A proposed model for expanding the A proposed model for expanding the DEA DEA experience – regional resource networks experience – regional resource networks

Proposing a desktop construction from North;

Which obstacles are overlooked?

Which resources are neglected?

Long term objectives

• Enhance energy policy through the incorporation of M&E of energy for development as an independent activity

• Equip donor recepients with a tool to evaluate energy interventions and communicate their experiences to donors

Methods

• Establish donor- and government independent, regional resource networks for M&E of energy in development, in sub-Sahara Africa’s regions – South, East/Central, and West

• Promote awareness of M&EED and human capacity through successful, regional cooperation on the implementation of M&EED projects

Utilize existing networks, (e.g. KNSEA, ECOWAS, SADC, EAC),

to:

• disseminate M&E skills • provide feedback on M&E plans• coordinate/assist M&E activities in different types of

interventions and/or across contexts• exchange/compare M&E results and experiences

Regional forums

Existing/conceivable M&EED capacity & resources:

• The African DEA collaboration partners in Botswana, Ghana, Mali, Senegal, Tanzania and Zambia

• The group of European M&EED experts that have developed the GVEP guide

• African collaboration partners of the European M&EED group

• Other local African capacity with M&EED experience?

Conceivable short-term finance?

• EU collaboration research projects (e.g. with the UNEP Risoe Center and organisations represented in the GVEP M&EED group)?

• Multilateral donors?

• Local utilities or public authorities?

• Regional Economic Councils?

Long term finance

• Self-financing/business model: Local stakeholders and/or large donors pay for M&E services

• GVEP has raised some money to set up a Southern African (pilot?) “business model” facility

• A feasibility study/business plan is imminent.

• Business model assumes local demand and capacity to pay.

What does the current situation look like?

Assume a high interest but local M&EED capacity is a bottle

neck, then

• Best case scenario: Existing and forthcoming interventions have built-in M&EED modules and dedicated budget lines.

• Worst case scenario: Existing and forthcoming interventions do not encompass M&EED and budget lines are none-existent or insufficient.

Key questions

• What are the current, local levels of interest, demand, and ability to pay for M&E services?

• What is the scope for intra-regional cooperation?

• Which resources does this proposition neglect?

• Which obstacles does the proposition overlook?

• How does the existing, local M&E capacity look like?

• Which M&E services – including capacity development - arecurrently in demand?

• Who will/should supply the services?