Skip to main content

Zambia

LESSON

Lesson Learned: Democratizing governance for development: LDC civil society engagement

The reality is that CSOs/NGOs have more influence on policy and practice at national level, and that their major contribution to international and UN processes most often comes when their advocacy has been effective on their national government whose delegation will then carry this into governmental debate and processes such as outcome documents.
Project Partner
LDC Watch
Project Description
The project was timed to coincide with UN processes related to follow-up of the outcome document of the Third UN Conference on the Least Developed Countries (LDC-III) in Brussels in 2001, known as the Brussels Programme of Action (BPoA) and preparations for the Fourth UN Conference on the LDCs (LDC-IV) held in Istanbul in May 2011. The project aimed to build the capacity of civil society organizations in Least Developed Countries to mobilize and consolidate their energy, expertise and commitment to achieving quality inputs to the Comprehensive Review Summit in 2010, and strengthening democratic decision making in international development processes. It had three intended outcomes: Enhanced capacity of CSOs and CBOs; Increased awareness and coverage of LDC issues; Progress and setbacks on MDGs and BPoA reviewed. The project aimed to undertake activities in 20 countries: 13 in Africa, 2 in South Asia, 2 in South-East Asia and 3 in Pacific Island Countries (PICs). However planned activities changed throughout the project.
Evaluation Date
August 2012
Country
LESSON

Lesson Learned: Democratizing governance for development: LDC civil society engagement

The relevance of the project is questionable, however, in relation to the capacity building and empowerment of constituent CSOs who participated in the project. Insufficient attention was paid to the capacity-building needs of the CSO partners.
Project Partner
LDC Watch
Project Description
The project was timed to coincide with UN processes related to follow-up of the outcome document of the Third UN Conference on the Least Developed Countries (LDC-III) in Brussels in 2001, known as the Brussels Programme of Action (BPoA) and preparations for the Fourth UN Conference on the LDCs (LDC-IV) held in Istanbul in May 2011. The project aimed to build the capacity of civil society organizations in Least Developed Countries to mobilize and consolidate their energy, expertise and commitment to achieving quality inputs to the Comprehensive Review Summit in 2010, and strengthening democratic decision making in international development processes. It had three intended outcomes: Enhanced capacity of CSOs and CBOs; Increased awareness and coverage of LDC issues; Progress and setbacks on MDGs and BPoA reviewed. The project aimed to undertake activities in 20 countries: 13 in Africa, 2 in South Asia, 2 in South-East Asia and 3 in Pacific Island Countries (PICs). However planned activities changed throughout the project.
Evaluation Date
August 2012
Country
LESSON

Lesson Learned: Democratizing governance for development: LDC civil society engagement

The evaluators believed that the grantee cannot simply continue advocacy actions but must put in place a strategy and work plan that reflect the needs of its members and that might include actions – like training and information processes – that donors would consider funding.
Project Partner
LDC Watch
Project Description
The project was timed to coincide with UN processes related to follow-up of the outcome document of the Third UN Conference on the Least Developed Countries (LDC-III) in Brussels in 2001, known as the Brussels Programme of Action (BPoA) and preparations for the Fourth UN Conference on the LDCs (LDC-IV) held in Istanbul in May 2011. The project aimed to build the capacity of civil society organizations in Least Developed Countries to mobilize and consolidate their energy, expertise and commitment to achieving quality inputs to the Comprehensive Review Summit in 2010, and strengthening democratic decision making in international development processes. It had three intended outcomes: Enhanced capacity of CSOs and CBOs; Increased awareness and coverage of LDC issues; Progress and setbacks on MDGs and BPoA reviewed. The project aimed to undertake activities in 20 countries: 13 in Africa, 2 in South Asia, 2 in South-East Asia and 3 in Pacific Island Countries (PICs). However planned activities changed throughout the project.
Evaluation Date
August 2012
Country
LESSON

Lesson Learned: Democratizing governance for development: LDC civil society engagement

