FIDAMERICA Network Phase II Programme achieved significant results in the context of both its general and specific objectives. These indicate that the execution of a third phase, beginning with the consolidation of a raft of electronic services for Learning and Knowledge Management (LKM), will contribute to improving the management and impact of IFAD regional projects and programmes in LAC.

The most important qualitative results, which increased the number of decision-making support elements at the disposal of IFAD projects and programmes in LAC were as follows:

(a) The IFAD in LAC System's Network concept was introduced, creating advantageous positions for those involved and establishing horizontal relationships between participants which complemented the traditional radial relationship with the LAC Division of IFAD;

(b) Learning and Knowledge Management was established as a practice of the IFAD in LAC System by implementing four Information and Knowledge Systems (IKS) in which almost all of the projects and programmes in the region took part. The IKS' principal components were the systematization of local development experiences, teleconferencing and the publication of short papers on good practices within the projects;

(c) A methodology for the Systematization of Local Agricultural and Rural Development Experiences was developed and went on to fill a technical vacuum in IFAD projects via a collaboration agreement with PREVAL II;

(d) A profitable complementary relationship was established between FIDAMERICA and other IFAD in LAC regional programmes which took advantage of the Network's raft of services to complete part of their activities;

(e) Certain projects also collaborated with FIDAMERICA and PREVAL II to carry out validation and training in the methodology for systematization of local development experiences, to the benefit of various projects and NGO's in the region;

(f) IFAD projects and programmes, together with their implementing agencies, systematized more than 60 development experiences, fifty of which were presented at the "Knowledge and Information to Eliminate Rural Poverty" meeting in Managua, Nicaragua;

(g) FIDAMERICA´s website, which placed two databases of documentation and human resources at its visitors' diposal, the former of which was particularly powerful, was heavily accessed. The electronic lists administered by the server made it possible to communicate news about the IFAD in LAC System and transmit relevant documentation on rural development and the war against poverty, as well as serving as a platform for teleconferencing;

(h) FIDAMERICA Phase II activities contributed to the dissemination and promotion of IFAD's image, projects and programmes and highlighted its presence and its role in rural development and the war against poverty;

(i) Advances were made towards achieving FIDAMERICA Network's institutional stability, as demonstrated by the high level of importance attached by those interviewed in the interim evaluation to the realisation of a third phase. Advances were also made towards achieving the Network's financial sustainability since the majority of FIDAMERICA Phase II activities and products were co-financed by IFAD regional projects and programmes together with other NGOs.

The programme's problems and aspects pending

The context within which FIDAMERICA Network Phase II was carried out highlighted various limitations, which made it difficult to achieve certain goals. These should be given priority treatment in the third phase. The main limiting factors were:-

(a) IFAD projects and programmes in the region do not have a specific component to take responsibility for learning and knowledge management. As a result FIDAMERICA found itself without sufficient resources for the projects and this, in turn, delayed the implementation of the LKMs. It also caused low participation by IFAD projects' field experts and implementing agencies in FIDAMERICA Network activities;

(b) The lack of an appropriate methodology for the systematization of local development experiences also delayed the implementation of the IKS. This was overcome, however, by the development of a specific methodology for IFAD projects through an agreement with PREVAL II;

(c) The incorporation of organisations of rural poor and their leaders into the Network was not achieved, due as much to the limitations of Internet connectivity in rural areas as to the lack of committed support by the projects to promote their incorporation and establish efficient means of connection to the Internet;

(d) Nor was it possible to train the leaders of rural organisations in computing and use of the Internet. This was due as much to the need to train the projects' experts in the methodology for the systematization of local development experiences, as to the lack of agreement with the projects themselves about how to produce the events. There were also some internal restrictions.

Conclusions and recommendations

Despite the above-mentioned problems, the concept of an information and knowledge system based on an Internet-enabled platform of electronic services is very current and promising. Its application can be expected to permit the communication of effective solutions for the war against rural poverty in a short time span and at low cost. This is especially valuable in view of the rapid and constant evolution of technology and the ways of delivering development services, not to mention globalisation. At the same time the enthusiasm and expectations of the Network's users clearly established the desirability of carrying out a third phase of FIDAMERICA Network, which should pay special attention to the following aspects.

