ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
ENVIRONET-WPSTAT TASK TEAM
FIFTH EXPERTS’ MEETING OF THE JOINT ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM ON
OECD RIO MARKERS, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT FINANCE STATISTICS
November 4-5 2015
OECD, PARIS, FRANCE
Main Points of Discussion
Final Draft
This document presents a summary of the main points of discussion of the Fifth Experts’ Meeting of the
Joint ENVIRONET-WP-STAT Task Team, held on November 4th -5
th 2015,Paris, France.
Contacts:
Stephanie Ockenden, DCD/GPP, Tel: +(33-1) 45 24 15 23 Email: [email protected]
Valérie Gaveau, DCD/SDF, Tel: +(33-1) 45 24 90 53, Email : [email protected]
Gisela Campillo, DCD/GPP, Tel: +(33-1) 45 24 18019, Email: [email protected]
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
1
Table of Contents
Introduction 2
Session 1: Update on proposals for fine-tuning the climate Rio markers definitions, eligibility criteria and
guidance. 3
Session 2: Update on Joint MDB Methodology on Biodiversity finance tracking 5
Session 3: Improving the transparency of members reporting on finance to the UNFCCC and CBD 6
Session 4: Communications at the UNFCCC COP21, including preparations for the OECD DAC
Statistics flyer on climate-related development finance up to 2014. 8
Session 5: Update on progress of members’ and international organisations’ reporting to OECD DAC
on climate and environment-related Official Development Assistance (ODA) and Other Official Flows
(OOF). 9
Session 6: Overview of Task Team work plan and progress to date, arrangements for future work after
the closure of the Task Team. 9
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
2
FIFTH EXPERTS’ MEETING OF THE JOINT ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM
ON OECD RIO MARKERS, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT FINANCE STATISTICS
MAIN POINTS OF DISCUSSION
FINAL
Introduction
1. The Fifth Experts’ Meeting of the Joint ENVIRONET and WP-STAT Task Team on OECD Rio
markers, environment and development finance statistics built on the four Experts’ meetings held
in March, June, and September of 2014, and May of 2015.
2. The objectives of the Fifth Experts’ Meeting were:
To reflect on the outcomes of the WP-STAT meeting (2-3 November) on incorporating
revised definitions on the adaptation and mitigation Rio markers in the statistical
reporting directives, as well as considering any supplementary tools and guidance to
support the application of the Rio markers (beyond the directives).
To consider the extension of the improved definitions and guidance exercise to the
biodiversity and desertification Rio markers.
To discuss improving transparency of methodological approaches for reporting to the
UNFCCC and CBD, including in the context of the recent OECD report, in collaboration
with Climate Policy Initiative (CPI), on Climate Finance in 2013-14 and the USD 100
billion goal.
To review progress and improvements in members’ and international organisations’
reporting to the OECD DAC on environment-related Official Development Assistance
(ODA) and Other Official Flows (OOF).
To review the Task Team’s work plan and progress to date, to define future activities
after its closure, including the preparations for the UNFCCC COP21 and the
improvement of the Rio marker definitions for biodiversity and desertification.
3. Participation in the Fifth experts’ meeting was high with over 40 participants, including members
from WP-STAT and ENVIRONET representing the statistical and policy community
respectively, international organisations (UN Development Programme (UNDP), development
finance institutions (KfW Development Bank, the European Investment Bank (EIB), the
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the World Bank (WB)), and
secretariats of the Rio conventions (the Global Mechanism of the UN Convention to Combat
Desertification (UNCCD) and UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
(Please find the full participants list in Annex I). The meeting was co-facilitated by Mr. Masayuki
Karasawa (WP-STAT Vice Chair, Japan), Ms. Shanti Bobin (WP-STAT Vice Chair, France), and
Mr. Matti Nummelin (ENVIRONET Chair, Finland).
4. Mr. Masayuki Karasawa, (co-facilitator) opened the meeting, noting that it would be the last of
the Task Team, mentioning the excellent work achieved in the two years of collaboration.
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
3
Session 1: Update on proposals for fine-tuning the climate Rio markers definitions, eligibility
criteria and guidance.
5. This session provided an overview of the revised proposal for fine-tuning the climate Rio markers
definitions, eligibility criteria and guidance, and reflected on the outcomes of the WP-STAT 2nd
November meeting (agenda item 2b), where WP-STAT was invited to approve for the inclusion
in the Statistical Directives, the refined definitions and guidance tables for the Climate Adaptation
and Mitigation Rio markers [see WP-STAT Document: Refined proposals for fine-tuning the
climate Rio markers definitions, eligibility criteria and guidance (OLIS Ref:
DCD/DAC/STAT(2015)25)].
