Nuestros proyectos

Together with other financing instruments managed by the Service for Foreign Policy Instrument (FPI), the Partnership Instrument (PI) contributes to responding to political priorities and supporting the EU foreign policy efforts as defined in the EU Treaties, the EUROPE 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable, and inclusive growth, the Global Strategy for the. EU's Foreign And Security Policy, the European Commission's political priorities for 2019-2024, the United Nations 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The PI thus provides a mechanism for the EU to promote its interests through political cooperation with key partners at bilateral, regional, and global level. With the revision of the Multiannual Indicative Programme 2018-2020, the PI focuses on strategic EU priorities and within the five areas of intervention set in the PI Regulation, priorities have been redefined.

The main objective of the assignment is to conduct an evaluation of the seven PI-funded Actions in the three broad thematic clusters of Responsible Business Conduct (RBC), Women’s Economic Empowerment (WEE) and Social and Solidarity Economy (SSE). The evaluation will provide the relevant EU services and relevant stakeholders with an overall independent assessment of:

• the seven Actions to be evaluated, paying particular attention to their intermediate or final results measured against expected objectives; and the reasons underpinning such results; and
• key lessons learned, conclusions and related recommendations in order to improve current and future Actions under the Multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2021-2026, as well as on thematic level and on approaches taken to influence the related policies effectively.

The overall purpose of the consultancy is to assess the performance and progress of health care system with focus on Basic Package of Health Services (BPHS) and Essential Package of Hospital Services (EPHS) implementation.

Particip conducted several assessments and surveys and disseminated the results.

1. Annual health facility surveys in 34 provinces including use of exit interviews to assess on citizen satisfaction.

2. Six monthly verification of Health Management Information System (HMIS) indicators for data quality assurance at the BPHS and EPHS levels as well as assess the functionality of hospitals and health facilities. This also served as verification of claims made by service providers under their contracts.

3. Assessment of the quality of essential medicines in a sample of BPHS and EPHS health facilities.

The purpose of this evaluation was to support the Ministry for Foreign Affairs in the process of incorporating the water diplomacy in its foreign and development policy toolbox and increase the Ministry’s preparedness to undertake carefully targeted actions.

The objective of the forward looking evaluation was to generate knowledge about capacity development needs in the area of water diplomacy and about good international practices and related risks that will help prepare future water diplomacy actions. Running in parallel with the planning phase of the Project “Pro-active Water Diplomacy for Peace, Prosperity and Partnership (4Ps for Peace)” that aims to strengthen Finland’s water diplomacy, this evaluation informed project’s design and implementation.

The evaluation analysed Finland’s water sector cooperation interventions carried out within Mekong River Commission (MRC) and in the Nile River Basin Initiative (NBI), i.e. ENTRO and ENSAP. Also Finland’s involvement in UNECE Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes were covered.

The evaluation covered the period of 2008–2020. The ultimate purpose of the evaluation was to support the achievement of goals for the transition process, i.e., transitioning from grant-based development cooperation to increased trade and other mutually beneficial forms of cooperation, in Vietnam and elsewhere in Finland’s partner countries

The evaluation shed light on what are the successes and challenges in the transition process in Vietnam and thereby helped to identify strengths and weaknesses of the transition process. The purpose was also to assist in understanding how development cooperation can support the transition process and build new partnerships and cooperation. The evaluation assisted the MFA to further develop synergies between development cooperation and Team Finland as well as between different development cooperation modalities and instruments in order to support transition as a process.

The following issues were addressed:

• To what extent has the transition process achieved its goal to move from traditional bilateral development cooperation to more diversified cooperation.
• To assess the successes, challenges and possible limitations in the approach, modalities and resources to support the transition process and its goal on building new partnerships and a new type of cooperation.
• How Finland’s development cooperation has supported the transition and how it has contributed to building new partnerships.
• How synergies between different cooperation modalities/instruments, between development cooperation and Team Finland as well as between different actors have been sought.
• What the MFA can learn from its peer organizations, e.g. Denmark and the Netherlands.
• How to best support transition processes elsewhere in Finland’s partner countries and continue support to post-transition phase, with still remaining available resources.

The main sectors of cooperation were Water and sanitation, Forestry, Climate Change, Education, Science, technology and innovation.

This action contributed to the effective implementation of international human rights instruments, principles and standards, primarily by means of exchange of best practices with partner countries.

The project was conceived to serve and preserve EU values and interests by means of complementary actions. It promoted policy cooperation with partner countries of strategic interest to the EU as well as enhanced the EU's visibility and coherence. This was done through the development of an analysis of the human rights situation in 13 countries, the organisation of seminars/roundtables and outreach activities. This ensured increased human rights awareness and access to human rights knowledge.

The Specific objectives were:

• 1) To ensure appropriate follow-up to political and human rights dialogues with partner countries. This includes, inter alia, facilitating south-south cooperation and exchange of ideas, knowledge and expertise on commonly identified human rights issues; providing technical assistance including in the form of trainings and roundtable discussions with governments in partner countries in order to strengthen their human rights expertise; facilitating interaction among representatives from the private sector and government representatives in partner countries to ensure compliance with the internationally recognised human rights framework; and facilitating regular interaction between partner countries with a view to building and reinforcing regional alliances which may contribute to serving EU interests in multilateral fora;
• 2) To contribute to bringing together experts from the EU and partner countries such as academics, private sector and government representatives in order to equip the EU to remain innovative and tackle emerging subjects of EU interest as a vehicle of cooperation with partner countries such as artificial intelligence, academic freedom, right to water and sanitation, economic social and cultural rights;
• 3) To support and enhance the monitoring of Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP) GSP+/ Everything but Arms (EBA) beneficiaries' commitments under the seven GSP core human rights conventions.

