assessment of development results...

Assessment of Development Resultse v A l u A t i o n o f u n D p ’ s C o n t R i b u t i o n bHutAn

Evaluation Office, May 2007United Nations Development Programme

Copyright © 2007United Nations Development ProgrammeEvaluation OfficeOne United Nations PlazaNew York, NY 10017, USAhttp://www.undp.org/[email protected]

Cover photographs by Bhutan Country Office and Getty Images

REPORTS PUBLISHED UNDER THE ADR SERIES

Bangladesh

Bulgaria

China

Egypt

Ethiopia

Honduras

India

Jamaica

Lao PDR

Montenegro

Mozambique

Nigeria

Serbia

Sudan

Syrian Arab Republic

Ukraine

Turkey

Viet Nam

Yemen

FORTHCOMING ADR REPORTS

Colombia

Jordan

Nicaragua

Rwanda

EVALUATION TEAM

Team Leader A.K.ShivaKumar

Team Members ZendaMunroOfir KunzangDechenDorji

UNDP EO Task Manager RuthAbraham& Team Member

Research Assistant ElizabethK.Lang

f O R E w O R D iii

The Assessment of Development Results (ADR)Bhutan report presents the findings of the evalu-ationofUNDP’scontributionsinBhutan,carriedout by the Evaluation Office (EO) of the UnitedNations Development Programme (UNDP) in2006.ItisoneofsevenADRscompletedin2006.AnADRisconductedinresponsetotherequire-mentsoftheevaluationpolicyofUNDPendorsedby the UNDP Executive Board in June 2006,whichcallsforanindependentcountry-levelevalu-ation of UNDP’s attainment of its intended andachievedresultsaswellas itscontributions to thedevelopmentresultsofthecountrieswhereitworks.The aim of the ADR is to generate lessons forstrengthening country-level programming andcontribute to the organization’s effectiveness andsubstantiveaccountability.

Bhutan, a small and beautiful mountainouskingdomhighupintheHimalayanfoothills, isundergoing ahistoric transition frommonarchyto democracy. In December 2006, after rulingfor 3 decades, His Majesty King Jigme SingyeWangchuck handed over his responsibilitiesas the Monarch and head of state of Bhutanto his son, the Crown Prince, Jigme KhesarNamgyel Wangchuck, who became the fifthkingofBhutan.Preparationsarebeingmadefora democratically elected government to assumepowerin2008underanewconstitution.Bhutanhas recorded significant gains in human devel-opment after ending its self-imposed isolationin 1961. It is on track to meet several MDGsandhasalreadymet the targetsof reducing theproportionofunderweightchildrenandensuringaccess tocleanwaterandpropersanitation.Thecountry’s human development index (HDI) hasrisen steadilyplacingBhutan in the categoryofmedium human development countries. Policy-makingandprogramminginBhutanareuniquelyguided by the concept of gross national happi-ness (GNH),whichemphasizes sustainable andequitablesocioeconomicdevelopment,conserva-tionofenvironment,preservationandpromotionofcultureandpromotionofgoodgovernance.

UNDPhashadalongassociationwiththeRoyalGovernmentofBhutan.Sincetheearly1970’sithasbeenprovidingsupport–frommaterialandtechni-cal support to tertiary, technical and vocationaltraining institutes; fellowships for training andgraduateandpost-graduatestudiesoverseas,supporttocivilaviation,telecommunications,privatesector,energy, tourism and media sectors to its currentsupport for theattainmentof theMDGsand forintegratingthegoalseffectivelywithinthenationaldevelopmentplanningandpolicyframework.

The evaluation found that UNDP has remainedrelevantinthechangingcontextofdevelopmentinBhutan. A number of factors have contributed tothis, includingUNDP’s responsiveness,flexibilityand use of flexible funding modalities. Its align-mentwithnationalprioritiesandtrustedrelation-ship with the government have further enabledUNDP to evolve with and respond to nationalneeds.Ensuringgovernment andnationalowner-ship is anotherway thatUNDP strives to ensuresustainable results. Further, its cross-sectoralmandate, coordination role among UN partners,globalaccesstohigh-leveltechnicalexpertise,andability to identify and help respond to emergingissuesbykeepingafingerontheinternationalandnational development pulse, have contributed toUNDP’spositiveimageinBhutan.Onthewhole,theassessmentrevealsthatUNDP’scontributionsareinlinewithintendedoutcomes.

However the evaluation found that there are anumber of internal and external factors - thathave affected UNDP’s capacity to maximize itscontributions.Despitepositivedevelopmentsinitshumandevelopment,thereareongoingchallengesposedby thecountry’s small andwidely scatteredpopulation,itsgeographyandmountainousterrain,and despite the fact that physical infrastructurehasexpandedconsiderablyovertheyears,itisstillinadequate toensureuniversal reachandeffectivedelivery of basic social services and to establisheffective systemsof local governance and connec-tivity to markets. At the same time, CBOs and

FOREWORD

iv f O R E w O R D

NGOsarefewinnumber,andtheircapacitiesarealso insufficiently developed. Similarly, very fewindependent research and consulting institutions,policygroupsoragenciesintheprivatesectorservethecriticalfunctionofindependentevaluationandpublicreporting.

Three significant lessons learned from UNDP’sexperience in Bhutan include: first, nurturing itsrelations with government, displaying sensitivity,astuteness and respect. It has partnered with thegovernmenttothinkthroughseveralinterventionsand implement themat apace setby thegovern-ment;second,UNDPBhutan,byandlarge,scoreswellintermsofitsupstreampolicycontributionstoBhutan’sdevelopment.Muchlessvisible,however,isthecontributiontodownstreameffectivenessandimpactatthelocallevel;andthird,thegovernmenthas been drawing upon UNDP Bhutan’s supportfor tapping information and knowledge in manyareas where local expertise has been insufficient.Thisfeature,andnottheamountoffunds,hasbeenthebasisfortherelationshipoftrustthathasbeenbuiltbetweenUNDPBhutanandthegovernmentovertheyears.ThedevelopmentofthedraftcountryprogrammedocumentforBhutan(2008-2012)hasbenefitedfromthefindingsandtherecommenda-tionsoftheevaluation.

A number of people contributed to this evalua-tion, particularly the evaluation team composedofA.K.ShivaKumar,teamleader,ZendaMunroOfirandKunzangDechenDorji, teammembers,Elizabeth K. Lang, Research Assistant and RuthAbraham, the Evaluation Office team member

and task manager. We would also like to thankKutisha Ebron and Anish Pradhan for theiradministrative support. We would also like toexpressourappreciationtoMargoAlderton,editorofthisreport.

Thepreparationoftheevaluationwasalsothanksto the excellent collaboration and openness ofthe UNDP Country Office in Bhutan, led bythe Resident Representative Nicholas Rosellini,the Deputy Resident Representative, ToshihiroTanaka,andthesupportofstaffmembersTenzinThinley and Wangdi Tshering, and to all theUNDP Bhutan staff. I would also like to thank,Jean-ClaudeRogivue,RazinaBilgramiandMariaSuokko of the Regional Bureau for Asia and thePacific, for their cooperation. Lastly this reportwould not be possible without the strong interestandsupportoftheRoyalGovernmentofBhutanatthecentraland local levels.TheADRis indebtedtorepresentativesofcivilsociety,theprivatesector,donors, and from representatives of the UnitedNations Country Team for their cooperation.The stakeholder workshop to discuss the report’sfindingsandrecommendationshasgreatlyenrichedthefinalreport.

UNDPhasbeenapartneroftheRoyalGovernmentofBhutansince1973.Ihopethatthefindingsandrecommendations of this report will assist UNDPin continuing and improving the effectiveness ofits assistance in Bhutan in responding to the newchallengesthatitspeoplewillfaceasademocracy,and in providing broader lessons that may be ofrelevancetoUNDPanditspartnersinternationally.

SaraswathiMenon

Director,EvaluationOffice

C O N T E N T S v

CONTENTS

Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................ viiExecutive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 81.1Purpose....................................................................................................................................................91.2Methodology......................................................................................................................................... 101.3Limitations............................................................................................................................................ 11

2. Development Context ................................................................................................................132.1Stateofhumandevelopment.................................................................................................................152.2FinancingBhutan’shumandevelopment.............................................................................................. 192.3Nationaldevelopmentchallenges..........................................................................................................22

3. UNDP’s Contributions to Development Results ........................................................................ 253.1UNDPinBhutan..................................................................................................................................253.2UNDPpartnerships.............................................................................................................................. 273.3RoundTableMeetings(RTMs)...........................................................................................................283.4UNDP’scontributionasadevelopmentpartner................................................................................... 293.5Sustainabilityofresults.........................................................................................................................403.6Summary............................................................................................................................................... 41

4. UNDP’s Strategic Positioning ....................................................................................................424.1Comparativeadvantages........................................................................................................................ 424.2FactorscontributingtoUNDP’seffectiveness...................................................................................... 424.3FactorsdetractingfromUNDP’sperformance..................................................................................... 434.4Strengtheningpartnerships................................................................................................................... 454.5UNresidentsystemcoordinationrole................................................................................................... 474.6Bhutan’sgraduationfromleast-developedcountrystatus.....................................................................48

5. Lessons and Recommendations......................................................................................................... 495.1Lessonslearned..................................................................................................................................... 495.2Recommendations................................................................................................................................. 50

vi C O N T E N T S

ANNExES

Annex1.TermsofReference......................................................................................................................54Annex2.ListofPeopleConsulted............................................................................................................. 59Annex3.KeyDocumentsConsulted.........................................................................................................66Annex4.MethodologyandEvaluationQuestions..................................................................................... 68Annex5.MapofIntendedResults............................................................................................................. 75

TAbLES

Table1.MDGstatus.................................................................................................................................. 13Table2.ODAinflowstoBhutan,1985-2005.............................................................................................20Table3.ODAbymajordevelopmentpartnerandareasoffocus................................................................ 21

bOxES

Box1.ObjectivesoftheADR......................................................................................................................8Box2.UsesoftheADR...............................................................................................................................9Box3.Implicationsofsmallpopulationsize...............................................................................................15Box4.UNDPinBhutan–AtaGlance.....................................................................................................26Box5.PerceptionsregardingUNDP’scontributionstodevelopmentresults.............................................29Box6.PerceptionsregardingUNDP’scontributionstowardsimprovinggovernance...............................31Box7.PerceptionsregardingUNDP’scontributionstowardspovertyreduction.......................................32Box8.PerceptionsregardingUNDP’scontributionstowardsenergyandenvironment............................36Box9.PerceptionsregardingUNDP’scontributionstowardspromotinggenderequity............................. 39Box10.UNDP’sroleandcontribution–Partners’Perceptions....................................................................46

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

ADB AsianDevelopmentBank

ADR AssessmentofDevelopmentResults

CBOs CommunityBasedOrganizations

CCA CommonCountryAssessment

CCF CountryCooperationFramework

CEDAW ConventionontheEliminationofAllFormsofDiscriminationAgainstWomen

CO CountryOffice

DADM DepartmentofAidandDebtManagement

DBS DirectBudgetSupport

DLG DepartmentofLocalGovernance

DSP DecentralizationSupportProgramme

DT DzongkhagTshogdue

DYT DzongkhagYargeTshogchhung

EC EuropeanCommission

FYP FiveYearPlan

GDP GrossDomesticProduct

GEF GlobalEnvironmentFacility

GNH GrossNationalHappiness

GTZ TechnicalarmoftheGermanDevelopmentAgency

GYT GewogYargyeTshogchhung

HDI HumanDevelopmentIndex

Helvetas SwissAssociationforInternationalCooperation

ICDP IntegratedConservationDevelopmentProgramme

IHDP IntegratedHorticultureDevelopmentProgramme

LEAP LocalEnvironmentalActionPlan

M&E MonitoringandEvaluation

MDG MillenniumDevelopmentGoal

MEAP Micro-EnvironmentalActionPlan

MYFF Multi-YearFundingFramework

NCWC NationalCommissionforWomenandChildren

NEX NationalExecution

NGO Non-GovernmentalOrganization

ACRONYMS AND AbbREVIATIONS

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

ODA OfficialDevelopmentAssistance

REDP RuralEnterpriseDevelopmentProgramme

RENEW RespectEducateNurtureandEmpowerWomen

RGoB RoyalGovernmentofBhutan

RMA RoyalMonetaryAuthority

RNR RenewableNaturalResources

RSPN RoyalSocietyfortheProtectionofNature

RTM RoundTableMeeting

SNV Netherlands-basedinternationaldevelopmentorganization

SQCA StandardsandQualityControlAuthority

SRF StrategicResultsFramework

UNCDF UnitedNationsCapitalDevelopmentFund

UNDAF UnitedNationsDevelopmentAssistanceFramework

UNDMT UnitedNationsDisasterManagementTeam

UNIFEM UnitedNationsDevelopmentFundforWomen

UNV UnitedNationsVolunteer

WFP WorldFoodProgramme

WWF WorldWildlifeFund

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y �

Bhutanisinthemidstofahistorictransitionfrommonarchytoafull-fledgeddemocracyafterhavingestablishedpeace,stabilityandimpressivegainsinhumandevelopment.Highexpectationstosuccess-fully manage the transition make it even moreimportant for Bhutan’s development partners—nationaland international—toreflectupon futuresupport in order to further accelerate and sustainprogressinthecomingyears.ThisisanopportunemomentforUNDPtoassess,andifneeded,reposi-tionandrestructureitsassistancetoBhutaninordertoenhancedevelopmenteffectiveness.TheAssess-ment of Development Results (ADR) exercise istimely in that it is an independent evaluation ofUNDP’scontributiontoBhutan’sdevelopment,theresultsofwhichwillbeusedasaninputtoUNDP’snextcountryprogramme(2008-2012)inBhutan.

Policymaking and programming in Bhutan areuniquely guided by the concept of gross nationalhappiness (GNH), which emphasizes sustainableandequitable socioeconomicdevelopment,conser-vationoftheenvironment,preservationandpromo-tionofculture,andpromotionofgoodgovernance.

UNDP Bhutan has, over the years, establishedan extremely positive relationship with the RoyalGovernment of Bhutan (RGoB)—a relationshipthat is characterizedbymutual trust, respect andconstructiveengagement.UNDPassistance,start-ing in 1973, has covered a number of fields fromtelecommunicationsandcivilaviationtohorticul-tureandpromotionofculturalheritage.

During theperiodunder review, January2000 toDecember 2005, UNDP Bhutan has contributedmainly to five programmatic areas: governance,povertyreduction,energyandenvironment,genderequity, andnaturaldisaster reduction.UNDP(inpartnership with United Nations Capital Devel-opment Fund [UNCDF] and United NationsVolunteer [UNV]) is currently the largest UN

system development partner in Bhutan. Between1997-2001,UNDP’sprogrammebudgetinBhutantotaledUSD18.2million.In2004,UNDP’stotalexpenditureforBhutanwasUSD3.34million.Forthe period 2002-2006, the amount budgeted wasUSD13.2million.

Currently, the staff in charge of managing theaffairsofUNDPBhutanincludetwointernationalstaff members, seven national officers, 23 generalstaffmembers,oneJuniorProgrammeOfficerandfiveUNVs.

SeveralnewopportunitiesforUNDPtoenhanceitscontributionareexpectedtoemergewiththetran-sitiontodemocracyin2008,whenademocraticallyelectedgovernmentwillbegintofunctionunderanewconstitution.

Development context: Bhutan is a small country672,4251peoplelocatedinSouthAsiaatthefootoftheHimalayas.WithapercapitagrossnationalincomeofUSD1,005in2005—40percenthigherthanthatofIndiaandmorethan70percenthigherthantheaverageincomeoflowincomecountries—Bhutan has recorded impressive gains in humandevelopmentafterendingitsself-imposedisolationin 1961. The country’s human development index(HDI)has grown steadily from0.325 in1984 to0.583 in2003,placingBhutan in the categoryofmediumhumandevelopmentcountries.

Asensiblemacroeconomicpolicyhasensuredhighgrowth,positivebalanceofpayments,andmanage-able levels of inflation and public debt. Annualgrossdomesticproduct(GDP)growthsince1980has averaged 7 percent. This has been sustainedprincipallybyhydropowerdevelopment,exportofsurplus power to India, and creation of extensiveinfrastructure including road networks, feederroadstoimproveruralconnectivity,electricityandtelecommunicationfacilities.Nevertheless,Bhutanfaces several development challenges. Among

ExECUTIVE SUMMARY

___________________________________________________________________________1. Office of Census Commissioner, Population and Housing Census of Bhutan, Thimphu, Bhutan, 2005

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

the priority issues identified by RGoB and otherpartnersaretheneedtoeliminatepoverty,reduceinequalities, generate employment (especially foryoungpeople),enhancereachandqualityofbasicsocial services, transition smoothly to parliamen-tary democracy, better manage the environment,developcivilsocietyorganizationsandtheprivatesector, andpromote leadership, especially in localgovernments.Critical toBhutan’s futuredevelop-mentwillalsobeapeacefulresolutionoftheissueofthepeopleinthecampsinEasternNepal.

Role of official development assistance (ODA):ODAhasplayedanimportantroleinfinancingandpromotinghumandevelopmentinBhutan.Accord-ingtoUNDP’sHumanDevelopmentReport2006,Bhutan received USD 88 per capita as ODA in2003,accountingfor11.1percentoftheGDP—thehighestproportioninSouthAsia.ODAtoBhutanhasmore thandoubled, fromUSD71million in1990toUSD147millionin2004.TheUNsystemhasemergedasthelargestcontributortoBhutan’sdevelopment.ODAhasbeenmostlyusedtofundinvestments in and expansion of much neededphysical and social infrastructure, housing andurban development, and the Renewable NaturalResources(RNR)sector.

The success of development outcomes in Bhutan,risingpercapitaincomesandtheincreasingabilityofthecountrytomeetitsowndevelopmentoutlayshave paradoxically created a situation whereinsomeofthedevelopmentpartnersarenowconsid-ering either reducing levels of ODA or a gradualphasing out of their assistance. This is a seriousconcern.Aprematurewithdrawalor reductionofODA resources could potentially jeopardize thedevelopment gains attained so far and adverselyaffectBhutan’slong-termsustainabledevelopmentatthiscriticaljuncturewhenBhutanhasembarkedonatransitiontodemocracy.EvenasrevenueandGDPareexpected togrowsubstantiallywith thecommissioningofthe1,020MWTalahydroelectricproject(thebiggestjointundertakingbetweenIndiaand Bhutan so far, which is expected to generate4,865millionkWh/yr),socialsectorexpendituresareprojectedtorisesteeplyasthestategearsitselftomeettheneedsofalargeyoungpopulationandfulfill its commitment to assure citizens a decentqualityof life.At thesametime, thegovernment

hastomeetrisingdebtandinterestobligationsinadditiontostartingrepaymentsforthehydro-powerprojectalmostimmediately.Costsofgovernancearealsoexpectedtoincreaseasmanynewinstitutionsessentialunderdemocracy(suchastheParliament)arebeingsetupforthefirsttimeandinstitutionsoflocalgovernancearefurtherstrengthened.

In the immediate term, Bhutan may increasinglydependonODA. In the long term,however, thecountryhasthepotentialtoreduceitsdependenceon foreign aid, especially as standards of livingimprove, incomesexpand,andhumancapabilitiesareenhanced.

UNDP’s contribution as a development partner:RGoB provides a comprehensive developmentframework, articulated in the Five Year Plansandotherpolicydocuments, that setoutnationalprioritiesandgoalsforthecountry.2Inthissense,RGoBretainsfullownershipofpolicyandstrategydevelopmentaswellasfieldexecution.Withinthiscontext,UNDPiscalleduponbyRGoBtoexplorenewapproachesandnewareas,mobilizetechnicalassistance, conduct studies that can informpolicyandprogramming,andbringlessonslearnedfromthe field to inform policy makers. In extendingsupport,UNDPoftenworks‘behindthescenes’inclosepartnershipwithRGoB.UNDPhasacquireda high profile for its contribution in all the fiveprogrammingareas(governance,povertyreduction,energyandenvironment,genderequityandnaturaldisasterreduction).ContributingtoUNDP’sposi-tiveimageareitsalignmentwithandresponsivenesstonationaldevelopmentpriorities,flexiblefundingmodalities, cross-sectoral mandate, coordinationroleamongUNpartners,globalaccesstohigh-leveltechnicalexpertise,andabilitytoidentifyandhelprespondtoemergingissuesbykeepingafingerontheinternationalandnationaldevelopmentpulse.

Some of UNDP’s important contributions havebeentoraiseawarenessthrougheffectiveadvocacy,create an enabling policy environment throughpreparatorywork,extenddirectsupportforpolicyandstrategydevelopment,andenhanceinstitution-alcapacityinthepublicsector.RGoBalsorecog-nizesthecontributionofUNDP’s‘softassistance’,such as donor coordination, assisting RGoB ininternational conventions, preparing Millennium

___________________________________________________________________________2. See, for example, two reports brought out by RGoB: ‘Bhutan 2020: A Vision for Peace, Prosperity and Happiness, 2000’, and ‘Good

Governance Plus: In Pursuit of Gross National Happiness 2005’.


DevelopmentGoal(MDG)ReportsandNationalHuman Development Reports, advocating andsupportingthedevelopmentoftheGNHconcept,mobilizingadhoctechnicalassistance,andsupport-inginstitutionalstrengtheninginthepublicsector,suchastheNationalCommissionforWomenandChildren(NCWC).

Onthewhole,theassessmentrevealsthatUNDP’scontributions are in linewith intendedoutcomes.Evidence for this comes from examining thesystematicdocumentationofmilestonesandgener-ationofreportsfollowingUNDP’smovetoadopta results-based approach. In cases where resultsdidnotoccuraccordingtoplan,thisappearstobelargely attributable to insufficient implementationcapacities among institutions at the local level,exacerbated by the accelerating pace of reformandgrowingdemandsoncentralplanning.Otherconstraining factors are perceived deficiencies insomeUNDPinstitutionalsystems(forexample,infinancialandreportingsystems),andprocessesthatlimitinstitutionallearning.

Comparative advantages:UNDPis,byandlarge,seenasacatalystthatcontinuestoundergochangesinorder tokeeppacewithchangingnationalandlocalneeds.Comparedtootherdevelopmentagen-cies operating in Bhutan, UNDP enjoys manyadvantages.TheseincludeaclosepartnershipwithRGoB,supporttomultisectoral interventions,thecapacitytocoordinateandmobilizesupportwithintheUNsystem,accesstoimpartialglobalexpertise,thecapacitytoextendfundingsupportthatisflex-ibleandresponsive,andtheabilitytotakerisksandtogloballyshowcaseBhutan’sachievements.

External factors contributing to UNDP’s effec-tiveness:PublicpolicyinBhutanisguidedbytheconceptofGNHwhich,inmanyways,complementsUNDP’sideaofhumandevelopment.Recentshiftsinpoliticalprioritiestowardsgreaterempowermentandengagementofpeople,forinstance,areconsis-tentwithUNDP’shumandevelopmentapproach.Themovetowardsdecentralizationassistsground-levelimplementationbyprovidingopportunitiesforbettermobilizingandinvolvingnon-governmentalorganizations (NGOs), community-based organi-zations (CBOs)andcivil society.UNDPhasalsobenefited fromRGoB’s strongsenseofownershipofUNDP’sinterventionsandbyaseriesofreformsinBhutanspearheadedbyRGoB.Atthesametime,

RGoBhasbeenopentonewideasandhasshownaneagernessto learnfromlocalandinternationalexperiences.Equallyimportanthasbeentheaccep-tance of UNDP’s leadership role by developmentpartnersinBhutan.

Internal factors contributing to UNDP’s effec-tiveness:ManyinternalfactorshavecontributedtoUNDP’seffectiveness.Asdiscussedearlier,UNDPhascapitalizedonitslongassociationwithRGoB,extendedsupporttoawiderangeofactivities,andremained flexible and responsive to the country’sneeds. It has tapped a broad range of expertiseavailableinUNDPHeadquarters,regionalcentresandacrossUNagencies.UNDPhasalsodisplayedagoodabilitytoplaninarapidlychangingenviron-ment. It has encouraged participatory approachestoplanningandfocusedongeneratingevidencetoinformpolicyanddecisionmaking.Today,itiswellplacedtoworkonbothupstreamanddownstreamissuesofdevelopment andhas also capitalizedonopportunities to establish strong policy-practicelinkagesindifferentsectors.

External factors detracting from UNDP’s performance:Manyexternalfactorshaveprevent-ed UNDP from being more effective. Bhutan’stopography, rough weather, mountainous terrainand landlocked status pose serious challenges foraccelerating human development. The country’ssmallandwidelyscatteredpopulationcompoundsthe challenges. As a result, while physical infra-structurehasexpandedconsiderablyovertheyears,it isstill inadequatetoensureuniversalreachandeffective delivery of basic social services and toestablisheffectivesystemsoflocalgovernanceandconnectivity to markets. Speedy political reformstowards democracy and decentralization havegreatly increased the need for administrative andmanagerial capacityaswell as leadershipatmanylevels of government. A constraining factor hasbeen RGoB’s capacities for planning and imple-mentation, especially in local governments. Thisisalsoareasonwhyinter-sectoralconvergenceandcoordinationremainweak.Atthesametime,CBOsandNGOsarefewinnumber,andtheircapacitiesarealsoinsufficientlydeveloped.Similarly,veryfewindependent research and consulting institutions,policygroupsoragenciesintheprivatesectorservethecriticalfunctionofindependentevaluationandpublicreporting.

� E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

Internal factors detracting from UNDP’s perfor-mance:Anumberofinternalfactorshavelimitedthe capacity of UNDP Bhutan to maximize itscontributions. While UNDP has dovetailed itsoperations with government priorities, this hasnot necessarily ensured adequate coherence andprogrammefocus.Beingflexible,agileandcapableoftakingriskshasenabledUNDPtoberesponsiveandtofunctionasacatalyst.However,ithasalsogiven rise toa feeling thatUNDP’s interventionsare small, scattered and unfocused. In addition,while UNDP has established strong ties withthe central government, this is not the case withlocal governments. UNDP Bhutan’s relativelysmallstaffseemsoverworked—burdenedbothbyUNDP programming work and the coordinationroleemanating fromthedual rolesof theUNDPResident Representative serving as the UN Resi-dentCoordinatoraswell.Finally,thereisroomforimproving monitoring and evaluation systems byfocusing,tostartwith,onthechangesthatUNDPis aiming to bring about, rather than on what isbeingdone.

Partnerships:UNDPBhutanhasbuiltsuccessfulpartnerships with UN agencies and bilateral andmultilateraldonors.StakeholdersapplaudUNDP’sroleasapartneranddescribeUNDPasbeinganhonest broker, independent, with no associatedagenda, anda transparent andeffective coordina-tor. Most partners see a useful synergy betweenUNDP’soperationsandtheirown.PartnersregardUNDPasbeingmosteffectiveinprovidinginterna-tionalexpertise,extendingsupportforpolicyadvicetothegovernment,catalyzingdevelopmentaction,mobilizingresources,promotingcollaborationandnetworks,strengtheningcapacity,andcoordinating(notdirectingordictating)developmentassistanceamongUNagenciesandotherpartners.However,UNDP has been less successful in building part-nerships with the private sector, NGOs and civilsocietyorganizations.

UN resident system coordination role:TheResi-dent Coordinator is credited with taking a leadroleinpromotingandcoordinatingactionsaroundthe MDGs. The Common Country Assessment(CCA) and United Nations Development Assis-tance Framework (UNDAF) provide the unifiedoverallplanningstructurefortheUnitedNation’sdevelopment assistance in Bhutan. The Round

TableMeetings(RTMs),co-chairedbyRGoBandUNDP,haveservedasausefulforumforpromot-ingconsultationsbetweendevelopingcountriesandassistance partners on issues of common interestand development themes. Stakeholders appreciateUNDP’s role in improving coordination throughtheThemeGroups,promotingpolicydialoguewithRGoB,andharmonizingprogrammingefforts.Atsomelevel,however,manyingovernmentandcivilsociety areunable todistinguishbetweenUNDPand the United Nations. This has sometimesresulted in incorrectly or inadvertently creditingUNDP with achievements that the organizationis not entirely responsible for.Also, there is littleevidence to suggest that the UN country team isengagedinactivelypromotingjointprogramming,monitoringandevaluations,althoughtheintentiontodosoisoftenexpressed.

Lessons learned:Somegenerallessonsareobvious.ItisimportantfortheUNDPcountryoffice(CO),for instance, toavoidnormaldevelopmentpitfallssuchastop-downplanning,superficialconsultationand insufficient emphasis on empowerment whenbuildingcapacityandexecutingprojects.However,there are three specific lessons from the UNDPBhutan’sexperiencethatareworthnoting.

Cultivating partnerships: UNDP Bhutan haslessons to offer in cultivating relationships withgovernments.ThetrustthattheCOenjoysreflectsthe sensitivity, astuteness and respect with whichUNDPhascultivateditsrelationshipswithRGoB.TheCOhaschosennotto‘impose’oreven‘appearto impose’ its own prescriptions. It has partneredwithRGoBtothinkthroughseveralinterventionsandimplementthematapacesetbyRGoB.Threeissues are important while nurturing governmentrelations.One,closeproximitytoanddovetailingofUNDP’sprogrammeswiththatofgovernment,while necessary, make it difficult for UNDP toclearly identify what its specific contributions aretothecountry’sdevelopment.Often,thetendencyis for UNDP to take credit for national achieve-ments and absolve itself of responsibility for anyshortcomingsbypointingtodeficienciesingovern-ment. It is therefore important to develop withinUNDPastrongercultureofresults-basedmanage-mentwherecontinuousmonitoringandevaluationbecome integral to performance assessment andreporting. Two, there is need to strike a balance


betweendevelopingrelationshipswiththegovern-mentontheonehandandwiththeprivatesectorandcivilsocietyontheother.Thismaynotalwaysbeeasyandneedstobeconsciouslyandproactivelypursued.Three,giventherapidlychangingexternalenvironment,itisnecessaryforUNDPtoconstant-ly review theunderlyingpathwaysof change thatguide its programming efforts by reviewing whatactions with what people and in what settingswillproducethedesiredoutcomes.Thiswillmakethe organization more alert, more responsive andmorecapableofmakingmid-coursecorrectionstoitsprogrammes.

Balancing upstream and downstream work: Ensuring development effectiveness requires bothappropriate upstream and downstream interven-tions. UNDP Bhutan, by and large, scores wellin terms of its upstream policy contributions toBhutan’sdevelopment.Muchlessvisible,however,isthecontributiontodownstreameffectivenessandimpactat the local level.Three factorsneedtobebetterunderstood.First,attheprojectdesignstage,UNDP and the central government must discussanddevelopadecentralizedsystemofprogrammeimplementationthatcanensureeffectiveflowanduseoffundsbylocalbodies.Theflowofresourcesmust be adequate to deliver the expected outputsandoutcomes.Second,theCOmustworktowardsdeveloping scaling up strategies, especially whereinterventions start as pilot projects and needto be expanded. Third, the CO needs to put inplaceeffectivequalityevaluationmechanismsthatcan highlight lessons for replication as scalingupoccurs.

Becoming a knowledge organization:RGoBhasbeen drawing upon UNDP Bhutan’s support fortappinginformationandknowledgeinmanyareaswhere local expertise has been insufficient. Thisfeature, and not the amount of funds, has beenthebasisfortherelationshipoftrustthathasbeenbuiltbetweenUNDPBhutanandRGoB.TheCOhasdrawnuponexpertise fromUNDP’s regionalcentres,RegionalBureauforAsiaandthePacific,andcorporatedivisionsofUNDP,especiallyinareaswhere UNDP Bhutan has not had the necessary

skillstorespondtorequestsfromRGoB.Thisfunc-tionneedsconsiderablestrengthening.Intheyearstocome,UNDP’scontributionwillbedeterminedincreasinglybytheextenttowhichitinformspublicdecisionmakingbydrawingon its global knowl-edgeofwhatworksandwhatdoesn’t.Tobetterdothis, UNDP will need to rapidly transform itselfintoaneffectiveknowledgeorganization.

Recommendations: Improvements in the func-tioning of UNDP Bhutan as well as enhancedsupportfromtheUNDPRegionalBureauforAsiaandthePacific,regionalcentresandotherUNDPheadquarterunitscanfurtherstrengthenUNDP’sdevelopmenteffectivenessinBhutan.ListedbelowarespecificrecommendationsfortheconsiderationofdifferentstakeholderswithinUNDP.

RECOMMENDATIONS TO UNDP bhUTAN

POSITIONINg

• Improve responsiveness: There is considerableroom for UNDP Bhutan to improve its abilityto assist RGoB in identifying and articulatingpolicychoicestomoreproactivelyaddressmanyof the challenges facing Bhutan. These wouldinclude, for instance, examining and findingappropriatesolutionstoconcernsofpovertyandinequality, youth unemployment, rural-urbanmigration,limitedcapacitiesatthelocallevel,aweakprivatesectorandcapacitybuildingofcivilsocietyorganizations.

