sign in sign up
<<
Home , Lithuania, United Nations

UNITED DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH (1992-2005)

2005 December

UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005) © DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME Gostauto str. 40A, LT-2001, Lithuania www.undp.lt

ISBN 9986-639-30-1

Mr. Arnoldas Puikis has done the layout, and cover. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Review of UNDP’s Partnership with Lithuania (1992-2005) was prepared by:

Mr. Michael Reynolds, International Independent Development Consultant.

The Preparion Phase for the Review was carried by:

BDA Lietuva and the Bradley Dunbar Group.

The Review has benefited from a contentful input by Ms. Cihan Sultanoglu, United Nations , UNDP and UNFPA Representative.

Contributions were provided by national counterparts and project partners.

UNDP Office team facilitated the Review preparation process.

Ms. Ruta Svarinskaite, Programme , was the focal point for the Review. UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acronyms and 6

Executive Summary 7

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE REVIEW 13 1.1 Overview of the UNDP Presence in Lithuania 14 1.2 Objectives and Scope 15 1.3 Methodology and Process 16

Chapter 2 national development context (1992-2005) 19 2.1 The Enabling Environment for Development 20 2.2 The of Human Development 21 2.3 The EU Accession Process 22

Chapter 3 undp’s STRATEGIC POSITIONING 25 3.1 The Evolution of the UNDP Country Programme 26 3.2 UNDP and the EU Accession Process 31 3.3 Development of Partnerships and Resource Mobilisation 33 3.4 Programming and Implementation Approaches 37 3.5 UNDP on the of Closing its Country Office 40

Chapter 4 UNDP’S CONTRIBUTION TO NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESULTS 43 4.1 Reduction 44 4.2 48 4.3 Environment 52 4.4 Cross Cutting Issues 57 4.5 Emerging Issues 61

Chapter 5 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 67

Chapter 6 LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS 73 6.1 Lessons Learned 73 6.2 Recommendations 74

 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

ANNEXES 1. Terms of Reference 77 2. Persons Interviewed 86 3. Documentation Reviewed 88 4. UNDP Programme Resources by Theme 89 5. UNDP Programme Resources (1993-2005) 90 6. Map of Lithuania 92 7. Lithuania Basic Indicators 93 8. Overview of Official (1992-2005) 94 9. Lithuania as an Emerging Donor 95 10. UNDP Projects (1992-2005) 96 11. UNDP Supported Reports (1992-2005) 99 12. UNDP Members (1992-2005) 102

LIST OF TABLES 1.1 UNDP Country Programmes in Lithuania (1993-2005) 14 2.1 Evolution of Lithuania’s HDI ranking (Human Development Reports 1995-2005) 23 3.1 Basic Resource Mobilisation Indicators 35 3.2 Resource Mobilisation (1993-2005) 35 3.3 Recognition of UNDP’s MDG Advertisements (percentage of total) 39 3.4 Some Key Results from the 2004 UNDP Partners 40 4.1 TI Perception of Index 49 4.2 Participation of Lithuania in Key Environmental Conventions 54 4.3 GEF SGP Projects by Theme 55

LIST OF BOXES 1.1 Triangulation 17 2.1 Membership of Major International Organizations (1991-2003) 22 3.1 UNDP Cooperation Frameworks 26 3.2 Examples of Inter-agency Partnerships 34 3.3 Key Partner – the Global Environmental Facility 35 3.4 Key Partner – The UNDP Baltic Trust Fund 35 3.5 Partnership with Microsoft 36 3.6 National Strategies, Programmes and Action Plans developed with UNDP Support 37 3.7 Millennium Development Goals 38 3.8 MDGs Awareness Campaign in 2003 39 4.1 Some of the Key Outputs of UNDP’s Support to Planning and Policy 44 4.2 Other GEF Interventions 53 4.3 Broad partnership in the SGP 55 4.4 Lithuanian Human Development Reports 57 4.5 Bridges without Barriers 62 4.6 The UN Global Compact 64

LIST OF CHARTS 3.1 Thematic Allocation CP-1 (1993-96) 27 3.2 Thematic Allocation CP-2 (1997-2000) 28 3.3 Thematic Allocation CP-3 (2001-2003) 30 3.4 Thematic Allocation CP-4 (2004-2005) 30

 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ACP , , Pacific NAPs/incl National Action Plan on Social Inclusion ADR Assessment of Development Results NPRS National Poverty Reduction Strategy BTF Baltic Trust Fund OA Official Aid BWI Bretton Woods institution ODA Official Development Assistance CBO Community Based Organisation OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation CCA Common Country Assessment and Development CCF Country Cooperation Framework OHCHR Office of the United Nations High CIDA Canadian International Development Agency Commissioner for CO Country Office OSCE Organization for Security and CP Programme Cooperation in CPD Country Programme Document POP Persistent Organic Pollutant CPI Corruption Perceptions Index PRSIP Lithuanian Poverty Reduction Strategy Implementation Programme EEA for 2002-2004 EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction RBEC Regional Bureau for Europe and and Development of Independent States EO Evaluation Office RBM Results-based Management EOO Equal Opportunities RC Resident Coordinator EU RR Resident Representative GCF Global Cooperation Framework RCF Regional Cooperation Framework GDP SGP Small Grants Programme GBV Based Violence SHD Sustainable Human Development GEF Global Environment Facility ToR Terms of Reference GLOC Government Contribution UNAIDS The Joint United Nations Programme to Local Office Costs on HIV/AIDS GNI UNCT United Nations Country team HDI UNDESA United Nations Department for Economic HDR Human Development Report and Social Affairs HRAP Human Rights Action Plan UNDP United Nations Development Programme HURIST Human Rights Strengthening UNEG United Nations Evaluation Group ICTD Information and Communication UNEP United Nations Environment Programme Technologies for Development UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific ILO International Labour Organisation and Cultural Organisation IT Information Technology UNFCCC United Nations Framework LEO on Equal Opportunities on Change LHDR Lithuanian Human Development Report UNFPA United Nations Population Fund LOGIN Local Government Information Network UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner MDG Millennium Development Goals for NATO North Atlantic Organisation UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund NEX National Execution UNODC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime NGO Non-Governmental Organisation UNTG UN Theme Group NHDR National Human Development Report WHO Health Organisation NISC NGO Information and Support Centre YFSL -friendly Services in Lithuania

 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

OVERVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA THE PARTNERSHIP 1992-2005 REVIEW

Since regaining in 1990 Lithuania The purpose of this review is to examine the has made remarkable progress in terms of both its experience of UNDP in Lithuania. Specifically, it has transformation to a democratic market economy and three objectives: (a) First, as a retrospective study, to its advancement towards greater human development. identify lessons learned to be used not only at national, External assistance to Lithuania’s transformation has at UNDP corporate levels but also in the frame of been limited but important, especially in the early years development cooperation (b) Second, a forward-looking of the transition process. In the run-up to European perspective in the sense that it establishes solid Union (EU) accession, it is not surprising that the EU reasoning for the discussions on the added-value for became by far the most important donor and most Lithuania of continued activities of UNDP beyond 2005 external assistance agencies closed their offices and (c) Finally, the review will also act as a record of UNDP’s ended their programmes in Lithuania. The United presence in Lithuania since opening an office in Vilnius Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has been in 1992. Regarding the scope of the review, it will cover supporting this process since 1992, but will close its the following: representative office at the end of 2005 coinciding with Lithuania’s transition from a recipient of aid to Strategic Positioning: An analysis of how UNDP has a donor in its own right and its membership of the positioned itself strategically to bring added value EU since 1 2004. From a UNDP perspective, the to the development process and respond effectively country has reached a high level of Human Development to national development needs and priorities as well with a ranking of 39 in the 2005 UNDP Human as to changes in the national development situation. Development Report. Problems remain, however, most notably the issues of rural poverty and inequality, Development Results: An overall assessment low and high rates of suicide. Other of the results achieved through UNDP support problems are still emerging, such as HIV/AIDS. and in partnership with other key development actors during 1992-2005 with specific in-depth Since 1992 UNDP has responded to Lithuania’s priority assessments within poverty, governance and needs with four country programmes as illustrated environment taking into account cross-cutting by the table below. Each of these has been financed issues such as and Information by a combination of core UNDP resources, third party and Communication Technologies for Development cost-sharing and a variety of trust fund mechanisms. (ICTD). Over the period being examined, UNDP has provided US$20 million in support of the Lithuanian development process.

 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

UNDP Country Programmes in Lithuania (1993-2005)* Country Priority Areas/ Programme Resources Programme Strategic lines of intervention (US$ mill.) CP I: - the development of and civil society 3.51 1993-1996 - public administration reform - the development of human resources for the market economy - the alleviation of the social impact of the transition CP II: - the promotion of sustainable livelihoods 7.96 1997-2000 - democratic governance and citizen participation - - environment protection - as well as on the advancement of women, the promotion of NGOs and the prevention of HIV/AIDS CP III: - the promotion of civil rights and 4.54 2001-2003 - the promotion of economic and social rights - the promotion of environmental rights - crosscutting themes of HIV/AIDS prevention, and the strengthening of civil society. CP IV: - Strengthening capacities for social inclusion 3.63 2004-2005 - Strengthening capacities for - Strengthening capacities as an emerging donor Total Programme Resources (1993-2005) 19.64

*Note: Resources include estimates for 2005 **Note: Approved resources from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) go beyond 2005. GEF allocation amounts to 1.64 US$ million for 2006-2008

Lessons Learned and Good Practices: The Review The country programmes (apart from the first) were will identify the key lessons from the thematic areas heavily skewed toward the environment largely of focus both for the period that Lithuania was because of the success in mobilising resources from considered a transitional economy and later as an EU the Global Environment Facility (GEF). This does not pre-accession country and a member of the EU. necessarily reflect UNDP’s comparative advantage in the country, the of most potential value-added or even where the national priorities lie. KEY FINDINGS AND Poverty was an important concern throughout BEST PRACTICES the period being examined and is an area where a relatively small proportion of resources were used. The main findings and conclusions are as follows: Poverty reduction, especially in the rural areas where poverty is most prevalent in Lithuania, is an (a) UNDP has been an important partner in the area of potential comparative advantage for UNDP. development process in the past 13 years. (c) There are a number of other factors that have been (b) While UNDP’s assistance has been broadly aligned behind UNDP’s successful contribution to Lithuania’s with national priorities and international commitments national development results: as well as the UNDP global mandate and corporate frameworks, there are a number of issues related to its The high quality of the staff (national and positioning: international) of the UNDP Country Office.

 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

UNDP administrative procedures are nonetheless considered to be relatively simple.

The neutrality of UNDP: it does not “play games” with the government and other stakeholders/ partners.

UNDP projects always designed with partners through a process of genuine partnership.

The fact that UNDP takes a holistic approach.

The ability to have a broad overview of the development situation above allows UNDP to identify gaps which it then is able to take to the government.

The role of UNDP is catalytic, engaging with the government on existing or emerging issues, helping develop national strategies and then opening the way for other supporters with larger programmes to take the process further and assist implementation.

UNDP has also pushed for cost-sharing to encourage/ illustrate greater commitment to the project and ensure effective use of resources.

Another key factor has been the effective utilisation of national expertise and appropriate balance between international and national expertise. area under a common theme and is already being emulated in other (, , (d) Best practices include: ) both in substance and methodology (the consultative approach to the preparation of the The preparation of the Lithuanian Republic Poverty Plan, its implementation by the ). Reduction Strategy Implementation Programme for 2002-2004 (PRSIP) using the format of the EU (e) Without UNDP, a number of areas would remain National Action Plans on Social Inclusion (NAPs/incl) underdeveloped or would have been addressed later on and specifically, the example of . in the development process, at a stage when addressing the issue would be far harder. This is largely due to The Disaggregated Millennium Development Goals UNDP’s ability to identify issues as they emerge or even (MDG) Report, not because of the report itself which before they do. Such interventions include: is well produced and well received as any UNDP report should be. Rather, it is because it represents The fundamental area of poverty reduction where a good example of using the MDG reporting process UNDP’s contribution to getting the issue on the to identify and address important gaps in the policy agenda, promoting a greater understanding knowledge and understating of the country in of the issue and developing the tools to address the MDG-related areas: In this case, there was limited issues was extremely important. disaggregated information. The best practice was to identify this gap and address it. In the area of HIV/AIDS, UNDP was instrumental in bringing together its international partners to The Human Rights Action Plan has been exemplary work with government on addressing the emerging in bringing the work being done in the governance problem at an early stage.

 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

The areas of ombudsman institutions and NGO development of national strategies and then support are the other ones that are most often implementing certain parts of them that UNDP mentioned in this respect. In addition, UNDP has thinks it has a comparative advantage. This provided other significant support to sustainable programmatic approach has meant that the themes institutional building in Lithuania as indicated in in the UNDP Country Programmes have been the main text. focussed within a national framework.

A second area where UNDP added value concerns the There has been little interest in using the MDGs flexibility of UNDP’s approach and the speed with as tools for development and their relevance as which it could respond to priority government needs. such has not been high in Lithuania. As a High There are numerous examples where, without UNDP’s Human Development Country the MDGs were largely support either as a catalyst to attract resources to new perceived as not so relevant by the government. issues or as a partner filling in gaps as they emerge, MDG-8 is seen as more useful especially in relation implementation of programmes and other interventions to Lithuania’s new role as a donor. would have been slower. Visibility seems to have increased over time (f) Resource mobilisation has been good in the context reflecting greater and more effective efforts in this of declining resources from traditional bilateral respect by the UNDP Country Office. partners. Mobilisation of the resources from EU pre- accession funds in the mid- was not necessarily (j) Lithuania has developed significant capacity in the opportunity for UNDP because of the EU’s prevailing last decade or more. There is clear recognition in the attitude that there existed sufficient national country among government, civil society and the donor capacities to implement the pre-accession instruments community that this expertise is of great potential which are by default designated at the national actors. use in other countries, specifically other former Soviet Resource mobilisation efforts have been successful in and of these, the neighbouring countries. the context of small aid flows from traditional suppliers of resources (i.e. certain bilateral donors). The GEF has (k) UNDP faces a number of remaining challenges, been the major source of cost-sharing resources and the first and most important one being the issue of a this had skewed the allocation of country programme programmatic presence in Lithuania and what it should resources heavily towards environmental issues in the look like. If a decision is taken by the Government last three country programmes. to support such continuity, the office will face a number of additional challenges that are already well (g) Partnership development has been good with civil understood by the Country Office staff including society and across government including at the local sources of funding and the nature of its organisation level. Working with the private sector has been limited and role in Lithuania. but has intensified during the last country programme. International partnerships have been good especially in (l) People interviewed across government and civil the context of declining representation and a small UN society will be sorry to see the UNDP Country Office Country Team. close its representative office but the vast majority recognise that this is the right course of action. (h) is an issue in terms of UNDP’s support Nonetheless UNDP will be missed by many. As one to specific organisations but one that UNDP has made government official summed up UNDP’s contribution: efforts to address in collaboration with these partner “The experience remains, the foundations have been organisations. built, and there are aspirations for greater progress.” From the interviews undertaken, it seems it is well (i) UNDP has adopted a programming approach that has known among government and civil society partners a number of key features: that UNDP will be closing its representative office at the end of 2005. Less clear are the viable options for a The issue of focus was raised in the 2000 Country new stage in terms of a continuing physical presence. Review, but needs careful examination. What In any case, UNDP will continue its partnership with there has been is an approach of supporting the

10 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Lithuania in the future, as a UN member state and a (c) It is important to get involved early in the process new donor. of pre-accession entering dialogue with government and the EU on the potential role of UNDP in the effective (m) UNDP has been exploring different options for its utilisation of EU funds for the country. future in Lithuania, in a situation without core funding or representation. The Government’s decision regarding (d) At the same time resource mobilisation ambitions its contribution to cover the costs of maintaining a need to be realistic in the context of declining bilateral programme presence in the country is critical in this resources as the accession process proceeds. respect. Three broad areas are being examined: (e) Once a member of the EU the Country Office will Mobilising of resources through the private sector. close and the country programme end. Preparation is essential and a decision on any future of UNDP in the Mobilising resources from Government sources and country needs to be made well in advance. other national partners, including through the EU. In most reviews of country programmes a set of Further supporting the development of Lithuania recommendations will be prepared to help support as a donor and facilitating the integration of future programming efforts in the country. Given into the international aid system, the nature of the situation in Lithuania and the especially, but not only, with respect to supporting forthcoming closure of the representative office, former Soviet republics and countries on the path to such a comprehensive set of recommendations is not EU accession. A trust fund option would be a useful appropriate. As already noted, Lithuania’s membership facility to help the Government while keeping a of the EU does not mean the end of UNDP’s partnership UNDP presence in Lithuania. with Lithuania but rather the start of a different partnership that is no longer based on a country (n) While EU membership doesn’t mean an end to programme. UNDP’s presence in a country, in the circumstances described above it is challenging to have programme (a) There is still a need for UNDP to engage with continuity. Rather a new form of engagement might be the new EU member states on the issue of human necessary to allow continued partnership between UNDP development. and Lithuania with a country presence. (b) The country programme review is a very good practice on the eve of closing a country programme. LESSONS The idea needs to be replicated after the methodology has been improved and adjusted to the specific LEARNED AND situation. RECOMMENDATIONS

The review has revealed some important lessons learned, defined here as learning from experience that is applicable to a generic situation rather than to a specific circumstance.

(a) The “partnership approach” really does work and can lead to better results.

(b) Once a country is committed to joining the EU and it is invited to do so, it starts on a clear path or reforms. It is possible to engage with the EU accession process through moving towards use of the various instruments some years before necessary.

11 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

CHAPTER 1 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

INTRODUCTION TO THE REVIEW

Since regaining independence in 1990 Lithuania has made remarkable progress in terms of both its transformation to a democratic market economy and its advancement towards greater human development. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has been supporting this process since 1992, but will close its representative office at the end of 2005 coinciding with Lithuania’s transition from a recipient of aid to a donor in its own right and its membership of the European Union (EU) since 1 May 2004. The closure of the UNDP Country Office (CO) is a mark of the success of Lithuania. Moreover, it is an unusual situation in a world where increasing levels of external assistance are being called for. It therefore represents a rare opportunity for examining the factors behind this success and the contribution UNDP has made to it over the past thirteen years. Through this process, lessons can be learned for other countries that are undertaking similar transformation process whether or not in the context of joining the EU.

In 2001 the Evaluation Office (EO) of UNDP launched a series of country evaluations in order to capture and demonstrate evaluative evidence of UNDP’s contributions to development results at the country level. Called Assessments of Development Results (ADR), they have been undertaken in selected countries with a focus on assessing UNDP’s added value and the difference its contributions make in addressing a partner country’s development challenges. This review of UNDP’s partnership with Lithuania between 1992 and 2005 (further referred to as the Review) is a modified version of an ADR, but uses the basic principles, approaches and methodologies. It will, however, cover a longer period than is usual in such exercises, examining the UNDP country programmes from the first until the present day.

13 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

the period being examined, UNDP has provided US$20 million1 in support of the Lithuanian development process. Further details of the country programmes, 1.1 their results and evolution are found in Chapters 3 and 4. A more detailed breakdown of the sources of finance can be found in Annex 5. OVERVIEW OF THE Agreement was reached with the government that UNDP PRESENCE IN the fourth country programme would be the last and that UNDP representation in Lithuania would close LITHUANIA at the end of 2005. At this stage core UNDP funds would no longer be available to finance activities in Since 1992 UNDP has responded to Lithuania’s priority the country. This does not necessarily mean the end needs with four country programmes as illustrated by of UNDP’s relationship with Lithuania but indicates a Table 1.1 below. Each of these has been financed by a change in this relationship consistent with Lithuania’s combination of core UNDP resources, third party cost- state of development and degree of integration in the sharing and a variety of trust fund mechanisms. Over

Table 1.1 UNDP Country Programmes in Lithuania (1993-2005)* Country Programme priority Areas/Strategic lines of intervention programme Resources (US$ million) CP I: 1993-1996 - the development of democracy and civil society 3.51 - public administration reform - the development of human resources for the market economy - the alleviation of the social impact of the transition CP II: 1997-2000 - the promotion of sustainable livelihoods 7.96 - democratic governance and citizen participation - human security - environment protection - cross-cutting themes of the advancement of women, the promotion of NGOs and the prevention of HIV/AIDS CP III: 2001-2003 - the promotion of civil rights and good governance 4.54 - the promotion of economic and social rights - the promotion of environmental rights - cross-cutting themes of HIV/AIDS prevention, gender mainstreaming and the strengthening of civil society. CP IV: 2004-2005** - strengthening capacities for social inclusion 3.63 - strengthening capacities for good governance - strengthening capacities for sustainable development - strengthening capacities as an emerging donor Total Programme Resources (1993-2005) 19.64

*Note: Resources include estimates for 2005 **Note: Approved resources from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) go beyond 2005. GEF allocation amounts to 1.64 US$ million for 2006-2008

1 It should be noted that the approved allocations go beyond 2005

14 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

global community. Issues related to Lithuania’s future To act as a record of UNDP’s presence in Lithuania partnership with UNDP are raised in later chapters. since opening an office in Vilnius in 1992.

The UNDP Resident Representative also serves as the Regarding the scope of the review, it will cover the UN Resident Coordinator and UNFPA Representative following: and UNDP operates as a member of the UN Country Team (UNCT) which, in the case of Lithuania, is (a) Strategic Positioning: An analysis of how UNDP relatively small. Apart from UNDP, none of the other has positioned itself strategically to bring added value members of the team has a representative office. The to the development process and respond effectively to United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural national development needs and priorities as well as to Organization (UNESCO) is represented by the - changes in the national development situation. Special General of the National Commission; the United Nations attention has been paid to: Children’s Fund (UNICEF) by the Director of its National Commission Office; the World Health Organization The entry points and strategy selected by UNDP (WHO) by its National Liaison Officer; and the United in support of the national development agenda, Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) by a especially within its areas of focus, with special National Liaison Officer. The Bretton Woods Institutions attention paid to the overarching elements of (BWIs) are also part of the UNCT: The is poverty reduction and practical implementation of represented by the Country Manager for Lithuania; the human rights agenda. and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) closed its office (with a shared Resident Representative between The key current strategies: developing national Lithuania and ) in December 2004. Inter- capacities of Lithuania as an emerging donor, agency collaboration is further examined in Chapter 3. engaging the private sector, assisting local partners to access the resources available under various EU related mechanisms, including the EU/European Economic Area (EEA) financing mechanisms.

The nature and level of cooperation with different development partners. 1.2 (b) Development Results: An overall assessment of the results achieved through UNDP support and in partnership with other key development actors during OBJECTIVES 1992-2005 with specific in-depth assessments within poverty, governance and environment taking into AND SCOPE account cross-cutting issues such as gender equality and Information and Communication Technologies The main purpose of this review is to examine the for Development (ICTD). The analysis focuses on how experience of UNDP in Lithuania. Specifically it has the results were achieved, identifies the factors that three objectives: accounted for success or failure and draw lessons, with particular attention to examining: To undertake a retrospective study, drawing lessons learned to be used not only at national How UNDP support was used to leverage the legal and UNDP corporate levels but also in the frame reform process in the area of governance. of development cooperation. The study will also assess, to the extent possible, UNDP’s role vis-a`-vis How effective UNDP support was in assisting Lithuania’s European Union (EU) accession process. vulnerable groups at risk of poverty; and providing advisory support in preparing strategic poverty To include a forward-looking perspective regarding programming and reporting documents. the continuing partnership between UNDP and Lithuania beyond 2005.

15 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

The contribution of UNDP support to meeting the requirements of United Nations (UN) conventions in the area of environment. 1.3 How effective UNDP was in accompanying Lithuania’s EU integration processes and addressing development areas not covered by EU pre-accession METHODOLOGY policies. AND PROCESS The effectiveness of UNDP support to policy advice and dialogue, national and The Review of UNDP’s Partnership with Lithuania engaging partners in delivering development results. consists of a three-stage process:

How effective UNDP was in engaging the private (a) Preparation Phase: Preparatory work was carried sector in the development process. out in advance to provide substantive background for the second phase and was conducted by a local (c) Lessons Learned and Good Practices: The review research company. It included a preliminary desk will identify the key lessons from the thematic areas of review, programme mapping, development of Terms of focus both for the period that Lithuania was considered Reference (ToR), preparation of standardised questions a transitional economy, and later as an EU pre- for different stakeholders, interviews of stakeholders, accession country and EU member state. These lessons the information retrieved from the interviews will be useful in the context of possible future EU systematised and reported, and the programme for the accession/candidate countries or transitional economies mission of international expert prepared. in the . Through in-depth thematic assessment, the review aims to identify good practices for learning (b) Conducting the Country Programme Review: the and replication and draw lessons from intended and mission of the international evaluation specialist unintended results where possible. Based on the including methodology briefing, meetings with key analysis of key achievements and overall findings, it stakeholders and UNDP Country Office, field visits and draws key lessons to be used at national level as well finalisation of the Review. as in the regional context, and provides clear and forward-looking recommendations regarding UNDP’s (c) Use of the Country Programme Review: positioning and the added value for Lithuania of UNDP’s presentation for discussions of the Review at an programmatic presence in the country beyond 2005 in international conference on the occasion of the closing specific areas. of UNDP’s Country Office (CO) in Lithuania and during other learning events, sharing it with national and international stakeholders and wide dissemination.

The assessment employed a variety of methodologies including desk reviews, stakeholder meetings, client surveys, and selected site visits. The International Evaluation Specialist reviewed national policy documents including national strategies and action plans, Lithuanian Human Development Reports, Common Country Assessment (CCA), and Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Reports which give an overall picture of the country context. The Specialist also considered thematic studies/papers, selected project documents, reports from monitoring and evaluation at the country level, as well as available documentation and studies from other development partners. The Country Review

16 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

undertaken in 2000 was especially useful in this (according to the concept of ‘triangulation’ which is respect. All documents reviewed are listed in Annex 3. illustrated in Box 1.1 below).

