Cases and Evidence
The Case Studies Case Stories Map

Programme of South-South Cooperation Benin-Bhutan-Costa Rica (PSC) Case StoryInformation

3 countries share their knowledge and practical experiences through PSC.

Country (ies) and institutions:

in the SSC activity (i.e. provider, recipient, traditional donor, etc.). If available, please add a diagram to describe how institutions were related to each other.

Country Organization

NationalMechanism of Bhutan SustainableDevelopmentSecretariat (SDS)
NationalMechanism of BenIn Centre de Partenariat et d'Expertisepour le Développement Durable (CePED) National Mechanism of Costa Rica Fundecooperación para el Desarrollo Sostenible
PSC Secretariat. Fundecooperación para el Desarrollo Sostenible Donor Kingdom of theNetherlands. Providers Organizations Country SustainableDevelopmentSecretariat (SDS) Bhutan
Centre de Partenariat et d'Expertisepour le Développement Durable (CePED) Benin
Fundecooperación para el Desarrollo Sostenible Costa Rica
RecipientOrganizations Country TEC (Academic) Costa Rica Group of Koswak, (Local Organizations,) Costa Rica Instituto Nacional de Aprendizaje (INA); (Academic) Costa Rica Universidad a Distancia (UNED); (Academic) Costa Rica Omar Dengo (NGO) Costa Rica Electricity Institute of Costa Rica (Govermental) Costa Rica GRAD-FB (NGO) Benin, National Mushroom Centre (Governmental) Bhutan, CIPGEF (NGO) Benin, TEC (Academic) Costa Rica, Association ofWomen of Söki (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Association of AlakölpaKanewak (Local Organizations) Costa Rica, GRAD-FB (NGO) Benin, CofpagesGroup (NGO) Benin CojesainGroup (NGO) Benin, Omar Dengo (NGO) Costa Rica, Instituto Nacional de Aprendizaje (INA); (Academic) Costa Rica Universidad a Distancia (UNED); (Academic) Costa Rica, Electricity Institute of Costa Rica (Govermental) Costa Rica CITA-UCR (Academic) Costa Rica. Universidad de Costa Rica (Academic) Costa Rica, National Mushroom Centre (Governmental) Bhutan National Center for Food Science and Technology.(Academic) Costa Rica, ACICAFOC (NGO) Costa Rica INRAB (Governmental) Benin, ACEPESA (NGO), Costa Rica, Municipality of San José (Govermental), Costa Rica Community Association of Hatillo (Local Organizations). Costa Rica, JICA (Japanese International Cooperation Agency) (NGO) Costa Rica, RSPN (Governmental) Bhutan, Information and Communication Services of the Ministry of Agriculture of Bhutan (Governmental) Bhutan, Ministry of Agriculture (Governmental) Bhutan, Ministry for Economy (Governmental) Bhutan, National Institute of Innovation and Technology Transfer (Governmental). Costa Rica, Asociación de Gestores Locales del Caribe, (Local Organizations) Costa Rica, Asociación de Productoras y Productores de Asentamientos Unidos, (Local Organizations) Costa Rica, Asociación de Productores y Productoras Agroecológica e Industrial del Caribe (AGROECO), (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación de Productores de Leche de Cuatro Esquinas (APROLECE). (Local Organizations) Costa Rica OBEPAB (Private) Benin PROAGROIN (NGO) Costa Rica ASOPROAGROIN (Producer´s association) (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Hogar Calasanz (NGO) Costa Rica GRAD-FB (NGO) Benin NATURE TROPICAL (NGO) Benin, BIO BHUTAN (Private) Bhutan, ACICAFOC (NGO) Costa Rica Asociación de Productores La Amistad-Biolley (Local Organizations) Costa Rica, Asociación para la Conservación y Manejo de los Recursos Forestales (ASCOMAFOR) (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación de Mujeres de Quebrada Grande (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación de Productores Agropecuario de los Ángeles. (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Lemon Grass Cooperative. (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Bepam Lemon Grass Management Committee (BLGMC) (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Phuensum Community Forestry Management Group (PSCFMG) (Local Organizations) Costa Rica PuniGakhilHandicraft (NGO) Bhutan RSEC (Private). Costa Rica Cultural Ministry (Govermental), Costa Rica CR USA foundation (NGO) Costa Rica ILAMInstituto Latinoamericano de Museo. (Govermental), Costa Rica Bhutan Agro Industries Limited (Private) Bhutan CIPGEF (NGO) Benin Communities of Bhutan. (Local Organizations) Bhutan ECO ECOLO (NGO) National Biodiversity Center (Governmental) Bhutan Department of Forest (DoF) (Governmental) Bhutan Renewable Natural Resources Research Centres (RNRRCs) (Academic) Bhutan Bhutan Agricultural and Food Regulatory Authority (BAFRA) (Governmental) Bhutan Department of Agriculture (DoA) (Governmental) Bhutan Department of Livestock (DoL). (Governmental) Bhutan CEBEDES (NGO) Benin ECO ECOLO (NGO) Benin Neotrópica (NGO) Costa Rica ASOPEZ Costa Rica ASDEI-CARIVARI, Benin Centro Socio-Ambiental de Osa(Local Organizations) Costa Rica CERGET (NGO), Benin National Biodiversity Center (Governmental) Bhutan Ministry of Agriculture, (Governmental) Bhutan Ministry of Health (Governmental) Bhutan Non Governmental Organizations Protection of Nature (RSPN) Bhutan World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Bhutan INBio (NGO) Costa Rica National System of Conservation Areas (SINAC), (Governmental) Costa Rica Organization for Tropical Studies (OTS), (NGO) Costa Rica National Museum of Costa Rica (MNCR) (Governmental) Costa Rica UniversitédAbomeyCalavi (Academic), Benin Non GovernmentalOrganizations CECODI Bhutan MIALIBOUN Bhutan TETOOMA Bhutan NationalMushroom Centre (Governmental) Bhutan INBio (NGO) Costa Rica Coopehongos (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación de Productores Agricolas, Pecuarios y de Ecoturismo de Siberia(Local Organizations) Costa Rica Nature Conservation Division, MoA (Governmental), Bhutan CINPE-UNA (Academic) Costa Rica Sistema Nacional de Áreas de Conservación. (SINAC; Governmental) Costa Rica CEBEDES (NGO) Benin RSPN (Governmental) Bhutan Royal Botanical and Recreational Parks Division (Governmental) Bhutan ECO BENIN (NGO, Benin) Benin AMBIO (NGO, CR) Costa Rica Kekoldi Indigenous Reserve(Local Organizations, Costa Rica) Costa Rica CIPGEF (NGO) Benin CECOS (NGO) Costa Rica ECO BENIN (NGO) Benin BEES (NGO) Benin COOPRENA (Private). Costa Rica Asociación Cultural, Ambiental y Turística Los Chiles (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación de Mujeres de San Antonio (AMSA) (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación Ulima de Caño Negro (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación de Guías y Transportistas Acuaticas (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación de Mujeres Productoras de Mariposas (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación LhajarraJutu (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación Comité de Mujeres Indígenas (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación Indígena Kabekwa de Costa Rica (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación de Mujeres de Caño Negro, ASOMUCAN (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación de Mujeres Artesanas BIjagüeñas COOABI (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Cooperativa de Jóvenes Bijagüeños COOPEJUBI (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Asociación de Productores Bijagüeños ABIPA (Local Organizations) Costa Rica Department of Tourism of Bhutan (Governmental) Bhutan ABTO (Private) Bhutan Tourism Council of Bhutan (TCB; Governmental) Bhutan ECOLE (Private) Costa Rica ABTO (Private) Bhutan Ríos Tropicales (Private) Costa Rica TGMI (NGO) Bhutan The Ministry of Home and Cultural Affairs (MOHCA),(Governmental) Bhutan Royal Academy of Performing Arts (RAPA), (Governmental) Bhutan Royal University of Bhutan (RUB), (Governmental) Bhutan Institute for Language and Cultural Studies (ILCS), (Governmental) Bhutan Tourism Council of Bhutan, (Governmental) Bhutan Association of Bhutanese Tour Operators, (Governmental) Bhutan Ministry of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Education, (Governmental) Bhutan Bhutan Chamber of Commerce and Industry (BCCI) (Governmental) Bhutan Centre for Bhutan Studies (CBS) (Governmental) Bhutan Association ChoeurD'enfants (NGO) Benin Benin Chamber of Commerce and Industry (CCIB) (Governmental) Benin Beninese Federation of Choir Music (FBMC) (Governmental) Benin NatureTropicale Benin Renewable Energy Division, Dept of Energy Benin BUNCA Costa Rica

Overview(s)

- What was the purpose of the activity, and who was involved?
- What can we learn from this experience?
PSC share their knowledge and practical experiences, with the intention ofcontributing to sustainable development goals and long term partnerships through practical hands-on and selfsustaining projectson 5 topics: Sustainable chains of production and consumption, conservation of biodiversity, sustainable tourism, efficient use of energy and gender equity as transversal theme. This has led 36 different projects that exchange experiences in a very balanced participation, making possible to think globally (development goals) and act locally (with successful results).

