IEO conducts accountability and learning-focused evaluations that generate lessons learned for the GEF. The evaluations focus on results, impact and performance of the GEF, and address strategic issues of the partnership.
Overall Performance Studies (OPS) are performed every four years to provide solid evaluative evidence to donors. These evaluations provide an independent assessment of performance and results of the GEF over a GEF replenishment period. The comprehensive evaluations assess the extent to which the GEF is achieving its objectives and identify potential areas of improvement.
Since inception, the Global Environment Facility (GEF) has been explicit about the importance of involving stakeholders, initially described as "the public", in GEF-financed interventions. This is stated in the original GEF Instrument and reflected in a series of policies, guidance, and strategies that have evolved over time to ensure that GEF Agencies are applying a uniform approach to inclusive of a diverse set of stakeholders across the GEF Partnership.
International Waters (2020) - Special studies in Fisheries, Health co benefits of the Chemicals portfolio
The world's marine fishery resources face critical challenges. Based on the data reported in 2018 by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), an estimated 33% of global marine fish stocks have been overexploited, while a further 60% are fully exploited. During the past three decades, the fraction of fish stocks that are within biologically sustainable levels has decreased from 90% in 1974 to 67% in 2015. Loss of coastal habitats, pollution and climate change are showing negative effects on global fisheries.
This is the first stand-alone evaluation of the Global Environment Facility’s (GEF’s) support to mainstreaming biodiversity interventions. The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the overall performance and effectiveness of GEF biodiversity mainstreaming projects drawing on the portfolio and in-depth case studies conducted in Colombia, India and South Africa. The study is based on the evaluative evidence drawn from the portfolio analysis of 471 biodiversity mainstreaming related projects, and three country case studies looking at the experiences from GEF-3 through GEF-6.
Since its inception, the GEF has provided support to its partner countries to improve the sustainability of their forestry resources. Although SFM is not a focal area, forest-based interventions have been supported through GEF focal area interventions, multifocal projects, integrated approach pilots (IAPs), and, more recently, designed through the impact programs. While projects prior to GEF-5 addressed forest issues through several focal area objectives, the GEF initiated a dedicated SFM program in GEF 5.
Scaling up is not new to the GEF and in the last decade, all GEF focal areas have been shifting from site-level pilot projects towards projects or programs implemented at higher scales. Based on a review of focal area strategies and interviews with the GEF partnership, the GEF has gradually shifted its focus from pilots to scaled-up interventions over the last 25 years. In part, this is because the GEF partnership has built up a much better understanding of what interventions work based on the portfolio of demonstration projects implemented during GEF's early phases.
This analysis brings together economists, computer scientists and geographers with expertise in remote sensing and impact evaluation to apply a value for money (VFM) assessment to the case of GEF Land Degradation (LD) projects. Leveraging methodological approaches to causal identification that have not previously been applied to the study of Land Degradation, this report explicitly quantifies (1) the causally-identified impact attributable to GEF LD project locations using three indicators (capturing vegetation productivity, forest fragmentation, and forest cover change), and (2) the VFM resultant from these impacts of GEF LD projects in terms of carbon sequestration.
Multiple benefits generated through GEF support consist of two types: the global environmental benefits (GEBs) that contribute towards achieving the strategic priorities of multiple focal areas, and the local environmental and socioeconomic benefits that indirectly generate and sustain the GEBs. One way that GEF has sought to create multiple benefits in a more integrated manner is through multi-focal area (MFA) projects. These projects are funded through allocations from different global environmental conventions and/ or trust funds, and track indicators specific to each focal area.
The main purpose of this study was to provide insight and lessons for GEF’s climate change support moving forward, by assessing the relevance, results, effectiveness, and lessons learned through GEF support to the issues of climate change mitigation and adaptation. The findings of this study and other complementary GEF Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) evaluations will feed into the Sixth Comprehensive Evaluation of the GEF. This report specifically provides:
This study is the first comprehensive study of the Chemicals and Waste (CW) focal area undertaken by the Global Environment Facility’s (GEF) Independent Evaluation Office (IEO), encompassing the GEF’s grant funding for activities focused on persistent organic pollutants (POPs), ozone depleting substances (ODS), mercury, and sound chemical management more generally. The GEF serves as the Financial Mechanism for the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and for the Minamata Convention on Mercury.