Taxonomy Term List
GCF resources will be used to implement a combination of integrated watershed and flood management works including both hard and soft measures. This includes upgrading river works to cater to increased water flows during flood events (taking into account the likelihood of the increased frequency of extreme events), ensuring that infrastructure works, and home dwellings, government and private-sector buildings are made more secure and provide adequate shelter in case of floods and their aftermaths. Additionally, the project will ensure that when floodwaters occur, the excess waters are channeled away through an effective, efficient, and fit-for-purpose drainage system. The project will consequently play a critical role in assisting the urban population and economy to effectively manage the inevitable increased intensity and frequency of flooding.
Direct benefits from these interventions include reduced risk of damage to public and private infrastructure/assets; reduced possibility of loss of life; and enhanced land value in flood-prone areas. Indirect benefits include reduced losses in income/sales; reduced costs of clean-ups, maintenance and repairs; reduced costs of relief and response efforts; and reduced possibility of health hazards. In addition to these 26,000 direct beneficiaries, the general population of Samoa will benefit from the safeguarding of critical economic assets and learning that will be generated.
In addition, mid and upstream ecosystem and community-based adaptation measures will enhance capture, infiltration, storage and delayed release of rainwater in soils and biomass, and water retention ponds will serve both climate-smart agribusiness development and combat degradation of vulnerable ecosystems through appropriate agro-forestry land-use practices.
Addressing Climate Change in Samoa
Recent extreme events have resulted in approximately US$200 million worth of damages during each event. Climate projections for Samoa suggest that the risk of climate induced events will increase, potentially undermining development progress in urban Apia where the majority of the population and economic activity is located.
Given the topography of the country, extreme events result in significant river discharge that results in flooding of lowland areas. Recent tropical events such as Cyclone Evan have caused significant damage to both public and private assets as a result of flooding, resulting in serious health impacts. Urban infrastructure has suffered considerably from the recurrence of flooding and is unable to cope as climate change-related events are expected to become more frequent and intense.
Projected climate change scenarios cited by the Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) suggest that Samoa is expected to have more frequent and extreme rainfall events; more frequent and longer drought events; increased air and water temperatures; sea level rise; and more frequent extreme wind events.
The project represents the Government of Samoa’s initial steps in operationalizing a comprehensive flood management solution for the likely consequences of extreme events in Apia, the capital with about 80,000 people. In this project, three interlinked project outputs will be pursued:
- Capacities and information base strengthened for the Government of Samoa to pursue an integrated approach to reduce vulnerability towards flood-related risks;
- Key infrastructure in the Vaisigano River Catchment are flood-proofed to increase resilience to negative effects of excessive water; and
- Upgraded drainage in downstream areas to increase capacity and allow for more rapid outflow of flood waters.
Project in the News
Every dollar counts in fight against climate change - New GCF Funding for Samoa
Friday 16 December 2016
Oped celebrating Somoa's recently approved US$58 million Green Climate Fund project.
Learn more about the climate challenges facing Samoa, and how UNDP is working to address those challenges and reduce risks.
Flood Management in Samoa
Output 1. Strengthening capacities and mechanisms for integrated approach to reduce flood-related risks in place.
Output 2. Key infrastructure in the Vaisigano River Catchment are flood-proofed to increase resilience to negative effects of excessive water.
Rising temperatures have melted glaciers, creating glacial lakes in Northern Pakistan. These carry the risk of outburst flooding events, threatening over 7 million people. Early warning systems, engineering structures and disaster management policies will reduce risk, protecting local communities and providing early warning of devastating flood events.
The melting of the Hindu Kush, Karakoram, and Himalayan glaciers in Northern Pakistan due to rising temperatures have created 3,044 glacial lakes in the federally-administered territory of Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) and the province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP). It is estimated that 33 of these glacial lakes are hazardous and likely to result in glacial lake outburst floods. Such flooding releases millions of cubic metres of water and debris in just a few hours, resulting in the loss of lives, destruction of property and infrastructure, and severe damage to livelihoods in some of the most remote areas of Pakistan.
In response to these risks, the "Scaling-up of Glacial Lake Outburst Flood (GLOF) risk reduction in Northern Pakistan" project will build 250 engineering structures including damns, ponds, spill ways, tree plantation and drainage to reduce risk. At the same time, the development of disaster management policies and the introduction of weather monitoring stations, flood gauges, hydrological modelling and early warning systems will increase the ability to respond rapidly to flood scenarios.
The melting of the Hindu Kush, Karakoram, and Himalayan glaciers in Northern Pakistan due to rising temperatures has created 3,044 glacial lakes in the federally-administered territory of Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) and the province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP). It is estimated that 33 of these glacial lakes are hazardous and likely to result in glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs). Such outbursts have occurred in the past and when they do, millions of cubic metres of water and debris is released in a few hours, resulting in the loss of lives, destruction of property and infrastructure, and severe damage to livelihoods in some of the most remote areas of Pakistan. Currently 7,101,000 people remain at risk in GB and KP. Most recently, in July 2015, over 280,000 people in GB and KP were affected, a combination of heavy rains and GLOFs.
At present, the country faces a critical gap in technical and technological capacity to monitor the status of glaciers through hydrological monitoring and forecasting. Current early warning systems (EWS) do not have the capacity to support the management of risks posed by rising water levels in the lakes, including failure to issue early warnings to communities. The design and implementation of medium- and long-term disaster management policies and risk reduction and preparedness plans are also not fully geared to deal with the specifics of GLOF threats.
The Government of Pakistan has recognized the threat from GLOFs in its National Climate Change Policy and in its National Determined Contribution to monitor changes in glacier volumes and related GLOFs. The Government of Pakistan is seeking GCF resources to upscale ongoing initiatives on early warning systems and small, locally-sourced infrastructure to protect communities from GLOF risks. The interventions proposed for scale up by this project will be based on activities implemented in two districts on a trial basis that have proven to be impactful. In particular, engineering structures (i.e. gabion walls) have been constructed; automatic weather stations, rain gauge and discharge equipment were installed to support rural communities to avoid human and material losses from GLOF events. The proposed GCF project will expand coverage to twelve districts in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Gilgit-Baltistan provinces. The proposed project will strengthen the technical capacity of sub-national decision makers to integrate climate change and disaster risk management into medium- and long-term development planning processes.
Output 1: Strengthened sub-national institutional capacities to plan and implement climate change -resilient development pathways
This output responds to the need for systematic integration of GLOF risk management into the processes, policies and plans of institutions that have a stake in avoiding human and material losses from GLOF events in vulnerable areas in the Departments of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and Gilgit-Baltistan (GB). GCF resources will be used to strengthen the capabilities of local level institutions (Disaster Risk Management, Agriculture, Livestock and Water sector in the Departments of GB and KP and federal level institutions (Ministry of Kashmir Affairs, Ministry of Environment and National Disaster Management Authority) to incorporate climate change adaptation considerations into development plans in GB and KP. The incorporation of climate change adaptation measures into the planning instruments will also be based on progress made at the national level under NCCP and by other regions in including climate change measures in sectoral, territorial, and environmental planning instruments. More specifically, the project will make use of the lessons learned from the recently completed UNDP/Adaptation Fund supported project: “Reducing Risks and Vulnerabilities from Glacier Lake Outburst Floods in Northern Pakistan”. In addition, GCF resources will be used to promote the inclusion of information generated from early warning systems and hydrological modeling (Output 2) to generate flood scenarios that then can better inform local development plans and, by extension, budgeting.
