SDNP 1994 Strategy/Evaluation Report

by Kate Wild

Executive Summary
1. Introduction
2. What is SDN?
3. The origins of SDN
4. The project definition process
5. Regional and national SDNs
6. The headquarters support role
7. SDN in relation to other actors on the environment, development and information scene
8. Operational issues for consideration by UNDP and SDN management
9. Organisational issues within UNDP
10. SDN costs and funding
11. SDN staffing
12. Recommendations
13. Conclusions
Annex 1: List of people contacted
Annex 2: Questions posed to operational SDNs
Annex 3: SDN documents and publications
Annex 4 Other documents consulted

1. Introduction


1.   SDN is a consultative process among national institutions
     from all sectors of society aimed at opening access to
     information for use in sustainable development planning and
     decision-making at all levels. The SDN Office in UNDP
     headquarters acts as a catalyst in the process and the UNDP
     country offices as full participants. 

2.   The idea for SDN originated in preparatory work for UNCED,
     which demonstrated clearly that countries would not be able
     to take responsibility for decisions concerning
     environmental sustainability without access to a sound
     information base and the tools to make use of it. UNDP
     accepted the challenge of developing SDN and established a
     small programme in 1992 with a headquarters secretariat and
     an allocation of resources for initiating country
     activities.

3.   Since then eleven national or regional SDNs have come into
     operation and another thirteen are close to that stage. UNDP
     has defined a programme approach which involves discussions
     within the country initiated by the Resident Representative
     and assessment missions by external consultants, followed by
     feasibility studies defined and executed by nationals. SDNs
     are managed by Steering Committees representing governments,
     NGOs, universities, the private sector and UNDP country
     offices. The process of defining SDNs and their work
     programmes is a participatory one. Initial emphasis has been
     placed on building network connections among national
     institutions and between them and global information
     sources. UNDP support is predicated upon the participation
     of a wide spectrum of institutions from different sectors of
     society, the agreement of participating institutions to open
     up their information resources to public use, and acceptance
     of the principle of sustainability through the incorporation
     of steps leading to cost recovery.

4.   Enough experience has been accumulated, if not to evaluate
     SDN in terms of improved development decision-making, at
     least to identify the results of the network building
     process and to adjust the model as a consequence.

5.   Adjusting the model, however, is probably less critical than
     determining the role that the SDN concept can play in UNDP
     and the level of UNDP commitment to the programme. It is
     these factors which will determine in turn the niche that
     UNDP can occupy among the increasing number of international
     organizations and national institutions in the
     industrialized world that are working on environment,
     development and information issues and the extent to which
     countries will turn to UNDP, with its unique structure of
     country offices and its broad development mandate, as a
     partner in their own endeavours to build information-based
     planning and decision-making capacities that reflect their
     own requirements for development, self-reliance and
     sustainability. 

6.   This report is not primarily an evaluation of the SDN
     programme. That programme within UNDP has been in existence
     for little more than two years and it is too early to
     pinpoint in more than an anecdotal way the impact of
     increased network participation and information use at the
     national level. The report will however attempt to trace the
     history and development, in operational terms, of the SDN
     concept and the processes behind it, and to position the
     programme within UNDP and within the international community
     of organizations dealing with information issues in relation
     to sustainable development. Sections 2 to 6 of the report
     define SDN, describe its origins and conceptual basis and
     show how the concept has been operationalized at the country
     level and in UNDP headquarters. Section 7 relates SDN to
     other international actors and suggests ways in which UNDP's
     role at this level can be reinforced. Section 8 addresses
     questions to UNDP and SDN management and recommends
     adjustments to the way the SDN model is implemented. Section
     9 reviews SDN in relation to other UNDP programmes and
     plans, suggests how SDN can be used in a corporate context
     and discusses the location of the programme. Sections 10 and
     11 review and make recommendations on funding and staffing
     issues. Section 12 summarizes the recommendations contained
     in the report and suggests, inter alia, the need for a broad
     advisory group to work with SDN and feed into UNDP thinking
     on a corporate information approach, particularly as it
     relates to services at the field level. Section 13 offers
     conclusions which are intended to justify continued UNDP
     support for SDN.    

7.   One recommendation can be made immediately: to change the
     name of the programme from Sustainable Development Network
     to Sustainable Development Networking to reflect two
     realities: the importance of the process of building
     consensus on the benefits of sharing information and the
     fact that SDN is not intended to be one  network but a
     number of linked networks with gateways to global and
     specialized services.

8.   One reservation and one bias need to be stated at the
     outset.

9.   The reservation is that this report is not based on direct
     experience of SDNs at the national level. To be meaningful,
     field visits should have covered several countries where SDN
     initiatives had, and had not, been carried out. This was not
     feasible within time and budget constraints. Visiting only
     one or two selected SDNs might have added a veneer of
     credibility but would not have had substantial impact on the
     substance of the report. All operational SDNs were queried
     by fax or e-mail and the answers received reflected in this
     report.

10.  The bias is that of this consultant in favour of a focus not
     on whether the international community should promote
     programmes to improve access to information in the South but
     on how this can best be achieved. A more sustained effort is
     required than has been evidenced in the programmes of many
     United Nations agencies in the last decades. 




2. What is SDN?


11.  "SDN aims at creating country-wide networks to provide
     information support to development activities in a
     sustainable fashion. Underlying a successful sustainable
     development network are: knowledge of the kinds of
     information people require for development decision-making;
     the capacity to obtain, assimilate and make available that
     information; and the establishment of connections among
     users and providers of information and people skilled in
     facilitating its use.

12.  The SDN approach provides countries with the opportunity to
     focus on information as a tool for the empowerment of all
     sectors of society. It changes the direction of the
     traditional flow of information from the North to the South
     and provides developing countries with the tools to enable
     them to select information appropriate to their own
     assessment of their needs. It thereby promotes self
     reliance.

