Public Disclosure Authorized PLAN...Global Environment Division Environment Department The World Bank Environment Operations NESS PLAN Year 1996 Public Disclosure Authorized Public

Global Environment Division Environment Department

The World Bank

Environment Operations

NESS PLAN

Year 1996

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Foreword

FY95 was a watershed year for the Bank's role in global environment stewardship. Key operational policies were adjusted to incorporate explicit consideration of global environment externalities in Bank assistance, and papers describing how the Bank plans to support the implementation of the Biodiversity and Climate Change Conventions were presented at the first meetings of the Conference of the Parties for each Convention. After further consultations inside and outside the Bank, these will be updated and finalized.

We have recently launched the Global Overlay program, seeking to recognize and integrate global environment externalities in sustainable development at the national and regional levels, and through our Bank assistance, to help align our clients' development plans and actions 'with their obligations under respective global environment Conventions. The Global Overlay program is a main theme in ESD's business plan in FY96 and is, in effect, a partnership between the Bank, developing country representatives, NGOs and donors.

FY95 was also the first year of the permanent GEF. Almost $100 million of Bank-GEF investments were endorsed in GEF-Council approved work programs; we strengthened the organizational arrangements required to oversee our role in resource mobilization, as a Trustee, and as an implementing agency; and we further aligned the GEF business planning, budget and project processing procedures with the Bank's. In FY96, the Bank plans to deliver at least $250 million of GEF investments for Council review.

The effectiveness of Bank assistance to the Parties to the Montreal Protocol to protect the ozone layer became evident in FY95 with documented phase-out of ozone depleting substances increasing almost ten-fold during the year and firm proj&ctions for several fold increases again in FY96. Exciting new market-based approacheg to phasing out these global environment pollutants will be designed by the China Cobntry Department and government counterparts in FY96, leading the way to much more cost-effective use of scarce donor resource for ozone layer protection.

Most important of all though is the mainstreaming of the global environment business in regular Bank work across CVPs, the regions and the IFC. While the Global Environment Division, led by Ken Newcombe, continues to be the focal point fbr the Bank's work in this growing field, increasingly staff from the rest of ENVY from Agriculture, Energy and Industry, and the IFC are assuming leadership in the mainstrea!rning and integration effort with exciting implications for sustainable developmerit and development partnerships.

Andrew Steer, Director, ENV

ORGANIZATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR OVERSIGHT OF THE BANK'S ROLE IN THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY AND THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL

b VP STEERING COMMITT'EE Sven Sandstrom, Managing Director, EXC - Chair Johannes Linn, VP - FPR Ibrahim Shihata, Sr. VP & Gen. Counsel Jules Muis, VP & Control1t:r Ismail Serageldin, VP - ESD Observers Andrew Steer, Director - ENV Paula Donovan, Director - FRM Ken Newcombe, Chief - ENVGC

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE (GEOCOM) Andrew Steer, Director ENV - Chair Robert S. Drysdale, SOA - SAS Sri-ram Aiyer, Director - LAT Tariq Husain, SOA - MNA Kevin Cleaver, Director - AFT Harinder Kohli, SOA - EAP V.S. Raghavan, Director - LOA Claude Blanchi, SOA - ECPL Anil Sood, Director - EMT Zafer Ecevit, SOA - LAT Andreas Raczynski, Director - CTE, IFC Mahmood Ayub, SOA - AFIR Andrew Vorkink, Asst. Gen. Counsel Ken Newcombe, Exec. Secretary, GEOCOM Kathy Mikitin, Secretary, GEOCOM

TRUSTEE COMMITTEE Ken Ohashi, Chief, Replenish.Policy, FRM - Chair Keny Mack, Chief, Accounting Unit - INV Rene Moreno, Sr. Economist, FRM Carol Bonney, Program & Budg. Officer - PBD Kah Hie Lau, Chief, Trust Funds Admin. - CTR Merja Soderlund, Chief, Borrawing/Disb. - CSN Diann Martin, Chief, Trust Funds - ACT Charles di Leva, Chief (Acting) Entr. Affhirs - LEG John Connolly, Chief, Special Prog. Trust Funds - ACT Susan Bender, Counsel, Finance - LEO

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT DIVISION (ENVGC) Ken Newcombe, Chief Lars Vidaeus, Deputy Chief GEF STAFF Kathy Mikitin, Operations Specialist Jo Albert, Reg. Coordinator for ECA-MNA Becky Alfaro-Flores, Admin. Officer Tina Kimes, Reg. Coordinator for LAC-EAP Charles Feinstein, Global Warming Specialist Robin Broadfield, Reg. Coordinator for AFR-$AS Kathy MacKinnon, Biodiversity Specialist Jarnison Suter, Data-base managermesearch Assistant Richard Paton, Focal Point - Int'l. Waters MONTREAL PROTOCOL STAFF Bill Rahill, Principal Coordinator Sergio Oxman, Ozone Operations Specialist Jessica Poppele, Reg. Coordinator - Asia Tom Waltz, Coordinator, Ozone Operations Resource Group Ajay Mathur, Reg. Coordinator - E. EuropeICIS COORG)

1996 Business Plan

Introduction to Bank-

Wide Context of

Global Environment

Operations Performance,

FY96 Strategy

Plans and Budget

/ The Structure of this Report I

Relationship between Bank operational

Pages 1-3 policy and assistance for global environment activities and external funding sources and

governance systems for specific global environment protection activities

FY95 GEF developments, including operation of the governance structure,

Pages 3-14 evolution of operational strategy, policy, procedures and resource allocation, status of Bank-GEF portfolio. EY96 implementation

strategy, business planning assumptions, and plan and budget outcomes, and program for

quality improvement.

Montreal FY 95 retrospective on Montreal Protocol Protocol Pages 6-23 Multilateral Fund operation and governance

Operations issues, status of Bank-MP operations - Performance, portfolio, implementation of streamlining

FY96 innovations. FY96 coordination and quality Strategy and improvement innovations and plan and

Plans budget outcomes.

Description of the Global Overlay program Pages 24-Annex in ESD-ENV as the main vehicle for

mainstreaming global environment concerns in the Bank's dialogue on

sustainable development and in country assistance strategy

FY96 Global Environment Business Plan

Introduction

This business plan and budget covers in detail the Bank's work on externally-funded global environment programs for FY96, including the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund (MPMF) operations. In addition, the business plan addresses ESD's work to mainstream global environment conservation in the Bank's environmentally sustainable development agenda. Measured by the size of GEF and MPMF assistance and associated Bank lending and sector work, the global environment is a rapidly expanding and increasingly important business sector in the Bank.

