KNOWLEDGEM A N A G E M E N Tfor Culture and Development

Culture and development together constitute one of the thematic windows and comprises a total of 18 development programmesimplemented in Africa, the Arab States, Asia, Latin America, and South-East Europe over a period of three to four years. They entailwork to strengthen cultural and creative industries, sustainable cultural tourism, safeguard of cultural landscapes and of culturalheritage, promote cultural diversity and pluralism and support inclusive policies and ethnic minority development. UNESCO, thespecialized agency of the United Nations system with a specific mandate for culture, was designated as Convenor ofthe thematic window on culture and development, with a leading role in this joint effort of United Nations agencies.

To capitalise on the multifaceted aspects of this experience, UNESCO, in partnership with the MDG-F Secretariat, isgathering, and building on, knowledge gleaned from Joint Programmes’ project implementation, success stories and lessonslearnt, as this is crucial both to knowledge generation and to knowledge capitalization with a view to informing future cultureand development programming and policy.

The knowledge management project implemented under the MDG-F culture and development Joint Programmes, whoseprinciples, objectives and contribution are outlined here, forms part of the wider MDG-F strategy for all eight thematic windows. In April 2009, at a meeting called by the MDG-F Secretariat, the Convenors of all eight thematic windows noted that the knowl-edge generated by the Joint Programmes under all thematic windows was not only wide-ranging and rich, but also inherentlyinnovative. It was, therefore, agreed that it was a bounden responsibility to record and capitalize on the data, knowledgeand information generated. Against that background, an MDG-F knowledge management initiative was launched andthe Convenors of each of the eight thematic windows were requested to draw up and implement a knowledge managementstrategy specific to the respective thematic window of their mandate and expertise.

THE MDG-F EXPERIENCE: a mi lestone for culture and development

THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS ACHIEVEMENT FUND (MDG-F): Established in December 2006 after the Spanish

Government contributed €528 million (US $710 million) to the United Nations system, the Millennium Development Goals

Achievement Fund (MDG-F) is an innovative international cooperation mechanism designed to speed up progress towards the

achievement of the MDGs worldwide. Building on the comparative advantage of United Nations organizations and their joint

endeavour in the framework of the United Nations Reform, the MDG-F supports national governments, local authorities and civil

society organizations in their efforts to reduce poverty and inequality through eight thematic areas known as ‘thematic windows.’

Environment and Climate ChangeGender Equality & Women’s EmpowermentYouth, Employment & MigrationDemocratic Economic Governance

Children, Food Security & NutritionConflict Prevention & Peace buildingCulture & DevelopmentDevelopment & the Private Sector

8 THEMATIC WINDOWS

Owing to systematic investment in knowledge collection, it is possible to build on past experience forreuse in due course. Operating in complex and fast-changing environments increases the need toconnect people in order to exchange information and knowledge. The goal of continuous improve-ment emphasizes the need for knowledge codification.

People are at the heart of Knowledge Management as Knowledge Management aims atconverting/translating personal knowledge into organizational knowledge. Capturing and document-ing processes or, in other words, the ‘how’ something was achieved, is also a core component ofKnowledge Management. It is the very ‘recipe’ that can be transferred to others and that can informfuture practices. It is crucial in Knowledge Management’s quest to transfer, translate but also updateexisting processes and information. Technologies have developed as an essential pillar of KnowledgeManagement as the latter needs vectors that allow for an effective and timely information flow.

Knowledge management focuses on raw data but also draws on people’s insights and experiences.

Explicit knowledge can be articulated, stored and transferred easily to others through, for instance,books, procedures, booklets and manuals. Tacit knowledge on the other hand is more elusive andmore difficult to transfer to others and may rather require direct interaction between people in orderto be identified, acknowledged and, ultimately, communicated.

Knowledge management is more inclusive and resource-intensive than knowledge sharing.Knowledge management also yields different results, as it has a quality assurance component thatenables peers in a given community of practice to highlight desirable information, exchange goodpractices and share lessons learnt.

Knowledge management shares common ground both with monitoring and evaluation and withcommunication and advocacy. While monitoring and evaluation focus on compiling programmeresults and comparing them with pre-set targets, knowledge management is also concerned withintangible results that are harder to measure and seeks to document and showcase unforeseenresults as well as that often denote extraordinary success. Moreover, in its quest to build a solidbody of knowledge, knowledge management seeks to capture the process through which resultsare obtained. Similarly, communication and advocacy seek primarily to focus on the result and normally aim toselect and convey one clear message to a wider public. The three tools (monitoring and evaluation, communication and advocacy, and knowledge manage-ment) can be genuinely complementary useful tools for building ownership, ensuring sustainabilityand maximizing the impact of a development project. Hence, it would be useful for a knowledge man-agement strategy and framework to be designed and to be integrated into a culture and developmentprogramme from the outset, as are monitoring and evaluation, and communication and advocacy.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT?Knowledge management involves action on several fronts to: (i) identify

and collect information; (ii) codify and store information; (iii) share infor-mation by connecting people; and (iv) create and disseminate knowledge

which may then be transferred for use in different environments.

Knowledge Management builds on ‘People, Processes, and Technologies’

Knowledge Management transcends data

Knowledge Management seeks to deal with both explicit and tacit knowledge

Knowledge Management transcendsKnowledge Sharing

Knowledge Management is complementary to other disciplines such as Monitoring and Evaluation, and Communication and Advocacy

WHAT IS

APPROACH TAKENThe establishment of a knowledge management system involves enhancing knowledge generated during

project and programme implementation under a systematic, coherent and predefined approach. This includes

the collection, recording, processing, sharing and dissemination of information and knowledge.

Under the MDG-F knowledge management project, UNESCO seeks to gather information andknowledge generated through the culture and development thematic window which can serve toinform future programming in this field: achievements and impact on the targeted MDGs national ownership success factors operational challenges

Action is being taken both to devise a resource tool for development practitioners and to contributetowards optimum relevance, efficiency and impact of future culture and development activities andcooperation programmes.

To ensure that the MDG-F culture and development knowledge management is effective, relevant anduseful and cuts across all 18 Joint Programmes, UNESCO’s strategy takes a bottom-up participatoryapproach. From the initial project stages, Joint Programme teams were consulted in order to mapavailable information and assess needs. In addition, the reflection process has been enriched bylinking academic debates to work conducted under the Joint Programmes and collaboratingwith academic experts in the economics of culture and in social and cultural policies.

The strategy was structured around the following three pillars in order effectively to collect, analyseand disseminate the valuable knowledge generated: MDG-F Knowledge Management Culture and Development Questionnaire (see carton 1, 2

and 3), and analysis thereof (see carton 5) Knowledge management workshops (see carton 4) Teamworks, the electronic platform (see carton 4)The knowledge management strategy and tools outlined in this brochure were used within the veryspecific framework of the Joint Programmes implemented under the MDG-F culture and developmentthematic window and were, therefore, often adapted to the specific features, challenges, opportunitiesand constraints associated with the unique MDG-F experience and target programmes. Thatnotwithstanding, they can serve as a springboard for future similar knowledge managementprogrammes on culture and development.