13.  The involvement of local consultants and expertise mitigates
     in favour of sustainability."

14.  The above three paragraphs provide neither an official nor a
     comprehensive definition of SDN. It was offered in
     conversation with a member of the SDN Steering Committee
     from Cameroon. This Committee was created following a short
     prefeasibility mission organized by the SDN secretariat in
     UNDP New York and independently of any further UNDP input.
     Its membership includes government ministries, NGOs,
     national offices of international organizations, the UNDP
     country office and the University of Yaound‚. It has defined
     the terms of reference for a full feasibility study to be
     undertaken by local consultants and is about to issue a call
     for tenders to initiate the study which will provide an
     overview of the national institutions and expertise that can
     contribute to information networking on development issues.
     The Cameroon initiative, and similar experiences in several
     other SDN countries, indicate how a relatively small UNDP
     investment can stimulate a communication process within a
     country when its objectives and methods coincide with
     national aspirations. It also demonstrates the independent
     and collaborative nature of the first phase of the SDN
     process at the country level. 

15.  SDN is representative of a new UNDP approach to development
     which focuses on broad participation of different segments
     of society (governments, NGOs, the private sector, community
     organizations, academia), and emphasizes the need for self
     reliance and sustainability. Among the consequences of this
     approach are slower decision-making and less central
     control, but the expectation is that the process itself will
     lead to changes in  cultures of information use that are
     more deeply rooted in national and local societies. These
     changes in their turn should, in the long run, lead to more
     effective, information-based policy-making and planning.
     



3. The Origins of SDN


16.  The SDN concept was first articulated by Maurice Strong as a
     result of the preparatory work for UNCED. This process
     clearly revealed that if developing countries did not have
     access to information about the environment and its linkages
     with development issues it would be extremely difficult for
     them to be responsible and accountable for decisions
     affecting environmental sustainability. Institutional
     capacities would need to be enhanced and human skills
     developed to deal with information as well as with
     substantive environmental issues. In Strong's view, UNDP
     should take the lead in establishing a Sustainable
     Development Network which would assist developing countries
     in the move towards a form of sustainable development
     responsive to their own needs by facilitating access to
     "policies, technologies, know-how, management practices and
     human resources". The SDN should be a tool to: coordinate
     and mobilize national, regional and international resources;
     effect the communication linkages and consultative processes
     required to promote sustainable development; and support
     capacity building. The UNDP Administrator took up this theme
     and stated that the SDN would "link sources and users of
     information on sustainable development in government,
     research, non-governmental, and entrepreneurial
     organizations on a global scale".

17.  Chapter 40, the 'information chapter' of Agenda 21, called,
     inter alia, for the development of user friendly information
     services, shared information sources, the strengthening of
     electronic networks and the better use of indigenous
     knowledge.

18.  Unfortunately SDN was left dormant for a period in UNDP
     while other priorities, including preparing for UNCED and
     establishing the Global Environment Facility (GEF), took
     precedence. It was not until 1992 that the SDN Programme
     within UNDP was fully launched and attempts were made to
     elaborate the concept put forward by Mr Strong and
     reinforced by Mr Draper. The revival of SDN enabled UNDP to
     reaffirm its interest, in a relatively modest way, in
     building capacities to apply information to environment and
     development questions. When it did reenter the field in 1992
     it found an increasing number of other institutions pursuing
     a similar goal. 

19.  The development objective of SDN was defined as assistance
     to countries to access the sources of information and sound
     technologies that would enable and empower them to take care
     of their environments while improving economic growth for
     present and future generations.

20.  This objective was to be achieved through the establishment
     of networks linking institutions working on environmental
     and development issues at the national level for the purpose
     of facilitating access to national and global sources of
     information and promoting consultative processes among
     different segments of society.

21.  SDN will not build databases but will facilitate access to
     them; wherever possible, it will not create new networks but
     will link to existing ones.
 



4. The Project Definition Process


22.  SDN begins with the selection of countries to participate in
     the programme. The original criteria for participation were
     identified as: geographic spread; a mix of command, mixed
     and market economies; a variety of sectors and subsectors; a
     positive attitude on the part of host institutions; and a
     variety of levels of sophistication with respect to data
     handling capacities. Once the Capacity 21 Programme had been
     launched priority within that programme also became an
     important criterium. Before the SDN programme was
     operational in 1992, two commitments had already been made
     for UNDP assistance with information networking to Angola
     and the Philippines and these two countries were retained in
     the programme.

23.  Within the above criteria it is the responsibility of the
     Resident Representative to explore with government and other
     institutions their interest in establishing an SDN based on
     broad principles and guidelines:

     -    the problems to be addressed by the SDN must be clearly
          defined and widely shared by stakeholders in the
          development process; 
     -    SDN will build wherever possible on existing networks;
          it will not create structures that compete with
          existing ones;
     -    the principle must be accepted that the network is to
          be demand driven; the needs of consumers of information
          must be identified and the network must respond to
          those needs;
     -    UNDP resources will be available for a limited period
          of time; countries will progressively assume
          responsibility for the financial and human resources
          needed to operate their national SDN; and
     -    planning will be participatory, to enable NGOs, private
          sector institutions, local and community
          representatives to fulfil their roles.

24.  If the response from national institutions is positive, a
     consultant then visits the country, typically for two to
     three days, to explain the concept in more detail and to
     prepare the way for a fuller feasibility study.

25.  Ideally, at this stage, national institutions select members
     of an interim Steering Committee to define the terms of
     reference of the feasibility study and identify suitable
     national consultants to carry it out, with UNDP funding. The
     feasibility study will survey users, prepare an information
     needs assessment, identify the host organization for the SDN
     and prepare a project document outlining activities over an
     eighteen month to two year period. 




5. Regional and National SDNs


26.  SDN projects are operational in Pakistan, the Philippines,
     Indonesia, Korea, the South Pacific, Angola, Tunisia,
     Bolivia, Honduras, Nicaragua and Estonia.

27.  Projects are close to the operational phase in Cameroon,
     Chad, Morocco, Mozambique, China, India, Lebanon, Syria,
     Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala and Mexico.

28.  Projects are managed by SDN coordinators, selected by open
     competition. Host organizations for SDN units are selected
     on the basis of the feasibility study, with the agreement of
     the Steering Committee. They vary widely (IUCN in Pakistan,
     an NGO (the YMCA) in Korea, an office within the Ministry of
     the Environment in Indonesia and Bolivia, the UNDP office in
     Tunisia, a university in Angola, the National Library in
     Estonia, for example) but must have the confidence of
     participants in their neutrality vis-a-vis all sectors and
     their willingness to open up their own information
     resources.

