1 Content 1. Editorial 1 2. The Adaptation Fund facts and figures 1 3. Summary of decisions adopted by the Adaptation Fund Board at its 17 th meeting 2 4. Which consultative process is needed in AF funded projects? 2 5. Background Information to the Adaptation Fund (AF) 6 6. Field visit in Senegal: An implementation at the right time 6 7. Saving the beaches of Negril: Jamaica making headway for full project proposal 8 an independent newsletter on the adaptation fund no. 4 • may 2012 ADAPTATION FUND NGO NEWSLETTER 1. Editorial The Adaptation Fund – an innovative approach to build on With the recent conclusion of the 17 th meeting of its Board, the Adaptation Fund has entered into its fifth year of operation. The meeting marked another step in capturing lessons learnt and further advancing the Fund´s provisions with regard to such critical aspects as the guidance for the consultative process, the consideration of most vulnerable communities, the establishment of complaints procedures and increased transparency regarding the technical review of project proposals. The AFB can be congratulated for increasing its attention towards these issues and for learning from its own lessons. This newslet- ter will provide some more background to these issues, as well as provide insights into the process in Senegal and Jamaica. This is important for the AF at its critical juncture of raising funds for meeting the ad- aptation needs of vulnerable countries and financing innovative projects that benefit the targeted areas. The prices for Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) which is the innovative and main funding source of the AF have drastically decreased over the last months. Part of this is due to the lack of global ambition in mitigation. The EU, with its Emission Trading Scheme is one of the key demanders of the CERs. However, the current EU target of 20% reduction is not only well below the ambition required by the IPCC with regard to the 2°C limit, but also affects the prospects of the ETS as a functioning setter of price signals for emissions. (Of course, other developed countries lag behind in their mitigation ambition as well). The direct access approach of the AF is speeding up with more and more developing countries managing the associated accredi- tation process, while sadly the funding gap is increasing, making hardly impossible for the AF to respond all the funding requests. Only few resources have been dedicated to the AF, despite its innovativeness and its progress. To address this issue the AFB has now set the target to raise USD 100 million additional funds by the end of 2013. We very much welcome further contributions to the AF at this point on time to allow the AF to fulfill its role for the years to come. We also most encourage all developed countries to put additional money into the Fund. These contributions should enable the AF to abide by the water -until the Green Climate Fund become operational- by adequately responding the increasing funding demands of developing countries. Climate finance will have to be increased in 2013 in view of the 100 billion commitment by 2020, and there should be a piece of everyone´s pie for this crucial instrument. This does not un- dermine the need for substantially larger funding into the GCF, which, however, still has to emerge. And finally, why should not some better-off developing countries support the AF? They can show a sign of solidarity to the more vulnerable ones, and help strengthen this instrument as a learning tool in their own interest. Yours sincerely Sven Harmeling Project level Full projects approved 18 Uruguay, Senegal, Cook Islands, Ecuador, Eritrea, Georgia, Honduras, Mada- gascar, Maldives, Mauritius, Mongolia, Pakistan, Solo- mon Islands, Samoa, Tanza- nia, Turkmenistan, Nicara- gua, Papua New Guinea Project concepts endorsed (full project not yet ap- proved) 13 Argentina, Jamaica, Dji- bouti, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, Guatemala, Myanmar, Seychelles, Benin, Belize, Cambodia and Lebanon Project concepts not endorsed/ fully developed Projects not approved 9 Belize, India, Mali, Niue, Sri Lanka, Turkmenistan, Co- lombia, Ghana and Uganda Funding Decisions (full project) USD 113,438,001 Implementing Entities (IE) accredited National (IE): Direct Access 11 Senegal, Jamaica, Uruguay, Benin, South Africa, Belize, Rwanda, Jordan, Kenya, Argentina and Mexico Multilateral 10 ADB, IFAD, UNDP, WFP, World Bank, WMO, IABD, ADB, BOAD, UNESCO 2. The Adaptation Fund facts and figures Resources in the AF Trust Fund (Status as of 31 December, 2011) Obtained Through CERs Monetization USD 168.34 million Voluntary contributions by developed countries USD 103,544,319 The AF NGO Network congratulates Sweden (100,000,000 SEK), Switzerland (CHF 3,000,000) for their donations and the UK for its pledge (GBP 10,000,000). It also encourage other wealthy nations particularly Finland, France, Japan and Norway who are also rep- resented in the AFB, to do so as well. Given the specific nature of the AF, it could also be a channel where richer developing countries could signal their solidariy with the most vulnerable by channelling resources into the AF.
an independent ne wsle t ter on the adap tation fund no. 4 • may 2012
ADAPTATION FUND NGO NEWSLETTER
1. Editorial
The Adaptation Fund – an innovative approach to build on Withtherecentconclusionofthe17thmeetingof itsBoard,theAdaptation Fund has entered into its fifth year of operation.The meeting marked another step in capturing lessons learntandfurtheradvancingtheFund sprovisionswithregardtosuchcriticalaspectsastheguidancefortheconsultativeprocess,theconsiderationofmostvulnerablecommunities,theestablishmentof complaints procedures and increased transparency regarding
the technical review of project proposals.TheAFBcanbecongratulatedforincreasingits attention towards these issues and forlearningfromitsownlessons.Thisnewslet-ter will provide some more background totheseissues,aswellasprovideinsightsintotheprocessinSenegalandJamaica.
