1 / 26

Update on GEF Policies and New Developments

Update on GEF Policies and New Developments. Sub-regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points Middle East, North Africa, and West Asia Cairo, Egypt, 20-22 October 2009. General issues (1). Reforms in GEF-4: Design and implementation of Resource Allocation Framework ( RAF )

zanta
Download Presentation

Update on GEF Policies and New Developments

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. Update on GEF Policies and New Developments Sub-regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points Middle East, North Africa, and West Asia Cairo, Egypt, 20-22 October 2009

  2. General issues (1) • Reforms in GEF-4: • Design and implementation of Resource Allocation Framework (RAF) • Development of Programmatic Approach to improve national, regional, and global coordination • Project cycle – streamlined and shortened for efficiency and effectiveness • Design of results based management strategy • Development of new incremental cost methodology • Establishment of level playing field among GEF Agencies • Launch of Earth Fund to engage with Private sector • Establishment of minimum fiduciary standards

  3. General issues (2) • GEF resources total more than $9 billion over 15 years (pilot phase and four replenishments) • But demand for resources to tackle global environmental problems is estimated at hundreds of billions of dollars • For example: UNFCCC says that $200 billion per year required by 2030 as additional investment, half in developing countries, for new low-emission technologies, if emissions are to be reduced by 25 percent of 1990 levels • Expert Group on Technology Transfer (EGTT) interim report on funding for new technologies estimates an additional $300 billion to $1 trillion a year • To reverse rapid degradation of natural resources and to preserve ecosystem services, estimates from intergovernmental and major international processes run as high as $50 billion per year

  4. General issues (3) • Therefore, important that GEF-5 replenishment amount be significant enough to respond to funding needs • Programming targets must be achievable for GEF partnership in GEF 5 while setting the stage for increasingly more robust replenishments subsequently • Three scenarios for GEF 5 - $5 billion, $6.5 billion, and $9 billion - are proposed

  5. GEF’s Strategic Goals • Four strategic goals cover all activities under GEF mandate: • Strategic Goal 1 – conserve, sustainably use and manage biodiversity, ecosystems and natural resources globally, taking into account anticipated impacts of climate change • Strategic Goal 2 – reduce global climate change risks by (1) stabilizing atmospheric GHG concentrations through emission reduction actions; and (2) assisting countries to adapt to climate change, including variability • Strategic Goal 3 – promote the sound management of chemicals through their life-cycle to minimize the effect on human health and global environment • Strategic Goal 4 – build national and regional capacities and enabling conditions for global environmental protection and sustainable development • Focal area strategies are: (i) biodiversity; (ii) climate change mitigation; (iii) international waters; (iv) land degradation; and (v) chemicals, including POPs and ODS • Cross-cutting theme: Sustainable Forest Management (SFM)

  6. Biodiversity • Goal is conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and maintenance of ecosystem goods and services • To achieve this goal, strategy has five objectives: • improve sustainability of protected area systems • mainstream biodiversity conservation and sustainable use into production landscapes/seascapes and sectors • build capacity to implement Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety • build capacity on access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing • integrate CBD obligations into national planning processes through enabling activities

  7. Climate Change • Goal is to support developing countries and economies in transition toward a low-carbon development path • To achieve this goal, strategy has six objectives : • Promote demonstration, deployment, and transfer of advanced low-carbon technologies • Promote market transformation for energy efficiency in industry and buildings • Promote investment in renewable energy technologies • Promote energy efficient, low-carbon transport and urban systems • Conserve and enhance carbon stocks through sustainable management of land use, land-use change, and forestry (LULUCF) • Continue to support enabling activities and capacity building

  8. International Waters (1) • Goal is to promote collective management of transboundary water systems and to implement policy, legal, and institutional reforms and investments contributing to sustainable use and maintenance of ecosystem services • To achieve this goal, strategy has five objectives: • Catalyze multi-state cooperation to balance conflicting water uses in transboundary surface and groundwater basins while considering climatic variability and change

  9. International Waters (2) • Catalyze multi-state cooperation to rebuild marine fisheries and reduce pollution of coasts and Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs) while considering climatic variability and change • Support capacity building, portfolio learning, and targeted research needs for joint, ecosystem based management of transboundary water systems • Promote effective management of Marine Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ) directed at preventing fisheries depletion - joint with Biodiversity • Undertake pilot-scale demonstrations of pollution reduction from Persistent Toxic Substances (PTS) , especially endocrine disruptors - joint with Chemicals