29.  Priority has been given in the first phase of SDN activity
     to creating organizational structures and to establishing
     network connections that will allow participants to exchange
     information and ideas among themselves and access
     international sources of data, information and expertise.
     The technical aspects of networking, adapted to the level of
     communications infrastructure available in the countries,
     has taken early priority. But evidence is now beginning to
     show that the technology is being exploited to answer
     specific questions of immediate concern in countries where
     SDNs are more advanced. Bolivia for example recently
     received through its SDN comprehensive information about
     environmental legislation in Peru requested in connection
     with the government's new land use planning approach. The
     Philippines SDN has set up a Bulletin Board Service on
     biodiversity around four theme papers: the national strategy
     for biodiversity conservation; the Philippine wildlife
     trade; national integrated protected area laws; and the
     draft design of the biodiversity conservation information
     system. 

30.  UNDP inputs include salaries for the SDN Coordinator and
     staff of the SDN unit, equipment costs, training and, for
     the time being, in almost all cases, communication costs.
     UNDP's financial input for the first operational phase of
     SDN varies, but is usually between $90,000 and $125,000
     annually.

31.  Since all SDN projects are considered to be activities
     within the overall project under which the headquarters unit
     operates, no project document is required against which
     project expenditures are approved. However, the SDN Director
     has insisted that project documents be prepared nevertheless
     to provide a guide to project implementation and to
     facilitate monitoring.




6. The headquarters support role


32.  SDN in UNDP headquarters supports national SDNs through
     international workshops, trouble shooting and technical
     support and through the identification of information,
     information sources and the variety of technologies needed
     to make SDNs operational under different circumstances.

33.  Three international workshops have been held, a first to
     reexamine and redefine the initial SDN concept and two
     subsequently for the exchange of experience and training.
     Nineteen countries have participated in one or both of the
     training workshops.

34.  SDN recognizes that trouble shooting should only be handled
     by New York as a last resort and is therefore identifying
     sources of support closer to the SDN sites. An agreement has
     recently been reached, for example, with the Economic
     Commission for Africa's Pan-African Development Information
     System (PADIS) to handle trouble shooting in Africa in cases
     where problems cannot be solved within the country.
     Networking support however is available from headquarters
     where communication costs are often considerably lower than
     in the developing country SDN units; the SDN node connects
     on a daily basis to several SDNs to provide a mail drop-off
     and pick-up capability; UNDP is billed for the
     communications charges and it, in turn, bills the project.

35.  In the early days of SDN, the intention was to provide
     standard sets of information and technologies (starter kits)
     to all SDNs but experience revealed that conditions and
     requirements varied too much, and technologies changed too
     fast, for this approach to be feasible. SDN has thus opted
     for the production of an Information Series which identifies
     appropriate hardware and software components and information
     sources. The first issue was published in 1994. Updates are
     planned.

36.  UNDP has established an information service ('gopher') on
     the Internet, the world's most extensive network of
     institutions, information sources and individuals, which
     provides access to the full texts of a variety of UNDP and
     UN documents for SDNs which have interactive access to
     Internet and an entrance to other Internet information
     services. 

37.  The headquarters unit has, apart from its technical role, an
     important promotional role, within UNDP itself, within the
     UN system, among the many organizations supporting
     information work on the environment and development, and
     within countries. The introduction of communication and
     information technologies changes work methods and
     bureaucratic procedures in international organizations as
     elsewhere. Adaptation is required and the promotional
     approach needs to take this into account. 

38.  The SDN unit in New York includes three staff members: the
     director, a technical specialist who also handles all
     project work related to Latin America, and an administrative
     assistant. A 'stable' of consultants has been identified
     which allows for continuity and coherence in the preparatory
     work on national SDNs and the development of activities and
     tools which benefit the SDN community as a whole.

 
7. SDN in relation to other actors on the environment,
development and information scene


39.  Twenty five organizations participated in a recent informal
     consultation on the above theme convened by the
     International Development Research Centre (IDRC). Many other
     organizations could have been invited. A number of
     networking activities are developing to facilitate
     coordination of the programmes dealing with the package of
     issues related to environment, development and information.
     UNDP should monitor these networks but does not have the
     capacity to take an active role in defining them or in
     developing inventories of existing initiatives.

40.  The report of the meeting is useful for its identification
     of problems and descriptions of activities of all the
     participating institutions. But its real interest might lie
     in its demonstration of the increasing complexity of work
     underway on information as it relates to environmental and 
     development issues and the consequent need to develop
     partnerships in order to reduce risks of duplication and
     competition for the attention of countries. No single
     organization can implement its response to Chapter 40 of
     Agenda 21 independently; complementary approaches and
     collaborative partnerships will be required.

41.  SDN has close working relationships with a number of
     organizations active in networking for development:
     -    with IDRC, which has funded meetings, provided inputs
          to the first issue of the Information Series and is co-
          funding the Pakistan and India SDNs;
     -    with the Rockefeller LEAD Programme in China where the
          same node will serve LEAD and SDN; LEAD is also
          interested in cooperating with SDNs in Russia and
          Indonesia where its promotional efforts have been
          helpful;
     -    with CIESIN (the Consortium for International Earth
          Science Information Network) in China and Estonia; in
          the latter country SDN is hosted by the CIESIN network;
          and
     -    with UNEP to provide access to INFOTERRA databases in
          African SDNs.

42.  Approaches have been made to a number of other
     organizations, particularly donor agencies, to seek joint
     funding opportunities and partnerships.

43.  The meeting noted a number of issues related to the
     implementation of the information components of Agenda 21
     which had not yet been satisfactorily addressed and
     identified the following criteria for improving existing
     systems:
     -    a meaningful participatory approach;
     -    effective feedback loops to encourage two-way flows of
          information;
     -    cost-effectiveness through a better understanding of
          benefits and costs;
     -    attention to particular needs of different types of
          users; and
     -    the development of the 'information broker' role to
          help interpret, manage, filter and add value to
          available information.

44.  The meeting singled out SDN as fulfilling these criteria and
     recommended it as a functional model. UNDP is, therefore, in
     the opinion of its peer organizations, meeting an important
     need with SDN. 