Joint Programme teams MDG-F Secretariat UNESCO Chair on Cultural Policies and Cooperation at the University of Girona, Spain ‘Silvia Santagata Research Centre’, Turin, Italy, part of the International Research Centre on

the Economics of Culture and World Heritage Studies under the auspices of UNESCO AECID Madrid, Department of Cooperation and Cultural Promotion

WHAT are we doing?

WHY are we doing it?

HOW are we doing it?

WHO are our partners?

�� � �

�� �

��� ��

THREE WORKSHOPSwere held following theJoint Programmes’ paceof implementation :

regional workshop for JointProgrammes in South-EastEurope, Sarajevo (Bosnia andHerzegovina), 28-30 March 2011

regional workshop for JointProgrammes in LatinAmerica, Montevideo(Uruguay), 4-6 May 2011

interregional workshop forJoint Programmes imple-mented in Africa, Asia andthe Arab States, El Jadida(Morocco), 23-25 June 2011

��

�

Beneficiaries

*Terms of referencethe Thematic

Window

1. Formulate, implementand monitor socially-

and culturally-inclusivepublic policies

2. Realize the economicand social potential ofthe cultural sector andstrengthen cultural and

creative industries

3. Develop institutionalcapacity to generateuseful and accurate

information monitoringand evaluating the

effectiveness of culturalpolicies

Promoting cultural based

economic activities(cultural industries,

cultural tourism) Conservationand promotion

of cultural and natural

heritage

Fosteringintercultural

dialogue

Reinforcingcultural

infrastructureand

institutions

Promotingcultural

expressions

MAINOBJECTIVES

OF THE THEMATICWINDOW(Terms of

Reference)*

Safeguardingof intangible

heritage

Reinforcingcultural policies andculturally-sensitive

developmentpolicies

EXAMPLES OF TYPES OF ACTION:Capacity building at the community, institutional, local, national levelsPromoting private enterprises and activitiesGeneration of studies, surveys, statistics, cultural mappingsPromotion of national culture/cultural products for local, national and international marketsProvide technical supportAwareness raising through workshops, dialogue, information sharing, etcDeveloping of support mechanisms: training materials, toolkits, business support infrastructureStrengthening cultural infrastructure, cultural community centres/villages, museumsSupporting cultural events, exhibits, cultural manifestationsFinancing cultural projects/ initiatives and eventsDeveloping intercultural dialogue mechanismsDeveloping intercultural material (ex: currícula)Creating socio-economic opportunities for women (craft, entrepreneurial skills, etc)

AlbaniaBosnia andHerzegovinaCambodiaChinaCosta RicaEcuador

EgyptEthiopiaHondurasMauritaniaMoroccoMozambiqueNamibia

NicaraguaOccupiedPalestinian TerritoriesSenegalTurkeyUruguay

PARTICIPATING UN AGENCIES:UNESCO, UNDP, UNICEF, UNFPA, UNEP,UNIDO, UNWTO, UNHCR, UNIFEM, UNV, FAO, ILO, WHO, ITC

TARGETED MDG’s

MAIN TARGET

COUNTRIES in which the culture and development JPs ARE IMPLEMENTED:

GENERAL POPULATION, WITH A PARTICULAR FOCUS ON WOMEN AND YOUTH

ETHNIC CULTURAL MINORITIES, INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, PEOPLES OF AFRICANDESCENT

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

ORGANISED CIVIL SOCIETY

PRIVATE SECTOR

��

��

�

GENERAL MAPPING of the Activities of the 18 MDG-F Culture and Development Joint Programmes (JPs)

© U

ND

P Br

azil

1982World Conference on CulturalPolicies in Mexico City, known asMONDIACULT, whose mainachievements consist in thebroadening of the notion ofculture as ‘the set of distinctivespiritual, material, intellectual andemotional features of society or asocial group. It includes not onlythe arts and literature, lifestyles,fundamental rights of humanbeings, value systems, traditionsand beliefs’

1988UNESCO, the United Nationsagency with a cultural mandate,launches the World Decade forCultural Development whichadvocates the contribution of culture to national and interna-tional development policies. This led to the establishment ofinternational standard-settinginstruments and demonstrationtools

1996The Report of the UnitedNations/UNESCO WorldCommission on Culture andDevelopment (‘Our CreativeDiversity’), a landmark in settingnew goals for international cooper-ation and bringing in culture fromthe margins. It advances the viewthat development embraces notonly access to goods and services,but also the opportunities given topeople everywhere to choose afull, satisfying valuable and valuedlife. Its International Agenda wasset up to transform conventionaldevelopment strategies

1998IntergovernmentalConference on CulturalPolicies for Development,Stockholm: establishes a newglobal cultural policy agenda fordevelopment to be establishedthrough international coopera-tion mechanisms as well asnational policy initiatives in partnership with civil society as key actors to implement this new agenda

1999UNESCO-World BankIntergovernmental conference ‘Culture Counts: Financing,Resources and the Economics of Culture in SustainableDevelopment’, held in Florence,acknowledges the cultural capitalas being crucial to progress inachieving sustainable develop-ment and economic growth

2001UNESCO Universal Declarationon Cultural Diversity, takes forward the policy agenda set bythe Stockholm Action Plan andsecures global consensus throughthe unanimous adoption of aDeclaration and concrete strategies to integrate culture into development policies and programmes

2003Convention for theSafeguarding of theIntangible Cultural Heritage,promotes international coopera-tion to safeguard intangible cultural heritage, constantly recre-ated by communities in responseto their environment, and recog-nized as a mainspring of culturaldiversity and a guarantee of sus-tainable development (Preamble);its scope is limited only to suchheritage as is compatible with therequirements of sustainable development (article 2)

2004UNDP’s Human DevelopmentReport ‘Cultural Liberty inToday’s Diverse world’ under-scores how diverse and unequalthe world has become. It offersthe view that poverty, in its manyforms, is often linked with issuesof access to opportunities andknowledge that have particularimpact on minority social, ethnicand religious groups. It makes thecase for adopting multiculturalpolicies respecting diversity andbuilding more inclusive societies

2005Convention on the Protectionand Promotion of theDiversity of CulturalExpressions, recognises cultureas a pillar of sustainable develop-ment (Article 13) and creates thelegal framework and operationalmechanisms to foster the emer-gence of dynamic cultural sectorsin developing countries throughinternational cooperation fordevelopment (Articles 14, 18)

The 2005 World SummitOutcome (paragraph 14),adopted by the High-level PlenaryMeeting of the United NationsGeneral Assembly, acknowledgesthe diversity of the world and recognizes that all cultures contributes to the enrichment of humankind

2006The ‘Culture andDevelopment’ ThematicWindow of the MDGAchievement Fund (MDG-F)is a major ground breaking experimental investment in largescale culture and developmentprojects by supporting country-based culture and developmentprogrammes for a total amountof 95 millions USD

2010The MDG Outcome of theMillennium Summit (para-graphs 16 and 66) adopted bythe High-level Plenary Meeting of the United Nations GeneralAssembly, explicitly recognises ofthe contribution of culture to theachievement of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs) andto development

United Nations GeneralAssembly resolution empha-sizes for the first time the role of culture in sustainable develop-ment and in the achievement of national and international development goals, including theMillennium Development Goals in adopting Resolution 65/166on culture and development

CULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT:

RECENT TIMELINE

PARTICULAR RELEVANCE OF KM for Culture and Development

Culture and development, culture and development programmes are designed to enable the local people or government institutionsto play a leadership and centre role conducive both to the appropriation process and to national ownership recommended in the2005 Paris Declaration and the principles of the 2001 UNESCO Declaration on Cultural Diversity.