A wide stakeholder consultation and involvement was This Review is divided into five further sections: undertaken. The evaluators, local and international, met with Government Ministries/institutions at central Chapter 2: National Development Context (1992- and province level, research institutions, civil society 2005). Sets out the development context in organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) Lithuania and in so doing establishes the platform and private sector representatives, bilateral donors, and for analysis in the two chapters. beneficiaries. The International Evaluation Specialist visited field/project sites selected in consultation with Chapter 3: UNDP’s Strategic Positioning. This section the UNDP CO and national stakeholders. All persons met examines how UNDP has positioned itself within the are listed in Annex 2. The review has also incorporated context described above. some of the key methodologies and principles of the ADR, including the following: Chapter 4: Contribution to National Development Results. Examines UNDP’s contribution focussing on (a) In assessing results at the country programme level, Poverty, Governance and the Environment. the review will largely follow a “top-down” approach. This involves looking at the overall achievements Chapter 5: Findings and Best Practices. Sets out the in the country, within a sector or thematic area, major findings and conclusions from the review as and then attempting to explain which parts of the well as best practices national successes and failures are linked to the efforts of a particular donor. This approach is basically Chapter 6: Lessons Learned and Recommendations. “subtractive”; starting from the top and “drilling down” Identifies lessons learned that could be useful for results to the donor level, but not to a detailed project other UNDP offices, UNDP at the corporate level or level. indeed aid policy in general. Similarly, best practices that could be replicated elsewhere are identified. (b) The empirical evidence, on which the Review will be Finally recommendations for UNDP are made. based, will be gathered through three major sources of information: perception, validation and documentation

Box 1.1 - Interviews with stakeholders Triangulation (project and government staff, donors, CO beneficiaries, public, NGOs, etc.) - Surveys, polls, questionnaires - Statistical analysis of national - Basic documentation data and indicators Perception (programming documents) - Field visits, direct observation - Monitoring and evaluation - In-depth thematic studies reports, progress reports - Opinion polls - Documentation on perceived success in reports, news, media - Stakeholder meetings, focus group interviews - Programme maps/analysis - Qualitative assessment of trends - Existing documentation using secondary data sources from external resources

Validation Documentation

17 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT (1992-2005)

Situated on the Eastern shore of the Baltic , Lithuania is the southernmost and largest of the three Baltic countries and shares with Belarus, , and . It has a predominantly urban population of 3.435 million (2004) of which over 80 percent is of Lithuanian origin. In 2003, the per capita income (PPP) was estimated at approximately US$11,700 and Lithuania is firmly established in the group of countries with a high Human Development Index (HDI) being ranked 39 in the 2005 Human Development Report (HDR) of UNDP.

a forced and radical transformation of its economy and its complete into the Soviet centrally - planned command system. The country’s movement towards economic and political independence gained momentum during late 1980s and on 11 1990 Lithuania declared the re-establishment of its independence. This was internationally recognized in -September 1990 and in 1991 Lithuania joined the United Nations. Some 14 years later, less than ten years after formally applying, Lithuania became a full member of the EU and, also in 2004, a member of the Organisation (NATO).

19 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) by 2003 Lithuania had only reached 84% of its 2.1 1989 level of real GDP. As a result of these reforms, the Government’s role in the economy is now modest. Total government CREATING THE expenditure accounts for 34 percent of GDP, the smallest among the new EU member countries (where ENABLING government, on average, accounts for 41 percent of GDP), and well below the average for other countries ENVIRONMENT FOR of the EU which stands at 46 percent. While the privatization agenda is nearly completed (aside from HUMAN DEVELOPMENT some energy and transportation enterprises) the business environment has improved: the World Bank On the eve of regaining independence Lithuania was reports that Lithuania is ranked 15 in the world for ease integrated into the Council for Mutual Economic of doing business2, a remarkable achievement given the Assistance, with exports highly concentrated in transformation this has required. a few products (machine tools, dairy products). Reorienting trade to the West, restructuring productive Agriculture’s contribution to GDP declined from assets, privatization, and price adjustments were 27.6 percent in 1990 to 7 percent in 2001. Land all huge tasks. On the positive side, the population privatization and restitution were implemented was highly educated and per capita incomes were rapidly, but the result was a large number of small- among the highest in the , estimated scale landholders with nonviable holdings. There is an at US$2,710. There was widespread support for ineffective land market so that consolidation is blocked economic reforms and, with its largely homogeneous contributing to high levels of rural poverty. Labour population, Lithuania was not subjected to the kinds of adjustment has lagged the sectoral declines in output, demographic stresses found in other countries. Closely and the agricultural sector still employs 18.7 percent balanced political parties have, however, resulted in of the labour force (28 percent if agro-processing is thirteen governments since 1990 due to shifts in voter included). Both labour and land productivity are low preferences. not only by EU standards, but also in comparison to the other new EU member states. The causes of this are In 1991-1992 Lithuania started implementing a small farm size, pervasive uncertainty about support comprehensive and far-reaching economic reform programs, and low levels of capital investment and program within an adverse macroeconomic environment complementary recurrent expenditures. (declining output, deteriorating terms of trade and high rates of inflation). At the same time, Lithuania took The country has made remarkable progress in significant steps in developing democratic institutions, developing democratic institutions and establishing establishing the rule of law and reforming the structure the rule of law. The reform of the judiciary has been at and administration of inherited social programs. During the centre of these developments. The establishment the first five years of the decade the focus was on of a four-tier system of courts of general competence stabilization and trade reform, and a start was made contributed to building a more elaborate and on privatization and restructuring. competent structure for the defence of human rights after 1994 has been, on the whole, satisfactory, and rightful interests. Lithuania is the only one of the although marred by two episodes. A banking crisis in new EU member states that has fully established the 1995/96 and the Russia crisis of 1998 when exports institutional structures dealing with equal opportunity lost competitiveness due to the depreciation of the issues. The country has steadily accumulated knowledge Russian and the strength of the US dollar to in preparing policy strategies and action plans on which the national currency, the litas, was fixed. GDP priority issues such as human rights (National Human fell by 3.9 percent in 1999. While recent economic 2 growth has been impressive (growing at 6.8 and 10.5 World Bank (2005) “Doing Business in 2006” percent in 2002 and 2003 respectively), according to

20 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Rights Action Plan adopted in 2002) and representation of women is obvious on all the levels of poverty reduction, which created the foundation governance, from Parliament to municipal councils. for the strategic papers on social inclusion required by the EU. Significant strategic documents have The environment has seen substantial progress, but been prepared in the area of and have much remains to be done. GDP per of energy stimulated the development of prevention, use (PPP$ per kg oil equivalent) has increased by primary health care, preventative medicine and high 35 percent from 1990 to 1999 while CO2 emissions quality preparation of health professionals. Lithuania have fallen by more than 25 percent during this has also showed notable success in developing HIV/ period. Some environmental standards are now more AIDS prevention and control measures, especially in restrictive than in the EU, including provisions on comparison with the other . evaluating the impact of planned industrial activities on the environment, recycling of waste, and defining According to the Transparency International corruption dangerous manufacturing objects. supply issues perception index (CPI) in 2005, Lithuania with score at the municipal level are being addressed through of 4.8 out of 10, occupies 44th place among 159 investment. countries. Since the Lithuanian CPI is still lower than the average 5, it cannot formally be recognized as a country where corruption is sufficiently contained. According to the Map of 2004, the highest corruption prevalence is witnessed in the public sector institutions. Local , traffic , tax administration, customs, hospitals and primary health care centers are mentioned as being among the most corrupt. 2.2 With regards to women’s share in the democratic governance process, Lithuania has made much progress THE INTERNATIONAL since independence. In 1992 the share of Parliamentary seats held by women was only 9%, but by 2004 ENVIRONMENT it had increased to 22%. Nonetheless, the under- Lithuania’s EU accession process started in 1995 with the Europe Agreement which established a formal association between the European Community and Lithuania. In 1997 the undertook an analysis of Lithuania’s ability to join the EU. This Agenda 2000 report stated that Lithuania demonstrated characteristics of a democracy with stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities. Political criteria were not considered to pose a significant problem and citizens’ were in order. However, economic criteria were noted as problematic, particularly difficulties associated with market forces and competition within the EU. Agriculture and the banking sectors needed modernising. Substantial efforts also were needed in the Environment and Energy sector to strengthen administrative capacities and enforce compliance with EU standards. Other problem areas included reform of administrative and legal capacities.

21 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Box 2.1 Membership of Major International Organizations (1991-2003)

Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) 10 September 1991 United Nations Organization (UN) 17 September 1991 North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) 20 December 1991 European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) 30 January 1992 Council of the States March 1992 International Monetary Fund (IMF) 29 1992 Int’l Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank) 6 July 1992 International Financial Corporation (IFC) 1993 (COE) 14 May 1993 Partnership for Programme (PFP) 27 January 1994 Baltic Council of Ministers 13 1994 (WTO) 31 May 2001

By 2000 the EU accession work covered a range of total assistance, reaching 90% of it in 2003 and 2004 priorities including efforts to improve the judiciary as bilateral donors began to close their programmes and the administrative capacity of civil servants, and in advance of EU accession. The aid regime has never to pay further attention to regional policy. The pre- been very resource intensive with Official Aid3 (OA) as accession period involved not only coordination of a percentage of Gross National Income (GNI) reaching Lithuanian legislation with that of the EU but also the 2.45% in 1995, but for most years that aid has been reorganization of the system of administration and received the figure has been considerably lower. Annex changes in many spheres of political and economical 10 sets out the development assistance flows to life. It has been realized that reorganization required Lithuania 1991-2004. huge administrative and financial means. However, all the required adoptions were made in the relatively short time span. In 2002 Lithuania successfully completed and was invited to join the NATO and the EU. Significant political and economic changes contributed to this political achievement. A growth rate of 6.7 per cent was reached, the currency was successfully re-pegged to the , and unemployment 2.3 declined to around 10 per cent. Lithuania officially joined NATO on the 2 April 2004 and the EU on 1 May the same year. Box 2.1 sets out Lithuania’s membership PROGRESS TOWARDS of major international organisations since 1991. HUMAN flows began after Lithuania regained independence and a large number of bilateral donors and multilateral As already noted, Lithuania is a high human organisations began programmes in the country. The EU development country and has been in this category has been by far the most important donor, especially since the 2001 HDR. The country has made steady since 2001 when it began to provide more than half progress since measurement of the index began for Lithuania in 1995, moving from a low position of 81 3 The term Official Aid is used by the OECD Development in the 1996 HDR to a rank of 39 in the 2005 report. Assistance Committee (DAC) rather than the usual term Official Strong economic growth has played a major role in this Development Assistance (ODA) as Lithuania is on Part II of the DAC List of Recipients. progression.

22 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Table 2.1 Evolution of Lithuania’s HDI ranking (Human Development Reports 1995-2005)

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 71 81 76 79 62 52 47 49 45 41 39

Education is virtually universal, with 99.7 percent of all (more than 40 people per 100,000) and has grown pupils continuing beyond basic (defined as significantly between 1991 and 2001.4 10 years). Expenditures are, however, inefficient. The student/teacher ratio was only 11.3 in 1997, well below Despite strong GDP growth, unemployment is high, the OECD average of 17.1. The school age population estimated at 13.8 percent of the labour force in has been shrinking and is projected to shrink by 1.5-2.0 2002, and currently at 11.45 percent, an increase percent per year for some time. There is also an urban from the very low (though likely underreported) bias, as fewer rural students continue beyond primary rates of about 1 percent at the beginning of school than students in urban areas. the transition. Poverty reduction needs to be a continuing priority. Poverty rates were measured at In the Health Sector, despite improvements, Lithuania 1 percent under the US$1 per day criteria in 1995, is still behind EU countries, with but, more relevantly, at about 3.3 percent for the substantially higher and life expectancy lower (related more widely accepted cut-off level of US$2.15 PPP in part to alcohol and tobacco usage, but also to the per day in 2000 (equivalent to a minimum standard higher incidence of and other diseases). of living as calculated by the Government). Using Lithuania introduced substantial reforms in the US$4.30 PPP per day measure (a minimum 1994/95, well ahead of many of its neighbours and standard of living as calculated for OECD countries) highly regarded at the time, although further reforms the figure was 25.5 percent in 2000. Households are warranted. Overall expenditures headed by women and those with education of are relatively low, however, at 15.2% of GDP in 2001 less than secondary school level have the highest versus 27% average for EU members. Life expectancy concentrations of poverty. 16,1% lived below is low (66.3 for men and 77.5 form women in 2002). relative poverty line (50% of averange consumption The suicide indicator is one of the highest in the world expenditures) in 2004 according to Household Budget Surveys. Rural poverty rates are much higher than urban poverty rates.

4 EU (2005) Report on Social Inclusion in the 10 New Member States 5 Data from Labour Force Survey in 2004, IV quarter

23 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

CHAPTER 3 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

UNDP’S STRATEGIC POSITIONING

This chapter examines UNDP’s strategic positioning in Lithuania within the national development context set out in the previous chapter. It ascertains the strategic focus of UNDP support and its relevance to national development priorities, including relevance and linkages with UNDP’s overarching goal of reducing poverty and achieving the MDGs. The aim is to identify the added value of UNDP support in effectively contributing to, and influencing, national development through strategic priority setting and intervening at optimal entry points.

It assesses how UNDP has anticipated and responded to significant changes in the national development context within the core areas of focus (poverty, governance and the environment). In this regard, the Review considers key events at national and political level that influenced and affected the development environment; the risk management of UNDP; any missed opportunities for UNDP involvement and contribution; its efforts at advocacy and policy advice, and; UNDP’s responsiveness. The Review attempts to bring out the choices made by UNDP in response to government reforms and explain the rationale behind these choices.

It also reviews the synergies and alignment of UNDP support with other initiatives and partners, including the Global Cooperation Framework (GCF) and the Regional Cooperation Framework (RCF). This includes examining how UNDP has leveraged its resources and that of others towards the achievement of results, the balance between upstream and downstream initiatives and the work on MDGs.

25 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Finally, the Review considers the influence of systemic issues: policy and administrative constraints affecting the programme, on both the donor and programme country sides, as well as how the development results achieved and the partnerships established have contributed to ensure the relevant and strategic positioning of UNDP support.

3.1 THE EVOLUTION OF THE UNDP PROGRAMME

The First Country Programme (1993-1996)

The UNDP Lithuania CO opened in the capital Vilnius preliminary programme priorities and objectives were in 1992 with the arrival of the first Resident agreed in late 1993 which then led to the development Representative. He initiated discussions with the of the first UNDP Country Programme (CP) for Lithuania. government, through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The content of the programme reflected the main aims on a broad range of technical co-operations options of the national transitional policy agenda and focused available within the UN support system. A set of support at four key areas of intervention:

Democratisation and civil society with a particular Box 3.1 focus on institutional building. UNDP Cooperation Frameworks Two Global Cooperation Frameworks (GCF) have been Public administration reform with special emphasis prepared: on capacity building for improved public sector - GCF I (1997-2000) efficiency. - GCF II (2001-2003 - extended to December 2004)

Two Regional Cooperation Framework (RCF) were also Human resource development for the market prepared for the Regional Bureau for Europe and the CIS economy with training for better economic (RBEC): management as a priority. - RCF I (1997-1999 - extended to 2001) - RCF II (2002-2005) Alleviation of the social impact of transition with primary attention on policy formulation and By promoting regional programmes to sustain human monitoring of indicators. development in the region, the RCF acts as a bridge between the global cooperation framework and the country programmes of the region. Work on these four areas of UNDP development support continued throughout the first Country Programme period from 1994 to 1996 supporting over 20 projects

26 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

(often during the critical start-up phase) worth more beneficial and add value in supporting the government’s than $3 million. national programme. Occasionally during the first Country Programme provide temporary direct support From Chart 3.1 it is clear that the vast majority of the was required by UNDP but in general NEX has continued resources were allocated to governance issues with to be the standard modality for UNDP assistance in poverty and cross-cutting issues being allocated similar Lithuania. smaller shares of the total. From the very beginning UNDP supported institution building and formed The Second Country Programme (1997-2000) partnerships with national and international entities to help establish democratic organisations. Many A second programming period extended the activities organizations such as the Public Servants Language of the initial Country Programme throughout the first Centre, the Public Administration Training Centre, Country Co-operation Framework (CCF) for Lithuania. the Lithuanian Innovation Centre, the International This first CCF provided assistance during the 1997 Business School, the Human Rights Centre, the NGO to 1999 period supporting over US$8m of projects Information and Support Centre, the Judicial Training which included important financial contributions and Centre, and the Women’s Issues Information Centre knowledge-based partnerships. were established during that period with UNDP support. Environmental issues did not feature at this stage and Lithuania’s first CCF further developed the initial no resources were allocated for this theme. Country Programme activities and in consultation with government remodelled them into four new programme UNDP was able to establish itself as a useful areas covering: development partner for the new government during the early years of transition due to its ability to Promotion of sustainable livelihoods. provide upstream policy-based and downstream project- related support on a wide range of activities. It was Democratic governance and citizen participation. particularly useful because it had the capacity to play a constructive and politically neutral role concerning Human security. sensitive topics. It had the ability to mobilize and leverage resources in many different forms and its Environmental protection. decentralised budget and operational arrangements allowed it to respond rapidly and flexibly to changing In addition, the first CCF also introduced and stressed circumstances. the importance of cross-cutting themes relating to:

UNDP interventions adopted the national execution Advancement of women. (NEX) modality which was seen to be strategically Promotion of NGOs.

Chart 3.1 Prevention of HIV/AIDS. Thematic Allocation CP-1 (1993-1996) Like the first GCF (1997-2001), the first Lithuania CCF was based within the Sustainable Human Development (SHD) paradigm. The RCF also focussed on the same themes: governance (creating an enabling environment Cross-cutting for SHD), poverty, gender and the environment Poverty (although the language used to describe the themes is Governance slightly different). Environment From Chart 3.2 it is clear that the environment had become the most important theme in terms of financial resource allocation, accounting for more than half of total resources during the programme

27 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Human Development Report started to be published as an aid to help the general public, academia and decision-makers to focus on specific development issues facing the country. To supplement these efforts, and to develop capacities in the concepts of human period with virtually all of it from non-core resources. development, UNDP initiated Human Development Approximately one quarter of resources went to courses in three universities in different parts of the Governance down from about 82% in the previous country, together with an accompanying textbook. programme. In absolute terms, however, resources for governance fell only by about one third since Socio-economic difficulties linked to the economic the second CP was more than twice the size of crisis of the late 1990’s were compounded by changes the first. UNDP continued to work on institution in the levels and type of development assistance from building, and public organizations such as the Crime bilateral sources. More European countries were now Prevention Centre, Information Centre for Sustainable directing their aid through the EU mechanisms, USAID Development, and a network of Citizen Advice was preparing to close its operations and the Open Bureaux came into being at this time. Moreover, it Society Fund Lithuania shifted its priorities from grant was during this period that the national Lithuanian funding of projects to advising on policy. Changing international priorities and the view that national NGOs should by now be able to support themselves were Chart 3.2 quoted as reasons for the reductions in development aid Thematic Allocation CP-2 from bilateral donors. (1997-2000) The UNDP Resident Representative considered the rationale to reduce aid to Lithuania’s NGOs “a serious and unfortunate misinterpretation and Poverty misunderstanding of the situation since the prevailing Governance legal climate for “Charities and Volunteerism” stands Environment in the way of developing an as-yet-limited Cross-cutting of volunteerism and ”. At the same time, severe budgetary constraints more than halved the contributions which the government made to civil society organisations in 1999, just at a time when these groups were still considered by UNDP to be most

28 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

in need of extra resources to deal with a worsening Promotion of civil rights and good governance. socio-economic situation. Promotion of economic and social rights. It was within this socio-economic climate that UNDP carried out a country review (April 2000) to assess the Promotion of environmental rights. previous development work and formulate policies for the second CCF. Policy and project related findings from Work also continued on the cross cutting themes the assessment are included in later sections of this of HIV/AIDS prevention, gender mainstreaming and Review, but in summary the country review identified strengthening of civil society. a number of lessons learned during the support period and endorsed main programme areas stressing Progress achieved in these thematic areas is their continued relevance. Recommendations in the highlighted later in the report within detailed reviews report included: of UNDP activities in the fields of governance, poverty and environment. One key piece of work worth noting Place priority on consolidating the capacity building covering all three themes was the Common Country efforts and encourage the conversion of research on Assessment (CCA) which was completed early in policy formation into results based follow-up action. the second CCF period. The preparation of the first Lithuanian CCA was considered a pivotal event in 2001 Strengthen activities outside the capital, in the context of the wider UN Country Team’s (UNCT) particularly working with and through NGOs. progress towards an integral evaluation of Lithuania’s progress against international development goals Explore possibilities for further co-operation and during the decade of transition following independence. cost-recovery from United Nations specialized agencies, funds and programmes.

Ensure that clusters of projects which are closely linked are designed programmatically.

Restructure staff roles and responsibilities to strengthen team capacity.

These recommendations were taken into consideration during the design of the third country programme (second CCF) which built on the original set of development priorities and added a new emphasis on human rights, linking sustainable human development with the protection and promotion of human rights, and supporting and creating relevant institutions such the Human Rights Centre and the Ombudsman for Equal Opportunities.

The Third Country Programme (2001-2003)

The second CCF was one of the very first in the UNDP which adopted a rights-based approach to development. It was also the first one that looked at UNDP’s interventions in Lithuania within the framework of Lithuania’s status as a candidate country for the EU.

The CCF ran from 2001 to 2003 and focused on three inter-linked priority areas:

29 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

percent. National action plans for poverty reduction Chart 3.3 and the promotion of human rights were approved and Thematic Allocation CP-3 programmes against corruption, trafficking in women (2001-2003) and drug abuse were established. A strategic plan for the development of an information society was also launched.

Poverty The Fourth Country Programme (2004-2005) Governance Environment By the end of the second CCF Lithuania ranked 45th in Cross-cutting the UNDP 2003 Human Development Report, placing in the high human development category. These development gains led to a realignment of UNDP activities during 2004 with the new status of Lithuania as a member of the EU resulting in a shorter two-year Country Programme Document (CPD) running from The CCA included contributions from the IMF and the 2004 to 2005, replacing the previous CCF approach to World Bank and its completion marked an important development support. step towards the implementation of UN reforms at the country level. Following the established practice, the new Country Programme was designed in consultation with Chart 3.3 hows that, as in the previous CP, environment government, civil society and other partners, including accounted for approximately half of total resources donors. It has a two-pronged approach in recognition disbursed during the programme period. of Lithuania’s new status as an EU member. These dual objectives are to: Analysis was provided in relation to internationally agreed goals set by UN Global Conference Action Plans Assist the government in closing the gaps and or Programmes. Trends were identified against relevant refining the EU integration process in areas in which indicators and priority areas were suggested including: UNDP has comparative advantages

Fight against corruption and continued reform of Help strengthen Lithuania’s role as a donor of judiciary. development assistance.

Prioritisation of regional development with a focus on a partnership approach.

Strengthening the capacity of local government Chart 3.4 through civil servant training and improved municipal finances. Thematic Allocation CP-4 (2004-2005) UNDP provided support to help public, private and voluntary sector organisations tackle these topics during the second CCF period which saw the country pull out of recession and make significant social, Cross-cutting economic and political gains. Governance Environment Lithuania successfully completed negotiations and was Poverty invited to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the European Union. A growth rate of 10.5 percent was reached in 2003, the currency was re-pegged to the Euro and unemployment declined to around 10

30 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Chart 3.4 shows again the importance of the environment in resources allocated but also a large increase in governance at the expense of poverty.

To fulfil the first objective, the Country Programme is helping the government focus on the Euro-integration agenda via strengthening national capacities in social inclusion, good governance and sustainable development. On-going project and policy activities in these fields are highlighted in the following thematic sections of this report. To fulfil the second objective UNDP is assisting Lithuania, as a European Union member and an emerging donor, to become an active contributor to international development cooperation.

Lithuania is already contributing to UNDP’s regional activities and participating in the “Wider Europe” initiative of the European Union. The Lithuanian foreign policy principle of “good neighbourly relations” has resulted in an increasing number of requests from Eastern European and Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) countries for sharing the experience of successful transition, demonstrated by one of the highest GDP growth rates in Europe. Progress towards its development cooperation outcomes are described the next chapter as well as UNDP’s contribution to them. It should be noted, however, that the decision to support Lithuania as an emerging donor was an important strategic one that changed the direction of the CP, reflecting the rapidly changing context in which it would be implemented.

The following examines how the issue of EU accession has evolved through the four country programmes:

CP I (1993-1996): At the stage of programme formulation the accession process had not begun and Lithuania’s aspiration in respect of joining the 3.2 EU was unclear. CP II (1997-2000): Although the programme document refers to the importance of the accession UNDP AND THE EU process and Lithuania’s aspirations to join the EU it is not built on in a strategic manner. The document ACCESSION PROCESS states: “The principle goal for UNDP assistance to Lithuania during the next cycle will be promoting As already noted, Lithuania’s application to join the SHD and building capacity” No further mention is EU was made in 1995. In 1999 the official invitation made of the accession process or the possibility of was made and a new stage in the accession process positioning UNDP’s county programme to support it. started. The question is: was UNDP support for EU The programme was originally to be implemented accession strategic and, if so, did the strategy work? between 1997-1999 but was extended by one

31 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

CP IV (2004-2005): The country programme document is inevitably far more explicit in its relationship with the EU accession process since from 1 May 2004 Lithuania became a full member of the Union. As noted earlier, UNDP’s overall strategy involves (a) closing the gaps and refining the integration process in areas where UNDP has a comparative advantage, and (b) helping Lithuania in its role as an emerging donor (also part of the responsibilities taken on by Lithuania as an EU member).

It is also inevitable that most, if not all, of the interventions UNDP supported in Lithuania were also contributing to the accession process. This may reflect the shared values of the UN and the EU. It also reflects the degree of cooperation between UNDP and its national and international partners, as well as the degree of national ownership of the UNDP programmes, whereby these programmes helped supporting the overarching national priority of EU accession. So even if it may not have been explicit in the first two CPs, UNDP’s interventions have largely been in line with the accession process and supportive of it.

There are cases where UNDP may have accelerated the year to include 2000. The UNDP Executive Board process or at least facilitated governments efforts to note requesting the extension does not mention comply with EU accession requirements, for example, the accession process and notes that “national interventions in the areas of gender, human rights and development priorities have not changed”. It also anti-corruption. There are also cases where UNDP has notes that “The continued relevance of the CCF directly supported the early development of EU-type has been confirmed through consultations with strategies. The best example of this is the preparation the Government and other development partners” of the Lithuanian Republic Poverty Reduction Strategy possibly indicating that they too may not have Implementation Programme for 2002-2004 (PRSIP) recognised a greater role or niche for UNDP in the which was designed using the National Action Plans on accession process or the need for UNDP to be more Social Inclusion (NAPs/incl) of existing member states. strategic in this respect. This meant that when Lithuania had to prepare its own NAP the process was quite familiar (UNDP’s contribution CP III (2001-2003): The situation changed to the PRSIP is described in the next chapter). significantly in the third country programme where linkages between the UNDP programme and the A key part of UNDP’s strategy has been to provide EU accession process are explicitly made. “In the capacity building support to the government, local light of the invitation in December 1999 to the municipalities and NGOs to absorb EU funds, both the to start negotiations for pre-accession funds and the new funding modalities accession to the European Union (EU), an important that Lithuania will be able to access as a member state. consideration for the programming of UNDP For example, UNDP work in strengthening municipal assistance is the need to provide support inter alia, capacities aims to facilitate access of local partners to in those areas which would help Lithuania to comply larger funds under various EU and related mechanisms. with EU accession requirements”.

