UNDP GEF Programming Kit on Productive Uses of Renewable Energy by hcj

VIEWS: 9 PAGES: 14

									November 22, 2004

UNDP-GEF Programming Kits

Introduction Objectives Methodology Outputs Budget Generic Outline of a Programming Kit (Draft) Annex I: List of Strategic Priorities Annex II: Outline and Workplan of a Kit for SP CC-4

1

November 22, 2004

UNDP-GEF Programming Kits

Introduction UNDP is responding to the new GEF Strategic Priorities (SP)1 by redirecting its hard and soft pipeline towards these priorities. To better understand and interpret from a UNDP perspective these priorities UNDP has decided to develop Programming Kits. The UNDP-GEF knowledge management (KM) strategy identifies several types of knowledge products and services, each with a specific audience and purpose2:
Knowledge products/ services (a) Human Development Viewpoints (SP-based) (b) Programming Kits (SP-based) Target audience UNDP country office staff Key objective Advocacy: To support UNDP’s advocacy efforts on important upstream, policy issues related to the global environmental conventions. Mainstreaming: To help users understand what is eligible under the GEF strategic priority, and articulate thematic links with relevant UNDP development practice areas. Learning: To provide an electronic discussion forum and allow exchange of non-codified information centered on a particular GEF strategic priority. Learning: To consolidate project learning by distilling and synthesizing GEF project evaluations, so as to improve future practice. Impact: To provide detailed technical guidance on developing and implementing such projects. Mainstreaming: To help users understand and apply standard GEF policies and procedures (incremental cost analysis, M&E, etc.). Learning: To share technical and other findings emanating from active projects. Outreach: To assist UNDP in its outreach activities in the area of global environmental management

UNDP country office staff and project teams, UNDP regional centers.

(c)

Project Learning Networks (SP-based) Lessons Learned Publications (SP-based) Practitioner Guides (SP-based)

Project teams, development practitioners, UNDP country office staff Members of the GEF family, development practitioners, consultants and project teams, UNDP country offices. Development practitioners, project teams/experts engaged in developing and implementing global environment initiatives. UNDP country office staff, consultants, project teams

(d)

(e)

(f) Resource Kits

(g) Project Publications (h) Publications for Outreach

Development practitioners Broad readership of government officials, media, private sector and civil society, Convention Secretariats, other members of the GEF family

As indicated in the above table, the Programming Kits are guides primarily targeted to UNDP Country Office (CO) staff and others involved in programming GEF resources. A key objective of programming kits is to help UNDP COs and their partners in identifying project ideas that fall into both GEF and UNDP mandates. Normally, but not necessarily, the Programming Kits would be prepared as guidance materials related to the GEF SPs.

1 2

Please refer to annex I. Please refer to the document Knowledge Management for the Global Environment: UNDP-GEF Initiatives (July 2004).

2

November 22, 2004

The Programming Kits are an important contribution to building internal capacity and sharing knowledge in line with UNDP’s KM and learning strategy. While clearly identifying GEF’s strategy in the area, the Programming Kits will build upon UNDP’s and UNDP-GEF’s achievements and comparative advantages. In keeping with the GEF mandate, programming will continue to emphasize innovation. It is expected that the Kits will lead to more effective integration of UNDP and GEF efforts at country level and, consequently, the formulation of new and innovative project concepts taking full advantage of GEF programming opportunities while at the same time integrating these concepts into UNDP’s development efforts3. What is presented here is a generic outline of a Programming Kit to guide the teams that are busy developing the Kits and to ensure a minimum of coherence between them. Deviations from the generic outline are encouraged as long as the basic structure is being maintained. Objectives The primary objective is to create enhanced capacity of the UNDP-GEF team, especially in Country Offices, to programme GEF resources under the GEF strategic priorities. One of the Programme Officers’ responsibility is to identify good investments for the country programme, and to monitor that these are afterwards implemented according to plan. They need guidance primarily to respond to the following questions:    Why? – Why is a specific sector or type of project important and how is it relevant to UNDP priorities (poverty reduction, governance, etc.). What? – What are UNDP’s comparative advantages in the sector and what are the kinds of projects and activities that would be eligible for GEF funding. How? – How to go about programming the specific kinds of interventions into the country programme, how to go about funding, how to calculate incremental costs in specific sectors, etc.

