Evaluation of FAO s contribution to the Islamic Republic ...

OFFICE OF EVALUATION

Country programme evaluation series

Evaluation of FAO’s contribution to the

Islamic Republic of Pakistan

2012-2017

TERMS OF REFERENCE

November 2017

COUNTRY PROGRAMME EVALUATION SERIES

Evaluation of FAO’s contribution to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan

2012-2017

TERMS OF REFERENCE

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONSOFFICE OF EVALUATION

November 2017

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Office of Evaluation (OED)

This report is available in electronic format at: http://www.fao.org/evaluation

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO.

© FAO 2017

FAO encourages the use, reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product. Except where otherwise indicated, material may be copied, downloaded and printed for private study, research and teaching purposes, or for use in non-commercial products or services, provided that appropriate acknowledgement of FAO as the source and copyright holder is given and that FAO’s endorsement of users’ views, products or services is not implied in any way.

All requests for translation and adaptation rights, and for resale and other commercial use rights should be made via www.fao.org/contact-us/licence-request or addressed to [email protected].

For further information on this report, please contact:

Director, Office of Evaluation (OED)Food and Agriculture OrganizationViale delle Terme di Caracalla 1, 00153 RomeItalyEmail: [email protected]

Cover photo credits: @FAO/ FAO Pakistan, ©FAO/Farooq Naeem (4th picture top to bottom)

http://www.fao.org/evaluation

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


iii

Contents

Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................................ iv

1. Introduction ...........................................................................................................................1

2. Purpose of the Evaluation .................................................................................................2

3. Brief overview of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan .................................................3

4. FAO in Pakistan .....................................................................................................................5

4.1 The Country Office .........................................................................................................5

4.2 Overview of FAO’s field programme .........................................................................5

4.3 FAO’s Country Programming Framework ................................................................6

5. Scope of the evaluation .....................................................................................................8

6. Objectives ...............................................................................................................................9

7. Evaluation Questions ........................................................................................................10

8. Methodology ......................................................................................................................12

9. Process ...................................................................................................................................14

9.1 Preparatory phase .......................................................................................................14

9.2 Main evaluation phase ................................................................................................14

9.3 Drafting and dissemination of the report, follow up of findings, conclusions, recommendations .................................................................................................................14

10 Organisation of the Evaluation ....................................................................................16

10.1 Roles and Responsibilities ..........................................................................................16

10.2 Composition and profile of the evaluation team .................................................16

10.3 Tentative evaluation timeline ....................................................................................17

10.4 Tentative work-plan for each evaluation team member ...................................18

Annex: Country projects by priority area of the CPF for Pakistan.........................19


iv

Acronyms

AJK Azad Jammu and KashmirCCA Climate Change AdaptationCO Country OfficeCPE Country Programme EvaluationCPF Country Programming FrameworkEC European CommissionEM Evaluation ManagerFAOR FAO RepresentativeFATA Federally Administered Tribal AreasFPMIS Field Programme Management Information SystemGB Gilgit-BaltistanGCP Government Cooperation Project GEF Global Environment FacilityGOP Government of PakistanHQ HeadquartersIFAD International Fund for Agricultural DevelopmentJFFLS Junior Farmer Field and Life SchoolsKP Khyber PakhtunkhwaMSFSR Ministry of National Food Security and ResearchOED Office of EvaluationOSRO Emergency projectPPR Peste de Petits RuminantsRG Reference GroupSO Strategic ObjectiveSFS Sub-regional Office for Southern AfricanTCP Technical Cooperation ProgrammeUN FAO United Nations Food and Agriculture OrganizationUNJP United Nations Joint ProgrammeWFP World Food Programme


1

1. Introduction

1 The FAO Office of Evaluation (OED) has been conducting country programme evaluations since 2005 to provide accountability to Member countries, national governments and development partners, and draw lessons and suggestions for programme improvement. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan was selected as one of the countries in which to carry out a Country Programme Evaluation (CPE) in 2017 at the request of the Government of Pakistan (GoP).

2 The Terms of Reference (ToR) for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan country evaluation are the result of the preparatory phase, consisting of: a desk review of existing external documentation1; a preliminary analysis of FAO’s portfolio of work in Pakistan; and scoping interviews with FAO staff at the country, regional levels and in HQ. The ToRs also benefited from discussions held during the inception mission with a selected number of partners at the national level including government officials, resource partners, UN agencies and other international organizations. The evaluation will primarily cover the current programme cycle – FAO Pakistan Country Programme Framework (CPF 2012-2017); ongoing and pipeline projects will be assessed for quality at entry. The CPE will not cover in depth the FAO emergency response to the floods 2010 as this has been evaluated by OED2.

3 These ToRs represent a guiding document for the Evaluation Team. Their purpose is to describe the FAO programme in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, identify some key areas of work undertaken over the current CPF cycle, define the scope of the evaluation and provide the initial evaluation work plan. The ToRs have been shared with and commented upon by FAO staff in the Country Office (CO), the FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (RAP), the Ministry of National Food Security & Research (MNFSR – FAO’s primary counterpart in the Government of Pakistan) and the Ministry of Planning, Development and Reform. A set of key questions has been developed to further define the objective of the evaluation and inform the methodology to be employed at different stages of the exercise. The methodology and the evaluation tools will be further developed by the team over the course of the evaluation.

1 Including government planning documents, the United Nations Country Team (UNCT), existing FAO evaluations of projects in Pakistan, and academic papers and reviews.

2 Available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/025/mC985E.pdf


2

2. Purpose of the Evaluation

4 The purpose of the evaluation is to provide inputs to the FAO country office to better orient FAO’s approach, strategy and programme in Pakistan, making FAO more relevant to the needs of the country. It will assist in assessing FAO’s work in terms of its accountability to the Government and non-government partners, communities and resource partners in the country, as well as all member countries, by assessing the FAO contribution to Pakistan’s achievement of its development goals. It seeks to draw lessons and make recommendations that will be useful for FAO’s future engagement in the country. Besides providing lessons specifically on FAO’s work in Pakistan, the evaluation will also enrich FAO’s synthesis of findings and guidance for its country-level support.

5 In addition to providing advice to FAO management and staff at the national, regional and headquarters level on how to improve the impact and relevance of FAO’s programme, the evaluation will also identify potential areas for future interventions in line with FAO’s comparative advantage.

