CONCEPT NOTE FOR SYNERGISTIC IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTILATERAL ENVIRONMENTAL AGREEMENTS UNDER THE UNCCD SOUTH EAST ASIA SUBREGIONAL ACTION PROGRAMME

Transcription

1 CONCEPT NOTE FOR SYNERGISTIC IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTILATERAL ENVIRONMENTAL AGREEMENTS UNDER THE UNCCD SOUTH EAST ASIA SUBREGIONAL ACTION PROGRAMME INTRODUCTION Desertification is defined under the U.N. Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) as land degradation in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas resulting from both human and natural causes. Considering that the South East Asian (SEA) countries fall within the humid tropics with only relatively small areas falling under the category of dry sub-humid or semi-arid, the question is what does the UNCCD contribute to the achievement of sustainable development objectives at the national level. Upon the request of the SEA countries the Global Mechanism of the UNCCD is seeking to demonstrate the added value of the UNCCD through the establishment of a partnership between the SEA countries and development cooperation partners for achieving resource use efficiencies through the adoption of a synergies approach for addressing land degradation related issues. In conformity with the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) strategy, the GM seeks to establish a convergent-platform that brings the SEA countries together with a diverse array of external partners for pursuing synergistic implementation Key terms Synergy: the interaction or cooperation of two or more organisations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects. Convergent: coming closer together, especially in characteristics or ideas. (Oxford Dictionary) of UNCCD, UNCBD and UNFCCC (Rio agreements - other Multilateral Environmental Agreement [MEAs] can be included as necessary). Initial consultations with the Asian Development Bank (ADB) has led to the understanding that the Global Mechanism s proposal should be presented to the Greater Mekong Subregion s (GMS) 1 Working Group on Environment (WGE) for considering its inclusion under the ADB s Core Environment Programme (CEP). Also, consultations with the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) have led to the preliminary understanding of involving the forestry constituency under this initiative given the important role forests play in this subregion. UNEP s Division of Environmental Law and Conventions has also agreed to collaborate with the programme, and brings with it considerable technical expertise on approaches and methodologies for synergistic implementation of MEAs. The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) has also agreed in principle to work within the program to pursue adaptation approaches for sustainable 1 The GMS consists of Cambodia, China, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam. The ASEAN grouping consists of Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Viet Nam. Under the UNCCD, Timor Leste comes within the South East Asia sub-grouping 1

2 agricultural production. Discussions with the UNCCD and CBD Secretariats were very positive and negotiations are currently underway on defining their collaboration within this programme. OVERALL GOAL The overall goal is to facilitate poverty reduction by increasing the productivity of land through adoption of sustainable land management (SLM) practices at a landscape level. OBJECTIVE Initiate synergistic implementation of UNCCD, UNCBD and UNFCCC at national level to facilitate efficient and effective use of existing national and external finances and to mobilise additional resources (other MEAs can be included as necessary). PROGRAMME RATIONALE Sustainable Development Considerations Deforestation rates vary widely among the countries; from the ASEAN region lost 31.4 million hectares of forest, a rate of about 15,700 sq km per year (an area greater than Lebanon). The following 10-year period from saw an increase in deforestation, the average annual loss, increasing by 48% to 23,260 sq km per year (an area greater than Belize); Indonesia, Myanmar, Malaysia and Thailand responsible for up to 90% of the total (ASEAN 2002). The social and environmental costs in terms of loss of livelihoods, ecological services and biodiversity have not been calculated with any accuracy however it can be safely assumed that it amounts to several billion per year based on figures related to forest fire and haze alone, which was estimated at US$6 billion during (excluding loss of biodiversity and social costs) (ADB 2001). A significant part of the ASEAN region is geographically susceptible to natural climate induced and other disasters; it constantly contends with landslides, floods, cyclones, hurricanes and tsunamis. The impacts of these events take their toll on the national economies of the countries and leave large numbers of people stripped of their livelihoods. In the Philippines, between , over 80% of rice losses were due to weather disasters, costing US$39.2 million in 1990 alone (World Bank 2006). According to the Fukasaku et al (2005, p. 7) during and after the economic crisis, several ASEAN countries, most notably Thailand, rediscovered that the agricultural sector plays an important role in sustaining export earnings and rural household income and absorbing displaced workers, thereby contributing to economic recovery and political stability. The subregion s vulnerability to climate change and consequent affects on agricultural productivity can be thus viewed from a broader national development perspective, considering that a majority of people still depend on agriculture for their livelihoods. In addition to the above, there are many interlinkages between environmental degradation and associated costs; the following are a few of them: deforestation leading to loss of soil fertility and disruption of hydrologic cycles and the consequent impact on agricultural productivity; land degradation and the loss of valuable medicinal species (biodiversity loss); warming of the sea as well as sea-level rise and the impact on the tourist industry; and eutrophication of fresh water bodies due to excessive loading of organic matter and related costs to health care. While among 2

