1.1.A.1 Identify Three Priority C-CAP Districts in Each Country of Operations & 1.1.B - Rank Five Priority Communities in Each Selected District for USAID Approval

Deliverables: 1.1.A.1 Identify three priority C-CAP districts in each country of operations & 1.1.B - Rank five priority communities in each selected district for USAID approval This document was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). It was prepared by the Coastal Community Adaptation Project (C-CAP) implemented by DAI for USAID/Pacific Islands. April 2013 INTRODUCTION A draft list of priority C-CAP districts in each country of operations was submitted within 30 days of contract award. This was completed while the technical team was still in Manila from 22 to 26 October 2013 without the benefit of meeting with subcontractors and most importantly with host country government stakeholders. The exercise was based on a literature review of existing studies but was submitted as a draft to be updated once partners in country could be consulted. The initial list of districts and communities was as follows: Papua New Guinea Year One 1. Milne Bay– Kiriwini-Goodenough District, Sumarai-Murua District, Esa’ala District, Makamaka Rural LLG, Huhu Rural, Maramatana Rural, Suau Rural 2. Central-- Manumanu Year 2 Considerations 1. Morobe– Morobe, Sialum, Lae 2. Manus/New Ireland/Bougainville /New Britain Fiji Year One 1. Rewa Delta– Lomanikoro, Daku, Buretu (Provincial Government identifies others) Year 2 Considerations 1. Macuata/Bua – Seaqaqa, Dreketi 2. Lomaiviti 3. Kadavu 4. Southern Lau 5. Yasawa/Mamanuca 6. Western Viti Levu Samoa Year One 1. Vaisigano – Falealupo, Auala, Asau Year 2 Considerations 1. Palauli – Palauli, Tafua 2. Gaga’ifomauga– Aopo, Manase, (existing CIMP) - 3 - 3. Fa’asaleleaga– Sapapilii (existing CIMP) 4. Va’a-o-Fonoti– Fagaloa Vanuatu Year One 1. Northern Efate– Pele, Moso (need to confirm), Lelepa, Emau, Year 2 Considerations 1. Malampa– Maskelyne, Uripiv, Litslits 2. Tafea– Lonamilo 3. Shefa (Outer) -- Epau 4. Santo Following the week in Manila, the Coastal Community Adaptation Project (C-CAP) team members met with University of South Pacific (USP) partner staff from October 29-31 in order to present C-CAP and seek input and guidance from USP on establishing an office for the program and more importantly, make an initial selection of participating districts and communities for C-CAP’s four year one countries of Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Tonga, and Samoa. USP has already worked with a number of communities under the European Union funded Global Climate Change Alliance (GCCA) programme; GCCA background is outlined in the text box below. - 4 - Global Climate Change Alliance - Pacific Islands Forum support programme GCCA priority Adaptation to climate change areas Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) All 15 ACP Member States in the Pacific: Cook Islands, Fiji, Beneficiary Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, countries Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Kingdom of Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu Main The Pacific Centre for Environment and Sustainable Development implementing (PACE-SD) of the University of the South Pacific (USP) partner Project duration January 2011 – December 2014 (48 months) In implementing this programme and its predecessor, USP’s Pacific Centre for Environment and Sustainable Development (PACE-SD) has developed a number of assessment tools for equitable work site (community) selection and community vulnerability assessments—both of which are done through an inclusive participatory approach with government and community, and civil society stakeholders.. After identifying communities through PACE-SD’s Rapid Assessment methodology, PACE-SD leads participatory vulnerability and adaptation assessments followed by an Action Plan phase where each community will define risk and disaster mitigation measures and calculate their costs. The process is one where C-CAP staff will coordinate with USP ICCs who have been trained to assist community leaders in the identification of their infrastructure needs . The final product will be in the form of an action plan aimed at address adaptation measures identified by the community through a participatory planning process. C-CAP will work carefully with the GCCA ICCs to coordinate the infrastructure investments planned under the GCCA with those to be funded via the C-CAP program in shared partner communities. During consultations in late October 2012, C-CAP team also communicated with SPC, GIZ and other actors working in supporting community level climate adaptation measures. SPC shared some results from an SPC/GIZ assessment conducted from July - September of 2012. They explained that although there had been some national level reports in conjunction with National Adaptation Programmes