A Review of Capacity Building in Central and Eastern Europe

BACKGROUND
1.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, UNHCR was unsure as to how it
should proceed in the region. Not only was the organization's potential role unclear,
there were dire predictions that the collapse of the Soviet Union would result in massive
population movements. Such fears were coupled with serious concerns regarding the
extent to which some countries of the region were prepared to receive refugees and
displaced persons. UNHCR's uncertainty was further heightened by reservations
regarding the relevance of many of the agencys traditional operational approaches in
such a developed region, and even the linguistic competence of the organization's staff.
2.
After considering alternatives, UNHCR chose an approach that emphasized
promotional action including strengthening government institutions, NGOs and asylum
procedures as well as and providing legal and material support. It was believed that, in
time, such an approach would permit countries to handle refugee and displaced person
issues in accordance with international standards with only minimal support from
UNHCR. The approach also provided UNHCR with a useful presence in the region while
its potential role evolved and became more evident.
3.
UNHCR's initial efforts concentrated on appraising institutional needs and training
the staff of governments and nascent NGOs. Gradually, however, institution-building
efforts developed into a more comprehensive set of activities which, although unevenly
applied from country-to-country, often included a number of common elements. These
institution-building activities consisted of assessing a country's needs; raising awareness
of desirable legal provisions and concepts related to asylum; suggesting institutional
models; providing small-scale equipment to fledgling entities; training professionals in
various domains; and informing the public. Although originally described as institutionbuilding, the term capacity-building would seem to better reflect the type of support
UNHCR actually provides.
4.
Although the terms institution-building and capacity-building were new to
UNHCR, in fact UNHCR has for decades guided governments and others in their work on
behalf of refugees. The term institution-building is often defined as the measures that
UNHCR takes to strengthen existing organizations or to create new ones which will
further the cause of populations of concern to UNHCR. Even if groups such as "the
judiciary" or "the legal fraternity" are taken as "institutions, the term "institutionbuilding" tends to be limiting in that it is restricted to constituted groupings only.
5.
Capacity-building has sometimes been used in UNHCR as a synonym for
training. More and more, however, the term has been broadly used to describe the wide
variety of measures that UNHCR takes or promotes that enable societies to deal with
issues relating to populations of concern to UNHCR. In effect, the concept of UNHCR
capacity-building implies that the organization is assisting the state to do its job. The
term as defined includes activities such as awareness-raising for the population at large,
promotion of refugee law, institution-building, the provision of office equipment and
professional training.
6.
Capac
ity-building has tended to be the main activity for the eight UNHCR
offices in Central Europe. Furthermore, its importance in Central Europe as well as the
Russian Federation and the Ukraine can be expected to grow. Although the UNHCR office
in Armenia has placed capacity-building high on its agenda, until now it has been seen as
a lesser priority in the two other countries of the Trans Caucasus.

7.
The extent of UNHCR's involvement in capacity-building is reflected in the
number of staff committed to this labour-intensive function. At least twenty international
UNHCR staff in the region devote between half and all of their time to capacity-building
activities. They are supported by fifty or more local staff who also give considerable time
to the function. It can be estimated that more than half of UNHCR's expenditure in the
region directly or indirectly supports capacity-building activities, the proportion being
highest in the Central European countries.
8.
Beneficiaries of UNHCR's activities include different sectors within the countries,
primarily at the state level but also increasingly including NGOs and society at large.
Beyond these beneficiaries, UNHCR partners in this effort are few although some
organizations such as the European Union and USAID have programmes of their own.
UNHCR has, to a limited extent, used international NGOs for the delivery of specific
training activities. IOM, which has capacity-building activities of its own in the region, is
already a UNHCR partner in several countries. In the future, UNHCR's partnership with
IOM is expected to grow appreciably as part of the CIS Conference joint strategy to
embrace shared assessments, activities and resources.
AIM AND SCOPE OF THE SURVEY
9.
A review of institution-building activities (referred to as capacity-building in this
report) in Central Europe and the CIS countries was requested by the Director of the
Regional Bureau for Europe in order to assess the effectiveness and impact of institutionbuilding in the region and to suggest ways in which policies and approaches in this area
can be improved.
10.
In carrying out the work, key documents generated over the past several years
were reviewed and visits were made to a number of countries, including Austria,
Slovakia, Hungary, Ukraine, The Russian Federation, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia..
In addition to in-depth interviews with UNHCR staff at Headquarters and in the field,
extensive discussions were held with governments and NGO personnel in the eight
countries visited. Information covering essentially all activities was collected and
analysed during the survey, but in the interest of brevity, only information required to
support the recommendations is presented.
11.
This evaluation was prepared by Philip Sargisson, former UNHCR staff member,
currently an independent consultant and senior advisor in the areas of organization,
development, strategic planning, institution-building, staff development, training and
evaluation. Mr Sargissons clients have included UNDP, DHA, UNCTAD, IOM, UNIDO, and
ILO.
OVERVIEW
12.
UNHCR can derive satisfaction from the relative institutional boldness it displayed
in the early 1990s when it chose to establish offices in Central Europe and the former
Soviet Union. Although the organization has had to overcome its lack of experience in
the region, UNHCR has generally performed well and enjoys an overall reputation for
being both responsive and pro-active.
13.
Despite the considerable size of the region, UNHCR's activities have had an
identifiable impact that is likely to become even more apparent during the years to
come. UNHCR has, to some extent, contributed to the integration of Central European
countries with Western Europe by helping them to perform in accordance with
international standards. Not only has the organization been able to introduce concepts
and approaches to the region, its emergency interventions in the Trans Caucasus and the

North Caucasus have also provided UNHCR with a reputation for credibility that the
organization can build upon.
14.
With several years of experience in the region, there now seems little doubt that
capacity-building activities constitute the most useful and cost-effective means of
assisting governments in such a geographically vast and relatively developed area.
Capacity-building also appears to be the best way in which UNHCR can exert significant
influence over asylum laws and practices. Although less important it has also permitted
UNHCR to maintain a presence that enables it to conduct activities falling within its
mandate. Thus, not only is capacity-building a legitimate and essential area of UNHCR's
involvement, in most countries it is the activity which should be receiving the highest
priority.
15.
Unfortunately, capacity-building remains an aspect of UNHCR's work in which the
organization continues to be hesitant and somewhat ambivalent. As a consequence,
UNHCR has never fully committed itself to defining, professionalizing and supporting such
activities.
16.
Although UNHCR has a considerable degree of scattered expertise in capacitybuilding, the organization has never really attempted to recognize, define and develop
the function in a systematic manner. Despite the fact that capacity-building is becoming
the backbone of UNHCR activities in the CIS and Central Europe, there is not yet a
budget item that refers to it as such, nor is there an institutional recognition that
capacity-building calls for sustainable effort. Furthermore, despite several decades of
often successful experiences in many parts of the world, capacity-building has not yet
been given a clear identity. Consequently, elements of it have often been cautiously
termed 'advice to governments', 'promotion of refugee law' or 'institution-building'.
17.
UNHCR has often displayed a regrettable weakness in drawing lessons from its
experience, both past and current. As a consequence, a record of the organization's
capacity-building experience in other regions cannot be found. Furthermore, the cross
fertilization of experience within the Central European and CIS region has tended to be
limited and inconsistent.
18.
In the somewhat ad hoc environment that has prevailed, the inventiveness and
motivation of many staff has been an important compensating factor. There are
noteworthy instances where staff have experimented with novel approaches and
developed capacity-building activities that demonstrate originality and creativity.
Particularly noteworthy has been the contribution of local staff who despite their modest
cost have demonstrated a high level of commitment and insight into capacity-building
needs. In too many instances, however, staff have tended to be unsure of how the work
should be approached. As a consequence, offices tend to limit themselves to the
workshops and institutional formulas with which they are familiar, despite indications that
more diversified approaches would produce a greater impact.
19.
UNHCR needs to bring a greater commitment and professionalism to this area of
its work. A first step would be to distill the organization's worldwide experience in
capacity-building and begin to develop terms, methodologies, policies, guidelines and
training modules. In adopting a more professional approach, UNHCR staff will also need
appreciable help in upgrading their skills in this area of work.
20.
The need for guidelines that would provide clear objectives and principles
common to all the countries of the region is among the most pressing requirements.
Although any guidelines should make allowance for the very different sub-region and
country approaches required, it is nevertheless essential that strategic planning is formed
around common objectives and approaches.

