Instead of being a separate phase, partner mobilisation is usually embedded in the ongoing participatory activities that we hold throughout the portfolio design phase. This is to ensure a smooth transition to the implementation phase, and to avoid treating implementation as a mere exercise of delegation and delivery. In the Almaty portfolio, we introduced an additional step of creating a ‘nested’ portfolio—the ‘Safe and Green Streets’ initiative, which strategically connected several initiatives (or “options”) within the larger portfolio to align with critical developments in the city (specifically the new General Plan of Almaty by the government, and mandates of key stakeholders). This was an effort to improve the chances of investment, in a context where portfolio-based investments were rare, and to secure the buy-in of key local stakeholders who may not be familiar with the portfolio framework. 

As such, portfolios emerged as a tool to move beyond traditional ‘master plans’ and municipal planning, which often result in extensive lists of actions that few people engage with and that become fragmented during implementation, typically being delegated to the most economic bidder. While the participatory portfolio design sessions helped counter the centralised and top-down nature of planning, transforming it into a more distributed and iterative process, an additional step is needed to make it truly actionable. Through our experience in Almaty, we recognised that to advance a portfolio of actions beyond a static list, it must be integrated into ‘pathways’ aligned with funding opportunities and potential coalitions of actors. 

Portfolio Management and Strategic Learning 

Portfolio management involves a dynamic process of strategic review and learning, combined with institutionalisation and mainstreaming, which is what we had attempted to do through developing a ‘nested’portfolio, aligned with municipal strategies. It recognises that portfolios need to be continually updated and respond to the latest information, learning through emerging partnerships that form along the way. In the Almaty portfolio process, we began with an open inquiry (not just a hypothesis that was going to be tested and evidenced), which was further defined through stakeholder interviews, challenged and validated continuously throughout the collaborative portfolio design process, and re-worked again through the formation of new partnerships. The evaluation of a portfolio does not happen at the very end—instead, it is iterated at multiple points throughout the process, which allows room for emergence and an ability to respond to the changing conditions of the system. 

Lessons Learned and Looking Ahead 

As a methodology, the portfolio approach is continuously evolving. Typically, the concrete outputs of a portfolio design process include a list of actions—also referred to as options, interventions, or experiments—that are strategically implemented by various actors. These actions are often clustered together to highlight adjacencies, connections, and potential synergies. In the Almaty portfolio, actions were organized under three strategic outcomes: 1) Improving health with a focus on families and children; 2) Building a Green Economy; and 3) Fostering Green Urban Development. These clusters align with the strategic framing of the portfolio, which addresses air pollution as both a health and economic issue. As detailed earlier, some initiatives in the portfolio were strategically grouped under the ‘nested’ portfolio of ‘Safe and Green Streets.’ This initiative envisions a network of interconnected innovations centred around schools, involving retrofitting for energy efficiency, low-emission zoning, urban green infrastructure improvements, and tactical urbanism for community engagement. 

As we continue the first stages of implementation, which includes among others a small-scale experiment centred on tactical urbanism, one critical reflection has emerged: a mere list of actions—or a portfolio of actions/initiatives—is insufficient. Greater effort is required to understand and articulate how these diverse actions can be implemented in real-world contexts. In essence, a more nuanced ‘portfolio’ approach to ‘implementation’ is necessary to ensure these strategies are effectively realised. 

As a first step, we are exploring how we can expand and complement the portfolio of actions with additional data and insights such as a list of relevant actors and assets in the ecosystem. The identification of relevant actors within the system highlights the potential for new, sometimes unexpected alliances that span institutions, spaces, and narratives. Similarly, identifying the assets available within the system—from financial resources and regulatory frameworks to democratic legitimacy—underscores the critical role of resources and constraints in shaping action. These assets do not merely facilitate action; they define the boundaries of possibility, encouraging, constraining, and aligning actions within the urban ecosystem. Ultimately, a portfolio that effectively conveys how multiple connected actions, delivered through a coalition of diverse actors who share resources and build on each other’s capabilities, can significantly amplify impact. 

Our initiative on improving air quality in Almaty has been a journey of discovery and learning. As the portfolio advances into new phases of implementation, it is progressively handed over to local actors who institutionalise and tailor the process to their context. Concurrently, we continue to explore ways to scale up the venture and apply the lessons learned to initiate or expand larger UNDP programmes both within Kazakhstan and beyond.