Output 2: Community-based EWS and long-term measures are up-scaled to increase communities’ adaptive capacity
A key result that GCF resources will finance focuses on the scaling up of interventions that have been tested with other financing to increase adaptive capacity of communities in target valleys. GCF resources will expand the climate information surveillance and discharge measuring network in the region. GCF resources will be used to procure and install 50 automatic weather stations (AWS) and 408 river discharge gauges/sensors. These monitoring instruments will provide the requisite data to conduct hydrological modeling to generate flood risk scenarios that will feed into a flood early warning system to enable the dissemination of flashflood warning signals on a 24-hour basis generated by PMD through cellphones. AWS and river discharge sensors will provide information to capacitate village hazard watch groups that will be part of a local-level early warning system. Small-scale hard adaptation structures will be constructed (gabion walls, spillways, check dams) to protect human lives and household’s assets in combination with bioengineering interventions to stabilize slopes slides, reducing the risk of debris slides. In Pakistan EIAs are not required for smaller infrastructure projects. The protective capability of these structures will be amplified by additional resources channeled to the communities ex ante and following a GLOF event through the scale up of already established, revolving community-based disaster risk management fund. In addition, ecosystem-based adaptation interventions will be promoted in order to increase resilience against GLOFs events while supporting livelihoods.
Project-level monitoring and evaluation will be undertaken in compliance with the UNDP POPP and the UNDP Evaluation Policy. UNDP will perform monitoring and reporting throughout the Reporting Period in accordance with the AMA. UNDP has country presence and capacity to perform such functions. In the event of any additional post-implementation obligations over and above the AMA, UNDP will discuss and agree these with the GCF Secretariat in the final year of the implementation period.
The primary responsibility for day-to-day project monitoring and implementation rests with the Project Manager. The Project Manager will develop annual work plans to ensure the efficient implementation of the project. The Project Manager will inform the Project Board and the UNDP Country Office of any delays or difficulties during implementation, including the implementation of the M&E plan, so that the appropriate support and corrective measures can be adopted. The Project Manager will also ensure that all project staff maintain a high level of transparency, responsibility and accountability in monitoring and reporting project results.
The UNDP Country Office will support the Project Manager as needed, including through annual supervision missions. The UNDP Country Office is responsible for complying with UNDP project-level M&E requirements as outlined in the UNDP POPP. Additional M&E and implementation quality assurance and troubleshooting support will be provided by the UNDP Regional Technical Advisor as needed. The project target groups and stakeholders including the NDA Focal Point will be involved as much as possible in project-level M&E.
A project inception workshop will be held after the UNDP project document has been signed by all relevant parties to: a) re-orient project stakeholders to the project strategy and discuss any changes in the overall context that influence project implementation; b) discuss the roles and responsibilities of the project team, including reporting and communication lines and conflict resolution mechanisms; c) review the results framework and discuss reporting, monitoring and evaluation roles and responsibilities and finalize the M&E plan; d) review financial reporting procedures and mandatory requirements, and agree on the arrangements for the annual audit; e) plan and schedule Project Board meetings and finalize the first year annual work plan. The Project Manager will prepare the inception report no later than one month after the inception workshop. The final inception report will be cleared by the UNDP Country Office and the UNDP Regional Technical Adviser, and will be approved by the Project Board.
The Project Manager, the UNDP Country Office, and the UNDP Regional Technical Advisor will provide objective input to the annual Project Implementation Report (PIR) for each year of project implementation. The Project Manager will ensure that the indicators included in the project results framework are monitored annually well in advance of the PIR submission deadline and will objectively report progress in the Development Objective tab of the PIR. The annual PIR will be shared with the project board and other stakeholders. The UNDP Country Office will coordinate the input of the NDA Focal Point and other stakeholders to the PIR. The quality rating of the previous year’s PIR will be used to inform the preparation of the next PIR. The final project PIR along with the terminal evaluation report and corresponding management response will serve as the final project report package.
An independent mid-term review process will be undertaken and the findings and responses outlined in the management response will be incorporated as recommendations for enhanced implementation during the final half of the project’s duration. The terms of reference, the review process and the final MTR report will follow the standard templates and guidance available on the UNDP Evaluation Resource Center. The final MTR report will be cleared by the UNDP Country Office and the UNDP Regional Technical Adviser, and will be approved by the Project Board. The final MTR report will be available in English.
An independent terminal evaluation (TE) will take place no later than three months prior to operational closure of the project. The terms of reference, the review process and the final TE report will follow the standard templates and guidance available on the UNDP Evaluation Resource Center. The final TE report will be cleared by the UNDP Country Office and the UNDP Regional Technical Adviser, and will be approved by the Project Board. The TE report will be available in English.
The UNDP Country Office will include the planned project terminal evaluation in the UNDP Country Office evaluation plan, and will upload the final terminal evaluation report in English and the management response to the public UNDP Evaluation Resource Centre (ERC) (http://erc.undp.org). Once uploaded to the ERC, the UNDP Independent Evaluation Office will undertake a quality assessment and validate the findings and ratings in the TE report, and rate the quality of the TE report.
The UNDP Country Office will retain all M&E records for this project for up to seven years after project financial closure in order to support ex-post evaluations.
A detailed M&E budget, monitoring plan and evaluation plan will be included in the UNDP project document. UNDP will perform monitoring and reporting throughout the reporting period in accordance with the AMA and Funded Activity Agreement (FAA). UNDP has country presence and capacity to perform such functions. In the event of any additional post-implementation obligations over and above the AMA, UNDP will discuss and agree these with the GCF Secretariat in the final year of the project and will prepare a post-implementation monitoring plan and budget for approval by the GCF Board as necessary.
Output 1: Strengthened sub-national institutional capacities to plan and implement climate change-resilient development pathways
Output 2: Community-based EWS and long-term measures are up-scaled to increase communities’ adaptive capacity
Addressing the Risks of Climate Induced Disasters in Bhutan through Enhanced National and Local Capacity for Effective Actions
The current NAPA II project, Addressing the Risk of Climate-Induced Disasters through Enhanced National and Local Capacity in Bhutan, will address urgent and immediate climate change adaptation needs and leverage co-financing resources from national government, bilateral and other multilateral sources, and the private sector. The project is working to “enhance national, local and community capacity to prepare for and respond to climate induced multi-hazards to reduce potential losses of human lives, national economic infrastructure, livelihood and livelihood assets.”
The USD 11.49 million project is funded by Global Environment Facility/Least Developed Countries Fund, and coordinated by the National Environment Commission Secretariat in partnership with UNDP, Bhutan. The project will safeguard essential economic and livelihood infrastructure in hazard-prone communities and key industrial areas from increasing climate hazards such as floods, landslides, windstorms and forest fire through reducing vulnerability at high-risk areas and increasing adaptive capacity of community-level disaster risk management institutions.
