33090 Capacity Development b r i e f s S H A R I N G K N O W L E D G E A N D L E S S O N S L E A R N E D COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE FOR LOCAL CAPACITY IN CENTRAL ASIA: The Community Empowerment Network Erik Caldwell Johnson, Knowledge Management Officer, WBIKO In 2002 the World Bank Institute and Europe and Central Asia Region (ECA) launched the Community Empowerment Network (CEN): four national networks linked through regional activities that would build the capacity of communities and development partners to implement community-dri- ven development (CDD) projects. CEN has to date had clear successes as well as difficulties--particu- larly in linkage to World Bank operations and improving local coordination with multiple donors. CEN's experience points to specific lessons that could be applied in creating other communities of prac- tice, for example, emphasizing peer review among countries and establishing clear indicators of progress as well as a number of specific administrative lessons. The World Bank has invested millions of dollars in (ECSSD) launched the CEN in late 2002 as a commu- the past decade in knowledge sharing to improve nity of practice for CDD practitioners. organizational performance. This is based on a belief in the value of "situational" or "social" learning: CEN: A Tool for Scaling up CDD learning that takes place through informal interaction "Community-driven development" (CDD) is a term with other professionals. Such learning is facilitated used to describe projects that encourage local commu- through informal groups of professionals who have a nities to control the direction of their own develop- real need to know what each other knows. Often ment from project conception through implementation referred to as "communities of practice," these groups and evaluation. Such projects are seen as a way of allow practitioners to find out what works, what does filling gaps in local service delivery and ensuring not, and how to solve common problems. these services respond directly to the needs of the The World Bank has used this approach internally poor. Recognizing that projects promoting CDD often through "Thematic Groups" to strengthen staff capac- demonstrate higher levels of development effective- ity, but has only promoted communities of practice in ness, the World Bank embarked on a program to a limited way in client learning programs, chiefly "scale up" its work in this area. Central Asia was cho- through the World Bank Institute (WBI). WBI has sen as a pilot subregion for carrying this out in the expanded the application of communities of practice ECA Region. beyond organizational boundaries, focusing heavily In addition to the challenges presented by the still on cross-national knowledge exchange through new largely centralized, post-communist states, one of the distance learning technologies: videoconferencing, main obstacles to scaling up CDD in Central Asia was electronic discussions, e-mail lists, and online the lack of knowledge on how best to implement such courses. projects. Although several CDD projects had been One example for which WBI has facilitated network- launched in the relatively short time the Bank has ing and knowledge exchange at the regional, national, been active in the region, not enough time had passed and community levels is the Community to capture lessons from this experience. In response, Empowerment Network for Azerbaijan, Kyrgyz WBI and ECSSD initiated CEN in late 2002 to tap the Republic, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. WBI and the experience of CDD project managers from the Bank, Europe and Central Asia Social Development unit other donor agencies, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), community-based organizations (CBOs), and M A R C H 2 0 0 5 NUMBER 11 other institutions to enhance the effectiveness of Counterpart Tajikistan (first partner) and UNDP Bank projects and facilitate the process of scaling up. Communities Program (second partner); The Norwegian government provided initial project Azerbaijan: Save the Children Azerbaijan (first funding of $470,000 for two years. The Japanese, partner) and Community Development Center Swiss, and Turkish governments provided additional (second partner). funding, raising total financing closer to $700,000 in · Steering group. Using WBI criteria, the World three years. Although WBI has managed the project, Bank, UNDP, and the national partner selected a at least one member of each country office has pro- multistakeholder group to design and approve the vided local supervision and guidance. action plan and budget and approve an annual What Is CEN? year-end evaluation prepared by the national partner. The CEN has well-defined goals, networking activi- ties, and guiding principles: · Action plan. Each country had broad flexibility in Goals. From the outset, the CEN was intended to designing its national action plan. The national build the capacity of communities and their develop- partner convened the steering group and other ment partners to design and deliver more effective relevant stakeholders to generate and distill ideas CDD projects that respond to the poor. This goal into a document for debate and approval by the included efforts to: increase understanding of what steering group. Box 1 lists some of the activities makes CDD projects succeed or fail; enhance access to included in action plans. relevant capacity development materials; and enhance · Mapping exercise. In the first year, national part- coordination among development partners on capacity ners undertook a mapping exercise to identify all development activities. international and national groups working on National networks. CEN was designed to