Transcript English

System for Transparent Allocation of
Resources (STAR)
Sub-Regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points in
Eastern and Southern Africa
Sandton, South Africa, 3-4 November 2010
Resource Allocation in the GEF (1)
 In GEF-4 the Resource Allocation Framework (RAF) was
implemented
 Its purpose was to determine a specific quantity of
resources for all countries eligible to receive grants from
GEF
 The allocations were based on:
• The capacity of countries to generate global
environmental benefits
• The level of country performance
Resource Allocation in the GEF (2)
 This Resource Allocation Framework was adopted in
September 2005
 It was applied in Biodiversity and Climate Change
 There were a large number of “group” countries vs. a
limited number of countries with individual allocations
 The ceiling was 10% for Biodiversity; 15% for Climate
Change
 The mid-term evaluation made a number of important
recommendations regarding the structure of the RAF, as
well as to the difficulties during its implementation
Resource Allocation in the GEF (3)
 The general objective of the system for transparent
allocation of resources (STAR) during GEF-5 has not
been modified:
 “…a system for allocating resources to countries in a
transparent and consistent manner based on global
environmental priorities and country capacity, policies
and practices relevant to successful implementation
of GEF projects”
Resource Allocation in the GEF (4)
The noteworthy elements of STAR are:
 Applied to biodiversity, climate change and land degradation
(international waters and POPs remain outside the STAR)
 “The group” is eliminated: all countries have individual allocations
 The ceilings are maintained (10% BD and 11% CC) and floors are
established (2M for CC, 1.5M for BD and 0.5M for LD)
 Principle of flexibility adopted for countries with small allocations
 Indices of global benefits for all focal areas and of country
performance will be reviewed
Resource Allocation in the GEF (5)
COUNTRY
GEF4- RAF
GEF5
$3.1B Initial Allocation
Total
15.65
10.50
4.78
6.64
6.63
19.02
18.21
4.31
33.27
7.58
8.08
13.06
Flexible
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Angola
Botswana
Comoros
Djibouti
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Kenya
Lesotho
Madagascar
Malawi
Mauritius
Mozambique
CC
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group
4.90
3.40
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group
BD
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group
7.70
7.90
Group
24.20
4.20
5.60
6.80
CC
5.18
3.18
2.00
2.00
2.00
6.59
5.00
2.00
4.34
2.00
2.00
3.19
Replenishment
$4.25Bn
STAR Envelopes (M$)
BD
LD
6.99
3.48
2.11
5.21
2.08
0.70
1.50
3.14
1.50
3.13
8.13
4.29
8.95
4.26
1.50
0.81
26.06
2.88
4.39
1.19
5.19
0.89
7.00
2.87
Namibia
Rwanda
Seychelles
South Africa
Group
Group
Group
23.90
6.50
Group
5.30
22.50
2.00
2.00
2.00
25.71
6.28
1.50
4.90
21.68
5.69
1.08
0.71
5.25
13.97
4.58
7.60
52.65
No
Yes
No
No
Sudan
Uganda
Swaziland
United Republic
of Tanzania
5.70
3.10
Group0
4.80
4.30
4.00
Group
12.80
8.88
4.64
2.00
7.86
3.68
3.83
1.50
13.95
2.67
2.22
2.69
5.61
15.23
10.68
6.19
27.43
No
No
Yes
No
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Group
Group
5.10
Group
3.77
2.00
4.26
1.72
3.01
2.87
11.04
6.58
No
Yes
STAR Operational Procedures (1)
 Individual allocations are based on the level of refinancing approved
(US$4.25 billion).
 With the elimination of group allocation under the GEF-5, a floor of US$2
million has been established for climate change, US$1.5 million for
biodiversity, and US$0.5 million for land degradation.
 Projects will be approved on a first-come first-served basis.
 In the event of project cancellation before the last six months of the GEF-5,
resources will remain available to the country to be used in the same focal
area.
 In the event of project cancellation after the last six months of the GEF-5,
resources may be used in the same focal area or in others, at the discretion
of the CEO and with the approval of the Council.
STAR Operational Procedures (2)
 Countries classified as “flexible”1 may use the full value of their
allocation in only one of the focal areas subject to the STAR.
 Marginal adjustments may be made when resources are exhausted in a
specific focal area in the following manner:
• Countries with allocations of US$7 - US$20 million: US$0.2 million
• Countries with allocations of US$20 - US$100 million: US$ 1 million
• Countries with allocations greater than US$100 million: US$2 million
 Endorsement letters must refer to current STAR allocations in each
relevant focal area, including preparation costs (PPG) and Agency
fees2.
_______________
1
2
Sum total allocation under US$7 million
Exclusions include corporate budget, SGP, CSP, international waters, management of chemicals (POPs
and ODS), earth fund, and assistance with the use of non-grant instruments.
STAR Operational Procedures (3)
 A revised letter of endorsement is required if an amount over 5% of the
original is requested during the CEO endorsement period.
 In the case of “flexible” countries, reference must be made to the total
amount and to the individual amount for each focal area.
 The Secretariats of the relevant conventions must be informed of “flexible”
and “marginal adjustment” cases in the endorsement letter.
 For the June 2011 and June 2012 Council meetings, reports on the
implementation experience of the STAR will be provided.
 For the June 2013 meeting, the Council will provide an assessment of
STAR design and implementation prepared by the Office of Evaluation
(OE), in addition to a report on progress in the development of indicators.