Discussion Paper: the Future Role and Position of the CIB Working Group & Minutes

Discussion paper: the future role and position of the CIB Working Group & minutes Drafted as input for the conference call on this topic on December 6 – 15:00 CET

Participants in conference call: Betty de Wachter (VVSG), Sebastien Hamel (FCM), Renée Giroux (FCM), Elena Pierce (FCM), Wouter Boesman (PLATFORMA), Sara Hoeflich (UCLG, Learning Agenda), Najat Zarrouk (UCLG Africa), Emilia Sáiz (UCLG), Peter Knip (VNG International), Daan Stelder (VNG International), Tim Poelman (VNG International) and Jessie Post (VNG International)

1. The Capacity and Institution Building Working Group – its overarching goal and niche

 The Capacity and Institution Building (CIB) Working Group is a technical platform within the World Organization of United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) for professionals of local government associations (LGAs) and local governments (LG) with substantive programs in capacity development and decentralized cooperation.

 Technical Chair of the Working Group is Peter Knip, Director of VNG International. Technical Vice-Chair is Sebastien Hamel, Senior Director of FCM International.

 The overarching goal of this platform is to be a place of inspiration and encouragement, for sharing information and knowledge on various aspects of development cooperation and is meant to contribute to more effective development cooperation programs supporting local governments. It also aims to contribute to achieving more attention and recognition for the role that local governments play in development cooperation, within and outside of UCLG. The CIB Working Group is the successor to the ACB Platform that had previously been formed within the International Union of Local Authorities (IULA).

 The main objectives of the Working Group are the following:

Objective 1: to contribute to more effective development cooperation  fostering information exchange and knowledge sharing on programs implemented by CIB members, developments of interest for the work of CIB members.  stimulating concrete coordination to ensure more effective cooperation and to avoid overlap and duplication between international cooperation programs of LGs and LGAs.

Objective 2: to disseminate and improve development cooperation methodologies  fostering exchange on methodologies of our work to improve the quality of programming. ` Objective 3: to contribute to UCLG advocacy  providing professional advice to UCLG, the UCLG political Committee on Development Cooperation and City Diplomacy (DCCD) and in particular the UCLG Champions on Development Cooperation, to achieve more donor attention for LG development cooperation.  following up on lobby efforts at national level to strengthen UCLG’s advocacy.

Objective 4: to strengthen the CIB network  ensuring increased participation in the CIB network and further highlight the specific roles and complementarities between programs of local government associations and individual cities in development cooperation (activities embedded in the other three objectives).

Topics for discussion  What is the niche of CIB working group? How does it differ from other networks?  Are the overarching goal and the main objectives of the CIB Working Group still relevant?  Has the CIB Working Group been able to reach this overarching goal and main objectives in the past years?

Minutes

VNG International (Peter):  The CIB Working Group started many years ago, within IULA. In the beginning we focused a lot on association capacity building – this got an extra boost through the merger with UTO in 2004, which brought in expertise in this field.  In 2007 we organized a CIB meeting in Brussels, hosted by the Belgians, where we agreed that we would organize CIB annual meetings.  The CIB Working Group has produced some good publications – the FCM publication on aid effectiveness, the development cooperation paper and recently the paper on LGA involvement in national development strategies.  We cannot fulfil all of our ambitions without additional funding.

FCM (Sebastien):  Agenda 2030 and the New Urban Agenda show that there is a strong interest for the critical role of local government in development – local government is a critical actor in tackling global issues. This is likely to also bring about new funding and resources for organizations such as ours. The context of CIB is clearly changing.  Another change in the context of the CIB Working Group is the new leadership in UCLG, which might lead to changes within the world organization as well.  After many years since the founding of CIB, it is perhaps time for a strategic review and to reflect upon the mandate, membership and networks it operates in – that is why we have organized this conference call.

