|
|
Abstract:
The WFP Nepal country portfolio evaluation covers the 15 WFP operations
implemented between 2002 and 2009 the country programmer seven resources to the most food insecure populations are commendable.operations.The evaluation serves the dual objectives of accountability and learning,and will enable the Nepal country office to make informed strategic decisions for its next country strategy and to improve ongoing operations This report evaluates the portfolio itself strategically and align with government and partner strategies? How did WFP make choices and how strategic were these? How did the portfolio perform, and what were the result The evaluation was conducted by a team of four independent consultants, with fieldwork taking place in March and April 2010. T million highly food insecure people in Nepal more than half of the population is estimated to live on less than US$1.25 per day.Nepal ranks 144 the out of 182 countries on the United Nations Development Programmer UNDP 2009 human development index.In 2009 the gross domestic product real growth rate was estimated at percent decrease from 5.3 percent in 2008.The predominant livelihood system is rained agriculture,which employs three-quarters of the labor force.Reduced investment in agriculture,problems of input supply limited irrigation,damage to infrastructure and disruption to communications caused by conflict have all contributed to slow productivity growth.Specific challenges related to food security include WFP has made a number of effective strategic choices regarding geographical coverage early 2000 it had a sizeable CP in place,which provided a platform for expanding the coverage of a development programme from 2002 to 2003 through FFW/FFA for keeping operations going in an environment where others withdrew.Nepal civil conflict prevented the Government from working in certain areas of the country,making it imperative that WFP work with NGOs to deliver its programmes in those areas.The repositioning of emergency response equipment and resources under the 2005 special operation was credited with facilitating a swift response to the 2006 drought in western Nepal. WFP was able to scale up when the CPA was signed, and moved FFA/FFT from the CP into the PRRO a programmer modality specifically suited for transitional programming.Following the CPA,many donors felt that it was important to provide a peace dividend to as many conflict-affected families as possible and WFP programmed provided an excellent means of doing this because of WFP extensive presence on the ground.Many donors therefore channeled considerable resources through WFP to provide short-term transfers for FFW. More recently however,stability in conflict-affected areas has led donor and government interests to shift towards capacity development and long-term development Since the early 2000s,WFP has had a reprogrammable in the Midwest and far west regions,giving it a platform for providing support to food insecure populations located in conflict-affected areas where the Government of Nepal had withdrawn. In addition to continuous programming during the conflict, WFP was also able to scale up its FFW/FFA/FFT transition programming to provide a peace dividend when the CPA was signed.interventions were highly appreciated by the Government and donors,and helped reduce the recurrence of conflict. A major issue now facing the Government of Nepal is how to address chronic food insecurity,and what role WFP should play in this effort.The programmer has followed Programmer Committee recommendations to ensure there are overlaps among beneficiaries of the various operations however,this has limited the opportunities synergy in the overall programmer portfolio acknowledged that food security improved, children healthier and households migrated less. Greater impact and synchronized monitoring systems can be achieved by ensuring that programmer activities are not implemented separately.
|
Publisher:
WFP
,
(2010)
|
Type / Script:
Progress Report
in English
|
Keywords:
EVALUATION RESULT, RECOMMENDATION, PERFORMANCE HIGHLIGHTS, FOOD DISTRIBUTION, FREE FOOD, FOREST POLICY, ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE, DISTRICT SPEFAIC RECOMMENDATIONS, COMMON PROPERTY RESOURCES, LIGAL SYSTEM, HEALTH SERVICE, , INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS, RISK ASSESSMENT, EVALUATION RESEARCH, JOB EVALUATION, SUPERVISION INTERNA, SECURITY, TECHNOLOGICAL SUPPORT
|
Thematic Group:
WFP
:
Food and Emergency humanitarian logistict support
|
Thesaurus:
14.05.03
- Social Development
|
|
|
** This document has been:
430
times viewed
11
times downloaded. Feeder:
BINDUPOUDEL
, Editor:
LUNI SHRESTHA
, Auditor:
View Document History
|
|
|
|
|