GEF-4 Overview & GEF-5 Outlook for POPs in China

1. The GEFPOPs Overview for GEF-4 and Outlook for GEF-5 National workshop on nine new POPs and implementation of the Stockholm Convention in China Beijing China, 1-2 July 2010

2. Structure of this Presentation • Background to the GEF • Project approval process • Overview of programs related to POPs • POPs projects in China • Chemicals management & GEF-5

3. Background to the GEF

4. About the GEF • World’s largest funder of projects in developing countries to protect the global environment while supporting sustainable development; • Established in 1991 before Rio as a network organization; • 184 member countries; • To date: 10 GEF Agencies: UNDP, UNEP, World Bank, FAO, UNIDO, International Fund for Agriculture Development ( IFAD), African Development Bank (AfDB), Asian Development Bank (ADB) European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Inter-American Development Bank.

5. About the GEF (cont’d) • Secretariat; • Independent Evaluation Office; • Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel (STAP); • Assembly (Every 4 years) : overall policies and evaluation; • Council (Twice per year): 32 members(18 representing recipient countries, 14 representing donor countries): responsible for approving operational policies and programs; • Financial mechanism for Conventions on Biodiversity, Climate Change, Desertification, and Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs).

6. Governance Framework Strategic Guidance Operations Action STAP • GEF Agencies • UNDP • UNEP • World Bank • ADB • AFDB • EBRD • IDB • FAO • IFAD • UNIDO GEF Assembly Countries: Political FPs Projects Countries: Operational FPs, Convention FPs, other gov’t agencies, civil society GEF Council Countries: Council Members/ Constituencies GEF Secretariat Conventions Countries: Convention FPs Evaluation Office

7. Financial History of the GEF GEF Pilot Phase • 1991-1994 -- $1 Billion US Dollars Replenishments • 1995-1998 – $2.2 Billion US Dollars • 1999-2001 – $2.8 Billion US Dollars • 2002-2005 – $2.9 Billion US Dollars • 2006-2010 – $3.1 Billion US Dollars • 2010-2014 : $ 4.3 billion World Bank is the Trustee of the GEF Trust Fund

8. Major reforms for GEF-5 • STAR: System for a transparent allocation of resources • A system for allocating resources to countries in a transparent and consistent manner based on global environmental priorities and country capacity, policies and practices relevant to successful implementation of GEF projects. • GEF-4: Biodiversity and Climate Change • GEF-5 : Biodiversity, Climate Change and Land degradation • POPs and International waters: out of STAR (not enough indicators for the time being)

9. Major reforms for GEF-5 (con’t) • Broadening the GEF partnership • Activities expected to expand in different GEF focal areas and cross-cutting themes such as – enlarged scope in chemicals, in CC (efforts to adopt low carbon development strategies and sustainable forest management – the GEF could benefit from the addition of new partners as Executing Entities under the policy of Expanded Responsibilities: 4 UNA Candidates: • United Nations Education, Scientific, and Culture Organization (UNESCO) • UN Habitat • The World Food Program (WPF) • World Health Organization (WHO) • Under discussion If approved as new GEF Executing Entities, GEFSEC will assess each agency’s fiduciary standards, as has been done for the ten GEF Agencies.

10. Major reforms for GEF-5 (con’t) • Under discussion • Direct access for Bilateral Agencies and National Entities, NGOS, academic institutions, etc… • Through an accreditation evaluation process • GEF will establish an accreditation panel comprised of qualified experts from appropriate disciplines to evaluate accreditation applications from the above candidates.

11. Major reforms for GEF-5 (con’t) Streamlining the project cycle and refining the programmatic approach • Full size projects : The current two-step Council approval process for full-sized projects modified to one-step Council approval process (through abolishing the requirement to circulate final project documents prior to CEO endorsement)18 months instead of 22 months • Medium size projects • No more PIF for MSP unless PPGs are required • Approval for MSP delegated to CEO without prior circulation to Council

12. Major reforms for GEF-5 (con’t) • Programmatic approach • Proposed New Approach for Qualifying Agencies • Council approves program and the full program amount requested as part of the PFD. • GEF Agency to focus on the preparation and approval of individual projects under the program following a streamlined approach with endorsement/approval authority delegated to the CEO.

13. Major reforms for GEF-5 (con’t) • Approval of Individual Projects under the Program • Project concept for the individual projects approved by the qualifying Agency following its own individual procedures. • Projects are fully prepared, the project documents for FSP & MSP submitted to GEFSEC for a 10 working-day review period for CEO endorsement/approval. •  After CEO endorsement qualifying Agency will approve the project following its own internal procedures, and the project will begin implementation. - Approved project documents posted on the GEF website for information; - All projects must start implementation no later than 22 months after the approval of the Program Framework Document

14. Major reforms for GEF-5 (con’t) • Two new GEF initiatives (adopted by GEF council) • National Portfolio Formulation Exercises (NPFEs): Recipient countries, to undertake, on a voluntary basis, NPFEs that could serve as a basis for seeking GEF support – Grant of $ 30,000. • Direct access for Convention Reports that are undertaken as obligations of the countries to the conventions (e.g..: NIP or NIP update preparation) with grant amounts up to $ 500,000. • However countries can alternatively opt to use the existing procedures for accessing GEF resources through a GEF Agency.

