Cape Town, South Africa Cape Town International Conference Center pptx

vList of Abbreviations ACmAD African Centre of meteorological Applications for Development ADB Asian Development Bank AfDB African Development Bank Bmz Federal ministry for Economic Coo

June 24–25, 2011

Cape Town, South Africa Cape Town International Conference Center

www.climateinvestmentfunds.org/cif/partnership_forum_2011

Inter-American Development Bank

Climate Investment Funds

Photos by Francis Dejon, International Institute for Sustainable Development

Climate Investment Funds Administrative Unit

World Bank headquarters

1818 H Street NW, Washington DC 20433

www.climateinvestmentfunds.org

i i i

Contents

LIST oF ABBrEvIATIoNS v

INTroDUCTIoN 1

A BrIEF HISTory oF THE CLImATE INvESTmENT FUNDS 3

opening remarks 5

oPENINg PLENAry 5

Election of Partnership Forum Co-Chairs 6

mESSAgES From PILoT CoUNTry mEETINgS 7

Forest Investment Program (FIP) 7

Pilot Program For Climate resilience (PPCr) 8

Clean Technology Fund (CTF) 8

Program for Scaling up renewable Energy in Low Income Countries (SrEP) 8

Dialogue and Discussion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 9 CTF Programming 11

EmErgINg LESSoNS 11

PPCr Programming 13

governance Panel 14

Expert group Panel 16

BrEAkoUT groUPS 19

Tapping growth Potential in Climate Change through Innovative Partnerships 19

Panel Presentations � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 19 Discussion and Dialogue with Panelists � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 21 Putting Science to Work: State of The Art in Climate modeling and its role in The CIF 22

Ongoing Challenges and Latest Developments in Climate Modeling � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 22 Initiatives to Develop Regional and Local Climate Projections � � � � � 24 Financing Transformation 24

Programmatic Approach to Financing Transformation � � � � � � � � � � 24 Finance for the Poor and Underserved � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 26 greening Clean Energy Sources: managing the Social and Biodiversity Trade-offs for Wind Energy 27

Wind Power and its Environmental and Social Impacts � � � � � � � � � 27 Dialogue with the Audience � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 27 Panel Discussion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 28 Discussion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 30 Why Adaptation Should be a Priority for the Private Sector 30

Perspectives for the PPCR � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 30

Keynote Address � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 31

Panel Responses � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 32 Discussion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 33 Small Group Discussions � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 34 Wrap-up � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 34

greening growing Cities: The Challenge of Climate-Smart mobility 35Leap into green growth: Promoting Clean Technology manufacturing 35

Strategies and Opportunities for Promoting Green Growth � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 36 Impact of Clean Technology on Growth and Social Equity � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 38

How Can We get It Done? Working as Partners at the Country-Level 40

Mexico’s CTF Investment Plan � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 40 Panel Discussion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 41 Climate Registry as a “Common Delivery Platform” � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 44 Discussion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 45

CIvIL SoCIETy orgANIzATIoN PANEL 47Discussion 48

UNEP SymPoSIUm oN THE oPPorTUNITIES For NEAr-TErm

CLImATE ProTECTIoN AND AIr QUALITy BENEFITS 51messages from Pilot Country meetings 53Emerging Lessons 53

WrAP-UP AND kEy mESSAgES: rEPorTS BACk From PLENAry AND

BrEAkoUT SESSIoNS 53

CSO Panel � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 54 Greening Clean Energy Sources: Managing the Social and Biodiversity Trade-Offs for Wind Energy � � � 54 Tapping Growth Potential in Climate Change through Innovative Partnerships � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 55 Financing Transformation � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 55 Putting Science to Work: State of the Art in Climate Modeling and its role in the CIF � � � � � � � � � � � � � 56 Why Adaptation should be a Priority for the Private Sector: Perspectives for the PPCR � � � � � � � � � � � � � 56 Greening Growing Cities: Delivering Climate-Smart Mobility � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 57 Leap into Green Growth: Promoting Clean Technology Manufacturing � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 57 How Can We Get it Done? Working as Partners at the Country Level� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 58 UNEP Symposium on the Opportunities for Near-term Climate Protection and Air Quality Benefits � � � � 58

CLoSINg PLENAry rEmArkS 59PrESS CoNFErENCE 61SIDE EvENT: THE roLE oF gENDEr IN mITIgATIoN EFForTS 63

v

List of

Abbreviations

ACmAD African Centre of meteorological Applications for Development

ADB Asian Development Bank

AfDB African Development Bank

Bmz Federal ministry for Economic Cooperation and

Develop-ment, germany

CDm Clean Development mechanism

CIC Climate Innovation Center

CIF Climate Investment Funds

CmS Convention on migratory Species

CoP 17 17th Conference of the Parties, UN Framework Convention

on Climate Change

CSo Civil Society organization

CSP Concentrated Solar Power

CTF Clean Technology Fund

DFID Department for International Development, United kingdom

EBrD European Bank for reconstruction and Development

FAo Food and Agriculture organization of the UN

FCPF Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

FIP Forest Investment Program

gCm global Climate model

gEF global Environment Facility

ICT Information and Communications Technology

IDB Inter-American Development Bank

IFC International Finance Corporation

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

LAmATA Lagos metropolitan Area Transport Authority

LDCF Least Developed Countries Fund

m&E monitoring and Evaluation

mDB multilateral Development Bank

mDgs millennium Development goals

mENA middle East and North Africa

Ngo Non-governmental organization

PPCr Pilot Program for Climate resilience

PPP Public-Private Partnership

rEDD reduced emissions from avoided degradation and deforestation

in developing countries

rEDD+ rEDD plus conservation, sustainable management of forests

and enhancement of forest carbon stocks

SADC Southern African Development Community

SCCF Special Climate Change Fund

SCF Strategic Climate Fund

SgP Small grants Programme

SrEP Program for Scaling Up renewable Energy in Low-Income CountriesSPCr Strategic Program for Climate resilience

Uk United kingdom

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

UNICEF UN Fund for Children

WFP World Food Programme

Wmo World meteorological organization

1

Introduction

The 2011 Climate Investment Funds (CIF) Partnership Forum took place on

June 24–25 June, 2011 in Cape Town, South Africa The Forum was organized

by the CIF Administrative Unit based at the World Bank and the African

De-velopment Bank (AfDB), in collaboration with other multilateral deDe-velopment

bank (mDB) partners.1 It brought together nearly 500 participants,

includ-ing representatives of all CIF stakeholder groups: developed and developinclud-ing

country governments, intergovernmental and bilateral organizations, United

Nations (UN) agencies, non-governmental organizations, indigenous peoples,

the private sector, and science and technology experts

Three years into the CIF and with 45 countries already running

CIF-support-ed pilot programs, the aim of the 2011 Partnership Forum was to provide an

opportunity for CIF stakeholders to share their experiences about how the

CIF is working in their countries, exchange lessons learned about what is most

effective and discuss how the CIF can be expanded or improved and share

on-the-ground achievements, challenges and knowledge, and help other CIF

stakeholders apply lessons learned In particular, the Forum gave participants

an opportunity to reflect on the current status of all of the CIF funds and

programs: the Clean Technology Fund (CTF), Forest Investment Program

(FIP), Pilot Program for Climate resilience (PPCr), and Program for Scaling

Up renewable Energy in Low Income Countries (SrEP) The Forum also

aimed to raise broader awareness of the CIF and the country selection process,

provide feedback to the CIF governing bodies, and identify opportunities for

further stakeholder participation

The Forum included a plenary session featuring stakeholder perspectives,

cur-rent findings from the 45 pilot countries, presentations on lessons learned in

the CTF and PPCr as the first two operationalized CIF programs, and

experi-ences and reflections on CIF strategic directions, results and impacts In

ad-dition, participants convened in a civil society organization (CSo) panel and

eight breakout sessions on issues related to: private sector engagement in

ad-aptation; climate-smart mobility; promoting clean technology manufacturing;

innovative partnerships; climate modeling; financing transformation;

biodiver-sity and social trade-offs for clean energy such as wind energy; and working as

partners at the country level A learning symposium on the latest developments

in climate science was held, as well as a poster exhibit showcasing evolving

CIF-supported programs and projects in the 45 CIF pilot countries

The Forum was preceded by a series of meetings of pilot country

representa-tives of the CTF, FIP, PPCr, and SrEP countries In addition, CSos also