Answering these questions does not require the kind of specific technical guidance that project developers or managers would need. However, answering these questions is essential to ensure that GEF resources are effectively programmed and integrated into UNDP’s overall programme at the country level. They will also be helpful in presenting this vision to clients in countries, as well as other donors and partners. The Programming Kits should be based on lessons learned regarding good practices. However, they are not the studies that produce or document these lessons. Normally, where UNDP-GEF can draw upon extensive lessons, Lessons Learned publications should be produced as a precursor to the Programming Kits so that the lessons can be fed into the latter. In cases where we do not yet have sufficient experience to rely upon, we may use lessons from other sources. The Programming Kits should make reference to lessons learned in a highly condensed form. Furthermore, the lessons learned/good practices would pertain primarily to the questions outlined above, rather than technical how-to manuals for project developers and practitioners.

3

An example of a Programming Kit outline and workplan for SP 4 is attached as annex II.

3

November 22, 2004

Methodology The methodology to be followed when developing a Programming Kit could be summarized as follows:  A UNDP-GEF staff with expertise in the given topic should have the lead responsibility (hereinafter referred to as Task Manager).  A small core group of between 3-5 persons from UNDP-GEF, BDP/EEG, BRSP and RBx/COs should contribute and assist the Task Manager. Such assistance should include drafting of sections of the kit, identifying project experiences and outside expertise, contributing with strategic advice and reviewing and commenting on draft versions. It is important to note that a firm time commitment is needed from each member of the core group. The members should be recruited by the Task Manager keeping in mind both a healthy regional balance and balance between the three groups (UNDP-GEF, BDP/EEG, RBx/ COs).  Around the core group a broader circle of advisors could be needed to direct the effort towards its objective. The advisory group could encompass other UNDP colleagues (including from other Practice Areas) who cannot dedicate a lot of time towards the effort but could offer inputs at different stages. The main task of the advisor group is to offer experience and substantive inputs at critical stages of the process.  A clear and realistic timeframe should be established for completing the Kit. Three to six months seems to be an adequate timeframe. A workplan should also be put together to structure and sequence the work in a transparent and efficient way.  The Task Manager should convene meetings of the core group and share drafts at appropriate intervals. These meetings in most cases will be held through teleconferences. Members of the advisor group can be invited to join these teleconferences. Otherwise the Task Manager will interact on a bilateral basis with the advisors.  It is important to stress that this cannot be an effort carried out by UNDP-GEF staff alone. BDP/EEG through their HQ staff and/or outposted environment policy advisors need to be mobilized to participate in developing the Kits. Close cooperation must be developed with the regional programmes. Equally important is the ownership and participation of RB HQ staff or staff from the RSCs and COs. Particularly tapping into the experience of CO staff should be encouraged. This could be done by identifying 1 or 2 interested and experienced individuals in a CO or through existing mechanisms of communication such as CO environment networks and SREC mailing lists.  Most of the work will be based on the practical knowledge and project experiences of the participants and the analytical work presented in a Lessons Learned publication. If the budget allows a workshop/ expert meeting could be convened to discuss the draft version of the kit and generate new insights.  A Programming Kit comprises a a main body (10 to 25 pages) and pertinent Technical Annexes. The main body of text will help to understand what is eligible under the specific GEF SP, and articulate thematic links with UNDP practice areas and service lines. The Technical Annexes provide more indepth guidance material on the topic.  The basic steps to be followed are summarized below: o Identify Task Manager, core group and advisors o Develop outline, workplan and budget

4

November 22, 2004

o o o o o Outputs

Analyze the relevant Lessons Learned publication or, in its absence, similar documentation from other sources Produce a first draft Test the usefulness of the draft in a country that is developing a relevant GEF proposal Discuss the draft in an expert meeting and/or circulate for comments Finalize the Programming Kit, including printing and translation

The main output will be a web-based Programming Kit that will contain the main text and hyperlinked annexes. The Programming Kit will not be a hard-copy publication, as it is a living document that may require frequent updating when GEF priorities change. However, it will be posted on the web in a PDF format so that it can be easily printed in a clear form. Additional outputs to be developed will include PowerPoint presentations that can be used to explain the contents of the Programming Kit. Budget It will be critical to monitor the exact expenditures invested in the production of the Programming Kit. A key requirement for the Task Manager is to prepare and monitor the budget for the project both in terms of staff time (Task Manager, core group and advisors) as well as direct cash costs (workshop, experts, printing). This financial management by-product will enable UNDP-GEF to clearly monitor its KM budget and expenditures. While each Programming Kit will have its individual budget, as a rule of thumb it can be estimated that the Task Manager is expected to contribute 10% of her/his time over a 3-6 month period. Each member of the core group should commit between 510% of their time. If cash is needed to recruit experts or hold a workshop GCF funds or regional programme funds might be available upon request. Fund request should be jointly prepared with EEG core policy advisers and regional programme advisers. Other smaller costs (such as printing or travel) could be absorbed by the UNDP-GEF administrative budget.

