chapter 4 undp contribution to national development...

C H A P T E R 4 . U N D P C O N T R I B U T I O N T O N A T I O N A L D E V E L O P M E N T R E S U L T S 2 1

As described in section 3.2.2, the UN systemplanning cycle begins with the more general tothe more specific through the UNDAF, CPO andCPAP process. During the 2004–2008 period,UNDP supported four national developmentobjectives. The analysis of UNDP contributionto each national objective was conducted in twosteps. The first step addressed the contribution ofUNDAF outcomes—and through UNDAF, theUNDP contribution—to each national objective.The second step dealt with the contribution ofUNDP CPAP outcomes to the UNDAF outcome.

4.1 POVERTY AND MALNUTRITION

The national objective: by 2015, reduce theproportion of the population living below thepoverty line and suffering from malnutrition by 50 percent

Growth and poverty reduction are the fundamentaltasks Benin needs to focus on during the nextdecade.These tasks also constitute a conglomerationof efforts and investments, not only by thegovernment, but also by the Beninese society atlarge and the country’s international partners.Two UNDAF outcomes were designed to supportthe reduction of poverty and malnutrition:strengthening the economic base throughimproved governance; and ensuring sustainablefood security. Although UNDP is part of theUNDAF, UNDP contribution to this nationalobjective may be viewed as larger than theUNDAF itself. Specifically, in addition to its own development programme, the UNDPcoordination role within the UN system isexpected to yield an important leveraging effect

of UN-system contribution to poverty andmalnutrition reduction in Benin.

4.1.1 UNDAF OUTCOME #1:STRENGTHENED ECONOMIC BASETHROUGH IMPROVED GOVERNANCE

UNDP contributions to the first UNDAFoutcome represent the major portion of UNDPinterventions during the 2004–2008 period.Specifically, 20 of 32 UNDP projects areorganized under 6 of the 10 CPAP outcomes. Itis also under this UNDAF outcome that mostadvocacy activities and special non-project studieswere realized. Governance appears to be the mostoutstanding feature of UNDP presence in Benin,as well as its primary vehicle to reduce poverty.In the overall architecture of the Benin CPO,UNDP contribution to this UNDAF outcomeconstitutes the most comprehensive set of CPAPoutcomes identified in the UNDP programme.Unfortunately, indicators used to measure theperformance of this UNDAF outcome do notproject or highlight UNDP contribution.

CPAP outcome 1: Poverty reduction strategies,including the MDGs, implemented using aparticipatory approach

According to The World Bank and IMFreports,25 the first PRSP was the result of broad-based consultations at all stages of development.These consultations took place at the regionallevel and included representatives of civil societyand members of parliament. Perceptions andconcerns of poor and vulnerable groups werepartly articulated by development associationsand NGOs.

Chapter 4

UNDP CONTRIBUTION TO NATIONALDEVELOPMENT RESULTS

25. The World Bank, ‘Benin Poverty Assessment’, 30 September 2003, and The World Bank International DevelopmentAssociation and IMF, ‘Benin Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper Joint Staff Assessment’, 21 February 2003.

C H A P T E R 4 . U N D P C O N T R I B U T I O N T O N A T I O N A L D E V E L O P M E N T R E S U L T S2 2

While some national indicators remainedstubbornly low during the 1990s (e.g., primaryschool completion) or even deteriorated (e.g.,stunting of children through malnutrition), mostindicators have improved. In addition, Benin’sscore on the Human Development Index hasbeen steadily rising, both in absolute andcomparative terms. At the start of PRSP 2003–2005, Benin was very poor, and its per capitaincome put it well below the sub-Saharanaverage. Rural poverty increased during the1990s: based on per capita expenditures, it rosefrom 25 percent in the mid-1990s to 33 percentin 1999–2000. In contrast, urban poverty fellfrom 28 to 23 percent during the same period.The incidence of non-monetary poverty washigher than the incidence of income poverty andincreased from 43 percent in 1996 to 49 percentin 2001.

The World Bank and IMF also report that,despite considerable donor support to assistBenin in poverty monitoring, there was littlecoordination. As a result, there has been muchcriticism regarding the quality of datasets andmethodological choices that underlie the estimatesof monetary poverty produced in the 1990s andpresented in the PRSP 2003–2005. Also, while

the interest in and partner support of povertymonitoring have contributed to increasedknowledge, they have also resulted in a lowdegree of local ownership. Dissemination offindings and access to information, in particularfor non-government stakeholders, remain weak.

The MDGs were partially integrated into the2003–2005 PRSP, but the GSPR used the MDGsas its foundation. MDG reports, reflecting theperspective of the civil society, were drafted anddisseminated from 2005 through 2007. Theparticipatory follow-up mechanism, through theinternational non-governmental organizationSocial Watch, can be considered the mainUNDP achievement. Through the ‘Partnershipfor the MDGs’ project, CSOs became activeplayers in major issues related to povertyreduction. Specific achievements included:

n A total of 120 non-governmental organizationleaders were trained on MDG monitoring,and 250 CSOs from nearly half the councilsof Benin expressed their concerns during thepreparation and finalization of the GSPR;

n Partnerships among CSOs, municipalities anddonors were reinforced, leading to an unplanned

Table 9. Projects related to CPAP outcome 1

Project Type Execution modality /Executing partner

Estimated budget(US$)

MDG-PRSP Sustainable HumanDevelopment (2002–2008)

National NEX / MECEPDEAP & INSAE

2,800,000

Partnership for the MDGs(2006–2008)

National NEX / ANCB (in MDG-PRSP)

Priority Projects (2006–2007) National NEX / MECEPDEAP 1,217,000

Proliferation of Small Arms andLight Weapons (2007)

Regional NEX / Presidency 61,000

Programme for Support andDevelopment of Exports(2007–2008)

National NEX / Ministry of Industryand Commerce; MA

940,988

Source: UNDP, Benin Briefing Note, February 2008.


result of increasing the number of donorssupporting CSOs;

n A higher level of CSO participation in thedecision-making process was attained, asreflected by an increased number of invita-tions from the government and donors toworkshops and thematic working groups onpolicy implementation;

n Recommendations presented in the alternativeMDG reports were taken into considerationby the government; and

n CSOs were recognized as active, though stillnot legitimate, actors in financial monitoringof the action plans of five councils.

Moreover, UNDP contribution helped CSOslearn to work together and establish coalitions:CSO-members of Social Watch in target areashave now mastered the MDGs and the content ofthe GSPR. These CSOs are becoming importantdevelopment actors and can directly contribute tothe capacity-building of CSOs in other regionsof the country. Finally, based on the recognitiongained through UNDP support, Social Watch isnow part of the APRM process.

Support to BenInfo, the database that was meantto allow a more participatory GSPR implemen-tation through gender and region-desegregatedinformation, did not attain its target. Despite theprovision of training and technical support, thedatabase has not been updated since 2006. Whileresearching the evolution of MDGs between 2000and 2006,26 the evaluation team found BenInfodata incomplete, contradictory and occasionallyunreliable. Not only did quality control seem weak,but UNDP support was also criticized by Benin’sNational Institute of Statistics and Economic Analysis(INSAE)27 and the United Nations Children’s Fund(UNICEF). The criticism suggested a lack ofappropriate support and cast doubts on the INSAEcapacity to sustainably maintain the database.

Although not directly linked to short-termpoverty, UNDP support to priority projects isperceived by MECEPDEAP as highly strategic:priority projects are the result of Benin’s strategicdirection and the GSPR, in which UNDPactively participates. MECEPDEAP seniormanagement asserts that, if it were not forUNDP contribution to the economic vision andits support in removing barriers, the national visiondocument ‘Emerging Benin’ would not exist.Experts provided by UNDP to MECEPDEAPcontributed to a behavioural change in publicservice, particularly within the Centre forPromotion of Investments,28 where an acceleratedanalysis process of applications, now in place,offers an example. The advice of UNDP expertswas also sought on the APRM and the design ofthe Employment for Youth project.

Overall, UNDP interventions have been effectivein making poverty reduction strategies a nationalparticipatory exercise. Unfortunately, the monitoringof these policies and their implementationthrough BenInfo remains weak. The weaknessesmay constitute a major constraint on sounddecision-making by the government in settingpriorities to concentrate efforts within theMDGs’ 2015 agenda.

Key factors affecting UNDP contribution to thisCPAP outcome

Strategic positioning (appropriate role andpartnerships): UNDP activities supported coregovernment strategies to stimulate growth andreduce poverty, particularly by creating a consensusaround the GSPR and encouraging stakeholderparticipation. UNDP advocacy resulted in resourcemobilization for PRSP monitoring and GSPRpreparation from bilateral donors, including theAfrican Development Bank, IMF and The WorldBank. UNDP adequately used its neutral statusto help Benin take a step forward in combatingpoverty and channel more funds to this end. In2007, an important non-project activity conducted

26. See Annex 3.27. Institut National de la Statistique et de l’Analyse Économique.28. Centre de Promotion des Investissements.


by UNDP, establishing semi-autonomous entities,focused on reinforcing Benin’s aid absorptioncapacity, particularly among ministries linked tothe MDGs.

