Evaluation Office, May 2008United Nations Development Programme

ENHANCEDPARTNERSHIPS

THE ROLE OF UNDP IN THE NET CONTRIBUTOR COUNTRIES OF THE ARAB REGION

EVALUATION OF

Copyright © UNDP 2008, all rights reserved.Manufactured in the United States of America

Design: Suazion, Inc. (NY, suazion.com) Production: A.K. Office Supplies (NY)

Team Leader George Zaidan

International Consultant Michael Reynolds

National Research Institutions Bahrain Centre for Studies and Research

Focus Marketing Consultancy, Kuwait

Gulf Research Centre, Dubai

Evaluation Office Task Manager Nurul Alam

Advisory Panel Ebtisam Al-Kitbi, Professor of Political Sciences, United ArabEmirates University, Dubai

Baqer Salman Alnajjar, Professor of Sociology, University of Bahrain

Ali Abdullahtif Ahmida , Professor of Political Science, Departmentof History and Political Science, University of New England

Rola Dashti, Chairperson of Kuwait Economic Society

Clement Moore Henry, Professor in the Department ofGovernment, College of Liberal Arts, University of Texas at Austin

Research Support Karima NehmehJaney Lawry-White

Programme Associate Concepcion Cole

Editor Lois Jensen

EVALUATION TEAM

EVALUATION OF THE ROLE OF UNDP IN THE NET CONTRIBUTOR COUNTRIES OF THE ARAB REGION

F O R E W O R D i

This report presents an assessment of the effective-ness of UNDP’s programmes in supporting thedevelopment challenges and aspirations of thenet contributor countries (NCCs) of the Arabregion. The report analyses the implications ofthis experience for UNDP’s corporate policies onNCCs as well as for its future activities. Theevaluation is especially relevant in light of thegrowing number of middle-income countriesthat will graduate to net contributor status in thecoming years.

The analysis in this report is based on evidencecollected from field work in all five net contributorcountries of the Arab region (Bahrain, Kuwait,Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Saudi Arabia and theUnited Arab Emirates), consultations withUNDP units in New York, and an in-depth deskreview of UNDP programmes in these countriesas well as UNDP’s overall strategies, policies andpractices regarding NCCs. The evaluation teaminteracted with government officials, UN systemrepresentatives and other national stakeholders.In addition, to encourage broad participation inthe evaluation process, surveys were undertakento determine the perceptions of a wide range ofstakeholders regarding UNDP’s current andpotential role in their respective countries. Threenational research institutions were contracted toundertake the studies, which were carried out inBahrain, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. The resultingNational Stakeholder Perception Reports wereextremely useful, and complemented earlierUNDP-focused studies.

The evaluation found a clear match between theemerging needs of net contributor countries andUNDP’s mandate and capabilities.The overarchingconclusion is that there is strong justification forcontinued and strengthened UNDP presence inthe net contributor countries of the Arab Region.All five countries strongly desire a UNDPpresence, primarily since it is the embodiment of

the UN system and serves both as a window and conduit to the international arena. Theevaluation distils the view emerging fromstakeholders that UNDP’s country presence andvalue-added have more intrinsic worth than thecontribution of its activities to meeting thecountries’ development challenges.

The evaluation also found that UNDP’s reformprocesses_which have evolved over the lastdecade and include a focus on practice areas and a new corporate business model—were notsufficiently mirrored in the formulation andmanagement of country programmes in Arabregion NCCs.

National ownership is a strong feature of theseprogrammes, but this has resulted largely fromthe fact that governments finance almost the entireUNDP programme in their respective countries.In the rapidly changing environment in which thenet contributor countries now find themselves,UNDP needs to respond to opportunities for moreeffective engagement, recognizing that businessas usual could result in increased marginalizationand reduced significance of its activities in termsof their human development objectives. This isespecially true in the context of increased privatesector competition in providing the kind oftechnical assistance that UNDP is known for.

A stakeholder workshop held in early 2008, atthe end of the evaluation process, brought togetherUNDP, government and civil society partnersfrom all five countries for the first time. Theobjective was to discuss the recommendations ofthe report and to take the relationship forward.The participants raised the need to establish anew relationship with UNDP that would moveaway from the traditional development agency/clientdynamics to one of full and equal partnership atboth the strategic/policy and programmatic levels.

FOREWORD

F O R E W O R Di i

I am very grateful to government and civil societyrepresentatives who engaged with the evaluationteam and were very generous with their time. I wouldalso like to thank the Resident Representatives,UNDP country office staff and members of UNCountry Teams in all five Arab region NCCs fortheir time and support. Without their help, thisevaluation could never have taken place. Inaddition, UNDP colleagues in headquarters alsodeserve our thanks for their input into theprocess. We would especially like to acknowledgethe Regional Bureau for Arab States, whichprovided significant support while respecting theindependent nature of the evaluation process.

The evaluation team was led by George Zaidan,a former senior World Bank official with significantexperience in the Arab region. He was supportedby Michael Reynolds. National StakeholderPerception Reports were undertaken in Bahrain,Kuwait and Saudi Arabia by the Bahrain Centre forStudies and Research, Focus Marketing Consultancyand the Gulf Research Centre, respectively.

An external advisory panel was established and anattempt was made to represent all five countriesin the region. The members of the panel were Dr. Baqer Salman Alnajjar (Bahrain), Dr. RolaDashti (Kuwait), Dr. Ali Abdullahtif Ahmida

(Libya), Dr. Ebtisam Al-Kitbi (UAE) and Dr. Clement Moore Henry (a regional specialist).We also received very useful comments on earlierdrafts from the five Arab region NCC countryoffices and the Regional Bureau for Arab States.The final report and the stakeholder workshopbenefited from the ideas, comments and sugges-tions of members of this panel.

Given the importance and complexity of thisevaluation, Nurul Alam, the Deputy Director of theEvaluation Office, provided substantive guidanceand management oversight to the evaluation process.Research support was provided by Karima Nehmeh.Concepcion Cole and Anish Pradham providedimportant administrative and dissemination support.

I hope that readers will find the evaluation usefuland that it will contribute to enhancing thequality and results of UNDP’s work in the Arabregion NCCs. I also hope that this evaluation willcontribute to the development of a corporatestrategy for UNDP’s engagement with netcontributor and middle-income countries.

Saraswathi MenonDirector, UNDP Evaluation Office

C O N T E N T S i i i

Acronyms and Abbreviations v

Executive Summary vii

1. Introduction 1

1.1 Background 11.2 Regional Development Context 21.3 Objectives and Scope of this Evaluation 51.4 Outline of the Report 6

2. The United Nations, UNDP and the NCCs of the Arab Region 7

2.1 United Nations and UNDP Presence in the Arab Region NCCs 72.2 The UNDP Policy Environment 92.3 UNDP Country Programmes in the Arab Region NCCs 12

3. Contribution to National Development Results and UNDP’s Value-Added 15

3.1 Contribution to National Development Results 153.2 Review of Five Model Projects 203.3 The Nature of UNDP’s Contribution and its Value-Added 213.4 Effectiveness, Sustainability and Replicability 25

4. Strategic Positioning of UNDP’s Country Programmes 29

4.1 Relevance of Country Programmes 294.2 Responsiveness to National Priorities 304.3 Strategic Partnerships 314.4 Resource Mobilization and Partnerships for Development and Humanitarian Aid 334.5 Awareness of UNDP and Knowledge of its Role and Services 34

5. Implementation of the Country Programmes 37

5.1 Management of Country Programmes 375.2 UNDP’s Operational Efficiency 405.3 Availability and Use of Corporate and Regional Support 425.4 Accountability and Measurement of Performance 44

6. Conclusions and Recommendations 47

6.1 Main Conclusions 476.2 Recommendations 51

CONTENTS

C O N T E N T Si v

Annexes

1. Terms of Reference 552. Select Bibliography 653. List of Persons Consulted 674. The National Stakeholder Perception Report 73

Boxes

1. UNDP’s Mission 12. Multi-Year Funding Framework 2004-2007: Strategic Goals and Drivers of Development 103. Saudi Arabia: Progress in Combating HIV/AIDS 184. Bahrain: Key Results from the MicroStart Project (1997-2002) 205. UAE: Key Results from the Date Palm Research and Development Project, Phase I 216. Contribution to National Development Results and UNDP’s Value-Added:

Summary of Key Findings 277. UNDP and Corporate Social Responsibility in Saudi Arabia 318. Strategic Positioning of UNDP Country Programmes: Summary of Key Findings 359. Implementation of UNDP Country Programmes: Summary of Key Findings 45

Tables

1. Basic Indicators for NCCs in the Arab Region (2005) 22. Basic Human Development and Income Indices 33. UN Agency Presence in the Arab Region NCCs 74. Countries/Territories in UNDP’s Arab States Region by Income and Status 85. Goals Examined in the First and Second Programming Cycles 126. Extra-Budgetary Resources (Total 2004-2006) 147. Selection and Administration of Projects in Arab Region NCCs 398. Country Office Finances (Average Annual 2004-2006) 409. Staff Workloads 41

Figures

1. Thematic Allocations in First and Second Programming Cycles in Arab Region NCCs 132. Projects Executed under National Execution 37

A C R O N Y M S A N D A B B R E V I A T I O N S v

ADR Assessment of Development Results

AFESD Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development

CAWTAR Centre for Arab Women Training and Research

CCF Country cooperation framework

CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women

CSO Civil society organization

ESCWA UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia

FAO Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations

GCC Gulf Cooperation Council

GIS Global Information System

GWU General Women’s Union (UAE)

HARPAS HIV/AIDS Regional Programme in the Arab States

HDR Human Development Report

ICTDAR Information and Communications Technology for Development in the Arab Region

ILO International Labour Organization

IRIN Integrated Regional Information Networks (OCHA)

MDG Millennium Development Goal

MYFF Multi-year funding framework

NCC Net contributor country

NEX National execution

NGO Non-governmental organization

NSPR National Stakeholder Perception Report

OCHA Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UN)

ODA Official development assistance

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

OPEC Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries

POGAR Programme on Governance in the Arab Region

PPP Purchasing power parity

RBAS Regional Bureau for Arab States (UNDP)

SURF Subregional Resource Facility

UAE United Arab Emirates

UN United Nations

UNAIDS Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

A C R O N Y M S A N D A B B R E V I A T I O N Sv i

UNDG UN Development Group

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNDSS UN Department of Safety and Security

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNESCO UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNHCR Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

UNIC United Nations Information Centre

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization

UNODC UN Office on Drugs and Crime

UNIFEM UN Development Fund for Women

UNOPS UN Office for Project Services

UNFPA UN Population Fund

UNU United Nations University

WFP World Food Programme

WHO World Health Organization

WMO World Meteorological Organization

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y v i i

INTRODUCTION

For UNDP, net contributor countries (NCCs) area special group that bring together the UN principleof universality with that of progressivity: Allcountries are eligible to participate in UNDPprogrammes, but those with higher levels ofincome are affected by policies that limit theresources that can be provided by UNDP. Thefive NCCs within the group of Arab States—Bahrain, Kuwait, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (Libya),Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates(UAE)—are busily adapting to fast-changinginternal and external environments. Internally, allfive countries have recently experienced rapidlygrowing economies combined with moves towardsgreater political openness. At the same time,they have had to adapt to the onward march ofglobalization and the challenge of finding theirrole in this new external environment.This shiftingcontext suggests that UNDP’s relationship withthese countries also needs to evolve.

This independent evaluation of the role ofUNDP in net contributor countries of the Arabregion was commissioned by the Evaluation Officeof UNDP. Its focus is very much on learning and the future role of UNDP in this group ofcountries. The key objective was to assess howwell UNDP’s activities and programmes in Arabregion NCCs addressed development challengesand supported national aspirations. It also soughtto assess the implications of this experience forUNDP’s corporate policies and practices relatingto NCCs and for its future activities in thosecountries. The evaluation is especially relevant inlight of the growing number of middle-incomecountries that will graduate to NCC status in thecoming years.

The evaluation was conducted by an independentevaluation team in 2007 and included visits to all five countries. Many types of stakeholders,

representing both government and civil society,participated in the evaluation process. To solicit awider range of views about UNDP’s role thancould be obtained from short missions by theevaluation team, National Stakeholder PerceptionReports (NSPRs) were commissioned in three ofthe countries and undertaken by national researchorganizations. On completion of the final draft, astakeholder workshop was held to bring togethergovernment, civil society and UNDP to examinethe report and its recommendations, with thespecific objective of finding ways to strengthenUNDP’s engagement in Arab region NCCs.

PROGRESS AND DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES

With the exception of Libya, all the Arab regionNCCs are classified as high-income countries; allfall into the category of high human developmentcountries. Moreover, all of them are making goodprogress towards achieving many of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs). Poverty is knownto exist in Libya and Saudi Arabia, but it haslargely been eradicated in the other three countries.Bahrain, Kuwait, Libya and the UAE have allachieved universal primary education, and SaudiArabia is making significant gains towards thatgoal. There is some progress towards genderequality, but this remains an important challengein these countries. As in education, tremendousadvances have been made in terms of health.Rates of infant and child mortality in thesecountries have fallen dramatically over the last 35 years. All countries have a low prevalence ofHIV/AIDS and are taking steps to ensure thatthe spread of the virus is contained. The seventhMDG, ensuring environmental sustainability,remains a challenge in all five countries. Therehas been greater progress on MDG 8, achievinggreater global partnership for development: TheNCCs of the Arab region are harnessing thepotential benefits of globalization for national

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Yv i i i

development and providing generous support fordevelopment in countries in need of assistance.

Notwithstanding notable progress in terms ofhuman and economic development, all fivecountries face a number of challenges. Underlyingthese is the aspiration to deepen and strengthentheir integration into the world economy. Thismeans finding ‘niches’ of comparative advantagein which they can play a role that transcends theircontributions to the energy sector to becomeimportant actors in areas such as trade, financialservices, information and communicationstechnology and tourism. Among the moreimportant challenges, many of which are relatedto integration into the global economy, are the following:

n Economic diversification: The economies ofArab region NCCs are still over-reliant onoil in terms of economic activity, governmentrevenue generation and export earnings.Recent increases in prices have onlyincreased this reliance. In view of the limitedsupply of oil in the long term, the challengefor some time has been to diversify awayfrom petroleum and related products.Diversification, together with social andpolitical dialogue, are needed to reduce thelarge and widespread inequalities amongthese countries’ citizens.

n Employment creation: All Arab regionNCCs have a young and growing nationalpopulation, a large number and share ofexpatriate workers in the private sector andstable public sectors with little room forexpansion. The rights of migrant workersraise sensitive social and human issues thatneed to be addressed. The challenge for Arabregion NCCs is to facilitate a gradual shiftaway from dependence on expatriate labourwhile addressing their concerns. At the same time, they need to create sustainableemployment opportunities for new entrantsin the labour market, especially youth and

women. Reform of the training and educationsystems to ensure that young people have theappropriate skills for employment in theprivate sector are related challenges. A strongrole for the private sector is crucial to bothemployment creation and diversification.

n Public administration and governance:Related to the above is the challenge ofstrengthening and streamlining large publicadministrations while ensuring that employ-ment opportunities exist outside governmentservice. Further progress on governance reformsis desirable in the interest of co-optingdisadvantaged segments of society into thepolitical process as well as in achieving thecommitments to democratic governanceenvisaged in the Millennium Declaration.

n Gender equality: Recent progress in thisrespect needs to be extended and deepened inthe political, economic and social spheres.Programmes to empower women are needed—for example, by fostering employmentopportunities, especially at the manageriallevel and through ownership, as well as byaccessing knowledge through the Internetand other sources.

n Protecting the environment: All five countriesface environmental challenges, the mostcritical of which is water. Rapid urbanizationand development, especially along coastalregions, also pose environmental problems.

UNDP RESPONSE TO DEVELOPMENT NEEDS

UNDP has responded to development challengesin Arab region NCCs in the context of its ownorganizational evolution. Specifically, UNDP’sreform efforts have led to a new practice focus,along with greater emphasis on developmenteffectiveness, national ownership and working inaccordance with a corporate business model. Therecently adopted UNDP Strategic Plan (2008–2011)1 notes the need for strengthening application

1 In October 2007 by the UNDP Executive Board

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y i x

of this business model, which is built on the threepillars of coordination, advocacy and developmentservices in line with the support UNDP providesto programme countries towards the fulfilment oftheir national development strategies. In terms ofthis response, the following represent the keyfindings of this evaluation:

GOALS AND THEMATIC ALLOCATIONS

A common theme of both programming cycles inall five NCCs was human resource development.Various aspects of governance and globalizationwere prominent in the second programmingcycle, reflecting the evolution of UNDP’smandate in these areas. However, environment, acontinuing concern and area of emphasis forUNDP, was present as a major goal in only twocountry programmes in each cycle. Neithercombating HIV/AIDS, one of five UNDPpractice areas in the second programming cycle,nor promoting gender equality, one of its cross-cutting themes, were included as goals in any ofthe country programmes of Arab region NCCs.

The thematic allocation of projects in bothprogramming cycles reveals an increasingemphasis on governance in both Bahrain andKuwait; in contrast, governance represented asmall proportion of programmes in Libya andSaudi Arabia. The allocations in both countryprogrammes in Libya were primarily of a sectoralrather than thematic nature, and involved therole of education, agriculture and industry inreducing poverty, an area not heavily representedin other countries. Combating HIV/AIDS andpromoting gender equality were pursuedprimarily through projects financed from avariety of UNDP sources, including ThematicTrust Funds, Resident Coordinators’ budgets andregional programmes (henceforth referred to as‘UNDP-financed’ as opposed to ‘government-financed’ activities).

RELEVANCE AND RESPONSIVENESS OFCOUNTRY PROGRAMMES

UNDP country programmes were largely relevantto beneficiaries’ needs. With the exception of afew large projects, they were also closely aligned

to national priorities. UNDP responded quicklyand well to emerging trends, often throughprojects that it financed. These projects were alsofound to be relevant to national priorities.

Country programmes were generally relevant toUNDP’s mandate with the exception of a fewlarge projects that were only tangentially related.Much of the important work in support ofUNDP’s human development agenda in NCCscomes from engagement with civil society and isfinanced primarily from UNDP sources.

CONTRIBUTION OF COUNTRY PROGRAMMESTO NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESULTS

When viewed by beneficiaries and UNDPcountry office staff, projects were largely seen ashaving achieved most of their objectives. Theywere also viewed as having contributed tonational development results in a variety ofsectors and themes. UNDP-financed projectswere particularly successful in achieving theirobjectives. They initiated and promoted dialoguein politically and socially sensitive areas such asdemocratic governance, gender equality, HIV/AIDS and human development, while contributingto national objectives.

UNDP’S VALUE-ADDED

Given the demand-driven nature of UNDPcountry programmes in Arab region NCCs, thereis a strong feeling of project ownership amongnational partners. A variety of factors makeUNDP an attractive partner compared to othersources of international expertise: UNDP is aconduit and window to the UN system; it hasaccess to a wide array of international expertise; itis transparent and impartial; it carries the UNDPimprimatur; it has guaranteed multi-year fundingand relatively quick administrative procedures; and,in Bahrain and Kuwait, it is perceived to be a sourceof ‘free’ budgetary resources for beneficiaries.

UNDP has provided maximum value-added toprojects within its core competencies by makingsubstantive contributions. In projects outside itscore competencies, which account for most of the

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Yx

country programmes, UNDP has played a morelimited coordination-cum-managerial role. Andin a few large projects, UNDP’s value-added waslimited to an administrative-financial role, whichwas largely process oriented.

Respondents to the three NSPRs had lesspositive views of UNDP’s value-added than thecountry offices. In Saudi Arabia and especiallyKuwait, UNDP’s role was seen to be primarilyadministrative, and insufficiently involved inproject content. National counterparts expresseda strong and unanimous desire to the evaluationteam and in their response to NSPRs to seeUNDP play a much stronger substantive role.

IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNTRY PROGRAMMES

A number of NCC country offices are heavilyinvolved in implementation, primarily because ofa government perception that it is UNDP’sresponsibility. In some countries, however, heavyUNDP involvement in implementation isrequired to meet delivery targets. Participation inregional programmes was limited mostly to aregional initiative to combat HIV/AIDS, whichwas effective notwithstanding cultural sensitivitiesassociated with this issue. There is no frameworkthat defines the mutual accountability of UNDPand governments or programmes to monitor theprogress of project content. Furthermore, projectevaluations have been very limited. TheSubregional Resource Facility (in Beirut) providedadequate support to country offices in UNDPpractice areas.

The lack of annual programming mechanisms in all Arab region NCCs contributes to theselection of projects that are not closely alignedto national priorities. Including UNDP projectsin the budgets of central ministries, as in Bahrainand Kuwait, provides a distorted incentive forbeneficiaries to make use of UNDP projects.Central ministry approval of contracts andexpenditures in addition to project approval, as inBahrain and Kuwait, makes implementation ofUNDP projects more onerous than it needs to be.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the presentations made by governmentcounterparts and actual and potential beneficiaries,along with the findings of the NSPRs, thisevaluation sees a clear match between theemerging needs of NCCs and UNDP’s mandateand capabilities. The overarching conclusion ofthis evaluation is that there is strong justificationfor a continued and strengthened UNDP presencein the NCCs of the Arab region. All five countriesstrongly desire the presence of UNDP, primarilybecause it is the embodiment of the UN systemand a link to the international community. In fact,in the view of stakeholders, UNDP’s countrypresence and value-added have more intrinsicworth than the contribution of its activities tomeeting countries’ development challenges.

1. UNDP needs to change the way it doesbusiness if it is to meet the expectations of theNCC partners in the Arab region. UNDP’sreform process over the last decade has not beenreflected sufficiently in the formulation andmanagement of country programmes and countryoffice cultures of Arab region NCCs. Nationalownership is a strong feature of these programmes,but it is largely the result of governmentfinancing. In the dynamic and rapidly changingenvironment in which the NCCs now findthemselves, UNDP needs to respond to opportu-nities for more effective engagement, recognizingthat business as usual could result in increasedmarginalization and reduced significance of itsactivities in terms of their human developmentobjectives. This is especially true in the context ofincreased private sector competition in providingthe kinds of technical assistance for whichUNDP is well known.

2. The special conditions prevailing in Arabregion NCCs—namely the demand-drivennature of their programmes and a limited UNfield presence— argue for greater flexibility onthe part of UNDP in these countries. In Arabregion NCCs, UNDP is frequently called uponto lend support in areas outside its mandate andcore competencies, often in the context of limited

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y x i

UN agency presence. This implies that UNDPmust be prepared to respond with a great deal offlexibility. Its facilitation role in drawing on UNsystem agencies takes on special significance,especially in areas not falling squarely withinUNDP’s mandate. At the same time, beneficiarygovernment agencies often have unrealisticexpectations of UNDP in projects involving UNspecialized agencies, often believing that UNDPcan and should have more than a coordinator-cum-managerial role in ensuring that neededtechnical inputs are forthcoming from the UN system.

3. UNDP has not sufficiently exploited thepotential for developing partnerships in Arabregion NCCs, which could further the qualityand depth of its interventions. The environmentfor developing partnerships is unusual in NCCsin that there tends to be less competition fromother donors and more from the private sector. Insome Arab region NCCs, private sector firms canbe found that offer upstream advisory servicesthat UNDP needs to match in terms of qualityand the speed of response. The region presentsopportunities for partnering with national andregional aid organizations, which have not beenexploited. Additionally, partnerships betweenUNDP and the UN system need to be furtherdeveloped in light of a relatively limited UNpresence and programmes.

4. There is only general awareness of UNDPand knowledge about its role in Arab regionNCCs. Nevertheless, there are high expectationsas to the extent and depth of UNDP’s technicalcapabilities. Knowledge of the specific substantivecontributions and the various services UNDPcan provide is limited. Existing and potentialstakeholders tend to have only a partialunderstanding of UNDP’s relative advantage,which limits the organization’s leveraging ability.UNDP has not defined with its counterparts(central government and prospective beneficiaries)in sufficiently specific terms where its comparativeadvantage lies vis-à-vis the private sector andother UN agencies. The media can play astronger role in fostering an awareness of UNDP

and an understanding of its capabilities; the mediacan also be used to greater effect to foster partner-ships with civil society and the private sector.

5. Some capacity-building has occurred. But tofurther UNDP’s catalytic impact and leverage,more and better focus on capacity-building(and other aspects of sustainability as well asreplicability) are paramount to all aspects ofUNDP’s country programmes. The record oncapacity-building in all countries has been mixed.But all concerned—central ministries, beneficiariesand respondents to NSPRs—were unanimous instrongly urging a much strengthened UNDP rolein this respect. While the need for greatercapacity-building is universally recognized,realities on the ground during project executionoften prevent it from happening. Typically,effective capacity-building is displaced by thepressures of ‘doing’ in response to beneficiaryneeds for quick results.

6. Better programming, implementationmanagement and evaluation in the specificcontext of NCCs can improve the efficiency ofcountry programmes. Programming arrangementsvary across the five countries. However, theycould be strengthened by the following ‘idealsystem’: 1) a central focal ministry is involved inproject approvals, which are reviewed in thecontext of an annual programme related tonational priorities; 2) funds come from a centralsource to the budgets of the beneficiary ministryor agency; and 3) implementation (contractapprovals and authorization of expenditures) is managed by the beneficiary agency and UNDPwithout involvement of a central ministry.Reformed programming arrangements also needto address accountability as well as effectiveness,for example, in relation to financing project andoutcome evaluations.

7. The majority of projects funded primarilyfrom non-governmental sources (UNDPThematic Trust Funds, regional programmes,etc.) seemed to be highly successful in generatinginterest and furthering dialogue in sensitiveareas. These important, low-cost activities were

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Yx i i

used to respond to emerging political and socialdevelopments in sensitive areas of UNDP’smandate, such as gender equality, HIV/AIDSand the promotion of political reform. Fundswere fully disbursed on time, and the projectswere generally more effective than those fundedby the government in promoting upstreamadvocacy activities. They were also effective inachieving their intended results, partly becauseUNDP was able to make a substantive contribution.In short, these projects had a better record onboth effectiveness and efficiency than the averageproject in country programmes. They proved tobe excellent instruments for promoting andadvocating human development, albeit in alimited and ad hoc manner in view of the limitedresources available for such activities and thegovernments’ ambivalence towards funding them.

8. UNDP’s policy towards NCCs, whichrequires a minimum delivery of $10 million per programming cycle to justify a countrypresence, is questionable and needs to berevisited. This policy, which is not strictly adheredto, has encouraged the inclusion of large projectsonly tangentially related to national priorities inseveral NCCs. It has also encouraged some countryoffices to be more involved in implementationthan is desirable. Delivery levels are not a goodmeasure of potential development value because1) the relationship between project amounts anddevelopment value is tenuous; and 2) UNDP isinvolved in many activities that add developmentvalue without being included in delivery. A moveaway from the current threshold could havebeneficial consequences by allowing UNDP tofocus on what it does best. In the longer term,this should, in turn, lead to an increased demandfor UNDP services, thus increasing both deliverylevels and development impact.

9. The capabilities of country offices in NCCsare insufficient to respond to the broader andmore substantive agenda advocated by thisevaluation. Hence there is a strong need toaugment the substantive and technical supportprovided by the regional centre, UNDP head-quarters and other sources. While it is clear fromthe feedback received by the evaluation team that

country offices have not been sufficiently involvedin the substance of project work, it is not clearwhy this has been the case. Are resources beingdiverted towards implementation? Or are theredeficiencies in staff capabilities or training or inmanagement style or systems? A diagnosis of theconstraints was not made by the evaluation team.There is a perception in country offices and thecentral ministries that NCCs are not given thesame attention as other countries. And thereappears to be a ‘disconnect in spirit’ between UNDPheadquarters and the country offices of Arabregion NCCs in terms of their integration intothe new strategic and policy directions of UNDP.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The major recommendations of this evaluationare based on the overarching proposition,strongly articulated by all Arab region NCCs,that UNDP can be an important player anduseful partner in helping these countries addresstheir development challenges and engage withthe international community.

RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE STRATEGIC LEVEL

1. Promote a new relationship between UNDPand the Arab region NCCs at the corporatelevel. This relationship, which will requirestrong commitment on the part of UNDPheadquarters, should move away from thetraditional development agency/client relation-ship to one of full and equal partnership at boththe strategic/policy and programmatic levels.This partnership will be based on the principlesof transparency, openness, mutual accountabilityand respect. Through consultation and dialogue,it should redefine UNDP’s role and strategy in the NCC context and develop a commonunderstanding and set of approaches fortechnical cooperation. The principles of partner-ship will recognize and be guided by the following:

n The acceptance by UNDP that governmentswill only include in country programmesactivities that the government believes arepriorities for the country. Government fundingdrives ownership, but demands from thenational side need to be moderated and

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y x i i i

discussed openly to strive towards an optimalalignment. Governments are receptive to anopen discussion of their priorities, and thealignment of country programmes tonational priorities can be shaped through anopen dialogue with UNDP.

n UNDP’s mandate and national priorities arelargely congruent. As a result, UNDP canmore fully exploit its role in supporting thedevelopment of national capacity, brokeringknowledge, and promoting South-Southcooperation and the transfer of technology.UNDP’s primary partners are nationalgovernments. But this partnership can besupplemented by working with and leveragingpartnerships with other actors, in particularcivil society and the private sector, not only in the implementation of key aspects of thecountry programmes but also in the formulationof these programmes.

n The match and balance between nationalpriorities and UNDP’s mandate needs to beassessed in a wider context. That is, theremust be a degree of flexibility that recognizesUNDP’s strong role in NCCs as a windowfor accessing the diverse expertise in the UNsystem and also drawing on complementaryinputs from its regional and global programmes.UNDP country offices should draw oncomplementary inputs from its regional and global programmes. The expertise (corecompetencies) and comparative advantage ofUNDP lie in particular thematic areas whereit can play a strong role in promoting humandevelopment and its core approaches such asnational ownership, capacity development,knowledge transfer, gender equality and south-south cooperation. At the same time, itshould stand ready to assist in its role as thegateway to the United Nations system—alsoseeking to add as much value as it canthrough the approaches listed above.

n UNDP’s flexibility should apply not only to the identification of areas of UNDPengagement and the design of countryprogrammes, but also in its implementation—through greater adaptation to the national

administrative processes of NCCs. Within astrengthened partnership, the principle ofmutual accountability needs to be reinforced.

RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE CORPORATE LEVEL

2. Revisit UNDP’s policy of requiring aminimum delivery threshold to justify acountry office presence. In addition, developspecific guidelines on the application ofexisting UNDP policies to NCCs. The currentminimum threshold for delivery that is appliedequally to all countries should be replaced withcountry-specific qualitative criteria for justifyingUNDP’s presence. From 2010, most countriessending country programmes to the UNDPExecutive Board will have programme documentsaccompanied by an Assessment of DevelopmentResults (ADR). This independent evaluation ofUNDP’s contribution to development in aparticular country represents an appropriate toolfor making a qualitative assessment of theviability of maintaining a country office. Criterianeed to be drawn up to allow the ADR to makesuch a judgement and to identify the need toenter into discussion with the host countrygovernment on reform of the programme orother options, including closure of a countryoffice or managing it from another country.

3. Develop guidelines in a number of areasrelated to the demand-driven nature of NCCprogrammes. The evaluation identified anumber of gaps in UNDP’s policies andguidelines for NCCs, which require specialinterpretation. Therefore, UNDP’s futurepolicy on middle-income and net contributorcountries should consider incorporating thefollowing issues:

n The flexibility with which UNDP canengage in an environment where much of thedemand from NCCs goes beyond UNDP’spractice areas.

n The application of UN reform efforts toNCCs in a context where governments fundboth the UNDP programme and those ofspecialized agencies.

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Yx i v

n Accountability for monitoring and evaluationwhen these activities are funded by governments.

RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE PROGRAMMATIC LEVEL

4. Strengthen the relationship and interactionbetween the central services/regional bureauxat UNDP headquarters and the country officesin NCCs in the Arab region. The objectivewould be to align the activities of these officesmore closely with UNDP’s evolving strategiesand policies to be able to respond moreforcefully to the special challenges thesecountries face. A closer dialogue should beencouraged between the Regional Bureau forArab States and UNDP country offices, at whichgovernment attendance should be encouraged.Initially, such dialogues could be held throughregular bi-annual meetings, at the minimum. Asa first step, the Regional Bureau for Arab Statesshould establish a subregional committee toredefine UNDP’s role and partnership strategy inthe Arab region NCCs. The committee shouldseek to arrive at a common understanding of how activities in these countries should beapproached, and include issues related to bothprogramming and management. Moreover, if anew approach is to be adopted in the region, thenthe Regional Bureau for Arab States will have tocommit considerably more resources, financialand human, to the region in the short term tosupport the transition. It should also exploreopportunities for further intra-NCC partnerships.These could include events addressing mutualconcerns, the sharing of lessons, and productssuch as joint assessments related to commonchallenges (for example, knowledge transfer andcapacity-building).

5. Explore and develop partnerships withpublic and private aid agencies in Arab regionNCCs. UNDP headquarters should decide onwhether this role should be formally added to the responsibilities of Resident Coordinators/Resident Representatives in Arab region NCCs.If so, the Regional Bureau for Arab States and theBureau for Resources and Strategic Partnershipsshould help country offices develop country-

based strategies. In addition, it would be necessaryto build technical capacity as appropriate in eachcountry office to respond to the demands of thisnew responsibility.

6. Strengthen the UN system to better respondto the more flexible approach being advocatedfor NCCs. The UN system partnership in theunique context of NCCs—government fundingof the country programme and limited UNpresence—needs to be strengthened. Optionsinvolving single budgets for the UN system andappropriate models of joint programming needto be explored within the UN and with thegovernments concerned. The Regional Bureaufor Arab States and the UN Development Groupshould work together to explore and assess theoptions. This initiative could be followed by apilot project in a net contributor country. Theunequivocal endorsement of the government iscritical for the success of such a pilot. Also, inview of UNDP’s enhanced UN coordination role,it would be necessary to increase the budgets ofResident Coordinators. Moreover, to facilitateoptimal utilization of the UN by the nationalgovernment, there needs to be greater awarenessabout what UNDP, and the broader UN system,has to offer and how countries can access it.

RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE OPERATIONAL LEVEL

7. Improve the system of country programmedesign and management in line with the newprinciples of partnership between UNDP andthe Arab region NCCs defined above. Theprogramming function exercised by centralministries in relation to UNDP countryprogrammes needs to be strengthened in all fiveArab region NCCs. A framework needs to beagreed upon between the governments concernedand the UNDP country office whereby projectselection would be better aligned to nationalpriorities. Mechanisms to strengthen harmoniza-tion of UNDP’s systems for management andimplementation of activities with nationalsystems need to be established and the nationalexecution system revised accordingly. Mutualaccountability of UNDP and the government for

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y x v

monitoring and evaluation needs to be clarifiedin all NCCs. The UNDP country office needs topresent regular progress reports on the content ofprojects as well as monitoring reports to a centralministry. An annual evaluation programme fromwhich lessons can be drawn and applied to futureprojects needs to be agreed upon and implemented.

8. Strengthen the capacity of country offices to increase UNDP’s contribution to thedevelopment effectiveness of its activities inArab region NCCs and implement the newpartnership envisaged above. An assessment ofthe capabilities of the country offices to becomemore involved in the substance of work is timely.

This assessment should lead to a strategy andplan to strengthen these capabilities in the lightof the work programme for the next three to fiveyears, and include the need for support fromUNDP headquarters and the subregional office.For many country offices, this will likely requireintensive staff training, in line with the humanresource learning strategy of the UNDP StrategicPlan. Equally important is the need to developprocesses across the project cycle—from designto evaluation—that encourage substantive inputsand a focus on capacity-building, sustainabilityand replicability of projects. Needless to say, all of this will provide a challenge for professionalleadership in the management of country offices.

C H A P T E R 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N 1

1.1 BACKGROUND

In 1997, UNDP determined that a programmecountry with a per capita gross national incomeof $4,700 or more would be considered a netcontributor country (NCC).2 The main implicationfor such countries is that they do not receive coreUNDP funds through normal distributionchannels.3 Rather, they must finance theirprogrammes almost entirely through theirrespective governments.4

Such a relationship has implications for thedynamic created between UNDP and the hostcountry, in terms of ownership, partnership andaccountability. This has prompted discussion ofhow UNDP can fulfil its mandate (see Box 1) to facilitate achievement of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs) and other humandevelopment objectives in these countries, giventheir level of development, specific capacities andstrong financial position. It has also stimulateddiscussion of what UNDP’s future role should bein the NCCs. The articulation of this role is

especially important in light of the growingnumber of middle-income countries that willgraduate to NCC status in the coming years.In response to this challenge, UNDP hasestablished a task force to examine the issue andestablish a corporate strategy for middle-incomeand net contributor countries.

Within this context, and as a contribution to thatprocess, the Evaluation Office of UNDPconducted an independent evaluation of UNDP’srole in the NCCs of the Arab region. UNDPplays a significant role in this region with 18country offices, five of which are in net contribu-tor countries.5 The Arab region NCCs coveredby the evaluation are:

n Bahrain

n Kuwait

n Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (Libya)

n Saudi Arabia

n United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

2 The threshold has been increased to $5,500 for the 2008-2011 programming cycle.3 The target for resource assignment from the core (TRAC).4 UNDP country offices have access to additional funds from a variety of sources, as described later in this report.5 Oman and Qatar also had UNDP country programmes and would also be classified as NCCs. However, the UNDP

offices were closed at the request of the governments concerned in 1992/1993 and 1998, respectively.

Source: UNDP Draft Strategic Plan, 2008-2011: Accelerating Global Progress on Human Development

The UNDP mission is to support countries to accelerate progress on human development. This means that all UNDPpolicy advice, technical support, advocacy and contributions to strengthening coherence in global developmentfinance must be aimed at one end result: real improvements in people’s lives and in the choices and opportunitiesopen to them. UNDP has championed this integrative approach to human development since the 1990s, using theHuman Development Reports launched under the leadership of the late Mahbub ul-Haq with Amartya Sen, as importanttools in this advocacy. Central to the human development approach is the concept of human empowerment. Inaddition to income, it treats access to education and health care, freedom of expression, the rule of law, respect for diversity, protection from violence, and the preservation of the environment as other essential dimensions ofhuman development and well-being.

Box 1. UNDP’s Mission

C H A P T E R 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N2

Although they share the same region, thesecountries vary significantly in their geographicsize and population. Their levels of income alsovary, both in nominal and PPP (purchasingpower parity) terms, as shown in Table 1. In thisevaluation, the five countries have been dealtwith as a cluster purely for the convenience ofanalysing UNDP’s role in a group of countriesthat share a similar relationship with UNDP,namely the fact that they are net contributors.Any trends or comparisons made through thedistillation of data in this report is meant to serveonly the analysis contained within the parametersof the terms of reference of this evaluation.

1.2 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT

1.2.1 PROGRESS TOWARDS HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

All five Arab region NCCs are classified as highhuman development countries in the 2007/2008Human Development Report (HDR). Libya andSaudi Arabia only graduated to that category in2007 (though Libya had attained this status tenyears ago and then lost it). Table 2 illustrates thechanges in the human development index value,classification and rank over the last ten years. Ofthe group, Kuwait stands out as having made themost progress during this period. The table alsoshows that all five countries, apart from Libya,

are classified by the World Bank as high-incomecountries. Bahrain and Saudi Arabia graduatedto this level from upper middle-income statusduring the last ten years, while Libya hasremained an upper middle-income country.

All five countries are making good progresstowards achieving many of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals. Poverty is known to exist inLibya, but in the absence of official figures thereis no agreement on its magnitude. In SaudiArabia, the government has recognized theexistence of poverty and placed great emphasison improving the welfare of its people. Theextreme poverty line (food insufficiency) in thatcountry was estimated at about $2 per person perday, a situation affecting 1.6 percent of families.Alternative measures of poverty also reveal someproblems. For example, according to the UNDP-Kingdom of Saudi Arabia website, the prevalenceof underweight children under five increasedfrom 5.1 percent in 2000 to 6.4 percent in 2004.An indirect measure of poverty is the extent ofmalnourishment in the population. Data from allfive countries show low levels of malnourish-ment—ranging from negligible to a maximum of5 percent—well below the levels prevailing inmiddle-income countries (11 percent). Thepercent of underweight children under five yearsof age is also very limited.

Country Population(millions)

Land mass(thousands of

square kilometres)

Gross domesticproduct percapita (US$)

Gross domesticproduct per

capita (PPP US$)

Bahrain 0.7 0.7 17,773 21,482

Kuwait 2.6 17.8 31,860 26,321

Libya 5.8 1,759 6,621 7,600*

Saudi Arabia 23.2 2,000 13,399 15,711

United Arab Emirates 4.5 83.6 28,611 25,514

* In 2002. World Bank Economic Report of July 2006, Report No. 30295-LY IBRDSource: World Bank, World Development Indicators database.

Table 1. Basic Indicators for NCCs in the Arab Region (2005)

C H A P T E R 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N 3

1.2.2 IMPLEMENTING THE MILLENNIUMDECLARATION AND THE MDGs

Bahrain, Kuwait, Libya and the United ArabEmirates achieved universal primary educationby 2004 and Saudi Arabia is making significantprogress towards this goal. There is some progresstowards gender equality, but this remains a keychallenge in these countries (see below). As apositive example, ten years ago only Libya andKuwait had signed the Convention on theElimination of All Forms of Discrimination againstWomen (CEDAW). Saudi Arabia, Bahrain andthe UAE signed in 2000, 2002 and 2004, respec-tively. As in education, substantial progress hasalso been made in terms of health. Rates of infantand child mortality have fallen dramatically (bymore than 80 percent) in all five countries overthe past 35 years, reaching levels above those ofmiddle-income countries. All countries have a lowHIV prevalence and are taking steps to ensure thatthe spread of the virus contained. The seventhMDG, ensuring environmental sustainability,

remains a challenge in all five countries (see below).There has been greater progress on the final MDG:achieving global partnerships for development.The four Gulf States have made attempts toharness the potential benefits of globalization fornational development. They have also madesignificant progress in achieving their aspirationsof becoming fully integrated in the worldeconomy and important actors in the areas oftrade and financial services. Moreover, thegovernment and people in all five countries haveprovided generous support for development incountries in need of assistance. Among UNDP’sprogramme country partners, the Arab regionNCCs are unique as major suppliers of interna-tional development and humanitarian assistance.Kuwait, along with Saudi Arabia and the UAE,provide substantial aid through bilateral channelsas well as through national, regional and multilateralfunds; humanitarian aid also comes from privateand official sources.6 Most of the developmentaid and humanitarian assistance is channelled to

* The human development index measures average achievement in a country in three basic dimensions of human development: a longand healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living. For information on how the index is calculated, see http://hdr.undp.org** Upper middle-income country*** High-income country

Sources: UNDP Human Development Reports (1997 and 2006); World Bank World Development Reports (1997 and 2007)

Country UNDP human development index* World Bank incomeclassification

1997 HDR 2007 HDR

Value Classification Rank Value Classification Rank Fiscalyear1997

Fiscalyear2007

Bahrain 0.870 High 43 0.866 High 41 UMI** HI***

Kuwait 0.844 High 53 0.891 High 33 HI HI

Libya 0.801 High 64 0.818 High 56 UMI UMI

SaudiArabia

0.774 Medium 73 0.812 High 61 UMI HI

UnitedArabEmirates

0.866 High 44 0.868 High 39 HI HI

Table 2. Basic Human Development and Income Indices

6 Obtaining detailed information on all these financial flows is difficult, partly because Arab institutional aid is directedthrough a multiplicity of channels, including bilateral official aid, aid from national aid funds, and aid from regional andmultilateral lending institutions, not all of which are Arab (such as the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries,or OPEC, and the Islamic Development Bank). Finally, there are private non-governmental sources that channel substantialaid and humanitarian assistance.

C H A P T E R 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N4

Arab and Muslim countries. Libya also channelssubstantial aid, mostly to African countries, butlittle data is available. The emergence of Libya asa donor to Africa and the large increases in oilrevenues in recent years in all Arab region NCCssuggest increased needs for programmaticassistance to a variety of regional, bilateral andprivate institutions providing aid and humanitarianassistance to developing countries.

All five countries have seen a significantevolution in the past ten years in terms ofincreased openness and participation in thepolitical process. Elections were initiated inBahrain at the parliamentary and municipallevels, for example. In Saudi Arabia, electionswere also held at the municipal level and newconsultative mechanisms were established fornational dialogues. Women were allowed to voteand run for office in Bahrain, Kuwait and theUAE and assumed ministerial posts. The removalof all sanctions in Libya after more than a decadeheralded the renewal of relations between Libyaand the international community.

1.2.3 MAIN DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES

Notwithstanding the notable progress in terms ofhuman and economic development, all fivecountries face considerable challenges. Thesehave been articulated in a variety of documents,including the National Development Plan ofSaudi Arabia, annual programmes approved bythe Kuwaiti Parliament, the Federal DevelopmentStrategy of the UAE, common country assessmentsfor Bahrain and Libya, national human develop-ment reports and related documents in Bahrain,Kuwait, Libya, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, andin the Arab Human Development Reports.

The NCCs of the Arab region face manycommon challenges. Underlying them is theaspiration to deepen and strengthen theirintegration into the world economy and to find‘niches’ of comparative advantage in which theycan play a role that transcends their contributionsto the energy sector and become important actorsin such areas as trade, financial services, informationand communications technologies, and tourism.

Among the more important challenges are:

n Economic diversification: The economiesof these five countries are still over-reliant onoil in terms of economic activity, governmentrevenue generation and export earnings.Recent increases in prices have only increasedthis reliance. In view of the limited supply ofoil in the long term, the challenge for sometime has been to diversify away from petroleumand related products. Diversification, togetherwith social and political dialogue, is neededto reduce widespread inequalities amongcitizens of these countries.

n Employment creation: All five NCCs have ayoung national population that is growing, alarge number and share of expatriate workersin the private sector, and stable public sectorswith little room for expansion. Job creationfor an expanding labour force has become themost pressing development challenge facingthese economies.The rights of migrant workersraise sensitive social and human issues thatneed to be addressed. The challenge is to createan environment for sustainable employmentopportunities for new entrants in the labourmarket, especially youth and women and, atthe same time, to facilitate a gradual shiftaway from dependence on expatriate labourwhile addressing their concerns. Reform ofthe training and education systems to ensurethat youth have the appropriate skills foremployment in the private sector are relatedchallenges. A strong role for the privatesector is crucial for both employmentcreation and diversification.

n Public administration and governance:Related to the above is the challenge ofstrengthening and streamlining large publicadministrations while ensuring that employ-ment opportunities exist outside governmentservice. Further progress on governancereforms is desirable in the interest of co-opting disadvantaged segments of societyinto the political process as much as achievingthe commitments to democratic governanceenvisaged in the Millennium Declaration.

C H A P T E R 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N 5

The efficiency and effectiveness of publicsector service delivery is an important concernfor policy makers and has implications forimportant reforms in the future.

n Gender equality: Recent progress in thisregard needs to be extended and deepened inthe political, economic and social spheres, asoutlined in the Arab Human DevelopmentReport 2005. Programmes to empowerwomen are needed—for example, fosteringemployment opportunities especially at themanagerial level and through ownership aswell as providing greater access to knowledgethrough the Internet and other sources.

n Protecting the environment: All five countriesface environmental challenges, the mostcritical of which is water. Rapid urbanizationand development, especially along coastalregions, also pose environmental problems.

All of these challenges can be framed in terms ofthe need to increase national capacity to addressthem. The countries have the financial, naturaland human resources to deal with the changinginternal and external environment in which theyfind themselves. What are needed across the boardare the appropriate institutional and individualcapacities to address them in an effective andsustainable manner. This represents the overallchallenge facing the Arab region NCCs.

1.3 OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF THIS EVALUATION

The focus of this evaluation is very much onlearning and the future. A key objective is toassess UNDP’s activities and programmes inthese net contributor countries in terms ofnational development challenges and aspirations;and to assess the implications of this experiencefor UNDP’s corporate policies and practicesrelating to NCCs worldwide, now and in thefuture. UNDP is engaging with these countriesin rapidly changing internal and external

environments. This means that it needs toreassess its role as a development partner as wellas its potential contributions, strategies andbusiness models in these countries so as to berelevant, efficient and effective. To this end, theevaluation aims to:

n Support the UNDP Administrator’s substantiveaccountability to the Executive Board withrespect to UNDP’s policies and practicestowards the NCCs in the Arab region.

n Provide an input into the review of UNDP’sstrategies and policies in the NCCs toenhance UNDP’s relevance and effectivenessin meeting the particular developmentpriorities of these countries.

n Provide stakeholders in the concernedcountries (governments, civil society partners,etc.) with an assessment of various UNDPactivities in the NCCs and how these mightevolve in future.

This evaluation covers the period of the last two programming cycles7 for each country(approximately eight or nine years), as well ascurrent cycles that have started recently. It coversthe totality of UNDP’s activities in those countries,whether carried out within or outside the contextof the UNDP country programme, and includesadvocacy, knowledge-sharing, partnership-building,resource mobilization and awareness-creationabout UNDP’s role and services. Since this is aforward-looking strategic evaluation, the mainfocus is on recommendations common to all fivecountries and that feed into corporate strategyand policy development.

The evaluation complements earlier examinationsof NCC issues but adds a regional dimension.Most importantly, it includes national perspectiveson these issues in addition to those of the UNDPand the United Nations family. Details of themethodology (including evaluation criteria andquestions), data-collection methods used andprocess can be found in the terms of reference

7 Country cooperation frameworks, country programme outline or country programme document.

C H A P T E R 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N6

(Annex 1). Annex 2 lists documents reviewedand Annex 3 provides a list of persons consultedin the process of preparing this report.

It should be noted that examining countryprogramme performance was made more difficultby the lack of comprehensive evaluative evidencein NCCs, since there are few thorough countryprogramme reviews or project evaluations. Thelarge number of projects over the time-spancovered and the limited time in the field dictateda ‘top-down’ selective approach to the assessment ofprojects rather than an in-depth and comprehensive‘bottom-up’ approach to the review of projects.The recent and ongoing nature of many projectsalso precluded addressing sustainability in asystematic and in-depth manner.

Further details on one of the key methods used tocollect national perceptions—through NationalStakeholder Perception Reports—are included inAnnex 4. The following four areas were coveredby the evaluation team, the first of which appliesto corporate-level and the following three tocountry-level activities.

n UNDP’s NCC policy and practices: thespecific policies related to NCCs and thecorporate practices related to these countries.Are they appropriate?

n Strategic positioning: an analysis of howUNDP’s strategic positioning has contributedto meeting the development challenges ofNCCs in the Arab region; and to identifyand assess the business model used byUNDP in those countries. Is UNDP doingthe right things?

n Country programmes: a review of thecountry programmes in terms of theireffectiveness, sustainability, replicability and

UNDP’s value-added for the country. IsUNDP doing things the right way?

n Efficiency of the country programmes: keyissues related to the efficiency of the countryprogrammes and the major constraints inimplementation. Is the country programmeusing its resources efficiently?

1.4 OUTLINE OF THE REPORT

Chapter 2 sets the policy context within whichthe evaluation is taking place and provides anoverview of UNDP’s programmes in the region.The first part reviews the UN’s and UNDP’spresence in the region, followed by a review ofthe policy environment, which includes progressin UN reform and the organization’s strategicplan and, at the micro-level, UNDP’s policiesand practices towards NCCs. A concludingsection sets the context of UNDP’s programmepresence in the NCCs of the Arab region,including the types of intervention, the fundingamounts and the sources of funds.

Chapter 3 is the first of the analytical chapters,assessing UNDP’s contribution to nationaldevelopment results. It identifies selectively thecontribution of key UNDP interventions tonational development results and UNDP’s value-added in achieving those results. The focus is on how well UNDP’s programmes are beingdischarged. Chapter 4 examines the extent towhich UNDP’s activities and programmes arestrategically positioned to further the nationaldevelopment agenda of NCCs. Its focus is onwhether UNDP’s activities and programmes arein the right areas. Finally, Chapter 5 coversvarious aspects of UNDP’s operational efficiency.Chapter 6 lays out the conclusions andrecommendations of this report.

C H A P T E R 2 . T H E U N I T E D N A T I O N S , U N D P A N D T H E N C C s O F T H E A R A B R E G I O N 7

2.1 UNITED NATIONS AND UNDP PRESENCE IN THE ARAB REGION NCCs

2.1.1 ENGAGEMENT WITH THE UN

All five NCCs of the Arab region are long-standing members of the United Nations: SaudiArabia was a founding member, and the otherfour countries joined when they becameindependent. All have engaged with the UnitedNations and have been members of UN bodies,including the Security Council and, with theexception of Saudi Arabia, the Economic and

Social Council and other UN entities. In Libya,the UN mission was among the first fieldmissions, dating back to the 1950s, with a majorimpact on the country’s development. It shouldalso be noted that the president of the 61stsession of the General Assembly (2006) camefrom Bahrain.

A key feature of Arab region NCCs is the limitedUN agency presence compared to most otherUNDP programme countries. Moreover, manyof the agencies that are present in these countries

Chapter 2

THE UNITED NATIONS, UNDP AND THE NCCs OF THE ARAB REGION

Country Organizations dedicated solely to the country

Organizations with regional responsibilities, including host-country

activities where applicable

Bahrain UNDP UN Environment Programme (UNEP),UN Information Centre (UNIC), WorldMeteorological Organization (WMO),UN Industrial Development Organization(UNIDO)

Kuwait UNDP, UNHCR, InternationalLabour Organization (ILO),International Organization forMigration (IOM)

Libya UNDP, Food and AgricultureOrganization of the UN (FAO)(projects), UNHCR, World HealthOrganization (WHO)*

African Centre for Applied Research andTraining in Social Development

Saudi Arabia UNDP, FAO, WHO, World Bank UNHCR, UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF)

United Arab Emirates UNDP, FAO, UN Office on Drugsand Crime (UNODC) (project),UN Development Fund forWomen (UNIFEM) (project)

UNDSS, UNHCR, UNICEF, OCHA, IntegratedRegional Information Networks (IRIN)/OCHA, UNOPS, UN University (UNU),World Food Programme (WFP)

*The Resident Coordinator in Libya exercises responsibility for both UNICEF and the UNIC.

Table 3. UN Agency Presence in the Arab Region NCCs

C H A P T E R 2 . T H E U N I T E D N A T I O N S , U N D P A N D T H E N C C s O F T H E A R A B R E G I O N8

have regional responsibilities. With the exceptionof UNDP, few are dedicated solely to the countryin which they are based (see Table 3). The UnitedArab Emirates is a special case. There, many ofthe agencies with regional responsibilities haveno activities oriented towards the country itself,but are based in Dubai solely for the purpose ofeasy access to other parts of the region. In theUAE, UNDP lends official legitimacy (throughits Standard Basic Agreement) and extends majorlogistical support to many of those agencies,including the Office for the Coordination ofHumanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the UNDepartment of Safety and Security (UNDSS),the Office of the UN High Commissioner forRefugees (UNHCR), the UN Office for ProjectServices (UNOPS), and others.The UNDP countryoffice also handles the increasing activities ofUNDP in Qatar.

2.1.2 THE UNDP REGIONAL BUREAU FOR ARAB STATES

UNDP’s Regional Bureau for Arab States(RBAS) serves as the headquarters for UNDPoffices in 17 countries, with the 18th located inthe Occupied Palestinian Territories.Table 4 showsthat the majority of the countries and territoriesin the region (11) are classified as middle-income, with only three countries classified aslow-income. In addition, five of the countries andterritories are in crisis.

UNDP country offices receive policy andadministrative support from the RBAS CountryOperations Division, which ensures qualityprogramming, results-based managementapplications and effective resource mobilizationstrategies. In each country office, the UNDPResident Representative normally also serves asthe Resident Coordinator of development activi-ties for the United Nations system and is thedesignated official for security.

The Regional Programme Division supports thedevelopment and implementation of the RBASregional programmes, the largest of which are the:8

n Arab Human Development Reports

n Centre for Arab Women Training and Research

n Programme on Governance in the Arab Region

n Information and CommunicationsTechnology for Development in the Arab Region

n HIV/AIDS Regional Programme in theArab States.

UNDP country offices in the Arab States regionreceive additional technical support and policyassistance from the Subregional Resource

8 More details can be found in the Evaluation Inception Report.

NCCs Crisis countries/territories Other countries

Low-income Somalia, Sudan Yemen

Lower middle-income Iraq, Occupied PalestinianTerritories

Algeria, Djibouti,Egypt, Jordan, Morocco,Syria, Tunisia

Upper middle-income Libya Lebanon

High-income Bahrain, Kuwait,Saudi Arabia, UnitedArab Emirates

Source: Income levels – World Bank, World Development Report 2007 (income classification for fiscal year 2007). Categories: RBAS.

Table 4. Countries/Territories in UNDP’s Arab States Region by Income and Status

C H A P T E R 2 . T H E U N I T E D N A T I O N S , U N D P A N D T H E N C C s O F T H E A R A B R E G I O N 9

Facility (SURF) for the Arab States, based inBeirut, Lebanon. The Regional Services Centre,based in New York, provides managementadvisory assistance.

2.2 THE UNDP POLICY ENVIRONMENT

2.2.1 PROGRESS IN UN REFORM

In the last ten years, numerous proposals havebeen made for UN reform. These have hadsignificant implications for how the organizationconducts its work, implements its mandates andmanages the funds entrusted to it by MemberStates. A key element of the broad-reachingreform has been to explore how the UnitedNations system could work more coherently andeffectively across the world in the areas ofdevelopment, humanitarian assistance and theenvironment. The outcome document adoptedby global leaders at the 2005 World Summit inNew York called for much stronger system-widecoherence across the various development-relatedagencies, funds and programmes of the UnitedNations. In addition to supporting ongoingreforms aimed at building a more effective,coherent and better-performing UN countrypresence, it specifically invites the UN Secretary-General to “launch work to further strengthenthe management and coordination of UnitedNations operational activities.” The outcomedocument also calls for such work to be focused onensuring that the UN maximizes its contributionto achieving internationally agreed upon develop-ment goals, including the Millennium DevelopmentGoals, and includes proposals for “more tightlymanaged entities” in the field of the environment,humanitarian assistance and development.

The United Nations Development Group(UNDG), chaired by the UNDP Administrator,was established in 1997 as a managerial structureto bring together UN entities dealing withdevelopment issues. As such, it plays a pivotalrole in implementing the reform agenda. Initiallycomposed mainly of the funds and programmes

of the United Nations, UNDG members nownumber 28, and include some of the specializedagencies of the United Nations system. TheExecutive Committee of UNDG consists ofUNDP, UNICEF, UNFPA and WFP. TheUNDG is represented at the country level by theUN Country Team, led by the ResidentCoordinator. UNDP is responsible for managingand funding the UN coordination function at thecountry level through the Resident Coordinatorsystem.9 The reform process related to the UNdevelopment system has increased its pace,especially since the 2006 publication of theReport of the Secretary-General’s High-Level Panelon UN System-Wide Coherence: ‘Delivering as One’.The resulting ‘One UN’ pilot initiative will testhow the UN family—with its many and diverseagencies—can deliver in a more coordinated wayin eight selected countries. UNDP has a specialrole to play in implementing this reform,especially at the country level.