  10. Land Degradation • Goal is to contribute to arresting and reversing current global trends in land degradation, specifically desertification and deforestation • To achieve this goal, strategy has four objectives: • maintain or improve flow of agro-ecosystem services to sustain livelihoods of local communities • generate sustainable flows of forest ecosystem services in arid, semi-arid and sub-humid zones, including sustaining livelihoods of forest-dependent people • reduce pressures on natural resources from competing land uses in wider landscape; • increase capacity to apply adaptive management tools in sustainable land management

  11. Chemicals • Goal is to promote sound management of chemicals throughout their life-cycle in ways that lead to minimization of significant adverse effects on human health and global environment • To achieve this goal, strategy has three objectives: • Phase out POPs (persistent organic pollutants) and reduce POPs releases • Phase out ODS (ozone-depleting substances) and reduce ODS releases • Pilot sound chemicals management and mercury reduction

  12. Sustainable Forest Management • Goal is to achieve multiple environmental benefits from improved management of all types of forests • To achieve this goal, strategy has two objectives: • Reduce pressures on forest resources and generate sustainable flows of forest ecosystem services; • Strengthen enabling environment to reduce GHG emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and enhance carbon sinks from LULUCF activities • Countries which present projects that combine resources and objectives in more than one GEF focal area for a transformative impact in Sustainable Forest Management should receive additional resources as incentive, in addition to indicative resources allocated to them

  13. GEF Corporate Programs / General Issues • Corporate activities are cross-cutting and respond to needs of countries and civil society organizations to develop their capacity to generate global environmental benefits • The GEF-5 strategic approach to corporate programs closely tied to needs of recipient countries, based on feedback from national GEF Focal Points: • need for greater coordination among national officers responsible for GEF-related matters, e.g., GEF Focal Points, convention focal points, ministries of finance, civil society organizations (CSOs) • need for greater visibility and recognition of GEF support to countries • need to re-focus Country Support Programme to help countries undertake new and/or redesigned GEF activities

  14. Corporate Programs / Voluntary National Business Plans (1) Through much of GEF’s history, country programming was mediated by GEF Agencies Under RAF, direct communications between GEF Secretariat and countries facilitated programming To further strengthen GEF’s strategic engagement at country-level, it is proposed that each recipient country prepare, with GEF financial support, a Voluntary National GEF Business Plan These plans will cover all relevant focal areas and should describe how GEF allocations will be programmed with national and regional projects to benefit global environment

  15. Corporate Programs / Voluntary National Business Plans (2) Preparation of plans should be consultative and participatory, with guidance from GEF National Steering Committees and coordinated by GEF Operational Focal Points Submission of these national plans is not a requirement to access GEF support for projects Countries which decide to prepare plans will be granted up to$30,000 from corporate programs budget Voluntary national plans will be shared with respective conventions for public disclosure and on GEF website

  16. Corporate Programs / National Steering Committees (1) National GEF Political and OperationalFocal Points with clear roles and responsibilities were intended to align GEF interventions with national priorities To strengthen this system and ensure internal coordination, it is proposed that in GEF-5 each recipient country that does not already have one will set up a GEF National Steering Committee Committee will be chaired by Operational Focal Point, and should include, among others, ministries of environment, agriculture, industry, energy, planning and finance, convention focal points, GEF Agencies, SGP national coordinator and CSO representatives

  17. Corporate Programs / National Steering Committees (2) Each country may adapt Committee membership to national circumstances, but with transparency and broad participation of stakeholders Main responsibilities of Committee will be to finalize National GEF Business Plans, and review and clear all projects/programs submitted to GEF Thus, programming of GEF resources in each country will be approved by internal consultation with all relevant stakeholders Endorsement letter from Operational Focal Point for PIFs/project documents will state that Steering Committee has considered and approved document for submission to GEF

  18. Corporate Programs / National Dialogue Initiative - NDI National Dialogue Initiative (NDI) currently facilitates a series of country-level multi-stakeholder dialogues on GEF-related issues NDI currently implemented by UNDP with strategic guidance from inter-agency Steering Committee, chaired by GEF CEO To integrate these dialogues into GEF Secretariat corporate activities and to have dialogues support work of GEF National Steering Committees, it is proposed that in GEF-5 these dialogues become an individual component of Country Support Programme

  19. Corporate Programs / Country Support Programme – CSP (1) • CSP main objective is to strengthen capacity of GEF Focal Points to effectively carry out their mandates for supporting global environmental programs in their countries and constituencies • Given its importance in conveying GEF strategies, policies and programs to countries, and to ensure that GEF identity is linked to results of GEF-financed activities, it is proposed that CSP in GEF 5 be managed by GEF Secretariat, with these elements: • Broad, multi-stakeholder Dialogues: these will be organized as in current NDI, by request from GEF National Steering Committee • Constituency Workshops: Current sub-regional meetings (1 per year) may be transformed into one GEF constituency-level workshop a year, to inform GEF Focal Points, convention focal points, other key stakeholders, including civil society, about GEF strategies, policies and procedures and to encourage coordination.

