Corporate Strategic Evaluation Thailand - GIZ
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Corporate Strategic Evaluation Thailand Unternehmensstrategische Evaluierung – Hauptbericht Im Auftrag der GIZ durchgeführt von Particip Prof. Dr. Jörn Dosch & Pituck Jongnarangsin
Impressum
Als Bundesunternehmen unterstützt die GIZ die deutsche Bundesregierung bei der Erreichung ihrer Ziele in
der Internationalen Zusammenarbeit für nachhaltige Entwicklung.
Als Stabsstelle Evaluierung der GIZ untersteht sie organisatorisch direkt dem Vorstand und ist vom operati-
ven Geschäft getrennt. Diese Organisationsstruktur stärkt ihre Unabhängigkeit. Die Stabsstelle Evaluierung
ist mandatiert, zur Entscheidungsfindung evidenzbasierte Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen zu generieren, ei-
nen glaubwürdigen Wirkungsnachweis zu erbringen und die Transparenz zu den Ergebnissen zu erhöhen.
Diese Evaluierung wurde im Auftrag der Stabsstelle Evaluierung von externen Evaluator/innen durchgeführt
und der Evaluierungsbericht von externen Evaluator/innen verfasst. Er gibt ausschließlich deren Meinung
und Wertung wieder. Die GIZ hat eine Stellungnahme zu den Ergebnissen und eine Management Response
zu den Empfehlungen verfasst.
Evaluator/innen:
Prof. Dr. Jörn Dosch, Pituck Jongnarangsin, Particip GmbH
Autor/innen des Evaluierungsberichts:
Prof. Dr. Jörn Dosch, Pituck Jongnarangsin, Particip GmbH
Consulting:
Particip GmbH
Merzhauser Str. 183
79100 Freiburg
T: +49 761 - 790 74 0
E: info@particip.de
I: http://www.particip.de/en/
Konzeption, Koordination und Management
Dr. Annette Backhaus, Stabsstelle Evaluierung,
Gruppenleiterin
Dr. Alexander Erich, Participatory Initiative for Social
Accountability (PISA), Auftragsverantwortlicher
Dr. Judith Müller-Gerold, GIZ Stabsstelle Evaluie-
rung, Fachkonzeptioinistin
Lennart Bendfeldt-Huthmann, GIZ Stabsstelle Evalu-
ierung, Fachkonzeptionist
Verantwortlich:
Dr. Ricardo Gomez, GIZ, Leiter Stabsstelle Evaluie-
rung
Herausgeberin: Design/Layout etc.:
Deutsche Gesellschaft für DITHO Design GmbH, Köln
Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH
Druck und Vertrieb:
Sitz der Gesellschaft GIZ, Bonn
Bonn und Eschborn
Gedruckt auf 100 % Recyclingpapier, nach FSC-
Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 36 + 40 Standards zertifiziert.
53113 Bonn, Deutschland
T +49 228 4460-0 Bonn 2017
F +49 228 4460 - 1766
Das vorliegende Dokument ist auf der GIZ-Website
E evaluierung@giz.de als pdf-Download verfügbar unter
I www.giz.de/evaluierung www.giz.de/evaluierung. Anfragen nach einer ge-
www.youtube.com/user/GIZonlineTV druckten Ausgabe richten Sie bitte an
www.facebook.com/gizprofile evaluierung@giz.de
https://twitter.com/giz_gmbh
Inhalt
List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... 4
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ 5
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................... 6
Management Response ........................................................................................................ 9
Evaluationreport ................................................................................................................. 12
2.1 Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... 13
2.2 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 19
2.3 Context ............................................................................................................................. 20
2.4 Evaluation Approach and Coverage ............................................................................... 24
2.5 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 28
2.6 Evaluation by DAC Criteria .............................................................................................. 35
2.7 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 78
2.8 Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 80
Annexes .................................................................................................................................. 83
Annex 1: Bibliography ................................................................................................ 83
Annex 2: Survey Report and Original Questionnaire ............................................... 87
Annex 3: List of active GIZ Thailand projects considered by the evaluation ......... 94
List of Figures
Figure 1: How satisfied are you with your relationship with GIZ? ....................................... 35
Figure 2: What is your perception regarding GIZ’s adaptation to the Thai context? ........... 36
Figure 3: What is your perception regarding the mission of GIZ? ....................................... 37
Figure 4: What is your perception regarding the collaboration with GIZ? ........................... 38
Figure 5: What are the challenges in working with GIZ? ..................................................... 38
Figure 6: Survey Question: What is your perception regarding GIZ’s adaptation to changing
circumstances? .......................................................................................... 43
Figure 7: In your view, to what extent has GIZ contributed to positive change in the following
sectors?...................................................................................................... 64
Figure 8: Impact of the project Greening Supply Chains in the Thai Auto and Automotive
Parts Industries .......................................................................................... 65
Figure 9: Based on your experience, to what extent are the results achieved by GIZ-Thai
cooperation sustainable in the long-term? ................................................. 71
Figure 10: Based on your experience, to what extent are the results achieved by GIZ-Thai
cooperation sustainable in the lng-term? ................................................... 71
4
List of Tables
Table 1: Sectors of GIZ cooperation with Thailand since 1956 21
Table 2: GIZ in Thailand at a Glance (2016) 23
Table 3: Selection of Focal Sectors as the Evaluation Sample and Rationale 24
Table 4: Evaluation Matrix 32
Table 5: Timeline of main events and political developments in Thailand 2000-2016 40
Table 6: Disbursements of funds in Euro for the projects under the Trilateral Cooperation 50
Table 7: Outputs: results in line with the Theory of Change 54
Table 8: Outcomes: results in line with the Theory of Change 59
Table 9: Impact: results in line with the Theory of Change 65
5List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
AA Auswärtiges Amt / German Federal Foreign Office
ADB Asian Development Bank
AEDP Alternative Energy Development Plan
AGE Commissioning Parties and Business Development
AIZ Academy for International Cooperation
APA ASEAN Ports Association
APEC Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation
ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
BDS Business Development Services
BMA Bangkok Metropolitan Administration
