64 / 156
6. Gender
All the activities under the Framework Agreement have addressed gender considerations in line with,
among others, Chapter 24 of Agenda 21, particularly with respect to the participation of women and youth
in the capacity building and awareness activities. The work has also been implemented in accordance to
UNEP’s guidelines for the integration of gender considerations in programme planning and
implementation. Gender issues are planned to be addressed in work with local communities in the GAIN
Program.
7. Deviations
There have been no major deviations from the plan other than the exceeding of planned expectations in
several cases.
8. Problems encountered
GA went through a structural re-organization and had an increased turnover of personnel in 2008. A
number of persons left the organization in 2008 and new staff was recruited. Procedures for filling all
vacancies were finalized by June 2009. The Head of Polar Programme started not until January 2010.
The staff located in the Geneva office established their own organisation (GENFSEC), effective January
1st 2009. However, GA has secured a relationship with the GENFSEC through a MoU to ensure
undisturbed implementation of projects throughout 2009. During 2009, the name GENFSEC was changed
to ‘ZOI Environment Network’ (
http://www.zoinet.org
). The cooperation with Zoi networks has been
successful and a new MoU between GRID-Arendal and ZOI Network is signed for 2010.
9. Audited financial statement
The audited report (Annex 3) from KPMG was undertaken in accordance with the SBT 4400
Engagements to perform Agreed upon Procedures Regarding Financial Information.
10. Assessment on effectiveness
The Framework Agreement had a major effect on strengthening GA’s abilities to support UNEP in its
environmental work to the benefit of developing countries. It enabled GA to build upon its competencies
and to focus on fields of communication, the marine environment and the cryosphere. GA’s new strategy
for year 2009-2013 was finalised in alignment with and complimentary to UNEP’s Medium Term Strategy
and the evolution of UNEP’s six thematic areas (sub-programmes). “Climate Change”, “Ecosystem
Management” and “Environmental Governance” were the dominating sub-programmes that GA related to
with a high number of concrete products. GA related to a lesser degree to the sub-programmes
“Disasters and Conflicts”, “Harmful Substances” and “Resource Efficiency”.
The fact that UNEP’s Framework Agreement was cross-referenced with GRID-Arendal’s Framework
Agreement had obvious effects on UNEP’s awareness of GA’s main fields of competencies.
The number and volume of contracts with UNEP were significant, particularly in 2009. A good example
was the increased cooperation, mutual influence on strategies and synergy with UNEP-DEPI’s marine
unit’s work, despite some initial obstacles. Meanwhile UNEP-DEPI has developed a comprehensive
strategy for marine ecosystem management with GA playing an integral role. This will in the future provide
a good base for GA’s transition from an organisation which predominantly runs the UNEP Shelf
Programme supporting ODA countries on their submissions in relation to the extension of their shelf, to an
organisation with major competence and focus on marine ecosystem and resource management.
Effectiveness regarding capacity building assistance has increased in work related to Africa.
GA’s focus was to collaborate with several African institutions and gain expertise from Africa in a larger
number of field projects. One example of effective capacity building was the production of the latest
35