3 the environmental constituencies there is awareness of these linkages they have yet to make an impact on policy making, planning and budget allocation processes for national development. Governance and Implementation Various challenges have been highlighted by the SEA countries with regard to implementation of the UNCCD with resource constraints topping the list - namely, financial. It has been pointed out that the lack of human and technical resources have obstructed efforts at the national level in setting up institutional frameworks, as well as, hindered coordination and management of implementation activities. In this regard, the SEA countries have requested for capacity building as a means to address some of the bottlenecks. In addition to capacity building however, significant work would need to be undertaken for facilitating a reorientation in policy and other enabling frameworks as well as delivery mechanisms, so as to prepare the countries to better implement UNCCD and other Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs). In response to the above referred to and other challenges, the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) regional grouping, through its ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Environment (AMME), adopted a strategy that pursues synergistic implementation of MEAs as a means to achieve resource-use efficiencies. This strategy was presented to the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg, South Africa in It can be argued that this approach is an effective and pragmatic response given the commonalities of the drivers and solutions to environmental degradation in the subregion. The above referred to strategy, argues that when environmental issues are dealt with separately, either as land degradation, biodiversity conservation, or adaptation to climate change, they do not command the political attention that they ought to. Despite the economic costs to development being high with relation to each of these environmental problems, they however come into sharp focus when the costs are added up. As mentioned earlier, the costs associated with forest fires and haze during was estimated at US$6 billion. The addition of social, biodiversity and climate change costs to this figure would reach a sum that could not be ignored from a national development or global environmental services perspective. With regard to financial constraints associated with MEA implementation, one of the preliminary findings of the Case Study on Inter-Linkages for the ASEAN Regional Implementation of the WSSD Plan of Action (a case study commissioned by ASEAN and undertaken by UNU and UNEP) casts the problem in a different light it concludes that the main constraint with regard to implementation has to do more with effective utilization of internal and external financial resources, rather than the lack of resources itself (UNU 2003, p.8). Policy Implications for Donor Partners There are several policy implications for donor partners in this program that will support their efforts in pursuing sustainable development objectives and for achieving the Millennium Development Goals. The following are a few: 1. Enhanced sustainability of donor projects and programmes as a result of an adoption of the principles of ecosystem or landscape level management of natural resources; 3

