Challenges of institutional frameworks in scaling up Climate Finance in Ghana

1. Antwi-Boasiako Amoah (EPA, Ghana)
(aantwib@gmail.com,/ antwi-boasiako.amoah@epa.gov.gh)
Climate Change Expert Group Global Forum
18 March 2014
OECD Conference Centre, Paris
Challenges of Institutional Frameworks in
Scaling up Climate Finance in Ghana

2. Reflection Questions
1. What are the challenges in designing suitable institutional structure of
climate finance sources that can facilitate scale-up and replication
of climate finance interventions?
2. How can international climate funds further contribute to
encouraging mobilisation of climate finance from various sources
(including private sector) through scale-up and replication processes?

3. Institutions are the capital stock for policy-making
INSTITUTIONS
Production
of Policies
Review of
Policies
Implementatio
n of Policies
Amoah, 2014
INSTITUTIONS-WHAT THEY ARE?

4. the nature of institutions (both at country and international
levels) is crucial for access, replication and upscale of
climate financing
Institutional structures can enhance or constrain climate
financing at all levels
It is more challenging and complicated for developing countries
due to high dependency on international climate funding sources
and vulnerable economies

5. Governance &
coordination
Capacity building
Research &
knowledge
management
Finance
International
cooperation
communication
Monitoring &
Reporting
Ghana’s National Climate
Change Policy Framework

6. Source: Tutu Benefoh, 2010
Key:
NCCC– National Climate Change Committee, MoFeP: Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, NDPC: National Development
Planning Commission, MLNR: Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources, MoFA: Ministry of Agriculture, MEST: Ministry of
Environment, Science and Technology, CSOs: Civil Society Organizations; CCU: Climate Change Unit, EECCU: Energy Efficiency
and Climate Change Unit, CDM/ DNA: Clean Development Mechanism/ Designated National Authority, MoEn: Ministry of Energy,
DPs: Donor Partners, MFA: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, PoGH: Parliament of Ghana, MoI: Ministry of Interior, NREAG: Natural
Resource and Environment Advisory Group
Operational Level
StrategicLevel
MEST
National Development PlanningFramework
NREAG
EPA
CCU
CC
ccu
CC
CDM/
DNA
ccu
CC
Energy
Commission
(EECCU)
ccu
CC
Forestry
Commission
REDD+ Secretariat
ccu
CC
National
REDD+
Steering
Committee
ccu
CC
Coordination &
Harmonisation
NADMO
CLIMATE CHANGE GOVERNANCE INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK IN GHANA

7. Institutional Challenges to Climate Financing in Ghana
Absence of or little practical institutional coordination on
climate change
Funding for climate change is largely at the project level(notable
exception to this is NREG a multi donor multi sector budget
support programme of $25-30m pa for 5 years)
Progress to date has been more donor-driven
Funding for CC in Ghana is largely provided bi-laterally or
through specific funds administered by the World Bank or
UNDP and to a limited extent through global funding
mechanisms
Donor activities have not, to date, focused on developing
systemic ownership of the agenda across government
(OECD, 2011)
Support has mainly been piecemeal and fragmented via never up-
scaled pilot projects (e.g. AAP)

8. Institutional Challenges to Climate Financing in Ghana
(cont.)
The seeming absence of private sector in climate financing
Different reporting as well as M&E systems between donor
agencies and implementing institutions often results in
delays
 Donors are also in principle aligned behind government
priorities for climate change but in
practice are `not very Paris like’ in their behaviour (OECD,
2011)

9. PARIS
PRINCIPLES
PERCENTAGE (%) REALIZATION BY STAKEHOLDERS
GOVERNMENT CSO DEV. PARTNERS
Mutual Accountability 50 38 50
Managing for Results - 38 60
Harmonization 100 90 70
Alignment 75 25 50
Ownership 50 75 80
Assessment of Paris Declaration(PD) Principle in Ghana by OECD in 2011

10. OECD DAC Key Principles to Inform Climate Change
Financing
 Ownership: Activities in response to climate change should be country driven and be‐
based on needs, views and priorities of partner countries. National sustainable development
strategies and climate change policies should be taken into account where they exist.
Recipient countries should lead in establishing and implementing their climate change
strategies in a broad consultative process ensuring full integration into policies, plans and
programmes in all relevant sectors.
 Alignment: Climate change financing needs to be integrated into countries‘ own planning
and budgeting mechanisms to ensure genuine ownership. Where possible, new and additional
climate change financing is channeled through countries‘ existing financial allocation systems.
 Capacity Development: Capacity development is critical to ensure that recipient countries
have the sufficient capacity to absorb and manage climate change financing.
 Harmonization: To reduce administrative costs, it is important that the international
community coordinates their actions, simplify procedures and share information to avoid
proliferation and duplication of funding mechanisms. A shift to programmatic approaches can
help.
 Managing for Development Results: The Bali Action Plan acknowledged the challenge
of yielding actual results on the ground and stressed the need for actions to be undertaken by
Parties to implement the convention to be measurable, reportable and verifiable (MRV)― ‖
(OECD Factsheet Oct. 2009)

11. Conclusion
Ghana’s visibility at the international level climate issues has not
reflected proportionally in attracting international climate
funding
Ownership, alignment, capacity development and harmonization
still remain key institutional challenges at the country level for
climate finance up-scaling though some modest achievements
have been made

12. THANK YOU