analysis - ecdpm

European Centre for Development Policy ManagementCentre européen de gestion des politiques de développement

John SaxbyPretoria, South Africa

The growth of capacity in IUCN in Asia

Anne Rademacher

A case study prepared for the project ‘Capacity, Change and Performance’

Discussion Paper No 57MDecember 2005

Analysis

The lack of capacity in low-income countries is one of the mainconstraints to achieving the Millennium Development Goals.Even practitioners confess to having only a limitedunderstanding of how capacity actually develops. In 2002, thechair of Govnet, the Network on Governance and CapacityDevelopment of the OECD, asked the European Centre forDevelopment Policy Management (ECDPM) in Maastricht, theNetherlands to undertake a study of how organisations andsystems, mainly in developing countries, have succeeded inbuilding their capacity and improving performance. Theresulting study focuses on the endogenous process of capacitydevelopment - the process of change from the perspective ofthose undergoing the change. The study examines the factorsthat encourage it, how it differs from one context to another,and why efforts to develop capacity have been more successfulin some contexts than in others.

The study consists of about 20 field cases carried out accordingto a methodological framework with seven components, asfollows:• Capabilities: How do the capabilities of a group,

organisation or network feed into organisational capacity?• Endogenous change and adaptation: How do processes of

change take place within an organisation or system? • Performance: What has the organisation or system

accomplished or is it now able to deliver? The focus here ison assessing the effectiveness of the process of capacitydevelopment rather than on impact, which will beapparent only in the long term.

External context Stakeholders

Internal features andresources

External intervention

The simplified analytical framework

Co r e va r i a b l e s

Capabilities

EndogenousChange andadaptation

Performance

Study of Capacity, Change and PerformanceNotes on the methodology

• External context: How has the external context - thehistorical, cultural, political and institutional environment,and the constraints and opportunities they create - influenced the capacity and performance of theorganisation or system?

• Stakeholders: What has been the influence of stakeholderssuch as beneficiaries, suppliers and supporters, and theirdifferent interests, expectations, modes of behaviour,resources, interrelationships and intensity of involvement?

• External interventions: How have outsiders influenced theprocess of change?

• Internal features and key resources: What are the patternsof internal features such as formal and informal roles,structures, resources, culture, strategies and values, andwhat influence have they had at both the organisationaland multi-organisational levels?

The outputs of the study will include about 20 case studyreports, an annotated review of the literature, a set ofassessment tools, and various thematic papers to stimulatenew thinking and practices about capacity development. Thesynthesis report summarising the results of the case studies willbe published in 2005.

The results of the study, interim reports and an elaboratedmethodology can be consulted at www.capacity.org orwww.ecdpm.org. For further information, please contactMs Heather Baser ([email protected]).

The growth of capacity in IUCN in Asia

Anne Rademacher and the IUCN in Asia Senior Management Team

A case study prepared for the project 'Capacity, Change and Performance'

November 2005

AcknowledgementsThis case study is the result of a collaborative effort between the IUCN in Asia management team and AnneRademacher, Assistant Professor in the Department of Social and Cultural Analysis, New York University.Four members of the IUCN management team - Aban Marker Kabraji, Stella Jafri, Nikhat Sattar and TehseenaRafi - made considerable contributions to the research, analysis and writing of the study. Other managersassisted by providing survey and interview responses, and participating in a workshop held at the IUCN AsiaRegional Office in Bangkok in March 2005.

TerminologyFollowing Morgan (2005), this study understands 'capacity' as the ability to perform, or to create or delivervalue. As a concept, capacity refers to the potential to act, as opposed to 'performance', which refers to the execution or implementation of some task. To assess capacity is, therefore, to consider the overall ability of asystem to perform. 'Capability', by comparison, refers to a collective ability to do a specific task, such as learn-ing. Finally, 'competence' refers to individual ability or mastery.

Capacity Study Analysis Discussion Paper No. 57M

iii

ContentsAcknowledgements iiTerminology iiAcronyms iv

Summary v

1. IUCN in Asia: the context and the challenge 11.1 IUCN: a global union 11.2 Conservation in the Asia Region 11.3 Constituency in the Asia Region: members and partners 21.4 Activities of IUCN in Asia 31.5 People and performance 41.6 IUCN in Asia as a case study 41.7 Assessing IUCN in Asia's capacity today 5

2. Creating a regional programme 82.1 Decentralisation and regionalisation 82.2 Positioning IUCN in Asia 92.3 Building a regional institution in a dynamic context 112.4 A strategic mindset for change 122.5 The role of leadership 132.6 The role of collaboration: collective strategic thinking 152.7 Scaling up from country to region: IUCN in Pakistan

and IUCN in Asia 15

3. Crafting coherence 163.1 Defining regional coherence in a multinational context 173.3 Building coherence through principles and structures 183.4 Creating the capacity for learning 213.5 Specific capabilities and the evolution of capacity in

IUCN in Asia 21

4. Conclusion 22

Appendix: IUCN in Asia 24

References 28

List of individuals consulted 30

The European Centre forDevelopment Policy ManagementOnze Lieve Vrouweplein 21NL-6211 HE Maastricht, The Netherlands Tel +31 (0)43 350 29 00Fax +31 (0)43 350 29 [email protected] www.ecdpm.org

Discussion Paper No. 57M Capacity Study Analysis

iv

ADB Asian Development BankAPEC Asia-Pacific Economic CooperationARD Asia Regional Directorate ARO Asia Regional OfficeASEAN Association of Southeast Asian NationsAWG Asia Working GroupCIDA Canadian International Development AgencyDGIS Directorate General for Development Cooperation, the NetherlandsECDPM European Centre for Development Policy ManagementELG Ecosystem and Livelihood GroupGEF Global Environment Facility MRC Mekong River CommissionNorad Norwegian Agency for Development CooperationICIMOD International Center for Integrated Mountain DevelopmentIUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature - the World Conservation UnionIUCN-P International Union for the Conservation of Nature PakistanPEP Pakistan Environment Programme SAARC South Asia Association for Regional CooperationSACEP South Asia Cooperative Environment ProgrammeSDC Swiss Agency for Development and CooperationSida Swedish International Development AgencyUN United NationsUNDP United Nations Development ProgrammeUNEP United Nations Environment Programme

Acronyms


v

SummaryThis study explores the growth of capacity in IUCN inAsia over the period from its inception in 1995 toearly 2005, with the aim of broadly assessing howcapacity was built, maintained and strengthenedover that period. This regional component of IUCN-the World Conservation Union employs 445 staffmembers who work in partnership with 136 govern-mental and non-governmental members to focus onthe conservation and rehabilitation of landscapes,ecosystems, habitats and species in Asia. In theprocess, IUCN in Asia aims to promote sustainablenatural resource management and equitable, sus-tainable livelihoods within and among nations, com-munities and gender groups.

In the first several decades of its existence, the management of the global IUCN programme washighly centralised. The effort to create an AsiaRegional Programme followed a global directive todecentralise and regionalise that was issued in themid-1990s. A regionalised IUCN was expected to bemore responsive to its membership, more financiallysound and sustainable, and more likely to realiseIUCN's overarching goals through regionally sensitiveapproaches.

The 23 countries of Asia present specific challengesand opportunities to an organisation like IUCN. Thepolitical, cultural and ecological complexity of theregion creates a highly specific context in whichmanagers worked to build an Asia RegionalProgramme within IUCN.

This report recounts, largely in their own words,senior managers' descriptions of the process of form-ing a regional manifestation of IUCN. It reviews thekinds of managerial thinking and approaches thatwent into creating the regional programme, andhighlights a strategy for change that combined formal, documented plans with a parallel process ofhighly flexible daily management practice.

The study examines how informants characterisedthe role of leadership, collective strategic thinking,and an established base country programme as theyreflected on the rapid growth of capacity in IUCN inAsia. It pays particular attention to the cultivation ofregional coherence, describing the key principles andstructures through which capacity and coherencewere encouraged. These include the Asia Working

Group/Asia Regional Directorate, the practice of co-location, the establishment of unique positions,the use of information-sharing networks, and anongoing process of reassessment and change thatcontinues at this writing.

While certain aspects of the trajectory of capacitydevelopment in IUCN in Asia resemble that of manyprivate transnational organisations, there is auniqueness to IUCN in Asia's management cultureand commitment that defies quick categorisation,and instead is best represented through the extend-ed quotations presented in this report.


vi

1.2 Conservation in the Asia RegionPractising conservation at a regional scale presentsparticular challenges, and the Asia context shapesthose challenges in specific ways. Asia is home toapproximately 3.4 billion people - over half theworld's population - and produces nearly one-third ofthe world's economic output. Its human populationis expected to grow to 4.2 billion by 2025, with thebulk of that growth concentrated in India, China,Pakistan and Bangladesh - all countries in whichIUCN has members and offices. Along with popula-tion growth, the region expects dramatic increases inthe demand for goods and services, and changes inconsumption and livelihood patterns that have thepotential to have substantial impacts on naturalresources and on the environment.

Asian ecosystems support more than half of theworld's biodiversity, but they are far from being managed in a sustainable or equitable mannereverywhere in the region. The integrity, productivityand diversity of many key ecosystems in Asia haveeroded significantly, with profound effects that are atonce social and environmental. The region's freshwa-ter resources are under considerable stress fromdepletion and pollution, forest cover is being lost anddegraded, and key ecosystems and their associatedbiodiversity are vanishing or being adversely affectedby a wide range of factors.

The conservation challenges faced in Asia are embed-ded in growing socioeconomic disparities. Althoughthe region has witnessed unprecedented economicgrowth in recent years, that growth is highly uneven.While Japan and Singapore have relatively high ratings on the Human Development Index and theWell-being of Nations index,2 for instance, otherAsian countries, such as Nepal, Cambodia andBangldesh, are among the poorest and least devel-oped in the world. Internal political unrest in coun-tries like Nepal, or regional geopolitical tensions,such as between India and Pakistan, further compli-cate the social and environmental scenario in partsof Asia.

China and India have made, and will continue tomake, a substantial ecological footprint in the region.Both are emerging as key global economic powers,and both depend on natural resources that arederived from ecosystems with processes and param-eters that reach far beyond national boundaries.Addressing ecosystem and livelihood concerns in this

1. IUCN in Asia: the context and the challenge

1.1 IUCN: a global unionSince its inception in 1948, IUCN-the WorldConservation Union has brought together scientists,environmental experts and policy makers in a globalalliance to promote the conservation of nature.Worldwide, the IUCN network presently includes 76member states, 111 government agencies, 720 NGOs,35 affiliates and over 10,000 experts and scientistsfrom 181 countries. IUCN is unique in that it com-bines both governmental and non-governmentalorganisations in its membership, an aspect of theorganisation that is considered essential to the effec-tive promotion of IUCN's vision of 'a just world thatvalues and conserves nature'.

IUCN's conservation goals include the mitigation ofspecies extinction, and the restoration and mainte-nance of ecosystem integrity. Its mission is 'to influ-ence, encourage and assist societies throughout theworld to conserve the integrity and diversity ofnature, and ensure that the use of natural resourcesis equitable and ecologically sustainable'.1

Although this mission is global, the scope of IUCNactivities ranges from local and national to regionaland global. The IUCN network is therefore organisedto facilitate programmatic efforts at multiple scales.While a global headquarters and individual countryprogrammes have existed for years, it is only relative-ly recently in the history of IUCN that a concertedeffort has been made to build and empower institu-tional components at the regional level in Asia.


1

Notes1 See IUCN (2005) Statutes of 5 October 1948, revised 24

November 2004, and Regulations revised 16 November2004.

2 The Human Development Index measures a country'sachievements in three aspects of human development:longevity, knowledge and standard of living. Longevity ismeasured by life expectancy at birth; knowledge ismeasured by a combination of the adult literacy rate andthe combined gross primary, secondary, and tertiaryenrolment ratio; and standard of living is measured by GDPper capita. The measures of human development used inthe 'Well-being of Nations' include indicators of wealth andeducation, as well as measures of freedom, governance,peace, order, education, communication infrastructure andbasic services. These are intended to give a more accurateportrayal of human wellbeing.


2

context requires a regional approach that worksacross and among the many diverse and complexnation-states in Asia.

IUCN in Asia takes as fundamental the propositionthat where economic growth is strong in the region,it cannot persist without the implementation ofmore sustainable management practices in bothenvironmental and livelihood terms. Likewise, inplaces where economic growth is weak, it cannot beeffectively encouraged without attention to issues ofecological and social sustainability.