++ Internal studies analysing Human Rights situation in the following countries++

• Armenia
• Bangladesh
• Bolivia
• Cabo Verde
• Cambodia
• Kyrgyztan
• Mongolia
• Myanmar
• Pakistan
• Philippines
• Sri Lanka
• Tajikistan
• Uzbekistan

The overall GIZ programme of which this project was a part provided support in ++improving the administrative and technical capacity++ of the competent governmental authority(-ies) and installation operators to implement the industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) (IED) and thus enforce the consistent application of the concept of integrated pollution prevention and control in industry and the promotion of the best available techniques (BAT).

The Project supported the further ++development of the institutional framework++, in particular, in ++reforming the existing system of environmental permitting++ and introducing the concept of ++integrated pollution prevention and control++. To this end, the project supported the MENR and the competent authority(-ies) in drafting laws and regulations to implement the IED, in preparing BAT conclusions, and in preparing recommendations to ++adapt existing sectoral legislation++.

The general objective of this contract was to ensure the communication and visibility of the support programme

migration policies and the European Union policies underlying the objectives of this programme.

In order to achieve this goal, the specific objectives foreseen in this mission were to:

• Increase the communication and visibility of the EU's external activities on migration and share information with different audiences (including: civil society, potential and actual implementing partners, media, citizens and other stakeholders);
• developing communication materials and implementing (in complementarity with other EU-funded migration projects in Morocco and in synergy with the MDCMREAM communication plan and the communication strategy for the Trust Fund under the North Africa Window), communication and visibility activities on the objectives and results achieved by the Migration Policy Support Programme and the underlying EU policies.

The overall purpose of the evaluation was to inform the Ministry for Foreign Affairs in Finland (MFA) on the achievements of its development policy and cooperation in the region over the past decade, and to support the MFA in deciding how to best achieve its policy objectives and to enhance its management of the programme in the region at strategic level. Main sectors of cooperation in the region are i) Government and Civil Society, ii) Energy, iii) Education and iv) Environment Protection. The evaluation was mostly forward-looking but also included summative analysis to respond to the evaluation questions.

Objectives: The objectives of the evaluation were to produce evidence and present well justified conclusions on the following:

1. To assess the impact(s), if any, of Finland’s development cooperation carried out in the region by the Department for Russia, Eastern Europe and Central Asia;

2. To assess the scope of the impact(s) and their relative significance to development in the area;

3. To assess the levels of sustainability of the achieved results and impact;

4. To assess the results achieved by, and management of, the current country strategies;

5. To analyse the reasons explaining success and/or failure in performance and in reaching a lasting impact, including the operational context, human aspects and resources; and

6. To provide recommendations that serve the Ministry in developing its strategic planning, management and response in the region as well as drawing the broader lessons on how to increase impact and sustainability, in advancement of Finland’s development policy objectives.

Final report available here: https://um.fi/development-cooperation-evaluation-reports-comprehensive-evaluations/-/asset_publisher/nBPgGHSLrA13/content/evaluointiraportti-suomen-kehitysyhteisty%25C3%25B6-it%25C3%25A4-euroopassa-ja-keski-aasiassa/384998

The specific objective was to demonstrate which global and regional Associations of Local

Authorities hold a de facto or de jure monopoly on the basis of which DG DEVCO will be able to

sign the second generation of Framework Partnerships Agreements for the period of 2021-2027.

In the realm of this assignment, regional and global Associations of Local Authorities have to be

understood as membership-based umbrella organisations centered around representativeness

operating at sub-national, national, sub-continental, continental and international level. In

particular, for the purpose of this study, ALAs were:

•  actor-based: “Actor-based” umbrella organisations are understood as structures that

gather the family of actors, in this case Local Authorities and their Associations,

excluding other types of actors; and

•  non-thematic: Non-thematic organisations focus on general development issues such as ,

inter alia, development effectiveness, capacity building of development actors, creation

of an enabling environment for LAs. Non-thematic organisations can be understood as

opposed to organisations that focus on particular policy domains and thematic fields

such as, inter alia, climate change, education, health, migration.

The objectives of the evaluation were threefold, covering both accountability and learning purposes:

• To document achievements in terms of assisting developing countries to mitigate climate change through the provision of Danish support in the period from 2013, both through the climate change envelope (CE) and through other development assistance channels;
• To analyse the outcomes of climate change mitigation funding, with due consideration of the opportunities and barriers at both national and global levels;
• On the basis of the lessons learned from the evaluation, to provide recommendations pertaining to future funding priorities.

On the basis of the above, four main evaluation questions had been identified:

• Taking into account the strategic objectives of development cooperation and the guiding principles for the CE, what are the main results of Danish funding for climate change mitigation since 2013?
• How has climate change mitigation funding responded to the aims and needs defined by developing countries in nationally determined contributions (NDCs), leading to measurable GHG emission reductions and to pro-poor low carbon development?
• How has climate change mitigation funding contributed to transformational change and the sustainable development goals in a manner consistent with Danish comparative advantages and opportunities and in terms of influencing global agendas for climate action?
• What are the main lessons learned from climate change mitigation funding that can determine strategic directions and operational considerations in the coming years?