Capacity Building of National Designated Authority (NDA) and Preparation of Country Strategic Framework - Belize, The Bahamas and Guyana

Learning Paper

11th February 2020

Table of Contents1. Introduction.............................................................................................................................4

2. Learning: Success factors and challenges........................................................................6

2.1 Succes factors.................................................................................................................6

2.2 Challenges......................................................................................................................8

3. Recommendations................................................................................................................11

4. Further reading.....................................................................................................................13

5. References.............................................................................................................................13

Acknowledgments Founded in 2004, Acclimatise is a specialist advisory and analytics company providing world-class expertise in climate change adaptation and risk management. We bridge the gap be-tween the latest scientific developments and real-world decision-making, helping our clients to introduce cost-effective measures to prepare for the challenges that climate change will bring. With experience on more than 400 projects with over 120 clients in over 85 countries, Acclimatise’s work is helping to shape the emerging climate finance architecture by utilising the skills and experience gained from advising regional agencies and national governments, as well as some of the largest global businesses, to develop and implement adaptation strategies. Acclimatise supports its clients to access, manage and channel the necessary financial resources for the implementation of climate adaptation strategies, programmes and projects. Acclimatise is accredited as a private sector observer organisation to the GCF.

We would like to extend our gratitude to Donneil Cain at the Caribbean Commu-nity Climate Change Centre (CCCCC) who provided valuable input and feedback.

AE Accredited Entity

BNCCC Belize National Climate Change Committee

CCCCC Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre

CEO Chief Executive Officer

CTCN Climate Technology Centre & Network

DAE Direct Access Entity

DP Delivery Partner

EE Executing Entity

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

GCF Green Climate Fund

GGGI Global Green Growth Institute

MEDP Ministry of Economic Development and Petroleum

MoEH Ministry of Environment and Housing

MoTP Minister of State within the Ministry of the Presidency

MRLF Monitoring Reporting and Learning Framework

NDA National Designated Authority

OCC Office of Climate Change

PMO Project Management Office

ToR Terms of Reference

UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization

Acronyms

1. Introduction Through the Readiness and Preparatory Support Programme (Readiness Programme), the Green Climate Fund (GCF) provides resources to strengthen country ownership, by build-ing the institutional capacities of NDAs or focal points and direct access entities (DAEs) to efficiently engage with the fund (see Eligible activities). NDAs can directly benefit from the funding or select international, regional, national and sub-national, public, private or non-governmental institutions, that are well-versed in readiness activities along with their delivery partners (DPs). In the Caribbean region, the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (CCCCC) was selected as a DP by the NDAs of Guyana, Belize, The Bahamas and Saint Lucia. Acclimatise was commissioned to implement aspects of readiness support projects in three of these countries - namely Belize (2018 – 2019), The Bahamas (2018 – 2019) and Guyana (2016 – 2017), and prepare their country strategic frameworks. This support, as seen in Figure 1, had three main objectives: (i) To strengthen the institutional capacities of the NDA to access and deliver Green Climate Fund (GCF) funding; (ii) To develop opera-tional guidelines for the effective engagement of the NDA with the GCF; and (iii) To prepare a country strategic framework engagement with the GCF, including a country programme (see Box 1 below). Underpinning these three objectives an awareness raising and com-munication strategy was developed, and relevant communication products were delivered.

Figure 1: Overview of the key deliverables of the readiness support

Recognising the importance of documenting the lessons learnt during the implementation of these readiness projects, this paper provides an overview of the learning outcomes of this readiness support provided by the CCCCC. In particular, this paper aims to identify lessons learned, focusing on the success factors and challenges identified throughout the process. It also includes recommendations to capitalise on this experience and inform future readiness efforts to access the GCF by the CCCCC and other GCF readiness DPs, the GCF Secretariat and the NDAs in other countries in the Caribbean region or globally. This paper was developed based on the experiences of the Acclimatise teams, CCCCC and NDAs. It also acknowledges key differences and similarities across the three countries in terms of the convening power of the NDA, the institutional landscape, changes in the institutional arrangements alongside the level of baseline capacity and awareness on GCF of the NDA and national stakeholders.

