Country Study – Botswanaweb.undp.org/evaluation/documents/thematic/cd/Btoswana.pdf · NSO National Strategy Office NSPR National Strategy for Poverty Reduction ... The study was

Strengthening of National Capacities for National Development Strategies and Their Management: An Evaluation of UNDP's Contribution

Country Study – Botswana

By Anthony M Land

Evaluation Office, July 2010 United Nations Development Programme

ii

Acknowledgements The preparation of this country study would not have been possible without the support and assistance of the Government of Botswana and the UNDP Country office in Botswana. Special words of thanks are due to Mr. Gaseitsiwe and Ms. Molefhi of the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning for facilitating the assignment and arranging meetings across Government and civil society, and to Mr. Moaneng of UNDP for overseeing the smooth conduct of the entire assignment as well as for arranging internal meetings within UNDP. An overall word of thanks goes to all those who were interviewed, for making time to answer probing questions and for their candid and insightful responses. Equally a word of appreciation is extended to all those who took time to review the draft report. The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Government of Botswana or UNDP. Any factual errors or omissions are the responsibility of the author.

iii

List of Acronyms ADR Assessment of Development Results CCA Common Country Assessment CSO Central Statistics Office GICO Government Implementation Coordination Office GoB Government of Botswana HIES Household Income and Expenditure Survey MFDP Ministry of Finance and Development Planning MLG Ministry of Local Government NDP National Development Plan NDS National Development Strategies NSO National Strategy Office NSPR National Strategy for Poverty Reduction OP Office of the President RDCD Rural Development Coordination Division UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework

iv

Contents

Page 1. Introduction 1 2. Context 2 3. Nature and Summary of Experiences of NDS 4

3.1. National Development Planning 4 3.2. Adoption of a Long-Term Vision 4 3.3. Towards More Strategic and Results-Focused Planning 5 3.4. Poverty and Millennium Development Goals 6 3.5. NDS Challenges 7

4. Broad Assessment of UNDP Contribution to NDS 8 4.1. Programming and Priority Setting 8 4.2. Engagement around NDS Capacity Strengthening 9 4.3. The Contribution of UNDP to Endogenous Capacity Development 12

5. Conclusions and Lessons Learned 14 5.1. An Endogenous Change Process 14 5.2. UNDP Support to NDS Capacity Development 14 5.3. Quality and Impact of Support 15

1

1. INTRODUCTION This country study on Botswana1 forms part of a larger thematic evaluation commissioned by UNDP headquarters through its Evaluation Office to explore the record of UNDP over the past 10 years in supporting partner countries to develop their capacities for formulating and managing national development strategies. The evaluation is particularly interested in appreciating the roles and functions of central agencies of Government in managing national development strategies and the contributions that UNDP has made to strengthen those roles and functions2. This report summarises major findings and conclusions and was reviewed by in-country stakeholders. A more detailed summary of the evidence assembled was collated into an evaluation matrix, for internal use by the overall team, and used to inform a cross case analytical workshop for the entire evaluation. Based on initial discussions between the evaluation team, the UNDP country office and the Government of Botswana, it was agreed to focus this country study on the preparations of National Development Plans 9 and 10, which coincide roughly with the preparations of the 2003-2009 and 2010-1016 UNDAFs. It is therefore important to note that the study only focuses on those parts of UNDP’s country programme that have addressed national development strategies, whether directly or indirectly. Other areas of UNDP assistance, be they sector-focused or thematic have not been examined. The country study was guided by a semi-structured questionnaire that focused on three core questions; i) What have been the successes and problems in developing and executing national development strategies in Botswana? ii) Is there evidence that (a) UNDP’s country programmes and (b) the projects of UNDP’s global and regional programmes enhanced national capacities to develop and execute national development strategies as identified as being needed by the country? iii) What is the capacity of UNDP to be an effective partner in capacity development at the country level? Interviews have elicited mainly qualitative findings that focus in particular on “process” issues. These offer insights on how capacities at individual, organisational and broader systems levels for national development planning have developed over time and the contribution that UNDP as a development partner have made to those processes of capacity development. The study was carried out between May and June 2010 and involved interviews with respondents from the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning (MFDP), Office of the President (OP), Ministry of Local Government (MLG), Vision Council, Botswana Council of NGOs and the UNDP country office3. A review of selected documentation was also carried out4. The full evaluation report will be finalised in October 2010 and submitted to the UNDP Board thereafter for consideration. The five country studies, which should not be more than 15 pages in length each, will be submitted as annexes to the main evaluation report. This Botswana country study report is divided into five chapters. Following this introduction in Chapter 1, Chapter 2 provides a brief country context. Chapter 3 then provides an overview of the evolution of national development planning in Botswana over the past 10 years. Chapter 4 summarises the contribution UNDP has made to strengthen capacity for national development planning. The fifth and final chapter draws conclusions and lessons learnt.

1 Three other detailed country studies are being prepared: Saudi Arabia, Paraguay, and Togo. 2 For further information on the study, see the Inception Report 3 See annex 1 for list of respondents 4 See annex 2 for list of documents consulted

2

2. CONTEXT5 Botswana is a landlocked country of 582,000 square kilometers, bordered by Zimbabwe, South Africa, Namibia and Zambia. Much of the country is covered by the Kalahari Desert and only 5 percent of the land area is considered arable. With low rainfall and high temperatures, Botswana is susceptible to droughts adversely affecting the food and agricultural sectors of the country. With a population of 1.8 million, growth rates have been declining and after averaging 2.4% between 1981 and 1991 are estimated to have dropped to a current rate of 1%, ascribed to a combination of declining fertility rates and increasing mortality rates6. Between 1965 and 2005, Botswana experienced real annual economic growth rates of on average 9 percent per year. Per capita income reached USD 7,000 in 2006/07, qualifying Botswana as an upper middle-income country7. Economic growth has been driven by the exploitation and export of minerals, with the diamond sector producing most of the sector’s output by value. The mining sector has been the largest contributor to GDP since 1977/78 (when it overtook agriculture)8. Since the mid-1990s, economic growth has slowed down as diamond production reached a plateau. There has been considerable emphasis on economic diversification so that other economic sectors can provide ‘engines of growth’ once mineral-led growth begins to decline. GDP growth excluding mining and government services averaged only 3.6 percent per year between 1999/00 and 2005/06, but in most recent years has increased significantly (12.3% in 2007/8 and 6.7% in 2008/9)9. Botswana remains heavily dependent on diamond production, which accounts for about three quarters of exports, one third of GDP, half of government revenue and 3 percent of total formal sector employment, while agriculture (driven by the livestock subsector and beef exports) accounts for only 2 percent of GDP but contributes a substantial proportion of rural income and some 20 percent of total employment10. Though declining, poverty as measured by income remains a structural problem, with a national average of 23 percent of people living below the Poverty Datum Line at the end of 200811. Despite improvements, the current poverty rates are considered too high for a middle-income country and are similar to those of low income countries. The level of income inequality is also quite high with a Gini coefficient currently estimated at 0.61, one of the highest in Africa12. Another important feature of poverty in Botswana is its high incidence among female-headed households. High unemployment levels among the youth are also a serious dimension of the problem. There is also a geographical variation in poverty with rural areas experiencing higher levels compared to urban regions. In urban areas, poverty levels range between 7 to 15 percent, compared to 43 percent in the north- west and 53 percent in the south-west.

