Evaluation report 2010:5/I: Finnish Support to Forestry and Biological Resources

Evaluation report 2010:5/I: Finnish Support to Forestry and Biological Resources

Evaluation report 2010:5/I: Finnish Support to Forestry and Biological Resources

Annex 2 People Met and Consulted

Annex 3 List of Interventions Considered

Annex 4 National Focal Points for International Conventions

Annex 5 Finnish Positions in International Conventions

Annex 6 Evaluation Matrix

Annex 7 Documentation Consulted

By:

Patrick Hardcastle
Alex Forbes
Irene Karani
Kaisu Tuominen
Jim Sandom
Robert Murtland
Vera Müller-Plantenberg
Deborah Davenport






ISBN 978-951-724-876-1 (printed)
ISBN 978-951-724-877-8 (pdf)
ISSN 1235-7618

The evaluation of Finnish Support to Forestry and Biological Resources, as part of the wider evaluation of the Sustainability Dimension in Addressing Poverty Reduction, aims to assess the performance and outcomes in terms of contribution to the three dimensions of sustainable development. The evaluation methodology consisted of applying ten evaluation questions within the context of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) evaluation criteria (relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability and impact) along with other agreed criteria (Finnish added value, coherence, connected-ness, coordination and complementarity). The evaluation consisted of two parts: an initial desk study and a subsequent field phase; and both were coordinated with simultaneous evaluations looking at the energy sector and concessional credits. The portfolio of forestry programme interventions reviewed included those in six long-term partner countries of Finland (Kenya, Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia, Vietnam and Nicaragua) as well as Laos, and regional interventions in Central America and the Western Balkans.

The findings are somewhat disappointing in terms of positive outcomes and impact in respect to forestry contributing to poverty reduction. There has been relatively good progress with strengthening the social pillar and to some extent on the environmental side while tangible economic benefits have been rather limited. In most partner countries the overall impact and changes have also been relatively restricted in extent, with good results at local level but somewhat less change at national levels. Although the application of the Development Policy Guidelines for Forest Sector of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland (MFA) is evident in recent interventions, it is too early to see marked effect although the Guidelines provide a very sound basis on which to work. Main recommendations relate to strengthening intervention designs through fielding multi-disciplinary teams at identification and appraisal, and also involving multi-disciplinary teams in MFA Headquarters, in order to address cross-cutting issues and assessment of national capacity at all levels. In cases where partner governments failure to undertake their commitments are prejudicing the progress and outcomes of interventions than alternative systems that force change need to be considered. Improved information systems need to be put in place where cross-sectoral coordination is poor and information systems lacking by using Finnish national expertise to provide improvements. A review of the archive systems at the Ministry and better use made of documentation retained by consulting companies are recommended.