People s Republic of China: Capacity Building to Combat Land Degradation Project

Transcription

1 Validation Report Reference Number: PCV: PRC Project Number: Grant Number: 4357 November 2011 People s Republic of China: Capacity Building to Combat Land Degradation Project Independent Evaluation Department

2 ABBREVIATIONS ADB Asian Development Bank CPCO central project coordination office CPF country programming framework CPMO central project management office GEF Global Environment Facility IEM integrated ecosystem management M&E monitoring and evaluation PCR project completion report PPCO - provincial project coordination office PPMO provincial project management office PRC People's Republic of China SFA State Forestry Administration TA technical assistance NOTE In this report $ refers to US dollars. Key Words people s republic of china, land degradation, capacity building, lessons, asian development bank, independent evaluation department, performance evaluation Director General Director Team leader Team members V. Tulasidhar, Officer-in-Charge, Independent Evaluation Department (IED) H. Hettige, Independent Evaluation Division 2, IED K. Mohit, Evaluation Specialist, IED O. Nuestro, Evaluation Officer, IED E. Li-Mancenido, Associate Evaluation Analyst, IED C. Roldan, Associate Evaluation Analyst, IED The guidelines formally adopted by Independent Evaluation Department (IED) on avoiding conflict of interest in its independent evaluations were observed in the preparation of this report. To the knowledge of the management of IED, there were no conflicts of interest of the persons preparing, reviewing, or approving this report. In preparing any evaluation report, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the IED does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.

3 PROJECT BASIC DATA Project Number: PCR Circulation Date: 29 December 2010 Grant Number: 4357 PCR Validation Date: November 2011 Project Name: Capacity Building to Combat Land Degradation Project Country: People s Republic of China Approved Actual Sector: Agriculture and natural Total Project Costs resources ($ million): ADB Financing ADF:0.00 Grant ($ million): ($ million) OCR: 0.00 Borrower ($ million): Beneficiaries ($ million): Others ($ million): Cofinancier: Global Environment Facility Total Cofinancing ($ million): Approval Date: 28 Jun 2004 Effectiveness Date: 23 Jul Jul 2004 Signing Date: 23 Jul 2004 Completion Date: 31 Dec Mar 2010 Closing Date: 31 Dec Mar 2010 Project Officers: Validators: Bruce Carrad Christopher Edmonds Frank Radstake R. Everitt, Consultant O. Nuestro, Evaluation Location: PRCM, ADB headquarters ADB headquarters ADB headquarters Team Leader: From To K. Mohit, Evaluation Specialist, IED2 Officer, IED2 Quality Reviewer: N. Bestari, Advisor, IEOD Director: H. Hettige, IED2 ADB = Asian Development Bank, ADF = Asian Development Fund, IED2 = Independent Evaluation Department (Division 2), IEOD = Independent Evaluation Department (Office of the Director General), OCR = ordinary capital resources, PCR = project completion report, PRCM = People s Republic of China Resident Mission. A. Rationale I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. The People s Republic of China (PRC) Global Environment Facility (GEF) Partnership on Land Degradation in Dryland Ecosystems is a long-term country programming framework (CPF) that was approved by the GEF s council in October The CPF covers a 10-year period ( ) and seeks to combat land degradation, reduce poverty, and conserve biodiversity through capacity building investments and developing viable model investment projects (consistent with the GEF s Operational Program 12 on integrated ecosystem management). The investments envisaged in the 10-year CPF were estimated at about $1.5 billion, of which the GEF would provide $150.0 million in grant assistance. The Capacity Building to Combat Land Degradation Project 1 was the first of an intervention series planned under the CPF. It aimed to strengthen the enabling environment and build institutional capacity for the integrated ecosystem management of drylands in six priority provinces and/or nationally and globally significant autonomous regions (Gansu, Inner Mongolia, Ningxia Hui, Qinghai, Shaanxi, and Xinjiang Uygur). B. Expected Impact 2. The project was aimed at combating land degradation, reducing poverty, and conserving biodiversity in selected provinces and/or autonomous regions of the PRC. The indicators were (i) an enabling administrative, policy, and legislative environment to promote integrated ecosystem management in key provinces and/or regions; (ii) sustainable practices (decision making, administration, and land use management) that are ecologically sound, socially acceptable, and 1 Asian Development Bank Financial Arrangement for a Proposed Global Environment Facility Grant and Asian Development Bank Technical Assistance Grant to the People s Republic of China for the Capacity Building to Combat Land Degradation Project. Manila.

