Proposal For Papua New Guinea
Proposal For Papua New Guinea
Proposal For Papua New Guinea
29/19
14 March 2022
Adaptation Fund Board
Project and Programme Review Committee
Twenty-ninth Meeting
Bonn, Germany (hybrid meeting), 5-6 April 2022
Agenda Item 5 k)
Background
1. The Operational Policies and Guidelines (OPG) for Parties to Access Resources from the
Adaptation Fund (the Fund), adopted by the Adaptation Fund Board (the Board), state in
paragraph 45 that regular adaptation project and programme proposals, i.e., those that request
funding exceeding US$ 1 million, would undergo either a one-step, or a two-step approval
process. In case of the one-step process, the proponent would directly submit a fully-developed
project proposal. In the two-step process, the proponent would first submit a brief project concept,
which would be reviewed by the Project and Programme Review Committee (PPRC) and would
have to receive the endorsement of the Board. In the second step, the fully-developed
project/programme document would be reviewed by the PPRC, and would ultimately require the
Board’s approval.
2. The Templates approved by the Board (Annex 5 of the OPG, as amended in March 2016)
do not include a separate template for project and programme concepts but provide that these
are to be submitted using the project and programme proposal template. The section on
Adaptation Fund Project Review Criteria states:
For regular projects using the two-step approval process, only the first four criteria will be
applied when reviewing the 1st step for regular project concept. In addition, the information
provided in the 1st step approval process with respect to the review criteria for the regular
project concept could be less detailed than the information in the request for approval
template submitted at the 2nd step approval process. Furthermore, a final project
document is required for regular projects for the 2nd step approval, in addition to the
approval template.
4. The fifth criterion, applied when reviewing a fully-developed project document, is:
(v) Implementation Arrangements.
5. It is worth noting that at the twenty-second Board meeting, the Environmental and Social
Policy (ESP) of the Fund was approved and at the twenty-seventh Board meeting, the Gender
Policy (GP) of the Fund was also approved. Consequently, compliance with both the ESP and
the GP has been included in the review criteria both for concept documents and fully-developed
project documents. The proposal template was revised as well, to include sections requesting
demonstration of compliance of the project/programme with the ESP and the GP.
6. At its seventeenth meeting, the Board decided (Decision B.17/7) to approve “Instructions
for preparing a request for project or programme funding from the Adaptation Fund”, contained in
the Annex to document AFB/PPRC.8/4, which further outlines applicable review criteria for both
2
AFB/PPRC.29/19
concepts and fully-developed proposals. The latest version of this document was launched in
conjunction with the revision of the Operational Policies and Guidelines in November 2013.
7. Based on the Board Decision B.9/2, the first call for project and programme proposals was
issued, and an invitation letter to eligible Parties to submit project and programme proposals to
the Fund was sent out on April 8, 2010.
9. The following project concept document titled “Adaptation of Small-Scale Agriculture for
improved food security of resilient communities in Papua New Guinea (ASSA)” was submitted for
Papua New Guinea by The Pacific Community (SPC), which is a Regional Implementing Entity of
the Adaptation Fund.
10. This is the first submission of the proposal, using the two-step submission process.
11. The current submission was received by the secretariat in time to be considered in the
thirty-eighth Board meeting. The secretariat carried out a technical review of the project proposal,
assigned it the diary number AF00000298, and completed a review sheet.
12. In accordance with a request to the secretariat made by the Board in its 10th meeting, the
secretariat shared this review sheet with SPC and offered it the opportunity of providing responses
before the review sheet was sent to the PPRC.
13. The secretariat is submitting to the PPRC the summary and, pursuant to decision B.17/15,
the final technical review of the project, both prepared by the secretariat, along with the final
submission of the proposal in the following section. In accordance with decision B.25.15, the
proposal is submitted with changes between the initial submission and the revised version
highlighted.
3
ADAPTATION FUND BOARD SECRETARIAT TECHNICAL REVIEW
OF PROJECT/PROGRAMME PROPOSAL
Technical Adaptation of Small-Scale Agriculture for improved food security of resilient communities in Papua
Summary aims to enhance the sustainability of main agricultural values chains through the adoption of climate-
smart practices, contributing to improving
jobs for women and youth in vulnerable communities. This will be done through the three components below:
Component 3: Capacity building and knowledge management for scaling up CRA practices (USD 849,100).
