Fortalecimiento de manejo de especies invasoras (EvMT)

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2014-2020, Mexico
Evaluation Type:
Mid Term Project
Planned End Date:
08/2018
Completion Date:
08/2018
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
35,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TORS evaluadora internacional Especies Invasoras.docx tor Spanish 596.98 KB Posted 112
Download document 15373402811.docx tor Spanish 592.27 KB Posted 106
Download document Final report MTE GEF Mexico 01 August 2018-compressed.pdf report English 4715.91 KB Posted 234
Download document Informe final EMT México 01 agosto 2018-compressed.pdf report Spanish 4697.67 KB Posted 177
Title Fortalecimiento de manejo de especies invasoras (EvMT)
Atlas Project Number: 00079321
Evaluation Plan: 2014-2020, Mexico
Evaluation Type: Mid Term Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 08/2018
Planned End Date: 08/2018
Management Response: Yes
UNDP Signature Solution:
  • 1. Sustainable
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 1.1.1 Capacities developed across the whole of government to integrate the 2030 Agenda, the Paris Agreement and other international agreements in development plans and budgets, and to analyse progress towards the SDGs, using innovative and data-driven solutions
SDG Goal
  • Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
SDG Target
  • 15.8 By 2020, introduce measures to prevent the introduction and significantly reduce the impact of invasive alien species on land and water ecosystems and control or eradicate the priority species
  • 15.9 By 2020, integrate ecosystem and biodiversity values into national and local planning, development processes, poverty reduction strategies and accounts
Evaluation Budget(US $): 35,000
Source of Funding:
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 29,166
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
SILVIA RENATE ZILLER Evaluadora Internacional sziller@institutohorus.org.br BRAZIL
MARGARITA GARCIA MARTINEZ Evaluadora Nacional magasa_78@hotmail.com MEXICO
SILVIA RENATE ZILLER Evaluadora Internacional sziller@institutohorus.org.br BRAZIL
MARGARITA GARCIA MARTINEZ Evaluadora Nacional magasa_78@hotmail.com MEXICO
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title:
Evaluation Type: Mid-term Review
Focal Area: Biodiversity
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-5
GEF Project ID: 4771
PIMS Number: 4714
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: MEXICO
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

Midterm Review recommendation 1. Update the National List in coordination with government agencies in charge of the missing species.

2

Midterm Review recommendation 2. Consolidate risk assessment protocols in user-friendly systems (e.g. Excel) and adjust the rapid assessment protocol (MERI), providing validation tests to ensure there is no bias. Pursue options to formalize the use of risk assessment by agencies in charge of authorizing species imports for different uses in order to establish an impartial and consistent risk assessment process that includes biodiversity concerns. Pursue the inclusion of biodiversity criteria in risk assessment protocols used by SENASICA.

3

Midterm Review recommendation 3. Strengthen the sectors within SEMARNAT in charge of IAS in order to: a) improve IAS management, b) optimize authorization processes for eradication and control actions and to establish an expedited process for rapid response actions in EDRR systems in coordination with CONANP and c) ensure resources are available for the implementation of the National Strategy on Invasive Species. SEMARNAT personnel responsible for IAS management might require specific training to allow for pro-active institutional coordination with CONABIO, CONANP and other government agencies in complementary sectors in charge of species introductions or sectors that function as pathways and vectors of IAS introduction and spread.

4

Midterm Review recommendation 4. Replicate biosecurity protocols developed for ornamental fishes to other species in aquaculture, pursuing a public policy to support producers in the implementation of biosecurity measures. Considering that aquaculture represents an expanding market, many new introductions of fishes, biological invasions and impacts due to the escape of alien fishes from breeding stations can be avoided.

5

Midterm Review recommendation 5. Strengthen the Central CONANP Coordination for Invasive Alien Species by assigning more personnel or allowing the Coordination to be exclusively dedicated to IAS management. This will improve management efficiency and increase support to NPA in order to ensure that all pending actions in the project are implemented in due time, as well as for future replication to other NPA. A higher level of involvement by the Director for the Conservation of Priority Species is desirable, as this position is levelled with NPA Directors. This is especially relevant for decision-making in key moments to ensure implementation of prevention measures, EDRR and control of IAS.

6

Midterm Review recommendation 6. Control five invasive plant species in PN Arrecife Alacranes (planned for year 1) with support and permits issued by CONANP for mechanical and chemical control as needed and based on technical reference for each species and/or experts in invasive plant control. Conclude goat eradication on Espíritu Santo Island using the most viable methods and considering the cost-benefit ratio. Eradication must proceed based on hunting and complementary methods to ensure success. CONANP must support the work and provide the necessary permits for eradication to be achieved in a few months, as planned, to prevent the goat population from increasing, as well as the costs involved.