32 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

joint projects/programmes. The RC arrangements are still much appreciated by resident members of the UNCT. The RC also makes a considerable and conscious effort 3.3 to reach out to those United Nations entities that are not present in the country, particularly the and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO), DEVELOPMENT OF the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the International Labour Organization (ILO), the Office of PARTNERSHIPS the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). AND RESOURCE Except for UNDP and UNHCR, each United Nations entity MOBILISATION is in separate premises. The United Nations in Lithuania web site (www.un.lt) is funded through the Resident The Development of Partnerships Coordinator System and managed by UNDP using written contributions from the above-mentioned United Nations UNDP has successfully developed a variety of agencies. The web site also includes entities without partnerships across a broad range of development their own in-country representation. partners. The main partnerships since the start of UNDP’s programmes in Lithuania have been with the UNDP is the only United Nations entity with a multi- central government, it ministries and agencies. This year cooperation framework in Lithuania. The issues of has extended to the Office of the President. At the harmonized programming periods and the preparation central level, UNDP has also been an important part of of a United Nations Development Assistance Framework the in Lithuania, working with (UNDAF), therefore, do not arise. A Common Country its members in undertaking development activities but Assessment (CCA) was initiated in 2000 and finally also, when appropriate, in lobbying the government produced as a joint CCA/MDG Report for Lithuania in for important policy reforms and action (for example 2002. It has served as the focus for the formulation the lead role taken by UNDP in bringing together major of projects/programmes in the last two country donors with regard to the expanding HIV/AIDS issue programmes. It is also of use to the other United in 2002). Partnerships with a broad range of civil Nations entities active in the country for similar society organisations have been developed including purposes. development NGOs, media and academia. There has been some development of partnerships at the local level, specifically in selected municipalities. Partnership with the private sector has been more limited and is something that has really only developed in recent years largely through the UN Global Compact initiative (this is further examined in Chapter 4).

The Specific Case of the UN Country Team

The 2000 Country Review noted that the role of the Resident Coordinator (RC) is well accepted and the opportunity for information gathering and sharing is welcomed by all. This situation has evolved towards more coordinated action and, to the extent possible,

33 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Two theme groups have been established: one on HIV/ Box 3.2 AIDS, which in essence constitutes the Joint United Examples of inter-agency Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) in Lithuania, partnerships and the other on curriculum development and teacher - Joint and parallel work was completed by UNDP, World support. There have been significant examples of UN Bank and UNDESA during discussions on poverty reporting agency cooperation and collaboration including some and monitoring which facilitated political support at the joint programming over the past decade, including highest levels those examples listed in Box 3.2. This is a significant achievement given the very limited UN presence in - Strong cooperation between UNDP, the World Bank and ILO occurred during reforms of the social security system Lithuania. and support for poverty elimination initiatives. This led to the preparation of the National Poverty Reduction Strategy The UNCT has also been successful in joint advocacy and its transformation into the Lithuanian Republic on international priorities and UN goals, bringing Poverty Reduction Strategy Implementation Programme for in other donors and the private sector on occasion. 2002-2004; jointly supported by UNDP and UNDESA These advocacy events and campaigns have covered environmental and health (HIV/AIDS) concerns, human - UNDP and OHCHR provided joint assistance to the preparation of the Human Rights Action Plan which was rights and poverty reduction, and focused on the the first in the Central and within the Millennium Declaration and the MDGs after 2000. global HURIST (a joint UNDP and OHCHR Human Rights Strengthening Programme) framework Resource Mobilisation - Activities supported by UNDP, the Global Environmental Resources mobilised in addition to core resources Fund (GEF) and UN Environmental Programme (UNEP) on conservation, and linkages represent 76% of total resources over the period 1993- with FAO regional activities contributed to integration of 2005. This represents a ratio of approximately 3.2:1 global environmental concerns into the national policy (non-core: core) compared to the UNDP global ratio of agenda 6.5:1 respectively6. If the first country programme is removed then the ratio increases to approximately 4:1 - UNDP collaboration with the UNFPA has brought about for the remaining three country programmes. substantial support for population issues, and HIV/AIDS prevention In the context of declining bilateral assistance - Through direct UNAIDS support and interagency to Lithuania, the UNDP CO prepared a Resource collaboration, Lithuania has benefited from assistance in Mobilisation Strategy in 2001. The first strategy HIV/AIDS programming, as well as technical and financial focused on the development of partnerships, support

- Memorandum of Understanding between GEF Small Grants Programme (SGP) and World Bank for cooperation and co- financing the implementation of small grant projects by NGOs and community-based organizations

- An inter-agency framework developed by UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF, WHO and UNODC on the application of a youth friendly approach to health services in responding to HIV/ AIDS in Central and Eastern Europe, led to a joint project “Youth Friendly Services in Lithuania” (YSFL); funded by UNDP, UNICEF, UNFPA with technical assistance from WHO

- The World Bank, UNDP and the GEF SGP cooperated on the organization and preparation of a Development Market Place and selected nominees to benefit from joint funding

6 UNDP Atlas system

34 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

the development of a client-oriented and In the context of the declining levels of external increased effectiveness. It tried to address the very assistance, especially from UNDP’s traditional bilateral large expectations for cost sharing in the third CP partners, the degree of resource mobilisation is high. (2001-2003), specifically resources from the Global The GEF has been the major provider of resources Environment Facility that were then not forthcoming. representing approximately 58% of total non-core A second strategy was prepared in 2004 to examine resources. The has been the major bilateral opportunities for mobilising resources once core partner in terms of resources followed by and funding finished at the end of 2005 (issues related to the future of UNDP’s partnership with Lithuania are Box 3.3 discussed in later parts of this Review). Key Partner – the Global Environment Facility The Global Environment Facility (GEF), established in 1991, helps developing countries and countries with economies Table 3.1 in transition fund projects and programs that protect the Basic Resource global environment. GEF grants support projects related Mobilisation Indicators to six complex global environmental issues: biodiversity, climate change, international , land degradation, (percentage of total funds) the ozone layer, and persistent organic pollutants. Since 1991, the GEF has provided $4.5 billion in grants and cp1 cp2 cp3 cp4 total generated $14.5 billion in co-financing from other partners Core 41 21 18 20 24 for more than 1,300 projects in 140 countries. The largest Non-core 59 79 80 80 76 GEF supported projects in Lithuania include Conservation of Inland Wetland Biodiversity (US$3.26 million), Lithuania Phase out of Ozone Depleting Substances (US$4.41 million), Elimination of Green House Gases in Table 3.2 the Manufacturing of Domestic Refrigerators and Freezers at Snaige (US$0.99 million), and Small Grants Programme Resource Mobilisation (SGP has committed US$ 1,66 million of grants, and has 7 1993-2005 leveraged over US$ 3,74 million since 2001) Donor US$ % Total GEF 8,283,642 58.00% Netherlands 1,557,273 10.90% Baltic Trust Fund 1,247,036 8.70% Box 3.4 746,457 5.20% Key partner – the UNDP Canada 696,000 4.90% Baltic Trust Fund Gov. of Lithuania 456,840 3.20% 280,207 2.00% The UNDP Trust Fund for the Baltic Republics (BTF) was established by the UNDP Administrator in October 1992. 259,556 1.80% The stated purpose of the BTF was “to assist in the capacity UNAIDS 197,506 1.40% building and training in economic and social areas, in 168,747 1.20% operating a democratic society, an in achieving sustainable 149,829 1.00% development”. It was envisaged that the BTF would be used Soros Foundation/ both for national projects in each of the Baltic countries Open Society Fund Lithuania 118,610 0.80% and for regional projects requested by all three or any two UNDP Governance Thematic of the Baltic States. Resources for the BTF were provided Trust Fund 70,000 0.49% by the Governments of Denmark, Finland, Norway and Other 45,037 0.31% Sweden and contributions totalled US$3.18 million over the period 1993-1999. In Lithuania the BTF resources Total 14,276,740 100.00% were used to support strengthening of the ombudsman institution, social policy reform, foreign aid management, NGO sector development and to strengthen the NGO Women’s Issues Information Centre. 7 These totals include estimates of 2005 disbursements

35 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Finland. The Baltic Trust Fund (BTF) has also been an examined. For the period 1993-2000 GLOC payments important source of funds. Table 3.2 sets out the share totalled US$ 123,000 or about 37% of the amount of bilateral and multilateral partners in cost-sharing requested. Since then they have been over US$ with UNDP in Lithuania over the period 1993-2005. 100,000 per year reaching nearly US$ 124,000 for the Boxes 3.3 and 3.4 described the two major trust funds year 2003 alone. used by UNDP in Lithuania. As already noted the EU has provided a large proportion Cost Sharing with the Government of external assistance to Lithuania since 1991. Annex 10 sets out the flows of EU assistance during the period There has been successful cost-sharing with government 1991-2004 indicating that it reached US$ 329 million but this has been a strategic approach of the CO only in in 2003. Some UNDP COs in the region have been recent years and was not foreseen as significant in the successful in establishing cost-sharing with government first three country programmes. using resources from EU programmes. However, in Lithuania this has proved more difficult, partly For the whole period under review (1993-2005) because of the relatively high level of capacity within government cost sharing represents only 2.1% of government and therefore limited value in utilising total resources and 2.7% of non-core resources. But UNDP to help absorb funds. When initial discussions government cost sharing only became significant after took place between Government and the EU during 2002 since before this time government contribution the mid-1990s on using the funds, and there was no to project interventions was largely in-kind. In 2002 obvious role for UNDP at this crucial stage. government cost sharing represented about 1% of total resources but increased rapidly to 7.5 % in 2003 Resources from the Private Sector then 8.4% in 2004. It is estimated that the level will be maintained in 2005 with government cost sharing As noted above, until recently the CO has had limited expected to represent about 8% of total resources. For partnerships with private sector companies. It has, these three years the share of government cost sharing however, successfully worked with Microsoft (Box 3.5 among non-core resources has been constant at around below) in the context of a project funded by the Japan 10%. Full information can be found in Annex 5 UNDP Women in Development Fund to support ICT capacities Programme Resources (1993-2005). among women. with the private sector have also been made in the area of anti-corruption and Government contributions to local office costs (GLOC) raising awareness about the MDGs. The further role have varied considerably over the period being of the private sector in supporting development is discussed more in next chapter.

Box 3.5 Partnership with Microsoft The regional office of Microsoft in the and Women’s Employment Information Centre signed an agreement in May 2003 within the framework of the UNDP project “Capacity Building of Lithuanian Women by Networking and ICT”. Microsoft provided software worth approximately US$ 56,000 free of charge. This software was installed in the training facilities of five women’s NGOs, where women learned how to use the new technologies. After signing the agreement, the Managing Director of Microsoft in the Baltics said that Microsoft had decided to support the project because it fully reflects the company’s values and corporate mission, and that software is a tool for people to realise their full potential.

36 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

programmes have been aligned to changing corporate fashions gives the impression that the programme has changed direction over time. In reality there has been 3.4 relatively steady support to the three main themes of poverty, governance and, after the first country programme, environment. Within these areas the focus PROGRAMMING AND has been on several clearly defined sub-themes. The extent to which interventions lying outside a focussed IMPLEMENTATION framework have been developed due to to mobilise resources is unclear. Similarly, it is to APPROACHES some extent inevitable that the GEF portfolio will be singularly focussed (thus skewing the focus of the A True Partnership Approach country programme) given the nature of the funds and the limited amount of core resources to compliment The previous section examined the development of them. It should also be noted that UNDP has been partnerships between UNDP, the state, civil society operating in a rapidly changing environment not only in and the private sector in Lithuania. This was partly in terms of Lithuania’s transition but also in terms of the the context of resource mobilisation but also in terms external assistance environment which was also fluid of more effective programming and results through and made UNDP’s strategic positioning more difficult. working together. In addition, UNDP in Lithuania has adopted or developed a strong partnership approach. In this context partnership is about the relationship between UNDP and the organisations with which it interacts, specifically a relationship where the partners have common values and goals and where power does not rest only with one side of the relationship. The partnership approach in this context is complex and the meanings are contested in academic discourse and Box 3.6 among development practitioners. National Strategies, Programmes

In Lithuania, however, the illusive meaning has been and Action Plans developed with grasped. The vast majority of people interviewed during UNDP Support the review mission stated with conviction that the Poverty UNDP has adopted a partnership approach in Lithuania - National Poverty Reduction Strategy (NPRS) and was not considered a “donor” in the same way as - Lithuanian Republic Poverty Reduction Strategy Implementation Programme for 2002-2004 (PRSIP) other organisations providing assistance to the country. It is difficult to assess if the approach was a deliberate Governance development from the start of UNDP’s engagement - National Human Rights Action Plan 2003-2005 with Lithuania or if it simply developed and was then - Juvenile Programme 2004-2008 encouraged or nurtured by management and programme Environment staff. That it exists is not in doubt and its existence - National Strategy for Sustainable Development 2003-2020 was also raised as one of the key factors of success for UNDP in Lithuania. Other - National Action Plan for the Advancement Programme Focus of Women 1998-2000 - National Programme for Equal Opportunities of Men and Women 2003-2004 The 2000 Country Programme Review criticised the - Policy Paper of Lithuania for the Provisions then current country programme for its lack of focus. of Development Assistance for 2003-2005 It could be stated that, to some extent, this has - National HIV/AIDS Prevention and been true across the whole programme, but the issue Control Programme 2003-2008 needs to be examined further. The fact that country

37 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

There are many examples where UNDP has followed a Box 3.7 programmatic approach helping government to develop national strategies with limited resources that it Millennium Development then helps implement within areas of its comparative Goals advantage. Box 3.6 lists some of the most important 1. Eradicate and ; ones where UNDP has played this vital role. 2. Achieve universal ; 3. Promote gender equality and empower women; Support to national development strategies, 4. Reduce mortality; programmes and plans has meant that the UNDP CPs 5. Improve ; 6. Combat HIV/AIDS, and other diseases; have been more focussed on upstream interventions 7. Ensure environmental sustainability; and such as policy support and advice, although there have 8. Develop a global partnership for development. been important down-stream initiatives as well, most notably the GEF-supported Small Grants Programme.

A number of areas have been identified as cross- (although there do not appear to be linkages between cutting in the various CPs and these have been noted them). There has also been more generic assistance to above. Support to CSOs has been the most obvious supporting NGOs through organisational strengthening with such activities in all three of the major themes and creating the right legal environment. Although it has a cross-cutting nature, gender has largely been treated as a stand-alone issue and gender concerns do not appear to have been mainstreamed into all areas of intervention. Issues related to ICTD are also cross- cutting but has been mainstreamed only through use of internet technologies in projects where appropriate.

Using the Millennium Development Goals

Lithuania participated in the of World Leaders in 2000 where the Millennium Declaration and, subsequently, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were agreed. The MDGs present a particular challenge in a country like Lithuania which has been classified in the High Human Development category of countries in UNDP’s Human Development Reports. Many of the MDG targets have been achieved in terms of quantitative indicators although they are likely to remain lower than other developed countries. Lithuania’s mission has therefore focused on making progress in qualitative terms against the MDGs which has been achieved by adapting and interpreting the most appropriate goals and linking them to the EU’s Laeken indicators, the social inclusion indicators in support of the implementation of the EU strategy (an ambitious strategy to promote growth and jobs throughout Europe).

A three-pronged approach has been employed by the UNCT/UNDP since 2001 to assist Lithuania’s efforts in this direction. This involves:

38 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Table 3.3 Recognition of UNDP’s MDG Advertisements (percentage of total) Total male Female 15-29 30-49 50-74 lithuanian Other 49 42 55 66 47 35 50 43

Accession Countries in the Context of Millennium Box 3.8 Development Goals” took place in Lithuania. The MDG awareness campaign purpose of the workshop was to bring together the EU in 2003 accession countries to facilitate their efforts in the In 2003, on the occasion of United Nations Week that field of poverty reduction and social inclusion and was dedicated to the MDGs, UNDP Lithuania together provide more information on the MDGs, also from the with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of emerging donor perspective. In April 2004 the UNDP CO Lithuania organized an outdoor MDG awareness campaign hosted a regional workshop on “Aligning the European in the five biggest cities of Lithuania. A poster, specially Union Social Inclusion Process and the Millennium designed by the Lithuanian artist Mr. Rimantas Rolia, was Development Goals”. The model for this workshop was symbolically grounded on the legend of the Creation of copied in a similar event for the Western in the World coming from Baltic mythology. The campaign was supported by the private sector company ClearChannel 2005. Also in 2004, a Disaggregated MDG Report for that has advertised the poster free of charge for the period Lithuania was prepared and released. This continued the of five months. The campaign was aimed at informing strategy of supporting social statistical development in Lithuanian society about the Millennium Development the context of EU accession. Goals and reminding that each of us contributes to the creation of better world. The campaign was also presented MDG advocacy work undertaken with a private sector throughout national media. partner – ClearChannel – has also been successful in raising recognition through an advertising campaign. This allowed the placement of a specially designed Joint advocacy for the Millennium Declaration poster in outdoor advertising panels free of charge for and the MDGs. a period of five months (see the box 3.8). Together the partners undertook analysis of success of the campaign Joint advocacy around common themes (including and the recognition of UNDP/MDGs. Table 3.3 sets out around the Millennium Project Report “Investing the percentage of positive responses in answer to the in Development”). question: “Have you noticed the [UNDP] advertisements on the street?” Launching of major UN and UNDP reports, including the global Human Development Reports The nature of the MDGs in terms of Lithuania’s and organizing public debates. development context means that they have not been fully adopted by the Government within its national Support to Lithuania’s participation in global UN development planning framework. The MDGs are not conferences. mentioned, in the National of Action Plan on Social Inclusion for 2004-2006 (a document prepared to an Leveraging existing UN and government EU format) nor in the Programme of the Government programmes to build partnerships and mobilise of the Republic of Lithuania for 2004-2008. Rather, resources for common priorities. Lithuania sees the MDGs as being useful tools in its new role as a donor. The overall objectives of The UNCT’s 2002 Common Country Assessment for Lithuanian development cooperation policy as framed Lithuania was developed around the MDGs with the in the “Policy Paper of Lithuania for the Provisions objective of providing a baseline analysis of the of Development Assistance for 2003-2005” are the country’s situation. In January 2003, an “Inter- Millennium Declaration and the MDGs. country Workshop on Social Inclusion in the EU

39 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

NEX – Ownership and Capacity Building building across all levels of development work from national government to local authorities, NGOs and The National Execution (NEX) modality was introduced community groups. at a very early stage during UNDP’s activities. By adopting this collaborative approach UNDP passes Other benefits of NEX include the management direct responsibility for the management of projects efficiencies that it offers by freeing up UNDP resources and the technical choices being made during delivery from intensive project management. These savings of activities, to national authorities, regional and local improve the CO’s ability to operate flexibly in response partners. UNDP’s role concentrates on assisting the to changing national development needs but more national executing and implementing bodies in making importantly allow extra staff time to be allocated the right choices and so can be seen to have more of to strengthening UNDP’s strategic position. NEX has an influencing and advisory role rather than actual day therefore helped UNDP to concentrate its efforts on to day decision making responsibility on projects. The shaping the structure of, and providing direction to, role of the UNDP, and thus its direct legal liability, is Lithuania’s national development agenda. therefore more limited than in other aid programmes where direct control of intervention measures are retained. This NEX approach has generated synergy between UNDP and Lithuanian partners resulting in the mobilisation of considerable combined resources and a focus on results at the local level. NEX can be judged a higher risk approach than other 3.5 more centralised intervention methods but the CO’s ability to sustain such an approach during its thirteen years of operations demonstrates its appropriateness UNDP ON THE EVE to Lithuania. The CO staff has remain vigilant in monitoring its aid work and direct intervention has OF CLOSING ITS been required on occasions, but in general the NEX approach has been highly successful in delivering COUNTRY OFFICE a wide range of development outputs. In addition and noteworthy, the approach has also facilitated On the eve of closing its representation in Lithuania, substantial amounts of added value in terms of how is UNDP doing? What do its partners think? Nearly empowerment, confidence, competence and capacity 30 national and international partners responded to the

Table 3.4 Some Key Results from the 2004 UNDP Partners Survey (% of total responses that are favourable) Questions Lithuania Region Global Overall, UNDP’s image in this country is favourable 96 92 90 UNDP is a valued partner to my organisation 96 91 89 I am very familiar with the work that UNDP does in my country 81 83 83 UNDP is perceived as a valuable partner by the government of this country 100 87 89 UNDP’s projects and programmes reflect national priorities 100 82 82 UNDP is flexible in accommodating changing needs during the course of a project or programme 79 71 66 UNDP is effective in integrating programmes/projects in to Government systems 86 70 71 UNDP’s operational performance is satisfactory 88 79 76 Source: 2004 UNDP Lithuania Partners Survey

40 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

2004 UNDP Partnership Survey, an exercise undertaken no longer be core UN resources allocated for Lithuania by all UNDP CO on a regular basis since 2002, usually after 2005, UNDP in Lithuania has been examining ways every two years. in which it can continue to support these important areas of work, particularly in areas which to a large Table 3.4 reveals a very positive perception on UNDP extent are not covered by the EU funds. Through in Lithuania not only in absolute terms but also in on-going activities it has aimed to develop new comparison with the region and UNDP as a whole. partnerships which help fill these gaps and increase Unfortunately the surveys do not go back far enough the access of those regions and communities which are to see how these perceptions evolve over time but especially needy but lack capacities. nonetheless it gives valuable insight into where UNDP is today. In only one of the nine indicators is the The scope of on-going UNDP activity in Lithuania has percentage of favourable responses lower than either been covered in consultations on the UNDP Regional the regional or global figure, and even so only very Programme for 2006-2010. This took place with slightly. In all others perceptions about UNDP Lithuania national counterparts at the end of 2004 and showed are significantly more favourable that either the a continued interest from Lithuania’s government regional or global averages. in working further with UNDP at the country level as well as at the regional level. Almost all persons Another example of the esteem in which UNDP is held in interviewed during the review recognise the need for a Lithuania is the conferment of the “Cross of Commander transformation of the relationship with UNDP now that of the Order for Merits to Lithuania” to the UNDP Lithuania has entered a new stage in its development Resident Representative and UN Resident Coordinator, although some will miss the financial resources and the Ms. Cihan Sultanoglu, by the President of Lithuania, advantage of UNDP’s relatively simple procedures. Three H.E. Mr. on 6 July 2005, the State Day areas have been identified through which engagement of Lithuania. could continue:

UNDP’s Future Contribution/Positioning Further support to building national capacity for utilising EU funds. Despite the tremendous and noteworthy progress made by Lithuania since its Independence, disparities Further support to strengthening the partnership between regions and between rural and urban areas with the private sector including through the UN remain. Furthermore, UNDP recognizes that the Global Compact. sustainability of civil society organizations needs to be secured and that more people still need to be Further support to facilitating Lithuania’s effective empowered to actively engage in decision-making for role as a donor in the context of (a) current limited the betterment of their lives and for the future of capacity to manage effectively the increases their country. Challenges also remain for Lithuania in in assistance that is being proposed (b) limited terms of limited national capacities for full application awareness of this new role and limited public of new , the growing needs of new institutions support for undertaking it. and the coordination and effective use of European Union funds. Poverty continues to be a problem and UNDP’s ongoing work in each of these three areas and risks becoming structural in rural areas where the its contribution to national development results will be agricultural sector lags behind in competitiveness and examined in the next section. productivity and usage of new technologies is relatively low.

UNDP remains committed to supporting development in Lithuania and has acknowledged that its shifting remit should concentrate remaining and declining resources in areas where it has most experience and where it can draw on international knowledge in activities linked to global UN conferences. Given the fact that there will

41 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

CHAPTER 4 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

UNDP’S CONTRIBUTION TO NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESULTS

This section provides an assessment of UNDP’s contribution to Lithuania’s national development results over the period 1993-2005. Three areas will be focussed on, namely poverty, governance and the environment. In addition, cross-cutting issues such as gender, and ICTD will be examined. The review provides an examination of the effectiveness and sustainability of the UNDP programme, by:

Highlighting main achievements (outcomes) at national level during UNDP’s presence in Lithuania and UNDP’s contribution to these in terms of key outputs.

Ascertaining current progress made in achieving outcomes in the given thematic areas of UNDP’s support.

The review qualifies the UNDP contribution to the outcomes with a degree of plausibility, and considers anticipated and unanticipated, positive and negative outcomes. It also gauges the contribution to capacity development at the national level as well as the degree of national ownership and sustainability of these results.

43 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

chapter) are acknowledged as providing an important development function, informing and motivating research into critical issues over the years as well 4.1 as contributing to the quality of national debate on development issues. Other research has also been commissioned to improve understanding of poverty POVERTY reduction requirements. The Disaggregated MDGs Report for Lithuania prepared in 2004 and mentioned earlier in Poverty emerged as a significant threat in Lithuania the Review should also be highlighted in this context. after the end of the Soviet regime and has continued to It has contributed to a better understanding of pose considerable structural problems for the country. poverty in a broad sense in the country and especially Living standards and prosperity have improved in some of the regional dimensions of the issue. Many of the areas, notably the main cities, but unemployment and persons interviewed during the review mission from deprivation remain serious issues across the country government and civil society raised the example of the and rural poverty is particularly problematic. Vulnerable Disaggregated MDGs Report as an extremely useful tool groups include large , the elderly, small that was much appreciated. farmers, single parents and residents with low levels of education. The Ministry of Social Security and Labour has been instrumental in applying the findings of UNDP UNDP in Lithuania has made important contributions to supported social inclusion and poverty research. reducing poverty and assisting vulnerable groups. This Close working relations have been secured between work has been based on a partnership approach and the Ministry and UNDP who have acted in partnership involved bringing partners together to work on policy on many different projects. These include the advice and development projects that have helped establishment of a Social Policy Unit (which operates as raise awareness about poverty issues, improve the a tasked to improve the efficiency of social social assistance system, translate the national poverty policy) and preparation and publishing of the Ministry reduction strategy into action plans and improved of Social Security and Labour’s annual Social Report legislation, develop community self-help activities, that covers the social policy pursued during the year, strengthen women’s NGOs and develop strategic the course of its implementation and future challenges. planning on national response to HIV/AIDS epidemic.

