Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Biodiversity-related Official Development Assistance 2016

667 views

Published on

Mainstreaming in the energy and mining, infrastructure, manufacturing and processing, and health sectors.

This brochure presents analysis of biodiversity-related official development assistance (ODA) by members of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) over the period 2009-2016.

Published in: Environment
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Biodiversity-related Official Development Assistance 2016

  1. 1. 25 BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 BIODIVERSITY- RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Mainstreaming in the energy and mining, infrastructure, manufacturing and processing, and health sectors THE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE: ENABLING EFFECTIVE DEVELOPMENT
  2. 2. BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, commit the international community to a set of ambitious goals on ‘living in harmony with nature’ and ‘leaving no one behind’. With nearly half of the world’s population relying directly on natural resources for its livelihood[1], the need for immediate and ambitious action to protect life on land and below water is evident. Development co-operation supports developing countries in their efforts to mainstream biodiversity considerations into national and sectoral planning processes in support of sustainable development. Examples include technical assistance to strengthen enabling policies and institutional capacity, and direct financial support to activities related to biodiversity conservation and sustainable use. This brochure presents analysis of biodiversity-related official development assistance (ODA) by members of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) over the period 2009-2016[2] . Further, it explores the scale and focus of biodiversity mainstreaming into four sectors that will be discussed at the 14th Conference of the Parties (COP) of the CBD in December 2018: i) energy and mining, ii) infrastructure, iii) manufacturing and processing, and iv) health. While these sectors are key pressures on biodiversity loss (e.g. hydropower dams, transport networks through natural habitats, large scale mining operations), they can also support action on biodiversity (e.g. enhanced sustainability of manufacturing supply chains). 2
  3. 3. 3• Bilateral biodiversity-related ODA by members of the DAC reached USD 8.3 billion per year in 2015-16, accounting for 6% of total bilateral ODA. • Africa accounted for the highest share of biodiversity-related ODA (34%), followed by Asia (23%), America (15%), Europe (13%), and Oceania (1%). 14% was unallocated by country and region. • Biodiversity-related ODA was evenly distributed across income groups, but the type of instrument used varied: grants dominated in Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and other Low Income Countries (LICs) (88%), while loans prevailed in Lower- and Upper-Middle Income Countries (LMICs and UMICs) (62% and 69% respectively). • Over the period 2012-16, the majority of biodiversity-related ODA was committed by a small number of providers, with the top three accounting for 46%. Over the same period, biodiversity-related ODA was distributed across a number of countries, with some receiving large commitments for individual activities that significantly impacted the average commitments received. • Six sectors accounted for nearly 90% of biodiversity-related ODA in 2015-16, with support for i) general environmental protection and ii) water supply and sanitation accounting for over 50%. Across sectors, the level of mainstreaming varied. • Biodiversity-related ODA to the four sectors to be discussed at COP14 accounted for: – 1% (USD 151 million per year) of total ODA to the ENERGY AND MINING SECTORS; a decrease in absolute and relative terms since 2011-12; – 10% (USD 1.9 billion per year) of total ODA to the INFRASTRUCTURE SECTOR, a sharp increase from previous years that had seen a gradual decrease; – Less than 1% (USD 65 million per year) of total ODA to the MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING SECTORS, a gradual decrease from 2009-2010; – 3% (USD 221 million per year) of total ODA to the HEALTH SECTOR, a small decrease from previous years in absolute and relative terms. Key highlights 3BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016
  4. 4. BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Biodiversity-related ODA reached USD 8.3 billion per year in 2015-16, representing 6% of total bilateral ODA commitments BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA, 2009-2016 TWO-YEAR AVERAGES AND SHARES OF TOTAL BILATERAL ODA Biodiversity-related ODA by members of the DAC reached USD 8.3 billion per year in 2015-16, representing 6% of total bilateral ODA commitments. This reflects a steady increase in absolute terms, and as a share of total bilateral ODA. Just under half (44%, USD 3.7 billion per year) targeted biodiversity as a primary or‘principal’objective. This suggests that these activities would not have been funded but for their biodiversity- related goals. The rest (56%, USD 4.6 billion per year), targeted biodiversity as a secondary or‘significant’objective, indicating that biodiversity considerations were mainstreamed into development co-operation activities with other primary objectives. 2.0 2.6 2.4 3.7 2.7 3.0 3.5 4.6 4% 5% 5% 6% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2009-10 2011-12 2013-14 2015-16 USDbillion,commitments,constant2016prices Principal Significant Biodiversity as a share of total bilateral ODA 4
