|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on Climate Change (Apr26/04) Kuala Lumpur, 9 April, (Jinghann Hong) – Discussions at the most recent meeting of the Advisory Board of the UNFCCC’s Santiago Network on Loss and Damage [Santiago Network] revealed growing interest from developing countries for technical assistance. The 6th meeting of the Advisory Board [SNAB.6] was held from 24–26 March 2026 in Geneva, Switzerland, preceded by an informal meeting on 23 March. [The Santiago Network (Network) connects developing countries and communities with technical assistance, knowledge and support for needs-based action on loss and damage. Its Advisory Board provides guidance and oversight to the Network’s Secretariat on the effective implementation of the functions of the Network.] The meeting was presided over by newly elected Co-Chairs Leona Hollasch (Germany) and Idy Niang (Senegal), who will serve for a one-year term. The Advisory Board considered 8 substantive agenda items which included reports from the Secretariat, Co-Chairs, and subcommittees and task force; operationalisation of the Network; recommendations on observer participation; Results Framework; budgetary matters; issues of complementarity and coherence, including collaboration with the Executive Committee of the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage [WIM ExCom] and the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage [FRLD]; the performance review of the Director of the Secretariat; and arrangements for its next meeting. [This article focuses on the operationalisation of the Network, namely on its membership and on catalysing technical assistance. Further articles will follow.] Santiago Network membership Co-chair Hollasch (Germany) recalled that at its last meeting, the Advisory Board had welcomed progress in expanding membership, particularly efforts to reach underrepresented groups, including women, children and youth, and Indigenous Peoples. The Advisory Board had requested further diversification across national, subnational and local levels, as well as improvements to the usability of the portal, including enhanced filtering by loss and damage topics and organizations, bodies, networks and experts [OBNE] type. Presenting on behalf of the Secretariat, Timo Schmidt reported that membership of the Network stood at 108 members (67 organisations, 3 bodies, 9 networks and 29 experts) as of 24 March 2026. On expressions of interest (EOIs), the Secretariat reported that 263 EOIs had been received. Of these, 108 have been admitted, 8 are in the final stages of approval, while others remain under review, pending additional information, or have been asked to resubmit. 6 applications did not meet the eligibility criteria. The Secretariat noted that most EOIs require multiple rounds of engagement—including follow-up calls, emails and targeted support to obtain additional information—particularly to assist local and national actors. On geographic coverage, the Secretariat noted that Network members self-report their areas of operation as part of the EOI process, which may affect interpretation of coverage. Experts may possess regional expertise but indicate a global scope to express interest in technical assistance (TA) opportunities beyond their primary region. Similarly, organisations and networks indicating a global scope may in practice draw on expertise through regional and national offices. Current reporting indicated that members operating in Asia account for about 21.6% of the total, followed by Oceania (13.6%), Africa (11.2%) and Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) (8.0%). The Secretariat also shared a broad thematic breakdown of membership, again based on self-reported data. Strong representation was noted in resilience and adaptation planning, loss and damage assessments, and policy integration and mainstreaming, followed by expertise in early warning systems and emergency preparedness, as well as institutional capacity-building. Of the areas that are less represented include expertise in risk analysis and risk management, knowledge exchange and learning, data management and climate information systems, non-economic loss and damage, monitoring and impact evaluation, and financing and innovative insurance solutions. On constituencies, the Secretariat noted that indicative data from 20 Network members showed engagement with local communities (18), children and youth (11), women and gender (11), and Indigenous Peoples (8), noting that members may represent more than one constituency. On the link between Network membership and TA, the Secretariat noted the trend of demand for TA driving membership growth. As the TA pipeline matures, calls for proposals and experts lead to increased registrations on the Santiago Network portal and the submission of EOIs by OBNEs. The Secretariat indicated that this demonstrates the Network’s ability to attract relevant expertise on demand, including beyond the existing membership base, and noted that the majority of proposals are submitted by new OBNEs rather than existing members, reflecting that the Network remains in a growth phase. The Secretariat highlighted examples of high numbers of EOIs linked to operational demand in countries from which TA requests originate, for example, Yemen (20 EOIs), Iraq (23 EOIs) and Kenya (19 EOIs). Moving on to member engagement, the Secretariat outlined recent activities with OBNEs. This included a Network members’ meeting on 22 October, where early lessons learned from TA delivery were presented to audiences focused on the Asia-Pacific, Africa and LAC regions. On 30 October, a regional membership webinar for LAC was held with over 60 participants; the session was conducted in both Spanish and English and provided an opportunity to clarify membership processes. The Secretariat also conducted bilateral engagements on the sidelines of the