2.2.2 THE UNDP BUSINESS MODEL

UNDP’s business model is set out in a series ofbusiness plans issued by the UNDP Administratoras well as multi-year funding frameworks(MYFFs), which establish the organization’sstrategic goals.These are designed to help focus theprogramme and improve communication withexternal stakeholders. The first MYFF (2000-2003) was intended to shift UNDP to results-based management and to answer some centralquestions to help monitor how well the organiza-tion is doing. These included: the extent to whichUNDP has been successful, at the country level,in moving towards a strategic programme focusand positioning; the effectiveness with whichUNDP has used advocacy, policy dialogue andcountry presence to support national policies; andthe effectiveness with which UNDP has usedpartnerships to further development change. Inaddition, it set out some core goals that reflectthe scope of UNDP’s interventions. Under thesecond MYFF (2004-2007), the focus areasunder the goals were rationalized and simplified.

9 Details concerning the work of UNDG and UN coordination can be found at www.undg.org

C H A P T E R 2 . T H E U N I T E D N A T I O N S , U N D P A N D T H E N C C s O F T H E A R A B R E G I O N1 0

Moreover, the MYFF identified a number ofdrivers of development effectiveness that wereintended to ensure that the programme objectiveswere those set by countries themselves. AlthoughUNDP’s goals and approaches in the two MYFFshave changed in presentation, the underlying areasof work have remained almost the same. Box 2illustrates the strategic goals and developmentdrivers in the second MYFF.

The recently adopted UNDP Strategic Plan(2008–2011)10 notes that global developmentchallenges, lessons learned and United Nationsreforms directed by the General Assembly all pointto the need to strengthen the UNDP businessmodel. The model is built on the three pillars ofcoordination, advocacy and development servicesin support of countries’ national developmentstrategies. Strengthening UNDP activities inthese areas in the NCCs is a special focus of thisevaluation. Key features of the strengthenedUNDP business model include the following:

n The services of UNDP remaining fullyresponsive to national priorities, recognizingthe responsibility of government to coordinateassistance at the national level.

n Enhanced support for United Nationscoordination and the role of the ResidentCoordinator in terms of overall responsibilityfor and coordination of operational activitiesfor development at the country level, and thesubsequent recommendations of 59/250 toprovide further support to the ResidentCoordinator system.

n Use of the extensive partnerships of UNDPto scale up the scope and impact of its workin all areas. In addition to core partnershipswith other UN organizations and governments,UNDP will pursue innovative strategicpartnerships with civil society organizationsand networks, as well as with the privatesector. South-South cooperation will be animportant element of corporate and country-level partnership strategies.

n Refined internal institutional arrangementsof UNDP to bring corporate and regionalpolicy and advisory support closer to wherethey are needed on the ground and to make those services more responsive tocountry programme needs. This will entailunderstanding the different contexts inwhich UNDP works and tailoring its services(advocacy, policy and advisory services andtechnical support) to the specific needs ofprogramme countries.

n Effective knowledge management throughthe use of UNDP’s global presence andknowledge and resource managementsystems. To deliver effectively on the agendalaid out in this plan, UNDP must: 1) furtherexpand and improve its existing knowledgenetworks, 2) open the networks to other UN staff and help build open UN-wideknowledge networks, and 3) gradually openthe networks to allow direct participation byexternal experts and institutions as well ascivil society. Work has already begun in allthree areas.

Strategic goals for MYFF 2004-2007§ Achieving the MDGs and reducing human poverty§ Fostering democratic governance§ Managing energy and environment for

sustainable development§ Supporting crisis prevention and recovery§ Responding to HIV/AIDS

Drivers of development effectiveness§ Developing national capacities§ Enhancing national ownership§ Advocating and fostering an enabling

policy environment§ Promoting gender equality§ Forging partnerships for results

Box 2. Multi-Year Funding Framework 2004–2007: Strategic Goals and Drivers of Development

10 Approved by the UNDP Executive Board in October 2007.

C H A P T E R 2 . T H E U N I T E D N A T I O N S , U N D P A N D T H E N C C s O F T H E A R A B R E G I O N 1 1

The strategic plan goes on to ‘chart the course’ forimplementing the business model, identifying anumber of core elements summarized below:

n In a world of expanding affluence andexploding inequality, ‘inclusive growth’ willserve as the connecting theme for UNDPwork over the period 2008–2011.

n A concerted and collective focus on humandevelopment and the MDGs is crucial tolong-term results.

n Global and collective advocacy efforts canhelp boost awareness—and indeed progress—in meeting development goals.

n The strategic plan lays out the UNDP shiftin approach in its governance efforts, whichwill now be more aligned to serve the needsof the poor.

n Capacity development, as the overarchingUNDP contribution, and the developmenteffectiveness principles of national ownership,effective aid management and South-Southcooperation will guide UNDP interventions.

n The promotion of gender equality—includingthe empowerment of women—is the keyintegrating dimension of the strategic plan.

2.2.3 UNDP’S NCC POLICIES AND PRACTICES

In its approach to and work in the NCCs,UNDP is guided by its general principles and anumber of policies and practices specific to the NCCs:

n UNDP principles: UNDP operates withinthe context of a number of principles, two ofwhich are important in its approach toNCCs. First, the principle of universalitythat applies to the overall UN developmentsystem and is meant to ensure that all eligiblecountries are able to participate in UNdevelopment programmes. Second, the principleof progressivity, which promotes greater resourceallocation to low-income countries.

n NCC threshold and no core funds: Allprogramme countries, including the NCCs,are required to prepare a country programmefor approval by the UNDP Executive Board,11

but NCCs receive no core funds from UNDP.

n Available programming funds: Even NCCsare eligible for support and resources beyondcore TRAC funds. Such funds could come,for example, from regional programmes runby each UNDP regional bureau as well asSubregional Resource Facilities. Alternatively,all country offices have access to other sourcesof project funds, such as UNDP ThematicTrust Funds. Allocation of these funds, however,favours low-income countries. Finally, countryoffices have access to other modest fundingsources from UNDP headquarters.

n Financing the costs of the country office:The principle of progressivity also applies tothe government contribution to local officecosts in programme countries. Office costsfor NCCs are to be borne by their respectivegovernments, with no contribution fromUNDP. In addition to this governmentcontribution, other sources of income supportoffice costs, including 1) the overhead UNDPcounty offices charge for project management,and 2) country office cost-recovery for theservices UNDP provides to other UN agencies.

n Financing international positions andprogramme delivery: The only contributionthat UNDP will make to local office costs in an NCC is financing the ResidentRepresentative or Resident Coordinator, andpossibly the Deputy Resident Representative(through extra-budgetary resources).Financing the Resident Representative/Coordinator depends on the level of deliveryof the country programme, currently set at athreshold of $10 million per programmingcycle or $2.5 per year within a four-yearprogramming cycle. Up until 2004, UNDPfinanced a Deputy Resident Representative if

11 When circumstances prevent the preparation or approval of a country programme, the UNDP Executive Board mayauthorize the Administrator to approve projects on a case-by-case basis. Such circumstances are normally a crisis situation.

C H A P T E R 2 . T H E U N I T E D N A T I O N S , U N D P A N D T H E N C C s O F T H E A R A B R E G I O N1 2

delivery was more that $16 million for theprogramming cycle or $4 million per year.Since 2004, the decision to finance theDeputy Resident Representative is made atUNDP headquarters, on the basis of need.

2.3 UNDP COUNTRY PROGRAMMES IN THE ARAB REGION NCCs

2.3.1 GOALS

Table 5 summarizes the major goals of the firstand second programming cycles of the five NCCs.Typically, each country programme had threebroad goals with overlapping definitions. Thepicture that emerges is the importance of humanresource development in all countries in bothprogramming cycles, while differences remainwith respect to the other goal. Various aspects of governance and globalization are prominent in the second programming cycle, reflecting theevolution of UNDP’s mandate in these areas in2004–2007. Environment, a continuing concernand area of emphasis for UNDP, is present as amajor goal in three of the NCCs for each countryprogramme. Neither combating HIV/AIDS—one of the five practice areas of the MYFF 2004-

2007—nor promoting gender equality, one of itscross-cutting themes, were included as goals in anyof the country programmes of Arab region NCCs.

2.3.2 THEMATIC ALLOCATIONS

How were the broad goals outlined in Table 5translated into budget allocations? Figure 1,compiled on the basis of the thematic classificationof practice areas in MYFF 2004-2007, providessome answers. Many projects classified underpoverty did not focus on poverty reduction in thetraditional sense, but more on human developmentin a broader sense, covering, as many did,information and communications technologiesfor development, private sector development,education as well as gender mainstreaming.Governance includes both projects that fosterdemocracy (parliamentary support, electoralsystems, justice and human rights, for example)and other areas less directly linked to that goal(public administration reform and e-governance,for instance). The latter are more prominent inthe country programmes of NCCs. Gender anddemocratic governance will be reviewedseparately in the next two chapters, since theseare so central to UNDP’s mandate.

Goals First programming cycle First programming cycle

Human resource development Bahrain, Kuwait, Libya,Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates

Bahrain, Kuwait, Libya,Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates

Environment Bahrain, Libya, SaudiArabia

Bahrain, Saudi Arabia,United Arab Emirates

Public sector performance Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia

Governance United Arab Emirates Bahrain, Kuwait,United Arab Emirates

Decentralization and local governance Libya

Globalization and economic efficiency Kuwait, Saudi Arabia,United Arab Emirates

Economic management and diversification Bahrain, Libya Libya, Saudi Arabia

Table 5. Goals Examined in the First and Second Programming Cycles

Figure 1 invites several observations:First,governanceis seen to account for high shares of the countryprogrammes in both Bahrain and Kuwait, butrelatively lower shares in the UAE, Saudi Arabiaand, especially, in Libya. Second, and not surpris-ingly, the share of country programmes devotedto poverty reduction is low in all NCCs exceptLibya, where it includes large sector programmesin education, agriculture and industry, and inKuwait, where it reflects globalization.

The category of ‘Other’ in Figure 1 refers toprojects that are tangential to UNDP’s mandateand do not fit into the practice areas of theMYFF as assessed by the country offices and/orthe evaluation team. These projects are typicallyfew in number but large in amount. They canaccount for a sizable share of the budgets ofcountry programmes: in Libya, for example, theyaccounted for 45-55 percent of the first program-ming cycle budget.

2.3.3 PROGRAMME LEVELS AND SOURCES OF FUNDS

Delivery in country programmes in Arab regionNCCs ranged from $1.5 million per year inBahrain to over $10 million in Saudi Arabia duringthe second programming cycle. The average levelof $4.3 million was considerably below the globalaverage (of almost $25 million) and the averagefor all countries in UNDP’s Regional Bureau forArab States ($19 million). As shown in Table 6,extra-budgetary resources from UNDP used tofinance projects in the Arab region NCCs weresignificant. In 2005 and 2006, they averaged 9percent of delivery in these countries, rangingfrom 2 percent for Kuwait to 12-13 percent forBahrain and Saudi Arabia. Almost three quartersof these resources come from trust funds, withmost of the balance accounted for by ResidentCoordinator funds. The interest on unspentbalances12 provides another potential source ofextra-budgetary resources in NCCs not reflected

Figure 1. Thematic Allocations in First and Second Programming Cycles in Arab Region NCCs (US$ Millions)

C H A P T E R 2 . T H E U N I T E D N A T I O N S , U N D P A N D T H E N C C s O F T H E A R A B R E G I O N 1 3

Country

Bahrain Kuwait Libya Saudi Arabia United ArabEmirates

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Per

cen

t o

f to

tal

n Governance n Poverty Reduction n Environment n Other

Note: Figures for Saudi Arabia and the UAE represent only the last completed cycle.

12 In Saudi Arabia, the interest on unspent balances held by UNDP accrue to the government, which, until recently, hadnot used this resource. These funds continued to grow, reaching more than $3 million in 2007. That year, the Governmentof Saudi Arabia (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) used some of the money to finance a $1.3 million junior professional officer( JPO) programme.

C H A P T E R 2 . T H E U N I T E D N A T I O N S , U N D P A N D T H E N C C s O F T H E A R A B R E G I O N1 4

in Table 6. Programme budgets, delivery and sourcesof funds are reviewed in detail in Chapter Five.

It should also be noted that, in terms of bothdelivery and staffing of country offices, Arab

region NCCs are lower than global and regionalaverages. Delivery in these countries amountedto only 20-25 percent of regional and globalaverages, and staffing represented only 30-35percent of regional and global averages.

Bahrain Kuwait Libya SaudiArabia

UnitedArab

Emirates

TotalNCCs

Extra-budgetary resources 569 228 509 3,973 500 5,779

Delivery 2004-2006 4,497 12,015 7,760 31,985 7,852 64,109

Total as percent of delivery 13% 2% 7% 12% 6% 9%

Source: UNDP ATLAS

Table 6. Extra-Budgetary Resources (Total 2004–2006, US$ Thousands)

C H A P T E R 3 . 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 1 5

The first part of this chapter reviews the contri-bution of UNDP country programmes to nationaldevelopment results, in terms of their catalyticimpact, leverage, support for policy generation,innovation and other attributes. These aspects arereviewed on a selective basis given the limitationsin information and time allotted to this evaluation. The review is country-based, butsingles out thematic areas that figure prominentlyin UNDP’s mandate, namely, democraticgovernance, poverty reduction, gender equalityand HIV/AIDS. A second part reviews fivesuccessful model projects, one in each NCC,illustrating the way in which project interventionscan be meaningfully leveraged for wider nationalimpact. The third part focuses on UNDP’scontribution in terms of national developmentresults, examining the nature of the value-addedand UNDP’s role as well as national perceptionsof the extent of this contribution. The final part focuses, within the strictures of limitedinformation, on the issues of effectiveness,sustainability and replicability.

3.1 CONTRIBUTION TO NATIONALDEVELOPMENT RESULTS

3.1.1 BAHRAIN

In Bahrain, projects in the current and previousprogramming cycles contributed to the country’snational development in a variety of areas:

n Democratic governance and women’sempowerment: Recent projects responded topolitical changes in the areas of human rightsand women, strengthening parliament and

its institutional capacity as well as supportingthe Bahrain Institute for Political Development.This institution was created by the King in2004 to support political reform and wasplaced outside government in order to beimpartial. Especially noteworthy in thecontext of women’s empowerment is thesignature by representatives of UNDP andthe Supreme Council for Women of theAction Plan for the Political Empowermentof Women project in mid-2005. The projectsupported women candidates in advance of the2006 parliamentary and municipal elections.

n Poverty and social development: UNDP’sengagement has been limited in this area, butincludes both upstream efforts to assessBahrain’s social development programmes aswell as downstream activities centred aroundimproving access to micro-finance (see nextsection). UNDP undertook important workpromoting greater understanding of andstrategic response to HIV/AIDS, as part ofthe country programme and in parallel withthe activities of the HIV/AIDS RegionalProgramme in the Arab States (HARPAS).In collaboration with WHO, UNFPA andthe Joint UN Programme on HIV/AIDS(UNAIDS), UNDP provided support tonational authorities, civil society organizationsand the media in promoting AIDS awareness.Knowledge/attitudes/behaviour surveys ofthree high-risk target groups—youth,injecting drug users and pregnant women—were completed.These findings were translatedinto a comprehensive national HIV/AIDSstrategy that is now being finalized. The

Chapter 3

CONTRIBUTION TO NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESULTS AND UNDP’S VALUE-ADDED

C H A P T E R 3 . 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 S1 6

strategy will be the first of its kind in theArab Gulf region. The country office is fullyinvolved in the HARPAS programme withan annual meeting of the programme focalpoints from each country office. The annualwork programme is reviewed by countryoffice focal points and linkages betweenHARPAS and the national HIV/AIDSprogrammes assessed. One of the outcomesof the cooperation between HARPAS andthe Bahrain country office was the recentworkshop involving religious leaders, whichtook place in Bahrain on 22-24 April 2007.

n Environment: UNDP supported upstreamactivities aimed at developing a nationalenvironmental strategy and action plan. Thisparticipatory process involved a comprehen-sive study of the country’s biodiversity andthe initiation of a national desertificationplan and strategy. Improvements in airpollution monitoring programmes were alsocarried out and environmental capability inusing Geographic Information Systemtechnology enhanced.

3.1.2 KUWAIT

Some notable contributions of the more successfulprojects in Kuwait included:

n Democratic governance and women’sempowerment: A programme to enhancepolitical participation, with an emphasis onwomen, was initiated in May 2006 with amedia campaign to raise awareness and supportwomen’s advancement in parliamentaryelections the following month. The success ofthese activities put Kuwait (together withBahrain) at the forefront of this issue,which is sensitive in the Gulf region. Variousother initiatives also promoted women’sempowerment. These included: symposiaand presentations by the country office ongender mainstreaming and violence againstwomen, directed at officials of the Ministryof Social Affairs, parliamentarians, women’ssocieties and other groups; and the Centrefor Arab Women Training and Research(CAWTAR), a regional initiative to build the

capacity of current and future women parlia-mentarians and community leaders. Thecentre was jointly supported by UNDP andUNIFEM, with help from UNDP’sSubregional Resource Facility, and sponsoredseveral capacity-building workshops in early2006. Another highlight was a gender auditand strategy, financed by the Gender TrustFund in Kuwait, and training in gendermainstreaming for the country office and theUN Country Team. The gender adviser atthe Subregional Resource Facility took theinitiative of promoting this programme andis facilitating its implementation.

n Strengthening the planning mechanism:A macro-econometric model developed inthe Ministry of Planning was used to prepareand test the socioeconomic developmentplan for 2000-2005. A model was alsodeveloped to facilitate comparisons withother economies around the world and isnow in use in the International ComparisonProgramme. Two reports on gender equalityindicators have also been produced.

n Strengthening public administration: APerformance Measurement System wasdeveloped and all of the country’s ministrieswere guided in its use through a speciallydeveloped website and training programmes.Key performance indicators were developedfor six ministries in 2004. Efforts to replicatethis experience in other ministries areongoing. Financial audit manuals were alsoprepared for the State Audit Bureau toanalyse investments in petroleum, high-techacquisitions, contract claims and disputes.Staff received training in auditing andinformation technology needed to automateaudit procedures.

n Environment: The discussion of the KuwaitIntegrated Environment Information Network(see following section) best captures contri-butions in this area.

n HIV/AIDS: HARPAS is active in Kuwaitand is responding to HIV/AIDS in the Arabregion through a number of initiatives. These

C H A P T E R 3 . 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 1 7

include awareness-raising targeted toreligious leaders, women, the media and theprivate sector. The country office focal pointmaintains contacts with relevant nationalorganizations, including the Kuwait NationalHigh Committee to Combat HIV/AIDS.

In addition, global and regional reports onprogress towards the Millennium DevelopmentGoals stimulated production of national reportsfor Kuwait in 2003 and 2005. Recommendationsfrom the widely disseminated global and ArabHuman Development Reports were discussed amonglocal non-governmental organizations (NGOs) andofficials from the Ministry of Social Development;NGOs were also invited to participate in thepreparation of the common country assessment.

Finally, an interregional forum on the highlysensitive issues of employment and immigrationis being planned. Other members of the GulfCooperation Council are expected to participate,eventually leading to a subregional programme.

3.1.3 LIBYA

UNDP programmes in Libya during the last two programming cycles were wide-ranging and contributed to a number of national develop-ment results.

n Planning: Though a series of projectsstarting in the 1970s, UNDP has assisted inthe preparation of national developmentplans. These projects have provided technicalsupport in specific areas identified by thegovernment. Although recognized by thegovernment as important, it is difficult toidentify the significance of this contributionto either the development of an effective planor, if implemented, progress towards nationaldevelopment goals.

n Agriculture: Two projects in particular, bothof which were executed by FAO, wereregarded as highly successful. These includeda Mapping of Natural Resources project,which established a database used inplanning agricultural and rural development,and a project called Strengthening NationalCapacities for Veterinary Services.

n Education: UNDP has supported a numberof projects in this field, including those thatwere instrumental in developing curricula forvocational training and other specializedschools. These interventions helped to buildcapacity, transfer knowledge and contributedto the development of a new education systemin Libya. According to the UN Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO), Libya’s experience sets apositive example for other countries.

The government’s desire to normalize relationswith the international community following theend of sanctions in 2003-2004 led to a number ofnew activities that have the potential to yieldimportant results. It also allowed increasedUNDP engagement in the areas of HIV/AIDSand gender issues. Most importantly, it openedthe door to engagement in the area of democraticgovernance issues:

n Judicial reform and human rights: A CriminalJustice Project, financed by the country office,provided a forum in which various countriescould exchange experiences on the issue ofhuman rights. It also laid the foundation fora much larger project, signed in 2006, whichaims to reform Libya’s justice system. Inaddition, and with financing from the countryoffice and bilateral donors, a Conference onDemocracy and Human Rights was held in2005, involving UNICEF, UNHCR andindependent human rights experts.

3.1.4 SAUDI ARABIA

Examples of UNDP’s contributions highlightedin the 2006 analytical review of the UNDPcountry programme in Saudi Arabia included the following:

n The most notable achievement, reported bythe Ministry of Economy and Planning, wasassistance in the formulation of the EighthDevelopment Plan for Saudi Arabia (2006-2010). Since 1970, these comprehensivedevelopment plans have played a crucial role inguiding the country’s development towardsclearly defined national goals. The eighthplan is especially important since it focuses

C H A P T E R 3 . 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 S1 8

on reducing poverty, raising standards ofliving, improving the quality of life for all,enhancing the role of women and youth innational development, optimizing the benefitsof globalization and enhancing partnershipsfor development, among other areas.

n A large number of mid-level managersparticipated in tailored training programmes toprepare them for in-depth training abroad onformulating policy based on solid data generation.

n Through technical cooperation with theNational Commission for Wildlife Con-servation and Development, the governmentwas able to build national capacities tooperate a network of wildlife reserves andparks. By the end of 2002, for instance, theNatural Resources Conservation TrainingCentre, established under this project, was ableto train 240 female and male trainees fromSaudi Arabia and a number of Arab countries.

n UNDP successfully built a partnership withthe King Abdul Aziz City for Science andTechnology, with the objective of empoweringthe energy sector in Saudi Arabia to meetrapidly growing demand through efficientand rational consumption patterns.

n In partnership with the Presidency ofMeteorology and Environment, and withfunding from the Global EnvironmentFacility, UNDP helped to ensure that thefirst national communication on climatechange was submitted to the United NationsFramework Convention on Climate Change.

In addition, a number of politically and sociallysensitive activities were undertaken that deservespecial mention:

n HIV/AIDS: Saudi Arabia is among themost conservative of the Arab region NCCs.Nevertheless, it made significant inroads incombating HIV/AIDS. Box 3, covering bothHARPAS-sponsored as well as other activities,shows how the country office was able topromote knowledge-sharing, networking,advocacy and partnership development inthis most sensitive area. NCC representativesattended several of these events and, inparticular, religious leaders from all the Arabregion NCCs attended the 2004 and 2006meetings organized by HARPAS. As aresult, the spread of HIV appears to be undercontrol.13 A $50,000 grant from UNDPfinanced a large number of small initiatives,

13 Reported cases numbered 262 in 2004, representing an increase of 10 percent over 2003 (238 cases). Over the period1984–2004, the cumulative number of cases reported among Saudis was 2,005 (2006 Saudi Arabia MDG Report).

§ November 2004: The first national workshop on HIV/AIDS was held in Saudi Arabia,on the topic of women and HIV/AIDS.

§ December 2004: The UNDP country office attends the HARPAS Regional Colloquium for Religious Leaders onHIV/AIDS. A representative of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs in Saudi Arabia was also in attendance.

§ December 2004: A national conference on women and the Millennium Development Goals was organized,focusing on gender issues.

§ December to February 2005: A series of events were held, revolving around the Millennium Development Goals,youth and HIV/AIDS.

§ June 2006: The first round-table discussion on HIV/AIDS in Saudi Arabia was organized.

§ June 2006: HARPAS sponsors a meeting for HIV/AIDS focal points in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, to discuss the country-level impact of the HIV/AIDS response.

§ November 2006: HARPAS sponsors the Second Regional Religious Leaders Forum in Response to HIV/AIDS in theArab States in Cairo. Saudi Arabia was well represented, with ten religious leaders participating.

§ November 2006: Workshops on the role of the media in human development focused on six topics inspired bythe MDGs, including the role of the media in combating HIV/AIDS.

Box 3. Saudi Arabia: Progress in Combating HIV/AIDS

C H A P T E R 3 . 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 1 9

carried out in partnership with the Ministryof Health, including workshops, awareness-raising among teenagers, and the productionof information materials.

n Gender: A workshop on women andHIV/AIDS was held in 2006 with theparticipation of UNDP, UNAIDS andUNICEF. Presentations examined thehuman rights implications of HIV/AIDS forwomen and children, particularly girls.

n Human Development Reports: The Ministryof Economy and Planning produced the firstnational human development report for2003. The report advocated measuring andmonitoring human development from aperspective much broader than the traditionalyardstick of gross domestic product. The ArabHuman Development Report had a noticeableimpact both within Saudi society as well as in the dialogue with UNDP on its humandevelopment agenda.14 In November 2006,the UNDP country office, in partnership withthe Ministry of Information and Culture, helda high-level seminar with workshops on therole of media in human development and theMDGs. A workshop on women and theMDGs was also held in 2006.

3.1.5 UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

Results from some of the more successful projectsin the UAE include the following:

n Development strategies and plans: Thefollowing key national and emirate-levelpolicies, plans and strategies were prepared:

• Dubai Strategic Plan (1996-2000)

• Abu Dhabi Strategic Development

Programme (2000-2009)

• Ras Al Khaimah Development Vision(2000-2009)

• National health policies and action plan

• Health-care financing study for theemirate of Abu Dhabi

• Agriculture policy analysis for theemirate of Abu Dhabi (which led to thepreparation of a Strategic Framework onAgricultural Development by theMinistry of Agriculture and Fisheries)

• Support to government institutions toformulate a federal e-government strategy

• Technical support to the Abu DhabiDepartment of Planning to conduct theemirate population census, and supportfor urban planning and management inRas Al Khaimah.

n Globalization: Technical support and capacity-building were provided to facilitate entry ofthe UAE to the World Trade Organization,and to implement UAE’s obligations in theworld body. This support included studies andtechnical reports, workshops and seminars.UNDP emphasized capacity-development ininformation and communications technologiesas part of this process.

n Environment: The National EnvironmentalAction Plan, approved in January 2002, wasformulated through cooperation amongUNDP, the UN Economic and SocialCommission for Western Asia (ESCWA)and the Federal Environmental Agency. Theplan is comprehensive, covering the availabilityof fresh water; air and water pollution;conservation of the marine environment;

14 Even though the NSPR showed that awareness of UNDP and its role in Saudi Arabia was limited, the Arab HumanDevelopment Report was well known. It generated different reactions among civil society participants in the NSPR.On the one hand there were those who deplored the fact that the report promotes Western values in Arab societies (forexample, on gender-related issues); that it does not differentiate sufficiently between different living standards (in oil-richand resource-poor countries, for example); and that it does not take into account external factors of poverty such as occu-pation in Iraq and the Palestinian territories. Others had a predominantly positive picture of the Arab HumanDevelopment Report, which raised critical issues the government could not ignore because of the authority of the UN(DP).Religious critics of the report were regarded with scepticism and even conservative members of the Majlis ash Shouraargued with the report for improvements in education. The accuracy of data was partly questioned because of the difficultyin obtaining it. The expertise of the writers of the Arab Human Development Report was questioned in terms of theirfamiliarity with local conditions, and more local recruiting was recommended.

C H A P T E R 3 . 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 0

conservation of the urban environment; andland resources, degradation and biodiversity.Policy advice on water resources managementwas provided at the federal and emirate levelby UNDP and ESCWA.

n Gender: UNDP helped develop the NationalStrategy for the Advancement of Women,which was approved at the highest level and is now being implemented; training wasalso offered for women starting their ownenterprises. In partnership with the GeneralWomen’s Union (GWU), UNIFEM organizeda symposium called ‘Enhancing the Role ofArab Women Parliamentarians in Public Life’in Abu Dhabi. Also in collaboration withGWU, UNIFEM is implementing a three-year regional project to facilitate empowermentof Arab women parliamentarians. The firstproject, on gender mainstreaming, wassigned by UNDP, UAE, GWU and theBritish Embassy in 2006.

n HIV/AIDS: UNDP, UNICEF and WHOpartnered with the Ministry of Health andthe UAE Red Crescent Society to provideAIDS awareness-raising activities, includingorientation sessions and training workshopsfor high school and university students andmedical professionals.

n The first MDG Report for the UAE wasproduced in 2004. Senior members of civil

society suggested these reports could be usedas a vehicle for engaging the central economicministries in dialogues that could lead to andstrengthen UNDP’s involvement in some ofits core competency areas. A second MDGreport for the UAE was produced in 2007.

3.2 REVIEW OF FIVE MODEL PROJECTS

The five model projects reviewed below wereselected for their innovation and catalytic impact.As their technical and geographic scope isdeepened and extended, it is expected that theirleverage will also increase. These projects includeMicroStart in Bahrain; the Integrated EnvironmentInformation Network Project in Kuwait; theRehabilitation of the Old Town of Ghadames inLibya; the Urban Observatory Network for Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah Region in SaudiArabia; and the Date Palm Research andDevelopment Project in the UAE.

