear. Among the essential ingredients that most successful strategies have in common is leadership. Usually there is a small team - and sometimes even a single individual – that maintains the vision, motivation and momentum through difficult periods, that is tenacious and prepared to face and overcome the challenges and adversities that a strategy process generates.

Strategies should build on and strengthen existing knowledge and expertise. Engagement in a strategy process will require a wide range of technical skills and analytical capacities. For example, those managing the process will require skills in facilitation and diplomacy. Those undertaking strategic analysis will need to understand the linkages between disciplines and sectors, as well as vertical interactions (e.g. between international, regional, national, district and local levels). Others will need to be concerned with institutional, legislative and administrative aspects of development. In many countries, there are specific initiatives to build capacity to help the development process (Box 16).

 

Box 16. National capacity-building project, Thailand In recent years, Thailand has introduced decentralisation policies and encourages participatory planning processes (see Box 12). But many communities lack strong citizen’s organisations to enable active engagement in such planning. In 2000 in response to pressure from NGOs and CBOs, the government approved the National Capacity-Building Project (budget US $2.5m) to train facilitators and promote multi-stakeholder involvement in national planning. The project will target highly committed villagers who are actively involved in community work and the facilitators will provide on-the-job training in project preparation, management, monitoring and evaluation.

Capacity can be undermined by a number of factors:

• Where there is no or weak evaluation of development programmes arising from strategies and no sanctions against poor performance by technical teams responsible for such implementation.

• When there is insufficient training/retraining of experts in government, the private sector and civil society to enable better understanding and management of the linkages between economic, social and environmental matters.

• When there are weak systems for selecting expertise capable of ensuring the quality and credibility of strategy processes.

• When salaries and fees, working conditions and career opportunities in the civil service are not attractive to attract high calibre individuals.

It is symptomatic of civil services in developing countries that good technical officers tend to leave the civil service, attracted by better salaries and conditions in the private sector and development agencies. They are also moved to new civil service posts frequently. This results in a loss of continuity of key experienced people after they have gone through a strategy cycle and gained experience of the challenges involved and the ways of managing the processes. With their departure, there is also a loss of institutional memory and access to networks. It is not surprising, therefore, that so many new strategies are initiated which appear to be overlapping and have failed to build on past experience. The capacity of public administrations and services can often be strengthened through a reform process.

Often national expertise exists but cannot be drawn upon due to lack of financial resources in the public sector and NGOs. The way in which development agencies often provide expatriate technical assistance rather than funding the engagement of national l expertise exacerbates this problem.

Public communication

Sustainable development is a complex goal and the development of a strategy for sustainable development is therefore a complex process. The effective engagement of stakeholders depends to a great extent on their understanding of the goal and acceptance that involvement in the strategy process demands changes in attitudes, behaviour and institutions. Therefore, developing a strategy demands two-way communication between policy-makers and the public. This requires much more than public relations initiatives through information campaigns and the media. It needs commitment to long-term social interaction to achieve a shared understanding of sustainable development and its implications, and promoting capacity building to find solutions to the challenges discussed in section 2.

Systems for conflict management

Within every society, economic, social, environmental, institutional and political interests and objectives (both long-term and short-term) vary and indeed often compete. This inevitably leads to conflicts between stakeholders. An important element of a strategy process is the development of mechanisms to identify such conflicts and help stakeholders negotiate compromises between current positions and longer-term common interests. The judicial system may not always be an appropriate mechanism to balance legitimate but opposing interests. Alternatives include the many traditional systems of resolving disputes that are culturally important and well-recognised by local people (e.g. chiefs and forums of village elders), but these have often been marginalized or ignored by central authorities. In recent times, a series of techniques for conflict resolution, arbitration and mediation have also emerged. Unlike the judicial system, such modern approaches do not impose solutions but facilitate compromise between the parties.

Knowledge and information systems

Capacity can be enhanced and interest and motivation promoted by sharing experience with others involved in strategy processes. There is much to gain from south-south and south-north learning and through networks of strategy practitioners to share experience (Box 17). A number of these networks have established web sites to facilitate information-sharing (e.g. www.nssd.net).

 

Box 17: Some examples of strategy practitioner networks In the 1990s, IUCN organised several regional networks for strategy practitioners and experts. These served well to share experience and generated many of the basic lessons on best practice that form the principles in this guidance. For example, the RedLat (Red Latinoamericano de Estrategias para el Desarollo Sostenible) has met five times since 1994. A core group of practitioners involved in some 25 sub-national and local strategies in 14 countries discuss common issues and share lessons learned. These are maintained on a website and there is a lively electronic network with over 1200 users in Spanish-speaking countries. RedLat has organised thematic workshops on tools for sustainable development are held, and organised south-south visits to exchange field experience. The Network for Environment and Sustainable Development in Africa (NESDA), was established in 1992 with World Bank sponsorship and assists African governments, institutions, the private sector, NGOs and local communities in capacity-building for strategic planning and implementation. Based on resolutions of the International Forum for National Councils for Sustainable Development (NCSDs) (April 2000), the global network of NCSDs is preparing to undertake a multi-stakeholder assessment of the Earth Summit commitments. Various regional NCSD groups meet regularly to share experiences. They vary in their effectiveness as well as in their adherence to the principles of nssds. Nevertheless, they are useful first point of contact to support and help NCSDs to evolve. UNDP has also developed extensive networks of people involved in strategies around the world through its work on Capacity 21.

