Nepal: Strengthening Capacity for Managing Climate Change and the Environment

Stakeholder Project Design Workshop

28 – 30 July 2008, Country Villa Hotel, Nagarkot, Nepal

Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (MoEST) Asian Development Bank

Project Number: 26194

Embankment improvement, Chitwan. Watch tower as part of community Photo: Practical Action flood early warning system Photo: Practical Action

Glacier AX010 (Shoring) in a. 1978, b. 1989, c. 1998 and d. 2004 (source GEN-DHM research)

Content

1. Introduction 1 a. Welcome Remarks 1 b. Objectives 2

2. Background Presentation 2 a. Initiative on Climate Change 2 b. Climate Change Policy 3 c. Strengthening Capacity on Climate Change and Environment 3 d. Overview of the Planning Process 4

3. Situation Analysis 4 a. Stakeholder Analysis 4

i. Affected people, civil society, farmers, youth/children, communities 5

ii. Central government, line agencies 6 iii. Local government, Apex Bodies, political parties 7 iv. Donors and NGOs/INGOs 8 v. Private sector, media, academia 8

4. Problem Analysis 9 a. Perceived Common problems 9 b. Core Problem 9 c. Identification of Direct Causes 10

d. Problem Tree Analysis 11 5. Solution Development 13

a. Objectives Analysis 13 b. Alternative Analysis 14 c. Consolidation exercise 15 d. Priority Activities 15

6. Design and Monitoring Framework 17 a. DMF 1: Effective Institutional Framework 17 b. DMF 2: Environmental Protection Fund 18 c. DMF 3: Effective Policy for Mainstreaming Environment and Sectoral Plans and Processes 18 d. DMF 4: Public Education, Information and Awareness 19 e. Presentation on DMF 21

7. Closing Addresses 22

Annexes: Annex 1: Agenda of the Workshop 23 Annex 2: List of Participants 25 Annex 3: Problem Trees 27 Annex 4: Objective Tree 32

Project Design Workshop: Strengthening Capacity for Managing Climate Change and the Environment

28 – 30 July 2008

Country Villa Hotel, Nagarkot, Nepal

Day 1 (28 July 2008):

1. INTRODUCTION

a. Welcome Remarks: All the participants arrived at the training venue around 11am and after a brief check-in time they gathered for workshop. The facilitator welcomed the participants at first and shared briefly about the general purpose of the workshop. They were also informed about the schedule of the three day long workshop. The participants were asked to introduce themselves. In their introduction, they were told to tell their name, role, organization and any words that came to their mind when thinking about managing climate change and environment in Nepal. Some of the major insights were as follows:

• Lack of coordination • Impact on poor • Awareness • Renewable energy • Sustainable development. • Temperature • Global • Risk reduction • Capacity building • Awareness • Energy • Adaptation • Environmental compliance • Millennium Development Goals (MDG) • Mainstreaming • Community-based adaptation • Local impacts • Local governance • Greenhouse gas • Coordination • Participation • Harder life of poor people • Public awareness

1

• Promotion of clean energy • Sustainable development • Global warming (temperature warming) • Risk reduction • Technology needs • Promotion of renewable energy • Technology transfer • Sharing experiences/adaptation • Snow and stream or GLOF • Vulnerability • Environmental compliance • Mainstreaming (climate change and environment) • Climate change is an opportunity • Community-based adaptation • understanding impacts of climate change • Local governance.

b. Objectives

Cindy Malvicini from ADB gave an overview of the workshop and its objectives. She emphasised on the need of multi-sectoral participation to design the project. She shared the objectives of the workshop as follows: Primary Objectives

• Define ways of improving and strengthening capacity on environmental and climate change issues;

• Define roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders in the proposed project. Secondary Objectives

• Develop a common understanding among all concerned on environmental and climate change issues;

• Identify mechanisms to enforce Nepal`s environmental rules and regulations. Introductory Remarks and Welcome Address: On behalf of the organiser, Iswor Singh Thapa from the Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (MoEST) welcomed the participants and thanked them for their presence. He emphasised on the importance of the workshop in the context of growing concern of climate change and need of capable institutions to tackle this issue.

2. BACKGROUND PRESENTATION

a. Initiative on Climate Change Mr. Batu K. Uprety, Under Secretary and Chief of Environmental Assessment Section at MoEST gave a presentation on ‘MoEST Initiatives on Climate Change including NAPA’. In his presentation, he outlined various issues such as major activities related to climate change and environment, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Kyoto 1994-2005, several studies conducted during last 11 years, USA country studies program,

2

implementation strategy on Rio Conventions and other international convention. He also mentioned about capacity building on Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and climate change, preparation of National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) proposal and implementation of National Capacity Self Assessment (NCSA). He said that in 2006 the government formed a 23 member Climate Change Network representing public and private sector, NGOs and academia. The government also asked World Bank to assist with projects on carbon markets. Technology Needs Assessment (GEF/UNEP) was about to start. 26 climate change activities from January 2008 to present was done by WWF and NGOs. NAPA process started to access funding from LDC fund. The objective of this work is simply to develop a document that prioritizes adaptation projects. Extended NAPA with US$1.43million fund has been proposed and on 21 July 2008 note said it should start in September 2008, however it is not clear when NAPA process should start. After his presentation, the participants asked him a number of questions related to difference between NAPA and NCSA. He said that MoEST do not have the NAPA project document. No duplication with NCSA. NAPA has been linked with non-NAPA activities. There is a need to agree on implementation modalities. It was agreed in principle but further discussion is needed once the full NAPA project document is received.

b. Climate Change Policy: Mr. Purushottam Ghimire, Joint Secretary and Chief of Environment Division, MoEST explained about selected policy recommendations which include mainstream climate concerns in development, improve governance, enhance resilience of poor, improve quality of growth and lobby. He mentioned that there is low level of clarity on climate change, no clear policy and guidelines and need of enactment of effective environmental legislation. After his presentation, the participants asked about biofuel issues and policy, timing for next steps, consultation process to develop policy etc. He shared that consultation process was initially an awareness raising process. There will be another national consultation on the policy. The sectoral aspects will also be covered and final policy will address the integration aspects. Climate Change Center is proposed and it needs to be approved by Cabinet. There was also concern from the participants that many policies are already approved, but what about the capacity to implement policy? For example, does MoEST have resources to implement existing policies? We have to focus on capacity building. Creation of Alternative Energy Center is a notable achievement of MoEST. We can learn from and build upon this achievement to address other climate change issues. We have to address capacity building issues in the policy. Policy is for all sectoral ministries – they have a responsibility to assist in implementing.

