Programme Cooperation Agreement 2010 – 2011

3 Introduction

This is the Final Report on the Programme Cooperation Agreement (PCA) between the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) and GRID-Arendal for the period 2010-2011 (the ‘biennium’). To avoid duplication of the information already provided in the Progress Report for 2010, the Final Report focuses on 2011 programme delivery and on the results that have been achieved during 2011 , rather than simply repeating and updating the previous report.

GRID-Arendal’s work under the PCA fall into one of three categories along the results chain: outputs , defined as the direct products and services generated by programme activities; outcomes are the effects that these products and services have on the target group, what the PCA is intended to accomplish as a contribution to the impact; and impact is the long-term change, or improvement that occurs in society or the environment.

3. Results Management in Norwegian Development Cooperation: A practical guide. NORAD on behalf of Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (December 2008)

Adhering to the terminology and principles associated with NORAD’s guide on Results Management 3 , the effects of

4 Attribution

It is well understood that certain outcomes and impacts only become apparent long after the products or services are delivered – especially when these products target decision-makers. Because of this time lag, the ultimate results of certain GRID-Arendal projects that pre-date the biennium report are only now beginning to make themselves felt (the impacts of the UNEP Shelf Programme and the Blue Carbon initiative are cases in point). This implies that significant results from this biennium’s activities may not materialize, and may not be objectively verified until a substantial period of time has passed. In addition, many of GRID-Arendal’s projects are implemented over longer than a two-year period and results could be cumulative over the whole period and beyond. For these reasons, reporting on the programme of work, to a certain extent, looks both back in time and into the future, reflecting on-going programme delivery and measured progress towards achieving outcomes and impacts.

While clear causal links – from inputs and activities through outputs to outcomes and impacts – form the basis of project design, the attribution of a particular result tends to become more tenuous along the results chain. GRID-Arendal’s outputs are relatively easy to identify and attribute. Direct linkages to outcomes and impacts, however, are generally harder to establish, invariably because of process time-lags (‘project gestation’), the difficulty of tracking the absorption of specific information by diverse end-users before they take decisions, and/or because decisions, especially those related to the environment, are rarely taken on the basis of a single information source. Despite these limitations in attribution, considerable evidence is available and presented in this report to trace direct and indirect linkages from positive outcomes or impacts back to the work of GRID-Arendal. Beyond this, there is anecdotal evidence to support indications of progress towards desired outcomes and impacts.

9