Building Capacity Of Local NGOs

By Shankar P. Rajbhandari

IN view of the national development of Nepal, it has been well recognised that NGOs are the development partners of the government. This has yet to be fully practised in Nepal. As a matter of fact, NGOs can contribute to the national development when they will be competent enough in the service sector for what they are broadly set up.

After the popular movement of 1990, NGOs have increased in Nepal and their roles and importance are becoming more and more alarming from the standpoint of socio-economic development of the kingdom. The government through its 8th and 9th plan documents has also articulated this fact.

Needs for NGOs’ Capacity Building

The needs and importance of NGO’s capacity building cannot be understood well unless it is well defined in operational terms. Different people perceive organisational capacity in different ways. Some equate capacity with physical assets whereas others equate it with the delivery of services or programs. Capacity is a multi-dimensional and complex attribute, It relates to a number of arena such as, strategic, renewal, management, human resource development, systems, physical, information, linkages—to mention a few. In a nutshell, institutional capacity covers the totality of an organised effort.

Capacity building of NGOs means a component of a wider process of empowering local institutions encouraging them to develop a strong and autonomous sector. This process includes any combination of a number of inputs designed to assist an NGOs to become stronger, effective and autonomous.

In view of the capacity building of NGOs, it is by and large assumed that NGOs allow their organisational capacities to develop in a spontaneous and unplanned manner. Besides, it is also believed that the organisational and managerial capacity to handle growth will develop as needed. But thsi is not true in most of the cases. This is because, if organisational growth and change are to be managed successfully, they need to be planned. Nevertheless, NGO capacities can be roughly grouped under three categories. These are: i, identity, culture and purpose; ii, management systems and structures, and iii, program and technical capacity.

Identity, culture, and purpose are some of the core areas of NGO capacity. These variables cover as the clear ideology of development and organisational culture, conflict resolution mechanisms, positive staff management relations, etc. To be an effective organisation, NGOs, require effective management system and structures. It also needs to enhance procedural capacities such as decision-making, role clarity, and effective financial management and others. Likewise, program and intervention strategies are the tangible capacities of NGOs. This covers technical capacity to deliver services, and ability to develop effective program strategy. There is a close relationship among these variables. Notably, effective organisational development starts from the inside out, while technical assistance starts and remains on the outside.

Issues and Strategies for Capacity Building of NGOs

Capacity building of NGOs in Nepal has largely been focused on human development and very little on systemic improvement. This has made the organisational capacity building program lop-sided. Since the aim of capacity building of NGOs cannot be achieved through either side—human development or systemic development, it should be of both. Moreover, one is not complementary to the other rather both are equally indispensable.

A sustainable capacity building largely depends upon active involvement of the member staff and its stakeholders. An adaptation of a process consulting cannot be overemphasised for capacity building of an NGO. It calls for core competency of the staff as well as their true commitments towards this end. Developing core competency of the staff members is not only the lacking parts of NGOs in most of the developing countries, it is also mostly neglected. This area therefore is one of the essential variables of capacity building of the Nepalese NGOs.

Besides, NGOs can enhance their capacity through a process of self-assessment. Even the staff from within the organisation can undertake this process. It requires a logical basis and technical know-how. follwing the processes adopted by other organisations, which have better experiences, on it, can attain lacking of such requirements. Whatever is the techniques followed, an NGOs most adopt a pragmatic approach to capacity building by carefully tailoring support and assistance to the needs of organisation and its service recipients.

The success of capacity building program of NGOs largely depends not only on its approach but also on its process. The nature of intervention will largely depend on many of its organisational variables such as, stage of development of the local organisation, the source of its organisational problems, and its organisational culture. It also needs to be continuously adapted and refined as the intervention progresses.

As capacity building of NGOs is not a one shot approach, it is suggested that retaining capacity of an organisation is equally essential as building capacity. Many NGOs become able to enhance their institutional capacity but over the period of time they loose it again. Thus, it is well noticed that the degree of organisational capacity of NGOs may fluctuate from time to time. This suggests that retaining organisational capacity of an NGO is as important as building capacity.

Conclusion

It is however, suggested that capacity building of NGOs, being a common challenge of all the Nepalese NGOs, is to be sorted out in a collective manner as a movement towards improvement for the delivery of better social services and social change through institutional development. This is also a public concern so far as social change and development is the basic priorities of the government. At the same time, it is equally concerning area of the International Non-Governmental Organisations who are involved in the social sector development programes of Nepal.

Ruined Ecology And Risked Life

By BT

BY VIRTUE of the fact that money rules the roost and human rapaciousness knows no bounds, biosphere the Mother Earth’s cosy lap, suffers the most.

The blind bad deeds of man turn the godly boons into bane that eventually boomerangs into life itself with a blow. Driven mad by sheer pursuit for profit, he forgets where to draw a line and goes too far, only to discover that his reckless misadventures have turned his habitat from healthy and hospitable to hostile.

Gains measured in narrow monetary terms tend to ignore the larger ecological costs that have to be paid in the long run in one way or other. Nature’s resources have been exploited in such a way that have given rise to occurrence of untold calamities. You make money for yourself and empty the sulphur and lead-laden effluents from factories into the clean rivers by putting at jeopardy the lives of aquatic animals and your own. You manufacture bulks of commercial merchandise with pride and in turn, send up the noxious blanket of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The consequences are ozone’s deadly depletion, acid rain, global warming, degraded air, water and food quality. The list goes long.

The ecological threat continues to intensify to the dreadful magnitude with the expansion of the scourge of poverty triggered by multiplying growth in population and unequal distribution of the dividends of development. Chiefly the twin factors, the indifferent monetary motive and inequity-induced human misery, have pushed the environmental problem to a new brink of danger. Dire damages have already been delivered to the biosphere- species driven to extinction, horrible holes in the natural ozone screen, dense rainforests turned barren, thousands of tons of crude oil spilled into the sea, increasing addition in the list of endangered species, climbing sea level and unprecedented climatic variations and so on.

Some of the damages inflicted to the environment are still recoverable while others are not. Contingency measures have meaning only when they are put into action before it is too late. Unless the environmental alarm bell is heard on time and responded with apt steps "we may lose control of the matter and go down path from which there is no return at all or return at great expense", as Dateline Earth warns.

Civilisation now needs to be redefined in relation to the environmental cost of living as the lavish mode of living especially in the urban areas is chiefly responsible for baneful plight of the biosphere. Generally, indigenous tribal people living simple life in harmony with nature are considered as uncivilised and barbaric. A comparative look at the actions of these simple people and those civilised in the cities will show who has more inclination and ability for destruction. The once glorious ethos of "conquering nature" ought to be shed in favour of "conservation of and cohabitation with nature".

Progress and prosperity that brings ruinous results are no more to be embraced. The earth will remain a cornucopia of life giving resources only if development goes with sustainability and eco-friendliness. Short-sighted vision that tends to turn the environmental gravity aside, will slim the chance of man’s survival on the planet.

If building more cities upon the stumps of cleared forests and burning up more coal and POL stuffs are seen as real development doom is what we will be inheriting to our posterity. Then, not only the challenge of livelihood will be intractable, humanity itself will be at stake.