Relevance: Overall, UNDP contributed positivelyto setting up mechanisms aimed at helping theGovernment of Benin reduce long-term povertyand consolidate the role of civil society inworking towards the achievement of the MDGs.In this regard, UNDP contribution can beviewed as an integrated process compatible withsustainable development. The recently establishedProgramme for Support and Development ofExports (PADEx),29 which aims to boost theprivate sector and promote export trade, isindirectly linked to participatory implementationof the MDGs. Although strategic, PADEx couldhave more leverage if it were linked to job creation.The country office could provide no informationregarding the regional project on small armsproliferation, which is also not clearly linked witha CPO outcome. The allocated funds could havebeen invested more usefully in BenInfo.

Responsiveness: With the exception of BenInfo,all interviewees met by the evaluation teamemphasized UNDP openness to discussingproblems and finding solutions. As a result of themid-term review of the 2004–2008 CPAP, UNDPrealigned some projects to be more consistentwith new government priorities. Production ofthe National Human Development Report wasintegrated with work on the MDGs and thePSRP, and the addition of an expert reinforcedpriority projects. The CPAP outcome was alsorevised to become “more efficiently take intoaccount the concerns of vulnerable groups.”

Effectiveness: According to NEX reports, UNDPattained most of its annual targets. However, annualtargets identified in the Annual Work Plans(AWP)30 do not appear to be clearly linked withCPO indicators. AWP monitoring was mostlycentred on operations rather than on assessing

short-term development results (outputs), andtrying to look for the potential contribution ofthese results to medium-term results (outcomes).Projects considered to be priorities were identified,MDGs and GSPR reports were produced anddisseminated, and CSO capacities were reinforcedthrough training. However, these operationalresults still seem insufficient to reduce theproportion of the population living in poverty to 24 percent—especially in rural areas. Theassessment of UNDP effectiveness was madeeven more difficult by the lack of reliablecomparative and disaggregated data. This problemis common to nearly all outcomes identified inthe CPO. Another issue was the delay in signingthe AWP, which resulted in late mobilization ofresources to implement activities.

Sustainability: Due to UNDP contribution,CSOs have developed new partnerships that willcontribute to building a stronger civil society inBenin. In order to consolidate the role of civilsociety, particularly in financial monitoring ofcouncil action plans, UNDP should support alegislative process granting CSOs a formalmonitoring role. Priority projects still constitute a work in progress. Without a second phase,MECEPDEAP, deprived of the experts providedby UNDP, may not be able to bring the vision of ‘Emerging Benin’ to completion. One seriousflaw in UNDP contribution during this periodconcerns its lack of leadership in supportingINSAE ownership of the BenInfo database. Whilethis is mandatory to ensure the monitoring ofboth progress towards the MDGs and theimplementation of the GSPR, BenInfo remainsunsustainable and unreliable.

CPAP outcome 2: Greater employment opportunities for the poor (including women and youth) through job creation

According to the 2003 The World Bank ‘PovertyAssessment Report on Benin’, most of the poorare employed either in agriculture or the informalsector, and the poverty rates among subsistence

29. Programme d’Appui au Développement des Exportations.30. The Annual Work Plan is a document that provides detailed activity planning and sets out what will be accomplished

during the year for each project identified in the Country Plan of Action Programme.


farmers, cotton-producing farmers or livestockfarmers are similar. In Benin, employment in thepublic or formal private sector provides an escapefrom poverty. Being poor is not so much an issueof unemployment, but rather an issue of irregularor unpaid employment. Unpaid or irregular work ischaracteristic of 21 percent of employed individualsin urban areas, and of 29 percent of employedindividuals in rural areas. Underemployment is widespread (over a third of the active urbanpopulation), and since 1995 has increased inBenin’s five major cities. Expenditure and incomeinequalities are more pronounced in urban thanin rural areas.

ADECOI project: During the 2003–2007 period,the UNCDF/UNDP project to Support toMunicipalities’ Development and Self-HelpProject in Borgou project (ADECOI) was the

main income-generating intervention of theUNDP portfolio. Its Local Development Fundintegrated a social investment fund, grants forlocal income-generating activities, a microfinanceline of credit31 and a fund supporting inter-municipal initiatives. ADECOI results include:

n 111 municipal infrastructure and communityfacilities developed;

n More than 4,000 people (95 percent of whomwere women) from 100 grass-roots organiza-tions received micro-credit loans;

n 409 people from 17 local communitiessupported in developing income generatingactivities; and

n Seven multifunctional platforms (PMF)32

were installed in addition to the monitoringof the three existing ones inherited from theProjet d’Appui aux Communes du Borgou.

31. Component conducted through the non-governmental organization Sian’son.32. The multifunctional platform is built around a simple diesel engine that is connected by belts to various tools, such as a

cereal mill, seed press and battery charger.




Micro-finance (absorbed by ADECOI) National – (Sian’son) –

Support Project to Councils in Borgou(2004–2005; unfinished activitiesabsorbed by ADECOI)

National NEX –

ADECOI (2003–2007) National NEX / Ministère de la Décentralisation,de la Gouvernance

Locale, del’Administration et de l’Aménagementdu Territoire - Unité

d’Appui Conseil

5,854,521

Employment for Youth (2007–2010) National NEX / Ministry ofMicrofinance, Small

and MediumEnterprises, and

Youth and WomenEmployment

163,000



A detailed review of the project and factorsaffecting its contribution to income-generatingactivities for the poor are presented as CPAPOutcome 5.

Employment for Youth project: For the 2006–2007period, the outcome changed from “greateremployment opportunities for the poor (includingwomen and youth) through job creation” to“increased incomes of vulnerable groups.” TheEmployment for Youth project embodied thisnew orientation of UNDP CPAP. Although thisproject only started in October 2007, much hadbeen achieved at the time of this evaluation, in lessthan six months. Such achievements included:

n A support unit is operational and advises theminister’s staff and other stakeholders;

n An orientation paper, based on which thenational employment policy will be developed,is available;

n The National Fund for the Promotion ofEnterprises and Youth Employment, with acapital of CFA 6 billion provided by theState, has been created. Loans have beenapproved for 60 young entrepreneurs;

n Conditions for self-employment in threecouncils have been established. The overallcost to the remaining 74 councils will besubmitted to the government for funding.UNDP will conduct advocacy activities tosecure funds covering the portion notsupported by the government; and

n The overall system to support youth employ-ment has been clarified and streamlined.

At the national level, UNDP contributionconsists of setting up a mechanism that shouldpositively impact job creation for the poor.Support to self-employment, however, will belimited to only one experiment per council. At

the regional level, UNDP intervention is limitedto Alibori, Atacora and Borgou provinces. If theexperimental approach developed through thepresent project portfolio is not replicated by thegovernment and supported by other donors, theoverall outcome is unlikely to have muchinfluence on poverty reduction.


Strategic positioning (appropriate role andpartnerships): Through UNDP support, theMinistry of Microfinance and Youth Employmentset up a mechanism to support job creation inrural areas and to help mobilize funds frominternational donors. In order to demonstrate thefeasibility of this mechanism, particularly for self-employment micro-projects or enterprises, theEmployment for Youth project team used ADECOIexpertise and local personnel to identify and conductfield visits to the first 60 youth enterprises createdthrough this project in Borgou. In parallel, UNDPdeveloped a partnership with the InternationalFund for Agricultural Development and theMillennium Challenge Account33 in order toreinforce rural and agricultural development inpublic policies, including the GSPR, and implementreforms necessary to increase income for the poor,particularly for women and youth.

Relevance:Youth unemployment is one of the mostcrucial issues in Benin.The national unemploymentrate stands at 40 percent generally, but is higherthan 50 percent for youth. The importance of thisproject for the government is confirmed by itscontribution of CFA 6 billion, within the first sixmonths of activity, to the National Fund for thePromotion of Enterprises and Youth Employment,set up as part of the intervention. Oriented towardscreating small agricultural-sector enterprises withhigh growth potential, the project directlysupports the strategic orientation of agricultural

33. Established in March 2002 by the United States government, the Millennium Challenge Account funds initiatives in qualified developing countries that demonstrate a strong commitment towards good governance, the health and education of their people, and economic policies that foster enterprise and entrepreneurship. The Millennium ChallengeAccount provided over $300 million to the Benin programme.


diversification put forward by the government forthe 2006–2011 period.

Responsiveness: In 2007, with the support of anon-project UNDP activity, the Ministry ofMicrofinance and Youth Employment organizeda forum on youth employment. Recommendationsstemming for this forum included the promotionof youth employment, access to credit, andtechnical and financial support to organizationspromoting employment. On government request,UNDP agreed to provide support to theimplementation of these recommendations. Thisgave birth to the Employment for Youth project.According to the Beninese interviewed by theevaluation team, UNDP support to the foruminitiated the intervention in favour of youth.

