Annex
Global Environment Facility
January 16, 1997
prepared by the
Global Environment Facility to assist the Subsidiary Body for Implementation
in its review of the Financial Mechanism
Introduction
1. The Conference of the Parties to the Framework Convention on
Climate Change (FCCC) decided at its first session, "that the
restructured GEF shall continue, on an interim basis, to be the
international entity entrusted with the operation of the financial
mechanism referred to in Article 11 of the Convention;" and also
decided, "in accordance with Article 11.4 of the Convention, to
review the financial mechanism within four years and take appropriate
measures, including a determination of the definitive status of the
GEF in the context of the Convention."
(2)
2. At its second session, the Conference of the Parties requested
the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) at its fourth session to
undertake the review process referred to in the decision
9/CP1.(3)
3. During consultations between the secretariats of the Convention
and the GEF, it was agreed that it would be useful to submit to the
SBI, with a view to assisting in its review of the financial
mechanism, the following information:
(a) Report of the GEF to the Intergovernmental Negotiating
Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change on the
Restructured Global Environment Facility (A/AC.237/89, December 14,
1994);
(b) Report of the GEF to the First Session of the Conference of
the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (FCCC/CP/1995/4, March 10, 1995);
(c) Report of the GEF to the Second Session of the Conference of
the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (FCCC/CP/1996/8, June 27, 1996); and
(d) Any additional information to that provided in the earlier
reports so as to make available up-to-date information on GEF
activities in the climate change area through the end of
1996.
4. The present paper provides the information referred to in the above subparagraph. It up-dates the report that was presented by the GEF to the Conference of the Parties at its second session by providing new information on project financing for the period from May 1996 through December 1996. The paper
also highlights information that was presented in earlier reports
that might be particularly relevant for purposes of the review.
Additional material that might assist the Subsidiary Body for
Implementation in its review, such as the most recent GEF Quarterly
Operational Report (November 1996), will be submitted separately by
the GEF.
Convention requirements concerning its financial mechanism
5. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 11 of the Convention set forth
the following provisions to guide the selection of the Convention's
financial mechanism:
(a) The financial mechanism is to provide financial resources on a
grant or concessional basis, including for the transfer of
technology;
(b) It shall function under the guidance of, and be accountable
to, the Conference of the Parties, which shall decide on its
policies, programme priorities and eligibility criteria related to
this Convention;
(c) Its operation shall be entrusted to one or more existing
international entities; and
(d) It shall have an equitable and balanced representation of all
Parties within a transparent system of governance.
6. Paragraph 3 of Article 11 provides that the Conference of the
Parties and the entity or entities entrusted with the operation of
the financial mechanism are to agree on arrangements to give effect
to paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Article.
7. Paragraph 4 of Article 11 provides that the Conference of the
Parties is to make arrangements to implement Article 11 at its first
session, "reviewing and taking into account the interim arrangements
referred to in Article 21, paragraph 3". The paragraph also calls for
the Conference of the Parties to "decide whether these interim
arrangements shall be maintained."
8. Paragraph 3 of Article 21 provides:
The Global Environment Facility of the United Nations Development
Programme, the United Nations Environment Programme and the
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development shall be the
international entity entrusted with the operation of the financial
mechanism referred to in Article 11 on an interim basis. In this
connection, the Global Environment Facility should be appropriately
restructured and its membership made universal to enable it to
fulfill the requirements of Article 11."
1. It is the opinion of the GEF that its restructuring, which occurred from April 1992 through March 1994 , responded to the requirements of Articles 21(3) and 11,
and therefore, it is an appropriate international entity to be
entrusted with the operation of the financial mechanism of the
Convention. The key aspects of this restructuring that respond to the
Convention requirements are described below.
(i) Universal Membership
10. Under the restructured GEF "any State member of the United Nations or of any of its specialized agencies may become a Participant in the GEF by depositing with the Secretariat an instrument of participation."(4)
As of December 1996, there are 156 country Participants in the
GEF. A list of Participants is attached as Annex A.
(ii) Function under the guidance of the Conference of the
Parties
11. The GEF Instrument and the Operational Strategy formally ensure that "the GEF shall function under the guidance of, and be accountable to, the Conference of the Parties which shall decide on policies, program priorities and eligibility criteria for the purposes of the convention." (5)
In its previous reports to the sessions of the Conference of the Parties, the GEF provided specific information on how it had responded to the guidance of the Conference(6)
. Up-dated information on the consistency of recent GEF activities
with the guidance of the Conference of the Parties is included in
paragraphs 20 through 29 of this report.
