Climate Change Screening and Programme Appraisal in MOAC

Areeya Obidiegwu and Ray Purcell

Presentation Purpose

• to present findings and recommendations of the recent Climate Change Screening and Programme Appraisal Consultancy for information, discussion and feedback

Assignment Objective

• to support the design of future programme activities and the development of the Strategic Climate Change Action Plan for Agriculture 2017-2021

• by assessing the effectiveness of institutional processes for Climate Change Adaptation planning and budgeting and recommending suitable climate change economic valuation and investment appraisal methods

Assignment Approach

The consultants' research and assessment worked with:

• A review of a wide range of national and sector/Ministry development and climate change policy, strategy and budgeting documentation

• Consultations with the Office of Agricultural Economics (OAE), and with the Departments of Agriculture, Agricultural Extension, Fisheries, Livestock, Rice, and Royal Irrigation.

Climate Change Context• Thailand is consistently ranked amongst the top 20

countries most vulnerable to climate change (11th in Germanwatch 1994-2013 Climate Risk Index)

• Studies in Southeast Asia suggest that the growth in agricultural GDP could be up to 5% lower by 2050 as a result of climate change (Thailand Country Brief, UNDP, 2014)

• Aggregate effects on all sectors could reduce overall GDP growth by similar levels by 2050

TasksTask 1: Review and advise on the integration of CC

into Policy, Planning and Budget Processes:(a) CC policy and strategy alignment and consistency

at national and sectoral levels(b) planning and budgeting processes and entry points

for CCTask 2: Review and advise on CC screening and

appraisal methods used in MOAC Benefit Analysis for CC investment analysis with a focus on CBA and prioritisation

Task 1a: CC Policy AlignmentAg Sector CC policy and strategy context:• National 20 Year Plan 2017-2036 (draft)• 11th NESDP• 2012-2016 CC Master Plan• National Policy on Green Growth 2013-2030• Government Action Plans• Agricultural Development Plans 2012-2016 and 2017-2021• Agricultural Strategic Plan for Climate Change 2013-2016• Agricultural Strategic Plan for Climate Change 2017-2021

Task 1a: CC Policy AlignmentOverarching National Priorities

The National 20 Year Plan 2017-2036 (draft)• CC is a risk to the sustainability of Thailand’s

economic development• Strategy 5 for environmentally friendly growth

emphasises: (a) enhancing adaptive capacity to respond to CC(b) transforming economic activity to low carbon

growth

Task 1a: Policy Alignment NESDP – Implementing Priorities

CC references run strongly through NESDPA core theme is to strengthen CC resilienceAnd for agriculture NESDP suggests:• practices that preserve biodiversity and are suitable for the

climate• CC R&D and crop, livestock and fish varietal breeding

responsive to CC• Adapt the role of Learning Centres in CC context• Improved water management to alleviate drought and

prevent floods• Expansion of the irrigation system by 200,000 rai per year

Task 1a: Policy AlignmentNational Climate Change Policy

The National Climate Change Master Plan (CCMP) 2013-2015 :• agricultural disaster monitoring for agricultural communities• insurance systems for crop, livestock and fishery products• prediction of CC impacts on agricultural production• research and genetic engineering knowledge including a

genetic bank for improving plant and animal species resistant to CC

• research on integrating agriculture and water management• expanding irrigation infrastructure• encouraging farmers to use sustainable agriculture practices

such as organic agriculture, Integrated Agriculture, environmentally friendly production of livestock and fishery, supporting the Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) etc.

