Methodologies of monitoring and evaluating capacity development Makoto Kato Japan 1 UNFCCC Expert Workshop on Monitoring and Evaluating Capacity-Building in Developing Countries Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 6-7 November, 2008

Outline Defining Capacity, and Capacity Development Methodologies and Tools for Monitoring and Evaluating Capacity Development Comparison? M&E at national level? Uniqueness of Capacity Development in Climate Change area 2

Defining Capacity, and Capacity Development Capacity: Developing countries ability to cope with challenges by their own organization and actions. Capacity development: Process in which such capacity is being strengthened and sustained at individual, institutional, and society levels as a whole. 3 Source: JICA 2006

Capacity at different levels (Capacity Development must be comprehensive) Individual Level Institutional Level Society Level Source: JICA Administrators Capacity Enhancement Strengthened Management of Waste Control Authority Consensus in Burden sharing by different stakeholders New Waste Segregation Rules Policy Goals toward Waste Reduction Awareness raised about Waste Reduction

Different Approaches to Capacity Development (Capacity Development should be country-driven and sustainable) Existing Capacity External Input (Incl. Knowledge Sharing) External Capital Transfer Level of Capacity necessary to cope with challenges Approach A: Transfer of capacity from external player (Filling a Gap with external capital transfer) Approach B: Developing capacity with external facilitation(building capacity under the ownership of host countries/communities) Source: JICA Not Sustainable More Sustainable

Key Drivers of Capacity Development Ownership Enabling Environment Incentives Leadership Knowledge 6

7 Methodologies and Tools for Monitoring and Evaluating Capacity-Building (1) Plan Implementation Evaluation Identification Formulation Preparation Implementation / Monitoring Evaluation Flow of M&E Conceptual Figure of Project Cycle Management(PCM)

8 Where indicators are used: Format of Project Design Matrix PDM Narrative SummaryIndicatorsMeans of Verification Important Assumption Overall Goal Project Objective Outputs Activities Inputs Pre-conditions Methodologies and Tools for Monitoring and Evaluating Capacity-Building (2) Vertical Logical Relationship ---

Cause Effect How Overalls Goals/project objectives and Indicators are made? Problem Tree Core Problem Methodologies and Tools for Monitoring and Evaluating Capacity-Building (3)

Expected Situations Feasibility Means Ends Core Objective Methodologies and Tools for Monitoring and Evaluating Capacity-Building (3) How Overalls Goals/project objectives and Indicators are made? Objective Tree

Methodologies and Tools for Monitoring and Evaluating Capacity-Building capacity assessment Evaluation is heavily dependent on Target Setting (based on capacity assessment) Target in different levels: Overall Goal, Objectives of Efforts (eg. Policy/Programme/Project objectives) Indicators are useful only if/when they are elaborated with means of verification, important assumption and pre- condition (used in PDM) M&E are properly done by Project Owners (and contracted external evaluators) 11

Can we compare? Same type Projects in 2 different countries 12 Country A Country B Project XProject Y Development Priority Governance Structure Existing Capacity Other attributes (eg, Size) Development Priority Governance Structure Existing Capacity Other attributes (eg, Size) Comparison is only useful for drawing lessons from Good Practices (Simple replication does not happen)

Can we compare? Same type Projects in the same country 13 Country C Project Q Project P Development Priority Governance Structure Existing Capacity Other attributes (eg, Size) (Internal Factors) Willingness of Stakeholders Entry point of Efforts etc. (Internal Factors) Willingness of Stakeholders Entry point of Efforts etc. Easier to compare the two, since the external factors are the same or similar. But still internal factors of projects should be taken into account.

Can we compare? M&E at National Level Accuracy of Comparison (Evaluation) Project level>Programme level>Policy level> Regional/International Network (At higher level, quantified indicators may omit useful qualified information) Methods of M&E We use the same M&E methods(some variety), but indicators are more tailor-made Pre-condition of Defining Indicators Capacity Assessment (jointly done by D-ing+D-ed countries) is crucial Assessment(BAU) Monitoring(Indicators) Evaluation (Indicators) must be coherent, and reflect a specific context. 14

Narrative SummaryIndicatorsMeans of Verification Important Assumption Overall Goal Project Objective Outputs Activities Inputs Pre-conditions - - Uniqueness of Capacity Development in Climate Change area 15 This Area is already decided by 2/CP7. Fill in one of the 15 scopes e.g. (promotion of) CDM - Entry points of such efforts are different by host countries. Host countries chose such entry point, jointly with our Agencies.

Conclusion from our practice A single methodology (with variation) for M&E is used. Indicators are used and functions in specific context (within PDM), and simple aggregation of evaluation results is strictly avoided. Indicators are useful to interpret lessons from Good Practices. Evaluation at larger level employs more qualitative/narrative way. Entry points of efforts are different by countries, and it affects selection of indicators. For climate change, we approach both from Overall Goal and from the bottom side of PDM( and it still works). 16