BRA/17/G31 - PIMS-5896 - Taking Deforestation out of Soy Supply Chain in MATOPIBA region.

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2017-2021, Brazil
Evaluation Type:
Mid Term Project
Planned End Date:
12/2020
Completion Date:
09/2020
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
45,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document 2019.12.09 - UNDP-GEF-MTR-TOR-Template 2014 ENGLISH MATOPIBA clean (1).docx tor English 206.43 KB Posted 259
Download document FINAL REPORT - MTR UNDP-GEF 5896 BRA17G31 (1).docx report English 821.86 KB Posted 333
Title BRA/17/G31 - PIMS-5896 - Taking Deforestation out of Soy Supply Chain in MATOPIBA region.
Atlas Project Number: 00097304
Evaluation Plan: 2017-2021, Brazil
Evaluation Type: Mid Term Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 09/2020
Planned End Date: 12/2020
Management Response: Yes
UNDP Signature Solution:
  • 1. Energy
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 1.4.1 Solutions scaled up for sustainable management of natural resources, including sustainable commodities and green and inclusive value chains
SDG Goal
  • Goal 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
  • Goal 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
SDG Target
  • 7.1 By 2030, ensure universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services
  • 7.2 By 2030, increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix
  • 9.4 By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit industries to make them sustainable, with increased resource-use efficiency and greater adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and industrial processes, with all countries taking action in accordance with their respective capabilities
Evaluation Budget(US $): 45,000
Source of Funding: Government cost-sharing
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 30,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: Yes
  • Joint with Donors
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title: PIMS-5896 - Taking Deforestation out of Soy Supply Chain in MATOPIBA region.
Evaluation Type: Mid-term Review
Focal Area: Biodiversity
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-6
GEF Project ID: 9617
PIMS Number: 5896
Key Stakeholders: Ministry of Environment Brazil; Conservation International ; Fundacão Brasileira de Desenvolvimento Sustentavel (FBDS), Sociedad Rural Brasileira (SRB)
Countries: BRAZIL
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

Revise outcome indicators and targets to correspond to the SMART criteria, adaptive management measures, time constraints, and political context.

JUSTIFICATION: Several outcome indicators and targets are ambitious and not suitable. Also, the political context has affected project execution.

2

Revise the Matrix of project risks.

 

JUSTIFICATION: Higher and new risks were identified by the reviewer

3

Revise project budget

 

JUSTIFICATION: According to the adaptive management measures undertaken by the project, and the recommendations of this MTR, a budget revision may be needed. Also, because the currency exchange, US Dollars to Brazil Reais, has significantly increased during project execution.

4

Oversee project implementation more closely and enhance communication with CI.

 

JUSTIFICATION: Next phase may require more effective communication with CI and support to undertake some of the recommended actions

5

Clarify and discuss with the other implementing agencies (IFC, WWF, and UNDP-FI) the role of the Project Management Unit concerning overall project coordination in terms of the integrated approach.

 

JUSTIFICATION: Outlined in the Prodoc (paragraphs # 182 and 186) and detailed in paragraph 22 of this MTR

6

Foster synergies and knowledge sharing with other GEF supported projects including the SGP, World Bank projects, as well as with the Brazil’s REDD+ Strategy, (when suitable and feasible) as mentioned in paragraphs #49 and # 84 of this MTR and as indicated in the Project Document.

 

JUSTIFICATION: The experience, studies and advances of other projects with similar objectives may benefit this Brazil child project.

7

Support CI in bringing together the other implementing agencies (IFC, WWF, UNEP-FI) for the construction of a joint plan for the remaining months of the project.

 

JUSTIFICATION: UNDP can contribute to convening and catalyzing interests and responsibilities under the project objectives as the GEF implementing agency of this project.

8

 

Integrate EMBRAPA in the Project Board together with MAPA for successful project execution and sustainability.

 

JUSTIFICATION: EMBRAPA is fundamental due that farmers highly trust this public enterprise and because of the successful ABC Programs and broader partnerships that can leverage the results of this project. The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Supply is participating in the Project Board but is not a formal member according to project design.

