Summary of conclusions Conclusions The Suriname Coastal Protected Area Management Project was highly pertinent and relevant for the country. Not only because it dealt with protected areas? management and financing but, more generally, because it attempted to confront coastal management issues and challenges in a country where these are crucial for development. The Project was, overall, able to achieve the completion of several products and to generate a certain level of engagement from relevant stakeholders. This engagement dealt with the need for coastal protected areas management instruments that take into account the multiple roles and uses that these systems play in the development of Suriname and its sustainable use of natural resources. The SCPAM Project, however, has not been successful regarding results and effects at the expected levels. The Project, although medium sized for UNDP / GEF, it was a large project within the Surinamese context. Therefore, there were expectations of capacity building, of proactive integration of district / local ? level institutions in coastal and protected areas management, of generation of financial resources to promote MUMAs management, and in general of coastal and protected areas improved management. The Project produced a series of instruments and products (such as management plans, mangrove education site, economic valuation studies, biodiversity monitoring protocols) that, potentially, could be implemented and used for management of MUMAs if improved institutional capacity accompanies implementation. This institutional capacity should be accompanied by enhanced institutional and regulatory frameworks and improved links between district ? level and national stakeholders. Some of these products and instruments, also, could have a broader potential for use and implementation in Suriname beyond protected area management and could, conceivably, have a catalytic effect concerning sustainable use of natural resources. Summary Lessons Learned In order to seek results, a project such as SCPAM needs to interweave results-based approach and management from the very beginning. Projects need constant monitoring by all parties involved (implementing and executing agencies, project governance bodies). Rigorous monitoring and evaluation throughout the life span of a project accompanied by adaptive management and modifications when issues arise are imperative to achieve results. The capacity of the implementing partner needs to be assessed from project inception / design onward. Gender mainstream needs to be clearly imbedded from project design onward, in order for mainstreaming to be achieved within project?s ambits. Governance structures and responsibilities (of board, steering committee, and implementing agency) within a project need to be clearly laid out from the very beginning of a project. Downstream results, effects and eventually impacts need to be generated with the proper inclusion, participation of, and relation with local and district level actors and institutions. The heavy reliance on consultancies to generate products is detrimental to institutional capacity building and ownership of a project?s products and eventual results.