While the GEF and MPMF funded assistance the Bank channels to developing countries plays a catalytic role in integrating the global and national environmental dimensions of sustainable development in the Bank's country assistance, in dollar terms it represents a small proportion of overall Bank assistance for global environment conservation.

In lending terms, in FY88 through FY95, Bank assistance for biodiversity outside of GEF topped $500 million. The cumulative value of the portfolio, which includes client governments and other donor contributions for biodiversity in the same projects, is approximatly $860 million. Between FY92 and FY95 the GEF pilot phase brought an additional $237 million to bear on biodiversity issues. Of that total, $182 million were from GEF grants with the remaining $55 million from client governments and other donors. Finally, the Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rainforest approved $161 million in assistance in FY95; $37 million from the Bank-administered Rain Forest Trust Fund, $103 million from bilateral cofinanciers, and $2 1 million from Brazilian counterparts.

The Bank, GEF, and Brazilian Rainforest Trust Fund together represent a total Bank-managed biodiversity portfolio of $1.26 billion. The Bank's IDA and IBRD biodiversity asistance is typically incorporated into broader projects for natural resources management, environmental institution building or pollution prevention. Therefore,

1996 Business Plan

Box 1. Bank Group Policies Relevant to the Global Environment

OMS 2.36 on Environmental Aspects of Bank Work-The World Bank will not finance activities that contravene an international environmental agreement.

OP 10.04 on Economic Evaluation of Investment Operations- Global externalities are identified in sector analysis or environmental assessment work and enter into project economic analysis and selection when payments are made to the project under an international agreement, or the project involves GEF financing; otherwise global externalities are fully assessed (to the extent tools are available) and are taken into account in project design and selection.

OD 4.01 on Environmental Assessment and Environmental Sourcebook-Global environmental externalities are to be identified and evaluated as part of the environmental assessment (EA) process.

Procedure for Environmental Review of IFC Projects-IFC encourages project sponsors to consider global environmental issues in project environmental analyses where relevant and feasible.

BP 2.11 on Country Assistance Strategies-Global environmental issues and the role of the GEF are discussed, when appropriate, in World Bank Country Assistance Strategy documents.

<

the total value of the Bank's environmental portfolio includes the $500 million mentioned above1.

It is also arguable that most Bank assistance for energy sector development is supportive of the climate convention in that it leads to improved economic efficiency and hence improved resource use efficiency and lower greenhouse gas emissions per unit of energy consumption. In addition, the Bank's direct support for supply and demand side efficiency is growing, as is its support for renewable energy sources, particularly under the aegis of the Bank's new Solar Initiative. As the Bank begins to address the global environment impact of other real sector development and macro-economic reform, its development assistance programs should be increasingly supportive of improved management of the global environment.

'ENVLW is completing a comprehensive analysis of cumulative direct and indirect Bank lending for biodiversity conservation, including GEF assistance.

Global Environment Operations

Bank Policy Framework for the Global Environment

During FY95, the Bank adjusted key operational policies to take global environment concerns into account (see box) and presented for ongoing discussion and review proposed assistance strategies to the developing countries for implementing their obligations to the two major post-Ftio global environment conventions: Climate Change and ~ i o d i v e r s i t ~ ~ .

I I The Global Environment Facility

1 Business Plan Baseline: Performance through FY95 I

External Governance Framework: FY95 was the first year for GEF I. This first replenishment accounts for slightly more than $2 billion in grant resources. GEF I became effective on March 17th when 70% of commitments were formally confirmed by the responsible national authority. During FY95 the GEF Council met four times. It agreed on short term guidance for the CY95 work program composition, approved $130 million in' project assistance, and substantially completed policy guidance on the design of the GEF project cycle, project development fund for project preparation, monitoring and evaluation arrangements, and operational strategy in international waters and land degradation.

In October 1995, the Council will approve the long term operational strategy for GEF assistance, thus providing agencies and their clients a durable framework for a dialogue on GEF assistance and the relationship between global environment protection and sustainable development. From FY97 onwards, the GEF operational strategy will provide the basis for GEF resource allocation.

Other operationally important guidance to be provided by Council in FY96 includes the role of GEF assistance to the private sector, overall financing policy, and the framework and cycle for rolling three year business planning and budgeting. With this guidance, the Bank will be able to complete the revision of its internal GEF operational policy (OP/l3PlO.l) and mainstreaming of the GEF business planning and budgeting with the Bank' s internal procedures.

Implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity: Towards a Strategy or World Bank Assistance, April 1995, and The World Bank and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, March 1995.

1996 Business Plan

Internal Arrangements for GEF Implementation: Bank senior management approved the organizational and planning arrangements for fulfilling the Bank's role in GEF and distributed the document defining roles organizational responsibilities (see box). The Trustee Committee was established and has met, the Global Environment Operations Steering Committee (GEOCOM) was expanded to include LEG and CTR, all senior regional operations advisors, as well as technical department directors; a VP-level Steering Committee was established to oversee implementation of all Bank support for GEF implementation, and ad-hoc meetings with RVPs will be convened by the responsible managing director.

4 Global Environment Operations

The Global Environment Division, Environment Department is responsible for oversight of the Bank Group's role as an implementing agency for investment operations, and collaborates closely with a small global environment team in the technical department of IFC. Council requested the Bank Group to prepare an implementation strategy for its review in November 1995. This strategy drives resource allocation for Bank GEF operations implementation in particular (see Box).

Bank's GEF Implementation Strategy

I The main elements of the World Bank's Operational Phase strategy are to: I

Streamline GEF Administrative and Operational Procedures: To improve the incentive structure for excellence and cost- effectiveness in Bank-GEF project processing, internal GEF business planning, budgeting, and operational policies must be as similar as possible to those applied to IBRDADA projects.

'

Integrate Global Environment Concerns in the Bank's Work: Global environment pr'oblems have local origins arid typically arise from the same policy and market failures, institutional weaknesses, and lack of information and understanding of environmental linkages that underlie national environmental problems and unsustainable development practices. The Bank will integrate identification and treatment of global environmental problems with national eqvironment action as part of the country assistance strategy by linking GEF projects to the Bank's policy dialogue and seeking opportunities to leverage GEF grant resources with other multilateral and bilateral funds.