5 The information contained in this chapter has been drawn from the 2009 Botswana ADR report. 6 GoB, NDP 10 7 Botswana ADR report, 2009 8 Botswana ADR report, 2009 9 GoB, NDP 10 10 Republic of Botswana-European Community, ‘Country Strategy Paper and National Indicative Programme for the Period 2008-2013’, Botswana 2008 11 GoB, NDP 10 12 Human Development Report, 2009, UNDP

3

Despite these trends, Botswana has made significant improvements in some of its social sectors such as education and health. Globally, Botswana’s human development index is ranked at 125 out of 177 and is classified as belonging to the medium human development countries, with a human development index value of 0.694 for 2007. An assessment of progress made towards the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) was conducted in 2004. It indicated significantly good progress made by GoB. MDGs relating to education, and environmental sustainability have already been achieved. Botswana is doing well with regard to achieving targets for gender equality and women’s empowerment (MDG 3), proportion of births attended by skilled personnel (MDG 5), and access to anti-retroviral therapy (MDG 6). Despite these achievements, Botswana still lags behind in the areas of eradication of extreme poverty and hunger (MDG 1), reduction of child mortality (MDG 4), and reduction of maternal mortality (MDG 5). Botswana gained independence from the United Kingdom in 1966. It is a tri-cameral democracy based on the separation of the legislative, executive and judicial powers. The President is both the head of state and head of government and is elected by the National Assembly for a five-year term. The President is restricted by the constitution to serve no more than two full terms in office. The National Assembly has 63 members, of which 57 representatives are directly elected by the populace, while four seats are appointed by the President. The House of Chiefs advises on matters affecting custom and tradition including reviewing relevant draft bills before their consideration in the national Parliament. Currently, the ruling party is the Botswana Democratic Party, which has been in power since independence. Botswana is widely considered to be a leading country in Africa with respect to good governance, which is a reflection of the generally high quality of its institutions, its independent legal system and the relatively low level of corruption. There is freedom of media and expression, but concerns have been expressed about the government’s dominant position in the media. Crime and corruption are low when compared to other countries in similar conditions, but may be increasing Development partners have either ended or reduced their aid programmes in Botswana. In recent years, the official development assistance (ODA) has been at approximately half a percent of the gross national income. The biggest donors to Botswana in 2005-2006 were the European Commission, the United States and Japan, followed by Germany, Norway and Canada. The situation has changed over the past two years and according to the European Commission Delegation, the planned donor disbursements to Botswana for 2008 total USD 134,000,000. Sixty-two percent of the aid in 2008 was allocated to combating HIV/AIDS, followed by education (16 percent), and environment and energy (11 percent). The aid provided by the United States to Botswana is directed exclusively to combating HIV/AIDS. It comes from both governmental and non-governmental sources. The European Commission’s support to Botswana has been given mainly to the development of human resources, identified as essential to economic diversification and growth. Eighty-four percent of the European Commission’s aid is granted as budget support. Since it closed its bilateral programme in Botswana, the Swedish International Development Agency has been focusing on HIV/AIDS through regional initiatives. Germany’s aid consists mainly of technical assistance for education, HIV/AIDS prevention, transportation, and environment and energy. France provides technical assistance to the education sector.

4

3. NATURE AND SUMMARY OF EXPERIENCE OF NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES 3.1. National Development Planning Since independence in 1966, Botswana’s development process has been guided by successive National Development Plans (NDPs). These have provided a medium term planning and budgeting framework (typically 5-6 years) for capital and recurrent expenditure, and have been a key feature of Botswana’s system of development management. The plans outline the government’s development priorities for the plan period as well as the policies, programmes and projects required to achieve those priorities. NDPs are guided by an elaborate preparatory process, which is overseen by the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning (MFDP). It includes broad based consultations across central and local government, with key non-governmental stakeholders, as well as with development partners13. This process combines elements of top-down and bottom-up planning and includes the preparation of district and more recently, urban development plans. The process starts with the preparation of a macro-economic outlook and policy framework (situational analysis) prepared by MFDP. It then proceeds with the elaboration of sector/ thematic and local authority key issues papers. On the basis of these issues papers, programme/ project priorities and budgets are negotiated and eventually the draft plan is submitted to parliament for approval and adoption14. The NDP therefore has the status of a law. A mid-term review is conducted halfway through plan implementation. Detailed annual programmes and budgets are contained in the annual budget speech. In 2009, parliament adopted Botswana’s 10th National Development Plan that covers the period 2009-2016. At the same time, the country’s 16 local authorities adopted their respective District and Urban Development Plans, which cover the same period. The National Development Plan and accompanying process retains the importance and respect that it has enjoyed since independence. In many respects its key features and characteristics remain unchanged. That said important innovations have been made over the past decade and a half, to improve the relevance and effectiveness of the planning and budgeting process, in response to a changing domestic and international social and economic climate. Some of these key innovations are highlighted below. 3.2. Adoption of a long term Vision In 1997 a special Presidential Task Group published Vision 2016: Towards Prosperity for All, which was developed on the basis of broad-based consultations. This offered a longer-term vision for Botswana’s development and was accordingly more aspirational in nature, as compared to the NDPs. Importantly it sought to articulate where the nation would like to see itself after 50 years of independence and adopted a multi-stakeholder perspective in formulating key outcomes. The Vision envisages a nation that is educated and informed, prosperous, productive and innovative, compassionate, just and caring, safe and secure, open, democratic and accountable, moral and tolerant, united and proud. It also foresees the eradication of absolute poverty by 2016. It was understood from the outset that government’s own NDP as well as the respective plans and strategies of civil society and the private sector would serve to translate Vision ambitions into

13 Note that Development Partner funds must fit into the NDP framework 14 Further details on the plan preparation process can be found in the introductory chapter of National Development Plan 10.

