Strategy Sub-Committee Meeting 19-5-2015

Participants

Marcus, Terry, Kheswar,Nigel,Nicole, Emma (minutes)

Apologies

Ali, Emad, Farah

Proposal for meeting

  • Discuss change in regional consultations to make these more regionally driven, which will be up to regions to decide the format of these discussions/meeting.
  • RDCs and GB members will have to discuss this with members in the region
  • See GNDR Strategy Review Process [revised 18 May] document.
  • Kheswar: maximise ownership and participation is key.

Terry presentation

  • Helpful to strengthen regional ownership of the entire strategy review process.
  • Practical reasoning: collaborate with other stakeholders, use timings for other events.
  • Philosophical reasoning: want to provide space for members to feel like they could shape consultation to regional perspective.
  • Initial chat with Farah yesterday endorsed the overall ideal but aware of danger that regions may head off in many different directions.
  • Therefore facilitation of workshops needs to be structured with outcomes in mind.
  • Mindful that coherence across regions is key.

Questions and comments

  • Kheswar: need clear guidance in order to achieve concrete outcomes. Have some reservations of too much freedom to the regions.
  • Terry: agree with the need for balance: free to raise issues in the meeting – network having a voice, but must reach outcomes with support and facilitation.
  • Marcus: must be a ‘bottom up, top down’ process. Key is what is GNDR’s added value as a global network? Imagine that a two day workshop will be the most effective way to brainstorm and discuss on a face to face level. GNDR Global Hub can provide pre-workshop training from Andy Bidnell to those organising and facilitating the workshops (to RDCs and GB members). GB will be important in this.
  • Kheswar: training is very important. We must have expectations clear in our mind – training is important for us to be all talking the same language.
  • Nigel: welcome more open approach, and piggy back on other opportunities to discuss in the region.
  • Perhaps more guidance on process? Minimum amount of diversity – members, or beyond? Number of members? Key targets that we want regions to reach out to.
  • Outcome 2 ‘regional problem statement’ – could you break this out further. Useful to have coherent themes (funding, government links, etc) for consistency for an overall strategy.
  • Outcome 3 ‘Governance’ – do you want to open to discussion to this again?
  • Outcome 4 could we have people rank / prioritise points / problems?
  • Outcome 5 – what is the niche for the network? Key purpose.
  • Costs: people should cost proposals out.
  • Terry: Intention not to reopen governance structure. In regions there are a number of different structures, and would be helpful to see how we can engage together. Perhaps we should delete the word governance to avoid confusion.
  • Marcus: also important to understand that regionally elected GB are accountable and report to their members. This is a governance issue.
  • Nigel: perhaps this needs to be separated out – functioning of the network out of the strategy outcomes.
  • Nicole: Important to explicitly understand and clarify what the specific role of this network is.
  • Kheswar: my region requires capacity building, this is why training is key. At the end of the regional consultations if regional outcomes are not the same, how do we bring these together?
  • Marcus: hoping to produce a regional outcome document from each consultation outlining priorities and the role of GNDR in this. GNDR Global Hub will bring these together to see where common issues are, and also significant differences. These will inform a broad overall strategy with particular regional references / context.
  • Nigel: is there a part of this process that is globally focused eg UNISDR, World Bank?
  • Marcus: will fall out of actions that we have already been doing – global advocacy. We could develop this further. Connectivity with other global networks under broader sustainability / development agendas in post 2015 environment.
  • Kheswar: How are we organising these meetings? What are the practical next steps?
  • Terry: Contact RDCs and GB member in regions and provide them with these guideline notes.
  • These individual regional discussions will decide how they want to put the consultations together.
  • We will also need to produce more detailed guidance, put together training notes.
  • Budget will need to be confirmed.
  • Marcus: Need to notify the members of this outline.
  • Kheswar: How do they members get invited? Is there a selection / screening process? We cannot invite everyone.
  • Marcus: For the original 8 regional workshops there was a selection criteria put together for members.
  • Can share this list with the regions
  • Need to see from members who is keen to attend
  • Nigel: may be an issue of language wording of ‘criteria’
  • Nicole: Should partners like UNISDR have a say as well?
  • Marcus: UNISDR a key stakeholder in this, in additional to regional and national bodies. Should encourage other stakeholders to be part of this processes. Can we suggest a list of partners / others that may be beneficial to attend? Or should we be less prescriptive
  • Terry: note that criteria was mainly for providing support for members, our budget is very tight. Should also be mindful of new members who have shown an interest.

Revised time schedule

  • Provides more time for regional consultation
  • Global Summit beginning of November
  • Final strategy end of 2015
  • Nigel: understand there is no budget for GS, is there a plan B?
  • Marcus: currently fundraising for this. If we do not have funding for the GS, this will not go ahead. Fundraising is an ongoing challenge for the network.
  • Nigel: therefore in the schedule we should build in the plan B process if funding has not been agreed by, for example, end of August.
  • Marcus: agreed this plan B should be factored into the review process.

Chair

  • For each subcommittee we require a chair from the GB.
  • Kheswar: proposed Nicole or Nigel to chair.
  • Nigel: may make sense for Farah as overall chair to be chair of this subcommittee. Better for one of the elected Board members to chair this than the Trustees.
  • Marcus: will go back to Farah with this proposition. Or Marcus may chair this group, but will not chair other subcommittees.
  • Nigel: if others can’t or won’t can step in, but politically better if elected members could take a lead.

Action List

  • Terry: communicate to RDCs and GB members of updated process, and put together a communication with RDCs and GB to inform members.
  • Terry: revise guidance note to include Nigel’s comments on outcomes, and additional separate note on governance / functioning of the network piece.
  • Marcus: discuss chair role with Farah.
  • Marcus: to outline training provisions from Andy Bidnell
  • Marcus: to provide details of plan B in case of no funding for the GS – this will need to be included in the GNDR Strategy Review Process document.

Strategy Sub Committee Meeting | 30 September 2018 | Page 1 of 3