6 The main audience for the evaluation, to which most of the lessons and recommendations will be addressed, are the FAO Representative and the representation staff. Other important users of the evaluation, and possible recipients of recommendations, are the Regional Office for Asia and the divisions in HQ. To a lesser extent, other Country Offices and FAO as a whole could also benefit and build on lessons learnt and good practices. Further users of the evaluation will be FAO’s partners within the broader development community, including resource partners, NGOs, implementing partners and other UN agencies, in particular those with whom strategic interventions were identified in the context of the third One UN Programme (OPIII). Although not a target group for the evaluation report itself, the evaluation also aspires to provide elements to assess accountability with respect to rural farming communities in Pakistan that FAO has sought to assist.

7 Since the adoption of the Paris Declaration on aid effectiveness, the international community has given increasing attention to country ownership of the development process. In this spirit, the evaluation will focus on the participation of national partners, in particular the Government at Provincial and Federal levels, to ensure the appropriation of the evaluation results by the relevant national institutions and promote their use at the national level. To this end, OED envisions the creation of a Reference Group (RG) involving national partners operating in FAO’s areas of work.


3

3. Brief overview of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan

8 The Islamic Republic of Pakistan is a lower middle income country located in south Asia bordering India, China, Afghanistan, Iran and the Indian Ocean. It is the sixth most populous country with a population of around 195 million3, and the second most populous Muslim country. The official languages are Urdu and English, with several other languages and dialects spoken by the several ethnic groups, which spill over into neighboring countries. Since its independence from Britain and partition from India in 1947, the country lost part of its territory in 1971, when East Pakistan broke off and formed Bangladesh. The region of Kashmir is disputed with India and is de facto divided into two separately administered areas along the Line of Control.

9 Pakistan is a parliamentary democracy with a federal form of government, comprised of the Federal Government and Provincial governments. The constitutional reform of 2010, known as devolution established a decentralized structure of government whereby most of the responsibilities and related budgets (such as Agriculture, Education, Health, Transport, Industry) are under the control of provincial governments. The federal governments is responsible for areas such as defense, national food security and strategic planning. Also, the federal government directly administers the areas which are not formally or fully provinces, i.e. the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, Gilgit-Baltistan, and Azad Jammu and Kashmir. The military has always played a prominent role in politics and on three occasions has successfully taken power and ruled directly, most recently in 1999. In 2013, following a general election, for the first time there was a transition from one civilian government to another.

10 The government’s long term development strategy is outlined in the ‘Vision 2025’4 (prepared in 2014), which aims at transforming Pakistan into an upper middle-income country by 2025, with a focus on the energy sector, economic growth and private sector development, education and combating extremism. The federal government is currently drafting a National Agriculture and Food Security Policy, while several provinces have prepared or are in the process of preparing provincial agricultural policies.

11 Pakistan is endowed with highly diverse agro climatic regions. Most of the population, agriculture and industry are located in the fertile plains of the Indus river basin, which spans the provinces of Punjab and Sindh, while the western province (Baluchistan) is arid and scarcely populated. The northern provinces (Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, FATA, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Gilgit-Baltistan) are mostly mountainous, and highly vulnerable to natural disasters.

12 The displacement of people due to natural disasters and security has been a major issue in recent years. Recurrent security operations in Pakistan’s north-west region have resulted in 1.6 million new or previously displaced people in 2015. Monsoon floods in 2015 affected approximately 1.6 million people in more than 4,000 villages5.

13 Economic growth has started to pick up after a slow recovery from the financial crisis in 2008. In 2015 the GDP grew by 4.5%, well above the 2009-13 average of 2.9% per year, with low oil prices and strong remittances playing a major role6. While the outlook is generally favorable for economic growth in the coming years, some of the major challenges include the lack of reliable energy supply, security risks and low human development. Over the past decades, services have increased their share and are currently around half of the country’s GPD, with industry and agriculture following with respectively 24% and 20% of GDP. Textiles are the main manufacturing industry, and an important export commodity, with the supply of cotton coming largely from domestic producers.

3 Economic Survey of Pakistan, 2015-16 (available at www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_16/02_Agriculture.pdf). A population census is ongoing in 2017 and is expected to produce updated figures.

4 Ministry of Planning, Development and Reform, 2014 (available at http://202.83.164.29/ntb/userfiles1/file/Pakistan-Vision-2025.pdf)

5 OCHA, 2016 (available at http://www.unocha.org/pakistan)

6 World Bank, 2016 (available at http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2011/12/22/country-partnership-strategy-progress-report)

http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_16/02_Agriculture.pdf


4

14 Poverty measures generally show a declining trend in poverty levels in the country, with differences in the percentage of people living in poverty, which currently ranges between 30% and 40% depending the measure. Based on the national poverty line, the share of people living in poverty has gone from 52% to 30% between 2004 and 20147, while in the same period according to the Multidimensional Poverty Index the rate has dropped from 55% to 39%8. Pakistan is ranked 147th (Low) according to the Human Development index (score of 0.538)9. Poverty is a most prevalent in rural areas, where the majority (61%) of Pakistanis live. There are also significant differences among the provinces, with Punjab being generally the most well of province. With a young and growing population, the country is increasingly facing the challenge of generating jobs and providing services to its people.

15 Agriculture generates about 20 percent of GDP, 45 percent of jobs, and about 80 percent of export earnings directly and indirectly10. However, the sector has been experiencing declining productivity, and especially low water productivity, which compounded with climate change risks, pose a serious challenge to farmers. Livestock plays a significant role in the economy of the country as the dairy sector contributes 58 percent to the agriculture value addition and 11 percent to GDP11. Wheat is the main staple crop, as well as a major export commodity. Rice is also a major crop, and some varieties (e.g. basmati) are an important export. Land ownership is highly skewed with 64% of farms being below 5 acres (2 hectares) and large holdings concentrated in few owners.

16 Food security remains a major issue as the country has not made progress in the Millennium Development Goals related to hunger and undernourishment. In 2015 the proportion of the population considered undernourished was estimated at 22%, and 43 percent of children under five years of age are stunted12. The method for calculating food insecurity is currently being revised and new figures will be available soon, most likely with lower food insecurity rates. Food and nutrition insecurity in the country are primarily attributable to limited economic access to an adequate and diverse diet for the poorest and most vulnerable.