Effectiveness: Although the project started laterthan intended, results after less than one year ofactivity demonstrate a high level of effectiveness.

CPAP outcome 3: The National Assembly ismodernized (e-parliament) and its representation,legislation and control capacities of governmentaction are strengthened

The Beninese Constitution endows both theexecutive and legislative arms of the State with thepower to initiate laws, but most are initiated by theexecutive.34 National Assembly records document35

weaknesses in the capacity of parliament overmatters of the production of legislation, especiallyprior to 2004. The ADR team nevertheless notesan overall annual increase in the production oflegislation by the Beninese Parliament since thestart of the project. For example, records at the levelof the Directorate in charge of Legislative Servicesof the National Assembly show a 33 percentincrease in 2004, 54.5 percent in 2005, 63.6 percentin 2006 and 69.7 percent in 2007. Nonetheless,as the Constitution establishes a very powerfulexecutive, there is need for strengthening parlia-mentary capacity to control government action.36



Inventory of Governance in Africa(1999–2007)

Regional AGEX *

Project for the Strengthening andModernization of the NationalAssembly (2004–2007)

National NEX / NationalAssembly

1,400,000

Support to the Beninese Press(2005–2007)

National NEX / HAAC 153,000

GSPR – National Association ofMunicipalities of Benin (2007–2010)

National NEX / ANCB & SocialWatch

100,400

Joint Governance (2007–2008) National NEX / Presidency 500,000


* The precise part of the $12,000,000,000 budget allocated to Benin was not specified.


34. In the first legislature, parliamentarians initiated only 3.5 percent of passed laws. This figure dropped to 2.5 percent inthe second legislature, increased to 3.25 percent in the third, and in the fourth dropped again to 1.95 percent.

35. Unité d’Analyse de Contrôle et d’Évaluation du Budget Général de l’État.36. See the Benin Constitution, laws 90–32, 11 December 1990, available online at www.bj.refer.org/benin_ct/cop/assemblee.


As appropriate, UNDP sought to realize thestated results through financial assistance andproject intervention, including the Project for the Strengthening and Modernization of theNational Assembly (PARMAN)37 in particular.Accomplishments of such interventions include:

n A timer now enables the House Speaker toequitably allocate floor time among members;

n A National Assembly Web site38 is now functional;

n Electronic cabling of the Assembly andGeneral Secretariat was undertaken in 2005;

n Support to the setting up of a legislativedrafting unit in the Assembly. In 2005, ateam of parliamentarians and other seniorAssembly staff trained in legislative draftingtechniques and one of these training sessionsrecommended the setting up of a legislativedrafting corps. Work is currently underway onthe status, functions and working modalitiesof the corps;

n Realization of studies for the improvementof legislative production;

n Realization of follow-up recommendationsof members of parliament during theexamination of the state budgets from 2004to 2007;

n Realization of follow-up guides of conven-tions and international agreements ratifiedby Parliament;

n A 72 percent improvement in the means ofcommunication with parliamentarians viathe increase of the number of members ofparliament with e-mail addresses;

n The elaboration of a code of ethics formembers of parliament;

n The setting up of nine parliamentarynetworks with those of the African

Parliamentary Association (APA) and theInternational Parliamentary Union (IPU)since 2004;

n Capacity-building of fourth-legislatureparliamentarians in skills including informationtechnology, communication techniques, theMDGs and the PRSP, the role of a member ofparliament, gender and development issues,gender-sensitive budgeting and political-partyethics sensitization of Deputies and the public;

n Public consultations on male and femaleequality, culminating in the passing of thelaw against sexual harassment; and

n A compendium of recommendations bymembers of parliament during 2003–2006 isavailable. It includes a glossary of terms usedin public finance and a code of ethics forpolitical parties.

In 2006, the outcome “the National Assembly ismodernized (e-parliament) and its representation,legislation and capacity to control governmentaction are strengthened” changed to “the rules ofengagement are better understood and respectedby political parties and all national institutions”for the 2006–2007 period. The ConcertedGovernance39 project, which began in 2007 andwas still in its launch phase during the ADRmission, is designed to support this new outcome.However, both Concerted Governance and theNational Association of Municipalities of Benin(ANCB)40 projects operate outside the NationalAssembly sphere and are more closely linked withpoverty reduction. This is especially conspicuousgiven the anticipated results that focus on partic-ipatory MDG monitoring and their effectivemanagement and reporting by municipalities.

The Support to the Beninese Press projectencountered implementation delays. The mainresult of increasing the capacity of journalists was

37. Projet d’Appui au Renforcement et Modernisation de l’Assemblée Nationale.38. See www.assembleebenin.org.39. Gouvernance Concertée.40. Association Nationale des Communes du Bénin.


reached, and a code of ethics was also prepared.By themselves, these results does not play animportant role in contributing to the nationalobjective unless the outcome, formulated in theproject as influencing public opinion regarding theMDGs and poverty reduction, is also reached.However, according to information collected bythe evaluation team, this does not seem to be the case.

According to National Assembly representatives,international donors and journalists themselves,this project instead raised the fundamental issueof freedom of expression. During the 2004–2006period, a free press was considered an asset for theconsolidation of democracy in Benin. However,the situation does not appear to be the same in2008. There are indications that political partiescontrol parts of the print media. Though thissituation is not connected with the NationalAssembly-oriented 2004–2005 CPAP Outcome3, there is a clear link to the 2006–2007 revisionwhich aims to achieve a better understanding and respect of the rules of engagement. In thecoming years, UNDP may positively contributeto the consolidation of democracy by helping re-establish freedom of expression in Benin.


Strategic positioning (appropriate role andpartnerships): Through different projects, UNDPestablished partnerships at all levels of the state.Concerted Governance partnered with Benin’sPresidency; ANCB was aligned with decentral-ized authorities and civil society organizations,particularly Social Watch members that werealready active in other UNDP-supportedinterventions related to participatory monitoringof MDGs and poverty reduction. PARMANpartnered with parliamentarians representing thelegislative power established by the constitution.These projects helped UNDP reinforce itscapacity to bring about social consensus andinfluence policies and strategies directed towardpoverty reduction. UNDP positioning is highlystrategic in the entire social and politicalstakeholders’ spectrum of the country. UNDP also

assisted in the mobilization of more than fourtimes its own financial resources by establishingpartnerships with donors, such as Germany, theGlobal Programme for Parliamentary Strengthening(supported by the Belgian Government), theNetherlands, the United Nations DemocracyFund and the United States Agency forInternational Development.

Relevance: In general terms, the accomplishmentsunder CPAP Outcome 3 contribute to thestrengthening of the foundations of democracy in Benin. Specific objectives of the PARMANproject have enhanced and strengthened thecapacity of the Beninese parliament in legislation,control of government action and nationalrepresentation. Planned and implemented afterthe review of the CPAP outcome, ConcertedGovernance aims at improving collaboration andsynergies between state institutions, ministries, civilsociety and locally elected bodies. UNDP supportedthis mechanism by advising the President of theRepublic on factors that are contrary to theprinciples of good governance and by assisting inthe search for socially acceptable solutions.

Responsiveness: In reviewing the initial CPAPoutcome in order to realign activities to thepriorities of the new government, UNDPdemonstrated flexibility and openness. Anindependent 2006 mid-term review ofPARMAN enabled the updating by UNDP of itssupport to the National Assembly. However,there is a disturbing quasi-absence of linksbetween the project’s expected results and theCPAP outcome performance indicators.

Effectiveness: The country-level strategy formodernization (e-parliament) relied on thePARMAN project. By this it would appear thatthe Assembly has been modernized, even if electronicvoting has yet to be implemented because of thedevelopment, due in December 2008, of the newheadquarters of the National Assembly.

The strategy adopted by PARMAN to reinforceNational Assembly capacities for representation,legislation and control of government action has


revolved around training workshops, exchangevisits and document publication. Arguably, thetraining of members of parliament effectivelystrengthens these capacities. Parliament has noconstitutional powers to accelerate the processafter laws are passed and effectively applied.

The foregoing seems to show that the objectiveswere largely achieved. Phase I (PARMAN I;State Budget Analysis, Oversight and EvaluationUnit) targeted budgetary aspects of support tothe National Assembly and phase II (PARMANII) focuses on legislation and representationwhile at the same time consolidating the resultsof phase I.

Sustainability: The State Budget Analysis,Oversight and Evaluation Unit, set up to supple-ment weaknesses in the capacity of members ofparliament over the examination of finance lawsunder PARMAN I, has been absorbed by theAssembly and is now one of its services. Thisrepresents a patent sustainable outcome and acontribution of UNDP to the development of theparliament of Benin. The various training sessionsthat have benefited members of parliament havealso produced unintended outcomes. For example,the training of parliamentarians in natural resourcemanagement enabled the creation of a natural

resource management network in parliament.It is premature to discuss the sustainability ofConcerted Governance or ANCB.

