Review of UN-Habitat's participation in the Delivering as One process

8/14/2019 Review of UN-Habitat's participation in the Delivering as One process

1/84

Evaluation Report 5/2011

Review of UN-HabitatsParticipation in theDelivering as One UN Initiative

DECEMBER 2011


2/84


3/84

DECEMBER 2011

Evaluation Report 5/2011

Review of UN-HabitatsParticipation in theDelivering as One UN Initiative


4/84

ii REVIEW OF UN-HABITATS PARTICIPATION IN THE DELIVERING AS ONE UN INITIATIVE

Evaluation Report 5/2011Review of UN-Habitats Participation in the Delivering as One UN Initiative

This report is available from http//www.unhabitat.org/evaluations

First published in Nairobi in December 2011 by UN-Habitat.Copyright United Nations Human Settlements Programme 2011

Produced by Monitoring and Evaluation UnitUnited Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat)P. O. Box 30030, 00100 Nairobi GPO KENYATel: 254-020-7623120 (Central Ofce)www.unhabitat.org

HS Number: HS/060/12EISBN Number (Series): 978-92-1-132028-2

ISBN Number (Volume): 978-92-1-132475-4

DisclaimerThe designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of anyopinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country,territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers of boundaries.

Views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reect those of the United Nations Human SettlementsProgramme, the United Nations, or its Member States.

Excerpts may be reproduced without authorization, on condition that the source is indicated.

AcknowledgementsAuthors: Mathias Hundsalz Antonio YachanEditor: UNON Conference ServicesDesign & Layout: Peter Cheseret

Photos: UN-Habitat & Julius Mwelu/UN-Habitat


5/84

iiiREVIEW OF UN-HABITATS PARTICIPATION IN THE DELIVERING AS ONE UN INITIATIVE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................................v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................................................1

I. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................1

Ii. Methodology .................................................................................................................................1

Iii. Key ndings ...................................................................................................................................2

V. Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................2

Vi. Lessons learned ..............................................................................................................................4

Vii. Key recommendations ...................................................................................................................5

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .................................................................................. ............ 6

1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................6

1.2 Background ....................................................................................................................................6

1.3 Objectives and relevance of DaO for UN-Habitat .......................................................................9

1.4 Outline of the report ...................................................................................................................10

2. REVIEW METHODOLOGY AND SCOPE .......................................................................................... 11

2.1 Data collection methods .............................................................................................................11

2.2 Data analysis ................................................................................................................................12

2.3 Scope ........................................................................................................................................... 12

2.4 Management of the review process ...........................................................................................13

3. KEY FINDINGS ON UN-HABITAT PARTICIPATION IN THE DAO PROCESS IN THE PILOT COUNTRIES .................................................................................... .......................... 14

3.1 Cape Verde ...................................................................................................................................14

3.2 Mozambique ................................................................................................................................15

3.3 Pakistan ........................................................................................................................................ 16

3.4 Rwanda ......................................................................................................................................... 18

3.5 Tanzania ....................................................................................................................................... 19

3.6 Vietnam ........................................................................................................................................ 20

4. UN-HABITAT PARTICIPATION IN DAO: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES ............................... 23

4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................23

4.2 Challenges and opportunities for country ofces .....................................................................24

4.3 Challenges and opportunities for headquarters and regional ofces .....................................27

5. CONCLUSIONS, LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 33

5.1 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................33

5.2 Lessons learned ............................................................................................................................36

5.3 Recommendations .......................................................................................................................37

ANNEX I: TERMS OF REFERENCE ............................................................................................. .......... 41

ANNEX II: LIST OF PEOPLE INTERVIEWED ......................................................................................... 49

ANNEX III: COUNTRY INFORMATION ...................................................................................... .......... 51


6/84

iv REVIEW OF UN-HABITATS PARTICIPATION IN THE DELIVERING AS ONE UN INITIATIVE

LIST OF TABLES

TABLES

Table 4.1: Stafng table of UN-Habitat country teams 25Table 4.2: Source of funding for UN-Habitat DaO projects 30


7/84

vREVIEW OF UN-HABITATS PARTICIPATION IN THE DELIVERING AS ONE UN INITIATIVE

ANAMM National Association of Municipalities of MozambiqueAOS Agency Operational SupportCPM Country Programme ManagerDaO Delivering as OneDESA Department for Economic and Social AffairsDOCO Development Operations Coordination OfceECHO European CommissionDirectorate-General for Humanitarian Aid & Civil ProtectionENOF Enhanced Normative and Operational FrameworkERRA Earthquake Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Authority (Pakistan)ExCom Executive Committee Agencies (UNDP, UNICEF and UNFPA)FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsFIPAG Fund for Investment in Water Infrastructure (Mozambique)GC Governing CouncilGEF Global Environment FacilityGOV Government of VietnamHACT Harmonized Approach to Cash TransferHCPD Habitat Country Programme DocumentHIV Human Immunodeciency VirusHPM Habitat Programme ManagerHPPMG Harmonized Programme and Project Management GuidelinesHSO Human Settlements Ofcer

ILO International Labour OrganisationIMIS Integrated Management Information SystemINAM National Institute of Meteorology (Mozambique)INE National Institute of Statistics (Instituto Nacional de Estadisticas)INGC National Institute for Disasters Management (Mozambique)IT Information TechnologyJPO Junior Professional OfcerLMDG Like Minded Donor GroupMAE Ministry of State Administration (Mozambique)MDG Millennium Development GoalsMDTF Multi Donor Trust Fund

ME Ministry of Energy (Mozambique)MekSan Mekong Sanitation ProjectMIC Middle Income CountryMICOA Ministry for Coordination of Environmental Affairs (Mozambique)MIMAS Ministry of Women and Social Action (Mozambique)MINAG Ministry of Agriculture (Mozambique)MINED Ministry of Education (Mozambique)MININFRA Ministry in charge of Housing and Urban Development (Rwanda)MISAU Ministry of Health (Mozambique)MOPH Ministry of Public Works and Housing (Mozambique)MOU Memorandum of UnderstandingMTSIP Medium-Term Strategic and Institutional Plan

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS


8/84


9/84

1REVIEW OF UN-HABITATS PARTICIPATION IN THE DELIVERING AS ONE UN INITIATIVE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

I. INTRODUCTION

United Nations bodies working in countriesaround the world are expected to deliver as oneUnited Nations under the terms of the Secretary-Generals High-Level Panel on UN system-wide coherence in the areas of development,humanitarian assistance and environment.(November 2006). The recommendationsare based on ve pillarsOne Leader, OneProgramme, One Budgetary Framework,One Communications Strategy, and whereappropriate One Ofce. This review looks at howUN-Habitat ts in with the One UN process insix countries and how it can make itself moreeffective as part of the One UN team. Requested

by the UN General Assembly at the behest ofMember States, this evaluation was conductedMarch-June 2011 by two independent experts,Mr. Mathias Hundsalz and Mr. Antonio Yachan.

Its aim is to determine the extent of UN-Habitatsparticipation when it comes to delivering as one.It also seeks to derive lessons learned, identify andassess strengths, challenges and opportunities,as well as to offer recommendations for a moreeffective participation. It also offers a clearer

understanding of the effects and potential of theDelivering as One (DaO) idea for UN-Habitat.

Objectives of the review include: An evaluation and recommendations on

strategic, planning, managerial, operationaland monitoring/reporting processes,mechanisms and human/nancial resources

for more effective and efcient participationof UN-Habitat at global and national levels;

An assessment of the value added of theOne UN process for UN-Habitat in thesix participating countries, including theintegration of the agency into this process; and

A qualitative assessment of the signicance ofUN-Habitats support to the One UN reformagenda.

II. METHODOLOGYThis review used three data collection methods:

(a) A review of existing documentation,including: the report of the High Level Panelon UN System Wide Coherence; other UNDaO evaluations; UN-Habitat strategic andpolicy documentation such as the UN-HabitatMedium-Term Strategic Institutional Plan(MTSIP), policy and strategy papers coveringthe Enhanced Normative and Operational

Framework (ENOF), country reports such asthe Habitat Country Programme Documents

Improved residential housing in Cape Verde UN-Habitat


10/84

2 REVIEW OF UN-HABITATS PARTICIPATION IN THE DELIVERING AS ONE UN INITIATIVE

(HCPD); annual reports of CountryProgramme Managers; and the September2010 evaluation;

(b) Field visits to Mozambique, Pakistan, Rwanda,

and Vietnam to gather primary informationthrough interviews and obtain relevantdocumentation; and

(c) Interviews at Headquarters and UN-HabitatRegional Ofces relevant to the six pilot DaOcountries.

