Collaboration between initiatives to facilitate implementation

Presenter: Habiba Gitay, Senior Environmental specialist, Climate Policy and Finance, World Bank & Litara Taulealo, Climate resilience/finance Coordinator, Ministry of Finance, Samoa

Contact details: hgitay@worldbank.org & litara.taulealo@mof.gov.ws

Dear All,
Thank you so much for attending "my space" session on 20 September at the GCCA meeting. It was wonderful to get so many ideas on "effective collaboration amongst different climate resilient interventions". It was also good to meet new people we had not met during the gcca meeting and hear different perspectives. As promised, here are the rough notes from the brain storming.

Challenges
The "project" modality for adaptation taken in many countries, often as a follow-up of supporting priorities identified in the NAPAs, has created a fragmented approach to adaptation.This stretches the limited absorptive and implementation capacity in the country. It also increases the risk of having large overlaps between projects and ineffective use of resources.

Responses that countries have started: Take ownership and drive the process for climate adaptation

1. Establish a policy framework where climate change is part of the development agenda. Detailed actions and implementation can be at the sectoral level, but a chosive policy framework helps with coordinatin and outcomes
2. Develop integrated/landscape/coastal zone appraoches. This would help manage the climate risksin a multi-sectoral manner.
3. Set up a coordinated mechanism. This can build on exisitng platforms or mechansim such as those used for diaster risk management, other develoment programs etc. The coordination mechanism will:
   a) help develop the capacity of the country
   b) Lead and set-up a regular dialogue with the multiple donors that have expressed an interest in supporting the country. In these clearly articulate the nationsl priorities (for many this is adaptation and not mitigation, which is often what the donors want to support)
   c) invite and include the civil society organisagions (CSO), NGOs and the private sector. In some countries, CSOs can help with the implementation capacity. Including them also means that there is less likelihood of having CSOs/NGOs implementing activities that are not meeting the country priorities. In some cases, given their experience, some may also provide training of trainers or act as bridging institutions and/or support implementation so that government stsff can focus on the needed policy changes. Note: This does mean that the governments have to accept and respect what theses organisagions have to offer and also seek that collaboration.
   d) help avoid institutional turf battles, especially amongst ministries/agencies with overlapping mandates.
   e) help plan ahead so that the limited capacity can be used effectively and the workload of major initiatives spread out. It will also mean that there is less likelyhood of different projects doing same training for the same staff which constrains the staff availability currently.
   e) set up a planning/coordination units to act as clearing house for funds. Some countries may choose to set up nationsl-level multi-donor trust funds but some donors might not choose to contribute funds through that way and the country may decide not to go that route. Some may choose to have a program account where dedicated accounts could be included.
   e) Another option would be to have an integrated plan and budget process that helps with decreasing fragmentation of funding and incising cohesiveness.
4. address the capacity limitations in a different way than in the past. Focus on sustained capacity, which means providing the right incentives, supporting and mentoring staff through staff exchanges/secondments; bringing in "ambassadors/secondees" rather than consultants; developing strategic partnerships with various stakeholders (international/national partners/ private sector, civil society etc (see points on CSOs above)

So why has this not been done before?
Some reasons were lack of leadership/champions; limited capacity of the government and in some cases when capacity is developed, it is not sustained due to the project approach. Adaptation is a new concept and key stakeholders and/or government agencies do not understand it.