CPAP outcome 4: An efficient and sustainablesystem for the management of free, fair andtransparent elections is set up

After the institutional framework set by the 1990Constitution demonstrated numerous short-comings,41 a 1995 law created the AutonomousNational Electoral Commission (CENA)42 ongeneral rules governing elections in Benin.43 Thecommission has since managed three presiden-tial, one municipal and three legislative elections.The political and financial weaknesses of CENAbecame apparent on the eve of the presidentialelections of 2001 and 2006. This threatened thefoundations of Beninese democracy, the saving ofwhich required resource mobilization andmanagement. The expected result relating toinputs into the electoral system was that asustainable, transparent, free and fair system ofelections be set up.

UNDP mobilized and successfully manageddonor44 resources for the 2006 presidentialelections, as confirmed to the ADR mission bythe government and the donor community. As aresult, CENA has amassed competence on the


Estimatedbudget (US$)

Presidential Elections of 2006 National DEX (CENA) 7,000,000

Support to Political Parties 2006 National DEX (NationalAssembly)

–

Legislative Elections of March 2007 National NEX / CENA 1,184,000



41. See Benin NDI final quarter report, ‘Benin: Support for Presidential Elections’ (01377), 2001, available online atwww.usaid.gov/bj/demcracy/p-ndireportoctober.

42. Commission Électorale Nationale Autonome.43. Section 36-1; see also section 46 of Law number 2000-18 of 3 January 2001.44. Denmark, the European Union, The Netherlands, and the UN system.


electoral process and on the utility of protectingelection equipment for future use. In addition,CENA is in the process of instituting apermanent computerized electoral register tohelp contain the cost of organizing elections.

However, the forgoing successes do not removethe weakness of institutional design: CENA isdependent on state funding for operationaliza-tion of all its activities. Mobilization andmanagement of resources by UNDP savedCENA in the recent past; it is now a feature ofthe institutional landscape and the democraticgains made by Benin since the 1990s. CENA alsocompels the government to internalize the factthat elections constitute a vital democratic tool,are tied to sovereignty and require resources ofthe State.


Strategic positioning (appropriate role andpartnerships): UNDP has been designated by thedonor community as a leader in supportingBenin’s electoral process. The community ofdonors unanimously agreed that UNDP wassuccessful in its role in the 2006 and 2007election processes in mobilizing more than $8million from Belgium, Denmark, the EuropeanUnion, The Netherlands, the United States ofAmerica and The World Bank.

The 2004–2006 CPAP outcome of “an efficientand sustainable system for the management offree, fair and transparent elections in place” wasremoved from the 2007–2008 CPAP. However,support was given to the 2006 presidential and2007 legislative elections. The evaluation team hasnot discovered an explanation for this situation.

Relevance: Free and transparent elections sincethe 1990 National Conference projected Beninonto the international scene as a democraticcountry. Support to CENA for the managementof the 2006 and 2007 elections was still necessaryto help consolidate this reputation. Through

UNDP support to CENA, the presidentialelections were held in time and constituted athird peaceful, free and transparent changeover ofpolitical power. Since the 2007 legislativeelection, Benin also has a National Assemblycomprised of more than 15 political parties.

Sustainability: CENA election costs are nowreduced through the preservation and use of non-perishable election materials such as ballot boxesand computers. However, the problem of relianceon the executive for funding, an apparent fataldesign flaw, remains. The recourse of mobilizingdonor resources to finance elections is notsustainable. UNDP assistance in 2006 was noteffective in resolving this long-term weakness.A sustainable strategy would be to enable CENAto marshal independent funds. While the executiveremains as constitutionally powerful as it is, there isno guarantee that dependence on the mobilizationof funds by donors for the institutionalization of itselectoral system is a sustainable strategic optionfor democracy in Benin.

CPAP outcome 5: Genuine involvement of localauthorities and civil society, particularly women’sgroups, in local planning and management,including provision of basic social services

Reaching this outcome depends on the existenceof an enabling framework for decentralization andthe empowerment of women. Decentralization inits current form commenced in 1999. In the Borgouprefecture, UNDP sought to attain this outcomethrough enabling the creation of a comprehensivedecentralization framework. This was done in2003 via partnerships with the Government ofBenin, the Belgian Survival Fund (BSF) and theUnited Nations Capital Development Fund. Theresult of these partnerships, the 2003–2007ADECOI project (see Box 2), which supportsmunicipal development in Borgou, is comingtoward the end of its first phase.

Even if funds allocated to councils by the centralgovernment remain extremely limited,45 theADECOI project experience, boosted by local

45. These amount to 1.8 percent of the state budget, according to the minister in charge of decentralization and local development, 18 March 2008.


councils, has inspired the central government togeneralize a number of tools that are vital fornationwide local development. ADECOI alsoseems to have enhanced the attainment of severalunexpected results that have benefited all ofBenin. Results include:

n ADECOI raised the appreciation oftechnical staff within councils, leading theGovernment of Benin to pass an orderinstituting this service in all local authorities;

n Council development plans are now acommon and mandatory tool in the 77councils of Benin. The minister in charge ofdecentralization confirmed to the evaluationteam that even the autonomous CotonouCity Council now works with a plan. Mayorsof councils within the project area have notedthat they have a head start over othercouncils in the implementation of decentral-ization for poverty alleviation, largely due tothe fact that they each started and based theiractivities on a council development plan;

n The Municipal Development Support Fund47

experience and potential have inspired a soonto be created National Council Development

Support Fund, for which the state isproviding CFA 5 billion and the EU 3 billion;48 and

n According to the Minister of the Ministry ofAdministrative and Institutional Reform(MRAI)49, ADECOI is the first Beninproject where donors have channelledearmarked aid through the national treasury,and that these resources have been disbursedand used in the target area together withcounterpart funds to the satisfaction of all.

Though this process would benefit from fasterdisbursement of funds, the lesson drawn from thisexperience is the usefulness of partnerships in clearlydrafted conventions and their respect by all partiesconcerned. This would require harmonizingdonor funds disbursement procedures and betterstaffing of the state treasury.

Most important with regards to vulnerablegroups, initiatives piloted by ADECOI haveinvolved councils, civil society and women insocial and productive activities, such as PMF.There is evidence that PMFs enable women to

46. Projet de Développement Local et d’Appui aux Communes de l’Alibori.47. Fonds d’Appui au Développement Communal.48. Per a declaration from the minister in charge of decentralization of Benin and the EU Resident Representative during

the evaluation mission.49. Ministère de la Réforme Administrative et Institutionnelle.



ADECOI (2003–2007) National NEX / Ministère de laDécentralisation, de la

Gouvernance Locale, del’Administration et de

l’Aménagement du Territoire- Unité d’Appui Conseil

5,854,521

Local Development and Supportto Alibori Communes (LocalDevelopment and Support toAlibori Communes,46 2005–2008)

National NEX / APIDA 3,761,488




process their produce much quicker, leaving timefor children to go to school while women embarkon sales, farming or other income-generatingactivities they were previously unable toundertake. The capacity of councils to planactivities that promote local economy is abenchmark that allows ADECOI to be consid-ered an example of good practice that willimprove during its second phase—despiteweaknesses identified by the 2007 UNCDFevaluation, which addressed the involvement ofwomen in council decision-making and theintegration of human rights.


Strategic positioning (appropriate role andpartnerships): Local partnerships developed withUNCDF and the BSF allow UNDP/UNCDF tomobilize significant resources for the elaboration,implementation and monitoring of council

development plans. UNCDF brought in itsexpertise of decentralized and innovative partici-patory planning and management tools, whilethe BSF, through the standing memorandum ofunderstanding it has with UNCDF, providedfinancial assistance for the reduction of householdvulnerability to food insecurity. According to theADECOI evaluation report, this partnership did not yield the expected results, as UNCDFcontribution, in adapting its approach to theBenin context, put less emphasis on establishingconditions for good local governance and civiceducation. However, the report states, “despitethe lack of a real food security strategy from thestart, the various activities undertaken byADECOI have contributed to clarifying theconcept and to sensitize the population as well as local authorities ... The experiences can in thefuture contribute to developing a real vision of therole of the municipality regarding food security.”50

50. Assessment of the ADECOI project. Final report, p.53, translated from French.

The UNDP/UNCDF ADECOI project, with additional funding from BSF, effectively improved wellbeing byfostering governance and local development with the active involvement of the population through acomprehensive decentralization package.

Benin is a centralized democracy governed by deconcentrated and decentralized authorities since 1999.Deconcentrated authorities (prefectures) are headed by Prefects who represent the state. A number ofdecentralized local councils, headed by elected mayors, comprise the prefectures. Borgou, covering asurface area of 25,415 square kilometres, is one of 17 prefectures. It has a population of some 571,836inhabitants, and 48.5 percent of its households are poor. Illiteracy levels here are high, and the vastmajority of the population is primarily involved in subsistence farming.