Task 1a: Policy Alignment Agricultural Development Plan 2017-2021

ADP 2012-2016 has little on CCADP 2017-21 reports:• the impacts of CC on agricultural productivity• farmers not yet ready to respond• adaptive capacity, R&D and knowledge transfer

importantBut ADP does not reflect: • actual progress made on mitigation and adaptation• and central problem of identifying CC resilient

technologies and practices adoptable for farmers

Task 1a: Policy Alignment Agriculture CC Strategic Plan 2013-2016

Plan 2013-2016 proposed preparing readiness for CC and building resilience by:

• Establishing and maintaining information infrastructure and early warning system

• Facilitating the development and rehabilitation of basic infrastructure for agriculture and conservation of agricultural resource and environment

• Promoting climate change impact prevention and reduction and readiness for adaptation

Task 1a: Policy Alignment Agriculture CC Strategic Plan 2013-2016

Based on a recent review, less than 1% of total MOAC budget was spent on climate specific projects during the Plan period

• The Plan has had little influence on departmental operations• No departments have an explicit CC policy or plan• None consider CC in their routine planning and budgeting

processesHowever:• Agriculture, Rice and RID have all been active for many years in

dealing with the impact of climate, but not of climate change• Now they are moving informally into dealing with CC though

based on historical rather than future CC projections and using different climate scenarios

Task 1a: Policy Alignment Draft Agriculture CC Strategic Plan 2017-2021

• 4 Strategies and 11 sub-strategies• 30 programmes under 2 adaptation strategies• Programmes mainly for “soft” investments

whose benefits are difficult to measure• “Hard” investments for irrigation and water

management, but no mention of “climate proofing” infrastructure

• Activities rather similar to previous plan

Task 1b: CC Planning and Budget IntegrationThe Project Cycle

• All departments base programme and project identification on government policies

• Several departments complement this with bottom-up problem analysis involving farmers

• RID has highly developed system for project identification, formulation and feasibility based on 25 5-Year Basin Master Plans

• In theory, every department should carry out CBA on any new programme proposed for the budget

• But in practice CBA is limited mainly to RID projects

Task 1b: CC Planning and Budget IntegrationCC Planning

• Lack of comprehensive information and knowledge in MOAC on long term CC trends

• As a result, practitioners are held back from developing adaptation technologies

• Agriculture Department and RID consider climate scenarios but based on historical evidence, not on future projections

• Some departments do not consider their sectors to be climate change sensitive

• And “there is no time or money for CC research”• ONEP is building a climate change data base with historical data and

projections. This will prepare climate risk analyses for sectors and subsectors but its outputs are not yet available

Institutional: Most departments have CC Committees but they are mostly inactive, except for the Agricultural Dept which reports monthly on GHG emissions

Task 1b: CC Planning and Budget IntegrationCC Budget Process

• October-November: Departments prepare initial budget proposals as basis for the

MOAC Budget Framework proposal

• End November: MOAC submits its Budget Framework and initial proposals to BOB

• February: BOB issues Annual Budget Guidelines including pre-ceilings at a budget

preparation seminar

• End February: MOAC revises its budget estimates and submits to BOB

• March: BOB reviews and revises the ministry budget submissions

• April: Revised ministry budget estimates submitted to Cabinet

• End April: Budget estimates returned to ministries for revision

• May: BOB reviews and finalises budget estimates

• June – September: Budget estimates scrutinised by Parliament, final revisions approved

and Budget published by BOB

Task 1b: CC Planning and Budget IntegrationCC Budget Integration Entry Points

• Vital to build CC into the Budget Framework at the start of the budget process

• Currently, initial department budget proposals are unconstrained “wish lists” – this is inefficient

• At the moment there is no explicit consideration of CC in the budget process

• Budgets need to be based on departmental CC policy and plan• And on CC screening of departmental programme and project

portfolios• A critical point is the BOB budget preparation seminar in March

and its guidelines where ceilings are issued• The latest BOB guidelines include references to both CC

mitigation and adaptation

Task 1b: CC Planning and Budget IntegrationCurrent Budget Allocations

• Of MOAC’s 2016-2017 budget of Baht 92.5 million, half is managed by RID

• The main part is spent on irrigation construction and maintenance

• A key technical/economic issue for infrastructure is climate proofing

• Climate proofing protects infrastructure against long term climate change damage

• It requires adjustments to planning, technical designs and construction and it costs more

• But prevents more costly rehabilitation and emergency repairs later

• Some climate proofing is happening but not on the basis of systemic and documented policy and guidelines

Tasks 1a and 1b: CC Planning and Budget Integration Status

Policies Status Alignment of CC policy in the agricultural sector with NESDP, the national CC Master Plan

NESDP, the CC Master Plan and the ADP are quite closely aligned but the effectiveness of sectoral CC planning has been weak due to lack of detail. CC has not yet been internalised into routine planning processes.