9

Define the target for the number and size of traditional lands protected trough safeguards.

 

JUSTIFICATION: This action is critical for project monitoring and evaluation.

10

Extend the project execution by 6 months at no additional costs.

 

JUSTIFICATION: The project is delayed and will need additional time to finalize key outputs. Furthermore, the COVID-19 will significantly affect project execution.

11

Reinforce capacities of Tocantins and Bahia state environment secretaries towards the implementation of the SICAR and the PRA through the ongoing project support. Also continue efforts to support the Consortium among the secretaries of environment and agriculture

 

JUSTIFICATION: Registration, analysis, validation, and proposed restoration plans are core results to accomplish the project objective. The Consortium may contribute to the sustainability of project impacts.

12

Continue and focus on the ongoing actions carried on through the MATOPIBA Coalition for the discussion and presentation to decision-makers of policies with potential long-term impacts.

 

JUSTIFICATION: This action is key to ensure project mid and long-term impacts

13

Continue and increase collaboration to EMBRAPA’s ABC programs aimed at stimulating the number and quality of loans.

 

JUSTIFICATION: This action could exert a significant and sustained impact in the focus area, with potential for replicability.

14

Accelerate the mapping of land use, which is crucial for promoting responsible soy sourcing and protected areas.

 

JUSTIFICATION: Through this mapping of land use, the project may propose the areas under integrated management

15

Continue and reinforce the tools and mechanisms directed at traders, financial institutions, and companies involved in the soy market chain, through for example, the WBCSD Natural Capital Protocol, the Soy Toolkit developed by Proforest, or the Agroideal through TNC.

 

JUSTIFICATION: Encouraging responsible soy sourcing processes contributes significantly to achieving project objectives.

16

Monitor and foster gender mainstreaming, following recommendations of the Gender Assessment conducted in 2018. Include the gender balance approaches in future project contracts and agreements.Provide spaces and attention to women’s contributions in project meetings and workshops.

JUSTIFICATION: These actions on gender ensure equal and active participation by women in the agriculture sector and within the project management.

17

Draft a work plan for the remaining months of project execution jointly prepared with the WWF, IFC, UNEP-FI, particularly focusing on impacts and sustainability of project outcomes.

 

JUSTIFICATION: It is critical to carry out a detailed revision of the workplan (activities and realistic deadlines), and to discuss the issue of indicators. Before the project ends, it is critical to plan for the project’s exit strategy to ensure continuity of project results, incorporating lessons learned.

18

Prepare a strategy for the sustainability of the MATOPIBA region through the MATOPIBA Coalition or other fora.

 

JUSTIFICATION: The MATOPIBA Coalition is the forum through which a strategy or project exit strategy for the sustainability of the MATOPIBA region can be prepared.  Assessments and studies carried out by the project may support this strategy.

19

Elaborate and execute a strategy of communication that considers implementing partners, implementing agencies, UNDP and the public. Consider adding more information on the project webpage.

 

JUSTIFICATION: A common message and the sharing of information would enhance project understanding and sustainability by stakeholders and the public.

20

In the strategy of communication, include a joint plan with EMBRAPA and Banks to effectively disseminate the good practices under the EMBRAPA’s programs, some of which have been supported by the CI Brazil child project.

 

JUSTIFICATION: It is essential to highlight the ABC Soy, ABC Beef, ABC Milk, and the crop-livestock-forest integration (ILPF) programs. The farming integrated approach or diversification of their production has proven to be highly beneficial. The ABC Programs contribute to reducing deforestation in MATOPIBA, to better water and soil management, and to increase the resilience of the MATOPIBA region, along with farm productivity.

21

Engage in knowledge exchange on applying the integrated supply approach through meetings of the GGP Global Secretariat and through spaces provided by the Adaptive Management and Learning child project, including the sharing of lessons learned and knowledge products.

 

JUSTIFICATION: Since this is a GEF demonstrative project, part of a global initiative, it is key to share information with the community and through the Adaptive Management and Learning child project.

