Elements & steps of a national safeguards system

277 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
277
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • The safeguards mechanisms vary according to when they are applied – during design/readiness or during implementation – for adaptive management, to maintain support of stakeholders and funding, to demonstrate compliance.They also differ in what they cover: covering in different levels of detail the different types of safeguards: governance, rights, positive and negative social and environmental impacts, the development and implementation of actions to avoid or mitigate negative impacts and enhance positive impacts.Finally, and importantly, they also differ with respect to who is involved, for example in defining what information is to be collected, who is involved in collecting, reviewing and reporting information and who is involved in the governance of the safeguards mechanisms itself, who ensures effective and fair application and who ensures impartiality of grievance/recourse mechanisms
  • The Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment or SESA is used in the design or readiness phase for countries participating in the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, and aims to improve design of the REDD+ program by combining analytical work and consultations in an iterative fashion. The multi-stakeholder, participatory approach helps to build support among stakeholders and ensures that it covers a full range of issues including governance, rights and positive and negative social and environmental impacts. One of the outputs of the SESA is the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) that aims to mitigate and manage risks with respect to existing World Bank safeguards. Though it is based on World Bank safeguards, which were not developed with REDD+ in mind, it could potentially cover full and effective participation or other governance-related issues in the Cancun safeguards and could also potentially cover positive benefits or equitable benefit sharing.It is important to note that ESMF is a framework that defines how specific mitigation plans will be developed later in the process before activities are actually implemented. The ESMF is composed of all the relevant safeguards frameworks and should include separate chapters depending on which safeguards may be triggered including an Environmental Management Framework if the safeguards relating to Natural Habitats,  Forests, Pest management, Physical Cultural Resources are triggered, an Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework and a Resettlement Policy Framework/Restriction of Access Framework if the Involuntary Resettlement safeguard is triggered. In the World Bank process, if the Indigenous Peoples Operational Policy 4.10 (safeguard) is triggered, then an Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework is developed as a step towards the development of a full Indigenous Peoples Plan which outlines mitigation actions and must be in place before implementation of an activity. The content of the ESMF may be quite general at the end of the readiness phase depending on the extent to which future REDD+ investments are identified but must lead to development of full mitigation plans for relevant safeguards by the time REDD+ activities are implemented. Development, approval and adherence to the ESMF are the main mechanism for demonstrating compliance of REDD+ programs with the World Bank safeguards and something ‘substantially equivalent’ is required for the other delivery partners as agreed under the ‘Common Approach’. Since the ESMF provides a framework for defining mitigation action it acts to improve design by ensuring that appropriate social and environmental sustainability standards are upheld during implementation of a country’s REDD+ strategy, while also providing a system for monitoring and reporting on progress of implementation of the agreed mitigation actions. The ESMF and the ensuing mitigation plans are typically developed by the government of the country concerned with support, review and approval by the World Bank.
  • The UN-REDD programme has developed Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria as a guiding framework to aid with (1) addressing social and environmental issues in UN-REDD National programmes and other UN-REDD Programme funded activities, and (2) supporting countries in developing their national approaches to REDD+ safeguards in line with the UNFCCC. The SEPC covers the full range of REDD+ safeguards issues including governance, rights, positive and negative social and environmental impacts. A Benefits and Risks Tool (BeRT) has been developed, which will be further developed along with other tools to support the application of the SEPC.UN-REDD has developed a Benefits and Risk Tool (BeRT) which is a question-based decision support tool that has been developed in the first instance to help countries to apply the SEPC in the formulation of UN-REDD National programmes. It is a series of questions designed to help a working group tasked with development of a national UN-REDD program document to identify and assess potential risks and opportunities and to identify ways to adjust program design to minimize risks and build on opportunities. There are plans to further develop BeRT to support application of SEPC in other contexts, including programme implementation, monitoring and evaluation (not yet developed so not shown on the graphic on this slide). The BeRT is intended for use by national teams for internal use to help them improve the design of national UN-REDD programs. There is no guidance on or requirement for stakeholder participation.In addition, UN-REDD is also developing Participatory Governance Assessment (PGA) and guidance that provide a framework for a participatory process for identification of indicators to provide information for stakeholders to analyse governance structures and systems and make recommendations for policy reform. This mechanism aims to feed back into design and build stakeholder support by providing information to encourage policy reform related to REDD+. It is focussed only on priority governance issues that are identified for the country through the participatory process and does not aim to be comprehensive. Indicators and the assessment process are adapted to the country context. PGA has been developed to support a one-time assessment but could be used by countries to develop indicators and a participatory process for ongoing assessment.