3.2.1 BAHRAIN: MICROSTART

An evaluation of this project in 2002 concludedthat it “succeeded in its important objective ofintroducing microfinance to Bahrain by creatinga sustainable credit delivery and managementcapacity in three national NGOs. A very strongfoundation has been established upon whichBahrain can now expand the range and impact ofmicrofinance on its unemployment situation and

§ Lending performance: MicroStart’s participating NGOs provided a total of over 5,000 small loans to over 3,000beneficiaries. The total value of the loans is approximately $1.8 million and growing.

§ Loan repayments: Over 99 percent of all the funds loaned are on their prescribed schedule for repayment (orfully repaid).

§ Financial sustainability: The NGO microfinance activities are financially sustainable. The amounts generated bythe interest rates (or administrative charge under murabaha lending) are greater than the cost of staffing andadministering the programme.

§ Impact on beneficiaries: An impact survey of beneficiaries reported that most increased their revenue between25 percent and 50 percent.

§ National impact: The number of beneficiaries (3,000) is equal to about 30 percent of the number of people onsocial assistance rolls, or 20 percent of the estimated number of Bahraini unemployed.

§ Cost-effectiveness: MicroStart proved to be a cost-effective means of assisting the needy as funds are rapidlyrepaid and rolled over to additional beneficiaries.

Box 4. Bahrain: Key Results from the MicroStart Project (1997-2002)

Source: MicroStart evaluation

C H A P T E R 3 . 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

social assistance programmes.” Policy makersinterviewed for the National Stakeholder PerceptionReport (NSPR) cited the MicroStart project asone of the more successful projects (Box 4 showssome of the key results), though NGOs noted anumber of shortcomings, including the lack oftrainers, limited capital for financing and insuffi-cient marketing due to the lack of marketingexperts. The project supported poverty alleviationby empowering the poor. Moreover, it ispotentially replicable, thereby successfullyleveraging the relatively small amount of moneyinvested in the initiative by the UN.

3.2.2 KUWAIT: INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTINFORMATION NETWORK

This project provided both specialists and thepublic with access to updated and reliabledemographic and environmental information,using the Geographic Information System(GIS), and is developing national institutionaland technical capacities for using the GIS. PhaseI of the project covered the marine and coastalenvironment; phase II included four mainmodules, relating to air, land, coastal zones andmarine environments. An issues paper onnational water security was prepared and fundedunder the umbrella project.

3.2.3 LIBYA: REHABILITATION OF THE OLD TOWN OF GHADAMES

The rehabilitation of the old town of Ghadames,located 650 kilometres southwest of Tripoli, is a$3.7 million project completed in 2007 as part ofthe Tourism Master Plan. It grew out of a projectin 1998-1999 to assist the General People’sCommittee for Tourism to prepare a developmentplan that assessed the potential for developingthe old town as a tourist attraction. Water-usestudies and a review of building styles followed asa basis for preparing a rehabilitation plan torestore the old city, which was endorsed by theGeneral People’s Committee in February 2000.Work began on restoring buildings that year, inaddition to repairing selected streets, publicplaces and mosques. The work was carried out byLibyans using traditional techniques and localmaterials, such as date palm branches and adobe

brick. The project also established sustainablewater usage of the water channel system in thespring of the Ain-Al Faras oasis.

3.2.4 SAUDI ARABIA: URBAN OBSERVATORYNETWORK FOR AL-MADINAH AL-MUNAWWARAH REGION

In the context of a new, more participatoryapproach to development planning, emphasis hasbeen placed on regional planning, with the needto localize MDG indicators for the 13 regions in Saudi Arabia. One of the best practices is a$137,000 pilot project that established an Urban Observatory Network for Al-MadinahAl-Munawwarah Region. Over 107 urbandevelopment indicators have been produced,analysed and are being translated to on-the-ground projects in line with the eight MDGs.The project is now being replicated in Jeddah,and other municipalities have expressed interest.The World Bank has also taken an active interestin providing additional assistance. This projectwas deemed as among the most successful by bothcountry office staff and government counterparts,who expressed a desire for additional capacity-building in future projects and more substantiveinvolvement by UNDP.

3.2.5 UAE: DATE PALM RESEARCH ANDDEVELOPMENT PROJECT

The first phase (2000-2004) of this programmewas completed and evaluated as highly successful;the second phase (2004-2008) is now under way.The long-term goal is to build the capacity of UAEnationals working at the Date Palm Research andDevelopment Unit of UAE University to producehigh-quality date palms of the desired varietiesthat meet national requirements. The strength ofthis intervention is in effectively responding tothe core development challenge facing UAE:economic diversification. The research anddevelopment unit has become the leading centrefor date palm work in the country and has alsoestablished a prominent international profile.Future assistance could potentially lead to anInternational Date Palm Research andDevelopment Centre. Box 5 summarizes theproject’s major achievements.

C H A P T E R 3 . 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

3.3 THE NATURE OF UNDP’S CONTRIBUTION AND ITS VALUE-ADDED

The first two sections of this chapter provided anoverview of some important contributions tonational development results associated withUNDP projects. This section will elaborate onthe nature of UNDP’s role in bringing about thoseresults. Before doing so, however, it is importantto note the many reasons project partners areattracted to UNDP in the Arab region NCCs.These reasons reflect their assessments ofUNDP’s value-added. Respondents to the threeNational Stakeholder Perception Reports (NSPRs)carried out—in Bahrain, Kuwait and SaudiArabia—and interviews held by evaluation teammembers in all five countries identified thefollowing attributes:

n Bearer of the UN flag. UNDP is theembodiment of the UN and a conduit as wellas a window to the UN system. This is apowerful rationale among senior politicalechelons in counterpart ministries (ministriesof foreign affairs, in particular), as wasemphasized in Bahrain but also pointed outin other Arab region NCCs. UNDP’scountry presence and interaction symbolize aspirit of national engagement with the humandevelopment principles and values of the UN.

n Impartiality. The fact that UNDP has nohidden agenda (unlike some bilateral aid

donors or private sector firms) make it anatural choice in many sensitive areas whereadvisory assistance is sought.

n Wealth of global experience. Officials inBahrain and Saudi Arabia highlighted thefact that UNDP can assess and relate tonational issues based on its experienceworldwide. This two-way channel draws inglobal standards of excellence and yieldsvaluable experience that builds upon and canpotentially benefit other countries.

n Access to the UN’s specialized expertise.Involving UNDP is an expedient and affordableway to access the services of UN specializedagencies that do not have a country presence.

n Transparency. All of the Arab region NCCsnoted that the relative transparency ofUNDP’s operations (including compliancewith international auditing standards,coupled with administrative and financialprocedures that are sometimes more efficientthan those of national development projects)make the organization an attractive partner.

n Access to international experts. UNDP’sglobal network gives it access to technicalexpertise not available within countries. In theview of Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of ForeignAffairs, Arab region NCCs will require suchassistance for four or five decades to come toaddress issues they share in common.

Annual production of date palms increased from less than 8,000 tons in 1971 when the UAE was formed to 760,000tons in 2003—an increase of 9,400 percent. The UAE now ranks seventh in the world in date production. The contribution of the first phase of the date palm project (2000-2004) to this result includes:

§ Strengthening tissue culture: The major activity of the project has been strengthening production of the tissueculture laboratory. The laboratory received certification in 2002 from the International Organization forStandardization.

§ Introducing new varieties: The project emphasized the introduction of varieties. At the outset there were twomain varieties. The project focused on some 20 varieties identified by UAE authorities.

§ Capacity-building: Nationals were trained in the United Kingdom to co-manage the Date Palm Research andDevelopment Unit. Extensive in-service training for 48 staff was also carried out for laboratory and greenhousestaff, and a website and libraries established.

§ Environmental benefits: These include better soil and water conservation, more shade for protection of plants,animals and humans and provision of natural materials.

Box 5. UAE: Key Results from the Date Palm Research and Development Project, Phase I

Source: Evaluation of First Phase of the Date Palm Research and Development Project

C H A P T E R 3 . 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 3

n UNDP imprimatur. Having the seal ofUNDP enhances the credibility and accept-ability of a final product. For example, in aproject involving Kuwait Airways, it wasthought that UNDP’s involvement would bea positive factor in getting the parliament toconsider privatization of the company. InBahrain, Ministry of Health officials notedthat they had been trying to get a special unit for about 20 years, but only succeededafter a UNDP consultant recommended itsintroduction in a report.

Not all the reasons for engaging with UNDPwere made in terms of its value-added. Somerespondents said simply that there is a need tomake use of existing agreements between UNDPand the government (as noted in the NSPRs inBahrain and Saudi Arabia). More specifically,some government project partners see UNDPprojects as sources of ‘free’ additional resources,for example, in Bahrain and Kuwait, where budgetsfor the UNDP programmes are centralized. Thisis also the case where the partner is guaranteedmulti-year funding (as is sometimes the case inall Arab region NCCs).

3.3.1 CONCEPTUALIZING DIFFERENT TYPES OF ROLES PLAYED BY UNDP

The nature of UNDP’s involvement can change,depending on the country and the initiative to be undertaken.

n Process facilitation: UNDP adds value interms of process when it acts as a facilitatoror medium for a UN agency or suppliesgoods or consultants faster than thoughgovernment channels. This typically occursin projects where UNDP plays mainly anadministrative-financial role. It includes suchaspects as speed; audits according to interna-tional standards; access to additional or ‘free’budgetary resources to the beneficiary;continuity of budgetary resources for multi-year programmes, etc.

n Technical and substantive support: This isan enhanced role whereby UNDP is pro-activelyproviding technical expertise, usually to fill a

capacity gap or to provide substantive inputs(this could mean, for example, drawing uplists of consultants and recommendations on the pros and cons of each candidate;contributing to the content of terms ofreference; and reviewing studies from apurely technical perspective). In such a role,UNDP has a major influence on projectdesign and implementation, with fulltechnical input by UNDP in both respects(either individually or in partnership withother organizations).

n Adding the UNDP dimensions: The firsttwo types of services could be provided by avariety of development organizations orprivate sector consulting companies ormanagement firms that have access to globalexpertise. What makes UNDP different is itsfocus on human development as well as on anumber of core approaches to its engagementwith programme countries. These includesupporting national ownership, capacity-development and gender equality andensuring a coordinated approach. UNDPvalue-added relates specifically to these areas.

This last type of value-added is the mostimportant and is what UNDP should attempt tomaximize in its engagement with programmecountries. In doing so, it can make the greatestcontribution to national development results.This UNDP dimension is not restricted toUNDP’s interventions in core areas, but can beadded value when UNDP enters into partner-ships with other organizations, including UNspecialized agencies. In this way, UNDP can addvalue in areas (sectors and themes) outside itsmain practice areas.

3.3.2 STAKEHOLDER PERCEPTION OF UNDP’S VALUE-ADDED

Identifying the areas in which UNDP canmaximize its value-added is also importantbecause UNDP is not the only internationaldevelopment organization in the Arab regionNCCs. A variety of groups are involved in

C H A P T E R 3 . 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 4

helping the NCCs meet their developmentneeds. Although not systematically reviewed by the evaluation team, these include otherinternational organizations such as the WorldBank and the International Monetary Fund in allArab region NCCs, including, most recently,Libya; bilateral donors (including, for example,the German Agency for International Cooperationand the Japan International Cooperation Agency),since some NCCs receive official developmentassistance;15 private sector firms;16 internationalcivil society organizations17 and other UNagencies. In addition, other nations providesmall-scale but important support through theirembassies that is relevant to UNDP’s humandevelopment agenda.18 In light of this plethoraof actual and potential actors,19 the question arisesas to why UNDP services are sought. There aretwo aspects to that question. The first is whatmotivates existing and potential beneficiaries toapproach UNDP. The second relates to theexperience of participants in UNDP’s projects:To what extent were their expectations met?

As a prelude to answering these questions, itshould be noted that in all Arab region NCCs,beneficiary agencies normally initiate projectrequests. This is mandated in Saudi Arabia by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and occurs inother NCCs as a general rule, as reflected in thethree NSPRs20 and the evaluation team’s findingsin Libya and the UAE. UNDP, however, isinvolved at all stages of project formulation anddevelopment. The evaluation team considers that

the demand-driven nature of the programme andtotal financial contribution by the governmentdrives a stronger sense of national ownership of UNDP-supported projects among nationalpartners in NCCs, compared to non-NCCcountries. But there is also a higher risk that thediversity of demands from the government willlead UNDP to extend support in areas beyond itsmandate. Even here, the differences may not beas stark as appears as first blush, since the samekinds of issues can arise in non-NCCs whengovernment cost-sharing predominates (as in thesome Latin American programme countrieswhere government cost-sharing can exceed 90percent of delivery).

What were the views of those involved in UNDPprogrammes in the three NSRPs in regards toUNDP’s actual valued-added? Different countriesemphasized different aspects of what they perceivedto be UNDP’s contribution. Respondents to the Bahrain NSPR were the most positive,commending UNDP’s value-added both withrespect to process (speed, imprimatur, conduit tothe outside world) and in providing goodinternational technical support.

Respondents in Saudi Arabia were also generallypositive, but more critical of UNDP’s shortcomings.They commended the process role of UNDP,since its rules for the commitment of funds andengagement of experts are considerably moreflexible than normal Saudi administrativeprocedures. But UNDP’s technical role was

15 DAC countries have reported annual official development assistance to Bahrain from 1997 to 2004 of between $1.1 millionand $1.65 million.

16 McKinsey is assisting the Bahrain Economic Development Board, chaired by the Crown Prince.17 The International Center for Not-for-Profit Law, for example, held a workshop on Developing Civil Society Law in

Bahrain (4-5 April 2007), with that country’s Ministry of Social Development.18 In Saudi Arabia, for example, Norway is engaging with the new Human Rights Association and is looking at supporting

study tours, exchanges, lectures and other interventions. Austria has sent three Saudi delegations to Austria to look at education systems in 2007 and has also sponsored delegations from the Ministry of Justice. In Kuwait, the Dutch Embassyis involved in financing and participating in the Interregional Forum for Expatriate Labour for Development of MutualRights. In Libya, bilateral local sources financed and participated in the Conference of Democracy and Human Rights.

19 Until the lifting of sanctions in 2003-2004, Libya had few alternatives to accessing international expertise, but the situationin Libya now mirrors that of other NCCs in the region.

20 This is the view of country office staff in all the NCCs studied except Bahrain, who, contrary to the responses of beneficiaries in the NSPR, believe they initiate the vast majority of projects. Clearly this is a ‘grey area’ where differentperceptions may not be unusual or even a cause for concern. What is important is that national partners believe they haveownership of project identification.

C H A P T E R 3 . 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 5

perceived to be weak, with insufficient attentionpaid to the selection of consultants and the qualityof their work. The curriculum vitae database ofUNDP was perceived as less comprehensive thanthose of other international consultancy serviceproviders, who reacted much more quickly thanUNDP to government requests. The UNDP wasseen to intervene too little in project design andimplementation and was mostly perceived as an‘accountant’ or ‘post office’ to the UN system.

In Kuwait, the NSPR concluded that “UNDP isperceived to be relatively strong on design, planningand strategy, but relatively weak on implementation.”The latter assessment is ascribed to a variety offactors, including insufficient coordination, frequentchanges of leadership, insufficient technical skillsand limited communication with stakeholders.

While no NSPR was conducted in Libya, thePlanning Ministry, reflecting the views ofimplementing ministries and project managers,requested a more pro-active involvement byUNDP in the content of projects. The need tohave substantive progress reports and regularevaluations from which lessons for new projectscould be drawn was stressed. These points werealso stressed to the evaluation team in the centralministries in Bahrain, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.Furthermore, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs inSaudi Arabia and the Ministry of Planning inLibya emphasized the need for UNDP to definemore explicitly the services it can provide andwhere its relative advantage lies.

It is interesting that national stakeholdersinterviewed focused mainly on process andtechnical types of value, together with a numberof political issues (which could also be considereda type of development value-added in a wide sense).The overall assessment of UNDP’s contributionby the evaluation team is more positive than theNSPRs, especially in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.This is partly because it was able to review pointsnot covered in the NSPRs and partly because ithad more in-depth interactions, especially withthe main counterparts of UNDP in the centralministries. There are many examples of UNDP’s

substantive contribution to projects in SaudiArabia, in particular the Al-Madinah UrbanObservatory, where UNDP focused the projecton the MDGs, the Environmental Strategic Planfor Jeddah and others. UNDP’s advocacy injectedthe MDGs into the National Development Plan and was used in the King’s address to the Consultative Assembly. This value-addedoccurred in UNDP’s areas of core competency—the MDGs, poverty, governance and environment.Notwithstanding such contributions, the evalua-tion team shares a major finding that comes outof the three NSPRs—namely that UNDP’ssubstantive contributions were too limited—and endorses the strong entreaties by all thecentral ministries and many beneficiaries thatUNDP’s role in this respect needs to be signifi-cantly enhanced.

3.4 EFFECTIVENESS, SUSTAINABILITYAND REPLICABILITY

3.4.1 EFFECTIVENESS

While clearly there are examples of effectiveprojects, self-assessment by UNDP countryoffice staff indicated positive perceptions of theoverall effectiveness of the project portfolios intheir respective countries. In Kuwait and SaudiArabia, the vast majority of recent projects (75-80 percent) were judged to have fully ormostly met their objectives; the minority weredeemed to have only partially met them or not atall. In Libya, where UNDP programmes werewide-ranging and mostly sector-based (ratherthan thematic), projects by and large achievedtheir objectives, until very recently. But therewere also sectors in which this was not the case(for example, in industry and tourism). In theUAE, most of the projects rated by country officestaff were considered to have fully or mostlyachieved their objectives.

3.4.2 SUSTAINABILITY

Sustainability involves a number of differentfactors, but institutional and financial sustainabilityare among the most important. There are manyprojects in the Arab region NCCs, such as those

C H A P T E R 3 . 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 6

described previously, which have proved to be orare likely to become sustainable. There are alsoexamples of projects that were unsustainable,even though project objectives were met. Oneexample, in Libya, was a project to build capacityin the Ministry of Planning. When the ministrymoved from Sirte to Tripoli, many of the trainedstaff left, and there was a net loss as far ascapacity was concerned. Sustainability was alsoimpaired after the successful reform of Libya’seducation system because of a policy change thatrevamped the structure of secondary education.In the final analysis it is not possible to generalizeabout the extent of sustainability in Arab regionNCC projects, both because many of the projectswere relatively new and the dearth of evaluations.

One important aspect of sustainability iscapacity-building, to which this evaluation gavespecial attention. Building capacity is very mucha mantra of UNDP and an explicit objective ofmany, if not most, UNDP-supported projects.In Bahrain, the NSPR revealed that capacity-building was part of many of UNDP’s activities;there was also a strong feeling among stakeholdersthat UNDP’s projects are sustainable. But theperception in Bahrain was the exception: In allfour other NCCs, capacity-building was seen tobe weak or insufficient. This was reflected in the NSPRs in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.21 InLibya, there was a prevalent and strong feelingamong policy makers as well as project managersthat capacity-building is an area that requiressignificant strengthening. This was one of themore important points emphasized by Libya’sUnder-Secretary of Planning, who said there wasa need to move from “importing experts tolocalizing them.”

The evaluation team also made an assessment ofcapacity-building in its field work and found theimplementation record to be uneven. The mostvisible deficiency in this respect was the lack of

inclusion of specific capacity-developmentstrategies and concrete steps in the projectformulation. Other reasons for shortfallsincluded experts that were too busy or notmotivated “to work themselves out of a job.”Whatever the record, this is an area that meritsthe greatest attention and can be improved.This was the unanimous view of NSPR respon-dents and the Ministry of Planning in Libya,which the evaluation team strongly endorses.Tighter planning for capacity-building combinedwith regular monitoring and supervision ofprogress by the implementing agency and UNDPare warranted.

3.4.3 REPLICABILITY

Replicability can be an important demonstrationof a project’s larger impact on development.Pilot projects that are specifically designed to betested and, when successful, applied on a widerscale have not been part of country programmesin Arab region NCCs. However, there areimportant examples of replicability in the region,though these have occurred rarely and on an adhoc basis. The most prominent examples are seenin the areas of public administration-budgetingand urban development. In the former areinterventions in e-governance in Saudi Arabia,where replication has great potential but explicitrecognition of the intervention as a pilot,integrated evaluation are not in place. Nonetheless,there has been replication, as in the case of aprize-winning information technology projectwith Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs,which is being extended to other governmentdepartments and shows potential for even further extension. A UNDP-supported regionalprogramme, Information and CommunicationsTechnology for Development in the ArabRegion, supported the creation of Bahrain’s e-voting system. It also forged an agreement withthe Central Informatics Organization of the

21 A situation highlighted in Saudi Arabia’s NSPR concerning the Ministry of Planning is not atypical of the reasons forlimited capacity-building in other ministries and NCCs. Some consultants in a UNDP-supported planning project werein place for more than 20 years, with little capacity-building among national staff. It was also suggested that the qualityof staff in some line ministries makes capacity-building difficult. Among the reasons for insufficient capacity is lack oftraining and low salaries for the Saudi workforce, which makes it difficult to retain young professionals.

C H A P T E R 3 . 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 7

Kingdom of Bahrain to support the customizationand replication of the system in other countriesin the Arab region.22 In Kuwait, the PerformanceMeasurement System, which developed indicatorsfor six ministries in 2004, is being extended toother ministries. Examples in the urban sectorinclude the highly successful Rehabilitation ofthe Old Town of Ghadames project in Libya,which is a scaling up of an earlier project relatedto the Tourism Master Plan. In Saudi Arabia,the Al-Madinah Urban Observatory is beingreplicated in Jeddah and other municipalitieshave expressed interest.

That said, replication is the exception rather thanthe rule in NCC programmes in the Arab region.

Given UNDP’s catalytic nature, replicabilitycould be an important criterion for selectingdevelopment projects. In addition, there is a greatdeal of potential for building replicability into thedesign of many projects (particularly thoseinvolving public administration and informationand communications technology) and using theconduit of regional programmes for replicationregion-wide. Systematic approaches in thedesign, implementation and evaluation ofprojects to build in replicability where appropriatecould enhance considerably the developmentvalue of country programmes.

UNDP’s contribution to national developmentresults and value-added is summarized in Box 6.

22 In this case, the UNDP country office had no knowledge of the regional programme intervention. This is an example ofthe lack of coordination between UNDP regional programmes and the country office.

ON PROGRAMME PERFORMANCE

§ Effectiveness: Most projects were seen as having achieved the majority of their objectives by the stakeholders aswell as the country offices, contributing to national development results in a variety of thematic areas and sectors.

§ Sustainability: There are several examples of sustainability, but it is difficult to assess across the board. Capacity-building has occurred, but not as much as programmed, expected or desired by local beneficiaries and the government.

§ Replicability: In the few instances where replicability did occur, it was on an ad hoc basis. There is potential forreplicating successful projects, especially in public administration and the urban sector.

ON UNDP’S VALUE-ADDED

§ A variety of factors make UNDP an attractive partner compared to other sources of international expertise: thefact that it is a conduit and window to the UN; its access to international expertise; its transparency and impartiality;the UNDP imprimatur; its guaranteed multi-year funding and quicker administrative procedures; and, in Bahrainand Kuwait, the fact that it is a source of ‘free’ budgetary resources for beneficiaries.

§ UNDP’s value-added was often limited to a process role in a few projects that represented a sizable part of theprogramme. This was the case in Libya and the UAE and, to a lesser degree, in Bahrain and Kuwait. In the majorityof projects, UNDP played a technical role. In fewer projects did UNDP play a role that allowed it to use anapproach that supported its responsibility to promote human development.

§ National counterparts expressed a strong and unanimous desire to the evaluation team to see UNDP play amuch stronger substantive role in all its activities; this was also the case for respondents to the NSPRs. Nationalswere generally not satisfied with the quality of consultants. Most NCC/Gulf Cooperation Council countries haveaccess and resources to private sector consultancy services with whom UNDP needs to compete in terms of quality.

Box 6. Contribution to National Development Results and UNDP’s Value-Added:Summary of Key Findings

C H A P T E R 4 . S T R A T E G I C P O S I T I O N I N G O F U N D P C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S 2 9

UNDP’s strategic positioning in the NCCs isreviewed in this chapter in terms of 1) therelevance and responsiveness of its countryprogrammes to national priorities as well as toUNDP’s mandate; and 2) the balance betweenUNDP’s involvement in the design andimplementation of projects and its other activi-ties. Among the latter, special attention is givento: 1) partnerships with different segments ofcivil society, the private sector or the UN system(which can also be pursued within as well asoutside the context of projects in the countryprogramme); 2) resource mobilization and theprovision of programming assistance to aidinstitutions in developing countries; and 3)information programmes related to UNDP’s roleand services.

4.1 RELEVANCE OF COUNTRY PROGRAMMES

4.1.1 RELEVANCE TO NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES

The goals of the last two programming cycles areclosely aligned to the national developmentchallenges summarized in Chapter 1. This is not surprising, since country programmes aredeveloped in conjunction with and funded by thegovernments concerned.

The relevance of country programmes to a country’spriorities is more difficult to assess. This alsoraises the question of relevance to whom. Fromthe perspective of NCC governments, the projectsare relevant since governments themselves approveindividual project proposals. Moreover, theseprojects are largely initiated by governmentpartners and presumably fill a need.

Notwithstanding the strong sense of ownershipof UNDP projects by implementing partners andcentral ministries, the alignment of countryprogrammes to national priorities can bestrengthened by:

n Minimizing the inclusion of some question-able projects not obviously related to centralnational development priorities (a point thatwas noted by respondents to the NSPRs aswell as country offices).

n Covering areas that are central nationalpriorities—for example, poverty reduction inSaudi Arabia (as requested by the Ministryof Foreign Affairs and suggested by civilsociety participants in the NSPR)—whilerecognizing that there are limits to thenumber of areas in which UNDP canbecome involved.

In short: The alignment of UNDP countryprogrammes is strong but can be improved. Giventhe dynamics of how projects are identified, thismust be primarily a government responsibility,working together with civil society partners whereappropriate. Strengthening the programmingfunction should facilitate this; it is particularlyimportant in the absence of clear articulation ofnational priorities, as is the case in most NCCs.

4.1.2 RELEVANCE TO UNDP’S MANDATE

UNDP-supported projects in the Arab regionNCCs are relevant to the organization’s mandateto varying degrees, but there are some notableexceptions. These projects are small in numberbut can represent a significant share of the budgetand even more in terms of programme expenditures.On the other hand, much of the important workthat is promoting human development stems

Chapter 4

STRATEGIC POSITIONING OF UNDP COUNTRY PROGRAMMES

C H A P T E R 4 . S T R A T E G I C P O S I T I O N I N G O F U N D P C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S3 0

from engagement with civil society and isfinanced by a variety of UNDP sources, includingtrust funds, regional programmes and ResidentCoordinator budgets.

It should also be noted that demand is not strongin all of UNDP’s practice areas, such as those thatdirectly affect the country’s ability to achieve itscommitments under the Millennium Declarationand, more specifically, the MDGs. The absenceof programme goals relating to gender equality or HIV/AIDS, for example, reflects the fact that these are of moderate significance to theNCC governments rather than weaknesses inalignment per se.

4.2 RESPONSIVENESS TO NATIONAL PRIORITIES

UNDP’s responsiveness or non-responsiveness tochanges in national priorities is an importantissue for NCCs, since the lack of core resourcescould have an impact on the ability to respond.Responsiveness is also affected by the ability of the country office to identify emergingopportunities and take subsequent action. In allfive NCCs, UNDP responded quickly and wellto emerging trends. Typically, this response wasinitiated by the use of UNDP funding. Thecountry offices were able to identify emergingnational trends and subsequent activities thatwere central to UNDP’s mandate in virtually allArab region NCCs.

One particularly illustrative example is fromBahrain. As described below, UNDP respondedquickly to the changes in the political situationand progress towards greater democracy that beganin 1999. The country cooperation framework(CCF) for 1998-2001, for example, was extendedto 2002 specifically to “enable greater and fullerimplementation of the CCF and timely preparationof the new CCF, given the new reforms beingannounced in the country.”23 The new countryprogramme outline (2003-2007) reacted by

engaging on two fronts: women and human rightsand, as a consequence, implemented a number ofkey projects:

n Strengthening the Institution of the ShuraCouncil & the Council of Representativesin Bahrain was signed in early 2004 and aimedto support these newly created institutions.The project is financed by government cost-sharing ($150,000) and the UNDPDemocratic Governance Thematic TrustFund ($50,000).

n In mid-2005, representatives of UNDP andthe Supreme Council for Women signed theAction Plan for the Political Empowermentof Women project, aimed at supporting womencandidates in advance of the 2006 parliamentaryand municipal elections. Other internationalorganizations tried to support the electionprocess, but were not allowed to interfere.UNDP managed to get approval for itsintervention through the fact that Bahrainhad ratified the Convention on theElimination of All Forms of Discriminationagainst Women.

n An ongoing project to Improve theInstitutional Capacity of the Parliament,which aims to provide newly electedmembers support to improve their skills and knowledge. In 2005, UNDP raised$100,000 from its Thematic Trust Fund forDemocratic Governance—which representshalf the total budget.

n Supporting Political Reform with theBahrain Institute for Political Developmentwas signed in late 2006. The institute hadbeen established by the government twoyears earlier to support its commitment topromote and accelerate political reform.