4 2 economically viable; (iii) stakeholder participation and use of community-based sustainable approaches to improve land use decision making and land management practices, and reduce poverty; (iv) international commitments met under conventions on desertification, biodiversity, and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; and (v) over the longer term, local benefits expected to result from sustainable use of land, water, and forest resources in selected eco-regions, and global benefits to include biodiversity conservation, increased carbon capture, and reduced frequency and severity of dust and sandstorms. C. Objectives or Expected Outcomes 3. The objective of the project was to strengthen the enabling environment and develop institutional capacity for land degradation control. The indicators were (i) greater understanding of the root causes of land degradation and introduction of integrated ecosystem management (IEM), including tools based on best practices and appropriate adaptive research; (ii) a more coherent, consistent, and responsive framework of legislation, policies, procedures and regulations, including incentives for investment in combating land degradation; (iii) the 11th Five-Year Development Plan, would reflect a more integrated approach, including greater harmonization of sector plans and government budgets; (iv) improved administrative capacity, including enhanced coordination inside government and with other stakeholders; (v) local-level strategic plans for combating land degradation operations in six provinces and/or areas, including institutional arrangements, increased budgets, and participatory processes; (vi) an effective and harmonized system of land and ecosystem monitoring and evaluation (M&E); (vii) an effective cofinancing mechanism for land degradation control, bringing greater coordination and feedback between government and funding agencies; and (viii) longer-term gains from IEM investments under the CPF and, in turn, global benefits in terms of biological diversity conservation, a reduction in the frequency and severity of dust and sandstorms, and carbon sequestration. D. Components and Outputs 4. The project as designed comprised six outputs and supporting activities which were determined through discussions and consultations with government agencies and other stakeholders. The six key outputs and performance targets for each output are listed in Table 1. E. Provision of Inputs 5. The total project cost, including contingencies, taxes, and duties, was estimated at $13.8 million equivalent, comprising $2.1 million (about 15.2%) in foreign exchange and $11.7 million equivalent (about 84.8%) in local currency costs. The GEF agreed to provide a $7.7 million grant to finance about 56.0% of the cost. The government was to finance $6.1 million equivalent in local currency, or 44.0% of the total cost. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) provided a $1.0 million associated technical assistance (TA) grant 2 from the TA Special Fund to complement GEF and government financing. The government also contributed $0.2 million to the TA in counterpart funds. 2 ADB Technical Assistance to the People s Republic of China to Support Implementation of Capacity Building to Combat Land Degradation Project. Manila (TA 4358).

