Table D- 8: Summary of evaluation ratings for the Kenya(A)test case Overall Criterion Sub-criterion Additional Sub-criterion rating rating Achievement of outputs and activities MU Relevance S Attainment of objectives and Effectiveness NA MS MS planned results Efficiency S Outcomes to impacts MS Socio-political sustainability ML Financial resources ML Sustainability Institutional framework L Environmental sustainability L Behavioral changes ML Sustainability ML and catalytic role Incentives ML Institutional changes ML Catalytic role Policy changes ML Catalytic financing ML Champions ML Preparation and readiness MS Implementation approach/adaptive mngmnt MS Procedures Stakeholder participation/public awareness MS affecting Country ownership and driven-ness NA S MS attainment of Financial planning and management S project results UNEP supervision and backstopping NA Monitoring and evaluation NA Complementarity Linkage to UNEP EAs & POW 2010-11 NA with UNEP Alignment with the Bali Strategic Plan NA NA NA programmes and Gender NA strategies South-South Cooperation NA Rating code for all criteria except Sustainability and catalytic role: Highly Satisfactory (HS); Satisfactory (S); Moderately Satisfactory (MS); Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU); Unsatisfactory (U); Highly Unsatisfactory (HU) Rating code for Sustainability and catalytic role: Highly Likely (HL); Likely (L); Moderately Likely (ML); Moderately Unlikely (MU); Unlikely (U); Highly Unlikely (HU) The major positive achievements of the Kenya(A)test case are summarized in the bullets below. The CBP achieved its main objective in providing a cost effective, user-friendly, yet scientifically rigorous methodology for measuring carbon and GHG mitigation benefits in GEF projects dealing with natural resources. The CBP has delivered the intended outputs and outcomes and the developed protocol which is now available online. However, the key factors that are likely to contribute to the persistence of the project benefits on the Kenya (A) test case are: Availability of project donor funds; Raising awareness on the CBP tool; Acceptability of the tool for use in carbon trading; Economic benefits the farmers are likely to get by practicing these SLM practices; and Continuity of carbon trading. Several scientists from KARI received training in the CBP model operation. The participation of the KARI scientists in both GEF Soil Organic Carbon (GEFSOC) and CBP projects has enhanced their capacity in modeling and can now measure, predict and monitor carbon stocks and fluxes and mitigate GHG in SLM projects.
The major positive achievements of the Kenya(A)test case are summarized in the bullets below. Table D- 8: Summary of evaluation ratings for the Kenya(A)test case Criterion Sub-criterion Additional Sub-criterion rating Overall rating Attainment of objectives and planned results Achievement of outputs and activities NA MU MS Relevance S Effectiveness MS Efficiency S Outcomes to impacts MS Sustainability and catalytic role Sustainability Socio-political sustainability ML ML Financial resources ML Institutional framework L Environmental sustainability L Catalytic role Behavioral changes ML Incentives ML Institutional changes ML Policy changes ML Catalytic financing ML Champions ML Procedures affecting attainment of project results Preparation and readiness NA MS MS Implementation approach/adaptive mngmnt MS Stakeholder participation/public awareness MS Country ownership and driven-ness S Financial planning and management S UNEP supervision and backstopping NA Monitoring and evaluation NA Complementarity with UNEP programmes and strategies Linkage to UNEP EAs & POW 2010-11 NA NA NA Alignment with the Bali Strategic Plan NA Gender NA South-South Cooperation NA Rating code for all criteria except Sustainability and catalytic role: Highly Satisfactory (HS); Satisfactory (S); Moderately Satisfactory (MS); Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU); Unsatisfactory (U); Highly Unsatisfactory (HU) Rating code for Sustainability and catalytic role: Highly Likely (HL); Likely (L); Moderately Likely (ML); Moderately Unlikely (MU); Unlikely (U); Highly Unlikely (HU) The CBP achieved its main objective in providing a cost effective, user-friendly, yet scientifically rigorous methodology for measuring carbon and GHG mitigation benefits in GEF projects dealing with natural resources. The CBP has delivered the intended outputs and outcomes and the developed protocol which is now available online. However, the key factors that are likely to contribute to the persistence of the project benefits on the Kenya (A) test case are: Availability of project donor funds; Raising awareness on the CBP tool; Acceptability of the tool for use in carbon trading; Economic benefits the farmers are likely to get by practicing these SLM practices; and Continuity of carbon trading. Several scientists from KARI received training in the CBP model operation. The participation of the KARI scientists in both GEF Soil Organic Carbon (GEFSOC) and CBP projects has enhanced their capacity in modeling and can now measure, predict and monitor carbon stocks and fluxes and mitigate GHG in SLM projects.
3449_2013_TE_UNEP_GLOBAL_MFA_FSP_Carbon_Benefits.docx