System for Transparent Allocation of Resources (STAR)

System for Transparent Allocation

of Resources

(STAR)

1

What is the STAR? The STAR is a short name of the System for Transparent Allocation of Resources.

With the STAR, the GEF Secretariat allocates resources in an indicative way to its eligible countries in a replenishment period. It was developed during 2009-2010 to upgrade the Resource Allocation Framework (RAF), which was the former GEF resource allocation system used in the fourth replenishment period of the GEF (GEF-4). In the fifth replenishment period of the GEF (GEF-5), the STAR covers three focal areas: biodiversity (BD), climate change (CC), and land degradation (LD). Other focal areas and programs may be covered by the STAR in the future GEF replenishment periods.

Why did the GEF change from the RAF to the STAR?

The GEF Secretariat developed the STAR to improve the RAF by addressing a number of shortcomings that were identified in the mid-term evaluation conducted by the GEF Evaluation Office. It also took into account the views of recipient countries and the experience of the GEF Agencies in implementing the RAF.

How is the STAR different from the RAF? The GEF Secretariat has made at least ten revisions to the allocation system from the GEF-4 RAF to the GEF-5 STAR. The following table highlights these changes.

Table 1 Comparison of the STAR against the RAF

2

GEF-5 STAR

GEF-4 RAF

Focal areas covered

BD, CC, and LD

BD and CC

Total resources in the STAR

$968 million in BD, $1,088 million in CC, and $324 million in LD.

$901.4 million in BD and $900 million in CC.

Individual country allocations

144 eligible countries

58 were in BD, 50 in CC, and others in the group.

Flexibility for countries with small allocations

Yes

No

Caps

11% in CC

15% in CC

Floors

$2 million in CC, $1.5 million in BD, and $0.5 in LD

None

GDP per capita index to favour low income countries

Yes

No

Accounting for countries’ forested areas in CC allocations

Yes

No

Weights of marine scores in BD

25%

20%

Eligibility to Eastern European countries

No

Yes

The Global Environment Facility

What are the main benefits of the STAR? The main benefits of the STAR for eligible countries are predictability of funding and flexibility in programming. This will enhance planning and contribute to country ownership of GEF projects and programs. In addition, the STAR can incentivize eligible countries to maximize their investment benefits, so that they may get higher allocations in the next replenishment period.

Why are international waters or persistent organic pollutants not included in the STAR? The three GEF focal areas to be covered by the STAR are biodiversity, climate change, and land degradation. The other focal areas were excluded because of the limited availability of suitable indicators of global environmental benefits and a lack of adequate datasets.

How are indicative country allocations calculated?

The funding envelope that a given country can access during a replenishment period is called “indicative allocation”. Indicative allocations are calculated based on a combination of the GEF benefits index (GBI), the GEF performance index (GPI), and a social and economic index based on the Gross Domestic Product (GDPI). The GBI represents the global environmental benefits that can be generated for each focal area in a specific country. The GPI is specific to a country, and is the same across all focal areas. The GDP-based index is a new design feature of the STAR. The rationale to have the new index in the STAR is that poorer countries need additional funding to build the capacity that is required to ensure the success of GEF project development and implementation. The GDPI is the same for all focal areas in a country.

What is the GBI? A GBI in the STAR is an index to measure GEF’s investment benefits in a specific focal area in a country. In the STAR, there are three GBIs: GBIBD, GBICC, and GBILD. They are directly related to environmental indicators for three focal areas: biodiversity, climate change, and land degradation. The GBIs in a focal area represent a country’s relative share of GEF potential benefits that can be generated by a fixed amount of resource input in the focal area. The higher the GBI in a focal area, the higher the investment benefits to be generated.

What is the GPI? The GPI in the STAR is an index to provide a relative ranking of eligible countries’ performance and capacity to deliver potential global environmental benefits. The GPI is the same across all focal areas in a country. The calculation of the GPI is based on a country’s past and current

System for Transparent Allocation of Resources

3

performance in project development and implementation, and on the quality of each country’s policies and institutions. The GPI therefore provides a proxy measure of each country’s capacity to successfully implement GEF programs and projects in order to deliver the potential global environmental benefits identified by the GBI.

