Summary of submissions on the Adaptation Fund Workshop on the Adaptation Fund Edmonton May 3-5, 2006

2 Relevant mandates 28/CMP.1 & 10/CP.7: Establishment of the Adaptation Fund and initial guidance Article 12.8 of KP, 3/CMP.1 & 17/CP.7: Share of proceeds of CERs to assist adaptation (2%) 5/CP.7, para 8: Eligible activities

3 Parties’ submissions | Management of the Adaptation Fund Institution to manage the Fund Membership of the governing body Institutional criteria and principles Relation of the governing body with the COP/MOP Institutional principles and criteria to be followed by an institution managing the Adaptation Fund Sources of funding for the Adaptation Fund

4 Parties’ submissions | Policies, programme priorities & eligibility criteria Eligibility criteria Operational principles Principles and modalities for disbursement of funding Criteria for prioritizing project activities Complementarities with other funding activities Additional priority areas

5 Management of the Adaptation Fund Options for institutional arrangements: GEF GEF provided that some principles and criteria can be fulfilled Alternative institutional arrangements : Frameworks such as Multilateral fund of Montreal Protocol Other UN agencies New institution under the COP/MOP

6 Management of the Adaptation Fund Options for membership: Balanced representation from Annex I and non Annex I Parties Majority of Non Annex I Parties Proposals on relationship with the COP/MOP: AF to be subject to the authority of the COP/MOP Decisions on how the funds are disbursed to be made by the COP/MOP and entrusted entity to be bound strictly by the guidance of the COP/MOP Entrusted Entity to regularly report on implementation of guidance

7 Management of the Adaptation Fund List of institutional principles and criteria,such as: Transparency Accountability Financial management Flexibility Expeditious operation Separation and independence from the management Procedural arrangements and decision-making process of existing funds under the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol Low transaction costs, independent monitoring and evaluation function Independent reviews at regular intervals, consistency and synergy with activities in related climate change areas Established knowledge and experience of adaptation activities and on how to manage a fund Responsiveness to the needs and views of developing countries

8 Proposals on sources of funding for the Adaptation Fund: Main source of funding for the Adaptation Fund is the share of proceeds from CDM project activities Consider alternative and innovative sources of funding, including: Contributions from the private sector at national and local levels, Existing development assistance, Other bilateral and multilateral sources. The trustee operating the fund should establish one account or trust fund to manage the fund Management of the Adaptation Fund

9 Eligibility criteria | Mandates Article 12.8 of KP: SOP is to be used to assist developing country Parties that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change to meet the costs of adaptation Decision 28/CMP.1: Finance concrete adaptation projects and programmes in developing country Parties that are Parties to the Protocol. Countries particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change are: “low-lying and other small island countries, countries with low-lying coastal, arid and semi-arid areas or areas liable to floods, drought and desertification, and developing countries with fragile mountainous ecosystems”.

10 Small island developing States; Least developed country Parties; Developing country Parties with projected higher risks in the near future, in particular those which do not already have a specific fund of their own; Developing country Parties and regions where available information indicates that the impacts of climate change are likely to be severe; All developing country Parties to the Kyoto Protocol Developing countries and eligible economies in transition. Eligibility criteria | Options

11 Decision 28/CMP.1: Adaptation Fund to be guided by: A country-driven approach Sound financial management and transparency Separation from other funding sources A learning-by-doing approach. Operational principles | Mandate

12 Not be subject to the funding conditionality and criteria and lengthy project preparation procedures of the GEF: Use expedited processing system, as followed for the medium-sized projects of the GEF; Incorporate year round submission of proposals; Provide authority for the IAs to commit the funds for the project following its own approval procedures Fund not to be linked with or managed under RAF No threshold limits for individual countries to access funds Avoid co-financing requirements and the use of the incremental cost concept Processes and procedures of the GEF could be used for the Adaptation Fund but they could be streamlined, as the examples of LDCF and SCCF. Operational principles | Disbursement of funding options

13 Operational principles | Proposed additional principles Defining learning-by-doing approach A wider base of organizations to serve as implementing agencies Regional organizations to play a critical role A time frame should be set to implement and prepare the readiness of the developing countries for achievements of the fund, i.e. three years before 2012 Consultations to be held with developing countries on the operation of the fund outside the COP/MOP and GEF Council setting Overall procedures to be flexible, simple and clear

14 Policies and programme priorities | Mandates Decision 28/CMP.1: Concrete adaptation projects and programmes Activities identified in decision 5/CP.7, paragraph 8.

15 Consider priorities under decisions 1/CP.10 (BA programme of work) and 2/CP.11 (5 year SBSTA programme of work) Options on what is understood by concrete adaptation projects and programmes: Concrete projects = stage III activities Concrete projects = stage II and III activities Establish a % of the fund to go for technical assistance (15%) and use most of the funds for “actions in the field” Complement the existing assessment, planning, and capacity-building activities, Policies and programme priorities | Criteria to prioritize

16 Proposals on how to operationalize the country based approach: Focus on sectors identified as being particularly vulnerable in NAPAs, national communications, national sustainable development startegies Identify thematic priority areas that have links with development goals Give priority to sectors that are of critical importance to human survival, and economic sustainability Give priority to effectiveness in addressing specific problems, local capacity-building, technology transfer and the promotion of indigenous technological applications Policies and programme priorities | Criteria to prioritize

17 Complementarities with other funding activities (to funding priorities and allocations for adaptation activities under the SCCF and the LDCF) Policies and programme priorities | Complementarities

18 Policies and programme priorities | Proposed sectors Detailed activities in the areas of health, agriculture and capacity-building for disaster management; Additional focal areas: Forestry Sustainable livelihoods Improving resilience of drinking water and sanitation systems, Integration of adaptation into policy Process and planning frameworks for decision-making, Increasing public awareness, Insurance schemes for particularly vulnerable sectors such as subsistence agriculture, Economic diversification as a subtheme of the five-year programme of work of the on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change.