  • The REDD+ SES provides a framework for assessment of social and environmental performance of a government-led REDD+ program both during readiness and throughout implementation that aims to build stakeholder support, nationally and internationally, and also supports adaptive management to feed back into design. The principles, criteria and indicators of the REDD+ SES were developed through broad stakeholder consultation so the framework reflects the full range of safeguards issues identified by stakeholders in countries implementing REDD+ and internationally (governance, rights, positive and negative social and environmental impacts, mitigation actions). The REDD+ SES are used through a clearly-defined, country-led, multi-stakeholder process. The use of the standards in each country is overseen by a multi-stakeholder committee representing a balance of government and civil society. There is a participatory approach to interpretation of indicators and to development of an assessment report, which must be reviewed by stakeholders before approval by the multi-stakeholder committee.
  • Elements & steps of a national safeguards system

    1. 1. Understanding similarities and differences of safeguardsmechanisms for REDD+ and howthey support development of a country safeguards system
    2. 2. Understanding similarities and differences ofsafeguards mechanisms for REDD+• WHY? – to promote effective design and adaptive management (that addresses safeguards effectively - avoiding harm and generating benefits) – to access and maintain funding – to demonstrate compliance with national law and with international obligations – to build and maintain support among stakeholders • interest groups/NGOs • general public • local people affected by REDD+ activities
    3. 3. • WHEN? – Design-readiness phase – Implementation phase• WHAT? – Governance: coherence, participation, disclosure, accountability, grievance mechanisms – Rights: respect for rights, Indigenous Peoples and local communities – Impacts: social and environmental, negative and/or positive, for different stakeholder groups – Actions to avoid or mitigate negative & enhance positive impacts• WHO? – Defines what information is to be collected – Collects, reviews and reports information – Participates in governance of safeguards mechanisms – Ensures implementation of agreed mitigation/enhancement actions
    4. 4. Design - Readiness Implementation Why: improve design, build support , Strategic Environmental & Social required for funding What: governance, rights, Assessment (SESA) positive & negative impacts,An iterative process of analysis and Who: multi-stakeholder, participatoryconsultation to improve design based onWorld Bank safeguards and issuesidentified through the processWhy: required forfunding, improve design Environmental & SocialWhat: WB Management Framework (ESMF)safeguards, negative Framework for development of plans toimpacts, rights, complian mitigate and manage risks with respect toce monitoring World Bank safeguardsWho: government andWorld Bank, possiblyother delivery partners
    5. 5. Design - Readiness Implementation Social & Environmental Principles & Criteria (SEPC) Guiding framework for addressing social and environmental issues in UN-REDD NationalProgrammes and to support countries in developing a national approach to safeguards in line with UNFCCC. BeRT and other tools to be developed for application Benefit and Risks Tool (BeRT) Why: improve designGuides design of UN-REDD National What : governance, rights, positive/negativeprograms. Principles, criteria and questions impacts Who: national UN-REDD program designfor comprehensive consideration of risks and teambenefits. Participatory Governance Assessment (PGA) Why: improve design, build stakeholderInclusive multi-stakeholder process support What: priority governance issuesidentifies priority governance issues, identified for the countrydefines indicators, collects information, Who: multi-stakeholder, participatoryto feedback into design. No predefined identification of indicators andcontent. assessment
    6. 6. Design - Readiness Implementation REDD+ Social & Environmental Standards (REDD+ SES) Inclusive, multi-stakeholder process uses a comprehensive framework to define country-specific indicators and to review performance for monitoring and reporting of process and impacts throughout implementationWhy: monitoring & reporting, build stakeholder support, improve designWhat: governance, rights, positive & negative impacts, adapted to country contextWho: multi-stakeholder, participatory identification of indicators, assessment & review
