Tiempo Climate Cyberlibrary
National Adaptation Programmes of Action: Priorities to Policies
About the Cyberlibrary
The Tiempo Climate Cyberlibrary was developed by Mick Kelly and Sarah Granich on behalf of the Stockholm Environment Institute and the International Institute for Environment and Development, with sponsorship from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency.
While every effort is made to ensure that information on this site, and on other sites that are referenced here, is accurate, no liability for loss or damage resulting from use of this information can be accepted.
National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) were initiated with Decision 28/CP7 as part of the Marrakesh Accords of 2001. This lays out a complementary approach, building on existing development plans and programmes. So, what have we learned in over five years of the NAPA process? We suggest the NAPA teams and international climate policy community face five challenges.
Challenge 1: Identify a priority sector, region, population and climate threat
Some 45 of the 50 Least Developed Countries (LDCs) have undertaken NAPA processes, and as of mid-September 2007, some 21 LDCs have submitted their NAPA reports to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The multidisciplinary NAPA teams used a variety of methods to capture current social, economic and environmental vulnerability to existing climatic stresses and future risks. Additional guidance material and support workshops introduced livelihood-based approaches, vulnerability screening, spatial analysis and participatory methods. All of the NAPAs have clearly identified priority risks. Given the mandate for NAPAs to identify urgent needs, this is not surprising.
The primary concern of NAPAs is current climatic risks and observed trends. Disaster risk reduction (for example, drought coping strategies), coastal erosion and storm protection, and early warning systems are common responses.
Beyond current climatic conditions and risks, climate change will bring wholly new climatic conditions in some places. For instance, sea-level rise will increase salinity in some coastal aquifers, and warmer conditions will allow crop cultivation at higher altitudes. Glacial lake outburst floods are a hazard that would not be serious in the absence of rapid glacial melting. These are conditions that have not been experienced in certain places before, although there is adaptation experience elsewhere.
Climate change might also lead to a jump to new climatic regimes. For instance, a prolonged period of desiccation, perhaps associated with a change in the El Niño Southern Oscillation, would render agricultural coping strategies ineffective and require a large-scale switch to non-farm economic activities or migration. Such regional catastrophic changes are difficult to anticipate.
A remaining challenge is the link between current climatic risks and longer-term climate change. To reduce climate vulnerability, urgent action is required and justified. Because the LDCs will experience additional climate burdens over the coming decades, further monitoring, assessment and development of robust strategies and policies is needed.
Challenge 2: Identify a priority project for funding by a donor
The NAPA projects typically identify several adaptation projects, in some cases more than ten. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) has provided support to transform projects from this initial menu into fundable projects. Boni Biagini from the GEF discusses the process in a Tiempo interview. Translating the NAPA profile into a project document requires additional planning and assessment, notably when defining the project baseline and conforming to donor rules, such as providing matching funds.
Some ten countries have now submitted a priority project for funding by the GEF, as shown in Table 1 below. This process has taken longer than expected, in part because the GEF has had to mobilize funds and develop guidance, and in part due to the general nature of many of the NAPA profiles. In addition, other projects may have been submitted to bilateral donors for funding or may be seeking funding from national resources.
Challenge 3: Learning by doing: implementing projects
The NAPA process is seen as an ongoing planning process that raises awareness amongst national and often local stakeholders. It is too early to assess the extent of learning from the NAPA process, or from initial adaptation projects. As yet, there has been no independent review of the NAPAs or of the outcomes of adaptation projects. Stocktaking in the NAPAs is ongoing, led by the LDC Expert Group. Interviews with NAPA teams have drawn some conclusions. The GEF project, Adaptation Learning Mechanism, seeks to accelerate adaptation experience. The website wikiADAPT intends to foster open community documentation of good practice and lessons learned.
A database of NAPA profiles suggests that few proposed projects are regional, focus on financial coping mechanisms (such as disaster insurance or micro-finance) or seek to reform poor institutional and regulatory management of natural resources or social and economic development. This is not surprising since the NAPA mandate is country-driven and stresses urgent needs. This has led mostly to sectoral or community-based actions.
Some agencies have suggested that other developing countries follow the NAPA example. But while adaptation planning is an essential complement to development practice, lessons learned in the NAPA process should be collected before assuming that guidance and approaches for LDCs readily translate to other countries. The international funding and context for adaptation has progressed and these developments should be taken on board.