21.
Although UNHCR would benefit from outside professional guidance, in general,
progress in the capacity-building field can and should be achieved principally through
internal means. Consequently, UNHCR will need to develop the professional resources to
manage and guide this important activity.
22.
It is clearly in UNHCR's interest to develop closer collaboration in the region with
other organizations involved in capacity-building. Partnerships would permit UNHCR to
widen its scope of involvement, increase the pool of expertise from which it can draw,
and improve its funding potential. Perhaps the best example of the kind of initiative that
should be encouraged is the strengthened partnership with IOM in the context of the CIS
Conference follow-up. UNHCR is also often in a privileged position to introduce other
organizations to countries whose experience of international experience institutions is still
limited.
23.
The potential for carrying out capacity-building activities varies among countries
of the region. Capacity-building has always been welcomed by Central European
countries which although they have only a relatively small number of refugees, are eager
to adopt Western European models. Ukraine and Belarus share the same interests as the
Central European countries, but have been faced with more significant refugee
populations as well as being limited by and less experienced governments. Yet there is
considerable potential for more capacity-building activities in both Ukraine and Belarus.
This need, however, has not yet been meaningfully addressed.
24.
In the Russian Federation, the UNHCR initial policy of non-involvement in the
issue of returning ethnic Russians combined with the unpopularity of refugees has greatly
hindered a capacity-building programme with considerable potential. There is, however,
reason to believe that recent adjustments in UNHCR's approach will lead to at least
partial realization of this potential.
25.
In the Trans Caucasus countries, which have suffered from both regional and/or
internecine conflict, there is a significant need for all types of UNHCR assistance. In
addressing this need, UNHCR's office in Armenia has been able to capitalize effectively on
the receptivity to UNHCR emergency assistance, and introduce a number of creative
initiatives aimed at strengthening the Government's capacity. UNHCR offices in
Azerbaijan and Georgia, on the other hand, have progressed more slowly. In general,
these two offices have been more occupied with traditional refugee- and IDP-related
issues than capacity-building.
26.
Clearly, there is much potential for UNHCR to develop capacity-building efforts
throughout the region. There is a growing recognition in the CIS and Central European
countries that migration issues have to be given more attention. As a consequence,
virtually all countries would like help with these broad issues, and have a desire to work
with whichever agency proves to be most capable of providing the assistance needed.
RECOMMENDATIONS
(More detailed explanations and support regarding recommendations covered in Section :
Areas requiring attention ; pages 15-23)
A)
UNHCR will need to recognise and accept capacity-building as one of its core
activities and, accordingly, bring to this area an institutional focus that can lead to
improved overall coherence, professionalism and effectiveness in this field.
B)
UNHCR should develop capacity-building methodologies, terms and materials that
can be consistently understood and applied throughout the entire organization.

C)
While targetting common goals, the somewhat different circumstances in the
countries of the CIS and Central Europe require UNHCR to develop separate combinations
of capacity-building activities. The organization will need to ensure that the strategies to
carry out the foregoing are shared and consistently applied by all concerned offices and
staff.
D)
UNHCR will need to put in place the means to gather and weigh its capacitybuilding experience worldwide as well as to strengthen cross-fertilising between the
countries and sub-regions of the CIS and Central Europe, thus building improved
institutional memory in this field. Increased use of on-the-spot assessments, experiencesharing workshops and teleconferences, study visits and special reporting can help to
achieve this.
E)
The organization will need to recognise the implications of protracted involvement
which is a condition to successful capacity-building and make systemic adjustments
accordingly. The issues requiring consideration will include multi-year planning horizons,
longer-term support in-country, appropriate staffing arrangements and a modified
funding base. A necessary, correlative measure will be to ensure that handover and
phasing-out arrangements are inherent to all UNHCR capacity-building programmes and
are much more rigorously put into effect by concerned staff than is currently the case.
F)
UNHCR's capacity-building activities in the region need to break out of an overreliance on traditional workshops and to draw on a wider and more systematically
applied range of approaches and techniques, such as mentoring, on-the-job training, and
more imaginatively conceived workshops when unavoidable.
G)
Through its capacity-building activities in the CIS and Central European countries,
UNHCR should consciously strive to act as a catalyst for countries to articulate their
needs and to bring them into productive relationships with bilateral and multilateral
organizations.
H)
UNHCR staff capability to deliver capacity-building should be professionalised
through skills development efforts that emphasize needs analysis, organizational
development techniques as well as learning and group dynamics.
I)
As a means to augmenting significantly its outreach and impact in the region,
UNHCR's capacity-building activities should increasingly be planned and conducted with
and through other organizations such as IOM (within the framework of the CIS
Conference follow-up) as well as with bodies able to provide new expertise and funding.
J)
In bringing an improved and sustained focus to capacity building, UNHCR will also
need to ensure that its future efforts are backstopped with conceptual and technical
support that incorporate the best professional experience available. Options here include
the creation of an in-house specialist capability and/or the use of outside
resources.
LESSONS
27.
The absence of a single methodology and approach consistently applied
throughout the region has provided UNHCR offices in Central Europe and CIS countries
with an opportunity to experiment with a wide range of activities and approaches.
Nevertheless, after several years of trial and error, UNHCR can usefully examine the
initiatives that have proven to be the most successful and those that have encountered
difficulties. Based on the review, UNHCR can begin harmonizing its approach throughout
the organization and hopefully avoid repeating errors.

There have been underlying weaknesses

28.
A somewhat ad hoc approach to the area is reflected in the confusing and often
interchangeable use of the terms describing the activities, be it 'institution-building',
'capacity-building' or 'promotional activities'. The concepts appear to have seldom
benefited from in-depth, internal discussion which in turn has meant unclear ultimate
objectives and an apparent lack of consistency.
29.
While a broad strategy for Europe was in fact developed and circulated in 1994
and which incorporated institution- and capacity-building as key items, application at the
field level, though often deserving admiration, has nonetheless been sporadic and
diverse. This is also to be explained by an absence of guidelines or similar
documentation as well as a lack of individual briefing in what institution- and/or capacitybuilding actually are and how to go about them.
30.
Consequently, activities have been more the result of inventiveness by an office
or individual rather than forming part of a framework of interactive activities leading to
planned levels of achievement, be it in-country or regionally. Not surprisingly, the notion
of handing over and/or phasing-out of UNHCR's input is scarcely acknowledged by staff
who have little vision of the broader picture or of the full range of approaches,
methodologies and techniques they could resort to, nor at what stage the job should be
considered complete.
Some activities have not worked out
31.
Given the thirst for development that prevails in the region, few of UNHCR's
activities have been outright failures, though an emergency management workshop
offered in Kiev is quoted as having backfired due to poor adaptation to the Ukraine
environment, as did an ECRE workshop for NGOs in Bucharest, for similar reasons. Of
greater significance is what too many activities have failed to undertake or to achieve on
account of insufficient professionalism in this field.
32.
The range of adult-learning options is not familiar to most staff with the result
that UNHCR has been overly dependent on workshops. A systematic approach, for
example, to on-the-job training has been lacking, yet this has even greater potential for
sustained and applied change than workshops. The same can be said for tutoring and
mentoring relationships.
33.
Workshops themselves are stepping stones on the long and often arduous
capacity-building path. A number of UNHCR workshops show a lack objectives that tie in
with previous activities. Many workshops pursue an obsession with pre-packaged
knowledge and fail to ascertain participants needs and provide them with an
understanding of how to use that knowledge and how to behave in practice back in the
workplace. Many workshops fail to produce action plans that can both guide participants
after the workshop while also providing staff with valuable indicators for the next
stepping stones, the follow-up activities. Though the foregoing can be considered
standard workshop approaches, they are nonetheless demanding and call on skills and
experience that many concerned staff do not yet possess.
34.
UNHCR capacity-building activities tend to focus on subject matter, to the
detriment of other areas where support is needed. For instance, government and NGO
staff have only exceptionally been provided with guidance or instruction in what is
generally referred to as organizational development, i.e. how to equip their
organizations or departments with decision-making mechanisms, staffing and funding
systems that can underpin all else. Yet without that institutional capability to manage
themselves, it is debatable whether the organizations in which UNHCR is investing other

