sharing in governance of extractive industries

Consultancy: Independent Evaluation of the Natural Resource Charter Program

Objectives and Audience

The Natural Resource Governance Institute (NRGI) seeks a consultant to carry out an independent evaluation of the Natural Resource Charter (NRC) program. The main objectives of the evaluation are:

(a)  Assess performance in relation to the original NRC work program and understand how that work plan has evolved in view of the merger with NRGI;

(b)  Derive lessons and areas for improvement for future NRGI work;

(c)  Serve as an input to a broader reflection about the potential future direction and use of the Natural Resource Charter and its related activities.


The audiences for the evaluation will be NRGI and donors who have supported the Natural Resource Charter program.



The Natural Resource Charter (NRC) is both the document (published in 2008, and a second edition in 2014) and a program of activities. Henceforth “the Charter” will refer to the document and “NRC program” will refer to the program of activities. The Charter document was first developed in 2008 by a group of experts including economists and lawyers from the University of Oxford, the Revenue Watch Institute and elsewhere, as a set of principles for the governance of oil, gas and mineral resources. It was designed to serve as a guide for governments and societies of resource-rich countries, and the international community. The Charter focuses on resource-rich developing countries that are most vulnerable to the so-called “resource curse”.


In 2009, UK DFID funded Phase 1 of the NRC program development, convening policy makers and resource governance experts to discuss and further develop the initiative. Phase 2 of the NRC implementation spanned 2011-2015 and was initially supported by DFID, with the World Bank Development Grant Facility (DGF) providing seed funding, aiming to attract support from other bilateral donors and foundations to further develop the NRC initiative. Additional support was subsequently offered by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, AusAid, the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs and USAID. In addition, Norad issued a grant to Oxford University to research extractive resource-driven private sector development.


These arrangements funded a small secretariat reaching seven staff members by 2013. The secretariat was accountable to an Oversight Board, consisting of five eminent experts in the fields of governance and natural resources, chaired by former Mexican president, Ernesto Zedillo. A Technical Advisory Group was also established to provide expertise and to support the drafting of the Charter text. While a UK registered entity was set-up, the project was administered by Revenue Watch Institute which managed financial systems and provided office space and operational support.


Phase 2 of the Natural Resource Charter program consisted of four work streams:

  • The drafting of a second edition of the Charter document and additional research into each of the topics covered by the Charter, including holding an annual conference and meeting of the Technical Advisory Group to discuss the latest developments in the resource governance field;
  • The development of country implementation of the charter, including “Charter benchmarking exercises” in Nigeria, Tanzania (funded by the Gates Foundation), Sierra Leone (funded by GIZ) and Myanmar, with various configurations and approaches, adapting to the specific country contexts;
  • Executive Course on Oil, Gas and Mineral Governance at the Blavatnik School of Government at Oxford University, aimed at resource rich country government ministers and top-level civil servants.
  • Advocacy to inform the policy of international organizations towards extractive industries and push for international norms to improve governance of the extractive resource sector.


In May 2013, the Oversight Board of the NRC and the Governing Board of Revenue Watch Institute agreed to merge their organizations, under a new name “Natural Resource Governance Institute”. Subsequently, the boards and advisory groups of the two organizations were joined, the Natural Resource Charter Secretariat staff were integrated into the combined organization, and the program activities were incorporated into NRGI’s workplan.  A 2015-2019 strategy was developed with the Natural Resource Charter as the intellectual backbone and work organized around the precepts of the Charter document.



The evaluation should cover the Natural Resource Charter program since the start of its Phase 2 implementation in 2011 up to the first half of 2016. Specifically, the evaluation should consider the content development and practical applications of the Charter:


  • As a set of products to help policy makers, and those who assist them, and to improve collective understanding and practice around the governance of resources:
    • Charter text, case studies and guides
    • Benchmarking framework and country benchmarking processes (Nigeria, Tanzania, Sierra Leone, Myanmar)
    • Annual conferences
  • Use of the Charter concepts and products by NRGI:
    • Political party dialogue (Ghana)
    • EITI report analysis
    • As the guiding framework in NRGI’s organizational strategy and its monitoring, learning and evaluation framework
  • As an organizing framework to structure training. Examples include:
    • Executive Course on Oil, Gas and Mineral Governance
    • Online and other generic trainings
  • Dissemination of the Charter at NRGI events and international fora
    • Annual NRC and NRGI conferences
    • Promotion of the Charter at international events and workshops


Key Evaluation Issues and Questions

The evaluation of the Natural Resource Charter program should be framed in terms of its overall success in achieving its objectives, as outlined in donor agreements. The following are examples of questions on which to develop the evaluation. These questions should be improved in discussion with the consultant:


  1. Fulfilling objectives
    1. To what extent did the NRC program contribute towards its objectives?
    2. Are these objectives still relevant for NRGI’s mission? How has the context changed? How effectively has the NRC program responded to those changing needs?
  1. Stakeholder perception
    1. What is the perception of the Charter document and NRC program in terms of independence, intellectual rigour and country ownership? How has this impacted the work?
    2. Which stakeholders have been the most and least receptive to the NRC program approach: government executives, government civil servants, national civil society, international civil society and international finance institutions? Which types of countries have been most and least receptive? Why?
    3. Impact on resource-rich countries
      1. What has been the lasting impact of the NRC program?
      2. Impact on NRGI
        1. How did the merger between Revenue Watch Institute and the NRC impact the NRC program?
        2. What were the benefits and costs of the integration?
        3. How did the merger with Natural Resource Charter impact NRGI’s work program?



As well as evaluating past performance, the evaluation should extract lessons to inform future NRGI practice. When answering each question, a supplementary question should also be asked: what can NRGI learn from this to improve future practice? A set of recommendations for NRGI should be included in the final report.



The evaluation should include a review of key documents including Natural Resource Charter research, donor reports and NRGI strategic documents. An initial briefing will be held with key NRGI staff who are leading the evaluation. This will be followed by a survey or a series of interviews with up to 25 stakeholders including NRGI staff and Board members, government and CSO stakeholders and donor representatives.


These will be used as the basis of an evaluation report that seeks to address the evaluation questions as agreed with the consultant.


Timeframe and Budget



This evaluation should be conducted within three months, along the following timeline:




31 March 2016

Consultant selected.

6 April 2016

Evaluation questions agreed with consultant

10 May 2016

Interviews with stakeholders, including NRGI staff, beneficiaries, service providers, the WB DGF and stakeholders completed and feedback received by the consultant.

22 May 2016

First draft of the evaluation report completed and delivered by the consultant to the NRGI development team for NRGI internal review.

31 May 2016

NRGI development team to facilitate donor partners to review evaluation report.

15 June 2016

Final report completed by the consultant and presented to NRGI staff.

30 June 2016

External version of the evaluation report disseminated among stakeholders.


Logistical support


The consultant will be managed by Alex Tilley from the NRGI development team. He will also provide logistical support with respect to documents, contacts, and setting up meetings and interviews. David Manley and Rob Pitman will provide additional input and oversight of the process.




The budget for the evaluation is expected to be US$20-25k all inclusive. The budget also includes a possible trip to the NRGI office in London and/or New York, depending on where the consultant is based. A first instalment will be paid at the initiation of the work, a second payment upon delivery of the draft report and the remainder upon submission and approval by NRGI of the final report.


Expressions of interest


Please email Alex Tilley at atilley@resourcegovernance.org with a short proposal, including a CV and a breakdown of costs and fees, by the end of Tuesday 29th March 2016.

Views: 114

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of GOXI to add comments!



           GOXI Partners



  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2018   Created by Kobina Aidoo.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service