7

Midterm Review recommendation 7. Systematize vertebrate eradication processes and verification methods for early detection alerts on islands for reference to other areas and projects. These references are especially important for CONANP in the application of EDRR systems, as it is not viable for GECI to travel to each island upon early detection alerts. CONANP must consolidate the capacity to verify the presence of IAS upon early detection alerts and carry out at least basic control and contention work as indicated in rapid response protocols.

8

Midterm Review recommendation 8. Take the lead in applying biosecurity protocols for insular NPA, supported by the CONANP Department for Priority Species for Conservation (DEPC), General Directorate for Regional Operation (DGOR) and Regional Departments for NPA so that GECI takes a supporting role, inverting current roles. As GECI is an NGO, it can provide technical support, but does not have the legal mandate to enforce the necessary actions except for voluntary cooperation by the public. In this case, a government institution must take the lead in ensuring that the biosecurity protocols are effective. Besides, the presence of GECI on islands depends on projects, being occasional, while the presence of CONANP is sustained.

9

Midterm Review recommendation 9. To promote simulations of EDRR systems developed for NPA (response chains) in order to test their efficacy and as a way to build capacity for NPA personnel. Once the effectiveness has been evaluated, the protocols should be disseminated for replication in other NPA

10

Midterm Review recommendation 10. Not perform experiments in the control of invasive plants without a technical basis. It is desirable to nominate one person to be in charge of IAS control in NPA, as well as one focal point in the Coordination for IAS in Central CONANP, who receive specific training to provide qualified technical support to ongoing control work. The best methods available must be applied, making use of existing experience and technical and scientific knowledge, in order to increase the chances of consolidating efficient control methods before project closure. Urgently implement new invasive plant control measures to consolidate replicable methods. Use chemical control for alien invasive grasses and estimate costs and efficacy in comparison with mechanical control. Make use of the expertise available in the Scientific Committee to support these actions and pursue capacity building alternatives outside Mexico if necessary, as there seems not to be much experience on integrated management of invasive plants in natural areas in the country.

11

Midterm Review recommendation 12. Ensure the extension of the project deadline to the end of 2019 in order to allow enough time for practical implementation of all the information produced through the project as well as for mainstreaming IAS management commitments in the new government.

12

Midterm Review recommendation 13. Support the PMU in project management on the constant changes in administrative processes that may cause implementation delays. Carry out an assessment of processes that cause delays in project implementation, especially the approval of consultancy reports and other products. Seek ways to improve the initial quality of reports by providing consultants with a proposed structure and minimum contents to facilitate approval. This is important to optimize product reviews and, especially, to make sure that payments are completed in due time to allow field activities to be carried out as necessary.

13

Midterm Review recommendation 14. Strengthen the PMU with more personnel in this final implementation phase to ensure that all outcomes are achieved, especially due to the current changes in administrative processes of the UNDP.

14

Midterm Review recommendation 15.  Systematize information on progress, achievements and limitations of the project for use in project management and especially for the Terminal Evaluation. Use the indicator and output tables updated for the MTR (Tables 2 and 8 – Strategic Results Framework, Table 3 – Indicators per output, Table 4 - progress per output and the Management Effectiveness / Institutional Capacity Tracking Tools), to monitor project implementation. The MTR Team does not recommend reviewing the indicators at this point in implementation because many would require revision, diverting efforts that must now be focused on the consolidation of activities and best practices. Include reports and products from complementary sources, such as PROCER reports on plant control in NPA, on the web page, organized by topic and by NPA.

15

Midterm Review recommendation 17. Mainstream IAS prevention and control into sectorial regulations of productive systems (aquaculture, forage grasses, forest products and others) and develop regulations for unregulated sectors (pets, ornamental plants and others) in order to reduce IAS escape and impacts of these sectors on biodiversity and ecosystem services.

1. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 1. Update the National List in coordination with government agencies in charge of the missing species.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: PMU will raise the issue of including the missing species the official list during committees meeting with partners in charge for the list and try to reach an agreement.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.2 Raise the subject of the actual official list during High-level committee and try to reach an agreement.
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
PMU 2019/09 No Longer Applicable [Justification: Discussions on attributions on who the entity that updates the list continues. This will be resolved by the publication of a new Internal Regulation within the MInistry, which has been overdue. Project attribution to inform this decision will be no longer applicable. ]
History
2. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 2. Consolidate risk assessment protocols in user-friendly systems (e.g. Excel) and adjust the rapid assessment protocol (MERI), providing validation tests to ensure there is no bias. Pursue options to formalize the use of risk assessment by agencies in charge of authorizing species imports for different uses in order to establish an impartial and consistent risk assessment process that includes biodiversity concerns. Pursue the inclusion of biodiversity criteria in risk assessment protocols used by SENASICA.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: CONABIO will pursue and oversee validation process of MERI and PMU will raise the issue during committees meeting with responsible partner institutions.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1 Convert risk assessment protocols into excel version and put it on the internet page.
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
CONABIO 2019/11 Completed ToR completed and programming work finalized. History
2.2 Validation of MERI for fishes by experts
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2019/03/07]
CONABIO 2019/02 Completed Roberto Mendoza from UANL has assessed the fish RA and has set new thresholds to be used with MERI for this group. The work was presented at the Mexican Ecological Society Congress in León Gto last year. History
2.3 Validation of MERI for plants with experts UAM
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2019/07/03]
Jordan Golubov, UAM & CONABIO 2019/09 Overdue-Initiated The agreement is not signed yet as the legal department of CONABIO is still adjusting some details of the document. CONABIO follows up closely with the legal department so that the signed agreement can be released as soon as possible History
2.4 Regarding the use of risk assessment for authorizing species imports, more species have to be included in the process through bilateral meetings with SEMARNAT and SENASICA and probably raise the issue again during committee meetings (High level and Technical)
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2019/09/30]
PMU & CONABIO, SEMARNAT, SENASICA 2019/08 Canceled The agreement is not signed yet as the legal department of CONABIO is still adjusting some details of the document. CONABIO follows up closely with the legal department so that the signed agreement can be released as soon as possible. History
2.7 Raise the issue of Inclusion of biodiversity criteria in risk assessment protocols in d committee meetings
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
PMU, Committees 2019/09 Completed Biodiveristy criteria incorporated into risk assesment protocols, additionally, the work done in the 6th National Report on Mexico to the CBD addresses the issue of biodiversity inclusion into risk assessments. History
3. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 3. Strengthen the sectors within SEMARNAT in charge of IAS in order to: a) improve IAS management, b) optimize authorization processes for eradication and control actions and to establish an expedited process for rapid response actions in EDRR systems in coordination with CONANP and c) ensure resources are available for the implementation of the National Strategy on Invasive Species. SEMARNAT personnel responsible for IAS management might require specific training to allow for pro-active institutional coordination with CONABIO, CONANP and other government agencies in complementary sectors in charge of species introductions or sectors that function as pathways and vectors of IAS introduction and spread.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: As soon as the new government is in place, PMU will arrange for meetings and bring up the issue during high-level committee meetings.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1 (a & b1) Meeting between CONANP and SEMARNAT to discuss IAS management and authorization process
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2019/12/31]
SEMARNAT & CONANP PMU 2019/10 Completed The meeting took place and clarification was obtained as it was stated priorly History
3.1 (b2) Raise the topic of resources during committee meetings (High level and Technical)
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
PMU and meeting participants 2019/09 Completed Committee meetings have addressed the topic of new and addittional funds and private fund mobilization to address this issue, however, due to extreme budgetary cuts happening at all levels in the Federal government, these recommendations remain unattended by Ministry of Finance authorities. History
3.2 Invite more SEMARNAT personnel to the next online training
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2019/12/31]
CONABIO 2019/10 Completed Personal of SEMARNAT took part in training regarding the control of invasive plants to talk about the process, which gave both sides a better understanding of their processes and needs. During the training it was clarified that specially limited Rapid Response action do not need a permission from SEMARNAT History
4. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 4. Replicate biosecurity protocols developed for ornamental fishes to other species in aquaculture, pursuing a public policy to support producers in the implementation of biosecurity measures. Considering that aquaculture represents an expanding market, many new introductions of fishes, biological invasions and impacts due to the escape of alien fishes from breeding stations can be avoided.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: Topic will be raised in different meetings and events to reach out to the aquaculture industry and create awareness.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.1 Raise the topic during committee meetings (High level and Technical)
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
PMU and meeting participants 2019/09 Completed Topic addressed in high-level committee meetings History
4.2 Raise the topic during sector meetings and industry events as well as publications
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
CONAPESCA, INAPESCA & SENASICA, CESAEM PMU, INAPESCA 2019/09 Completed Building on the previous efforts to raise awareness on the biosecurity measures, the project continued to address the topic in sector events, including the FIACUI 2019 meeting. Other outreach material produced by the project also included this matter. History
5. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 5. Strengthen the Central CONANP Coordination for Invasive Alien Species by assigning more personnel or allowing the Coordination to be exclusively dedicated to IAS management. This will improve management efficiency and increase support to NPA in order to ensure that all pending actions in the project are implemented in due time, as well as for future replication to other NPA. A higher level of involvement by the Director for the Conservation of Priority Species is desirable, as this position is levelled with NPA Directors. This is especially relevant for decision-making in key moments to ensure implementation of prevention measures, EDRR and control of IAS.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: During this administration, CONANP will not be able to higher more personnel; PMU will start talks with the new commissioner of CONANP.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
5.1 Raise the topic during High level committee meetings and raise the issue during bilateral meetings with commissioner and new Director for Conservation of Priority Species
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
PMU & CONANP 2019/09 Completed Talks with the Adminstrator of CONANP (at the moment) resulted in a documented response of the impossibility of assigning specific and exclusive personnel to supervise the invasive species area. The current situation of personnel covering more than one topic continues due to budgetary restrictions. History
6. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 6. Control five invasive plant species in PN Arrecife Alacranes (planned for year 1) with support and permits issued by CONANP for mechanical and chemical control as needed and based on technical reference for each species and/or experts in invasive plant control. Conclude goat eradication on Espíritu Santo Island using the most viable methods and considering the cost-benefit ratio. Eradication must proceed based on hunting and complementary methods to ensure success. CONANP must support the work and provide the necessary permits for eradication to be achieved in a few months, as planned, to prevent the goat population from increasing, as well as the costs involved.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: GECI will collaborate with CONAFOR to facilitate plant eradication and change tools for goat eradication. Necessary permits from CONANP see point 3.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
6.1 Control invasive plant species
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
GECI 2020/12 Initiated Work with GECI will continue regardless of project termination date, as can be seen by the exit strategy document. History
6.2 Conclude goat eradication
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
GECI 2020/12 Initiated Work with GECI will continue regardless of project termination date, as can be seen by the exit strategy document History
7. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 7. Systematize vertebrate eradication processes and verification methods for early detection alerts on islands for reference to other areas and projects. These references are especially important for CONANP in the application of EDRR systems, as it is not viable for GECI to travel to each island upon early detection alerts. CONANP must consolidate the capacity to verify the presence of IAS upon early detection alerts and carry out at least basic control and contention work as indicated in rapid response protocols.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: GECI will generate the necessary documents and articles as well as continue to invite CONANP to their workshops on the topic.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
7.1 Create necessary documentation on EDRR and make it available to CONANP
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
GECI 2020/12 Initiated Work with GECI will continue regardless of project termination date, as can be seen by the exit strategy document History
7.2 Generate articles on EDRR to be published in relevant journals
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
GECI 2020/12 Initiated Work with GECI will continue regardless of project termination date, as can be seen by the exit strategy document History
8. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 8. Take the lead in applying biosecurity protocols for insular NPA, supported by the CONANP Department for Priority Species for Conservation (DEPC), General Directorate for Regional Operation (DGOR) and Regional Departments for NPA so that GECI takes a supporting role, inverting current roles. As GECI is an NGO, it can provide technical support, but does not have the legal mandate to enforce the necessary actions except for voluntary cooperation by the public. In this case, a government institution must take the lead in ensuring that the biosecurity protocols are effective. Besides, the presence of GECI on islands depends on projects, being occasional, while the presence of CONANP is sustained.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Reunions with partners