The initial technical review raised several issues, such as the need to include an initial gender assessment, more
details on vulnerable groups in the consultative process, alignment with the Adaptation Fund strategic results
framework, and how the project will ensure sustainability, manage risks, mitigate impacts, and avoid duplication
with other initiatives, as is discussed in the number of Clarification Requests (CRs) and Corrective Action Requests
(CARs) raised in the review.
The final technical review finds that the revised project concept has addressed all the CRs and CARs raised in the
initial technical review.
Review Criteria Questions Comments Initial Technical Review Comments Final Technical Review
Country Eligibility 1. Is the country party to the Yes. -
Kyoto Protocol?
2. Is the country a Yes. Papua New Guinea Please is -
developing country particularly vulnerable to natural
particularly vulnerable to disasters induced by climate change,
the adverse effects of climate variability, and sea-level rise,
climate change? including increasing severity of storms,
coastal flooding, landslides, and
droughts.
Project Eligibility 1. Has the designated Yes. As per the endorsement letter -
government authority for dated January 10, 2022.
the Adaptation Fund
endorsed the
project/programme?
2. Does the length of the No. The project concept is currently 58 CAR1: Addressed. While the project
proposal amount to no pages, not including annexes. concept has been reduced to stay within
more than Fifty pages for the 50-page limit, this does not include
the project/programme CAR1: Kindly integrate the budget into the annexes, such as lists of
concept, including its the concept and reduce the document participants from the consultations
annexes? length to the 50-page limit. process. It should also be noted that the
concept includes section III
Implementation Arrangements, which is
not required at concept stage and has
therefore not been counted in document
length.
3. Does the project / Yes, the proposed project activities -
programme support aim to strengthen the sustainability of
concrete adaptation agricultural value chains and resilience
actions to assist the of small-holder farmers in the face of
country in addressing climate risks through the adoption of
adaptive capacity to the climate-smart practices, contributing to
adverse effects of climate improving the quality of produce,
change and build in increasing access to markets, and
climate resilience? creating green jobs for women and
youth in vulnerable communities.
Policy.
9. Does the project / Yes. Component 3, Capacity Building CR3: Addressed, as per details
programme have a and Knowledge management for provided in section G on pages 29-30.
learning and knowledge Scaling up CRA Practices includes
management component training of farmers and a capacity
to capture and feedback building program on CRA practices.
lessons? The project also includes a detailed
M&E system planned to produce,
categorize, and disseminate
information from the project. A M&E
manual will be produced with data from
the first year of the project, and a
computerized database will be
developed and regularly fed by data
collected from implementing partners.
10. Has a consultative Yes, but needs further information. CR4: Addressed, as per Section H on
process taken place, and Consultations with provincial pages 30-31, and Annex 10.
has it involved all key stakeholders, including members from
stakeholders, and various sectors, communities and
vulnerable groups, private sector were held in Enga, Milne
including gender Bay, and New Ireland to identify the
considerations in priorities. (See annexes 3-5). The most
compliance with the vulnerable and gender groups were
Environmental and Social represented by faith-based
Policy and Gender Policy organizations, women in agriculture
of the Fund?Cle associations, and small medium
enterprises.
13. Has the sustainability of Unclear. While preliminary technical CAR4: Addressed, as per section J on
the project/programme and financial analyses show that the pages 32-33.
outcomes been taken into project is financially sustainable, more
account when designing information is needed to understand
the project? how adaptation benefits can be
sustained after project completion end,
including maintenance of any
infrastructure or installations to be
developed, such as the multiplication
sheds and integrated digital platform.
framework? Does it
include at least one core
outcome indicator from
framework?
10. Is a disbursement n/a at concept stage
schedule with time-bound
milestones included?
ADAPTATION FUND BOARD SECRETARIAT TECHNICAL REVIEW
OF PROJECT/PROGRAMME PROPOSAL
Technical Adaptation of Small-Scale Agriculture for improved food security of resilient communities in Papua
Summary aims to enhance the sustainability of main agricultural values chains through the adoption of climate-
smart practices, contributing to improving
jobs for women and youth in vulnerable communities. This will be done through the three components below:
Component 3: Capacity building and knowledge management for scaling up CRA practices (USD 849,100).
The initial technical review raises several issues, such as the need to include an initial gender assessment, more
details on vulnerable groups in the consultative process, alignment with the Adaptation Fund strategic results
framework, and how the project will ensure sustainability, manage risks, mitigate impacts, and avoid duplication
with other initiatives, as is discussed in the number of Clarification Requests (CRs) and Corrective Action Requests
(CARs) raised in the review.