III. KEY FINDINGS

UN-Habitat is currently active in six of the eightpilot DaO countries: Cape Verde, Mozambique,

Pakistan, Rwanda, Tanzania and Vietnam (andhas no presence in Albania and Uruguay). HabitatCountry Programme Managers have taken thelead in the time-demanding and complex tasksof DaO planning and implementation. They havemade commendable efforts. Indeed, they havedemonstrated the competency and comparativeadvantage of UN-Habitat in a highly competitiveenvironment with resident and non-resident UNagencies. This has also served to raise the proleof the UN-Habitat mandate, resulting in improvedrecognition from United Nations agencies andGovernments. The country programmes, ingeneral, have expanded activities and staffnanced from DaO funds.

The Delivering as One approach has changedthe way country ofces are representing theagency, becoming fully participative in the newOne UN approach. However, some UN-Habitatstaff appear to consider the DaO approach as amodality of implementation applicable to UN-Habitats Regional and Technical CooperationDivision only. This misunderstanding of a globalchange in the UN system is affecting the agencyas a whole, particularly regarding its future focuson country activities.

Funding of UN-Habitat country activities from coreand DaO sources is currently through divisionsand/or projects, diluting the contributions of theagency in the One UN Fund and Governmentcounterparts. UN-Habitat funding would bemore useful if it were consolidated to establish

complete agency country budgets, under a singleaccounting system. This will require revision ofUN-Habitat programming to enrich the wholeproject cycle at country level, by simplifying the

programming, approval and reporting exerciseand reducing the number of required documents.

The Governments are requesting the UN systemof agencies to concentrate more on policy,strategies and capacity building. Further, theyhave asked UN agencies for new and innovativeproposals that can add value to development,even as DaO funds are likely reduce.

Field staff, though qualied, have inadequatecapacity to respond to new requests without thesupport from UN-Habitat Headquarters, which upto now has been limited to the former Regionaland Technical Cooperation Division. There areno signicant inputs from the other programmedivisions.

The One UN Fund has proved to be an incentivefor UN agencies to work together, in particular thespecialised agencies, encouraging a coherent andholistic approach to planning and programmingwhich plays to the strengths of each participatingagency.

Headquarters has not adapted its workingsystem and structure as One UN-Habitat . TheRegional Ofces are also limitedthey lackbalanced normative, operational and managerialtasks. An agency-wide policy, programming andimplementation modality is required, with acommon and coherent strategy and programmefocus, common management practices, pooledcountry budgets, unied nancial and substantivereporting, and strengthened human resourcesupport from all programme divisions.

V. CONCLUSIONSCountry level conclusions

UN-Habitat activities undertaken and nanced inDaO countries are important. Staff are committedand have delivered results recognised by theGovernments. However, looking at the countryneeds and priorities, and UN-Habitats mandatefrom a wider perspective, it is possible that other


11/84


Without common and unied administrative,budgetary, accounting and reporting procedures atcountry level, UN-Habitat country programmes willremain fragmented and inadequately recognized

by the DaO reform process. Country ProgrammeManagers must work to overcome currentfragmented procedures which negatively affect UN-Habitat participation in the DaO reform process.

Conclusions for Headquarters andRegional Ofces

Considering increasing competition amongUnited Nations agencies to place their mandate onDaO priority interventions and on DaO funds, UN-

Habitat advocacy to position the urban agendais becoming extremely important. Establishmentof National Urbanisation Committees or NationalUrban Forums, with membership drawn from theGovernment, civil society groups and the privatesector is urgent.

The DaO reform process has created considerabledemand on UN-Habitats way of doing business aspart of the United Nations system. This is especiallybecause there is no DaO ofcer at Headquarters

to coordinate and raise awareness, monitor DaOdevelopment and provide assistance to DaOcountries on the wide scope of implications of theUnited Nations DaO reform process. This practicehas been adopted by other UN Headquarters, andresident agencies at eld level have also one staffdedicated to DaO coordination and monitoring.

It is necessary for UN-Habitat to revise the wholeproject cycle, simplifying programming, approvaland reporting exercise, and reducing the number

of required documents. This would improveinteraction between eld and Headquarters, andat Headquarters it will speed up response ontechnical and administrative aspects.

Regional Ofces should be gradually restructuredand expanded to become fully edged regionalarms of UN-Habitat as a whole, with balancednormative, operational and managerial tasks.They should also become capable of providingprogrammatic and administrative support to the

scope of operational and normative activities atregional level.

interventions at policy and strategy levels couldhave had a greater impact.

The main strategy of the One UN Programmeunder the reform process is to set up jointprogramming of agency inputs (resources andactivities) at Headquarters and country-level toachieve stated and agreed upon results. Effectiveparticipation of UN-Habitat in joint programminghas the potential to enhance its visibility andsharpen its comparative advantage.

The performance of Country ProgrammeManagers in DaO countries has been satisfactory.To maintain the momentum requires strongerparticipation, streamlined from Headquartersproviding new and updated know-how on UN-Habitat mandated topics and strengthening eldstaff to better respond to the increasing demand.

Country Programme Managers need somedegree of delegated authority and seed fundsfrom Headquarters core resources to better llthe current gap in UN-Habitat DaO process forconducting assessments, studies, workshops,advocacy campaigns, media announcementsand other upcoming issues under the UN-Habitatmandate that can justify being included in theOne UN country plan.

Funding of UN-Habitat country activities fromdifferent sources (i.e., Multi-donor Trust Fund,Foundation earmarked and non-earmarked,global programmes, etc.) need to be consolidatedinto a complete UN-Habitat country budget, undera single accounting system. Effective participationin country level DaO process would require acritical mass of funds and human resources.

There is tendency among donors to shift theiroverseas aid less to the Multi-donor Trust Fund infavour of funding global programmes (e.g., theGlobal Environment Facility (GEF) or HIV/AIDS) andback to earmarked agency funding. UN-Habitatcountry programmes therefore need to increaseefforts in mobilising additional funds, and openother funding sources such as Government cost-sharing (e.g., Vietnam) or corporate sources. If not,the agencys participation in joint programmingunder the DaO process will not be sustainable.


12/84


13/84


eld level. It would also be good if core fundingallocated to projects could reach the countryaligned with the DaO plan but coordinatedfrom Headquarters with the DaO mechanisms of

implementation.

VII. KEY RECOMMENDATIONSCountry level recommendations The present status of a UN-Habitat country

team as a non-resident (or resident agencydepending on the perception of the UNResident Coordinator) should be kept. Thereis no need to upgrade the status of theprogramme manager to international, except

for countries with large development orhumanitarian programmes.

In countries (e.g., Mozambique, Pakistan,Rwanda and Vietnam) where the rangeof functions of the programme managerhas increased following the DaO reform,and where UN-Habitat is implementing areasonable portfolio, the eld ofces shouldhave at least two additional non-project staffwith relevant specialisations and in line withnational priorities.

UN-Habitat should create National HabitatCommittees or National Habitat Forums forraising and maintaining the level of advocacyand awareness on its competence andcomparative advantage in the DaO countries.The objectives of the Participatory SlumUpgrading Programme (PSUP) ts perfectlywell on this aspect and the project ofceshould ensure that all pilot, as well as self-started DaO countries are considered in the

programme.

Recommendations for Headquarters andRegional Ofces UN-Habitat should sharpen its recently

published policy papers on the MTSIP focusareas for use by the working UN CountryTeams in joint programming. Further, thereis need to add country-specic strategies foruse by the Country Programme Manager andteams to sharpen the agencys competenceprole.

The current fragmented managementpractices in UN-Habitat should be reviewed toenable it to deliver as one at country level:one budget, one coordinator and one set

of management practices in line with DaOguidelines for pilot and self-started countries.This will require unied management andprogramme support structure at Headquartersto guide and coordinate the agencysinterventions in the DaO countries, and alignthem with the efforts of the UN system ofagencies.

UN-Habitat Headquarters, through PSDand UNON should clarify with UNDP howrecruitments and procurements will beimproved for projects implemented for UN-Habitat at country level, eliminating theduplication on the steps being followed.

Within the One UN country planningdocuments (i.e., United Nations DevelopmentAssistance Framework, UNDAP, etc.) UN-Habitat should ensure that its componentis coherent, structured and coordinated,consolidating all agency activities andbudgets to demonstrate a complete prole

of UN-Habitat competencies and comparativeadvantages to the DaO joint programmingprocess.


