GEF CEO EXPOUNDS 100 MILLION USD PACIFIC ALLIANCE FOR

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 SUVA 000463 SIPDIS SIPDIS BANGKOK FOR REO AND USAID COMMERCE FOR NOAA MANILA FOR ADB REP E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: SENV EFIN EAID WS XV GEF SUBJECT: GEF CEO EXPOUNDS 100 MILLION USD PACIFIC ALLIANCE FOR SUSTAINABILITY REF: SUVA 245 (NOTAL) SUVA 00000463 001.2 OF 003 ¶1. SUMMARY: GEF CEO Monique Barbut laid out her vision for the GEF Pacific Alliance for Sustainability (GEF-PAS) on September 10 at a one-day event for GEF focal points in advance of the annual SPREP meeting in Apia. Barbut explained that GEF-PAS, a country-driven sub-regional program, could provide as much as USD 100 million to Pacific island countries over the next three years but only if they act quickly. On September 24, the World Bank, which has been charged with helping countries to formulate a single GEF-PAS submission to the April meeting of the GEF Council, circulated a document laying out next steps. This document, which reflects a timetable developed at the Apia meeting, requires every Pacific island country to prepare a prioritized wish list of projects by October 15. Countries and implementing agencies are deeply concerned that such short deadlines could result in this unprecedented opportunity being lost. End Summary. ¶2. Global Environment Facility (GEF) CEO Monique Barbut elaborated on her vision for the future of GEF in the Pacific in Apia, Samoa, on September 10 at a meeting with environmental officials and GEF focal points from across the region, who were in town for the annual Pacific Regional Environmental Organization (SPREP) meeting (septel). The event was attended by members of the U.S. delegation to the SPREP meeting. Expanding on the announcement of the GEF Pacific Alliance for Sustainability (GEF-PAS) that she made at her meeting with Pacific leaders in Washington in May, Barbut identified three objectives for the initiative: providing "on the ground solutions" for adapting to the impacts of a changing environment, increasing resources available to countries, and putting national governments in the driver's seat. ¶3. Barbut told participants that the first objective of providing "on the ground solutions" will be achieved by replacing the existing patchwork of small, isolated projects with a more comprehensive and programmatic approach. The second objective, increasing resources, has been the most commented upon aspect of GEF-PAS. The initiative holds out the promise of making as much as USD 100 million available to Pacific island countries over the next three years. Although not all of this is new money, it represents a potential dramatic increase over historical GEF funding, which totals only USD 86 million over the past fifteen years. Finally, GEF-PAS will be built around national priorities and will diminish the role of regional organizations in developing project proposals. In keeping with the central role of national governments, it will expand eligibility for GEF small grants from NGOs only to include Pacific island governments as well. Barbut held up the Micronesia Challenge and Coral Triangle Initiative as examples of regional undertakings that embody a broad programmatic approach as well as multi-sectoral and multinational partnerships, that have been assigned high priority by national governments, and that can, therefore, benefit from the greater availability of GEF funding that GEF-PAS will provide. ¶4. Meeting participants were asked to bring to Apia indicative lists of national priorities. After listening to the country presentations, Barbut identified land management, biodiversity conservation, climate change mitigation, food security, and climate adaptation as dominant national concerns. She also acknowledged the broad support for a submitted but not yet approved regional project, "Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change" (PACC). She cautioned, however, that neither this project nor any other project in the GEF pipeline would be approved outside the GEF-PAS framework. Even fully developed project proposals like PACC and Samoa and Fiji's biodiversity projects would have to be recast as GEF-PAS submissions and reflected in national priorities. (Comment: In this context, the fate of the regional "Integrated Water Resources and Wastewater Management" (IWRM) project (reftel) and other regional and national initiatives that do not seem to correspond closely to stated national priorities is uncertain. End Comment.) ¶5. In response to a question, Barbut clarified that GEF-PAS did not include any change in the eligibility of territories, which cannot receive GEF support. Nevertheless, she encouraged countries to SUVA 00000463 002.2 OF 003 consider incorporating participation by territories into regional elements of GEF project proposals, since doing so would strengthen regional partnerships and promote synergies. (Comment: Participation of territories in GEF projects supporting regional initiatives could also be a source of co-financing. Some U.S. expenditures in Guam and the CNMI might, for example, count toward co-financing requirements for a GEF project to support Micronesia Challenge-related activities. End Comment.) ¶6. Barbout's determination to