in poverty reduction addressed the economic decline, aggravation of poverty and rising unemployment, in line with the Strategic Framework for the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation Programme 2011–2020118. The portfolio of regional projects which tackled these challenges includes Growing Inclusive Markets (GIM) and AfT. A significant number of knowledge products were developed in support of raising awareness, development of knowledge and serving advocacy purposes on major challenges faced by the countries of the RBEC region. A notable example is the new social exclusion measurement methodology which was tested in six countries and was presented in the UNDP Regional Human Development Report (RHDR) 2011. While the methodology is highly relevant to Central Asia, Caucasus and even Western CIS, reservations concerning its relevance and use in the future have been expressed by the Western Balkan countries, Turkey and EU Member States, as the countries have to follow the EU methodology of monitoring and measuring social exclusion, EU-SILC.119 Nevertheless, the methodology is relevant for identifying marginalized communities and socially excluded groups (e.g. minorities) which EU-SILC is not able to do, as it is too general. It can also contribute to the Open Method of Coordination process in EU Member States, acceding and candidate countries.
The regional programme has responded in a relevant manner to the emerging needs of the region in the area of poverty reduction and social inclusion due to demand orientation of BRC advisory services provided at the subregional level and development of relevant knowledge products. The crisis has provided a unique opportunity for RBEC to use its comparative strengths to promote the UN values and advance the agenda of poverty reduction, social inclusion, inclusive growth and human development in the region. The office of the senior economist for RBEC developed vulnerability databases to facilitate the monitoring of socio-economic trends affecting vulnerable households. It also helped the governments in the identification of evidence-based solutions for the mitigation of social impact of economic crisis.120 The regional programme was most relevant when the activities implemented in the area of social inclusion had the following features: a) focus on specific subregions with shared concerns and common development challenges (e.g. Roma, social economy in Western Balkans and EU Member States, HIV in Caucasus and Western CIS); b) flexible design of interventions at the country level in development areas which are highly context specific (e.g. trade in Central Asia); c) design of regional projects based on thorough preliminary needs assessments and analytical work (e.g. needs assessments in the first phase of AfT which informed the second phase, UNDP Business Solutions to Poverty,
Asian Development Bank, ‘CAREC 2020: A Strategic Framework for the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation Programme 2011–2020’, Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank, 2012.
118
For example, references are made to: i) ‘Human Development Study Serbia. Drivers and Outcomes of Social Exclusion’, Belgrade, UNDP Serbia, 2011 that states “It is hard to make precise estimate of the number of socially excluded without reliable methodology, like hopefully SILC will offer’and ii) ‘Description of Target Variables: Cross-sectional and Longitudinal’, Eurostat, 2012 that states “Bulgaria and Turkey started the full implementation of the EU-SILC instrument in 2006 while Romania did it in 2007 (…). Three further countries i.e. Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) and Serbia, are in test of implementation”. EU-SILC is the EU reference source of comparative statistics on income, poverty, social exclusion and living conditions at the European level.
119
See, for example, Slay, Ben (ed.), ‘Energy and Communal Services in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan: A Poverty and Social Impact Assessment’, UNDP, Bratislava Regional Centre, 2011 which aimed to provide answers to Central Asian governments to the difficult challenges raised by the increasing costs of these services brought by the crisis and which affect especially the low-income households.
120
CHAPTER 3. CONTRIBUTION OF THE UNDP REGIONAL PROGRAMME TO DEVELOPMENT RESULTS
35