1. Advice/activities related to adaptation to the Global Environment Facility Habiba Gitay Visiting Fellow, Australian National University Vice Chair, STAP habiba.gitay@anu.edu.au Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel (STAP)

2. Presentation… To share some of STAP’s present and future activities - –alert you to the need for possible input from AIACC researchers –to inform about activities within GEF to help with the future plans of AIACC

3. Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel (STAP) of the GEF 15 members (internationally recognised experts) Diverse expertise Regional representation Provide advice to the GEF and bring relevant scientific and technical knowledge to the attention of the GEF

4. Focal Areas of the GEF Focal AreaProjects include: Climate ChangeMostly mitigation, but this year on adaptation BiodiversityConcentrate on conservation of many ecosystem types International Waters Rivers, lakes, aquifers, coastal and inland wetlands, LMEs Ozone DepletionReduction of Methyl Bromide Land degradation Multi-Focal (OP #12) New focal areas Integrated ecosystem management POPs Capacity building, non-combustion disposal technologies

5. Summary of GEF Investments (1991-2002) Focal AreaGEF Investments ($m) Climate Change1407.4 Biodiversity1485.8 International Waters550.8 Ozone Depletion169.9 Multi-Focal (OP #12)210.0 POPs20.9 LD later (about $500m)

6. GEF projects… Generally in one Focal Area (except OP#12) Generally do not consider the effect of project in one area on the global benefits of other areas No systematic consideration of linkages between the global change issues including CC impacts

7. Example… analysis of recent projects submitted Reviewed project documents Our assessment is all should have looked at the effect of CC on the project 12 BD - 9 include CC; 2 dealing with carbon sequestration 2 in IW - neither mention CC 8 LD - 7 mention CC; 5 propose to use it in project design Missed Opportunities

8. Action: A Design Tool To help conceptually incorporate the major interlinkages into project design by identifying the impact of a project done in one focal area on another Help identify what to do, NOT how to do it (first step)

9. Major intervention types GEF funds 1.Protected Areas - Terrestrial, Coastal 2.Ecosystem Management - arid and semi-arid ecosystems, forested ecosystems, Inland Wetlands 3.Renewable energy (micro hydrodams, solar, wind) 4.Management of Transboundary Water Bodies or International Waters (including river, lake, aquifer, Large marine ecosystem Others types of areas in which projects are done (win- win) Energy efficiency (barrier removal is a policy interlinkages) IW - Sectoral Demonstration Projects POPs (stockpile disposal) Adaptation to climate change

10. A project can have a positive or negative effect on another focal area. Through the design tool (a checklist), in early stages of project development, project developers ask a series of questions with the aim to maximise the benefits and minimise negative effects E xample Ecosystem management in semi-arid lands

11. Ecosystem management - restoration and rehabilitation of semi-arid lands Primary goals: Decrease land degradation Conservation and sustainable use of the biodiversity Local people deriving direct socio-economic benefits Positive effects on other focal areas: CC: Increased carbon storage if project is successful Reduced wind erosion can lead to decreased dust storms if large areas are planted IW: Decreased sediment flow; decreased fluctuations in seasonal flows and water erosion, increased productivity of aquatic biota if project is successful Negative effects on other focal areas: BD: Changes in herbivore communities and fire regime if there are changes in c3:c4 mix due to replanting activities and/or as a response to changes in the atmospheric CO 2 concentration IW: Reduced water related gains to freshwater bodies if using species with high water demand

12. Example: Design considerations (checklist) for restoration and rehabilitation of semi-arid lands Have the effects of climate change and land use change been considered? Is the use of native species being encouraged? Are multi-species plantings encouraged? Has the potential increased risk of invasiveness due to use of any exotics been assessed? Have tradeoffs between livelihood needs (eg. firewood), biodiversity goals and reduction in land degradation been considered? Has the potential increase in water demand posed by use of any exotic species been assessed?

13. Design Tool - next steps and other activities How to incorporate interlinkages between global issues (CC, BD etc) into projects Adaptation to climate change - a particularly valuable theme for assessing the nature of interlinkages and exploring ways for dealing with interlinkages in practical situations. Input into strategic priority on adaptation (SPA) –state some of the guidelines for information –A possible framework for the SPA –Multi-agency project –Small grants

14. Activity: workshop in Feb-March 2005 Bring together academics, practicians, bilateral and multi-lateral funding agencies. Work with the Implementing agencies and GEF Secretariat Input into a framework for the SPA - so that projects are not funded on first come basis, not infrastructure only projects etc To identify and evaluate options for adaptation to climate change in different regions of the developing world Discuss practical ways for implementation of adaptation options

15. SPA - operational guidelines Pilot or demonstration projects to show how adaptation planning and assessment can be practically translated into national policy and sustainable development planning Portfolio designed to maximize opportunity for learning and capacity building be representative of particularly vulnerable regions, sectors, geographic areas, ecosystems, communities. Use experience from the SPA to develop good practices and better mainstream adaptation into GEF activities Source:http://www.thegef.org/Documents/Council_Documents/GEF_C23/C.23.Inf.8. Rev.1_Adaptation_Council_paper_FINAL.doc

16. SPA - operational guidelines contd. pilot must include: (i) activities within a natural resources management context that generate global environmental benefits, and (ii) adaptation measures that provide other major development benefits (e.g. WEHAB, i.e. water, energy, health, agriculture, biodiversity). the approach to incrementality and co-financing will be consistent with GEF practices and overall portfolio experience. Co-financing for each project will depend on the delivery of global environmental benefits, additional costs associated with actions necessitated by climate change, and the degree of capacity building. The larger the project the greater the expected cost sharing. (contrast with other climate fund)

17. Multi-agency adaptation project (MSP) Information on adaptation in GEF funded and other projects/activities scattered Bring this together in a “knowledge system” Extract major lesson learned and incorporate them into projects being funded through the SPA Phased approach - concentrate on one or two regions in the first year and then go wider Identify information, research and implementation gaps and generate other projects Suggest ways of incorporating lessons learned into the GEF portfolio - beyond the SPA

18. Small Grant Projects (SGPs) in SPA SGP’s activities are demand-driven - ideas and activities arising from communities, NGOs and CBOs Pilot community adaptation initiatives –(i) developing community based capacity and tools to respond to adaptation; –(ii) financing diverse community-based adaptation projects in a number of selected countries and –(iii) capture and disseminate lessons learned at the community level Yr 1Yr 2Yr 3Yr 4Yr 5Total GEF (US$m)1.091.131.580.820.374.99

19. Some information for “futures” discussion SPA is a pilot - long term funding mechanism through the focal area Targeted Research: medium sized or regular projects –"goal oriented research that supports the GEF Operational Strategy by providing information, knowledge and tools that improve the quality and effectiveness of the development and implementation of GEF projects and programmes“ Some discussion on programmatic approach - outcome oriented rather than project by project

20. Thank you