 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
1. This report presents the findings of a survey of the bilateral and multilateral development partners and major NGOs active in Cambodia on their capacity building practices. The main objective of this study was to create a factual data set on the existing capacity building practices of Cambodia’s external development partners and NGOs, and to identify feasible solutions to achieve a more harmonized approach for capacity development. 2. Over the last decade, the development partners of Cambodia have responded to the challenges of capacity gaps in the administrative structures of the Government, specifically in the implementing ministries/agencies where their programs/projects are being implemented, by providing support for building capacity of these institutions. According to Government documents this has, however, led to a situation where now there is a proliferation of uncoordinated capacity building efforts on the ground. While the current practices of donors of providing salary incentives within the context of the implementation of individual programs/projects may expedite the implementation of these programs/projects, these practices have also resulted in depleting the capacity within the Government structures as qualified personnel move to more lucrative donor supported programs/projects and as a result continue to adversely affect Government’s institution building efforts. 3. At the 6th CG Meeting for Cambodia held in Phnom Penh in June 2002, the Government expressed these concerns in the context of building meaningful and effective partnerships with its external partners. It also asked for the formation of a “Government-Donor Partnership Working Group” under the CG mechanism to address these and other issues and to make recommendations on appropriate approaches. The proposal was overwhelmingly endorsed and the Working Group was formally established in August 2002. This Working Group is chaired by the Government (CDC/CRDB) and has two Co-Vice Chairs from the donor community. 4. The mandate of the Working Group is to examine issues related to Government-Donor Partnerships, make recommendations to strengthen the partnerships, and to follow up and report on progress made at both the CG and the Post-CG Meetings. In its deliberations the Working Group has agreed to focus on problems/issues for which feasible solutions already exist and that can be agreed to and implemented immediately. The Working Group has begun its work by commissioning three studies to collect and analyze the necessary background information and outline feasible solutions to begin to tackle the harmonization issues. The three studies focus on developing: (i) a systematic analysis of the practices and lessons learned in the management of development cooperation; (ii) a harmonized approach for capacity development; and (iii) a harmonized approach for program formulation, review, and implementation management strategies. These studies were planned to be completed during 2003 and 2004. 5. Over the last fifty years, the terms “capacity building” and “capacity development” have been defined in many ways. This report is not intended to be a contribution to a discussion on the conceptual aspects or the definition of “capacity building” or “capacity development”. The scope of this report is limited to presenting the findings of a survey whose focus was on developing a factual dataset on the current practices of Cambodia’s development partners in response to the capacity gaps that exist and to make recommendations that will assist in the formulation of a harmonized approach for capacity development. The report begins by outlining the methodology employed to collect the required data from the bilateral and multilateral development partners of Cambodia and the major NGOs. It is followed by a section on the country context. The next section presents the findings of the survey. The final section presents major conclusions and recommendations. |
|