Culture and development projects foster the empowerment of the local people and place responsibility on partner countries for thesafeguarding and dynamics of their cultural life. For this reason, one of the fundamental and most essential strategies for culturaldevelopment is capacity building for individuals, groups and institutions of the societies and communities involved in cooperation.

The field of culture and development has long been characterized by the unavailability of comparable data and systemization anddissemination of information illustrating, assessing and measuring linkages between culture and development. The productionand collection of information only rarely featured in projects in the field of culture and difficulty was encountered in establishingindicators to measure and explicitly demonstrate their impact on development.

Furthermore, the importance and value of the intangible component of culture and development projects could not always bereflected easily and quantifiably. All too often, owing to lack of experience and uncertainty about ways and means of outlining theintangible aspects of development projects, they were not reflected in evaluation processes and were thus not recorded butnonetheless made a positive contribution and had an impact both in the short and long terms. Against this background, it isimportant to create opportunities for duly recording and reporting such impacts and contributions.

CULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES have the twofold advantage of concurrently permitting

both economic development and social cohesion. Indeed, development cooperation programmes that focus on

facilitating vulnerable groups’ access to the creation and production of cultural goods and services, create and/or

strengthen cultural institutions and political bodies and contribute to the establishment of legislative and

regulatory frameworks that promote cultural diversity, provide examples of growth combined with equality

and social inclusion as the very essence of the added value of culture and development projects.

There is a long history of reflection on culture and development, which is the fruit of the continuous changes in contemporary societies and in the international arena.

Finally, it is widely acknowledged that the wealth of experience generated by culture and development projects constitutes animportant body of knowledge. However, owing to a lack of systematizing and sharing of these activities, these experiments andtheir successes are hardly turned to account, so that dynamics remain largely inward-looking, with little scope for socializationand for opening up this wealth of experience to a wider public. Knowledge management indirectly builds capacity to identify,formulate culture and development projects and implement them through more adequate, more relevant and more informedmethodologies that meet project realities and objectives directly.

5 REASONS TO ENGAGE IN KM FOR CULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT:

the shift in international development cooperation to the inclusion of culture as a key aspect of development

the emergence of a new generation of national, regional and local public policies, with considerable progress beingachieved in the acknowledgement of the cultural dimension

institutional capacity building at various levels of responsibility in cultural sectors and capacity building for groups andorganizations, leading to the emergence of the private and civil sectors and the formation of human capital as a result of varioustraining courses in cultural management, development cooperation, social promotion, cultural governance and other subjects

the growing number of groups, universities, institutes and other bodies that conduct studies, programmes andresearch on the need for culture and development programmes

the rise in the number of large-scale culture and development operational projects implemented under the MDG-Fculture and development thematic window

� �

�

�

�

Quest ionna ire 1 l COLLECTING KNOWLEDGE

1.0 General

Overall objectives of the JP (please tick asmany boxes as you feel are relevant)

□ Design and elaboration of culturalpolicies and strategies that facilitate thepolitical participation □ Protect the rightsof groups excluded on cultural grounds □Develop the legal/regulatory framework forculture-related sectors □ Enhance culturalinfrastructure development □ Enhance theproduction and distribution of culturalgoods and services □ Capacity building andcreation of human capital □ Promotecultural and creative industries as driversof economic and social development □Develop institutional capacity to maintainsystems of information and data on culturalpolicies □ Promote useful and accurateinformation monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of cultural policies □ Develop

public policies that incorporate culture indevelopment □ Promote interculturaldialogue and interaction □ Safeguardindigenous peoples’ cultures and/or ofAfrican descent □ Conserve/Manage cul-tural tangible heritage □ Safeguard culturalintangible heritage □ Increase population’saccess and/or participation to cultural life□ Conduct cultural mapping, studies andresearch □ Incorporate the cultural dimen-sion in other sectors of development (educa-tion, health, gender) □ Strengthen culturalcommunication □ Promote creative andartistic processes □ Promote cultural heritage□ Other (please specify):

Cultural domains1 covered by the JP

□ Cultural and natural heritage [museums(also virtual), archaeological and historical

places, cultural landscapes, natural heritage]□ Intangible cultural heritage [oral traditionsand expressions, rituals, languages, socialpractices] □ Performance and celebration[performing arts, music, festivals, fairs, feasts]□ Visual arts and crafts [fine arts, photogra-phy, crafts] □ Books and press [books, news-paper and magasines, other printed matter,library (also virtual), book fairs] □ Audio-visual and interactive media [film and video,TV and radio (also internet live streaming),internet podcasting, video games (alsoonline)] □ Design and creative services [fash-ion design, graphic design, interior design,landscape design, architectural services,advertising design] □ Tourism [charter traveland tourist services, hospitality and accom-modation] □ Other (please specify):

1. As per the UNESCO framework for Cultural Statistics (2009)

1.2

The questionnaire to be read in conjunction with carton 5

What is the purpose of the MDG-F Culture and Development Questionnaire?

Ques

tion

naire

For the purposes of knowledge codification, the questionnaire structurally reflects theoverall Joint Programme objectives, target beneficiaries, main results and impact.Below is a copy of the questionnaire, showing relevant information, areas and domainson which information was gathered. The advantages of obtaining such data on knowledgemanagement by means of a standard questionnaire are:

the collection, recording, processing and sharing of the same types of informa-tion on all projects by means of a systematic and coherent tool

the establishment of a database holding the same information on all projects

cross-cutting analyses of all projects

1.1

�

� �

Ques

tion

naire

International Culture Conventions covered by the JP

□ 2005 Convention on the Protection andPromotion of the Diversity of CulturalExpressions □ 2003 Convention for theSafeguarding of the Intangible CulturalHeritage □ 2001 Convention on the protec-tion of the Underwater Cultural Heritage □1972 Convention concerning the Protectionof the World Cultural and Natural Heritage□ 1970 Convention on the Means of pro-hibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import,Export and Transfer of Ownership of CulturalProperty □ 1954 Convention for the pro-tection of Cultural Property in the Event ofArmed Conflict with Regulations for theExecution of the Convention □ Other(please specify)

Dimensions covered by the JP

□ Economics □ Education □ Heritage□ Communication □ Governance □ Social□ Environment □ Gender equality □Other (please specify):

Action of the JP

Carried out a preliminary needs assessment on:• Cultural institutional capacity: □ Not Done□ Done, please specify how this was done

• Private sector: □ Not Done □ Done. Ifdone, please specify how this was done

• Other (please specify)

Followed a participatory process during thedesign, inception and implementation phases ofthe JP with the following stakeholders:

• Public cultural institutions: □ Not Done

□ Done. Please specify how this was done and at what phase (design, inception,implementation). Please also indicate howmany? Which institutions?

• Local and regional authorities: □ NotDone □ Done. If done please specify howthis was done

• Private sector: □ Not Done □ Done. Ifdone, please specify how this was done.Please indicate how many and in which sectors

• Civil society: □ Not Done □ Done. Ifdone, please specify how this was done andindicate whom it was done with

• Local authorities (traditional and mod-ern): □ Not Done □ Done. If done, pleasespecify how this was done

• International partners: □ Not Done. Ifnot done, please specify whether/why thiswas a shortfall □ Done. If done, pleasespecify how many? which ones?

