Coordination at National Level

1. Sub-Regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points in East and Southern AfricaNairobi, Kenya: 14th to 16th May Talking Points on: Enhancing GEF Coordination, Communications and Outreachin MalawiPresented by Evans NjewaMalawi

2. Coordination at National Level • Mw has both GEF Political (Ministry of Finance) and Operational Focal Points (Environmental Affairs Department) • Have a GEF National Steering Committee with members from govt, private sector, academia & the civil society • The Steering committee meets quarterly, or on ad hoc basis as appropriate

3. What the NSC Does • -Reviews project proposals from proponents and makes recommendations for improvements; • -Recommends endorsement of project proposals by Operational Focal Point; • -Formed thematic committees based on focal areas and, on their own, or in consultation with other stakeholders, prepare project concepts for consideration by the full Steering committee; • -Gives input to the OFP when attending Constituency, Assembly and Council meetings.

4. Coordination at Regional Level • OFP is currently Chairperson of GEF SA Constituency • As chair, Mw has convened 2 meetings: in Pretoria, April 2006 and in Cape Town, August 2006. • Efforts to hold a 3rd meeting have failed due to commitments by member states

5. Impacts of GEF Intervention • Programmes in (c) above have adequately addressed critical issues of cc; biodiversity; international waters; land degradation and phase out of ODSs. • Impact= an added benefit of strengthening capacity to address sustainable environmental and natural resources programmes. • Have reviewed some national policies & legislation

6. Benefits of Country Coordination • -Interventions have been country driven and therefore bear ownership; • -Capacity building to prepare GEF project proposals; • -Sharing of regional and global experiences, leading to regional projects; • -Constituency meetings have enabled focal points from the member states to share experiences and explore areas with trans-boundary effects that require a common approach; • -Council member has been able to speak for the Constituency at Assembly and Council meetings.

7. Challenges • Mw appreciates the financial resources received from the GEF • However, the following have been some of the challenges experienced:

8. Challenges cont’d • Difficulties in accessing the financial resources • Ltd capacity to prepare GEF projects • Ltd operational equipment eg. Computers, internet facilities, etc • Many institutions do not fully participate in meetings due to other problems & priorities • Difficulties to fulfil the co-financing requirement for GEF supported projects due to budgetary constraints • Communication problems especially when calling for constituency meetings--- countries have other national priorities & programs

9. Challenges cont’d • Limited capacity of IAs in Mw (UNDP & WBk) to support us. • Some IAs eg UNEP not represented at national level= difficult to facilitate their operations in the country

10. Proposed Solutions • -Country and regional dialogue networks aimed at training focal points on preparation of GEF projects. • -Provide adequate allocations for operational equipment in the CSP funds eg. Computers, internet facilities; etc • -Institutions to have components for consideration for funding in project proposals • -Governments to have allocations for supporting GEF activities in national budgetary allocations • -Constituency meetings to be facilitated by the GEF Sec for constituency member states to attend • -Implementing Agencies to have designated Technical experts to support Operational Focal Points. • -The 3 Ps are a welcome concept for regional bodies such as UNEP to be represented at country level in order to facilitate their operations in the country. • Thank you for the Attention!!!!!