Transcript 1 - International Institute for Sustainable Development

Hear this you Elders, and give ears all you inhabitants of the
land!
Has anything like this happened in your days, or even in the
days of your fathers?
Tell your children about it….
What the chewing locust left the swarming locust has eaten;
What the swarming locust left, the crawling locust has
eaten;
And what the crawling locust left, the consuming locust has
eaten
“sea level rises and agricultural
changes could result in an
estimated 150 million
environmental refugees by 2050”

Dr. R. Pachauri – Chairman of IPCC, 2005
Samoa’s NAPA
Experience
Peniamina D Leavai (Coordinator)
Ministry of Natural Resources, Environment & Meteorology
Climate changes for Samoa
 Reduction
overall annual rainfall
 Frequency of sporadic rainfall
events
 Increase average temperature
 Rising sea-levels
 Increase frequency and intensity of
tropical cyclone / hurricanes
Overall NAPA process &
experience
NAPA process exceptional in its country-driven
approach
 Vision: To achieve a high level of community
capacity for adaptation to adverse impacts of
climate change
 National Vision: For every Samoan to
achieve a better quality of life (Strategy for the
Development of Samoa, SDS 2005-2007)

Objectives of the NAPA
To develop and implement immediate and
urgent project based activities to adapt to cc
 To protect life and livelihoods of people,
infrastructure and environment
 To incorporate adaptation measures and goals
into national and sectoral policies, and
development goals; and
 To increase awareness of cc impacts and
adaptation activities in communities, civil
society and government

NationalBuild
Climate
NAPA
Change
Team Country
and
Team
Multidisciplinary
NAPA Task Team
Team
13 Pre Synthesis
Sectoral
Reports
?
Synthesize
Synthesize Available
Available Impact
Impact Assessments,
Assessments,
Coping
Coping Strategies,
Strategies, Past
Past Consultations,
Consultations,
Trends
Trendsand
andExisting
ExistingDevelopment
Development
Frameworks
Frameworks
Existing
Assessments
e.g.
CIM Plans,
NBSAPs,
Adequate
for NAPA
First
Nat Com,
MEAs
Development
Participatory Rapid Assessment of
Current Vulnerability and Potential
Increase in Climate Hazards and
Associated Risks
Climate Change Synthesis Report
Public Consultation Report
Articulate Potential
PotentialNAPA
NAPA
Articulate
Activities based
based on
on Ideas
Ideas
Activities
From Consultation
Consultation
From
Conduct Public Consultation
Aiming at Identifying Potential
Ideas for Activities
Tier-1Undertake
and Tier-2Criteria
Criteria
Prioritization
Prioritization
and Selection
Process
Of Key
(Ranking
Adaptation
the Criteria)
Needs
Ranking
Rank Projects/Activities
of Projects/Activities
and
Demonstrate
And involve demonstration
Integration into
Of
National
integration
Policyinto
Frameworks
national
Policy And
frameworks
Programmes\
in Projects
Periodic Review of
Risks and Prioritization
of Activities
Develop Project Profiles
And Submit NAPA
IMMEDIATE & URGENT
COMMUNITY NEEDS
PERCENT
(%)
PRIORITY
RANKING
Water Availability, Quality &
Accessibility
17.6
1
Reforestation
15.2
2
Education & Awareness
Programmes
12.8
3
Health
9.9
4
Agriculture & Food Security
9.6
5
Seawalls
9.1
6
Essential Infrastructure & Works
7.8
7
Others
7.8
8
Village Development Inspections
6.8
9
Capacity Building for Social
Groups
3.4
10
The top 2 priority projects
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Securing Community Water Resources Project
Reforestation, Rehabilitation & Community Forestry
Fire Prevention Project
Climate Health Cooperation Program
Climate Early Warning System
Agriculture & Food Security Sustainability Project
Zoning & Strategic Management Planning
Implement Coastal Infrastructure Management Plans
for Highly Vulnerable District
Establishing Conservation Programs in Highly
Vulnerable Marine & Terrestrial Areas of Communities
Sustainable Tourism Adaptation Project
Technical Issues and
Challenges faced


Financial
Issues
Lack
of Data








Uncertaintyinconsistent
of accessibility
funds (SCCF,
SPA)
Unreliable,
env.to&other
socio-economic
data
Funding modalities (LDC Fund, sliding scale)
Limited and insufficient data
Mismatch: national planning cycles & donor fiscal cycles
Institutional constraints in accessing and sharing data
Institutional
Capacity
Other Constraints
Capacity
of institutions
holding/managing
databases
Institutional
arrangements
for multi-stakeholder
adaptation
activities
 Socio-economic
data and technical tools
 Level of synergy between projects and national structures
 Sci, tech’l & Instit’l capacity to implement projects
 Commitment of implementing agencies`



Human Capacity

Technical CB to transform project profilesdetailed projects
Lessons Learned &
Best Practices
 Developing
pre-synthesis sectoral reports
vital to establish baseline information
 Country-wide Community Consultation
(Public Consultation Report) was a key
player in criteria prioritization and ranking of
key adaptation needs
 Bottom-up approach , consensus approach
Steps taken to implement NAPA
to date

National NAPA Dialogue with Development Partners





EU: 4millionEURO ‘Water for Life’ Project (Samoa Water
Authority)
Australia: Regional Assistance (SPREP)
USA: exploring options
New Zealand: LDC fund contribution
What are the expectations for implementation?


Accessibility to the LDC Fund
Integration of NAPA into National Communication
“Adapt to sustain,
Sustain to live,
Live to learn,
Learn to Adapt”