Marieta Sakalian Regional Programme Coordinator Europe/CIS UNEP Division of GEF Coordination

1. UNEP-GEF Biodiversity Conservation Projects in Europe/CIS Region Results, Lessons Learned and Key Challenges Marieta Sakalian Regional Programme Coordinator Europe/CIS UNEP Division of GEF Coordination

2. Presentation Outline ● Background of UNEP-GEF Biodiversity Portfolio in the Europe/CIS Region; ● Results and Lessons Learned on: • Regional cooperation, key elements of success • Safeguarding biodiversity (Biosafety) • Protected Areas (PA) Management • Mainstreaming Biodiversity ● Challenges

3. Background of UNEP-GEF Biodiversity Portfolio in the Europe/CIS Region ●Includes 15 ongoing and closed GEF3 and GEF4 projects in 17countries: - 10 on Biosafety - 2 on mainstreaming biodiversity into agriculture production sector - 3 on catalyzing the sustainability of protected areas ● Total US$ 30.81million GEF funding and US$ 35million in co-financing.

4. Regional Cooperation: Key elements for success ● Work through National and International Executing Agencies and partners with networks at national and regional levels; ● Cooperation and shared objectives within the regions; ● Strong and sustainable partnerships at all levels; ●Strong local community engagement; ● Qualified and motivated project teams

5. BIOSAFETY Results and Lessons Learned ●5 active projects supporting Implementation of National Biosafety Frameworks (NBFs) - Czech Republic, Estonia, Lithuania, Moldova and Slovakia; ●5 approved PIFs for Albania, FYR Macedonia, Tajikistan, Turkey and Turkmenistan; ● Armenia, Kyrgyz Republic, Romania have PIFs that they decided to postpone to GEF-5. Azerbaijan has expressed interest in biosafety in GEF-5

6. BIOSAFETY Results and Lessons Learned ●The existence of EC Directives has been a strong "driver" of fully-compliant national systems; ●Sustainability of capacity building is fragile in the absence of applications and the need to use the regulatory framework; ●Polarisation of agbiotech private sector and NGO/public opinion places politicians in a difficult position; ●Although regional approaches make more scientific and technical sense, politically, this will be difficult to achieve.

7. Protected Areas ManagementResults and Lessons Learned ●Siberian Crane Wetland Project: RussianFederation, Chına, Iran, Kazakhstan; ●Wings Over Wetlands (WOW):Armenia, Estonia, Azerbaijan, Georgia,Hungary, Lithuania, Kazakhstan, Russian Federation,Turkmenistan,Turkey,Uzbekistan • New PA established - Zharsor-Urkash Nature Reserve (53,350 ha, Kazakhstan) and Synsko-Voykarskyi Natural Park (Kunovat, Russia); • PA Expanded in Size - Naurzum (Kazakhstan) from 30,000 to 191,381 ha, plus buffer zone of 116,726 ha and Kytalyk (Russia) from 1,607,000 to 2,598,590 ha; • PA and Water Management Plans developed; • Addressed threats - Removal of Oil Exploration Rig from Uvat breeding grounds in Russia

8. Protected Areas ManagementResults and Lessons Learned ●Decentralization of PA management to local governments and communities and NGOs is essential to achieve sustainable conservation objectives; ● Emerging environmental problems such as climate change has to be taken into consideration in PA management; ● Financial sustainability should be a primary component of intervention strategies and exit strategies of projects; ● Management decisions should be based on Applied Research and Ecological Monitoring results

9. Mainstreaming BiodiversityResults and Lessons Learned ●In-Situ/On Farm Conservation and Use of Agricultural Biodiversity (Horticultural Crops and Wild Fruit Species)in Central Asia: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan ●In-situ Conservation of Crop Wild Relatives through Enhanced Information Management and Field Application:Armenia, Bolivia, Madagascar, Sri Lanka, Uzbekistan • Demonstration activities cover 828,228 ha • Key sectors covered - agriculture (agricultural biodiversity) and forestry

10. Mainstreaming BiodiversityResults and Lessons Learned ● Legal frameworks and benefit sharing mechanisms; ●Increased capacity - Regional Training Centers; ● Knowledge base and information management systems – National and International information systems on Crop Wild Relatives and Horticultural crops ● Reducing vulnerability - Increasing the potential of farmers to withstand economic and climate change

11. Mainstreaming BiodiversityResults and Lessons Learned ● Replication and scaling up of project outputs depends on the political will to commit resources to research and implementation and to make the necessary political and institutional arrangements; ● In order to achieve global environmental benefits arising from a complex and challenging project it is essential to establish sustainable effective partnerships between relevant sectors – environment, agriculture and forestry, and to promote the sharing of experiences between countries;

12. Mainstreaming BiodiversityResults and Lessons Learned ● Mainstreaming into decision-making depends on integration and institutionalization of project implementation and management through the relevant partner agencies at national and regional level; ● Frequent and clear communication with partners is critical for achievement of project objectives. ● Long-term cooperation and shared objectives within the regions are critical for multi-country projects;

13. Some Current Challenges ● UNEP’s regional presence is limited while demand for services is high; ● GEF project cycle remains cumbersome despite good reforms; ● Co-finance burden for many partners and countries; ● Lack of incentives for inter-agency cooperation on projects;

14. Some Current Challenges ● Incentives for regional cooperation & multi-country projects (mechanism of Set Aside funds as ‘top-up’ to STAR); ● Some misconception regional GEF projects – as being too costly or not having national benefits; ● Transaction costs for Executing Agencies not fully recovered through project management costs.

15. Спасибо за внимание