Trends, Approaches and Project Opportunities on Climate Change and Adaptation in Mesoamerica © 2018 IUCN/ Paúl Aragón

SERIES 4 No. 02 Evidence

n recent years, especially since the dissemination of the fourth report Agreement, formulated in 2015 and ratified in 2016. This Agreement´s I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)1 there main objective is to keep the increase in temperature below the has been a growing awareness by society about the threat posed by 2ºC threshold in this century and encourage additional efforts to climate change to the human and natural systems of Latin America limit the increase in temperature to 1.5ºC above pre-industrial levels. and the Caribbean.2 In this context, the countries of the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) presented their Nationally Determined Part of the international efforts to achieve a greater impact on the Contributions (NDC) in which they indicate commitments related to design of policies and programs on climate change is the Paris climate action.

1 M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, eds. (2007). Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, New York: Cambridge University Press.

IUCN promotes a Nature-based Solutions (NBS) approach to face For this reason, IUCN initiated a registry and characterization of climate challenges such as climate change, in order to improve food security change adaptation programs in five countries. The systematization and and economic social development.3 It also advocates and provides analysis of this information is intended to broaden the understanding technical support so that countries can consider NBS within their on the thematic, geographic and priority approaches to adaptation policies in their own NDCs. in Mexico (Chiapas), Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica and Panama. Through this analysis, it is possible to identify gaps The countries of Central America and Mexico recognize in their NDCs and priority areas, as well as to inform decision makers, cooperation both actions to reduce climate vulnerability, as well as commitments agencies and the general public on the climate change and adaptation directly related to ecosystems and their key role in adaptation. These efforts in the Mesoamerican Region. The results seek to support the adaptation efforts are reported in national communications that countries monitoring of progress of the NDCs with the framework of the Paris send to the UNFCCC. Despite these advances, it is still necessary to Accord and the Sustainable Development Goals. have accessible systems that allow us to know the trends, themes, areas of intervention, partners and opportunities for strengthening investments to address climate change in these countries.

3 UICN (2016). 2017- 2020 IUCN Programme. Gland, Switzerland. IUCN.

2 EVIDENCE Application of the Methodology

This methodology had two objectives: For the selection and characterization of the projects, those that were considered met with the following criteria: (I) it contained the words • Know the trends, thematic and geographical and investment “climate change” or “adaptation”, either in its title of in the general priorities of the adaptation and climate change projects in Mexico objective; (II) the execution time of the project was of at least one (Chiapas), Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica and year; (III) in the case of those projects that had ended, that they had Panama. not ended beyond a year from the time the information was collected. These criteria allowed the delimitation of the project universe to develop • Identify activities in the projects related to adaptation and in this registry in a more efficient manner. particular those with an Ecosystem-based Adaptation approach (EbA). Later, these projects were classified according to 10 categories (see Table 1) and the information on the projects was completed for each of Information was collected on national and regional projects that were the 10 categories. Based on this information, the maps were developed implemented in Mexico (Chiapas), Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and are accessible through the IUCN ArcGIS Map Web Server.4 Costa Rica y Panama. For the collection of this information primary sources (project manager and implementor) and secondary sources (bibliography references or website searches) were used. In addition, coordination was carried out with the competent national authorities on climate change for its validation.

Table 1. Categories for the Characterization of the Projects

CATEGORIES DESCRIPTION

1 Title and Objective Words “climate change” and /or “adaptation”

2 Main Executers Project managers

3 Implementing Partners Partnerships to implement the projects

4 Status Initiated / In Progress / Ended

5 Technical Monitoring System Yes / No

6 Execution Timeline Starting date / End date / Months of execution

7 Intervention Communities Name of the Communities / Geographical location

8 Budget USD

9 Scale National (one or many communities within a country) / Regional (two or more countries)

10 Activity Themes 1. Food Security

2. Availability of water resources

3. Protection and restoration of ecosystems

4. Improve local capacities for adaptation

4 http://iucn.cr/arcgis/home/

Scope of the information

• Due to the need to limit the universe of analysis, this • The information collected, as well as its analysis, are of research is a description of the projects that meet the a descriptive character. It does not imply an evaluation described criteria, not of all the projects on climate nor an assessment on the field results of each of the change adaptation that exist in Mesoamerica. registered projects.

• Includes 5 countries: Mexico (Chiapas), Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica and Panama. This is not a regional analysis, since this first phase does not yet include Nicaragua or Belize.

4 EVIDENCE Preliminary Results Until now, a total of 173 projects have been registered and characterized in the database: 142 national projects (implemented in one or several communities within a country) and 31 regional projects (in two or more countries) (see Figure 1).