1 The CIF multilateral development bank partnership consists of the African De-velopment Bank, Asian Development Bank, European Bank for reconstruc-tion and Development, Inter-American Development Bank, and the World Bank group, including the Internation-

al Finance Corporation

convened a set of consultations for observer

constitu-encies in the days prior to the Forum

The following is the agenda of the 2011 CIF nership Forum These Proceedings provide highlights

Part-of the presentations and discussions for each Forum session

Climate Investment Funds 2011 Partnership Forum

June 24–25, 2011 — Cape Town International Conference Center

Convention Square, 1 Lower Long Street, Cape Town 8001, South Africa

Schedule of Meetings

Friday, June 24

8:30am–1:30pm Opening Plenary

8:30am–9:30am opening remarks

Bobby Pittman, vice President, african development Bank on behalf of Donald Kaberuka,

President, african development Bank

Hon Pravin Gordhan, minister of finance, south africa

9:30am–10:30am messages from Pilot countries meetings

10:30am–1:30pm emerging lessons:

greening clean energy sources:

managing the social and Biodiversity trade-offs for Wind energy

Saturday, June 25

8:30am–1:30pm Break-out Sessions

8:30am–10:30am cso organized Panel

10:30am–1:30pm Why adaptation should Be a Priority for the Private sector: Perspectives for the PPcr

greening growing cities – the challenge of climate-smart mobilityleap into green growth: Promoting clean technology manufacturinghow can We get it done? Working as Partners at the country-level

1:30pm–3:00pm lunch

2:30pm–4:30pm climate science update (uneP)

4:30pm–6:30pm Closing Plenary

4:30pm–4:40pm closing statement on the road to durban

Hon Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, minister of intl relations & cooperation, south africa

4:40pm–6:30pm Wrap-up and Key messages

3

A Brief History

of the Climate Investment

Funds

Climate change is considered to be one of the most serious threats to

sustain-able development, with adverse impacts expected on the environment,

hu-man health, food security, economic activity, natural resources and physical

infrastructure It is expected to disproportionately affect developing countries,

especially the poor, thus making climate change a central consideration in

poverty reduction and development efforts recognizing this, the UN

Frame-work Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) acknowledges the need to

provide additional financial resources to developing countries in order to help

them mitigate and manage the challenges posed by climate change It was in

this context that the Climate Investment Funds (CIF) were established

The CIFs, formally approved on 1 July 2008, are a collaborative effort among

the multilateral development banks (mDBs)2 and countries to bridge the

financing and knowledge gap between now and a post-2012 global climate

change agreement The CIFs were designed through consultations with

vari-ous stakeholders and are governed by a balanced representation of donors and

recipient countries, with active observers from the UN, the global

Environ-ment Facility (gEF), civil society, indigenous peoples and the private sector

The CIFs are comprised of two Funds, each with its own scope and

gover-nance structure:

Ç The Clean Technology Fund (CTF), which provides scaled-up financing

for demonstration, deployment and transfer of low-carbon technologies

with the potential to achieve long-term greenhouse gas emission

reduc-tions Among other things, it funds low-carbon programs and projects

that are contained in countries’ national plans and strategies

Ç The Strategic Climate Fund (SCF), which supports developing

coun-try efforts to achieve climate-resilient, low-carbon development through

2 The CIF multilateral development bank partnership consists of the African De-velopment Bank, Asian Development Bank, European Bank for reconstruc-tion and Development, Inter-American Development Bank, and the World Bank group, including the International Fi-nance Corporation

three programs funding new approaches to

cli-mate action with the potential to achieve

scaled-up, transformational action:

Ç Forest Investment Program (FIP), which

sup-ports efforts to reduce emissions from estation and forest degradation and enhance forest carbon stocks by helping countries ad-dress the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, and promoting sustainable forest management;

defor-Ç Pilot Program for Climate resilience (PPCr),

which helps countries mainstream climate resilience considerations into development planning and action; and

Ç Program for Scaling Up renewable Energy in

Low Income Countries (SrEP), helping low income countries exploit their renewable en-ergy potential and move toward low-carbon energy paths

So far, donor countries have pledged US$6.5 billion

to the CIF, to be disbursed as grants, near-zero interest

credits and/or risk mitigation instruments The

coun-try-led programs and investments, are implemented

with the help of the multilateral development bank

partners Forty-five developing countries are currently

taking climate action with the support of the CIF

With a strong emphasis on partnership and

stakehold-er engagement as the path to effective implementation, and a commitment to knowledge as a central guiding principle, the CIF convenes a yearly CIF Partnership Forum to ensure effective lesson—sharing and stake-holder involvement In october 2008, an initial CIF Partnership Forum was held at World Bank Headquar-ters in Washington, DC, to provide an early oppor-tunity to explore how best to promote dialogue and open exchange on various aspects of the CIF and set the stage for convening the Forum on a regular basis

on march 18–19, 2010, the second CIF Partnership Forum was held at Asian Development Bank (ADB) Headquarters in manila, Philippines, providing a plat-form for stakeholders to reflect on the CIF’s first year

of operations, share their experiences and knowledge gained, and extract useful lessons further implementa-tion It also aimed to share lessons learned from the CIF design process and early implementation of CIF-funded programs, in particular, from country-level activities of the CTF and the PPCr, which had both advanced to the implementation stage

Three years beyond the CIF’s creation, the 2011 nership Forum was an opportunity to advance knowl-edge and learning about the CIF among stakeholders based on the expanded programs and operational ac-tivities being undertaken by the 45 countries who are undertaking pilot programs with CIF support

Panelists discuss lessons learned, sharing CTF

experiences from Mexico and Turkey, and PPCR

experiences from Niger and St Lucia.

5

The opening plenary took place on Friday morning, June 24, moderated by

Tumi makgabo, Africa Worldwide media

Opening Remarks

The 2011 Climate Investment Funds (CIF) Partnership Forum opened on

Friday morning, June 24, with a series of opening remarks and a keynote

address Bobby Pittman, African Development Bank (AfDB) vice President

for Infrastructure, Private Sector and regional Integration, read a message on

behalf of AfDB President Donald kaberuka outlining the AfDB’s

climate-related work, such as green bonds, climate risk insurance, improvements in

market employment and expanding opportunities for green technologies

He noted that although Africa has contributed the least to climate change,

the relative economic costs are higher than elsewhere, observing that climate

change casts a long shadow on Africa’s development prospects, including the

millennium Development goals (mDgs)

Pittman observed that over 600 million people in Africa lack access to

en-ergy, and also highlighted water challenges and dependency on agriculture

He emphasized the AfDB’s work in the critical areas of sustainable forest

management and energy access, and stressed the need for climate finance so

that mechanisms can be put in place to meet Africa’s needs He emphasized

the importance of making resources available to all countries, and allocating

them to projects and programs on the ground, as well as providing incentives

to the private sector to leverage investment

Opening Plenary

Pravin Gordhan.

In a keynote address, Pravin gordhan, minister of

Fi-nance, South Africa, said climate change is the central

issue facing humanity, testing man’s ability to overcome

adversity and the instinct to act only in one’s own

self-interest He said the CIF is a pioneer, showing a new

way of addressing global issues and new coping

mecha-nisms He urged “breaking the shackles” of the current

way of thinking on climate change, and stressed the

importance of political and administrative will

gordhan said the South African experience of

na-tional reconciliation provides an example of what

consensus building can achieve, by putting the needs

of the greater good above those of the individual He

stressed the need for the right level of urgency, said

that reaching out to the most vulnerable requires

generosity of spirit and intellect, and emphasized the

importance of reconciling different interest groups

He said the traditional paradigms of funding and aid

need to be transformed and the development

trajec-tory reformulated He expressed hope that the

delib-erations at the CIF Partnership Forum would help

to move the discussions forward at UNFCCC CoP

17 in Durban later this year and contribute to its

success

Election of Partnership Forum Co-Chairs

Following the opening remarks, renosi mokate,

South African representative to the World Bank

Board of Executive Directors, and SCF Co-Chair

Andrew Steer, World Bank, were elected Partnership

Forum Co-Chairs mokate, highlighting South

Af-rica’s upcoming role as host of CoP17, noted that

South Africa’s association with the CIF has been both

important and substantive, particularly in piloting

transformational technologies She urged ers and delegates to engage in a Forum dialogue that will result in constructive outcomes

stakehold-Steer highlighted the CIF’s origin, beginning three years ago as a scaleable investment fund, underscor-ing that the initial fund size of US$6.5 billion has leveraged approximately US$40 billion in additional funding He said that CIF focuses on results and de-velopment in a pro-growth manner Stressing that Africa receives the majority of the money disbursed from the CIF, he lamented that the continent is still not sufficiently engaged in climate change discourse Steer called for the swift operationalization of the UNFCCC-proposed green Climate Fund, noting that it can learn much from the CIF as it is a “living lab.” He said that much work still needs to be car-ried out and discussed over the course of the Forum, including feedback from the pilot country meetings

Following these remarks, the plenary session ued with a series of working panels and discussions

Bobby Pitman, Vice President, AfDB.