Source: UNDP Bhutan Project Identification Form (May 1, 2012), and the Bhutan NAPA II brochure, June 2015.
Brochures, Posters, Communications Products
Assessments and Background Documents
Plans and policies of relevance to NAPs for Least Developed Countries (LDCs)
The overarching objective of the project is to increase national, local and community capacity to prepare for and respond to climate-induced multi-hazards to reduce potential losses of human lives, national economic infrastructure, livelihoods and livelihood assets. This objective is fully aligned with the development priorities of the RGoB as set out in Bhutan’s tenth 5-year plan, which is in turn underpinned and guided by the long-term development vision of Gross National Happiness (GNH) and Bhutan 2020: A Vision for Peace, Prosperity and Happiness. Under the four pillars of GNH (i.e. sustainable and equitable socio-economic development; environmental conservation; preservation and promotion of culture; and good governance), the 5-year plan places a strong emphasis, among others, on balanced rural-urban development for poverty alleviation, expansion/maintenance of key economic infrastructure including road infrastructure that connects rural and urban centers, and strengthening of the agricultural sector which continues to employ the majority of Bhutanese and be the backbone of the rural economy.
This project will implement priority interventions addressed in Bhutan's National Adaptation Programme of Actions corresponding to the following objectives, in part or full, as outlined in NAPA profile:
- Disaster management strategy
- Weather forecasting system to serve farmers and agriculture
- Landslide management and flood prevention
- Flood protection of downstream industrial and agricultural area
- Rainwater harvesting
- Promote community-based forest fire management and prevention
Situated on the southern slope of the Eastern Himalayas, Bhutan’s landscape is mountainous and rugged with elevations ranging from 100m in the southern foothills to 7500m towards north. Due to its topography, habitable and arable areas are limited to approximately 8.3% and 2.9%, respectively, of the landmass. Agriculture, which employs 69% of the population and accounts for 78% of monetary income in rural households, and industrial activities are largely practiced in this highly confined space that its topography permits. While Bhutan is in general endowed with abundant water resources from the four major rivers and their tributaries, most of the large rivers are at the bottom of valleys and gorges rendering these rich water resources largely inaccessible for agriculture or domestic use. As a result, irrigation is limited to areas near small perennial streams that exist above main rivers and majority of farmers rely primarily on monsoonal rains, which account for 60-90% of annual precipitation.
Bhutan is one of the most disaster prone countries in the Asia-Pacific region, irrespective of the presence of climate change. The country is exposed to multiple hazards, most prominently flash floods, landslides, windstorms, earthquakes, forest fires, and glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs). In terms of relative exposure to flood risks (as % of population), Bhutan ranks fourth highest in the region. Although the direct human risks of landslides, windstorms, and forest fires are not particularly higher compared to other countries, the socioeconomic repercussions from these events are thought to be high due to the baseline poverty prevalence.
Climate change is likely to magnify the intensity and frequency of these hazards. In fact, according to the International Disaster Database, among the top 10 natural disasters in Bhutan between 1900 to 2012, in terms of the number of casualties and number affected, all of them occurred in the last two decades (except epidemic outbreaks), which makes certain degree of attribution of climate change to the increasing magnitude of such hazards plausible. The most pronounced consequences of climate change in Bhutan are two folds: disruptions in the monsoonal system and increasing/intensifying trends of extreme hydro-meteorological hazards, both of which are obviously closely linked. These disturbances will amplify the socioeconomic challenges for the Bhutanese society, especially in rural areas where the majority of the population is engaged in rain-fed agriculture and rampant poverty makes them least equipped to adapt to creeping changes in climate.
Monsoon rains generally arrive during the summer months (from late June to late September). Downscaled simulations undertaken in Bhutan’s SNC indicate that the mean annual rainfall will increase by 26-30% by 2069 compared to the baseline year of 1980. This increase occurs primarily during the summer monsoon season while the dry winter season rainfall is projected to decline slightly. In addition, accelerated melting of glaciers, which act as a gigantic natural water retention and dispensing mechanism to communities downstream, is disrupting the hydrological regime of the perennial river systems in the region. All in all, climate change will increase the uncertainty of water availability throughout the year, and rural farmers are likely to have to better manage high fluctuation of rainfalls – increasing volume of monsoonal rain so that they can sustain longer dry periods. This poses significant risks to development when built rural infrastructure to alleviate water shortages, such as communal rainwater harvesting, is minimally available.
Source: UNDP Bhutan Project Identification Form (May 1, 2012)
- Outcome 1: Risks from climate-induced floods and landslides reduced in the economic and industrial hub of Bhutan
- Output 1.1: Protection of Pasakha Industrial area from flooding events through riverbank protection, river training and development of flood buffer zones
- Output 1.2: Slope stabilization to reduce climate-induced landslides in the Phuntsholing Township
- Output 1.3: Integrated risk hazard assessment and mapping completed in 4 critical landslide and flashflood prone areas with data collection standards compatible with the national database
- Outcome 2: Community resilience to climate-induced risks (drought, flood, landslides, windstorms, forest fires) strengthened in at least four Dzongkhags
- Output 2.1: Climate-resilient water harvesting, storage and distribution systems designed, built and rehabilitated in at least four Dzongkhags, based on observed and projected changes in rainfall patterns and intensity
- Output 2.2: Community-level water resource inventory completed and maintained by Dzongkhag administration to increase the adaptive capacity of communities in the face of increasing water scarcity
- Output 2.3: Disaster Management Institutions at various levels established and trained in four Dzongkhags to prepare for, and respond to, more frequent and intense floods, storms and wildfire events
- Outcome 3: Relevant information about climate-related risks and threats shared across community-based organizations and planners in climate-sensitive policy sectors on a timely and reliable basis
- Output 3.1: Enhanced quality, availability and transfer of real-time climate data in all Dzongkhags which experience increasing frequency of extreme hydo-meterological events
- Output 3.2: Increased effectiveness of National Weather and Flood Forecasting and Warning Center through improved capacity to analyze, manage and disseminate climate information in a timely manner
Source: UNDP Bhutan Project Identification Form (May 1, 2012)
- Project Inception Workshop: will be held within the first 2 months of project start with those with assigned roles in the project organization structure, UNDP country office and where appropriate/feasible regional technical policy and programme advisors as well as other stakeholders. The Inception Workshop is crucial to building ownership for the project results and to plan the first year annual work plan.
- Day to day monitoring of implementation progress: will be the responsibility of the Project Manager, based on the project's Annual Work Plan and its indicators, with overall guidance from the Project Director. The Project Team will inform the UNDP-CO of any delays or difficulties faced during implementation so that the appropriate support or corrective measures can be adopted in a timely and remedial fashion.
- Project Progress Reports (PPR): quarterly reports will be assembled based on the information recorded and monitored in the UNDP Enhanced Results Based Management Platform. Risk analysis will be logged and regularly updated in ATLAS.
- Annual Project Review/Project Implementation Reports (APR/PIR): This key report is prepared to monitor progress made since project start and in particular for the previous reporting period (30 June to 1 July). The APR/PIR combines both UNDP and GEF reporting requirements.