This is important for the AF at its criticaljunctureofraisingfundsformeetingthead-aptation needs of vulnerable countries andfinancing innovative projects that benefit
thetargetedareas.ThepricesforCertifiedEmissionReductions(CERs)whichistheinnovativeandmainfundingsourceoftheAFhave drastically decreased over the last months. Part of this isduetothelackofglobalambitioninmitigation.TheEU,withitsEmissionTradingSchemeisoneofthekeydemandersoftheCERs.However,thecurrentEUtargetof20%reductionisnotonlywellbelow the ambition required by the IPCC with regard to the 2°Climit, but also affects the prospects of the ETS as a functioningsetterofpricesignalsforemissions.(Ofcourse,otherdevelopedcountrieslagbehindintheirmitigationambitionaswell).
The direct access approach of the AF is speeding up with moreandmoredevelopingcountriesmanagingtheassociatedaccredi-tationprocess,whilesadlythefundinggapisincreasing,makinghardlyimpossiblefortheAFtorespondallthefundingrequests.
Only few resources have been dedicated to the AF, despite itsinnovativenessanditsprogress.ToaddressthisissuetheAFBhasnow set the target to raise USD 100 million additional funds bytheendof2013.Weverymuchwelcomefurthercontributionsto
theAFatthispointontimetoallowtheAFtofulfillitsrolefortheyearstocome.Wealsomostencouragealldevelopedcountriestoput additional money into the Fund. These contributions shouldenabletheAFtoabidebythewater-untiltheGreenClimateFundbecome operational- by adequately responding the increasingfundingdemandsofdevelopingcountries.
Climate finance will have to be increased in 2013 in view of the100 billion commitment by 2020, and there should be a pieceof everyone s pie for this crucial instrument. This does not un-dermine the need for substantially larger funding into the GCF,which, however, still has to emerge. And finally, why should notsome better-off developing countries support the AF? They canshow a sign of solidarity to the more vulnerable ones, and helpstrengthenthisinstrumentasalearningtoolintheirowninterest.
The AF NGO Network congratulates Sweden (100,000,000 SEK), Switzerland (CHF 3,000,000) for their donations and the UK for its pledge (GBP 10,000,000). It also encourage other wealthy nations particularly Finland, France, Japan and Norway who are also rep-resented in the AFB, to do so as well. Given the specific nature of the AF, it could also be a channel where richer developing countries could signal their solidariy with the most vulnerable by channelling resources into the AF.
2
Adaptation Fund NGO newsletter • No. 4 / May 2012
a) textual decisions with regard to the consideration of vul-nerable communities:
“Forafullydevelopedproposal,theestimatedbenefitswillhave to be quantified, whenever possible. In addition, ifthere is any concern of negative development or maladap-tation in any of these areas, relevant evidence would needto be referenced, with specific studies if necessary. In thatcase, based on an Impact Assessment, the proposal shoulddescribehowitaddressespossiblethreats,risksofmaladap-tationorimbalancescausedinawiderregion,orupstream/downstreamtoothercommunitiesandecosystems.”
b) textual decisions with regard to the consultative process:
“Attheconceptstage,aninitialconsultativeprocesshastotakeplace,withkeystakeholdersoftheproject/programme.Depending on the level of involvement of local communi-ties or governments, private sector, CSOs or universities/researchcentresintheexecutionoftheproject/programme,those stakeholders may or may not be consulted at theconcept stage. Where Project Formulation Grants (PFG)are accessed,theseshould also beusedtofacilitate acom-prehensive stakeholder consultation process in the projectpreparationphase.
Forafullydevelopedproposal,acomprehensiveconsultativeprocess has to take place, and should involve all direct andindirect stakeholders of the project/programme, includingvulnerablegroupsandtakingintoaccountgenderconsidera-tions.Theresultsoftheconsultativeprocessmustbereflect-edintheprojectdesign.Underextraordinarycircumstances,the consultation of a specific stakeholder can be deferredto the implementation stage, if it enables a more effectiveconsultation(e.g.ifbeneficiariesforspecificactivitieshavenotbeenidentifiedyet).However,iftheprojectspecificallytargetsthemostvulnerablegroups,theywillhavetobeiden-tifiedandconsultedbythetimeofsubmission.
The implementation arrangement should include a frame-work allowing for stakeholders’ views to be heard duringprojectimplementation.Wheneverpossible,astrategyandtimetable for sharing information and consulting with eachof the stakeholder groups during project implementationshould be provided. Adequate facilitation measures (e.g.travel costs) should be budgeted to minimise barriers forinvolvement of key stakeholders where these impede theirparticipation.3
The documentation of the consultative process should atleast contain a) the list of stakeholders already consulted(principles of choice, role ascription, date of consultation),b)adescriptionoftheconsultationtechniques(tailoredspe-cificallypertargetgroup),c)thekeyconsultationfindings(inparticularsuggestionsandconcernsraised).”
3. Summary of decisions adopted by the Adaptation Fund Board at its 17th meetingFrom14thto18thMarch,the17thmeetingoftheAdaptationFundBoardtookplaceinBonn,Germany.Thefollowingkeydecisionswereadopted:
TheAFBapprovedtheaccreditationofthreeNationalImple-mentingEntities(NIEs)• InstitutoMexicanodeTecnologiadelAgua(IMTA)• National Environment Management Authority (NEMA)
This accreditation is seen as a furthermilestone set bytheAFB. Simply because, it is the first time that the number ofNIEs(eleven)exceedsthoseofMIEs(ten).