The biodiversity of Asia is matched by rich culturaldiversity, a vast array of traditions and histories thatform an intricate tapestry of languages, religiouspractices and identities. These differences testify tothe variety of human experience that is at once asource of regional pride and regional tensions.

Governance systems in Asia are often ill equipped toadequately address socioeconomic and ecologicalstresses, and a general lack of accountability orresolve has allowed many problems to escalate.Political tensions linked to long-standing rivalries,such as between India and Pakistan, and pressuresfrom the international community, such as thoseapplied to China, create a distinct dynamism, and attimes instability, in the region.

In the unique ecological, cultural, and political con-text of Asia, IUCN in Asia seeks to conserve and reha-bilitate ecosystems, habitats and species; to use andmanage natural resources on an equitable and sus-tainable basis within and among nations, communi-ties and gender groups; and to develop a dynamic,sustainable organisation that is effectively managedto pursue IUCN's mission. Implicit in the mission isthe goal of strengthening IUCN membership in theregion.

This study concentrates on the goal of developing adynamic, sustainable organisation that is poised tobridge the global and the local conservation aspira-tions of IUCN in Asia.

1.3 Constituency in the Asia Region: membersand partners

IUCN has 136 members in 17 of the 23 countries in theAsia Region (see Appendix). Members may be states(generally represented by the Ministry of ForeignAffairs or the ministry concerned with the environ-ment), government agencies (those dealing withforests, wildlife, parks, or science and technology, forinstance), NGOs (ranging from small grassroots levelgroups to larger national, regional and global play-ers), educational and research institutions, andregional and global organisations.

IUCN partners at the global, regional, national andlocal levels provide financial support and assistancein project implementation. Funding arrangementsare sometimes flexible, allowing IUCN in Asia to testnew approaches, and maintain its innovation andcreativity. The sources of funding available to IUCN inAsia are:• general programme allocation from IUCN

Headquarters in Gland, Switzerland. These fundsare unrestricted and can be used for any purposein the region;

• programme restricted funds, also made availablefrom IUCN Headquarters, for use in specific pro-grammes defined by Headquarters;

• project income; and• programme and country framework agreements,

which are restricted to country or thematic out-puts.

IUCN goals for Asia

• Landscapes, ecosystems, habitats and species areconserved and rehabilitated.

• Natural resources are used and managed on anequitable and sustainable basis within andamong nations, communities and gender groups.

• IUCN in Asia operates as a dynamic, effective andsustainable organisation pursuing successfullythe mission of IUCN in Asia.


3

1.4 Activities of IUCN in Asia IUCN in Asia is composed of seven technical pro-grammes: biodiversity, environmental economics,environmental law, forests, marine and coastal, pro-tected areas, and water and wetlands. Since January2003, these programmes have been organised asregional Ecosystem and Livelihood Groups (ELGs).These groups are organised in two clusters, eachwith a pan-Asian mandate, and consisting of a com-bination of ecosystem-based, socio-economic, andcross-cutting components. One cluster is located inColombo, Sri Lanka (biodiversity, environmental eco-nomics, marine and coastal), while the other is basedin Bangkok, Thailand (environmental law, forests,protected areas, water and wetlands).

The aim of this approach to organising IUCN'sregional technical programmes is to better reflectand deliver an ecosystem and livelihoods approachto nature conservation, one that is based on simul-taneously improving socioeconomic and environ-mental status, with a focus on the poorest groups.

The Asia Regional Office, which houses the IUCN inAsia Secretariat, is located in Bangkok, Thailand. Itincludes the Regional Director's office, corporateservices, and core central functions, and providescoordination, integration, and support for the region.It also coordinates membership and constituency-related matters in close collaboration with the mem-bership unit at IUCN Headquarters in Gland.

RegionalCountry OfficeProject Office

Figure 1. IUCN Secretariat: presence in AsiaCountry programmes: Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, India, Lao PDR, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam.

Ecosystem and Livelihood Groups

Group 1 (Bangkok, Thailand): Environmental Law,Forests, Water and Wetlands

Group 2 (Colombo, Sri Lanka): Biodiversity,Environmental Economics, Marine and CoastalProtected Areas


4

1.5 People and performanceIUCN has 445 staff members in the Asia Region,representing 21 nationalities, of whom 82% arelocated in country programmes in the region, and17% are allocated to the Regional Office or its ELGprogrammes. While the total number of staff in theAsia Region remained basically static, between400-500, in the period 1995 to 2005, the number ofcountry programmes has effectively doubled, andthe portfolio of the region grew dramatically.

IUCN in Asia emerged at a time when environmen-tal funding in general was shrinking. Yet the organi-

sation saw a steady growth in its budget; in 2004its total turnover was approximately USD 15 million,which had grown from about USD 2 million in 1995.The programme has also become considerably morecomplex. This would seem to indicate that throughthe recrafting of structures, and the re-profiling ofstaff competencies, the organisation has increasedits capacity.

One means for assessing the growth of capacity inthe Asia Region is to note that it has recently beenawarded several global projects, including aEuropean Union project on Timber and Governance,a Protected Areas project funded by the GlobalEnvironment Facility (GEF) and United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP), and global pro-grammes in economics.

1.6 IUCN in Asia as a case studyThis study focuses on capacity building in IUCN inAsia over the period from 1995 to early 2005, withthe aim of assessing how capacity was built, main-tained and strengthened over that period.

The study was commissioned as part of a largerproject on organisational capacity, change and per-formance, coordinated by the European Centre forDevelopment Policy Management (ECDPM). TheIUCN in Asia regional programme was selected asone of 17 case studies analysed in this project. Caseswere chosen according to several criteria, amongthem the assumption that some success at devel-oping capacity had been achieved.

The guiding questions for the ECDPM study addressboth the practices through which organisationalcapacity is developed, and the ideas that guidethose practices. The researchers are particularlyinterested in the endogenous process of capacitydevelopment - that is, the processes of change fromthe perspective of those undergoing the change.This includes factors that encourage capacity devel-

Examples of IUCN in Asia projects

Coastal and Marine Resource Management andPoverty Reduction in AsiaMulti-country project: Sri Lanka, Maldives, Indiaand PakistanValue: USD 600,000

Mountain Areas Conservancy ProjectLocation: PakistanValue: USD 10,350,000

Mekong Wetlands Biodiversity ProjectMulti-country: Lao PDR, Cambodia, Thailand andVietnamValue: USD 14,000,000

Sustainable Utilisation of Non-Timber ForestProducts in VietnamLocation: VietnamValue: EURO 1,581,000

Integrating Gender, Poverty, and Social Equity inNatural Resources ManagementLocation: NepalValue: USD 70,000

2005 2003 2001Signed projects 68,91 46,32 34,46Projects in negotiation 26,47 40,22 52,73Projects in planning stages 127,87 123,15 62,38Total 223,36 209,70 149,58

IUCN in Asia budget data (USD million)


5

and the Head of regional emerging programmeswere in residence at the Karachi office at that time.While it was not always explicit, coordinationefforts for a long-term response to the tsunami byIUCN in Asia formed a constant backdrop for allmeetings and discussions that took place during theinterview research. As will be discussed later in thereport, the challenges presented by the tsunami evi-denced both capacity development within IUCN inAsia, and areas where capacity development wasneeded. This study, then, was undertaken in a his-torical moment that illustrated both the dynamismand unpredictability of the region, and the constant,process-oriented nature of capacity development atIUCN in Asia.

Following a series of in-person interviews, struc-tured questionnaires were sent to senior managersin IUCN in Asia, IUCN Headquarters, and to selecteddevelopment professionals familiar with the workand capacity development of the organisation. Theinformant pool from which data for this study aredrawn, therefore, was intentionally selected accord-ing to their involvement in, and knowledge of, thegrowth of capacity in IUCN in Asia. Furthermore,the study was designed and conducted internally,as a collaborative effort among several senior man-agers, assisted by one external consultant. This self-reflective approach to exploring capacity develop-ment is consistent with the goal of ECDPM's Studyon Capacity, Change and Performance, which, asnoted above, is particularly interested in processesof change from the perspective of those undergo-ing it.

Through the words and insights of senior managersat IUCN in Asia, this report focuses on a specificcapacity development process, rather than strictlyon capacity itself. While there is a brief discussion ofhow various senior managers think about themeaning of capacity in the section to follow, theoverall discussion is less concerned with solidifyinga singular definition of capacity than with profilinga capacity development path for a specific organisa-tion.

1.7 Assessing IUCN in Asia's capacity todayAs noted above, the interview research for this casestudy was undertaken in the immediate aftermathof the Asian tsunami. It was in this completelyunforeseen, multinational moment of profound

Notes3 See Morgan et al. (2005) The Study on Capacity, Change, and

Performance: Interim Report.

opment, and the question of why efforts to developcapacity succeed in some contexts better than inothers.3

A total of 28 consultations were conducted with keyinformants from IUCN in Asia, IUCN Headquarters,and among development professionals outsideIUCN but familiar with the regional programme.Eighteen of these were semi-structured interviewsconducted in person, while 10 were administered inthe form of a written questionnaire. Extensivearchival work was undertaken to supplement theinterview findings, and a preliminary report on thecase study was presented to IUCN in Asia regionalstaff members in a workshop in March 2005.

Since the ECDPM study takes a particular interest inprocesses of change from the perspective of thoseundergoing it, this report draws heavily on the con-tent of individual interviews and written commentsprovided by several senior managers. This approachis used to understand, through the direct wordsand insights of those who formed and nurtured theorganisation, the experiences, thought processes,and challenges through which it developed itscapacity. In particular, this case study focuses onbuilding a regional organisation - one that soughtto bring together largely autonomous country pro-grammes as part of a unified, coherent regionalorganisational entity.

It is important to note that while this study empha-sises the growth of capacity at IUCN in Asia,respondents often framed their discussions of suc-cess in terms of capacity development that has yetto be realised. While this report should be read as areview of successes, then, one should also bear inmind that no staff member expressed the opinionthat capacity development in IUCN in Asia has beenfully achieved; rather, it was viewed as an ongoingprocess, and a challenge always unfolding - onethat remains at the forefront of IUCN in Asia'sorganisational consciousness.

The research for this case study commenced, bycoincidence, in the immediate aftermath of theAsian tsunami of 26 December 2004. In-personinterviews with senior managers were undertakenin the Karachi sub-regional office of IUCN in Asia,which is housed in the main office of the IUCNPakistan country programme. The Asia RegionalDirector, the Head of organisational development,


6

natural and socioeconomic change that the con-temporary capacity of IUCN in Asia became imme-diately apparent.

In order to formulate a quick and thoroughresponse - by a global organisation to a regional cri-sis - IUCN in Asia required functional and efficientinformation-sharing networks, and the flexibility ofindividual staff members to compile and synthesisethe massive inputs of information flowing acrossthose networks. IUCN in Asia's rapid reaction to thetsunami evidenced capacity, while at the same timeit stretched and challenged it.

In the interviews in the weeks following the tsunami, informants were asked first to reflect onthe question of how they would describe the levelof capacity of IUCN in Asia today. Respondentsrepeatedly referred to the unfolding tsunamitragedy and offered that a few years ago such asituation might have paralysed the regional pro-gramme. Instead, the programme was functioning,albeit challenged, to try to discern and formulate aclear, long-term plan of action, and to coordinate

that plan across multiple affected country pro-grammes.

Although respondents could point to the tsunamiresponse for evidence of capacity, each seemed tohave a slightly different definition of precisely whatcapacity means. One interview respondentdescribed capacity as:

'To me, capacity is fundamentally to do withboth having the quality and quantity of staffand collective organisational ability to addressIUCN's core and existing areas and demands,and to adapt and expand to deal with new areasand demands. The meaning of capacity thusgoes beyond solely looking at current knowl-edge, staff and abilities; it also involves somedegree of potential to incorporate new knowl-edge, staff and abilities. The latter depends onthe former.'

Another said,'In the simplest sense capacity is the ability toperform. This is derived from a definition of pur-pose, legitimacy or mandate to pursue that pur-pose, the skills required to do them, the [physi-cal] resources needed to mobilise the skills avail-able or developed, and the systems [rules, proce-dures, accountability, rewards and the like] thatenable or disable carrying out the mandate.'