submit GEF-PAS to the GEF Council for approval in April implies a very tight timeline for countries and implementing agencies, which must now scramble to identify national priorities and prepare project descriptions. The World Bank has accepted the task of assisting countries in this effort and of compiling national submissions into a single program document for the GEF Council. ¶7. On September 24, the Bank circulated a document outlining next steps and providing a written version of the timeline laid out in Apia. It has asked GEF eligible countries to provide it with nationally coordinated lists of prioritized projects and preferred implementing partners by October 15. In addition, the Bank will consult with regional and GEF agencies, in coordination with the Pacific Island Forum Secretariat and SPREP's new GEF advisor, over the next few weeks and will form a GEF-PAS Working Group to facilitate national participation. ¶8. After receiving country submissions, the Bank will compile, with the GEF-PAS Working Group, a synthesis of priorities, which will be reviewed with countries on the margins of the Asian Development Bank's Constituency Meeting in Manila, October 24-25. Countries will then work with implementing agencies to complete Project Identification Forms (PIFs)--short 4-5 page documents outlining the project--by mid-December. The Bank proposes a regional follow-up meeting in December, perhaps on the margins of the Bali climate meeting, although some Apia meeting participants expressed concern that the press of business in Bali might make this impractical. By the end of January, 2008, finalized PIFs are due to the Bank, which will provide a draft umbrella GEF-PAS submission for approval by countries and implementing agencies. The Working Group will then finalize the documents for submission to the GEF Secretariat by the end of February. ¶9. A number of countries expressed concern at the short deadlines, particularly the October 15 initial submission, and worried that this unprecedented opportunity could be lost if they were unable to act quickly enough. In addition to country concerns, the UNDP representative at the Apia meeting noted that implementing agencies had their own review and approval processes that would slow and complicate the formulation of a final submission. In response to these concerns four Bank-engaged consultants will visit GEF-PAS countries over the next few weeks to assist in the preparation of national submissions. According to the Bank document, most countries have already conducted limited internal consultations to identify and rank proposed projects. Consequently, the consultants will spend 3-4 days in each country to help complete the required internal consultations. The Bank document indicates that Samoa is alone among GEF-PAS countries in having already conducted appropriate consultations, and therefore, requires less assistance with its submission that other countries. According to the Bank, three countries, PNG, FSM and East Timor have yet to conduct appropriate consultations and will require "substantial assistance." ¶10. The Samoan representative to the GEF event and subsequent SPREP meeting, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment CEO Tu'u'u Taule'alo emphasized the importance of every country participating fully in the process. In the SPREP meeting and in a subsequent conversation with the Suva-based Pacific Regional Environmental Officer (REO),Tu'u'u' fretted that the success of the initiative depended on each country making a timely, high quality submission. Providing the Council with a list of indicative place-holder priorities from countries that do not move quickly enough, as SUVA 00000463 003.2 OF 003 proposed by the World Bank representative in Apia, jeopardizes the whole enterprise, he said. Calling SPREP's offer to respond to requests for assistance "inadequate," Tu'u'u lamented SPREP's failure to demonstrate leadership and initiative by proactively reaching out to countries. In a separate conversation with the REO, an experienced SPREP program officer complained that Secretariat staff has gotten no guidance or direction on how to engage countries in the GEF-PAS effort. ¶11. Comment/Recommendation: Countries are under the gun to clearly articulate their national priorities and to participate effectively in the evolving World Bank-led process to meld them into a single submission. The Forum Secretariat, SPREP, and other regional organizations have the area knowledge and subject matter expertise to assist the World Bank in this process and to facilitate national participation by Pacific island governments. The Bank's decision to enlist the Forum and SPREP is a positive development but a more active mode of engagement by the regional organizations, particularly by SPREP, is required. SPREP's passivity may be explained in part by a desire not to be seen as intruding on the prerogatives of national governments in the country-driven GEF-PAS process. Nevertheless, SPREP's active engagement with island governments and with the World Bank is needed to help ensure full and effective participation in the development of this initiative. REO recommends that the U.S. encourage the Secretariat to step up to the plate. End Comment/Recommendation. Dinger