14/84


1.1 INTRODUCTION

This is a review of UN-Habitats participation inthe Delivering as One (DaO) initiative in pilotcountries of Cape Verde, Mozambique, Pakistan,Rwanda, Tanzania and Vietnam. The DaO isan approach following the recommendationscontained in the Secretary-Generals High-Level Panel on UN-system-wide coherencein the areas of development, humanitarianassistance and environment (November 2006).The recommendations build on ve pillars:One Leader, One Programme, One BudgetaryFramework, One Communication Strategy andwhere appropriate One Ofce. Under these pillars,DaO approach is expected to create system-wide

capacity to coherently addressing cross-cuttingissues such as sustainable development, povertyreduction, gender equality and human rights,inclusively, at country level.

The review covers the current opportunities andchallenges of UN-Habitats participation in theDaO, and makes recommendations for a morerational, coherent and effective participation. Itwas requested by the UN General Assembly, forconsideration by Member States, and conducted

by two independent consultants: Mr. MathiasHundsalz and Mr. Antonio Yachan during the

period from March to June 2011 (Annex I: Termsof Reference).

1.2 BACKGROUND

Following the 2005 World Summit, a High-LevelPanel on System-wide Coherence recommendedthe DaO approach to the Secretary-General,when addressing the key UN mandates ofdevelopment, humanitarian assistance andenvironment (November 2006). In response,UN Country Teams (UNCT) were establishedbetween the agencies with the expectation ofa strengthened and aligned UN system whichwould improve collaboration with member statesin the joint effort of making real progress towards

the achievement of the Millennium DevelopmentGoals (MDGs).

Responding to a request by the Secretary-Generalto the General Assembly, in early 2007 a numberof Governments volunteered to have the DaOapproach tested in their countries: Albania, CapeVerde, Mozambique, Pakistan, Rwanda, Tanzania,Uruguay and Vietnam. For this purpose participatingpilot countries have carried out the evaluabilitystudy (2007-2008), the stocktaking exercise

(2007-2008) and the country-led evaluations(2009-2010). Pakistan is expected to do that

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Urban transport in Vietnam UN-Habitat


15/84


in 2011. Coordinated by the UN DevelopmentGroup (UNDG), and with the help of the currentindependent evaluation, experiences from thesepilot countries shall be reviewed at the next UN

General Assembly, as an input to intergovernmentalconsultations on the future of DaO.

The One UN also built on the Paris Declaration adopted in September 2005 that called for greaterharmonization and simplication of developmentaid and increased effectiveness. It also recognizedthe need for more national ownership of thedevelopment programmes and alignment withnational development goals. The Accra Agendafor Action reafrmed these intentions in 2008 by

adopting a declaration intended to:(a) Strengthen country ownership over

development;

(b) Building more effective and inclusivepartnerships for development; and

(c) Delivering and accounting for developmentresults.

UN-Habitat participated actively (through itsNew York Ofce) in the assessments which wereconducted by the UNDG in 2007 and 2008. Thisassessment focused on:

(a) Design and progress of the DaO process toimprove coherent programming;

(b) Identication of modalities for monitoringand evaluation, such as indicators, baselinesand targets for measuring results; and

(c) Involvement of stakeholders, adequate useof resources, national ownership, or forms ofexternal aid.

As a result of the evaluability assessment, a numberof critical aspects were identied which impacton meeting the above overall DaO expectations.Among these aspects are the needs to: Harmonize strategies in the different countries

to move from United Nations DevelopmentAssistance Framework coordination principlesto DaO joint programming;

Ensure national ownership and participationof all partners;

Align DaO with other external developmentpartners, such as development banks;

Delegate more authority from agencyHeadquarters to UN country ofces;

Harmonize agency budgeting procedures andmanagement practices;

Dene common result-oriented indicators formonitoring and evaluation;

Enhance the predictability and adequacy of(non-earmarked) contributions to the DaO UNFund from bilateral and multilateral donors;

Harmonize accounting and reportingprocedures; and

Look for understanding on expected reductionof overhead costs for use in programming.

At the tripartite meeting hosted by theGovernment of Vietnam in June 2010, theemerging ndings and conclusions from thecountry-led evaluations were discussed amongstthe pilot countries. This was the third meetingorganized by the Governments who hadvolunteered to develop and implement DaO.As in earlier meetings (held in Maputo in 2008and in Kigali in 2009), the host Government wassupported by the UN Department for Economicand Social Affairs (DESA) and the Development

Operations Coordination Ofce (DOCO).

The experiences and lessons learned from themeetings in Maputo, Kigali and Vietnam include: Participants acknowledge that while there

was no blueprint for Delivering as One thepioneering efforts of the pilot countries havebeen crystallized into an approach under theprinciple of No-One-Size-Fits-All which hasresulted in a certain degree of diversity ofexperiences and lessons learned, but at thesame time has shown a number of commonelements across the countries.

Participants stress that the UN organizationsare called upon to provide support to capacitydevelopment in programme countries, includingnormative and policy advice in achieving povertyeradication, sustained economic growth andsustainable development.

The Delivering as One approach has providedbenets for achieving better development

results through increased national leadership


16/84


and ownership in the developmentpartnership with the UN system. In all pilotcountries, the role and contribution of theUN system is better integrated in national

development processes and the UN systemhas become more responsive to nationalneeds and priorities.

The contribution of agencies is notdetermined by the residency status, but ratherby the contribution that they can make tothe development priorities. Increasingly non-resident agencies (NRA) have contributedwith their specialized expertise in jointprogramming and policy dialogue whichhas allowed the UN development system todraw upon the normative strength of the UNsystem.

On the country-led evaluations and the resultsobtained was noted:

(a) The quality of the country-led evaluationswas fairly uneven, with Vietnam beingof highest quality in terms of followingthe earlier on agreed Terms of Reference(TOR), which was partly attributed to thetight schedule placed on countries to

complete their reports before the Hanoiconference;

(b) The relationship between ndings,conclusions and recommendationsremained weak; and

(c) Not enough attention was given inthe reports to contributions madeto development results at countrylevel, including the achievement ofinternationally agreed development aims

under the MDGs. Participants of the pilot countries noted

with concern that there are still signicantfunding gaps in the implementation of OneUN Programmes and called upon donorsand other countries in a position to provideadditional, predictable and multi-yearcontributions.

Participants also noted that:

(a) UN agencies should decentralise roles and

responsibilities to the country ofce;

(b) Small agencies should be strategicallyconsolidated at country level;

(c) The UN silos have started to erode andnew levels of synergies emerged; and

(d) Programme alignment improved and theUN capacity to address multi-sectoraldevelopment programme was tested.

It is important to mention, that based on theexperience of pilot countries, an increasingnumber of self-starters, although not ofciallydesignated as pilot countries, are in processesof adopting the concept of One UN , or aspects ofit, through increased efforts of coordinating thescope of agency programmes, and strengtheningtheir alignment with national developmentpriorities. Among the self-starters are Bhutan,Kiribati, Laos, Maldives, Mongolia, Papua NewGuinea and Philippines in Asia and the PacicRegion; and Benin, Botswana, Comoros, Ethiopia,Liberia, Lesotho, Malawi, Namibia and Zimbabwein the Africa Region. Such efforts are usuallybuilt upon experiences with the United NationsDevelopment Assistance Framework. UN-Habitatis currently active in Cape Verde, Mozambique,Pakistan, Rwanda, Tanzania and Vietnam, withprojects funded through and implemented underthe DaO umbrella, as well as projects directlyfunded through UN-Habitat core funds.

So far, the DaO participation of UN-Habitatin the pilot countries has been ensured byHabitat Programme Managers and their teams,and within the framework of promoting theimplementation of UN-Habitats mandate at thelevel of interacting with national partners andcoordinating with UN agencies. Habitat countryteams who have been in existence for about10 years, are assigned key roles in preparingcountry plans in the form of Habitat CountryProgramme Documents (HCPDs) on the basis ofnational priorities and UN-Habitat mandate, andalign them with UN system wide coordinationprocesses, such as UNDAF and the DaO process.The HCDPs nd their rationale in UN-HabitatsMedium-Term Strategic and Institutional Plan(MTSIP) 2008-2013, which assigns them (and the

Country Programme Managers) a strategic role


17/84


for preparing and implementing an enhancednormative and operational framework (ENOF) toenable UN-Habitat play a leadership and catalyticrole in promoting sustainable urbanization in at

least 30 countries by 2013.

1.3 OBJECTIVES AND RELEVANCE OFDAO FOR UN-HABITAT

The review, subject of this consultancy, will focuson the current challenges and opportunities of UN-Habitats participation in the DaO. The objective ofthe review is to determine the extent of UN-Habitatsparticipation; lter lessons learned; identify andassess strengths, challenges and opportunities;

and make recommendations for a more effectiveparticipation. Among other issues, the review willgenerate better understanding of the effects andpotential of the DaO for UN-Habitat.