Still a third perspective defined capacity as'… a complex, forever changing approach whichdetermines the potential of an individual, or inour case, an institution, to address problems,meet challenges, and overcome hurdles in mov-ing towards a vision and [pursue] strategies. It isconstantly changing, and may often take adownturn, in which case its potential to reviveitself demonstrates its resilience.'

Although perceptions of the meaning of capacityitself, and metrics for measuring it, differed amongrespondents, most agreed that, over the course ofits development, IUCN in Asia had witnessed arapid and effective development of capacity. Thissuggestion, as mentioned previously, was usuallyaccompanied by a reflective discussion of enduringgaps in capacity, and the need for continued capaci-ty growth to address those gaps.

When asked how she would characterise the capac-ity of IUCN in Asia today, one senior managerreplied,

IUCN responds to the Asian tsunami

IUCN's Director General Achim Steiner establisheda task force to ensure that IUCN's efforts to assistwith the relief and rehabilitation work followingthe Asian tsunami are effective. It aims to assistnational and international efforts to cope with thedisaster in both the short and the longer term. Inthe immediate aftermath of the tsunami, IUCNsupported emergency relief efforts, particularly inSri Lanka, through members, staff and projects, byproviding human resources, transport and adviceto the affected governments.

After the emergency relief efforts provided thebasic needs of drinking water, shelter, and food, aswell as the reconstruction of basic infrastructure,attention began to shift to the longer-term needto rebuild shattered communities and restore theecosystems upon which so many coastal liveli-hoods depend. It is in the arena of linking liveli-hoods and ecosystems that IUCN has the most tooffer. Activities have included humanitarianefforts, an IUCN appeal for the affected regions,and technical advice for the rehabilitation effort.


7

'Unrecognisable compared to what it used to be!It is now a recognised regional organisation.When our membership thinks of IUCN now, itrecognises that there is a region. They feel partof a global organisation, yes, but they also iden-tify with the secretariat on a regional basis.'

Others emphasised both the progress realised thusfar, and a sense that capacity building is continous:

'The IUCN in Asia region as a whole, if I think ofwhat it was in 1999 or 2000, with individual"one-man show" thematic programmes, andthen I think of what it is now, with theEcosystems and Livelihood Groups working onthe real issues of integrating livelihoods andecosystems, on having a balance of technicaland managerial capacity, on continuing to worktoward a regional identity as well as developingthe capacity of country programmes. IUCN inAsia is now in a position to make an impact -but you cannot impact if you remain small. Thatis the main reason we have grown, and that wewish to continue to grow.'

One respondent linked capacity growth to adapt-ability itself, the organisational characteristic per-haps most critical in a dynamic cultural, ecologicaland political context like Asia:

'I would say that IUCN's capacity has grownmanifestly over recent years, particularly in themore dynamic aspect of capacity. The organisa-tion's (and its staff's) skills sets have expanded.But perhaps more important, their ability torespond to change, and to incorporate newareas and skills into their portfolio and staffbase as required, has increased. In terms of corecapacities, it is clear that IUCN in Asia still hasnotable gaps. But there is the capacity to recog-nise these gaps, and to at least start to work tofill them.'

The Regional Director emphasised that capacitybuilding is ongoing, and that it can catalyse furthercapacity development:

'We have the capacity today to take on the tasksand challenges that face us. By and large our

capacity is keeping up with the requirements ofthe programme. But every time we meet thegoal, it is my job to raise the bar. And I do thatfor myself as much as I do it for the staff. ... Asthe programme grows, and we raise the bar, sotoo does capacity build even more. And it's acrossthe board, from secretaries to country heads.'

While the tsunami response might be taken as themost immediate evidence of, as well as challengeto, IUCN in Asia's capacity development, informantsalso pointed to another recent event that had madethe level of capacity development apparent bothinside the organisation, and to outsiders interactingwith it. In November 2004, a month before theresearch for this case study commenced, IUCN host-ed the Third IUCN World Conservation Congress(WCC) in Bangkok. 4

Elaborating on how the WCC had showcased IUCNin Asia's capacity both to its constituents and to itsown staff, one senior manager reflected,

'I think the Congress showed us two things.First, we worked with each other, we createdsmall teams without really realising what ahuge effort it was, and it fell into place. Weworked in a very integrated, almost seamlessfashion - of course we had internal hiccups, upsand downs, but that meant that the teamingprocess, which we had started with the reorgan-isation, really worked. We were able to do it notonly internally within the region, but also withthe global team. So it proved to us that the peo-ple are working, the systems are working, andour spirit is working.'

The performance of IUCN in Asia during the WCCwas not just a mirror on the organisation's owncapacity, however; it was also a catalyst throughwhich its members and partners developed newexpectations. She continued:

'I think [the Congress posed] a larger challengeto us than ever before; we have met expecta-tions, and … we now have to work even betterwith our constituency, our membership, and ourcommission members. … After this Congress,after a long process of negotiation, IUCN hassigned a Memorandum of Understanding withthe Asian Development Bank. Now we will havea national presence in India,5 and a lot of inter-

Notes4 Over 3500 conservationists, policy makers, funders and

community representatives gathered at the 3rd IUCN WorldConservation Congress (WCC) in Bangkok in November2004 to share ideas and find common ground towardadvancing conservation efforts worldwide. Held every fouryears, the WCC is the venue for IUCN members to set acourse of action, and to discuss global approaches toconservation. This Congress was one of the world's largestgatherings of conservationists ever.

5 The IUCN-India country programme is in its nascent stages.An MoU between IUCN and the government of India wassigned at the 3rd WCC in Bangkok.


8

esting work that we have started in China,6 andour ability to hold ministerial roundtables - allthese things have just thrown us into a differentcategory, a different league altogether.'

This manager also emphasised that the performanceof IUCN in Asia had reinforced in practice the idea ofa regional organisation, and even placed it in a posi-tion in which others were asking how IUCN in Asiahad developed its capacity. She noted that the morethe organisation performed, the greater were theexpectations that others placed upon it:

'I think the World Conservation Congress alsoproved to several of our staff that there is aregional identity, and that people are now lookingto us for advice - they are asking, how did you dothis, how did you set up an office in Bangkok, howdo you work across countries, how are you able totransfer resources and skills and capacities fromone part of the organisation to the other?'

If capacity has indeed developed at a notable pace,and to a notable degree, in IUCN in Asia, then it isimportant to understand precisely how this tookplace. This report now explores the regional pro-gramme, and the processes through which it wascreated and continues to develop.

2 Creating a regional programme

2.1 Decentralisation and regionalisationIUCN in Asia is a relatively new organisational component of IUCN. Until the early 1990s, the man-agement of most country programmes was highlycentralised, administered from the headquarters inGland, Switzerland. Like all IUCN country offices,those that were operating in Asia7 depended on theGland office to raise funds, sign contracts and admin-ister finances. In a few cases, independent countryrepresentatives and support staff managed somecountry programmes, but the general norm was aconcentrated, headquarters-centred approach tomanaging the global network.

During the early 1990s, however, the internationaldevelopment community began to question the

efficacy of centralised management, and as an alter-native promoted decentralisation. The membership ofIUCN saw many potential advantages to decentralisa-tion, and formally called for the implementation of anorganisational structure that would group individualcountry programmes into regional clusters. A region-alised IUCN was expected to be more responsive to itsmembership, more financially sound and sustainable,and more likely to realise IUCN's overarching goalsthrough regionally sensitive approaches. 8

As the broad organisational directive in IUCN wasshifting toward decentralisation and regionalisation,there was recognition by Headquarters, and a simul-taneous, growing internal sense among various IUCNcountry programmes in Asia, of the need to form aregional organisation. Country programmes werewitnessing rapid growth and expansion, but at thatpoint there was no regional organisational entitythrough which that expansion could be broadly coor-dinated.

In reflecting on the external and internal circum-stances that catalysed the formation of IUCN in Asia,one senior manager explained the internal sense of aneed for a regional organisation as follows:

'There were regional organisations involved withenvironmental conservation in Asia, but it wasdifficult to see their impact. … There was obvious-ly room for another, and there seemed to be theneed. But that may have been more of an intu-itive sense; it wasn't determined by doing surveysor anything else. And the opportunity that wasgiven by the regionalisation of IUCN provided animpetus to start looking at how this new con-

Notes

6 China became a State member of IUCN in 1996 and anational committee for members was established in 2003.The IUCN Beijing office was established in January 2003.During 2002 and 2003, a number of project developmentmissions were carried out by IUCN, and several areas forcollaboration were explored. Programmatically, IUCN isaiming to help its members and partners in China in specificareas of ecosystem management and livelihood support:forest landscape restoration and management; integratedwater resources management; and integrated coastal zonemanagement. Support in policy discussions will relate tomultilateral environmental agreements, protected areamanagement and World Heritage, and environmentalimpacts of economic development. IUCN will offerassistance in providing information, strengthening capacityand helping to test approaches on the ground. A strategicsituation analysis carried out by IUCN in 2001 identifiednine priority provinces, mainly in the west and south of thecountry, which will be the focus of IUCN assistance duringthe first years.

7 At that time these were Bangladesh, Lao PDR, Nepal,Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Vietnam.

8 IUCN General Assemblies 1991, 1994.


9

tions in which the organisation could move in orderto address key weaknesses.

Among the important strengths identified in thismeeting were the organisation's relevance to Asia,and the reach and dynamism of its programmes. Theparticipants expressed their collective desire tomaintain flexibility, while at the same time making awider and deeper impact on development in Asia.They agreed that in order to do that, they wouldhave to carefully manage the rapid expansion, andconsequent stresses, that growth was producing forIUCN in Asia's structures, systems and relationships.11

The reorganisation process initiated in 2002 still con-tinues,12 and IUCN in Asia remains on a consciousand self-reflective path toward further capacitydevelopment.

2.2 Positioning IUCN in AsiaThe thinking and action that went into creating theAsia Regional Programme can be traced back to theglobal IUCN. During the 1990s, IUCN was increasingits involvement in international policy dialogue, andwas gradually assuming a role of convener for discus-sions between members with divergent views onenvironmental issues.13

As international recognition of the strength and roleof IUCN grew, it became clear that an Asia RegionalProgramme that merely coordinated a collection ofcountry programmes would fall far short of theopportunities present in Asia. Thus emerged the keyquestion of what kind of identity IUCN wished toestablish with its member governments, network ofscientists, and non-governmental members and part-ners in Asia.

The way that Asian IUCN country programmes devel-oped until 1995 was essentially as national institu-tions. They were aspects of the global IUCN, but witha Pakistani or Bangladeshi or Vietnamese grounding.While their systems, procedures, programmatic man-dates and management reflected those of the globalsecretariat, country programmes were set up toembody the best of what an environmental organi-sation in that particular country was capable of producing. The governments of host countries in Asiahad a strong sense of ownership and stake in nation-al programmes in a way that the offices of mostother multilateral organisations do not. Headed by

struct, within IUCN, could become recognised notjust as a conglomeration of country offices or anadministrative arrangement within IUCN itself,but as a truly regional manifestation of the insti-tution.'

The journey to realising the internal aspiration tobecome a 'truly regional manifestation of the institu-tion' began with the formation of a self-administer-ing entity called the Asia Working Group. This group,convened in 1995, began the task of visioning,designing and implementing an Asia RegionalProgramme. The Asia Working Group, in turn, estab-lished the Asia Regional Directorate, which, between1997 and 2000, oversaw the establishment of an AsiaRegional Office in Bangkok, and witnessed theappointment of a regional director.9 A regional staffwas recruited, new regional thematic programmeswere developed, and efforts were made to set upnew country programmes. The areas of responsibilityand authority that were delegated from IUCNHeadquarters to the region steadily expanded.

IUCN in Asia developed gradually, then, through aseries of entities charged with the formation of theregional programme. But even as it was forming,IUCN's programmatic coverage in Asia, as well as thenumber of Asian countries in which it was working,continued to grow at an unprecedented rate. By theend of 2001, in the context of this rapid expansion, aneed was felt to reassess and reorganise IUCN inAsia. In order to help guide a new phase in the devel-opment of IUCN in Asia, two consultants were hiredand asked to propose a range of options for reorgan-ising the regional organisation and managing con-tinued change.

