Sudan’s National Adaptation Programme

of Action

Prepared in cooperation with UNFCCC Focal point in Sudan (HCENR)

Presented by:Sumaya Ahmed Zakieldeen

Khartoum University, Institute of Environmental StudiesCLACC and CBAA coordinator for SUDAN

Zakields@yahoo.com

(www.unfccc.int) Source Sudan NAPA

• The NAPA process was based on participation and consultation as an integral part

• It used the bottom-up approach which was quite successful

• For a very intense participation 15 regional workshops were held (3 in each of five selected ecological zones) that in addition to national workshops at the beginning and end of the NAPA process

• Hundreds of people were involved in each workshop (farmers, herders, national and international NGOs, government officials, students, employees, community-based organizations, native administration representatives (omdahs or sheikhs), researchers, university professors, women’s societies and local organizations),

Steering Committee (SC)

National Project Coordination Unit

(NPCU)

Technical Committee (TC)

Consultative Assessment Task

Force

Synergy Assessment Task Force

Evaluation Criteria Task Force

Project PortfolioTask Force

Regional Project

Coordination Unit I

Regional Project

Coordination Unit II

Regional Project

Coordination Unit III

Regional Project

Coordination Unit IV

Regional Project

Coordination

Unit V

Regional and National Stakeholder Consultation Process

Stakeholder during the workshops assessed vulnerability and selected the highly prioritized adaptation options

The diversity of stakeholder involvement guaranteed wide coverage of a variety of different fields thus ensuring broad coverage of the resulting vulnerability assessment and proposed adaptation options.

• Awareness raising, capacity building, introducing climate change problem and its consequences on people livelihood and development and the need for adaptation strategy

• Identification of the most vulnerable areas (communities) and systems (biological, socio-economic) and the non-climatic factors that increase vulnerability

• Identification of the urgent and priority adaptation needs for the most vulnerable areas and systems

• Review of current policies and institutional framework related to the integration and implementation of the NAPA, and needs for improvements

• Adaptation options were in line national plans and strategies, even before the completion of the process some its activities were adopted by the local states.

• State strategies were developed based on NAPA gathered information

• The goal of the NAPA is to put in place (implement) priority urgent and immediate adaptation options.

• Financial limitations stand as the major obstacles in front of the achievement of the NAPA goals.

• Other obstacle could be managed if finance became available; such as capacity building, overcome of remoteness and resolution of conflicts

The NAPA document contains many important entry points; the most vulnerable sectors (agriculture, water, health) which were targeted in 5 different ecological zones, the synthesis of the gathered valuable information generated, would reflect the situation of the targeted sectors not only in targeted zones but also in the whole country.

At the moment the NAPA has been found quite helpful for given guidance for in depth coverage of vulnerability assessment which is dearly needed for adaptation planning

The NAPA proved both the important and the success of the bottom-up approach.

The interest will not be in another NAPA but will be in a comprehensive strategy that would do combination of both short-term and long-term planning and also combine Top-down and bottom-up approach.

For the comprehensive strategy there should be consideration of mapping and modelling, vulnerability mapping and assessment, assessment of adaptation options and cost-benefit analysis to insure avoidance of mal-adaptation.

The NAPA process has generated considerable knowledge and expertise that in addition to the wealth of information been gathered. These represent real assets for future coming adaptation planning and strategies.

both the consultation and participation processes were quite successful and satisfactory. The identification of vulnerabilities (who is vulnerable? Where? What sector/ecosystem/ livelihood? etc) and the identification of adaptation options (the identified options were ranked based on their prioritization) were done by the vulnerable people themselves in a friendly environment.

Implementation of NAPA (for material evidences)

Introduction of NAPA document to decision-makers at the national, regional and local level in the country; in order to create awareness so as to affect decisions, legislations and decrees

Utilize the decentralization system in the country and Advocate for vulnerability assessment and identification of adaptation options for every state

All the selected adaptation strategies are of triangular nature as they all they contain:

Adaptation options Recommendation for specific policies

reform and Recommendation for reform for

institutional frameworks They also consider adaptive capacity

building

Ecological Zone

Adaptation option

Desert Zone (River Nile State)

Improving sustainable agricultural practices under increasing heat-stress in the River Nile State

Semi desert Zone (North Kordofan State)

Environmental conservation and biodiversity restoration in northern Kordofan State as a coping mechanism for rangeland protection under conditions of increasing climate variability

Savannah on clayey soil (Gedarief State)

Enhancing resilience to rainfall variability through rangeland rehabilitation and water harvesting in the Butana area of Gedarif State

Savannah on sandy soil (South Darfour State)

Reducing the vulnerability of communities in drought-prone areas of southern Darfur State through improved water harvesting practices

Southern Sudan (Central Equatorial State)

Strategies to adapt to drought-induced water shortages in highly vulnerable areas in Central Equatorial State

No implementation yet, the funding of the whole projects is beyond the national affordability.

however the NAPA follow-up programme is working on two important vulnerable sectors and partially addressing these sectors in multi-regions,

The approach is to address actual work on ground so as to achieve adaptive capacity building besides working the enabling factors (policies reform and institutional building) in order to be able to set an example

There were very good lessons in the NAPA process which was quite educational and the consultation and real participation of the stakeholders guaranteed the achievement of the objectives of the NAPA goals.

The NAPA exercise in Sudan clearly showed that information sharing helps empower stakeholders.

One of the important outcomes of the process was the fact that the national team become very experienced and confident to carry long-term adaptation planning

The least developed countries can set a very good example with regard to the following:

Generation of information Lessoned learned Building capacities

However the LDCs need to implement their NAPAs first in order to set examples for good practices, their success in sustainable development which is the ultimate target and could then provide another lesson for learning.