1 / 13

NEX and DEX: Theory and Reality

NEX and DEX: Theory and Reality. RBEC Environment and Energy Practice Workshop: GEF Training and Kyoto Implementation Mechanisms 6-9 October 2004 Almaty, Kazakhstan Zharas Takenov, UNDP Kyrgyzstan. Agency Execution NGO Execution National Execution (NEX) Direct Execution (DEX ).

bing
Télécharger la présentation

NEX and DEX: Theory and Reality

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NEX and DEX: Theory and Reality RBEC Environment and Energy Practice Workshop: GEF Training and Kyoto Implementation Mechanisms 6-9 October 2004 Almaty, Kazakhstan Zharas Takenov, UNDP Kyrgyzstan

  2. Agency Execution NGO Execution National Execution (NEX) Direct Execution (DEX) UNDP Project Execution:

  3. List of eligible Agencies: *FAO, ILO, DESA, UNESCO, UNIDO * Other UN Specific Organizations (e.g. WHO,WMO, IAEA) * Regional Economic Commissions * UNOPS, Multilateral Banks (WB, Regional Banks etc.) Recommended, when: * activities require unique technical sector experience, specific management capacity or access to international networks *Govt lacks the required management or substantive capacity: or *the Parties prefer agency execution for other reasons Agency Execution

  4. Can be National or International NGO Recommended when: * project involves close cooperation with local stakeholders at the grassroots/community level; * NGOs under consideration have a comparative advantage in the areas the project targeting (experience, expertise or relations to the targeted beneficiaries); * Project calls for a lager number of extensive stakeholders consultations and participation NGO Execution

  5. Decision by Res. Rep (as AE and NGO) Considered as a norm Eligible institutions: * ministry or department within a ministry; * a semi-autonomous Covt institutions such as central bank, university, regional or local authority or municipality; Mechanisms for coordination to be described in prodoc, e.g. establishment of PMC Designated institutions may contract other entities to undertake specific tasks as implementing agencies or subcontractors of the project. NEX

  6. EXPECTATIONS • Better integration with national programs • Strengthening local capacity • Improved ownership and commitment • Sustainability • Lower costs

  7. Advantages: VAT exemption Ensures transparency and gives the donors better trust. Customs etc easier when it is UNDP Can pay higher salaries to staff and attract better expertise Disadvantages: Capacity constrains Influence of implementing agency interests In-country disputes and lack of cooperation between different Govt institutions In case of low Govt capacities often ends up close to DEX NEX

  8. CHALLENGES OF NEX • Changes in Govt (staff and structure) • No ownership (name vs institution) • No follow up to signed co-financing • Low capacity (in spate of frequent trainings: CDI, CDW, FPSS) • No substantive commitment from partners • Signature of contracts, financial reports • Prodoc signing delays • Project implementation delays • Corruption

  9. 2. Absence of coordination FP is not functioning properly Environmental Ministries the weakest of all Govt not able to bring co-financing 3. Place of GEF projects in the CO Poor understanding of importance of GEF projects for SD Seed co-financing from UNDP CO Uniqueness of the GEF portfolio CHALLENGES OF NEX

  10. Decision by Associate Administrator Used only in the countries with special development situations Must be temporary by nature Need to ensure transparency within UNDP by the division of responsibilities among several staff members DEX evaluated by UNDP Evaluation Office in 2000-2001 A key finding - direct implementation services provided by UNDP are not detrimental to national ownership DEX

  11. Advantage Flexibility Environment for innovation Clear line of accountability Corruption avoidance and transparency UNDP commitment Greater efficiency/effectiveness UNDP neutrality ensures broader stakeholders participation Disadvantage Increased cost for DEX start-up Weak financial system. DEX approval process somewhat centralized. DEX

  12. UNDP CO Support Service under the request of EA • Formulating, monitoring and evaluation • Provision of assistance for financial reporting and payments • Identification and recruitment of project personnel • Identification and provision of assistance for the implementation of training activities • Procurement of goods and services • Formal agreement for the provision of the support service to be signed

  13. WHAT TO DO: INPUTS FOR THE DISCUSSION At the national level • Understanding that GEF is tool for introduction SD principles in the national policy (MDG7(9)) • GEF projects used as an entry point to strengthen national capacities for NEX. • Involvement of CO in the early stages of formulation/negotiation. • Identify constraints at the institutional level and at the CO level. • Environment and GEF mainstreamed in the CO programme. At the regional level • Out-sourcing GEF Advisors on country levels At HQ level • To follow up with DEX Evaluation recommendations

More Related