United Nations Development Programme Country: Lao PDR ANNEXES1 Project Title: Effective Governance for small-scale rural infrastructure and disaster preparedness in a changing climate UNDAF Outcome(s): By 2015, the Government and communities better adapt to and mitigate climate change and reduce natural disaster vulnerabilities in priority sectors (Outcome 8). UNDP Strategic Plan Environment and Sustainable Development Primary Outcome: Strengthened capacities of developing countries to mainstream climate change adaptation policies into development plans. UNDP Strategic Plan Secondary Outcome: National, regional and local levels of governance expand their capacities to manage the equitable delivery of public services and support conflict resolution. Expected CP Outcome(s): By 2015, better climate change adaptation and mitigation implemented by government and communities and natural disaster vulnerabilities reduced in priority sectors. Expected CPAP Output (s) Those that will result from the project and extracted from the CPAP) Executing Entity/Implementing Partner: Government of Lao PDR, Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Implementing Entity/Responsible Partners: United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF) Table of Contents Annex 1: Risk Analysis. ..............................................................................................................................3 Annex 2: Agreements. .................................................................................................................................7 Annex 3: Terms of Reference .....................................................................................................................7 Annex 4: Capacity Assessment ................................................................................................................17 Annex 5: Maps...........................................................................................................................................28 Annex 6: Tables .........................................................................................................................................38 Annex 7: Graphs and Figures ................................................................................................................116 Annex 8: V&A analysis ..........................................................................................................................120 Annex 9: The Role of Women within the Ethnic Minorites of Sekong and Saravane ......................120 1 For UNDP supported GEF funded projects as this includes GEF-specific requirements 1 Annex 10: Climate Change Adaptation Training Modules.................................................................123 Annex 11: Overview and examples of macro- and micro-level climate risk assessment tools .........127 Annex 12: Annual Workplan Year One (2013/14) ...............................................................................129 Annex 13: Economic Analysis of CCA Projects in Sekong and Saravane Provinces ......................130 Annex 14: References .............................................................................................................................148 2 Annex 1: Risk Analysis. Use the standard UNDP Atlas Risk Log template. For UNDP GEF projects in particular, please outline the risk management measures including improving resilience to climate change that the project proposes to undertake. LFM Description of the risk Potential consequence Countermeasures / Type Probability Owner Submittedu Last Status level management response (risk category) Impact (high- pdated by Update medium-low) PO Other risk areas may Climate related risk There is increasing awareness Political P=l GoL emerge as more important areas will be unattended amongst government officials, Operational I=h UN than climate related risks in Exacerbates Vulnerability that these investments Donor some localities. of livelihoods within the contribute to macroeconomic unattended areas benefits, while livelihood improvements are barely achieved. As part of their mandate officials are in search of programs that contribute to livelihood security, such as the proposed project. There is also an increasing awareness on existing and emerging of climate threats in the districts and provinces and how climate change trends are interlinked with other ongoing land use change processes. As an example, some districts do not allow the establishment of plantation concessions any more, since they do not see the benefit for their districts and fear the long-term environmental effects. 3 PO Overall quality of Key issues will not be The effects of climate change Institutional P=l GoL / consultations associated achieved. are occurring on the ground and Operational I-h MAF with district planning may High dependency on affect peoples livelihoods even UN not be sufficiently high to quality of consultations. within the range of current Donor ensure key issues emerge. Increase of Vulnerability climate variabilities. The consultations will focus on the fact that the proposed adaptation measures have lead to immediate benefits, while also counter measuring longer term impacts of climate change. LFM Description of the risk Potential consequence Countermeasures / Type Probability Owner Submitted Last Status level management response (risk category) Impact (high- updated by Update medium-low) 1.1 Insufficient engagement Quality of implemented The capacity development Political P=l GoL and understanding of projects will suffer. activities will provide officials Institutional I=m UN climate risks among key Exacerbation of with those data sets. Operational Project stakeholders at district and Vulnerability. Demonstration projects will sub-district planning levels. show that CCA is not an additional burden, but a vehicle for rural development and an additional funding source to fulfil the government agencies’ mandates better than under business as usual conditions. 1.1 The 12 districts of two Compartmentalized The project objective as agreed Institutional P=l MAF provinces replicate the planning in a non climate with the government states that Technical I-m NAFRI conventional non climate resilient manner there is no other opportunity to CC Office resilient planning continues. High climate spend the project budget as for procedures, since they are vulnerabilities of the CCA. cheaper and thus a larger population remain. There is a huge discontentment part of the population can amongst officials that business be claimed to be as usual built infrastructure and addressed. ecosystem management fails. This is the entry point for CCA’ed measures, which in the long term are more cost efficient and contribute to more credibility of the involved agencies amongst the population. 4 1.2 Existing government Officials will not discover There is currently no indication Institutional P=l Board decentralisation policies how the long term that recentralisation efforts are Operational I=l UN and approaches are process of climate planned, negatively affecting MAF/NAF significantly delayed during change is linked to short decentralised delivery RI the project period. term planning cycles of mechanisms such as DDF. Project districts. Projects will not be implemented Exacerbation of Vulnerability. LFM Description of the risk Potential consequence Countermeasures / Type Probability Owner Submitted, Last Status level management response (risk category) Impact (high- updated by Update medium-low) 2.1 Design of suitable Climate resilient water The project is informed by the Operational P=l MAF/NAF infrastructure is not based supply innovations do not locally informed V&A analysis Technical I=l RI on sufficient local contribute to the and the detailed local Project consultations and is not wellbeing of the consultations of the CRVA valued and used as a population since they are analysis consequence. not understood and as a consequence not maintained 2.2 Local resistance occurs to Project attempts will be The resistance of some groups Operational P=h Board the introduction of new blocked. is due to the fact, that they do Technical I=h Project water management not benefit from new water techniques on socio- management techniques cultural grounds. introduced in the past, while they were are asked to financially or in-kind contribute to the construction and maintenance of those innovations. The CRVA assessment at each project site will clarify differentiated rights, roles and responsibilities of local stakeholders to ensure that new management techniques will benefit the community as a whole and will be sustained. LFM Description of the risk Potential consequence Countermeasures / Type Probability Owner Submitted, Last Status level management response (risk category) Impact (high- updated by Update medium-low) 5 3.1 Land ownership issues in Implemntation of projects The CRVA analysis at each Institutional P=h NAFES the vicinity of built might be not possible. project site will give an Operational I=h NAFRI infrastructure restrict Exacerbation of indication whom to involve. Technical Board possibilities in introducing vulnerability. Subsequent management Project new ecosystem based land contracts with the communities management approaches. as a prerequisite for further support will ensure sustainability. 6 Annex 2: Agreements. Cofinancing letters (submitted separately) Annex 3: Terms of Reference Project Personnel A. CORE PSU TEAM PM Full responsibility for project operations. Acting on behalf