6. The proposal had been developed by the ENVIRONET/WP-STAT Task Team over the past two
years (for background see Task Team Room Documents 5, 10, 15 and 15/REV1).
7. Ms. Valérie Gaveau and Ms. Gisela Campillo (OECD DAC Secretariat) highlighted the main
proposed changes to the definitions, which included:
Definition for adaptation adjusted to better align to IPCC latest definitions.
Features of the methodology slightly adjusted to:
Place emphasis is on the objective pursued by the activity (instead of on the
provider’s reasons).
Double principal scoring kept as a possibility but only upon explicit
justification in particular cases: opinion against double scoring by some
members and observers.
Changes and improvements to the indicative table developed to guide the
application of the Rio markers.
Sectors and sub-sectors adapted to match CRS purpose codes (list for flows as
of 2016).
Examples improved, reflecting comments from members, guidance from the MDB
methodology and examples from the current CRS database. Reflect ongoing discussion
on the marking of programmatic aid.
8. Ms. Gaveau provided a summary of the discussion during the 2nd November WP-STAT meeting
on the proposal. While the WP-STAT agreed on the principles of the proposal, there were two
main concerns raised that needed to be addressed: i) the MDBs’ concern in relation to the
inclusion of the concept of climate variability in the definition, and ii) the need to better highlight
that the guidance table is to facilitate the application of the Rio markers and scoring and is by no
means prescriptive. The WP-STAT agreed to bring this work to closure before the end of the year.
9. The discussion during the Task Team meaning focused on the two concerns raised during WP-
STAT:
10. Indicative table: during the discussion members generally remarked that the guidance table to
design the application of the Rio markers was a useful development, and that an online table
format of the table would be welcome, as it would further improve the use and accessibility of the
guidance on the climate markers. Mr. Philipps (UK) highlighted that the guidance on scores in
the table could be perceived as prescriptive, increasing the risk of marking activities automatically
without proper assessment, and that it should be more clearly caveated that this was not the case.
Participants from KfW and EIB noted that they had some smaller comments on the detail in the
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
4
guidance table, which the Secretariat noted and committed to take on board for the revised
proposal.
11. Definition of adaptation: The MDBs present (EIB, EBRD, IFC, WB) had strong views against
including “climate variability” in the definition of climate change adaptation, and proposed an
alternative of “the current and expected impacts of climate”. They explained their rationale by
making the following points:
Mr. Stenek (IFC) voiced the concern that there was a shift in the proposal away from
climate change towards climate variability, which may result in over-reporting and
inflating figures on adaptation. This was echoed by Ms. Saich (EIB) who stressed that the
definition should focus on climate change, rather than just climate; otherwise any aspect
of climate variability could be counted.
Mr. Cronenberg (EBRD) noted that the climate was inherently variable. Under climate
change, one needed to think of the future increased variability. For project designers, the
distinction between current and future variability made a huge difference. When one
looked at variability, they only considered previous trends, while in case of the climate
change; they should focus on the future.
12. However, several members argued for maintaining a reference to climate variability in the revised
definition:
Mr. Haider (KfW) argued that the proposed definition of adaptation followed IPCC
definition which included present climate variability. Mr Haider noted that for KfW, this
definition implied that adaptation should be defined as adaption to climate variability and
change, since present climate variability already involved climate change, with the two
being inseparable. He also highlighted that for a desk officer it may be difficult to decide
on whether a certain case relates to present variability or climate change. For this reason,
Mr Haider suggested including both aspects into the definition.
M. Tomodori (Japan) also noted that one could not always be certain if a climate
phenomenon was a consequence of climate change, whilst it clearly related to climate
variability. Japan supported the proposed new definition.
13. Other members were of the view that although there was a scientific difference between
variability and change, in practice, the difference was much smaller (Mr. Fugl (EC)). Ms.
Gabriela Blatter (Switzerland) highlighted that the revised definition added robustness and limited
the interpretation, but that the MDB proposal was more pragmatic if the aim was to align the Rio
markers completely with the MDB definition. Ms. O'Reilly from Ireland expressed an opinion
that the two standpoints were not far apart, and that it was important to include both.
14. Mr. Matti Nummelin (Finland) suggested as a middle ground to include a reference to “increased
variability” instead of only “variability”. On that basis, revised text was drafted and presented to
the meeting. It was felt that this new text was more in line with the Joint MDB/IDFC common
principles for climate adaptation finance.
15. There was a general consensus across meeting participants that there would remain need for
increased coordination and harmonisation across organisations working on climate change
definitions. Ms. Blatter (Switzerland) made a request and emphasised that organisations and
groups such as the Joint MDBs, IDFC, and OECD should invite each other to their meetings, to
facilitate greater harmonisation going forward.