Carried out research prior to or at the beginningof the implementation of the JP :

• Anthropological / Sociological researchon the communities in which the JPwould be implemented: □ Not Done □Done. If done, please specify how this wasdone and indicate whether local actors wereinvolved? If yes, which ones?

• Research on the culture sector: □ NotDone □ Done. If done, please specify howthis was done and indicate whether localactors were involved? If yes, which ones?

• Economic research on the relationshipbetween economics and culture: □ Not

Done □ Done. If done, please specify howthis was done and indicate whether localactors were involved? If yes, which ones?

Took into account local knowledge when design-ing the project document:

• Used material, studies, archives andresearch on the context: □ Not Done □Done. If done, please specify how this wasdone

• Incorporated experts, specialists andlocal leaders: □ Not Done □ Done. Pleasespecify how this was done

• Incorporated concepts, values and localcultural practices: □ Not Done □ Done. Ifdone, please specify how this was done

Assessed the regulatory and legal environment • Took into account the country’s culturallegislation (or absence thereof): □ NotDone □ Done. If done, please specify howthis was done

• Assessed the potential impact that thelegal framework could have had on achiev-ing the JP’s objectives: □ Not Done □ Done.If done, please specify how this was done

Ensured ownership of JP on behalf of the followingagents:

• National cultural institutions: □ NotDone □ Done. If done, please specify howthis was done

• Local and regional authorities: □ NotDone □ Done. If done, please specify howthis was done

• Private sector: □ Not Done □ Done. Ifdone, please specify how this was done

1.3

1.4

1.5

COLLECTING KNOWLEDGE

Ques

tion

naire

1.6

1.7

2.0 Impact of the Culture and Development Thematic Window and its relation to the targeted Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)

• Civil society: □ Not Done □ Done. Ifdone, please specify how this was done

• Group and community leaders: □ NotDone □ Done. If done, please specify howthis was done

• International partners: □ Not Done □Done. If done, please specify how this was done

Ident if ied and put in place implementat ionmodalities with:

• Concrete cooperation modalities,between UN agencies involved in theimplementation of the JP: □ Not Done □Done. If done, please specify how this wasdone and indicate which UN agencies

• Private-public partnerships created forimplementing the JP: □ Not Done □Done. If done, please specify how this wasdone and indicate how many partnershipsand among whom?

Obta in free, pr ior and informed consent of theactors/communities concerned

□ Not Done □ Done. If done, please specifyhow this was done □ Other (please specify)

Please provide a list/titles of all the JP’sproducts (such as surveys, methodolog-ical tools, training materials, maps, books,etc.), indicating (i) the type of product (ii)its main use (iii) its target audience (iv) thelanguage in which it was produced.

Beneficiaries of the JP

In order to obtain an indication of the approx-imate number of direct and indirect benefici-aries for each JP, the questionnaire included,in table format, a list of beneficiaries, divided

in sub-groups of beneficiaries. The JPs wereasked to provide approximate numbers ofdirect beneficiaries as well as indirect benefici-aries (explaining what they meant by indirectin each context). Moreover, conscious of theimportance of gender, the JPs were asked toalso indicate how many of the direct and/orindirect beneficiaries were women. The Groupof beneficiaries were divided as follows:

• Population: □ Population in specificgeographic zones □ Primary schools tudents □ Secondary school □University students □ Children □ Youth(15-24) □ Senior citizens □ Ethnicminorities □ Immigrants □ Displaced □Refugees □ Indigenous □ African descent

• Private Sector: □ Small and medium sizedbusinesses in the culture sector □ Culturalindustries □ Independent professionals(freelance) □ Artists, Creators, Artisans □Experts, Academics □ New entrepreneurs

• Public Administration: □ State authori-ties in general □ Ministry of Culture □Ministry of the Environment □ Ministry ofEducation □ Ministry of Tourism □Ministry of Commerce □ Ministry ofEconomy and Finance □ Ministry of Health□ Ministry of Labour □ Ministry of ForeignAffairs □ Other Ministries (please specify)□ Regional and/or local authorities □Centres of public education (includingteachers) □ Cooperation agencies

• Organised Civil Society (with the need toindicate whether it refers to institutions or peo-ple): □ Civil and community associations □Foundations □ Community leaders □Religious / Spiritual leaders □ Grouped pro-fessional collectives □Training centres □NGOs

Outputs (stakeholders)

The JPs were asked to indicate how manystakeholders were trained in □ Culturalpolicies development and implementation□ Programming and planning □ Culturalinstitutions management □ Cultural enter-prises management □ Artistic /technicalskills □ Others (to be specified)They were asked to indicate the type oftraining (ex: on the job, workshop, peer topeer, etc), number of people trained, the agegroups trained, the cultural domain(s) thetraining corresponds to (c.f question 1.2), aswell as to specify whether the training wasa the national/local/regional level.

Outputs (studies/surveys)

The JPs were asked to indicate whetherstudies/surveys were completed and, if so,to indicate their title, what culturaldomain(s) it corresponds to (cf question 1.2)as well as the geographic level it targeted(national, regional, local).

Outputs (others)

A further list of outputs, presented in tab-ular format, sought to obtain informationfrom the JPs whether they were targetedand, if so, to obtain a description on howmany, what cultural domain(s) it corre-sponds to (cf question 1.2), and thegeographic level it targeted (national,regional, local):

2.1

2.2

2.3

COLLECTING KNOWLEDGE

Ques

tion

naire

□ Cultural infrastructure enhanced (in termsof an output) □ Cultural events organised □Cultural enterprises supported □ Culturalgoods produced (in terms of an output) □Cultural services offered □ Cultural assetspreserved/restored/managed □ Aspirationsof diverse cultural groups are accounted for inactivities undertaken □ Institutional discrimi-nation of individuals/groups is addressed □Culture department (of public institutions)strengthened politically, financially, withhuman resources □ Cultural policies devel-oped/improved □ Cultural policies moreeffectively implemented □ Cultural policiesreflect regional / local specificities □ Culturalpolicies recognize diversity and empowercultural groups □ Others, (please specify)

Results (including unforeseen results)

In order to capture results which were bothforeseen and unforeseen, the JPs wereasked to indicate, wherever relevant totheir JP activities, whether the followingcategories and subcategories of resultswere (i) achieved, or not (ii) foreseen in theproject document /workplan, or not (iii)indicate which MDG was targeted throughthe result achieved and (iv) How did theresult impact / how is it anticipated toimpact on the targeted MDG, by clearlyspecifying if the impact is (i) Social (ii)Economic (iii) Institutional (iv) Network2:

• Increase of institutional culturalcapacity: □ Strengthening of nationalinstitution/Ministry of Culture

• Strengthening of regional and local insti-tutions: □ Strengthening of organised civilsociety □ Strengthening of the participationof groups, leaders and cultural communities

• Improvement of the legislative and reg-ulatory framework of the culture sector

• Social dialogue / cohesion increased

• Creation or strengthening of networkand social capital

• Improvement of policies relevant for theimprovement of cultural policies: □Improvement of cultural policy developmentprocess □ Efficiency increase in the imple-mentation of cultural policies □ Culturesector statistics generated □ Increase incooperation between different governmentdepartments □ Increase in cooperationbetween national, regional and local gov-ernmental entities

