Greening Development Co-operation

Annex C. Visit to Canada: 1-5 April 2019

Background

The OECD has undertaken a peer-learning exercise on environment mainstreaming to support OECD members who face challenges in this critical dimension of development co-operation. The key areas for learning were: how and why environment issues (including biodiversity, climate adaptation and mitigation, and pollution) are integrated across programmes; what has worked and why; what challenges remain and are emerging; and how these challenges can best be addressed.

This peer-learning exercise involved consultation with Development Assistance Committee (DAC) members, three country visits by peers, and independent facilitation by the International Institute of Environment and Development (IIED). It began with a survey of mainstreaming progress and challenges among members of the DAC Network on Environment and Development Co-operation (ENVIRONET) in February 2018. This informed an inception workshop that was conducted in May 2018 to allow ENVIRONET members to share their experiences, and resulted in an analytical framework prepared by facilitators from IIED. That framework in turn provided helped to guide the three peer-learning visits.

The first peer-learning visit was of the European Union (EU) institutions (the European Commission and the European Investment Bank) in Brussels, from 24-28 September 2018 (see Annex A). Peer visits also occurred in Sweden in January 2019 (Annex B) and Canada in April 2019. This report shares impressions, challenges and lessons identified and discussed in the peer learning visit to Canada, 1-5 April 2019 conducted by a team comprising Sida and the EC, represented by the mainstreaming facility, and facilitated by the OECD’s Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD) and IIED. The results were reviewed at an ENVIRONET meeting on 30 April 2019, and a final report based on all three country visits will be drafted by IIED in June 2019 and presented to the DAC. It is expected that the results may inform future formal DAC peer reviews, which are carried out regularly of DAC members, as well as providing a basis for sharing among ENVIRONET members interested in enhancing their mainstreaming of environment and climate change.

The peer learning visit to Canada was successful, impressing the peers and demonstrating lessons that could be of wider value to DAC members as well as to Global Affairs Canada (GAC). The peers were very grateful to Canadian colleagues for the opportunity and the excellent organisation of the visit. Their overall impressions of the Department’s effectiveness and challenges, as well as lessons of wider applicability and peer suggestions on meeting challenges are summarised below.

Environment and climate mainstreaming effectiveness

Global Affairs Canada (GAC) has developed a strong legal framework for environmental compliance over two decades. A key driver for mainstreaming is the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) and the requirement to apply the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals, which foresees a wide application of strategic environmental assessments to policies, plans and programs. Prior to the introduction of the Feminist International Assistance Policy, the framework for environmental compliance of Canada’s development assistance was provided by the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) policy for environmental sustainability, which called for the integration of environmental considerations into development programmes and projects. In order to operationalise the CEAA, the cabinet directive and the policy, an Environmental Integration Process (EIP) tool was developed in 2014, to assess environmental risks and opportunities in each project. The EIP is integrated into GAC’s financial system as a way to improve compliance, and projects cannot be made operational until all environmental requirements are met. It is interesting that the EIP goes beyond compliance to explore environmental and climate change-related opportunities as well. The strength of GAC’s environmental compliance framework is shown by the fact that some NGOs such as the Aga Khan Foundation globally use GAC’s environment approaches for all their projects as it is more demanding than frameworks used, for example, by the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

Canada has increased is spending on environment and climate programming and mainstreaming. GAC collects data on its environmental sustainability spending to report annually to the OECD DAC. Analysis for this peer-learning exercise (Global Affairs Canada, 2019[1]) showed that there is significant and growing spending on the environment. Preliminary analysis of environmental mainstreaming found that GAC programme areas of health and education performed relatively well, with 19% and 14% of projects tagged as “fully integrated” in terms of environment.

Canada benefits from having a strong and committed body of environmental staff. Global Affairs Canada has 11 environmental specialists at headquarters and 12 locally recruited environmental consultants in partner countries. These headquarters environmental specialists, as technical staff, do not rotate around the department as most employees do, and so have built up long experience of environmental mainstreaming as many have been in the organisation for some time. However, as with other specialists within GAC, their numbers have been substantially cut since the 2013 amalgamation between the former CIDA and the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT). Opinion was mixed about the need for additional specialist environment staff; however it is clear that current numbers are at a critical mass and should not be reduced further. There is also growing environmental consciousness within GAC as a whole, demonstrated by the formation of a network focused on greening the department, EcoGAC, now approaching 90 members. This could be harnessed into GAC programming through the formation of an environmental network, as Sweden has done, also including in it staff who are not environment specialists. There are also opportunities to complement in-house environmental expertise with an external facility or helpdesk, as the EC and Sweden have done. Both of these ideas are explored below.