Box 4.1 Raising Awareness and Poverty Analysis Some key outputs of UNDP’s One of the first poverty reduction goals for UNDP was support to poverty reduction to raise awareness about the poverty issue and ensure planning and policy that the policy makers focus their attention on it. This - Expanded Household Budget Survey required a systematic approach involving the collection - Labour Survey of data as a first step. Very little useful information - Survey of Social Beneficiaries was available in the early days of UNDP’s activities - Poverty Levels in Lithuania: Results of Studies of and so initial poverty reduction support focused on Household Budgets and Living Conditions providing support to help make improvements in social - Poverty and Employment Report research and analysis of specific social problems. Box - Living Conditions of Social Benefit Recipients Survey - Poverty Monitoring Report 4.1 sets out some of the key outputs from UNDP’s - Assessing Poverty and Pre-conditions for Reducing It interventions in this area. - World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD)+5 Follow-up Report – the Lithuanian Government document UNDP’s assistance in preparation of social research presented at the WSSD+5 conference held in in data and policy building analysis has continued June 2000 during its operations in Lithuania and this aspect of - National Poverty Reduction Strategy the UNCT’s work can be highlighted as a key output - Lithuanian Republic Poverty Reduction Strategy Implementation Programme for 2002-2004 of its development work. The annual Lithuanian Human Development Reports (described later in this

44 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

UNDP support for the Unit has covered methodological Limitations to, and passive nature of, poverty advice, policy guidance, the promotion of NGO reduction measures. involvement and public participation. The Ministry continues to produce the annual Social Report following High levels of unemployment leading to persistent the end of UNDP’s support. poverty.

“The impact of the project has been considerable, placing Low agricultural productivity. poverty issues on the national agenda and assisting the government in developing a national strategy approved Limited availability of state assistance to rural by the President to reduce poverty. The strategy has areas. set a platform for the development of pro-poor policies as well as for poverty reduction interventions to take Growth of social exclusion. place.” Evaluation of the UNDP Poverty Assessment and Reduction Project (July 2000) Slow pace of implementing poverty prevention measures. The National Poverty Reduction Strategy

In early 1997, the Government of Lithuania and UNDP started working together with the ultimate aim of formulating and implementing a National Poverty Reduction Strategy (NPRS). By 1999 the President of Lithuania had set up a National Social Committee to report on the follow-up to the World Summit for Social Development (WSSD) in . The Committee was chaired by Ministry of Social Security and Labour and included representatives from government institutions and NGOs who were given responsibilities to prepare the NPRS. UNDP and the International Labour Organization (ILO) provided technical and financial support during the NPRS preparation.

In 2000 a special Baltic conference was organised by UNDP and Latvia’s Ministry of Welfare to discuss the formulation of the anti-poverty strategies in the three Baltic countries. The conference proved useful in exchanging ideas and experiences and led to the finalisation of Lithuania’s NPRS in June 2000.

The Strategy presented a concept of poverty that was adapted to the situation in Lithuania. It defined measures of poverty, described the spread and nature of poverty and classified vulnerable population groups. On the basis of NPRS data analysis, two kinds of poverty reduction targets were presented: an overall reduction of poverty and more specific support to the most vulnerable groups in society. Ten high priority policy areas were outlined where solutions could be formulated to reduce and alleviate poverty. Issues requiring urgent action included:

45 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

The principles of subsidiary and solidarity were Strengthen attention of civil society to the problems promoted in the NPRS with the roles of NGOs and social of poverty. partners stressed in solving poverty problems. Targets were set that relative poverty should be reduced Create conditions for public institutions and civil from 16% in 1998 to less than 10% in 2005 and that society organisations to communicate and co- absolute poverty (0.8% of the population in 1998) operate with reference to the poverty reduction should be eliminated by 2005. To achieve these goals, issue thus promoting civil society’s participation in the strategy recommended new directions in various general. areas of public policy varying from employment and education policies to taxation and social security Transform the aspirations of poverty reduction to measures with particular emphasis on rural residents, the discourse on practical measures. where the poverty incidence rate was almost twice the national average. Force the participants of this process to assess actual poverty reduction possibilities and estimate UNDP made a significant contribution to the the necessary resources as well as look into their development of this strategy. It was formulated potential sources. using the other key outputs described in the previous section, namely the surveys and the associated reports, Allow evaluation of other poverty related and included a process of consultation with major programmes implemented by the government. stakeholders including civil society. Few other donors or international organisations were supporting the Revisit the legal acts both in force and under development of poverty reduction policies, programmes preparation to assess their possible impact on and knowledge at this time. Policies addressing the poverty situation. rural and regional dimension of poverty were prioritised with UNDP, UN Department of Economic and Social The document listed poverty reduction measures, Affairs (UNDESA) and Lithuanian partners undertaking the organisations responsible for implementing the a detailed assessment of the rural poverty situation measures, completion date targets and results expected in Lithuania. Results of this exercise offered a deeper for seventeen areas of activity split between four main insight into living standards in rural areas and made headings: specific policy recommendations. Strengthening the Activation and Participation of In accordance with the NPRS, a Poverty Monitoring Individuals. Commission (PMC) was set up in 2001 by the President of Lithuania to act as an independent watchdog Positive Economic Developments. body charged with the task of monitoring Lithuania’s progress towards the implementation of its social Development of . development goals. The members of PMC were empowered to analyse the status of poverty, the Income Guarantees. effectiveness of measures to reduce poverty and also publish an annual report on poverty in Lithuania. UNDP It has been noted by a number of observers that the resources were harnessed to assist the PMC monitor implementation of the National Poverty Reduction progress and make recommendations for adjustments to Strategy was somewhat diluted once it had been the poverty reduction policies. transferred from the President’s administration (where it was prepared) to the various government agencies The realisation of the NPRS was assisted by the responsible for implementation. This was, however, only government’s preparation of the Lithuanian Republic a stage in the poverty reduction process that inevitably Poverty Reduction Strategy Implementation will continue for some time. Importantly, the NPRS was Programme for 2002-2004 (PRSIP) which also received developed using the examples of similar documents considerable support from UNDP and UNDESA. The core prepared by EU member states, especially the example aims of PRSIP were to:

46 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

of Ireland, which had been very successful in addressing Prior to the launch of NISC there were no sources of its social problems in the 1990s. The use of these information for the NGO sector, no organization that existing instruments that had been prepared according could represent the sector or promote its collective to EU norms facilitated the development of Lithuania’s interests and no contact point for overseas donors to next round of instruments related to reducing poverty turn to if they wanted to work with Lithuanian NGOs. and strengthening social inclusion. The opening of the NISC acted as a catalyst for a major transformation of the NGO sector. It established a Specifically, this process facilitated the development networking function organising seminars, conferences, of the Joint Inclusion Memorandum (JIM) and the an annual NGO Forum and its “Third Sector” Newsletter subsequent national plans. All countries that acceded to is now published bi-monthly. This information sharing the EU in 2004 had, prior to their accession, to draft, helps the sector to develop its identity, learn about with the European Commission, a JIM, with the purpose common issues and how they can be better addressed. of preparing the country for full participation in the The quotations below from both government and open method of coordination on social inclusion upon independent evaluators attest to the contribution this accession. The JIM “outlines the principal challenges has made. in relation to tackling poverty and social exclusion, presents the major policy measures taken in the light of “Agreements signed in late 2002 between UNDP and the the agreement to start translating the European Union’s Ministry of Social Security and Labour and between UNDP common objectives into national policies and identifies and Non-Governmental Organization Information and the key policy issues for monitoring and further review” Support Centre (NISC) concerning the implementation of It therefore provided the basis for the new Member project on Strengthening of NGO Abilities in Pursuit of States to prepare their first National Action Plan on Poverty Reduction in Lithuania are of utmost importance Social Inclusion 2004-2006 after accession. for cooperation between the state and NGOs on the efforts to reduce poverty and social exclusion.” National Civil Society Organisations and Public Action Plan on Social Inclusion 2004-06 Participation in the Poverty Reduction Process “The NISC has had a major impact on the growth and Public participation has been encouraged and strengthening of the NGO sector in Lithuania…….NGO achieved through many different UNDP projects. NGOs, volunteers and informal service providers have all been actively involved in projects which contribute to the NPRS objectives and on-going work includes improving co-operation between municipalities and NGOs. A range of other UNDP projects have been established which help contribute to the NPRS objectives including employment support initiatives, equality and health related investments. These equality and employment measures supported by UNDP have been complemented by a considerable amount of poverty reduction work on health related issues, particularly in area of HIV/AIDS (discussed later in the chapter).

One early intervention that can be highlighted was UNDP’s support for the establishment of the NGO Information and Support Centre (NISC) in 1995 in partnership with the Open Society Fund Lithuania with a mission to develop Lithuania’s embryonic non-governmental sector through the provision of information, technical assistance, consultations and training.

47 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

voices are being heard in government although change is slow and uneven” Action Program for NGO Sector Development: Report of an Evaluation Mission for UNDP (April 1999) 4.2 K. McLaren, K. Kovaite GOVERNANCE Financing is one of the main challenges facing Lithuanian NGOs and the NISC provides important The process of legal reform has been critical for guidance and training on fund raising, project countries like Lithuania during the transition from development and management topics as well as other Soviet republic to market-oriented democratic . relevant issues including organisational management, Legal reform is necessary to reinforce national identity, advocacy and public relations/outreach. Another promote the rule of law and allow fully functioning challenge for Lithuanian NGOs is the legal framework democratic institutions. In partnership with other which complicates economic activities, , donors UNDP has played a key role in assisting state and the payment of taxes. The NISC has helped build and civil institutions develop upstream and downstream NGO capacities in these issues through provision of activities which promote participation, accountability legal counselling and the NISC representatives have and effectiveness at all levels of governance and civil also engaged in regular advocacy with government society. This has included translating human rights officials to help improve both the laws and their commitments from law to practice, improving juvenile implementation. Communication channels have been justice legislation, rationalizing and modernizing state opened and government officials now interact with and regional administration functions, supporting NGOs at NISC seminars dealing with specific legal the Third Sector, addressing and topics. The issues of the sustainability of the centre facilitating gender mainstreaming in national policy. were raised by one government partner who noted that such interventions are more successful when they result Legal Reforms from the aspirations of the NGOs themselves rather than through a project. One of the first tasks that UNDP support was directed towards in the early 1990s involved helping Lithuania’s UNDP has also contributed to increased public new government rebuild the legal system and participation in the decision making process at the restore people’s trust in the country’s laws and legal local level through support to school self-help activities institutions. Extensive support was provided to reform in 26 rural communities. In addition there is emerging public administrative systems and strengthen the evidence that communities have strengthened their competence of government officials (national and local) autonomy, their feeling of shared responsibility for local responsible for drafting and implementing legislation. living conditions and that the cooperative spirit within the community has also improved. Knowledge, skills and During the decade after independence, Lithuania experience gained by the most successful communities was able to substantially reform its legal system and are replicable and shared at the regional level. Through replace many of the previous Soviet laws. However, the the relationships and networks developed with UNDP development of a new legal system sometimes lacked assistance, self-help schemes are promoted for their consistency and the rapid pace of changes during the application at a wider scale. 1990s did not always allow time for a comprehensive review of law-making procedures. As a result, UNDP assisted a Government Commission to undertake a comprehensive scientific study of law making to help develop a new model of law making to facilitate integration within the EU legal system. Several other important restructuring projects were also supported during the reform process which continues to date.

48 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Table 4.1 Information concerning problems to be addressed TI Perceptions in the context of child rights, children in difficult of Corruption Index circumstances and children in conflict with the law has been launched on a broad scale and the goal to 1999 2003 2004 inform and interest the public at large was reached. Lithuania 3.8 4.7 4.6 (rank) (50) (41) (44) Training and skill improvement seminars for the Finland 9.8 9.7 9.7 police force, and to a certain extent for judicial 5.7 5.5 6.0 personnel, were conducted. 3.3 3.9 4.1 2.3 2.5 2.5 The need for special legislation, special youth/ Note: the PCI ranges form 10 (honest) to 0 (most corrupt) courts and specialised personnel was introduced and discussed.

The Government is aware that an important part of the Problems of the deficient institutional system were legal reform process during transition involves building defined and awareness was raised for the need of citizens’ trust in the new laws and legal institutions. improvement and restructuring of the system. UNDP has targeted funds and assistance towards this priority process within a number of different strategic The evaluation confirmed that the benefits should be projects. sustained and strengthened with recommendations regarding: Other strategic interventions in citizen security have also featured strongly on the support agendas for Advocating for a coherent legal system. UNDP and its government partners. A Crime Prevention Centre was established in 1997 to formulate a scientific Ongoing training of professionals working with approach to developing crime policy, as well as children. significant efforts have been invested in the judiciary, court system, and in particular into juvenile justice A quick and complete reform of institutions, which has been a key priority for UNDP. especially the creation of aftercare .

UNDP initiated and supported the Juvenile Justice The legal and practical development of diversion and Programme for the period of 1999-2002 which was alternatives to punishment. prepared with the assistance of UNICEF and bilateral donors such as the Netherlands and Open Society Fund These recommendations have been taken up in the Lithuania. The Programme created a basis for strategic newly adopted Programme which involves partnership reforms in the country which led to the adoption of the working with stakeholders throughout the judiciary and Government’s Juvenile Justice Programme for the period the community. of 2004-2008 being approved in May 2004. The Fight against Corruption An independent evaluation of the UNDP Juvenile Justice Programme was undertaken in 2002 which reported the Lithuania has made progress in fighting corruption following conclusions: since the start of its transition process. As Table 4.1 illustrates the trend of the Transparency International The Programme had an extremely positive impact (TI) Perceptions of Corruption Index (CPI) is in the on the development of a modern juvenile justice right direction but there is still much work to be done. system due to the involvement of all ministries/ In relative terms, it is clear that Lithuania has much departments/research institutes concerned in to do to reach the levels of freedom of corruption of elaborating strategies to cope with the problem of Finland, the least corrupt European country or even youth criminality.

49 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Estonia, the least corrupt of the group of countries that joined the EU in 2004.

In response to the level of corruption in the country in 2002 the Lithuanian (Parliament) adopted a comprehensive National Anti-Corruption Programme which includes an Anti-Corruption Strategy and Measures to implement it. The Government and Special Investigation Service are responsible for the organisation and enforcement of the Implementation Measures of the National Anti-Corruption Programme. The Lithuanian Chapter of “Transparency International” is responsible for the realization of different sections of the same programme.

UNDP is one of a number of donors providing support to the implementation of the national programme. Interventions are focussed on increasing national understanding about the state of corruption and raising awareness about corruption issues. Specifically UNDP has worked closely with different government the former was facilitated by the development of a and non-governmental institutions during its Human map of current hot-spots and the spread of corruption Rights activities, including: the Ministry of Justice, in Lithuania using an institutional and geographical the Ministry of Social Security and Labour, the Ministry profile. It was followed by the identification of of Education and Science, the Ministry of Interior, responsive measures for corruption prevention through the Chancellery of Parliament, Human Rights Centre, a consultative process and an awareness raising Association for Human Rights and others. Together with campaign to present the report contents and proposed the Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights these preventive measures (such as ethics training), to organisations used UNDP and the Office of the UN High national and local authorities, business community, Commissioner for Human Rights support to develop a NGOs, academia, and the media. Additional efforts were National Human Rights Action Plan (HRAP). It should then undertaken aimed at increased anti-corruption be noted that Lithuania’s HRAP was the first in the awareness and strengthened public education in the UNDP Regional Bureau for Europe and Commonwealth area of anti-corruption. These included preparation of Independent States (RBEC) region approved by of an anti-corruption education course, TV campaign Parliament, and the first developed globally within the on anti-corruption, public opinion surveys and a global HURIST8 programme. round-table discussion by policy makers and other stakeholders. Expert inputs from Denmark and Sweden played important roles during the Action Plan’s development Human Rights process which took place between 2001 and 2002 and was divided into two stages. During the first stage a Equality and Human Rights remain interlinked concepts national working group (a HURIST Country Team) was set but, as in many other developed and developing up and an initial situation assessment mission carried out countries, Lithuanian political and civil rights still including a public opinion survey. UNDP project support remain more advanced in statute than in practice. was then approved for the development of the Action Imbalances still exist in society between men, women, Plan which was implemented in three phases. children, rural and urban residents and UNDP’s work on Human Development and Human Rights continue 8 to play important roles in strengthening the abilities HURIST (HUman RIghts STrengthening), a joint programme of of government and civil society to redress these UNDP and OHCHR, supports the implementation of UNDP’s policy on human rights fundamental development issues.

50 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Priority issues were identified in the first phase Introduction of the Action Plan has led to a more through a participatory process. A baseline study on consistent system for monitoring human rights human rights in Lithuania was also developed and in Lithuania, which in turn has resulted in better validated at the expert level. During the second phase awareness, better protection and greater exercise of the baseline study on human rights in Lithuania was human rights. The Plan provides an official vehicle verified and corrected involving broad participation to strengthen public institutions’ accountability for of the public, including five regional workshops and a implementation of human rights policies and requires national conference. In the third phase the National public institutions to raise awareness about human Human Rights Action Plan was drafted on the basis of rights policies and promote dissemination of actions the conclusions and recommendations of the baseline across the country. study on human rights in Lithuania as well as the results of the regional workshops and the national As mentioned earlier, the Country Cooperation conference. Framework for Lithuania 2001-2003 applied a human rights perspective to the work of UNDP in Lithuania The National Human Rights Action Plan was approved by which led to the above mentioned Human Rights Parliament in November 2002 and covers the following Action Plan. Earlier work on human rights has included issues: significant amounts of practical and research-based activity in the field of Human Development. Increasing protection of the rights of elderly persons. Ombudsman

Increasing protection of the rights of disabled In addition to strengthening the status and capacity persons. of strategic civic institutions, UNDP’s democratic reform programme has also included assistance to the Increasing quality of services and better guarantees establishment of Ombudsman institutions which play to consumers. Increased consumers’ awareness of valuable roles in ’s institutional framework their rights. for human rights protection. Partnership has been an important part of this process with Government Improving legal instruments for protection of Ministries, UNDP, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden women’s rights. all contributing to found Lithuania’s Parliamentary Ombudsman Office in 1995. This was the first Office of Increasing protection of the rights of the child. its type in Central and Eastern Europe.

Increasing protection of vulnerable groups against .

Increasing effectiveness of the protection of rights of sexual and ethnic minorities.

Increasing possibilities for the public for obtaining information from state and municipal institutions.

Increasing awareness of citizens on possibilities to participate in state governance.

Increasing effectiveness of institutional system of human rights protection, including the Seimas.

Establishment of a continuous system of monitoring human rights situation in Lithuania.

51 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Subsequent UNDP input in the development of the democratic institutions led to the establishment of an Equal Opportunities Ombudsman (EOO) in 4.3 1999. UNDP’s start-up assistance included capacity building for EOO officers, development of procedures for processing appeals and helping enforce the Law THE ENVIRONMENT on Equal Opportunities by raising public awareness and sharing of experience internationally. The EOO Environmental issues were generally neglected office has become an important part of the national during the Soviet era when industrial development machinery and one of the main partners for UNDP in was considered a higher priority. This situation was addressing equality issues, not only gender but also similar to elsewhere in the world prior to the 1990s on other grounds of discrimination such as race, age, when global environmental awareness began to climb and . The Government has since extended the political and personal agendas. UNDP has been actively Ombudsman concept through establishing a Children’s involved in supporting these agendas through a variety Ombudsman in 2000 and expanding the mandate of of projects since it started operations in Lithuania. Equal Opportunities Ombudsman to include other forms In addition, the UNDP CO has been very successful in of discrimination, such as race and age. mobilising resources for addressing priority environment issues identified by the Government. Some of these are Institutional Strengthening listed in Box 4.2 below.

Community Based Organisations (CBOs) provide a vital National Planning and the Lithuanian role in every democratic society. They enable citizens Strategy for Sustainable Development to influence government decisions, support weaker members of society and raise public awareness on Sustainable development goals first emerged after important issues. UNDP activities have provided an independence with the drafting of a National effective mix of different support to strengthen these Environmental Protection Programme in 1992 which Third Sector institutions across Lithuania. linked into the UN’s Rio International Summit on environmental issues of the same year. Further Lithuanian society lacked a voice under its former developments occurred in 1993 when the Government Soviet regime and so considerable effort and resources launched a pilot programme to counteract climate have been invested by UNDP and its partners to help local and national NGOs and CBOs help themselves to fill the civic void. By 2004 over 7,000 different organisations were registered as active and the sector continues to grow and mature in many different social, economic and environmental fields.

UNDP published the country’s first Directory of Lithuanian NGOs in 1995 and much of its subsequent work has focused on establishing and building the capacities of strategic umbrella institutions which in turn cascade their support down to a wide range of smaller NGOs and CBOs. These important agencies have become active agents of change in their own areas and include: the NGO Information and Support Centre, Human Rights Centre, Citizens Advice Bureaux, Civil Servants Language Centre, Lithuanian Innovation Centre, and the Women’s Issues Information Centre, Men’s Crisis and Information Centre.

52 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Ensure a clean and healthy environment, effective Box 4.2 use of natural resources, overall economic welfare of Other GEF interventions the society and strong social guarantees. - Conservation of Inland Wetland Biodiversity - Enabling Lithuania to Prepare its Initial National It notes the “main challenge of sustainable development Communication in Response to its Commitments to United in Lithuania is to achieve the present development level Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) of EU countries by 2020, according to the indicators - Elimination of Green House Gases in the Manufacturing of economic and social development as well as the of Domestic Refrigerators and Freezers at the Snaige corporation efficiency in consumption of resources and not to exceed - National Capacity Self-Assessment for Global Environment allowable EU standards, according to indicators of Management environmental pollution while meeting the requirements - Lithuania Phase out of Ozone Depleting Substances of international conventions in the field of environmental - Preparation of the POPs (Persistent Organic Pollutants) pollution and input into global climate change”. The National Implementation Plan under the Strategy recognises that implementation of sustainable Convention development actions requires a holistic and integrated - Marine Biodiversity Protection approach such as:

Reduction on fossils fuels requiring investment in change and then in 1996 a national strategy was production and distribution systems for alternatives prepared to tackle emissions. including bio fuels or wind energy.

Work continued on a number of environmental fronts Reduction of waste requires increase in recycling during the 1990s and culminated in the National Report facilities and development of market for recycled on Sustainable Development which was approved by products. Government in 2002. The UNDP played important advisory and financial roles throughout the preparation Success and efficiency of actions requires public of this document by the Ministry of Environment, which support and ownership of the process hence provided a baseline report assessing progress made promotion of public participation is fundamental in the previous decade and highlighting important across the actions. environmental issues that still needed to be addressed.

Recommendations from the report were then converted into the Lithuanian Strategy for Sustainable Development for 2003-2020 which was approved in 2003 and acknowledges the important input provided by UNDP into this national strategy. The Strategy is relevant for many different public, private and voluntary sector development organisations with objectives that aim to:

Balance environmental protection, economic and social development concerns.

53 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Table 4.2 Participation of Lithuania in key environmental conventions No. Name of the document Ratified / signed 1. UN Framework Convention on Climate Change R 1995 1.1. R 2002 2. Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer ( Convention) R 1994 2.1 Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer ( Protocol) R 1994 3. UN Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution R 1993 4. Convention on Biological Diversity R 1995 4.1 Cartagen Protocol on Biosafety R 2003 5. Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) R 1993 6. Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitat ( convention) R 1996 7. UN Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (Basel Convention) R 1998 8. Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area ( Convention) R 1997 9. UN Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes R 2000 10. Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes. S 2003 11. UN Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (ESPOO Convention) R 1999 11.1 Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo Convention). Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment. S 2003 12. Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters R 2001 13. Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES) R 2001 14. Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention) R 2001 15. European Landscape Convention R 2002 16. UN Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) S 2002 17. UN Convention to Combat R 2003 18. Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade R 2003

Key informants raised the issue of the implementation International Conventions of the strategy and the difficulty this presents when it is not fully integrated into the national development Lithuania has joined a number of key international planning framework. Rather than developing a separate environmental conventions with the support of UNDP. sustainable development strategy it was suggested Air quality has been prioritised by government who that sustainable development principles should be ratified the Montreal Protocol on Ozone Depleting integrated into the instruments of the mainstream Substances in 1998 and adherence to the Kyoto national development planning system. This would protocol on climate change was acknowledged as ensure that pro-sustainable policies and activities are an important step for Lithuania. UNDP support has implemented as clear linkages would be made between often been upstream in support for the preparation of them and the budget process.