7 Planning Commission, Ministry of Planning, Development and Reform, 2016

8 UNDP, Multidimensional Poverty in Pakistan, 2016 (available at http://www.pk.undp.org/content/pakistan/en/home/library/hiv_aids/Multidimensional-Poverty-in-Pakistan.html)

9 Human Development Report 2015 (available at http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/PAK)

10 World Bank, Country Partnership Strategy 2014 (available at http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/886791468083329310/pdf/846450CAS0P146090Box385177B00OUO090.pdf)

11 FAO FAPDA Country Fact Sheet 2016 (available at http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6054e.pdf)

12 FAO, State Of the World Food Insecurity 2015 (available at www.fao.org/3/a-i4646e.pdf)


5

4. FAO in Pakistan

4.1 The Country Office

17 FAO has been working with Pakistan since it became a member country just three weeks after partition in 1947. FAO’s work in the country focuses on supporting improvements in agricultural policy analysis, strengthening institutions, enhancing integrated area development and expanding participation of marginalized and vulnerable communities in sustainable development as well as emergency response, post-crisis recovery and resilience building. A wide range of capacity development has been provided in support of individual farmers, community organizations, service providers and government staff. The Organization’s activities in Pakistan are aligned with the national priorities outlined in National Five years development plan, Pakistan Vision 2025, Pakistan Scaling Up Nutrition documents, multi-sectoral Policy Guidance Notes, National Zero Hunger Programme, sustainable livelihood and Nutrition framework, and National Agriculture and Food Security policy13.

18 The Country Office (CO) has 10 Regular Programme (RP) staff posts. The Representation also employs more than 200 national project personnel (NPP), local consultants and other non-staff (PSA).

4.2 Overview of FAO’s field programme

19 Pakistan is one of the eight UN Delivering as One (DaO) pilot countries and FAO’s programme is aligned with the One UN Programme Second Phase (OP-II). The national priorities formed the basis for the OP-II. UNCT has identified Outcome level results that are grouped within six Strategic Priority Areas (SPAs). The OP-II is a national programme framework of the UN system in Pakistan: the planned results are national at the outcome level in order to capture main trends and priority areas across the country. At the output level where the specific interventions and accountability stands, it will capture the specific provincial and local priorities in order to respond to provincial needs and contexts. The six Strategic Priority Areas (SPAs):

1 Vulnerable and marginalized populations have equitable access and use of quality services;

2 Inclusive economic growth through the development of sustainable livelihoods;

3 Increased national resilience to disasters, crises and external shocks;

4 Strengthen governance and social cohesion;

5 Ensure gender equality and social justice; and;

6 Food and nutrition security for the most vulnerable groups.

20 Each SPA comprise a set of joint Outcomes and Outputs. There is a working group for each of the six SPAs. These groups are responsible for providing strategic guidance and coordination of activities being carried out in the achievement of the SPA’s outcomes and outputs. The SPA Working Groups also is supported by specialists in Monitoring and evaluation to support the overall OP II M&E process. FAO is contributing to SPA2, SPA 3, SPA4 and co-chairing SPA6.

21 The Cluster Approach was applied for the first time following the 2005 earthquake in Pakistan. Nine clusters were established within 24 hours of the earthquake. The Food Security Cluster was co-chaired by the National Disaster Management Authority (till March 2013) and co-lead by FAO and WFP provides a forum for strategic needs analysis, response planning and dissemination of timely information to ensure for equitable distribution of humanitarian assistance among the affected populations. A large number of organizations are members of the Food Security cluster in various capacities, including international,

13 In 2013, The Federal Ministry of National Food Security and Research (MFSR) formulated a Draft National Agriculture and Food Security Policy, but it is still not adopted.


6

national and local NGOs, government authorities of National and Provincial Disaster Management Authorities and line departments, including Agriculture and Livestock and Dairy Development Department, donors and UN agencies. The number of cluster members today exceeds 300, although less than 100 are active.

22 Against this background, the FAO project portfolio in Pakistan during the period 2012 - 2017 included 50 projects, of which 44 country (88%) and 6 inter-regional (12%). The total portfolio for national projects amounts to a total of USD 125,972,246.

23 FAO Pakistan benefited from six projects funded by the GoP worth USD 20,024,547, making the GoP the second largest donor following USA.

Chart 1: FAO Pakistan Resource Partners14

Table 1: FAO Field Programme Approvals and Delivery15

Approvals (USD) Delivery (USD)

2014 2015 2016 2014 2015 2016

Total 2,780,587 21,522,375 5,079,150 20,751,067 16,501,488 15,403,140

Funded through TCP 50,165 911,020 213,000 354,927 479,751 296,018

Funded through voluntary contributions

2,730,422 20,611,355 4,866,150 20,396,140 16,021,737 15,107,122

(of which UTF) 140,962 1,222,770 0 964,598 1,217,900 124,375

of which technical cooperation

230,062 10,060,203 150,000 12,282,554 12,299,277 10,381,200

of which emergency assistance

2,500,360 10,551,152 4,716,150 8,113,586 3,722,460 4,725,922

4.3 FAO’s Country Programming Framework

24 The Pakistan CPF for the period 2012-2017 was formulated to bring a new focus in FAO’s field programme for the country, in particular, realigning the Organization’s development support to the Government’s revised priority programmes, while contributing to the implementation of FAO’s global Strategic Framework 2010-19.

14 As at January 2017

15 As at 23/11/2016; source: FPMIS


7

25 The Pakistan CPF for 2012-2017 identifies four priority areas for cooperation:

Priority area 1. Support to the National Zero Hunger Action Plan for Enhanced Food and Nutrition Security.

1.1. Effective functioning of Food and Nutrition Security networks for synergetic outcomes.

1.2. Food and nutrition programmes - targeted at the poor and most vulnerable - effective in chronic food insecure situations.

Priority area 2. Support to Pakistan New Growth Strategy through Sustainable Agricultural Economic Growth.

2.1. Provincial and District sustainable agricultural investment programmes developed and implemented effectively, including value addition to large infrastructure projects.

2.2. Public and private sector agricultural service providers able to support sustainable intensification.

Priority area 3. Disaster Risk Reduction and Emergency Response.

3.1. Government, civil society and UN partners of the agriculture sector at the national, provincial, district and community levels able to prepare for and respond to emergency situations.