c. Strengthening Capacity on Climate Change and Environment: Mr. Batu K. Uprety gave a presentation on ‘Strengthening the Government Capacity on Climate Change and Environment - MoEST Perspective’ in which he explained about the starting process to establish the Department of Environment and emphasised on focusing on mobilizing resources. Policies are implemented through legislation. He emphasized the need to establish the

3 3

Department of Environment. He also mentioned about roles and responsibilities of MoEST and NCSA experience. There were concerns from the participants about follow up of NCSA.

d. Overview of the Project Planning Process: After the lunch break, the facilitator gave an overview of the project planning process. He said that the process has two main components i.e., analysis and monitoring framework. He described the process covering following components of the project planning process or Project performance Management System (PPMS) developed by Asian Development Bank. The process consists of two main parts namely analysis and design and monitoring framework. Situation analysis

• Stakeholder analysis • Problem analysis

Solution development

• Objectives analysis • Alternative analysis

Design and Monitoring Framework The design and monitoring framework consists of impact, outcome, outputs, activities and milestones, inputs, performance targets and data source.

3. SITUATION ANALYSIS

a. Stakeholder Analysis After the brief overview, the facilitator explained in detail about the stakeholder analysis and how to prepare the stakeholder table. He asked the participants, who are the key stakeholders of this project? The participants opined as follows:

• Affected persons • Communities • Farmers • Line ministries • Everyone • Hydro-power investors • Ministry of Finance • Primary and secondary stakeholders • Private sector • Civil society • NGO’s

• IGO’s • Local government • Academia • Political parties • Donors • Researchers • Media • Public in general • Youth/children • Ethnic groups • Trade Unions

4

Based on the types of the stakeholders, the participants were divided into five groups and asked to work in group. Groups 1. Affected people, civil society, farmers, youth/children, communities 2. Central government, line agencies 3. Local government, Apex Bodies, political parties 4. NGOs, INGOs, donors 5. Private sector, media, academia The groups worked separately and focused on interests, perception of problem, resources and mandates related to various stakeholders concerned to them. After the completion of all the group reports, the the participants were requested to see the reports and focus on perception of problem. They were asked to think if there was similarity on problem perception among different groups. The reports from different groups are as follows: i. Group 1: Affected people, civil society, farmers, youth/children, communities

Stakeholder

Interests Perception of

Problem Resources Mandate

Farmers • Risk management for pest and disease

• Reliable weather forecast

• Reliable irrigation facilities

• Increased crop productivity

• Alternative crops in response to effects of climate change

• Abrupt variability in weather

• Local knowledge • Local technology • Land (private,

community, etc.) • Human resources

n/a

Local Government • Awareness regarding the effects of climate change

• Devolution of functions, functionaries and funds regarding adaptation to climate change

• Address interest of people, communities and farmers

• Too many unfunded mandates

• Lack of disaster risk information

• Local tax • Central

government grants

• Welfare of residents

• Protection and utilisation of natural resources

Public/ Communities

• Food security • Secured settlements • Protection of land

from floods and landslides

• Health safety

• Hot days and drought increase frequency of floods and landslides

• Traditional institutions

• Community level funds and networks

n/a

Civil Society • Data and information

• Timely rescue and relief in case of disaster

• Low capacity of government for service delivery

• Issue of climate change not a

• Network, leadership

• Advocacy on behalf of affected communities

5 5

Stakeholder

Interests Perception of Problem

Resources Mandate

• Pro-poor friendly policy on adaptation to climate change

national priority

ii. Group 2: Central government, line agencies

Stakeholder

Interests Perception of

Problem Resources Mandate

Ministry of Physical Planning and Works (MPPW)

• Build roads, housing and W/S projects

• Deforestation and resettlement

• Govt. Fund, local fund and human resources

• Govt work distribution, mandated by Cabinet.

Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (MoEST)

• Environmental management/coordination of carbon projects

• Lack of financial/human resources

• Institutional (coordination/sub coordinating institutions/dept)

• Technology know how

• Govt. Fund and donor

• Policy, plan, programme formulation and implementation

• Monitoring

Ministry of Industry, Commerce and Supplies (MOICS)

• Entrepreneurship (industry development) Business/trade development

• Supply (guaranteeing the supply of goods)

• Lack of industrial environment

• Not connected to sea (Landlockedness/) high transportation cost

• Dependency on foreign goods

• Govt. Fund • Entrepreneur

funds (fund) • Public –private

funds

• Industrial/supply promotion

• Laws enforcement • Quality control

Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MOAC)

• Agri development • (agri business and

marketing) • Agro environment

management

• Lack of financial resources

• Mainstreaming (policy programme to environmental friendly development)

• Coordination (vert. + horizontal)

• Govt. Fund (central and local)

• Private entrepreneurs funds

• Few of the NGOs

• Policy formulation, mainstreaming programmes towards achieving the policies, implementing the programmes

Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation (MOFSC)

• Building capacity and mainstreaming programme for forest management and soil conservation

• Forest degradation, soil erosion

• Biodiversity management

• Government fund

• Community fund (generated based on legislation)

• Donors

• Conservation of forests, PAs and Soil

Ministry of Local Development (MOLD)

• Policy, planning, coordination and monitoring of local level infrastructure development and decentralization

• Waste management

• Technical backstopping

• Govt. Of Nepal • Donors • Community

• Remote area development

• Policy, plan, programme formulation/implementation

• Local governance Alternative Energy Promotion Centre (AEPC)

• Promote renewable/alternative energy technologies

• Funding gap • Institutional human

resources

• Govt. of Nepal • Donors • Carbon Trading

• Planning, coordination, implementation quality assurance and monitoring of

6

Stakeholder

Interests Perception of Problem

Resources Mandate

renewable/alternative energy

Ministry of Labour and Transport Management (MOLT)