What is the impact of the GDP-based index on allocations?

The GDP-based index (GDPI) is designed so as to increase the allocation of countries with low GDP per capita, decrease the allocation of countries with higher GDP per capita, and keep the allocations with middle GDP per capita unchanged. The higher the GDP per capita, the larger impact the GDPI will have. Under the $4.25 billion scenario, this GDPI will reduce the allocation to the richest countries by up to 7%, and increase allocations by up to 12% for countries at the lowest range of GDP per capita.

Does the GDP index provide more allocations to all vulnerable countries?

The GDP index increases a small amount of allocations to least developed countries (LDCs), and slightly decreases allocations to the richest countries.

It does not necessarily increase allocations to any vulnerable countries. For example, the vulnerability of small island developing states (SIDS) is not addressed in the GDP index, since SIDS with small economies and relatively small populations can have a comparatively high per capita GDP. The STAR uses floors to take care of SIDS and small countries, which are highly sensitive to natural disasters.

What is an allocation floor?

An allocation floor is the minimum indicative allocation for a focal area for an eligible country in the STAR. This floor has been set at $2 million for climate change, $1.5 million for biodiversity, and $0.5 million for land degradation. Therefore, a country can program up to $4 million if it is eligible in all three focal areas. Without the provision of an allocation floor, several countries would have been allocated a smaller amount of resources that would not allow preparation of a viable-sized project.

Is there a maximum limit that any country can receive in a focal area?

Maximum limits (or caps) for country indicative allocations were set at 11 percent of total funds for climate change, and 10 percent of total funds for biodiversity and land degradation. Under the $4.25 billion GEF-5 replenishment scenario, only one country is capped in climate change, and no countries are capped in biodiversity and land degradation.

4

The Global Environment Facility

What happened in GEF-5 to the category of “group” countries that existed in GEF-4?

The rule of “group country” allocation that existed in RAF has been abolished in the STAR. Every eligible country within the STAR will have an indicative allocation, the minimum being the sum of floored amounts of the three focal areas. This ensures that the countries previously included in “groups” under the RAF have individually allocations to develop projects for GEF funding. This improves the situation for 112 countries in climate change and 89 countries in biodiversity.

Why do some countries get a smaller allocation in biodiversity in GEF-5 than in GEF-4?

The calculation of indicative country allocation scores for biodiversity under the STAR is based on three indices: (i) the biodiversity GEF Benefits Index (GBIBD); (ii) the GEF Performance Index (GPI): (iii) the GDP-based index (GDPI). The decrease in BD allocation scores for some countries is essentially due to at least one of the three indices.

The same GBIBD data were used in the RAF and in the STAR. In the RAF, the GBIBD score consisted of two components: (1) Terrestrial Score (80%) and (2) Marine Score (20%). In the STAR, the weights were slightly modified — Terrestrial (75%) and Marine (25%). This change has caused drops in some countries’ scores in GBIBD. The GPI share might also drop in some countries. When developing the RAF, due to non availability of CPIA (IDA indicators) performance data for some countries, the GPI data for these countries were computed from the IFAD rural sector indicator. In the STAR, the approach was modified, and the average CPIA data or minimum CPIA data were used for countries which did not have CPIA data. More details on this issue are available in Annex 3 of the STAR Policy Paper: System for Transparent Allocation of Resources (STAR), GEF/P3, June 24, 2010. http://thegef.org/gef/policy/STAR The last factor is the GDPI, the new income adjustment index in the STAR. With this index active, the STAR will shift a small amount of resources from richer countries to poorer countries. If a country’s GDP per capita in 2008 was more than $2,700, this country may contribute a very small share of allocation to a country whose GDP per capita was less than $2,700.

Therefore, the reduction of resource allocation in BD for some countries might be caused by any one or all of the above factors. To summarize, the STAR is an improvement over the RAF in several ways and therefore it is bound to result in changes as some parameters evolve as noted above.

