redlac capacity building project scaling up conservation finance
Post on 31-Dec-2015
29 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
RedLAC Capacity Building ProjectScaling up conservation finance
RedLAC Capacity Building for EFs
Objectives
1. Strengthen the capacity of EFs to develop new market based resource streams for biodiversity conservation.
2. Facilitate the implementation of new financial mechanisms demonstrating greater resource flow to biodiversity conservation.
3. Document and share best practices of EFs in their day to day operation, enhancing learning, collaboration and exchange among practitioners.
3
Knowledge
Knowledge management Innovation Network
Exchange of experiences Case studies Experts Best practices
Risk investment Apply concepts
South-South collaboration Contents sharing Strengthened platform
Capacity building
workshops
EF to EF mentoring
Impact monitoring
working groupLearning route
Pilot projects on innovative
financial mechanisms
Web platform Planning with CAFE
RedLAC business plan
RedLAC innovative
mechanisms
Knowledge sharing
Topic Date and place1. Environmental Funds and PES Mexico, November 20102. Strategic Planning for Environmental Funds Kenya, March 20113. The roles of EFs in REDD+ Brazil, July 20114. Fundraising Strategies for Environmental Funds Tanzania, September 20115. Opportunities for Environmental Funds in Compensation and Offset Schemes Suriname, November 20116. Communication and Marketing for Environmental Funds Uganda, September 20127. Monitoring the Impact of EFs on biodiversity in Protected Areas Peru, November 20128. Governance Strategies for EFs Madagascar, September 20139.Resources Mobilization Mechanisms for Environmental Funds Costa Rica, November 2013
Since the beginning of the Project in 2010, nine thematic workshops were organized by Funbio in collaboration with host funds:
Handbooks are available in English, Spanish and French at RedLAC and Funbio websites.
5
Participants x regions
17
4
15
3
11
4
17
4
22
4
11
4
229
18
8
17
7
1
1
OceaniaAsiaAfricaLAC
Funds participation
Funds Participation
Participants 119
Funds 54
Countries 33
Regional 4
Funds per region
LAC 31
Africa 21
Asia 1
Oceania 1
Funds participation
1 person
2 people
3 people
4 people
5 people
8 people
20
18
9
3
3
1
Different participants per Fund
1 workshop
2 workshops
3 workshops
4 workshops
5 workshops
6 workshops
7 workshops
81
14
14
3
3
3
1
Workshops attended
Participants
56%28%
16%
Staff DirectorsBoard members
68%
23%
10%
LAC
39%
35%
26%
Africa
Asia
Oceania
100%
100%
16 directors from LAC + 16 directors from Africa
EF to EF mentoring
• Mentees and mentors registration forms• Matching pairs• Define mentee demand and how the
mentor plans to supply it: expectations, outcomes, timeline, methodology, commitment (staff involved and time dedicated), Budget, baseline, learning objectives and indicators
• Sign MoU• Implementation: share documents,
experiences, support in documents development and new contacts
• Define future• Evaluation survey and testimonies
Two simultaneous experiences:Fondo Accion (Colombia) – Fundesnap (Bolivia)Funbio (Brazil) – Biofund (Mozambique)
Measuring the Impact of EFs on Biodiversity in Protected Areas
• Create a methodology applicable for all EFs.
• Consider that EFs do not have presence in the field and must work with PAs’ stakeholders.
• Use indicators that can be independently monitored:• One effect indicator: threat reduction rate.
• Two impact indicators: abundance index for indicative species and habitat cover change rate – remote sensing.
• Seven funds are testing the methodology in one PA each in 2013.