• Occupation health and safety

• Enforcement of transport laws

• Handling labour dispute

• Alternative cost effective transport system

• Traffic management

• Unskilled labour force/unemployment

• Trained human resources

• Remittances • Govt. budget

• Low cost transport promotion

• Traffic safety • Occupational health and

safety • Overseas labour

management

Ministry of Water Resources (MOWR)

• Hydropower irrigation development

• Climate variability • Water availability • Flooding • Breakdown of

infrastructure

• Technical staff • Authority

decision on natural resources

• Sustainable management of water resources

Ministry of Women, Children and Social Welfare (MOWCS)

• Women and children health related to environment and climate change

• Reducing women’s drudgery

• Less priority • Less resources

• Networking with I/NGOs

• Monitor NGOs • Promote water and

climate rights

Ministry of Health and Population (MOHP)

• Reducing health risk from climate change

• Poor understanding on linkage between climate change and health

• Grassroots level network

• Research on health impacts of climate change

Ministry of Finance (MOF)

• Promoting economic growth (related to environment)

• Investment in environment does not pay

• Environment agenda is donor driven

• Environment is sectoral issue

• Money • Influence

• Encouraging new investment in environment sector

iii. Group 3: Local government, Apex Bodies, political parties

Stakeholder

Interests Perception of Problem

Resources Mandate

Local Government

• To deliver environmental goods and services

• Poor awareness, knowledge, resources and incentives for environmental management

• Local taxes • Central grants • CBOs, NGOs,

INGOs

• Local Self Government Act (2055/1999)

APEX Bodies • Prompt and appropriate decision-making

• Plans, policies and strategies formulation

• Poor coordination among stakeholders and expert opinion on policy formulation

• Weak professional capacity and delay in formulation of policy and programs

• Social and political crisis

• Donors • Revenue

• Formulation of policies and programs

• Internal commitment

Political Parties • To implement their manifestos on environmental issues

• Poor understanding on poverty/environment nexus

• Specialised units • Sister organizations

• To ensure/pressure the formulation and implementation of environmental

7 7

Stakeholder

Interests Perception of Problem

Resources Mandate

• Unsustainable use of natural resources (political biases)

policies, programs and legislation

iv. Group 4: Donors and NGOs/INGOs

Stakeholder

Interests Perception of Problem

Resources Mandate

Donors • poverty reduction • achieve MDGs • strategic national

interest • lending • new opportunity

• low priority for environmental issues

• inadequate capacity • weak governance • weak institutions • inadequate/poor

coordination • insufficient

financial resources

• technical capacity • Influence/leverage • Funding

• supporting MEAs/MDGs

NGOs/INGOs • fulfill the gaps of government

• new work/business opportunities

• peoples representation

• promoting environmental agenda

• government’s delivery needs improvement

• lack of integration and coordination

• lack of capacity • Inadequate private

sector fails to tap opportunity

• CDM is complex process

• community mobilization

• goodwill • funds from donors • volunteers • technical capacity

• advocacy • awareness • facilitation • mobilization • implementation at

grass roots level

v. Group 5: Private sector, media, academia

Stakeholder

Interests Perception of

Problem Resources Mandate

Academia • Curriculum development

• Collaborate on research

• Teaching and training

• Capacity building • Consultancy

services • Advisory services

• Not update • Limited research • Limited training skills • Lack of specialised

human resources • Lack of coordination/

cooperation

• Financial constraint

• Limited specialised human resources

• Low level of technical resources

• Educate people • Conduct research • Develop

curriculum

Media • Public awareness • Development of

content • Capacity building

• Limited knowledge/experience

• Lack of reference material/information

• Low priority no media strategy

• Financial constraint

• Limited specialised human resources

• Low level of technical resources

• Information dissemination

• Information sharing

• Early warning • Promoting CFT

and CEP

Private Sector • Profit making • Knowledge gap • Financial • Adopt CFT/CEP

8

Stakeholder

Interests Perception of Problem

Resources Mandate

• Adopt energy efficient technology/clean energy

• Compliance with laws

(technology) • Lack of skilled human

resources • No incentives from

government

constraint • Limited

specialised human resources

• Low level of technical resources

• Sustainable development

• Protect environment, health and livelihoods

4. PROBLEM ANALYSIS

a. Perceived Common problems

After the completion of the group work, the participants were asked to go through all the reports and focus on the perceived problem. The participants emphasized on weak professional capacity to implement plans and programmes [knowledge (information, education and awareness) gap and human resources], low absorptive capacity and weak national capacity to negotiate with the donors. Other concerns were weak governance (enforcement and accountability); lack of financial and technical resources and low priority/commitment (political and institutional commitment) on climate change and environmental issues (the ownership of the environment programmes and the climate change management) including policy, institutions and implementation) etc. After a vigorous discussion, the participants agreed on following main problems: 1. Knowledge gaps – information, education and awareness 2. Poor coordination 3. Weak governance 4. Lack of financial/technical resources 5. Low priority on climate change and environmental management

b. Core Problem:

Based on the major problems and the subsequent discussion after the group reports, the core problem or starter problem was identified as follows: Limited Country Capacity to Manage Climate Change and Other Environmental Issues

9 9

Day 2 (29 July 2008): Overview of the First Day Workshop: Bibek Chapagain of Winrock International gave a brief presentation on first day programme covering the key issues and overall feeling as a participant. Nogendra Sapkota of ADB gave the overview of the second day programme.

c. Identification of Direct Causes: In the plenary, the facilitator asked the participants the direct causes of the core problem i.e., limited country capacity to manage climate change and other environmental issues. The facilitator asked the participants two leading questions regarding this problem: Why do we have this problem? What are direct causes of this problem? The participants’ opinions were as follows:

• Low priority and commitment by government • Lack of financial resources • Knowledge gap • Resource gaps (human, technical, financial) • Value of environmental services not recognised • Public pressure on political leadership • Environment is not owned by any sector – it is cross cutting • No single champion – dedicated agency – for the environment • Overlapping of jurisdictions • Poor coordination amongst many agencies • Absence of a dedicated agency/institution – have a policy function only • Weak in enforcement • Widespread poverty affects sustainable use of resources • Lack of monitoring and implementation • Weak enforcement and policy making • Weak administration • No mechanisms to engage more people in the environmental sector

After another round of discussion, five direct causes were identified, which were as follows:

• Limited resources (human, technical, financial); • Poor coordination; • Low priority for climate change and environmental management; • Knowledge gaps; and • Weak environmental governance.