ItalsoendorsedthreeprojectconceptsfromBelize,Cambo-dia, Lebanon submitted by Multilateral Implementing Enti-ties(MIEs)andoneprojectsubmittedforBeninbytheFondsNationalpourl’EnvironmentactingasNIE.Thisprojectaimsat supporting the adaptation of Cotonou Lagoon ecosys-tems and human communities to sea level rise and extremeweathereventsimpacts.
TheAFBdiscussedputtinginplaceprovisionsforinvestiga-tiveprocedurestoprotecttheAFagainsmisappropriationsand misuses of its resources managed by the ImplementingEntities.
The AF decided to maintain the 50% cap for projects sub-mitted by MIEs and will consider at its next meeting themodalitiesonhowtosuspendthesubmissionofprojectsandprogrammesbyMIEswhenthe50%isexceeded.
Giventheincreaseddemandforfundingforprojectsanditslimited resources, the Board decided to reduce the amountofitsannualmeetingstothree.
The Board pursued its consultation with CSOs during themeetinganddecidedtoconveneabroadCSOdialogueadaypriortoitsnextmeeting,on25thJune.
4. Which consultative process is needed in AF funded projects?The debate on the lessons learnt in the project review processhas been closed at the 17th meeting of the Adaptation FundBoard (AFB). The discussion held within the Board was basedon the concise guidance document for project and programmeproponents,whichtheAFSecretariatwaschargedtopreparefortheAFBmeeting.Thisguidanceshouldhelp“theproponentstobetterapprehendthedifferentsectionsoftheproposal”1tem-plate,interalia:howtobetterexplainthestakeholderconsulta-tive process necessary to prepare the project and programmeproposals.
Through its decisions the AFB spelled out further the expecta-tions through adopting the amendments proposed by the AFBSecretariat (as can be seen in the following box)2. The implica-tionswillbeanalysedmoreindetailbelow.
The authors very much welcome the decisions, even if they are not perfect, but they provide a much better guidance which bet-ter reflects the importance of the two aspects. Inthefollowing,more explanation will be given on key aspects to be taken intoaccount.
The consultative process with key stakeholders is essential forthe successful outcome of any projects dealing with local andpoor communities, particularly if these have some social andenvironmentcomponents.Inthefieldofadaptation,aconsulta-tive process should initiate and sustain constructive externalrelationshipswiththebeneficiariesovertime4.Thisensuresthattheneedsofthebeneficiariesaretakenintoaccountthroughouttheproject,inordertoenablethemtobetterwithstandclimateeventspotentiallyoccurringyearsafterprojectimplementation.
The AFB has therefore set an increasing value on the consulta-tion process. This is reflected in both: the eligibility criteriaof the project review which asks: Has a consultative processtakenplace,andhasitinvolvedallkeystakeholdersandvulner-ablegroups,includinggenderconsiderations?5,andtheprojectprogramme template, which requests a description of the con-sultativeprocessfosteredbya listofpeopleconsulted6.Theseprovisions,however,asfartheyareformulatedinboththepro-jecttemplateandprojectreviewcriteriaaretoovaguetoenablean inclusive and sustainable consultation. This has resulted indiverginginterpretationsoftheconsultativeprocessbythepro-ponents,whichhaveinturnleadtodiverselevelsofconsultation.ThishasalsobeennotedbytheAFSecretariatinitsreportonthereviewoftheprojectssofarsubmitted.Accordingly,threemainissuesrelatedtotheconsultativeprocessneedtobeaddressedbytheAF,inordertoensureasustainableandinclusiveconsulta-tioninitsfundedprojects.Accordingly,theAFrequiresthattheproject proponents should inter-alia: (i) provide an explanationofthescopeoftheconsultationanditsinfluenceoverthedesign;(ii)provideguidanceontheroleofthestakeholderandtosomeextent on the identification of key stakeholders (iii) encouragetheparticipationofthemostvulnerablecommunities.7
Therearenogenerallyestablishedwaystoundertakeaconsulta-tiveprocessthatcanbeappliedtoallprojects.Severalapproach-es and methodologies, however, have emerged from, and beendeveloped by, diverse organisations working in different fieldsonhowtocarryoutasustainableconsultativeprocess.Thispartwillthereforedescribeanddefineonlysomekeybasicprinciplesthat can be applied to a sustainable consultation. These princi-pleshavebeenchosenbecauseoftheirrelevancetotheAFandshouldthereforehelpprojectproponentstobetterunderstandandundertaketheconsultativeprocessasrequiredbytheAFinboththeprojecttemplateandprojectreviewcriteria.
Accordingly, the focus of this newsletter is not on the reviewcriteriausedbytheAFsecretariattoscreenprojects,butratherdedicatedtohelpabetterapprehensionbytheAF’sprojectpro-ponentsofthescopeandextentofconsultationrequiredbytheAF.Therationalebehindthischoice isquitesimple. Itdoesnotaffecttheresultoftheproject,nomatterhowhighthestandardsare by which the AF Secretariat uses to review a project. But,it does affect the whole process how the project proponentsunderstand and implement the instructions for the design andsubmissionoftheprojects.