System for Transparent Allocation of Resources

5

Does reporting to Conventions have to be funded out of a country’s indicative allocation?

In contrast with RAF, additional resources will be available outside the STAR to fund reporting to Conventions, with up to $500,000 per country for biodiversity and climate change. Countries can always program higher amounts for these purposes by adding resources from their national allocations.

Does the GEF support reporting for land degradation?

Yes. The GEF Council has also agreed that resources in addition to the country allocations will be available to support countries in their reporting against the 10-year strategic plan of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), with up to $150,000 per country.

Are there any special provisions for Sustainable Forest Management, a theme that cuts across all the focal areas under the STAR? The GEF Council has set aside resources from the three focal areas of biodiversity, climate change, and land degradation, to create a Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) incentive program of $200 million. This would ensure that the GEF can continue to act strategically in this arena and support the multiple international conventions related to forests, while addressing synergies and trade-offs between different focal area objectives.

How are the interests of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) represented in the STAR? GEF-eligible countries are encouraged to include CSOs in their internal national discussions regarding programming of GEF resources under STAR. CSO projects can be financed under the STAR, but, in addition, funding for CSOs and Community Based Organisations (CBOs) is provided through the GEF Small Grants Programme (SGP) which is outside of the STAR.

How are the interests of the private sector represented in the STAR? GEF-eligible countries are encouraged to include the private sector in their internal national discussions regarding programming of GEF resources.

Moreover, funding for the GEF Earth Fund which specifically targets the private sector is provided outside of the STAR. This will ensure that the GEF pursues its on-going efforts to leverage private sector investments for delivering global environmental benefits.

6

The Global Environment Facility

Is there a restriction on how much money a country can access at any time during GEF-5?

Another improvement of the STAR over the RAF is the elimination of the “fifty percent rule�. This rule prevented countries from utilizing more than fifty percent of their indicative allocations during the first two years of GEF-4. This feature was identified by the mid-term review and the GEF Council as hindering operations and country ownership. In the STAR under GEF-5, there will be no such constraint.

Can a country keep all its indicative allocation until the end of GEF-5?

In principle yes; there is no particular condition or restriction for how a country uses its allocation during the replenishment period. However, for the system to run as smoothly as possible, and to take into account absorptive capacity, it is recommended that countries develop and submit project proposals for funding over the entire replenishment period.

Moreover, allocated resources that most likely will not be utilised during the replenishment period can be reallocated to other countries and programs at the very end of the replenishment period.

If a country did not use its GEF-4 indicative allocations, has that affected its allocation in GEF-5?

No. Every country has started GEF-5 with a clean slate. This means that the GEF-4 allocations are independent of those generated by the STAR for GEF-5.

However, a country cannot carry over its unused GEF-4 resources to GEF-5.

Is there any flexibility to move individual country allocations from one focal area to another?

Yes, the STAR has built in flexibility for countries for which the sum total of its focal area allocations is under a certain threshold. Countries below the threshold will be allowed to use the total of their allocations across all and any STAR focal areas during the GEF-5 cycle. The threshold has been set to ensure that at least ninety percent of total GEF-5 biodiversity and climate change resources are in fact used for projects in these focal areas.

What is the minimum amount of resources allocated to a country?

A country will have at least $4 million for programming in GEF-5 across all focal areas subject to STAR if the country is eligible in all three focal areas.

System for Transparent Allocation of Resources

7

What is the threshold for countries to flexibly use resources?

Under the current $4.25 billion replenishment scenario, countries with a total allocation of up to $7.00 million (when adding up biodiversity, climate change, and land degradation), would have the flexibility to allocate these $7.00 million in any or all of these three focal areas, without having to respect the respective proportions.

Which are the African countries that benefit from this flexibility?

Burundi, Comoros, Cape Verde, Chad, Central African Republic, Congo, Djibouti, Eritrea, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liberia, Mauritania, Niger, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Togo, and Zimbabwe.

Which countries from Asia and the Pacific benefit from the flexibility?