Then the facilitator gave the process overview of the Problem Tree analysis. The participants were then asked to work in five different groups taking one direct cause of the problem. They were asked to reveal the root causes of the problems and find the cause and effect relationship.

10

d. Presentation on Problem Tree Analysis:

After the discussion in the group, each group prepared a separate problem tree and presented in the plenary. The reports included following points:

A. Inadequate Knowledge on Climate Change and Environment Inadequate knowledge (information, education, and awareness) on climate change and environment from national to local levels. Underlying reasons for this are limited research on climate change, lack of knowledge management, and uniformed stakeholders. Limited research is due to shortage of resources, inadequate technical expertise, low prioritization of a climate change research agenda, limited infrastructure for data generation and management, lack of incentives for research institutions to participate in climate change research, lack of focus on applied research, and a brain drain of environmental professionals due to inadequate professional opportunities. Lack of knowledge management is due to limited linkages amongst knowledge providers, lack of an information center, which results in scattered information material, and policy documents and information materials are unavailable in local language. Stakeholders are currently uninformed about climate change and environmental awareness in general is weak. Reasons include limited training, awareness, and education, and information of various stakeholders (judiciary, politicians, policy makers, decisions makers, local government bodies, youth/children/women and disadvantaged groups. The effects of this problem include increased scientific uncertainty, inappropriate policy formulation leading to inappropriate adaptation measures. In addition, the country is unable to present a strong negotiating position at international fora. These effects culminate in weak implementation in monitoring and evaluation, and ultimately result in environmental degradation.

B. Low Priority on National Agenda Climate change and environmental issues are given inadequate priority on the national development agenda. Key causes include the nature and gravity of climate change risks are not appreciated, inadequate public pressure for change, and pressing national agendas overshadow effective environmental priority. The lack of appreciation is due to inadequate information and a data base on climate change impacts in Nepal. Nepal is not included in international information exchange and there are no regional or local dissemination mechanisms on appropriate adaptation and risk management measures. Realization of immediate benefits outweigh long-term efforts toward developmental sustainability. Stakeholders (political parties and the public in general) do not demand due consideration for environment because they are not adequately informed and aware of the climate change and environmental risks. Environment receives low priority and little attention on the national development agenda because of ongoing political instability; peace, reconstruction, rehabilitation, and reunification on national priorities. The effect of the low priority is weak governance and the loss of environmental resources.

11 11

C. Weak Environmental Governance Environmental governance is weak because environmental and climate change is cross-cutting and there are no cross-cutting policies in place to govern them. Information management is seen as effective. Organizations working in the environmental sector are not accountable to civil society and the public in general. Local government and communities are not provided the opportunity to participate in climate change risk management and environmental decision-making. While a MOEST exists, environmental management should be mainstreamed throughout the governance system, but existing codes of conduct, regulations and guidelines are not clear about the different mandates and jurisdictions of key sectoral agencies, the MOEST, apex organizations, and local government bodies. This jurisdictional confusion results in poor enforcement of existing environmental laws which provide inadequate mechanisms and incentives for compliance. A key deficiency is the absence of any legal protection of environmental rights. Ineffective information management results in inadequate information and communication between stakeholders, weak linkages between central, local, and inter-organizational environmental protection activities, and the authority and responsibilities between organizations are not clearly defined. Environmental management agencies and organizations lack accountability due to ineffective monitoring mechanisms, inadequate input from local government, and the lack of a citizens’ complaint mechanism regarding environmental degradation. Low level participation at the local level is principally due to the low level of awareness about the risks of climate change impacts and increased environmental degradation.

D. Limited Resources (financial, technical, and human) All stakeholders responsible for management lack inadequate resources to effectively address climate change risk and environmental protection. These stakeholders especially include line ministries, local government, and the private sector. Additionally, adequate financial resources have not been committed because government priorities are placed on other pressing national development issues, and environment is not seen as directly contributing to poverty reduction. MOEST has not set up a dedicated entity to enforce environmental rules and regulations, implement policy, coordinate among the various sectors, develop public awareness, and collaborate with other line ministries and stakeholders at all levels. Part of the systemic problem is the lack of environmental professional group or track within the civil service system. The result of the lack of resources is the inability to address critical environmental and climate change risks, resulting in environment degradation.

E. Poor Coordination There is poor coordination among stakeholders responsible for climate change risk management and environmental protection. The underlying reasons include the absence of an effective coordination mechanisms, duplication and overlapping of responsibilities amongst stakeholders, no clearly defined responsibilities for apex bodies, poor information network, poor linkages between central to local government, and the absence of effective pressure groups.

12

In regard to the apex bodies, e.g., EPC, NPC, and the Cabinet, they lack a clear legal mandate and no secretariats to carry out their decisions. The apex bodies themselves do not understand their own hierarchy of responsibilities in decision-making. There are no coordination mechanisms with clearly defined procedures to promote effective collaboration between the central and local governments, and among sectoral agencies, and communities and the private sector. Mechanisms are needed to negotiate the conflicting political and sectoral agendas. The information networks currently suffer a shortage of professional knowledge. The constant high turnover of professional creates a lack of institutional memory and there is no system of knowledge transfer within organizations or to other organizations. Local governments do not have the capacity to collaborate with central government and undertake a community-based climate change and environment programs. This situation is aggravated by NGO and INGO preference to work directly with communities, often in isolation from local government. There is not legal clarity regarding the roles of central and local government in undertaking climate change and environmental programs. Pressure groups are needed to lobby and champion effective change.

5. SOLUTION DEVELOPMENT

a. Objectives Analysis: The facilitator gave an overview of objective analysis and clarified the process of objectives based on the specific causes and effects in the problem tree. The participants were then told to work in the same group to design objectives.

1. Adequate knowledge on CC and other environmental issues To avert the situation of inadequate knowledge on climate change and environmental issues various objectives were set. They were increased resources, enhanced resources, enhanced research capacity, linking applied research with academia, improved knowledge management, better informed stakeholders, curriculum updated etc. Other objectives such as improved networking, enhanced awareness, sound policy formulation, training curriculum designed and improved implementation were identified as major objectives.