60 National 30 Projects 50 Regional 40 26 9 Projects 30

and regional level and regional 22 40 20 3 32 8 26 10 16

Number of projects at a national at a national Number of projects 13 11 0 Guatemala Honduras Costa Rica El Salvador Mexico- Panama Chiapas Countries

Figure 1. Climate change and/or adaptation projects per country

Note: The graph shows the total number of national projects. In the cases of regional projects, it shows in which each country participates.

• Implementers As far as the main implementers, NGOs, international organisms The role of the community associations as main implementers and government agencies are the principal actors that directly is marginal in relation to the rest of the actors, since it does not execute the projects. reach 5% of the registered projects (see Figure 2).

Donor 0.39

Community Association 4.7

Private Sector 8.98

Academia/Scientific Sector 14.44

Government 21.89

Type of Executors Type International Organizations 24.21

NGO 25.39

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

% of main executors

Figure 2. Percentage of climate change adaptation projects by type of main implementer.

EVIDENCE 5 • Financing Sources In the case of project financing sources, international or external It is important to consider that these are regionally-grouped organizations represent the largest source of financing for results; however, for each country the data varies greatly from registered projects (see Figure 3). one to another.

Private Sector 4.8

National Governments 5.5

Academic/Scientific Sector 9.7

NGO 13.1

66.9

Financial Entity International Organizations

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

% of Financial Entities

Figure 3. Percentage of climate change adaptation projects by type of financing source.

Note: Projects financed by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) can have important contributions from international organizations and the private sector. When the NGOs took their own mixed funds to carry out the projects, this was categorized separately.

• Activity Themes Thus, at the regional level, in 38.8% of cases these activities focus Considering the 173 registered projects, the activities carried out in on improving food security, 29.4% on increasing capacities to face all the communities were classified according to their direct influence climate change, 22.8% on improving ecosystem conditions, 8.6% on one or more of the four themes described above (food security, on improving the availability of water resources and 0.4% on other water resources, capacities and ecosystems). topics (see Figure 4).

0,4 Food Security

Water Resource Availability 29,4 38,8

Ecosystems Protection and Restoration

Increasing Capacities to Face Climate Change 22,8 8,6 Others

Figure 4. Percentage of activities in the communities according to their theme

The majority of activities are carried out on the region´s Pacific In the other countries of the region, activities mainly focus on capacity watershed, and especially within the Mesoamerican Dry Corridor. building to face climate change. There are few interventions focused on Despite this, the activities carried out in the communities at each improving the availability of water resources in the core areas of the Dry country level vary considerably. In Chiapas-Mexico, interventions in Corridor (see Figures 5 and 6). communities for the protection of ecosystems and the strengthening of food security predominate.

700 Water Resource 600 Availability

500 Ecosystems Restoration and 400 Protection

300 Capacity building to face climate 200 change country per activity 100 Food Number of interventions in each Number of interventions in each 0 Security Panama El Salvador Honduras Mexico- Guatemala Costa Rica Chiapas Others Countries

Figure 5. Number of project activities per country per type

EVIDENCE 7 Figure 6. Communities with climate change adaptation projects according to their main activity. A) capacity building; B) water resource management; C) ecosystem recuperation and D) food security.

Caribbean Sea

Pacific Ocean

A) capacity building

Symbology Climate change adaptation projects Type of activity Strengthening of local capacities - civil society, government entities and others Protected areas Dry corridor Countries Geographic coordinate system Degrees, minutes and seconds WGS 84 ellipsoid Kilometers Cartography developed in May, 2019 Prepared by Marlon Morúa and Fiorella Sánchez

Caribbean Sea

Pacific Ocean

B) water resource management

Symbology Climate change adaptation projects Type of activity Water resource management and availability Protected areas Dry corridor Countries Geographic coordinate system Degrees, minutes and seconds WGS 84 ellipsoid Kilometers Cartography developed in May, 2019 Prepared by Marlon Morúa and Fiorella Sánchez

8 EVIDENCE Caribbean Sea

Pacific Ocean

C) ecosystem restoration

Symbology Climate change adaptation projects Type of activity Protection and restoration of ecosystems Protected areas Dry corridor Countries Geographic coordinate system Degrees, minutes and seconds WGS 84 ellipsoid Kilometers Cartography developed in May, 2019 Prepared by Marlon Morúa and Fiorella Sánchez

Caribbean Sea

Pacific Ocean

D) food security

Symbology Climate change adaptation projects Type of activity

Food security Protected areas Dry corridor Countries Geographic coordinate system Degrees, minutes and seconds WGS 84 ellipsoid Kilometers Cartography developed in May, 2019 Prepared by Marlon Morúa and Fiorella Sánchez

EVIDENCE 9 • Monitoring Systems • Budget Regarding the existence of technical monitoring systems in these Approximately 502 million USD have been invested in climate projects, for 32.4% no information could be obtained and 3.6% change adaptation projects. However, budget information was stated they didn´t have one, while 64% stated that they did have obtained for only 70% of the 173 projects surveyed. The regional a technical monitoring system. Analyzing the projects´ period of projects make up 28.1% of the total budget. These projects execution, 2018 was identified as a critical closing year for many have mainly focused on Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. of these. This reflects the importance of proposing actions or new The country with the lowest budget, both in national as well as projects for their continuity. regional, is Costa Rica, representing less than a quarter of the estimated budget for Honduras and Guatemala (see Figure 7).

