The document discusses Nepal's efforts to mainstream poverty, environment, and climate change issues into its national planning and budgeting processes. It outlines key outputs such as incorporating these issues into the 3-year plan and poverty monitoring system. It also describes developing a climate budget code to track climate public expenditures and applying it to the annual plan and budget. Finally, it discusses next steps like advocating for a climate finance framework and institutionalizing the climate budget coding system.

1. Yuba Raj Bhusal
Member Secretary
National Planning Commission Secretariat

2. PEI Nepal
PEI supports the national level planning process through the National Planning Commission
(NPC) and The Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development (MoFALD)
Key Outputs
– Incorporated poverty and environmental issues in the Three Year Plan
(2010-13)
– Updated Poverty Monitoring Analysis System (PMAS) Indicators to
incorporate environmental indicators,
– Completed Climate Public Expenditure and Institutions Review
(CPEIR),
– Developed climate budget code and applied the tool to prepare
current year annual plan and budget,
– Case studies on “Revenue collection from natural resources (stone,
sand & gravel mining), & investment in infrastructures (roads).

3. PEI Nepal
 Key outputs
 Revised Minimum Condition and Performance Measure (MCPM)
guidelines to incorporate poverty, environment at local level,
 Reviewed three central projects (Agriculture, Irrigation and Road) from
poverty and environment angle.
 Pipeline activities (until Dec. 2012)
 Validation of PMAS indicators
 Develop a green economy framework
 Formation of advisory group for PE mainstreaming
 Revision of IEE Guidelines and Environmental & Social Safeguard
Checklists.

4. Tracking Climate Public Investments
The Future for Climate Finance in Nepal (2010)
suggested.
 Drawing a national Vision for climate finance to guide the
development of new and additional funding flows
 Moving from project delivery to a programmatic approach for public
funding of climate programmes
 Exploring possibility of tracking climate change public expenditure
within the national budget
 Tracking climate expenditure flows to the local level
 Identifying the incremental cost of making sector programmes
‘climate resilient’ (using long term tool, NPC 2010) across all
sectors of the economy.
As follow up to climate finance study, conducted in 2011.

5. Climate Public Expenditure Review (CPEIR)
Findings Fiscal Year Budget (NRs in
 Annual expenditure in climate activities constitutes around 2 to 3% of GDP
and around 8% of Government Expenditure. The trend is increasing billions)
 Around 80% of climate change expenditure relates to adaptation activities 2007/08 9.68
 Around 60% of the expenditure is executed directly by Central Agencies and 2008/09 15.15
40% through Local Agencies 2009/10 18.56
 Donor funding in government climate expenditure is about 55%. (where 25% 2010/11 25.63
of the overall budget is funded by Donors) 2011/12 27.62
Issues
 Developing a climate fiscal framework for Nepal planning , budgeting and
reporting on climate results nationally;
 Defining climate change expenditure (budget coding recommended).
[Coding helped define climate activities ]
 Delivering climate finance to the local level.[Climate policy 2011 mentions
80% has to go to the field]
 The need for a sector-led approach, from project to programme mode.

6. Climate Budget Coding
Purpose
 Additional funds needed to meet additional costs of mitigating climate impacts
 Record climate investments in a transparent and accountable manner
 Differentiate climate problem from environmental or development problem
 Increased coordination among sectors and harmonization of donor support .
Formation of Interagency Climate Finance Working Group
(NPC took the lead and MoF, MoEST, MoFALD, MoFSC worked as members)
[The group worked for about 8 months to do the following]
 Define climate activities
 Developed criteria and method of climate budget coding
 Training to planning officers on climate coding
 Climate code introduced from FY 2012-2013
Limitations
 Used for development budget and not for recurrent costs
 Coded for public finance only (NGO and private sector to be included later)

7. Way forward
 Advocacy to set up climate finance framework
 Institutionalization of climate budget coding
― Evaluation of information generated by climate budget codes by analyzing current
year’s budget against CC strategies (e.g. NAPA activities)
― Incorporating climate budget criteria in project prioritization (P1, P2, P3)
guidelines
― Evaluation of sectoral capacity of each key ministry in rating climate activities after
two years of code application
 Integration of climate finance delivery at the local level
 Harmonization of green growth with the spirit of Rio+ 20 outcome especially focusing
on agriculture sector.