The relevance of UN-Habitats participationin the DaO process is related to the role andcontribution that the agency can provide to theUN systems policy and programme support tomember states and their national developmentpriorities. This is of particular importance due

to the fact that UN-Habitat is a specialized Non-resident Agency whose urban developmentmandates are generally recognized amongnational Governments development priorities.

Specically, this review focuses on the currentchallenges and opportunities of UN-Habitatsparticipation in the DaO process, with theobjective of providing a detailed information baseon what would be needed to participate moreeffectively. The review includes:

An evaluation and recommendationsconcerning strategic, planning, managerial,operational and monitoring/reportingprocesses, mechanisms and human/nancialresources for more effective and efcientparticipation of UN-Habitat at both the globaland national levels.

An assessment of the value added of theOne UN process for UN-Habitat in thesix participating countries, including theintegration of the agency into this process.

A qualitative assessment of the signicance of

UN-Habitats support to the One UN reformagenda.

According to the UNDG work plan for 2010-2011, the following outcomes of the DaO-guidedreform process have been formulated: Outcome 1: Accelerated national achievement

of MDGs/IADGs; Outcome 2: Strengthened UN coherence and

coordination at country level; and Outcome 3: UN Development system more

effectively deploys knowledge and know-how. It should be recalled here that theexpected administrative and cost benets fora DaO UN system include:

(a) Synergies of interagency programmingand implementation;

(b) Reduction of overlaps and duplication;

(c) Achievements of economies of scale; and

(d) Reduction of transaction costs fordevelopment activities.

Consequently, the challenges, opportunities andprospects of UN-Habitat participating in the DaOsystem-wide initiative will have to be assessedunder those aspects, both at Headquarters andRegional Ofce levels, as well as at countrylevels. The scope of this consultancy doesnot include a full assessment of these issueswhich are fundamental to the prospects of theagencys participation in the DaO reform processat country level, and can only raise them withrecommendations for organizational reform. Theexpected DaO results include: Reduction of costs by minimizing duplication

and overlap of efforts following use ofcommon services for reducing overheads andincreasing value for money in service delivery.

Better alignment of UN agency competencieswith national development priorities.

Better use of comparative advantages, basedon the diversity of mandates and types ofintervention of UN agencies.

Application of a result-oriented approach to joint programming by securing multi-year

resources from donor trust funds and agencycore contributions.


18/84


19/84


2.1 DATA COLLECTION METHODS

In order to address the purpose and objectiveof this consultancy, the following methods wereused:

(a) Literature review a desk study ofdocumentationwas conducted of (including,but not limited to) DaO documents andreports; DaO evaluations already undertaken(evaluability reports, stocktaking reports,country-led evaluation reports, progressreports, and others); country UN documentssuch as United Nations DevelopmentAssistance Framework, DaO joint programme,assessments and strategies; UN-Habitatcountry documents such as Habitat Country

Programme Document (HCPD), DaO projectdocuments, Country Programme Managerreports; and UN-Habitat policy documentssuch as MTSIP, ENOF and strategic papers.

(b) Guided interviews were used during eldmissions to collect primary data from UN-Habitat staff in country ofces, and nationalstakeholders in selected pilot DaO countriesof Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania andVietnam. The interviews involved, amongothers, the Resident Coordinator andrelevant UN country team members; focal

points from participating UN agencies, UN-Habitat national counterparts; other nationalUN-Habitat partners which participated inplanning and implementing DaO projects;civil society organizations and resident donors

that contributed to One UN Fund.(c) Distant consultations were used for Cape

Verde and Pakistan, non-visited pilot DaOcountries, and done through administration ofe-questionnaires and e-mail communicationwith UN-Habitat staff and other countrystakeholders as was found necessary.

(d) Face-to-face discussions were held usingsemi structured questions with staff from theRegional Ofce for Africa and the Arab States

and the Regional Ofce for Asia and thePacic, relevant Divisions at Headquarters forinternal UN-Habitat DaO review. This reviewassessed the level of understanding of theDaO initiative seeking views and commentsfor better UN-Habitat DaO involvement. Itfocused on: Assessing substantive and global UN-

Habitat policies and strategies (i.e, MTSIP),its relation to the DaO initiative and theways it related to present practice in pilotcountries;

2. REVIEW METHODOLOGY AND SCOPE

Reconstruction site in Pakistan UN-Habitat


20/84


Assessing the value of interdivisionalteamwork (ENOF) and its potentialsupport to planning and implementationof DaO joint programmes;

Assessing the level of administrativeand nancial support required fromHeadquarters to strengthen the deliveryefciency in DaO projects jointlyimplemented with other UN agencies; and

Assessing the role of information,documentation, monitoring andevaluation at Headquarters and RegionalOfces to support UN-Habitat team inDaO countries.

(e) Consultations were held with RegionalOfces and the Headquarters staff forfeedback based on a presentation on ndingsand recommendations of the rst draft report.The presentation was complemented withconsultations via e-mails sent to CountryProgramme Managers in pilot DaO countryofces seeking for comments on the rst draft.

2.2 DATA ANALYSIS

The different data were processed by ltrationand ordering, and by triangulation andverication with data from other data sources toarrive at the ndings, and draw conclusions andrecommendations.

2.3 SCOPE

The methodology was applied to help understandUN-Habitat participation on the DaO, and forthat reason, the study composed of the followingthree phases:

(a) Preparatory Phase (Phase I): This phaseconsisted of a desk review of availablesecondary sources of information includingDaO documentation and previous DaOevaluations as well as UN-Habitat reports onDaO projects and achievements.

This phase had the following main activities: Understand the evaluation tasks and prepare

the inception report; and Collect background information and carry out

a desk review.

(b) Data Collection and Analysis Phase (PhaseII): This phase was undertaken through:

(a) Field visits to Mozambique, Rwanda,Tanzania and Vietnam for collecting datafrom primary sources, including UN-Habitat eld staff and stakeholders;

(b) Distant consultation to Cape Verdeand Pakistan through e-mails andquestionnaires with UN-Habitat eldofces and DaO stakeholders; and

(c) Meetings with UN-Habitat staff inRegional Ofces (ie., ROAAS and ROAP)and in Headquarters to assess the levelof understanding of the DaO initiative,identify aspects which needed to beaddressed and evaluate the supportprovided by Regional Ofces andHeadquarters to the DaO implementationat country level (Annex II: InterviewedPersons).

Phase II had the following main activities: Undertake country visits and conduct

interviews; Arrange and conduct distant country

consultations; and Carry out internal consultations in Regional

Ofces and in UN-Habitat Headquarters.

(c) Reporting Phase (Phase III): This phaseincluded the preparation of a draft reportfrom the desk review and the data collectedfrom different sources and, production ofPowerPoint for presentation of the ndings,

conclusions and recommendations. The draftreport was presented in a consultative sessionwith ROAAS and Headquarters staff seekingfor comments and recommendations. Thedraft report was also discussed with UN-Habitat eld staff who contributed withcomments. The nal report incorporatedthe recommendations from the consultativesession at the Headquarters, and from UN-Habitat eld staff at country level. This phasehad the following main activities: Undertake data analysis and prepare rst


21/84


draft report; Prepare PowerPoint presentation; Present draft report and arrange internal

discussion; and Incorporate recommended changes into

the present (nal) report.

2.4 MANAGEMENT OF THE REVIEWPROCESS

This review was conducted by two independentconsultants, Mr. Mathias Hundsalz and Mr.Antonio Yachan during the period, March to June2011, in close consultation with UN-Habitat.

The RTCD managed the administrative andlogistical components of the review while theMonitoring and Evaluation Unit managed thequality of the review report, including ensuring

that the terms of reference conform to UN-Habitatevaluation requirements, and made comments onthe draft and nal reports.


22/84


This section is a summary on the ndings of DaOprocess in pilot countries. Details on ndings foreach of the six countries where UN-Habitat iscurrently active in the DaO process are presentedin Annex III.

3.1 CAPE VERDE

The UN-Habitat ofce in Cape Verde was createdin 2009, after the DaO was initiated, recruitinga country coordinator supported by the CountryProgramme Manager. The country coordinatoris based in Cape Verde and participates in DaOmeetings as well as works together with nationalpartners on the planning and implementation ofthe projects. The Country Programme Manager,who is also the Country Programme Manager forSenegal, assisted in key meetings in Cape Verdeproviding the necessary support from Dakar.

