Success message
error message
warn message
Strengthening Protected Area System of the Komi Republic to Conserve Virgin Forest Biodiversity in the Pechora River Headwaters Region
Commissioning Unit: Russian Federation
Evaluation Plan: 2011-2017
Evaluation Type: Project
Completion Date: 12/2011
Unit Responsible for providing Management Response: Russian Federation
Documents Related to overall Management Response:
 
1. Recommendation: Capacity development for the NCP: During the next two years, while the NCP still has the foundational springboard of project support, the project should invest in individual and institutional capacity development to ensure the long-term sustainability of the NCP. With further capacity development the NCP has the potential to be the future catalyzing force for financial sustainability for the KR?s PAs once the project is complete. [Project Team, Non-commercial partnership]
Management Response: [Added: 2012/05/30]

The recommendation is appreciated, the capacity development of the NCP will be ensured through support in development of a detailed business model for the partnership and realistic workplans, as well as staff trainings

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Preparation of a comprehensive business model for the NCP and workplans to be agreed with the National Park Yugyd-Va and Pechoro-Ilychsly reserve
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
NCP, project team, federal PAs 2012/12 Completed The NCP business model and workplan developed History
Defining the capacity building and training needs of the NCP staff. Trainings for the staff.
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
NCP, PAs, project team 2013/12 Completed Training in accounting and finance reporting and disclosure requirement organised for the NCP Operation Manager. The financial and operational audit of the NCP activities organised. History
2. Recommendation: While the ideal long-term status would be for the existence of a regional PA directorate, as a risk mitigation strategy the project team and key stakeholders should strategize about specific feasible alternative options for the management of the KR PAs for the medium-term that could be catalyzed by the project if it appears that establishing a regional agency will not be a viable option. Options could include providing capacity development support on PA management for Forestry Committee staff, and putting additional emphasis on the local management committee mechanism. [Project Team and key government institution partners]
Management Response: [Added: 2012/05/30]

The recommendation is appreciated and the evaluator?s opinion shared with key stakeholders concerned. Upon consultations with the Komi Rosprirodnadzor, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Komi Forestry Committee it was decided that one of the existing affiliates of the Ministry of Natural Resources of Komi will be reorganized to function as a local entity responsible for the regional PA management. As an alternative option, such an entity could be formed within the Forestry Committee.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Environmental Research Center for study and protection of eastern-European tundra ecosystems? affiliated with the Ministry of Natural Resources of Komi will be reorganized to function as a local entity responsible for the regional PA management. As an alternative option, such an entity could be formed within the Forestry Committee. The project team will facilitate necessary consultations at the regional level and ensure support at the planning stages for the future agency and necessary capacity building and experience sharing for the relevant staff.
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
Ministry of Natural Resources of Komi Komi Rosprirodnadzor; Project team 2012/09 Completed The Directorate responsible for the regional PA management is established History
3. Recommendation: The mid-term of a project is early to recommend a project extension, but the option of a 6-12 month extension should be opened for consideration in the final year of project implementation. In addition to the initial slower-than-anticipated project implementation rate, the question of the establishment of the regional directorate for PAs remains uncertain. If this key outcome has not been achieved at the end of the project?s planned implementation period ? and it is anticipated that it could be achieved with project support under a short extension ? it may be worthwhile for the Project Steering Committee (PSC) to consider such a move. An extension should not be considered under this rationale if the establishment of a regional PAs directorate remains an open-ended question, without achievement of the final goal clearly in sight. [UNDP, Executing Agency, PSC]
Management Response: [Added: 2012/05/30]

The project extension seems already the only viable option and will be further justified and hopefully endorsed with the Project SCM and UNDP

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The project team will prepare justification for the project extension for further consideration and approval by UNDP and the Project Steering Committee
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
Project team, UNDP, PSC 2013/02 Completed Justification for the project extension endorsed by the Project Steering Committee in January 2013. Official request to UNDP/GEF for project extension prepared and endorsed. History
4. Recommendation: The project team must ensure that the necessary time and resources are set aside to turn the scientific data and knowledge gained from the carbon component research into practical recommendations for effective forest and ecosystem management in response to and planning for future climate change. The project team should plan to produce forest management and PA management technical guidelines that are as specific as possible on ways to strengthen ecosystem resilience to mitigate the effects of climate change. [Project Team, key government institution partners]
Management Response: [Added: 2012/05/30]

