S ignposts GEF Country Portfolio Study: Jamaica (1994–2010) 68269 February 2012 In 2011, the Evaluation Office coastal zone management, and measures to address of the Global Environment invasive alien species; these have helped enable Jamaica Facility (GEF) conducted a to meet its obligations under global environmental conven- GEF Small Grants Programme Jamaica country portfolio study of GEF tions. International waters projects have enhanced coun- support to Jamaica for the period 1994–2010. Country try capacity and regional collaboration, and have delivered portfolio studies are a new modality for the Evaluation successful pilot and demonstration activities. In the climate Office; they are intended to complement the country port- change focal area, GEF support has helped Jamaica sub- folio evaluations that are one of the Office’s main evalua- stantially increase its capacity in fields such as renewable tion streams of work. Specifically, country portfolio studies energy, energy efficiency, adaptation, and energy sector provide additional regional coverage of country portfolios, planning and management. but with a reduced focus and scope. They are undertaken Most GEF assistance in Jamaica has been in the form of where opportunities exist to collaborate with independent enabling activities that have supported capacity develop- evaluation offices of GEF partners as they undertake ment and piloting. Real challenges will be posed in sustain- country evaluations. They thus enable the Office to study ing and scaling up this initial progress. Given the limited a country’s GEF portfolio with a relatively lower investment resources available to the Jamaican government, effective of cost and effort; this also reduces the evaluation bur- collaboration and pooled efforts by the GEF Agencies and den on the country, while insights and understanding are other international development partners are critical. The gained through information exchange and collaboration. prospects for such collaboration, however, are limited by The Jamaica initiative was undertaken in collaboration with the GEF’s low profile among many of these stakeholders. the United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP’s) The process of developing and managing the GEF assessment of development results for the country (2002– portfolio has strengthened networking among national 10). Since 1994, the GEF has invested about $11.86 mil- agencies engaged in environmental management. In lion in Jamaica; a further $42.09 million has been provided several cases, national agencies have expanded their in cofinancing. partner networks through GEF projects. For example, the Integrated Water and Coastal Area Management project Findings has helped the National Environment and Planning Agency Results and Effectiveness develop a new approach to working with government agen- GEF support in all focal areas has helped Jamaica cies, local government, and community organizations. develop good capacity in environmental management It would be more appropriate to talk of “national adop- and link to international best practices. However, the tion� than of “national ownership� of the GEF portfolio. country lacks the resources to scale up from these initial The portfolio has been mainly designed by the GEF Agen- benefits, and the GEF portfolio is not sufficiently well known cies, but it is relevant to Jamaica’s national priorities. The among Jamaica’s other international development partners government and other stakeholders have committed to to maximize collaboration and follow-up. activities at various stages of design and implementation, GEF biodiversity activities focused on management of but have not led the process. Although national stakehold- watersheds, conservation of areas important for bird life, ers are involved in evaluations, there is little coherence to GEF Country Portfolio Study: Jamaica (1994–2010) S ignposts GEF monitoring and evaluation processes, which are pri- ible recruitment and procurement procedures that have not marily driven by Agency systems. been tailored to small island developing states in general or to the Caribbean in particular. Such rules often require com- Relevance petitive bidding, which is difficult in Jamaica given that there GEF support in Jamaica has been relevant to the coun- are so few environmental specialists or supply companies try’s national environmental goals and priorities, as available. well as to its efforts to fulfill its obligations under the international agreements to which it is a signatory. This Lessons support has covered the range of GEF focal areas for which � The Jamaica portfolio gives rise to concerns about the the country is eligible, either through national projects or potential for sustainable progress in environmental through the Jamaican components of regional and global management. projects. Since the mid-1990s, a significant amount of sup- port has focused on international waters, often as part of � Many GEF Agency procedures are not appropriate for regional initiatives. Work on biodiversity, conducted in close small countries in regions with limited resources; this is collaboration with the National Environmental Protection seriously hampering the efficiency of GEF implementa- Agency, has grown significantly since 2003. There has also tion in Jamaica and elsewhere. been investment in climate change initiatives and, most – Some possible procedural changes to improve effi- recently, land degradation. ciency have been suggested by evaluations and reviews of GEF activities by its Agencies. For UNDP, Efficiency it has been suggested that changes to consultant All three GEF Agencies active in Jamaica—UNDP, procurement rules, use of consultant rosters and the United Nations Environment Programme, and the referrals, budgeting of additional time for project World Bank—have had difficulty in keeping projects start-up, and use of inception phases to expedite within their intended time limits. The latter two Agencies contracting arrangements and implementation would have experienced substantial delays in their regional proj- be useful. ects. Many UNDP projects have had some form of delay – For the World Bank, it has been suggested that more as well, which frustrates partners and may reduce effective- conservative scheduling, cost contingencies, and ness, since projects often have to take shortcuts to try to improved assessment of project risks and implemen- get back on schedule. Many delays are the result of inflex- tation capacity needs should be considered. The GEF Evaluation Office is an independent entity reporting directly to the GEF Council, mandated to evaluate the focal area programs and priorities of the GEF. The full version of GEF Country Portfolio Study: Jamaica (1994– 2010) (Evaluation Report No. 66, 2012) is available on the GEF Evaluation Office website, www.gefeo.org. Also available on the website is GEF Annual Country Portfolio Evaluation 2011 (Evaluation Report No. 64, 2012), which presents a synthesis of the two country portfolio studies (in Jamaica and El Salvador) undertaken in 2010–11. For more information, please contact the GEF Evaluation Office at gefevaluation@thegef.org.