Transcript Challenges and Constraints in Monitoring and Evaluation of

Challenges and constraints in
Monitoring and Evaluation of
CB
UNITAR’s Recent Experience
Blane Harvey
United Nations Institute for Training and Research
Climate Change Programme
November, 5-6, St. John’s, Antigua and Barbuda
Overview
• Our CB approach
• Current activities which fit within our
approach
• M&E Constraints encountered
• An integrated approach to CB M&E.
Our approach to
Capacity Building
• Keys:
– Strengthening existing institutional and human
capacity at Southern centers of excellence
and with Southern researchers.
– Strengthening the autonomy of Southern
institutes and researchers and facilitating
South-South cooperation.
– Encouraging partners to develop their own
aims and strategies for building capacity
internally and with their networks of partners
(Endogenously driven approach).
Examples of our Approach
Climate Change
Capacity Development
• Partners: ENDA-TM (Senegal), ERC (South
Africa), MIND (Sri Lanka).
• Launched in 2003, with funding from the EC,
Irish Aid, DANIDA, and the Swiss (FOEN).
• Aims to strengthen the network's ability to
deliver targeted training and capacity
development at national and regional levels in
West and southern Africa, and Asia.
• 19 Pilot Projects in 17 countries.
Implemented with ENDA-TM, SEI and START
International.
• Launched in Jan. 2007 with funding from the
EC, UK-DEFRA and IDRC.
• Focuses upon both the identification and
prioritization of climate risks among vulnerable
stakeholders and strengthening the capacity
of researchers to effectively communicate
these risks to stakeholders and policy-makers.
M&E Constraints and Challenges
• Lack of ownership of the M&E process or results:
– Different funders = different and ever-changing
monitoring and reporting requirements.
• Little is retained in terms of M&E capacity.
– Partners feel alienated from the M&E process.
•
•
•
•
Non-negotiable, “one-size-fits-all” requirements.
Just another hoop to jump through?
Relevance to their aims?
One-way, upward accountability.
• Provides little account of qualitative “change” or
learning and how they occurred.
• Complexity is masked.
Integrative design
• Seeks to accommodate both funder concerns
(accountability, verifiable results, timely
implementation) and the partner concerns noted
above.
• Draws upon both results- and process-oriented
approaches to M&E.
• Participatory development of targets at inception
and regular review of their viability and
appropriateness.
• Encourages partners to document and learn
from their experience and change.
Integrative design
• Collaborative relationship with
backstopper, who guides and challenges
partners to reflect. Facilitated through a
collaborative online platform.
THANK YOU!
www.unitar.org/ccp
[email protected]
[email protected]