• Improvement in the relationshipbetween tourism and culture: □ A greatercoordination between cultural and tourismpolicy was generated □ More value wasgiven to the contribution of culture in thetourist industry □ Different cultural tourismrepresentatives were trained □ Culturalemployment was generated in the tourismsector □ There was an increase of incomein the tourism sector due to cultural activity

• Transversal impacts of culture in otherareas of development: □ Increase ofwomen’s participation in the culture sector□ Employment for women generated intourism and culture □ Improvement andstrengthening of the relation between theculture and the education sector □ Culturalelements were incorporated in primary andsecondary education □ Increase and enrich-ment of artistic training □ Environmentprotection was incorporated in the culturalpractices □ Local knowledge on nature

were incorporated to cultural life and values□ Contributed to improving health and toproviding solutions related to disease andharmful habits

• Strengthening of the cultural dimensionof development: □ Actors of developmentcooperation were sensitivised of the impor-tance of culture on development □ Therewas training and capacity building onculture and development □ Cultural agentswere sensitivised on the contribution ofculture in development policy and the fightagainst poverty □ Studies and research onculture and development were undertaken□ Reflection on the contribution of cultureto the Millennium Development Goals waspromoted and strengthened

• Increase of the socio-economic capaci-ties of the cultural sector: □ Culturalindustries and businesses reinforced □ Newcultural ventures were promoted □ Culturalemployment increased □ Cultural goodsand products incorporated in the nationaland international market □ The economicpotential of the cultural sector was studied□ Creativity and its impact on developmentwere highlighted

2. Economic impact (for example in terms of jobs createdand incomes generated). Institutional impact (for examplein terms of improved institutional capacity and provision oftraining). Social impact (for example in terms of respect ofgender positions; and of making possible intercultural dia-logue). Network impact (for example in terms of personaland group relations; of making sustainable local developmentbased on a real increase in the number of actors and activities)

2.4

COLLECTING KNOWLEDGE

Success stor ies 2 l COLLECTING KNOWLEDGE

Succ

ess

stor

iesWhat is a success story?

Under the knowledge management project, a success story has been defined as activitiesthat together give rise to a desired outcome based on collectively supported values thatcould be replicated easily in different contexts. The aims are to communicate and showcasespecific Joint Programme components and to serve as a tool for recording and transferringknowledge in order to improve future culture and development programmes. Success storieshold out the promise of being exemplary sources of inspiration to other stakeholders andinterested parties.

Title and Categorisation of the Success Story

Please name your success story: ...

Cultural domains covered by the SuccessStory□ Cultural and natural heritage [museums(also virtual), archaeological and historicalplaces, cultural landscapes, natural heritage]□ Intangible cultural heritage [oral traditionsand expressions, rituals, languages, socialpractices] □ Performance and celebration

[performing arts, music, festivals, fairs, feasts] □ Visual arts and crafts [fine arts, photogra-phy, crafts] □ Books and press [books,newspaper and magasines, other printedmatter, library (also virtual), book fairs] □Audio-visual and interactive media [film andvideo, TV and radio (also internet live stream-ing), internet podcasting, video games (alsoonline)] □ Design and creative services [fash-ion design, graphic design, interior design,

landscape design, architectural services,advertising design] □ Tourism [charter traveland tourist services, hospitality and accom-modation] □ Other (please specify):

Dimensions covered by the Success Story□ Economics □ Education □ Heritage □Communication □ Governance □ Social □Environment □ Gender equality □ Other(please specify):

Identifying, documenting and communicating success stories: MDG-F Culture and Development Questionnaire on success stories

WHAT DOES A SUCCESS STORY ENTAIL?

Knowledge management is particularly useful incapturing the three main stages that are crucialto identifying and recounting a success story:

the initial situation and context of the success story – this is particularly importantbecause development activities are always conducted within a context and a culture thatmust be understood in order to ensure effectivedevelopment cooperation

the methodology – which is of the utmostimportance to knowledge management, as it seeks to document the process and activitiesundertaken in order to achieve a successfulresult. It is of the essence to document the fruitful methodology followed in a success storyin order to build a solid body of knowledge that may be instrumental in informing futuredevelopment programming

the actual change that has been fosteredas a result of the success story – namely positive changes achieved vis-à-vis the initial situation and issues at stake

1

2

3

HOW TO REPORT ON SUCCESS STORIES?

It is important to reflect on the appropriate means of reporting the success story inorder to ensure that both the importance of the success story to development and the differencethat it has made locally are effectively conveyed. Accordingly, in addition to the traditionalreporting tools, the identification of targeted beneficiaries to transmit their message throughtheir own human stories and use of media, including local media, are all means of effectivelytransmitting the success story to wider public. Moreover, success stories recounted with thebeneficiaries’ full involvement and participation also contribute to ownership and to thesustainability of the activities that led to the success story.

Below, is a copy of the ‘success stories’ section used in the MDG-F Culture andDevelopment Questionnaire, illustrating the important area of information gatheredand the criteria used to determine what constituted a success story.

Succ

ess

stor

ies

used for the identification of theSuccess Story

A list of criteria is proposed below tohelp and guide you in identifying asuccess story. Additional criteria canalso be added.□ The identified success story is the result ofa multisectoral approach with, for example,a particularly successful cooperationbetween the UN Agencies. Please specifyhow (if applicable) □ The identified successstory has significant development impactthat is traceable and measured in terms ofMDGs. Please specify how (if applicable) □The identified success story induces strategicpolicy changes or is innovative at all levels(UN, national governments, stakeholders).Please specify how (if applicable) □ Theidentified success story is sustainable overtime and is replicable, it can be flexiblyapplied elsewhere, it is a promising practiceon which future programming can bebased. Please specify how (if applicable). □There is a remarkable level ownershipamong stakeholders, it has been generatedthrough dialogue and participation and itbears inclusiveness. Please specify how (ifapplicable). □ The identified success storycontributes to strengthening nationaland/or local capacities. Please specify how (ifapplicable). □ The identified success storyresponds to a rights-based approach. Pleasespecify how. □ The identified success storyincorporates a gender perspective. Pleasespecify how. □ The identified success storyhelps promote institutional collaboration.Please specify how. □ The identified successstory raises awareness and visibility among

the general public. Please specify how (ifapplicable).

Additional criteria agreed upon by theJP team (facultative): ...

Initial situation and of the SuccessStory

This section refers to the description ofthe initial situation and context of thesuccess story and the issue which youwanted to act upon. In this section, youmay wish to provide information on thefollowing: (i) some background infor-mation on the situation/context beforeyou undertook the activity; (ii) theissue(s)/obstacle(s) you were facedwith; (iii) the stage of the programme(design, inception, implementation) theissue(s)/obstacle(s) was/were identified;(iv) the stakeholders / beneficiariesinvolved; (v) the gender dimension ofsuch initial situation.