3.2 Agricultural responses to emergencies effective.

3.3. Food and nutrition programmes - targeted at the poor and most vulnerable - effective in acute food insecure situations.

3.4: Vulnerable populations benefit from improved sustainable environmental management practices, including climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Priority area 4. Capacity Development for Agriculture Sector under Devolution.

4.1. Structures and mechanisms in place at federal and provincial-levels for agriculture policy development following devolution of the Ministries of Food and Agriculture (MinFA) and Livestock and Dairy Development (MinLDD) and establishment of Ministry of National Food Security and Research (MoNFSR).

4.2. The capacity of Pakistani stakeholders of the agriculture sector effectively involved and appropriate international standards and best practices is enhanced.

Table 2: Classification of projects by priority area

CPF Area No. of projects Proportion of total portfolio

Total Budget Proportion of total Budget

1 8 16% $4,371,279 3%2 1 2% $1,339,253 1%3 19 38% $45,701,327 36%4 19 38% $28,703,682 23%Multiple Areas 3 6% $45,856,705 36%Grand Total 50 100% $125,972,246 100%


8

5. Scope of the evaluation

26 Country evaluations are designed to assess the totality of the Organization’s assistance provided to a FAO member state, irrespective of the source of funding. This includes activities funded through the regular programme as well as extra-budgetary resources; national, regional and global projects and initiatives; FAO’s global normative role as it is tied to the country’s participation in international instruments under FAO’s responsibility; emergency and development interventions. Since the CPE is a programme evaluation, the exercise will not focus on single projects, but rather assess FAO’s overall contribution to development changes in the country, in particular (but not only) in the priority areas defined in the CPF, including advocacy, partnership mobilization and governance.

27 This evaluation will examine five main clusters of the FAO Pakistan work programme, namely:

i The One UN Joint Programmes, focusing on outcomes from the SPAs on food security assessments, Scaling Up Nutrition, monitoring and sector coordination;

ii Support on agricultural policies, strategies and systems (national and provincial);

iii Resilience and emergencies (Climate Change and Disaster Risk Reduction) focusing on early warning systems, prevention and mitigation measure;

iv Support for the recovery of agriculture-based livelihoods focusing on the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), Baluchistan and Sindh;

v Animal health and veterinary services;

28 Further, the evaluation will be carried out within the scope of FAO’s Strategic Objectives (SO) and Core Functions. In particular, seeing that the objectives and activities carried out by FAO in Pakistan are relevant to all five SOs, the evaluation will pay particular attention to strategic alignment with and possible contribution to these SOs and the SDGs, and to the way they interact in practice, endeavouring to draw lessons benefiting the work of the organisation towards these objectives.

29 Contributions provided by FAO as part of its core functions, which are often by their nature not necessarily delivered as part of specific projects, will also be covered by this evaluation. These include the areas of analysing, monitoring and improving access to data and information; policy dialogue; capacity development to prepare, implement, monitor and evaluate evidence-based policies, investments and programmes; assembling, disseminating and improving the uptake of knowledge, technologies and good practices; coordination; partnership; advocacy and communication.


9

6. Objectives

30 The specific objectives of the CPE are to:

• Assess the strategic relevance of FAO’s contributions and interventions in responding to country needs and national development goals;

• Assess the strategic relevance of the CPF (FAO’s country strategy) and the impact of the CPF on FAO’s ability to deliver a stronger contribution to change in the country;

• Likewise assess the strategic relevance and possible contributions of FAO’s work and role in Pakistan over the past five years vis-a-vis FAO’s global Strategic Framework;

• Assess achievements of the work programme in terms of results identified in the CPF under the four priority areas;

• Identify lessons learnt as well as causes of successes and failures;

• Identify gaps or weaknesses in FAO’s country strategy and programme and potential areas of future work.

31 During the inception mission, support for the recovery of agriculture-based livelihoods and moving to a more income generation, value chain and employment development interventions emerged as a key area in which FAO has been providing and is planning to provide more cooperation in the future on regional/provincial level. In particular, in FATA, Baluchistan and Sindh. The evaluation will therefore assess past support, and provide inputs for future interventions of this kind.

32 FAO’s participation in the One UN Joint programmes has mobilised almost $12 millions under the CPF, and has enabled delivery of a handful of targeted interventions that seem to have yielded some positive results. The evaluation will assess the outcomes of these activities and also identify ways to enhance FAO’s strategic positioning within such joint programmes, its partnership strategy and working modalities under the One UN framework.


10

7. Evaluation Questions

33 The following questions have been developed to further define the objective of the evaluation. More specific questions will be developed by the team at the beginning of the in-country investigation phase.

Strategic positioning: Are we doing what is needed?

Strategic relevance

• Has FAO been addressing the most acute and structurally important challenges in Pakistan in line with the areas of FAO’s competence?

• To what extent is FAO’s programme aligned with relevant national development plans, strategies and policies - in particular on GoP’s ability to achieve its development goals? Are there any gaps or missed opportunities?

• In view of the Devolution, Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition and water managemnt being part of the regional/provincial mandate, how effective has the FAO representation in Pakistan been in responding to the needs of both federal and provincial authorities under this new government structure? How does this affect FAO’s work in Pakistan vis-à-vis staffing, funding, procedures? What are the constraints and opportunities this creates?

Partnership and Coordination

• How effectively did FAO engage in partnerships and to what extent were these partnerships complementary and synergetic? And to what extent FAO contributed to the capacity development of community organisations and non-state actors?

• Has participation in the One UN joint programmes, Food Security Cluster/working groups and Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) contributed towards enhancing FAO’s capacity to achieve desired results? To what extent has FAO supported the coordination of actors working in the agricultural development and food security and nutrition sectors?

Normative values

• To what extent has FAO taken into account UN normative values and principles such as equity, human rights and targeting the most vulnerable communities and localities in the design of its programme and during the implementation?

• To what extent have FAO beneficiaries (men and women) accepted, adopted and up scaled any of the innovation developed?

• To what extent has FAO contributed to women’s economic empowerment along the value chain?

• How has FAO succeeded in equally improving livelihoods of men and women?

Comparative advantage

• What role has FAO played vis-à-vis other development actors (national and local government, civil society, the private sector, and other international development partners) and did it draw from its own comparative advantage?

Programme contribution: Are we making a difference?