45.  While UNDP is active on this particular international scene,
     there are doubts among the other players about the
     'sustainability' of UNDP's effort. The niche that it has
     identified for itself is concrete country level programmes;
     other models have not been developed to effectively address
     questions at this level in a participatory fashion. But the
     process is a long one and the coverage very far from
     worldwide. The international community is looking for
     indications as to whether UNDP is willing to target enough
     countries, and to support SDNs long enough, for there to be
     clear results in terms of the value of network participation
     and the new information tools in a development decision-
     making context which is profoundly multisectoral and which
     involves a wide range of actors at the national level. 

46.  UNDP could strengthen its hand by forging partnerships close
     to home. It could, for example, work more closely with CSD
     (Committee on Sustainable Development) to ensure that all
     country reports and other CSD documentation are available to
     SDNs through the UNDP's Internet 'Gopher' or on diskette.
     This would be useful to national institutions and to UNDP's
     own country offices. It should similarly ensure that all UN
     bodies that are publishing relevant information in
     electronic form are offered the same opportunity to bring
     their information to the attention of national and regional
     SDNs.

47.  In addition, UNDP could put more emphasis on encouraging all
     UN country offices to participate in national SDNs. These
     two steps could represent a real breakthrough in terms of
     the delivery of information from UN information sources to
     the countries which, after all, contribute substantially to
     the development of these resources.  

48.  UNEP represents a special case both because of its area of
     responsibility within the UN system and because of the
     emphasis it has put on building information services. Care
     should be taken that SDN and UNEP initiatives never compete
     at the country level and that INFOTERRA participate in the
     building of SDNs. Current levels of cooperation clearly work
     well in some countries but not in all. Top level leadership
     in both organizations may be needed to encourage partnership
     at the country level and override technical differences.

49.  But, in the final analysis, SDN will not attract additional
     partners unless UNDP is seen to be standing behind the
     programme for a reasonable period of time. 




8. Operational Issues for consideration by UNDP and 
Management


50.  The SDN concept has earned respect on the international
     scene and the national SDN networking process is beginning
     to show information results in countries where the earlier
     SDNs were established. The proposals made here are for
     adjustments to SDN methods and not for a new approach. They
     are not prescriptions but ideas to be explored with
     participating institutions in the process of developing
     SDNs.

8.1  SDN and Sustainable Development

51.  The broad issue of sustainable development is the focus of
     the networking activity supported by the programme and UNDP
     encourages a close link between the SDN and the country's
     national programme for Agenda 21. But the nature of the
     institutions making up the networks determines the
     information flows. As long as the networks are created
     through a participatory process within the country which is
     not controlled by UNDP, the definition of development that
     drives the flow of information through the network will
     similarly reflect national interests. UNDP might want to
     consider whether it will accept the degree of autonomy in
     SDNs which now exists or whether it should take a more
     active role in ensuring that network members correspond to a
     profile that more nearly reflects its own conception of
     sustainable human development. In the final analysis, the
     participation of the Resident Representative in the Steering
     Committee will help ensure overall consistency between the
     SDN and UNDP's broad goals.

8.2  Focus and coverage

52.  SDN lives in the real world of limited resources. With
     eleven operational SDNs and thirteen more close to the end
     of the pipeline, funds for any one country are necessarily
     limited. The question then arises as to whether to narrow
     the focus of the programme to provide substantial support to
     a few countries where maximum demonstration effect could be
     achieved or whether to aim for broad coverage but with more
     limited inputs. The danger of the former course is that
     countries with a relatively sophisticated technological
     infrastructure would tend to benefit most. SDN participants
     have expressed strong reservations about this approach and
     recommended that UNDP support a range of countries at
     varying levels of economic development and with different
     networking needs.

53.  Networking is primarily a human activity which can be
     supported, but not substituted, by computers and
     communication technologies; a broader more flexible approach
     reflects the need to address networking issues from both
     human and technical perspectives. Instead of focusing only
     on the countries with the best chances for sophisticated
     networking success, therefore, the SDN Office should
     continue with a broad and varied approach, but make every
     effort to contain costs, to enter into partnerships with
     other international organizations and to use the increasing
     pool of SDN coordinators to replace international staff in
     prefeasibility and other consulting missions. The interest
     of countries, of the Resident Representatives and of the
     newly appointed sustainable development advisers should to
     be critical factors in selecting SDN countries.

8.3  Information and Information Technologies

54.  Much of the emphasis in the existing SDN has been on the
     creation of connectivity among national institutions and the
     provision of communication links to the outside world in
     order to provide access to information and to electronic
     mail and conferencing services. This is an important
     condition for the exchange of information which enables
     institutions to tap into external expertise and some sources
     of information. However, much relevant development
     information is available locally, some of it stored in
     databases, on occasion built through technical cooperation
     projects. In defining SDN projects it may be time to
     encourage participating institutions to move more actively
     towards incorporating local information sources, in machine-
     readable, audio-visual and paper form, more effectively into
     the information exchange mechanisms. 

8.4  Salaries

55.  Criticism has already been leveled at SDN for taking on too
     much load in the way of salaries for project staff. Most
     national SDN offices are staffed by one or two people; two
     are considerably larger: Pakistan with an intended staff of
     ten and the Philippines with five. Apart from questions of
     cost, the more staff that are covered by UNDP budgets the
     less likely it is that the SDN will be sustained after UNDP
     resources are withdrawn. UNDP recognizes this potential
     problem and has thus insisted that SDNs be managed on a
     business-like basis and seek possibilities for cost
     recovery, but, under the most optimistic scenarios, it will
     be difficult to generate sufficient income in the early
     years to sustain services, particularly if large numbers of
     staff are involved.

56.  Ideally, SDNs should be located in existing institutions
     where staff are already available and where the SDN mission
     conforms to the existing mandate. UNDP resources would then
     be allocated to the strengthening of human skills and
     technical infrastructure rather than to salaries. While this
     approach will not always, or even perhaps often, be
     feasible, whenever it is it should be the option of choice.  
     

8.5  National Telecommunications Policies

57.  Attempts to broaden access to telecommunications services is
     likely on occasion to challenge national telecommunications
     policies. Telecommunications costs are high, in some cases
     because high-end services subsidize the broad spread of
     basic infrastructure to areas not yet served at all. The
     issues are complex and the developmental implications of
     electronic communications not yet fully understood. The SDN
     Office has had preliminary discussion with ITU in an attempt
     to seek guidance on telecommunications policy issues. It is
     time to try to bring ITU more formally into the process so
     that advice and technical support can be obtained for SDNs
     on complex policy issues as required.