Analysis of the provision of the AF on the consultative process
ThesectionHoftheprojectprogrammeproposalstemplatere-quiresadescriptionoftheconsultative process, including the list of stakeholders consulted, undertaken during project preparation, with particular reference to vulnerable groups, including gender considerations8.Theprovisioncontainssomekeytermsthatareworthexaminingmoreclosely.ThiswillenableustounderstandtheextentoftheconsultationrequiredintheAF.
Thefirsttermtobedefinedisthe consultative process.Consul-tation means an inclusive process by which the public –in thiscase the key stakeholders- can actively participate in mattersaffecting their lives. In other words, the consultation is not acommunication where project proponents communicate to thelocalcommunitiesorpublictheirprojectplan,butratherakindofknowledgeandinformationsharingbetweenandamongkeyplayersworkingtowardsacommongoal.Consultationisneces-sary for the realistic understanding of potential obstacles andrisks,thedefinitionofproblemsandtheidentificationofcauses,inordertogainanoverviewofalreadyexistingmeasures,tomax-imize synergies, avoid duplications and ensure coordination9.Therefore the level of consultation should be in line with the level of risk related to the project.Nonetheless,theprocess of consul-tationshouldbynomeansbeunderstoodasastaticone,inwhichtwoorthreeworkshopsareconsideredsufficientforthewholeconsultation. Rather, it should be understood as an on-goingactionoperatingindifferentsystemiccontexts.Inotherwords,thismeans thattheconsultation should beconductedfromtheconceptualisation of the project idea until the final evaluation,to be carried out according to the AF’s Evaluation Frameworkwithinnine(9)monthsafterprojectcompletion.10
Thenew textadoptedbytheAFBondistinguishesbetweentheconceptstageandthefullprojectproposaldesign,whereinthefirstcasetheconsultationswoulddependonthelevelofinvolve-mentofthedifferentstakeholders.Itremainsinthehandsoftheprojectdesignerstodecidewhatthismeansinpractice.Itisnowimportant to observe whether this would be used to limit theconsultationsmorethannecessary.Experienceshowsthatearlyinvolvementisimportant.
Forthefullprojects,keyamendmentsarethattheprojectpro-ponents must show that the results of the consultative processmust be reflected in the proposal, and also that key vulnerablegroupshavebeenidentifiedandconsultedbeforesubmissionofthe full proposal. Furthermore proponents have to describe onhow the consultation techniques is specifically tailored to thetargetgroups.
It is also important to note that Project Formulation GrantsprovidedtoNIEsforthedesignoffullproposalsshouldbeusedtofacilitateacomprehensivestakeholderconsultationprocess.Furthermore, itsetsoutthattheprojectproposalmust includea framework for taking into account and incorporating stake-holders views during project implementation, where possibleincluding a strategy and a timetable for the consultations, plusfacilitationthroughinteraliabudgetallocationsfortravelcoststominimisebarrierswhichimpedetheparticipationofkeystake-holders.
The second key term in the provision is stakeholder. The AF’samended provision requires listing the stakeholders consultedand mentions some exemplary groups of important stakehold-ers.Ageneraldefinitionofrelevantstakeholderfollowsbelow.At this stage, however, it is would be better not to restrict theterm stakeholder to a specific group of persons, but rather tokeepitasbroadaspossibletoensurethattheinterestsofeachgroupinvolvedintheprocessareconsideredandreflectedintheproposal. There are nonetheless certain stakeholders who arekeydeterminantsforasuccessfulconsultation.
Amongthesekeystakeholders,themostvulnerablecommunitiesandgendergroupsintheprojectregionsarecentralintermsofsustainabilityandpivotalinensuringameaningfulconsultation.Theprecisetermoftheprovisionistogivea particular reference to the most vulnerable. This term is the link to the section B oftheprojectjustificationfromthesametemplate,whichrequiresto show how the proposal provides economic, social and environ-mental benefits, with particular reference to the most vulnerable communities, and vulnerable groups within communities, including gender considerations. The further amended text also broadensthe subject not only to benefits but also pay due attention po-tentialadverseeffects,suchasthroughmaladaptation,whichisaswellakeyimprovementoftheguidance.
Both references to the most vulnerable communities in sectionBandHrequireanevidence-basedidentificationofthosemostvulnerable to climate change in the project regions. These sec-tionsaremoreconnectedthanmightbeapparent.Theyshouldactuallybeseenastwosidesofthesamecoin.Howcanthisbetranslatedintotheconsultativeprocess?
This could be done step by step, starting with a vulnerabilityand impact assessment, which would help to identify who arethe most vulnerable communities among the population in theproject areas. This assessment should also cover all aspects of
the adaptive capacity of these communities, in order to gaugethe benefits they could accrue from the implementation of theprojectsor,alternatively,tobetterassessandunderstandtheirneedsandconcernsintheconsultationprocess.
As both cases show, special attention to the needs of the mostvulnerable communities in developing proposals is paramountfortheAF.ThisfeaturedistinguishestheAFfromotherfundses-tablishedtofinanceadaptationactionindevelopingcountries.
