Evaluation of the Sustainability Dimension in addressing Poverty Reduction

Transcription

1 Evaluation of the Sustainability Dimension in addressing Poverty Reduction Selected Highlights from the Synthesis Evaluation Julian Caldecott (team leader), Sukhjargalmaa Dugersuren, Svend Erik Sørensen, Paula Tommila, Alina Pathan & Mikko Halonen, Development Evaluation Day 2010 Helsinki, Finland

2 Selected highlights Evaluation of the Sustainability Dimension in addressing Poverty Reduction Design and Monitoring The typical Finnish activity is not well-enough designed to be able to deliver much in the way of short-term results or longer-term and broader impacts, or to adapt to external pressures that may arise Sustainability of poverty reduction impacts Interventions received only a mediocre score on sustainability Sustainable Poverty Reduction Sustainable Poverty Reduction Despite the clear overall objective of all development aid interventions, relevant data on poverty reduction impacts remain scarce. Coherence MFA does not fully exploit its opportunities to promote coherence either internally, or externally in the EU and UN Finnish distinctiveness and strengths Finnish added value can be characterized in several different ways: as a set of values; as a set of technical competencies; as a set of ways of relating to others; and as a set of performance attributes Finnish interventions typically meet the priorities both of Finland and of her partner countries

3 Selected highlights Design and Monitoring & Evaluation The typical Finnish activity is not well-enough designed to be able to deliver much in the way of short-term results or longer-term and broader impacts, or to adapt to external pressures that may arise train officials in activity design, which requires a diverse range of key issues to be considered in formulating logframes, M&E systems, management strategies for knowledge, risk, conflict and stakeholder expectations and involvement. review regularly the implementation of recommendations from evaluations and systematically disseminate lessons learned and best practices. 3 Despite the relev

4 Selected highlights Sustainability of poverty reduction impacts Poverty reduction is a key aim of all activities, yet is vague, indistinctly measurable and little measured, so is often assumed to be delivered even when it may not be, or when it occurs for other reasons. Interventions received only a mediocre score on sustainability, mainly due to weak design." Strengthen participatory poverty reduction analysis and establish sufficient baseline data on root causes of poverty and suitable indicators to ensure that these are expressly endorsed as desirable features of intervention design and outcomes of implementation, and routinely assessed during appraisal and monitoring. As sustainability remains hard to define, and relevant data are very scarce, we suggest paying closer attention to proxies of sustainability - arrangements that should usually favour wealth creation, equitability, peace-building and improving the health of people and the ecosystems that support livelihoods. 4

5 Selected highlights Coherence More than aid projects were running worldwide in 2007, an average of around 600 in each developing country that was receiving aid, and or more in some of them.meanwhile, several previous aid recipients (including Brazil, China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela) have become major aid donors and investors in developing countries. MFA does not fully exploit its opportunities to promote coherence either internally, or externally in the EU and UN Due to emerging challenges, strategic priorities may need to change to accommodate new needs (including changes in aid architecture), and strengthen policy coherence and coordination, while continuing to pay special attention to the excluded and the vulnerable who need support more urgently and in greater numbers than ever previously. Improved awareness and understanding is a precondition for public support for aid appropriations and contributes to improved policy coherence between key policy sectors (foreign policy, trade, security, agriculture, fisheries, migration, energy, environment etc.) 5

6 Selected highlights Finnish distinctiveness and strengths Distinctiveness The evaluation suggests that Finnish added value can be characterized in several different ways: Values - e.g. human rights, equality and democracy, volunteerism, egalitarian forms of social organisation Technical competencies - e.g. water sector, sustainable land use, meteorology, education, health care, information technology, governance, research, renewable energy Relating to others - e.g. core funding, inclusive consultations, mutual learning, civil society capacity building and networking, constructive relations with local partners, the donor community and governments Priorities - e.g. human rights, social and gender equality, sexual and reproductive health, support for vulnerable groups Performance attributes - e.g. honesty, inoffensiveness, neutrality, flexibility, focus, effectiveness and efficiency Finland also sometimes adds value by going to places or doing things that other donors will not or cannot, or in leveraging new and additional resources. Finally, there is the distinctive courage with which the MFA commissions and publishes independent reviews of its activities, for which it is to be commended. 6

