Upload
betty-henry
View
257
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
GEF National CoordinationCountry Mechanisms, Processes, Experiences
Sub-regional Workshop for GEF Focal Pointsin Latin AmericaSao Paulo, Brazil, 15-16 October 2007
Overview
I. GEF Focal Points and their coordination roles
II. National coordination mechanisms
III. Elements of successful national GEF coordination mechanisms
IV. Common challenges to coordination
V. Benefits of national GEF coordination
VI. Country experiences with coordination
Why this presentation?
GEF Focal Points have consistently requested guidance on improving GEF coordination in their countries:
Through GEF National Dialogue process
During 2006 GEF Sub-regional consultations
In responses to GEF CSP questionnaire sent to Focal Points in late 2006
Sources for this Presentation
GEF National Dialogue Initiative and CSP study “GEF National Coordination - Lessons Learned” (2005)
Country presentations at Third GEF Assembly National Dialogue side-event on GEF coordination (2006)
Case studies prepared for CSP by national GEF Focal Points on GEF coordination (2007)
I. GEF Focal Points
Play critical coordination roles regarding GEF matters at different levels:
National
Regional
Global
GEF Focal Points (continued)
National coordination:
Sectoral coordination (inter-ministerial and inter-agency), including with convention focal points
Outreach to other national stakeholders (civil society organizations, academic/scientific institutions, private sector)
Liaison with GEF Implementing and Executing Agencies (IAs/EAs)
Linkages with other international cooperation agencies
FPs help inform, mobilize andEngage wide range of stakeholders
FPs facilitate coordinationwith sectoral agencies on
integrating global environmentinto development plans
FPs helpinfluence policy
by upscaling lessons
From policy makersto local groups
Across range ofsector activities /
environmental issues
GEF Focal Points (continued)
Regional coordination:
Participation in GEF constituency meetings and activities
Engagement with regional cooperation frameworks
Involvement in regional projects and initiatives
Global coordination:
Liaison with GEF Secretariat
Constituency representation on GEF Council (on a rotating basis)
II. National GEF Coordination Mechanisms
Support Focal Points’ coordination roles
Different models and compositions
National GEF Committee most common
May include: Government, civil society, private sector, IAs/EAs, other donors
Provide sectoral expertise
Provide institutional continuity given FP changes
III. Elements of successful national GEF coordination mechanisms
Leadership by committed, informed, dynamic individuals
Broad participation by national stakeholders, including civil society
Clearly defined roles for IAs/EAs (whether as regular members, observers, or resources persons)
Informed about global environmental issues and up-to-date on GEF policies and procedures
Elements of successful national GEF coordination mechanisms (continued)
Means to integrate GEF and national priorities and strategies
Effective links with convention focal points and activities
Monitoring role of national GEF projects and portfolio and application of lessons learned
Capable of growth and evolution
IV. Common challenges to coordination
Focal Point personnel changes hamper continuity
Resource constraints
GEF procedures frustrate national stakeholders
Broad stakeholder participation proving difficult to achieve
V. Benefits of national GEF coordination
Benefits specific to the GEF:
Facilitates endorsement of GEF project concepts by Focal Points
Increases awareness and appreciation of GEF and its mandates and activities
Encourages greater local, sectoral, and national involvement in GEF programs and projects
Promotes participation in monitoring of GEF projects
Fosters a shared commitment to goals of the GEF
Benefits of national GEF coordination (continued)
Benefits integrating the GEF:
Enables better integration of GEF in broader national environment and sustainable development frameworks
Reveals commonalities and synergies involving national GEF portfolios and related government and donor activities and projects
Improves flow of information among stakeholders and quality of decisions made on global environmental matters
Encourages and sustains involvement of national stakeholders in the global dialogue on the environment
VI. Country experiences with coordination
Following examples show how countries have managed coordination challenges and the good practices that have evolved in distinctive national contexts
Country experience: Bolivia
Broad participation of national stakeholders in GEF Committee Nearly equal representation of Government and civil society
members Five Vice-Ministries, including OFP and PFP Two national NGO networks Indigenous peoples’ organization Ecology institute Private sector organization
Potential benefits: Transparent and democratic decision-making facilitated Global environment goals and information widely
disseminated
Country experience: Cameroon
GEF National Consultative Committee Role Identify and Prioritize Project Concepts
Provide technical and financial advice to identify and validate project concepts that comply with GEF priorities and strategies and reflect national priorities and plans
Facilitate GEF Focal Point endorsement
Country experience: China
China GEF Office
Established by Ministry of Finance and State Environmental Protection Administration in 2000
Composed of director and four technical staff Objective “to better fulfill China’s roles and
responsibilities under the international conventions with improved management of GEF projects” by:Studying convention and GEF strategies and
policies to propose government responses
Country experience: China (continued)
Capturing new GEF developments for translation and dissemination to national stakeholders as needed
Supporting potential project proponents
Providing GEF training to existing and potential government partners
Training project management offices in financial budgeting and reporting
Promoting and facilitating information exchanges between projects
Preparing documents for GEF Council meetings
Disseminating information about GEF in China to national stakeholders and the international community
Country experience: Colombia
Coordination and Portfolio Monitoring
Small GEF Coordination Committee consisting of OFP (Ministry of Environment), Agency for International Cooperation, GEF IAs
Functions include:Regular reviews of project executionTracking portfolio synergies and results