Aspointedoutabove,thereisnosinglerecipeforundertakingaconsultativeprocess.Theconsultativeprocess,assuch,ishighlydependent on the scope, scale, range and goal to be achieved.Inotherwordstheapproachandtheprocessofconsultationde-pendonthescopeoftheproject,theprevailingsituationandthevarietyofpeopletobeconsulted.Despitethisdifficulty,thereare some basic principles to which a sustainable consultationshouldadhere.Theseprinciplesarebasedonthebestpractice,andonmethodologiesthathavealreadybeentriedandtestedintheimplementationofprojects.
Thisnewsletterproposesfiveprinciples,whicharebasedonthenineprinciplesdevelopedinthedocument“TowardsaSustain-ableConsultation”preparedfortheAFNetworkasbackgroundinformation on the consultative process in the context of theAF.11 These principles, as listed below, have been chosen fortheir relevance to the Adaptation Fund projects, but should bynomeansbeseenasthecriteriaforadoptionbytheAFinordertoensuresustainableconsultation.Rather,theyareintendedasasoundbasis,uponwhichanyconsultativeprocessescanbuild.
First Step: Identification and Engagement of Key Stakeholders
Whoshouldbethetargetedpeople?Whoaremostdirectlyandindirectly affected by climate events? Who have most interestin influencing the process and who are already contributing toregionaldevelopment?
Under ‘stakeholder’ one understands a group of people , which is generally directly or indirectly affected by a project or has a strong interest in influencing actions taking place in its region.Thisdefini-tionshouldbekeptasbroadaspossibleandthelistofstakehold-ersshouldbethesubjectofamendmentsthroughoutthewholeprocess.However,amongthestakeholdersthemostvulnerableandgendergroupsshouldremaincentralintheAFcontext,notonly because of the reference to them in both project require-ments,butalsobecausethestrategicprioritiesofitsOperationalPoliciesandGuidelines12give special attention to their needs. Itisthis combination of innovative features – the direct access ap-proachoftheAFandthefocusonmostvulnerablecommunities-thatmakestheAFamodelforthefuture.
Keys principles that should lead the consultative process
Havingsaidthis,theidentificationofthemostvulnerablecom-munities should be evidence-based. This can be accomplishedthroughanassessmentofthelevelofthevulnerabilityofpeopleliving in the project areas. It is also essential for all parties tounderstand the interdependence between both the most vul-nerablecommunitiesandtheclimateimpactstobeaddressedinthe project together with the social cultural and economic fac-tors that need to be considered in sustainable decision makingprocess.Havingdonethis,onecanstarttoencouragethemostvulnerable communities and other stakeholders to get moreinvolved in the project design, which is quite important in par-ticularforlarger-scaleprojectsandprogrammes.13
The sooner the involvement and engagement of the targetedpeopleissecured,themorecertainiseventualmvcownershipoftheprocess.Thisiscrucialforsustainabilityandcosteffective-ness.Agroundup“bottomup”approachwouldbethebestwaytoestablishthisengagement,startingfromacommondefinitionandunderstandingoftheclimatechallengetobefacedintheaf-fectedregions.Theadaptivecapacityandtraditionalknowledgearekeytodeterminewhatkindofinterventionsaremostappro-priateinaspecificcontext.Thisalsowouldenablethemtoplantheproject’simplementationandtodeterminehowtheycanbebebestinvolved.
Methodology Stakeholder Engagement Plan
Since the stakeholder consultation is critical for the success ofall projects, particularly those in the adaptation field, it is im-portantthattheconsultativeprocessfollowsawell-elaboratedplanstakeholderengagementplan.Suchaplanshouldcontainaninitialscheduleofallactivitiesplannedandundertaken,aswellasminuteallconcerns,needsandhopesexpressedbythestake-holders. This plan should also describe resources, responsibili-ties and techniques for implementing stakeholder engagementactivitiesaswellashowtheseactivitiesshouldbeincorporatedinto the project’s/programme’s management system – becausestakeholder consultation should go beyond the preparation oftheadaptationprogramme.14
Tosumup,theSEPisakindofagendadetailingthewholepro-posal design, to be regularly updated throughout the projectimplementation process. It is a key tool not only for keepingtrack of project implementation , and stakeholder concerns, aswellasbeinganimportantdocumentforthemidandfinalevalu-ation. The provision in the amended AF text that a frameworkwithideallyastrategyandtimetableforconsultationsshouldbeincludedinthefullprojectproposalpointstotherightdirection,butcouldbemoreexplicitlydemandingsuchaplan.
Level of Participation
The level of participation depends on the approach applied toundertaketheconsultationandhowtailoreditistotheneedsofthoseconsulted.Consultationrequiresthefullsharingofviewsand information and between all participating parties in ordertobuildaconsensus.The level of consultation should be set ac-cording to the level of risk relating to the projects.Thechallengewould be to include the best available climate database in thestakeholderengagementplan.Thisnecessitatesthetranslationof scientific information into local languages so as to enablethoseconsultedtotakeinformeddecisions.
To enhance participation levels, the consultation should be in-formed, understandable, inclusive, context specific, translatedintolocallanguages,reportable,unbiasedandon-going.Thiswillno doubt require considerable time and resources. Therefore,the AF would be well advised to request that the proponentsallocate adequate funds from the Project Formulation Grant
for the consultative process, which has de facto been decidedthroughtheamendedprovision.