Bhutan, Cook Islands, Iraq, Jordan, Kiribati, Lebanon, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu.

Which countries in Europe and Central Asia benefit from the flexibility?

Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Georgia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan.

Which are the Latin American and Caribbean countries that benefit from the flexibility?

Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, El Salvador, Grenada, Guyana, Nicaragua, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, and Uruguay.

Is there any provision for flexibility for countries with total indicative allocation higher than the “flexibility threshold�?

Yes, for countries with total allocations in the three focal areas greater than $7.00 million, marginal adjustments among the three focal areas are allowed to complement GEF funding for focal areas that are lacking resources. These marginal adjustments vary by focal area and by country.

8

The Global Environment Facility

More detailed information on this variation is available in a GEF policy paper at paragraph 24, page 6: System for Transparent Allocation of Resources (STAR), GEF/P.3, dated June 24, 2010. http://thegef.org/gef/policy/STAR

How is the biodiversity benefits index calculated?

For biodiversity, the “benefits index” is built utilizing the updated GEF-4 benefits index, but with an increased weight for the marine component from 20 to 25 percent. The GBI makes maximum use of the available, scientifically-reliable information for a cross-country assessment of terrestrial and marine biodiversity. The GBI reflects the complex, highly uneven distribution of species and threats to them across the ecosystems of the world, both within and across countries. In terrestrial biodiversity, the GBI accounts for eco-region representation, species representation, threatened species, and threatened eco-regions. In marine biodiversity, it accounts for species representation.

How is the climate change benefits index calculated?

For climate change, the “benefits index” is built, as for GEF-4, with an emission related component adjusted for a factor that takes into account improvement in carbon intensity since the base year of 1990. In addition, a small five percent component was added that is related to forest cover and deforestation. Such a component is a modest initial attempt to reflect the importance of forest cover and deforestation, whilst recognising that related matters are still being negotiated under the UNFCCC, and that currently there are methodological issues related to indicators of carbon stocks.

How is the land degradation benefits index calculated?

For land degradation, the “benefits index” takes into account a combination of the total land area affected by land degradation, the proportion of dry lands, and the proportion of rural population. These three indicators are based on the need to control and prevent land degradation, to combat desertification as the extreme case of land degradation in dry lands, and to address the livelihood needs of vulnerable populations. The proportion of dry lands was given a greater weight in the index to reflect the priorities of the UNCCD in it’s recently adopted 10-year Strategy.

When will the GEF Secretariat reallocate the GEF-5 resources?

As long as additional cumulative resources, such as those from donors, exchange rate gains, and investment income, are $300 million greater than the GEF-5 replenishment figures to the GEF Trust Fund, the STAR model will be run within one month after these additional resources become available. Otherwise there will be no reallocation.

System for Transparent Allocation of Resources

9

What are the most recent STAR allocations?

GEF-4 RAF

GEF-5 STAR

Country

$3.1Bn Initial allocation ($Mn)

$4.25Bn Indicative allocation ($Mn)