4 2. Greater overall impact by working in harmony with other partners under an agreed upon umbrella framework that articulates a common understanding of the issues and potential solutions; 3. Opportunities for complementary programme and project development with modalities of co-financing and parallel financing leading to resource use efficiencies; 4. Reduce transaction costs through the adoption of donor harmonisation and alignment; and 5. Increased potential to leverage sustained national political commitment for necessary policy reform processes. PROGRAMME APPROACH The Global Mechanism s proposed programme will be linked to the Asian Development Bank s (ADB) Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) Core Environment Programme s (CEP) component 5 programme development, delivery and sustainable financing. Under this component, ADB seeks to initiate strategies and mechanisms to promote the financial sustainability of efforts to conserve natural systems and environmental quality in the GMS and as such, the proposed Global Mechanism s synergies approach contributes to achieving that objective. The link with ADB s GMS/CEP will allow for a practical example to be undertaken demonstrating how a synergistic approach could be adopted with a sub-group of adjacent GMS countries. The convergent-platform, bringing both the countries and development cooperation partners together, shall operate at the subregional level to benefit from economies of scale and shall host expert thematic consultations on strategic topics, as well as, conduct targeted capacity building for relevant GMS and non-gms South East Asian country stakeholders to enable them to pursue, at a later date, synergistic implementation of MEAs at the national level. The non-gms countries participation in this initiative shall be facilitated by the Global Mechanism. Work under this initiative will be guided by an approach that pursues processoriented activities supported with evidence-based knowledge products. The core knowledge products will be developed in the form of analyses, diagnostic reports, training tools and advocacy materials. They will constitute the basis for discussion and consensus building, as well as, for capacity building under the convergentplatform. The following are some of the key activities (undertaken concurrently for the most part) that will guide the development and implementation of the programme and potential agencies that may take a lead in implementing these activities: 1. Formation of a partnership between the GMS and non-gms SEA countries and interested development cooperation partners for establishing a convergent-platform (Global Mechanism together with ADB and FAO); 2. Drawing on national and regional expertise, as well as, expertise from international institutions, develop knowledge products that elaborate the arguments for integrated approaches to MEA implementation into national development planning and budgetary frameworks, as well as, into external development cooperation frameworks. The knowledge products, in the form of a series of policy documents, will be developed based on the analyses listed in Table 1 section a) below (ADB together with WB, FAO, UNEP and UNU); 4

5 3. Develop practical approaches for donor harmonisation and alignment with regard to synergistic implementation of MEAs (GM together with OECD/DAC, ADB, WB, IFAD, UNDP and select bilaterals); 4. Undertake a sequence of subregional workshops for presenting, discussing and gaining consensus on the knowledge products being developed (GM together with ADB and FAO); 5. Develop a transboundary project with a group of adjacent GMS countries where UNCCD, CBD and UNFCCC cross-cutting aspects can be brought into sharp focus under one programme and investment framework. This initiative could be submitted for GEF cofinancing as an integrated project (ADB together with GM, FAO, WB, UNEP, IFAD, UNDP and select bilaterals); 6. Develop a targeted capacity building programme drawing on the relevant knowledge products developed under 2 and 3, as well as, content from other GM training initiatives, for establishment of a national team of senior policy decision makers, civil society actors and other relevant stakeholders who will be knowledgeable in capturing innovative sources of financing and developing a strategy for mainstreaming synergistic implementation of MEAs into national planning, development frameworks and budgetary processes (GM together with FAO, UNDP, UNEP and UNU); and 7. Country level actions spearheaded by the national team for executing the synergies strategy. Among others, the strategy shall focus on the following: inter-sectoral models for operationalising synergies; national priority interventions focusing on synergies with high added-value; integration of these priorities into the planning and budgetary allocation process; and mobilisation of external complementary sources of finances (Lead agency will be determined based on level of engagement). Focus Areas, Knowledge Products and Potential Partners Focus Areas Knowledge Products/Analyses Potential Partners a) Mainstreaming synergistic implementation of MEAs into policy, planning, development frameworks and budgetary processes at all relevant levels within a country. Past and ongoing resource flows for implementation of MEAs in SEA countries Economic efficiencies and effectiveness, ecological benefits, and costs associated with synergistic implementation of MEAs for meeting sustainable development goals of the SEA countries New and emerging modalities, tools and approaches of international development cooperation financing, differentiated by low-income, lowmiddle income and upper-middle income groupings of the SEA countries Innovative sources of financing (adaptation to climate change etc.) SEA Countries UNCCD Focal Points ASEAN Senior Officials on the Environment (ASOEN) GM ADB FAO WB GEF UNU UNEP UNDP UNESCAP UNCCD/Sec UNFCCC/Sec CBD/Sec IFAD 5