Background and set-up.

- What were the expected results, purpose and overall goal of the SSC activity?
- Why did the partners engage in the SSC activity? Who was the driving force, who connected the institutions?
- What methods were used to bring together the actors?
- How was the specific expertise of the provider identified?
- Did the provider offered first, or did the receiver demand directly the expertise?
- Was there any previous cooperation? What role did the political context play?
- What (logistical, financial, etc) challenges did you need to tackle before starting this experience?
- Was it worth the effort, or do you feel the transaction costs were excessive?

A decade, of promoting and supporting hundreds of projects implemented between the Republic of Benin, the Kingdom of Bhutan and the Republic of Costa Rica, of delivering joint declarations at multilateral forums and debating policies towards achieving sustainable development, demonstrated the potential of an innovative framework of collaboration based on equity, reciprocity and participation, that tried to break with traditional North - South relationships in development cooperation. Therefore, the partnership between The Netherlands (representing "the North"), and a limited number of selected countries: Bhutan (in Asia), Benin (in Africa) and Costa Rica (in Latin America) was seen as a manageable pilot experience in four world regions, that could (1) inspire clustering of many similar small partnerships and real commitments between other countries; and (2) promote alliances between a wide array of stakeholders, both within, as between these countries. For this reason, during the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) held in Johannesburg in 2002, the three countries reaffirmed their commitment to the pursuit sustainable development goals. Based on the Sustainable Development Agreements (SDAs), in 2005 a Programme for South-South Cooperation on Sustainable Development (PSC) was proposed. Framework in which the Netherlands took the decision to hibernate their active participation, but agreed to transfer funds to support the PSC.

Logistic and financial challenges:

The first half year was considered as Start-up Phase, dedicated to set-up and strengthening of the PSC Secretariat, improvement of administrative and promotion instruments, careful preparation of the Annual Plan for the next years to come. Improvements:

• Design and implementation of a plan for continuous training: Language lessons (English, French and Spanish)

• Training on budgeting, Excel, financial report, customer service

• Training on Project Management

• Organisational capacity assessments were carried out for the remaining National Mechanisms; the Centre de Partenariatetd'Expertise pour le Développement Durable (CPEDD, Benin) and the Sustainable Development Secretariat(SDS, Bhutan). This assessment was conducted directly by the PSC Secretariat

Worth it or not..
An attractive attribute of this Programme it's the cost-effectiveness: the total investment for 36 projects over the last four years was only US$13,2 million. The total amount was distributed to the 3 National Mechanisms, for the improvement of administrative deficiencies (20% of the total amount) and projects investment (80% of the total amount),that made possible, the implementation of 36 trilateral, bilateral or unilateral projects. Four years later, the results talk for themselves, XX of knowledge exchanges between the three countries, creation of incomes for farmers, reduce of the use of chemical resources, 174 new services, 674 new products created, 132 women involves in decision making, 3505 farmers converted to organic production and others.

The partnership. Tell how the partners worked together

- Did the receiving partner lead and coordinate the SSC activity within its own plans and priorities?

-If so, to which extent was this leadership effective? If not, what was the reason? - How were the responsibilities divided? Did all involved partners commit to make contributions?

-How was it ensured that these contributions were actually made? - How were other national actors, such as parliaments and civil society, involved in the SSC activity?

-Was there external oversight of the implementation and the results? Why (not)? - Is the information on the project activities, budget and results available to all stakeholders? Why (not)?

As we mentioned before the Netherlands took the decision to hibernate their active participation, but agreed to transfer funds to support the PSC. For this reason, one organization per country was defined as "National Mechanism" in charge of the define, monitoring and administration of the Programme and to acts as platforms for alliances between government, civil society, academic sector, and private stakeholders: Fundecooperación in Costa Rica, Sustainable Development Secretary (SDS) in Bhutan and Centre de Partenariat et d`ExpertisepourleDéveloppement Durable (CePED) in Benin. From these leaders, Fundecooperación acts also as PSC Secretariat in charge of the complete management of the Programme for South-South Cooperation (PSC) and as Administrator of the PSC Fund. Each national mechanism have the responsibility to inform the Secretariat about the assumed strategy and the results obtained, as part of periodic reports in order to document the experience of the PSC, also staffs of the NMs communicate frequently on management issues regarding the PSC. These communications are related to the formulation of the work plan, monitoring of progress, financial and administrative support to the activities, evaluation and monitoring of projects, results publicity, and maintenance and updating of the website etc.

