Taller subregional para Puntos Focales del FMAM en América Latina Lima, Perú, 29 de septiembre al 1 de octubre de 2009

1

Proposed GEF-5 Programmingand Policy

Recommendations

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

General issues (2)

GEF resources total more than $10 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

General issues (3)

• 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

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

Focal Area Strategies

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)

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

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

(NOTE: enabling activities will be supported under FAS for eligible countries using expedited process)

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:

International Waters (2)

• Catalyze multi-state cooperation to balance conflicting water uses in transboundary surface and groundwater basins while considering climatic variability and change

• 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

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 agroecosystem 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

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

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

Engagement with the private sector (1)

Private sector engagement outside of resource allocation system is proposed (difficult to induce countries to allocate resources to promote private sector engagement under RAF)

GEF Earth Fund - pilot public-private partnership concept was approved with funding allocation of $50 million

Purpose is to mobilize private capital into projects, technologies and business models that contribute to protection of global environment

Earth Fund structured around “Platforms” with portfolio of projects

Earth Fund Platforms have regional or global focus

Engagement with the private sector (2)

Platforms must be aligned with GEF focal area strategies

Projects under Platforms address specific environmental challenges or leverage business models or financial instruments

GEF Council approves Platforms; projects approved by GEF Agencies that manage Platforms

Proposal that resources be allocated for expanded and recapitalized Earth Fund in GEF-5, with aim of leveraging additional resources from private sector

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

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

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

Corporate Programs / Voluntary National Business Plans (3)

Major strength of GEF as a financial mechanism is support for recipient countries to help meet their commitments to global conventions

GEF strategies are articulated focal area by focal area and draw closely on convention guidance, but project design and implementation can seek synergies and connections across different focal areas, reflecting multiple needs of recipient countries

Preparation of Voluntary National Business Plans could help countries use GEF investment to strategically address multiple objectives

Corporate Programs / Voluntary National Business Plans – Implementation Process (4)

1. Recipient country prepares Grant Proposal (including Terms of Reference for Business Plan and budget) and submits to GEF Secretariat for review

2. GEF Secretariat reviews proposal and CEO approves

3. Grant Agreement, including milestones, disbursement arrangements, and deliverables, signed between recipient country and GEF CEO; and Disbursement Letter signed by GEF CEO

4. Arrangements for disbursements to Recipient Countries will follow World Bank procedures (recipient country opens designated account, submits withdrawal application, receives funding)

5. Country prepares National Business Plan

6. Completed National Business Plan submitted to Secretariat with activity completion report (including financial and disbursement requirements)

Corporate Programs / National Steering Committees (1)

National GEF Political and Operational Focal 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

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

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

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; (i.e. South America / Central America / Caribbean)

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 previous point 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

Corporate Programs / Capacity Development – (1)

All GEF capacity development activities undertaken under Strategic Approach to Enhance Capacity Building and Capacity Development Initiative approved by Council

Strategy reflects convention guidance to GEF to support country-driven capacity development activities

In GEF-4, support available to prepare National Capacity Self Assessments (NSCAs) in 143 countries, following Capacity Development Initiative

Corporate Programs / Capacity Development – (2)

Evaluation of capacity development activities proposed for 2010 in order to prepare new strategy to be considered by Council in 2011

Proposed GEF-5 approach to capacity building: capacity development through regular projects and programs

Stand-alone projects for capacity development will be limited to specific strengthening of capacities directly related to GEF or to implementing international conventions

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

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

Corporate Programs / Conflict resolution

Well-functioning conflict resolution system critical for ensuring countries have trustworthy system for resolving complaints and conflicts

Conflict Resolution Commissioner introduced at GEF Secretariat in GEF 4

Expected GEF-5 developments: Enhanced measures to protect integrity of GEF partnership (policy reviews

and assessments to sustain confidence in GEF; review of public disclosure; development of guidelines, procedures and tools; sensitization of stakeholders; enhanced responsiveness)

Conflict/dispute settlement framework for handling cases, documentation, data base and tracking tools, communication, preventive strategy, rules and procedures, strengthening capacity of Secretariat and other stakeholders

Special outreach and cooperation with GEF Agencies, Focal Points and Conventions

Broadening engagement with Agencies

Three phases in evolution of engagement of GEF Agencies: • From GEF inception to 1999, 3 Implementing Agencies had direct access

to GEF resources• From 1999 to 2006, 7 Executing Agencies added and progressively gained

direct access to GEF resources• Post-2006 period, level playing field established for all ten GEF Agencies

based on comparative advantage

Recognition that GEF is poised to be active in new areas in GEF 5: • Enlarged scope in chemicals• Expanded approach in climate change• Integrated water resources management involving both surface and

groundwater

Acknowledgement that multilateral agencies, NGOs and others could play useful roles in GEF partnership

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

Under present rules, Council reviews all final project documents before endorsement during four-week web-posting

Streamlining the Project Cycle - FSP (2)

Council has not rejected any projects before endorsement during past five 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

Streamlining the Project Cycle – MSP and EA (3)

CEO will continue to 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

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, project preparation 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.