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
-
Event / 12 December 2024, 13:00 - 14:30
Exploring new avenues of CSO participation in UNCCD processes
Enhancing inclusivity within UNCCD processes and its implementation by strengthening the involvement of civil society organizations (CSOs) and Indigenous Peoples.
-
Event / 11 December 2024, 13:00 - 14:30
Making strategic impact: Shifting resources and power to women-led initiatives for Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN)
How donors, foundations and other funders can better support women-led initiatives in achieving Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN), focusing on challenges, collaboration, and opportunities for improved matchmaking.
-
Event / 4 December 2024, 18:00 - 19:30
Enhancing the role of civil society in the UNCCD to achieve Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN)
Effective local action by land-using communities is at the heart of achieving LDN globally. However, their contributions are often not well recognized or adequately supported by governments and other agencies. Within the UNCCD framework, civil society organisations play a key role in engaging with policymakers in the context of recognizing and supporting these contributions by local communities. The side event will engage participants in a GEF-supported joint Drynet/ IUCN initiative to enhance the capacities of civil society to engage effectively in the achieving Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN) within the UNCCD framework.
-
Blog / 2 December 2024
COP29: devastating outcomes, but our partners are a beacon of hope
By Daan Robben and Marius TroostWhat to think of the outcomes of this year’s Conference of the Parties (COP29) of the UNFCCC? As it has been so many times, we look back with mixed feelings. On the one hand, the negotiations had very devastating outcomes. On the other hand, working so close together with our many partners and feeling their commitment and energy, also gives a spark of hope.
-
News / 2 December 2024
Ten recommendations for the UNCCD COP16 to strengthen its efforts in combating desertification, land degradation, and drought
For decades, our local partner organisations have been developing and promoting effective ways to combat land degradation, desertification, and drought. This includes regions like the drylands, as well as forests, and wetlands. Supporting these locally-led actions is essential to reversing negative trends. For COP16, Drynet has developed 10 recommendations to strengthen the implementation of the UNCCD. Success at COP16 would mean turning these recommendations into action, fostering inclusive land governance and sustainable land management practices globally. By enabling locally-led actions—particularly those led by women, youth, pastoralists, and Indigenous Peoples—we can build a more resilient future.
-
News / 2 December 2024
Advocating for Local Solutions: Both ENDS at UNCCD COP16 to Champion Sustainable Land Management and Gender Equality
As the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) celebrates its 30th anniversary, the global community faces an urgent need to address the escalating challenges of land degradation, desertification and drought. At the forefront of these efforts, Both ENDS has long advocated for inclusive, locally-led solutions to these critical issues. In this interview, Nathalie van Haren and Yordanos Mulder, who will represent Both ENDS at the upcoming UNCCD COP16, share insights into the significance of the conference, the key issues on the agenda, and the crucial role of local communities in shaping effective land governance. They discuss Both ENDS' ongoing work to amplify the voices of marginalised groups and emphasise the importance of sustainable land management practices, particularly those driven by women, youth, and Indigenous Peoples.
-
News / 2 December 2024
Both ENDS at UNCCD COP16
Since 1994, Both ENDS has been advocating for inclusive governance in addressing desertification, land degradation, and drought, ensuring local communities have a strong voice in global discussions. As a member of Drynet, a network of over 20 civil society organisations, we champion the inclusion of women, youth, and Indigenous Peoples in land governance and highlight the importance of locally-led initiatives. Our work promotes gender equality, agroecology, and sustainable land management. This landing page serves as a comprehensive hub for all information and updates related to the UNCCD COP16 and Both ENDS' efforts to drive positive change. Here, you’ll find key resources, initiatives, and insights into how locally-led solutions can shape the future of land governance and environmental sustainability.
-
News / 26 November 2024
The Time to Rethink Investment Rules: Amplifying Civil Society Voices
At the core of the Fair, Green, and Global (FGG) Alliance’s mission is the commitment to building a just and sustainable world. As members of this alliance, Both ENDS, SOMO, and the Transnational Institute (TNI) recognise the urgent need to reimagine global investment frameworks. These frameworks, entrenched in outdated treaties such as Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) and the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), often prioritise corporate profits over human rights, environmental sustainability, and social justice.
-
Publication / 25 November 2024
-
Blog / 25 November 2024
The Need for Civic Space in Global Policymaking
and Kyra Pohlan
In today’s interconnected world, international forums play a pivotal role in shaping policies and strategies that impact communities and the environment worldwide. These gatherings, whether they focus on climate change, water resources, or biodiversity, are critical venues where decisions are made that affect the lives of billions of people and species. However, for these decisions to be truly inclusive and effective, they must be informed by the voices of those most affected by climate change and environmental degradation.