54 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Table 4.3 GEF project by theme Theme No. of Projects Budget (US dollars) Co-financing Biodiversity 34 771.619,58 54.7% Climate Change 12 334.317,64 78.1% International Water 16 279.803.52 62.0% Integrated Projects 11 279.135,60 56.5% TOTAL 73 1.664.876,34 69.2%

strategies and implementation plans to comply with the level. Specifically, it played a central role in the conventions. Moreover, UNDP is supporting efforts to design and implementation of Lithuania’s GEF’s Small create sustainable capacity and ownership in Lithuania Grants Programme (SGP) - executed by UNOPS and to meet the country’s obligations under various implemented by UNDP - which has been operational conventions of international importance, for instance, since 2001 and promotes grass roots action through preparation of a Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) communities and NGOs. National Implementation Plan under the UN Stockholm Convention. The National POPs Implementation Plan The CO assisted the Ministry of Environment and sixteen describes how Lithuania will meet its obligations major national NGO partners submit a national bid under the Convention to phase-out POPs sources for a GEF SGP which focused on assisting Lithuania and remediate POPs-contaminated sites. Table 4.2 in the implementation of international conventions. illustrates the broad participation of Lithuania in key This is reflected in the overall goal of the SGP which environmental conventions. refers to: “long term strengthening of NGOs and CBOs that address community-level actions to conserve Global Environment Facility biodiversity, reduce adverse climate change and Small Grants Programme protect international waters as an integral component of sustainable development, while securing the As in the other two major themes, UNDP has played an implementation of international agreements and the important role in contributing to the strengthening EU’s environmental policy”. of civil society organisations, especially at the local Throughout Lithuania the SGP has gained a reputation for its ability to manage and administer a wide Box 4.3 variety of projects, maintain a strong commitment Broad partnerships in the SGP for the development of quality project proposals and successfully manage a strategic portfolio. The SGP has UNDP, World Bank, , Baltic been said to represent the public face of the GEF (and Partnership Programme, UK Rural Partnership Programme, UNDP) in many communities where relatively small of Ministers and the EC Delegation in scale projects have made significant contributions to Lithuania have all been close partners that cooperate with SGP on information sharing, programming issues and environmental protection and community capacity. co-financing of SGP projects. Lithuanian SGP has also SGP’s reputation as a transparent, country-driven, worked in partnership with the Polish GEF Small Grants decentralised and participatory mechanism is well Programme in the development of cross- projects. established and the potential of its approach is Such bi-national cooperation at the project level is a new increasingly being recognised as offering scope type of SGP collaboration globally, and is especially useful for adoption by other programmes. The bottom-up for sharing experiences and know-how, as well as providing approach to sustainable development, using the grounds for new ideas on joint projects that could be environment as an catalyst, eligible for cross border and transnational EU financing. has had success in helping balance economic, social and environmental demands whilst also helping

55 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

provide crucial linkages between poverty reduction and SGP-Lithuania can be considered a UNDP success story environmental protection. and the Programme’s staff remain ambitious in their outlook. For the period 2005-2006 the Programme The Programme is a good example of how UNDP can will put more emphasis on strategic project portfolio provide a mechanism to facilitate better collaborative management by developing projects in certain strategic action between communities, local authorities directions for more tangible direct impacts. SGP will and NGOs. SGP has highlighted the potential of continue to assist the strengthening community partnerships, the opportunities from innovative ideas organizations, particularly in the marginalized and the value of local environmental solutions in countryside, by presenting transferable examples generating wider national and global benefits. from neighbouring SGP supported communities and by direct technical assistance to obtain financial support. An evaluation of the SGP published in 2004 noted that Equally, SGP will carry on building NGOs’ capacities in three and a half years of activities, SGP in Lithuania so that they can access EU structural funds and EC had funded 48 projects, 25 of which were completed. initiatives with the possibility to merge them with SGP The report went on to note that GEF Headquarters had co-financing. regularly increased the annual grant allocation for Lithuania starting from US$ 150,000 to US$ 750 000 SGP will also look for innovative modalities to help in 2005. NGOs and municipalities to find common goals for the development of projects where their partnership would Since its inception in Lithuania in 2001, SGP has be key to successful joint financing from EU and SGP committed US$ 1,66 million of grants, and has simultaneously. In line with partnership promotion leveraged over US$ 3,74 million for 73 projects. Total goals, SGP is striving to enhance relations among leveraged co-funding has constituted 69%, made up environmental NGOs and the national government by from 52% cash and 17% in-kind contributions. The supporting the creation of NGO networks or maximum size of SGP grant was US$ 50,000 and the that aim to better assist environmental decision making average size of the SGP grant has been litas 63,000 and policy development processes in Lithuania. (US$ 22,000). The Programme will nurture and strengthen The evaluation report was designed to act as a collaborative relations with current stakeholders while capacity building tool to help others learn from the creating new ones, particularly within the private project experiences and replicate the models where sector. This multi-sector approach will be integrated appropriate. It observed that the true environmental within plans to develop strategic cross border projects impact of projects was difficult to assess after with Polish and Belarusian SGP country programmes such a short period but confirmed that community for solving common environmental problems and development impacts were prevalent. These were largely strengthening international cooperation at a local added value and indirect impacts concerning: the level. empowerment of NGOs and local communities to create a measurable difference at the local level; to bring partners together; to have a policy dialogue with the government; and sustain the results of their activities.

Capacity building and awareness raising of NGOs and CBOs has been one of the major goals of SGP in Lithuania. Consequently, the Programme’s administration allocates about 60% of its time to comprehensive consultations and technical assistance for NGOs and CBOs in project identification, design and further management. SGP also organizes countrywide capacity building seminars and trainings every third year. Participants have acknowledged the usefulness of these intensive training sessions.

56 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

as contributing to the quality of national debate on 4.4 development issues. Box 4.4. UNDP RBEC and UNDP Lithuania supported the introduction of human development courses during CROSS CUTTING AND the academic year 1999-2000. The courses are interdisciplinary, theoretically and empirically grounded OTHER ISSUES and developed from an international perspective with explicit contextualization to the situation and policies It was noted in the previous chapter that a number of in Lithuania. They aim at (a) broadening the focus of issues have been treated as cross-cutting in most, if students of economics and expose other students to not all, of the UNDP Country Programmes in Lithuania. the concept, measurement and application of human Gender, ICTD and HIV/AIDS are such issues and here the development, and (b) increasing national capacity concept of Human Development as a central theme at for identifying human development priorities and the core of all UNDP’s work is also examined. formulating sustainable people-centred policies, both directly and indirectly. The courses were established The Promotion of Human Development at Magnus University in Kaunas and (both Faculty of Philosophy and Faculty of UNDP sponsors the holistic concept of Sustainable Economics) where they continue to be taught today. Human Development which covers the four Universities have the ownership of the courses; it interconnected development principles of Equality, is crucial to their success and strongly support the Empowerment, Productivity and Sustainability. initiative. UNDP promotes these principles across its activities in governance and civil society through individual projects, national policy reports and education initiatives. These include a Human Development Textbook, human development university courses and the national Human Development Reports.

The Lithuanian Human Development Report (LHDR) has been published annually since 1995 and provides a balance sheet of human resources in the country. This flagship annual publication represents a key output of UNDP work in Lithuania and is acknowledged as playing an important development role over the years informing and motivating research into critical issues as well

Box 4.4 Lithuanian Human Development Reports

2002-03 Knowledge, Information, Technology and Human Development 2001 Opportunities for Youth and Human Development 2000 Territorial Disparities in Human Development 1999 Globalisation and Human Development 1998 State and Human Development 1997 Living Standards and Choices 1996 Human Development and Habitat 1995 Untitled

57 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

In 2001 UNDP supported the preparation and Gender and Equal Opportunities publication of a Human Development Textbook in Lithuanian. Complementing the Human Development UNDP has been actively involved in promoting equal Course project, it builds on past experiences to opportunities throughout its Lithuanian operations. further strengthen the comprehension by students, This has included work on equality issues linked coherence of the human development courses and to regional disparities between urban and rural coordination between universities by providing a communities, age related concerns and awareness common understanding and analyses of the SHD concept of children’s rights, gender-based violence related and related vocabulary in Lithuanian. In the economic concerns, educational opportunities as well as faculty of Vilnius University alone, over 300 students considerable investment into efforts to confront have been examined in the human development course gender imbalances in cooperation with other UN funds just for the years 2003-5. There are also many part concerned, such as UNICEF, UNFPA and UNIFEM. time students received a short (seven hour) version of the human development course in the evening. UNDP Lithuania’s first National Action Plan of Advancement has recently supported the revision of the human of Women was completed in 1996 as a follow-up from devlopment curricula to add sections on development the Fourth World Conference on Women in . The cooperation especially in relation to CIS. As such, Action Plan identified several major problem areas this has been among the most sustainable of UNDP’s including a general failure to perceive women’s rights as interventions. human rights; the widespread harassment and and in both society and family; a lack of public programmes tackling the elimination and prevention of violence against women; an absence of public awareness about the extent of violence against women; and an absence of shelters for victims of violence. The main objectives of the Action Plan were to:

Achieve society’s comprehension that rights of women are universal human rights.

Draw up laws and create a mechanism for their implementation and control.

To achieve equal rights for women and men in the society and family.

The guidelines included, but were not limited to, analysing all international conventions and declarations on women and human rights; preparing for ratification of international instruments; developing human rights educational programs with an emphasis on women’s rights; and training teachers, police officers, lawyers and civil servants. The government pledged to ensure that harassment and violence against women would be treated as violations of human rights.

The Law on Equal Opportunities (LEO) has helped tackle these issues and represents one of UNDP’s most successful Lithuanian initiatives in terms of collaboration with the government and NGOs. The LEO was introduced in 1998 after a considerable amount of preparation work including practical outreach projects

58 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

initiated by the National Action Plan of Advancement of Women.

These included pro-active UNDP measures to improve women’s educational opportunities in the project “Women Confronting New Technologies” and other support to tackle elimination of violence against women (supported by the UNDP and UNIFEM). Another UNDP demonstration project “Wanted: Women-in-Business” was launched in 1999 to help improve participation of women in the business sector. The project involved personal training, a mobile information and counselling service, computer training and mentoring programme as well as a line for enterprises run by women. The UNDP project Capacity Building of Lithuanian Women Through ICT & Networking (fully funded by Japanese Women in Development Fund) aimed at improving sustainable human development for women in rural areas and facilitating their increased involvement in social, political and economic spheres of life at both local and regional levels was showcased by UNDP as a successful initiative for ICT for development in the World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) that took place in Geneva in 2003. region, and ). Regional cooperation In 2002 UNDP supported the drafting of the country’s with Belarus, Ukraine, Russian Federation, Poland and second National Action Plan for the Advancement the Baltic countries remains an essential element of of Women which concentrates efforts on improving Lithuania’s HIV/AIDS strategy. Such cooperation is women’s capabilities for better livelihoods through actively promoted through a number of UNDP regional access to information and communications technology cooperation arrangements. and small and medium enterprise development. Issues geared towards confronting and reducing Gender Based The cross-border implications of the epidemic make Violence (GBV) feature in the new Action Plan and, in constant vigilance a priority at the national level. cooperation with the Open Society Fund Lithuania and UNDP support at the country level has included work several men’s NGOs, UNDP organised the first White on prevention and care as well as continuing advocacy Ribbon Campaign in Lithuania to raise awareness about especially targeted at the groups considered most at GBV. These gender equality issues cut across many risk: intravenous drug users, youth and women. different development activities supported by UNDP in Lithuania and additional examples of gender related In 1998 UNDP allocated resources to its first country investments are covered in other sections of the report. project which aimed to overcome the complacency about HIV/AIDS in Lithuania and also help introduce HIV/AIDS more humane treatment of HIV positive persons and prevent stigmatization. Further work was progressed in Lithuania is still a low prevalence country but the 1999 with the establishment of Peer Education Centres spread of HIV/AIDS remains a very sensitive issue by UNFPA and since then UNDP has been able to support considering the country’s geographic vulnerability at a number of other youth related HIV/AIDS prevention the cross roads of major regional communication and projects. trade routes. HIV/AIDS cases continue to spread in most developing countries and also in the European In addition to local projects UNDP has assisted Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) partner states (for strategic HIV/AIDS initiatives such as the Baltic Sea example, the Russian Federation, particularly in the Initiative and Action Plan on HIV prevention in the

59 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Baltic Sea Region (together with USAID and UNAIDS) educational expertise enabling it to provide HIV/AIDS and Interregional Partnership Against AIDS. UNDP related training throughout the region. was also a partner in the USAID-supported “Network of Excellence” initiative. These projects help reduce As with other national institutions, the National AIDS spread of HIV/AIDS via formulation of multidimensional Centre has benefited from UNDP work on HIV/AIDS approaches, building strategic capacities and which has been carefully designed and delivered dissemination of experience and information. within the context of a coherent strategy produced in partnership with the key stakeholders. This In 2002 Lithuania experienced one of its sharpest collaborative approach to the delivery of development increases in the number of registered HIV cases aid has predominated throughout UNDP’s operations in (doubling the numbers) through the explosion in the Lithuania and can be noted as a key contributing factor prison system. UNAIDS provided an initial assessment to the successes achieved by UNDP in the fields of which made recommendations for the appropriate poverty reduction, good governance and environmental holistic policy options to halt the spread of HIV in protection. prisons and its consequent potential to the general population. UNAIDS Programme UNDP has highlighted the linkages between poverty Acceleration Funds were also used to help prepare the and HIV/AIDS during its Lithuanian work on the cross- National HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control Programme cutting theme. Through projects, advocacy and policy 2003-2008 which was developed in co-operation with dialogue across sectors, UNDP has helped to place UN Theme Group (UNTG) on HIV/AIDS in Lithuania. HIV/AIDS as a prominent issue on the social agenda and A framework developed by UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF, contributed to the development of Lithuania’s national UNODC, UNAIDS, and WHO on the application of a youth strategy on HIV/AIDS prevention. friendly approach to [health] services in responding to HIV/AIDS in Central and Eastern Europe led to a joint Information and Communication project “Youth Friendly Services in Lithuania” (YFSL) Technologies for Development that was approved in 2003, with funding from UNDP, UNICEF and UNFPA, and the technical support by WHO. Although access to IT is expanding fast in many countries, in Lithuania it still remains relatively low. A number of key informants in the government and According to the Information Society Development civil society noted the importance of UNDP’s role Committee under the Lithuanian Government, 33.8% in bringing together the international community of households possessed personal computers in 2005. to engage with the government on the issue of the According to Statistics Lithuania only 10.6% of emerging aids problem. In 2004 the 2nd Open Lithuanian inhabitants used internet at in 2004 Europe AIDS Conference “Europe and HIV/AIDS: New while only 2% people living in rural areas used internet Challenges, New Opportunities” was held in Vilnius at home. Existing and deepening inequalities in where EU Health Ministers and HIV/AIDS experts from acquiring and using IT skills is yet another barriers that across the met in Vilnius. The main outcome might distance women from taking part in the every of the conference was the adoption of a Declaration day economic, political and social life, as well as in the on Measures to Strengthen Responses to HIV/AIDS in community development. the EU and in Neighbouring Countries, committing all participants to a coordinated, continent-wide effort to UNDP’s contributions to ICTD development in Lithuania fight the disease. have been limited. Only two projects have directly focussed on the issue, one in relation to increasing the Lithuania remains more advanced in HIV/AIDS engagement of women in ICTD. Research carried out in surveillance, prevention and treatment management January 2003 by the Women Issues Information Centre, then neighbouring non-EU countries (Ukraine, Belarus, showed that of the 77 women’s organisations in the the Kaliningrad region of Russian Federation). This country only 13 (17%) had their own Internet website allows the Lithuanian AIDS Centre to act as a Regional and that only 49 (69%) used email. Only the largest of HIV/AIDS Resource and Competence Centre. The Centre the women’s non-governmental organisations (NGOs) hosts considerable knowledge, experience, modern have their own websites and communicate regularly HIV Diagnostic equipment, and in dept HIV/AIDS via email with international partners. Information

60 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

technology is often not accessible for smaller women’s organisations due to the high costs. Another example of a stand-alone project is support to 4.5 the Municipal Training Centre at Kaunas University of Technology for a project to support the establishment and operations of the Local Government Information UNDP’S SUPPORT TO Network (LOGIN) in Lithuania. Through supporting internet-based information systems and traditional EMERGING ISSUES methods, such as seminars, publications, conferences and training UNDP has contributed to increased Three issues have emerged that do not fit into either information sharing at the local level. Not only is this cross-cutting or the traditional categorisation of UNDP important for better strategic planning, improved daily programmes. These are key issues that have become operations and service provision, it is also closely important in recent years and where support will be related to the concept of e-government which is high required beyond the closure of the UNDP CO. UNDP’s on the national agenda. Moreover it serves not only strategic attention to these issues during the last local governments, but also the broader public, NGOs UNDP CP has been significant in shaping the future and private enterprises facilitating NGO and citizens’ partnership between the organization and the country. group participation in decision-making at the local level. Lithuania as an Emerging Donor

As noted in the previous chapter, UNDP together with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) took an important strategic decision to support Lithuania strengthen its institutions and capacities as an emerging donor. Lithuania has learnt many important lessons during its sixteen years of transition from autocracy to democracy and from a centrally planned to a market economy. It is now a promoter of stable democracy through good relations with neighbouring countries and the development momentum gained over the last two decades allows Lithuania to be in a position from where it can share its experiences with those who are embarking on similar transitional paths.

Together with other donor partners, UNDP has played a key role in shaping and building this development momentum over the years and recognises its role in continuing to provide structural direction as Lithuania shifts from a net recipient of UNDP aid to an emerging donor. This redefinition of the country’s role and responsibilities will involve the establishment of new partnerships within the region and beyond. UNDP’s main contribution in assisting the country during this emerging donor process has been, and will continue to be, advisory and operational services.

The emerging donor process began in 2001 when the MFA set the country’s first budget line for Official Development Assistance (ODA). Only a small amount of funding was allocated but the commitment carried great

61 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Box 4.5 “Bridges without barriers” The vast majority of people interviewed during the course of the review raised, without prompting, the issue of Lithuanian support to former Soviet Union countries and beyond. Most of these people represented organisations that had already engaged in such activities either on a purely bilateral basis or through an international organisation. All had identified the kind of comparative advantages listed above. Some focused on such activities as commercial opportunities or as simply part of Lithuania’s aspirations for a larger role on the international stage. Many had a genuine passion to assist many countries less fortunate than Lithuania. Many had a sense that having received significant international support in the past, it is now Lithuania’s turn to provide assistance. The of Lithuania as a bridge between east and west was raised on a number of occasions. The idea of Lithuania establishing “bridges without barriers” seems to sum up the idea and was suggested by a women’s NGO in Kaunas.

symbolic weight. The following year, in cooperation Both challenges have proved demanding but with the Canadian International Development Agency, involvement of the private sector and NGOs continues CIDA, UNDP supported the assessment of Lithuania’s to help improve the situation. Nevertheless the draft policy on development cooperation and assisted underlying prerequisite of such improvements is in the preparation of the accompanying communications support by the broader public and awareness that strategy. The UNCT/UNDP also facilitated an internal development cooperation is an important national goal. policy review of Lithuania’s aims in international and To assist this process, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, regional forums for the medium term with a view to EU in partnership with UNDP, introduced a project to help and NATO memberships. strengthen Lithuanian administrative capacities for progressing towards ODA goals. The project included These contributions to the development of national a public opinion survey and information campaign to ODA policies proved valuable in assisting Lithuania’s promote awareness about international development government which today has two parallel challenges cooperation. Conclusions from the opinion survey noted to deal with regarding ODA. The first challenge the following issues: relates to improving the volume and quality of ODA and the second challenge, directly linked to the first, Emerging from 50 years under soviet rule, Lithuania involves gaining public and political support for has no tradition as an aid donor. development cooperation and ODA. To assist Lithuania in this process, as well as provide various alternative Little understanding, at all levels of society, of the mechanisms to successfully manage Lithuanian ODA as global context that places Lithuania among the High it continues to increase, a concept paper on “Managing Human Development category of countries. International Technical Cooperation in Lithuania: Proposals for Institutional Arrangements” was Popular public attitudes are reflected by the commissioned by UNDP and presented to the MFA. statement: “We are a small country. We are a poor country. What can we do?”.

Media coverage of international issues is focused mainly on issues.

Given current levels of understanding and awareness, any significant spending on international cooperation could meet with a negative public reaction.

More opinion polling is needed to broaden understanding of public attitudes and to develop strategies and messages that will be effective in raising awareness and support.

62 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Responses were developed to tackle these issues and for a large number of government officials, awareness help improve support levels for ODA. The messages through discussions and workshops to the Parliament, included: NGOs, private sector (the later however in plans for the end of the year only). In joining the EU, Lithuania takes on the responsibility to become an aid donor and operate UNDP in Lithuania has been well placed to encourage within the regulations governing the EU aid systems. and facilitate East-East co-operation via practical transfers of Lithuanian expertise during design Lithuania has expertise to share with our neighbours and delivery of cross-border projects co-funded by from our successful transition. national budgets, including a trilateral projects in promoting “inclusionary democracy”. Other cross border It is in our interest to help develop stable and co-operations activities have involved employing prosperous neighbours. Lithuanian experts to implement projects and share experiences in the region. Lithuania has also been Participation as an aid donor in the EU will open up used as a centre for regional initiatives and other opportunities for Lithuanian NGOs and companies for transnational work has been supported on NGO capacity contracts through EU funds and national budgets. building. UNDP will continue to be well placed to assist Lithuania help its new partners align their development Lithuania’s role as an aid donor will help it to activities with the MDGs and social inclusion principles. be an active and credible player in international The UNDP network can facilitate not only East-East organisations. cooperation but also identify new opportunities to work with partners from the accession/candidate countries UNDP supported a comprehensive public awareness such as , Bulgaria, and . campaign on Lithuania’s new role as an emerging donor that involved the broadcasting of video and radio The investments demonstrate Lithuania’s commitment spots on development cooperation through the main to act as an emerging donor and support UNDP’s media channels in Lithuania, organisation of radio global strategy within the MDG framework. Lithuania programmes on the issue and facilitating journalists (and UNDP in Lithuania) has gained a significant understanding and future engagement. In addition, the amount of experience over the years of transition and MFA/UNDP project included developing a Knowledge has a considerable amount to offer other countries Database to codify Lithuanian knowledge and expertise undergoing transition. Of particular transferable for future use in development projects. Simultaneously use will be Lithuania’s (and UNDP’s) experience in information was also gathered on potential demand successfully translating international development for Lithuanian development expertise. UNDP has also goals into deliverable local actions and embedding the supported greater effectiveness and innovation through principles of these global strategies within national linking advocacy concerning the Millennium Project policy. Report “Investing in Development” to Lithuania’s emerging donor efforts. While Lithuania’s commitment to supporting global development has to be lauded there are two issues that The UNDP’s Regional Trust Fund for new donor need to be examined. First, that the administration countries in and Baltic States has and management of an aid programme could draw on assisted this process. Donor countries will use the a significant amount of resources, both financial and fund to finance national consultancy and training human. The EU has agreed to the levels of aid to which services through commercial contracts in Eastern new member should aim: “Member states, which have Europe and CIS. Annex 9 provides more information joined the EU after 2002, and that have not reached on Lithuania’s aid programme and sets out the ODA a level of 0.17% ODA/GNI will strive to increase their financed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs since 2002. ODA to reach, within their respective budget allocation As already noted, UNDP commissioned and facilitated processes, that level by 2010, while those that are the preparation and introduction of Development already above that level undertake to sustain their cooperation course in various universities/institutes efforts.“9 Depending on the rate of growth of GNI in of Lithuania. It has also provided capacity training Lithuania this will mean ODA levels of somewhere 130

63 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Box 4.6 The UN Global Compact In an address to the on 31 January 1999, United Nation Secretary-General challenged business leaders to join an international initiative – the Global Compact – that would bring companies together with UN agencies, labour and civil society to support universal environmental and social principles. The Global Compact’s operational phase was million Litas in 2010 (approximately US$ 25-40 million) launched at UN Headquarters in New York on 26 July out of which about 40 million would go for bilateral/ 2000. Today, many hundreds of companies from all multilateral projects and 230 million in 2015. This regions of the world, international labour and civil society will require a significant increase in the capacity of the organizations are engaged in the Global Compact, working Lithuanian Government to manage such a programme to advance ten universal principles in the areas of human and to clearly elaborate the government structures to rights, labour, the environment and anti-corruption. Through the power of collective action, the Global Compact deal with the process. To obtain the required outreach seeks to promote responsible corporate citizenship so that through representation in recipient countries will also business can be part of the solution to the challenges require capacity as well as financial resources. of globalisation. In this way, the private sector – in partnership with other social actors – can help realize Second, and on the other side of the coin, is the the Secretary-General’s vision: a more sustainable and situation of the recipient and the trend within the inclusive global economy. aid business away from small stand-alone technical assistance projects towards budget support and sectoral frameworks. There is plenty to learn from Engaging the Private Sector the mistakes of the older donor nations in terms of in the Development Framework the burden that their aid programmes place on weak recipient administrations and these should be taken in As already noted the private sector in Lithuania has to account in the context of the Declaration grown rapidly since independence was regained in 1990 as well as the and Declarations on aid reflecting both domestic growth as well as foreign harmonisation. In this respect it is important to de- investment. The private sector has started playing a link Lithuania’s comparative advantage as a supplier of role in the social and environmental development of technical assistance to the former Soviet Union and its the country as well as contributing to its economic emerging aid programme. The Trust Fund facility offered development. It has done so through taking on board by UNDP’s Regional Bureau for Europe and CIS to the many of the principles of corporate social responsibility new donors may also be used by Lithuania to expand their cooperation programmes outside of the immediate 9 Millennium Development Goals: EU Contribution to the Review area of interest in the region and former Soviet block of the MDGs at UN 2005 High Level Forum countries.

64 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

(CSR). UNDP has sought and managed to collaborate and concrete actions from the private sector in with the private sector in HIV/AIDS prevention, development issues, which can materialize only when women’s issues advancement, anti-corruption, and MDGs necessary awareness and capacity is built. Together advocacy. Through GEF, important cooperation has with local partners (for example, the Lithuanian taken place between UNDP, SPG and the private sector Investors’ Forum and businesses) UNDP fosters creation in the elimination of green house gases. However, UNDP of stable structures/forums for responsible business has supported this process of engaging the private in the country, so that it could gradually transfer the sector in the development framework in a more focused driving force and competence to local partners who manner during the fourth country programme largely are expected to become strong enough in a short time through the introduction and facilitation of the use of span. Until then, UNDP involvement as catalyst and the UN Global Compact in Lithuania (Box 4.7 sets out coordinator is necessary to stimulate the progress. the basic principles of the compact). Facilitating more Effective Absorption of EU The process of launching the Global Compact in and European Economic Area (EEA) Funds Lithuania was initiated by UNDP in mid-2004 in cooperation with the Lithuanian association Investors’ In 2004, UNDP began to provide support for Forum while a national network of over a dozen strengthening the administrative capacities of socially responsible companies of Lithuania was Lithuanian municipalities, focusing on municipalities established in April 2005. Along with the objectives from disadvantaged and economically stagnant areas. of Global Compact, companies of the national network The overall emphasis of these efforts is to prepare mainstream the Global Compact’s ten principles in their local authorities to meet successfully EU membership business activities, exchange information, organise standards as well as create conditions for efficient, joint trainings and discussions and promote the idea of responsive and transparent local governance. While socially responsible business in Lithuania. the earlier project focused on building capacity for long-term planning, including the preparation and In June 2005, the official Global Compact launch event implementation of the local development strategies, took place in the office of the President of the Republic currently, the main focus of current efforts is on of Lithuania. A total of 40 Lithuanian businesses strengthening of administrative and management expressed their willingness to join the Global Compact. skills. In particular, the UNDP-sponsored project These companies and organizations officially declared facilitates the transition to programming budgeting that in the strategies of the companies, relations within selected municipalities as well as encourages with partners and employees, and everyday activities more regional cooperation in the area of public services they would embrace, support and enact a set of core and joint project management. In combination, these values in the areas of human rights, labour standards, efforts should enable participating municipalities to the environment and anti-corruption. In his greeting overcome constraints stemming from a relatively small speech President V. Adamkus expressed his belief that size of municipal units and their limited financial the initiative would certainly influence the state’s resources thus paving the way for a more effective economic and social development, stating: “The process absorption of available EU assistance. that has been started a couple of years ago as an idea, today transforms into a concrete actions. I truly believe UNDP support for NGO capacity building in Lithuania that these actions will have an important effect for the includes extensive efforts for raising awareness and people of Lithuania.” strengthening capacities of NGOs and NGO coalitions not only to propose policy reforms on poverty reduction However, to sustain these developments in Lithuania but also for effective absorption of EU funds. Capacities it is essential to ensure further strengthening of the of NGOs were built through various workshops and recently established Lithuanian CSR network through seminars aimed at promoting easier access EU funds for building capacities of local partners, promoting their poverty reduction and development projects. networking within and outside Lithuania and raising awareness in order to motivate more companies to adapt Global Compact principles and practices. The challenge lies in obtaining a deeper commitment

65 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

CHAPTER 5 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

In the context of an evaluation, UNDP defines a finding as “a factual statement about the programme or project based on empirical evidence gathered through monitoring and evaluation activities” and conclusions as “a reasoned judgment based on a synthesis of empirical findings or factual statements corresponding to a specific circumstance” 10.