1. Recommendation:

Revise outcome indicators and targets to correspond to the SMART criteria, adaptive management measures, time constraints, and political context.

JUSTIFICATION: Several outcome indicators and targets are ambitious and not suitable. Also, the political context has affected project execution.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

In February 2018, CI pledged to revise the indicators precisely due to the topics highlighted by the reviewer. However, we received the information that any changes of this nature with the GEF should happen after the MTR. Since MTR took place only by the end of Year 3 and this is GGP’s last year (2020/2021), we believe it’s not appropriate to modify outcomes’ indicators and targets at this point of project implementation. Since 2018, CI is monitoring other indicators, which complement those listed on Prodoc and are more accurate concerning activities’ implementation under project Outcomes and Outputs.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1 Revise GGP indicators proposed by CI and technically justify their adoption in GGP’s monitoring (not in the Prodoc)
[Added: 2020/12/02] [Last Updated: 2021/07/07]
CI 2021/06 Completed Project closing. History
2. Recommendation:

Revise the Matrix of project risks.

 

JUSTIFICATION: Higher and new risks were identified by the reviewer

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

Revising the project’s risk matrix is aligned with closer oversight actions to be implemented by UNDP CO. This action will be coordinated with RTA and will also be reflected in the annual Project Implementation Report. Overall risks will be mapped out, including risks related to COVID-19, as well as the key challenges impacting the individual project components

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1 To revise the Risk Matrix, UNDP CO proposes a working session with CI to map the high impact and high likelihood risks to deliver each output/product, including mitigation actions.
[Added: 2020/12/02]
UNDP CO, Regional Technical Center. 2020/12 Completed
3. Recommendation:

Revise project budget

 

JUSTIFICATION: According to the adaptive management measures undertaken by the project, and the recommendations of this MTR, a budget revision may be needed. Also, because the currency exchange, US Dollars to Brazil Reais, has significantly increased during project execution.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

As agreed between UNDP CO & CI, project budget is under revision since June and will finalize the process in December 2020. This exercise will address the issues of currency exchange, expenses reallocations and activities implementation in the last 6 months of Year 4 (until Jun.21), as well as the impact of restraints imposed by Covid-19 pandemic in Brazil since March 2020.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1 Revise project budget (2020/2021)
[Added: 2020/12/02]
CI, UNDP CO 2020/12 Completed
4. Recommendation:

Oversee project implementation more closely and enhance communication with CI.

 

JUSTIFICATION: Next phase may require more effective communication with CI and support to undertake some of the recommended actions

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

UNDP CO has discussed this recommendation with CI and has agreed to hold regular monthly meetings, in addition to eventual meetings to deal with urgent matters. UNDP CO will also provide additional support to CI in liaising with political entities, including the ministries at the federal level (Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Environment). The CO has already contacted the new Secretary of External Relations at the Ministry of Environment, reintroduced the project, shared material and contacts at the Ministry of Agriculture.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.1 UNDP CO to hold regular monthly meetings with CI, as from August 2020. Also to support CI to engage with the Ministries in Brasília.
[Added: 2020/12/02] [Last Updated: 2021/07/07]
UNDP CO 2020/08 Completed UNDP CO is holding regular monthly meetings with CI. History
5. Recommendation:

Clarify and discuss with the other implementing agencies (IFC, WWF, and UNDP-FI) the role of the Project Management Unit concerning overall project coordination in terms of the integrated approach.

 

JUSTIFICATION: Outlined in the Prodoc (paragraphs # 182 and 186) and detailed in paragraph 22 of this MTR

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

Management response:

Address the topic of Project Management Unit role concerning GGP’s integrated approach in the next round of Governance meetings (aka the Executive Committee Meeting with WWF, IFC and UNEP-FI) at UNDP Brazil headquarters in Brasília, DF.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
5.1 Schedule next Executive Committee meeting and coordinate with UNDP on the discussed agenda
[Added: 2020/12/02] [Last Updated: 2021/07/07]
CI with support of UNDP CO 2020/12 Completed Executive Committee meeting held. History
6. Recommendation:

Foster synergies and knowledge sharing with other GEF supported projects including the SGP, World Bank projects, as well as with the Brazil’s REDD+ Strategy, (when suitable and feasible) as mentioned in paragraphs #49 and # 84 of this MTR and as indicated in the Project Document.