7

This session took place on Friday morning Introducing this session, Tumi

makgabo explained that in the days prior to the Partnership Forum,

repre-sentatives from CIF pilot countries had met to discuss their implementation

of CIF programs and projects and to exchange views and lessons learned

thus far in using CIF financing She noted that pilot country meetings take

place twice a year for countries participating in the SCF, and once a year for

those participating in the CTF, and that the Partnership Forum provides an

ideal setting to learn about the discussions and main messages emerging from

these meetings one representative from each pilot country meeting was then

invited to share the main messages from the various discussions held during

the meetings The representatives were asked to describe the challenges and

opportunities faced in developing the pilot programs, discuss challenges faced

in engaging stakeholders during CIF programming, and highlight the most

important lessons from the meetings

Forest Investment Program (FIP)

victor kabengele, Democratic republic of the Congo, noted that the FIP

has great potential to support the accomplishment of national objectives of

forest management To that end, countries are using existing institutional

Messages

from Pilot Country Meetings

Moderator Tumi Makgabo.

arrangements and have engaged with stakeholders

already active in forestry and climate change issues

He noted that countries have identified several

chal-lenges, including the ability to bring relevant

minis-tries to the table, the need for coordinating rEDD+

activities, the importance of overcoming

socio-cul-tural barriers including gender issues, and the lack of

capacity to implement and monitor rEDD+ actions

Pilot Program For Climate Resilience (PPCR)

David kaluba, zambia, said that work on

vulner-ability and climate resilience requires the

participa-tion of all sectors This increases the complexity of the

national-level Strategic Programs for Climate

resil-ience (SPCrs), adds challenges to the identification of

priorities, and makes coordination across institutions

and different government ministries a challenge He

noted the importance of civil society involvement in

the development stage and providing a platform for

communities to learn from the programs He

high-lighted different mechanisms and processes being

pro-posed for climate change, stressing that coordination

is a priority for countries He described the process

of priority-setting across sectors, and said countries

have different approaches to choosing which sector

will take the lead on implementing measures to

com-bat climate change He stressed that interacting and creating partnerships with stakeholders is key to the process He also referred to the barriers preventing the private sector from scaling up action in adaptation and noted that governments could address those barriers through information, regulation and finance kaluba said the pilot country meetings provided platforms where countries can pick up one or two things and then use them to apply solutions to the problems in their respective countries

Clean Technology Fund (CTF)

raúl Delgado, mexico, noted that discussions among pilot countries had underscored the challenge of al-locating funds to climate change initiatives in devel-oping countries where combating poverty is the main priority Delgado said that national and multilateral funding was limited, and that resources and funds from the private sector were needed as well He said long-term structural changes were also needed and that all levels (state, municipal, federal) need to work together to help align the private sector so that it can work with governments Delgado called for strong leadership and civil society involvement from the planning stages of programs to minimize perceived risk, and attract more private sector involvement

Program for Scaling up Renewable Energy in Low Income Countries (SREP)

Narayan Prasad, Nepal, said the SrEP provides portunities for low income countries to address energy constraints and exploit renewable energy’s national po-tential He referred to challenges such as the need for countries to focus on immediate development needs, providing basic energy and electricity services to the poorest while trying to limit costs to ensure affordabil-

Victor Kabengele, Democratice Republic of the Congo.

m e s s a g e f r o m P i l o t c o u n t ry m e e t i n g s • 9

ity He noted that while many ministries are linked

to-gether, they are not coordinating with each other He

also highlighted the need to mainstream SrEP into

the national development agenda, saying this was a

challenge as developing countries had numerous

pov-erty-related initiatives He said all stakeholders must

be brought together and that while some gains have

been made in this regard, more needs to be done He

said another challenge was to enhance institutional

ca-pacity to deliver results He stressed the importance of

“preparation before transaction”, which would include

the acquisition of a good technical basis and internal

consultations on monitoring and evaluation (m&E),

he noted that coordination was necessary at two levels:

externally among the external development partners

and internally between ministries He said

develop-ment partners have their own reporting systems and

requirements, and that they are now trying to jump

into the programmatic approach

Dialogue and Discussion

on overcoming challenges, Prasad emphasized the need

for a bottom-up rather than a prescriptive approach,

where available expertise on the ground is tapped

Del-gado cited difficulties in identifying on-the-ground

solutions, which he said require planning and nation He said investments are risky, and that leaders are needed to effectively coordinate and manage

coordi-on challenges to stakeholder engagement, kaluba discussed the antagonism that may be present be-tween government and civil society, as civil society

is often critical of government He said civil society must be broadly engaged in the design of SPCrs as well as their implementation, monitoring and evalu-ation He said in many countries civil society is in-strumental in designing SPCrs, and that civil society engagement has become part of the process He noted difficulties with private sector engagement, observing that their role and possible incentives to get them on board were still being determined He said the private sector needed to be informed about climate change issues affecting them and opportunities to partner

kabengele emphasized: improving engagement with all relevant stakeholders, particularly civil society and local and indigenous communities; ensuring political commitment to help take the process forward; and coordinating initiatives in order to avoid overlaps

In the subsequent discussion, participants highlighted

issues related to, inter alia: enhancing participation

of all stakeholders; alleviating poverty to enable local communities to access clean technologies; aid effec-tiveness; low climate change literacy levels and the lack

of greenhouse gas accounting systems; mainstreaming climate change science in the education system; the efficacy of climate change campaigns; and lack of syn-chrony between civil society and government actions

on private sector engagement, kaluba stressed that businesses need to understand how climate change impacts on them because the trend is for them to take a short-term view He highlighted collaboration between government and institutions, which have

Naryan Prasad, Nepal.

climate change information, and business, which

requires this information He also called for

incen-tives to encourage private sector participation rasad

observed that technology development has to be

de-mand-driven and take a bottom-up approach

In closing, panelists summarized key lessons Prasad

stressed blending together the knowledge of the

sci-entific and political communities, and addressing

lo-cal issues Delgado highlighted the need to relay the

right message and perspective, and bringing the right

ministries on board kaluba emphasized the

impor-tance of country ownership, mainstreaming climate change into development plans, and stakeholder par-ticipation He said that civil society is more in touch with rural communities, and stressed incentives for the private sector reflecting on the importance of political will, kabengele said that government is the major stakeholder, but that all stakeholders should be involved, including women He stressed that the ap-propriate business atmosphere was necessary for FIP co-financing, that networking and communication among all stakeholders was important, and that hu-man and technological capacity building was needed

Bobby Pittman, AfDB, Minister Pravin Gordhan.

