Corporate Strategic Evaluation

Thailand

Unternehmensstrategische Evaluierung – Hauptbericht

Im Auftrag der GIZ durchgeführt von Particip
Prof. Dr. Jörn Dosch & Pituck Jongnarangsin
Impressum

Als Bundesunternehmen unterstützt die GIZ die deutsche Bundesregierung bei der Erreichung ihrer Ziele in
der Internationalen Zusammenarbeit für nachhaltige Entwicklung.

Als Stabsstelle Evaluierung der GIZ untersteht sie organisatorisch direkt dem Vorstand und ist vom operati-
ven Geschäft getrennt. Diese Organisationsstruktur stärkt ihre Unabhängigkeit. Die Stabsstelle Evaluierung
ist mandatiert, zur Entscheidungsfindung evidenzbasierte Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen zu generieren, ei-
nen glaubwürdigen Wirkungsnachweis zu erbringen und die Transparenz zu den Ergebnissen zu erhöhen.

Diese Evaluierung wurde im Auftrag der Stabsstelle Evaluierung von externen Evaluator/innen durchgeführt
und der Evaluierungsbericht von externen Evaluator/innen verfasst. Er gibt ausschließlich deren Meinung
und Wertung wieder. Die GIZ hat eine Stellungnahme zu den Ergebnissen und eine Management Response
zu den Empfehlungen verfasst.

Evaluator/innen:
Prof. Dr. Jörn Dosch, Pituck Jongnarangsin, Particip GmbH

Autor/innen des Evaluierungsberichts:

Prof. Dr. Jörn Dosch, Pituck Jongnarangsin, Particip GmbH

Consulting:
Particip GmbH
Merzhauser Str. 183
79100 Freiburg
T: +49 761 - 790 74 0
E: info@particip.de
I: http://www.particip.de/en/

Konzeption, Koordination und Management

Lennart Bendfeldt-Huthmann, GIZ Stabsstelle Evalu-
ierung, Fachkonzeptionist
Dr. Alexander Erich, Participatory Initiative for Social
Accountability (PISA), Auftragsverantwortlicher
Dr. Judith Müller-Gerold, GIZ Stabsstelle Evaluie-
rung, Fachkonzeptioinistin

Verantwortlich:
Dr. Ricardo Gomez, GIZ, Leiter Stabsstelle Evaluie-
rung

Herausgeberin:
Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH
DITHO Design GmbH, Köln
Sitz der Gesellschaft
Bonn und Eschborn Druck und Vertrieb:
GIZ, Bonn
Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 36 + 40
53113 Bonn, Deutschland Gedruckt auf 100 % Recyclingpapier, nach FSC-
T +49 228 4460-0 Standards zertifiziert.
F +49 228 4460 - 1766
Bonn 2017
E evaluierung@giz.de
I www.giz.de/evaluierung Das vorliegende Dokument ist auf der GIZ-Website
www.youtube.com/user/GIZonlineTV als pdf-Download verfügbar unter
www.facebook.com/gizprofile www.giz.de/evaluierung. Anfragen nach einer ge-
https://twitter.com/giz_gmbh druckten Ausgabe richten Sie bitte an
evaluierung@giz.de
Design/Layout etc.:
Inhalt
List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... 4

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ 5

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................... 6
Management Response ........................................................................................................ 9

Evaluationreport ................................................................................................................. 12
2.1 Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... 13
2.2 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 19

2.3 Context ............................................................................................................................. 20

2.4 Evaluation Approach and Coverage ............................................................................... 24
2.5 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 28
2.6 Evaluation by DAC Criteria.............................................................................................. 35
2.7 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 78
2.8 Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 80

Annexes .................................................................................................................................. 83
Annex 1: Bibliography ................................................................................................ 83
Annex 2: Survey Report and Original Questionnaire ............................................... 87
Annex 3: List of active GIZ Thailand projects considered by the evaluation ......... 94
List of Figures

Figure 1: How satisfied are you with your relationship with GIZ? ....................................... 35
Figure 2: What is your perception regarding GIZ’s adaptation to the Thai context? ........... 36
Figure 3: What is your perception regarding the mission of GIZ? ....................................... 37
Figure 4: What is your perception regarding the collaboration with GIZ? ........................... 38
Figure 5: What are the challenges in working with GIZ? ..................................................... 38
Figure 6: Survey Question: What is your perception regarding GIZ’s adaptation to changing
circumstances? .......................................................................................... 43
Figure 7: In your view, to what extent has GIZ contributed to positive change in the following
sectors?...................................................................................................... 64
Figure 8: Impact of the project Greening Supply Chains in the Thai Auto and Automotive
Parts Industries .......................................................................................... 65
Figure 9: Based on your experience, to what extent are the results achieved by GIZ-Thai
cooperation sustainable in the long-term? ................................................. 71
Figure 10: Based on your experience, to what extent are the results achieved by GIZ-Thai
cooperation sustainable in the lng-term? ................................................... 71

4
List of Tables

Table 1: Sectors of GIZ cooperation with Thailand since 1956 21

Table 2: GIZ in Thailand at a Glance (2016) 23
Table 3: Selection of Focal Sectors as the Evaluation Sample and Rationale 24
Table 4: Evaluation Matrix 32
Table 5: Timeline of main events and political developments in Thailand 2000-2016 40
Table 6: Disbursements of funds in Euro for the projects under the Trilateral Cooperation 50
Table 7: Outputs: results in line with the Theory of Change 54
Table 8: Outcomes: results in line with the Theory of Change 59
Table 9: Impact: results in line with the Theory of Change 65

5
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

AA Auswärtiges Amt / German Federal Foreign Office

ADB Asian Development Bank
AEDP Alternative Energy Development Plan
AGE Commissioning Parties and Business Development
AIZ Academy for International Cooperation
APA ASEAN Ports Association
APEC Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation
ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
BDS Business Development Services
BMA Bangkok Metropolitan Administration
BMUB German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety
BMWi German Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy
BMZ German Federal Ministry of Development and Economic Cooperation
CAP Clean Air Plan
CASC Clean Air for Smaller Cities
CBOs Community Based Organisations
CC Climate Change
CCMP Climate Change Master Plan
Clean Air for Smaller Cities in the ASEAN Region Project, later renamed Cities, Environment, Transport in the
CET
ASEAN-Region
CIM Centre for International Migration and Development
COMFA Center of Materials and Failure Analysis
CSCP Centre for Sustainable Consumption and Production
CSE Corporate Strategic Evaluations
CSO Civil Society Organisations
DAC Development Assistance Committee
DED German Development Service
DEDE Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency
DoA Lao Department of Agriculture
DVT Diploma in vocational training
DWR Thai Department of Water Resources
EAG Evaluation Advisory Group
EE Energy Efficiency
EEP Energy Efficiency Plan
EPPO Energy Policy & Planning Office
EQ Evaluation Questions
EU European Union
EUR Euro
FTI Federation of Thai Industries
GAP Good Agricultural Practice

6
GCF Green Climate Fund
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit
GMS Greater Mekong Subregion
GPP Green Public Procurement
GTZ Former name of GIZ
HDI Human Development Index
HQ Headquarter
IFIs International Financial Institutions
IKI BMUB International Climate Initiative
IL Intervention Logic
IMF International Monetary Fund
JC Judgement Criteria
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
KFW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau
KMUTNB King Mongkut's University of Technology North Bangkok
LPP Laos Pilot Program
MTWG ASEAN Maritime Transport Working Group
NAP National Adaptation Plan
NGO Non-governmental organisation
NIC Newly Industrialised Country
OCCC Office of Climate Change Coordination
ODA Official Development Assistance
OECF Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund
ONEP Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning
OVEC Office of Vocational Education Commission
PAD People’s Alliance for Democracy
PCD Pollution Control Department
PDR People's Democratic Republic
PDRC People’s Democratic Reform Committee
PEC Programme for Enterprise Competitiveness
PEV Project Evaluation Mission
PM Prime Minister
PPP Public–Private Partnership
QA Quality Assurance
QI Quality Infrastructure
SAS Sustainable Agrifood System
SCP Sustainable Consumption and Production
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SHE Safety, Health and Environment

7
 SME Small and medium enterprise
SPD Sustainable Port Development
TAI Thai Automotive Institute
TC Technical Cooperation
TCC Transport and Climate Change
TDRI Thailand Development Research Institute Foundation
TEI Thailand Environment Institute
TG Thai-German
THB Thai Bhat
TICA Thailand International Cooperation Agency
TPQI Thailand Professional Qualification Institute
TVET Technical Vocational Education and Training
TZ Technical Cooperation
UDD United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship
UK United Kingdom
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UNESCAP United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
USAID United States Agency for International Development
USD US Dollar
VDA German Association of the Automotive Industry
WTO World Trade Organisation

8
 Management Response

In its key conclusions, the corporate strategy evaluation found that the 11 projects/programmes evaluated in
the sectors climate change, energy, vocational education and training, promotion of SMEs and support for the
Thailand International Cooperation Agency (TICA) were of substantial effectiveness for Thailand and the part-
ner countries in the region (trilateral cooperation). In their assessment based on the five OECD-DAC criteria
relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability, the evaluators give GIZ a positive overall rating.

The evaluation also came to the conclusion that GIZ successfully handled its transition from bilateral develop-
ment cooperation and dependence on BMZ as the main commissioning party to international cooperation and a
diversified client base, both at Head Office and in the field. In this respect, the evaluation produced findings and
recommendations that are also relevant for other emerging economies.

The reference group discussed the findings of the corporate strategy evaluation. Below is a statement by GIZ
on all the recommendations made.

Recommendations to the Country Office in Thailand

1. The ex-post evaluation found that the Thai partner organisations do not perform results-based monitor-
ing and evaluation, neither together with GIZ nor independently. This poses a problem with regard to owner-
ship, precludes a joint process of critical reflection and means that data and information obtained from monitor-
ing and evaluation are not sufficiently available in the long term (for ex-post evaluations, for example).

In principle, GIZ welcomes approaches for the joint assessment of results (wherever possible), whether by set-
ting up joint monitoring systems or conducting joint evaluations. Since the result from Thailand is not repre-
sentatitve for other partner countries, GIZ has not formulated a specific implementation measure of this recom-
mendation for the whole company. However, considering other available information sources this does not
seem to be an isolated case. The responsible organisational units of GIZ will deal with that matter and take
decsions accordingly. GIZ recognises that a lack of partner data as well as the availability of monitoring data
from the programmes present a major problem for conducting ex-post evaluations. The Evaluation Unit will ad-
dress this problem and propose solutions.

2. The evaluators come to the conclusion that regional challenges and approaches will play a stronger role
in future, and that GIZ Thailand is essentially well-prepared to respond to this. The regional approaches should
therefore be expanded and cooperation with the regional organisations UNESCAP, ASEAN, APEC and GMS
increased. This would enable synergies with the existing support processes facilitated by GIZ with the regional
organisations. Although it is up to the commissioning parties to decide whether to expand regional approaches,
GIZ should use its scope to position itself strategically and harness opportunities for pro-active advisory ser-
vices.

GIZ basically shares this opinion. However, as the evaluators correctly assumed, it is BMZ’s prerogative to de-
cide whether to pursue a stronger regional approach.

For other emerging economies, the transferability of this recommendation to expand regional approaches
largely depends on the regional (geographical, political, economic, etc.) framework conditions. No specific im-
plementation measure is identified based on this recommendation.

3. The evaluation found that the Country Office in Thailand has made efforts to acquire smaller projects in

9
the EUR 100,000 range since the transition phase commenced in 2008. Although this approach also has disad-
vantages (e.g. opportunity costs as compared with the size of the intervention), they are outweighed by the ad-
vantages: employment opportunities for national personnel, pooling of resources for similar themes and
maintenance of working relationships with Thai partners. It is nevertheless recommended that criteria be estab-
lished to determine the circumstances under which it is worthwhile for GIZ to implement small-scale projects.

GIZ points out that small-scale projects also offer the advantage of opening up new partnerships and thematic
areas that may enhance GIZ’s relevance in the partner country. A study or an evaluation could be carried out to
examine the validity of this argument.

Small-scale commissions from German public sector clients are often extremely time-consuming and only en-
rich the portfolio in the medium to long term if they can be well embedded in the overall portfolio in terms of
their content, and efficiently carried out using existing structures. GIZ Thailand aims to develop selection crite-
ria for small projects. The Commissioning Parties and Business Development Department is currently develop-
ing indicators that will make it possible to better calculate the effort involved in pursuing business opportunities.
However, this is not restricted to small projects and/or emerging economies.

GIZ states that the Thai partners commission large consulting firms to provide management consultancy. GIZ
will therefore examine whether new service can be developed in this area. However, questions arise as re-
gards profitability, legal capacity and whether additional local support structures are required.

4. The evaluation establishes that GIZ supports Thai partners in developing strategies and plans, but that
partners frequently fail to put these into practice, or do not implement them adequately, due to a lack of capac-
ity (and funding).

In this context, GIZ recognises the risk that the plans drawn up will not be applied to a sufficient degree, and
intends to advise partners on implementation. The conditions required for implementing plans and mobilising
resources should be taken into consideration when advice is provided on drawing up the plans. In future, GIZ
will urge commissioning parties to take this into account in their commissions.

5. The evaluators establish that GIZ cooperates and coordinates its activities only to a limited degree with
other development partners. This is a problem, given that several development partners work in the same sec-
tors as GIZ. It is recommended that duplication be avoided and synergies be harnessed to increase GIZ’s own
effectiveness. This applies particularly to the vocational training sector.

GIZ agrees with this recommendation, but it is primarily up to its commissioning parties to take the correspond-
ing action. Without a political mandate, cooperation at implementation level is only possible or cost-effective to
a limited extent. In Thailand, other development partners have so far shown little interest in coordination and
cooperation. No specific implementation measure is identified based on this recommendation.

6. The evaluators consider trilateral cooperation between GIZ, Thailand (TICA) and other countries in the
region, especially Lao PDR, to be an innovative and effective model for cooperation between an industrialised
country and emerging economies. However, this approach does not appear sustainable owing to the limited
financial and human capacities of the partner organisation TICA. In the long run, TICA will not be able to con-
tinue its work without support from GIZ. The evaluators recommend that trilateral cooperation only be contin-
ued if TICA pledges greater financial contributions.

GIZ recognises the need to adapt the trilateral cooperation arrangement. However, this need must primarily be
addressed by the commissioning party. GIZ will arrange talks with BMZ and BMUB on this subject.

10
Recommendations to the company as a whole

7. The evaluators come to the conclusion that the overall political conditions, especially at government
level, played a much smaller role for GIZ’s work than initially presumed. They therefore recommend that GIZ
examine the extent to which political conditions affect the success of projects and programmes.

GIZ points out that its projects and programmes are designed to take a politically sensitive approach and can
therefore respond flexibly to changes in context. In Thailand, the partners’ need for support from GIZ in the joint
fields of activity persisted even under changing governments. Nevertheless, GIZ Thailand remained sensitive
to changes at working or bureaucratic level. The Evaluation Unit intends to carry out a cross-section evaluation
of project evaluations to examine the connection between political conditions and project success.

8. The evaluation comes to the conclusion that GIZ was most successful at handling its transition – from
bilateral cooperation and dependence on BMZ as the main commissioning party to international cooperation
and a diversified client base – in the field. In principle, GIZ agrees with this conclusion. However, the country
offices need additional guidance from Head Office in specific cases and contexts as regards possible options
and their assessment, and the issue of legal capacity. GIZ will develop options and scenarios for selected pilot
countries, but cannot guarantee that comprehensive guidance will be provided.

9. Having recognised that it is not a realistic option for partners to commission GIZ, the evaluators recom-
mend that GIZ should focus on one or only a few main commissioning parties/clients in similar situations in
emerging economies.

GIZ is preparing itself for the fact that its client base needs to be diversified at an early stage given the reduc-
tions in the BMZ portfolio. Although GIZ can understand the evaluators’ recommendation, no single commis-
sioning party has yet emerged to offset BMZ. However, BMUB has become established as a large commission-
ing party in a few countries such as Thailand. The German Federal Foreign Office is not suitable as a
substitute in the context of emerging economies. No specific implementation measure is identified based on
this recommendation.

10. The evaluation named several comparative advantages of GIZ versus other development agencies and
other potential competitors in the field of international cooperation in emerging economies. Based on these ad-
vantages, it is recommended that GIZ carry out a benchmarking study.

GIZ will examine whether it makes sense to carry out such a study for selected partner countries.

11
 Evaluationreport

Prof. Dr. Jörn Dosch; Pituck Jongnarangsin

Particip GmbH

12

2.1 Executive Summary
Purpose
In March 2011, the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Inter-
nationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) introduced Corpo-
rate Strategy Evaluations (CSE) as a new evaluation
tool. The Corporate Evaluation Unit (StS08) conducts
three to five CSE annually, the topics of which are
decided by GIZ’s Management Board in light of stra-
tegically relevant change processes and resulting in-
formation needs. On April 28, 2015, the Management
Board of GIZ commissioned the Evaluation Unit to
carry out an ex-post evaluation of the cooperation
programmes implemented in Thailand by GIZ and its
predecessor organisations. The evaluation was sub-
sequently conducted between March and November
2016.
The overall purpose of the evaluation is to improve
strategic decisions in GIZ in regard to how the or-
ganisation responds to the challenges arising from
adapting to the post-ODA world.
The specific objectives of the evaluation are:
 To analyse, appraise and document the results of
projects implemented by GIZ and its Thai part-
ners.
 To examine and identify factors influencing upon
the attainment of results, including changing po-
litical, legal and socio-economic framework con-
ditions.
 To investigate the modes of collaboration be-
tween GIZ and its Thai partners.
 By juxtaposing these aspects, to identify factors
that drive and hamper results.
Background and Approach
Development cooperation between the Federal Re-
public of Germany and the Kingdom of Thailand
dates back to 1956, when the two governments
signed a first agreement on Technical Cooperation
(TC). Since then, nearly 300 projects have been im-
plemented, covering a broad spectrum of thematic
areas. From January 2000 to February 2016, GIZ (in-
cluding the former GTZ) implemented a total of 111
projects in 14 sectors. The total budget amounted to
EUR 140.4 million which equals an annual average
of EUR 9.4 million. The cooperation reached a critical
juncture in 2008, when the German Federal Ministry
of Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ)
decided on ending its bilateral support to Thailand, as
the country has developed into a newly-industrialised
country and into being a donor of Official Develop-
ment Assistance (ODA) itself. Subsequently, GIZ has
maintained a presence in Thailand and implemented
projects funded by a range of donors with the Ger-
man Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature
Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB)
as the main one.
Ten major interventions in different fields were se-
lected as representative examples for the work of
GIZ in Thailand for the purpose of the evaluation.
These are: Climate Change, Technical Vocational
Education and Training (TVET), SME support, and
projects under the Thai-German Trilateral Coopera-
tion. While the first three areas are sectors, the fourth
(Trilateral Cooperation) is a mechanism to deliver
support across various sectors. Selection criteria in-
cluded data availability, temporal scope and duration
of the support, geographical scope, cross-linkages
with other sectors, and strategic relevance for the fu-
ture cooperation.
These sectors are presented in a reconstructed The-
ory of Change (ToC) which visualises the activities
and results at various levels of the interventions and
thus provides an explanation of the causal links that
tie a programme activity to expected outcomes and
impacts. The evaluation is based on four evaluation
questions (EQ) and related Judgement Criteria. The
report itself follows the five DAC criteria (relevance,
efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability)
but is guided by the EQs and Judgement Criteria.
The evaluation draws on an in-depth documentary
review, analysis of existing quantitative data along
the ToC, structured and semi-structured interviews
as well as an online stakeholder survey of GIZ’s part-
ners in Thailand.
Relevance in view of changing framework condi-
tions
Across all sectors covered by the evaluation GIZ pro-
jects were highly relevant for Thailand’s develop-
ment needs and responded well to respective gov-
ernments’ policy agendas and strategies. Equally im-
portant, GIZ support to Thailand has been character-
ised by an adequate degree of flexibility in the de-
sign and implementation of interventions, which were
all based on participatory approaches and therefore
allowed for an ongoing alignment with partner needs
and priorities.
The environment sector has taken centre-stage for
the past half-decade within the context of climate
change to which Thailand is particularly vulnerable.
13
The relevance of the approach was strengthened by
its holistic nature, i.e. the fact that a whole range of
programmes and projects addressed the broad field
of climate change and environmental challenges from
different but related angles.
Assistance in the field of vocational education has
corresponded with government policy to strengthen
the qualifications, skills and competences of the
workforce as a crucial contribution to escaping the
middle income trap. Since 2004, interventions for the
benefit of small and medium sized companies
(SMEs) have directly addressed their needs arising
as the result of growing international competition.
The trilateral cooperation between GIZ, the Thailand
International Cooperation Agency (TICA) and third
countries, e.g. Lao PDR and Vietnam, was relevant
both in terms of strengthening TICA’s role as devel-
opment agency and in responding to development
needs of the two supported countries. However, the
relevance of these interventions for Lao PDR and Vi-
etnam was weakened due to the small size of the
projects and their implementation in isolation from bi-
lateral cooperation programmes.
The relevance of many interventions was strength-
ened by virtue of their regional dimension, i.e. the
alignment of projects with growing regional needs, in-
cluding on-going integration based on the agenda of
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)
and the Mekong region.
During the evaluation period, Thailand experienced
thorough change, triggered by, inter alia, phases of
political instability and unrest, economic crises due to
the global financial crisis 2008 and the floods of
2011, as well as Thailand’s decision to transform
from being a recipient of ODA to acting as a donor.
Yet, the country has also made steady progress in
climbing up the ladder of economic and human de-
velopment. Overall, the modes of collaboration be-
tween GIZ and Thai partners did not significantly
change in response to changing framework condi-
tions because this was not needed to ensure effec-
tive project implementation. GIZ has supported Thai-
land in key sectors, which have stayed relevant
regardless of the specific situation and the govern-
ment of the day. As an implementing agency which,
unlike donors, does not engage in direct negotiations
with the Thai government, GIZ has largely been unaf-
fected by major political events. Furthermore, GIZ ad-
dressed technical, non-sensitive areas of support. If
adaption was necessary, this was usually in re-
sponse to changes in the organisational structure or
the top management of project partners.
14
Efficiency
The majority of programme activities was delivered
on time or without substantial delays. Only a small
number of cases encountered problems in the imple-
mentation process. If the implementation diverted
from the original project design, changes to the re-
sults framework were explained and well founded.
There are only a small number of instances when
project activities or components were completely
abandoned. Overall, the evaluation did not find any
differences regarding the efficiency of project imple-
mentation in different sectors.
Across all interventions GIZ support to Thailand was
perceived as being of high quality due to “top notch”
expertise in the delivery of technical solutions, trans-
parency and accountability of project implementation,
the results-oriented and often incremental and/or ho-
listic approach of interventions as well as generally
the participatory approach at all levels of the cooper-
ation.
Projects which developed standards – especially at
the regional level – can be seen as particularly effi-
cient as such results are easily replicable. GIZ also
developed several innovative approaches and “prom-
ising practises” to address Thailand’s changing de-
velopment needs as the country moves up the mid-
dle-income ladder. These methods include, but are
not limited to, value-chain approaches and integrated
resource management in urban planning. Both stand-
ards and value-chains represent economies of scales
approaches.
Effectiveness
The effectiveness criterion covers outputs and out-
comes. Outputs of all interventions focused on ca-
pacity building and training, addressing mainly state
actors and the private sector (SMEs) but to lesser ex-
tent civil society actors/NGOs. Equally important, in a
systematic manner all projects embedded technical
advice within broader structures of policy consulting,
network-building among different state and non-state
stakeholders as well as knowledge sharing and
transfer. This was particularly the case – and indeed
a necessary requirement – for the two phases of the
climate change project that were implemented at the
political level. Across the entire portfolio GIZ support
resulted in concrete, measurable products, mainly in
the form of standards, strategies, action plans or
studies.
Thai partners perceive environment, energy and edu-
cation as the sectors in which GIZ has made the
strongest positive contribution to change, achieving –
in comparative terms – high levels of effectiveness.
As one of their most important outcomes, the climate
change projects enabled government officials to de-
velop and follow better informed and ultimately more
effective approaches to climate change mitigation.
The projects also made a strong contribution to the
mainstreaming of climate change in policymaking.
GIZ support to SME projects achieved effectiveness
mainly through the innovative combination of different
approaches integrating eco-efficiency and economic
development in a comprehensive and systemic way.
The approach achieved or even exceeded the ex-
pected results, leading to stronger and more competi-
tive agricultural SMEs in Northern Thailand.
The GIZ-TICA trilateral projects expanded policy con-
sulting and inter-ministerial coordination beyond
Thailand’s border to include Lao ministries and state
agencies. As for the individual projects themselves,
the most effective part of the trilateral cooperation
programme has been the establishment and
strengthening of Good Agriculture Practice (GAP) in
Lao PDR.
However, the effectiveness of the introduction of
standards and technical solutions depended on
whether a standard or solution was the means to an
end or the project outcome itself. Projects were more
effective in cases where standards were means to an
end. A good example in this regard is the case of the
project Effective In-Company Vocational Training in
the Mekong Region in which the development of a
standard was the pre-condition for the actual training
of in-company trainers. The project established a re-
gional standard, which formed the basis for the Thai
national standard. On the other hand, the GIZ-sup-
ported “Low Carbon City” masterplans developed in
Ranyong and Nan as pilots under the climate change
project have provided the blueprint for similar ap-
proaches in 16 other provinces. Yet there is no evi-
dence that plans have yet been implemented any-
where.
Impact
Impact is most visible in areas, which have enjoyed
GIZ’s long-term support. In this regard, the projects in
support of SMEs achieved several visible and meas-
urable impacts. Most importantly, the productivity and
income of supported SMEs in the agricultural sector
in Thailand increased by at least 20% as envisioned
in the project design. In some cases, the productivity
and income of farmers increased by more than
100%.
As a policy advisory intervention, the climate change
project has not had a measurable environmental im-
pact yet. Thailand’s “National Climate Change Master
Plan 2013-2050” and the current Climate Change
Policy might well – and are indeed likely to – result in
reduced greenhouse gas emissions but it is too early
for any sound findings. As for low carbon procure-
ment and green labelling, data on energy savings is
not yet available due to project outcomes In fact,
there is no indication pointing at increased energy ef-
ficiency yet and available studies rather show an in-
crease in energy consumption between 2000 and
2014.
In a similar vein, the GIZ approach to creating a vo-
cational training system inspired by the German dual
system has the potential to achieve substantial im-
pact on the improvement of labour skills in Thailand.
However, the implementation has just started; there
is not a sufficiently strong base to prognosticate, if it
will be possible to firmly establish the system in Thai-
land, particularly since the German approach com-
petes with a similar Japanese system.
The impact of the trilateral cooperation programme
has to be seen from two angles. TICA officials con-
firmed that the collaboration with GIZ markedly con-
tributed to the agency’s effective transformation from
a donor-coordinating agency of a recipient country to
becoming a donor and development agency itself.
However, the impact of the four projects implemented
in Lao PDR and Vietnam is mixed. The Strengthen-
ing Good Agriculture Practice (GAP) Project created
the strongest impact because it has now firmly es-
tablished the GAP standard in Lao PDR. The other
three projects have achieved very limited impact, if
any, since they were too small to trigger change.
As the implementation of GIZ interventions was not
substantially affected by external factors, changing
framework conditions have not played a crucial role
regarding the achievement of long-term changes.
Sustainability
As in the case of effectiveness, Thai stakeholders
perceive environment, energy and education as the
sectors, which offer the greatest potential for sustain-
ability. GIZ’s participatory approach to project plan-
ning and implementation, elaborated approaches to
knowledge transfers and capacity-building were iden-
tified as crucial factors in achieving sustainability.
As mentioned, GIZ has developed standards and in-
novative solutions to challenges in the sectors of en-
vironment/climate change, SME support and educa-
tion. Where standards have been adopted, imple-
mented and are actively used, as in the case of the
standard on in-company vocational training and low
carbon emission procurement, the project outcomes
15
are sustainable. The development of regional stand-
ards offers the best prospect for sustainability in view
of expanding regional cooperation and integration.
Whether or not GIZ’s contribution to the shaping of
Thailand’s energy and climate change policy will
have a sustainable impact, depends on the extent to
which advised plans and strategies will be imple-
mented. The value-chain approaches developed and
applied by the SME support projects have created a
strong basis for sustainability. The participation of lo-
cal actors is a key to sustainability. Many projects in-
volved Thai experts and universities, which are still
providing advice – or are at least in a position to do
so – after projects have come to an end.
The sustainability level of the projects implemented
under the trilateral programme varies. Of the three
projects implemented in Lao PDR, the one on GAP
offers the best potential for sustainability. The low
level of sustainability of the trilateral projects in Lao
PDR is mainly due to the fact that TICA has not con-
sidered any funding for follow-up interventions once
the GIZ support had ended. Hence, although the tri-
lateral cooperation has made a contribution to the ca-
pacity building of TICA, it has not encouraged the
agency to embark on its own cooperation programme
with neighbouring countries.
Adaptation to the post-2008 setting
BMZ, GIZ’s main commissioner, phased out its bilat-
eral assistance with Thailand in 2008. It is against
this background that the portfolio of GIZ in Thailand
has grown to incorporate other forms of international
funding.
The transition to the post-BMZ environment was
mainly managed by the country office, with the sup-
port of headquarters. This approach proved to be ef-
fective and allowed the GIZ Thailand office clear stra-
tegic priorities for transition based on local framework
conditions.
GIZ’s main challenge in the early phase of the transi-
tion was to establish strong and mutually beneficial
partnerships. In the case of the BMUB, GIZ was able
to convince the ministry that smaller countries, such
as Thailand, should be included in the German Inter-
national Climate Initiative (IKI). The substantial
BMUB funding for IKI in Thailand provided the back-
bone for GIZ’s continuous operations in Thailand.
Stakeholders voiced their impression that without the
BMUB funding, GIZ would not have been able to sus-
tain its operations in Thailand.
16
Developing the GIZ office in Bangkok as a regional
hub proved to be a good strategic decision. Due to its
location and infrastructure Bangkok is a natural re-
gional hub for activities in mainland Southeast Asia
and the Mekong Region but also Southeast Asia as a
whole and even the wider Asia-Pacific region. Alt-
hough this might not be easily replicable in other
countries, the successful ”regionalisation” of activities
is an important lesson learnt which should be consid-
ered for GIZ operations in other countries.
The trilateral cooperation involving GIZ, TICA and
partner countries is an innovative approach to the
strengthening of South-South and North-South-South
cooperation. However, without sizable funding com-
mitment, the model is unlikely to be more than a pilot
project without much potential for sustainability.
Conclusions
A central factor in the efficient and effective imple-
mentation of GIZ programmes and projects across all
selected sectors was the fact that GIZ did not have to
change its approaches and modes of cooperation in
response to altering circumstances in any substantial
way. The frequent changes at the political level in
Thailand during the evaluation period did not signifi-
cantly affect GIZ as an implementing agency given
the technical, non-political nature of the support pro-
vided. Hence, as an important finding which might go
beyond the specific case of Thailand, it can be con-
cluded that political and economic framework condi-
tions are markedly less important for GIZ’s work than
it was assumed before the evaluation.
Due to its long-term engagement in Thailand, GIZ
has established and maintained close relations and
tight networks with a wide range of line ministries and
government agencies, which have survived govern-
ment changes. This allowed for efficient and effective
communication with key stakeholders, being an es-
sential condition for project planning and implementa-
tion.
In Thailand, GIZ had a flexible and participatory ap-
proach to project design and implementation. This in-
cludes an opportunity for stakeholders at the national
and sub-national levels to actively contribute to shap-
ing the scope and direction of interventions and facili-
tates an alignment of the GIZ support with national
needs. This aspect is further strengthened by GIZ’s
strong emphasis on local staff in project implementa-
tion. Moreover, the results-focussed approach often
leads to outcomes (standards, model action plans
etc.) which are replicable and thus offering a good
potential for sustainability.
GIZ in Thailand made a somewhat innovative contri-
bution to South-South and North-South-South coop-
eration based on its cooperation with TICA. This can
be a useful model for GIZ in other middle-income
countries, which aspire to transform themselves from
recipients to donors.
During the evaluation period, GIZ has increasingly
moved towards the implementation of regional inter-
ventions in alignment with the growing dynamics of
regional integration in Southeast Asia and particularly
the needs of regional actors, such as ASEAN. How-
ever, the situation of Southeast Asia is unique in this
sense as, for some time, it has been the region with
the strongest integration drive outside of Europe.
While “ODA-graduating countries” in other regions
might also be part of regional cooperation schemes,
the specific and highly successful approach of the
GIZ Thailand office of tapping into the opportunities
of supporting regional cooperation and integration
processes is not easily replicable elsewhere.
Recommendations
Recommendations are divided into two sets. The first
addresses primarily the GIZ office in Thailand. How-
ever, the recommendations can also be considered
by GIZ offices in other middle-income countries in
which bilateral development cooperation has been
phased out or where such a decision is imminent.
The second set comprises general recommenda-
tions, which go beyond the country level and are
therefore directed at GIZ headquarters.
Recommendations related to evidence-based de-
cision-making (focusing on the level of the GIZ
country office in Thailand):
 Create and implement joint approaches to
monitoring and evaluation with partners to
strengthen ownership: The evaluation has re-
vealed that Thai partner organisations do not
monitor or evaluate their projects with GIZ. This
translates to lack of ownership in the sense of the
Paris Declaration and also reduces the oppor-
tunity for critical reflections and thus lessons
learnt.
 The development of the country into a regional
hub and the related strong focus on regional pro-
jects should not only continue but be expanded:
Particularly the Bangkok-based UNESCAP pro-
vides multiple opportunities for cooperation in the
Asia-Pacific – not at least because the organisa-
tion will play a dominant role in the implementa-
tion and monitoring of the 2030 Agenda for Sus-
tainable Development. Although the further
development of the regional hub is mainly donor-
driven, GIZ can strategically position itself to take
advantage of relevant donor initiatives or can ac-
tively provide advice through established commu-
nication channels.
 Develop clear criteria for the selection of part-
ner projects: Criteria should be developed to
guide the selection process to make sure that
small projects are well integrated into the country
office’s overall portfolio and are feasible. These
criteria should clarify the context and conditions
that render projects viable, not only from an eco-
nomic perspective but also regarding other rele-
vant points, such as presence in the country,
maintaining relationships or strategic relevance.
 Assist Thai partners in the process of actually im-
plementing strategies and action plans which
were developed in the context of GIZ projects: It
seems important that projects do not stop at the
completion of strategies and plans but that GIZ
supports partners in the process of implementa-
tion, including the mobilisation of funds.
 Increase exchanges with other development
agencies: During the evaluation period, little ef-
fort has been made to engage in structured dia-
logues or even cooperation with other develop-
ment agencies.
 Only continue the trilateral cooperation if
TICA agrees on stronger financial commit-
ments: If the trilateral programme continues in
some way or is reactivated, TICA should be com-
mitted to ensure the sustainability of the interven-
tions.
Recommendations related to organisational
learning (Level of GIZ HQ):
 Re-assess the importance of political frame-
work conditions: The lessons learnt of this eval-
uation should form the basis for a reassessment
of the importance of political framework condi-
tions which may lead to a revision of the ex-
pected role of politics and political changes for
GIZ’s cooperation programmes.
 Decentralised strategy building process with
GIZ country offices leading transition pro-
cesses: It is important to consider various and
partly competing options to sustain GIZ opera-
tions in countries similar to Thailand (i.e. where
BMZ considers phasing out bilateral coopera-
tion). The different options need to be considered
carefully and strategically and this works best if
17
 the respective GIZ office takes the lead in this
process, while being supported by headquarters.

