Joint Evaluation of the UNDP-United Nations Industrial Development Organization cooperation agreement

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2009-2013, Independent Evaluation Office
Evaluation Type:
Thematic
Planned End Date:
09/2009
Completion Date:
09/2009
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
--

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document UNIDO-Evaluation.pdf report English 993.67 KB Posted 1882
Title Joint Evaluation of the UNDP-United Nations Industrial Development Organization cooperation agreement
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2009-2013, Independent Evaluation Office
Evaluation Type: Thematic
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 09/2009
Planned End Date: 09/2009
Management Response: Yes
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
Evaluation Budget(US $): --
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: Yes
  • Joint with UNIDO
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Asbjorn Skaaland and Urs Zollinger Team Leader
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders:
Lessons
Findings
1.

Chapter 3 Assessment of the Cooperation Agreement

This chapter assesses the implementation of the Cooperation Agreement and provides the findings of this evaluation. The first section (3.1) presents a general finding on the relevance of the Cooperation Agreement between UNDP and UNIDO, taking into account current trends in intra-UN cooperation. The subsequent sections present the findings related to the UNIDO desks component (3.2) and the joint PSD programmes component (3.3) of the agreement. 

3.1 General findings

Is the Cooperation Agreement between UNDP and UNIDO still relevant, taking into account current trends in intra-UN cooperation?

Finding 1 - 

While its objectives remain important, the agreement has lost its relevance as a platform for joint programming, particularly in light of the UNDAF guidelines. On the other hand, there still is need for operational agreements defining the administrative and logistical support to the UNIDO Desks. 


Tag: Relevance Joint UN Programme Partnership UN Reform Country Government UN Agencies UN Country Team

2.

3.2 Findings: UNIDO desk

This section assesses the UNIDO desk component of the Cooperation Agreement. The second component, the joint PSD programmes component, is assessed in Chapter 3.3.

3.2.1 Design and implementation

The Cooperation Agreement was designed in 2004 within the context of the United Nations reform process and was seen, in part, as an attempt to develop a new model of collaboration for other UN organizations. Some of the key features of the agreement with regard to the UNIDO desks were:

- To initially establish 15 UNIDO desks within UNDP premises. - To staff the UNIDO desk with one national officer financed by UNIDO (without accreditation to the host government). - To have UNDP represent UNIDO at the country level where the UNIDO Desk is established. - To provide administrative and logistical support from UNDP to UNIDO desks. UNDP was to meet the operational costs during the first two years of the desks’ operation. After the first two years, UNDP was to provide implementation support services required by the UNIDO desks in accordance with the universal price list. - To have the UNDP Resident Representative serve as the first reporting officer of the head of UNIDO operations. The UNIDO Regional Director was to act as the second reporting officer. - To close the UNIDO desk, if, after two years of operation, it failed to generate programmes and projects with sufficient income to cover the cost of the UNIDO desk.

Was the Cooperation Agreement implemented as planned?

Finding 2 -

With regard to the UNIDO desk component, the agreement was largely implemented as envisaged. 


Tag: Country Government UN Agencies UN Country Team

3.

Did the Agreement provide sufficient guidance on implementation?

Finding 3 - 

With regard to the UNIDO desk component, the agreement did not provide sufficient guidance for implementation. Country-level agreements complementing the agreement would have helped.


Tag: Relevance Policies & Procedures Project and Programme management UN Country Team

4.

To what extent did UNIDO and UNDP facilitate and support country-level implementation of the Agreement?

Finding 4 - 

While UNIDO Headquarters made efforts to facilitate the implementation of the activities related to the Agreement in many ways, there are still a number of issues which need to be resolved. UNDP’s support to the implementation of the Agreement was limited to the administrative support provided at the country level for the UNIDO Desks.


Tag: Efficiency Country Support Platform Partnership Capacity Building Operational Services

5.

Were the findings and recommendations of the 2006 joint midterm assessment acted upon?

Finding 5 - 

The evaluation team found that the follow-up to the recommendations was mixed. UNIDO focused on those recommendations that it could implement unilaterally. The evaluation team found little evidence of UNDP taking action to follow up the recommendations of the joint midterm assessment. 


Tag: Coherence Effectiveness Communication Knowledge management Monitoring and Evaluation Partnership Programme Synergy Results-Based Management Private Sector UN Agencies

6.

Does an effective working relationship exist between UNIDO desks and the staff of respective UNIDO regional offices?

Finding 6 - 

The effectiveness of the working relationship between the UNIDO desks and their respective UNIDO regional offices vary widely. 


Tag: Effectiveness Human and Financial resources Partnership UN Agencies

7.

3.2.2 Relevance of the agreement

Two dimensions are key to assessing the relevance and appropriateness of the agreement with regard to the UNIDO desk component:

- Dimension 1: relevance of the expanded UNIDO field representation to partner countries, UNIDO, and UNDP; - Dimension 2: appropriateness of the UNIDO desk model of field representation

Is the objective of an expanded UNIDO field representation as set out in the agreement of relevance to partner countries, UNIDO, and UNDP?

Finding 7 -

Field visits have shown instances where UNIDO desks have added value to governments’ development efforts. The expanded UNIDO field representation is increasingly important to UNIDO. To UNDP, the UNIDO desks are of limited relevance. 


Tag: Relevance Multi Donor Trust Funds Partnership Country Government UN Agencies

8.

Is the UNIDO desk model of field representation appropriate and adequate to meet country demands?

Finding 8 - 

Staffing UNIDO desks with nationals is appropriate and adequate. However, there is a mismatch between the many tasks assigned to HUOs and the resources available.