2. High priority and strong commitment The objectives are concerned to sensitisation of the issues, commitment, integrating environmental issues with sector policies and programmes, long and short term benefits projected and publicized. It was realized that by designing proactive mitigation measures, this particular problem could be overcome.

3. Good environmental governance Objectives are related to developing comprehensive policy on climate change and environmental issues, effective information management, making the organization accountable, meeting the

13 13

environmental compliance, making people aware of the climate change and environmental issues, strong linkages between stakeholders, law and guidelines, reward and punishment system etc.

4. Availability of resources It was agreed that to overcome the existing problem related to resources, objectives such as adequate financial allocation and availability of human resources at all levels are essential. Need of environment fund, fully staffed local bodies, provision of environmental service group in civil service, effective advocacy are important objectives.

5. Strong coordination Objectives set to establish strong coordination are related to clear role and responsibilities, well functional secretariat, clear norms and processes, strong political commitment, information and knowledge management system, professionalism, strong local bodies etc.

b. Alternative Analysis: The facilitator gave an overview of process to consolidate and rationalise outcomes as alternative analysis. Preliminary Outcomes: Based on the objective tree, following long list of objectives were suggested by the participants:

• Improved environment • Policy, legislation, guidelines, checklists established • Policy and legal harmonization • Strong compliance mechanisms • Integration of environmental issues with development and enforcement • Linkages with stakeholders established • Organization set up – e.g. Department of Environment • Adequate resources • People`s participation, ownership and awareness • People`s empowerment • Information knowledge management • Increased knowledge (research, socio-economic impact analysis) • Strengthened negotiating capacity • Link research with academia • Strong civil society • Defined responsibility and environmental group in civil service • Set up Department of Environment • Awareness program • Enhance capacity of local authorities • Training, awareness • Integration of environment with development

14

They were grouped as follows:

• Train local level institutes and professionals on adaptation to climate change and other environmental issues

- Enhanced capacity of local bodies - Training/awareness programme

• Strengthen implementing and other concerned organizations - Linkage with stakeholders - Organization set up for executing department - Adequate resources

• Policy and legislative framework for mainstreaming environment and climate

change concerns into National and sectoral development plans and programmes - Strong compliance mechanisms - Integration of environment with development and enforcement - Policy, legislation, guidelines/checklists - Policy and legal harmonisation - Integration of environmental issues with sectoral policies and programmes - Information knowledge management

• Improved knowledge on climate change risk management - Strong civil society - People’s participation, ownership and awareness - Link research with academia - Increased knowledge (knowledge, research, socio-economic impact analysis, data) - Defined responsibility of environmental group in civil society - Priority to environmental issues with adequate resources - People ownership/participation/empowerment - Negotiation capacity.

c. Consolidation exercise:

The facilitator asked the participants to find the common objectives from the reports of different groups. They were requested to go through all the reports and find the common objectives in these different reports. The objectives were designed as the outputs of the project as follows:

• Strengthen implementing and other concerned agencies • Information and communication system • Train local level institutions and professionals on adaptation to CC and other

environmental institutions • Strengthen national policy and regulatory framework to adequately address obligations

under MEAs, with particular reference to CC d. Priority Activities

The participants were asked to identify options or alternatives under each output. They were told to design the activities which could be implemented and while carrying out this, they were told to

15 15

discuss whether these activities are viable or not. They were also asked to discuss the feasibility of such activities. Output 1: Effective institution framework established

• A study on institutional set-up under federal structure and implement the recommendation of the study

• Develop and implement training programme for staff of key implementing agency (MoEST, MoWR, MLD, NPC, OPMCM etc.)

• Trainers of key public training institutions • Technical and financial support to environmental compliance (standard formulation,

quality monitoring (equipment), demonstration of PPP, vehicle emission testing equipment)

• Support (technical/financial) for the establishment of website at DHM and other environmental database website at MoEST and link these websites of key ministries and departments

• Support to establish coordinating committee headed by Environment Division with representation of section chief of key line ministries

• Development of framework for environmental service in civil service act • Create a core team from international negotiation and enhance their negotiation skills

through training and provide funding for participation Output 2: Public education, information and awareness

• Curriculum of school universities (staff college) • Impact analysis and inventory of vulnerable areas • Develop awareness programme and implementation strategy • Establishment of resource centre and research centre for the collection and dissemination

of CC related information • Development/production of awareness material and dissemination

Output 3: Devise training programme and implementation strategy

• Trained local level institutions and professionals on climate change and other environmental issues

• Improved knowledge on climate change risk management • Policy and legislative frameworks established to mainstream climate change and

environmental concerns into national and sectoral plans and programs • Strengthened implementing and other concerned agencies

16

Day 3 (30 July 2008) Overview of the Second Day Workshop: Gehendra Gurung of Practical Action presented the brief overview of the second day workshop. The facilitator then mentioned about the third day agenda.

6. DESIGN AND MONITORING FRAMEWORK

The facilitator then gave the overview of the Design and Monitoring Framework mentioning all the different steps such as impact, outcome, outputs, activities and milestones, input, performance indicators and data sources. He gave example of another project clarifying the ways of designing output, activities, input, indicators, data source etc. The participants were then requested to work in groups to complete the DMF. The impact and outcome of the project were designed as follows: Impact: Reduced environmental risk Outcome: Enhanced country capacity to manage climate change and other environmental issues. Based on the experience and relation to specific output, the participants were divided into four groups to develop four different frameworks. In each group, the participants discussed in detail about the various aspects of the outputs such as developing activities and milestones, indicators, data sources and inputs. After the completion of the framework, all the participants revisited the activities and other details in the framework to see any overlapping or gapping. a. DMF 1: Effective Institutional Framework Indicators and Targets Data sources Inputs/budget Output: Effective institutional framework established

Functional environmental enforcement agency at national level in 3 years time

MoEST/Report/Organization chart

Activities: Study on institutional set-up under federated structure for environment protection with focus on a dedicated environment agency, environment services and legislations

A detailed study report with implementation plan (within 2 years)

MoEST Environment Division

Rs. 3 million (NC 3 mm, regional, national consultation and international visits)

Establish core team for international negotiation and effective implementation of MEAs

A national team for international negotiation be formed within a year and trained regularly