Parliaments and civil society involved in the PSC activities:

• Parliaments: Through the Joint Committee of the PSC was comprised the high level representatives of the partner countries that provided political support and policy directions to enhance the implementation of the PSC.

• The direct beneficiaries of the PSC projects are the inhabitants of the partner countries, the civil society acted as protagonists in the development of concrete projects and Programme of South-South Cooperation Benin-Bhutan-Costa Rica (PSC) activities, identified, carried out and monitored in a participatory way. Rural communities, women, small tourism firms, consumers, users of energy and actors that depend directly on a sustainable use of natural resources and biodiversity.

• Intermediate or participant organisationshave beenindirectly benefited. These can be grass-root organisations of the direct beneficiaries (like community organisations, cooperatives, associative enterprises, marketing boards); governmental and nongovernmental institutions or development organisations; local governments; academic and research institutions; and private sector companies or firms. Institutions and organisations played a facilitating role in project formulation, provision of services (like training, technical assistance and business development services), market access, financial services, technology transfer, research, and so forth, in concrete alliances for project implementation. Through their commitment and participation, it was possible to strengthen capacities, accumulate knowledge, improve the quality of future services, and position themselves as reliable partners for service delivery.

External oversight:

• Mid Term evaluation of the PSC programme: The mid-term evaluation provided recommendations to be considered for a possible continuation of the PSC. Also determined, as systematically and objectively as possible, the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness (achievement of outputs and outcomes), pertinence, impact, sustainability and the gender equity (cross-cutting theme) of the PSC. It identified factors that have facilitated or impeded the achievement of the objectives.

•Audit reports:Yearly audits have been applied to PSC Programme Trust fund and National Mechanisms, also each semester audits have been applied to the 36 reciprocal projects.. Information on the project activities, budget and results available: PSC catalyses the transition to sustainability by supporting innovation in policies, seeding iniciatives, replicating successes, establishing new partnerships with civil society organisations between the partner countries, and disseminating information.The projects, activities and the results are open to the public through a website and other electronic media.(Article VI, Strategic Partnership Agreement Bhutan, Benin and Costa Rica)

Lessons learned.

- Did the activity support national capacities, for example in ministries, agencies and organizations, to cope with critical development challenges? How and to which extent?

- What was the specific comparative advantage of the provider? Do provider and recipient share the same opinion on this added value, or do they diverge? Why (not)?

- Did your experience provide a more efficient solution than North-South cooperation (for example, in terms of cost reduction, sustainability, context responsiveness, etc.)?

- In the light of this experience, was mutual learning and knowledge exchange motivating for you as partners?

- What role do committed people and change-makers ('champions') play for improving the policy and institutionalenvironment?

National capacities: Acting locally with 36 projects, made possible to:

• Contribute to the construction of sustainable and competitive demand-led supply chains in Benin, Bhutan and Costa Rica: by means of strengthening productive and commercial capacities of farmers and producer organizations; adoption of sanitary, phytosanitary and quality standards; enhancement of labour productivity and efficiency; management of natural resources and waste; and promoting their articulation with possible market actors.

•Enhance people's participation in conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, under "win-win" scenarios (poverty reduction and conservation of natural capital); through the strength of capacities of communities.

• Implement innovative projects at micro-level with more sustainable production systems, certifications and technology development.

• Strengthmicro and small producers, local organizations and cooperatives with an entrepreneurial spirit.

• Improve technical capacities and agricultural research combining traditional techniques with new organic practices, promoting credits; adapting forest legislation and promoting several commercialization opportunities.

• Develop new knowledge through exchange events, workshops, dissemination and public information on 5 main topics: Sustainable chains of production and consumption, sustainable use of biodiversity, sustainable tourism, efficient use of energy and gender equity as transversal theme.

Challenges:

Because of the distance between countries, there have been major challenges that the National Mechanisms have faced before the implementation of the program and during it. Some of those challenges are:

• Administration of the PSC Programme: Managing a Programme with three countries in different parts of the world, with different cultures, languages and backgrounds, makes the administration and the communication between partners a very challenging job. However after 3 years of execution, PSC has managed to overcome the differences, build on similarities and found effective ways to be in contact by the definition of a new structure of communication, including the use of technologies solutions like the official website of PSC, virtual meetings, chats, blogs and other ways.