8.6  Evaluation of SDN

58.  SDN is both a process and an outcome. The process of
     building consensus in support of open access to information
     challenges cultures of information management and secrecy
     and of lack of information use. The process therefore is
     likely to be a slow and the results difficult to evaluate.
     The recent Independent Review of Capacity 21 suggested that
     effecting permanent changes in public attitudes and
     behaviour can take as long as a generation and that UNDP may
     have underestimated "what was required to support longterm
     national dialogues involving not just governments but broad
     segments of civil societies". To expect that SDNs would
     already show measurable results in terms of the impact of
     information use on development decision-making is therefore
     unrealistic. It is not, however, unrealistic to build into
     SDN projects indicators of success in terms of numbers of
     network members, their representativity, their activeness in
     network management and policy, the scope and quality of
     their databases and information collections, the numbers of
     questions processed through the networks, the degree of
     satisfaction with the results, users willingness to pay for
     services and so forth.  Some of these indicators have been
     identified in project documents. Future feasibility studies
     should systematically address the question of the means by
     which the success of the network can be measured and
     monitored; the resulting information should be made
     available to UNDP so that the programme as a whole can be
     evaluated at some future time.     

8.7  Management

59.  Overall management of the SDN project is in the hands of the
     New York unit which authorizes expenditures for review and
     execution by OPS. Management of the substantive work of the
     national SDNs is the responsibility of the coordinator and
     the Steering Committee. Both the size of the New York
     secretariat and the capacity building nature of the project
     work in favour of a  decentralized management approach. The
     UNDP country office is a participant in the national SDN and
     a member of the Steering Committee. It therefore has a
     particular responsibility to ensure that the process remains
     participatory and to alert the New York unit when its
     intervention may be needed to reinforce this requirement,
     for example for regular Steering Committee meetings and
     project reports.

8.8  Language

60.  The language of SDN is English. Producing all SDN materials
     in other international languages would add considerably to
     costs and administrative overhead. A case can be made that
     English may be adequate to the technological aspects of the
     project but it will not be sufficient to ensure that key
     information is made widely available within countries, nor
     that particularly interesting  material in national
     languages receives an international audience. Some
     capability should be built into SDN units to summarize
     critical material in the national languages or in English,
     depending on the direction of the information flow.

8.9  Communication of the SDN message

61.  SDN has issued a number of brochures and organized
     presentations in UNDP to explain the concept and the
     programme. However, SDN is not yet well understood and is
     often perceived as a technology-driven rather than an
     information-driven activity. More work needs to be done to
     explain the supporting nature of technology and the
     developmental value of communications facilities and the
     information and expertise to which they provide access.
     Better communication within UNDP could also lead to more
     opportunities for joint action, for example with the UN
     Sudano-Sahelian Office (UNSO). 




9. Organizational issues within UNDP


62.  SDN is a small programme but it deals with global issues
     within UNDP and thus can benefit from exchanges with many
     parts of the house on substantivee and on logistical
     questions. UNDP interest in the programme is seen as a
     measure of its broader interest in exploiting information
     and communication technologies in support of sustainable
     development. What follows is not an exhaustive catalogue of
     all units within UNDP whose involvement with SDN is or could
     be beneficial (OPS, for example, is not included although it
     plays a crucial role in delivering expertise and material to
     SDN sites) but it attempts to identify the main players and
     the main issues of concern on an organization wide basis.

9.1  SDN and UNDP's Corporate Information Role

63.  SDN has, from its inception, involved UNDP country offices
     as  key participants in national networks; in rare cases the
     UNDP office serves as the node for the national SDN.

64.  Other UNDP initiatives are moving in the direction of a more
     active information role for country offices, in particular
     the Administrator's call for them to provide a service to
     countries on behalf of the UN system as a whole. UN
     information services are built in many cases on information
     and data provided by countries to contribute to global
     comparative databases, to meet reporting needs on
     international conventions and agreements and to provide
     input into development research. Much of this development
     information is more easily available within the
     international system than within the countries that supplied
     it originally.  The system of UN Information Centres (UNICs)
     and depository arrangements with libraries and documentation
     centres has not succeeded in providing effective local
     access.  UN information is largely wasted in terms of
     development decision-making at the national and local
     levels.

65.  The availability of much of the system's information in
     electronic form affords new opportunities to solve this old
     problem. UNDP is uniquely positioned because of its network
     of country offices, its communications infrastructure and
     its central role in the UN development system. The SDN
     experience, with its emphasis on participatory processes
     involving users and producers of information to promote
     access to information sources, could provide a helpful
     model. Any new services offered by country offices will
     benefit from an organized and experienced user community.
     Identifying UNDP offices as SDN coordinators in a select
     number of countries with different levels of technological
     infrastructure could maximize UNDP investments in computer
     and communication technologies in its field structure by
     reinforcing its substantive information role, in its own
     interests and those of its national constituencies. This
     linkage between SDN and the country offices to promote UNDP
     goals would necessitate more active interest in the
     programme from the regional departments and senior
     management.

9.2  Capacity 21 and SDN

66.  Capacity 21 is a broad international programme in support of
     countries' efforts to achieve development without destroying
     the resources on which it depends through national
     programmes that adopt the principles of Agenda 21. The
     programme is managed by UNDP with the backing of the UN
     system and major donor agencies. It involves policy review,
     analysis of institutional capacity, the development of
     participatory processes, and consensus building. In
     countries where Capacity 21 is active it has found its work
     impeded by lack of information. Many SDN countries are also
     priority countries for Capacity 21. It is logical therefore
     that there should be close links between Capacity 21 and SDN
     and these links exist. When Capacity 21 identifies that SDN
     responds to a country's own vision of its development needs
     it earmarks funds for an SDN programme. Capacity 21 has
     provided critical financial and conceptual inputs into SDN.
     The SDN Director sits on the Capacity 21 Management
     Committee. The Directors of both Capacity 21 and SDN believe
     that the existing level of cooperation works well. 

67.  The question nevertheless arises as to whether SDN, which is
     a small programme currently housed with UNDP's Global and
     Interregional Programmes, would be more effective if it were
     housed in Capacity 21. This would have the advantage of
     clarifying the relationship between the two programmes which
     appears to cause some confusion in UNDP and therefore
     probably also at the country level.