4

Box 1: Country programme for engagment with the GCF

A country programme represents a country’s engagement strategy with the GCF, building on existing climate change and development frameworks and poli-cies, such as the national and sectoral climate strategies and action plans, the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to the Paris Agreement, as well as national and sectoral development or sustainable development frameworks.

It highlights priority sectors and measures for adaptation and mitigation, includ-ing a pipeline of projects and programmes to be submitted by the country for funding by the GCF. These projects and programmes must meet the fund cri-teria and also be aligned with national priorities, economically feasible and are expected to have transformational impacts. It also points out institutional, technical, financial, and capacity gaps for which GCF resources are needed.

5

2. Learning: Success factors and challengesThis section presents a set of key lessons learnt focusing on the success factors and challenges identified throughout the GCF readiness support in Belize, Guyana and The Bahamas. The identified lessons learnt will be relevant to both the CCCCC act-ing as the GCF readiness DP and NDAs in the Caribbean region seeking GCF readi-ness support. In addition, these lessons could apply to a wider audience, including NDAs and GCF DPs in other countries, as well as development partners and the GCF.

2.1. Success factors

A set of seven success factors have been identified through this GCF readiness support implemented across the three Caribbean countries:

1. Particular attention to capacity building activities was essential to build a more informed dialogue amongst stakeholders: A three-day training event was conducted in each country to build the capacity of the NDA and selected national stakeholders in re-viewing and appraising (1) concept notes/funding proposals that are in line with national priorities and GCF requirements and (2) potential applications for nomination of candidate national entities for accreditation under the GCF’s direct access modality. These are two important roles and responsibilities of the NDA, which require an enhanced understanding of GCF operational modalities and requirements. Across all three countries, training participants mainly those representing potential Executing Entities (EEs), found the sessions on the GCF project requirements particularly useful as they provided a better understanding of the type of projects the GCF is willing to fund and the key evaluation criteria of the fund. Stakehold-ers in the process of or interested in applying for direct access to GCF particularly enjoyed the sessions to help them understand the requirements and complexities, opportunities and challenges associated with the process of becoming accredited under the GCF. In Belize, participants said they would like to gain more knowledge of how to develop concept notes and funding proposals to submit to the GCF. In Guyana, participants said they would need further support on the specialised fiduciary standards, grants and co-financing requirements; and, the differentiated responsibilities between the NDA and AEs with regards to the approval of GCF projects and programmes. The training also allowed the NDA and potential AEs and EEs to share views, discuss challenges and provide suggestions, hence contributing to a more informed dialogue among stakeholders engaged in or interested in accessing the GCF.

2. Prior early engagement activities helped mobilise stakeholders in the countries: A series of engagement activities took place prior to the readiness support and were critical to raise awareness and mobilise actors in the region. These included the GCF’s Empower-ing Direct Access Entities Workshops, held in 2017 and 2018, and GCF Regional Structural Dialogues among others. With CCCCC as delivery partner, Belize hosted the GCF regional dialogue in June 2017 convening representatives from countries across the Caribbean region to advance collaboration with the GCF and accelerate access to its resources. This contrib-uted to better understanding of the GCF and its operational modalities in most countries; even if the understanding of the GCF and its operational modalities is not homogeneous across the region. For example, during the implementation of the aforementioned readiness projects in Belize and The Bahamas, which were approved around the same time, it was evident that the national stakeholders in Belize had a better understanding of the GCF and raise awareness of the GCF when compared to the stakeholders in Bahamas. In the case of Guyana, it received readiness support from the GCF in 2016 – one year before the first structural dialogue - and was the first country in the Caribbean region to receive GCF readiness support, which served as the basis for actions implemented in Belize and The Bahamas. Similar to many countries in the early years of GCF operation, there was limited prior knowledge about the GCF among the NDA and national stakeholders of Guyana. Although Guyana’s readiness project was the first to catalyse awareness about the GCF in that country, this ‘first-mover’ has not translated into an advantage over Belize or The Bahamas as the GCF has evolved and continues to evolve re-quiring first movers (national stakeholders and AEs) to update their knowledge about the GCF.