5

concrete activities. A Vision Council reflecting the interests of different sections of society15 and supported by a small secretariat was set up to monitor implementation of the Vision as well as to perform an advocacy role. In practice, it has proven challenging to monitor implementation of the Vision as well as to use the Vision as a framework for national development planning in a meaningful way. However, over time, a basic M&E system has been put in place to monitor the Vision at outcome level against the Vision’s seven pillars, and last year, the Council published the first “Botswana Performance Report 2009” drawing on a wide range of statistical and qualitative data. Also, for the first time, a deliberate effort was made to align NDP 10 to the Vision. Doing so represented part of a more elaborate and continuing effort to make the planning and budgeting process more results oriented, as discussed below. 3.3. Towards More Strategic and Results-Focused Planning Over the past 10 years, the Botswana government has taken steps to increase the overall performance and accountability of the public service, as well as to create the conditions for private sector-led economic growth and diversification. While having experienced exceptional levels of growth and the expansion of government services and infrastructure across the country since independence, there has been growing concern, within government and across society at large, with the overall quality and pace of implementation and service delivery. As acknowledged already in Vision 2016: “It is a commonly expressed view in Botswana that the problems that exist are in the main not the result of poor policies – rather they are largely the result of a failure to implement the existing polices. For Botswana to realize its Vision, there will be a need to address implementation problems, and to introduce stringent monitoring mechanisms at every level of the public sector.” Through the leadership of the Office of the President, a variety of public sector reform initiatives have been undertaken. These include results orientation in planning, privatisation and divestiture of state-owned enterprises, transformation of selected government departments into semi-autonomous agencies and introduction of performance management systems across the civil service16, including performance contracts for senior personnel, as well as development of Ministerial strategic plans. A special office, the Government Implementation Coordination Office (GICO), was also created within the OP to monitor implementation across government and to seek solutions for identified bottlenecks in service delivery17. Against this general thrust to enhance service delivery and public sector performance, the decision was taken to make NDP 10 results-driven. The need to tighten the planning process and to focus on strategic outcomes, rather than project inputs and outputs was further driven by recognition of the diminishing revenues accruing from diamonds and the need to diversify the economy. The vulnerability of the country to a single commodity was further brought home by the global recession, which drastically reduced revenue flows and led to the first deficit budget and the need to borrow both locally and internationally to meet expenditure commitments. In preparing NDP 10, it was also recognised that the plan offered the last real opportunity to address the main goals of Vision 2016. To this end, a number of actions have been taken, including: Aligning NDP 10 to the seven pillars of Vision 2016 and setting a cascading macro-results

monitoring framework which brings together outcomes at the level of the Vision, national development priorities, key thematic result areas as well as sector and agency outputs and outcomes.

15 Including the private sector and civil society 16 Including adoption of the balanced scorecard instrument 17 Most recently, GICO has been renamed the National Strategy Office (NSO) to facilitate strategic forward thinking.

6

Adopting principles of Integrated Results-Based Management as a way to link planning, budgeting, human resources management and monitoring and evaluation around the aforementioned results framework.

Combining the divisions responsible for budget preparation and development projects within MFDP into one, in order to encourage more robust results-based project planning and budgeting.

Structuring for the first time consultative processes around Vision-related thematic topics that cut across sector boundaries and stakeholder groups, as a basis for plan development and review, as well as establishment of a multi-stakeholder reference group to oversee the entire plan preparation process18.

Re-alignment of responsibilities for plan preparation with OP assuming a more direct role in coordinating the planning and review process through the newly formed National Strategy Office (NSO).

Other related initiatives that support the results focus and stronger M&E function include the decision to transform the Central Statistics Office from a government department into a semi-autonomous entity. MFDP is also exploring the possibility of introducing a medium term expenditure framework to guide the management of recurrent expenditure based on non-mining revenue projections. MFDP is also reviewing the Audit Act so that the Ministry has greater powers to monitor public expenditure. Meanwhile MLG is leading the preparation of a decentralization policy, which among other things will clarify the role of local government and community based organisations in the national and local planning processes. Other strategies that reinforce the NDP process include the recently adopted Human Resources Strategy that will be implemented through a Human Resources Council. With a 12 year perspective, the strategy will assist both government and the private sector to align education and training systems to the future needs of the economy. The National Aids Coordination Agency has also recently launched the second national strategic framework for aids prevention and treatment while the Ministry of Trade has worked with the private sector to develop a Private Sector Development Strategy. 3.4. Poverty and Millennium Development Goals Poverty reduction has been an implicit policy objective of the Government of Botswana since independence and important strides have been made to reduce both absolute and relative levels of poverty. Data emanating from successive national census and from periodic household and income and expenditure surveys have attempted to track levels of poverty over time using a poverty datum line. However it has been recognized that greater disaggregation of data – both spatial and social – is required to build a more in-depth picture of the nature and extent of poverty across the country. Vision 2016 signaled a more explicit commitment to eradicate poverty as a key development objective and the country is a signatory to the Millennium Declaration in 2000. Although the MDGs have not been adopted as a tool for planning and budgeting purposes, the country does report on progress towards the attainment of the MDGs19. It is nevertheless recognized that there is a close overlap between the MDGs and the aspirations contained in Vision 2016, (which some argue constitutes de facto a local version of the MDGs) and it is acknowledged that the MDGs have helped catalyze thinking around issues of poverty at all levels.

18 Other well-established consultative bodies such as the High Level Consultative Committee (HLCC), which meets twice a year, and its sector-specific consultative committees, which meet four times a year, are also expected to contribute to the broader monitoring effort. 19 A first progress report was prepared in 2004. Currently a second report is under preparation. An MDG costing exercise was carried out with the support of UNDP but this proved unsatisfactory as cost projections were quite unrealistic and were difficult to integrate into established budgeting approaches. However, the MDGs were used as a guide in the preparation of the most recent district and urban development plans.

