Annex 1: Capacity Development Scorecard Project/Programme Name: Capacity Building for Mainstreaming MEA Objectives into Inter-Ministerial Structures and Mechanisms Project/Programme Cycle Phase: Project preparation (PPG) Date: May 2014 Capacity Result / Indicator Staged Indicators Rating Score Comments Next Steps Outcome Contribution CR 1: Capacities for engagement Indicator 1 – Degree of legitimacy/mandate of lead environmental organizations Institutional responsibilities for environmental management are not clearly defined 0 2 The institutional mandates of lead organizations are partially recognized. However, lack of coordination among these lead organizations is a recognized problem in Fiji. The project will review these mandates and the capacity of these institutions to coordinate environmental activities including the implementation of the Rio Convention obligations. Then, recommendations will be made to improve the coordination at the national but also local levels. 1. The institutional framework is strengthened and more coordinated, and more able to address global environmental concerns Institutional responsibilities for environmental management are identified 1 Authority and legitimacy of all lead organizations responsible for environmental management are partially recognized by stakeholders 2 Authority and legitimacy of all lead organizations responsible for environmental management recognized by stakeholders 3 Indicator 2 – Existence of operational mechanisms No co-management mechanisms are in place 0 2 Not all sectors are equal. Co-management mechanisms exist in the biodiversity area but are limited in other areas. Through project activities, the enabling environment for managing natural resources will be improved and will provide a better framework for the development of such mechanisms. 1. The institutional framework is strengthened and more coordinated, and more able to address global environmental concerns Some co-management mechanisms are in place and operational 1 Some co-management mechanisms are formally established through agreements, MOUs, etc. 2 Comprehensive co-management mechanisms are formally established and are operational/functional 3 Indicator 3 – Existence of cooperation with stakeholder groups Identification of stakeholders and their participation/involvement in is poor 0 2 The participation of stakeholders in regarding the management of the environment is happening in Fiji. Some decision-making processes are participative such as in the biodiversity sector. Through the collaborative approach used by the project and the engagement of stakeholders in the implementation of the project, it is anticipated that the cooperation among stakeholders should increase, including a greater collaboration among government and organizations. 1. The institutional framework is strengthened and more coordinated, and more able to address global environmental concerns Stakeholders are identified but their participation in decision-making is limited 1 Stakeholders are identified and regular consultations mechanisms are established 2 Stakeholders are identified and they actively contribute to established participative decision-making processes 3
being delivered Indicator 7 – Extent of the linkage between environmental research/science and policy development No linkage exist between environmental policy development and science/research strategies and programmes 0 1 Limited environmental research is being done in Fiji, due mostly to lack of resources but also lack of strategies to development research programme. No direct contribution from the project to improve this capacity. Research needs for environmental policy development are identified but are not translated into relevant research strategies and programmes 1 Relevant research strategies and programmes for environmental policy development exist but the research information is not responding fully to the policy research needs 2 Relevant research results are available for environmental policy development 3 Indicator 8 – Extent of inclusion/use of traditional knowledge in environmental decision-making Traditional knowledge is ignored and not taken into account into relevant participative decision-making processes 0 1 Traditional knowledge is recognized but is not collected and used in decisions related to the management of natural resources. As part of improving the monitoring of the environment, appropriate traditional knowledge will be collected, stored and made available. 2. Global environmental objectives are reconciled and integrated into national legislation, policy, strategies and planning frameworks Traditional knowledge is identified and recognized as important but is not collected and used in relevant participative decision-making processes 1 Traditional knowledge is collected but is not used systematically into relevant participative decision-making processes 2 Traditional knowledge is collected, used and shared for effective participative decision-making processes 3 CR 3: Capacities for strategy, policy and legislation development Indicator 9 – Extend of the environmental planning and strategy development process The environmental planning and strategy development process is not coordinated and does not produce adequate environmental plans and strategies 0 2 There are environmental plans and strategies in place in Fiji but they lack a good inter-sectorial coordination mechanism to facilitate their implementation and do not take fully into account MEA obligations, particularly the Rio Convention obligations. The project will support activities to strengthen the policy framework, which in turn will facilitate the development of better environmental plans and strategies; including putting the environment higher on the national agenda of government. 2. Global environmental objectives are reconciled and integrated into national legislation, policy, strategies and planning frameworks The environmental planning and strategy development process does produce adequate environmental plans and strategies but there are not implemented/used 1
