1 / 21

GCF Pipeline Development Part II - Proposal Development

GCF Pipeline Development Part II - Proposal Development. Enhanced climate resilience of rural communities in central and north Benin through the implementation of ecosystem-based adaptation ( EbA ) in forest and agricultural landscapes. Dr Marie-Ange Baudoin

rodj
Download Presentation

GCF Pipeline Development Part II - Proposal Development

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GCF Pipeline Development Part II - Proposal Development Enhanced climate resilience of rural communities in central and north Benin through the implementation of ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) in forest and agricultural landscapes Dr Marie-Ange Baudoin Senior Climate Change Consultant/ Climate Finance Contact: marieange007@gmail.com

  2. Project Proposal Timeline 2016: Preliminary country consultations to identifyidea notes December 2016: presentation and validation of 1 idea note February to June 2017: development of 1 Concept Note: - desktop review/data collection - field mission in potentialproject sites and stakeholder/communities consultations - preparation, presentation and validation of the CN in June 2017 July 2017 to May 2018: development of a Full FP + Annexes: - field mission to identifiedproject sites and stakeholder/communities consultations - preparation of the full FP, then SAP proposal

  3. The project Enhanced climate resilience of rural communities in central and north Benin through the implementation of ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) and climate-resilient agriculture in forest and agricultural landscapes GCF Result Areas – Adaptation: Increased resilience of most vulnerable people and communities, including women and girls; and Ecosystems and ecosystem services Duration: 5 years AE: UN Environment EE: MCVDD with DG EFC and DQIFE as partners Budget: USD 10 million (incl. USD9 M grant from GCF and USD1 M co-financing from GoB)

  4. The baseline problem Benin - LDC Size of 114,763 km2 with 68% of forest cover Population of 11.1 M ~70% of the population rely on agriculture Rapid degradation of forests and lands due to unsustainable management practices 10% decline of agricultural productivity between 1983-2008 15% of rural population with severe food insecurity

  5. The baseline problem Climate change in Benin Expected increase of mean annual temperatures of 3.3˚C by 2100 esp. in north Observed declines in mean annual rainfall Expected increased intra-annual variability of precipitation and more frequent/intense climate extremes (floods, droughts) Consequences: Further declines in productivity of agricultural landscapes and forest ecosystems Increased food insecurity esp. in rural areas Additional pressures on natural resources

  6. The baseline problem

  7. The adaptation alternative Catalyse a shift of behaviour and policies towards improved, climate-resilient management practices in forests and agricultural landscapes How? Demonstrate the considerable environmental and socio-economic benefits of sustainable, climate-resilient forest and land management through on-the-ground implementation of EbA and climate-resilient agriculture that increase yields Replication: Monitor impacts and establish knowledge hub; training and awareness raising; policy support

  8. Project description 7 municipalities with riverine forests located in the 5 central and northern Departments of Benin: Vulnerable to CC Located in wide geographic area to facilitate replication Include valuable riverine forests degraded and/or located along important water catchments

  9. Project description 3 Outcomes Outcome 1: 3,600 hectares of land restored for multi-use energy and livelihood benefits

  10. Project description Outcome 2: Higher productivity from agricultural livelihoods secured in the face of climate change

  11. Project description Outcome 3: Strengthened technical and institutional capacity for implementing EbA and climate-resilient agriculture

  12. Proposal development: challenges 1. Long process Start in November 2016 (concept ideas); submission of FP to GCF in July 2018 21 months ….and continues GCF comments received in August 2018  revised FP to submit in October Second round of comments expected Aim for Board22 in February 2019  27 months after start

  13. Proposal development: challenges 2. Complex data collection Lack of climate data esp. fine scale to build robust climate rational Limited locally-relevant data to conduct financial and economic analysis In-country information not easily accessible (not available online, language barrier, etc.)

  14. Proposal development: challenges 3. Time constraints/pressures Numerous Annexes to prepare Lack of time to conduct in-depth VAs in identified project sites Multiple deadlines to consider: funding agency, selected AE, target GCF Board and beneficiary country expectations Language barrier  need to factor time for translation

  15. Proposal development: challenges 4. Uncertainties GCF expectations for: paradigm shift, climate rational, cost-efficiency, financial analysis, etc. Inherent uncertainties for new SAP Who will be the AE? Difficult alignment between AE expectations and beneficiary country needs/realities

  16. Proposal development: challenges 5. Addressing GCF comments Lack of clarity / feeling that the Board has not reviewed the full FP/all Annexes Requires lots of details even for SAP: - Fine-scale details about project sites, beneficiaries & selection process - Specific adaptation interventions, design and costs - How fund will be used, with clear demonstrations that GCF fund will support adaptation vs. development  can be challenging esp. for LDCs

  17. Proposal development: challenges Justify the concessionally: why grant only? Demonstration of cash flow/quantitative analysis Details on co-finance: what will the gov. support? why is GCF support needed? Specific information for O&M: who will be responsible during and after project implementation? Demonstrate replicability and scalability  how to achieve the paradigm shift? Proof that the proposed interventions will work (based on past experience)  not always possible if innovative approach

  18. Lessons learned and recommendations 1. Resources: Time: plan ahead as Full Funding Proposal development is long Team of experts: recruit relevant national/international experts to put together all Annexes  economist, sociologist, gender expert, etc. Cost: enough funding available for project development including in-country missions

  19. Lessons learned and recommendations 2. Engagement with project partners Identify AE asap Establish regular communication between AE and EE  commitment from both side is required Document all consultations with project beneficiaries (gender balance for project beneficiary)

  20. Lessons learned and recommendations 3. Data collection Collect as much data as possible during in-country mission as it is not easy to access them later Engagement of relevant country partners is critical 4. Climate rational and paradigm shift Think climate change: all project interventions must be linked to adaptation/mitigation Think beyond project interventions: how is the project going to initiate a wider shift in behaviour/policies/practices?

  21. Thankyou for your attention Dr Marie-Ange Baudoin Senior Climate Change Consultant/ Climate Finance Contact: marieange007@gmail.com

More Related