VVSG (Betty):  We very much appreciate the CIB network because it has allowed us to use good publications in our own advocacy and the fact that we could refer to this network, also beyond the European Union (Canadian colleagues).  We feel that on the first objective (coordination) that maybe real coordination was not very successful. Donor criteria and specifications are often so different that it is difficult to talk about real coordination. But sharing information is very important and sharing knowledge is very important; however, real coordination was not really achieved from our point of view. Maybe we should leave this objective from the mandate and talk about information sharing instead.  I think CIB should really (continue to) look into the methodologies regarding M&E and planning. That way we can approve and advance our work in development cooperation.  The role of CIB as an advocacy agency is very important and should be strengthened.  One of the upcoming challenges is how we are going to make a step forward and really work together and share information and knowledge about the SDGs. This is a theme that unites us all and to my understanding and insight it would be very important topic to take on board, as transversal issue in the 4 objectives.

UCLG Learning Agenda (Sara):  The UCLG learning agenda and CIB should definitely be linked. The Champion programme is very useful as well.  One of the big strengths of the CIB Working Group is that it targets local government associations – this is something other committees and working groups do not do.  Regarding the role of local government associations versus networks: UCLG’s clients are the associations. However, many associations are primarily occupied with acting as a communication instrument between local governments and central governments, and not so much participating within international networks, such as the UCLG learning agenda. Is there a way that we can encourage the associations to participate and make more use of these networks? CIB should play a role in this.  It would be good if more CIB members would connect to other, ongoing (UCLG) initiatives and create more outreach. The CIB Working Group secretariat could facilitate linking up of different initiatives from members.  I recognize the issue that there is a big demand for work but no contribution; this is also the case for UCLG learning agenda. Workload lies with the founding members.

UCLG Africa (Najat):  After a decade of valuable work, it might be useful to report what has been achieved.  With regard to the future, we are facing a new context with new agendas that need to be localized: climate change, urban agenda, Agenda 2030.  The CIB Working Group should be a very strong body within UCLG – capacity building and learning are required all around the world. There are so many initiatives in this field and so much funding but very little results for now. The African Academy will work to upgrade what we are doing in this field. The CIB Working Group should also place this discussion at the centre of its (renewed) vision and strategy. Maybe we should develop a roadmap of what CIB can do until the next world congress.  UCLG Africa is currently looking at the needs of local governments regarding implementation of the SDGs; maybe we should organize a physical meeting on this topic.

VNG International (Peter):  Unfortunately, we do currently not have the means and position to develop and work within a broader mandate. Instead, we need to focus on what our added value is within a changed context, taking into account the modest resources we have.

UCLG (Emilia):  It is important to reconsider/review the CIB’s mandate, within the broader context of the world organization and development cooperation in general. These changing contexts should be taken in mind – all development partners are doing this reflection right now. Partnerships need to change, what does this look like? CIB is not an island (within UCLG and broader development context).  We need to be conscious of the fact that the world organization formed an exploratory agenda on the assumption that it should focus mainly on advocacy and contributing to policy and implementation. Actual operation of the development agenda was to be done by members themselves; not necessarily operating together. Within the context of the SDGs, we need to consider if this approach is still valid.  With regard to resources, I do not see the availability of new resources that Sebastien mentions. There is a rumour about new resources available in the context of climate change but I have not seen it internationally; nor at a multi-lateral level.

FCM (Sebastien):  Currently, everybody is looking at how the SDGs and New Urban Agenda should be implemented. We need to consider how to position ourselves. How are we going to hit the road? What is our core added value to this?  The value of CIB is that it is able to bring together practitioners with a lot of experience in municipal development cooperation. We have practical experience in our own countries and abroad that we should build on. The experience from the ground is our added value.  Practitioners have good international, in-depth experience. We have used our experience to make tools, share experience etc. Use our experience to make practical lessons into policy lessons. We need to keep the focus on what practitioners can bring.

