In Bali, build a Fund you can be proud of
In Bali, build a Fund you can be proud of
This is the meeting where the Board will discuss:
• Country ownership (of activities funded by the GCF);
• The composition of National Designated Authorities and focal points (the two bodies currently envisaged at the national level, in addition to the funding entities mentioned below);
• Options for country coordination and multi-stakeholder engagement (very important – governments can’t fight climate change on their own); and
• Additional modalities that further enhance direct access, including through funding entities (quite literally, last but not least, for herein lies transformational change – explored in more detail in the previous blog, here).
In brief, the Board will be talking about how the GCF will interface with countries, and what sort of national architecture will be needed for countries to access GCF funds. This may be a good time, therefore, to deconstruct some of those (development jargon-laden) topics listed above, and explore their interactions.
What, for instance, do we mean by country ownership? The World Bank defines it as “sufficient political support within a country to implement its developmental strategy, including the projects, programs, and policies for which external partners provide assistance.”
Wrong answer! This definition could apply equally to external partners deciding what’s to be done, and governments then selling that plan ex post to the country (“line ministries, parliament, sub-national governments, civil society organizations, and private sector groups”).
The 2011 Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation takes the definition of country ownership somewhat out of the dark ages, taking forward the Paris Agreement on Aid Effectiveness and the Accra Accord. It defines country ownership as “ownership of development priorities by developing countries…led by developing countries, implementing approaches that are tailored to country-specific situations and needs”. This definition is not just the result of developing countries pushing for more ownership – it is the result of a realisation by developed and developing countries, based on years of experience, that country ownership is an absolute pre-requisite for effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability.
This definition of country ownership, applied meaningfully, would mean that decision-making on the activities that are to be funded should be taken in-country – through “enhanced direct access” and in-country (national) “funding entities”. Country ownership, moreover, does not stop at the government or national level – it implies the active engagement of the electorate, or multi-stakeholders. It means the use of existing country systems to the extent possible, instead of creating additional bodies that dance to a foreign tune. It means ownership across sectors, not just ownership by the environmental sector.
Developing countries have sometimes been afraid to explore beyond the surface of “country ownership”, sometimes claiming national sovereignty on the design of national processes, but in this instance they must. Country ownership costs time and money if it is to be done meaningfully – engaging stakeholders, not only in the planning phase but also through implementation and post-project/ programme sustainability; bolstering existing national systems to bear the additional burden; creating incentives for mainstream sectors to participate; and creating effective accountability systems, to prove to the local, national and international community that the funds have been used effectively. Adequate funding will have to be built in to allow for this – in the readiness phase, but also on a more sustained basis, to ensure that the results live out the duration of the activity. IFIs do not usually take these longer-term costs (or resulting benefits) into account.
Country ownership, multi-stakeholder engagement and enhanced direct access are therefore closely connected and should be discussed in connection with one another in Bali. Once the Board has explored the depths of its willingness to signal transformational change on each of these very important issues, it can address the issue of the institutional architecture that will be needed at the national level to implement this vision. Enough flexibility must be built in to the guidelines for each country to design the architecture to also suits national circumstances – as long as they meet certain prerequisites identified by the GCF Board. Ideally, this architecture should:
1. Build on existing national mechanisms that have been most successful in implementing local-level action through devolved governance and decentralisation, facilitating multi-stakeholder decision-making processes, and in cross-sectoral integration. For instance, Indonesia may choose to use the mechanisms it has in place for its National Program for Community Empowerment – the Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandirithe (PNPM). India may choose to build in an integral role for Panchayat Raj (local governance) institutions, as it has done in its broadly successful National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. The Philippines may choose to build upon its Climate Change Commission and Peoples Survival Fund. Creating a new architecture for the GCF comes with the following risks:
a. It will be designed only to suit the GCF/global requirements, and not national circumstances and needs.
b. It may not have the same relationship with the key sectors, that an existing home-grown mechanism/ body already has.
c. An existing mechanism is likely to be more sustainable in the long-run, rather than one that relies entirely on the GCF for its existence.
d. A mechanism for the GCF alone could end up creating a “climate finance silo”, by creating separate channels for climate finance at the national level.
