Challenges and constraints in Monitoring and Evaluation of

CB

UNITAR’s Recent Experience

Blane HarveyUnited Nations Institute for Training and Research

Climate Change ProgrammeNovember, 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

• 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.

Climate Change Capacity Development

• 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

blane.harvey@unitar.org

annie.roncerel@unitar.org