BRIEF ON LDC EXPERT GROUP

1. BRIEF ON LDC EXPERT GROUP LDC Workshop 29 to 30 November 2007 Bali, Indonesia Chanel Iroi Director Meteorology Solomon Islands Meteorological Service

2. LDCs • Least Developed Countries (LDCs) – group of 50 countries identified by UN as the poorest and weakest segment of the international community • Characterised by their acute susceptibility to external economic shocks, natural and man-made disasters, communicable diseases, limited access to education, health and other social services and to natural resources, poor infrastructure, and poor access to information and communication technologies.

3. THE UNFCCC PROCESS • Recognise the specific situation of LDCs in Article 4.9 of the Convention with regards to funding and technology transfer • COP at its seventh session adopted a package of decisions (decision 5/CP.7, 7/CP.7, 27/CP.7, 28/CP.7 and 29/CP.7) to support LDCs to adapt to climate change. This include establishment of a LDC Work Programme, which provided support for development of NAPAs • Decision 28/CP.7 sets guidelines for National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPAs) • NAPAs will allow LDCs to set priority activities to be undertaken to meet their immediate needs and respond to their urgent concerns with regards to adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change

4. The LDC Expert Group • Decision 29/CP.7 provides for the establishment of an LDC Expert Group (LEG) • Mission is to provide guidance and advice on the preparation and implementation strategies of the NAPAs • Not to be involved in the execution of identified activities and projects in NAPAs. • LEG consisted of 12 experts – 5 from Africa LDCs, 2 from Asian LDCs, 2 from SIDS-LDCs and 3 from Annex II Parties • Members served in personal capacity and shall have no pecuniary or financial interest in the issues considered by the group • Serve in the LEG for two years with possibilities of continuation or nomination of new members

5. LEG Mandate • Contained in paragraph 9 of the Annex to Decision 29/CP.7 • Specifically: • To provide technical guidance and advice on the preparation and on the implementation strategy of NAPAs, including the identification of possible sources of data and its subsequent application and interpretation, upon request by LDC parties • To serve in an advisory capacity to the LDCs, for the preparation and strategy for the implementation of NAPAs through inter alia, workshops, upon request by LDC Parties • To advise on capacity-building needs for the preparation and implementation of NAPAs and to provide recommendations, as appropriate, taking into account the Capacity Development Initiative of GEF and other relevant capacity-building initiatives • To facilitate the exchange of information and to promote regional synergies, and synergies with other multilateral environmental conventions, in the preparation and implementation strategy of NAPAs • To advise on the mainstreaming of NAPAs into regular development planning in the context of national strategies for sustainable development.

6. Mandate Cont’d • Decisions 7/CP.9 and Decisions 4/CP.11 provide for the extension of the mandate of the LEG • Dec 4/CP.11: • request LEG to develop a work programme that includes implementation of NAPAs for consideration at SB 24 (May 2006). At its 9th meeting, LEG developed its work programme for 2006-2007 • COP extend LEG mandate until 2007 under its original mandate and at its 13th seesion is seeking to review the progress, need for continuation and TOR of LEG and adopt a decision thereon.

7. LEG Work Programme – Activities undertaken • Synthesis of information from submitted NAPAs and usage of NAPA guidelines • Provision of advice to LDCs during final phase of NAPA preparation • Provide support and input to training workshops and advised LDCs to consider including of a NAPA Implementation Strategy in the final NAPAs • Periodic update information on status of NAPA preparation through questionnaires and interaction with LDC Parties • Identify problems, constraints and capacity building needs for implementation of activities and projects identified in NAPAs • Interacted with NAPA teams (Bangladesh,Uganda, Maldives, Tuvalu, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu) during LEG meetings

8. Work Programme – Cont’d • Collaboration with other actors engaged in providing technical support to LDCs and disseminate info on financial and technical support for NAPA implementation • Identify technical needs in relation to access to and management of NAPA related data and info • Cooperate with EGTT on adaptation technology and project training and CGE on integration of info in NAPA into SNC • Examine submitted NAPAs to know if efforts are made to integrate NAPA into national development and national strategies for sustainable development

9. Need for continuation of LEG • About 50% have yet to submit their NAPAs so need technical advice and continued support to NAPA teams, especially in reviewing draft NAPAs upon request • On NAPA implementation, immediate need to provide information on project development and implementation • Further work needed to disseminate information on project preparation process and provide training on this issue to LDC Parties • Exploration of additional synergies with other expert groups, in particular the efforts of the CGE to provide guidance on the integration of NAPA info into SNC • Support to francophone and lusophone NAPA teams to overcome language barriers and provide feedback on the Nairobi work programme on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change • Monitor bottlenecks in NAPA preparation

10. Cont’d • Efforts to identify and communicate information through public outreach activities • Provide more detailed info on a thematic basis on areas identified in submitted NAPAs proposed for implementation • Provide support for integration of climate change adaptation related activities in national sustainable development planning • Further guidance on development of an implementation strategy for NAPAs

11. Changes to TOR – issues on NAPA preparation • See Annex II of the Report of 12th Meeting of LEG • Specifically: • In keeping with NAPA guidelines, inclusion of info on climate change risk in the projects or activities proposed for implementation • Possible inclusion of climate indicators, where info is available, to demonstrate the impacts of climate change on economic development • Alignment and prioritization of NAPAs with other development plans (such as PRSPs and MGDs) is needed • Infrastructure projects are eligible for funding under the LDCF • Important to have scientific/technical data and info on local communities and circumstances as well as information on climate impacts on the economy for policy makers and other stakeholders • Need feedback mechanism on NAPA status; work with GEF agencies and country to monitor the bottlenecks • Need to include better variability (hot-spots) maps for policy makers to be able to understand the magnitude of climate impacts • Support from agencies to explain how the implementation of the activity would increase the resilience of infrastructure to climate change • Updated and detailed info needed from GEF and its agencies at the country level on funding modalities for NZAPA preparation • Expedited feedback/comments from agencies on project statues

12. Cont’d • Need to form sectoral WG at country level that draft sectoral chapters as part of NAPA team-building exercise • Languages support for all LDCs Parties and especially for lusophone countries

13. Changes to TOR – issues in NAPA implementation • Need stronger political will for NAPA implementation • Strengthen institutional arrangements to promote implementation • Advise NAPA team of utility of clustering related projects and activities for submission for funding • Summary of thematic issues (eg water, health, agriculture and coastal zones) contained in NAPAs • Improve the preparation of project proposals/detailing project costs at the initial stage (PIF) to expedite implementation • In the process of identifying additional technical and financial resources for implementation, countries could establish forum/existing donor coordination mechanisms involving a broad stakeholder base, to select partners for project or activity implementation • Updated and detailed information needed from GEF and its agencies at the country level on funding modalities for GEF operational procedures and LDCF modalities and on the GEF agencies comparative advantagesd

14. THANK YOU