UNFCCC COP30 with OBNEs. On 11 December, an information session on responding to TA requests was held, attended by over 100 OBNEs. The Secretariat then presented several new features of the Network member portal. [This serves as a central hub for members to convene and build consortia in response to TA requests.] As for growth in the Network member portal, more than half of its total user base growth has occurred in just the last six months; 426 new users have registered, representing 51.3% of the total user base (831 users). Monthly platform activity has also grown, rising from 1,248 actions in September 2025 to a peak of 5,156 actions in March 2026, a 413% increase. Service requests have accelerated significantly, with 137 requests submitted since September 2025. As for EOI processing turnaround, the median processing time is ~17 days, with 90% of EOIs processed within ~30 days. Summarising the key lessons learnt, the Secretariat noted that TA demand is the strongest driver of Network membership growth, with implications for Secretariat capacity; that there is an increasing demand for collaboration spaces between Members, which has informed the different features introduced in the portal; that there is a need to simplify the guidance and submission process given the high number of EOIs requiring additional information; that strengthening data capture within the actual user interface process is needed, to support a more systematic understanding of member expertise beyond self-reported data; and that future reflection on the guidelines and associated criteria for membership is needed, given the evolving mandate of the Network from TA delivery to other functions, including the Global Loss and Damage Report. [At COP 30, Parties agreed to the production of a Global Loss and Damage Report.] In their comments, the Advisory Board members welcomed the growth in membership and the increasing number of EOIs. Camila Rodríguez (Dominican Republic) proposed analysing whether peaks in EOIs correspond to regional workshops or TA requests, which could help inform future engagement strategies. Stella Brożek-Everaert (representing the WIM ExCom), pointed to potential operational bottlenecks, noting that EOIs are often triggered by TA calls and asking whether there is sufficient time to process new members so that they can participate in those same calls. Advisory Board members also shared other aspects of concern in relation to a desire for more balanced Network membership and for further disaggregation of members’ data. Aayush Dwivedi (representative of the children and youth NGOs) welcomed the increase in regional and national Network members but highlighted that some imbalances persist in certain regions, emphasizing that the Secretariat must strategize to cultivate a diverse, inclusive membership that prioritizes local participation in national OBNEs, particularly from developing countries and least developed countries [LDCs.] Rachid Tahiri (Morocco) noted the uneven thematic distribution, with strong capacity in resilience and L&D assessments, but weaker representation in finance, insurance, evaluation, and data systems, and asked what measures the Secretariat will take to address these gaps. On strengthening local participation, Angela Rivera (representing the WIM ExCom) also stressed the importance of having “more local OBNEs experienced on the ground,” and suggested flexibility in applying eligibility criteria—such as the three-year experience requirement—for Indigenous Peoples, youth and local communities. Alpha Kaloga (Guinea) called for data breakdowns distinguishing national and regional Network members, which was echoed by Aisha Humera (Pakistan) and Gideon Sanago (representative of Indigenous Peoples’ organisations), the latter emphasising representation from Indigenous Peoples, children and women, and disaggregation on their geographic distribution. A number of interventions also focused on how to better activate and engage the Network members. Rodríguez (Dominican Republic) stressed the importance of fulfilling the Network’s knowledge-sharing function, asking how it is promoting “exchanges of experience, of knowledge, of lessons learned, of good practices.” Kaloga (Guinea) similarly questioned whether the membership platform is effectively fostering collaboration, including consortium-building and peer-to-peer learning. Interventions from Observers—including the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC), the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), the Climate and Biodiversity Network (CBN), the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)—largely focused on the practical challenges of consortia-building. They highlighted that the relatively short timeframes provided for matchmaking among OBNEs make it difficult to form consortia capable of responding effectively to TA requests, particularly when proposals require a diverse range of technical expertise and partnerships. Following the exchanges, in the decision adopted, the Advisory Board “requested the Secretariat to: – Continue expanding the membership of the Network to include national and local organisations, bodies, networks and experts (OBNEs), including within developing countries; –
Foster collaboration among members, including for the formation of
consortia to respond to requests for technical assistance, and in