6

7

3. Coordination at the ministerial-level was critical for concerted actions: In countries where the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) focal point is not the GCF’s focal point, it is important that there is a concerted effort to coordinate actions for the delivery of readiness projects and more broadly climate action, by taking into account the country’s system for planning, project formulation and resource mobilisation as funds are mobilised for climate action. If the NDA does not have in-house expertise in public finance or a deep understanding of the economic programming requirements of the country, it was critical to involve an external public finance expert in the readiness support, in particular with respect to the development of the no-objection procedure. The latter aims to provide an effective, transparent, fair and impartial process for reviewing and approving projects and programmes that are presented to the GCF for endorsement by the NDA. In Guyana, the office with responsibility over climate change, which is both the UNFCCC Focal Point and NDA, resides within the Office of the President. This allows for ease of collaboration between the office with responsibility for climate change and the office of public finance as both fall under the purview of the President. In Belize, the NDA is the ministry in charge of economic planning and the UNFCCC Focal Point is within the Ministry of Environment; whereas, in Bahamas, the NDA and the UNFCCC focal point is in the Ministry of Housing and Environ-ment. Despite the NDA and UNFCCC Focal Points not residing in the same ministries in Belize and The Bahamas, both countries deem it important to integrate the expertise of Public Finance into the initial no-objection procedure so as to provide guidance on, and allow for the identification of, entry points and veto players for the no-objection procedure. In Belize, the NDA being the Ministry in charge of finance and planning was critical to ensure the no-objection procedure is closely aligned with the existing country system for planning, project formulation and resource mobilisation; and not create a standalone process for GCF projects. Further, it is still critical that the NDA and UNFCCC focal point coordinate, dialogue and foster collaborations with all stakeholders, especially if both are not under the same ministry.

4. The NDA’s ability to mobilising stakeholders helped reach a more diverse group of stakeholders: The convening power of the NDA was important to ensure that a wider range of stakeholders were engaged throughout the readiness activities, especially among the private sector. In Belize, participants from the private sector represented approximately 23% of the participants at both the NDA training and the prioritisation workshops, whilst representing 16% of the participants at the validation workshop. This may be explained by the NDA in Belize being the ministry in charge of economic planning. In addition, when compared to The Bahamas, at the start of the readiness project there was better aware-ness among all key national stakeholders on the GCF, including from the private sector. In addition, this may be further explained by Belize being among the countries that are the most progressive in the region and globally in terms of environmental policies and efforts.

5. Outreach and awareness-raising were useful in reaching a wider audience of non-experts: Outreach and awareness-raising activities via traditional and social media were undertaken in all three countries. Their success was dependent on communicating complex information about the GCF and its operational modalities in an engaging way by using visu-ally striking infographics, news articles, policy briefs, podcasts and short videos, as well as including on-the-ground human-centred stories that can help non-expert groups better un-derstand the narratives, rather than lengthy textual descriptions. The characteristics of the outreach products were: (i) Design : Must be clear, clean and visually striking; (ii) Tone and style: Written in an accessible, journalistic style, with a focus on communicating key informa-tion through narrative development; and (iii) Content: The modalities of operation of the GCF, including its access modalities and project requirements, were placed in context of the considerable challenges for prospective EEs and AEs. With tailored design, tone and style and content, the developed communication products can be further disseminated via vari-ous media. These products are also easily transferable to different localities, countries and regions. For instance, this helped with managing expectations of potential candidate organi-sations interested in seeking accreditation, by clearing mentioning the key challenges faced by previous applicants, such as the lengthy and resource-intensive accreditation process.