 

JUSTIFICATION: The experience, studies and advances of other projects with similar objectives may benefit this Brazil child project.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02] [Last Updated: 2020/12/02]

 

: UNDP CO will invite CI representatives to have meetings with other managers in charge of other GEF supported projects (e.g Bem Diverso, etc.), as well as with the Brazil’s GCF REDD+ project in other to seek synergies, exchange lessons learned and mitigate similar risks. Moreover, UNDP CO with bridge interaction between CI and the integration crop-farming-forest’s network.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
7.1 CI and UNDP CO to present the Matopiba project to other sections (GEF lead officer, REDD+ Project Manager, and others) and explore synergies by December 2020
[Added: 2020/12/02]
UNDP CO and project managers of other projects 2020/12 Completed
7. Recommendation:

Support CI in bringing together the other implementing agencies (IFC, WWF, UNEP-FI) for the construction of a joint plan for the remaining months of the project.

 

JUSTIFICATION: UNDP can contribute to convening and catalyzing interests and responsibilities under the project objectives as the GEF implementing agency of this project.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

UNDP CO and CI agreed to hold preparatory meetings prior to Board meeting to better explore synergies with other implementing agencies. Trilateral preparatory meeting with each other implementing agencies may be held to seek concrete actions to be taken by the end of the project, including those that may contribute to the socioeconomic response post-COVID 19.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
6.1 UNDP CO to facilitate and support more joined up work (including IFC, WWF, UNEP-FI) in the next meeting to be held in 2020.
[Added: 2020/12/02]
CI and UNDP CO 2020/12 Completed
8. Recommendation:

 

Integrate EMBRAPA in the Project Board together with MAPA for successful project execution and sustainability.

 

JUSTIFICATION: EMBRAPA is fundamental due that farmers highly trust this public enterprise and because of the successful ABC Programs and broader partnerships that can leverage the results of this project. The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Supply is participating in the Project Board but is not a formal member according to project design.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply (MAPA) is an active member of Project Board since August 2018 (Year 2 of the project), despite not formally present in the Prodoc. The Project Board is the sphere of deliberation composed by CI, UNDP and Brazilian federal government representatives, namely the Ministries of Environment and Agriculture. Embrapa is a member of the Steering Committee since 2019. Since the Ministries are also part of GGPs Steering Committee, they have an opportunity to engage with Embrapa and discuss its relevant results benefiting project implementation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
8.1 Provide quarterly updates on specific developments under EMBRAPA’s cooperation agreement to Project Board
[Added: 2020/12/02]
UNDP CO, Project Board, CI 2021/12 Completed
9. Recommendation:

Define the target for the number and size of traditional lands protected trough safeguards.

 

JUSTIFICATION: This action is critical for project monitoring and evaluation.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

CI’s team has been revising the recommendations on socioenvironmental safeguards for Matopiba prepared in 2019 to integrate those results with the river basins mapped in the focal areas of GGP. Together with close state government collaboration, this will be part of the criteria to define targeted traditional lands (number/size) to be protected through project safeguards.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
9.1 Identify traditional lands (number and size) within GGPs geographical scope (selected river basins) to be targeted by project activities
[Added: 2020/12/02]
CI 2020/10 Completed
10. Recommendation:

Extend the project execution by 6 months at no additional costs.