In Cape Verde, 20 UN agencies are collaboratingin the DaO (i.e., six resident and 14 non-residentagencies) and in a participatory way have preparedthe OneUN Programme in Cape Verde . Theprogramme is divided into four thematic areas: Good governance;

Promotion of growth and economicopportunities;

Environment, energy, disasters, preventionand response; and

Human capital and social protection.

The gender component is a cross-cutting aspect

mainstreamed in most interventions. The totalestimated budget for the OneUN Programme wasUSD 70.3 million; donor contribution reachedUSD 40.8 million.

The entry point of UN-Habitat in Cape Verde wasthe Participatory Slum Upgrading Programme(PSUP) which is nanced by UN-Habitat withcontribution from the European Commission. Thisentry point allowed UN-Habitat access to the OneUN Programme with an urban governance project

nanced by the DaO. At present, UN-Habitatis implementing activities for a total of USD588,500 including USD 88,500 from the PSUPproject and USD 500,000 from DaO funds underthe Local Urban Development Programme in theframework of the One UN in Cape Verde. Thiscase is a good example where core funds (fromPSUP programme) in a relatively small amountenabled UN-Habitat to implement activities underDaO with considerable larger funds.

The Government of Cape Verde has been workingon an integrated urban policy and operational

3. KEY FINDINGS ON UN-HABITAT PARTICIPATIONIN THE DAO PROCESS IN THE PILOT COUNTRIES

Maputo Island, Mozambique UN-Habitat/Alain Grimard


23/84


strategy which will act as a guide for betterliving conditions in the cities. Accordingly, theGovernment of Cape Verde in partnership withUN-Habitat intends to produce this urban policy

and the respective strategy in the next cycle of theUNDAF 2012-2016, where it is already included.This intervention is in line with the focus that theGovernment of Cape Verde is intending to give tothe next DaO cycle, requesting less small projectsand more substantive contribution from the UNwhere value could be added to the developmentprocess in the country. For UN-Habitat, with onlyone staff member in the eld, to deal with policyand strategic aspects becomes a great challenge.

The DaO planning exercise with Governmentcounterparts and UN agencies facilitated thedialogue and the recognition of UN-Habitatmandate strengthening the working relationswith the Resident Coordinator ofce and sisteragencies. Taking advantage of this situation, UN-Habitat could draw a plan covering additionalurban aspects, for what will further advocate theagency mandate and capability.

Concerning increasing UN-Habitat capacity in

Cape Verde, it would be important to strengthenthe local ofce investing on its human resourcesby upgrading and enlarging staff. The workloadon programmatic and substantive aspects, thetime spent on meetings and the perspectives onthe new United Nations Development AssistanceFramework cycle justies this. Improvements onthe procurement and recruitment process are alsoneeded to speed implementation and reduce theadministrative work in the eld ofce.

3.2 MOZAMBIQUEUN-Habitat in Mozambique is implementinga portfolio of USD 7.3 million within the DaOapproach, with USD 4.1 million coming from DaOfunds and USD 3.2 million from bilateral or corefunds from the agency. The eld ofce has tenstaff, with the Country Programme Manager beingthe only one nanced from core funds. Althoughthe number of staff seems large (compared toother countries) there are huge limitations on

staff and resources at a time when it is necessary

to maintain the pace of bigger agencies, or it isintended to advocate for the agency mandateor negotiate larger funds to increase the volumeunder implementation.

The DaO in Mozambique has been operationalsince 2007; its rst cycle is nalising in 2011. Inplanning and implementation DaO involves 24UN agencies (nine resident, seven non-residentwith ofce and staff in-country and eightcovered from abroad). This rst cycle has 13 jointprogrammes, with UN-Habitat collaborating inthree programmesenvironment mainstreaming,decentralisation and disaster risk reduction.

The strength of UN-Habitat in DaO is on itsspecic mandate, which is not available inother UN agencies. The planning exercise isvery demanding on policy aspects and ontechnical knowhow and the Country ProgrammeManager in the UNCT and in meetings with theGovernment needs to convince UN agenciesand ministries on the identied priorities andon innovative and feasible solutions in orderto be considered as a priority in the DaO plan.Although the voice of the Country Programme

Manager in planning and decision takingmeetings is equally considered, it is less powerthan the voices of resident agencies. Althoughbehind the Country Programme Manager is a fullagency with normative and operational divisions,the required support with updated normative andstrategic information does not reach the eld. Itis only with joint Headquarters, RTCD and eldofce interventions, that the agency will properlyadvocate for its mandate in a continuous andmore prominent way in the DaO plan and DaO

funding, reinforcing present areas of interventionand opening new ones within the mandate andneeds in country.

The United Nations Development AssistanceFramework 2012-2015 was recently approvedand is the result of a highly participatory planningprocess involving the Government of Mozambiqueand the UN. The United Nations DevelopmentAssistance Framework was based on the ActionPlan for Poverty Reduction (PARP) for 2011-2014

as well as the country-led DaO evaluation done


24/84


in 2010. The new United Nations DevelopmentAssistance Framework is organized around threefocus areas:

(a) Economic: aimed at diminishing the economic

disparities, improving productive capacities,and reducing vulnerability to natural disasters;

(b) Social: aimed at reducing inequality of accessto services for vulnerable groups; and

(c) Governance: deepening democracy andimproving governance at the local level. Forthe Government of Mozambique, the valueof the DaO programme, compared to gainsfrom other sources of support, is the neutralposition of the UN, the value of the technical

expertise of agencies and the global advice.To implement United Nations DevelopmentAssistance Framework 2012-2015, will requirea total budget of USD 735 million out of which20 per cent is expected to be covered from DaOfunds, 25 per cent from regular resources (fromUN agencies) and the difference from otherbilateral arrangements. UN-Habitat is included inthe new United Nations Development AssistanceFramework with a total of USD 10 million from

DaO funds.Obtaining DaO funds is very competitive. On theone hand are small NRAs that want to initiateor increase their presence in the country. Onthe other hand are the big resident agenciesthat have a large number of technical staff andconsolidated programmes and do not want tolose their predominance. In the rst DaO cycle,UN-Habitat was able to leverage a reasonableproportion of funds from DaO due to:

(a) Good performance obtained in-country onpreviously implemented projects;

(b) Considerable number of project staff alreadyon board; and

(c) Ability to contribute non-DaO funds to theDaO joint programmes.

For the second DaO cycle, where UN-Habitat aimsto considerably increase participation, its presencein the eld and the contribution of core funds willplay an important role.

UN-Habitat implementation in terms ofdisbursement is on track with approximately 80 percent of the DaO funds committed. However, it isimportant to mention that delays on recruitments

and procurements are hampering eld work.The most important delays are inside of UNDPofce that after receiving the authorisations fromUNON, the authorisation is put on hold for UNDPto re-initiate the full recruitment or procurementprocess based on its local system.

3.3 PAKISTAN

The One UN Plan for Pakistan is a follow-up tothe experiences with the countrys United Nations

Development Assistance Framework whichwas extended to 2010 in order to align it withPakistans National Development Plan, in terms oftiming and matching national priorities with thecapacities of the UN system.

Based on its mandate, experience and capacityto deliver, UN-Habitat participated actively in theformulation of four joint programmes, under theumbrella of the United Nations Country Team:

Environment, with several outcomesaddressing human settlement related issues;

Disaster risk management, with severaloutcomes addressing human settlementsrelated issues;

Health and Population (to a very limitedextent, jointly with UNFPA); and

Education (to a very limited extent, jointlywith UNESCO).

The One UN Plan in Pakistan is funded through

a combination of earmarked and non-earmarkedfunding from donors under the Multi Donor TrustFund (MDTF), as well as from agency core funds(except UN-Habitat). Approximately, ten per cent ofthe overall One UN budget has funding from MDTFand several agencies kept their own programmesrather than integrate them into the One UN Plan.Further, many donors (and agencies) now focustheir funding on post disaster programmes ofrecovery and rehabilitation, rather than contributeto the One UN Fund. There is an overall shortfall offunding for the current One UN Plan.


25/84


26/84


the agencys capacity to participate in coordinatedpolicy support and joint programming along theOne UN Plan is the goal.

With a situation where donor funds in Pakistanbeing overwhelmingly directed towardshumanitarian and peace-building activitiesof the UN system, the future of One UN Plandevelopment activities through pooled and non-earmarked donor contributions remains seriouslyunderfunded. This has a direct impact on UN-Habitats participation in the One UN Plan whichis also in future likely to remain limited in terms ofcost-effectiveness.