Improve Quality of Project Design and Implementation: Flexibility to test GEF project initiatives on a pilot basis before wider application regionally or globally is key to ongoing quality improvement of project design and implementation. Similarly, well designed implementation monitoring and evaluation systems, and regular incorporation of lessons learned and best practice is critical to improving the effectiveness and sustainability of Bank-GEF assistance.

Strengthen In-house Capacity: GEF projects require particular expertise in social assessmeqt methodology, monitoring and evaluation techniques, environmental economics, and emerging technologies of relevance to GlEF thematic areas. To improve the complement and depth of skills available for GEF work, the Bank will implement an in-house training program on the four thematic areas and will organize workshops on selected critical topics, and will seek GEF support for the minimum of the newly required expertise. These training programs will be shared progressively with national staff and associated multilateral1 executing agencies as they enter into GEF operations.

Expand Local Participation and Consultation: Project implementation performance is closely linked to beneficiary ownership and participation in project design and implementation. GEF project effectiveness will be improved by expanding the process of stakeholder identification and consultation during project preparation and throughout implementation.

Develop and Sustain Partnerships with Other Actors: Developing country counterparts, NCiOs, the scientific community, private sector entities, and other multilateral agencies possess an abundance of skills and experience necessary for identifying priorities and designing effective GEF projects. The Bank is in the process of forming strategic partnerships with diverse: agencies and individuals, North and South, to benefit from their expertise and to improve the effectiveness afid quality of its, GEF assistance.

Communicate More Effectively to External Constituencies: Sharing rapidly accumulating experience from the Bank's global environment portfolio with all stakeholders is an important GEF mandate. This will be accomplished by facilitating implementation performance reviews, making available the most up-to-date project information in the Public Information Center and by issuing periodic reports on the Bank's involvement with global environmental issues and operations.

I From: World Bank Operational Strategy To Implement the Global Environment Facility. Prepared for and presented to the November 1-4, 1994, GEF Council at the request of the CEO, Global Environment Facility. I 1996 Business Plan

GEF Porffolio through FY95

Pilot Phase GEF resources were allocated to 115 projects, totaling $735 million, to be implemented by the World Bank, UNDP, and UNEP. Through FY95, the Council had allocated GEF 1 resources to an additional 33 projects totaling $134 million.

As of beginning FY96, the World Bank GEF portfolio consisted of 63 projects totaling $557 million. Fifty-two of these projects, accounting for $454 million, are Pilot Phase operations while 11 projects totaling $103 million are GEF I grants. Allocations across thematic areas and regions for the combined Pilot PhasejGEF 1 World Bank work program through FY95 are depicted below.

MNA SAS

LAC 20%

Climate Change

Multiple

30% Thematic

Areas

ODs Phaseout 7

Through FY95, 44 GEF projects representing $380 million in GEF grants had been approved by Bank management. This represents 70% of the portfolio and 68% of total allocations. From the Pilot Phase, 43 projects (83%) had been approved through FY95, representing 80% of Pilot Phase commitments. The remaining nine projects are all expected to be approved in W96. Project approvals by thematic area and by region, from the GEF's inception to present, are portrayed in the following graphs:


Cumulative Project Approvals by Region Cumulative Project Approvals by Tlhematic Area

Project Approval Date

H SAS

BMNA

LAC

U ECA . EAP . AFR

Project Approval Date

FY96 Business Plan and Budget: Planning Assumptions

GEF Council approves the GEF-wide budget in April or early May each year, before the Bank concludes its detailed business plan and budget. Hence ENVGC prepares the Bank's GEF business-plan and budget submission to the GEF Council through the GEF Secretariat based on the portfolio under preparation and supervision and the pipeline under development, emerging cost coefficients for project processing through approval and for supervision, and consultation with the regions and PBD on their programming and cost considerations..

The following business planning assumptions were applied to the development of the FY96 business plan and budget for presentation for approval by the GEF Council in May, 1996.

Pilot Phase Approvals and Supervision: Through the end of April, 1995, the Bank had approved 40 of the 52 pilot phase operations amounting to $342 million. A further 3 were planned for approval by end FY95, leaving 9 for approval during FY96. Two of these projects have encountered difficulties with the responsible Governments and may be dropped by the end of CY95.

With approval of the remaining pilot phase operations during FY96, projections can be made of costs through to completion.

BODS Phaseout

lntl. Waters

Cl imate Change

Wi Biodiversity

i

1996 Business Plan

GEF I Portfolio Development: Guidance on planning assumptions provided by the GEF Secretariat included:

in dollar terms the Bank should plan to deliver about 70% of GEF I work programs. Taking into account overhead and special programs, this translates to about $1.1 billion of GEF funding for investment operations over the FY95-98 period.

a distribution of GEF resources between thematic areas of climate change (40%), biodiversity (35%), international waters (15%) and ozone layer protection (ozone-depleting substance phase-out) should be assumed;

assume $150 million of Bank GEF projects would be authorsied in approved work programs by GEF Council in FY9.5. The Bank will phase its work programs as follows for Council approval: $200 million in FY96, $300 million in FY97, and $450 million in FY98, the final year of GEF I. ( In the event, Council-mandated delays in presenting ODs projects, led to reduction in the Bank's approved FY95 GEF I work program to $84 million, and the balance is deferred to N96.)

Bank Capacity: Bank management must be assured that it has the capacity to deliver proposed GEF outputs. Capacity resides both in the regions and in the CVPs, and in ENVGC, in particular. To ensure that the regions had the required delivery capacity, the Bank's Global Environment Operations Steering Committee (GEOCOM) advised that no more than 30 operations per year on average should be programmed for the foreseeable future.

Accordingly, in order to deliver an output of $450 million in FY98, average GEF project size would have to increase from $10 million to $1 5 million.

Central coordination and technical capacity and advisory functions in ENVGC include, inter alia:

to communicate and administer GEF operational policy, strategy and administrative procedures throughout the GEF project cycle and help GEFSEC prepare, review and revise GEF policies and procedures based on ongoing evaluation of their effectiveness, and to streamline and mainstream GEF Bank procedures wherever feasible;


to assist the regions, IFC and other collaborating partners (MDBs, IFAD, Bilaterals) with policy and specialized advice in the identification, preparation and implementation performance review of GEF programs and projects.