5 3 Output 1. Improving policies, laws, and regulations for land degradation 2. Strengthening national and provincial coordination 3. Improving operational arrangements in provinces and autonomous regions and counties 4. Capacity development for land degradation investment projects 5. Monitoring and evaluation system for land degradation 6. Implementation arrangements for the country programming Table 1: Project Outputs and Performance Targets Indicators a. Recommended mechanisms and procedures result in improved quality and effectiveness of key environmental policies and laws by b. Institutional capacity improved for legislative and policy aspects of land degradation management by c. Policy and regulatory advice and problem solving capacity improved by a. Planning mechanisms set up for coordinating land degradation sector investments under the forthcoming 11th Five-Year Development Plan by b. Integrated ecosystem management (IEM) approach accepted for use during the 11th plan. a. Participatory processes begun to promote common understanding of IEM principles, community involvement, and land use planning. b. Land degradation strategies and action plans harmonized and IEM approach in place for six provinces and/or regions by c. Trained staff to support IEM development by a. Provincial capacity for land degradation projects upgraded. Initial IEM investment projects identified for all participating provinces and/or regions by a. Coordinated system for land degradation monitoring ensures that a national mechanism is operational for collecting, analyzing, and reporting land degradation data by a. Project implementation capacity in place to support Operational Program (OP) 12 Partnership by b. Funding coordination mechanism in place to maximize concessional financing for OP12 Partnership by framework Source: Asian Development Bank Completion Report: Capacity Building to Combat Land Degradation Project in the People s Republic of China. Manila. 6. Consultants were to be recruited for the project (GEF-financed: international, 22 personmonths, and national, 187 person-months, at an estimated cost of $1.3 million; and ADBfinanced: international, 19 person-months, and national, 103 person-months, at an estimated cost of $0.9 million). Other inputs included equipment, software, supplies, and vehicles ($1.1 million); surveys and studies ($1.5 million); workshops ($2.5 million); training and study tours ($2.8 million); incremental staff ($1.0 million); office operations ($1.9 million); and pilot projects ($2.0 million). The total cost of all inputs (combined project and TA) was estimated to be $15.0 million (including 10% contingencies). F. Implementation Arrangements 7. The overall project implementation period was to be 4 years. A high-level steering committee comprising representatives of 11 participating agencies and ADB had been functioning for the previous 2 years to guide the design phase and was to continue to guide project implementation. A central project coordination office (CPCO) was created in the Ministry of Finance, and a central project management office (CPMO) was established in the State Forestry Administration (SFA). Similar coordination and management arrangements were created in the six participating provinces and/or autonomous regions. 8. The potential risks included slower-than-anticipated institutional and policy reform and investment project development. This would be mitigated under the project by promoting a better understanding of the root causes of land degradation, upgrading the existing legal and regulatory framework for land degradation, and promoting participatory approaches. 9. The project at that time was unique in that it did not fall into either of ADB s traditional TA or loan categories. Given the need for increased government ownership of the policy reform process, loan processing procedures were followed that provided for greater government implementation responsibilities and ADB supervision intensity.

6 4 II. EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE AND RATINGS A. Relevance of Design and Formulation 10. The project completion report (PCR) 3 assessed the project highly relevant. Fostering sustainable land management through IEM to combat land degradation in the western PRC is as important today as when the PRC GEF partnership was established in It is consistent with ongoing efforts to adapt to challenges of climate change brought about by drought and dust and sandstorms. The project remains consistent with the GEF s land degradation focal area strategy as well as with the development strategy of the PRC, which gives priority to addressing land degradation. The project is also consistent with ADB s Strategy with respect to inclusive and environmentally sustainable growth, in particular with respect to activities to strengthen institutional capacity for environmental management and assist countries to adapt to climate change. The project was designed to strengthen the enabling environment and develop institutional capacity for land degradation control. The six project outputs were well integrated and designed in detail with performance targets. These outputs were complemented by ADB TA designed to support (through technical advice) and monitor the implementation of the project. This validation agrees with the PCR s assessment of highly relevant. B. Effectiveness in Achieving Project Outcomes 11. The PCR assessed the project effective. The project made progress toward the overall outcome of strengthening the enabling environment and institutional capacity for land degradation control. Stakeholders have an improved understanding of the causes of land degradation. The IEM concept, including tools based on best practices and appropriate adaptive research, has been introduced, accepted, and adopted. A more coherent, consistent, and responsive framework of policies, legislation, regulations, and procedures, including incentives for investment in combating land degradation, has been established. An integrated approach to land degradation control has been reflected in the 11th Five-Year Plan, Local strategic plans for combating land degradation operations have been prepared in six provinces and/or autonomous regions. An expert group has been established for the M&E system and provincial data centers have been established, however, the M&E system is not fully operational. While some of the planned outputs were not fully realized such as implementing community participatory planning, farmer field schools, and study tours in 18 pilot sites out of the 22 planned pilot sites, major strides in achieving project objectives and outcomes were achieved. This validation agrees with the PCR s assessment of effective. C. Efficiency of Resource Use in Achieving Outputs and Outcomes 12. The PCR rated the project efficient. Because of the nature of the project and the absence of economic analysis, this validation bases its rating on how well resources were utilized in achieving the outcome and outputs and how well the government and its agencies with ADB made adjustments to ensure that the project outputs and outcome were achieved within the revised time frame. The SFA, as the executing agency, performed satisfactorily. Consultant recruitment and contractual arrangements, which were conducted by SFA, were satisfactory concluded. The SFA established an interagency coordination mechanism for the partnership. Through the CPCO, CPMO, provincial project coordination offices (PPCOs), and provincial project management offices (PPMOs) management structure, the SFA was able to coordinate the project. The government made corresponding adjustments in its formal procedural steps for 3 ADB Completion Report: Capacity Building to Combat Land Degradation Project in the People s Republic of China. Manila. 4 ADB Strategy 2020: The Long-Term Strategic Framework of the Asian Development Bank, Manila.

