ivco 2010 innovative approaches

8/8/2019 IVCO 2010 Innovative Approaches

1/19

With a special

focus on Asia

Innovative approaches to voluntarismand South to South cooperation


2/19

Exchange within institutional partnerships Public/semi public sector Private sector NGO/CSO

Reciprocal All partners both send and receive at the same time

Exchange in all directions South to North, North to South and South to South

4 main programmes , approx 550 volunteers/year Result areas/Objectives for change

Capacity/skills Networking Both on institutional and individual level

Global learning

The reciprocal model of FK Norway


3/19

FK South SouthSome facts and figures 174 participants exchanged South to South in 2009

(98 in Africa / 65 in Asia / 11 in Latin-America)

Total 1045 participants in south to south exchange since we started the programme in 2001


4/19

FK Norway South South Asia16 projects, 68 institutions in: Bangladesh Bhutan

Cambodia China India Indonesia Laos Malaysia Mongolia Myanmar

Nepal Pakistan

Philippines Sri Lanka Thailand Vietnam Maldives


5/19

FK South SouthSectors

Environment Good governance, incl.

HR and media Women/gender equality Business development,

incl. agriculture Culture and sports Health, incl HIV/AIDS Peace building


6/19

The reciprocal model of FK Norway

Partners themselves define objectives and capacity needs, recruit Horizontal, equitable partnerships and mutual accountability Promotes national and regional networking


7/19

- Funding- Training- Monitoring

Vietnam Malaysia Thailand Cambodia Philippines Indonesia

Objectives and results Administration of funds, reports Facilitate exchanges and partnership

meetings


8/19

Results AWCF

Individual level

Institutional level


9/19

Results FK Individual level

North-South - friendship

- social responsibility- widened field of interest

South-South - friendship- career development- social responsibility


10/19

Results FK Institutional level

North-South - aware of other cultural traits (77%)- increased knowledge of North /South

issues (70%)

South-South - aware of other cultural traits (84%)- improvement of technical skills (74%)

- more international exposure (72%)- more motivated staff (70%)


11/19

Sending Receiving, benefits The individual volunteer/participant seems to

have the most benefit from an exchange Organizations report that they gain more in

terms of capacity building and institutionalizingof skills transfer when sending volunteers, than

when receiving .

=> The two main result areas of internationalexchange gain the sending partner the most


12/19

South-South cooperation FK

Reciprocity/Mutuality has been moreeffective than our earlier one - way sending

Stronger adaptation to local contexts Stronger ownership and relevance of exchange More cost-effective External evaulation 2006: S-S more relevant and

efficient method of capacity building in the globalSouth than traditional N-S volunteer programme


13/19

Challenges Retaining staff who have

been on exchange Asymmetries also in

South-South cooperation Can be political challenge

to defend in the North(public opinion, among decision

makers)


14/19

South-South cooperation Increasing interest for this area within the international

discourse on aid effectiveness and developmentcooperation (OECD, UNDP, regional bodies in global South etc)

Not conditional, not charity-driven. Based on more mutualeconomic/political interest. Political Trade/infrastructure development

Education, public health, social protection and othertechnical cooperation

Integrating MDGs, and particularly poverty reduction Increasing focus on (renewable) energy + energy security


15/19

South-South cooperationBUT South within the South? Is South-South development cooperation essentially

different from North-driven ODA, if so when andhow?

Some issues of lack of transparency/information Is there adherence to aid effectiveness principles,

social and environmental standards? Lacking inclusion of CSO


16/19

Discourse on SSC in the North South-South trade increasing proportionally faster than

North-South (OECD) Strong inclusion into foreign and trade policy agendas

in the North (e.g foreign direct investments) Triangular cooperation Will it redefine the shape of traditional North

development cooperation?


17/19

Recommendations to IVOs

Tap into national foreign policy debates ALSO when it comes to the emerging South-

South relations.

Lobby for SS volunteerism as an innovative,cost-effective and politically opportune area of development cooperation


18/19

Recommendations to IVOs

FORUM would also benefit from following

the SSC-debates within multinational fora.

Thematic group or network within FORUM forSouth-South and triangular volunteerism?


19/19

For more case stories, please check:OECD Task Force on South-South Cooperationhttp://www.impactalliance.org/ev_en.php?ID=49886_201&ID2=DO_TOPIC(FK Norway Asia Health Research project)andhttp://www.impactalliance.org/ev_en.php?ID=49888_201&ID2=DO_TOPIC(FK Norway Southern Africa Water Cooperation Project)

www.fredskorpset.no

www.fk-world.com
http://www.impactalliance.org/ev_en.php?ID=49886_201&ID2=DO_TOPIChttp://www.impactalliance.org/ev_en.php?ID=49888_201&ID2=DO_TOPIChttp://www.fredskorpset.no/http://www.fk-world.com/http://www.fk-world.com/http://www.fk-world.com/http://www.fk-world.com/http://www.fredskorpset.no/http://www.impactalliance.org/ev_en.php?ID=49888_201&ID2=DO_TOPIChttp://www.impactalliance.org/ev_en.php?ID=49886_201&ID2=DO_TOPIC

ivco 2010 innovative approaches

Documents