(iii) Provision of financial resources on a grant or
concessional basis
12. The GEF Instrument stipulates that the GEF shall "provide grant and concessional funding".(7)
To date, all GEF financing in the area of climate change has been
through grants. As of December 1996, the GEF has provided US$528
million in grant financing for climate change projects and project
preparation. This financing has leveraged an additional US$2,730
million in project financing, for a total of US$3,258 million in
climate change project financing. These projects have provided
assistance to 97 countries. In addition, financing totaling over
US$94 million has been provided to multi-focal area projects with
significant climate change benefits. A complete listing of GEF
project activities in the climate change area, both within and
outside the financial mechanism, is presented in Annexes B through G
of this paper.
(iv) Equitable and balanced representation within a
transparent system of governance.
13. Governance of the GEF is primarily vested in two bodies established by the Instrument: the Council and an Assembly.(8)
The Assembly consists of representatives of all
country Participants. It meets once every three years and is to
review the general policies of the GEF. The GEF will convene its
first Assembly in 1998.
14. The Council comprises 32 Members, each representing a
constituency grouping of Participating countries. 16 Members are from
developing countries, 2 Members are from the countries of central and
eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, and 14 Members are from
developed countries. Constituency groupings were decided by the
Participating countries, and were formulated and distributed taking
into account the need for balanced and equitable representation of
all Participants. The Council meets semi-annually.
15. The GEF Council has held eight meetings. Its major
accomplishments to date have focused on establishing the operational
policies to be followed in the preparation and implementation of GEF
activities. These policies include:
(a) the GEF Operational Strategy;
(b) the project cycle;
(c) project preparation financing through the Project Development and Preparation Facility (PDF);
(d) the terms of reference for STAP;
(e) monitoring and evaluation work program;
(f) expedited procedures to support enabling activities;
(g) approach on estimating incremental costs;
(h) public involvement in GEF-financed projects; and
(i) expedited procedures for medium-sized projects.
Arrangements between the Conference of the Parties and the
GEF as the entity entrusted with the operation of the financial
mechanism
16. At its first session, the Conference of the Parties requested
the Convention secretariat, in consultation with the secretariat of
the GEF, to prepare draft arrangements between the Conference of the
Parties and the operating entity or entities of the financial
mechanism for consideration by the SBI at its first session and
adoption by the Conference of the Parties at its second session.
Accordingly, the SBI considered at its first session the draft
Memorandum of Understanding that had been prepared by the two
secretariats and approved by the GEF Council at its meeting in July
1995. The SBI decided to recommend that the Conference of the Parties
adopt the draft Memorandum, which it did at its second session
(Decision 12/CP.2).
17. The SBI also requested the secretariats of the Convention and
the GEF to elaborate jointly the annex to the Memorandum of
Understanding on procedures to facilitate the joint determination in
a predictable and identifiable manner of the amount of funding
necessary and available for the implementation of the Convention
referred to in paragraph 9 of the Memorandum. The annex to the
Memorandum of Understanding, elaborated jointly by the secretariats
of the Convention and the GEF, was approved by the GEF Council at its
meeting in April 1996 and submitted to the SBI for its review prior
to adoption by the Conference of the Parties.
18. The SBI recommended, and the Conference agreed, that the SBI
should consider the draft annex, together with an alternative text
submitted by the G.77 and China, at its session in December 1996
(Decision 13/CP.2). The SBI is to report to the third session of the
Conference of the Parties on their consideration of the
annex.
19. At its fourth session in December 1996, the SBI prepared and
adopted an annex to the Memorandum and agreed to transmit it to the
GEF Council for expeditious consideration and approval so that the
SBI could recommend its adoption by the third session of the
Conference of the Parties in December 1997. The Council of the GEF
will consider the annex prepared by the SBI at its next meeting in
early May 1997.
Project Activities in the climate change area approved
between May and December 1996.