MoEST and concerned ministries

Rs. 2.5 million (participation and international training to core team)

17 17

Indicators and Targets Data sources Inputs/budget Finalise the draft air quality management action program and develop project proposals for prioritized actions

AQMAP approved by GoN project proposals for prioritized actions identified in a year

MoEST Environment Division

Rs. 1 million (NC - 4 man months and consultations)

Establish a climate change desk at MoEST and concerned ministries

A functional climate change desk under MoEST and concerned ministries formed in 6 months of project initiation

MoEST and concerned ministries

Rs. 0.2 million (organization of meetings)

b. DMF 2: Environmental Protection Fund

Indicators and Targets Data sources Inputs/budget Output: Environment Protection Fund expanded and operationalized

Well functional fund mechanism

MoEST - Environment Division

Activities: Review of existing various funds

A review report within 6 months

MoEST Environment Division

Rs. 0.5 million (NC 2 mm + consultation)

Explore the international best practices of fund management

A report is produced within 6 months

MoEST Environment Division

Identification of green tax areas

A recommendation report on green taxes within 6 months

MoEST Environment Division

Rs. 3 million (NC 2 mm regional visits and consultations)

Develop legal framework for fund management

An Act on EPF management drafted within a year and implemented within 2 years

Legal/convention Division MoEST (draft) Gazette (Act)

Rs. 2 millions (NC 3 mm consultation and procedures)

c. DMF 3: Effective Policy for Mainstreaming Environment and Sectoral Plans and

Processes Indicators and

Targets Data sources Inputs/budget

Output: Effective policy recommendations developed for mainstreaming environment and sectoral plans and processes

A position paper developed

Project progress report

Activities: Background papers to

20 papers by end of 6 months (in

Quarterly progress report

USD 100,000

18

Indicators and Targets

Data sources Inputs/budget

demonstrate links between economic development/environment/ poverty

relevant areas/sectors)

Review mission reports

Awareness/sensitize policy makers, legislators, judiciary, media and community groups on links between economic development/environment/ poverty

Workshop seminars - 12 Brochures - 5 TV/Radio documentaries - 1

Workshop/ training reports

Workshop - $ 100,000 Brochures - $ 30,000 TV/Radio - $ 15,000 Total $ 150,000

Train/capacity building at local/national level to review policies/programmes/projects from contemporary environmental perspectives

1 overseas exposure program within 6 months Technical trainings - 6 within 12 months

Workshop/ training reports

Tech. training - $ 100,000 Overseas expert - $ 50,000 Total $ 150,000

Review mandate of NPC to serve as apex agency for mainstreaming environment and climate change concerns

Institutional assessment report

Project progress report

$ 10,000 (local consultant)

Assessment of effectiveness of the integration process

Pilot projects (local level) to demonstrate links between economic development, environment and poverty reduction

3 pilot projects initiated within 6 months

Field reports $ 300,000 ($100,000 per site) for 2 years Local consultant - 18 mm - $ 60,000 International consultant - 2 mm - $ 40,000 Total $ 100,000

Formulate a position paper to recommend the framework for mainstreaming environment and climate change

A position paper developed within 12 months of commencement

d. DMF 4: Public Education, Information and Awareness

Output: Public education, information and awareness developed, implemented and sustained

Indicators and Targets Data sources Inputs/budget

19 19

Activities: Develop curricula for various training institutions

For all training: Training = 25-30 participants curriculum developed

Training institutions NRs. 2 million (national consultants and workshop)

Training programme on international negotiation and participation

Two trainings in 3 years, two delegates/year

Training report traveled report at MoEST

Rs. 3 million

Training on CDM and carbon credit (PIN, PDD, R-PIN etc.)

3 trainings in 3 years or 2 training/year

Training report Rs. 1.5 million (international and national consultants, MoEST)

Training on impact and vulnerability assessment tools

Two trainings each year

Training report Rs. 2 million (international and national consultants)

Training for media at central and regional levels

Two trainings each year

Media reports and coverage

Rs. 2 million (NEFEJ and national consultants)

Training and orientation for constituent assembly members

One training for environment committee members, 2 sensitisation programmes to other CA members

Issues raised by CA members

NRs. 0.3 million (MoEST and national consultants)

TOT to produce CC and environment champions at district level

3 TOT (25 participants) to produce district level trainers

Training reports Rs. 1.5 million (MoEST and national consultants)

Production of information materials (booklets, leaflets, posters, digital brochures, documentaries)

One documentary/yr, poster, leaflets, brochures according to needs

Media coverage Rs. 3 million (National NGOs)

Awareness activities (media campaign, tele serial, radio serials, street dances)

Media campaign Media coverage Rs. 6 million NEFEJ and MoEST

Training for village level institutions

400 trainings at VDC level

Training completion report

Rs. 8 million, LDTA and NAVIN

Legend: UNDP NAPA Other Donors After the lunch, the workshop was continued with the observation of the charts and reports prepared by different groups.

20

e. Presentation of DMF:

On behalf of the participants and the organisers, Mr. Purushottam Ghimire of Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (MoEST) presented all the DMFs in the plenary. Apart from the participants, Mr. Laxman P. Mainali, Officiating Secretary and Paulo Spantigati, Office In Charge of Asian Development Bank were also present in the programme. Mr. Ghimire summed up all the outputs, key activities, inputs and indicators.

