Energy, Environment and Disaster Risk Management

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2003-2007, India
Evaluation Type:
Outcome
Planned End Date:
03/2008
Completion Date:
10/2007
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
--
Overall comments: Challenges : Lesson learning exercises, best practices and mid-course developments in the context have not led to significant programmatic adjustments to take advantage of new knowledge, e.g. missed opportunity vi-a-vis the DM Act, 2005. Also, given the scope and size of the programme, it could have played a much stronger advocacy role at the higher policy levels. Emphasis on achieving numerical targets has led to compromises in quality, which is reported in terms of limited impact of one-day workshops and very little time spent on community processes under the village disaster management planning activity. Sustainability of village level disaster committees and disaster management plans is uncertain due to the lack of commitment from local institutions to continue support beyond the period of the DRM Project. There is no significant and sustainable impact on long-term vulnerability reduction. The focus of activities seen at the district and sub-district levels has been on preparedness and not on mitigation. The impact of the programme on political will at the local level has been minimal. The progamme remains an externally administered one, and is even seen locally as a United Nations initiative. Desirable impacts of training programmes have been hampered due to poor enforcement of legislation at local level. Cross-cutting issues such as resource management, gender and disability are not addressed adequately. Similarly, commitments of bi-lateral and multi-lateral agencies have not been influenced in a significant way. The establishment of the National Disaster Management Authority under the DM Act presents UNDP's DRM agenda with both a challenge and an opportunity to take substantial strides in introducing not only advocacy and awareness initiatives (which has been the bulk of the existing programme) but also 'cutting edge' risk reduction actions. In summary, it is clear that in relation to the Intermediate Outcome