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
5
16. Answering a remark by Japan, Ms. Blatter (Switzerland) reported to the meeting on the intention
to present the support to high-efficiency coal facilities separately from, and additionally to, the
aggregate total estimates of climate finance. She clarified that this was not to exclude support to
high-efficiency coal plants, but to be transparent in this regard.
Next steps:
17. Task Team members were invited to send last comments on the proposal by 13th November; the
proposal would then be submitted on the week of November 23d to the WP-STAT for approval
under the written procedure (as part of the overall revision of the Statistical Reporting Directives
undertaken by WP-STAT). Endorsement by the DAC is expected before the end of the year.
Session 2: Update on Joint MDB Methodology on Biodiversity finance tracking
18. Ms. Nancy Saich (EIB), provided an update on the progress achieved among the MDBs to
develop a joint methodology to track biodiversity-related finance. She stated that, although
progress has not yet been huge, important steps had been made, including the appointment of
consultants to tackle the task. MDBs have had a number of discussions for example to identify
what parts of a project relate to biodiversity.
19. Ms. Mariana Mirabile (OECD DAC Secretariat) reported on an MDB workshop on tracking
biodiversity finance (week of October 26th) where biodiversity definitions and tracking were
discussed. Next step was to hire a consultant to look into MDB portfolios. MDBs expect to have
data available by 2017, with no certainty that it would be available for the CBD COP. Ms
Mirabile noted that avoiding double counting across climate and biodiversity-related development
finance would be a future consideration. With the Rio markers, activities can be identified as
targeting multiple objectives and these are tracked with the DAC statistical system, ensuring
double counting is avoided when aggregating data for total environmental finance. It is not clear
if this will be possible in future for MDB data for climate and biodiversity, within the DAC
statistical system.
20. Ms. Gaveau (OECD Secretariat) added that the Secretariat would collect data on biodiversity
components from MDBs when they become available, and that the Secretariat would need to
think carefully how to integrate them into the DAC statistical system, to avoid double counting
with climate components.
21. The discussion included the following comments:
Mr. Cronenberg (EBRD) stated that they did not only track overall numbers, but also
overlap figures, noting that it is a reporting issue on how to deal with this matter.
Biodiversity is already a component in EBRD projects and considered within
Environmental Impact Assessments.
Ms. Blatter (Switzerland) highlighted that there should be transparency on what amount
of biodiversity finance is also counted as climate-related finance. For instance, if a REDD
project has a biodiversity aspect, although many of them do not, one should make it clear
that there is a co-benefit. Ms. Blatter noted that indicative MDB biodiversity finance
figures for the CBD COP13 taking place in Mexico in December2016 would be useful.
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
6
22. A related discussion also followed on the reporting by Parties to the Rio conventions on finance
that targets both biodiversity and climate objectives. Ms. O'Reilly (Ireland) highlighted that there
is a difference between the presentation of ODA statistics and reporting to the Rio conventions
against specific quantified goals, adding that Ireland makes a distinction between climate-related
ODA and climate finance which is reported to the convention. Mr. Nummelin (Finland) stated
when the process is transparent, there can be no complaints about hidden double counting, noting
that in Finland’s statistical systems, they make sure that the sum of the individual percentages
never exceeds 100 per cent. All the shares should be explicitly mentioned, agreed by both donors
and a recipient. Mr. Fugl (EU) remarked however that the Finnish approach is unique, and very
few do this type of exclusion in terms of coefficient reporting. There should be a system to have
both figures available, i.e. reporting to the biodiversity convention, while keeping visible what
might be relevant for other conventions. Mr. Hjøllund (Denmark) suggested that there is an easy
solution to double counting risks, if a user uses the details of the data and not the aggregated data.
23. Ms Blatter also raised the issue that at CBD there is a completely different perception from the
climate change community regarding what is double counting vs co-benefits. The main objective
for the forthcoming CBD COP is to mainstream biodiversity. In this respect, it is not perceived as
double counting, but as a co-benefit which is essential. There is thus a difference between
reporting to a single Rio convention and reporting across Rio conventions. However, in either
case transparency is most important.
24. There was limited discussion on considerations for the review and potential fine-tuning of the
biodiversity Rio marker. Ms O'Reilly added that it would be helpful to follow what has already
been achieved in climate change revision, and develop a similar guidance table for biodiversity.
25. Ms. Ruhweza (UNDP) shared that in BIOFIN, they are working in 29 countries, tracking
biodiversity finance at the national level using a newly developed bottom-up methodology.
Session 3: Improving the transparency of members reporting on finance to the UNFCCC and
CBD
26. Ms. Shanti Bobin, (co-facilitator) introduced the third session by congratulating the OECD team
of the very successful and challenging report.
