Transcript Local Government, Climate Change Adaptation and Strategic

Local Government Finance and
Climate Change
Note for discussion World Urban Forum, Rio, March 2010
D Jackson UNCDF
Hypotheses

This presentation will discuss three hypotheses:



2
DJ : UNCDF : 10/2009
That local level resources and decision making can be
more efficient in responding to the challenges of CC
That local level resources and decision making can be
more effective in identifying these challenges and
designing holistic solutions. However there are systemic
constraints that prevent local government financing
from performing this role.
That providing resources locally would enable local
institutions to ‘buy in’ the services and expertise of
higher level institutions on a demand driven basis.
Likewise it will facilitate the pooling of resources
between affected local governments
Complex local reality (1)
3
DJ : UNCDF : 10/2009

Whilst the challenge of CC is global, the immediate
effects are local. Just a few kilometres can separate
the arid from the fertile or the disaster prone from the
safe.

Yet governments and development partners often
respond by channelling resources into programmes
covering large areas. These are sometimes inefficient
and fail to recognise local specificity. Their effect can
sometimes be counterproductive (for example to
encourage to greater migratory pressure and conflict
rather than dealing with problems at their source).
Complex local reality (2)
4
DJ : UNCDF : 10/2009

Whilst there are common issues surrounding CC (managing
the carbon cycle, for instance) its local reality is varied and
highly specific. In some cases it requires a local disaster risk
reduction / disaster management capacity, in other areas it
requires new infrastructure such as small dams etc. In yet
others it may require relocation of households.

These are multiple configurations that do not easily fit into
sector or ministerial boxes. For example - whilst the skills and
resources of the Ministry of Health may be relevant in one
case, the skills of a different agency are needed elsewhere.
Furthermore, whilst environmental agencies can identify these
issues they do not always have the mandate to resolve them.

These challenges do not respect administrative boundaries. For
example, they may affect three local government jurisdictions
along a river bank, but not affect others on higher ground.
Definitions

Delegation– A local agency empowered to do

De-concentration-Staff and offices of an agency

Devolution– Power and authority given to a body
There is an (almost)
infinite variety of
combinations that
can be observed
5
DJ : UNCDF : 10/2009
something on behalf of a central agency. It takes
decisions in the name of the central authority and the
central authority remains accountable for its
performance.
are located away from its headquarters. They still
belong to the central body, still report to it, but are
located somewhere else.
for specific areas of responsibility. In local
government this normally means administrative and
financial autonomy. The body is accountable for its
actions.
Budget approval - how does
this differ?
Where is the
majority of NECC
expenditure in your
country?
6
DJ : UNCDF : 10/2009

Delegation – budget approved centrally as part of central
agencies allocation but managed on central agency’s behalf
either by local representations of that agency or by a local
government with devolved responsibilities.

De-concentration – budget approved centrally as part of
allocation for local representation of central agency and
managed by that local representation

Devolution – budget approved locally by devolved
authority. Resourced by own revenue and fiscal transfers
from other levels of government
Budget methodologies

Zero sum – start from zero each year and reallocate
according to what you now need with no attention paid
to last years budget

Programme – allocate resources across and between
agencies according to policy goals and objectives

Incremental / departmental - each budget unit prepares
a proposal with the previous year as its starting point.
Guess which is most
common?
7
DJ : UNCDF : 10/2009
One of the above is ALMOST ALWAYS the model
adopted in practice – though it may be “retrofitted” to
fit in with other models
Expenditure and mandates

Mandates for CC are spread between a variety of central and
local government agencies and operate at different levels.
These include:









8
DJ : UNCDF : 10/2009
Environmental Protection
Energy
Forestry, Minerals and Mining
Land Use Planning
Public Works
Water and Sanitation
Health
Education
Climate Change adaptation should not be seen as a “new”
function. Expenditure on CC adaptation is possible and
desirable under already assigned mandates. There is also scope
for delegation of mandates from central government.
Three types of planning
Draft for discussion: DJ 03/2010

Needs based, priority setting. Often focuses on
individual projects or actions and chooses between
them.

Strategic, “Where are we going” planning. often
focuses on overall objectives and has a longer term
horizon.

Scenario, Asks the question “What would happen
if ?” and requires a break from existing assumptions.
Some points
Draft for discussion: DJ 03/2010

Needs based planningand strategic planning are often
based on existing information.