• Rearticulate a theory of change: A ‘theoryofchange’ is theproductof ‘aseriesofcritical-thinking exercises that provides a comprehen-sive picture of the early-and intermediate-termchangesinagivencommunitythatareneededtoreachalong-termgoalarticulatedbythecommu-nity.’3 Re-examining four variables—actions,people, setting and outcomes—is a useful wayforanyorganizationtofurtherimproveitsdevel-opment effectiveness. Strategic thinking and acommonunderstandingofthedevelopmentpathwill enable UNDP Bhutan to tap better into

___________________________________________________________________________3. Articulating a Theory of Change helps to (i) identify the issue(s) that an intervention will address, (ii) spell out the roles and responsi-

bilities of different stakeholders, (iii) set benchmarks for groups that will benefit from the programme, (iv) analyse the policy environ-ment in which the programme will be implemented, and (v) outline strategies that will help achieve specific outcomes. for details, see discussions, such as www.evaluationtools.org/plan_theory.asp and www.gse.harvard.edu/hfrp/eval/issue30/expert3.html

� E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

globalknowledgeandenableBhutantocreateanappropriateenvironmentforpolicyreformsandprogrammatic interventions.DoingsowillalsoenableUNDPBhutantostrikeabetterbalancebetween upstream and downstream interven-tions,andaddresstheissuesofscatterofprojects,focus,policyandfieldlinkages.

• Develop into a knowledge centre:ThereisarealopportunityforUNDPBhutantopositionitselfas a knowledge centre. Doing so will greatlystrengthenthesupportingrolethatitplaysvis-à-visRGoBandwillalsofulfilltheexpectationsofother development partners. There is, however,a need to formalize and improve knowledgecreation, management and dissemination. Thiswillrequirepayingmoreattentiontoconcurrentproject (and even programme) monitoring andevaluation,synthesisofactionresearchandeval-uationlessons.Inaddition,UNDPBhutancouldplayaconstructiveroleinencouragingknowledgenetworks within the country. Effective use ofinformation and communications technologycan help make the generation and sharing ofknowledge more inclusive and participatory.UNDP can also play a useful role in ensuringthatknowledgedisseminationresultsinfurtherenrichingthequalityofpublicdiscourse.

PROgRAMMINg

• Consolidate interventions:Thereisstillmuchground to cover in terms of advancing humandevelopment, eliminating human poverty andreducing inequalities. While continuing itsactivities in the current programming areas,UNDPBhutanshouldpayspecialattention tonationaldevelopmentchallengesthatarelikelytoassumeimportanceinthecomingdecade.Thiswould include focusing on RGoB-articulatedpriority areas including anti-corruption, goodgovernance,leadership,cultureandethics.

• Sharpen focus: UNDP has been particularlyeffective in evolving with the needs of RGoB.Although a majority of UNDP’s resources areconcentrated in only two large projects—RuralEnterprise Development Programme (REDP)andDecentralizationSupport—itseffortsappearscatteredduetotheambitiousdesignofthetwoprojects and the slow progress towards resultsbecauseofinsufficientinstitutionalandindividual

capacities.Theresults-basedapproachandMulti-YearFundingFrameworkhavehelpedtosharpenUNDP’s work towards outcomes, but they stillneedtobebetterinternalizedinordertobecomemoreoutcomeandlessprocessorientated.

• Strengthen downstream delivery: UNDPBhutanhasbeensuccessfulinsupportingRGoBin a number of upstream policy initiatives. Itssupport and impact downstream need to bemade more effective and obvious. Work at thefield level requires more effort, resources andmonitoringcapacity.Thepotential contributionof NGOs and CBOs can be substantial, butthisrequiresbothnurturingandinvestmentsincapacitybuilding.Assessingdownstreamcontri-butionshouldbeimprovedbybettermonitoringattheprojectlevel,specifyingclearmethodolo-giesinprojectevaluationandresolvingconflict-ingviewsontheeffectivenessofpartnerships.

• Capacity building:UNDPBhutanshouldworktowardsimprovingefficiencyaswellasgovern-mentcapacityatcentralandlocal levelstodealwiththedemandsof implementation.Itshouldfocusonfurtherdevelopingpublicsectorcapacity,particularlyintheareasofdisastermanagement,genderanalysisandmainstreaming,sustainableuse and management of natural resources, andin fulfilling human rights treaty obligations.TheCOshouldgenerateadequatesynergiesandlinkagesbetweenexecutingagenciesandworktoease rigid and ineffective institutional systems.TheUNcountry teamshouldassesswhether ithas sufficient policy and analytical capacity tohelp the RGoB use direct budget support. Atthesametime, itwillbe important forUNDPBhutantofindwaysandmeansofenhancingthecapacityandresourcesoftheprivatesectorandNGOsaswell.

• Monitoring and evaluation:Bettermonitoring,evaluationandknowledgemanagementsystemsare needed to maximize UNDP’s impact andthatofitspartnersinadvancingthedevelopmentagenda.UNDP,togetherwiththeUNsysteminBhutan,shouldassistinbuildingnationalcapac-ityformonitoringandevaluation.

• Aid mobilization and coordination:Giventheresource pressures on RGoB, UNDP Bhutancan assist by better leveraging its resources tomobilizeadditionalexternalfundsandhelpwith

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y 7

prioritysetting.UNDPBhutancanactasafilterforRGoB,initiateadialoguewithpotentialpart-ners,andhelp identifyandarticulatebetter theresourceneedsofdifferent sectors.Moreatten-tionwillalsoneedtobepaidtomanagingaidbyintroducinggreatertransparencyandemphasiz-ingtheimportanceofmutualaccountability.

• Round Table Meetings (RTMs): A uniquefeature of development cooperation in BhutanistheextremelyusefulrolethattheRTMshaveplayed in advancing the development agenda.As co-chairof theRTMs,UNDPBhutanhassupportedRGoBin this initiative thathashadseveral beneficial outcomes. The RTM is nota ‘pledging’ meeting where different interna-tionalagenciescommitfinancialresources.Overthe years, it has emerged as a platform fordevelopmentdialogueanddiscussionsonissuesofinterestandconcerntoallparticipants.UNDPshouldcontinuetosupporttheRTMsandmakethemanevenmoreeffectiveforumforpromot-ingdevelopmentdialogueandforfollow-upwithRGoBonissuesdiscussedattheRTMs.

• Harmonization:UNDP’ssubstantiveupstreamaswellasdownstreamworkplaces it inagoodposition to better link policy and practiceeffectively. There is scope for developing moreeffective mechanisms to build bridges andpromote harmonization between UNDP anditsdevelopmentpartners.Thiswillrequiremoreactively promoting management practices thatareresultsorientedandharmonized.

• Advocacy: Bhutan is likely to experience rapidpolitical, social and economic transformationsoccurring with varying time lags and varyingintensities. In this context, it is important fortheResidentCoordinator—andforUNDP—toadvocateforthesetofuniversalvaluesenshrinedintheMillenniumDeclaration:freedom,equal-ity, solidarity, tolerance, respect for nature andsharedresponsibility.TheMillenniumDeclara-tionalsoidentifiesseveralkeyobjectivesinorderto translate these shared values into actions:peace, security and disarmament; developmentandpovertyeradication;protectingourcommonenvironment; human rights, democracy andgoodgovernance;andprotectingthevulnerable.Incorporating these values into its policies willbe critical for Bhutan and UNDP can play a

useful role in advocating for their inclusion inpolicyformulation.

RECOMMENDATION TO REgIONAL CENTRES

UNDPBhutanhas receivedperiodicandspecial-izedsupportfromtheregionalcentresinColomboandBangkokinitsmainareasofprogramming.Inthecomingyears,thepotentialforUNDPregionalcentres to contribute to Bhutan’s development islikely to increase substantially. It would help toidentify specific areaswhereUNDPcanbemoreeffective in mobilizing external aid and technicalsupport.Creatingaknowledgebaseandacompre-hensive resource centre are likely to enhance thecontributionoftheregionalcentres.

RECOMMENDATION TO UNDP hEADqUARTERS

There are two areas that require the attention ofUNDP’s management. The first is simplificationof bureaucratic procedures. Staff members inthe CO as well as government counterpartscommonlyexpresstheviewthatUNDP’scorporateproceduresareunnecessarilycumbersomeandtimeconsuming. Indeed, many staff members seem tobeoverburdenedbyroutinereportingrequirementsleavinglittletimeforthinkingcreativelyabouttheirprogrammes.Useofstafftimeandstaffdeploymentneed tobe examined and improvedupon ifmoretangibleresultsaretoaccrue.Second,itisnecessaryto assess the viability of multiple planning andresultsframeworks.TheEvaluationTeamreviewedseveralkeydocumentssuchastheStrategicResultsFramework, Multi-Year Funding Framework andResults-OrientatedAnnualReports.Theusefulnessof these documents is not apparent. It wouldbe useful for UNDP to undertake a systematicassessmentoftheextenttowhichtheseinstrumentsareeffective inactuallyenabling theCOtoplan,implementanddeliverbetteronresults.

AttheHeadquarters,thereisalsoahighpotentialfor the Regional Bureau for Asia and Pacific toenhanceitscontributiontoBhutan’sdevelopment.TheBureauhasspecializedknowledgeofcountriesintheregionandcountriesthathaveundergoneorareundergoingpoliticaltransitions.ThisknowledgebaseneedstobebettertappedandusedtoinformpolicyformulationanddecisionmakinginBhutan.

C H A P T E R 1�

Bhutanisasmallcountryof672,425people.It islocated in South Asia at the foot of the Himala-yas and is landlockedbetween twoof theworld’smost populous nations: India and China. With apercapitagrossnationalincomeofUSD1,005in2005—40percenthigherthanIndiaandmorethan70percenthigherthantheaverageincomeof lowincomecountries—Bhutanhasrecordedimpressivegainsinhumandevelopmentafterendingitsself-imposedisolationin1961.Lifeexpectancyatbirthhas increased from 42 years during 1970-1975 to66yearsin2004,andtheinfantmortalityratehasbeenmorethanhalvedfrom156deathsper1,000livebirthsin1970to40deathsper1,000livebirthsin2005.4Thecountry’shumandevelopmentindex(HDI)has grown steadily from0.325 in1984 to0.583 in2003,placingBhutan in the categoryofmedium human development countries. Policy-makingandprogramminginBhutanareuniquelyguidedbytheconceptofgrossnationalhappiness(GNH), which emphasizes sustainable and equi-table socioeconomicdevelopment, conservationofenvironment,preservationandpromotionofcultureandpromotionofgoodgovernance.

UNDPBhutanhas,since1973,supportedavarietyof activities within the country and has, over theyears,establisheditsreputationasatrustedpartner

of the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGoB).Assessing UNDP’s contributions and exploringfutureopportunitiesassumeaspecialsignificanceasBhutaniscurrentlyinthemidstofahistorictransi-tion from monarchy to democracy. In December2006,HisMajestyKingJigmeSingyeWangchuckhanded over his responsibilities as the MonarchandheadofstateofBhutantotheCrownPrince,Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck. The CrownPrincebecamethefifthKingandhasassumedfullresponsibilitiesoftheheadofstate.In2008,therewillbeademocraticallyelectedgovernmentundera new constitution. The constitution pledges tocreateanenlightenedsocietytopromotehappinessandwell-beingofallbyprovidingaframeworktoensure accountability of the government, respon-siblemanagementofstateresources,independenceof constitutional offices, the ruleof lawand legalprotectionofhumanrights.

TheADRforBhutanassessestheUNDPprogrammeportfolio between January 2000 and December2005. It includes all UNDP activities within thecountry, including structured programmes andprojects as well as ‘soft’ ad hoc forms of support.UNDPassistanceisconsideredirrespectiveofthesourcesoffunding.

Chapter 1

Introduction

1. To provide an independent assessment of development results at the country level, with an emphasis on the strategic relevance and effectiveness of UNDP Bhutan’s country programme.

2. To assess how UNDP has positioned itself strategically to add value in response to national needs and changes in the national development context.

3. To contribute to accountability and learning from experience, taking into account self evaluations at the project and programme level and the role of development partners.

4. To provide a set of clear and forward-looking lessons and options for current and future programming at country and organizational levels by UNDP and its partners.

Box 1. Objectives of the ADR

___________________________________________________________________________4. Data for this section have been largely obtained from the Population and Housing Census 2005, Human Development Report 2006,

National Human Development Reports 2000 and 2005, and Bhutan MDG Progress Report 2005.

I N T R O D U C T I O N �

�.� PURPOSE

TheobjectivesandusesoftheAssessmentofDevel-opmentResults(ADRs)aredetailedinBoxes1and2.TheADRisnotacomprehensiveprogrammeorimplementationevaluation,but insteadfocusesontwocorecomponentsofperformance:

Contributiontonationaldevelopmentresults—TheADR assesses UNDP’s contributions to nationaldevelopment results in terms of outcomes in fiveareas of programming: governance, environmentand energy, poverty reduction, natural disasterreductionandgenderequity.Itincludesananalysisof the extent to which perceived contributionsmatch intentions and assesses progress towardsdesired results. The ADR also identifies internalandexternal factors thathave influencedUNDP’scontributionsaswellasthesustainabilityofresults.

Strategic positioning issues—The ADR assessesthe extent to which UNDP has capitalized onits comparative advantages in response to thedevelopment context, needs and priorities ofstakeholders. It examines UNDP’s contributionstoadvancinghumandevelopment, theattainmentof the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)and United Nations Development AssistanceFramework (UNDAF) objectives in Bhutan.It analyzes the relevance of support to nationalprioritiesandexaminesalignmentandcoordinationwith other partners, anticipation of and responseto contextual changes, responsiveness and the

leveragingofresourcestowardsdesiredresults.TheADRalsoassessestheroleinensuringcoordinationoftheUNsystemthroughtheOfficeoftheResidentCoordinatorandthecohostingwithRGoBoftheRoundTableMeetings(RTMs).

Several factors led to the selection of Bhutan byUNDPasoneofninecountriesinwhichtounder-takeanADRin2006.

First, many new institutions of governance areexpected to emerge within government and civilsociety as Bhutan adopts a democratic system ofgovernmentin2008.Thischangeislikelytoneces-sitatearethinkingbyUNDPofitsroleandcontri-bution to Bhutan’s development as the transitionwillcreatenewopportunitiesforstrengtheningthepractice of democracy and also change thepolicyenvironment inwhichUNDPBhutanoperates insignificantways.

Second, inputs from the ADR can help UNDPBhutan position its support and improve itseffectiveness in the coming years, especially sinceBhutanisinthemidstofdraftingits10thFiveYearPlan(FYP)2008-2012.Thenewplanisexpectedto provide the development framework once thenewconstitution isadoptedandtheparliament isinplacein2008.

Third, UNDP’s country programme and theUNDAF were extended to the end of 2007 tocoincide with the 10th FYP. The completion ofthe 2002-2007 Country Cooperation Framework

Box 2. Uses of the ADR

The ADR should provide opportunities for stakeholders to reflect upon and learn from development approach-es and practices. It should help to improve understanding of UNDP’s comparative strengths, practices and performance. for UNDP in Bhutan, the ADR should help:

• facilitate dialogue with RGoB

• Inform and facilitate strategic decision making and validate country self assessments and evaluations

• Ensure national and corporate accountability

• Identify opportunities for future programming and positioning that can inform the next UNDP cycle and its role in UNDAf

• Improve its strategic position in Bhutan

• Encourage harmonization with development partners

• Guide regional and corporate strategies and practices

• Inform UNDP participation in global debates on development effectiveness

C H A P T E R 1�0

(CCF) presents an opportunity to evaluate theachievementsandresultsoverthepastprogrammecycle.TheUnitedNationshasalsocompleted theCommon Country Assessment (CCA) and hasfinalized theUNDAF.Thefindings of theADRcan provide lessons to inform the next countryprogrammecycleanditsintegrationwiththe10thFYPandcanalsobeusefulinoperationalizingthe2008-2012 country programme in the context ofthenewUNDAF.

Fourth, UNDP is committed to continuing itssupport to Bhutan, which has a history of morethan three decades. The appointment of a newResident Representative of UNDP and ResidentCoordinator of theUN inDecember 2005offersafreshopportunitytoreviewbothpastandcurrentarrangementsandreformulatestrategiestofurtherenhancepartnershipswithRGoB.

In short, the ADR is structured to be forwardlooking.ItexamineswhetherUNDPisontherighttracktohelpacceleratehumandevelopment,meetits own objectives, and achieve desired results. Itassesses the extent towhichUNDP ispositionedto make contributions in line with its strengthsand intent. Lessons and proposed adjustments tostrengthenfutureprogrammingarecriticaloutputsoftheADRprocess.

�.2. METhODOLOgY

The ADR team consisted of two internationalconsultants,anationalconsultant/adviser,andtheTaskManagerfromtheUNDPEvaluationOffice.TheTeamwasassistedbyresearchsupportinNewYorkforthedeskreviewandbyasecondnationalconsultantinBhutanforbothprimaryandsecond-arydatacollection.

The preparation phase of the ADR involved anextensive and critical desk review of backgrounddocuments and a series of consultations withUNDP’s headquarters units and the RegionalBureauforAsiaandPacificinNewYork.Thiswasfollowed by a one-week scoping mission by twoteammembers to clarify theobjectives and scopeof the evaluation with the country office (CO)and its development partners; gather secondarymaterial from UNDP, the United Nations andnon-UNsources;finalize theevaluationapproach

and methodology; commission supplementarystudiesinstrategicandprogrammaticareaswherelittleorpoorinformationexisted;andputinplaceamechanismformanagingsupplementarystudiesandconductingtheassessment.Detailedtermsofreferenceweredrawnup (seeAnnex1).Anentryworkshop with the CO and national stakehold-ers and extensive consultations with experts, COstaffandRGoBrepresentativesduringthemissionwere held to validate preliminary findings. Theinternational consultants subsequently met withkeyUNDP,UnitedNationsCapitalDevelopmentFund(UNCDF)andUnitedNationsDevelopmentFundforWomen(UNIFEM)officialsinNewYorktofurtherrefinethescopeoftheassessment.

Following the scoping mission, two nationalconsultants were commissioned to undertakesupplementarystudiesandresearchtofillinforma-tion gaps. An expert opinion survey with open-endedandclosedquestionswasconductedinpersonorviatelephonebyoneofthenationalconsultants(contracted from Tshar Gyam Consultants)among 21 key representatives from governmentdepartments or agencies, donor agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and civilsociety. The national consultant was tasked withconductingsemi-structuredinterviewswithdzong-khag(district)chiefstoobtaintheirinputondevelop-mentpriorities,UNDPcontributionsandpractices.Theconsultantalsoundertookanextensivenine-dayfield visit to conduct informal meetings with 68nationalofficials,leaders,youth,menandwomenofWangdue,Trongsa andBumthang inorder to gettheirperspectivesondevelopmentachievementsandchallenges, including UNDP’s contributions andpotentialareasforfutureengagement.

Thetwo-weekmainmissiontoBhutanwasunder-taken after detailed background work had beencompletedbynationalconsultants.ThemainmissiontoBhutan included twofield visits toBumthang,Mongar,PunakhaandTrongsafordiscussionswithDzongkhagYargeTshogchhung(DYTs)ordistrictdevelopmentcommittees,GewogYargyeTshogch-hung (GYTs) or block development committees,Gupsorvillagecouncilheads,andprojectpartici-pants.Thefield visit siteswere selected to exposethe ADR team members to key projects in threethematicareas(governance,povertyreduction,andenergyandenvironment)thatcouldillustratecriti-

I N T R O D U C T I O N ��

calfeaturesofUNDPactivitiesatthesub-nationallevel. Six thematic focus group discussions wereheldinThimphutoobtaininputfromandstimu-latedebatebetweenadiverserangeofstakeholders.AimingtoensurestakeholderinputintotheADRdesign,validationoffindings,refinementofrecom-mendationsandstimulating interest inADR, theteam conducted debriefing sessions with the COandkeygovernmentofficialsattheendofthemainmission.Thiswassupplementedbyextensiveinter-viewswithmorethan90individualsfromRGoB,civilsociety,theprivatesector,donoragenciesandotherstakeholders(seeAnnex3).TheTeamLeadervisitedDhaka,BangladeshforaninterviewwiththeformerResidentRepresentativeofUNDPBhutan,the UNDP Regional Centre in Bangkok, andUNIFEM’sRegionalCentreinNewDelhi.Tele-phoneinterviewswerealsoconductedwithstaffatUnitedNationsVolunteer(UNV)headquartersinBonnandtheWorldBankinWashington,DC.

Prior to the publication of the report, a halfday workshop was organized in Thimphu byEO and the CO with all the key stakeholders,to review and discuss the report’s findings andrecommendations.

This ADR adopts an inductive approach and isguidedbyanevaluationmatrix(seeAnnex4)thatoutlinesthekeyquestionsandissuesbeingexam-ined.TheNormsandStandardsforEvaluationintheUNSystem,theHandbookofMonitoringandEvaluation of Results, and the ADR FrameworkPaper5 helped inform the evaluation approach.While the evaluation questions help to sharpenthefocusoftheADR,theteamhasremainedflex-ibleandopentoincorporatingadditionalissuesastheevaluationunfolded.ThisADRhasadoptedavalidation strategy that focuses on: sound evalua-tionmethodology, extensive triangulationusing avariety of data sources (within the constraints oflimitedtimeandresources),engagementofnationalexpertiseasanintegralpartoftheevaluationteam,andtestingofpreliminaryfindingswithstakehold-ersinworkshopsaswellascirculationofthedraftreportforcomments.

Bhutan’sprogressandnationaldevelopmentachieve-ments since 2000 were identified, triangulatingbetween the desk study and informants’ percep-tions.UNDP’scontributionstotheseachievementswere determined in a goal-free manner based oninformantperceptionsandrecentoutcomeevalua-tionsconductedineachofUNDP’sthematicareas.Thisstrategyhelpedtoidentifyunintendedresultsas well as the positive and negative consequencesof UNDP’s work. A similar approach has beenusedtoassessUNDP’sorganizationalpositioninginrelationtothedevelopmentsituationinBhutan,RGoB’s strategies and people’s priorities, and theCO’spositioningstrategiesvis-a-visotherdevelop-mentpartners.Developmentpriorities,eventsandprocessesthatillustrateUNDP’srolehaveinformedthe evaluation. UNDP’s performance was finallyassessedwithcognizanceof the iterative relation-shipbetweenitsresultsandpositioninBhutan.

�.�. LIMITATIONS

ThisADRhasusedevaluation reportsofprojectsand thematic area outcomes with some caution.This is particularly so when statements aboutUNDP contributions are not sufficiently backedwithevidenceandtheevaluationmethodologyhasnotbeenwelldefined.Triangulationhasbeenusedtopartiallymitigatetheseeffects.However,itmaynothavebeendoneadequatelyinsomeareassuchascapacitydevelopmentoractioninthefield,wherethefindingsmaybeunderoroverestimated.

Changes in programming approaches introducedbyUNDPHeadquartersafter2000haveaffectedacleararticulationofoutcomes.ThetwoBhutanCCFcycles covered during this period, CCF 1 (1997-2001)andCCF2(2002-2007),arenotinharmonywith the corporate Strategic Results Framework(SRF)2000-2002andMulti-YearFundingFrame-work(MYFF)2004-2007.Thecorporateswitchtoresults-basedmanagementandfromSRFtoMYFFhasresultedinsomeinevitableretrofittingaswellaslackofsufficientmonitoringinformationfor2003.WhiletheimplementationoftheMYFFframeworkhashelpedtosharpenthefocusoftheCO,thelossofcontinuityinadoptingtheresultsframeworkhascomplicatedsomeoftheanalyses.

___________________________________________________________________________5. UNDP, ‘The Norms and Standards for Evaluation in the UN System’, 2005; ‘Handbook of Monitoring and Evaluation of Results’; ‘ADR

framework Paper’; UNDP Evaluation Office, New York, NY

C H A P T E R 1�2

NounintendedresultsorconsequenceswerefoundfromtheworkofUNDPduringthisperiod.Thisseemshighlyunlikely.Yetoutcomeevaluationsdidnot refer to thisaspectand the team’sdiscussionshavenotyieldedanyinsightsinthisregard.

Attribution of development results can be achallenge and this is even more so in the case ofBhutan.RGoBisastrongdrivingforce formuch

of theactionbydevelopmentpartners,whooftenfacilitateorfundratherthanshapearesult.Atthesame time, contributionsofdevelopmentpartnerstendtobeintertwined.Theanalysesinthisreportare, therefore, based as far as possible on widelyheld perceptions of UNDP’s main contributionsamong key Bhutanese stakeholders, supported bydocumentedevidencewhereverpossible.

I N T R O D U C T I O N ��

In 1961, Bhutan ended its self-imposed isolationwhen the late King Jigme Dorji Wangchuck, thethirdmonarch,launchedthecountryonapathtomodern development. Until then, Bhutan was aself-containedtraditionalruralsociety.Peoplecul-tivatedasmuchastheyneededandhadasustain-able relationship with nature. They bred animals,wove their own clothes and made pottery. Therewere practically no motorable roads; yaks, mulesandhorsesweretheprincipalmodesoftransport.

Today,conditionsareverydifferent.Inarelativelyshortperiodoftime,Bhutanhasrecordedsignifi-cant gains in human development. Bhutan is ontracktomeetseveralMDGsandhasalreadymetsome MDG targets such as reducing the propor-tionofunderweightchildrenandensuringaccesstocleanwaterandpropersanitation(seeTable1).

Chapter 2

Development Context

Table 1. MDG status

Goals, targets and indicatorsPrevious measure-ments (year)

2000 2004 2015 State of progress

GOAL 1: ERADICATE ExTREME POvERTy AND HUNGER

Target 1: Halve by 2015 the proportion of people living below poverty line

• Proportion of population living below national poverty line (%)

36.3% 31.7% 20% On track

• Human poverty index (HPI-1) 33.34 33 Insufficient data

Target 2 : Halve by 2015 the proportion of people who suffer from hunger

• Population below minimum level of dietary energy consumption (2,124 Kcal) (%)

3.8% 1.9% Insufficient data

• Underweight under-five children (%) 38% (1989) 19% 19% Achieved

• Under-height under-five children (%) 56% (1989) 40% 28% On track

GOAL 2: ACHIEvE UNIvERSAL PRIMARy EDUCATION

Target 3 : Ensure by 2015 children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling

• Gross primary enrollment ratio (%) 55% (1990) 72% 84% 100% On track

• Proportion of pupils starting grade 1who reach grade 5 (%) 73% (1990) 91% 94% 100% On track

• Proportion of pupils starting grade 1 who reach grade 7 (%) 35% (1990) 81% 86% 100% On track

GOAL 3: PROMOTE GENDER EqUALITy AND EMPOwER wOMEN

Target 4 : Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education preferably by 2005, and to all levels of education by 2015

• Ratio of girls to boys in primary schools (%) 69% (1991) 82% 95% 100% On track

• Proportion of Pupils starting grade 1 who reach grade 5 (%) 43% (1991) 78% 96% 100% On track

• Proportion of pupils starting grade 1 who reach grade 7 (%) 12% (1991) 41% 53% 100% Needs attention

�� C H A P T E R 2

GOAL 4: REDUCE CHILD MORTALITy

Target 5 : Reduce by two-thirds, between 1990 and 2015, the under-five mortality rate

• Under-five mortality rates (per 1,000 live births) 123 (1990) 84 41 On track

• Infant mortality rates (per 1,000 live births) 90 (1990) 60.5 30 On track

• Proportion of children covered under immunization programme (%)

84 % (1990) 85% 90% (with card) >95% On track

GOAL 5: IMPROvE MATERNAL HEALTH

Target 6 : Reduce by three-quarters, between 1990 and 2015, the maternal mortality ratio

• Maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births) 560 (1990) 255 140 On track

• Births that need attention by skilled health personnel 15 % (1990) 24% 32% 100% On track

GOAL 6: COMBAT HIv/AIDS, MALARIA AND OTHER DISEASES

Target 7: Halt and begin to reverse the spread of HIv/AIDS

• HIV cases detected 0 (1990) 38 74 On track

• Contraception prevalence rate (%) 18.8% (1994) 30.7% 60% (national target)

On track

Target 8: Halt and begin to reverse the spread of Malaria and Other Major Diseases

• Number of malaria cases and incidences (cases per 100,000) 22,126 (1991) 5,935 2,760 On track

• Number of tuberculosis cases and incidences (cases per 100,000)

4,232 (1990) 1,140 1,002 On track

GOAL 7: ENSURE ENvIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITy

Target 9 : Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes and reverse the loss of envi-ronmental resources

• Proportion of land area covered by forest 72.5% (1990) 72.5% 72.5% On track

• Ratio of protected area to surface area for maintaining biological diversity

23% 26% 29% On track

• CO2 (per capita) emissions -5.89 tons (1994)

On track

• Proportion of population using solid fuels (i.e., wood, charcoal, dung)

75% 70% Insufficient data

Target 10 : Halve by 2015 the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and sanitation

• Proportion of population without sustainable access to an improved water source (%)

55% (1990) 22% 16% 27.5% Achieved

• Proportion of population without access to improved sani-tation (%)

33% (1990) 12 % 7.4%(of house-holds)

17.5% Achieved

GOAL 8: DEvELOP A GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP FOR DEvELOPMENT

Target 14 : In cooperation with developing countries, develop and implement strategies for decent and productive work for youth

• Youth unemployment rate 2.6% (1998) 5.5% Insufficient data

Target 18 : In cooperation with the private sector make available the benefits of new technologies, especially information and communication technology

• fixed telephone lines in service 4,0520 (1990) 16,580 30,420 On track

• Telephone density (per 100 persons) 0.68 (1990) 2.4 4 On track

• Computers in use (per 100 persons) 0.58 (2001) 1.0 Insufficient data

• Internet users (per 100 persons) 0.43 (2001) On track

Note: Some of the data reported in this table by RGoB may not match the figures given in the global Human Development Report.Source: Bhutan MDG Report 2005

D E V E L O P M E N T C O N T E X T ��

2.�. STATE OF hUMAN DEVELOPMENT

According to Bhutan’s Human DevelopmentReport2005,thecountry’sHDIhasgrownsteadilyfrom 0.325 in 1984 to 0.583 in 2003, placingBhutaninthecategoryofmediumhumandevelop-mentcountries.

In2005,Bhutanreportedapercapitagrossnation-alincomeofUSD1005,whichis47percenthigherthan the average forSouthAsia.Life expectancyatbirth is66years,andBhutan’s infantmortalityrate—40per1,000livebirthsin2005—isalmost50percentlowerthantheaverageforSouthAsia.Morethan90percentofhouseholdshavesanitationfacilitiesand84percentofhouseholdshaveaccessto piped water within the house (22.7 percent)or outside (61.5 percent).6 In 1999, 17 percent ofchildren under the age of five were underweight,compared to an average of almost 50 percent forSouth Asia. Bhutan’s Maternal Mortality Ratio,

255 per 100,000 live births in 2004, was nearlyhalf the levels reportedby India andSouthAsia.Though adult literacy rates are low at 47 percent,thegrossenrolmentrateattheprimarylevelwas84percentin2004.

AccordingtothePopulationandHousingCensusofBhutan2005,Bhutan’stotalpopulationconsistsofastablepopulationof634,982peopleandafloat-ing population of 37,443. Population is dispersedover 20 Dzongkhags (districts) with Gasa beingtheleastpopulous(populationof3,116).Thimphu,thecapitalcityandmaindistrict,isthemostpopu-louswithapopulationof98,676(accountingfor15percentof totalpopulation).A thirdof thecoun-try’spopulationisbelowtheageof14years,and69percentresideinruralareas.Withafemale-to-maleratioof900womenper1,000men,menoutnumberwomeninBhutan’spopulation.Someoftheimpli-cationsofBhutan’ssmallpopulationareexaminedinBox3.

Box 3. Implications of small population size

Demographic and health indicators assume a unique significance for countries with small populations. for Bhu-tan, which has a stable population of 634,982, the demographic and health indicators shown in Table 1 translate into the following annual events:

Population size

Children 0-14 years 209,959

Population 15-64 years 395, 278

Population 65+ 29,745

vital events

Number of live births in 2004 12,538

Number of deaths in 2004 4,498

Annual number of infant deaths 500

Annual number of maternal deaths 32

Approximately 12,000-13,000 children are born every year, and approximately 5,000 people die annually. In 2004, there were 500 infant deaths and 32 maternal deaths. The small numbers reflect not only small popula-tion size but also the challenge of ensuring universal coverage of good quality services in a country where population is scattered over difficult mountainous terrain and road connectivity and provisioning of physical infrastructure is limited.

Source: Population and Housing Census of Bhutan 2005

___________________________________________________________________________6. Population and Housing Census of Bhutan 2005

�� C H A P T E R 2

In pursuance of the concept of GNH, the Popu-lationandHousingCensusofBhutan2005askedrespondentswhethertheywere‘veryhappy’,‘happy’or‘notveryhappy’.Whilerecognizingthelimita-tionsofsuchasurveyandproblemswiththeinter-pretationofresults,itisneverthelessinterestingtonote that 97 percent of Bhutanese said they wereeitherveryhappy(45percent)orhappy(52percent).Levelsofhappinessdidnotvarymuchacrossruralareasandurbanareas.Whereas96.4percentoftherural population was either very happy or happy,the corresponding proportion in urban areas was97.3percent.

Contributingsignificantlytothepositivetrendsinhumandevelopmenthasbeenaseriesofgovernancereforms initiated by Bhutan. The process towardsdemocratization was initiated by the Third Kingwho,duringhisreign,separatedthepowersofthevarious branches of government, established theNational Assembly in 1952, appointed the RoyalAdvisory Council in 1963, and set up the HighCourtin1968.TheFourthKing,HisMajestyJigmeSingye Wangchuck, who was enthroned in 1974,continuedthereformanddemocratizationprocess.Supportivelegislation,developmentstructuresandproceduresfordecentralizationenabledthesettingupof20DYTsin1981and201GYTsin1991withapproximately4,245electedrepresentatives.