20. Since its last report to the Conference of the Parties, the
following GEF financing for project preparation has been
approved.(9)
|
Country |
Project Name |
GEF |
|
Project Preparation Financing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21. The following enabling activities have been approved by the
CEO/Chairman of the GEF in the period from May to December
1996.
|
Country |
Project Name |
GEF |
|
Enabling Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22. The table below lists the investment projects that have been
approved by the GEF Council since May 1996.
|
Country |
Project Name |
GEF Financing (in US$ millions) |
Total Financing |
|
Long-Term Operational Program |
|
(India, Kenya, Morocco) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23. The following table lists financing recently approved for
multi-focal area projects with significant climate change components
or for preparation of such projects.
|
Country |
Project Name |
GEF |
Total |
|
Project Preparation Financing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multi-focal Area Projects |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other activities undertaken in response to COP guidance
24. At its second session, the Conference of the Parties approved
new guidance to the GEF (Decision 11/CP.2). One principal matter
addressed in the guidance concerns enabling activities, and in
particular the funding of communications from non-Annex I Parties
under Article 12.1 of the Convention. In this regard, the Conference
of the Parties also adopted guidelines and a format for the
preparation of initial national communications by non-Annex I Parties
(Decision 10/CP.2). In the preamble to decision 11, concern was
expressed over difficulties encountered by parties in receiving
financial assistance from the GEF, and the decision requests the GEF
to expedite the approval and disbursement of financial resources to
meet the agreed full costs incurred by developing country parties in
complying with their obligations under Article 12.1 of the
Convention. The GEF is also requested to take steps to facilitate the
provision of financial resources, including the enhancement of
transparency and the flexible and pragmatic application of the
concept of incremental costs.
25. Shortly after the second session of the Conference of the
Parties, the CEO convened a senior management meeting of the
Implementing Agencies and Secretariat. During the meeting agreement
was reached on a number of ways to streamline GEF internal working
procedures and to further expedite GEF enabling activity approval and
implementation. At the meeting there was general agreement on the
need to ensure rapid preparation, approval and implementation of
enabling activities. It was recognized that the approval by the
Council in April 1996 of expedited procedures was an important step
towards improving the process, but these were still quite recent.
Nonetheless, it was agreed that even more could be done to facilitate
early disbursement of funds at the country level. In particular,
steps were agreed to :
(a) expedite task force review of project proposals;
(b) enable approval of enabling activities to occur on a rolling basis, as and when proposals are prepared; and
(c) provide for up to 15% of the total budget activity to be
available for start up work as soon as the CEO approves the project
proposal.
26. It is expected that this agreement will further facilitate the
processing of project proposals and lead to early implementation of
activities and disbursement of project funds in developing countries.
To date, financing for enabling activities in 81 countries has been
approved (see Annex D).
27. Agreement has also been reached with the Implementing
Agencies, in consultation with the secretariat of the convention, on
using, for purposes of climate change enabling activities, the
guidelines and format for the preparation of initial national
communications by non-Annex I Parties as the basis for the
preparation of national communications under GEF-financed enabling
activities.
28. These steps are consistent with the agreement reached at a
meeting of GEF Heads of Agency in June 1996. At the meeting, the
Chairman/CEO briefed the Heads of Agency on the status of programming
of GEF financial resources, commitments and disbursements. It was
noted that, while the quality of GEF projects has risen appreciably
over time, and the ability to commit resources to projects is
proceeding satisfactorily, disbursement of funds continues to be a
problem. The President of the World Bank outlined the steps he is
undertaking within the Bank to streamline its project cycle and
documentation and indicated that he will ask Bank staff to explore
ways to reduce in half the processing time of GEF projects within the
Bank's control. The Heads of UNDP and UNEP indicated that their staff
will also explore opportunities for speeding up processing and
disbursement in their agencies even further.
29. The GEF Council, like the Conference of the Parties, has
recognized the need for a flexible application of the concept of
incremental costs. The Secretariat and the Implementing Agencies are
collaborating on ways to apply the approved incremental costs
approach to specific focal areas and projects. As biodiversity
projects have presented the most difficulties, efforts will focus on
this focal area, recognizing that lessons learned will then be
applied as appropriate to the other focal areas, including climate
change. The intention is to develop criteria for projects (training,
capacity building, institutional strengthening or planning projects)
that lend themselves to a rapid incremental cost assessment.
Guidelines will be developed on how to carry out such assessments,
and how to identify items that should be financed at full cost. For
larger investment projects the incremental costs would need a fuller
consideration. Paradigms for such analysis in each focal area are
being developed.
