The African Biomes Strategic Country Cluster Evaluation (SCCE) covers GEF activities in 23 countries situated in two Sub-Saharan African biomes: the Sahel and the Sudan-Guinea Savanna. Selection of these two biomes is based on the countries’ comparable land-based environmental challenges. These countries also face challenges related to governance, demographics, migration, conflict and fragility, working as drivers for the environmental issues at hand. Most countries situated in the two biomes are Least Developed Countries (LDCs), and half are countries in fragile situations.
The strategic country cluster evaluation (SCCE) of small island developing states (SIDS) covers 39 SIDS in the AIMS (Atlantic, Indian Ocean, Mediterranean and South China Sea), Caribbean, and Pacific regions. The choice to evaluate the SIDS as a strategic cluster is based on their shared geophysical constraints, resulting in disproportionately large economic, social and environmental challenges, and is supported by Council members’ requests for a more in-depth reviewing of the SIDS portfolio of projects.
The strategic country cluster evaluation (SCCE) of least developed countries (LDCs) covers all 47 LDCs, located in Africa, Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean. Selection of the LDCs for an SCCE is based on the countries’ common LDC status and related economic, social and environmental challenges. LDCs are low-income countries confronting severe structural impediments to sustainable development. They are highly vulnerable to economic and environmental shocks, have low levels of human assets, and almost half of the LDCs are countries in fragile situations.
During the GEF-5 replenishment negotiations it was agreed that, within the framework of paragraph 28 of the GEF Instrument, the GEF partnership needs to be broadened further to enhance country ownership in the GEF operation and to provide recipient countries greater choice in terms of agencies with which they work. At the request of GEF Council, GEF Independent Evaluation Office (GEF IEO) conducted a Process Evaluation of the Expansion of the GEF Partnership to assess the design, transparency and efficiency related aspects of the accreditation process.
In September 2005, the GEF Council agreed to implement a resource allocation framework for the GEF 4 replenishment period. Implementation of the resource allocation framework started in 2006 and it covered biodiversity and climate change focal areas. During its implementation, several weaknesses in its design such as group allocations for some countries, a 50 percent ceiling on resource utilization within first two years of replenishment period, and inadequacy of set-asides, became apparent.
This evaluation is a formative review of the three Integrated Approach Pilots introduced in GEF-6. They were designed to implement integrated programming as a means of achieving systemic change at scale by addressing the major drivers of global environmental degradation in a holistic way. They are:
The annual performance report (APR) provides an update on performance of the Global Environment Facility’s (GEF) portfolio of completed projects. It provides an update on project outcomes, the likelihood of sustainability of project outcomes, the quality of project implementation and execution, co-financing trends, the quality of project M&E systems, and the coverage and quality of terminal evaluation reports. It also includes the adoption of GEF Council decisions that are based on GEF IEO recommendations, and a summary assessment of the performance of GEF Agencies.
The GEF has been engaging with indigenous peoples since its inception and significant steps have been taken by the GEF to increase the engagement and participation of indigenous peoples in GEF activities over time. The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the GEF’s engagement activities with indigenous peoples and provide insights and lessons leading to recommendations to strengthen GEF collaborations.
Supporting transformational change is a strategic priority of the Global Environment Facility (GEF), as cited in its 2020 vision statement. In this context, transformational change can be understood as deep, systemic, and sustainable change with large-scale impact in an area of global environmental concern.