The value of the grantee as a coordinating body is not in dispute, however its members do not pay fees and it has no way to raise funds other than through projects submitted to donors.
Project Partner
LDC Watch
Project Description
The project was timed to coincide with UN processes related to follow-up of the outcome document of the Third UN Conference on the Least Developed Countries (LDC-III) in Brussels in 2001, known as the Brussels Programme of Action (BPoA) and preparations for the Fourth UN Conference on the LDCs (LDC-IV) held in Istanbul in May 2011. The project aimed to build the capacity of civil society organizations in Least Developed Countries to mobilize and consolidate their energy, expertise and commitment to achieving quality inputs to the Comprehensive Review Summit in 2010, and strengthening democratic decision making in international development processes. It had three intended outcomes: Enhanced capacity of CSOs and CBOs; Increased awareness and coverage of LDC issues; Progress and setbacks on MDGs and BPoA reviewed. The project aimed to undertake activities in 20 countries: 13 in Africa, 2 in South Asia, 2 in South-East Asia and 3 in Pacific Island Countries (PICs). However planned activities changed throughout the project.
Evaluation Date
August 2012
Country
LESSON

Lesson Learned: Democratizing governance for development: LDC civil society engagement

Over-reliance on one person’s credibility and profile is a risk. Succession planning, especially in between major events - like the international conferences on Least Developed Countries -  should be a priority.
Project Partner
LDC Watch
Project Description
The project was timed to coincide with UN processes related to follow-up of the outcome document of the Third UN Conference on the Least Developed Countries (LDC-III) in Brussels in 2001, known as the Brussels Programme of Action (BPoA) and preparations for the Fourth UN Conference on the LDCs (LDC-IV) held in Istanbul in May 2011. The project aimed to build the capacity of civil society organizations in Least Developed Countries to mobilize and consolidate their energy, expertise and commitment to achieving quality inputs to the Comprehensive Review Summit in 2010, and strengthening democratic decision making in international development processes. It had three intended outcomes: Enhanced capacity of CSOs and CBOs; Increased awareness and coverage of LDC issues; Progress and setbacks on MDGs and BPoA reviewed. The project aimed to undertake activities in 20 countries: 13 in Africa, 2 in South Asia, 2 in South-East Asia and 3 in Pacific Island Countries (PICs). However planned activities changed throughout the project.
Evaluation Date
August 2012
Country
LESSON

Lesson Learned: Democratizing governance for development: LDC civil society engagement

The impact of the project activities on the LDC-IV outcome document is questionable. Few respondents considered that CSO efforts had translated into impact on the outcome of LDC-IV (the IP0A), which is essentially a political outcome decided by governments.
Project Partner
LDC Watch
Project Description
The project was timed to coincide with UN processes related to follow-up of the outcome document of the Third UN Conference on the Least Developed Countries (LDC-III) in Brussels in 2001, known as the Brussels Programme of Action (BPoA) and preparations for the Fourth UN Conference on the LDCs (LDC-IV) held in Istanbul in May 2011. The project aimed to build the capacity of civil society organizations in Least Developed Countries to mobilize and consolidate their energy, expertise and commitment to achieving quality inputs to the Comprehensive Review Summit in 2010, and strengthening democratic decision making in international development processes. It had three intended outcomes: Enhanced capacity of CSOs and CBOs; Increased awareness and coverage of LDC issues; Progress and setbacks on MDGs and BPoA reviewed. The project aimed to undertake activities in 20 countries: 13 in Africa, 2 in South Asia, 2 in South-East Asia and 3 in Pacific Island Countries (PICs). However planned activities changed throughout the project.
Evaluation Date
August 2012
Country
LESSON

Lesson Learned: Democratizing governance for development: LDC civil society engagement