The first four-year phase of ADECOI, 2003–2007, benefited from joint funding of $5,854,521, provided byBSF, the Government of Benin, UNCDF and UNDP.

Through local-authority driven development, the project aims to support the decentralization process for poverty reduction and sustainable improvement of wellbeing of the people in seven ‘ordinary’councils of Borgou. The stakeholders are the central administration, deconcentrated and decentralizedlocal authorities, civil-society and private-sector and a Parakou-based multi-disciplinary unit that isworking in support of project execution.

Another ADECOI component aims to assist councils in building capacity to lead local development forwealth creation. This component provides funding for grassroots, municipal and inter-council income-generating initiatives. For this purpose, the project developed three tools under its Local DevelopmentFund: the “Fonds de Développement Socio-Communautaire,” a council development support fund; theGrant Support for Local Initiatives (Subvention d’Appui aux Initiatives Locales), including microcredit;and the “Fonds Inter-Communal.”

Box 2. Support to Municipalities’ Development and Self-Help Project in Borgou (ADECOI): Improving wellbeing by fostering governance and local development through decentralization


Even though UNDP did not participate in thecapitalization workshop and only in one of severalproject board meetings, the strategic positioningof UNDP contributed to creating an enablingenvironment for the capitalization of good practices,allowing ADECOI results to be integrated ingovernment policies at the national level.

Relevance: ADECOI was initially planned as anintervention to stimulate the decentralizationprocess, which was affected by three mainconstraints: insufficient human, technical andfinancial resources; lack of effective transfer ofcompetencies by the central government; andweaknesses of deconcentrated public services.ADECOI subsequently added interventionstargeting poverty and food security. Not only dothese sectors constitute government priorities,but ADECOI also demonstrated the successfullinkage of these sectors in one administrative unitand then nationwide generalization. ADECOIdid so through:

n Relationship management, catering forcoordination difficulties through partneralignment at council, prefectoral and centrallevels. Failure to do so in decentralization andlocal development endeavours in centralizedsystems often impinges on effectiveness;

n Knowledge management through performancemonitoring, evaluation and reporting, as isevident from its journal. This has facilitatedinter-council dialogue and served all partnersas a source of information for diverse purposes.

Effectiveness: Effectiveness was assured throughcareful strategic management. ADECOI appearsto have been designed with the three componentsnecessary for the successful implementation ofdecentralization, and with local development inmind. It should be noted,however, that improvementin effectiveness will need efforts directed at localgovernance, particularly at consolidating andreinforcing economic development capacities.

Sustainability: Although the ADR team did nothave the opportunity to review the second phase ofADECOI (named PA3D), sustainability is alreadypartially addressed through the government’scommitment to nationally generalize three mainproject results: mandating a technical staff servicewithin local councils; mandating the use ofcouncil development plans; and creating theNational Council Development Support Fund.

Efficiency: The ADECOI project design andimplementation addressed not only the allocationof financial resources, but also the procedure fortheir disbursement through the national treasury.However, the speed with which requested resourceshave been disbursed through this operational set-up, despite improvements during 2007,remains a problem. Future donor harmonizationof procedures that tie resource mobilization totime would remove this setback.

CPAP outcome 6: A more efficient, transparentand accountable public administration

Public administration was marked by underper-formance due to weaknesses in coordination, absenceof accountability, corruption,51 and an imperfectelectoral system. In order to address these majorthreats to the development of Benin, the govern-ment signed a memorandum of understandingwith the APRM in March 2004. This agreementconfirmed the commitment of Benin’s politicalauthorities to observe principles of democracyand good political, economic and enterprisegovernance, and was made to both the Beninesepopulation and the international community.

Performance of public administration, particu-larly in absorption of aid, is still very weak.According to the December 2007 Social Watchreport,52 the rate of execution of budgeted capitalexpenditure reached 21.2 percent at the end of June 2006, and that of current expenditure,40.4 percent. Good governance constitutes aprerequisite for an efficient absorption of aid,while the fight against corruption should

51. The 2004 Transparency International index ranks Benin as the 77th most corrupt country of 145 polled in that year.52. Social Watch, ‘Third Alternative Report on MDGs’, December 2007.


represent one of the most powerful vehicles forreversing poor economic performance andaddressing the failure of development policies.

Between 2005 and 2007, UNDP planned andimplemented three projects to support a moreefficient, transparent and accountable publicadministration: APRM, Support to Administrativeand Institutional Reform (PARAI53) and Supportto the Consolidation of Democracy through the Strengthening of Women’s Representation in Decision-Making Bodies and Public Policy (PARPF).54

But UNDP contribution to this outcome startedbefore 2005, through advocacy activities andstudies conducted by the UNDP SubregionalResource Facility (SURF). In 2004 and 2005,UNDP, in partnership with MRAI, undertook aseries of activities aimed at:

n Supporting cross-cutting and sectoraladministrative reforms through inter-ministerial coordination and national capacityfor better coordination of public activities;

n Fighting corruption through the moralizationunit, housed at the Presidency of theRepublic and charged with the fight againstcorruption; and

n Supporting the General Secretariat of the Presidency.

On cross-cutting and sectoral administrativereforms, the 2004–2005 revision of legal instrumentsgoverning coordination saw an improvement ininter-ministerial coordination involving civilsociety. This revision resulted in the creation ofthe Administrative Reform Steering Committee andthe Administrative Reform National SteeringCommittee, which include the SecretaryGenerals of all ministries in their membership.The function of these structures has improvedthrough UNDP interventions and training onhow best to play these roles. Activities weresuspended in 2006.

In 2007, the PARAI project was approved underthe NEX modality with MRAI as the executingpartner. Anticipated results focused on institu-tional reform. However, all results linked to thefight against corruption in previous UNDPinterventions disappeared from the programme.After eight months of activity, PARAI completedthe diagnosis of the Beninese institutionalenvironment and identified quick-win activitiestargeting key national institutions. The evalua-tion team found that effective coordination ofPARAI is lodged with UNDP instead of thenational partner.




African Peer Review Mechanism(2005–2007)

National DEX 1,200,000

Support to Administrative and InstitutionalReform (PARAI, 2007–2008)

National NEX / MRAI 470,000

Strengthening of Women’s Participation inPublic Affairs (PARPF, 2007)

National NEX / Ministry of theFamily and the Child

150,000


53. Projet d’Appui à la Réforme Administrative et Institutionnelle.54. Projet d’Appui à la Consolidation de la Démocratie à Travers le Renforcement de la Représentation des Femmes dans

les Instances de Prise de Décision Publique et Politique.


Due to a scheduling conflict with work onmunicipal elections, the evaluation team wasunable to meet with the national focal points ofinterventions touching on transparency andcorruption, or the focal points of interventionssupporting the General Secretariat of thePresidency. Literature review did not allow theevaluation team to assess the level of achievementin these areas. Between 2004 and 2007, activitiesinitiated to ensure that an evaluation system forboth “performance and public service is set up”and “regular audits of public administration areundertaken” did not attain these goals.

Benin was the first Francophone country to jointhe APRM at its 2005 start-up. UNDP supportto the APRM process suffered from difficultiesduring its initial phase. These included unclearroles and responsibilities of the members of theindependent commission in charge of APRMimplementation, low mobilization of key council-level contacts, and inadequate understanding ofAPRM philosophy and principles by commissionmembers. The Benin Country Evaluation wasconducted in 2006, validated in 2007, andpublished in January 2008. As a result of thisexercise, Benin received an award of CFA 1billion to conduct projects aiming at improvinggovernance. Although this project is not directlylinked to the indicators retained for thisoutcome, projects identified through thegovernance action plan as part of the APRMexercise could do much to improve performance,transparency and accountability.

Pursuing the empowerment of marginalizedgroups, particularly women and their participationin local planning and management, UNDP soughtto build the capacity of women of Cotonou,Parakou and Porto-Novo through PARPF, apilot project in leadership training, representationand participation in public life. An indicator ofsuccess will be the number of women from thesethree towns who are voted into the variouscouncils after the April 2008 municipal elections.As discussed below, this project’s tie to CPAPOutcome 6 is somewhat awkward.


Strategic positioning (appropriate role andpartnerships): At a time when governance is at thecentre of international development-aid discourse,activities prior to and during the PARAI projectresponded to a national and international focus.However, the 2004–2007 strategy towards thereinforcement of the public administration hasbeen largely ineffective in relation to set results.The identification of expected results, lodged attwo levels (MRAI and the Presidency of theRepublic), portrayed an operational vision wheresuccess depended on effective coordination. Thiseffective coordination was designed to be lodgedat UNDP Benin, with little influence over thepresidency or MRAI.

