Transcript PPT 2.1MB - START - SysTem for Analysis Research and Training

Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel (STAP)
Advice/activities related to
adaptation to the Global
Environment Facility
Habiba Gitay
Visiting Fellow, Australian National University
Vice Chair, STAP
[email protected]
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 GEF
Focal Area
Projects include:
Climate Change
Mostly mitigation, but this year on
adaptation
Concentrate on conservation of
many ecosystem types
Rivers, lakes, aquifers, coastal and
inland wetlands, LMEs
Reduction of Methyl Bromide
Biodiversity
International
Waters
Ozone Depletion
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
submitted
Reviewed 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.
2.
Protected Areas - Terrestrial, Coastal
Ecosystem Management - arid and semi-arid ecosystems,
forested ecosystems, Inland Wetlands
3.
4.
Renewable energy (micro hydrodams, solar, wind)
Management of Transboundary Water Bodies or
International Waters (including river, lake, aquifer, Large
marine ecosystem
Others types of areas in which projects are done (winwin)
•
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 biodiversity
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