7 5 withdrawal applications as well as in its remittance procedures to provincial implementation agencies. In spite of slight delays during the first 2 years of project implementation, the implementation of the project outputs was completed as planned during the 1-year extension. The programmatic and participatory approaches adopted by the government and its agencies allowed flexibility and facilitated adjustments in activities and schedules as necessary. These provided a stronger and more effective cooperation and collaboration in discussing and addressing interrelated issues and problems concerning land degradation. It also facilitated leveraging investment funds from various development partners for scaling up pilot investment projects for combating land degradation that were initiated under the project. 13. The original cost estimate of the project was $13,800,000. The actual cost was $14,644,900, with the additional cost of $844,900 being borne by the government. The costs of outputs 1 5 were slightly under the estimated cost, while output 6 was almost double at $5,851,400 (compared with $3,131,700 including 10% contingency, estimated at appraisal). It is reasonable to assume that this output includes the project management costs. 5 The PCR noted that substantial cost increases in incremental staff (from $287,000 to $1,152,800) and office operations (from $877,400 to $2,696,000) contributed to the additional government expenses (footnote 3, Appendix 5, Table A5.2). During the project, there were three reallocations of GEF funds. 6 The project was able to achieve its outcome and outputs in a cost-efficient manner with all of the funds under the GEF grant utilized as intended. Relative to what was envisioned during appraisal, the total number of studies, workshops, and training sessions carried out under the project exceeded targets. Overall, this validation concurs with the PCR rating of efficient. D. Preliminary Assessment of Sustainability 14. The PCR assessed the project likely to be sustainable. The PCR noted that sustainability is supported by the mainstreaming of IEM for land degradation control into central and provincial strategy and action plans and in five-year plans (footnote 3, para. 32). A more coherent and responsive framework of policies, legislation, regulations, and procedures, including incentives for investment in combating land degradation have been established. An integrated approach to land degradation control has been reflected in the 11th Five-Year Plan, , including greater harmonization of sectoral plans and government budgets. Local strategic plans for combating land degradation operations in six provinces and/or autonomous regions, including institutional arrangements, increased budgets, and participatory processes have been developed and mainstreamed into their respective development plans. An effective and harmonized system of land and ecosystem M&E is now in place. Effective cofinancing mechanism for land degradation control, bringing greater coordination and feedback between government and funding agencies was also established. In addition to all these, the project has trained a significant number of technical experts, policy decision makers, legislators, private sector representatives, and communities on participatory IEM which ensures that the IEM approach will continue to be integrated in provincial and autonomous regional plans. Continued government support for the IEM approach to combat land degradation is reflected by the inclusion of land degradation priority 5 The government s PCR (SFA, Dec 2009) treats this component as the project management component, stating This component was mainly concerned with project management and implementation arrangement and was not required to produce specific output. 6 The reallocations were not considered a major change in implementation arrangements, nor were they considered to affect the scope or total project cost. The three reallocations were processed through divisional memorandums: (i) Memo dated 10 August 2006, from Bruce Carrad to Kunhamboo Kannan, on Capacity Building to Combat Land Degradation Request for Approval of Reallocation of Funds under the GEF Grant; (ii) Memo dated 6 May 2008, from Frank Radstake to Kunhamboo Kannan, on Capacity Building to Combat Land Degradation Request for Approval of Reallocation of GEF Funds and Extension of the Project Completion; and (iii) Memo dated 6 May 2009, from Frank Radstake to Kunhamboo Kannan, on Capacity Building to Combat Land Degradation Request for Approval of Reallocation of GEF Funds.