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR - DRM and EE Outcome Evaluation.doc tor Posted 558
Download document Outcome Evaluation - DRM - E&E.pdf report Posted 938
Download document summary Posted 104
Title Energy, Environment and Disaster Risk Management
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2003-2007, India
Evaluation Type: Outcome
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 10/2007
Planned End Date: 03/2008
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Environment & Sustainable Development
Corporate Outcomes (UNDP Strategic Plan 2008-20013)
  • 1. Reduced vulnerability to natural and man-made disasters through community preparedness.
Evaluation Budget(US $): --
Joint Programme: No
Mandatory Evaluation: Yes
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Mr. Gernot Brodnig Team Leader
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: INDIA
Comments: Final ToR available
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 Evaluation Recommendation 1: To be able to see lasting change in the overall vulnerability scenario in the country, the mechanisms built at local level have to find roots in existing institutional structures. As of now, such mechanisms appear temporary. The CO needs to step up its efforts to integrate with other National Programmes, including UN, government and civil society programmes, as well as with institutions, especially national civil society organizations that have similar parallel connections with the community. The DRM approach needs to broaden its scope further to focus on mitigation, and not just preparedness and response. This will ensure vulnerability reduction in a deeper sense, and will orient the programme strongly towards carrying out the UNDP's global mandate to establish `partnerships to fight poverty' in the country.
2
3 Evaluation Recommendation 1: To be able to see lasting change in the overall vulnerability scenario in the country, the mechanisms built at local level have to find roots in existing institutional structures. As of now, such mechanisms appear temporary. The CO needs to step up its efforts to integrate with other National Programmes, including UN, government and civil society programmes, as well as with institutions, especially national civil society organizations that have similar parallel connections with the community. The DRM approach needs to broaden its scope further to focus on mitigation, and not just preparedness and response. This will ensure vulnerability reduction in a deeper sense, and will orient the programme strongly towards carrying out the UNDP's global mandate to establish `partnerships to fight poverty' in the country.
4 Evaluation Recommendation 2: In the absence of strategic planning unit or 'think tank', the CO interventions in DRM have somewhat slowed down. This was explicitly emphasized by the donors and hinted at by the practitioners and stakeholders on the ground. Any future DRM interventions by UNDP in India should look to establish such a body which would provide strategic guidance and foresight to the initiatives and also be in a position to adapt the initiatives based on the developing scenario in the country.
5 Evaluation Recommendation 3: Given the scope and size of the programme, it needs to play much stronger advocacy role at the higher policy levels to influence policy in a significant manner.
6 Evaluation Recommendation 4: Shift focus to upstream policy work: In a country like India where UNDP's resources are only a drop in the ocean, and development actors are plentiful, very little is gained through extensive community work except for sharply focused pilot or demonstration projects. The emphasis has to shift instead to policy-directed interventions, primarily at state level, where impact is higher.
7 Evaluation Issue 5: The capacity built by the DRM programme at the level of the district administration is entirely centric to the UNVs posted to support the government machinery. This "temporary capacity" will lead to a vacuum once the Programme comes to a conclusion and as expected the UNVs are withdrawn. With counterpart volunteer capacities still at a nascent stage and parallel government capacities either non existent or insufficient, the human resource gap presents the greatest threat to UNDP's overall outcome under this practice area. The exit strategy developed for the Programme does try to address this issue, but more in a 'suggestive' manner rather than as concrete steps. Also, being in an operationally supportive mode to the government, DRM structures face the risk of being made subservient to the government structure. The capacities built for risk management get diverted to administrative causes, making it further difficult to achieve the ambitious targets at sub-district level. There is thus a need to institutionalize the gains of the DRM programme at the village, block, taluk, district and state levels. This can be pursued in three main ways: a. Build on the opportunities created by the National Disaster Management Act In DRM states, this will require building linkages with District and State Disaster Management Authorities (DDMA & SDMAs) and institutionalizing some of the current functions of the DRM programme within these emerging institutional structures. b. Learn from the successes and failures of DRM and contribute to a national coverage There is a need to expand the response preparedness type activities to all states and districts of the country. There is an opportunity for UNDP to engage with the government at a higher level and assist in shaping such a programme that draws upon the experience of the DRM programme. c. Build partnerships to develop/generate sustainable capacities at all levels The implementation of provisions of National Disaster Management Act will create demand for capacities on different aspects of DRM at all levels. There is an opportunity for UNDP to identify key niche areas and build partnerships with a few national and state level institutions for building capacities in those areas. For example, UNDP could work with NIDM in delivering sustained training and mentoring support to professionals who will be engaged in disaster risk assessments at the local level.
8 Evaluation Issue 6: With the DRM Programme being implemented by the MHA and the NDMA having an independent mandate for risk reduction, it will be imperative that the CO is able to bridge this gap to ensure that its work contributes towards a coordinated and cohesive national strategy for disaster management in India.
9 Evaluation Issue 7: Cross-cutting issues such as resource management, gender and disability are not addressed adequately. The issue of gender equity particularly needs to be addressed in a more meaningful way by providing practical tools and knowledge.
10 Evaluation Recommendation 8: Building on the positive experiences with Solution Exchange, DRM should upscale their knowledge work and make it an integral element in the new Country Programme through a catalogue of advisory services. These could include one or two hosted communities of practice in the priority programme areas.
11 Evaluation Recommendation 9: Integration with governance, environment issues: Within the context of Urban Disaster Risk Reduction, there is an opportunity to forge linkages with the ongoing programme on capacity building for decentralized urban governance. The key aspects of the urban governance programmes such as gender-centric planning, equity, transparency and accountability are as much a pre-requisite for disaster risk reduction as they are for sustainable development. Similarly, under the rural decentralization programme, capacity building of Panchayati Raj Institutions could easily included disaster risk management issues. Similarly, there are two programme areas in the environment sector where linkages can be established: Coastal biodiversity projects; and Adaptation to climate change The Programme can also look at integration with Human Development Indices.
12 Evaluation Recommendation 10: Move beyond enhancing preparedness to managing disaster risks a. At the local level explore specific opportunities for expanding response preparedness to risk management b. As the government begins to develop guidelines for disaster risk reduction, begin to pilot its implementation at different levels, capture lessons and inform policy making at the state and national levels As National Disaster Management Authority begins to issue guidelines, methodologies and toolkits for application at the state and district levels, there are opportunities for UNDP to work with NDMA in implementing the provisions of the Act in DRM states and districts, given that capacities at the local level are very limited. d. Promote evidence based disaster risk management decision-making: assist in building capacities for undertaking disaster risk assessment at various levels As the Planning Commission of India establishes a disaster mitigation fund, there will be a need for sound risk assessments to form a basis for allocations. There is currently a dearth of capacities to undertake such assessments. CO can assist in building capacities for such risk assessments and in piloting the risk assessments in select locations.