6. Handholding of potential project proponents was required: One output of this readi-ness support was the development of a country programme, which identified the country’s prioritised project ideas. During the process of developing these country programmes it be-came evident that further capacity building and technical support will be required to enable potential project proponents to identify, document and prepare concept notes and funding proposals; which could be translated into a robust pipeline of GCF projects for the country. Adopting a handholding approach, the project team supported project proponents to better articulating their project ideas to respond to GCF requirements (e.g. climate impact and para-digm shift). In The Bahamas, the project team had to consider innovative ways of interacting with potential project proponents, because of a lack of investment-grade projects. One-to-one meetings were combined with the circulation of a questionnaire among relevant stakeholders to identify potential projects and programmes that could be relevant for GCF funding, with a view to discuss them with the NDA and as part of a dedicated multi-stakeholder prioritisation exercise. This allowed the project team to identify the project ideas or concepts that had not emerged at earlier stages of the readiness support and were not known to the NDA, collect critical information for the prioritisation process and elaborate the first country programme. Further, CCCCC followed up with a project development workshop, which advanced some of the project ideas identified in The Bahamas’ country programme. In Belize, the organisation of an “informal roundtable” by CCCCC and the NDA with selected stakeholders was an effective way to collect missing information about prioritised projects and programmes that are required for the elaboration of the first country programme (as per the GCF template). In Guyana, after the validation workshop, the project team held individual meetings with the proponents of the prioritised projects and programmes to discuss and provide guidance on the potential next steps required for them to develop and submit concept notes/funding proposals to the GCF.

7. Using a participatory approach helped build stakeholders’ buy-in to define the country funding priorities: Early stakeholder engagement with all relevant participants regarding the priority-setting exercises, allowed for addressing stakeholder needs, in-terests and concerns in a timely manner. Early engagement can also counteract the fear of change, which can often lead to objection or conflict. It was vital in securing buy-in from stakeholders across various sectors and locations in each country, which often had varying interests and priorities. This was confirmed by the positive feedback received af-ter the consultative workshops conducted in each country. In particular, the validation workshop was particularly effective in facilitating the review of and collection of feed-back on the country first country programme in a participatory manner, by circulating the draft country programme to key national stakeholders in advance of the workshop.

8

2.2. Challenges

A set of five key challenges were faced when delivering GCF readiness support in the three Caribbean countries:

1. Human capacity was a major constraint: At the beginning of the implementation of the readiness project, the NDAs in The Bahamas and Guyana had limited knowledge and understanding of GCF’s operational modalities, which contribute to initial challenges related to implementation; however, the impact of insufficient human capacity within the NDA’s of-fice, in all three countries, was a major constraint in implementing the readiness activi-ties. For instance, Belize’s NDA, CEO in the Ministry of Economic Development (acting as the NDA) was supported by only one technical officer, who acts as the GCF Readiness project Focal Point. The shortage in staff means that only one full time and one part time staff was dedicated to NDA-related matters in Belize. This hindered access to/sharing of information as well as, the coordination of consultative events with national stakeholders under the readiness activities. In addition, the NDAs in Belize and The Bahamas do not currently have a communication team in house (see Awareness-raising activities) and dedi-cated website (see Belize and Bahamas Website), while the communication channels used to raise awareness among national stakeholders on the GCF, its operational modalities and GCF-funded country activities, are mostly through workshops or other physical events, rather than via social media (e.g. Facebook) and traditional media (e.g. radio, newspaper and TV).

It was found that social and traditional media are more effective in reaching a wid-er audience of non-experts in the civil society, private sector and vulnerable com-munities. More broadly, staying up-to-date on new GCF developments was a sig-nificant challenge faced by all the NDAs that are often relying on the support of CCCCC and/or international AEs for strategic and technical guidance on GCF matters.