  5. 5. 5 BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Africa accounted for the highest share (34%) of biodiversity- related ODA in 2015-16, grants contributing 78% BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA BY REGION AND INSTRUMENT 2015-16 AVERAGE AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL ODA TO REGION In 2015-16, one third (34%, USD 2.8 billion per year) of biodiversity-related ODA was committed to Africa, representing 7% of total ODA commitments to the region. Grants accounted for 78%. In comparison, 23% (or USD 1.9 billion per year) was committed to Asia, representing 4% of total ODA to the region. In Asia, loans accounted for 54%.  5 Note: 14% of biodiversity-related ODA falls into an ‘unallocated’category that is not earmarked to a country or region. Africa USD 2.8 bn (7%) America USD 1.2 bn (10%) Asia USD 1.9 bn (4%) Europe USD 1.0 bn (13%) Oceania USD 0.09 bn (4%) Debt instrument Grant
  6. 6. BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Biodiversity-related ODA was evenly distributed across income groups in 2015-16 BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA BY INCOME GROUP AND INSTRUMENT 2015-16 AVERAGE AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL ODA TO INCOME GROUPS Bilateral biodiversity-related ODA was evenly distributed across income groups, with Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and other Low-Income Countries (LICs) receiving 23%, and Lower- and Upper-Middle Income Countries (LMICs and UMICs) 26% and 24% respectively. The remaining 26% was unallocated by country or income group, supporting regional or multi-regional activities. In terms of the instruments used, there was a marked differences across income groups: for LDCs and other LICs, the majority (88%) was committed in the form of grants; for LMICs and UMICs, loans accounted for the majority (62% and 69% respectively). 5% 6% 7% 4% 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 LDCs and other LICs LMICs UMICs Unallocated USDbillion.commitments,constant2016prices Grant Debt instrument Biodiversity as a share of total ODA to income group 6
  7. 7. 7 BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 The majority of biodiversity-related ODA was committed by a small number of providers PROVIDERS OF BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA 2012-16 AVERAGE AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL ODA BY PROVIDER Over the period 2012-16, three providers accounted for nearly half (46%) of commitments; ten for 90%. For the majority of providers, biodiversity was marked as a significant objective in broader development activities. The United States, Germany, France and Japan provided the largest amounts of bilateral biodiversity-related ODA. Norway, Iceland, France and Belgium dedicated the highest shares of their ODA portfolios to biodiversity-related activities. Note: 18% of biodiversity-related ODA was unallocated by country or region. 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 200 0 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 UnitedStates Germany France Japan EU(excl.EIB) Norway Sweden Australia UnitedKingdom Denmark Belgium Netherlands Switzerland Canada Italy Spain Ireland Korea Austria Finland Luxembourg NewZealand Iceland CzechRepublic Poland Portugal Greece SlovakRepublic Slovenia USDmillion,commitments,constant2016prices Principal Significant Biodiversity as a share of total ODA by provider (right-hand axis) - 7 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 200 0 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 UnitedStates Germany France Japan EU(excl.EIB) Norway Sweden Australia UnitedKingdom Denmark Belgium Netherlands Switzerland Canada Italy Spain Ireland Korea Austria Finland Luxembourg NewZealand Iceland CzechRepublic Poland Portugal Greece SlovakRepublic Slovenia USDmillion,commitments,constant2016prices Principal Significant Biodiversity as a share of total ODA by provider (right-hand axis) -