PLATFORMA (Wouter):  The new agendas are universal and enormous – how do we create the governance to implement them correctly? Our focus needs to be with the SDGs and how to equip local governments with the capacity to implement them correctly. This should be our primary objective.  Even if the local aspect of the agendas has become more recognised, it remains difficult to convince donors to directly finance local governments.  CIB should take its niche: we need to be very much aware that we are in a small playing field and we need to demarcate our part very clearly.

UCLG (Emilia):  We need to realize that we need to develop a comprehensive narrative of the role of local governments and LGAs in the Agenda 2030. This goes beyond the implementation of SDGs, we should create a narrative around the New Urban Agenda and Climate Agreement, together with local politicians in particular. CIB should define part of this narrative of UCLG (especially related to localizing of SDGs and role of LGAs) and UCLG should resource this.  This will create a clear perspective and niche, for UCLG and its committees and working groups. I encourage to look at CIB in broader context of UCLG and work in other committees/working groups and add to this comprehensive narrative. Role of CIB goes beyond peer-to-peer-learning and city to city diplomacy.

VVSG (Betty):  We remain interested in taking part of the CIB Working Group. As an LGA we are very close to our members and therefore are interested in exchange. For example, our findings on the issue of public procurement. We want to share this within both the PLATFORMA and CIB network.

2. The position of the CIB Working Group within UCLG and in the broader context of networks

 The UCLG CIB Working Group is formally liaised to the political UCLG Committee on Development Cooperation and City Diplomacy (DCCD) and prepares input for this Committee. The work plan of the CIB working Group feeds into that of the DCCD Committee.

 The CIB Working Group also follows the work of the UCLG learning agenda and of the committee on Local Economic Development among other committees. Through its members, the CIB Working Group has a link with all UCLG committees and working groups.

 The CIB work plans of the past years have paid special attention to the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development and Habitat III/the New Urban Agenda; as both will have considerable impact on the work(ing environment) of the CIB members.

 Both Agenda 2030 and the New Urban Agenda recognize the important role of local and regional governments. It is likely that this will have a considerable impact on donor programs, tenders etc. in the next years.

Topics for discussion

CIB Working Group and UCLG  How do we position the working group within UCLG? How can we strengthen the link between the two?  What is the precise relationship with the DCCD and is this committee functioning the way we would like it to function?  How can we link up with initiatives such as the UCLG learning agenda and the Local Financing and Development Committee, for example?  How can we make sure that the CIB Working Group does not become bypassed within UCLG?

CIB Working Group and other networks  How can the CIB working group react to the adoption of new international agendas which underline the role of local governments? There is emerging potential – how can we respond to these developments?  How do we make sure that the CIB Working Group does not become bypassed between other city-to-city, SDG etc. networks. Minutes

FCM (Sebastien):  We need to figure out how we can better help UCLG in its advocating role for more funding, more programmes and more recognition for local governments. As such, we have to make CIB relevant and consolidate our position within the UCLG network.  There is a difference between the work of the UCLG committees and of the work of CIB. The CIB Working Group concerns capacity and institution building activities within development cooperation programmes. We can provide input to the DCCD but potentially also to other committees and working groups. We should discuss this during the retreat in February.  There are a number of networks that are emerging and looking at local governments and cities – some of these are hosted by organizations which are part of our own network – we need to reposition ourselves between and vis-à-vis these networks.  Within UCLG, how can we better leverage to help UCLG to better advocate for more funding, more programs, more recognition for local governments. And how do we make CIB work relevant within UCLG network?  We need to reconsider the position of CIB within UCLG ánd look at how we can better connect with the CIB members. And how we can then link all of this.

VVSG (Betty):  VVSG is also a member of Platforma – I would plea for a very good cooperation between CIB and PLATFORMA.

UCLG Learning Agenda (Sara)  Within the Learning Agenda, the SDGs are the umbrella of all activities. Everything we will be doing (learning, city to city cooperation etc.) is linked to the SDGs. Some of the CIB members, including the Deutsche Staedtetag and the VNG, are quite front-running when it comes to monitoring the implementation of the SDGs. These are interesting processes for other members – how can we apply this to other levels and countries? There is a lot of need for knowledge and topics to be dealt with. The task is very big.  The UCLG learning agenda and CIB should definitely be linked

PLATFORMA (Wouter):  The added value of CIB within UCLG should be that it is a place where you can come with a global perspective on development cooperation.