In June 1998, His Majesty Jigme SingyeWangchuck voluntarily devolved full executivepowers to a Council of Ministers consisting ofsix ministers elected through secret ballot by theNational Assembly. In 1999, the Municipal Actdevolved greater administrative and financialpowers to municipal councils that were electedforthefirst timebyregisteredurbanresidents.In2002, revised DYT and GYT Acts were passedthatdevolvedgreateradministrative,financialandregulatory powers to local bodies. Bhutan’s draftconstitutionwasreleasedinMarch2005.Extensivepublicdiscussionsandconsultationshavebeenheldon the constitution in Bhutan’s 20 districts. Thedraft constitution mandates the establishment oflocalgovernmentsinall20dzongkhagscomprisingof Dzongkhag Tshogdu, Gewog Tshogde andThromdeTshogdeinordertoprovidedemocraticandaccountablegovernmentstolocalcommunities.

Bhutan’s peaceful progress has been affected bytwodevelopments.HumansecurityinBhutanwasthreatened since the early 1990s by the presence

of foreign militants who had established campsin Bhutan. However, in December 2003, Bhutansuccessfully dealtwith this problemandwas ableto restore peace in the region. Conversely, for avarietyofreasonsnotentirelyinBhutan’scontrol,progresshasbeenslowinsettlingtheissueofthepeople in the camps in Eastern Nepal. DespiteongoingeffortsbyRGoB,thisissuehasremainedunresolvedformorethan15years.

SignificantdimensionsofBhutan’shumandevelop-mentarepresentedbelow.

2.�.�. INCOME

In 2005, Bhutan reported a total gross domesticproduct (GDP)ofUSD840millionaccording tothe World Bank. GDP growth in Bhutan since1980hasbeenimpressiveatanaverageof7percentperannum.Thesehighratesofgrowthhavebeensustained principally by hydropower developmentandexportofsurpluspowertoIndiaandextensiveinfrastructuredevelopment—roadnetworks,feederroadstoimproveruralconnectivity,electricityandtelecommunicationfacilities.

Between1980and2004, agriculturegrewby3.6percent, services by 6.5 percent and industry by13.5percent—contributing tomore thanhalf thegrowthinGDP.Thesedifferentialratesofgrowthhaveresultedinsignificantstructuralshiftsintheeconomy. In 1980, agriculture accounted for 52percent of Bhutan’s GDP. By 2004, its share hadfallen to 24 percent. Conversely, the contributionof industry toGDP increased from14percent in1980to45percentin2004.Theservicessectorhasmoreor lessmaintained its shareofGDP; itwas33percentin1980and31percentin2004.Thoughindustrycontributesto45percentofBhutan’sGDP,the country does not have a large manufacturingbase,norisitindustrialized.Muchofthisgrowthhas been accounted for by progress in the energysub-sector.

From being virtually a closed economy in 1960,Bhutan has transformed itself into a small, openeconomywithatraderatioofnearly74percentinthesecondhalfofthe1990s.IndiaisBhutan’smostimportant tradingpartner. In the early1990s,88percentofallexportswenttoIndia.Thatnumberisnowcloseto95percent,andIndia’sshareinimportsincreasedfrom74percentto81percent.

D E V E L O P M E N T C O N T E X T �7

Bhutanhaspursuedasensiblemacroeconomicpolicythathasensuredhighgrowth,apositivebalanceofpaymentsposition,andmanageablelevelsofinfla-tion and public debt. The fiscal regime displaysdistinctivepro-poorfeaturesincludingalargesizeoffiscaloperationsconsistingofalargegovernmentbudgetsustainedtoaconsiderabledegreebyforeignassistance(ofwhichthemajorpartisreceivedfromIndia).Despitehighlevelsofpublicspending(withsocialsectorsabsorbingmorethanaquarteroftotalexpenditures),budgetdeficitshavebeenkeptwithinanon-inflationaryrange.Moreover,furthereffortstopromoteruraldevelopmentandfiscaldecentral-izationwillenablelocallyelectedbodiestospendathirdofnationalbudgetaryresourcesinaccordancewithlocallydeterminedprioritiesstartingfromthe10thFiveYearPlan.

2.�.2. POVERTY

Althoughthereisnowidespreadhunger,homeless-ness or destitution in Bhutan, a sizeable propor-tionofthepopulationisincomepoor.TheBhutanPovertyAnalysisReport2004revealsthatalmostonethird(31.7percent)ofthepopulation,primar-ily peasants in rural areas, live below the incomepoverty line.Incomepoverty ismuchmorewide-spread and severe in rural than in urban areas.Almost38percentoftheruralpopulationlivesinpovertycomparedto4percentoftheurbanpopula-tion.Poverty ishighest in theEasternzone(48.8percent),lesssointheCentralzone(29.5percent)andleastintheWesternzone(18.7percent).Poorhouseholds, on average, comprise 6.6 persons asopposed to 4.6 persons in non-poor households.Female-headed households report marginallyhigher levelsofpoverty thanmale-headedhouse-holds.Someof theprimary causes of poverty arelimitedroadconnectivity,whichresultsinrestrictedaccesstomarketsandsocialservices;ahighdegreeof fragmentation and shortageof arable farmlandcombinedwith lowproductivity; lackofsufficientresources and assets; vulnerability to food short-ages;andpooreducationalattainments.

Approximately4percentofthepopulation,compris-ingmostlyoflandlessfarmers,wagelabourersandwomen-headed households, suffer from chronichunger.Contributingtothefoodinsecurityofsuchhouseholds are very small landholdings, labourshortagesinruralareasduetoout-migration,and

natural calamities such as landslides, floods andhailstormsthatadverselyaffectfarmoutput.

Though poverty remains largely a rural phenom-enon, Bhutan faces conditions of growing urbanpoverty as well. Such poverty manifests itself intheabsenceofaffordableanddecenthousing,inad-equate access to clean drinking water and propersanitation, joblessness,andhigher incidentalcostsofeducation.

Theunequaldistributionof incomes inBhutan isalso an issue of concern. The richest 20 percentconsume eight times more than the poorest 20percentofthepopulation,andincomeinequalitiesarereportedlyincreasingacrossthecountry.

2.�.�. EMPLOYMENT AND LIVELIhOODS

Bhutanfacesanincreasingchallengeofjobcreation,especially in rural areas and among its youth.AccordingtotheLabourForceSurveyscarriedoutbetween1998and2004,employmentinagriculturehasdecreasedfrom76percentin1998to63percentin2003,andtheunemploymentratehasincreasedfrom1.4percentto2.5percent.Moreover,accordingto the2004LabourForceSurvey,unemploymentrates are considerably higher among women thanmen.Risingunemployment,especiallyamongtheyouth,istheresultofagrowingnumberofschoolgraduatessearchingformodern-sectorjobsandtherelative inabilityof thecountry togeneratecorre-spondingemployment.Theslowgrowthinjobsisa result of the capital-intensive nature of growth(largelyhydropowerprojects),limitedabsorptioninthepublicsector,andtheunder-developedprivatesector. The unemployment challenge is furthercompoundedbyagrowingnumberof job-seekingmigrantsfromtheruraltourbanareas.

2.�.�. hEALTh AND EDUCATION

Bhutan has established an impressive network ofhealth services. As a result, primary health carecoverageexpandedfrom65percentin1990to90percent in 2002. Life expectancy at birth, whichwas 48 years in 1984, has increased to 66 years.The infant mortality rate has decreased from 142per1,000livebirthsin1984to40in2005,andthematernalmortalityratiofellfrom770per100,000livebirthsin1984to255in2005.

�� C H A P T E R 2

AccordingtothePopulationandHousingCensusofBhutan2005,thecountryreportsabirthrateof20per1,000peopleandadeathrateof7per1,000people.Approximately49percentofdeliverieswereattendedtobyhealthprofessionals in2004.Only10.1percentofhouseholdsacross thecountrydidnothaveaccesstotoiletfacilities.

Bhutanhasalsoputinplaceanetworkofschoolsandeducationalinstitutions.However,theabsenceofmotorableroadsandthescatteredpopulationinmountainous areas have constrained both expan-sionandreachofservices.Accordingtothe2005Census,49percentofgirlsandwomenaged6yearsandaboveand69percentofboysandmenwereillit-erate.Urbanliteracyrates(76percent)farexceededtheliteracyratesamongruralresidents(52percent).Bhutan has recorded a rapid growth in schoolenrollment at all levels.Gross enrollment rates attheprimarylevelrosefrom55percentin1990to84percentin2004andthereisvirtualparitybetweenboysandgirls.Theproportionofgirlstoboysrosesharplyfrom69girlsforevery100boysin1990to95girlsforevery100boysby2004.Bhutan,never-theless,needstoimprovereachandaccessaswellasthequalityofbasiceducation.Schoolparticipationvariesacrossincomesinallregionsofthecountry—evenwherephysicalprovisioningisrelativelybetter.Forexample,77percentofchildren6to12yearsamongthenon-poorattendedschoolcomparedto58percentfrompoorhouseholds.

2.�.�. gENDER EqUALITY

Conscious policy efforts by RGoB to promotewomen’s empowerment and gender equality arequite recent. Five Year Plan documents, startingwiththe5thFYP,containachapteronwomenthatoutlinesmeasuresforinvolvingwomenindevelop-ment.In1981,theNationalWomen’sAssociationof Bhutan (NWAB) was established as an NGOresponsible for empowering women, especially inruralareas.ThiswassupportedbyaRoyalDecreein 1998 that emphasized women’s participationat all levels of government and society. The 10thFYPisfurtherexpectedtoincorporategenderandwomen’sparticipationmoreconcretelyintosectoraldevelopmentprogrammes.

Genderparityhasbeenachievedinprimaryschool-ing,andatthesecondarylevel,thereare92girlsforevery100boys.Womenown60percentoflandinruralareasand45percentofallassets(shares,prop-

erty and business establishments) in urban areas.Yet, work participation rates among women arelowerthanamongmen,andwomenreportahigherunemploymentratecomparedtomen.

TheestablishmentoftheNationalCommissionforWomenandChildren(NCWC)in2004reflectsaseriousattemptbyRGoBandBhutanesesocietytoaddress issuesaffectingwomen(includingdomes-ticviolence)andtoadvancegenderequality.Sevencriticalareasforactionhavebeenidentifiedunderthe Draft National Plan of Action for Gender:good governance; education and training; health,economic development, with a focus on employ-ment; violence against women; prejudices andstereotypes; and ageing, disabilities and mentalhealth.ArecentanalysisbytheUNDPBureauofDevelopment Policy suggests that Bhutan shouldcontinue to do more in order to ensure gender-sensitivity across all its MDG strategies. A 2001pilotgenderbaselinestudy foundthatwomenarenotnecessarilyperceivedascapableandequalpart-nersinneweconomicopportunities.Theyarealsoperceivedas less capableandconfident inmattersof governance.Men continue todominate invest-mentdecisions.Domesticviolencehasbeenrecog-nizedasasocialproblem.Despiteimprovementsinadult literacyamongwomen, itremains lowat39percent.Girlsdropoutofschoolinlargenumbersafter secondary level, diminishing opportunitiesto serve in professional and leadership positions.Women are engaged in lower productivity andlessremunerativejobs.However,theproportionofwomen in the civil service has increased from 12percent in 1990 to 28 percent in 2006. In 2006,women’s representation was only 3 percent in theNationalAssemblyandwasreportedtobesimilarlynegligibleatthedzongkhagandgeoglevels.

2.�.�. ENVIRONMENT

With72.5percentofthecountry’stotalareaunderforest cover, Bhutan has the largest forest coverin proportion to land mass in Asia. In 1995, theNational Assembly mandated that the countryshouldmaintainatleast60percentofitslandareaunderforestcoverforperpetuity.

A distinctive and recurring feature of Bhutan’sdevelopmentplanshasbeenthehighpriorityofandstrongcommitmenttothepreservationoftheenvi-ronment.EnvironmentalsustainabilityisoneofthefourpillarsofGNHandfiguresprominentlyasa

D E V E L O P M E N T C O N T E X T ��

key development objective in the country’s long-term development vision, Bhutan 2020: Visionfor Peace, Prosperity and Happiness. As part ofthis national commitment RGoB has endorsedand signed numerous international environmen-talconventions,includingtheUNConventiononBiological Diversity, UN Convention to CombatDesertification and the UN Framework Conven-tionforClimateChange.

Numerous legal, policy and regulatory activitiesarebeingundertaken toprotectBhutan’s valuableforestresourcesandwatershedareas,improvewaterandairquality,andinstillagreaterawarenessandunderstandingofenvironmentalissues.Effortsarebeing made to integrate environmental concernsinto national policies and programmes acrosssectors,andmorerecently,inlinewiththeongoingdecentralizationprocess,intodzongkhagandgeoglevelplans.EnvironmentalImpactAssessmentsarenowmandatoryforalldevelopmentandindustrialprojects in the country. However, all these rapiddevelopmentshavebeenplacingamajorstrainoninstitutionalcapacitiesforimplementationofpoli-ciesandstrategies.Thechallengeistomovebeyondconservationtotheproperuseofnaturalresourcesforenhancinghumandevelopment.

2.�.7. DISASTER PREVENTION AND MANAgEMENT

Disaster prevention and management is a newarea of concern. Bhutan lies in a highly seismicactive zone. Its fragile geological conditions andextreme climate make it extremely vulnerable tonationaldisasterssuchasflashfloods,fires,earth-quakes,glacialoutburstsandlandslides.Untilnow,thecountryhasrespondedeffectivelytosuchdisas-ters, but coordination between sectors has beenweak, national preparedness low and capacitiesat district levels inadequate to deal with large-scalecatastrophes.

2.�.�. SUMMARY

Bhutan has followed a distinctly unique develop-ment path. The philosophy of promoting GNHunderscoresallnationaldevelopmentefforts.Whilenoting the instrumental significance of income

for improving the quality of life, GNH calls forensuringaharmoniousbalanceandsynergyacrossfour importantconstituents:sustainableandequi-table socioeconomic development, conservationof the environment, preservation and promo-tion of culture, and enhancement of good gover-nance. Fully consistent with, and complementingthe pursuit of GNH, is the human developmentapproachembracedbyBhutan,whichseekstoplacepeople,theirrightsandwell-beingatthecentreofalldevelopmentefforts.

2.2. FINANCINg bhUTAN’S hUMAN DEVELOPMENT 7

Officialdevelopmentassistance(ODA)hasplayedan important role in financing and promot-ing human development in Bhutan. Accordingto UNDP’s Human Development Report 2006,Bhutan received USD 88 per capita as ODA in2003, accounting for 11.1 percent of GDP—thehighest inSouthAsia.ODAtoBhutanhasmorethan doubled, from USD 71 million in 1990 toUSD 147 million in 2004. Between 1997 and2004,theUNsystemcontributedtoapproximately12 percent of the ODA and has emerged as thelargestcontributortoBhutan’sdevelopment.ODAhas beenmostly used to fund investments in andexpansionofmuch-neededinfrastructurelargelyinthesocialsectors,housingandurbandevelopment,theRenewableNaturalResources(RNR)sectoraswellasforimprovingconnectivityviatelecommu-nicationsandroads.

Nearly all of Bhutan’s development expendituresunder the country’s first two FYPs (1961-1972)werefundedbytheGovernmentofIndia.However,by the 7th FYP (1985-1992), Bhutan was able tofundapproximately30percentof itsdevelopmentbudget. The proportion of self-financing rose toapproximately 40 percent during the 8th FYP(1997-2002) and is expected to reach 50 percentduring the 9th FYP (2002-2007). The sustainedincreaseindomesticresources,principallythroughthe growth of hydro-power export revenues, hasmadethispossible.ThecommissioningoftheTalaHydro-electricPowerProject in2006 isexpectedtofurtherreducedependenceonODA.

___________________________________________________________________________7. financial data for this section have been gathered from Development Cooperation Reports and individual agencies, and therefore

may not entirely match figures of the RGoB.

20 C H A P T E R 2

Bhutan receives ODA on a regular basis fromapproximately14countries,eightmultilateralagen-cies, a few internationalNGOsand four interna-tionaldevelopmentfinancialinstitutions.

ODA to Bhutan has traditionally been in grantform.Duringthelastfiveyears,grantshaveconsti-tutedapproximately85percentof the totalODAand highly concessional loans account for thebalance.DependenceonODA,thoughstillhigh,hasbeendeclining.ODAasapercentageofGDP(seeTable2)decreasedfrommorethan50percentinthe1980stoapproximately25percentonaverageduringthelast10years.BilateralsourceshavebeenandremainthemajorsourceofODA.Forthe9thFYPperiod(1997-2002),bilateralassistanceconsti-tuted approximately75percentof the totalODApackage, while multilateral and NGO sourcesaccounted for the remaining 25 percent. Trendsindicateadecliningshareofbilateralassistanceandagrowthofmultilateralassistance.

TheGovernmentofIndiahastraditionallybeenthelargestproviderofODAtoBhutan.India’scontri-bution has, on average, accounted for more thanhalfofODAoverallplanperiodssince1961,andIndianassistancetoBhutanhasgrownsubstantiallyinabsoluteterms.Forinstance,betweenthe7thand9thFYPperiods,GovernmentofIndiaassistanceis estimated tohave increased fromanaverageof

USD46millionayeartoUSD65millionayear,virtually doubling in terms of Ngultrum (BTN)value from BTN 7,500 million for the 7th FYPto an estimated BTN 14,430 million for the 9thFYP.Nevertheless,India’sshareasapercentageofODA toBhutanhas steadilydeclined frommorethan80percentinthemid1980stoapproximately40percentduringthe9thFYP.ODAfromIndiatakes on several forms including developmentsubsidy,projectaid(turn-keybasis),technicalassis-tance and hydro-power development. The latter,financedthroughamixofgrantsandloansandona turn-keybasis, isnotusually treatedwithin theFYPframework.WhileIndianassistancetouchesvirtuallyeverydevelopmentactivityinthecountry,the assistance has largely focused on supportingBhutan’sinfrastructuredevelopmentintheenergy,communicationsandsocialsectors.

AfterIndia,theUNsystemisthelargestdonorinBhutan.Between1997and2004,itcontributedtoapproximately12percentof theODA.Denmark,Japan and the Asian Development Bank wereamongtheotherfivelargestdevelopmentpartnerscontributingbetween8and11percentofthetotalODA.Thesefivemajordonors collectivecontrib-utedapproximatelythreefourthsofthetotalODA.PartnercontributionsandbroadareasoffocusareshowninTable3.

Table 2. ODA inflows to Bhutan, 1985-2005 (USD millions)

1985 1990 1995 1997 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Grant assistance 97.5 54.7 76 81.3 85.5 89.6 77.3 98.4 130 *

Loan assistance 7.5 7 5 3.5 13 16.2 25.8 13.9 16.9 *

Total ODA 105 71 76 90 99 106 103 112 147 155+

ODA as percentage of GDP

50% 20% 25% 22% 21% 22% 24% 23% 27% <25%

Sources: Development Cooperation Reports, UNDP; DADM, RGoB; RMA, RGoB.

D E V E L O P M E N T C O N T E X T 2�

Table 3. ODA by major development partner and areas of focusDevelopment partner

ODA in USD millions (1997-2004)

Focus areas

India 272 Social (health, education and urban) and communication (civil aviation and transport) infrastructure, hydro-power, human resource development, RNR

UN system 104 Poverty alleviation, private sector, decentralization, environment, education, health and food

Denmark 97 Health, environment, urban development, judiciary (governance)

Japan 70 RNR, telecommunications, bridges, culture.

ADB 70 Private sector (financial sub-sector), social and road infrastructure, skills development and employment

world Bank 30 forestry, education, urban development, transport, private sector (pipeline)

Austria 29 Hydro-power development, tourism and culture

Netherlands 27 RNR, energy, rural development, education/HRD

Switzerland 27 RNR, rural development, bridge infrastructure, education, culture

NGOs 26 SNV: Decentralization and democratization, rural access and development, community-based tourism

Helvetas: Education and culture, RNR, rural access (bridges)

EC 14 Private sector (trade), rural development, health

Source: Development Cooperation Reports (various issues), UNDP. Note: RNR = renewable natural resources.

The RGoB has maintained a cautious policy ofrestricting loan financing but has had to increas-inglyresorttosoft-termborrowingfromDevelop-mentFinanceInstitutions(DFIs)inordertofullyfinance its capital development expenditures. Thegrowth inconcessionalborrowing fromDFIshasincreased the country’s total convertible currencydebtstoUSD226.5millionasofJune2005.Alongwith the growing rupee debts on account of thelarge hydro-power projects (USD 372.2 million),thetotaldebtstock(USD607.8million)hasbeenrisingrapidlyandiscurrently87percentofGDP.Bhutan is regarded under the World Bank’s debtsustainability analysis as ‘debt distressed’. Debtservicing, however, has been maintained at lessthan7percentforthelastseveralyearsduetothesustainedgrowthinexports.

Development funding modalities used in Bhutaninclude direct budget support mainly by theGovernment of India and Danida, grants, andhighly concessional loans. At the corporate level,UNDP’ssupportfor‘ProgrammeApproach’intheearly1990slaidthegroundworkforgivingprimacytonational policy andprogramme instruments as

theframeworkandguidefordevelopmentcoopera-tion. UNDP Bhutan used the national execution(NEX)modalitytoexecuteallprogrammesunderthe first CCF. This helped to increase ownershipbyRGoBanddevelopnationalprojectimplementa-tionandmanagementcapacities.

In view of the anticipated growth in domesticrevenues, it appears that some development part-nerswillreadjusttheirassistancelevelsorphaseouttheirassistance.Thereareindications,though,thatany significant changes indevelopment assistancewillprobablybeevidentonlyafter the10thFYP,thatis,after2012.ItisalsoverylikelythatBhutanwillhavetoincreasinglyresorttoconcessionalloansfromDFIsoravailmixed-credit schemes to funditscapitalexpendituresfordevelopment.TheloanportfolioisthuslikelytoprogressivelyaccountforalargershareoftheODApackage.

The success of development outcomes in Bhutan,risingpercapitaincomesandtheincreasingabilityofthecountrytomeetitsowndevelopmentoutlayshaveparadoxicallycreatedasituationwhereinsomeof the development partners are now consideringeitherreducinglevelsofODAoragradualphasing

22 C H A P T E R 2

out of their assistance. This is a serious concern.A premature withdrawal or reduction of ODAresourcescouldpotentiallyjeopardizethedevelop-mentgainsattainedsofarandaffectthecountry’slong-term sustainable development and growthespeciallyatthiscriticaljuncturewhenBhutanhasembarked on a transition to democracy. Even asrevenueandGDPareexpectedtogrowsubstantial-lywiththecommissioningoftheTalahydroelectricproject,social-sectorexpendituresareprojectedtorisesteeplyinthefuture,giventhecountry’syouth-fuldemographicprofileandthefirmcommitmentof the state to assure citizens the constitutionalrighttofreebasiceducationandhealth.Addition-ally, the government has to meet rising debt andinterestobligationsbesidesstartingrepaymentsforthehydro-powerprojectalmostimmediately.Costsofgovernancearealsoexpectedtoincreaseasmanynewinstitutionsessentialunderdemocracy,suchastheParliament,arebeingsetupforthefirsttime.

Inthelongrun,however,Bhutanhasthepotentialofreducingitsdependenceonforeignaidespeciallyasstandardsoflivingimprove,incomesexpand,andhumancapabilitiesareenhanced.However,intheimmediaterun,BhutanmayhaveanincreasedneedtocontinuetorelyonODA,especiallytosupportinfrastructureexpansion,parliamentarydemocracyandinstitutionalizationoflocallevelgovernance.

2.�. NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ChALLENgES

Bhutanisinacriticalstageofeconomicandpoliti-caltransition.RecentassessmentsbyRGoBaswellas extensive discussions with stakeholders haveidentifiedthefollowingcriticaldevelopmentchal-lenges.Thesewillrequirespecialattentionevenasseveral new opportunities for accelerating humandevelopment emerge inBhutanover thenextfiveto10years.

2.�.�. ELIMINATINg POVERTY

Eliminating human poverty poses the biggestchallengetoBhutan.Despiteimpressiveeconomicgrowth,incomepovertyremainshigh,particularlyin rural areas. Rapid growth has failed to infusedynamismintoboththeagriculturalandmanufac-turingsectors.Growthhasalsonotgeneratedsuffi-cientemploymentnorhasitbeeninclusive.Benefits

ofgrowthhavebypassedmanygroupsandcommu-nities. The challenge is to make growth moreinclusive if the MDG of poverty reduction is tobeachieved.

2.�.2. REDUCINg INEqUALITIES

Thebenefitsofgrowthanddevelopmenthavenotbeen equitably distributed across Bhutan. Peopleliving in urban areas have benefited more, espe-ciallythroughbetteraccesstosocialservices,thanresidentsofruralremoteandhillyareas.Similarly,menbyandlargehavebenefitedmorethanwomen.Addressing these imbalances and inequalities inthedistributionofopportunities—economic,socialandpolitical—oughttobecomeacentraldevelop-mentconcerninthecomingyears.Thiswillrequirethatthestatemakesspecialeffortstoaddressissuesofregionaldisparitiesandeconomicinequality(ofincomesandassets)inBhutan.

2.�.�. gENERATINg EMPLOYMENT

Growth in Bhutan has not led to the creation ofsufficientemploymentopportunities,especiallyforyoung people. The challenge facing Bhutan is toimprovephysical infrastructure inorder toensurebetterconnectivity tomarketsandsimultaneouslycreatenewmarketsforBhutan’sgoodsandservices.Growinghardshipsinruralareasandperceptionsofbetterjobopportunitiesinurbanareasareleadingto rural-urban migration. Therefore, there is anurgentneedtoaddressthestagnationinagricultureas well as to invest in employment-creatinginitiatives.Severalnichemarketshavealreadybeenidentified, including herbal medicines, essentialoils,organicfoodproducts,textiles,artsandcrafts,andothereco-friendlyproducts.Thesewillneedtobedeveloped.

The unemployment question is tied to thediversificationofBhutan’seconomy.Thecountry’seconomicbaseremainsfragileduetoseveralfactorsincludingsmallsize,landlockedstatusandexcessivedependenceonhydroelectricpowerthatisnotamajoremployment generator. Bhutan needs to generateemployment and ensure that growth is inclusivebypushing fora rapiddiversificationofeconomicactivities.ThechallengefacingBhutanistodevelopan outward-oriented approach that capitalizeson technological modernization for creating low-

D E V E L O P M E N T C O N T E X T 2�

volume high-value export products, based on thecountry’s natural and cultural resources. Creatinganappropriateemployment strategy thatdevelopsskilled and productive manpower and matches itwith sectors is important if thehighpotential forjobcreationistobemeaningfullytapped

2.�.�. ENhANCINg bASIC SOCIAL SERVICES

Bhutanwillneedtoaccelerateprovisioningofbasicsocial services across many parts of the countryand improve reach, coverage, access and quality.Amajorconstraintsofarhasbeentheabsenceofadequateroadconnectivity.Forinstance,accordingtothePopulationandHousingCensusofBhutan2005,almost21percentof ruralhouseholdswerefour hours or more walking distance from thenearestroadandanother21percentofhouseholdswerebetweenoneandfourhourswalkingdistance.Thishaslimitedthereachofhealthservicestotherural population and to women and children, inparticular,whofindphysicaldistancetobeaseriousconstraintinaccessingservices.

Promotion of public health and greater publicawareness will become important in the comingyears as Bhutan could face new generation prob-lems. A high percentage of Bhutan’s populationis made up of adolescents and youth, which addstotheHIV/AIDSrisk.Thoughnotaseriousissuenow, Bhutan will need to put in place effectivemeasurestopreventthespreadofHIV/AIDS.

2.�.�. PREPARINg FOR ThE TRANSITION TO PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY

Bhutanwill be facedwith severalnewchallengesas the countryprepares itself to become aParlia-mentarydemocracy.Thiswillinclude,forinstance,strengthening the institutional capacity of newlyestablishedconstitutionalbodiesandtheNationalAssembly;deepeningtheruleoflaw;preparingforthefirstnationalelections;deepeningthefreedomofthepress;scaling-upanti-corruptionefforts;andencouraging active and engaged citizenry on thepartof thepeople throughcivic andvoter educa-tion.Effortswillalsobeneededtosetupnewinsti-tutionsaswellasstrengthenthecapacityofexistinginstitutionstoimplementthereformsunderway.

2.�.�. ENSURINg bETTER MANAgEMENT OF ThE ENVIRONMENT

People’slivelihoodsareintricatelylinkedtonaturalresources in Bhutan. The country has adopted ajudiciousapproach toprotectingandnurturing itsenvironment in a sustainable manner. Managingthese resourcesbetter in the comingyearswillbecentral to thegenerationof employmentopportu-nitiesandcreationofmore sustainable livelihoodsfor thepoor.Recent reportsandanalysespoint tothecriticalneedforBhutantomovefrompreserva-tionandconservationoftheenvironmenttobettermanagementofnaturalresources.Bhutanplanstorelyonhydropowerforgeneratingadditionalreve-nuestofinancehumandevelopment.Indoingso,itisimportanttominimizelosstobiodiversityandthecosts of displacement from such capital-intensiveprojectswithlonggestationandpaybackperiods.

2.�.7. DEVELOPINg CIVIL SOCIETY ORgANIzATIONS AND ThE PRIVATE SECTOR

OnlyafewNGOsandcivilsocietyorganizationsworkondevelopment issues inBhutan.However,evenasnewlegislationisbeingworkedout,someNGOs have become more active in recent years,andtheirnumbersandcontributioncanbeexpect-edtogrowinthecomingyears.Nevertheless,thereareseriouscapacityissueswithinNGOs.Similarly,even though the private sector is often projectedas an engine of growth, there is little evidenceto suggest that the real potential of this sectorto contribute to Bhutan’s development has beentapped. This sector has the capacity to contributesignificantlytoBhutan’seconomicvibrancyinthenextfiveyears.Developingcapacitiesofboththesestakeholders—NGOsandtheprivatesector—willbecomeincreasinglyimportantasBhutanadoptsamoredecentralizedsystemofgovernance.

2.�.�. RESOLVINg CONFLICT

Critical to Bhutan’s future development will be apractical and amicable resolution of the issue ofthepeopleinthecampsinEasternNepal.SeveralmeasureshavebeeninitiatedintherecentpastbyRGoBtoresolvethependingissues,butmanycouldnotbefollowedthrough,giventhepoliticalchangesthatwereunderwayinNepal.However,possibilitiesof finding an amicable solution have improvedconsiderablywiththerecentpoliticaldevelopmentsinNepal.

2� C H A P T E R 2

___________________________________________________________________________8. Although Bhutan’s income has surpassed the limit for least developed countries, it is still in the category.

2.�.�. PROMOTINg LEADERShIP

Untilnow,muchoftheleadershiphasbeenprovidedbyHisMajestytheKinghimselfandbycommittedofficials in the central government. With greaterdecentralizationandthetransitiontoparliamenta-rydemocracy,Bhutanwillneedtoexpanditshighcalibreofleadershipatalllevelsofgovernanceandpublicadministration.

ThesechallengesoffernewopportunitiestoUNDPfor future partnerships with RGoB and otherdevelopmentpartners.Theyalsoofferanopportunityto revisit the issue of strategic positioning byUNDPinBhutantofurtherenhancedevelopmenteffectiveness. At the same time as RGoB gearsupfor thefuture, it is important tokeep inmind

that Bhutan—like Afghanistan, Nepal and LaoPDR—is one of four landlocked least developedcountries that face very distinct developmentchallenges.8Beinglandlocked,itisdependentuponIndiaformovementofgoodsandaccesstoglobalmarkets.Atthesametime,bothBIMSTEC(Bayof Bengal Initiative for Multi-sectoral TechnicalandEconomicCooperation) andSAARC(SouthAsianAssociationforRegionalCooperationalongwithBangladesh,India,Maldives,Nepal,PakistanandSriLanka)offeravenuesforfurtheringregionalcooperation within and beyond South Asia toincludeThailandandMyanmar.TheseforumscanpotentiallybeusedbyBhutantofurtheracceleratehumandevelopment inthecountrythroughmorepro-activepursuitofSouth-Southcooperation

2�U N D P ’ S C O N T R I B U T I O N S T O D E V E L O P M E N T R E S U L T S

Chapter 3

UNDP’s Contributions to Development Results

Starting with an initial allocation of USD 2.5million for the first country programme (1973-1976), UNDP has since provided approximatelyUSD 115 million in assistance to Bhutan acrossa number of fields from telecommunications andcivil aviation to horticulture and promotion ofculturalheritage.

ManagingtheaffairsofUNDPBhutantodayaretwointernationalstaffmembersandsevennationalofficers,supportedby23generalstaffmembers,oneJuniorProgrammeOfficerandfiveUNVs.

�.�. UNDP IN bhUTAN

UNDPassistancetoBhutaninthe1970sand1980s(coincidingwiththe5th,6thand7thFYPperiods)focusedprimarilyoncapacitybuildingandupgrad-ing the human resource base in all sectors. Until1995, roughly one third of all UNDP assistancewasallocatedforin-countrytrainingprogrammes;materialandtechnicalsupporttotertiary,technicalandvocational training institutes;andfellowshipsfortrainingandgraduateandpost-graduatestudiesoverseas.OthernotableareasofUNDPassistancepriorto1996wereincivilaviation,telecommuni-cations,private sector, energy, tourismandmediasectors.Forinstance,UNDP,incollaborationwiththe International Civil Aviation Organization,helped launch the national airline, Druk Air, byproviding partial funding for the purchase of thefirstaircraft,developingthe technicalandprofes-sional service capabilities of the airline and civilaviation staff, and ensuring air safety standards.In partnership with the International Telecom-munication Union, UNDP assisted RGoB inpreparing its Telecommunications Master Planand in upgrading the necessary technical skillsandcapacitytosupporttheplan.Similarly,UNDPprovidedassistanceforthedraftingoftheTourismMaster Plan and the Power System Master Plan.