ENV also adds value to GEF operations through identification and transmission of best practice learned from Bank and other assistance, and through advice on optimizing global environment benefits of national sustainable development plans (CAS, NEAPs and sector work).

The cost of the Bank's operation and policy coordination function has been reduced through centralization and productivity gains to below the peak of the pilot phase in FV95, and is expected to remain at about that level in real terms, despite an expected tripling of operational transactions and growing demands of the GEF Council and OEF Secretariat for consultations and contributions to policy development and review and for implementation of mandatory procedures. (See graph).

ENVGC and ZFC coordination and specialist staff requirements to deliver proposed GEF outputs and meet quality requirements in FY96 are 16.5 HL stag in permanent and long term assignments (13.5 ENVGC, 2 ZFC, 1 LEG).

Despite management's proposed minum complement of staff to ensure Bank accountability for programmed GEF outputs, the GEF Secretariat only agreed to support 10.5 HL and consultant staff in ENVGC in FY96.

1996 Business Plan

Work Program Volume (No. of Projs.) vs. Adm.Costs($m) Bank Proposed Budget al

--t Bank Adm. --E- ENVGC Adm.

FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 P/97 FY98 P/99

Fiscal Year

a1 The Bank's proposed budget for FY96 of $18.7 m was reduced by the GEF Secretariat to $15.1 m

Global Environment Facility Operations: Planning and Budget Outcomes

Budgets: A comparison between the Bank-GEF FY96 work program and budget submission to GEFSEC and that approved by the GEF Council is provided in the table on Page 1 1.

The Bank proposed GEF budget of $18.6 million was reduced by the GEF Secretariat to $15.1 million by imposing a limit on staff supported by GEF in the coordination function (10.5 HL and consultant staff in FY96); excluding contractual support for UNDP collaboration, budget support for IFC's coordination unit and for Regional Development Banks (RDBs) and IFAD collaboration, and by eliminating global environment sector work from the administrative budget. Resources for IFC, RDB and IFAD were successfully sought from GEF Council at its July 1995 meeting. Management will request a budget supplement for additional Bank capacity at the October 1995 GEF Council meeting and in January 1996 to address actual shortfalls in regional and central coordinating unit budgets evident now and emerging at mid-year review.


The World Bank

FY96 GEF WORK PROGRAM & ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET

10riginal Submission [council Approved I I I

Work Program I $m I % of Total I $m I % of Total I $m I % af Total

Project Related Costs a/ Project Administration bl Project LendingISupervision Fees for Collaborating Partners d 1.1 Sub-total Project Costs 14.2 76% 12.2 8,% 1::; -1

Global Overlay Sector Work a/ Policy (ESD) 0.5 Country (regions) 1.1 Sub-total Sector Work 1.5 8% 0% 0.5

Program Coordination a/ ENVGC LegaYFinance 0.5 0.5 0.5 Sub-total Program Coord. 2.9 16% 2.9 19% 2.9 17%

GRAND TOTAL 18.6 100% 15.1 1, 16.6 ,Id I Institutional benefits and overhead costs are allocated across all tasks. I "Project Administration" includes the costs of regional coordinatordthematic specialists' time

spent on processing specific projects from initial project review through completion, e.g. screening for eligibility and priority, project document review and meetings, obtaining project clearances from GEFOP, Council, and CEO; and reports on projects under implementation for CounciUCEO.

' Fees for Collaborating Partners include: IFC $5 12,000 IFAD $200,000 RDBs $100,000 TA for UNDP Proj. $150,000

Sub-total $962,000 BanWNDP Collaboration $150,000

Ban W N D P $1,112,000

The status of the MPMF work program and plans for FY96 are provided in a separate section of this business plan. The Executive Committee of the MPMF approved in March 1995 a calendar year budget for the Ilank/lFC of $5.2 million. The corresponding budget for the Bank's fiscal year is $5.1 million.

1996 Business Plan

Allocation of the $15.1 million GEF Budget and the $5.1 m of MP budget between Bank regionshnits and IFC is as follows:


The World Bank FY96 GEF AND MPMF ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET

(in $ million)

Bank Units World Bank as Implementing Agency GEF Budget MPMF Budget

Africa 2.90 0.15 East Asia 1.40 1.24 South Asia 0.88 0.67 Europe & Central Asia a/ 2.20 0.16 Middle East & North Africa 0.70 0.1 1 Latin America & Caribbean 1.20 0.56 Unspecified region 0.30 0.20 ENVGC-Project Administration 0.70 Institutional Benefits and Overheads 1.27 0.41

Sub-total Operations 1 1.55 3.50

ENVGC-Program Coordination 2.32 1.12 Fin.Po1. & Resource Mobilization 0.02 Controller's & Treasurer's 0.11 0.05 Legal Department 0.36 0.08 Institutional Benefits and Overheads 0.15 0.17 Sub-total Non-Operations 2.94 1.44

World Bank Total 14.49 4.94 IFC bl 0.66 0.20 World BanWTFC 15.15 5.14

a/ MP budget for ECA was subsequently reduced to $0.1 1 million. bl This amount is only for processing of IFC projects; the coordination budget

of $0.51 million was approved separately by the GEF Council on July 19, 1995.

M- 1) FY95 Revised Budget ($ million) 14.09 6.20 *

FY96 % increase over FY95 8% -17% *MPMF CY95 budget is $5.2 m

2) Allocation for Bank's GEF Trustee Role $ million Fin.Po1. & Resource Mobilization 0.46 Controller's & Treasurer's 0.26 Legal Department 0.05 Institutional Benefits and Overheads 0.04 Total World Bank as Trustee 0.8 1

Planned vs Programmed Outputs: A comparison between planned outputs as submitted to the GEF Council and the programmed outputs by region is provided in the table below:

The World Bank FY96 GEFIMP PLANNED OUTPUTS

MP Amt. of RVP Approvals ($m) I 20.0 13.0 2.3 0.4 25.9 61.6, Total Amt. of BoarBmVP Approvals ($m) 24.2 33.5 44.0 62.8 0.4 87.4 252.3

I

MP No. of Projects under Supervision 8 2 2 , ;C Total No. of Projects under Supervision 12 17, 5 20

I a1 With approximately 25% droppage rate, this would be equal to 20 projects. b/ Includes projects which are estimated to be approved in FY96 and would be under implementation during the year.