6 b) Implementation of a transboundary project that addresses UNCCD, CBD and UNFCCC cross-cutting issues under one programme and investment framework c) Donor harmonisation and alignment with country policy, planning and budgetary processes to ensure, among others, focus on country priorities, reduced administrative transaction costs and negotiation fatigue, harmonisation and coordination of donor programmes and projects, and increased financing for SLM. d) Capacity building of a cadre of senior policy decision makers, civil society actors and other relevant stakeholders Table 1 Potential Partners Approaches for mainstreaming synergistic implementation of MEAs into national policy, planning, development frameworks and budgetary processes, as well as, into external development cooperation frameworks Project brief for submission to GEF Approaches for donor harmonisation and alignment with regard to development cooperation policy, modalities and implementation. Drawing on the work of mainstreaming and donor harmonisation and other GM training initiatives, develop an adult-learning pedagogical approach, and training materials for undertaking training to develop an execution strategy for mainstreaming synergistic implementation of MEAs. IUCN IDRC SARC MRC ADB GM GEF FAO WB UNEP IFAD UNDP select bilaterals SEA Countries ASEAN Senior Officials on the Environment (ASOEN) GM ADB FAO WB IFAD Bilateral donors OECD DAC UNU UNEP UNDP UNESCAP IDRC UNCCD/Sec select bilaterals SEA Countries GM ADB FAO GEF IFAD A regional training institute There are a number of national, regional and international institutions that have been working in the SEA region in relation to implementation of MEAs. Several of them are already advanced with regard to synergistic implementation of MEAs. The foundation 6

7 for undertaking this work is already in place with various technical expertises readily available. The above list of potential partners is far from comprehensive and a more thorough analysis will need to be undertaken. Currently, however the core partners that have been identified are the ADB and FAO and effort shall be taken to make the core group a critical mass of development cooperation partners. DURATION A realistic timeline for undertaking this initiative will require 4 5 years; consultations shall commence during the last quarter of PROGRAMME COORDINATION The Global Mechanism shall take the lead in coordinating the programme together with Vietnam and Indonesia and the core group of development cooperation partners. BUDGET A detailed budget shall be developed together with the detailed programme document. Funding for the programme will need to be mobilised from a variety of sources including the partner institutions. ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN AND NEXT STEPS 1. Consultations undertaken on the Concept Note with the SEA countries and partners at the Seventh Regional Meeting of Asian and Pacific Focal Points on National Report Preparation, Bangkok, Thailand 7-11 August Consultations undertaken with the SEA countries forestry constituency at the FAO organised conference on Financial Mechanisms for Sustainable Forest Management: Sharing Experiences from Latin America and Asia-Pacific from November 2006 in Chiang Mai, Thailand. 3. Consultations already undertaken with international partners and in principle agreement reached: ADB, IFAD, FAO, and UNEP. 4. Obtain an agreement with the SEA countries for further programme development at the UNCCD Fifth Committee for Review of the Implementation of the Convention (CRIC.5) from March 2007 in Buenos Aires, Argentina 5. Undertake consultations with subregional institutions and international partners: ASEAN/ASOEN, World Bank, UNDP, ESCAP and others 6. According to results of consultations with SEA countries and external partners, and mobilisation of GM in-house expertise, a full-fledged programme shall be developed. The programme will include a detailed workplan providing estimated timelines for each component and associated costs. Programme development will be undertaken post CRIC A subregional workshop shall be convened to endorse the programme subsequent to the programme document being circulated for comment (opportunities for organising this workshop back-to-back with another regional meeting will be pursued). Ideally, the subregional workshop should be convened prior to COP.8 in October Initiate implementation 7