UCLG (Emilia):  The discussions within CIB are very relevant; discussions that CIB should have regard the overall UCLG organization. We should therefore continue these discussions at the meeting of UCLG committees and working groups in January and during the UCLG retreat in February. Harmony within the work of the world organization and the different working groups is very relevant.  With the aim of localizing the 2030 Agenda, CIB should assist the UCLG members and especially the politicians to shape a the new agenda of UCLG. There is a need for an overall narrative and this is where I see much added value for the Working Group.  UCLG has been able to develop some political leadership in UCLG. To continue, we need to look very critical, but also acknowledge, what we have achieved thus far. We should check with the political leadership if development cooperation is something that’s prioritized. In my opinion, the political leadership needs guidance in setting its priorities. Currently this is not happening. Therefore, I see a critical role for CIB in shaping UCLG leadership.  If the DCCD does not function, we need to shape it into something else. How can we make CIB less dependent on the DCCD committee and more on policy dialogue?

FCM (Sebastien):  I agree with Emilia that CIB can add to the narrative of UCLG: we can use our expertise and experience to strengthen the UCLG narrative. CIB is about development cooperation but can also help to advance themes/topics/subjects of other committees. Therefore, more interaction and better linking with committees and working groups is necessary.

VVSG (Betty):  We felt quite distant from the UCLG committees because we have no politicians involved in them, so for us this connection is not very clear. We always relied on our colleagues, mostly of VNG International, to make sure that the work done by CIB was spread across the concerned committees.  VVSG wants to continue to be part of the CIB network – and also to contribute to the network from the practitioners’ point of view. This is our strength – we are very close to our members as association: we know what’s going on. The exchange between practitioners is crucial and the fact that the membership is broader than the EU, as opposed to PLATFORMA is also an added value.  VVSG has recently worked on the issue of public procurement and ethical criteria in public procurement – it would like to share the results of this innovative approach within PLATFORMA and CIB. Both networks can benefit from these findings (sustainable procurement could be a very interesting topic for the CIB meeting in South Africa too). The same goes for sharing of methodologies and publications. CIB should continue to engage through these kind of outputs.

VNG International (Peter):  Is it possible to have a clear position/role within the world organization? This would be helpful for our efforts in the field.  We think that one of our tasks is to provide input to UCLG’s DCCD committee, which focuses on development cooperation and peace issues, but this committee is not functioning well at this moment. How do we then position ourselves in UCLG?  We are particularly contributing through the delivery of concrete outputs, such as the last development effectiveness publication. Is this what we should focus on?

UCLG Africa (Najat):  Maybe we should consider ourselves a working group with a transversal mission, not limited to development cooperation and peace – but with a broader perspective. 3. Members & ownership

The current members of the CIB Working Group are:

Membership list

AFRICA UCLG Africa Burkina Faso Association of Municipalities of Burkina Faso (AMBF) Kenya Association of Local Government Authorities of Kenya (ALGAK) Mauritania Urban Community of Nouakchott Mali Association of Municipalities of Mali (AMM) Tanzania Association of Local Authorities of Tanzania (ALAT) South Africa City of Durban South African Local Government Association (SALGA) ASIA UCLG Asia Pacific Cambodia National League of Communes/Sangkats (NLC/S) Nepal Assocation of District Development Committees of Nepal (ADDCN) Nepal Municipal Association of Nepal (MuAN) Pakistan Local Councils Association of the Punjab (LCAP) Sri Lanka Federation of Sri Lankan Local Government Authorities (FSLGA) EUROPE Council of the European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR) Belgium Union of Cities and Communes of Wallonia (UVCW) Association of the city and the Municipalities of the Brussels-Capital Region (AVCB) Association of Flemish Cities and Municipalities (VVSG) Denmark Local Government Denmark (LGDK) Finland Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities (AFLRA) France Cités Unies France (CUF) City of Lyon Germany German Cities Association (DST) Italy European Association of Communes, Provinces and Regions (AICCRE) Netherlands VNG International (Chair) Norway Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities (KS) Spain Andalusian Fund of Municipalities for International Solidarity (FAMSI) City Council of Barcelona Provincial Council of Barcelona

Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces (FEMP) Sweden International Centre for Local Democracy (ICLD) SKL International Development Agency (SKL International) Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SALAR) United Kingdom Local Government Association (LGA) LATIN AMERICA Latin American Federation of Cities, Municipalities and Associations (FLACMA) Argentina City of Buenos Aires Bolivia Federation of Associations of Municipalities (FAM) Brazil National Confederation of Municipalities (CNM) National Front of Prefects (FNP) Chili Chilean Association of Municipalities Colombia Federation of Colombian Municipalities (FCM) Agency of International Cooperation and Investment, City of Medellin (ACI) Ecuador Association of Ecuadorian Municipalities (AME) Mexico Association of Municipalities of Mexico (AMMAC) National Federation of Municipalities of Mexico AC (FENAMM) Mexico City MIDDLE EAST AND WEST ASIA UCLG Middle East and West Asia Turkey Union of Municipalities of Turkey (UMT) Palestinian Authority Association of Palestine Local Authorities (APLA) NORTH AMERICA Canada Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) (Vice-Chair) United States of America National League of Cities OBSERVERS Association of International Francophone Mayors (AIMF) Commonwealth Local Government Forum (CLGF) International City/County Management Association (ICMA) PLATFORMA

 Within this group, 10-15 members play an active role in the CIB Working Group.

Current roles (to give an indication):

Role Who? Chair and vice-chair VNG International & FCM Hosting of secretariat VNG International Members financially contributing to CIB in VNG International, FCM, City of Barcelona (& 2016 UCLG) Members financially contributing to CIB in VNG International, FCM, SALGA (& UCLG) 2017 (confirmed) Members which financially contributed in the VVSG, UCVW, LGA, CUF past Usually present at CIB annual meetings: FCM, VNG International, SALGA, Deutsche Staedtetag, VVSG, UCVW, UMT, LGA, CUF, CEMR-PLATFORMA, KS, ICLD

Provided input to CIB newsletter in the past FCM, Deutsche Staedtetag, SALGA, ALAT, year CUF, KS, VNG International, CNM, Mexico City. Contributed to the online community this FCM, FCM Colombia, UCLG, SALGA, LCAP, year PLATFORMA, UMG, Staedtetag

Reacted to survey on LGA involvement in ABELO, UTCC, ECA, NATG, ICALA, AMM, national development stragies (now: CIB RALGA, UALA, SALGA, Municipal Council of policy brief) Mbabane, ALAT, UCT, UAAU, NLC/S Cambodia, NAVDC Nepal, ADDCN, LCAP, LCP, FSLGA, UMT, ACV, SMO, LALRG, VNG, KS, APC, ICMA, ABM, CNM, FNP, FCM Colombia, NULG, AEM, COMURES, FENAMM, AMUPA, CMU. Reacted to survey or contributed otherwise Province of Barcelona, MILE, CNM, UCLG- to CIB publication on Monitoring & MEWA, ICMA, APC, FCM, FNP, Barcelona Evaluation City Council, VVSG, LGDK, KS, UVCW, VNG International. Provided speakers for CIB Working Group AMM, FCM, VNG International, LGA, VVSG, events in Bogotá FNP, SALGA, UMT, CNM, FSLGA.

 Currently, no membership fee is charged. The CIB Working Group secretariat enquires yearly whether CIB members would be willing to contribute to the budget of the following year (either by covering staff hours or by covering ‘hard costs’).

