Progress report of the Impact Evaluation of the GEF in the SCS

and EASAaron Zazueta

Expanded Constituency WorkshopDa Lat, Vietnam

April 5, 2011

Overview

2

Contents

GEF’s Approach to International Waters

Objectives of the Evaluation

Impact Evaluation Approach

Evaluation timeline and activities

Activities in the coming months

South China Sea Background

Known for its rich biodiversity and natural resources, the South China Sea (SCS) provides food to 250 million people and directly provides a livelihood for over 100 million people

40 years of rapid economic growth have had results that threaten the sustainability of the social, economic, and ecological services that the SCS provides– Growing coastal habitat destruction– Increased pollution– Increased overfishing

Management of the SCS’s rich marine resources is complicated by outstanding territorial disputes

3

GEF support in the SCS+

Since 1993, the GEF has allocated over US$180M to projects related to the SCS and the surrounding East Asian Seas (EAS)

4

IW Global Projects

8 Projects$ -- M

IW Regional & National Projects

22 Projects$ 172M

Other Focal Projects

11 Projects$ 42M

SCS4 Proj

Others8 Proj

IF7 Proj

PEMSEA4 Proj

GEF Approach to International Waters

The GEF helps countries work together to secure environmental benefits from shared surface water, groundwater, and marine ecosystems by fostering international cooperation and catalyzing action on priority transboundary waters issues.

The GEF has developed an International Waters approach that involves:– Foundational Activities

Build trust and confidence among countries, strengthen knowledge base on root causes, improve national capacity, and strengthen regional coordination mechanisms

– Demonstration ActivitiesDevelop, test, and adapt approaches and technologies; catalyze further action to address problems

– InvestmentsReplicate, upscale, and/or mainstream technologies and approaches that work

5

Objectives of the Evaluation

Main objective: Assess the extent to which to which GEF contributes to changes in policy, technology, management practices, and other behaviors that will address the priority transboundary environmental concerns that affect the social, economic, and environmental services of the SCS / EAS.

Evaluation will answer four main questions:– Has support been relevant to SCS/EAS environmental threats and

to country priorities?– What are the effects of GEF support (positive or negative, intended

or unintended) on country efforts and environmental concerns?– What are the critical factors that affect the likelihood that support

will catalyze actions that will reduce transboundary environmental stress and improve environmental and socioeconomic status?

– What lessons can be learned from the interventions’ successes and failures that apply to the SCS and elsewhere?

6

Impact Evaluation Framework

Impact

ReducedThreats to

GEB

Enhancedstatus of

GEBOutcomeOutputs

State/condition

State/condition

Assumption Assumption Assumption

Threats Based AnalysisOutcomes-Impacts TOC AnalysisProject Logframe Analysis

Assess direct effects of the project

Assess how these effects are leading to impacts

Assess whether impacts have actually occurred

+ ++ +++

8

Actors

Complex Socio-Ecological System

Regional Factors Country Factors Country Decisions

Project Intervention

Overview of Phases and Products of the Evaluation

Phase 1: Development of theory of change/ evaluation framework of GEF support for the main SCS IW project clusters

Phase 2: Data-Gathering

Using theory of change, triangulate data-gathering along three lines of inquiry:– Portfolio analysis

• Broad picture of GEF support at various levels; map of interventions and outcomes

– Examination of regional dimensions of GEF support• Transboundary environmental governance

– Country-level assessments• Country studies in China, Philippines and Viet Nam • Portfolio reviews of Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand• Assessment of “demonstrations” (at least102 have been identified)

Phase 3: Analysis and Synthesis– Extent of GEF partnership contributions– Assess factors and conditions contributing to/ hindering achievement of

intermediate stages– Assess role of GEF support in the light of apparent trends– Identify lessons learned and knowledge products

9

Stakeholder Involvement

Three groups are designed as vehicles for stakeholder input and support to the evaluation. These groups will:– Comment on the Approach Paper draft and report– Provide suggestions on making evaluation useful to operations– Help establish contact with appropriate contacts– Help identify and facilitate access to information

Technical Advisory Group (TAG): Consisting of 6 marine science and evaluation specialists, the TAG will provide quality assurance support on methodological, scientific, and technical issues.

IW Task Force: Composed of IW focal area coordinators, the GEF Secretariat, and STAP, the IW Task Force will provide input into the selection of knowledge products as well as the water body to be evaluated; it will also comment on the Approach Paper and evaluation report and facilitate ongoing communication with GEF Agencies.

Reference Group: This group consist of 15-20 people, including representatives from governments, GEF Secretariat, GEF Agencies, key staff involved in SCS GEF projects, and some non-GEF stakeholder institutions. This group will play a critical role in the evaluation follow-up.

10

Evaluation Timeline

Date Activity

Nov 2009 Upstream consultations on evaluation questions and water body to be evaluated

Sep 29/30, 2010

Reference Group Meeting to discuss Approach Paper

Jan 2011 Portfolio Analysis and Mapping of SCS institutional actors and programs

Mar 2011 Characterization of the social, economic and ecological services of the SCS

Aug 2011 Analysis of GEF contributions to transboundary environmental governance

Aug 2011 Country case studies

Sep 2011 Assessment of role of GEF support with regards to transboundary environmental trends

Sep 15, 2012 Meeting of the Reference Group to discuss comments on the draft

Apr 2012 Report and Council paper prepared

Jul/Nov 2012 Publication and learning products

11

Activities during April to August 2011

Country case studies:

China: Xu Xiangmin

Philippines: Annadel Cabanban and Mikhail Maxino

Vietnam : Vo Si Tuan

Assessment of regional dimensions of GEF support

Consultant: Derek Staples

Advisor: Antonio LaVina

Other recommendations for advisory group?

Country reviews – GEF EO visits:

Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand

12

Thank you.

For more information on this evaluation, please contact Aaron Zazueta, azazueta@thegef.org

13