8 ANNEX 1 BACKGROUND Biogeographic and Socio-Economic Features The South East Asia (SEA) 2 region is made up of peninsular mainland and archipelagos, is culturally rich, and is endowed with diverse and unique natural resources. It is characterised by its tropical humid forest cover of over 48% in comparison to a global average of less than 30%. Three of the seventeen mega-biodiversity countries are located in the SEA region. In addition, the rich aquatic and marine ecosystems form an intricate web that intersperse the land. The majority of the half billion population of the SEA countries are tightly coupled with these natural resources for their livelihoods. With the exception of Brunei, which is a non-oecd high-income country, the SEA countries can be grouped according to the following categories: 1) low-income (Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Timor Leste and Viet Nam); 2) lower-middle income (Indonesia and the Philippines); and 3) upper-middle income countries (Malaysia and Thailand) (World Bank, 2005). Over the last 2 3 decades, the majority of SEA countries have been undergoing profound socio-economic and environmental changes. Despite the variations in income levels and disruption caused by the financial crisis of , the majority of the SEA countries have been advancing at a steady pace. While this rapid development trajectory has brought substantial benefits, it has been accompanied with significant social and environmental costs; predictably, affecting the poorer segments of the population disproportionately. Rapid population expansion has been one of the significant drivers of environmental degradation in addition to political instability, trade pressures, perverse incentives, inadequate law enforcement, to name a few. As stated in The Changing Environment of Southeast Asia (SARCS 1998), in the 1800 s the populations of Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand were approximately 8.5, 6 and 1.7 million SEA Countries and UNCCD The following countries are members of the UNCCD South East Asia Subregional Action Programme (SEASRAP): 1) Brunei Darussalam; 2) Cambodia, 3) Indonesia; 4) Lao People s Democratic Republic; 5) Malaysia; 6) Myanmar; 7) Philippines; 8) Singapore; 9) Thailand; 10) Timor Leste; and 11) Viet Nam. Apart from Brunei, Singapore and Timor Leste, all of the other countries have developed their National Action Programmes (NAPs). Both the national and subregional action programmes were developed with the financial support of the Global Mechanism (with the exception of Malaysia) and technical and financial support of the UNCCD Secretariat. A SEASRAP launching workshop was convened in Viet Nam in December 2005 with participation from all the SEA countries (except Brunei and Singapore), as well as, the UNCCD Secretariat, UNDP, IUCN and the Global Mechanism (GM). The draft SEASRAP consists of two programme components: 1) Geoinformatics development for land degradation control and drought mitigation; and 2) Sustainable land and integrated ecosystem management, particularly in drought prone, seasonally arid and food insecure areas. Complementing the two main programme areas are four cross-cutting programmes: i) information network development; ii) exchange and transfer of science, technology and traditional knowledge; iii) capacity building and community empowerment; and iv) resource mobilisation and partnership building. The SEASRAP countries requested the GM to develop a resource mobilization and partnership building initiative in response to the cross-cutting programme iv). Indonesia and Viet Nam were selected by the countries to act as Task Managers and liaison between the GM and the SEASRAP countries. All SEASRAP member countries present at the workshop committed themselves to fully engage in the preparation and implementation of the resource mobilisation and partnership building initiative. respectively. By 1960 these figures were 96.7, 27.9 and 27 million. The United Nations medium variant projections for 2010 are 229, 86.6 and 75.6 million. One of the consequences of rapid population growth has been the demand for greater food production with consequent expansion of agriculture and aquaculture into respectively forests and 2 With the exception of Timor Leste, all the other SEASRAP countries are members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN); for the purpose of this Concept Note the SEA region and ASEAN are used interchangeably. 8