forms of capacity-building can actually fully use it. Similarly, few entities in the region
are able to identify and draw up projects in ways that the outside world can respond to,
yet only one project design workshop has been run in the region. (The workshop in
question was convened in Moscow and is reported to have been well received.)
A number of factors contribute to these failures
35.
Many of these factors are internal to UNHCR itself. The organization appears to
have a somewhat non-committal, almost apologetic, attitude to its institution-building
activities as evidenced by there being no identified item in its budgets. It also finances
these activities over short time spans.
36.
Institutional memory-building and the cross-fertilising of experience are also a
problem. Thus capacity- and institution-building experience in different parts of the
world does not appear to have been distilled for the benefit of the current effort in Europe
(significantly, many staff in the region believe that UNHCR has never been involved in
this kind of activity before). In fact, cross-fertilization of capacity-building experience
between countries within the region itself is tenuous. Valuable experiments in Armenia
are not known in Georgia or Azerbaijan for instance, let alone outside the Trans Caucasus
while the PARinAC workshop experience gained with local NGOs in Georgia is not known
to the other countries of that sub-region. Scattered terms and methodologies are the
result and staff often do not have the wherewithal to deliver effectively. In short,
institutional impact would be enhanced by a more forthright and professional approach.
37.
Another factor is in part external to UNHCR. As a large and varied region, the
CIS and Central Europe contain diverse conditions for which UNHCR must have the
expertise and flexibility to respond. The needs for capacity-building in oil-rich, Moslem
and war-torn Baku are quite different from those needed in sedate Budapest. The
former calls for an ability to help build statehood in a wide range of areas. The latter
calls for an ability to help to fine tune legislative provisions and their implementation in a
relatively sophisticated environment. UNHCR's capacity-building repertoire lacks, as yet,
the depth and agility to be responsive to such varied needs, let alone to bring strategic
coherence to the activities on a regional basis.
Successes have been numerous
38.
Despite the weaknesses described above, UNHCR's capacity-building efforts have
incorporated many strengths which deserve to be noted.
39.
In general, practical workshops run in-country by UNHCR national officers have
been excellent value for money and have had considerable impact. Such workshops
have targeted, for instance, the legal community, border guards or other groups.
40.
The impact of country-level and sub-regional workshops bringing together
government and NGO participants has also been considerable. Such events have allowed
counterparts to communicate in ways that would almost certainly not otherwise have
occurred. Although obviously more expensive on account of participant travel, where this
has been done on a regional and multi-country level, as in the Caucasus and Central
Europe, the impact has been greater still. Such events cast UNHCR in an invaluable
bridge- and peace-building role, allowing individuals and organizations to gain trust in
each other and sowing the seeds for national and regional cohesion.
41.
As a rule, feedback on the improved performance and productivity of government
officials back on the job after attending workshops held out of the country is favourable,
with losses due to participants job changes falling within acceptable parameters. Similar
favourable feedback was gleaned regarding regional workshops for journalists.

42.
Although maybe not as systematic as one would like, there are examples of
working relationships in the region between UNHCR staff and country counterparts that
have strongly influenced the building of local capability, such as in Armenia, Azerbaijan
and Slovakia. Such working relationships, often through informal on-the-job training,
have successfully passed new knowledge and skills to key individuals in both the
government and the NGO sector which have then had a considerable multiplier effect.
This is true both at field level (Armenia and Azerbaijan) and in the capitals.
43.
Visiting non-UNHCR experts, though too rarely resorted to, have also had an
impact. Where financed by donor countries, this has been a cost-effective approach for
UNHCR and has had the advantage of sharing some of the message-carrying burden
with others. The real-life experience, for instance, of the UK immigration officials who
shared their perceptions in Kiev to the Ukrainians in February 1996 was of considerable
assistance.
44.
Although called on in a few cases only, the use of UNHCR General Service staff
for the tutoring of NGOs or government departments in office and accounting procedures
is an interesting initiative that is worth developing further.
45.
In Central Europe in particular, there can be no doubt that UNHCR, despite the
underlying unpopularity of its refugee message, has made inroads and succeeded in
grabbing the attention of part of the legal community and enabled the interested minority
to intervene more meaningfully in the debate on related issues.
46.
The UNHCR strategy in Armenia deserves special mention. In this country, a
particularly far-reaching approach to capacity-building has produced a combination of
activities that has sought to develop communities, stimulate economic sectors, build civil
society and human rights awareness as well as actively generate an NGO sector (see
country profile on Armenia).
47.
Clearly in Armenia, as in other countries where UNHCR has cumulated the DHA,
ResRep and/or ResCoord functions, the office has had an opportunity to go deeper into
capacity-building. Indeed, the effectiveness of capacity-building is enhanced by multidisciplinary and multi-organization approaches, especially those that incorporate
development-oriented considerations.
Various factors have contributed to the UNHCR successes
48.
A major ingredient has been the interest of countries to emulate the systems of
Western Europe. UNHCR has often been seen as the bearer of part of that knowledge and
savoir faire.
49.
In the Trans Caucasus, the high esteem which UNHCR enjoys as a result of its
ability to respond energetically to the emergencies in Armenia and Azerbaijan, has
opened the door for capacity-building activities.
50.
Clearly the fact of a dedicated UNHCR presence in 14 countries has been a
condition to being able to carry out such activities, as has been UNHCR's ability to devote
substantial funding to the activities.
51.
Underlying UNHCR's interest in capacity-building for Europe and its capability to
deliver at all is a notable change that has taken place in the culture of the organization
over the last ten years or so. UNHCR has built within itself a training culture consisting
of an ability to identify and distill what it knows, to analyze staff development needs and
to consciously build its own capability as needed. Capacity-building efforts in Europe is a

logical extension of that capability for outside audiences. The honing of its internal
capacity-building indirectly and directly benefits others in this field.
52.
Several human resource initiatives have also been useful. The appointment in
1990 of a Legal Training Officer for Europe (based in Geneva and with dedicated funds)
helped to bring a sense of purpose and direction to at least the legal aspects of the job.
Likewise, the appointment in-country of National Officers has had a major impact. Many
of these local staff have been well chosen and are of high calibre, and yet cost the
organization little. They are effective within their environment, know the issues well and
communicate fluidly.
While some approaches remain debatable
53.
Integration of refugees, particularly through accommodation projects, is seen by
many as the condition to arresting their continued movement westwards. UNHCR offices
differ in their commitment to seeking the political approval and the concrete projects that
will permit refugees to remain in their country of asylum. A lack of decisiveness,
detectable in this area, has an impact on subject matter and approach to UNHCR
capacity-building activities.
54.
Public Information Officers have been appointed in the Russian Federation,
Slovakia, Vienna and other offices of the region with a view to raising public awareness.
The aim is laudable and can serve well the overall goals of capacity-building but some
argue that public information activities have stirred up xenophobia rather than calmed it.
Others say that in this region, public information activities are "shots in the dark" in very
complex environments and in which public opinion is still hard to gauge and even more
difficult to predict. Yet others say that public relations rather than information is the real
priority.
55.
There is without doubt a real capacity-building challenge to be met in influencing
and informing the public. As much as in the training field, however, PI needs to be
based on well agreed and understood objectives and strategies. Public information
officers must have highly professional backgrounds in their trade. Good public
information and/or public relations results stem from the merging of those shared
objectives and strategy with the specialized knowledge of the media. That synergy may
not be sufficiently present now.
56.
UNHCR staff in the region express frequent frustration relative to the job changes
that not infrequently affect government staff in whom a training investment has been
made. Clearly, careful selection of staff for training events is important and this should
take into account the prospects for the participant to continue in the refugee field.
Experience shows, however, that over the long term, many such persons who appear to
have been host to refugee work do in fact reappear in a related capacity to exert
favourable influence.
57.
There have been instances in which NGOs have been trained but not been given
tasks or funds with which to apply their new capability. For instance, a technically
successful programme of NGO training in Georgia in 1995/96 gave NGOs knowledge and
skills but also raised expectations. Such events should be contingent upon a broader
strategy that sets aside sectors of activity and funds, albeit in small quantities, to allow
recently trained, nascent NGOs to initiate activities in the UNHCR field.
58.
The UNHCR registration system introduced to the region has had a mixed
reception. Since 1993 UNHCR has been developing and installing in the region a
registration system known as CEERICS (Central and Eastern European Registration of

