Speaker 1 african priorities-results from aap countries_07march2011

Supporting Integrated and Comprehensive Approaches to Climate Change Adaptation in Africa

Africa Adaptation Programme

“What African Countries Perceive to be Key Adaptation Priorities: Results from 20

Countries in the Africa Adaptation Programme”

Presented for the AfricaAdapt Symposium 2011


Africa Adaptation Programme• Government of Japan funding• $92m over three years 2009-11• Projects running in 20 countries

Burkina FasoCameroonCongoEthiopiaGabonGhanaKenyaLesothoMalawiMauritius

MoroccoMozambiqueNamibiaNigerNigeriaRwandaSao TomeSenegalTanzaniaTunisia

Regional team in Dakar, SenegalSatellite office opened recently in Nairobi


Africa Adaptation ProgrammeObjectives

• Enhancing the adaptive capacity of vulnerable countries to climate change and disaster risks

• Promoting early adaptation through evidence-based solutions and initiatives for action

• Laying the foundation for long-term investment to increase resilience to climate change across the African continent


Africa Adaptation ProgrammeOutcomes

Country Projects have been designed to achieve ….

– Strengthening long term planning to enable countries to manage both existing and future risks associated with climate change and other causes

– Building effective leadership and institutional frameworks for enhanced coordination and cohesion of programmes

– Supporting the piloting of adaptation initiatives in the field

– Identifying a range of financing options for sustained adaptation

– Building knowledge management systems and promoting information sharing.

Planned activities to ensure that inter- regionalexpertise and capacity development is provided to 20 countries including.....

Advice and assistance relating to enhanced Government policy-making and planning in this field

Support for leadership development and institutional reform as well as enabling individual development

Encouraging exposure to world best practice and data

Support in finding innovative funding options

Creation of region-wide databases and learning opportunities


Purpose of the Study

• “In order to cope effectively with climate variability and change, it is recognized that countries need capacities at systemic, institutional and individual levels including policy/legal frameworks, institutional mechanisms, economic and social capital, human resources, technologies and resilient ecosystems.”*

• Governments face a considerable challenge in prioritizing measures, and in forging multi-disciplinary links to ensure that their adaptation strategies complement existing national development / sectoral strategies.

•Recognizing country priorities for climate change adaptation will: help shape development initiatives for long-term cross-sectoral success point to solutions for addressing the zero-sum development reality and inevitability of priorities


Methodology

• We reviewed the project documents of the 20 participating countries for AAP to analyse the priority adaptation responses identified by the countries

•We analysed the priority adaptation options from the following four perspectives:

What types of adaptation options did countries identify as priority adaptation options?**What sectors do countries focus under AAP?***What are the scales of AAP’s priority adaptation options?Are AAP’s priority adaptation options soft or hard interventions?****


Typology of Adaptation Measures

Type of Interventions # %Raising Awareness 106 24%Promoting Policy Change 66 15%Financing 52 12%Building Institutions 42 10%Other Strategies (knowledge management) 30 7%Establishing Monitoring/Early Warning Systems 28 6%Empowering People 28 6%Changing natural resource/management practices 19 4%Promoting Technology Change 16 4%Launching Planning Processes 14 3%Improving Infrastructure 14 3%Changing Agricultural Practices 13 3%Providing Social Protection 8 2%


Emerging Trends of Adaptation Options Proposed by Countries

• Countries target wide-ranging groups i.e. parliamentarians, national and local government officials, NGOs, community-based organizations (CBOs), private sector

• Some countries intend to empower vulnerable groups i.e. women/youth

• Many countries aim to promote cross-practice approaches towards adaptation, establishing and enhancing multi-sectoral coordination platforms

• Many countries intend to mainstream climate change adaptation into policy frameworks in a comprehensive manner, including strategies, policies, plans and budgets

• Some countries aim to harmonise climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction*

• Cost-benefit analysis or economic assessment a priority**

• Securing a steady flow of resources for future adaptation a priority***


Sectors of AAP Outputs

Sector Count Percentage

Multi-Sectoral 160 57%

Environment 20 7%

Agriculture 18 6%

Coastal Zone 18 6%

Water 17 6%

Health 15 5%

Energy 14 5%

Disaster Risk Reduction 13 5%

Others 8 3%

Total 283 100%

57% percent of AAP’s adaptation options cover multiple sectors.


Scale of AAP Outputs

Level CountPercentage

National 197 71%

Sub-national 59 21%

Community 23 8%

Total 279 100%


“Soft” versus “Hard” Interventions

Type Count Percentage

Soft 220 90%

Hard 25 10%

Total 245 100%

Soft-interventions are often considered “no-regret” as they bring benefits to countries, societies and communities regardless of the extent to which climate change materializes


Findings

• AAP focuses on soft, “no-regret” options covering multiple sectors at the national level.

• A majority of AAP measures intend to develop capacities at the systemic, institutional and individual levels, such as

promoting policy change enhancing institutions raising awareness of climate change issues

• Countries demonstrated their desire to pursue various financing options, particularly identifying and securing national and international funds for adaptation.

• Promoting multi-sectoral coordination is a priority*


Overall Finding

African governments have ostensibly responded in an appropriate manner by focusing most of their AAP funding on awareness raising and creating the appropriate institutional environment for catalyzing and implementing adaptation on a large scale in different sectors.


Four Reasons for the Findings

1. Countries gave priority to soft, multi-sectoral interventions with focus on capacity development at the systemic, institutional and individual levels under AAP*

2. Findings of the analysis are in line with UNDP’s comparative advantages, which are the development of capacities at the national level such as enhancing policy/regulatory frameworks and institutional development.**

3. AAP’s outcome framework which consists of 5 outcomes restricted countries’ selection to some extent.***

4. Adapting to climate change is a complex and relatively new initiative for governments, Complex, new initiatives tend to require education of practitioners and development of plans and systems for implementation.****


Thank you!

Presentation based on the paper by Mihoko Kumamoto and Anthony Mills “What African Countries Perceive to be Key Adaptation Priorities: Results From 20 Countries in the Africa Adaptation Programme”

Documents

Speaker 1 african priorities-results from aap countries_07march2011