sharing knowledge and information within the Network; – Consider, as part of its review of the Guidelines for the designation of OBNEs as members of the Santiago Network,…, the simplification of the membership guidelines and process, for consideration by the Advisory Board at its seventh meeting.” Catalysing technical assistance Co-Chair Niang (Senegal) recalled that at its last meeting, the Advisory Board had welcomed progress made on TA requests and requested the Secretariat to further expedite support to proponents, particularly diverse local actors and vulnerable communities. The Advisory Board had requested further the importance of continued outreach to the Network national liaisons and UNFCCC national focal points, as well as the development of procedures to facilitate the submission of TA requests. They also noted that, in response to previous requests to simplify guidance for accessing support, the Secretariat—working with the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR)—is developing video animations and infographics to raise awareness about the Network and to communicate the TA and membership processes, including their respective application procedures. Presenting on behalf of the Secretariat, Elizabeth Carabine reported that the Secretariat is currently managing over 20 formally submitted TA requests via the Network portal or email, with additional draft requests in development. Of the formal TA requests, 8 are currently active. Besides the ongoing TA delivery to Vanuatu, 4 other calls—for Yemen, Cook Islands, Iraq, and Kenya—have resulted in a number proposals which are now under evaluation. 3 additional calls for proposals for Namibia, Fiji, and Palau, along with the Network’s first call for experts for Namibia, are currently open. The cumulative value of active TA stands at approximately USD 3.1 million, based on TA calls published to date. The average value per request is around USD 387,000, ranging from USD 250,000 to USD 700,000 depending on scope. The average implementation timeline is approximately 12 months, with some variation on either side. Requests vary in scope from targeted, single-component support to broader, multi-component initiatives. Emerging trends on the nature of TA delivery include support for improving data systems for loss and damage assessments, conducting gap analyses, and strengthening evidence bases for UNFCCC reporting requirements and for climate finance access. All requests include an element of institutional capacity building, focusing on national and subnational authorities, and sometimes strengthening horizontal and vertical coordination mechanisms. Approximately 80% of requests in the current pipeline reference enhancing access to the FRLD or other climate finance mechanisms, including through data generation, development of financing frameworks and FRLD proposal development. Regional distribution shows a higher proportion of requests from LDCs and Small Island Developing States [SIDS], with ongoing efforts to address remaining regional gaps. The Secretariat also reported that community engagement is generally implicit rather than articulated at the request stage, and that there has been a process of widening the discussion and incorporating community-based actors or civil society organizations in some of the requests that are already published. While the majority of proponents in this early phase are government entities, interest has been expressed also by subregional government entities and non-governmental organizations. Notably, the Secretariat received its first formal request from a civil society organization this month and has launched a simplified window to facilitate community-led TA. The Network national liaisons are now present in 45 countries. [A key function of the national liaison is to coordinate with other L&D contact points at the national level, and to ensure coherence and complementarity at the national level.] The Secretariat observed that requests coordinated with national liaisons tend to reach formal submission more efficiently, while those without national liaison involvement often require longer processing due to the 21-day no-objection period and to provide additional national-level coordination. It was also reported that as for the current TA delivery in Vanuatu, it has already generated valuable results and lessons, which are being integrated into other ongoing operations. A key focus of this is collaboration with the broader ecosystem to find the coherence and complementarity in the loss and damage architecture, whether it is including other sources of finance like climate vertical funds and multilateral development banks (MDBs), and other providers of TA like the Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN). The aim is to ensure that the Network support fills critical gaps and complements existing initiatives on TA and project financing. When the floor was opened for discussions, Advisory Board members raised a number of issues. Rachid Tahiri (Morocco) noted a strong emphasis on technical assistance and capacity building expertise, but recommended greater attention to access to finance, developing data systems for loss and damage, loss and damage assessments and analysis. He welcomed the strong engagement from African countries and noted that the limited number of national liaisons should not be viewed as a negative signal, but that some countries have UNFCCC national focal points that also play the role of Network national liaison. Stella Brożek-Everaert (representing the WIM ExCom) welcomed the dynamic progress, including the 1 TA request from civil society organisations, and highlighted the value of learning from the new community access window modality. She also highlighted the benefit of peer-to-peer learning from countries that have already received assistance and suggested using outreach events and further stressed the need to clarify roles and responsibilities among FRLD and the Network—citing examples of confusion on whether there is a competition between eligibility to apply for the one or the other; and between the various contact points to the UNFCCC L&D entities—and recommended joint outreach to improve awareness and reduce confusion at the national level. Akio Takemoto (Japan) echoed the importance of coherence with the FRLD and its current Barbados Implementation Modalities start-up phase, emphasising that the two mechanisms