For UN-Habitat to play a recognized and effectiverole in the new One UN Plan, it needs to focus itsparticipation in the DaO through:

(a) More advocacy and policy support and less onsingle project service delivery;

(b) Capacity development of civil society;

(c) Intervention through policy advice at theregional and local levels; and

(d) Disaster preparedness and humanitarianresponse.

3.4 RWANDA

UN-Habitat opened its country ofce in UNDPcompound in July 2004. This ofce has one CountryProgramme Manager and eight staff, implementingin the past four years a portfolio of USD 2.25 millionin the DaO programme in Rwanda.

One UN Programme in Rwanda CommonOperational Document 2008-2012 was preparedby 20 UN agencies (nine resident and 11 non-

resident agencies, including UN-Habitat). This isthe programmatic document specifying how theUN in Rwanda will implement the United NationsDevelopment Assistance Framework 2008-2012. The UNDAF is a response to the nationalneeds and priorities outlined in the RwandanGovernments Economic Development andPoverty Reduction Strategy and the Vision 2020.The Common Operational Document is dividedinto ve sectors: Governance; Health, population,HIV and nutrition; Education; Environment, andSustainable growth and social protection; with

gender as a cross-cutting aspect. The CommonOperational Document presents key activities byoutcome and by agency and its implementationrequire a total of USD 487.6 million.

The Country Programme Manager is responsiblefor UN-Habitats planning. It is very challengingand often difcult to meet the requirements dueto the number of meetings involved or becausespecic policy or technical knowledge is requiredon matters that fall under the agencys purview.Advocacy on policy and strategic aspects toconvince Government and other UN agencies onthe importance of the UN-Habitat mandate andthe relevance for the country plays a key role.

If this is not well articulated, it can simply getignored. Current strategic planning left out theCountry Programme Manager. During the nextplanning cycle the Government indicated that UNshould contribute more to policy and strategicaspects and less on project implementation.

Only one Non-Resident Agency (NRA) representsall the NRAs in planning and fundraising meetingswith donors. These decisions taken by theResident Coordinator at country level adds layers

of difculty to the planning and funding limitingthe advocacy on UN-Habitat mandate that can bedone by the staff in-country.

Approximately one third of the expectedDaO funds in Rwanda have been obtainedwith reluctance from some donors to meetcommitment or increase their contribution. Thisfunding situation increases competition amongagencies for available funds. Resident agencieswith larger amounts of core funds and stronger

presence seem to have better opportunity ofgetting funds than NRAs that lack strong presenceand have limited core funds.

UN-Habitat Headquarters promised theGovernment of Rwanda core funds for projectimplementation on water and youth. In the caseof water, a memorandum of understanding wassigned for USD 1.12 million but the Headquartersprovided only USD 180,000 in an Agreementof Cooperation before announcing that no

more funds were available. On Youth, it waspromised USD 200,000 from core funds, which


27/84


did not materialise. It is beyond the terms of thisconsultancy to study why this occurred, but somelessons can be drawn: Core funds exist in reasonable amount to

involve the agency with core funds in theDaO and qualify for leveraging DaO fundsimplementing more signicant projects, butthis was not done.

Trust on the agency is eroded and affect theefforts done by eld staff with the Governmentand inside the One UN by promising funds tothe Government and not materialising it.

Better coordination between Headquartersand Regional Ofce should be established to

work as One UN-Habitat in the eld.According to eld staff, the main problem withUN-Habitat participation is the time taken forrecruitment and procurement in the UNDP ofce.Delays in implementation affect beneciaries,relations with Government and counterparts,reduce the delivery capacity of the agencyand impede obtaining DaO funds due to non-utilisation of funds already allocated.

3.5 TANZANIAIn close collaboration with the Government ofTanzania and the donor countries (and coordinatedby a tripartite agreement through the JointSteering Committee), the United Nations CountryTeam formulated and adopted the present UnitedNations Development Assistance Plan (UNDAP2011-2015) which is composed of three clusterswith ten programme areas: Cluster 1: Economic Growth and Poverty

Reduction (with a budget USD 180 million,i.e., 23 per cent). Cluster 2: Quality of Life and Social Well-

Being (with a budget USD 323 million, i.e.,42 per cent).

Cluster 3: Governance, Emergency andDisaster Response; Refugees (with a budgetUSD 270 million, i.e., 35 per cent).

The total budget for this period stands at USD 777million, out of which USD 216 (28 per cent) is to

be nanced by donors through the One UN Fund,leaving the balance to be funded through agency

core funds and non-core funding mechanismssuch as earmarked donor funds and global UNprogrammes.

The One UN Fund contribution to UNDAP 2011-2015 is nanced from pooled contributions ofseven donors (friends of the UN). Accordingto the UNRC ofce, there is a trend emergingamong donors to revert to higher earmarkedcontributions to specic programme areas and/orpreferred agencies.

UN-Habitat participates in the Water, Sanitationand Health programme (WASH) under Cluster2 of UNDAP, jointly with UNICEF, UNFPA andWHO. WASH is likely to get an allocation ofapproximately three per cent of the total OneUN Fund for Tanzania, the smallest of the tenprogramme areas. The Country ProgrammeManager has been requested to specify theinputs of UN-Habitat (actions) to WASH, whichwill focus on water and sanitation (WatSan) forZanzibar Water and Sanitation Authority (ZAWA)and for the Dar es Salaam Water and SanitationAuthority. The total budget will be approx. USD3 million, out of which about USD 0.9 million

is likely to come from the One UN Fund, therest is expected from agency core funds. Actualallocation will be made on the basis of proposalsfor joint programmes with the other agencies.There is a likelihood of earmarked funding forthe WASH programme area of UNDAP fromSwitzerland and The Netherlands.

The UNDAP 2011-2015 has no programme areanor specic activities on urbanization, and none ofthe other UN-Habitat operated projects in Tanzania

feature in the UNDAP 2011-2015. According tothe Country Programme Manager and the UNRCOfce, the main reason for this omission is failureby the Government of Tanzania to prioritize onurban issues when requests to the UN systemwere made. However, there are a number of UN-Habitat-supported project initiatives in Tanzania,many of them operated and backstopped bydifferent Headquarters divisions under separateagreements with Tanzanian Government and non-governmental institutions. These initiatives are

usually part of global Headquarters programmes


28/84


with normative and operational elements.Although some of them are coordinated andsupported by the Country Programme Managerin Tanzania, none have been included in the

UNDAP. It becomes evident that such an array offragmented and non-coordinated UN-Habitat-supported activities (often of very small scale)does little to strengthen UN-Habitats competencyprole, under the Habitat Country ProgrammeDocument and as inputs to UNDAP.

Consequently, UN-Habitats competence andcomparative advantage on urbanization issues likesustainable urbanization, slum upgrading, andland management are not properly recognized

in the current UNDAP. The past positive projectresults with Sustainable Dar es Salaam andslum upgrading have apparently not adequatelyinuenced the Government of Tanzania tointroduce these issues into the consultations withthe United Nations Country Team and the ResidentCoordinator on priorities for assistance from theUN agencies. Considerable effort is needed bothat the level of Headquarters and the CountryProgramme Manager to convince the UnitedNations Country Team and the Government

of Tanzania of UN-Habitats urbanizationcompetencies and comparative advantages.

Inadequate support from Headquarters andthe RTCD to the Country Programme Managerin terms of funding, stafng, and policy/ programming expertise is a matter of concern.The Country Programme Manager is not anexpert on human settlement issues, has noassistance from a competent team, and noresources to contribute to the United Nations

Country Team and its working groups on actionplans for joint programming. There is urgent needfor Headquarters to review this unsatisfactorysituation. UN-Habitat risks being marginalizedfurther in the UN reform process in Tanzania.

On the more positive side, the CountryProgramme Manager participation in the UnitedNations Country Team and its working group onthe WASH component has helped to raise thevisibility of the agency, and enhanced the interest

of other agencies to do joint programming with

UN-Habitat, notably UNDP, UNICEF, WHO, ILOand UNFPA. If the participation of UN-Habitat inthe DaO reform programme and its programminginstitutions can be strengthened, on account of

its better recognized and understood coherentand comparative advantage, it will help to deectthe danger to marginalize UN-Habitat in thereform process.

In order to provide professional support tothe programming process, the substantivebackstopping from Headquarters (by RTCD andassisted by the water and sanitation programme)cannot be ignored. This should include advice to thewater and sanitation working group on dening

the focus of UN-Habitats specic action to achievea more comprehensive, interlinked and coherent joint programme with the other participatingagencies (i.e., UNICEF, UNFPA and WHO). As partof such programming contributions, there is needto develop a more comprehensive and strategicdenition of a Joint Programme, includingoperational responsibilities, management practicesand reporting.