Institutional Support for the Execution of FIDAMERICA: The general performance of the Programme could have been better if the LAC Division of IFAD had attempted to counteract the apathy of certain project directors and officials of the national implementing agencies by involving Department Managers and co-operating institutions to a greater extent, especially those latter which have not yet fully incorporated themselves into the Network.

Raft of Services for Other Regional TAG Programmes: The good results achieved with the services provided by FIDAMERICA for certain regional TAG programmes show that the Network can contribute significantly to their execution and effectiveness. FIDAMERICA and the LAC Division of IFAD should therefore make new efforts to consolidate this line of work, which, at the same time, will contribute to the Network's institutional and financial sustainability.

Functionality of the Information and Knowledge Systems: The development and approval of the methodology for the systematization of local development experiences represented a significant advance in the implementation of LKMs and will allow rapid progress in the third phase, provided that learning and knowledge management has a sufficient allocation of human and financial resources in IFAD projects and programmes. The private sector implementing agencies of IFAD projects should play an important role in the IKS since, in many cases, they will maintain their relationships with the grassroots organisations once the projects have been completed.

Incorporation of Organisations of Rural Poor into the FIDAMERICA Network: This objective should be prioritised for the third phase. To do this it will be necessary to concentrate on a group of grassroots organisations which not only enjoy favourable conditions for Internet connectivity and a certain degree of institutional consolidation but also whose leaders are fully involved in the war against poverty. An aspect that FIDAMERICA must consider is the development of products that are sufficiently attractive to the grassroots organisations. At the same time the programmes and projects related to these organisations must give their unrestricted support to the production of promotional programmes, the provision of Internet equipment and access, training and knowledge management.

Lessons from the experience

FIDAMERICA's experience concerning the rural poor organisations' problems of connection and access to the Internet, and the project experts' and implementing agencies' problems with accessing the Network's services show the need to evaluate the contextual characteristics and assumptions more precisely before defining what action should be taken.

Those regional programmes which provide products and services to the projects must, necessarily, adapt themselves to real demand, at the very least with regard to: I) pending products, ii) strategy and the method of implementing it; iii) opportunity for supply; and iv) costs. In practice the regional programmes contain a basic product defined in accordance with IFAD's policies and strategies for the region, which is correct since that is their role within the IFAD System for LAC. However there is an expectation that these products be immediately accepted by the projects, which is not always possible due to questions of viability, availability of budget, clashes with national programmes and internal conflicts.

The FIDAMERICA experience shows that the general fulfilment of IFAD projects and programmes depends in great measure upon the institutional support received from the LAC Division of IFAD and its co-operating agencies which control the majority of their technical and financial operations.

In the same manner as in the case of gender focus and S&E, Learning and Knowledge Management requires the presence of specialised experts, with specific functions and budgetary allocations, within the organisation of the projects and programmes. This implies that minimum guidelines must be set both for projects in course and for new project design

Carrying out regular evaluation activities in the regional programmes, starting with timely knowledge about the satisfaction of users' needs, will certainly improve their effectiveness. These activities, combined with sufficiently flexible mechanisms for taking and carrying out decisions, will definitely bring results.

Special contribution of Julio A. Berdegué, Coordinator of FIDAMERICA to the Agreement at Completion Point

Here are three elements of conclusion/recommendation that I consider most useful or important after this experience of implementing and evaluating FIDAMERICA Phase II. Besides the evaluation process itself, I wish to acknowledge that the following ideas are in part a result of a recent internal workshop in which some of the individuals that will be working on FIDAMERICA III, discussed FIDAMERICA-Phase 2 and the strategies for the future.

1) Learning and knowledge management processes and objectives must be explicitly incorporated in the design of IFAD projects.

The achievements and contributions of a network such as FIDAMERICA, designed to facilitate such LKM processes at a regional level, will be proportional to the ‘richness' of the LKM processes carried out at the project level.

Learning and knowledge management (LKM) cannot be expected to take place effectively if they are not recognized as constituent elements of the project. The starting point must be a recognition by IFAD and by the agency and teams that will implement the project, that knowledge is the main strategic resource of institutions involved in the complex task of reducing rural poverty. Learning organizations are those that organize systematic processes aimed at improving the quality and pertinence of their knowledge base to enhance their understanding of the context in which they operate, all with the purpose of applying this strategic resource to the task of making difficult strategic decisions.