15. Project Approval Process

16. GEF-4 Reforms: Simplified Project Approval Process Main Features: • Consolidation of steps in project cycle • Reduction of the project cycle from 66 months to 22 months (FSP) and 12 months (MSP) • Reduction in documentation requirements

17. Review Criteria for Project Concepts Criteria for PIF Review: • Country eligibility • Consistency with GEF strategic objectives/programs • Comparative advantage of GEF agency submitting PIF • Estimated cost of the project, including expected co-financing • Milestones for further project processing

18. Review Criteria for Complete Project Proposals Criteria for CEO Endorsement of Projects: • Project’s ability to deliver its outcomes, and generate global environmental benefits consistent with focal area strategies • Cost-effectiveness in using GEF funds (review of project budget, cost tables for project components, project management, consultants, and co-financing) • Compliance with GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy • Project preparation grant status report

19. Comparative Advantage of GEF Agencies • GEF agencies are requested to focus their involvement in GEF project activities within their respective comparative advantages • Secretariat, in agreement with country, assesses comparative advantage of GEF agency proposed to manage a project during the PIF review. • Partnerships encouraged for integrated projects with components where the expertise and experience of a GEF agency is lacking or weak. • Criteria and description of comparative advantages to be regularly reviewed by Council

20. Countries Driving GEF Programmes • Countries are advised to: • Identify national priorities for GEF funding • Develop comprehensive and coherent GEF strategy in consultation with key stakeholders • Integrate GEF priorities within broader national environment and sustainable development frameworks (NPFEs)

21. Overview of POPs Programs

22. POPs: Programming • 2001-2006 (GEF-3) $218m (co-financing $153m) • GEF-4 allocation $267m • At the end of GEF-4, cumulative allocation since adoption of the SC of $450m; leveraging $650m co-financing

23. POPs Key Issues • Issues identified under the NIPs • Obsolete pesticides; • PCB management • Dioxins/Furans • Management of healthcare wastes • Development of alternatives to DDT for vector control. • Limited ability to deal with POPs in developing countries due to lack of basic chemicals management capacities • 135 countries prepared a National Implementation Plan (NIP), assessing and prioritizing POPs issues – now ready for NIP implementation • GEF-4: shift towards NIP implementation

24. POPs projects in China • In China, GEF’s intervention in the POPs focal area is characterized by a large number of activities covering all POPs issues identified under the Stockholm Convention. These include: • Investment projects addressing PCBs and PCB containing wastes, pesticides containing waste; • Development of alternatives to DDT for vector control and alternatives to DDT  for the production on anti-fouling paint;

25. POPs projects in China • Management of medical wastes; • Minimization of dioxins and furans in sleeted industrial sectors (i.e. pulp and paper); • Capacity building projects for ensuring a sustained implementation of the Stockholm Convention. • Total GEF contribution in China: $ 83 million, representing 19.6 % of total GEF allocation for POPs - Co-financing: $ 132 million

26. GEF-5 programming • Negotiations for the fifth replenishment came to a successful conclusion on May 12, 2010. • Thirty-five donors have generously pledged $4.3 billion for programming in the next four years. This represents a 52.5% increase in new resources available to the GEF.

27. Chemicals management • $420 million allocated to chemicals. The distribution of resources is as follows: • POPs: $375 million; • Ozone: $25 million; • Sound chemicals management and mercury reduction: $20 million.

28. Chemicals programming for GEF-5 • Brings together POPs, ODS and Sound chemical management for increased coherence • Goal: To promote the sound management of chemicals throughout their life-cycle in ways that lead to the minimization of significant adverse effects on human health and the global environment • Expected Impact: Reduction in the exposure to Persistent Organic Pollutants and other Persistent Toxic Substances of humans and wildlife

29. POPs Outlook for GEF-5 • Increased attention to potential for synergies with other focal areas, in particular with climate mitigation and releases of un-intentionally produced POPs (dioxins). • Proposal to address chemicals in a more comprehensive manner, whilst keeping focus on mandate as financial mechanism to the Stockholm Convention.

30. POPs Outlook for GEF-5 • Core objectives • Reduce POPs use / production / releases; including that of “new POPs”; Outcomes: • Capacity build for implementation and National Implementation Plans updated; • Reduction of production and use of POPs; • Reduction of releases – with emphasis on linkages with climate mitigation; • POPs waste disposed of.

31. Additional GEF-5 Programs • Demonstration of mercury reduction in priority sectors; • Pilot implementation of SAICM priorities to generate global environmental benefits;

32. Summary • GEF-4&5 reforms for a more effective GEF – in particular simplification of project cycle; • POPs program marked by shift from preparation to implementation on the ground; • GEF committed $450 million for POPs projects since adoption of Stockholm Convention; • GEF-5 –(30% increase) Consolidation of the POPs portfolio- Chemicals management addressed in a more comprehensive manner; Enhance work on new POPs and support to the development of the Hg Convention

33. Thank You!! Contact Information Robert Dixon rdixon1@the GEF.org Laurent Granier lgranier@theGEF.org Ibrahima Sow isow@theGEF.org