CC

BD

CC

BD

LD

Total

Afghanistan

Group

3.50

2.00

3.35

3.89

9.24

No

Albania

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.58

4.08

Yes No

Algeria

7.60

3.70

9.17

3.87

1.99

15.03

Angola

Group

Group

5.18

6.99

3.48

15.65

No

Antigua and Barbuda

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.94

4.44

Yes

Argentina

13.30

14.50

20.21

14.61

4.96

39.78

No

Armenia

Group

Group

2.35

1.50

4.12

7.97

No

Azerbaijan Bahamas Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belize

4.10

Group

6.52

1.50

3.46

11.48

No

Group

Group

2.00

4.26

1.48

7.74

No

6.70

Group

9.65

1.88

1.12

12.65

No

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.50

4.00

Yes

7.90

Group

9.56

1.50

0.50

11.56

No

Group

Group

2.00

2.44

0.68

5.12

Yes

Benin

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

4.65

8.15

No

Bhutan

Group

Group

2.00

1.96

0.53

4.50

Yes

Bolivia, Plurinational State of

3.10

11.40

5.93

11.44

3.12

20.49

No

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Group

Group

2.77

1.50

0.66

4.93

Yes

Botswana

Group

Group

3.18

2.11

5.21

10.50

No No

Brazil

38.10

63.20

53.92

68.22

7.17

129.31

Burkina Faso

Group

Group

3.23

1.50

5.10

9.83

No

Burundi

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

1.07

4.57

Yes

Cambodia

3.30

Group

2.21

3.85

1.22

7.28

No

Cameroon

Group

11.90

2.97

10.31

1.66

14.95

No

Cape Verde

Group

4.10

2.00

3.52

1.48

7.00

Yes

Central African Republic

Group

Group

2.00

1.68

1.75

5.44

Yes

Chad

Group

Group

2.20

1.91

2.72

6.82

Yes

Chile

6.10

15.70

9.00

18.09

1.97

29.07

No

China

150.00

44.30

149.60

52.67

9.42

211.69

No

8.90

36.60

13.43

37.49

2.44

53.36

No

Colombia

10

Flexible

Comoros

Group

Group

2.00

2.08

0.70

4.78

Yes

Congo

Group

Group

2.00

3.28

1.04

6.32

Yes

Cook Islands

Group

Group

2.00

2.14

0.50

4.64

Yes

The Global Environment Facility

Country

GEF-4 RAF

GEF-5 STAR

$3.1Bn Initial allocation ($Mn)

$4.25Bn Indicative allocation ($Mn)

Flexible

CC

BD

CC

BD

LD

Total

Costa Rica

Group

12.00

3.03

11.27

0.75

15.04

No

Côte d'Ivoire

Group

3.60

2.00

3.25

2.94

8.19

No

Croatia

0.00

Group

3.33

1.50

0.76

5.59

Yes

Cuba

4.20

14.70

4.40

11.52

1.11

17.03

No

Democratic People's Republic of Korea

6.40

Group

6.93

1.50

0.51

8.94

No

Democratic Republic of the Congo

Group

10.40

8.92

13.81

0.67

23.41

No

Djibouti

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

3.14

6.64

Yes

Dominica

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.50

4.00

Yes

Dominican Republic

Group

5.80

2.58

5.36

0.72

8.66

No

Ecuador

Group

23.20

4.07

24.37

3.39

31.82

No

Egypt

11.50

4.30

14.48

4.58

1.49

20.55

No

El Salvador

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.59

4.09

Yes

Equatorial Guinea

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.50

4.00

Yes

Eritrea

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

3.13

6.63

Yes

4.90

7.70

6.59

8.13

4.29

19.02

No

Ethiopia Fiji

Group

5.10

2.00

4.56

0.59

7.15

No

Gabon

Group

Group

2.00

3.40

0.91

6.31

Yes

Gambia

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

4.57

8.07

No Yes

Georgia

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

2.05

5.55

Ghana

Group

Group

2.45

2.62

3.78

8.85

No

Grenada

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

1.16

4.66

Yes

Guatemala

Group

8.20

2.28

7.99

0.94

11.22

No

Guinea

Group

Group

2.00

2.43

1.50

5.93

Yes

Guinea-Bissau

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

1.10

4.60

Yes

Guyana

Group

Group

2.00

3.26

1.12

6.37

Yes

Haiti

Group

4.10

2.00

4.56

0.79

7.35

No

Honduras

Group

6.80

2.00

7.27

0.78

10.05

No

India

74.90

29.60

93.75

30.58

5.10

129.43

No

Indonesia

16.30

41.40

29.67

54.17

4.07

87.91

No

3.75

28.77

No

4.08

Yes

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

16.50

6.70

18.69

6.33

Iraq

Group

Group

2.58

1.50

System for Transparent Allocation of Resources

11

Country

GEF-4 RAF

GEF-5 STAR

$3.1Bn Initial allocation ($Mn)

$4.25Bn Indicative allocation ($Mn)