7

In 2003, MFDP prepared a National Strategy for Poverty Reduction (NSRP) (under portfolio responsibility of Food and Poverty Policy Coordination section of MFDP) to provide more operational guidance on ways to tackle poverty. While helping to frame conceptual and operational dimensions of poverty, it did not succeed in mainstreaming poverty into the policy and planning processes of government, and therefore did not influence spending patterns in NDP 9 or 10 to any significant extent. That said, poverty and issues of sustainable livelihoods have been given greater attention within NDP 10 as compared to previous plans. More significantly, the OP launched on 4th May 2010 a new policy direction on poverty eradication under the direct leadership of the Vice-President. The direction indicates an elevation of the poverty agenda to the highest levels of government and in so doing, closer links established with the afore-mentioned planning and results-based management processes. Meanwhile, Government has commissioned a review of the 2003 NSPR, which is expected to offer recommendations on how to make the NSPR more strategic and should offer inputs to the design of the new OP initiative. 3.5. NDS Challenges The actions being taken to enhance service delivery and to make planning and budgeting more results focused can be regarded as part of a broader and system-wide process of public service performance improvement through the enhancement of individual, organisational and system level capacities. As with all major and multi-pronged reform processes, the changes being undertaken take time both to bed down and to take effect. Respondents noted the need for mind-set change at all levels as well as honing of new skills and adoption of new systems, procedures and approaches. In this regard, the changes being introduced might be regarded as transformational in nature, rather than merely transactional20. Some of the challenges include: Translating the cascading and nascent M&E system into a fully functioning system at all levels.

This is a complex undertaking that requires clarification of what to measure, and how best to measure and, thereafter, development of appropriate instruments, systems and competencies.

Integration of different components of results-based management system (planning, budgeting, human resources etc.) at both central and local government levels21.

Clarification of roles and functions between key central agencies in the management and oversight of the M&E system as part of the effort to increase coherence and coordination. Ensuring that appropriate capacity is in place to support the management of the M&E system across entities such as Vision Council, Government departments as well as within the private sector and civil society.

Implementing specific agency level reforms such as establishment of the Central Statistics Office as a semi-autonomous agency, able to produce relevant data to support evidence-based decision-making.

Broadening awareness and understanding of the reforms (results based management) among members of parliament, councillors and other stakeholders, and exploring ways to engage such stakeholders earlier on in the processes22.

Strengthening institutions responsible for overseeing development of district and urban development plans so that they become more strategic and results focused in line with the national level.

Articulating clear strategies for mainstreaming poverty across all government departments and programmes.

20 Transactional change can be understood as making small adjustments to existing systems and processes whereas transformational change can be understood as making more far reaching changes in the way things are done and therefore requires as much a mind-set change as it does adaptation of skills and routines. 21 For now the district and urban development plans have not embraced the results focus. 22 An important initiative here is operationalising the NGO policy, which Cabinet endorsed in 2004. It is understood the European Commission will fund a project to assist civil society and government to come up with an implementation strategy.

8

4. BROAD ASSESSMENT OF UNDP’S CONTRIBUTION TO NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES CAPACITY STRENGTHENING 4.1. Programming and Priority Setting This section summarises how UNDP has supported Government of Botswana’s efforts to strengthen its national planning processes over the last decade. In so doing it is important to note that UNDP has not addressed capacity development for national development planning as a priority area in either the UNDAF I or UNDAF II planning periods. Rather, the focus of support has been on a number of substantive development areas; poverty, environment, HIV/AIDs and more recently governance23. However, as discussed below, various sub-components of these focal areas have contributed towards strengthening the national planning system. The focal areas emerged from the CCA analyses and resultant consultations between the UN country team and Botswana stakeholders undertaken in preparation of the UNDAFs in 2001 and 2007, and took as their points of departure socio-economic development challenges identified within the NDP 9 and 10 planning processes. Both CCAs, therefore, focused on substantive development challenges, where it was felt the UN country team was well placed to respond, treating public administration (including planning), human resources development and governance more generally, as crosscutting issues that would be taken account of as necessary within thematic/sector programmes24. That said, in the last year of the UNDAF 1 plan period, UNDP was invited by GoB to provide more targeted support to the preparation of NDP 10 in the framework of its Governance programme (see further below). While both CCAs do highlight capacity development challenges related to the substantive development themes identified as priorities25, capacity development is not addressed, either as a development issue in its own right, or in relation to national development planning specifically26. In neither case was a formal capacity assessment undertaken as part of the CCA/UNDAF preparation process. References to capacity challenges are based on more informal observations identified during the preparatory process. In part this reflected a deliberate effort on the part of UN country team to avoid commissioning additional and potentially onerous research and to rely as much as possible on information available from government’s own NDP preparatory process. This was especially so with regard to UNDAF II which was deliberately aligned to the NDP 10 planning process. Doing so avoided running parallel processes and helped ensure that identified priorities were consistent across the NDP and UNDAF. At the same time, given the importance of capacity development to the mandate of the UN system in general and UNDP in particular, the conduct of a capacity assessment could have added real value to the UNDAF process and in so doing usefully complemented work carried out in preparation of the

23 While canvassing the overall development scene in Botswana, the 2001 CCA addressed three main development issues, namely: Poverty, HIV/AIDS and Environmental Degradation 24 The One-UN approach which was introduced as part of the UNDAF 2 process further encourages UN agencies to address those aspects of the UNDAF where they have a clear comparative advantage, and to seek cross-agency synergies where possible. 25 For example, in CCA 1, reference is made to capacity gaps for poverty analysis and public discourse around poverty issues, while CCA 2 identifies the need to strengthen organisational capacity of coordination agencies responsible for the environment and HIV/AIDS, as well as the need to enhance engagement between the Government and civil society. 26 In fact, the focus of both CCAs is on downstream implementation capacity challenges rather than on planning/ policy formulation. For example CCA 1 discusses the challenges of human resources development within the health sector, and implementation constraints within the Central Statistics Office. CCA 2 does go further to flag a number of broader capacity challenges that relate to decentralisation, performance management, corruption and monitoring and evaluation, and civil society.

9

NDP. In part, the absence of a formal capacity assessment reflects the lack of what may be described as a robust and systematic approach to the analysis of capacity issues as a basis for subsequent programme and project design within the UNDP country office (see further below)27. Nevertheless, compared to UNDAF I, UNDAF II has adopted the language of capacity development to a far greater extent with most objectives and outcomes defined in terms of capacity enhancement.