Before setting out the findings and conclusions, it is worth examining some of the methodological problems presented by the length of the period being examined. For example, people interviewed would refer to factors that relate to specific periods of UNDP’s engagement and it may not be clear which one. Some of the information also conflicts, for example the 2000 Country Review refer to the way the CO practices NEX as a best practice while a project evaluation the following year found the NEX modality to be problematic in the project. It was also clear that persons being interviewed often found it difficult to remember the early days on UNDP’s involvement even if they were in a position to do so. More often than not, the people dealing with UNDP in its early days were no longer in the same position and not always easy to find.

10 UNDP Evaluation Office “Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluating for Results”

67 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

It is also useful to start with some generic findings that being examined and the limited knowledge of what although readily available elsewhere summarise earlier priorities were being articulated by government and parts of the document and set the context for the more what other donors were doing. While UNDP’s assistance specific UNDP related findings and conclusions: has been broadly aligned with national priorities and international commitments as well as the UNDP global The people of Lithuania have made remarkable mandate and corporate frameworks there are a number progress since regaining independence in 1990. of issues related to its positioning: The difficult economic, social and political transformation has been undertaken rapidly and The overall CP was heavily skewed toward the Lithuania is now fully entrenched in European and environment largely because of the success in Trans-Atlantic alliances. mobilising resources from the GEF. This does not necessarily reflect UNDP’s comparative advantage in From a UNDP perspective, the country has reached the country, the area of most potential value-added a high level of Human Development with a ranking or even where the national priorities lie. of 39 in the 2005 HDR. Problems remain, however, most notably the issues of rural poverty and Poverty was an important concern throughout inequality, low life expectancy and high rates of the period being examined and is an area where a suicide. Other problems are still emerging, such as relatively small proportion of resources were used. HIV/AIDS. Poverty reduction, especially in the rural areas where poverty is most prevalent in Lithuania, is an Once committed to joining in the EU/NATO the path area of potential comparative advantage for UNDP. of development became clear. In sensitive cases where political will may not be easily forthcoming (c) There are a number of other factors that have been (e.g. anti-corruption or gender equality) the path behind UNDP’s successful contribution to Lithuania’s has ensured that appropriate efforts were made. national development results:

External assistance has been limited but important, The vast majority of partners interviewed pointed to especially in the early years of the transition the importance of the quality of the staff (national process. In the run-up to EU accession it is not and international) of the UNDP Country Office. surprising that the EU became by far the most This was especially appreciated in the context of important donor. Most external assistance agencies providing timely backstopping and technical support have closed their offices and have ended their to project implementation. programmes in Lithuania. Although considered by some to be complex, The main findings and conclusions are as follows: UNDP administrative procedures are nonetheless considered to be relatively simple compared to (a) In brief, UNDP has been an important partner in other donors such as the EU. While use of the NEX the development process in the past 13 years. This was procedures has not been without its problems it is noted by virtually all persons interviewed during the good that the CO persevered when necessary and review mission. It has made a significant contribution in general the impact on national ownership and to Lithuania’s national development results since 1992 capacity building has been very positive. in all three of its areas of focus: poverty, governance and environment. It has also made significant The neutrality of UNDP was raised as a factor. contribution in cross-cutting areas, especially gender Although this is often an abused term and one that with a smaller contribution in the area of ITCD. It is is not appropriate to an organisation that has its impossible to say where the impact was the strongest own human development agenda and supports the over the 13 years of UNDP’s engagement with Lithuania. MDGs, it is used in Lithuania in the sense that UNDP avoids : it does not “play games” with the (b) In terms of its strategic position and specifically government and other stakeholders/partners. assessing if it did the right things at the right time, analysis is made very difficult by the long period

68 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

UNDP projects always designed with partners (d) Best practices are defined by UNDP as “Planning through a process of genuine partnership. It has and/or operational practices that have proven successful not been afraid to raise issues that it felt were in particular circumstances. Best practices are used important and that the government was in danger to demonstrate what works and what does not and to of ignoring. The lead role UNDP played in bringing accumulate and apply knowledge about how and why they together international partners to engage the work in different situations and contexts.” Each of the government in the issue of HIV/AIDS is an example above can be identified as best practice in this respect. of such an approach. In addition there are some specific interventions that should be noted in this respect: The fact that UNDP takes a holistic approach was also raised as a factor by some informants. Its broad The preparation of the Lithuanian Republic Poverty mandate and country programmes mean that it is Reduction Strategy Implementation Programme able to look at the bigger picture and not be too for 2002-2004 (PRSIP) using the format of the EU focussed on very specific issues. National Action Plans on Social Inclusion (NAPs/incl) and specifically the example of Ireland. The ability to have a broad overview of the development situation allows UNDP to identify gaps The Human Rights Action Plan has been exemplary which it then is able to take to the government. in bringing the work being done in the governance UNDP has been able to balance being reactive to area under a common theme and is already being government priorities with being pro-active in emulated in other countries (Moldova, Nepal, raising sometimes sensitive issues that need to Mongolia) both in substance and methodology (the be addressed. Again, raising the issue of poverty consultative approach to the preparation of the reduction and HIV/AIDS is an example of this Plan, its implementation by the Parliament). approach. The Disaggregated MDGs Report can be considered The role of UNDP is catalytic, engaging with the a best practise. This is not because of the report government on existing or emerging issues, helping itself which is well produced and well received as develop national strategies and then opening the any UNDP report should be. Rather it is because way for other supporters with larger programmes to it represents a good example of using the MDG take the process further and assist implementation. reporting process to identify and address important gaps in the knowledge and understating of the UNDP has also pushed for Government cost-sharing country in MDG-related areas: In this case there was to encourage/illustrate greater commitment to limited disaggregated information. The best practice the project and ensure more effective use of was to identify this gap and address it. resources. The slow disbursement of project funds often reflects the cautious nature of a government (e) It is difficult to examine the counterfactual: What ministry spending its own funds. if UNDP had not been in Lithuania? While UNDP made contributions, could these have been undertaken Another key factor has been the effective utilisation by others? Would they have been undertaken? What of national expertise and appropriate balance was the value-added by UNDP compared to other between international and national expertise. organisations supplying assistance? The main findings Local expertise is identified as a first step and in this respect are that without UNDP a number of then internationals recruited only where necessary. areas would remain underdeveloped or would have been This has probably led to greater capacity building addressed later on in the development process, at a and more appropriate outputs and has certainly stage when addressing the issue would be far harder. been a more cost effective approach. Support to This is largely due to UNDP’s ability to identify issues as poverty reduction planning is a good example of this they emerge or even before they do. approach. This is clearest in the fundamental area of poverty reduction where UNDP’s contribution to getting the issue on the policy agenda, promoting a greater

69 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

understanding of the issue and developing the tools (i) UNDP has adopted a programming approach that has to address the issues was extremely important. a number of key features:

In the area of HIV/AIDS, UNDP was instrumental The issue of focus was raised in the 2000 Country in bringing together its international partners to Review but needs careful examination. What work with government on addressing the emerging there has been is an approach of supporting the problem at an early stage. development of national strategies and then implementing certain parts of them that UNDP The areas of ombudsman institutions and NGO thinks it has a comparative advantage. This support are the other ones that are most often programmatic approach has meant that the themes mentioned in this respect. In addition, UNDP has in the CPs have been focussed within a national provided other significant support to sustainable framework. institutional building in Lithuania as indicated in the main text. There has been little interest in using the MDGs as tools for development and their relevance as A second area where UNDP added value concerns the such has not been high in Lithuania. As a High flexibility of UNDP’s approach and the speed with Human Development Country the MDGs were largely which it could respond to priority government needs. perceived as not so relevant by the government. There are numerous examples where without UNDP’s MDG-8 is seen as more useful especially in relation support, either as a catalyst to attract resources to new to Lithuania’s new role as a donor. issues or as a partner filling in gaps as they emerge, implementation of programmes and other interventions Visibility seems to have increased over time would have been significantly slower. reflecting greater and more effective efforts in this respect by the CO. (f) Resource mobilisation has been good in the context of declining resources from traditional bilateral (j) Lithuania has developed significant capacity in the partners. An opportunity to position UNDP to mobilise last decade or more. There is clear recognition in the resources from EU pre-accession funds in areas of country among government, civil society and the donor common priority was not necessarily an opportunity community that this expertise is of great potential in the mid-1990s in the specific context of Lithuania. use in other countries, specifically other former Soviet Resource mobilisation efforts have been successful in republics and of these the neighbouring countries. the context of small aid flows from traditional suppliers of resources (i.e. certain bilateral donors). The GEF has (k) UNDP faces a number of remaining challenges, been the major source of cost-sharing resources and the first and most important one being the decision this had skewed the allocation of country programme about maintaining a presence in Lithuania and what resources heavily towards environmental issues in the it should look like. If a decision is taken to support last three country programmes. it operationally it will face a number of additional challenges that are already well understood by the CO (g) Partnership development has been good with civil staff including sources of funding for programmes and society and across government including at the local the nature of the organisation in Lithuania. level. Working with the private sector has been limited but has intensified during the last CP. International (l) People interviewed across government and civil partnerships have been good especially in the context society will be sorry to see the UNDP CO close its of declining representation and a small UNCT. representative office but the vast majority recognise that this is the right course of action. Nonetheless (h) Sustainability is an issue in terms of UNDP’s support UNDP will be missed by many. As one government to specific organisations but one that UNDP has made official summed up UNDP’s contribution: “The efforts to address in collaboration with these partner experience remains, the foundations have been built, organisations. and there are aspirations for greater progress.” From the interviews undertaken, it seems it is well known among government and civil society partners that UNDP will

70 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

be closing its representative office at the end of 2005. UNDP has a comparative advantage (in many but not Less clear are the viable options for a new stage in all) aspects of this issue. In the area of institutional terms of a continuing physical presence. In any case, strengthening and capacity building for Lithuania as UNDP will continue its partnership with Lithuania in the a bilateral donor, the comparative advantage for this future, as a member state and a new donor. kind of support may lie with another bilateral donor.

(m) UNDP has been exploring different options for its (n) While EU membership doesn’t mean an end to future in Lithuania, in a situation without core funding UNDP’s presence in a country, in the circumstances or representation. It is expected that the Government described above it is challenging to have programme will provide increased Government Local Office continuity. Rather a new form of engagement might be Contribution (GLOC) contribution to cover the costs necessary to allow continued partnership between UNDP of maintaining a programme presence in the country and Lithuania with a country presence. although financial picture remains unclear. Three broad areas are being examined:

Mobilising of resources through the private sector. This has met with limited success and even though potential partnerships could be developed through the Global Compact it will probably be difficult to get commitment for core funding although maybe on a project by project basis.

Mobilising resources from Government sources and other national partners, including through the EU. UNDP has many advantages in this respect (e.g. administration and thematic experience accumulated under one office, catalytic role and partnership building experience, good practices like the SGP mechanism, flexible procedures, capacity to attract funds, transparency of procedures, etc). As a close partner the Government is well aware of these advantages and will decide whether to use UNDP in this manner. Where the government does need help in utilizing funds, it will also have to examine not only UNDP’s absolute advantage but also its comparative advantage, especially in relation to private sector organizations.

Further supporting the development of Lithuania as a donor and facilitating the integration of Lithuanians into the international aid system, especially, but not only, with respect to supporting CIS countries and countries on the path to EU accession. Related to this would be UNDP’s role in facilitating effectiveness of Lithuania’s contribution and reducing the burden both in Lithuania and the recipients of Lithuanian assistance. In this respect support to compliance with agreements made in Rome, Paris and Monterrey would be important. It is in this area that the greatest potential for future UNDP engagement with Lithuania lies and where

71 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

CHAPTER 6 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 LESSONS LEARNED

The review has revealed some important lessons learned, defined here as learning from experience that is applicable to a generic situation rather than to a specific circumstance.

(a) The “partnership approach” really does work and can lead to better results. It needs to be distinguished from the concept of broad partnership which refers to engagement with a wide range of partners across government (central and local), the broad range of civil society organisation (beyond simply development NGOs) and the private sector. The idea that the partnership approach is effective is not new but is rarely implemented. It is also clear that the extent that the approach can be used may vary according to context. In the case of countries on the path to EU accession the shared values will be in place to facilitate use of the approach.

73 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

(b) Once a country is committed to joining the EU and it is invited to do so, it starts on a clear path or reforms. It is possible to engage with the EU accession 6.2 process through moving towards use of the various instruments some years before necessary. UNDP’s support to the development of poverty reduction and RECOMMENDATIONS social inclusion planning is a good example of this. In such a way the transition to the instruments required In most reviews of country programmes a set of by the EU will be less painful and will be completed in a recommendations will be prepared to help support timely manner. It is also important to use the language, future programming efforts in the country. Given concepts and approaches of the EU. UNDP’s support the nature of the situation in Lithuania and the to identifying links between the MDGs and the EU’s forthcoming closure of the representative office, Social Inclusion agenda is a good example of such an such a comprehensive set of recommendations is not approach. appropriate. As already noted, Lithuania’s membership of the EU does not mean the end of UNDP’s partnership (c) It is important to get involved early in the process with Lithuania but rather the start of a different of pre-accession entering dialogue with government and partnership that is no longer based on a country the EU on the potential role of UNDP in the effective programme. utilisation of EU funds for the country. The lesson here is that where you don’t get involved at the early states (a) There is still a need for UNDP to engage with of negotiations between the government and the EU the new members states on the issue of human it is extremely difficult to become involved at a later development. EU membership alone will not ensure stage. adequate progress towards even higher human development. The World Bank for example continues to (d) At the same time resource mobilisation ambitions produce quarterly economic reports for 8 of the 10 new need to be realistic in the context of declining bilateral members of the EU (the EU-8). UNDP could continue to resources as the accession process proceeds. A resource monitor the state of Human Development in the region mobilisation strategy needs to take into account and provide technical support as required. increasing EU funds, declining funds from traditional sources of bilateral cost-sharing and increased Continued engagement at the regional level may also possibilities for government cost-sharing. be through regional networks for example or through support to developing their people as a technical (e) Once a member of the EU the CO will close and the assistance resource. Facilitating more National Human country programme end. Preparation is essential and a Development Reports could be another example of decision on any future of UNDP in the country needs to continued support to academic organisations offering be made well in advance. training in human development. Lithuanians will engage with the developing world and poorer transition countries not only through aid programmes but as citizens, consumers, tourists, investors and traders, and the implications of this engagement need to be clearly understood.

74 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

(b) The country programme review is a very good practice on the eve of closing a country programme. The idea needs to be replicated and the methodology based on the ADR improved and adjusted to the specific situation. UNDP will close many more offices in the future. This is not a reflection of a lack of commitment to the region but the reasonable assumption that if UNDP and its partners are successful this will be the natural course of events. The final review is an idea that should be replicated across all accession countries as their representative offices close. It would be interesting in years to come to have a study of the role UNDP played in the transition process. In this context it is also recommended that record keeping systems are improved to facilitate such a process.

75 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

ANNEX

1 TERMS OF REFERENCE

LITHUANIA COUNTRY PROGRAMME REVIEW

1. Background

The Evaluation Office (EO) of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) launched a series of country evaluations, called Assessments of Development Results (ADRs), in order to capture and demonstrate evaluative evidence of UNDP’s contributions to development results at the country level. Undertaken in selected countries, the ADRs focus on assessing UNDP’s added value and the difference its contributions make to the country’s development challenges with a view to enhancing performance and strategically positioning the organization’s support within national development priorities and emerging corporate policy directions. The overall objectives of the Assessments of Development Results are:

77 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Support the Administrator’s substantive accountability function to the Executive Board and Basic data of Lithuania serve as a vehicle for quality assurance of UNDP HDI rank (2004*) 41 interventions at the country level. Life Expectancy at Birth (2002) 72.5 years Adult Literacy Rate (2002) 99.6 (%) Generate lessons from experience to inform GDP per Capita (PPP US$ 2002) 10.320 current and future programming at the country and Real GDP growth (2003-2004) 6.7% corporate levels.

Provide to the stakeholders in the programme country an objective assessment of results affects the population of Lithuania (more that 15000 (specifically development outcomes) that have been citizens have left Lithuania in 2004 while comparing achieved through UNDP support and in partnerships with 7000 in 2002). Lithuania is firmly established in with other key actors in a given period. the group of countries with a high HDI (41 HDI rank as for 20041) for the few consecutive years. Lithuania Country Programme Review that is a modified version of ADRs will be more based on a retrospective Lithuania’s by the Soviet Union resulted study and drawing lessons learnt to be used not only in a forced and radical transformation of its economy. at national, at UNDP corporate levels but also in the Lithuania was fully incorporated in the Soviet centrally frame of development cooperation. The study will also planned command system. Country’s movement towards assess at the extent possible UNDP’s role vis-à-vis EU economic and political independence gained momentum accession processes (playing a catalyst role, assisting during late 1980s. On , 1990 Lithuania the Government to meet the EU requirements timely declared the re-establishment of its independence, and building national capacities, focusing on niche which was internationally recognized in August- development areas not covered by EU policies). The September 1990. study will entail a forward-looking perspective in a sense that the study should build a solid reasoning for In 1991-1992 Lithuania has been implementing a the discussions on an added value for Lithuania of the comprehensive and far-reaching economic reform continued activities of UNDP beyond 2005, UNDP’s program under an adverse macroeconomic environment comparative advantages in continuing its activities (declining output, deteriorating terms of trade, and in Lithuania during the first years of EU membership, high rates of inflation). At the same period Lithuania UNDP’s experience in managing development and their took significant steps in developing democratic relevance to the present Lithuanian context. institutions, establishing rule of law and reforming the structure and administration of inherited social Lithuania Country Programme Review is planned for the programs. beginning of July 2005. it will cover the whole period of UNDP presence in Lithuania starting from 1992 to The decision to become the member of the EU was mid-2005. officially expressed and formalized by Lithuanian Government in 1995. The transformation from 2. National Context centralized economy to the liberal pro-market system as well as carrying out the reforms in all spheres of Lithuania is the southernmost and largest Baltic life (fulfilling ) was not an easy country, with a territory of 65,200 square kilometers transition towards the EU. At the beginning Lithuania‘s and a population of 3.43 million as it was estimated relations with the EU were very dynamic nevertheless in 2004 (the population’s peak was in 1992 with the integration process dragged. It happened that the 3.7 million people). More than 80 percent of the integration process was much more complicated as it population is of Lithuanian origin. Lithuania is divided was expected. Pre-accession period involved not only into 10 , eight of which are predominantly coordination of Lithuanian legislation with the EU urban (over 50 % urban); the remaining two (Taurage

and Marijampole) are predominantly rural. Increasing * Statistical data from year 2002 international migration is an important factor that

78 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

legislation but also the reorganization of the system EU Member States in the implementation of the EU of administration and the changes in many spheres Development policy and in pursuing commitment to the of political and economical life. It has been realized UN Millennium Development Goals. For the past two that reorganization required huge administrative and years, Lithuania has been preparing itself for this role financial means. The increasing skepticism of Lithuanian by developing its strategies, defining its objectives and citizens and radical politicians was another obstacle tasks and specifying the target countries it wishes to for the integration. However, all the required adoptions work with, in the near term, and transfer its experience were maid in the relatively short time span. as a successful .

In 2002 Lithuania successfully completed negotiations Above mentioned developments indicate that Lithuania and was invited to join the North Atlantic Treaty has made steady reform progress in the past years that Organization and the European Union. Significant was mainly driven by the prospect of EU membership. political and economic changes contributed to this However, the years of rapid economic growth have not political achievement. A growth rate of 6.7 per cent brought about substantially improved living conditions; was reached, the currency was successfully re-pegged nor significantly reduced unemployment in Lithuania. to the Euro, and unemployment declined to around 10 Lithuania is still experiencing high income inequality per cent. (Income quintile share ratio was 4.7 in 2002 according to data). Regional disparities increased Lithuania has made a remarkable progress not only in virtue of past transitional reforms. Every sixth in eurontegration processes but also in economic Lithuanian falls below relative poverty line (17 percent) development, democratic governance, justice, when absolute poverty remains is close to 1 percent. environmental protection, social security and health In 2003, the poverty level in rural areas (27.4%) was protection. Lithuanian Government‘s policies for over two times that in urban areas (10.3%). Societal impressive economic development, low inflation and groups having multiple poverty risks (such as living fast integration in the euro zone placed the country in rural area/unemployment/having three and more into a position of the fastest growing economy in children) are particularly exposed to social exclusion. Europe. The country made remarkable progress in Unemployment level was still high (11.8%) in 2004 developing democratic institutions and establishing (according to the data of Statistics Lithuania). the rule of law. The reform of the judiciary has been at Increasing regional disparities widens the gap between the centre of these developments. The establishment urban and rural areas flagging few counties lagging of a four-tier system of courts of general competence behind the country’s average on a number of socio- contributed to building a more elaborate and competent economic indicators. structure for the defense of human rights and rightful interests. Lithuania is the only one of the new EU As it regards women share in the democratic member states that fully set up institutional structures governance process, Lithuania has not made much dealing with equal opportunities issues. The country progress since independence on promoting women share has steadily accumulated knowledge in preparing policy in the governance of their democratic country. The strategies and action plans on priority issues such under-representation of women is obvious on all the as human rights (National Human Rights Action Plan levels of governance, starting with the parliament and adopted in November 2002) and poverty reduction, ending up with municipal councils. The non-existence which created the foundation for the strategic papers of gender equality institutions on the regional or local on social inclusion required by the European Union level makes gender equality mechanism only partially (EU). Significant strategic documents prepared in public functioning and widens the regional gap. health area stimulate the developments in health care prevention, primary health care, preventative medicine Already high regional disparities may be even more and high quality preparation of health professionals. sharpened by the centralized application of EU Lithuania has also showed a notable progress in structural and related funds that might increase developing HIV/AIDS prevention and control measures. regional inequalities even further instead of buffering or reducing them. With the EU membership Lithuania’s status has changed and it assumed new obligations. Lithuania joined other

79 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

According to Transparency International corruption promotion of young people’s health and development in perception index (CPI) in 2004, Lithuania with the country. score 4.6 out of 10, occupies 44th place among 146 countries. Since Lithuanian CPI is still lower that However, it should be taken into account that in the average 5, it cannot formally be recognized as a Lithuania, UNDP is the only UN organization with a country where corruption is sufficiently contained. multi-year programme. UNDP’s RR in Lithuania also acts According to the Map of Corruption in Lithuania 2004, as UN RC and undertakes the leading role in UN country prepared under one of the UNDP projects, the highest teams’ work. corruption prevalence is witnessed in the public sector institutions. Local municipalities, traffic police, tax UNDP cooperation in Lithuania. Having been a administration, customs, hospitals and primary health partner of Lithuanian Government since 1992, care centers are mentioned as being the most corrupt. the UNDP has served both as a catalyst for policy development, governmental and institutional reforms Despite a comparatively low HIV prevalence in and as a strategic partner for governmental and non- Lithuania, the growing rates in new HIV infections in governmental initiatives. the close neighbourhood and in Lithuania itself call for prompt relevant actions. During the first framework of cooperation (1993- 1996), in close partnership with the Government of 3. UN System Cooperation in Lithuania Lithuania, UNDP activities covered four major areas: the development of democracy and civil society, public Even having the limited presence of the UN system administration reform, the development of human agencies in Lithuania, the collaboration among them resources for the market economy, and the alleviation was successful in several key areas of economic and of the social impact of the transition. Some 20 projects social development. worth more than 3 million US$ were carried out, which resulted in the establishment of institutions, giving Important results were achieved through inter- assistance when most needed. agency collaboration in poverty reduction and human rights. Joint and parallel work has done by UNDP, In the second framework of cooperation (1997-2000) World Bank and UNDESA have opened discussions the UNDP focused on the promotion of sustainable on poverty reporting and monitoring and facilitated livelihoods, democratic governance and citizen political support at the highest levels. That led to participation, human security and environment the preparation of the Poverty Reduction Strategy protection, as well as on the advancement of women, and its transformation into the Implementation Plan the promotion of NGOs and the prevention of HIV/AIDS. of the Strategy. UNDP and UNHCHR have provided assistance to the preparation of a human rights action In terms of results, building on its trusted partnerships plan which was the first in the Central and Eastern with the Government of Lithuania and the donor Europe. Activities supported by UNDP, GEF and UNEP community, the UNDP realized individual technical on biodiversity conservation , climate change and cooperation projects worth more than 8 million US$. linkages with FAO regional activities contributed to Besides, material assistance, global knowledge and integration of global environmental concerns into practical thinking were brought to the country through the national policy agenda. Collaboration with the these activities. UNFPA has brought about a significant support for population issues, reproductive health, HIV/AIDS Building on Lithuania’s achievements since prevention in adolescent health and finally for independence, the UNDP has adopted a human rights building national statistical capacities for meeting UN approach within the third framework of cooperation for recommendations for holding censuses. Through direct the period 2001-2003, following consultations with UNAIDS support and in interagency collaboration, national and international partners. In the period of Lithuania has benefited from a solid assistance in HIV/ 2001-2003 the UNDP focussed on three inter-linked AIDS programming, as well as technical and financial priority areas: the promotion of civil rights and good support. UNICEF contributed highly to Lithuanian’s governance; the promotion of economic and social efforts in protecting children’s’ rights, strengthened rights; and the promotion of environmental rights

80 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

with crosscutting themes of HIV/AIDS prevention, Establishment of a Knowledge database to codify gender mainstreaming and the strengthening of civil the existing Lithuanian knowledge and expertise, society. In the first area, the mounting challenge was as well as experts in different areas for later use in to translate human rights commitments from law to development projects of Lithuania; practise through a concerted focus on implementation. In the area of social and economic rights, the UNDP Identification of existing and possible future provided a significant support transforming the demand for expertise available in Lithuania and national poverty reduction strategy and social research possibly few concrete development cooperation into action plans and improved legislation as well as on projects. self-help assistance for vulnerable groups in Lithuanian society. In the environmental sector, support An increasingly significant intervention emerged in was provided for alternative energy, biodiversity the area of engaging a private sector in development. conservation, environmental education and sustainable UNDP approached the private sector, sensing that the development. private sector has reached a certain maturity to be able to launch the Global Compact in Lithuania. UNDP Against this background, UNDP embarked upon its has played a catalytic role in this area, consolidating last Country Programme 2004-2005, focusing on four the efforts to promote Corporate Social Responsibility strategic lines of intervention: and introducing the Global Compact (GC), thus bringing all related stakeholders together: private companies, Strengthening capacities for social inclusion; business and related associations, trade unions, government, local authorities, NGOs, local communities, Strengthening capacities for good governance; international organizations, the EU.

