Report of the Regional Workshop - Escap

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Annex II: Group activity three • Communication tools • Planning, management and monitoring tools • Database tools • Data analysis tools C. Group activity three: logical framework analysis Mr. Brett Tan broke the Workshop into three groups and asked each group to prepare a Logic Frame Analysis table on their nominated country. The groups were as follows: Group One: Bangladesh Goal: Muhammad Rahman (Bangladesh) Yongfu Zhang (China) Tuti Riyati (Indonesia) Anura De Silva (Sri Lanka) To increase productivity, value and sustainability of forests in Bangladesh In the feedback following their presentation, Mr. Tan said the group had formulated a strong goal, and made an excellent start with their objectives by focusing on immediate objectives. He questioned the indicators however, and asked the group whether the use of “all” in the indicator “all forest areas to be demarcated by 2006”. He suggested the group try to avoid generic terms when formulating indicators, and instead try to make the indicators as specific as possible, that is, what kind of forest, what kind of area and so on. Another example was the use of necessary in “necessary legislative reform by 2002”. He asked the group what did they mean by necessary? Again suggesting they should be as specific as possible. He also suggested that in using figures, using phrases such as “at least” can provide protection in the evaluation stage from challenges that goals have not been achieved because indicators have not been reached. For example, at least 50,000 households, provides protection from challenges that project goals haven’t been reached if exactly 50,000 households are not achieved. The aim was to leave minimum room for argument at completion of the project. 110 Mr. Tan suggested that the group’s assumptions (commitment from government and timely allocation of resources and funds) should not be issues
Annex II: Group activity three if the project has been formulated with the participation of the stakeholders. The elements of cooperation, collaboration, and partnership were missing from the assumptions. He also raised the concern that there did not appear to be any activities in the project formulation that would enhance the cooperation between the project team and its partners. He said he would like to see the breaking down of activities per output – that way the validity of the project can be checked against its goal and objectives. Group Two: Pakistan Goal: Objectives: Raza Shah (Pakistan) Anita Frio (Resource Person) Rajendra Dahal (Nepal) Fariyadh Moosa (Maldives) Khosbat Batsukh (Mongolia) Kanykey Tunguchbekovna Baigazieva (Kyrgyzstan) Lae Tui Siliva (Samoa) Timur Hasanov (Tajikistan) Serasinghe Nandasiri (Turkmenistan) Akilbek Musabekov (Uzbekistan) Efficient services delivered by government to all in Pakistan To reduce the cost and improve productivity of government operations so that more time and resources are freed from administrative work, to be utilized for improving citizen services related activities. Problem tree analysis Negative Impact Problem Root Causes Less money available for the most urgent development activities Less time available with government employees to work on citizen benefit projects/activities/policy analysis Huge spending on government operations Large portion of time of government officials spent on administrative activities Old processes and procedures No information pooling and sharing /lack of linkages among government activities Low skills level of government employees Minimal use of ICT 111
Page 1 and 2:
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMISSION FOR
Page 3 and 4:
ST/ESCAP/2345 The designations empl
Page 5 and 6:
Contents Contents Preface .........
Page 7 and 8:
Contents LIST OF TABLES 1. Bhutan s
Page 9 and 10:
PART ONE Report of the Workshop
Page 11 and 12:
Organization of the Workshop • Ca
Page 13 and 14:
Key concepts and approaches of part
Page 15 and 16:
Key concepts and approaches of part
Page 17 and 18:
Principles of participatory communi
Page 19 and 20:
Logical framework analysis in parti
Page 21 and 22:
Logical framework analysis in parti
Page 23:
Logical diagram and bar chart Step
Page 27 and 28:
Stakeholder participation in micro-
Page 29 and 30:
Evaluation findings from special ev
Page 31 and 32:
Evaluation of ADB’s completed pro
Page 33 and 34:
Building an e-community into planni
Page 35 and 36:
ICT support of stakeholders availab
Page 37 and 38:
Partnerships with stakeholders Casc
Page 39 and 40:
Partnerships with stakeholders easi
Page 41 and 42:
Participatory project design 6. Int
Page 43 and 44:
Participatory project design Stakeh
Page 45 and 46:
Participatory monitoring The four m
Page 47 and 48:
Participatory monitoring The databa
Page 49 and 50:
Legal framework for participatory g
Page 51 and 52:
Legal framework for participatory g
Page 53 and 54:
Country project proposals and actio
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64: Country project proposals and actio
Page 101 and 102: Annex I: Workshop schedule Annex I
Page 103 and 104: Annex I: Workshop schedule Thursday
Page 105 and 106: Annex II: Group activity one Annex
Page 107 and 108: Annex II: Group activity two holder
Page 109 and 110: Annex II: Group activity two • Ti
Page 111 and 112: Annex II: Group activity two • IC
Page 113: Annex II: Group activity two Indica
Page 117 and 118: Annex II: Group activity three Desi
Page 119 and 120: Annex II: Group activity three Desi
Page 121 and 122: Annex III: List of participants IND
Page 123 and 124: Annex III: List of participants RES
show all

Report of the Regional Workshop - Escap

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?