ESPM 169: International Governmental Organizations and the ...



ESPM 169: International Governmental Organizations and the Global Environment Facility

October 1 2002

Big Points:

1. International Governmental Organizations and their role

2. Funding international environmental politics

- capacity building

- GEF and associated instruments

1. International Governmental Organizations

Role: decision-making organizations whose members are nation states (and their representatives); the organizational underpinnings of global governance

"Governmental" (cf. NGOs): made up of national representatives (though actiosn don't always reflect dominant national interests)

Examples: UN (UNEP, UNDP, General Assembly, CSD, Security Council); World Bank, International Monetary Fund, NATO, WTO

Ways in which they vary: role and function, voting, membership (and entry requirements), funding rules (and who supports them), autonomy (decision-making procedures); typically, not very big in terms of staff, office space, resources

Porter, Brown and Chasek, p. 45: An IO may influence the outcomes of global environmental issues in 4 ways: set the agenda for global action; convene and influence negotiations; may develop normative codes of conduct (soft law); may influence state policies on issues not under negotiation.

UN:

- most recent member? Switzerland

- functions: peacekeeping (peacemaking, peace building) and international security (Iraq situation); human rights and humanitarian assistance; economic development; environmental protection - sustainable development, plus health, children, other agencies

- security council, general assembly

- funding issues

World Bank and IMF:

• The WB has historically operated more like a fund, and the International Monetary Fund more like a bank

• IMF: created as part of the post WW2 international economic system, to supervise the international monetary system, and engage in medium term lending to countries experiencing temporary balance of payments difficulties

- members deposit money, therefore like a bank

- now spearheading the neoliberal revolution – conditionalities

( debt crisis as catalyst of changing role: move into restructuring, in particular, micro level restructuring, not just macro (so, privatization as well as balance of payments and money supply adjustment)

( restructuring imposes heavy adjustments on recipient countries, and these costs are highly uneven with respect to environment, poor, women

( IMF remains fairly impervious to demands that it takes environmental and social concerns directly into account

• World Bank: makes loans and channels aid and development assistance from DCs to LDCs

- especially known for funding large scale development projects

- has provided c. $400bn in loans to LDCs and economic institutions, plus c. $100bn via the International Development Agency (zero or low interest)

- part of a set of MDBs - Asian, Inter-American, African, European (the set to which the US belongs)

( it has of necessity been dragged kicking and screaming into the environmental arena.

2. Funding IEP

a. Capacity-building

- financial, institutional, personnel, technological type resources to improve a country's public sector and policy-making abilities; i.e. more than just "one-time" aid

- kind of a buzz word, but is guiding a lot of aid, and analysis of international environmental institutions

- aimed at state, local, NGO capacities

- important for long-term effectiveness

b. The GEF



In 1990: GEF set up as an experimental program to supply funds to LDCs - grants –or very favorable terms – for projects with global benefits.

- in response to demands for aid in order to fulfill international environmental commitments

Germany and France: suggested

World Bank: funded

UNEP and UNDP administered

15 member Scientific and Technical Advisory Board

( an unusual example of collaboration between UN and WB

( clearly a very important project and institution: has it lived up to its potential?

4 priorities:

1. protection of the stratospheric ozone layer

2. limiting emissions of greenhouse gases

3. preservation of biological diversity

4. protection of international waters

First phase: July 1991 – July 1993

- allocated $750 million to projects in (potentially) 25 countries: 80% to BD and GW; little to Ozone, due to Montreal Protocol Fund

- to projects that would not otherwise be viable

Criticisms:

a. criteria not clear

b. Priorities represented DC not LDC concerns, such as desertification and urban air pollution; weighted in favor of the donors

c. Weak leadership and institutional arrangements

d. Participation problems: NGOs and local groups excluded; “green sticker” for WB

- or is it the “mainstreaming” role?

1992 at Rio: Negotiations begin over its Restructuring:

Main point: become an interim mechanism for transfer of funds to carry out CC and BD conventions adopted at the meeting

- also home of Montreal protocol fund, eventually

Permanent institutional structure redesigned over the next 18 months to balance north and south concerns; restructured GEF inaugurated in 1994.

a. all countries represented in an assembly, meets every three years

b. 32 seat governing council: 16 LDCs; 14 DCs; 2 former soviet bloc countries (who appear to be recipients – FP in Focus Brief); complicated majority decisions: 60% of donors AND 60% of recipients

Industrial countries committed $2 billion for trust fund between 1994-1997.

