Terminal evaluation - Multi-sectoral and integrated systems approach to the conservation, management and sustainable utilisation of coastal biodiversity (Gulf of Mannar )

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2013-2017, India
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
01/2014
Completion Date:
05/2014
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
20,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document 568_India_TE.pdf report English 1987.34 KB Posted 811
Title Terminal evaluation - Multi-sectoral and integrated systems approach to the conservation, management and sustainable utilisation of coastal biodiversity (Gulf of Mannar )
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2013-2017, India
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 05/2014
Planned End Date: 01/2014
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Others
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
  • 1. Output 1.3. Solutions developed at national and sub-national levels for sustainable management of natural resources, ecosystem services, chemicals and waste
Evaluation Budget(US $): 20,000
Source of Funding:
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Phillip Edwards Team leader
Mohamad Kasim INDIA
GEF Evaluation: Yes
Evaluation Type:
Focal Area: Biodiversity
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-3
PIMS Number: 568
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: INDIA
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 The UNDP-CO should assist the State Government in passing control of the Trust to the Indian Administrative Service
2 The UNDP-CO should assist the State Government in providing the GoMBR Trust with the powers of compliance monitoring through the Environmental Protection Act 1986
3 The UNDP-CO should assist the Trust in examining the feasibility of providing another tier of loans to be available for the expansion of business enterprises
4 The UNDP-CO should assist the Trust in examining the feasibility of allocating a proportion of the corpus fund for use in community-based projects
5 The independent auditors should examine the issues, decision-making, and apparent failure of the mechanisms connected to the co-financing of this Project as part of the Country Office Audit Plan later in the year
1. Recommendation: The UNDP-CO should assist the State Government in passing control of the Trust to the Indian Administrative Service
Management Response: [Added: 2014/12/30]

This has been discussed with the focal point- the principal secretary and additional chief secretary, government of Tamilnadu. However, he is of the view that the forest department should continue management of the Trust and its activities since the focus of the initiative is on conservation and biodiversity management. In addition, if the Trust is under the charge of an IAS official, it will be the District Collector, who is already overburdened as he is the Chairperson of all administrative and development works in the project district. He will not be able to accord sufficient time to the demands of the project.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Discussed with the nodal officer who is not supportive of this recommendation
[Added: 2014/12/30]
Nodal Officer 2014/12 Completed
2. Recommendation: The UNDP-CO should assist the State Government in providing the GoMBR Trust with the powers of compliance monitoring through the Environmental Protection Act 1986
Management Response: [Added: 2014/12/30]

The Trust is involved in monitoring developmental activities that may have an impact on the coastal biodiversity, though not legally empowered. However, this is a sensitive subject due to an ongoing clash between the government and production sectors in the neighbouring state, where a high level expert committee proposed zero-development activity in a biodiversity rich ecoregion. As a result, the officials of the Trust thought it wise to take up the subject at an appropriate time.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
To be taken up by the Trust when the subject of ecosensitive areas is less politically sensitive
[Added: 2014/12/30] [Last Updated: 2017/06/15]
UNDP Project Officer 2015/01 No Longer Applicable [Justification: UNDP CO supported the state govt, but due to the political sensitivity of the matter, it was put on hold. since the project is closed in the meantime, UNDP is not in a position to influence the state govt anymore]
History
3. Recommendation: The UNDP-CO should assist the Trust in examining the feasibility of providing another tier of loans to be available for the expansion of business enterprises
Management Response: [Added: 2014/12/30]

The Trust is of the view that the corpus that was created during the project is sufficient to support the livelihood initiatives of the local communities for the time being. The corpus can support local level business startups that are not detrimental to the coastal biodiversity, however, successful business enterprises can explore opportunities elsewhere.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
No action required
[Added: 2014/12/30]
N/A 2014/12 Completed
4. Recommendation: The UNDP-CO should assist the Trust in examining the feasibility of allocating a proportion of the corpus fund for use in community-based projects
Management Response: [Added: 2014/12/30]

This has been proposed to the Trust officials who maintain that the entire corpus fund is used for carrying out community based projects that support livelihood promotion of local people. They agree with this suggestion, though they are of the view that the amount is not sufficient to be diverted from the main corpus. Another option is to scale up the amount through tie-ups with ongoing rural development initiatives and schemes of the government.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
To be followed up by the Trust
[Added: 2014/12/30] [Last Updated: 2017/06/15]
Project Officer 2015/01 No Longer Applicable [Justification: The State govt was not agreeable to this recommendation, this could not be implemented ]
History
5. Recommendation: The independent auditors should examine the issues, decision-making, and apparent failure of the mechanisms connected to the co-financing of this Project as part of the Country Office Audit Plan later in the year
Management Response: [Added: 2014/12/30]

The Trust officials are of the view that auditing of the project activities is not necessary as the Trust strictly monitors fund utilization.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
No action required
[Added: 2014/12/30]
NA 2014/12 Completed

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