The regional programmed outputs for GEF/MP as shown above were estimated to meet the expected outputs for the GEF Council and planned outputs for the MPMF Executive Committee with resources allocated to the Bank . [Actual numbers programmed in the Bank's Budget document are higher than the above because these output estimates were prepared before final budget authorizations from the GEF and MP were received in May 19951. With provision for the experienced level of slippages and dropped projects, there is a good fit between planned and programmed outputs in terms of Bank and Council/Executive Committee approvals during FY96. The Council approved work program and budget envisages substantially fewer projects under supervision during FY96 than is programmed by the regions which is explained by differing expectations on the timing of approval and effectiveness of remaining pilot phase and early GEF I projects.

1996 Business Plan

Quality Improvement: Analytical Tools, Methods, and Best Practice

d,

Bank management wishes to assure the GEF of the quality of the Bank's work program and portfolio management. Quality is defined here in both operational and technical terms: operational quality as the likelihood that projects will be completed on time and with the resources available; technical quality as the project's effectiveness in meeting its objectives of increasing global environment benefits.

During FY95, ENV units completed a substantial work program to complement existing operational policy and improve quality in GEF project and program implementation, including the following:

participation and public involvement guidelines in global warming, international waters and ozone depleting substance phase-out operations;

monitoring and evaluation guidelines completed for global warming projects and drafted for international waters and ozone depleting substance phase-out operations;

r '-

guidelines on biodiversity conservation trust funds, and draft guidelines for biodiversity rapid appraisal, protected area management planning, and design issues for ecologically sound ecotourism projects.

The Bank's GEF Implementation Strategy provides the basis for programming GEF and Bank resources to GEF and global environment business improvement for FY96. Provision has been made in ENV's budget for actions corresponding to the Bank's GEF implementation strategy as follows:

Quality in Project Design and Implementation: completion of international waters M&E guidelines and review of the effectiveness of biodiversity monitoring and evaluation guidelines that have been in use for two years;

Streamline GEF Operational Procedures: completion of GEF I Bank operational policy (BP 10.0 1) and piloting application of innovative Montreal Protocol umbrella project grant agreements to GEF projects, especially small biodiversity operations, and for phasing Council funding for very large long term GEF projects;


Develop and Sustain Partnerships for GEF Implementation: A number of initiatives are planned, including to expand partnership with Government of Norway and developing countries for pioneering pilot Joint Implementation of climate change mitigation measures under the Climate Convention; maintain liaison with WCN on biodiversity conservation and GEF-Bank activities and maintain outreach to global network of NGOs on climate change issue and Bank actions; launch phase I1 (field test) of the BIORAP rapid assessment of biodiversity priorities with Government of Australia, NGOs and selected developing countries; launch MacArthur Foundation-Bank global learning forum on sustainable forestry with industry and NGOs; expand bilateral collaboration in GEF implementation with Germany and France; complete arrangements for RDB and IFAD collaboration in GEF investment program collaboration.

Communicate More Eflectively to External Constituencies: upgrade and extend dissemination of the Global Environment Operations report (BMOR) and launch the global environment component of ESD Bank home page on World Wide Web.

1996 Business Plan

Multilateral Fund under the Montreal Protocol

Baseline: Operational Context at the end of FY95

The Multilateral Fund for the Implementation of the Montreal Protocol (the Fund) was replenished at a level of US$510 million for the period 1994-96. However, the annual availability of funds is approximately US$130 million due to defaults on contributions and accumulated delays in payments. Resource constraints is now the most important issue facing the Fund. With assistance from the Bank and other implementing agencies, developing countries have been so successful in preparing projects for funding under the Fund that the pipeline of projects for approval in CY95 is US$275 million- more than twice the expected availability of funds for 1995.

In response to the funding short-fall, the Executive Committee (EC) of the Multilateral Fundhas identified cost-effectiveness ceilings at the sector level which are designed to capture the most cost-effective projects and to balance funding supply and eligible project funding requests. With the exception of the production sector, low cost- effectiveness ceilings have been adopted by the EC for all the major ODs-using sectors. Projects that do not meet these ceilings will still be r--

considered for funding but will be a lower priority than those that do meet the criteria.

Multilateral Fund resource constraints have implications for the World Bank's FY96 operations. While the CY95 Work Program outlined US$95-110 million in new investment operations, consistent with the Three-Year Plan and Budget presented to the EC in 1993, the allocation to the Bank for investment projects is more likely to be in the range of US$50-60 million. While the Bank is also sponsoring ODs phase-out projects for funding under the GEF, the overall ODs Phase-out business for FY96 will remain below $100 million as a result of limitations on Multilateral Fund resources.

Independent Evaluation of the Multilateral Fund of the Montreal Protocol

At their Fourth Meeting, the Parties to the Montreal Protocol requested that a study be undertaken to review and evaluate the effectiveness of the Financial Mechanism of the Montreal Protocol including the role of the Bank as an implementing agency for Montreal Protocol operations. The study was carried out by an independent consulting firm during the period September 1994 to March 1995. While the evaluations were critical of the slow pace of implementation and phase-out of the Bank's MP portfolio, they did recognize that the


country implementation mode supported by the Bank requires considerable and time-consuming capacity-building and local organizational learning, and that innovations introduced by the Bank to streamline and expedite project processing had the potential to help overcome delays experienced to date. See Section below on

i c

"mainstreaming streamlined procedures" for record of processing time improvements. Fundings and follow-up recomendations from the independent evaluation are provided in the Box below.

I Independent Evaluation of the Multilateral Fund I The Study Team found that:

the institutional framework of the Financial Mechanism's system for development, ~eview and approval of projects is successful in producing an increasing flow of ODs phase-out prdjects. The current pipeline of projects, in fact, exceeds the level of resources available in the Fund.

the main issue facing the Multilateral Fund mechanism is its ability to implement approved projects in a timely manner.

that a major obstacles to date to achieving ODs phase-out was the nationql execution approach to implementing projects that the World Bank pursues in that the national execution "requires substantial investments in time and resources prior to commencement of project implementation and it's benefits have not yet been proven in World Bank Multilateral Fund projects."3

However, the Study Team acknowledged, recent experience with process innovations, such as the Bank's Umbrella Grant Agreements and the elimination of legal opinion for Montreal Protocol projects has greatly shortened the time taken between EC approval of a project and Bank approval.