BMUB German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety
BMWi German Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy
BMZ German Federal Ministry of Development and Economic Cooperation
CAP Clean Air Plan
CASC Clean Air for Smaller Cities
CBOs Community Based Organisations
CC Climate Change
CCMP Climate Change Master Plan
Clean Air for Smaller Cities in the ASEAN Region Project, later renamed Cities, Environment, Transport in the
CET
ASEAN-Region
CIM Centre for International Migration and Development
COMFA Center of Materials and Failure Analysis
CSCP Centre for Sustainable Consumption and Production
CSE Corporate Strategic Evaluations
CSO Civil Society Organisations
DAC Development Assistance Committee
DED German Development Service
DEDE Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency
DoA Lao Department of Agriculture
DVT Diploma in vocational training
DWR Thai Department of Water Resources
EAG Evaluation Advisory Group
EE Energy Efficiency
EEP Energy Efficiency Plan
EPPO Energy Policy & Planning Office
EQ Evaluation Questions
EU European Union
EUR Euro
FTI Federation of Thai Industries
GAP Good Agricultural Practice
6GCF Green Climate Fund
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit
GMS Greater Mekong Subregion
GPP Green Public Procurement
GTZ Former name of GIZ
HDI Human Development Index
HQ Headquarter
IFIs International Financial Institutions
IKI BMUB International Climate Initiative
IL Intervention Logic
IMF International Monetary Fund
JC Judgement Criteria
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
KFW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau
KMUTNB King Mongkut's University of Technology North Bangkok
LPP Laos Pilot Program
MTWG ASEAN Maritime Transport Working Group
NAP National Adaptation Plan
NGO Non-governmental organisation
NIC Newly Industrialised Country
OCCC Office of Climate Change Coordination
ODA Official Development Assistance
OECF Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund
ONEP Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning
OVEC Office of Vocational Education Commission
PAD People’s Alliance for Democracy
PCD Pollution Control Department
PDR People's Democratic Republic
PDRC People’s Democratic Reform Committee
PEC Programme for Enterprise Competitiveness
PEV Project Evaluation Mission
PM Prime Minister
PPP Public–Private Partnership
QA Quality Assurance
QI Quality Infrastructure
SAS Sustainable Agrifood System
SCP Sustainable Consumption and Production
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SHE Safety, Health and Environment
7SME Small and medium enterprise
SPD Sustainable Port Development
TAI Thai Automotive Institute
TC Technical Cooperation
TCC Transport and Climate Change
TDRI Thailand Development Research Institute Foundation
TEI Thailand Environment Institute
TG Thai-German
THB Thai Bhat
TICA Thailand International Cooperation Agency
TPQI Thailand Professional Qualification Institute
TVET Technical Vocational Education and Training
TZ Technical Cooperation
UDD United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship
UK United Kingdom
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UNESCAP United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
USAID United States Agency for International Development
USD US Dollar
VDA German Association of the Automotive Industry
WTO World Trade Organisation
8Management Response
In its key conclusions, the corporate strategy evaluation found that the 11 projects/programmes evaluated in
the sectors climate change, energy, vocational education and training, promotion of SMEs and support for the
Thailand International Cooperation Agency (TICA) were of substantial effectiveness for Thailand and the part-
ner countries in the region (trilateral cooperation). In their assessment based on the five OECD-DAC criteria
relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability, the evaluators give GIZ a positive overall rating.
The evaluation also came to the conclusion that GIZ successfully handled its transition from bilateral develop-
ment cooperation and dependence on BMZ as the main commissioning party to international cooperation and a
diversified client base, both at Head Office and in the field. In this respect, the evaluation produced findings and
recommendations that are also relevant for other emerging economies.
The reference group discussed the findings of the corporate strategy evaluation. Below is a statement by GIZ
on all the recommendations made.
Recommendations to the Country Office in Thailand
1. The ex-post evaluation found that the Thai partner organisations do not perform results-based monitor-
ing and evaluation, neither together with GIZ nor independently. This poses a problem with regard to owner-
ship, precludes a joint process of critical reflection and means that data and information obtained from monitor-
ing and evaluation are not sufficiently available in the long term (for ex-post evaluations, for example).
As a general rule, GIZ welcomes approaches for the joint recording of results (wherever possible), whether by
setting up joint monitoring systems or conducting joint evaluations. In connection with the joint procedural re-
form (GVR) and the 2030 Agenda, monitoring systems are required to meet more stringent requirements, es-
pecially as regards partner involvement. GIZ will take model advisory approaches in its field structure to ensure
that monitoring systems in projects and programmes are sustainably embedded in the institutional framework
of partner systems (relevance to the 2030 Agenda) and that information useful for steering purposes at pro-
gramme and country level is provided.
GIZ recognises that a lack of partner data presents a major problem for conducting ex-post evaluations. The
Evaluation Unit will address this problem and propose solutions.
2. The evaluators come to the conclusion that regional challenges and approaches will play a stronger role
in future, and that GIZ Thailand is essentially well-prepared to respond to this. The regional approaches should
therefore be expanded and cooperation with the regional organisations UNESCAP, ASEAN, APEC and GMS
increased. This would enable synergies with the existing support processes facilitated by GIZ with the regional
organisations. Although it is up to the commissioning parties to decide whether to expand regional approaches,
GIZ should use its scope to position itself strategically and harness opportunities for pro-active advisory ser-
vices.
GIZ basically shares this opinion. However, as the evaluators correctly assumed, it is BMZ’s prerogative to de-
cide whether to pursue a stronger regional approach.
For other emerging economies, the transferability of this recommendation to expand regional approaches
largely depends on the regional (geographical, political, economic, etc.) framework conditions. No specific im-
plementation measure is identified based on this recommendation.