• Technology issues: Given the differences on the development of each country, some projects coordinators had difficulties with the systematization of the information. So through the operative budget and the help of the respective National Mechanism, new equipment was acquired and new channels of communications were developed.

• Reciprocity: It has been a challenge to demonstrate the real added value of the reciprocity in the projects, in terms of economic, environmental and social relations between partner countries. For this reason, it was developed an indicators data base that made possible the accountability of the results.

• Successful reciprocity mainly depends upon a shared vision and a long history of (getting to) knowing each other. This implies conscious efforts of organizing exchange events and matchmaking efforts, which was only possible because of the joint proposal and hard work of the three National Mechanisms and the PSC Secretariat. All 36 projects implemented under PSC show reciprocity results. Each of these projects contributes to ecological sustainability and benefits the social and economic position of people in the three partner countries

Lessons learned

• National Mechanisms can grow along with the executing organizations through the project implementation process; which is favored by developing long-term relationships with these counterparts in a mutual learning experience; wherein support mechanisms and instruments should be progressively adapted for each "development stages".

• A key factor for the success of this kind of cooperation model is the participation of multiple stakeholders. In case of PSC, this experience was a true success given the joint work of local organizations, NGO's, private sector, educational institutions and government organizations.

•"Learning doing it". Through the exchange visits, different challenges affronted by the three countries were successfully solved by the direct learning and teaching of local individuals. Barriers of language and culture were easily broken through the language of 'common work and knowledge'.

• "Expansion". This trilateral model of South-South Cooperation can be (and should be) replied with more partner countries. It is cost effective and demonstrates that South- South countries can work together and conquered their common challenges.

• A joint interaction among the donor representatives and PSC Secretariat allowed certain flexibility to this Programme and also made possible the accountability and showcase of successful results.

Complementarity with north-south cooperation.

- Did a traditional DAC donor participate in this experience? If so, how are the roles divided? Do all partners learn from each other? If not, would it be desirable for your experience to engage traditional donors?

- Was the experience facilitated by a mechanism identifying the demand and the supply, and/or providing resources? If so, how was the match done and what kind of needs was covered? If not, could the activity benefit from future support by mechanisms?

- (for experiences with a South-South mechanism/platform only) Does the mechanism capture good practices? How are resultsaccounted for?

As mentioned before the principal PSC donor (the Netherlands) took the decision to hibernate their active participation, but agreed to transfer funds to support the PSC. For this reason, the basic mechanisms and instruments of the operational strategy of the PSC are laid down in the PSC Regulations, undersigned on the 19th of May 2005 in The Hague, between the three partner countries and The Netherlands. As result, the basic features of the implementation strategy can be summarised as follows:

• The guiding principles of the PSC are equality, reciprocity and participation of all societal stakeholders. Identification of common interests is basic and the assessment of real added value for reciprocal projects and of opportunities for cost-effective and efficacious cooperation in each thematic area is one of the core challenges of the PSC Programme, its feasibility and sustainability.

• By this regulation, South-South cooperation makes development countries equal partners in their own development and creates joint responsibility for solving problems. By breaking away from North-South development stereotypes, global development issues are addressed in new and moderns ways. The approach recognizes that all of us can be leaders of change.

• In the operational field, the basic technical feature of the PSC is an institutional arrangement and financial facility for "call for proposals" from a bottom-up approach, taking into consideration the guiding principles of equality, reciprocity and participation and other criteria. Through this mechanism each National mechanism have the responsibility of identify the necessities of each country and combine the opportunities of built bilateral or trilateral cooperation among the participant countries.

By the end of the framework, PSC has brought significant economic, social and environmental benefits to the people in the partner countries, especially women:

Indicator

TOTAL Number of new micro enterprises 326,00
Number of new services 174,00
Number of new products 674,00
Number of new centers of production operating 126,00 Number of farmers converted to organic production 3.
505,00 Existing number of positive actions to improve the access for women to technology 149,00
Number of families that applied clean technologies 8.885,00
Number of clean technologies implemented 334,00
Number of new jobs 880,00
Number of hectares used for organic production 15.903,45
Quantity of increased incomes from sustainable tourism 749,55
Number of women involved in decision making (increase) 1.132,00
Number of trees planted 151.484,00
Sales (LAST YEAR) 122.746,55
Quantity of wastes well managed (PER MONTH) 549,00
Number of reforested hectares 44,61
Programme of South-South Cooperation Benin-Bhutan-Costa Rica (PSC)

How to share.

