Protectia Mediului

Chapter Eleven NGOs & Policy—How Can I Participate In GEF Policy-And Priority-Setting

1. OPPORTUNITIES FOR NGO ADVOCACY: AN OVERVIEW

Within the GEF process, there are many advocacy opportunities for NGOs to contribute substantively to policy- and priority-setting. To better understand these opportunities, it is useful to consider (i) the major substantive target areas for advocacy (see Box 11.1 and Sections 2–6 below); and (ii) the major processes involved (see Box 11.2).

Box 11.1 Substantive "Target Areas" for NGO Advocacy.

Project funding. Decisions to fund (or not fund) proposed projects is a key step in setting GEF priorities and—in effect—setting unofficial, but de facto, GEF policies. For example, these decisions determine what types of projects should be funded, what level of funding should be allocated to specific projects or focal areas, and whether certain countries or regions should be priorities for funding.

Project development. Individual governments take the lead in developing project proposals for GEF funding consideration. The types of projects developed, and some specific aspects of projects, will reflect priorities and key policy issues at the national level (see Chapter 10).

Formal GEF policies. The Council adopts formal policies that have an important influence on GEF funding and the GEF process more generally (see Chapter 2).

Operational Strategies and Operational Programmes. These two centerpieces of GEF policy will be periodically updated (see Chapters 3–7).

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of GEF performance. The ongoing M&E program, housed within the GEF Secretariat, has important implications for GEF policy- and priority-setting.

National appropriations. Donor governments are required to appropriate funds committed to the GEF during replenishment negotiations. NGOs in GEF donor countries can work with government officials and members of parliament to help ensure that such funds are appropriated.

Box 11.2 Processes for NGO Advocacy

In terms of the substantive areas for advocacy listed in Box 11.1 above, NGOs could participate in three relevant processes:

National government decision-making process. Through direct meetings, individual and jointly signed letters, and other avenues, NGOs can provide input into decisions by their national governments related to the target areas in Box 11.1. For example, prior to a GEF Council Meeting, NGOs can seek to mobilise governmental support for—or opposition to— proposed projects, based in part on whether such projects are built on sound or poorly conceived policy.

GEF Council decision-making process. NGOs can provide input into decisions by the GEF Council through communications with several or all GEF Council members before official Council decisions. Also, NGOs can prepare individual or joint interventions (i.e., verbal statements) to be presented during formal GEF Council meetings. If, for example, a new social policy or revised Operational Strategies for climate change and biodiversity were to be considered at a future Council meeting, NGOs could work in advance to help shape them.

GEF Secretariat implementation process. The GEF Secretariat implements Council decisions and, more generally, supports all GEF activities. NGOs could contribute to important Secretariat activities that have at least indirect policy implications. For example, NGOs can provide input to the Monitoring and Evaluation Coordinator on M&E activities and can send comments to the Secretariat on drafts of new GEF policies.

Implementing Agency policy process. IAs are required to mainstream GEF objectives into their regular (non-GEF) portfolios and programs. NGOs can monitor and evaluate the process of mainstreaming, as well as advocate development of policy reforms and other actions to catalyse such mainstreaming.

2. PROJECT FUNDING

NGOs can contribute to decisions by individual governments and the GEF Council on whether to fund proposed projects. Individual NGOs, possibly in collaboration with other NGOs, will determine which policies and criteria are of particular importance for supporting or opposing a proposed project. Some relevant considerations include:

Thematic emphasis within focal area. What should the thematic emphasis be for projects in each focal area? For example, should biodiversity projects emphasise sustainable use versus conservation?

Should climate projects emphasise renewable energy sources versus more efficient fossil fuel use?

Prioritisation. Should the size of individual grants (and totals of grants awarded) reflect the relative importance of a country (or region) in relation to the focal areas? For example, should larger grants go to (i) countries that are biodiversity "hot spots" or "megadiversity" countries, such as Brazil, Papua New Guinea and Madagascar; or (ii) countries with high potentials for future emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and ozone depleting substances (ODS), such as China and India?

Underlying versus direct causes. Should the emphasis be on projects that address underlying causes of problems, as opposed to direct (proximate) causes? Should all funded projects address—at least to some degree—underlying causes?

Public involvement. Was there adequate public (stakeholder) involvement in the planning phase of the proposed project, and does the project include an effective role for civil society in implementation?

For example, does a proposed international waters project on integrated coastal zone management involve the relevant coastal communities and artisanal fisher groups?

Social impacts. What are the potential social impacts of the proposed project? For example, what are the employment and income implications of a proposed energy efficiency project? What are the land tenure implications for local and indigenous communities of a proposed project to establish a new protected area?

Another funding issue for NGOs to consider is procurement-reform. Procurement is the way in which project funds, once approved, are delivered by the GEF IAs to the executing agency. NGOs have generally criticised this process as inefficient and time-consuming. The situation is especially difficult for NGO executing agencies that do not have financial resources to "front" the money for project activities and then receive reimbursement. Such criticisms are being addressed through the Medium-Size Grants

Programme, and a GEF task force is also looking into the issue.