Focus on specific groups:
Both, the special attention to the particular needs of mostvulnerablecommunities,andthedirectaccessapproachmodal-ity are the AF’s innovative features and key elements that willdeterminethefutureroleoftheAFinthepost2012adaptationfinanceregime.Thefocusonthemvcwithaspecificemphasisongendergroup,oldandyoungidentifiedinframeoftheconsulta-tionprocessshouldbethecentreofallattentionsinthedesignandimplementationoftheproject.Thisfocusshouldbeachievedthroughaninclusiveandproactiveconsultativeprocess.Thereisessentialforensuringtheownershipofthebeneficiariesaswellasthesustainabilityoftheadaptationactions.
Grievance Procedure:
Having considered and carried out all these principles, thewholeconsultationprocessframeworkshouldberedressedbyagrievancemechanism.Thisgrievanceprocedureisaharmonizedset of mechanisms applied, to solve or address the preoccupa-tionsorapprehensionofapartyinvolvedornotinvolvedintheconsultation.Itisvitaltohaveagrievanceprocedurewhenitisprobablethatsomeofthevulnerableoraffectedgroupmaynotbe consulted or their views could not truly be reflected in theimplementationoftheprojects.
Now the AFB has set up Mechanisms for Handling Complaints.Accordingly,theAFwebsiteprovidesthecontactpersonsfromthe implementing entities in charge of receiving complaints, aswellasofprovidinglinkstothekeyproceduresthattheIEsap-plywithregardtoissuessuchasfraudandcorruption,ontheAFwebsiteisanimportantstepforaddressinganycomplaintsthatmay arise. Once first experience is gained with this approach,one could gain enough lessons to decide whether the currentapproachissufficient.15
Overall one can summarise that with the decisions from the 17th
meeting the AFB has taken important decisions to strengthen and clarify the consultative process, and the decisions reflect main issues that this article has identified to be crucial to an effective and comprehensive process. Unfortunately it has taken some time for the AFB to come to this decision, which, however, has been fa-cilitated by the evidence that too little guidance results in too much divergence and lack of quality in some of the projects submitted and approved so far. For the AFB it is also important to highlight that the new rules now apply to all projects to be submitted, includ-ing those concepts which had already been endorsed and which are now turned into full proposals. Whether this already materialises will be observed with the submission of the next round of project proposals.
5. Background Information to the Adaptation Fund (AF)Established under the Kyoto Protocol, the Adaptation Fund(AF) was created to finance concrete adaptation projects andprogrammes in vulnerable developing countries that are PartytotheProtocol.Becauseofitsfeaturesuchasthedirectaccesstofunding,revenuegeneration,governanceandlegalstructure,the AF has received considerable attention in the internationalclimatecommunity16.
Firstly,theAFisnotatraditionaldevelopmentassistancedrivenfunds,butratherademanddrivenone,financedthroughaninno-vativefundingmechanism.Fundrevenuesareobtainedprimarilyfroma2percentshareoftheproceedsfromtheKyotoProtocol’sClean Development Mechanism (CDM) project activities. Ac-cordinglythefundisanindependentfund.Itisfinancedmainlythrough the revenue obtained from the sold of the CERs in thecarbon market in addition to the contributions from developedcountries official development assistance. So far, the Trustee-the World Bank-has generated revenues of US$ 168.34 millionsince the start of the CER sales monetization program in May2009.17EstimatesofpotentialresourcesavailablefortheAdap-tation Fund until December31, 2012 range from approximatelyUSD187milliontoUSD223million..Thisisadropintheoceancomparedtotheexpectedadaptioncostsfordevelopingcoun-tries,whichtheWorldBankestimates$70billionto$100billionperyearonaverageuntil205018.
Secondly,theAFisgovernedbytheAFBoard,whichworksundertheauthorityandaccountabletotheConferenceoftheParties.Assisted by a secretariat, the AF Board is the principle body ofthefundinchargeofstrategicpoliciesandguidelinesaswellastheoversightoftheprojects.Itiscomprisedof16membersandtheir alternates, in an overall majority of developing countries.Nevertheless the decisions of the Board were undertaken byconsensus.
Inaddition,theAFBhasadoptedthestrategic priority of giving special attention to the particular needs of the most vulnerable communities.Thisisimportanttoensureownershipandsustain-abilityoftheprojectfundedbytheAF.Also,theAFBhasadopt-edatransparentworkingmode,byallowingcivilsocietyorgani-sationstoattenditsmeeting.Thisiscrucialregardingreliability,accountabilityandtransparency.SinceDecember2010,theAFBhasformalisedaregularconsultationwithcivilsocietyinordertoenhancetheawarenessraisingaroundandoutsidetheAF.
Thirdly, the AF allows direct access of developing countries toits resources. This is a precedent case in the climate financelandscape. Direct access is the manifestation of converting into reality the notion of capacity building, by which developing countries carry their own actions through their own institutions. Itisanapproach,whichsimplifiesandacceleratestheprocessbywhichresourcesflowtodevelopingcountries.