27. Ms. Ockenden (OECD Secretariat) outlined that the OECD, in the context of improving
transparency was requested by the incoming and current UNFCCC COP presidencies, France and
Peru, to provide an estimate of climate finance supporting climate action in developing countries,
as an indication of the progress made towards meeting the USD 100 billion commitment. The
report on “Climate Finance in 2013-14 and the USD 100 billion goal” was produced in
collaboration with the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI), and was a horizontal project across the
OECD’s Environment Directorate, and the Development Co-operation Directorate. Ms Ockenden
thanked countries and international financial institutions for accelerating their reporting, which
made it possible for the report to present comprehensive, albeit preliminary, figures for public
climate finance in both 2013 and 2014.
28. Ms. Ockenden presented the headline results: the aggregate volume of public and private climate
finance mobilised reached USD 61.8 billion in 2014, up from USD 52.2 billion in 2013, with an
average for the two years of USD 57.0 billion per year in 2013-14. Public finance contributed
71% of the total in 2013-14, with the private finance constituting 26%. Ms Ockenden concluded
by highlighting some key lessons learned, in particular that methodologies for measuring and
reporting climate finance are improving, but that further progress is needed on methodologies and
to improve transparency.
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
7
29. Ms. Calder (OECD Secretariat, Environment Directorate) presented details on member
approaches for reporting on climate finance to the UNFCCC, in the context of information shared
for the recent climate finance report (see Room Document 18). This information was gathered
following the template developed by the Task Team to improve the transparency of reporting
approaches to the Rio conventions, and provided an example of how the work of the Task Team
has improved transparency. To date, nine members have completed the templates for reporting to
the UNFCCC, and four members have completed the templates for reporting to the CBD. Based
on this information response, Ms. Calder illustrated the variety of reporting practices across
countries but also some areas of convergence. Examples of differences include the points of
measurement (disbursement vs commitment), calendar vs fiscal year, currencies and metrics used,
as well as the share of finance that is reported (the coefficient, or use of components). The main
area of convergence is climate finance definition – nearly 90% of members use Rio markers.
30. Ms Calder stressed that the process of standardising data so that it could be aggregated and
analysed took a lot of effort, and that differences in reporting approaches made the exercise more
challenging. As another lesson learned, she noted further scope for greater transparency in
reporting, including by members providing the detail on the methodology used in upcoming
Biennial Reports under the UNFCCC and reporting to CBD.
31. Members expressed their general appreciation for the work conducted by the OECD on this
report. Ms. Blatter noted that the report has added a lot to clarity, as it is the first time there is
comparable data available, although only to a certain extent, as indeed the report highlighted that
some sources were only partially comparable, or that in some cases methodologies were unclear.
The EU highlighted that the ultimate objective would be to agree on a definition of climate
finance, and that the report served for transparency purposes, especially on practise and use of
coefficients to adjust the share of Rio marker data reported to the Rio conventions. Ireland
echoed this and noted that the report had provided significant clarity on what is reported as
climate finance under the UNFCCC negotiations. The UK noted that it would be useful to have
more details on the approach for the attribution of multilateral finance, and welcomed the
Secretariat’s proposal to provide details in forthcoming technical annexes.
32. Regarding the template developed by the Task Team to improve transparency of reporting
approaches, Ms. Blatter noted that it covers all the core elements, and raised a question on
whether the members are planning to incorporate the template into their reporting to the
conventions. Switzerland is still considering it. The EU noted that they will draw on the detail in
the template to develop the narrative to accompany their reporting.
33. Members also agreed that whilst the report and the templates are a good first step forward towards
greater transparency, further work is needed on to improve the comparability, developed common
understandings and potentially consider harmonisation of reporting approaches in some areas.
Suggestions during discussion included:
“quick wins” – i.e. reporting in consistent currencies (i.e. USD), and common exchange
rates.
improving transparency at activity level on which activities are reported as
climate/biodiversity finance to UNFCCC/CBD, and providing detail on the reporting
approach, specifically the quantifiable amount of finance report, i.e. through providing
detail on the coefficient or component. It was suggested that a new field could be
introduced in the DAC CRS to enable members to provide this information, by activity,
for transparency.
scope for developing a common understanding on the practice of applying coefficients,
given the range of approaches but recognising also that approaches may necessarily vary
reflecting the heterogeneity of members portfolios (e.g. by activity type);
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
8
greater transparency on reporting across conventions on finance targeting multiple
objectives, i.e. on climate finance and on biodiversity finance;
considerations for reporting on commitment and disbursements, whether reporting under
the conventions could allow both points on measurement to be reported (this would
require a form of data system to avoid double counting when aggregating flows).
harmonising reporting approaches for multilateral flows, i.e. the reporting of inflows
based on imputed shares provided by the DAC (reflecting on difference between country-
level reporting on inflows, vs collective reporting efforts focused on attributing
multilateral outflows).