- If you are the receiving partner, would you recommend the solutions and models provided to other countries and organizations in need of support? Why (not)?

- If you are the provider, to which extent are you interested and able to share your solutions and models with other partners? Whatkind of supportcouldyouneed?

PSC is a framework for south-south cooperation, a visionary idea that starting to pay off today. Due to their first-hand familiarity with the problems on the ground, actors of South-South cooperation can be more efficient and effective in identifying and implementing promising strategies and solutions. In this case, due the differences between the countries, their culture, languages, traditions and many others, the cooperation between Benin, Bhutan and Costa Rica was possible. PSC emerge as a success formula, was independence from donors, emphasis on real reciprocity and equality between members and the participation not only of governments, but with communities, universities and many other sectors. The Programme is meaningful and effective in terms of regional integration and unity in global negotiations. By working closely together the three countries were able to tap into the diverse knowledge of each partner, also facilitated the creation of empathy between the southern countries and creates a better understanding of realistic strategies for problems resolutions. South-South partnership between Benin, Bhutan and Costa Rica, was once a concept now is a reality, a successful cooperation, an innovative and valuable strategy. The most important is that it is possible to upscale and replicate a successful-proven model, including other countries. The closeness of southern countries to the identification of the main problems can increase the cost effectiveness of technical cooperation: promote transfer of appropriate technology and enhance ownership, leadership and capacity building among the participants. The potential of a fruitful international alliance between civil society actors, private sector, research institutions and government institutions of different countries depends not only of the participation of South countries, it is necessary the support of the North. Mutual learning among the globe requires cooperation and leadership, it facilitates understanding and an important response to global problems.

Duration.

Start date: (07-05-15) End date: (11-06-30)
Stage Time-span Start-up phase (6 months)
May 15th – November 15th 2007
Year 1 November 16th 2007-November 15th 2008
Year 2 November 16th 2008-November 15th 2009
Year 3 November 16th 2009-November 15th 2010
Year 4 November 16th 2010
Year 5 June 30 2011

Budget. Optional

Please enter the budget and the shares of the stakeholders in it (ideally in USD)
- Financial resources.
- In-kind resources.
- Other contributions.
- Total.

Counterpart:

A. Reciprocal Projects Total 3.534.137 3.534.137 3.534.137 10.602.410 80,0% 2.430.886 23%
B General Management Total (BI+BII+BIII) 378.572 378.572 1.232.013 2.650.602 20,0%
0. Start-up Phase 346.988
I PSC Governance subtotal 163.855 1,2%
a. Management Board Meetings (2x3x21.000) 151.807 1,1%
b. Joint Committee Meetings 12.048 0,1%
II PSC Secretariat (Fundecooperacion) subtotal - - 654.646 654.646 4,9%
a. Working days and expenses 636.573 636.573 4,8%
b. Additional audits of National Mechanisms by PSC Secretariat 18.072 18.072 0,1%
III National Mechanisms subtotal 378.572 378.572 577.367 1.485.113 11,2%
a. Working days National Mechanisms 198.795 198.795 397.590 795.181 6,0%
b. Strengthening of staff capacities (training) 48.193 48.193 48.193 144.578 1,1%
c. Logistics, travels and materials 18.072 18.072 18.072 54.217 0,4%
d. Annual reporting and work plan preparation (printing and translation) 3.012 3.012 3.012 9.036 0,1%
e. External evaluation 90.361 0,7%
f. Annual audit (3x3x2000) 7.831 7.831 7.831 23.494 0,2%
g. Follow-up un the WSSD 3x3x3000 10.843 10.843 10.843 32.530 0,2%
h. South-South policy consultation (2 x 25.000) 60.241 0,5%
i. Joint declarations (3x15,000) 18.072 18.072 18.072 54.217 0,4%
j. Documentation and publication of experiences 26.765 26.765 26.765 80.294 0,6%
k. Participation in conferences on sustainable development 10.843 10.843 10.843 32.530 0,2%
l. Communication (assistance & media) 36.145 36.145 36.145 108.434 0,8%
Grand Total (A+B) Does not include: Mid-term review, policy consultations, Start up phase and PSC Governance 3.912.708 3.912.708 4.766.149 12.591.566
General TOTAL 13.253.012 100,0% 2.430.886 23%
D. Participation (%) 31,1% 31,1% 37,9% 100,0% 23%
Total % Counterpart %
C.PSC Budget 2007-2010 per country
DOLLARS
Benin Bhutan Costa Rica