1 1

Emerging

Lessons

CTF Programming

robin Broadfield, consultant to the CIF Administrative Unit, shared lessons

learned from CTF country programming, specifically on the CTF investment

plans He noted that the CTF objective is to accelerate low carbon growth

through a country-led process that reflects national priorities and operates in

a programmatic and partnership approach which taps the comparative

advan-tage of the mDBs and other partners He observed that the CTF was the first

CIF Fund to get underway and that significant progress had been made, with

14 investment plans involving 17 countries endorsed and US$4.35 million of

CTF funds projected to leverage US$35 billion of co-financing from national

governments, private sector, the mDBs and bilateral donors He said 21

proj-ects were now approved for total CTF funding of US$1.45 billion

Highlighting current activities, Broadfield said this now involved

coordi-nating an information gathering exercise from stakeholders to learn from

this phase to help orient future investment planning He outlined lessons

learned, including: continued country leadership; transformation of

rel-evant sectors; inter-stakeholder partnerships; and increased private sector

involvement on country leadership, he highlighted that investment plans

must be fully aligned with national development strategies to strengthen

country ownership He noted that this was effective and efficient when

ex-ercised by ministers of finance in tandem with ministers of planning, with

input and support from key sectoral ministries of environment, transport,

forestry and energy

Broadfield said that transformational change is fundamental to the rationale

of the CTF He noted that investment plans define how and how much they

Robin Broadfield, Raul Delgado,

Mexico, Elvan Ongun, Turkey.

will contribute to eliminating or reducing costs and

regulatory, capacity and financing barriers to market

transformation He also noted that it was vital at the

beginning of the planning stage to identify targets,

strategies and actions for achieving transformational

change He said the limited CTF funds and capacity

can be overcome by focusing on targeting niche

mar-kets with high greenhouse gas mitigation potential He

said eliminating barriers to low carbon market growth

requires demonstrating the technical and financial

vi-ability of low carbon technology, reducing their costs

and increasing national capacity for deployment

on unique partnerships, Broadfield highlighted

co-ordinated action and collaboration by governments,

mDBs, bilateral agencies and other developing

part-ners He said that the most challenging dimension is

the relationship between the mDBs with each other

and with national stakeholders, noting that mDBs

have now developed extremely strong collaborative

working relationships and that they can and should

promote strategic dialogue if there are gaps in donor

assistance coordination

Broadfield said that private sector engagement is an

important aspect, as they bring finance, technical

skills and capacity to the table He observed that the target of one third of financing from the private sec-tor had been achieved, but that their involvement was still less than desired going forward, he called for sustaining leadership and setting market transforma-tion activities and targets

Elvan ongun, Turkey, spoke on her country’s CTF experiences, saying that the Treasury had taken the lead in inter-ministerial interaction and that the CTF was a catalyst to eliminate barriers to clean energy These barriers include: lack of financial resources due

to limited access to funding because of perceived risks; and insufficient technical capacity of local financial institutions for evaluating clean energy investments and projects She noted that insufficient technical capacity is also a problem in the private sector on-gun emphasized that the CTF is essential in break-ing down barriers and improving public knowledge

on new clean energy technologies She said the CTF also motivated transformations and fostered unique partnerships between the private sector and mDBs, eliminating duplication and creating synergies while coordinating donors She underlined that private sec-tor engagement from the beginning of the investment preparation phase was very important

e m e r g i n g l e s s o n s • 1 3

raúl Delgado, mexico, underlined the successful

co-ordination effort in mexico between ministries and

national development programs, such as the national

development plan, national climate change strategy,

and climate change program, which defined specific

goals for reducing carbon emissions He said it was

easier to channel resources toward initiatives when

a solid plan was developed, and noted that changes

to laws had enabled better distribution of internal

resources Delgado stressed that climate change

mea-sures must be attractive and offer tangible benefits

to the public, and highlighted the effectiveness of

mexico’s mass transport system program He said it

was not possible for governments to know all project

details and urged sending the right messages to the

private sector He emphasized that climate change

was a complex issue that must be addressed by

mo-tivating people through incentives to act, showing

them the costs and savings of clean energy measures,

and supporting inter-ministerial work to make

cli-mate change mitigation important and relevant

across ministries

PPCR Programming

Erik reed, PPCr consultant to the CIF tive Unit, shared lessons on the early PPCr program-ming phase, observing that the PPCr is the only CIF program that focuses on adaptation He said the fo-cus is on building resilience and that the approach is promising He highlighted five lessons: country lead-ership; unique partnerships; transformational change; the private sector; and leveraging funds

Administra-on country leadership, he said expectatiAdministra-ons must be realistic, since there might be limitations on the gov-ernment which may impact its ability to lead when the PPCr is being developed These limitations in-clude: lack of experience; institutional financial and human capacity limitations; demand in response to emergencies; insufficient resources dedicated to cli-mate change; and changes in government focal points

on unique partnerships, he highlighted that mDBs work closely together and consult with civil society during the planning phase, which is perceived as an improvement on business as usual He also noted that development partners have been instrumental in real-izing greater resilience at the country level

on transformational change, he noted that country visions vary; for instance, Niger is using the PPCr

to reduce vulnerability to food insecurity and gladesh is scaling up investments to coastal districts

Ban-on the private sector and leveraging funds, reed served that the private sector is impacted by climate change and is also an important source of funding

ob-He noted that the approach to engaging the private sector needs to be different In Niger, for example, the International Finance Corporation (IFC) is working with private firms on an insurance scheme for crop/

livestock protection He noted the need to leverage

Erik Reed.

the comparative advantage and resources of partners,

observing that governments and mDBs must do this

He said that in Tajikistan, the Uk Department for

In-ternational Development (DFID) is using the PPCr

as an opportunity to engage with the government

Laverne Walker, Saint Lucia, provided an overview of

the PPCr process in her country She emphasized that

the process was driven from a country perspective,

en-suring ownership and commitment at all levels and not

only within the public sector She said that all the

con-sultants working in the country were nationals to help

build capacity at the local level and because of their

lo-cal knowledge She described consultations with both

the public and private sectors, underscored that some

organizations and businesses had been strategically

tar-geted and that civil society had been engaged from the

onset, and noted that the approach to private sector and

civil society is not necessarily the same She emphasized

that the approach to getting messages across had to be

specific to the group being targeted and that national

SPCr process is an adaptive management process

Dan-Bakoye Chaibou, Niger, discussed his country’s

experience with the PPCr, noting the decision-making

process involved in deciding that the ministry of

Fi-nance would take ownership of the PPCr process and

consult with other ministries He underscored the steep learning curve, as many had not even heard of climate change, but said that people were prepared to work to-gether, and that the aim was to enable the involvement

of the most vulnerable Lamenting that information ten does not reach the grassroots level, he underscored the development of information campaigns He said over 800 Ngos were involved across the country Not-ing the importance of making the program relevant to the private sector, he highlighted examples in his coun-try where the private sector is involved around the is-sue of irrigation He discussed transformational change both in the planning process and at the local level

of-In the ensuing discussion, participants highlighted: ensuring local community involvement in the design and development of projects and plans to ensure sus-tainability; enhancing private sector and civil society engagement; using mDBs to build local capacity and encourage investment; and payment of concessional loans in local currency Noting similarities in lessons learned from the CTF and the PPCr, one participant asked why the utilization rate of funds available under the CTF is so much greater than under the PPCr and whether this was because CTF funding is in the form

of loans while PPCr funding is in the form of grants

or concessional loans, which may be more difficult to obtain In response, Broadfield noted that the CTF fi-nances projects in high-capacity, middle-income coun-tries, with low carbon development strategies already prepared and discussed reed emphasized that the fo-cuses of the two programs were different, and that the CTF began operations a year earlier than the PPCr

Governance Panel

on the effectiveness of the CIF’s equitable nance structure, Jan Sheltinga, PPCr Sub-Commit-tee member, Canada, said that the committees are

Dan-Bakoye Chaibou, Niger, Laverne Walker, St Lucia

sharing PPCR lessons.

e m e r g i n g l e s s o n s • 1 5

functioning well according to their mandate with

equal representation from donor and recipient

coun-tries on a key criticism of the CIF about

involve-ment of recipient countries in setting up structures

and functions, Forum Co-Chair Steer said that: the

CIF was trying to avoid falling into the trap of the

past where one group dominated; the UNFCCC

ne-gotiations had laid out what the right kind of balance

should be; and the CIF was designed to be

commen-surate with that He said it was exciting to have such

a diverse group of countries addressing serious

ques-tions in a de-politicized manner

David kaluba, PPCr Co-Chair zambia, said that

the empowerment of low-income countries to have a

voice in the deliberations has been critical to the

pro-cess Jean Bernard Carrasco, FIP Co-Chair, Australia,

acknowledged a differentiation regarding

participa-tion in the different trust funds, noting that in the

CTF, recipient countries are more active than in the

SCF, where participation needs to be encouraged and

facilitated He noted the global Support Program

and the pilot country meetings aimed to facilitate this

participation Ahmed moosa, SCF and PPCr resentative, the maldives, commended the opportu-nity that the CIF provides to sit down together and work out a governance structure that enables things

rep-to move forward in a speedy and efficient way He said the green Climate Fund was looking at the CIF model, which could, perhaps, speed up the availabil-ity of funds to the most vulnerable countries He said the first fund that was made available to the maldives was from the SrEP