During roughly the same period, the Asia RegionalDirectorate met in Dhaka10 for one of its regularmeetings, which are convened three times per year.During this session, participants undertook an exten-sive organisational self-assessment, reviewing theregional programme's cultural, structural and sys-temic strengths and weaknesses. This exercise pro-vided a collective opportunity to discuss IUCN inAsia's capacity development to date, and the direc-

Notes9 This was originally a part-time appointment; the Asia

Regional Director split her time between her position asCountry Representative of IUCN in Pakistan and the Directorposition in Bangkok.

10 IUCN Asia 2002. ARD Meeting #12 Minutes. Dhaka: 11-13February 2002.

11 For a list of the strengths and weaknesses identified at theconference, see Jafri and Sattar (2002a).

12 See Jafri (2005a, 2005b).13 Including issues related to indigenous peoples, genetically

modified organisms, and large dams.


10

in such ecosystems, and for serving its goals andmembers in Asia.

But when it came to finding models for the kind ofregional institution that IUCN in Asia aspired to be,none were immediately apparent. IUCN in Asiawould have to invent its own model. The RegionalDirector explained,

'… we looked around to see what everyone wasdoing in Asia - what other organisations could welearn from? What we found, interestingly, was anempty space. We found ASEAN, SAARC, APEC,SACEP; we found thematic sub-regional organisa-tions like MRC and ICIMOD, and we found the UNsystem: UNDP (with country offices in all UNcountries) and some donors who worked at theregional level from their headquarters. Theregional bureaus, even for the UN, were based inNew York, not in the region itself. None broughtthe world of civil society and government togeth-er in the way that IUCN did. Having found thisempty niche, we worked with the idea that IUCNin Asia needed to position itself as a pan-Asianorganisation, and in order to do that, we neededto develop an organisational structure that wouldbuild on what existed. We needed regional the-matic programmes and country programmes asour resource base. We saw that we would have tomove people, money and resources - whateverexisted - within the parameters of what we werepermitted to do. We had to shift from the currentpractices of individual pockets - country andregional units - to integration and higher levels ofthinking. So, what drove us was the goal of posi-tioning IUCN as a working pan-Asian organisa-tion, one that could work across political bound-aries and throughout regional ecosystems.Immediately, the canvas moved from being withinthe then-current comfort zone of IUCN to thisgreat challenge of the vast region.'

Thus IUCN in Asia programmes on biodiversity,forests, water and other issues were established witha pan-Asia brief, and an eye toward the regional picture. The central challenge became the need tobalance a decentralised programme of countries anddispersed centres of responsibility, with the integra-tion and capacity to hold it all together at theregional level. As part of this challenge, it was neces-sary to ensure the interlinkages between the region-al office and IUCN Headquarters.

national representatives as a matter of policy, thecountry programmes maximised their effectivenessthrough the strength of this national identity andnational grounding.

The Regional Director of IUCN in Asia described thebalance between the global and the national in theAsian country programmes as follows:

'When IUCN begins to work in a new region orcountry, the office is the diplomatic representa-tional face of the Union. If you see the UNDPoffice, you know it is representative of UNDP. InIUCN, we go a step further; we also see ourselvesas an institution within a country and region - asa partner in the environment-development agen-da as long as the country needs us. Since mem-bers are part of that governance, we see ourselvesas institutions helping with the overall develop-ment agenda of a given country. Now the UN sys-tem would stop there. But IUCN goes further andbecomes part of the social fabric of the country,and behaves, when needed, like a civil societyorganisation. It not only provides a platform to itsAsian members, but it also becomes an environ-ment-development voice for Asia. The creativetension is in the need to maintain the balancebetween the national, regional and global.'

Building the regional organisation of IUCN in Asiafrom a pre-existing group of well established, locallygrounded country programmes, then, presented bothchallenges and opportunities. Two choices facedthose charged with developing the regional pro-gramme in Asia: either to take a conventionalapproach that would maintain a coordinated group ofcountry programmes in the region, but with the func-tions of the IUCN Headquarters simply transferred tothe regional office, or a less conventional approachthat would create a truly regional organisation.

Since environmental issues and problems rarely correspond exclusively with national boundaries, theless conventional approach was understood as essen-tial to fulfilling IUCN's mandate in the region. A trulyregional institution would allow IUCN to addressissues that were transboundary in nature. Theseinclude issues related to the large, sub-continentalecosystems that extend across vast swathes of theAsian continent, including the Hindukush-Himalaya,the Mekong, the South China Sea, or the Ganges-Brahmaputra system. IUCN in Asia saw a regionalorganisation as the only effective option for working


11

2.3 Building a regional institution in a dynamic context

Given the extraordinary challenge of building a trulyregional institution, how did capacity develop inIUCN in Asia? Was it a product of the external pres-sure produced by the directive to decentralise fromthe IUCN Headquarters in Gland, or was it craftedthrough internal strategic guidance? Senior man-agers answered this question by describing a combi-nation of both. Elaborating on the interplay betweenthe two, the Regional Director recounted a vision ofthe organisation as analogous to an individualspecies in an ecosystem, the parameters of which aresubject to constant change:

'In IUCN in Asia, we live within an ecosystem, theAsia Region. And then within that ecosystem,there are sub-ecosystems, such as countries andother regional programmes. We might think ofourselves, for example, as a frog living in a pond -a large frog, comfortable with its environment,knowledge of the parameters of the pond, thewater temperature, and the threats from preda-tors. The frog is comfortable, until one day there'sa massive rain, and a flood, and suddenly the frogfinds itself living in a lake. The frog is faced with achoice: either to leave that lake and go findanother pond, or to consider the lake its newecosystem, thinking, OK, I'm now a small frog in abig lake, but there is now room to grow. There arenew threats, but also new opportunities. The frogneeds to adapt if it decides to stay. There is a thirdoption, which I would say is the worst: to stay inthe lake but continue to pretend that it's a pond.And those are the options. That second option iswhere I think most of us in IUCN in Asia were. Yes,our capabilities emerged in response to externalpressures. But internal processes of strategicmanagement had to direct the process. We'relooking, in a sense, at a pond that's changed to alake. But our internal strategic management wasguided by the sense that we must grow and wemust change.'

Another senior manager elaborated on the sense ofan internal need for change, and the overalldynamism of the Asian context within which theregional organisation developed:

'Capacity building cannot take place in an envi-ronment that is stress-free. And I am using theword stress deliberately, instead of challenges.The stress has to come with recognition of the

need for change - institutional change, systemicchange, or individual change. And that recogni-tion cannot be externally imposed, but externalcircumstances can raise the need to a level wheresomething has to be done. IUCN in Asia had tochange because of external forces - the constantunpredictability, and the fact that we operate in asystem which is not enabling. In our countries,environment and development, and the linksbetween ecosystems and people, are not issuesthat are built into government systems. Added tothat, Asia has a very high population, a high per-centage of people living below the poverty line,and social indicators that are extremely low. Wedeveloped our capacities in response to theseexternal challenges and to a sense of an internalneed for change.'

Along with external challenges, external support wasalso critical. Through their essential financial assis-tance, advice and an enduring interest in what IUCNwas doing in Asia, donors formed an importantexternal catalyst for the creation and developmentof IUCN in Asia.

The list of donors that have funded IUCN throughvarious field projects, framework agreements, andsmaller initiatives is long. All were in some wayinstrumental to strengthening IUCN in Asia's capaci-ty, highlighting gaps, assisting with processes andmodels for capacity building, or stimulating debateson what constitutes capacity. IUCN in Asia managershighlighted the contributions of the following specif-ic donor organisations:

The Canadian International Development Agency(CIDA) provided the initial impetus, through its sup-port for the National Conservation Strategy (NCS) inPakistan, and through its follow-up project, thePakistan Environment Programme (PEP). The NCSitself was a capacity development effort thatbrought multiple stakeholders in a very top-down,authoritarian society together to work out a sustain-able development agenda for Pakistan. The PEP alsoforged partnerships between government and non-government institutions. These initiatives providedIUCN with a platform to think through the variousconnotations of capacity development, to focus oninstitutional capacity building, and to devise and usemethods that ranged from strategic planning tomore conventional training programmes. CIDA's sup-


12

port also enabled IUCN to hire staff with a variety ofskills and backgrounds, and they formed the start-upteam of what is now IUCN in Asia.

The Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation(SDC) provided support to the capacity buildingprocess as one that was inclusive, multi-faceted andclosely associated with human development sys-tems. The SDC served as development partners toIUCN in Asia, and had a major impact through theirprogramme support, technical advice, debate sessions, concepts of use of knowledge and second-ment mechanisms.

The Norwegian government provided IUCN with flexi-bility to use funds on internships, exchange pro-grammes, and secondments, in collaboration withCIDA and the SDC. The Norwegian Agency forDevelopment Cooperation (Norad) was key inenabling IUCN to invest in new or emerging areas, totest new partnerships and to respond to unpre-dictable changes in the external context in whichIUCN in Asia was developing.

Through the Royal Netherlands Embassy, the Dutchand Swedish governments (DGIS and SwedishInternational Development Agency, Sida) contributedto capacity building by supporting the exchange ofpersonnel, in the form of interns or junior officers, asthey moved from their respective countries intoshort-term placements in the various offices of IUCNin Asia. This enabled a better understanding of theAsian context within these agencies, and providedIUCN with a group of energetic and bright youngpeople when needed.

While donors form an important external group, it ismainly the members and partners who are served byIUCN in Asia, and who jointly implement its workprogramme. Members and partners exert majorinfluence through the demands and expectationsthey hold of IUCN services. Senior managers consult-ed for this study cited these external expectations asan ongoing source of motivation to improve capacity.

2.4 A strategic mindset for changeIf IUCN in Asia's capacity developed as a product ofexternal pressures and internal strategic manage-ment, then it is critical to understand both theapproach to internal management taken by themanagement team, and the specific strategy theyused to build organisational capacity.

In describing how the formation and development ofIUCN in Asia was managed, senior managers rarelypointed to the formal documents that outline thegrowth of the organisation. While these documents,such as the Asia Intersessional,14 constitute animportant set of guidelines and formal plans for theregional organisation, when reflecting on the every-day realities of management, senior managersseemed to rely less on these documents as templatesfor action, and more on incremental processes char-acterised first and foremost by flexibility. This doesnot imply that formal documents were unimportant,but rather highlights a parallel, everyday process ofstrategic management that could both refer back toformal plans and remain highly adaptive. TheRegional Director described her strategy as deliber-ately dynamic:

'I do not have a road map; what I do have is agoal. But having said that, it can change. Whenwe first started building a regional programme,I had a vision that this would be like an ASEAN ora SAARC, but for IUCN in Asia, and it would be abit like UNDP or the ADB in terms of a regionalinstitution. OK, that's a place to start, but ofcourse IUCN in Asia is not any of these, becauseit's not governmental, it's not a bank, and it's nota development agency. So that ability to see whatthe goal actually becomes - how it changes - isalso important. And that depends on so manythings. … The whole strength of this programmehas been adaptation, continuous adaptation. Yes,we want to be the premier regional institution inAsia when people talk about the environmentand development. But we don't want to be theonly one, not necessarily even the most impor-tant one, depending on the crisis or the nature ofthe change. What we do want to do is take ourplace as an equal partner with the others.'

Another senior manager de-emphasised structuredlong-term plans, and highlighted instead the impor-tance of a strong leader, a flexible staff, the forma-tion of teams and networks, and what she called an

Notes14 See Imbach (2004) IUCN Asia Intersessional Programme

2005-2008. The IUCN Intersessional Programme is theoverall framework and planning tool of the IUCNCommissions and Secretariat.


13

overall mindset that managers sought to dissemi-nate throughout the regional organisation:

'I don't think it [capacity development] happenedbecause we had a five-year strategic plan. Whichis what, whenever I go through most manage-ment literature, they talk about: ten-year vision-ing and five-year strategic planning, and three-year planning, and so on. We didn't have any sortof strategic plan whatsoever. What we did have isa very strong leader who had to make a differencewhen she moved from a country level (IUCN-Pakistan) to the regional level (Asia RegionalDirector). What she had was a small group of indi-viduals she could talk to and share ideas with,individuals who were able to shift gears veryquickly. We in Asia have to be able to work according to priorities that change almost daily,weekly, monthly. So [several] times a day wewould hear: person A, this is what needs to hap-pen, can you please quickly put together some-thing; person B, this is what I have heard, can westart doing something along these lines? The abil-ity to just talk informally to ourselves, and quicklyput together small working teams that woulddiscuss, contact on email, talk to each other, andcome up with some ideas and then take them for-ward. … And then what we also had was a goodnetwork, and good friends in our global network,with our donors, with our partners and members.So first, we had to have a mindset.'