  20. Corporate Programs / Country Support Program – CSP (2) • Council Member Support: currently two constituency meetings per year to discuss issues and adopt positions before each Council meeting. If previouspoint approved, there will be one constituency meeting as workshop. So it is proposed in GEF 5 Council Member Support reduced to 1 constituency meeting per year • Direct Support to Operational Focal Points: Since OFP will have to organize National Steering Committees, it is proposed to increase Direct Support from $8,000 to $10,000 per year in GEF 5 • Knowledge Facility for GEF Focal Points: it is proposed KF be further developed to reflect evolving needs of GEF focal points, and also to target other relevant stakeholder groups, in particular convention focal points • GEF Familiarization Seminars: it is proposed in GEF-5 Familiarization Seminar be held once a year in Washington, D.C, to train new country focal points and GEF Agency staff on GEF strategies, policies and procedures

  21. Corporate Programs / Small Grants Programme - SGP (1) GEF Small Grants Programme (SGP) covered 123 countries by end of GEF 4 10 more country requests to join SGP Proposed that mature SGP country programmes be upgraded in GEF- 5 and would seek GEF funding through different modalities, specifically programmatic approach with stand-alone FSPs Other SGP country programmes continue to rely on core programme funding, using resources both within and outside resource allocation system

  22. Corporate Programs / SGP (2) • Two main criteria considered for upgrading countries: • SGP participation for 15 years • Benefited from 6 million dollars of GEF funding • Policy paper for next Council Meeting will cover additional criteria and operational issues • Upgraded country programmes will function more independently and have broader responsibilities, accessing larger amounts of funding from different sources (i. e., STAR allocations, GEF projects, CBOs and NGOs), while remaining part of global SGP for knowledge exchange and communications

  23. Streamlining Project Cycle - FSP (1) Currently, Council reviews and approves full-sized projects in two stages prior to CEO endorsement: 1) concept (based on Project Identification Form) and 2) project fully prepared (based on final project document) Proposed current two-step Council approval for FSPs become one-step Council approval Proposed Council continue to approve work program comprised of PIFs as currently done. Following Council approval, Agencies in partnership with recipient countries will continue to undertake project development

  24. Streamlining the Project Cycle - FSP (2) Under present rules, Council reviews all final project documents before endorsement during 4 week web-posting Council has not rejected any projects before endorsement during past 5 years - eliminating this step would mean significant time savings Once final project document is developed, appraised, and agreed, CEO will endorse. All endorsed project documents will be posted on GEF website for information. Agency will then approve project and implementation can begin GEF Secretariat, with GEF Agencies and Evaluation Office, will review efficacy and impact of 22-month and other standards

  25. Streamlining the Project Cycle – MSP and EA (3) CEO will continue to approve MSP PIFs Proposed Council delegate authority to CEO for approval of MSP final project document, without prior circulation to the Council for two-week comment period Even if MSP project cycle is streamlined, concerns proposals subjected to same degree of review and documentation requirements as FSP MSP review criteria for both PIFs and final project documents will be re-considered to balance speeding up process and receiving critical information necessary to achieve GEF objectives CEO will continue to approval Enabling Activities and PPGs under expedited procedures

  26. Streamlining the Project Cycle – Programmatic Approach (4) • Current programmatic approach policy obliges countries and Agencies to go through project cycle for every project financed under a program, even after program approval by Council • Proposed for GEF-5: • First step in agreement on programmatic approach is Council approval of Program Framework Document (prepared by lead Agency) as part of work program • Following Council approval of Program Framework Document, projectpreparation begins • When program implemented by Agency with Executive Board or Governing Body that approves full-sized projects, Council to delegate authority to Agency for processing and approval of projects under program - neither CEO nor Council will be involved in approval of individual projects • For other Agencies, Council to delegate authority to CEO for approval of PIFs and endorsement of final projects under program.

More Related