Periodic Monitoring through Site Visits:
- UNDP CO and the UNDP RCU will conduct visits to project sites based on the agreed schedule in the project's Inception Report/Annual Work Plan to assess first hand project progress. Other members of the Project Board may also join these visits. A Field Visit Report/BTOR will be prepared by the CO and UNDP RCU and will be circulated no less than one month after the visit to the project team and Project Board members.
Mid-Term of Project Cycle:
- Mid-Term Evaluation: will determine progress being made toward the achievement of outcomes and will identify course correction if needed. It will focus on the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of project implementation; will highlight issues requiring decisions and actions; and will present initial lessons learned about project design, implementation and management. Findings of this review will be incorporated as recommendations for enhanced implementation during the final half of the project’s term.
End of Project:
- Final Evaluation: will take place three months prior to the final Project Board meeting and will be undertaken in accordance with UNDP and GEF guidance. The final evaluation will focus on the delivery of the project’s results as initially planned (and as corrected after the mid-term evaluation, if any such correction took place). The final evaluation will look at impact and sustainability of results, including the contribution to capacity development and the achievement of global environmental benefits/goals. The Terminal Evaluation should also provide recommendations for follow-up activities.
- Project Terminal Report: This comprehensive report will summarize the results achieved (objectives, outcomes, outputs), lessons learned, problems met and areas where results may not have been achieved. It will also lie out recommendations for any further steps that may need to be taken to ensure sustainability and replicability of the project’s results.
Learning and Knowledge Sharing:
- Results from the project will be disseminated within and beyond the project intervention zone through existing information sharing networks and forums.
- The project will identify and participate, as relevant and appropriate, in scientific, policy-based and/or any other networks, which may be of benefit to project implementation though lessons learned. The project will identify, analyze, and share lessons learned that might be beneficial in the design and implementation of similar future projects.
- Finally, there will be a two-way flow of information between this project and other projects of a similar focus.
Human wellbeing and livelihoods cannot be sustained without healthy ecosystems. Mountain ecosystems are particularly important, in that they maintain rich ecological processes and provide essential goods and services, especially water, not only to mountain people, but also to downstream lowlands where demand from population centers, agriculture and industry is high. These ecosystems, however, face severe threats from unsustainable land use practices (overgrazing and non-conservation agriculture), illegal wood extraction, development of large-scale infrastructure (dams, roads) and unsustainable natural resource projects (hydrocarbons, mining).
Climate change further compounds these threats by increasing levels of exposure to droughts, floods (which in turn results in an increase in landslides) and changes in seasonality. These impacts both undermine the resilience of the mountain ecosystems and increase the vulnerability of the local mountain communities, whose livelihoods and wellbeing depend on their services. Mountain people tend to be among the world’s poorest and most marginalized populations. Not only do many share the disadvantages of rural poverty and ethnic or religious discrimination. They also face additional challenges to subsistence brought about by elevation, rough topography and severe climate.
Through the global Ecosystems-based Adaptation (EBA) in Mountains Programme, UNDP, UNEP and IUCN, with funding from the German Government, are using sustainable management, conservation and restoration of ecosystems, as part of an overall adaptation strategy, to reduce the vulnerability and enhance the resilience of select fragile mountain ecosystems and their local communities to climate change impacts. It is a global partnership that involve national and regional government agencies, civil society and local communities in three pilot countries: Uganda, Nepal and Peru.
Photos provided by: UNDP Peru, Carlos Diaz Huertas and Adriana Kato, UNDP Nepal, Tine Rossing, Andrea Egan, UNDP Uganda, Ed Barrows and James Leslie.
Assessments and Background Documents
Project Brief / Fact Sheet
Training & Tools
Brochures, Posters, Communications Products
The Ecosystems-based Adaptation (EbA) in Mountains Programme is a global partnership jointly implemented by UNDP, UNEP and IUCN from 2011-2015, with funding from the Germany’s Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB). While global in scope, Uganda, Nepal and Peru were selected as pilot countries, due to their significant vulnerability to climate change, coupled with their endowment of fragile mountain ecosystems upon which a multitude of communities and economic activities depend.
The overarching Programme goal is to strengthen capacities of the involved governments and local communities to reduce vulnerability and increase resilience to the effects of climate change using EbA measures in targeted mountain ecosystems.
Expected programme results include:
- New and field tested methodologies and decision-making tools for EbA, including Vulnerability & Impact Assessments;
- Monitoring and Evaluation centered on ecosystem resilience; and
- Capacities and knowledge of all involved stakeholders (national, district and local level government, local communities and civil society organizations) will be enhanced for planning and implementing both early action “No Regrets” and longer-term EbA measures through pilot activities in target mountain ecosystems.
Based on evidence emerging from these processes, lessons will also be generated on how to use cost-benefit analyses to make an economic case for specific EbA measures. In close collaboration with key governments agencies, evidence and lessons will be generated on how to mainstream EbA into broader district and national policy and financing frameworks. These lessons can be scaled-up and shared as policy examples at regional and global levels beyond the three pilot countries. Overall, the resilience to climate change of targeted mountain ecosystems and their local custodians will be enhanced.
Outcome 1: Methodologies and tools for EbA decision making developed. The application of appropriate scientific methodologies and tools to assist decision makers on the effectiveness of the interventions is a critical ingredient of successful EbA approaches. In each pilot country, this outcome will finance a process that will assess, evaluate and develop appropriate methodologies for use in informing project adaptation actions. Additional results that will be generated include development of project baselines as well as comprehensive monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to monitor programme impacts. Indicators will be developed to specifically measure impacts related to ecosystem functioning and adaptive capacity.
Outcome 2: EbA methodologies and tools applied at ecosystem level. This outcome will finance the development of a capacity building approach that, in turn, will be used to apply the methodologies and tools developed under Outcome 1. In order to ensure sustainability in the use of the tools as well as ensuring that results from the programme are integrated in national processes, relevant stakeholders who were to be involved in the programme will be trained in the use and application of the tools.
Outcome 3: EbA pilot projects implemented in each pilot country and contributing towards ecosystem resilience and reduction of livelihood vulnerability in the face of climate change impacts. A number of EbA activities will be identified and selected for implementation based on the outputs of outcomes 1 and 2. In addition, 1) institutional roles and responsibilities for EbA will be agreed to by different stakeholders at all levels; 2) Institutional capacity of local governments and other key national institutions to plan, monitor and enforce EbA will be enhanced; 3) pilot projects focusing on water resources management and enhancement of soil conservation measures will be implemented; 4) market opportunities and access will be enhanced; and 5) lessons learned from pilot projects will be captured and disseminated.
Outcome 4: Business case for EbA at the local and national levels developed. To make an economic case for EbA, the project will identify and apply the best methods and practice for socio-economic evaluation of adaptation options. This will provide an economic justification for support from relevant government institutions for the use of EbA as a climate risk management strategy. To this end, i) an enabling environment for scaling-up EbA at national level will be created; and ii) information and capacities of key government stakeholders will be enhanced so as to integrate EBA into national development planning processes and climate change policies and strategies.
