Discussion
of the Advocacy and Leadership session from Yesterday
Innovative
program for leadership, but not to be function as coachers
Martin
Eduvie, introduced himself
Discussion
For
every where it is leadership. Any
particular courses, there are unique modules for them, that cannot be applied
to the water sector leadership blindly, So we should have some dedicated water
leadership course that could support to the on-going capacity development work.
It is not necessary to everyone to become manager or higher position, but what
leadership means that everyone should have the capacity to manage resource and
all other aspects to get done his/her job well. Are we going for the long term
programs like few months? This needs to
be discussed.
Neena:
Cap-Net has one week training program structure. It is important to see whether
we really need such long term programs.
It will be helpful to have some long term programs specially for the areas
which has trans-boundary issues.
Callist:
This is a cross cutting area. It is more important how people read, so having
many modules in a long term program it gives sense for well-coordinated and
harmonized programs.
Dora:
who are the target group for this? Youth? Some people have water resource
management skills and knowledge but not the leadership skills to get the things
done effectively.
Damian: Private sector involved in the picture could
be important.
Going
forward we have to engage in different kinds of partners and institutional
strengthening. Developing a module with UNESCO IHE, and looking into more long
term and water diplomacy perspective.
Is
there a need to innovate? What would it mean in practice?Which
pending?
New
Initiative Programs developed in the
past year – Facilitator Damian Indij
Carribean
WaterNet running the Climate change program in Gyuana. Can we use this webi
AGW
Network focused primarily regarding to groundwater. Since 2011 we did needs
assessment and raised profile for trans-boundary issues. We concern on
practical application in river basin level, So we are really improving
ourselves to reach it in broad view with the theme of groundwater
Cap-Net
Lanka, Urban Lake Management workshop, is replicable to address urban pollution
issues.
Aguajaring
– Need assessment is necessary to make your pathway correctly. Water foot print
as a new initiative.
Damian
pointed out that we need the demand assessment together with monitoring of
impacts.
Kees:
Meta Meta cooperation and Virtual campus for courses. Once this is developed it
will be available to use by the networks. For ToT, when you have more people
from other network in the region, the impact are bigger than the usual.
Callist:
Are we using the Assessment to change ourselves and make decisions. Some
repition is also important.
WaterNet
(Jaen Marrie) have put together an long term strategy for get involved all the
networks as a regional network. So it should be strengthen with the plans of
the networks to keep the relevance.
Lilliana
commented the innovations done to alligned with MDG indicators
Raising
funds throughout the region (Africa) to implement IWRM on the ground taking
examples from Latin America.
South
East Asia, we have many lakes, Integrated Lake Management, there is a need to
develop and document the knowledge on Integrated Lake Management and develop
the capacity on the ground.
Amel
Azab – Ecosystems, EO tools link these topics together because these topics as
a cross-cutting issue. We are not repeating ourselves. Leadership training is
also a support for more outreach.
There
is a ground to collaborate among networks for more outreach.
JanYap,
CK Net: Leaders are the one who gives directions, so this is very important
area to address. Identifying the
organizations leading the sector and topics, and try to find out what kind of
knowledge and attitude they need to do their job and derive the training based
on that is a key thing to do.
There
is a need to identify the different target group and tailor the material and
training courses accordingly.
Virtual
campus is planned to run the first course in Sep-Oct. Sharing and coordinate
the networks already happening. Foot ball, we stop the ball and see what’s
going on before kick the ball. This is a time to stop and see for the next
planning.
Presentation by GEF IWRM project
- Geo node tool , publications these tools linking to science
and policy,
- Case studies
- Community
to Cabinet approach
How
you learn from the project – when we work with the stakeholders all the lessons
are incorporated into the publications case studies and publications.
Take
advantages of some of the experiences to our programs.
Are
country level networks and organizations aware on the specific things happening
to cooperate for the project? To reach an effective collaboration, it would be
difficult to at small scale level because the projects are huge and the
practically how to collaborate for this for regions or country?
Kees
commented that “not a structural collaboration now we have with GEF project,
but the incidental few collaborative programs”.
Joakim was interested on how we could fit this into the Cap-Net ongoing
program. Tamiru commented that GEF
involved in Africa in trans-boundary level. In network perspectives, we
consider lots of potentials to collaborate to resolve capacity gaps in
trans-boundary level. Callist commented that to be clear what role we could
play it is important to lead from the secretariat for more planned collaborations in Africa.
Outcomes of the Delft Symposium
The
objective is to mainstream outcomes of the Delft events into our work plans.
Element
of leader ships, Collaboration among stakeholders in all level. Awareness, Leadership, Partnership and
Networking, Training. Tailoring the
training modules, sustainability of water and sanitation. Leadership in all
different level of stakeholders like media, youth, etc.. Network Management
tools training and Water Integrity Forum outcomes discussed in brief and how
that can be linked to our programs and planning?
Themba
and Damian suggested the papers to read in Delft symposium “Water Policy”
special issue and get the important things out for the related themes and area
of work of the network to improve the impacts on the ground.
Discussion on Outcome of the Symposium
Group
1 mentioned that Relevance of various tools related to IWRM and M&E
partnership ways and means are very good to adapted and replicate. Need
assessment and information dissemination required. Legal framework, good
governance need for overcoming corruptions in the water sector. Media coverage
and media capacity development is also important.
Group
2 mentioned that establishing and managing database is very important in
managing the network plans. Each of water related institutions have training
centers for their own training. These training centers should be capacitating with
new thematic areas. This should be concerned in implementing network plans by
each network. Scientific evidence based case studies should be developed and
feedback into the system to improve. Tacit knowledge capturing and documenting
should be also focused. MRV Measurable, Reportable and Verifiable information
should be produced in reporting.