7. CLOSING ADDRESSES Officiating Secretary of MoEST Mr. Laxman P. Mainali, Officiating Secretary of MoEST in his closing address thanked the participants for their participation and ADB for conducting the workshop. MoEST appreciate the efforts by ADB and the participants in identifying key mechanisms to strengthen environmental management, climate change institutions and capacities. He emphasised on being mindful of any duplication or gapping while designing this type of project. OIC, ADB Nepal Resident Mission Mr. Paulo Spantigati, Officer in Charge of ADB Nepal Resident Mission thanked the participants for such an important work done in the past 3 days. He said that we are already seeing climate change impacts and the people of Nepal are increasingly at risk from extreme events and increased variability in rainfall patterns. Impacts are particularly felt at the community level and provide additional challenges to the government’s national agenda and overall poverty reduction program. He also recognized that Nepal has done a lot of work so far to assess its own needs and capacity; through the National Capacity Self-Assessment process, communication reports to the UNFCCC, and activities by NGOs and community groups. He mentioned that this TA directly follows up on those self-assessments and will hopefully implement the actions that have already been identified. The design of the TA has benefited from collective knowledge and active input. This is an unusual process in developing a TA in such a collaborative way. It improves the quality of the TA design and will hopefully be used more often. The degree of ownership of the diverse group of stakeholders present is evident and encourages you to maintain this during project implementation. One of the key issues coming out of the work done by government and others and confirmed during this workshop is that national capacity for climate change risk management, and environmental management in general, needs to be strengthened. There are 4 key areas where ADB input will be strategic and timely. He briefly explained about the identification of need to strengthen institutions at the national and community level, planning to establishing a broad-based public information, education, and awareness program, recognizing the need to mainstream climate change and environmental protection within the national and sectoral policies and programs and emphasizing that funding mechanism should also be addressed. He said that the establishment of four programs over the next three years will build an important foundation for ongoing environment and climate change risk management programs undertaken at the national and local levels. ADB is pleased to assist Nepal in this regard. He thanked all for dedicating time, energies, and ideas/solutions and assured of ADB help to realise the project.

21 21

ADB Task Manager Cindy Malvicini from ADB expressed her appreciation to MoEST for hard work and coordination in convening successful workshop, and participants for frank and open input into workshop and TA design. She outlined next steps to finalise TA proposal. Closing Remarks from Participants As the workshop would not be successful without the active participation of all the participants, they were requested to close the workshop with their brief remarks. So, all the participants were requested to give brief opinion and feeling about the workshop. Finally, all the participants and the organizing team left for Kathmandu.

22

Annex 1: Agenda of the Workshop

Strengthening Capacity for Managing Climate Change and the Environment Tentative Agenda for Project Design Workshop

28 to 30 July 2008 Day 1 (28 July) 8.00–8.30 Registration and Transport to Hotel

10:00-10:30 Arrival and Check-In

10:30-11.00 Tea 11.00-13.00

Introductory Plenary Session

Welcome Remarks, Introductions and Context Setting Objectives of the Workshop Background to the Project Design Workshop

• “Preparation of Nepal’s National Adaptation Plan of Action (NAPA)”

• “Developing a Climate Change Policy” • ”Strengthening Government Capacity for Managing

Climate Change and the Environment: MoEST’s Perspectives”

13.00-14.00 Lunch

14.00-17.00 Situation Analysis – Part A: Stakeholder Analysis

17.00-17.30 Tea

17.30-18.30 Situation Analysis – Part B: Problem Analysis

19.00-21.00 Group Cocktails and Dinner

Day 2 (29 July) 8.30-8.45 Opening Plenary

8.45-10.15 Situation Analysis – Part B: Problem Analysis (Continued)

10.15-10.45 Tea

10.45-12.30 Plenary: Problem Tree Analysis

23 23

12.30-13.30 Lunch

13.30-15.30 Project Identification: Part A – Objectives Analysis

15.30-16.15 Tea Break and Galley Walk

16.15-18.30 Project Identification: Part B – Result Chain Analysis

19.00-21.00 Dinner

Day 3 (30 July) 8.30-8.40 Opening Plenary

8.40-13.30

Project Design: Design and Monitoring Framework

12.30-13.30 Lunch - Senior Government officials arrive

13.30-14.30 Project Design: Presentation and Validation

14.30-15.00 Remarks/Responses

15.00-15.15 Next Steps

15.15-15.30 Closing Remarks from Participants

15.30-16.00

Tea, Pack, Load Bus

16.00 Bus Departs for Kathmandu

24

Annex 2: List of Participants

Project Design Workshop 28 to 30 July 2008

Nagarkot

Government 1. Laxmi Bilas Koirala Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers 2. Mukti Narayan Paudel National Planning Commission Secretariat 3. Gopal Amatya Water and Energy Commission Secretariat 4. Madhav Prasad Ojha Ministry of Home Affairs 5. Hari Prasad Sharma Ministry of Physical Planning and Works 6. Binod Kumar Upadhyay Ministry of Industry, Commerce and Supplies 7. Dr. Deepakmani

Pokharel Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives

8. Kiran Rupakheti Ministry of General Administration 9. Jagat Kumar Bhusal Department of Hydrology and Meteorology 10 Raju Laudari Alternative Energy Promotion Centre 11 Anil Kafle Association of DDCs of Nepal, Sanepa, Lalitpur 12 Saroj Nepal Association of VDCs of Nepal, Dillibazar, Kathmandu 13 Laxman Mainali Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (MoEST) 14 Iswor Singh Thapa Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (MoEST) 15 Purushottam Ghimire Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (MoEST) 16 Ramesh Sthapit Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (MoEST) 17 Batu K. Uprety Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (MoEST) 18 Arjun Thapa Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (MoEST) 19 Chiranjibi Gautam NCSA Project

NGOs 20 Nimesh Regmi Nepal Forum of Environmental Journalists 21 Gopal Raj Joshi Clean Air Network Nepal 22 Bal Krishna Prasai Better Nepal 23 Mandira Shrestha ICIMOD, Lalitpur 24 Moon Shrestha WWF – Nepal Programme 25 Ram Chandra Khanal World Conservation Union (IUCN) 26 Bibek Chapagain Winrock International 27 Gehendra Gurung Practical Action, Reducing Vulnerability

Academia 28 Prabin Kishor Sharma Central Department of Environmental Science, T.U., Kirtipur 29 Dr. Rijan Bhakta

Kayastha Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, K.U., Dhulikhel, Kavre

Donors 30 Vijaya Singh UNDP, Pulchowk, Lalitpur 31 Sanath Ranawana UNEP-ROAP 32 Cindy Malvicini Asian Development Bank, Manila

25 25

33 Nogendra Sapkota Asian Development Bank, Nepal 34 George de Berdt

Romilly Asian Development Bank, Consultant

35 Paulo Spantigati Asian Development Bank, Nepal 36 Tatwa P. Timsina Asian Development Bank, Consultant

26

Annex 3: Problem Trees

1. Inadequate knowledge

Polluted

Environment

Weak implementation, monitoring and evaluation

Increased scientific uncertainty

Weak country position in

international negotiation

process

Inappropriate policy

formulation

Inappropriate adaptation measures

Limited country capacity to manage CC and other env. issues

Inadequate knowledge on CC and other env. issues from national to local level

Lack of knowledge management

Limited research

Uninformed stakeholders

Limited resources

Low priority

Inadequate tech. experts

Limited infrastructure for data generation and mgmt.