GEF project development workshops
30. To facilitate access to GEF resources and the preparation of high quality GEF projects, a GEF project development workshop was designed. To date, 26 workshops have been organized in Africa, Asia/Pacific, Latin America/Caribbean, Europe/Central Asia and Middle East/North Africa. Representatives from the following regions and countries participated in workshops:
Africa: Botswana, Comoros, Djibouti, Côte d'Ivoire, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Senegal, Seychelles, South Africa, Sudan, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe;
Asia/Pacific: Cook Islands, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Malaysia,
Pakistan, Philippines, Samoa, Thailand, and Tonga;
Europe/ Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Lithuania,
Central Asia: Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and
Uzbekistan;
Latin Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados,
America/ Brazil, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Haiti,
Caribbean: Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago and Venezuela; and
Middle East/ Algeria, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Sudan, Syria,
North Africa: Tunisia and Turkey.
31. The GEF has received very positive feedback from the
workshops, and additional requests have been made from countries that
have not yet benefited from participating in a workshop. 12 workshops
have been initially scheduled for 1997. They will include
representatives from approximately 20 additional countries.
Medium-Sized-Projects
32. The GEF Council, at its meeting in October 1996, approved
procedures to expedite the processing and financing of medium-sized
projects. The goal of the procedures is to simplify and expedite the
preparation and approval of projects requiring up to US$ 1 million of
GEF-financing. The expedited procedures are to apply to project
proposals submitted by all potential executing agencies, including
governments, national institutions, local communities,
non-governmental organizations, academic institutions and private
sector entities.
GEF monitoring and evaluation
activities
33. At its October meeting, the Council approved a work program and budget for the GEF monitoring, evaluation and dissemination program. It is expected that the Conference of the Parties will be one of the primary users of the results that will emerge from the GEF monitoring and evaluation. This work program includes initial activities concerning the design of monitoring and evaluation components in projects, performance monitoring reports, mid-term evaluations, project completion reports and performance audits, and evaluation of project impact. The program also provides for an evaluation of the performance of the operational strategy, and assessments of GEF's global results and impacts.
34. Prior to the approval of the monitoring, evaluation and
dissemination work program, the GEF conducted a project
implementation review in 1995. The project implementation review will
be an annual feature of the monitoring and evaluation program. The
second project implementation review is under preparation, and the
Implementing Agencies are scheduled to meet with the GEF Senior
Monitoring and Evaluation Officer in early 1997 in order to undertake
the review for 1996 activities.
35. All of the projects examined during the first review were
approved during the GEF Pilot Phase. Although most of the ongoing
projects were in the early stages of implementation, an effort was
made to draw some operational lessons and to identify well-performing
GEF activities. Lessons learned through the Project Implementation
Review are summarized below:
(i) Participation
36. One of the most striking points that came through in the
review is the strong interagency consensus that effective public
involvement in GEF projects has contributed significantly to
improving conditions for project performance. Data from the projects
clearly showed that public involvement activities initiated early in
the project cycle promoted ownership and accountability, developed
sensitivity to the needs of affected people, and created broad
support for the project.
(ii) Project Information
Base
37. The reporting procedures from many projects underscored
the importance of adequate baseline data for successful project
implementation. The compilation of sound economic and social data
during project preparation was considered an important factor toward
meeting the project objectives.
(iii) Implementation
Plans
38. Clearly formulated project objectives with understandable
operational consequences together with advance preparation of
detailed implementation plans with assigned responsibilities have
contributed to building executing agency support and facilitating
implementation progress. Clarity on these points may also contribute
positively to efforts in increased local capacity building.
Performance indicators should be integrated in the project design and
not left to refinement after the project has been
approved.
(iv) Institutional
capacity
39. An effective project design should ensure that the tasks
to be implemented under the project do not exceed the scope or
capabilities of the institutions charged with carrying them out. To
this end, established institutions seem to be more successful project
executors than new institutions established by the project. Another
point made during the review was the need for dedicated project
managers in the executing agencies who would be allocated to work on
a full-rather than on a part-time basis.
(v) Training
40. Training can help to improve the capacities of the
executing institutions at local and national levels, and should be
fitted to the particular needs of the country concerned. It is not
only the content but also the duration of training that must be
adjusted to a particular project's objectives. In some cases,
different levels of training are needed before knowledge can be
successfully absorbed. For instance, through an energy efficiency
project in Peru, institutional strengthening and support was given to
an NGO, and through the energy audits stimulated by this project,
cost-effective GHG emission reductions resulted.