In the ensuing discussion, a representative from zambia asked about linkages between the CIF and long-term fi-nancing Steer responded that the green Climate Fund should look at the CIF, as well as other funds, during the design process He highlighted that many lessons can be learned from the CIF, including those related

to its focus on development and results, its country-led approach, and its governance structure Emphasizing that the CIF Administrative Unit operates the US$6.5 billion fund with a very small staff, Steer commended the CIF Administrative Unit for running the Fund in

a very nimble, low-cost and efficient manner, and for empowering decision-making and pushing those de-cisions to the implementing agencies He contrasted the CIF model with the global Environment Facil-ity (gEF), which is a smaller fund with a much larger staff, noting that the gEF makes more decisions itself and undertakes more analysis, and has the governance structure to do so Steer underscored that the designers

of the green Climate Fund need to decide what kind

of model they want, recommended that the CIF could

be used as a template by the Fund, and said it would

be great if the green Climate Fund could be “up and running on day one” with billions of dollars being dis-persed in many countries

Sheltinga reiterated that the CIF had a sunset clause, which would come into effect once an alternative long-term climate fund had been established and op-

David Kaluba, Zambia, PPCR co-chair.

knowledge transfers between countries’ CIF sentatives, kaluba responded that it was not nec-essarily a question of having the same people, but rather more a question of building capacity and lead-ership at the state level, and said that governments understand the need for consistency In conclusion, Steer said he believed civil society involvement had enriched the process.

repre-Expert Group Panel

The panel shared experiences related to selecting the countries to receive financing under the PPCr Dan-

erationalized She pointed to other effective funds and

mechanisms, such as the Least Developed Countries

Fund (LDCF), the Adaptation Fund and the Special

Climate Change Fund (SCCF), as well as other UN

initiatives, and said lessons can be learned from the

CIF as well as from other mechanisms in moving

for-ward

As a challenge, a representative from Brazil

highlight-ed the nehighlight-ed to ensure that the voices of those who

are not participating in the committees are still heard

Carrasco agreed with the idea of broader

consulta-tions and sharing of lessons, and underscored that the

Transitional Committee of the green Climate Fund is

placing heavy emphasis on regional consultations

La-menting that some regional representatives have little

communication with pilot countries, kaluba called

for mechanisms to enable constituents’ voices to be

heard, said pilot countries have to create networks to

communicate, and noted the creation of a platform

where interactions between donors and pilot

coun-tries can be facilitated

on policy measures to reduce overall Co2 levels,

Ahmed moosa said the CIF serves as a platform from

which developing countries could learn to develop

national policies regarding a question on ensuring

Daniel Riley, US.

e m e r g i n g l e s s o n s • 1 7

that without proper local leadership, projects will not

be sustainable and highlighted the importance of the role of Ngos in the design and planning process An-other participant, however, cautioned that there is no set methodology for achieving project sustainability

Participants stressed that if plans were successful on

a smaller scale, there is an opportunity to replicate them at a larger level one participant highlighted the importance of involving the private sector and civil society in addition to having country-led processes for formulating successful plans and projects, while another encouraged the use of mDBs to build local capacity and encourage investment

iel riley, US, noted that the selection process has to

be legitimate and use the appropriate criteria rolf

zelius, Consultant for the CIF Administrative Unit,

observed that feedback from a questionnaire had

re-vealed the need for clarifying the PPCr’s objectives,

measuring achievements and improving the

assess-ment of pilot country motivation and ability to

de-liver results He said in the future, expert groups could

benefits from advice from the mDBs and the UN

David kaluba, zambia, observed that the Expert

group, which makes recommendations on the

se-lection of pilot countries, takes into consideration

the different capacities of countries in consultation

with the mDBs responding to the challenges faced

by the Expert group, richenda van Leewen, UN

Foundation, explained that the mandate of the group

was limited to evaluating countries and not specific

transactions and projects on the group’s

composi-tion, she also noted that the members were drawn

from different disciplines, as a deliberate attempt to

bring different perspectives, and that several group

members had worked with communities in a range of

developing countries, so the depth of this experience

was brought to the process

In the ensuing discussion, participants highlighted

the importance of ensuring local community

involve-ment in the design and discussion of projects and

plans to ensure sustainability one panelist noted that

the process in Niger for design and planning showed

Andrew Steer.

1 9

Tapping Growth Potential in Climate Change through Innovative

Partnerships

This session took place on Friday afternoon, moderated by Jamal Saghir,

World Bank Saghir said the aim of the session was to explore innovative

business models to accelerate climate change action and fund deployment

through public-private partnerships (PPPs) He said ensuring continued

pri-vate sector interest is needed, as well as innovative climate change models and

a discussion on best practices and challenges facing PPP practitioners He

said a structure was required that ensures the best value for the money, and

noted that in Africa, PPPs have been discussed for the past 20 years, but more

problems have been found than solutions, which have come from outside the

continent He said traditional PPP models have failed in delivering structured

finance He called for the session not to focus on what should be done better,

but rather on what should not be done, as well as future financing,

particu-larly related to climate change potential, and how to link industrialization

with climate change and project finance He stressed the “partnership” aspect

of PPPs, the use of private expertise, and how to use public money as an

in-vestment to leverage private money From a World Bank perspective, he said

financing from the Bank should be used for investment purposes, not only as

grants, but to leverage private money as well

Panel Presentations

Christopher Clarke, Advisor to the Evolution one Cleantech Fund, South

Africa, said the one Cleantech Fund would not exist if not for PPPs and that

it was one of the first dedicated to clean technology investment He provided

Breakout

Groups

insights into some of the portfolio investments and

the PPPs his fund has been able to leverage, as well

as some of the innovations around funding

mecha-nisms currently being explored He underscored the

long road to getting capital committed, noting that

environmental investing in the southern tip of Africa

was still relatively new, and that investment in

emerg-ing areas, such as climate change, involves higher risk

than commercial funding and investment in more

tra-ditional areas

Clarke underscored that it was largely on the backs of

the progressive policy positions of the multilateral and

bilateral funds that commitments had been secured to

southern Africa and the Southern African

Develop-ment Community (SADC) countries regarding the

one Cleantech Fund, he said the commitment of a few

benchmark institutions, including the IFC, has been

critical in the Fund’s success and for bringing in the

balance of its investors He underscored the fact that

climate change investing on their part is driven by a

de-velopment impacts perspective He explained that the

public institutions that have committed funds are

por-tals for additional networks, technical assistance,

infor-mation and case studies from which the one Cleantech Fund and others can learn He said this was invaluable

in coordinating good quality information, which is not always readily available, and understanding what types

of public financing mechanisms are available, to enable the structuring of deals, as well as for starting up new funds in countries/regions where such funds did not previously exist

Discussing the renewable energy feed-in tariff in South Africa, Clarke said this was an example of a subsidy scheme that allows renewable energy to come to market now with the commitment of funding by governments

He underscored the difficulties in getting renewable energy products to markets without procurement and said that if the true cost of accounting of energy proj-ects was taken into account, subsidies would not be re-quired He said public sector grants and concessionary financing were often used in SADC deals, making it easier to bring deals to financial close He underscored the importance of guarantees and credit worthiness and highlighted South Africa’s great potential for en-ergy conservation He stressed the importance of get-ting the business model right and of how technologies

Richard Jones, Hadley Centre, UK.

