NAPAs

1
NAPAs and National Communications Cairo,
Egypt 20 - 22 September 2007 Mr. Bubu Pateh
Jallow CHAIR OF THE LEG
2
OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION

• Context of NAPA Process under the Convention
• Status of Preparation
• Status of Implementation
• Barriers and Constraints
• Lessons learned
• Conclusions and Recommendation

3
CONTEXT OF THE NAPA PROCESS

• By its Decision 5 CP.7, Section II, the COP
  decided
• to establish a work programme for the
  implementation of Article 4.9 of the Convention,
  which would include activities, among many others
  Supporting the preparation of national
  adaptation programmes of action (NAPAs) Para
  11(c)
• and in Para 15 the Decision relates the NAPAs to
  NATCOMs as the information contained in NAPAs
  may constitute the first step in the preparation
  of initial national communications

4
CONTEXT OF THE NAPA PROCESS

• By Decision 7CP.7, COP decided to establish the
  LDC Fund to support the work programme for the
  least developed countries
• By Decision 27CP.7, COP adopted the initial
  guidance to GEF for the operation of the LDC Fund
  to support the work programme for the least
  developed countries and requested GEF to provide
  funding from the LDC Fund to meet the agreed full
  cost of preparing the NAPAs, given that the
  preparation of NAPAs will help to build capacity
  for the preparation of national communications.
• By Decision 28CP.7, paragraph 1 COP adopted the
  guidelines for the preparation of NAPAs
• By Decision 29 CP.7, paragraph 1. COP established
  the least developed countries expert group (LEG)
  with its terms of reference

5
STATUS OF NAPA PREPARATION

• As of 31 July 2007, the following 21 LDCs have
  completed and officially submitted their NAPAs
  Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burundi, Cambodia, Comoros,
  Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Eritrea,
  Haiti, Kiribati, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi,
  Mauritania, Niger, Rwanda, Samoa, Sénégal, São
  Tomé e Príncipe, Sudan and Tuvalu.
• The officially submitted NAPAs can be accessed on
  the UNFCCC website http//unfccc.int/2679.php

6
STATUS OF NAPA IMPLEMENTATION

• Out of the 21 submitted NAPAs, six NAPA
  implementation projects have been officially
  submitted by 21 May 2007 to the GEF for funding
  under the LDCF, including from Bangladesh,
  Bhutan, Malawi, Mauritania, Niger and Samoa
• These projects have been PIF-approved, which
  means that the early- stage submissions have been
  identified as consistent with the LDCF
  eligibility criteria and that they have been
  entered into the LDCF pipeline
• Since May an additional three NAPA implementation
  projects from Cambodia, Eritrea and Sudan have
  been officially submitted by UNDP to be included
  in the November 2007 LDCF Work Programme

7
Barriers and Constraints

• Change of Accounting System at the UNDP Country
  Offices coinciding with the start of NAPA process
• Opening of Special Government Accounts for the
  depositing and managing NAPA Funds
• Inadequate critical mass outside of Government
  and private Consultants not available when needed
• NAPA endorsement process considered a bit longer
  than expected in some countries
• Inadequate national capacity to translate NAPA
  Project Profiles to full fundable Projects
• More data and information needed for the
  preparation of Project Identification Forms
  (PIFs) which is found inadequately presented in
  the current completed NAPAs

8
LESSONS LEARNED UNDER THE NAPA PROCESS

• The total cost for priority adaptation projects
  identified in the submitted NAPAs so far amounts
  to USD 341,289 million
• Current deposit in the LDC Fund is about US
  150,000 leaving a funding gap of US 191,289
  million.
• Financial contributions from Annex II Parties
  were vital for the success register under the
  NAPA Process and the Parties and the LEG are
  highly appreciative of this support and
  recognizes that any future mandate of the LEG
  should have the endorsement of and continued
  support from Parties to carry out the activities
  entrusted to the group.

9
LESSONS LEARNED UNDER THE NAPA PROCESS

• Through the establishment of NAPA Teams and
  Working Groups, the NAPA process has improved
  coordination and dialogue at the national and
  regional levels. The Ministries of Environment,
  Finance, Planning and Development, and Civil
  Society have been driving the process.
• The National Communication process should benefit
  from this broadened and bottom-up institutional
  framework.
• The NAPA Stakeholder Consultation process
  particularly at the grassroots levels has
  generated a lot more data and information for
  climate change studies. The data and information
  includes traditional knowledge and coping
  strategies.
• This additional level of information will
  particularly be useful for the process of
  preparation of Second National Communications by
  Parties.

