1 / 20

Accessing Resources from the Adaptation Fund – Accreditation for Direct Access

Accessing Resources from the Adaptation Fund – Accreditation for Direct Access GEF Sub-Regional Workshop Hanoi, March 11, 2010 Mikko Ollikainen Adaptation Fund Board Secretariat. GEF and the Adaptation Fund. GEF Assistance to Address Adaptation.

jersey
Télécharger la présentation

Accessing Resources from the Adaptation Fund – Accreditation for Direct Access

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Accessing Resources from the Adaptation Fund –Accreditation for Direct Access GEF Sub-Regional WorkshopHanoi, March 11, 2010 Mikko OllikainenAdaptation Fund Board Secretariat

  2. GEF and the Adaptation Fund GEF Assistance to Address Adaptation Secretariat services for the AF provided by GEF on an interim basis. GEF Trust Fund UNFCCC climate change funds The Adaptation Fund GEF Trust Fund Strategic Priority on Adaptation (SPA) adaptation action with GEBs Least Developed Country Fund (LDCF) (implementation of NAPAs) NO GLOBAL BENEFITS Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF) Top priority to Adaptation NO GLOBAL BENEFITS Adaptation Fund (AF) Adaptation in developing country parties to KP NO GLOBAL BENEFITS Estimate $260-480M by 2012 Total: $200M Total: $105M Total: $50M

  3. Background of the AF • Kyoto Protocol, art. 12.8: “Share of the proceeds from certified project activities is used to cover administrative expenses as well as to assist developing country Parties that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change to meet the costs of adaptation”; • COP 7 (Marrakesh, 2001): decided that an AF be established and financed from a 2% share of the proceeds on the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) project activities and other sources of funding; • CMP 3 (Bali, 2007): Established the AF and set up its legal framework: Adaptation Fund Board (AFB) as operating entity served by a secretariat and a trustee; • CMP 4 (Poznan, 2008): Legal capacity to the AFB. • CMP 5 (Copenhagen, 2009): Germany to legally host the AFB.

  4. The Adaptation Fund (AF) An innovative financial mechanism: • Governing body: equitable and balanced representation of Kyoto Protocol Parties • New funding source: international levy • Direct access to AF resources for eligible countries

  5. Governing Body: the AF Board • The Board is composed of 16 members and their alternate members representing Parties, formally elected at a session of the CMP as follows: • Two representatives from each of the five UN regional groups; • One representative of the small island developing states; • One representative of the least developed country Parties; • Two other representatives from Annex I Parties; and • Two other representatives from non-Annex I parties. • Two years term, once renewable

  6. The AF Board 2010-2011 (1) Member Mr. Cheikh Ndiaye Sylla (Senegal) Africa Alternate Mr. Richard Mwendandu (Kenya) Africa Member Mr. Zaheer Fakir (South Africa) Africa Alternate Mr. El-Sayed Sabry Mansour (Egypt) Africa Member Mr. Abdulhadi Al-Marri (Qatar) Asia Alternate Mr. Damdiny Dagvadorj (Mongolia) Asia Member Mr. Liucai Zhu (China) Asia Alternate Ms. Tatyana Ososcova (Uzbekistan) Asia Member Mr. Jerzy Janota Bzowski (Poland) Eastern Europe Alternate Ms. Iryna Trofimova (Ukraine) Eastern Europe Member Ms. Medea Inashvili (Georgia) Eastern Europe Alternate Mr. Valeriu Cazac (Moldova) Eastern Europe Member Mr. Jeffery Spooner (Jamaica) GRULAC Alternate Mr. Luis Paz Castro (Cuba) GRULAC Member Mr. Luis Santos (Uruguay) GRULAC Alternate Mr. Santiago Reyna (Argentina) GRULAC

  7. The AF Board 2010-2011 (2) Member Mr. Hans Olav Ibrekk (Norway) WEOG Alternate Mr. Anton Hilber (Switzerland) WEOG Member Mr. Jan Cedergren (Sweden) WEOG Alternate Mr. Markku Kanninen (Finland) WEOG Member H.E. Peceli Vocea (Fiji) SIDS Alternate Mr. Amjad Abdulla (Maldives) SIDS Member Mr. Richard Muyungi (United Republic of Tanzania) LDCs Alternate Mr. Shawkat Ali Mirza (Bangladesh) LDCs Member Mr. Hiroshi Ono (Japan) Annex I Alternate Ms. Ana Fornells de Frutos (Spain) Annex I Member Mr. Julien Rencki (France) Annex I Alternate Mr. Yvan Biot (United Kingdom) Annex I Member Mr. Ricardo Lozano Picon (Colombia) Non-Annex I Alternate Mr. Bruno Sekoli (Lesotho) Non-Annex I Member Mr. Farrukh Iqbal Khan (Pakistan) Non-Annex I Alternate Mr. William Agyemang-Bonsu (Ghana) Non-Annex I