In1986,UNDPhelpedestablishKuensel,thefirstnationalnewspaper,andsupportedthestrengthen-ingofBhutanBroadcastingService(nationalradiobroadcast)throughtrainingandtheprocurementofessentialequipment(seeBox4).

An important element in UNDP’s programme isthe support for the attainment of the MDGs. InadditiontothevariousthematicprogrammesthatcontributetotherealizationoftheMDGs,UNDPhasprovidedextensivepolicysupportforintegrat-ingthegoalseffectivelywithinthenationaldevel-opmentplanningandpolicyframework.

UNDP(inpartnershipwithUNCDFandUNV)is currently the largest UN system developmentpartner in Bhutan, followed closely by the WFPandUNICEF.In2004,UNDP’stotalexpenditureforBhutanwasUSD3.34million,equivalentof2.3percentofODA.At itsheight,UNDPassistanceamounted to USD 9.86 million in 1990 and hasaveragedapproximatelyUSD4.56millionannuallyduringthelast15years.

Since 2000, UNDP funding has declined to anaverage of USD 3.6 million a year, accountingfor a little more than 3 percent of ODA and forapproximately 0.5 percent of the country’s GDP.Additionally,UNDPcorefundinghasdeclinedinabsolutetermsbyapproximately40percentandintherelativeshareofthetotalUNDPbudgetfrom75percentofthetotalfundingoverthefirstCCFperiod(1997-2001)to63percentinthesecondCCF(2002-2006).Between the twoCCFs, thebudgetshareofpoverty-relatedprogrammeshasincreasedfrom 33 percent of the total to 44 percent whilethat of governance programmes has shrunk fromroughly half of all expenditures to approximatelyone third. The environment portfolio share hasincreasedfrom17percentto22percentduringthetwoCCFs.Thefundingforpolicysupport,genderandITrelatedactivitieswithinthethematicfocus

2� C H A P T E R 3

areas have all increased substantially during thetwoCCFs.ReflectingUNDP’sconsciousdecisionto move upstream, the share of UNDP resourcesdevoted to policy support went up from approxi-mately 6 percent of the first CCF total budgetto approximately 15 percent in the second CCFperiod, and virtually doubled in absolute terms.Support for UNDP’s gender-based developmentactivitiesalsoincreasedfromlessthan0.25percent

ofthefirstCCFbudgetto5percentinthecurrentCCFperiod.

ITactivitieswithinUNDPbudgetedresourcessawasimilarexpansionrisingfromlessthan1percentto3percentofthetotalbudgetoverthattime.

Annex 5, which will be available online atwww.undp.org/eo, presents the map of intendedresultsineachofUNDP’sprogrammingareas.

Box 4. UNDP in Bhutan—At a Glance

Between 1997-2001, UNDP’s programme budget in Bhutan totaled USD 18.2 million. for the period 2002-2006, the amount budgeted was USD 13.2 million.

Areas of support have expanded from sustainable livelihoods and governance between 1997-2001 to the following during 2002-2006:

Governance:1. Local governance—decentralization policies • Developed effective legal and policy framework for decentralized authority and management

2. Public sector—civil service accountability • Improved efficiency, accountability and transparency in the civil service

Poverty:1. National poverty frameworks—monitoring poverty • Improved national capacity to monitor (human and income) poverty and inequality in accordance

with the MDGs

2. Access to assets—productive resources and assets • Improved capacity for the rural poor to sustain their livelihoods

3. Access to technologies • Reformed the policy, legal and regulatory framework to substantially expand connectivity

to information and technologies (ICT)

Environment:1. Environment and energy for livelihoods—institutional framework • Improved capacity of local authorities and community-based groups in environmental

management and sustainable energy development

2. Instruments for environmental sustainability—Global conventions and funding mechanisms • Integrated global environment concerns and commitments into national development

planning and policy

27U N D P ’ S C O N T R I B U T I O N S T O D E V E L O P M E N T R E S U L T S

�.2. UNDP PARTNERShIPS

UNDPmaintainsstrongpartnershipswithRGoBandotherdevelopment agencies inBhutan.Since2000, the types and number of UNDP partner-ships have been increasing and are widening indiversity. After 2004, more NGOs, the privatesectorandinternationalagencieshavebeendrawninto UNDP supported projects. With the focuson decentralization, UNDP has also expandeditscontactsatdzongkhagandgeog levels.Differ-ent types of partnerships have helped to enhanceUNDP’s effectiveness in the areas of its support.Nearly all UNDP assisted programmes are beingimplementedundertheNEXmodalityonthebasisof the NEX framework introduced a decade ago.Thishascontributedtostrengtheningandpromot-ingnationalownership.

UNDP in Bhutan has also established collab-orative arrangements with associated funds andprogrammesoftheUnitedNationsaswellaswithbilateralagencies.WithintheUNsystem,UNDPhascollaboratedactivelywiththeFAO,UNICEF,WHO and WFP in the areas of natural disastermanagement,povertyandMDGmonitoring,HIV/AIDSandadultliteracy.UNDPenjoysacloseandfruitful partnership with UNV. Assistance fromUNVhascontinuedandpositiveresultshavebeenreported from the contribution of the volunteers.UNV,throughUNDPBhutan,hasalsopromotedvolunteerism through various activities, includingcelebrationofInternationalVolunteerDay.

These arrangements take the form of strategicpartnerships and co-financing of activities. Theco-financing of activities carried out by UNDPwith development partners has increased overthe years. For example, UNCDF and SNV areprincipal partners in the areas of rural enterprisedevelopmentanddecentralization.SNV’stechnicaladvisoryandcapacitybuildingservicescomplementUNDP’sinputsthroughthelocalizedknowledgeofandfieldpresenceofSNVinpartsofthecountry.UNDPhasalsobeenimplementingmanyenviron-ment and sustainable energy programmes for theGlobalEnvironmentFacility(GEF)inareassuchasclimatechange,protectedareamanagementandsmallandmicro-hydelenergyschemes.Thegrowthin co-financing partnerships, however, could belimitedbythefactthatRGoBhasveryclearareasidentified for different development partners toavoidduplicationofactivities.

TheAsianDevelopmentBank(ADB)andUNDPhavebothbeenactive inpovertyreduction.Theseseparatelyfundedactivitiesarecarefullycoordinatedtoavoidunnecessaryoverlap.ADBsupportsactivi-ties that require substantive resource investmentsthatUNDPcannotprovidebutthatarecrucialandcomplementarytothevariousruralenterpriseandprivate-sector initiatives undertaken by UNDP.With the World Bank, UNDP has collaboratedon affecting pro-poor fiscal management and inconducting a seminal survey study on the privatesector, the Bhutan Private Sector Survey 2002,whichtheWorldBankhasusedtoprepareseveralcriticalprogrammeassistancepackagestostimulateprivate-sectordevelopmentinthecountry.

UNDPhashadjointpartnershipswithGTZintheareaofentrepreneurshipandjobskillstraining,theWorld Wildlife Fund (WWF) in protected areamanagementandadvocacyonenvironmentalissuesintheareaofessentialoildevelopment.

UNDPplaysanimportantfacilitation,coordinationand information-sharing role amongdevelopmentpartners in Bhutan. For instance, at the periodicRoundTableMeetings(RTMs),onthebasisofarequestfromRGoBin2004,UNDPassumedtheroleofpartnerfocalpointinBhutantohelpprepare‘donor’ coordination meetings in thematic andsectoralareas:povertyreduction,decentralization,information communications technology (ICT),education,health,urbandevelopment,roads,RNR,human resource development and private-sectordevelopment.

UNDPhashadagrowingbutlimitedpartnershipwith civil society organizations, as there are veryfewsuchinstitutionsinthecountry.Formanyyears,UNDPprovidedperiodicsupporttotheNationalWomen’sAssociationofBhutantopromotetextilesandhandicraftsproducedbyruralwomen.Mean-ingfulcollaborativeeffortswerealsoinitiatedwiththeWWFandtheRoyalSocietyfortheProtectionof Nature (RSPN) in the areas of nature conser-vation and national park and biological corridormanagement.More recently,UNDPhas initiatedpartnerships with the National Commission forWomen and Children, the Tarayana Foundationand RENEW (Respect Educate Nurture andEmpower Women) organization that assists poorandvulnerablegroups.With theonsetofdemoc-ratizationandtheenactmentoftheNGOAct,itislikely thatcivil societyorganizationswillgrowin

2� C H A P T E R 3

numbersandbecomemoreactive,thuspotentiallyleadingtomanymorepartnershipswithUNDP.

�.�. ROUND TAbLE MEETINgS (RTMS)

Since1983,RTMsforBhutanhavebeenorganizedjointly and co-chaired by RGoB and UNDP.UNDP, in its role as co-chair, has success-fullymanagedconsultationswithRGoBandwithBhutan’sdevelopmentpartnersonissuesofcommoninterestanddevelopmentthemes;facilitatedtheuseoftheRTMmechanismtoprovideaninternationalforumforBhutantodefineandpresentitsdevelop-mentobjectives,policies,programmesandresourcerequirements;helped topromote amutualunder-standingoftheeconomicandsocialcircumstancesaffectingthecountry’sdevelopment;andassistedinestablishingfollow-uparrangements.

RTMshavefacilitatedin-depthanddetaileddiscus-sions and exchange of views between the RGoBand its development partners on a wide range ofdevelopmental and other issues. UNDP’s supportin preparing the meetings is valued highly andacknowledgedbythegovernmentanddevelopmentpartners.Muchpreparatoryworkisinvolvedintermsofgetting agreementon issues fordiscussion, thetimelypreparationofdocumentspresentedby thegovernment, follow-up with in-country consulta-tionsandtheimplementationofpolicyagreements,periodicmonitoringoftheimplementationofRTMpolicy and programme agreements and resourcecommitments,andsuccessiveRTMmeetingswithfollow-up.Alargenumberofrepresentativesfromdevelopmentpartnersparticipate.TheUNsystempreparesjointstatementsonkeyissuesadoptinganiterativemannerincloseconsultationwithalargenumber(18UNagenciesforthelastRTM)aimedatprojectingaunitedUNsystem.

Two RTMs were held during the period of theADRreview—theseventhinNovember2000andtheeighthinFebruary2003.Attheendof2005,preparations were made for the ninth RTM heldin February 2006. Poverty reduction has been aconsistentthemethroughoutthethreeRTMs.

TheninthRTM,heldinFebruary2006,had‘GoodGovernanceforDevelopment’asitstheme.Taking

placeatanimportantjunctureinBhutan’shistory,UNDP as co-chair called upon the internationalcommunitytounderwritethedemocratictransition.The RTM provided an opportunity for partnerstodiscusswithRGoBonceagaintheissueofthepeopleincampsineasternNepal.TheneedfortheconstitutiontoenforceConventionssuchastheoneontheRightsoftheChildwasalsoraised.Theissueofenhanced‘donor’coordinationandaharmonizedsystemtoimprovetheeffectivenessofdevelopmentassistance was raised again by development part-ners.Thegovernmentfeltthatthoughitcontinuedtomakeeffortstoimproveaidcoordinationthroughsectorcoordinationmeetings,difficultieshadbeenexperiencedintermsofvarioussystemsadoptedbydifferentagencies.FollowingthisRTM,theRGoBdecided to hold ‘donor’ coordination meetings inspecificareas.

It would take a separate evaluation to establishthattheRTMhasbeenaneffectiveinstrumentforassistingBhutaninachievingitsdevelopmentgoals.ItisnotedthatthatUNDP,initsroleasco-chair,hasmanagedsuccessfully theprocessofconsulta-tionswithRGoBandwithBhutan’sdevelopmentpartnersonissuesofcommoninterestanddevelop-mentthemes.Somemeasureshavebeeninitiatedtoimprovecoordinationandfollow-uptoRTMs.Forinstance,RGoBhasactedonaRTMrecommen-dationtoorganizedonorcoordinationmeetingsbyrequestinglineministriestoholdthematiccoordi-nationmeetings.Sofar,threemeetingsintheareasofInfrastructureDevelopment,ICTforDevelop-ment, andPrivateSectorDevelopmenthavebeenheld.Also,forimprovingaideffectiveness,coordi-nationisbeingenhancedbetweentheWorldBank,UNsystemandotherdonors intermsofnationalsystem capacity assessment and development inareassuchasaudit,financialrulesandregulationsandprocurement.However, theEvaluationTeamdidnotcomeacrosstangibleevidencethattheRTMprocess has succeeded in significantly improvinginstitutionalarrangementsforaidcoordinationandbetterharmonizationandcoordinationofeffortsonthepartofdevelopmentpartners.RGoBconsiderstheRTMsanimportantandusefulmechanismforregularpolicydialogueandcoordinationwithallitsdevelopmentpartners.

2�U N D P ’ S C O N T R I B U T I O N S T O D E V E L O P M E N T R E S U L T S

�.�. UNDP’S CONTRIbUTION AS A DEVELOPMENT PARTNER

UNDP Bhutan is recognized as an importantcontributor to the country’s development. TheRGoBregardsUNDPtobe‘anextremelytrustedandvaluedpartner’(seeBox5).

This section traces the major developments since2000 in five critical areas of human development

that are the focus of UNDP’s support to RGoB:governance, poverty reduction, environment andenergy,naturaldisasterreductionandgenderequity.ThissectionalsopresentsanevaluationofUNDP’srole and contribution to development results. Anattempt has been made to identify significantdevelopment contributions for which UNDP isrecognized,tooutlinemechanismsandmodalitiesadoptedbyUNDPtoachievetheseoutcomes,andtocommentonmatchwithintendedresults.

Box 5. Perceptions regarding UNDP’s contributions to development results

As part of the ADR, an expert opinion survey with open- and closed-ended questions was conducted in person or via telephone by a national consultant. Twenty-one carefully selected informants belonging to government departments or agencies, donor agencies, NGOs and research institutions were surveyed. Of these, only two were not familiar with UNDP’s work. The rest were either very familiar (10) or quite familiar (9) with UNDP’s work in Bhutan.

According to the expert opinion survey:

• 81 percent of respondents consider UNDP’s contributions to be very significant (57 percent) or significant (24 percent)

• 86 percent regard UNDP as a ‘very effective’ role player in development

• 14 percent regard UNDP’s effectiveness as being ‘average’

This is consistent with the 2004 UNDP Partners Survey in which 90 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that UNDP’s image in Bhutan is favourable.

UNDP’s positive reputation is largely derived from its effective partnership with RGoB, flexibility and responsive-ness to national needs. for instance, 96 percent of respondents in the Expert Opinion Survey consider UNDP’s programmes to be ‘consistent’ or ‘very consistent’ with national priorities; 71 percent of informants view UNDP’s programmes to be ‘very consistent’ with the principle of GNH and 29 percent regard it as being ‘reasonably consistent’, and 90 percent of informants regard UNDP to be ‘very responsive’ (43 percent) or ‘responsive’ (47 percent) to development needs in Bhutan. Only 5 percent believe that it is not.

�0 C H A P T E R 3

�.�.�. gOVERNANCE

Since 2000, RGoB has introduced far reachinglegislative, judicial and administrative reforms. Adraft constitution, developed in 2005, has beenwidelycirculatedanddiscussed.Numerousreformsare underway to improve public administration,strengthenanti-corruptionmeasures,ensureeffec-tive enforcement, extend decentralization, deepengovernance in the corporate and private sectors,amend the judicial systemand further strengthenthe rule of law. In early 2005, RGoB establishedthe Department of Local Governance (DLG)withintheMinistryofHomeandCulturalAffairsto further strengthen thedecentralizationprocessand to coordinate, empower and facilitate localgovernance.Threenewconstitutionalbodies—theElection Commission, the Anti-CorruptionCommission and the office of the AttorneyGeneral—have been established to facilitate asmoothtransitiontodemocracy.

Comprehensive governance reforms have beenproposed in the recently released ‘Good Gover-nance Plus: In Pursuit of Gross National Happi-ness2005Report’(theGGPlusReport)byRGoB.This report contains numerous pragmatic recom-mendations to further enhance government effi-ciency, transparencyandaccountability.Proposalsincludeanewtwo-to-threeyearrollingannualplanframework,designofanewfiscalformulatoguidebudgetarytransfers,developmentofnationalplan-ningandinformationsystems,theintroductionofannualblockgrants,andstrengtheningofdzong-khag andgeog staff capacity.All agencieswithinthe government have been required to developactionplansandestablishappropriatemanagementstructurestomonitortheexecutionoftheGGPlussolutions.Additionally,aGGPlusmonitoringandevaluation mechanism is to be set up within theCabinetSecretariatandPrimeMinister’sOfficetooverseetheimplementationoftheseinitiatives.

Sincethe8thFYP(1997-2002),UNDPhasadvo-cated for performance-based public administra-tion and civil service, and engaged in dialoguewithRGoBongovernanceissuesandindependentoversight mechanisms, such as the judiciary andauditinstitutions,andonestablishinganenablingframeworkforcivilsocietyinstitutions.Twomajorprogrammes were implemented in support of

the 8th FYP priorities of balanced and equitabledevelopment: decentralization and communityparticipation, and institutional strengtheningand human resource development. Through theseprogrammes,developmentfundswere,forthefirsttime,directlyprogrammedandmanagedby localrepresentatives. Main activities included supportforcapacitybuildingintheMinistryofHomeandCultural Affairs and the Planning Commission,strengthening dzongkhag offices to become moreeffectiveconduitsforcommunicationbetweenlocalcommunities and the government, and conduct-ingtrainingfor localofficialsandcommunitiestoenhance their awareness of decentralization poli-ciesandregulations.Animportantcomponentwastheawardingofgrantsto10geogstofunddevel-opment activities of their own choice. This GeogDevelopment Facilitating Activity representedthe first attempt to make financial disbursementsatgeog leveland is said tohavestrengthenedthegovernment’sowncapacitytoplan,implementandmonitordevelopmentactivitiesatmicro-level.The9thFYPintroduced,forthefirsttimeinthecountry,block-specific micro level plans. The approachpilotedunderthisprogrammeisalsocreditedwithproviding crucial lessons for the decentralizationprocess. UNDP also supported dissemination ofGYT/DYTChathrim2002andthe2004ManualonGYT/DYTChatrim2002.

UNDP, together with UNCDF, has taken theleadinformulatingthefirstframeworklinkingthecollectiveeffortsofseveralpartnersinanintegratedprogramme on decentralization. The Decentral-ization Support Programme (DSP) 2002-2007is funded in partnership with the UNCDF andSNV.Ithasanumberofobjectivesandcontinuesto support all three levels of government—main-streamingseveralinitiativesthatweretestedintheearlierprogramme.Aswiththeearlierprogramme,special grant funds have been made available to32geogsdirectlyfromtheDepartmentofBudgetand Accounts to enable them to develop moredirectexperienceinplanningforandimplementingtheir own development activities. In addition, 20Micro-EnvironmentalActionPlans(MEAPs)arebeingimplementedin40geogs.Thisiscoupledtocapacitybuildinginitiativesandatrainingmanualfor local officials to operationalize the DYT andGYTChathrims.

��U N D P ’ S C O N T R I B U T I O N S T O D E V E L O P M E N T R E S U L T S

UNDPhasacquiredahighprofile(seeBox6)forits contribution in thegovernance areabymainlysupporting RGoB’s efforts to create an enablingframework and build capacities for decentralized,people-centredgovernance.StakeholdersrecognizeUNDP’ contribution towards supporting decen-tralization through planning grants at the geoglevel and for its donor coordination in buildingcapacities in this regard. UNDP’s engagement inthisfieldstartedinthelate1990swiththeimple-mentationofthepilotStrengtheningCapacitiesforDevelopment Management and DecentralizationProgramme(1997-2002).A2000evaluationoftheinitialphaseindicatedthatUNDPhadatthattimehelpedshape“anincreasinglyclearandsophisticat-ednationaldialogueregardingthepracticalpursuitofadecentralizationvision.”Accordingly,the10thFYPproposestoadopttheblockgrantmodalityinall201geogsbasedonthesuccessofthismodel.

The 2005 Mid-Term Evaluation of the DSPobservesthatthedecentralizationeffortssupportedbyUNDPandothersseemtobegraduallytranslat-ing into enhanced GYT and DYT planning andfinancial management capacities. This, in turn, isleading to enhanced localprioritization anddeci-sionmaking.However, the evaluation alsopointsoutthatrepresentationhaswidenedbutnotdeep-ened and does not necessarily encourage genderequity.Challengestoeffectivenessandsustainabil-ityarethelackofbaselineinformationondevelop-menttrendsindzongkhagsandgeogs,weakgeogcapacitiestoutilizefunds,weakDLGcapacitiestoguideimplementation,andlackofaperformance-basedsystemtofollowupontheefficiencyofgeogsinimplementingblockgrantprojects.

StakeholdersalsorecognizeUNDP’scontributiontowardssupportingcriticaloversightfunctionsforenhancing transparency and accountability. ThisincludessupporttotheRoyalCourtofJusticeandtotheRoyalAuditAuthority fordraftingPerfor-manceAuditingGuidelinesandundertakinginitialperformanceaudits, studyvisitsofkeyofficials inmanaging local level elections, and assisting theAnti-Corruption Commission with institutionalcapacitybuilding.

AnotherareanotedbystakeholdersisUNDP’srolein thedevelopmentof an enabling framework forICTinBhutan,althoughthesecontributionshaverecently been somewhat eclipsed by other largerinitiatives (among others, by the Government ofIndia).UNDP’searlyadvocacyonICThasinflu-enced the establishment of a Planning Informa-tion Network for the Planning Commission. ItssupporttothefirstInternetServiceProvidersandInternetcafeshasreportedlyprovidedinformationfortheICTmasterplanoftheMinistryofEduca-tion.UNDP’sregionalexpertisewasusedtocarryoutareviewofthestatusofongoingICTprojectsanddirectionsforthefuture.UNDPalsoassistedtheMinistryofCommunicationsindevelopinganICTAct forBhutanand initiated,withpartners,e-commerce initiatives targeted at women entre-preneurs. UNDP, along with other partners, hassupported Bhutan’s ICT Policy and Strategy thatwasapprovedbytheCouncilofMinistersin2004,and is now assisting RGoB in standardizing andreducingthedigitaldividebetweenruralandurbanareas and between women and men. MoreoverUNVfielded14UNVsinsupportofICTcapacitybuilding in Bhutan, including at district level forthedecentralizationprocess.

Box 6. Perceptions of UNDP’s contributions towards governance

According to the Expert Opinion Survey conducted for this ADR, 81 percent of the experts interviewed indicated that UNDP’s contribution since 2000 has been significant (52 percent) or very significant (29 percent) in improving good governance in Bhutan.

UNDP is rated even higher in strengthening decentralization and local governance, with 91 percent of informants agreeing that it has made significant (58 percent) or very significant (33 percent) contributions.

UNDP’s profile in this area is confirmed by the finding in the 2004 Partners Survey wherein 86 percent of respondents regarded it as active to a great extent (72 percent) and to a very great extent (14 percent).

According to both these surveys, UNDP’s contribution is reportedly better in governance than in any of the other thematic areas.

�2 C H A P T E R 3

Work in this thematic area seems to be on tracktowards the intended results,9 with some minorconstraints. The IT efforts have been somewhatstymiedduetoalackofinfrastructure,butthisisbeing addressed through other funding sources.Theintendedoutputswereachievedexceptforafewthatwereformulatedasoutcomesandinamannerthatmakesanassessmentdifficultwithoutamorerigorousandresource-intensivemethodology.10

�.�.2. POVERTY REDUCTION

Following the publication of the 2000 PovertyAssessment and Analysis Report and the 2004Poverty Analysis Report, RGoB has officiallyrecognized that poverty in Bhutan is widespreadand entrenched. Today, there is strong politicalcommitment to address eradicating poverty moresystematically. A major focus of the 10th FYP(2008-2012) is expected to be poverty reductionandtheattainmentoftheMDGs.

From 1997 to 2001, UNDP had virtually nopolicyrelatedactivityorexplicitlystatedintendedoutcomesinthispracticearea.Inthelastfiveyears,however, UNDP has established a high-profilepresence in the field of poverty reduction and isrecognizedasanimportantcontributortoBhutan’spovertyreductionefforts(seeBox7).

EvidenceshowsthatUNDP’smostvaluableinter-ventions have been in providing direct policysupport, advocacy and institutionbuilding. It hasplayed a significant role in raising awareness of

poverty,improvinginstitutionalcapacitytodeveloppolicies for poverty elimination and monitoringprogresstowardstheMDGs.ThemaininstrumentshavebeenthevariousreportspromotedorproducedinconjunctionwiththePlanningCommission,theNationalStatisticalBureauandavarietyofUNpart-ners: theNationalHumanDevelopmentReports,PovertyAnalysisReportsandMillenniumDevel-opment Goals Progress Reports. All these docu-ments unambiguously highlight Bhutan’s povertysituation and context. Although not yet availableatdistrictandlocallevel,socio-economicdataandanalysis are starting to be produced in a mannerthat will enable effective targeting of vulner-able groups. The 2004 Poverty Analysis Report,produced by UNDP using ADB Bhutan LivingStandardsSurveydata, contains, forexample, thefirstpovertyprofilewithurban-ruralandregionaldisaggregation. The poverty monitoring paper isreportedlybeingusedasabasisforRGoB’spositionon indicators for theSouthAsianAssociation forRegional Cooperation poverty mapping exercise.Thesereports,aswellasUNDPsupportandadvo-cacyoftheMDGprocesses,areacknowledgedashaving helped to generate a better understandingof the situation among policy makers and amongBhutanesesocietyingeneral.

UNDP is recognized for itsdirect support to thedevelopmentofBhutan’sFYPs, including the9thand10thFYPsaswellasthecountry’s long-termstrategic perspective on development encapsulat-ed inVision2020.Placing theMDGframework

___________________________________________________________________________9. As formulated by the CO in the SRf and MYff. Refer to Annex 5.

10. for instance, ‘performance of the civil service improved.’

Box 7. Perceptions regarding UNDP’s contributions towards poverty

UNDP is acknowledged for both its project-based support as well as ‘soft assistance’ (non-project based) in the area of poverty reduction.

According to the Expert Opinion Survey, 81 percent of informants considered UNDP’s contributions to be either very significant (57 percent) or significant (24 percent).

The 2004 UNDP Partners Survey revealed that 72 percent of partners regarded UNDP as being active in poverty eradication to a great or very great extent; and 79 percent considered UNDP to be similarly engaged in efforts to address the MDGs.

These positive perceptions were confirmed by the focus group discussions that also identified UNDP as one of the major role players in Bhutan in poverty reduction.


withinvariousdevelopmentprocessesisalsohelpingintrackingadiverserangeofpovertyindicatorsandlinkingthesetoadvocacycampaignsrelatedtotheMDGs.AccordingtotheNovember2005PovertyOutcomeEvaluation,UNDPhas alsohelped theDepartment of Budget and Accounts develop itsexpertise through training and the developmentof Rolling Budget and Mid-Term ExpenditureFramework modules for more effective financialdecentralization.

The 2005 Poverty Outcome Evaluation commis-sionedbytheCOjudgesUNDP’s‘softassistance’ashavingmadesignificantcontributionsinsensitizingthepublic and facilitating in-countrydonor coor-dination in the area of poverty reduction; raisingawareness through the organization of specialeventssuchastheInternationalDayfortheEradi-cationofPoverty;coordinatingandsupportingtheexposure of relevant national officials at relevantregionalUNDPtrainingprogrammes,workshopsand seminars; assisting RGoB in the preparationof MDG reports; highlighting the importance ofmonitoringprogressandusingthereportsforadvo-cacyandinformedpolicymaking;andmobilizingtechnical assistance from the Regional UNDPProjectonMacroeconomicsofPovertyReductionfordevelopingapro-poordevelopmentstrategyforBhutan.These recentachievementshelp to justifyUNDP’s decision to move into more upstreampolicyareasanddoubleresourcesdevotedtopolicyreform and MDG and poverty reporting supportservicelines.

Improving thecapacityof small andmicro-enter-prisesandevolvinganemployment-intensivebusi-nesspromotionstrategyareimportantconstituentsofpovertyreduction.Inlinewiththe ‘highvalue,low volume’ approach, a national framework fororganicproductionhasbeenformulatedandeffortsareunderwaytoimproveandpromotelocalhandi-craftsandcapitalizeonnatural resources, suchasmedicinalplantsinasustainablemanner.Althoughmicro, small andmediumenterprisedevelopmenteffortsareafocus,muchprogressneedstobemade.These initiatives are weakened by an inadequateenabling environment and inadequate nationalinstitutions and capacities. Private-sector capaci-tiesremainlimited.Lackofroadandinformation

technologyinfrastructureremainsamajorobstacle.Emphasisisbeingplacedonimprovingfarmroadaccess, marketing outlets and services, and infor-mationservices inordertofacilitateaccesstoandunderstandingofmarkets.

Since the 1990s, UNDP has committed muchlargeramountstothedevelopmentofruralenter-prises (including supporting the creation of anenablingenvironment)inordertopromotesustain-able livelihoods, raise incomes and stimulate theruralprivatesector.FocusgroupdiscussionsnotedUNDP’sinterventionsinhorticulture,microenter-prisedevelopment,e-businessandthepromotionofBhutanesehandicrafts.However,opinionsdifferedontheireffectivenessandthemorerecentcontribu-tionsweregenerallynotashighlyrated.Thiscouldbedue to thenature of downstreamwork,whereresults are less visible than upstream activities.Also,inadequateprojectmonitoringandevaluationsystemsmakepropermonitoringofoutcomesdiffi-culttorecordandevaluate.

The main achievements noted have been in theIntegratedHorticultureDevelopmentProgramme(IHDP—1997-2002).11 Together with the RuralEnterprise Development Programme (RED—2002-2006), these flagship programmes accountfor more than 60 percent of UNDP’s povertyreductiondisbursementsbetween2000and2006.Boththemid-termandfinalevaluationsreportthattheIHDPiseffectiveinbuildingthekeyelementsof horticulture in Bhutan related to marketing,research, extension and post-harvest. The LemonGrassOilruralindustry,inwhichUNDPhadbeeninvolvedsince1992,isdeemedtobeamajorsuccessinthisregard.

BuiltontheexperiencesoftheIHDP,butwiderinscope,theUNDP-SNVfundedREDisthelargestongoing UNDP programme. UNDP is workingwith the Ministries of Agriculture and of TradeandIndustrytoinitiatepromotionalandmarketingactivitiestostimulateruralenterprisesandenhanceruralincomes.Themid-termreviewtakesacriticalviewofREDimplementationandoutputstodate.Itistooearlytoassessitsachievements,especiallyintheabsenceofamonitoringandevaluationsystem,butaccordingtothe2005PovertyOutcomeEvalu-

___________________________________________________________________________11. See in particular assessments from the mid-term and final evaluations of the IHDP

�� C H A P T E R 3

ation,itsmaincontributiontodateappearstobeitssupportoforganicfarmingand, inparticular, thedevelopmentoftheorganicpolicyframework.

Institutional capacity in Bhutan to obtain andmanage poverty-related data has been improving.ThePlanningCommissionhasformulatedaFrame-workDocument forBhutan’sPovertyMonitoringandAssessmentSystemto strengthenmonitoringfordevelopmentplanning,butimplementationhasbeen stymied by limited institutional capacities.Businesspromotionfunctionsincludingadviceandsupporthavebeen integrated intoRegionalTradeand Industry Offices to assist rural enterprises.Decentralizationistransferringmanyresponsibili-ties to thedzongkhagandgeog level, buthumanresourcecapacitiesatthenationalleveltomeetnewchallengesandimplementpovertyreductionstrat-egies are limited. Budget allocation and controlremaincentralizedduetolackofexpertiseatsub-national levels. Inter-institutional coordinationamong agencies remains weak and sector-based.Efforts to promote e-business for entrepreneurshavebeenstymiedbythedifficultiesinconnectivityovertheroughterraininBhutan.Proceedingwiththis initiative was deemed not feasible given thechallenges,andtherequiredresourcesandskillstomakearealdifference.ThismaychangeasRGoBand the Government of India partner to advanceICTinitiatives.

UNDP’s contributions in this practice area havebeeninlinewiththeintendeddevelopmentresults.Thisseemstobe,inlargepart,duetotheplanningapproachofworkinghandinhandwithRGoBtoagreeuponandworktowardsmilestones,withthegovernment’s fullownershipof interventions.TheMediumTermExpenditureFramework (MTEF)hasofficiallybeenadoptedandwillbeoperation-alized starting from the 10th FYP. Most successhasbeenachievedinthetwoservicelinesrelatedtopolicyreformandpovertymonitoringandreport-ing.Milestoneshavebeenachieved,butprogressinoperationalizing Bhutan Poverty Monitoring and

AssessmentSystemhasbeenslow,apparentlyduetoinadequateinstitutionalcapacities.