of Action and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the guidelines remained broad on topics such as impacts, vulnerabilities, and adaptation - 5 - measures at the sectoral level. These findings were too general to inform assessments on vulnerability and adaptation measures at the community level. Although the SPC/GIZ community selection process, as outlined below, is focused more on food security issues related to climate change, it is very similar to that which USP uses in its methodology. Also, convening a wide range of stakeholders from government agencies, civil society and international organizations the V&A team under the guidance of SCP, GIZ and SPREP used the following criteria to identify communities to participate in demonstration adaptation approaches. The rapid assessment criteria were as follows: More than 100 people Low-lying coastal or close to a river Existing environmental degradation and over-exploitation of natural resources (fisheries, forests, coral reefs) Experienced the destruction of food crops, coastal erosion, severe storm surges and inundation in association with cyclone events Community is organized (previous experience) and willing to support the project. This work in Choiseul is of particular interest to C-CAP as the Component 2 of the methodology is a participatory assessment of climate change related risks and threats. Although this approach fits well with C-CAP's participatory mapping and infrastructure identification exercises the GCCA methodology is more appropriate in understanding the communities and their climate change adaptation needs. The additional elements which make the GCCA process more comprehensive are 1) it analyzes the adaptive capacity of the community through a series of detailed exercises on identifying solutions to the climate change problems; 2) it identifies the resources or funding needed to address the vulnerabilities and 3) it is a methodology being implemented in all 12 of C-CAP’s target countries and could be expanded in a more expedient manner. The Coastal Community Adaptation Project (C-CAP) team members are engaged in continuous consultations with climate change stakeholders from the public, civil society, community and education fields in each of C-CAP’s Year 1 countries. In Papua New Guinea and Fiji, team members have met with leaders in a number of communities in order to establish preliminary informational exchanges with prospective communities. In early November 2012 the C-CAP team visited the Rewa delta in Fiji and met with leaders in Daku and Buretu communities documenting climate change risks and vulnerabilities faced by the residents. On November 12, C-CAP team members met with the Office of Climate Change and Development in Port Moresby where Director Jacob Ekinye suggested visiting the initial community of Gabagaba in Central District. The C-CAP team tested a draft Community Engagement Methodology during two days in Gabagaba and worked with the community to assess climate change risks to their community infrastructure. - 6 - Following these visits to communities in Papua New Guinea and Fiji a series of communications with USP and I’Taukei Affairs advisor were conducted to narrow down the choices for the five communities per country. The sections below will detail the communications conducted in each of the year one countries. In the C-CAP partner community selection process section below, the different consultations between C-CAP staff and respective government officials is detailed. The following section provides country by country lists of the five proposed communities including the process by which they were identified. METHODOLOGY District and Community Site Selection Background To achieve rapid site selection and delivery of completed social, economic and/or water infrastructure projects across C-CAP’s four year one priority countries—Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Samoa and Tonga]—within the first year of the contract, C-CAP applied PACE- SD’s Rapid Assessment Methodology for equitable community selection—which has been approved and used by partner governments in each of C-CAP’s year one countries—and through additional consultations with : o C-CAP Partner—University of the South Pacific Center for Environment and Sustainable Development (USP PACE-SD), as well as its AUSAID-funded predecessor, which applied the same methodology. o Host country government partners in each Year 1 country; and o Recommended communities, through site assessments. The GCCA Rapid Assessment methodology for equitable community selection has been tested and improved over a number of years and is at the foundation of USP’s engagement with communities and data base of socioeconomic and climate data in GCCA partner countries. C- CAP’s use of the same methodology will allow for standardized data collection and contribution to

Load more