Tag: Relevance Resource mobilization Human and Financial resources Civil Societies and NGOs Country Government UN Agencies UN Country Team Technical Support

9.

3.2.3 Effectiveness

It is important to recall that this evaluation does not assess development results of UNIDO/ UNDP projects or programmes. It assesses the effectiveness of the agreement and its signatories in achieving the agreed upon objectives. The terms of reference for the terminal evaluation identified five criteria to measure the effectiveness of the agreement with regard to the UNIDO desk component:

- extent to which the UNIDO desks have been an effective tool for facilitating government and private sector access to UNIDO expertise through the UNDP country offices; - contribution of the UNIDO desks to enhance UNIDO participation in national, UNDAF and One UN objectives; - advisory role played by UNIDO desks to UNDP and other UN partners regarding sustainable industrial development; - contribution of the UNIDO desks to the work of UNCTs ? extent to which coverage of 80 countries has been achieved

To what extent have the UNIDO desks been an effective tool for facilitating government and private sector access to UNIDO expertise?

Finding 9 -

The performance of UNIDO desks with regard to facilitating access to UNIDO expertise is uneven and depends to some extent on the size of the UNIDO portfolio.


Tag: Partnership Country Government Private Sector Technical Support

10.

What has been the contribution of the UNIDO desks to national, UNDAF and One United Nations Initiative objectives?

Finding 10 - 

Although UNIDO desks contribute to national development objectives, by facilitating UNIDO participation in UNDAFs, and to the development of new UNIDO projects, the establishment of UNIDO desks does not automatically lead to an increased delivery of UNIDO services. 


Tag: Partnership Programme/Project Design Project and Programme management Service delivery UN Country Team

11.

Are the UNIDO Desks playing an effective advisory role regarding sustainable industrial development to UNDP and other UN partners?

Finding 11- 

The UNIDO desk role as advisors on sustainable industrial development to UNDP and other UN partners varies and depends on the UNCT thematic priorities.


Tag: Effectiveness Partnership UN Agencies UN Country Team

12.

Are the UNIDO Desks effectively contributing to the work of UNCTs?

Finding 12- 

UNIDO desks contribute rather well to the work of the UN country teams, particularly with regard to the UNDAF process and thematic working groups. HUOs who are not full members of UNCT cannot fully participate in all UNCT meetings. This limitation hinders their ability to contribute to the work of UNCT. 


Tag: Effectiveness Multi Donor Trust Funds Private Sector UN Agencies UN Country Team

13.

To what extent has the objective of UNIDO expanding its field presence to 80 countries, as set out in the agreement, been achieved?

Finding 13 -

With a country representation in 46 countries by the end of 2009, UNIDO, thanks to the agreement, expanded its country presence by over 50 percent.


Tag: Efficiency Human and Financial resources UN Agencies

14.

3.2.4 Efficiency

UNIDO desks have a number of core functions:

- to facilitate government and private sector access to UNIDO expertise to contribute to the development of new UNIDO projects and programmes; - to contribute funds mobilization; - to contribute to the implementation of UNIDO projects and programmes ; - to enhance UNIDO participation in national, UNDAF and UN delivering as one objectives; - to advise UNDP and other UN partners regarding sustainable industrial development, including contributing to the work of UNCTs.

However, the evaluation team found that assessing the efficiency of UNIDO desks with regard to these core functions is not feasible, because data of the actual cost of each function is not available. Therefore, the evaluation team chose one core function, as a proxy, to assess the efficiency of the UNIDO desks—contribution of the UNIDO Desks to the implementation of projects and programmes—based on feedback from stakeholders involved and on a review of the ratio between cost of the UNIDO Desk and the volume of activities (financial delivery).

To what extent do UNIDO desks contribute to efficient implementation of projects and programmes?

Finding 14 - 

UNIDO desks contribute to efficient implementation of projects, but several factors constrain them.


Tag: Efficiency Resource mobilization Communication Human and Financial resources Partnership Project and Programme management Country Government Private Sector UN Agencies UN Country Team Technology Technical Support

15.

What is the efficiency in terms of ratio between cost of the UNIDO desk and the volume of activities (delivery)?

Finding 15 -

In some countries the cost of the UNIDO Desk is high compared with the volume of activities (delivery). However, the presence of a UNIDO desk in a country cannot be justified by comparing cost with delivery.


Tag: Efficiency Operational Efficiency UN Agencies

16.

3.2.5 Sustainability

Are the UNIDO desks sustainable?

Finding 16 -

Sustainability depends on many factors, including: country demand; demonstrable comparative advantage of partnerships to meet country demands in the context of changing aid environment; and commitment to partnership at all levels of organizations which in turn, depends on the strength of the mutual benefits accruing through the agreement including resource mobilization. Sustainability can only be decided on a case-by-case basis. 


Tag: Sustainability Resource mobilization Donor relations Partnership Policies & Procedures Private Sector UN Agencies

17.

3.3 Findings: Joint private sector development programme

Finding 17 - 

3.3.1 The PSD concept in the agreement

The scope of cooperation as described in Article II of the Cooperation Agreement was that the UNIDO and UNDP should “work together at the country level on issues of sustainable industrial development in line with the national priorities and the Millennium Development Goals as expressed in country level frameworks, in particular the CCA/UNDAF.” In conjunction with the MDGs promoted by the UN system, the Agreement was seen as a platform for coordinated contribution aimed at involving the private sector in the efforts of creating employment and reducing poverty.