7 Selected highlights Finnish distinctiveness and strengths Strengths Finnish interventions typically meet the priorities both of Finland and of her partner countries, respond to some but not all elements of the global development agenda, and satisfy the needs and wishes of cooperating partners UNEP would like to highlight the strategic role that Finland has played since 1999 in supporting the development of new capacity and expertise to assess and address the environmental causes and consequences of conflicts and disasters as part of UN crisis prevention, early recovery and reconstruction efforts. This has been a uniquely Finnish effort reflecting 10 years of sustained and focused financial and political support. Specifically, within UNEP this support has translated into a number of important outcomes that Finland can take credit for Evaluation correspondence database: Achim Steiner, Executive Director, UNEP => Finland should review its strategic priorities for reducing and preventing poverty according to simple, clear criteria, i.e.: (a) the greatest benefit for the greatest number of the most vulnerable people; and (b) the suitability of a partnership-building approach for delivering these benefits 7

8 Thank you

9 Evaluation Report Back-up/background

10

11 Poverty and Development Poverty reduction depends on peace, good governance and good health, among other things... Including viable ecosystems, and the equitable distribution of goods and services from them Hence Finnish policy stresses that: favourable economic development is the best tool against poverty, and that Eradicating poverty is possible only if progress made in developing countries is economically, socially and ecologically sustainable, and that Ecologically sustainable development is the foundation of all development. 11

12 Millennium Development Goals MSOffice12 The MDGs target hunger, education, gender equality, child mortality, maternal health, major diseases, environmental sustainability and global partnership. MSOffice13 Source: Global Monitoring Report 2009: A Development Emergency, Washington D.C.: World Bank (2009). 12

13 Slide 12 MSOffice12 While on current trends, many of the MDGs will not be reached by the target dates in many countries notably in sub-saharan Africa progress is being made, even in some of the more challenging regions. A number of goals are expected to be achieved globally, including the overarching goal of reducing absolute poverty by half, thanks to the historically unprecedented reduction of poverty in India and China made possible by high growth rates linked to participation in the global economy. But beyond this, the multiple effects over many years of aid-supported policy reforms, and improvements in governance and investment, have made it possible to reduce poverty in many least developed countries. In these countries, development assistance has helped mobilise more foreign and domestic investment by lowering risks, developing economic infrastructure and financial markets, and by strengthening the capacities of local firms. As well as the successes, many goals and targets are, however, unlikely to be achieved unless additional, stronger or corrective action is taken urgently. Goals and targets that are most off track include child malnutrition and maternal mortality. ; MSOffice13 Note that these figures (shares) of what would need to be achieved by 2007 to meet the MDGs are based on the assumption that normal progress towards the MDGs is linear. This assumption is unrealistic when additional progress is more diffi cult and expensive. For example, additional progress towards universal primary education is getting more diffi cult and expensive the more the effective enrolment rate approaches 100% (the last 1 5% are always the most diffi cult and expensive to reach). ;

14 Aims of the Study Objective: assess how the sustainable development approach has enabled progress towards poverty reduction. Purpose: identify achievements, draw lessons, identify new solutions, and spot things that help or hinder Finnish aid work. 13

15 Lines of Evidence 1. Analysis and scoring of 22 evaluations commissioned and published by the MFA since 2008 (200 pages annexed to the report). 2. Semi-structured interviews with policy makers, desk officers, consultants, NGOs and officials of relevant public and private institutions. 3. Questionnaire-based correspondence with international observers, on the reputation of Finnish aid, new challenges facing poverty reduction, and what to do about them. 14

16 1. Inception phase Preliminary review of evaluation material and specifying evaluation method & plan of work (Inception Report) 2. Desk-study and data collection phase Addressing ten umbrella questions (TOR, Annex 1) through a comprehensive evaluation matrix (Annex 5) evaluation through 14 criteria (OECD DAC, EC, Gaia) scores & narratives on 22 MFA evaluations (Annexes 4 and 6) 3. Analysis and Synthesis Phase Strengths, Weaknesses, Distinctiveness and Sustainability of Finnish aid Emerging challenges and Policy Implications 4. Reporting Phase Synthesis evaluation findings and conclusions Recommendations and lessons learned Global development agenda & big emergent issues Literature review, stakeholder workshops, interviews, international observers questionnaire (Annexes 2 and 3)

17 Main Sections of the Report Part 1: Purpose and methods of the evaluation Part 2: Goals, modalities and stakeholders of Finnish aid Part 3: Findings on Strengths and Weaknesses, Cross- Cutting Themes, Sustainability and Distinctive Features Part 4: Challenges, conclusions and recommendations 16