CC

CC

BD

LD

Total

Jamaica

Group

5.10

2.00

4.80

2.09

8.89

No

Jordan

Group

Group

2.06

1.50

3.44

7.00

Yes

Kazakhstan

13.50

5.50

15.49

4.76

5.09

25.34

No

Kenya

3.40

7.90

5.00

8.95

4.26

18.21

No

Kiribati

Group

Group

2.00

1.69

0.56

4.25

Yes

Kyrgyzstan

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

3.05

6.55

Yes

Lao People's Democratic Republic

Group

5.20

3.26

6.11

1.49

10.86

No

Lebanon

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

2.75

6.25

Yes

Lesotho

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.81

4.31

Yes

Liberia

Group

Group

2.00

2.42

0.62

5.04

Yes

Libyan Arab Jamahiriya

Group

Group

2.09

1.50

0.91

4.49

Yes

Madagascar

Group

24.20

4.34

26.06

2.88

33.27

No

Malawi

Group

4.20

2.00

4.39

1.19

7.58

No

Malaysia

11.30

15.20

14.24

14.66

1.41

30.31

No

Maldives

Group

Group

2.00

2.54

0.91

5.45

Yes

Mali

Group

Group

3.54

1.96

4.04

9.54

No

Marshall Islands

Group

Group

2.00

2.02

0.50

4.52

Yes

Mauritania

Group

Group

2.00

2.05

2.87

6.92

Yes

Mauritius

Group

5.60

2.00

5.19

0.89

8.08

No

Mexico

28.30

54.60

40.03

52.75

5.47

98.25

No

Micronesia (Federated States of)

Group

Group

2.00

3.49

0.90

6.38

Yes

Mongolia

Group

3.80

3.19

4.33

3.34

10.86

No

Montenegro

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.65

4.15

Yes

3.80

4.30

5.81

4.90

5.04

15.75

No

Morocco Mozambique

Group

6.80

3.19

7.00

2.87

13.06

No

Myanmar

Group

Group

7.12

6.72

1.51

15.35

No

Namibia

Group

6.50

2.00

6.28

5.69

13.97

No

Nauru

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.50

4.00

Yes

Nepal

Group

Group

4.02

2.67

1.60

8.29

No

Nicaragua

Group

4.00

2.00

3.94

0.78

6.72

Yes

Niger

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

3.38

6.88

Yes

9.30

5.60

14.29

5.64

3.14

23.08

No

Nigeria 12

BD

Flexible

The Global Environment Facility

Country

GEF-4 RAF

GEF-5 STAR

$3.1Bn Initial allocation ($Mn)