Date: January 21, 2022
2. Is the country a developing country particularly Yes. Papua New Guinea Please is particularly vulnerable to
vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate natural disasters induced by climate change, climate
change? variability, and sea-level rise, including increasing severity of
storms, coastal flooding, landslides, and droughts.
Project Eligibility 1. Has the designated government authority for Yes. As per the endorsement letter dated January 10, 2022.
the Adaptation Fund endorsed the
project/programme?
2. Does the length of the proposal amount to no No. The project concept is currently 58 pages, not including
more than Fifty pages for the annexes.
project/programme concept, including its
annexes? CAR1: Kindly integrate the budget into the concept and
reduce the document length to the 50-page limit.
3. Does the project / programme support Yes, the proposed project activities aim to strengthen the
concrete adaptation actions to assist the sustainability of agricultural value chains and resilience of
country in addressing adaptive capacity to the small-holder farmers in the face of climate risks through the
adverse effects of climate change and build in adoption of climate-smart practices, contributing to improving
climate resilience? the quality of produce, increasing access to markets, and
creating green jobs for women and youth in vulnerable
communities.
4. Does the project / programme provide Yes. The project provides clear economic, social, and
economic, social and environmental benefits, environmental benefits, as outlined on pgs. 27-29
particularly to vulnerable communities,
including gender considerations, while However, more details are needed on how the project will
avoiding or mitigating negative impacts, in avoid or mitigate negative impacts.
compliance with the Environmental and Social
Policy and Gender Policy of the Fund? Additionally, while the project briefly elaborates on the
gender-specific cultural and/or legal context in which the
project will operate and includes a Gender and Youth
Specialist (GYS) as part of the National Project Management
Unit (PMU), it does not include an initial gender assessment,
5. Is the project / programme cost effective? Yes, as outlined on page 29, which provides a logical
explanation of the selected scope and approach, and
demonstrates the sustainability of activities, beyond the life of
the project.
6. Is the project / programme consistent with Yes. The project is well aligned with the priorities and
national or sub-national sustainable objectives of the Government of PNG in relation to climate
development strategies, national or sub- change and agriculture, including the Medium-Term
national development plans, poverty reduction Development Plan III (2018 2022), the PNG Development
strategies, national communications and Strategic Plan 2010-2030, and the PNG Enhanced NDC 2020
adaptation programs of action and other 2030. The project was endorsed by the Climate Change and
relevant instruments? Development Authority.
7. Does the project / programme meet the Yes. The project activities will be consistent with all relevant
relevant national technical standards, where national technical standards, including Lands and Physical
applicable, in compliance with the Planning Act, Environment Act, Organic Law of Provincial and
Environmental and Social Policy of the Fund? Local Level Government (provisions for District and local level
approvals), and Disaster Management Act.
8. Is there duplication of project / programme Unclear. The project plans to create synergy and
with other funding sources? complementarity with initiatives outlined on pgs. 32-35.
However, given that some of the projects have similar scope
or are in the same areas as the proposed project, it would be
helpful to understand whether the National Project
Management Unit mentioned on Page 35 will oversee and
track all existing initiatives listed to avoid duplication and
ensure coordination.
9. Does the project / programme have a learning Yes. Component 3, Capacity Building and Knowledge
and knowledge management component to management for Scaling up CRA Practices includes training
capture and feedback lessons? of farmers and a capacity building program on CRA practices.
The project also includes a detailed M&E system planned to
produce, categorize, and disseminate information from the
project. A M&E manual will be produced with data from the
first year of the project, and a computerized database will be
developed and regularly fed by data collected from
implementing partners.
10. Has a consultative process taken place, and Yes, but needs further information. Consultations with
has it involved all key stakeholders, and provincial stakeholders, including members from various
vulnerable groups, including gender sectors, communities and private sector were held in Enga,
considerations in compliance with the Milne Bay, and New Ireland to identify the priorities. (See
Environmental and Social Policy and Gender annexes 3-5). The most vulnerable and gender groups were
Policy of the Fund? represented by faith-based organizations, women in
agriculture associations, and small medium enterprises.
12. No.
results framework?
CAR3: Kindly provide information on t
framework in the section of the project
components description, by stating the project alignment with
one or more of the AF outcomes of the strategic results
framework.