93. The evaluation found that the Country Office in Thailand has made efforts to acquire smaller projects in the EUR 100,000 range since the transition phase commenced in 2008. Although this approach also has disad- vantages (e.g. opportunity costs as compared with the size of the intervention), they are outweighed by the ad- vantages: employment opportunities for national personnel, pooling of resources for similar themes and maintenance of working relationships with Thai partners. It is nevertheless recommended that criteria be estab- lished to determine the circumstances under which it is worthwhile for GIZ to implement small-scale projects. GIZ points out that small-scale projects also offer the advantage of opening up new partnerships and thematic areas that may enhance GIZ’s relevance in the partner country. A study or an evaluation could be carried out to examine the validity of this argument. Small-scale commissions from German public sector clients are often extremely time-consuming and only en- rich the portfolio in the medium to long term if they can be well embedded in the overall portfolio in terms of their content, and efficiently carried out using existing structures. GIZ Thailand aims to develop selection crite- ria for small projects. The Commissioning Parties and Business Development Department is currently develop- ing indicators that will make it possible to better calculate the effort involved in pursuing business opportunities. However, this is not restricted to small projects and/or emerging economies. GIZ states that the Thai partners commission large consulting firms to provide management consultancy. GIZ will therefore examine whether new service can be developed in this area. However, questions arise as re- gards profitability, legal capacity and whether additional local support structures are required. 4. The evaluation establishes that GIZ supports Thai partners in developing strategies and plans, but that partners frequently fail to put these into practice, or do not implement them adequately, due to a lack of capac- ity (and funding). In this context, GIZ recognises the risk that the plans drawn up will not be applied to a sufficient degree, and intends to advise partners on implementation. The conditions required for implementing plans and mobilising resources should be taken into consideration when advice is provided on drawing up the plans. In future, GIZ will urge commissioning parties to take this into account in their commissions. 5. The evaluators establish that GIZ cooperates and coordinates its activities only to a limited degree with other development partners. This is a problem, given that several development partners work in the same sec- tors as GIZ. It is recommended that duplication be avoided and synergies be harnessed to increase GIZ’s own effectiveness. This applies particularly to the vocational training sector. GIZ agrees with this recommendation, but it is primarily up to its commissioning parties to take the correspond- ing action. Without a political mandate, cooperation at implementation level is only possible or cost-effective to a limited extent. In Thailand, other development partners have so far shown little interest in coordination and cooperation. No specific implementation measure is identified based on this recommendation. 6. The evaluators consider trilateral cooperation between GIZ, Thailand (TICA) and other countries in the region, especially Lao PDR, to be an innovative and effective model for cooperation between an industrialised country and emerging economies. However, this approach does not appear sustainable owing to the limited financial and human capacities of the partner organisation TICA. In the long run, TICA will not be able to con- tinue its work without support from GIZ. The evaluators recommend that trilateral cooperation only be contin- ued if TICA pledges greater financial contributions. GIZ recognises the need to adapt the trilateral cooperation arrangement. However, this need must primarily be addressed by the commissioning party. GIZ will arrange talks with BMZ and BMUB on this subject. 10
Recommendations to the company as a whole
7. The evaluators come to the conclusion that the overall political conditions, especially at government
level, played a much smaller role for GIZ’s work than initially presumed. They therefore recommend that GIZ
examine the extent to which political conditions affect the success of projects and programmes.
GIZ points out that its projects and programmes are designed to take a politically sensitive approach and can
therefore respond flexibly to changes in context. In Thailand, the partners’ need for support from GIZ in the joint
fields of activity persisted even under changing governments. Nevertheless, GIZ Thailand remained sensitive
to changes at working or bureaucratic level. The Evaluation Unit intends to carry out a cross-section evaluation
of project evaluations to examine the connection between political conditions and project success.
8. The evaluation comes to the conclusion that GIZ was most successful at handling its transition – from
bilateral cooperation and dependence on BMZ as the main commissioning party to international cooperation
and a diversified client base – in the field. In principle, GIZ agrees with this conclusion. However, the country
offices need additional guidance from Head Office in specific cases and contexts as regards possible options
and their assessment, and the issue of legal capacity. GIZ will develop options and scenarios for selected pilot
countries, but cannot guarantee that comprehensive guidance will be provided.
9. Having recognised that it is not a realistic option for partners to commission GIZ, the evaluators recom-
mend that GIZ should focus on one or only a few main commissioning parties/clients in similar situations in
emerging economies.
GIZ is preparing itself for the fact that its client base needs to be diversified at an early stage given the reduc-
tions in the BMZ portfolio. Although GIZ can understand the evaluators’ recommendation, no single commis-
sioning party has yet emerged to offset BMZ. However, BMUB has become established as a large commission-
ing party in a few countries such as Thailand. The German Federal Foreign Office is not suitable as a
substitute in the context of emerging economies. No specific implementation measure is identified based on
this recommendation.
10. The evaluation named several comparative advantages of GIZ versus other development agencies and
other potential competitors in the field of international cooperation in emerging economies. Based on these ad-
vantages, it is recommended that GIZ carry out a benchmarking study.
GIZ will examine whether it makes sense to carry out such a study for selected partner countries.
11Evaluationreport
Prof. Dr. Jörn Dosch; Pituck Jongnarangsin
Particip GmbH
12decided on ending its bilateral support to Thailand, as
2.1 Executive Summary the country has developed into a newly-industrialised
country and into being a donor of Official Develop-
ment Assistance (ODA) itself. Subsequently, GIZ has
Purpose
maintained a presence in Thailand and implemented
In March 2011, the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Inter- projects funded by a range of donors with the Ger-
nationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) introduced Corpo- man Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature
rate Strategy Evaluations (CSE) as a new evaluation Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB)
tool. The Corporate Evaluation Unit (StS08) conducts as the main one.
three to five CSE annually, the topics of which are
decided by GIZ’s Management Board in light of stra- Ten major interventions in different fields were se-
tegically relevant change processes and resulting in- lected as representative examples for the work of
formation needs. On April 28, 2015, the Management GIZ in Thailand for the purpose of the evaluation.
Board of GIZ commissioned the Evaluation Unit to These are: Climate Change, Technical Vocational
carry out an ex-post evaluation of the cooperation Education and Training (TVET), SME support, and
programmes implemented in Thailand by GIZ and its projects under the Thai-German Trilateral Coopera-
predecessor organisations. The evaluation was sub- tion. While the first three areas are sectors, the fourth
sequently conducted between March and November (Trilateral Cooperation) is a mechanism to deliver
2016. support across various sectors. Selection criteria in-
cluded data availability, temporal scope and duration
The overall purpose of the evaluation is to improve of the support, geographical scope, cross-linkages
strategic decisions in GIZ in regard to how the or- with other sectors, and strategic relevance for the fu-
ganisation responds to the challenges arising from ture cooperation.
adapting to the post-ODA world.