Challenge 4: Mainstream climate adaptation through national policy and strategy
NAPAs are intended to build upon and become mainstreamed into and integrated with existing national development plans. Such plans include poverty reduction strategies (for example, Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers), sustainable development strategies, national conservation strategies, disaster preparedness or management plans and sectoral plans (such as for agriculture, forestry and transport). In this context, ‘mainstreaming' refers to integration of the objectives, policies, strategies or measures outlined within a NAPA such that they become part of national and regional development policies, processes and budgets at all levels and at all stages. This should be done so that NAPA issues complement or advance the broader objectives of poverty reduction and sustainable development.
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers, sustainable development strategies, national conservation strategies and sectoral development plans are the most important plans for a country's development. Careful analysis of these documents will enable NAPA preparation teams to identify projects, programmes and measures that support the achievement, or overcome any deficiencies, of current national development goals. Such analysis can also ensure that activities recommended within a NAPA complement and do not duplicate plans already initiated.
Developing mechanisms, methods and examples of how national adaptation policies and strategies develop is necessary. Engaging stakeholders, bringing robust science to policy debates and strengthening institutional and legal capacities for ongoing assessment and adaptation planning are important challenges beyond the immediate urgent need to implement NAPA projects.
Mainstreaming NAPAs into national development processes requires that a variety of barriers, many of which also challenge efforts to engage in sustainable development, must be overcome. One way to overcome these barriers is to create an enabling environment to facilitate the integration of NAPAs and long-term climate change adaptation activities into national planning processes. Areas in which activities may be undertaken to facilitate the creation of this enabling environment include education and awareness raising, capacity development, and development of appropriate institutional structures and policy and planning frameworks.
Challenge 5: Address climate adaptation beyond national action
Some aspects of climate adaptation surpass national action. The most obvious case is transboundary water resources management, such as for the Nile and Niger rivers in Africa. Regional planning and foresight, such as the African Union's ClimDev programme, will be essential. Many adaptation actions have common elements, so learning from distant places faced with common stresses may promote solidarity and common purpose, as well as good practice. Sectoral and trade organizations should be encouraged to develop practical guidance, but also standards of acceptable planning and implementation of climate adaptation, supported by data sets, methods, working examples and audit procedures.
Finance is a clear case of international action. This can be for supporting disaster risk reduction, such as the purchase of drought insurance for Ethiopia by the World Food Programme, or for multi-scale activities extending from targeted vulnerable households to national and international risk pooling. These examples are all being tested, although none are fully operational on a widespread scale. All look forward to increased climate resilience beyond the initial 'learning by doing' of the NAPA projects.
In conclusion, the NAPA process is increasingly recognized as a means of identifying urgent adaptation needs, building stakeholder awareness and supporting an initial round of adaptation projects. Lessons learned regarding the need for technical backstopping, supporting an ongoing planning process, and linking current to future climatic conditions are being documented. Some five years after the NAPA process was initiated, however, there is still a long way to go. The 'report card' of the above NAPA challenges in Table 2 benchmarks progress so far. Clearly, much remains to be done in terms of implementing adaptation projects, and constraints regarding funding, institutional development and broader strategies that help vulnerable communities to 'adapt well' to climate change are well-known.
Bubu Pateh Jallow, Department of Water Resources, 7 Marina Parade, Banjul, The Gambia. Fax: +220-225009. Email: email@example.com.
On the Web
The national NAPAs submitted to date are available for download.
General Electric plans to cut solar installation costs by half
Project 90 by 2030 supports South African school children and managers reduce their carbon footprint through its Club programme
Bath & North East Somerset Council in the United Kingdom has installed smart LED carriageway lighting that automatically adjusts to light and traffic levels
The United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the American Public Gardens Association are mounting an educational exhibit at Longwood Gardens showing the link between temperature and planting zones
The energy-efficient Crowne Plaza Copenhagen Towers hotel is powered by renewable and sustainable sources, including integrated solar photovoltaics and guest-powered bicycles
El Hierro, one of the Canary Islands, plans to generate 80 per cent of its energy from renewable sources
The green roof on the Remarkables Primary School in New Zealand reduces stormwater runoff, provides insulation and doubles as an outdoor classroom
The Weather Info for All project aims to roll out up to five thousand automatic weather observation stations throughout Africa
SolSource turns its own waste heat into electricity or stores it in thermal fabrics, harnessing the sun's energy for cooking and electricity for low-income families
The Wave House uses vegetation for its architectural and environmental qualities, and especially in terms of thermal insulation
The Mbale compost-processing plant in Uganda produces cheaper fertilizer and reduces greenhouse gas emissions
At Casa Grande, Frito-Lay has reduced energy consumption by nearly a fifth since 2006 by, amongst other things, installing a heat recovery system to preheat cooking oil