-
News / 25 November 2024
Empowering Civil Society: Shaping investment policies for climate and sustainable development in Africa
From 26-29 November 2024, Both ENDS and its partners will host the Civil Society Forum on Investment Policies, Climate and Sustainable Development Goals in Entebbe, Uganda. Our colleagues Iván and Fernando explain the importance of this event: “Through this event, we aim to provide an in-depth perspective on the impact of current investment policies on climate and environmental issues, with a strong focus on the African continent.”
-
Blog / 19 November 2024
Building Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning systems based on mutual accountability and trust
Just before summer, on June 27th we participated in a panel discussion on inclusive conservation in a learning event organized by WWF Netherlands. Several organizations joined in a discussion on inclusive, decolonial, rights-based, and community-led approaches in conservation. We discussed the barriers, gaps and opportunities in how power is shared, inclusion promoted, and accountability practiced in our work. The question raised was: as Dutch-based organizations, are we doing enough to really work inclusive? In 2023 Both ENDS started an Examination of Power process to research how power is experienced in our partnerships. I share a couple of practical tips and insights that I feel might benefit the greater conversation around Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) in our sector.
-
Blog / 18 November 2024
The global rise of authoritarian regimes demands global strategies
The global funding landscape for civil society movements is changing, and is increasingly faced with policies that restrict funding streams, limit philanthropic work, and silence critical voices. These are not incidental shifts but part of a broader pattern that erodes the support for those international networks and movements under the guise ‘necessary financial cuts’, ‘aid reform’ or ‘efficiency’.
-
Event / 15 November 2024, 12:50 - 16:45
#BothENDSatCOP29 Side Events
Both ENDS’ participation at COP29 includes three critical side events that will highlight gender-just climate finance, locally-led adaptation, and multilateral approaches to a just energy transition and industrialisation in the Global South.
-
Press release / 12 November 2024
Ruling climate case Shell: "Shell has an obligation to protect human rights."
The Hague, 12 November 2024 - The court has ruled in Shell's appeal in the Climate Case that Milieudefensie won against Shell in 2021. The Court of Appeal has ruled that the oil and gas giant has a responsibility to reduce its emissions, but has not imposed a reduction obligation.
-
Press release / 11 November 2024
Both ENDS's response to government letter on future cooperation with civil society organisations
DEN HAAG, 11 November 2024 - Today, the Dutch government published its policy on future cooperation with development organisations, both in the Netherlands and abroad. PVV minister Reinette Klever is putting the axe to this funding: she has decided to cut the budget for aid to international civil society by more than two-thirds: from roughly €1.4 billion to €0.4 billion in the period 2026 to 2030. This has major implications for critical voices at home and abroad, at a time when civic space for organisations around the world is already shrinking. Karin van Boxtel, director of environmental and human rights organisation Both ENDS: ‘This is an unprecedented step in exactly the wrong direction. Civil society organisations are essential for sustainable and social change worldwide. International movements fulfil multiple, indispensable roles: as a watchdog of the rule of law, as a driver of change, and as a counterforce against authoritarian tendencies. The weakening of support for these roles is a telling signal.’
-
News / 11 November 2024
Kenya Terminates Bilateral Investment Treaty with the Netherlands
The government of Kenya has officially terminated its bilateral investment treaty (BIT) with the Netherlands, marking a significant win for economic justice and environmental protection. Kenya’s decision reflects a growing global trend of rethinking outdated treaties that often prioritize corporate interests over public welfare. The Dutch Minister for Foreign Trade and Development recently confirmed that Kenya unilaterally ended the treaty in December 2023, rendering it inoperative from 11 June 2024. Kenya now joins South Africa, Tanzania, and Burkina Faso as the fourth African country to terminate its BIT with the Netherlands.
-
News / 9 November 2024
Why is the Dutch climate case against Shell important to our partners in the Global South?
On November 12th, a new ruling will be issued by the Court of Appeal in The Hague in the climate case against Shell, in which Both ENDS is a co-plaintiff. Ahead of this ruling, we asked our partners why this Dutch lawsuit is important for the Global South.
-
News / 1 November 2024
Both ENDS at COP29: advocating for gender just climate finance
On November 11th, the 29th UN Climate Conference will start in Baku, Azerbaijan. Just like previous years, Both ENDS will be there to advocate for local access to climate finance, and to support our partner organisations in their advocacy work. How do we do that, and what are our hopes (and worries) about this 29th edition of the UNFCCC COP? We asked Marius Troost, who will be joining COP29 together with Daan Robben.
-
Publication / 29 October 2024