Strengthening capacities for sustainable Having been present in Lithuania since 1992, UNDP development; continues to be a partner to Lithuania in fulfilling its socio-economic goals, effectively absorbing EU and Strengthening capacities as an emerging donor. European Economic Area (EEA)/Norwegian Government funds and focusing on strengthening its role as an Given the fact that there will no longer be core active partner in development cooperation in the region resources allocated for Lithuania after 2005 the UNDP and worldwide. in Lithuania promptly get into an accelerated learning process about the EU financing mechanisms available As a member of the European Union, Lithuania attaches to the EU member states to understand how UNDP can a great importance to the strengthening of democratic legally and managerially be a partner to Lithuania to processes and stability in its eastern neighbours. increase access of those regions and communities which Through development of closer relations with its are especially needy but lacking in capacities. neighbours and other countries Lithuania aims to strengthen its position as an expert of the European Assisting the country in building its capacities as New Neighbourhood Policy (ENNP) and enhance its an Emerging Donor, the UNDP and the Ministry of strategic role in the region. UNDP in Lithuania has Foreign Affairs has signed and started to implement been well placed to encourage and facilitate practical An Emerging Donor project aimed at supporting the transfer of Lithuanian expertise through design and Government of Lithuania to develop national capacities implementation of cross-border projects co-funded by for the design and implementation of development Lithuania, local governance regional project in Belarus cooperation activities throughout the implementation and other countries, project in Belarus on inclusionary of major components: democracy”; sending Lithuanian experts to implement the projects and share experiences in the region; Awareness building to help the government to using Lithuania as a centre for regional initiatives and publicize and explain its development cooperation events; as well NGO capacity strengthening through activities to the decision makers, the media and the provision of quality expertise to the neighbours. UNDP citizens of Lithuania; in Lithuania is well placed not only at promoting East- East cooperation but also at aligning MDGs and Social

81 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Inclusion (the lessons learnt in developing strategic How effective was UNDP support to policy advice poverty papers) in the context of possible future and dialogue, national capacities building and accession/candidate countries such as Turkey, Croatia engaging partners in delivering development results. and FYROM. How effective was UNDP in engaging private sector The Lithuania Country Programme Review evaluation into development processes. will look at all the results achieved for the period of 1992 to mid-2005. The evaluation will consider all Provide an analysis of how UNDP has positioned the key results, as described in Annex 1 and the main itself strategically to bring added value and intended objectives described in the various planning responded effectively to national development instruments of UNDP. needs and priorities to changes in the national development situation with special attention to: 4. Objectives of the Assessment The entry points and strategy selected by UNDP The purpose of the evaluation is to review the in support of the national development agenda, experience of UNDP in Lithuania; draw lessons learned especially within its areas of focus, with the special and their applicability in the regional context; to learn focus on the overarching the elements of poverty the added value for Lithuania of UNDP’s continuity reporting and practical implementation of human beyond 2005; make recommendations for continuing rights; UNDP’s activities in Lithuania during the first years of EU membership. The Lithuania Country Programme The key current strategies: developing national Review will: capacities of Lithuania as an emerging donor, engaging private sector, assisting local partners to Provide an overall assessment of the results mobilise resources attempting to access the EU/EEA achieved through UNDP support and in partnership financing mechanisms; with other key development actors during 1992- 2004 with specific in-depth assessments within The nature and level of cooperation with different poverty, governance and environment taking into development partners. account cross-cutting issues such as gender equality and ICTD. The analysis should focus on how the Based on the analysis of key achievements and results were achieved, identify the factors that overall findings; draw key lessons to be used at accounted for success or failure and draw lessons, national level as well as in regional context, and with particular attention to: provide clear and forward-looking recommendations in order to suggest UNDP’s positioning (the added How UNDP support was used to leverage the legal value for Lithuania of UNDP’s presence in the reform process in the area of governance; country beyond 2005).

How effective UNDP support was in assisting 5. Scope of the Assessment vulnerable groups at risk of poverty; and advisory support in preparing strategic poverty reporting The evaluation will undertake a comprehensive review documents; of the UNDP programme portfolio and activities during the period under review, with a more in-depth focus on The contribution of UNDP support to meeting governance, poverty and environment. Specifically, the the requirement of UN conventions in the area of Country Review Programme will cover the following: environment. a. Strategic Positioning How effective was UNDP in facilitating Lithuania’s eurointegration processes and addressing Ascertain the strategic focus of UNDP support development areas not covered by EU pre-accession and its relevance to national development policies. priorities, including relevance and linkages with the overarching goal of reducing poverty and the

82 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). This may b. Development Results include an analysis of the perceived comparative strengths of the programme and a review of the Provide an examination of the effectiveness and major national challenges to development. The sustainability of the UNDP programme, by: (a) evaluation will assess UNDP support in relation to highlighting main achievements (outcomes) at helping the government to implement actions aimed national level during UNDP’s presence in Lithuania at reducing poverty and assisting vulnerable groups and UNDP’s contribution to these in terms of key (especially the ones heavily exposed to poverty due outputs; (b) ascertaining current progress made to regional development challenges) and UNDP’s in achieving outcomes in the given thematic areas assistance in poverty reporting, monitoring and of UNDP’s support. The evaluation should qualify strategy papers setting. The aim is to ascertain the UNDP contribution to the outcomes with a fair the added value of UNDP support in effectively degree of plausibility, and consider anticipated and contributing to and influencing the national unanticipated, positive and negative outcomes. development through strategic priority setting and It should also gauge the contribution to capacity intervening at optimal entry points. development at the national level as well as the degree of national ownership and sustainability Assess how UNDP has anticipated and responded of these results. The assessment will cover the to significant changes in the national development key results and support in all thematic areas context within the core areas of focus. In this (governance, poverty, environment, gender, HIV/ regard, the Country Programme Review may, for AIDS, ICT, and any other areas as appropriate). example, consider key events at national and political level that influenced and affected the Provide an in-depth analysis of UNDPs involvement development environment; the risk management in building national capacity of Lithuania as an of UNDP; any missed opportunities for UNDP emerging donor and engaging private sector into involvement and contribution; its efforts development framework assessing the anticipated at advocacy and policy advice and UNDP’s progress in achieving intended outcomes. responsiveness. The evaluation should bring out the choices made by UNDP in response to government Identify and analyze the main factors influencing reforms and explain the rationale behind these results, including the range and quality of choices. development partnerships forged and their contribution to outcomes Review the synergies and alignment of UNDP support with other initiatives and partners, Provide an in-depth analysis of the two thematic including the Global Cooperation Framework areas governance, poverty and environment and (GCF) and the Regional Cooperation Framework identify the best Lithuanian practices accumulated (RCF). This may include examining how UNDP has during the transitional period that might be leveraged its resources and that of others towards successfully brought into regional as well as global the achievement of results, the balance between development cooperation framework. upstream and downstream initiatives and the work on MDGs. c. Lessons Learned and Good Practices

The Evaluation should consider the influence of Identify key lessons in the thematic areas of focus systemic issues, i.e. policy and administrative while operating in a transitional economy, and later constraints affecting the programme, on both in an EU pre-accession country that can provide the donor and programme country sides, as well a useful basis for applying them in the context of as how the development results achieved and possible future EU accession/candidate countries or the partnerships established have contributed to transitional economies in the Region. Through in- ensure a relevant and strategic positioning of UNDP depth thematic assessment, identify good practices support. for learning and replication and draw lessons from intended and unintended results where possible.

83 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

6. Methodology Preparatory work at the local level will be carried out in advance to provide substantive background for The assessment will employ a variety of methodologies the International Expert. Preparatory works will be including desk reviews, stakeholder meetings, client conducted by local research institute or companies. surveys, and selected site visits. (See Annex for a range The Lithuanian company will also be charged with of evaluation techniques) The International Expert will conducting selected surveys of key partners through review national policy documents (including national questionnaires. The in-depth study work may entail strategies, CCAs, MDG reports) which give an overall the review of available reports, collecting additional picture of the country context. The Expert will also documentation, conducting interviews, field visits and consider any thematic studies/papers, select project analysis. This work will be based on specific TOR in documents and programme support documents as addendum to these generic terms of reference. well as any reports from monitoring and evaluation at country level, as well as available documentation and 7. Expected Outputs studies from other development partners. Statistical data will be assessed where useful. The main expected output is the comprehensive final report on “Lithuania Country Programme Review“, A wide stakeholder consultation and involvement including relevant annexes with detailed data. is envisaged. The Evaluation Team will meet with Government Ministries/institutions at central and The final report by the International Expert, should at province level, research institutions, civil society the very least contain: organizations, NGOs and private sector representatives, bilateral donors, and beneficiaries. Executive Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations The Expert will visit field/project sites selected in consultation with the country office and national Background, with analysis of country context stakeholders. Strategic Positioning and Programme Relevance In terms of methodology, the Country Programme Review will follow the guidance issued by the Evaluation Programme Performance Office, and consist of: Lessons Learned and good practices Preparation Phase - with preliminary desk review, programme mapping, TOR proposal, preparation of Findings and Recommendations (including the standardised questioners for different stakeholders findings on remaining development challenges and interviews of stakeholders carried, the information to be possibly addressed by UNDP based on its retrieved from the interviews systematised and comparative advantages in development field reported, the programme for the mission of and accumulated experiences work as trusted international expert prepared) counterpart of the Government)

Conducting the Country Programme Review – the Annexes (TOR, abbreviations, persons met, mission of international expert including methodology documentation reviewed or references, statistics/ briefing, meetings with key stakeholders and CO, field national development indicators etc., details on visits and finalisation of the Review. the programme portfolio, overview of official development assistance, and overview of intended Use of the Country Programme Review - presentation results for UNDP, MDG indicators and status, country for discussions the Review at the International map). Conference on the occasion of the 60th Anniversary of the UN “UN role in Lithuania’s development” and during other learning events, sharing it with national and international stakeholders and wide dissemination.

84 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Timeline/key milestones for Lithuania Country Programme Review Milestones Dates First draft TOR circulated for comments June 2005 Revised TOR finalized and distributed Beginning of July 2005 Identification/selection of local research entity/national consultants Beginning of July 2005 Start of desk reviews, programme mapping, preparation of standardised questioners for different stakeholders and interviews of stakeholders carried; July 2005 –mid August, 2005 The information retrieved from the interviews systematised and reported, the programme for the mission of international expert prepared; End of August, 2005 Mission of an international expert 3 first weeks of September 2005 Submission of draft report by an international expert Beginning of October 2005 Circulation of draft report for feedback Mid-October 2005 Submission of final report End of October 2005 Presentation for discussions of the Review at the International Conference on the occasion of the 60th Anniversary of the UN “UN role in Lithuania’s development” November 2005

Towards the end of the mission, and prior to leaving the 9. Management Arrangements country, the International Expert will discuss his/her preliminary findings and recommendations with the The Evaluation Office will manage the evaluation and Resident Representative and the Country Office staff ensure coordination and liaison with concerned units and present these to the Government and partners at at Headquarters’ level. The general timeframe and a meeting of key stakeholders. The Expert will use this responsibilities for the evaluation process is given feedback to finalize the report. in Annex 2.

8. Evaluators The Country Office will take a lead role in dialogue and interaction with stakeholders on the findings The Country Review Programme will be carried by an and recommendations, support the International international expert. He/She will base the work on Expert in liaison with the key partners and preparatory work done by local research institutes, and discussions with the Team, and make available to the questionnaire and survey results. The local research Team all relevant materials. The country office will partners will also work in close collaboration with provide overall administrative support to logistics the international expert during the main evaluation and planning. mission. The CO will also assist the international expert and local researches engaged. The Evaluation will be financed mainly from RC funds with the possibly expected financial contribution from the Evaluation Office.

85 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

2 PERSONS INTERVIEWED

1. PERSONS INTERVIEWED BY LOCAL CONSULTANTS (formal questionnaire)

Telephone Interviews Raminta Geceviciene Seimas, Human Rights Committee Jatkevicius Seimas, Law Department Kestutis Zaborskas Special Investigation Service Jurate Tumoniene Special Investigation Service Rytis Juozapavicius Transparency International Paulius Skardzius Ministry of Interior Migle Bernotiene Ministry of Interior Dainius Radzevicius Ministry of Justice Rimante Salaseviciute Children’s Ombudsperson Romas Valentukevicius Seimas Ombudsmen Ausrine Burneikiene Equal Opportunities Ombudsperson Jolanta Rimkute Social Policy Unit Dalia Ambrozaitiene Statistics Lithuania Romas Lazutka Vilnius University, Faculty of Philosophy Esmeralda Kuliesyte and Sexual Health Association Marija Teriosina Ministry of Environment

Face to Face Interviews Aleksandras Dobryninas Vilnius University, Faculty of Philosophy Andrejus Piliavecas Crime Prevention Centre Jolanta Vaiciuniene Municipal Training Centre Kastytis Gecas Lithuanian Innovation Centre Ruta Skyriene Investors’ Forum Vaidotas Ilgius Non-Governmental Organization Information & Support Centre Rasa Laiconiene Vilnius City , Social Protection Department Rascius Nature Heritage Fund Kestutis Navickas Regional Environmental Centre Vytautas Toleikis Foundation for Educational Change Jurate Puidiene Women Employment and Information Centre Guoda Burokiene Lithuanian Farm Women’s Association

86 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

2. PERSONS INTERVIEWED BY INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANT (semi-structured)

GOVERNMENT OF LITHUANIA LITHUANIAN CIVIL SOCIETY Ministry of Justice Regional Environmental Center Elvyra Baltutyte, Agent of the Government of Lithuania before Kestutis Navickas, Country Office Director the European Court of Human Rights Social Policy Unit Special Investigation Service Jolanta Rimkute, Director Povilas Malakauskas, Director Vilnius University Jurate Tumoniene, Head Department Vita Karpuskiene, Lecturer, Faculty of Economics Ministry of Foreign Affairs Women Issues Information Center Rokas Bernotas, Director, Department of Multilateral Relations Jurgita Peciuriene, Director Rasa Kairiene, Director, Europe Department Erika Griesiuviene, Second Secretary, Department of Multilateral Relations UNITED NATIONS COUNTRY TEAM Lithuanian AIDS Centre IN LITHUANIA Saulius Caplinskas, Director UNDP Country Office Cihan Sultanoglu, UNDP Resident Representative and UN Ministry of Health Resident Coordinator Viktoras Meizis, Head, International Relations Division Dalia Bagdziuviene, Finance Examiner Ministry of Social Security and Labour Protection Vilma Bucaite, Programme Manager Grazina Jalinskiene, Deputy Head, Department of Social Policy Lyra Jakuleviciene, RC/RR Advisor and Forecasting Lina Jankauskiene, Programme Officer Darius Juozas Kontvainis, Operations Manager Institution of the President of Lithuania Ruta Svarinskaite, Programme Officer Skirmante Kondrotienë, Adviser Ieva Burneikaite, Communications Associate Violeta Toleikienë, Deputy Adviser Giedre Balcytyte (former Comunications Associate) Kaunas University of Medicine World Health Organization (WHO) Ruta Nadisauskiene, Head of Department, of Obstetrics Robertas Petkevicius, Liaison Officer and Gynecology of Kaunas University of Medicine Raimunda Sadauskiene, Administrative Assistant Rosita Anuliene, Administrator of Outpatient Department, Clinics of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Kaunas University of Medicine UNICEF National Committee Jovita Majauskaite, Head of Unicef Committee in Lithuania Lithuanian National Commission for UNESCO INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS Asta Dirmaite, Secretary General Canada World Bank Egle Jurkeviciene, Programs Officer Mantas Nocius, Country Manager for Lithuania US Embassy International Organisation for Migration (IOM) Randolph Flay, Attache, Cultural and Scientific Affairs Audra Sipaviciene, Head of Vilnius Office Giedra Gureviciute-Demereckiene, Pol/Econ Section Egle Viluniene, Program Assistant, Public Affairs Section

87 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

3 DOCUMENTS UNDP Lithuania Programming REVIEWED A Decade of Partnership. United Nations Development Programme in Lithuania (October 2002) Country Review Report (April 2000) CP 1 1993-1996 CCF 1 1997-2000 CCF 2 2001-2003 CPO 2004-05 Lithuania Government Administrative Justice in Lithuania: An Assessment. Daniel A. UNDP Headquarters Bilak (November 2003) Technical Assistance to Lithuania 1991-1999. Ministry of Global Cooperation Framework I (1997-2000) Foreign Affairs Global Cooperation Framework II (2001-2004) Regional Cooperation Framework I (1997-2001) UNDP Lithuania Regional Cooperation Framework II (2002-2005) Lithuanian Human Development Reports (1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002-2003) UN Methodology Development of a national human rights action plan: The experience of Lithuania. Tomas Baranovas, (December 2002) UNDP – ADR Framework Paper (First Draft – July 2002) UNDP Governance Centre (The Democratic Governance Fellowship Programme) UN System Lithuania Progress for All. Common Country Assessment for Lithuania UNDP Lithuania Evaluations/Assessments (September 2001) Project Performance Assessment Report for the UNDP Project Report on the Millennium Development Goals: A Baseline Study. No. LIT99/Q12/72 “Wanted: Women in Business”. Arunas Common Country Assessment for Lithuania (December 2002) Gricius (2004) Disaggregated Millennium Development Goals. Report for Evaluation of the UNDP Poverty Assessment and Reduction Lithuania (April 2004) Project 1997-2000 (LIT/96/551/A99;LIT/96/G51/A99; Annual Resident Coordinator Reports (1999 - 2004) LIT/97/551/A11) and Recommendations for a Second Phase. Michael Reynolds (July 2000) “Microsoft software for women’s non-governmental organisations”. The UN Bulletin in Lithuania No 35. July 2003 External Evaluation Report on UNDP Juvenile Justice Programme LIT/99/005 Other Donor Programme Evaluations Lithuanian Judicial Training Centre Evaluation Report (November 2000) World Bank OED Lithuania Country Assistance Evaluation (2004) Support to International Business School at Vilnius University DfiD Review of DfID/ODA’s Programmes in Accession Countries (LIT/97/004). Report of the Evaluation Mission. J-P Larcon, (2004) Viniaus Gedimino (January 1999) CIDA Canada and the Baltics: Partners in Transition (2004) Action Programme for NGO Sector Development (LIT/94/006/ Other A/01/99; LIT/94/Q06/A/1Q/99) Report of the Evaluation Mission. K. McLaren, K. Kovaite. (April 1999) EBRD Transition report 2004 Linking the Interests of Environment and Society. GEF SGP World Bank Lithuania: CEM Converging to Europe (2002) Three Years in Lithuania (2004) Statistical data from year 2002.

88 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

4 UNDP PROGRAMME RESOURCES BY THEME

THEME sOURCE COUNTRY PROGRAMME (US$)

CP1 CP2 CP3 CP4 tOTAL

1993-96 1997-00 2001-03 2004-05 1993-05 Poverty total 340.582 765.494 681.680 29.845 1.817.601 core 122.935 399.292 282.637 2.438 807.302 non-core 217.647 366.202 399.043 27.407 1.010.299 Governance total 2.892.339 1.926.191 1.216.379 1.115.055 7.149.964 core 1.202.148 865.036 330.788 586.711 2.984.683 non-core 1.690.191 1.061.155 885.591 528.344 4.165.281 Environment Total - 4.571.956 2.082.032 1.628.247 8.282.235 core - 25.579 63.421 - 89.000 non-core - 4.546.377 2.018.611 1.628.247 8.193.235 civil society total 223.044 98.590 50.667 60.700 433.001 core 72.112 22.320 30.300 28.500 153.232 non-core 150.932 76.270 20.367 32.200 279.769 HDR total 40.391 255.012 178.458 2.745 476.606 core 40.391 214.291 65.302 2.745 322.729 noncore - 40.721 113.156 - 153.877 Gender total 15.263 321.286 138.500 63.391 538.440 core 15.263 129.281 32.882 25.287 202.713 noncore - 192.005 105.618 38.104 335.727 HIVAIDS total - 25.000 52.953 267.785 345.738 core - - 2.953 79.838 82.791 noncore - 25.000 50.000 187.947 262.947 ICTD Total - - 134.867 145.341 280.208 core - - - - - noncore - - 134.867 145.341 280.208 TOTAL Total 3.511.619 7.963.529 4.535.536 3.313.109 19.323.793 core 1.452.849 1.655.799 808.283 725.519 4.642.450 noncore 2.058.770 6.307.730 3.727.253 2.587.590 14.681.343

89 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

5 UNDP PROGRAMME RESOURCES (1993-2005)

Sources of Assistance 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 plan for 2005 Total for 1993-2005

UNDP CORE RESOURCES of which: 131.628 378.645 748.103 194.473 242.348 592.501 451.950 369.000 255.000 235.904 317.379 284.000 435.792 4.636.723

IPF/TRAC (Indicative Planing Figure / Target for Resource Assignment from the Core) 131.628 378.645 748.103 194.473 162.077 579.793 384.232 315.000 243.000 209.726 292.798 284.000 435.792 4.359.267

SPPD/STS (Support for Policy and Programme Development / Support for Technical Services) 80.271 12.708 67.718 54.000 12.000 26.178 24.581 - - 277.456 NON-CORE RESOURCES of which: - - 577.955 1.480.815 775.574 4.054.986 900.047 577.123 714.609 2.079.272 933.372 1.377.319 1.575.949 15.047.021

Government Cost Sharing ------23.544 93.569 140.089 155.064 412.266

Third Party Cost Sharing (from the donor countries etc.) - - 391.747 1.089.202 552.329 191.294 260.769 343.000 300.000 507.087 158.617 234.964 225.574 4.254.583

BTF (Baltic Trust Fund) - - 186.208 391.613 178.245 56.325 15.123 157.000 66.000 52.950 99.146 29.426 13.000 1.245.036

GEF (Global Environment Facility) - - - - - 3.800.833 615.438 70.000 348.609 1.374.297 466.218 872.824 1.132.311 8.680.530

Other Trust Funds - - - - 45.000 6.534 8.717 7.123 - 121.394 115.822 100.016 50.000 454.606 TOTAL PROGRAMME RESOURCES 131.628 378.645 1.326.058 1.675.288 1.017.922 4.647.487 1.351.997 946.123 969.609 2.315.176 1.250.751 1.661.319 2.011.741 19.683.744

As a % of Total resources

% Core 100% 100% 56% 12% 24% 13% 33% 39% 26% 10% 25% 17% 22% 24%

% non-Core 0% 0% 44% 88% 76% 87% 67% 61% 74% 90% 75% 83% 78% 76% As a % of Total resources

% Government Cost Sharing 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 1,0% 7,5% 8,4% 7,7% 2,1%

% Third Party Cost Sharing 0% 0% 30% 65% 54% 4% 19% 36% 31% 22% 13% 14% 11% 22%

% BTF 0% 0% 14% 23% 18% 1% 1% 17% 7% 2% 8% 2% 1% 6%

% GEF 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 82% 46% 7% 36% 59% 37% 53% 56% 44% As a % of non-core resources

% Government Cost Sharing 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1,1% 10,0% 10,2% 9,8% 2,7%

% Third Party Cost Sharing 0% 0% 68% 74% 71% 5% 29% 59% 42% 24% 17% 17% 14% 28%

% BTF 0% 0% 32% 26% 23% 1% 2% 27% 9% 3% 11% 2% 1% 8%

% GEF 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 94% 68% 12% 49% 66% 50% 63% 72% 58%

90 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Sources of Assistance 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 plan for 2005 Total for 1993-2005

UNDP CORE RESOURCES of which: 131.628 378.645 748.103 194.473 242.348 592.501 451.950 369.000 255.000 235.904 317.379 284.000 435.792 4.636.723

IPF/TRAC (Indicative Planing Figure / Target for Resource Assignment from the Core) 131.628 378.645 748.103 194.473 162.077 579.793 384.232 315.000 243.000 209.726 292.798 284.000 435.792 4.359.267

SPPD/STS (Support for Policy and Programme Development / Support for Technical Services) 80.271 12.708 67.718 54.000 12.000 26.178 24.581 - - 277.456 NON-CORE RESOURCES of which: - - 577.955 1.480.815 775.574 4.054.986 900.047 577.123 714.609 2.079.272 933.372 1.377.319 1.575.949 15.047.021

Government Cost Sharing ------23.544 93.569 140.089 155.064 412.266

Third Party Cost Sharing (from the donor countries etc.) - - 391.747 1.089.202 552.329 191.294 260.769 343.000 300.000 507.087 158.617 234.964 225.574 4.254.583

BTF (Baltic Trust Fund) - - 186.208 391.613 178.245 56.325 15.123 157.000 66.000 52.950 99.146 29.426 13.000 1.245.036

GEF (Global Environment Facility) - - - - - 3.800.833 615.438 70.000 348.609 1.374.297 466.218 872.824 1.132.311 8.680.530

Other Trust Funds - - - - 45.000 6.534 8.717 7.123 - 121.394 115.822 100.016 50.000 454.606 TOTAL PROGRAMME RESOURCES 131.628 378.645 1.326.058 1.675.288 1.017.922 4.647.487 1.351.997 946.123 969.609 2.315.176 1.250.751 1.661.319 2.011.741 19.683.744