These sectors are presented in a reconstructed The-
The specific objectives of the evaluation are: ory of Change (ToC) which visualises the activities
To analyse, appraise and document the results of and results at various levels of the interventions and
projects implemented by GIZ and its Thai part- thus provides an explanation of the causal links that
ners. tie a programme activity to expected outcomes and
impacts. The evaluation is based on four evaluation
To examine and identify factors influencing upon questions (EQ) and related Judgement Criteria. The
the attainment of results, including changing po- report itself follows the five DAC criteria (relevance,
litical, legal and socio-economic framework con- efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability)
ditions. but is guided by the EQs and Judgement Criteria.
The evaluation draws on an in-depth documentary
To investigate the modes of collaboration be- review, analysis of existing quantitative data along
tween GIZ and its Thai partners. the ToC, structured and semi-structured interviews
as well as an online stakeholder survey of GIZ’s part-
By juxtaposing these aspects, to identify factors ners in Thailand.
that drive and hamper results.
Relevance in view of changing framework condi-
tions
Background and Approach
Across all sectors covered by the evaluation GIZ pro-
Development cooperation between the Federal Re-
jects were highly relevant for Thailand’s develop-
public of Germany and the Kingdom of Thailand
ment needs and responded well to respective gov-
dates back to 1956, when the two governments
ernments’ policy agendas and strategies. Equally im-
signed a first agreement on Technical Cooperation
portant, GIZ support to Thailand has been character-
(TC). Since then, nearly 300 projects have been im-
ised by an adequate degree of flexibility in the de-
plemented, covering a broad spectrum of thematic
sign and implementation of interventions, which were
areas. From January 2000 to February 2016, GIZ (in-
all based on participatory approaches and therefore
cluding the former GTZ) implemented a total of 111
allowed for an ongoing alignment with partner needs
projects in 14 sectors. The total budget amounted to
and priorities.
EUR 140.4 million which equals an annual average
of EUR 9.4 million. The cooperation reached a critical
The environment sector has taken centre-stage for
juncture in 2008, when the German Federal Ministry
the past half-decade within the context of climate
of Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ)
change to which Thailand is particularly vulnerable.
13The relevance of the approach was strengthened by Efficiency
its holistic nature, i.e. the fact that a whole range of
programmes and projects addressed the broad field The majority of programme activities was delivered
of climate change and environmental challenges from on time or without substantial delays. Only a small
different but related angles. number of cases encountered problems in the imple-
mentation process. If the implementation diverted
Assistance in the field of vocational education has from the original project design, changes to the re-
corresponded with government policy to strengthen sults framework were explained and well founded.
the qualifications, skills and competences of the There are only a small number of instances when
workforce as a crucial contribution to escaping the project activities or components were completely
middle income trap. Since 2004, interventions for the abandoned. Overall, the evaluation did not find any
benefit of small and medium sized companies differences regarding the efficiency of project imple-
(SMEs) have directly addressed their needs arising mentation in different sectors.
as the result of growing international competition.
Across all interventions GIZ support to Thailand was
The trilateral cooperation between GIZ, the Thailand perceived as being of high quality due to “top notch”
International Cooperation Agency (TICA) and third expertise in the delivery of technical solutions, trans-
countries, e.g. Lao PDR and Vietnam, was relevant parency and accountability of project implementation,
both in terms of strengthening TICA’s role as devel- the results-oriented and often incremental and/or ho-
opment agency and in responding to development listic approach of interventions as well as generally
needs of the two supported countries. However, the the participatory approach at all levels of the cooper-
relevance of these interventions for Lao PDR and Vi- ation.
etnam was weakened due to the small size of the
projects and their implementation in isolation from bi- Projects which developed standards – especially at
lateral cooperation programmes. the regional level – can be seen as particularly effi-
cient as such results are easily replicable. GIZ also
The relevance of many interventions was strength- developed several innovative approaches and “prom-
ened by virtue of their regional dimension, i.e. the ising practises” to address Thailand’s changing de-
alignment of projects with growing regional needs, in- velopment needs as the country moves up the mid-
cluding on-going integration based on the agenda of dle-income ladder. These methods include, but are
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) not limited to, value-chain approaches and integrated
and the Mekong region. resource management in urban planning. Both stand-
ards and value-chains represent economies of scales
During the evaluation period, Thailand experienced approaches.
thorough change, triggered by, inter alia, phases of
political instability and unrest, economic crises due to Effectiveness
the global financial crisis 2008 and the floods of
2011, as well as Thailand’s decision to transform The effectiveness criterion covers outputs and out-
from being a recipient of ODA to acting as a donor. comes. Outputs of all interventions focused on ca-
Yet, the country has also made steady progress in pacity building and training, addressing mainly state
climbing up the ladder of economic and human de- actors and the private sector (SMEs) but to lesser ex-
velopment. Overall, the modes of collaboration be- tent civil society actors/NGOs. Equally important, in a
tween GIZ and Thai partners did not significantly systematic manner all projects embedded technical
change in response to changing framework condi- advice within broader structures of policy consulting,
tions because this was not needed to ensure effec- network-building among different state and non-state
tive project implementation. GIZ has supported Thai- stakeholders as well as knowledge sharing and
land in key sectors, which have stayed relevant transfer. This was particularly the case – and indeed
regardless of the specific situation and the govern- a necessary requirement – for the two phases of the
ment of the day. As an implementing agency which, climate change project that were implemented at the
unlike donors, does not engage in direct negotiations political level. Across the entire portfolio GIZ support
with the Thai government, GIZ has largely been unaf- resulted in concrete, measurable products, mainly in
fected by major political events. Furthermore, GIZ ad- the form of standards, strategies, action plans or
dressed technical, non-sensitive areas of support. If studies.
adaption was necessary, this was usually in re-
sponse to changes in the organisational structure or Thai partners perceive environment, energy and edu-
the top management of project partners. cation as the sectors in which GIZ has made the
strongest positive contribution to change, achieving –
14in comparative terms – high levels of effectiveness. Plan 2013-2050” and the current Climate Change
As one of their most important outcomes, the climate Policy might well – and are indeed likely to – result in
change projects enabled government officials to de- reduced greenhouse gas emissions but it is too early
velop and follow better informed and ultimately more for any sound findings. As for low carbon procure-
effective approaches to climate change mitigation. ment and green labelling, data on energy savings is
The projects also made a strong contribution to the not yet available due to project outcomes In fact,
mainstreaming of climate change in policymaking. there is no indication pointing at increased energy ef-
GIZ support to SME projects achieved effectiveness ficiency yet and available studies rather show an in-
mainly through the innovative combination of different crease in energy consumption between 2000 and
approaches integrating eco-efficiency and economic 2014.
development in a comprehensive and systemic way.
