| Overview : In accordance with UNDP and GEF M&E policies and procedures, all full and medium-sized UNDP support GEF financed projects are required to undergo a terminal evaluation upon completion of implementation. These terms of reference (TOR) sets out the expectations for a Terminal Evaluation (TE) of the “Enhancing capacities of rural communities to pursue climate resilient livelihood options in the Sao Tome and Principe districts of Caué, Me-Zochi, Principe, Lemba, Cantagalo, and Lobata ” (PIMs 4645). The project evaluation will assess the performance of the project in achieving its results and draw lessons that can both improve the sustainability of benefits from this project, and aid in the overall enhancement of UNDP programming. It should be conducted according to the guidance, rules and procedures established by UNDP and GEF as reflected in the UNDP Evaluation Guidance for GEF Financed Projects. Sao Tomé and Principe (STP) is a small island country particularly vulnerable to climate-related hazards, which is showing significant signs of change, such as decrease and variation of the rainfall pattern, longer episodes of drought, coastal erosion and temperature raise. In the future, this climate change pattern could lead to the decreasing of productive zones and culture productivity, changes to the soil’s organic matter, decrease of farmers’ revenue and the risk of revenue-generating crops to become unfeasible due to the rainfall reduction. Despite the recurrent rainfalls, the country has been experiencing longer periods of drought, which constitutes a constraint to food production, predominantly in the north. In Sao Tome and Principe, agriculture, particularly the cocoa production, remains the main economic activity and the main source of revenue for rural households. It generates 70% of rural employment and about 80% of exports revenues, according to project’s documents data. But despite its importance for the economy and communities, STP agriculture is characterized by a very low productivity mainly due to the lack of good farming practices, the bad state of agricultural support infrastructures (irrigation schemes, rural markets, rural roads), the absence of efficient advisory support, and the failures of the agricultural inputs and product markets. |