Inadequate effort for mobilising existing research

instuitutions

Lack of central research centre

Limited linkage among existing stakeholders

Scattered information, knowledge

and materials

Policy documents, information

materials are not in local language

27 27

2. Low priority on national agenda

Lack of realization of scale of loss/damage

caused by env. problems

Inadequate demand from different stakeholders

Burning issues other than env. that need urgent

attention

Weak environmental governance

Limited country capacity

Weak data base system Low level of awareness

Low level

of education

Inadequate preventive/protective measures

Political stability and commitmen

t

Political parties, govt. and educated

people are insensitive to

the env. issues

Inadequate integration of env. issues with sectoral policies and programs

Peace, reconstruction,

rehabilitation,

and re-unification are

primary agenda

Attraction to short term benefits by

not realizing long term

loss

Loss of env. resources

Low priority and commitment on CC and env. issues

Common properties

non exclusive

28

3. Weak environmental justice

Lacking environmental

justice

Peoples livelihood threatened

Umbrella policies on CC and env. Issues is not in

place

Weak environmental governance

Downward accountability of organizations working in env. Sector is weak

Limited country capacity to manage CC and other env. issues

Code of Conduct rules, regulations and guidelines

not clear

Information mgmt is ineffective

Weak enforcement of env. laws

Ineffective monitoring mechanism

Punishment and reward

system is not effective

Inadequate env. Rights

ensured/mentioned in existing system

Weak linkages between central and local level as well as inter organization

No defined authority and responsibility between

organization

Inadequate communication between stakeholders

Local govt. has

inadequate mandate on env. sector

Vested interest of different groups

Violence of environmental compliances

Resource/ecosystem degradation

Peoples’ ownership on the issues is not felt

Low participation of local level in CC and env.

Lack of awareness

about CC and env. issues

29 29

4. Limited Resources

Limited financial resource allocation

Env/CC situation degradation

Difficulty in addressing env. issues

Limited country capacity to manage CC and env

Limited resources (financial and technical)

Inappropriate human resources

Inadequate env. staff positions

No Env. Dept. & civil service group

CC and env. no govt. priority (MOF)

Other Priority (poverty and security)

Env. not viewed as part of poverty reduction/Dev.

Capacity of civil society is weak (advocacy)

30

5. Poor Coordination

Impact on human health

Env. Degradation

•

Duplication/Overlapping responsibilities among line

ministries/dev. workers

No clear responsibilities of EPC,

NPC

Organizational

supremacy/inferiori

ty, overwhel

ming personalized issues

Poor information

network

Poor linkage and

harmonization to local

bodies

Pressure

groups

Poor coordination

Weak env. governance

Weak compliance/enforcement

Weak coordinating

/no secretariats

Defined procedures, norms lacking

Political interest biasness

Shortage of professional knowledge, Lack of institutional memory, Lacks efficient knowledge transfer system

Absence of coordinating mechanism

Different

organizationa

l interest

s

Limited country capacity to manage CC and other environmental issues

Isolated works (misuse and resources)

I/NGOs preference in working

in isolation, Lack of

legal clarity, Weak

capacity local govt.

Frequent

transfer of

organizationa

l leaders

Absence of env.

Services

under CSAct

No policy integration

31 31

Annex 4: Objective Tree

1. Adequate knowledge

Improved well being

Improved implementation, monitoring and implementation capacity

Scientific knowledge and know how enhanced

Influence international negotiation

process

Sound policy formulation (assessment, mitigation,

Training curriculum prepared for local govt. policymakers, judiciary

Strengthened knowledge on CC and other env. issues from national to local

Inadequate knowledge on CC and other env. issues from national to local level

Improved

knowledge mgmt

Establish central

resource centre

Better informed

stakeholders

Curriculu

m updated

Policy docs/info materials published

n local language

Increased

training at all levels

Improved networkin

g and communic

ation

Increased resources (govt./donors)

Enhanced research capacity

Increased research

Link applied research

with academia

Enhance

d awarenes

s

32

2. Priority on national agenda

Environmental resources protected

High priority and strong commitment to climate change and env. issues

Increased demand from stakeholders

from stakeholders for

env.

People and govt. aware and

sensitized on scale of loss

Strongly committed and prioritized CC and env. issues

quality

Proactive mitigation measures taken to address

Long and short term env. benefits

projected and publicized

Ensured ownership

and participation

of people/com

munity

Integrated env. issues

with sectoral policies and programmes

33

3. Environmental governance

Healthy ecosystem

Comprehensive policy on Cc and other env. issues

prepared

Good environmental governance

Organization working in env. sector are accountable to local level/people

Env. compliance are met

Code of conduct at national and local level

prepared

Effective information management using latest technologies

Effective law, guidelines and regulations prepared

Result based monitoring system with

checklist institutionalize

d

Transparent info sharing

Peoples own the issues on CC and

env.

Aware people participate in CC and env. activities

Strong linkage between stakeholders

Strong country capacity to manage CC and other env. issues

Env. friendly livelihood

Environmental justice

Env. rights ensured in

constitution as

fundamental rights

Effective punishment and reward system in place (in existing acts

and legislation)

34

4. Resources

Improved environment

Capacity developed to address the CC and env. issues

Availability of competent/adequate resources

Adequate financial allocation

Provision of env. service

group in civil service.

Establishment of env.

dept.

Environmental values /poverty reduction

High govt. priority to CC and env. along

with other issues

Env. climate

fund through pollution

Availability of sufficient human resources at all levels

Local bodies

staffed with env.

specialists

Effective advocacy for env. issue by civil society

35

5. Strong Coordination

Clear role and responsibilities established

Clear norms and process

Information and

knowledge mgmt. system

Harmonisation of EPA and LSGA

Professionalism

in civil

Effective coordination

Strengthened country capacity

Well functional secretariat

Strong local bodies

Strong political

commitment

Well institutionalized env. Govt. system in Nepal

Clean and healthy environment

Effective district coordination mechanism

Proactive civil socie

ty

36