The Study Team proposed a variety of recommendations aimed at improving the effectiveness of the mechanism. In reviewing these, a Sub-group of Parties to the Protocol, identified as priority for follow- up: procedures for the implementation and monitoring of projects; a programmatic and strategic approach to project preparation and approval; innovative mobilization of existing and additional financial resources; ownership of country programs and phase-out projects by countries anld enterprises; and cost- effectiveness of Fund activities.

COWIconsult, GOSS Gilroy Inc., Study on the Financial Mechanism of the Montreal Protocol. (March 1995). 10.

1996 Business Plan

Montreal Protocol Cumulative Project Approval

Date of Project Approval by Bank 7 7

Management

r

Status of World Bank Montreal Protocol Portfolio though FY95

Since 1991, the Bank has developed a portfolio of over 160 subprojects in 20 different countries. As of the end of June 1995, the Executive Committee of the Fund had approved about US$140 million in Bank implemented projects to recipient countries. To date, the Bank's projects have helped developing countries phase out over 3,000 tons of ODs, representing 75 percent of the total amount of ODs phased out with Fund assistance thus far. The Bank's current portfolio of Fund supported investment projects will help phase-out an additional 35,000 ODP tons over the next two years, or 75 percent of the ODP to be phased out by all Multilateral Fund Projects. While progress on actual phase-out of ODs was initially slow, the recent upward trend is significant. The Bank expects that the total ODs phased out under its projects will reach 12,000 tons during FY96. A graphical surnrnary of portfolio characteristics is presented in Figure 1.

Disbursements have grown from approximately US$500,000 in 1992 to over US$20 million currently. Over the last two years, disbursements have been doubling every six months.


FY96 Montreal Protocol Operations Strategy and Plans

As a result of the severe resource constraints of the Fund and the uncertainty associated with the Bank's share of new investment operations, FY96 activities will focus on:

* implementing approved projects;

* fully utilizing recently developed streamlined administrative and project preparation;

* developing innovative approaches for low cost ODs phase-out;

consolidating and right-sizing the Bank's internal coordination function;

continuing development of analytical tools and best practice guidance.

The FY96 business plan support for these strategic element is presented below:

Implementation of Approved Projects

This is the top priority for the Bank's Montreal Protocol operations. Close to 100 percent of the Fund approved projects will have been committed by the Bank through grant agreements by September 1995, the highest level achieved by the Bank since the inception of the MP program. This is largely due to efficiency gains achieved in the processing of grant agreements. Commitments at the end of FY95 stood at $120 million, or 86% of Fund approved projects for Bank client implementation.

Mainstreaming Streamlined Procedures

Umbrella Grant Agreements. In early 1993 the Bank developed "Umbrella Grant Agreements" as a method of minimizing legal formalities of project processing while maintaining fiduciary responsibility. The umbrella agreements, made between local financial intermediaries (or the recipient country's national ozone unit) and the Bank, establish the framework for resource transfer over a minimum 2-3 year period. Brazil was the first country to sign an umbrella grant agreement with the Bank. Umbrella agreements are now also in place with China, Indonesia, India, Philippines, Thailand, and Uruguay and are in the final stages of negotiations in Argentina, Jordan,

1996 Business Plan

Malaysia and Turkey. As illustrated in Figure 1, the total value of the umbrella agreements - over $300 million - will easily cover the expected approvals of new projects over the next two fiscal years. As a result, the administrative cost of processing projects will be susbtantially reduced.

Umbrella agreements save significant time between EC approval and Bank commitment. For example, a project approved for Brazil in December 1994 was cleared through the umbrella agreement in January 1995, three weeks after EC approval. Similarly, Indonesia projects approved by the EC in December 1994 were cleared through the umbrella agreement within 8 weeks. Projects approved for funding for India in May 1995 were committed by the Bank in a similar time-frame. Prior to umbrella agreements the time lag for Bank approval was 12-18 months

Small Project Approval Procedure. Because the current extended governance system for approving Montreal Protocol projects, was taxing the technical, administrative and managerial resources of all the key players, the Fund Executive ,-

Committee approved a Bank proposed a streamlined small project (less than $500,000) approval procedure (SPAP) for India with an initial allocation of $4 million over 6 months. The SPAP supports ODs phase-out in small-scale industries on the basis of approved cost effectiveness levels at the sector and sub-sector levels. The agreement between the Bank and the Executive Committee set out selection criteria for these projects.

Fourteen foam projects (phasing out 250 ODP tons with an average unit abatement costs of US$2.22/kg-ODP were successfully processed through SPAP by May 1995.

The FY96 objective is to formally operationalize the SPAP and expand the program to other countries. Replenishment for the India SPAP initiative is being requested at the July 1995 meeting of the Fund Executive Committee, followed by a formal request to make this mechanism a permanent operational procedure of the Multilateral Fund.


Implementation Pegormance Review and Task Manager Focus Group. In FY95 the Bank undertook an Implementation Performance Review (IPR) of its MP operations4. One outcome of the IPR exercise was the creation of a Bank-wide Focus Group made up of Task Managers working on MP projects as well as a representative of the Legal Department. The focus group has directly helped standardized and expedite procedures.

In FY96 the Focus Group will address approaches and guidelines for disbursement of incremental operating costs and standardization of monitoring and evaluation guidelines and criteria.

Innovative Strategies for Low Cost ODs Phase-out

In FY96, special efforts will be made to design and pilot new operational instruments which would both expedite and reduce the cost of ODs phase-out. These include:

Sector-Based Approaches: With strong support from the Multilateral Fund Executive Committee Chairman & Secretariat, the Bank and China have initiated discussions and prepared a work program to develop a sector-wide approach to ODs phase-out projects in FY96. This initiative would further streamline Montreal Protocol operations by moving away from project-by-project approvals to compensation for whole sector phase-out of ODs under policy-based incentives and technology transfer conditions which would drive the costs of phase-out down and motivate accelerated phase-out. Selection and compensation of ODs consuming enterprises would be made by governments instead of the Bank and Executive committee.

Use of Market-Based Instruments to Support ODs Phase- out. The MP project being implemented in Chile involved a flat compensation payment of US$2/kg ODP phase-out. This approach captures the lowest cost conversion projects. The compensation payment can be increased slowly to clear the market at each level. This approach to ODs phase-out is easy to manage and implement given that there is no Bank

Implementation Performance Review of Bank-Implemented Montreal Protocol Investment Operations, December 1994.

1996 Business Plan

involvement at the subproject implementation level. A new study has now been initiated by LACIESD which will further evaluate the usefulness of market-based instruments in h?

supporting national ODs phase-out strategy.

