At a glance
Growing national political sensitivity and strong Ministry of Environment (MoE) leadership have enabled the Climate Change Department (CCD) within the National Council for Sustainable Development (NCSD), supported by CCCA interventions, to achieve significant milestones in mainstreaming CC at national policy levels. This reflects high levels of national ownership and commitment that appear in sharp contrast with that of CCCA Phase 1 evaluations. The project invested significantly in building capacity in line agencies for prioritizing or mainstreaming CC activities and respective CCTTs (Climate Change Technical Teams) were instrumental in developing Climate Change Action Plans (CCAPs).
However, the limited extent to which agencies appear to maintain active CCTTs to inform strategic planning and budgeting and update CCAPs, suggests that further sensitization and capacity building to achieve CC mainstreaming within line agencies are needed. Of 14 agencies that developed CCAPs, only 3 have confirmed ongoing CCTT meetings, with limited record-keeping of discussions or decisions made. Further capacity-building for Cost-benefit Analysis to inform project-level planning and budgeting for mainstreaming climate proofing appears to offer opportunities that are as yet untested. A scaling up of capacity-building initiatives is recommended to ensure that sensitization reaches minimum threshold levels within all agencies and departments. Meanwhile, CCCA's present support for elaboration of the national CC M&E framework, MoFE budgeting guidelines for CC, and CDC/CRDB and NCSD/DCC tracking and mobilization of international climate finance will help to drive accountability for CC mainstreaming within agencies from above.
There is great scope for complementaries across the NCSD's climate change portfolio, and with a range of line agency climate change relevant projects funded by different funding partners. However, these are vastly under-realized due to the absence of a CC Technical Working Group (TWG) and limited sector-wide coordination or even information sharing among agencies and donors. At least one GoC agency commented on the administrative burden of collaborating with separate donors in related projects. Furthermore, the specific contracting modalities of various climate-relevant projects appear to limit the potential for developing synergies during implementation in particular. This suggests the need for further support to GoC agencies in strategically and actively guiding project identification and formulation processes with donors rather than accepting projects as proposed and simply engaging at implementation stage. Specific potential areas for synergies with several UNDP, EUD, and Swedish-funded projects were discussed CCCA PM.