Environmental, Social and Economic Review Note (ESERN)
I. Project Overview
Identification | 9835 |
Project Title | Strengthening Chile’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) Transparency Framework |
Managing Division | Economy Division |
Type/Location | National |
Region | Latin America & the Caribbean |
List Countries | Chile |
Project Description | Chile has maintained a progressive vision on climate action transparency. For instance, it was the first Latin-American country to submit a Biennial Update Report (BUR) in 2014, while its second BUR was submitted in 2016 (Conference of the Parties (COP) 22). In that sense and although the orientations, modalities, procedures and guidelines for implementing the Enhanced Transparency framework (ETF) are still under revision of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the PA, Chile is already adapting its own framework, considering its own necessities and priorities as established in the NDC. Key points to adapt Chile’s framework include approaches to plan mitigation strategies to ensure the NDC target is achieved cost-effectively. Mitigation planning may require updates and increasing levels of ambition in order to achieve the NDC target (eventually, mitigation actions may not be as effective as initially planned). Tracking progress made can be facilitated by breaking the NDC target for 2030 into a number of intermediate and closer targets. Planning towards cost-effective mitigation trajectories and avoiding technology lock-in can best be done based on a long-term mitigation target and a long-term mitigation strategy. The CBIT support solicited will help Chile becoming a benchmark for the region in terms of the ETF, allowing it to implement and test systems related to transparency which have not been implemented in developing countries ever before. The project will address the needs of Chile on building capacities in advanced planning tools, improving and enhancing the institutional arrangements in place for international reporting and improving the data management for a cost-efficient and reliable evaluation of mitigation and adaptation actions, informing political decision-making and climate-related public expenditure to track the progress of the NDC. This will be achieved focused on three Outcomes: “Coordination and availability of climate change related information enhanced”, “Institutional and technical capacities for the formulation and use of low GHG emissions development strategies strengthened”, and Public institutions achieve to robustly report their climate expenditures and support received. |
Estimated duration of project: | 2018 - 2021 (36 months) |
Estimated cost of the project : | GEF Grant: 1,232,000 Co-finance: 870,000 |
| Funding Source: | GEF |
II. Environmental Social and Economic Screening Determination
Summary of the Safeguard Risks Triggered
Safeguard Standard Triggered by the Project | Impact of Risk (1-5) | Probability of Risk (1-5) | Significance of Risk (L, M, H)* |
SS 1: Biodiversity, natural habitat and Sustainable Management of Living Resources | 1 | 1 | L |
SS 2: Resource Efficiency, Pollution Prevention and Management of Chemicals and Wastes | 1 | 1 | L |
SS 3: Safety of Dams | 1 | 1 | L |
SS 4: Involuntary resettlement | 1 | 1 | L |
SS 5: Indigenous peoples | 1 | 1 | L |
SS 6: Labor and working conditions | 1 | 1 | L |
SS 7: Cultural Heritage | 1 | 1 | L |
SS 8: Gender equity | 1 | 1 | L |
SS 9: Economic Sustainability | 1 | 1 | L |
Additional Safeguard questions for projects seeking GCF-funding (Section IV) | NA | NA | NA |
*Refer to the UNEP ESES Framework (Chapter 2) and the UNEP’s ESES Guidelines
ESE Screening Decision
|
|
|
|
Development of ESE Review Note and Screening Decision
| ESERN Prepared by: | Name: Tania Daccarett | Date: 09 May 2017 |
| Conforms to ESES Framework | Name: Yunae Yi | Date: 15 May 2017 |
| Accepted by Project Manager: | Name: | Date: |
Recommended further action from the Safeguard Advisor
I agree that it is a low safeguard risk project. However, I request that training, consultation, guidelines and information disclosure are based on adequate stakeholder mapping, including vulnerable & marginalized people and gender dimensions. PIF stated that there is high risk on “data ownership and intellectual property issues prevent certain stakeholders from participating in the project.” Inclusive process will help preventing such risk.
Data needs and collection also should be done based on the background research on the relevant variables and identify what data to collect, how to collect and how to interpret. Often, relevant socio-economic data gets omitted.