Individual Cases System). The system was viewed at its inception as an institutionbuilding measure designed for governments.
59.
A survey carried out in February/March 1996 reveals that CEERICS has had a
somewhat chequered career to date. The same impression was also gleaned during this
overall review on capacity-building. The need for a registration system is clear, and
especially one that can bring comparable approaches and information bases to the
region's users. But for a wide variety of reasons, CEERICS has been used to date in only
a small number of countries and then only with difficulty. Reasons have had to do with
divergent views on its purpose, technical difficulties, inadequate expertise on site, slow
turnaround on requests for modifications, or simply due to legislative or administrative
developments in-country.
60.
The internal survey recommends that "UNHCR not engage in any new CEERICS
agreements, but rather focus on support to countries where both UNHCR and the
Government are committed to making CEERICS work in 1996." It also recommends that
"the requirements for individual cases registration within UNHCR offices should be
assessed and the usefulness of CEERICS in this regard should be determined." Both
points of view seem wise, and to which one might add two comments. Firstly, beyond
the technical success or failure of the system to date, CEERICS has been valuable
educationally in that it has helped raise both the issues of registration and the means of
addressing them, which might otherwise not have happened so concretely. Secondly,
more than one country suggested a regional workshop of CEERICS users, at the
managerial and senior technical levels, to assess the system and reach joint conclusions
regarding the future of the product or its successor product. The proposal may well be
worth the expense.
61.
Beyond computers and software connected with CEERICS, UNHCR has provided
office equipment and vehicles in support of capacity-building efforts. Some have argued
that a committed organization in Europe should not need this form of help, which could
well be seen as official bribery. Others point out that part of the heritage of the Soviet
system is a chronic lack of material resources of the simplest kind and that, without
them, no capacity-building could be put into effect. On balance, the provision of
equipment can be judged to have been positive, given that it has been of modest
proportions and has generally been put to good use. It has also helped to generate
goodwill in situations where the lack of equipment could be used as an excuse to defer
action.
What is the capacity-building job?
62.
A profile emerges as to the nature of the UNHCR capacity-building job and the
main tasks that need to be accomplished. The international officer in such a position
needs to perform the following tasks :
analysis and accurate assessment of the country's development needs in UNHCR's
area of interest. (An ability to consider this within a broad review of human rights and
migration issues would seem essential.);
-

placing the assessment within the regional strategic context;

designing a country capacity-building strategy and making adjustments thereto;

providing substantive know how in various fields and locating resources

(documentation and/or persons) that can complement it;
-

establishing and maintaining in-country and in-region networks;

providing and sustaining strong mentoring relationships;

providing ongoing on-the-job training;

organising and running training; and

managing local staff resources to full complementary advantage

63.
The question arises as to whether these tasks are basically different from those
faced by international staff in other postings. On balance it would seem not, though
some areas of emphasis may be. A profile also emerges as to the desirable traits of the
international staff member posted to this kind of function. Characteristics and
qualifications might best combine those one would expect to find in a well-rounded
UNHCR generalist (probably with a legal profile) with those more specific to capacitybuilding, namely demonstrated interest and ability in people development issues, group
dynamics and organizational development
AREAS REQUIRING ATTENTION
UNHCR needs to bring focus to the field of capacity-building
64.
Capacity-building is already an important UNHCR objective in the region and is
destined to become ever more so. The raison d'Ltre of UNHCR's presence in Central
Europe, Eastern Europe and the Trans Caucasus is to help countries that have recently
emerged from Soviet rule to deal with refugee and related internally displaced in
knowledgeable and effective ways which are compatible with international legislation and
practices.
65.
Much of the northern part of Central Europe should be ready to do that with
considerable independence within a few years. In these countries, the predominant
UNHCR activity is to assist them to acquire the proficiency and the means to do this.
66.
In the southern countries of Central Europe as well as in Belarus, Ukraine and
most of the Russian Federation, the process will be slower. In these countries, capacitybuilding is important but other UNHCR inputs are also called for, including assistance
programmes and interim measures on behalf of individual cases as yet unable to receive
protection from the state either because the countries are not yet party to the legal
instruments or/and they lack the means or the will to behave in accordance with
international practices.
67.
In the countries of the Trans Caucasus as well as in the Northern Caucasus area
of the Russian Federation, political and social instability together with major economic
problems may render capacity-building more difficult but no less necessary. Such
activities there are invaluable investments even if the countries' ability to exercise full
independence in the UNHCR field will only come at a considerably later date.
68.
Capacity-building thus emerges as the cornerstone of UNHCR's activities in the
region. It follows that UNHCR must place a primary focus on delivering capacity-building
with the highest levels of institutional ability it can muster. That must include the
distilling of its experience throughout the world. It must include in-depth internal
discussion on the subject, the concepts involved and the desired long-term objectives. It
must include an approach to UNHCR member governments that presents the issues in
question and proposes policies. It must include budgets that clearly identify capacitybuilding as such and that provide the activity with multi-year vision and capability.
Capacity-building must emerge from the institutional sidelines, where it still is, to be

given the impetus that can provide UNHCR with the intellectual, financial and technical
capability to do the job to the best of its ability. Capacity-building needs to be at the core
of UNHCR programming. Many of the suggestions that follow flow from this view.
In Europe and beyond, strategy must be global and shared and applied by all
69.
Strategies for capacity-building in the region need to be reformulated so as to be
comprehensive. They need to define objectives, including long-term ones, that apply
equally to all parts of the region and to which all staff posted in all parts of the region can
subscribe. The strategies, which must make substantial allowances for sub-regional and
country differences, must construct frameworks of approach that ensure that activities
interact to provide regional consistency of purpose and build final positions or products
that help countries to relate to each other with similar approaches and institutions. The
strategies must describe in some detail how objectives will be reached, with what
activities and indicators of success or failure. Ensuring the strategies are applied
consistently in the region should constitute a primary Bureau responsibility.
Terms and methodologies must be developed and distilled
70.
It is increasingly inappropriate that what, in effect, has become a prime UNHCR
activity is conducted without the underpinning of relevant research and documentation.
It is important and urgent that the organization draws up guidelines and/or modules that
incorporate information and references to provide UNHCR practitioners with the tools to
do the capacity-building job as comprehensively and efficiently as possible. Such tools
should ensure levels of consistency within the organization leading to improved
compatibility of systems between countries.
71.
Such guidelines and/or modules should incorporate definitions of relevant
terms, descriptions of when and how to assess country capacity-building requirements,
the various models of learning that apply, when and how to use them as well as pitfalls to
watch for and avoid. UNHCR would also do well to develop materials that can provide
staff with the means to help institutions develop their managerial capabilities.
Although working to shared goals, different approaches will be required for
each sub-region or country
72.
With a fuller palette of models and skills at their disposal once guidelines and
more specialized training have been provided, UNHCR staff will be in a position to design
their activities with greater accuracy. The ultimate goals and objectives for the Trans
Caucasus or for the Russian Federation, for instance, will be the same as for Central
Europe, namely to create a level of public awareness, professional competence and
institutional strength that will allow the country to deal with refugees and related issues.
Yet the methods used in each case will be adapted to the particular environment. The
methods in question as well as the pacing of the approach should be reflected in the
strategy itself to a considerable level of detail in order to ensure compatibility between
countries and to guarantee a high chance of implementation.
73.
It is recommended that at the earliest opportunity, individual case work be
phased-out of the UNHCR offices that are still handling this with a view to achieving
maximum concentration and the meeting of capacity-building objectives.
Improved institutional memory and cross fertilizing of experience must be
achieved
74.
Albeit under differing circumstances and using different terms, UNHCR has been
involved for several decades in the capacity-building of governments and implementing

