Local Government Initiative on Climate Change (LoGIC) Project
Menu
Capacity Development
The LoGIC Project aimed at improved and strengthened capacity of Local Government Institutes (LGIs) for inclusive planning, budgeting and financing resilient schemes, thus to promote financing mechanism for community based climate change adaptation solutions. While the project’s core concern is to strengthen capacity of LGIs, other community institutes and vulnerable community people, this capacity building strategy is developed for the LoGIC Project to systematic identify capacity assets and needs and implement capacity development responses for cross section of stakeholders of the project. Specific objectives of the capacity building strategy include:
Identifying and listing stakeholders to define their desired capacity following their expected roles and responsibilities to the project
Designing and implementing capacity assessment process for systematic gathering of critical knowledge and information on capacity assets and needs
Identifying and prioritizing capacity needs
Identifying capacity development responses for implementation following a priority list of capacity development
The LoGIC Project and Capacity Building:
The Local Government Initiative on Climate change (LOGIC) is a joint project of United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF). LoGIC is supported by the European Union and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). The project will be implemented in 72 Unions of 7 most climate vulnerable districts (Kurigram, Sunamganj, Khulna, Bagerhat, Barguna, Patuakhali, and Bhola) of Bangladesh to reduce vulnerability of the community, enhancing their participation in local planning and budgeting for climate actions, increasing capacity of stakeholders and improving the governance of Local Government Institutes (LGIs) with regard to climate change.
During the development phase, LoGIC banked on two participating UN Agencies’ previous and ongoing initiatives to understand the opportunities and gaps at national, local government, NGOs, CSOs and vulnerable community levels and envisaged following priority areas of actions to address identified gaps:
a) Building capacities of individuals and households with information, knowledge, skills and technology to adapt to climate change as well as leadership skills to influence the local planning process.
b) Build capacity of the local CSOs, local institutions, and LGIs in climate change integrated planning, budgeting and implementation with high degree of accountability and inclusive practice.
c) Provide funds to LGIs to plan and implement climate resilient activities and interventions at community and household level.
d) Generate knowledge and mobilise opinion for shaping a local climate fiscal framework and enhance readiness of both the LGIs and the Local Government Division to utilise national and international climate finance in an accountable way..
The Project planned to address above priorities through three sets of core actions. These are:
i) Capacity building;.
ii) Providing access to climate change funds; and
iii) Policy advocacy. .
LoGIC also defined 3 outputs for the project to achieve those through implementing numbers of diversified activities throughout the
i) Strengthened capacity of local governments, households and other local stakeholders to develop local plans that integrate climate change adaptation measures and disaster risk management
ii) Established financing mechanism to fund local governments and communities for implementing climate change adaptation measures.
iii) Experience and evidence inform and contribute to further improvements in policies and practices for UPs and national systems in relation to climate change adaptation.
It is understood from the review of the LoGIC Project document that capacity building has become a critical issue among others and it has been emphasised in priority area of actions, core action and in outputs of the Project. First two priority areas, the first core action and the output one of the project specifically are dedicated to capacity building. Improving and strengthening capacity of cross section of stakeholders of the LoGIC Project has become one of the key concern of the project, thus a Capacity Building Strategy for the project is a key priority and essential driver to achieve defined outputs of the project. Following the urgency and key requirement of the project, an attempt is taken to develop this document which will outline and describe the capacity building strategies and implementation methodology of capacity development responses of the LoGIC project including key stakeholder engagement on capacity development, capacity assessment process and monitoring and evaluation of capacity development responses in the following sections.
Objectives of Capacity Building Strategy:
The LoGIC Project aimed at improved and strengthened capacity of Local Government Institutes (LGIs) for inclusive planning, budgeting and financing resilient schemes, thus to promote financing mechanism for community based climate change adaptation solutions. While the project’s core concern is to strengthen capacity of LGIs, other community institutes and vulnerable community people, this capacity building strategy is developed for the LoGIC Project to systematic identify capacity assets and needs and implement capacity development responses for cross section of stakeholders of the project. Specific objectives of the capacity building strategy include:
Identifying and listing stakeholders to define their desired capacity following their expected roles and responsibilities to the project
Designing and implementing capacity assessment process for systematic gathering of critical knowledge and information on capacity assets and needs
Identifying and prioritizing capacity needs
Identifying capacity development responses for implementation following a priority list of capacity development
Understanding Capacity Building:
Capacity refers to the ability of individuals, institutions and societies to perform functions, solve problems, and set and achieve objectives in a sustainable manner (UNDP definition of capacity). The term Capacity Building emerged in the 1970s in the United States, in reference to the need to improve the capacity of individuals and institutions in developing countries and it appeared as a core concept of development policy since 1990s.
However, a new development paradigm came into discourse during the late 1990s based on local ownership and partnership between donors and recipients. The debates encouraged to shift a new concept, that of ‘Capacity Development’, which become the preferred choice of the development community. These new trends were inspired by some major turning points in development policy, such as the adoption in 2000 of the UN Millennium Development Goals and 2005 Paris Declaration of Aid Effectiveness. Capacity development is one of the essential preconditions for aid effectiveness – the capacity to plan, manage, implement, and account for result of policies and programmes, is critical for achieving development objectives – from analysis and dialogue through implementation, monitoring and evaluation.
