Evaluación Final Implementación Protocolo de Nagoya

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2018-2022, Costa Rica
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
12/2018
Completion Date:
11/2018
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
11,600

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TdR Final Evaluation Nagoya.docx tor English 492.28 KB Posted 22
Download document Executive Summary Nagoya.docx summary English 24.92 KB Posted 27
Download document PIMS 4962 TE Final Nagoya.docx report English 4115.01 KB Posted 19
Download document PIMS 4962 TE Final Nagoya.pdf report English 1478.61 KB Posted 10
Title Evaluación Final Implementación Protocolo de Nagoya
Atlas Project Number: 00080416
Evaluation Plan: 2018-2022, Costa Rica
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 11/2018
Planned End Date: 12/2018
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Environment & Sustainable Development
  • 2. Others
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
  • 1. Output 2.5. Legal and regulatory frameworks, policies and institutions enabled to ensure the conservation, sustainable use, and access and benefit sharing of natural resources, biodiversity and ecosystems, in line with international conventions and national
Evaluation Budget(US $): 11,600
Source of Funding: GEF Trustfund
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 13,750
Joint Programme: No
Mandatory Evaluation: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Oscar Huertas External evaluator oscarhuertas@gmail.com
Oscar Huertas External evaluator oscarhuertas@gmail.com
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title: Promoting the Application of the Nagoya Protocol through the Development of Nature-based Products, Benefit-sharing and Biodiversity Conservation
Evaluation Type: Terminal Evaluation
Focal Area: Biodiversity
Project Type: MSP
GEF Phase: GEF-5
GEF Project ID: 5420
PIMS Number: 4962
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: COSTA RICA
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

Regarding the design and programming of similar interventions in the future, the evaluation recommends establishing the specific problem to be solved from the beginning, with a theory of change according to where the route is visualized from the inputs, activities, and products to the expected results or effects.

2

Investments must be made in products that can be achieved through projects that do not depend on external factors or political will (for example, ratification of treaties). Considering the political swings is essential. 

3

During the design phase, it is essential to analyze the experience of the Nagoya project by including different organizations from different sectors, but especially by linking the private sector and civil society.

4

For future interventions that require an implementing agency, it is important to analyze the financial solvency in detail1, as well as the technical capacity, experience, and prestige.

5

All GEF interventions need to consider gender mainstreaming strategies from the onset, as well as a clear link to the achievement of the SDGs.

6

Dissemination and communication: the project should make a compilation of the lessons learned and good practices in the process of negotiating the distribution of benefits, focusing on the active participation of different organizations, the incentives to keep an active collaboration, and the human process of Biological products. This information can be translated into a common language, identifying key messages and narratives to disseminate through the UNDP website, email lists, media, and social networks. Likewise, this information can be used for the systematization of Nagoya experiences.

7

The project needs to elaborate a detailed exit strategy, establishing the steps to be taken and pending issues (for example, the appropriation of the project by the stakeholders involved, viability strategies for INBIO, management of missing data on commercial viability and economic, possible investment by the actors involved and / or third parties, possible linking of the lessons of this project to the portfolio of UNDP projects).

1. Recommendation:

Regarding the design and programming of similar interventions in the future, the evaluation recommends establishing the specific problem to be solved from the beginning, with a theory of change according to where the route is visualized from the inputs, activities, and products to the expected results or effects.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/19]

The original implementation of the Project was designed within the scope of action of Inbio for the development of the two natural products but also included institutional strengthening and Nagoya Protocol implementation. The three together were very ambitious.  UNDP was recognized as a neutral partner that could facilitate at least the institutional and technical scope.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The LPAC process in the Country offices reviews consistency between project scope and regulatory framework of the stakeholders and partners.
[Added: 2018/12/19]
UNDP Officer 2019/12 Initiated
2. Recommendation:

Investments must be made in products that can be achieved through projects that do not depend on external factors or political will (for example, ratification of treaties). Considering the political swings is essential. 

Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/19]

UNDP will ensure that theory of change in CR includes assumptions and does not depend solely on political will in a defined outcome or that there are alternative accomplishments or milestones that a project may report, such as those achieved in the Nagoya Project regarding national capacities for ABS implementation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The LPAC process in the Country offices reviews risk management and POPP procedures for NGO implementation.
[Added: 2018/12/19]
UNDP Officer 2020/12 Not Initiated
3. Recommendation:

During the design phase, it is essential to analyze the experience of the Nagoya project by including different organizations from different sectors, but especially by linking the private sector and civil society.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/19]

SDGs also point out to the need for alliances to achieve sustainable development.

Key Actions:

4. Recommendation:

For future interventions that require an implementing agency, it is important to analyze the financial solvency in detail1, as well as the technical capacity, experience, and prestige.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/19]

Regarding financial solvency UNDP will request more detailed bank statements and permits, especially when operation depends on these factors.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
UNDP will request more detailed bank statements and permits for NGO partners, especially when operation depends on these factors
[Added: 2018/12/19]
Program officer with operations manager 2019/06 Initiated
5. Recommendation:

All GEF interventions need to consider gender mainstreaming strategies from the onset, as well as a clear link to the achievement of the SDGs.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/19]

UNDP Country office is undergoing a review to strengthen gender mainstreaming in all Projects and Operations.  SDGs are the basis for the new UNDAF and CPD which all

Key Actions:

6. Recommendation:

Dissemination and communication: the project should make a compilation of the lessons learned and good practices in the process of negotiating the distribution of benefits, focusing on the active participation of different organizations, the incentives to keep an active collaboration, and the human process of Biological products. This information can be translated into a common language, identifying key messages and narratives to disseminate through the UNDP website, email lists, media, and social networks. Likewise, this information can be used for the systematization of Nagoya experiences.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/19]

The project has systematized the experience of the Project in a publication and will develop a video for ABS best practices.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1. Project publication of the DMDP case will be showcased in the UNDP Publication of Nagoya at the COP. 2. Video will be developed with CONAGEBIO for ABS promotion.
[Added: 2018/12/19]
Project officer 2019/03 Initiated
7. Recommendation:

The project needs to elaborate a detailed exit strategy, establishing the steps to be taken and pending issues (for example, the appropriation of the project by the stakeholders involved, viability strategies for INBIO, management of missing data on commercial viability and economic, possible investment by the actors involved and / or third parties, possible linking of the lessons of this project to the portfolio of UNDP projects).

Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/19]

Sustainability is a great concern at different levels because the Country  and private enterprises have learned that bioprospection is not a cheap task and requires lots of investment in investigation to actually find an economical viable solution, or that findings are easily replaced with synthetical compounds. Wider policy and commercial strategy for a nature based solution alternative is required especially with private sector involvement.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The project will develop an Exit Strategy
[Added: 2018/12/19]
Program officer 2019/03 Initiated
UNDP is scoping possibility of supporting bioprospection through BIOFIN financial solutions development
[Added: 2018/12/19]
UNDP Officer 2019/03 Initiated

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

220 East 42nd Street
20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org