Outcome 5:New learning and knowledge on EbA generated. In early 2014, the scope of the Programme was expanded to include a new Learning and Knowledge Component. These new activities will strengthen learning about EbA at various levels namely 1) site level – i.e. the three pilot sites in Nor Yauyos-Cochas, Mount Elgon and Panchase – 2) country level (Peru, Uganda and Nepal), and 3) beyond (inter-country, regional and global levels). Systematization of generated information and learning wil be used by partners to generate new science, insights and messages that can influence policy and practice on EBA in mountain ecosystems and beyond. The application of methodologies and tools, combined with implementation of pilot activities, will enable the Programme to shorten the learning curve for local and national institutions, and fast-track the transfer of knowledge and experience in building ecosystem and social resilience to climate change.
Malawi’s high dependency on rainfed, maize dominated agriculture, combined with poor urban planning in rural towns makes 85% of its populations highly vulnerable to climate change induced droughts, floods and post harvest grain losses. Between 1967 and 2003, 18 floods were recorded killing at least 570 people, rendering 132,000 homeless, and affecting a total of 1.8 million people.
This GEF-LDCF funded, UNDP-supported project will help facilitate the use of an integrated package of ecological, physical and policy measures to reduce climate change related risks and improve the effectiveness of the baseline initiatives in Mangochi and Machinga Districts, in the upper Shire Basin.
(More Information to come)
The project has two main components with the following associated outcomes –
Ecological and physical works demonstrated as climate smart measures for water, soil fertility and post harvest management practices. This component includes the distribution of public and domestic water harvesting and storage facilities (Outcome 1.1); Landscaping and adoption of other measures that complement physical water management infrastructure to reduce risk of climate change induced floods (Outcome 1.2) and; Adoption of climate safe post harvest management technologies and practices (Outcome 1.3)
Upscaling results from the previous component to transform local and national implementation of the baseline programmes, upscaling the resilience of the productivity gains and decentralized development processes. This includes capacity development of district level technical officers to support implementation, maintenance and monitoring of the activities (Outcome 2.1) and; Pilot projects to strengthen policies and policy enforcement for climate consideration in development (Outcome 2.2)
(More Information to come)
(More Information to come)
Reducing vulnerability of natural resource dependent livelihoods in Boucles du Mouhoun Forest Corridor and Mare d’Oursi Wetlands Basin in Burkina Faso
With more than 70% of the population live on less than $2 per day, Burkina Faso’s economy is heavily dependent on natural resources. In the riparian areas of the Boucles du Mouhoun Forest Corridor (BdM) and the Mare d’Oursi Wetlands Basin (MdO) approximately 150,000 people are directly dependent on natural assets such water, pasture, forests and fertile soil for a living. The project aims to increase the adaptive capacity and reduce vulnerability of the riparian population through timely dissemination of risk information and strengthening of physical, natural and social assets in the two regions.
The project has three major components with the following expected outcomes –
Component 1 aims at establishing a knowledge support platform on climate change impacts and risks – under this a geo-based climatic, agro-ecological and hydrological information system (Outcome 1.1) will be operational by the end of year 1; approx. 30 national and provincial planners, plus 235 local commune leaders and 50 staff from NGOs/CSOs will be trained on the use and interpretation of analyses from the established information system (Outcome 1.2)
Component 2 deals with the vulnerability reduction and strengthening of resilience in the management of natural and social assets in the project area – this includes cost-effective rewetting and replanting/ protection of indigenous grasses and herbaceous vegetation resilient to significant climatic variance (Outcome 2.1); ensuring flood and erosion control through a “surgical” and climate anticipatory approach (Outcome 2.2); protection of gazetted forests against climate induced bushfire (Outcome 2.3); establishment of an equitable and climate resilient plan for the use of pasture and water resources (Outcome 2.4); demonstration of polyculture and adaptive agro-ecological production systems in communal lands (Outcome 2.5) and; training of local commune leaders and resource users in climate adaptive and anticipatory management of natural and social assets (Outcome 2.6).
Component 3 aims at mainstreaming Climate change adaptation into local and regional development planning and finance. This will be achieved through – integration of climate risk management and climate resilient landscape management into the management (or master) plans of the project area (Outcome 3.1); incorporation of climate resilient poly-culture model into relevant forestry, agricultural and livestock management strategies, plans and investments (Outcome 3.2) and; establishment of wide collaboration frameworks for learning and sharing climate change concerns and options (Outcome 3.3).
Mangroves cover more than 5% of the total area of Cuba and play a vital protective role against effects of storm surges and sea level rise. This UNDP-supported project, "Reduction of vulnerability to coastal flooding through ecosystem-based adaptation in the south of Artemisa and Mayabeque provinces," seeks to reduce the vulnerability of communities in coastal areas of Artemisa and Mayabeque provinces from climate change related coastal erosion, flooding and saltwater intrusion.
With the objective of increasing the resilience of populations in the coastal regions of Artemisa and Mayabeque provinces to the effects of climate change, the project will have the following key components –
Component 1: Reduction of the impacts of coastal flooding through the recovery of coastal ecosystems Re-establishment of coastal belt of red mangrove between Surgidero de Batabanó and Punta Mora (Output 1.1); Restoration of mangrove ecosystems between Majana and Surgidero de Batabanó (Output 1.2) and; Elimination and/or control of invasive alien species in coastal wetlands between Majana and Punta Mora (Output 1.3)
Component 2: Integrated and participatory management of coastal ecosystems to increase resilience to climate change Ecosystem-based adaptation mainstreamed into integrated coastal zone planning and productive sector activities (Output 2.1); Buy-in, participation and governance in local communities (Output 2.2) and; knowledge management systems at community level (Output 2.3)
Component 3: Establishment of a favourable enabling environment at regional level for the effectiveness and sustainability of adaptation investments Consolidated information on costs and benefits of EBA available to decision makers and planners (Output 3.1); Strengthened institutions including provincial and municipal Governments, Forest Guard Corps, Frontier Guards and Fisheries Department supporting ecosystem-based adaptation actions (Output 3.2)
The Africa Adaptation Programme was launched in 2008 by the United Nations Development Programme in partnership with the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the World Food Programme (WFP) and with US$92.1 million support from the Government of Japan. The AAP was established under the Japan-UNDP Joint Framework for Building Partnership to Address Climate Change in Africa, which was founded at the Fourth Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD) in May 2008.
Over a 3 year period, concluding at the end of 2012, AAP instituted transformational changes in the 20 African countries in the areas of 1) long-term planning; 2) leadership and institutional capacity; 3) climate-resilient policies and measures; 4) innovative finance; and 5) knowledge generation and sharing. AAP’s support helped enhance the adaptive capacity of the AAP countries, promote early adaptation action and lay the foundation for long-term investment to increase resilience to climate change across the African continent.
The 20 AAP countries were: Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Congo, Ethiopia, Gabon, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Morocco, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome Principe, Senegal, Tanzania, and Tunisia.
Africa is particularly vulnerable to climate change. It will exacerbate the economic, political and humanitarian stresses that countries in the region already face, and greatly reduce their capacity to eradicate extreme poverty. The poorest segments of society will be the most severely affected because they are also the least able to adapt. Responding to the threat of climate change will require concerted action on an unprecedented scale. Systematic action will be required across all levels of development planning and implementation (regional, national, sub-national, and local) if development in a number of countries is not to be reversed.