  8. 8. BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 A large number of countries received biodiversity-related ODA; a few received very large commitments TOP RECIPIENTS OF BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA 2012-16 AVERAGE AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL ODA RECEIVED Over the period 2012-16, a large number of countries regularly received biodiversity-related ODA. In some cases, support to individual activities significantly changed the average level of biodiversity-finance to that country. For example, Ukraine received in 2012-14 on average USD 10 million per year in bilateral biodiversity-related ODA. In 2015, it received a USD 1 billion loan from Japan in support of a sewage treatment plant in the capital Kiev. The plant treats all sewage water from Kiev and surrounding cities before it gets discharged into the Dnieper River. It is indicated that the loan included biodiversity as a principal objective. This loan from Japan makes Ukraine one of the largest recipients of bilateral biodiversity-related ODA. 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 0 50 100 150 200 250 USDmillion,commitments,constant2016prices India Turkey Ukraine Colombia Brazil Indonesia Ethiopia VietNam Philippines DRC Kenya China Senegal Tanzania Bangladesh Principal Significant Biodiversity as a share of total ODA to country (right-hand axis) 8
  9. 9. 9 BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Mainstreaming of biodiversity into sectors The Aichi biodiversity targets under the CBD encourage Parties to mainstream biodiversity across government and society by integrating, where appropriate, the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity into national and local planning processes, poverty reduction and development strategies. Subsequent decisions by Parties have recognised that the objectives of the Convention can only be achieved if biodiversity considerations are integrated across all sectors. Most economic sectors rely to varying degrees on biodiversity and related ecosystem services. In turn, they can also exert adverse impacts on biodiversity, such as pollution, over-exploitation and habitat loss. Mainstreaming of biodiversity considerations is therefore key in realising potential and sustainable growth, while at the same time, maintaining the wellbeing of the natural environment. This section explores the scale and focus of bilateral biodiversity-related ODA into four sectors that will be discussed at the 14th Conference of the Parties (COP) of the CBD: i) energy and mining, ii) infrastructure, iii) manufacturing and processing, and iv) health. 9
  10. 10. BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Six sectors accounted for nearly 90% of biodiversity-related ODA TOP SECTORS RECEIVING BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA AND LEVEL OF MAINSTREAMING 2015-16 AVERAGE In 2015-16, commitments to general environmental protection[3] accounted for almost a third (30%) of biodiversity-related ODA, followed by the water supply and sanitation (22%), and the agriculture, forestry and fishing (17%) sectors[4] . The share of activities that targeted biodiversity as a‘principal’or‘significant’ objective provides an indication of the level of biodiversity mainstreaming into these sectors. For instance, 36% of total bilateral ODA to the water supply and sanitation sector included considerations of biodiversity objectives, whereas this share was 3% for the health sector. Some sectors with a high impact on biodiversity received smaller shares of bilateral biodiversity- related ODA, such as energy and mining (1%, USD 151 million per year) and tourism (0.1%, USD 5 million per year). 18% 18% 64% 1% 2% 97%Health 2% 98% Government Civil Society 3% 5% 92%Other Multisector 9% 13% 78% Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing Water Supply Sanitation 36% 24% 40% General Environmental Protection Top sectors receiving bilateral biodiversity-related ODA, total volume and share of total USD 2.49 bn (30%) USD 1.85 bn (22%) USD 1.37 bn (17%) USD 0.88 bn (11%) USD 0.29 bn (3%) USD 0.22 bn (3%) Biodiversity as a share of total bilateral ODA to sector Principal Significant Non-biodiversity 10
  11. 11. 11 BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 In the context of the CBD, mainstreaming of biodiversity into the energy and mining sectors refers to extractive industries (fossil fuels, minerals and metals), as well as energy production and supply[1] . While these sectors rely extensively on ecosystem services for their operations, the natural environment is also relied upon for the mediation of waste. At the same time, energy and mining projects in developing countries are well known pressures on biodiversity loss. For example, the development of hydropower dams can result in deforestation and also impacts river and ocean ecosystems, while mining activities have been associated with land degradation and forest loss. Despite the potential of the energy and mining sectors[5] to adversely affect biodiversity, the focus on biodiversity in these sectors has been minimal. In 2015-16, 1.2% (or USD 151 million per year) of commitments included biodiversity considerations, down from 2.5% (or USD 221 million per year) in 2011-12. At the same time, the majority of activities included biodiversity as a significant rather than a principal objective. Only 1% of total bilateral ODA commitments to the energy and mining sectors included biodiversity-considerations in 2015-16 BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA TO ENERGY AND MINING SECTORS, 2009-2016 TWO-YEAR AVERAGES AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL BILATERAL ODA TO SECTORS 5 18 40 17 67 203 125 135 1.0% 2.5% 1.7% 1.2% -0.4% 0.1% 0.6% 1.1% 1.6% 2.1% 2.6% 50 0 100 150 200 250 2009 -10 2011 -12 2013 -14 2015 -16 USDmillion,commitments,constant2016prices Principal Significant Biodiversity to sectors as a share of total ODA to sectors 11 ENERGYMINING