partners around the world. Whether in Africa, Latin America or Asia, examples abound of
formal or informal UNHCR efforts to influence the design of government structure, to
share perceptions with regard to procedures and best practices, as well as to help set up
new operational partners. Therein lies an essential UNHCR contribution over the years
and a vital segment of its experience. It is proposed that experience be distilled and
made available for the UNHCR efforts in Europe as well as for the rest of the
organization.
75.
To ensure new ideas and conclusive experiments are available to the other
countries of the European region, UNHCR will need to put in place systems that ensure
that ongoing analysis and sharing take place. Such systems may include comparative
analyses of reports and documents sent to HQs by the field, as well as field visits by a
practised expert. The results of this work should be disseminated to all practitioners. A
highly beneficial approach is likely to be regular meetings of involved staff from different
countries to allow them to 'compare notes'. An in-house or outside professional should
also be present at such meetings to capture the ideas and build them into institutional
literature.
76.
This issue also raises a structural implication. An argument in favour of regional
or sub-regional offices is the ease with which such cross-fertilising can take place at the
field level.
77.
It is also suggested that, in the immediate future and as a means of spreading
successful approaches, officers who have gained substantial experience recently in
Central Europe be made available to UNHCR offices in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus
on extended missions.
78.
Lastly Regional Bureaux will need to ensure that they effectively listen to and
learn from each other. There is evidence that a vision of capacity-building, spearheaded
and experimented by SWANAME primarily in Tajikistan, many not be familiar in all its
detail to RBE.
Successful capacity-building must be seen as a long-term activity
79.
UNHCR must bring attitudes of patience, consistency and monitoring to the job of
capacity-building as well as adjusted approaches. The UNHCR culture is on the whole
better adjusted to the requirements of large-scale action than to the development-like
needs of capacity-building. The planning horizon for capacity-building will need to be at
least three years and, better still five years to allow concepts to become firmly anchored
and to ensure learning objectives can be realistically met. Projects will consequently
need to be mapped over multi-year periods.
UNHCR can be a catalyst for inter-institutional dialogue
80.
In certain locations of Central and Eastern Europe, UNHCR is one of the only few
international organizations present. As such, and given the often privileged nature of the
contacts that it possesses in-country and the nature of the information at its disposal, it
is well placed to bring together country authorities and other organizations such as the
World Bank and UNDP, as well as the international NGO community, especially when they
visit the country. Capacity-building activities, and workshops in particular, provide an
opportunity for the defining of needs and the joint search for remedial action.
81.
On a broader scale it could be argued that the CIS Conference process has in
itself been an excellent capacity-building exercise that has furthermore brought about
inter-institutional dialogue.

UNHCR should hone its phasing-out skills

82.
If the ultimate purpose of the capacity-building effort is to allow countries to
perform with autonomy, UNHCR must design and rigorously implement its programmes
accordingly. Failure to hand over activities in timely fashion and to step back, undermine
the attaining of the basic objectives of capacity-building as partners lose the motivation
to take responsibility.
83.
The sub-regional and country strategies must define fields of activity, for
instance, and in particular in parts of Central Europe today, from which UNHCR should
retract by a given date, possibly choosing to continue watching from the sidelines until
completely satisfied that performance is up to expectations. The regional strategy needs
furthermore to foresee complete or partial UNHCR withdrawal from such countries within
a given time-frame, with the countries being party in advance to that decision and helped
to reach proficiency by the deadline.
84.
In a number of instances UNHCR staff, in understandable fear for their jobs and
despite their best professional intentions, may in subtle ways work against phasing-out.
This is an area for senior management awareness, sensitivity and firmness.
Capacity-building methods need to be more imaginative and structured
85.
While there is considerable evidence of inventiveness through the region as a
whole, the standard capacity-building menu still tends to be reliant on workshops which,
are not always professionally conducted and often focus unduly on the assimilation by
participants of pre-packaged knowledge.
86.
It is proposed that the organization assemble, distill, package and present to
concerned staff its best experience with all of the models, approaches, methodologies
and techniques with which practitioners in the field may work. A capacity-building
programme should thus be an attainment of synergy between consistent components
such as on-the-job coaching, different kinds of workshop offerings, conference
attendance, a study tour, the visit of an outside expert, the provision of office materials,
and the nurturing of individuals through carefully conducted mentoring or tutoring
processes. Workshops themselves, where used, should be designed and led in ways that
tie them in with the other components of the capacity-building process and utilise their
full potential.
87.
It is also suggested, beyond the subject-matter training that UNHCR provides,
primarily in the protection field, that due attention also be given to 'organizational
development', namely the management measures and skills that build the institution into
a viable entity and concept often understood in the French-speaking world as
'l'administration publique'. If not delivered by UNHCR itself, then the organization would
be well advised to work with organizations and/or individuals attuned to UNHCR's
objectives and work methods, who might do this on its behalf and in complementarity
with its other capacity-building activities.
UNHCR needs to work with and through others
88.
For a variety of reasons it is very much in UNHCR's interest to undertake major
portions of the capacity-building programmes in partnership with other organizations.
The task is far too vast for any single entity, and partnership permits a greater coverage
of the needs. Partnership allows the experience and expertise of other organizations to
be brought to bear and therefore provides complementarity. Partnership also facilitates
joint planning that divides up the job more effectively and avoids duplication and gaps.
In times of dwindling resources, partnership improves the chances of being able to fund

capacity-building programmes. With its increasing influence in the capacity-building field

and its considerable field presence, UNHCR will eventually enjoy a strong position in
most partnerships, thus in effect extending its influence further.
89.
On a region-wide level, the primary partner for UNHCR is IOM, with which the
basis for cooperation in Europe in the field of capacity-building and beyond is now
established within the parameters of the CIS Conference. Through its Management
Development Programme UNDP is a potential partner. DHA and UNDP jointly manage the
Disaster Management Training Programme which has a significant contribution to make.
The European Union also promotes and funds capacity-building projects in the region
under the names PHARE and TACIS. It is suggested that a concerted negotiation effort
with all of the foregoing, and others, could lead to enriched programmes, improved
funding prospects and greater UNHCR outreach.
90.
At the local level, indigenous NGOs can be found, assisted or even created
whose task can be to train and nurture the creation of local NGOs. A good example of
this is to be found in Armenia. Such specialized international NGOs will be far more
effective at this task than UNHCR itself, and certainly much more cost effective.
91.
An area of concern is that of coordination with bilateral bodies which offer
capacity-building without coordination with UNHCR. Extreme examples of this have been
workshops held in Moscow to FMS and others by Canadian and Finnish bilateral agencies
leading to obvious overlapping and wasted resources. The CIS Conference follow-up
process offers the opportunity to identify needs and resources as well as to solve
coordination issue.
92.
In countries in which UNHCR is implementing assistance programmes working
through international NGOs, the contracts with those international NGOs can be made to
incorporate significant local NGO capacity-building components. Virtually all
international NGOs have the capability to train others but often need to be prevailed upon
by UNHCR to do so. Azerbaijan and Georgia are good examples of where this should
currently be negotiated.
Staff capability to deliver capacity-building will need developing
93.
Certain personnel management initiatives could now be taken a step further.
UNHCR has moved towards a regional delivery system that rests on the complementarity
of the international officer and the national officer. That model is both effective and
economical and should be pursued, the national officer bringing local cultural and
linguistic knowledge, the international bringing experience from other parts of the world
and the advantage of greater objectivity towards everyday problems. Given the high
levels of education and the low salaries that prevail in the region, coupled with the
obvious success of National Officer employment to date, UNHCR could do well to employ
more National Officers thereby saving on international posts. Such a move could provide
substantial savings without adversely affecting performance.
94.
Some have made the case that the selection and appointment of international
staff for duty stations in which capacity-building is the prime UNHCR activity should fall
outside the rotation system, or at least be placed on a slower track. That point of view
does not appear well-founded. Breadth of experience and neutrality are precisely the
ingredients that are required to counterbalance the strengths of National Officer staff.
The regular application of the rotation system provides just that. That being said, it is to
be noted that for reasons of hardship, the duty tour of international staff in the countries
of the Trans Caucasus countries is currently of limited duration (normally two years) and
may be just a little too short from the capacity-building perspective. However, in this

