- Evaluation Plan:
- 2016-2020, Armenia
- Evaluation Type:
- Final Project
- Planned End Date:
- 12/2018
- Completion Date:
- 07/2018
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- Yes
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 10,595
Green Urban Lighting Final Evaluation
| Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 UNDP-GEF-Terminal-Evaluation-ToR_#4669 project.docx |
tor | English | 68.46 KB | Posted | 1248 |
 GUL TE Report fin (2).pdf |
report | English | 2487.18 KB | Posted | 1322 |
| #4669 UND_GEF Project TE Management Response_Armenia (1).docx |
related-document | English | 25.74 KB | Posted | 1269 |
| Title | Green Urban Lighting Final Evaluation | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Project Number: | 00074869 | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Plan: | 2016-2020, Armenia | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Type: | Final Project | ||||||||||||||
| Status: | Completed | ||||||||||||||
| Completion Date: | 07/2018 | ||||||||||||||
| Planned End Date: | 12/2018 | ||||||||||||||
| Management Response: | Yes | ||||||||||||||
| Focus Area: |
|
||||||||||||||
| Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021) |
|
||||||||||||||
| SDG Goal |
|
||||||||||||||
| SDG Target |
|
||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Budget(US $): | 10,595 | ||||||||||||||
| Source of Funding: | UNDP | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Expenditure(US $): | 14,990 | ||||||||||||||
| Joint Programme: | No | ||||||||||||||
| Joint Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||||||||||
| GEF Evaluation: | Yes
|
||||||||||||||
| Key Stakeholders: | |||||||||||||||
| Countries: | ARMENIA |
| Lessons | |
|---|---|
| Findings | |
| 1. | 4.1Project design and formulation The project document is clearly formulated and logically structured.It provides a thorough information and situation analysis, and it clearly defines in detail project implementation strategy; it defines project results framework, time-bound budget and work plan, management arrangements and monitoring framework and evaluation plan including its budget, and it explains policy and regulatory context. The project design provides all necessary and relevant information. Annexes to the Project Document include among others Risk Log, expected responsibilities of Project Board and National Director, TOR of key personnel, letters confirming co-financing commitment of the main project stakeholders, i.e. of the Ministry of Nature Protection, Yerevan, Spitak, and Sevan municipalities, UNDP, US AID and the local Ararat Bank. The Project Document did not address any specific gender issues. Tag: Programme/Project Design |
| 2. | 4.1.1Project relevance The Project was designed in compliance with the national priorities to strengthen the economic and energy independence of the Republic of Armenia by promoting resources efficient and climate-resilient growth. The Project design is highly relevant with national policies and priorities, as well as with national and municipal development plans developed before and during the Project implementation period, namely with the law on Energy Saving and Renewable Energy (2004), National Program for Energy Saving and Renewable Energy (2007)with assessment of energy efficiency and renewable potential, National Energy Efficiency Action Plan (2010), and the decision of the government of the Republic of Armenia“On implementation of energy saving and energy efficiency improvement measures in facilities being constructed (reconstructed, renovated) under the state funding (adopted by the Government on December 25, 2014). At the Project development phase, first activities focused on energy efficiency upgrades of street lighting have been launched in parallel in Armenia(The World Bank Energy Efficiency Project in Armenia, implemented by the R2E2 Fund was launched in 2012 and it includes a component on public lighting). Tag: Energy Relevance Urban Human and Financial resources Infrastructure Urbanization |
| 3. | 4.1.2 Project implementation approach The Project strategy is structured in four components and outcomes, with several outputs within each project outcome, and it includes:
The first component was designed to raise awareness and develop and strengthen local capacity in designing efficient, good quality urban lighting Demonstration projects apply the “learning by doing” approach. In addition to that, implemented demonstration projects generate cash savings for project replications by municipalities, improve quality of urban lighting, reduce greenhouse emissions and last but not least, modernized street/urban lighting is very visible and utilizes new, modern and “nice looking” technology. Efficient street lighting thus helps to “sell” energy efficiency to both, municipal decision-makers and general public as a win-win solution. National policies and standards facilitate adoption of energy efficient lighting technology. Tag: Awareness raising Capacity Building Emission Reduction Energy Urbanization |
