United Nations Environment Programme
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
United Nations Environment Programme Terminal Evaluation of the Project “MITIGATING THE THREAT OF INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES IN THE INSULAR CARIBBEAN” UNEP IMIS #: GFL/-2328-2740-4995 // GEF ID #: 3183 Hugo Arnal UNEP Evaluation Office September 2014 Front Cover Photographs: Close up of two emblematic reptile species from the Caribbean. In the lower left, the Saint Lucia Whiptail (Cnemidophorus vanzoi), pictured in Maria Major Island, Saint Lucia, and on the upper right the Jamaican Iguana (Cyclura collie), at the Hope Zoo, Kingston. The Whiptail was originally from the main Saint Lucia Island from where it was extirpated, very small populations remain in adjacent Maria Major (10.1 ha) and Maria Minor (1.6 ha) and Rat and Preslin islands. The Jamaican Iguana was presumed already extinct in 1948 and a remaining population was discovered in the Hellshire Hills of Jamaica in 1990. In both cases, their near extinction is due in great part to the impact of invasive alien predators, particularly Indian Mongoose in the Iguana’s case. Both species are good examples of the threat that ‘Invasive Alien Species (IAS)’ represent to the survival of the Caribbean biodiversity and natural heritage. (Photographs © Hugo Arnal). Disclaimer: The perspectives and opinions expressed in this report do not represent official positions of the United Nations Environment Programme, its staff or The Global Environment Facility (GEF). Unless otherwise explicitly indicated, opinions and perspectives herein contained belong to the evaluator. Citation: Arnal, Hugo. 2014. Terminal Evaluation Report: “Mitigating the Threat of Invasive Alien Species in the Insular Caribbean” (UNEP IMIS #: GFL/-2328-2740-4995; GEF ID #: 3183). Prepared for the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, Kenya. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT First and foremost, the evaluator would like to thank the UN Environment Program (UNEP) for the opportunity to perform the ‘Terminal Evaluation’ (TE) of the GEF-financed ‘Mitigating the Threat of Invasive Alien Species in the Insular Caribbean’ (MTIASIC) project and in particularly to Mrs. Elisa Calcaterra, from UNEP’s Evaluation Office, for her trust when assigning the evaluation task to the author of this report. Her comments and support were very enriching and pivotal for the completion of this evaluation. Similarly, my gratitude to Mrs. Kristin McLaughlin, UNEP’s project Task Manager and Liaison Officer with the Global Environment Facility (GEF), who fully embraced the evaluation, providing feedback, organizing information exchange mechanisms and bridging with National Coordinators (NC) and Project Directors, the National Executing Agencies (NEAs) and the Regional Project Director, Mr. Naitram (Bob) Ramnanan, CABI’s Regional Representative for Central America and the Caribbean. Equally important, I would like to thank Mrs. Mela Shah, from UNEP HQ in Kenya, who helped with the logistics and administrative aspects of the work. This ‘Terminal Evaluation (TE) Report’ was prepared after visiting the five countries participating in the MTIASIC Project and attending the regional Caribbean workshop “Policies, Strategies and Best Practices for Managing Invasive Alien Species in the Insular Caribbean’ which took place in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, from March 31st through April 4th, 2014. As stated in the previous ‘Inception report’, visits to the participant countries and interviews with local governmental officers, experts and stakeholders would have been very difficult or far less complete without the support from the National Coordinators (NCs) and National Executing Agencies (NEAs): Mr. Frederick Arnett II, from the Department of Marine Resources, Ministry of Agriculture, Marine Resources and Local Government, Bahamas; Mr. Carlos Rijo, from the Environment and Natural Resources Ministry, Dominican Republic; Mrs. Nelsa English-Johnson, from the National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA), Jamaica; Mrs. Ulrike Krauss, consultant with the Forestry Department, Ministry of Sustainable Development, Energy, Science and Technology, Saint Lucia; and Mrs. Velda Ferguson-Dewsbury, consultant with the Ministry of Food Production, Trinidad and Tobago. Similarly, both during the workshop as well as during country visits, ‘Project Directors’ (PDs) were very supportive of the evaluation and provided significant amounts of information and candid perspectives about the project’s achievements and limitations: Mr. Michael Braynen, Bahamas; Mr. José Mateo, Dominican Republic; Ms. Sheries Simpson, Jamaica; Mr. Michael Bobb, Saint Lucia; and Mrs. Audine Mootoo, from Trinidad and Tobago. The support from National Coordinators and Project Directors did not stop after the visits to their countries but continued for several weeks while this evaluation was being prepared. This evaluator is very grateful to all of them (ANNEX B provides complete institutional information on executing agencies, National