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
8.1 Meeting with technical personnel of the 6 NPA and key actors (staff of public institutions, civil organizations and service providers) for training in island biosecurity strategies. 28 people approximately.
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2019/03/29]
CONANP, GECI 2019/12 Overdue-Initiated Subject was discussed in the Directive Committee meeting. History
8.2 Define the structure of work among the institutions involved, to encourage the development of biosecurity protocols in other insular NPA.
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
CONANP, GECI 2019/12 No Longer Applicable [Justification: No agreement was achieved due to uncertainty related ot internal regulations. ]
History
9. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 9. To promote simulations of EDRR systems developed for NPA (response chains) in order to test their efficacy and as a way to build capacity for NPA personnel. Once the effectiveness has been evaluated, the protocols should be disseminated for replication in other NPA

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: Follow up activities are planned for Cañon de Sumidero National Park and EDRR topic included in TdR to be published.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
9.1 EDRR activities included in TdR and EDRR exercises planned in different NPA
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
CONANP 2019/12 Completed EDRR completed in 2019 for several Natural Protected Areas, as informed in project quarterly reports. History
10. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 10. Not perform experiments in the control of invasive plants without a technical basis. It is desirable to nominate one person to be in charge of IAS control in NPA, as well as one focal point in the Coordination for IAS in Central CONANP, who receive specific training to provide qualified technical support to ongoing control work. The best methods available must be applied, making use of existing experience and technical and scientific knowledge, in order to increase the chances of consolidating efficient control methods before project closure. Urgently implement new invasive plant control measures to consolidate replicable methods. Use chemical control for alien invasive grasses and estimate costs and efficacy in comparison with mechanical control. Make use of the expertise available in the Scientific Committee to support these actions and pursue capacity building alternatives outside Mexico if necessary, as there seems not to be much experience on integrated management of invasive plants in natural areas in the country.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: Training von control of invasive plants will be provided and follow up of ongoing control activities is planned.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
10.1 Organize training on plant control and make sure responsible person participate in training
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2019/07/03]
CONANP 2019/06 Completed Training took place with more than 30 participants History
10.2 Implement and supervise chemical control measures
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
Personnel NP Cumbres de Monterrey & headquarters, CONANP &PMU 2019/12 Completed Chemical control measures were piloted in the specified area, as can be seen in the project quarterly reports. History
11. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 12. Ensure the extension of the project deadline to the end of 2019 in order to allow enough time for practical implementation of all the information produced through the project as well as for mainstreaming IAS management commitments in the new government.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: Extension requested by PMU.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
12.1 Petition made to UNDP Petition made to GEF
[Added: 2019/01/14]
CONABIO UNDP 2018/12 Completed
12. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 13. Support the PMU in project management on the constant changes in administrative processes that may cause implementation delays. Carry out an assessment of processes that cause delays in project implementation, especially the approval of consultancy reports and other products. Seek ways to improve the initial quality of reports by providing consultants with a proposed structure and minimum contents to facilitate approval. This is important to optimize product reviews and, especially, to make sure that payments are completed in due time to allow field activities to be carried out as necessary.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: This has been done in the past and is done continously

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
13.1 Manuel is continuously updated to ensure performance improvement and kick off meetings are held before the consultants start to work
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
PMU 2019/12 Completed Continued informal capacity building efforts were implemented between the PMU and Operations Unit in CO to address performance issues. History
13.2 Changing and automating of processes
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
UNDP 2019/12 Completed Continued informal capacity building efforts were implemented between the PMU and Operations Unit in CO to address performance issues History
13. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 14. Strengthen the PMU with more personnel in this final implementation phase to ensure that all outcomes are achieved, especially due to the current changes in administrative processes of the UNDP.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: Due to limitations on personal by UNDP and due to missing budget in CONABIO this will not be possible.

Key Actions:

14. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 15.  Systematize information on progress, achievements and limitations of the project for use in project management and especially for the Terminal Evaluation. Use the indicator and output tables updated for the MTR (Tables 2 and 8 – Strategic Results Framework, Table 3 – Indicators per output, Table 4 - progress per output and the Management Effectiveness / Institutional Capacity Tracking Tools), to monitor project implementation. The MTR Team does not recommend reviewing the indicators at this point in implementation because many would require revision, diverting efforts that must now be focused on the consolidation of activities and best practices. Include reports and products from complementary sources, such as PROCER reports on plant control in NPA, on the web page, organized by topic and by NPA.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: Additional information on activities conducted with co-financing will be included, available information will linked with the project page and proposed tables will be used. Most of the indicators remain unchanged.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
15.1 Recommended tables are in use since evaluation
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
PMU, CONANP, GECI 2019/12 Completed Recommended tables derived from the evaluation continued to be used until project completion. History
15.2 Links between web page of CONABIO and the project are established and brief summaries for activities have been generated
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
PMU & CONABIO PROFEP & CONAFOR 2019/12 Completed Links between both webpages continues up to date, and beyond project completion. History
15. Recommendation:

Midterm Review recommendation 17. Mainstream IAS prevention and control into sectorial regulations of productive systems (aquaculture, forage grasses, forest products and others) and develop regulations for unregulated sectors (pets, ornamental plants and others) in order to reduce IAS escape and impacts of these sectors on biodiversity and ecosystem services.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/14]

Management response: PMU seeks continuously meetings with the different productive sectors and try to achieve better management through conditions linked to financing.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
17.1 Pursue collaboration of FIRA regarding promotion of certification scheme, development of financial instruments and capacity building.
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
SEMARNAT, SAGARPA, CONANP, CONAPESCA 2019/12 No Longer Applicable [Justification: Due to the change in federal authorities, FIRA could not be re-engaged in project activities due to a change in their priority focus areas. ]
History
17.2 topic will be raised during High-level and technical Committee meetings
[Added: 2019/01/14] [Last Updated: 2020/01/23]
PMU & High-Level / Technical Committees 2019/12 No Longer Applicable [Justification: See above]
History

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