| 4. | Project strategy and implementation approach is structured into following components, outcomes and outputs: Component 1: Knowledge and capacities for urban green lighting Outcome 1:Municipal energy audits and technical capacity-building Output 1.1: Audits of public lighting systems Output 1.2: Study tour Output 1.3: Technical training and capacity building Output 1.4: Increased awareness and support among the general public Tag: Energy Rural Human and Financial resources Policies & Procedures |
| 5. | 4.1.3 Log-frame analysis The logical framework/results matrix specified in the ProDoc was, with a few reservations, well-defined and logically structured. It specifies indicators, baselines,end-of-project targets, source of verification and risks and assumptions for the project objective and each of project outcomes. The LogFrameis not overwhelmed with excessive number of indicators and targets, and thus it clearly reflects project achievements. In total, the results framework includes less than 20 targets that all comply in principle with SMART requirements: SMART –Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound. In two cases, the target definition is not specific enough in quantitative terms. The new target introduced as per recommendations of the Inception Report “Media releases on outcomes of each pilot. Awareness raising materials available for general public” does not specify the required number of media releases/awareness rising materials, although the specific number might be just a formal indicators/target. On the other hand more complex media outreach impact indicator/target would be very difficult to measure. Also the target “Similar programs are adopted in other cities of Armenia” does not specify the required number of programs/cities. The Project Document includesonly end-of-project targets.The Inception Report added one midterm target. Tag: Communication |
| 6. | According to recommendations of the Inception Report, the LogFrame has been slightly changed, and some targets were revised and replaced or added. Mainchanges to LogFrame targets include:
These changes were introduced based on consultations with the Yerevan city municipality during an inception phase. It was identified that LED-based street lighting is considered as a priority technology to be tested under the pilot projects. In particular, the Municipality proposed to implement a LED-based street lighting demonstration project on one of the major avenues involving about 884 fixtures. Given the reduced number of fixtures affordable within the budget due to the higher capital cost of LED lighting technologies, the initially estimated direct energy saving from implementation of pilot projects was revised and reduced accordingly: from 1.4 GWh/y to 1.2 GWh/y. Tag: Energy Human and Financial resources Innovation |
| 7. | 4.1.4 Assumptions and risks Assumptions and risks were specified in the LogFrame for the project objective and each project outcome, and they include timely adoption of municipal programs and national policies, that require sufficient political will and financing available. The Project Document specified three main risks in the Risk Log, including financial, political and strategic one, as well as their impact and probability, counter measures/management response, owner and status/updates. Main risks identified in the ProDoc include:
Scale used for ratingfrom 1 to 5: 1 –low, 5 -high Inception Report did not introduce any new risk nor changed the risk analysis. The Midterm Review updated the rating of risks (slightly decreased probability of two risks) and introduced two new socio-economic risks, and two new environmental risks. Tag: Emission Reduction Human and Financial resources Policies & Procedures Awareness raising |
| 8. | 4.1.5 Planned stakeholder participation The Project Document specified key project implementation partners and stakeholders and their responsibilities and areas of collaboration with the Project, see Chapter3.6Main Stakeholders3.6. Key Project stakeholders identified in the ProDoc, include:
Planned stakeholder participation included all relevant project partners at the governmental and municipal level, as well as relevant state agencies, universities, and research institutions. Tag: Partnership National Institutions Regional Institutions |
| 9. | 4.1.6 Linkages between the project and other interventions within the sector The Green Urban Lighting Project has been developed as a third in a row of UNDP-supported GEF-financed project in Armenia targeting energy efficiency. The GUL project is complementary to the previous ones that included the full-sized project “Improving Energy Efficiency of Municipal Heating and Hot Water Supply” (2005-2012), and “Improving Energy Efficiency in Buildings”(2010-2016). Since 2012, the Renewable Resources and Energy Efficiency Fund of Armenia (R2E2 Fund) was managing World Bank-and GEF-financed “Armenia Energy Efficiency Project” that steer the World Bank funds as loans to public entities for reducing energy consumption in public and municipal buildings, and in street lighting as well. The 10 mil USD project provided preferential loan facility (with 2.5% interest and10 years loan maturity). The focus of the World Bank/GEF/R2E2 project is much broader than of the GUL project, and although it includes also component on street and indoor lighting, its main focus is on larger energy efficiency building reconstructions, such as military facilities, and other public facilities such as Puppet Theater and Slavic University.