The recommendation is highly appreciated and will be implemented as described below in the ?key actions? section

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The project experts will come up with specific recommendations for effective forest and ecosystem management in response to and planning for future climate change and will try their best to ensure their integration into forest management guidelines for the PAs
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
Project team, federal PAs, Forestry Committee, Ministry of Natural Resources of KR, 2013/12 No Longer Applicable [Justification: Initial consultations with regional forest management authorities organised by the project proved the proposed intervention to be out of scope for the project with regard to integration of recommendations into the forest management guidelines]
History
5. Recommendation: The project team, UNDP, and relevant stakeholders should work to develop a proposal for logframe revision that would improve alignment of indicators and targets with SMART criteria, and would enhance the results-focused approach. A revision should then be approved by the PSC at its next meeting in early 2012. [Project Team, UNDP, Executing Agency, other partners as relevant]
Management Response: [Added: 2012/05/30]

The project logframe will be revised taking into account the MTE recommendations

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The project team is to consider recommendations proposed by the MTE with regard to logframe indicator revisions. The amended logframe will be discussed internally within the project team, with UNDP and presented to the Project Steering Committee for endorsement
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
Project team, UNDP, PSC 2012/07 Completed The Logframe is amended and duly endorsed both by the SC and the UNDP/GEF (RTA History
6. Recommendation: This evaluation recommends that the project consider additional PA management capacity development activities through study tours to other similar regions that are facing and successfully addressing comparable PA management challenges. Stakeholders consistently cite study tours as among the most valuable capacity development activities. Given the characteristics of the KR and its PA system, one highly comparable context for a possible study tour could be to Alaska to gain lessons and experience about the successful management of PAs and tourism revenue generation in large-scale remote landscapes, and effective protected management coordination between state and federal authorities. [Project Team]
Management Response: [Added: 2012/05/30]

The recommendation is noted, the study tour options will be considered

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The proposals for study tours will be further analyzed and presented to the Project Steering Committee as a part of the project annual workplan for further endorsement. Further on, specific TORs for study tours will be developed.
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
Project team, UNDP, PSC 2012/09 Completed Proposals for study tours endorsed, study tours held History
7. Recommendation: The eco-rating methodology should be continuously refined through testing and peer review, and the project should take measures to ensure the sustainability of its use once the project is completed. One opportunity for sustainability would be to partner with the KR Public Chamber to fully hand the eco-rating program off at the end of the project (or before), and to develop an annual award to be presented by the Public Chamber to the private sector company with the strongest eco-rating, and an associated media event. [Project Team, KR Public Chamber]
Management Response: [Added: 2012/05/30]

The recommendation is appreciated and will be implemented as described below in the ?key actions? section

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The project will pursue the application of the eco-rating methodology through testing and assessment of visibility of the rating results; will work actively with the companies to get data for rating calculation and assignment, will establish partnership with the KR Public Chamber to ensure the ownership of the methodology and continuity of approach; will establish the procedure for an annual award to be presented by the Public Chamber to the private sector company with the strongest eco-rating, and distribution of the results via media
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
Project team, Public Chamber of the Komi RK, Rosprirodnadzor of RK, private sector companies 2014/01 No Longer Applicable [Justification: The initial assessment showed that the existing methodology is adequate but cumbersome. The project made no further progress with this particular recommendation]
History
8. Recommendation: The KR provides an excellent example of successful and large-scale private sector partnership for biodiversity conservation, a long-standing objective of the GEF that has seen limited uptake. The project should produce multiple specific case studies on collaboration with the private sector for distribution through UNDP and the GEF?s knowledge network. It would be helpful for the project team to fully analyze and assess the context and driving factors behind the successful private sector partnerships in the KR. [Project Team, private sector partnership stakeholders, UNDP]
Management Response: [Added: 2012/05/30]

The recommendation is appreciated and will be implemented as described below in the ?key actions? section