Identifying indicators, establishing monitoring systems and ensuring accountability

There is a need to identify indicators of strategy progress and establish systems to monitor strategy development and implementation. This is crucial to enable the tracking of progress, the capturing of key lessons and changing strategic direction where necessary. It is also important to promote accountability. A good monitoring system requires action at several levels. First, strategic planning and decision-making for sustainable development depends on credible and reliable information and data on environmental, social and economic trends, pressures and responses. There is a lack of such baseline information and data in many countries. Secondly, organisational issues must be addressed so that the ‘rules of the game’ are clear. There must be an agreed action plan identifying what should be monitored, by whom, and when. There must be governance and management systems with checks and balances (including formal redress procedures) which ensure transparent ways of working. Not least, there should be regular provision of information to stakeholders. It is important that these matters are addressed in an integrated and participatory way in the strategic planning process.

The experience of Local Agenda 21s have provided some useful guidance on monitoring strategy practices. Local Agenda 21s have enabled local authorities to undertake internal audits of the compatibility of existing internal procedures and practices with the goals and targets of the action plans; to reform these procedures, rules and standards where necessary; and finally to establish new or improved internal management systems. Problems associated with the lack of a monitoring system are illustrated by Box 18.

Independent monitoring and auditing

Independent monitoring and auditing can be used to measure the performance of organisations against their mandates and to assess compliance with roles and responsibilities. But independent auditing of government performance (at any level) in relation to strategy development and implementation is rare. The official procedures for auditing public expenditure that exist in many countries could possibly provide a useful model. Some countries have established official ombudsmen to hold government to account in particular areas (see Box 19).

Community-based monitoring and the value of traditional community fora in ensuring accountability

Whilst formal monitoring and auditing is essential, local communities can also play an important role. In Nepal, for example, local communities are increasingly becoming involved in collecting baseline data prior to implementing development programmes, and NGOs and CBOs have developed participatory tools for community use in monitoring their sustainable development activities.

Traditional community fora have been used to air views, discuss problems and reach decisions affecting local people, and have been an important mechanism for local accountability. But many of them have fallen into disuse or been replaced as governments have introduced formal administrative structures at local levels and as political parties have established local organisational units. Traditional ways still exist in many countries and local people respect these systems which could again play a useful role. In some countries, traditional chiefs continue to play a key and powerful role in local governance and decision-making. But they often behave in unaccountable ways. The problem can be overcome through establishing democratic structures (e.g. Box 20).

Financial resources for strategies

Financing the strategy process and continuing systems from recurrent expenditure

Critical steps in initiating a strategy are to design the process, prepare a realistic budget and secure the financial resources. Funding an effective strategy process will not be cheap if it is undertaken according to the principles in Box 2. But the investment should reap benefits in terms of more sustainable development options, avoided costs of unsustainable activities, and more efficient deployment of resources and personnel. It is important that a strategy process is financed by the government from recurrent budget because then it is more likely to become a continuing process that will engage political support and be integrated into the policy- and decision-making process. Without such links, the strategy is likely to be dependent on external funding (Box 21). There are a number of examples of domestically-initiated and funded strategies which, as a result, command national respect and have had strong influence on government thinking and action (for example, Namibia’s Green Plan and Ghana Vision 2020).

General budgetary assistance for a strategy is better than one-off funding

The usual alternative in developing countries is that a strategy is funded as a single-task, time-bound project and, as such, it will be less likely to endure or influence government budgets (one-off funding is, of course, appropriate for initiating many of the investments proposed through the strategy process). This has been the situation in the case of most of the strategic planning frameworks which have arisen from international agreements (e.g. Agenda 21, Rio conventions) and those which have been undertaken in response to donor initiatives or requirements. Nevertheless, many of them have helped to cover the transaction costs of establishing elements of a future system – forming networks, preparing baseline studies, establishing various fora, etc, that can now be further used.

But the reality is that many developing country governments are likely to require, seek or be offered financial assistance to undertake strategies for sustainable development. This could be provided as a part of general budgetary assistance as project funding, keeping in mind that the strategy should be internalised and integrated within the government’s annual expenditure regime and programmes. Further efforts are needed to co-ordinate external assistance, and pool donor funding in support of the development and implementation of strategies. Any commitment to budgetary support needs to be on a progressive basis with guarantees on usage and transparency.

Financial support to district level strategies

At district levels, the financial burden of developing and then implementing strategies is particularly acute, as district authorities usually have limited financial resources and means to raise income. Funds to finance local strategy development can come either from above - though higher-level government allocation, or from below – through mobilisation of local resources. Some development co-operation agencies are prepared to provide funding direct to districts or to NGOs operating at this level. Whilst this may overcome short-term difficulties, it does not resolve the longer-term problem of financial self-sufficiency. One approach is to match local government support with local private sector support from a group of businesses. Another is exemplified by the pilot programme on Local Development Funds (LDFs) established by the UN Capital Development Fund (UNCDF) which aims to provide financial autonomy to local authorities (Box 22). At an even more local level, funds are often provided directly to communities to support development efforts. In Nepal, for example, the Sustainable Development Facility Fund provides credit to CBOs to undertake income-generating sustainable development activities.