Projects financed by governments also showedsome responsiveness to national priorities. Forexample, the inclusion of environment as a newgoal in the second country programmes of

23 UNDP-Bahrain country programme outline (2003-2007).

C H A P T E R 4 . S T R A T E G I C P O S I T I O N I N G O F U N D P C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S 3 1

Bahrain and the UAE and the increasing numberof environmental projects in the second cycle inKuwait and the current cycle in Libya reflect theincreasing importance of this area amongnational priorities. In Libya as well, the secondcountry programme became involved indecentralization and local governance in responseto the government’s comprehensive decentralizationprocess—a trend that is being continued in thecountry programme document. Finally, in SaudiArabia, the project to support municipal electionsin 2004 is a good example of UNDP’s quickresponse to evolving priorities.

4.3 STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

The development of strategic partnerships hasbecome a mainstream practice throughoutUNDP’s work at the corporate, regional andcountry level. UNDP is committed to promotingpartnerships within the UN system and withstate, civil society and private sector organizationsto support country-led development efforts.

Private sector. Although the economies of theArab region NCCs are dominated by state oilinterests, the role of the private sector in the non-oil sector is extremely important, is growingand should continue to do so as diversificationstrategies bear results. The private sector has avery large role to play in addressing many of the

challenges identified earlier, including creatingjobs and addressing environmental concerns. Theprivate sector is also a channel though whichsome of the more sensitive challenges toachieving sustainable human development can beaddressed, such as promoting the employment ofwomen and their ownership and management ofsmall- and medium-sized enterprises.

In the region, however, private-sector partnershipshave been limited in all NCCs except SaudiArabia, Bahrain and, to a lesser extent, UAE,where efforts have been made to promotecorporate social responsibility.24 The Bahraincountry office and the UN Country Teamconvened a June 2007 meeting on the UN’sGlobal Compact with that country’s Chamber ofCommerce, which hopes to establish a GlobalCompact chapter in early 2008. UNDP’s Bureaufor Resources and Strategic Partnerships providedsupport to the Saudi country office in its effortsto promote corporate social responsibility (seeBox 7), but will only respond to demands at thecountry level. There has been no engagementwith the UN Global Compact, even though manyof Saudi Arabia’s large international companiesengaged in the oil sector in the region havealready signed the compact.

Civil society. The context in which civil societyorganizations (CSOs) work varies from country

In May 2006, the UNDP country office invited private sector companies in Saudi Arabia to a Corporate SocialResponsibility Forum, the first of its kind among members of the Gulf Cooperation Council. The forum was openedby the Crown Prince and attracted some 250 participants. Its purpose was to raise awareness of the concept ofcorporate social responsibility and to showcase UNDP’s practical experiences in the region, using the example ofEgypt. In addition to promoting development through corporate social responsibility, the country office is alsoattempting to mobilize resources from the private sector for development activities. As an initial step, the countryoffice introduced the ‘Adopt a Project’ concept on its website, which encourages potential partners to select andfinance projects to which they have a particular affinity. This initiative has attracted two financing partners to dateand, according to the country office, many more partners are willing to engage. One restriction on this process isthe need for the financing partner to be a Saudi company, as is the case for all investments.

Box 7. UNDP and Corporate Social Responsibility in Saudi Arabia25

Source: Strategic Evaluation of the Role of UNDP in the NCCs of the Arab Region: Saudi Arabia Working Paper

24 Developing partnerships with the private sector is different from supporting private sector development, for example,though microfinance schemes or supporting the development of a better policy environment for private sector development.

25 It should be noted that, subsequent to the forum, the government has discouraged UNDP’s partnership with the private sector.

C H A P T E R 4 . S T R A T E G I C P O S I T I O N I N G O F U N D P C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S3 2

to country. Bahrain, for example, has an activecivil society and the number of CSOs is growingrapidly. Senior officials in the Ministry ofForeign Affairs suggested they would like to see“a healthy, vibrant civil society involved inUNDP projects.” In Libya, NGOs work under asmall number of umbrella organizations close tothe state. UNDP’s engagement with civil societyis often through events aimed at advocacy and networking. Efforts have been made tostrengthen CSOs through capacity-building andnetworking, most notably in Bahrain. There arealso examples of implementation partnerships,such as the MicroStart project in Bahrain,support to early childhood learning in Kuwait,and engagement with the General Women’sUnion in the UAE. Civil society participants inall three NSPRs suggested that UNDP needs toplay a larger role in supporting civil societydevelopment.This view is shared by the evaluationteam for all the Arab region NCCs and is alsowidely held among country office staff.

UNDP counterparts in the central ministries inBahrain, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia26 have calledfor more involvement of civil society in UNDPprojects in principle. However, there appears tobe some ambivalence about UNDP’s directengagement with CSOs; there is less ambivalenceabout selected non-political CSOs working with UNDP as implementing partners. Directpartnership with CSOs also brings up theproblem of financing. Since UNDP has no coreresources for these countries, it has to rely onother sources of funding to undertake suchactivities. Governments may be willing to financeinitiatives to strengthen CSOs, as in Bahrain, butcompeting priorities and interests often preventthis from happening. Renewed efforts to overcomethese constraints are therefore warranted.

The media. The media has been an importantpartner for a number of the country offices, bothin promoting the activities of UNDP and the UN

in general and in carrying out joint advocacyefforts. While it is clear that partnerships arebeing built, a clear message from the threeNSPRs is that UNDP’s visibility is still quitelimited (see section 4.5).

UN system. As noted earlier, features of Arabregion NCCs are small UN Country Teams andfew resident offices dedicated to the country(without regional responsibilities). None of thecountries are working within a UN DevelopmentAssistance Framework. Nevertheless, there havebeen efforts to prepare common country assessmentsand UN Development Assistance Frameworks inthe past and, in the case of Bahrain, the processis ongoing. Some country offices have hostingrelationships, such as Libya, where UNICEF is‘hosted’ by the UNDP county office. In manycountries, the use of UN agency execution wasthe main way that UNDP worked with otheragencies, though this modality is being replacedby national execution. Within this context, UNpartnerships are likely to be limited. Nonethelessthey do occur, in addressing HIV/AIDS, forexample, and, more generally, in UN advocacy(UNDP partnered with the ILO for a proposedKuwait Interregional Forum for ExpatriateLabour, for example). It should be noted that akey issue related to partnerships with civil societyand the private sector is the need to movetowards broader partnerships with the UNsystem as a whole and not just UNDP.

Notwithstanding the relatively limited activitiesof the UN system in NCCs, a role remains forUNDP to work in partnership with UN agenciesto ensure that the government has access to thebest the UN can offer. The new UNDP StrategicPlan suggests strengthening existing partnershiparrangements, reflected in Memoranda ofUnderstanding with UN partners to ensure apractical division of labour and to createsynergies. Different models of joint programminghave yet to be tried. The UN Country Team in

26 For example, the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs in Saudi Arabia called for UNDP to bring in elements of societyother than government and form a committee with business, women, university professors, NGOs and government tointeract with regularity.

C H A P T E R 4 . S T R A T E G I C P O S I T I O N I N G O F U N D P C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S 3 3

Bahrain, for example, is actively examiningpossibilities for joint programmes amongthemselves and examining opportunities toincrease the role of non-resident agencies.

NCC cluster. A final type of partnership isamong country offices themselves. At present,such partnerships are either informal or limited tooccasional meetings of Resident Representatives.Some cooperation does occur at the operationallevel (for example, staff exchanges betweenoffices), but it is limited. This issue is discussed inmore detail in the next chapter.

4.4 RESOURCE MOBILIZATION ANDPARTNERSHIPS FOR DEVELOPMENTAND HUMANITARIAN AID

Country office involvement in raising resourcesfor the UN system has been ad hoc and purelyadministrative, limited primarily to setting upmeetings for visiting representatives of UNagencies when requested. The country office has also been used at the request of UNDPheadquarters as a conduit for raising voluntarycontributions to UNDP by the host governments.Voluntary contributions have totalled almost $3 million a year in recent years, with contribu-tions from Saudi Arabia ($2 million), Kuwait($600,000), the UAE ($324,000), and Bahrain($56,000).27 The total voluntary contributionsfrom Arab region NCCs exceed the cost of the fiveResident Coordinators/Resident Representatives,who are estimated to cost the organizationaround $200,000 a year each. The resourcemobilization role of the country office forvoluntary contributions is appropriate and hasabsorbed a minimal amount of time of thecountry office; there is no need to revisit thisaspect in future.

Regarding UNDP’s activities with aid institutionsin NCCs, there are ad hoc instances where thecountry office was instrumental in raising resourcesthat were channelled to developing countries. In

the UAE, resource mobilization from NGOs forother countries totalled $16 million. The UAEcountry office has been successful in mobilizingresources for supporting tsunami recovery inIndonesia. In Kuwait, requests to nationalinstitutions to contribute to UN developmentand humanitarian efforts led the Kuwait RedCrescent to donate $3 million to the UN resourcemobilization campaign. And in Saudi Arabia,UNDP has been active and successful in raisingresources for development assistance to othercountries through national agencies. Approximately$10 million was raised in 2006 with limited effortin terms of time spent (the majority directed tothe Occupied Palestinian Territories). TheBahrain country office raised $3 million for aUNDP/government project in the Philippines.UNDP Bahrain was also successful in raisingmore than 150 metric tons of in-kind contributionsfor Lebanon during the crisis of the summer of2006. All these activities were undertaken on anad hoc and reactive basis, since such activities are not viewed to be a central aspect of countryoffice responsibilities.

The above efforts were limited to raising fundsrather than supporting programming interven-tions in which UNDP services could be used toimprove aid administration to other countriesand foster cost-sharing with UNDP projects inother countries. There are potential institution-building possibilities for UNDP in this respectthat need to be defined and explored. Forexample, since countries lend money for politicalreasons (to foster friendships and promotesecurity), UNDP could help them channel aid towards achievement of the MDGs.Subsequently, UNDP could help them measureand advertise the results. This was the basis of theMemorandum of Understanding that UNDPsigned with the African Development Bank in2003. To exploit this potential, institutionalrelationships need to be built. So far, this hasoccurred in only one case in an Arab regionNCC—namely the signing of a Memorandum of

27 Libya has contributed about $90,000 per year to UNICEF in the last ten years.

C H A P T E R 4 . S T R A T E G I C P O S I T I O N I N G O F U N D P C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S3 4

Understanding between UNDP and the IslamicDevelopment Bank in 2006 to “facilitate cooperationbetween the two parties in matters of commoninterest and to establish the arrangement forimplementing the same.” 28

The potential for developing mutually beneficialrelationships with a variety of regional, bilateraland private institutions in all the NCCs that aremembers of the Gulf Cooperation Council(GCC) may be significant, given the increases invarious forms of assistance from these countriesthat are likely to result from rising oil prices.These countries have been involved with aid fora long time and, for the most part, have institutionswith established policies and experience in thatarea. UNDP needs to explore the role it can play ona case-by-case basis. If there is sufficient interestfrom the parties concerned, UNDP involvementcould result in considerable development valuefor both GCC and developing countries.

The situation in Libya is different from that ofthe Gulf State NCCs. Libya is an emergingdonor whose government is keen to have theassistance of the international community,especially the UN system, to help streamline andrationalize its development aid. In this respect,Libya’s situation resembles more the ‘Koreanmodel’ in which the Republic of Korea sought to obtain UNDP assistance to channel its aid to Africa. Four Memoranda of Understandingwere recently signed in Libya between theCommunity of Sahel-Saharan States and FAO,UNESCO, the African Centre for AppliedResearch and Training in Social Development andWHO to obtain their assistance in special areas ofexpertise.29 UNDP has not explored a potentialrole for itself to assist relevant institutions in their

efforts to streamline their aid to Africa, eventhough the UNDP country office has been fullyaware of the possibilities. This is a major lostopportunity for UNDP that was recognized bythe country office that sought headquarterssupport in this area; unfortunately, the requestedassistance was not forthcoming.

4.5 AWARENESS OF UNDP AND KNOWLEDGE OF ITS ROLE AND SERVICES

The NSPRs in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait as wellas in Bahrain found that awareness of UNDPoutside a circle of government officials wassurprisingly limited. Beyond awareness, knowledgeof UNDP’s specific role is also important. Thecountry offices make an attempt to distinguishbetween the political and developmental roles ofthe UN. But NSPR respondents (other thangovernment officials) indicated that there is littleunderstanding of that distinction and thatUNDP is often confused with the political armof the UN. In Libya, the Ministry of Planningnoted the same confusion with respect to the imposition of sanctions. NSPR respondents(other than government officials) as well as theMinistry of Planning in Libya noted that there is a limited understanding (even among govern-ment officials and UNDP partners) aboutUNDP’s role and the role of its sister UNagencies as well as the specific services theseorganizations can offer. The majority of thosewho were aware of UNDP lacked a thoroughknowledge of its mandate, mission, actual orpotential activities or what kind of services it isbest suited to provide. These consistent, pervasiveand strong findings were corroborated by theevaluation team’s field work in the NCCs.

28 In late 2004, a senior mission from UNDP visited Saudi Arabia to hold talks with the Islamic Development Bank and theArab Gulf Programme for United Nations Development Organizations (AGFUND) aimed at further strengthening collaboration. The mission included the Director of UNDP’s Regional Bureau for Europe and the Commonwealth ofIndependent States, the Deputy Director of the Bureau for Resources and Strategic Partnerships and the Deputy Directorof the Regional Bureau for Arab States.

29 For example, with technical assistance from FAO, a broad range of projects are being developed in Africa in agribusinessand agro-pastoral domains under three programmes involving cotton; cereals, fruits and vegetables; and the promotion ofagricultural exports.

C H A P T E R 4 . S T R A T E G I C P O S I T I O N I N G O F U N D P C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S 3 5

This lack of knowledge about UNDP prevailsdespite efforts by several country offices topromote UNDP’s image and advertise its services.It also has a bearing on UNDP’s strategicpositioning and the composition and effectivenessof its programmes. Saudi Arabia is the only countryoffice that has specialized media staff; it alsosponsored the most activities to raise awareness ofUNDP. In addition to recruiting media specialists,the Saudi country office has also recruited twopopular, high-profile Saudi personalities to serve asUNDP Goodwill Ambassadors and participatein UNDP events to create UN(DP) awareness.An example of the latter is an MDG PaintingCompetition (November 2006) among studentsin which girls were invited to create a painting

reflecting each Millennium Development Goal.Certificates and UNDP gift items were given tothe winners. A soccer game in November 2006aimed to raise young boys’ awareness of theMDGs. While Bahrain has no dedicatedcommunications staff, it has recently managed todevelop good relations with local media and hashad extensive coverage of its activities. In Libya,a football match between senior officials of theLibyan Olympic Committee and a team headedby the UN Resident Coordinator was organizedin June 2004 to promote the MDGs.

Box 8 provides a summary of the evaluationteam’s finding regarding the strategic positioningof UNDP country programmes.

RELEVANCE AND RESPONSIVENESS

§ Relevance to national priorities: Country programmes were largely relevant to beneficiaries’ needs; with fewexceptions, they were also closely aligned with national priorities.

§ Relevance to UNDP’s mandate: Country programmes were generally relevant to UNDP’s mandate with theexception of a few large projects that could only be tangentially related to the practice areas under the multi-year funding framework for 2004-2007.

§ Much of the important work of promoting human development in Arab region NCCs comes from projectsfinanced by UNDP, especially those that involve civil society.

§ Responsiveness to national priorities: UNDP responded quickly and well to emerging trends.

PARTNERSHIPS

§ Partnerships with civil society and the private sector have not been broadly developed, though there aresome good examples of success in both areas. These successes do not extend across all five countries, however.

§ Governments have an ambivalent view about UNDP’s direct engagement with civil society and the private sector.

§ UN system partnerships are limited by the small UN presence in the Arab region NCCs; in the past they have beenlimited mostly to UN agency execution. Important UN partnerships have been developed to combat HIV/AIDS andfor advocacy. Opportunities exist for greater joint efforts both with resident and non-resident agencies.

§ Partnerships with national and regional aid agencies and private groups have not been pursued, and occuron an exceptional and ad hoc basis. In Libya, UNDP has not exploited a potential major role for assisting theLibyan authorities, especially through the Community of Sahel-Saharan States, to streamline aid to otherdeveloping countries, especially in Africa.

AWARENESS OF UNDP AND KNOWLEDGE OF ITS ROLE AND SERVICES

§ Awareness and knowledge of UNDP’s role as a development agency is limited outside of direct counterparts.

§ Knowledge and understanding of the services UNDP and other UN agencies can provide is limited in the Arabregion NCCs.

§ Partnerships with the media have not been effective in promoting awareness of UNDP or the services it can offer.

DEVELOPMENT VALUE AND BALANCE OF UNDP’S ACTIVITIES

§ Delivery levels are not a good measure of development value because 1) the relationship between projectbudgets and development value is tenuous; and 2) UNDP’s role is not limited to delivery, but involves otherimportant activities, such as advocacy, knowledge-sharing and partnership-building.

§ UNDP spends relatively too much time on implementation and too little time on the activities not related to delivery.

Box 8. Strategic Positioning of UNDP Country Programmes: Summary Of Key Findings

C H A P T E R 5 . I M P L E M E N T A T I O N O F T H E C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S 3 7

The efficiency with which UNDP programmesare implemented depends partly on issuesinvolving the UNDP country offices as well ashow programmes are administered and financed bythe governments concerned. Following an overviewof country programme budgets and delivery, thischapter looks at the management and adminis-tration of the programme. This is followed by areview of the operational efficiency of UNDPcountry offices. A concluding section deals withaccountability and performance measurement.

5.1 MANAGEMENT OF COUNTRYPROGRAMMES

5.1.1 IMPLEMENTATION MODALITIES

National execution (NEX) has become the norm inall Arab region NCCs in the second programming

cycle, except in Libya, where none of the projectswere implemented under this modality (seeFigure 2). It was only in 2006, under the latestprogramming cycle, that six of the seven newprojects in Libya were implemented under NEX.There has been a significant and sustained moveaway from agency execution towards NEXbetween the first and second programming cyclesin Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. In Kuwait, therewas some back-sliding, but close to three quartersof projects were executed under NEX in thesecond programming cycle.

While national execution has become the norm forall new projects in Arab region NCCs, its applicationdiffers considerably. In Bahrain, the countryoffice is heavily involved in implementation onbehalf of national project partners, while, in

Chapter 5

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COUNTRY PROGRAMMES

Country

Bahrain Kuwait Libya Saudi Arabia United ArabEmirates

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Per

cen

t o

f To

tal P

roje

cts

n First programming cycle n Second programming cycle

Figure 2. Projects Executed under National Execution

C H A P T E R 5 . I M P L E M E N T A T I O N O F T H E C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S3 8

Kuwait, country office involvement is far morelimited. It is unclear how the NEX modality willbe applied in Libya. In an NCC, the governmentnot only pays project overhead of three percent,but also the full cost of the country office. Forthis reason, there is government expectation insome NCCs—as noted in the Bahrain and SaudiArabia NSPRs—that UNDP should do much ofthe project management work.

5.1.2 COUNTRY PROGRAMME BUDGETS AND DELIVERY

Examination of budgets and delivery in thecountry programmes of all five NCCs in the lasttwo programming cycles (as well as in 2005 and2006) invites some interesting observations:

n UNDP has a policy of requiring a minimumdelivery of $10 million per programmingcycle to justify a country presence. Yet severalindicators suggest that this policy is not strictlyadhered to. Saudi Arabia, with average annualdeliveries of $6 million–$7 million, has beenconsistently well above the minimum threshold.The Kuwait country programme was probablybelow the benchmark in the first cycle, butwas well above it in the second with annuallevels above $4 million. Delivery in Libya hasbeen hovering very close to the minimumbenchmark levels in the last two programmingcycles. The Bahrain country programme,with a delivery of $6 million in the first cycleand $5 million in the first four years of thesecond cycle (2003 to 2006), was below the$10 million benchmark. The pressure to raiseand meet delivery levels is a major issue inBahrain and Libya, but is also present tolesser degrees in other Arab region NCCs.

n As mentioned, the Bahrain country programmehad indicative allocations and budgets belowthe benchmark. And though the countryoffice gives emphasis in its discussions withgovernment authorities on the importance ofexpanding the country programme, UNDPformally accepted levels below that thresholdin the last cycle. In Libya, there is also anoverriding emphasis on the importance ofdelivery. However, the evaluation teamobserves that, as a practical matter, compli-

ance to the principle of minimum thresholdso far has not had any perceptible influenceon maintaining a UNDP country presence inthe NCCs in the Arab region. When countryoffices have been closed—in Qatar andOman—this was for reasons unrelated to thesize, composition or delivery levels of thecountry programmes.

In Bahrain, the implementation responsibilitiesof country office staff are time-consuming, andstaff members believe they are far too involved in implementation. On the other hand, benefici-aries responding to the NSPR expected UNDPto undertake these tasks and consider them to bea UNDP obligation as part of the cost-sharingservice fee. Such views were corroborated ininterviews by the evaluation team. The pressure tomeet delivery targets appears to be one reason UNDPhas not questioned its role in implementation,since local capabilities for project implementationare weak. The country office informed theevaluation team that the procedures followed inBahrain are allowed in the new UNDP ResultsManagement Guide, but represent an usuallyheavy involvement in supporting implementation.How the national execution modality is imple-mented in Libya may also be influenced by theneed to meet delivery levels. Meeting delivery targetsis also a factor in country office involvement inproject implementation in other NCCs in theArab region, albeit a less important one.

5.1.3 COUNTRY PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK

The administration of the programme reviewedbelow involves not only issues of efficiency (timeli-ness, etc.) but also project selection, affecting therelevance and responsiveness of projects tonational priorities reviewed in Chapter Four.

Table 7 summarizes the administration andfinancing mechanisms in the five NCCs. Itshows differences between the countries thathave a considerable impact on the selection ofprojects in terms of their alignment to nationalpriorities as well as in the efficiency with whichprojects are implemented. In all NCCs, agreementon the country programme includes a government

C H A P T E R 5 . I M P L E M E N T A T I O N O F T H E C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S 3 9

allocation for that cycle. But only in Kuwait isthis followed by an annual allocation of funds inthe budget of the Ministry of Planning. Centralministries approve projects in Bahrain, Kuwait,Libya (beginning in 2007) and Saudi Arabia, butnot in the UAE. Approval of contracts andexpenditures is also required from centralministries in Bahrain and Kuwait but not in theother countries. This will not be required inLibya under the system now being established.Finally, there is no regular mechanism for UNDPto report to the government on the progress ofprojects beyond their financial aspects or inevaluating them in any NCCs; the few UNDPcountry programme reviews and project evalua-tions that are undertaken are discussed with theconcerned governments.

The above mechanisms have several implications:

n First, the lack of an annual programmingmechanism within which projects are approved

makes the alignment to national prioritiesdifficult. However, project approvals bycentral ministries (Bahrain, Kuwait, Libyaand Saudi Arabia) can overcome thisconstraint with a strong programmingmechanism.

n Second, when the UNDP programme is partof the budget of a central ministry, as inBahrain and Kuwait and as is now proposedin Libya, a UNDP project from the point ofview of the beneficiary government agency isa source of additional resources that are ‘free’.In this framework, while the programme is‘demand-driven’, it is not ‘market driven’.Because the beneficiary does not pay forUNDP services (compared to using, say, aprivate firm) the demand favours UNDPprojects.30 This is not the case in SaudiArabia or the UAE, where programmes areboth demand-driven and market-driven.

Central ministry* Administrationand finance**

Monitoring andevaluation by

UNDPProgramming Project approval***

Bahrain None Yes Tripartite† Minimal

Kuwait Yes Yes Tripartite† None

Libya Planned Yes Two parties‡ Requested

Saudi Arabia None Yes Two parties‡ Requested and planned

United ArabEmirates

None None Two parties‡ None

Ideal approach Yes Yes Two Parties‡ Yes

* Ministry of Finance, Planning or Foreign Affairs (Saudi Arabia)** Mainly approval of contracts and expenditures *** Signature of project document

† Central ministry, beneficiary and UNDP‡ Beneficiary and UNDP

Table 7. Selection and Administration of Projects in Arab Region NCCs

30 This incentive structure also prevails in non-NCC countries where projects represent extra-budgetary resources for therecipient. In non-NCC countries, however, UNDP may have more influence in the formulation of the country programmeand the design of projects because it, rather than a central ministry, is the ultimate financier. In conclusion, the modalitiesof implementation in the Bahrain and Kuwait programmes are comparable to non-NCC countries concerning the financialincentives for the recipient. But they are more onerous with respect to the procurement and disbursement aspects becauseof the involvement of a central ministry.

C H A P T E R 5 . I M P L E M E N T A T I O N O F T H E C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S4 0

n Third, the involvement of a central ministryin approving contracts and expenditures after‘signing-off ’ on a project, as in Bahrain andKuwait, makes implementation of UNDPprojects more onerous than it needs to be,even though UNDP projects may still besimpler to administer than national develop-ment projects.

The compatibility of national execution withgovernment requirements is an issue that wasbrought to the attention of the evaluation team inBahrain and Kuwait. It may also become an issuein Libya once implementation under nationalexecution is under way. National execution inKuwait31 is guided by current country office‘Guidelines’ (August 2002). Administrative andfinancial procedures underlying the UNDPcountry programme are not well understood byeither the Technical Cooperation Unit of theMinistry of Planning or beneficiaries. As a result,there are issues of clarity and consistency withgovernment financial requirements. Frequentchanges in staff, both in UNDP and the Ministryof Planning have not helped, since NEX manualswere changed or re-interpreted. The manuals are now being revised to clearly spell out the

obligations and roles of all parties. Some traininghas been provided in Bahrain and will beprovided in Kuwait once the revised Guidelinesare issued. Training could considerably hastenimplementation and is desirable, especially inLibya where the NEX modality has only beenrecently initiated. Regular training programmesfor all counterparts are also desirable, at least inBahrain, Kuwait and Libya.

5.2 UNDP’S OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY

5.2.1 COUNTRY OFFICE FINANCES

The cash position of the UAE was affected byextraordinary costs in 2005. Despite the move ofthe country office and the change of rentalpayment in arrears to payment in advance, annualexpenditures and income in 2006 returned to abalanced position. Table 8 shows an unusuallylow level of cost-recovery in Libya, compared todelivery levels in all other Arab region NCCs. InLibya, cost-recovery is only 0.23 percent of delivery,compared to 2-3 percent in other countries. Italso shows that the UAE has an unusually highlevel of agency service reimbursement (increasingto $77,415 in 2006) due largely to the influx of

Bahrain Kuwait Libya SaudiArabia

UnitedArab

Emirates

Annual government local officecontribution

695,840 687,300 658,118 1,628,460 927,094

UNDP programme cost-recovery 33,722 76,497 6,007 159,401 81,175

Agency service reimbursement 8,617 13,553 8,419 10,502 48,811

Total income 738,179 777,350 672,544 1,798,363 1,057,080

Administrative expenditures 637,678 806,024 538,172 1,917,470 1,157,548

Income minus expenditures (+/–) 100,501 –28,674 134,372 –119,107 –100,468

Table 8. Country Office Finances (Annual Average 2004–2006, US$)

31 The involvement of the country office in Kuwait under national execution is less extensive than that of Bahrain, where thecountry office normally prepares the progress reports of the implementing agencies.

C H A P T E R 5 . I M P L E M E N T A T I O N O F T H E C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S 4 1

UN agencies into Dubai and related activity insupport of regional emergencies.

5.2.2 MANAGEMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

Several staffing issues were raised with respect tocountry offices in NCCs.32 One was thefrequent rotation in Resident Coordinators/Resident Representatives, especially in Kuwait,which has had three country office heads sincemid-2000, including the current one. This hasnegatively affected the continuity and consis-tency of the country programme—a weaknesshighlighted by respondents to the NSPR. Also ofconcern were Deputy Resident Representatives,for which new positions were approved andincumbents appointed in Kuwait (2006) andLibya (2007); a Deputy Resident Representativeposition was approved for the UAE in 2007. Inall cases, Deputy Resident Representatives have

been given the primary responsibility formanaging the country programmes. Bahrain,whose delivery levels and workload (number ofongoing projects) are lower than all other fourNCCs (Table 9), is now the only country withouta Deputy Resident Representative.

Table 9 also shows the number of staff involvedin country programmes. Relating these to variousmeasures of workload33 reveals some interestingcomparisons. Bahrain has the lowest number ofprojects per staff because of the unusually closeinvolvement of the country office in implementation.It also has the lowest delivery per staff—$185,000or one half that of Libya and one quarter that ofKuwait. Conversely, Kuwait has a high workload(projects per staff ) and the highest delivery perstaff of any Arab region NCC, suggesting that anincrease in staff may be justified—the more so if

Bahrain Kuwait Libya Saudi Arabia United ArabEmirates

Average annual delivery insecond programming cycle

$1,240,000 $4,230,000 $2,590,000 $6,440,000 $3,020,000

Number of ongoing projects 10 17 16 30 17

Number of programme staff * 5 4 5 8 4

Number of programme staff,including Deputy ResidentRepresentatives and ResidentRepresentatives**

5.5 5.5 7.5 9.5 5.5

Ratios

Projects per programme staff 1.82 3.09 2.13 3.16 3.09

Delivery per programme staff $225,455 $769,091 $345,333 $677,895 $549,091

Government local office contri-bution (share of delivery)

56% 16% 25% 25% 31%

Government local office contri-bution per project (US$)

69,584 40,429 41,132 54,282 54,535

* Programme analysts, associates and assistants. Excludes media specialists in Saudi Arabia.** All countries except Bahrain have a Deputy Resident Representative. All of a deputy’s time is assumed to be used for the countryprogramme, unlike that of the Resident Coordinator/Resident Representative, who typically spends only half of his or her time on programming activities.