2. The mechanism should ideally be designed to pool climate funds from different sources and contributors, to prevent in-country fragmentation, and to facilitate a consistent and simple process for access.
3. It should have high-level leadership, and buy-in from mainstream ministries and sectors. The default leadership in many countries – the environment ministries – simply do not have the clout to create buy-in for these mainstream sectors. It will be worth thinking about other incentives that can be created for engaging mainstream sectors.
4. It should be able to reach out to the sub-national/local level – not just to deliver funds that are already “tied”/ earmarked for centrally decided programmes, goals and activities, but also easily accessible funds that local communities can avail off, to address concerns they have identified. A strong role should be built in for responsive local governments.
5. The GCF should actively support community driven climate action, rather than simply community-based action that calls only for participation. Gender-responsive, transparent multi-stakeholder decision-making should be the goal at every stage.
6. There must be strong formal mechanisms for transparency, “top to down” accountability, and dispute settlement built in, through which local communities can question the decisions of the national mechanism/ body.
How will the currently mandated bodies of NDAs, NFEs and focal points fit into this national architecture? We think that will be a decision for the countries to take – as long as the basic standards set out by the GCF Board are satisfied, they should be able to identify an existing national level climate change commission or national climate fund as the NDA, if this is what works best from the point of view of national-level implementation. The in-country architecture cannot be designed only to suit the requirements of the Fund – it must also work from the point of view of effective implementation at the national and sub-national levels.
Read more about this subject
-
News / 10 July 2025
Both ENDS and Global Witness condemn harassment of anti-reclamation activists in Manila Bay
Global Witness and Both ENDS strongly condemn the reported of harassment and surveillance by the Armed Forces of the Philippines of environmental activists and fishing communities in Navotas, Philippines. Pamalakaya-Pilipinas, a National Federation of Small Fisherfolk Organisation in the Philippines, has received credible reports that the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) are engaged in “red-tagging” their members.
-
News / 10 July 2025
Shell's Silent Exit: Evading Accountability in the Niger Delta
Following Both ENDS & Kebekatche Women Development & Research Centre participation in Shell’s Annual General Meeting (AGM) and a formal follow-up in writing, the response received from Shell plc raises more questions than it answers.
-
News / 2 July 2025
-
Blog / 2 July 2025
Women at the frontlines of climate action: local power for global change
By Tamara MohrLast week, GAGGA, the Global Alliance for Green and Gender Action, with Both ENDS as one of the Alliance members, together with FCAM and Mama Cash, organised its Global Meeting in Indonesia. The goal of this meeting was to recognise, celebrate and look ahead at cross-movement and cross-regional connections, to strengthen the collective power of gender, climate and environmental justice movements.
-
Publication / 1 July 2025
-
News / 24 June 2025
Indigenous communities in Panama obtain recognition and partial mitigation measures by Development Banks FMO and DEG in relation to the Barro Blanco dam
Both ENDS and SOMO welcome the signing of the agreement of understanding between four Indigenous Ngäbe communities in Panama and the European development banks FMO and DEG on June 17th 2025. The arrangement includes a community development program that, together with a public statement issued by the banks, aims to recognize and mitigate some of the negative impacts caused by the Barro Blanco hydropower dam. We wish to congratulate the community-based organisation Movimiento 10 de Abril (M10) for its perseverance to seek justice for the affected communities, and we acknowledge the commitment of FMO and DEG to pursue a solution to their long-standing dispute with the communities arising from their partial financing of the hydropower project since 2011.
-
News / 23 June 2025
Who benefits from better protection of our oceans?
The ocean emerged strengthened from the UN Ocean Conference in Nice. More countries are supporting a ban on deep-sea mining, more marine protected areas are being established, and more pledges are being made to fight pollution. The question now is whether countries will follow through on their commitments. Because the ocean movement faces a camp of powerful interests.
This article was originally posted in Dutch on MO*Magazine.
