The document outlines next steps for refining climate adaptation and mitigation markers, focusing on eligibility criteria and typical activity examples. It emphasizes the need for greater specification in mitigation projects and the development of resilience-focused adaptation activities. A collaborative effort is suggested to create revised guidelines, including examples and FAQs.

1. NEXT STEPS TO REFINE PROPOSALS FOR
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ADAPTATION AND
MITIGATION MARKERS
OECD Task Team on Rio markers, 18 September 2014

2. Next steps to refine proposals for improvement
to the climate markers
1. Mitigation: additional examples
2. Mitigation: greater specification in the eligibility
criteria
3. Adaptation: develop further typical examples of
adaptation activities
4. Adaptation: introduce the three steps outlined in
the MDB methodology into the criteria for eligibility
5. FAQs on significant versus principal
6. Ruling to ensure the Environment marker is
systematically screened for Rio marked

3. Next steps to refine proposals for improvement
to the climate markers
1. Mitigation: additional examples
• Drawing from the MDB and IDFC methodologies
• Examples mentioned in members’ replies
 energy transmission projects
 integrated multisectoral projects involving strong
capacity development components,
 social forestry projects.
 “thermal power plant retrofit to fuel switch from a more
GHG-intensive fuel to a different, less GHG-intensive fuel
type”: does this qualify under the mitigation Rio marker?

4. Next steps to refine proposals for improvement
to the climate markers
2. Mitigation: greater specification in the eligibility
criteria
 GHG savings could be used to demonstrate the eligibility of
large-scale, ambiguous cases such as climate-friendly transport
infrastructure or large hydro power plants.
 MDB principles for brownfield and greenfield energy could be
considered for implementation.
 Should minimum threshold of energy efficiency be defined for
score significant/principal?

5. Next steps to refine proposals for improvement
to the climate markers
3. Adaptation: develop further typical examples of
adaptation activities
 Study examples individually, and more specifically those that
aim at making infrastructure more resilient and enabling
private sector investment in adaptation.

6. Next steps to refine proposals for improvement
to the climate markers
4. Adaptation: use the three steps outlined in the MDB
methodology in the criteria for eligibility
 Good practice rather than eligibility criterion.
 Should a minimum threshold of adaptation relevance
in a project be defined for application of score
significant or principal?

7. Next steps to refine proposals for improvement
to the climate markers
5. FAQs on significant versus principal
• Add examples;
• Add a note that an expected indirect side effect with
regard to the objective is not sufficient to justify the
“significant” score.
• No consensus on the use of thresholds for
determining scoring
6. Rule to ensure the Environment marker is
systematically screened for Rio marked

8. Next steps to refine proposals for
improvement to the climate markers
Next step: Secretariat to work with a group of
interested members to develop the revised set
of guidelines:
• Examples
• FAQs
• Three-step approach