GEF and Civil Society

1. Civil society demands for key changes in GEF 5 Faizal Parish GEC, Central Focal Point GEF NGO NetworkGEF-NGO ConsultationWashington DC 9 November 2009

2. GEF and Civil Society • Civil society as key stakeholders in GEF • Problems faced at present • Expectations for the fifth replenishment • Future issues

3. Many indigenous cultures and local communities depend on natural resources

4. Environmental Degradation has major local impacts on local communities

5. Communities can protect and restore the environment and promote sustainable use

6. Challenges and barriers to civil society engagement with GEF • Insufficient and declining resources • Poor or restricted access • Inadequate consultation and No prior informed consent • Complex and inconsistent policies across agencies • Fragmented outreach and dissemination • Limited voice in governance

7. Insufficient and declining resources • In real terms GEF resources have been declining over the past 10 years • In real terms GEF4 Resources are 40% less than GEF 3 • Demands and scope of GEF work is expanding • More agencies and target groups are being involved

8. Poor or restricted access • Amount of GEF projects executed by CSOs declined up to 70% in GEF 4 compared to GEF 5 • National NGOs in recipient countries have been particularly impacted. • The level of consultation in project planning and approval has been reduced. • Project selection and design generally made by government agencies in capital guided by international agencies • No direct access options

9. Overall Impact ( RAF review 2008)

10. Inadequate consultation and No prior informed consent • In new project cycle – before Project is approved by Council ( at PIF stage) there is often inadequate consultation. • After approval there is no prescribed or standardise procedure for consultation and consent of affected communities • Many agencies have inadequate safeguard policies to protect community rights

11. Limited voice in governance • Civil society is well represented at council but not consistently represented at other levels. • The national level is key for engagement – but civil society is rarely consulted on governance. • Comments or inputs provided by civil society are often ignored or not fully respected.

12. Complex and inconsistent policies across agencies • Policies and procedures of GEF Agencies are complex and inconsistent across different agencies • Project procedures add complexity • It is hard for civil society organisations understand procedures and to request support .

13. Fragmented outreach and dissemination • Outreach and dissemination is fragmented and inconsistent • GEF is often not visible as a common factor between agencies • There are little dedicated outreach resources at country level

14. Addressing problems • Over the past siix months there has been a lot of discussion and some progress to address problems • More needs to be done

15. Increasing resources • GEF resources need to be raised significantly in real terms to address current challenges • The network supports a $9 billion allocation for the Trust fund and a $2.5 billion replenishment of SCCF/LDCF • Use of resources needs to be efficient and effective

16. Enhancing access • Incentives or set asides should be introduced at country level to encourage CSO led MSPs and FSPs • CSOs should be given priority access to MSPs • GEF Agencies should be broadened to include option of appropriate CSO to act as the GEF agency in appropriate activities • Direct access options should be piloted at country level

17. Improving consultation • The GEF public Involvement Policy from 1995 needs to be reviewed , updated and properly implemented • Resources need to be made available in project design(PPG) to ensure adequate consultation • Specific attention to Prior and informed Consent – especially in lands of Indigenous and Tribal communities

18. Effective Voice in Governance • Effective representation on National Steering committees, National dialogues and development of National Business plans • Key role in all project steering Commitees • Clearer role in Monitoring and evaluation • Mechanism to ensure voice is heard

19. Proposed allocation for civil society in GEF 5 • Expanded Small grants programme • Overall set aside for CSO projects. As part of the exclusions of the new system for the allocation of resources for GEF5 under consideration, an additional 15% of GEF5 should be allocated for CSO projects. Or • A percentage of the country resource allocation assigned for CSO projects. From the country resource allocation assigned to each country, a fixed 15 percent should be allocated for CSO projects.

20. Enhancing policy consistency • Policies and procedures of GEF Agencies to civil society should be reviewed and gaps identified and best practices promoted • Development of safeguard policies for GEF projects – eg for indigenous communities, forest management code of conduct, etc • More openness and transparency

21. Enhanced and common outreach • Collective effort to enhance outreach and civil society engagement across whole GEF family • Providing information in local language • Collective vision and mission • Multipartner approach

22. Progress • Empowerment of GEF NGO Network and transfer of CSO accreditation to Network • Representation of CS in Replenishment meetings • Proposal to develop a new strategy for CS participation in GEF 5 • Civil society participation in national steering committees and GEF plan preparation • Further exploration of option to broaden execution agencies

23. Challenges • Overall Replenishment levels • Enhancing access to MSPs and FSPs • Improving CS role in GEF governance • Strengthen GEF NGO Network capability to support country and regional action • Exploring direct access • Implementing Paris Declaration on Aid effectiveness

24. The future • Let us all work together to secure a future for all

25. Thank you