9 wetlands. Conversion of forests into agricultural land combined with large scale industrial logging and forest fires have led to a high rate of deforestation. Similarly, demand for water has increased rapidly in pace with population expansion with a corollary dynamic of diminishing water quality. Deforestation rates vary widely among the countries; from the ASEAN region lost 31.4 million hectares of forest, a rate of about 15,700 sq km per year (an area greater than Lebanon). The following 10-year period from saw an increase in deforestation, the average annual loss, increasing by 48% to 23,260 sq km per year (an area greater than Belize); Indonesia, Myanmar, Malaysia and Thailand responsible for up to 90% of the total (ASEAN 2002). The social and environmental costs in terms of loss of livelihoods, ecological services and biodiversity have not been calculated with any accuracy however it can be safely assumed that it amounts to several billion per year based on figures related to forest fire and haze alone, which was estimated at US$6 billion during (excluding loss of biodiversity and social costs) (ADB 2001). The ASEAN region is geographically susceptible to natural climate induced and other disasters; it constantly contends with landslides, floods, cyclones, hurricanes and tsunamis. The impacts of these events take their toll on the national economies of the countries and leave large numbers of people stripped of their livelihoods. In the Philippines, between , over 80% of rice losses were due to weather disasters, costing US$39.2 million in 1990 alone (World Bank 2006). SEA Countries and External Partners Response The ASEAN countries are cognizant of the impact of environmental degradation and have adopted various national, suregional and international measures to protect natural resources, mitigate land degradation processes and contend with climate change impacts. All the countries have Accepted, Acceded or Ratified the UNCCD; with the exception of Brunei and Timor Leste all the other SEA countries have Acceded or Ratified the UNCBD; and with the exception of Brunei and Timor Leste all the SEA countries have ratified both the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol. At national level, the SEA countries have developed several environmental action programmes and have undertaken policy reform processes however capacity constraints have stifled implementation. Through the ASEAN regional grouping, the countries have developed strong regional collaboration, among others, in the area of environment and sustainable development with several agreements having been crafted for collective action. Common positions on global environmental issues however need to be translated into consistent national level responses. An expert group entitled the ASEAN Senior Officials on Environment (ASOEN) was established to formulate, implement and monitor regional environmental programmes; it reports to the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on the Environment (AMME). Also, a Working Group on Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) was established and together with the United Nations University (UNU) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), a case study was undertaken to identify linkages and synergies among the MEAs, as well as, between the national institutions involved in their implementation. The preliminary findings point to various opportunities for translating synergy concepts into national level actions (discussed further under the rationale section). External development cooperation support to the ASEAN region has come from both bilateral and multilateral sources. Net ODA flows have averaged around US$6 billion at 2002 prices and exchange rates (Fukasaku et al 2005). Post the financial crisis of ODA priorities shifted to social infrastructure (education, health, water and other social services). However, development cooperation partners are increasingly beginning to identify environment as a priority as demonstrated by the launching of the World Bank (WB) Environment Strategy for East Asia and the Pacific in March While one of the priorities of this strategy focuses on urban issues the other two emphasise governance of natural resource management and response to global environmental challenges such as climate change. The fragmentation of habitat due to anthropogenic activity requires the conservation of contiguous areas to ensure that viable populations of threatened species can survive. In 9

10 response, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) launched its Core Environment Programme (CEP) for the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) focusing on establishing biodiversity conservation corridors, undertaking strategic environmental assessments in economic corridors, environmental performance measurements, and development of sustainable financing mechanisms to name a few. Similarly, several bilaterals are increasingly looking to address environmental issues through their ODA support. 10