Somewhatmoredifficulttodetermineistheextenttowhichthecapacitiesoftheruralpoorhavebeenimproved towards more sustainable livelihoods.The intended results in terms of stated ‘outputs’arehardertomeasureandassess,especiallyintheabsenceofgoodprojectmonitoringandevaluationsystems. The results of the IHDP seem to havecontributed well to the intended outcome. Prog-ress towards replicablenationalpoverty initiativeshasbeenslow,althoughtherathermodestoutputsfor 2004-2005 indicate the preparatory nature oftheworkatthisstage.TheREDmid-termreviewappears positive that progress is on track, despitedesign flaws and a recommendation to terminatethe grant scheme, which was not encouragingentrepreneurialactivity.ImprovementssuchastheonesbasedontheREDmid-termreviewwillhaveto be made, including documenting experiencesandlessons,ifitistomakeasignificantcontribu-tiontothisimportantoutcome.

�.�.�. ENERgY AND ENVIRONMENT 12

Nurturing of the environment has always been atoppriority forBhutan.Since themid1980s, thecountry’sFYPshaveintegratedenvironmentalandbiodiversityconcernsintodevelopmentplansatalllevels.Theauthorityforenvironmentalmanagementis devolved to DYTs and GYTs—a crucial steptowardsamoreparticipatoryandcommunity-basedapproachtosustainabledevelopment.MEAPsandlaterLocalEnvironmentalActionPlans(LEAPs)havefedintotheplanningprocessandarereflectedinthe9thFYP.

Since 2000, the Royal Government has furtherstrengthenedthepolicyandregulatoryframeworkfortheprotectionandmanagementoftheenvironment.Key policy developments include integratingthe principle of environmentally sustainabledevelopmentintothenationalenvironmentstrategyand Bhutan’s long-term vision. Conscious efforts

___________________________________________________________________________12. This section draws on several background materials, assessments and evaluation studies including Guidelines for Preparation of

the Tenth Plan (2007-2012), Planning Commission, Royal Government of Bhutan, March 2006; The Middle Path, a National Environ-ment Strategy for Bhutan, 1999; Bhutan 2020: A Vision for Peace, Prosperity and Happiness, 2000; Environmental Assessment Act 2000; Electricity Act 2000; Regulation for the Environmental Clearance of Projects 2002; Regulation on Strategic Environmental Assessment 2002; forest and Nature Conservation Rules of Bhutan, 2000; Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP II), 2002 Biodiversity Act, 2003; Rules and Regulations for the Implementation of the Biodiversity Act, 2005; Vision and Strategy for the Nature Conservation Division, 2003; and 2001 Bhutan Ecotourism Strategy.


have been made to promote clean and renewableenergy resources and technological practices.Measureshavebeentakentoconservehabitatandspeciesaswellasnaturalanddomesticbiodiversity,recognizingthecross-cuttingnatureofbiodiversityand the importance of protecting traditionalresources. RGoB has introduced the IntegratedConservationDevelopmentProgrammes (ICDPs)in theprotected areas ofBhutan that forge inter-sectoral linkages to attainnational environmentalgoalsandmeetcommunitydevelopmentpriorities.The protection of biodiversity received a furtherboostwiththecreationoftwonewprotectedareasandabiologicalcorridorbetweenthenationalparks.AregulatoryframeworkforthenewThrumshinglaNational Park and corridor was initiated. Thisperiod also heralded in a policy focus on climatechangeandtheuseofrenewableresources.

Another significant development since 2000 hasbeenthedevelopmentofnational institutionsandcapacities towards sustainable livelihoods throughenvironmentalstewardship.Forinstance,aNationalPlanofActionforGlobalEnvironmentalManage-menthasbeendesignedtobuildcapacitiesandhelpinstitutionalize linkages between the conserva-tionactivitiesofrelatedagencies.TheGreenhouseGasInitiativeandtheBiodiversityActionPlanarein place. Dzongkhag environmental committeeshave been established to implement, enforce andmonitorthe2000EnvironmentAssessmentActatthedzongkhaglevel.Thestrengtheningofenviron-mentaleducationandawarenessatthelocal level,institutional twinning and spin-offs from proj-ects suchas theCapacity21and the JigmeDorjiNationalParkarereportedtohavecontributedtocapacitydevelopmentamongparkstaff,localleadersandcommunities.NationalfacilitieshavealsobeenextendedthroughtheestablishmentoftheNationalBiodiversityCentre,theRoyalBhutanGeneBankandtheupgradingoftheNationalHerbarium.

The 2004 Energy and Environment OutcomeEvaluation, project evaluations and focus groupdiscussions highlight the following UNDP andGEF contributions. UNDP generally supportsthe thematic area of the environment by directlysupportingpolicyandstrategyinitiatives,introduc-ingpilotanddemonstrationactivities,encouragingdata analysis, research and advocacy, and assist-ing RGoB with donor coordination and resource

mobilization. Currently, UNDP’s own resourcesaccount for13percentof the fundingsupport forenvironment.Thebalanceof87percentcomesfromGEF,ofwhichUNDPinBhutanistheimplement-ingagency.Severalprojectshavestrengthenedthestrategic framework for biodiversity conservation,informednationalstrategiesandhighlightedexpe-riencestowardsaninclusiveconservationapproach.The 2004 Energy and Environment OutcomeEvaluation notes UNDP/GEF support for actionplanning as the most significant contribution tobiodiversityconservation,notinshapingtheagendabutenablingRGoBtodevelopitsownframeworksinanefficientmanner.Thesupportprovidedoveran extended period enabled the development oftwo Biodiversity Action Plans with considerableimprovements to the second, and will facilitateimplementation through support to developmentoftheRulesandRegulationsfortheImplementa-tion of the Biodiversity Act. In partnership withWWF,UNDPalsosupportedthe formulationoftheICDPGuidelinesaswellasstudiestoinforma regulatory framework for biological corridorsthat link more than 30 percent of the country’sprotectedareas.Theimplementationoftheproject,undertheIntegratedLivestockandCropConser-vation Programme submitted through UNDPandrecentlyendorsedby theGEF, isexpectedtofurtherpromotemainstreamingofagrobiodiversityconservation into livestock and crop developmentpolicyandpracticesinBhutan.

UNDPhassupportedtheestablishmentofBhutan’sfirst Greenhouse Gas Inventory and the FirstNational Communication, prepared for the 2000ConferenceofParties,whichhelpedtriggeraware-ness about climate change and set the stage forthe country’sparticipation in theUNFrameworkConvention for Climate Change. A vulnerabilitystudy ledby theNationalEnvironmentCommis-sion resulted in the development of the NationalAdaptationStrategyandActionPlanforClimateChange. The 2004 Energy and EnvironmentOutcomeevaluationindicatedthattheSustainableSolar Energy Programme Review of existing andpotentialsolarenergyoptionsmayhavehelpedtoidentify thepotential foralternativeenergies.TheRGoBreferstotheReviewasastrategicplanningtool.UNDPisassistingtheDepartmentofEnergyin formulating a National Renewable Energy

�� C H A P T E R 3

Policytowardsfacilitatingelectricityaccesstooff-grid rural households and thereby facilitating theachievementofthevisionof‘ElectricityforAllby2020’. The National Renewable Energy Policy isexpectedtoexclusivelyfocusonmini-microhydels,solarphotovoltaic,windpower,biogas,andothercommunityanddistrictlevelinterventions.

UNDPcontributionshavehelpedtointegrateenvi-ronmentalconcernsintonationalandlocaldevelop-mentplans.ManyUNDPoutputsarealignedwiththeenvironmentalthrust inthe9thFYP,buttheextenttowhichthismayhaveinfluencedthecontentoftheFYPisunclear.MuchmoresignificantarethecontributionsUNDP/GEFhavemadetotheinte-grationofenvironmentalconcernsintogeogplansatlocallevel.EvaluationsreportthatUNDP/GEFhelpedtofostercapacitiesatthenationalandlocallevel. They have supported, through the Capacity21 planning processes, the move towards decen-tralizationbybuildingGYTandDYTmembers’experience in environmental management plan-ning.Capacity21alsofacilitatedtheeffortsoftheNationalEnvironmentCommissiontoworkwithawiderangeofstakeholders,includinglocalgovern-mentauthoritiesandcommunityleaders.

Capacity building has been an important partof the WWF, GEF and UNDP programme onthe Integrated Management of the Jigme DorjiNational Park. It has assisted park managementin implementing a park management plan anddeveloping their understanding of protected areamanagementusingmechanismssuchasshort-termtraining, twinningofparksandstudy tours.Parkstaff have also acknowledged the role of the twoassignedUNVsindevelopinghands-onknowledgeandskills.Localcommunitieswereencouragedtoimplementsustainable livelihoodprojects,gainingexperiencethatissaidtohaveassistedthemingeog

level development planning. The project evalua-tionindicatesthattheprojecthas,onasmallscale,helped to promote sustainable livelihoods andimprovethequalityoflifeamongparkcommuni-ties.Mostnotablehasbeenthe legalizedharvest-ingofCordycepssinensisahighlyvaluablefungus,whichhashelpedraiseincomeofthecommunitiesin the park area. It has also decreased poaching,helped to reduce the human stress on the park’snatural environment, and somewhat amelioratedthe tensions between conservation and the liveli-hoodsoflocalcommunities.

This approach is being continued in theWWF-GEF-UNDP supported Linking andEnhancingProtectedAreasproject in theThrun-shinglaNationalPark.It istooearlytomakeanyassessmentoftheresultsfromthisproject,butlocaltourismanddairyandcottageindustriesarebeingpromoted,fodderproductionandpasturemanage-mentimproved,watersourcesprotected,corrugat-edgalvanized iron sheetsused to replacewoodenshingleroofsandsolarlightingusedtoreducefuel-wood consumption. Awareness of conservation iscreatedthroughruralscholarshipprogrammesandsupportforschool-basednatureclubs.

The UNDP/GEF Small Grants Programme hassupported more than 30 other community-basedenergy and conservation initiatives since 2000.Many of these projects aim to reduce deforesta-tionthroughefficientenergyusesuchasimprovedstoves, solar heating and lighting, and also assistwith reforestation and community awareness onconservation.Informationonthecontributionsthattheseprojectshavemadehasnotbeenavailable.

In addition to governance and poverty reduction,UNDPpartnersperceiveUNDPasbeingactiveinthe area of energy and environment. (see Box 8).

Box 8. Perceptions regarding UNDP’s contributions towards energy and environment

According to the 2004 UNDP Partners Survey, only 54 percent of respondents judged UNDP to be active in energy and environment to a great or very great extent, compared to 72 percent and 86 percent for poverty eradication and governance respectively.

Only 57 percent rated UNDP as a critical partner in energy and environment to a great or very great extent as opposed to 79 percent and 63 percent for poverty eradication and governance respectively.

Conversely, of the 21 informants in the Expert Opinion Survey, 86 percent considered UNDP (and GEf) contribu-tions to the promotion of conservation and the sustainable use of biodiversity as either significant (62 percent) or very significant (24 percent).

�7U N D P ’ S C O N T R I B U T I O N S T O D E V E L O P M E N T R E S U L T S

ApartfromRGoB,sixbilateralagenciesandinter-nationalfinancialinstitutions,oneotherUNagency(UNEP) and one NGO (WWF) are significantplayersinthisfield,inmostcaseswithfargreaterfinancialassistancethanUNDP/GEF.

UNDP,directlyandthroughGEF,hasgoodvisibil-ityinthefield.Analysisshowsthattheirupstreamwork on biodiversity and climate change is morevalued than their work on the ground, but it hastobetakenintoaccountthattheresultsofdown-streamworkoftentakelongertomakeaperceptibledifference(especiallyinBhutanwhereRGoBisverydeliberateandefficientinitspolicydesign).

It isdifficult todistinguishUNDP’s contributionfrom that of other partners and role players. Forinstance, it isnotquite clear towhat extentproj-ectsonthegroundhavehadaninfluenceonpolicy,althoughtheJigmeDorjiNationalParkproject isacknowledged for its generation of baseline dataandinformationonnaturalresourcesandlanduse,while researchandawareness raisinghave report-edlyassistedRGoBinitseffortstogatherevidenceforliftingthebanontheharvestingofthehighlyvaluablefungusCordycepssinensis.

The contributions made by UNDP/GEF in thispractice area are generally in line with what wasexpected, although the alignment of the signifi-cant contributions during 2000-2002 with whatwasexpectedislessclear.IntheSRF,theintendedoutputsoroutcomesarelessclearlyformulated,thusinsomecasestheirachievementhasprovendifficultto assess without more extensive monitoring andevaluation.Certainsmallerprojectcomponentsdidnot lead to the expected results, for example theworkonthedevelopmentofEnvironmentalImpactAssessment guidelines was terminated due to thework of the National Environment Commissionwith ADB and DANIDA support. Some contri-butionsduringthisperiodwerealsoquitemodest,particularly with respect to work with the WorldSummit on Sustainable Development, the capac-ity development of local leaders and the impactof interventions on livelihoods, but much of thework continues and builds on the lessons learntovertheyears.Conversely,progressfortheMYFFperiod 2004-200513 is on track towards intendedresults and all milestones have been reached andoutputsproduced.

�.�.�. NATURAL DISASTER REDUCTION

ThoughnaturaldisastersareacommonoccurrenceinBhutan,effortstofocusmoresystematicallyonnatural disaster reduction and management arequite recent.Theneedtoaddress thisareawithasenseof urgencywas a consequenceof the globalattention drawn to the issue in the aftermath ofsevereflashfloods and theAsian tsunami. Itwasonly in 2004 that RGoB prioritized preparationfornaturaldisastersatthecentralandlocallevels.Aseriesofinitiativesfocusedonbringinganinte-grated and holistic approach to natural disasterreductionatthenationalanddistrictlevel.TheDLGintheMinistryofHomeAffairswasappointedasthe national disaster management coordinatingagency.AnintegratedNationalDisasterManage-mentStrategywasdevisedandanEarthquakeRiskManagement Plan for the Thimphu Valley wasdevelopedby theMinistryofWorksandHumanSettlementinconsultationwithprivatecompaniesandresidents.Thesemanagementplansweretobeapproved and implemented in2006.ThePhuent-soling City National Disaster Management PlanhasbeenmadeoperationalandaNationalDisasterRiskManagementFrameworkdocumenthasbeenformulatedandreleased.

UNDP is acknowledged by RGoB as one of itskey partners in this effort. This is evidenced byUNDP’s engagement in critical developments inthe field since 2004. Other UN agencies (WFP,UNICEFandWHO)aswellasJapanInternation-al Cooperation Agency (JICA) provided support,butUNDPhasworkedcloselywiththeDLGfromthe beginning to devise and move interventionsforward. Stakeholders acknowledge UNDP’s rolein mobilizing technical expertise and resources,buildingcapacitiesandsupportingRGoBinseveralareas. It initiated and led a coordinated effort bythe UN Disaster Management Team (UNDMT)tohighlighttheurgentneedforanationaldisastermanagement mechanism and provide support tosubsequentactions.Earlierworkonclimatechangeexecuted by the National Environment Commis-sion and supportedbyGEF throughUNDPhadalready identified the need for a national disastermanagement strategy and proposed several pilotprojects to counter natural disasters in a moresystematicway.

___________________________________________________________________________13. Refer to Annex 5.

�� C H A P T E R 3

___________________________________________________________________________14. Refer to Annex 5.

15. This section draws on various documents relating to gender and women’s empowerment including specifically the Gender Pilot Study: Bhutan. Extracted from http://www.pc.gov.bt/rep/gpsr.htm on 10 July 2006; CEDAw 30th Session: Replies from Bhutan, Ku-wait, 02 feb 2004; and Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Discrimination Against women – An Updated Summary of the Report of the Kingdom of Bhutan (2003)

UNDP Bhutan supported and facilitated theformulationoftheNationalDisasterManagementStrategybysupportingareviewofgovernmentandcivil society’s disaster preparedness and manage-ment (the resulting report was submitted to the2005WorldConferenceonDisasterManagementinKobe),five stakeholder consultationworkshopsat the central and district level, and a study tourfor14officials.Theseactivitiesarenotedbypart-nerstohavehelpedidentifyprioritiesandcreateabetterunderstandingofdisastermanagementissuesamongseniorgovernmentofficials.

UNDP Bhutan supported the preparation of theThimphu Valley Earthquake Risk ManagementPlanbytheMinistryofWorksandHumanSettle-ment, in the process strengthening the technicalcapacityof theresponsibleStandardsandQualityControl Authority in earthquake vulnerabilityassessmentandearthquakeresistantreconstruction.GovernmentengineersvisitedNepalandcompleteda 12 week seismic engineering course, while theMinistry’s laboratory facility was strengthened tocarry out vulnerability assessment of buildings inotherpartsof thecountry.Privatecompaniesandresidents participated in the project. The public-privatepartnershipwasevidentintrainingoppor-tunities, hosting of the Construction Expo 2005andtheretrofittingofthreebuildingsasademon-stration project. Additional support was providedbyJICAandaUNV,whoprovidedexpertiseandtrainednationalcounterparts.

UNDPhasfolloweduponseveraloftherecommen-dationsoftheEnergyandEnvironmentOutcomeEvaluation, including adopting disaster manage-mentasanewfocusforUNDPprogramming.Prog-ress is thuswellunderwaytoachievetheMYFFoutcomerelatedtothisareaofwork14.All2004and2005targetssetbyUNDPhavebeenachieved.TheNationalDisasterManagementStrategyhasbeenadopted and should soon be operationalized. Theoutcome will be achieved if the strategy is inte-gratedintothe10thFYP,whichiscurrentlyunderdevelopment.Thisishighlylikely,astheguidelinesfor thepreparationof the 10thFYPnotes that a

directlinkexistsbetweendisastersandpovertyandproposestheinclusionofmeasuresforthepreven-tionandmitigationofdisastersinalldevelopmentplans,whereverpossible.

�.�.�. gENDER EqUITY 15

RGoB has taken several steps recently to addresswomen’s empowerment and gender equity inBhutan. Most significant national achievementsnoted by stakeholders since 2000 point to therecognition by RGoB that gender gaps exist andthat priorities related to women and girls shouldbeexpandedfromhealthandeducationtoincludeotherareasofsocio-economicandpoliticaldevelop-ment.Anotherimportantstephasbeentheestab-lishmentoftheNationalCommissionforWomenandChildren(NCWC)in2004withthemandateto monitor the implementation of Convention onthe Elimination of All Forms of DiscriminationagainstWomen(CEDAW)andtoensureadequateintegration of gender concerns into developmentpolicies and programmes. Lastly, NCWC hasdraftedaNationalPlanofActionforGenderasamaster plan tomakegendermainstreamingmoreeffective across all sectors and encouraging pro-genderpolicydecisions.

UNDP has played a key role in advancing thewomen’sempowermentagenda(seeBox9).

BysupportingthefirstGenderPilotStudyin2001,UNDP raised awareness on gender issues. Thefindingsofthepilotstudywereanimportantinputto the first CEDAW periodic report and stimu-lateddiscussionsonpossible interventions.Disag-gregateddataanalysesanddetaileddiscussionsongenderarealsoincorporatedintothe2005BhutanMDG Report and National Human Develop-mentReport.In2006,thegenderproject‘MovingForward on Gender: Empowerment and Protec-tion’ was approved and is being implemented byNCWCwithfinancial support fromUNDP.Theprojectaimedatincreasingwomen’sparticipationinnationalandlocaldecisionmakingandstrengthen-ingproceduresandmechanismstoaddressviolence


against women. Under the project, the NationalPlanofAction forGenderhasbeendrafted.Theproject played a critical role in the institutionalstrengtheningofthenewlyestablishedNCWC.

UNDP provided financial and technical supportthat helped to build institutional capacity. Incoordination with the NCWC and the PlanningCommission,itsupportedtwotrainingworkshopsongenderanalysisandmainstreamingtobuildthecapacitiesofpolicymakers and theGenderFocalPoint Network. While we could not confirm thestatement in UNDP reports that the training“ensured greater efficiency and effectiveness inpolicy formulation, service delivery and resourcemanagement,” the gender focal point representa-tivessubsequentlyusedtheirknowledgetoconductgenderanalysesoftheirorganizations’policiesandprogrammesinpreparationforthedevelopmentoftheNationalPlanofActionforGender.

UNDP, in collaboration with NCWC andUNICEF,fundedthefirsteverNationalConsulta-tiononWomenandChildFriendlyPoliceProce-dures. UNDP also collaborated with NCWC,UNICEF and the UN Trust Fund for EndingViolence against Women to support the NationalConsultationonWomenandChildFriendlyJudi-cialProcedureswithrepresentativesfromtheRoyalBhutan Police, Royal Court of Justice, MinistryofHealthandthegenderfocalpoint.Therecom-mendationoftheconsultationsledtothecreationof the Women and Child Protection Unit withinthe Royal Bhutan Police. UNDP Bhutan alsosupported a workshop by the NCWC and thethenDepartmentofPlanningwhere70delegatesdeveloped and endorsed a framework that servedasthebasisforfurtherdevelopingaNationalPlanofActionforGender,intendedtoguideallfuture

gender-related developments in Bhutan. Supportforthisprocessiscontinuingin2006.StakeholdersemphasizedUNDP’ssupportofBhutanesehandi-craftsashaving“madeabigdifference”towomen(although this has not been confirmed in evalua-tions),especiallyasUNDPisseentobe“theonly[donor]roleplayer”inthisfield.

UNDP resource allocation to gender projectsincreased during the two periods from less than0.25 percent during 1997-2001 to 5 percent ofthe 2002-2006 budget, although the dedicatedamount for NCWC remains relatively small atapproximately USD 200,000 for 2006. Capacity-buildingactivitieshavecontributedtoraisingaware-nessamonggenderfocalpointsandenhancedtheircontributionstoandcollaborationwithNCWCforthe development of the National Action Plan forGender. Additional efforts to mainstream genderinclude the appointment of a gender specialistworkingwithNCWCandpart-timeintheUNDPBhutan,thepreparationofagenderchecklistthattheCOusesforprojectappraisal,arecentlyestab-lished and trained Gender Team in the CO, andgendertrainingfortheentirestaffofUNDPCO.However, as these initiatives are quite recent, wecouldnotfindstrongevidenceofsignificantactionstowardsgenderequityinUNDP’sworkinthethreepracticeareasandmorespecifically,towardsgendermainstreaming. Gender was not mentioned as apriority area in programme documents preparedduring1997-2001,butwasmoreexplicitlythoughperfunctorilyarticulatedinsubsequentprogrammedocuments.Mostevaluationreportsdidnotaddressgenderasaspecifictopicforinvestigation.

UNDPmanagers,aswellasatleastonemajoreval-uationreport(REDMid-TermReview),confirmedthatgendermainstreaminginUNDPprojectshas

Box 9. Perceptions regarding UNDP’s contributions towards promoting gender equity

In the Expert Opinion Survey, 95 percent of respondents judged UNDP to have been effective (76 percent) or very effective (19 percent) in promoting gender equity in Bhutan.

Sixty-eight percent of respondents in the 2004 Partners Survey perceived UNDP to a great extent (50 percent) or to a very great extent (18 percent) as a critical partner in efforts to promote gender equity—significantly above average for all countries.

Such a positive contribution by UNDP was confirmed by several key individuals as well as by the focus group on gender. This positive perception is explained by the fact that UNDP has, since 2000, been part of all those developments noted as the most important in promoting gender equity in Bhutan. Its contributions have been widely recognized in several areas.

�0 C H A P T E R 3

been inadequate, despite some efforts to incorpo-rategenderdimensions inprojects in someof theservicelines.AsgenderequitywasneverregardedasamajorchallengeinBhutan,thisaspecttendedto be neglected in programme and project designandimplementation.Encouragedbythecorporatefocus on gender mainstreaming , the CO is nowputtingprocessesinplaceanddevelopingin-houseexpertisetoaddressthisissueaspartofarecentlylaunchedefforttomakeUNDPBhutananexem-plaryrolemodel forgendermainstreaming in thecountryandAsiaPacificregion.

The results described above are in line with theintendedoutcomesofUNDP’sworkongenderfortheCCF2cycle.Theintendedresultsareembod-ied in theprocesses todevelop theNationalPlanof Action for Gender. The Guidelines for thepreparationof the10thFYPconfirmthatgendermainstreamingcoupledwithdisaggregationofallpossibledatabygenderwillberequiredatallplan-ningandexecutinglevels.Indicationsarethatpoli-cieswill not be enough to ensure that barriers towomen’sappointmentindecision-makingpositions,especiallyatsub-nationallevel,arereduced.Moredeliberate interventions will be needed to ensurethis,especiallyatsub-nationallevel.Opportunitiesforemploymentintheprivatesectorforwomeninruralandurbanareasremaininadequate.

�.�. SUSTAINAbILITY OF RESULTS

UNDP Bhutan has adopted a variety of mecha-nisms to ensure and improve sustainability ofresults.Nevertheless,thisisanaspectofprogram-mingthatrequiresfurtherattention.

Remaining relevant in the changing context ofdevelopment in Bhutan has been the most effec-tive way for UNDP to ensure sustainable results.Anumberoffactorshavecontributedtothis,includ-ingUNDP’s responsiveness,flexibility anduseofflexible funding modalities. Its alignment withnationalprioritiesandtrustedrelationshipwiththegovernmenthavefurtherenabledUNDPtoevolvewithandrespondtonationalneeds.UNDPthere-foretendstocommititselftospecificareasofworkas they advance from preparatory consultations,developingenablingpoliciestonationalstrategies,to building institutional capacity and implement-ingactionsatnationalandlocallevels.Thisphased

support strengthens its impact and also increasesthechancesthatitsworkandresultswillyieldlong-termresultsandbenefits.

AsecondwaythatUNDPhasensuredsustainabil-ity is by advocating for and supporting RGoB inscaling-upoperations.TheresultsofmanyUNDPprojectsprovideevidenceorexperiencesthathavealready influenced, or will eventually influence,nationalpoliciesandstrategies.For instance,dataand consultative processes have helped to informthe gender, climate change and disaster manage-mentmasterplans.TheMDGNeedsAssessmentandCostingexercisewillsupportRGoBinmakingthe10thFYPMDG-basedthusinformingwiderdevelopment planning. The 10th FYP is adopt-ing the block grant modality, which was pilotedthrough the DSP. UNDP is also supporting theCentreforBhutanStudiestodevelopaGNHindi-cator framework and Bhutan Development Indexthat can be used as a basis for target setting andmonitoringofthe10thFYP.

Ensuring government and national ownership isanotherwaythatUNDPstrivestoensuresustain-able results. In the case ofBhutan,RGoBgener-allyhas‘strongownership’ofUNDPprojects,asitoftendirectssuchprojectsandcontributesitsownresources.NearlyallofUNDP’ssupportaimedatstrengthening policies and strategies is providedto government agencies that lead the processes.Morethan90percentofUNDPprojects,includingfieldprojects,areexecutedusingtheNEXmodal-ity.Even though insufficientgovernment capacitysometimesdelaysprogressandslowsdownperfor-mance, the benefits of this government-drivenapproachtendtoovershadowthenegativeaspects.Ownershipofdevelopmentprojectsbycivilsociety,includingcommunitiesandtheirleadershipatlocal(dzongkhagandgeog)levelismorecomplicatedtoachieveandtodetermineintheabsenceofappro-priate monitoring systems. However, UNDP hasbeen playing a significant role in advocating andtesting efforts to decentralize decision-making,planning and budget management, which are allcrucial to promoting local ownership. Accordingto information received by the evaluation team,UNDP intends to increase this aspect in its newprogrammingcycle.

Further enhancing sustainable results is UNDP’sinvestment in institutional capacity development.


Despite a decreasing focus on this as a separateprojectactivity,itisabasiccomponentofmostoftheexecutedprojectssuchastheIHDP,REDPandtheDSP.Usinganumberofmodalities,UNDPhasprovided,inconjunctionwithRGoB,fundingandtechnicalexpertiseforthecreationandskillsdevel-opmentofentitiessuchastheNCWC,thenationalAnti-corruption Commission, and the BusinessPromotion and Support Centres through REDP.The support for the national capacity self-assess-mentforglobalenvironmentalmanagementanditsfollow-upprojectareanotherexampleofUNDP’seffortstobuildcapacitieswithinBhutan.

UNDPhasusedthecreationofnationalconsensusbuilding through instruments such as the MDGReport,theNationalHumanDevelopmentReportandtheFYPstocreateabroadcoalitionofsupportforcritical interventions.ThishaslegitimizedandprioritizedseveralcriticalchallengesfacingBhutanandhasensuredthatsuchissuesremainatthetopofthepublicpolicyagenda.UNDPhasalsousedtheforumofRTMstobuildsupportamongdonorsformajordevelopmentchallenges.

ThesustainabilityofUNDP’scontributionscouldbe impeded by weak institutional capacities andlinkages at national and local level, as well as anapparent lackof emphasison sufficientdocumen-tation of information, knowledge transfer andinstitutional learning. Insufficiencies in exit strat-egy planning have also been reported in certaininstances.Exitplanningshouldbedoneearlyandinconjunctionwithdevelopmentpartnerstoensurea timely and systematic withdrawal over time.Another area where UNDP has not made suffi-cient progress is broad-base ownership. Nationalownershipmustnotbeconstruednarrowlytomeangovernmentownershiporpublicsectorengagementonly. There should be a move toward decentral-izedgovernmentsandcivil societyempowerment,makingroomforgreaterengagementofpeopleandcommunities insettingprioritiesandundertakingdevelopmentprogrammes.

�.�. SUMMARY

Contributing to UNDP’s image are alignmentwith and responsiveness to national develop-

ment priorities, flexible funding modalities,cross-sectoral mandate, coordinating role amongUN partners, global access to high-level techni-cal expertise, and ability to identify and promoteemerging issues by keeping a finger on the inter-national and national development pulse. RGoBtendstoretainfullownershipofpolicyandstrategydevelopment as well as field execution. However,UNDP is called upon to help shape agendas andapproachesbyhighlightingnewareas,mobilizingtechnicalassistance,conductingstudiesandbring-ing lessons from thefield—oftenworkingbehindthescenes.AcrossallUNDPthematicareas,someof UNDP’s most significant contributions havebeen to raise awareness through effective advo-cacy around emerging areas of concern, create anenabling policy environment through preparatorywork,extenddirectsupportforpolicyandstrategydevelopment,andenhanceinstitutionalcapacityinthe public sector. ‘Soft assistance’ (such as donorcoordination,assistingRGoBinthepreparationforinternationalconventionsandMDGReportsandNational Human Development Reports, advocat-ingandsupportingtheGNHconcept,mobilizingad hoc technical assistance, and helping establishand advise bodies such as the NCWC, has beenrecognizedasavaluableadditionbyUNDP. It isa resultof,aswellasacontributingfactor to, thestrongrelationshipwithRGoB.

UNDP’scontributionsare,generally, in linewithintendedoutcomes.Thisisborneoutbythesystem-aticdocumentationofmilestonesandreportingaspartofUNDP’smovementtowardsaresults-basedapproach. It is further corroboratedby the stronglinkages with national priorities and executionmodalitiesandthestrongownershipbyUNDPandgovernmentcounterpartsofagreedupondirectionsandmilestones.Whereresultswerenotaccordingto plan this appears to be largely due to insuffi-cientimplementationcapacitiesamonginstitutionsat local level,exacerbatedbytheacceleratingpaceofreformandcentralplanning.AlsocontributinghavebeencertainperceivedinadequaciesinUNDPcapacities, institutional (for example financial)systems,andprocessesaimedatinstitutionallearn-ing for improvement16. Some of these aspects arediscussedinChapter4.

___________________________________________________________________________16. Although the CO has significant monitoring and evaluation systems in place, these are not always equally well applied and used.

�2 C H A P T E R 4

This chapter examines issues relating to UNDP’sstrategic positioning and options for the future.It is based on an assessment of UNDP Bhutan’scomparative strengths, an identificationof factorscontributingtoandlimitingUNDP’seffectiveness,andanevaluationofUNDP’srelevanceandrespon-siveness. Critical aspects of UNDP’s partnershipstrategyarealsoanalyzedanddiscussed.

�.�. COMPARATIVE ADVANTAgES

Stakeholdersidentifiedtwoormoreofthefollow-ing as areas of UNDP’s advantages compared toother development agencies operating in Bhutan.One, UNDP enjoys the confidence of RGoB. Ithasagoodunderstandingofgovernmentprioritiesandhasdovetaileditsoperationstomatchnationalpriorities.RGoBseesUNDPasatrustedandneutralpartnerandproviderofunbiasedadvice.ThisallowsUNDP to work closely with RGoB in key areasand also apply ‘soft pressure’ wherever necessaryto move the development agenda forward in thebest interests of Bhutan. Two, UNDP’s mandateallows for supporting cross-sectoral interventionsand pursuing holistic approaches to development.This places UNDP in a relatively advantageousposition vis-à-vis the specialized agencies whosemandate ismore technical and focused.This alsoputs UNDP in a better position to coordinatewithotherdevelopmentpartners.Three,UNDP’sbroadmandateaswellassupporttotheOfficeofthe Resident Coordinator allows for coordinationandmobilizationwithintheUNsystemandaccesstothoseUNpartnersnotresident inthecountry.MoststakeholdersseetheUNDPResidentRepre-sentative’sroleastheUNResidentCoordinatorasbeing impartial. Most international developmentpartnersalsocreditUNDPwithbeingstrategicallysituatedintermsofitsworkingrelationshipswiththegovernmenttobeabletodialogue,coordinate,and share ideas on Bhutan’s development. Four,UNDPhasthecapacitytotapintoandleverageawide range of development expertise by drawing

on international experiences through knowledgenetworks, such as COs, technical assistance, andregional centres. UNDP is thus able to provideexpertisethatisflexible,inclusive,andrelevanttoBhutan.Five,UNDP’sCOservesasawindowforBhutantotheoutsideworldandhas,overtheyears,highlighted several achievements of the country.UNDPhas, for instance,helped tochampionthehome-grown idea of GNH across the world. Atthe same time, UNDP’s corporate priorities havehelped Bhutan gain profile and initiate activi-ties in anumber of areas such as gender, disastermanagement, human development and MDGs.Lastly,UNDPhasestablisheditsreputationasanagencythatsupportsRGoBbyhelpingittapintonewopportunitiesandexperimentwithnewideas.Thismeansthatfundingsupporthastobeflexibleandresponsive.At thesametime,UNDPshouldbeabletocovertherisksoffailureespeciallywhenthe idea being tested is new. UNDP is seen as acatalystandyetitcontinuestoundergochangestokeeppacewithchangingnationalandlocalneeds.