B r e a K o u t g r o u P s • 2 1

are packaged and brought to market, and that public

finance mechanisms are playing a big role He noted,

however, that getting technologies to market is often

more dependent on business model innovation than

on technology innovation

mohammedi Allach, office National de l’Electricité

(oNE), morocco, discussed electricity generation in

morocco, explaining that to help meet demand, his

office turned to PPPs, which cover 50% of energy

projects He said that the rates of the national

elec-tricity office were not sufficient to cover all expenses

and, given that as recently as 1994 only 18% of the

population had electricity, PPPs were used in order to

meet the demand for electricity generation He said

the next phase is to mobilize hydroelectric, solar and

wind power potential in morocco

Allach noted that PPPs were complicated, particularly

in terms of guarantees, and said a balance was

nec-essary between the needs of oNE and the needs of

the investors, with a distribution of risk between the

two parties He observed that usually when PPPs are

launched, the financial situation is good, but in this

case innovation took place in a weaker financial

posi-tion Stating that no state subsidies were received for

the project, he noted that financing should be

opti-mized through concessional financing

Jose Salazar, SUNASS, discussed private sector

partici-pation and investment in providing access to drinking

water in Peru, and noted Peru’s attractiveness to

inves-tors and its aim of cleaner economic growth and social

equity He discussed price setting to help those who

cannot afford to pay for water, strong regulation and

placing value on non-tangible assets He highlighted

moving from a market approach to a citizen’s

ap-proach Salazar highlighted key factors for attracting

private investment in Peru, including: political

stabil-ity; sound macroeconomic fundamentals; an open

economy; its position as a regional hub; strong tal market; legislation promoting PPPs; Peru’s mega-biodiversity; the fact that Peru is a regional source of drinking water; and qualified local professionals He also discussed creating more value from and moving toward participatory PPPs

capi-mark Pickering, meridian Economics, discussed South Africa’s renewable Energy Program, noting that renewables would make up 42% of planned new energy capacity over the next 20 years Noting that the government has no intention of breaking the mo-nopoly of Eskom, the electricity utility, he said that institutional reform and entry through public pro-curement processes are required

Noting the huge scale of the program, Pickering said: its legal status remains unclear; it will not be treated

as a PPP; and its price mechanism remains tain (feed-in tariff vs competitive bid program) He noted the program’s benefits, including: carbon re-duction; establishment of manufacturing industries for renewable energy components; black economic empowerment and ownership; and socioeconomic and enterprise development He observed that the program is only happening because of public pro-curement, and highlighted some key challenges, in-cluding: limited or inadequate government capacity; unfinalized legal framework, e.g., land use rules get

uncer-in the way; and the government’s heavy reliance on expensive transaction advisors He emphasized the importance of providing security to foreign partners, noted broad political and social consensus behind the program, and said convening CoP 17 in South Africa had helped accelerate the Program

Discussion and Dialogue with Panelists

During the ensuing discussion, participants discussed issues related to: the role of public subsidies and

funds; the complexities of regulating PPPs; the need

for in-house experts on finance, legal issues and

insur-ance in developing PPPs; and well-constructed PPPs

and their ability to enhance sustainability

responding to concerns about the private sector and

sustainability, Clarke noted the fixation with gDP

and country growth rates, without consideration of

cost, but said that well-constructed PPPs can enhance

sustainability He said many countries are concluding

bilateral contracts at a huge cost but are not

factor-ing in sustainability, and emphasized the quality of

partners and the solidity of their practices It was

em-phasized that the public sector must keep its promises

to the private sector to avoid shocking the market

Saghir said the provider is not important as long as

efficient, sustainable, low-cost services are available

to the poor Allach emphasized the lack of resources

in developing countries, and said that infrastructure

needs are enormous He said for electricity in his

country, the government decided subsidies would

only be used for solar energy one participant asked

how sustainable it was to have the private sector

step-ping in, while another underscored the insurance

costs of PPPs

PUTTING SCIENCE TO WORK

State of The Art in Climate Modeling and its

Role in The CIF

This session took place on Friday afternoon,

moder-ated by Daniel kammen, World Bank

Ongoing Challenges and Latest

Developments in Climate Modeling

richard Jones, Hadley Centre, Uk, presented on

be-half of Neville Trotz, Caribbean Community Climate

Change Centre, Belize, who could not attend the

meeting He provided an introductory presentation

on country needs and challenges regarding climate modeling He highlighted the approach to inform adaptation measures, which includes downscaling, regional climate projections, and regional climate scenarios He noted that these approaches are used to assess the impacts of climate change as well as extreme events He referred to constraints to better climate information at the national level, including: lack of credible projections at adequate resolution levels; lack

of access to methods to combine different ing techniques; absence of robust socioeconomic sce-narios and projections; lack of adequate climatology

downscal-at the regional and country levels; lack of climdownscal-ate and socioeconomic data; and lack of access to information such as Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenarios, methods to deal with uncertainty and others In relation to the Caribbean, Jones noted that the triggers for climate extremes, such as hurri-canes, droughts and floods, were being incorporated into the models to project changes in the frequency

of their occurrence He said that gaps in the region include: the possibility of natural variability obscur-ing climate signals; lack of sufficient capacity of cli-mate modelers and meteorological experts; and lack

of adequate training on the use of output data from regional climate models

Professor Bruce Hewitson, University of Cape Town.

B r e a K o u t g r o u P s • 2 3

Jones also presented on advancements in global

Cli-mate models (gCms), noting that gCms were

be-coming increasingly complex in the subsystems they

incorporated, but that the resolution of results data

remained on course at between 150–300kms He

ob-served that the New Earth System model included

complex components of the climate system, including

the biosphere, carbon cycle, chemistry and their

inter-actions and feedbacks, which makes it possible to assess

the carbon and climate implications of deforestation

and reforestation, as well as for integrating carbon

di-oxide effects on plants, ocean acidity and, thus,

plank-ton, corals and ecosystem services He said collating

climate change projections from numerous models can

provide for a range of outcomes, enabling exploration

of risk for large infrastructure projects, and easily

ac-cessible data products promoting systematic evaluation

and analysis to derive regional information

Bruce Hewitson, University of Cape Town, presented

on improving decision-making using climate

projec-tion data He pointed out how attempts to address

climate change were akin to “three groups of people

trying to handle a runaway elephant heading towards a

village”: the climate scientists are trying to describe the

elephant to the villagers; the mitigation community is trying to steer the elephant with a piece of string; and the adaptation community trying to shout instructions

to the villagers to avoid the elephant Hewitson warned

of the accuracy limitations of downscaled gCm data, cautioning that data must be translated into informa-tion and correlated with other information sources be-fore adaptation actions can be decided upon, explaining that using point sources of downscaled regional data was dangerous, and could misinform decision-makers and the public Hewitson underlined the challenges for

regional climate models, highlighting, inter alia: the

desperate need for data analysis; expansion of nication channels; approaching unavoidable limits to model predictability; dangers in simplified dissemina-tion; and commercial pressures

commu-Francisco Doblas-reyes, Institut Català de Ciències del Clima, Spain, presented research on Short Term Climate Prediction, describing what can be predicted, how it can be predicted, and how it is being commu-nicated Doblas-reyes described the methods being used to generate inter-seasonal and short-term climate data using empirical approaches, noting that limita-tions existed due to the availability of historical data

Daniel Kammen, Mohammed Sadek Boulhaya.

Initiatives to Develop Regional and Local

Climate Projections

Joseph Daniel Intsiful, UNDP, emphasized that it is

crucial for developing countries to formulate

adapta-tion strategies, but noted the limited access to robust,

high-resolution climate projections He observed that

UNDP’s work with developing countries has

identi-fied key challenges to gaining access to models,

includ-ing: lack of appropriate climate data; limited country

expertise for high resolution climate models; lack of

understanding on the design, interpretation and use

of climate change scenarios for impact assessments;

the inability to effectively link scenarios and models

with short- and long-term decision making; and the

need for establishing and strengthening strategic

net-works at national, regional and global levels He noted

that numerous collaborative efforts for sharing climate

data and projections were underway to bridge the gap

regarding climate models, including: CorDEX,

EN-SEmBLES, PrECIS and regCNET initiatives; and

highlighted UNDP’s involvement in the African

Ad-aptation Programme, which facilitates access to best

available climate data and impacts, UNDP’s Strategic

Networks and Technical Assistance, and the National

Communications Support Programme

mohammed Sadeck Boulahya, The African

Cen-tre of meteorological Applications for Development

(ACmAD), presented on African efforts to generate

climate projections and their associated implications

on the energy sector He highlighted the SimCLIm

toolbox to simplify climate projection information

for decision makers and the global Framework for

Climate Services to enable more effective information

dissemination to inform adaptation decisions

Discussion followed on, inter alia: robust methods of

using gCm data to inform small geographic regions;

probabilities for regional downscaled climate models;

knowledge transfer and local cooperation for climate modeling; increased r&D spending on climate mod-els; and the merits of rain-seeding and geoengineering

as viable strategies

Financing Transformation

The session on financing transformation took place on Friday afternoon, moderated by Hela Cheikhrouhou, AfDB

Programmatic Approach to Financing Transformation

Carlos manuel rodriguez, Conservation

Internation-al, presented the environmental payment program in Costa rica He explained that his country had estab-lished a mechanism for payment for environmental services based on the understanding that environmen-tal services generated by nature should be accounted for He also emphasized that this program had been implemented in conjunction with major structural reform resulting in the creation of the ministry of En-vironment and Energy in 1985, which resulted in a more coherent institution He explained that payment

Carlos Manuel Rodriguez, from Financing

Transformation.