$4.25Bn Indicative allocation ($Mn) CC

BD

LD

Flexible

CC

BD

Total

Niue

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

1.05

4.55

Yes

Pakistan

13.20

5.10

12.61

4.92

4.17

21.69

No

Palau

Group

Group

2.00

1.92

0.50

4.42

Yes

Panama

Group

11.20

2.16

11.29

0.51

13.95

No

Papua New Guinea

Group

12.50

2.00

13.32

1.17

16.49

No

Paraguay

Group

Group

2.89

2.95

2.81

8.65

No

Peru

4.60

25.30

8.71

26.25

2.97

37.93

No

Philippines

6.60

21.30

8.83

25.96

1.04

35.83

No

Republic of Moldova

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

4.88

8.38

No

Russian Federation

72.50

25.30

87.01

24.37

8.18

119.57

No

Rwanda

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

1.08

4.58

Yes

Saint Kitts and Nevis

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.98

4.48

Yes

Saint Lucia

Group

Group

2.00

1.87

0.86

4.73

Yes

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.71

4.21

Yes

Samoa

Group

Group

2.00

2.43

0.93

5.36

Yes

São Tomé and Principe

Group

Group

2.00

2.77

2.73

7.50

No

Senegal

Group

Group

2.41

1.80

4.92

9.13

No

0.00

Group

4.46

1.50

0.70

6.66

Yes

Serbia Seychelles

Group

5.30

2.00

4.90

0.71

7.60

No

Sierra Leone

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.68

4.18

Yes

Solomon Islands

Group

Group

2.00

3.60

0.65

6.25

Yes

South Africa

23.90

22.50

25.71

21.68

5.25

52.65

No

Sri Lanka

Group

6.40

2.67

7.84

2.16

12.68

No

5.70

4.30

8.88

3.68

2.67

15.23

No

Sudan Suriname

Group

0.00

2.00

3.00

0.55

5.55

Yes

Swaziland

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

2.69

6.19

Yes

Syrian Arab Republic

4.90

Group

5.39

1.50

4.30

11.19

No

Tajikistan

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

2.44

5.94

Yes

Thailand

14.70

9.20

20.10

9.05

2.48

31.63

No

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

2.48

5.98

Yes

Timor-Leste

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.90

4.40

Yes

System for Transparent Allocation of Resources

13

Country

GEF-4 RAF

GEF-5 STAR

$3.1Bn Initial allocation ($Mn)

$4.25Bn Indicative allocation ($Mn)

CC

BD

CC

BD

LD

Flexible

Total

Togo

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

1.99

5.49

Yes

Tonga

Group

Group

2.00

1.59

0.75

4.34

Yes

Trinidad and Tobago

Group

Group

2.94

2.74

1.24

6.91

Yes

Tunisia

0.00

Group

4.00

1.50

5.36

10.86

No

Turkey

17.50

6.10

18.03

5.65

3.39

27.07

No

Turkmenistan

0.00

Group

5.40

1.70

3.27

10.37

No

Group

Group

2.00

1.50

0.59

4.09

Yes

Uganda

3.10

4.00

4.64

3.83

2.22

10.68

No

Ukraine

18.90

Group

22.46

1.50

2.99

26.94

No

United Republic of Tanzania

4.80

12.80

7.86

13.95

5.61

27.43

No

Group

Group

3.47

1.99

0.63

6.09

Yes

9.30

Group

12.77

1.65

4.98

19.40

No

Group

Group

2.00

2.55

0.89

5.44

Yes

8.80

16.70

11.77

14.49

0.95

27.21

No

Tuvalu

Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) Viet Nam

8.50

10.20

13.89

12.12

1.50

27.52

No

Yemen

Group

Group

2.66

4.27

2.11

9.04

No

Zambia

Group

5.10

3.77

4.26

3.01

11.04

No

Zimbabwe

Group

Group

2.00

1.72

2.87

6.58

Yes

Countries in the group in GEF4

148.60

147.10

Total (M$)

900.00

901.40

1,088

968

324

2,380

144

144

143

Eligible countries Floor countries

70

45

8

Cap countries

1

0

0

Number of flexible countries

63

Note: Since Cape Verde and Jordan each has an allocation of $7 million, the total allocations of the flexible countries in BD is 10.1% over all the resources allocated in BD.

14

The Global Environment Facility

ABOUT THE GEF The Global Environment Facility (GEF) unites 178 member governments — in partnership with international institutions, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector — to address global environmental issues. An independent financial organization, the GEF provides grants to developing countries and countries with economies in transition for projects related to biodiversity, climate change, international waters, land degradation, the ozone layer, and persistent organic pollutants. These projects benefit the global environment, linking local, national, and global environmental challenges, and promoting sustainable livelihoods.

Established in 1991, the GEF is today the largest funder of projects to improve the global environment. The GEF has allocated $9 billion, supplemented by more than $40 billion in cofinancing, for more than 2,600 projects in more than 165 developing countries and countries with economies in transition. Through its Small Grants Programme (SGP), the GEF has also made more than 12,000 small grants directly to nongovernmental and community organizations.

The GEF partnership includes 10 agencies: the UN Development Programme; the UN Environment Programme; the World Bank; the UN Food and Agriculture Organization; the UN Industrial Development Organization; the African Development Bank; the Asian Development Bank; the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development; the InterAmerican Development Bank; and the International Fund for Agricultural Development. The Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel provides technical and scientific advice on the GEF’s policies and projects.

Production Date: September 2010 Design: Patricia Hord.Graphik Design Printer: Professional Graphics Printing

www.theGEF.org Printed on Environmentally Friendly Paper