8 6 projects developed during the project into their respective provincial and autonomous regional 12th five-year plans. Continued central and provincial government financial support for investments that apply the IEM approach in combating land degradation will ensure the long-term sustainability of activities initiated under the project. This validation s preliminary assessment of sustainability concurs with the PCR and rates the project likely sustainable.. E. Impact 15. The project goal (i.e., impact) is combating land degradation, reducing poverty, and conserving biodiversity in selected provinces and/or autonomous regions of the PRC. The PCR did not discuss the project impact precisely but discussed project achievements toward the envisaged impact of combating land degradation (footnote 3, para. 33). Progress towards realizing the project goal and determination to realize project impact is evidenced by the commitment made by the partnership s consolidated program framework for , comprising about $600 million worth of investment and capacity building projects. The project was instrumental in changing the government s traditional top-down approach in strategic planning, particularly in the preparation of provincial five-year plans, to a more participatory and communitybased approach that required interagency and multisectoral participation, collaboration, and cooperation. The compilation and dissemination of existing laws, regulations, and measures for IEM implementation in a computerized database facilitated information sharing in the six IEM information centers established, strengthen the capacity of provincial policy and legislative officials for adopting an IEM approach in future preparation of provincial strategy and action plans. The centers are now being utilized in the management and documentation of IEM-related data of other projects outside of the partnership. On balance, this validation rates project impact significant. III. OTHER PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS A. Performance of the Borrower and Executing Agency 16. The PCR concluded the SFA performed satisfactorily. It was able to establish an effective interagency coordination mechanism for the partnership. Through the CPCO, CPMO, PPCOs, and PPMOs, it was able to generate interest in the IEM approach among policy decision makers, planners, legislators, experts, and communities. This ensured the adoption of IEM concepts and principles in provincial strategy and action plans and subsequently in the provincial five-year plans. The SFA was also able to establish links with development partners, which created opportunities for possible financing of IEM project proposals. This validation notes that the executing agency did not fully comply with covenants for submission of annual, midterm, and semi-annual progress reports, with regular annual and semi-annual reports being submitted only from 2008 onward. On balance, this validation rates the performance of the executing agency satisfactory. B. Performance of the Asian Development Bank 17. The PCR concluded that ADB s performance during implementation was satisfactory. ADB was quick to make adjustments, ensuring that the project outputs and outcome were effectively achieved within the allocated time frame. During , ADB fielded a total of 13 project administration and review missions, comprising members with varied disciplines and specializations to provide technical advice and monitor the progress of project implementation. During these missions, ADB discussed problems and issues encountered by the SFA, CPCO, CPMO, PPCOs, and PPMOs; provided timely recommendations for their resolution; and ensured that these solutions met the requirements of the SFA. ADB provided the necessary support and supervision for ensuring that all activities were completed within the time frame allowed. ADB carried out regular monitoring of the withdrawal, disbursement, and use of funds to determine how the project

9 7 was progressing through review missions and annual reports. This validation agrees with the PCR s assessment and assesses ADB s performance satisfactory. C. Other 18. The PCR did not directly discuss issues of safeguards, governance, and anticorruption; fiduciary aspects; or government assessment of the project, except to confirm that the government submitted the PCR in compliance with the loan covenants. The ADB TA grant of $1 million provided to assist with the implementation of the project included compliance with ADB safeguard policies. Appendix 3 of the PCR rated the financial and institutional and governance risks to the project unlikely. IV. OVERALL ASSESSMENT, LESSONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Overall Assessment and Ratings 19. The project design and formulation is rated highly relevant. A detailed assessment of problems and opportunities was made during project preparation. The project design was consistent with the strategies of the government, GEF, and ADB. The project was effective in achieving its overall outcome of strengthening the enabling environment and developing institutional capacity. The project was efficient in the use of resources, achieving its outcomes and outputs. The project is likely to be sustainable given the substantial capacity within the provincial governments and the commitment to the partnership by the government, ADB, GEF, and other development partners. This validation rates the overall performance of the project successful. Table 2: Overall Rating Criteria PCR IED Review Reason for Disagreement/Comments Relevance Highly relevant Highly relevant Effectiveness in achieving outcome Effective Effective Efficiency in achieving outcome and outputs Efficient Efficient Preliminary assessment of sustainability Likely Likely Borrower and executing agency Satisfactory Satisfactory Performance of Asian Development Bank Satisfactory Satisfactory Impact Not rated Significant Overall assessment Successful Successful Quality of project completion report Satisfactory IED = Independent Evaluation Department, PCR = project completion report. Source: Independent Evaluation Department. B. Identification of Lessons 20. This validation agrees with the lessons in the PCR and would like to highlight two additional lessons. First is the importance of establishing a properly functioning M&E system, which must not only monitor the performance of PRC GEF partnership and individual investment projects but also monitor for global environmental benefits. Without such an M&E system, it will not be possible to verify the impact of PRC GEF partnership interventions with respect to combating land degradation, reducing poverty, and conserving biodiversity. 21. The second lesson relates to the ADB-funded TA project. While funded as a separate project, TA activities were well integrated into the overall project, resulting in effective guidance being provided in achieving project outputs. Consultants served as lead resource persons and technical support in (i) various training activities, (ii) completion of IEM strategies and action plans, (iii) formulation and revision of 33 local laws and regulations, and (iv) implementation of 18 pilot sites. The TA played a catalytic role in strengthening interagency and multisector cooperation and collaboration for IEM, including the collection and sharing of IEM-related data and information among policy decision makers, legislators, planners, private sector, and communities. This reiterates the