  12. 12. BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 LDCs and other LICs received 82% of commitments to the energy and mining sectors in the form of grants BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA TO ENERGY AND MINING SECTORS BY INCOME GROUP AND INSTRUMENT 2015-16 AVERAGE AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL ODA TO SECTORS Africa received the majority (81%, USD 122 million per year) of biodiversity-related ODA to the energy and mining sectors, 52% in the form of loans. Across income groups, LDCs and other LICs received 37% (or USD 56 million per year) and UMICs 33% (or USD 50 million per year). While the former primarily received this support in the form of grants (82%), loans dominated commitments to the latter group (67%). 1.8% 0.4% 2.2% 1.7% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 LDCs and other LICs LMICs UMICs Unallocated income (regional) USDmillion,commitments,constant2016prices Grants Debt instruments Equity and shares in CIVs Biodiversity as a share of total ODA to income groups and sectors 12 ENERGYMINING
  13. 13. 13 BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Ten countries received almost two thirds (63%) of biodiversity- related ODA to the energy and mining sectors over the period 2012-16. The high level of mainstreaming in Cameroon is explained by two loans by France totalling USD 136 million in support of a hydropower project. Commitments to Tanzania included a USD 71 million grant by Sweden in support of increased rural electrification through the provision of distribution lines. Over the same period, France was the largest provider of biodiversity-related ODA to the energy and mining sectors, accounting for 53% (or USD 103 million per year). Out of this, the large majority (99%) was provided in the form of loans. Other large providers included Canada (12%, USD 22 million per year) and Sweden (10%, 20 million per year), both of which provided grants only. Over the period 2012-16, five countries received almost half (48%) of biodiversity-related ODA to the energy and mining sectors TOP RECIPIENTS OF BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA TO ENERGY AND MINING SECTORS 2012-16 AVERAGE AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL ODA TO SECTOR IN COUNTRY 90% 3% 11% 7% 7% 49% 22% 28% 5% 4% 5 10 0 15 20 25 30 Cameroon India Tanzania South Africa Pakistan Mauritius Cabo Verde Burkina Faso Uganda Colombia USDmillion,commitments,constant2016prices Grants Debt instruments Biodiversity to sector as a share of total ODA to sector 13 Note: 2% of biodiversity-related commitments to the energy and mining sectors was not specified by country or region. ENERGYMINING
  14. 14. BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Principal Significant 715 393 151 917 398 343 273 1,031 7% 5% 3% 10% 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2009-10 2011-12 2013-14 2015-16 USDmillion,coomitments,constant2016prices Biodiversity to sector as a share of total ODA to sector The infrastructure sector saw a sharp increase in the level of biodiversity-related ODA in 2014-15 BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE SECTOR, 2009-2016 TWO-YEAR AVERAGES AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL BILATERAL ODA TO THE SECTOR The infrastructure sector provides the physical structures and facilities needed for the operations of a society. This includes buildings, transport and communication networks, water and sanitation. Often, the infrastructure sector also encompasses energy, but energy is excluded here since it (together with mining) was examined earlier. While crucial for economic development and poverty reduction, infrastructure development has major, and historically often adverse, impacts on natural resources and ecosystems. Examples include the fragmentation or destruction of ecosystems during the construction of transport networks, pipelines and electrical power lines, air, water and noise pollution, and habitat loss associated with the construction and operation of coastal, offshore and subsea infrastructures. 10% (or USD 1.9 billion per year) of total bilateral ODA to the infrastructure sector[6] in 2015-16 included a focus on biodiversity, either as a principal (47%) or a significant (53%) objective. Consideration of biodiversity in this sector saw a large increase in 2015-16, after a steady decline for a few years. This was in part due to ten large loans provided in 2015 and 2016 (each exceeding USD 100 million, and one of nearly USD 1 billion to Ukraine ( see p.8)). All of these were provided in support of water supply and sanitation, except for one in support of transport and storage. 14 INFRASTRUCTURE