The approach achieved or even exceeded the ex- In a similar vein, the GIZ approach to creating a vo-
pected results, leading to stronger and more competi- cational training system inspired by the German dual
tive agricultural SMEs in Northern Thailand. system has the potential to achieve substantial im-
pact on the improvement of labour skills in Thailand.
The GIZ-TICA trilateral projects expanded policy con- However, the implementation has just started; there
sulting and inter-ministerial coordination beyond is not a sufficiently strong base to prognosticate, if it
Thailand’s border to include Lao ministries and state will be possible to firmly establish the system in Thai-
agencies. As for the individual projects themselves, land, particularly since the German approach com-
the most effective part of the trilateral cooperation petes with a similar Japanese system.
programme has been the establishment and
strengthening of Good Agriculture Practice (GAP) in The impact of the trilateral cooperation programme
Lao PDR. has to be seen from two angles. TICA officials con-
firmed that the collaboration with GIZ markedly con-
However, the effectiveness of the introduction of tributed to the agency’s effective transformation from
standards and technical solutions depended on a donor-coordinating agency of a recipient country to
whether a standard or solution was the means to an becoming a donor and development agency itself.
end or the project outcome itself. Projects were more However, the impact of the four projects implemented
effective in cases where standards were means to an in Lao PDR and Vietnam is mixed. The Strengthen-
end. A good example in this regard is the case of the ing Good Agriculture Practice (GAP) Project created
project Effective In-Company Vocational Training in the strongest impact because it has now firmly es-
the Mekong Region in which the development of a tablished the GAP standard in Lao PDR. The other
standard was the pre-condition for the actual training three projects have achieved very limited impact, if
of in-company trainers. The project established a re- any, since they were too small to trigger change.
gional standard, which formed the basis for the Thai
national standard. On the other hand, the GIZ-sup- As the implementation of GIZ interventions was not
ported “Low Carbon City” masterplans developed in substantially affected by external factors, changing
Ranyong and Nan as pilots under the climate change framework conditions have not played a crucial role
project have provided the blueprint for similar ap- regarding the achievement of long-term changes.
proaches in 16 other provinces. Yet there is no evi-
dence that plans have yet been implemented any- Sustainability
where.
As in the case of effectiveness, Thai stakeholders
Impact perceive environment, energy and education as the
sectors, which offer the greatest potential for sustain-
Impact is most visible in areas, which have enjoyed ability. GIZ’s participatory approach to project plan-
GIZ’s long-term support. In this regard, the projects in ning and implementation, elaborated approaches to
support of SMEs achieved several visible and meas- knowledge transfers and capacity-building were iden-
urable impacts. Most importantly, the productivity and tified as crucial factors in achieving sustainability.
income of supported SMEs in the agricultural sector
in Thailand increased by at least 20% as envisioned As mentioned, GIZ has developed standards and in-
in the project design. In some cases, the productivity novative solutions to challenges in the sectors of en-
and income of farmers increased by more than vironment/climate change, SME support and educa-
100%. tion. Where standards have been adopted, imple-
As a policy advisory intervention, the climate change mented and are actively used, as in the case of the
project has not had a measurable environmental im- standard on in-company vocational training and low
pact yet. Thailand’s “National Climate Change Master carbon emission procurement, the project outcomes
15are sustainable. The development of regional stand- Developing the GIZ office in Bangkok as a regional
ards offers the best prospect for sustainability in view hub proved to be a good strategic decision. Due to its
of expanding regional cooperation and integration. location and infrastructure Bangkok is a natural re-
gional hub for activities in mainland Southeast Asia
Whether or not GIZ’s contribution to the shaping of and the Mekong Region but also Southeast Asia as a
Thailand’s energy and climate change policy will whole and even the wider Asia-Pacific region. Alt-
have a sustainable impact, depends on the extent to hough this might not be easily replicable in other
which advised plans and strategies will be imple- countries, the successful ”regionalisation” of activities
mented. The value-chain approaches developed and is an important lesson learnt which should be consid-
applied by the SME support projects have created a ered for GIZ operations in other countries.
strong basis for sustainability. The participation of lo-
cal actors is a key to sustainability. Many projects in- The trilateral cooperation involving GIZ, TICA and
volved Thai experts and universities, which are still partner countries is an innovative approach to the
providing advice – or are at least in a position to do strengthening of South-South and North-South-South
so – after projects have come to an end. cooperation. However, without sizable funding com-
mitment, the model is unlikely to be more than a pilot
The sustainability level of the projects implemented project without much potential for sustainability.
under the trilateral programme varies. Of the three
projects implemented in Lao PDR, the one on GAP Conclusions
offers the best potential for sustainability. The low
level of sustainability of the trilateral projects in Lao A central factor in the efficient and effective imple-
PDR is mainly due to the fact that TICA has not con- mentation of GIZ programmes and projects across all
sidered any funding for follow-up interventions once selected sectors was the fact that GIZ did not have to
the GIZ support had ended. Hence, although the tri- change its approaches and modes of cooperation in
lateral cooperation has made a contribution to the ca- response to altering circumstances in any substantial
pacity building of TICA, it has not encouraged the way. The frequent changes at the political level in
agency to embark on its own cooperation programme Thailand during the evaluation period did not signifi-
with neighbouring countries. cantly affect GIZ as an implementing agency given
the technical, non-political nature of the support pro-
Adaptation to the post-2008 setting vided. Hence, as an important finding which might go
beyond the specific case of Thailand, it can be con-
BMZ, GIZ’s main commissioner, phased out its bilat- cluded that political and economic framework condi-
eral assistance with Thailand in 2008. It is against tions are markedly less important for GIZ’s work than
this background that the portfolio of GIZ in Thailand it was assumed before the evaluation.