Thus the strategy for change combined formal, docu-mented plans with a parallel process of daily strate-gic management that required more dynamism thanfixed plans, strictly adhered to, can allow. Formalplans could be used as reference points, or for expla-nations of the institutional vision, but in the dailyworkings of management they did not always deter-mine practices. Interestingly, among those inter-viewed for this case study, only one mentioned theAsia Intersessional; all other respondents describedthe managerial strategy and 'mindset' without refer-ring to formal fixed plans. Thus while one can discerna formal documented structure for building IUCN inAsia, senior managers stressed an additional process- highly adaptive and sensitive to change - that drovecapacity development.

2.5 The role of leadershipBuilding IUCN in Asia as a truly regional institutionrequired particular leadership qualities andapproaches. Informants for this study emphasisedhow the Asia Regional Director created an enablingenvironment for the creative formation of IUCN inAsia, and how she continuously encouraged its re-thinking and re-fashioning. While some informantssuggested that it was strong leadership that mat-tered most for capacity development, others empha-sised the ways that leadership capacity itself devel-oped in concert with the growth of overall capacityin IUCN in Asia.

When asked to characterise the relative importanceof strong leadership in the development of IUCN inAsia's capacity, a management consultant with along history of working with IUCN in Pakistan andIUCN in Asia replied,

'I think that, minus [strong leadership], the AsiaRegion would still be a collection of country pro-grammes without an organisation at the regionallevel. Of course [the Regional Director] broughtsome people on board who were highly capable,but the leadership was the most important factordriving the expansion. One thing I have learned isthat if you don't have a leader in a programmethat is in its infancy, people can always retard itsgrowth. It's within human nature [to] becomecomplacent.'

But another senior manager cautioned againstassigning too much of the responsibility for capacitydevelopment to the leader alone:

'I would hesitate to put either the entire successor the entire failure of the institution onto [theRegional Director]. Over the past five years, shehas changed her own capacity for dealing withissues and people, probably for reasons similar tothose [with regard to the larger organisation]:external issues and challenges, the need forchange, [and her own] internal sense of the needfor change. Leaders can bring about change, butthe [opposite] is also true. It is the followers whoalso force change. And if that had not also hap-pened in IUCN in Asia, then we would be having avery different conversation.'


14

Another senior manager agreed, pointing to theleadership within the 'followership' of senior man-agers:

'… often [the leadership] is not the most apparentaspect of the group when we meet collectively.It's not the Regional Director who, nine out of tencases, makes the final decisions. It is the group ofpeople who work with her - they primarily decidewhat needs to be done. So it's not so much [thatwe are] followers. She is almost an arbitrator.When the question is between option A or optionB, that's when she comes in, and often she givesus the justification for one or the other. So it's notso much about being followers. We don't see our-selves as followers; we see ourselves as col-leagues.'

When asked to identify the kinds of leadership quali-ties that were associated with the growth of capacityat IUCN in Asia, an informant long affiliated with theorganisation identified a mix of authority, respectfulhuman relations skills, and genuine support for staff.A senior manager in IUCN described the RegionalDirector's leadership style by saying,

'I think her leadership is very much based on heragility of mind. She can pick up what is troublinggroups of people. She does quick mental invento-ries, both among staff and on public occasions. Shealso picks out key strategic points and puts theminto context, so people are able to lift themselvesout of their immediate problems and worries, sothey can see into the future - to the next stage. Sheoften talks about 'getting to the next level' as if thelevels themselves are already laid out somehow inher mind. Her long-term vision is very acute. … Oneof her weaknesses as a leader, however, is that sheassumes that because she finds something easy orpossible, it's [due to] a lack of effort if others can-not do it.'

When asked to characterise her own managementstyle, the Regional Director described a conceptualapproach that seeks to simultaneously engage issuesat both the micro-level, and in their broader context:

'My management style … is a bit of two thingswhich are in some ways contradictory, in someways not. I always think that a really good man-ager has the ability to simultaneously hold intheir head the big picture, and focus on the detail,so that while you can see the big picture you canstill pick at the detailed understanding. Now a lotof them feel this is micromanagement, and some-

times it is. But to me it's also an opportunity totweak the system. The poet William Blake said itbest: "to see a world in a grain of sand, and aheaven in a wild flower".'

She also emphasised a deep belief in the possibilityof change:

'The other thing that underlies my work is that Iwill not accept that something cannot be done ifI think it needs to be done. To me there is alwaysa way. So it's very difficult to take no for ananswer if something is intrinsically, in my mind,justified. To me there must be a way. We need tothink outside the box; there must be some way oflinking up, doing things … and once you put thatinto place, you find that other people's mindsstart thinking that way too. And we put this con-viction into the system, the kind of structure ofthinking, and this is where capacity is important.If you restrict people's capacity by saying, "youwill work within this framework and no other",then you are not encouraging their minds tothink otherwise. However, if you tell people, "no,always think that there must be a way", then theoutcome is quite different. Of course we haverules and guidelines, but then using these as ourbase, we can always ask, "how do we achievewhat we want to achieve?"'

Finally, in reflecting on her leadership style, theRegional Director described an ongoing, consciouseffort to develop a team of leaders around her. Sheexplained,

'I believe that constant interplays of responsibilityand teamwork are in turn absorbed and inter-nalised, and people then start doing things them-selves. Capacity becomes an issue of demonstra-tion. If you want to build someone's capacity, youhave to start with you. I try to do this in severalways. I used to have a scheme when I was in thePakistan office called "Tracking the CR [CountryRepresentative]". Whenever I went to Islamabador Peshawar, or some other place outside theKarachi office, I either picked someone, or asked astaff member to volunteer, to come with me.Their job was just to observe what went on.That's it: observe, ask questions. To some extent Istill do this.'

While it may be tempting to understand capacitydevelopment in IUCN in Asia largely in terms of thesenior leadership, some informants cautioned


15

against this, emphasising the unevenness of capacitydevelopment across the various countries in theregion:

'It is important to understand that the leadershipof IUCN in Asia cannot be seen as one homoge-neous entity; there are clear differences in leader-ship and followership styles and techniques,underpinned to some extent by cultural contexts,across countries in the region. The different kindsof leadership capacities have also had a bearingon the philosophy and practice of leadership inthe region. While in some instances intellectualand programmatic leadership has been strong,weaknesses in management or leadership in others have given rise to varied followerships.This has had its effects on overall capacity devel-opment in the region.'

2.6 The role of collaboration: collective strategic thinking

If leadership and 'followership' were interactive inIUCN in Asia, this was facilitated, in part, by process-es that promoted and utilised collective strategicthinking. One respondent pointed to these processesas a crucial feature of capacity development in IUCNin Asia:

'Collective strategic thinking and decision makingare a key part of how IUCN in Asia functions. Itshould also be emphasised that these processes donot just contribute to decision making, they alsoplay an important part in building the capacity ofmanagers to address and deal with issues, and tohave buy-in to the decisions that are made. Thegeographical dispersion that is an essential ele-ment of IUCN's structure in Asia makes collectivethinking and action more of a challenge than it isin other more centralised organisations. The AsiaRegional Directorate (ARD) has been an importantmechanism from its formation, and as IUCN in Asiahas evolved and adapted, so has ARD as a focusand process for collective thinking and decisionmaking. Another important and useful tool hasbeen the formation of task teams, working groups,and taskforces to deal with specific issues, themes,or processes [such as reorganisation]. These, again,feed into collective thinking and decision making.'

One respondent emphasised the importance of staffattitudes - resonant with the point about a mindsetmade previously - for making collective strategicthinking effective:

'I think that IUCN in Asia has a permanent collec-tive strategic thinking mechanism in place.I have seen the system working collectively toaddress issues such as the planning process thatled to the IUCN Asia Quadrennial Programme2005-2008,15 or the setting of the MountainsProgramme,16 or the development of theEcosystem and Livelihoods Group idea into anoperational reality. … There are some formal sys-tems in place, … but just as or even more impor-tant is the attitude of the key senior staff. Andthis staff is not there by chance; it is therethrough a careful process of selection, nursing,and evaluation that keeps bringing and maintain-ing good people in key positions in the pro-gramme.'

At the same time, however, some managersexpressed a sense that developing structures thatencourage and mobilise collective strategic thinkingis a challenge that IUCN in Asia has yet to fully meet;instead, it is an ongoing process. Stratified applica-tion limits the effectiveness of these structures inthe present:

'What is perhaps less strong, or less clear, is theextent to which other levels of staff and pro-grammes are brought into these collective deci-sion-making processes, or are informed of them.Not all of the management styles and approachesthat are used or promoted at "the top" filterdownwards. Perhaps some of the advances andmodels that have been applied to bring seniormanagement into the collective thinking loopneed to be promoted - even forced! - within thecomponent programmes of IUCN in Asia.'

2.7 Scaling up from country to region: IUCN inPakistan and IUCN in Asia

Particularly in the early years of its formation, IUCNin Asia depended on the IUCN in Pakistan (IUCN-P)programme, which at that time was the strongestIUCN country programme in the region, employingabout 250 staff.17 IUCN-P was also the home office ofAban Kabraji, who would later become the AsiaRegional Director. In several ways, IUCN-P providedmodels for systems that could be scaled up andadapted into the workings of the regional pro-gramme.

Notes15 See Imbach (2004) IUCN Asia Intersessional Programme

2005-2008.16 See Mountains Intersessional Strategy Document: Annex 16

of IUCN Asia Intersessional Programme 2005-2008.17 The development of the National Conservation Strategy for

Pakistan was a landmark and trend-setting contribution ofthe IUCN-P programme. Developed through consultationswith some 3000 people over three years, it broughttogether the greatest number of experts ever in Pakistan tofocus on the way their sectors affect, and in turn areaffected by, the environment.


16

The anchoring role of IUCN-P had several facets.Most visibly, it was Kabraji, then the country repre-sentative from IUCN in Pakistan, who eventually,after spending approximately five years in bothroles,18 became the Asia Regional Director. But therewere other critical ways that the IUCN-P programmeserved as a nurturing institution for the nascentIUCN in Asia. These included providing models forsystems that worked well, and financial stability foran organisation still developing its own sources offunding. Early in the development of IUCN in Asia,IUCN-P provided substantial financial support - asmuch as USD 150,000 per year.

One senior manager characterised the IUCN-P pro-gramme as a model that had developed structuresand processes over time, lending the benefits of itsown learning process to IUCN in Asia:

'The Pakistan office functioned as a microcosm inseveral ways. It had multiple offices - a countryoffice [in Karachi] and other programme offices[in Islamabad and Peshawar], and so in someways, this mirrors the situation in the region. Thesystems that worked for Pakistan to maintain itsintegrity as a whole were looked at as a basefrom which to launch the regional systems. Thatwas not done blindly - these structures had beenwell thought-through and chewed over inPakistan. The Pakistan human resources manage-ment became the base for Asia Regional humanresources policies and procedures. These, in turn,were sent off to Headquarters. In many ways,they routinised these as a useful tool for developing global systems and procedures. In thatway, you have growth from country office toregion to global.'

The Regional Director elaborated on the supportiverole that IUCN in Pakistan played as IUCN in Asia wasdeveloping, and the critical importance of IUCN-P'srelative strength for simultaneously sustaining itselfand nurturing the regional programme.

'I was basically drawing on all the resources, mod-els and learning done to date within the Pakistanprogramme. So when I was given the responsibili-ty for managing this collection of country officesand individuals [as a regional organisation], if Iwanted to do certain things … the only way Icould do them was by bringing my own resourcesfrom the Pakistan programme, and my own people from the Pakistan programme, to effectthe changes. That overlap period was when I usedall the capacities that had been built in IUCN-P to

Notes18 During this 'overlap period', from 1996 to 2000, the present

Regional Director was chair of the Asia Working Group butretained her position as the country representative for IUCNin Pakistan.

lay the foundation for the Asia region. And that isan important thing: if we want to see progressionand links between capacity, [then it is clear that]if IUCN in Pakistan had not been as robust anorganisation, and a capacity-empowered organi-sation, they would not have had the ability to[both nurture IUCN in Asia and maintain thecountry programme itself].'

