Background

Azerbaijan has joined key multilateral environmental conventions and enacted important national environmental laws and policies. It has ratified or acceded to at least twenty international environmental conventions. The most relevant to this outcome are: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), UN Convention on Biodiversity (UNCBD) and UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD).Environmental degradation and exposure to natural hazards are one of the critical issues highlgihted in the Vision 2020 national development strategy. The strategy prioritizes protection of biodiversity resources, forest management, energy efficiency, reduction of GHGs gases, land reclamation, waste management, flood preparedness. The State Programme for Poverty Reduction and Sustainable Development in the Azerbaijan Republic (SPPRSD) covering the period 2008-2015 also has a strong environmental component. It aims to inter alia: increase the coverage of protected areas to 12% of the country; reduce greenhouse emissions in the power sector by 20%; and achieve 100% treatment of all sewerage and wastewater. SPPRSD is complement complemented by national and sector-specific programmes and action plans.

The most relevant to this outcome are:

  • State Programme for the Socio-Economic Development of the Regions of the Azerbaijan Republic (2009-2013);
  • State Programme on Pasture Management;
  • The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan;
  • The National Action Plan on Strengthening Capacity to Respond to Challenges of Biodiversity Conservation, Climate Change and Desertification / Land Degradation;
  • The National Caspian Action Plan;
  • The country has made progress towards achieving MDG 7, particularly by improving protection of its biodiversity resources through doubling the size of Protected Areas, as a proportion to the total area of the country, from 5% in 2000 to 10.3% in 2014, undertaking massive reforestation measures and improving water supply.

Still, Azerbaijan continues to face serious environmental challenges. 43% of its territory is affected by erosion and 20% by salinization, the two phenomena that reduce land productivity and negatively affect livelihoods of 40% of workforce employed in agriculture. Additionally, there is an urgent need for protection of a highly vulnerable environment from the negative impact of unsustainable management and illegal practices such as over-grazing, tree cutting and poaching. Last but not least, Azerbaijan is highly vulnerable to climate change, particularly given the scarcity of freshwater resources, mountainous landscape and location on the coast of the Caspian Sea, and needs to strengthen its coping mechanisms and adaptive capacities of the communities.Azerbaijan is not among the globally significant GHGs contributors: it emits the same amount of CO2 per capita as UMIC average and half of the amount emitted by high-income economies. However, considering the recent upward trend in CO2 emission per capita and reliance of Azerbaijan’s economy on hydrocarbon production, the government should define new pathways to reduce carbon footprint of the economic development, especially in the energy sector that is responsible for 84 % of GHGs emissions.

Duties and Responsibilities

This evaluation is to evaluate the collective results of UNDP interventions towards improved environmental management and resilience to natural disasters in Azerbaijan as implemented through various projects and initiatives under the Outcome 3 of the current CPD.Programmatic scope, geographical coverage and timeframe are presented in Annex 1 of the ToR.For more information on the projects, visit www.az.undp.org As indicated in the Country Programme, the achievement of the outcome 3 will be measured through the following indicators/baseline/targets:Indicator: 1.3.1: Carbon intensity of economy (green house gas emissions per unit of output).

Baseline: 2008:  849.3 tons CO2 per $ 1 million.Target: Reduce by at least 2%.

Indicator: 1.3. 2: Percentage of total country area covered by Protected Area network.

Baseline: 2008:  9%.

Target: 11%.

However, it is recognized that these indicators may not be the most appropriate indication to measure the progress or the achievement of the outcome. The evaluation consultant is expected to design the additional indicators that can better suit the evaluation purpose.

The evaluation will be conducted against the following set of criteria and should respond to the following set of questions that may be adjusted as need be:

  • Desk reviews of relevant documents;
  • Interviews with key stakeholders and target groups;
  • Focus group discussions;
  • Direct observations during the visits to project sites;
  • Administration of surveys/questionnaires, if applicable.

Evaluation criteria and questions:

  • To what extent do the intended outcome and the relevant outputs address national priorities;
  • Have UNDP interventions been relevant to women and other vulnerable groups;
  • What are potential area of engagement for UNDP’s next Country Programme in relation to sustainable growth that generates decent and productive employment;
  • To what extent the planned outcome has been or is being achieved;
  • How have the corresponding results at the output level delivered by UNDP affected the outcome, and in what ways have they not been effective;
  • What are the challenges to achieving the outcome;
  • Has UNDP best utilized its comparative advantage in defining and delivering these planned outputs;
  • What are the key gaps that UNDP interventions could address within its comparative advantage that would significantly contribute to the achievement of the outcome;
  • Has UNDP’s partnership strategy been appropriate and effective in contributing to the outcome;
  • To what extent did the results, both at the outcome and output levels, benefit men and women equally;
  • Is the current set of indicators effective in informing the progress made towards the outcome? If not, what indicators should be used;
  • Has there been any duplication of efforts among UNDP’s interventions and interventions delivered by other organizations contributing to the outcome;
  • How strong is the level of ownership of the results by the relevant government entities and other stakeholders;
  • What is the level of capacity and commitment of the Government to ensure sustainability of the results;
  • What could be done to strengthen sustainability.

Evaluation products:

  • The evaluation consultant is expected to produce the following deliverables;
  • Draft evaluation report for Outcome 3 for initial feedback from UNDP;
  • Final evaluation report for Outcome 3;                                                                                                                                           
  • The reports should include the following contents;
  • Executive Summary;
  • Description of the intervention;
  • Evaluation purpose, objective, and scope;
  • Evaluation methodology;
  • Key findings;
  • Lessons learnt and recommendations (forward-looking and actionable);

Competencies

  • Excellent analytical and strategic thinking skills;
  • Good inter-personal and communication skills;
  • Ability to meet deadlines;
  • Good knowledge of Azerbaijan’s political and economic context.

Required Skills and Experience

Education:

  • Advanced university degree in relevant disciplines (e.g. environmental management, economics, development planning or related).

Experience:

  • At least 10 years of international working experience in the field of environmental/natural resource management, climate change, sustainable development;
  • At least 5 years of experience in programme evaluation and proven accomplishments in undertaking evaluations for international organizations, preferably including UNDP;
  • Experience in Outcome Evaluations will be an asset.

Language:

  • Excellent written and spoken English and presentation capacities;
  • Working knowledge of Azerbaijani or Russian an asset, but not a requirement.