sub-region, the potential for appointing national officers who would help provide
continuity may not have been fully realised.
95.
It is clear that staff with certain attributes will be preferred over others, in
particular those with a demonstrated interest and experience in capacity-building and
training, those with a solid grounding in substantive protection, social and/or
organizational development questions.
96.
It will be vital, on the other hand, to provide all international staff, whatever their
backgrounds, with extensive training in the contents of the guidelines and modules
recommended earlier. They must also be brought up-to-date through thorough trainingof- trainers processes on the latest presentation and group dynamics techniques. They
must also be given in-depth briefing covering the strategy for the region and their
country in particular as well as the cultural peculiarities they will be encountering.
97.
National Officer staff will need induction and refresher training to be offered in
Geneva or regionally to fine tune their broader knowledge of UNHCR work and objectives,
and to ensure they possess the skills in which UNHCR as an institution has become
proficient.
98.
Beyond the supervision received from their seniors in the office, all UNHCR staff
in the region in key capacity-building roles would benefit from on-the-job mentoring early
in their tenure (say some time between 3-6 months into the job). Various options could
be envisaged for this.
UNHCR's capacity-building efforts will benefit from professional support
99.
The effort to bring UNHCR's overall capacity-building activities to a higher level of
quality and consistency will need to be underpinned by professional help. What is needed
overall is to provide a quality focus on capacity-building in much the same way as
protection, site planning or social issues require a specialist input. Specific tasks that
come to mind include: spearheading the effort to draw up the recommended
guidelines/modules; advising offices and staff in respect of capacity-building strategies,
programmes and delivery techniques; helping to design staff training; and, being a
primary vehicle for the cross-fertilizing and recording of experience in different countries.
100.
A major component of this professional capability would need to be institutionally
based. For Europe the function is in part assumed at present by the RBE Legal Training
Officer in Geneva and by the Regional Legal Training Officer in Vienna. The issues go
beyond the current terms of reference of these posts, however, to embrace capacitybuilding in a much broader sense. Strong backgrounds in organizational development
and/or training background as well as considerable practical experience also need to be
brought to the issue.
101.
Various in-house models could be considered, which would be either of
organization-wide application or merely focused on Europe. On the one hand, the job
descriptions of the present legal training posts could be amended to include the new
responsibilities, but the posts would then need to be upgraded or an additional new post
of Regional Capacity-Building Officer could be created in RBE or in the field; or a post of
UNHCR Capacity-Building Officer could be created in either the technical support or
training sections.
102.
UNHCR would also be well advised to use, with flexibility, outside professional
support in the capacity-building field, probably in the form of consultant services. Such
support should provide the organization with a neutral view of how it is forming, can help

to initiate a reform process and can share with the organization the body of experience
gained by others.
Funding for capacity-building needs a new approach
103.
In 1990/91, Western Europe was driven by a very real fear of massive influx of
populations from the ex-Soviet sphere. With the realization that this would not come to
pass, at least not in the near future, funding sources have shown decreasing interest in
the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Yet UNHCR's capacity-building activities are
significant contributions to preventing or at least mitigating the effects of what could still
come to pass.
104.
On a broad plane, it can be anticipated that the funding potential for UNHCR's
capacity-building programme in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe would be
significantly improved by the more forthright approach proposed for the issue overall.
With that would come analytical presentations of the objectives and strategies of those
activities, demonstrated collaboration with others in the same field, and clearly identified
budgets over realistic multi-year time-frames. All of this would testify to the seriousness
of UNHCR's capacity-building commitment in the region. The organization would
probably be well advised to proceed similarly for other parts of the world.
105.
Clearly the follow-up process to the CIS Conference in collaboration with IOM,
provides a privileged avenue for the pursuit of capacity-building funding for the Central
and European countries.
106.
In Central Europe specifically, the rule of thumb that funding of UNHCR activities
should be roughly proportionate to the refugee presence hardly applies since the number
of refugees is insignificant. This raises new issues. On the one hand, UNHCR must make
the case with donors that capacity-building is a genuine preventive activity and is worth
the money that goes into it in these countries. On the other hand, the need is clearly
strong to seek out and enter into meaningful partnerships with organizations that do
have a vested interest in prevention in Europe and will not be deterred by the current low
refugee figures. In the Central European context it would thus appear particularly urgent
to negotiate a new understanding at the highest levels of the European Union. Existing
European programmes such as PHARE and TACIS, which need UNHCR's expertise and
contacts, should be helping UNHCR in a meaningful way to sustain its activities. An
association with the Social Development Fund of the Council of Europe could also be
worthwhile.
107.
In Ukraine and Belarus, the reasoning would be similar to that applying to the
countries of Central Europe, with the difference that the refugee populations there are
bigger and more difficult to deal with on account of the lesser development of the
relevant institutions. On the other hand, Ukraine and Belarus being further from the
donor countries in question, there will likely be less interest in providing financial
assistance through capacity-building, although these countries' needs are actually
greater. Again the EU should be approached with a view to securing much higher levels of
cooperation with TACIS.
108.
The Russian Federation has an appreciable number of refugees plus an estimated
population of 3 million ethnic Russian returnees. Funding has to be seen here within the
broader context of ongoing IMF, World Bank and bilateral negotiations with the Russian
Government.
COUNTRY SITUATIONS
AUSTRIA

(Also covering Poland, Czech and Slovakia)

109.
A small, long-standing UNHCR office in Vienna has been turned into an office with
a regional as well as traditional Austria-specific purview. The Liaison Offices in Poland,
the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic report to the office in Vienna. The latter also
provides resource persons and/or backstopping to other UNHCR offices in Central Europe
as and where required or requested. In the main, RO Vienna staff are divided into those
with regional tasks and those with Austria-only tasks.
110.
The office sees capacity-building in its various forms as a primary activity. In
Austria itself this includes a strong focus on the NGO sector. UNHCR is also active incountry on the Public Information field. Given its history, geography and institutional
structure, Austria is attuned to the Central European countries, is something of an EU
outpost for the region and takes a close interest in UNHCR activities in the countries of
the region, and is prone to candid expression of its views in this regard.
111.
In the interests of harmony of approach, learning lessons between countries and
disseminating those lessons, it appears both conceptually and managerially correct to be
providing outposted regional capability. The approach is certainly cost-effective too
since in most cases the existence of specialized regional staff should reduce staff needs
correspondingly at the national level and at HQs.
112.
Regional efforts have focused on legal promotion/advice and on training. The
latter has been predominantly geared towards supporting the building up of legal
institutions and procedures, has worked with short planning horizons and has been
essentially knowledge-based in its approach. There is a realization in the RO that a more
varied subject base is called for which should be projected over a medium-to long-term
timespan. Workshops will need to be increasingly oriented towards problem solving. The
approach itself will above all need to form part of an integrated strategy of interactive
components that takes into account other forms of capacity-building undertaken by
different staff of the Regional Office and of the concerned UNHCR offices.
113.
The potential impact of a more comprehensive approach is far-reaching. On the
one hand, it should be done very professionally and will certainly benefit from timely
inputs from experienced training-design and- delivery experts. On the other hand, it
should also be geographically extensive if it is to achieve its full potential for integrated
systems between the countries, yet be creative and practical. However, the ability to
realise the full benefits of a regional resource may be currently handicapped by the
ambiguity that prevails with regard to the RO's role towards the UNHCR offices of the
region, in particular with those offices over which it has no direct supervisory role.
SLOVAKIA
114.
Slovakia, like most of the other states in the region, is far from enamoured with
refugees or migrant issues for that matter, yet is one of the region's shining examples of
a country that has put considerable effort into trying to 'do things right', at least from
the UNHCR perspective. The Convention and Protocol are signed, implementing
legislation is in place, and Aliens and Refugee Laws are well advanced. This favourable
state of affairs obviously has much to do with the country's geographical location, its
small size and its avowed interest in aligning itself with Western approaches. But it also
has to do with an effective UNHCR input from which lessons can be learned.
115.
Though established relatively recently, the UNHCR Liaison Office in Bratislava is
credited by the Government with being 'a small office with big influence'. Consisting of
two internationals and two National Officers who are housed in premises paid for by the
Slovak Government, the UNHCR office has had significant input into raising the