B r e a K o u t g r o u P s • 2 5

for environmental services was based on the premise

that the provider of environmental services should be

compensated by the recipient or beneficiary He noted

that a 3.5% tax on fossil fuels has been introduced

to internalize environmental services and that 5% of

revenue was channeled to a forestry fund, which pays

plantation owners He also noted that the value of

water has been internalized in water fees and that a

voluntary program to offset carbon emissions at the

national level had been implemented rodriguez also

discussed the need to address market failures and

per-verse incentives that create unfavorable conditions for

forest conservation

on the social component, he noted that

indig-enous communities were the largest owners of

for-ests in Costa rica and had received payments of

US$450,000 for carbon fixation He said most of the

financial resources had been invested in social

infra-structure, such as houses, schools and roads, which

has had a direct impact on alleviating poverty in

Costa rica Highlighting an integrated conservation

and agriculture program, rodriguez explained that

farmers had also been paid for carbon sequestration

and water that had increased agricultural activity,

de-scribing this as a “win-win” solution He underscored that reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (rEDD) should be addressed in tandem with institutional and market transformation, and that a rEDD mechanism should act as a triggering process toward a low carbon economy He noted that

a healthy sustainable economy, which enhances social capital and equity and improves human wellbeing, requires integrity, resilience and productivity of natu-ral ecosystems and their biodiversity

Naoko Ishii, ministry of Finance, Japan, discussed scaling up low emissions development, noting that adaptation and mitigation activities require sig-nificant financial resources, which are currently inadequate She highlighted the report of the UN Secretary-general’s High-level Advisory group on Climate Change Financing and the ongoing dis-cussions aimed at operationalizing the UNFCCC green Climate Fund Ishii also discussed the need

to mobilize private resources in an innovative and catalytic way, as well as the need to improve the in-vestment climate She said that private sector money should not be a substitute for public money She re-flected on what the green Climate Fund could learn from the CIF, such as governance structure and wide stakeholder involvement She also highlighted the potential role of the CIF in assisting countries during a “readiness” phase to prepare them to re-ceive funds from the green Climate Fund, once it is operationalized Ishii also addressed the question of how to avoid the financing “gap” before the Fund is fully operational and the role that the CIF can play

in this

responding to the presentations, Frank Pinto, UNDP, observed that Costa rica had also pro-moted ecotourism alongside payment for ecosystem services He also emphasized that rEDD must be part of an overall transformation, a component of

Moderator Hela Cheikhrouhou.

a comprehensive program on mobilizing financial

resources, he also underscored mobilizing domestic

private financial resources He envisaged the

con-tinuation of the CIF until the operationalization of

the green Climate Fund and emphasized that

cli-mate resilient strategies must be tied to low carbon

development

Finance for the Poor and Underserved

mustafa Hussain, global Partnership for output

Based Aid, presented on service delivery to the poor

using results-based financing, where output-based

aid links the payment of aid to the delivery of

spe-cific services or outputs He gave the example of a

solar home system project in Bangladesh, which he

said had been very successful He observed that

un-der this scheme, service delivery is usually contracted

out to a private firm, which receives a subsidy The

service provider is responsible for pre-financing the

project until output delivery Hussain explained that

the subsidy is performance-based and verified by an

independent agent and that payments are only made

upon verification that the solar system, for example,

is up and running

Hussain explained that output-based aid tends to be targeted at low-income communities and when the service is being set up, the subsidy level must be con-sidered up front, with the objective of incentivizing efficient activity He noted that output-based aid provides a framework for delivering access and en-ergy efficiency at the local level He also elaborated

on the benefits of an output-based approach where the monitoring process is internalized and payment

is only made based on successful outputs or results, which creates strong incentives for service delivery

Japhet Aritho, Safaricom, presented on tion through innovation, using lessons from m-PESA

transforma-as his example He explained that m-PESA is a mobile phone-based money transfer service in kenya, which

is also used to pay bills and to purchase goods and services He observed that the service is saving three hours per transaction, and also providing personal and financial security, especially to women

responding to the presentations, richenda van wen, UN Foundation, noted that subsidies can be controversial, and that the required loan period also has to be considered She also reflected on the regula-tory framework required for mobile banking and the different services that can be provided

Lee-During the ensuring discussion, participants cussed: Costa rica’s institutional framework; pre-paring countries for the readiness phase; low carbon development pathways; and the limitations of re-sults-based financing; sampling, where individual verification for each installation is not possible; and modalities for procuring microfinance Participants also reflected on whether water should be priced as a commodity or if it is the service delivery that should

dis-be priced

B r e a K o u t g r o u P s • 2 7

GREENING CLEAN ENERGy SOURCES

Managing the Social and Biodiversity

Trade-Offs for Wind Energy

This session took place on Friday afternoon,

moder-ated by gary Allport, Birdlife International Allport

said wind energy is a “tricky issue” because although

it is a clean form of energy, the negative trade-offs for

biodiversity and social well-being are becoming

in-creasingly clear

Wind Power and its Environmental and

Social Impacts

george Ledec, Lead Ecologist, African region,

World Bank, gave a keynote address, stating that

the main impacts of onshore wind power include:

biodiversity impacts such as bird collisions and

dis-placement, and bat deaths; local nuisance impacts,

such as noise and radar and visual interference;

so-cioeconomic and cultural impacts, such as those

concerning land acquisition, local incomes and

lo-cal indigenous communities; and the impact of

complementary infrastructure, such as transmission

lines and access roads He said that wind power is

already “green” as it is fully renewable, with

near-ze-ro carbon emissions and lower water consumption

He stressed that wind can become even greener by adequately addressing the environmental and social impacts

Ledec noted that wind power scales up quickly and, thus, so does bird mortality He discussed what he called “notorious” wind farms, using, as an example, the Altamont Pass Wind Farm in California, which once killed over 1000 raptors a year, including dozens

of golden eagles, calling it a “population sink.” noting that while many other wind farms are documented as having low bird mortality, many do not monitor, and, therefore, the number of bird deaths is unknown He highlighted key environmental and social measures during project operation, including: post-construction monitoring of birds and bats; operational curtailment

of speeds and shutdowns; wind farm land management;

managing human access; and equipment maintenance

Dialogue with the Audience

During a discussion session following this tion, one participant asked about how resistant these technologies are to natural weather events in small is-lands Ledec responded that he had not heard of tur-

Biodiversity trade-offs, Gary Allport, Birdlife International.

bines being damaged during severe storms, but that it

is possible, and that the turbines should be set back

approximately 300 meters Another participant,

re-sponding, said some wind turbines are built to handle

high wind environments, and some companies take

the blades down when there is a cyclone or a hurricane

responding to a question on how bird seasonality

helps in planning wind power installation and

us-age, Ledec said that if birds are only passing through

during a relatively short period of the year, it makes

economic sense to perform a shutdown, which can be

either programmed or on demand

A representative from the IFC asked how wind flows

and the passage of migratory birds are reconciled, and

whether there is a global analysis to determine best

project locations In response, Ledec suggested that

the CTF should consider how to support mapping of

environmentally sensitive areas and zoning if the

gov-ernment in question agrees to this, noting that

hav-ing this information would reduce plannhav-ing conflicts

Participants stressed investing in environmentally

sensitive technologies, pre-constructive assessments,

and the importance of site selection one participant

advocated more discussion on best practices for

devel-oping sensitivity maps, noting the process of

develop-ing a map for South Africa was underway and that

it would be good to develop a standardized way for approaching this

Allport discussed soaring birds that migrate without flapping their wings, by gliding up and down and us-ing air currents to migrate, noting that their migra-tions were very mappable He highlighted the Soaring Birds Project, funded by the gEF, which works in eight countries in the middle East and North Africa, and looks at how to mainstream issues that relate

to soaring birds in those countries A representative from zambia asked about the trade-offs for protect-ing bats, for example, if power was really needed in this area

