Evaluation of the UNEP Nature Action Subprogramme January 2014–June 2025

This evaluation of UNEP's Nature Action Subprogramme (NA-SP) aims to strengthen UNEP’s future strategic positioning, inform the 2026-2029 Medium-Term Strategy (MTS), inform adaptive and strategic planning of the Nature Action subprogramme, and assess its alignment with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KM-GBF). The evaluation was underpinned by the MTS 2022-2025 NA-SP Theory of Change (ToC), which sets out the causal pathways through which the NA-SP inputs and activities are expected to contribute to outcomes and impacts. Evidence sources included project evaluations, ongoing projects and deep-dive case studies, interviews with staff and stakeholders and a staff survey. The evaluation covered three Medium-Term Strategy (MTS) periods spanning 2014 to 2024. Across these periods, the subprogramme sought to integrate biodiversity and ecosystem considerations into global, regional, and national decision-making, while responding to the triple planetary crises of climate change, biodiversity and nature loss, and pollution and waste. The NA-SP portfolio has grown substantially over the decade with an active multi-year value of roughly USD 1.36 billion that is characterized by partnerships spanning MEAs Secretariats, UN agencies, NGOs, academia, and increasingly, although still limited, private sector entities. Approximately 64% of the portfolio at the time of this evaluation, in terms of value, comprises of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) supported projects. Findings indicate that the subprogramme is a relevant and critical vehicle for UNEP to advocate for strategic nature action initiatives. Implementation performance has been effective in making progress towards specific objectives but still has challenges with coherence. UNEP’s convening power has contributed to subprogramme efficiency. The impact of the subprogramme is evident within the context of projects and partners but is less clearly articulated at the subprogramme level. The future of the NA-SP faces significant contextual uncertainties that require a clear focus, continuing strength in partnerships and stronger versatility. The key lessons arising from the evaluation are that results are strongest where interventions are embedded in national frameworks, respond to explicit country demand, and are supported by sustained partnerships. The partnerships enable resource mobilisation, policy influence, and technical delivery. Integration across UNEP subprogrammes has improved but remains largely informal and dependent on individual initiative rather than institutionalised processes. The NA-SP has generated a substantial body of evidence, tools, and knowledge products, yet monitoring, evaluation, learning, and knowledge management are under-utilised as strategic assets. Based on the findings, the evaluation recommends to sharpen the focus of operations inline with the NA-SP strategic priorities, institutionalize targeted integration across UNEP subprogrammes, MEAs and UN agency collaboration, leverage partnerships, and strengthen vertical fund engagement, monitoring, evaluation and learning.