 Focus on one main donor: Efforts will need to

concentrate on identifying one (or few) main do-
nor(s), which replace(s) BMZ while at the same
time trying to diversify funding and contract port-
folios. If it is not possible to find one main donor,
an early strategic analysis of what is profitable
with regard to smaller projects is necessary.

 Headquarters and country offices should engage

in strategic benchmarking together to identify
GIZ’s strengths and unique selling positions vis-
à-vis other development organisations: A full
benchmarking would require a detailed assess-
ment of other stakeholders’ strategies and imple-
mentation practises. Such an approach is beyond
the scope of this evaluation, but the findings of
this evaluation can be taken as the nucleus for
more detailed studies.

18
2.2 Introduction By juxtaposing these aspects, factors driving and
hampering results are identified. In regard to as-
sessing the results of GIZ-Thai cooperation, the di-
In March 2011, GIZ introduced Corporate Strategic
verse “zones of influence” of interventions and the
Evaluations (CSE) as a new evaluation tool. The Cor-
heterogeneity of their goals and objectives are
porate Evaluation Unit (StS08) conducts three to five
acknowledged. “Second-order” and "spill-over" ef-
CSE annually, the topics of which are decided by
fects are also taken into account as far as possible.
GIZ’s Management Board in light of strategically rele-
In line with the general approach of a CSE, the evalu-
vant change processes and resulting information
ation employs both an ex-post and a formative per-
needs. CSE address the implementation of policies
spective with the specific aim of producing findings
and strategies throughout GIZ that relate to the deliv-
regarding the results and, to the extent possible, their
ery of services. CSE also examine issues that will
sustainability and formulating recommendations on
help develop corporate policies and strategies fur-
the future direction of GIZ’s work in Thailand and po-
ther. CSE as an evaluation instrument aim to enable
tentially beyond the specific case of Thailand.
evidence-based learning and decision-making
throughout GIZ. They should help boosting the effec-
The analysis focuses on a time-period of fifteen years
tiveness, efficiency and quality of service provision at
between 2000 and 2015, with particular emphasis on
GIZ and (further) develop key policies and strategies.
the period since 2008, when the German Federal
A CSE thus serves a dual purpose: it is best under-
Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development
stood as both an ex-post impact evaluation as well as
(BMZ) decided on exiting bilateral assistance with
a contribution to formative learning and providing ad-
Thailand. Against this background the evaluation as-
vice in the process of strategy-building.
sesses the results of GIZ’s work in Thailand to high-
light the lessons learned that could further guide the
On 28 April 2015, the Management Board of GIZ
transformation of GIZ’s role in the country. To the ex-
commissioned the Evaluation Unit to carry out an ex-
tent possible, this experience might also be applied in
post evaluation of the cooperation programmes im-
understanding and approaching the transforming of
plemented in Thailand by GIZ and its predecessor or-
GIZ’s cooperation with other countries as they ap-
ganisations.
proach medium income status. Hence, in a formative
sense, findings of the evaluation might inform the
In middle-income countries, the emergence of new
broader GIZ-strategy in newly industrialised countries
modes of cooperation implies the need to adapt and
(NICs) and create space for internal learning about
innovate processes and structures of development
NICs.
and international cooperation. The development ef-
fectiveness agenda and the Sustainable Develop-
In line with the ToR and discussions with GIZ’s evalu-
ment Goals (SDGs) reinforce this need. The case
ation unit, the evaluation does not engage in a pro-
study of GIZ’s engagement with Thailand provides
spective market analysis.
important insights and lessons learned in this regard.
Primary users of the evaluation are the GIZ Manag-
The overall purpose of the evaluation is to contrib-
ing Board, the GIZ HQ, the GIZ country office in Thai-
ute to improved strategic decision-making in GIZ with
land, and other GIZ country offices in NICs and GIZ’s
regard to how the organisation responds to the chal-
partners in Thailand. Secondary users might include
lenges arising from adapting to the post-ODA world.
German line ministries (as donors), other develop-
ment partners and potentially the wider public if the
The specific objectives of the evaluation are:
report is published.
 To analyse, appraise and document the results of
projects implemented by GIZ and its Thai part-
ners.

 To identify and examine factors influencing upon

the attainment of results, including changing po-
litical, legal and socio-economic framework con-
ditions.

 To investigate the modes of collaboration be-

tween GIZ and its Thai partners.

19
2.3 Context knowledge and skills rather than the transfer of finan-
cial resources in most cases (although Thailand con-
tinues to accept loans from Japan and China).
Country Background
At the same time, authoritarian state control of poli-
Over the past half a century, Thailand has become
tics and the economy have long been entrenched in
one of the most dynamic and diversified economies
Thailand. The aftermath of the 1997 crisis helped get
in Southeast Asia. Between the early 1960s and mid-
Thaksin Shinawatra elected who immediately insti-
1990s the economy grew at a sustained annual rate
tuted welfare policies for the poor, established an
of 7%. As a result, per capita income increased 30-
enormous base of loyal voters and kindled fear
fold, from less than USD 100 in 1962 to over USD
among the traditional aristocracy that he would try to
3000 in 1996. This growth steered the country into its
overshadow the influence of the monarchy. Though
current middle-income status. Although the Asian Cri-
Thaksin was reelected in 2005, an anti-Thaksin pro-
sis of 1997-1998 put an end to rapid and sustained
test movement (aligned with opposition parties) took
growth and GDP figures have been highly volatile
to the streets to demonstrate against what it saw as
since then (particularly since the 2008 global financial
Thaksin’s growing personalist leadership approach.
crisis the Thai economy has not performed as
In 2006, the anti-Thaksin military overthrew Thaksin.
strongly as in the past), financial stability as well as
The subsequent period of political turmoil has been
significant achievements in reducing poverty have
characterised by instable civilian governments, fre-
firmly established Thailand as a NIC. Generally, Thai-
quent military intervention into politics, the ongoing –
land’s socioeconomic development has consistently
at times violent – polarisation of society in two
improved, paralleling an incremental rise on the
camps: the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD)
UNDP’s Human Development Index (HDI) since
and, since 2013, the People’s Democratic Reform
2005. Yet, a large number of Thais continue to suffer
Committee (PDRC) on the one hand (“the Yellow
from poverty, social exclusion or discrimination due
Shirts”) and the United Front for Democracy Against
to gender, ethnicity or geographic location. According
Dictatorship (UDD) on the other (“the Red Shirts”)
to UNDP data, 12.6% of Thais live below the interna-
along with other groups allied with each side. Since
tional poverty line (3.5% survive on less than $2 per
the last military coup in 2014, the clash between the
day). Furthermore, many observers identify Thailand
two camps has stalled, given the military junta’s ap-
as a typical example of a country caught in the “mid-
plication of martial law throughout Thailand. Never-
dle-income trap”: once a country reaches middle-in-
theless, a high level of conflict intensity remains be-
come levels the growth rate often declines and grad-
tween the two sides.2
uation from middle-income to higher-income levels
stalls. According to analysis of the Thailand Develop-
In economic terms, Thailand suffered from both ex-
ment Research Institute Foundation (TDRI), Thailand
ternal and internal shocks, i.e. the global financial cri-
is at risk of remaining in the middle-income trap for
sis in 2008 and major floods in 2011. From July 2011
many years.1
to January 2012, Thailand encountered the worst
flooding in five decades. The floods killed over 800
In addition to much needed structural reforms, the
people and left millions homeless or displaced. Over
post-1997 period brought about a considerable
three quarters of Thailand’s provinces were declared
change in the role of the international financial institu-
flood disaster zones, and the World Bank estimated
tions (IFIs) in supporting Thailand to address the de-
that the economic loss exceeded $45 billion. The
velopment issues and challenges it faces as a mid-
death of King Bhumibol Adulyadej on 13 October
dle-income country. Since Thailand graduated from
2016 was the most recent shock for the country. The
an IMF stand-by arrangement in 2000, its engage-
monarch had reigned Thailand for 70 years and em-
ment with the IFIs and other major development or-
bodied the unity and continuity of the nation. While
ganisations has no longer been based on traditional
the king’s passing is beyond the temporal scope of
broad-based public sector borrowing programs. Dur-
the evaluation, there are early signs that Thailand
ing the past and a half-decade development partner-
has not faced major economic and political disrup-
ships have primarily involved the transfer of
tion in the aftermath.

1
Peter Warr, Thailand, a nation caught in the middle-income
trap, East Asia Forum, 18 December 2011, http://www.easta-
siaforum.org/2011/12/18/thailand-a-nation-caught-in-the-mid-
dle-income-trap/; Bishal Chalise, Can Thailand Avoid the Mid-
dle-Income Trap? The Diplomat, 8 April 2016; Nakarin Srilert,
Thailand 'stuck' in middle-income trap, The Nation, October 11,
2014; Nonarit Bisonyabut. Investment in Thailand following the
global financial crisis and into the future: evidence from cross-
country comparisons, in: TDRI Quarterly Review, Vol. 30, No.
3, September 2015.
2
BTI 2016 | Thailand Country Report, https://www.bti-pro-
ject.org/fileadmin/files/BTI/Downloads/Re-
ports/2016/pdf/BTI_2016_Thailand.pdf; stakeholder interviews.

20
Thai-German Cooperation
In 1956, the first agreement on Technical Coopera-
tion (TC) between the Federal Republic of Germany
and The Kingdom of Thailand was signed. Subse-
quently, in 1959, the "Thai-German Technical
School" in Northern Bangkok (today the renowned
King Mongkut's University of Technology North Bang-
kok (KMUTNB) with three campuses) was estab-
lished, which represented the first milestone for the
technical cooperation between Thailand and Ger-
many. Nearly 300 projects have been implemented
since then, covering a broad spectrum of thematic ar-
eas.

Table 1: Sectors of GIZ cooperation with Thailand since 1956 3

Sector Short summary of cooperation in this sector

Vocational Educa- Education is the first and longest-running area of the cooperation.
tion The Thai-German Technical School was established to meet the huge demand for
technicians and skilled workers that the process of industrialising Thailand had cre-
ated. Initially, the German dual vocational training system was supposed to be
adopted. Later, cooperative efforts moved on to highly specialised training needs and
more advanced academic levels, especially in the field of engineering.
Important vocational education institutes have been established, and many other insti-
tutions have been supported, e.g., through curriculum development and scholarships.
Today, scientific and research cooperation continues, while education has become a
prime focus of Thai–German Trilateral Cooperation with third countries.
More recently, the project “Effective In-company Vocational Training in the Mekong Re-
gion” (2013-2016) which supports a localised form of the German Dual System of vo-
cational education in Thailand and other Mekong countries, and the GIZ Training Hub
Bangkok, a fully integrated branch of the company’s Academy for International Cooper-
ation (AIZ) in Germany, continue the strong focus on education.
Other projects in this field have been funded by the German Federal Foreign Office
and the Asian Development Bank (ADB). The latter focused on mutual recognition
frameworks for skills in the region.
In 1965, the cooperation expanded to support Thailand’s plans for rural development
and economic growth. Initially, it focused on the improvement of agricultural produc-
Agriculture and tion, the development of infrastructure, and the promotion of land-settlement commu-
Rural Develop- nity.
ment In the 1980s, an integrated rural development approach was introduced as a means of
achieving increased efficiency and sustainability. The activities involved multiple part-
ners and disciplines and addressed issues such as the environment, health, finance
and credit schemes, and smallholder economic development. A central part played the
promotion of alternative crops in the Golden triangle to combat cultivation of drugs.
In 1990, the cooperation shifted towards sustainable production and consumption with
the aim of reducing the latter’s social and environmental impact. New standards, pro-
duction, and services were introduced to boost the global competitiveness of Thai
products.
Agriculture and rural development remain a focal theme for trilateral and regional Thai–
German cooperation within the ASEAN and Mekong context. One of several examples
is the “Strengthening National GAP (Good Agricultural Practises) in Lao PDR” project
(2012-2014), which was jointly implemented under the Lao-Thai-German Trilateral Co-
operation.
Energy, Infrastruc- Before the 1990s, cooperation efforts focused on strengthening agencies responsible
ture and Climate for basic infrastructure such as the power supply, transportation, traffic regulation, port
Change facilities, postal services, the state railway, dam construction, and irrigation.
Since 1990, Thailand and Germany have been exploring and promoting alternative en-

3
Source: compiled from various GIZ documents, including for German Trilateral Cooperation”, and stakeholder interviews.
example “Six Decades of Sustainable Development” (the out-
put of the History Workshop), “GIZ in Thailand 2016”, “Thai-

21
 Sector Short summary of cooperation in this sector

ergy sources such as biogas, hydropower, and solar energy. Additionally, they are co-
operating on energy savings and efficiency issues amidst the economic boom and on-
going modernisation. This has also led to efforts to promote sustainable urban devel-
opment, especially in the transport sector. Recent examples include, but are not limited
to, regional projects with a Thailand component, i.e. “Integrated Resource Manage-
ment in Asian Cities: The Urban Nexus” (2013-2015) and “Cities, Environment and
Transport in the ASEAN Region” (2009-2015).
Since 2000, energy has become one of the main issues addressed in various projects,
particularly under the BMUB International Climate Initiative (IKI).4 The current flagship
project is the “Thai-German Programme on Energy Efficiency Development Plan”
(2012-2016).
Together with sustainable infrastructure, energy has also become a focal theme of the
German–ASEAN cooperation based in Bangkok.
At the same time, recent GIZ projects, for example the BMUB-funded “Improved man-
agement of extreme events through ecosystem-based adaption in watersheds (ECOS-
Wat)” (2013-2016) directly address the effects of climate change by trying to adapt to
them.
Health In 1965, Thailand and Germany started supporting selected Thai public-health institu-
tions with equipment and skills development for medical personnel.
Later projects aimed at improving rural health care and dealing with specific health
challenges such as HIV/AIDS, drug abuse, and occupational health.
Health issues were also integrated into many other projects in the fields of agriculture
and rural and industrial development.
Furthermore, the cooperation supported health research and system reform for exam-
ple as part of the major EU-funded Health Care Reform project (2004-2009).
Health continues to be a focal theme of today’s Thai–German Trilateral Cooperation
and remains an important cross-cutting area for international cooperation with third
countries.
Economic Devel- In the 1960s, Thailand’s economy depended primarily on the agricultural sector. There-
opment fore, the technical cooperation in economic development started by facilitating trade
and investment activities between the two countries.
In the 1990s, small and medium enterprise (SME) promotion became an important fo-
cus of cooperation, with the aim of reducing economic and social imbalances among
different regions in the country.
Since 2000, Thailand and Germany have focused on improving the standing of Thai
SMEs through its extensive Programme for Enterprise Competitiveness (2004-2012).
This was the first project which combined economic, environmental, and social aspects
into a single large programme to promote Thai production value chains.
This multifaceted approach SME support continues in sustainable consumption and
production projects in the regional context.

Over six decades, GIZ has established itself as one
of the key stakeholders in the country’s development
process. At the same time, Thai-German cooperation
has experienced fundamental changes in its frame-
work conditions, most importantly – as outlined
above – Thailand’s development towards NIC status
and emerging market economy. This has been ac-
companied by the country’s transformation from be-
ing solely a recipient of ODA to also acting as a do-
nor through its Thailand International Cooperation
Agency (TICA). In March 2003, the then-Thai Prime
Minister Thaksin Shinawatra gave a speech entitled

4
Since 2008, the International Climate Initiative (IKI) of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and
Nuclear Safety (BMUB) has been financing climate and biodiversity projects in developing and newly industrialising countries, as well
as in countries in transition. In the early years of the programme, its financial resources came from the proceeds of auctioning allow-
ances under the emissions trading scheme. To ensure financial continuity, further funds were made available through the Special
Energy and Climate Fund. Both funding mechanisms are now part of the Federal Environment Ministry’s regular budget. The IKI is a
key element of Germany’s climate financing and the funding commitments in the framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity
(https://www.international-climate-initiative.com/en/about-the-iki/iki-funding-instrument/).

22
“Forward Engagement” which would later become
the name of a policy characterising the country’s
emerging “recipient-turned-donor” identity. Subse-
quently the BMZ, GIZ’s main commissioner, phased
out its bilateral assistance with Thailand in 2008.
It is against this background that the portfolio of GIZ
in Thailand has grown to incorporate forms of inter-
national funding other than bilateral projects commis-
sioned by BMZ. This includes:
 Thai participation in BMZ-funded regional and
global projects (for example ASEAN Sustainable
Agrifood Systems; and Effective In-company Vo-
cational Training in the Mekong Region)
 Projects funded by other German line ministries,
such as environment (BMUB), economy (BMWi),
and foreign affairs (AA), as well as
 Projects funded by other international actors as
the European Union (EU) and Asian Develop-
ment Bank (ADB).
 Since 2009, GIZ also implements a triangular
programme between Germany, Thailand and its
neighbours in the region.
 Furthermore, GIZ’s Academy for International
Cooperation (AIZ) has established its own train-
ing centre in Thailand, acting as a regional hub
for capacity development in the field of sustaina-
ble development cooperation.
From January 2000 to February 2016, GIZ (including
the former GTZ) implemented a total of 111 projects
in 14 sectors (according to GIZ’s own classification):
Agriculture, Banking & Financial Services, Business
& Economy, Disaster, Education, Energy, Environ-
ment, Government & Civil Society, Health, Industry,
Research & Development, Sustainable Economy,
Transport and Urban Development. The total budget
amounted to EUR 140.4 million which equals an an-
nual average of EUR 9.4 million. According to several
stakeholder interviews in Bangkok, there were no
projects implemented by DED and InWEnt5 in Thai-
land between 2000 and 2015. However, the DED in
Lao PDR provided volunteer services for Thailand
during that period.
For reading convenience, GIZ will be used through-
out the report even if findings refer to the pre-GIZ
era.

Table 2: GIZ in Thailand at a Glance (2016)6

 Employs over 120 staff, incl. 30 international long-term experts

 Implemented 111 projects in 14 sectors with a total budget of EUR 140.4 million during the period
2000-2015
 Currently (October 2016) 21 projects in seven sectors (including projects which were completed in
late 2015)
 Currently (October 2016) provides three CIM-Integrated Experts to Thai and regional organisations
 Currently (October 2016) over 70 training courses annually in various fields of sustainable develop-
ment through the GIZ Training Hub in Bangkok
 Cooperates with more than 100 Thai state and non-state stakeholders, including but not limited to,
Departments of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (TICA), Ministry of Natural Resources and Environ-
ment, Ministry of Energy, Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Science, Ministry of Finance, Ministry
of Interior, Ministry of Commerce, National Economic and Social Development Board, business as-
sociations, enterprises, banks, cooperatives, universities, think tanks, media, civil society organisa-
tions and networks, provinces, cities, municipalities and communities
 Current main clients/financing: German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development
(BMZ) (for regional projects based in Bangkok), German Ministry for the Environment, Nature Con-
servation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB), German Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy
(BMWi), European Union (EU), Thai Government, Public–Private Partnerships (PPP)

5 6
In 2011, the two agencies were merged with GTZ to form GIZ. Source: Various GIZ documents and stakeholder interviews.

23
 sectors meet the following requirements:
2.4 Evaluation Approach and Cover-
age
This evaluation has a dual purpose. First, it aims at
providing GIZ with an independent assessment of the
development cooperation support given to Thailand
during the period 2000-2015 (ex-post evaluation). In
some cases, projects are still ongoing and, to the ex-
tent possible, findings on potential results and their
sustainability are presented, thus going beyond an
ex-post perspective. Second, the evaluation will iden-
tify key lessons and forward-looking recommenda-
tions.
Overall, this is a question-driven evaluation that
adopts a theory of change (ToC) approach for the as-
sessment of results visualised through an interven-
tion logic. The methodological approach is described
in detail in the following section
Selection of Focal Sectors
While the evaluation questions relate to GIZ-Thai co-
operation in general, due to the breadth of its cover-
age, the evaluation focuses on a selected number of
interventions in different sectors. These areas are:
Climate Change, Technical Vocational Education
and Training (TVET), SME support, and projects
under the Thai-German Trilateral Cooperation.
While the first three areas are sectors, the fourth (Tri-
lateral Cooperation) is a mechanism to deliver sup-
port across various sectors. In addition, the AIZ
Training Hub in Bangkok will be looked at in the con-
text of GIZ’s management of the transition to a post-
BMZ environment after 2008. The rationale for this
selection is based on specific criteria; the identified
 Data availability: In line with the ToR the evalua-
tion is mainly based on secondary sources.
There is a good availability of data and docu-
ments for the selected sectors.
 Temporal scope: Projects are reflective of the
entire evaluation period, i.e. both projects from
earlier phases and more recent interventions
were selected. However, in accordance with the
ToR, the evaluation will prominently focus on pro-
jects, which have been implemented since 2008,
when the BMZ phased out its bilateral coopera-
tion with Thailand.
 Long duration: While GIZ’s approach to the spe-
cific support in individual sectors has seen sev-
eral changes in terms of both thematic ap-
proaches and beneficiaries during the evaluation
period, there are also clear continuities across
the GIZ portfolio in Thailand. Therefore, empha-
sis is given to sectors and sub-sectors which are
characterised by long-term support. This allows
for an assessment of the impact and sustainabil-
ity of interventions in the selected sectors.
 Geographical scope: The selected sectors and
interventions are representative of the GIZ sup-
port in Thailand as a whole and include regions,
which are at different stages of development. In
addition, the selection should also give justice to
the increasing regional dimension and focus of
the GIZ support, particularly with regards to the
Mekong region.

Table 3: Selection of Focal Sectors as the Evaluation Sample and Rationale

Cross-link-
Temporal Geographical
Sector Long Duration ages with Strategic Relevance
Scope Scope
other sectors
National, regional
Climate
and local levels; the
Change inter-
Entire project “Support to
ventions have
evaluation the Development Energy
gained im-
period and Implementation Most major interven-
portance under Agriculture
with a par- of the Thai Climate tions are still ongoing;
Climate IKI but GIZ
ticular em- Change Policy” has Governance significant BMUB fund-
Change support in the
phasis on already covered 3 ing envisioned for sev-
field of en- Vocational edu-
the post- provinces and sev- eral more years
ergy/climate cation
2008 pe- eral municipalities;
change dates
riod 17 additional prov-
back to the
inces and 32 munici-
1990s
palities
Vocational Entire Sector with the While vocational ed- Vocational edu- GIZ has a well-estab-
Education evaluation longest running ucation and training cation and lished presence in this

24
 and Train- period GIZ support is mainly Bangkok- training is best field. The promotion of
ing based, beneficiaries described as an approaches to voca-
are located across “umbrella sec- tional training which
Thailand and the en- tor” which is are inspired by the
tire ASEAN region linked with, and German “Dual Sys-
contributes to, tem” enjoys a strong
the implemen- take-up and offers sig-
tation of inter- nificant potential for fu-
ventions in vir- ture expansion.
tually all
sectors
SME support in
various sectors
More than 95% of all
of the Thai Agriculture businesses in the
economy and
Energy ASEAN region are
increasingly All of Thailand and,
Entire classed as SMEs; The
SME sup- the neighbour- more recently, other Climate
evaluation ASEAN Economic
port ing region has countries in the re- Change
period Community has a
been the direct gion, e.g. Vietnam
Economic De- strong emphasis on
or indirect fo-
velopment SME support and de-
cus of numer-
velopment
ous interven-
tions
Innovative approach
which sets standards
Agriculture in the field of North-
Covers the regional South-South Coopera-
Water manage-
dimension of GIZ tion and is often con-
Thai-Ger- ment
support – projects sidered the future of
man Trilat- Since Still a young
have been imple- Governance development coopera-
eral Coop- 2009 approach
mented in Lao PDR, tion; trilateral coopera-
eration Economic De-
Vietnam and Timor tion will be expanded
velopment
Leste to include more South-
SME support east Asian countries
(e.g. Myanmar, Cam-
bodia)

Climate Change Policy, Energy Efficiency in Me-

Selection of projects
In the chosen sectors a total of ten projects were se-
lected to provide the empirical basis for the evalua-
tion:
Climate Change (CC): CC, as a policy issue, has
the potential of integrating a wide range of technical,
economic, environmental, and social concerns into a
comprehensive and horizontal approach. This com-
plex task requires the connection of different sector
strategies towards the greater goal of supporting Low
Carbon Development in Thailand. CC policy there-
fore focuses on creating the political and economic
conditions for connecting economic growth to climate
protection.
 The Total Budget for the Thai-German Climate
 The Thai-German Climate Protection Programme
(2009-2011) comprised three individual projects:
dium-Sized Enterprises and Climate-friendly
Tourism. Financed through the German Interna-
tional Climate Initiative (IKI) of BMUB, GIZ as-
sisted the Thai Ministry of Natural Resources and
the Environment (MoNRE) and its Office of Natu-
ral Resources and Environmental Policy and
Planning (ONEP) in the elaboration and imple-
mentation of the Thai National Climate Change
Master Plan 2012–2050 (CCMP). Corresponding
CC Strategies and Action Plans were then devel-
oped for two Provinces and two Municipalities in
an effort to connect Climate Change Policy with
regional and local development planning.
Protection Programme is EUR 5.66 million con-
sisting of Climate Change Policy (EUR 3.117 mil-
lion), Energy Efficiency in Medium-Size Enter-
prise (EUR 1.332 million) and Climate Friendly
Tourism (EUR 1.211 million). There were two