As noted above, IUCN-P also provided financialresources for the start-up and support of IUCN inAsia, which were critical for the creativity and adapt-ability characteristic of the regional programme.Specific budget lines that enabled IUCN-P to help theregional programme were built into frameworkagreements and project agreements, which were inturn accepted by donors. IUCN in Asia also drew onthe human resources available in the Pakistan pro-gramme.

If initially the relationship between the two facets ofthe organisation was one of dependence, it has grad-ually become more reciprocal. The current countryrepresentative for IUCN-P commented that 'Thesedays, the balance has shifted to where there is moreexpertise residing in the Asia Region now, and we aretrying to benefit from that and get resources fromthe region. This is helping create integration betweenthe country and the regional programmes.'

3 Crafting coherence In building a truly regional institution, the IUCN inAsia management team faced a key challenge: tobalance the autonomy and independence of thecountry programmes with the need for broader,transboundary coordination through the regionalentity. As IUCN in Asia positioned itself, the issue ofcoherence between countries on the one hand, andan integrated programme on the other, became para-mount. One senior manager explained, 'If we are tobe capable of serving our members and partners inall of Asia, then we have to have an integrated func-tioning secretariat. We cannot say to someone, "wework on the big picture", and then say, "Nepal andPakistan won't work with each other!" It was thisintegration of individual country programmes thatthe regional entity would have to catalyse and coor-dinate.'


17

'I remember after 9/11, Pakistan was ready for allkinds of explosions and implosions. And I sat in astaff meeting here and I gave an instruction, …that under no circumstances will there be anystaff meetings or official discussions on the issueof 9/11. It was of course OK to do it informally, butformally there could be no staff meetings, and nodiscussion. Because at that moment we were citi-zens of the world, working in a regional and aninternational organisation, and we could not …enter the political debates. I felt that the situationwas so incendiary that if discussions began, therewould be huge arguments, and it would blow theorganisation apart. So I said no discussions what-soever in an official context, and we survivedwithout a problem through that entire period.'

Cultivating regional coherence and identity alsoentailed instituting a shared sense of organisationalethics that would weave together the cultural back-grounds of managers from countries across the AsiaRegion, as well outside it.

But informants were careful to point out that theshared identity associated with regional coherencewas not to be mistaken for regional uniformity.Whereas coherence was seen to preserve, and evenencourage, some measure of diversity, uniformitywas regarded as undesirable. Since each of the coun-try programmes had developed in different ways, interms of their programmes and human resources,there were vast differences at the country level thatthe regional organisation would have to balance.'While we valued that difference,' one senior managerexplained, 'we also saw that if we were to build aregional institution, they couldn't keep going intotally different directions. Otherwise they wouldjust remain distinct country offices.' So the regionalprogramme was built with the objective of coher-ence, in which commonalities were identified andbuilt upon, but certain levels of diversity amongcountry programmes were considered both desirableand strengthening.

While organisational development for the AsiaRegion devised certain tools for establishing coher-ence, such as a single manual, and a set of basic con-ditions adapted by every country programme in theregion,19 a level of flexibility was also maintained sothat these tools did not simply cultivate uniformity.

3.1 Defining regional coherence in a multinational context

But just what was it that the regional entity was try-ing to cultivate? The Regional Director described herultimate vision of regional coherence as somethingthat created a continuity of identity among all staffacross an extremely diverse and complex region. Sheexplained,

'I tell people that the only thing IUCN is totallyintolerant about is intolerance itself. You leaveyour personal beliefs at the door of the office, andwhen you come in, you're an IUCN person. You'renot a Muslim, you're not a Hindu, you're not aBuddhist, Christian or Parsi. You leave your preju-dices out. … Anyone among the staff should beable to walk into an IUCN office anywhere in theregion, sit down, and feel they are part of theoffice.'

She elaborated further:'While diversity, both cultural and geographic, isencouraged in the staff profiles and culture of theoffices, there is, as part of the integration chal-lenge, the tendency of groups, national and eth-nic, to want to stay with their own. This is rela-tively benign when such groups are located out-side their own countries and cultures, but canbecome quite damaging, if in countries, officesbecome the domain of one ethnic or nationalgroup. Regional coherence then becomes threat-ened by national cohesion which manifests itselfin a desire to keep out "the foreigner", undermin-ing the very nature of the diverse membershipIUCN is meant to represent and secure. Thehuman resources units are continuously monitoring for signs of this happen-ing, and insist on a mix of ethnic groups whenev-er a programme becomes too [homogeneous].'

Cultivating and maintaining a shared collective iden-tity is an ongoing process, and ideas of a unifiedregional identity were constantly subject to the ten-sions produced in national, as well as international,politics. For example, in conversations about forginga regional identity, the Regional Director discussedthe potential challenges that the regional organisa-tion faced in the days after September 11, 2001. Shedescribed her sense of the possible volatility, anddivisiveness, that might follow this event in the IUCNin Asia sub-regional office in Karachi, where she wasat the time:

Notes19 See the appendix for a more comprehensive accounting of

these tools.

3.3 Building coherence through principles andstructures

A senior manager summarised IUCN in Asia's opera-tional principles as follows:• Decentralisation: each national and Ecosystem

and Livelihoods Group component handles itsown programme, budget, staff, etc.

• Coordination: as a way to balance decentralisationand keep a reasonably coherent and consistentorganisation.

• Transparency: broad communications across thesystem through multiple, parallel and simultane-ous channels.

• Entrepreneurship: everyone has a role to play tokeep the organisation moving forward in its dif-ferent areas (technical, financial, humanresources, policy influencing, administration, etc.)and programmes (national, regional, etc.).

• Shared responsibility.

Adhering to these operational principles, and achie-ving the right balance between the country, regionaland global programmes, depended on a set ofprocesses and structures that would cultivate aregional identity and regional coherence, but thatwould also complement the country and global levels. When asked to identify and describe the mostimportant organisational structures for cultivatingthis identity and coherence, informants discussed theAsia Working Group and Asia Regional Directorate,the practice of co-location, unique positions, informa-tion-sharing networks, and the ongoing reorganisa-tion process. Each of these is briefly elaboratedbelow.

The Asia Working Group and the Asia RegionalDirectorateA development professional long associated with,but positioned outside of IUCN, said, 'IUCN in Asiahas struck an ingenious balance between the needto give individual countries priority-setting autono-my, and the need to weave a coherent regional pro-gramme. In that respect, ARD appears to have beenthe central mechanism for striking the balance.'

The Asia Working Group (AWG) was formed in themid-1990s, as the extent of IUCN's work in the Asiaregion grew, and as the list of countries expanded. Itspurpose was to guide the development of theregional organisation. Eventually, it grew into theAsia Regional Directorate (ARD).


18

The AWG, and later the ARD, consisted of countryprogramme heads that were appointed on the basisof their position. They had a clear set of responsibili-ties and terms of reference, and their regular meet-ings were held in different locations, as an additionaltechnique for building exposure to, and familiaritywith, the region as a coherent entity. The ARD contin-ues this practice, meeting three times per year in dif-ferent locations in order to set the policies, reviewthe programme and set the budget for the region.

Reflecting on the accomplishments of the AWG andthe ARD, one informant related these groups directlyto the formation and promotion of shared values.

'Shared values were extremely important. This iswhere … AWG and then ARD played such animportant role. Transparency was, from the startof AWG, a key notion. Everything - budgets, con-tracts, deficits, opening and closing of offices andprogrammes, new projects, you name it - was onthe table and open for discussion. All senior [2ndlevel] regional staff were members along withone coordinator from Headquarters representingthe Director General. Decisions were articulatedby the chair and consigned in writing ... meetingswere held every three months. Over a period oftwo years, shared values and identity were devel-oped within the Secretariat.'

Informants suggested that the AWG/ARD had a dis-cernable effect on people's sense of the regionalorganisation; one remembered that,

'… in the early days one kept hearing, "oh, but it'sthis way for Sri Lanka", "oh, but it's this way forPakistan". Now one more often hears, "but whatabout the region?" Of course they consider theirown countries and programmes first, but they canlink them to the regional programme and think interms of larger interests.'

The Asia Regional Director pointed out that there isno structural equivalent to the AWG/ARD anywhereelse in IUCN. She emphasised in particular the valueof meeting in different locations on a regular basis.'You sense the environment of the country, and get afeel for the issues there, while at the same time youget a sense that, yes, I'm part of a regional pro-gramme, and this is part of my normal work.' Shecalled the Asia Regional Directorate 'the key to theregion', by virtue of the fact that it is regular, and ithas a consistent membership that is focused on run-ning the region.


19

Multiple centres: co-locationThrough co-location and the existence of a regional(Bangkok) and sub-regional (Karachi) office and tworegional programme groups (ELGs) in Bangkok andColombo, IUCN in Asia maintains a physical presenceat multiple sites. This is rooted in a deeply held con-viction that, as the Regional Director put it, 'locationis absolutely the core of what you are as an organisa-tion. Location, and your connection to ground reali-ties, is everything: it determines how you functionand who the pool of your staff is. If the managementteam is not in constant contact with the region, howcan they own it? How can they work there?'

The practice of co-location allows the IUCN in Asiastaff to work from offices throughout the region.This technique emerged in the earliest days of IUCNin Asia, in part as a way to allow regional staff toremain in the country offices with which they werealready affiliated.20 The system then had to be inte-grated with each country office, with co-located staffexpected to follow the rules and norms of the officethat hosted them. So, for example, today the regionalstaff working in Ecosystem and Livelihood Group 2 isco-located with the Sri Lanka country office inColombo.

The system helps the regional programme avoidduplicating overhead costs and support services,making it both practically and financially efficient. Italso allows regional staff members to be 'closer tothe ground,' avoiding the sense that the programmeis run exclusively by the Asia Regional Office inBangkok.

Senior staff members also stressed that the presenceof non-nationals in country programme offices helpsto maintain a desirable culture of openness. TheRegional Director explained, 'whenever a countryoffice becomes entirely national, you have a verydangerous situation, because you look inwards. Andthere's nothing to bring in fresh blood and newthinking, nothing to link an office with the fact thatit's part of an international and global organisation'.This echoes comments recounted above on the topicof regional coherence.

Like all of the processes employed by IUCN in Asia tobuild capacity, co-location is neither perfect norunproblematic; many country programmes find itchallenging, and sometimes undesirable. One seniormanager explained that 'expats are more expensive,

and they often come into jobs which country peoplefeel they can do perfectly well. … And of course(among nationals) you speak the same language andshare the same culture. But what can develop is asort of fortress mentality'. Such a mentality, referredto earlier, is understood within IUCN in Asia to beinconsistent with the aspiration for a regional identi-ty and regional coherence.

Maintaining multiple centres through multiple loca-tions is thus a central feature of the regional pro-gramme. One senior manager summarised its impor-tance by saying that, 'the fact that we have what wecall distributed centres of power … has contributed tothe sharing of the wider region, to a feeling withinpeople that they are part of the core, part of the cen-tre. They are not just out-posted officers. So this abili-ty to have a centre, not only a physical centre, butalso a conceptual centre, a virtual centre, is impor-tant for coherence. At least that's the way I like tosee it; I see myself a part of a virtual centre'.

Unique positionsFrom the outset, two high-level posts unique to IUCNin Asia were created: a director of constituency devel-opment and an adviser on organisational develop-ment. These positions served two aspects of creatinga truly regional institution: the director of con-stituency development was to establish closer linkswith the IUCN membership, councillors and commis-sion members. It also acted as the programme's'antennae,' sensitive to the external setting, theactivities of other regional institutions, and opportu-nities for building strategic partnerships. The directorof organisational development, meanwhile, was toidentify commonalities among, and differentialsbetween, the organisational components of IUCN inAsia, and use these to foster integration. In addition,this position supported the ongoing development ofregional structures and systems by encouraging thesharing of lessons learned between country pro-grammes. When asked why the Asia Region found itimportant to invest in these positions when mostother organisations do not, the Regional Directorresponded, 'because we saw it as the underpinningof success, reorganisation and management change.We need people who are mentoring, training andmonitoring the system'.

Information-sharing networksSenior managers repeatedly identified information-sharing networks as critical to building capacity

Notes20 This system involved the creation of a new human resources

category - the 'regional expatriate'.

within IUCN in Asia. As with other processes and sys-tems, these networks as they exist today may be farfrom perfect, but they were considered to be animportant part of cultivating and strengtheningregional coherence and identity. Many of the respon-dents interviewed for this study referred to the im-portance of the senior management forum,21 or theinformation sharing that is encouraged by the matrixmanagement structure22 practised in IUCN in Asia.