�.2. FACTORS CONTRIbUTINg TO UNDP’S FFECTIVENESS

A variety of external and internal factors havecontributedtoUNDP’seffectivenessinBhutan.

�.2.�. ExTERNAL FACTORS

Amongtheexternalfactorsistheuniqueapproachthat characterizesmuchofBhutan’sdevelopment.ThisismoststrikinglyembodiedintheprincipleofGNHandcommitment topeople-centredhumandevelopment. UNDP has also benefited fromRGoB’s strong sense of ownership of UNDP’sinterventions.At the same time,RGoB itselfhasbeen spearheading a series of reforms in Bhutan.Recent shifts in political priorities towardsgreater empowerment of people are consistentwithUNDP’shumandevelopmentapproach.Thedecentralizationdriveassistsimplementationonthe

Chapter 4

UNDP’s Strategic Positioning

��U N D P ’ S S T R A T E G I C P O S I T I O N I N G

groundbyprovidingopportunitiestobettermobi-lizeandempowerNGOs,CBOsandcivilsociety.While thismovebringswith itnewcomplexities,the emphasis on increased people’s participationis in line with UNDP’s commitment to people’sempowerment. RGoB has also been open to newideas,hasdisplayedahighdegreeofownershipofinterventionsandhasshownaneagernesstolearnfrom local and international experiences. Equallyimportanthasbeen the acceptanceby the ‘donor’communityofUNDP’sleadershiprole.

�.2.2. INTERNAL FACTORS

At the same time, many internal factors havecontributed to the success of UNDP’s effective-ness. UNDP has made good use of its compara-tive advantages. As discussed earlier, UNDP hascapitalizedeffectivelyonthelongassociationwithRGoB,extendedsupporttoawiderangeofactivi-ties,andremainedflexibleandresponsivetoneeds.Ithastappedintoabroadrangeofexpertiseavail-able in Headquarters, regional centres and acrossUNagencies.UNDPhasdisplayedagoodabilitytoplan ina rapidlychangingenvironment. Ithasfacilitated the process by encouraging participa-tory approaches to planning and focusing ongeneratingevidencetoinformpolicyanddecisionmaking.Itiswellplacedtoworkonbothupstreamanddownstreamissuesofdevelopment.Ithasthepotentialtocapitalizeonopportunitiestoestablishstrongpolicy-practicelinkagesindifferentsectors.Relatively few RGoB partners directly engage inupstreamwork;thisgivesUNDPanaddedadvan-tage. There has also been sufficient cohesion andcommunicationswithintheUNDPCOandacrosstheprogrammeareasleadingtobothcross-sectoralprogramming as well as meaningful synergies inoperations.

�.�. FACTORS DETRACTINg FROM UNDP’S PERFORMANCE

Anumberofexternalandinternalfactorshavealsoconstrained the organization’s performance andabilitytomaximizecontributions.

�.�.�. ExTERNAL FACTORS

Among the external factors isBhutan’s tough ter-rainandtopography.Thecountry’sroughweather,

mountainous terrain and landlocked status poseseriouschallengesforacceleratinghumandevelop-ment.Whilephysicalinfrastructurehasexpandedconsiderably over the years, it is still inadequateto ensure effective reach and delivery of basicsocial services, establishment of effective systemsof local governance and connectivity to markets.Compounding these difficulties is the fact thatBhutan’ssmallpopulationiswidelyscatteredacrossthecountry.

AnequallyimportantfeatureisRGoB’scapacitiesforplanningandimplementation.Differentdepart-ments,agenciesandministrieswithinRGoBimple-mentamajorityofUNDP-supportedprogrammesand projects. To that extent, UNDP’s impact isa function of RGoB’s implementation capacity.AlthoughUNDPandotherpartnershavefocusedon enhancing RGoB’s institutional capacity, withthe possible exception of the central government,it remains weak, especially in local governments.Outcomes of programme interventions thereforedependuponhoweffectivelyUNDPcanmotivategovernment staff and systems to deliver. In thecoming years, there are likely to be far greaterdemands and pressures on the state for effectivedatacollection,monitoringandevaluationsystemsas pressures for accountability build up in thenewdemocracy.

Inter-sectoral convergence and coordination arecriticalforthesuccessofmostUNDPinterventions.This remains weak, especially in the governmentwhere inter-departmental and inter-ministerialintegrationareincomplete.Thereareoverlapsandambiguitiesinresponsibilitiesbetweengovernmentagencies and duplication in efforts. For instance,in the ruraldevelopmentprojects, there is aneedforgovernmentdepartmentsofindustry,tradeandagriculture to work together to ensure success ofruralenterprises.Effectivemechanismarenotfullyinplacetoensurethisatthefieldlevel.

Over the years, Bhutan has established a strongcentralized system of public administration formeetingpeople’sneeds.Mostofthewell-qualifiedpeoplehavebeenabsorbedbythegovernmentandinthepublicsector.CBOsandNGOsarefewinnumber,andtheircapacitiesremaininadequatelydeveloped.There are very few independent research andconsulting institutions, policy groups or agenciesintheprivatesectorthatservethecriticalfunctionofpublicvigilance.Limitedopportunitiesandfew

�� C H A P T E R 4

institutionshavealsoconstrainedpeople’spartici-pationinpublicdecisionmaking,particularlyatthelocallevels.

Speedy political reforms towards democracy andactive decentralization have greatly increased theneed for administrative and managerial capacityaswellasleadershipatmanylevelsofgovernment.Therehasbeenamanifoldincreaseinthepressureson institutional and individual capacities. At thesametime,citizensdonotyetfullycomprehendtheimplications of electoral politics. Their exposureto the practice of democracy remains extremelylimited. While there is a need for managementcapacity building at the sub-national level, espe-cially tobridge thegapsbetween implementationat the central, dzongkhag and geog levels, onlylimitedspaceandopportunitieshavebeencreatedforeffectivepeople’sparticipationinpublicadmin-istration.Newprocessesarebeingputinplacebuttheserequiretimetoyieldresults.

�.�.2. INTERNAL FACTORS

Atthesametime,anumberofinternalfactorshavelimited UNDP Bhutan’s capacity to maximizeits contributions. Prominent among them are thefollowing:

Logic of change.UNDPhasmanagedtoeffectivelydovetail itsoperationswithgovernmentpriorities.However,thishasnotnecessarilyensuredadequatecoherenceandprogrammefocus.Itisimportanttoevolveawell-reasonedstrategythatlogicallydelin-eates theprocesses throughwhich transformationor results are to be achieved. Integral to such anarticulation will be an examination of assump-tions and specification of the roles and responsi-bilities of different stakeholders.There alsoneedstobeanaccountability frameworkunderlying theprogramme strategies that helps to identify gapsandpointtocorrectiveactions.Theevaluationdidnot always point to a clear articulation of such alogic of change. The absence of a clearer overallstrategy as well as the inability to define moresharply different programme strategies that canbetter ensure delivering on results has limitedUNDPBhutan’scontributions.

Small and scattered projects.Beingflexible,agileandcapableoftakingriskshasenabledUNDPtobe

responsiveandtofunctionasacatalyst.Neverthe-less,ithascreatedafeelingthatUNDP’sinterven-tions are small, scattered and unfocused. Havinga range of scattered projects may be UNDP’sniche,especiallyifitwantstoactasacatalystandberesponsive todemands.Thisgivesgoodresultsthrough high-value/low-resource input. However,a portfolio consisting of many small, diverseand scattered projects is taxing on CO staff andlimits contribution in any particular area. It alsomakesitdifficultforprogrammestafftoeffectivelybackstop projects and ensure that milestones arereachedontime.

Scope of partnerships.Beingabletocultivateandworkeffectivelywithgovernmentcounterpartshasenabled UNDP Bhutan to establish close coop-erationwithRGoB.Inductionofnationalofficersinto the middle management has contributed tothe process by strengthening UNDP’s ability tomaintaincloseworkinglevelcooperationwiththegovernment. However, UNDP has managed toestablishsuchmeaningfuloperationallinkagesandstrongtieslargelyatthelevelofthecentralgovern-ment,andmuchlesssowiththelocalgovernmentssuch as GYTs and DYTs. At the same time, thelimited expansion of the private sector and civilsociety organizations has led UNDP Bhutan’sprogrammestobecomepredominantlygovernmentdriven and public-sector oriented though there isnow increasing demand and need for UNDP tomoreactivelyengagedirectlywiththeprivatesectorandcivilsocietyorganizationsinitsprogramming.Many interviewees expressed the view that whileUNDP Bhutan had been effective in supportingnationalgoalsandobjectives,itcouldplayamoreactive role in advocating for human rights andaddressingissuesofinequalityanddiscrimination.

UNDP’s bureaucratic procedures. By and large,development partners seemed satisfied with theirdealingswithUNDPBhutan.However,someoffi-cialsinRGoBaswellasdevelopmentpartnersdidexpress the view that UNDP’s requirements andprocedures are cumbersome and demanding, andthatsystemsarerigidandinflexible.SomewithinUNDPalso felt that toomuch timewas spent incomplyingwithinternalreportingrequirements.Asaresultofwhich,muchlesstimewasavailableforreflectingon-the-groundexperiencesorbeingstra-tegic.Itispossiblethatsuchreactionsmaybethe

��U N D P ’ S S T R A T E G I C P O S I T I O N I N G

___________________________________________________________________________17. Three out of 16 outcome statements and six out of 31 annual targets in the 2004 MYff.

resultofspecificexperiencesofafew.However,itisworthnotingandactingupontoaddresseitherthemisperceptionoractualproceduralbottlenecks.

Staff time and capacities. UNDP Bhutan’s rela-tivelysmallsizestaffseemsoverworked,burdenednotonlybyUNDPprogrammingworkbutalsobythecoordinationrolethatfallsonthememanatingfromdualrolesofUNDPResidentRepresentativeserving as the UN Resident Coordinator. Whilefacing limited staff capacity in some substantiveareas,theCOhasbeenproactiveintappingregionalandglobalexpertise,notablythoseoftheregionalcenters. Staff capacity particularly in analyzingand meeting the emerging needs of the countryin democratic governance, disaster managementand employment, needs to be further enhanced.Instituting a culture of learning and knowledgesharing among the staff may further help reducesomeredundancyandincreasetheproductivityofstaff’stime.

Monitoring and evaluation.TheUNDPCOhasbeenspendingconsiderabletimeandresourcesonimproving its monitoring and evaluation systems.Several outcomes and project evaluations havebeenconductedandtheMYFFandaccompanyingROAR improved. According to reports, SteeringCommittee meetings are held with the govern-mentandstakeholderswhereprogressisdiscussed.UNDPhasalsocontributedtothedevelopmentofanationalmonitoring and evaluation system.Butthere is room for improvement. The results-basedapproach promoted among others through theMYFFandROARhashelpedtosharpenUNDP’swork towardsoutcomes,but this still needs tobebetterinternalizedinmonitoringandreportingbytheCO.ThefocusshouldbeonthechangesUNDPis aiming to bring about, rather than on what isbeingdone.Themonitoringframeworksandprojector outcome evaluations should make this a clearemphasis. Monitoring and evaluation at projector field level are becoming more important andwarrantmore strategicattention.TheMYFFandROARalsoneedsomeimprovement.Forexample,severalresultsstatements17needformulationtobemore clear or measurable. The 2005 PerformanceAuditreportconfirmedthat23percentofoutcomestatementsinthesereportscouldonlybepartially

verified.ThereissomeevidenceofresultsattributedtoUNDPeffortsinthesereportsthatcanbechal-lengedbasedoninformationprovidedtotheevalu-ationteam.

�.�. STRENgThENINg PARTNERShIPS

UNDP is seen by partners as most effective inprovidinginternationalexpertise,extendingsupportfor policy advice to the government, catalyzingdevelopmentaction,mobilizingresources,promot-ing collaboration and networks, strengtheningcapacityandcoordinating(notdirectingordictat-ing) development assistance among UN agenciesandotherpartners.RGoB, inparticular, appreci-ates and acknowledges UNDP’s indirect support,whenevercalledupon,totheongoingprocessesofdemocraticandrelatedinstitutionalreforms.Whiletheseperceptionsneedtobeinterpretedcautiously,theycorroboratefindingsfromourassessment(seeBox10).

SeveralkeystakeholderspraisedUNDP’sroleasapartner anddescribedUNDPasbeing anhonestbroker,independent,withnoassociatedagendaandan excellent agency for coordinating; it was closeto the government and trusted; it played a vitalrole and was a leader in development; and it wasa transparent and effective coordinator. UNDPcouldgarnersupportforacommoncauseasithadleverageatthenationallevelthatotherdonorsdidnothave.Appreciationwasalsoexpressedabouttheroleofindividuals(specificallytheformerResidentRepresentative and Deputy Resident Representa-tive),whoweresaidtohavemadeabigdifferenceto Bhutan’s past development cooperation efforts.UNDP’s role as coordinator was seen as critical,especiallyintheareasofresourcemobilizationandsectorcoordination,andRGoBexpressedaprefer-ence touseUNDP in this roleoverotherdonorswhohadofferedtheirservices.

The Department of Aid and Debt Manage-ment (DADM) handles donor coordinationsometimes jointly with UNDP. RGoB in manyforums has emphasized the need for improveddonor coordination and aid management throughbudgetary support, better harmonization, and

�� C H A P T E R 4

reductionoftheadministrativeburdenbyadoptinggovernment reporting systems. The key findingsrelatingtoUNDP’spartnershipsinBhutanincludethefollowing:

First,mostpartners seeauseful synergybetweenUNDP’s operations and their own. UNDP has acomparativeadvantage inupstreamwork, suchasadvocacy and policy dialogue, whereas partners(other then RGoB) see themselves as being moreeffective in responding to local needs, largelybecause simpler procedures enable them to accessfinancial and technical resources more quickly.SomedevelopmentpartnersseemdissatisfiedwithUNDPbureaucracyintheirinteractions.ThiscouldbeareflectionoftheprocedurestobefollowedasaresultoftheNEXandothermodalities.

Second,itisapparentthatRGoBisverycommittedanddeterminedtotakethefullresponsibilityofaidcoordinationinBhutan.Accordingly,RGoBisverystrategicandthoughtfulindevelopingpartnershipswith international agencies, balancing need andexpertise in the process. To that extent, UNDPBhutan does not have the principal responsibilityfor aid coordination. Though RGoB defines theareasofcooperation,evolvingamoreeffectivepart-nershipstrategycanfurtherhelpUNDPBhutanto

systematicallycapitalizeonpotentialsynergiesandassistmoreeffectivelywithresourcemobilization.

Third, UNDP has built successful partnershipswith RGoB, UN agencies, and bilateral andmultilateraldonors.Whilethesepartnershipshaveexpanded during the last few years, partnershipswithNGOsandtheprivatesectorarestillrelativelylimited.WhileUNDPreceivesrecognitionamongpartnersforitsfocusoncapacitybuildingofNGOsandCBOssince1999,itisalsocriticizedbyothersfornotdoingenoughtodrawtheseorganizationsinto its work. The Poverty Outcome Evaluationof 2005 states that the “…potential to work withother Bhutanese NGOs has not been adequatelyharnessed.” UNDP Bhutan has room to furtherimprovemechanismsfornurturingandinteractingwithNGOsandcivilsocietyorganizations.UnlikeRGoB, which credits UNDP with a flexible andresponsiveapproach,afewNGOsfindUNDPtobe rigid and inflexible. Inadequate capacity andinabilitytobackstopandmonitorNGOscombinedwiththeexcessivedependenceonRGoBarecitedas examples. While there is growing recognitionandtrendtointeractwithNGOsandcivilsocietyorganizations, lack of adequate mechanisms haveconstrainedUNDP’sabilitytodoso.

Box 10. UNDP’s role and contribution—Partners’ perceptions

According to the UNDP Partners Survey of 2004, 90 percent of respondents agreed (35 percent) or strongly agreed (55 percent) that UNDP is perceived as a valuable partner by RGoB; 70 percent of respondents agreed (52 percent) or strongly agreed (18 percent) that UNDP is flexible in accommodating changing needs during the course of a programme or project, higher than the average for all countries worldwide (66 percent) and in the region (63 percent), and much higher than in 2002 (50 percent).

At the same time, however, UNDP Bhutan’s ratings vis-à-vis UNDP in other countries and regions have not been as high: 80 percent of respondents agreed (43 percent) or strongly agreed (37 percent) that UNDP is a valued partner to their organization—somewhat below the average for all countries worldwide (89 percent) and in the region (88 percent), and a significant decrease from 2002 (90 percent); 69 percent of respondents agreed (45 percent) or strongly agreed (24 percent) that UNDP’s operational performance is satisfactory—somewhat below the average for all countries worldwide (76 percent) and in the region (71 percent), and about the same as in 2002 (70 percent).

Respondents of the Partners Survey 2004 see UNDP as a critical partner mainly in advocacy (71 percent), promoting gender equity (68 percent), capacity development (66 percent) and aid coordination (64 percent). They are less likely to see UNDP as a critical partner in forging strategic partnerships (57 percent), supporting institutional and policy reform (52 percent) and strengthening participatory processes with civil society (47 percent).

The Partners Survey also reports that UNDP is perceived to be working much less with international NGOs (41 percent), civil society—NGOs and CBOs (54 percent), the world Bank (40 percent), other international financial institutions (42 percent), and the private sector (43 percent), than with UN organizations (78 percent) up from 60 percent in 2002, media (70 percent), and bilateral agencies (58 percent).

�7U N D P ’ S S T R A T E G I C P O S I T I O N I N G

Fourth, the evaluation team encountered mixedviewsonthesuccessofaidordonorcoordinationinBhutanwithsomepeopleexpressingtheviewthatUNDP should play a bigger role and that donorcoordinationremainedweakbecauseeachgovern-mentsectorhaditsownregulationsrenderingcoor-dination difficult, particularly across sectors. TheteamwasinformedthatdifferentviewpointsexistedwithinRGoBonthisissue.Theoverallassessmentis that there is considerable room for improvingdonor participation and that DADM could playan even more constructive role in improvedcoordination, assisted in the process by the UNResidentCoordinator.

Fifth,fromRGoB’spointofview,donorcoordina-tionrequirestime,effortandadditionalresources.ForasmallcountrylikeBhutanwithasmallcivilservice, it becomes difficult to organize frequentdonorcoordinationmeetingsasexpectedbysomedevelopment partners. At the same time, it isRGoB’sviewthatfollowingupondonorcoordina-tionwithinthecountryhasnotnecessarilyalwaysresulted in additional resource mobilization andbetterharmonization.

Sixth,UNDPBhutanneeds to reconsider its roleintermsofresourcemobilization,inviewoflargeresourcesflowingintothecountryfromthebanksand ADB. The fact that UNDP’s role in donorcoordinationhasbeenlimitedsofardoesnotseemreasonenoughtoenvisagethatthissituationwouldcontinue this way in the future. In view of thecomplexitiesthatwillbefacingBhutaninthenearfuture,andinviewofincreasedresourcesthatcouldflowtothecountry,Bhutanwillneedareliableandeffectivepartnertoassistitinmobilizingresources.Basedontheperspectivesofdifferentstakeholders,itispossibleforUNDPtoplayamoreactiveroleinsupportingRGoBtocoordinatebetterforincreaseddevelopmentresults.

Finally, playing a more proactive role in helpingthegovernment tocoordinatebetter for increaseddevelopment results and sharing knowledgeare likely to improve development resultsmuch more in the coming years. It is thereforeimperative forUNDPand theUnitedNations toarticulate an overall partnership and resourcemobilizationstrategy.

�.�. UN RESIDENT SYSTEM COORDINATION ROLE

TheResidentCoordinator is creditedwith takinga leadrole inpromotingandcoordinatingactionsaroundtheMDGs.TheCCAandUNDAFprovidetheunifiedoverallplanningstructure for theUNdevelopment assistance in Bhutan. StakeholdersexpressedappreciationforUNDP’srolein:

•Initiating coordination through the ThemeGroups,especiallyongenderandalsoincoordi-natingdonorsonpovertyreductionissues

• Ensuring close coordination between UNcountry teammembersunder the leadershipoftheResidentCoordinator,resultingaboveallincontinuouspolicydialoguewithRGoB

• Managingtoshiftthedialogueawayfromfocusonpublicadministrationandcivilservicereformtomoreemphasisonissuesofgovernance,suchas further decentralization and devolution ofpower, independentoversightmechanisms,andparticipationofNGOSandtheprivatesector

•Advocatingforarights-basedapproachtodevelopment

•Harmonizingprogramminginstruments

Many in government and civil society could notseethedifferencebetweenUNDPandtheUnitedNations.ThishassometimesresultedinincorrectlycreditingUNDPwithachievements.Thoughitwasadmittedthatthiswasnotdeliberate,someoftheUN agencies, in particular, were sensitive to themixingupofidentities.Atthesametime,however,there is little evidence that theUNcountry teamengagedinformulationorimplementationofjointprogrammes,monitoringorreviews.

Inrecentyears,variousresolutionsanddeclarationshavefocusedincreasingattentionontheUNreformandharmonizationagendaandonastrengthenedResident Coordinator system. The 2004 trien-nial comprehensivepolicy reviewcalled forbettercoherenceandcoordinationbetweenUNentitiesatthecountrylevel,andforsimplificationandharmo-nizationof rulesandprocedures.Multipleprojectmanagementmethods,programminginstruments,and monitoring and evaluating consultant visitsplaced huge management burdens on developingcountries.TheParisDeclarationonAidEffective-

�� C H A P T E R 4

ness focused attention on capacity developmentandnationalownership.Thecapacitydevelopmentagenda is fundamental to both UNDP’s and theUnited Nation’s value to programme countries.UNDP,becauseof its cross-sectoralmandate andthe platform it offers globally, can be a leader inpromoting an integrated approach with others inthis function, in particular with its own associ-atedfundsandprogrammes,UNV,UNIFEMandUNCDF.UNDPBhutaniswellplacedtopromotethisagendaandassistBhutaninachievinggreaterresults during the transition period. Howeverit was felt by some partners that UNDP and theUnited Nations could play an important role inasserting the significance of the six fundamentalvalues enshrined in the Millennium Declaration:freedom,equality,solidarity,tolerance,respectfornatureandshared responsibility.TheMillenniumDeclarationalsoidentifiesseveralkeyobjectivesinordertotranslatethesesharedvaluesintoactions:peace, security and disarmament; developmentand poverty eradication; protecting our commonenvironment; human rights, democracy and goodgovernance;andprotectingthevulnerable.

Beginning in 2000 when it was newly upgraded,DADM,themajorgovernmentcounterpartforallUN agencies located in the Ministry of Finance,becamemuchmoreassertiveaboutaidcoordinationthaninpreviousperiods.RGoBseesaidcoordina-tionasitsprincipalfunction,notthatofUNDP’s.ThroughDADM,thegovernmentsetsclearpriori-tiesfortheusesofgrantfundsandidentifiesareasfor different donors to avoid duplication of donoractivities. All donor activities are centralized andDADMensuresthatdonoractivitiesareconsistentwithBhutan’sDevelopmentPlan.

However,severalpartnersexpressedtheviewthatdonorcoordinationremainedweak.Donorcoordi-nationwasnotfunctioning,andthereseemedtobereluctanceonthepartofgovernmentfordonorstotrytoimprovecoordination,despitetheUNResi-

dentCoordinator’seffortstotrytodoso(ingender,goodgovernanceandpoverty).

UNDP is mandated to assist the government inbuilding partnerships for aid effectiveness. TheRTMs act as a vehicle for achieving consensuson approaches andpolicies by fosteringdialoguesbetweendevelopingcountriesandassistancepart-ners.BhutanhasbeenorganizingRTMssince1983.Asinmanyothercountries,RTMsinBhutanareorganized jointly and co-chaired by the RGoBandUNDP.

�.�. bhUTAN’S gRADUATION FROM LEAST-DEVELOPED COUNTRY STATUS

ThegovernmentiscommittedtograduatingBhutanfromleast-developedcountrystatusandtoeventu-allybecomeselfreliant.Whatwouldtheimplica-tionsofthisbeforBhutan’sdevelopment?To-date,Botswana in Southern Africa is the only countryto have graduated from least-developed countrystatus,whichitdidin1994.Botswana’sgraduationresultedindecreasedforeignassistance.Basically,itwaspenalizedforitssuccess.

With the process of graduation, increasing callshavebeenmadeformorefocustobeplacedontheimportanceofsmoothtransitionsandtheneedformeasuresintermsoflossofbenefitsintheareasoftrade,financialaidandtechnicalassistance.Someofthelikelycostsincludelossofpreferentialaccesstomarkets,declineinforeignaidandforeigndirectinvestments,andanincreaseindebtburden.UNDP,togetherwiththeUnitedNationsinBhutan,shouldencourageBhutantoagreeonasmoothtransitionstrategywithitsdevelopmentpartnersinanticipa-tion of the phasing out of relevant concessions.This could help to prevent any adverse impact ofthelossofleast-developedcountrytreatmentuponBhutan’sgraduation,andtosustainitsdevelopmen-talprogrammesandprojectsatthelevelitwaspriortograduation.

��L E S S O N S A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S

Chapter 5

Lessons and Recommendations

UNDPBhutanhasplayedanimportantsupportiverole inenhancinghumandevelopmentinBhutan.Overtheyears,ithasemergedasatrustedpartnerof RGoB. Moreover, the CO has established itscredibilitywithotherdevelopmentpartners as aneffectivestakeholderinthecountry’sdevelopment.

�.�. LESSONS LEARNED

TherearethreespecificlessonsthattheevaluationunderscoresfromtheBhutanCOexperience:

Cultivating partnerships

UNDPBhutanhaslessonstoofferforharnessingrelationships with government. The trust enjoyedreflectsthesensitivity,astutenessandrespectwithwhich the CO has cultivated its relationshipswith RGoB. Cultivating such a relationship withgovernment is crucial, as most of the goals thatUNDP supports require concerted state action.A distinguishing feature has been the manner inwhich UNDP Bhutan has supported RGoB inthinkingthroughandevolvinganationaldevelop-ment strategy that is unique to Bhutan. The COhasalsoconsciouslychosennotto‘impose’oreven‘appeartoimpose’anyofitsownprescriptions.Onthecontrary,ithaspartneredwithRGoBtothinkthroughseveralinterventionsandimplementthematapacethathasbeensetbyRGoB.Atthesametime, however, UNDP Bhutan has helped intro-ducenewideasandinitiatedthinkingonnewissuesthatareofglobalimportance.

Three issuesare important tokeep inmindwhilenurturing government relations. One, close prox-imity to and dovetailing with RGoB of UNDP’sprogrammesmakes itdifficult forUNDPBhutantoclearlyidentifywhatitsspecificcontributionsaretothecountry’sdevelopment.ThistypicallyleadstoasituationwheretheCOtakescreditfornationalachievements and absolves itself of responsibilityfor any shortcomings by pointing to deficienciesingovernment.Sucha‘convenient’arrangementisduepartly to the fact thatUNDPoverallhasnot

yetfullyinculcatedandmainstreamedacultureofresults-basedmanagementwherecontinuousmoni-toring and evaluation become integral to perfor-manceassessmentandreporting.Two,theUNDPCOneedstostrikeabalancebetweendevelopingrelationshipswiththegovernmentontheonehandandwiththeprivatesectorandcivilsocietyontheother.Thismaynotbeeasytoaccomplish.EffortstocultivatepartnershipswithNGOsandtheprivatesectorhavebeeninadequate.Three,giventherapidlychangingexternalenvironment, it isnecessaryforUNDPBhutantoconstantlyreviewthetheoryofchangethatguidesitsprogrammingefforts.Amongthemanyfactorscontributingtorapidchanges intheexternalenvironment,forinstance,areincreas-ingglobalization,deepeningofdemocracy,spreadofinternetandinformationtechnology,advancesinmediaandcommunications,newlegislation,risingawareness and growing pressures for accountabil-ity. Undertaking periodic reviews of programmethrustswillhelptheCOrevisittheissueofbeingproactive and responsive to Bhutan’s needs. Thiswillalsocallforchangesinprogrammingthatwillcreate the space for more flexibility. At the sametime, the CO will need to become increasinglymorealerttothesechangesandrespondbymakingappropriate modifications and mid-course correc-tionstoitsstructuredprogrammes.

Balancing upstream and downstream work

Ensuring development effectiveness requires bothappropriate upstream and downstream interven-tions.Thishasnotalwaysbeeneasy.Byandlarge,UNDPBhutanscoreswellintermsofitsupstreampolicycontributionstodevelopment.Thisisreflect-ed in the number of new policy initiatives intro-ducedbyRGoBoverthelastfiveyears,withwhichtheCOhasbeencloselyandconstructivelyassoci-ated. Much less visible, however, is the contribu-tiontodownstreameffectivenessandimpactatthelocal levels.Theneed tobe equally effectivewithboth upstream and downstream interventions isa challenge that the CO faces. Well-written and

�0 C H A P T E R 5

well-meaningreportsanddocumentsareoftennotactedupon.The real challenge is to ensure effec-tive implementation—anissuethattheCOneedstoincreasinglygrapplewith.

UNDPBhutan’sexperiencesuggeststhatstrengthin up-stream work does not necessarily translateinto strength in downstream work. Three factorsneedtobebetterunderstood.First,UNDPBhutanandRGoBmustdiscussandevolveat theprojectdesignstageadecentralizedsystemofprogrammeimplementation that can ensure effective flowanduseoffundsbylocalbodies.Thisneedstobebackedbyapropersystemofregularreportingandmonitoringtoensurethedesiredimpact.Indoingso,adequateattentionmustbepaid toaddressingcapacity constraints within government as wellaswithin theCOthat tendtoactasbottlenecks.Second, the CO must work towards developingscalingupstrategiesespeciallyifinterventionshavestartedwithpilotprojectsthatneedtobeexpandedafterestablishing‘success’.Third,theCOmustputin place effective quality evaluation mechanismsthatcanthrowuplessonsforreplicationasscalingupoccurs.Implicitinsuchanevaluationmustbeanassessmentof thequestionofsustainabilityof theinterventiononceUNDPsupportceases.

Becoming a knowledge organization

RGoB has been drawing upon UNDP Bhutan’ssupportfortappinginformationandknowledgeinmanyareaswhere localexpertisehasbeen insuffi-cient.Thisfeature,andnottheamountoffunds,hasbeenthebasisfortherelationshipoftrustthathasbeenbuiltbetweenUNDPBhutanandRGoB.TheCOhastappedsuchexpertisefromUNDP’sregion-alcentres,RegionalBureauforAsiaandthePacific,andcorporatedivisionsofUNDP,especiallyinareaswhere UNDP Bhutan has not had the necessaryskillstorespondtorequestsfromRGoB.Thisfunc-tionneedsconsiderablestrengthening.Intheyearstocome,UNDP’scontributionwillbedeterminedincreasinglybytheextenttowhichitinformspublicdecisionmakingbydrawingonitsglobalknowledgeofwhatworksandwhatdoesn’t.Todothisbetter,UNDPwillneedtorapidlytransformitselfintoaneffectiveknowledgeorganization.

�.2. RECOMMENDATIONS

ImprovementsinthefunctioningofUNDPBhutanas well as enhanced support from the UNDPRegionalBureauforAsiaandthePacific,regionalcentres and other UNDP headquarter units canfurtherstrengthenUNDP’sdevelopmenteffective-ness in Bhutan. Listed below are specific recom-mendationsfortheconsiderationofdifferentstake-holderswithinUNDP.

�.2.�. UNDP bhUTAN

Positioning

1.Improveresponsiveness

UNDP Bhutan’s reputation as a trusted partneris derived partly from the ability of the CO tobe responsive to RGoB. There are many areaswhere UNDP support has been forthcoming andwelcomed.Atthesametime,however,itisalsotruethat many of the contemporary challenges facingBhutan,suchaspoverty,inequalities,youthunem-ployment, rural-urban migration, limited capaci-ties at the local levels, a weak private sector andthelimitedexpansionofcivilsocietyorganizationsshouldhavebeenanticipated.TheseareareaswhereUNDP, inpartnershipwithRGoB,could initiatemore timely action. Stepping back, this suggeststhatthereisconsiderableroomforUNDPBhutantoimproveitsabilitytobemorehelpfultoRGoBbynotmerelyidentifyingemergingchallenges,butsupportingthearticulationofpolicychoices.

