Powerpoint 0.31MB - GEF

Download Report

Transcript Powerpoint 0.31MB - GEF

Fourth Overall
Performance Study
Interim Report
June 21, 2009
Interim report: overview
 The GEF in a changing world
 The catalytic nature of the GEF
 Progress toward Impact: from Hypothesis to
 Programming Resources: the Challenge of
Addressing Global and Transboundary Issues at
the National Level
 Toward Efficiency and Cost-Effectiveness
 The GEF as a learning organization
 The Nature of the GEF: at a Crossroads?
Interaction with NGOs and CSOs
 Active engagement with NGOs and CSOs mainly through
sub-regional consultations
– Last one to take place with CSO and NGO representatives in Accra
July 9-10
– Representatives selected in collaboration with NGO Network and
– But also: NGO and CSO reports
 Issues that were raised consistently:
– Access of CSOs to GEF funding is becoming increasingly difficult
– Effects of the RAF?
– GEF could better incorporate sustainable development needs of
local communities
– Lack of transparency in national operational focal point mechanism
– Involvement in monitoring & evaluation at project level
– GEF not well known
– Insufficient attention to capturing and disseminating lessons
– Need to strengthen the NGO network
The GEF in a changing world
 Climate Change is more rapid than expected; cost
for mitigation and adaptation very high
 International public funding for environment and
related issues has gone down since 1997 – new
funds not yet visible on the ground
 GEF funding has gone down as percentage of
overall ODA
 Fragmentation and lack of coordination in
international environmental governance structure
 International financial crisis is complicating factor
Catalytic nature of GEF
 Three categories approach:
 “Foundational” and enabling activities focus on
policy, regulatory frameworks, and national priority
setting and relevant capacity;
 Medium-size and full-size projects and the Small
Grants Programme focus on demonstration,
capacity development, innovation, and market
barrier removal
 Full-size projects with high rates of cofunding,
catalyzing investments or implementing a new
strategic approach at a national level.
Progress toward Impact
 Solid progress toward impact in all three categories
 Climate Change:
– Approximately 60 percent of the projects reviewed already
show impacts at project termination through reduced and
avoided GHG emissions.
 Biodiversity:
– 10-15 of projects show impact – but impact takes years to
achieve – and 60% of projects are progressing toward
 International Waters:
– Solid achievements, especially in threat reduction
 Ozone Depleting Substances:
– Production stopped; use slowly re-emerging due to illegal
 Other focal areas: no impact yet
Ability to deliver?
 Perception is linked to the preparatory phase
 Reform processes have not yet led to visible
improvements at the country level
 The final report of OPS4 will aim to provide insight
in causes and possible solutions
 While further improvements in the programming
phase are necessary, the final report will also look
at whether the current funding levels of the GEF
are sufficient for the kind of support that the GEF
is supposed to make available according to
guidance of the conventions and its catalytic and
incremental role
 Current evidence suggests that funding levels are
not adequate.
According to guidance?
 GEF support continues to be in line with guidance
from the conventions, where applicable, as noted
in OPS3
 No evidence that the increasing emphasis on
national programming in the GEF leads to reduced
attention for global environmental issues
 Through becoming signatories to a convention,
countries are required to bring their national
policies in line with convention obligations.
 Evidence so far suggests that countries have used
GEF support to introduce new policies and to
support the requisite environmental legislation and
regulatory frameworks.
Three issues
1. Tackling transboundary problems in the context of
national programming will be a challenge for GEF5
2. GEF as learning organization has many
advantages, but needs to improve learning across
agencies and countries
3. Evaluative evidence so far suggests that the GEF
needs to solve the tension in its network
relationships to become a smooth and efficient
operator, especially in identifying project ideas,
programming of national support, and appraisal
and approval.
 On the governance of the GEF the final OPS4
report will contain an assessment of the current
structure and the role of its various components
 On the replenishment process, current best
practice in several recent replenishments has
been to involve recipient countries as members of
the process
– The 15th replenishment of the International Development
Association included nine borrower country members
 The interim report recommends that recipient
countries of the GEF should be included in the
replenishment process
Suggestions, comments, issues, questions?
[email protected]