4.2. Engagement around NDS Capacity Strengthening UNDP has therefore addressed NDS capacity development indirectly rather than directly through selected sub-components of its poverty and governance programmes. Both programmes were identified and developed as part of the implementation of UNDAF I and related UNDP Country Programme Document (although Governance was initially treated as a cross-cutting issue), and both programmes will continue to run under UNDAF II28. 4.2.3. The Poverty Programme Under UNDAF 1, a Programme Support Document was developed to guide programme implementation. It structures support across five components29. Two of these have had a bearing on NDS in so far as they have sought to strengthen national capacities for poverty data collection and analysis, as well as to mainstream poverty reduction as a substantive development policy within the national planning process30. Programme implementation began in 2005, after a long gestation period, and in 2008 a 2-year extension was prepared to prepare the ground for a second round of support aligned with the NDP 10 timeframe. Both components have provided support to the MFDP through what was at the time the Rural Development Coordination Division (RDCD) and what is today the Food and Poverty Policy Coordination Section. One component sought to strengthen the Division’s capacity to conduct the analysis of poverty data as well as to promote implementation of the Government’s National Strategy for Poverty Reduction (NSPR) - which UNDP had assisted the Government to prepare in 2003 - through a multi-sector committee on poverty reduction. The other component aimed to strengthen capacity of the Central Statistics Office (CSO), which falls under the MFDP, to carry out statistical analysis of poverty data, building on existing survey instruments notably the Housing, Incomes and Expenditure Survey (HIES). The programme has had mixed results. Capacity development objectives were defined in broad terms anticipating capacity change at both individual (skills enhancement) and organisational levels (mandate, strategy and systems). At the individual level, the intention was to enhance the skills of selected technical officers within the RDCD and CSO to undertake policy analysis and data collection. However, in part due to difficulties in retaining staff once trained, particularly in the case of CSO, and in part due to difficulties in arranging an understudy for the technical assistant assigned to the RDCD, the contribution to individual capacity development has been limited. At the organisational and cross-organisational levels, it is possible to identify aspects of capacity

27 This does not suggest that formal capacity assessments are needed in all situations. The administration of assessment instruments that are perceived as intrusive or simply inappropriate can end up undermining ownership and commitment for change, so their use needs to be carefully considered in each situation. 28 Programme support to the environment and HIV/AIDs, have also included support to the development of national policies and strategies but have concerned primarily the content of these rather than development of individual and organisational capabilities for strategy development. These strategies have not been looked at as part of this assignment. 29 In the revised programme, increased focus will be given to local economic development, and actions to promote economic diversification. It will also work to strengthen capacity of coordination structures responsible for HIV/AIDS response and civil society. 30 A third component assisted the MLG to pilot a Community Resilience Programme that sought to empower communities to prepare their own development plans as an eventual input into district and urban development plans. The programme was only piloted in seven communities and it is not clear how far this experience will be replicated as part of a broader effort to strengthen the overall national planning processes.

10

enhancement. Thus the RDCD and more particularly the Food And Poverty Policy Coordination Section are said to have a clearer strategy to address poverty issues and a framework has been set in place to organise the work of the multi-stakeholder committee on poverty reduction, for which the unit serves as secretariat. Templates have also been developed to enable reporting on poverty-oriented projects identified under the NSPR, while at the CSO, improvements have been made to the principal survey instrument used for poverty analysis, the HIES, now referred to as the Botswana Core Welfare Indicator Survey. However, it has proven difficult to sustain production of the Annual Poverty Report, as a key product of the Food and Poverty Policy Coordination Section, which the technical assistant had helped develop.

In and of themselves, these are worthwhile developments, albeit pitched at a primarily technical level. Their significance for national planning is, however, more difficult to determine. In this respect, it is important to look beyond the contribution of discrete project interventions aimed at the development of specific capacities and to recognise broader processes of engagement that UNDP has entered into with the GoB around the issue of poverty. UNDP has been engaging GoB on issues of poverty for at least the last 15 years and has sought opportunities to encourage GoB to take on a more purposeful approach to poverty. Work on strengthening the HIES survey methodology, seeking to establish a poverty analysis unit within CSO, working with the population and development unit to explore ways of introducing the MDGs to Botswana’s planning and review processes, assisting government to prepare a first national strategy on poverty reduction as well as strengthening the RDCD as focal point within MFDP represent efforts to raise the profile of poverty within the policy making processes of government. Under the new programme, an additional initiative will seek to establish a centre for poverty analysis within the University of Botswana that will be expected to prepare policy relevant research and data as well as encourage broader based participation. That the NSPR is now under review by government and given the more prominent attention paid to poverty within NDP 10, it may be concluded that UNDP has contributed, even if modestly, to raising the profile of poverty and to enhancing technical capacities for evidence-based poverty policy making, monitoring and review. This may be regarded as a positive contribution towards strengthening national capacities for pro-poor planning, monitoring and review. But, equally the limits of external intervention in influencing capacity development and change need to be recognised. The experience of the programme highlights the importance that local ownership and contextual factors play in shaping outcomes. At the organisational level, it is clear that the effectiveness of technical assistance, short-term consultancies and training was limited due to more fundamental organisational issues that both the CSO and RDCD faced31. Equally that while capacity development was the espoused objective of technical assistance support, in practice, host institutions were anxious to draw on technical assistance as an extra pair of hands to help get work done. Building sustainable capacity became then a secondary objective as the focus fell on short-term deliverables. At the policy level, it is noteworthy that the real push to raising the profile of poverty to the highest levels has resulted not from any technical cooperation project but rather from a political decision to raise the profile of poverty eradication as a key priority of the incumbent president. 4.2.4. Governance Programme During implementation of UNDAF I, UNDP proposed to Government the establishment of a self-standing governance programme to address some of the cross-cutting governance and capacity issues that had been identified in the CCA and which could lend support to Government’s on going public

31 In this regard it is noteworthy that the CSO will soon become a semi-autonomous agency with the ability to set more competitive remuneration packages. It is expected that this will allow it to retain professionals and build up a core set of organisational capabilities including for poverty analysis, which the UNDP project had hoped to develop. It should be noted however that UNDP assisted the CSO to develop a national strategy for statistics, which will likely be used as reference as the new organisation takes form.

11

service reforms. The proposed programme took as its point of departure the desire to improve service delivery by enhancing the implementation capacity of various government departments as well as enhancing key system-wide processes. Although focusing on downstream implementation constraints, the programme would also address aspects of national development planning, particularly with respect to monitoring and results-based management. Programme development received support from the UNDP Regional Service Centre in South Africa while the conceptual framework used to guide UNDP’s Southern African Capacity Initiative was also adopted to support programme design. Reaching agreement on the precise nature and scope of the programme however took several years to negotiate, as some of the dimensions under consideration required clarifications as a basis for common understanding. This included ensuring that the proposed programme responded to country context and priorities as well as identifying appropriate entry points that could add real value to government’s on-going reform processes. It was only in 2007 that programme activities began under the overall management of the Office of the President, with the support of technical assistance (national programme coordinator) and oversight provided by a multi-stakeholder steering committee32. The programme has consisted of a large number of sub-components33, which have been implemented by eight different implementing partners. Those most relevant to NDS include: Introduction of integrated results-based management systems across government Strengthening the capacity of the Vision Council to monitor and evaluate implementation of