13. Has the sustainability of the Unclear. While preliminary technical and financial analyses
project/programme outcomes been taken into show that the project is financially sustainable, more
account when designing the project? information is needed to understand how adaptation benefits
can be sustained after project completion end, including
maintenance of any infrastructure or installations to be
developed, such as the multiplication sheds and integrated
digital platform.
14. Does the project / programme provide an Yes, as outlined in the checklist on pages 40-44 and in the
overview of environmental and social impacts / risk assessment questionnaire provided in annex 9.
risks identified, in compliance with the
Environmental and Social Policy and Gender The potential adverse impacts associated with project
Policy of the Fund? activities are foreseen to be low in intensity, minor and site-
specific, and lend themselves to readily available and already
widely used mitigation measures. For these reasons, the
ASSA project has been assigned an Environmental and
Social Safeguards Category B (medium risk), consistent with
the requirements and standards of the Pacific Community
(SPC) Social and Environmental Responsibility Policy and
ironmental and Social Policy.
Eligibility of IE 1. Is the project/programme submitted through Yes, the Pacific Community (SPC) is an accredited
an eligible Implementing Entity that has been Implementing Entity of the Board.
accredited by the Board?
framework?
10. Is a disbursement schedule with time-bound n/a at concept stage
milestones included?
Social and Environmental Risks and Impacts Assessment
The social and environmental assessment is a process that aims at reviewing a project to identify whether it is likely to cause adverse social and
environmental risks and/or impacts.
What for? Make an initial assessment of risks and/or impacts based on criteria allowing to categorize them according to their significance (low
medium or high- risk project).
When? It is a desk assessment undertaken at the stage of project design, before project proposal approval, to determine if further assessment
of the identified risks/impacts is necessary and if prevention or mitigation measures can be integrated within the project activities.
How? It is based on information made available for the project design and should be conducted in using the Social and Environmental
assessment Questionnaire. It is the assessment Report that determines the risk category for each project on the basis of the identification and
ranking of risks/potential impacts, in taking account of available information as well as comments from consulted stakeholders including
affected populations.
By Whom? The Project Manager in charge of the Project Concept Note is responsible for filling in the SER Questionnaire and make
recommendations for the next septs.
Next Steps:
- low risk
technical appraisal.
- high risk , further assessment may be needed in order to determine if it can be implemented while
not triggering the social and environmental safeguards of SPC SER Policy, and under what conditions or adjustments, including mitigation
measures.
Risk assessment Score
Risk Description
under the risk description column
Will the project present unsafe, indecent or There are no activities planned under the
unhealthy working conditions for stakeholders No project that would entail unsafe, indecent or L
1. Labour and involved? unhealthy working conditions.
Working
Is there potential for the project to apply
Conditions
adverse discriminatory practices based on The project will maintain strictly non-
L
religious, racial, gender, disability or political discriminatory approaches for all activities.
considerations?
Could the project adversely contribute to Small GHG emissions may arise from The project design will ensure that there is
climate change by generating greenhouse gas agricultural activities, e.g. use of vehicles no large-scale deforestation or forest
Yes L
emissions including through deforestation or running on fossil fuels. However, these are degradation, and that all GHG emissions
2. Climate forest degradation? likely to be negligible. are minimised.
change
Could the project negatively affect the The project is inherently designed to
No L
resilience to climate change? enhance resilience to climate change.
Will the project generate hazardous waste?
The project is unlikely to generate large
Is the project likely to lead to environmental
No amounts of waste, and no waste generated is L
damages due to an uncontrolled management
3. Resource expected to be hazardous.
of waste?
Efficiency
and Pollution The project is only expected to lead to minor
Prevention and negligible release of pollutants, largely
Is the project likely to lead to pollutants All pollution and use of chemicals will be
from emissions from agricultural and
release? Are chemicals (including pesticides) Yes strictly monitored and managed to ensure M
processing equipment. Some pesticides may
likely to be used during the project? that it remains within relevant regulations.
be used during the project for agricultural
activities.
Is the project likely to negatively impact on
the human rights of the affected Project activities are not expected to have
populations? (e.g. their rights to water, No any negative human rights impacts, but L
work, health, to a healthy environment, rather enhance rights to water and health.
etc.)?
Is the project likely to create less favourable The project management will be undertaken
treatment of, or discrimination against, any No in such a way as to ensure that there is no L
4. Human
person or group? discrimination.