1998: Replenished with $2.75 bn

By end of FY 1999: a total of 338 projects had been allocated funding, a total of US$2,347m

- often with matching funds

eligible countries: those eligible to borrow from the World Bank, or an eligible recipient of UNDP technical assistance

Incremental costs:

"GEF funds the "incremental" or additional costs associated with transforming a project with national benefits into one with global environmental benefits.  For example, choosing solar energy technology over coal or diesel fuel meets the same national development goal (power generation), but is more costly.  GEF grants cover the difference or "increment" between a less costly, more polluting option and a costlier, more environmentally friendly option." (GEF webpage)

c. role of NGOs: consultants and subcontractors - projects often passed over to them to carry out; also are supposed to monitor the GEF - feel more like "hired hands" than equal partners.

d. in 1995 land degradation added to list of projects, as long as could be linked to CBD or CC

GEF Instrument:

Questions:

- is it actually additional, or have amounts of overseas development assistance declined correspondingly?

- still need to address local concerns, like desertification (which may also have an indriect impact on GEF core issues), or sanitation and drinking water

- lengthy and inefficient project approval processes

- Still seen in some quarters as complex and secretive;

- need to “present needs in a globalized language” excludes many – Young, in Rootes.

- donor veto power

( but unique attributes: ability to adapt, involvement of different sorts of organizations at different levels

- WB: money and management of projects; UNDP: development and management of capacity building and development assistance programs on the ground; UNEP: catalyzing development of scientific and technical analysis, and in relating projects to global treaties

( growing involvement of NGOs - involved in implementing projects - "eyes and ears" of GEF; something of a quandary - legitimization, trust

Other issues:

- no involvement of the private sector

- power of WB

- complexity of project cycle

( currently meeting to plan 2002-2006 cycle; including POPs

Biodiversity.  A wide spectrum of efforts to conserve and sustainably use earth's biological diversity makes up nearly half of all GEF projects.  As the financial mechanism for the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), GEF receives guidance from the conference of parties (or COP) on policy, strategy, program priorities, and eligibility criteria related to the use of resources for purposes of the Convention.  Projects generally deal with one or more of four critical ecosystem types and the human communities found there: 1) arid and semi-arid zones; 2) coastal, marine, and freshwater resources; 3) forests; and 4) mountains.

Between 1991 and 1999, GEF allocated $991 million in grants and mobilized and additional $1.5 billion in co-financing (from recipient countries, bilateral agencies, other development institutions, the private sector, and nongovernmental organizations) for biological diversity projects. 

August 8 2002: Announced $30m project to protect Brazil's Amazon ecosystems

Funding Options

Full-size projects. GEF's three implementing agencies (and soon RDBs) work with the operational focal point in each recipient country to develop project ideas that are consistent both with the country's national programs and priorities and with GEF's operational strategy and programs.  Regional or global programs and projects may be developed in all countries that endorse the proposed activity.

Medium-Sized Projects (MSPs).  Grants of less than US$1 million are available through expedited procedures that speed processing and implementation.  These medium-sized grants increase GEF's flexibility in programming resources and encourage a wider range of interested parties to propose and develop project concepts.  To access the MSP Guidelines document, please click here.

Enabling Activities. Grants for enabling activities help countries to prepare national inventories, strategies, and action plans in cooperation with the Convention on Biological Diversity and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.  This assistance enables countries to assess biodiversity and climate change challenges from a national perspective, determine the most promising opportunities for project development, and subsequently pursue full-scale projects.

Project Preparation and Development Facility (PDF). Funding for project preparation is available in three categories or "blocks."  Block A grants (up to $25,000) fund the very early stages of project or program identification, and are approved through GEF's implementing agencies.  Block B grants (up to $350,000) fund information gathering necessary to complete project proposals and provide necessary supporting documentation.  These grants are approved by the GEF CEO, with attention to the GEF operations committee's recommendations.  Block C grants (up to $1 million) provide additional financing, where required, for larger projects to complete technical design and feasibility work.  Block C grants are normally made available after a project proposal is approved by the GEF Council.

Small Grants Program. UNDP administers this project, which offers grants of upto $50,000 to eligible projects. 

Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) Program.  A partnership with the International Finance Corporation (IFC), a World Bank affiliate, the SME program finances projects that demonstrate a positive environmental impact and have basic financial viability, thus promoting private sector investment opportunities in developing countries.

The GEF Project Cycle

Eligibility Criteria & Project Cycle

Any eligible individual or group may propose a project, which must meet two key criteria:  It must reflect national or regional priorities and have the support of the country or countries involved, and it must improve the global environment or advance the prospect of reducing risks to it. GEF project ideas may be proposed directly to UNDP, UNEP, or the World Bank.

Country eligibility to receive funding is determined in two ways.  Developing countries that have ratified the relevant treaty are eligible to propose biodiversity and climate change projects.  Other countries, primarily those with economies in transition, are eligible if the country is a party to the appropriate treaty and is eligible to borrow from the World Bank or receive technical assistance grants from UNDP.

- national focal points

- if a project meets these criteria, it enters the "pipeline" - preparatory phases

- may or may not be eventually approved

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download