 

JUSTIFICATION: The project is delayed and will need additional time to finalize key outputs. Furthermore, the COVID-19 will significantly affect project execution.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

Due to some constraints faced along project implementation (political environment and COVID pandemic), it may be needed to extend the project. UNDP will seek clarifications with UNDP-GEF on the conditions and procedures for such an extension and will explore the possible length of the extension request with CI. In this scenario, CI would need to assess the budgetary implications of such an extension in order to achieve the full commitments as stated in the ProDoc, keeping in mind that the PMC amount established in the ProDoc cannot be exceeded.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
10.1 assess the budgetary implications of such an extension in order to achieve the full commitments as stated in the ProDoc 10.2 UNDP will explore the possible length of the extension request with CI 10.3 UNDP will seek clarifications with UNDP-GEF on the conditions and procedures for such an extension
[Added: 2020/12/02]
CI, UNDP CO, UNDP Regional Technical Center 2020/12 Completed
11. Recommendation:

Reinforce capacities of Tocantins and Bahia state environment secretaries towards the implementation of the SICAR and the PRA through the ongoing project support. Also continue efforts to support the Consortium among the secretaries of environment and agriculture

 

JUSTIFICATION: Registration, analysis, validation, and proposed restoration plans are core results to accomplish the project objective. The Consortium may contribute to the sustainability of project impacts.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

: CI signed cooperation agreements with state governments of Tocantins and Bahia in 2018 and has been carrying out the activities defined in the work plans since Year 2. One of the main bottlenecks identified by both states was the support in CAR validation and technical experts were hired in 2019 to meet this demand. However, during discussions held with the local secretaries, it was identified the requirement to extend experts’ contract until December 2020, in order to meet CAR validation targets mutually agreed by CI and the states. Concerning the Consortium of Secretaries, CI continues to engage in the consolidation of this strategic governance forum in Matopiba, through the support of the elaboration of their workplan, as well as securing co-financing budget to support their meetings’ organization in throughout 2021.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
11.1 Extend contract with technical experts to support CAR analysis with state government until December 2020 11.2 Gather results on CAR analysis supported by GGP and discuss actions targeted at advancing PRAs with state government 11.3 Hire a consultancy to support the elaboration of the Consortium of Secretaries’ work plan 11.4 Support Consortium meetings and dialogues
[Added: 2020/12/02]
July 2021 February 2021 July 2020 July - April 2020 2020/12 Completed
12. Recommendation:

Continue and focus on the ongoing actions carried on through the MATOPIBA Coalition for the discussion and presentation to decision-makers of policies with potential long-term impacts.

 

JUSTIFICATION: This action is key to ensure project mid and long-term impacts

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

The discussions under the Matopiba Coalition are taking place on a quarterly basis, bringing together representatives of traders and financial institutions to act upon a shared vision of sustainable production in the region established in 2019 together with a workplan (properly aligned with GGP goals). This shared vision will be further explored through a series of interviews with Matopiba Coalition partners, bringing their perspectives on ecosystems’ services relevance within commodities production. Together with a set of farmers’ case studies, this effort will culminate in a publication – to be launched in May 2021. This will be widely disseminated among key stakeholders in different sectors to support decision-making for the Matopiba region

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
12.1 Engage with Matopiba Coalition partners, by gathering in a quarterly basis to foster discussions and monitor workplan implementation.
[Added: 2020/12/02] [Last Updated: 2021/07/07]
CI 2021/05 Completed UNDP Engaged with Matopiba Coalition partners, to foster discussions and monitor workplan implementation. History
13. Recommendation:

Continue and increase collaboration to EMBRAPA’s ABC programs aimed at stimulating the number and quality of loans.

 

JUSTIFICATION: This action could exert a significant and sustained impact in the focus area, with potential for replicability.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

Since early 2020, CI’s team is focused on increasing collaboration with Embrapa to support other ABC initiatives exploring the potential of the integration between soy and cattle supply chains in Tocantins. Cooperation agreements are planned to be finalized in Q3 2020.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
13.1 Sign cooperation agreements with EMBRAPA to support their ABC initiatives in the region (ABC Carne and ABC Leite) 13.2 Monitor activities’ implementation
[Added: 2020/12/02] [Last Updated: 2021/07/07]
CI 2021/05 No Longer Applicable [Justification: Rec is beyond UNDP.]
Rec is beyond UNDP. History
14. Recommendation:

Accelerate the mapping of land use, which is crucial for promoting responsible soy sourcing and protected areas.

