Mid-term evaluation report : environmental policy technology project (EPT), 110-0003

The project is being implemented by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Evaluation covers the period 5/93-9/95. For political and foreign policy reasons, the project was designed hurriedly, resulting in management problems and confusion about the roles of USAID and EPA. EPA was initially reluctant to accept USAID's leadership role. Internally, both agencies could have organized themselves better, with USAID delegating authority sooner to its field mission and EPA consolidating project tasks in fewer offices under direction of its Office of International Activities. Further, EPA should assign a project coordinator to Moscow as early as possible to facilitate communications with USAID and within EPA itself. Despite these problems, the project has initiated a number of worthwhile activities, which have begun to yield positive results, including preparations for air monitoring systems in Volgograd; establishment of a training institute in Ekaterinburg with the help of a U.S. PVO; public awareness activities via a local NGO in Nizhnii Tagil; central government approval of a priority environmental program and budget, also in Nizhnii Tagil; legal research in Volgograd to assist in drafting improved environmental laws and policies; and excellent training programs in the United States and Russia, some funded under this project and some through other USAID funding. Less successful activities include those in the Moscow water district, where delays occurred as budgets were slowly worked out and numerous EPA experts or contractors made several seemingly unproductive visits to Russia. The diagnostic approach and reportedly non-collaborative style of some activities in Nizhnii Tagil and the Moscow region frustrated Russian counterparts, who felt that they were not given credit for their expertise and were impatient with delays in gaining usable U.S. recommendations and access to U.S. technology. In focusing on technical issues, subprojects in the Moscow area and Nizhnii Tagil largely ignored economic factors. In addition, commodities did not always arrive when needed, there has been minimal linking of components of this project internally and with other complementary activities in Russia, and only limited progress has been made in developing new private sector opportunities and potential joint ventures between Russian and U.S. enterprises. So far there is limited evidence of sustainability and replicability of EPA subprojects, nor is there a strategy for institution-building. This should be taken into consideration during future funding decisions.