3.6 VIETNAM

The present One UN Plan for Vietnam duringthe period 2006-2010 (extended to 2011) is theresult of tripartite consultations between theGovernment of Vietnam, the United NationsCountry Team (UNCT) and the donor community.The Plan is nanced from ODA donor grantallocations to the One UN Plan Fund (OPF) forVietnam, under the UN Multi Donor Trust Fund(MDTF), as well as from earmarked and non-earmarked agency contributions (core funds). For

the period 2008-2010, OPF budget is at the levelof USD 79 million, representing approximately 30per cent of multilateral ODA grants for Vietnam.UN-Habitats participation is solely fundedthrough allocations from the OPF for Vietnam(USD 0.95 million, representing slightly over oneper cent of OPF).

As per the OPF allocation criteria, it is hoped thatthe next One UN Plan will be better integratedamong the agencies through procedures of joint

and result-based planning. In the current One


29/84


UN Plan, the UN-Habitat issues of urbanization,urban development strategies, pro-poor land andhousing, improvements of basic infrastructureand services remain somewhat hidden in the total

list of 23 output clusters and 93 expected results.Nevertheless, UN-Habitat is recognized, and theagency is expected to make contributions undereach of the ve plan components in line with itsmandate and comparative advantage.

Participation in the One UN Plan in Vietnamis under the responsibility of the UN-Habitatcountry team, which is composed of one CountryProgramme Manager and six other nationals (i.e,four professionals and two clerical staff). While

the Country Programme Manager is funded fromHeadquarters resources, the other team membersare funded through UNDP administered servicecontracts, under funds allocated to UN-Habitatfrom the One UN budget. The One UN Fundallocation is for the purpose of implementing threeprojects: the Quang Nam Provincial DevelopmentStrategy; the Urban Observatory (urbanindicators) project; and the pro-poor housingproject, totalling USD 0.95 million. While mostagencies contribute own resources (core funds) to

the DaO process, in the case of UN-Habitat, thismodest amount ensures the implementation ofthree projects, and is the only source of funds forall the other functions of the Country ProgrammeManager and the team, including participationin the DaO programming and implementationprocess. The limited resources available tothe Country Programme Manager team poseconsiderable stress and constraints to the teamsability to perform its multitude of functions.

Apart from the above DaO projects, UN-Habitatactivities in Vietnam are funded by the Waterfor Asian Cities and Mekong Sanitation Project(MekSan), implemented by a national projectmanager, and coordinated by a regional projectofce in Laos, separate from the institutionalarrangement for DaO in Vietnam, and outsidethe scope of responsibilities of the CountryProgramme Manager in Vietnam and of theRegional Ofce for Asia and the Pacic.

With the implementation of projects funded under

the One UN Fund, the visibility and perception ofthe agencys mandate has remarkably increased. Asa result of the cooperation agreements on projectswith national partners like the Association of

Cities of Vietnam, and agencies under the Ministryof Construction, DaO has helped to engage theexpertise of other UN agencies in national policyadvocacy (i.e. UNFPA involvement in housingpolicy advocacy, UNDP in climate resilient urbandevelopment policy) and local strategic planning(i.e., Quang Nam Provincial Development Strategywith involvement of UNESCO, ILO and FAO). Withfunding provided under the One UN Plan, UN-Habitat was able to undertake specic projects todemonstrate its competence and value added to

its Government counterparts, donors and otherUN agencies. The Government recognizes UN-Habitat as its main international partner on issuesof sustainable urbanization. With its comparativeadvantage in terms of specialized expertise, UN-Habitat has been taking the lead among UNagencies on DaO initiatives with sustainableurban development, and has made competentcontributions to United Nations Country Teamdiscussions on climate change.

In the next One UN Plan (2012-2016), UN-Habitatshall focus its intervention more on capacitybuilding, policy support, general advocacy, andresearch on topical issues emanating from theUnited Nations Country Team. The prospects offunding future UN-Habitat projects through theOPF are not promising. This is not a reectionof UN-Habitats competence and relevance tothe Socio-Economic Development Plan, but theresult of a likely reduction of the OPF for thenext plan period. The change of Vietnams statusfrom a developing to a middle income country(MIC) will change the external developmentassistance architecture, less from ODA, with ashift to (concessional) loans and Governmentcost-sharing. Agency representatives, as well asdonors expect a signicant drop in OPF fundsavailable for the next One UN Plan. Largeragencies such as UNDP, UNICEF and UNFPAare already preparing for a shift in the fundingstructure. This scenario will affect UN-Habitats

future operations in Vietnam considerably. With


30/84


the absence of own (core) resources, the prioritiesand funding modalities through Governmentcost sharing, or direct donor funding for specicproject proposals along the agencys recognized

competencies (including climate change ordisaster/risk mitigation and adaptation), need tobe considered.

At the level of the Ministry of Construction,which is the Ministry responsible for policieson urbanization and housing, a wide range ofrequests for assistance is directed towards UN-Habitat and its country team. The ministry hasidentied the bottlenecks to be at the level ofinfrastructure, institutional development, and

capacity building and human resources. Thepresent support provided by UN-Habitat projectsunder DaO is highly appreciated; a formal requestfor further assistance will be made to UN-Habitatsoon, including a request for further consultationson future cooperation.

There is overall recognition of UN-Habitats specicmandate relevant to the countrys developmentpriorities, its competence and comparativeadvantage within the United Nations Country Team.

The active participation of the Country ProgrammeManager and the team in the DaO process is verymuch appreciated by the ofce of the ResidentCoordinator. This positive view is shared by therepresentatives of other UN agencies, particularlyUNDP, UNFPA, FAO and ILO. UN-Habitats statusas a NRA does not appear to limit its active roleand competent participation in the deliberations ofthe United Nations Country Team and its workinggroups. In the view of the UNDP country ofce,UN-Habitats focus on programme delivery, whileauthorizing UNDP to administer its funds, is agood model for other UN agencies of similar sizeto follow. However, and as mentioned above, theeffectiveness of the present Country ProgrammeManager structure is severely constrained by a lackof human and nancial resources.


31/84


4.1 INTRODUCTION

After analysing the information collected in allsix countries where UN-Habitat is participating inthe DaO, it is possible to conclude that each eldofce presents a particular case adapting the wayof working for positioning UN-Habitat in the newOne UN system.

Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania and Vietnamhave the Country Programme Manager dealingwith DaO and all additional matters related tothe UN-Habitat ofce. In Cape Verde there is anational coordinator and the Country ProgrammeManager from Senegal is supporting the DaOprocess. Pakistan ofce has a Country ProgrammeManager dealing with humanitarian projects andtwo national professionals dealing with DaO. It isinteresting to note that countries with CountryProgramme Manager (with the exception ofTanzania) UN-Habitat managed to enlarge itscountry programme and increase its funds. Thiswas true also for Cape Verde with the CountryProgramme Manager from Senegal. Except forTanzania, countries with Country ProgrammeManagers, as a consequence of the enlargedprogramme UN-Habitat has built a team of seven

to ten staff. In all DaO countries the Country

Programme Managers are fully participating inthe United Nations Country Team and in planningmeetings, but they are excluded from strategicmeetings where main decisions are taken.

In all DaO countries advocacy of UN-Habitat mandatehas increased and recognition from UN agenciesand Government has improved. This is not true forTanzania, where changes have not been signicant;and in Pakistan, where the strength of the ofceis measured on the humanitarian programme. Itis also a common pattern in DaO countries thatGovernments are relegating UN agencies fromthe purely implementation of projects, requestingfor more policy, strategic and capacity buildinginvolvement, and looking for areas where the UN

can add value and make a difference.It is interesting to note that although the DaOchanged the way eld ofces are doing business,becoming fully participative in the new One UN approach, the working relation with the RegionalOfce (technical support) and with Headquarters(normative, nance support) has remainedlargely unchanged. UN-Habitats RegionalOfce and Headquarters have not adaptedtheir working system and structure as One UN-

Habitat . This becomes very disruptive with core

4. UN-HABITAT PARTICIPATION IN DAO:CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

Women waiting to collect water in Pakistan UN-Habitat


32/84


33/84


the UN makes a difference between NRAswith presence and NRAs without presence in-country. In Tanzania, UN-Habitat is considereda resident agency, simply on the account of

having Country Programme Manager beingresident in the country, regardless of national orinternational status.