The main objectives of the joint PSD programmes are expressed in the Cooperation Agreement’s “Framework for Joint UNIDO/UNDP Technical Cooperation Programmes on Private Sector Development” paragraph 2.3:

“The ultimate objective of joint programmes is to expand, and enhance the impact of, both organizations' PSD support programmes with a view to strengthening the contribution of the private sector to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in developing countries. Special emphasis will be placed on the joint design and development of mutually reinforcing, interlinked support programmes, which can effectively tackle existing constraints to unleashing dynamic entrepreneurship.”

Furthermore, the main benefit of joint PSD support programmes would be derived from the design of innovative solutions and partnerships, according to the Framework (Para 2.4).

The broad nature of the PSD concept and the resulting varying applications of the concept by different actors in the PSD field, including UNDP and UNIDO, have led to a lack of common understanding of what PSD is supposed to encompass. Furthermore, the agreement and the PSD framework have different sets of activities for joint programme development. The Agreement states that:  

“UNIDO, within the overall vision and framework to foster private sector development and with ultimate view to reducing poverty, shall make available the services described below, namely: 1)Trade capacity building 2)Investment promotion 3)Agro-industries 4)Energy 5)Cleaner and sustainable industrial development 6)Entrepreneurship and SME [Small and Medium Enterprise] development.” 

Alongside the Cooperation Agreement, a Framework for Joint UNIDO/UNDP Technical Cooperation Programmes on Private Sector Development was drafted as a companion document to the Agreement and signed together with the Agreement. It describes the objectives, substantive areas and cooperation modalities of the envisaged joint programmes aimed at strengthening PSD in developing countries. The Framework responds to the analysis, conclusions and recommendations of the United Nations Commission on the Private Sector and Development and gives substance to the fundamental recommendation of the Commission that the operational strategies of development agencies be redirected towards a better coordination of collective actions, based on specialization and partnerships.  

The Cooperation Agreement Framework defines four quite different components of programme areas:

1. Create an enabling environment;  2. Assist skill and knowledge development; 3. Develop broad financing and investment options for entrepreneurs 4. Mobilize private sector capabilities and resources

These components are typical ingredients of many UNIDO and UNDP interventions, not only those that are labelled as PSD (e.g., many projects in the area of environment and industry have these components).

The concept of PSD in the Cooperation Agreement does not refer to the commonly found distinction between interventions that strengthen the private sector as an engine for growth and development (sometimes referred to as PSD in a narrow sense) and interventions that involve the private sector in partnerships for development (sometimes referred to as private sector engagement. This distinction, however, can now be found in the PSD strategies of both UNIDO and UNDP.

For UNIDO, the ambiguous definition of the PSD concept in the Agreement means that most of the UNIDO services to promote sustainable industrial development can be interpreted as falling under the Agreement. At the same time, UNIDO has a branch that specializes in PSD with a given set of services (policy support, cluster and business linkages, rural development and women entrepreneurship). UNIDO anchored implementation of the Cooperation Agreement to that particular branch, resulting in a narrower focus than the one reflected in the Agreement.


Tag: Rural development Energy Private Sector Financing Resource mobilization Gender Equality Women's Empowerment Donor relations Knowledge management MDGs Partnership Programme/Project Design Project and Programme management International Financial Institutions Private Sector UN Agencies Capacity Building Inclusive economic growth Jobs and Livelihoods Poverty Reduction Trade and Development

18.

3.3.3 Implementation

Was the Cooperation Agreement implemented as planned?

Finding 18 -

The MTA found that “the Agreement and the implementation strategy needed to be revisited” in order to “overcome the implementation shortcomings identified.” After the MTA in 2006, no changes have been implemented.


Tag: Resource mobilization Implementation Modality Partnership Programme/Project Design Country Government Private Sector UN Agencies Technical Support

19.

To what extent were joint fundraising activities undertaken?

Finding 19-

The MTA found that no joint PSD programmes mobilized the intended level of resources. No changes have taken place for the joint PSD programmes since the MTA with the exception that some components have been presented to the Millennium Development Goals Achievement Fund.


Tag: Efficiency Multi Donor Trust Funds Resource mobilization MDGs Private Sector UN Agencies UN Country Team

20.

To what extent did UNIDO and UNDP promote the Agreement at the country level and among donors and facilitate country level implementation of the Agreement?

Finding 20 - 

Promotion of the Agreement by the two organizations and facilitation of the implementation at the country level were limited during the pilot phase and even less evident during the final phase.


Tag: Effectiveness Impact Resource mobilization Donor relations Knowledge management Private Sector UN Agencies

21.

Were the findings and recommendations of the MTA carried out in 2006 acted upon?

Finding 21 - 

With respect to joint PSD programmes, the recommendations of the MTA were not implemented. A task force was established but did not produce observable effects with regard to the joint PSD programmes.


Tag: Resource mobilization Partnership Private Sector UN Agencies

22.

3.3.4 Relevance

Taking into account other initiatives of UN reform, new funding sources and modalities, are all elements of the Cooperation Agreement between UNIDO and UNDP still relevant and appropriate to the country context?

Finding 22 - 

The emergence of several joint programme funding initiatives as well as the progress made in the operationalization of the UN reform have, to a large extent, made the Agreement redundant with respect to joint PSD programmes.


Tag: Relevance Multi Donor Trust Funds Resource mobilization Local Governance Implementation Modality Partnership UN Reform Private Sector UN Agencies Coordination

23.

Are the objectives of the joint PSD programme as set out in the agreement of continuous relevance to partner countries, UNIDO and UNDP?

Finding 23 - 

All of the host countries covered by the Agreement have set employment creation and income generation as priority areas in their respective national policies. 


Tag: Relevance Partnership Private Sector UN Agencies Inclusive economic growth Jobs and Livelihoods

24.

