Developing National GEF Strategies and Setting Priorities Nino Tkhilava GEF Operational Focal Point in Georgia Europe and CIS workshop for GEF Focal Points 7-8 March, Istambul

Background information  The Ministry of Environment Protection and Natural Resources of Georgia is the key Government authority for coordination of GEF activities within the country;  The GEF Political Focal Point is the Minister and the OFP is the Head of Integrated Environmental Management Department;  Georgia is active in four Focal Areas: Biodiversity, Climate change, International waters, and Persistent Organic Pollutants;  Georgia is not a recipient of the Small Grants Programme;  Georgia is in the group allocation for Biodiversity and Climate change under the RAF.

Key Project partners The Minister (PFP) IA Gov. Aut  Country Support Programme for GEF Focal Points gives the possibility to coordinate the work; Head of the Department (OFP) EA NGOs Division for coord. of Projects Divisions respons. for FA Scient. Inst. Deputy ministers

National GEF coordination activities  Coordination activities are supported by CSP;  Workshops on GEF policies and procedures are organized on a permanent basis;  Meetings to promote country level coordination in particular Focal areas are considered as an important mechanism;  Workshops to identify synergies in cross-focal areas are to be further developed;  Creation of a GEF website at the national level needs some further guidelines from GEF Secretariat (at least general templates are to be prepared).

Priority Setting process in Georgia  National Environment Action Plan (NEAP). 5 years medium term priorities in the field of environment protection;  Millennium Development Goals in Georgia. Goal 7 is to ensure environmental sustainability within the country;  The Special Committee of the Government for development of Action Plan (medium term) is established in the year of Consists of representatives of all ministries. The Minister of Finance of Georgia is the chair of the Committee;  GEF Focal Point and stakeholders use above documents for identification of priorities in line with GEF strategy.

Ongoing Activities and Constrains (Challenges) (1)  No clear information on the ongoing reforms of GEF and instructions on the future work under RAF and other activities from GEF Secretariat;  Role of IAs/EAs in the ongoing processes should be further assessed by GEF and Governments;  Working with IAs/EAs without country presence of these organizations. Project implementation modalities/assistance suggested by some EAs without strong government/country ownership and their capacity building;  The only IA from all IAs/EAs which has its implementation modality - National Execution is the UNDP;  Delays in the implementation of the first two years of GEF4 (PIF and Project concepts might be out of date);  The same applies to the Second part of GEF4.

Ongoing Activities and Constrains (Challenges) (2)  RAF: The Project on Enabling Activity was developed through assistance of UNDP, endorsed by GEF OFP and submitted to GEF– seven months - no response; (1) Strengthening Protected Area System; (2) Promotion of Sustainable Transport in the City of Tbilisi; and (3) Adaptation of Coastal Zone to Climate Change – no clear future;  The fate of the regional Kura-Aras initiative is unclear due to the cancellation of the project concept and so far non- existence of new strategy in this focal area;  PDF As for two POPs projects were developed under GEF3. Unclarity on POPs strategic priorities within GEF4.

Lessons Learnt  GEF projects are considered as key means for mainstreaming global environmental issues through activities at the national level;  Monitoring and tracking of the implementation of the GEF projects at the national level are not sufficient;  Collaboration between Operational Focal Point and IAs and EAs is an important milestone for development, implementation and evaluation of GEF projects;  Awareness raising campaign on the GEF role - important component;  Co-financing problems occur when project approval is delayed.

Conclusions and Recommendations  Country Support Programme is to be continued;  GEF Secretariat should provide OFPs with more detailed information about ongoing reforms;  The work under the RAF system is to be further clarified;  IAs and EAs should present revised Action Plans and assessment of their own work within each Focal Area;  The coordination between Countries and IAs/EAs is to be further strengthened;  The coordination between GEF OFPs and the official representatives of the Constituency group in the Council is to be improved.

Thank you very much for your attention Nino Tkhilava, GEF OFP Head of Integrated Environmental Management Department Ministry of Environment Protection and Natural Resources of Georgia 6 Gulua str., 0114 Tbilisi, Georgia Tel: ( ) Fax: ( )