Tag: Energy Global Environment Facility fund Resource mobilization Urban International Financial Institutions |
| 10. | 4.1.7 UNDP comparative advantage UNDP has demonstrated administrative and project management capacity to implement energy efficiency projects,it is a neutral GEF implementing agency. UNDP has a substantial in-country and regional expertise and experience from implementing similar energy efficient lighting projects in other countries of operation in the region of Europe and CIS countries (Slovakia, Ukraine, Russia, Kazakhstan). UNDP Armenia has successfully implemented two GEF-financed energy efficiency projects (Improving Energy Efficiency of Municipal Heating and Hot Water Supply,and Improving Energy Efficiency in Buildings), and it has established effective cooperation scheme with the government and municipalities, as well as with relevant state agencies, with expert community and NGOs in Armenia. Tag: Coordination Operational Services |
| 11. | 4.1.8 Replication approach and sustainability Replication and long-term self-sustainability compose a cornerstone of the project strategy outlined in the Project Document. All four project components have been designed to support post-project replication, including local capacity strengthening, learning by doing/pilot projects, and policies and standards. One of four project components is fully dedicated to replication:Component 3-Replication via municipal lighting programs and associated financial instruments. The core of the replication strategy is establishment and funding of a financial mechanism –revolving fund to finance energy efficiency lighting projects in municipalities, and municipal plans/programs to continue urban lighting retrofits.
Tag: Sustainability |
| 12. | 4.1.9 Management arrangements The Project was designed to be implemented by the Ministry of Nature Protection (MNP) following UNDP’s National Implementation Modality (NIM). As the national authorized body for UNFCCC implementation in Armenia, MNP has coordinated UNDP-supported GEF-financed climate change program since 1997 and it was designed to be responsible for the overall management and supervision of the Project. MNP has served already as an implementing agency for two UNDP-supported GEF-financed energy efficiency projects. The Ministry of Nature Protection appointed a National Project Director who served as the Focal Point of the Government of Armenia for the Project, and as a Chairperson of the Project Board in the same time. The Project Board was designed to consist of the UNDP Environment Governance Portfolio National Director; a representative of the Government and implementing partner, the Ministry of Nature Protection; a focal person nominated from the municipality of Yerevan as main project beneficiary and second implementing partner; and a senior representative of UNDP. Tag: Implementation Modality Oversight Project and Programme management Coordination |
| 13. | 4.1.10 Lessons learned from other relevant projects The GUL project was developed after two previous energy efficiency projects have been successfully implemented in Armenia (Improving Energy Efficiency of Municipal Heating and Hot Water Supply, and Improving Energy Efficiency in Buildings). The GUL project thus benefited from country-specific experience gained when implementing these two energy efficiency projects in Armenia The GUL project in Armenia was not the first UNDP-supported GEF-financed energy efficiency lighting project in Europe and CIS region. The first public/street lighting project in this region was implemented in Slovakia in 2005 –2011. Further efficient lighting projects have been developed and launched in Russia (2010), Ukraine (2011), and Kazakhstan (2012).The GUL project benefited especially from the other three efficient lighting projects under implementation in the CIS region. Project Managers of these three lighting projects have participated at the Inception Workshop of the GUL project and shared experience from their project implementation. The GUL project cooperated also with other lighting experts from these countries and from Belarus, who shared their experience also from implementation of their national projects. Tag: Energy Sustainability Rural Knowledge management |
| 14. | 4.2 Project Implementation 4.2.1 Project implementation and adaptive management The Project was implemented in-line with the project strategy and a work plan outlined in the Project Document and adjusted according with revisions recommended by the inception Report and the Midterm Review, where appropriate. The Midterm Review included 18 recommendations, of which all but one were implemented. MTR recommendation B.1 to extend the scope of the Project from lighting to all energy forms and energy efficiency opportunities in buildings and to develop detail energy audits for several typical building representatives was not implemented by this project, because it was addressed already by other projects, including the UNDP-supported GEF-financed project Energy Efficiency in Buildings, and the World Bank/R2E2 Energy Efficiency Project. Tag: Energy Urban Human and Financial resources Procurement Capacity Building |
| 15. | 4.2.2 Partnerships arrangements The Project worked with all relevant local and international stakeholders. Main project partners included:
|
| 16. | 4.2.3 Monitoring and evaluation The Project Document described in detail necessary monitoring framework and evaluation procedures, as required for all UNDP-supported GEF-financed projects. Specifically,it drafted a Monitoring and Evaluation Work Plan that identified responsible parties for M&E activities, including Inception Workshop and Report, GHG emission monitoring (baseline and results) in-line with GEF-STAP (Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel) methodology, monitoring, reporting and verification of Project Progress and Performance, APR/PIR, annual Project Board meetings, quarterly Periodic Status Reports, Midterm Review, Terminal Evaluation, Terminal Lessons Learned Report, Audit, visits to field sites/project demonstration sites. For each M&E activity responsible parties have been specified, appropriate indicative budget allocated, and time-frame specified. According to the M&E plan, key parties responsible for performing project monitoring and evaluation included project Coordinator/Manager, UNDP Country Office, UNDP-GEFRegional Technical Advisor, international and local experts/consultants. Tag: Monitoring and Evaluation Policies & Procedures Coordination |