Table 9. Staff Workloads

32 Details on the financing, staffing and organization of the country offices are contained in the respective country reports,together with pertinent country-specific analyses and recommendations.

33 Programme staff are also involved in activities not related to country programmes that are time consuming. The aboveanalysis assumes that such activities absorb more or less an equivalent amount of time across country offices.

C H A P T E R 5 . I M P L E M E N T A T I O N O F T H E C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S4 2

UNDP’s activities under the 2007-2011 countryprogramme document were to be expanded.High workloads lead staff to focus on what isurgent rather than what is important but time-consuming, such as building relationships andoffering on-site assistance. The comparatively lowlevel of the government’s local office contributionin Kuwait (compared to the number of projectsand delivery levels) suggests that an increase inthis contribution to finance staff increases wouldalso be warranted.

A self-assessment of actual and optimal time usewas filled out by country office staff in Bahrain,Libya and Saudi Arabia. While this was animpressionistic rather than rigorous survey, itsresults were remarkably consistent. In all threecountry offices, staff were unanimous in believingthat too much time was spent on implementation,which detracts from time available to engage inmore upstream activities related to advocacy,regional programmes and resource mobilizationfor the country concerned and other countries.These findings also suggest that the staff fromthese country offices would generally welcomegreater involvement in the substance of projectwork. This need for such substantive involvementwas strongly expressed by government counterpartsas well as the respondents to all three NSPRs.This assessment is shared by the evaluation teamfor all Arab region NCCs.

5.3 AVAILABILITY AND USE OF CORPORATE AND REGIONAL SUPPORT

To the country offices, the NCCs do not appearto be a priority for UNDP headquarters. No seniorUNDP staff visited Saudi Arabia or Libya34 inrecent years, even though senior managementfrom other UN agencies regularly visit all theNCCs in the region. Country office staff suggestthere may be a misconception that these are rich

countries and therefore do not need UNDPsupport. Furthermore, the UNDP RegionalBureau for Arab States is preoccupied with crisiscountries, such as the Iraq, Lebanon, Somaliaand Sudan. Although clearly high-income, NCCsface specific challenges in terms of humandevelopment, including gender equality, care forthe environment and democratic governance,which may not be top government priorities butnonetheless warrant UNDP’s attention.

Subregional Resource Facility for the ArabStates. UNDP’s Subregional Resource Facility(SURF) for the Arab States, based in Beirut, hascontributed to work carried out under UNDPtrust funds, regional programmes and countryprogrammes. Experience with the facility amongNCCs is generally positive (though Bahrain andthe UAE voiced some reservations about timelinessand the suitability of consultants for the countries).Gender and governance were two areas singledout where the quality of the expertise provided bythe SURF was particularly effective. The facilityalso provided good support in the environmentsector in Libya. Improvements in its services arenevertheless warranted and include the need todeepen its information base on consultants tocover their experience (for example, with a ratingsystem) and to broaden the nationality base. TheSURF portal was also found to be very useful.Although the resource facility is often the firstport of call for consultants, there are other options,including UNDP’s knowledge networks, UNagencies, personal contacts and Internet databases.

Regional programmes. The major regionalprogrammes in the Arab States are the ArabHuman Development Reports; Centre for ArabWomen Training and Research (CAWTAR);Programme on Governance in the Arab Region(POGAR); Information and CommunicationsTechnology for Development in the Arab Region(ICTDAR); and the HIV/AIDS RegionalProgramme in the Arab States (HARPAS).

34 Specifically, no high-level visit to Libya by Regional Bureau for Arab States management occurred in the past four yearsin the tenure of the current Resident Coordinator/Resident Representative. The Africa Bureau was invited to send a mission to explore possibilities for aid coordination and assistance with institutions prepared to channel substantialamounts of aid to Africa, but the mission was never carried out.

C H A P T E R 5 . I M P L E M E N T A T I O N O F T H E C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S 4 3

All of these programmes provide importantopportunities for advocacy in sensitive areas andfor launching related national projects. Butparticipation has been limited in all five NCCs,with the notable exception of HARPAS, inwhich all NCCs were actively involved. Noprojects fully funded by the governments (withthe exception of one in Bahrain) deal with AIDSbecause of the extreme sensitivity of the subjectin Arab culture. Nevertheless, UNDP was able touse the vehicle of the regional programme toopen a dialogue that addressed the medical,statistical, public relations, social and religiousdimensions of this topic in all the NCCs.This included Saudi Arabia, among the mostconservative of the Arab region NCCs. Throughthe Arab Human Development Reports, UNDPstrongly supports advocacy for the achievementof human development and the MillenniumDevelopment Goals. Production of global andregional Human Development Reports, in particularthe 2004 Arab Human Development Report, offeredan opportunity to disseminate the knowledgecontained in them but also to produce a variety ofnational reports. The global and regional reportsalso generated a context for engaging UNDP inexamining these issues, thus effectively furtheringthe human development agenda.

In the case of regional programmes other thanHARPAS, country office involvement was eitherpassive and limited or totally absent. This can beascribed to a variety of factors. For example, someregional programmes are not seen by UNDPheadquarters to be directly relevant to NCCs.Moreover, there is a tendency by headquarters todeal directly with the governments concernedrather than through the country office. Bahrainwas formally involved in the other regionalprogrammes in a passive and limited way; Kuwaitand Libya had brief and passive involvementswith CATWAR as did the UAE. Bahrain hasbeen involved in ICTDAR and only the UAEand Bahrain were involved in POGAR.

There are several reasons for this limited partici-pation. The country office is not involved in the

design of regional programmes, which thereforemay not reflect the needs of NCCs. A commonview among country office staff is that UNDPconsiders NCC participation in theseprogrammes of low priority on account of theirwealth and the limited resources of regionalprogrammes. Also, governments are often notaware they exist and the country office plays apassive role in implementation. There have evenbeen instances in which regional programmesplanned in-country events without informing thelocal UNDP country office or the ResidentCoordinator. Funding is also an issue since manyorganizations have liquidity problems that mayprevent their participation. And governments aresometimes reluctant to fund participation of theirnationals ‘on principle’, notwithstanding thesmall amounts involved. Finally, the support ofthe Subregional Resource Facility is critical andwas important in the success of HARPAS.Regional programmes could be used to muchgreater effect to promote activities in sensitiveareas. The highly successful experience withHARPAS, elaborated in Chapter 3, clearly shows there were significant lost opportunities as a result of the non- or limited involvement of NCCs in other regional programmes—especially in ICTDAR, since most NCCs had e-governance projects.

Subregional programmes. Different NCCsparticipate in regional and subregional events.But there is limited evidence of informalsubregional programmes whose design andimplementation is coordinated across the Gulfcountries or with Libya in the same way asregional programmes. There is the potential forsubregional cooperation in addressing intercon-nected issues (such as the environment) orcommon problems (such as stimulating employ-ment creation through the private sector,adapting education to the needs of a globaleconomy or promoting democratic governanceand gender equality). But, in practice, thispotential has not been realized, even thoughResident Representatives in the Arab Statesregion meet at least once a year and also withinregional clusters. In addition, the country offices

C H A P T E R 5 . I M P L E M E N T A T I O N O F T H E C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S4 4

of Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the UAE(which are all member of the Gulf CooperationCouncil) meet more regularly to discuss commonissues and to identify opportunities for coopera-tion. (Libya is oriented more towards Africa thanthe Arab States of the Gulf ). There is goodcoordination among the group, with countryoffices sending staff to other UNDP offices toconduct training or exchange experiences. Therehas also been replication of good ideas andinterventions between the various countryoffices. Kuwait’s adoption of the junior profes-sional officer scheme, following the lead of SaudiArabia, is one example. But all these interactionshave yet to result in even informal subregionalprogrammes, which would require close govern-ment coordination and funding.

Trust funds. All country offices have had accessto UNDP’s Thematic Trust Funds and havegenerally used this opportunity for accessingadditional funds for innovative projects. Kuwaithas been the exception, and the country office hasnot been able to access these resources. Of thesefunds, the Thematic Trust Fund for DemocraticGovernance has been most successfully used,followed by the Thematic Trust Fund forGender. None of the Arab region NCCsimplemented projects financed by the remainingtrust funds (which finance energy, povertyreduction and information and communicationstechnology projects).

5.4 ACCOUNTABILITY AND MEASUREMENT OF PERFORMANCE

The accountability framework in UNDP’sresults-based management system is not orientedto programme countries. The main accountabilityfocus in the country is primarily financial: that is,with UNDP being accountable for the resources

it uses but not for project results. In NCCs,financial accountability as well as accountabilityfor project effectiveness is particularly importantsince governments fund the programmes. Theidea of ‘mutual accountability’ (donors beingaccountable to recipients and vice versa) is acornerstone of the international community’sHarmonization and Alignment Agenda and theParis Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. A newUNDP evaluation policy requires all countries toattach an evaluation plan to the countryprogramme document. However, in an NCCcontext, government endorsement of evaluationsis necessary since it provides funding for them.

There are very few project evaluations in Bahrain(the country office provided three, which hadbeen undertaken in the last ten years) and nooutcome evaluations.35 There have been onlythree project evaluations in Saudi Arabia36 overthe period being examined. And in Kuwait,Libya and the UAE, no evaluation plans werefound in UNDP’s Evaluation Resource Centre(http://erc.undp.org/); nor were any projectevaluations found in any of the three countriesexcept for the Date Palm Research andDevelopment Project in the UAE. A number ofpeople in UNDP and the governmentsinterviewed noted that there is no culture ofevaluation in the NCC governments.Government officials interviewed for the NSPRin Saudi Arabia noted that, for their projects, inno case was an independent third-party evalua-tion intended. Moreover, there was a clear wishfor ‘privacy’ on the part of government institu-tions. Another contributing factor is the fact thatevaluations are almost never included in projectcosts, and separate government approval isrequired to fund evaluations.

Country programme reviews (independent orsemi-independent) are done more frequently, but

35 It should be noted that some Arab region NCC country offices are planning project and outcome evaluations in the nearfuture, but at the time of writing there are very few completed.

36 One of the core functions of a newly established unit in the country office is to support performance measurement, resultsreporting and evaluation—although focus is on UNDP corporate mechanisms and on auditing rather than evaluation.As such, accountability is focused on UNDP and not government.

C H A P T E R 5 . I M P L E M E N T A T I O N O F T H E C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S 4 5

not systematically or always in a fashion that istimely enough to draw lessons for the nextprogramming cycle. Two country programmereviews were done in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia andthe UAE, only one in Bahrain (in 2000) andnone in Libya. The quality of these reviews alsovaries considerably.

Strong requests were made by the centralministries of all NCCs visited by the evaluationteam (except the UAE, which has a decentralizedsystem) for UNDP to provide regular reports onproject results, in addition to financial results,and to monitor and evaluate projects so thatlessons could be drawn for future projects. Thiswas particularly true in Saudi Arabia and Libya.In Saudi Arabia, the Ministry of Foreign Affairsrequested an annual programme review tomonitor progress and assess what can be learned

from ongoing projects. The UNDP countryoffice has taken initial steps to develop aframework that would allow for such a review. InLibya, the Planning Ministry took a similarlystrong view in the context of its new program-ming and monitoring role. These same pointswere made by the Ministry of Planning inKuwait and the Ministry of Finance in Bahrain.

The UN, including UNDP, must remaintransparent and accountable not only for the fundswith which it is entrusted, but also for resultsachieved. However, there is no accountabilityframework that articulates the relative responsi-bilities of UNDP and the government in thecontext of an NCC. Is the accountability ofUNDP different in the case of NCCs than innon-NCC countries since governments pay forUNDP services and may therefore be entitled to

DELIVERY

§ UNDP’s minimum benchmark policy is not strictly adhered to. Bahrain’s delivery in both the cycles beingexamined was below the threshold. Even the delivery planned in the country programme was below thethreshold. In Kuwait, it is also likely that the threshold was not met in the first programming cycle. No countryoffices were closed, however, because of shortfalls in delivery.

§ The pressure to reach the minimum delivery threshold is one reason large projects that are not closely aligned toUNDP’s mandate and national priorities were included in the country programmes of several NCCs. Without suchprojects, delivery in Libya and the UAE would have been below the benchmark.

§ Meeting delivery targets encourages country office staff, especially in Bahrain, to be more involved in the administrativeaspects of implementation than should be necessary under national execution or than they would like. Governmentcounterparts expect UNDP to undertake this work as a quid pro quo for the cost-sharing fees they pay.

COUNTRY PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK

§ The lack of annual programming mechanisms in all NCCs is not conducive to the selection of projects that areclosely aligned to national priorities.

§ Including UNDP-supported projects in the budgets of central ministries, as in Bahrain and Kuwait, provides adistorted incentive for the beneficiary to use UNDP projects.

§ Central ministry approval of contracts and expenditures, in addition to project approval, as in Bahrain and Kuwait,makes implementation of UNDP-supported projects more onerous than it needs to be.

§ There are problems with government understanding of national execution and insufficient training for allgovernment counterparts, at least in Bahrain, Kuwait and Libya.

UNDP OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY

§ Efficiency of UNDP: The country offices are too heavily involved in implementation, primarily because of govern-ment perception that this is UNDP’s responsibility, but also, in some countries, to meet delivery targets.

§ Support: The Subregional Resource Facility for the Arab States provides adequate support in its practice areas.Thequality of consultants is of key importance, particularly in NCCs where the government can afford to contract privatesector organizations. Participation in regional programmes was limited mostly to HARPAS and could be strengthened.

§ There is no framework that defines the mutual accountabilities of UNDP and the government or programmes tomonitor the progress of project content. Evaluations have been very limited.

Box 9. Implementation of UNDP Country Programmes: Summary Of Key Findings

C H A P T E R 5 . I M P L E M E N T A T I O N O F T H E C O U N T R Y P R O G R A M M E S4 6

have more of a say in the type, frequency andcontent of reports from UNDP? For example,should the government or UNDP determinewhen evaluations are undertaken, covering whichprojects and by whom (UNDP or an independ-ent contractor)? And who should manage theseevaluations? There was a noticeable lack of clarityin answering such questions in all the NCCs. Inthe absence of general guidelines from UNDPheadquarters on these issues, an understandingneeds to be reached with the governments

concerned. Agreements are needed on standardreporting and evaluation requirements as well asproviding timely financial reports. Commonreporting formats, frequency and responsibilitiesall need to be agreed upon with the governmentsconcerned within annual programmes. Progressneeds to be reviewed and outstanding issuesclarified, preferably on a quarterly basis.

Box 9 summarizes the findings related to theimplementation of UNDP country programmes.

C H A P T E R 6 . C O N C L U S I O N S A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S 4 7

UNDP’s important contributions to the develop-ment challenges faced by Arab region NCCshave been described and analysed in this report.Based on the views of government counterparts,current and potential beneficiaries and respondentsto the NSPRs, this evaluation sees a clear matchbetween the emerging needs of Arab regionNCCs and UNDP’s mandate and capabilities.

6.1 MAIN CONCLUSIONS

The overarching conclusion of this report is as follows:

There is strong justification for continued andstrengthened UNDP presence in the NCCs ofthe Arab region. All five countries strongly desirethe presence of UNDP, which they see as theembodiment of the UN system and a windowand conduit to the international arena. In fact,in the view of stakeholders, UNDP’s countrypresence and value-added has more intrinsicworth than the contribution of its activities tothe countries’ development challenges.

More specific conclusions below elaborate howthis presence can be strengthened.

1. In order to meet the expectations of the NCCpartners in the Arab region, UNDP needs tochange the way it does business. UNDP’sreform process over the last decade—which hasled to a new practice focus, greater emphasis on development effectiveness and nationalownership and reliance on a corporate businessmodel—has not been reflected sufficiently in thecountry programmes and country office culturesof Arab region NCCs. National ownership is astrong feature of these programmes, but it is

largely the result of government financing.Business as usual in an NCC context meansaccepting a situation that limits the potential toadd significant development value to partnercountries or to strongly promote the humandevelopment agenda. In the rapidly changingenvironment in which NCCs now find themselves,UNDP needs to respond to opportunities formore effective engagement, recognizing thatbusiness as usual could result in increasedmarginalization and reduced significance of itsactivities in terms of their human developmentobjectives. This is especially true in the context ofincreased private sector competition in providingthe kinds of technical assistance that UNDP isknown for.

2. The special conditions prevailing in Arabregion NCCs—namely the demand-drivennature of their programmes and a limited UNfield presence—argue for greater flexibility of UNDP activities in these countries. Thedevelopment challenges that NCCs face can becompared to those of middle-income countriesthat have not yet reached NCC status, or, indeed,to those of some less-developed countries.Poverty is less prevalent, but human developmentneeds and some economic and social prioritiesare comparable. The different types of assistancethat UNDP is asked to provide are also similar.For example, tackling gender issues may requiremore advocacy; reducing poverty may require morepolicy and advisory assistance; and addressingenvironmental issues may require more technicalsupport. Thus, both the challenges and types ofassistance required by the NCCs fit well withinUNDP’s core mandate and competencies asarticulated in the latest UNDP Strategic Plan. Atthe same time, and due partly to the fact that

Chapter 6

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

C H A P T E R 6 . C O N C L U S I O N S A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S4 8

programmes are government funded and demand-driven, UNDP is frequently called upon to supportor facilitate support in areas outside its mandate.This happens to a greater extent in NCCs than inother programme countries, even though theemphasis of the Strategic Plan is on focusinginterventions in areas where the organization hasa clear mandate and comparative advantage.

Another factor affecting UNDP’s role in Arabregion NCCs is the limited presence of UNagencies in these countries. UNDP has thereforebecome an important conduit for accessing thespecialized expertise of sister agencies. It must beprepared to play the role of facilitator-managerwith respect to the UN system as well as being adirect provider of technical inputs in its areas ofcore competency. It must also be prepared torespond to the demands of NCCs with a gooddeal of flexibility. That said, governments tend tohave an unrealistic expectation of the role thatUNDP can play in projects involving UN specializedagencies. Typically, they believe that UNDP canand should have more than a coordinator-cum-manager role in ensuring that needed technicalinputs are forthcoming from the UN system.

Though UNDP should respond to the broadrange of demands of national governmentsthrough partnerships with other UN agencies, itneeds to keep two things in mind. First, itscontribution in the partnership needs to go beyondsimply facilitating and managing the intervention.It needs to ensure that the intervention incorpo-rates adequate capacity-building and partnershipdevelopment to maximize its contribution tohuman development. Second, in cases whereUNDP undertakes an intervention that is not inpartnership with other UN agencies (or otherpotential partners with the relevant expertise), itshould ensure that this intervention is within itsown areas of competence (identified not justglobally but also at the country level).

3. UNDP has not sufficiently exploited thepotential for greater partnership development tofurther the quality and depth of its interventions.The environment for developing partnerships isdifferent in NCCs than other programme countries

in that there tends to be less competition fromother donors and more from the private sector. Insome Arab region NCCs, private-sector firmscan be found offering upstream advisory servicesthat UNDP needs to match in terms of qualityand speed of engagement. There are also moreopportunities for partnership with national andregional aid organizations in the NCCs of theArab region. Finally, partnerships betweenUNDP and the UN system need to be developedin the context of the relatively limited UNpresence and programmes in NCCs.

There is great potential for expanding varioustypes of partnerships:

n Partnerships with civil society and the privatesector alone can be useful, but, in certaincircumstances, they can be made stronger ifthe government is also involved. Facilitatingthe access of civil society and the privatesector to government is as important forpromoting human development as UNDPdeveloping bilateral partnerships by itself.Increased partnership with the private sectoris important since the sector has animportant role in addressing many of thedevelopment challenges faced by the NCCs,such as creating jobs and addressing environ-mental concerns.

n There is large untapped potential for UNDPin all Arab region NCCs, especially in Libya,to play a role in providing programmaticassistance to a variety of regional, bilateraland private institutions providing aid andhumanitarian assistance to developingcountries. Expanding such partnershipsneeds to be actively explored. At the sametime, it is important that efforts to supportsuch organizations be viewed as a means toproviding effective aid and not as a means for resource mobilization for UNDPprogrammes in other countries.

n With respect to fostering partnerships withthe UN system, several conclusions emerge:

• Since the priority needs of governmentsgo beyond the core practice areas ofUNDP, UNDP has a role to play in

C H A P T E R 6 . C O N C L U S I O N S A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S 4 9

ensuring that the government has fullaccess to the UN system in addressingthese needs. The best modalities fordoing so may differ among countries. Inthe larger programme countries (forexample, Saudi Arabia) the workloadmay be sufficient for an appropriateagency to establish a presence in thecountry. In others (such as Bahrain), thismay not be possible. In such circum-stances, the UN Development Groupsuggests the promotion of hostingarrangements, as practised in Libya.

• There are also opportunities for jointprogramming (for example, with UNDPacting as an administrative agent). Thisis especially true in areas where UNDPaddresses horizontal aspects of capacity-building (that is, those areas common toall government agencies that it can linkto other efforts, such as e-governance,strategy development and planning), andthe UN agency addresses the verticalissues that relate specifically to itstechnical skills and the technical needs ofthe government agency.

• Such coordination would be facilitatedby a government allocation that wouldcover the costs not only of UNDP’s share in the joint programme, but that ofthe UN agency. Such an allocation to the Resident Coordinator to cover UNinterventions should be considered whereappropriate and where strongly supportedby the government. This may be done inparallel to direct UN agency allocationswhere the activities are large enough towarrant a separate programme andrepresentation (such as the FAO in SaudiArabia or Libya). If some sort of deliverythreshold is retained, then the broaderallocation suggested above (to otheragencies involved in joint programmes orhosted by UNDP) should be used as anindicator rather than UNDP delivery alone.

4. Awareness of UNDP and knowledge aboutits role is only known in general terms.Nevertheless, there are high expectations as to

the extent and depth of UNDP’s technicalcapabilities. Knowledge of the specific substan-tive contributions and the various servicesUNDP can provide is limited. Existing andpotential stakeholders tend to have only a partialunderstanding of UNDP’s relative advantage,which limits the organization in leveraging its full role. UNDP has not defined with itscounterparts (central government and prospectivebeneficiaries) in sufficiently specific terms whereits comparative advantage lies vis-à-vis theprivate sector and other UN agencies. The mediacan play a stronger role in fostering an awarenessof UNDP and an understanding of its capabili-ties; the media can also be used to greater effectto foster partnerships with civil society and theprivate sector.

5. Some capacity-building has occurred. But tofurther UNDP’s catalytic impact and leverage,more and better focus on capacity-building(and other aspects of sustainability as well asreplicability) are paramount in all aspects ofUNDP’s country programmes. The record oncapacity-building in all countries has been mixed.But all concerned—central ministries, beneficiariesand respondents to NSPRs—were unanimous instrongly urging a much strengthened UNDP rolein this respect. While the need for greatercapacity-building is universally recognized,realities on the ground during project executionoften prevent it from happening. Typically,effective capacity-building becomes displaced bythe pressures of ‘doing’ in response to beneficiaryneeds for quick results.

6. Better programming, implementationmanagement and evaluation by UNDP in thespecific context of NCCs can improve theefficiency of its country programmes. ChapterFour draws important conclusions that couldincrease the relevance of projects to nationalpriorities as well as the efficiency of the countryprogrammes through the following ‘ideal system’:1) a central focal ministry needs to be involved inproject approvals, reviewed in the context of anannual programme related to national priorities;2) funds should preferably come from a central

C H A P T E R 6 . C O N C L U S I O N S A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S5 0

source of the budgets of a beneficiary ministry oragency; and 3) implementation (contract approvalsand authorization of expenditures) should bemanaged by the beneficiary agency and UNDPwithout involvement of a central ministry. Theadministration of the programme in Libya,37

which is in a transition stage, could evolve intosuch an ideal system. The programmes for theUAE and Saudi Arabia would benefit fromstronger central programming and projectapproval role on the part of central ministries,while those in Bahrain38 and Kuwait wouldbenefit by moving from a tripartite to a simplifieddual modality in which contract and expenditureapprovals are made solely by the beneficiary andUNDP. In all NCCs, UNDP needs to presentregular progress reports on the content of projectsto a central ministry and agree on an evaluationprogramme from which lessons can be drawn andapplied to future projects.

All types of evaluations have been very limited in NCCs. In principle, UNDP should be heldaccountable by all programme country govern-ments, whether they pay for the programme ornot. But, in practice, the issue of financingevaluations is very important since governmentswith an ambivalent attitude may not be willing tofund these activities. Country offices now have toattach an evaluation plan to their new countryprogramme documents, which begs the questionof how these plans will be funded.

7. The majority of projects funded primarilyfrom non-government sources (UNDP,ThematicTrust Funds, regional programmes, etc.)seemed to be highly successful in generatinginterest and furthering dialogue in sensitiveareas. These important and low-cost activitieswere used to respond to emerging political andsocial developments in sensitive areas of UNDP’smandate, including gender equality, combatingHIV/AIDS and the promotion of political

reform. In comparison with government-fundedprojects, they were used to good effect for upstreamadvocacy. They were also highly effective inachieving their results, partly because UNDP wasable to make a substantive contribution. In thisway, UNDP’s value-added was maximized.Funds were fully disbursed on time, and theseprojects had a better record on both effectivenessand efficiency than the average project in countryprogrammes. In short, they proved to be excellentinstruments for promoting human development,albeit in a limited and ad hoc manner in view ofthe limited resources available for such activitiesand the governments’ ambivalence towardsfunding such activities.

8. UNDP’s policy of requiring a minimumdelivery of $10 million per programming cycleto justify a country presence is questionableand needs to be revisited in NCCs. This policy,which is not strictly adhered to, has encouragedthe inclusion of large projects only tangentiallyrelated to national priorities in several NCCs. Ithas also encouraged some country offices to bemore involved in implementation than isdesirable. Delivery levels are not a good measureof potential development value because 1) therelationship between project amounts anddevelopment value is tenuous; and 2) UNDP isinvolved in important existing and potentialactivities that add development value withoutbeing included in delivery.

A move away from the current threshold can beexpected to have some beneficial consequences,but it also entails some risks. In the short term:1) it would lead to less pressure to include largeprojects not related to national priorities whereUNDP’s value-added is marginal at best; and 2) the country offices would be encouraged toresist the request of beneficiaries to be moreinvolved in supervision of national executionthan is the case in NEX in non-NCC countries.

37 For this to happen, the staffing of the Technical Cooperation Unit in the Ministry of Planning would have to be signif-icantly strengthened and procedures that define the ministry’s role in programming implemented.

38 The programming function in the Ministry of Finance in Bahrain would need to be strengthened, but with no changein responsibilities for project approvals.

C H A P T E R 6 . C O N C L U S I O N S A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S 5 1

Staff would thus be able to devote more time toactivities that cost little—such as advocacy andpartnership development. The net result of theabove could well be a programme that has ahigher development outcome, even if deliverylevels are lower. In the longer term, the impact of UNDP’s enhanced value-added that wouldresult from UNDP doing what it does bestshould lead to an increased demand for UNDPservices. This would increase both delivery levelsand development impact.

9. The capabilities of country offices in NCCsare insufficient to respond to the broader andmore substantive agenda advocated by thisevaluation. Hence there is a strong need toaugment the substantive and technical supportfrom the regional centre and UNDP head-quarters, and to draw from other modalities.While it is clear from the feedback received bythe evaluation team that country offices have notbeen sufficiently involved in the substance ofproject work, it is not clear why this has been thecase. Are resources being diverted towardsimplementation? Or, are there deficiencies instaff capabilities or training or in managementstyle or systems? A diagnosis of the constraintswas not made by the evaluation team.

There is a perception in country offices and thecentral ministries that NCCs are not given thesame attention as other countries. And thereappears to be a ‘disconnect in spirit’ betweenUNDP headquarters and the country offices ofNCCs in terms of their integration into the newstrategic and policy directions into which UNDPis moving. For example, at the strategic level,the Regional Bureau for Arab States has notexplicitly dealt with such issues as to how the newcorporate Strategic Plan applies to NCCs. At theoperational level, the specific needs of NCCs interms of regional programmes or technicalsupport from the Subregional Resource Facilityhave not been sufficiently defined or accommo-dated. Nor are Arab region NCCs included in theresource mobilization programmes of UNDP’sBureau for Resources and Strategic Partnershipsin the same manner as OECD donor countries.

6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

The major recommendations of this evaluationare based on the overarching proposition,strongly articulated by all the Arab region NCCs,that UNDP can be an important player anduseful partner in helping these countries addresstheir development challenges. The recommenda-tions below are grouped into four interdependentclusters. They list the major changes at thestrategic, corporate, programmatic and organiza-tional levels needed to strengthen the impact ofUNDP’s activities in helping these countiesaddress their development challenges and engagewith the international development community.

6.2.1 RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE STRATEGIC LEVEL

1. Promote a new relationship between UNDPand the Arab region NCCs at the corporatelevel. This relationship, which will requirestrong commitment on the part of UNDPheadquarters, to should move away from thetraditional development agency/client relation-ship to one of full and equal partnership at boththe strategic/policy and programmatic levels.This partnership will be based on the principlesof transparency, openness, mutual accountabilityand respect. Through consultation and dialogueit should redefine UNDP’s role and strategy inthe NCC context and develop a commonunderstanding and set of approaches fortechnical cooperation.

The principles of partnership will recognize andbe guided by the following

n The acceptance by UNDP that governmentswill only include in the country programmesactivities that they believe are priorities forthem. Government funding drives ownership,but demands from the national side need tobe moderated and discussed openly to strivetowards an optimal alignment. Governmentsare receptive to an open discussion of their priori-ties, and the alignment of country programmesto national priorities can be shaped throughan open dialogue with UNDP.