Action and of the Success Story

This section seeks to describe themethodology which you undertook inorder to address the situation describedin the previous section (‘Initial Situationand Context’). In this section, you maywish to provide information on the fol-lowing: (i) what was the decision whichwas taken in order to overcome theissue(s)/obstacle(s) previously identified?(ii) how was the decision implemented[methodology] such as for example: tes-timonies, surveys, communication cam-

paign, etc; (iii) how were the beneficiariesinvolved in all methodologies? Pleaseinclude the gender dimension whenanswering this question.

situation

This section seeks to explain what actu-ally changed as a result of the method-ology you implemented, how and why itwas a success story. This should allow fora comparison between the before(‘Initial Situation and Context’) and afterthe ‘Action/Methodology’ was imple-mented. In this section, you may wish toprovide information on the following: (i)how has the situation improved? (ii)What was the difference/added valuewhich was created?

of your success story

Where possible, please provide anysupporting visual material illustrating thesuccess story described above (such asphotographs, videos, brochures, links towebsites, etc.).

Criteria

ContextFinal

Methodology

Illustration

COLLECTING KNOWLEDGE

Learn ing from Operat ional Chal lenges 3 l COLLECTING KNOWLEDGE

Less

ons

lear

ntWhat is a lesson learnt?

�

�

A lesson learnt can be defined as knowledge or understanding gained by a positive or anegative experience, which serves to inform future programming activities that are eithersimilar in area, type of activity or context.

Below, is a copy of the ‘lessons learnt’ section used in the MDG-F Culture andDevelopment Questionnaire, illustrating the areas and types of lessons learnt fromthe MDG-F experience.

When filling in the questions below, issues of sustainability, negative impact on neighbouringcountries, loss of authenticity of cultural products, advert effects of tourism, should also beborne in mind.

MDG-F Culture and Development Questionnaire on lessons learnt

A. Overall

Capitalising on the experience, what doyou think are the most important aspectsthat should be taken into account by afuture Culture & Development Programmein the targeted geographic area?

In the programme design and inception?

In the programme implementation?

Please describe any mechanisms thatare put into place to ensure continuityof activities/networks beyond the life ofthe Joint Programme. What support isneeded to guarantee the sustainabilityof the results?

B. Specific

Please name your lesson learnt: ...

Please provide a summary of your lessonlearnt, including information on why it isimportant and how it is useful in thedesign/implementation of the programme.

Please indicate at which level yourlesson learnt applied to:□ Process: Executive, operational andfinancial level □ Programme: Technical level□ Communication and Advocacy level□ Other (please specify)

Please briefly describe the potentialapplication of this lesson to program-ming beyond its original context. Arethere potential applications nationally,regionally, in emergency situations, etc?

Learning by doing TYPES OF OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES

Large scale development projects come with lessons learnt on the operational challenges faced, which are valuable forfuture programming activities. These can be both at the process level (executive, operational, financial) as well as on the technical programme-oriented level.

This knowledge management tool is knownto facilitate the sharing of tacit knowledge,a deeper understanding of a particulartheme and the sharing and exchange oflessons learnt. Joint Programme participantswere divided into several discussion groupsand each was requested to address variouspre-set culture and development topics,

illustrated by concrete examples from theirJoint Programmes. One facilitator remainedat each table, while the other participantsmoved to other tables at regular intervals inorder to contribute to the topic assigned toeach table. This knowledge managementtechnique was adapted methodologically tomeet specific workshop needs, in particular

the participants’ wish to reduce rotationsper table in order to devote more time to aparticular topic under discussion. Othercontextual adjustments were made regard-ing the number of pre-set topics and thebilingual working languages used for theworkshop.

In order to collect further knowledge andinformation about each Joint Programmeand submit them for peer reviews, theattending Joint Programme team mem-bers were requested to bring one objectconsidered to be representative either ofthe Joint Programme as a whole or of aparticularly important activity undertaken.

Joint Programme teams were encouragedto be creative in selecting that object, asthe underlying idea was to portray theirwork attractively and visually. The JointProgramme objects exhibited ranged fromcrafts to commercial products such asmusic CDs and brochures, to objects madefrom traditional raw materials to materials

recycled to promote environmental sus-tainability, to figurative illustrations repre-sentative of the Joint Programme’s work.The Joint Programme teams exhibited theirobjects and explained their importance inshort five-minute statements.

The inspiring object

Knowledge Café/World Café

The value added of this technique is that it affords participants opportunities to hold discussions in small groups of peerprofessionals working in different contexts on various topics associated with programme implementation. This not onlypermits constructive learning by various other professionals working on similar topics and facing similar challenges, butalso further increases knowledge enhanced by peer-to-peer exchanges and discussions.

This type of visual representation exercise is useful as a team-building exercise, as it allows the teams to consult beforethe workshop and decide collectively which object encapsulates a particularly representative Joint Programme activity.It also makes for a particularly vivid portrayal of the work undertaken. W

orks

hops

Information and knowledge processing has enormous potential in terms of speed, worldwide access and instantaneous retrievaland dissemination through the Internet. Information technology is therefore a crucial component of knowledge management.In order to capitalize on broadband and maximize knowledge sharing among all Joint Programme and all stakeholders,Teamworks, an electronic platform developed by UNDP and adapted to the operating needs of the MDG-F is spearheading knowl-edge exchanges as the social media platform provided to the Joint Programmes for online collaboration. The platform providesa state-of-the-art bundle of functionalities for communicating, networking and finding people with particular expertise throughan electronic community of practice. The added value of an electronic platform is that the community of practice establishedthrough workshops, for instance, can be kept alive well after such meetings, by a mere ‘click’. It also places a much widercommunity of practitioners and their areas of expertise and knowledge at the fingertips of those who have an Internet connection.

TEAMWORKS, the Electronic Platform

CONNECTING PEOPLE AND SHARING KNOWLEDGE

KM workshops and an electron ic platform 4 l CONNECTING PEOPLE AND SHARING KNOWLEDGE

Wor

ksho

psThe purpose of knowledge management workshops

The knowledge management workshops complemented the questionnaire by contributingto the formation of a solid body of knowledge, with emphasis on three primary issues,namely impact, success stories and lessons learnt. They were attended by the main imple-menting partners, provided for important teambuilding exercises and constituted fora fordiscussing the challenges and opportunities faced, for engaging in peer-to-peer sharing ofexperience and knowledge for establishing a community of practice.

Participants were representatives of the main implementing partners of the Joint Programme, namely:the Joint Programme Managerthe United Nations partner agenciesthe main national counterpart

• FOSTER A COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE among professionals working on similar subjects indifferent contexts – introduction of colleagues and of their respective Joint Programmes in orderto foster a community of practice and a network among the Joint Programme teams.• EXCHANGE AND ENHANCE KNOWLEDGE: share knowledge and experience among JointProgrammes in order to build a body of knowledge; provide a forum for in-depth discussions of issuesdirectly relating to culture and development by sharing and exchanging concrete examples of specificissues; strengthen the participants’ capacity with specific emphasis on areas within the culture anddevelopment thematic window; exchange views on linking tangible activities to targeted MDGs.• IDENTIFY AND AGREE ON CATEGORIES OF INFORMATION relevant to the knowledgemanagement project: explanation of the MDG-F Culture and Development questionnaire andpresentation of Teamworks, the electronic platform.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP TOOLSDuring the workshops, various knowledge management techniques were used and adapted tomeet each workshop’s contextual needs in order to provide participants with tools to enable themto interact, share, exchange and learn better. This publication provides some examples.

WHO?

WHAT?

HOW?