| 17. | Project implementation has been regularly reviewed by Project Board meetings held once a year(with one exception). Project Board meetings were held on December 18, 2014, November 28, 2016, and December 19, 2017. However the Project Coordinator met with the National Project Director and Chair of the Project Board frequently on an ad hoc basis several times a year. The inception phase begun in November 2013 at the launch of the Project, Inception Workshop was held on January 15, 2014, and the Inception Report was finalized in February, 2014. The final Mid-Term Evaluation report was submitted on June 8, 2016, 2.5years after the Project start. Tag: Human and Financial resources Monitoring and Evaluation Oversight |
| 18. | 4.2.4 Feedback from M&E activities used for adaptive management Feedback from M&E activities, namely revised work plan and LogFrame of the Inception Report, and recommendations of the MTR were taken into account and implemented in the next phase of project implementation, where appropriate. Feedback from annual PIRs was implemented in following implementation period and annual work plans. Specifically, the MTRincluded eighteen specific recommendations in six chapters, including recommendation for each project component, for project implementation/adaptive management, and for project sustainability. The project management response fully endorsed implementation of the MTR recommendations, and the MTR recommendations have been implemented with one exception. MTR recommendation B.1 to extend the scope of the Project from lighting to all energy efficiency opportunities in buildings and to develop detail energy audits for several typical building representatives was not implemented by this project, because it was addressed already by other projects, including the UNDP-supported GEF-financed project Energy Efficiency in Buildings, and the World Bank/R2E2 Energy Efficiency Project. For more details of MTR recommendations, see Chapter 4.2.1. Tag: Monitoring and Evaluation Project and Programme management |
| 19. | 4.2.5 Financial planning and management The GEF budget of 1.6mil USD as of the project document is shown in Table 6.UNDP budget used for management costs and its spending is shown in Table 7and Table 9. Actual project expenditures very closely follow budgeted amounts in each of the budget line (outcome). Half of GEF project budget (47%) was designed to be spent on Outcome 2 –demonstration projects, and exactly 50% of total project expenditures were spent on demonstration projects/Outcome 2 GEF management expenditures as of mid June, 2018 represent 6% of total project budget. Total management expenditures, including UNDP management costs, represent 12% of combined GEF + UNDP budget. This illustrates very good cost-effectiveness of project management. All project team members served (except for theTask Leader at the beginning of the Project) under a part-time contract. The Project implemented standard financial controls and timely flow of payments. The Project was subject toa complex audit. The audit expressed minor formal comments (regarding working hours timesheets reporting, and micro-procurement of goods of value lower than 100 USD), and no comments whatsoever on financial reporting and management.
Tag: Global Environment Facility fund Human and Financial resources |
| 20. | 4.2.7 Management by UNDP and implementing partner The Project was managed according to the planned management scheme specified in the Project Document, see Chapter 4.1.9and Figure 1: Project Implementation Structure as per ProDoc. The Project was implemented by the Ministry of Nature Protection (MNP) following UNDP’s National Implementation Modality (NIM) under the supervision of the Minister of Nature Protection(asof 2018Mr. Erik Grigoryan, Minister), who serves also as a UN FCCC focal point and GEF national focal point, and as a National Project Director and Chair of the Project Board. The Project team is supervised by Ms. Diana Harutyunyan, the UNDP Climate Change Programme Coordinator at the Ministry of Nature Protection. The liaison between the Project management, the Climate Change Programme Coordinator and the National Project Director was very effective, allowing for ad hoc informal meetings whenever required. Mr. Artem Kharazyan served as a full-time Task Leader responsible for operational project management. Sincemid2015, when he left for another job, the duties of the Task Leader are performed by Ms. Diana Harutyunyan, the UNDP Climate Change Programme Coordinator. Tag: Human and Financial resources Oversight Project and Programme management |
| 21. | UNDP Armenia was successful in developing and implementing a series of energy efficiency projects that complement to each other in both, the subject and implementation period. These projects include GEF-financed “Improving Energy Efficiency of Municipal Heating and Hot Water Supply” project, “Improving Energy Efficiency in Buildings” project, “Regulatory Framework to Promote Energy Efficiency in the Countries of Euroasian Economic Union”, a regional project financed by the Trust Fund for Development of the Russian Federation and UNDP, and “De-risking and Scaling-up Investment in Energy Efficient Building Retrofits” GCF financed project. UNDP CO used this strategy to develop and maintain a strong in-house expertise of project team experts who work (in some cases on a part-time basis) continually on these energy efficiency projects. By adopting this strategy, UNDP CO avoided a typical problem of project-based time-limited financial support provided by international donors (including GEF) to individual development interventions/projects (usually for 4 -6 years maximum). This discrete, project-based financing often leads to loss of expertise generated during project implementation due to experts leaving for other jobs after project terminations. Tag: Human and Financial resources Sustainability |