2. There was limited representation of certain stakeholder groups during the con-sultation processes: The types of non-governmental stakeholders (indigenous peoples, women’s associations, private sector etc.) engaged during the readiness support are largely a reflection of the pre-existing networks and relationships of the NDA. In Guyana and The Bahamas, there was in particular limited representativeness of the private sector, which may be further explained that the NDAs in Guyana and The Bahamas, being the Ministry or Office in charge of climate change or the environment, have limited or no experience in engag-ing with the private sector. To date, climate discussions inside and outside official climate negotiations have had surprisingly little business engagement. Yet, the business commu-nity is a key partner in achieving low carbon and climate resilient development, by making available their ingenuity, skills and financial resources. In addition, while women’s and in-digenous peoples’ associations in Belize were invited to participate, they were underrepre-sented in the course of the consultations for the elaboration of the first country programme. This may have adverse consequences in terms of their engagement downstream in the sub-sequent design, financing and implementation phases of GCF projects and programmes.

3. The timeframe and budget for the delivery of the readiness support was not ade-quate: Frequent changes in GCF policies and procedures, lengthy feedback time, as well as uncertainties linked to ongoing country institutional changes meant that a contract extension were required in all countries. However, while this also meant additional resources required by the consultant team, contract extensions were not supported by additional budget. For instance, the ongoing institutional makeover of the Belize National Climate Change Commit-tee (BNCCC) affected the project timeline, requiring to repeatedly update in the Stocktake Report relevant content on the institutional context. Such delays had knock-on effects for the preparation of other deliverables dependent on the Stocktake Report, including the NDA Toolkit/Manual, and the set of outreach and awareness- raising products. On one side, this led to multiple changes in the set-up of the no-objection procedure while on the other, the review of relevant deliverables by the NDA was delayed due to uncertainties linked to the ongoing institutional developments. More generally, multiple rounds of review were often re-quested by CCCCC for the same deliverables, requiring more working days than originally budgeted. This was also exacerbated by a lengthy response time from the GCF in review-ing and providing feedback on the deliverables. This in turn led to delays in payment of invoices. It should be noted that, as per the original contract, all the payments are subject to deliverables being acceptable to the CCCCC and the MEDP, while the GCF’s sign-off is not mentioned in the contract. In some cases, GCF comments were received after all consulta-tion and validation processes were completed in-country, and the country programme was validated by the NDA and all key national stakeholders. Despite the value of the comments, it was not possible to integrate them at such a late stage due to time and budget constraints.

4. There was a lack of investment-grade projects at the country level: At the time of writ-ing (August 2019), in the Caribbean region there were only three national projects approved by the GCF in Barbados, Belize and Grenada (see Approved projects), alongside two multi-country projects being implemented by IDB and the Department of Environment of the Gov-ernment of Antigua and Barbuda (see DOE ATG) for a total of $324,350 (with $176,450 in GCF funding, see GCF funding). Developing bankable projects is challenging for developing coun-tries that struggle with the complexities of completing funding applications and paying the upfront costs associated with funding proposal preparation. High project development costs are often linked to the high level of due diligence required. With limited human resources and capacity, these capacity constraints and challenges are often exacerbated in small island states such as in the Caribbean. Access to data is also often mentioned by countries as a sig-nificant cost factor in project identification and preparation. AEs are increasingly requesting detailed (quantitative) data and analysis to support projects, even at the concept note stage.

9

10

This is particularly relevant for building the climate rationale of a project, by determining the additionality and concessionality of finance that can be accessed (GCF, 2019). These higher standards come from the GCF in an effort to drive up the quality of projects, as the fund has entered its first replenishment process and is increasingly under pressure to deliver results on the ground. Countries may encounter further challenges to fund their adaptation projects if a proposal currently under consideration by the GCF Board is approved. According to this GCF Board proposal, there are two distinguished types of activities: those that advance climate adaptation and those that advance development, and GCF will only cover the incremental cost of a project, which is the difference between the costs of business as usual development project and the estimated costs of an adaptation project (Sidner & Amerasinghe, 2019). The workshops undertaken in this first readiness proved useful in raising awareness about the GCF modalities, procedures and requirements; however, these did not translate into the high-quality funding proposal the GCF is expecting. While this was not the goal of this readiness support, addressing the lack of investment-grade projects would require in-depth capacity building for concept note and funding proposal development. This could be achieved through a technical assistant programme, as is case now available via the GCF’s Project Preparation Facility (PPF) or through organized project development workshops geared toward delivering concept notes and funding proposal whilst fostering cross-sector fertilisation and peer-to-peer learning.