Challenges in environment and climate mainstreaming

Canada’s mainstreaming is generally effective and there is much to build on. But there are some areas where GAC faces challenges – many of which are common to other DAC members:

• Changing political priorities, with current emphasis on gender equality: While the environment was a key priority in the late 1990s, the current priority area for development assistance within the department is gender equality and empowerment of women and girls. This is demonstrated by the high-level political commitment to Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy (FIAP) which was introduced in June 2017 by the previous Minister of International Development. The Minister of International Development remains strongly committed to this agenda and is simultaneously the Minister for the Status of Women. The FIAP sets out six priority action areas, which are currently being developed as standalone sub-policies. Environment and Climate Action is one of these and aims “to support government planning and initiatives to mitigate and adapt to climate change; advance women's leadership and decision making; and create economic opportunities for women in clean energy.”

• The specific modalities of environment and climate mainstreaming at the department are not clearly defined by the FIAP, pending the release of a more detailed action area policy. However, as per the Cabinet Directive requirement, a strategic environment assessment of the FIAP was conducted to set out the environmental integration aspects of the policy. While a plus side of FIAP has been the high degree of commitment and programming in climate and gender equality issues, overall, in other respects, the overarching focus on and increased contributions to gender equality and women’s empowerment programming at Global Affairs Canada has seen environmental considerations lessen in importance.

• Fragile states and humanitarian focus leading to less emphasis on environment: While the department’s emphasis on fragile states and humanitarian programming is welcome from a poverty reduction perspective, the peer review found that GAC has focused on immediate humanitarian needs, service delivery and basic state capacity (providing food, water, health and shelter), to the detriment of a medium-term commitment to addressing environmental aspects in fragile and conflict-affected areas. There are a couple of important exceptions which GAC should consider further:

  • Short-term environmental health issues – for example around refugee camps – of sanitation and energy, i.e. indoor air pollution from biomass burning.

  • For fragile states, there is also growing evidence internationally that environmental decline and exposure to climate shocks are contributing to country fragility and conflict.

Trade-offs between the humanitarian and the fragility agenda, and medium-term environmental issues, and the need to understand the exceptions around environmental health and fragility/environmental decline/climate shocks is a challenge facing a number of DAC members and warrants further enquiry by GAC.

• Dominance of climate change over other environmental priorities: As with many DAC members, climate is the dominant environment issue at GAC. Canada’s engagement in climate change comes from the Copenhagen Pledge to spend CAD 100 billion per year on climate change, and the current Canadian administration pledging CAD 2.65 billion over five years for climate finance, comprising grants of CAD 827 million and CAD 1.829 million in loans. Canada is striking in that despite international assistance focusing on least developed countries and fragile states, climate mitigation spending is higher than climate adaptation. Indeed, climate mitigation has grown in the last two years as part of GAC’s portfolio. Non-government organisations consulted during the peer-learning process flagged this growth of mitigation over adaptation as a major concern. By contrast, biodiversity received just over 1% of total GAC expenditure (Global Affairs Canada, 2019[1]) and 1.1% of total official development assistance (ODA) in 2015-2016 (OECD statistics). GAC contributions to biodiversity efforts could be better aligned and create more synergy with other Canadian contributions to the Biodiversity Convention’s Secretariat based in Montreal (although Environment and Climate Change Canada provides funding for some programming with this Secretariat).

Lessons from Canada’s experience of environment and climate mainstreaming

Ten broad lessons emerged from the peers’ engagement with Global Affairs Canada that have wider applicability across DAC members:

1. Leadership of senior management is key for environment mainstreaming. The current political leadership of GAC seems to have stronger commitment to gender equality than environment which constrains the department’s ability to undertake environmental programming and mainstreaming. For example, the department has held four recent ministerial events on gender equality, but has not recently participated in major events on climate/environment.

2. Strong policy mandate: In Canada, the government’s policy mandate is set by political leadership and so can vary over the medium term with election cycles. Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy is the current overriding policy framework. While a strategic environmental assessment of the FIAP has been undertaken and the policy includes a climate and environment action area, policy guidance in this area is still under development and has not been issued. The Environment and Climate Change Action Area Policy is expected to provide guidance for GAC’s Environment and Climate Change programming including the policy framework for environmental integration.

3. Robust legal framework: Legal compliance with doing no harm and beyond to identify environmental opportunity is vital for environmental mainstreaming. GAC benefits from an exceptionally strong and operationally effective legal framework. This strong legal framework has been particularly important for not losing sight of the environment when political trends or leadership priorities change – as with GAC’s current focus on gender equality.

4. Lack of financial targets for climate and environment programming and mainstreaming: Canada has no targets for environment programming and mainstreaming, unlike for gender equality, where the policy requires that by 2021-22, no less than 95% of Canada’s support will target (15%) or integrate (80%) gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls. By contrast, both Sida and the EC have quantitative targets for climate spending (20% for the EC and 28% for Sida1) and Sida has an environment spending target (15% principal and 45% as significant). The closest Canada comes is a commitment to spend CAD 2.65 billion on climate jointly with Environment and Climate Change Canada. However, unlike in in Sida, the European Union and the United Kingdom, much of this climate finance is channelled through multilaterals and is managed as a separate pot of funding by a separate unit and not mainstreamed into the department budget.

5. Challenge of moving beyond climate: With the exception of Canada’s commitment to spend CAD 2.65 billion on climate change, other environmental issues receive limited attention within GAC. Biodiversity receives just over 1% of GAC spending and pollution almost no spending.