25
 phases for budgeting: First Phase 2009-2012: to-
tal EUR 3.6 million (EUR 1.6 million for Climate
Change Policy, EUR 1.332 million for Energy Ef-
ficiency and EUR 0.668 million for Climate
friendly tourism); Second Phase 2012-2013: total
EUR 2.06 million (EUR 1.517 million for Climate
Change Policy, EUR 0.543 million for Climate
friendly tourism)
 The follow-up project Support to the Develop-
ment and Implementation of the Climate Change
Policy (2014-2017) (EUR 2.8 million) is based on
the objective of contributing to Thailand’s shift to
a low carbon economy by, inter alia, elaborating
a new Thai Climate Strategy (2014-2018) and a
corresponding guideline for its implementation;
and aligning all German IKI-financed project ac-
tivities with the goals of the CCMP and Climate
Change Strategy.
 Clean Air for Smaller Cities in the ASEAN Region
Project, later renamed Cities, Environment and
Transport in the ASEAN Region (2009-2015)
(EUR 5.0 million) consisting of Phase 1 (EUR 2.5
million) and Phase 2 (EUR 2.5 million) aimed at
empowering cities to develop and implement
“Clean Air Action Plans” (Chiang Mai and Na-
khon Ratchasima participated in this project); im-
prove the basis for an increase of energy effi-
ciency and a reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions in the land transport sector; and to im-
prove the quality and efficiency of environmental
and safety management in ports.
 Sustainable Consumption and Production for
Low Carbon Economy: Green Public Procure-
ment and Eco-Labelling (2012-2015) (EUR 2 mil-
lion). The BMUB-funded project was based on
the assumption that climate-friendly public pro-
curement and the integration of climate relevant
criteria into existing ecolabels are two key ele-
ments for establishing a low-carbon economy.
The project supported the Thai government in im-
plementing its programme for the sustainable
(“green”) adjustment of public procurement.
Vocational Education and Training (TVET): As in
many other partner countries, GIZ’s support to Voca-
tional Education and Training has focused on mod-
ernising initial and continuing vocational training and
adjusting it to the needs of industry and the labour
market.7 Some projects had a specific emphasis on
7
The global GIZ support Vocational Education and Training
was the topic of a meta-evaluation conducted in 2010-11, GIZ.
Vocational Education and Training Evaluation results, findings
26
selected branches of industry or the requirements of
SMEs. Support to education dates back to the early
days of German-Thai development cooperation and
has been an integral part of GIZ’s mission in Thailand
for the past decades.
 The project Effective In-Company Vocational
Training in the Mekong Region (2013-2016)
(EUR 1.5 million) aims to promote the German
Dual Vocational Education System, stressing the
role of private sector in workforce development
as an approach to tackle the skilled labour depri-
vation in the region. The project is based on the
following assumption: through the promotion of
cooperation between vocational schools and
companies and the demand-oriented establish-
ment of effective In-Company Training system
supplement to the in-school education, students
graduated from vocational schools possess the
skills that not only increase their employability,
but also match the demand of industrial sector.
SME Support: The competitive advantage of the
Thai economy in many sub-sectors is still based on
low wages not on high productivity through techno-
logical progress. New regional competitors such as
China and Vietnam are increasing competitive pres-
sure and thereby revealing weaknesses inherent in
Thai industry, particularly those of small and medium-
sized companies (SMEs). There is a risk that increas-
ing pressure from international competition combined
with low productivity will lead to low wages or the mi-
gration of jobs to other countries. Currently, sophisti-
cated industries with high added value are located al-
most exclusively in Bangkok and its environs. Many
companies still use outdated production technolo-
gies, which not only results in low competitiveness in
many sub-sectors but also causes environmental pol-
lution and poor product quality. In addition to facing
considerable competitive pressures, Thai producers
(especially SMEs) do not dedicate sufficient attention
to ecological matters. GIZ support to SME develop-
ment has a long history and the evaluation focusses
mainly on two major projects:
 The long-term Thai-German Programme for En-
terprise Competitiveness (TG-PEC) project
(2004-2011) (EUR 18.2 million) aimed at
strengthening Thai SMEs in agro-industrial value
chains (mainly palm oil, shrimps, tapioca, fruit
and vegetable and mulberry paper). In partner-
ship with more than 20 Thai implementing agen-
cies it focused on oared business, eco-efficiency
and renewable energy services. It was also the
and conclusions, https://www.giz.de/de/downloads/giz2013-en-
vocational-education-training.pdf
 first major project which worked together with dif-
ferent Thai line ministries.8
 Greening Supply Chains in the Thai Automotive
Industry (2012-2015) (EUR 1.592 million): As
part of the SWITCH Asia Programme funded by
the EU, GIZ implemented the project in coopera-
tion with the Thai Automotive Institute (TAI), the
Federation of Thai Industries (FTI), Thai SME
Bank, and the Centre for Sustainable Consump-
tion and Production (CSCP). The objective was
to improve sustainable production of SMEs in the
Thai auto and automotive parts supply chains.9
Thai-German Trilateral Cooperation: In 2008, Thai-
land and Germany signed a Memorandum of Under-
standing (MoU) on Trilateral Cooperation to form a
joint partnership with pooled resources for regional
development. Within the programme, Thailand and
Germany jointly apply their development experiences
and technical know-how to support third partner
countries by implementing small-scale trilateral pro-
jects in selected sectors, i.e. education, rural devel-
opment, and health. Currently, the third country-part-
ners countries include Lao PDR, Vietnam, and Timor-
Leste, with a possible extension to Cambodia and
Myanmar in the future. The programme also aims to
enhance Thailand’s role as a provider of develop-
ment cooperation and to support South-South coop-
eration in order to promote regional know-how, and
ownership. The programme is co-funded by the Thai-
land International Cooperation Agency (TICA) within
the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the BMZ.
Since Thailand transformed itself from a recipient to
an (emerging) donor country in 2003-2004, TICA10
has played an active role in promoting development
cooperation among developing countries in South-
east Asia and beyond its own region, including South
Asia, Africa and Latin America. According to TICA,
there are two main types of assistance. One is pro-
ject cooperation, which is composed of dispatching
Thai experts to other countries in the areas of agricul-
ture, banking, economics, education, finance, public
health, transport as well as science and technology.
The other is in support of infrastructure projects in
Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar and the Maldives, in-
cluding roads, bridges, dams and power stations by
8
GIZ. Competitiveness & eco-efficiency of SME, project num-
ber: 07.2170.4, Final Report, 2012; Alexander Mierke Bericht
an das BMZ, Referat 200. Teil-Evaluierung des Programms
„Stärkung der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Ökoeffizienz von
KMU, Thailand“, 22. Mai 2006; stakeholder interviews.
9
Switch Asia. Greening Supply Chains in the Thai Auto and
Automotive Parts Industries. Final Technical Report, April 2016;
Sustainable Consumption and Production: Switch Asia. Policy
Support Component – THAILAND (DCI-ASIE/2011/ 270-471)
Final Project Report, January 2015.
10
TICA was established on 19 October 2004 – succeeding the
means of concessional loans. However, despite its
growing portfolio and responsibilities, TICA is still a
relatively small Department within the Thai govern-
ment with an annual budget of just approximately 480
million Baht (ca. EUR 11.9 million).
The Evaluation particularly looked at the three pro-
jects, which have been implemented in Lao PDR.
This required a short stay in Vientiane.
 The Nam Xong Sub-River Basin Management
project (2012-2014) followed the objective of im-
proving the water resource management in the
river basin through the strengthening and coordi-
nation of local authorities and community repre-
sentatives as well as practical water protection
regulations and technical solutions for the com-
munity. (EUR 128,000)
 The Paper Mulberry Supply Chain project (2010-
2013) aimed at the enhancement of the paper
mulberry value chain in Northern Thailand and
Lao PDR. (EUR 114,000)
 The ongoing Strengthening National Good Agri-
cultural Practice (GAP) in Lao PDR project
(2012-2016) aims at establishing a functioning
national GAP system which forms the basis for
increased competitiveness of Lao farmers and
small holders in the fresh fruit and vegetable sec-
tor.11 (EUR 108,000)
Lao PDR provides a good case because it has been
the main focus of the Thai-German Cooperation and
the country is also the most important in terms of
TICA support. About 25% of TICA’s budget is desig-
nated for the cooperation with Lao PDR.12
Department of Technical and Economic Cooperation (DTEC),
founded in 1963 - by a Royal Decree to serve the Thai Govern-
ment as a focal agency under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of
Thailand in administrating international development copera-
tions. TICA is principally responsible for the implementation of
Thailand's development cooperation programmes in neighbour-
ing countries in particular as well as other regions of the world.
11
GIZ, TICA. Thai-German Trilateral Cooperation. Projects un-
der Implementation. 2015.
12
Interviews at TICA.
27
2.5 Methodology
The methodology was presented in the inception re-
port and subsequently agreed upon in the Reference
Group meeting in May 2016. In a nutshell, the meth-
odology for the ex-post dimension of this evaluation
is designed to verify to what extent the intended ob-
jectives of the GIZ support in the selected sectors
have materialised as originally foreseen. In other
words, did the modalities employed and activities un-
dertaken yield the results expected, and thereby con-
tribute to the overall objectives of the GIZ’s support to
Thailand?
This approach requires a causal examination based
on a reconstructed theory of change (ToC), which is
used to model how an intervention is expected to
bring or has brought about intended changes. A ToC
is a model of generative causality, showing the steps
that occur between some deliberate actions of an in-
tervention and subsequent observed changes, and
the assumptions needed for the steps to occur. The
assumptions are the events and conditions that need
to occur, according to the ToC, if the causal link is to
be realised.
Theory of Change
In use since the 1990s, ToC are tools for visualising
results and activities at various levels of interven-
tions. In other words: A ToC is an explanation of the
causal links that tie a programme activity to expected
outcomes.
In sum, ToC-based evaluations are designed to an-
swer three generic questions:
1. Was the strategy in question implemented
faithfully?
2. Did the strategy produce the desired results
as defined by the outcomes template?
3. Were the assumptions regarding the causal
outcomes correct?
The theory of change-based evaluation process ap-
plied in this CSE consists of four distinct steps:
13
For the above see: Barbara Befani and John Mayne. Process
Tracing and Contribution. Analysis: A Combined Approach to
Generative Causal Inference for Impact Evaluation; Julian, Da-
vid A. Enhancing Quality of Practice Through Theory of
Change‐Based Evaluation: Science or Practice? American
Journal of Community Psychology, 2005, Vol.35(3-4), pp.159-
168; Alan Dyson & Liz Todd (2010) Dealing with complexity:
theory of change evaluation and the full service extended
schools initiative, International Journal of Research & Method
28
1. Development of a results model reflecting
the relationships between a strategy, outputs
of strategy implementation, desired pro-
gramme outcomes and longer-term
changes;
2. Articulation of evaluation questions related to
the ToC;
3. Collection of data related to the evaluation
questions and
4. Review of the evidence to answer the evalu-
ation questions against the backdrop of the
ToC.13
The reconstructed intervention logic (IL) of GIZ’s sup-
port to the selected sectors (see below), which is vis-
ualised in the ToC, constitutes the backbone of this
evaluation, bearing in mind the specific context and
environment in which GIZ support exists and oper-
ates. While a reconstructed IL potentially faces the
criticism of bias (in the sense that a reconstructed
model might look “perfect” without inconsistencies
and incoherencies), in the absence of a “faithful” IL it
is the only option available. A faithful IL would require
for certain preconditions to be met which was not
given in this case. The reasons are as follows: In the
field of development cooperation, the evaluation of
an entire country programme, which tries to depict a
broad picture of the cooperation over a substantial
period of time and thus goes beyond the level of indi-
vidual projects, requires the presence of a country
strategy (or strategies) as a starting point.
A strategy document usually states the overall objec-
tives of the support provided to a partner country and
the expected outcomes and impacts of this coopera-
tion. However, since GIZ is not a donor but an imple-
menting agency it has not drafted explicit country
strategy to define and describe GIZ’s contributions to
Thailand’s development. Instead, GIZ has contrib-
uted to implementing the global, regional or country-
specific development strategies of its respective cli-
ents. Consequently, GIZ’s support to Thailand has
been guided by and embedded in the strategic ap-
proaches and thus the theories of change, of the
BMZ, BMUB or EU. An overarching “results model”
for the cooperation with Thailand in general does
therefore not exist.
in Education, 33:2, 119-134; Weiss, C.H. 1995. Nothing as
practical as a good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation
for comprehensive community initiatives for children and fami-
lies. In New approaches to evaluating community initiatives:
Concepts, methods and contexts, ed. J. Connell, A.C. Kubisch,
L.B. Schorr, and C.H. Weiss, 65–92. Washington, DC: The As-
pen Institute.
The recently formulated Schwellenländer Strate-
giepapier Thailand is first and foremost a business
strategy which is based on the objective of sustaining
and possibly expanding GIZ’s operations in Thailand.
In other words, this is a strategy for GIZ operations
but not a document, which outlines the development
objectives of GIZ’s work in Thailand. While the docu-
ment refers to some of Thailand’s core development
challenges, it does so from the perspective of a ser-
vice provider and the steering and diversification of
its portfolio. From this, it becomes obvious that the
Schwellenländer Strategiepapier Thailand or any
other documents related to GIZ’s general approach
to Thailand cannot be used to reconstruct a ToC,
which captures the development cooperation be-
tween GIZ and Thailand.

29
30
In the absence of a country development strategy,
the following ToC (see Figure 1) can therefore only
be a simplified reconstructed intervention logic
based on the project results models of the selected
11 individual projects. To reduce complexity and to
make the ToC manageable, the intervention logic
identifies common outputs, anticipated outcomes
and impacts and syntheses them with the aim of
presenting the goals of GIZ interventions in Thai-
land at the level of sectors and the country. Out-
puts, outcomes and impacts are linked through
multiple assumptions, which are outlined below.
 The implementation of national and regional
standards and the efficient and effective appli-
cation of technical solutions in various sectors
of the economy.
Between them these outcomes are expected to
lead to impacts, which are – for the sectors in-
cluded in the evaluation –, best summarised as:
 Reduced environmental pollution, decreased
greenhouse gas emissions and increased en-
ergy efficiency;

The underlying assumptions for the ToC as a  A more responsive labour market in the sense
whole are described in the following. of a reduced gap between labour supply and
demand for skilled labour;
Across all sectors the most significant outputs can
be clustered into three generic groups:
 Increased competiveness of companies, partic-
ularly SMEs, from Thailand and the region; and
 Capacity building and intensive training for rel-
evant state and non-state stakeholders groups,
 A strengthened role of Thailand as a donor
including but not limited to officials of line min-
country in development cooperation.
istries and state agencies, businesses, and
civil society organisations.
An overarching general factor, which applies to all
levels and will thus be prominently taken into ac-
 Policy and technical dialogues, awareness
count by the evaluation is: To what extent is the
raising and the transfer of know-how at differ-
work of GIZ in Thailand (as elsewhere) affected by
ent levels including relations between German
external events and developments. External fac-
and Thai stakeholders (and in the case of trilat-
tors relate to:
eral cooperation also from other partner coun-
tries) and between stakeholder groups in Thai-
 First, the country context in which cooperation
land, including the strengthening of inter-
takes place (e.g. changing political and/or eco-
ministerial collaboration.
nomic framework conditions). In the case of
Thailand these factors include, for example,
 Directly supported targeted issue-specific ac-
the military coups which happened during the
tivities to, inter alia, provide technical solutions,
evaluation period, phases of political instability
increase economic activity, develop standards,
and unrest, economic crises due to the global
strengthen gender equality, etc.
financial crisis 2008 and the floods in 2011, as
well as Thailand’s decision to transform from
These outputs are assumed to lead to results or
being a recipient of ODA to acting as a donor.
outcomes, which are mainly described as:
 Second, to GIZ’s position within the institu-
 The strengthening of national and regional pol-
tional setting of German and international de-
icy and legislative frameworks in the supported
velopment cooperation (e.g. changes to BMZ’s
sectors (including the alignment and harmoni-
bilateral cooperation programmes). The most
sation of different policies and laws), leading to
decisive development in this regards was
more efficient and effective approaches by
BMZ’s decision to phase out bilateral coopera-
state actors to address challenges;
tion with Thailand.
 Increased qualifications and competencies of
Results (“Wirkungen”) of the cooperation (out-
the supported stakeholder groups in a broad
comes and impact) and the external factors as in-
range of areas, ranging from project planning
tervening variables will be juxtaposed to explain
and management skills to specific qualifica-
how GIZ has responded to changing framework
tions in different sectors of the economy and
conditions. As outlined above, GIZ does not formu-
more efficient and effective approaches to pol-
late explicit assumptions about the higher-level
icy formulation and implementation;
development goals of its interventions. However,
it can be deducted from the available documents

31
that GIZ support to Thailand is expected to make a
decisive contribution to the sustainable economic
development of the country and, through the em-
powerment of Thailand as a donor, to strengthened
South-South cooperation in development.
and related judgement criteria. The report itself fol-
lows the five DAC criteria (relevance, efficiency, ef-
fectiveness, impact and sustainability) but is
guided by the EQs and Judgement Criteria.

Evaluation Questions (EQ)

The evaluation is based on evaluation questions

Table 4: Evaluation Matrix

How did GIZ respond to changing policy environments?
Rationale: EQ 1 addresses the extent to which the GIZ-Thailand cooperation has pro-
actively and flexibly reacted to changes in the structural framework conditions and made
sure that the cooperation and its projects stayed relevant for overall development in
Thailand. It also looks at the way the modalities and thematic approaches of collabora-
tion between GIZ and Thai partner stakeholders reflected structural changes in the
framework conditions.
Judgement Criteria:
EQ 1  GIZ support has maintained its relevance over time (JC 1.1)
(Relevance, Ef-  GIZ support reflected partners’ development strategies and objectives (JC 1.2)
ficiency)
 The modes of collaboration between GIZ and Thai partners have changed in line
with changing framework conditions (JC 1.3)
 The GIZ support was flexible and adapted to facilitate rapid responses to changes in
circumstances (JC 1.4)
 Any institutional, policy and technical constraints as well as impeding external fac-
tors were addressed during planning and implementation (JC 1.5)
 GIZ developed innovative approaches and “promising practises” in response to
changing framework conditions for the cooperation (JC 1.6)
What concrete development results were achieved by the GIZ-Thai cooperation
2000-2015?
Rationale: EQ2 assesses outputs, outcomes and impact in the selected sectors. Due to
the complexity and long-term nature of the evaluation, a systematic and complete analy-
sis of outputs across all chosen sectors is not feasible; however, outputs are taken into
consideration whenever necessary to explain outcomes. The EQ also identifies and dis-
cusses constraints, bottlenecks and unanticipated obstacles, which have impeded the
EQ 2 implementation of activities.
(Effectiveness, Judgement Criteria:
Impact)
 Observable outputs and results are in line with the reconstructed theory of change
(JC 2.1)
 Aid delivery modalities were appropriate to the national context and to achieve the
desired results (JC 2.2)
 Impact of the outcomes was achieved in relation to the supported sectors (JC 2.3)
 The achievement of longer-term changes was not influenced or constrained by ex-
ternal factors (JC 2.4)

32
 Are the development results achieved in GIZ-Thai cooperation being sustained?
Rationale: This question refers to the specific results (for the selected sectors) docu-
mented under EQ 2. It reflects on the factors that have influenced sustainability.
Judgement Criteria:
 Changes that have taken place are robust and likely to continue to yield benefits in
EQ 3 the selected sectors (JC 3.1)
(Sustainability)  Measures have been taken by the government and other Thai stakeholders to en-
hance the sustainability of the outcomes (JC 3.2)
 Threats to future sustainability have been overcome or there is potential for this (JC
3.3)
 Necessary actions have been identified and taken in response to any capacity gaps,
information gaps, market failures or the presence of vested interests (JC 3.4)
 The development results of the GIZ-Thai cooperation are replicable or there is po-
tential for this (JC 3.4).
What lessons learnt can GIZ draw from the experiences for its future engagement
in Thailand and in other countries?
Rationale: The experience from GIZ-Thai cooperation might provide relevant lessons
learnt which are useful for the further development of GIZ’s strategy towards Thailand.
These lessons learnt might potentially also shape and guide strategic decisions for simi-
lar situations in other countries. In answering the EQ, the approach of other development
agencies in Thailand will also be consulted and reflected.
Judgement Criteria:
 GIZ’s long term engagement in Thailand as well as flexible responses to changing
circumstances were crucial factors in the implementation process (JC 4.1)
EQ 4
 The GIZ country office managed the transition process to the post-BMZ structural
(Lessons environment pro-actively, efficiently and effectively (JC 4.2)
Learnt)
 Thai state and non-state actors at national, provincial and local levels were promi-
nently included in the planning, organisation and implementation of support (JC 4.3)
 The GIZ approach to Thailand has taken the strategies of other development agen-
cies into account to avoid duplication (JC 4.4)
 The experiences of GIZ and other development agencies in Thailand allow for a
benchmarking of success factors in the implementation of development cooperation
(JC 4.5)
 The specific experiences of the GIZ-Thai cooperation can be regarded as a “best
case” or model for GIZ support in other middle-income / industrialising countries
which have graduated from ODA or are about to do so (JC 4.6)

Data Sources and Tools

In-depth documentary review: The analysed
documents include GIZ programme and project
documentation (project descriptions/overviews, fact
sheets, logframes, progress reports, final reports
etc.), monitoring and evaluation reports, strategy
papers and annual planning documents, reports
and other material provided by GIZ and its partners
as well as media reports, research reports and ac-
ademic publications.
Analysis of existing quantitative data along the
theory of change: The evaluation uses project
monitoring data from GIZ and partners, as well as
existing surveys and statistical material from other
sources. However, quantitative data was only
available to a limited extent, mainly because GIZ’s
Thai partner organisations have neither conducted
monitoring nor did they conduct any project report-
ing on their own.
Structured and semi-structured interviews: The
interviews were prepared with interview guidelines
adapted for the stakeholders to be interviewed.
The field investigations in April 2016 (inception

33
phase) and in September 2016 (main field phase)
included site visits, stakeholder interviews with GIZ
staff as well as partners and beneficiaries of GIZ
interventions in Thailand (see Annex 5 and 6). The
team leader also conducted interviews with GIZ’s
current main clients for Thailand-focussed projects,
BMUB, AA, BMWi and EU (Delegation in Bang-
kok), as GIZ’s work in Thailand has to be assessed
against the backdrop of the development goals and
objectives of these donors. Some interviews were
conducted as small group interviews. However, it
was not possible to organise focus group inter-
views due to logistical hurdles. The evaluators also
requested to conduct a participatory observation of
AIZ training courses but this request was not
granted by the GIZ office.
An online stakeholder survey of GIZ’s partners in
Thailand was conducted. The online survey was
geared towards the collection of information on is-
sues related to: i) the perception of GIZ’s role and
mission in Thailand in general and ii) the collabora-
tion with GIZ in Thailand in particular. The survey
was targeted towards stakeholders (including ben-
eficiaries, partners, consultants, contractors, em-
ployees of organisations that have collaborated
with GIZ) of GIZ in Thailand and actors knowledge-
able of the role and activities of GIZ in Thailand.
The survey complemented the information gath-
ered through documentary reviews and interviews.
would certainly have strengthened the comprehen-
siveness of the assessment. This gap is particu-
larly crucial with regards to sustainability. The as-
sessment of sustainability requires the availability
of data and documents, which show and prove on-
going effects of interventions long after they have
ended.
However, final project reports are written immedi-
ately after – or even shortly before – the conclusion
of a project and thus cannot provide empirical evi-
dence on sustainability. The same applies to most
project evaluations. The evaluation team expected
Thai partners to provide the necessary data and
documentary basis to allow for judgements on the
sustainability of project results. However, such in-
formation was unavailable in most cases. There-
fore, the evaluators had to almost solely rely on in-
terviews; but even then, it was difficult to obtain
information on projects, which had ended more
than two or three years ago and find stakeholders
who were still following-up on the results. Within
the given time-frame and considering the available
resources it was not feasible for the evaluation
team to conduct extensive primary research with
the view of generating data.

Limitations

As it is the purpose of this evaluation to capture the

GIZ support at country-level in a holistic way, and
with the objective of presenting findings, conclu-
sions and recommendations in relation to the coop-
eration between GIZ and Thai partners in general,
the evaluation cannot provide detailed assess-
ments of the individual projects, or even sectors,
included in the sample. In other words, this evalua-
tion does not replicate or duplicate project evalua-
tions and, consequently, does not and cannot sys-
tematically evaluate the results of projects against
their respective indicators and results models. In-
stead, project results across the portfolio of GIZ’s
support to Thailand are taken into account and are
elaborated on in an exemplary manner to present
aggregated and synthesised findings.

The evaluation was somewhat hampered by the

lack of documents, particularly monitoring and
evaluation reports, from GIZ’s Thai partners. While
the online survey and interviews provide a good
view on the partner perspective, more documented
evidence on project outputs, results and impact

34
2.6 Evaluation by DAC Criteria The partner perspective: findings of the stake-
holder survey

The following part assesses the GIZ support for

Thailand according to the DAC evaluation criteria
relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and
sustainability. The chapter begins with a short
analysis of main findings of the online survey,
which address several of these criteria.

Main results of the online stakeholder survey

 73% of respondents stated that they were satisfied with their relationship with GIZ to a great extent,
while 27% were satisfied to some extent (figure 2).
 71% of the respondents thought that “GIZ involves Thai partners in the development of cooperation
strategies and projects” to a great extent. 63% believe that “GIZ responds to the needs” (“ideas, sugges-
tions of Thai partners”) also to a great extent (figure 3).
 72% of respondents agreed to a great extent that “GIZ follows a results-oriented approach”. 62% ap-
proved to a great extent of the statement that “GIZ utilises its resources efficiently” (figure 3).
 However, it should also be noted, that on the point of “GIZ’s cooperation strategies are clear and well
communicated”, 12% of respondents answered that this statement was only true to a little extent or not
at all. This is the highest negative score of all questions on perception (figure 4).
 A large majority of respondents expressed positive views about their collaboration with GIZ. However,
19% of respondents agree with the statement “GIZ is uncomplicated to work with” only to a little extent
or not at all (figure 5).
 When asked about the challenges in working with GIZ, most respondents mentioned “Bureaucracy/
complicated work procedures” (53%), followed by “changes in policy direction” (48%), changes in fund-
ing priorities (38%) and staff turnover (28%) (multiple answers were possible) (figure 5).

 Individual open comments on challenges comprised statements such as “GIZ lack of the actual unde-
standing of [Thai] culture and bureaucratic system which is different from GIZ culture”, “Be flexible in
working with the government of Thailand”, “I think GIZ should try and get higher commitment for reach-
ing project goals and be more realistic about Thai organisations’ ability to do so”; “GIZ is sometimes per-
ceived as a consulting company, rather than a development partner”.

Almost all surveyed partners were satisfied with hard for a specific agenda. The platform is always
their respective relationship with GIZ. This was flexible enough to respond to the needs on the
largely driven by a positive perception of a) GIZ’s ground”.
participatory approach to project planning and im-
plementation and b) the efficiency and effective-
ness of modalities. Follow-up stakeholder inter-
1%
viewees confirmed that the participatory approach, 27%
which has been applied throughout GIZ’s coopera-
tion portfolio, allowed to address institutional, pol-
icy and technical constraints as well as impeding
external factors during planning and implementa-
tion. As a high-ranking official of an international 72%
N = 67
organisation who has been working with GIZ for 12
years put it, “GIZ’s comparative advantage is its
ability to always mobilise top-notch expertise linked Great extent Some extent Little extent Not at all

to technical solutions and strategies. GIZ is open,

Figure 1: How satisfied are you with your relationship with GIZ?
transparent, accountable and never pushes too

35
 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GIZ stands out among Thailand’s development partners. N = 64

GIZ involves Thai partners in the development of
cooperation strategies and projects. N = 63
GIZ takes the Thai context in development into
consideration. N = 66
GIZ responds on the needs (ideas, suggestions) of Thai
partners. N = 65
Thai partners have a high level of responsibility of and
engagement in GIZ-funded projects (ownership). N = 64
GIZ has strong expertise on issues relevant to Thailand’s
development. N = 65
GIZ plays an important role in Thailand’s development
process. N = 64
GIZ’s aid delivery modalities have been adapted to the
areas of your work in Thailand. N = 62
GIZ has flexibility in adapting to changing needs of Thai
partners. N = 65
The GIZ approach to Thailand has taken the strategies of
my institution/organisation into account. N = 63

Great extent Some extent Little extent Not at all

Figure 2: What is your perception regarding GIZ’s adaptation to the Thai context?

The fact that the vast majority of survey respond-
ents perceived GIZ as standing out among devel-
opment partners in Thailand, confirms the global
findings of the AidData partner perception report
which mentions “GIZ’s above-average perfor-
mance in providing policy advice for reforms”.14
Overall, a large majority of respondents expressed
positive views about their collaboration with GIZ
and it can reasonably be assumed that this is also
reflective of efficient and effective GIZ-partner rela-
tions.
GIZ’s results-oriented approach and efficient utili-
sation of resources are seen as crucial success
factors. Albeit expressed by only a minority of sur-
vey respondents, some problems seem to exist in
the communication of GIZ’s cooperation strategies.
Follow-up interviews revealed that partners could
not always clearly distinguish between the strate-
gies and approaches of donors (such as BMZ) on
the one hand and those of GIZ as an implementing
agency on the other.

14
AidData, Deval. German Aid from a Partner Perspective: Efforts Survey, 2016, p viii.
Experience-based Perceptions from AidData’s 2014 Reform

36
 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GIZ is governed by a clear mission. N = 65

GIZ addresses any emerging capacity gaps in the

preparation and implementation of projects. N = 65

The work of GIZ is characterised by innovative

concepts and initiatives to solve problems. N = 67

GIZ follows a results-oriented approach. N = 67

GIZ utilizes its resources efficiently. N = 66

GIZ is effectively working for change. N = 67

GIZ effectively acts as a mediator between

different stakeholders. N = 66

GIZ’s cooperation strategies are clear and well

communicated. N = 64

Great extent Some extent Little extent Not at all

Figure 3: What is your perception regarding the mission of GIZ?

Another critical point on efficiency and effective-
ness which emerged from the online survey and in-
terviews refers to the level of bureaucratic com-
plexity and challenges involved in the
implementation of projects, changes in policy direc-
tion, funding priorities and staff turnover. According
to open answers on the issue of challenges and
follow-up interviews, stakeholders who expressed
critical views about their relationship with GIZ did
so because they believed GIZ did not fully under-
stand work and administrative cultures at partner
organisations coupled with unrealistic expectations
regarding human resource capacities at Thai gov-
ernment agencies. While it is difficult to determine
if these views are reflective of structural problems
in relations between GIZ and its partners or mainly
perceptions of individuals, it seems important to
address these issues in GIZ-partner exchanges.

37
 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GIZ has highly qualified staff. N = 67

Relations with GIZ are based on mutual respect. N = 67

Relations with GIZ are based on openness. N = 67

GIZ coordinates its work well with Thai partners. N = 67

GIZ’s collaboration with Thai partners takes

N = 66
place on a set of common aims and goals.

GIZ staff are recognized as team player. N = 68

GIZ always keeps its partners well informed of

the progress of project implementation.
N = 67

GIZ is uncomplicated to work with. N = 68

Great extent Some extent Little extent Not at all

Figure 4: What is your perception regarding the collaboration with GIZ?

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Bureaucracy / complicated work procedures

Changes in policy direction

Changes in funding priorities

Staff turnover

Other - Write In

There are no challenges in working with GIZ.

% of respondents who ticked the option

N = 64
Figure 5: What are the challenges in working with GIZ?

38
Relevance in view of changing framework conditions

Overview
The section of Relevance addresses EQ 1 (How did GIZ respond to changing policy environments?) but
also elaborates in more general terms of the relevance of the support, thereby addressing the following
judgement criteria (JC):
 GIZ support has maintained its relevance over time (JC 1.1)

 GIZ support reflected partners’ development strategies and objectives (JC 1.2)

 The modes of collaboration between GIZ and Thai partners have changed in line with changing
framework conditions (JC 1.3)

 The GIZ support was flexible and adapted to facilitate rapid responses to changes in circumstances
(JC 1.4)

 Any institutional, policy and technical constraints as well as impeding external factors were ad-
dressed during planning and implementation (JC 1.5)

 GIZ has developed innovative approaches and “promising practises” in response to changing
framework conditions for the cooperation (JC 1.6)

 The section also partly covers EQ 4, i.e. GIZ’s long-term engagement in Thailand as well as flexible
responses to changing circumstances were crucial factors in the implementation process (JC 4.1).

Main Findings on Relevance

 While Thailand has gone through phases of profound political and economic change, GIZ had
not to adapt to altering framework conditions as GIZ, to a large extent, has addressed tech-
nical, non-sensitive areas of support (e.g. climate change), which have maintained relevance
over time and for subsequent governments regardless of the regime type. GIZ did also not
have to engage in direct negotiations with the Thai government because of its role as an imple-
menting agency (JCs 1.1, 1.3, 1.5)

 Adaption was only necessary – and successfully achieved – in a few cases of changes in the
organisational structure or the top management of project partners and in response to exter-
nal developments such as the floods of 2011 (JC 1.4)

 GIZ support to Thailand has apparently been characterised by a sufficient degree of flexibility
in the design and implementation of interventions which were all based on participatory ap-
proaches and therefore allowed for an ongoing alignment with partner needs and priorities (JCs
1.2, 1.4)

 Support in the selected sectors, especially in the fields of vocational education and SME sup-
port, is deeply rooted in GIZ’s long-standing experience and continued involvement in Thai-
land. There can be no doubt about the relevance of this support for Thailand’s socio-economic
development. The environment sector has taken centre-stage for the past half-decade within
the context of climate change to which Thailand is particularly vulnerable (JCs 1.1, 1.2)

 The trilateral cooperation of GIZ, TICA and third countries, e.g. Lao PDR and Vietnam, was
relevant both in terms of strengthening TICA’s role as a development agency and in response
to development needs of the two supported countries. However, the relevance of these inter-
ventions for Lao PDR and Vietnam was diminished due to the very small size of the projects
and their implementation in isolation from bilateral cooperation programmes (JC 1.2)

 The relevance of many interventions was strengthened due to their regional dimension, i.e.
their alignment with growing regional needs, including ongoing integration based on the agenda
of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Mekong region (JCs 1.1, 1.2).

39
During the evaluation period, Thailand has been
characterised by frequent and often profound politi-
cal change. Factors, which potentially have im-
pacted on GIZ’s cooperation with Thailand include,
for example, the military coups which happened
during the evaluation period, phases of political in-
stability and unrest, economic crises due to the
global financial crisis 2008 and the floods in 2011,
as well as Thailand’s decision to transform from
being a recipient of ODA to acting as a donor. At
the same time, the country has made steady pro-
gress in climbing up the ladder of economic and
human development. GIZ has supported Thailand
in key sectors, which have stayed relevant regard-
less of the specific situation. Throughout the evalu-
ation period the supported sectors were closely
aligned with national needs and development prior-
ities.
The first part of this section assesses, in general
terms, the flexibility of the GIZ support and its abil-
ity to adapt to and facilitate responses to changes
in political and economic circumstances in Thai-
land. This section is largely based on stakeholder
interviews with GIZ staff, German line ministries,
other donors, such as the EU, Thai partner organi-
sations and the online survey. The second part dis-
cusses the relevance of support provided in the se-
lected sectors over time.
Relevance of Economic and Political Frame-
work Conditions
With regards to main historic events and the politi-
cal situation, Thailand has experienced a very tu-
multuous time during the evaluation period (see
Table 5).

Table 5: Timeline of main events and political developments in Thailand 2000-201615

New Thai Rak Thai (“Thais Love Thais”) party wins elections after partial re-run
January 2001 of poll. Leader and new Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra forms coalition gov-
ernment.

Controversial crackdown on drugs starts; more than 2,000 suspects are killed.
February 2003 The government blames many of the killings on criminal gangs; human rights
groups say extra-judicial killings were encouraged by the authorities.

Martial law is imposed in largely Muslim south after more than 100 killed in a
January-March 2004 wave of attacks blamed on Islamic militants; the violence has continued and
more than 6,500 people have been killed to date.

Thousands of people are killed when a massive tsunami devastates communi-

December 2004
ties on the south-west coast, including the resort of Phuket.

Thaksin Shinawatra begins a second term as Prime Minister after his party
March 2005
wins February's elections by a landslide.

October 2005 Thailand fights avian flu as fresh outbreaks of the disease are reported.

Snap election called by Thaksin amid mass rallies against him is boycotted by
April-May 2006 the opposition and is subsequently annulled, leaving a political vacuum. The
Prime Minister takes a seven-week break from politics.

Military leaders stage a bloodless coup while Thaksin is at the UN General As-
19 September 2006 sembly. Retired General Surayud Chulanont is appointed as interim prime min-
ister in October.

15
Source: mainly based on BBC, Thailand Profile Timeline, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-15641745

40
 Ousted PM Thaksin Shinawatra's Thai Rak Thai party is banned. Thousands of
May 2007
soldiers are put on alert.

August 2007 Voters approve a new military-drafted constitution in a referendum.

General elections mark the first major step towards a return to civilian rule. The
December 2007 People Power Party (PPP), seen as the reincarnation of Thaksin's Thai Rak
Thai party, wins the most votes.

Return to civilian rule. Samak Sundaravej (PPP) is sworn in as prime minister.

February 2008
Ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra returns from exile.

June 2008- Decem- Thai-Cambodian border dispute involving the area surrounding the 11th century
ber 2011 Preah Vihear Temple, resulting in 23 military and civilian casualties.

Thaksin flees to the UK with his family after failing to appear in court to face
August 2008
corruption charges.

Opposition protesters (“yellow shirts”) occupy Bangkok’s main government

September 2008 complex and begin mass anti-government protests calling for the resignation of
PM Samak Sundaravej.

Tens of thousands of opposition People’s Alliance for Democracy supporters

November 2008 rally around parliament in Bangkok and blockade Thailand’s main airports in “fi-
nal battle” to topple the government.

PM Somchai Wongsawat is forced from office by a Constitutional Court ruling

disbanding the governing PPP for electoral fraud and barring its leaders from
December 2008 politics for five years.
Opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva forms a coalition to become Thailand’s new
PM.

Supporters of former PM Thaksin Shinawatra (“red shirts”) hold mass rallies

March-April 2009
against the government’s economic policies.

Tens of thousands of Thaksin supporters – in trademark red shirts – paralyse

parts of central Bangkok with months-long protests calling for PM Abhisit’s res-
March-May 2010 ignation and early elections. Troops eventually storm the protesters’ barricades
in a bid to break the deadlock and end the demonstrations. The death toll – the
worst in the country’s modern history – is put at 91.

Severe flooding happens during the monsoon season, described as the worst
March-April 2011 in Thailand’s history. 65 of the country’s 77 provinces are declared flood disas-
ter zones.

The pro-Thaksin Pheu Thai party wins a landslide victory in elections. Yingluck
July 2011
Shinawatra – the sister of Thaksin Shinawatra – becomes PM.

Anti-government yellow-shirts blockade parliament to prevent debate on pro-

June 2012
posed reconciliation bill aimed at ending six-year-old political tensions.

Tens of thousands of opposition supporters protest in Bangkok against a pro-

November 2013 posed political amnesty bill that critics say would allow ousted leader Thaksin
Shinawatra to return to Thailand without facing jail.

In response to opposition pressure, PM Yingluck announces that early elec-

December 2013
tions will be held in February 2014.

41
 General elections take place but the Constitutional Court declares them invalid
February 2014
because of disruption by the opposition.

Constitutional court orders PM Yingluck and several ministers out of office over
May 2014 alleged irregularities in appointment of security adviser.
Army seizes power in coup.

King Bhumibol gives his assent to an interim constitution enacted by the junta
June 2014
and giving the military sweeping powers.

August 2014 Coup leader General Prayuth Chanocha is made prime minister.

Voters approve a new constitution giving the military continuing influence over
August 2016
the country's political life.

October 2016 King Bhumibol Adulyadej dies at the age of 88 after 70 years on the throne.

In spite of the significant and in some cases dra-
matic events in Thailand since 2000, the collabora-
tion between GIZ and Thai partners has been
largely unaffected by changing framework condi-
tions, triggered by, inter alia, government changes,
military coups, domestic conflicts, and natural dis-
asters. The major visible effect is that policy dia-
logues involving German and Thai line ministries,
which had been planned as part of individual inter-
ventions, have not taken place since the military
seized power in 2014.On 23 June 2014, the Coun-
cil of the European Union suspended all “official
visits to and from Thailand”.16 For example, this
has affected the Thai-German dialogue on energy
transition, which has not continued since an inau-
gural meeting in 2013. However, the cooperation
has continued at the working level of the ministries
and there is no indication that the implementation
of the project in general has been affected.
Otherwise, if adaptation was necessary, this was
usually in response to changes in the organisa-
tional structure or the top management of project
partners. For example, in the field of climate
change, the projects had to deal with several
changes in the leadership of ONEP and OCCC.
The effectiveness of cooperation depended on the
respective top officials in charge but overall the in-
terventions had apparently not been hampered by
fluctuations at the management level.17 In a small
number of cases, projects had to deal with unpre-
dictable events but were able to adjust accordingly.
For example, due to the flooding situation in Thai-
land in late 2011 the final events for the pro-
gramme Strengthening of the competitiveness &
eco-efficiency of SMEs in Thailand had to be post-
poned to January and February 2012, which was
agreed with BMZ.18 Also, as a result of the floods,
GIZ asked the EU as the donor of the Switch Asia
Greening Supply Chains in the Thai Automotive In-
dustry project to reduce the number of supported
SMEs to 100 as the industry was struggling at the
time to deal with the impact of the floods. However,
the EU did not agree and GIZ eventually managed
to complete the project with 502 SMEs.19
The online survey shows that an overwhelming
majority of respondents agreed that GIZ has flexi-
bly adapted its support to changing economic and
political circumstances to a great or some extent.
However, according to follow-up interviews with se-
lected respondents, most believed that there were
relatively few instances in which GIZ had to adapt
its support.

16
Council of the European Union, Council conclusions on Thailand. Foreign Affairs Council meeting, Luxembourg, 23 June 2014.
17
This is also mentioned in GIZ. Entwicklung und Umsetzung der Klimawandelpolitik in Thailand, 2009-2014. Schlussbericht, Au-
gust 2014.
18
GIZ. Strengthening of the competitiveness & eco-efficiency of SMEs in Thailand, Report number: 8 (last reporting period
1.5.2011-31.12.2011), Reporting period: 1.5.2008 - 31.12.2011.
19
Interview with the EU Delegation in Bangkok.

42
 0% 10% 20%
GIZ has flexibly adapted its support to changing economic
circumstances in Thailand.
GIZ has flexibly adapted its support to changing political
circumstances in Thailand.
Great extent
Figure 6: Survey Question: What is your perception regarding GIZ’s adaptation to changing circumstances?
The fact that GIZ’s work was not substantially af-
fected by changing framework conditions is mainly
related to GIZ’s status as an implementing agency
which, unlike donors, does not engage in direct ne-
gotiations with the Thai government. As an EU offi-
cial put it, “GIZ can interact with the Thai govern-
ment at a technical level. Unlike the EU and its
member states, GIZ is not bound by political rela-
tions and constraints.” Furthermore, GIZ mainly
works in politically “non-sensitive” areas. This
means, while GIZ is prominently involved in policy
consulting and directly works at the level of policy-
making, the issues that have been addressed in
Thailand are generally of a non-confrontational na-
ture. Climate change is a politicised issue but it is
not GIZ that creates the political framework for co-
operation but the German government, the EU or
other donors as GIZ’s clients. GIZ has contributed
to the design of BMZ-funded interventions but does
not bear political responsibility. The current Thai
military government has not been a stumbling
block for GIZ’s activities. To the contrary, it has
been supportive of the climate change initiative as
it is important for the government to find interna-
tional cooperation platforms.
Below the level of the overarching structural politi-
cal and economic framework conditions, all pro-
grammes, projects and their components covered
by the evaluation were characterised by a flexible
approach. This allowed for the amendment and ad-
aptation of project designs and logframes in line
with the specific interests and needs of Thai part-
ners and beneficiaries. Partners were prominently
involved in the design of interventions. Projects
started with stakeholder workshops, which set the
implementation agenda based on a participatory
approach. This has increased ownership. Partici-
patory approaches are not customary applied in
Thailand and, according to stakeholder interviews,
GIZ’s approach stood out among development
30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
N = 58
N = 56
Some extent Little extent Not at all
agencies. At the same time, however, as several
interviewees confirmed, Thai ministries often sent
junior staff to project meetings who are not in a po-
sition of decision making and are not the group of
participants GIZ is looking for. The participation in
projects also creates an extra burden for junior
staff as this is often on top of their workload at a
ministry for which no additional compensation is of-
fered.
Relevance of Sector-specific Support
In the following, the relevance of GIZ support for
the different sectors is discussed in detail. Such a
sector-specific approach and understanding is a
necessary pre-condition for an aggregated per-
spective on effectiveness, efficiency, impact and
sustainability in the subsequent chapters.
Vocational education
GIZ support to vocational education dates back to
the early days of German-Thai development coop-
eration and throughout the years and decades this
support has continued to be relevant in the Thai
development context as interviewed stakeholders
unanimously stated. There has always been a
strong interest on the Thai side to learn from the
German dual training system and from the long-
term experiences of German vocational education.
Questions such as how companies or social em-
ployers can get involved in the dual system take
centre stage in this debate. In 1995, based primar-
ily on the German model, the Department of Voca-
tional Education launched the initiative to introduce
dual vocational training programmes which involve
students in hands-on training in suitably selected
organisations in the private sector. The training is
for a period of three years with more than half of
the time devoted to practical training on-the-job,
spread over two days a week, or for longer periods
43
depending on the distance, throughout the semes-
ters. Two levels of a diploma in vocational training
(DVT) are offered: the three-year certificate level
for skilled workers where students and trainees are
admitted at the age of 15 after completing Mattha-
yom 3 (Grade 9); and the two-year diploma techni-
cian level for students who have graduated with
the Certificate of Vocational Education after 12
years of formal education.
During the evaluation period, the Thai Office of Vo-
cational Education Commission (OVEC) has been
making substantial efforts to promote the study of
vocational schools and to persuade young people
to apply for vocational education. In relation to this
objective, the OVEC issued a 15-year Vocational
Education Policy (2012-2026) and specified mis-
sions, goals and strategies to try to nourish and
foster the Thai vocational education system. “This
aims to boost the number of young people attend-
ing vocational schools and train them to be compe-
tent and qualified employees, in both core and
functional competency. OVEC plans to work col-
laboratively with the industrial and commercial sec-
tors, and both local and international agencies.”
In May 2013, OVEC signed an agreement with the
German government in order to share the best
practices from Germany's vocational education
system. A memorandum of understanding on
Ger¬man-Thai Dual Excellence Education has
been drawn up between the Thai Ministry of Edu-
cation and Germany's Federal Foreign Office. The
German government and German-Thai Chamber
of Commerce cooperated with OVEC to set up a
'Dual Training Curriculum' for Thai vocational
schools with collaboration from German industrial
sectors. The aim is to tackle the region’s in-
tensi¬fying skilled-labour shortage by creating real
public-private partnerships, introducing efficient
mea¬sures and creating a recognised standard for
training through the development of minimum
stan¬dards for “In-Company-Trainers”. While the
GIZ project Effective In-Company Vocational Train-
ing in the Mekong Region (2013-2016) does not
and cannot replicate the German model – given
the different framework conditions in Thailand – it
is based on the key concept of the dual system. It
clearly responds to the needs of Thai economy to
expand and strengthen a well-educated and
trained workforce able to lift Thailand out of the
middle-income trap and thus can be considered an
intervention, which is particularly suitable to meet
the demands of middle-income countries. Further-
more, Thai-German collaboration on dual voca-
tional education in general has gone through an
evolutionary period in recent years and has now
44
reached a level at which there is buy-in from the
private sector, not at least major German compa-
nies, such as BMW, Bosch and B Grimm (almost
600 German companies operate in Thailand) which
have joined GIZ to address growing worries about
shortage of skilled labour.
As in all other sectors covered by this evaluation –
albeit to varied degrees – the GIZ TVET Mekong
project gains further relevance due its regional em-
beddedness. This is crucial against the backdrop
of ongoing and increasing regional cooperation
and integration in Southeast Asia, which is strongly
supported by the Thai government. While based in
Thailand – where the training courses take place
as well – the project has involved stakeholders
from countries in the Mekong region and has had
an explicit regional dimension.
SME support
SME support is a further sector in which GIZ has
been active for many years. Since 2004, the inter-
ventions have directly addressed the needs of
small and medium sized companies arising as the
result of growing international competition. Thai-
land was severely affected by the Asian Crisis of
1997-98. While the country had largely recovered
in the early 2000s, many challenges remained. As
GIZ correctly analysed, the competitive advantage
of the Thai economy in many sub-sectors was still
based on low wages and not on high productivity
through technological progress. New regional com-
petitors such as China and Vietnam had substan-
tially increased their competiveness creating pres-
sure on Thai companies. Particularly for SMEs, this
competitive pressure intensified due to low produc-
tivity, outdated production technologies (which also
cause poor product quality and environmental pol-
lution) and the migration of jobs to other countries.
Furthermore, sophisticated industries with high
added value were located almost exclusively in
Bangkok and the immediate region around the
capital. Although Thailand had to import a large
proportion of its energy, energy efficiency in pro-
duction was very low, especially in the agricultural
sector. SMEs were facing considerable competitive
pressures and did not dedicate sufficient attention
to ecological matters. This was the context in
which the Thai German Programme for Enterprise
Competitiveness (PEC) began to operate in 2004.
The project focused on the whole value chain of a
number of agroindustrial sub-sectors (palm oil,
mulberry paper, fruit & vegetable, shrimp and tapi-
oca), which are dominated by SMEs and have high
levels of employment or which are labour-intensive
and characterised by a significant need to improve
as well as a potential to achieve an increase in
productivity. Additional selection criteria were: the
priority of the sector on the partner side, the pro-
spect of structural effects and the presence of suit-
able partner institutions in the implementing pro-
cess to ensure sustainability after the end of the
intervention. The selected sub-sectors were rele-
vant to the Thai economy (employing around 1.5
million people at the time the intervention started)
enabling the programme to enhance the livelihood
of the rural population in the North and South of
the country. SMEs in those sectors face considera-
ble challenges and have substantial room for im-
provement with regard to competitiveness and eco-
efficiency. The sub-sectors also reflected the de-
velopment priorities on the Thai side. The project
was aligned with the 9th National Economic and
Social Development Plan (2002-2006).
The second phase of the project, strengthening of
the competitiveness & eco-efficiency of SMEs
(2008-2011) in Thailand focused on the improve-
ment of the competitiveness, eco-efficiency and
utilisation of renewable energies of Thai SMEs in
the agro-industry, addressing the framework condi-
tions and political dialogue, quality infrastructure,
innovation, technology and eco-efficiency. Particu-
lar emphasis was given to the improvement of
productivity and eco-efficiency in the production
process and the improvement of product quality.
The two phases built on each other, which was
particularly suitable for the Thai framework condi-
tions. While the first phase strongly focused on the
transformation to organic agriculture, the second
phase emphasised production methods, marketing
and match-making between Thai and foreign com-
panies. Furthermore, the project provided support
to develop the value chains for agro products for
which other kinds of assistance were not available
or only to a limited extent. As a beneficiary com-
mented, “there has not been a lot of opportunity to
get technical assistance for Longan.”
Environmental Sector and Climate Change
With regard to the environment sector, Thailand
will likely be one of the most affected countries by
climate change due to its geography, economy and
level of development. In fact, Thailand is already
experiencing the impacts of global climate change,
such as prolonged droughts, decreased agricul-
tural and fishery yields or sea level rise. Subse-
quent Thai governments have demonstrated their
commitment to address the causes of climate
change. To use energy more efficiently, among
other initiatives, Thailand’s Ministry of Energy intro-
duced the Power Development Plan, which sets a
target for achieving a 20% share of power genera-
tion from renewable sources in 2036. The Ministry
also introduced the Alternative Energy Develop-
ment Plan (AEDP) and the Energy Efficiency Plan
(EEP). The implementation has been supported by
the Thai German programme: Energy Efficiency
Development Plan (2012-2015) under the IKI of the
BMUB. The AEDP aims to achieve a 30% share of
renewable energy in the total final energy con-
sumption in 2036. The EEP plans to reduce Thai-
land’s energy intensity by 30% below the 2010
level by 2036. A challenge for Thailand’s reduction
in greenhouse gas emissions are the high costs
and capacity constraints in the energy sector. Fur-
thermore, Thailand largely lacks the technical ca-
pacity and effective coordination which are re-
quired to support energy efficiency reforms. To
address this problem, “Thailand has domestically
launched support mechanisms like feed-in tariffs,
tax incentives and access to investment grants and
venture capital for promoting renewable energy ex-
pansion. However, Thailand still has a long way to
go in terms of establishing effective energy
measures.”
GIZ support has been highly relevant as the three
components of Thai-German Climate Protection
Programme (2009-2011) – Climate Change Policy;
Energy Efficiency in Medium-Sized Enterprises;
and Climate-friendly Tourism – as well as the fol-
low up intervention Sustainable Consumption and
Production for Low Carbon Economy: Green Public
Procurement and Eco-Labelling (2012-2015) have
directly responded to climate-related challenges
and have been closely linked with the respective
government agendas. The relevance of the ap-
proach was strengthened by its holistic nature, i.e.
the fact that a whole range of programmes and
projects addressed the broad field of climate
change and environmental challenges from differ-
ent but related angles.
Most importantly, the programme Clean Air for
Smaller Cities in the ASEAN Region Project, later
renamed Cities, Environment, Transport in the
ASEAN-Region (CET) – with its modules Clean Air
for Smaller Cities (CASC), Sustainable Port Devel-
opment (SPD) and Transport and Climate Change
(TCC) – was relevant in addressing environmental
pollution caused by a rising demand for transport,
water, energy and solid waste management infra-
structure. Fast economic growth and a rapidly ex-
panding urban population have been causing a
negative impact affecting the quality of life and
health of citizens in Thailand. The three modules
addressed this core problem from different angles
but used similar approaches for capacity building
45
by harmonising the training approach. The CASC
module supported medium-sized cities in ASEAN
member states – in Thailand Chiang Mai and Na-
kornratchasima – in the development and imple-
mentation of clean air plans (CAPs). These plans
were designed to improve air quality and support
sus-tainable urban development. The Sustainable
Port Development (SPD) module assisted selected
ports to improve the quality and efficiency of their
Safety, Health and Environmental (SHE) manage-
ment. Ports are commercial, logistic and industrial
nodes at the intersections of international trade
and play a key role in the economic development
of their countries and regions. Due to a rapid in-
crease in maritime transport in the ASEAN Region,
there are growing challenges to achieving ecologi-
cally and sustainably economic growth in the port
sector.
The TCC module worked towards improving en-
ergy efficiency and thereby mitigating greenhouse
gas emissions arising from land transport. Improv-
ing the energy efficiency and mitigation of green-
house gas (GHG) emissions has important co‐ben-
efits in terms of reducing congestion and air
pollution. The project developed strategies and ac-
tion plans towards the improvement of energy effi-
ciency and the reduction of greenhouse gas emis-
sions.
Overall, CET addressed issues of long-term rele-
vance in the process of Thailand’s industrialisation
process as well as its socio-economic and human
development. According to interviews, Thai part-
ners perceived CASC as the most relevant of the
three modules, which also generated the strongest
“buy in”. The relevance of CET was further en-
hanced through its embeddedness in regional ap-
proaches, e.g. the development of an ASEAN re-
gional policy to increase energy efficiency and
reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the land
transport sector. Thus, the programme also gained
relevance in terms of strengthening regional coop-
eration on key environmental agendas in South-
east Asia. Apart from Thailand CET was imple-
mented in Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia and
involved the ASEAN Secretariat.
In the broader context of climate change, energy
security and resource efficiency, the project
Inte¬grated resource management in Asian Cities:
The Urban Nexus has been relevant in addressing
the challenges of cities. Managing rapidly growing
cities and their urban regions is one of the most
critical challenges facing Thailand, as well as Asia
in general, especially with regard to the relation-
46
ship between urban development and natural re-
source management. Of all natural resources, en-
ergy, water and food are essential to sustain devel-
opment efforts. The overall objective of the project
is to contribute to the long-term sustainable devel-
opment of rapidly growing cities. The project has
supported ten cities in six countries, namely:
China, Indonesia, Mongolia, Philippines, Thailand
(Chiang Mai and Korat) and Vietnam providing
technical advice to municipal administrations for
the design, planning and, where possible, imple-
mentation of practical nexus initiatives. While
there can be no doubt about the overall relevance
of the project, the criteria used by BMZ to select
the respective cities remain unclear.
Thai-German Trilateral Cooperation
The relevance of the Thai-German Trilateral Coop-
eration has to be judged against the programme’s
two-fold objective, i.e. the strengthening of TICA as
a development agency (within the context of Thai-
land’s role as an emerging donor) and the joint
GIZ-TICA implementation of projects in partner
countries in the region. According to interviews
conducted at TICA, collaboration with GIZ gained
its relevance particularly through the uniqueness of
the approach, i.e. GIZ has been TICA’s only part-
ner, which based its support on trilateral joint pro-
jects. In 2000, Thailand also signed a MoU with
Australia on trilateral cooperation but the agree-
ment was never implemented. Cooperation also
exists with New Zealand. Hence, GIZ’s support is
perceived as making a crucial contribution towards
1) Thailand’s transformation from a recipient coun-
try for 40 years to a donor, and 2) generally to the
strengthening of South-South and North-South-
South cooperation.
TICA has grouped its partner countries into three
categories: a) neighbouring/regional countries, b)
post-conflict countries (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Ti-
mor Leste), and c) strategic countries. The coun-
tries supported by the trilateral cooperation – Lao
PDR and Vietnam – fall both in the first and third
category. Cooperation with Cambodia was also
planned but did not materialise for political rea-
sons.
 The Mulberry Paper Supply Chain Project
(2010-2013) was the first project to be imple-
mented under the trilateral programme. It
aimed at improving the rural cross-border
economies in Northern Thailand and Lao PDR
by upgrading the Mulberry Paper Supply
Chain. Supporting the mulberry paper sector is
relevant for two reasons. First, it creates em-
ployment opportunities for socio-economically
 disadvantaged groups. At the same time, the
traditional production process of mulberry pa-
per causes environmental pollution through the
extensive use of chemicals. Therefore, the ob-
jectives of the project did not only include the
creation of employment opportunities but also
the introduction of eco-friendly and eco-effi-
cient methods – also with the aim of reducing
production costs.
 The project Nam Xong Sub-River Basin Man-
agement (2012-2014) addressed sustainable
water management in the watershed area of
the Nam Xong River in Lao PDR. The Nam
Xong watershed comprises 50 tributary rivers.
Nam Xong River is the lifeline for the people
living in the area as the water resources have
been utilised for all key economic activities,
e.g. tourism, agriculture, fishery, industry and
domestic consumption. Some 90% of the in-
habitants (64,000 in 2009) of the Nam Xong
watershed area make their living by working in
agriculture, fishing or the tourism industry, and
are therefore highly dependent on sufficient
and clean water supplies for their livelihoods.
 The Strengthening National Good Agricultural
Practice (GAP) in Lao PDR project (2012-
2016) addressed the country’s needs in estab-
lishing a food safety certification system. At the
time of the project design phase, Lao PDR is
one of only a few ASEAN member states that
did not have a national GAP system harmo-
nised with ASEAN GAP in place. This lack of
GAP certification had negatively affected the
development of the fruit and vegetable indus-
try. Producers were unable to access important
regional markets for fresh horticultural prod-
ucts, while neighbouring countries such as
Thailand had moved forward with GAP certifi-
cation for both domestic and export markets.
The first two projects were relevant in addressing
the livelihoods of poor populations in the Thai-Lao
border area while the third project responded to a
clearly defined national need in the agro industry.
All three projects gained particular relevance within
the specific context of the trilateral cooperation as
they dealt with issues for which Thai experiences
and expertise could be utilised to provide a sub-
stantial added value in the implementation pro-
cess. Hence, the projects were ideally suited for
GIZ-TICA collaboration. Several interviewees sug-
gested that the projects were primarily chosen be-
cause they allowed TICA to develop its profile and
capacities as a donor and development agency.
This rationale is less clear in the case of the project
Vietnamese-Thai-German Trilateral Cooperation
Advanced Technical Services for SME in Selected
Industrial Sectors of Vietnam (2010-2014). The
project aimed at increasing the productivity and
competitiveness of SMEs in sugar, paper and auto-
motive industry through improved services of the
Center of Materials and Failure Analysis (COMFA)
within the Vietnamese Academy of Science and
Technology. The strengthening of the SME sector
has been a national priority in Vietnam’s ongoing
economic transformation process. Since the early
2000s, a large number of bilateral and multilateral
donors and development agencies has been active
in this sector, including the World Bank, the Inter-
national Finance Cooperation, United Nations De-
velopment Programme European Commission and
bilateral donors, most notably the Australian
Agency for International Development, Canadian
International Development Agency, State Secretar-
iat for Economic Affairs, Japan Bank for Interna-
tional Cooperation, United Kingdom Department
for International Development and the United
States Agency for International Development. Pro-
ject documents do not elaborate on the specific rel-
evance of the GIZ-TICA approach and particularly
TICA’s input and the final report does not even
mention TICA apart from its contribution to the
budget.
47
Efficiency

As the previous section, EQ 1 and the related JCs provide the framework for the following part, whichelabo-
rates on the degree of efficiency with which the support was delivered. Efficiency measures the outputs --
qualitative and quantitative -- in relation to the inputs. In other words, efficiency looks at how economically
resources/inputs (funds, expertise, time etc.) are converted to outputs. The efficiency criterion mainly ad-
dresses three questions: Were activities cost-effective? Were objectives achieved on time? Was the pro-
gramme or project implemented in the most efficient way compared to alternatives? 20 Efficiency is also
based on the assumption that differences in the way an intervention is approached and conducted can have
a significant influence on the effects.21 An examination of administrative and regulatory burden, aspects of
simplification, the mode of communication among stakeholder groups and economies of scale are thus im-
portant aspects of efficiency which are considered in the following.

Main Findings on Efficiency

 The vast majority of programme and project activities was delivered on time or at least without
substantial delays. There are only a very small number of cases which encountered significant
problems in the implementation process. This includes the Mulberry paper project under the
GIZ-TICA-Lao PDR trilateral cooperation which was not fully implemented (JC 1.4)

 Projects which developed standards – especially at the regional level – can be seen as partic-
ularly efficient as such results are easily replicable (economies of scale) The evaluation did not
find any differences in the efficiency of project implementation in different sectors (JCs 1.2,
1.6)

 Across all sectors GIZ support to Thailand is perceived as being of high quality due to “top-
notch” expertise in the delivery of technical solutions, transparency and accountability of
project implementation, the results-oriented and often incremental and/or holistic approach of
interventions as well as generally the participatory approach at all levels of the cooperation
(JCs 1.2, 1.3, 1.5)

 GIZ developed several innovative approaches and “promising practises” to address Thailand’s
changing development needs as the country moves up the middle-income ladder. These meth-
ods include, but are not limited to, value-chain approaches and integrated resource manage-
ment in urban planning (JC 1.6)

 Although there can be no doubt that a vast majority of Thai stakeholders is greatly satisfied with
their relations with GIZ, some problems exist – at least according to partners’s views – regard-
ing GIZ’s communication of strategies and occasionally a perception that GIZ lacks an appre-
ciation of the work and administrative culture of Thai partner organisations (JC 1.5)

In assessing efficiency, it is important to determine
whether and to what extent programmes were im-
plemented in the most efficient way compared to
alternatives. The same applies to the aspect of
cost-effectiveness.
Most programmes and projects provided support
for planning processes and the development of
strategies, policy and action plans at national and
local levels delivered by GIZ experts. In interviews
Thai partners almost unanimously stressed the

20
OECD. DAC Criteria for Evaluating Development Assistance, OECD Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based
Management, 2002, p. 21, https://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/2754804.pdf
21
EU. Guidelines on evaluation and Fitness Checks. Better Regulation, http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/guidelines/ug_en.htm

48
high quality and efficiency of this approach. Ger-
man experts are seen as “modern development
workers” who are highly respected as reliable,
knowledgeable and have a systematic approach in
working with Thai partners. Interviewees saw the
multi-level and sequential nature of the GIZ sup-
port as a particularly important factor of efficiency.
This finding is in line with the study on “German
Aid from a Partner Perspective”, according to
which “the survey participants on average per-
ceived the advice and assistance provided by GIZ
to be particularly valuable at various stages (e.g.,
when reform priorities are being established, when
policy advice is provided and when reforms are be-
ing implemented)”.22
GIZ developed several innovative approaches and
“promising practises” to efficiently address Thai-
land’s changing development needs as the country
moves up the middle-income ladder. A case in
point is the project Integrated Resource Manage-
ment in Asian Cities: The Urban NEXUS (Water /
Energy / Food Security / Land Use) which was
based on, amongst others:
 The introduction of innovative engineering
technologies in the area of waste water and
solid waste management, generation of en-
ergy, link to (urban) agriculture, energy effi-
ciency (EE) in/of buildings
 Holistic/integrated urban planning/breaking
open of “silo-thinking” (multi sectoral)
 Multi-level approach (micro, meso, macro, su-
praregional levels of decision-making)
 Involvement of the private sector, civil sector,
state/communal bodies
In Chiang Mai, Urban Nexus supported urban
planning for waste-water management. Based on
the provision of technical advice, the project sup-
ported change in governance structures with the
objective of achieving more integrated planning
and management. This approach was particularly
efficient as it was implemented regionally and fa-
cilitated the exchange of ideas and best practises
making use of a regional exchange platform that
22
AidData, Deval. German Aid from a Partner Perspective:
Experience-based Perceptions from AidData’s 2014 Reform
Efforts Survey, 2016, p. vi. The study has a global approach
and does not comprise specific findings on Thailand.
23
GIZ. Integrated Resource Management in Asian Cities: the
Urban NEXUS (Water / Energy / Food Security / Land Use)
4th Regional Workshop, Nov. 05 / 07.2014, Ulaanbaatar,
Mongolia, power point presentation; GIZ, Portfolio of GIZ
utilised external know-how (e.g. via private sec-
tor, universities etc.) to develop a better under-
standing and joint enhancement of integrated
management procedures. Synergies between the
project partners GIZ and the United Nations Eco-
nomic and Social Commission for Asia and the
Pacific (UNESCAP) also contributed to efficiency
of project implementation. While GIZ has undis-
puted technical knowledge which enables it to
provide sound technical advice, UNESCAP’s stra-
tegic advantage lies in the utilisation of political
channels to provide policy advice.23
A second example of innovative approaches is the
TG-PEC project, which introduced organic farming
in North Thailand and a value chain approach to
the fruit and vegetable sector. Considering that the
project was mainly based on the deployment of
short-term experts, TG-PEC achieved a substantial
impact, i.e. an increase of production and income
for farmers between 20% and more than 100%
(see below) in a cost-effective manner, according
to stakeholder interviews.
Several final project reports and evaluations attest
regional projects a particularly high level of effici-
ency. For example, according to a regional pro-
gramme evaluation of “ASEAN region: Sustainable
Port Development (SPD)”, “with relatively low avail-
able resources for a regional coverage, the project
has carried out a large number of activities at the
port level and organized regional workshops and
training. To achieve this, one of the main factors is
the employment of permanently contracted country
managers to improve coordination and cooperation
with counterparts. These high qualified and enga-
ged persons are able to move forward the project
activities, supported by regional and international
[…] advisors.”24 Interviews confirmed that this find-
ing can be taken as being representative for re-
gional projects in general.
Based on final project reports, evaluation reports
and interviews, it can be concluded that the vast
majority of programmes and project activities was
delivered on time or at least without substantial de-
lays. There are several instances of final reports
claiming that all actions were delivered and imple-
mented on time. The Switch Asia project Greening
Supply Chains in the Thai Auto and Automotive
Projects in Asean Environment and Natural Resource Man-
agement, 2013; GIZ. Integrated Resource Management in
Asian Cities: the Urban NEXUS. Third Regional Nexus
Workshop. Da Nang, June 25-27, 2014, power point presen-
tation; interviews.
24
Project evaluation: summary report. ASEAN region: Sus-
tainable Port Development (SPD), 2015.
49
Parts Industries is case in point: “The Action has
completed all activities as planned within 3 years
and 9 month no-cost extension. In total, 502 SMEs
have identified over 1,200 improvement measures.
As of November 2015, 590 measures were com-
pleted with all data assessed and verified.”
If the implementation diverted from the original pro-
ject design, changes to the logframe were ex-
plained and wellfounded. There are only a small
number of instances when project activities or
components were completely abandoned. This
was the case for the support of the tangerine sec-
tor under TG-PEC which was characterised by a
high degree of competition among farmers and a
lack of willingness to cooperation. Furthermore,
Tangerine plantations were severely affected by
parasites during the implementation phase.
According to interviews, the „Mulberry Paper Sup-
ply Chain Project“ under the Trilateral Cooperation
with Lao PDR could only partly be implemented,
i.e. a processing plant for Mulberry paper was not
built as planned due to a lack of investment and
demand for such a small factory. At the time of pro-
ject implementation, an electrical power plant was
constructed in the same area absorbing most of
the workforce from Lao the Northern districts of
Sayaboury Province, the target area of the project.
Furthermore, the interest of farmers to get involved
in Mulberry paper production was low. The regional
trade was still increased as farmers were able to
sell the bark of the Mulberry tree, from which the
paper is made, to Thailand and mainly China, but
no value added in the production process and sup-
ply chain was achieved.
Generally, however, the trilateral programme can
Table 6: Disbursements of funds in Euro for the projects under the Trilateral Cooperation
Total GIZ
Nam Xong Sub-River Basin 127,310
Management
Strengthening Good Agri- 97,521
culture Practice in Lao PDR
Mulberry Paper Supply 132,000*
Chain Project
Advanced Technical Ser- 147,470
vices for SME in Selected
Industrial Sectors of Vi-
etnam
(*) committed funds
Sources: Nam Xong Sub-River Basin Management, final report; Trilateral Cooperation Lao PDR – „Mulberry Paper Supply Chain Project“;
50
be considered a cost-effective approach for
strengthening of North-South-South cooperation in
development cooperation. All four implemented
projects had very small financial volumes and –
apart from the Mulberry paper project – achieved
their objectives. For example, the final report of the
Vietnamese-Thai-German Trilateral Cooperation
project noted, “The implementation of the trilateral
project in the time up to September 2012 can be
considered very successful for the Center of Mate-
rials and Failure Analysis (COMFA) and for the tar-
get SMEs. With relatively low project inputs (in
terms of man/months for consultancy and training
and funds for the improvement of equipment)
COMFA was able to open more subsectors and
more industries to become service partners.”
Equally important, they built TICA’s capacity in
managing and implementing projects and strength-
ened its ownership as a donor and development
agency. As one senior official stated, “TICA should
not cost-share and should be able to fund projects
such the ones implemented under the trilateral co-
operation on its own but at the moment there is no
other choice”. TICA’s share of the disbursed funds
of the four projects was between 30% and 39%
and thus, in most cases, slightly higher than the
originally planned 70:30 split between GIZ and
TICA – due to differences between committed and
disbursed funds. At the same time, even higher ef-
ficiency in terms of logistics and project manage-
ment could have been achieved through intra-GIZ
synergies with the GIZ country office in Vientiane,
which was not involved in the trilateral cooperation
programme.
TICA Other
89,447 (70%) 37,862 (30%)
60,989 (63%) 36,532 (37%)
99,000 (75%)* 33,000 (25%)*
86,082 (58%) 38,881 (26%) 9,717 (IMF)
(16%)
Vietnamese-Thai-German Trilateral Cooperation; Advanced Technical Services for SME in Selected Industrial Sectors of Vietnam, final re-
port.

When asked about the efficiency of project imple-

mentation, several interviewees criticised that GIZ
only provided technical expertise and advice for
planning but contributes no funds for the imple-
mentation of these plans. For example, in the case
of the Chiang Mai Urban Nexus project, the plan-
ning process for integrated waste-water manage-
ment was completed to the satisfaction of the
stakeholders involved, particularly Chiang Mai mu-
nicipality. However, interviews revealed that the
city had limited funds to implement the plan and
that the priority to spend the Baht 1,400 million an-
nual budget was for waste disposal in solid waste
and not waste water. In a similar vein, according to
interviews on the Thai partner side of the project
Sustainable Consumption and Production for Low
Carbon Economy: Green Public Procurement and
Eco-Labelling, GIZ’s policy advice was perceived
as having been delivered efficiently, i.e. on time. At
the same time, the partner would have liked to see
a GIZ contribution to implementation, for example,
through a pilot project.

However, while it might be a natural reaction on

the partner side to ask for direct financial support,
Thailand is in a position to mobilise the funds itself
and from a development perspective, it would not
be a sustainable approach for the donors commis-
sioning GIZ to provide grants for an upper middle-
income country. At the same time, it seems im-
portant to support partners in the process of imple-
menting plans and strategies (including the mobili-
sation if funds) which resulted from GIZ projects.
This is, for example, also in line with the recom-
mendation of the 2015 evaluation of CASC pro-
gramme, which advised to “mobilize available
funds at provincial or national level for continuity
and replication”. As the evaluation was only com-
pleted recently, no evidence has emerged for the
implementation of this recommendation.

51
Effectiveness, Impact and Sustainability

The following parts of effectiveness, impact and sustainability address EQs 2,3 and partly EQ 4;
EQ 2 (What concrete development results were achieved by the GIZ-Thai cooperation 2000-2015?) is based
on the following judgement criteria:
 Observable outputs and mainly outcomes are in line with the reconstructed theory of change (JC
2.1)

 Aid delivery modalities were appropriate to the national context (JC 2.2)

 Impact of the outcomes was achieved in relation to the supported sectors (JC 2.3)

 The achievement of longer-term changes was not influenced or constrained by external factors (JC
2.4)

EQ 3 (Are the development results achieved in GIZ-Thai cooperation being sustained?) is based on the fol-
lowing judgement criteria:
 Changes that have taken place are robust and likely to continue to yield benefits in the selected
sectors (JC 3.1)

 Measures have been taken by the government and other Thai stakeholders to enhance the sustain-
ability of the outcomes (JC 3.2)

 Threats to future sustainability have been overcome or there is potential for this (JC 3.3)

 Necessary actions have been identified and taken in response to any capacity gaps, information
gaps, market failures or the presence of vested interests (JC 3.4)

 The development results of the GIZ-Thai cooperation are replicable or there is potential for this (JC
3.5)

 The section also partly covers EQ 4, i.e. Thai state and non-state actors at national, provincial and
local levels were prominently included in the planning, organisation and implementation of support
(JC 4.3)

Main Findings on Effectiveness

 At the output level all interventions comprised capacity building and training addressing mainly state
actors and the private sector (SMEs) but to a much lesser extent civil society actors/NGOs (JCs 2.1,
2.2)

 In terms of outcomes, all projects produced concrete, measurable products, mainly in the form of
standards, strategies, action plans or studies. However, the balance of the implementation of standards
and technical solutions is mixed and depends on whether a standard or solution was the means to an
end or the project outcome itself

 Thai partners perceive environment, energy and education as the sectors in which GIZ has made
the strongest positive contribution to change (JCs 2.1, JC 2.2)

 In the case of the project Effective In-Company Vocational Training in the Mekong Region the develop-
ment of a standard was the pre-condition for the actual training of in-company trainers. The project is
effective regarding the improvement of labour skills (JCs 2.1, 2.2)

 The project Low-emission Public Procurement and Eco-Labelling supported the Thai Government in
developing standards and suitable criteria, which can be used to identify and label climate-friendly
products. The project can thus be regarded as having achieved effectiveness (JCs 2.1, 2.2)

 At the other end of the spectrum, Urban Nexus developed a solution to integrated waste-water man-
agement in Chiang Mai which the municipality perceives as being most suitable to resolve a pressing

52
 problem. However, city officials doubted that an implementation of the plan was feasible given the high
cost involved which reduced the potential for effectiveness (JCs 2.1, 2.2)

 Across all sectors interventions embedded technical advice within broader structures of policy con-
sulting, network-building among different state- and non-state stakeholders as well as knowledge
sharing and transfer (systemic approach). This was particularly the case – and thus strengthened ef-
fectiveness – for the two phases of the climate change project, which were implemented at the political
level. The GIZ-TICA trilateral projects expanded policy consulting and inter-ministerial coordination be-
yond Thailand’s border to include Lao ministries and state agencies. The business support projects
equally involved policy consulting and dialogue, albeit in a more diffuse way, producing less concrete
output as these projects were not mainly directed towards the level of policy making (JCs 2.1, 2.2, JC
4.3).

In the following part, outputs, outcomes and im-
pacts are assessed against the reconstructed the-
ory of change (see methodology). The purpose is
to present aggregated findings on effectiveness,
impact and sustainability based on examples from
the programme/project portfolio covered by this
evaluation. A certain limitation to the assessment
of impact and sustainability exists due to the lack
of evaluations and monitoring conducted by GIZ’s
partners. Consequently, the partner perspective
can only be presented on the basis of stakeholder
interviews and the online survey but not partner re-
ports. Furthermore, gathering information and
views on projects which ended three or more years
ago was challenging as Thai project staff had
moved on to different areas and, if they could be
located, were often not in a position to provide a
full picture of project results. Unless interventions
continued through different phases, neither GIZ nor
Thai partners have followed-up on project out-
comes to determine their long-term impact and
sustainability. Final reports are often written even
before a project is completed providing only prelim-
inary findings on effectiveness, let alone impact.
While these reports are usually very detailed and
comprehensively assess the implementation
against the respective project’s logframe, objec-
tives and indicators, their usefulness in determining
the achievements of interventions beyond the sta-
tus quo is limited.
The following part is divided into 1) Effectiveness
(outputs), 2) Outcomes, 3) Impact and 4) Sustaina-
bility.
Outputs delivered in the sectors covered by this
evaluation can be clustered into three broad cate-
gories:
a. Capacity building and intensive training for
relevant state and non-state stakeholder
groups, including but not limited to, offi-
cials of line ministries and state agencies,
businesses and civil society organisations.
All interventions comprised capacity building and
training addressing mainly state actors and the pri-
vate sector (SMEs). The project Greening Supply
Chains in the Thai Auto and Automotive Parts In-
dustries is a typical example: 44 trainers/consult-
ants were trained and provided consultation on re-
source and energy efficiency to 502 SMEs in the
automotive sector; 29 SMEs were trained on
ISO14001 & 26000 as well Green Industry Mark;
78 SMEs were qualified for the Green Industry
Mark 2-3 level. All project reports include figures
on the number of trained persons and the capacity-
building they received. The capacity building was
always closely linked with the stated project objec-
tives and indicators.
Particularly the large policy advisory and support
projects – The Thai-German Climate Protection
Programme and Support to the Development and
Implementation of the Thai Climate Change Policy
as well as Sustainable Consumption and Produc-
tion for Low Carbon Economy: Green Public Pro-
curement and Eco-Labelling – strongly focused on
the training of government officials involved in the

Effectiveness: Outputs

drafting and implementation of the advised policies
and strategies. For example, in the case of the Cli-
mate Change projects the Thai partner organisa-
tion Office of Natural Resources and Environmen-
tal Policy and Planning (ONEP) and the sub-
ordinated Office for Climate Change Coordination
(OCCC) supported by the project, regularly trained
their staff as well as officials in selected provinces
and cities in relation to project objectives, i.e. the
implementation of the climate change policy/strat-
egy.

53
At the same time, capacity building for civil society
organisations has not been a main focus of the se-
lected projects. For example, the evaluation of the
project City, Environment and Transport found that
the involvement of civil society had been rather
low.
b. Policy and technical dialogues, awareness
raising and the transfer of know-how at dif-
ferent levels including relations between
German and Thai stakeholders (and in the
case of trilateral cooperation also from
other partner countries) and between
stakeholder groups in Thailand, including
the strengthening of inter-ministerial col-
laboration.
All interventions embedded technical advice within
broader structures of policy consulting, network-
building among different state- and non-state
stakeholders as well as knowledge sharing and
transfer. This was particularly the case – and in-
deed a necessary requirement – for the two
phases of the climate change project which were
implemented at the political level. GIZ first sup-
ported ONEP in applying the “Climate Change
Strategy 2008-2012” (which ONEP drafted) in
provinces and cities to decentralise Thailand cli-
mate change policy. The second phase advised
and assisted OCCC – which had been tasked by
ONEP – with the elaboration of the Thai “National
Climate Change Master Plan 2013-2050”. How-
ever, the project could not directly contribute to
drafting of the Master Plan as this was declared a
sovereign act by the Thai Ministry for Natural Re-
sources and the Environment (MoNRE). This was
only clarified after the project had started and thus
presented a clear hurdle, which should ideally have
been discussed between GIZ and its partner during
the design of the project phase. ONEP/OCCC facil-
itated inter-ministerial cooperation on Thailand’s
climate change policy and coordinated with the se-
lected partner regions and cities Kon Kaen,
Rayong, Nan and Bangkok Metropolitan Admin-
istration (BMA) within the context of the Low Car-
bon Cities’ initiative. However, while interministe-
rial coordination exists on paper, interviewees re-
vealed that achieving effective interactions among
different ministries was still a challenge.
The Green Public Procurement and Eco-Labelling
created a purpose-build network comprising state
and non-state agencies to facilitate effective pro-
ject implementation. The Pollution Control Depart-
ment (PCD), Thailand Environment Institute, the
Federation of Thai Industries and the Thailand
54
Greenhouse Gas Management Organisation col-
laborated in establishing and implementing ap-
proaches towards eco labels and low-emissions
procurement.
The GIZ-TICA trilateral projects expanded policy
consulting and inter-ministerial coordination be-
yond Thailand’s border to include Lao ministries
and state agencies. In the case of the Nam Xong
Sub-River Basin Management project for example,
the network comprised the District Office of Natural
Resources and Environment in Kasy, Vangvieng
and Hinheup as the main implementing agency in
cooperation with the Department of Natural Re-
sources and Environment of Vientiane Province
and the Department of Water Resources, Ministry
of Natural Resources and Environment of Lao
PDR. On the Thai side, the main agency involved
was the Thai Department of Water Resources
(Thai DWR), Ministry of Natural Resources and
Environment. Interviewees stated that the involve-
ment of TICA was the main success factor in mak-
ing the cooperation with Lao state agencies work
as the Thai and Lao partners shared a common
understanding and there were no cultural and lan-
guage barriers.
The business support projects equally involved pol-
icy consulting and dialogue, albeit in a more diffuse
way, producing less concrete output as these pro-
jects were not mainly directed towards the level of
policy making. In a multi-level approach, the TG-
PEC supported state and private stakeholders in
strengthening the political dialogue and framework
conditions in the areas SME promotion, eco-effi-
ciency and renewable energy. The recommenda-
tions mainly concern to incentive mechanism e.g.
improve process and criteria of soft loan applica-
tion, standard infrastructure e.g. improve process
of standard approval, enhance capability of auditor,
increase benefit for qualified factory and regula-
tions e.g. broaden excise tax to cover pollutant
emissions from vehicles.
The Urban Nexus project was prominently based
on a peer-to-peer learning process among partici-
pants from partner cities across Southeast Asia
who met in five workshops. Referring purely to
quantitative output, the final project report notes
that “100% of the actors involved in the Nexus net-
work […] actively contributed to the exchange of
experiences at the city-, national and transnational
level”.
c. Directly supported targeted issue-specific
activities to, inter alia, provide technical
 solutions, increase economic activity, de-
velop standards, strengthen gender equal-
ity, etc.
As in the case of the other two output categories,
all projects produced concrete, measurable prod-
ucts:
The City, Energy and Transport project resulted in
Air Pollution Control Plans for Chiang Mai and Na-
khon Ratchasima as well as other cities in the re-
gion. The action plans also included management
and legal provisions. The Urban Nexus project pro-
duced a comprehensive waste-water management
plan for Chiang Mai, which according to inter-
viewed stakeholders, is potentially replicable in
other Thai cities. The second participating Thai
city, Korat, benefitted from a feasibility study, which
assessed the energy efficiency of pumps for the
drinking water supply system. The project Green
procurement and eco labelling, later renamed Low-
emission procurement and eco labelling resulted in
24 standards for green procurement services (19
for products and 5 for services). As already out-
lined, while not directly a result of the climate
change projects, the projects played a decisive role
in advising the drafting of the “National Climate
Change Master Plan 2013-2050”, as noted in inter-
views. Localised strategies/action plans of the re-
lated “Climate Change Strategy” for the reduction
of greenhouse gases (GHG) at the local level were
a direct project output. The Switch Asia project de-
Table 5: Outputs: results in line with the Theory of Change
Sector Planned Outputs
Regular Thai-German dialogue
on energy transition
Climate Elaboration of a strategy to
Change strengthen the development of
renewable energies and en-
ergy efficiency
Political dialogue between
BMUB and MoNRE
25
BMUB. Programme: Thai-German Dialogue on the Green and Low Carbon Economy. 11-12 September Bangkok.
veloped and disseminated a guidebook on Sustain-
able Consumption and Production via national and
regional platforms e.g. of the Switch Network Facil-
ity, the SCP Leadership Programme for ASEAN or
UNEP SCP winter school. TG-PEC introduced or-
ganic standards in agricultural production in the
North of Thailand.
Within the framework of the project Effective In-
Company Vocational Training in the Mekong Re-
gion participants from six ASEAN member states
(Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand
and Vietnam) agreed upon a common standard for
in-company trainers. The standard was developed
by 60 experts from these countries during four
workshops between September 2014 and Febru-
ary 2015. The group consisted of experts from gov-
ernment institutions, chambers of commerce, pri-
vate enterprises, universities and other educational
and training institutions. The standard aims at sup-
porting a better cohesion between education and
training systems and the labour market by synchro-
nizing education standards and work demands in
the ASEAN countries. It is a standard that can be
applied by all participating countries. The underly-
ing occupational profile of an in-company trainer
ranges from analysing work requirements (in order
to adjust training to changing needs) to assessing
competencies, which trainees have acquired (in or-
der to assure a good quality of training). The core
of the in-company trainer’s activity is to plan and to
conduct Technical Vocational Education and Train-
ing (TVET) competently and effectively.
Level of Achievement
The dialogue was initiated with the “Thai-German Dia-
logue on the Green and Low Carbon Economy” and
took place in Bangkok 2013.25 However, there have
not been follow-ups so far due to the political situation
in Thailand (military government)
GIZ supported the development of the “Climate
Change Strategy 2008-2012” and the “National Cli-
mate Change Master Plan 2013-2035”
The conference on “Thai-German Dialogue on the
Green and Low Carbon Economy”, (see above) was
planned to be the starting point for a regular dialogue
between the ministries. BMUB maintains contacts with
55
 Sector Planned Outputs
Support to the Office of Natu-
ral Resources and Environ-
mental Policy and Planning
(ONEP) in the coordination of
international donors
Development of policy recom-
mendations
Capacity building for staff of
organisations that support cli-
mate change projects
Awareness raising and use of
participatory approaches to
combat climate change
Cooperation with international
partners
Development and implementa-
tion of “Clean Air Plans”
Development of a Standard for
In-Company Trainers in
ASEAN countries
Development of curriculum
and training measures (Master
Trainer Courses, In-Company
Training Courses)
Organisation of dialogue plat-
forms and discussion rounds
Vocational with relevant German minis-
Education tries
and Training
Facilitation of dialogues be-
tween different state and non-
state stakeholders involved in
vocational education
High-quality training courses,
seminars and study visits pro-
vided by GIZ Training Services
SME Support Dissemination of clean produc-
tion technology tools to 500
56
Level of Achievement
its Thai counterpart but there is no regular dialogue
yet due to the political situation
ONEP has been the key partner of the climate change
project; GIZ supported ONEP with regards to the
drafting of climate change strategies and capacity
building of its staff
Policy recommendations have continuously been de-
veloped at the national and sub-national levels of de-
cision-making
Staff of ONEP and OCCC has regularly been trained
to build capacities for the implementation of the cli-
mate change strategies
GIZ support had a very strong focus on awareness
raising and continuously applied participatory ap-
proaches
There is no evidence that GIZ has engaged in system-
atic cooperation with international partners with re-
gards to Thailand’s vulnerability to climate change and
strategic approaches in response to this challenge
Clean Air Action Plans were developed for Chiang Mai
and Nakhon Ratchasima but they are not imple-
mented yet (see under outcomes)
A regional standard exists and forms the basis for na-
tional standard in Thailand
The curriculum und training materials for the course is
fully developed and is already in use
Regular institutionalised exchanges do not currently
exist due to the political situation in Thailand
The drafting and implementation of the standard and
the programme for the in-company training requires
frequent and formal interactions among several gov-
ernment agencies and non-state stakeholders which
GIZ facilitated
AIZ Bangkok offers the same range courses which are
also provided by AIZ in Bad Honnef. However, the
quality of the courses has not been the focus of this
evaluation
The technology tools were disseminated to 502 SMEs
Sector Planned Outputs
SMEs in the automotive indus-
try
Support to raised productivity
of SMEs in at least four agro-
industrial sub-sectors
Introduction of internationally
recognised standards and
tested with SMEs
Promotion of women in man-
agement roles
Initiation of cooperation agree-
ments (MoU) between Thai
and European research/ tech-
nology institutes
Joint development and imple-
mentation of small-scale trilat-
eral projects
Conducting of Capacity build-
ing measures and training
Thai-German courses for TICA officials
Trilateral Co-
operation Transfer of know-how between
Germany and Thailand
Development of institutional-
ised approaches to trilateral
North-South-South coopera-
tion
Level of Achievement
The support was provided and a significant rise in
productivity has been achieved (see under impact)
GIZ contributed to the development and introduced or-
ganic food standards in the agro-sector in Northern
Thailand; these standards are continuously applied
Gender has been a cross-cutting issue for all projects,
which however did not have an explicit focus on
women in management roles
The final reports of the project components under TG-
PEC and the final report of the project “Greening Sup-
ply Chains in the Thai Auto and Automotive Parts In-
dustries” mention such MoUs. Within the context of
the latter a MoU for cooperation was signed between
VDA (German Automotive Association) and Thai Au-
tomotive Institute (TAI) was signed
Three projects (two in Lao PDR and one in Vietnam)
were developed and fully implemented; one project (in
Lao PDR) was only partly implemented
Regular and comprehensive training for TICA officials
on project management was conducted
There is no evidence that know-how transfer has hap-
pened in a systematic way
The four interventions played an important role as pi-
lot projects but no institutionalised approaches to tri-
lateral cooperation beyond the specific cases and in
general terms have been developed
57
Effectiveness: Outcomes
Outcomes are equally clustered into three catego-
ries according to the specific GIZ contribution
a. Strengthening of national and regional pol-
icy and legislative frameworks in the sup-
ported sectors (including the alignment
and harmonisation of different policies and
laws), leading to a more efficient and ef-
fective approach by state actors to ad-
dress challenges.
According to interviews with Thai partner organisa-
tions, enabling government officials to develop and
follow better informed and ultimately more effective
approaches to climate change mitigation was
among the most important achievements of the cli-
mate change projects. Interviewees also stressed
that the projects made a strong contribution to the
mainstreaming of climate change in policy-making.
As one interviewee put it, “the project created
awareness that many issues, including energy, are
related to climate change. In the past the Thai gov-
ernment and ministries regarded energy and cli-
mate change as different and unrelated issues.
This is no longer the case”. In a similar vein, the
“Low Carbon City” masterplans in the supported pi-
lot cities had a similar effect in terms of creating
and strengthening awareness. The participatory
approach towards the drafting of the plans based
on ten or more meetings of dedicated working
groups, involving local government officials, indus-
try representatives, NGOs and a GIZ advisor, con-
tributed to the ownership of the plan. The drafting
process did not follow a one-size-fits-all approach
but addressed the specific environmental problems
regarding climate change of the supported munici-
pality. While the focus in Rayong was on industrial
GHG emissions, the plan for Nan addresses the
pressing local issue of deforestation. The planning
process and the resulting plans worked as a model
which is currently being followed in 16 other prov-
inces which are in the process of developing their
own Low Carbon plan.
Other projects, such as City, Energy and Transport
and Urban Nexus also addressed environmental
challenges, but they did not directly strengthen pol-
icy or legislative frameworks. However, CET
closely co-operated with the climate change pro-
ject, mainly through joint workshops on energy,
thus at least indi-rectly contributing to the changing
perceptions of climate change in Thailand. Some
interviewees suggested that GIZ’s climate change
support to Thailand played a role in its decision to
increase its original commitment of a reduction of
20% in GHG emissions by 2030 to 25%.
58
Other projects achieved effectiveness through the
innovative combination of different approaches.
For example, the mid-term evaluation of the first
phase of the SME support project stated, “The pro-
gram is the first German program that integrates
the eco-efficiency and economic development in
such a comprehensive and systemic way. It is
therefore an interesting test and show case for a
program that fully incorporates the idea of sustain-
able economic development following the concept
of a ‘socially and ecologically sustainable market
economy’”. Ten years on, there can be little doubt
that the approach achieved the expected results,
as support to agricultural SMEs in Northern Thai-
land has been one of the most effective projects
among those covered by the evaluation as it
achieved and in some cases exceeded the antici-
pated impact (see under impact).
However, while the projects in the environment
sectors gained effectiveness through synergies in
the implementation process and the SME was
commended for the novel blending of approaches,
the evaluation of CET noted missed opportunities
regarding outcomes/results due to a lack of syner-
gies among the three components. There were
“only few links between the [three] projects” which
hampered the programme’s potential to achieve re-
gional effectiveness. The evaluation also con-
cluded that “the regional character of the pro-
gramme” had only “limited visibility”. This led to the
recommendation to “support ASEAN, promote re-
gional networks (top-down) and make use of ‘fore-
runners’ in the region (bottom-up)”.
b. Increased qualifications and competencies
of the supported stakeholder groups in a
broad range of areas, ranging from project
planning and management skills to spe-
cific qualifications in different sectors of
the economy and more efficient and effec-
tive approaches to policy formulation and
implementation.
Virtually all interviewed stakeholders at Thai part-
ner organisations claimed that the respective pro-
jects and the capacity building measures that went
along with them, positively impacted on their and
other participants’ planning and management
skills. On the one hand, it is plausible that both tar-
geted capacity building across the entire portfolio
of GIZ support to Thailand as well as the participa-
tory approaches to project planning and implemen-
tation have indeed increased qualifications and
competencies. On the other hand, it is not possible
to empirically prove that this has really been the
case, except in those instances when training was
the main purpose of the project and participants
achieved a certified qualification. This is particu-
larly the case for the 24 in-company trainers who
have completed the course to-date.
Based on partner and beneficiary interviews, it can
be concluded that farmers who participated in the
project Strengthening of the competitiveness &
eco-efficiency of SMEs in Thailand were able to
improve their livelihoods – in some cases substan-
tially – due to the technical advice and support they
received.
The final technical report of the Switch Asia project
makes a valuable point in stressing the utility of
linking capacity-building with a more formalised
TVET approach: “[An] aspect which future projects
shall work further on is to improve the content and
levels of technical vocational education and train-
ing (TVET) systems in the country. Although the
Action [Greening Supply Chains in the Thai Auto
and Automotive Parts Industries] has achieved all
indicators, with showcases and the guidebook
helping to sustain the results in the system, a more
sustainable effort to integrate SCP principles must
in the end also reach the TVET and skill labour
trainings as well as entrepreneurship development
in all sectors – combined with economic personal
gains on the workers’ side”.
As confirmed by stakeholder interviews, the Ger-
man-Thai trilateral projects strengthened TICA’s
management capacities and general knowledge
and ability to conduct development cooperation. In
this regard, the programme was effective but the
same does not apply to all four projects with re-
gards to achieving development outcomes in the
partner countries, i.e. Laos PDR and Vietnam. The
Strengthening Good Agriculture Practice (GAP)
project was the most successful of the three pro-
jects implemented in Lao PDR. It introduced and
developed a national Good Agricultural Practice
(GAP) system in line with ASEAN standards and
enabled the Lao Department of Agriculture (DoA)
to introduce the GAP logic into the ministry and
train further staff and multipliers. The Nam Xong
watershed project produced legal standards and
regulations concerning water use as well as tech-
nical measures to improve water quality. However,
according to interviews, the water quality has not
improved. At the same time, it has not deteriorat-
ed either, which some stakeholder regarded as a
success. The Mulberry Paper Supply Chain Project
was not completed and the anticipated value chain
approach could not be implemented as explained
in the chapter on efficiency. According to the final
project report of the Vietnamese project: “The SME
manufacturing automotive parts has reduced their
production costs (by saving the input materials, la-
bour and energy) and improved their final product
quality.”
c. The implementation of national and re-
gional standards and the efficient and ef-
fective application of technical solutions in
various sectors of the economy.
The balance of the implementation of standards
and technical solutions is mixed and depends on
whether a standard or solution is the means to an
end or the project outcome itself. In the case of the
project Effective In-Company Vocational Training
in the Mekong Region the development of a stand-
ard – together with the Office of Vocational Educa-
tion Commission (OVEC) – was the precondition
for the actual training of in-company trainers (also
referred to as the programme for master trainers).
The project established a regional standard, which
formed the basis for the Thai national standard.
The government adopted the standard, which is
managed by the Thailand Professional Qualifica-
tion Institute (TPQI), founded in 2011.
In a similar vein, the project Low-emission Public
Procurement and Eco-Labelling has established
standards to achieve higher-level objectives. Sus-
tainable consumption and production are essential
to reduce the risks and impacts of climate change.
Green Public Procurement (GPP) and established
eco-labels play an important role on the way to a
low-emission economy. Thailand introduced a GPP
programme in 2008. The project has supported the
Thai Government in developing suitable criteria
which can be used to identify and label climate-
friendly products. These criteria have been applied
during the procurement processes of public author-
ities. Thirteen product groups were selected based
on priorities in the product directories and the inter-
est of the Thai partners for the development and
integration of climate relevant criteria. These in-
cluded printers, heavy goods vehicles, water foun-
tains, display refrigerators and computers. Climate-
friendly criteria were developed for all thirteen
products. However, the Green label awarded for
eco-friendly products and services is 100% volun-
tary. Interviewees also stressed that the label
should be awarded by the Department of Industry,
which has provided a budget for the label every
year, and not the Thailand Environment Institute
(TEI) as the certified body to issue the label. The
label would carry substantially more prestige and
significance.
59
Urban Nexus developed a solution to integrated
waste-water management in Chiang Mai which the
municipality perceives as being most suitable to re-
solve a pressing problem. The plan is based on a
vacuum technology, which reuses treated water for
irrigation and simultaneous fertilisation of green ar-
eas. At the same time, biogas can be produced
through fermentation of the black water. The
waste-water treatment plant is operated by the
generated energy. Furthermore, treated water can
be used to substitute for missing rain water in the
city’s moat. However, city officials doubted that an
implementation of the plan was feasible given the
high costs involved which are estimated to be EUR
6.3 million. In Korat, the recommendations of an
Urban Nexus-supported feasibility study on the en-
ergy efficiency of pumps for the portable water sys-
tem were implemented. The city used its own
Table 6: Outcomes: results in line with the Theory of Change
Sector Projected Outcomes
New Thai Climate Change Strat-
egy and implementation guide-
lines in place
Thai Climate Change Master
Plan (CCMP) and Climate
Change Strategy integrated
Environment/
into the development plans of
Climate Change
17 Thai provinces and 32 mu-
nicipalities
Inter-ministerial coordination on
CC strengthened
National, provincial and local de-
velopment-based strategies on
CC mitigation and adaption con-
nected
26
Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency. Ministry of Energy. Energy in Thailand: Facts & Figures Q1/2014,
p. 4, http://weben.dede.go.th/webmax/content/energy-thailand-facts-figures-q12014 (latest official data available); Anuchit Nguyen.
Thailand's Energy Absolute to Invest $1.4 Billion in Solar, Wind Projects. Bloomberg, 22 August 2014,; interviews. For example: 500
megawatts can provide power for up to 500,000 households.
60
funds to replace the existing pumps with more effi-
cient ones supplied by the German company KSB
and its Dutch subsidiary. The monthly energy sav-
ings are in the region of EUR 25,500 or 30% of the
previous energy bill. The city also improved the en-
ergy efficiency of its biogas plant based on a fur-
ther project supported study. Overall, Korat in-
vested EUR 692.000 for the implementation of the
two studies.
The “Low Carbon City” masterplans developed in
Ranyong and Nan as pilots under the climate
change project have provided the blueprint for sim-
ilar approaches in 16 other provinces (see above).
However, available documents and interviews did
not produce any conclusive evidence that plans
have yet been implemented anywhere.
Results
The “National Climate Change Master Plan 2013-
2050” and related implementation guidelines build
the official framework for the government approach
towards climate change. However, there is no data
available yet to show that energy efficiency has im-
proved. In the quarter of 2014 the capacity of re-
newable energy was 3,969 megawatts, accounting
for 12.2% of total power capacity in Thailand. The
capacity is expected to increase by 570 megawatts
in 2017 from about 100 megawatts in 2014. 26
To date, “low carbon city” plans have been devel-
oped to integrate CCMP into the development plans
of two municipalities. Others will follow but the pro-
cess has not yet been completed.
Within the context of the climate change projects
ONEP/OCCC facilitated inter-ministerial cooperation
on Thailand’s climate change policy and coordi-
nated with the selected partner regions and cities. It
can reasonably be assumed that inter-ministerial
cooperation had been strengthened.
The climate change projects made a strong contri-
bution to the mainstreaming of climate change in
policy making at all levels.
 Sector Projected Outcomes
Demand-oriented, effective In-
Company training system (to
supplement in-school education)
established
Vocational Edu-
cation/Training
Role of private sector in the pro-
vision of vocational education
strengthened
Regional standard for vocational
education established
Regional standard integrated
into national Thai system for vo-
cational education
The Thai quality infrastructure
(QI) is consolidated as a net-
worked, nationally coordinated
system and provides efficient
services which are bench-
marked with international re-
quirements
Private sector and state institu-
tions are strengthened in their
ability to enhance the framework
conditions in the areas eco-effi-
ciency, renewable resources, re-
newable energy and SME com-
petitiveness
SME Support
Supply and demand for state
and private BDS and finance
services for innovation and tech-
nology, particularly in the area of
eco-efficiency, are improved
27
International Energy Agency. Accelerating Energy Efficiency in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises. Paris 2015, p. 36.
https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/SME_2015.pdf
28
Asian Development Bank. Energy efficiency developments and potential energy savings in the Greater Mekong Subregion. Man-
daluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank, 2015, p. 55.
Results
The in-company training programme is in the pro-
cess of being implemented and the first trainings
have taken place. However, the extent to which the
system will be demand driven and effective de-
pends on the level of buy-in from Thai companies.
Despite verbal commitments of many businesses, it
is too early to make a judgment on effectiveness.
By definition, dual education increases the role of
the private sector in vocational education. Thus, in-
house company training programmes make a strong
contribution to this end.
The regional standard is established
A national standard which is based on the regional
standard forms the basis for dual education in Thai-
land
No evidence has emerged that a national system
which meets the anticipated criteria has been estab-
lished and is working for the benefit of SMEs.
The GIZ supported strategies and action plans pro-
vide a framework for the strengthening of different
stakeholders groups in the environmental sector. The
capacity of key state agencies to address eco-effi-
ciency and other challenges has been improved but
the evaluation did not look at the private sector.
The government supports leasing through the En-
ergy Conservation Fund. Energy service companies
can acquire loans for equipment, which they then
lease to SMEs. As a result of reduced energy costs,
the SMEs have the funds to meet their lease pay-
ments back to the service companies.27
Energy efficiency tax incentives have been estab-
lished with the Revenue Department and the Board
of Investment. These incentives include a 25% tax
credit for the purchase of electrical appliances and
other products labelled as meeting energy efficiency
standards under the Revenue Department scheme.
Energy conservation investments are supported by
favourable corporate income tax and import duty
provisions under the Board of Investment scheme.28
61
 Sector Projected Outcomes Results

Improved capacity regarding

project design and preparation, According to stakeholder interviews, this capacity
project management and project has been strengthened but there is no documented
monitoring and evaluation evidence to substantiate this claim.

TICA officials confirmed that the GIZ projects helped

Methods and instruments for the TICA to implement trilateral cooperation projects in
conduct of trilateral cooperation general, including with other donors (for example Ja-
Thai-German pan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)). How-
strengthened
Trilateral Coop- ever, there is no evidence that the GIZ-TICA projects
eration developed or strengthened methods and instruments
in a systematic way.

Project specific outcomes in tar-

get countries, e.g. value chains
The most effective part of the trilateral cooperation
enhanced; Good Agricultural
programme has been the establishment and
Practices (GAP) established;
strengthening of GAP in Lao PDR. Other projects
water resources management
improves; performance and in- have only been effective to a limited extent.
come of cooperatives and SMEs

62
Impact

As a starting point, it is useful to look at the online
survey according to which environment, energy
and education have been the sectors in which GIZ
contributed to positive change in a particularly
strong way. While it should be noted that the result
might have been affected by the respondents’ bias
towards their own sector, this result is reflective of
views which also transpired in interviews. In educa-
tion, especially vocational education, GIZ is almost
a “household name” in Thailand given the agency’s
decades-long contribution to the development of
this sector. According to interviews, throughout the
evaluation period media reports have regularly
mentioned and elaborated on the German model of
dual education and GIZ’s role in helping this ap-
proach to gain traction in Thailand. The positive as-
sociation between change in the environment sec-
tor and GIZ’s cooperation with Thailand is mainly
driven by the agency’s substantial engagement in
this field since 2009 based on the German Interna-
tional Climate Initiative and synergies created with
other interventions in the field of environment.

Main Findings on Impact

 Enabling government officials to develop and follow better informed and ultimately more
effective approaches to climate change was among the most important achievements of
the climate change projects. The projects also made a strong contribution to the main-
streaming of climate change in policy-making. However, as a policy advisory intervention,
the climate change projects have not had a measurable environmental impact yet. The
“National Climate Change Master Plan 2013-2050” and the current Climate Change Policy
might well – and are indeed likely to – result in reduced GHG emissions but it is too early
for any sound findings (JC 2.3).

 The GIZ approach to creating a vocational training system inspired by the German dual
system has the potential to achieve substantial impact on the improvement of labour skills.
However, the implementation has just started and there is not a sufficiently strong base to
prognosticate if it will be possible to firmly establish the system in Thailand, particularly
since the German approach competes with a similar Japanese system (JC 2.3).

 The projects in support of SMEs in Thailand achieved several visible and measurable im-
pacts. Most importantly, the productivity and income of supported SMEs in the agricultural
sector in Thailand increased by at least 20% as envisioned in the project design. In some
cases, the productivity and income of farmers increased by more than 100% (JC 2.3).

 The impact of the trilateral cooperation programme has to be seen from two angles. TICA
officials confirmed that the collaboration with GIZ markedly contributed to the agency’s ef-
fective transformation from a donor-coordinating agency of a recipient country to becoming
a donor and development agency itself. The trilateral projects strengthened TICA’s man-
agement capacities. However, the impact of the four projects implemented in Laos and Vi-
etnam is mixed. The Strengthening Good Agriculture Practice (GAP) Project was the most
successful of the three projects implemented in Lao PDR while the others have achieved
very limited impact, if any (JC 2.3).

 As already outlined under the relevance criterion, the implementation of GIZ interventions
was not substantially affected by external factors. Consequently, changing framework
conditions have not played a crucial role regarding the achievement of long-term changes
(JC 2.4).

63
 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Environment N = 53

Energy N = 45

Industry N = 39

Business & Economy N = 30

Agriculture N = 33

Research & Development N = 32

Education N = 31

Transport and Urban development N = 31

Sustainable economy N = 35
Government & Civil Society N = 29
Health N = 15
Banking & Financial Services N = 17
Disaster N = 19

Great extent Some extent Little extent Not at all

Figure 7: In your view, to what extent has GIZ contributed to positive change in the following sectors?

Project-specific impacts are grouped into four cate-
gories:
a. Reduced environmental pollution, de-
creased greenhouse gas emissions and
increased energy efficiency
As a policy advisory intervention, the climate
change project has not had a measurable environ-
mental impact yet. The “National Climate Change
Master Plan 2013-2050” and the current Climate
Change Policy might well – and are indeed likely to
– result in reduced GHG emissions but it is too
early for any sound findings. As for low carbon pro-
curement and green labelling, the Thai partner or-
ganisations were not in a position to provide any
data on energy savings due to project outcomes.
Detailed impact data is available for Switch Asia
project Greening Supply Chains in the Thai Auto
and Automotive Parts Industries. As part of the
.
project, a total of 590 resource efficiency measures
were implemented with SMEs in the Thai automo-
tive sector to conserve energy, reduce greenhouse
gas emissions, increase productivity and improve
working conditions. All of these measures are doc-
umented as good practices to showcase the eco-
nomic, environmental, social and productivity ben-
efits that can be achieved through the tools applied
through the project. As of November 2015 cost
savings from all verified measures amounted to ap-
proximately EUR 7.9 million (THB 318 million) an-
nually with a total once-off investment of about
EUR 2 million (THB 80 million) by the SMEs. The
average annual cost savings achieved per imple-
mented measure was about THB 537,433 per
year. The average return on investment is about 4
months. Average energy saving in percentage in
specific company processes is 27% and average
raw material and waste reducing saving in percent-
age in specific company processes is around 49%

64
Figure 8: Impact of the project Greening Supply Chains in the Thai Auto and Automotive Parts Industries
The Evaluation of the Sustainable Port Develop-
ment (SPD) project under the City, Energy and
Transport programme found that SPD strength-
ened the legal and organisational capacity for envi-
ronmental and climate protection at the regional,
national and sub-national levels.”
b. A more responsive labour market in the
sense of a reduced gap between labour
supply and demand for skilled labour
The project Effective In-Company Vocational Train-
ing in the Mekong Region has the potential to
achieve substantial impact on the improvement of
labour skills. The implementation has just started
and 24 master trainers have completed their train-
ing. This is a good start but not a sufficiently strong
A systematic coordination with other development
partners, such as particularly JICA, with regard to
vocational education has not yet taken place. Like
Germany, Japan has shown strong interest in
working with Thailand to jointly produce a work-
force in vocational fields. Japan has its own voca-
tional education system, called Kosen, which is
similar to, but not identical with the German ap-
proach to dual education. Kosen (Colleges of
Technology) was founded in 1961 in response to a
strong demand from the industrial sector to foster
engineers who sustained the high Japanese eco-
nomic growth at that time. Today, Kosen has con-
tributed not only to the industrial world but also to
the academic sector. The Thai Education Minister
said that some vocational colleges under the su-
pervision of the Thai Office of the Vocational Edu-
cation Commission would be selected to develop
base to prognosticate if a vocational training ap-
proach inspired by the German dual system will
take hold in Thailand. Thailand-based German
companies have shown a strong interest in the pro-
gramme but it is not well known among Thai busi-
nesses yet. Private sector buy-in needs to increase
to make the programme successful. According to
the FTI, despite generous tax breaks for a partici-
pation in the programme, Thai companies are gen-
erally rather reluctant to send their employees on a
10-day training course. Besides, with a small num-
ber of master trainers it will be difficult to train a
sufficient number of trainers to meet a nationwide
demand for vocational training if the programme
rapidly gains in popularity.
their curricula based on the guidelines of the
Kosen system. By doing so, a Thai-Japanese
Technical College would be established in the fu-
ture. It would be important for GIZ to engage in
discussions with both the respective Thai govern-
ment agencies and JICA to coordinate the efforts
towards TVET to avoid the development of parallel
systems and to increase the potential for impact
(see also under recommendations).
c. Increased competiveness of companies,
particularly SMEs, from Thailand and the
region
The project Strengthening of the competitiveness &
eco-efficiency of SMEs in Thailand achieved sev-
eral visible and measurable impacts. Most im-
portantly, according to the project’s final report and
65
interviews, the productivity and income of sup-
ported SMEs increased by at least 20% as envi-
sioned in the project design. The price of organic
food increased six times since the project intro-
duced organic food standards. For Longan, a 20%
increase in quality output was achieved and the
fruit can be marketed as premium quality, thus
achieving a higher price. According to interviews,
in some cases the productivity and income of farm-
ers increased by more than 100%.
In terms of impact on poverty, although TG-PEC
was not designed to address poverty directly, TG-
PEC does not only promote enterprise competitive-
ness, but also spreads and opens economic oppor-
tunity to those with lower incomes and those living
in more rural regions. The impact of TG-PEC in
this regard can be assessed through three chan-
nels of poverty reduction: employment, income and
spill-over benefits. GIZ estimates indicate that TG-
PEC’s interventions have directly resulted in an an-
nual income gain of roughly THB 124 million (EUR
3.1 million) to lower income farmers. As some in-
terventions promoted by TG-PEC resulted in em-
ployment losses as a result of more efficient labour
usage, while others resulted in employment gains,
the net effect on employment levels seems to be
rather neutral. Despite this, it can be said with rela-
tive certainty that the competitive edge of Thailand
has been strengthened in many key agricultural
sectors, within which job security has been pro-
moted. Additionally, the promotion of environmen-
tal and workplace safety standards have certainly
had a tangible impact on the health and liveli-
hoods of employees and their communities.
d. A strengthened role of Thailand as a do-
nor country in development cooperation.
The impact of the trilateral cooperation programme
has to be seen from two angles. TICA officials con-
firmed that the collaboration with GIZ markedly
contributed to the agency’s effective transformation
from a donor-coordinating agency of a recipient
country to becoming a donor and development
agency itself.
However, the impact of the four projects imple-
mented in Laos and Vietnam is mixed. According
to the final project report of the Vietnamese project
“The technical staff of COMFA now has more tech-
nical competence and can deal with their specific
problems.” However, as already noted, the report
does not mention TICA’s specific contribution and
it is thus not known if TICA’s participation made a
difference in achieving impacts.
66
The Strengthening Good Agriculture Practice
(GAP) project developed a certification system for
organic agriculture and 300 small farms have al-
ready certified as GAP farms. The project also pro-
duced a roadmap to transform the 2015-2025 strat-
egy of the Department of Agriculture to concrete
action. Inter alia, the roadmap foresees the up-
grading the Lao GAP to meet international stand-
ards. However, this impact has not yet been
achieved. According to project partners at DoA, the
role of TICA was crucial in achieving impact: “TICA
provided a resource person to DoA, a technical ex-
pert from the Thai ministry of Agriculture. He devel-
oped the approach to the roadmap and also pro-
vided the capacity building for the Lao trainers and
advisors. This was useful because of the similari-
ties between the Thai and Lao farming systems
and agricultural sectors. It was valuable for us to
learn from Thailand. Also, this input could not have
been provided by an English-speaking resource
person”.
The amount of work in preparing, implementing
and reporting allowed the Thai Department of Agri-
culture to reflect the ministry’s capacity in providing
training. For further application and extension of
project results, course curriculum and training ma-
terials in packages can be adjusted and updated to
be used in future training for other neighbouring
countries.
The Nam Xong watershed project produced legal
standards and regulations concerning water use as
well as technical measures to improve water qual-
ity. The „Nam Xong water quality protection regula-
tion“ was officially endorsed at district level with
agreement of provincial office and the Department
of Water Resources (DWR) in December 2013 and
subsequently implemented in early of 2014 through
its dissemination and awareness raising. According
to the final project report, approximately 10% of the
population living in the Nam Xong sub-river basin
were aware of the legal provisions and technical in-
struments for water use. More than 100 house-
holds made use of the technical instruments
(waste separation and recycle, bio-fertilizer, house-
hold waste treatment, simple grease trap and eco-
fishing) and other households were planning to do
so. However, the envisaged impacts did not mate-
rialise to the anticipated extent according to inter-
views.
The Mulberry Paper Supply Chain Project was not
completed and did not achieve any impact beyond
slightly improved business opportunities for the lo-
cal population to engage in cross-border trade of
Mulberry bark (Lao: Posaa) for paper production.
It seems particularly useful to engage in more for-
mal discussions with JICA, which, in some cases,
operates in the same or closely related sector.
There was only one instance of collaboration, i.e.
the GIZ-TICA trilateral project on GAP in LAO PDR
collaborated with the ASEAN-JICA project named
“Laos Pilot Program”-LPP project that supported
the introduction of ASEAN GAP in Lao PDR. This
networking with JICA-LPP project was established
to enhance the implementation impact and syner-
gise resources of the two projects effectively. To
what extent this has happened is not clear.

Table 9: Impact: results in line with the Theory of Change

Sector Anticipated Impacts Level of Achievement

WTO data shows an increase of carbon dioxide

emissions (in metric tonnes per capita) from
Greenhouse gas emis-
255.358 (2008) to 303.117 (2013, latest data avail-
sions are reduced
able), but a slight decrease by 2.11 from 2012 to
2013.29

Energy efficiency had not been systematically

measured in Thailand due to lack of agreed indica-
tors. GIZ developed an Energy Efficiency Indicator
database, which was handed over to the statistical
offices of the Energy Policy & Planning Office
(EPPO) and Department of Alternative Energy De-
velopment and Efficiency (DEDE) for further use
and maintenance.30 Interviewees stressed that the
indicators are being used but there is no current
energy efficiency data available. All Thai govern-
Energy efficiency is in- ment reports and other studies solely refer to
creased planned efficiency gains in line with existing strate-
gies or forecasts. However, an academic study
Climate Change conducted at Mahidol University shows that total
energy consumption between 2000 and 2014 in-
creased by 3.2% per year. The petroleum-based
energy source was the highest increasing con-
sumption rate of 7.4% annually. The electricity con-
sumption increased by 5.2%. The traditional re-
newable energy also increased by 1.7% – despite
the promotion of high-efficiency equipment and
materials to energy conservation labelling etc. 31

According to the Pollution Control Department

Climate-friendly public
procurement is strength-
ened
(PCD), the 1st Green Public Procurement Plan
(GPP Plan) for 2008 – 2011, which was supported
by the Thai-German Climate Protection Pro-
gramme (2009-2011) resulted in:
 Of all products purchased through public
procurement 861 Million baht (41%) of a
total of 2,090 Million baht were for “green
products”

29
World Bank. CO2 emissions (kt) database, http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.KT?locations=TH
30
Milou Beerepoot. Energy Efficiency Indicators in Thailand. GIZ Energy Efficiency Programme Thailand, power point presentation,
http://www.cepal.org/drni/biee/_include/img/Paris15/Milou%20Beerepoot.pdf.
31
Anucha Tiangketa, Bunyongvut Chullabodhia, Kanoksak Eam-O-Pasa, Sarawoot Watechagita. The Energy Saving Calculation for
a Residential Sector in Thailand with Top-Down Methodology. Energy Procedia 79 (2015), pp. 415 – 422.

67

Gap between labour
supply and demand for
skilled labour in Thailand
and the Mekong region
is reduced
Efficiency of state and
non-state agencies and
organisations is
strengthened
Vocational Education
and Training
Human capacity in so-
cial change processes is
strengthened
Environmental protec-
tion in production pro-
cesses is improved
SME Support
Competitiveness, eco-
efficiency and utilisation
of renewable energies of
Thai SMEs in the agro-
industry are improved
32
Jarinporn Tippamongkol Pollution Control Department (PCD). Green Public Procurement in Thailand. Regional Workshop on Sus-
tainable Public Procurement and Harmonization of Eco-Labelling 21th May 2014, power point presentation.
68
 Green procurement resulted in an overall
reduction of 25.685 tons of CO2 emis-
sions.32
Documented data for the period since 2011 is not
yet available, but according to interviews at PCD,
on average 60% of public procurement is now cli-
mate friendly with some government departments
achieving more than 80%. The low-emission pro-
curement and eco labelling project substantially
contributed to this result according to interviews.
There is no data available to allow for a robust as-
sessment.
The cooperation between state agencies, non-
state agencies and the private sector within the
context of the In-House vocational training pro-
gramme is institutionalised and provides a solid ba-
sis for achieving impact in terms of fostering a dual
education system in Thailand which responds to
the needs of the labour market.
There is good potential for this and given the long-
term involvement of GIZ in Thailand’s vocational
education sector there can be no doubt that human
capacity in social change processes has been
strengthened. For example, the GIZ supported
"Thai-German Technical School" in Northern Bang-
kok, which is today the renowned King Mongkut's
University of Technology North Bangkok
(KMUTNB) with three campuses and is the most
important vocational education institute. Hundreds
of KMUTNB have assumed influential positions in
government, society and the private sector and
have made sizable contributions to Thailand’s de-
velopment. However, in the narrower sense, the In-
House Vocational Training project is too young to
allow for findings on its contribution to change pro-
cesses.
The TG-PEC project introduced organic farming in
North Thailand and a value chain approach to the
fruit and vegetable sector. Organic farming and the
related production process contributes to environ-
mental protection through a more sustainable ap-
proach to agriculture and the abandonment of pes-
ticides. That way, environmental protection
achieved through organic farming is attributable to
GIZ.
The competitiveness of Thai SMEs in the agricul-
tural sector in Northern Thailand has been
strengthened (see also under outcomes). How-
ever, there is no available data on eco-efficiency
and the utilisation of renewable energies of Thai
 SMEs which are (former) beneficiaries of GIZ inter-
ventions.

The introduction and implementation of the GAP

Development goals in standard has been a priority of the Lao government
the target countries fos- and the trilateral cooperation was instrumental in
tered achieving this goal. Thus, the basis for impact in
terms of a widespread application of GAP has
been established. Other projects did not achieve
Thai-German Trilat- impact or only to a very limited extent.
eral Cooperation
The trilateral cooperation programme made a siza-
Thailand’s role as a pro- ble contribution to improving TICAs position. By
vider of development co- that, the GIZ has contributed to the strengthening
operation strengthened of South-South development cooperation as a
higher level development goal according to the re-
constructed ToC.

69
Sustainability

Main Findings on Sustainability

 Thai stakeholders perceive environment, energy and education as the sectors which offer
the greatest potential for sustainability. GIZ’s participatory approach to project planning
and implementation, elaborated approaches to knowledge transfers and capacity-building
were identified as crucial factors in achieving sustainability (JC 3.1).

 GIZ has developed standards and innovative solutions to challenges in the sectors of envi-
ronment/climate change, SME support and education. Where standards have been
adopted, implemented and are actively used, as in the case of the standard on in-company
vocational training and low carbon emission procurement, the project outcomes are sus-
tainable (JCs 3.1, 3.5).

 The development of standards and training manuals and methods is principally a contribu-
tion to sustainability as such standardised approaches are replicable. This applies, for ex-
ample to TG-PEC, In-Company Vocational Training in the Mekong Region and Clean Air
for Smaller Cities in the ASEAN Region Project/Cities, Environment and Transport in the
ASEAN Region and Sustainable Consumption and Production for Low Carbon Economy:
Green Public Procurement and Eco-Labelling (JCs 3.1, 3.5).

 The development of regional standards offers the best prospect for sustainability in view of
deepening and expanding regional cooperation and integration and a growing demand and
need for standardised approaches (JCs 3.3, 3.5).

 Whether or not GIZ’s contribution to the shaping of Thailand’s energy and climate change
policy will have a sustainable impact, depends on the extent to which advised plans and
strategies will be implemented (JC 3.4).
 The value-chain approaches developed and applied by the SME support projects – TG-
PEC and Switch Asia Greening Supply Chains in the Thai Automotive Industry – have cre-
ated a strong basis for sustainability (JC 3.5).

 The involvement of local actors is a key to sustainability. Many projects involved Thai ex-
perts and often universities which are still providing advice – or at least are in a position to
do so – after projects have come to a conclusion (JCs 3.1, 3.4).
The sustainability level of the projects implemented under the trilateral programme varies. Of
the three projects implemented in Lao PDR, the one on Good Agricultural practice offers the
best potential for sustainability, if the GAP standard is consequently implemented and certifi-
cates issued accordingly. The low level of sustainability of the trilateral projects in Lao PDR is
mainly due to the fact that TICA has not considered any funding for follow-up interventions
once the GIZ support had ended and thus disengaged with the interventions it implemented.
Hence, although the trilateral cooperation has made a contribution to the capacity building of
TICA, it has not encouraged the agency to embark on its own cooperation programme with
neighbouring countries based on the lessons learned of the trilateral programme. A further lim-
iting factor regarding sustainability of the trilateral cooperation was a lack of coordination with,
or even involvement of, the GIZ country office in Vientiane, missing an opportunity to create
synergies with the Lao country programme (JC 3.2).

70
It is perhaps not surprising that those sectors in
which Thai partners perceived GIZ support as be-
ing particular effective – environment, energy and
education – are also those that are seen as having
the greatest potential for sustainability. In open an-
swers of the survey, respondents identified GIZ’s
participatory approach to project planning and im-
plementation, elaborated approaches to knowledge
transfers and capacity-building as crucial factors in
achieving sustainability. It seems plausible that the
case of education GIZ’s long-standing support in
this field, which has already achieved sustainabil-
ity, forms the basis for stakeholders’ expectation
for future sustainability. In the environment and en-
ergy sectors, sustainability is all but assured and
will depend on the Thai government’s and its agen-
cies’ political will as well as financial capacities and
human resources to implement the GIZ-advised
strategies and action plan. Yet, interviews left no
doubt that Thai stakeholders have high hopes con-
cerning the sustainability of GIZ interventions
mainly because of GIZ’s sizable investments and
the outstanding reputation the agency enjoys in
providing technical advice and solutions in the en-
vironment sector.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Environment N = 48
Energy N = 37
Education N = 26
Industry N = 38
Sustainable economy N = 27
Business & Economy N = 25
Research & Development N = 28
Transport and Urban development N = 26
Agriculture N = 29
Government & Civil Society N = 22
Banking & Financial Services N = 15
Disaster N = 16
Health N = 15

Great extent Some extent Little extent Not at all

Figure 10:
9: Based
Basedon
onyour
yourexperience,
experience,totowhat
whatextent
extentare
arethe
theresults
resultsachieved
achievedby
byGIZ-Thai
GIZ-Thaicooperation
cooperationsustainable
sustainableininthe
thelong-term?
lng-term?

As outlined above, across the entire portfolio of
programmes and projects, which are covered by
the evaluation, GIZ has developed standards and
innovative solutions to challenges in the sectors of
environment/climate change, SME support and ed-
ucation. Where standards have been adopted and
implemented, as in the case of the standard on in-
company vocational training and low carbon emis-
sion procurement, the project outcomes are sus-
tainable. However, whether or not the GIZ’s contri-
bution to the shaping of Thailand’s energy and
climate change policy will have a sustainable im-
pact, depends on the extent to which advised plans
and strategies will be implemented. What can be
concluded, though, is that GIZ created strong
awareness among Thai government stakeholders
and other actors about the interlinkages and mu-
tual dependencies of different factors in climate
change. In this way, a contribution was made to a
new thinking of Thai stakeholders on climate
change and the environment in general.
Furthermore, the development of standards and
training manuals and methods is principally a con-
tribution to sustainability as such standardised ap-
proaches are replicable. This applies, for example
to TG-PEC, In-Company Vocational Training in the
Mekong Region and Clean Air for Smaller Cities in

71
the ASEAN Region Project/Cities, Environment
and Transport in the ASEAN Region and Sustaina-
ble Consumption and Production for Low Carbon
Economy: Green Public Procurement and Eco-La-
belling. Plans and management solutions are de-
veloped, for example, in Urban Nexus. How¬ever,
apart from the application of the in-company voca-
tional education standard in the countries which
participated in the programme and an expansion of
organic standards to agricultural products which
were not included in the original TG-PEC projects,
e.g. rice, vegetables and banana, no evidence for
the systematic replication of results of other pro-
grammes/projects has emerged. However, the cur-
rent second phase of the Low Emission Public Pro-
curement and Eco-Labelling project, which
developed several standards for Thailand, now ad-
dresses eco labelling among selected ASEAN
countries, i.e. Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines
and Thailand. Generally, the development of re-
gional standards offers the best prospect for sus-
tainability in view of deepening and expanding re-
gional cooperation and integration and a growing
demand and need for standardised approaches.
Within the context of the ASEAN Economic Com-
munity, for example, common regional standards
across a wide range of sectors have been agreed
or at least discussed but are not developed yet.
The value-chain approaches developed and ap-
plied by the SME support projects – TG-PEC and
Switch Asia Greening Supply Chains in the Thai
Automotive Industry – have created a strong basis
for sustainability. In the case of organic agriculture
in Northern Thailand local stakeholders are still fol-
lowing the same value chain approach long after
the project has ended and some ten years after the
approach was introduced.
The involvement of local actors is a key to sustain-
ability. Many projects involved Thai experts and of-
ten universities, which are still providing advice –
or at least are in a position to do so – after projects
have come to a conclusion. The project Cities, En-
vironment and Transport in the ASEAN Region
provides a good example. The project established
a network of local and regional experts and univer-
sities who are supported by international experts in
conducting quality assurance processes. The
strong emphasis on regional human capacities
strengthens regional cooperation on and owner-
ship of approaches to urban environmental protec-
tion. The sustainability of training and capacity
72
building approaches is notoriously difficult to as-
sess as it depends on the multiplier effect and staff
turnover rates. For example, interviewees at TICA
doubted the sustainability of capacity-building as
part of the trilateral programme in view of high staff
turnover. The evaluation of Sustainable Port Devel-
opment under the CET project offers a valid point
on the difficulties in achieving sustainability of train-
ing and capacity building. “Regarding the training
approach, the project has not achieved a sustaina-
ble concept how to maintain the services in the re-
gion. There are enough quality training providers in
the region who can perform as ‘knowledge and re-
sources centers on SHE matters, but the institu-
tional framework for ongoing training activities
(without the projects interventions) is not yet con-
solidated. As main challenge remains the upscal-
ing of the results and therefore the question which
institution is able and willing to continue with the
project’s interventions and services after the end of
the project. In terms of sustainability the project is
rated “rather successful”.
The degree of sustainability of the projects imple-
mented under the trilateral programme varies. Of
the three projects implemented in Lao PDR, the
one on Good Agricultural practise offers the best
potential for sustainability, if the GAP standard is
consequently implemented and certificates issued
accordingly. The Department of Agriculture has the
overly ambitious goal of increasing the number of
certified GAP farms from 300 in 2016 to 100,000 in
2020. However, the implementation of the stand-
ards, farm inspections and the technical and bu-
reaucratic procedures of issuing of certificates re-
quire a high number of qualified staff, which DoA
currently does not have. For the DoA, however, the
main bottleneck of the sustainability of the project’s
outcomes is funding, not staff. The low level of sus-
tainability of the trilateral projects in Lao PDR is
also related to the fact that there has not been any
further engagement and involvement of TICA,
which did not consider any own-funded follow-up
interventions once the GIZ support had ended.
This demonstrates that while the trilateral coopera-
tion has made an important contribution to the ca-
pacity building of TICA, it has not encouraged the
agency to embark on its own cooperation pro-
gramme with neighbouring countries based on the
lessons learned of the trilateral programme. A fur-
ther limiting factor regarding sustainability was a
lack of coordination with the GIZ country office in
Vientiane, thus losing an opportunity for synergies
with the Lao country programme.
Adaptation to the post-2008 setting
This section is mainly based on EQ 4 (What lessons learnt can the GIZ draw from the experience
for its future engagement in Thailand and in other countries?). It addresses the following judgement
criteria:
 The GIZ country office managed the transition process to the post-BMZ structural environment
pro-actively, efficiently and effectively (JC 4.2)

 The GIZ approach to Thailand has taken the strategies of other development agencies into ac-
count to avoid duplication (JC 4.4)

 The experience of the GIZ and other development agencies in Thailand allow for a benchmark-
ing of success factors in the implementation of development cooperation (JC 4.5)

 The specific experience of the GIZ-Thai cooperation can be regarded as a “best case” or model
for GIZ support in other middle-income/industrialising countries, which have graduated from
ODA or are about to do so (JC 4.6).

 JC 4.1 is covered under relevance and JC 4.3 under effectiveness.ODA or are about to do so
(JC 4.6).

 JC 4.1 is covered under relevance and JC 4.3 under effectiveness.

Main findings on Adaptation to the post-2008 setting

 The transition to the post-BMZ environment was mainly managed locally, by the coun-
try office, with the support of headquarters but not vice versa. This approach proved to be
effective and allowed the GIZ office clear strategic priorities for transition based on local
framework conditions (JC 4.4).
 GIZ’s main challenge in the early phase of the transition was to get to know other Ger-
man ministries. In the case of BMUB, GIZ was apparently able to convince the ministry
that smaller countries, such as Thailand, should be included in the German International
Climate Initiative (IKI). The substantial BMUB funding for the IKI in Thailand provided the
backbone for GIZ’s continuous operations in Thailand. There was general agreement
among interviewed stakeholders that without the BMUB funding GIZ would not have been
able to sustain its operations in Thailand. It is likely that GIZ offices in other middle-income
countries will face the necessity of finding one main donor

73
Responses to the phasing out of BMZ-funded form the new GIZ and the integration of the new
bilateral cooperation broad set of instruments in the portfolio of the
country office became an additional priority.
The analysis of the specific way that GIZ ap-
proached the transition towards the post-BMZ envi-
The merger of the different German institutions for
ronment merits some detailed analysis. As ex-
technical cooperation offered the opportunity to di-
plained, as an implementing agency it is not the
versify GIZ’s portfolio in Thailand internally. This
mandate of GIZ to think strategically about devel-
also marked the definite end to any discussions
opment policy. However, in relations with BMZ and
about the establishment of a foundation as an al-
other line ministries GIZ is actively involved in de-
ternative approach to continuing GIZ’s activities in
liberations and strategy-building on the directions,
Thailand. The idea was modelled on the Kenan-In-
perspectives and options of development coopera-
stitute in Bangkok which USAID founded as part of
tion vis-à-vis partner countries, including Thailand.
the United States’ exit strategy for its bilateral de-
Thus, GIZ contributes an important voice in the
velopment cooperation with Thailand. A founda-
shaping of German development policy. This ena-
tion, in form of an NGO, would have allowed GIZ to
bles GIZ to proactively interact with ministries with
continue activities in Thailand if the GIZ office had
the objective of project acquisition and formed one
to close. The foundation would also have created
part of the post-BMZ approach towards sustaining
an employment perspective for the local GIZ staff.
the country office in Thailand. Overall, the transi-
It was planned that the NGO would maintain close
tion was mainly managed locally, by the country of-
links, also in terms of funding, with the GIZ head-
fice, with the support of headquarters but not vice
quarter, and attract projects both from national and
versa. This is an important finding which potentially
international sources. Part of the vision was that
also applies to GIZ’s presence in other higher mid-
this organisation could establish itself as a service
dle-income countries which are in a similar position
provider for neighbouring countries. However, it
as Thailand. The successful transition from an
was soon realised that the establishment of a foun-
ODA to a post-ODA structural setting requires a lot
dation/NGO was challenging from a legal point of
of local knowledge and is thus best managed lo-
view. Furthermore, there were doubts that it would
cally, at least primarily.
be able to compete in an already tight and compet-
itive consulting market. The creation of the “new
The GIZ office in Thailand developed clear strate-
GIZ” provided the framework and long-term basis
gic priorities for the post-BMZ period as reflected
to stay engaged in Thailand with an own office.
by the annual planning document for 2009:
Development of a strategic approach for regional
According to GIZ staff involved in the early phase
BMZ-funded projects based in Bangkok
of the transition, the main challenge was to position
itself as service provider at the level of other minis-
 Structured approach to the acquisition of pro-
tries. As for the BMUB, GIZ was able to convince
jects for German public clients
the ministry that smaller countries, such as Thai-
land, should be included in the IKI. BMUB originally
 Establishment of a foundation
planned to concentrate on larger countries but later
included Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia and
 Promotion of at least two service sectors vis-à-
Vietnam in Southeast Asia in IKI. The substantial
vis Thai or international clients to develop the
BMUB funding for IKI in Thailand provided the
foundation business
backbone for GIZ’s continuous operations in Thai-
land. There was general agreement among inter-
Support to the development and implementation of
viewed stakeholders that without the BMUB fund-
regional CIM positions.
ing, GIZ would not have been able to sustain its
operations in Thailand. At the same time, environ-
In the following years, the strategic objectives were
ment is a sector in which Germany is perceived as
modified but the focus on regional projects and the
being particularly strong. According to the AidData
establishment of Bangkok as GIZ’s regional hub,
study on German aid from a partner perspective,
as well as new approaches to the contracting of
“Germany has a comparative strength in the envi-
projects with different clients (i.e. German govern-
ronmental sector. Survey participants, on average,
ment ministries, European Commission, Thai Gov-
report that reform advice and assistance from offi-
ernment, private enterprises), access to new mar-
cial German development actors is particularly
kets and the development of new products
useful in the environmental sector. Across various
continued to take centre-stage. For 2012, the utili-
measures, Germany outperforms the average DAC
sation of the GTZ, InWEnt and DED merger to
bilateral donor in this policy area.” GIZ had to get

74
used to the competitive setting of project acquisi-
tion and different operating modes at BMUB (as
compared to BMZ) and, according to the ministry,
there was a phase of “getting to know each other”
but the cooperation soon stood on solid grounds.
BMUB, like other ministries and the EU, sees the
long-time presence of the GIZ in Thailand as well
as the organisations’ well-established networks in
the country and its proven and outstanding tech-
nical expertise as factors, which make GIZ an ideal
cooperation partner. For the EU, GIZ’s long track
record in implementation, its ability to “deliver what
is promised”, its approach of also basing its project
proposals and applications for interventions in
Thailand and the region on experience from its co-
operation with other countries, cost effectiveness
and the substantial involvement of local staff are
GIZ’s comparative advantages as compared to
other development agencies.
Overall, it can be concluded that the transition was
managed efficiently and effectively and that the
GIZ office has managed to consolidate its position
in Thailand. However, GIZ has not given much
thought to the strategies of other development
agencies to avoid duplication or to actively create
synergies, which also constitutes an important les-
son learnt for GIZ in other middle-income coun-
tries. The evaluation has not come across any in-
stances of significant overlap with the interventions
of other development partners (except for the case
of JICA regarding vocational education). There is
no evidence of duplication either. However, this
could well be coincidental and not be the result of
strategic thinking.
Further reactions and aspects of the adaptation by
GIZ to the post-2008 setting will be presented
hereafter.
Positioning as a Regional Hub
Developing the GIZ office in Bangkok as a regional
hub proved to be a good strategic decision, which,
as already mentioned above, bears relevance for
GIZ’s strategic approach to other higher middle-in-
come countries where a phasing out of bilateral de-
velopment cooperation is being considered or al-
ready decided. Thailand’s beneficial geostrategic
position might not be easily found elsewhere but
lessons learnt should still be considered in other
33
http://training.thai-german-cooperation.info/; Interviews.
34
GIZ. Die Internationale Zusammenarbeit der GIZ mit
Schwellenländern. Am Beispiel von sechs Schwellenländern
cases. Due to its location and infrastructure, Bang-
kok is a natural regional hub for activities in main-
land Southeast Asia and the Mekong Region but
also Southeast Asia as a whole and even the wider
Asia-Pacific region. 80% of all GIZ events in main-
land Southeast Asia take place in Bangkok.
USAID, Australia, UNESCAP have established re-
gional hubs in Bangkok and the EU is in the pro-
cess of doing so. In recent years Bangkok has de-
veloped into a regional institutional centre “where it
is easy to communicate, maintain a regular dia-
logue and negotiate with multilateral organisations
and other stakeholders” as one interviewee put it.
The regional hub concept enables GIZ to tap into
the increasing market for regional projects within
the context of growing regional integration as fos-
tered by ASEAN for Southeast Asia as a whole or
within sub-regions such as the Mekong region. The
regional perspective also means that GIZ can con-
tinue to implement BMZ-funded projects, which fol-
low regional approaches.
The establishment of GIZ Training Services –
Bangkok as a branch of the AIZ in early 2013 has
significantly strengthened the role of GIZ Bangkok
in the region as a provider of in-house training for
GIZ and for external stakeholders, such as TICA
officials. GIZ Training Services - Bangkok offers a
broad range of training and seminar courses in a
wide array of sectoral focus areas such as agricul-
ture, energy, environment, communication, consul-
tancy, leadership development, and trade, among
others. Modules can range from one-day work-
shops to one-week seminars or one-year program-
mes, combining a whole range of methodologies
such as case studies, project-based assignments
or study trips.33 Furthermore, the Training Hub
gains importance as a pilot project for the AIZ’s in-
ternationalisation strategy.34 According to interview
information provided by the team, which works on
the Business Plan for the AIZ in Bangkok, the AIZ
contributes to sustaining the GIZ operations in
Thailand. It has the potential to generate a surplus
of approximately EUR 200,000 and to create five
jobs by 2021. The estimate is based on a total ca-
pacity of 120 training courses offered per year.
However, the legal position of the AIZ in Bangkok
is currently still under consideration. Germany and
Thailand do have a bilateral cooperation agree-
ment dating from 1970 but this covers only projects
for which a project agreement has been concluded.
Such an approach is not feasible for the Training
hub. The situation would be the same in any other
des Bereichs Asien/Pazifik und Lateinamerika/Karibik. Feb-
ruar 2015.
75
country including Indonesia or the Philippines. GIZ
has applied for a foreign business license in order
to create a legally registered branch office of GIZ
under Thai corporate laws, in order to supply a le-
gal base for the Training Hub and other projects.
A further issue, which according to the draft report
on the AIZ Business Plan needs to be addressed is
the complex reporting structure. While the Hub is a
direct subsidiary of AIZ in Germany, it reports to
the GIZ country director in Bangkok - in line with
GIZ policy that every staff member should have a
local supervisor.
Positioning in Export Promotion
Other strategies for the post-2008 setting have
successfully been followed but overall have been
less significant than the regional hub concept and
project acquisition in the environment sector. The
German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and
Energy (BMWi) wanted to see GIZ moving more in
the field of supporting the interests of German
companies and export promotion. GIZ has indeed
become a partner of BMWi’s Project Development
Programme Southeast Asia, which follows the ob-
jective of supporting German renewable energy
enterprises to tap into Southeast Asian markets. “A
challenging business climate in Southeast Asia
tends to restrict the development of markets for in-
novative products and services, which is a particu-
lar strength and unique selling point of German
providers. Other hurdles include a lack of technical
and business resources and shortfalls in the exper-
tise of local partners, as well as insufficient trans-
parency regarding the current market situation,
promotion opportunities and changes in the con-
tract law.” The Project Development Programme
Southeast Asia helps German companies in the re-
newable energy sector to access the Thai, Viet-
namese and Myanmarese markets. It supports bi-
lateral business partnerships and contributes to the
promotion of sustainable market structures as well
as the wider use of renewable energy. GIZ has
been implementing the Project Development Pro-
gramme Southeast Asia since 2011. Besides its
activities to share information and prompt contacts
between German and local companies, the pro-
gramme has also supported, for example, the initi-
ation of municipal renewable energy projects in
Thailand.35However, according to a BMWi inter-
view, many German companies do not perceive
GIZ as a stakeholder who can support their inter-
ests or facilitate access to markets and contracts.
This view was also expressed in communications
35
https://www.giz.de/en/worldwide/27280.html
76
with GIZ staff who said that the German Chambers
of Commerce and Industry in partner countries, in-
cluding Thailand, were better positioned to support
the interests of the German industry.
At the same time, GIZ Bangkok has intensified its
cooperation and collaboration with the German-
Thai Chamber of Commerce and Industry in fields
that are relevant for the private sector in general
and German companies in Thailand in particular.
GIZ has a clear advantage over the Chambers as it
has direct access to ministries. That way GIZ and
the Chamber complement each other.
Further Diversification of the Project and Client
Portfolio
Of the relevant German line ministries, the Federal
Foreign Office has had the smallest stake in GIZ’s
project portfolio since 2008. It founded two small
projects on dual education: Quatätsverbesserung
in der Beruflichen Bildung Südostasiens durch
Duale Berufsbildung (2015, EUR 250,000) and
earlier Exzellente Berufsbildung für Thailand (Ger-
man-Thai Dual Excellence Education) (2013, EUR
150,000) which were initiated by the visit of a Ger-
man member of parliament to Thailand. The pro-
jects were slightly hampered by long decision-mak-
ing processes and delays in communication and
reporting. In addition, the projects have to be as-
sessed by the Federal Office of Administration
(Bundesverwaltungsamt) which currently has a
backlog of two to three years. Generally, however,
contacts between GIZ and the Federal Foreign Of-
fice went very well as does the triangular communi-
cation among GIZ, the Federal Foreign Office and
the German Embassy in Bangkok. However, the
question needs to be asked if such a diversification
of donors/clients which includes relatively small
projects is useful and effective, considering that
such projects are not easily integrated within exist-
ing sector programmes (funded by other sources)
and pose additional bureaucratic hurdles.
As an additional pillar of sustaining GIZ’s opera-
tions in Thailand the office has embarked on at-
tracting Thai partner projects. However, it soon
turned out that while GIZ’s partners appreciated
the cooperation, they were not able or willing to
provide funding for activities after the phasing out
of bilateral development cooperation. The country
office has nevertheless followed a strategy of the
flexible acquisition of smaller projects (in the range
of EUR 100,000 or less) which allows GIZ to re-
spond to new dynamics and agendas in the coop-
eration with Thailand. This has been successful to
a limited extent and first small projects could be se-
cured. It is difficult to determine whether or not GIZ
should concentrate on small projects and several
criteria need to be taken into account to assess
this question in a differentiated manner. On the
one hand, the margin on these projects is negligi-
ble while the bureaucratic and organisational bur-
den and opportunity costs are high in relation to
the size of the interventions. On the other hand,
these projects provide employment opportunities
for local staff, allow for resources to be pooled if
small projects are thematically in the same area,
and enable GIZ to sustain working relations with
Thai stakeholders and keep “the foot in the door”
for potentially larger contracts in the future. Alt-
hough the latter does not seem to be an overly re-
alistic perspective at the moment, it might still be
successful in the mid-term in terms of “catching a
big fish”. Moreover, other reasons such as strategi-
cally relevant projects or the representation of Ger-
man cooperation abroad might also be justifiable
arguments in order to pursue smaller projects,
even though these factors are not quantifiable and
the projects not economically very profitable in the
first place.

77
2.7 Conclusions
The Role of Political and Economic Framework
Conditions
As an important and highly relevant finding, which
goes beyond the specific case of Thailand, it can
be concluded that political and economic frame-
work conditions are markedly less important for
GIZ’s work than it was assumed – mainly by GIZ it-
self – before the evaluation.
As discussed in the previous chapters, a crucial –
perhaps the most central – factor in the efficient
and effective implementation of GIZ’s implementa-
tion of programmes and projects across all se-
lected sectors was the fact that GIZ did not have to
change its approaches and modes of cooperation
in response to changing circumstances in any sub-
stantial way. The frequent changes at the political
level during the evaluation period did not signifi-
cantly affect GIZ as an implementing agency as it,
unlike other Development Partners, does not have
to – and is in fact not expected to – interact with
partner countries at a high political level with the
view of negotiating the terms and modalities of co-
operation. Consequently, GIZ does not carry any
“political ballast” in Thailand. It is thus more flexible
in providing technical support to key sectors rele-
vant to the country’s socio-economic development.
Furthermore, GIZ has engaged mainly in technical
areas of cooperation, which can be politicised
(such as climate change) but are generally consid-
ered “non-sensitive”. In instances in which GIZ had
to adapt its support due to structural changes or
staff turnover at the management level in partner
organisations, changes in government or due to
other reasons and external factors such as the
2011 floods, adjustments in project implementation
were swiftly ensured. Overall, the evaluation has
not come across any examples of substantial dis-
ruptions due to changing framework conditions.
Success Factors
From the evaluation, a comprehensive picture of
GIZ’s role in Thailand has emerged which allows
for a first general benchmarking of success fac-
tors in the implementation of development cooper-
ation.

Success factors of GIZ’s support to Thailand

 As an implementing agency, which concentrated mainly on technical, politically non-sensi-
tive areas of intervention in Thailand, GIZ has not so much depended on the political frame-
work conditions for cooperation.

 GIZ’s decades-long presence in the country and its reputation as an agency which provi-
des and mobilises top-expertise and concrete, implementable solutions makes it a trusted and
reliable partner.

 Due to its long-term engagement in Thailand, GIZ has established and maintained close rela-
tions and tight networks with a wide range of line ministries and government agencies, which
have survived government changes and allow for efficient and effective communication with key
stakeholders. This is an essential condition for project planning and implementation.
 The result-focussed approach (standards, model action plans etc.) often leads to outcomes
which are replicable and thus offering a good potential for sustainability.

 GIZ has demonstrated a flexible and participatory approach to project design and implemen-
tation. This includes an opportunity for stakeholders at the national and sub-national levels to
actively contribute to shaping the scope and direction of interventions. Ultimately, this approach
facilitates a strong alignment of the GIZ support with technical needs and any changes in the
priorities of Thai stakeholders. This aspect is further strengthened by GIZ’s strong emphasis on
local staff in project implementation.

 During the evaluation period GIZ has increasingly moved towards the implementation of re-
gional interventions in response to, and alignment with, the growing dynamics of regional inte-
gration in Southeast Asia and particularly the needs of regional actors, such as ASEAN. ODA or
are about to do so (JC 4.6).

 JC 4.1 is covered under relevance and JC 4.3 under effectiveness.ODA or are about to do so
(JC 4.6).
78
 JC 4.1 is covered under relevance and JC 4.3 under effectiveness.
Most of the above mentioned factors might also ap-
ply to GIZ’s position and role in other countries.
However, the specific experience of the GIZ-Thai
cooperation can only be regarded to some extent
as a “best case” or model for GIZ support in other
middle-income/industrialising countries. This is
mainly related to the fact that the last of the points
mentioned in the table above – the regional ap-
proach of the GIZ office in Thailand – has been
one of the most crucial factors, which helped GIZ
to put its position on solid ground after the termina-
tion of the bilateral German-Thai cooperation in
2008. The situation of Southeast Asia is unique in
this sense as, for some time, it has been the region
with the strongest and most concrete integration
drive outside Europe. While “graduating countries”
in other regions might also be part of regional co-
operation schemes, the specific and highly suc-
cessful approach by the GIZ Thailand office of tap-
ping into the opportunities of supporting regional
cooperation and integration processes is not easily
replicable elsewhere.
Cross-cutting Conclusions from Past Project
Implementation
There are a number of areas which require atten-
tion both with regards to the specific situation of
GIZ in Thailand as well as in other middle-income
countries. Most crucially, perhaps, Thai partners
have not yet been systematically involved in project
evaluation and have not shown much initiative in
applying own approaches to monitoring and evalu-
ation. This shortcoming potentially impacts on the
sustainability of interventions as project out-
comes/results are not being followed up after the
completion of the respective intentions. Further-
more, the national ownership of programmes and
projects is likely to be limited in the absence of in-
volving Thai partners in the assessment of inter-
ventions. There is also a lack of GIZ-commissioned
impact evaluations after the completion of projects.
Currently, final project reports are written by project
managers and are finalised shortly before the end
of an intervention or around the time of completion.
There is also a need to improve communication
strategies with Thai partners particularly with re-
gards to clarifying the role, mission and mandate of
GIZ as an implementing agency in contrast to a do-
nor’s. A particular challenge in this regard is to es-
tablish a modus operandi to the implementation of
policies, strategies, actions plans and studies,
which were directly advised by GIZ. In Thailand, as
probably in other middle-income countries which
are no longer ODA recipient countries or are at the
brink of experiencing this step, expectations to-
wards development agencies have often not
changed yet; i.e. many stakeholders still expect not
only expert advisory support in the process of for-
mulating polices and strategies but also grants to
implement these plans. During this transition phase
it would be important to assist partners to source
and mobilise the needed funding without GIZ, in-
stead of directly providing funds.
Trilateral Cooperation
Last but not least, GIZ in Thailand made an innova-
tive and original contribution to South-South and
North-South-South cooperation based on its coop-
eration with TICA. This can be a very useful model
for GIZ in other high middle-income countries,
which aspire to transform themselves from recipi-
ents to donors. However, there are also important
lessons learnt from the Thai case. While the trilat-
eral cooperation has achieved an impact in
strengthening the capacities of TICA, the sustaina-
bility of the approach is questionable both with re-
gards to the mid- and long-term effects on TICA’s
role as a donor and, even more, considering the
TICA-implemented projects in other countries
which in some cases were effective only to a lim-
ited extent. The budget for the trilateral cooperation
has been very small – both on the side of GIZ and
TICA – and more a token contribution towards im-
plementing a promising concept. There needs to
be much stronger financial commitment to put the
North-South-South cooperation on solid ground.
This of course also depends on the priorities of po-
tential donors.
79
2.8 Recommendations
The following recommendations are divided into
two sets. The first addresses primarily the GIZ of-
fice in Thailand. However, the recommendations
can also be considered by GIZ offices in other mid-
dle-income countries in which bilateral develop-
ment cooperation has also been phased out or
where such a decision is imminent. The second set
comprises general recommendations which go be-
yond the country level and are therefore directed at
GIZ headquarters.
Recommendations related to evidence-based
decision-making (focusing on the level of the
GIZ country office in Thailand):
 Create and implement joint approaches to
monitoring and evaluation with partners to
strengthen ownership: The evaluation has re-
vealed that Thai partner organisations do not
monitor or evaluate their projects with GIZ.
This translates to lack of ownership in the
sense of the Paris Declaration and also re-
duces the opportunity for critical reflections and
thus lessons learnt on development impacts
and sustainability. It is recommended that a
system of joint and participatory monitoring
and/or evaluation is introduced for future inter-
ventions. It would be particularly important in
the case of policy advisory projects, which
have resulted in the formulation of plans and
strategies to follow up on implementation. This
recommendation is also addressed at GIZ
Headquarters and relevant for BMZ and BMUB
as it underscores the need for joint M&E ap-
proaches in the planning and design of pro-
grammes and projects.
 The development of the country into a regional
hub and the related strong focus on regional
projects should not only continue but be ex-
panded: Due to the ongoing processes of re-
gional cooperation and integration, for example
with regard to the ASEAN Economic Commu-
nity, the demand and need for regional ap-
proaches and solutions to address commonly
perceived or cross-border problems and chal-
lenges will grow. GIZ is well positioned to
strongly contribute to regional cooperation
through regional project approaches. Further-
more, as the evaluation has confirmed, re-
gional standards or other approaches tend to
be particularly sustainable. The expansion of
80
regional activities should be based on agree-
ments with regional organisations and stake-
holders such as UNESACP, the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Asia
Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) or the
Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS). Such an
approach could also make stronger use of syn-
ergies with GIZ projects which are based at the
ASEAN Secretariat and directly support
ASEAN. Particularly the Bangkok-based UN-
ESCAP provides multiple opportunities for co-
operation in the Asia-Pacific – not at least be-
cause the organisation will play a dominant
role in the implementation and monitoring of
the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
and the SDGs. Although the further develop-
ment of the regional hub is mainly donor-
driven, GIZ can strategically position itself to
take advantage of relevant donor initiatives or
can actively provide advice through established
communication channels.
 Develop clear and context-related criteria for
the selection of partner projects: As outlined,
as one strategic approach to the post-2008
transition the country office has been active in
attracting Thai partner projects. Despite the dif-
ficulties in attracting funding from Thai sources,
the GIZ office has nevertheless followed a
strategy of the flexible acquisition of smaller
projects (in the range of EUR 100,000). This
approach has advantages and disadvantages
but the former dominate as small projects are
often a leeway to enter new markets and might
offer opportunities for larger government con-
tracts as Thailand proceeds further in its socio-
economic development. However, criteria
should be developed to guide the selection
process to make sure that small projects are
well integrated into the country office’s overall
portfolio and are feasible. These criteria should
clarify the context and conditions that render
projects viable, not only from an economic per-
spective but also regarding other relevant
points, such as presence in the country, main-
taining relationships or strategic relevance.
 Assist Thai partners in the process of actually
implementing strategies and action plans which
were developed in the context of GIZ projects:
It seems important that projects do not stop at
the completion of strategies and plans but that
 GIZ supports partners in the process of imple-
mentation, including the mobilisation of funds.
For this purpose, it is important and necessary
to consider the partners’ implementation ca-
pacity and preconditions already during the
planning process of projects working on strate-
gies and action plans. Such an approach would
help to prevent plans from just being shelved.
This is, for example, also in line with the rec-
ommendation of the 2015 evaluation of the
CASC programme which advised to “mobilize
available funds at provincial or national level
for continuity and replication”. The ongoing
Green Climate Fund (GCF) project develop-
ment, for example, already mobilises interna-
tional funding for Thailand.
 Increase exchanges with other development
agencies: During the evaluation period, little ef-
fort has been made to engage in structured di-
alogues or even cooperation with other devel-
opment agencies. There is no formal
requirement to do so in a post-ODA environ-
ment. However, given that some agencies –
most prominently JICA – often work in the
same or closely related sectors and share
many of GIZ’s respective partners - it seems
important that efforts are made to avoid dupli-
cation and, in the best-case scenario, produce
synergies to increase outputs and impact. This
is particularly the case for the field of voca-
tional education where there is serious risk of
overlap and potentially parallel system in the
implementation of German and Japanese ap-
proaches.
 Only continue the trilateral cooperation if TICA
agrees on stronger financial commitments:
GIZ‘s trilateral cooperation with Thailand
(TICA) and several other countries in the re-
gion (most importantly Lao PDR) is an innova-
tive and effective model of both South-South
cooperation and emerging new approaches to
partnerships between industrialised and mid-
dle-income nations. However, the sustainability
of the approach depends on the financial and
staff capacities (including staff numbers) of
TICA, which is not yet given to an extent that
would enable TICA to implement regional de-
velopment cooperation programmes without
the substantial assistance of GIZ or other part-
ners. If the trilateral programme continues in
some way or is reactivated, TICA should be
committed to ensure the sustainability of the in-
terventions.
Recommendations related to organisational-
learning (focusing on the level of GIZ HQ):
 Re-assess the importance of political frame-
work conditions: No development cooperation
programme can ever be implemented without
giving consideration to a country’s politics and
diplomatic/international relations. However, as
the evaluation has shown, the political
frame¬work conditions play a less crucial role
for GIZ’s work in Thailand than assumed. Cur-
rent strategic thinking at GIZ seems still promi-
nently directed towards such political condi-
tions. The lessons learnt of this evaluation
should form the basis for a reassessment of
the importance of political framework condi-
tions, which may lead to a revision of the ex-
pected role of politics, and political changes for
GIZ’s cooperation programmes.
 Decentralised strategy building process with
GIZ country offices leading transition process-
es: Transition processes from bilateral devel-
opment cooperation programmes to post-BMZ
environments are best managed locally. As the
case of Thailand has shown, it is important to
consider various and partly competing options
to sustain GIZ operations in such a situation.
The different options need to be considered
carefully and strategically and this works best if
the respective GIZ office takes the lead in this
process, while being supported by headquar-
ters.
 Focus on one main donor: Partner Funding is
unlikely to be a sustainable option. Experience
from Thailand has shown that it is unrealistic to
believe that BMZ funding can largely be re-
placed by partner funding. Unless the structural
setting in other countries substantially differs
from the situation in Thailand, it is not likely
that governments of middle-income countries
provide the funding for services they used to
receive for free or with a small national contri-
bution – regardless of how highly the former
cooperation with GIZ is valued. Efforts will
therefore need to concentrate on identifying
one (or few) main donor(s), which replace(s)
BMZ while at the same time trying to diversify
funding and contract portfolios. If it is not possi-
ble to find one main donor, an early strategic
81
 analysis of what is profitable with regard to
smaller projects is necessary.
 Headquarters and country offices together
should engage in strategic benchmarking to
identify GIZ’s strengths and unique selling
points vis-à-vis other development agencies:
This evaluation has presented some first and
preliminary criteria that put GIZ in a favourable
position to determine its relative strengths as
compared to other development agencies and
82
other actors in general. However, a full bench-
marking would require a detailed assessment
of other donors/agencies/ stakeholders’ strate-
gies and implementation practises. Such an
approach is beyond the scope of this evalua-
tion and would require a good number of addi-
tional interviews. The findings of this evaluation
can be taken as the nucleus for more detailed
studies. These bench-marking analyses need
to be countryspecific to give justice to the spe-
cific socioeconomic factors for development.
Annexes
Annex 1: Bibliography
AidData, DEval. German Aid from a Partner Perspective. Experience-based Perceptions from AidData’s
2014 Reform Efforts Survey, 2016, https://www.deval.org/files/content/Dateien/Evaluierung/Ber-
ichte/2016_DEval_AidData_Final_WEB.pdf
Anucha Tiangketa, Bunyongvut Chullabodhia, Kanoksak Eam-O-Pasa, Sarawoot Watechagita. The En-
ergy Saving Calculation for a Residential Sector in Thailand with Top-Down Methodology. Energy
Procedia 79, 2015, pp. 415–422, http://ac.els-cdn.com/S1876610215022444/1-s2.0-
S1876610215022444-main.pdf?_tid=a5ffaea2-ac06-11e6-b121-00000aab0f01&ac-
dnat=1479305703_a1c3472e8aab5d20576e81fb853397af
Anuchit Nguyen. Thailand's Energy Absolute to Invest $1.4 Billion in Solar, Wind Projects. Bloomberg, 22
August 2014, http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2014/08/thailands-energy-absolute-to-
invest-1-4-billion-in-solar-wind-projects.html
Asia News Monitor [Bangkok]. Thailand: Thailand Is Preparing New Strategic Plan for Climate Change in
the Agriculture Sector, 9 July 2016, http://thailand.prd.go.th/ewt_news.php?nid=3458&filename=in-
dex
Asia News Monitor [Bangkok]. Thailand: Developing Vocational Education to Produce Workforce of High
Quality, 14 May 2016, http://thailand.prd.go.th/ewt_news.php?nid=3195&filename=index
Asian Development Bank. Second Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises Development Program, Vietnam,
https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/linked-documents/41360-01-vie-dc.pdf
Asian Development Bank. Energy efficiency developments and potential energy savings in the Greater
Mekong Subregion. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank, 2015,
https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/161894/energy-efficiency-savings-gms.pdf
Beerepoot, Milou Energy Efficiency Indicators in Thailand. GIZ Energy Efficiency Programme Thailand,
power point presentation, http://www.cepal.org/drni/biee/_include/img/Paris15/Mi-
lou%20Beerepoot.pdf
Befani, Barbara; John Mayne. Process Tracing and Contribution. Analysis: A Combine Approach to Gen-
erative Causal Inference for Impact Evaluation, IDS Bulletin, volume 45, issue 6, November 2014,
pp. 17–36.
Bertelsmann Stiftung. BTI 2016, Thailand Country Report, https://www.bti-project.org/filead-
min/files/BTI/Downloads/Reports/2016/pdf/BTI_2016_Thailand.pdf
BMUB. Programme: Thai-German Dialogue on the Green and Low Carbon Economy. 11-12 September
2013, Bangkok.
Carle, Manon. Emerging Donors and Development Cooperation: Thailand and Malaysia. Lund University:
Centre for East and Southeast Asian Studies, 2015, http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=down-
loadFile&recordOId=7855312&fileOId=7855314
Chalise, Bishal.Can Thailand Avoid the Middle-Income Trap? The Diplomat, 8 April 2016, http://thediplo-
mat.com/2016/04/can-thailand-avoid-the-middle-income-trap/
Climate Scorecard.Thailand Emission Reduction Challenges. Climate Scorecard 2016, http://cli-
matescorecard.org/2016/08/30/thailand-emission-reduction-challenges/.
Council of the European Union. Council conclusions on Thailand. Foreign Affairs Council meeting, Lux-
embourg, 23 June 2014, http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/workarea/downloadAs-
set.aspx?id=15958
Deboonme, Achara. The Nation March 18, 2013. Initiative between German corporates and Education
Ministry aimed at tackling shortage of skilled labour, http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Dual-
vocational-training-gets-a-new-lease-of-life-30202154.html

83
Department of Agriculture. Technical Report on Strengthening. Good Agriculture Practice (GAP) in Lao
PDR, Period: 1 March – 31 August 2012, 17 December 2013.
Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency. Ministry of Energy. Energy in Thailand:
Facts & Figures Q1/2014, http://weben.dede.go.th/webmax/content/energy-thailand-facts-figures-
q12014
Dyson, Alan and Liz Todd. Dealing with complexity: theory of change evaluation and the full service ex-
tended schools initiative, International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 33:2, 119-134,
2010.
European Commission. Switch Asia. Greening Supply Chains in the Thai Auto and Automotive Parts In-
dustries. Final Technical Report, April 2016.
European Commission. Switch Asia. Sustainable Consumption and Production: Switch Asia. Policy Sup-
port Component – THAILAND (DCI-ASIE/2011/ 270-471) Final Project Report, January 2015.
EU. Guidelines on evaluation and Fitness Checks. Better Regulation, http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regula-
tion/guidelines/ug_chap6_en.htm
Fadu, Jose al. Insights from Emergent Education Systems in Selected Countries. Raleigh et al.: Lulu,
2011.
Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety. Low-emission
Public Procurement and Eco-labelling, project data, 2016.
GIZ Office Bangkok. Dokumente der Landesplanung, 2009-2016.
GIZ - TICA. Thai-German Trilateral Cooperation. Projects under Implementation, 2015.
GIZ ASEAN region: Sustainable Port Development (SPD). Project evaluation: summary report, 2015.
GIZ. Förderung eines nationalen GAP-Standards in der Demokratischen Volksrepublik Laos Report num-
ber: 1, Reporting period: May 2012 – May 2014.
GIZ. Cities, Environment and Transport (CET). Findings of the Project Evaluation Mission (PEV) Mission,
Workshop, Bangkok, 28 January 2015, power point presentation.
GIZ. Competitiveness & eco-efficiency of SME, project number: 07.2170.4, Final Report, 2012.
GIZ. DC programme: Strengthening of the competitiveness & eco-efficiency of SMEs in Thailand. Report
number: 8, Reporting period: 1.5.2008 - 31.12.2011.
GIZ. Die Internationale Zusammenarbeit der GIZ mit Schwellenländern. Am Beispiel von sechs Schwel-
lenländern des Bereichs Asien/Pazifik und Lateinamerika/Karibik, Februar 2015.
GIZ. Entwicklung und Umsetzung der Klimawandelpolitik in Thailand, 2009-2014. Schlussbericht, August
2014.
GIZ. Integrated Resource Management in Asian Cities: the Urban NEXUS (Water / Energy / Food Secu-
rity / Land Use) 4th Regional Workshop, Nov. 05 / 07.2014, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, power point
presentation.
GIZ. Lao-Thai-German Trilateral Cooperation. Strengthening Good Agriculture Practice in Lao PDR Pro-
ject. Final Report, 2014.
GIZ. Monitoring and Evaluation Unit. Learning from evaluations Processes and instruments used by GIZ
as a learning organisation and their contribution to interorganisational learning. Bonn and Eschborn,
2013.
GIZ. Portfolio of GIZ Projects in Asean Environment and Natural Resource Management, 2013; GIZ. Inte-
grated Resource Management in Asian Cities: the Urban NEXUS. Third Regional Nexus Workshop.
Da Nang, June 25-27, 2014, power point presentation.
GIZ. Schlussbericht zu einer TZ-Maßnahme. EZ-Programm: Asien NA TZ-Maßnahme: Integriertes Res-
sourcenmanagement in asiatischen Städten: der urbane Nexus. Berichtszeitraum: 01.01.2015 –
31.03.2016.
GIZ. Six Decades of Sustainable Development (output of the History Workshop).

84
GIZ. Stadt, Umwelt und Verkehr in der ASEAN-Region (Asien NA), Luftreinhaltung und Klimaschutz in
mittelgroßen Städten der ASEAN-Region, Schlussbericht.
GIZ. Stadt, Umwelt und Verkehr in der ASEAN-Region (Asien NA). TZ-Maßnahme: Luftreinhaltung und
Klimaschutz in mittelgroßen Städten der ASEAN-Region. Projektnummer: 2011.2279.5, Berichtszeit-
raum: 01/2014–12/2014.
GIZ. Stadt, Umwelt, Verkehr in der ASEAN-Region. TZ/IZR-Maßnahme: Nachhaltige Hafenentwicklung in
der ASEAN-Region. Schlussbericht, Januar 2006.
GIZ. Standard for In-Company Trainers in ASEAN Countries. Effective In-Company Vocational Training in
the Mekong Region, Politikfeldübergreifender Kooperationsfonds Einzelmaßnahme: Förderung be-
trieblicher Aus- und Weiterbildung Mekong. Nummer des Berichts: 2 Berichtszeitraum: 01.09.2014 –
31.08.2015.
GIZ. Stärkung der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Öko-Effizienz von KMU, Thailand, Berichtszeitraum:
01.07.2006–30.06.2007; Thai German Programme for Enterprise Competitiveness (PEC) Presenta-
tion of the findings of the PPR Mission, 28 April 2006.
GIZ. Strengthening of the competitiveness & eco-efficiency of SMEs in Thailand, Report number: 8 (last
reporting period 01.5.2011 – 31.12.2011), Reporting period: 01.05.2008 – 31.12.2011.
GIZ. SWITCH Asia, Greening Supply Chains in the Thai Auto and Automotive Parts Industries, Final
Technical Report (01 February 2012 – 31 October 2015), April 2016.
GIZ. TZ mit ASEAN, Berichterstattung zum EZ-Programm Stadt Umwelt und Verkehr in der ASEAN-Re-
gion; Terms of Reference for Project Evaluation and Appraisal of a Follow-on Measure for the Pro-
gramme “Cities, Environment and Transport in the ASEAN Region”.
GIZ. Verbesserung der Wasserqualität im Wassereinzugsgebiet Nam Xong. Final Report, Report number:
1, Reporting period: March 2012 – March 2014.
GIZ. Vietnamese-Thai-German Trilateral Cooperation Advanced Technical Services for SME in Selected
Industrial Sectors of Vietnam, Reporting period: August 2010 – September 2012, brochure,
http://www.thai-german-cooperation.info/admin/uploads/publica-
tion/2e18b1c7f46ac18ac02aa45f662b7c7fen.pdf
GIZ. Vocational Education and Training Evaluation results, findings and conclusions, 2013,
https://www.giz.de/de/downloads/giz2013-en-vocational-education-training.pdf
International Energy Agency. Accelerating Energy Efficiency in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises.
Paris 2015, https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/SME_2015.pdf
Jarinporn Tippamongkol Pollution Control Department (PCD). Green Public Procurement in Thailand. Re-
gional Workshop on Sustainable Public Procurement and Harmonization of Eco-Labelling 21th May
2014, power point presentation.
Julian, David A. Enhancing Quality of Practice Through Theory of Change‐Based Evaluation: Science or
Practice? American Journal of Community Psychology, 2005, Vol. 35 (3-4), pp.159-168.
Kraisoraphong, Keokam. Thailand Environmental Policies: Mitigation and Adaptation to Climate Change
and Implications for Human Security. In: Antonio Marquina (ed.). Global Warming and Climate
Change Prospects and Policies in Asia and Europe, Houndmills and New York: Palgrave MacMillan
2010, pp. 444-464.
Kisner, Corinne. Climate Change in Thailand: Impacts and Adaptation Strategies, July 2008. http://cli-
mate.org/archive/topics/international-action/thailand.htm
Marks, Danny. Climate Change and Thailand: Impact and Response: Contemporary Southeast Asia, Vol.
33, No. 2 (August 2011), pp. 229-258.
Mierke, Alexander. Bericht an das BMZ, Referat 200. Teil-Evaluierung des Programms „Stärkung der
Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Ökoeffizienz von KMU, Thailand“, 2006.

85
Moxay Thantavong Vangvieng. Nam Xong Sub-River Basin Management & Practices: from local per-
spectives and participation, Vientiane Province, Lao PDR, power point presentation, http://www.mrc-
mekong.org/assets/Publications/Events/Watershed-man-2011/Nam-Xong-Sub-river-basin-mngt-n-
practices-by-Mixay-Thantavong.pdf
Nakarin Srilert, Thailand 'stuck' in middle-income trap, The Nation, October 11, 2014.
Nirawan Pipitsombat, Acting Director, The Office of Climate Change Coordination. Thailand Climate Pol-
icy: Perspectives beyond 2012. Power point presentation, https://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/thai-
land/documents/thailande_eu_coop/environment_energy/onep_climate_policy_en.pdf
Nonarit Bisonyabut. Investment in Thailand following the global financial crisis and into the future: evi-
dence from cross-country comparisons, in: TDRI Quarterly Review, Vol. 30, No. 3, September 2015.
Priyakorn Pusawiro. Lessons learned from Germany's dual system, The Nation, 19.08.2013,
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Lessons-learned-from-Germanys-dual-system-
30212922.html
Santi Nindang, v. Teigan Allen. Ahead of Flood Season, Thailand’s Communities Demand Greater Pre-
paredness. Asia Foundation, 8 August 2012.
Sullivan, Boris. Bangkok among Asia’s Cities Most At Risk from Climate Change. Thailand Business
News, May 11, 2015, http://www.thailand-business-news.com/news/headline/50757-bangkok-
among-asias-cities-most-at-risk-from-climate-change.html
UNESCAP. Integrated Resource Management in Asian Cities: The Urban Nexus. http://www.unes-
cap.org/our-work/environment-development/urban-development/urban-nexus
United Nations. 2012. Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A future worth choosing The report of the United
Nations Secretary-General’s High-level Panel on Global Sustainability, http://www.ipu.org/splz-
e/rio+20/rpt-panel.pdf
Warr, Peter. Thailand, a nation caught in the middle-income trap, East Asia Forum, 18 December 2011,
http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2011/12/18/thailand-a-nation-caught-in-the-middle-income-trap/
Weiss, C.H. Nothing as practical as a good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive
community initiatives for children and families, 1995. In: New approaches to evaluating community
initiatives: Concepts, methods and contexts, J. Connell (ed.), A.C. Kubisch, L.B. Schorr and C.H.
Weiss, pp. 65–92. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.
World Bank. CO2 emissions (kt) database, 2016, http://data.worldbank.org/indica-
tor/EN.ATM.CO2E.KT?locations=TH

86
 Annex 2: Survey Report and Original Questionnaire

Overall purpose and structure of the questionnaire

The online survey was geared towards the collection of information on issues related to: i) the percep-
tion of GIZ in Thailand and ii) the collaboration with GIZ in Thailand. The survey was targeted towards
stakeholders (including beneficiaries, partners, consultants, contractors, employees of an organisation
that have collaborated with GIZ) having worked with or for GIZ in Thailand or knowledge of the role and
activities of the GIZ in Thailand. The survey complements the information gathered through documen-
tary reviews and interviews. It was translated to Thai and available in English and Thai.
The questionnaire featured three sections. The first section aimed at identifying the type of respondent
and his/her involvement with GIZ in Thailand. The other two sections aimed at gathering information on
the perception of and collaboration with GIZ in Thailand. The survey provides the evaluation team with
additional subjective views on main issues at stake.
The questionnaire was structured – with some exceptions – in a series of closed questions with a four
option rating scale, ranging from “Great extent” to “Not at all” (plus the “don’t know” answer). In addition,
respondents had the possibility to further develop their answers through optional text boxes for com-
ments.

Respondents
Five target groups were identified:
Public sector;
Private sector;
Academic institutions and think tanks;
Development partners; and
Other resource persons (e.g. independent consultants, CSOs, NGOs).
The survey featured the same set of questions for all categories of respondents, although – according
to the group and the question – there are differences in the depth of the replies and the views ex-
pressed. 246 resource persons with contact details were identified, mostly by GIZ. A total of 70 persons
responded to the questionnaire. The table below provides the number of respondents by category.

Table 1: Overview of respondents

Final number of re-

Target group
spondents
1. Public sector 2. 41
3. Private sector 4. 8
5. Academic institutions and
6. 8
think tanks
7. Development partners 8. 6
9. Other 10. 7
11. Total 12. 70
Source: Online Survey.

More than 80% of the respondents have been working or been in contact with GIZ between 2008 and
2015. A quarter of the respondents have been working or been in contact with GIZ in 2016, about 10%
between 2000 and 2007 and about 10% before 2000.
The full questionnaire is presented hereafter.

87
Appendix: original questionnaire

Identification of respondent
13. Using the survey:
 Click 'Next' at the end of each page to save the current page and to get to the next set of
questions.
 It is possible to use the ‘Back’ button at the end of each page to refer to earlier pages
and/or edit earlier answers if you wish. However, the data you entered on any page is only
saved by clicking ‘Next’ on that page. Do not go back before saving the current page by
clicking Next first, to avoid losing data you entered on the current page.
A 'Save and continue survey later' bar can be found at the very bottom of each page of the sur-
vey. By clicking the button, a link will be sent to your email address, which allows you to con-
tinue the questionnaire at the point where you have interrupted it.

Survey: Perception of and collaboration with GIZ in Thailand

How would you describe your working relationship with GIZ?*

Required questions are marked with a red star *
Check all answers that apply.
 I have directly worked with GIZ in the implementation of activities as a beneficiary or partici-
pant.
 I have directly worked with GIZ in the implementation of activities as a partner.
 I have worked as a consultant or contractor for GIZ.
 I am an employee of an organization which has collaborated with GIZ but I have not per-
sonally been involved in the implementation of activities.
 I have knowledge of the role and activities of the GIZ in Thailand, but I have not been per-
sonally involved in the implementation of activities.
 I have not been involved with GIZ in Thailand and have a very limited knowledge of GIZ’s work
and activities in Thailand.

To what extent are you familiar with GIZ’s work and activities?*
 Not at all  Little extent  Some extent  Great extent  Do not know

Over which of the following periods did you work or have you been in contact with GIZ?*
Please tick all that apply.
 Before 2000
 2000-2007
 2008-2015

88
  After 2015

Which type of institution are you associated with while being involved / working with GIZ?*
Tick one answer.
 Public Sector
 Private Sector
 Development partner (including bilateral and multilateral organizations)
 Civil society (including CBOs and international and locally based non-governmental organiza-
tions)
 Academic institutions and think tanks
 Other (including e.g. independent consultants and associations)

In which sector have you collaborated with GIZ?*

Tick all answers that apply.
 Agriculture
 Banking & Financial Services
 Business & Economy
 Disaster
 Education
 Energy
 Environment
 Government & Civil Society
 Health
 Industry
 Research & Development
 Sustainable economy
 Transport and Urban development
 Other: _________________________________________________________________

Section 1: GIZ-Thai Cooperation – Results and Lessons Learnt

In your view, to what extent has GIZ contributed to positive change in the following sectors?

Little ex- Some ex- Great ex- Do not

Not at all
tent tent tent know

Agriculture     
Banking & Financial Services     
Business & Economy     
Disaster     
Education     
Energy     
Environment     
Government & Civil Society     

89
 Health     
Industry     
Research & Development     
Sustainable Economy     
Transport and Urban Develop-
    
ment

Please specify reasons for the sectors you assessed above.

Based on your experience, to what extent are the results achieved by GIZ-Thai cooperation
sustainable in the long-term?

Little ex- Some ex- Great ex- Do not

Not at all
tent tent tent know

Agriculture     
Banking & Financial Services     
Business & Economy     
Disaster     
Education     
Energy     
Environment     
Government & Civil Society     
Health     
Industry     
Research & Development     
Sustainable Economy     
Transport and Urban Develop-
    
ment

Please specify reasons for the sectors you assessed above.

In your view, which of the activities of the GIZ-Thai Cooperation do you think are worth replicating
in other countries and why?

Activities Why?

1.
2.
3.
4.

What are, in your view, the main lessons learnt from the implementation of GIZ projects that
should be taken into account for the future cooperation?

Lessons learnt

1.

90
 2.
3.
4.
If you have any other remarks regarding the topic GIZ-Thai Cooperation please indicate them be-
low.

Section 2: Working with GIZ

If you had to select two words best representing GIZ’s work and image in Thailand, what would
they be?
_____________________________________AND____________________________________

What is your perception regarding the mission of GIZ?

To what extent do you agree to the following statements?

Not at Little ex- Some Great Do not

all tent extent extent know

GIZ is governed by a clear mission.     

The work of GIZ is characterised by
innovative concepts and initiatives     
to solve problems.
GIZ’s cooperation strategies are clear
    
and well communicated.
GIZ addresses any emerging capac-
ity gaps in the preparation and imple-     
mentation of projects.
GIZ is effectively working for change.     
GIZ effectively acts as a mediator be-
    
tween different stakeholders.
GIZ utilizes its resources efficiently.     
GIZ follows a results-oriented ap-
    
proach.

What is your perception regarding the collaboration with GIZ?

To what extent do you agree to the following statements?

Not at Little ex- Some Great ex- Do not

all tent extent tent know

GIZ is uncomplicated to work with.     

Relations with GIZ are based on mu-
    
tual respect.
Relations with GIZ are based on
    
openness.
GIZ staff are recognized as team
    
player.
GIZ has highly qualified staff.     

91
 GIZ always keeps its partners well
informed of the progress of project     
implementation.
GIZ coordinates its work well with
    
Thai partners.
GIZ’s collaboration with Thai partners
takes place on a set of common aims     
and goals.
What is your perception regarding GIZ’s adaptation to Thai context?
To what extent do you agree to the following statements?

Not at Little ex- Some Great Do not

all tent extent extent know

GIZ plays an important role in Thai-

    
land’s development process.
GIZ takes the Thai context in devel-
    
opment into consideration.
GIZ has strong expertise on issues
    
relevant to Thailand’s development.
GIZ has flexibility in adapting to
    
changing needs of Thai partners.
GIZ responds on the needs (ideas,
    
suggestions) of Thai partners.
GIZ involves Thai partners in the de-
velopment of cooperation strategies     
and projects.
The GIZ approach to Thailand has
taken the strategies of my institu-     
tion/organization into account.
GIZ stands out among Thailand’s de-
    
velopment partners.
Thai partners have a high level of re-
sponsibility of and engagement in     
GIZ-funded projects (ownership).
GIZ’s aid delivery modalities have
been adapted to the areas of your     
work in Thailand.

What is your perception regarding GIZ’s adaptation to changing circumstances?

To what extent do you agree to the following statements?

Not at Little ex- Some Great Do not

all tent extent extent know

GIZ has flexibly adapted its support

to changing political circumstances     
in Thailand.
GIZ has flexibly adapted its support
to changing economic circum-     
stances in Thailand.

92
In your view, has there been a change in GIZ strategies and projects since 2008?
 Yes
 No
 Do not know
Please explain and highlight any potential changes that occurred since 2008 (what happened
and when).

What are challenges in working with GIZ?

Tick all that apply.
 Changes in policy direction
 Bureaucracy / complicated work procedures
 Changes in funding priorities
 Staff turnover
 There are no challenges in working with GIZ.
 Do not know
 Other: _________________________________________________________________

Overall, to what extent are you satisfied with your relationship with GIZ?
 Not at all  Little extent  Some extent  Great extent  Do not know

If you have any other remarks regarding the topic Perception of GIZ please indicate them be-
low.

93
 Annex 3: List of active GIZ Thailand projects considered by the evaluation

Climate Change and Environment

Project: Greening Supply Chains in Thai Auto & Automotive Parts Industries
Stakeholders: Federation of Thai Industries
Location: Bangkok

SCP for Low Carbon Economy - Low Emissions Public Procurement and
Project:
Eco-Labelling (SCP4LCE)
Pollution Control Department (PCD), Thailand Greenhouse Gas Manage-
Stakeholders:
ment Organisation (TGO), Thailand Environment Institute (TEI)
Location: Bangkok

National Energy Efficiency Plan as Core Element of Action - and MRV-Based

Project:
Emission Reduction Strategies Thailand (TGP-EEDP)
Ministry of Energy, Energy Policy and Planning Office (EPPO), Joint Gradu-
Stakeholders: ate School for Energy and Environment (JGSEE), Thailand Greenhouse Gas
Management Organisation (TGO)
Location: Bangkok

Project: Risk based - National Adaptation Plan (NAP)

Stakeholders: Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy (ONEP)
Location: Bangkok

Advancing and Measuring Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP)

Project: for a Low-Carbon Economy in Middle Income and Newly Industrialised Coun-
tries (Advance SCP)
Stakeholders: Pollution Control Department (PCD)
Location: Bangkok

Vocational Education & Training

Project: Effective In-company Vocational Training in Mekong Region (BB Mekong)
Stakeholders: Office of Vocation Education Commission (OVEC)
Location: Bangkok

SME Support
Project: Promotion of Northern Agro-Industry Clusters (PNAC)
Thai-German Programme for Enterprise Competitiveness (TG-PEC), Depart-
Stakeholders:
ment of Industrial Promotion, Ministry of Industry
Location: Bangkok and Chiangmai

94
 Project: Promotion of Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) through Eco-
Efficiency Services and Business Enabling Environment for SMEs in Thai-
land
Stakeholders: Thai-German Programme for Enterprise Competitiveness (TG-PEC), Depart-
ment of Environmental Quality Promotion (DEQP), Ministry of Natural Re-
sources and Environment
Location: Bangkok

Project: Promotion of Thai Organic Fruit and Vegetable Industry

Thai-German Programme for Enterprise Competitiveness (TG-PEC), Thai
Stakeholders:
Organic Trade Association (TOTA)
Location: Chiangmai

50 Years Dairy Development in Northern Thailand; Thai-German Dairy Prod-

Project:
uct
Stakeholders: Livestock Industry Development Centre
Location: Chiangmai

Trilateral Cooperation
Project: Thai-German Trilateral Cooperation with Laos
Department of Natural Resources and Environment of Vientiane Province,
Stakeholders:
Standard Division under Lao Department of Agriculture (Loo DOA)
Location: Vientiane, Laos

Project: Thai-German Trilateral Cooperation with Laos: Paper Mulberry Supply Chain
Department of Small and Medium Enterprise Promotion and Development
Stakeholders:
(DOSMEP) in Laos, Industrial Promotion Centre Region
Location: Vientiane, Laos

95
96
Fotonachweise und Quellen

Fotonachweise/Quellen:
© GIZ / Harald Franzen, Samuel Goda, Ala Kheir, Florian Kopp

URL-Verweise:
In dieser Publikation befinden sich ggf. Verweise zu externen Internetseiten. Für die Inhalte der
aufgeführten externen Seiten ist stets der jeweilige Anbieter verantwortlich. Die GIZ hat beim erst-
maligen Verweis den fremden Inhalt daraufhin überprüft, ob durch ihn eine mögliche zivilrechtliche
oder strafrechtliche Verantwortlichkeit ausgelöst wird. Eine permanente inhaltliche Kontrolle der
Verweise auf externe Seiten ist jedoch ohne konkrete Anhaltspunkte einer Rechtsverletzung nicht
zumutbar. Wenn die GIZ feststellt oder von anderen darauf hingewiesen wird, dass ein externes
Angebot, auf das sie verwiesen hat, eine zivil- oder strafrechtliche Verantwortlichkeit auslöst, wird
sie den Verweis auf dieses Angebot unverzüglich aufheben. Die GIZ distanziert sich ausdrücklich
von derartigen Inhalten.

Kartenmaterial:
Kartografischen Darstellungen dienen nur dem informativen Zweck und beinhalten keine völker-
rechtliche Anerkennung von Grenzen und Gebieten. Die GIZ übernimmt keinerlei Gewähr für die
Aktualität, Korrektheit oder Vollständigkeit des bereitgestellten Kartenmaterials. Jegliche Haftung
für Schäden, die direkt oder indirekt aus der Benutzung entstehen, wird ausgeschlossen.

97
Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH

Sitz der Gesellschaft

Bonn und Eschborn
Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 36 + 40
53113 Bonn, Deutschland
T +49 228 44 60-0
F +49 228 44 60-17 66
Dag-Hammarskjöld-Weg 1-5
65760 Eschborn, Deutschland
T +49 61 96 79-0
F +49 61 96 79-11 15

E info@giz.de
I www.giz.de

98