34. A number of members noted that they draw on their OECD DAC CRS Rio marker data as a basis
for their reporting to the Rio conventions, but that significant work is involved in taking this data,
applying adjustments and formatting this for the purposes of reporting to the UNFCCC and CBD.
Finland highlighted that they had now automated their reporting, enabling data from their CRS
reports to be automatically extracted and converted for the purposes of reporting to the UNFCCC
and CBD, and Ireland noted that they also have a similar level of automatic for both reporting to
the Rio conventions and to the EU. There was significant interest in the group for the Task Team
to consider whether a general tool could be developed.
35. Broader discussions touched on the value of the approach and lessons of the OECD climate
finance report feeding into the ongoing DAC discussion around the development of the measure
for Total Official Support for Sustainable Development (TOSSD), in particular given the
elements of the report covered, i.e. both public and mobilised private finance.
Next steps:
36. Members are invited to comment on the templates developed and consolidated (Room Document
18), providing any revisions on further inputs by 25th November.
Session 4: Communications at the UNFCCC COP21, including preparations for the OECD
DAC Statistics flyer on climate-related development finance up to 2014.
37. Ms. Mariana Mirabile (OECD DAC Secretariat) presented an outline for the forthcoming DAC
Statistics flyer climate-related developed finance that is being prepared for release ahead of the
UNFCCC COP21. Ms. Mirabile highlighted that the flyer this year is intended to be more visual,
and place emphasis on the details available from the project-level data in DAC Statistics. The
members were invited to provide comments and suggestions.
38. Overall, the flyer and particularly the accompanying online data sets were deemed a welcome
initiative, facilitating the access to data for analysts wishing to conduct their own analysis.
39. Concerns were voiced regarding confidentiality of data published. The Secretariat clarified that all
the data included in the flyer is public and follows the statistical standards; the same approach as
last year was taken. For instance, the publication of non-concessional financing constitutes semi-
aggregate data. Another question raised related to the presentation of bilateral Rio-marked data
and multilateral climate components. It was agreed, as suggested by Switzerland, that there should
be two different tabs in the data sheet, in order to avoid potential confusion.
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
9
Session 5: Update on progress of members’ and international organisations’ reporting to OECD
DAC on climate and environment-related Official Development Assistance (ODA) and Other
Official Flows (OOF).
40. Mr. Matti Numelin, (co-facilitator), welcomed the participants to the second day of the meeting.
41. This session provided an update on the progress made by members and international organisations
in reporting to the OECD DAC on the Rio and environment markers, and “green” multilateral
flows, including reviewing the status of 2014 flows reporting against the official summer
deadlines and in the context of the special reporting exercise on 2014 climate-related development
finance data.
42. Ms. Mirabile (OECD Secretariat) presented the status in DAC statistics of multilateral climate
finance data, explaining that data had now been received from a large share of multilateral
organisations: the 6 main MDBs (AfDB, AsDB, EBRD, EIB, IADB, WBG), Adaptation Fund,
Climate Investment Funds, Global Environment Facility, Nordic Development Fund and
International Fund for Agricultural Development. Based on this data, the Secretariat has
estimated the climate-related shares for each multilateral organisations portfolios that can be used
by members to estimated their imputed multilateral contributions. Following discussion, it was
noted that whilst the exercise last year focused on imputed shares for the concessional windows of
the MDBs, non-concessional windows are also occasionally supported by members, and shares
for these will be provided by the Secretariat going forward.
43. On the status of bilateral reporting, in particular related to the Rio marking of Other Official
Flows (OOF) and disbursement data, a number of members informed the Task Team of
progresses they are making. For example, Sweden stated that they plan to report on OOF on the
Rio markers, and clarified that they already report on disbursements. Ms. Julia Benn (OECD
Secretariat) provided an update on the ongoing work of the DAC Secretariat to modernise the
statistical system and the measure of ODA, and elaborate a new statistical measure named Total
Official Support for Sustainable Development (TOSSD) where efforts are currently concentrated
on improving the coverage of data captured within the system, including amounts of private
finance mobilised.
Session 6: Overview of Task Team work plan and progress to date, arrangements for future
work after the closure of the Task Team.
