Success message
error message
warn message
Cross-border Cooperation for Sustainable Peace and Development Tajikistan_Kyrgyzstan
Commissioning Unit: Kyrgyzstan
Evaluation Plan: 2018-2022
Evaluation Type: Project
Completion Date: 06/2020
Unit Responsible for providing Management Response: Kyrgyzstan
Documents Related to overall Management Response:
 
1. Recommendation:

Revise Theories of Change (ToC) and strategies to further clarify the logic of pathways with regards to changes in attitudes/Behaviours and linkages/cooperation/trust building.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/08]

The Recommendation is accepted. In the design of future programmatic interventions having elements of cross-border cooperation and strengthening social cohesion, UNDP will build the ToC and approach on a thorough eco political analysis that takes into account immediate and underlying causes, root challenges and results chain logic to clarify the changes in attitudes/behaviors and linkages/cooperation/trust building.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
During project design and through project duration regularly monitor and analyse root causes, drivers, potential risks and other factors that define local context developments and results chain logic to clarify the changes in attitude/behaviors and linkages/cooperation/trust building.
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The actions will be taken during next project design and implementation stages. History
Test and validate ToC with key stakeholders and target communities during design stage to identify potential risks in the results flow logic to find the best appropriate control measures.
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The actions will be taken during next project design and implementation stages. History
2. Recommendation:

Clarify the outcome of Cross-border peace building projects to detail which drivers of conflict they aim to address and therefore which types of conflict incidents they may reduce.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/08]

The recommedation is partially accepted. At outcome level, there are many root causes and drivers of conflict that come into play and that are closely interrelated, and the programmatic response should consider complexities of each particular target zone and conflict areas. The recommendation is more relevant to the level of project outputs, where the project can better focus its interventions on specific conflict drivers.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
During the next project design phase and through the project duration: Analyze root causes, drivers, potential risks and other factors to identify context specific conflict drivers to be addressed by the project and design relevant programmatic response to reduce conflict incidents.
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed
3. Recommendation:

Ensure that the strengthening of Capacities for Peace, in addition to the addressing of conflict drivers, is central to cross-border peace building, and build on existing Capacities for Peace. Ensure that outcome statements clarify which Capacities for Peace the project aims to contribute to strengthening.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/08]

The recommendation is accepted. UNDP will strengthen analysis of the existing and potential Capacities of Peace, in terms of systems, processes, mechanisms and institutions that can enable peace building and enhance broader social cohesion agenda and integrate the analysis into design and ToC for new projects aimed at peace-building and cross-border cooperation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
During next project design stage: Analyze the existing and potential Capacities of Peace, in terms of systems, processes, mechanisms and institutions that can enable peace building and enhance
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The action will be taken during next project design stage.
4. Recommendation:

Ensure that strengthening of cross-border trade is based on a further in-depth analysis of the linkages between income generation/business support and cross-border trade, and between cross-border trade and peace building.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/08]

The recommendation is accepted. Support to income generation and business has multiple purposes, such as strengthening local livelihoods, reducing poverty and inequality, empowering of vulnerable groups, strengthening social inclusion, etc. The linkages between more effective cross-border trade and cross-border peace building will be taken into consideration in future programming.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
During project design stage: In-depth analysis of the linkages between income generation/business support and cross-border trade, and between cross-border trade and peace building.
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The action will be taken during next project design stage.
During next project design stage: Design interventions on strengthening cross-border trade based on the above analysis
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The action will be taken during next project design stage.
During next project design stage: Embed peacebuilding/social cohesion approaches into existing and future livelihood and cross-border trade projects (Aid for Trade Project)
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The action will be taken during next project design stage.
5. Recommendation:

Further strengthen conflict sensitivity by ensuring close alignment of interventions with the conflict context; robust and ongoing local community level understanding of conflict dynamics; providing space for adaptation of interventions where needed; and ongoing joint monitoring of intervention implementation.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/08]

The recommendation is accepted. This recommendation will be taken into account in future programming. Space for adaptation of interventions based on joint ongoing monitoring data demands clarity of implementation arrangements, including protocols for change in the project approach prior to launch of the project and existence of clear agreement between the donor and implementing partners on the level of tolerance for change.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Regularly monitor and analyze root causes, drivers, potential risks and other factors that define local context and conflict dynamics;
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The recommendation and actions will be taken into account in future programming.
Test and validate the monitoring data and analysis with key stakeholders and target communities before the intervention takes place to identify potential risks and - strengthen conflict sensitivity.
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The recommendation and actions will be taken on future programme implementation.
6. Recommendation:

Bring further nuance to the mirroring principle so that local context is prioritised in the design of interventions

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/08]

The recommendation is accpeted. The principles of any future projects will be defined based on the mirroring principle ensuring that interventions on one side of the border were mirrored on the other, as well as on the result of analysis of situation, local context and conflict drivers and ToC of project interventions.  Moreover, the conflict sensitivity should be a core principle while designing interventions. The approaches should be tailored to particular local contexts.  It is important to note that mirroring principle should abide by the principle of conflict sensitivity and should also be assessed from an impact and cost-benefit perspective. 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
During the next project design phase and through the project duration: Regularly monitor and analyze root causes, drivers, potential risks and other factors that define local context developments and conflict dynamics.
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The recommendation and actions will be taken during next project design and implementation stages.
Design programmatic response based on the above analysis and mirroring approach tailored to particular local context in line with conflict sensitivity principle
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The recommendation and actions will be taken during next project design and implementation.
7. Recommendation:

Further strengthen coordination and M&E by appointing an overall cross-border coordinator.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/08]

The recommendation is partially accepted. The operational and management structure of future projects will be defined jointly by participating parties based on the scope of each particular project and taking into account the principles of impartiality and neutrality.  Appointing one cross-border coordinator may have advantages in terms of ensuring programmatic coherence/alignment – although this cannot be assumed.  However, combining this with an M&E function risks bias due to geographic location.  This could also create unnecessary sensitivities in politically charged cross-border projects/interventions.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
During next project design phase: Discuss and design the need for project coordinator by implementing partners on case by case basis in case of having new cross-border project envisaging cooperation of several implementing agencies, and consider other mechanisms and means to strengthen coordination and M&E by implementing agencies and UNDP
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The actions and discussions will be taken place during next project design stage.
8. Recommendation:

Further strengthen peace building coordination between RUNOs by considering more implementation through the same implementing partner and complementarity in terms of beneficiary targeting.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/08]

The recommendation is partially accpeted. Recommendation about ‘more implementation through the same implementing partner’ is vague and the usage of ‘Implementing Partner’ terminology needed to be clarified. It should be noted that the Implementing Partner terminology also refer to the RUNOs themselves in the lexicon of some UN Agencies. Based on the related section in the report on page 40, UNDP agrees that overall coordination within UNCTs is enhanced when agencies co-implemented through the same implementing partner or complemented each other in terms of beneficiary targeting.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
During project design: Analyze comparative strengths, capacities and mandates of each RUNO and the level of access RUNOs/IPs have.
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The actions will be taken during next project design stage.
During next project design stage: Discuss and agree with RUNOS on the distribution of the roles and responsibilities, complementarities of actions, targeted beneficiaries, coordination mechanisms, information exchange etc.
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The actions will be taken during next project design stage.
9. Recommendation:

Continuously consider the dilemma/trade-offs between the aim of short-term conflict reduction and longer-term trust building when considering the rehabilitation of infrastructure that discourages shared use.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/08]

the recommendation is accepted. The trade-off between the aim of short-term conflict reduction and longer-term trust building will be continuously considered.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
During next project design and implementation stages: Define trade-off on case-by-case basis and considering the actual benefits for the local communities and target beneficiaries while planning the rehabilitation of community infrastructure.
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The recommendation and actions will be taken and discussed during next project design and implementation stages.
Regularly monitor and assess the implementation approaches in delivering infrastructure activities
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The actions will be taken during next project design stage and implementation.
10. Recommendation:

Incorporate a review of potential entry points on policy/advocacy to support progress towards a solution in the border areas into the design of future cross-border peace building projects.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/12/08]

The recommendation is accepted. UNDP will strengthen its partnership and advocacy work with the national counterparts to ensure the entry points for policy actions are clearly defined during the design stage and are in line with the principles of impartiality and do-no-harm. 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
During next project design stage: Conduct participatory conflict analysis and needs assessment to identify potential entry points for programme interventions in line with principles of impartiality and do no harm.
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The action will be taken during next project design stage.
During next project design stage: Validate the results of analysis and envisaged programme response with key counterparts and communities
[Added: 2020/12/08]
UNDP 2020/12 Completed The action will be taken during next project design stage and implementation.

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