-
article / 13 June 2025
-
News / 6 June 2025
Both ENDS at the UN Ocean Conference: voicing our environmental justice concerns about the “Blue Economy”
Next week, the United Nations Ocean Conference will take place in Nice, France. This conference is focused on the conservation and sustainable use of coasts, seas and marine resources. Both ENDS colleague Murtah Shannon will be attending. We’ve asked him to explain a bit more about his plans.
-
News / 5 June 2025
Op-ed: New trading partners, but not on the same terms
Since President Trump's trade war and tariffs, international trade has once again been thrust into the spotlight. In Europe and the Netherlands, there are growing calls for new free trade agreements to be concluded as quickly as possible, as reflected in recent opinions in FD and de Volkskrant. But that is the wrong reflex, writes our colleague Marius Troost.
-
News / 4 June 2025
Demanding Shell’s Accountability for decades of pollution in Niger Delta
Both ENDS and our Nigerian partner Kebetkache Women Development & Research Centre attended Shell’s Annual General Meeting (AGM), on May 20th, in London, to demand transparency and accountability for Shell Plc’s opaque divesment in the Niger Delta.
-
Blog / 3 June 2025
A food forest as an inspiring oasis between monoculture fields
Recently, we visited food forest Ketelbroek with a group of colleagues. This project was initiated by food forest pioneer Wouter van Eck and our own Pieter Jansen. What a beautiful place! Located between monocrop fields of ryegrass, beetroot and potatoes, the food forest is a green oasis. Birdsong fills the air and there is a constant buzz and fluttering all around. Hares, badgers, foxes and wild boars are regular visitors. And let's not forget the beavers.
-
News / 20 May 2025
Both ENDS and partners demand Shell to clean up the Niger Delta before divesting
At the Annual General Meeting (AGM) of Shell in London, community leaders from the Niger Delta and international allies, including Both ENDS, are confronting Shell with a clear demand: Shell must take full responsibility for decades of pollution and human suffering in Nigeria’s Niger Delta before divesting from its on-shore oil operations.
-
News / 9 May 2025
Women’s leadership in agroecology flourishes in Eastern and Southern Africa
On 12 and 13 February 2025, women from Kenya, Uganda, and Zimbabwe gathered in Nairobi for the Africa Women Leaders in Agroecology (AWOLA) Regional Networking Forum. The event marked a significant moment in the leadership programme of PELUM Kenya, which empowers young women in their role as leaders in the agroecological transition. This project was made possible thanks to support from Both ENDS as part of the Fair, Green and Global (FGG) Alliance.
-
External link / 29 April 2025
-
Blog / 23 April 2025
The power of trust
Trust builds trust. That is what I have learned from how Both ENDS works - within our team, with partners in joint strategies and advocacy, and in our relationships with partners as a funder. Trust is the foundation. It is what allows compassion to grow, what gives rise to hope, and what fuels real solidarity. This is especially powerful in contrast to the prevailing global trend of political and international leaders who prioritize hard measures and self-interest, ignoring relations of trust. It is even more reason for us to share what we have experienced when we put trust first.
-
Letter / 15 April 2025
African civil society urges Oman against EACOP support as east Africa trade expo kicks off
Just one day before the Oman East Africa Trade and Investment
Expo opens in Muscat on April 16, over 70 civil society organisations (CSOs) from Uganda, Tanzania, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and beyond have published an open letter urging the Government of Oman to refrain from providing financial or diplomatic support for the controversial East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP). -
Blog / 11 April 2025
FMO is very pleased with its own success – now the local population still needs to be
The FMO development bank is proud of its results and the opportunities it seizes where commercial banks fail to act. But do the bank's actions really help, ask Anne de Jonghe and Nick Middeldorp.
-
News / 7 April 2025
Food forest Ketelbroek: where food production and biodiversity come together
When Both ENDS-colleagues visit partners, they often go on a "field trip" to see how our joint work affects people and communities. This year, we did the same in the Netherlands. Food forestry pioneer Wouter van Eck demonstrates a group of Both ENDS partners how regenerative agriculture can offer solutions to the climate and biodiversity crises.
-
Publication / 1 April 2025