44. This final session took stock of the Task Team’s progress against the work plan agreed at the First
Task Team meeting in March 2014, and discussed arrangements and modalities for future work. It
was noted that whilst this was the last meeting of the Task Team, many elements of the Task
Team’s work will continue through other modalities, for example i) as part of members and
international organisations regular reporting to the OECD DAC and ii) under the existing
Secretariat plans and work under the WP-STAT and ENVIRONET. There may however be need
and interest to continue specific joint work areas and convene specific joint workshops of the
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT in future. This session explored members’ priorities for future joint
work and suggested modalities.
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
10
45. Ms. Stephanie Ockenden and Ms. Valérie Gaveau, (OECD DAC Secretariat) presented the
progress against the work plan of the Task Team and next steps future work after closure of the
Task team. Ms. Ockenden reflected on the fact that in recent years there has been significant
scrutiny of members’ approaches for reporting on finance to the Rio conventions, in particular on
climate finance, and the Task team was born of the need to improve it. Progress against the Task
Team work plan was reported in its four areas of work:
Quality: this included the application of Rio markers and improvements in methodology
and definitions. Each Task Team meeting has taken stock of the status of reporting by
members of the DAC and international organisations, and special reporting exercises to
improve the timeliness of reporting were conducted for climate-related development
finance in 2013 and 2014.The focus on the work to date has been on the climate
adaptation and mitigation Rio markers, where proposals have been developed for fine-
tuning their definitions (RD5,10,15,15-REV, WP-STAT proposal). A guidance table was
created and will be put online to support improved application and scoring of the markers.
Depending on the existing resources, next steps could focus on biodiversity and
desertification, as well as potential quality reviews.
Coverage: In collaboration with MDBs and other international organisations, the DAC
Statistics now present an integrated picture of bilateral and multilateral data for the 2013
and 2014 climate-related development finance flows. On Biodiversity, initial data has
been received from the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), and the Secretariat is
following developments by the MDBs in reporting on these flows. The Green Climate
Fund was added to the DAC list of ODA eligible international organisations (Annex 2 of
reporting Directives), and the Task Team proposed additional environmental fund that are
either being reviewed for inclusion on Annex 2 (CBD, GM) or are part of a pilot on
channel code1 to improve reporting on these flows, and possibly collect their outflows.
Use: The Team Task undertook stocktake of reporting practices (RD1) and explored the
different approaches followed by members for reporting on finance to the Rio
conventions and underlying evidence (RD8, PPT17). Most recently, the work of the Task
Team in this area has focused on improving transparency of reporting approaches, and the
Task Team has developed a template to enable reporting information to be consistently
shared and compared across members (RD18). In addition, the recent report by OECD, in
collaboration with CPI, further enhanced transparency in reporting on climate finance.
The Task Team is continuously engaging and co-operating with the UNFCCC, CBD, and
UNCCD, and future work could include considerations for CRS field to collect
information on reporting to Rio conventions.
Communication: Ms. Ockenden described the work undergone which has ranged from
improvement and restructuring of the Rio markers website, the publication of statistical flyers,
online data visualisation portals and videos and improved access to the CRS data. The
Secretariat has also presented detail on DAC statistics and the Rio makers in numerous
different workshops and meetings to gather perspectives from partner countries and improve
the understanding of the markers. Additionally, two webinars in Spanish have been developed
with the help from regional Latin American Knowledge Platforms.
1 These include: Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF), United Nations Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (UN-REDD) and Global Fund for Disaster Risk Reduction (GFDRR).
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
11
46. Ms. O’Reilly (Irish Aid) provided with a short presentation on the country reports as a tool for
outreach and in reach. The reports will be online on November 20th. The reports were useful for
external communications: civil society, external partners and were deemed very useful to train
embassy staff but also partners. They include basic information on the country context such as
indicators, public data and public research. IPCC, World Bank info, UNDP studies, as well as info
on the projects.
47. Ms. Corfee-Morlot (OECD Secretariat) presented the future outreach work and communication
opportunities. This included a continued policy dialogue on tracking international climate-related
development finance at the country level. Ms. Corfee-Morlot expressed the need to raise funds in
order to maintain a good pace of work around the Rio markers. She encouraged members to
provide voluntary contributions ideally tied to Rio Markers work. She envisages two main areas
or types of work and expressed the need to prioritise:
Technical – extension of work of the Task Team – i.e. Biodiversity and Desertification
marker updates; engaging with MDBs to harmonise / improve comparability / integrate
multi- and bilateral data; and
Outreach: focused on looking outward, listening and gather feedback from users and
feeding suggestions back into system.
48. Ms. Benn (OECD) Secretariat intervened to introduce current and future work under the TOSSD
work plan, which includes a pilot with Kenya, a back to back TOSSD workshop with the annual
ENVIRONET Meeting 1-3 March, where other aspects of environmental data and green finance
are discussed. The aim is to finalise the definition and agree on the use of the new measure to be
applied to 2018 flows (coinciding with the year when the grant equivalent system of ODA
becomes the standard), which implies that the Secretariat would need to be ready by mid-2017.