C H A P T E R 6 . C O N C L U S I O N S A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S5 2

n UNDP’s mandate and national priorities arelargely congruent. As a result, UNDP canmore fully exploit its role in supporting thedevelopment of national capacity, brokeringknowledge, and promoting South-Southcooperation and the transfer of technology.UNDP’s primary partners are nationalgovernments, but this partnership can besupplemented by working with and leveragingpartnerships with other actors, in particularcivil society and the private sector, not only in the implementation of key aspects of thecountry programmes but also, and importantly,in the formulation of these programmes.

n The match and balance between nationalpriorities and UNDP’s mandate needs to beassessed in a wider context, with a degree offlexibility that recognizes UNDP’s strongrole in NCCs as a window for accessing thediverse expertise in the UN system and alsodrawing on complementary inputs from its regional and global programmes. UNDPcountry offices should draw on complementaryinputs from its regional and global programmes.The expertise (core competencies) andcomparative advantage of UNDP lie inparticular thematic areas where it can play a strong role in promoting human develop-ment and its core approaches such as nationalownership, capacity development, knowledgetransfer, gender equality and south-southcooperation. At the same time, it shouldstand ready to assist in its role as the gatewayto the United Nations system—also seekingto add as much value as it can through theapproaches listed above.

n UNDP’s flexibility should apply not only tothe identification of areas of UNDP engage-ment and the design of country programmes,but also in implementation—through greateradaptation to the national administrativeprocesses of NCCs. Within a strengthenedpartnership, the principle of mutual account-ability needs to be reinforced.

6.2.2 RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE CORPORATE LEVEL

2. Revisit UNDP’s policy of requiring aminimum delivery threshold to justify a countryoffice presence. In addition, develop specificguidelines on the application of existingUNDP policies to NCCs. The currentminimum threshold for delivery that is appliedequally to all countries should be replaced withcountry-specific qualitative criteria for justifyingUNDP’s presence. From 2010, most countriessending country programmes to the UNDPExecutive Board will have programme documentsaccompanied by an Assessment of DevelopmentResults (ADR). This independent evaluation ofUNDP’s contribution to development in aparticular country represents an appropriate toolfor making a qualitative assessment of theviability of maintaining a country office. Criterianeed to be drawn up to allow the ADR to makesuch a judgement and to identify the need toenter into discussion with the host countrygovernment on reform of the programme orother options, including closure of a countryoffice or managing it from another country.

3. Develop guidelines in a number of areas thatemanate from the demand-driven nature ofNCC programmes. The evaluation identified anumber of gaps in UNDP’s policies and itsguidelines for NCCs, which require specialinterpretation. Therefore, UNDP’s futurepolicy on middle-income and net-contributorcountries should consider incorporating thefollowing issues:

n The flexibility with which UNDP canengage in an environment where much of thedemand from NCCs goes beyond UNDP’spractice areas.

n The application of UN reform efforts toNCCs in a context where governments fundboth the UNDP programme and those ofspecialized agencies.

n Accountability for monitoring and evaluationwhen these activities are funded by governments.

C H A P T E R 6 . C O N C L U S I O N S A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S 5 3

6.2.3 RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE PROGRAMMATIC LEVEL

4. Strengthen the relationship and interactionbetween the central services/regional bureauxat UNDP headquarters and country offices inNCCs in the Arab region. The objective wouldbe to align activities of these offices moreclosely with UNDP’s evolving strategies andpolicies and to be able to respond more forcefullyto the special conditions they present. A closerdialogue should be encouraged between theRegional Bureau for Arab States and the NCCcountry offices, at which government attendanceshould be encouraged. Initially, such dialoguescould be held through regular bi-annualmeetings, at the minimum. As a first step, theRegional Bureau for Arab States should establisha subregional committee to redefine UNDP’s roleand partnership strategy in Arab region NCCs.The committee should seek to arrive at acommon understanding of how activities in thesecountries should be approached, and include issuesrelated to both programming and management.Moreover, if a new approach is to be adopted inthe region, then the Regional Bureau will have tocommit considerably more resources—financialand human—to the region in the short term tosupport the transition. The Regional Bureau forArab States should also explore opportunities forfurther intra-NCC partnerships. These couldinclude events addressing mutual concerns, thesharing of lessons, and products such as jointassessments related to common challenges (suchas knowledge transfer and capacity-building).

5. Explore and develop partnerships withpublic and private aid agencies in Arab regionNCCs. UNDP headquarters should decide onwhether this role should be formally added to the responsibilities of Resident Coordinators/Resident Representatives in Arab region NCCs.If so, the Regional Bureau for Arab States and theBureau for Resources and Strategic Partnershipsshould help country offices develop country-based strategies. In addition, it would benecessary to build technical capacity as appropriatein each country office to respond to the demandsof this new responsibility.

6. Strengthen the UN development system tobetter respond to the more flexible approachbeing advocated for NCCs. The UN systempartnership in the unique context of NCCs—government funding of the programme andlimited UN presence—needs to be strengthened.Options involving single budgets for the UN system and appropriate models of jointprogramming need to be explored within the UN and with the governments concerned. TheRegional Bureau for Arab States and the UNDevelopment Group should work together toexplore and assess the options. This initiativecould be followed by a pilot project in an NCCcountry. The unequivocal endorsement of thegovernment is critical for the success of such apilot project. Also, in view of UNDP’s enhancedUN coordination role, it would be necessary toincrease the Resident Coordinator’s budget.Moreover, to facilitate optimal utilization of theUN by the national government, there needs tobe greater awareness about what UNDP, and thebroader UN system, has to offer and howcountries can access it.

6.2.4 RECOMMENDATIONS AT THEOPERATIONAL LEVEL

7. Improve the system of country programmedesign and management in line with the newprinciples of partnership between UNDP andthe Arab region NCCs defined above. Theprogramming function exercised by centralministries in regards to UNDP country programmesneeds to be strengthened in all Arab regionNCCs. A framework needs to be agreed uponbetween the governments concerned and theUNDP country office whereby project selectionwould be better aligned to national priorities.Mechanisms to strengthen harmonization ofUNDP’s systems for management and imple-mentation of activities with national systemsneed to be established and the national executionsystem revised accordingly. Mutual accountabilityof UNDP and the government for monitoringand evaluation needs to be clarified in all NCCs.The UNDP country office also needs to presentregular progress reports on the content of projects aswell as monitoring reports to a central ministry.

C H A P T E R 6 . C O N C L U S I O N S A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S5 4

An annual evaluation programme from whichlessons can be drawn and applied to future projectsneeds to be agreed upon and implemented.

8. Strengthen the capacity of the countryoffices to increase UNDP’s contribution to thedevelopment effectiveness of its activities inArab region NCCs and implement the newpartnership envisaged above. An assessment ofthe capabilities of the country offices to becomemore involved in the substance of work is timely.This assessment should lead to a strategy andplan to strengthen these capabilities in the light

of the work programme for the next three to fiveyears, and include the need for support fromUNDP headquarters and the subregional office.For many country offices, this will likely requireintensive staff training in line with the humanresource learning strategy of the UNDP StrategicPlan. Equally important is the need to developprocesses across the project cycle—from designto evaluation—that encourage substantive inputsand a focus on capacity-building, sustainabilityand replicability of projects. Needless to say, allthis will provide a challenge for professionalleadership in the management of country offices.

A N N E X 1 . T E R M S O F R E F E R E N C E 5 5

1. CONTEXT

The evaluation is being undertaken within thecontext of UNDP’s policies and practices towardsNCCs as well as three important global factorsrelated to aid, the UN and UNDP respectively:

n The changing global aid environment andefforts towards increasing aid effectiveness

n The increasing pace of UN reform and themove towards greater harmonisation of efforts

n The evolving UNDP business model andspecifically the development of the newUNDP Strategic Plan for 2008-11

1.1 UNDP AND NET CONTRIBUTOR COUNTRIES

For UNDP a Net Contributor Country (NCC)is a programme country with 1997 GNI percapita above US$4,700 per year. All programmecountries, including the NCCs are required toprepare a Country Programme (CP) for approvalby the UNDP Executive Board1 and althoughNCCs may receive core funds from UNDP, thefunds must be reimbursed.2 UNDP is nowworking in more than thirty NCCs worldwide.

Apart from these resource allocation issues,3

UNDP has virtually no specific policies for dealing

with NCCs either at a corporate or a regional level.An internal review of UNDP’s role in NCCs andMiddle-Income Countries (MICs) carried in 2003provided no definitive conclusion or decisions otherthan to continue with the status quo. However,the review found that the role of UNDP inNCCs and MICs was reported by all regions atthe time to be a major issue in need of attention.A recent UNDP Internal Review of the 2004-2007 Programming Arrangements noted that itis unlikely that there will be any major change tothe status of NCCs in the next programmingcycle. However, in light of the questions thathave been raised, the UNDP policy on andfunding of NCCs should be re-assessed for futureprogramming cycles.

Since UNDP’s programmes in the NCCs arefunded by the host countries the situation createsan atypical dynamic in the relationship betweenthe agency and the host country. With the hostgovernment funding the program, this means thatthe programme is almost exclusively demand-driven suggesting that some of the UNDPcountry programme activities could cover areasthat are not central to UNDP’s five practice areas.

The implications of this arrangement haveprompted discussion of how UNDP can fulfil its

Annex 1

TERMS OF REFERENCESTRATEGIC EVALUATION OF THE ROLE OF UNDP IN THENETCONTRIBUTOR COUNTRIES OF THE ARAB REGION

1 When circumstances prevent the preparation or approval of a CP, Executive Board may authorize the Administrator toapprove projects on a case-by-case basis. Such circumstances are normally a crisis situation.

2 Target for Resource Assignment from the Core (TRAC 1) funds, but the funds must be reimbursed. NCCs do not normally receive TRAC 2 funds. The Associate Administrator may approve an advance authorization of TRACresources to an NCC on an exceptional basis. Countries graduating the NCC status have a three-year grace period during which time they can receive core resources and a reducing level.

3 Given in Executive Board decision 99/24 ‘Net Contributor and Middle-Income Countries – Towards a Corporate Strategy’ internal discussion paper, Bureau of

Management, January 2003

A N N E X 1 . T E R M S O F R E F E R E N C E5 6

mandate in influencing host countries to movetowards the fulfilment of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals and the UN’s other normativegoals given the level of development, specificcapacities, and the financial strength that exists in these countries. This has in turn, prompteddiscussion of what UNDP’s future role should bein the NCCs.

1.1 THE REGIONAL CONTEXT5

The four Gulf States have experienced an acceleratedpace of modernization and development over the last three to four decades, with large-scaleinfrastructure projects and substantial subsidiesfor many social benefits (i.e. in health, education,water and electricity) funded from oil revenues.In Libya too, sizeable oil wealth has supportedcomfortable living standards for the population.All the countries are now considered “high income”by the World Bank apart from Libya which is inthe “upper middle income” category.

The economies of NCCs in the Arab Regionbeing based on oil exports all show common

economic and social characteristics. All countriesenjoyed high levels of economic growth whichhas accelerated substantially in recent years withthe increase in oil prices; they have a high rate ofpopulation growth but rely increasingly onmigrant labour in the private sector especially inconstruction and services; youth unemployment isa major issue; generous social subsidies are unsustain-able; environmental issues especially related to waterare prevalent; and democratic governance andgender empowerment present difficult challenges.Absolute poverty as defined in the MDGs (lessthan $1 per day) is virtually non-existent in theGulf States and is limited in Saudi Arabia wherethe bench-mark for absolute poverty was raisedto $2 per day. (Information about absolute povertyin Libya to be collected during scoping mission). Butthe other development challenges faced by thesecountries are especially important in the contextof the fundamental values established in the 2000UN Millennium Declaration.

Table 2 indicates the Human Development Index(HDI) rankings in each country and compares it

Country Population (millions) Gross domestic product per capita

(PPP US$)

% GDP from oil

Bahrain 0.7 20,800 30

Kuwait 2.6 19.400 50

Libya 5.7 7,600 30

Saudi Arabia 24.0 13,800 40

United Arab Emirates 4.3 24,100 28

Middle human development 4,900

High human development 26,600

Source: Population, GDP per Capita, Internet - UNDP HDR 2006; GDP from Oil - various

Table 1. Basic Indicators for NCCs in the Arab Region (2004)

5 At this stage data is collected from a single source to ensure consistency across the region. This may mean that it is notthe latest available or even the most accurate and efforts will be made to ensure that the latest and most accurate data iscollected from local sources during the evaluation process.

A N N E X 1 . T E R M S O F R E F E R E N C E 5 7

to the rankings for GDP per capita and the Gender-related Development Index (GDI). It indicatesthat the high income levels hide lower humandevelopment and gender-related levels. The gapbetween GDP per capita and HDI rankings aresignificant in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and UAE.At the same time Saudi Arabia shows a significantgap between HDI and GDI rankings.

While the countries are in the medium or highhuman development category they recognise thatthey still face some important economic and humandevelopment problems. The intensity of theseproblems differs from country to country buttheir economic and social development prioritiesinclude many common characteristics:

n Efficient diversification of their economies awayfrom oil-based activities through private sectordevelopment and privatization;

n Streamlining the education systems and ration-alizing immigration policies to encourage the employment of nationals especially in theprivate sector;

n Increasing the efficiency of public adminis-tration and the public sector through bettertransparency and efficiency (e-governanceand ITC);

n Developing and implementing sustainableenvironmental policies;

n Rationalizing and improving the sustainabilityof subsidies for social services;

n Promoting gender equality; and

n Improving transparency/governance in publicsector institutions, government and Parliament.

Last but not least, the NCCs of the Arab region—especially Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the UAE—have a long history of providing generous levelsof development aid through national, bilateraland multilateral channels.

2. PURPOSE AND SCOPE

UNDP plays a significant role in the Arab regioncovering nearly twenty countries and territories.Within the context described above, the EvaluationOffice (EO) of the UNDP will be conducting anindependent evaluation of UNDP’s role in theNCC countries of the Arab region. Five countrieswithin the UNDP Regional Bureau for ArabStates (RBAS) have been identified for participa-tion in this cluster evaluation:

n The Kingdom of Bahrain

n The State of Kuwait

n The Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya

Country Human DevelopmentIndex rank

(out of 177)

Human development

category

GDP per capita rank –

HDI rank

HDI rank – GDI rank

Bahrain 39 High -10 -3

Kuwait 33 High 2 -1

Libya 64 Medium 7 n/a

Saudi Arabia 76 Medium -31 -10

United Arab Emirates 49 High -25 0

Source: UNDP HDR 2006

Table 2. Human development Indicators for NCCs in the Arab Region (2004)

A N N E X 1 . T E R M S O F R E F E R E N C E5 8

n The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

n The United Arab Emirates

Evaluations either assess UNDP’s strategic policiesor involve an assessment of development resultsof UNDP programs and activities in terms oftheir relevance, performance and efficiency. Thisevaluation includes features of both types ofevaluation. Its primary objectives are forwardlooking learning objectives:

(1) At the global and regional levels to contributeto the development of UNDP’s corporateand regional strategies and policies related toNCCs; and

(2) At the country level to evaluate and helpimprove UNDP’s strategic positioning in relationto national priorities and in co-ordinationwith other partners.

To reach conclusions in both respects the evaluationwill also review:

(3) the performance of UNDP’s activities at thecountry level; and

(4) efficiency of UNDP’s programs and activities

The evaluation will thus contribute to UNDP’saccountability to the Executive Board and to theArab Region NCC countries themselves.However, the primacy of the first two objectivesmeans that the last two objectives will not be

treated in a comprehensive and exhaustivemanner: instead they will be dealt with to theextent they are germane to reaching conclusionswith respect to the first two objectives.

The evaluation will cover the period of the lasttwo programming cycles6 for each country,approximately eight or nine years with moreemphasis being given to the latest programmingcycle. Since this will be a forward looking,strategic evaluation, the main focus will be onrecommendations common to all five of thecountries which will feed into corporate strategyand policy development. The evaluation willcomplement earlier examination of NCC issuesbut will add a regional dimension and, mostimportantly, will obtain national perspectives onthese issues in addition to those of UNDP andthe UN family.

3. EVALUATION CRITERIA AND KEY EVALUATION QUESTIONS

As the overall approach evolved it becamepossible to identify the evaluation criteria and keyevaluation questions. The basis for identifyingthe appropriate evaluation criteria at the countrylevel comes from the DAC criteria, namely,relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact andsustainability but these have been adapted to thespecific context and objectives of the evaluation.Table 3 indicates the criteria for evaluating

UNDP policies and practices towardsNCCs

UNDP activities at the country level

Strategic positioning

Performance Management and operations

§ Appropriateness§ Coherence

§ Relevance§ Responsiveness§ Balance§ Partnerships§ Development Value

§ Effectiveness§ Sustainability

§ Efficiency § Support

Table 3. Evaluation criteria

6 Country Cooperation Frameworks (CCF) or Country Program Outline (CPO)

A N N E X 1 . T E R M S O F R E F E R E N C E 5 9

UNDP’s activities at the country level as well asfor evaluating its explicit and implicit policiestowards NCCs.

Based on the evaluation criteria identified above,key evaluation question have been identified.Table 4 below sets out the key evaluationquestions for examining UNDP’s explicit andimplicit policy on NCCs in the Arab Region.

Table 5 on the following page sets out the keyevaluation questions for examining UNDP’sactivities at the country level in the five NCCs ofthe Arab Region.

4. METHODOLOGY

The evaluation will draw on a number ofmethods as indicated in Table 6 below whichlinks each method with one or more groups oftarget stakeholder.

4.1 DESK REVIEW

The evaluation Research Assistant collectedrelevant documentation from the five participat-ing countries as well as the region. Analytical andsummary documents were then prepared. Thedocumentation was also reviewed by the othermembers of the evaluation team.

4.2 THE LOCAL RESEARCH COMPONENT

The local research component represents a keypart of the value-added of the evaluation and isan essential part of the evaluation process. Itsobjective is to collect the perceptions of a widerange of national stakeholders on the perform-ance and future role of UNDP in the country.Local research institutes (LRI) will be contractedto undertake the research which should cover thefollowing three elements:

n Stakeholder Mapping: First a mapping ofnational stakeholders covering state(Government policy makers and senior civilservants; parliamentarians, etc.), civil society(opinion makers such as journalists; NGOs,etc.) and the private sector would be made.These stakeholders would not just be listed butthe relationships between them and betweeneach one and UNDP would be identified.The LRI would work with the UNDP CObut following the mapping exercise wouldindependently identify a sample of stake-holders for inclusion in the process.

n Identification of Methods: the mainapproach to the methods was to identify the most appropriate set of each countrycontext and for each group of sub-group of stakeholder. A selection of methods wouldinclude formal survey, focus groups, direct

Evaluation criteria Evaluation questions

Appropriateness § What is the impact of the lack of core-funds and limited access to non-corefunds have on the effectiveness of the UNDP COs in the Arab region NCCs?

§ Is UNDP’s narrow perspective on development value (level of countryprogramme delivery) appropriate for Arab Region NCCs?

§ How do UNDP’s administrative policies restrict the overall effectiveness ofthe UNDP COs in the NCC region?

§ What level of importance does UNDP place on resource mobilisation fromthe Arab region NCCs and why? What is the potential in this area?

§ How could a more effective implementation of the UN reform agenda increasethe effectiveness of the UN family as a whole in the Arab Region NCCs?

Coherence § How coherent are UNDP’s and the broader UN’s policies and principles on NCCs? Is there any conflict between the different elements?

Table 4. UNDP policy on NCCs

A N N E X 1 . T E R M S O F R E F E R E N C E6 0

Evaluation criteria Evaluation questions

1. UNDP’s strategic positioning

Relevance § To what extent have UNDP’s programmes been relevant the NCC’s mostpressing national needs?

§ To what extent have UNDP’s programmes been relevant to the NCC government’s national development goals and strategies?

§ What is the relevance of UNDP’s mandate to the national priorities of thecountry as reflected in National Development Plans and other documents.

Responsiveness § To what extent and in what manner has UNDP anticipated significant changes in the development context relevant to its areas of intervention?

§ To what extent and in what manner (ad hoc, planned, strategic, cautious, etc.;building partnerships, coordinating, piloting, etc.) has UNDP responded toemerging issues and opportunities.

Balance § To what extent has UNDP been able to strike an appropriate balance between upstream and downstream initiatives?

§ How much is the country office programme driven by delivery rather than results?

Partnerships § To what extent are major programmes designed in active coordination withother UN agencies?

§ To what extent is UNDP playing a role in promoting coordination between (i) Government and donors; (ii) donors; (iii) civil society organizations and;(iv) the private sector?

Development value § How has UNDP increased its development value through its non-program-matic activities such as mobilisation of resources for use in poor countries inthe region or outside?

§ How has UNDP increased its development value through support to theoperations of other UN agencies?

II. Programme performance: UNDP’s contribution to national development results

Effectiveness § What are the main contributions to national development results for whichUNDP is recognized in the NCC?

§ To what extent, and how, do these contributions relate to the intendedoutcomes that UNDP has strived to achieve?

Sustainability § Does UNDP have effective strategies in place to increase the likelihood oflasting effects from its development contributions?

§ Does UNDP promote and facilitate the scaling-up or replication of successful interventions?

III. Management and operations

Efficiency § How has UNDP’s management and operations impacted on its ability tocontribute to national development results?

Support § How effective has been the support of HQ especially RBAS and regionalresources including regional programmes and SURF?

Table 5. UNDP activities at the country level

A N N E X 1 . T E R M S O F R E F E R E N C E 6 1

interviews, or the combination of suchmethods as appropriate.

n Questions: Agreement would be reached onthe questions to be asked of each stakeholdergroup, for example in the form of a detailedquestionnaire or a list of core interviewquestions, depending on the methodsselected. A sample set of questions was givento the LRI and also discussed with the CO.

4.3 CO QUESTIONNAIRES AND PRO FORMA TABLES

Basic information from the Country Offices wascollected during the preparation phase andsupplemented during the scoping missions. Inaddition, the evaluation team prepared a standardquestionnaire that it left behind with the evaluationfocal point in each CO. These questions will beanswered by relevant CO staff although a combineddocument will be returned to the evaluation teamat least one week in advance of the main mission.The answers to the questions will not only allowa degree of comparison of issues across all fivecountries but will also flag issues that will needfurther investigation during the main mission.Pro-forma tables of basic project and manage-ment related information were left with the COsduring the scoping missions.

4.4 EVALUATION TEAM INTERVIEWS AND THE STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP

The evaluation team will hold a number of formalsemi-structured interviews with key stakeholdersduring the main mission. The selection ofinterviewees will depend on a number of factorsincluding the nature of stakeholders covered bythe local research and the emerging issues arisingfrom the local research and answers to the COquestionnaires. The focus will be on validation ofthe data collected by the other methods in theevaluation process.

Following completion of the report a finalstakeholder workshop will be held to discussfindings, conclusions, lessons learned andrecommendations with groups of nationalstakeholders and members of the UNDP COs inthe participating countries.

5. EVALUATION PROCESS AND MANAGEMENT

The preparation and inception phases of theevaluation have been completed (for details seethe inception report) and the remaining processwill involve a set of missions to the countriesbeing evaluated and the writing of the report(follow-up to the report is described in section 6).

5.1 MAIN MISSION

n Main Mission 1 – Bahrain, UAE and Kuwait(7-26 April): The first main mission wouldimmediately follow the final scoping missionin Libya (3-4 April).

n Full team briefing in HQ (8-10 May): TheTL and SES will meet in New York for 3 to4 days to undertake formal interviews withUNDP HQ (RBAS, BoM, UNDG, BRSP,OA) and other NY-based persons (for examplemembers of UNDP’s Executive Board or UNRepresentatives of the Arab Region NCCs).

n Main Mission 2 – Saudi Arabia and Libya(19-30 May): After the team briefing in NYthe team will undertake main mission to thefinal two countries for approximately oneweek each.

n Review of Local Research Findings (2 June):At the end of the final main mission, theevaluation team will undertake a review of thelocal research findings with the institutionsconcerned, possibly with CO representation.

n Team Meeting (3 June): Immediately afterthe local research workshop the evaluationteam will meet for two days to brainstormconcerning the conclusions, findings, lessonsand recommendations for the evaluation.

At the end of the main missions the evaluationteam will prepare country reports. These willserve as inputs into the main report but will alsoinclude recommendations for use by the COs intheir programming.

5.2 REPORT WRITING

The process of report writing is programmed tobe as follows:

A N N E X 1 . T E R M S O F R E F E R E N C E6 2

n Preparation of first draft of the EvaluationReport: The first draft will be produced bythe evaluation team members as noted below.The Team Leader will finalise the first draftbased on the inputs from other members.This will be submitted to the EP TaskManager by mid-July.

n Review of drafts: The EO task Manager willarrange EO internal reviews and ReferenceGroup review and UNDP for factual checking.

n Final Stakeholder Workshop: Followingreview of the draft documents, a finalstakeholder workshop will be held in theregion. The workshop will be divided intotwo parts. First, an internal UNDP sessioninvolving the RRs of the countries concernedas well as representatives of RBAS and itsregional programme. This session will lastone day. Second, based on the first sessions, abroader session with national stakeholdersfrom the Arab region NCCs (Government,civil society and private sector) as well asmembers of the Reference Group. Thissession will also last one day.

n Preparation of final document: Followingthe Stakeholder Workshop the EvaluationTeam Leader will finalise the EvaluationReport and submit it to the UNDP EO. TheEO Task Manager will arrange editing,designing and printing etc.

5.3 MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS

The EO selected members of the evaluation team:

n UNDP EO Task Manager: Nurul Alam

n Team Leader: George Zaidan

n Senior Evaluation Specialist:Michael Reynolds

n Research Assistant: Karima Nehmeh

EO will manage the evaluation and ensurecoordination and liaison with RBAS and otherconcerned units at headquarters level. The EOwill meet all costs directly related to the conductof the evaluation. These will include costs related

to participation of the evaluation team members,the local research and the issuance of the final ADRreport. The CO will contribute support in kind. EOwill also cover costs of any stakeholder workshops.

The concerned COs will take a lead role inorganizing dialogue and stakeholder meetings forthe main mission, support the evaluation team inliaison with the key partners and discussions withthe team, and make available to the team all thematerial that is available. The office will providesupport to logistics and planning.

The timeframe and responsibilities for the evalua-tion process are as follows (a detailed work plan iscontained in Annex 14 of the Inception Report):

n Main Missions: April and May 2007

n Report Writing (first draft):June to mid-July 2007

n Stakeholder Workshop: September 2007

n Final Report and Review: October 2007

6. EVALUATION OUTPUTS AND THEIR USE

The main output of the evaluation will be a finalevaluation report of not more than 75 pagesreviewing the experience of UNDP in these fiveNCCs; identifying lessons learned across thesecountries, and making recommendations whichwill feed into ongoing discussions of corporatepolicy for NCCs in the Gulf. In addition, a set offive country reports of less than 20 pages eachwill be prepared as an input into the process.These will be used by the COs as appropriate butwill not be published or widely distributed. Alocal research report will also be prepared by thelocal research institute in each of the fivecountries as an input into the process.

The evaluation will be utilized by a variety ofstakeholders. At the corporate level it will beused by UNDP as an input into its developmentof a corporate NCC policy. At the country level,the evaluative aspects of country reports wouldfocus on what is distinctive about NCCs focusing

A N N E X 1 . T E R M S O F R E F E R E N C E 6 3

on recommendations that may streamlineUNDP’s existing and potential activities in thesecountries. The forward looking aspects wouldintegrate the views of stakeholders resulting fromthe local research as well as the main missionsand benefit from the perspectives of theReference Group. The country reports could beused by the COs to realign program priorities,processes and resources in discussing annualprograms with Governments within the parametersof the next programming cycle. Governmentsand civil society stakeholders in the NCCcountries should also find the independentassessment useful for future planning.

The following steps will be undertaken followingcompletion of the final evaluation report:

n Dissemination of the Evaluation Report:Hard copies of the report will be widelydisseminated. Electronic versions will beavailable on the EO public website as well asin the UNDP Evaluation Resource Centre.An Evaluation Brief will also be produced.

Background documentation related to boththe process and substantive issues will bemade available on the EO public or internalwebsites as appropriate.

n Submission of final report to the UNDPAdministrator and the UNDP ExecutiveBoard: the final evaluation report will beformally submitted to the UNDPAdministrator and the UNDP ExecutiveBoard. The Administer will arrange for amanagement response to be prepared andthis will also be submitted to the Executiveboard.

n Knowledge Management: A number ofknowledge management initiatives areenvisaged although the nature of these willdepend of the nature and scope of thefindings, lessons and recommendation thencome from the evaluation. At this stage it isassumed that a NCC workshop will beorganised to discuss lessons learned andimplications for NCC group. In addition, aRBAS Workshop will also be organised.

A N N E X 2 . S E L E C T B I B L I O G R A P H Y 6 5

The following is a list of corporate and regional documents reviewed during the inception phase of theevaluation process. Lists of country-specific documents are included in each country report.