3. FORMAL GEF POLICIES

NGOs can help shape formal GEF policies, including strengthening existing policies and catalysing the adoption of new policies.

Strengthening existing policies. Several policies have been formally adopted by the Council (see Chapter 2). NGOs could catalyse reviews of these policies and help formulate revisions to strengthen them. Some illustrative examples of such revisions that have been proposed by various NGOs in the past include:

• Incremental costs. Ensure that countries with "environmentally progressive" baseline activities are not penalised.

• Financing modalities. Allow for concessional or contingency loans in targeted areas.

• Monitoring and evaluation (M&E). Require a more unified M&E system, covering all levels of the GEF; keep under periodic review the effectiveness of the current IA structure of the GEF.

• Public involvement. Require that all projects entail specific and documented forms of stakeholder participation, and set out operational guidelines for public involvement throughout the project cycle.

Catalysing new policies. NGOs could catalyse new GEF policies. Some options that may be worth considering include:

• Social policy;

• Indigenous peoples policy;

• Procurement (disbursement of funds) policy for IAs;

• Capacity building and training policy; and

• Trust fund policy.

4. OPERATIONAL STRATEGIES (OS) AND OPERATIONAL PROGRAMMES (OP)

The OS and OP are viewed as "living documents" and will be periodically updated, based on experience gained, further guidance from the Conferences of the Parties (COPs) to the Biodiversity and Climate Conventions, technological advances and other developments. NGOs can play an important role in this process by proposing and advocating needed revisions.

Operational Strategies. There will be opportunities for NGOs to raise and advocate (i) issues previously debated, but rejected, during the formulation of the current OS; and (ii) new issues that might be incorporated into the OS. Examples of issues raised by various NGOs in the past include:

• Climate: the need for greater emphasis on promoting renewable energy sources;

• Biodiversity: the need for greater emphasis on sites of high biodiversity value, and on sustainable use of biodiversity;

• International waters: the need to identify priorities; and

• Ozone: the need for greater emphasis on CFC substitutes that are not ozone-depleting substances and do not have high greenhouse gas potential.

Operational Programmes. There will be opportunities for NGOs to advocate revisions to existing OPs and to advocate new programs. Examples that have been raised by various NGOs in the past include:

• Climate: adding a new transport programme under the climate focal area;

• Biodiversity: adding an equitable benefit—sharing programme under the biodiversity focal area.

5. MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) OF GEF PERFORMANCE

NGOs can help shape the terms of reference (TOR) for M&E studies, and participate directly in such activities (see Chapter 9). Examples of NGO involvement in the three M&E studies initiated in 1997 include:

• Several NGOs met with the GEF M&E coordinator and followed up with written comments, to provide input into the TOR.

• NGOs in various countries are being interviewed to ascertain their perspectives on specific GEF projects examined in these studies.

• An NGO representative is serving on a small International Advisory Panel for these studies.

• NGOs have met with and provided input to the teams and expert advisory panel for the studies on the GEF's overall effectiveness and lessons learned from project experience.

6. NGO PARTICIPATION IN GEF COUNCIL MEETINGS

Since the GEF Council makes many of the formal decisions related to the areas discussed above, NGO policy advocacy efforts involve active participation in Council meetings. Ten NGOs are allowed to participate as "observers" at Council meetings (eight from developing countries and two from developed countries). Travel grants, awarded through an NGO self-selection process and funded by the GEF Secretariat, are available to help ensure at least limited representation from developing countries (see Chapter 13). Travel grant recipients ("NGO delegates") must be accredited with the GEF, which involves a very simple process (see accreditation form inserted on the back page of this guide). GEF-accredited NGOs will receive background documents for future Council meetings and other information on GEF activities.

NGO activities. There are a number of activities undertaken by NGOs around GEF Council meetings, some involving information-sharing and networking, while others are more advocacy-oriented. These activities include:

• An NGO strategy session two days before the Council meeting, to discuss concerns, strategies and positions on various agenda items; to begin developing NGO statements for presentation to the Council; etc.

• An NGO-GEF consultation the day before the Council meeting, providing a forum for exchanging views, positions and concerns with government officials and representatives of the GEF Secretariat and IAs. NGOs present case studies, outlining concerns and perspectives on specific GEF projects in their regions.

• Presentation of statements ("interventions") during official sessions of the Council meeting, detailing NGO views on various agenda items. NGOs generally agree that short interventions with a few well-chosen points, backed by good examples, have a greater impact than those that voice more general concerns.

• Lobbying Council members often involves private discussions "in the corridors" before official agenda item discussions. Such lobbying is generally more effective if groundwork is laid well before Council meetings (e.g., communications with Council members as they prepare their position papers at home).

• Writing a report of the results of the Council meeting. NGOs will often cover specific issues of interest during the Council meeting and write reports on these issues. The international focal point (see Chapter 13) usually integrates these into one summary report, which is distributed widely to the international NGO community.

• Serving on official government delegations is an arrangement that is usually worked out well ahead of time with relevant government officials