Topics for discussion:

Type of members  How can we create real sense of ownership among the members?  Should we broaden the membership?  Should we continue to focus on LGAs in some of our activities? (as we did through the organization of community fora with LGAs in Bogotá)

Funding  Should we start charging a membership fee to achieve financial sustainability/continuity of the Working Group?  How can we attract external funding?  Should we consider opening up for foundations and philanthropies to contribute financially?

Other  How can we better engage members in the drafting of work plans and budgets, to make sure that the work of the secretariat is in line with the needs of the members?  How do we make ourselves more visible? (for members, potential funders etc.) Is visibility necessary?

Minutes

UCLG Africa (Najat):  The membership seems to be diverse: associations, cities, networks. We should clarify the issue of membership. Each member is realizing a lot in the field – what is the link between the Working Group and all the other work of the associations/organizations?  What role do we see for regions? This is another issue to highlight/clarify.

VNG International (Peter):  There is in fact not a very clear committee/working group structure nor clarity about the membership of the working groups. It’s an open space where members can participate and contribute if they want to. All members of UCLG are welcome.  We are a Working Group for professionals, not for politicians. All our organizations are involved in concrete programmes of capacity development. Within these programmes, we sit around the table with local government, LGAs and donor agencies to listen to and discuss the needs of local governments. The DCCD committee works on the political level.  There is a substantial group of members that would like to continue to work for/with CIB. We also need to open for newcomers.  We always had the wish that the regional sections of UCLG participate in CIB. ASPAC, PLATFORMA and UCLG MEWA (sometimes) participate. We are happy to see that UCLG Africa also shows interest.  Should we also open up membership for other kinds of organizations, such as foundations? Or other networks? Should we also invite Secretary Generals to CIB meetings?

VVSG (Betty):  For the purpose of advocacy, it is important that the CIB broadens its network to include more colleagues from Africa, Asia and Latin America so that it has a really strong international network.

UCLG Learning Agenda (Sara):  It is sometimes difficult to get CIB members to work together. It would be good if more CIB members would connect to ongoing initiatives and create more outreach.  There should be more alignment with LGAs from the South  Link to associations which are already active in your organizations’ development cooperation programmes, such as the associations in Sri Lanka and Cambodia. Maybe they have (financial) difficulties to participate in the network and difficulties to see their work beyond their own programme.

PLATFORMA (Wouter):  We need to consider what way we should interact with each other and with whom. Do we only engage with LGAs, or also local governments? We need to innovate here.  Our diverse network is something that might be worth investing in more, in order to foster exchange.

UCLG (Emilia):  We currently have a loose structure for committees and working groups. There is a tendency to continue with this but there are also critics of the current system, in which a small group of members invests a lot.  We need to redefine the mechanism of working groups – maybe a working group is not the ideal structure for CIB. How can we retain areas and format of work that are interesting, but might not be functioning right now in the right format. Also, the financing mechanism should be reviewed.  CIB should find out what works best. As it is now, it is a good network of practitioners, and more of them would join if there were more specific tasks and responsibilities. More active membership activity might not be realistic.

4. Follow-up/next steps

VNG International (Jessie) & FCM (Sebastien)  The minutes of this meeting will be shared before the holidays; an updated version of the discussion paper will be drafted in January 2017.  The strategic review of the role and position of the CIB Working Group will be added to the draft work plan for 2017, as an overarching activity.  The strategic plan – which will be based on the discussion paper, this conference call and other member consultations - will be presented to the CIB members at different occasions (meeting with UCLG committees and working groups, UCLG retreat, UCLG executive bureau) and validated and adopted at the CIB annual meeting in South Africa (dates to be confirmed shortly).  If deemed relevant, the strategic plan can be shared with the broader UCLG network at the UCLG World Council.  A draft, updated work plan for 2017 will be shared with you shortly for feedback.

UCLG (Emilia)  It would be great if CIB can take the lead within the UCLG retreat and share ideas and views on linking up committees and working groups, among other.