awareness of Slovak officials, in guiding them relative to the institutions and procedures
that would serve them best, in helping them put those in place, and in providing them
with the professional training they needed to implement their new undertaking.
Concurrently the office has provided educational activities to broad audiences of
students, journalists, and members of the legal profession with a view to building a
society with an improved understanding of refugee issues. The office has also provided
targeted training in various parts of the country in anticipation of problems that would
arise as implementation of legal procedures came on line.
116.
A significant measure has been, in a poor NGO environment, the strengthening of
existing, or the setting up of new, NGOs to handle specific aspects of attention to
refugees, e.g. counselling and legal defence. These NGOs have needed considerable
nurturing, notably with regard to their administrative and project management capability,
and are performing well. Of significance is the example of civil society building that they
represent in a region that needs more examples of this kind.
117.
The question now needs to be asked in the Slovak context as to how far UNHCR
should go in both its capacity-building efforts and in maintaining its presence. Although
some senior members of the Government state that as far they themselves are
concerned UNHCR's input is no longer required, there is evidence that at specialized
levels at least they benefit from UNHCR expertise. Nonetheless, State personnel out in
the field are not necessarily as proficient as staff in Bratislava, and UNHCR has a
continued role to play, in monitoring the Government's activities generally. Clearly also,
the promising work begun with NGOs should be pursued, given the vulnerability of this
sector. To what depths should such work go, especially in a country in which refugees
are currently to be counted in the hundreds? All things considered, UNHCR might
legitimately consider reducing its international presence in Slovakia soon, covering the
country from its regional office in Vienna and through a capable National Officer antenna
in Bratislava.
HUNGARY
118.
Hungary was the first of the Central European nations to accede to the
Convention in 1989. However it still has not signed the Protocol and the UNHCR Branch
Office is conducting the determination procedure under the Mandate for non-European
asylum-seekers. Recognised refugees, who number of few hundred only, are referred to
the Red Cross and Interchurch aid. Hungary has also until recently been hosting former
Yugoslavs who are now returning.
119.
The Government and others in-country, who had little previous experience of
dealing with international organizations, have clearly been disoriented by an apparent
inconsistency of UNHCR approach and style over the years since the opening of the BO.
This institutional weakness probably partly explains some disappointments that UNHCR
has experienced in Hungary.
120.
The office in Budapest sees refugee integration as key to containing the usual
drift westwards. To do that, new jobs need to be created, the 'job-market pie' must be
expanded if refugees are not to be perceived as taking jobs from Hungarians, and
awareness-raising becomes a priority. But at $1.9 million per year the UNHCR
programme appears expensive. Staff and office costs of $60,000 per month also seem
high considering the size of the caseload on the one hand and on the other hand the size
and development level of the country itself. Expectations of an early breakthrough
relating to the Protocol and on the refugee-integration front fuel a current 'wait-and-see'
approach.

121.
Capacity-building is an important aspect of the BO's work. Various kinds of costeffective workshop are run in Budapest and in the provinces. The office also stages
monthly high-level discussion groups on the BO premises on subjects relevant to
migration and refugee issues and of general interest to international and intellectual
circles in Budapest. The model is original and clearly has been influential. Government
officials recognise that they continue to learn through the meetings that they hold with
UNHCR as well as by attending the interview process for mandate refugee status that the
BO conducts. Workshops that have brought together government, NGO and
international personnel score particularly high marks. BO staff worry about the turnover
of government staff and the apparent loss that this implies when the officials in question
have received UNHCR training. In Hungary, as much or more than in other countries of
the region, UNHCR staff, especially local, need to be reminded that handing-over and
eventual phasing-out must be UNHCR's purpose.
122.
Of late, the office has set up an NGO to provide an 'informal umbrella
coordination role'. The effort is a contribution towards the stimulation of the NGO sector
and increasing its influence in refugee issues. The NGO in question conducts research
into migration issues in addition to offering legal services. Therein lies a further
multiplier opportunity for capacity-building.
UKRAINE
123.
Ukraine may not be part of the immediate buffer zone of interest to Western
Europe but it actually has to deal with refugee and related issues on a magnitude that is
considerably greater than those confronted by the countries of Central Europe. But
UNHCR set up a full-time presence in Ukraine in 1994 only. With the benefit of hindsight,
this may seem regrettable.
124.
Ukraine has not acceded to the Convention and Protocol. Refugee legislation
existed prior to UNHCR's arrival but is generally still not implemented. Over 5,000
asylum-seekers have been recognised by the UNHCR office since 1994, some of whom
are financially assisted by UNHCR but often harassed by local police. Ukraine also
harbours a large number of citizens of various origins (including Armenian and
Chechnian) fleeing war or poverty and whom it absorbs without reference to UNHCR.
125.
Ukraine is particularly fertile ground for a significant capacity-building effort that
should take inspiration from the experience acquired by UNHCR elsewhere, and in
particular in Central Europe. Though not without strong elements of conservatism that
have carried over from Soviet days, Ukraine's backwardness with regard to the questions
of concern to UNHCR is more the result of widespread unawareness than bad will. Many
government officials plead for information, training and any other form of help that can
help bring legislation, institutions and practice closer to those of Western Europe.
Concurrently there are young NGOs and informal associations that have the background,
information sources and attitudes that UNHCR needs and that, with the organization's
help, would be natural allies in the quest to inform and influence constructively from the
inside of Ukrainian society.
126.
It is of great importance and urgency that UNHCR set up networks of capacitybuilding in Ukraine. They can be expected to have a considerable multiplier effect. A
substantial part of the office's energy is currently being sapped by individual casework
which, though meritorious in many ways, should be quickly passed to others.
Awareness-building events of a general nature, broad based conferences and seminars in
the legal field, targeted training for government and municipal authorities, special events
for the NGO sector and press briefings are examples of activities that would soon lead to
considerable progress. This must be the young office's absolute priority. It should not
hesitate to assume a high profile in the country.

127.
To achieve the foregoing, it is recommended that UNHCR staff with recent or
current experience of capacity-building in Central Europe undertake extended missions
to Ukraine to share approaches with senior staff in Kiev. It is also recommended that the
Kiev office carefully recruit local, high-calibre staff at the National Officer level, both in
protection and programme, to help meet these objectives quickly.
THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
128.
Of all the countries of the former Soviet Union, the migration and refugee
situation of the Russian Federation is probably the most complex. Although it acceded to
the Convention and Protocol in 1993 the Russian Federation is not implementing that
commitment and the many thousands of refugees in the Russian Federation. It is
estimated that some 3 million ethnic citizens of the Russian Federation have returned
from the countries forming part of the former Soviet Union, often referred to as the 'near
abroad'. Some observers estimate that 7-8 million of the remaining 22 million or so
ethnic the Russian Federation in the near abroad may well return during the years to
come as 'involuntarily forced migrants' or in some other capacity that will anyway require
external help of some kind as well as a receiving country equipped to deal effectively with
such numbers.
129.
The UNHCR office in Moscow is sizeable and relatively well equipped. Its
representative wears the Resident Coordinator as well as the DHA hats. Yet, despite this
high profile, UNHCR and the Federal Migration Service (FMS), the principle counterpart,
have experienced difficulty in matching points of view. The Russian Federation is
preoccupied with its economic and other issues and assistance to refugees is not a
priority. UNHCR's early reluctance to view refugee questions in tandem with the ethnic
Russian issue was not appreciated in Moscow The Russian Federation authorities also
wanted substantial financial support. The practical protection of refugees is difficult to
achieve and programme activities are relatively limited. In the North Caucasus, on the
other hand, a significant UNHCR involvement has borne fruit and is helping indirectly to
improve the level of understanding with the Government in Moscow.
130.
Beyond the very real requirements for new approaches in general that prevail in
the Russian Federation and for which capacity-building is greatly needed, the latter is
also a means for UNHCR to assist the Government to ponder its policies and gradually
adjust its practices. The approach will call for patience and consistency but should
ultimately be of considerable help. The FMS Department of Immigration Control, for
instance, would benefit from expert advice on questions related to status determination,
with the creation of a central information centre, and with the drafting of FMS regulations
and internal instructions. Further provision of equipment would be useful as would be
training in a number of specialized areas notably for officials of FMS at the Points of
Immigration Control, Regional Migration Centres, reception centres as well as in other
state agencies such as the Border Guards, the Ministry of Interior and the Federal
Employment Agency. All of the foregoing need capacity-building primarily of a practical
kind and also to delve into broader issues of organization, human rights and civil society.
The thin NGO base willing to work with UNHCR also requires substantial support.
131.
Needs greatly outstrip UNHCR capabilities. In the Russian Federation, more than
anywhere, synergistic use of resources is needed in collaboration with other entities in
the capacity-building area if efforts are to exercise leverage. At present TACIS, the
Canadian and Finnish Governments, IOM and others are all involved in different activities
of this sort. Only IOM and UNHCR, however, have plans to coordinate their inputs. Yet
there is a need all round, with the multilaterals, bilaterals as well as the Russian
Federation authorities themselves, to jointly establish objectives and resolutely work
towards them over an extended number of years. To succeed at this could make a