One senior manager explained, 'keeping lines ofaccess and communication open is extremely impor-tant for capacity development, and information sharing is really important for regional coherence.The more information, the more correspondence, andthe more communication there is, the more peoplecan build links and function as a team'.

Another senior manager linked information sharingto the creation of an enabling environment for adap-tation and creativity:

'I have seen that within some components of theAsia programme, information sharing is limitedand very hierarchical. In others, I see people ableto think laterally, come up with solutions, andthey tend to have a higher degree of enthusiasmand relate their job to their personal lives. Thereare those components where one receives infor-mation, even if it is not directly related to one'son-the-job duty or responsibility. And I think thatis what I find to be one of the most valuable ele-ments of IUCN in Asia.'

Ongoing assessment and change: the reorganisationprocessThe two-phase reorganisation that was initiated in2001 was repeatedly referenced as an importantprocess through which regional coherence and iden-tity are continually forged in IUCN in Asia. One seniormanager explained,

'I think the process of reorganisation has begunto make a regional identity a reality, and in fact I


20

General Director

Regional Director

Asia Regional Office Constituency, Finance, Human Resources,Strategic Planning Team* (PC, REP, OD)

Country Offices/Programmes Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, Lao PDR, Nepal, Pakistan,Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam

Projects

Ecosystem & Livelihood Groups

ELG1: Forests, Environmental Law, Water andWetlands ELG2: Biodiversity, Marine, EnvironmentalEconomicsELG3: Protected Areas

Figure 2. Organisational structure of IUCN in Asia

* PC = programme coordination; REP = regional emerging programme; OD = organisational development.

Notes21 This information network allows senior managers to share

information quickly and broadly among regionalmanagement team members.

22 See Jafri and Sattar (2002a).


21

see that IUCN in Asia is now perceived externallyas a regional institution. So while our members inNepal may see a Nepal country office, while ourmembers in other constituencies may see IUCNcountry offices, the more they see the linksbetween Asia, and the more they see what wehave been able to do, the more they begin to seethat there is a global organisation, and yes, thereare country offices, but then there is an Asia levelorganisation which is able to look at regionalissues and which is able to bring regional skillsand capacity together. I think this regional identi-ty has emerged, and that the pace of this emer-gence has been fastest since we reorganised twoyears ago. And I think it has to do with structures,but more so with continuously [repeating] to our-selves and our colleagues that we are part of alarger entity than the office we are currently man-aging. And it is the ability to be flexible, to beable to change from the day-to-day operationallevel to the longer term conceptual and ambigu-ous entity that we aim to be, which will make usa regional player in environment and develop-ment in Asia.'

The reorganisation process also evidences an organi-sation that is self-reflective and consistently interested in understanding and addressing its weaknesses.

3.4 Creating the capacity for learningA crucial aspect of capacity development in IUCN inAsia is the organisation's commitment to learning. Astated objective of the Asia region reorganisation isto build opportunities for learning about alternativeorganisational models, organisational life cycles, andthe management of change. While formal trainingtakes place from time to time,23 by far the mostprevalent, and often interlinked, modes of learning inIUCN in Asia are experiential, and involve mentoringand on-the-job training. When asked to identifysome of the key ways that the capacity for learning isbuilt in IUCN in Asia, the director of organisationaldevelopment noted the following:• Regular management and programme reviews - a

habit originally established in IUCN Pakistan -were consciously transferred to the regional pro-gramme.

• The Ecosystem and Livelihood Groups hold regu-lar retreats that are designed to examine and self-evaluate programme and financial achievements,

relationships with other parts of the organisation,systems development, and other issues. Theseretreats are also used to map out new directionsand necessary shifts.

• Programme coordinator meetings bring togethercoordinators from across the region to developinstruments for programme development, coordi-nation and monitoring.

• Finance managers from each of the countries inthe Asia Region meet regularly to learn from eachother and to build, for instance, better ways ofproviding information for management decisions.

• Human resources focal points have providedimportant inputs to human resources systems,which has enhanced organisational capacity atthe regional as well as the country levels.

• The terms of reference for specialist staff mem-bers who are responsible for developing newareas of work (for instance, environmental eco-nomics) make that specialist responsible fordeveloping organisational capacity to work in aparticular field. For this, others need to under-stand and learn to utilise and incorporate thenewly acquired specialty into their own pro-gramme. This is often done through planning andworking together on joint initiatives, as well asthrough papers, presentations or discussiongroups.

• Orientation programmes at different levels intro-duce new staff to IUCN's mission and pro-gramme, and help familiarise them with its struc-tures and systems. Most importantly, they give afirst taste of IUCN in Asia's organisational cultureand principles.

3.5 Specific capabilities and the evolution of capacity in IUCN in Asia

What current capabilities characterise IUCN in Asia,and did they develop in a discernible order? Is therean evolutionary trajectory through which we canunderstand how a specific trajectory of capabilitydevelopment in IUCN in Asia led to growth in capaci-ty? When asked to trace the development of capabili-ties in IUCN in Asia, and in turn to link that develop-ment to the evolution of capacity in the organisa-tion, one senior manager responded by emphasisingthat capability development was definitely not lin-ear. She noted, 'the best analogy I can find is anupwardly rising, exponentially expanding, multi-stranded spiral with dynamic interplay and iterationbetween and within each strand or bundle'. She iden-

Notes23 Undoubtedly formal training has contributed to individual

and organisational capacity development. Though valuable,such individual training is costly. Less costly group trainingat the regional and country levels has been used both forlearning and team building.


22

tified IUCN in Asia's current bundle of capabilities inthe following list:• Institutional culture and systems: enabling and

regulating values, management approaches, man-agement constructs, and consultative decisionmaking, knowledge management.

• Content/technical: contributing to the fulfilmentof the mission, generating value for partners andbeneficiaries. This includes programme delivery(planning, project development, coordination andmonitoring) and convening (brokerage on knowl-edge-based issues, outreach, influence).

• Strategic interaction with the external context:establishing and maintaining a regional identitywhile balancing the global and national levels.

• Adaptability/flexibility: 'morphing', repositioning,reshaping content, recrafting systems, seekingnew partnerships and new dimensions to oldones.

She continued,'Initially, to pull the discrete parts of the IUCNSecretariat in Asia together into some manage-ment construct, the institutional systems capa-bilities already available came into play. Thenthey were adapted and enhanced. Three pres-sures - i.e. the need to be visible in the regionalprogrammatic "marketplace", the need to revi-talise some of the country offices, and shortagesof funds, coalesced to force content/technicalcapabilities to develop new dimensions. Withoutcertain elements from the strategic interactionwith the external paving the way and then nur-turing the programme efforts, these would havefailed. Success meant added credibility and newcontacts, so it also raised the bar for strategicinteractions. These brought more opportunities,using and enhancing our content/technical capa-bilities, which triggered the need for changes ininstitutional systems. So the story goes on.'

She concluded by emphasising the critical impor-tance of adaptability and flexibility as inherent char-acteristics of a vital 'spiral'.

Even as capability development was not necessarilylinear, certain capabilities from the content/technicalbundle were shed or reshaped. As examples, a seniormanager explained that the capacity for undertakingenvironmental impact assessments that was initiallyto be built at the regional level had since reverted tothe country level, and the concept of sustainable use

had changed into 'the ongoing building of capabili-ties for ecosystems and livelihoods approaches toIUCN in Asia projects and programmes'. While shedding capabilities from other bundles was said tobe more difficult to detect, this manager noted that'it seems as if the more primitive forms disappear byabsorption into a higher evolutionary form, such ashow our capacity to establish a country office usingall of the bundles remains, but it is now becomingonly one page in a portfolio of alternative ways ofestablishing a country presence'.

4 ConclusionScholars of private sector management have longnoted the challenges involved in managing transna-tional companies.24 IUCN in Asia presents an exampleof a successful transnational non-profit organisationin which a strong sense of purpose and commitmentto environmental change unites managers and staffacross the region. Although complexity anddynamism characterise the context in which theywork, a combination of specific organisational charac-teristics and ongoing management efforts haveallowed IUCN in Asia to rapidly develop its capacity.

It is worth noting in conclusion that managers andstaff in IUCN in Asia were adamant that organisa-tional change and improvement are ongoing. Fewwould say simply that IUCN in Asia had developedits capacity; rather, they would note successes incapacity development and go on to identify newopportunities for growth and improvement. Aninterconnected process of ongoing assessment andchange characterises IUCN in Asia, and many ofthose consulted for this study felt that this was cen-tral to the growth of capacity itself.

Building IUCN in Asia into a 'truly regional institution'that was embedded within the global IUCN entailedidentifying and meeting a complex array of challenges, both external and internal. While thetremendous volatility of Asia, and the ever-evolvingobjectives of international donor organisations posedparticular external challenges, the internal directiveto decentralise and the consequent aim to coordinateand unite several autonomous country offices at thelevel of the region posed extraordinary internal chal-lenges. The management strategy for meeting these

Notes24 See Bartlett and Ghoshal (1998).

challenges combined a formal, documented agendafor organising the region with a daily practice ofstrategic management that allowed flexibility beyondthat afforded by fixed, long-term plans.

Respondents for this study emphasised the impor-tance of strong leadership for capacity building inIUCN in Asia, but many pointed to an equally impor-tant and capable 'followership'. Through collabora-tion and collective strategic thinking, leadership inthe organisation is sometimes diffused and shared.

It is important to understand the growth of capacityin IUCN in Asia, particularly in the nascent stages ofthe organisation's development, as a process of scaling up from the country level. The IUCN-Pakistanprogramme provided organisational models, finan-cial backing, and important human resources toIUCN in Asia as it came into being. It was from thecapacity of IUCN-Pakistan that IUCN in Asia built itsown foundation.

This report emphasises the importance of craftingand maintaining regional coherence as IUCN in Asiasought to build its capacity. In the context of cultural,linguistic, political and national diversity, the balancebetween unity and difference among the region'scountry programmes was identified as a key chal-lenge, and a key opportunity for capacity develop-ment. The Asia Working Group/Asia RegionalDirectorate, the practice of co-location, specific positions created for the regional organisation,information-sharing networks, and the ongoing reor-ganisation were all identified as key structures thatenabled capacity development unique to Asia, butinformed by and informing the global organisation.

While certain aspects of the trajectory of capacitydevelopment in IUCN in Asia resemble that of manyprivate transnational organisations, there is auniqueness to IUCN in Asia's management cultureand commitment that defies quick categorisation,and instead is best represented through the extend-ed quotations presented in this report. It is apparentto anyone who spends time among the senior man-agement of IUCN in Asia that a key to the high levelof energy, commitment and performance that res-onates throughout the regional organisation is theenduring belief that necessary change is always pos-sible, regardless of how difficult or challenging itmay be.


23


24

Appendix: IUCN in Asia IUCN in Asia - organisational development timeline

Resolution #18.6 on increased IUCN support for Asia Region, Perth,18th session of the IUCN General Assembly November-December 1990

Establishment Regional Wetland Coordinator's Office September 1991

Resolution #19 containing basic recommendations for regionalisation,Buenos Aires, 19th session of the IUCN General Assembly January 1994

Asia Working Group established 1995

Asia Regional Coordination Office 1997-1998

ARD established Between 1997 and 2000

Bangkok trip followed by development of ToR of ARD August-September 1999

Asia Regional Office set up and regional programmes initiated Between 2000 and 2001

Regionalisation of IUCN: A reiteration via 2nd WCC resolution #2.5 October 2000

Internal evaluation via the Dhaka and Bangkok meeting February and May 2002

Regionalisation review by IUCN Headquarters March 2002

Asia reorganisation stage 1 Between 2002 and 2003

Revised ToRs for ARD developed January 2003

Reorganisation of regional programmes and establishment of the Ecosystems and Livelihoods Groups (ELG) January 2003

Terms of reference for ARD finalised Effective January 2004

Asia reorganisation stage 2 January 2005


25

IUCN status1. IUCN is an international organisation, registered and headquartered in Gland, Switzerland, with

Observer Status in the United Nations General Assembly.