10 8 importance of effectively timing TA interventions when supporting investment projects so as to derive best value addition. C. Recommendations for Follow-Ups 22. This validation generally agrees with the recommendations in the PCR and would like to highlight that the M&E system should be operated more effectively as a tool for monitoring and evaluating project implementation. The M&E system must also monitor the global benefits achieved toward combating land degradation, reducing poverty, and conserving biodiversity. It is understood that these are included as outputs in the ongoing follow-up TA. 7 V. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS AND FOLLOW-UP A. Monitoring and Evaluation Design, Implementation, and Utilization 23. The project framework included details on performance indicators and targets. A comprehensive set of qualitative indicators and targets were provided at the goal (impact), objective (outcome), component (output), and activity levels. This structure allowed for the PCR s evaluation of attainment of each of the indicators. However, the absence of the quantitative indicators and targets makes it difficult to assess the degree of achievement of the results. The government s annual reports provided for this validation did not use the project logical framework to report on progress or performance. This validation also notes the PCR s recommendation that the M&E system should be operated more effectively and used as a tool for monitoring and evaluating the progress of project implementation. B. Comments on Project Completion Report Quality 24. The PCR was well prepared, generally clear, concise, and consistent with the PCR guidelines, Project Administration Instructions 6.07, and Independent Evaluation Department guidelines. The PCR has provided substantial and consistent documentation on the project to support the overall assessment, lessons, recommendations and ratings. The PCR could have better explained the costs associated with output 6, including a discussion of why costs almost doubled, from $3.3 million at appraisal to $5.8 million, to better explain the efficiency rating. Similarly, the PCR could have emphasized the importance of effective and timely implementation of the M&E framework. The PCR drew relevant lessons and pertinent recommendations. The quality of the PCR is rated satisfactory. C. Data Sources for Validation 25. The primary data sources for the validation were the ADB PCR, the executing agency s completion report, Board paper (footnote 1), aide-mémoire, and back-to-office reports. D. Recommendation for Independent Evaluation Department Follow-Up 26. The project was in support of the overall implementation of the PRC GEF partnership to combat land degradation. It is recommended that the overall PRC GEF partnership be evaluated. Appropriate timing for the project performance evaluation report would be around mid-2014 when the follow-up TA on Management and Policy Support to Combat Land Degradation is completed. By that time, an independent evaluation of select GEF-3 and GEF-4 projects could provide a justification for the sustainability and success of the partnership. 7 ADB Technical Assistance to the People s Republic of China for Management and Policy Support to Combat Land Degradation. Manila (TA 7439-PRC, approved on 8 December, co-financed by the GEF).

11 9 REGIONAL DEPARTMENT S RESPONSE TO THE PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT VALIDATION REPORT On 4 July 2011, Director, Independent Evaluation Division 2, Independent Evaluation Department (IED), received the following comments from the Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture Division of the East Asia Department. We have reviewed IED s earlier draft project completion report validation report circulated to us and its final draft that was sent to us for review. We appreciate that the comments we made to IED on the earlier draft have been adequately incorporated in the final draft. Therefore, we have no formal comment to make on the final draft.