considerable difference. The CIS Conference follow-up provides in particular an

opportunity not to be missed.
GEORGIA
132.
With the Abkhazian and South Ossetian situations still unresolved and some
300,000 IDPs scattered around the country to whom UNHCR extends assistance,
Georgia is in continued political, social and economic disarray though militarily calm. The
desire to rebuild Georgian statehood is present but commitment is sporadic and
institutions are weak. The need for capacity- and institution-building could hardly be
clearer.
133.
Georgia has attracted many international organizations interested in helping the
country with its capacity-building requirements. OSCE for instance, through study tours,
conferences and seminars, focuses on 'the rule of law' and the building of Georgian civil
society. The strongest lead in country has been taken by IOM which has spearheaded a
comprehensive Capacity-Building Programme in Migration Management to which UNHCR
contributes. The programme concept and strategy, with its comprehensive approach and
that brings structure to the interactive nature of a variety of components in capacitybuilding for migration, is a model for what could be done more widely within the CIS. An
interagency initiative provided the resources and expertise to set up the Georgian
Coordination Bureau for International Humanitarian Aid which is also a good example of
successful institution-building. UNHCR is contributing financially to this now-functioning
body. UNHCR has helped establish and guide the Ministry of Refugees and
Accommodation which is its main counterpart.
134.
Recognising the somewhat sterile nature of its assistance programme to IDPs
(mainly delivered through international NGOs) amid the continued poor prospects of
Abkhazian return, UNHCR has somewhat belatedly begun to place an emphasis on
capacity-building. A series of workshops in the protection field has been recently
started, well received and will doubtless pay dividends. Worthy efforts have also been
made to nurture and train local NGOs through the PARinAC process in management and
programme skills. A CIS-adapted version of People Oriented Planning has also been run
in-country. More such efforts will be necessary in a country that thirsts for know how
and guidance. However UNHCR must plan, structure and deliver these capacity-building
activities as part of a well-thought-through strategy with clear objectives, synergy
between activities and follow-through mechanisms. Some of the experience gained in
Central Europe should be made available to UNHCR in Georgia to help it exercise this
vision and intellectual leadership.
135.
It is recommended that UNHCR renegotiate its agreements with its international
NGO partners to include partnership arrangements with nascent local NGOs. Such
partnerships should include initial, on-the-job training and other forms of capacitation.
The arrangement should provide time-frames whereby the local NGOs in question
progressively take over sectors of the programmes (see also the country profile on
Azerbaijan).
136.
An interesting government proposal worth examining is that of an international
training centre for the Caucasus to be established in Tbilisi. The centre, for which the
Government would be willing to provide premises, would be open to government and
NGO participants and would provide capacitation to underpin a whole range of refugee,
migration and related areas. UNHCR and IOM support would be welcome.
AZERBAIJAN

137.
UNHCR has in Azerbaijan the opportunity to help the country build its capacity in
a variety of ways. This opportunity is in large measure ascribed to considerable visibility
enjoyed by UNHCR as a consequence of the running of an emergency programme that is
generally viewed as having been responsive and dynamic. Azerbaijan has signed the
Convention and Protocol and has implementing legislation in place. There is also a
functioning refugee-determination procedure. A significant milestone in bringing this
about was a UNHCR-sponsored, conference on refugee law, migration and human rights
at the end of 1994 which, with presidential participation, helped to draw national
attention to legal and protection issues.
138.
At the assistance level, UNHCR works with a somewhat tangled government
structure and which clearly needs ongoing help. There is evidence though that the
participation of government officials in UNHCR regional workshops has been very useful
in helping the government to conceptualize and professionalize its role. Additionally
some strong mentoring relationships established between UNHCR staff (Programme as
well as Field officers) and government officials has also had considerable impact. Further
in-country workshops, notably those with a strong organizational development
orientation, could help further. UNHCR would do well to continue its policy of supporting
the IOM programme which has started to formally address this area.
139.
Direct assistance to the million refugees and IDPs from the war with Armenia is
channelled through a network of international NGOs. These NGOs have delivered
assistance efficiently but have done little, other than through the employment of their
own local staff and their influence on contractors and suppliers, to build an NGO sector
that would remain after their departure and be able to perform with at least acceptable
proficiency. It is clear that few international NGOs will take the initiative to do this, in the
belief that they may thus be hastening their own departure. However, as the main
provider of funds, UNHCR is in a position to make the capacitation of indigenous NGOs,
and including, if need be, their initial creation, a contractual condition of service for
international NGOs in country. There is no doubt that all the international NGOs have the
capability to do this competently. As for Georgia therefore, it is recommended that
UNHCR renegotiate this issue with the international NGOs in Azerbaijan, suggesting
small-scale partnerships as the means to start. UNHCR can further set an example by
identifying and establishing direct relationships of its own with local NGOs, as it has
already done with the NGO Hayat.
140.
With the maturing of the situation in Azerbaijan, the time has come, in line with
the rest of the region, to shift the emphasis of its activities more resolutely in the
direction of capacity-building. This is where the greatest contribution can be made in the
long run.
ARMENIA
141.
Armenia is party to the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol. UNHCR
activities in Armenia contain a particularly full range of capacity-building examples and
illustrate well how a proactive and creative UNHCR approach can make a significant
contribution to helping a country regain confidence and stability.
142.
Following the war with Azerbaijan, its neighbour, several hundred thousand ethnic
Armenians came to Armenia, a country which, following the collapse of the Soviet Union,
was already in dire economic straits. In responding to Armenia's request for assistance,
since December '92 UNHCR has constructed a web of interrelated activities designed to
strengthen Armenian society in a number of ways while simultaneously addressing its
population displacement and integration issue. To further its objectives, UNHCR in
Armenia has used to advantage the small size of the country, the compelling nature of
the emergency situation that it faced, the strong national identity of Armenia and the

fact that the concerned populations were all of the same cultural belonging, as well as
the existence outside the country of the Armenian diaspora with its political and financial
influence. The UNHCR representative also has made use of his position of DHA
representative and sometime Acting Resident Coordinator.
143.
Instead of channelling through international NGOs care and maintenance
assistance to the scattered population, UNHCR chose to do this through the community
structure, while purposefully seeking to develop and strengthen it. Income-generation
programmes are currently being identified and implemented in similar fashion. A largescale UNHCR shelter programme is implemented on a nationwide tendering basis which
helps to breathe life into the economy by using local resources and providing
employment. Concurrently, local NGOs have been trained and contracted for specific
small-scale tasks, which in time it is planned should lead to more extensive tasks as their
capabilities are confirmed.
144.
UNHCR Armenia, in partnership with other organizations in country, also lends
active support to a training centre for local NGOs from which 20-30 capacitated and
equipped NGOs are expected to emerge within a year, several of which can be expected
to become UNHCR implementing partners. UNHCR has also been instrumental in the
creation of the Armenian Centre for Democracy and Human Rights which could become
an influential tool for the development of civic society. The office has also helped IOM to
establish its Migration Management project. Training on the job, mentoring roles, and
workshops have underpinned all of the foregoing initiatives
145.
The key to influencing and delivering on so many fronts has been the office's
outreach, achieved by recruiting significant numbers of local staff who have cost the
office very little but who work hard and well, and by instigating at field level the setting
up of a network of government Refugee Officers who act as responsible counterparts.
Many of these persons, through osmosis, example and as a result of direct training, can
be expected to contribute significantly to the continued capacity-building of the country,
long after UNHCR's departure. There are many lessons to learn from UNHCR's
achievements in Armenia which should be factored more generally into the organization's
capacity-building approaches.