| 22. | Project objective and outcome level results and rating are summarized in Table 13: Project results and achievements as per LogFrame targets below. The Project has achieved all objective and outcome level targets, and in most cases the target was significantly exceeded. Only one target has not been fully achieved: the universal incandescent phase-out plan including residential sector was not developed because of lack of political will. However, market data show that the market has evolved quickly towards energy efficient lighting with LEDs being the dominant technology sold, and incandescents representing only ca 15% of sales. Effective ban of incandescent lamps has been implemented through updated legislation and technical standard with minimum energy performance requirements for public procurement. The Project has implemented a number of additional activities and produced deliverables supporting its objective that are not included in the LogFrame results matrix. Main project events implemented and deliverables published are listed at the end of this Chapter. Project results including rating are summarized in Table 13: Project results and achievements as per LogFrame targets Tag: Energy Effectiveness Communication Awareness raising Capacity Building |
| 23. | Outcome 2 Demonstration projects: Pilot projects yield cost-effective energy savings, raising the confidence of investors and decision-makers about EE lighting Baseline
Achievements
Tag: Emission Reduction Energy Effectiveness |
| 24. | Outcome 3 Replication via municipal programs and associated financial instruments:Municipal lighting programs lead to widespread deployment of EE lighting and associated energy savings Baseline
Achievements
Tag: Energy Effectiveness Human and Financial resources International Financial Institutions Infrastructure |
| 25. | Outcome 4 National policies, codes, and standards on lighting: New national policies mandate significantly greater energy efficiency and ensure product quality for lighting, particularly in residential buildings Baseline There is no regulation on energy performance of lighting products in Armenia Achievements
Tag: Effectiveness Policies & Procedures |
| 26. | MTR suggested another specific tasks of the project to be performed within the scope of the fourth outcome, also it was not included into the MTR recommendations specifically–a proposal ofthe national regulations for environmentally safe collection, transportation, recycling and disposal of used mercury-containing lighting equipment. The Project team prepared a report on experience with and regulation on CFL recycling and mercury collection applied in Russia and Kazakhstan, submitted it to the MNP and organized a meeting with the First Deputy Minister of Nature Protection, National Focal Point for Basel Convention and aHead of Hazardous Waste Department, Head of Division ofWaste Inventory, Identification and Technology Research, and “Waste Research Center” SNCO. The position of the MNP was that hazardous and mercury-containing waste regulations and action plan have to be implemented after Minamata convention will be ratified. In 2017 the Law of the Republic of Armenia “On Ratification of Minamata Convention on Mercury” (No. HO-130-N of October 6, 2017)was adopted, and on December 13, 2017, the Government of Armenia deposited it for ratification. In its 2018 legislative plan, the Government of Armenia plans to adopt three new regulations on hazardous waste, including Requirements for handling of mercury-containing wastes, Requirements for handling of used tires, and Requirements for handling of lead-containing wastes. Tag: Waste management |
| 27. | Additionalimplemented project activities, trainings, study tours, and deliverables are listed below: Trainings, workshops, study-tours, and public awareness rising activities delivered Year 2018 (total 33 participants in 1 event) A workshop on “Modelling, design and estimation of lighting systems”led by the project’s technical experts was held on March 16. (33 participants) Year 2017(total 3,748 participants in 9 events)
Tag: Energy Communication Awareness raising Capacity Building |
| 28. | 4.3.2 Relevance The relevance of the Project has been demonstrated by adoption of municipal development policies/plans and programs that prioritize municipal energy-efficient lighting upgrades (see for example Yerevan Annual Development Plan 2016, 2017, 2018, Yerevan Sustainable Energy Action Plan, Yerevan Green City Action Plan). The project relevance is not documented only by adopted municipal policies and plans, but primarily by actual replication of energy-efficient street lighting retrofit projects across municipalities in Armenia with financing from newly established municipal revolving funds, municipal budgets, and also from other external sources(EBRD and ADB loans, grants of Armenian Territorial Development Fund, and from local and international donors). The best evidence of project relevance is that energy efficiency retrofits of public lighting became a political priority of municipal decision-makers across the country.Project relevance is rated Relevant
Tag: Energy Relevance Policies & Procedures International Financial Institutions |