5

November 22, 2004

Generic Outline of a Programming Kit (Draft)

I. Foreword: Acknowledgements; Fit into UNDP and UNDP-GEF KM efforts II. Introduction: Content of the Kit; Audience; Purpose III. Context and rationale: a. The importance of the SP and type of intervention to development and global environment. b. The related GEF focal area and general issues relevant to the specific SP c. Link to sustainable development (social equity, economic growth and environmental protection), broader policy issues and links to the achievement of MDGs. d. Relevance to UNDP and UNDP’s comparative advantages of e. Integrating SP projects into the broader national and local development context: f. Planning level (defined as appropriate, e.g. regional, state, provincial, municipal), g. Private or public initiatives, h. Urban and/or rural development strategies, plans, programs and budgets including PRSPs i. Integration into ongoing development/ environment initiatives are relevant especially as these set out priorities for action and outline areas of baseline funding and opportunities. IV. Eligibility issues: What is/is not eligible under GEF, both generically and with regard to the specific SP? Requires clear definition of the SP. a. Explanation and definition of the SP, including GEF definition of the SP. b. Brief matrix with examples of GEF eligible and non-eligible types of project components/ activities/ technologies. V. Lessons learned from SP X projects (both UNDP and non-UNDP), or projects with a SP X components that could be expanded/ replicated a. Summary of the relevant Lessons Learned document or, in its absence, that of external materials. b. What has UNDP done and learnt so far in the area of the SP? The SP can best be integrated into specific types of projects. Who has been funding these projects, relative importance and differences between regions and countries? c. Other relevant guidance as to, for example:  (What) are the(re) adverse implications of SP programmes/ components?  What other donors are doing to make co-financing opportunities and partnerships more easily to identify. VI. UNDP-GEF programming niche: Interpretation of the specific GEF SP from a UNDP perspective; a. How to mainstream GEF into UNDP programming and vice versa. Where should we be proactive and encourage SP X-type projects in the coming years?

6

November 22, 2004

b. Fit into practice areas and service lines? Strategic vision for the SP projects: Potential linkages with UNDP practice area(s) (Energy and Environment, as well as others), including linkages to the WEHAB priority areas of UNDP. A concise matrix showing the direct/indirect links to each MDG may also be needed. Discussion of policy interventions, which may focus on supporting sector/macro-economic development that will have direct impact on national development. VII. Annotated bibliography: Resources, articles, websites etc. VIII. Technical Annexes: a. How to prepare a Logical Framework for projects in the specific SP. b. Guidelines and sample M&E indicators for the SP c. Guidelines and sample calculation of incremental costs

7

November 22, 2004 Annex I: UNDP Service Lines and GEF Strategic Priorities
UNDP Service Line SL 3.1 Frameworks and Strategies for Sustainable Development SL 3.5 Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity GEF Strategic Priority Capacity building CB-1 CB-2 Biodiversity BD-1 BD-2 BD-3 BD-4

Enabling Activities (climate change and biodiversity) Cross-cutting Capacity Building Catalyzing Sustainability of Protected Areas Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Production Landscapes and Sectors Capacity Building for the Implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety Generation and Dissemination of Best Practices for Addressing Current and Emerging Biodiversity Issues Transformation of Markets for High Volume Products and Processes Increased Access to Local Sources of Financing for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Power Sector Policy Frameworks Supportive of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Productive Uses of Energy Efficiency Global Market Aggregation and National Innovation for Emerging Technologies Modal Shifts in Urban Transport and Clean Vehicle/Fuel Technologies Short Term Measures Catalyzing Financial Resources for Implementation of Agreed Actions Expand Global Coverage with Capacity Building Foundational Work Undertake Innovative Demonstrations for Reducing Contaminants and Addressing Water Scarcity

SL 3.3 Access to Sustainable Energy Services

Climate Change CC-1 CC-2 CC-3 CC-4 CC-5 CC-6 CC-7 International Waters IW-1 IW-2 IW-3

SL 3.2 Effective Water Governance

SL 3.6 National/ sectoral Policy and Planning to Control Emissions of ODS and POPs

SL 3.4 Sustainable Land Management to Combat Desertification and Land Degradation SL 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5