  15. 15. 15 BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 In 2015-16, Asia received two fifths (42%, USD 814 million per year) of biodiversity-related ODA to the infrastructure sector, the large majority (92%) in the form of loans, Europe received 30% (or USD 586 million per year), 96% of which were loans, and Africa (21%, USD 411 million per year), with loans accounting for 70%. Across income groups, LMICs received the majority of commitments (57%), loans accounting for 96%. In comparison, commitments to LDCs and other LICs were evenly split between grants (52%) and loans (48%). An example of the former includes a grant of USD 31 million committed by Germany to the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2015 in support of sustainable supply of safe drinking water and adequate sanitation. LMICs received the majority (57%) of biodiversity-related ODA to the infrastructure sector BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE SECTOR BY INCOME GROUP AND INSTRUMENT 2015-16 AVERAGE AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL BILATERAL ODA TO INCOME GROUPS 5% 12% 11% 10% 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 LDCs and other LICs LMICs UMICs Unallocated income (regional) USDmillion,commitments,constant2016prices Grants Debt instruments Biodiversity as a share of total ODA to income groups and sector 15 INFRASTRUCTURE
  16. 16. BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Principal Significant 97% 6% 39% 19% 3% 82% 7% 15% 17% 34% 0 50 100 150 200 Ukraine India Iraq Jordan Viet Nam Congo Turkey Senegal Uganda Ecuador USDmillion,commitments,constant2016prices Biodiversity to sector as a share of total ODA to sector Ten countries received nearly two thirds (61%) of biodiversity- related ODA to the infrastructure sectors over the period 2012-16 TOP RECIPIENTS OF BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE SECTOR 2012-16 AVERAGE AND AS SHARE OF TOTAL ODA TO SECTOR IN COUNTRY The high levels of biodiversity mainstreaming in Ukraine (97%) and Congo (82%), reflect the fact that support to a small number of large biodiversity-related activities accounted for the majority of support to the sector in these two countries. This includes a USD 1 billion loan from Japan to Ukraine (see p. 8), and two loans committed by France to Congo of USD 69 million and USD 111 million each. All three loans were in support of water supply and sanitation. Over the same period, Japan and France accounted for 74% of biodiversity-related ODA to the infrastructure sector, with the majority provided in the form of loans (96 and 97% respectively). Germany and Belgium also provided biodiversity-related ODA in the form of loans (7% and 20% respectively), with all other providers committing grants only. 16 INFRASTRUCTURE Note: 3% of biodiversity-related commitments to the infrastructure sectors was not specified by country or region.
  17. 17. 17 BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 The manufacturing and processing sectors include activities that transform raw materials into products for consumption, e.g. textiles, wood, metallic and non-metallic products, food and beverages. Adverse impacts on the natural environment from these activities stem, among other, from the construction of production facilities and from the disposal of waste and toxins used during the production process. Some of these impacts can be managed through regulation on pollution and waste management. At the same time, the sectors also provide opportunities for biodiversity mainstreaming, for example through the use of sustainable supply chains. In 2015-16, just under 1% (or USD 65 million per year) of total bilateral ODA to the manufacturing and processing sectors[7] included biodiversity considerations. For the majority (87%), biodiversity was mainstreamed into development co-operation activities with other primary objectives. Only 13% included specific biodiversity- objectives. The amount of biodiversity- related ODA to the manufacturing and processing sectors has remained fairly stable over the years; the share of total ODA to the sectors that includes biodiversity considerations has seen a modest decrease. Biodiversity mainstreaming in the manufacturing and processing sectors is limited and decreasing BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA TO MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING SECTORS, 2009-2016 TWO-YEAR AVERAGES AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL BILATERAL ODA TO THE SECTORS Principal Significant 5 4 8 8 45 59 44 56 1.7% 1.5% 1.1% 0.9% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 2009-10 2011-12 2013-14 2015-16 USDmillion.commitments,constant2016prices Biodiversity to sectors as a share of total ODA to sectors 17 MANUFACTURINGPROCESSING