provide CDD activities. The resulting databases have overall program structure, but only light guidance on helped CDD practitioners understand better who is working in their issue area. Box 1 Regional networking. To complement national Examples of Action Plan Activities capacity development, WBI has brought the national networks together to share experiences and learn · Monthly newsletters (electronic and print) from each other through the following: · TV trailers highlighting successful · Monthly videoconferences on various topics, pro- community-based initiatives viding WBI "virtual supervision" of the project · Radio programs · Multilingual websites and allowing national partners to interact and · A community-produced national newspaper provide ongoing feedback on project activities · A play for youth · Annual conference at which country delegations · Customized training for communities in several topics (i.e. social partnership) share past successes and challenges and strate- · Large national conferences on CDD gize for the coming year · Community-to-community field visits to visit · Regional web site with content from all four successful projects · Training communities facilitators country web sites and other relevant Russian- · Community mobilizations manuals language web sites · E-newsletter to a range of subscribers to draw national-level activities. National-level stakeholders attention to web site content and reach audiences received full authority to determine which activities to with limited web access carry out in each country, helping to build local, group "ownership" and increase the relevance of the Guiding principles. In consultation with CEN part- activities. ners and stakeholders, WBI developed a set of guid- ing principles to help ensure application of lessons Each national network includes the following: learned from other communities of practice. The fol- · National partner. A local NGO from each country lowing principles were inserted into the activity manages each national network by facilitating agreement signed between WBI and each national development of annual action plans, coordinating partner: implementation of network activities, managing · Local ownership. CEN stakeholders determine funds, reporting on project activities, chairing their own priorities and activities in each country, meetings, and so on. The national partners for and national partners work to ensure that steer- each country are: Kyrgyz Republic: Counterpart ing groups and other key stakeholders strongly Sheriktesh; Uzbekistan: Business Women's support action plans. Association of Uzbekistan; Tajikistan: M A R C H 2 0 0 5 NUMBER 11 · Multistakeholder participation/perspectives. · Local partnership. Each of the CEN networks suc- Community members interact with a variety of cessfully collaborated with other related groups, stakeholders to meet their needs, so steering mainly by sharing responsibilities for action plan groups were designed to represent their diverse activities (and sharing funds), exploiting syner- views. gies among groups working in CDD. · Linkage to World Bank country activities. To · Building institutional capacity for CDD. Lacking ensure that CEN supported the ECA Region's strong, local CDD capacity development groups, efforts to scale up CDD, efforts were made to CEN partners in Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan ensure that each national action plan added value became more prominent leaders in this field. to World Bank country activities. Activities that worked moderately well: · Partnerships to leverage knowledge and resources. National partners were encouraged to · Government involvement. Most of the national collaborate with other local organizations to networks found it difficult to engage government deliver specific activities and identify other officials in the CEN, due to lack of interest or sources of funding to ensure sustainability. antagonism toward CDD and NGOs in general. Cooperation with the Kyrgyz CDF Secretariat was · Informal structure. The CEN was designed as an strong, as well as with the Azeri PRSP unit. informal "networking" activity. There are no membership criteria, no special bank accounts, · Regional exchange. Face-to-face interaction was nor by-laws for its operation. most successful in facilitating interactions between national networks, whereas videoconfer- Formative Evaluation Results encing inspired less cross-country exchanges, and In June 2004 WBI commissioned consultants Asyl the e-mail list only saw only modest use. Undeland (Tajikistan and Uzbekistan) and Shahkruh · Linkage to World Bank operations. Despite inclu- Makhkamdjanov (Azerbaijan and Kyrgyz Republic) to sion of World Bank country staff in each steering evaluate the first 18 months of CEN. Some of their group, linkage between CEN and World Bank key findings apply to all and others to only some of operations was not as strong as was hoped. the four countries: Nonetheless, substantial partnerships were Activities that worked well: formed to support the Kyrgyz Village Investment Project, National Social Investment Fund of · Public awareness building. Via TV trailers, radio Tajikistan, as well as emerging support to the shows, and print media, the CEN has provided PRSP process in Uzbekistan and the Azerbaijan community members with confidence and ideas Rural Investment Project. for becoming active in local development. · Community-to-community knowledge sharing. Activities that did not work so well: Visits among communities helped expose their · Donor coordination. The CEN offered an opportu- members to successful projects in other communi- nity to alleviate pressure from competing interests ties and led to replication of several activities in and approaches of donors. On the whole, competi- other communities (For an example, see box 2). tiveness among donors and their approaches has not noticeably changed. · Objectives and evaluation. National networks Box 2 found measurement of progress difficult. Community-to-Community Inspiration Indicators for measuring changes in community From Talas to Kant activities were not sufficiently established and remain a complicated area for assessing progress. Counterpart Sheriktesh organized a gathering of around 300 people in the Talas Province from CBOs, local govern- · Regular interaction among practitioners. Due to ments, Ayl Okmotu, and Civil Society Support Centers. The competing priorities, most international agencies group learned about various community-based projects and initiatives in the province. As a result, participants organized were not as involved in CEN activities as local their own community-to-community exchange visits using community members. their own resources. Four communities in Kant developed a proposal on networking to address youth problems. The Lessons for Better Communities of Practice leader of the CBO "Krasnaya Rechka," who participated in the field visit to Talas, decided to launch a microcredit program Although the CEN operates in a unique subject area in her own village. According to her, more then 15 people in and region, the following lessons could still be applied the village have obtained credits for the development of small businesses. to enhance the effectiveness of CEN and other kinds of communities of practice: · Emphasize peer review among countries. · Strike a balance between community of practice Although transaction costs may be high, peer priority setting and Bank country strategy. review has great value, whether through funding Although involvement of World Bank country incentives or structured activities. Web and video- staff is essential, too much may diminish owner- conferencing could reduce transaction costs. ship by community members. · Focus on national or community organizations In addition, an important, yet elusive issue to exam- and less on busy international agencies. ine in future application of communities of practice is Indigenous groups are usually much more eager cost-benefit analysis. Significant funds are spent on to take the time to learn from each other. A training with a potentially substantial cost for each dynamic working group of local practitioners will participant. But, how do communities of practice com- likely attract representatives of international pare in terms of value for money? Do participants agencies. Case studies to examine for lessons on learn more for less? This is a question for future networking among local governments exist in examination. The answer may or may not build an Latin America (i.e., Ayuda Urbana) and East even stronger case for applying this new learning Asia. methodology. · Establish clear indicators of progress. Maintaining interest of members is difficult if Peer Reviewers: Lesley-Ann Shneier, Senior they do not see what they are accomplishing. Learning Officer, SECCA and Marsha Olive, Lead Every effort should be made to measure commu- Knowledge and Learning Officer, ECAVP nity development, however difficult. The Bank's Thematic Group Toolkit provides one useful References resource for ideas, as does private sector-oriented assessments produced by the American Blázquez, Juan Ancín . 2005. "Communities of Practice: WBI Tools for Sustained Learning." World Bank, Productivity and Quality Center. Washington, D.C. The following lessons emerged from administration Wenger, Etienne. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, of funding and WBI support: Meaning and Identity. 2002. Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. · Promote flexibility in contracts or agreements to "The Context for Community Driven Development in Central allow for multiyear implementation and adjust- Asia: Local Institutions and Social Capital in Kyrgyz ments in activities to reflect changing circum- Republic, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan." World Bank, ECSSD, stances. Washington, D.C. http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library/106415/ · Take a long-term approach to evaluate "social istanbul/pdf/community_driven_development_asia.pdf capital" that has been built (i.e., social network Community Empowerment Network (web site)Center for analysis). The impact of communities of practice Economic Research, Uzbekistan. cannot be measured based on the number of peo- http://www.communityempowerment.net ple who participate. About World Bank Institute (WBI): Unleashing the Power of Knowledge to Enable a World Free of Poverty WBI helps people, institutions, and countries to diagnose problems that keep communities poor, to make informed choices to solve those problems, and to share what they learn with others. Through traditional and distance learning methods, WBI and its partners in many countries deliver knowledge-based options to policymakers, technical experts, business and community leaders, and civil society stakeholders; fos- tering analytical and networking skills to help them make sound decisions, design effective socioeconomic policies and programs, and unleash the productive potential of their societies. WBI Contacts: Mark Nelson; Program Manager, Capacity Development Resource Center Tel: 202-458-8041, Email: mnelson1@worldbank.org Wema J. Kategile; Operations Analyst Tel: 202-473-7811, E-mail: wkategile@worldbank.org Visit our website for more information and download the electronic copies of all Capacity Development Briefs: http://www.worldbank.org/capacity M A R C H 2 0 0 5 NUMBER 11 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 0 3 N U M B E R 1