(vi) Regional and Global
Projects
41. Regional and global projects can enhance networking, and
active systems for international information exchange, particularly
among developing countries, are certainly needed. Regional projects
may sometimes present economic, scientific, and technical advantages
but would generally appear to need established institutions to
provide effective project implementation. Some of the implementation
delays experienced suggested difficulties in obtaining country
commitment and in-country ownership.
Conclusions
42. With the consolidation of the GEF institutional structure
and its policy framework, including the adoption of the GEF
Operational Strategy in October 1995, the restructured GEF is now
fully operational. The GEF has demonstrated that it institutionally
complies with the provisions of Article 11 of the Convention and this
has been formalized in the Memorandum of Understanding approved by
the Conference of the Parties and the GEF Council. As is clear from
its activities, the GEF has been fully responsive to the guidance of
the Conference of the Parties concerning the policies, program
priorities and eligibility criteria related to the Convention. As
such, it is well-suited to be designated as the entity entrusted to
operate the financial mechanism of the Convention.
|
Country |
Date of Notification of Participation |
|
|
|
|
2. Afghanistan |
4/7/94 |
|
3. Albania |
5/6/94 |
|
4. Algeria |
5/13/94 |
|
5. Antigua and Barbuda |
3/29/94 |
|
6. Argentina |
5/12/94 |
|
7. Armenia |
6/16/94 |
|
8. Australia |
6/27/94 |
|
9. Austria |
6/21/94 |
|
10. Azerbaijan |
7/24/95 |
|
11. Bahamas |
4/19/94 |
|
12. Bangladesh |
6/22/94 |
|
13. Barbados |
5/13/94 |
|
14. Belarus |
3/30/94 |
|
15. Belgium |
1/30/95 |
|
16. Belize |
4/29/94 |
|
17. Benin |
6/29/94 |
|
18. Bhutan |
|
|
19. Bolivia |
6/17/94 |
|
20. Botswana |
7/12/94 |
|
21. Brazil |
6/13/94 |
|
22. Bulgaria |
3/22/94 |
|
23. Burkina Faso |
8/24/94 |
|
24. Cambodia |
1/31/95 |
|
25. Cameroon |
10/31/94 |
|
26. Canada |
7/6/94 |
|
27. Cape Verde |
7/18/94 |
|
28. Central African Republic |
3/23/95 |
|
29. Chad |
7/27/94 |
|
30. Chile |
7/1/94 |
|
31. China |
5/16/94 |
|
32. Colombia |
6/28/94 |
|
33. Comoros |
9/5/95 |
|
34. Cook Islands |
5/6/94 |
|
35. Costa Rica |
5/19/94 |
|
36. Côte d'Ivoire |
6/24/94 |
|
37. Cuba |
4/4/94 |
|
38. Croatia |
3/4/94 |
|
39. Czech Republic |
6/30/94 |
|
40. Denmark |
6/9/94 |
|
41. Djibouti |
5/24/94 |
|
42. Dominica |
6/8/94 |
|
43. Dominican Republic |
4/21/94 |
|
44. Ecuador |
6/23/94 |
|
45. Egypt |
6/8/94 |
|
46. El Salvador |
5/20/94 |
|
47. Eritrea |
12/27/95 |
|
48. Estonia |
5/12/94 |
|
49. Ethiopia |
10/27/94 |
|
50. Fiji |
5/10/94 |
|
51. Finland |
6/9/94 |
|
52. FYR of Macedonia |
7/7/94 |
|
53. France |
6/20/94 |
|
54. Gambia |
8/16/94 |
|
55. Georgia |
7/8/94 |
|
56. Germany |
6/23/94 |
|
57. Greece |
5/11/94 |
|
58. Grenada |
4/20/94 |
|
59. Guatemala |
5/20/94 |
|
60. Guinea |
10/17/94 |
|
61. Guyana |
5/12/94 |
|
62. Haiti |
5/10/94 |
|
63. Honduras |
9/6/94 |
|
64. Hungary |
6/22/94 |
|
65. India |
5/12/94 |
|
66. Indonesia |
6/29/94 |
|
67. Iran (IR) |
5/25/94 |
|
68. Ireland |
6/14/94 |
|
69. Israel |
3/19/95 |
|
70. Italy |
6/28/94 |
|
71. Jamaica |
6/29/94 |
|
72. Japan |
6/27/94 |
|
73. Jordan |
5/10/94 |
|
74. Kenya |
5/25/94 |
|
75. Kiribati |
5/10/94 |
|
76. Korea (D.P.R.) |
5/6/94 |
|
77. Korea (Rep) |
5/3/94 |
|
78. Lao (P.D.R.) |
8/2/94 |
|
79. Latvia |
6/27/94 |
|
80. Lebanon |
7/21/94 |
|
81. Lesotho |
6/29/94 |
|
82. Libya |
12/13/94 |
|
83. Lithuania |
5/13/94 |
|
84. Luxembourg |
4/28/95 |
|
85. Madagascar |
7/14/94 |
|
86. Malawi |
2/23/96 |
|
87. Malaysia |
5/4/94 |
|
88. Maldives |
8/25/94 |
|
89. Mali |
7/4/94 |
|
90. Malta |
7/27/94 |
|
91. Marshall Islands |
4/15/94 |
|
92. Mauritania |