UNDP abandoned its contribution to the fightagainst corruption in 2006, and its support to the implementation of institutional reforms hasyet to make any progress in sectoral ministries.The partnership with MRAI in its currentconfiguration is ineffective. The focal pointshould be located at a higher level , which doesnot exist. Since the beginning of 2008, UNDPhas been conducting advocacy activities to reviewthe overall mechanism of institutional reform inorder to identify the proper locus of leadership inthe government.

Relevance: According to the 2007 APRM BeninCountry Report, the Beninese population“unanimously” considered that corruption inpublic administration had already attained thestatus of culture and an instrument ofgovernance. The APRM also noted that thecountry assessment did not reflect on the presentgovernment, thus constituting an opportunity for the government to carry out reforms based onan updated audit of governance. The UNDPcontribution to this process is highly relevant, andit is anticipated that the Country ProgrammeDocument 2009–2013 will harmonize itsgovernance programme with interventions to beidentified in the National Governance ActionPlan. Activities prior to and during the PARAIproject were directed at the same target, but


from a more operational perspective. Parts ofPARAI could have been redundant with APRM,particularly the diagnosis of the institutionalenvironment. The evaluation team suggests that,by the end of the CPO 2004–2008, the PARAIshould be revised and should take over theAPRM legacy.

Responsiveness: UNDP has been quite flexible inproviding answers to occasional or non-projectrequests from ministries, especially in interventionsdirected at improving their performance. However,capacity development, through UNDP technicalassistants appointed in ministries may become moreconfusing than constructive if it is not designedfrom a holistic perspective that encompasses theentire public administration. In the context ofthis particular outcome, UNDP responsivenesscould then produce the reverse effect of dilutingthe leadership required to effectively carry outinstitutional reform.

Efficiency: Out of 10 outcomes identified in the2004–2006 CPAP, this was the only one thatremained unchanged after the mid-term review.Indicators used for the outcome show a CPOpursuing results through limited and insufficientinterventions (mostly SURF activities) andprojects with multiple objectives that are looselylinked to the CPO. By this it would appear thatproject planning was based more on opportunitiesthat arose during the programme life rather thanon a systematic exercise, where projects aredesigned as necessary components of a globaldevelopment result or outcome.

4.1.2 UNDAF OUTCOME #2:SUSTAINABLE FOOD SECURITY IN AN HEALTHY ENVIRONMENTCONDUCIVE TO PRODUCTION

Contrary to the sub-architecture designed tosupport the previous UNDAF outcome, only oneCPAP outcome contributed in the achievementof this second UNDAF outcome. The UNDPcontribution, as measured by its current perform-ance indicator, exceeded the UNDAF outcome in

contributing to the achievement of highlystrategic results at the central level. However, asof 2007, UNDP contribution only partially metthe UNDAF performance indicator by notreaching the implementation point of localdevelopment plans.

CPAP outcome 7: Increased capacity of local authorities and communities (particularly women) and private sector in the management of the environment and sustainable energy development

Benin is among the least developed countriesvulnerable to climate change. Such vulnerabilitybears risks to poverty reduction. Particularclimate change challenges include increased sealevel (which threatens to submerge parts ofCotonou and Grand-Popo), water qualitydegradation, and desertification. In the denselypopulated south and in north-west Atacora, majorthreats include soil erosion, degradation andincreased salinity. All have major consequencesfor agricultural activities and food security.

In 2005, the Environmental Sustainability Indexranked Benin 63rd out of 117 countries and 7th out of 13 West African countries. Despite thecountry’s relatively rich biodiversity, environmentalconditions have rapidly deteriorated. Similarly,natural resources continuously decreased over thelast 30 years. Forestry surface per capita alsodropped from 1.63 in 1980 to 0.87 in 1995, andcould reach 0.29 in 2025, if current trendspersist.55 In coastal zones, 38 percent of ecosys-tems are threatened by various facilities andwaste discharge.

In the 2008 assessment of its programme in Benin,GEF concluded that the political will needed toreverse this trend exists. In addition, civil society isaware of environmental issues, and GEF supportis perceived as key to facing such challenges.

The UNDP environment programme was twofold.It provided support to policy development at thecentral level and to decentralized management ofthe environment and stakeholder empowerment

55. Global Environment Facility, ‘Country Portfolio Review’, Benin, preliminary report, February 2008.


at the local level. Environmental concerns haveprogressively risen in importance for the UNsystem, culminating in a programme revision.Following the mid-term review of the 2004–2008 CPAP, environment ceased being a cross-cutting issue subsumed in the poverty programmeand became a programme in itself. Among resultsattained in the course of the CPO period were:

n At the policy level, the “greening” of theGSPR was completed; sectors vulnerable toclimate change were identified and strategies

to protect them were adopted; studies werecompleted (e.g., economic and financial costsof environmental degradation); and forumsand consultations were organized for climatechange and land reform;

n At the local level, 12 environmental profilesand Local Environment Development andManagement Plans59 were developed withlocal authorities and the populations ofBorgou and Alibori; 12 small projects aimingat protecting the global environment received




Niger River Basin, Benincomponent (2004–2009)

Regional NGOEX 2,000,000

New Rice for Africa 1, 2 and 3(2005–2008)

National NGOEX 1,200,000

Support to the Implementationof National EnvironmentalManagement56 (2004–2008)

National NEX / MEPN 800,000

National Action Plan forAdaptation to Climate Change(2005–2007)


Arid Zones (2006–2009) National NEX / MEPN 600,000

Self-Evaluation of NationalCapacities to Reinforce GlobalEnvironment Management57

(2006–2008)


Microfinance Programme of theGlobal Environment Facility58

(2006–2010)

National AGEX 400,000 (per year)

2nd Communication on ClimateChange (2007–2009)



56. Projet d’Appui à la Mise en œuvre du Programme National de Gestion de l’Environnement.57. Auto-Evaluation des Capacités Nationales à Renforcer pour la Gestion de l’Environnement Mondial.58. Programme de Microfinancement du Fonds pour l’Environnement Mondial.59. Plans Locaux d’Aménagement et de Gestion de l’Environnement.


funding from the Microfinance Programmeof the Global Environment Facility (PMF–GEF); and

n At the capacity-building level, the planningand monitoring capacities of the Ministry ofthe Environment and Protection of Nature(MEPN)60 were improved; the GSPRgreening monitoring unit was trained; andmore than 2,500 women and members ofgrass-roots organizations in Borgou and

Alibori were trained on, and now use,improved cooking stoves.

In terms of training, some results were unexpected,such as the training of Borgou authorities on thegreening of Council Development Plans and oflocal journalists as information relays on environ-ment-related matters.

Despite the apparent ease identifying the resultsof UNDP interventions in the environment

Table 16. UNDP environmental initiatives in Benin, 2004–2007

Project Focus

2004: Support to theImplementation of NationalEnvironmentalManagement (UNDP funds)

Decentralization

(i) Natural resources management through communal environment profile

(ii) Preparation of Local Environment Development and Management Plans

(iii) Reforestation

(iv) Energy management at the household level

2005: National Action Planfor Adaptation to ClimateChange (GEF funds)

Central level

(i) Identification of priority activities to face consequences of climate changes

(ii) Preparation of a National Action Plan of Adaptation to Climate Change

2006: Self-Evaluation ofNational Capacities toReinforce GlobalEnvironment Management(GEF funds)

Central level

(i) Diagnostic of national capacities for the management of internationalconventions related to biodiversity, climate change and desertification

(ii) Development of a strategy and action plan to reinforce national capacities

2006: Arid Zones (DrylandsDevelopment Centre andGTZ funds)

(i) Central and local levels – greening of the GSPR

(ii) Decentralization – support to pilot projects for the development ofarid zones

2006: PMF–GEF (GEF funds) Decentralization – support to small environmental projects

2007: 2nd Conference onClimate Change (GEF funds)

Central level

60. Ministère de l’Environnement et de la Protection de la Nature.


sector, the rationale of UNDP contribution couldbe confusing. With the exception of the regionalproject of Niger River Basin and the experimentalNew Rice for Africa project on rice hybridizationfunded by Japan, UNDP contribution toenvironmental management is presented in Table16, in chronological order of project approval.

These projects are all closely linked. For example,as of April 2008, the Arid Zones project is stillmanaged by the accountant from the ‘Support tothe Implementation of National EnvironmentalManagement’ project. The rationale for locatingthe greening of the GSPR under the Arid Zonesproject is not immediately clear without consid-ering the timing of its approval, the concomitantfinalization of the GSPR and the fundingconstraints imposed by the project format.

Another method of distinguishing between theseprojects is to take into consideration the source offunding. Apart from micro-projects, GEF fundsare channelled at the central level. UNDP funds,including those of the Drylands DevelopmentCentre, are decentralized at the local level.

UNDP-funded projects seem more in line with theexpected outcome of “increased capacity of localauthorities and communities (particularly women)and the private sector: environmental managementand sustainable energy development.” In 2006,this outcome was revised to “better conservationof resources, including flora, fauna and fisheries.”This change coincided with the strengthening ofthe UNDP–GEF partnership. Nevertheless, thecontribution of UNDP to attaining the revisedoutcome is harder to discern.