11 ANNEX 2 SERVICES OF THE GLOBAL MECHANISM (GM) The GM follows an approach of process oriented work together with the development of knowledge products together with interested partners for mainstreaming sustainable land management into national and development cooperation partners programming frameworks. The GM brings a wealth of knowledge with regard to partnership building for resource mobilisation (see Box.1 on Central Asia) for realising the overall objective of establishing comprehensive financing strategies for UNCCD implementation at the national level. The GM s strategy focuses on achieving the following outcomes: Broadening stakeholder participation and establishing productive partnerships between national and external actors; Engendering a common understanding of the root causes of desertification; Enhancing enabling policy, legislative, institutional and incentive frameworks for improved land management and poverty alleviation; and Securing dedicated conventional and innovative financing for UNCCD implementation over the long term. The GM is a centre of excellence providing strategic advisory services on financing UNCCD implementation and in this regard has developed a number of Strategic Programmes to broaden resources for UNCCD implementation. Through GM s Strategic Programmes of Economics and Financing Instruments; Mainstreaming the UNCCD into the Broader Development Agendas Of Affected Country Parties; Compensation for Ecosystem Services; South South Cooperation; Market Access and Trade; Private Sector; Civil Society; and Information, Communication and Knowledge Management the GM is able to further broaden perspective on synergistic implementation of MEAs. As highlighted earlier, the changes in development financing taking place at the international level require a more strategic response at the national level for mobilising finance for UNCCD implementation. In this regard, under the Strategic Programme on Economics and Financing Instruments, the GM is developing a concept of a National Financing Strategy (NFS). Box.1 In Central Asia, the GM spearheaded the formation of a multi-donor consortium entitled the Strategic Partnership for UNCCD Implementation in Central Asian Countries (SPA) 3. The major outcome this partnership was the development of the Central Asian Countries Initiative for Land Management (CACILM) led by the ADB - a Global Environment Facility (GEF) ten year, multicountry, multi-donor programme promoting sustainable land management (SLM). It is anticipated that over the 10 year period, an estimated investment of $1.4 billion will be invested in SLM related activities. The launching phase has identified approximately $155 million of which the countries, development partners and GEF are respectively contributing roughly $24, $110 and $20 million. A NFS helps leverage various public and private financial sources both external and domestic - by recognising their complementary roles as well as the relation between them. Financial instruments can directly generate or influence the financial flows of funds by attracting or re-directing them (e.g. fiscal or policy incentives and disincentives). A NFS may furthermore involve financial mechanisms such as GEF, ODA delivery mechanisms, national and international funds and implementation frameworks and compensation for ecosystem services schemes. Under the GM s Resource Mobilisation and Partnership Building for SEA Countries initiative, the NFS will support the policy process for MEA implementation. 3 The SPA consists of the following bilateral and multilateral institutions: the Asian Development Bank (ADB); the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA); the CCD Project of the German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ); the Global Mechanism of the UNCCD; the International Centre for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA); the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD); the Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation (SDC); United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and World Bank (WB). For more information see, and 11

12 ANNEX 3 REFERENCES ASEAN (2002) Report To The World Summit On Sustainable Development. ASEAN Secretariat, Jakarta, Asian Development Bank (ADB) (2001). Fire, Smoke, and Haze: The ASEAN Response Strategy. Ed. S. Tahir Qadri, Manila, Philippines Fukasaku, K., Kawai, M., Plummer M.G. and Trzeciak-Duval A. (2005) Policy Coherence Towards East Asia: Development Challenges For OECD Countries, OECD Development Centre, Policy Brief No. 26 SARCS (1998) Global Environmental Change and Sustainable Development in Southeast Asia: Science Plan for a SARCS Integrated Study. (Eds) L. Lebel & W. Steffen with the Southeast Asian Regional Committee for START (SARCS), Thailand. United Nations University (UNU) (2003). Work in Progress: A Review of Research Activities of the United Nations University. Public Affairs Section, Vol. 17, Number 1, Spring World Bank (WB) (2005) Environment Strategy for East Asia and the Pacific. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Washington D.C. USA World Bank (WB) (2006) East Asia Update: Solid Growth, New Challenges Special Focus: Climate Change and East Asia: Challenges and Opportunities. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Washington D.C. USA 12