Some African countries have identified key vulnerabilities and priority adaptation measures, and others have initiated demonstration adaptation projects. However, countries continue to face a number of challenges including the following: (i) adaptation initiatives are limited in scope and scale, and their impacts are neither cohesive nor sustainable; (ii) institutional capacities, relationships, policies and practices to assess and manage climate change risks are not developed sufficiently to create an enabling environment, with corresponding political and social champions to support the formulation and implementation of efficient solutions to a problem that has complex multi-sectoral effects; (iii) limited knowledge of the most appropriate adaptation policies and measures hinders countries from preparing themselves with the necessary institutional capacities to support climate risk management; (iv) limited financing options to sustain scaled-up adaptation remains a constraint; and (v) it is difficult for countries to learn from each other about their experiences with different approaches to adaptation.
During the three years of its implementation (2010-2012), AAP laid the groundwork for an ongoing, dynamic adaptation process in harmony with each country’s social, environmental and economic priorities. In all 20 countries, AAP has nourished an environment in which decisions and activities in support of adaptation can be evidence-based, strategic and appropriate to the goals of sustainable development, resulting in long-term investment to increase resilience to climate change.
Strengthening Long-Term Planning Mechanisms
AAP’s Data and Information Management Component (DIMC) assisted countries to develop the infrastructure and capabilities needed to access, analyse and apply climate data and information for decision-making. Overall, over 10,000 people were trained in climate data analysis under AAP’s DIMC. AAP’s support under DIMC helped increase countries’ capacity to support vulnerability and risk assessments and use climate data and information to integrate adaptation into national development planning.
Building Institutional and Leadership Capacity
AAP assisted in enhancing professional leadership capacity and institutional effectiveness in countries by increasing awareness of climate change issues, developing multi-stakeholder approaches and implementing national adaptation strategies that address the needs of men and women equally. For example, under AAP, Kenya established a National Climate Change Secretariat to coordinate the different climate change focal points in key government ministries. Through this multi-ministerial coordination, Kenya has facilitated the National Climate Change Response Strategy and ensured adaptation interventions take a multi-sectoral approach.
Implementing Climate-Resilient Policies and Measures
AAP provided assistance to countries to implement policy measures that protect climate sensitive sectors and encourage private sector investment in adaptation, such as adaptation pilot projects and national climate change strategies. For example, Nigeria, with the support of AAP, adopted a National Policy on Climate Change and Response Strategy, which will ensure a coordinated approach to addressing climate change.
Under AAP, innovative financing options to meet national adaptation costs were expanded at the local, national, sub-regional and regional levels. For example, AAP supported Morocco to expand public-private partnerships to mobilise funds for future climate change projects in local communities. Through a public-private partnership developed through AAP, a solar lighting project was completed in a rural community. Additionally, AAP trained stakeholders to undertake cost-benefit analyses of adaptation options.
Generating and Sharing Knowledge
Through AAP, knowledge on adjusting national development processes to fully incorporate climate change risks and opportunity was generated and shared across all levels across all 20 countries. For example, the production and broadcast of television and radio segments (e.g. Burkina Faso, Mauritius, Namibia, and Tunisia) and documentaries (e.g. Cameroon, Kenya, Morocco, Rwanda, Senegal and Tanzania) effectively shared information and concerns on climate change adaptation.
Climate-resilient development & enhanced adaptive capacity for disaster risk in Angola’s Cuvelai River Basin
The Cuvelai Basin has experienced regular flooding for centuries; however over the past three hydrological years (2008-2011) the Basin has had extensive floodings with various negative repercussions, including loss of life and property. According to the Angola Civil Protection Commission, at least 234 persons were killed, 204,000 displaced and 254,000 directly affected by flooding between January and April 2011 throughout Angola. The Cuvelai Basin region was especially impacted. Heavy rainfall made access to communities difficult, with some areas only reachable by air. At the same time, many years in the Basin are extremely dry. Almost all rain falls in the summer months and the further south in the Basin the more unpredictable the rainfall; this is typically the area where the most extreme droughts occur. The driest among these in recorded history have led to catastrophic famines, the most disastrous of which resulted in the deaths of up to 40% of the people in the Basin. Moreover the timing of summer rainfall within one summer may be so erratic that crops fail, even if the total aggregate amount of rainfall received is high.
The activities in this project are solely focused on the Angolan side of the Basin. Namibia started its basic monitoring systems (and disaster early warning systems) in the 1940s and is one of the countries in SADC that has a wide range of monitoring data available. The Namibian Hydrology Division in the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) continuously monitors the stream flow on the major rivers in Namibia, including those within the Cunene River Basin; it has river water level stations in operation at Ruacana and Epupa on the Cunene River; and operates river gauging stations (Ombuku, Minimahoro) on the ephemeral tributaries of the Lower Cunene River. Whereas almost every homestead in the Namibian side of the Basin can be reached along roads or tracks that are clearly visible on Google Earth images, the same images show that most homesteads on the Angolan Cuvelai have never or seldom been visited by vehicles. Moreover the great majority of livelihoods in the Angolan side are subsistence-oriented and dependent on rain‐fed agriculture whereas the Namibian inhabitants of the basin are much less vulnerable to climate-induced shocks.
As noted in the opening of a ground-breaking study published in 2011, the “Cuvelai is different!” It is not a delta nor a river nor an alluvial fan. The Cuvelai Basin is perhaps unique in the world as a drainage system that consists of hundreds of channels that join and separate thousands of times. It has a geographical area of 159,620 km2 split between Angola and Namibia, extends over 450 kilometers from north to south and covers more than half of the Province of Cunene in Angola. Slivers of the Cuvelai Basin also lie within the Angolan provinces of Cuando Cubango and Huila. Part of Cuvelai’s water comes from the headwaters on the southern slopes of the Angolan highlands but most channels begin as broad courses right along the Cunene River. The Cunene River is 1,050 km long and is one of the few perennial rivers in this region with a mean annual discharge of 5.5 km³ at its mouth. Local rivers provide water to these channels (called iishanas) that mesh, network and divide on their way downstream to the famous Etosha Pan. For much of the year, most channels hold no water and fill only after summer rains. Rainfall in the northern-most catchment area averages about 900 mm per year, just over double the historical average of 400 mm in the south. Compared to surrounding areas the Cuvelai Basin is home to a very large number of people, largely because of the presence of shallow groundwater and relatively fertile soil in many areas. Among the many livelihood activities practiced by local people are rain-fed agriculture and livestock-raising, principally cattle. The borderland of the Basin is clearly visible from space due to the fact that there have been considerably higher rates of deforestation on the Namibia side compared to the Angola side.
This project specifically focuses on support for NAPA priorities 7 (Create an early warning system for flooding and storms) and 13 (Climate monitoring and data management system). These two NAPA priorities are intricately linked (and have therefore been bundled together for the purpose of this project) since establishment of a comprehensive famine and flood early warning systems (FFEWS) – including downscaled seasonal forecast delivery systems – is one key component of a more broad-based climate monitoring and data management system, which also includes climate information dissemination and capacity-building. As the NAPA notes, there is “insufficient climate monitoring infrastructure in Angola and as a result, early warning is nearly impossible in the country.” Agricultural planning and extension is also made difficult due to the lack of appropriate seasonal forecasts and climate monitoring information; even if systems are established the data must be shared with key stakeholders at the local level to develop appropriate site-specific responses, such as distribution of flood-resistant seed varieties.