13 Evaluation Recommendation 11: UNDP can play a crucial and important role to promote integrated approaches to risk assessments, forecasting systems and adaptations in response to climate change, linking with the work and achievements of DRM. The "Climate Resilient Development and Adaptation" project can be used as a pilot to build knowledge and Capacity in adaptation work. The focus of immediate interventions will need to be in improving the human and institutional capacities assess, forecast and develop adaptation strategies to be incorporated into development planning. This should also include approaches or a framework for a review of existing policies and strategies to enhance their adaptive capacity. Increasing attention will be given to adaptation in future UNFCCC COP negotiations and global initiatives, and UNDP will need to position itself to work closely with other development partners to provide appropriate and timely support to India.
14 Energy and Environment Programme Evaluation Recommendation 1: Consolidation of current portfolio: This suggestion requires a conscious decision to forego any new project proposals that do not fit programme priorities or UNDP's comparative advantage. As fragmentation is the single-most culprit for the sub-optimal impact of the current portfolio, the streamlining of projects must be the cornerstone of the new programme.
15 Evaluation Recommendation 2: Shift focus to upstream policy work: In a country like India where UNDP's resources are only a drop in the ocean, and development actors are plentiful, very little is gained through extensive community work except for sharply focused pilot or demonstration projects. The emphasis has to shift instead to policy-directed interventions, primarily at state level, where impact is higher.
16 Evaluation Recommendation 3: Integrate and expand knowledge management: Building on the positive experiences with Solution Exchange, the E&E portfolio should upscale their knowledge work and make it an integral if not dominant element in the new Country Programme through a catalogue of advisory services. These could include one or two hosted communities of practice in the priority programme areas. A knowledge management component in the form of a Community of Practice could also be thought of.
17
18
19 Evaluation Recommendation 4: Increase visibility: Owing to the portfolio's fragmentation and lack of policy focus, it will be necessary to identify one overarching programmatic theme (with pro-poor mainstreaming focus) for the next cycle. This will not only help to bring about more coherence and cohesion but is also essential in terms of UNDP's strategic positioning and visibility. The dilution of achievements due to the fragmented portfolio and the implementation support has to be countered through a couple of soft assistance flagships (conferences, reports) as key ingredients of the new programme priorities. Each one of the programme years could have one "theme" that would inform the focus and scope of these activities.
20 Evaluation Recommendation or issue 5: New partnerships: In the dynamic new landscape of development actors, the CO needs to reach beyond the "usual suspects" and engage with other sectors and emerging new stakeholders (incl. private sector) through a mainstreaming focus. Such a diversification approach is also good risk management as it helps to overcome bottlenecks in particular partnerships through new opportunities with other stakeholders.
21 Evaluation Recommendation or issue 6: To promote integrated approaches to risk assessments, forecasting systems and adaptations in response to climate change, linking with the work and achievements of DRM programme, the "Climate Resilient Development and Adaptation" project can be used as a pilot to build knowledge and Capacity in adaptation work. (Joint analytical work and joint programming in the context of the adaptation agenda would avoid duplication and bring about synergies).The focus of immediate interventions will need to be in improving the human and institutional capacities assess, forecast and develop adaptation strategies to be incorporated into development planning. This should also include approaches or a framework for a review of existing policies and strategies to enhance their adaptive capacity. Increasing attention will be given to adaptation in future UNFCCC COP negotiations and global initiatives, and CO will need to position itself to work closely with other development partners to provide appropriate and timely support to India.
22 Evaluation Recommendation or issue 7: Adaptation - CO need to provide support to expand the resource and partnership base of the portfolio of climate change mitigation projects by tapping further GEF resources and bilateral partners. New areas of work can include: energy efficiency improvements in industry, buildings and mass transport sectors; with coal consumption projected to increase rapidly, clean coal technologies and its utilization in a more "sustainable" manner at the consumer level; and, given the huge reliance on traditional biomass in rural areas, the continued promotion of renewable energy technologies for both productive and consumptive purposes at the community level so that energy access for the poor is also given equal attention. The focus of these projects should continue to be in capacity development and policy intervention to mainstream global environmental commitments into development planning.
23 Evaluation Recommendation or issue 8: Biodiversity - GEF funding under GEF4 and the new Resource Allocation Framework (RAF) needs to be accessed in line with the new strategic objectives. While discussions have been ongoing for a while to identify a number of entry points, the evaluation team suggests that those be limited to TWO full-size projects in the current cycle. It is further proposed that the programmatic umbrella be mainstreaming in line with GEF's second strategic objective for biodiversity. Mainstreaming is the logical area for UNDP, given its broader development agenda and rather mixed results with its protected area projects in the current and previous country programmes. Moreover, the World Bank will support GoI through the large-scale Biodiversity Conservation and Rural Livelihood Improvement (BCRLI) Project, which focuses on protected areas and builds on the Eco-development Project. Finally, given their technical nature, the other GEF strategic priorities on bio-safety, invasive species and ABS might be more suitable for other agencies such as UNEP. Whatever projects emerge from this prioritization exercise, they should include as an integral component a Community of Practice or similar knowledge management dimension, implemented by the project team. This would help to address some of the shortcomings in terms of visibility, soft assistance, etc. identified in this evaluation.
24 Evaluation Recommendation or issue 9: Land and Water - Although land and water issues were outside the scope of this evaluation, nevertheless suggestion is that CO can explore couple of entry points for the new programme cycle: First, any existing and planned future activities including GEF land degradation projects should be consolidated under a broader Sustainable Livelihood umbrella. Second, this framework could be guided by a programmatic theme such as resource governance for Tribals and other marginalized beneficiaries, and focus on the priority states. Third, water and land issues are important platforms for integrated UN approaches and joint programming with UNICEF, FAO, etc. and multi-donor partnerships.
25 Evaluation Recommendation or issue 10: Comprehensive gender approach and a clear gender mainstreaming strategy is required to guide the projects under the E&E portfolio. Experience indicates that the bio-diversity portfolio was not guided by a gender strategy or similar mainstreaming framework, leaving it up to individual projects and interventions to work towards gender equity. This has happened at the micro-level in Sunderbans and Mannar which can not be considered a substitute for a comprehensive gender approach.
26 Evaluation Recommendation or issue 11: Integrate Solution Exchange into priority programme clusters through knowledge officers for EEU and DRM.
27 Evaluation Recommendation or issue 12: Strategy Groups: Establish cross-practice "think teams" (staff, consultants, external partners) to undertake cutting-edge analytical work and programme development. Sustainable Development Advisor: Establish a senior position (temporary or permanent) to head strategy groups and recruit high-level official from government or think-tank circles with the aim of raising the clout, visibility and status of EEU agenda.
28 Evaluation Recommendation or issue 13: UNV: Make better use of UNVs and/or set up equivalent national modality to supplement project resources in the field.
1. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 1: To be able to see lasting change in the overall vulnerability scenario in the country, the mechanisms built at local level have to find roots in existing institutional structures. As of now, such mechanisms appear temporary. The CO needs to step up its efforts to integrate with other National Programmes, including UN, government and civil society programmes, as well as with institutions, especially national civil society organizations that have similar parallel connections with the community. The DRM approach needs to broaden its scope further to focus on mitigation, and not just preparedness and response. This will ensure vulnerability reduction in a deeper sense, and will orient the programme strongly towards carrying out the UNDP's global mandate to establish `partnerships to fight poverty' in the country.
Management Response:

Management Response: The institutional structures for disaster management envisaged under the DM Act, 2005 are being put in place at different administrative levels viz. national, state and district. A study has been commissioned to analyze the extant institutional structures and to suggest ways and means to promote institutionalization of DRM mechanisms and DRM Programme. Another study to analyze the PRI system and to crystallize strategies for dovetailing DRM initiatives through the PRI system is also underway. The recommendations emerging from these studies would be factored in while formulating the new programmes. Under the existing DRM programme, initial efforts have been made to leverage upon the on-going development programmes/schemes viz. Indira Aawas Yojana, SSA, JNNURM, NRHM etc. and linkages have been forged with a view to fuse energies under the new CPAP of voluntary, non-governmental and corporate entities with community-based DRM approaches. It is proposed to build upon t

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1. a. Completion of study on institutional structures b. Completion of study on PRI system DRM No due date No deadline established
1.2 Establish platforms for promoting partnerships for holistic disaster risk management DRM No due date No deadline established
1.3 Developing guidelines for promoting an inclusive approach to disaster risk mitigation and preparedness through SDMAs/DDMAs DRM No due date No deadline established
2. Recommendation:
Management Response:

Key Actions:

3. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 1: To be able to see lasting change in the overall vulnerability scenario in the country, the mechanisms built at local level have to find roots in existing institutional structures. As of now, such mechanisms appear temporary. The CO needs to step up its efforts to integrate with other National Programmes, including UN, government and civil society programmes, as well as with institutions, especially national civil society organizations that have similar parallel connections with the community. The DRM approach needs to broaden its scope further to focus on mitigation, and not just preparedness and response. This will ensure vulnerability reduction in a deeper sense, and will orient the programme strongly towards carrying out the UNDP's global mandate to establish `partnerships to fight poverty' in the country.
Management Response:

The institutional structures for disaster management envisaged under the DM Act, 2005 are being put in place at different administrative levels viz. national, state and district. A study has been commissioned to analyze the extant institutional structures and to suggest ways and means to promote institutionalization of DRM mechanisms and DRM Programme. Another study to analyze the PRI system and to crystallize strategies for dovetailing DRM initiatives through the PRI system is also underway. The recommendations emerging from these studies would be factored in while formulating the new programmes. Under the existing DRM programme, initial efforts have been made to leverage upon the on-going development programmes/schemes viz. Indira Aawas Yojana, SSA, JNNURM, NRHM etc. and linkages have been forged with a view to fuse energies under the new CPAP of voluntary, non-governmental and corporate entities with community-based DRM approaches. It is proposed to build upon these linkages, streng

Key Actions:

4. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 2: In the absence of strategic planning unit or 'think tank', the CO interventions in DRM have somewhat slowed down. This was explicitly emphasized by the donors and hinted at by the practitioners and stakeholders on the ground. Any future DRM interventions by UNDP in India should look to establish such a body which would provide strategic guidance and foresight to the initiatives and also be in a position to adapt the initiatives based on the developing scenario in the country.
Management Response:

Management Response: The recommendation, though unexceptionable, is rather complex. Efforts have been made to actively contribute towards the national and/or state level task forces/core groups constituted from time to time on various aspects of disaster management and to learn from the considered approaches and strategies developed during deliberations and these have been suitably assimilated/factored into the programmatic interventions under DRM. DRM Programme has been making use of the existing knowledge generated and guidelines developed for vesting its initiatives with greater focus. DRM Programme is actively contributing in the Task Forces constituted by NDMA on CBDP, NGOs, Corporate Sector involvement etc. The expertise and inputs from the Solution Exchange Resource Group comprising expert DM practitioners, NGOs, Government representatives etc. are also sought from time to time. The Programme implementation process is actively guided by advice and inputs received from the delibe

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1. a. Task forces constituted by NDMA on CBDP, PPP etc. b. Consultation process with various stakeholders 2.2. Meetings of Solution Exchange Resource Group DRM, DM Community, Solution Exchange No due date No deadline established
5. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 3: Given the scope and size of the programme, it needs to play much stronger advocacy role at the higher policy levels to influence policy in a significant manner.
Management Response:

Management Response: Under DRM Programme, efforts have been made to engage the parliamentarians/legislators, policy and decision-makers at the highest echelons of Government about the need to mainstream DRM approaches in all development programmes and schemes, especially in the States of Bihar and Orissa. The CBDP approach successfully spearheaded under DRM has led to its proposed replication by Government to non-DRM districts as well as States. The process of continuous dialogue with institutions/officers at apex level is an on-going one and this has led to initiation of the process to formulate a national-level programme for imbuing DRM initiatives a pan-Indian coverage. It may be mentioned that the advocacy efforts under DRM Programme has contributed to the process of incorporation of risk reduction concerns in quite a few development schemes and efforts are being made to integrate the same in the training programmes of ATIs and SIRDs also. Under the next programme, stronger advocac

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1 a. engaging with parliamentarians/legislators by synergizing with the advocacy efforts as part of UN system as well as on a programmatic or agency basis. DRM and RR's Office No due date No deadline established
6. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 4: Shift focus to upstream policy work: In a country like India where UNDP's resources are only a drop in the ocean, and development actors are plentiful, very little is gained through extensive community work except for sharply focused pilot or demonstration projects. The emphasis has to shift instead to policy-directed interventions, primarily at state level, where impact is higher.
Management Response:

Management Response: In DRM states, technical assistance is being rendered for developing policy frameworks, legislative mechanisms, institutional structures and for developing appropriate disaster management rules and building by-laws. Capacity building efforts aimed at enhancing the capabilities of administrative personnel especially at state and district/sub-district level are being synchronized with concerted efforts aimed at dovetailing disaster risk management concerns with the development planning process. Under the National Capacity Building of Engineers and Architects, respectively, efforts have been made to incorporate disaster-resilient construction practices in the training curricula of architects and engineers as also in the academic curricula in engineering and architecture colleges through AICTE. With the consolidation of DRM systems and mechanisms with the proposed institutional structures at state and district levels under the new CPAP, efforts aimed at policy-directed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.1. a. Guidelines for mainstreaming DRR concerns into development and planning process b. Institutional strengthening esp. SDMAs/DDMAs for greater focus on policy interventions. DRM 2010/12 Overdue-Initiated
7. Recommendation: Evaluation Issue 5: The capacity built by the DRM programme at the level of the district administration is entirely centric to the UNVs posted to support the government machinery. This "temporary capacity" will lead to a vacuum once the Programme comes to a conclusion and as expected the UNVs are withdrawn. With counterpart volunteer capacities still at a nascent stage and parallel government capacities either non existent or insufficient, the human resource gap presents the greatest threat to UNDP's overall outcome under this practice area. The exit strategy developed for the Programme does try to address this issue, but more in a 'suggestive' manner rather than as concrete steps. Also, being in an operationally supportive mode to the government, DRM structures face the risk of being made subservient to the government structure. The capacities built for risk management get diverted to administrative causes, making it further difficult to achieve the ambitious targets at sub-district level. There is thus a need to institutionalize the gains of the DRM programme at the village, block, taluk, district and state levels. This can be pursued in three main ways: a. Build on the opportunities created by the National Disaster Management Act In DRM states, this will require building linkages with District and State Disaster Management Authorities (DDMA & SDMAs) and institutionalizing some of the current functions of the DRM programme within these emerging institutional structures. b. Learn from the successes and failures of DRM and contribute to a national coverage There is a need to expand the response preparedness type activities to all states and districts of the country. There is an opportunity for UNDP to engage with the government at a higher level and assist in shaping such a programme that draws upon the experience of the DRM programme. c. Build partnerships to develop/generate sustainable capacities at all levels The implementation of provisions of National Disaster Management Act will create demand for capacities on different aspects of DRM at all levels. There is an opportunity for UNDP to identify key niche areas and build partnerships with a few national and state level institutions for building capacities in those areas. For example, UNDP could work with NIDM in delivering sustained training and mentoring support to professionals who will be engaged in disaster risk assessments at the local level.
Management Response:

