1. with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global Evaluation of the International Trade Centre Performance of Interventions : Findings from the Field Studies Presentation to the Informal JAG November 24, 2005 S.V.Divvaakar, Evaluation Core Team

2. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 2 Coverage of the Evaluation Field Studies: Country Studies covering nearly all geographical regions and income groups Tanzania, Burkina Faso, El Salvador, India, Kenya, Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, St. Lucia, Tunisia, Vietnam Specific projects in China, South Africa Technical Studies covering all competence areas (15) South South Trade Promotion, Export-led Poverty Reduction Programme, E-Trade Bridge, ProCip, International Purchasing & Supply Management, Export Packaging, World Tr@de Net, Executive Forum… Desk studies Local experts and regional experts

3. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 3 Performance Assessment Five Evaluation Criteria: Relevance, Efficiency, Effectiveness, Impacts/Outcomes, Sustainability Information Sources: Documents, ITC staff, Partner TSIs, non- partnering TSIs, beneficiaries, donors Four-level ranking: Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory

4. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 4 Patterns –country studies low high

5. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 5 Patterns – Global Programmes high low

6. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 6 Summary of Findings Relevance: is generally regarded high by ITC partners and beneficiaries Efficiency: is also viewed favourably Effectiveness: ITC has contributed to capacity development of its partners. However, there is less evidence of results at the end user level, which depends on absorptive capacity and initiative of TSI partners, besides follow up of results. Impact: Impact was not possible to measure in most projects: absence of baselines, control groups, and formal tracking and feedback. Sustainability: Was a key concern in several projects. TSI initiative, and continuity of funding are major challenges.

7. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 7 Relevance Overall, ITC products and services were found very relevant to the beneficiaries and TSI partners In most cases, projects followed appropriate needs assessment exercises Country-specific/sector-specific projects were found to be more relevant than multi-country themes (latter having non-uniformity of needs, readiness and absorptive capacities)

8. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 8 Efficiency Overall, ITC delivers its projects within agreed timelines and budget lines (better than other TRTA providers). ITC inputs and services are of high quality, including in some very complex projects. In some cases, implementation and project follow up was inadequate. In some, there was a poor recall of activities by partners and beneficiaries. In some, activities were found to be sporadic. Cost-efficiency could not be ascertained for most projects, as country-wise cost break-ups are not compiled/available. Surrogate estimates indicate ITC is generally cost-efficient.

9. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 9 Effectiveness Considerable variation in extent to which results achieved Many projects (JITAP, Executive Forum etc.) have enhanced capacities of TSI partners Effectiveness at level of end-user beneficiaries was more difficult to establish TSIs do not monitor results at the level of SMEs Limited distribution and utilisation of publication products; Low internet penetration in many countries deprives access to online services and products There are other external constraints and challenges on which ITC has little control Examples:

10. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 10 Impact Evaluation of longer-term impact most problematic. In many projects, supporting evidence of longer term impacts could not be found: a rigorous monitoring system does not exist at the level of TSIs. Small scale and duration of ITC intervention raise issues of attributability. Yet, some products are rated satisfactory on impact. Product guides, Trade Maps, Export Strategy template are used widely by TSIs and private sector in some countries EPRP prototype projects – Floriculture in Yunan, China and Organic spices in India are judged to have a significant economic impact Intra African book trade has increased several fold through SSTP. Some projects are not expected to have any impact on account of low effectiveness ratings.

11. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 11 Sustainability Sustainability was found to be low in many projects. Initiative and dynamism of the TSI partner, overall trade related infrastructure, and access to financial resources are important factors in sustainability. Technical sustainability achieved in some projects where TSIs have absorbed skills and are disseminating them effectively Financial sustainability is low even for some projects that have shown good results at the project level- due to internal resource constraints of beneficiary countries.

12. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 12 Factors affecting effectiveness and impact Overall development levels Trade infrastructure constraints Supply side constraints Scale and duration of intervention Initiative of TSIs after withdrawal of ITC Monitoring and feedback systems Continuance of funding for scaling up

13. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 13 Issues identified for improvement of performance Balance of country and global projects Scale and duration of intervention at country/sector level Project design: gender, labour and environment issues Selection of beneficiaries in multi country/global programmes TSI partner selection Profile (sector based or generalised) Partner contributions and commitments Initiative and outreach Monitoring and feedback systems TSI and enterprise level

14. with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global Evaluation of the International Trade Centre Intervention Strategy Presentation to the Informal JAG November 24, 2005 Denise Colonna d’Istria, Evaluation Core Team

15. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 15 Three tracks delivery Track 1 global coverage low-intensity field-level support, based on: (i) a publications and information dissemination programme; (ii) direct collaboration through the product-network approach; and (iii) the provision of targeted inputs under GTF Window II programmes (South-South Trade Promotion, World Tr@de Net and E-Trade Bridge). increasingly through cyber collaboration (i.e. via the Internet). Track 2 multi-agency, multi-purpose, multi-country TRTA projects. medium-intensity field-level support The 2004-2006 Business Plan attaches priority to broadening this consortium approach, technical synergies and the critical mass needed to address export development issues, but it also creates a foundation for the development of single country, Track 3-type projects.

16. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 16 Three tracks delivery cont’d Track 3 specific country high-intensity field-level support. greatest scope for achieving impact, and ITC attached highest priority to the expansion of this mode of delivery in the 2004-2006 Business Plan.

17. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 17 Main characteristics Track 1:  In line with the UN policy priority of providing collective benefits for all beneficiary countries  Contributes to easing the digital divide  Economies of scale But : not based on specific needs assessment, sprinkling effect, low recall, little ownership, little follow up Track 3:  bilateral trust funds are the primary source of funding for country-specific projects  more intensity, deeper footprint for ITC, higher visibility and ownership  Easier to achieve and demonstrate impacts But: can only be provided to selected beneficiary countries

18. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 18 ITC Annual Report, Statistical Appendix, for 2000 to 2004.

19. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 19 Resource constraints Total Trade Development TRTA was USD1,478 million annually, of which ITC provided USD18.9 million, or only 1.3 per cent. An annual delivery of USD21 million in technical assistance to 133 countries in 2004 implies an average expenditure of only USD158,000 per country

20. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 20 Main Delivery Channel Although ITC has a 3-track approach, most of its products are delivered to or through Trade Promotion Organisations (TPOs) and other Trade Support Institutions (TSIs). The TSIs are partners in national trade support networks and the principal direct beneficiaries of ITC activities. As noted above, the term TSIs includes TPOs as a form of TSI.

21. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 21 Capacity and viability of TSIs ITC results depend on: whether and how ITC products are utilised by TSI partners, whether the products lead to capacity building for the TSIs whether the TSIs provide ITC services to end-user enterprises, and the effectiveness of those services at the end-user level

22. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 22 A more systematic and strategic process for assessing the emerging needs of TSIs and end-users. A systematic process for monitoring results and outcomes through TSIs and end-users, including results in terms of the targets for MDG 8 as well as other MDGs, (in particular poverty reduction and gender equity, and also environmental effects) Developing a framework of cooperation with TSIs supportive of their capacity (baseline and indicators of performance) and sustainability Needs

23. Evaluation of the International Trade Centre with Ticon DCA, Copenhagen DC and Ace Global 23  Structuring/Strengthening partnerships with TSIs Develop a formal performance standard ( Baseline, indicators of performance ) Support organisations attempting to reach that standard ( on-going monitoring process, certification or peer reviews )  Systematic monitoring “MDG lens” ( Including: poverty reduction, gender equity and environmental effects ) Involving both TSIs and end-users ( To identify and demonstrate outcomes and impacts effectively ) Recommendations