2.Rearticulatetheoryofchange

A ‘theoryof change’ is theproduct of ‘a series ofcritical-thinkingexercisesthatprovidesacompre-hensivepictureoftheearly-andintermediate-termchanges inagivencommunity thatareneededtoreachalong-termgoalarticulatedbythecommuni-ty.18Re-examining fourvariables,namelyactions,people,settingandoutcomesisausefulwayforanyorganization to further improve its developmenteffectiveness. Strategic thinking and a commonunderstandingofthedevelopmentpathwillenableUNDP Bhutan to tap better into global knowl-edge and enable Bhutan to create an appropriate

___________________________________________________________________________18. Articulating a Theory of Change helps to (i) identify the issue(s) that an intervention will address, (ii) spell out the roles and respon-

sibilities of different stakeholders, (iii) set benchmarks for groups that will benefit from the programme, (iv) analyse the policy environment in which the programme will be implemented, and (v) outline strategies that will help achieve specific outcomes. for details, see discussions, for instance, in www.evaluationtools.org/plan_theory.asp and www.gse.harvard.edu/hfrp/eval/issue30/expert3.html.


environmentforpolicyreformsandprogrammaticinterventions. Doing so will also enable UNDPBhutantostrikeabetterbalancebetweenupstreamanddownstreaminterventions, scatterofprojects,focus,policyandfieldlinkages.

RevisitingthetheoryofchangeunderlyingUNDPBhutan’sinterventionswillenabletheCOtoevolvemore effective programme strategies to addressdevelopmentchallengesthattakenoteoftherapidlychanging external environment and anticipatefuture changes. The country is set to experienceanunusualpoliticaltransitionfromamonarchytoparliamentarydemocracy.Bhutanisalsopreparingtodiversify itseconomicbaseandtonurturenewinstitutions of democracy. Many new actors andstakeholdersareexpectedtoenterthedevelopmentfield. Roles and responsibilities of the state andreligious institutions are likely to get redefined.At the same time, experiences of only a very fewcountries are relevant to Bhutan given its smallsize, landlocked status and scattered population.Tapping into thatglobalknowledge andenablingBhutan to create an appropriate environment forpolicyreformsandprogrammaticinterventionscallsforstrategicthinkingandacommonunderstandingof thedevelopmentpath.Suchanexercise shouldbe based on a better analysis and understandingof the linkagesbetween inputs, activities,outputsand outcomes, as well as a reassessment of theassumptions underpinning programmes andprojects. Doing so will enable UNDP Bhutanto strike a better balance between upstream anddownstreaminterventions,andaddresstheissuesofscatterofprojects,focus,policyandfieldlinkages.Itmightalsohelptodevelopastrategyforprivate-sectordevelopmentandcapacitybuildingofNGOs.Equally important is to get a consensus withinUNDPstaffandRGoBontheprogrammelogicsothatthereisagreementontherationaleaswellasresponsibilitiesofdifferentpartners.

3.Developintoaknowledgecentre

There is a real opportunity forUNDPBhutan topositionitselfasaknowledgecentre.Doingsowillgreatlystrengthenthesupportingrolethatitplaysvis-à-visRGoBandwillalsofulfilltheexpectationsofotherdevelopmentpartners.Thereis,however,aneedtoformalizeandimproveknowledgecreation,management anddissemination.Thiswill requirepaying more attention to concurrent project (andeven programme) monitoring and evaluation,

synthesisofactionresearchandevaluationlessons.Inaddition,UNDPBhutancouldplayaconstruc-tiveroleinencouragingknowledgenetworkswithinthecountry.EffectiveuseofICTcanhelpmakethegenerationandsharingofknowledgemoreinclusiveandparticipatory.UNDPcanalsoplayausefulroleinensuringthatknowledgedisseminationresultsinfurtherenrichingthequalityofpublicdiscourse.TheCOwillthenbeabletobetterexploitthepotentialtodraw lessons from the ground, avoidmistakes,inform policy, improve capacity to monitor andevaluate interventions, and systematically worktowardsup-scalingofinterventions.ThepossibilityofdoingsoarisesfromthesupportingrolethattheCOplaysvis-à-visRGoBandalsoinfulfillingtheexpectationsofotherdevelopmentpartners.Atthesametime,thereisaneedtoformalizeandimproveknowledge creation, management and dissemina-tion. This will require paying more attention toconcurrentprojectandprogrammemonitoringandevaluation,synthesisofactionresearchandevalu-ationlessons.

Programming

Consolidate interventions

There is still much ground to be covered in thecurrent areas of UNDP programming. Eliminat-inghumanpoverty and reducing inequalitieswillassumeincreasingsignificanceinthecomingyears.Promoting both the concept of GNH and thehumandevelopmentapproachwillbecomecrucialfor ensuring effectiveness of policy and program-matic interventions. Increased engagement ofyoungpeopleandactivistswiththeGNHthroughdiscussionswillbecomeimportant.

In advancing good governance, UNDP shouldmake available its in-house expertise toRGoB inmany fields: formulating rules and procedures ofparliament, public education in order to enablepeople tounderstandtheprinciplesofdemocracy,civic education inpreparationof elections, schooltextbookrevisions,andpromotionofhumanrightsknowledge. Interventions in the field of naturalresources and the environment will require thatattention is paid to natural resource managementanduse,notonlytoconservation,givenhowintri-catelythelivesandlivelihoodsofpeoplearelinkedto the country’s natural resource base. Similarly,advancingthedisasterpreventionandmanagementfunctionswillbecomeevenmorenecessary.

�2 C H A P T E R 5

While continuing its activities in the currentprogramming areas, UNDP Bhutan should payspecialattentiontothenationaldevelopmentchal-lenges that are likely to assume growing impor-tance in thecomingdecade.Apriority shouldbefurther strengthening areas that will nurture thepracticeofdemocracy.Thiswouldincludefocusing,for instance, on RGoB-articulated priority areasincludinganti-corruption,goodgovernance, lead-ership,cultureandethics.TheseareallareaswhereUNDPBhutancanmakeameaningfulcontribu-tioninthecomingyears.

Sharpen focus

UNDP has been particularly effective in evolv-ing with the needs of RGoB. Although a major-ityofUNDP’s resources are concentrated inonlytwo large projects (REDP and DecentralizationSupport), its efforts appear scattered due to theambitiousdesignofthetwoprojectsandtheslowprogress towards results because of insufficientinstitutional and individual capacities. It is diffi-cult tocommenton the issueof focusandscatterintheabsenceofawell-articulatedlogicofchangethatunderliesprogrammingefforts.Thismakesitdifficulttodeterminehowsignificantresultscouldbe(orhavebeen)incontributingtowardsacertainoutcome. The results-based approach and MYFFhave helped to sharpen UNDP’s work towardsoutcomes,butitstillneedstobebetterinternalizedto become more outcome and less process orien-tated. In other words the focus should be on thechangesUNDPisbringingabout,ratherthanwhatitisdoing.Monitoringandevaluationinstrumentsshouldbringthisforward.

Strengthen downstream delivery

UNDP Bhutan has been successful in support-ingRGoBinanumberofupstreampolicy initia-tives.Itssupportandimpactdownstreamneedtobe made much more effective and obvious. Workat the field level requires more effort, resourcesand monitoring capacity. The potential contribu-tion of NGOs and CBOs can be substantial, butthis requires both nurturing and investments incapacitybuilding.Assessingdownstreamcontribu-tionshouldalsobeimprovedbybettermonitoringatproject level, specifying clearmethodologies inproject evaluation and resolving conflicting viewsontheeffectivenessofpartnerships.

Capacity building: UNDP Bhutan shouldimprove efficiency aswell asgovernment capacityatcentralandlocallevelstodealwiththedemandsof implementation. It should focus on furtherdeveloping public sector capacity, particularly intheareasofdisastermanagement,genderanalysisand mainstreaming, sustainable use and manage-mentofnaturalresources,andinfulfillinghumanrights treatyobligations.TheCOshouldgenerateadequate synergies and linkages between execut-ingagenciesandworktoeaserigidandineffectiveinstitutionalsystems.TheUNcountryteamshouldassesswhetherithassufficientpolicyandanalyti-cal capacity to help the RGoB use direct budgetsupport.Atthesametime,itwillbeimportantforUNDPBhutantofindwaysandmeansofenhanc-ingthecapacityandresourcesoftheprivatesectorandNGOsaswell.

Monitoring and evaluation: Better monitor-ing and evaluation and knowledge managementsystems are needed to maximize UNDP’s impactandthatof itspartners inadvancingthedevelop-mentagenda.UNDP,togetherwiththeUNsysteminBhutan,shouldassistinbuildingnationalcapac-ity for monitoring and evaluation. It should alsosupporttheestablishmentofastrongpublicfinan-cialmanagementsystem.

Aid mobilization and coordination: Given theresourcepressures onRGoB,UNDPBhutan canassistbybetterleveragingitsresourcestomobilizeadditional external funds and help with prioritysetting.UNDPBhutancanactasafilterforRGoB,initiateadialoguewithpotentialpartners,andhelptoidentifyandarticulatebettertheresourceneedsofdifferentsectors.Moreattentionwillalsoneedtobepaidtomanagingaidbyintroducinggreatertransparency and emphasizing the importance ofmutualaccountability.

Round Table Meetings:Auniquefeatureofdevel-opment cooperation in Bhutan is the extremelyusefulrolethattheRTMshaveplayedinadvancingthedevelopmentagenda.TheRTMisnota‘pledg-ing’meetingwheredifferentinternationalagenciescommitfinancial resources.Over theyears, ithasemerged as a platform for development dialogueanddiscussionsonissuesofinterestandconcerntoallparticipants.Asco-chairoftheRTMs,UNDPBhutanhassupportedRGoBinthisinitiativethathashadseveralbeneficialoutcomes.UNDPshould


continuetosupporttheRTMsandmakethemanevenmoreeffectiveforumforpromotingdevelop-ment dialogue and for follow-up with RGoB onissuesdiscussedattheRTMs.

Harmonization: ThereisscopefordevelopingmoreeffectivemechanismstobuildbridgesandpromoteharmonizationbetweenUNDPanditsdevelopmentpartners.Thiswillrequiremoreactivelypromotingmanagementpracticesthatareresultsorientedandharmonized.UNDP’ssubstantiveupstreamaswellasdownstreamworkplacesitinagoodpositiontobetterlinkpolicyandpracticeeffectively.

Advocacy:Managingtherapidsocial,politicalandeconomicchangeswillbeachallengeforBhutan.Thesechangesoftenoccurwithvaryingtimelags,varying intensities and varying repercussions.Guidingpolicyandinterventionsintheprocessofmanaging thepaceof transformationought tobethevaluesandobjectivesenshrinedintheMillen-nium Declaration. The Resident Coordinator hasan important role toplay in asserting the signifi-cance of the six fundamental values enshrined inthe Millennium Declaration: freedom, equality,solidarity,tolerance,respectfornatureandsharedresponsibility. The Millennium Declaration alsoidentifies several key objectives in order to trans-late these shared values into actions: peace, secu-rity and disarmament; development and povertyeradication;protectingourcommonenvironment;human rights, democracy and good governance;and protecting the vulnerable. It is important forthe Resident Coordinator—and for UNDP—toadvocateforthesetofuniversalvaluesenshrinedintheMillenniumDeclaration.

�.2.2 REgIONAL CENTRES

UNDPBhutanhas receivedperiodicandspecial-izedsupportfromtheregionalcentresinColomboandBangkokinitsmainareasofprogramming.Inthecomingyears,thepotentialforUNDPregional

centres to contribute to Bhutan’s development islikelytoincreasesubstantially.Itwouldneverthe-less help to identify specific areas where UNDPcanbemoreeffectiveinmobilizingexternalaidandtechnicalsupport.Creatingaknowledgebaseandacomprehensiveresourcecentrearelikelytoenhancethecontributionoftheregionalcentres.

�.2.� UNDP hEADqUARTERS

There are two areas that require the attention ofUNDP’s management. The first is simplificationof bureaucratic procedures. Staff members inthe CO as well as government counterpartscommonlyexpresstheviewthatUNDP’scorporateproceduresareunnecessarilycumbersomeandtimeconsuming.Indeed,manystaffmembersseemtobeover burdened by routine reporting requirements,leaving little time for thinking creatively abouttheir programmes. Use of staff time and staffdeployment need to be examined and improveduponifmoretangibleresultsaretoaccrue.Second,it is necessary to assess the viability of multipleplanning and results frameworks. The EvaluationTeamreviewedseveralkeydocumentssuchastheSRF,MYFFandROARinBhutan.Theusefulnessofthesedocumentsisnotapparent.Inmanycases,completing the forms seems to become a merereporting exercise. It would be useful for UNDPtoundertakeasystematicassessmentoftheextenttowhichtheseinstrumentsareeffectiveinactuallyenabling the CO to plan, implement and deliverbetteronresults.

At the Headquarters, there is also a high poten-tialfortheRegionalBureauforAsiaandPacifictoenhanceitscontributiontoBhutan’sdevelopment.The Bureau has considerable knowledge of coun-tries in the regionandcountries thathaveunder-gone or are undergoing political transitions. ThisknowledgebaseneedstobebettertappedandusedtoinformdecisionmakinginBhutan.

�� A N N E X 1

Annex 1

Terms of Reference*

�. bACkgROUND

TheEvaluationOffice(EO)oftheUnitedNationsDevelopment Programme (UNDP) launched aseriesofcountryevaluations,calledAssessmentsofDevelopmentResults(ADRs),inordertocaptureand demonstrate evaluative evidence of UNDP’scontributionstodevelopmentresultsatthecountrylevel.Undertakeninselectedcountries,theADRsfocusonoutcomesandcriticallyexamineachieve-mentsandconstraintsintheUNDPthematicareasoffocus,drawlessonslearned,andproviderecom-mendationsforthefuture.TheADRsalsoprovidestrategic analysis for enhancing performance andstrategically positioning UNDP support withinnationaldevelopmentprioritiesandUNDPcorpo-ratepolicydirections.

BhutanwasamongseveralAsiancountriesconsid-ered for the ADR process. It was selected for anumber of reasons. The completion of the 2002-2007 Country Cooperation Framework (CCF)presents an opportunity to evaluate the achieve-ments and results over the past programme cycleandbefore.Thefindingswillbeusedtohelpopera-tionalizethe2008-2012countryprogrammewithinthecontextofthenewUNDAF.Further,thenewUNDP Resident Representative in Bhutan, pres-ents an excellent opportunity to establish a basisfor enhanced accountability for results. Develop-ment initiatives being carried out by UNDP arereported tobeprogressingwell.Bhutan isunder-goingtransformationfromamonarchytoademo-craticsystemofgovernment,aprocessbeingledbytheKinghimself,whoisplanningtostepdownbyJuly2008.

This year, the Round Table Meeting focused ondevelopment priorities for the Government ofBhutan’s10thFive-YearPlan,aswellasdiscussingthe outcome of the 9th Five-Year Plan. UNDP’scountryprogrammeandUNDAFwereextendedtotheendof2007,therefore,the10thFive-YearPlan

cannowcommencejointly.Thekeyprioritiesofthe9thFive-YearPlanwere:1)MillenniumDevelop-ment Goal (MDG) targets, 2) Good governancethrough decentralization and Information andCommunications Technology (ICT), 3) Povertyreductionthroughruralenterprisedevelopmentaswell as private sector development, and 4) Envi-ronmental sustainability. It is likely that the10thFive-YearPlanwillfollowinthisvein,withmoreattentionperhaps,totheissueofyouthunemploy-ment. The Bhutanese concept of Gross NationalHappinesswillalsocontinuetobeincorporatedinallgovernmentstrategies.

TheoverallgoalsoftheADRsareto:

1) SupporttheUNDPAdministrator’ssubstantiveaccountabilityfunctiontotheExecutiveBoardand serve as a vehicle for quality assurance ofUNDPinterventionsatthecountrylevel.

2) Generate lessons from experience to informcurrentandfutureprogrammingatthecountryandcorporatelevels.

3) Provide to the stakeholders in the programmecountry an objective assessment of results(specificallyoutcomes)thathavebeenachievedthroughUNDPsupportandpartnershipswithotherkeyactorsforagivenmultiyearperiod.

An ADR mission is planned for Bhutan in June2006. It will focus on the period of the presentCountryProgramme,butwillalsocapturethekeyresults over the past five to seven years that theevaluation teammayfindrelevant. Itwill refer tothe UNDP activities under the First CCF 1997-2001andtheSecondCCF2002-2007.

2. ObjECTIVES OF ThE ASSESSMENT

ThepurposeoftheevaluationistoassessUNDP’scontributions todevelopment results and strategic

___________________________________________________________________________* Prepared in April 2006

��T E R M S O f R E f E R E N C E

positioning in Bhutan, draw lessons learned, andoutlineoptions for improvements,withaparticu-larfocusonpovertyreduction,governance,energy,environmentandgendermainstreaming.TheADRinBhutanwill:

• Provideanindependentassessmentofdevelop-mentresultsatthecountrylevel,withparticu-lar emphasis on UNDP’s country programme,assessing its relevance and effectiveness, asachieved throughUNDPsupport and inpart-nership with other key development actorsduringthelastfivetosevenyears.

• Contribute to accountability and to learningfromexperience,takingintoaccountselfevalu-ations(projectandoutcomeevaluations)andtheroleofdevelopmentpartners.

• Provide an analysis of how UNDP has posi-tioneditselfstrategicallytoaddvalueinresponseto national needs and changes in the nationaldevelopmentcontext.

• Basedontheanalysisofachievementsandposi-tioning above, present key findings, draw keylessons,andprovideasetofclearandforward-looking options for the management to makethenecessaryadjustmentsinthecurrentstrategyandnextcountryprogrammeappliedbyUNDPandpartnerstowardsintendedresults.

�. SCOPE OF ThE ASSESSMENT

The evaluation will undertake a comprehensivereview of the UNDP programme portfolio andactivitiesduringtheperiodofreview,withmorein-depthfocusonspecificareas.Specifically,theADRwillcoverthefollowing:

A. STRATEgIC POSITIONINg

• Ascertain the relevance of UNDP support tonational needs, development goals and priori-ties,includinglinkageswiththegoalofreduc-ingpovertyandotherMDGs.Thisincludesananalysisoftheperceivedcomparativestrengthsof the programme versus the major nationalchallengestodevelopment.

• AssesshowUNDPhasanticipatedandrespond-edtosignificantchangesinthenationaldevel-opmentcontext,affectingthespecificthematicareas outlined in item2 above.The evaluationwill considerkeyeventsatnational andpoliti-cal level that influenced (or will influence) thedevelopment context, notably the round tableprocess, as well as the risk management ofUNDP, any missed opportunities for UNDPinvolvementandcontribution,effortsofadvoca-cy,andUNDP’sresponsivenessversusconcen-trationofefforts.

• ReviewthesynergiesandalignmentofUNDPsupport with other initiatives and partners,including that of UNDAF, the Global Coop-eration Framework (GCF) and the RegionalCooperation Framework (RCF). This willincludelookingathowUNDPhasleverageditsresourcesandthatofotherstowardsresultsandthebalancebetweenupstreamanddownstreaminitiatives.

• The evaluation should consider the influenceof systemic issues, i.e. policy and administra-tive constraints affecting the programme, onboth the donor and programme country sides,aswellashowthedevelopmentresultsachievedand the partnerships established have contrib-utedtoensurearelevantandstrategicpositionofUNDP.

• Examine country-specific positioning issues,especially UNDP’s role in supporting theorganization and follow-up of the round tableprocess, aswell as thedecentralizationprocessinthecountry.

b. DEVELOPMENT RESULTS

• Provideanexaminationoftheeffectivenessandsustainability of the UNDP programmes by:(i) highlighting main achievements (outcomes)atthenationallevelinthelastfivetosevenyearsand UNDP’s contribution to these in termsof key outputs; (ii) ascertaining current prog-ress made in achieving outcomes in the giventhematic areas and UNDP’s support to this.Qualify UNDP contribution to the outcomeswithafairdegreeofplausibility.Assesscontri-

�� A N N E X 1

bution to capacitydevelopment at thenationaland sub-national level to the extent that itis implicit in the intended results. Consideranticipated and unanticipated, positive andnegativeoutcomes.

• Provide an in-depth analysis of the mainprogramme areas outlined above in section 2,assessing the anticipated progress in achievingintendedoutcomesundereachoftheobjectivesandprogrammeareas.

• Identify and analyze the main factors influ-encingresults, including the rangeandqualityof development partnerships forged and theircontributiontooutcomes,andhowtheposition-ingofUNDPinfluencesitsresultsandpartner-shipstrategy.

C. LESSONS LEARNED AND gOOD PRACTICES

• Identifykeylessonsinthethematicareasoffocusand on positioning that can provide a usefulbasis for strengtheningUNDPand its supportto the country and for improving programmeperformance, results and effectiveness in thefuture.Through in-depth thematicassessment,present good practices at country level forlearning and replication. Draw lessons fromunintendedresults.

D. CROSSCUTTINg

• Assess implementation capacity as it pertainstotheimplementationofUNDP’sprogrammesandtheachievementofresultsandimpacts.

�. METhODOLOgY

The evaluation will employ a variety of method-ologies, includingdeskreviews,stakeholdermeet-ings, client surveys, and focus group interviewsand selected site visits. The detailed methodol-ogydesignwillbeundertakenaspartoftheADRprocess,includingthescopingmission.TheEvalu-ationTeamwillreviewnationalpolicydocuments,suchastherecordoftheroundtablemeetingsandsectoralpoliciesandactionplans,aswellasoverallprogrammingframeworks(UNDAF,CCA,CCFs,SRF/ROAR,etc.),whichgiveanoverallpictureofthe country context. The team will also consider

select project documents and programme supportdocumentsaswellasanyreportsfrommonitoringandevaluationatcountrylevel.Statisticaldatawillbeassessedwhereuseful.

A wide stakeholder involvement and consultationprocessisenvisaged.TheEvaluationTeamwillmeetwithgovernmentministries/agencies,otherinstitu-tions,civilsocietyorganizations,non-governmen-talorganizations(NGOs),privatesectorrepresen-tatives,UNagencies,BrettonWoods institutions,bilateral donors, and beneficiaries. The team willvisitprojectandfieldsitesasrequired.

In terms of methodology, the ADR will followguidanceissuedbyEOinaphasedapproach:

Phase 1: Preparatory phase

• Deskreview–CarriedoutbytheEOincloseconsultationwiththeEvaluationTeamLeader,thecountryoffice(CO)andtheRegionalBureauforAsia and thePacific (RBAP)basedon thekey questions for the evaluation developed bythe EO Task Manager and Evaluation TeamLeaderinconsultationwithRBAP.

• Scoping mission – Completed April 2006,theEOTaskManager, togetherwitha locallyrecruitedconsultant,conductedabriefmissiontothecountrytodefinethescopeandtocompletetheevaluabilityassessment.

• Developmentoffinalevaluationdesignandplan–Thiswillincludethebackgroundtotheevalua-tion,keyevaluationquestions,detailedmethod-ology, informationsourcesand instruments fordatacollection,planfordatacollection,designfordataanalysis,andformatforreporting.

• Complementary data gathering – Wheregaps have been identified, the CO will planand conduct reviews, and assist in organizingmeta-evaluationstobecarriedoutbytheEvalu-ationTeam.

Phase 2: Conducting ADR and drafting evalua-tion report

• ADR mission of data collection and valida-tion–Themainmissionof twoweekswillbeconductedbytheindependentEvaluationTeam,led by the Evaluation Team Leader. The EOTaskManagerisamemberoftheteam.

�7T E R M S O f R E f E R E N C E

• Stakeholdermeeting–Ameetingwiththekeystakeholders will be organized in the countryaftertheendoftheADRmission.Thecommentswill be incorporated into the final evaluationreportbytheEvaluationTeamLeader.

• Analysis and reporting – The final phase willbetheanalysisofallinformationcollectedandproductionofthedraftADRreportbytheEval-uationTeamwithinthreeweeksafterthedepar-ture of the team from the country. The draftwillbesubjecttofactualcorrectionsbythekeyclientsfortheevaluation,andatechnicalreviewby the EO using expert evaluators. The TeamLeader inclosecooperationwiththeEOTaskManagershallfinalizetheADRreportbasedonthesefinalreviews.

Phase 3: Follow-up

• Management response – The preparation ofthe management response and tracking itsimplementation will be undertaken internallybyUNDP.

• Learning events – The dissemination of thereport’sfindingsshallservethepurposeoforga-nizational learning, as part of the overall EOdisseminationandoutreachstrategy.

�. ExPECTED OUTPUTS

Theexpectedoutputsare:

• AcomprehensivefinalreportonBhutanADR.

• Annexeswithdetailedempiricalandevaluativeevidence.

ThefinalreportoftheADRtobeproducedbytheEvaluationTeamshould,attheleast,contain:

• Executive summaryof conclusions and recom-mendations

• Background,withanalysisofcountrycontext

• Strategicpositioningandprogrammerelevance

• Programmeperformance

• Lessonslearnedandgoodpractices

• Findingsandrecommendations

• Annexes (statistics, terms of reference (TOR),personsmet,documentationreviewed,etc.)

Attheendoftheirmission,andpriortoleavingthecountry,theevaluationteamwilldiscussitsprelim-inaryfindingsandrecommendationswiththeResi-dentRepresentativeandtheCOstaffandpresentthesetothekeygovernmentcounterpart.Theteamwillusethisfeedbacktofinalizethereport.

TheTeamLeaderisresponsibleforsubmittingthedraft report to theEOno later than threeweeksaftercompletionofthecountrymission.

�. EVALUATION TEAM

The composition of the Evaluation Team shallreflecttheindependenceandthesubstantiveresultsfocusof theevaluation.TheTeamLeaderandallmembersoftheteamwillbeselectedbyEO.TheTeam Leader must have a demonstrated capacityinstrategic thinkingandpolicyadviceand intheevaluationofcomplexprogrammesinthefield.

The team will comprise three consultants (one ofwhomwillbetheTeamLeader):aTeamSpecialistwithspecificskills in topicalareas relevant to theevaluation,alocallyrecruitednationalconsultant/advisor with extensive knowledge of the countrysituation,andastaffmemberfromtheEOastheTaskManager.TheTaskManagerwillbringtotheteamtheResults-BasedManagementperspective,knowledge of the ADR methodology, familiaritywithUNDPoperationsandknowledgeofUNDP’spractice areas. The National Consultant willsupporttheTeaminsecuringaccesstokeystake-holdersandprepareanalyticalassessments.Theallaroundsupport inthecountrywillbehandledbythe National Advisor. Furthermore, the team issupportedbyaResearcheratEOwhowillconductdeskresearch,documentationreviewandassist infurther methodology refinements for the researchphaseoftheADR.

7. MANAgEMENT ARRANgEMENTS

EOwillmanagetheevaluationandensurecoordi-nationandliaisonwithRBAPandotherconcernedunitsatheadquarterslevel.TheEOTaskManagerwill lead the ADR process, in close consultationwithRBAPandBhutanCOmanagement.

TheCOwilltakealeadroleinorganizingdialogueand stakeholder meetings on the findings andrecommendations, support the evaluation team in

�� A N N E X 1

liaisonwiththekeypartnersanddiscussionswiththe team, and make available to the team all thematerial that is available. The office will providesupporttologisticsandplanning.

Thegeneraltimeframeandresponsibilitiesfortheevaluationprocessareasfollows:

• Desk review and analysis of documentation–ConductedbyEOinclosecollaborationwiththeTeamLeaderandEOTaskManager,Febru-arytoMarch2006

• Scoping mission to country by the EO TaskManagerandTeamLeader–OneweekmissiontoBhutan,April2006

• Developmentoffinalevaluationdesignandplan–LedbytheTeamLeader,earlyMay2006

• Complementarydatagathering–Ledbylocallyrecruited Consultant (as required), April toMay2006

• ADRmissionofdatacollectionandvalidation–ByfullEvaluationTeam,threeweeksinApriltoMay2006

• Analysisandreporting–JunetoJuly2006

• Finalization of the ADR report – By Evalua-tionTeamundertheleadershipofTeamLeaderin close consultation with EO Task Manager,basedonreviewbyclientsandEO,endofJuly2006

TheEOwillmeetallcostsdirectly related to theconductoftheADR.ThesewillincludecostsrelatedtoparticipationoftheTeamLeader,internationalandnational/regionalconsultantsandtheEOTaskManager, aswell as thepreliminary researchandthe issuance of the final ADR report. The COwillcontributesupportinkind.EOwillalsocovercosts of any stakeholder workshops during theADRmission.

��L I S T O f P E O P L E C O N S U L T E D

Annex 2

List of People Consulted

ROYAL gOVERNMENT OF bhUTAN

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

Pem Chewang,SeniorProgrammeOfficerH.E. Lyonpo Wangdi Norbu,MinisterAum Yanki Tobgyel Wangchuk,SecretarySonam Wangchuk,DirectorGeneral,DepartmentofAid&DebtManagement(DADM)Lhaba Tshering,ProgrammeOfficer,DepartmentofAid&DebtManagement(DADM)

MINISTRY OF FOREIgN AFFAIRS

Pema Choden,Head,PolicyandPlanningDivision,MultilateralDivisionYeshey Dorji,SecretaryNima Ome,Director,MultilateralDivisionH.E. Daw Penjo,Ambassador,BhutanMissiontotheUN,NYDasho Tsultrim,DeputySecretary

PLANNINg COMMISSION

Lam Dorji,SecretaryRinzin Dorji,DeputySecretary

MINISTRY OF hOME & CULTURAL AFFAIRS

Dasho Sonam Tenzin,DirectorGeneralDasho Penden Wangchuk,Secretary

hIgh COURT

H.E. Lyonpo Sonam Tobgyel,ChiefJustice

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION

Nado Rinchin,DeputyMinister

MINISTRY OF TRADE & INDUSTRY

Dasho Karma Dorji,SecretarySonam P. Wangdi,Director

ELECTIONS COMMISSION

Dasho Kunzang Wangdi,Commissioner

�0 A N N E X 2

ANTI-CORRUPTION COMMISSION

Aum Neten Zangmo,Chairperson

PARTICIPANTS, ADR ENTRY WORkShOP

Pema Chewang,ChiefProgrammeOfficer,DepartmentofAid&DebtManagement,(DADM),MinistryofFinanceRinzin Dorji,DeputySecretary,PlanningCommissionSecretariatSingay Dorji, ProgrammeManager,NationalBiodiversityCentre,MinistryofAgricultureYeshey Dorji,AssistantProgrammeOfficer,PlanningandPolicyDivision,MinistryofInformation&CommunicationYuden Dorji,ProgrammeCoordinator,MinistryofAgricultureSatchi Dukpa,AssistantEngineer,DepartmentofEnergy,MinistryofTrade&IndustryJamtsho,ProgrammeManager,RoyalAuditAuthorityNeera Lama,IndependentConsultantSonam Lhaden,ProgrammeOfficer,NationalEnvironmentCommissionTashi Pem, ProgrammeOfficer,Helvetas/SwissAgencyforDevelopment&Cooperation(SDC)Karma Penjor,DecentralizationSupportProgrammeCoordinator,DepartmentofLocalGovernance,MinistryofHomeandCulturalAffairs,TashichhodzongTenzin Rondel,UnderSecretary,MinistryofForeignAffairsMaurits Servaas,Monitoring&EvaluationAdviser,NetherlandsDevelopmentOrganization(SNV)Megumi Shuto,ProjectFormulizationAdviser,JapanInternationalCooperationAgency(JICA)Karma Tenzin,AlternateProjectManager,RoyalMonetaryAuthorityUgyen Tenzin,Head,PolicyandPlanningDivision,NationalEnvironmentCommissionKarma Thinlay,ProjectManager,Anti-CorruptionCommissionKarma Tshering,ProgrammeOfficer,PlanningandPolicyDivision,MinistryofTrade&IndustryLhaba Tshering,ProgrammeOfficer,DADM,MinistryofFinanceSangay Wangchuk,DeputyDirector,DepartmentofInformationTechnology(DIT),MinistryofInformation&CommunicationPem C. Wangdi,ProgrammeOfficer,NationalCommissionforWomen&ChildrenTashi Wangmo, Head,PolicyandPlanningDivision,MinistryofLabour&HumanResourcesJambay Zangmo, AssistantProgrammeOfficer,DADM,MinistryofFinance

DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS

Torben Bellers,Coordinator,LiaisonOffice,EmbassyofDenmarkDr. Samdu Chettri,DeputyResidentCoordinator,ProgrammeCoordinationOffice,Helvetas/SDS,SwitzerlandKunzang Namgyel,Director,WorldWildlifeFund(WWF)Enrique Pantoja,SeniorCountryOfficer,Bhutan,Washington,DC,WorldBank(telephonicinterview)H.E. Sudhir Vyas,Ambassador,EmbassyofIndiaNencah Wangdi, ProgrammeOfficer,WorldWildlifeFund(WWF)


bhUTAN CIVIL SOCIETY

Kinley Dorji,Editor-in-Chief,KuenselNewspaperKungten Gyatso,Principal,InstituteofLanguage&CulturalStudies,RoyalUniversityofBhutanBap Kinga,ChiefExecutiveOfficer,VicePresident,BhutanChamberofCommerce&Industry(BCCI)Karma Ura,Director,CentreforBhutanStudiesChime P. Wangdi,Director,TarayanaFoundation

UNITED NATIONS bhUTAN

UNDP bhUTAN

Karma Chogyal,Environment&EnergyUnitAnjana Giri,GEFSmallGrantsProgramme,EnvironmentandEnergyUnitSeeta Giri, AssistantResidentRepresentative,Head,Environment&EnergyUnitAki Hakanen,UNV,Economist,MDG&PovertyUnitIlona Leskinen,UNV,MDG&PovertyUnitNathalie Meyer,UNVIntern,AssistantProgrammeOfficer,GovernanceUnitMarie Pedersen,Consultant,GovernanceUnitTshering Pem,AssistantResidentRepresentative,HeadMDG&PovertyUnitSonam Y. Rabgye,ProgrammeAssistant,Environment&EnergyUnitTirtha Rana,GEFSmallGrantsProgramme,Environment&EnergyUnitNicholas Rosselini,ResidentRepresentative&UNResidentCoordinatorJunko Taguchi,ProgrammeOfficer,UNVToshihiro Tanaka,DeputyResidentRepresentativeTenzin Thinley, AssistantResidentRepresentativeDoley Tshering, ProgrammeOfficer,Environment&EnergyUnitWangdi Tshering,ProgrammeOfficer,ProgrammeManagementSupportUnitLily Wangchuk,HeadGovernanceUnitTashi Wangchuk, Consultant,SeniorPolicyAdviserTshering Yanki, ProgrammeAssistant,GovernanceUnit

UN RESIDENT COORDINATOR UNIT

Sunita Giri,CommunicationsOfficerAkiko Ueda,ProgrammeOfficer

UNITED NATIONS POPULATION FUND

Yeshey Dorji, AssistantResidentRepresentative

UNITED NATIONS ChILDREN’S FUND

Vathinee Jitjaturunt,SeniorProgrammeOfficerAnoja Wijeyesekera,RepresentativeBhutan

WORLD FOOD PROgRAMME

Gerald Daly,Representative

�2 A N N E X 2

UNDP hEADqUARTERS

Razina Bilgrami,DeputyChief,South&WestDivision,RegionalBureauforAsia&SouthPacif icRegionArthur Erken,AssociateDirector,UNDevelopmentGroupOfficeTerence Jones,Director,CapacityDevelopmentGroupOlav Kjorven,Director,EnvironmentandEnergyGroup,BureauforDevelopmentPolicyKamal Malhotra,SeniorAdviser,PovertyGroup,BureauforDevelopmentPolicyRomesh Muttukumaru,Director,BureauforResourcesandStrategicPlanningJean-Claude Rogivue,Chief,South&WestAsiaDivision,RegionalBureauforAsia&SouthPacificRegionBharati Silawal-Giri,OIC,GenderUnit,BureauforDevelopmentPolicyMaria Suokko,ProgrammeSpecialist,RegionalBureauforAsia&SouthPacificRegionJuha Uitto,TaskManager,LaoPDRADR,EvaluationOfficeRobertson Work,PrincipleAdviser,DemocraticGovernanceGroup,BureauforDevelopmentPolicy

UN CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT FUND, NY

Rebecca Dahele,EvaluationAdviser

UNIFEM, NY

S.K. Guha,ProgrammeSpecialist

UN VOLUNTEERS, bONN, gERMANY

Alissar Chaker, ProgrammeSpecialist(telephonicinterview)

UNDgO

Arthur Erken, AssociateDirector

WORLD bANk, WAShINgTON D.C.