has grown to incorporate other forms of international
funding. Due to its long-term engagement in Thailand, GIZ
has established and maintained close relations and
The transition to the post-BMZ environment was tight networks with a wide range of line ministries and
mainly managed by the country office, with the sup- government agencies, which have survived govern-
port of headquarters. This approach proved to be ef- ment changes. This allowed for efficient and effective
fective and allowed the GIZ Thailand office clear stra- communication with key stakeholders, being an es-
tegic priorities for transition based on local framework sential condition for project planning and implementa-
conditions. tion.
GIZ’s main challenge in the early phase of the transi- In Thailand, GIZ had a flexible and participatory ap-
tion was to establish strong and mutually beneficial proach to project design and implementation. This in-
partnerships. In the case of the BMUB, GIZ was able cludes an opportunity for stakeholders at the national
to convince the ministry that smaller countries, such and sub-national levels to actively contribute to shap-
as Thailand, should be included in the German Inter- ing the scope and direction of interventions and facili-
national Climate Initiative (IKI). The substantial tates an alignment of the GIZ support with national
BMUB funding for IKI in Thailand provided the back- needs. This aspect is further strengthened by GIZ’s
bone for GIZ’s continuous operations in Thailand. strong emphasis on local staff in project implementa-
Stakeholders voiced their impression that without the tion. Moreover, the results-focussed approach often
BMUB funding, GIZ would not have been able to sus- leads to outcomes (standards, model action plans
tain its operations in Thailand. etc.) which are replicable and thus offering a good
potential for sustainability.
16GIZ in Thailand made a somewhat innovative contri- development of the regional hub is mainly donor-
bution to South-South and North-South-South coop- driven, GIZ can strategically position itself to take
eration based on its cooperation with TICA. This can advantage of relevant donor initiatives or can ac-
be a useful model for GIZ in other middle-income tively provide advice through established commu-
countries, which aspire to transform themselves from nication channels.
recipients to donors.
Develop clear criteria for the selection of part-
During the evaluation period, GIZ has increasingly ner projects: Criteria should be developed to
moved towards the implementation of regional inter- guide the selection process to make sure that
ventions in alignment with the growing dynamics of small projects are well integrated into the country
regional integration in Southeast Asia and particularly office’s overall portfolio and are feasible. These
the needs of regional actors, such as ASEAN. How- criteria should clarify the context and conditions
ever, the situation of Southeast Asia is unique in this that render projects viable, not only from an eco-
sense as, for some time, it has been the region with nomic perspective but also regarding other rele-
the strongest integration drive outside of Europe. vant points, such as presence in the country,
While “ODA-graduating countries” in other regions maintaining relationships or strategic relevance.
might also be part of regional cooperation schemes,
the specific and highly successful approach of the Assist Thai partners in the process of actually im-
GIZ Thailand office of tapping into the opportunities plementing strategies and action plans which
of supporting regional cooperation and integration were developed in the context of GIZ projects: It
processes is not easily replicable elsewhere. seems important that projects do not stop at the
completion of strategies and plans but that GIZ
Recommendations supports partners in the process of implementa-
tion, including the mobilisation of funds.
Recommendations are divided into two sets. The first
addresses primarily the GIZ office in Thailand. How- Increase exchanges with other development
ever, the recommendations can also be considered agencies: During the evaluation period, little ef-
by GIZ offices in other middle-income countries in fort has been made to engage in structured dia-
which bilateral development cooperation has been logues or even cooperation with other develop-
phased out or where such a decision is imminent. ment agencies.
The second set comprises general recommenda-
tions, which go beyond the country level and are Only continue the trilateral cooperation if
therefore directed at GIZ headquarters. TICA agrees on stronger financial commit-
ments: If the trilateral programme continues in
Recommendations related to evidence-based de- some way or is reactivated, TICA should be com-
cision-making (focusing on the level of the GIZ mitted to ensure the sustainability of the interven-
country office in Thailand): tions.
Create and implement joint approaches to Recommendations related to organisational
monitoring and evaluation with partners to learning (Level of GIZ HQ):
strengthen ownership: The evaluation has re-
vealed that Thai partner organisations do not Re-assess the importance of political frame-
monitor or evaluate their projects with GIZ. This work conditions: The lessons learnt of this eval-
translates to lack of ownership in the sense of the uation should form the basis for a reassessment
Paris Declaration and also reduces the oppor- of the importance of political framework condi-
tunity for critical reflections and thus lessons tions which may lead to a revision of the ex-
learnt. pected role of politics and political changes for
GIZ’s cooperation programmes.
The development of the country into a regional
hub and the related strong focus on regional pro- Decentralised strategy building process with
jects should not only continue but be expanded: GIZ country offices leading transition pro-
Particularly the Bangkok-based UNESCAP pro- cesses: It is important to consider various and
vides multiple opportunities for cooperation in the partly competing options to sustain GIZ opera-
Asia-Pacific – not at least because the organisa- tions in countries similar to Thailand (i.e. where
tion will play a dominant role in the implementa- BMZ considers phasing out bilateral coopera-
tion and monitoring of the 2030 Agenda for Sus- tion). The different options need to be considered
tainable Development. Although the further carefully and strategically and this works best if
17the respective GIZ office takes the lead in this
process, while being supported by headquarters.
Focus on one main donor: Efforts will need to
concentrate on identifying one (or few) main do-
nor(s), which replace(s) BMZ while at the same
time trying to diversify funding and contract port-
folios. If it is not possible to find one main donor,
an early strategic analysis of what is profitable
with regard to smaller projects is necessary.
Headquarters and country offices should engage
in strategic benchmarking together to identify
GIZ’s strengths and unique selling positions vis-
à-vis other development organisations: A full
benchmarking would require a detailed assess-
ment of other stakeholders’ strategies and imple-
mentation practises. Such an approach is beyond
the scope of this evaluation, but the findings of
this evaluation can be taken as the nucleus for
more detailed studies.
182.2 Introduction By juxtaposing these aspects, factors driving and
hampering results are identified. In regard to as-
sessing the results of GIZ-Thai cooperation, the di-
In March 2011, GIZ introduced Corporate Strategic
verse “zones of influence” of interventions and the
Evaluations (CSE) as a new evaluation tool. The Cor-
heterogeneity of their goals and objectives are
porate Evaluation Unit (StS08) conducts three to five
acknowledged. “Second-order” and "spill-over" ef-
CSE annually, the topics of which are decided by
fects are also taken into account as far as possible.
GIZ’s Management Board in light of strategically rele-
In line with the general approach of a CSE, the evalu-
vant change processes and resulting information
ation employs both an ex-post and a formative per-
needs. CSE address the implementation of policies
spective with the specific aim of producing findings
and strategies throughout GIZ that relate to the deliv-
regarding the results and, to the extent possible, their
ery of services. CSE also examine issues that will
sustainability and formulating recommendations on
help develop corporate policies and strategies fur-
the future direction of GIZ’s work in Thailand and po-
ther. CSE as an evaluation instrument aim to enable
tentially beyond the specific case of Thailand.
evidence-based learning and decision-making
throughout GIZ. They should help boosting the effec-
The analysis focuses on a time-period of fifteen years
tiveness, efficiency and quality of service provision at
between 2000 and 2015, with particular emphasis on
GIZ and (further) develop key policies and strategies.
the period since 2008, when the German Federal
A CSE thus serves a dual purpose: it is best under-
Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development
stood as both an ex-post impact evaluation as well as
(BMZ) decided on exiting bilateral assistance with
a contribution to formative learning and providing ad-
Thailand. Against this background the evaluation as-
vice in the process of strategy-building.
sesses the results of GIZ’s work in Thailand to high-
light the lessons learned that could further guide the
On 28 April 2015, the Management Board of GIZ
transformation of GIZ’s role in the country. To the ex-
commissioned the Evaluation Unit to carry out an ex-
tent possible, this experience might also be applied in
post evaluation of the cooperation programmes im-
understanding and approaching the transforming of
plemented in Thailand by GIZ and its predecessor or-
GIZ’s cooperation with other countries as they ap-
ganisations.
proach medium income status. Hence, in a formative
sense, findings of the evaluation might inform the
In middle-income countries, the emergence of new
broader GIZ-strategy in newly industrialised countries
modes of cooperation implies the need to adapt and
(NICs) and create space for internal learning about
innovate processes and structures of development
NICs.
and international cooperation. The development ef-
fectiveness agenda and the Sustainable Develop-
In line with the ToR and discussions with GIZ’s evalu-
ment Goals (SDGs) reinforce this need. The case
ation unit, the evaluation does not engage in a pro-
study of GIZ’s engagement with Thailand provides
spective market analysis.
important insights and lessons learned in this regard.
Primary users of the evaluation are the GIZ Manag-
The overall purpose of the evaluation is to contrib-
ing Board, the GIZ HQ, the GIZ country office in Thai-
ute to improved strategic decision-making in GIZ with
land, and other GIZ country offices in NICs and GIZ’s
regard to how the organisation responds to the chal-
partners in Thailand. Secondary users might include
lenges arising from adapting to the post-ODA world.
German line ministries (as donors), other develop-
ment partners and potentially the wider public if the
The specific objectives of the evaluation are:
report is published.
To analyse, appraise and document the results of
projects implemented by GIZ and its Thai part-
ners.
To identify and examine factors influencing upon
the attainment of results, including changing po-
litical, legal and socio-economic framework con-
ditions.
To investigate the modes of collaboration be-
tween GIZ and its Thai partners.
192.3 Context knowledge and skills rather than the transfer of finan-
cial resources in most cases (although Thailand con-
tinues to accept loans from Japan and China).
Country Background
At the same time, authoritarian state control of poli-
Over the past half a century, Thailand has become
tics and the economy have long been entrenched in
one of the most dynamic and diversified economies
Thailand. The aftermath of the 1997 crisis helped get
in Southeast Asia. Between the early 1960s and mid-
Thaksin Shinawatra elected who immediately insti-
1990s the economy grew at a sustained annual rate
tuted welfare policies for the poor, established an
of 7%. As a result, per capita income increased 30-
enormous base of loyal voters and kindled fear
fold, from less than USD 100 in 1962 to over USD
among the traditional aristocracy that he would try to
3000 in 1996. This growth steered the country into its
overshadow the influence of the monarchy. Though
current middle-income status. Although the Asian Cri-
Thaksin was reelected in 2005, an anti-Thaksin pro-
sis of 1997-1998 put an end to rapid and sustained
test movement (aligned with opposition parties) took
growth and GDP figures have been highly volatile
to the streets to demonstrate against what it saw as
since then (particularly since the 2008 global financial
Thaksin’s growing personalist leadership approach.
crisis the Thai economy has not performed as
In 2006, the anti-Thaksin military overthrew Thaksin.