| 29. | 4.3.3 Effectiveness of project implementation Effectiveness of project implementation evaluates an extent to which an objective has been achieved The project goal to save energy and to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases by increasing energy efficiency of lighting in the cities of Armenia via the implementation of municipal investment programs and national policies and the project objective to remove barriers to energy-efficient lighting in Armenia by means of technical assessment, facilitation of financing, and development and implementation of municipal programs and national policy, and all its direct and indirect energy and GHG emission savings targets have been fully achieved and exceeded. Average savings per lighting installation reached 69% of original energy consumption and GHG emissions. More importantly, the Project facilitated transformation of the lighting market, both in public and private sectors, with modern energy efficient LED technology being the primary new technology used in public lighting retrofits as well as in new private installations. Sales of incandescent lights dropped already to ca 15% of total sales. Effectiveness of project implementationis rated Highly Satisfactory. Tag: Emission Reduction Energy Effectiveness Urban Policies & Procedures |
| 30. | 4.3.4Efficiency (cost-effectiveness)of project implementation UNDP defines project efficiency (cost-effectiveness or efficacy) as an extent to which results have been delivered with the least costly resources possible. 50% of the total GEF budget of 1.6mil USD was used for financing of new LED luminaires in pilot public lighting retrofit projects, co-financed from municipalities (municipalities financed installation works, and pole reconstruction/replacement where needed). Savings generated from implemented projects were used for financing of municipal revolving funds and for replication of first demonstration GEF-financed projects. In addition to that, 40+ mil USD have been mobilized in Armenia from international and local sources for financing additional energy efficiency lighting projects. Tag: Efficiency Global Environment Facility fund Resource mobilization |
| 31. | 4.3.5Country ownership This Project can serve as a good example of a full and effective country ownership: it was designed fully in line with national development and environmental priorities of Armenia. The Government, and especially municipalities, demonstrated full and effective support to Project implementation and demonstrated commitment for successful project replications. Additional funding of 40+ mil USD has been mobilized during project implementation period for replication of additional energy efficiency lighting projects in Armenia. Tag: Resource mobilization Ownership |
| 32. | 4.3.6 Mainstreamingand gender equality Project objectives and outcomes are fully in line with UNDP country program strategies and GEF conventions, namely with the UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF)Outcome“Environment and disaster risk reduction is integrated into national and local development frameworks”,UNDP Strategic Plan Environment and Sustainable Development Primary Outcome: Mainstreaming environment and energy,UNDP Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) Output4.1.5 “Innovative policies and practices for environmentally sound, energy efficient technologies and cleaner production developed and implemented”, and Country Programme (CP) Outcome: 4.1 “Armenia is better able to address key environmental challenges including climate change and natural resource sustainable management. In addition to environmental and resource/energy sustainability, the Project directly supported also four Sustainable Development Goals: Affordable and Clean Energy, Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure, Sustainable Cities and Communities, and Climate Action. Tag: Gender Equality Infrastructure Awareness raising SDG Integration Elderly Vulnerable Women and gilrs |
| 33. | 4.3.7 Prospects of sustainability 4.3.7.1Financial risks The Project was successful in mobilizing municipal co-financing for pilot and demonstration projects. In case of street lighting, in the first pilot projects, the GEF Project financed up to 100% costs of new LED luminaires, and municipalities typically financed installation works. Following demonstration projects financed by municipal revolving funds received smaller or no financial support from the Project, with the share of GEF Project funding decreasing from ca 50% to 0%in a second and third project replication. Total costs of implemented pilots in street lighting and replications financed from revolving funds in particular municipality (up to 3 replications in Yerevan) were 1.2 mil USD, of which 53% were financed from the Project budget, and 47% from revolving funds and municipal budgets. Tag: Sustainability Global Environment Facility fund Resource mobilization Urban International Financial Institutions |
| 34. | 4.3.7.2 Socio-Political Risks Social-political and economic risks having potential impact on project results sustainability include social and political acceptance of energy-efficient lighting technology, dedication to invest into and finance energy efficiency lighting retrofits, financial affordability related with economic development and financial situation of municipalities and a country as a whole, and of private and residential sectors. All municipal decision makers interviewed during site visits as well as governmental decision makers expressed their full dedication to continue implementing street and public lighting retrofits in the future, using primarily or solely LED technology. LED luminaires have already the largest share on sales of light bulbs in retail shops. LED technology is generally considered to be energy efficient, reliable, and financially affordable for most of customers. The socio-political/economic risk to project sustainability is negligible. The socio-political/economic sustainabilityis rated Likely Tag: Sustainability Human and Financial resources |
| 35. | 4.3.7.3 Institutional Framework and Governance Risks Municipalities and experts have been trained in good quality design of energy efficient public lighting and green procurement reflecting minimal energy performance requirements for lighting. Municipalities have gained their hands-on expertise implementing public lighting pilot projects and projects funded with their own funding from revolving funds and from municipal budget. Municipalities who implemented their pilot/demonstration projects share their experience with other neighboring municipalities. Municipalities and the Government of Armenia included public lighting retrofits into their development programs and action plans, including support funding from the Ministry of Territorial Development/Armenian Territorial Development Fund. Institutional framework and governance risks are negligible. Institutional framework and governance sustainability is rated Likely Tag: Sustainability National Institutions Regional Institutions |