Rights
Is the project likely to increase the risk to
people with disability (physical, hearing, The project is not expected to result in any
No L
visual, intellectual and sensory risks to people with disabilities.
impairments)?
Is the project likely to increase risks to
The project is not expected to result in any
children or vulnerable adults through No L
risks to children or vulnerable adults.
interaction with SPC staff and non-staff?
It will not be possible to consult with all Project consultations will to the greatest
potential beneficiaries during the project extent possible attempt to engage with as
Any risk that populations perceive they did not
design. Thus it is possible that some many interested parties as possible. Parties
receive enough opportunities to raise their Yes L
5. Impacts on populations may feel that they were not feeling aggrieved will be able to use a
concerns regarding the project?
Affected afforded the opportunity to raise their Grievance Redress Mechanism to have
communities concerns. their concerns heard.
Is there a risk that the project would create or None of the project activities are judged to
exacerbate conflicts with or within affected No be likely to create or exacerbate any forms of L
populations? conflict.
Is the project likely to increase community
Project activities are not expected to have
exposure to disease (water-borne, water-
No any impacts on exposure to diseases of any L
based, water-related and vector-borne
sort.
diseases as well as communicable diseases)?
Is there a likelihood that the project would The project will specifically ensure that Gender-sensitive indicators and activities
have adverse impacts on gender equality, No gender-sensitivity is mainstreamed will ensure that the priorities of women L
and/or the situation of women and girls? throughout project activities. and other vulnerable groups are included.
During on-going stakeholder engagement,
Have community groups/leaders raised gender
project proponents will ensure that gender
equality concerns regarding the project during No To date, no such concerns have been raised. L
equity is included as a core aspect of
the stakeholder engagement process?
6. Gender consultations.
On the contrary, the project will enhance the
ability to access or use natural resources upon No ability of women to access natural resources L
which they depend for a livelihood? for their livelihoods.
8. Use of There is a possibility that some activities may All project activities will be strictly
Could the project lead to adverse impacts on
natural Yes lead to minor and localised impacts on monitored and managed to ensure that M
biodiversity or natural habitat?
resources biodiversity or natural habitat. they remain within relevant regulations.
Is the project likely to negatively impact a Project activities will be undertaken outside
No L
protected area? of protected areas.
Is the project likely to introduce invasive alien No invasive alien species are likely to be
No L
species to the project area? introduced by project activities.
Is the project likely to restrict p access Project activities are designed to enhance
to natural resources and their means of No people s access to natural resources and L
livelihoods? livelihoods.
While use of renewable resources (especially
Is the project likely to favour unsustainable
No water) is likely to take place, it will be L
exploitation of a renewable resource
ensured that this is done sustainably.
Is the project likely to negatively affect
peoples or communities rights: rights of
affected populations, including procedural
rights such as the right to be consulted or to The people-centred approach adopted by
have access to information, or substantive SPC for all of its activities ensures that
No L
rights (real or personal) such as the right of peoples and communities rights are always
9. Peoples
access to natural resources or benefit-sharing protected.
right and
related to these natural resources (carbon
tenure
rights, benefits from access to genetic
resources...).
Could the project require the relocation of
Project activities do not entail any relocation
people from their homes or lands subject to No L
or displacement of people or communities.
traditional ownership or customary use?
Is the project likely to negatively affect cultural No impacts on cultural heritage are
No L
heritage? anticipated.
10. Cultural
heritage
Is the project likely to negatively affect a No impacts on cultural heritage are
No L
legally protected cultural heritage area? anticipated.
If only L on the right-hand column, then the project is Low risk > no further
assessment is required
If one or more M then the project is Medium risk > further assessment is required
Risk categorization process to formulate alternatives
If one of more H, > topic assessment is compulsory, including for the assessment of
credible alternatives (NB: the project may have to be categorized as Medium or
High risk depending on the outcome of the ESIA)
Conclusion:
- Risk Categorization (tick the relevant answer in the right-hand box): - Low - Medium - High
- Is further assessment needed (Please specify if it is a topic or full Environmental and Social Impact Assessment, as well as in which areas or on
which topic(s) any such further assessment should be conducted):
All topics/areas Further environmental and social impact screening and/or assessment
to be undertaken during formulation of the project proposal, as per
Adaptation Fund and SPC requirements.
I, undersigned, Mr Dirk Snyman, hereby certify that I have answered this Questionnaire truthfully and to the best of my knowledge.
Signature:
10 January 2022