To be implemented
• Planning meeting RedLAC and CAFÉ
• Learning Route
• Publication with results:• Additional innovative mechanisms (being identified and prepared by the
Secretariat)
• All cases and projects
• 10th workshop in Africa (Cameroon, September 2014)
• RedLAC new website launched
• External final evaluation
Survey on training needs
GOVERNANCE
OPERATIO
N
ADMIN
ISTRATIO
N
ASSET
MANAGEM
ENT
M&E A
ND REPORTIN
G
RESOURCES
MOBILI
ZATIO
N
23%31% 37% 43%
60%71%
Percentage of "critical to have" responses
13 Funds from RedLAC + 11 Funds from CAFÉ answered
Survey on training needs
16 16
1110 10
35 5
911
8
11
4 45
46
10
Governance
not necessary moderate critical
Survey on training needs
86
24
610
30
812 12
1012
10
1612
86
10 106
4 5
11
Operation
not necessary moderate critical
Survey on training needs
8
43 3
9
3
10
6
11 11
14
79
810
910
78
12
6
Administration
not necessary moderate critical
Survey on training needs
12 2
67
65
9
16 1617
9
M&E and reporting
not necessary moderate critical
Survey on training needs
INVESTMENT POLICY RISK MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES
GOVERNING BODY (COMMITTEE)
SELECT FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS
CONTRACTS WITH INVESTMENT
PROFESSIONALS
6
23
65
6
8
10
12
10
12
14
11
6
9
Asset management
not necessary moderate critical
Survey on training needs
Resources mobilization
not necessary moderate critical
20
Survey on training needs
GOVERNANCE
OPERATIO
N
ADMINISTRATIO
N
M&E REP
ORTING
ASSET
MANAGEM
ENT
RESOURCE M
OBILIZATIO
N
Formats
WORKSHOPS EF TO EF MENTORING DISTANCE LEARNING
Innovative Financial Mechanisms for Conservation
Fund ProjectsPROFONANPE PERU
Mechanism for the PES based on the Water Resources from the Salinas - Aguada Blanca National Reserve
Fondo Acción COLOMBIA
Designing and pilot testing an innovative financial mechanism (crowd funding) to support community ecotourism in Protected Areas in Colombia
Patrimonio Natural COLOMBIA
fundraising mechanism based on the linking of hotels, guests and the private sector in the conservation of the natural areas of Colombia
FMCN – MEXICO Developing, among fisheries, compensation schemes for Sea Turtle Bycatch
FUNBIO – BRAZIL Guanabara Bay Effluents Cap & Trade Scheme
Provide funds the opportunity of trying out new market-based mechanisms:
CAFÉ – Consortium of African Funds for the Environment
A network created in 2010 by the African EFs, inspired in RedLAC.
The thematic workshops gave African funds the opportunity to meet periodically and build a trust relation.
RedLAC and CAFÉ - joint proposal for a second phase for the Capacity Building Project.
www.consortiumcafe.org
Budget execution
Comp 1: Capacity Building
Comp 2: Grants facility
Comp 3: Network Comp 4: Final Evaluation
-
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
Total budget execution
Planned Executed
83%
67%
79%
Budget execution Moore FFEM Funds Planned Executed Planned Executed Planned Executed
Comp 1: Capacity Building 209.497 209.497 597.640
246.627 360.000 439.950
Comp 2: Grants facility 472.305 342.305 311.785
113.392 300.000 265.753
Comp 3: Network 257.535 145.486 37.607
42.377 207.900 207.900
Comp 4: Final Evaluation 12.075 - 35.968
- -
TOTAL 951.412 697.288 983.000
402.395 867.900 913.603
Balance 254.125
580.605 -45.703
754.786
Budget execution
$ day $ monthNumber of participants
staff 170 5100 67
board/ director 500 15000 52
Ticket (average) 1500
per diem (average) 250
27
Feedback
Name Fund Region Position 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 TAngélica Blanco FIAES LAC Board 1 1Deisy Herrera FIAES LAC Staff 1 1Jorge Oviedo FIAES LAC Director 1 1 2
• Co-funding: travel and time costs• Rotation• Progress: training effectiveness (based on Future Steps)
28
Ecofunds
REMAINS THE SAME• Systematize conservation investments
• Showcase for conservation institutions projects (funds)
PREVIOUS VERSION CURRENT VERSION
Investments of all types of conservation organizations
Investments of EFs
Users managing own information Funbio manages database for now
Very detailed information about each investment
Simpler forms with essential information
Additional features (funding needs and opportunities)
Focused on the core
www.funbio.org.br
Camila MonteiroCommunication & Networks
camila.monteiro@funbio.org.br
www.fotonatural.com.br
top related