Panel Discussion

This panel, comprised of representatives from the

pri-vate sector, local communities, development partners, and an Ngo, discussed the environmental and social impacts of wind energy production and how to turn this into a “win-win” technology, including strategic planning for wind energy development Ana maria Sondoval, Empresas Públicas de medellín, Colom-bia, outlined the construction and implementation

of the pilot Jepírachi Wind Project She said that as wind power becomes more economically viable, more wind projects would be constructed She said that lo-cal and indigenous communities were involved in all stages of the Jepírachi Wind Project Noting that trust was built between the community and the company, she highlighted an intercultural dialogue to identify site placement and explore the values of cemeteries and other sacred places, and creation of a buffer zone around sacred places and residential areas to avoid in-terference with daily lives She said that the dialogue assisted in identifying impacts of the project, and es-tablishing protocols and training for the project’s op-eration and conflict avoidance

B r e a K o u t g r o u P s • 2 9

Sandoval also emphasized: joint planning to

deter-mine the site of the project; and positive benefits of

the project to the community, including increased

employment opportunities, incomes, and the

empow-erment of the community and culture She said that

after the project was operationalized, some impacts

not previously identified were discovered During a

brief discussion session following this presentation,

participants raised issues related to: land

compensa-tion in the form of in-kind contribucompensa-tions, such as

the development of salinization plants and schools,

and other compensatory measures Participants also

stressed co-management of the wind plant and the

importance of involving local communities and

tradi-tions in planning and implementation

Claudio Alatorre, IDB, noted that the IDB was

fi-nancing a number of wind projects in oaxaca,

mex-ico, where the wind power potential is great He

lamented that the area was part of a migratory

cor-ridor for birds, which caused additional risks He said

the land in the area is communally owned and cannot

be easily bought, so the majority of land is leased to

the power projects, stressing that real development,

such as the construction of schools and other social

infrastructure, needs to occur in addition to monetary transfers for leasing land and labor He noted that as

an mDB, the IDB requires that a number of mental and social safeguards be addressed throughout all the dimensions of the project, and said with other partners and mDBs, best practices could be collated and disseminated

environ-Edward Arnett, Bat Conservation International, noted that bats occupy a unique place in nature as key seed dispersers and pollinators and important actors in in-sect control and agricultural sectors He emphasized that his organization is not against wind power genera-tion, but that it should not compromise wildlife, high-lighting the unforeseen consequences of bat fatalities

He said a number of deterrent devices and other odologies are being developed to counteract this, say-ing that the correct siting of projects, for example on already disturbed sites, can lead to a win-win situation

meth-mohamad yasser Sherif, managing Partner, ics, Egypt, noted that most of Egypt is subject to des-ert conditions, although there is some grazing land and the Bedouins have established important grazing paths He highlighted the wind potential in the des-

Environ-ert, and said existing shallow streams and wells need

to be preserved He discussed the migratory path of

birds, noting large birds are the most vulnerable due

to low maneuverability outlining a number of

sur-veys to assess bird migratory patterns, he said this has

led to the designation of “no construction zones,”

which are increasingly under pressure from wind

power developers He called for alternative

meth-odologies that could allow construction within

mi-gratory paths, such as plant shut-down during peak

bird migratory times, and the definition of

accept-able and unacceptaccept-able risks within the international

community

Aline kühl, Convention on migratory Species

(CmS), stressed the increased availability of

decen-tralized power generation options, which is also

ben-eficial to migratory species She emphasized that the

“devil is in the detail,” observed that a wind farm in

the wrong place can be a “killer.” She noted that wind

power had been of some concern to the CmS and

has been on the agenda since 2002 kühl stated that

large animal migration is not currently an issue for

wind power, but that this could change in the future

She also underscored the impact of off-shore wind

farm development on the ocean and biodiversity due

to noise, saying that the consequences of this are

dif-ficult to research She highlighted that many species

use echo location which can be impeded by ocean

noise In addition, she said such development creates

a type of protected area where fishing is not really

possible Noting that CmS is an international legal

tool to share expertise and bring guidelines together,

she said there is a need for best practices and a

com-mon standard to move forward

Discussion

During the ensuring discussion, participants addressed

the CIF’s potential to respond to the issues introduced

by the panelists Participants raised issues related to: pertise and capacity development for countries requir-ing this; the potential for the Jepírachi Wind Project to

ex-be replicated, particularly within Africa; construction

of access roads; attaching price tags to needed tion measures; the need for adequate data to scope, plan and implement wind power projects; standard-ized methodologies for sensitivity mapping; and the consolidation of methods and data Participants also addressed the importance of accurate data on biodiver-sity risk for factoring costs into economic and financial models upfront when it is more socially acceptable as opposed to factoring it in down the line

mitiga-In conclusion, key lessons highlighted are: able, low-carbon and clean energy impacts can have significant impacts; good practice measures are available; sites should be carefully selected; planning tools should be used; pilot country governments and partners must ensure that significant environmental and social issues will be addressed; and technical and financial assistance is needed to support national ex-pertise to ensure the application of social and envi-ronmental safeguards

renew-Why Adaptation Should be a Priority for the Private Sector

Perspectives for the PPCR

This session took place on Saturday morning, ated by Hans Schulz, IDB Schulz noted the implied absence of the private sector in the realm of adapta-tion, and clarified that in fact the private sector has been active in adaptation for a long time, including in agriculture, the building supply industry, response to disasters and extreme weather events, and the insur-ance industry However, he said that to date private sector adaptation efforts have for the most part been

B r e a K o u t g r o u P s • 3 1

reactive, and that challenges should also be considered

opportunities He said the onus will be on helping the

private sector to be proactive and anticipatory, and

providing the private sector with the necessary

ana-lytical models and tools to understand the threats that

climate change poses to the sector itself Schulz said

uncertainties over magnitude and timing afflict

pri-vate sector planning just as they do public sector

plan-ning He said adaptation, as opposed to mitigation,

is almost always local, and generates its own demand

for a wide range of products and services He said the

goal is to be able to build resilience into planning and

strategy, and offer more resilient products and services

in the future

Keynote Address

Celine Herweijer, PricewaterhouseCoopers, said the

private sector will be affected by climate change like

any other sector, and will have to manage risks and

impacts regardless of geography, size and ownership

She identified two types of private sector engagement

and responses: defensive and proactive She said the

de-fensive response includes managing risk and

climate-proofing responses, and described three classifications

of companies falling into this response: those with long lifetime, high-value locked-in assets, such as the met-als, mining, oil and gas, and utilities industries; those with extensive supply chains; and those investing in climate-sensitive sectors, such as international banks and the insurance industry Describing those taking a proactive response, she pointed to private sector actors that are leveraging finance and developing adaptation technologies She mentioned, as examples, the devel-opment of technologies to reduce energy intensity and the cost of converting sea water into drinking water, and irrigation products that reduce water waste

Herweijer highlighted barriers to effective action by the private sector, stressing that access to usable in-formation is critical She also noted other barriers in-cluding: the tendency of the private sector to focus on the short term, while many climate change impacts are more long term; lack of regulatory and fiscal in-centives that support forward-looking business mod-els; and other risks, such as political, economic and market, and reputational risk She emphasized that, for developing country private sector actors, these challenges are greater when considered in the context

of the PPCr

on enabling the private sector to respond effectively

to adaptation, Herweijer discussed, inter alia:

collabo-ration and partnerships, not only up the value chain but across the public-private sector divide; public sector provision of information to the private sector; public finance mechanisms to catalyze private sector action on adaptation; and private sector engagement when taking decisions and developing policies regard-ing regulatory measures She said grants should not create market distortions She emphasized that there

is no “silver bullet” for private sector action on aptation, but that this should not be used an excuse for inaction Herweijer invited participants to address

Hans Schulz, IDB.