6. Strong technical tools through the project cycle: The department has evolved a strong and sophisticated set of environmental appraisal tools through both project preparation and implementation. These include environmental screening, and SEA for policies and strategies requiring ministerial approval, although the number of SEAs has recently decreased as the requirement for country strategies has been removed.

7. Results and evaluation framework: While many agencies, such as the EC and Sida, tend to focus on environmental mainstreaming in the project preparation process, it is just as important to mainstream environment into the project implementation and monitoring and reporting phases. GAC has been generally more successful at the latter with frequently conducted environment management plans and environment specialists included throughout the project cycle. However, there is also some evidence that in the project cycle monitoring, measurements of environmental outcomes may drop off as there may only be room for a certain number of project indicators. In addition the mandatory chapter on environment has been removed from GAC’s programme evaluations since environment is not seen by some as a cross-cutting theme within FIAP.

8. Technical capacity of environmental staff: GAC has currently 11 headquarters environment staff and 12 in-country environment consultants, which is fewer than before the amalgamation. This compares with 11 gender equality specialists in headquarters, with 3 more being recruited, and one focal point in each country. Thus there is a concern that the environment staff have reached critical mass and should not be reduced further.

9. Engaging with non-environmental staff: GAC is planning to reconstitute its environment network both to engage existing environment staff and to bring in interested staff who are not environment specialists. There is clearly much potential and interest in environmental issues in various groups at Global Affairs as shown by volunteer interest in the department’s greening network EcoGAC. Membership at EcoGAC has quickly increased in just a year from three volunteers to 90, with several incoming permanent staff.

10. Partnering with civil society: GAC has a long and impressive tradition of Partnerships for Development Innovation Branch financing Canadian civil society organisations to implement development work – ranging from large professional organisations to much smaller voluntary groups. However, civil society actors consulted would welcome a broader policy dialogue with GAC. One positive example is the Canadian Coalition for Climate Change and Development (C4D) which has been active in pushing climate and development – particularly in stressing the need for more spending on adaptation and less funding to be channelled through multilaterals. However, in general there is potential and interest from the NGO community to be more engaged with GAC. This will have to be managed carefully as some NGOs are so involved as GAC grantees that their ability to engage in active, impartial policy dialogue may be limited.

Peer suggestions for consideration by GAC and DAC members

Discussions during the peer visit raised several ideas to pursue. Many of these are noted throughout the text. There was particular discussion of jointly working with DAC members on:

• Mainstreaming climate finance, more focus on climate adaptation, and greater attention to biodiversity and environmental health: Internal data indicate that approximately two-thirds of climate finance goes to mitigation, while the remaining one-third is allocated to adaptation. Climate mitigation, while important, seems an unlikely priority given the department’s focus on least developed countries and fragile states, where adaptation is paramount. In addition, these climate funds are largely ring fenced for the multilaterals such as the development banks and the Green Climate Fund, instead of being mainstreamed across the development portfolio as in Sweden and the United Kingdom. The climate spending masks much lower commitment to other environment issues. Biodiversity receives just over 1% and desertification just over 2% of GAC funding. Despite GAC’s major focus on health, there is relatively less attention to some preventative environmental health issues – which particularly affect women and girls in least developed countries and fragile states – e.g. indoor air pollution, vector-borne disease, etc.

• Supporting environmental capacity with an environmental network, helpdesk function and inclusion in the competency passport: The environmental specialist function is acknowledged to be core to the effectiveness of GAC’s legal environmental framework. However, the number of environmental specialists has dropped, while new challenges such as the rise of blended financed are growing. There are three options highlighted in this report to increase capacity:

  • The first is to learn from Sida and take forward plans to revitalise the environmental network. This could involve both better networked environmental expertise as well as engaging with non-specialists who wish to play a more proactive role in environmental mainstreaming.

  • A second institutional reform is to learn from the EC’s in-house mainstreaming facility and Sida’s external Environment Helpdesk and to introduce a streamlined external helpdesk to provide contracted environmental services at short notice and with the minimum of paperwork.

  • A third option is to increase environmental awareness and training by ensuring that the Competency and Assignment Management System includes competency on environment.

• Some revisions to the project cycle in the context of the Impact Assessment Act drafting: While GAC’s project cycle integration of environment is strong, there are a number of areas where important reforms can be made:

  • Highlight environmental issues in project calls, particularly through the Partnerships for Development Innovation Branch and geographic programming.

  • Use strategic environmental assessment with effective follow-up, possibly based on the re-introduction of country strategies and other such processes.

  • Focus on environment in the implementation framework, including environment outputs/outcomes and indicators in the logic model and project implementation plan

  • Include environment objectives in the project results framework: The current results framework limits the number of outcomes so that environment is often left out in favour of sector and gender equality results.

References

[1] Global Affairs Canada (2019), Briefing Note: DAC-OECD Peer Learning Exercise on Mainstreaming Environment, March 2019.

Note

← 1.  Weighted amount, contributions marked significant and principal (Rio markers Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation).