3.1 Conclusions Conclusion 1. Strategic positioning:241 UNDP benefits from strong positioning as a trusted partner of national authorities. This is the result of a long history of support, reputational capital, its perceived neutrality and recognized comparative advantage. The UNDP value proposition lies in its responsiveness to national long-term development priorities and ability to support the country’s immediate needs. UNDP has established itself as a trusted partner of national authorities. It is often solicited by Government partners such as PCM to support strategic areas for Peru’s long-term development. Through the provision of strategic and technical advice, and the implementation of interventions, UNDP has consolidated its positioning and role supporting the Government to address key challenges related to good governance, poverty reduction, climate change adaptation and DRM. In particular, the UNDP positioning on governance has progressed during the current programme cycle through the adoption of new approaches (e.g. stronger relationships with regional and municipal governments) and engagement in new areas of work (e.g. anticorruption). In general, UNDP areas of intervention are aligned with the country’s needs and national priorities, and considered relevant to address prevailing barriers to development. UNDP reputation, transparency and perceived neutrality have allowed the country office to engage in highly strategic and sensitive areas of work (e.g. decentralization, anticorruption, transboundary water management, etc.). Its broad development agenda, catalytic role and knowledge creation are other differentiating factors particularly valued by UNDP counterparts. The UNDP Peru portfolio is characterized by dispersed themes and interventions. This is partly due to a challenging context for resource mobilization, a changing country development context and the lack of a clear ToC for the programme. Nevertheless, the country office has made deliberate efforts to achieve thematic integration and synergistic complementarity between interventions, mainly through the adoption of a territorial approach. There is scope for further integration, in particular with the governance portfolio. The breadth of the programme has affected the perception of some stakeholders, who sometimes mistake UNDP for a donor rather than a partner. The ability to partner with different stakeholders played a key role in UNDP positioning. The country office has made significant progress in recent years with non-state partners, in particular the private sector. Partnerships with non-traditional actors have accelerated during the COVID-19 period as a result of its quick positioning. UNDP also established some partnerships with donors and other United Nations agencies, which have enabled it to mobilize resources and generate the necessary synergies to achieve results. Conclusion 2. Environmentally sustainable economic development:242 UNDP succeeded in integrating ecosystem conservation with inclusive and sustainable development through its territorial approach. UNDP support to local governance mechanisms, fostering the participation of local and indigenous communities, proved to be instrumental for progress toward inclusive and sustainable development. It also created holistic solutions between public, private and civil society actors around common sustainable development goals. Despite an important line of work on youth empowerment in the CPD, few results were achieved during this programme cycle.
241 242
See Findings 1-20. See Findings 1, 2, 3 and 4.
Chapter 3. Conclusions, Recommendations and Management Response
58