2. Evidence of IUCN's international, intergovernmental status is available from several sources:a. The relationship of State governments with IUCN. Eighteen governments - including two Asian

States, India and Siam/Thailand - were among the original founders of IUCN in 1948. The way States become IUCN members is similar to the way they become parties to an international agreement:they submit a formal statement, in writing, that they agree with the contents of the IUCN Statutes and agree to abide by them. As they would do in becoming parties to a treaty, States that become members of IUCN designate a ministerial-level authority as their representative to IUCN. Many States designate the Ministry of Environment or its equivalent; others the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or its equivalent. Any other institution that wants to become a member of IUCN - including government agencies - must submit to an application and approval process. A total of 81 States worldwide have agreed to IUCN's Statutes. They include the countries with the world's largestpopulation centres and more than half of the 'mega-diverse' countries that harbour the greatestconcentrations of biodiversity, including China, India and Malaysia.

b. IUCN Headquarters status. Article 1 of the IUCN Statutes states that IUCN is constituted in accordance with Article 60 of the Swiss Civil Code as an international association of governmental and non-governmental members.

c. The relationship of the United Nations with IUCN. The UN General Assembly granted IUCN Observer Status for four reasons: because of the importance of IUCN; because of the need to promote and support every effort towards the conservation of nature; because IUCN's main objective is to encourage and assist the international community on conserving the integrity and diversity of nature; and in order to promote cooperation between the UN and IUCN.

d. The relationship of international agreements with IUCN. Multinational environmental agreements - the Ramsar Convention and the World Heritage Convention - designate IUCN to carry out specific functions on behalf of the parties.

3. The international organisation most similar to IUCN is the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Like IUCN, the ICRC is registered in Switzerland under Article 60 of the Swiss Civil Code, has Observer Status at the UN General Assembly, and is designated to carry out specific functions under international agreements.


26

Countries in the IUCN Asia Intersessional 2005-2008 and members in AsiaMembers

State Govt. NGOs Affiliatesagencies

People's Republic of Bangladesh x 14State of BruneiKingdom of BhutanKingdom of Cambodia 1People's Republic of China x 2 3 1Democratic Republic of East TimorRepublic of Indonesia 1Republic of India x 4 14 1Japan x 1 19Democratic People's Republic of KoreaRepublic of Korea 1 4 1Lao People's Democratic Republic xMalaysia x 2 3 1Republic of MaldivesMongolia 1Union of MyanmarKingdom of Nepal x 9Islamic Republic of Pakistan x 7 14Republic of the Philippines 1 2Republic of Singapore 4Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka x 3 9Kingdom of Thailand x 1 1Socialist Republic of Vietnam x 2


1. MOU/agreements governingIUCN presence in a country

2. Delegation of authority

3. Asia Intersessional programme(4 years) + annexed country pro-grammes

4. Project developmentprocesses

5. Budgets

6. Asia Region HR rules and proce-dures

7. Iterative processes which maybegin in one country, go to regionand back to country (or countries).The orientation presentation isone example.

8. Functional group focal points:-programme coordinators-HR focal points-Finance heads

Regional coherence

Regional Law Programme providesmodel and lays down essentials.

The delegation of authority fromthe DG to the regional directors isconsiderable and largely commen-surate with the responsibilities.

Regional and country levels concurrently designed throughconsultative process - ELGs lead atregional level.Regional programme coordinator(PC) works with ELG & country PCsto create an integrated Asia IP -country specific annexed. Tiedtogether from country to region toglobal through results.

Asia project development groupand guidelines. Responsible forquality control and programme fitof projects designed by countryand regional units.

Region prepares Asia budgetbased on country/ELG budgetsand overall needs of region.

Establish regional norms based oncommonalities between countries,within framework of global HRpolicy.

Created initially in a country office- further developed by ARO forregional staff.

Regional PC involves all other PCsin developing /reviewing/redesigning regional operationalsystems and guidelines (withinglobal framework)Similar to above Similar to above

Autonomy

Country programme negotiatesand redrafts beyond the model.

Formal sub-delegation of authori-ty to country representatives, ELGheads & heads of corporate servic-es to match responsibilities andsome sub-sub-delegation in largeroffices (with agreement of ARO).

Country specific programme (con-sultative process with nationalstakeholders) helps to shaperegional and visa versa.

Delegation to country /ELG levelproject development groupsdepending on capacity and size ofproject.

Country/ELG prepare own budgetsbut adjusts in consultation withthe region.

Local conditions of service re-tailorAsia rules to country-specificneeds (for all staff in the samelocation whether regional ornational).

Now regional HR supporting coun-try office in enhanced design forcountry-specific portion.Will then become Asia Region ori-entation pack, with a portfolio ofcountry specific elements.

Country 'manageability' built intoregional operational systems

Integrating tools and processes that allow for coherence and autonomy

27


28

References Bartlett, C. and Ghoshal, S. 1998. Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution. Cambridge, MA: HarvardBusiness School Press.

Gilmour, D. 2004. Report to Regional Director on Vietnam Programming Exercise. IUCN confidential report.

Imbach, A. 2004. IUCN Asia Intersessional Programme 2005-2008.

IUCN. 1999. Asia Regional Directorate's Terms of Reference. IUCN internal document.

IUCN. 2002. IUCN Asia in 2001: An Overview of Programme and Budget. IUCN internal report.

IUCN. 2002. Terms of Reference for Review of Decentralisation and Regionalisation of IUCN. IUCN internal document.

IUCN. 2002. The Concept of Capabilities.

IUCN. 2002. Draft Minutes of Inception Meeting of ARD Sri Lanka (reconstituted January 2003). IUCN internaldocument.

IUCN. c.2002. Asia Regional Directorate Terms of Reference (reconstituted January 2003). IUCN internal document.

IUCN. 2003. List of Working Groups within Asia Region. IUCN internal document.

IUCN. 2004. Asia Regional Directorate Terms of Reference (reconstituted January 2004). IUCN internal document.

IUCN. 2005. Statutes of 5 October 1948, revised 24 November 2004 and Regulations revised 16 November2004. Gland: IUCN.

Jackson, W.J. and Imbach, A. 2002. Review of Regionalisation and Decentralisation of IUCN. IUCN workshopreport.

Jafri, S. 2000. IUCN Asia Reorganisation. IUCN internal presentation.

Jafri, S. 2002a. Collated Responses: Pre Dhaka ARD Meeting Task. IUCN internal document.

Jafri, S. 2002b. Reorganisation of the IUCN Asia Programme. Situation paper prepared for the information of Dr.Zafar Qureshi.

Jafri, S. 2002c. Role of the Regional Programme. IUCN internal document.

Jafri, S. 2005a. IUCN Asia Re-Organisation: Stage 2. IUCN working paper.

Jafri, S. 2005b. What was Debated and Where We Are. IUCN internal document

Jafri, S and Sattar, N. 2002a. Matrix: Synthesis of Strengths, Weaknesses and Recommendations - ARD. IUCNinternal document.

Jafri, S and Sattar, N. 2002b. Narrative Analysis of Strengths and Weaknesses and Recommendations. IUCN internal document.


29

Kabraji, M.A. 1995. Management Styles. Paper.

Kabraji, M.A. 2003. Corporate Functions: What do they mean for IUCN Asia? IUCN background paper.

Morgan, P. (undated). A Framework for Analyzing Asia Region's Capabilities. IUCN in Asia internal report.

Morgan, P. 2002. Observations on the Outcomes of the Bangkok Meeting on Regionalisation andDecentralisation. Internal document.

Morgan, P. 2004. Organising for Large-scale System Change: The Environmental Action (ENACT) Programme,Jamaica. Discussion Paper 57J. Maastricht: ECDPM.

Morgan, P. 2005. The Idea and Practice of Systems Thinking and their Relevance for Capacity Development.Maastricht: ECDPM, March.

Morgan, P., Land, T. and Baser, H. 2005. Study on Capacity, Change and Performance: Interim Report. DiscussionPaper 59A. Maastricht: ECDPM.

Peter et al., 2002. An Assessment of the Strengths and Weaknesses of IUCN's Asia Region. IUCN internal presentation.

Qureshi, Z. and Morgan, P. (undated) Asia Regional Programme: A Proposal for Reorganisation. IUCN internaldocument.

Qureshi, Z.I. 2002. IUCN Asia Reorganisation Programme. IUCN presentation.

Qureshi, Z.I. 2003. Recrafting IUCN Asia Regional Office. Teaching notes, Lahore University of ManagementSciences.

Qureshi, Z.I. 2003. Recrafting IUCN in Asia Regional Organisation. Lahore: Lahore University of ManagementSciences.

Sattar, N. 2002. ARD Narrative. IUCN confidential document.

Sattar, N. and Jafri, S. 2002. Draft Matrix and Narrative on ARD Core Functions. IUCN internal document.

Smillie, I. and Hailey, J. 2001. Managing for Change: Leadership, Strategy, and Management in Asian NGOs.Oxford University Press/Aga Khan Foundation.

List of individuals consultedIUCN HQ Staff:Friederich, Hans Head, Conservation Finance and Donor Relations Corporate Strategy GroupJackson, William Director Global ProgrammeRafiq, Mohammad Head, Business and Biodiversity Program

IUCN Asia Regional Directorate (ARD) Members:Emerton, Lucy Regional Group Head, Ecosystems & Livelihoods Group 2, AsiaHussain, Zakir Director, Constituency Development & Coordination, IUCN Asia RegionIngles, Andrew Regional Group Head, Ecosystems & Livelihoods Group 1, AsiaJafri, Stella Head, Organisational Development, IUCN Asia RegionKabraji, Aban Marker Regional Director, IUCN Asia RegionNishat, Ainun Country Representative, IUCN BangladeshPalihakkara, Nande Director, Finance, IUCN Asia RegionRao, A. L. Country Representative, IUCN PakistanSattar, Nikhat Head, Regional Emerging Programmes, IUCN Asia RegionYasaratne, Shiranee Country Representative, IUCN, Sri Lanka

IUCN Associates:Bruszt, Gabor Team Leader, IUCN External Review - October 2003 & June 1999Gilmour, Don former Country Representative, IUCN Vietnam & IUCN LaoHalle, Mark European Representative and Director, Trade and Investment, IISDHislaire, Peter ConsultantImbach, Alejandro former Programme Coordinator, IUCN Asia RegionQureshi, Zafar former Prof. & Associate Dean, Lahore University of Mangement Sciences,

Consultant to ARORezel, Peter former Regional Human Resources and Finance Director, IUCN Asia Region

Other IUCN Staff:Ali, Sajid Human Resources Officer, Asia Regional Office, BangkokBangash, Riaz Accounts Officer, Asia Regional Office, BangkokGajaseni, Jiragorn Programme Coordinator, IUCN ThailandJeanmonod, Denise Communication Coordinator, IUCN Asia RegionMahindapala, Ranjith Deputy Regional Programme Coordinator, IUCN Asia RegionMoore, Patricia F. Head, Regional Law Programme, IUCN Asia RegionSaengsanthitham, Rosa Mary Head of Administration, Asia Regional Office, BangkokSrivastava, Asheem Programme Coordinator, Ecosystems & Livelihoods Group 2


30

The European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM) aims to improve internationalcooperation between Europe and countries in Africa, the Caribbean, and the Pacific.

Created in 1986 as an independent foundation, the Centre’s objectives are:• to enhance the capacity of public and private actors in ACP and other low-income

countries; and • to improve cooperation between development partners in Europe and the ACP Region.

The Centre focuses on four interconnected themes:

• Development Policy and EU External Action• ACP-EU Economic and Trade Cooperation• Multi-Actor Partnerships and Governance• Development Cooperation and Capacity

The Centre collaborates with other organisations and has a network of contributors in the European and theACP countries. Knowledge, insight and experience gained from process facilitation, dialogue, networking,infield research and consultations are widely shared with targeted ACP and EU audiences throughinternational conferences, focussed briefing sessions, electronic media and key publications.

This study was undertaken by ECDPM in the context of the OECD/DAC study on Capacity, Change andPerformance and financed by the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), the UK Department forInternational Development (DfID) and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA).

The results of the study, interim reports and an elaborated methodology can be consulted atwww.ecdpm.org/dcc/capacitystudy. For further information, please contact Ms Heather Baser([email protected]).

ISSN 1571-7569

The European Centre forDevelopment Policy ManagementOnze Lieve Vrouweplein 21NL-6211 HE Maastricht, The Netherlands Tel.: +31 (0)43 350 29 00Fax.: +31 (0)43 350 29 [email protected] www.ecdpm.org

analysis - ecdpm

Documents