The discussion around the monitoring of the Sustainable development Goals, endorsed in
September 2015, has included the proposal to review the purpose codes and the policy marker
system, and the possibility to assign several purpose codes for the same activity.
49. The discussion around the table focused on the decision to close down the Task team, reflecting
that whilst it has been very successful in setting direction, building momentum, and achieving a
number of its objectives, running the Task Team has resulted in a heavy administrative burden.
Therefore, when going forward there is now a need to consider the priorities for the remaining
work and the modalities for how best to continue. The proposal remains to continue specific work
using regular channels and in close coordination, for example using the meetings of the WP-
STAT, DAC Meetings and the meetings of ENVIRONET.
50. Participants repeatedly thanked the Secretariat for the good work and excellent outcomes after the
two years. Ms. Blatter proposed to prioritise the technical work, rather than outreach (although the
suggestion of webinars did have appeal, reflecting the low cost). Mr. Patrick Rabe (EU) supported
the idea to continue the work on fine tuning the biodiversity and desertification Rio markers. He
also communicated that the outreach work should rather be performed by members. He supports
back to back meetings with ENVIRONET/TOSSD.
51. Ms. Henche (Spain) congratulated the team on the progress but expressed that they would have
welcomed more guidance on the coefficients and more information on the potential for
harmonisation of reporting approaches to the Rio conventions, as they believe this to be a core
issue. Mr. Philipps (UK) and Mr. Hjøllund (Denmark) also agreed that more work can be done
to improve for transparency and coherence, and that the coefficients need to be publicly available
and visible, although the responsibility lies within each country.
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
12
52. The UNCCD explained that they have collaborated closely with the Task Team in the analysis of
financial flows and that CRS datasets have been used for financial analysis and been presented to
their constituencies. They stated that sharing the data has been very useful as 195 countries are
reporting using the Rio markers. The recent UNCCD COP in Turkey finished with the decision
that calls for ways to compare financial flows with results on the ground. The UNFCCC
Secretariat also welcomed continued co-operation with the OECD Secretariat, noting that a lot of
work under the Task Team has also been core to the work under the UNFCCC Standing
Committee on Finance (SCF), encouraging all actors to collaborate and share information.
Next steps:
53. The Secretariat will organise a telephone conference call to define and agree next steps in the
second half of January. The Secretariat will issue a call for funds before the end of the year. The
main contact for the fundraising is Jan Corfee-Morlot ([email protected]).
Further information:
The presentations from the Fifth Experts’ Meeting of the Task Team are available online here.
The OECD community space site for the Task Team allows members to access view and download all meeting documents, background documents, and members’ comments. Please see here for further information.
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
13
ANNEX I:
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Co-Facilitators/Co-modérateurs
Mr. Masayuki KARASAWA, WP-STAT Vice Chai
Japan
Ms. Shanti BOBIN WP-STAT Vice Chair
France
Mr. Matti NUMMELIN DAC ENVIRONET Chair,
Finland
Australia/Australie
Ms. Laura ALLISON Policy Officer
Permanent Delegation of Australia to the OECD
Belgium/Belgique
Ms. Els VAN DE VELDE Advisor International Policy
Flemish Ministry of Environment, Nature and Energy
Canada
Mr. Darren ROGERS Counsellor (Development)
Permanent Delegation of Canada to the OECD
Denmark/Danemark
Mr. Ole Jacob HJØLLUND IT-Architect
Quality Assurance of Development Assistance (KVA)
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ms. Sabrina MEINECKE Head of section
Department for Quality Assurance of Development
Assistance
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
EU/UE
Mr. Jens FUGL Policy Officer
DG DEVCO
Mr. Patrick RABE Development Advisor
EU delegate to the OECD DAC
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
14
Finland/Finlande
Mr. Matti NUMMELIN Senior Environmental Adviser
Department for Development Policy
Ministry for Foreign Affairs
France
Ms. Shanti BOBIN Chef de Bureau Multifin5 - APD
Direction Générale du Trésor
Ministère des Finances et des Comptes publics - Ministère
de l’Economie, de l’Industrie et du Numérique
Ms. Claire DEVINEAU Adjointe au chef de bureau
Direction générale du Trésor