  8. Where are we now: finance • International levy of 2% on the shares of proceeds of the CDM (Certified Emission Reductions, CERs) • WB as the Trustee of the AF monetizes CERs, holds proceeds in a trust fund and disburses at the instruction of the AFB • Initial sales and testing of market since May 2009 • As of January 31, 2010: • 5,217,023 CERs in the balance of the Share of Proceeds • USD 38.98 million cumulative receipts (money from sales so far)

  9. Where are we now: finance (2) • CER revenue to the AF depends on: • Total number of CERs issued from CDM projects • Prices of CERs in the carbon market • Estimated CER income: • Between USD 106 and 190 million made available by end-2010, • Between USD 254 and 443 million by end-2012 (estimates) • CMP 5 (Copenhagen, 2009): • Annex-I parties encouraged to provide additional financial resources to the AF

  10. Accessing AF funding: IE structure Direct Access Modality • Eligible Parties can submit their projects directly to the AFB through an accredited National Implementing Entity (NIE). • A group of Parties may also nominate regional and sub-regional entities as implementing entities in lieu of NIE. MIE Access Modality • Parties can submit their proposals through an accredited Multilateral Implementing Entity (MIE).

  11. Accessing AF funding (2)

  12. Accessing AF funding (3) NIE and MIE shall: • Meet the fiduciary standards established by the AFB: • Financial management and integrity • Institutional capacity • Transparency, self-investigative powers and anti-corruption measures • Bear full responsibility for the overall management of the projects and programmes; and • Carry out financial, monitoring and reporting responsibilities.

  13. Fiduciary Standards (1) • Financial Integrity and Management • Accurate and regular recording of transactions and balances, audited periodically by an independent firm or organization • Managing and disbursing funds efficiently and with safeguards to recipients on a timely basis • Produce forward-looking plans and budgets • Legal status to contract with the AF and third parties

  14. Fiduciary Standards (2) • Institutional Capacity • Procurement procedures which provide for transparent practices, including on competition • Capacity to undertake monitoring and evaluation • Ability to identify, develop and appraise project • Competence to manage or oversee the execution of the project/programme including ability to manage sub-recipients and support delivery and implementation • Transparency and Self-Investigative Powers Competence to deal with financial mismanagement and others forms of malpractice

  15. The Accreditation Process • Step 0: The government endorses a Designated Authority and the Implementing Entity. DA must endorse all IE proposals. • Step 1: Submit application: • Description of how the organization meets the specific required capabilities • Attachment of supporting documentation • Step 2: Accreditation Panel Reviews Application. • Step 3: Panel can request additional information/clarification from organization. • Might suggest to Board that an on-site visit and /or observation of an organization is required • Might suggest that technical support needs to be provided to an applicant to improve its capacity in order to attain accreditation • Step 4: Accreditation Panel makes recommendation to AF Board. • Step 5: AF Board makes final decision on accreditation of entity

  16. AF funding for projects and programmes Some principles: • Funding provided on full adaptation costs basis of projects and programmes to address the adverse effects of climate change. • AF will finance projects whose principal and explicit aim is to adapt and increase climate resilience. • AFB has not prescribed sectors or approaches: accommodating different country circumstances

  17. Proposal evaluation: emphasis on… • Consistency with national sustainable development strategies • Economic, social and environmental benefits • Meeting national technical standards • Cost-effectiveness • Arrangements for management, financial and risk management, M&E, impact assessment • Avoiding duplication with other funding sources for adaptation • Moving towards programmatic approach

  18. Where are we now: operations • Operational Guidelines and Procedures approved by AFB in September 2009 and contained in the Handbook • Invitation to apply for NIE accreditation sent to all Non-Annex I parties • Invitation to apply for MIE accreditation sent to select multilateral agencies • Accreditation Panel begun its work on first accreditation applications in January 2010 • First call for proposals foreseen in March 2010

  19. Thank you! www.adaptation-fund.org secretariat@adaptation-fund.org

More Related