Professor James Williams of the University of Pittsburgh in the United States and H. Authur Vespry, former head of the Library and Regional Documentation Centre of the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) in Thailand, reviewed the project entitled "Improved Processing, Management, Communication and Dissemination of Population Data and Information" (1992-1995), with some reference also to work done previously to 1990. The evaluation was funded by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which has also supplied the bulk of funding for the secretariat's work in this field.
The report these experts prepared is a wide-ranging one covering not only the past and the present but also making recommendations for future directions. Because of the importance of their findings to members of Asia-Pacific POPIN, this newsletter will provide highlights of the report in three parts, the first of which is provided below.
Part 1 of the report focuses on how well the goals, objectives and work plans as stated in the project proposal had been met by the end of September 1995. It rates the effectiveness of the project on the basis of (a) the developments and results that have been achieved in 14 national and subregional members of the Network and (b) the quantity, quality and impact on intended users of the outputs of the secretariat's team, all of which factors were compared with the project's six stated objectives.
Part 1 of the report observed systems, services, products and technologies utilized at the secretariat and identified new information needs of the developing country members, strategies and programme areas to the end of the decade.
Before making their assessment, the experts identified the types and nature of the difficulties confronted by the project. One of these involved the varying levels of Governments' interest in population information. "In those countries where the Government has accorded POPIN activities a high priority, the national focal point (population information centre) and in-country networks have been enthusiastic and successful", the experts observed. Where such activities have been accorded a low priority, the experts found that the level of success was not so high.
Another institutional difficulty the experts identified was a relatively low level of information sharing by individual network members with the secretariat and with other members, which they felt is especially important to remedy in view of the goal of members working towards network self-sufficiency. They felt that "highlighting the range of activities of ideal centres (including non-national ones) should be done through feature articles and papers published in the Asia-Pacific POPIN Bulletin".
None the less, the highly detailed assessment revealed almost 100 per cent delivery of project outputs by the secretariat.
In broad terms Part 1 of the report evaluated the technical assistance provided by the secretariat to a number of network members under UNFPA country project execution, in addition to the other national and subregional members as well as new or reorganized centres and networks.
Also assessed were workshops the secretariat organized on information needs, information-seeking and repackaging, and the matching grants programme for POPIN centres and networks.
Further, TCDC (technical cooperation among developing countries) training workshops and technical meetings, network coordination meetings, and specialized workshops and technical meetings for subregional POPINs were assessed.
Another set of outputs that was reviewed related to activities conducted on behalf of UNFPA Country Directors and the UNFPA Country Support Teams, as well as the publication of this newsletter.
A different type of work assessed related to activities to establish numerical, bibliographic and textual databases; the holding of a workshop on database development; and technical assistance and training in database development and software.
Other activities reviewed were the provision of literature searches and selective dissemination of information (SDI) services for users throughout the region as well as the production of the Asia-Pacific POPIN directory series.
As for the production of other periodicals by the secretariat, the work done in connection with the Asia-Pacific Population Journal, Population Research Leads series, Population Headliners, and various booklets, catalogues and occasional publications was assessed. A related area of work was the completion of a users' survey for each of the three regular periodicals and updating of the secretariat's stratified mailing list.
A special one-time item was the secretariat's work in organizing exhibitions and producing a daily newsletter during the 1992 Fourth Asian and Pacific Population Conference.
Highlights of the reports' findings are provided below according to the relevance of the project's goals and objectives in the light of current users' needs and the development status of the national and regional centres.
Objective 1: To have strengthened the capabilities of national population information centres and networks in the region to acquire, analyze, process and disseminate technical information and data in support of population policy formulation, planning, research and programme implementation at the national level.
The experts found that this had been accomplished through technical assistance missions undertaken as part of UNFPA country project execution in China, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Viet Nam. Technical assistance was provided under the regional project to India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Republic of Korea, POPIN Pacific, Philippines, Thailand and Viet Nam.
The report also identified the new members of the Network, Islamic Republic of Iran and Myanmar, with Maldives and Mongolia expressing strong interest in putting forward project proposals for POPIN activities in the near future.
During the period reviewed, the experts noted that a joint workshop was organized with the HELLIS (Health Literature, Library and Information System) network of the World Health Organization. Matching grants were made to several centres for the production of directories and translation of certain United Nations publications.
All these activities were judged to be relevant to efforts aimed at strengthening the centres and ultimately Asia-Pacific POPIN itself; however, the experts felt that more would have to be done by certain countries which they referred to as "lagging" members.
Objective 2: Depending on the availability of resources, to have expanded technical cooperation among developing countries (TCDC) for improved exchange of knowledge and experience between POPIN centres and networks.
The experts judged this area to have been very successful, as it was making a major contribution towards achieving the above goal: arrangements had been made for more than 200 people to receive training and instruction during the four-year review period, with many fellowships and graduate-level programmes having been arranged in the first two years of the decade as well. In this context, China received 78 trainees from 17 countries in the region and sent 42 trainees to other countries during the period 1992-1995.
The experts noted that this objective continues to be relevant since it is a means through which the Network can enhance self-sustainability.
Objective 3: To have increased cooperation and coordination among the national population information centres and networks through expansion of Asia-Pacific POPIN, and the establishment of subregional networks for the improved exchange of information, experience and knowledge.
The authors of the report identified a number of measures taken by the secretariat to achieve the above-mentioned objective ranging from the organization of consultative and specialized training workshops for the network members to assistance in creating the POPIN Gopher and providing special assistance to information centres in preparation for their Government's participation in the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development. They also commended the secretariat for its efforts to broaden membership to include some non-governmental population institutions as members of the Network.
Regarding subregional networking, the experts stated that subregional network development should continue to be promoted. "In a geographic area as large as the Asia-Pacific region . . . it is more effective administratively to develop sub-regional networks for countries which share proximity, similar cultural backgrounds and similar levels of socio-economic development", they said.
Objective 4: To have established the Asia-Pacific POPIN Databank, in coordination with national POPIN counterparts and other related institutions, to improve support to Governments in the acquisition, analysis, dissemination and utilization of population data and information.
The experts felt that, while it is essential for the secretariat to have access to up-to-date databases to carry out its information functions, CD-ROM technology should be promoted for the more advanced members, with direct on-line access being the ultimate goal.
Objective 5: To have produced and disseminated population information repackaged to meet the identified interests of various users in order to improve policy formulation and programme implementation.
Observing that the population publications produced by the project have been influential and highly commended, the experts made individual comments on each periodical. On the Asia-Pacific Population Journal, they said that there were no other good alternatives for readers and authors in the region. "It should continue to be supported as an information source, as an outlet for regional authors, and as a model for the members to use in developing their national publications".
With regard to this Bulletin and Population Headliners, the experts noted that both had been found very useful in user surveys and the demand for them is high. They commented on the possibility that network members could be sub-contracted to do portions of these publications as a way of involving them more closely in this type of work.
Objective 6: To have increased awareness of population issues and an appreciation of their importance to national development among policy makers and the general public through various information activities at the Fourth Asian and Pacific Population Conference and through recurring publications.
Since this objective largely had been fulfilled at the 1992 Conference itself, the experts noted that the other awareness-creation activities were being carried out through Objective 5.
The foregoing summary provides a broad idea of what was covered in the first part of the comprehensive evaluation report. The next issue of the Bulletin will provide the main points covered in Part 2 of the report, i.e. the detailed set of recommendations prepared by the experts; the final installment will summarize Part 3 of the report, i.e. recommendations about how the Network should develop in the future towards becoming a more fully self-sustaining entity.