5. There was also a lack of or limited guidance available from the GCF: Countries are re-quired to independently decide a nationally appropriate process for ascertaining no-objection to funding proposals according to the country’s capacities and existing processes and insti-tutional set-up. However, at the time of writing (August 2019), there existed limited precedent or example of good practice in this area. The same concerns also apply to the nomination of sub-national and national entities applying for accreditation and selection of readiness DPs for accessing the GCF Readiness and Preparatory Support Programme. For instance, while the initial purpose and basic principles of the no-objection procedure are highlighted in GCF board documents (GCF, 2014 & GCF, 214a), the latter includes nothing about important con-siderations such as examining the legal implications of setting up a no-objection procedure or how to ensure transparency and impartiality in designing and implementing the procedure. Similarly, there is no GCF guidance for the NDA’s framework to monitor, evaluate and report on the GCF country activities, including funded programmes and projects and readiness support.

11

Beyond this readiness support in Belize, The Bahamas and Guyana, there are important take-away messages for CCCCC in its role as the GCF readiness DP. This section pre-sents key recommendations to capitalise on the lessons learnt generated throughout this support and applying it in another context that could inform future readiness activities:

1. Ensuring the long-term sustainability of the capacity building efforts: Under this first readiness support, the respective NDAs in Belize, Guyana and The Bahamas have initiated a process to raise awareness among key national stakeholders and develop their own capaci-ties to effectively engage with them. However, capacity building does not happen overnight and these efforts need to be sustained in the long term. Capacity-building efforts, including hand-holding and building the understanding of the NDAs and more widely national stake-holders, requires time and resources essential for long-term sustainability. As such, future readiness support should align with awareness-raising and capacity-building needs, and the time needed to invest at the initial stages in building buy-in, trust and credibility with partners (Whittle, Colgan & Rafferty, 2012). Future readiness support can cover focused capacity building for the development of a pipeline of investment-grade projects, as well as the iden-tification and strengthening of potential national institutions to apply for GCF accreditation.

2. Institutionalising new skills and strengthening human capacity within the NDAs: New skills and expertise will become institutionalised within the NDAs and sufficient re-sources should be allocated for this in future readiness support, so that more informed and swifter decisions can be made, avoiding potential delays from reliance on external experts. This will also help the NDAs to better review and appraise concept notes/fund-ing proposals under the newly developed no-objection procedures. To this end, the NDAs need to expand their own capacities by supporting continued professional development of their staff and eventually hiring new staff. Continuing professional development can in-clude long term or short-term certified courses focusing on climate finance-related topics such as logical frameworks, gender, financial/economic analysis, etc. This could also in-volve appointing a staff member within the NDA dedicated to communication and knowl-edge management, including regularly integrating relevant updates from the GCF Board meetings into the NDA operational manual or Toolkit. This would also enable regional AEs such as CCCCC to better coordinate and implement GCF related activities in each country.

3. Allowing sufficient resources for outreach and communication activities: Outreach and communication activities will help to gain traction with new audiences (e.g. the private sector or vulnerable groups such as women’s and indigenous people’s associations). and sufficient resources should be allocated in future readiness support. As a starting point, out-reach and awareness-raising can be carried out through the NDA’s existing communication channels, such as workshops or other stakeholder engagement fora. However, as the GCF activities expand at the country level, it will be critical overtime to develop focused social and traditional media campaigns (e.g. Facebook, newspaper, radio, TV). NDA’s should also have an online presence through a dedicated website (see Bangladesh website), in order to make available and disseminate information about the NDA and GCF funding opportunities in a user-friendly manner. This should be supported by an in-house communication team.