Management Response: One of the primary components under the new CPAP is the consolidation of capacities developed under DRM Programme and interventions in this regard would be initiated in conjunction with SDMAs/DDMAs. The Government also intends to replicate the experience of DRM in all States and districts of India in discussion with UNDP and has sought UNDP support to extend the activities. The experience of joint programme implementation in coordination with administrative personnel has led to creation of basic expertise and capacity in the administrative system for undertaking DRM activities. In addition, efforts would be made to promote volunteerism at sub-district levels to complement the resources and capacities of the administrative system. The engagement with National Service Scheme [NSS], Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan [NYKS] and other voluntary organizations under DRM Programme would be augmented to create a reservoir of skilled volunteers for supporting community based DRM a

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
5.1. a. Close programmatic implementation with SDMAs/DDMAs b. Strengthening partnerships with national/state level organizations/institutions to promote volunteerism and capacity building DRM 2012/12 Overdue-Initiated
8. Recommendation: Evaluation Issue 6: With the DRM Programme being implemented by the MHA and the NDMA having an independent mandate for risk reduction, it will be imperative that the CO is able to bridge this gap to ensure that its work contributes towards a coordinated and cohesive national strategy for disaster management in India.
Management Response:

Management Response: The new CPAP will be implemented in close coordination with nodal national government ministry(ies)/institutions. The on-going engagement with the Ministry of Home Affairs, the nodal ministry for disaster management, would be intensified and regular interactions with the institutional structures extant/proposed under the DM Act, 2005 would be maintained. Under the DRM Programme, continuous dialogue to broad-base DM agenda have been initiated with core infrastructural and policy=making ministries/agencies of the national government viz. the Ministry of Urban Development, Rural Development, Health, Education, Planning Commission, Railways etc. The linkages built would be utilized to inform the process of policy formulation in these and other core infrastructural departments/agencies for mainstreaming risk reduction concerns to promote sustainable development and achievement of MDGs as well as the national development goals.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
6.1. a. The expertise and experience gathered under DRM Programme is being shared with NDMA and the process of developing guidelines for hazard risk mitigation and on various aspects of disaster management commenced by NDMA is being duly supported. b. DRM is also supporting the NDMA with regard to implementation of the National Cyclone Risk Mitigation Project apart from assisting with development of guidelines for CBDP, NGOs, Corporate Sector and other aspects of DM agenda. c. Close interaction is being maintained with SPHERE Group for facilitating close interaction with NGOs/CSOs. DRM No due date No deadline established
9. Recommendation: Evaluation Issue 7: Cross-cutting issues such as resource management, gender and disability are not addressed adequately. The issue of gender equity particularly needs to be addressed in a more meaningful way by providing practical tools and knowledge.
Management Response:

Management Response: The mid-term Evaluation Report had also highlighted these issues and requisite correctives have been put in place in consultation with the Ministry of Home Affairs. For example, for gender mainstreaming under DRM Programme, a Gender mainstreaming strategy has been developed, the DRM professionals at national, state and district level have been trained on integrating gender issues in DM, advocacy efforts with stakeholders viz., state governments, NGOs, PRIs and SHGs have also been undertaken and regular monitoring of programme activities from the gender perspective has also been commenced. A tool kit to address disability and gender issues in DM is being developed to support the state governments and the community based organizations and a workshop has already been conducted to implement the same with NGOs.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
7.1. a. Gender mainstreaming tool-kit for DM practitioners b. Assessment of disaster planning and preparedness activities from a gender perspective - developing a took-kit for the same 7.2 Study to assist participation of women in mock-drills and DMCs 7.3 Capacity development of all stakeholders through SDMAs/DDMAs on gender sensitive and inclusive approaches on DM DRM 2009/12 Overdue-Initiated
10. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 8: Building on the positive experiences with Solution Exchange, DRM should upscale their knowledge work and make it an integral element in the new Country Programme through a catalogue of advisory services. These could include one or two hosted communities of practice in the priority programme areas.
Management Response:

Management Response: The Disaster Management Community on Solution Exchange has already attracted wide membership and contributions from DM practitioners on various aspects of DM.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
8.1. a. Efforts would be made to develop a 'knowledge bank' on key programme areas with compilation of knowledge resources from different sources. b. Number of knowledge products on disaster risk management would be developed and posted on Solution Exchange. c. It is also proposed to have linkages with other knowledge networks especially the India Disaster Knowledge Network (IDKN), a Government of India effort to facilitate exchange of information on DM issues within the administrative as well as non-government stakeholders. DRM 2012/12 Overdue-Initiated
11. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 9: Integration with governance, environment issues: Within the context of Urban Disaster Risk Reduction, there is an opportunity to forge linkages with the ongoing programme on capacity building for decentralized urban governance. The key aspects of the urban governance programmes such as gender-centric planning, equity, transparency and accountability are as much a pre-requisite for disaster risk reduction as they are for sustainable development. Similarly, under the rural decentralization programme, capacity building of Panchayati Raj Institutions could easily included disaster risk management issues. Similarly, there are two programme areas in the environment sector where linkages can be established: Coastal biodiversity projects; and Adaptation to climate change The Programme can also look at integration with Human Development Indices.
Management Response:

Management Response: Under the new CPAP, synergies between different programme units esp. governance, environment and DRM are being promoted to optimize resources and to complement activities.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
9.1. a. Studies on Climate Change and its impact on disaster risks are to be undertaken in coordination with energy and environment unit and the knowledge generated with inform the interventions of both the units. b. In order to enhance capacities of the administrative personnel especially at sub-district level, synergistic approach through a joint capacity building strategy would sought to be implemented with Governance unit. c. A study is already underway to suggest ways and means to mainstream disaster management concerns with the PRIs and their programmes and trainings. d. The gender mainstreaming component under DRM Programme is being already implemented in coordination with the gender-sensitive and inclusive strategy prepared by UNDP CO. e. Similarly, study to explore the disaster-poverty linkages and use of 'HDI' [Human Development Indices] for disaster risk mitigation is also being undertaken in collaboration with ISDR to develop suitable strategies and to reduce d DRM, Governance & EEU 2009/12 Overdue-Initiated
12. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 10: Move beyond enhancing preparedness to managing disaster risks a. At the local level explore specific opportunities for expanding response preparedness to risk management b. As the government begins to develop guidelines for disaster risk reduction, begin to pilot its implementation at different levels, capture lessons and inform policy making at the state and national levels As National Disaster Management Authority begins to issue guidelines, methodologies and toolkits for application at the state and district levels, there are opportunities for UNDP to work with NDMA in implementing the provisions of the Act in DRM states and districts, given that capacities at the local level are very limited. d. Promote evidence based disaster risk management decision-making: assist in building capacities for undertaking disaster risk assessment at various levels As the Planning Commission of India establishes a disaster mitigation fund, there will be a need for sound risk assessments to form a basis for allocations. There is currently a dearth of capacities to undertake such assessments. CO can assist in building capacities for such risk assessments and in piloting the risk assessments in select locations.
Management Response:

Management Response: The recommendation is very relevant. One of the components under the next CP is to make "Communities aware of their vulnerabilities and adequately prepared to manage (and reduce) disaster and environmental related risks". The thrust would be on hazard, vulnerability and risk assessments; development of insurance products for most vulnerable segments; adoption of an inclusive and gender-sensitive approach to risk reduction; amendment of development control regulations and building by-laws etc. For this, appropriate capacity building initiatives would be implemented esp. for risk assessment, damage and loss assessment, mainstreaming etc. The effort would also be to move from preparedness for response to preparedness for sustainable and speedy recovery with elements of risk reduction built into it. Under DRM Programme too, efforts have been made to mainstream DRR concerns into development planning process and in schemes of Government of India like Indira Aawas Yojana,

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
10.1. a. Efforts to mainstream DRR concerns into development planning process and in schemes of Government of India like Indira Aawas Yojana, JNNURM, NRHM will be taken up in new CP. DRM 2012/12 Overdue-Initiated
13. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 11: UNDP can play a crucial and important role to promote integrated approaches to risk assessments, forecasting systems and adaptations in response to climate change, linking with the work and achievements of DRM. The "Climate Resilient Development and Adaptation" project can be used as a pilot to build knowledge and Capacity in adaptation work. The focus of immediate interventions will need to be in improving the human and institutional capacities assess, forecast and develop adaptation strategies to be incorporated into development planning. This should also include approaches or a framework for a review of existing policies and strategies to enhance their adaptive capacity. Increasing attention will be given to adaptation in future UNFCCC COP negotiations and global initiatives, and UNDP will need to position itself to work closely with other development partners to provide appropriate and timely support to India.
Management Response:

Management Response: Studies to understand the linkages between climate change and disaster risks are proposed to be undertaken in the new Country Programme. This will help develop suitable adaptation strategies for both disaster risk reduction interventions and environment management.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
11.1. a. Studies to understand the linkages between climate change and disaster risks are proposed under new Country Programme. DRM & EEU 2012/12 Overdue-Initiated
14. Recommendation: Energy and Environment Programme Evaluation Recommendation 1: Consolidation of current portfolio: This suggestion requires a conscious decision to forego any new project proposals that do not fit programme priorities or UNDP's comparative advantage. As fragmentation is the single-most culprit for the sub-optimal impact of the current portfolio, the streamlining of projects must be the cornerstone of the new programme.
Management Response:

Management Response: This has been taken care of in the new country programme, where outcomes and outputs have been clearly outlined.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1. The portfolio will build on it's current strengths of integrating poverty and environmental challenges, while leveraging additional environmental finance and fostering strategic partnerships. Clearly defined outcome indicators will help in streamlining the portfolio in terms of priorities and achievements. For example, an old project proposal which was pending signatures on Community based natural resource management was revisited and realigned to CPAP priorities before it was finally signed. EEU 2012/12 Overdue-Initiated
15. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 2: Shift focus to upstream policy work: In a country like India where UNDP's resources are only a drop in the ocean, and development actors are plentiful, very little is gained through extensive community work except for sharply focused pilot or demonstration projects. The emphasis has to shift instead to policy-directed interventions, primarily at state level, where impact is higher.
Management Response:

Management Response: The emphasis of the portfolio has always been directed towards supporting environmental related policy interventions, with strategic community based projects. The community-based projects were supported to build successful demonstrative models that would strengthen inclusive approach, capacity development and integrate poverty and environment challenges. Further, these models have served as platforms to feed-in grassroot level reality and learning into the larger policy framework. This recommendation has been specially considered in the CPAP where in the emphasis would also be on developing capacities at the state level, especially for biodiversity conservation, rehabilitation of degraded land area and adaptation to climate change

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1. a. Guidelines for mainstreaming environmental concerns into development and planning process especially at the state and district level EEU 2009/12 Overdue-Initiated
16. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 3: Integrate and expand knowledge management: Building on the positive experiences with Solution Exchange, the E&E portfolio should upscale their knowledge work and make it an integral if not dominant element in the new Country Programme through a catalogue of advisory services. These could include one or two hosted communities of practice in the priority programme areas. A knowledge management component in the form of a Community of Practice could also be thought of.
Management Response:

Management Response: In the new country programme the EEU portfolio has clearly outlined expanding the knowledge management initiatives by developing and contributing knowledge products related to environment through the Solution Exchange. The portfolio will also support two new communities of practice on clean technologies and sustainable environment in the Solution Exchange. Further, supportive documents to influence policies and programmes on environment and energy would also be generated.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1. a. Support the launch of Communities of Practice on Clean Technology and Sustainable Environment EEU 2008/12 Overdue-Initiated
17. Recommendation:
Management Response:

Key Actions:

18. Recommendation:
Management Response:

Key Actions:

19. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 4: Increase visibility: Owing to the portfolio's fragmentation and lack of policy focus, it will be necessary to identify one overarching programmatic theme (with pro-poor mainstreaming focus) for the next cycle. This will not only help to bring about more coherence and cohesion but is also essential in terms of UNDP's strategic positioning and visibility. The dilution of achievements due to the fragmented portfolio and the implementation support has to be countered through a couple of soft assistance flagships (conferences, reports) as key ingredients of the new programme priorities. Each one of the programme years could have one "theme" that would inform the focus and scope of these activities.
Management Response:

Management Response: This has been considered in the new CPAP and this year (2008) Climate Change is identified as the theme that would inform the focus and scope of activities. Environmental governance and energy-environment-poverty, with pro-poor mainstreaming will be the overarching programme them in building capacities at the national, district and local levels to directly address environmental issues.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.1 a. Climate Change is the theme for advocacy and focus in new CP. EEU 2008/12 Overdue-Initiated
20. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation or issue 5: New partnerships: In the dynamic new landscape of development actors, the CO needs to reach beyond the "usual suspects" and engage with other sectors and emerging new stakeholders (incl. private sector) through a mainstreaming focus. Such a diversification approach is also good risk management as it helps to overcome bottlenecks in particular partnerships through new opportunities with other stakeholders.
Management Response:

Management Response: In the new country programme, the EEU will focus on developing new partnerships between investors (donors, private sector and financial institutions) and implementing parties (government agencies, CSOs, private sector) for meeting national commitments under Multilateral Environmental Agreements. Within the climate change thematic area, energy intensive industries, transport and commercial sectors will be engaged to increase energy efficiency for reduction of GHG emissions. Similarly, in biodiversity conservation, community initiatives, access to benefit sharing and agri-businesses, market orientated ecosystem services approaches will be supported, thus, diversifying the scope of partnerships. The work in this direction has already begun and some of the significant partnerships are with Indian Railways and Indian Olympic Committee.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
5.1 a. Engage with the Indian Railways under the GOI GEF Programmatic Approach in Climate Change b. Forge partnership with the Organizing Committee Commonwealth Games on Greening the Common Wealth Games EEU 2010/12 Overdue-Initiated
21. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation or issue 6: To promote integrated approaches to risk assessments, forecasting systems and adaptations in response to climate change, linking with the work and achievements of DRM programme, the "Climate Resilient Development and Adaptation" project can be used as a pilot to build knowledge and Capacity in adaptation work. (Joint analytical work and joint programming in the context of the adaptation agenda would avoid duplication and bring about synergies).The focus of immediate interventions will need to be in improving the human and institutional capacities assess, forecast and develop adaptation strategies to be incorporated into development planning. This should also include approaches or a framework for a review of existing policies and strategies to enhance their adaptive capacity. Increasing attention will be given to adaptation in future UNFCCC COP negotiations and global initiatives, and CO will need to position itself to work closely with other development partners to provide appropriate and timely support to India.
Management Response:

Management Response: In the new country programme, the EEU will work with the DRM programme to build capacities of state and district institutions to support communities reduce their risks to natural disasters and climate change. Methodologies will be developed for carrying out risk and vulnerability (including climate change) assessments and adaptation to climate change in identified vulnerable districts. This will be further substantiated with the unit's interventions to support National efforts on poverty, climate change and land degradation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1. a. Completion of study on institutional structures b. Completion of study on PRI system 1.2 Establish platforms for promoting partnerships for integrated disaster risk management and adaptation EEU and DRM 2008/12 Overdue-Initiated
22. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation or issue 7: Adaptation - CO need to provide support to expand the resource and partnership base of the portfolio of climate change mitigation projects by tapping further GEF resources and bilateral partners. New areas of work can include: energy efficiency improvements in industry, buildings and mass transport sectors; with coal consumption projected to increase rapidly, clean coal technologies and its utilization in a more "sustainable" manner at the consumer level; and, given the huge reliance on traditional biomass in rural areas, the continued promotion of renewable energy technologies for both productive and consumptive purposes at the community level so that energy access for the poor is also given equal attention. The focus of these projects should continue to be in capacity development and policy intervention to mainstream global environmental commitments into development planning.
Management Response:

Management Response: The key focus areas for energy interventions would be energy efficiency improvements in industry, buildings and mass transport sectors and promotion of renewable energy technologies to increase energy access for the poor with focus on livelihood generation. We would not be working on CCT as we do not recognize it as one of the focus areas.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
7.1 a. Start implementation of energy efficiency improvement project in small scale industry sector (e.g. manufacture of copper cast rotor and electric motors, brick industry) b. Start implementation on energy efficiency in commercial buildings and Indian Railways under the Programmatic Approach in Climate Change, with GEF. EEU 2008/12 Overdue-Initiated
23. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation or issue 8: Biodiversity - GEF funding under GEF4 and the new Resource Allocation Framework (RAF) needs to be accessed in line with the new strategic objectives. While discussions have been ongoing for a while to identify a number of entry points, the evaluation team suggests that those be limited to TWO full-size projects in the current cycle. It is further proposed that the programmatic umbrella be mainstreaming in line with GEF's second strategic objective for biodiversity. Mainstreaming is the logical area for UNDP, given its broader development agenda and rather mixed results with its protected area projects in the current and previous country programmes. Moreover, the World Bank will support GoI through the large-scale Biodiversity Conservation and Rural Livelihood Improvement (BCRLI) Project, which focuses on protected areas and builds on the Eco-development Project. Finally, given their technical nature, the other GEF strategic priorities on bio-safety, invasive species and ABS might be more suitable for other agencies such as UNEP. Whatever projects emerge from this prioritization exercise, they should include as an integral component a Community of Practice or similar knowledge management dimension, implemented by the project team. This would help to address some of the shortcomings in terms of visibility, soft assistance, etc. identified in this evaluation.
Management Response:

Management Response: The Biodiversity Programmatic Approach has already been developed by the CO, in partnership with the Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF). The Umbrella Programe and the PIF on Mainstreaming coastal and marine biodiversity in production sectors of Gulf of Kutch, Gujarat has been endorsed by the MoEF and has been further submitted to the GEF Secretariat for approval.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
8.1 a. Submission of the GOI GEF Biodiversity Conservation Programmatic Approach EEU 2008/12 Overdue-Initiated
24. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation or issue 9: Land and Water - Although land and water issues were outside the scope of this evaluation, nevertheless suggestion is that CO can explore couple of entry points for the new programme cycle: First, any existing and planned future activities including GEF land degradation projects should be consolidated under a broader Sustainable Livelihood umbrella. Second, this framework could be guided by a programmatic theme such as resource governance for Tribals and other marginalized beneficiaries, and focus on the priority states. Third, water and land issues are important platforms for integrated UN approaches and joint programming with UNICEF, FAO, etc. and multi-donor partnerships.
Management Response:

Management Response: The activities under the GEF land degradation thematic area has already been consolidated under the Sustainable Land and Ecosystem Management (SLEM). The PIF on Enabling sustainable land management in desertification prone shifting cultivation areas in Nagaland has been approved by SLEM and the FSP is being developed. The PIF on Integrated land use management to combat land degradation and deforestation in Madhya Pradesh is ready for submission to the MoEF. The PIF on Sustainable participatory management of natural resources to control land degradation in the Thar Ecosystem is ready and will be considered in the next tranche of SLEM. All these projects focus on Tribals and other marginalized beneficiaries, and two are in the priority states.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
9.1 a. Project development under SLEM in process. EEU 2008/12 Overdue-Initiated
25. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation or issue 10: Comprehensive gender approach and a clear gender mainstreaming strategy is required to guide the projects under the E&E portfolio. Experience indicates that the bio-diversity portfolio was not guided by a gender strategy or similar mainstreaming framework, leaving it up to individual projects and interventions to work towards gender equity. This has happened at the micro-level in Sunderbans and Mannar which can not be considered a substitute for a comprehensive gender approach.
Management Response:

Management Response: In the next country programme, pro-poor and gender mainstreaming in strengthening of environmental governance will be integrated in EEU's work in the areas of livelihood promotion and capacity development in planning, implementation and monitoring. Along with biodiversity, a gender mainstreaming framework is being developed in climate change, especially to facilitate access to clean energy and pilot renewable energy technologies at the community level and related to adaptation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
10.1 a. Develop strategy for gender mainstreaming within EEU portfolio 10.2 Commission a study to look into gender and adaptation nexus issues EEU 2008/12 Overdue-Initiated
26. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation or issue 11: Integrate Solution Exchange into priority programme clusters through knowledge officers for EEU and DRM.
Management Response:

Management Response: Solution Exchange is being integrated into priority programme clusters, however due to human resource constraints knowledge officers would be taken in with the new recruitments.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
11.1 a. Launch two new communities of practice in Solution Exchange EEU 2008/12 Overdue-Initiated
27. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation or issue 12: Strategy Groups: Establish cross-practice "think teams" (staff, consultants, external partners) to undertake cutting-edge analytical work and programme development. Sustainable Development Advisor: Establish a senior position (temporary or permanent) to head strategy groups and recruit high-level official from government or think-tank circles with the aim of raising the clout, visibility and status of EEU agenda.
Management Response:

Management Response: A proposal to develop core teams on thematic areas is already being discussed. These teams will provide programme development support and give technical inputs to the programme. Also, It is felt that hiring a Sustainable Development Advisor may not be needed at this stage, and the suggestion to hire the Advisor, maybe on a retainer basis, could be considered on when required.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
12.1 a. To Develop core teams on thematic areas. EEU 2009/12 Overdue-Initiated
28. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation or issue 13: UNV: Make better use of UNVs and/or set up equivalent national modality to supplement project resources in the field.
Management Response:

Management Response: Agreed.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
13.1. A strategy on UNVs is being developed by the UNCT. Based on their strategy, a plan to involve UNVs in the EEU would be developed. 2008/12 Overdue-Initiated

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

220 East 42nd Street
20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org