Has the selection of target countries for the implementation of the Agreement been relevant?

Finding 24 - 

The constraints encountered during the implementation of the joint PSD programmes and the lack of successes is not found to have been affected by the choice of target countries. 


Tag: Relevance Resource mobilization Partnership Results-Based Management Private Sector UN Agencies

25.

Is the Agreement relevant to strengthening complementarities and to creating synergies between the two organizations?

Finding 25 - 

Relevance of the Cooperation Agreement in creating synergies between the two partners was initially limited by lack of interest. Gradually, through the presence of the UNIDO desks at the country offices, synergies and evidence of complementarities are emerging. But the joint PSD programme component of the Agreement did not play a role in this.


Tag: Coherence Relevance Implementation Modality Partnership Programme Synergy Private Sector UN Agencies

26.

Is the Agreement relevant in relation to other multi-partner cooperation initiatives in the area of PSD?

Finding 26 - 

Recent developments at the UNDP country offices in planning and implementation have made the relevance of the agreement to multidonor PSD cooperation redundant.


Tag: Partnership UN Reform Bilateral partners Private Sector UN Agencies Relevance Aid Coordination Donor relations Harmonization MDGs Ownership Coordination

27.

3.3.5 Effectiveness

Did the cooperation lead to expanded PSD programmes of both organizations with enhanced impact? 

Finding 27 - 

The cooperation has not led to expanded PSD programmes with enhanced impact. 

 


Tag: Effectiveness Impact Resource mobilization MDGs Partnership Results-Based Management Private Sector UN Agencies

28.

Have the joint PSD programmes led to broader inter-agency coordination in PSD?

Finding 28 - 

No evidence has been found indicating that the joint PSD programmes led to broader interagency coordination in PSD, the presence of the UNIDO Desks did. 


Tag: Energy Environment Policy Resource mobilization Implementation Modality Operational Efficiency Partnership Private Sector UN Agencies Coordination

29.

3.3.6 Efficiency 

To what extent have the implementation of UNDP, UNIDO or joint UNIDO/UNDP projects and programmes been influenced by the presence of UNIDO desks? 

Finding 29 - 

Validation missions confirmed that donors regard UNIDO’s headquarters-based project execution to be more complex and less efficient than local execution and found evidence of significant delays in obtaining information and decisions from headquarters. The presence of the desks helped somewhat, but delegations to the desk were too limited to ameliorate this weakness. 


Tag: Efficiency Donor relations Human and Financial resources Technical Support

30.

3.3.7 Sustainability

To what extent is the cooperation between UNIDO and UNDP, as described in the Agreement, sustainable, and will the efforts under joint PSD lead to sustainable results? 

Finding 30 - 

The joint task force, established after the MTA, met only once in three years. The PSD strategies formulated by both agencies were not complementary to each other and did not establish any cooperation mechanisms. These strategies did not refer to the Cooperation Agreement. Thus, the agreement led to only insignificant sustainable structures or mechanisms, rather than to robust structures, which could have allowed a more sustainable relationship between UNIDO and UNDP with regard to PSD.

With the limited progress of the three operational projects formulated and partly implemented, it is too early to judge sustainability of results. 

 


Tag: Sustainability Partnership UN Agencies

Recommendations
1

Recommendation 1. In line with United Nations reform, bilateral agreements among United Nations organizations working on private sector development should be replaced with a system-wide, cluster approach involving all such relevant organizations. UNDP and UNIDO should spearhead an effort to ensure that the United Nations develops a cluster approach to further coordination and coherence as well as to promote synergies among UN organizations working in private sector development. A joint UNDP and UNIDO effort should articulate a United Nations system-wide approach on critical issues to clarify and provide a platform for sustained collaboration. This cluster approach should be based on the experience of the United Nations and other organizations working on private sector development. Specifically, this effort should draw from the lessons from the cluster approaches followed by United Nations in providing emergency response to disaster-affected countries and the United Nations Chief Executive Board Inter-agency Cluster on Trade and Productive Capacity as well as the Donor Committee for Enterprise Development. Such a collaborative effort could eventually become a driving force for more effective support to the partner countries.

2

Recommendation 2. Until a system-wide approach is developed, the existing partnership agreement between UNIDO and UNDP should be replaced with a memorandum of understanding that defines operational and administrative arrangements at the country level, including provisions for UNIDO desks. 

The memorandum of understanding should address the following issues:

Describe the thematic areas of cooperation and common interest. This should not be limited to private sector development but include other areas of common interest such as energy. The memorandum of understanding should resist the temptation to clarify a division of labour in PSD. Each country is different and the country context should define who does what. - The principle administrative arrangements for hosting the UNIDO desk (e.g., office space, cost recovery, etc.). - The preferred modality or modalities for joint collaboration at the country level to simplify and standardize the collaboration. An annex to the memorandum of understanding could provide templates. This should fully reflect the inherent challenges in bridging the asymmetries in the operational modalities of a decentralized organization like UNDP and a more centralized one like UNIDO. The modalities should be developed In line with the UN Reform and in consultation with DOCO. The modalities of cooperation should be consistent with other memoranda of understanding and practices of the UN system. 

3

Recommendation 3. The expansion of UNIDO desks should be commensurate to the capacity of UNIDO headquarters to provide adequate technical, human and financial support in response to the increased national demands triggered by the new UNIDO desks.

4

Recommendation 4. UNIDO should establish a transparent selection and review mechanism to guide the expansion of its country presence through the desk modality and to monitor progress towards the intended results.