Medium term financial frameworks (for local
government), functional assignments and fiscal
decentralisation will help move from needs based
planning to more strategic planning. LGSP is moving
in this direction.

But scenario planning often requires the introduction
of new information.
Planning for climate change
adaption
Draft for discussion: DJ 03/2010

Based on “what if ?” and therefore requires scenario
based planning.

Is a long term process and therefore requires strategic
planning.

A major challenge is providing the information for
the “what if ?”

Climate change is a global issue with extremely
localised consequences
Mainstreaming Climate
Change in Local Government

Draft for discussion: DJ 03/2010
Some practical problems

Where to get the information for the “what if ?”

How to integrate the “what if ?” into mainstream
organisations – not just environmental related
organisations.

A clear assignment of functions between central and
local governments and much greater coordination
between agencies that is usual.

Climate change adaptation does always require new
institutions, it just requires that existing institutions
require more resources (financial, technical, human).
Example of negative effect
of needs based planning
13
Draft for discussion: DJ 03/2010
Difficulty in financing
climate adaptation
Will Climate
Proofing come from
Core or Project?
Capital
Non - Capital
Some air
conditioners
Teachers’ Salaries
A new school
building
A consultancy to
install a new
software system
Core
(normally
incremental
changes in resource
envelope)
Project
14
Draft for discussion: DJ 03/2010
(fluctuation in
resource envelope,
specific approval
process, activities
of finite duration)
Economic Classifier (3)
Will Climate
Proofing be
politically popular
under 3.2?
15
DJ : UNCDF : 10/2009
Part two

Draft for discussion: DJ 03/2010
Local climate adaptation grant?
Local CCA response (1)
The local holistic
response may
involve more than
one local
government
Requires
different
agencies
Local holistic
response
To deliver
smart
response
17
Draft for discussion: DJ 03/2010
With
different
mandates
But
coordinated
locally
Local CCA response (2)

Some examples of
good practice
Hurricane Mitch – Honduras – 1998

Local response saved lives


Hurricane Katrina vs California Wildfires – USA
2005 & 2007

Local response was better

18
Draft for discussion: DJ 03/2010
Source: World Bank
Source: Heritage Foundation
How to enable a holistic
response? (1)
19
DJ : UNCDF : 10/2009

The previous sections have shown how “sticky” local
expenditure can be and how difficult it is to change
long term expenditure patters

Yet we have also examined the potential of local level
planning to define holistic responses to the challenges
of climate change and the environment

In addition, NECC challenges are not evenly spread
across a territory

It may be that specific measures are required to
ensure resources are directed in its direction
How to enable a holistic
response?

20
Draft for discussion: DJ 03/2010
These measures could include:

Examination of where climate change adaptation
expenditure would fit in to the existing expenditure
classification system

A similar exercise with regard to the planning and
programming for such expenditure

Specific grants / transfers attributed to the local
government specifically for this purpose but not tied to
any institution.

Mechanisms for the “matching” of these grants with the
larger programmes of central government or with other
local jurisdictions
How to enable a holistic
response? (2)

21
DJ : UNCDF : 10/2009
These measures could include:

Examination of NECC related expenditure within the
budget classifiers with the objective of maximising the
resources attributed to this function

A similar exercise with regard to the planning and
programming for such expenditure

Specific grants / transfers attributed to the local
government specifically for this purpose but not tied to
any institution.

Mechanisms for the “matching” of these grants with the
larger programmes of central government or with other
local jurisdictions
Advantage of local
knowledge

Draft for discussion: DJ 03/2010
Local adaptation work is based on three premises:

That local level resources and decision making can be
more efficient in responding to the challenges of climate
change adaptation

That local level resources and decision making can be
more effective in identifying these challenges and
designing holistic solutions

That providing resources locally will then enable these
local institution to ‘buy in’ the services and expertise of
higher level institutions on a demand driven basis.
Likewise it will facilitate the pooling of resources
between affected local governments
What could adaptation
grants be used for?

Draft for discussion: DJ 03/2010
LCF capital could be targeted towards a variety of
areas – in accordance with the nature of the climate
adaptation challenge and the decisions made by local
communities – including:

Dams, dykes, drains and other water management
infrastructure

Local disaster proofing, disaster risk reduction and
disaster management capacity, for example in an area
prone to landslides following deforestation

Small scale relocation of communities and / or public
infrastructure.

Insurance policies for local institutions