Specifically, the AF Board offers two avenues to access its re-sources. Eligible countries can use the “classic way” throughMultilateral Implementing Entities (MIEs), or nominate a do-mestic institution as National Implementing Entity (NIE). BothImplementing Entities (IE) – National as well as Multilateral –havetomeetthesamefiduciarystandardssetbytheAFB.ThisfiduciarystandardisguarantorofthecredibilityoftheBoardand
warrant that the Implementing Entities has the required finan-cial integrity, institutional capacity as well as transparencyandself-investigative powers to manage the funds entrusted. Theaccredited IEs will be the direct recipients of funding and bearthefull responsibilityduring the implementation.Sofar elevennationalentitieshavebeenauthorizedtoreceivemoneyfromtheAdaptationFund:
However, the accreditation process reveals itself as difficult asexpected.TheaccreditedNIEsaredifferentfromeachotherinthe way they are governed and managed as well as the field oftheir expertise. There is no single recipe therefore for the NIEor the successful accreditation process of NIEs. The AF and itssecretariat are still exploring ways through which developingcountriescouldbeassistedtorisetothechallengeofaccredita-tion.Thus,theAFBhaslaunchedthe“accreditationtoolkit”withthegoalofprovidingapractical“how-to”guidetoassistcoun-triesintheaccreditationprocessfortheirnationalimplementingentity(NIE).InAddition,theAFsecretariatwiththesupportoftheUNFCCCsecretariathasorganisedlastyeartwoworkshops-InAfricaandInLatinAmerica-inordertofamiliarisedevelopingcountrieswiththeaccreditationprocess.TwootherworkshopswillbeconvenedthisyearinAsiaandinthePacific.Thepartici-pationintheseregionalworkshopswasalsoausefulexerciseforapplicantcountries,sincetwoofthethreenewaccreditedNIEshavereceivedonsidelineoftheseworkshopstherequiredinfor-mationandmotivationtheyneededtosuccesstheprocess.
Tosumup,therecentaccreditationalsogiveclearevidencethatdevelopingcountriesarebecomingmoreconfidenttotacklethisavenue. The timidity of developing countries and their fear fortheaccreditationprocessatthebeginningoftheprocessseemsgraduallytobesurmounted.Theaccreditationprocessisbecom-ing a popular exercise among developing countries, which havedecidedmorethanever,totaketheirowndestinyintheirhandbyaccreditingtheirowninstitution.
Alpha Oumar Kaloga
6. Field visit in Senegal: An implementation at the right timeGermanwatch and Enda TM undertook a field visit in the threeregions -Saly, Joal, and Rufisque- of Senegal-. These cities vis-itedarethetargetedregionsofthefirsteverapprovedprojectbytheAFB.ThisdirectaccessprojectwillbecarriedoutbytheCentredeSuivieEcologiqueduSenegal,thefirsteveraccreditedNational Implementing Entity by the AFB, and aims at address-ingtheadaptationneedtocoastalerosioninvulnerableareasofSenegal.
ThefieldmissionstartedatJoal,asmallcityalongSenegal’slit-toralalmost150kmfarfromthecapitalDakarcity.SoafruitfulconsultationhastakenplacewiththerepresentativeofDynam-iqueFemme(DF)actingasanexecutiveentity,inchargeofassist-inglocalcommunitiesofthecoastalareaofJoal,inhandlingfishprocessing areas of the districts and of conducting awarenessprogrammeandtrainingrelatedtoadaptationanditsadverseef-fect.Thisrootsorganisationhasbeenemergedoftheawarenessofthelocalcommunity,especiallywomentogetmoreorganisedin their interventions, in order to better participate in the de-velopment of their hometown. DF will also coordinate actionsrelatedtothecleaningofthebeachaswellasthere-plantationofthemangrovetoprotectthepeopleagainsterosionandisinclose consultation with the represent of both the CSE and themunicipality.HoweverthemajoractivityinJoalwillhoweverbethe construction of an anti-salt dikes, to fight the salinizationofagriculturallandsusedtogrowriceinJoal.Thiscoastalinfra-structure will be built on findings of an Environmental ImpactAssessmentstudy,whichwillstartattheendofAugust.
ThesecondpartofthefieldvisitleadtoSaly,whichisanewmu-nicipalityerectedasaresponseofthegrowingtourismactivitiesin the region. Most of the economic activities – particularly intourismsector-inthecityandsurroundingvillages19areaffectedbycoastalerosionwhichhasintensifiedsince1989,withashore-linerecessionof1meterperyear20.
InSaly,themunicipalityconvenedthemeetingwiththefieldvisitteam, in which the vice major of Saly and two representativesof Green Senegal (GS) participated. GS as executing entity isinchargeofawarenessandtrainingprogrammeaswellasenvi-ronmentalassessment.MsOulimataDiopofGSdescribedtheirmethodologyofoutreachsensitization,whichconsistsofvisitingathomeeachsinglefamilyaffectedbytheadaptationmeasure.Therational istotriggerasustainablediscussionwiththe localcommunitywiththegoalofenhancingownership,byexplainingthe positive impact of the planed adaptation activities in thelivelihoods.Attheendofeachhomevisit,concernsandviewsoflocal communities have been collected, in order to be fed lateroneintheimplementationphase.Shealsopointedoutthatindo-ingso,GShassignificantlyraisedtheawarenessofthetargetedpeople.ThevicemajorofSaly,Mr.BabacarGueyesaidthattheAFB funded project comes at the right time, since the measureundertakenarenecessaryintheregion.FurthermoreHemadeinitsstatementclearthatthemunicipalitydoesn’thaveresourcesto fund adaptation action in the region as needed. Rather themunicipality tries to act as facilitator, which in one side, en-courages private sector mainly hoteliers to invest in activities
which address adverse effect of climate change imperilling thecoastalandtheirinfrastructure.Andontheotherside,toenactlawagainstanarchicconstructionofthetourismsector,sothatfuture construction takes into account the premise of climatechange. It also highlighted the pivotal role of stakeholder in-terplayandjointworkasthereceiptofensuringenvironmentalintegrityandsustainabledevelopment.