There is no doubt that organized contributions from coalitions of CSOs and NGOS to UN processes carry more weight than individual participation. In the case of CSOs from the LDCs, the cost of attending UN conferences or even the preparatory regional meetings is likely to exclude most organizations from attending, so some mechanism for capturing their views and representing them in the meetings is essential.
Project Partner
LDC Watch
Project Description
The project was timed to coincide with UN processes related to follow-up of the outcome document of the Third UN Conference on the Least Developed Countries (LDC-III) in Brussels in 2001, known as the Brussels Programme of Action (BPoA) and preparations for the Fourth UN Conference on the LDCs (LDC-IV) held in Istanbul in May 2011. The project aimed to build the capacity of civil society organizations in Least Developed Countries to mobilize and consolidate their energy, expertise and commitment to achieving quality inputs to the Comprehensive Review Summit in 2010, and strengthening democratic decision making in international development processes. It had three intended outcomes: Enhanced capacity of CSOs and CBOs; Increased awareness and coverage of LDC issues; Progress and setbacks on MDGs and BPoA reviewed. The project aimed to undertake activities in 20 countries: 13 in Africa, 2 in South Asia, 2 in South-East Asia and 3 in Pacific Island Countries (PICs). However planned activities changed throughout the project.
Evaluation Date
August 2012
Country
LESSON

Lesson Learned: Governance and Transparency through Radio in Southern Africa

In practice, while the project did reach poor, rural communities, it failed to engage with their urban counterparts. There was little relationship between the rural and urban programming supported, and the urban programming was not aimed at the poor, but at the educated middle class.
Project Partner
Panos Southern Africa
Project Description
The project aimed to enhance dialogue between poor citizens across the Southern Africa region and policy-makers at local level. It also aimed to enhance the responsiveness and accountability of government institutions. To do this the project established Radio Listener Clubs (RLCs) and the produced interactive radio programming to bring citizens’ voices to the attention of a wider audience, and to bridge the gap between local decision-makers and poor rural and urban communities. Despite problems the project succeeded in producing and broadcasting a substantial set of programmes by both the community rural and urban radio stations. In at least three of the participating countries, the project increased awareness and knowledge of development issues and encouraged dialogue within communities to determine priorities for advocacy with local government. In Zambia the Project contributed in some way to increased engagement between the poor and local decision-makers in the rural target areas.
Evaluation Date
October 2011
Country
LESSON

Lesson Learned: Governance and Transparency through Radio in Southern Africa

An example of poor integration across the project components concerns was the baseline research undertaken in the four participating countries. This baseline report did not inform the planning and needs assessment work done at the project sites.
Project Partner
Panos Southern Africa
Project Description
The project aimed to enhance dialogue between poor citizens across the Southern Africa region and policy-makers at local level. It also aimed to enhance the responsiveness and accountability of government institutions. To do this the project established Radio Listener Clubs (RLCs) and the produced interactive radio programming to bring citizens’ voices to the attention of a wider audience, and to bridge the gap between local decision-makers and poor rural and urban communities. Despite problems the project succeeded in producing and broadcasting a substantial set of programmes by both the community rural and urban radio stations. In at least three of the participating countries, the project increased awareness and knowledge of development issues and encouraged dialogue within communities to determine priorities for advocacy with local government. In Zambia the Project contributed in some way to increased engagement between the poor and local decision-makers in the rural target areas.
Evaluation Date
October 2011
Country
LESSON

Lesson Learned: Governance and Transparency through Radio in Southern Africa

Given the budget, the scope of the work was too ambitious. Insufficient resources were allocated to core activities which had a negative impact on the outputs and results achieved. Scarce resources were allocated to activities which had marginal relevance for overall project outcomes
Project Partner
Panos Southern Africa
Project Description
The project aimed to enhance dialogue between poor citizens across the Southern Africa region and policy-makers at local level. It also aimed to enhance the responsiveness and accountability of government institutions. To do this the project established Radio Listener Clubs (RLCs) and the produced interactive radio programming to bring citizens’ voices to the attention of a wider audience, and to bridge the gap between local decision-makers and poor rural and urban communities. Despite problems the project succeeded in producing and broadcasting a substantial set of programmes by both the community rural and urban radio stations. In at least three of the participating countries, the project increased awareness and knowledge of development issues and encouraged dialogue within communities to determine priorities for advocacy with local government. In Zambia the Project contributed in some way to increased engagement between the poor and local decision-makers in the rural target areas.
Evaluation Date
October 2011
Country