| 36. | 4.3.7.4 Environmental Risks The Project reflected the demand of municipalities and focused solely on LED technology. No CFLs have been installed with the support of the Project. LED lighting is already a standard preferred technology used by municipalities (and in other sectors) for new installations/retrofits. High mercury content CFLs are no more imported into the country.CFLs represent already minor and decreasing share of total luminaires’ sales, with growing majority being LEDs. In contrast with CFLs, LED technology does not include any hazardous substances that would pose an environmental risk.Environmental sustainability is rated Likely. Overall prospects of sustainability of delivered project results are rated to be Likely. Tag: Environment Policy Sustainability Innovation |
| 37. | 4.3.8 Catalytic Role The Project served as a real catalystin mainstreaming affordable and sustainable energy efficient street lighting retrofits across municipalities in Armenia. In addition to capacity development in design, financing, procurement and implementation of efficient street lighting and development and adoption of minimum energy performance standards for lighting appliances, the Project supported implementation of 27pilotprojects in street lighting and indoor lighting in public facilities, and replicated 15 projects financed from energy savings collected in municipal revolving funds, in total in16 municipalities and 2 villages across the country. The focus on smaller projects implemented in a larger number of municipalities, as well as extensive public awareness rising activities helped to establish LED technology as a new standard for lighting retrofits in Armenia. LED technology represents already the largest share in lighting luminaires sold locally. The leading retail shop visited during the TE mission sells only LEDs, they have few remaining CFLs on stock for sale, and no incandescent lights whatsoever on sale. Corporate and private business investors and inhabitants gained their confidence in LED technology thanks to the Project achievements and highly visible demonstration projects implemented across the country, and replicate the project and install LEDs themselves in their facilities.
Tag: Energy Innovation Awareness raising |
| 38. | 4.3.9 Project Impact Project impact evaluates impact on environmental status improvement and environmental stress reduction. Environmental status improvement was not subject to monitoring and evaluation, because GHG emission reductions have a global impact on climate change and impact of individual project cannot be properly monitored. Environmental stress reduction correlates with GHG emission reductions. Combined direct and indirect GHG emission reductions are: 84,143 tCO2per year, i.e. an equivalent of 1.683miltCO2of combined direct and indirect lifetime GHG emission reductions. Because of the nature of the Project and its project objective focused on GHG emission reductions, both progress towards environmental stressand statusare positive, although not exactly enumerated. However, the Project has also other significant impact, in addition to environmental impact. In comparison with similar countries in the region, and even with some more economically developed/rich countries, Armenia has witnessed rapid transformation of its lighting market towards modern and energy-efficient lighting luminaires based on LED technology, both in street lighting and indoor-lighting. As described above, LED technology dominates nowadays the sales of lighting appliances in Armenia, even without general ban on incandescent lights. Although it is difficult to attribute exact numbers to the share and impact of the Project on this market transformation, and to identify and quantify exactly individual drivers for this market transformation, it is clear that the Project had a significant and dominant impact on this market transformation. Several project stakeholders highlighted that it was the GUL Project that generated confidence in Armenia in energy efficient LED technology as a mature and affordable lighting technology. Tag: Emission Reduction Energy Environment Policy Impact |
| 39. | In addition to Project results, including its public awareness rising activities, the following factors facilitated widespread adoption of energy efficient lighting and lighting market transformation (including also very visible retail sector): ?
A critical factor that had a decisive influence on project impact was a proper timing of this Project, when demand for and supply of modern energy efficient lighting/LED technologies perfectly matched. Should the same Project be implemented few years earlier or later, the market would be underdeveloped, or well-developed already, in terms of both, ability and willingness of municipalities to prioritize and finance lighting retrofits, and in terms of technical and financial maturity/affordability of LED technology. And the same project would have much less significant impact. The project impact rating is Significant Tag: Impact Urban Innovation |
| Recommendations | |
|---|---|
| 1 | Lessons Learned Report to be disseminated and published on-line
|
| 2 | Certification of the light testing laboratory
|
| 3 | Replicate best practices in maintaining developed in-house expertise across follow-up projects and in regional cooperation in other countries of operation
|
1. Recommendation:
Lessons Learned Report to be disseminated and published on-line
- The Project team is expected and is planning to develop and publish the Lessons Learned Report by the end of the project.