An operational coordination mechanism) that build on existing instruments such as NEC, NBSAP committee, NCCCC, NLCSC, etc. Three existing mechanisms are operational, however there is very little inter-sectorial coordination. Coordinating MEAs including a broader stakeholder involvement Policy paper approved by NEC and Cabinet, regular updates to NEC and Cabinet Risks: Political - delays due to ministerial reforms. Operational - Irregular frequency of meetings for relevant bodies, unclear approval mechanism for an inter-sectorial coordination body, unwillingness to participate in the inter-sectorial coordination body. Assumption: Supporting mechanism is in-place Policy decisions supported through improved MEA awareness. Limited awareness of policy-makers Adoption of policy-papers at various levels (ministries, Cabinet, NEC) NEC policy and Cabinet papers Risk: Lack of participation from decision-makers, limited understanding of MEAs Assumption: Good participation to an effective awareness programme Endorsed annual work plans for MEAs (from government, NGOs, Academia, CBOs/Faith Organizations and private sector) to support government's MEA obligations. Validated MOUs/NBSAP/draft NAP/CC Policy Renewed commitments under annual work plans with specific budgets MOUs, annual work plans, minutes of inter-sectorial committee meetings Risk: Limited participation of ministries, unwillingness to declare all activities Assumption: Willingness to coordinate and collaborate for effective planning COMPONENT 2.0 - STRENGTHEN FIJI'S ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME 2: Global environmental objectives are reconciled and integrated into national legislation, policy, strategies and planning frameworks. Output 2.1 Revised legislation and policies addressing MEAs obligations. Output 2.2 An effective system to An analytical legal framework for the three MEAs emerging issues Currently, 56 legislations exist that need to be improved to incorporate MEAs and emerging issues Legal framework / instructions developed for the three MEAs and emerging issues National reports for the three conventions, policy priorities of the government under national strategic planning and each ministry annual corporate plans Risk: Changes in the legal system, lack of support from legislators, lack of national capacity to review and draft legal framework/instructions. Assumption: Clear processes and mechanisms to support deliverables Number of institutions that are actively involved in the formulation of environmental legal framework. 3 (Department of Environment, the Fiji Environment Law Association, and the Office) 5 institutions (2 additional - Climate Change Division of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs & International Legal documents from the Office, NEC discussion papers and decisions. Risk: Lack of national capacity to support the process Assumption: Political will
monitor implementation of MEAs. Output 2.3 Guidelines for Sustainable financing mechanisms developed Corporation; and the Land Use Division of the Ministry of Agriculture) Number of individual MEA monitoring systems upgraded and operational (with strong guidelines, data collection methods, data norms and standards, database structures, and data sharing), and a centralized data bank. Each institution has its own database/data sets, which need to be upgraded and fed into a centralized data bank. Indicator-based monitoring systems in all institutions, and a central data bank established. Reports from MLGUDHE/MPI/ MFAIC/MoPUWT and relevant actors Risk: Unwillingness to participate, lack of capacity Assumption: Effective monitoring systems Comparative analysis of research on Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) based on national and international practices Environmental Financing Mechanisms currently in place/ practice and other relevant research materials Formalized MEAs sustainable financing mechanisms Guideline for sustainable financing mechanism, Cabinet and NEC endorsements Risk: Lack of sustainability and ownership, and ineffective accountability and management systems. Assumption: Commitment to sustain sustainable financing mechanisms Annex 3: Outcome Budget (GEF Contribution and Co-financing) Activity Description Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 GEF Total Component 1: Integrate inter-ministerial decision-making process for the global environment 86,667 55,666 64,067 206,400 540,000 746,400 Output 1.1 1.1.1 Update of government institutions involved in implementing MEAs 20,000 3,000 23,000 30,000 53,000 1.1.2 Develop and implement strategies to address prioritized institutional gaps 10,667 6,000 6,000 22,667 60,000 82,667 1.1.3 Develop capacity of staff in relevant government institutions 1,500 6,000 9,000 16,500 60,000 76,500 1.1.4 Training of Environmental Management Units in each approving authorities 10,000 7,000 8,000 25,000 80,000 105,000 1.1.5 Identify role of iTaukei Conservation Officers for implementing MEAs 1,000 5,666 4,000 10,666 40,000 50,667