Systematic Search for Publications

Sommaire
I. Présentation de l'évaluation
II. Les stratégies d'intervention dans les deux pays
III. Activités au Congo: les élections et le PADH
IV. Activités en Tanzania: le soutien au processus de paix d'Arusha
V. Les risques, analyse des ressources employées pour y faire face
VI. Recommandations
ANNEXE 1: Personnes rencontrées
ANNEXE 2: Chronologie des évènements au Congo Zaïre

The negative external effects of profit orientated businesses on the environment and society are most visible and destructive in developing countries, where compensation measures for adversely affected groups rarely exist and where high corruption rates often impede meaningful enforcement of existing legislation. But what role can Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) play in developing countries? How can CSR be generally strengthened by EU policies to contribute to the achievement of sustainability goals in a meaningful manner? This study is an attempt to get a solid overview of the current situation of CSR at the international level. Strengths and weaknesses of the implementation of CSR are analysed both in general terms and more specifically in a case study on the mining sector in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The study ends with a suggestion for future policy action to enhance CSR as a complementing tool to legislation for a range of economic, social and environmental challenges. Different actions are outlined and discussed. [European Parliament]

The evaluation has three objectives: To assess EU support to environment and climate change in third countries through the Thematic Programme for Environment and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources including Energy (ENRTP)1, and through the geographic instruments.To evaluate EU support to strengthening global environment and climate governance, provided under ENRTP and channelled mainly through international organisations.To assess EU support for mainstreaming environment and climate change issues into EU external aid programmes through the analysis of two key sectors: infrastructure (including energy) and agriculture/rural development.The assessment focuses on outcomes and impacts of the EU actions in environment and climate change, identifies key lessons and best practices, and produces recommendations in order to improve the current and future EU strategies, policies and actions. The evaluation covers the period 2007-2013. The geographical scope includes all third regions and countries under the mandate of the EU Directorate-General for International Co-operation and Development (DG DEVCO)that are covered by the thematic programme ENRTP and by the Development Co-operation Instrument(DCI), European Development Fund(EDF)and European Neighbourhood Partnership Instrument(ENPI) geographic instruments. Also,interventions co-financed and managed by the EU Directorate-Generals for Environment (DG ENV), Energy (DG ENER)or Climate Action (DG CLIMA) are included if the funds are provided by DG DEVCO.As such, this assessment replies to the Court of Auditor’s recommendation of carrying out an overall evaluation of the Commission’s devel-opment cooperation environmental assistance (interventions and mainstreaming).[Author vide copyright]

Executive Summary
1 Introduction
1.1 Mandate and scope of the evaluation
1.2 Structure of the report
2 Key methodological steps
2.1 Overall methodological approach
2.2 Challenges and limitations
3 Overall policy framework of the EU strategy in relation to environment and climate change
4 The intended Intervention logic of EU support to environment and climate change in third countries
4.1 The Intervention logic diagrams
4.2 The different levels of the reconstructed intervention logic
5 The realised Intervention logic: Analysis of EU worldwide financial resources allocated to sectors related to environment and climate change in third countries in the period 2007-2013
5.1 Methodological limits and challenges
5.2 Main findings
5.3 Global overview of total environment and climate change versus all DG DEVCO allocations
5.4 Global overview of total allocations
6 Answers to the Evaluation Questions
6.1 EQ1: Policy & instruments
6.2 EQ2: Low emission
6.3 EQ3: Sustainable energy
6.4 EQ4: Biodiversity
6.5 EQ5: Green economy
6.6 EQ6: Environmental governance
6.7 EQ7: Climate governance
6.8 EQ8: Mainstreaming approach
6.9 EQ9: Mainstreaming practice
6.10 EQ10: Complementarity
7 Overall assessment
8 Conclusions
8.1 Policy framework and strategic focus
8.2 Results and impacts
8.3 Environment and climate change governance
8.4 Mainstreaming
9 Recommendations
9.1 Policy framework
9.2 Implementation approach
| VOLUME II: DETAILED INFORMATION MATRIX
1. EQ1 Policy & instruments
2. EQ2 Low emission
3. EQ3 Sustainable energy
4. EQ4 Biodiversity
5. EQ5 Green economy
6. EQ6 Environmental governance
7. EQ7 Climate governance
8. EQ8 Mainstreaming approach
9. EQ9 Mainstreaming practice
10. EQ10 Complementarity
VOLUME III: ANNEX 1 TO 13
1. Annex 1: Terms of Reference
2. Annex 2: Key methodological steps
3. Annex 3: Overall policy framework analysis
4. Annex 4: Analysis of EU strategy in environment and climate change in third regions
5. Annex 5: Inventory methodology
6. Annex 6: Inventory analysis
7. Annex 7: Final Evaluation Matrix
8. Annex 8: Inventory list
9. Annex 9: List of interventions considered by EQ
10. Annex 10: Survey to EU Delegations
11. Annex 11: List of People interviewed
12. Annex 12: List of documents and sources of information
13. Annex 13: RG meeting presentation synthesis phase
VOLUME IV: ANNEX 14: COUNTRY NOTES
1. Bolivia
2. China
3. DRC
4. Egypt
5. Ghana
6. Kenya
7. Rwanda
8. Ukraine