68.  The disadvantage of this association is that it would link
     SDN more closely with an environmental approach to
     sustainable development when the reality of its networks at
     the country level represents a broader concept.  


9.3  SIDSNET and SDN

69.  UNDP has been asked by the Global Conference on Sustainable
     Development of Small Island Developing States (SIDS) to 
     undertake a study to help these countries: gain access to
     relevant information to support policy-making and planning
     related to sustainable development; develop the capacity to
     use these resources; and increase collaborative mechanisms
     through which experiences and resources can be shared in
     areas of common concern. SDN is managing this study within
     UNDP and is carrying it out with a number of consultants
     from existing SDNs. SIDSNET at the moment is consuming 100%
     of the time of the Director of SDN. If SIDSNET takes off and
     follows the SDN model it could put an additional workload on
     the SDN Office in New York that would be difficult to
     absorb. SIDSNET and SDN are closely related but they are not
     the same. Specific approaches developed in the context of
     small island states are not likely to be broadly applicable
     elsewhere. If SDN is expected to take responsibility for
     follow up to the SIDSNET study additional resources would be
     required if SDN activities in the rest of the world are to
     be maintained.

9.4  DAIS and SDN

70.  The Division for Administrative and Information Services is
     responsible for UNDP's central computer and
     telecommunications service and support. SDN at headquarters
     has purchased its own computer to support its own
     communications needs and those of  national SDNs. During
     frequent missions to the field, and because of the UNDP
     country offices central role in some SDNs, SDN staff are
     asked to provide technical advice and support to the field.
     This leads to occasional tensions with DAIS which is
     required to maintain UNDP corporate standards and recover
     costs from user units. These tensions are a part of the
     transition in today's world from central to decentralized
     approaches to computing and communications. They need to be
     controlled through frequent communication and mutual
     understanding rather than through regulation. 

71.  DAIS has no desire to swallow SDN. It accepts that a certain
     amount of diversity is a feature of today's landscape; it is
     the provision of services and facilities  that is important,
     not by whom they are provided. However it is important that
     once services are in place, particularly at the field level,
     that all parts of UNDP can take advantage of them and that
     competition ceases. Some mechanism, although probably not a
     formal one, needs to ensure that information flows regularly
     between SDN and DAIS on technical issues.

9.5  The location of SDN

72.  SDN is now located within the Division of Global and Inter-
     regional Programmes. This Division, in the current
     restructuring of UNDP, will cease to exist and will be
     replaced, at least in part by a Division of Science and
     Technology which will be one of four substantive and
     advocacy divisions within the Bureau for Programming,
     Planning and Support. The other divisions cover management
     technologies; poverty, NGOs and participation; and the
     environment and natural resources. The present suggestion is
     that SDN be attached to Environment. An alternative would be
     to attach it to Science and Technology. The disadvantage of
     the former is that it might associate SDN too closely with
     environmental issues whereas in fact it represents a broader
     approach to sustainable development. The disadvantage of the
     latter is that it might reinforce the view that SDN is
     driven by technology rather than by information needs. A
     third alternative might be to locate SDN at the Bureau level
     where the documentation and statistics function is located
     and which would associate SDN conceptually with all four
     programme areas. The advantage of all three locations is
     that SDN could share clerical support with a larger unit
     thus perhaps obviating the need for additional clerical
     staff within SDN itself.




10. SDN Costs and Funding


73.  SDN is a global project within the framework of which
     individual country projects are identified and funded. Three
     project documents illustrate the financial history of the
     project. INT/92/028 provided $245000 from  DGIP to carry the
     headquarters component of the project from May 1, 1992 to
     June 30, 1993. INT/92/204 provided $1200000 from January 1,
     1992 to December 31, 1993 from the Special Programme Reserve
     (BPPE) for pilot national programmes to be designed and
     managed by the resident representatives. An additional
     $126000 supplemented this project to bridge country
     operations from July 1 to September 30, 1993. INT/93/006
     combined the headquarters and field components into a single
     project with a total of $1588000 allocated for the fifteen
     month period from October 1 1993 to 31 December 1994 of
     which $1004000 were to come from the Special Programme
     Reserve (BPPE) and $584000 from DGIP, Capacity 21 and CEO.
     Of this total allocation, $411000 covers the salary costs of
     the three New York-based staff.

74.  The project has thus received a total allocation of $3159000
     for the three year period from 1992 to 1994.

75.  Additional resources have been made available, notably
     through the IPFs which are expected to cover 25% of  the
     cost of SDNs in their countries. SDN would like to see a
     larger proportion of SDN costs covered by IPFs as a
     demonstration of national commitment to the networks. CAP 21
     funds are allocated in countries where SDN corresponds to
     the countries' own assessment of their needs in relation to
     national Agenda 21 programmes. Other organizations have also
     contributed:  IDRC to the first issue of the Information
     Series and to the Pakistan SDN (and the planned SDN in
     India); CIESIN in the form of the basic network
     infrastructure in Estonia; Rockefeller, equipment in China. 

76.  The problem of the SDN is less one of financial resources
     and more one of financial stability. The less-than-three-
     year period during which the project has been staffed and
     operational has seen two projects of fourteen and fifteen
     months, with a bridging period of three months between them.
     Management has therefore spent a good deal of time and
     energy presenting the case for continued funding. When
     management constitutes fifty percent of the professional
     staff this represents a considerable drain on project
     activities. It has also contributed to the doubts that are
     expressed by UNDP's partner organizations in its capacity to
     sustain the concept of SDN for a sufficient period of time
     to test the benefits it can bring to countries struggling
     with new approaches to development.

77.  The case was put earlier in this report that it is too soon
     to evaluate the substantive results of SDN. Indications were
     also provided to suggest that the focus of the more
     established SDNs is beginning to move from the technological
     infrastructure to the use of communications facilities to
     obtain information to meet defined needs. UNDP therefore
     should stand behind SDN with a project of sufficient
     duration to allow for confidence to build, within the SDN
     Office itself, in countries, in UNDP country offices and in
     other international organizations. A three year commitment
     beginning in January 1995 is probably the minimum that is
     required. The operational budget should reflect the need to
     sustain existing SDNs and initiate a realistic number of new
     ones. What is realistic will be conditioned, inter alia, by
     UNDP's overall posture with respect to information and
     communications and the need to implement SDNs in enough
     countries in different circumstances to allow for assessment
     of transferability of the models developed. 




