Advice/activities related to adaptation to the Global Environment

Facility

Habiba GitayVisiting Fellow, Australian National

UniversityVice Chair, STAP

habiba.gitay@anu.edu.au

Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel (STAP)

Presentation…

• To share some of STAP’s present and future activities - – alert you to the need for possible input from

AIACC researchers– to inform about activities within GEF to help

with the future plans of AIACC

Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel (STAP) of the GEF

• 15 members (internationally recognised experts)

• Diverse expertise

• Regional representation

Provide advice to the GEF and bring relevant scientific and technical knowledge to the attention of the GEF

Focal Areas of the GEFFocal Area Projects include:

Climate Change

Mostly mitigation, but this year on adaptation

Biodiversity Concentrate on conservation of many ecosystem types

International Waters

Rivers, lakes, aquifers, coastal and inland wetlands, LMEs

Ozone Depletion Reduction of Methyl Bromide

Land degradation

Multi-Focal (OP #12)

New focal areas

Integrated ecosystem management

POPs Capacity building, non-combustion disposal technologies

Summary of GEF Investments (1991-2002)

Focal Area GEF Investments ($m)

Climate Change 1407.4

Biodiversity 1485.8

International Waters 550.8

Ozone Depletion 169.9

Multi-Focal (OP #12) 210.0

POPs 20.9

LD later (about $500m)

GEF projects…

• Generally in one Focal Area (except OP#12)

• Generally do not consider the effect of project in one area on the global benefits of other areas

• No systematic consideration of linkages between the global change issues including CC impacts

Example… analysis of recent projects submittedReviewed project documents

Our assessment is all should have looked at the effect of CC on the project

• 12 BD - 9 include CC; 2 dealing with carbon sequestration

• 2 in IW - neither mention CC• 8 LD - 7 mention CC; 5 propose to use it in

project design

Missed Opportunities

Action: A Design Tool

To help conceptually incorporate the major interlinkages into project design by identifying the impact of a project done in one focal area on another

Help identify what to do, NOT how to do it (first step)

Major intervention types GEF funds

1. Protected Areas - Terrestrial, Coastal

2. Ecosystem Management - arid and semi-arid ecosystems, forested ecosystems, Inland Wetlands

3. Renewable energy (micro hydrodams, solar, wind)

4. Management of Transboundary Water Bodies or International Waters (including river, lake, aquifer, Large

marine ecosystem

Others types of areas in which projects are done (win-win)

• Energy efficiency (barrier removal is a policy interlinkages)

• IW - Sectoral Demonstration Projects • POPs (stockpile disposal)• Adaptation to climate change

A project can have a positive or negative effect on another focal area.

Through the design tool (a checklist), in early stages of project development, project developers ask a series of questions with the aim to maximise the benefits and minimise negative effects

Example Ecosystem management in semi-arid lands

Ecosystem management - restoration and rehabilitation of semi-arid lands

Primary goals:

Decrease land degradation

Conservation and sustainable use of the biodiversit y

Local people deriving direct socio-economic benefits

Positive effects on other focal areas:

CC: Increased carbon storage if project is successful

Reduced wind erosion can lead to decreased dust storms if large areas are planted

IW: Decreased sediment flow; decreased fluctuations in seasonal flows and water erosion, increased productivity of aquatic biota if project is successful

Negative effects on other focal areas: BD: Changes in herbivore communities and fire regime if there are

changes in c3:c4 mix due to replanting activities and/or as a response to changes in the atmospheric CO2 concentration

IW: Reduced water related gains to freshwater bodies if using species with high water demand

Example: Design considerations (checklist) for restoration and rehabilitation of semi-arid lands

• Have the effects of climate change and land use change been considered?

• Is the use of native species being encouraged? • Are multi-species plantings encouraged?• Has the potential increased risk of invasiveness due

to use of any exotics been assessed?• Have tradeoffs between livelihood needs (eg.

firewood), biodiversity goals and reduction in land degradation been considered?

• Has the potential increase in water demand posed by use of any exotic species been assessed?

Design Tool - next steps and other activities

• How to incorporate interlinkages between global issues (CC, BD etc) into projects

• Adaptation to climate change - a particularly valuable theme for assessing the nature of interlinkages and exploring ways for dealing with interlinkages in practical situations.

• Input into strategic priority on adaptation (SPA)

– state some of the guidelines for information – A possible framework for the SPA– Multi-agency project– Small grants

Activity: workshop in Feb-March 2005 Bring together academics, practicians, bilateral

and multi-lateral funding agencies.Work with the Implementing agencies and GEF

Secretariat

• Input into a framework for the SPA - so that projects are not funded on first come basis, not infrastructure only projects etc

• To identify and evaluate options for adaptation to climate change in different regions of the developing world

• Discuss practical ways for implementation of adaptation options

SPA - operational guidelines

• Pilot or demonstration projects to show how adaptation planning and assessment can be practically translated into national policy and sustainable development planning

• Portfolio designed to maximize opportunity for learning and capacity building

• be representative of particularly vulnerable regions, sectors, geographic areas, ecosystems, communities.

• Use experience from the SPA to develop good practices and better mainstream adaptation into GEF activities

Source:http://www.thegef.org/Documents/Council_Documents/GEF_C23/C.23.Inf.8.Rev.1_Adaptation_Council_paper_FINAL.doc

SPA - operational guidelines contd.

• pilot must include: (i) activities within a natural resources management context that generate global environmental benefits, and (ii) adaptation measures that provide other major development benefits (e.g. WEHAB, i.e. water, energy, health, agriculture, biodiversity).

• the approach to incrementality and co-financing will be consistent with GEF practices and overall portfolio experience. Co-financing for each project will depend on the delivery of global environmental benefits, additional costs associated with actions necessitated by climate change, and the degree of capacity building. The larger the project the greater the expected cost sharing. (contrast with other climate fund)

Multi-agency adaptation project (MSP)

• Information on adaptation in GEF funded and other projects/activities scattered

• Bring this together in a “knowledge system”• Extract major lesson learned and incorporate them

into projects being funded through the SPA• Phased approach - concentrate on one or two

regions in the first year and then go wider• Identify information, research and implementation

gaps and generate other projects• Suggest ways of incorporating lessons learned into

the GEF portfolio - beyond the SPA

Small Grant Projects (SGPs) in SPA

• SGP’s activities are demand-driven - ideas and activities arising from communities, NGOs and CBOs

• Pilot community adaptation initiatives – (i) developing community based capacity and tools

to respond to adaptation; – (ii) financing diverse community-based adaptation

projects in a number of selected countries and – (iii) capture and disseminate lessons learned at

the community level• Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5

Total

GEF (US$m) 1.09 1.13 1.58 0.82 0.37 4.99

Some information for “futures” discussion

• SPA is a pilot - long term funding mechanism through the focal area

• Targeted Research: medium sized or regular projects

– "goal oriented research that supports the GEF Operational Strategy by providing information, knowledge and tools that improve the quality and effectiveness of the development and implementation of GEF projects and programmes“

• Some discussion on programmatic approach - outcome oriented rather than project by project

Thank you