Evaluación medio término del proyecto Global Marine Commodities

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2019-2022, Ecuador
Evaluation Type:
Mid Term Project
Planned End Date:
12/2019
Completion Date:
11/2019
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
No
Evaluation Budget(US $):
40,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR MTR GMC GLOBAL.pdf tor English 768.82 KB Posted 302
Download document GLOBAL MARINE COMMODITIES MTR Final Report.docx report English 2930.88 KB Posted 404
Title Evaluación medio término del proyecto Global Marine Commodities
Atlas Project Number: 00090199
Evaluation Plan: 2019-2022, Ecuador
Evaluation Type: Mid Term Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 11/2019
Planned End Date: 12/2019
Management Response: Yes
UNDP Signature Solution:
  • 1. Poverty
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 2.4.1 Gender-responsive legal and regulatory frameworks, policies and institutions strengthened, and solutions adopted, to address conservation, sustainable use and equitable benefit sharing of natural resources, in line with international conventions and national legislation
SDG Goal
  • Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
  • Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
  • Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
  • Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
  • Goal 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development
SDG Target
  • 14.5 By 2020, conserve at least 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, consistent with national and international law and based on the best available scientific information
  • 15.1 By 2020, ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services, in particular forests, wetlands, mountains and drylands, in line with obligations under international agreements
  • 17.16 Enhance the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development, complemented by multi-stakeholder partnerships that mobilize and share knowledge, expertise, technology and financial resources, to support the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals in all countries, in particular developing countries
Evaluation Budget(US $): 40,000
Source of Funding: GEF
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 43,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title: Global Sustainable Supply Chains for Marine Commodities
Evaluation Type: Mid-term Review
Focal Area: International Waters
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-5
GEF Project ID: 96079
PIMS Number: 4754
Key Stakeholders: Ministerio de Producción, Comercio Exterior, Inversiones y Pesca; Asociaciones de Pescadores Artesanales, Empresas de commodities marinos, NGO Sustainable Fishieries Partnership.
Countries: ECUADOR
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

National steering committees do not explicitly encompass all Components

2

The plans arising from FIP and Platform processes run the risk of not being financed.

3

Three project design weaknesses identified by the MTR should be addressed in the design phase of a potential second phase of the GMC Project: National Platform Coordinators are financed by the project; the timescale of the processes the project supports are longer than the project itself; and low budgets for some key positions.  UNDP might usefully replicate the UNDP/NGO partnership in future interventions. It must draw on the conclusions of this MTR and those to be drawn by the learning processes being implemented by the GMC project.

4

Three project design weaknesses identified by the MTR should be addressed in the design phase of a potential second phase of the GMC Project: National Platform Coordinators are financed by the project; the timescale of the processes the project supports are longer than the project itself; and low budgets for some key positions.  UNDP might usefully replicate the UNDP/NGO partnership in future interventions. It must draw on the conclusions of this MTR and those to be drawn by the learning processes being implemented by the GMC project.

5

IPCU to establish methods of measuring what actions partners have undertaken as a result of the project, and qualitative aspects such as how levels of trust have been engendered in the Platform & FIP processes.

6

IPCU to establish methods of measuring what actions partners have undertaken as a result of the project, and qualitative aspects such as how levels of trust have been engendered in the Platform & FIP processes.

7

The IPCU should integrate the MTR’s suggestions on the wording of indicators and the expressions in Baselines and Targets.

8

SFP to ensure that sustainability and supply chain matters throughout its interventions are presented from a business perspective and include information sharing regarding for example the potential value-added of sustainability initiatives, or how to maintain or increase market share.

9

National Authorities and UNDP to do all that is possible to ensure that Platforms supported by the project are anchored in existing permanent legally constituted institutions, and that national platform coordinators are from permanent staff positions [1]; GMC staff to take the role of facilitator and advisor.

10

National Authorities and UNDP to do all that is possible to ensure that Platforms supported by the project are anchored in existing permanent legally constituted institutions, and that national platform coordinators are from permanent staff positions [1]; GMC staff to take the role of facilitator and advisor.

11

National Authorities and UNDP to note that output of the Platform might be government-endorsed fisheries management plans (FMPs) instead of Sustainable Fisheries Action Plans (SFAPs), case by case, and Platform Steering Committees need to ensure value chain relevance with continued involvement of big international players and an increased focus on realistic financing of the plans.

12

From 2020 to project end, IPCU to recruit one person under the post of Global Platform Advisor, in order to draw lessons learnt and best practices, and provide coherence.

13

SFP and national authorities to ensure that FIPs are industry-led, and all FIP action plans are realistic, financed and implemented, otherwise the process is undermined.

14

SFP & IPCU to renew efforts, and the UNDP to support these efforts, for SFP to support long-term sustainability of industry-led FIPs in Costa Rica & Indonesia.

15

National Platform Coordinators, SFP & UNDP must ensure strong clear links between FIPs, Platform & government to ensure that FIP outcomes support long-term management measures

16

SFP to continue to provide specific scientific support to FIPs but consider making this conditional on significant financing of the FIP plan by the private sector, and involvement of the public sector, as appropriate.

17

Project staff in each country and the Specialists and Advisor for each Component must contribute to the production of lessons learnt and best practice documents, and the IPCU must ensure they are put up onto the GMC, SFP & partner institution web sites.

18

IPCU & country offices to coordinate National Workshops early in Yr3 to collect lessons learned & contribute to best practice documents, & National and International workshops drawing on experiences in year 4.

19

IPCU to ensure that methodology or guidance for Marine Commodity Platforms be elaborated in Yr3, as well as guidance on other aspects.

20

IPCU to ensure that methodology or guidance for Marine Commodity Platforms be elaborated in Yr3, as well as guidance on other aspects.

21

All National GMC Project Steering Committees to consider C1, C3 & C4 activities, not for approval but to ensure complementarity & information exchange.

22

IPCU to convene global PSC every six months, having consulted and received feedback on relevant technical aspects, and to propose SFP appoint new member.

23

IPCU to convene global PSC every six months, having consulted and received feedback on relevant technical aspects, and to propose SFP appoint new member.

24

IPCU to convene global PSC every six months, having consulted and received feedback on relevant technical aspects, and to propose SFP appoint new member.

25

UNDP regional and Country Offices to convene to establish how it was possible to allow such a staggered start, and such slow recruitment, and how such can be avoided in future projects of this kind.

26

UNDP regional and Country Offices to convene to establish how it was possible to allow such a staggered start, and such slow recruitment, and how such can be avoided in future projects of this kind.

27

IPCU and SFP to define an exit strategy, including gender and with a focus on sustainability before the end of 2019.

28

All components be extended to end October 2021, allowing for closure by December 2021.

29

Though it is too early to determine what form this should take, UNDP & SFP should give consideration to a second phase, taking into consideration lessons learned regarding timescale, phasing and budget inter alia and using best practices.

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

1 UN Plaza
DC1-20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org