Presentation - Regional Policy Briefings
Transcript Presentation - Regional Policy Briefings
“Poverty and climate change are the two great challenges of the 21st century. Our responses to them will define our generation, and because they are linked to e
Financing Climate Change
Adaptation and Mitigation in the
Coral Pasisi, 1 November 2012
1. What is climate change funding? – sources and
2. Challenges for PICs in accessing and managing CCF
(from any source)
3. Leaders direction
4. Multi-tiered response
How to determine optimal mix of modalities and sources –
Country and task specific
Coral Pasisi, 1 November 2012
What is climate change funding?
1. Climate financing no globally agreed definition – OECD
2. Funds to address climate change – Domestic, CCF,
ODA, financing institutions, private sector
3. Lots of grey area – development and climate change
discourse are interlinked as are their resources.
4. Comparability and accountability very difficult.
5. Definition of CCF most meaningfully defined at country
Funds for CC Landscape
Projected ODA by 2020 = USD117 billion per annum; Pledged Climate Change funding by 2020 = USD100 billion per annum
ODA equate to a significant part of PICs economies (68% of Niue’s 2011/12 budget is ODA, 33% of Samoa’s 2011/12 budget is ODA (loans and
grants) 18.6% of ODA is climate change funding and 75% of that is project based) . Hence the need for significant engagement by central line
Ministries of financing, planning and aid management
ODA access and management: Pacific region faces significant challenges with effective donor coordination, aid effectiveness and overall development
effectiveness [The Compact].
Focus on strengthening national systems for effective access to and management of these resources combined with national resources.
Work to increase donor harmonisation and use of country systems (Compact reporting found = Only %25 of ODA using country systems.
180 individual projects in Solomone Islands, 46 different development partners operating in Samoa)
Climate Change funding
80% mitigation funding, 20% Adaptation so far.
Complex requiring specialist knowledge to access.
Adaptation funding should accrue to PICs and not be diverted to larger countries with bigger capacity to access and develop projects;
Largely globally allocated, lowest common denominator (size and focus often not PIC compatible)
Fast start funds accounted for differently so not comparable.
No doubt significant ‘new and additional’ resources are required. This does not mean that climate funding should be provided as a separate
stream of investment, with an eruption of self standing projects, policies and initiatives. It should rather be integrated with existing national
planning financing processes, imperfect as these may be.
Climate Financing Options Paper 2011
Supported key findings of SPREP
commissioned report of 2010 – technical
backstopping and potential for regional fund
Challenges for Pacific Island Countries and
General assessment of options at:
national, level - budget support, trust fund
sub-regional, regional levels - technical
backstopping mechanism (PCCR), sub-reg or
regional fund potential; and
international level – SIDS friendly Green Climate
Fund design, SIDS friendly modalities
KEY CHALLENGES FOR PICS
Access to international financing. The Global funding structure and architecture is messy,
complex and requires specialist knowledge and capacity to access. Mitigation focused.
Access to bilateral funding - Improving development effectiveness and donor
harmonisation. Significant source of funding for CC from bilateral donors. Highly fragmented,
many players and outside country systems (75%).
Enabling environment – policy and institutional and strength of national systems.
effectively mainstreaming climate change, including in M&E.
Capacity constraints in the region – PICs internal; donor capacity; regional organisations.
Maximising mitigation ,adaptation and development efforts. Mitigation efforts and resources
offer clear co-benefits in key development areas
Complexity of accessing and
managing/utilising Climate Change
S Climate Min
FIN Country R
Help improve PICs access to and management of climate change
Relevant policy papers considered by Forum Leaders and Economic
Ministers in 2011
Climate change and development effectiveness
Budget support and trust fund arrangements
Regional funding arrangements
Capacity supplementation and institutional strengthening
Leaders tasked the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat to detail of how
national and regional options could work in practice.
1. Documenting practical experiences with a range of
2. Country specific assessment of options – Pacific Climate
Finance Assessment Framework and Nauru case study
3. Regional Technical Support Mechanism
4. Pacific Solutions Exchange
5. Potential regional funding arrangements
6. Improved access to international climate financing
Practical Experiences with Modalities
Relevant for Climate Financing
Budget support – Samoa
National Trust Fund – Tuvalu
Sub-regional Fund – Micronesia
National Development Bank – Palau
National Implementing Entity – Cook Islands
Regional Implementing Entity – SPREP
Multilateral Implementing Entity – Solomon
Islands and UNDP
Pacific Climate Finance Assessment Framework
Build on existing global and regional
assessment tools and frameworks
Further refined through Nauru Case
Study, exploring 6 key dimensions:
Sources of Climate Finance
Policies and Plans
Public Financial Management and
Regional Technical Support Mechanism
1. Technical assistance – increasing
absorptive capacity of Pacific Island
Countries and Territories
2. RTSM and associated rapid response
fund – funded by Climate Investment
3. Pacific Regional Organisations, ADB
and World Bank to develop by mid
Consideration must be given to complexities at the source as well as to
country systems and capacity to implement. Country specific analysis
The ability to harness and effectively use climate change financing will benefit
from strengthened national systems and increased use of those systems by
Capacity constraints in the Pacific region present a significant challenge which
we must collectively and innovatively try to address.
Donors are likely to continue to use a range of modalities to deliver climate
change resources. PICTs will therefore need to draw on a range of options to
improve access to and management of these resources.
Project based implementation is likely to remain a significant access
requirement no matter the modality of disbursement.
New and additional resources are necessary to respond to climate change.
The way in which these are delivered is equally important as are the volumes.
Coral Pasisi [email protected]