The following are some of the considerations to bear in mind when expanding the desks:

a. Level of government and private sector interest and demand: Strong stakeholder interest in UNIDO services is essential. National development priorities and strategies should reflect the need for UNIDO services. Evidence shows that country commitment to thematic areas of the agreement (as measured, for example, by articulation in national development plans) in conjunction with strong government interest in UNIDO or United Nations services are critical prerequisites for success. Clear and comprehensive assessment of demand for UNIDO services must be conducted.

b. Alignment with UNDAF: Ideally, the UNIDO mandate is already reflected in the on-going UNDAF even before a desk is established. If UNIDO is absent or only marginally represented in the ongoing UNDAF, the establishment of a new UNIDO desk must be timed with the development of the next UNDAF, specifically, the second half of the ongoing UNDAF programming cycle.

c. Substantial pre-existing volume and trend in the UNIDO portfolio: Having a track record of past UNIDO projects in a country helps to justify the continued presence of UNIDO desks. A good portfolio demonstrates a robust relationship with the government and financial feasibility of UNIDO activities. It also suggests country demand. Clear targets for annual delivery rates must be set when a UNIDO desk is established. If, after four years of operation, the annual delivery is less than the agreed goal, where a typical goal might be an annual delivery equal or exceeding twice the cost of the desk, the continued presence of that desk should be questioned. However, strategic considerations should be allowed to prevail under exceptional circumstances. For instance, UNIDO may position itself to support countries in economic transition or crisis. Under such conditions, clear and measurable outcomes must be specified upfront and verified annually during operations.

d. Funding opportunities for UNIDO projects: A history of funding for UNIDO services by government or donor sources within a country is essential for success of a desk. In addition to clear evidence of government or donor commitment to industrial development within national development priorities, donor funding is essential for related initiatives that lack resources. Funding scenarios should be developed that take into account the general trends in official development assistance in a given country.

5

Recommendation 5. UNIDO should conduct a feasibility study based on the above-mentioned criteria before a new investment is made to establish UNIDO desk, so as to minimize the risks of failure.

6

Recommendation 6. The review of existing UNIDO desks, as outlined above, should be conducted annually by a panel representing the different divisions in UNIDO.

7

Recommendation 7. Taking into account the limited capacities of the UNIDO desks, UNIDO should establish priorities with regard to each desk's core function, on a country-by-country basis.

The core functions of the UNIDO desks are: to facilitate government and private sector access to UNIDO expertise to contribute to the development of new  UNIDO projects and programmes; - to contribute to the implementation of UNIDO projects and programmes to enhance UNIDO participation in national, UNDAF and UN delivering as one objectives to advise UNDP and other UN partners regarding sustainable industrial development, including contributing to the work of UNCTs While the implementation of UNIDO projects might be a priority in one country, in other countries the priority might be to develop new projects or to advise the government and private sector. Not only should specific priorities be established, UNIDO should empower the heads of UNIDO operations and clarify their roles internally and externally. This evaluation recommends new staffing modalities for the UNIDO desks depending, for example, on the volume of the UNIDO portfolio. The evaluation team recommends using two different staffing modalities for desks.

Desks in countries with a significant UNIDO portfolio should be managed by national UNIDO Country Directors. UNIDO desks in countries with a small UNIDO portfolio should be managed by Assistant Representatives. This is to avoid a situation of a national Country Director with no or insignificant UNIDO portfolio. The titles of both new staffing modalities are in line with the practice of other UN organizations and clarify roles and status. UNIDO should eliminate the title, head of UNIDO operations. Moreover, UNIDO might wish to consider changing the term UNIDO desk to UNIDO office in order to clarify the difference between the institution (UNIDO office) and the person (national Country Director or Assistant Representative). Until now the terms UNIDO desk and head of UNIDO operations have been used almost synonymously. The staffing of a UNIDO desk can be changed as appropriate, i.e., a desk can be upgraded from being staffed with an Assistant Representative to being staffed with a national UNIDO Country Director. However, the decision should be based on institutional criteria, not on individual performance. The roles and responsibilities of national UNIDO Country Directors could be defined as follows (see Table 11 for more details): National UNIDO Country Directors are heads of agency with the same status and responsibilities as the international UNIDO Country Directors except that they are not accredited with the Government. There is no need for accreditation. National UNIDO Country Directors are, as a head of agency, part of the UNCT. Accreditation, that is, a formal agreement with the host government, should not be a criterion to participate in the UNCT, as the experience of UNCT in Cape Verde demonstrates. However, the UN Resident Coordinator remains the primary interlocutor for the UNCT with the Head of State or Government.

National UNIDO Country Directors are not  nder the supervision of UNIDO regional offices. Unless the regional office in question has significant capacities and resources to ensure efficient supervision and administrative support to the desk, National UNIDO Country Directors should communicate directly with UNIDO headquarters, keeping regional offices duly informed. National UNIDO Country Directors should enjoy financial authority similar to the authority enjoyed by international Country Directors. The roles and responsibilities of Assistant Representatives could be defined as follows (see Table 11 for more details): Assistant Representatives are under the supervision of UNIDO regional offices. Assistant Representatives should have more financial authority than current heads of UNIDO operations. Minimally, they should be empowered to manage the office budget in order to reduce time required for administrative activities. However, as the portfolio within a country grows, either the capacity of the UNIDO office (formerly UNIDO desk) needs to be expanded or the responsibility for implementation support needs to be reduced.

8

Joint private sector development programmes 

Recommendation 8. It is recommended not to renew the joint PSD programmes component of the agreement after expiry of the original five years period.