UNITED NATIONS AND UNDP CORPORATE DOCUMENTS

UNDP STRATEGY

Executive Board of UNDP and United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), ‘Financial, Budgetaryand Administrative Matters. Multi-Year Funding Framework, 2000-2003. Report of theAdministrator’ (DP/1999/30), 6 August 1999

Executive Board of UNDP and UNFPA, ‘Second Multi-Year Funding Framework, 2004-2007’(DP/2003/32), 13 August 2003

UNDP, ‘Global Partnership for Development. UNDP Annual Report 2006’, June 2006

UNDP, ‘UNDP Strategic Plan 2008-2011: Accelerating Global Progress on Human Development’,September 2007

UNITED NATIONS REFORM

United Nations, ‘Delivering as One’. Report of the Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel,9 November 2006

POLICY AND STRATEGY RELATING TO NET CONTRIBUTOR COUNTRIES

UNDP Office of Corporate Planning and Office of Budget Resources, ‘Net Contributor andMiddle-Income Countries: Toward a Corporate Strategy’, Discussion Paper (working draft,22 January 2003)

UNDP Office of Planning and Budgeting, Bureau of Management, ‘Internal Review of the 2004-2007 Programming Arrangements’ (draft for discussion, 1 December 2006)

Papers presented at a workshop entitled ‘Towards a Corporate Strategy for NCCs/High-IncomeMICs’, Abu Dhabi, October 2002:

n Draft discussion paper

n Option paper (Regional Bureau for Arab States)

n ‘Corporate Policy on UNDP Presence in Upper-Tier MICs and NCCs: A Perspective fromLatin America and the Caribbean’ (Regional Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean)

n ‘Elements of a Regional Strategy on NCCs and MICs’ (Regional Bureau for Asia and the Pacific)

EVALUATION

UN Evaluation Group, ‘Norms for Evaluation in the UN System’, April 2005

UN Evaluation Group, ‘Standards for Evaluation in the UN System’, April 2005

Annex 2

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

A N N E X 2 . S E L E C T B I B L I O G R A P H Y6 6

UNDP Evaluation Office, ‘The Evaluation of UNDP’s Contribution at the Country Level.Guidelines for an Assessment of Development Results’, January 2007

UNDP, ‘The Evaluation Policy of UNDP’, June 2006

REGIONAL DOCUMENTS

REGIONAL BUREAU FOR ARAB STATES GENERAL

UNDP, ‘Regional Bureau for Arab States Background Briefing’, undatedUNDP regional programmesExecutive Board of UNDP and UNFPA, ‘Review of the Regional Cooperation Framework for the

Arab States, 1997-2001’, 2001 Makharita, Ragaa, ‘Regional Programme on Governance in the Arab Region (POGAR)’

(RAB/99/005/L/01/31), Evaluation Report, 2004 UNDP, ‘Evaluation of UNDP’s Regional Cooperation Framework for the Arab States 2002-2005’, 2005UNDP, ‘Implementation Strategy for the First Regional Cooperation Framework for the Arab States

1997-2001’, 1997 UNDP Regional Bureau for Arab States, ‘Draft Regional Programme Document for the Arab States

2006-2009’, 2006UNDP, ‘Regional Cooperation Framework for the Arab States 2002-2005’, 2002

ARAB HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORTS

UNDP and the Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development (AFESD), Arab HumanDevelopment Report 2002: Creating Opportunities for Future Generations, 2002

UNDP and AFESD, Arab Human Development Report 2003: Building a Knowledge Society, 2003 UNDP, AGFUND and AFESD, Arab Human Development Report 2004: Towards Freedom in the

Arab World, 2005 UNDP, AGFUND and AFESD, Arab Human Development Report 2005: Towards the Rise of Women

in the Arab World, 2006

ARAB AID

Georges Corm, ‘The Arab Experience’, UN Seminar on the Role of Regional FinancialArrangements, New York, 14-15 July 2004

OTHER REGIONAL DOCUMENTS

Elissar Sarrouh, ‘The UNDP Role in Public Administration Reforms in the Arab Region, UNDPSubregional Resource Facility – Arab States’, 2003

UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, ‘The Millennium Development Goals inthe Arab Region 2005’, 2005

A N N E X 3 . L I S T O F P E R S O N S C O N S U L T E D 6 7

BAHRAIN

GOVERNMENT

Abdulla, Sk. Khalid Bin, Minister, PrimeMinister’s Court

Al A’Ali, Mr. Habib Ali, Chief MeteorologicalOperations, Civil Aviation Affairs,Ministry of Transportation

Al Alawi, Ms. Dhawiya Sharaf, AssistantSecretary-General, Strategy Management,Supreme Council of Women

Al Arrayad, Dr. Shaikha, Consultant ClinicalGeneticist, Head of Genetic Department,Salmaniya Medical Complex Ministry of Health

Al Daylami, Ms. Bahija Mohamed, AssistantSecretary-General, Supreme Council of Women

Al Jowder, Dr. Somaya, Head, Naim HealthCentre Council; National STD ProgrammeManager, Head of National AIDSCommittee, Ministry of Health

Al-Kawari, Ms. Zahwa, Director ofEnvironmental Assessment and PlanningDirectorate, Public Commission for theProtection of Marine Resources,Environment and Wildlife

Al Khalifa, Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Mubarak,Assistant Under-Secretary forCoordination, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Al-Kubaisy, Dr. Falah, Architect and TownPlanner, Research and DevelopmentAdvisor, Ministry of Municipalities Affairsand Agriculture

Al Sabba, Mr. Mohammed, Civil Services Bureau Al Sayed, Dr. Jamal, Assistant Under-Secretary,

Ministry of HealthAmin, Dr. Fawzi, Assistant Under-Secretary for

Training and Planning; Vice-Chair ofHealth Promotion Council, Ministry of Health

Darwish, Fouad I., Minister PlenipotentiaryInternational Organization, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Farraj, Mr. Ahmed Jassim, Director of Budget,Ministry of Finance

Khalaf, Mr. Yousif, Acting Director ofMeteorology, Civil Aviation Affairs,Ministry of Transportation

Khalfan, Mr. Ali, Civil Services Bureau Khamis, Mr. Aref Saleh, Assistant Under-

Secretary, Ministry of FinancePidaparty, Mr. Sudhakar, Budget Advisor,

Ministry of FinanceAl-Alawi, Majid Mushin, Minster, Ministry of

Labour Shaikoo, Mr. Ghasan, Director, International

organizations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

PARLIAMENT

Al Salah, Mr. Ali Saleh, Shura/Consultative CouncilAlansari, Dr. Fouad Ahmed, Director of

Parliamentary Committee Affairs,Chamber of Deputies

Hussein, Dr. Jassem, Member of Parliament,Chamber of Deputies

Diairi, Dr. Fakhria S., former MP, Chamber of Deputies

CIVIL SOCIETY

Alekri, Abdulnabi H., Assistant Researcher,Political, Strategic & Public Opinion Surveys,Bahrain Centre for Studies and Research

Al-Rumaihi, Dr. Ebrahim M., Political,Strategic & Public Opinion Surveys,Bahrain Centre for Studies and Research

Al Rumaidh, Dr. Mohammed, Political,Strategic & Public Opinion Surveys,Bahrain Centre for Studies and Research

Alsadiq, Dr. Abdulla M., Secretary General,Bahrain Centre for Studies and Research

Fakhro, Dr. Ali, Retired, Ex-Chairman ofBahrain University, ex-Minister ofEducation, ex-Minister of Health

Fakhro, Munira A., Associate Professor,University of Bahrain

Annex 3

LIST OF PERSONS CONSULTED

A N N E X 3 . L I S T O F P E R S O N S C O N S U L T E D6 8

UN SYSTEM

Abdel-Khader, Dr. Adel M. Farid, RegionalCo-ordinator for West Asia, UNEP ROWA

Al Faris, Mohamed A., Programme Associate(evaluation focal point)

Al Khalifa, Hessa, Programme AnalystAl-Sharif, Mohamed H., Assistant

Resident RepresentativeAqa, Sayed, UNDP Resident RepresentativeEl-Habr, Dr. Habib N., Director and Regional

Representative, UNEP Regional Office for West Asia

Friji, Mr. Nejib, Director, UN Information CentrePais, Shalet, Finance AssociateSaeed, Afnan, Programme AnalystSalman, Ali, Programme Analyst

KUWAIT

GOVERNMENT

Al-Anjari, Ms. Nabila, Ex. Assistant Under-Secretary for Tourism Affairs,Ministry of Information

Al-Hilal, Mr. Mohammed, Assistant ManagingDirector, Finance & Administration,Kuwait Airways

Al-Kaaby, Dr. Talal, Project Coordinator,State Audit Bureau Project

Al-Khamees, Mr. Khaled, Acting Under-Secretary, Ministry of Planning

Al-Jandal, Ms. Nadia, Assistant UnderSecretary, Ministry of Planning

Al-Musalam, Ms. Faten, from EnvironmentPublic Authority

Al-Shaheen, Ms. Hessah, Women’s Affairs Committee

Al-Shemmari, Mr. Torky, National ProjectDirector, Enterprise DevelopmentProgramme in Kuwait University

Buxtorf, Mr. Martin, Project Coordinator Dar Al-Athar Al-Islamiah Project

Dhaw, Mr. Khaleefa, Senior FinanceConsultant, Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development

Hussain, Ms. Tamama, Project Coordinator,Sustainable Environmental Management Project

Munawer, Mr. Hammad, Assistant Under-Secretary for Planning and Future StrategiesSector, Ministry of Planning

Hawana, Mr. Samir, Project Coordinator,Ministry of Planning Project

CIVIL SOCIETY

Al-Bader, Ms. Faten, Director of Centre forChild Evaluation and Teaching

Al-Duwailah, Ms. Ibtisam, from KuwaitInstitute for Judicial and Legal Studies

Al-Jabsheh, Ms. Fate, Associate Researcher,Techno Economics Department, KuwaitInstitute for Scientific Research (KISR)

Dashti, Ms. Rula, Chairperson, KuwaitEconomic Society

Gedeon, Mr. Camille, General Manager, FocusMarketing and other staff from FOCUS

Hajiah, Mr. Mohammad, Director, TechnoEconomics Department, KISR

Jalili, Mr. Riad Ben, Consultative CommitteeRapporteur, Arab Planning Institute

Members of the Women’s Cultural and Social Society

Tadros, Mr. Mahfouz, Senior Advisor KuwaitInstitute for Scientific Research

UN SYSTEM

Ahmad, Ms. Rasha, Programme Assistant, UNDPAhmad, Mr. Wasfi, HR Associate, UNDPAl-Behaisi, Ms. Raja’a, Programme Analyst, UNDPAl-Haroun, Mr. Thabet, Country

Representative, ILOAli, Mr. Hashim, Hassan Finance Associate,

UNDPAl-Naciri, Mr. Mohammed, UNDP Kuwait

Deputy Resident RepresentativeAl-Nimer, Mr. Bassam, IT Associate, UNDPAl-Shawa, Ms. Sahar, Programme Associate,

UNDPAmour, Mr. Wahid Ben, Chief of Mission,

UNHCRChahine, Ms. Rana, Media Associate, UNDPCliff, Ms. Valerie, UNDP Resident RepresentativeEl-Zien, Ms. Eman, Finance Assistant, UNDP

A N N E X 3 . L I S T O F P E R S O N S C O N S U L T E D 6 9

LIBYAN ARAB JAMAHIRIYA

GOVERNMENT

Al-Equal, Mr. Mohamed Khaled, Under-Secretary of Planning

Al-Fakhri, Mr. Abed-Lekbeer Mohammed,GPC for Higher Education

Al-Harram, Mr. Fathi, GPC for General EducationAl-Isawi, Dr. Ali, Secretary of Economy,

Trade & InvestmentAl-Jabou, Mr. Abdulbaset, GPC for Manpower

& Employment and TrainingAl- Mahjoubi, Mr. Mohamed Zekry, GPC

for JusticeAl-Qbaili, Colonel/Dr. Faraj Naseeb, GPC

for Public SecurityAl-Sharif, Mr. Hassan Ghanem, GPC for

Social AffairsAmmar, Mr. Mustafa, GPC for Sports and YouthBiram, Mr. Fathi, GPC for Agriculture and

Animal ResourcesElmagouri, Dr. Ali M., R., Director, Foreign

Investment Affairs, GPC Economy, Tradeand Investments

Fituri, Dr. Ali M., Director, Economic Researchand Studies Department, GPC Economy,Trade and Investments

Jebreel, Dr. Mahmoud, Secretary of GeneralCouncil of Planning

Sarkas, Mr. El-Haj Taher, GPC for EconomySarkez, Mr. Taher M., Under-Secretary, GPC

Economy, Trade and InvestmentsTamer, Mr. Habib, GPC for HealthTraibel, Mr. Ashour Khalifa, GPC for FinanceWafa, Ms. Fatima, Under-Secretary of

Planning-Director of the TechnicalCooperation at the Secretariat

PROJECT DIRECTORS COORDINATORS*

Abughnaya, Dr. Abdulanabi, Secretariat ofEducation and Training, National Centrefor Education and Training and GPC forManpower, Employment and Training; andSecretariat of Education and Training

Berdardef, Mr. Fathi, MSA RehabilitationCentre for Handicapped, Benghazi Hospital

Abuaishi, Mr. Ibrahim Mohammed, PublicTelecommunication & Postal Company

Shalouf, Mr. Mohamed, PublicTelecommunication & Postal Company

Al-Ghallay, Mr. Ahmed, General Authority for Industry

Belhaj, Mr. Ahmed, National Meteorological CenterAlgayd,Mr.Yusuf,Higher Institute for Civil AviationAl-Zleetni, Dr. Saleh, Dir. Research and Studies

Department (NIDA) National Informationand Documentation Authority

Bari Al-Zunni, Abdul, Former Under-SecretaryGPC for Planning (planning projects)

Al-Muzowghi Mr. Fawzi, Environment General Authority

Grimida, Ms. Samia, Environment General Authority

Nagi, Mr. Sadeg, Environment General AuthorityAl-Kikely, Mr. Ali, Environment General AuthorityIdris, Mr. Ramadan, Industrial Research Center Al-Sherif, Mr. Ali, National Information and

Documentation AuthorityRashdi, Mr. Hadi, GPC for AgricultureHamdi, Dr. Samira, National Center for

Animal HealthAl-Sherif, Dr. Ali, GPC for PlanningDernawi, Mr. Khaled, Industrial Research CenterGharsa, Mr. Juma, High Authority for Tourism

(replaced GPC for Tourism as of Jan. 2007)Jenef, Juma, High Authority for Tourism

(replaced GPC for Tourism as of Jan. 2007)Ali Sharif, Mr., Development Mapping for

Local Governance* Invited by the Ministry of Planning to a general meeting during main mission, most of whom attended;some met with the evaluation team.

CIVIL SOCIETY

Ali Kajman, Mr. Ahmad, Executive Director,Watessemi Organization

Abani, Mr. Ibrahim Sani, Director ofIntegration, Community of Sahel-Saharan States

UN SYSTEM

Alwash, Mohamed, Chief of Mission, UNHCRBalakrishnan, Ramanathan, Deputy

Resident RepresentativeBelkher, Mamon, Programme Assistant

A N N E X 3 . L I S T O F P E R S O N S C O N S U L T E D7 0

Burawi, Ehab, Operations ManagerEl-Medani, Saad, FAO RepresentativeEl-Moghrabi, Amal, Programme AssociateEl-Sherif, Ibrahim, WHO RepresentativeFituri, Ahmed S., ARCATSOD Executive DirectorGrieco, Julio, Resident Representative and

UN Resident CoordinatorKhweldi, Abubaker, Programme AnalystMatri, Osama, Programme OfficerMarkus, Nibal, Programme AssistantMohamed, Abdulmonem, Programme OfficerMuttawa, Asma, former Programme

Manager, UNDPNegrotto, Giacomo, CTA ART GOLDZayan, Fadel, Programme OfficerZeineddine, Ghada, PSU Associate

SAUDI ARABIA

GOVERNMENT

Al-Saadoon, Mr. Youssef, Deputy Minister forEconomic and Cultural Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Al Kozaim, Mr. Youssef, Ministry of Foreign AffairsAref, Mr. Adil, Ministry of Foreign AffairsSalah, Dr. Ahmad Habib, Senior Advisor,

Ministry of Economy and PlanningAlweshail, Dr. Abdullah S., General Director,

National projects for Tourism HRDevelopment, Supreme Commission for Tourism

Al Oraini, Ibrahim A., HRD Investment UnitManager, Supreme Commission for Tourism

Hatem, Taha, Secretary General of the UrbanObservatory Council / Director of RegionalPlanning, Medina

CIVIL SOCIETY

Al Faysal, HRH Turki, Chairman, King FaisalCentre for Research and Islamic Studies

Abu-Sulayman, Muna A., Executive Manager, Strategic Studies; and UNDP Goodwill Ambassador

Al-Safadi, Lilac, Executive Director, Lavender Scent Al-Mugren, Samar, Head of Women’s

Department, Al-Watan NewspaperRasooldeen, Mohammad, Journalist, Arab News

DIPLOMATIC CORPS

Bugge-Mahrt, Jan, Ambassador of NorwayStift, Dr. Friedrich, Ambassador of Austria

UN SYSTEM

Abu-Laban, Ayman, UNICEF RepresentativeAl Azem, Dima, Communications/Media

Associate, UNDP Al-Bakry, Reem, Monitoring and Evaluation

Associate (evaluation focal-point), UNDP Al-Kibbi, Jamal, World Bank Country

Manager, Saudi Arabia Al Okby, Tuful, Programme Associate, UNDP Benlamlih, El-Mostafa, UNDP Resident

Representative and UN ResidentCoordinator

Gubartalla, Ahmed, UNHCR Regional Representative

Ismail, Thuraya, Programme Coordinator, UNDP Mukhtar, Dr. Awad Abu Zeid,

WHO RepresentativeOihabi, Dr. Abdallah, FAO Programme

Coordinator/Team LeaderSalah, Asim, Programme Associate, UNDP Shammout, Nasser, Deputy Resident

Representative, UNDP Tamim, Mayssam, Programme Coordinator, UNDP Yassin,Yassin Hassan, Programme Associate, UNDP

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

GOVERNMENT

Al Jabri, Haj Abdulla Bintursh, Director of International Cooperation, Ministry of Economy

Al Jaberi, Dr. Jaber E., Director, EnvironmentProtection Agency, Abu Dhabi Government

Al Kindi, Dr. Mohammed Saeed, Minister,Ministry of Environment

Al Mansoori, Dr. Nasser Saif, Deputy Under-Secretary, Department of Planning andEconomy, Abu Dhabi Government

Aziz, Mr. Mohamed Ahmed Bib Abdul,Under Secretary Planning Sector,Ministry of Economy

Bashir, Prof. Ahmend K., Director ofEnvironmental Educational and Awareness Division, Environment Agency,Abu Dhabi Government

A N N E X 3 . L I S T O F P E R S O N S C O N S U L T E D 7 1

CIVIL SOCIETY

Ghobash, Saaed Ahmed (former Minister of Planning)

Mansour, Dr. Mohamed Ibrahim, Project Manager,UAE Gender Mainstreaming Initiative

Sager, Abdulaziz, O., Chairman, Gulf Research Centre

Yousef, Dr. Tarik, Dean, Dubai School of Government

Zaid, Prof. Abdelouahhab, GeneralCoordinator, Date Palm Global Network,UAE University

UN SYSTEM

Al Hashimi, Rasha, Programme Analyst,Youth and Environment (evaluation focalpoint), UNDP

Al Hassan, Ruba Yousef, Programme Analyst,Human Development and Gender, UNDP

Alloush, Khaled, UN ResidentCoordinator/UNDP ResidentRepresentative

Al Yafaie, Muhil K. A., Finance/ProgrammeSupport Unit Associate, UNDP

Arar, Lama Soussan, Human ResourcesAssociate, UNDP

Bidder, Mark, Head of Operations,UN-OCHA/IRIN (Nairobi)

Bullaleh, Musa, Programme Analyst (responsible for Qatar), UNDP

Freijsen, Ivo, Head of UN-OCHA RegionalOffice (Dubai)

Juma, Dr. Mutar Ahmed Abdullah, ProgrammeSpecialist, UNDP

Khaldoun, Jandali, OperationsOfficer/Programme Analyst, UNDP

Lewis, Phil, Regional Director, Middle EastOffice, UNOPS (Dubai)

Senigaglia, Giulia, Programme Analyst,Governance and HIV/AIDS, UNDP

UN SYSTEM, NEW YORK

Aboul-Hosn, Randa, Regional ProgrammeAdvisor, Regional Bureau for Arab States

Alsoswa, Amat Al Alim, Assistant Secretary-General, Assistant Administrator andDirector of the Regional Bureau for Arab States

Bazile-Finley, Jocelline, Director of Planningand Budgeting, Bureau of Management

Biha, Giovanni, Chief, Office of Planning andBudgeting, Bureau of Management

Chungyalpa, Kunzang, Chief, CountryOperations Division, Regional Bureau forArab States

Doraid, Moez, Former RR/RC Kuwait (nowDeputy Executive Director, Organisationaland Business Development Services,UNIFEM), Regional Bureau for ArabStates

Faria e Maya, Martim, Donor RelationsAdvisor, Bureau for Resource Mobilisation,Bureau for Resources and StrategicPartnerships

Jenks, Bruce, Assistant Secretary General andDirector of the Bureau for Resources andStrategic Partnerships

Karim, Moin, Programme Advisor, CountryOperations Division, Regional Bureau forArab States

Lillehammer, Giske, Governance Specialist,Democratic Governance Group

Melkert, Ad, UN Under-Secretary-General andAssociate Administrator

Menon, Saraswathi, Director, Evaluation Office Muttukumaru, Romesh, Acting Director of

Human Resources (Deputy-DirectorBRSP), Bureau of Management

Nigam, Ashok, Associate Director,Simplification and Harmonisation Cluster,United Nations Development Group Office(UNDGO)

O’Hara, Michael, Deputy Director, Office ofPlanning and Budgeting, Bureau ofManagement

Oliveira, Marielza, Programme Specialist,Regional Bureau for Latin America and theCaribbean (RBLAC)

Sam, Dominic, Deputy Director, CountryOffice Support, Division for ResourcesMobilisation, Bureau for Resources andStrategic Partnerships

Sonesson, Casper, Policy Advisor, Division forBusiness Partnership, Bureau for Resourcesand Strategic Partnerships

Tabet, Mounir, Senior Programme Advisor,Country Operations Division (now Country Director Egypt), Regional Bureaufor Arab States

A N N E X 3 . L I S T O F P E R S O N S C O N S U L T E D7 2

Tamesis, Pauline, Practice Manager, DemocraticGovernance Group

Topping, Jennifer, Director, Division forResources Mobilisation, Bureau forResources and Strategic Partnerships

Younus, Mohamed, Programme Advisor,Country Operations Division, RegionalBureau for Arab States

ARAB REGIONAL SPECIALISTS

Abdel-Malek, Dr Talaat, Advisor to theMinistry of Economic Co-operation,Centre for Project Evaluation and Professorof Economics, American University of Cairo

Al-Sabah, H.E. Salem Abdullah Jaber, KuwaitAmbassador to the USA

Aujali, H.E. Ali, Libyan Ambassador to the USABelooshi, H.E. Naser M.Y., Bahrain

Ambassador to the USAEl Gehani, Mr. Ahmad, Technical Assistant to

the Executive Director of Countries of theTechnical Co-operation Program, World Bank

Fergany, Dr. Nader A., Director AlmishkatCentre for Research, Cairo

Galal, Dr Ahmad, CEO of Economic ResearchForum, Cairo

Gehani, Mr Ahmad, Office of the ExecutiveDirector in charge of Libya, World Bank

Ghattas, Mr. Marcos, Manager, Technical Co-operation Program for Bahrain, Kuwaitand UAE, World Bank

Ghobash, H.E. Saqr Ghobash Saeed, UnitedArab Emirates Ambassador to the USA

Hafez, Mr Ziad, Consultant with the Global South

Hassouna, H.E. Hussein, League of Arab StatesAmbassador to the USA

Hudson, Mr Michael, Director of the ArabCentre, Georgetown University

Makharita, Ragaa, Team leader of the KuwaitCountry Program Review of the Second CCF

Maksoud, Dr Clovis, Director of Global South,American University

Mattar, Dr Gamil, Director, Arab Center forDevelopment, Cairo

Razavi, Mr. Hossein, Director of the TechnicalCo-operation Program (TCP), World Bank

A N N E X 4 : T H E N A T I O N A L S T A K E H O L D E R P E R C E P T I O N R E P O R T 7 3

Since the strategic evaluation had evolved from acluster evaluation of UNDP’s contribution tonational development results at the country level(that is, an Assessment of Development Results, orADR) the idea of having a local research componentwas included in the overall design of the evaluation.Whereas in the ADR methodology this wouldusually be an in-depth examination of a sector ortheme of special importance in the country beingexamined, this approach would be more difficultwhen dealing with a cluster of countries wherethe needs may be different. Rather, it was decidedto undertake a uniform type of research across allfive countries and to address an issue that is oftendifficult for consultants in their main mission(especially short ones that are undertaken in acluster evaluation).

The objective of the local research component wastherefore to obtain the perspectives of a widergroup of stakeholders, including civil society andthe private sector in the Arab region NCCs as tothe role, performance and potential for UNDPand the UN development system in the region.

APPROACH

The basic approach consisted of three core elements:

n The scope of the exercise was to be wide andinclude government, civil society and privatesector as well as UNDP consultants.

n The local research institutes are in the bestposition to identify and map the stakeholdersand, more importantly, to identify the bestmethods for each. This approach was basedon the belief that the knowledge of the localsituation, language and culture would allowricher interaction with stakeholders and providebetter data for analysis.

n That the exercise should be independent tothe extent possible from the UNDP countryoffice in line with the overall independenceof the evaluation.

A terms of reference was produced by the evalua-tion team along with a broad list of questions.

PROCESS

The terms of reference indicated that the researchwould be undertaken in three phases:

n Stakeholder mapping: The first task wouldbe to map the civil society and private sectorstakeholders in the Arab region NCCs. Inaddition to recent and actual recipients ofUNDP assistance, these could include media,universities, professional and business associ-ations. Government stakeholders and partnersshould also be mapped.

n Identification of methods: The second is toagree on the methods to be used, for example,formal surveys, focus groups or interviews, ora combination of such methods as appropriate.In addition, agreement would be reached onthe questions to be asked, for example, in theform of a detailed questionnaire or a list ofcore interview questions, depending on themethods selected.

n Implementation: The third is to apply theselected methods as part of the research ineach of the five Arab region NCCs. The tablebelow indicates the number of participantsby country and stakeholder group.

THE ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED

The major questions to be addressed as set out inthe terms of reference are listed below. Each ofthe major questions will need to be broken down

Annex 4

THE NATIONAL STAKEHOLDER PERCEPTION REPORT

A N N E X 4 : T H E N A T I O N A L S T A K E H O L D E R P E R C E P T I O N R E P O R T7 4

into a number of subsidiary questions resulting ina comprehensive questionnaire to be used in asurvey or focus group discussion or interviews asdecided above:

Awareness of UNDP and its ‘ideal’ role (for all respondents):

n How well known are the services that UNDPcan provide?

n Which are the more important services fromthe perspective of the respondents?

n What do respondents think about UNDP’spast and potential contributions in the fivepractice areas?

n What role should UNDP (and the UNdevelopment system) play in Arab region NCCs?

Relevance and effectiveness of UNDP’s pro-grammes (for past and present clients in relationto the programmes they were involved in):

n How relevant are UNDP’s interventions tonational priorities?

n How well are they implemented?

n How can they improved?

MANAGEMENT

The local research was commissioned and managedby the UNDP Evaluation Office in New York.Based on the nature of potential researchers andresearch organizations, the Evaluation Office will decide whether to approach one individual/institute for each country or a regional one (forexample, one for the four Gulf countries and another

for Libya). The former may be quicker becausework can proceed in parallel, but the latter will bemore consistent/comparable. Quality of output isparamount since the product of this exercise willbe a major value-added of our evaluation.

OUTPUTS

The selected local research institutes were askedto prepare a comprehensive (synthesis) reportwith the following structure (to be agreed uponwith the institute following the stakeholdermapping exercise and the decision on themethodology to be used):

n Introduction

n Stakeholder mapping

n The selection of methods used

n The participant responses (format to dependon the methodology)

n A concluding section giving a preliminaryinterpretation of the findings in relation toeach of the questions listed under the issuesto be addressed above.

It was made clear that the report would be aninput to the main evaluation report and, as aresult, would be shared with the country officebut not be placed in the public domain.

TIME-FRAME

It was hoped that the National StakeholderPerception Report would be carried out in Marchand April 2007. Precise timing of report submis-sion for each country would depend on the

Stakeholder group

Policy makers Projectmanagers

Civil societyrepresentatives

Other

Bahrain 9 20 45 0

Kuwait 2 9 10 1

Saudi Arabia 16 31

A N N E X 4 : T H E N A T I O N A L S T A K E H O L D E R P E R C E P T I O N R E P O R T 7 5

timing of the country missions undertaken by theevaluation team, since the local research reportsneed to be presented in advance of, and discussedby, the missions. Initial efforts will therefore bemade to synchronize the phases of the localresearch with the missions.

WORKSHOP

The idea for a workshop came during theimplementation of the local research when itbecame clear that none of the country reportswould be ready before the relevant mainmissions. Since it would be desirable for theevaluation team to discuss the reports face to facewith the local research institutes, it was decidedthat bringing them together was the most

practical solution and would mean that theevaluation team would not have to return to thethree countries. At the same time, it was hopedthat interaction between the three researchinstitutes as well as the participating countryoffices could provide some rich insights into theprocess and provide an opportunity to clarify anddiscuss the draft reports.

FUTURE USE OF THE APPROACH

The NSPR approach was innovative anddesigned as a pilot with clear intentions to learnfrom the process and refining and adapting it foruse in other UNDP Evaluation Office reports,where appropriate. The UNDP is preparingguidelines to facilitate effective replication.