should be complementary rather than competitive. He also highlighted the potential importance of in-kind contributions from OBNEs and sought clarification on this in the OBNE selection process. Muriel Gschwend (Switzerland) acknowledged the value of the Secretariat’s co-created approach with proponents but noted that it is highly time-intensive, calling for standardising certain aspects while keeping a flexible approach to ensure sustainability. On financing, she pointed to the broader ecosystem, including the FRLD and the humanitarian system, and that engagement and coordination would be needed to better understand next steps. Regarding in-kind contributions from OBNEs, she sought clarity on the modality and the potential benefits for OBNEs in providing such contributions. Alpha Kaloga (Guinea) stressed the need to “sharpen the approach” to targeted outreach to relevant OBNEs for each TA request. He also highlighted expectations regarding support for LDCs and SIDS, noting that there is only 1 LDC TA currently approved. Observing the “moderate involvement of the national liaison”, he highlighted the need for the Secretariat to strengthen national liaison capacities and potentially develop a knowledge product on best practices for the national liaison’s role in the technical workflow, from origination to the subsequent implementation of TA. Tetet Lauron (representative of the Women and Gender Constituency) noted the need for the Secretariat to proactively expand outreach to ensure a more balanced distribution of TA requests across all developing country regions, highlighting that requests from the LAC region remain limited. She expressed concern that the current pipeline of around 20 requests is already equivalent to the annual allocation for TA, warning that resource constraints could become a serious issue if resource mobilisation is not strengthened. In this context, she called for greater transparency regarding the expected scale of support for each request, including whether different levels of assistance could be provided. Supported comments on the need to avoid confusion in the broader landscape, Angela Rivera (representing the WIM ExCom) raised two key questions: first, seeking clarification on the financial aspects of TA, including how many requests are supported with funding versus without; and second, requesting greater clarity on contributions from OBNEs, particularly the role and extent of in-kind support. She highlighted that understanding these contributions is important for future discussions on resource mobilisation and the functioning of the network, noting potential challenges if OBNEs are expected to contribute without financial support. Noting the absence of formal requests from Latin America and attributing this to capacity constraints, she emphasised that such challenges are not limited to LDCs and SIDS but affect all developing regions, and expressed hope that ongoing efforts to strengthen regional capacity, including recruitment within the Secretariat for regional coordinators, would lead to increased TA submissions from underrepresented regions. Gideon Sanago (representative of Indigenous Peoples’ organisations) confirmed that outreach has been conducted through the Indigenous Peoples constituency and sought clarification that Indigenous organisations and communities have been able to both request TA and respond to TA calls. He affirmed that Indigenous Peoples and local communities have the capacity to provide expertise, citing a local Indigenous NGO from Kenya that has shown interest in the TA call for Kenya. Aisha Humera (Pakistan) noted that the new challenge of “matchmaking” the “galaxy” of OBNEs with the “galaxy” of TA requests, given the increasing number of requests, and suggested that the Secretariat should better identify the types of requests and the corresponding capabilities of OBNEs. She further proposed greater selectivity in registering OBNEs, including assessing their capacity to deliver and contribute resources, suggesting the categorising of OBNEs based on whether they provide financial contributions or only technical expertise, and said that this bifurcation may lend a hand towards empowering national and community-based organisations. She also raised concerns about high administrative costs among larger organisations like the Global Environment Facility and the Green Climate Fund, stressing that a greater share of TA funding should be directed toward delivering substantive support. In parallel, she underscored the importance of national ownership, highlighting the role of national focal points and encouraged stronger engagement with them to generate requests and support matchmaking with OBNEs. She also added that national focal points could also play a role in verifying OBNEs and encouraging national organisations to participate as OBNEs. Following the exchanges, in the decision adopted, the Advisory Board “requested the Secretariat to: – Consider, in its review of the Guidelines and procedures for responding to requests of technical assistance …the lessons learned from the processing of technical assistance requests, and to take into account the specificities of affected communities, local contents, vulnerabilities and risks, for consideration by the Advisory Board at its seventh meeting. – Advance its support to LDCs and SIDS in the development of technical assistance requests, including through targeted outreach efforts. – Focus outreach and engagement efforts, in coordination with National Liaisons to the Santiago Network Secretariat and based on identified gaps and lessons learned, to stimulate demand-driven requests for technical assistance across regions, considering, where appropriate, joint outreach with the WIM Executive Committee and the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD) to their respective contact points and focal points.” [More to follow.]
|
||