4. Setting a realistic timeframe and budget for the delivery of the readiness support: The budget and timeline of future readiness support should be cognisant of the awareness-raising and capacity-building needs, frequent changes in GCF policies and procedures, ex-pected feedback time, especially when multiple reviewers are involved (NDA, CCCCC and GCF), while bearing in mind potential election periods and the uncertainties linked to ongoing country institutional changes. It is also important that the political validation of the proposed country level procedures (no-objection, nomination of DAEs and readiness DPs) and the first country programme is the sole responsibility of the NDAs, and does not impact the valida-tion of deliverables by CCCCC and the corresponding payment of contractual milestones.

3. Recommendations

5. Providing greater guidance on best practices and lessons learnt: It will be im-portant for the CCCCC to capture and disseminate best practices and lessons learnt from the development and implementation of country-level operational modalities (e.g. the no-objection procedure and the country programme) under this first readiness sup-port. This can be done with collaboration with other DPs and/or the GCF Secretariat.

12

4. Further readingEligible activities: Include the preparation of country programmes; building in‐country institutional ca-pacities including for country coordination and multi‐stakeholder consultation mechanisms; developing the capacities of potential regional, national and subnational entities for accreditation; and building the capaci-ty of NDAs to perform their role in coordinating and overseeing GCF activities in their respective countries.

Awareness-raising activities: The NDA in Belize is for instance dependent on the Belize Government Press Office to carry out outreach and awareness-raising activities. During the readiness support, engage-ment with the Press Office was challenging, despite numerous attempts by the project team, hence affect-ing the timeline for the delivery of the communication products. In The Bahamas, the NDA relies on the support of Bahamas Information Services (BIS).

Belize and The Bahamas Website: Both NDAs in Belize and The Bahamas rely on the official ministry website.

Approved Projects: “Water Sector Resilience Nexus for Sustainability in Barbados (WSRN S-Barbados)” by the CCCCC, “Resilient rural Belize (Be-Resilient)” by the International Fund for Agricultural Develop-ment (IFAD) and “Climate Resilient Water Sector in Grenada (G-CREWS)” by GIZ.

DOE ATG: Namely “Sustainable Energy Facility for the Eastern Caribbean” and “Integrated physical ad-aptation and community resilience through an enhanced direct access pilot in the public, private, and civil society sectors of three Eastern Caribbean small island developing states”.

GCF funding: As of August 2019, a total of $20 billion in total funding has been approved with $5.5 billion in GCF funding.

Bangladesh Website: Other NDAs such as in Bangladesh have created dedicated websites: http://nda.erd.gov.bd/en

GCF (2014). Green Climate Fund. “GCF/B.08/45 : Decisions of the Board - Eighth Meeting of the Board, 14-17 October 2014.” Green Climate Fund, Green Climate Fund, 3 Dec. 2014, www.greenclimate.fund/document/gcf-b08-45.

GCF (2014a). Green Climate Fund. “GCF/B.08/10 : Revised Programme of Work on Readiness and Prepar-atory Support.” Green Climate Fund, Green Climate Fund, 7 Oct. 2014, www.greenclimate.fund/document/gcf-b08-10.

GCF (2019). “Adaptation: Accelerating Action towards a Climate Resilient Future.” Green Climate Fund, Green Climate Fund, www.greenclimate.fund/document/adaptation-accelerating-action-towards-climate-resilient-future.

Sidner, L., and Amerasinghe, N.M. (2019). “INSIDER: The Green Climate Fund’s Proposed Approach to Costs: Not Fit for Adaptation.” World Resources Institute, 24 Sept. 2019, www.wri.org/blog/2019/07/insider-green-climate-fund-s-proposed-approach-costs-not-fit-adaptation.

Whittle, S., Colgan, A. and Rafferty, M. (2012) Capacity Building: What the Literature Tells Us. Dublin: The Centre for Effective Services. https://www.effectiveservices.org/downloads/Capacity_Building_What_the_Literature_tells_us_v1_4.11.13.pdf

5. References

13

Photo by Tomas Munita/CIFOR

www.acclimatise.uk.com