Ministère des Finances et des Comptes publics - Ministère
de l’Economie, de l’Industrie et du Numérique
Germany/Allemagne
Mr. Sascha OPPOWA Section Climate Change and Climate Policy
German Agency for International Co-Operation
Ireland/Irlande
Ms. Gemma O'REILLY Consultant
Climate Finance
Irish Aid
Japan/Japon
Mr. Masayuki KARASAWA Executive Advisor to the Director General
Operations Strategy Department
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)
Dr. Tomonori SUDO Associate Professor
College of Asia Pacific Studies
Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University
Mr. Akihiko SUNAMI Director
Development Assistance Policy Planning Division
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Korea/Corée
Ms. Yoon Jeong KOO Senior Representative - KEXIM Bank
The Permanent Delegation of Korea to the OECD
Ms. Eunoh CHANG Expert
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
15
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ms. Hanseul CHO Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA)
Mr. Jindong JANG The Export-Import Bank of Korea (KEXIM)
Ms. Chanyou KIM Specialist in Statistics
KOICA (Korea International Cooperation Agency)
Ms. Min Jung PAK Loan Officer
EDCF Planning & Coordination Department
Export-Import Bank of Korea (EXIM)
Portugal
Ms. Maria do Carmo FERNANDES Climate Change Focal Point
Camões - Institute for Cooperation and Language (CICL)
Spain/Espagne
Ms. Carolina MAYEUR DANEL Head of Food Security and Environment Area in
Development Policy Unit
SGCID - Office of Development Planning and Policy
Evaluation
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation
Ms. Ana HENCHE Head of Statistics Unit
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation
Sweden/Suède
Mr. Mirza TOPIC Statistician, Analysis and Coordination Unit
Department for Corporate Management
Sida -Swedish international development and cooperation
agency
Switzerland/Suisse
Ms. Gabriela BLATTER Senior Policy Adviser
Département fédéral de l'environnement, des transports,
de l'énergie et de la communication - DETEC
Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN)
Mr. Marco LUSTENBERGER Policy Advisor
Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA)
United Arab Emirates/Émirats arabes unis
Mr. Zaki YOUSIF Head of Information and Reporting Section
Aid Coordination Department
Ministry of international Cooperation and Development
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
16
United States/États-Unis
Ms. Kimberly SMITH Program Analyst
Program, Policy & Learning/Donor Engagement
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)
INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)/
Banque européenne de reconstruction et de développement (BERD)
Mr. Carel CRONENBERG Principal MRV Manager
Energy Efficiency & Climate Change Team
Mr. Craig DAVIES Senior Manager
Climate Change Adaptation
European Investment Bank (EIB)/
Banque européenne d'investissement (BEI)
Ms. Nancy SAICH Adviser in Climate and Environment
Environment, Climate and Social Office
International Finance Corporation (IFC)/
Société financière internationale
Mr. Vladimir STENEK Sr. Climate Change Specialist
KfW Development Bank
Dr. Josef HAIDER Senior Sector Economist Climate Change & Environment
Competence Centre for Environment & Climate
UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD)/
Convention des Nations Unies sur la Lutte Contre la Désertification (UNCCD)
Mr. Simone QUATRINI Coordinator, Policy and Investment Analysis
Global Mechanism of the UNCCD
Global Mechanism of the UNCCD
United Nations Development Program (UNDP)/
Programme de Développement des Nations Unies (PDNU)
Ms. Alice RUHWEZA Regional Team Leader
Africa & Regional Technical Advisor
Ecosystems and Biodiversity
ENVIRONET-WP-STAT TASK TEAM: M(2015)2-FINAL
17
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)/
Convention-cadre des Nations Unies sur les changements climatiques (CCNUCC)
Mr. Marenglen GJONAJ Programme Officer, Finance, Technology and Capacity-
Building Programme
Long Term Finance Unit
World Resource Institute (WRI)/Institut des ressources mondiales
Mr. Dennis TIRPAK Senior Fellow
WRI-UNFCCC Consultant
OECD/OCDE
Ms. Galina ALOVA Policy Research and Advice
DCD/GPP
Mrs. Julia BENN Senior Policy Analyst
DCD/SDF
Mr. Gonzalo BUSTOS-TURU ENV/CBW
Ms. Jennifer CALDER Research Assistant
ENV/CBW
Ms. Gisela CAMPILLO Junior Policy Analyst
DCD/GPP
Mrs. Jan CORFEE-MORLOT Senior Policy Analyst - Team Leader
DCD/GPP
Ms. Naeeda CRISHNA MORGADO Policy Analyst
DCD/GPP
Ms. Valérie GAVEAU Statistical Analyst
DCD/SDF
Miss Susan HODGSON Assistant
DCD/SDF
Miss Mariana MIRABILE Statistician, Development Finance
DCD/SDF
Miss Stephanie OCKENDEN Policy Analyst
DCD/GPP
Ms. Kristin SAZAMA Personal Assistant
DCD/REED
Ms. Lisa SMADJA Assistant
DCD/GPP