In addition to responding to these NAPA priorities as classified on a sectoral level, the project has been specifically designed to address the specific needs of a particularly vulnerable region of the country: the Angolan portion of the Cuvelai River Basin and more specifically the Province of Cunene (see Section B). In an effort to better understand the different dimensions of vulnerability across the whole country, as part of the NAPA formulation process it was decided to divide Angola into various geographic areas in which each one represented a type of vulnerability. In each province, consultations took place at 4 different levels: with local authorities, non-governmental organisations, private sector entities as well as the population of specific locations providing evidence as to the types of vulnerability in a certain area and providing input into a list of context-specific adaptation priorities.
The province of Cunene was chosen as the NAPA priority province for “integrated vulnerabilities” due to a rare confluence of factors that classify it as the most vulnerable province in the country as regards significant climate-induced risks, particularly as it applies to what was identified as the highest ranked topical threat in the NAPA: flooding and water-induced soil erosion. Thus the populations who will most directly benefit from this project are those that are most vulnerable to floods and other disasters due to the risks factors identified in the NAPA.
Finally in line with LDCF guidelines the project is based on a learning-by-doing approach. Angola has recently emerged from what was one of Africa’s most protracted conflicts. The civil war between 1975 and 2002 resulted in the destruction of infrastructure and the breakdown of institutions of all kinds. The ability of the Angolan Government to maintain an administrative presence and collect and monitor data of all kinds during this period was also negatively impacted by the war. The primary geographic focus of this project – the Cuvelai River Basin – was one of the regions most affected by the war and remains poorly understood by both development practitioners and climate experts, both as regards its basic geography (climate, soils and hydrology) and socioeconomic characteristics. In many Angolan provinces there has been almost no donor presence until recently. At the same time decentralization, or the delegation of administrative and fiscal responsibilities to sub-national units of government, is slowly taking place in Angola albeit at a slow and uneven pace; much information gathered at national levels still does not reach local authorities. This particular project involves several layers of government – from national entities to provincial and municipal level authorities – and builds on a variety of recently proposed initiatives that seek to address the complex climate-related challenges facing this critically important trans-boundary wetland. As such this project will by default need to assume a rigorous adaptive management approach and adopt a learning and information-sharing orientation from the onset, with the potential to indirectly benefit a much larger population than just its intended beneficiaries and hopefully inform the development of similar multi-stakeholder efforts in other provinces of the country. The GoA, in partnership with USAID efforts, will seek to communicate all relevant findings, conclusions and recommendations to neighboring governments as well as SADC experts on climate‐related disasters.
Component 1: Transfer of appropriate technologies and related capacity building for climate and environmental monitoring infrastructure
• Establishment of a comprehensive famine and flood early warning systems (FFEWS), including downscaled seasonal forecast delivery systems, that take into account climate change induced drought and flood events in the Cuvelai Basin
• Procurement and installation or rehabilitation of at least 3 gauging stations and at least two hydrometric stations in the Basin
• Procurement and installation of satellite monitoring equipment
• Training of at least 5 officers in the Provincial government and Civil Protection to operate and maintain climate monitoring infrastructure
• Strengthen the Civil Protection’s capacity for assimilating forecasts and monitoring into existing development planning, and disaster management systems, including the provincial contingency plan.
• Communication channels and procedures for issuing warnings (through both governmental and non-governmental agencies) are enabled (e.g. radio, newspapers, mobile phones, television etc).
Component 2: Enhanced human and institutional capacity for increased sustainable rural livelihoods among those communities areas most prone to flooding in the region.
• Livelihoods assessment conducted of the spatial density and location of all smallholder farming communities in the Angolan side of the Basin that are vulnerable to climate impacts
• Establishment of online registry of vulnerability data and population density from assessment
• Identification of of locally appropriate, climate-resilient germplasm resources for the Basin from the National Plant Genetic Resources Centre (CNRF) database
• Establishment of at least three demonstration plots in the Basin for climate-resilient crop varieties
• Dissemination of climate-resilient seed packets (from CNRF database) for multiplication to smallholder farmer groups , leading to improved yields and food securty indicators
Component 3: Increased understanding of climate change adaptation and practices in climate-resilient development planning at the local community and government levels
• Updating of Province of Cunene Master Plan as regards best practices in climate-resilient development planning
• All Civil Protection officials in Province receive training on climate change impacts and adaptation measures
• Awareness raising campaigns about climate change impacts on watershed resources and on human activities undertaken at village level in 300 sites
• Case studies developed and disseminated that capture traditional knowledge about climate change management at local leve
• Development and annual dissemination of micro-seasonal maps of adaptability of different climate resilient crops to all Provincial rural extension agents
The implementation of the project’s activities will reflect UNDP-GEF monitoring and evaluation standards and procedures, in line with the requirements of the LDCF. Details for monitoring and evaluation will be articulated during the project development phase.
More information to come...
Improving Capacity towards Conventions Implementation through Institutional Strengthening & Development in Uzbekistan
The project aims at assisting Uzbekistan to improve its national environment governance system, by creating adequate national capacity to accommodate global environmental concerns into the national development and environmental management plans. The project’s goal is to effectively mainstream global environmental priorities into national development planning and management processes of Uzbekistan. The overall objective of the project is to build national capacity for more effective environmental management in Uzbekistan, by improved national environmental policy planning and financing.
The project plans to attain its objective through the accomplishment of two major activities. These are: (i) Improvement of environmental planning and management to accommodate global environmental objectives; (ii) Improvement of financial management capacity of the National Environmental Fund for increased global environmental financing.
Based on the results of the National Capacity Self-Assessment (NCSA) process and subsequent analysis of the existing opportunities during the preparatory process (PDF-A), it became evident that the national system of environmental management should be further improved for better accommodation of global environmental priorities. The environmental concerns in Uzbekistan can only be addressed when all involved stakeholders at the national level have a common strategic vision on outstanding environmental issues and attempt to solve the problems jointly, and in a cost- effective way.
This can be done through a number of instruments that will strengthen coordination and cooperation efforts of the stakeholders. At present, governmental agencies that are involved in the process of natural resources and environment management do not have a joint mechanism that enables them to coordinate activities for more effective implementation of sound environmental practices. This leads to a situation when not only every sector of the national economy, but also institutions directly engaged in environment management, develop their own departmental action plans, which do not take any account of plans from other sectors, and thus do not bring any additional value to activities. In these conditions, improvement of coordination and cooperation mechanisms becomes vital.
This dissociation is further exacerbated by low levels of understanding among personnel of involved sectoral and environmental ministries regarding real values of environmental products and services, and their significance for sustainable development of the country.
The NCSA and the preparatory analysis have demonstrated that deficiencies in environmental management planning and management processes as well as in environmental professional education, indeed exist and should be regarded as priorities for Uzbekistan. These deficiencies cause constant omission of environmental concerns, while composing national development plans, and must thus be addressed immediately.