• What are FAO contributions to the support on agricultural policies, action-plans and information systems (national and provincial)? (primary CPE PA 1 / secondary CPE PA 4)

• What are FAO contributions to resilience building and emergency response (Climate Change and Disaster Risk Reduction) focusing on early warning systems, prevention and mitigation measure? (primary CPE PA 3 / secondary CPE PA 1)

• hat are FAO contributions to support the recovery of agriculture-based livelihoods focusing on the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), Baluchistan and Sindh? (primary CPE PA 4 / secondary CPE PA 3)


11

• What are FAO contributions to improved Animal health and veternarian services?

• What are FAO contributions to agriculture sector productivity and profitability (income generation and value addition)? (primary CPE PA 2 / secondary CPE PA 3)

Sustainability of results

• To what extent have the changes that were generated been sustainable?

• To what extent are the results owned by beneficiaries?

• Have livelihoods been affected by results on the medium and long-term and how?

Coherence and synergies

• To what extent have FAO’s global and regional initiatives provided coherent and/or complementary support in view of achieving the CPF results?

• To what extent has FAO HQ and RAP represented an added value, particularly in terms of technical support?

• Has FAO’s knowledge base (normative products, guidelines, publications, etc.) been effectively used at country level in the areas of FAO’s comparative advantage?


12

8. Methodology

34 The general evaluation questions listed above will be the basis for specific evaluation questions to be contextualised according to different types of activities, individual projects, and stakeholders involved. These specific questions will be developed by the team and validated with FAO Country office staff. Questions and critical issues identified during the preparatory phase will also be included in the set of evaluation questions.

35 This evaluation will use a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods. The methodologies that the evaluation will draw on Beneficiary Assessment methods16. This is as an addition to the usual quantitative evidence collected from secondary data. Where appropriate, the evaluation will use economic modelling to assess value for money in addition to geo-special analysis.

36 To answer the question “strategic positioning: are we responding to needs”, the team will start by researching whether the FAO programme in Pakistan was based on a preliminary assessment of the needs of different stakeholders: e.g. Government, communities, vulnerable households. It will then research what these needs were, and whether the programme responded to them. To gather information related to this question the team will conduct semi-structured interviews and review relevant documents. Through stakeholder mapping carried out with the support from the country office, the team will identify who is best able to respond to each question. Sources of information will be key informants, internal and external stakeholders at the central and decentralised levels and secondary sources. In addition, workshops targeting different groups of stakeholders will be organized to identify issues, lessons learned and potential areas for future interventions. Facilitation techniques, developed by the evaluation team at the beginning of the main mission, will be employed during the workshops. Information from different sources will be validated through triangulation.

37 To answer the question “programme contribution: are we making a difference”, the team will conduct an impact assessment of work under the Area-based support for the recovery of agriculture-based livelihoods Programmes. Field work will be conducted to meet direct and indirect beneficiaries and assess changes brought by the intervention on their lives and livelihoods. In so far as possible, considering time, logistical and methodological constraints, the team will assess short and long term impacts and negative and positive results at community level. Project sites for field visits will be selected in consultation with the Country Office, aiming at relevance and geographic variety but also considering security and accessibility concerns. During site visits the team will use different evaluation tools, including semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions, to collect the views of the beneficiaries and of communities at large. The team will also meet with non-beneficiary households to explore targeting issues and spill-over effects. The issue of sustainability will also be looked into, and what lessons can be learned from the intervention.

38 Given the extended longevity of the CPF, the evaluation will use the Pipeline Design for some interventions such as the transboundary animal diseases to assess the short-medium impacts the initiative brought as it was implemented in phases over a period of time, the segments of the population only affected by the latter phases can be used as comparison groups for the earlier phases.

39 The evaluation will conduct an in-depth study on FAO’s agriculture sector policy support. The study will research the results of FAO’s work in this area with a forward looking focus, particularly given that the country is on the cusp of a the devolution and the Provinces are taking over the agriculture sector development planning and implementation. The aim is to assess the positive, negative, intended and unintended changes produced by FAO’s activities, and evaluate its impact on strengthening the sector towards improving the livelihoods of smallholder farmers, young farmers, women, and communities in particular.

16 Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation (contributors Cathy Shutt, IDS and Laurent Ruedin, SDC, How-to-Note: Beneficiary Assessment, May 2013.


13

40 The evaluation will maximize the use of past evaluations conducted by FAO and/or our development partners, the meta-analysis of the past evaluations will focus on the evidences collected and analyzed by the past evaluation team.

41 As mentioned, this aims to be a forward looking evaluation, and this will be reflected in the methodology. In order to assess present and future needs Key Informant Interviews and Focus Group Discussions will also need to address gaps in FAO programming, and potential areas of work.

42 Emphasis will be placed on assessing FAO’s contributions to capacity development. The definition adopted in FAO’s Capacity Development Corporate Strategy (2009), based on the enhanced capacities across three dimensions (individual, organizational, and enabling environment dimensions), and constitutes an important analytical framework for this evaluation.

43 The evaluation will adopt a consultative approach, seeking and sharing opinions with stakeholders at different stages throughout the process. Different sources will be used to verify information. Triangulation of information across stakeholders will be a key approach for validating evidence.

44 Finally, the evaluation will follow UNEG Norms and Standards as well as ethical guidelines. Gender and equity aspects will be examined throughout the evaluation.


14

9. Process

9.1 Preparatory phase

45 These ToRs are the result of the preparatory phase, which included:

• An inception mission, carried out to discuss with FAO staff at country level as well as to engage with the national government and set up a framework for collaboration with key national counterparts, scope the national research and evaluation capacity to establish collaborations for the evaluation process, and discuss evaluation design and activity plans with the relevant programme managers. Interviews with internal and external stakeholders were conducted to identify key issues for the evaluation and formulate related evaluation questions.

• A portfolio analysis, prepared to better understand FAO’s past priorities and the details of its programme in the country, providing an overview of activities and, when possible, of results achieved.

• A context analysis, prepared to highlight the country’s needs and priorities falling within FAO’s areas of work.