5/8/94 |
|
93. Mauritius |
7/4/94 |
|
94. Mexico |
5/17/94 |
|
95. Micronesia (F.S.) |
4/26/94 |
|
96. Moldova |
10/27/95 |
|
97. Mongolia |
4/14/94 |
|
98. Morocco |
6/29/94 |
|
99. Mozambique |
12/27/95 |
|
100. Myanmar |
5/13/94 |
|
101. Nauru |
5/5/94 |
|
102. Nepal |
8/10/94 |
|
103. Netherlands |
6/20/94 |
|
104. New Zealand |
5/18/94 |
|
105. Nicaragua |
5/19/94 |
|
106. Niger |
8/23/94 |
|
107. Nigeria |
7/12/94 |
|
108. Niue |
5/4/94 |
|
109. Norway |
7/1/94 |
|
110. Pakistan |
4/8/94 |
|
111. Panama |
4/7/94 |
|
112. Papua New Guinea |
5/6/94 |
|
113. Paraguay |
2/15/95 |
|
114. Peru |
6/14/94 |
|
115. Philippines |
6/16/94 |
|
116. Poland |
4/18/94 |
|
117. Portugal |
6/17/94 |
|
118. Romania |
7/29/94 |
|
119. Russian Federation |
6/23/94 |
|
120. Saint Lucia |
3/31/94 |
|
121. Saint Vincent and the Grenadines |
5/4/94 |
|
122. Samoa |
3/28/94 |
|
123. Senegal |
4/7/94 |
|
124. Sierra Leone |
9/6/94 |
|
125. Slovak Republic |
11/01/94 |
|
126. Slovenia |
7/12/94 |
|
127. Solomon Islands |
4/16/94 |
|
128. South Africa |
7/6/94 |
|
129. Spain |
6/9/94 |
|
130. Sri Lanka |
5/26/94 |
|
131. St. Kitts and Nevis |
7/25/94 |
|
132. Sudan |
6/14/94 |
|
133. Suriname |
5/12/94 |
|
134. Swaziland |
5/16/94 |
|
135. Sweden |
6/28/94 |
|
136. Switzerland |
7/1/94 |
|
137. Syria |
4/15/96 |
|
138. Tanzania |
3/26/96 |
|
139. Thailand |
6/30/94 |
|
140. Togo |
7/21/94 |
|
141. Tonga |
5/4/94 |
|
142. Trinidad and Tobago |
5/19/94 |
|
143. Tunisia |
5/13/94 |
|
144. Turkey |
7/6/94 |
|
145. Tuvalu |
5/3/94 |
|
146. Uganda |
6/28/94 |
|
147. Ukraine |
6/15/94 |
|
148. United Kingdom |
6/13/94 |
|
149. United States |
6/24/94 |
|
150. Uruguay |
4/22/94 |
|
151. Uzbekistan |
4/5/95 |
|
152. Vanuatu |
5/19/94 |
|
153. Venezuela |
7/1/94 |
|
154. Vietnam |
5/12/94 |
|
155. Yemen |
3/30/94 |
|
156. Zambia |
6/13/94 |
|
157. Zimbabwe |
7/7/94 |
|
Activities |
Pilot Phase |
Co-financing |
GEF |
Co-financing |
Total |
|
|
|
-- |
|
-- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multi-focal with Climate Change Components |
|
Activities |
Pilot Phase |
Co-financing |
GEF |
Co-financing |
Total |
|
|
|
-- |
|
-- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Country |
Project Name |
Amount |
|
I. Pilot Phase Project Financing Preparation |
|
(Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, Russian Federation) |
|
|
|
(Argentina, Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Country |
Project Name |
Amount |
|
II. Project Preparation Financing |
|
(India, Kenya, Morocco) |
|
|
|
(Africa) |
|
|
|
(Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Granada, Guyana, Jamaica, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Trinidad and Tobago) |
|
|
|
(Antigua and Barbuda, Cuba, Grenada, St. Kitts) |
|
|
|
(Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, Senegal) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Country |
Project Name |
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Project Name |
GEF Financing |
Co-financing |
Total |
|
I. GEF Pilot Phase Support for Capacity Building |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Costa Rica, the Gambia, Mexico, Morocco, Poland, Senegal, Tanzania, Uganda, Venezuela) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Lithuania, Vietnam, Zimbabwe) |
|
|
|
|
|
(Ghana, Kenya, Mali, Zimbabwe) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Project Name |
GEF Financing |
Co-financing |
Total |
|
(China, India, Indonesia, Republic of Korea, Mongolia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam) |
|
|
|
|
|
(Algeria, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Project Name |
GEF Financing |
Co-financing |
Total |
|
II. Enabling Activities |
|
(Argentina, Ecuador, Estonia, Hungary, Senegal, Indonesia, Mauritius, Vietnam) |
|
