NEGOTIATIONS
FOCUS
PROCESS
KEY STEPS
|
|
Best practice and lesson 6: Good relations with the GEF agency result in smoother implementation of
NAPA projects
|
|
|
The process of accessing funding under the LDCF underpins the process of preparing and
implementing a NAPA. Following COP guidance, the GEF responds with operational guidance on how
countries can access funding via a GEF agency.
The role of the GEF agency is to assist the country in formulating a coherent project idea,
based on one (or more) of the highest-ranking NAPA priorities, and convert this idea into a PIF
in accordance with current LDCF templates. The country can choose freely between each of the 9
GEF agencies for the implementation of its project(s). It is also possible to implement
separate projects with separate agencies, or have two or more agencies working together in one
project to utilize their expertise in specific sectors. The choice of GEF agency(ies) should be
based on its comparative advantage in relation to the specific issues addressed by the project
implemented. Additional considerations include current projects being implemented by the agency
chosen, past experiences and working relations with the agency.
There has been considerable discussion of the experience of LDC Parties in accessing funding
during previous LEG meetings and in an effort to improve this process, the LEG conducted
training on how to write proposals to the GEF. Each agency has its own procedures for
developing projects, and although the agency will assist the country in fulfilling all the
requirements for the project, this may lead to delays in processing the project and
misunderstandings if the requirements are not clearly communicated.
Experience shows that countries that chose an agency with which they had had a previous
positive experience in other projects had a higher level of satisfaction, mostly because better
interaction also meant greater transparency in the exchange of information, a clear
understanding of each other’s roles and responsibilities, a better ownership of the
projects and more realistic expectations regarding the whole process.
After a lot of dialogue between the GEF and its agencies with LDC Parties, as well as the
training conducted by the LEG in close collaboration with the GEF and its agencies, many of the
bottlenecks have been addressed and access to funding appears to be much smoother. The time
taken to obtain GEF CEO endorsement for projects has been reduced and many more GEF agencies
are becoming involved in NAPA implementation.
|
|
|
Best practice: One of the challenges that some countries face is in the choice
of a GEF agency. There is no clear-cut process for selecting an agency, since more than one
agency can usually assist with a given project type and because the factors in the choice are
varied. A good practice seems to be to choose an agency that has existing experience in a given
activity, since the agency can then easily apply its expertise to the project. In any case,
taking the time to assess each agency’s advantages against the country’s specific
circumstances and project objectives can ensure a smoother overall process.
|
|
Lessons learned: Many countries have reported that good working relations with
an agency at the country level can lead to a very positive interaction and smooth
implementation of NAPA projects. Good communication is also important in addressing and
resolving bottlenecks as they arise. In cases where problems arise, countries can and should
contact the GEF secretariat directly for assistance. In the long run, addressing and resolving
problems as they arise is far easier than cancelling a project and re-entering the GEF/LDCF
pipeline with a new submission and another agency.
|
+ Next
best practice and lesson
++ Back to best
practices and lessons learned main page
|
|
|
| |
|