Evidence shows that other developments provide more effective incentives for the coordination and cooperation envisaged in the Agreement, such as strengthened UN reform processes at the country level and new aid modalities such as the MDGs Achievement Funds. This leaves no justification for extending this component of the Agreement.

9

Recommndation 9. UNDP and UNIDO should resist the temptation of establishing a too rigid global division of labour within private sector development.

Each country context is different and may require a different division of labour, thereby building on each organization's comparative advantage in a particular country, such as its experience or local network. As demonstrated above, the main challenge is not to define each organization's role, but to meet the huge demand for PSD and access the financial resources necessary.

10

Recommendation 10. Prior to new, joint projects, UNIDO and UNDP should pay due attention to the issue of implementation modalities and the division of labour.

They should also refer to the United Nations Development Operations Coordination Office modalities. Finally, they should specify the agreed modalities in the project document beforehand. In addition, they should agree upon the modalities of funds mobilization in advance. Such agreements should help avoid the deadlock situations seen in the implementation of the present agreement.

1. Recommendation:

Recommendation 1. In line with United Nations reform, bilateral agreements among United Nations organizations working on private sector development should be replaced with a system-wide, cluster approach involving all such relevant organizations. UNDP and UNIDO should spearhead an effort to ensure that the United Nations develops a cluster approach to further coordination and coherence as well as to promote synergies among UN organizations working in private sector development. A joint UNDP and UNIDO effort should articulate a United Nations system-wide approach on critical issues to clarify and provide a platform for sustained collaboration. This cluster approach should be based on the experience of the United Nations and other organizations working on private sector development. Specifically, this effort should draw from the lessons from the cluster approaches followed by United Nations in providing emergency response to disaster-affected countries and the United Nations Chief Executive Board Inter-agency Cluster on Trade and Productive Capacity as well as the Donor Committee for Enterprise Development. Such a collaborative effort could eventually become a driving force for more effective support to the partner countries.

Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/03] [Last Updated: 2020/07/09]

The joint UNDP-UNIDO Private Sector Development Programme did not achieve the intended results, and is in large measure rendered less relevant in the context of system-wide efforts to achieve coherence and to deliver increasingly as one. In 2004, when the agreement was signed, it was seen as a model of cooperation in the United Nations system, based on the comparative and complementary strengths of the two organizations. In the five years since the Agreement was signed, however, there was a significant enhancement in the United Nations system approach to country-level cooperation and coherence.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
UNIDO participation in UN MDG F funded joint programmes in DaO countries. Cooperation review in 2011
[Added: 2011/04/13]
No due date No deadline established
2. Recommendation:

Recommendation 2. Until a system-wide approach is developed, the existing partnership agreement between UNIDO and UNDP should be replaced with a memorandum of understanding that defines operational and administrative arrangements at the country level, including provisions for UNIDO desks. 

The memorandum of understanding should address the following issues:

Describe the thematic areas of cooperation and common interest. This should not be limited to private sector development but include other areas of common interest such as energy. The memorandum of understanding should resist the temptation to clarify a division of labour in PSD. Each country is different and the country context should define who does what. - The principle administrative arrangements for hosting the UNIDO desk (e.g., office space, cost recovery, etc.). - The preferred modality or modalities for joint collaboration at the country level to simplify and standardize the collaboration. An annex to the memorandum of understanding could provide templates. This should fully reflect the inherent challenges in bridging the asymmetries in the operational modalities of a decentralized organization like UNDP and a more centralized one like UNIDO. The modalities should be developed In line with the UN Reform and in consultation with DOCO. The modalities of cooperation should be consistent with other memoranda of understanding and practices of the UN system. 

Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/03] [Last Updated: 2020/07/09]

The organizations will formulate a corporate memorandum of understanding describing umbrella provisions for areas of cooperation and a framework for future collaboration. In taking the cooperation forward, the Administrator of UNDP and the Director-General of UNIDO will seek to enhance coherence, cooperation and coordination in the wider context of United Nations reform, at country, regional and global levels

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
(1) The fifteen (15) UNIDO Desks Desks, established in Afghanistan, Armenia, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Ecuador, Eritrea, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Lao, Mali, Nicaragua, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, and Zimbabwe, further to the terms of the Cooperation Agreement, shall continue to be hosted in the relevant UNDP Country Offices in accordance with the terms of this letter, as set forth herein; (2) Continuation of cooperation for UNIDO desks shall be limited to the fifteen (15) UNIDO Desk Officers (?Desk Officers?) assigned to the Desks, who shall be recruited and appointed by UNIDO under UNIDO letters of appointment, and be subject to UNIDO Staff Regulations and Rules; UNIDO shall appraise the performance of the Desk Officers in accordance with UNIDO?s performance management system
[Added: 2011/04/13]
UNIDO/UNDP 2010/05 Completed Review planned for 2011
3. Recommendation:

Recommendation 3. The expansion of UNIDO desks should be commensurate to the capacity of UNIDO headquarters to provide adequate technical, human and financial support in response to the increased national demands triggered by the new UNIDO desks.

Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/03] [Last Updated: 2020/07/09]

Increased UNIDO field presence can be achieved using national staff.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Cooperation review in 2011
[Added: 2011/04/13]
No due date No deadline established
4. Recommendation:

Recommendation 4. UNIDO should establish a transparent selection and review mechanism to guide the expansion of its country presence through the desk modality and to monitor progress towards the intended results.