Although the term Capacity Development has become the favoured choice of the development community, the term ‘Capacity Building’ is still widely used in the development sector. Capacity Building suggests building something new from the ground up, according to a pre-imposed design, while Capacity Development is believed to better express an approach that builds on existing skills and knowledge, driving a dynamic and flexible process of change, borne by local actors.
UNDP’s strategy is strengthening and promoting capacity of stakeholders through contributing to capacity needs (desired capacity) that builds on capacity assets (existing capacity), thus, prefers to use the term ‘Capacity Development’ since this best reflects its approach: starting from capacities that exist locally and supporting efforts to enhance and retain these. The organisation differentiated capacity building and capacity development by providing with clear and specific definition as follows:
Capacity building: A process that support only the initial stages of building or creating capacities and assume that there are no existing capacities to start from.
Capacity building is generally used to refer to a process that is less comprehensive than capacity development process and focus only on the initial stages of building or creating capacities and assumes that there are no existing capacities to start from.
Capacity development: The process through which individuals, organisations and societies obtain, strengthen and maintain the capabilities to set and achieve their own development objectives over time.
Capacity development is commonly used to describe the process not just of creating and building capacities but also of the (subsequent) use, management and retention of (such) capacities. This process is seen as endogenous and recognise and builds on existing capacity (capacity assets).
The United Nations Development Groups (UNDG) uses the definition adopted by the Development Assistance Committee of the Organisations for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD/DAC). This definition has become the working definition for a large number of official development agencies.
The definitions clearly described that capacity building does not recognise existing capacity and operates with a pre-imposed design, while capacity development suggests an endogenous process of change. UNDP’s support for capacity development is a process that recognises that capacity issues are context specific and that therefore resist blueprint. It is demand -not supply- driven and goes beyond a focus on the individual to address the organisational level and the enabling environment.
It is found that people often use the term capacity development and capacity building interchangeably. However, the two terms have different connotations and should not be used synonymously. As discussed earlier, UNDP prefers to facilitate the process of Capacity Development as it start with the capacity assets of the local stakeholders and supporting efforts to enhance and retain those. Therefore, as a UNDP Project, LoGIC will follow the UNDP Framework of Capacity Development and will use the term “Capacity Development” from now throughout this document.
UNDP Framework of Capacity Development:
UNDP uses three questions to give meaning to the concept of Capacity Development in different situations and to guide the development of an appropriate response:
● Capacity for why?
● Capacity for whom?
● Capacity for what?
‘Capacity for why?’ asks about priority capacity needs and provides the rationale for support. The answer will depend on the challenges and opportunities in a given context or may be politically motivated. For example, a country emerging from a political transition may wish to strengthen its electoral system, or an organisation may wish to strengthen its ability to deliver services to its clients.
‘Capacity for whom?’ asks whose capacities need to be developed to address the priority capacity needs identified. This can range from the enabling environment at the national or sub-national level, to organisations in the public sector, such as a ministry, a department or a special office such as the Auditor General’s. Or it can apply to private, non-profit or civil society organisations. Since the different levels of capacity are interdependent, it will generally not be enough to address capacities at just one level, or of a single entity.
‘Capacity for what?’ asks which capacities need to be developed to address the priority capacity needs identified. The answer to this question is of course influenced by and in turn influences ‘capacity for whom?’ Is the capacity need related to managerial capacities such as planning and budgeting or is it a matter of specific technical capacities?
These three guiding questions run as a continuous thread throughout the capacity development process and they help identify the rationale and scope of the support required.
The UNDP approach to supporting capacity development brings together a value base, a conceptual framework and a methodological approach:
● The UNDP approach makes the concept of national/local ownership tangible. This is about the ability to make informed choices and decisions.
● It addresses power relations, mindsets and behaviour change. It therefore emphasises the importance of motivation as a driver of change.
● Capacity development is a long-term process. It can be promoted through a combination of shorter-term results that are driven from the outside and more sustainable, longer-term ones that are driven from the inside.
● It requires sticking with the process under difficult circumstances.
● The UNDP approach links the enabling environment, as well as organisations and individuals, and promotes a comprehensive approach.
● It looks beyond individual skills and a focus on training to address broader questions of institutional change, leadership, empowerment and public participation.
● It emphasises the use of national systems, not just national plans and expertise. It discourages stand-alone project implementation units; if national systems are not strong enough, they should be reformed and strengthened, rather than bypassed.
● It requires adaptation to local conditions and starts from the specific requirements and performance expectations of the sector or organisation it supports. There are no blueprints.
● It should link to broader reforms, such as those in education, wage structures and the civil service. There is little value in designing isolated, one-off initiatives.
● It results in unplanned consequences that must be kept in mind during the design phase. These should be valued, tracked and evaluated.
● It measures capacity development systematically, using good-practice indicators, case evidence and analyses of quantitative and qualitative data, to ensure that objective judgements are made about capacity assets and needs, as well as the progress achieved.
The capacity development process is a way of bringing rigour and a systematic method to support capacity development and of promoting the consistency, coherence and impact of efforts. UNDP follows five steps to complete the capacity development process. These are:
1. Engage stakeholders on capacity development;
2. Assess capacity assets and needs;
3. Formulate a capacity development response;
4. Implement a capacity development response; and
5. Evaluate capacity development.
This document will further elaborate and will describe the detail of these five steps of capacity development process in the following sections.