11. SDN Staffing


78.  SDN has three staff members: a Director, a Technical Adviser
     and an Administrative assistant/Secretary. Even for a unit
     which relies extensively on electronic means for producing
     documents and communicating information, resources are not
     adequate to sustain programmes that are underway, administer
     initial consultancies and feasibility studies and promote
     the programme at the country level and in the international
     community. The programming and administrative workload is
     such that the technical adviser is now spending most of his
     time on this rather than on technical support. Remaining up-
     to-date on technical issues is important if SDNs are to be
     built in as cost-effective and efficient a manner as
     possible.

79.  To sustain any kind of growth in SDN country coverage will
     require an additional technical adviser, with more skills in
     the area of information to complement the technology skills
     of the  adviser who is presently on the team. An additional
     junior clerical staff member is also required to allow the
     present administrative assistant to take over the
     administrative tasks currently handled by the two
     professional staff.




12. Recommendations: Elements of a Strategy 


80.  The following recommendations are, for the most part, spelt
     out in more detail in the report. The first set is addressed
     to UNDP. The second set deals with the relationship between
     SDN and the rest of the international community, including
     the United Nations. The final set summarizes the operational
     aspects of SDN dealt with in more detail in section 8. 


12.1 Recommendations addressed to UNDP

81.  UNDP should continue to fund SDN on a project basis for a
     minimum period of three years. The staff resources should be
     increased by 1 professional post and some general service
     assistance. Both measures are needed to provide credibility
     not only for SDN, but also for UNDP's  overall commitment to
     actions to improve access to information for development
     decision-makers from all sectors and at all levels in
     developing countries. Depending upon the rate of growth of
     the programme, additional staff resources may need to be
     considered before the end of the three year period. 

82.  This three year period should be followed by an evaluation
     of SDN and a decision as to whether it should be
     'mainstreamed' within UNDP through the more systematic
     integration of information and communication tools into
     development approaches.
 
83.  UNDP should create an advisory group through which SDN
     experience can be more effectively shared with related
     programmes and SDN can learn of relevant initiatives
     elsewhere. This group should include GEF, Capacity 21, the
     Regional Bureaux, DAIS, UNSO and the Documentation and
     Statistics Office of BPPS. It could contribute to an
     integrated UNDP approach to information and provide useful
     input into definitions of a future information role for
     UNDP.


84.  UNDP should consider creating pilot SDNs in which its
     country offices play a major role in order to progressively
     test their capabilities with respect to information service
     and different approaches to information access.


12.2 Recommendations in respect of the International Community

85.  SDN should make maximum use of networks that share
     information on the activities of the international community
     working at the intersection of development, environmental
     and information issues.

86.  SDN should continue to develop partnerships with
     institutions that share its basic principles of
     participatory approaches, broad institutional involvement
     and sustainability.

87.  SDN should not take a lead in coordinating international
     activities. 

88.  SDN should reinforce its links, in directions identified in
     this report, within the UN and in particular with UNEP, ITU
     and CSD.  


12.3 Recommendations concerning the operation of SDN

89.  The SDN approach to network building is participatory. UNDP
     should accept that this will lead to information exchange
     related to broad and varied concepts of development
     determined by network members and that those concepts will
     change over time. 

90.  The selection of countries to participate in SDNs should not
     be limited to countries most likely to implement
     successfully high level networking technologies. Countries
     at all levels of development should be included in the
     programme.

91.  More focus should be put on the information components
     rather than the technology components of the network, and,
     in particular, on drawing local information into the
     exchange process. More information expertise should be used
     in advisory missions.

92.  Efforts should be made to identify existing organizations
     whose mandate matches that of SDN coordinator in order to
     reduce the salary component of project costs.

93.  Indicators allowing for evaluation should be identified at
     the feasibility stage and implemented in SDN work
     programmes.

94.  UNDP country offices should monitor SDNs and alert SDN/NY to
     any project difficulties.

95.  SDNs should try to recruit national offices of other UN
     system organizations into the network. SDN/NY should offer
     to incorporate UN system information into the services it
     provides centrally.

96.  SDNs should include a capability to translate key materials
     between international and national languages.    

97.  SDN/NY should continue its efforts to explain SDN within
     UNDP.




13. Conclusions


98.  SDN is proving itself to be useful and appreciated in most
     countries where it is operational. Enthusiasm exists in
     countries where initial contact has been  made. The
     programme has earned the respect of its international
     partners.

99.  Two realities suggest that it is worth continued UNDP
     investment.

100. New approaches to development recognize that effective
     decision-making requires broad community participation and
     multidisciplinary inputs. SDN creates a space for
     interaction and information exchange for actors from all
     sectors of society and provides opportunities for cutting
     across disciplinary lines.

101. New technologies have the potential to link people,
     institutions and information and break down institutional,
     disciplinary and geographic barriers in ways that we are
     only beginning to explore but which may radically alter
     approaches to problem solving and planning. These tools are
     easily available in the North. SDN is experimenting with
     them in the South.

102. UNDP is the only international organization that has a
     comprehensive structure of field offices with basic
     communications infrastructure in place and a mandate to
     support the UN system's operational activities for
     development. 

103. It is almost inevitable that UNDP will develop a corporate 
     approach to information for development within the context
     of the UN system. That will take some time. In the meantime,
     SDN should be maintained and the lessons learned
     incorporated in any future UNDP programme. The cost of
     stopping SDN and developing a new approach from scratch will
     be much higher than the cost of sustaining the programme and
     using the experience gained to nurture future initiatives.