The following are some of the considerations to bear in mind when expanding the desks:

a. Level of government and private sector interest and demand: Strong stakeholder interest in UNIDO services is essential. National development priorities and strategies should reflect the need for UNIDO services. Evidence shows that country commitment to thematic areas of the agreement (as measured, for example, by articulation in national development plans) in conjunction with strong government interest in UNIDO or United Nations services are critical prerequisites for success. Clear and comprehensive assessment of demand for UNIDO services must be conducted.

b. Alignment with UNDAF: Ideally, the UNIDO mandate is already reflected in the on-going UNDAF even before a desk is established. If UNIDO is absent or only marginally represented in the ongoing UNDAF, the establishment of a new UNIDO desk must be timed with the development of the next UNDAF, specifically, the second half of the ongoing UNDAF programming cycle.

c. Substantial pre-existing volume and trend in the UNIDO portfolio: Having a track record of past UNIDO projects in a country helps to justify the continued presence of UNIDO desks. A good portfolio demonstrates a robust relationship with the government and financial feasibility of UNIDO activities. It also suggests country demand. Clear targets for annual delivery rates must be set when a UNIDO desk is established. If, after four years of operation, the annual delivery is less than the agreed goal, where a typical goal might be an annual delivery equal or exceeding twice the cost of the desk, the continued presence of that desk should be questioned. However, strategic considerations should be allowed to prevail under exceptional circumstances. For instance, UNIDO may position itself to support countries in economic transition or crisis. Under such conditions, clear and measurable outcomes must be specified upfront and verified annually during operations.

d. Funding opportunities for UNIDO projects: A history of funding for UNIDO services by government or donor sources within a country is essential for success of a desk. In addition to clear evidence of government or donor commitment to industrial development within national development priorities, donor funding is essential for related initiatives that lack resources. Funding scenarios should be developed that take into account the general trends in official development assistance in a given country.

Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/03] [Last Updated: 2020/07/09]

The suggested reforms in the evaluation regarding the UNIDO desks are appreciated and will be taken into consideration when planning for expansion of the field representation. Both organizations agree with the evaluation team that the expansion of UNIDO field representation should continue when nationally identified United Nations programming would benefit from a UNIDO field presence provided that it is brought about in a step-by-step fashion, taking into account UNDAFs that are nationally led and supported by the United Nations country team, and other joint programming processes, and the capacity and resources of UNIDO to respond

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Cooperation review in 2011
[Added: 2011/04/13]
No due date No deadline established
5. Recommendation:

Recommendation 5. UNIDO should conduct a feasibility study based on the above-mentioned criteria before a new investment is made to establish UNIDO desk, so as to minimize the risks of failure.

Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/03] [Last Updated: 2020/07/09]

General Assembly resolutions, especially the triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development (TCPR), have mandated: (a) system-wide coherence and harmonized business practices; (b) changes to the inter-agency governance structures, including the integration of the United Nations Development Group (UNDG) as the third pillar of the Chief Executives Board (CEB); (c) the development of the High-Level Committee on Policy, High-Level Committee on Management policies and UNDG procedures, mechanisms, and tools, to strengthen and provide guidance on joint programming, funding modalities, and implementation processes for efficiency, coherence, and cooperation in operational activities; and (d) improvements in cooperation and coherence resulting from strengthening of the resident coordinator system, harmonizing programming cycles, increased involvement of non-resident organizations in the preparation of United Nations Development Assistance Frameworks (UNDAFs) and joint programmes, and lessons learned from the ?delivering as one? initiative.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
UNDG Delivering as One Independent Review planned for 2011
[Added: 2011/04/13]
No due date No deadline established
6. Recommendation:

Recommendation 6. The review of existing UNIDO desks, as outlined above, should be conducted annually by a panel representing the different divisions in UNIDO.

Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/03] [Last Updated: 2020/07/09]

The suggested reforms in the evaluation regarding the UNIDO desks are appreciated and will be taken into consideration when planning for expansion of the field representation. Both organizations agree with the evaluation team that the expansion of UNIDO field representation should continue when nationally identified United Nations programming would benefit from a UNIDO field presence

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Cooperation review in 2011
[Added: 2011/04/13]
2011/06 Overdue-Not Initiated
7. Recommendation:

Recommendation 7. Taking into account the limited capacities of the UNIDO desks, UNIDO should establish priorities with regard to each desk's core function, on a country-by-country basis.

The core functions of the UNIDO desks are: to facilitate government and private sector access to UNIDO expertise to contribute to the development of new  UNIDO projects and programmes; - to contribute to the implementation of UNIDO projects and programmes to enhance UNIDO participation in national, UNDAF and UN delivering as one objectives to advise UNDP and other UN partners regarding sustainable industrial development, including contributing to the work of UNCTs While the implementation of UNIDO projects might be a priority in one country, in other countries the priority might be to develop new projects or to advise the government and private sector. Not only should specific priorities be established, UNIDO should empower the heads of UNIDO operations and clarify their roles internally and externally. This evaluation recommends new staffing modalities for the UNIDO desks depending, for example, on the volume of the UNIDO portfolio. The evaluation team recommends using two different staffing modalities for desks.