 

JUSTIFICATION: Through this mapping of land use, the project may propose the areas under integrated management

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

GGP results under partnerships with FBDS, TNC, IEB and Lina Galvani Institute (PVC) provided relevant data to be integrated in a comprehensive landscape management strategy for Matopiba. These efforts will culminate in a proposal to public and private sector stakeholders, considering elements of prioritization for conservation and restoration, hydrographical basins mapping, potential of protected areas implementation and suitable zones to sustainably expand soy production.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
14.1 Integrate GGP results to develop a proposal of integrated land use management to public and private decision-makers
[Added: 2020/12/02] [Last Updated: 2021/07/07]
CI 2021/05 Completed Complete History
15. Recommendation:

Continue and reinforce the tools and mechanisms directed at traders, financial institutions, and companies involved in the soy market chain, through for example, the WBCSD Natural Capital Protocol, the Soy Toolkit developed by Proforest, or the Agroideal through TNC.

 

JUSTIFICATION: Encouraging responsible soy sourcing processes contributes significantly to achieving project objectives.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

CI understands that recommendation 15 must be addressed by the Demand Child, since this is primarily within the scope of WWF interventions under GGP. Considering CI’s limited role and budget on this matter, it’s important to point out that such recommendation is not applicable.

Key Actions:

16. Recommendation:

Monitor and foster gender mainstreaming, following recommendations of the Gender Assessment conducted in 2018. Include the gender balance approaches in future project contracts and agreements.Provide spaces and attention to women’s contributions in project meetings and workshops.

JUSTIFICATION: These actions on gender ensure equal and active participation by women in the agriculture sector and within the project management.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

The collaboration with the State secretary of Agriculture of Tocantins (SEAGRO) and with Embrapa in 2019 were key to advance farmers targeted actions and build a less hostile environment towards gender focused activities, as perceived in Year 2. The 2020 – 2021 gender-focused plan was prepared by CI’s team and revised by UNDP. This approach is aligned with GGP Program report prepared in December 2019 by Leisa Perch (UN Women) and considered the recommendations in the Gender Assessment produced in 2018. It aims to (1) engage women's organizations that work in agricultural production primarily in the states of Matopiba; (2) elaborate a consolidated vision on sustainability from the perspective of women working in the soy supply chain (based on a qualitative and quantitative survey in Tocantins and Bahia); (3) Disseminate results and booklets in different communication channels and promote exchange of knowledge in workshops and events and (4) Promote technical training for rural producers in Matopiba, by developing capacity building modules on selected topics according to the demands and bottlenecks pointed out in the survey.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
16.1 Implement GGP Brazil 2020 – 2021 gender plan
[Added: 2020/12/02] [Last Updated: 2021/07/07]
CI 2021/05 Completed GGP Brazil 2020 – 2021 gender plan completed. History
17. Recommendation:

Draft a work plan for the remaining months of project execution jointly prepared with the WWF, IFC, UNEP-FI, particularly focusing on impacts and sustainability of project outcomes.

 

JUSTIFICATION: It is critical to carry out a detailed revision of the workplan (activities and realistic deadlines), and to discuss the issue of indicators. Before the project ends, it is critical to plan for the project’s exit strategy to ensure continuity of project results, incorporating lessons learned.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

Coordination between GGP implementing agencies (WWF, IFC, UNEP-FI) take place on a quarterly basis in the Executive Committee governance meetings conducted by CI. In early 2020, a few activities were already identified for jointly implementation in order to achieve greater impact in the region.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
17.1 Carry out Executive Committee meetings focusing on the monitoring of integrated activities’ implementation and indicators discussion
[Added: 2020/12/02] [Last Updated: 2021/07/09]
CI with support of UNDP CO 2020/12 Completed Executive Committee meetings focusing on the monitoring of integrated activities’ implementation and indicators held History
18. Recommendation:

Prepare a strategy for the sustainability of the MATOPIBA region through the MATOPIBA Coalition or other fora.