Vision 2016 Local governance strengthening and development of decentralisation policy Capacity strengthening of Directorate for Public Service Management and Public Service Reform

Unit The programme is relatively young and has only been fully operational for three years. Nevertheless it has recorded some significant successes in terms of capacity development at the “systems” (public service-wide) and to a lesser extent “organisational” levels (ministry, department, agency) 34. The governance programme has functioned primarily as a “facility” offering technical and financial inputs to enable GoB to implement a range of initiatives that form an important part of its wider public sector reform efforts. In this regard, the “facility” was drawn upon by GoB to introduce results-based management principles into NDP 10 including training of involved officers, and worked with the Vision Council, with the assistance of a UN Volunteer to set up a basic computerised M&E system to enable it to track progress on the implementation of the Vision. At the local government level, the facility has assisted MLG and the Botswana Association of Local Authorities to engage local stakeholders around issues of local governance as well as drafting of a long-awaited decentralisation policy. Given the nature of these interventions, it would be premature to expect that capacity has been built, but rather to recognise that a long-term process of capacity development that is tackling challenging and system-wide capacities has been launched and is showing some first results, as has been noted above. As in the case of the poverty programme, the experience of the Governance programme underscores the importance of the following in influencing outcomes: The need for adequate preparatory time to build a common and shared understanding of

programme concepts and objectives

32 Chaired by the Permanent Secretary to the President 33 27 in all 34 Attention here focuses only on those aspects that relate to national development planning. It should be noted however that achievements have been recorded in other parts of the programme; eg assistance to establishment of the Civil Service College, support to review of the Public Service Act, review of case management processes in the judiciary, training of media to report on development issues.

12

The importance of building relationships over time as a basis for open dialogue and exchange The legitimate role of an outside agency to take positions on particular policy issues while

recognising the ultimate decision-making role of the country partner The recognition of the limits of influence any external partner can expect to have on local change

processes, and accordingly the importance of being strategic in terms of where and how interventions are made

The fundamental importance of country ownership and leadership in the conceptualisation and implementation of any change process.

The Government has now commissioned a review of the Programme to assist it in developing the next phase. In part this will provide a framework for aligning any future external partner support behind GoB priorities. UNDP is expected to continue to provide support.

4.3. The Contribution of UNDP to Endogenous Capacity Development This section makes some observations regarding UNDP’s approach to capacity development and highlights some of the challenges and issues that UNDP and Government may wish to consider. Readers are reminded that this analysis is based on a selective review of UNDP interventions related to national development planning and does not necessarily reflect the experiences of other parts of the country programme. A potential strength of UNDPs support in Botswana has been the use of the national execution modality, which gives ownership and responsibility for implementation to the country partner. As a consequence, UNDP’s role is more muted consisting primarily of provision of discrete inputs to what are otherwise government led and managed processes35. While this helps to ensure that Government is the prime mover in the implementation process, it can make it more challenging for UNDP to act and engage strategically for capacity development. In this respect, it has been difficult to fully grasp – based on review of project/ programme documentation - the strategies (theories of change) that UNDP has employed to guide the way it has gone about supporting government’s own capacity development processes36. What is evident is that a mix of technical and financial assistance has been mobilised on the request of government to carry out certain actions. In a number of instances, a full time technical adviser has been mobilised but in the majority of situations funding has been used to procure short-term consultants as well as finance specific activities such as meetings, workshops and training. While this has ensured that UNDP has been responsive to Government requests, it does raise questions regarding UNDP’s core role as a capacity development agency and the associated quality of its support.

International experience has highlighted the need for adopting more robust approaches to capacity development including better appreciation of capacity challenges as a basis for strategic design. Consideration of inputs, such as technical assistance or training should only be considered at the end of the formulation process once a picture of what capacity is required and what strategy is appropriate to achieve it has been articulated. Such a diagnostic and strategic design process needs to be a collective endeavour and suggests the need for an explicit discussion between Government and UNDP about capacity development and in particular the role of technical assistance.

As a development agency with a core mandate to support capacity development, UNDP should be in a position to guide such a dialogue by drawing on international good practice as well as its wide network of expertise. Discussions with country office staff however suggest that additional support from

35 However, the observation was made that this has not always been the case in practice, and that in some instances; initiatives have been treated as if they were UNDP rather than Government managed projects. 36 eg: what level of analysis was carried out as a basis for selecting particular CD support strategies, the assumptions and risks associated with particular change strategies, the kinds of CD results anticipated etc.

13

headquarters to help hone skills around capacity development would be desirable, as it is acknowledged that staff does not necessarily have capacity development expertise, nor share a common view as to what it comprises. While capacity development guidance developed by UNDP headquarters has been drawn upon during project design along side other guidance (eg: on environment, human rights and gender) by country office staff, there has not been a systematic approach to the design of capacity development interventions beyond a general level of analysis37.

It is acknowledged on all sides that technical assistance has not always succeeded in building the capacity of counterpart staff and that all too easily, it performs a primarily gap-filling role meeting short term organisational delivery needs rather than longer term capacity development objectives. It is recognised that the roles technical assistance perform will always straddle implementation and capacity development. However, global experience also demonstrates that the effectiveness of technical assistance for capacity development can be enhanced when a) it forms part of a clear intervention logic and b) there are clear terms of reference that define anticipated capacity development results. Clear Terms of Reference can then be linked to a broader performance framework that sets out the respective roles and responsibilities of technical assistance and the host organisation. These then can form the basis for mutual accountability and performance monitoring between provider and the host entity.

Shifting towards a more robust capacity development approach depends in part on the right institutional incentives being in place. In this regard, the relationship between UNDP and GoB needs to be considered. Unlike elsewhere in Africa, but similar to contexts in South America, the UNDP country office is financially supported by the Government of Botswana to the extent that more than 60% of programme and operational costs are paid by Government, while administrative costs, such as office space are also paid by Government. This has shaped the relationship in terms of how UNDP’s role is perceived. While on the one hand, government’s willingness to finance UNDP suggests its confidence in the contribution UNDP can make to country’s development process, it is also true that UNDP is perceived as much as a service provider as it is a development partner. While Government respondents recognise the value added of UNDP in terms of its network of expertise, and global reputation around particular development themes such as poverty, respondents emphasise the service delivery functions that UNDP is able to provide such as procurement and financial management. The UNDP country office has moreover acknowledged its own tendency to focus more on project administration functions, rather than on substantive policy issues, including capacity development. A number of UNDP and GoB respondents, however, believe that UNDPs real value added would be in engaging country stakeholders around substantive policy discussions and that a shift needs to be made from the current administrative focus.