Ozone Depletion OZ-1 Methyl Bromide Reduction Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) POP-1 Targeted Capacity Building POP-2 Implementation of Policy/Regulatory Reforms and Investments POP-3 Demonstration of Innovative and Cost-Effective Technologies Sustainable Land Management SLM-1 Targeted Capacity Building SLM-2 Implementation of Innovative and Indigenous Sustainable Land Management Practices Integrated Ecosystem Management IEM-1 Integrated Approach to Ecosystem Management

8

Version 3 September 29, 2004

Annex II: UNDP/GEF Programming Kit on Productive Uses of Renewable Energy Draft Outline and Work Plan
Objective To develop a Programming Kit on Productive Uses of Renewable Energy to enhance the capacity of the UNDP-GEF team, especially in the UNDP Country Offices to programme GEF resources under GEF Climate Change strategic priority 4. The Programming Kit comprises a main body and pertinent Technical Annexes. The main text will help to understand what is eligible under GEF Climate Change strategic priority 4, and articulate thematic links with UNDP practice areas and service lines. The Technical Annexes provide more in-depth guidance material on the topic. Draft Outline of Programming Kit 0) Foreword: Content of the Kit 1) Context and rationale: a. Climate change and general energy issues b. Energy as a key link to the realization of sustainable development (social equity, economic growth and environmental protection). Energy policy and sustainable energy development linkages (energy access, energy consumption, poverty linkages etc). Briefly describe direct and indirect links to the achievement of MDGs4. Productive uses are triggered by the energy services (and not technologies) being made available. While the toolkit will be exclusively focused on GEF SP4 related issues, starting on this point is needed to clarify what and what not this toolkit offers. (Consider eligibility for projects that clearly focus on poor people’s energy needs, or on the environmental aspects of energy with social concerns? In this regard, should such project cover both rural and urban poor?) c. Integrating SP 4 projects into the broader national and local development context:  planning level (defined as appropriate, e.g. regional, state, provincial, municipal),  private or public initiatives,  urban and rural development (focus in particular on rural infrastructure, education, industry, agricultural and commercial sector) strategies, plans, programs and budgets,  Integration into ongoing development initiatives are relevant especially as these make references to the productive sectors and set out priorities for action and outline areas of baseline funding and opportunities. These distinct links or integration efforts very rarely happen in an effective manner in UNDP-GEF projects; however the chances of sustainability are much higher if such links/integration could be done. The integration aspects should be the “red line” through all sub-chapters. 2) Eligibility issues: What is/is not eligible under GEF? Requires clear definition of productive uses (productive vs. consumptive/residential).

4

Energy for the Poor, DFID 2002

9

Version 3 September 29, 2004

a. Explanation and definition of productive uses of renewable energy: renewable energy as a means for spurring economic development and generating income. GEF definition of SP4. Clarify distinction between consumptive and productive use, also between income generating use/activity and productive use/activity. Briefly mention sources/modes of energy: if delivered as electricity from decentralized mini/micro grids and standalone systems, otherwise mechanical. Energy from different energy sources e.g. solar PV, wind, hydro, biomass-biogas, possibly in hybrid combinations. Mention sectors or types of activities as productive uses listed. b. Brief matrix w examples of productive uses (FAO summary note and other docs have such a list) c. Brief matrix w examples of GEF eligible and non eligible types of components/activities 3) Lessons learned of PU programmes (both UNDP and non-UNDP), or RE projects with PU components that could be expanded/replicated a. Summary of relevant lessons learned (e.g., coverage and target groups, specific objectives, project cost, benefits targeted and achieved; social, economic and environmental benefits; energy savings achieved and GHG emissions reduced; financing and delivery models, policy development, etc) b. What has UNDP done and learnt so far in the area of PU? PU as a component in these types of projects: Area Based Development Programs, Micro Finance Projects (UNCDF), Local Development Projects, Social Mobilization projects, Energy Projects, other project/program approaches? Who has been funding these projects, relative importance and differences btw regions and countries? c. This section should also provide guidance as to, for example:  Analysis if particular delivery models are more or less appropriate for PU.  Micro enterprise aspects (e.g. cottage industry), what is the application and use of energy? Linkages to territorial development and rural development.  (What) are the(re) adverse implications of PU programmes/components?  Explore what other donors are doing to make co-financing opportunities and partnerships more easily to identify.  What productive activities can be cost-effectively supported by RE  What factors shall be considered in investing on the development of the RE resource for supporting such activities. (E.g. will the usual economic/financial feasibility parameters of NPV, IRR, Payback Period, etc be used?)  Approaches and methodologies for cross-sectoral project development  Will the RE resource be better used for household energy needs (consumptive) instead for productive uses, or will a combination of household use and productive uses be more practical/cost-effective?  Local Business Development, Access to Markets, Micro Finance (MF): Impacts of access to markets and access to micro-finance (business development finance and support to entrepreneurs) on PU programmes; importance of demand-driven and technology neutral choice of energy source while also consider differences of electric vs. mechanical energy. Feasibility studies guidelines. Perhaps consider if the BD publication on local business development could have relevant information/sections for this SP, possibly supplemented by additional information as well as relevant info/publications on MF from UNDCF or other sources. 4) “UNDP/GEF programming niche”: a. Interpretation of GEF strategic priority 4 from a UNDP perspective; How to mainstream GEF into UNDP programming and vice versa. Where should we be