Strategic positioning (appropriate role andpartnerships): With the exception of Japan-funded New Rice for Africa, GEF contributed tothe bulk of UNDP projects portfolio during 2004–2008. GEF also contributed to strengthening theUNDP Benin focal point and enhancing countryoffice capacity to deliver better quality supportfor central and local stakeholders in the sector.

One of the fundamental roles of UNDP, asperceived by the country office environment focalpoint, was to conduct negotiations for themobilization of funds. UNDP succeeded indoing so with GEF, which increasingly mobilizedfunds during the CPO period.

Through the Drylands Development Centre, apartnership was also established with GTZ. Thispartnership allowed UNDP to mobilizeadditional funds from GTZ for the PAMOproject, and from the International LandCoalition for the Arid Zones project. Thesepartnerships may have influenced the UNDPprogramme with their own objectives.

At both central and local levels, UNDP played astrategic role in creating an enabling environmentfor the sustainable management of naturalresources, environmental policy, environmentalauditing, and Local Environment Developmentand Management Plans serving as fundingframeworks. UNDP also played an importantrole in demonstrating to both the governmentand local population—especially through thegreening of the GSPR—that ecology and theeconomy are compatible. Consequently, not onlycan greening initiatives be translated intoconcrete actions (through PAMO or PMF), butalso these initiatives can represent an effectivemeans of creating jobs and generating income atthe local level.

In order to reinforce its local presence in 2008,UNDP is developing partnerships withADECOI local personnel, the United StatesPeace Corps and UN Volunteers. The plan is toexpand these partnerships during the nextUNDAF Country Programme Document periodto integrate, when and where applicable, issuesand activities relating to the environment in theUNDP projects portfolio.

Relevance: The international community notonly acknowledges the strong link betweenenvironmental degradation and poverty, but alsoincreasingly considers it to be one of the mostchallenging issues of the 21st century—one that


may result in major human, social and economicturmoil. The greening of the GSPR was a majorUNDP accomplishment in linking the environ-ment with the MDGs and growth for povertyreduction. The main question about relevance isthat of the number of simultaneous projects inoperation, which impose severe administrativeconstraints on the MEPN. Although new projectideas—such as Sacred Forest, Micro-hydro,Grand Pana and Pendjari Natural Park—shouldmobilize nearly $20 million in the coming years,there is no guarantee that combined with currentUNDP projects they will significantly contributein the operationalization of the greening of theGSPR, which should be the core of the UNDPenvironment programme.

Responsiveness: All projects were elaborated bythe MEPN, to which UNDP acted as adviser,quality monitor, liaison between donors and MEPN,and broker. The MEPN perceives UNDP as aprivileged and highly valuable partner, andregards UNDP interventions as fully adapted tonational needs. A key finding of a recent GEFevaluation is that “UNDP is the executing agencywith the most GEF projects in its portfolio in Benin, and various exchanges of the GEFevaluation team with actors directly or indirectlylinked to the GEF projects’ portfolio in Beninattest that the UNDP approach is the mostappreciated and seemingly, the best coordi-nated.”61 Unfortunately, the evaluation team didnot have the opportunity during the mission tovalidate this central perception with decentral-ized or local stakeholders’ views.

Effectiveness: The environment programme is aclear example of good practice in mobilizing theUNDP network and regional human resources toreinforce national effectiveness. The country officeenvironment focal point maintains close and regularrelations with the UNCDF and GEF offices inDakar. The latter acts as the environment SURFand regroups specialists for each set of environ-

mental themes covered by the Benin programme.The speed of communications has increasedsince the GEF office was decentralized in Dakar.It now provides support in project design, anannual capacity-building training session inDakar, counsel and monitoring, special thematicstudies, and support in identifying expertsrequired by projects. The effectiveness of theenvironment programme has also been enhancedby the focal point’s regular participation in anInternet-based network of good practices relatingto the environment.

Sustainability: The GEF evaluation report indicatedthat environment projects in Benin entail activitiesthat, while enabling, are insufficient to guaranteesustainable development in the long term.According to a UNDP-supported self-assessmentby MEPN project director and managers, theministry can be considered autonomous in thearea of reforestation. However, MEPN still needstechnical and financial support for the managementof desertification (Arid Zones), clean developmentmechanisms, climate change projects and anenvironmental database. Apart from this support,which UNDP should continue to provide,sustainability will require a change in the MEPNattitude. MEPN should become more proactivein identifying, planning and budgeting for thecontinuous and strategic improvement needs ofits technical and managerial staff.

Efficiency: Despite recurrent delays in fundmobilization, UNDP succeeded in realizing most ofthe activities identified in various projects’ AWPs.Note, however, that ‘activity’ does not meanresult, and that AWPs do not establish a clearlink between the two concepts. For example, inthe 2006 National Action Plan for Adaptation toClimate Change (PANA)62 AWP, the CPAPoutcome is “better conservation of resources,including flora, fauna and fisheries,” using theindicators of tree-cover degradation rate and thepercentage of fishermen using prohibited fishing

61. Rapport d’Évaluation du FEM, 2008, page 80. The translation of the quotation from French to English is that of theADR team.

62. Projet d’élaboration du Programme d’Action National d’Adaptation aux Changements Climatiques.


gear. Main activities are related to the preparationof the PANA document. The 2006 PAMO AWPuses the same outcome indicators, with greeningof the GSPR as the first activity, which is one ofthe results expected from the Arid Zones project.The UNDP environment programme exemplifiesthe need to review planning and monitoring toolsused by country office programme managers, andmake the tools congruent to an effective results-based management approach. The NEX Unitpersonnel should also benefit from the exercise.

4.2 HEALTH AND EDUCATION

National objective: reduce maternal and infantmortality rates, improve on all health indicatorsand promote access to education

The UNDP architecture of interventions should,similar to a mathematical or logical model, possessthe essential quality of elegance. This is not thecase where shaky architecture seems to assumethat one outcome—increased awareness—willresult in changes to maternal and infant mortalityrates or indicators of health and education (seeTable 6). When combined with the UNDAFcontributions of other UN agencies, UNDP couldhave played a second, but most probably third or figurative role in supporting this nationalobjective. In light of the effective results producedby UNDP intervention in matters of humanrights (see section 4.2.1), UNDP may havecontributed very little to this national objective.If UNDP needs to rationalize its activities inBenin or reduce dispersion of its portfolio, thenthe CPAP outcome should be realigned toprovide more support to another nationalobjective, such as the rule of law and liberties.

4.2.1 UNDAF OUTCOME #3:INCREASED USE OF SOCIAL SERVICES

Through its support to the National Policy forthe Promotion of Human Rights, UNDPdirectly contributed to the UNDAF objective,considered here as an expected outcome: “Anenabling legal environment for the promotionand protection of human rights, especially those ofwomen and children.” However, this contributionhas been weak and lacking in sustainable results.

The primary factors that explain this can be foundin UNDP relevance and responsiveness: UNDPdesigned its intervention as an experiment and,on a narrow basis, for demonstration purposes ata decentralized level. Initially planned to operatefor four years, the experiment was abandonedafter the first two. This abandonment leftunfinished activities and no assets that could begeneralized. The Ministry of Justice, the UNDPpartner, considers the relationship to constitute agood partnership; however, the Ministry believesthat UNDP may not have given enough consid-eration to this project. The Ministry alsofavoured a partnership at the decentralized levelrather than at the central level where UNDP hadrepositioned its support.

CPAP outcome 8: Increased awareness of humanrights, particularly at the community level

Manifest human-rights abuses in Benin duringthe ADR period were largely related to the slowsystem of justice (there are only 140 judges for allof Benin) and in the domains of child abuse,child labour, child trafficking and domesticviolence, especially in the Alibori and Dongaregions. UNDP set out to create human-rightsawareness at the grass-roots level in the Prefectureof Alibori.

The review conducted by the evaluation teamcovers only one project, the National Policy for thePromotion of Human Rights. The Popularizationand Promotion of Human Rights project wasexecuted through Social Watch, and the approachadopted was based on principles of inclusion,participation and accountability. This approachwas applied during consultations, workshops andpresentations leading to the preparation andfinalization of the GSPR. The approach iscurrently used for the preparation of MDGannual reports. The project addressing legalcapacities of the poor is coordinated from UNDP headquarters in New York through theCommission of Legal Empowerment of thePoor. Benin is one of the 25 countries targeted bythis project, and four national consultations areplanned. UNDP Benin is not directly involved inthis intervention.


In 2004, the creation of human-rights clubs inschools and relay groups in six of the Aliboricouncils started the process of sensitization tobasic human rights concepts. In 2006, UNDPfroze the support to the project on grounds that,as a matter of policy, human rights had become across-cutting theme.