Group
3: Training manual developed and program developed on new themes dealt from the
ground is also help us to continue these programs. Among the networks partnerships
and case sharing. Journal on special issue on capacity development, use media
for communication.
Group
4: education training, Different communication strategy for different groups,
collaboration between networks and sharing joint program among the networks
need to be developed through Cap-Net.
Virtual learning, face to face to community methods and Case study
publication.
Group
Latin Power : Strengthening capacity and Awareness, Collaboration among
networks, Seminar using Aqua Republica, Corruption
is a disvalue so work with School children.
Case
studies should be coming from network. There are money allocated for that. This
year we have received 13 case studies, so this trend should be continued. And
what should we do with this case studies, this is also important to look at. It
should be available to everyone. Lenneke pointed out that the case studies
should be well captured in short and digestable way that can be taken the cream
out to feed into the on-going programs.
Presentation by Lenneke
Lenneke Discussion:
How
can network increase their visibility?
How
can learn from and communicate each other?
-
Simple
and user friendly intra net with access to all networks
-
Mobile
Apps – Really needed? We should think what should be in Apps rather than the website?
-
Teamwork
knowledge sharing platform can be used as a intranet. Sharing and tracking
information tools required.
-
Malasia
water projects with schools is a good example.
Is there any
need to continue award as an incentive
mechanism for towards capacity building ? question was raised by Kees.
To related to
visibility approach they award a prize every year to participate to the SWW.
Aguajaring
commented that some one needs to initiate communication and sharing activities
among the networks. Lilliana commented that put together the related inputs
from the network and start working on it.
Themba
commented that Cap-Net as a flat structured organization it can also be
initiated by the networks itself.
Presentation by Hong on website
development and update.
He
presented about the weaknesses had and recent development proposed, and the
information from recent survey of the website and applications in plan.
E-Learning
process is successful for youngsters like undergraduate. Easy browsing of information
is required.
Website
in French demanding, and website update who is going to do this when its done
in French? We don’t have the capacity at the secretariat, but Network can take
it over.
Link
to the stakeholders and the development of website as innovative way, NBCBN
commented that they are interested to support.
Method
for quickly searching of information is required. Simple things like what’s
cap-net doing in their region or country so on. Dora commented that Apps will
be tedious process for networks but the website is more important to easily
locating the information.
Internal Review - Peer Review of
Networks Presentation
The
key rule is not to pin point personal or sensitive things, but to learn from
each other. (don’t shoot the messenger).
Total
22 reports received so far. The results are the evaluation presented by Prof.
Nimal Gunawardana. Considerable Increasing of review exercise taken over from
2008 to 2013.
Strengths
of the networks are interest of the meber ship, quality relevance and experience
of delivering training, communication with members, recognition of the
networks, other network characteristics like competence of steering committee,
ability to deal ……
Weaknesses
are financial constraints of networks and dependence of cap-net funding, poor
communication, less number of capacity development activities, none or poor
implementation of rate of annual work plan., Insufficient human resource at
network secretariat etc.
Opportunities
are Increasing need for capacity development, recognition and credibility
behind them, political will of many government for water sector reports, need
for community level interventions, network with established track record with
potential donors for them.
Threats
are Unavailability of continuous funding from CapNet, (diversifying funding
sources is required), lack of understanding and appreciation, conflicts within
networks, lack of good governance, political and financial instability.
Collaboration
with Global partners
Benefits
to global partners: provided access, sharing the resources, increased
visibility, access to network of global partners, etc. Cap-Net also has
benefitted by working with the partners in technical as well as financial
support.
Strengths
Extended
and international professional networks, reputation, extensive outreach, etc..
(refer to the report for detail)
Weakness
; no clear tangible results, potential limited by passive members, Cap-Net
is network and network that open with no hidden agenda, and also there is a
danger that Cap-Net rely on their affiliated network that rely on success and
failure.
Opportunities
Link
up to the exsisting content providers are link to the convening power to more
impact.( For more details on each points refer to the reports).
Threats
Lack
of feedback on the results, we need to really look in to the details how it can
be improved etc.. Compared
to 2008 many of the networks has good governance structure.
Workload
of the secretariat ends up with insufficient inputs from the secretariat.
Recommendation to Networks
Enhance
the effectiveness of network management. Increased visibility of networks,
leverage additional funding from government, Better to diversify funding
sources,
Recommendation
to Cap-Net
Follow
international dev elopement agenda,Synthesize
reports would come end of January and there was a request to make it available
for comments for the networks.
It
was contradictory suggestions on the time of finalizing reports but the it was
suggested to keep the deadline to publish at end of the year while keeping the
opportunity to continue the peer review for learning purposes of the networks
who still to be reviewed.
Damian
suggested that it should not be end up as a report but really used to enrich
the Cap-Net strategy concerning the needy areas to be addressed. The report
will not be the same as individual reports but will reflects the follow-up
actions. And Lilliana commented that some of the findings should not end up in
the reports but need to taken the actions really by secretariat to make sure we
are in the right path.
It
would be really important to make networks work plan based on the discussion of
reports with their steering committees, and secretariat would make the plan
also based on the recommendations.
Networks
has different characteristics, so we can’t put the blanket recommendations for
all the networks, this should be addressed.
There
was a question that ministries and political people engagement ways and means
in network works. It can be done in partnership approach.
Jaen
–Marrie ; Some networks which are not having a good governance structure,
Cap-Net should help and act as a catalyzer .
Themba:
Cap-Net is not supposed to do the hierarchical advisor job. We don’t have a
weight in network decisions. That point
supported by three other networks.
Few
were commenting that the review process was very very useful for them to learn
and also understand the weaknesses and strengths in their own networks.
Review
was much easy when it has a good governanace structure