  18. 18. BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Asia USD 4 m (0.1%)America USD 2 m (32%) Europe USD 28 m (3%) Africa USD 27 m (5%)Principal Significant Europe and Africa received the majority (85% combined) of bio­ diversity-related ODA to the manufacturing and processing sectors BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA TO THE MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING SECTORS BY REGION AND OBJECTIVE 2015-16 AVERAGE AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL ODA TO SECTORS IN REGION Europe and Africa received the largest shares of biodiversity- related ODA to the manufacturing and processing sectors, accounting for 43% (or USD 28 million per year) and 42% (or USD 27 million per year) respectively, compared to 7% (or 4 USD million per year) and 3% (or 2 USD million per year) allocated to Asia and America. No commitments were earmarked for Oceania. While 98% of commitments to Europe were provided as loans, this reflects one loan of USD 55 million committed by France to Turkey in 2016. In fact, this was the only loan provided to the manufacturing and processing sectors in 2015-16 that included biodiversity considerations. 18 Note: 5% of biodiversity- related ODA to the manufacturing and processing sectors falls into an‘unallocated’ category that is not earmarked to a country or region. MANUFACTURINGPROCESSING
  19. 19. 19 BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 All biodiversity-related support to the manufacturing and processing sectors was provided in the form of grants, except for three loans committed by France: to Turkey (USD 55 million), Mauritius (USD 17 million), and one that was unallocated by country or region (USD 7 million). All three loans were in support of small and medium sized enterprises development. The loan to Mauritius accounted for 89% of the total bilateral ODA to the sector, which explains the high level of biodiversity mainstreaming. Two countries received a third (33%) of biodiversity-related ODA to the manufacturing and processing sectors, ten received two-thirds (66%) TOP RECIPIENTS OF BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA TO MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING SECTORS 2012-16 AVERAGE AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL ODA TO SECTOR IN COUNTRY Principal Significant 9% 22% 51% 54% 89% 58% 49% 4% 0.04% 7% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 USDmillion,commitments,constant2016prices Biodiversity to sectors as a share of total ODA to sectors Turkey Kenya Bolivia Nicaragua Mauritius Somalia Guinea South Africa China Uganda 19 Note: 10% of biodiversity-related commitments to the manufacturing and processing sectors was not specified by country or region. MANUFACTURINGPROCESSING
  20. 20. BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Principal Significant 12 19 14 4323 224 265 178 1% 5% 5% 3% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 2009-10 2011-12 2013-14 2015-16 USDmillion,commitments,constant2016prices Biodiversity to sector as a share of total ODA to sector Biodiversity-related commitments to the health sector decreased in 2015-16 after a steady increase for a few years BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA TO THE HEALTH SECTOR, 2009-2016 TWO-YEAR AVERAGES AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL BILATERAL ODA TO THE SECTOR Human health, wellbeing and livelihoods rely on biodiversity and related ecosystem services such as fresh water, food and fuel. Ecosystem services also play a crucial role in pest and disease control, pollination and in medical and pharmacological discoveries. Further, biodiversity contributes to invaluable health benefits e.g. through the recreational opportunities and spiritual enrichment it provides. Changes in biodiversity and ecosystem services can have direct and indirect impacts on peoples’health, but also on their livelihoods. In 2015-16, 3% (or USD 221 million per year) of total bilateral ODA to the health sector[8] , included a focus on biodiversity, either as a principal (19%) or a significant (81%) objective. The amount of biodiversity-related ODA to the health sector has remained fairly stable since 2011-12, while biodiversity as a share of total bilateral ODA to the sector has seen a slight decrease over the past couple of years. 2020 HEALTH
  21. 21. 21 BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 In 2015-16, the majority (74%, USD 163 million per year) of biodiversity-related ODA to the health sector was allocated to Africa, all of which was provided in the form of grants. In fact, all biodiversity-related ODA to the health sector was committed as grants. Across income groups, commitments were concentrated in LDCs and other LICs, accounting for 57% (or USD 126 million per year). In this category, activities with biodiversity as a principal objective focused on malaria control, tuberculosis control and basic nutrition. All biodiversity-related ODA to the health sector was provided as grants BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA TO THE HEALTH SECTOR BY INCOME GROUP AND OBJECTIVE 2015-16 AVERAGE AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL ODA TO SECTOR AND INCOME GROUP Principal Significant 17 4 22 109 38 30 4% 3% 2% 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 LDCs and other LICs LMICs Unallocated income (regional) USDmillion,commitments.constant2016prices Biodiversity to sector as a share of total ODA to income group and sector 21 Note: USD 360,000 was allocated to UMICs, too small an amount to meaningfully feature on the figure. HEALTH
