AFRICAN ELEPHANT SUMMIT GABORONE, BOTSWANA 2 DECEMBER 2013

Transcription

1 AFRICAN ELEPHANT SUMMIT GABORONE, BOTSWANA 2 DECEMBER 2013

2 Decision (Rev. CoP15) of the Conference of the Parties directed the Secretariat to establish a Fund that will be applied to the implementation of the African elephant action plan (Action plan). It further directed the Secretariat to establish a steering committee, consisting of representatives of the African elephant range States and donors, to govern the Fund and to support and advise African elephant range States in the implementation of the Action plan. Under Decision 14.76, Parties, trading countries, the ivory carving industry, intergovernmental organizations, non-governmental organizations and other donors are called upon to contribute significantly to the Fund to ensure its establishment and maintenance. The African elephant range States present at the CoP15 agreed to the Action plan by consensus in the margins of the meeting. 68 on behalf of the 37 range States of the African elephant.

3 Due to limited funds, calls for proposals were focused to the first three (3) objectives of the African Elephant Action Plan: Reduced Illegal Killing of Elephants and Illegal Trade in Elephant Products Maintained Elephant Habitats and Restored Connectivity Reduced Human-Elephant Conflict

4 UNEP had ample experience in administering trust funds in an efficient and cost-effective manner; With its headquarters on the African continent and as part of the United Nations system, UNEP was generally regarded by range and donor States alike as an impartial and dependable organization; A number of range and donor States had already indicated that they would support administration of the Fund by UNEP; and The CITES Secretariat and Trust Fund were already administered by UNEP, making it a natural choice of institution to host the Fund.

5 AEF Fund Allocation Discretionary Account Allocated Funds 30% 70% This ratio may only be altered by consensus of the African elephant range States Regional Account is divided into four equal parts. Each part is exclusively allocated to proposals submitted by African elephant range States in each of the four subregions, so as to guarantee that each subregion benefits from the Fund; and The Discretionary Account is used for proposals from any subregion identified by the Steering Committee as urgent and consistent with the AEAP's Priority Objective 1, 2 or 3

6 Southern Africa Chair Eastern Africa Central Africa Western Africa DONOR and Ex Officio South Africa Kenya Cameroon Burkina Faso Netherlands Germany Alternate Chair Botswana South Sudan Congo - Bravaville Nigeria CITES Secretariat UNEP - Administrator

7 The first meeting to consider proposals was hosted by South Africa in Kruger National Park in December Financial support provided by Germany & South Africa The second meeting held in Burkina Faso September 2013; thanks to the generous support of Burkinabe government

8 AEFSC agreed that South Africa will chair for a period of three (3) years to facilitate the first phase of implementation of the projects funded through the AEF Terms of Reference have been adopted include additional provisions relating to the role of UNEP and the CITES Secretariat

9 UNEP: Host fund and provide regular financial reports; Provide secretarial support to AEFSC; and Disburse funds based on decisions made by AEFSC to UNEP CITES Secretariat: Liaise with CITES Parties on matters relating to the AEF, the Steering Committee and the African Elephant Action Plan

10 AEFSC developed and adopted Rules of Procedures Meetings annually & linked to regular meetings of CITES Working languages English & French CHALLENGE: Translation Quorum - Eight representatives of the four subregional members of the Steering Committee, either in attendance or with a transferred vote, and one donor State in attendance Decisions By consensus (provision made for voting two-thirds majority)

11 Rules of Procedures (continue) Communication Procedures call for proposals: Based on funds available; dates are agreed for submission of proposals and communicated to subregional members through sub-regional representatives Provision made for submission and consideration of emergency proposals through an procedure AEFSC has prepared criteria for emergency proposals

12 Template for project proposals Simplify certain requirements use of tables to reflect activities, deliverables (outputs), timeframes, costs Clear breakdown of costs & specific information relating to funding required from AEF Detailed reporting requirements to be included (AEFSC has agreed that certain items should not be funded through the AEF, including for example daily allowances. Such items should be included in the funds to be committed by the Government or through other sources of funding)

13 Criteria for the evaluation of proposals Sustainability - The project proposal must demonstrate how it can be sustained in the long term, i.e. beyond the funding period. This must encompass long-term socio economic and ecological aspects Transparency - The proposal should demonstrate stakeholder involvement, for example, communities that may be affected, other organisations, or NGOs are involved in the project Quality - Proposals that demonstrate they can produce high quality outputs that meet the Priority Objectives outlined in the African Elephant Action Plan

14 Criteria for the evaluation of proposals. Uniqueness, innovation and potential to replicate - Projects that are unique, and may result in new innovation relating to elephant management, as well as those that can be replicated in other range States are prioritised. This includes proposals aimed at addressing a fragile population or unique ecosystems to be conserved to ensure the conservation of the specific population of African elephants. Good governance - The project proposal should demonstrate that good governance systems are in place or provided for, including financial management; monitoring and evaluation; and reporting.

15 At the most recent meeting of the AEFSC held in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso on 25 th -27 th September 2013, a total of 11 projects were submitted by range states and 8 approved for funding amounting to a total of USD 445, Projects ranged from equipping and training rangers to mitigation of human wildlife conflict.

16 Teething challenges including delays in designating the Fund secretariat, communication difficulties within region faced by some regional representatives have resulted in delays disbursement of and uptake of funding by proponents Concern about lack of proposals from Central Africa Translation services expensive and no funds available to provide for translation of projects proposals Low levels of contributions to AEF African elephant range States ready to submit project proposals to implement the African Elephant Action Plan, but funding constraints limit the scope of proposals that can be adopted. The AEFSC & range States appeal to donor states and other organisations to contribute to the AEF.

17 AEAP and AEF are the only PAN AFRICAN elephant action plan and conservation funding mechanism respectively. AEFSC conducts its business in a transparent manner through its composition, ToRs and rules of procedure. Any changes to its modus operandi require the approval of the African elephant range states. The AEF has been constrained in terms of the number and scope of projects that have been approved due to limited funds. Proposals have been approved and several projects are ongoing with others due to begin following signing of agreements. The AEFSC & range States appeal to donor states and other organisations to contribute to the AEF.

18