As a % of Total resources

% Core 100% 100% 56% 12% 24% 13% 33% 39% 26% 10% 25% 17% 22% 24%

% non-Core 0% 0% 44% 88% 76% 87% 67% 61% 74% 90% 75% 83% 78% 76% As a % of Total resources

% Government Cost Sharing 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 1,0% 7,5% 8,4% 7,7% 2,1%

% Third Party Cost Sharing 0% 0% 30% 65% 54% 4% 19% 36% 31% 22% 13% 14% 11% 22%

% BTF 0% 0% 14% 23% 18% 1% 1% 17% 7% 2% 8% 2% 1% 6%

% GEF 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 82% 46% 7% 36% 59% 37% 53% 56% 44% As a % of non-core resources

% Government Cost Sharing 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1,1% 10,0% 10,2% 9,8% 2,7%

% Third Party Cost Sharing 0% 0% 68% 74% 71% 5% 29% 59% 42% 24% 17% 17% 14% 28%

% BTF 0% 0% 32% 26% 23% 1% 2% 27% 9% 3% 11% 2% 1% 8%

% GEF 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 94% 68% 12% 49% 66% 50% 63% 72% 58%

91 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

6 MAP OF LITHUANIA

92 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005) 7 LITHUANIA BASIC INDICATORS

POVERTY and SOCIAL lithuania Europe& Upper-middle- INDICATORS income 2004 Population, mid-year (millions) 3.4 472 576 GNI per capita (Atias method, USS) 5.740 3.290 4.770 GNI (Atias method, USS billions) 19.7 1.553 2.748 Average annual growth, Population (%) -0.6 -0.1 0.8 1998-04 Labor force (%) -0.1 -0.5 -0.9 Most recent estimate Poverty (% of population below national poverty line) … … … [latest year available, Urban population (% of total population) 67 64 72 1998-04] Life expectancy at birth (years) 72 68 69 Infant mortality (per 1.000 live births) 8 29 24 Child (% of children under 5) … … … Access to an improved water source (% of population) … 91 93 Literacy (% of population age 15+) 100 97 91 Gross primary enrollment (% of school-age population) 98 101 106 Male 99 103 108 Female 98 101 106 KEY ECONOMIC RATIOS 1994 2003 2004 and LONG-TERM TRENDS GDP (USS billions) 7.0 18.4 22.3 Gross capital formation/GDP 18.4 21.7 23.5 Exports of goods and services/GDP 55.4 51.4 54.3 Gross domestic savings/GDP 12.4 16.3 16.5 Gross national savings/GDP 16.3 15.2 14.9 Current account balance/GDP -1.4 -5.6 -5.9 Interest payments/GDP 0.3 1.3 0.7 Total debt/GDP 7.2 45.6 40.7 Total debt service/exports 2.9 68.5 13.4 Present value of debt/GDP … 45.7 … Present value of debt/exports … 85.4 … (average annual growth) 1994-04 2003 2004 2004-08 GDP 5.1 9.7 6.7 6.0 GDP per capita 5.8 10.2 7.1 6.4 Exports of goods and services 8.5 6.0 11.7 6.7 STRUCTURE of the ECONOMY 1994 2003 2004 Agriculture 11.1 6.3 6.2 (% of GDP) Industry 35.5 32.0 33.6 Manufacturing 25.1 19.8 20.8 Services 53.4 61.7 60.3 Household final consumption expenditure 68.0 65.0 67.4 General gov’t final consumption expenditure 19.5 18.7 16.1 Imports of goods and services 61.4 55.8 61.3 (average annual growth) 1994-04 2003 2004 Agriculture 0.0 2.1 3.0 Industry 5.7 16.0 7.0 Manufacturing 7.5 14.1 7.0 Services 5.7 7.4 5.7 Household final consumption expenditure 5.6 12.2 2.8 General gov’t final consumption expenditure 2.2 5.7 9.9 Gross capital formation 9.7 12.8 17.1 Imports of goods and services 9.1 8.8 12.1 Note: 2004 data are preliminary estimates Source: The 93 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME 8 DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE FLOWS TO LITHUANIA 1991-2004

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 tOTAL % TOTAL

AID FLOWS (net disbursements US$ million) OA (2003 prices) 4,69 100,92 72,77 80,95 173,82 91,49 113,53 147,98 152,54 125,29 170,48 161,12 370,98 216,74 1.983,30 OA 3,96 93,89 62,25 71,51 179,25 91,05 103,8 133,69 134,02 99,08 130,26 132,21 370,98 242,42 1.848,37 100,0% of which EU 20,86 11,37 16,24 63,25 28,92 41,72 50,61 65,28 45,74 76,45 92,07 329,45 217,86 1.059,82 57,3% EU as a percentage of total OA 22% 18% 23% 35% 32% 40% 38% 49% 46% 59% 70% 89% 90% Canada - - 1,29 1,32 1,04 1,15 0,71 1,95 0,83 0,80 0,15 0,79 0,41 - 10,44 0,6% Denmark 1,17 5,83 - 0,14 4,24 6,36 11,22 14,09 26,83 17,45 19,68 8,93 12,07 1,44 129,45 7,0% Finland - 0,21 0,17 0,92 2,40 0,75 2,14 6,01 2,14 0,12 1,89 1,96 2,35 - 21,06 1,1% - 1,02 1,32 1,65 2,90 3,00 1,29 6,20 1,85 1,45 1,34 2,03 2,67 - 26,72 1,4% 1,70 5,30 14,39 11,06 65,59 11,47 8,24 8,32 7,42 4,00 6,84 6,87 9,80 9,75 170,75 9,2% Japan - 0,02 0,08 0,12 0,16 0,29 0,27 1,21 1,69 2,01 1,79 1,48 2,51 3,16 14,79 0,8% Netherlands 0,10 1,20 1,46 - 1,44 - - 0,80 - 1,28 2,02 0,68 0,94 - 9,92 0,5% Norway 0,52 0,44 1,34 3,25 2,20 2,15 2,78 3,19 1,81 1,73 0,57 1,00 0,63 - 21,61 1,2% Sweden 0,34 24,60 2,85 11,32 17,75 17,36 21,10 13,51 10,04 14,72 14,84 13,26 8,79 6,99 177,47 9,6% - 25,00 24,00 15,00 11,00 14,00 1,00 9,26 7,81 2,04 -1,19 -1,51 -1,58 - 104,83 5,7% Poland ------1,71 2,42 1,61 2,70 2,20 ,22 1,06 15,92 0,9%

AID INTENSITY OA/Capita (US$) 25 17 20 49 25 29 38 38 28 37 38 107 70 OA as % GNI 0,04 1,12 0,86 1,05 2,45 1,17 1,08 1,23 1,27 0,89 1,09 0,95 2,07

Note: 2004 figures are provisional Source: OECD Development Assisstance Committee (DAC)

94 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Whilst African, Asian, American and Caribbean regions remain the main beneficiaries from other EU Member States assistance, these have yet to play a prominent 9 role in Lithuania’s bilateral cooperation policies. Nevertheless, Lithuania’s international commitments and growing economy provide possibilities that LITHUANIA AS AN the Africa, Carribbean and Pacific (ACP) region could become a future partner area in development EMERGING DONOR cooperation on bilateral basis. This process has been accelerated through consultations with other EU Lithuania’s main opportunities for current overseas Member States, particularly Scandinavian countries, development co-operations are with the former soviet regarding criteria and possibilities to identify partners countries who are particularly interested in gaining in the ACP region. However Lithuania’s main short-term experience of transition from post-soviet regimes to partners for development co-operation continue to be democratic structures. These countries remain priority the former soviet republics and EU candidate countries areas for Lithuanian development cooperation policy through East-East co-operation. and Lithuania’s geopolitical position, historical and cultural ties help strengthen cooperation opportunities Through development of closer relations with its with these countries. neighbours and other countries Lithuania aims to

Lithuanian Development Assistance Projects Financed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs 2002 2003 2004 Belarus: Kaliningrad: Enhanced Partnership European Integration: Women on the rise in Challenges and Opportunities (trilateral project: Finland, Lithuania, Kaliningrad) Kaliningrad: South Caucasus: : Development of Critical Thinking Training of civil servants Training of Civil Servants Kaliningrad: South Caucasus: Ukraine: Localizing Sustainable Development Strengthening of NGOs Training of Civil Servants - 3 (trilateral project: Lithuania, UNDP and Kaliningrad) Ukraine: Ukraine: Kaliningrad: Women on the rise Training on EU Policies Training on EU Policies – 2 (trilateral project: Finland, Lithuania, Kaliningrad) Ukraine: Ukraine: Belarus: Study visit of youth Ukraine Institute Relationship between affected by catastrophe EU – Ukraine Ukraine: Ukraine: : Training of civil servants on Economic Management Training Economic Management Training the elections procedures (trilateral project: Canada, Baltic (trilateral project: Canada, countries and Ukraine) Baltic countries and Ukraine) Belarus/Ukraine/Moldova: Strengthening of Youth NGO Regional: Northern.e-dimention.net Regional: Know Your Neighbors

Source: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs

95 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

strengthen its position as an expert of the European New Neighbourhood Policy (ENNP) and enhance its strategic role in the region. Responsibilities of an 10 emerging donor, however, are not limited to commercial consultancy opportunities and require a financial commitment from the public and their representatives UNDP LITHUANIA to help fund overseas development projects in less developed countries through multilateral assistance PROJECTS programmes. (1993-2005) Multilateral assistance consists mainly of compulsory contributions and payments to international organizations. Lithuania provided aid in 2004 to A. POVERTY , , Iraq, , Russian Federation and (Tsunami). This multilateral assistance Ongoing demonstrates Lithuania’s intention to contribute to PROJECT NAME the achievement of MDGs and, due to the absence of bilateral relations with other , multilateral NGO Capacity Building for Poverty Reduction in Lithuania assistance through international organisations will likely continue to represent the main form of donor Promoting Innovation and Employment in Lithuania aid until government increases its commitment to participate in multi-lateral activities.

Lithuania’s main areas of bilateral aid are expected to Completed remain based on strengthening democratic processes PROJECT NAME and stability in its eastern neighbours. Lithuania’s short-term priority regions are Kaliningrad Region Social Exclusion and Poverty during Transition of the Russian Federation, Ukraine, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Moldova, and Iraq. Project “Partnership Against AIDS” Medium and longer term support is anticipated for other Support to the Implementation of the National Poverty regions, particularly in South Caucasus (, reduction strategy: Preparation of the Action Plan Georgia and Armenia) and the Balkans. Umbrella Project UNFPA Population and Housing Census in Lithuania: Sup- to Data Dissemination and Analysis Assessment of the Implementation of Poverty Reduction Policies in Lithuania Social Policy Monitoring and Evaluation Social Safety Net Poverty Assessment and Reduction Support for Social Policy Development Assessment of Rural Living Standards Assessment of the Implementation of Poverty Reduction Strategies School Self-help Activities to Increase Participation of Local Communities

96 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Equal Opportunities for Women and Men B. GOVERNANCE Juvenile Justice Programme Ongoing Projects Lithuanian Human Development Textbook PROJECT NAME Lithuanian Human Development Courses Facilitation of the Delivery of Effective Juvenile Justice System in Lithuania Support for the Establishment of Citizen Advice Bureaus System in Lithuania Implementing Local Development Strategies in Lithuania: Improving Public Service Delivery through Strengthening Preparatory Assistance for the Public Administration the Capacity for Partnerships and Sound Financial Manage- Reform ment Support for Public Administration Reform in Lithuania Strengthening Human Rights Through Legal Education of the Public Establishment of a Judicial Training Centre Creating Conditions for Successful Local Development Action programme for NGO sector development through Strengthening the Administrative Capacities of Municipalities Support to establishment of Crime Prevention Centre Promoting Transparency and Accountability in Public Support to International Business School Administration Marketing of Hi-tech Scientific Know-how Support to Implementation of the National Human Rights Advancement of Citizen Security Programme Action Plan Preventing Corruption through Education, Information and Strengthening of the Ombudsman Institution Consciousness-raising Support to Establishment of Language Training Centre Foreign Aid Management Support to Establishment of a Human Rights Centre Completed Projects PROJECT NAME UNDP and UNESCO Support for Vilnius’ Old Support for Local Government Information Network Regional Public Awareness Campaign on Women’s Rights to a Life Free of Violence Against Women Lithuanian Human Development Report Lithuanian Human Development Report 2002 - 2003 C. ENVIRONMENT

Human Development Strategies Ongoing Human Development Textbook PROJECT NAME HD course for Universities National Capacity Self-Assessment for Global Environment Support to National Human Development Report Management Umbrella Project for Short-Term Advisory Services and Hu- Marine Protected Area System for the Eastern Baltic Sea: man Resource Development in Priority Sectors Assessment and Implementation Support to the expansion of mandate of the Equal Oppor- Development of two MSP’s in priority areas identified dur- tunities Ombudsman ing the formulation of Lithuania’s NIP Support to the legislative (law-making) reform Conservation of Inland Wetland Biodiversity in Lithuania Support to development of National action plan for the Preparation of the POPs National Implementation Plan promotion and protection of human rights under the Stockholm Convention Support for the initial activities of the Ombudsman of The GEF Small Grants Programme

97 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Completed Completed PROJECT NAME PROJECT NAME Regional Baltic Wind Energy Programme Men’s Crisis and Information Centre’s Institutional Capac- ity Building Education for sustainable development Wanted: Women in Business Elimination of Green House Gases in the Manufacturing of Domestic Refrigerators and Freezers at Snaige Gender Mainstreaming into Lithuanian Policies Info Centre on the Environment and Sustainable Develop- Project “Partnership Against AIDS” ment Strategic Planning to strengthen the Multisectoral Institutional Strengthening and Capacity Building: Estab- response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic at the national and lishment of An Ozone Office Sub-National Levels in Lithuania Phase-out of Ozone Depleting Substances at Vilnius Bu- Regional project “Social, Economic and Governance Di- itine Chemija, Snaige, Oruva mensions of the HIV epidemic in Eastern Europe, CIS and Baltic States” Recovery and Recycling of Refrigerants IEC Activities to Overcome Complacency about HIV/AIDS Situation in Lithuania Action Programme for the Advancement of Women D. CROSS CUTTING THEMES Peer education centres Ongoing Policy Development PROJECT NAME Women’s Issues Information Center Strengthening National Capacity of Lithuania as an Emerg- Equal Opportunities ing Donor Expansion of Equal Opportunities Youth Friendly Services for Lithuania Assessing Gender Mainstreaming Approaches Youth Debate Tour to Improve Awareness on HIV/AIDS at the Local Level HIV/AIDS and STI prevention among Uniformed Services in Lithuania Capacity Building of Lithuanian Women through ICT and Networking UNFPA global pilot INT/01/PB2 Strengthening the capac- ity of the health sector to address gender based violence.

98 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

to the Ministry of Social Security and Labour and the Social Policy and Employment Committee of the Parliament of Lithuania, 1999. In Lithuanian. Social 11 Policy Unit. Social Policy Unit, Analysis of Pension Replacement UNDP SUPPORTED Rates, Report to the Ministry of Social Security and Labour, 2000. In Lithuanian. Social Policy Unit. REPORTS National poverty reduction Strategy (in English and (1993-2005) Lithuanian, June 2000). Ministry of Social Security and Labour and UNDP Selection of publications, reports and other informational materials prepared by UNDP in Lithuania National Report on the Implementation of the Outcome or with their significant support and involvement. of the World Summit for Social Development. Republic of Lithuania 1999. Government of Lithuania. General Development: Poverty Reduction in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, Progress for All. Common Country Assessment for 2000 (in English also available on the website) Lithuania. United Nations. September 2001.Vilnius (in English and in Lithuanian) Katsiaouni, O., Gorniak, J., Lazutka, R., Poverty in Lithuania: Capacity Building for Rural Poverty Report on the Millennium Development Goals: a Reduction, 2000 (in English and Lithuanian) Baseline Study. Common Country Assessment for Lithuania. United Nations. December 2002. Vilnius (in Gediminas Cerniauskas, Monitoring Poverty, Paper for English and in Lithuanian) Conference on Poverty and Policy, UNDP Lithuania, February 1999 (also in Lithuanian and available on the Disaggregated Millennium Development Goals Report website) for Lithuania. United Nations. April 2004. Vilnius. (in English and in Lithuanian) Romas Lazutka, Assessing Poverty and Preconditions for Reducing it, Paper for Conference on Poverty Poverty and Social Security: and Policy, UNDP Lithuania, February 1999 (also in Lithuanian and available on the website) UNDP Lithuania and Social Policy Unit, Lithuanian Human Development Reports (also in Lithuanian and UNDP Lithuania and Social Policy Unit, Human available on the website) Development: concept and trends, April 1999 (also in Lithuanian) Social Policy Unit, The Reform of Cash Benefits Granted according to the Principle of Means-Testing, Report to Corinne Elsing, Regional Policy and Development in the Ministry of Social Security and Labour and Tripartite Lithuania, UNDP Lithuania, July 1999 (available on the Council, 1999. In Lithuanian. Social Policy Unit. website)

Social Policy Unit, Analysis of Possibilities for Ernst van Koesveld, Human Development across Regions Transforming Social Insurance Contributions, Report in Lithuania, UNDP Lithuania, August 1999 (available to the Ministry of Social Security and Labour, 1999. In on the website) Lithuanian. Social Policy Unit. Republic of Lithuania, National Report on the Social Policy Unit, The Concepts of Pension Reforms, Implementation of the Outcome of the World Summit Report to the Government of Lithuania, 1999. In for Social Development, UNDP Lithuania, September Lithuanian. Social Policy Unit. 1999 (also available in Lithuania and on the website)

Social Policy Unit, Evaluation of Economic Efficiency of Social Assistance for Families with Children, Report

99 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Ministry of Social Security and Labour, Annual Social : an innocent flirt or contravention Report 1998, October 1999, 2000 (in English and of human rights. L.Vaiciuniene. Chancellery of the Lithuanian; available on the website www.socmin.lt) Lithuanian Parliament, 2003. Vilnius.

National Poverty Monitoring Commission Report 2001, Problems with preventing human rights in international 2001 (in Lithuanian) and Lithuanian. D.Jociene and K.C ilinskas. Chancellery of the Lithuanian Parliament, 2003. Vilnius. Lithuanian Republic Poverty Reduction Strategy’s Implementation Programme for 2002-2004, Ministry of Is the Lithuanian Society Safe? V.Gaidys and Social Security and Labour and UNDP, 2003 (in English A.Dobryninas. Chancellery of the Lithuanian Parliament, and Lithuanian) 2003. Vilnius

Governance: Constitutional Values for Youth. Ministry of Educiation and Science. (to be published in 2005) Study “ and Governing Institutions in Lithuania in 1998” prepared by A. Astrauskas, Sciential Studies of Career Education for Disabled Presidential advisor (in English and Lithuanian) People in Lithuania. Ministry of Education and Science. 2004. Study “Strategic Directions for the year 2000-2003 of Association of Local Authorities” prepared by A. Quality and Evaluation of Social Work for the Elderly”. Astrauskas and Z. Svetikas (in Lithuanian) Ministry od Social Security and Labour.(to be published in 2005) Study “Models of Subordination of Government Institutions. Evaluation of Functions and Human rights in Lithuania: comparative situation Accountability” prepared by Prof. A. Marcinskas and A. assessment and progress review. (to be published in Sakocius (in English and Lithuanian) 2005). Chancellery of the Lithuanian Parliament.

A handbook for teachers and schoolchildren of higher Environment: grades on legal education “Law for Everyone” 2003 (in Lithuanian) Development of lake and wetland ecosystems. Rimvydas Kunskas. 2005. (in Lithuanian) Administrative Justice in Lithuania. An assessment. 2003 Cultivation of large-cranberries in plantations. Remigijus Daubaras. 2005 (in Lithuanian) A publication “Fight against corruption: practical examples”, 2002 National Biosafety system in Lithuania”. 2004. Vilnius. (in Lithuanian) “Corruption in Institutions of : Viewpoints, Challenges, Solutions”, 2005 (in The Kartachena bio-safety protocol for biological Lithuanian) diversity convention. 2004. Vilnius. (in Lithuanian)

A series of 5 CDs, Ethics training for Civil Servants”, Genetically modified organisms. A. Paulauskas. 2004. 2004 (in Lithuanian) (in Lithuanian)

A publication “Transparency and Corruption in A National Report on Sustainable Development, 2002 Lithuania”, 2005 (in Lithuanian) The Lithuanian Strategy for Sustainable Development, A study “Map of Corruption in Lithuania”, 2004 2003

Human rights in Lithuania: situation assessment. Linking the Interests of the Environment and Society. Chancellery of the Lithuanian Parliament, 2002. GEF SGP Three Years in Lithuania, 2004 Vilnius. Gender issues and Human Rights:

100 REVIEW OF UNDP’S PARTNERSHIP WITH LITHUANIA (1992-2005)

Monthly newsletter - “’s World” (in Lithuanian, The NGO “Elderly Women’s Activities Centre” was quarterly in English) provided with support for whole-year information campaign on the International Year of Older Persons in The Report for Beijing+5 review “Women in Lithuania”, the Mass Media. 1999 (in English) Woman in Lithuanian Society: Comparative Research Statistical pocket book “Women and Men in Lithuania”, Analysis” .Women’s Issues Information Centre (in 1999 (in Lithuanian and English) Lithuanian), Women’s Issues Information Centre. 2001

Leaflet of Lithuania Equal Opportunities Ombudsman Sexuality and Education: Surveys of Approaches, institution, (in Lithuanian) Stereotypes and Education Substance. 2001. (in Lithuanian) Collection of scientific articles “Women’s Self Identification” (in Lithuanian) ‘’Women Handcrafts”. Women’s Employment Information Center. 2002. Kaunas. (in Lithuanian) UN Resolution on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Measures to Eliminate Violence against Women (in 2003-2004 National Programme for Equal Opportunities Lithuanian) of Men and Women. Women’s Issues Information Centre. 2003. Vilnius. (in Lithuanian) Law of the Republic of Lithuania on Equal Opportunities (in Lithuanian) Digest of Women NGOs. Women’s Issues Information Centre. 2003. Vilnius. (in Lithuanian) Report of the 1998 survey “Rural Women in Lithuania” (in Lithuanian) “Internet for You”. Women’s Employment Information Center. 2004. Kaunas. (in Lithuanian) Collection of scientific articles, including the victim survey report “Violence against Women” (in Lithuanian Our Right is to Live without Violence. Women’s Issues and English) Information Centre and UNFPA 2003.

Politics Towards Women and Women in Politics (in Health and Education, HIVAIDS, Drug Use: English) Publication of bulletin “Vilnius against drugs” for the “Women in Lithuania”, Women Issues Information First Lithuanian Conference on HIV/AIDS and Centre, prepared for the UN General Assembly on Drugs Issues, jointly organized by Vilnius Municipality, Beijing+5. UNDP, and European Cities against Drugs (ECAD).

Gender in Transition: Five Years of UNDP Projects Informational brochure “Viral Sexually Transmitted in Eastern and Central Europe and CIS. UNDP/RBEC, Infections. Diagnostic and Treatment”. (in Lithuanian) UNOPS. Prepared by the Women Issues Information Centre for the UNECE regional preparatory meeting of Information brochures on Sexually Transmitted the Beijing+5 review in 2000. Infections’ Surveillance and Prevention. (in Lithuanian)

Quarterly issues of the European Electronic Bulletin on National HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control Programme Gender related developments in Central and Eastern 2003-2008, 2003, Ministry of Health and UNDP, 2003. Europe. Issued by the Lithuania based Women Issues (in English and Lithuanian) Information Centre. Peer Education Kit for Uniformed Services, 2005. Kaunas Municipality Council on the Protection of (in Lithuanian) Child Rights, Assistance to Children and their Families (including the Convention on Children’s Rights, in Women’s Issues Information Centre and UNFPA, Gender- Lithuanian), December 1999. Based Violence: A Practical Guide for the Staff and Administrations of the Health Care Institutions, 2002. (in Lithuanian)

101 UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

12 UNDP STAFF MEMBERS (1992-2005)

UNDP RESIDENT REPRESENTATIVE/ UN RESIDENT COORDINATOR Mr. Jorgen Lissner, (1992-1995) Mr. Cornelis Klein, (1995-2000) Ms. Cihan Sultanoglu, (2000-2005)

Kornelija Jurgaitiene, Programme Officer (1993-1994) Giedre Balcytyte, Communications Associate (2002-2005)

Remigijus Tranas, Programme Assistant (1993-1996) Ruta Svarinskaite, Programme Officer (2003 - present)

Philip Tanner, Junior Professional Officer (1992-1993) Agne Bajoriniene, National Project Coordinator (2003- present)

Rita Bureikaite, Programme Assistant (1993-1994) Lyra Jakuleviciene, Adviser to RC/RR (2004-present)

Michael Rymek, Junior Professional Officer (1993-1995) Arturas Dudoitis, Programme Assistant (2005-present)

Neringa Kranauskiene, Public Relations Associate (1993-2002) Ingrida Stankeviciene, Programme Assistant (2005-present)

Birute Jatautaite, Programme Officer (1994-1999) Ieva Burneikaite, Communications Associate (2005-present)

Virginija Poskute, Programme Assistant (1994-1997) Darius Juozas Kontvainis, Operations Manager (1992-present)

Ingrida Sidlauskiene, Programme Assistant (1995-1997) Vidas Motieka, Clerk-Driver (1994-2004)

Toshiaki Tanabe, Junior Professional Officer (1995-1997) Jurga Brazaityte, Secretary (1994-1996)

Jolanta Taruskiene, Programme Assistant (1996-1999) Rima Maneikaite, Finance Assistant (1994-1996)

Vilma Bucaite, Programme Manager (1998-present) Egidijus Damulis, Administrative Assistant (1996-1998)

Giedre Purvaneckiene, Project Coordinator (1998-2000) Beatrice Malaiskiene, Assistant to the RC/RR (1996 – present)

Mika Sulkinoja (1998-1999) Tomas Pauliukonis, Administrative Assistant (1996-1997)

Ernst van Koesveld, Junior Professional Officer (1998-2000) Jurate Geciene, Finance Assistant ( 1996-1999)

Lina Jankauskiene, Programme Officer (1999-present) Tomas Masaitis, Finance Associate (1998-2003)

Tomas Baranovas, Programme Officer (1999-2003) Dalia Bagdziuviene, Finance Examiner (1998-present)

Asse Fosshaug, Junior Professional Officer (2000-2001) Saulius Seskus, Administrative Assistant (1997-2000)

Mathieu Ryckewart, Programme Assistant (2001-2003) Dargis, Clerk-Driver (2004-present)

102