10

Version 3 September 29, 2004

proactive and encourage “productive use of RE”-type projects in the coming years? b. Fit into practice areas and service lines? Strategic vision for productive uses of renewable energy projects: Potential linkages with UNDP (e.g. poverty) practice area(s) Potential linkages with UNDP – a chart presenting the linkages of RE to the WEHAB priority areas of UNDP is suggested. A concise matrix showing the direct/indirect links of RE utilization to each MDG may also be needed. Discussion of policy interventions, which may focus on supporting sector/macroeconomic development that will have direct impact on national development, rather than promoting/devising policies to support renewables dissemination 5) Annotated bibliography: Other resources, articles, websites etc that is already available 6) Technical Annexes, e.g.: a. Guidance on preparing a Logical Framework for SP4 projects b. Guidelines and sample M&E indicators for productive uses projects (both energy/emissions and social/development impacts) c. Guidelines and sample calculation of incremental costs Work Plan 0. Agree on Programming Kit outline and terminology a. Draft overall outline circulated (SN, v) b. Short-list of key references for background reading (SN, v) c. Discussion and agreement of outline (more in-depth discussion on need for and content of various technical annexes) and working language, agreement on lead in /support to technical annexes, external expertise identified (All) See minutes from meeting September 28, 2004 for details. d. Guidance from HQ on specific requirements for Programming Kits ( /JIU) e. Explore possibilities for workshop in December 2004. (SN, MK) Compile an annotated list of data and information sources for productive use of RE. Topic 5 in Programming Kit 2. (SN) Ongoing

1.

Analyze existing lessons on productive uses of RE and how productive uses of RE fit under UNDP and GEF programming. Ensure to include work by FAO, WB, UNDP papers etc. Involve UNDP expert(s) from other UNDP practice areas (as well as energy) , as necessary. Inform Topic 1, 2 and 3, 4 in Programming Kit (SN lead) Ongoing

Early stage: a. Agreement of focus and general outline of technical annexes Later stage: b. Input of regional experiences (MK, OP, MS) c. Involve experts on specific issues and/or technical annexes (resources permitting) a. 3. Produce draft reports; analyzing existing lessons from experiences up to date with productive uses of RE, recommending good practice of identifying, formulating and

11

Version 3 September 29, 2004

implementing productive uses projects. lead) 4.

(SN

Conduct a global workshop to discuss and reflect upon the draft report(s), get practitioners experience and feedback, and promote horizontal learning among UNDP COs on the subject. (funds permitting) Finalize draft report(s) based on recommendations from global workshop. Extensive review process needed to replace workshop (SN lead) Develop and finalize the products: the main text of Programming Kit and Technical Annexes (SN lead) Publicize and translate the Programming Kit (SN lead)

5.

6.

7.

Roles and Responsibilities Core group: Martin Krause (Task manager) Noel Soriano (Input according to learning plan and as time permits) Olav Lundstol (Input according to learning plan and as time permits) Sara Nordström (Input: 50% of full time during 9 months) Expert advisory team: o Kamal Rijal, Greg Woodsworth and Leida Mercado from UNDP EEG/BDP and SURF to act as key expert advisors. o Andy Yager, Minoru Takada and Brian Dawson from EEG to be involved as necessary o Include a few targeted COs (tbd) in the study for key input on CO specific/cross-sectoral issues. As this is the first Programming Kit to be developed it will require ongoing interaction with and guidance from HQ.

12

Version 3 September 29, 2004

Tentative time line

Month Activity 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

September

October -----------------------------

November ---------------------------

December ---------------

January --------------

February --------------

March --------------

April

May

--------------------------------------------------------

13

Version 3 September 29, 2004

14


								
To top