9.2 Main evaluation phase

46 This phase will include the following:

• Desk review of existing documentation, and in particular any previous evaluations, monitoring information and M&E studies;

• On the basis of the ToRs, development of more specific evaluation questions;

• With the support of the country office, mapping of FAO’s internal and external stakeholders able to provide information in relation to the evaluation questions;

• Consultation with key informants, national institutions at central and decentralised level, and development partners, including donors, NGOs, UN agencies and others in Pakistan;

• Field visits to project sites selected in coordination with the Country Office to meet with government staff at provincial and district level, project beneficiaries and beneficiary communities;

47 The main evaluation will take place in the period Jan - May 2017, and include work in several streams undertaken in parallel by the evaluation team members. An initial mission will take place in February 2017 to refine the evaluation questions, methodology and tools, as well as to undertake preliminary data collection at federal level. A second mission will be conducted in Feb - Mar 2017 to launch the in-depth studies and the policy review. A final mission will be conducted in April 2017 to undertake complementary data collection, and to analyse the information collected, on which basis the team will discuss and agree on main conclusions, recommendations and lessons learnt. At the end of this mission, preliminary results will be presented to FAO country office staff.

9.3 Drafting and dissemination of the report, follow up of findings, conclusions, recommendations

48 The Evaluation Manager (EM), with the support of the Associate Evaluation Manager (AEM), will consolidate team members’ contributions to prepare the draft report. The draft report will be circulated to FAO staff and the RG, who will provide comments and suggestions before the finalisation of the report.

49 The final draft report will be presented to the national government counterparts, development partners, implementing partners and other national and regional stakeholders in order to validate the overall conclusions reached by the team, build consensus on the way forward, promote ownership of the evaluation results and maximise


15

their use. The FAO Representative will be responsible for coordinating the management response to the report and its recommendations.

50 Wide dissemination of the report to maximise the impact of the evaluation results will be ensured by OED, with the support of the Reference Group and the CO. The final report and FAO’s management response are public documents and will be broadly disseminated both internally and externally17.

17 The Office of Evaluation posts all reports on the OED website. The FAO representative is responsible for distributing the report to all key stakeholders at the country level after its finalisation.


16

10 Organisation of the Evaluation

10.1 Roles and Responsibilities

51 Office of Evaluation: OED is responsible for managing the evaluation and leading the team through the designated Evaluation Manager (EM). During the preparatory phase, the EM is responsible for drafting the ToRs for the evaluation, selecting team members, and drafting individual ToRs. In the main evaluation phase, the EM will oversee and guide the evaluation team, especially during the launch. Towards the end of the evaluation, the EM will facilitate discussions during the analysis of findings, conclusions and recommendations. OED, in collaboration with the RG and the CO, will promote the dissemination of the report.

52 Evaluation Team: The evaluation team (ET) will be responsible for collecting data and analysing evidence to develop findings, conclusions and recommendations under their areas of responsibility. For this purpose, the team members will participate in the initial briefing sessions delivered by OED, and through group discussions will contribute to the refinement of the methodology and preparation of the evaluation tools. At the beginning of the main evaluation phase, each team member will carry out a desk review of documents in their area of work. During the investigation phase, team members will conduct individual and group interviews with internal and external stakeholders, participate in field visits to project sites, participate in the analysis session and at the initial stakeholder debriefing, contribute written inputs to the evaluation report and support the EM in the consolidation of the inputs and the preparation of the draft report. Once the draft report is circulated and the comments received, the team members will provide advice on the integration of comments received from the Reference Group and FAO staff.

53 Country Office: The Country Office staff will provide comments on the ToRs, support OED in mapping FAO’s stakeholders in the country, support the preparation of the evaluation programme and the identification of locations for the field visits, ensure that the team has access to all relevant documentation, be available for meetings and discussions with the evaluation team, provide administrative and logistical support to the evaluation as needed, and provide comments to the draft report. The FAOR is responsible for leading and coordinating the preparation of the management response, and after one year of preparing the follow-up report informing on progress in the implementation of the evaluation’s recommendations.

54 RAP and HQ divisions: Relevant HQ divisions and FAO staff involved in the country programme will also provide their comments to the draft ToRs and later to the draft report, ensure time for meetings with team members, and provide information and documentation upon request. Relevant RAP technical officers and the CPF/Evaluation focal point are key stakeholders in the CPE and the ET will consult and brief with them.

55 Reference Group: The Reference Group will be an integral part of the process to improve the relevance and use of the evaluation. The RG will help guide the evaluation, providing advice at key stages throughout the process. In particular, the group will be asked to i) provide comments on the ToRs; ii) assume an advisory role for the evaluation team during the main mission to refine the methodology and, if needed, facilitate meetings with national government officials at the central and decentralized levels; iii) provide comments on the draft report for the finalization of the report and lastly iv) ensure the promotion and use of evaluation results through dissemination within the government and amongst external stakeholders.

10.2 Composition and profile of the evaluation team

56 The evaluation team will consist of national experts. An effort will be made to achieve gender balance in the team makeup. Following the preparatory phase, necessary expertise identified for members of the evaluation team are the following:


17

• A senior Principal Consultant, Expert in policy development: He will cover in detail the analysis of aspects related to agricultural policy support, community-based rural development, economic growth, community infrastructure and social sectors. The Principle consultant will also look at the cross-cutting issue of capacity development, assessing how it has been integrated in FAO’s work in Pakistan, and assess institutional support provided by FAO. The expert will also cover work on women empowerment, agribusiness and value-chains.

• A senior Principal consultant, Expert in Climate Change and DRR: He will cover in detail the analysis of aspects related to DRM/DRR Programme targeting livelihood-oriented disaster risk management into agriculture early recovery processes. The Principle consultant will also look at the cross-cutting issue of capacity development, assessing how it has been integrated in FAO’s work in Pakistan, and assess institutional support provided by FAO. The expert will also cover work on natural resource management, climate change mitigation and adaptation.

• A senior Principal consultant, Expert in Resilience and Livelihoods: She will cover in detail the analysis of aspects related to Agricultural Livelihoods, community-based rural development, Return and Rehabilitation to FATA. The Principle consultant will also look at the cross-cutting issue of capacity development, assessing how it has been integrated in FAO’s work in Pakistan, and assess institutional support provided by FAO in FATA. The expert will also cover work on women empowerment, agribusiness and value-chains.

• A senior Principal consultant, Expert in Livestock: He will cover in detail the analysis of aspects related to livestock transboundary diseases, livestock productivity and livestock in emergencies. The Principle consultant will also look at the institutional capacity of the veterinarian services.