180 000 000 $ 159 M Contributions of national projects 160 000 000

140 000 000 Contributions of regional Project for each country 65,2% $ 123 M 120 000 000 78,1% M = $1,000,000 100 000 000

USD ($) 80 000 000 $ 63 M 34,8% $ 48 M $ 59 M 60 000 000 0,4% 43,5% 13,7% 40 000 000 21,9% 99,6% $ 29 M 20 000 000 44,5% 56,5% 86,3% 55,5%

Honduras Guatemala Mexico- Panama El Salvador Costa Rica Chiapas

Figure 7. Budget of climate change adaptation projects in USD considering the contribution of national and regional projects (%) within the total budget for each country.

Nota: El 9,1% del presupuesto de proyectos regionales (12,9 millones USD) no se pudo desglosar a nivel de países ya que su objetivo era fortalecer la gobernanza a nivel de la región mesoamericana y no a nivel de cada país. Tipos de cambio utilizados: 1 USD: 1,1214 Euros: 18,93 Pesos Mexicanos: 24,42 Lempira. © 2018 IUCN/ Paúl Aragón

Conclusions and recommendations

• The water resources issue is one of the least addressed in the • Most of the activities and communities where the projects intervened activities of these projects. Considering the link between water under the characteristics described here, implemented actions on resources and climate change, food security and the maintenance the Pacific watershed, identifying an important gap in the Caribbean of environmental goods and services, it is essential to focus efforts region. on this issue to achieve a more sustainable adaptation to climate change. • Given the low presence of monitoring systems in the projects analyzed, it is relevant to draw attention to the importance of • Capacity building activities are present and constitute a large part designing, implementing and making accessible the results of of the efforts in Costa Rica, Panama, El Salvador, Guatemala and technical monitoring systems. This is key for the follow-up and Honduras. This being the basis for the sustainability of adaptation lessons learned that can be generated to strengthen and replicate measures, it is considered a priority to further strengthen those these initiatives. activities in these and other countries. • The largest budget investment was directed toward countries within • The results showed that the participation of local groups as main the core area of the Mesoamerican Dry Corridor and especially to executing actors of the projects is low. Due to the importance of Guatemala and Honduras. However, both in the number of projects providing sustainability and promoting local empowerment of and in the budget, an important gap is identified in forested areas and community actors for the implementation of measures that reduce countries, where NBS are key to the adaptation of the Mesoamerican the effects of climate change, it is recommended to further boost region in the medium and long term. their participation in decision-making.

Authors Melissa Marín, Marta Pérez de Madrid, Elías Cruz, Fiorella Sánchez-Monge.

About the AVE project The AVE project: Adaptation, Vulnerability & Ecosystems seeks to scale the Ecosystem-based Adaptation (EbA) approach through the strengthening of capacities to address climate change, the articulation of political, legal and institutional frameworks and the gathering of evidence on their multiple benefits to increase resilience and reduce the vulnerability of people and nature. Its implementation is carried out since 2015 in six Mesoamerican countries (Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Costa Rica and Panama) with the support of the Federal Ministry of the Environment, Nature Protection and Nuclear Safety (BMU) of Germany, and executed by the Environmental Law Centre (ELC) and the Regional Office for Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and in coordination with member organizations and partners such as the Fundación Hondureña de Ambiente y Desarrollo VIDA, the Unidad Ecológica Salvadoreña, the Sociedad de Historia Natural del Soconusco, the Asociación del Corredor Biológico Talamanca Caribe and International Union the Trinational Commission of the Plan Trifinio. for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) For more information visit: https://www.iucn.org/node/594 - Contact: [email protected] Regional Office for Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean (ORMACC) About IUCN San José, Costa Rica IUCN is a membership Union composed of both government and civil society organisations. It harnesses [email protected] the experience, resources and reach of its more than 1,300 Member organisations and the input of more www.iucn.org/ormacc than 10,000 experts. IUCN is the global authority on the status of the natural world and the measures needed to safeguard it.

Environmental Law Centre (ELC) Bonn, Germany [email protected] www.iucn.org/law