The analysis undertaken during the NCSA process identified key weaknesses in national environmental management capacities that seriously impede more synergistic and cost-effective implementation of the global convention requirements. The PDF-A confirmed the recommendations of the NCSA and determined that such key barriers as ineffective financial management capacities, weak coordination of efforts between focal environmental areas’ responsible entities, low level of environmental understanding among decision makers seriously affect implementation of global and national environmental agenda, and addressing of the most outstanding environmental priorities.
The proposed project will build upon the findings of the NCSA process, and use the momentum available after NCSA completion. The following features favors implementation of the current project at this point in time:
- This is a good timing for follow-up interventions, as the NCSA process has initiated and kept alive a profound discussion of the capacity needs in the area of environmental management, major stakeholders involved in the process of NCSA assessment have fresh memories of discussions and are eager to continue the process as the findings of the NCSA were the result of their direct contribution
- The government understand the need to improve its environmental management capacities and open to modernization of environmental management processes
- The Government has taken up the recommendations of the NCSA, by including its capacity development Strategy and Action Plan in the State Programme for Environment Protection 2006-2010, thus putting capacity development needs among the Government’s priorities in environmental management
The GEF project will take this process further, by assisting the government in improving planning and implementation mechanisms for the five year State Programme for Environmental Protection, introducing the participatory planning model with a detailed set of procedures, timelines and accountability system for monitoring and evaluation. The project will coherently link the SPEP planning process and with other planning exercises under the global conventions and various related sectors; it will also more rigorously tie the SPEP with the funding framework set by the Environmental Fund.
The project will increase effectiveness of EF operations in support to global environmental objectives, by introducing the appropriate eligibility criteria, as well as quality management system to the Fund’s operations. In so doing, the project will look into the good practices and lessons learned from the other countries of Eastern and Central Europe and CIS. Environmental fund management practices from Bulgaria’s National Trust Ecofund, the Czech State Environmental Fund and others will be reviewed and lessons learned considered, based on existing analysis and performance reviews.
Particular focus will be placed on the following key elements of EF management and operations: (i) roles and objectives of funds; (ii) legal foundations and institutional structures; (iii) revenues; (iv) spending strategies and expenditures; (v) project appraisal and selection (“project cycle management”); (vi) monitoring, evaluation and reporting.
The proposed project aims at assisting Uzbekistan’s administrative and environment governance system to enhance effectiveness of environmental management, by creating adequate capacities of involved stakeholders in financial management of the environmental expenditures, strengthening professional capacities of the environmental institutions’ personnel and developing suitable level of environmental education among sectoral decision makers for more effective planning and implementation of the environmental programme.
The approach of developing capacities within both environment and non-environment Ministries to promote global environmental issues, is seen as an essential complement to other GEF supported interventions in Uzbekistan, inasmuch as it will provide a conducive environment for these interventions, as they seek a dialogue with national and regional environmental planning authorities in the context of realizing their site-specific, or focal area specific objectives. These cross-cutting capacities are of critical importance for realizing the objectives of multiple GEF focal areas.
To implement the project strategy, it will be essential to involve and build ownership of the project among other key stakeholder groups as well – regional and local authorities, environmental institutions, academia, local NGOs and makhallyas (lowest level municipalities), and private enterprises/companies. All these groups are essential to influencing and changing the current practice in terms of how national, regional and local planning documents and environmental expenditures plans are formulated and implemented.
The main imperative should lie in stressing the importance of joint measures that will improve efficiency of the national activities to fulfill the general commitments related to the Rio Conventions and increase coordination of the inter-sectoral activities and interaction among all involved participants at all levels.
The overall objective of the project is to build national capacity for more effective environmental management in Uzbekistan, by improved national environmental policy planning and implementation.
- Outcome 1: Improvement of environmental planning and management to accommodate global environmental objectives
- Output 1.1: Introduction of a new mechanism for coordinated environmental planning and management for SPEP and programming from environmental funds
- Output 1.2: Improvement of professional capacity of the environmental institutions to develop, formulate and evaluate effectiveness of the environmental programmes and environmental plans
- Outcome 2: Improvement of financial management capacity of the National Environmental Fund for increase
- Output 2.1: Introduction of fund management tools for improved operations of the EFs
- Output 2.2: Improvement of skills and knowledge of the EF personnel to effectively manage EF
Project Inception Workshop: will be held within the first 2 months of project start with those with assigned roles in the project organization structure, UNDP country office and where appropriate/feasible regional technical policy and programme advisors as well as other stakeholders. The Inception Workshop is crucial to building ownership for the project results and to plan the first year annual work plan.
Day to day monitoring of implementation progress: will be the responsibility of the Project Manager, based on the project's Annual Work Plan and its indicators, with overall guidance from the Project Director. The Project Team will inform the UNDP-CO of any delays or difficulties faced during implementation so that the appropriate support or corrective measures can be adopted in a timely and remedial fashion.
Project Progress Reports (PPR): quarterly reports will be assembled based on the information recorded and monitored in the UNDP Enhanced Results Based Management Platform. Risk analysis will be logged and regularly updated in ATLAS.
Annual Project Review/Project Implementation Reports (APR/PIR): This key report is prepared to monitor progress made since project start and in particular for the previous reporting period (30 June to 1 July). The APR/PIR combines both UNDP and GEF reporting requirements.
Periodic Monitoring through Site Visits:
UNDP CO and the UNDP RCU will conduct visits to project sites based on the agreed schedule in the project's Inception Report/Annual Work Plan to assess first hand project progress. Other members of the Project Board may also join these visits. A Field Visit Report/BTOR will be prepared by the CO and UNDP RCU and will be circulated no less than one month after the visit to the project team and Project Board members.
Mid-Term of Project Cycle:
Mid-Term Evaluation: will determine progress being made toward the achievement of outcomes and will identify course correction if needed. It will focus on the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of project implementation; will highlight issues requiring decisions and actions; and will present initial lessons learned about project design, implementation and management. Findings of this review will be incorporated as recommendations for enhanced implementation during the final half of the project’s term.
End of Project:
Final Evaluation: will take place three months prior to the final Project Board meeting and will be undertaken in accordance with UNDP and GEF guidance. The final evaluation will focus on the delivery of the project’s results as initially planned (and as corrected after the mid-term evaluation, if any such correction took place). The final evaluation will look at impact and sustainability of results, including the contribution to capacity development and the achievement of global environmental benefits/goals. The Terminal Evaluation should also provide recommendations for follow-up activities.
Project Terminal Report: This comprehensive report will summarize the results achieved (objectives, outcomes, outputs), lessons learned, problems met and areas where results may not have been achieved. It will also lie out recommendations for any further steps that may need to be taken to ensure sustainability and replicability of the project’s results.
Learning and Knowledge Sharing:
Results from the project will be disseminated within and beyond the project intervention zone through existing information sharing networks and forums.
The project will identify and participate, as relevant and appropriate, in scientific, policy-based and/or any other networks, which may be of benefit to project implementation though lessons learned. The project will identify, analyze, and share lessons learned that might be beneficial in the design and implementation of similar future projects.
Finally, there will be a two-way flow of information between this project and other projects of a similar focus.