While emphasising the desirability of strengthening design processes, it is clear that capacity development outcomes depend as much on local contextual factors including leadership and opportunity as they do on good robust design. This raises two additional points.

First, UNDP’s contribution to capacity development in Botswana needs to be looked at over the medium to long term. While it remains important to get design right, particularly as it affects delivery of specific capacity development inputs through project interventions, it can be as important that the organisation develops and maintains a respected and trusted relationship with country stakeholders that is built over time. Good projects and programmes usually emerge out of an on-going relationship where each side is able to put forward proposals and seek consensus around sometimes, controversial policy areas. Both the poverty and governance programmes illustrate the significance of these process dimensions as indeed both programmes emerged after a number of years of dialogue and pilot activities. Country presence ensures access to senior levels of government and an ability to identify “windows” of opportunity for initiating new programmes that can lend support to key government processes. As with any development partner, maintaining relationships over time can be undermined by routine staff transfers, particularly at senior levels. Ensuring a stable workforce, particularly at middle management levels through recruitment of local experts can certainly help maintain those relationships based on local knowledge and networks. Equally important is ensuring that key 37 As earlier noted, this does not necessarily mean an obligatory use of comprehensive capacity assessments in all situations.

14

principles of engagement, including roles and responsibilities in programme, design, implementation and review, are respected and fully understood by all parties.

Second, a balance needs to be struck between investing in highly structured programmes that benefit from all the advantages of detailed design that have been mentioned above, and leaving space to provide flexible and responsive support that meets emerging and unforeseen needs. Ideally both are required. Current planning and budgeting processes linked to the UNDAF and UNDPs Country Programme Document emphasise greater flexibility through the use of annual workplans that are linked loosely to higher order UNDAF outcome areas, rather than on the elaboration of programme support documents. This can indeed ensure that UNDP is able to respond to government requests in a timely manner but risks placing emphasis on inputs rather than necessarily on the strategic design of interventions. A potential risk is that the opportunity for assuring rigorous design, clarity of objectives and change strategy as well as reporting framework is lost as there is no binding document where this information is reflected and signed off on. The relative significance of this issue depends in part on the country context. An argument can be made that in middle-income country contexts where there is clear ownership of change and a clear strategy for managing change, that the role of an outside partner such as UNDP should be no more than mobilisation of discrete high quality inputs. A counter-argument would be that in any circumstance, the design of change strategies needs to be made explicit and the quality of any support provided by an external partner must be based on a substantive discussion of strategy. 5. CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED This brief report has sought to capture the main findings and lessons learned from the review of UNDPs support to capacity strengthening for national development planning in Botswana over the past decade. This final chapter draws together some key conclusions and lessons. 5.1. An Endogenous Change Process A purposeful process of capacity development is being implemented by the Government of Botswana. This process is focused on improving the performance of government departments so as to enhance service delivery, which consecutive governments have identified as a key challenge. This can be understood in the broadest sense as an endogenous capacity development process owned and managed by senior GoB decision makers. While focusing primarily on implementation capacity, Government’s change process is also concerned to make development planning more results focused and accountable. In so doing, government has sought to align NDP 10 to the targets contained in Botswana’s overarching Vision 2016 long-term development strategy as well to mainstream poverty eradication as a central policy objective. The change process includes elements of capacity development at individual, organisational and systems level, although the language of capacity development has not necessarily been used to describe these elements. Actions being undertaken include awareness raising and training of key stakeholders, the development and mainstreaming of new systems and processes, organisational restructuring and enhancement of coordination and consultation mechanisms. 5.2. UNDP Support to Capacity Development for National Development Planning UNDP support to Botswana’s development process is informed by the CCA/ UNDAF process which itself draws on Botswana’s own national development plan preparatory process to identify areas of assistance38. These processes have tended to focus on substantive development challenges, such as

38 The process is also informed by global policy agendas which the UN system is mandated to advance and which need to be reconciled with national development priorities and contexts.

15

HIV/AIDS and the environment, while underlying capacity issues to do with public sector management, human resources development and governance have tended to be treated as crosscutting issues. As a result, national development planning as a substantive development challenge did not emerge as a priority area for UNDP support. However, through its eventual Poverty and later Governance programmes, UNDP has made selective contributions to strengthening national development planning capacity as part of Government’s wider agenda of service delivery enhancement. This contribution includes fielding expertise to assist Government to introduce a system of results-based management across the public service, establishing a mechanism to monitor implementation that embraces Vision 2016 as well as the NDP, and which also gives more focus to poverty analysis and monitoring as a crosscutting theme. Other interventions relevant to national development planning include assistance to the development of the 2nd national strategic plan for HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment, as well as support to strengthening local governance and local planning process. 5.3. Quality and Impact of Support UNDP has channelled its support for national development planning through two principal programme areas – poverty and governance. Support has been selective focusing on particular elements of a complex change process that seeks to transform the very way that government works. For UNDP, as an external agency, operating with limited resources, shaping and influencing such change processes confronts many challenges. Accordingly, a degree of modesty is required in terms of the impact such interventions can be expected to make on endogenous change processes. UNDP has sought to engage Government around policy issues and processes, which it believes itself to be competent to address and which are regarded as adding value to government’s own efforts to improve public service performance. However it is acknowledged that a disproportionate amount of time and effort has been given to administration of project inputs with a commensurate reduction of investment of effort into substantive discussions on policy and strategy. Based on available evidence, it is difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of UNDP support from a capacity development perspective. In this regard, while the language of capacity development has become more visible in planning documents, the approach used to design capacity development interventions remain quite light. Emphasis has been given to ensuring delivery of timely inputs that respond to government requests for support but it less clear how far these inputs are guided by an explicit intervention strategy aimed at bringing about sustainable capacity development. This makes the task of assessing effectiveness all the more difficult. There are clearly examples where capacity development support has yielded tangible results. This has tended to happen when the timing was opportune and where interventions were pitched at the right level and where local ownership was assured. However, in other situations, initiatives may have been less successful than expected, in part due to factors over which the programme may have had little influence – these are indeed the inevitable risks of investing in a change process, in part because they did not enjoy the level of local stakeholder support required. UNDP’s long-standing relationship with GoB creates opportunities to accompany government-led processes and to identify areas where it can lend support. There are examples where through long-term engagement and advocacy, UNDP has been able to prepare the ground for more structured initiatives at a later date. Being able to do so, is facilitated by having staff that is locally recruited, and that understand the local context. In this regard, a good sense of local country dynamics can prove to be as useful as implementing a formal capacity assessment exercise, or drivers of change/ power analysis. But equally it relies on country office leadership being ready to engage government on policy issues, as well as ensuring that country office staff is well placed to support policy dialogue processes.