10
LESSONS LEARNED UNDER THE NAPA PROCESS

• Mainstreaming is a process and has been initiated
  under the NAPA Process through the establishment
  of appropriate institutional framework.
• All NAPA Teams are multi-sectoral and
  multi-disciplinary with membership drawn from
  research institutions, agriculture, environment,
  forestry, fisheries, academia, media and civil
  society and private sector (Comoros) with some
  international consultants (Gambia and Uganda).
• NAPA Teams are guided by a Project Steering
  Committee, which is more policy oriented and
  oversees the progress of the NAPA development
  process
• The NAPA Project Steering Committee of The Gambia
  is chaired by a Permanent Secretary and includes
  National Focal Points of the Desertification and
  Biodiversity Conventions and the GEF Focal Point,
  National Assembly and Civil Society.
• Comoros established a NAPA Island Committees to
  coordinate the NAPA process at the island level.

11
LESSONS LEARNED UNDER THE NAPA PROCESS

• Mainstreaming through the PRSP, other National
  Plans and Programmes and the MDGs
• In the selection of the priority NAPA projects in
  Bhutan, one of the criteria was to assess whether
  the projects complement national goals such as
  overcoming poverty, enhancing the adaptive
  capacity or other multilateral environmental
  agreements.
• In Bangladesh the "Policy Matrix 18, integration
  of climate change adaptation in all policies,
  programmes and projects is one of the key targets
  and recognises that NAPA is closely related to
  the other environmental policies or programmes in
  particular the National Action Plan on
  biodiversity and the National Environmental
  Management Action Plan (NEMAD).

12
LESSONS LEARNED UNDER THE NAPA PROCESS

• Reduction of the vulnerabilities of the rural
  communities to the adverse impacts of extreme
  weather events, enabling the rural communities to
  adapt to climate change, attainance of food
  security, resettlement of population, provision
  of fresh water, rational use of coastal
  structures, effective land-uses, utilisation of
  marine resources, reduction of poverty and
  environmental degradation and achievement of
  sustainable rural livelihood are all elements of
  poverty reduction strategy that are common to the
  NAPA and the PRSP in Malawi and Samoa.
• Key activities laid out in Mozambiques PRSP
  include measures to manage its vulnerability to
  and strengthening its capacity to respond to
  natural disasters. This resulted to disaster risk
  management and reduction being the highest
  priority in the Mozambique NAPA.

13
LESSONS LEARNED UNDER THE NAPA PROCESS

• The NAPA process is entering a transition from
  NAPA preparation to NAPA implementation. Six
  countries have already received approval for
  funding implementation from the LDC Fund under
  the GEF.
• The implementation of these projects and others
  to come will provided practical knowledge and
  experience on climate change adaptation in
  addition to whatever study outcomes will be
  coming out of the technical institutions and
  Universities. This Learning by doing is a
  concrete and fast way of gaining knowledge and
  the NAPA Implementation process will provide this
  to the global climate change process and in
  particular the experiences and knowledge gained
  will be good input to the National Communications
  process.

14
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

• The National Communications Process should adopt
  and maintain the institutional framework sutup
  under the NAPA process
• NAPA process is at a juncture implementation
  phase is starting for about half of the LDCs that
  have completed their NAPAs, while the other half
  of LDC Parties are still at various stages of
  preparation - some of whom (East Timor,
  Afghanistan, Equatorial Guinea) are at incipient
  stages
• There is continuing need for the LEG to provide
  technical guidance and advice on the preparation
  of NAPAs, to advise on capacity-building, to
  facilitate the exchange of information, and to
  advise on efforts to mainstream adaptation into
  development planning

15
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

• Closer collaboration is needed to support LDC
  Parties to prepare NAPA proposals for funding,
  and to support NAPA teams that are in various
  stages of NAPA preparation
• Need to continue monitoring bottlenecks and
  constraints in the preparation of NAPAs through
  targeted questionnaires
• Variety of effective partnerships have been built
  which involve a number of support organizations
  at the international level as well as in-country
  institutions at the level of the individual NAPA

16
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

• Contributed to raising awareness of adaptation
  among stakeholders, integrating climate change
  concerns across agencies represented in NAPA
  teams, and raising the importance of adaptation
  to the highest decision-making level through the
  NAPA endorsement process
• NAPA preparation process has itself generated
  benefits beyond serving as a vulnerability and
  adaptation assessment. The challenge will be to
  maintain the momentum and awareness generated
  into the implementation phase

17
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

• The COP should extend the mandate of the LEG at
  COP 13 for the continuation of the provision of
  advisory services to meet the special
  circumstances and needs of the LEAST DEVELOPED
  COUNTRIES (LDCs) and implementation of the
  remaining elements of the LDC Work Programme
  adopted by COP 7 in 2001

18

• THANK YOU