Coordinators and Project Directors). My gratitude to Naitram (Bob) Ramnanan and Arne Witt, both from CABI, with whom I spent several hours reviewing achievements and lessons learned through the MTIASIC Project as well as technical issues related to invasive species in the Caribbean and worldwide, and particularly Mr. Ramnanan as per his continued support providing additional documents for the TE. Special mention is also ought to Boris Fabres, Caribbean regional Director for Island Conservation, who provided significant support during my visits to Nassau and Trinidad. This evaluator is deeply indebted to all those who contributed their expertise, perspectives and time during the elevated number of interviews conducted in country or through Skype and telephone. They are all listed in this Report’s ANNEX C. Page | ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT II PROJECT IDENTIFICATION TABLE 6 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 10 I. INTRODUCTION 14 EVALUATION AND PROJECT NAMES 14 PROJECT DURATION 14 PROJECT COST 14 IMPLEMENTING AND EXECUTING PARTNERS 15 II. THE EVALUATION 17 OBJECTIVES 17 APPROACH 17 LIMITATIONS 19 III. THE PROJECT 20 A. CONTEXT 20 INTERNATIONAL POLICIES AND AGREEMENTS ON IAS IN THE CARIBBEAN 20 COUNTRIES PARTICIPATING IN THE MTIASIC PROJECT 22 B. OBJECTIVES AND COMPONENTS 26 C. CHANGES IN DESIGN DURING IMPLEMENTATION 27 D. TARGET AREAS AND GROUPS 33 COMPONENT 4, OUTCOME 1, SAINT LUCIA PILOT PROJECT 34 COMPONENT 4, OUTCOME 1, TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO PILOT PROJECT 1: 34 COMPONENT 4, OUTCOME 1, TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO PILOT PROJECT 2: 34 COMPONENT 5, OUTCOME 1, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC PILOT PROJECT: 34 COMPONENT 5, OUTCOME 1, JAMAICA PILOT PROJECT: 34 COMPONENT 5, OUTCOME 2, PILOT PROJECT SAINT LUCIA: 35 COMPONENT 5, OUTCOME 3, PILOT PROJECT BAHAMAS: 35 COMPONENT 5, OUTCOME 3, PILOT PROJECT JAMAICA: 35 COMPONENT 5, OUTCOME 3, PILOT PROJECT TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO: 35 COMPONENT 5, OUTCOME 4, PILOT PROJECT JAMAICA: 35 COMPONENT 5, OUTCOME 4, PILOT PROJECT TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO: 35 E. MILESTONE AND KEY DATES IN PROJECT DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION 35 F. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENT 37 G- PROJECT FINANCING 38 H. PROJECT PARTNERS 40 I- RECONSTRUCTED THEORY OF CHANGE 41 Page | iii IV. EVALUATION FINDINGS 44 A. STRATEGIC RELEVANCE 44 B. ACHIEVEMENTS OF OUTPUTS 46 C. EFFECTIVENESS: ATTAINMENT OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND RESULTS 63 ACHIEVEMENT OF DIRECT OUTCOMES 63 LIKELIHOOD OF IMPACT 64 ACHIEVEMENT OF PROJECT OBJECTIVE AND GOAL 64 D. SUSTAINABILITY AND REPLICATION 65 SOCIO-POLITICAL SUSTAINABILITY 65 FINANCIAL RESOURCES 66 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK 67 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY 68 CATALYTIC ROLE AND REPLICATION 68 E. EFFICIENCY 69 F. FACTORS AFFECTING PROJECT PERFORMANCE 70 PREPARATION AND READINESS 70 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND MANAGEMENT 72 STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS 73 COUNTRY OWNERSHIP AND DRIVEN-NESS 73 FINANCIAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT 74 UNEP SUPERVISION AND BACKSTOPPING 76 MONITORING AND EVALUATION 77 G. COMPLEMENTARITY WITH OTHER UNEP STRATEGIES AND PROGRAMS 78 V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 78 A. CONCLUSIONS 78 B. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS 84 ANNEX A – TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE TERMINAL EVALUATION 91 PROJECT BACKGROUND 91 TERMS OF REFERENCE 99 ANNEX B – TASK MANAGER AND EXECUTING PROJECT OFFICERS 112 ANNEX C – INTERVIEWEES 114 ANNEX D – PARTNERS AND STAKEHOLDERS 119 ANNEX E – MTIASIC PROJECT “INITIAL” LOGFRAME (AS A REFERENCE ONLY) 122 ANNEX F – EVALUATION FRAMEWORK 131 ANNEX G – REVIEW OF OUTCOMES TOWARD IMPACTS METHODOLOGY 142 ANNEX H – MTIASIC FINAL/UPDATED PROJECT LOGFRAME 145 ANNEX I – MEMBERS OF PROJECT NATIONAL STEERING COMMITTEES 154 ANNEX J – INITIAL REGIONAL AND GLOBAL PROJECT PARTNERS 157 Page | iv ANNEX K – REFERENCES AND LITERATURE 160 ANNEX L – CONSULTANT RESUME 163 Page | v PROJECT IDENTIFICATION TABLE GEF project ID: 3183 UNEP IMIS number: GFL/-2328-2740-4995 Biodiversity Focal Area(s): Strategic Program 7: GEF OP #: Invasive Species UNEP’s Strategic Ecosystem Management GEF approval date: 16 July 2009 Priority/Objective: UNEP approval date: 14 September 2009 First Disbursement: 22 September 2009 Actual start date: 23 September 2009 Planned duration: 48 months Intended completion 22 September 2013 Actual completion date: 30 April 2014 date: Project Type: Full Size Project (FSP) GEF Allocation: US$ 3,034,027 PDF GEF cost: US$ 225,000 PDF co-financing: US$ 748,2221 US$ 3,379,367 Expected MSP/FSP Co- (US$1,894,183 cash + Total Cost: US$7,116,616 financing: US$1,485,184 in-kind) Mid-term review/eval. Terminal Evaluation Start August 15, 2011 14 March 2014 (planned date): Date: 1 September 2011 Mid-term review/eval. (completion