 

JUSTIFICATION: The MATOPIBA Coalition is the forum through which a strategy or project exit strategy for the sustainability of the MATOPIBA region can be prepared.  Assessments and studies carried out by the project may support this strategy.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

A shared vision for the development of activities towards a sustainable production model in Matopiba was already consolidated in partnership with the Matopiba Coalition in 2019. A workplan is under implementation with the support of traders and financial institutions. These opportunities can be perceived also in the ongoing collaboration between CI and the Consortium of Secretaries, another strategic forum with the potential to provide financial sustainability and institutional robustness, as well as scaling-up GGP actions in the long-term

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
18.1 Coordinate discussions with the Matopiba Coalition and Consortium of Secretaries towards a strategy for the sustainability of Matopiba
[Added: 2020/12/02] [Last Updated: 2021/07/09]
CI and the MATOPIBA Coalition 2021/05 Completed Discussions with the Matopiba Coalition and Consortium of Secretaries towards a strategy for the sustainability of Matopiba coordinated History
19. Recommendation:

Elaborate and execute a strategy of communication that considers implementing partners, implementing agencies, UNDP and the public. Consider adding more information on the project webpage.

 

JUSTIFICATION: A common message and the sharing of information would enhance project understanding and sustainability by stakeholders and the public.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

Due mainly to political risk throughout Year 3 and the scaling-up of polarization between agriculture and environment agendas, CI had to adjust GGP’s communication strategy to avoid reactions from stakeholders, which could potentially impact activities implementation and government engagement. Our communication plan for Year 4 in under revision until the end of July. It aims to establish clear actions for the next 12 months focused on showcasing project main results and achievements, through case studies, media coverage, publications, web platforms and events.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
19.1 Finalize communication plan revision 19.2 Implement communication plan activities engaging GGP partners
[Added: 2020/12/02] [Last Updated: 2021/07/09]
CI 2021/06 Completed Communication plan revised and implemented History
20. Recommendation:

In the strategy of communication, include a joint plan with EMBRAPA and Banks to effectively disseminate the good practices under the EMBRAPA’s programs, some of which have been supported by the CI Brazil child project.

 

JUSTIFICATION: It is essential to highlight the ABC Soy, ABC Beef, ABC Milk, and the crop-livestock-forest integration (ILPF) programs. The farming integrated approach or diversification of their production has proven to be highly beneficial. The ABC Programs contribute to reducing deforestation in MATOPIBA, to better water and soil management, and to increase the resilience of the MATOPIBA region, along with farm productivity.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

GGP Brazil communication plan for Year 4 in under revision until the end of July. It aims to establish clear actions for the next 12 months focused on showcasing project main results and achievements, through case studies, media coverage, publications, web platforms and events. CI’s team will include coordinated activities with EMBRAPA and financial institutions, focusing on the support to ABC programs, to disseminate main results achieved.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
20.1 Revise GGP Brazil communication plan to include activities with Embrapa and partners focused on promoting the impact on ABC agenda in the region
[Added: 2020/12/02]
CI 2020/12 Completed
21. Recommendation:

Engage in knowledge exchange on applying the integrated supply approach through meetings of the GGP Global Secretariat and through spaces provided by the Adaptive Management and Learning child project, including the sharing of lessons learned and knowledge products.

 

JUSTIFICATION: Since this is a GEF demonstrative project, part of a global initiative, it is key to share information with the community and through the Adaptive Management and Learning child project.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/02]

CI’s team participates in the GGP Global Secretariat calls and continuously provides materials and information to A&L child project reports, as well as attending workshops and meetings. In Year 4, as part of the communication plan, CI aims to consolidate GGP Brazil knowledge products, lessons learned and public policies’ recommendations in order to broadly share with partners (also through A&L exchange platforms).

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
21.1 Share knowledge products, lessons learned and recommendations with GGP community
[Added: 2020/12/02] [Last Updated: 2021/07/09]
CI 2021/06 Completed Knowledge products, lessons learned and recommendations with GGP community shared upon project closure 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