10.3 Tentative evaluation timeline

Dec 2016 – Jan 2017 Preparatory work, Development of the ToRs and budget;Development of protocols for field studies, Desk review

1-10 February 2017 preparation and briefing mission in Islamabad with the aim of involving the Government of Pakistan, FAO staff and partners in the evaluation process, refine the questions that the evaluation will raise, develop a detailed methodology with the evaluation team.

13 – 17 Feb 2017 Distribution of the ToRs to the Country Office and to the Reference Group for comments, and finalisation of the ToRs; finalize the evaluation design, methodology and logistical arrangements for the field evaluation mission based on consultations with the evaluation team and the country office.

20 Feb – 3 Mar 2017 field mission to Sindh and Punjab with the Principal Consultant, Expert in policy development and the Principal consultant, Expert in Climate Change and DRR

5 – 23 Mar 2017 field mission to KP and FATA with the Principal Consultant, Expert in Resilience and Livelihoods and the Principal consultant, Expert in Climate Change and DRR

26 – 31 Mar 2017 field mission to Baluchistan with the Principal Consultant, Expert in Expert in policy development

2 – 15 April 2017 Follow up interviews with stakeholders – if needed

5 April 2017 Debriefing the country office team

May 2017 Drafting of report by the evaluation manager

Early June 2017 Distribution of draft to Country Office and to the Reference Group for comments

End of June 2017 Integration of comments and preparation of the final draft report

July 2017 Presentation of the final report and validation. Finalisation of the report and publication of the final report and dissemination


18

10.4 Tentative work-plan for each evaluation team member

Principal Consultant, Expert in policy development

Dr. Tariq Husain

Timeframe Mission Deliverable Due date Payment

30 Jan-10 Feb Islamabad Refine the evaluation questions with detailed methodology

10 Feb 2017 N/A

20 Feb – 3 Mar Sindh and Punjab

Outcome paper on:(general) agriculture economic development;Agricultural Information Systems; Livelihood Restoration and Protection; Agricultural Value Chain and Rural Finance.

18 Mar 2017 12 working days (mid-March)

18 – 30 Mar Baluchistan Metal analysis of the project evaluationsOutcome paper on:value chain development, agribusiness enterprises, market development and provincial agricultural policies and regulatory frameworks.

10 April 2017 20 working days (mid-April)

2 – 30 April Follow-up interviews, secondary data collection and comments on the draft report

10 May 2017 12 working days (mid-May)

Principal consultant, Expert in Climate Change and DRRDr. Syed Sajidin Hussain


30 Jan-10 Feb Islamabad Refine the evaluation questions with detailed methodology

10 Feb 2017 N/A

20 Feb – 3 Mar Sindh and Punjab

Outcome paper on:(general) NDMA and PDMAs capacity and needs;Disaster Risk Reduction Policy;Water Sector Improvement;Good Aquaculture Practices.

18 Mar 2017 10 working days (mid-March)

5 – 23 Mar KP and FATA Outcome paper on:Livelihood assets and food production of the conflict affected small-scale livestock holders;Community-driven and participatory research and extension approaches for agricultural development;Integrated natural resource management.




Principal Consultant, Expert in Resilience and Livelihoods

Ms. Umm e Zia


1 - 4 Mar Islamabad Refine the evaluation questions with detailed methodology

18 Mar 2017 N/A

5 – 23 Mar KP and FATA Outcome paper on:Recovery and Development of the Agricultural Economy;Increase crop and livestock productivity and income generation; Community development.





19

Annex: Country projects by priority area of the CPF for Pakistan

No Project Symbol Project Title Total Budget

Actual EOD Year

Actual NTE Year

CPF Area

1 EP /GLO/802/GEF BABY06

Conservation and management of pollinators for sustainable agriculture through an eco-system approach

$311,135 2008 2015 4

2 GCP /INT/114/USA Capacity Building in Pesticide Risk Reduction in Middle East and Asia (Under ProgAgreemnt-Support FAO strengthen nat phytosanitary services, plant production infrastructure, and security of agricultural chemical inputs)

$432,151 2010 2014 3

3 GCP /PAK/090/GFF Reversing deforestation and degradation in high conservation value Chilgoza Pine Forests in Pakistan (PPG)

$150,000 2016 2017 3

4 GCP /PAK/113/USA Balochistan Agriculture Project (BAP)

$32,000,003 2009 2016 1, 2, 3

5 GCP /PAK/123/USA Support to Increase Sustainable Livestock Production

$7,140,500 2011 2015 3

6 GCP /PAK/125/USA Agricultural Information Systems - Building Provincial Capacity for Crop Estimation, Forecasting and Reporting based on the Integral Use of Remotely Sensed Data

$2,317,617 2011 2016 4

7 GCP /PAK/126/AUL Australian Assistance to Agricultural Development in Balochistan Border Areas - AUSABBA

$10,993,301 2012 2017 1, 2

8 GCP /PAK/127/USA Progressive Control of Peste Des Petits Ruminants (PPR) in Pakistan

$1,654,999 2013 2017 3

9 GCP /PAK/130/USA Soil Fertility Management for Sustainable Intensification in Pakistan: Baseline Input Atlas and Promotion of Soil Fertility with Private Sector

$604,268 2013 2017 4

10 GCP /PAK/134/USA Pakistan Livestock Emergency Guidelines and Standards (LEGS) Planning and Training Programme

$202,352 2015 2017 4

11 GCP /RAS/294/ASB Regional Capacity Development for Regional Cooperation on Food Security through Control of TADs in South Asia

$213,479 2015 2017 4

12 MTF /INT/661/MUL Indian Ocean Tuna Commission $1,339,253 1997 2017 2

13 OSRO/PAK/109/UK Emergency livelihood assistance to support flood-affected vulnerable farmers in Sindh Province, Pakistan

$7,893,991 2011 2013 3


20

14 OSRO/PAK/203/UNJ Social cohesion and peace building programme for Refugees Affected and Hosting Areas (RAHA) adjacent to the Peshawar-Torkham express way.

