Monitoring and Assessing Capacity Building Activities in Developing Countries for

Combating Global Warming: Approaches

Professor Ji ZOU

UNFCCC Expert Workshop on Monitoring and Evaluating Capacity Building in Developing CountriesHeritage Hotel, St. John’sAntigua & Barbuda, November 5-6, 2007

Contents

• Purposes and rationales• Indicators and baselines• Steps• Uses of the results of monitoring and

evaluation• Practices in China• Conclusion

Purposes: in general

• Without substantial capacity building in Non-Annex I parties, it will be hopeless to reach the ultimate objectives of the Convention, given the increasing share of GHG emissions from Non-Annex I Parties

• For better implementation of Decision 2/CP7 (Marrakesh Accords) with higher effectiveness and efficiency.

Purpose: in concreteIt’s a tool to improve quality of capacity building

activities:• Evaluate adequacy of the implementation of the

convention;• Identify the gap of capacity and then the needs

for capacity building;• Provide for guidance to determine priorities for

capacity building during planning;• Share experiences and lessons learned for

better performance; and• The mechanism of monitoring and evaluation in

the context of UNFCCC guarantee the process in tracks.

Rationales Observe performance in climate protection

Evaluate level of capacity and compare with the requirement of meeting the Convention’s ultimate goals

Identify the gap of capacity and the needs for capacity building

Develop programmes and plans to conduct CB activities

To evaluate the quality of CB activities: process evaluationor

To evaluate the improvement of capacity level: objective evaluation

With the mandate of Decision 2/CP7, we select process evaluation strategy to focus on monitoring and evaluation of CB activities together with evaluationof performance/capacity level.

Indicators 1

Principles of design– Easy to use and not complicated;– Data and information available;– Not too costly;– Covering key aspects of CB activities

Indicators 2: process-orientedEvaluation of CB activities: what we have done?• Coverage of CB activities: if they have covered

most of the domains/areas identified in Decision 2/CP7?

• Range of beneficiaries: coverage of stakeholders, number of key beneficiaries (%)

• Project numbers and amount of financial resources (in terms of percentage or growth rate)

• Timing: how quick and how timely?

Indicators 3: objective-orientedEvaluation of Capacity Level• Human resources and endogenous

capacity (performance of managers, officials, experts)

• Institution performance (companies, institutes, and NGOs) in specific areas

• Institutional and legal system (institutional arrangement and integrity of enabling legal and regulation basis including design and implementation)

Baseline: Programs/Plans on Capacity Building at National, Local, and

Sectoral Level• To set up a ruler against the gaps between

requirement of meeting the ultimate goals of the Convention and the real local performances;

• Compare the observation of real performance of CB activities (by means of indicators) with the baselines to identify gaps and needs for CB.

Steps• Set up mandates by COP/SBI and establish a task

force to deal with the operation (Secretariat? An expert group? International organizations?);

• Formulate a mechanism to make all stakeholders together for communication, data provision/submission, and analysis (e.g., NC, parties’ submissions, standard report format etc);

• Accept rules including adoption of indicators, data collection and information sources, etc;

• Analysis and make conclusion of the evaluation;• Integration of the conclusion into future plan; and• Report to and to be adopted by COP/MOP

Uses of the results of monitoring and evaluation

• Assess the adequacy of the implementation of the Convention and the Protocols

• Sharing experiences and lessons learned among parties and organizations

• Support the development of future plan by identification of gap and priorities

• Support optimal allocation of resources for capacity building

• Support 5-year comprehensive review mandated by Decision 2/CP7

Practices in China: experiences and lessons learned

• Political will and a matter of development,• Learning by doing,• Area by area and sector by sector,• All the changes depend on local progresses,• One of the challenges is to deliver knowledge,

information and awareness to local government, institutions, industries, and citizens, given so large and imbalanced population and territory; and

• A long-way to go to improve the whole country’s capacity (continuous efforts needed)

Areas Status Gaps and Needs

Institutional capacity

National authority upgraded and enlarged slightly

Local authorities & network to be developed

National program

Published for the 1st version of national program

•Delivery to provinces and cities; •Updating.

National communication and gas inventories

Published the initial NC and a national expert team formed

Preparing the 2nd NC and develop local and sectoral teams

Areas Status Gaps and NeedsVulnerability and adaptation assessment

Limited work done

Development program and more case/pilot studies and demonstration

Implementation of adaptation measures

Limited work More demonstration & program/plans

Assessment for implementation of mitigation options

•More studies;•Combination with energy conservation and emission reduction (EC&ER)

•Policy instruments;•Technologies•Human resources•Networking•Funds

Areas Status Gaps & Needs

Research and systematic observation

Current system enhanced and improved

Weak in modeling and analysis

Development and transfer of technology

Improved in manufacturing capacity

•Weak in design and R&D,•Slow and limited diffusion because of lack of financial resources and strong incentives

Areas Status Gaps & Needs

Decision making and int’l negotiation

Improved with stable core human resources

•Information sharing and coordination;•Decision-making support•experience

CDM •DNA and a managing centre in place •Limited groups of experts to develop projects•A website and info system;•A range of projects developed

•Carbon market analysis•Trading skills•Combination with D&T&T

Areas Status Gaps & Needs

Article 4.8, 4.9 Little work Lack of methodologies and experts

Education, training and public awareness

•Leaders’ awareness•Media progress•Training officials and more workshops•Link to routine business

•Less links with routine education•Far lack of local training•Further needs for awareness

Areas Status Gaps & Needs

Information, networking

limited • Cross-sectors;• public access;• deliveries to local authorities, companies, and people

Enhancement and/or creation of an enabling environment

Some progresses together with efforts for EC&ER

• Systematic design and impact assessment;• weak implementation capacity• Weak enforcement• Policy infrastructure

Conclusions• Important and necessary to guarantee the

quality of implementation of Decision 2/CP7

• Indicators should be easy and substantial• Nomination is needed for special group of

people/organizations to conduct regular monitoring and evaluations, and

• The results should be widely used as guidance and basis for action program development and performance evaluation.

Thank you for your attentions!

zouji@ruc.edu.cnor

zouji61@126.com