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The project will analyze its experience in collaboration with the private sector, and driving factors behind it. The questionnaires will be distributed among the private sector companies to see which are the key factors defining active private sector involvement into conservation activities in the region. A stakeholder meeting could be arranged to review the results and agree on the future cooperation mechanisms, develop cooperation framework agreements etc.
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
Project team 2012/04 Completed The project introduced an eco-manifest that was joined by a number of enterprises. History
9. Recommendation: There is a history of good cooperation between Gazprom Transgaz Ukhta and Yugyd va National Park due to the transversal of the pipeline through the national park. A framework cooperation agreement has been signed by Gazprom Transgaz Ukhta and Yugyd va under the auspices of the project. The project must now support and encourage Yugyd va National Park administration in establishing a specific and concrete partnership agreement with Gazprom that outlines in detail areas for ongoing and future cooperation. Such an agreement would be an example for other PAs and private sector companies in the KR. [Project Team, relevant partners]
Management Response: [Added: 2012/05/30]

The recommendation is noted. The project must will support Yugyd va National Park administration in establishing a specific and concrete partnership agreement with Gazprom that outlines in detail areas for ongoing and future cooperation as described below in ?Key Actions? section

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The project will support development of an agreement between Gazprom Transgaz Ukhta and Yugyd va National park on monitoring of valuable plan and animal species. In support to the implementation of such an agreement, a list of concrete activities, timeframes and budgets will be developed.
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
National park Yugyd va, project team, Gazprom Transgaz Ukhta 2012/12 Completed The agreement developed and signed History
10. Recommendation: The location and size of Yugyd va and Pechora-Illych PAs present excellent opportunities to develop large-scale transboundary protected landscapes. The project team and relevant stakeholders should establish linkages and open communication with the natural resource management authorities in Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug to begin a dialogue on transboundary PA and natural resource management across the Urals. [Project Team, relevant government partners, UNDP]
Management Response: [Added: 2012/05/30]

The recommendation is noted. The options for transboundary protection mechanism establishment will be discussed by the project team with the relevant regional authorities.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The project will facilitate dialogue with the Federal Ministry of Natural Resources and the Tumen authorities regarding transboundary protected areas and corridors
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
Project team 2012/12 No Longer Applicable [Justification: Negotiations with MNR of Komi Republic officials and authorities in Tumen conducted, however, the Project SC decided not to pursue the activity due to lack of imminent interests from relevant stakeholders in the neighbouring regions]
History
11. Recommendation: By the end of the project there should be clear agreements and plans among relevant stakeholders (particularly UNDP, the national executing agency, the Yugyd va National Park administration, Pechora-Illych Nature Reserve administration, the non-commercial partnership, any relevant private sector partners (such as the elk farm or tourism operators), and local government) with specific commitments and financial plans for the maintenance and upkeep of infrastructure developed. [Project Team, UNDP]
Management Response: [Added: 2012/05/30]

The recommendation is noted. The project would make sure there is a solid ownership of the infrastructure and concrete plans for its maintenance (incl.relevant financial commitments)

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The project will take necessary steps to ensure proper ownership and partners? commitments to maintain infrastructure which was developed by the project. Relevant agreements will be developed and agreed with the NCP, federal PAs, municipalities and private sectgor companies. The project will also undertake additional efforts to promote partnership between private sector and local communities involved in tourism development with the PAs
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
Project team 2016/12 Completed All assets duly transfered ytowards the end of the proejct. Infrastructure mainainance arrangements are in place History
12. Recommendation: Considering that the region is heavily involved in natural resource extraction industries, an important priority for future international donor support for biodiversity conservation efforts in the region will be to focus on the mainstreaming of biodiversity considerations in production sectors and landscapes, notably, oil, gas and timber, of which there is presently little territory under sustainable certification. This evaluation recommends that potential future international donor support in the KR examine opportunities for biodiversity mainstreaming in production sectors, as a complement to the current critical work on PAs. [UNDP, Project Team, relevant international donor partners]
Management Response: [Added: 2012/05/30]

The recommendation is appreciated and will be implemented as described below in the ?key actions? section

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Mainstreaming of biodiversity considerations in production sectors and landscapes should become the main entry point for development of new international donor support projects in the KR. This is particularly relevant for the new UNDP initiated to get the EU support for peatlands project with ClimaEast, and for the recently approved UNDP/GEF project on biodiversity mainstreaming into energy sector; the latter has Nenets AO as one of the pilot regions, and private companies of Komi Republic have already been invited to participate in the project as key stakeholders
[Added: 2012/05/30] [Last Updated: 2018/11/07]
UNDP 2013/12 Completed The Clima East proposal for peatland conservation and restoration is developed and approved, the EU funding released in late2013. History

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