The paper highlights the importance of a stronger commitment to more effective European coordination on the field in the context of crisis and fragility. It aims at presenting a first analysis of the characteristics that are specific to situations of crisis and fragility and the needs encountered on the field in order to draw recommendations for coordination among European actors that are better suited to Fragile States.[Author vide copyright]

The European Commission (EC) contracted a consortium led by SOFRECO pursuant to Request for Offer N° 2009/226296, to conduct an evaluation and formulate recommendations on EIDHR support to Human Rights Defenders. The evaluation was carried out from January to March 2010, and covered the 11 projects that were funded under the EIDHR. The global objective of the evaluation was to provide the EC with an assessment of the quality of the actions financed under the EIDHR in support of HRDs from October 2008 to February 2010, with recommendations on how to improve this support in order to better respond to future needs for protection of HRDs. The specific objectives required the Expert to:- provide an evaluation of the first phase of implementation of the Programme;- make recommendations on how to improve EIDHR support to HRDs; and analyse the added value of the actions financed under the EIDHR in support of HRDs.The evaluation was a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the Programme. The Evaluation was structured and conducted around an inquiry framework comprised of a number of evaluation questions, to which the Expert sought relevant, accurate and concise responses.[Author vide copyright]

ABBREVIATIONS, ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY
GLOSSARY
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Background to the Evaluation
1.2 EIDHR Support to HRDs
1.3 The Beneficiaries and the Projects
1.4 Main Findings
1.5 Main recommendations
1.5.1 Main recommendations to the European Commission
1.5.2 Main recommendations to EC Beneficiary Organisations
1.5.3 Main recommendations to all parties
2 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Analysis of the Programme Context
2.2 Objectives of the Evaluation
2.3 Methodology
3 THE EIDHR PROGRAMME OF SUPPORT TO HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS
3.1 The EU Guidelines on Human Right Defenders
3.2 The Calls for Proposals
4 ACCOUNTABILITY AND QUALITY CONTROL
5 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE PROJECTS
5.1 Profile of the selected organisations & projects
5.2 Geographical composition of the projects
5.3 Types of activities
5.4 Status of the projects
5.5 Case studies
6 MAIN FINDINGS
6.1 Calls for proposals
6.2 Programme Management
6.3 General issues
6.3.1 Communication & Coherence
6.3.2 Security, Confidentiality and Impartiality
6.4 Relevance
6.5 Effectiveness and Impact
6.6 Efficiency
6.7 Sustainability
6.8 Cross-cutting and overlapping issues
6.8.1 Gender
6.8.2 Objective 1, Torture, the Death Penalty
6.9 Visibility
7 RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Recommendations to the European Commission
7.2 Recommendations to EC Beneficiary Organisations
7.3 Recommendations to all parties
ANNEX I - BIBLIOGRAPHY EC/ EU
Beneficiaries
Other Sources
ANNEX II - EVALUATION TERMS OF REFERENCE
ANNEX III - LIST OF BENEFICIARIES & PROJECTS
ANNEX IV - INCEPTION REPORT
ANNEX V - BENEFICIARY GUIDANCE NOTES
ANNEX VI - METHODOLOGY
ANNEX VII - DISTRIBUTION OF PROJECT ACTIVITIES
ANNEX VIII - CASE STUDY 2: DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO
The Country Visit
Observations & Comments
ANNEX IX - PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS
ANNEX X - SUGGESTED HRD PROJECT IMPACT INDICATORS

‘Mine action’ is a generic term which includes any of the following range of activities: mine risk education, minefield survey assessment and marking, mine detection, mine clearance, destruction of stockpiled mines, assistance to mine victims including rehabilitation and reintegration, training and capacity building in general, advocacy against the use of anti-personnel mines and research and development of mine detection and clearance. The purpose of this publication is to provide an overview of EU-funded Mine Action in the period 2012-2016.SWD(2018) 45[Author vide copyright]

Foreword by the EU High Representative
How the European Union supports mine action
World map: EU support for mine action 2012 -2016
The European Union funding activities across mine action sectors
I — Mine clearance
Angola
Chad
Croatia
Iraq
Laos
Occupied Palestinian Territory
Somalia
II — Stockpile destruction
Belarus
Ukraine
III — Mine risk education
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Libya
Myanmar
IV — Victim assistance
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Egypt
Lebanon
V — Capacity building
Colombia
Global
VI — Research and development
D-BOX
Tiramisu
ANNEXES
ANNEX I — Glossary of selected acronyms and abbreviations used in the text
ANNEX II — The European Union’s financial contributions to mine action activities across the world