Consolidation of the Coordination Function

As a direct consequence of the success of the streamlining efforts and the standardization of the business procedures, the central coordination function has begun to change. Consequently, the role and staffing of the MP coordination unit in ENVGC must be adjusted in light of a changing business environment. Staffing will be reduced by at least one long-term consultant position and possibly two over the fiscal year. Furthermore, in order expedite processing innovation and effect better cornrnunications between the Multilateral Fund Executive Committee, Secretariat and Bank clients, unit team members will increase their direct participation in project preparation and supervision work at Country Department request.

Quality Improvement: Analytical Tools, Methods And Best Practice

As the Montreal Protocol program develops into a mature and established business, there is increasing demand for improved analytical tools and methods and for best practice guidance to define practical alternative technologies, define efficient policies for ODs phase-out, and monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of ODs projects. Following are initiatives that have been initiated in FY95 and will be completed in FY96:

Monitoring and Evaluation. The Bank will complete in FY96 guidelines on monitoring and evaluation (M & E) of MP projects. These will provide the necessary framework for enhanced reporting on project implementation, effectiveness of achieving the goals of the Montreal Protocol, and identifying and disseminating lessons from these experiences.

Standardization of Project Documents (Templates). ENVGC has contracted TERI, an Indian consulting firm, to develop five model sector-specific project specification and design packages (templates) which would help promote greater uniformity and consistency in technical approaches to MP project development regardless of implementing agency. These types of templates should help standardize and increase the transparency in preparation of ODs phase-out projects, related .-

technical reviews, cost estimation.


.,%Z *-*v7h>,% w * v m e w * * a *------- -- "----" --* c...--.v- qz3a-z --Ps--------- . . -

Social Assessment Guidelines. As a result of increasing attention to social assessment and participation issues, ENVGC is developing Good Practices for Social Assessment for ODs phase-out projects. These guidelines will apply to projects financed under both the GEF and the Multilateral Fund.

Ozone Operations Resource Group. The Bank's own standing committee of world recognized technical specialists, the "Ozone Operations Resource Group" (OORG) provided technical project reviews and final OORG sector reviews for 63 Montreal Protocol and GEF ODs phase-out projects during FY95. OORG experts routinely identify key technology transfer issues, commercially viable technological alternatives, and promising phase-out opportunities emerging in Article 5 countries for Bank task managers, client country and enterprise staff.

In addition to its regular advisory and review function, in FY96, the OORG will convene a Commercial Refrigeration Working Group to prepare an up-date for the Executive Committee of the Multilateral Fund on the current state of commercial refrigeration technology and the tradeoffs confronting Article 5 countries which face the choice between transitional HCFC options and more ozone-friendly zero-ODs alternatives.

Montreal Protocol Operations Budget and Planned Outputs

FY96 budget and deliverables are incorporated in the comprehensive tables provided in the section on GEF above. Unusually, the Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund operations plan budget is approved by the MP Executive Committee on a calendar year basis, leading to some uncertainty in the second half of the Bank's FY plan and budgets for this Fund. In FY96 two new factors in business planning emerged at the turn of the fiscal year. First, agreement was reached between the implementing agencies, and agreed with the MP Executive Committee, on resource allocation between implementing agencies for delivery of assistance to eligible developing countries. Of the four implementing agencies, the Bank has been allocated the largest share: 45%, or $50-55 million annually, depending on implementation performance. Second, from CY96, there will be a formal business plan agreed on

1996 Business Plan

allocation of funds for all purposes, including overheads, preparation and supervision costs. To simplify this business plan development and justification, To simplify this business plan development and justification, the Bank will move from a budget estimate to accepting a fixed percentage of project allocations from FY96 onwards: possibly 13% in line with the other UN agencies acting as implementing agencies for the Fund.


Mainstreaming the Global Environment in the Bank's Country Assistance

This business plan also supports scaling up the ENV program, launched in FY95, to mainstream the global environment in the Bank's dialogue on sustainable development and its country assistance strategies. Pioneering work completed or ongoing from N 9 5 to integrate global environment objectives into sector plans and actions included the Mexico Greenhouse gas emissions assessment and mitigation plan for the oil and gas sector, the Ukraine Greenhouse Gas mitigation optimization plan, and the Argentina carbon sequestration options study in forestry development. This work constituted contributions to ESD's "Global Overlay" program which is coordinated by ENVGC as one of five themes of the ENV N 9 6 business plan.

Conceptually, a global overlay seeks to overlay sector, national and even regional economic planning for sustainable development with anticipated global environment impacts and an analysis of opportunities for internalizing at low or no cost, global externalities. The global overlay program directly supports the implementation of the Bank's operational policy that global externalities be identified in the Bank's sector work and in the environmental assessment process (OP 10.04, OP 4.01).

The Global Overlay Program is also intended to help developing countries align their development plans and strategies with their obligations to global environment conventions and in prioritizing the requests for assistance from the GEF. The program is a collaborative initiative with NGOs, bilateral donors and developing country institutions.

The two main elements of the Global Overlays Program are to develop a conceptual framework and analytical tools for examining the relationships between real sector activities and global externalities and to apply these at the country and sector levels in partnership with developing country counterparts and other collaborating patterns, such as NGOs and scientific and research organizations.

The objective of the Global Overlay' Program is to enable the institution to more effectively help its client governments to pursue policies and programs that will result in decisions on use of local resources that better reflect global environmental impacts; such impacts relating to GHG emissions, loss of biodiversity, depletion of the ozone layer or pollution of international waters. The concern

1996 Business Plan

underpinning this objective and the major global environmental conventions is that the degradation of the global commons continues and, as a result, the sustainability of economic development at the i

local and national level is threatened

ENV has contributed about $500,000 to the Global Overlay program and ENVGC is seeking to mobilize additional funding to support both the analytical and developing country counterpart inputs to selected pilot activities over the next three years.

Annex I provides a description of the FY96-98 plan for the Global Overlay Program.


Annex I

Mainstreaming the Global Environment

The Bank's agenda for mainstreaming the global environment revolves around three basic elements, all aiming at integrating the global environment in the dialogue with client governments:

GAS. First, the Bank's country assistance strategies (CASs) through their individual components ( policy dialogue, ESW and lending program) need to recognize that national economic development policies and programs impact the global environment. Hence, formulation of CASs should consider the need and associated resource requirements for National Environmental Action Plans (or other strategic frameworks for national environmental planning and management) to include the global environmental dimension.

