Success message
error message
warn message
Terminal Evaluation Report for the project "Sustaining agricultural biodiversity in the face of climate change in Tajikistan"
Commissioning Unit:Tajikistan
Evaluation Plan:2016-2020
Evaluation Type: Project
Completion Date:07/2016
Unit Responsible for providing Management Response: Tajikistan
1. Recommendation:

Recommendations for the Project design

  • To pay specific attention to the Project “Theory of Changes”, its strategy and “causal outcomes-impacts pathways”, coordination and synergy of intermediate results, removing barriers, risks and assumptions
  • Developing SMART indicators to the outputs, not only objective and outcomes, and associated targets to them could guide the Project team in proper planning of activities across the years. The targets of outputs (outcomes as well) could be divided into annual milestones (keeping their relative flexibility), which would make easy the reporting process as well as providing an idea of which activities to focus on in subsequent years.
  • This would help to avoid excessive ambitions and elaborate more adequate and measurable, not duplicative indicators for targets and outputs. For example, explanation of the key measurable Project targets (such as hectares of the Project affected area, number of species/varieties conserved, number of farmers involved, etc.) should be more clear in terms of activities undertaken in each particular case.
  • Nevertheless, evaluators fully understand and even can recommend that projects like these should set ambitious goals (but not extreme) in order to have flexibility in planning and prioritizing within the Project development.
  • The ways to check and approve any scientific hypothesis like Homologue approach and relative modelling tools should be clearly scientifically and practically identified at the Project development phase in order to realize its feasibility and generate practical steps for this purpose.
  • Any investments in agriculture, especially in environmentally fragile mountainous regions cannot avoid assessment of land degradation/desertification issues and comprehensive analysis of its cross-links with biodiversity conservation, climate change vulnerability, and other environmental and socio-economic issues. For GEF projects an assessment of possible integrated impact (positive or adverse) related to all focal areas should be obligatory at all scales of implementation.
  • The application of the ecosystem services approach and payments for them (PES) is seen as an opportunity in many of environmental projects, including those of GEF-funding. So, PES application is likely to be evaluated in all the projects like this even there are no evident capacities in the country to realize it from the start. Building national capacities could be one of the Project’s aims in this connection.
Management Response: [Added: 2017/01/06]

Recommendation will be taken into account in the ongoing and new initiatives

Key Actions:

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