16

Flexibility is a key quality to enable timely and relevant support to be provided but this should not be at the expense of rigour. There is evidence that perhaps too much attention has been paid to facilitating the delivery of discrete inputs to government rather than ensuring that a solid capacity development intervention strategy is in place to guide and monitor the use of those inputs. As an institution that prides itself on its capacity development expertise, it is critical that the country office is equipped to provide the highest quality of capacity development support that can ensure that interventions are pitched at the right level, the right mix of inputs is provided and that a clear strategy is in place that recognises the mutual responsibilities of country and external partner. It remains to be seen if the recently adopted annual workplans provide adequate opportunity for articulation and monitoring of such strategic considerations. The argument made her for the adoption of more robust approaches to capacity development design is something that should be discussed with government as it is equally important to take account of Government’s own view of UNDP’s value added and the roles that it would like the organisation to play in supporting its own development processes. Currently, it is not clear whether UNDP support is valued primarily for its contribution to long-term capacity development or rather for the delivery of short-term inputs that address more immediate operational needs of partners. It would seem appropriate therefore for UNDP and GoB to organise a more substantive discussion around capacity development as the basis for guiding future support.

17

Annexes

1. List of Persons Interview 2. Documents Consulted

18

ANNEX 1: List of Persons Consulted during Country Case Fieldwork

Government of Botswana Last Name First

Name Role/Title Organisation Division

Gaseitsiwe Disikisela Dep. Secretary (Socio-economic policy)

MFDP Socio-economic Policy

Molefhi Kebabonye Chief Food and Policy Coordinator

MFDP Food and Poverty Policy Coordination Section

Pitso M.R. Performance Management Analyst

OP Public Service Reform Unit

Madikwe Alfred Director, International Economic Policy Coordination

MFDP International Cooperation

Makosha S. Director MFDP Human Resources Planning and Enterprises Development Policy Section

Ndobano K. Dep Secretary, Macro-economic policy

MFDP Macro-economic Policy Division

Moremi M. Chief Economist MFDP Economic and Financial Policy Division

Serame P. Director MFDP Macro-economic Policy Division

Kerekang M Deputy Government Statistician

Central Statistics Office (CSO)

Montshiwa Montshiwa Dep Secretary OP National Governance Programme

Makgonatsotlhe A. Secretary, Defence, Justice and Security

OP

Masimega O. Ag. Dir Budget Administration

MFDP Development Programmes and Budget Administation

Makgwa Jerry Chief Economist, Projects


Maphorisa Christine Head, Monitoring Unit


Radibe R. Director MFDP Rural Development Policy Coordination

Koketso C Head, Food Security MFDP Food and

19

and Poverty Policy Coordination

Poverty Policy Coordination Section

Makgosa Principal Development Officer

MLG Local Government Development

Dibothelo Senior Development officer


Batolomi Principal DDP Coordinator


Leipego K. Principal DDP Coordinator


Baakile T. Director MFDP Population and Development Section

Chalashika L. IEC Coordinator MFDP Population and Development Section

UNDP Country Office - Botswana Name First Name Job / Post

Designation Organisation Division

Moaneng Rebonyebatho Ass. Resident Representative

UNDP Botswana

Edjang Fernando Dep. Country Director

UNDP Botswana

Lwin K-S Resident Representative

UNDP Botswana

Dube N. Planning and Monitoring Analyst

United Nations Botswana

Mukiza R. UN Coordination Specialist

United Nations Botswana

Obuseng Sennye Economist UNDP Botswana Poverty Programme

Non-State Actors Monkge C. Vision 2016

Coordinator Vision 2016 Council Secretariat

Kalake N. Ag. Executive Director

BOCONGO

Melville I. Fundraising and Communications Coordinator

Ditshwanelo

Gaotlhobogwe P. Coordinator Nkaikela Youth Group

Makhumalo O. Project Coordinator – local governance

BOCONGO

20

ANNEX 2: List of Documents / Publications Referred To

AUTHOR TITLE PUBLISHER / DATE

NATURE OF DOCUMENT39

GoB NDP 10 Government Printer 2010

Official Government Report

GoB NDP 9 Government Printer 2003


GoB National Strategy for Poverty Reduction

Ministry of Finance and Development

Planning 2003

Unpublished mimeo

Poverty Strategy Unit, MFDP

Annual Poverty Monitoring Reporting

2006/7

Government of Botswana 2007


Presidential Task Group

Vision 2016 – Towards Prosperity for All

1997 Official Government Report

UNDP / Government of Botswana

Best Practices and Lessons Learnt –

National Governance Programme

No Date Official Government Report

Vision Council Botswana Performance Report

2009

Vision Council Annual Report 08/09 2009

AUTHOR TITLE PUBLISHER / DATE

NATURE OF DOCUMENT

UNS Botswana / Government of

Botswana

UNDAF 2010-2016 Botswana

UNS Botswana / 2009 UN Publication

UNDP Assessment of Development Results -

Botswana

UNDP/ EO / 2009 UN Publication

Italtrend Evaluation of the Programme Support for the Implementation of the National Strategy for Poverty Reduction

Italtrend / 2008 Consultant Report

UNS Botswana / Government of

Botswana

UNDAF 2003-2007 UNS Botswana / 2007 UN Publication

UNDP Draft Country Programme Document – Botswana 2010-2014

UNDP / 2009 UN Publication

UNS Botswana Second Common Country Assessment for Botswana – Final

Report

2007 UN Publication

UNS Botswana Botswana – Towards National Prosperity –

CCA of the UN agencies working in

Botswana

2001 UN Publication

UNDP Botswana GoB- UNDP Cooperation

No Date Unpublished mimeo

39 Official Government report; Development Partner report; Consultant Report; Book; periodical article; unpublished mimeo; UN publication; UNDP office circular / memo.

21

UNDP Country Programme 2003-7

UNDP Botswana PSD Poverty Programme 2 yr extension 2008-9


UNDP Botswana PSD Governance Programme 2005-7


AUTHOR TITLE PUBLISHER /

DATE NATURE OF

DOCUMENT40 European Commission Country Strategy

Paper 2008-13 European Commission

/ 2008 Development Partner

Report

40 Official Government report; Development Partner report; Consultant Report; Book; periodical article; unpublished mimeo; UN publication; UNDP office circular / memo.