- The Project has developed extensive expertise in energy efficient lighting, including significant technical expertise. This experience is not only country-specific but it might help also project developers when developing energy efficient lighting projects internationally.
- The Project team is thus encouraged to include into the Lessons Learned Report also the technical experience gained during project implementation and include as appendix, or refer to the web link for download, also specific technical guides, textbooks and other deliverables developed by the Project, and to publish the Report on the www.nature-ic.am web site.
- The Project is also encouraged to offer links to their web page and Lessons Learned Report also to other energy efficient lighting initiatives inetrnationally.
Management Response: [Added: 2018/10/09] [Last Updated: 2020/12/30]
Proper planning for preparation of the Lessons Learned Report and consistent implementation in accordance with the schedule to complete the Report before the Project's closure.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1 Collect and summarize information and data, interview key experts, consider major findings per each of the project’s components, compile the Lessons Learned Report, circulate it respectively, amend in accordance with comments and recommendations, then finalize it and prepare for online publication.
[Added: 2018/10/10] [Last Updated: 2018/11/02] |
UNDP RTA UNDP CO UNDP Project Team Key stakeholders | 2018/11 | Completed | Lessons Learned Report produced, finalized and prepared for publication. History |
2. Recommendation:
Certification of the light testing laboratory
- The Project and the municipal owned Yerevan Illumination Company CJSC are planning to have accredited the photometric testing laboratory operated by the Yerevan Illumination Company CJSC. International accreditation would increase international credibility of the testing laboratory and would allow the Yerevan Illumination Company to offer its services in photometric testing of luminaires internationally as well, and thus to maximize utilization of the laboratory equipment that was financed from the GEF budget.
- The UNDP Project team is encouraged to facilitate the accreditation and to support it with any remaining GEF budget resources available.
Management Response: [Added: 2018/10/10] [Last Updated: 2020/12/30]
Provide technical assistance and consultancy support to the upgraded laboratory to enable its international accreditation both within the project’s timeline and beyond that.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.1 Consult and provide technical assistance to Yerevan Municipality as per the issue of accreditation of its testing laboratory according to the national procedures.
[Added: 2018/10/10] [Last Updated: 2018/11/02] |
UNDP Project team Yerevan Municipality | 2018/11 | Completed | Based on UNDP programmatic approach, it was recommended to include the respective activities in the work plan of the UNDP-RTF regional project. History | |
| 2.2 Based on synergy principle in UNDP energy efficiency related projects provide all the necessary information and insights to enable the laboratory to increase its capacity
[Added: 2018/10/10] [Last Updated: 2018/11/02] |
UNDP CO UNDP Project Team | 2018/11 | Completed | All the relevant materials and information provided to the UNDP-RTF regional project to continue the testing and certification laboratory capacity building activities. History |
3. Recommendation:
Replicate best practices in maintaining developed in-house expertise across follow-up projects and in regional cooperation in other countries of operation
- Several UNDP country offices in the region implemented similar strategy as the UNDP CO in Armenia in maintaining the developed in-house expertise by sharing its experts across multiple follow-up similar projects implemented in different sectors. However, this practice is not yet shared by all UNDP country offices. Some of them loose their experts and expertise developed after project termination.
- Effectiveness of regional cooperation among similar UNDP projects depends primarily on activities of UNDP CO and its project teams, and support from the UNDP RTA, as well as on similar projects being implemented in parallel in the region.
- UNDP and its regional headquarters and RTAs are encouraged to replicate and adopt the practice of maintaining in-house expertise across all countries of their operation, and to facilitate effective regional cooperation and experience sharing where appropriate.
Management Response: [Added: 2018/10/10] [Last Updated: 2020/12/30]
Based on Lessons Learned Report findings and on synergy principle in UNDP project implementation routine, use online dissemination tools for utmost availability of the key achievements and recommendations.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.1 The Lessons Learned report and the links to the project resources available on the web-site will be shared with relevant country teams and respective online platforms.
[Added: 2018/10/10] [Last Updated: 2018/11/02] |
UNDP Regional Hub UNDP-GEF RTA UNDP CO UNDP Project Team | 2018/11 | Completed | Lessons Learned Report’s final version is prepared and highly appreciated by with Regional Technical Adviser, especially for the needs of other GEF-funded projects in the broader region. History |