ADDED VALUE OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT TOOLS ANDMETHODOLOGIES USED DURING THE KMWORKSHOPS

Joint programme teams can step back fromtheir daily management and implementationand reflect on the activities and their impact

Joint Programme teams can self-assess theindividual and collective knowledge generated,often in relation to their peers

A relaxed atmosphere for networking andbuilding of team spirit

Joint Programmes’ experience and lessonslearnt can be shared and success stories showcased

A body of knowledge on culture and development can be built on practice

In collecting existing knowledge, stakeholdersmust first and foremost be informed as to Whois Who and what expertise is availablewithin the community of practice. The riverdiagram methodology can be used in a largegroup to identify specific themes on which asignificant amount of knowledge can beshared, group learning opportunities and areas

possibly requiring external inputs in order toenhance knowledge and know-how. The tool isbased on each team’s self-assessment, and acommon list of competencies or results is eval-uated according to pre-set standards. The needto be fair and to avoid underestimating or over-estimating the level of knowledge is primordialto this exercise. Once the results of the self-

assessment exercise has been analysed andsubmitted to the group, participants are invitedto compare their assessment and discuss thebasis and criteria that they have used for theirself-assessment in a given area of competence.This enables the group to classify their knowl-edge and know-how, thus promoting debateamong peers.

River DiagramThis creative approach to various topics and to transmission to peers permits:• time to self-assess the knowledge generated through project implementation• identification of the strengths and weaknesses of such knowledge• ultimate improvement in the effectiveness of project implementation

�

�

�

�

�

gKnowledge Analys is and Products 5 l TRANSLATING AND DISSEMINATING KNOWLEDGE

Anal

ysin

g Kn

owle

dgeA nalysing Knowledge

The processing of raw data into knowledge products, in particular analysing and dis-seminating generated knowledge, is a crucial component of knowledge management.

Analysis – rather than mere storage – of knowledge management-generated data isimportant to the ‘feedback’ provided to Joint Programme teams on the useful materialthat they have produced by devoting time and effort in order to contribute to theknowledge management initiative. The processing of raw data and ‘feedback’ to theimplementing teams in the form of knowledge products entail external interpreta-tion of the information and knowledge gathered that may be used for further learning,research or for advocacy. In addition to communication and advocacy, knowledge management products can beused to encourage implementing teams to monitor their own impact, successes andshortcomings, since they can draw on intangible and unforeseen results compiledthrough knowledge management and not only refer to predefined targets set at thebeginning of the programme. Moreover, knowledge management products are wrought from data and informa-tion provided by the teams and are not the handiwork of an external evaluator. It istherefore extremely interesting and pertinent to have both the internal and externalviewpoints on programme implementation and its impact in order to identify anyoverlap and deviation that can but enrich and elucidate culture and development inspecific contexts.

The methodology used to analyse the questionnaire is given below as the referenceagainst which each question of the MDG-F questionnaire was read and analysed inconjunction with the appointed academic experts:

Overall Joint-Programme objectives

As it was important for the Joint Programmeteams to select overall activity goals set whenthe projects were designed to reflect projects’execution status at the time of completion ofthe questionnaire, Joint Programme respon-dents were requested in the questionnaire totick objectives as appropriate from a list ofoverall objectives based on the terms ofreference of the culture and developmentthematic window. Joint Programme teamsthus reported on overall action goals set

when projects were designed and on projectimplementation status at the time of com-pletion of the questionnaire.

Cultural domains covered by the JointProgramme

The aim here was to place action takenunder the Joint Programme on ‘culturaldomains’, a term used by UNESCO to definethe cultural sector, establish cultural indica-tors and compile statistics. This aspect was important in order to identify development

dynamics in culture consistent with otherculture and development studies.

International culture Conventions cov-ered by the Joint Programme

Joint Programmes were linked to the majorculture Conventions administered byUNESCO’s Culture Sector. Under this section,significant information was gleaned aboutthe links between the work undertaken, themajor Conventions and priorities set.

1.1

1.21.3

MAKING THE LINK WITH ACADEMICDEBATES IS NECESSARY in order to heedthe will to increase the practical applications of culture and development through academicdebates and theoretical views, provide a particular appraisal of information receivedfrom Joint Programme teams, and exploreinnovative analytical methodologies. To thisend, UNESCO is working with academics fromthe UNESCO Chair on Cultural Policies andCooperation of the University of Girona, Spain,and the ‘Silvia Santagata Research Centre,’Turin, Italy, part of the International ResearchCentre on the Economics of Culture and WorldHeritage Studies, under the auspices ofUNESCO.

Anal

ysin

g Kn

owle

dgeDimensions covered by the JP

The aim here was to place action takenunder the Joint Programmes on develop-ment pillars such as economics, educationand the environment. This allows for theidentification of the outreach of JP activitiesin relation to important development pillars.

Identification, definition and implemen-tation of the Joint Programme

On the basis of the data collected, actiontaken under the Joint Programme was thefirst feature analysed internally in order toglean information on the design of theJoint Programme’s content and on variousaspects of its implementation.

Joint Programme products

Joint Programme outputs and deliverablesboth to the cultural sector and to sectorsrelated to their f ields of action andachievements in meeting needs orrequirements identified either during theJoint Programme’s proposal or during itsimplementation were considered in thissection. In analysing these deliverables,Joint Programme teams implemented awide variety of strategies in order to achievetheir goals, achieve efficiency gains andenhance the sustainability of their action.The section also contained information onJoint Programmes beneficiaries and tangi-ble options for their participation in actiondesigned to ensure strong ownership of theJoint Programmes.

Beneficiaries

In this section of the questionnaire, JointProgramme managers identified the bene-ficiaries of their activities very precisely underfour broad headings, namely population,private sector, public administration and civilsociety organization. Groups and subgroupsof beneficiaries were listed in the question-naire itself, and a distinction was drawnbetween direct and indirect beneficiaries.

Impact on stakeholders through strate-gies and training

This section required specific information onthe type of outputs and the results oftraining, capacity-building and knowledgetransfer activities undertaken with JointProgramme stakeholders. Such impactswere of great importance in ensuringgreater sustainability of Joint Programmesand ownership of their results as an illus-tration of the consolidation and progressof the Joint Programmes in their fields ofaction. This data were linked to specificcultural domains covered by the trainingcourses, their territorial scale and thenumber and age group of the beneficiaries.

Outputs (studies)

The compilation of studies, collection ofdata and dissemination and outreachmaterials were detailed in the various JointProgrammes’ objectives and action. Theyconstituted a very important source ofknowledge for national stakeholders whosupported and the Joint Programmes andfostered their sustainability. This impactoffset in many instances the dearth ofstudies reflecting each country’s circum-stances and the lack of specific proposalscontaining nationally expressed needs.

Other outputs

The purpose of this section of the question-naire was to identify specific outcomes andimpacts generated during the implementa-tion of Joint Programme objectives. Theseimpacts yielded highly accurate data on thetype and number of activities undertakenand on their policy implications.

Results

Results, both foreseen and unforeseen, andtheir contribution to the achievement ofMillennium Development Goals targeted bythe Joint Programmes were reported in thissection.