ANNEX 1: List of people contacted



UNDP

Philip Dobie, Senior Programme Advisor, Capacity 21

Timothy Rothermel, Director, Division of Global and Interregional
Programmes (DGIP)

Kerstin Leitner, Deputy Director, Division of Administrative and
Information Services (DAIS)

Lawrence Yeung, Chief, Communications and Computer Services DAIS

Niky Fabiancic, Information Management Unit, DAIS

Linda Schieber, Chief, Documents and Statistics Office, Bureau of
Programming, Policy and Support (BPPS)

Peter Hopkyns, Deputy Director, Office for Project Services

Toshi Niwa, Acting Associate Administrator

Bryan Wannop, Division for Europe and the Commonwealth of
Independent States

Annie Roncerel, Division for Europe and the Commonwealth of
Independent States

Nay Htun, Director, Regional Bureau for Asia and the Pacific

Anne Forrester, Deputy Director, Regional Bureau for Africa

Maamar-Rashid Ayadi, Regional Bureau for Arab States

Gus Edgren, Assistant Administrator, Director, BPPS

Maxine Olsen, Chief, Programme Operations Division, UN Sudano--
Sahelian Office (UNSO)

Peter Gilruth, Environmental Information Systems Advisor, UNSO

Carlos Lopes, Office for Strategic Planning and Evaluation

Chuck Lankester, Director, SDN

Raul Zambrano, Technical Advisor, SDNOrganisations other than UNDP

Janos Pasztor, Senior Information Systems Officer, United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change

Mary Pat Williams Silveira, Senior Officer, Human Development
Institutions and Technology Branch, Department for Policy
Coordination and Sustainable Development, UN

Luciana Marulli-Koenig, Chief, Information Systems Unit,
Department of Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development, UN

Ji-Quiang Zhang, Senior Programme Advisor, Rockefeller Foundation
Celine Walker, Secretary, Information Systems Coordinating
Committee, UN

Robert Valantin, Director, Information and Communication Systems,
IDRC

Yunkap Kwankam, Director for Health Technology, University of
Yaounde





ANNEX 2: Request for information to be sent by fax to all SDNs listed in Current Events:


Pakistan, Philippines, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Honduras, Suva, Angola
(?), Indonesia, Estonia (?)

Consultation with SDNs

UNDP is undertaking an internal study of the SDN operations in
order to help it better define its future role in the SDN
programme. Because of the limited time available site visits are
not included in this exercise; we would however very much like to
solicit the views of those involved in national SDN processes on
the issues that are identified below.  The consultant who is
preparing the review is Kate Wild, who has long experience with
information systems and development issues in IDRC and the ILO. 
She will be at UNDP from July l9 to the 29th and will try to
contact you by phone during that period.  It would however, be
extremely useful if you could fax your responses to the following
questions in order to facilitate further discussion.

1.   When did discussions on SDN begin in your country or region?

2.   What motivated those discussions: desire to increase access
     to information about sustainable development; desire to
     improve the technical infrastructure and human skills
     required for communication within your country or region;
     desire to initiate a process of consultation and dialogue on
     sustainable development issues?  Other motivations?

If your response includes a mixture of the above points can you
assess the relative weight of each?

3.   How frequently does your SDN Steering committee meet? How
     many meetings have been held?  Have other forums been used
     to bring SDN members together?

4.   How many members does your SDN contain? How many are active
     providers of information to other members of the SDN and
     active users of information from SDN sources?  Please give
     several examples of information queries dealt with within
     the SDN.  Can you indicate the number of queries dealt with
     through the coordinating centre of your SDN each week?

5.   Of the total membership, how many are: 

     -    government organisations; 
     -    ngos;
     -    universities;
     -    other research centres;
     -    private sector institutions.

6.   Please identify the priority sustainable development issues
     to be addressed by your SDN.

7.   In addressing those issues can you give priority to
     information from local, national, regional or international
     sources?

8.   Please identify the main networking problems faced by your
     SDN; are they:

     -    technical: absence of telecommunication links, computer
          hardware, software, etc; 
     -    financial: lack of resources to invest in
          communications infrastructure etc; 
     -    human: lack of skills to make use of computer
          communications technologies; lack of time to devote to
          networking issues; little culture of information
          sharing and use, etc.;
     -    organisational institutional barriers to the free
          exchange of information;
     -    any other problems?

9.   Please identify the main achievements of your SDN in terms
     of: 

     -    information provision; and 
     -    the process of consultation.

10.  Please identify any major disappointments you have
     encountered in developing your SDN. 

11.   Please describe the reasons for your own commitment to SDN.





ANNEX 3: Documentation produced by SDN HQ



UNDP, Workshop on the Sustainable Development Network, 8-10
September 1992, New York, Workshop Report; NY 30 September, 1992

Brochure: The Sustainable Development Network; UNDP; March (?)
1993. Inserts: Current Events and Future Happenings, 3 to date.

UNDP, IDRC; Sustainable Development Network. Starter Kit and
Coordinators Workshop, 8-12 February 1993 Ottawa, NY April, 1993

UNDP; Sustainable Development Network; Starter Kit and
Coordinators Workshop; 6-11 December 1993. Bombay.

UNDP, IDRC; Sustainable Development Network, SDN Information
Series. First release, March, 1994

Electronic Sources of Information provided by UNDP

UNDP Gopher Server: through UNDP documents option in main gopher
menu; for users with full Internet connectivity;

SDN FTP Server: experimental for users with full Internet
connectivity

SDN Mail Server. for all sites that have e-mail access to
Internet.

selected information on diskette





ANNEX 4: Selection of Other Documents Consulted


Information and Agenda 21: Report of an Informal Consultation on
Environment Development and Information, 11-12 April, 1994, IDRC,
Ottawa, 1994

Independent Review of Capacity 21, prepared for Capacity 21 by M.
Khalikane and H. Macdonald Stewart, May 1994

The Sustainable Development Network: Progress Report with
Recommendations, C. Rajana, S. Ruth, May 1993

Study on the Optimal Configuration of the UNDP Sustainable
Development Network for the Philippines (SDN-Philippines),
prepared by S. D. Talsayon, Asian Center, University of the
Philippines, UNDP, Manila, 1991

Feasibility Study of a Sustainable Development Network, Egypt, S.
Youssef et al American University, UNDP, Cairo, 1993

Study on the Development of a Sustainable Development Network,
Tunisia, E. Ben Hamidi, M. Cracknell, ENDA Inter-Arabe, UNDP,
Tunis, 1993 (?)

Capacity 21 Management Report, synopsis of Programmes, UNDP 1994
(?)

The Sustainable Development Network, Progress Reports l-8, June
1992-April 1994, SDN

Summary Report of the UNDP Global Meeting, Rye, 21-25 March, 1994

UNDP: A Charter for Change, Part I, Vision and Goals, Part II,
Management Challenges, Working Paper by a Transition Team of UNDP
Staff. October 1993

| Brochures | Workshops | Papers | Evaluations | SIS | Guidelines |