ThelastpartofthefieldvisitwasThiawleneaprojectareasdis-trictofRufisque.Thiaweleneisovercrowdedandmainlyhabitedby the fisher, which was in the last decade often obligatedbecauseoftheexpandingocean,toleavetheirhousealongthebeach. In Thiawlene the field visit team met represent of theGreenSenegalaswellasfromtheDirectorateofEnvironmentalofSenegal.Bothsaidthattheyjustarrivedfromaradiobroad-coast,whichtheywasorganisingsincetwoweeksinortousethelocalwellheardradiostationastooltoelucidatetherationaloftheprojectaswellastoinvitelocalcommunitiestoattendtheirregularmeetingatthebasisofthehoodofThiawaline.
Area, where the anti salt dike will be erected in Joal, PhotobyKalogaAlphaOumarGermanwatch
Municipality of Saly from right to linkMr. Babacar Gueye Vice Mayor of Saly, Ms Oulimata Diop Green Senegal and Emanuel Seck Enda TM Senegal. PhotobyKalogaAlphaOumarGermanwatch
The intended adaptation measures of the AFB’s project aimson the one side to fight against erosion of the coastal and thebeachaswellastocleanthechannelofthecanaltotheseawithastrongparticipationofthelocoalpopulation.TherepresentofDEEC also highlighted that the project will be implemented attherightmomentbecausemostoftheinfrastructureareheavilyaffected. The project will surely enhance the livelihood of theFisher and protect their habitations. However, he made clearthat the sustainability of the project will depend on the strongroleofthemunicipalitiesinthetransportofwaste.Thefirstdikeconstructed by the Senegal Government was abounded by thegavarageofthelocalcommunitieslivingaroundofthebeach.Itis therefore important that the municipalities find sustainableandaffordablesolutiononhowtomanagethegavarageinordertodiminishthepressionofthetobeconstructeddike.
Alpha Kaloga (Germanwatch) and Emmanuel Seck (Enda TM)
7. Saving the beaches of Negril: Jamaica making headway for full project proposalJamaicaistakingstepstodevelopafullprojectproposalafterre-ceivingapprovaloftheirconceptattheAdaptationFundBoard(AFB) meeting held in June 2011.Jamaica’s National Implement-ingentity,thePlanningInstituteofJamaica(PIOJ),isinthepro-cessofrecruitingalocalconsultanttodevelopthefullproposal.While developing the full proposal the PIOJ will work with thecommentssuppliedbytheAFBandotherstakeholderstomaketheprojectsuccessful.
In late August a team of representatives from Germanwatchand Panos had the chance to visit future project sides, speakto potential project beneficiaries and vulnerable people in theareas and talk to the implementing and executing entities. Thebiggest part of the project being developed deals with coastalactionsintheNegrilregionofJamaica.Negrilisapopulartouristdestinationknownforits7milesstripofwhitesandbeachesbutthe area is subject of heavy coastal erosions and unsustainablemanagementpractices.
Theareaitselfisanationaleconomicalhubandservesassourceof employment for many people. The erosion and beach lossis a serious threat to Negril’s vibrant tourist market – loss ofwhich would be a major blow to Jamaica’s economy. Discus-sions with fishermen, vendors and other persons revealed thatresidents see the urgent need to act to preserve the beaches.ManysaidthattheywouldsupportPIOJeffortstogetfundstoput in breakaways to address problemswiththebeaches.TheyalsocommendedtheNationalEnvironmentandPlanningAgency(NEPA) on their efforts to involve residents in maintaining Ne-gril’s environment in good condition. NEPA will be one of theexecutingagenciesinPIOJ’sproposal.
Afewoftheresidentshoweverspokestronglyofthelackofin-clusioninthedecision-makingaroundinterventionsthatcanbedoneinNegril.Therewasmuchresentmentagainstthehoteliers,who residents say, have contributed most to the decline of thebeaches.
Another component of the project is agricultural adaptation.ThishoweverisanareawherethePIOJisstillworkingontheac-tionstobetaken.Intalkingtofarmersofthetargetparishes(StCatherine,ClarendonandpossiblyManchester),theydescribedveryclearlyhowclimatephenomena,mainlydrought,freakrainsand hurricanes, have impacted them. Most of the persons spo-ken with did not yet know of the planned adaptation activities
Generally, it was great to see the enthusiasm and the generalopennessofPIOJandotheractorstomaketheprojectasuccess.However, especially the agriculture activities need to furtherflashed out, also in terms of how they drill down to the mostvulnerable farmers. The opinions of the people in the differentcommunities have been very useful and Panos in collaborationwith PIOJ will be having more consultations with the communi-ties as the concept concept is developed. It is expected thatPanoswillbeworkingwithitspartnerstoprovideinputintotheprogrammeandassisttocapturethevoicesofthemarginalizedfortheproject’sbenefit.
Sönke Kreft (Germanwatch) and Indi Mclymont-Lafayette (Panos Caribbean)
Adaptation Fund NGO newsletter • No. 4 / May 2012
Fishermen in Negril, Jamaica talk about sea level rise and other climate impacts. Photo:SönkeKreft
