10 RESILIENCE PROGRAMMING AMONG NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS


adapt to different shocks and stresses, including conflict, political instability, population pressure, and global finan- cial crises. NGO efforts to strengthen adaptive capacity oſten include adoption of “climate-smart” agricultural practices, improved access to markets and information, education and skills training to enable off-farm income generation, provision of infrastructure (for example, roads, water), and improved local governance based on effective participation of vulnerable populations (women, ethnic minorities, the poor, and others). NGO initiatives can be successful at enhancing ab-


sorptive and adaptive capacities of individuals, house- holds, and communities and at enhancing transformative capacity at the local level. It appears less common (and more difficult), however, for them to emphasize initia- tives that enhance transformative capacities at the coun- try level, which would be needed in order to facilitate systemic changes in the structural constraints (such as those of ecological, political, economic, or social struc- tures) contributing to food and livelihood insecurity. NGOs may influence transformative capacity at the dis- trict level by working with local governments, but they are typically not well placed to impact national govern- ment policies, processes, and systems, where the changes are often most needed. Rather, other stakeholders, such as UN actors and donors, may be better placed to ad- dress various aspects of transformative capacity. Efforts to enhance country-level transformative capacity can be more effectively implemented where NGOs are part of a larger task force that includes such stakeholders.


Regional strategies


Tough not yet widely adopted by NGOs, a regional strategy may enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of resilience capacity–building programming. Mercy Corps recently developed regional resilience strategies for East Africa (TANGO International 2013a) and for West and central Africa (TANGO International 2013b). CRS has also devel- oped a regional strategy for West Africa, as evidenced through its Scaling-Up Resilience to Climate Extremes for 1 Million People (SUR1M) project, implemented as part of the DFID- funded BRCED initiative1


and consisting of a consortium


of international and national agencies, coordinated with the national governments of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger.


Regional strategies may allow NGOs to align resources,


build staff capacity, and address cross-country themes that require systems thinking and approaches (for example, cross-border conflicts, large-scale natural disasters, trans- boundary migration). While a global strategy supports the regional strategy, it tends to be thematic, focusing on broad themes that might be relevant anywhere (for example, capacity building, integrated programming, part- nerships). A regional strategy may beter allow for contex- tualization of a defined area, which is required for good problem analysis (particularly at a systems level) and programming. Because many different actors oſten imple- ment similar program initiatives within a single region, a regional strategy provides significant opportunities for cross-learning. Tere are, however, limits to what should constitute a region, such as physical or political boundar- ies, agroecological zones, culture, language, and so on. Tus, regional strategies are likely to differ from each other based on contextual factors unique to each.


Collaborative Partnerships and Approaches to Knowledge Management


Moving beyond conceptual and sector-specific debates related to resilience capacity, many NGOs have joined development policy and research organizations in acknowledging that it is impossible for any single actor to facilitate comprehensive, cross-sectoral action at each layer of society to effectively respond to complex and rapidly evolving risk landscapes (TANGO International 2011). In response, NGOs have entered into strategic partnerships with each other, with donors, and with policy organizations (such as the Resilience Learning Consortium and the Community-Managed Disaster Risk Reduction Learning Alliance; see Opportunities section below) to clarify programming priorities based on primary research. The common purposes of these collaborations are to integrate resilience theory into program design, test the efficiency and effectiveness of implementation at the ground level, and forecast the longer-term impact of different approaches to enhancing resilience among vulnerable populations. In this sense, knowledge management is different from traditional monitoring and evaluation (M&E) in that rather than focusing on specific indicators of project performance, it


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45