Evaluation of Denmark’s Climate Change Funding to Developing

Countries

Overview of the Findings

DIIS Seminar Copenhagen 30 September 2015

2

Purpose of the Evaluation

Core evaluation question:

• What is the impact of the Danish climate change funding on mitigation of and adaptation to the consequences of climate change in developing countries?

Two subsidiary tasks:

• Identify the transformations and contributions of Danish climate-change funding to global climate change policies and financing; and

• Provide lessons from this support to inform the shape and scope of future interventions and the Climate Envelope as a whole.

Level of Support & How it was Spent

Portfolio primary focus approx. DKK 3

billion

Implementing partner sample –

DKK 1.2 billion

3

4

Results from the Interventions

5

Global Agenda, Poverty & Social Inclusion

• Successful influence on global climate change policies

Capacity building for poorer countries at global negotiations

• Stronger voice for vulnerable groups

• Poverty focus thru’ broadly based approaches

6

Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy

• Builds on Danish expertise and experience

• Strong focus on policy influence and modelling

• Working in middle-income countries provides lower risk inputs for low-income countries

• Some successes in attracting private sector investment partners

7

Portfolio-level Findings

8

Overall Portfolio

• Good relevance and alignment with Danish and partner aims and priorities

• Very wide range of themes, modalities and geography

• Intense pressure to spend post Bali 2007

• Limited experience captured on what does/does not work

• Tendency to be opportunistic

9

Portfolio Management

• Similar issues to those of other donors

• Complex institutional framework

• Diverse guidance documentation

• Annual budgeting

• Limited lesson learning

• Good use of energy expertise but limited “Danish Identity”

10

Conclusions and Lessons

• Uncertainty in 2008, hence “research”

• Negative results are not failures

• Need to consolidate, be more strategic and enhance cross-portfolio coherence

11

Recommendations

1. Develop Climate Envelope strategy

2. Improve Climate Envelope structure

3. Strengthen M&E and feedback system

4. Maximise funding leverage

5. Strengthen policy influence and cross-portfolio coherence

12

Points for Discussion

• Climate Change cuts across institutional structures in donor and partner countries

• Middle-income cf. Low income partners

• Policy “balloon” detached from reality?

• Objectives, safeguards and multiple voices?

• Decision making by consensus or opting out?

• Cost-effective evaluation approaches?

• Difficulties of tracing climate finance

13

That’s All Folks!!