One of the main benets of DaO is that it providesNRAs with the opportunity to participate in equalconditions with resident agencies in the UnitedNations Country Team providing technical and policyadvice to the Government and other UN agencies toensure mainstreaming some of their mandates in theUnited Nations Development Assistance Framework

(or other One UN country programme documents).This opportunity that brings technical capacity,providing the relevant normative and strategicinputs adding value to the national programmewith actions that are worth to be implemented,providing a short-term solution to one of thegreatest challenges for NRAs when competing withresident agencies that are institutionalised in thecountry with larger number of technical staff anda large baggage of implemented projects and linkswith national institutions.

The status of UN-Habitat as a NRA does notappear to constrain the ability of the CountryProgramme Manager to make programmaticand coordinated contributions to the DaO

process in the case of Cape Verde, Mozambique,Pakistan, Rwanda and Vietnam, largely becauseof their demonstrated competence. However,UN-Habitats contribution in Tanzania remainsmarginal for reasons of inadequate agencypresence. UN-Habitat has teams of seven to tenstaff in Mozambique, Rwanda and Vietnam, buthas only one staff in Cape Verde and Tanzania,and a team of over 40 staff in Pakistan dedicatedto humanitarian projects with only two workingon DaO (Table 4.1). Except Country ProgrammeManagers who are nanced from Headquarterssfunds, all others are nanced from projects or DaOfunds. Project nanced staff are not consideredpermanent staff and their TORs address projectimplementation, leaving little or no time for themto participate in DaO planning and coordination.In the case of Pakistan, project income from thelarge volume of humanitarian activities nancethe staff dedicated to DaO. The benet of Pakistanwith a large humanitarian programme subsidisingDaO staff is not repeated in other countries.

Table 4.1: Stafng table of UN-Habitat country teams

Cape Verde Mozambique Pakistan Rwanda Tanzania Vietnam

Country Programme Manager 0 1 0 1 1 1

Professional 1 7 2 4 0 4

General Service 0 2 0 3 0 2

Sub-total DaO staff 1 10 2 8 1 7

Non-DaO staff 0 1 (JPO) 40 0 0 0

Total 2 21 44 16 2 14

The Country Programme Managers are responsiblefor DaO planning, a time demanding task as wellas stressful due to the technical requirementsin a variety of topics covered by the agencymandate. Nonetheless they have ensured UN-Habitat participation in DaO in the pilot countries;thereby, promoting the implementation of UN-

Habitats mandate jointly with national partners

and coordinating with UN agencies. However, thesupport to Country Programme Manager ofces inthe pilot countries is reciprocaluncoordinated,undernanced and understaffed and remainsadministratively fragmented as Headquartersprogramme divisions continue to apply differentmanagement practices.


34/84


The scope and effectiveness of UN-Habitatsparticipation in the One UN reform processdepends, to a large extent on the professionalcompetence of its country team. The prole of

functions of Country Programme Manager teamsis considerable in scope: Ensure the recognition of UN-Habitats

competence, competitiveness andcomparative advantage at the level of UnitedNations Country Team deliberations, includingparticipation in numerous meetings requiredfor OP preparation and coordination;

Establish partnerships with UN agencies for joint programming under DaO;

Establish partnerships with Governmentinstitutions and local authorities as well aswith the civil society;

Set up and coordinate the implementation oftechnical cooperation projects in the country;

Carry out advocacy work and public relations,including World Habitat Day at country level;

Provide logistic and substantive support toUN-Habitat global programmes, which arenot funded through DaO or other operational

budgets; and Carry out administrative (including nancial)

and substantive reporting to United NationsCountry Team, UNDP, ROAP, former RTCDand donors, as required under establishedarrangements.

UN-Habitat mandate in DaO countries

UN-Habitat activities undertaken and nancedin DaO countries are important and there is a

commitment from staff in delivering them inthe best way possible. The results obtained areof good quality and recognised at country level.However, when looking at the country needsand priorities, and the UN-Habitat mandate froma wider perspective, it is possible to notice thatother interventions at policy and strategy levelscould have had a greater impact.

Coordinated by the UN Resident Coordinatorand his/her team, the work of UN Country

Teams in joint programming and coordination

of the UN agencies respective competenciesand comparative advantages for DaO is stilldominated by the big resident UN agencies.DaO country plan priorities and outcomes in the

result-oriented programming approach withinthe overall framework of MDGs are led by UNDP,UNICEF and UNFPA (i.e., ExCom agencies underthe UNDG coordination). It is unlikely that thisimbalance will change in the years to come, alsobecause the process of agencies applying forresources from a common pool of Multi DonorTrust Fund resources is especially competitive,given the scope of mandate overlaps in theUN system. UN-Habitat is therefore faced bothwith opportunities and risks, when enhancingits competitive prole, while responding toits specic mandate. The country programmemanagement team in Vietnam has so far notexperienced a competitive business climate.This could probably change if the overall ODAallocations to that country are reduced in the yearsto come (as Vietnam change to a Middle IncomeCountry). In contrast, the Country ProgrammeManager in Cape Verde, Mozambique, Rwandaand Tanzania experienced increased competitionamong the agencies even more so thanexpected.

UN-Habitats activities with the Government andother UN agencies have been facilitated witha unique platform for planning, coordinationand implementation at all levels gaining betterrecognition of its mandate. This has helped theexpansion of the agencys portfolio. However, inthe next DaO cycle, the Governments of CapeVerde, Mozambique, Rwanda and Vietnamwill push for a change requesting UN agenciesto concentrate more on policy and strategicactivities that add value to the development inthe country. They will make even more difcultthe planning, coordination and prioritization ofthe One UN programme at the United NationsCountry Team and Government level. This newapproach will imply that UN-Habitat will haveto enhance its capabilities and competencesin matters related to urbanization and slumupgrading strategies, housing and urban

policy, climate change, disaster response and


35/84


preparedness, urban transport strategies, urbanland management and so forth. Accordingly, theagency will have to present new and innovativeproposals to convince other UN agencies to

express interest in joint programming andGovernments to include UN-Habitat priorities inthe next DaO cycle for its nance.

4.3 CHALLENGES ANDOPPORTUNITIES FORHEADQUARTERS AND REGIONALOFFICES

UN-Habitat is a relatively small agency in theUN system with a specic mandate. It has to

overcome a number of structural constraintsat Headquarters and Regional Ofces. To fullyparticipate in this system-wide initiative UN-Habitat will need to lay the policy, programme,legal and administrative foundation to addressvarious constraints, including: Planning and approval processes of work

programmes and (project) activities which arecurrently agency-specic and Headquartersfocused;

Human resource constraints in terms oflimited capacity at the country level toeffect DaO operations, as well as resourcemanagement, contract modalities etc. whichneed to be harmonized with the DaO reformprocess; and

Incompatible information technologyplatforms, making monitoring and reportingat different levels, a complex and time-consuming exercise.

There are considerable opportunities for UN-Habitat to participate in the DaO/ One UN process,including: Work as a full member of UN country teams

with a unity of purpose to support agreednational priorities;

Achieve improved understanding of UN-Habitats comparative advantage andcompetitive capacity at country level andwithin the UN system;

Strengthen UN-Habitats capacity andcomparative advantage in joint programming

with other agencies; Introduce UN-Habitats specic mandate to

a wider and more receptive internationaldevelopment fraternity;

Make specic contributions through aharmonized approach of the UNs work withGovernment partners at national and locallevel with donors and other stakeholders;

Improve long-term and predictable fundingsources; and

Contribute to achieve commonly agreed (UNsystem wide) programme results.

Such opportunities for UN-Habitats future role inthe DaO process are closely linked to a number ofchallenges to the organization, such as: A joint effort by different agencies with

unique mandates and specic interests tendsto slow down the acceptance of radicalreforms required by the DaO approach;

UN-Habitat currently does not provideadequate policy, programmatic, nancial andhuman resource support to the DaO processin countries;

Donors are yet to ensure predictable multi-year nancing of One UN country plans,which particularly affects small agencies sucas UN-Habitat;

UN-Habitat has to reconsider its mandateand programme balance between normativeactivities at Headquarters and operationalintervention at country levels; and

Results-based programming and implementationof joint programmes (with other agencies)has risks in diluting the specic mandateand added value of UN-Habitat, and poseparticular challenges with regard to reportingand agency accountability.

a. One UN-Habitat and needed reform

In line with the key components of the DaOreform process in the UN system, UN-Habitatshould take appropriate steps to act and Deliveras One coordinating policy/programmes, unifyingUN-Habitat budget, and directing one set ofmanagement practices. If not, there is a great

Date post:	04-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	united-nations-human-settlements-programme-un-habitat
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times