Alignment and Effectiveness of Sector Strategic Development Plan and the Sector CC Strategic Plan

There are weaknesses in both sector policy documents. Departments are not required to prepare a CC review, policy or Plan. Neither ADP nor the CC Strategic Plan describe what progress has been made with CC research, technology development, dissemination, and adoption at the farm level. And there are disconnects between policy, implementation and internalisation.

Integration of CC into the National Budget

So far there has been no systematic integration of CC into the budgeting process with the exception of irrigation expansion..

Climate Change System Integration Principles

• Integrate CC, don’t separate• Think long-term• Use existing systems and processes• Strategise and work from in-depth CC knowledge; mindset

and skills development as important as systems change• Integrate the Ag Sector CC Strategic Plan into regular

budget processes• Incentives and disincentives are important - alert BOB to

climate proofing disincentives for infrastructure• Use a multi-level multi-pronged approach• CC knowledge building and sharing more important than

ticking boxes

MOAC Climate Change Integration Recommendations: Knowledge Development• Build a MOAC CC knowledge base including CC projections downscaled to

agro-ecological zone or basin level to underpin long-term development planning. Use this as the platform for identifying effective CC adaptation solutions. Build a knowledge base comprising bio-physical, engineering and social science studies on climate change impacts and implications. Action: CC TWG.

• Integrate state-of-the-science CC knowledge into line departments and routine planning processes. Action: OAE and Line Departments.

• Use the CC TWG as a facilitator for Departments to strengthen (a) more in-depth CC scientific knowledge; (b) the understanding of long term CC impacts, implications, risks and vulnerabilities, and (c) to be a catalyser of creative CC adaptation solutions. Action: Senior management.

• Engage with the ONEP CC data base, when available, which should be an open access knowledge sharing tool, accessed by government officials, researchers, academics, media and civil society. Action: ONEP/MOAC Departments.

MOAC Climate Change RecommendationsSystems and Processes

• Require all departments to carry out a CC review and to prepare a CC plan which reviews climate trends likely to impact on the subsector, the technical and economic implications of those impacts, and the measures proposed to address those implications. Action: all Departments.

• Incorporate CC screening and the Sector CC Strategic Plan proposals into the routine annual budget planning and review exercises for the national recurrent and capital budgets. Action: Senior management, OAE, CC TWG.

• Strengthen the incorporation of CC in the annual MOAC Budget Framework and budget submissions through pre-budget climate change planning sessions for mitigation, adaptation and proofing. Action: Depts supported by TWG.

MOAC Climate Change RecommendationsSystems and Processes cont.

• Ensure that water sector infrastructure projects are properly climate proofed taking account of the latest Thailand climate change projections. Action: RID, OAE.

• The MOAC Executive Committee together with CC TWG check that climate change has received due consideration in line Department budget proposals. Action: MOAC Senior Management and CC TWG.

• In the medium term, engage with the preparation of the next round of NESDP and sector ADP to consolidate CC more closely into the narrative for the agricultural sector. Action: Senior management and OAE.

• Consolidate the role of the ADP as the comprehensive framework for all funding to the sector, including for CC. Action: Senior management and OAE.

MOAC Climate Change Recommendations Climate Change Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA)• Use rapid CC CBA for MOAC projects especially irrigation projects

to supplement the CBA work already carried out. At the moment, CBA is carried out by RID but not CC CBA (with and without investment, with and without climate change). Wider and fuller benefit assessment s for water supply and irrigation and other projects should also be taken into account. Action: OAE, RID.

• Utilise CC CBA results in budget negotiation with BOB. Action: MOAC Senior Management.

• Ensure continuity of staff working on CBA. Action: OAE and Departments.

• Provide an anchor for MOAC's CBA activities in OAE and key technical departments especially RID to provide skill back-stopping for CBA in other line departments. Action: OAE.