ESW. Secondly, and within the framework of CASs, the traditional economic and sector work needs to be extended to address global externalities. Such extensions, or "global overlays", need to be done in collaboration with governments and local institutions in an effort to promote understanding and technical capacity for including analysis of global impacts in national economic and sector planning.

Project Analysis. Thirdly, the Bank's project analysis needs to address and wherever possible measure in economic terms the global externalities caused by the design and scale of the proposed project (OD 10.04 on Economic Evaluation).

The Role of ENVGC

ENVGC is championing the global dimension of the mainstreaming of the environment in Bank operations. Its specific role vis-a-vis the three-level global environment agenda set out above (para 2) is as follows:

First, it will provide technical support for, and facilitate the channeling of GEF and other resources to the efforts by CDs and SODS to on the one hand encourage client governments

1996 Business Plan

to address global impacts under NEAPs (or their equivalents) and on the other hand integrate the global environment dimension into the Bank's Country Environmental Strategy Papers (CESPs) and CASs.

Second, and as described below (para. 4)' it will coordinate the development and implementation of the Global Overlays Program (GOP) as a means of supporting incorporating global environmental impacts into sectoral planning and policy making. In this task ENVGC will work closely with other divisions within ESD as well as regional CDs and SODS, and with the active involvement of NGOs and bilateral donors. [Suggest we put following in footnote: The term "global overlay" refers to the dimension of economic and sectoral work (in the Bank context ) and planning (in the client government context) that addresses global externalities and their mitigation through national policies and programs.]

Third, and as part of the GOP support the development of analytical tools required to measure global externalities in the context of economic evaluation of projects.

The Global Overlay Program

The GOP is a key component of the overall effort to mainstream the global environment in Bank operations. It analyses sectorally the causes, nature, and impact of global externalities; evaluates how policies and institutions affect externalities; prescribes policy adjustments and institutional reform (focusing on complementarity between sector development objectives and global externality mitigation); examines investment priorities; identifies opportunities to capture global environmental benefits with the help of international resource (include. GEF) transfers; and builds understanding and capacity at the country level for integration of the global environment dimension in national and sectoral planning.

The program involves five sequential but overlapping components: awareness building; development of analytical frameworks, tools and methods; design and implementation of individual country/sector applications; determination of good practice and preparation of good practice guidelines; implementation support; and monitoring and evaluation of applications. ENVGC's activities and expected outputs in each of these areas over the next three years are projected as follows: ,f


(a) Awareness Building.

Promote understanding of the global overlay concept at the level of Task Managers through thematic workshops on global overlays (FY 96 - 2 workshops, one on energy and climate change, the other one on agricultural development (include. land degradation control) and global externalities; FY97 - one on international waters protection).

Convene a GOP Advisory Group including representatives from client countries, NGOs, scientific community, bilaterals and the GEF. This Group would provide a forum for discussion and sharing of experiences in the mainstreaming of the global environment from the perspective of different constituencies and stakeholders. It would be expected to provide guidance to the design and implementation of the Bank's GOP initiative. Finally, it would serve to identify opportunities for partnerships and collaboration, including cofinancing, with respect to individual elements of the GOP work program.

Establish and promote CC, Biodi and IW networks

(b) Development of analytical frameworks and tools. ENVGC will coordinate the preparation of GOP Working Papers on Analytical Frameworks and Tools. (NOTE: we had called them Concept Papers or Sector Policy Notes/Papers, but I would prefer just referring to them as working papers). Each of these working papers, within their specific sectoral context, would first, establish an analyt.1cal framework for examining causes, nature, and impact of global externalities; second, within such a framework assess how national and sectoral policies and institutions affect externalities; third, attempt in broad and mostly qualitative terms identify areas of complementarity between sector development objectives and global externality mitigation (win-win opportunities) as well as beyond such complementarity where additional mitigation of externalities involve positive incremental costs; and finally identify studies and research required to develop betters tools for measuring global externalities. The preparation of these working papers would involve ESD and other Bank staff, with key inputs from outside specialists. The draft papers would be presented to the thematic workshops discussed above.

1996 Business Plan

FY96 - Agricultural Development and Biodiversity Conservation

F*

- Forest Management and Biodiversity Conservation

FY97 - Land Degradation Control and Global Externalities

- Watershed Management and International Waters Protection

- Transport Sector Development and GHG Emissions Reduction

(c) Support for Design and Implementation of Applications. ENVGC will collaborate with regional departments and sector divisions in screening proposed Bank ESW for opportunities for global overlay application; on a case by case basis coordinate ESD support to regional task managers in conceptualizing, designing and undertaking global overlay sector work; systematically review Initiating Memoranda for proposed global overlays and other .---

global environmental sector work; expedite processing of requests for GEF PDF funding of sectoral Global Overlays; and advise the regional departments of cofinancing opportunities from bilateral and other donor agencies.

Progress in global overlay applications will be determined by the size and nature of the Bank's regular ESW program, the appreciation of the Regions of the significance of the global overlay initiative and their preparedness to embark on specific applications. The planning assumption is that 6-10 applications will be initiated annually over the next three year.

(d) Preparation of Good Practice Guidelines. Based on the GOP Working Papers, a systematic evaluation of completed global overlays and ENVGC would be responsible (through contracting with qualified institutions or specialists) for preparing good practice guidelines for global overlay applications, the measurement of global externalities in physical and economic terms.

FY96: GHG Assessment Handbook

Good Practice Guidelines for GHG Overlays


FY98: Good Practice Guidelines for Biodiversity Conservation Overlays

Good Practice Guidelines for International Waters Protection

(e) Monitoring and Evaluation . Throughout the BP period, ENVGC will monitor progress in the implementation of the GOP and its applications. Evaluation will focus on country ownership, effectiveness in bringing about policy and institutional reform designed to mitigate global externalities, and identification and funding of investment priorities aiming at capturing global environmental benefits. In FY98, a Bank wide stock taking review of the Bank wide impact of the GOP will be carried out.

Budget for FY96

Awareness Building (workshops, Advisory Group and Networks) $75,000

Development of Analytical Frameworks and Tools $275,000

Implementation Support (technical) for SOD applications $ 75,000

M&E of GOP $ 50,000

Contingencies $ 25,000

Total $500,000

1996 Business Plan