$1,631,750 2012 2014 3

15 OSRO/PAK/204/EC Develop and strengthen Food Security and Livelihood analysis and response frameworks in Pakistan

$746,269 2012 2013 1

16 OSRO/PAK/206/UNO Livelihood Restoration and Protection and Sustainable Empowerment of Vulnerable Peasant Communities in Sindh Province

$2,863,401 2013 2016 1,2,3,4

17 OSRO/PAK/207/CHA Emergency assistance for the prompt resumption of agricultural activities and protection of productive livestock assets in flood affected districts of Jacobabad and Jafferabad

$489,073 2012 2013 3

18 OSRO/PAK/301/BEL Emergency support to the restoration of agricultural-based livelihoods of returned families in Kurram Agency of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA)

$500,000 2013 2014 3

19 OSRO/PAK/302/EC Food Security and Livelihoods Analysis and Response Frameworks in Pakistan

$1,322,000 2013 2014 1

20 OSRO/PAK/303/CHA Emergency Assistance for the Protection of Critical Livestock Assets and Improved Household Food Security for Conflict Affected IDPs of Tirah Valley

$344,358 2013 2013 3

21 OSRO/PAK/304/UK Support for the recovery of agriculture based livelihoods of vulnerable farmers affected by 2012 floods of Sindh and Balochistan Provinces in Pakistan

$6,362,905 2013 2015 3

22 OSRO/PAK/401/CHA Critical livelihood support to protect and restore Agriculture based livelihoods of conflict affected farming families in Kurram and Khyber Agencies of Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) - 14-UFE-FAO-008

$1,479,517 2014 2014 3

23 OSRO/PAK/402/CHA Emergency support to protect the livestock affected by the North Waziristan crisis through provision of critical veterinary supplies and feed

$299,996 2014 2015 3

24 OSRO/PAK/403/BEL (SFERA)Emergency support to protect the livestock affected by the North Waziristan crisis through provision of critical veterinary supplies and feed.

$300,000 2014 2015 3

25 OSRO/PAK/404/WFP Strengthening Food Security Cluster for better disaster preparedness and effective response in Pakistan

$292,972 2014 2015 1


21

26 OSRO/PAK/501/EC Strengthening the Food Security Situation in Pakistan through Improved Coordination, Information Management, Response Framework and Integrated Phase Classification.

$821,287 2015 2016 1

27 OSRO/PAK/502/JPN Project for Assistance to the Recovery and Development of the Agricultural Economy in Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

$4,870,275 2015 2017 3

28 OSRO/PAK/503/IOM Multi-year Humanitarian Programme for Natural Disaster Preparedness, response and Recovery in Pakistan 2015-2019 (the Activities)

$3,813,206 2015 2019 3

29 OSRO/PAK/601/UK Technical Support to Stakeholder Capacity Development for Effective Implementation of Pakistan s National Disaster Risk Reduction Policy

$2,647,001 2016 2018 3

30 OSRO/RAS/102/EC Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) in Asia: Special Focus to Strengthen IPC Capacity in Four Countries

$419,896 2011 2013 1

31 OSRO/RAS/901/EC Improvement of regional capacities for the prevention, control and eradication of highly pathogenic and emerging diseases (HPED) including HPAI in ASEAN and SAARC countries

$575,614 2009 2014 4

32 TCP/PAK/3301 TCP Facility (includes CPF Preparation and Agriculture Development Policy for Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province with TCS as LTU)

$299,714 2010 2013 4

33 TCP/PAK/3401 Vision 2050: Addressing Challenges to the Agriculture Sector in Pakistan

$419,144 2013 2015 4

34 TCP/PAK/3402 1.Symposium on Rangeland Resources of Pakistan - NRL; 2. Review on Women in Agriculture in Pakistan ESW; 3. Preparation and Repatriation of Agriculture-based Afghan Refugees in Pakistan - TCE; 4. Institutional Assessment for Integrating Disaster Risk Management into Agriculture Planning and Programming processes - TCE)

$208,395 2013 2015 4

35 TCP/PAK/3403 Food Security and Livelihoods analysis and response frameworks in Pakistan

$240,570 2013 2015 1

36 TCP/PAK/3501 TCP Facility (Two babies: 1. Capacity building of Food department in Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJ&K) to improve its food stock information management system - ESS; 2. Wool Value Chain Development - AGS)

$142,185 2014 2016 1


22

37 TCP/PAK/3502 Promotion of Good Aquaculture Practices (GAqP) in farming of carps and other potential finfish in Punjab and Balochistan Provinces

$371,000 2015 2017 4

38 TCP/PAK/3503 Development of National Control Program for Foot and Mouth Disease in Pakistan

$448,000 2015 2017 3

39 TCP/PAK/3601 Building Capacity of Federal Seed Certification and Registration Department to facilitate seed and plant supply industry regulation

$213,000 2016 2017 4

40 UNJP/PAK/121/EDF Mainstreaming livelihood oriented DRM into public sector organizations and communities through piloting, research and capacity building interventions under the One UN Framework

$473,750 2010 2013 3

41 UNJP/PAK/131/UNJ Technical Assistance for Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN)

$386,100 2015 2016 1

42 UNJP/PAK/136/UNJ Community Resilience and Recovery Support to FATA s Returning Internally Displaced Persons

$2,970,298 2015 2017 3

43 UTF /PAK/099/PAK FAO/MinNFS&R Cooperation in Programme Development

$391,464 2006 2016 4

44 UTF /PAK/101/PAK Technical Assistance to the SUPARCO Project on Monitoring of Crops through Satellite Technology

$1,545,216 2007 2017 4

45 UTF /PAK/106/PAK Sindh Water Sector Improvement Phase-I Project (WSIP)

$3,772,768 2008 2018 4

46 UTF /PAK/108/PAK Support to the Fisheries Resources Appraisal in Pakistan

$5,282,770 2008 2015 4

47 UTF /PAK/110/PAK Capacity Development on Agricultural Value Chain and Rural Finance

$140,962 2014 2016 4

48 OSRO/PAK/602/EC Enhancing the Food Security Situation in Pakistan through Efficient Coordination, Situation Analysis, Response Planning and Integrated Phase Classification

$496,690 2016 2017 3

49 GCP /PAK/137/EC Improved Land Tenancy in Sindh Province

$4,246,284 2017 2020 4

50 UTF /PAK/139/PAK Control of Transboundary Livestock Diseases (Foot and Mouth Disease and Peste des Petits Ruminants)

$8,891,367 2017 2018 3

OFFICE OF EVALUATIONwww.fao.org/evaluation

Date post:	16-Oct-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	5 times
Download:	0 times

Evaluation of FAO s contribution to the Islamic Republic ...

Documents