Country experience: Costa Rica
GEF National Consultative Council
Composed of convention and thematic focal points and SGP National Coordinator
Meets monthly to Review project proposals and GEF pipeline Monitor projects Analyze GEF policies in terms of national needs
Is kept informed of GEF policies and procedures by Political Focal Point
Country experience: Egypt
Coordination and National Capacity Self Assessment (NCSA) process outcome
To help overcome capacity constraints and integrate environment into sectoral plans requires:
Establishment of coordination mechanism: GEF National Steering Committee
Strategic planningMonitoring and self assessment
Country experience: Federated States of Micronesia
National coordination and consultation challenges and SIDS
FSM geographic and demographic situation presents biggest challenge
Each of 4 FSM states is semi-autonomous
Islands relatively isolated over a vast area of ocean
Lack of human and financial resources to travel to cover isolated islands
Majority of consultations through internet and e-mail (if available)
Consultations to develop GEF strategies and priority settings benefit from and contribute to existing mechanisms and networks developed since the FSM gained independence in 1979
Country experience: Ivory Coast
Coordination mechanism and project review
Operational Focal Point is supported by a Technical Secretariat
Composed of representatives from Ministry of Environment, Water, and Forests National Bureau of Technical and Development Studies National Coordinator of OFP housed in the National
Investment Bank
Role is to review projects based on GEF criteria and national environmental policies
Country experience: Mauritius
Coordination at project level
Ministry of Finance and Economic Development (OFP and PFP) ensures projects designed according to national priorities
Project development team, led by relevant line ministries and including NGOs, private sector, academia, creates project ownership
GEF project National Steering Committees, composed of high level representatives of key stakeholders, meet 4-6 times annually to monitor overall project implementation
Country experience: Mauritius(continued)
Benefits of coordination mechanism:
Views of key stakeholders gathered and incorporated in project concepts and proposals
Duplication of work is avoided
National strategies, studies, priorities, and targets incorporated in project design
Cross-sectoral issues addressed
Project implementation workloads shared among various agencies
Country experience: Mexico
Coordination and the RAF National Coordination Committee (1999) designed to review and support
proposals for GEF financing and promote interagency cooperation Consensus on GEF interventions means: Broad stakeholder consultations Coordination mechanism
Ensure optimal use of limited and scarce resources Comply with national strategies Assess proposals, review stakeholder roles and avoid undesirable
practices (“first come first served,” portfolios dominated by agency interests, conflicts of interest)
Review and approval - Guidelines, criteria, and priorities for July 2006 - June 2010 , including a methodology to assess global benefits
Project portfolio approval and endorsement by Focal Points
Country experience: Philippines
GEF Coordination with Conventions
OFP developed coordination mechanism with Convention focal point agencies (FPAs)
FPAs organize multi-agency committees to oversee convention commitments including GEF projects
For RAF priority-setting
Biodiversity focal point convened core group of NGOs
Climate change focal point convened Interagency Committee for Climate Change
Country experience: Poland
National coordination and EU accession
Government activities and policy debates dominated by process of joining European Union
Poland to graduate from GEF funding after joining EU
Government of Poland decided to decline new GEF resources in 2006
National Steering Committee previously focused on country-driven projects, often co-financed by SGP and national environmental funds
Country experience: Poland (continued)
Committee will continue to monitor existing projects until completion
Committee plans to evaluate experience of cooperation with GEF
National Steering Committee includes representatives of:
• Ministries of Environment, Economy, and Finance
• Ozone Action Centre
• Institute of Environmental Protection
• EcoFund
• National Fund for Environmental Protection and Water Management
• Institute for Sustainable Development (NGO)
• SGP National Coordinator
Country experience: Sri Lanka
Coordination and National GEF Strategy
New coordination mechanisms needed to implement effectively National GEF Strategy
Support unit for OFP in Ministry of Environment
Sectoral Expert Committees (in GEF focal areas) to support OFP in project proposal review and evaluation
GEF coordinator network linking OFP and other GEF project implementing agencies
Country experience: Sri Lanka (continued)
GEF National Steering Committee to support OFP to:
• endorse projects for GEF funding• monitor and evaluate GEF funded projects in the country • review action/development plans and programmes at the
national/sectoral/provincial level and identify areas best suited for GEF interventions including strategic directions
• advise and assist NOFP to develop guidelines and coordination and dissemination mechanisms
• provide directions for the GEF Small Grant Programme
Country experience: Uganda
Coordination and Mainstreaming GEF and poverty reduction
All government-supported GEF activities must be consistent with and included in the relevant sector of the Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP)
GEF Coordination Committee includes convention focal points
Each convention focal point heads thematic subcommittee responsible for submitting potential GEF project concepts to full committee
Convention focal points required to take account of PEAP national priorities in developing potential GEF projects
Country experience: Vietnam
Coordination and GEF National Strategy design process
Produce recommendations for effective collaboration and harmonization of GEF program for next five years by
Reviewing 10-year GEF portfolio
Reviewing coordination processes by different agencies for accessing GEF funding
Analyzing national priorities of key sectors to determine opportunities and priorities for GEF funding
Carrying out needs assessment for building capacity among key beneficiaries for implementing strategy
Establishing Steering Committee chaired by GEF Vietnam Chairman and including line Ministries to review and approve strategy