By the end of the first phase of the project, therewas a provision for securing legal aid to at least100 human-rights abuse victims who could notafford counsel or other redress. At the timeUNDP called the project off, only 20 victims hadbenefited from legal aid. Available resources werewell managed during the first two years of thesupport project. The Government of Benin took an interest by programming counterpartfunds in 2007. However, because these resourceswere not absorbed due to the UNDP change ofapproach, the budget line for the project waswithdrawn in 2008. The human rights actionplan is yet to be finalized. UNDP financed theelaboration of a strategic plan for the protectionand promotion of human rights, but because ofthe premature end of the project, implementationhas yet to commence.

This cross-cutting subject should be reflected inall UNDP development cooperation interventions.However, the evaluation team found no clear-cutleads by which to assess UNDP contribution tohuman rights awareness in Benin.


Strategic positioning (appropriate role andpartnerships): The contribution of UNDP startedbefore 2004 when, through a specific activity,UNDP supported the Ministry of Justice andHuman Rights in the preparation of a nationalaction plan for the promotion and protection ofhuman rights. The purpose of this support was tostreamline and coordinate the activities of donorsin support of human rights. Although theBelgians, the Danes and the European Union arethe major donors in the sector of justice andhuman rights, UNDP input during the projectlife (2004–2006) was more appreciated by theministry. This is based on the perception thatregional-level support produces more perceptibleresults than national-level support, where otherdonors concentrate their activities.

Following the mid-term review of the CPAP, theoutcome was revised in the annual results reports of2006 and 2007 into “human rights, particularlythose of vulnerable groups, are better respected.”Those reports present activities conducted in thesector. The evaluation team notes, however, thatby 2006 the national project for the promotion ofhuman rights was shut down due to mainstreaming,and that the February 2008 UNDP BriefingNote on Benin does not list any projects relatedto human-rights promotion or protection.



Estimatedbudget

National Policy for the Promotion ofHuman Rights (2004–2006)

National NEX / Ministère de laJustice, de la Législation et

des Droits de l’Homme

–

Popularization and Promotion ofHuman Rights (2005–2008)

National NEX / Social Watch –

Enhancing the Legal Capacities of thePoor (2006–2008)

National AGEX –


Relevance and responsiveness: While the ministryperceived decentralized activities on humanrights as the most positive aspect of the UNDPintervention, the UNDP Benin perspective wasthat it was more justified to concentrate strategicthinking at the national level rather than supportdecentralized operational activities. Consequently,the human-rights component moved from theProgramme Division to the Strategy, Policy andEvaluation Division in the UNDP Beninstructure. The evaluation team does not haveenough information to formulate a clearstatement on UNDP contribution relevance andresponsiveness after 2006.

Effectiveness: The expected outcome of the“existence of a plan of action, the number ofneedy persons granted legal aid and the speedwith which justice is dispensed” was notaccompanied by a corresponding and effectiveimplementation strategy. UNDP effectivenesswould appear to have been seriously compromisedby mainstreaming human rights at the countrylevel as a matter of policy in favour of the cross-cutting approach, and the resulting mid-streamabandonment of an ongoing project. Theconsequence is that to date, there is nooperational plan of action. In addition, theproject was prematurely terminated and theimplementation of human-rights awareness as across-cutting theme still awaits feasible indica-tors of value and attainment. The evaluation

team was not made aware of any current strategyaimed at accelerating the pace with which justiceis dispensed.

4.3 HIV/AIDS, MALARIA AND TUBERCULOSIS

National objective: Fight against HIV/AIDS,malaria and tuberculosis

4.3.1 UNDAF OUTCOME #4:STRATEGIC ANTI-AIDS AND ANTI-MALARIA PLANS IN OPERATION, ANDNATIONWIDE EXTENSION OF THETREATMENT OF TUBERCULOSIS

CPAP outcome 9: Strengthened Institutionalcapacity to plan and implement multisectoralstrategies to curb the spread of HIV/AIDS and to mitigate its social and economic impact

Random surveys carried out in early 2000 showan AIDS prevalence incidence of 4.10 percent.63

The prevalence was attributable to generallyinadequate sex education, denial about the realityof HIV/AIDS, poverty and lack of effectivecontrol of the disease. The demographic andhealth survey of 2006 estimates HIV/AIDSprevalence in Benin at 1.5 percent. However,because the random survey and the demographicand health surveys adopted different approaches,this cannot be interpreted as a drop in HIV/AIDS prevalence. Moreover, UNDP managedthe Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis andMalaria in Benin until 2006, when in 2007 the




Support to the Implementation ofthe National Strategic Plan for theFight against HIV/AIDS and STDs,64

Integration in GSPR (2004–2008)

National NEX / CNLS 17,320,000


63. ‘Universities and HIV/AIDS in Sub-Saharan Africa: the Case of Benin’, available online at:http://hivaidsclearinghouse.unescop.org.

64. Projet d’Appui à la Mise en Œuvre du Plan Stratégique Nationale de Lutte contre le VIH/SIDA et les MST.


Government of Benin claimed and obtainedmanagement of Global Fund resources.

Within the framework of the Global Fund,UNDP was able to:

n Strengthen the technical capacity of labora-tories handling HIV/AIDS data;

n Improve the rate of detection of tubercu-losis patients;

n Increase the number of persons using anti-retroviral drugs;

n Strengthen the prevention of transmissionfrom mother to child;

n Build the HIV/AIDS capacity of the GlobalFund and civil-society personnel in Benin;

n Reduce the prevalence of false beliefs,stigmatization and discrimination againstpeople living with HIV/AIDS;

n Increase the rate of persons going forvoluntary screening; and

n Increase from 23 in 2005 to 47 in 2008 thenumber of associations of persons living withAIDS, and develop capacity in the multi-sectoral Benin Network of Associations ofPersons Living with HIV/AIDS.


Effectiveness: The ADR team is unable toconfirm that UNDP made a contributiontowards reducing the level of prevalence of HIV/AIDS due to the inconclusiveness of baselinestatistics and the total number of factors thatcontributed to the attainment of this outcome.Though activities for the period under review donot appear to specifically target the plannedresults (e.g., those that concern associations andpersons living with HIV/AIDS), the realizationsseem to have contributed to expanding HIV/AIDS information to many more households.

Sustainability: The positive contributions ofUNDP seem to have gone into regression afterthe government obtained ownership andmanagement of the Global Fund to fight AIDS,Tuberculosis and Malaria. The evaluation team

learned that procurement and tender proceduresare now slow, that this impedes project imple-mentation, and that there is no ownership of theresults-based disbursement technique. However,the ADR team records that the responsibility ofUNDP for this regression is mitigated by thepremature, unilateral and abrupt withdrawal ofthe Global Fund and the transfer of managementto the Government of Benin.

4.4 RULE OF LAW AND SOCIAL DIALOGUE

National objective: Support the rule of law and liberties, a peaceful social climate,social dialogue and private initiative based on the orientations of government

There is no UNDAF outcome identified tocontribute to this national objective. The 2004–2006 CPAP identified one outcome, but it wasabandoned in 2006 after the mid-term review ofthe CPO. This should not imply that UNDP didnot contribute to the national objective. However,it is unsound to try to measure the extent of thiscontribution. It seems that this national objectivecould have been treated in three different ways: asa strategic leadership domain of the ResidentCoordinator; as a cross-cutting objective; or as anindicator of UNDP global interventions. Datasupports them all.

The government was able to define its orientationsand design more structured activities, such asgouvernance concertée and priority projects, due inpart to advocacy activities conducted by the BeninResident Coordinator or UNDP professionalsand to special studies conducted by SURF orother appointed experts through developmentservice support funds. Consultations with privatesector representatives figured in the ResidentCoordinator agenda, and could result in moreformal support from UNDP.

As a cross-cutting sector, this national objectivewas supported through activities such as:

n Support to the rule of law and liberties:interventions in favour of human rights andthe National Assembly;


n Support towards peaceful social climate:interventions targeting job creation andelections; and

n Support of social dialogue: social watch andparticipatory planning and monitoring ofGSPR and MDGs.

Social dialogue is one of the main contributionsof UNDP to the development of Benin. It is alsoin this sector that UNDP was able to use itscomparative advantages the most effectively, inparticular its status as a trusted and neutral partner

and provider of unbiased advice to government,local authorities and civil society organizations.

CPAP outcome 10: Use of new information and communication technologies to encouragedecision-making attuned to the needs of the population

This CPAP outcome is not linked with aUNDAF outcome, but is documented throughCPAP Outcome 3: The National Assembly ismodernized (e-parliament) and its capacities forrepresentation, legislation and control of govern-ment action are strengthened.




Support to the ImplementationStrategy for New Information andCommunication Technologies65

National – –


65. Projet d’Appui à la Stratégie d’Implantation des Nouvelles Technologies de l’Information et de la Communication.

chapter 4 undp contribution to national development...

Documents