Desks in countries with a significant UNIDO portfolio should be managed by national UNIDO Country Directors. UNIDO desks in countries with a small UNIDO portfolio should be managed by Assistant Representatives. This is to avoid a situation of a national Country Director with no or insignificant UNIDO portfolio. The titles of both new staffing modalities are in line with the practice of other UN organizations and clarify roles and status. UNIDO should eliminate the title, head of UNIDO operations. Moreover, UNIDO might wish to consider changing the term UNIDO desk to UNIDO office in order to clarify the difference between the institution (UNIDO office) and the person (national Country Director or Assistant Representative). Until now the terms UNIDO desk and head of UNIDO operations have been used almost synonymously. The staffing of a UNIDO desk can be changed as appropriate, i.e., a desk can be upgraded from being staffed with an Assistant Representative to being staffed with a national UNIDO Country Director. However, the decision should be based on institutional criteria, not on individual performance. The roles and responsibilities of national UNIDO Country Directors could be defined as follows (see Table 11 for more details): National UNIDO Country Directors are heads of agency with the same status and responsibilities as the international UNIDO Country Directors except that they are not accredited with the Government. There is no need for accreditation. National UNIDO Country Directors are, as a head of agency, part of the UNCT. Accreditation, that is, a formal agreement with the host government, should not be a criterion to participate in the UNCT, as the experience of UNCT in Cape Verde demonstrates. However, the UN Resident Coordinator remains the primary interlocutor for the UNCT with the Head of State or Government.

National UNIDO Country Directors are not  nder the supervision of UNIDO regional offices. Unless the regional office in question has significant capacities and resources to ensure efficient supervision and administrative support to the desk, National UNIDO Country Directors should communicate directly with UNIDO headquarters, keeping regional offices duly informed. National UNIDO Country Directors should enjoy financial authority similar to the authority enjoyed by international Country Directors. The roles and responsibilities of Assistant Representatives could be defined as follows (see Table 11 for more details): Assistant Representatives are under the supervision of UNIDO regional offices. Assistant Representatives should have more financial authority than current heads of UNIDO operations. Minimally, they should be empowered to manage the office budget in order to reduce time required for administrative activities. However, as the portfolio within a country grows, either the capacity of the UNIDO office (formerly UNIDO desk) needs to be expanded or the responsibility for implementation support needs to be reduced.

Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/03] [Last Updated: 2020/07/09]

The suggested reforms in the evaluation regarding the UNIDO ?desks? are appreciated and will be taken into consideration when planning for expansion of the field representation. Both organizations agree with the evaluation team that the expansion of UNIDO field representation should continue when nationally identified United Nations programming would benefit from a UNIDO field presence provided that it is brought about in a step-by-step fashion, taking into account UNDAFs that are nationally led and supported by the United Nations country team, and other joint programming processes, and the capacity and resources of UNIDO to respond

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Review in 2011
[Added: 2011/04/13]
No due date No deadline established
8. Recommendation:

Joint private sector development programmes 

Recommendation 8. It is recommended not to renew the joint PSD programmes component of the agreement after expiry of the original five years period.

Evidence shows that other developments provide more effective incentives for the coordination and cooperation envisaged in the Agreement, such as strengthened UN reform processes at the country level and new aid modalities such as the MDGs Achievement Funds. This leaves no justification for extending this component of the Agreement.

Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/03] [Last Updated: 2020/07/09]

The joint UNDP-UNIDO Private Sector Development Programme did not achieve the intended results, and is in large measure rendered less relevant in the context of system-wide efforts to achieve coherence and to deliver increasingly as one. In 2004, when the agreement was signed, it was seen as a model of cooperation in the United Nations system, based on the comparative and complementary strengths of the two organizations. In the five years since the Agreement was signed, however, there was a significant enhancement in the United Nations system approach to country-level cooperation and coherence.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents

[Added: 2011/04/13]
No due date No deadline established
9. Recommendation:

Recommndation 9. UNDP and UNIDO should resist the temptation of establishing a too rigid global division of labour within private sector development.

Each country context is different and may require a different division of labour, thereby building on each organization's comparative advantage in a particular country, such as its experience or local network. As demonstrated above, the main challenge is not to define each organization's role, but to meet the huge demand for PSD and access the financial resources necessary.

Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/03] [Last Updated: 2020/07/09]

As a result of those developments, the 2004 bilateral cooperation framework between UNDP and UNIDO has become less relevant to the delivery of country-level technical cooperation. Instead, UNDP and UNIDO are engaged, along with other parts of the United Nations system, in enhancing inter-agency cooperation, and they are promoting policy coherence in such forums as the Donors Committee for Enterprise Development, the CEB Cluster on Trade and Productive Capacity, UN-Energy, and the Industry, Trade and Market Access Cluster led by the Economic Commission for Africa, in which UNDP and UNIDO are active participants.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
UNDG review of mutual accountability framework in 2011
[Added: 2011/04/13]
No due date No deadline established
10. Recommendation:

Recommendation 10. Prior to new, joint projects, UNIDO and UNDP should pay due attention to the issue of implementation modalities and the division of labour.

They should also refer to the United Nations Development Operations Coordination Office modalities. Finally, they should specify the agreed modalities in the project document beforehand. In addition, they should agree upon the modalities of funds mobilization in advance. Such agreements should help avoid the deadlock situations seen in the implementation of the present agreement.

Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/03] [Last Updated: 2020/07/09]

General Assembly resolutions, especially the triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development (TCPR), have mandated: (a) system-wide coherence and harmonized business practices; (b) changes to the inter-agency governance structures, including the integration of the United Nations Development Group (UNDG) as the third pillar of the Chief Executives Board (CEB); (c) the development of the High-Level Committee on Policy, High-Level Committee on Management policies and UNDG procedures, mechanisms, and tools, to strengthen and provide guidance on joint programming, funding modalities, and implementation processes for efficiency, coherence, and cooperation in operational activities; and (d) improvements in cooperation and coherence resulting from strengthening of the resident coordinator system, harmonizing programming cycles, increased involvement of non-resident organizations in the preparation of United Nations Development Assistance Frameworks (UNDAFs) and joint programmes, and lessons learned from the ?delivering as one? initiative.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Use of new common UNDAF Action Plan in DaO pilots.
[Added: 2011/04/13]
No due date No deadline established

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