strongly as in the past), financial stability as well as
The subsequent period of political turmoil has been
significant achievements in reducing poverty have
characterised by instable civilian governments, fre-
firmly established Thailand as a NIC. Generally, Thai-
quent military intervention into politics, the ongoing –
land’s socioeconomic development has consistently
at times violent – polarisation of society in two
improved, paralleling an incremental rise on the
camps: the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD)
UNDP’s Human Development Index (HDI) since
and, since 2013, the People’s Democratic Reform
2005. Yet, a large number of Thais continue to suffer
Committee (PDRC) on the one hand (“the Yellow
from poverty, social exclusion or discrimination due
Shirts”) and the United Front for Democracy Against
to gender, ethnicity or geographic location. According
Dictatorship (UDD) on the other (“the Red Shirts”)
to UNDP data, 12.6% of Thais live below the interna-
along with other groups allied with each side. Since
tional poverty line (3.5% survive on less than $2 per
the last military coup in 2014, the clash between the
day). Furthermore, many observers identify Thailand
two camps has stalled, given the military junta’s ap-
as a typical example of a country caught in the “mid-
plication of martial law throughout Thailand. Never-
dle-income trap”: once a country reaches middle-in-
theless, a high level of conflict intensity remains be-
come levels the growth rate often declines and grad-
tween the two sides.2
uation from middle-income to higher-income levels
stalls. According to analysis of the Thailand Develop-
In economic terms, Thailand suffered from both ex-
ment Research Institute Foundation (TDRI), Thailand
ternal and internal shocks, i.e. the global financial cri-
is at risk of remaining in the middle-income trap for
sis in 2008 and major floods in 2011. From July 2011
many years.1
to January 2012, Thailand encountered the worst
flooding in five decades. The floods killed over 800
In addition to much needed structural reforms, the
people and left millions homeless or displaced. Over
post-1997 period brought about a considerable
three quarters of Thailand’s provinces were declared
change in the role of the international financial institu-
flood disaster zones, and the World Bank estimated
tions (IFIs) in supporting Thailand to address the de-
that the economic loss exceeded $45 billion. The
velopment issues and challenges it faces as a mid-
death of King Bhumibol Adulyadej on 13 October
dle-income country. Since Thailand graduated from
2016 was the most recent shock for the country. The
an IMF stand-by arrangement in 2000, its engage-
monarch had reigned Thailand for 70 years and em-
ment with the IFIs and other major development or-
bodied the unity and continuity of the nation. While
ganisations has no longer been based on traditional
the king’s passing is beyond the temporal scope of
broad-based public sector borrowing programs. Dur-
the evaluation, there are early signs that Thailand
ing the past and a half-decade development partner-
has not faced major economic and political disrup-
ships have primarily involved the transfer of
tion in the aftermath.
1
Peter Warr, Thailand, a nation caught in the middle-income global financial crisis and into the future: evidence from cross-
trap, East Asia Forum, 18 December 2011, http://www.easta- country comparisons, in: TDRI Quarterly Review, Vol. 30, No.
siaforum.org/2011/12/18/thailand-a-nation-caught-in-the-mid- 3, September 2015.
2
dle-income-trap/; Bishal Chalise, Can Thailand Avoid the Mid- BTI 2016 | Thailand Country Report, https://www.bti-pro-
dle-Income Trap? The Diplomat, 8 April 2016; Nakarin Srilert, ject.org/fileadmin/files/BTI/Downloads/Re-
Thailand 'stuck' in middle-income trap, The Nation, October 11, ports/2016/pdf/BTI_2016_Thailand.pdf; stakeholder interviews.
2014; Nonarit Bisonyabut. Investment in Thailand following the
20Thai-German Cooperation King Mongkut's University of Technology North Bang-
kok (KMUTNB) with three campuses) was estab-
In 1956, the first agreement on Technical Coopera- lished, which represented the first milestone for the
tion (TC) between the Federal Republic of Germany technical cooperation between Thailand and Ger-
and The Kingdom of Thailand was signed. Subse- many. Nearly 300 projects have been implemented
quently, in 1959, the "Thai-German Technical since then, covering a broad spectrum of thematic ar-
School" in Northern Bangkok (today the renowned eas.
Table 1: Sectors of GIZ cooperation with Thailand since 1956 3
Sector Short summary of cooperation in this sector
Vocational Educa- Education is the first and longest-running area of the cooperation.
tion The Thai-German Technical School was established to meet the huge demand for
technicians and skilled workers that the process of industrialising Thailand had cre-
ated. Initially, the German dual vocational training system was supposed to be
adopted. Later, cooperative efforts moved on to highly specialised training needs and
more advanced academic levels, especially in the field of engineering.
Important vocational education institutes have been established, and many other insti-
tutions have been supported, e.g., through curriculum development and scholarships.
Today, scientific and research cooperation continues, while education has become a
prime focus of Thai–German Trilateral Cooperation with third countries.
More recently, the project “Effective In-company Vocational Training in the Mekong Re-
gion” (2013-2016) which supports a localised form of the German Dual System of vo-
cational education in Thailand and other Mekong countries, and the GIZ Training Hub
Bangkok, a fully integrated branch of the company’s Academy for International Cooper-
ation (AIZ) in Germany, continue the strong focus on education.
Other projects in this field have been funded by the German Federal Foreign Office
and the Asian Development Bank (ADB). The latter focused on mutual recognition
frameworks for skills in the region.
In 1965, the cooperation expanded to support Thailand’s plans for rural development
and economic growth. Initially, it focused on the improvement of agricultural produc-
Agriculture and tion, the development of infrastructure, and the promotion of land-settlement commu-
Rural Develop- nity.
ment In the 1980s, an integrated rural development approach was introduced as a means of
achieving increased efficiency and sustainability. The activities involved multiple part-
ners and disciplines and addressed issues such as the environment, health, finance
and credit schemes, and smallholder economic development. A central part played the
promotion of alternative crops in the Golden triangle to combat cultivation of drugs.
In 1990, the cooperation shifted towards sustainable production and consumption with
the aim of reducing the latter’s social and environmental impact. New standards, pro-
duction, and services were introduced to boost the global competitiveness of Thai
products.
Agriculture and rural development remain a focal theme for trilateral and regional Thai–
German cooperation within the ASEAN and Mekong context. One of several examples
is the “Strengthening National GAP (Good Agricultural Practises) in Lao PDR” project
(2012-2014), which was jointly implemented under the Lao-Thai-German Trilateral Co-
operation.
Energy, Infrastruc- Before the 1990s, cooperation efforts focused on strengthening agencies responsible
ture and Climate for basic infrastructure such as the power supply, transportation, traffic regulation, port
Change facilities, postal services, the state railway, dam construction, and irrigation.
Since 1990, Thailand and Germany have been exploring and promoting alternative en-
3
Source: compiled from various GIZ documents, including for German Trilateral Cooperation”, and stakeholder interviews.
example “Six Decades of Sustainable Development” (the out-
put of the History Workshop), “GIZ in Thailand 2016”, “Thai-
21You can also read