    7. 7. Potential elements of a national safeguards system for REDD+Policies, Law Policy and legal framework that defines and operationalizes country-specific safeguardss and interpretation for REDD+Regulations - Existing policies, laws and regulations - REDD+ specific polices, laws and regulationsInstitutions Institutional framework that defines roles, responsibilities and interrelations of those responsible for the safeguards system - Institution(s) to ensure fair, effective and transparent processes for design and implementation - Institutions to implement policies, laws and regulations - Institutions to collect and process information for monitoring and reporting on safeguardsProcesses Processes and procedures that are followed to implement the safeguards systemand - Consultationsprocedures - Capacity building - Action plans to mitigate harm and support benefitsMonitoring Country-specific monitoring and reporting frameworkand - Indicators for process and outcomes related to country-specific safeguards interpretationreporting - Monitoring methodologies - Reporting frameworks to address different information needs (for adaptive management, for national stakeholders, for donor agencies, for UNFCCC etc)Grievance National-level mechanism to receive and address grievances related to the nationalmechanism safeguards system
    8. 8. Main steps for development of a country safeguards system The ‘system’ Development process Policies, Laws and RegulationsCountry Gap Gap Identificati Developm Developminterpretat analysis and analysis on of ent of ent ofion of developme and indicators monitoring grievance InstitutionsREDD+ nt of new developme for and mechanissafeguards PLRs and nt of new social/envi reporting m institutions processes ronmental methodolo and performan gy Processes procedures ce and procedures-What are - What -What - What are What are the - How willthe potential existing existing the key data needs grievancessoc/env risks PLRs/instituti processes/pr indicators to and gaps? relating to Monitoringof the ons help to ocedures determine if - How will REDD+ andREDD+ meet REDD+ help to meet safeguards monitoring be safeguards reportingstrategy? safeguards REDD+ are met and carried out? be heard-- What -Where are safeguards? performance - How will andshould be the gaps ? -What new with respect data be respondedprotected or - What ones are to country reported? to? Grievancesupported PLRs/institutio needed? interpretatio - Who should - Who mechanismwhen doing ns are needed n of be should beREDD+? to fill gaps? safeguards? responsible? responsible?
    9. 9. Potential country inputsExisting PLRs Existing PLRs Existing Biodiversity, Biodiversity, Existing(statutory and processes/pr social and social, forest grievanceand institutions ocedures forest monitoring mechanisms The ‘system’customary) (statutory and indicators Policies, Law customary) s and RegulationsNational Gap Gap Identificati Developm Developminterpretat analysis and analysis on of ent of ent ofion of developme and indicators monitoring grievance InstitutionsREDD+ nt of new developme for and mechanissafeguards PLRs and nt of new social/envi reporting m institutions processes ronmental methodolo and performan gy Processes procedures ce and procedures- Cancun SG - FCPF SESA - FCPF ESMF -REDD+ SES - REDD+ SES- Donor Ops - UN-REDD (for WB OPs) - UN-REDD- Internati’l BeRT -UN-REDD PGA (for Monitoringconventions - UN-REDD BeRT governance) andagreements PGA (for - PGA (for -Governance reporting- UN-REDD governance) governance) of ForestsSEPC - UN-REDD Indicators-REDD+ SES guidelines (for-FCPF SESA on FPIC governance) Grievance(for risks/ mechanismopportunities) Potential international inputs
    10. 10. Durban decision on safeguards information2. Agrees that systems for providing information on how the safeguards [inCancun agreement] are addressed and respected should, • taking into account national circumstances and respective capabilities, • recognizing national sovereignty and legislation, and • relevant international obligations and agreements, and • respecting gender considerations:(a) Be consistent with guidance [in para 1 Cancun agreement];(b) Provide transparent and consistent information that is accessible by all relevant stakeholders and updated on a regular basis;(c) Be transparent and flexible to allow for improvements over time;(d) Provide information on how all of the safeguards [in Cancun agreement] are being addressed and respected;(e) Be country-driven and implemented at the national level;(f) Build upon existing systems, as appropriate;
    11. 11. A Safeguards Information System

    ×