1.4

1.5

2.2

2.3

2.4

1.6

1,7

TRANSLATING AND DISSEMINATING KNOWLEDGE

2.1

NETWORK ANALYSIS AND ITS RELEVANCETO CULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTSThe formation of new networks and social dynamics and thedurability and dissemination of cultural networks are importantcomponents of the relevance and sustainability of cultural devel-opment projects. As a result, the mapping and measurementof cultural networks, by applying network analysis to culturaldevelopment projects, yields a different interpretation from thatprovided by traditional financial and econometric analyses.

Network analysis can be an effective means of ascertaining theextent to which development projects establish local networksand of understanding which stakeholders are key to their imple-mentation. Moreover, network analysis can provide comple-mentary pointers on the potential sustainability of developmentprojects over time through the establishment and potential con-tinuation of network interaction after project termination.Interpretative network analysis can therefore contributeto the study of sustainability of some implementedactivities, inasmuch as many other factors – political, financial –are crucial to determining the sustainability of the networksformed as a result of the Joint Programme activities and theircapacity to continue beyond the life of the Joint Programmes.Four categories of questions that can be addressed throughnetwork analysis are set out below.

Who were the project’s key actors and key beneficiaries? Byconsidering the number of stakeholders who have interacted ina project, the ones who have been key to the various projectphases can be individuated and those who have not beeninvolved can be identified. By identifying key actors at thedesign, inception and implementation phases, those actors whocould be incentivized further can be targeted in order to help topromote the project activities’ future sustainability.

Is the nature of the key beneficiaries consistent with theproject’s original target? By comparing original aims and targetswith actual project beneficiaries, it is possible to evaluatewhether the ultimate beneficiaries had been targeted initiallyand to identify any initially unforeseen beneficiaries.

Which actors have established permanent networks and/orpermanent outputs, and how are they related to each other? Theestablishment of permanent outputs and permanent networks isfundamental to the potential sustainability of the benefits createdby the project after the project has been terminated. Incidentally,outputs and networks must be reviewed at some point after theend of the programme, in particular regard to their success inestablishing new contacts and instituting new actors, in order toobtain a full output and network durability map.

Which network can develop further once the project hasbeen terminated? Once two actors have interacted, they couldcontinue to do so in future. For this reason it is important not onlyto know whether two actors have interacted, but also to measurethe number of interactions (intensity of the relationship). Themore frequent their relations, the higher the likelihood thatthey would interact again in the future. Periodic monitoring ofnetwork formation, the frequency of interaction and its futurepotential during the implementation phase can assist projectteams in catering to their target groups and in meeting theirconcern for sustainability.

What action and which measures could be taken to improvesustainability? Network analysis could also be instrumentalin individuating best practices and drawbacks to ensuresustainability over time. Moreover, it permits quantitative com-parisons of projects. Indeed, it produces not only network maps,but also a series of indicators for measuring the main network’scharacteristics and each actor’s centrality.

1

2

3

4

5

yg

g

Anal

ysin

g Kn

owle

dge

THE MDG-F CULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT JOINT PROGRAMMES were analysed as a network in order to appraisetheir potential to be sustainable as networks.

Social network analysis is a technique increasingly used in a number of research fields, in particular in the social sciences. Thismethodology approaches society as a network of relations among stakeholders and rests on the twofold premise that people arefulfilled in relation to others and that relations structurally determine individual and group behaviour. Social network analysispermits a deeper understanding of social and economic interconnections, structure and development.

WHAT IS NETWORK ANALYSIS?

TRANSLATING AND DISSEMINATING KNOWLEDGE

K nowledge Products

Dissemination of knowledge gathered is a pillar of knowledge management. Not only is itimportant to communication and advocacy, but it also is crucial in culture and developmentto informing future programming activities. Indeed, the knowledge products generatedunder the MDG-F culture and development thematic window’s knowledge managementproject are designed to contribute to optimum relevance, efficiency and impact of activitiesand cooperation programmes in this field with a view to informing development policy in theservice of the international community.

In order to serve the international development community by reporting on the MDG-F cultureand development experiment, it is important to disseminate knowledge products generated andthe knowledge gathered as widely as possible. Electronic media and the Internet are thereforeprimordial, as they allow the wider culture and development community and policy- and decision-makers to have at their fingertips a wealth of information sources such as:

the UNESCO website, which provides MDG-F information, data and knowledge products,in addition to access and links to UNESCO’s work generally and to UNESCO’s majorstandard-setting instruments that form the very backbone of culture and development(www.unesco.org/culture)

the MDG-F Secretariat’s websites, which contains important information on all eightthematic windows and gives a full picture of the MDG Fund generally, by thematic windowand by implementing Joint Programme (www.mdgfund.org)

dedicated Joint Programme websites, containing a wealth of information on theiractivities, endeavours and outputs

TEAMWORKS, the dedicated electronic platform (carton 4) that virtually connectspersons working on similar issues in various thematic windows and areas of work worldwidein order to share and disseminate information, owing to the culture and developmentcommunity of practice that emerged and grown through the Joint Programmes

A series of PUBLICATIONS has been issued in order to provide information on the 18MDG-F Joint Programmes implemented under the culture and development thematicwindow. The analyses in these publications stem from various knowledge managementtools used to gather and organize the knowledge generated by those Joint Programmes andthrough the dedicated MDG-F Culture and Development Questionnaire completed by theJoint Programme teams. As a result, they provide information and data which the JointProgramme teams have chosen to highlight from their innumerable implemented activities,products and impacts. That said, the material depicted in the publications is by no meansexhaustive, but rather provides a snapshot of the knowledge generated both from a trans-country (regional) standpoint and from an individual Joint Programme standpoint on themain four components that constitute very cornerstone of the MDG-F experiment:

achievements and impact on the targeted MDGsnational ownership and participatory processessuccess factorsoperational challenges

Know

ledg

e Pr

oduc

ts

�

�

�

�

�

TRANSLATING AND DISSEMINATING KNOWLEDGE

Cov

er P

hot

os :

Asi

a©

Lian

g Q

uank

ang;

Sou

th E

ast E

urop

e©

Yvon

Fru

neau

; Lat

in A

mer

ica©

Min

iste

rio C

oord

inad

or d

e Pa

trim

onio

de

Ecua

dor/

Den

is T

orre

s; A

fric

a©

Moi

ra W

elch

; Ara

b S

tate

s©

UN

ESCO

/ Kam

al R

afta

ni.

Prin

ted

by U

NES

CO/C

LD.

Des

ign

Rect

oVer

so33

(0)1

46

24 1

0 09

‘’

Culture can clearly facilitate economic growth through job creation, tourism and the cultural industries,as an important economic sector for production, consumption and access. Furthermore, Culture providesthe social basis that allows for stimulating creativity, innovation, human progress and well-being. In this sense, culture can be seen as a driving force for human development, in respect of economic growthand also as a means of leading a more fulfilling intellectual, emotional, moral and spiritual life.Excerpts from the Terms of Reference of the MDG-F Culture and Development Thematic Window

Published by the Culture Sector of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).7, Place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France

© UNESCO 2012 All rights reserved CLT-2013/WS/3 This publication exists in English and French on our website: www.unesco.org/new/mdgf

For further information please contact the editors :Dorine Dubois: d.dubois@unesco.org Maria Gropa: m.gropa@unesco.org Caroline Munier: c.munier@unesco.org

http://www.unesco.orghttp://www.mdgfund.org