Enrique Pantoja, SeniorCountryOfficer

OThERS

Renata Lok Dessalien,RRUNDPBangladesh,formerResidentRepresentative,UNDPBhutanDr. S.R. Osmani,LeadConsultant,MacroeconomicsofPovertyReductionChador Tenzin,independentconsultant,formerProgrammeOfficer,WWF

Mongar, Bhutan

Chador,Secretary,LGCooperativeKinley Namgay,QualityInspector,EssentialOilsDevelopmentProgrammeTenzin Namgay, Member,LGCooperativeTshering Peldon,PrivateindividualandruralentrepreneurSangay Pintso,ProjectChemist,ManagerEssentialOilsDevelopmentProgrammeLungten Tshering,Chairman,LemonGrassCooperative,Dramitse


thruMshingla Park

Tashi Dorji,ParkManager,ThrumshinglaPark,BumthangKencho Gyeltshen,ForestGuard,Lingmethang

trongsa

Karchung,GeogLivestockExtensionOfficerYeshey Samdrup,Director,RTOITenzin,ChairmanDratenGup/GYT

FOCUS gROUP DISCUSSION PARTICIPANTS

DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS

Torben Bellers,Coordinator,LiaisonOfficeofDenmark(LOD)Saamdu Chetri,DeputyResidentCo-ordinator,Helvetas/SDCBhutanKhandu-Om Dorji,ProgrammeOfficer,UNICEFPhintsho Dorji,AssistantResidentRepresentative,FAOYeshey Dorji,Representative,UNFPACecilia Keizer,CountryDirector,NetherlandsDevelopmentOrganization(SNV)Nancy Strickland,ResidentCoordinator,CanandianCooperationOffice(CCO)Norbu Wangchuk,ProgrammeOfficer,WHOMarie Christine Weinberger,ResidentCoordinator,AustrianCooperationBureau(ACB)Nove Yakiya,ProgrammeOfficer,WFP

ENERgY, ENVIRONMENT AND DISASTER MANAgEMENT

Davide Annandale,Consultant,NationalEnvironmentCommissionChhimi Dorji,AssistantProjectManager,DepartmentofEnergyKandu-om Dorji,ProgrammeOfficer,UNICEFSonam Dorji,AssociationofBhutaneseTourOperators(ABTO)Sonam Tshering Dorji,PlanningOfficer,PolicyandPlanningDivision(PPD),MinistryofTrade&Industries.Carolyn Hamer-Smith,Consultant,WFPR. Ngawang,ProjectManager,RoyalBotanicalPark,NatureConservationDivision,MinistryofAgriculture.Sonam Penjore,ProgrammeOfficer,Helvetas/SDCDago Tshering,FieldCoordinator,RoyalSocietyforProtectionofNature(RSPN)Ugyen Tshewang,ProgrammeDirector,NationalBiodiversityCentreJambay Zangmo, AssistantProgrammeOfficer,DepartmentofAid&DebtManagement(DADM),MinistryofFinance

�� A N N E X 2

gENDER MAINSTREAMINg/ADVANCEMENT OF WOMEN

Tashi Choden, ProgrammeOfficer,YouthDevelopmentFundDr. Rinchen Chophel,ExecutiveDirector,NationalCommissionforWomenand Children(NCWC)Dasho Daw Dem, Secretary,NationalWomen’sAssociationofBhutanTshering Dolkar,CounselingCoordinator,Respect,Educate,NurtureandEmpowerWomen(RENEW)Kunzang Lhamu, UnderSecretary,PlanningCommissionSecretariatSonam Pem,Intern,TarayanaFoundationLunten Wangde,ManagingDirector,HandicraftsEmporiumChime P. Wangdi,ExecutiveDirector,TarayanaFoundationPem Chuki Wangdi, NationalProgrammeOfficer,NationalCommissionforWomenandChildren(NCWC)Tshering Wangmo, ProgrammeOfficer,WFPJambay Zangmo, AssistantProgrammeOfficer,DADM,MinistryofFinance

gOVERNANCE

Tashi Pem,ProgrammeOfficer,Helvetas/SDCKarma Penjor,ProjectCoordinator,DecentralizationSupportProgramme,MinistryofHome&CulturalAffairs(MoHCA)Sonam Phuntsho, Director,RoyalInstituteofManagement(RIM)Maurits Servaas,M&EAdviser,DepartmentofLocalGovernance(DLG)/SNVMegumi Shuto, ProjectFormulationAdviser,JICAKarma Tenzin, AlternateProjectManager,NationalPension&ProvidentFund,RoyalMonetaryAuthority(RMA)Lhaba Tshering,ProgrammeOfficer,DADM,MinistryofFinanceRinchen Tshering,LocalTechnicalCoordinator,LocalGovernanceandDecentralizationProgramme,(LGDP)/JICA

POVERTY

Saamdu Chetri,DeputyResidentCo-ordinator,Helvetas/SDCRinzin Dorji,DeputyDirector,PlanningCommissionSecretariatSingye Dorji, Head,MinistryofAgricultureYeshey Dorji, SeniorPlanningOfficer,PPD,MinistryofAgricultureThinley Jamtsho,MarketingManager,HandicraftsEmporiumKunzang Norbu, DeputyDirector,PlanningCommissionSecretariatSujala Pant,JuniorAdvisorforLocalGovernance,SNVSonam Pem,Intern,TarayanaFoundationSonam Phuntsho, PlanningOfficer,PlanningCommissionSecretariatSonam Tobgyal,PlanningOfficer,PlanningCommissionSecretariatLhaba Tshering,ProgrammeOfficer,DADM


Sonam Tshering Dorji,PlanningOfficer,MinistryofTrade&IndustryChime P. Wangdi, ManagingDirector,TarayanaFoundationNaichu,Offtg.SecretaryGeneral,BhutanChamberofCommerceDema,PlanningOfficer,MinistryofAgriculture

CIVIL SOCIETY (INCLUDINg NgOS AND PRIVATE SECTOR)

Saamdu Chetri, DeputyResidentCo-ordinator,Helvetas/SDCSangay Choden,PlanningOfficer,BhutanBroadcastingServiceIrene Christiansern,AgricultureEnterpriseAdvisor,MinistryofAgriculture/SNVYuden Dorji,ProjectManager,HorticultureDivision,MinistryofAgricultureTshewang Drukdra,Reporter,BhutanTimesTshering Dukpa, ProgrammeManager,BhutanDevelopmentFinanceCorporationLimitedSonam Phuntsho, Director,RoyalInstituteofManagementSonam Tobgyel,Reporter,BhutanBroadcastingServiceSonam Tshering Dorji,PlanningOfficer,PolicyandPlanningDivision,MinistryofTrade&IndustryNaichu,Offtg.SecretaryGeneral,BhutanChamberofCommerce

�� A N N E X 3

Annex 3

key Documents Consulted

Thisisalistingofimportantdocuments,reportsandevaluationsthatwerereferredtoduringtheADR.MostofthemareinthepublicdomainandareaccessibleontheUNDPBhutanwebsite(www.undp.org.bt)aswellasonthedifferentwebsitesoftheRoyalGovernmentofBhutan.TheADRTeamalsohadaccesstointernalUNDPdocumentsthatarealsolistedbelow.

ROYAL gOVERNMENT OF bhUTAN AND UNDP REPORTS AND EVALUATIONS

‘Bhutan2020:AVisionforPeace,ProsperityandHappiness’,2000.ConventionontheEliminationofAllFormsofDiscriminationAgainstWomen,‘AnUpdatedSummaryoftheReportoftheKingdomofBhutan’,2003.CEDAW(ConventionontheEliminationofAllFormsofDiscriminationAgainstWomen)30thSession,‘RepliesfromBhutan’,Kuwait,2Feb2004.‘DecentralisationOutcomeEvaluationReport’,2005.‘GenderPilotStudy’,Bhutan,June2001.‘MDGProgressReport’,2003.‘MDGProgressReport’,2005.‘TheMiddlePath:ANationalEnvironmentStrategyforBhutan’,1999.‘Mid-TermReview:RuralEnterprisesDevelopmentProject’.‘Mid-TermReview:DecentralisationSupportProgramme’.‘NationalHumanDevelopmentReport’,2000.‘NationalHumanDevelopmentReport’,2005.‘PovertyAnalysisReport’,2004.‘PovertyOutcomeEvaluationReport’,2005.RoyalGovernmentofBhutanandGovernmentofDenmark,‘CapacityDevelopmentOutcomeEvalua-tionofSelectedOrganisationsinBhutan—MainReport(Draft)’,BhutanApril2006.RoyalGovernmentofBhutan,‘PovertyOutcomeEvaluation—FinalReport’,DepartmentofResearchandDevelopmentServices,MinistryofAgriculture,Bhutan,2005.RoyalGovernmentofBhutan,‘GuidelinesforPreparationoftheTenthPlan(2007-2012)’,PlanningCommission,March2006.UNDPBhutan,‘FinalDraft:Mid-TermEvaluation—IntegratedHorticultureDevelopmentProgramme(IHDP)Bhu/97/003(1997-2002)’,DepartmentofResearchandDevelopmentServices,MinistryofAgricultureandUnitedNationsDevelopmentProgramme,Thimphu,Bhutan,2000.

�7K E Y D O C U M E N T S C O N S U L T E D

OThER DOCUMENTS

2001BhutanEcotourismStrategy.BiodiversityActionPlan(BAPII),2002.BiodiversityAct,2003.TheCentreforBhutanStudies,‘GrossNationalHappinessandDevelopment’,Thimphu,Bhutan,2004.EnvironmentalAssessmentAct2000.ElectricityAct2000.ForestandNatureConservationRulesofBhutan,2000.RegulationfortheEnvironmentalClearanceofProjects2002.RegulationonStrategicEnvironmentalAssessment2002.RulesandRegulationsfortheImplementationoftheBiodiversityAct,2005.VisionandStrategyfortheNatureConservationDivision,2003.

UNDP DOCUMENTS

‘1stCountryCooperationFramework:1997-2001’,Bhutan.‘2ndCountryCooperationFramework:2002-2007’,Bhutan.‘AnnualReportoftheResidentCoordinator’,2005.‘AnnualReportoftheResidentCoordinator’,2002to2005.‘CommonCountryAssessment’,2002.‘CommonCountryAssessment’,2006.‘DevelopmentCooperationReports’.‘EnRoutetoEquality:AGenderReviewofNationalMDGReports,’UNDPBureauofDevelopmentPolicy,2005.Globalscan,‘UNDPPartnersSurveyBhutan’,22March2005.MapofIntendedDevelopmentResults.‘MonitoringPovertyinBhutan’,2003.‘ReportoftheNinthRoundTableMeetingforBhutan:15-16February2006’,Geneva30March2006.‘UnitedNationsDevelopmentAssistanceFrameworkBhutan:2002-2007’.UNDPBhutan,‘Bhutan—RTM:UNSystemStatementonPriorityAreasfor10thFiveYearPlan’,Geneva,16February2006.‘UNDPMulti-YearFundingFramework’,2000-2003.‘UNDPMulti-YearFundingFramework’,2004-2007.‘UNDPResultsOrientedAnnualReports’,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005.

�� A N N E X 4

Annex 4

Methodology and Evaluation questions

SUMMARY OF METhODOLOgY FOR ADR bhUTAN (2000-200�)

5. To provide independent assessment of development results at country level, with an emphasis on the

strategic relevance and effectiveness of UNDP’s Bhutan Country Programme.

6. To assess how UNDP has positioned itself strategically to add value in response to national needs and changes in the national development context.

7. To contribute to accountability and learning from experience, taking into account self-evaluations at project and programme level, and the role of development partners.

8. To provide a set of clear and forward-looking lessons and options for current and future programming at country and organizational levels by UNDP and its partners.

To provide evidence and lessons that can contribute to accountability and to learning from experience, taking into account self-evaluations (e.g. project and outcome evaluations) and the role of development partners.

All stakeholders

• Provide opportunities for learning with regard to development planning, approaches and practice

• Increase understanding of UNDP’s comparative strengths, weaknesses, practices and performance

UNDP corporate, regional and country offices

• Ensure local and corporate accountability

• Validate country self-assessments and evaluations

• Inform and facilitate strategic decision making

• Identify opportunities for future programming and positioning that can inform next UNDP cycle and role within UNDAf

• Improve UNDP strategic positioning in relation to other local role players

• Improve harmonization with other local role players

• facilitate dialogue with the Royal Government of Bhutan

• Inform regional and corporate strategies and practices

• Inform UNDP participation in global debates on development effectiveness

OBJECTIvES OF THE ADR

PURPOSE OF THE ADR

ExPECTED USES OF THE ADR

��M E T H O D O L O G Y A N D E V A L U A T I O N Q U E S T I O N S

1. Manage processes and approaches to increase chances for use of ADR:

• Input on evaluation questions by Headquarters, Regional Bureau and Country Office (CO)

• Entry workshop with local stakeholders during scoping

• Engagement of local expertise for studies and as part of evaluation team

• Stakeholder workshop before final report, for validation and to discuss implications for national development actions

• Opportunities for management responses as integral part of report

• Tailor-made presentation and report formats

2. work with flexibility and responsiveness within the ADR framework.

3. Define and guide the assessment through the ADR matrix, which summarizes the key evaluation questions and sources of evidence for triangulation.

4. focus on

• National level

• Two core issues – strategic positioning and results at outcome level

• All three thematic / practice areas

• Projects and “soft assistance”

• Implementation only as it impacts on the achievement of results and UNDP’s ability to position strategically

• UNDP assistance irrespective of sources of funding

5. Use an inductive strategy, goal-free and top-down coupled to a goal-oriented, bottom-up analysis of programme progress towards its stated goals.

6. Ensure forward-looking analysis based on past experience and performance. Relevant questions:

• On track according to national needs and own frameworks?

• Achieving results to provide a solid foundation for the future?

• Positioned to make a contribution in line with its strengths and intent?

7. Analyze positive and negative, intended and unintended results.

8. Ensure ADR quality through:

• Use of UN norms and standards

• Triangulation

• Stakeholder validation

• Expert review of the assessment

PRINCIPLES AND APPROACH

70 A N N E X 4

PHASE 1: PREPARATION – SCOPING AND FOCUSING THE ASSESSMENT

(i) Incorporation of corporate guidelines and interests

(ii) Document analysis / desk review

(iii) Stakeholder identification

(iv) Evaluability analysis. Limitations included:

Limited scope for attribution

• Small financial assistance from UNDP compared to support from India and other donors

• funding from multiple donors

Limited opportunities for diverse perspectives during triangulation

• few non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and independent research and academic institutions that carry out independent studies

• Government officials dominate perspectives on UNDP’s role and contributions

Limited data for statistical analysis

• Disaggregated and specialized data on outcomes are not readily available

• National statistical system has yet to report on many indicators of human development

• Results of official Census expected in April/May 2006 but does not contain more than broad population tools

(v) Exploratory scoping mission

(vi) UNDP scoping missions to Headquarters and Regional Bureau

(vii) Supplementary document review

PHASE 2: CONDUCTING THE ADR – vALIDATING AND ANALyZING EvIDENCE

(i) Supplementary inception studies

(ii) Main mission – gathering evidence

(iii) Analysis and validation of evidence

(iv) Distillation of lessons, good practice and recommendations

(v) National stakeholder workshop for verification

PHASE 3: ENSURING USE OF THE ADR

(i) Propose tailor-made presentations and material for diverse stakeholders

(ii) National stakeholder workshop and management responses to facilitate and stimulate use and action

ADR PROCESS

7�M E T H O D O L O G Y A N D E V A L U A T I O N Q U E S T I O N S

Matrix of Evaluation questions (continued)PERFOR-MANCE AREA

KEy ISSUE EvALUATION qUESTIONS DATA SOURCES AND REvIEw TOOLS

Programme results

Effective-ness in delivering develop-ment results

• what are the main contributions to development for which UNDP is recognized in Bhutan?

• To what extent is UNDP being recognized for contributing to significant development outcomes in Bhutan in each of its practice and cross-cutting areas?

• To what extent, and how, do these contributions relate to the intended outcomes that UNDP has strived to achieve?

• were there any unintended results or consequences from the work during this period?

• what are the implications of any mismatch with what was intended?

• Is progress on track to enable UNDP to achieve its intended results as planned?

• Documented analyses of national development changes and achievements in Bhutan

• MDGRs, NHDRs, CCA and other relevant national reports

• National fYPs and other development strategies

• UNDP programme documents

• Supplementary preparatory studies

• Progress and evaluation reports (including ROAR, MYff)

• RTM reports

• Expert opinion survey

• Key informant interviews

• District administrator interviews

• CO team interviews

• focus group discussions

• field visit observations

• Stakeholder workshops

factors influencing the achieve-ment of de-velopment results

• To what extent has UNDP been responsive to national and local needs and priorities?

• To what extent has UNDP been effective in maximizing its comparative advantage and niche to deliver its results?

• To what extent does UNDP use a clear, coherent and appropriate strategy to maximize opportunities to contribute to development in Bhutan?

• To what extent do the programme assumptions and key drivers for its priorities improve its chances of delivering the most effective and relevant results?

• To what extent has UNDP been effective in maximizing the synergies between the component parts of its programme and organization to deliver the results?

• To what extent, and how have the range and quality of its partnerships influenced the achievement of results? To what extent has UNDP been effective in making use of the opportunities for harmonization of its efforts with those of potential partners?

• To what extent, and how, have the implementation capacity and approach of the CO influenced UNDP’s contribution to development results?

• To what extent, and how has UNDP’s strategic position in Bhutan affected its achievements?

• what other conditions and factors have had a significant influence on the achievement of UNDP’s development results?

• Documented analyses of national development changes and achievements in Bhutan



• Analysis of strategic positioning

• Map and analysis of development partnerships







• field visit observations


72 A N N E X 4



Programme results (continued)

Sustain-ability of de-velopment results

• Does UNDP have effective strategies in place to increase the likelihood of lasting effects from its development contributions?

• Are there any socio-cultural, political, eco-nomic or other aspects that may endanger the sustainability of the results and benefits of the work of UNDP?

• Do adequate systemic, technical and finan-cial capacities and commitments exist within key role players to capitalize on UNDP’s contributions to development?










future pro-gramming for delivery of develop-ment results

• what are the key external factors most likely to have a significant influence on future interventions by UNDP in Bhutan?

• what are the implications of the intended and achieved outcomes, and the factors that have influenced these, for the future work of UNDP in achievement of national develop-ment priorities, the principle of GNH, the MDGs and UNDAf?

• what lessons can be learned and good prac-tices identified to inform future program-ming by UNDP in Bhutan?

• Country documents, including fYPs

• Key informants


• ADR analysis


Strategic positioning

Relevance • To what extent have UNDP’s programmes been relevant to Bhutan’s most pressing national needs?

• To what extent have UNDP’s programmes been relevant to RGoB’s national development goals and strategies?

• To what extent are RGoB’s national development goals and strategies in line with the most pressing national needs? If discrepancies exist, what are the implications for UNDP’s position and programming?

• To whose needs do UNDP seem to be responding most frequently (RGoB, NGOs, private sector, etc.)? what are the implications?

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

• To what extent is it likely that UNDP’s current objectives, thematic foci and implementation strategies will be appropriate in the next programming cycle?

• UNDP and UNDAf programme documents





• RTM reports







7�M E T H O D O L O G Y A N D E V A L U A T I O N Q U E S T I O N S



Strategic positioning (continued)

Responsive-ness

• To what extent and in what manner (ad hoc, planned, strategic, cautious, building partnerships, coordinating, piloting, etc.) has UNDP anticipated and responded to significant changes in the development context relevant to its areas of intervention?

• To what extent and in what manner has UNDP been able to capitalize on opportunities and emerging issues? To what extent has this affected its ability to focus on its own goals and vision?

• How effectively and in what manner has UNDP anticipated and dealt with problems and constraints?

• To what extent were timely and adequate adjustments made to the CCf, SRf and MYff to reflect changing needs and priorities?






• RTM reports







Alignment with MDGs

• To what extent are the CCf, SRf and MYff strategically linked to the achievement of the MDGs? Are gaps used to direct programme development?

• To what extent have partnerships been formed to address the MDGs? Are mechanisms in place for collaboration and knowledge sharing?

• To what extent has UNDP been active in raising national awareness around the MDGs?

• To what extent is UNDP supporting the monitoring of progress and preparing MDG reports?


• MDGRs









Alignment with the UN system

• How relevant are the intended SRf and MYff outcomes to the intended results of the UN system as expressed in UNDAf?

• How effectively is UNDP contributing to UNDAf goals?

• How effective is the cooperation strategy with other UN agencies within these addressed areas?

• To what extent are major programmes designed in active coordination with other UN agencies?

• To what extent is UNDP active in areas not indicated in the UNDAf? what are the implications of this?

• How effectively has UNDP leveraged the resources of others towards results?




• RTM reports





7� A N N E X 4



Strategic positioning (continued)

factors influenc-ing UNDP’s position

• what were the key internal and external influences on UNDP’s ability to respond to and position itself in changing contexts?

• To what extent and how effectively is UNDP’s position in Bhutan guided by a clear-cut vision and strategy?

• Does UNDP have adequate and effective technical and administrative capacity and systems to play its perceived and intended role in Bhutan?

• To what extent, and how, are policy and administrative constraints affecting UNDP’s position and role in Bhutan?

• To what extent, and how, have UNDP’s development contributions affected its position and role in Bhutan?

• To what extent is UNDP contributing to effective learning and knowledge sharing among development partners and programme participants?

• To what extent, and how, has UNDP’s partnership approach influenced its position and role in Bhutan?









future role and posi-tioning

• what are the key external factors most likely to have a significant influence on UNDP’s future role and position in Bhutan over the next 5 to 10 years?

• what are the key emerging areas of support that would become significant for UNDP over the next 5 to 10 years?

• what lessons and good practice will help UNDP determine and play its most effective role in Bhutan?

• How should UNDP adjust its areas of work and strategies to be best positioned in Bhutan to fulfill its mission?

• Country documents, including fYPs

• Key informants


• ADR analysis


Annex 5

Map of Intended Results

Bhutan: Map of Intended Development Results 1997-2006* CCF Focus (continued)Themes 1st CCF

Objectives

Country Cooperation Framework

1997-2001

UNDAF objectives

Development Assistance Framework

2002-2007

2nd CCF Objectives


2002-2006

SRF Outcomes

SRF Outputs

Strategic Results Framework

2000-2002

Governance Governance

• Strengthening of capacities for development management & decentralisation

• Capacity-building for human resources development & management

Enhanced support to good governance

• Promotion of people’s participation in the planning process, particularly among women & at all levels

• Capacity-building for dzongkhag & geog administrations alike

• Promotion of collection, analysis, & dissemination of improved baseline information & data on the develop-ment situation in Bhutan at the national, dzongkhag & geog levels

• Promotion of a performance-oriented civil service

Decentralisation & local participation

• Legal , policy, & institutional frameworks defining decen-tralised allocation of functional & decision-making responsi-bilities between the centre, dzongkhags1, & geog2s

• Planning, administrative, financial, & implementation responsibilities transferred from the centre to the dzong-khags & geogs, per approved frameworks

• Capacity of dzongkhag & geog administrations to apply par-ticipatory approaches & to plan, manage, & implement develop-ment activities strengthened in collaboration with UNCDf & other partners

• A UN system-wide decentrali-sation programme developed & implemented to support national plans by dzongkhag administrations in develop-ment planning, accounting, budgeting, & monitoring

Efficiency & accountability in the civil service

• Improved quality of public audits

• Higher service standards in the public sector

• Greater accountability of the executive branch

• More strategic human resourc-es management & planning in the public sector

• Enhanced productivity of institu-tions in the executive, legislative, & judiciary branches due to effective application of ICT

• Legal, policy, & institutional frameworks to promote the growth of the ICT sector

• More advanced information management systems for aid coordination & debt management

• Increased gender-sensitivity in the formulation of plans & strategies in the civil service

Decentralisation policies

Outcomes

• Effective legal & policy frame-work for decentralised authority & management

Outputs

• A policy & implementation framework for political, admin-istrative, & financial decen-tralisation designed & discussed (central & local levels)

• Information sharing & commu-nication between the central & districts improved

• Management & administrative capacity at district & geog level for decentralised governance strengthened

Civil service accountability

Outcomes

• Improved efficiency, accountability, & transparency in the civil service

Outputs

• Performance of civil service improved

• Increased application of IT for information sharing & management in the public sector

7�


Objectives


1997-2001

UNDAF objectives


2002-2007

2nd CCF Objectives


2002-2006

SRF Outcomes

SRF Outputs


2000-2002

Sustainable

Livelihoods

Sustainable Livelihoods

• Promotion of the private sector, entrepreneurship, cottage, and SME

• Integrated horticulture development

Improved livelihoods for the disadvan-taged

• Creation of interactive, dzongkhag-level development centres such as agricultural cooperatives to promote sustainable livelihoods, including adoption of emergent technologies & efficient management options

• Support to geog-level infrastructure development in order to help the disadvantaged create & preserve assets through access to markets

• Support to generate a composite data-base to provide a comprehensive picture of vulnerability in Bhutan

• Improvement in access to information & knowledge, particularly through ICT, for sustainable development

Policy, legal, & regulatory framework to support private sector development

• Legal, policy, & institutional frameworks to promote the development of the enterprise sector as a whole, particularly small industries & eco-tourism

• Legal, policy, & institutional frameworks to furtherstrengthen the development of credit markets

• Establishment of new small-scale enterprises, cooperatives, & business incubators

• Greater employment oppor-tunities in the private sector, particularly for women, in both rural & urban areas

• Increased exports of low-volume & high-value-added agricultural & horticultural products

• Improved access of entrepre-neurs & farmers to micro-credit & venture capital

• More effective functioning of institutions that promote growth of the private sector

Access to & utilisation of ICT

• Improved public access to knowledge & information

• More effective coordination of production & marketing in the agricultural sector in selected geogs

• Enhanced information tech-nology skills of graduates in selected high schools

• Better public access to informa-tion on employment opportu-nities in the private sector

• Greater opportunities for women & men in rural areas to pursue distance learning

Monitoring poverty

Outcomes

• Improved national capacity to monitor (human & income) poverty & inequality, in accordance with the new Millennium Development Goals

Outputs

• Assistance in designing a system of relevant poverty monitoring indicators

• Exposure to different methodologies for establishing poverty lines

• Strengthening institutional capacity

Productive resources & assets

Outcomes

• Improved capacity of the rural poor to improve & sustain their livelihoods

Outputs

• An enabling framework for development of agricultural business & rural enterprises

• Improved agricultural based and non-farm enterprise production skills/technologies popularised among the rural poor of both sexes

• Improved post harvest & marketing facilities & services for agri/horticulture & non-farm products

Access to technologies

Outcomes

• The policy, legal, & regulatory framework reformed to substan-tially expand connectivity to information & communication technologies (ICT)

Outputs

• The policy, legal, & regulatory framework reviewed to substan-tially expand ICT connectivity

A N N E X 5

77


Objectives


1997-2001

UNDAF objectives


2002-2007

2nd CCF Objectives


2002-2006

SRF Outcomes

SRF Outputs


2000-2002

Environment

MDGs:

Renewable natu-ral resources/envi-ronment

• Strengthening of environmental management & education

• forest resources management & institutional capacity develop-ment

• Preparation of a national biodi-versity strategy & action plan

• Integrated man-agement of Jigme Dorji National Park, including the preparation of Community Natural Resource Management Plans

• Capacity-building to ensure that Bhutan meets its obligations under the UN framework Convention on Climate Change

Institutional framework for sustainable environmental management & energy devel-opment

• Legal, policy, & institutional frameworks for the protection of the environment

• Eco-tourism plans for desig-nated protected areas

• Increased income of rural farm-ers in selected areas

• Community-based natural resources management plans in selected areas

Institutional frameworks

Outcomes

• Improved capacity of local authorities & community-based groups in environmental man-agement & sustainable energy development

Outputs

• Block Advisory Committee(s) facilitating development/imple-mentation of 2-3 pilot Commu-nity Natural Resource Manage-ment Plans (CNRMPs)

• Ecotourism management plans drawn up & under implementa-tion in selected protected areas

• Sustainable pilot mini-micro hy-dropower plants & an enabling environment for further mini-micro hydropower development in place

Global conventions & funding mechanisms

Outcomes

• Global environment concerns & commitments integrated in national development policy & planning

Outputs

• Country reporting obligations met for biodiversity & climate change conventions

• wSSD National Assessment com-pleted and Royal Government of Bhutan represented at wSSD

• Royal Government’s capacity in GEf focal areas developed

Gender Gender

• Promotion of gender- disaggregated data within the overall context of strengthened data collection, analysis, & dissemination in all sectors

• Leadership training for women, both in rural & urban areas

Tolls & methods for women

Outcomes

• Improved quality of decision-making based on gender assess-ments & integration of statistics & data on gender issues

Outputs

• Greater understanding of gen-der issues at the national policy & planning level

M A P O f I N T E N D E D R E S U L T S


Objectives


1997-2001

UNDAF objectives


2002-2007

2nd CCF Objectives


2002-2006

SRF Outcomes

SRF Outputs


2000-2002

UN Support Strategic partnerships & policy dialogue

• UN system will rely on a network ap-proach to broaden its contacts & linkages beyond the traditional actors in develop-ment cooperation

• UN will implement joint programming & implementation to facilitate the develop-ment of such partnerships

• UN will take critical role in assisting the Royal Government in organising Round Table meetings in Thimphu

Knowledge networking & information sharing/communication

• UNDP has been commissioned to provide major assistance to the RG in preparation of the Ninth five-Year Plan

• UN will facilitate communication, interactions, & consultations through the application of IT

• Joint UN system data reference library containing all regular national, statisti-cal, policy, & analytical publications as well as official studies & surveys will be established in the UN house

• UN system will undertake joint data collection & research on key policy issues with the RG

Capacity-building & institutional development

• UN system will continue to support Bhutan’s participation in regional & international networks of expertise on international cooperation & institutional reform, as well as the development of national networks

• UN system will focus on a limited number of areas of capacity & institutional devel-opment where it can show added value

• Each set of core activities or programmes at the agency level will be clearly linked to the objectives set out in the UNDAf

Advocacy

• UN system has applied a multi-faceted strategy of radio programmes, written advocacy materials, opened UN develop-ment forums, participated in national & local forums of debate, & flagged global UN events & summits

• UN system will also embark on more ac-tive use of its web site & the production of short but effective videos of the UN work in Bhutan

Global conference goals

Outcomes

• Government’s monitoring of progress to reach Millennium Development Goal (MDG) tar-gets strengthened

Outputs

• Bhutan’s first MDG progress report prepared

Effective operational activities

Outcomes

• Mobilisation of UN partners to adopt common positions on development issues & achieve concrete development out-comes through the UNDAf

Outputs

• UNDAf adopted by all UN agen-cies; implementation launched

1. Dzongkhags (districts), 2. Geogs (blocks)

7� A N N E X 5