|
|
|
|
(Antigua and Barbuda, Estonia, Cameroon, Pakistan) |
|
|
|
|
|
(Benin, Bolivia, Chad, Cook Islands, Cuba, Ecuador, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Paraguay, Peru, Samoa, Senegal, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Vanuatu) |
|
|
|
|
|
(Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Tuvalu, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Western Samoa) |
|
|
|
|
|
(Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Granada, Guyana, Jamaica, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and Trinidad and Tobago) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Project Name |
GEF Financing |
Co-financing |
Total |
|
II. Enabling Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Country |
Project Name |
GEF Financing |
Co-financing |
Total |
|
Energy Efficiency |
|
(Côte d'Ivoire, Senegal) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Country |
Project Name |
GEF Financing |
Co-financing |
Total |
|
Renewable Energy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Country |
Project Name |
GEF Financing |
Co-financing |
Total |
|
Reducing Costs of low GHG technologies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Project Name |
GEF Financing |
Co-financing |
Total |
|
Short-term Response Measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Country |
Project Name |
GEF Financing |
Co-Financing |
Total |
|
Operational Program No. 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outside Financial Mechanism |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Country |
Project Name |
GEF Financing |
Co-Financing |
Total |
|
Operational Program No. 6 |
|
(India, Kenya, Morocco) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outside Financial Mechanism |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Country |
Project Name |
GEF Financing |
Co-Financing |
Total |
|
Operational Program No. 7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term Response Measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Region |
Project Name |
Focal Areas |
GEF-financing |
Co-financing |
Total |
|
I. Project Preparation Financing |
|
|
|
-- |
|
-- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
(Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela) |
|
-- |
|
-- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
II. Projects |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a This document is reproduced as submitted and without formal editing by the UNFCCC secretariat.
1 The decision designates the GEF, on an interim basis, as the international entity entrusted with the operation of the financial mechanism referred to in Article 11 of the Convention and decides, in accordance with Article 11.4, to review the financial mechanism within four years and take appropriate measures, including a determination of the definitive status of the GEF in the context of the Convention.
2 Decision 9/CP.1, FCCC/CP/1995/7/Add.1.
3 Instrument for the Establishment of the Restructured Global Environment Facility, paragraph 7.
4 Instrument, paragraph 6. The GEF Operational Strategy was adopted in October 1995. The Climate Change chapter of the strategy was developed taking fully into account the guidance received from the Conference of the Parties. The Operational Strategy also states, "The GEF will maintain sufficient flexibility to respond to changing circumstances, including evolving guidance of the Conference of the Parties and experience gained from monitoring and evaluation activities."
5 See in particular FCCC/CP/1996/8, June 27, 1996, Report of the GEF to the Second Session of the Conference of the Parties.
6 Instrument, paragraph 2.
7 Instrument, paragraph 11.
8 This financing was provided through the Project Development and Preparation Facility (PDF)