Seite - (000334) - in Evaluating Climate Change Action for Sustainable Development

todevelop theplan.Theparticipation in theprocess and the implementationof the DPPs and DM helped in raising awareness, identifying the gaps and building a strong foundation for stronger institutions. It required partners to look for and organize information that, until then, had never been assembled and interpreted together. The internalizationof thenewknowledgeand the incorporationofnewroutines started immediately as the process commenced. These new routines and tools, information, and plans are intended to be used by the organizations beyond the scopeof theDPPs/DM. Thecontradictionbetween institutional fragility (pointed tobyintervieweesasa challenge, as seen above) and the institutional strengthening as a benefit (as indicated by the outcomes) is in fact, two sides of the same coin. Institutional fragility has been identified as a general constraint to development in Brazil, particularly in the sameregionsof thecountryas thisprogram(i.e., theNortheast). In thecaseof theDM,while thekey-partnersof theprocess,FUNCEME, INEMA, APAC, ANA, MI, and INMET are more developed and capable of acquiring knowledge frominternationalprocesses, trainingprofessionals in their institutions, adapting the technologyandprocesses to theBrazilian reality, andevenadvancing itmuchmore thanexpectedandplanned,manypartners in theNortheast remain in much earlier stages of development. For example, some did not have permanent personnel or appropriate equipment. Institutional fragilities are, therefore, a chal- lenge in the process of developing a shared and voluntary permanent cooperation process that needs periodic and reliable feedingof data. Thus, the institutional strengthening appears as an absolutely critical benefit of theDrought NLTAprocess. Stakeholders report, in these early stages, awareness about their institutional fragilities and also a gradual shift in their perspectives, followedbychanges in their practices and the institutionwith respect tonewrules andprocedures.TheDroughtNLTAprocess has alsoprovided theseprofessionals with concrete evidence for justifying requests to their superiors for technical and informational improvements to support the improvedmanagement of drought. Integration of Sectors States and Institutions Institutions that did not initially have much dialogue with one another were brought together, or have further tightened already existing institutional relationships through the participation in theDrought NLTAprocess. This integration is happening across-sectors (meteo- rological, agricultural andwater sectors), within sectors, and between institutions (hydro-meteorological institutes, water and sanitation companies, etc.), across states, andfinally, across state and federal institutions. The integrated vision of the drought and its management, along with the associatedimprovementof institutionalcapacities todeliverserviceswerereported, as highlightedbelow: 322 E.Bretan andN.L.Engle