  22. 22. BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 17% 10% 12% 9% 16% 15% 11% 8% 11% 5% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 USDmillion,commitments,constant2016prices Principal Significant Biodiversity to sector as a share of total ODA to sector Nigeria DRC Kenya Mozambique Zambia Mali Uganda Malawi Ghana Tanzania Biodiversity-related ODA to the health sector was evenly distributed among top recipients TOP RECIPIENTS OF BILATERAL BIODIVERSITY-RELATED ODA TO HEALTH SECTOR 2012-16 AVERAGE AND AS A SHARE OF TOTAL ODA TO SECTOR IN COUNTRY Biodiversity-related ODA to the health sector was fairly evenly distributed among the top ten recipients over the period 2012- 16, with Nigeria receiving 13% (or USD 33 million per year) of commitments, and the rest between 4% and 7%. Among the top recipients, all located in Sub-Saharan Africa, the Democratic Republic of Congo received the largest share of activities with biodiversity as a principal objective (22%, USD 4 million per year). The United States accounted for the large majority (94%, USD 230 million per year) of biodiversity-related ODA to the health sector, followed by the United Kingdom (3%, USD 7 million per year). The support provided by the United States focused primarily on malaria control (nearly 90%). 22 Note: 12% of biodiversity-related commitments to the health sector was not specified by country or region. HEALTH
  23. 23. 23 BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Notes [1] CBD, FAO, World Bank, UNEP, UNDP (2016), Biodiversity and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. [2] The analysis in this flyer is based on data reported by members of the OECD DAC to the Creditor Reporting System (CRS) as of May 2018. Detailed activity level data are available online: http://oe.cd/RioMarkers. [3] The sector category General Environmental Protection includes the sub-sector Biodiversity that in 2015-16 received 34% of biodiversity-related commitments to the sector. Support to Biosphere Protection totalled 9% of commitments to the sector. [4] Within these broader sector categories, finance to individual sub-sectors is in some cases considerable. For example, within the sector category Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing, USD 982 million per year was allocated to the Agriculture sector and USD 319 million per year to the Forestry sector, with a much smaller share (USD 67 million per year) allocated to the fishing sector. Within the broader Other Multisector category, almost half (USD 397 million per year) was allocated to Multisector Aid, and over USD 200 million per year to both Urban Development and Management and Rural Development. [5] For the analysis on biodiversity-related ODA to the energy and mining sector, the following sub-sector codes in the OECD CRS were considered: 230 Energy Generation, Distribution and Efficiency, and 322 Mineral Resources and Mining. [6] For the analysis on biodiversity-related ODA to the infrastructure sector, the CRS sub-sector codes considered were: 140 Water and Sanitation, 210 Transport and Storage, 220 Communications. [7] For the analysis on biodiversity-related ODA to the manufacturing and processing sector, the CRS sub-sector code 321 Industry was considered. [8] For the analysis on biodiversity-related ODA to the health sector, the CRS sub-sector code 120 Health was considered. 23
  24. 24. BIODIVERSITY-RELATED OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 2016 Tracking and reporting environment-related development finance Since 1998, the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) has monitored development finance targeting the objectives of the Rio Conventions on climate change, biodiversity and desertification. Data are reported by members of the OECD DAC to the Creditor Reporting System (CRS) using the so-called Rio markers. Reporting on climate change mitigation, biodiversity and desertification became mandatory in 2006, while reporting on climate change adaptation started in 2010. For each activity reported, DAC members indicate whether it targets the objectives of the Rio Conventions as a ‘principal’ or ‘significant’ objective. Activities marked ‘principal’ would not have been funded but for that policy objective; activities marked ‘significant’ have other prime objectives but have been formulated or adjusted to help meet the policy objective. Through this scoring system the markers provide an indication of the degree of mainstreaming of environmental considerations into development co-operation portfolios. For more information and to download the data used see: http://oe.cd/RioMarkers. July 2018 THE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE: ENABLING EFFECTIVE DEVELOPMENT

×