LKM are complex processes that can yield results only if a project contains or develops the capacities and incentives required to carry them out efficiently and effectively. These include: (a) closely linking the objectives of LKM to the objectives and priorities of the project itself; (b) human resources charged with the function and empowered with the capacity to facilitate LKM; (c) appropriate and cost-effective strategies, methods and operational procedures to carry out LKM; (d) easy and timely access by all relevant stakeholders to the time and facilities needed to engage in these processes, and; (e) perhaps most important of all, an institutional environment that values and stimulates critical reflection and open and honest discussion of processes, products, effects and impacts.

These capacities and incentives must be designed in such a way that they contribute to the active engagement in LKM of all the main stakeholders of a development project. LKM is not a task for a single specialist, much less for external consultants working isolated from the everyday practice of a project. In the context of IFAD projects, LKM should not be database or information technology-driven.

2) It is important to recognize the functions that can be carried out by an e-network such as FIDAMERICA, in the overall context of LKM in the "IFAD system"

Pursuing the idea of using E-networks for facilitating learning by practitioners leads us to consider potential E-network functions, of which we have identified seven main ones:

a. E-networking infrastructure and skills: assisting network members to have the necessary equipment (hard and software) and skills to engage in the e-network. This can be undertaken via webpage development, skills workshops, advice on software, etc.

b. Basic communication: being able to carry out necessary exchanges quickly and easily between geographically dispersed actors who need to co-operate. This is mainly via email lists or by posting large documents or data for access to all partners but also includes access to contact details.

c. Building relationships: enabling people to build with ease a network of contacts with whom they need or wish to interact, on which they can draw to carry out their work better.

d. Mediating access to web-based information: the potential for easy and quick access to up-to-date focused information that practitioners require and that is therefore focused and filtered by network moderators and/or members. This type of web-based information can range from literature lists, key readings, organisational profiles, where to find books or tools, market prices, etc.

e. Providing a network member-related information bank: providing the opportunity for network members to provide information about their experiences by posting basic information, Powerpoint presentations about innovations, project documents, etc. This function is critical for those experiences that would otherwise not have a podium through which to offer their insights and innovations.

f. Interactive information exchange and dialogue: practitioners being able to support each other by sharing their knowledge, experience and ideas, usually around specific themes. This function has a question-answer character and includes peer support groups, activist groups, e-conferences and loose discussion lists on any topic a subscriber wishes to consider.

g. Facilitating action learning: structured learning efforts with a group of practitioners with the explicit aim to generate knowledge and extract lessons learned and thus to improve particular practices or overcome specific problems and knowledge gaps.

FIDAMERICA Phase I and II have concentrated on functions (a) through (f). Phase III must extend its reach to function (g), while making sure that it continues to invest in solving pending problems with the other functions (e.g., extending at least functions (a) through (d) to project stakeholders at the field level, including CBOs).

3) Learning about LKM in the context of the "IFAD System" in Latin America and the Caribbean

We are still hampered by an insufficient understanding of how does LKM today takes place in the "IFAD System" in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), and, above all, at the project and sub-project level. This is due to several factor: (a) the whole issue of "learning and knowledge management" has only recently been recognized by the development community as being of critical importance; (b) FIDAMERICA in engaged in a specific modality of LKM, i.e., that which is mediated by an e-network, which in itself is a rather new phenomenon; (c) in the past FIDAMERICA has not become engaged in developing a deeper understanding, both theoretical and methodological, about how does LKM today takes place in the "IFAD System" in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC).

Now that many of the simpler and rather obvious steps have been taken, this lack of understanding is clearly beginning to hamper the achievement of more complex tasks and more ambitious goals.

FIDAMERICA must establish the necessary alliances or agreements with other actors that can allow it to solve this shortcoming through some form of ‘action-research' program and through M&E that can contribute to obtaining a richer conceptual and methodological picture. By working on this in alliance with others, FIDAMERICA can still keep its main focus on developing and delivering services to IFAD projects in the region.

---

The Core Learning Partnership (CLP) is composed of the followng members: J.Berdégue (RIMISP), R. Peña-Montenegro (PL), E. Murguia (PL), R. Hopkins (PL), R. Haudry (PL), the Coordinator of FIDAFRIQUE Network (PA), the Coordinator of ENRAP Network (PI), j.Ph. Audinet (OE), P. Silveri (OE)