-
The SGP is seen as an
excellent vehicle to facilitate local initiatives related particularly
to the areas of biodiversity Climate change and land development.
-
SGP projects while
addressing the GEF focal areas has impacted livelihood needs of local
communities. This is endorsed through the active participation of the
local communities and stakeholders, in sharing costs, taking
responsible roles and decisions and creating more institutionalization
of the processes.
-
SGP adopted a
strategy of building projects with the NGOs and CBOs in the areas
where they have a demonstrated track record, thus furthering the
capacities of the Grantees and providing them the necessary links and
creditability.
-
SGP created
confidence within partners, catalyses and strengthened the capacity
and commitments of local communities and groups on awareness for
conservation and development actions.
-
Networking, sharing
experiences within and in between the SGP projects focused more on
providing qualitative and quantitative data and the much needed
learning's and links that have shown confidence in the approaches
replicated in the neighboring and related areas. This has also
generated close ties with local governments and other institutions to
adopt the technologies and the pro-active ways of working.
-
Positive mechanisms
and long term vision emerged, both within the Grantees and the local
communities, during the evaluations and reviews of the projects (by
the NHI) at various levels, to ensure proper documentation and sharing
of experiences, dissemination of lessons learnt etc.
-
Enhance a more
balanced thematic and geographical coverage. In case of geographical
coverage, there needs to be a strong involvement of NHI and partners
for the regional outreach of the SGP.
-
Recently ideas have
also emerged that SGP should work closely and focus on pilot projects
within the Regional, State, National government priorities,
encouraging governments and agricultural and other academic
institutions to share costs or creating equal co-financing within the
projects. Presently many such initiatives are on the anvil.
-
In case of thematic
coverage, there is need to initiate an intensified approach towards
involving Institutions and Universities, including academic, research
and related NGOs and CBOs that work in the field of appropriate
technology for rural areas, and towards marine research' institutions,
agriculture universities to develop proposals in the area of
international waters and POP's. Linkages with institutions and local
governments dealing with similar focal areas in projects need to be
continuously explored and linked within the program.
-
Replication of
innovative and viable projects in the GEF thematic areas throughout
India. Enhanced partnerships to respond flexibly strengthen varying
degrees of capacities to achieve effective results. Hold joint
workshops (with partners, governments, NGOs and CBOs) aimed at
facilitating better clarity of thought and roles on developing project
proposals and capacity building of the project holders, a better
geographical spread of projects can certainly be achieved by SGP.
-
The programme should
include a detailed consideration on the nature of funding: whether it
is to focus on experimental projects or it should aim to achieve a
maximum impact; whether SGP is to be a testing ground for larger
funding or it is to complement other funding.
-
The CPS needs to
spell out whether 'the SGP aims to work extensively, with a large
number of project partners, or intensively with a limited number of
partners. It needs to reassess the maximum funding amount for each
project and also the pattern of installments paid to the grantees
should not be in a uniform pattern of three installments, but shall be
approved to cater to the specific needs of the projects.
-
Introduce the effects
of the Planning Grants, within the SGP. Planning Grants are envisaged
as small grants up to a maximum of US $ 2000 (Rs 90 000) that serve as
precursors to full SGP projects. When an organization and the
communities it works with need to be exposed to experiences outside
its own location. When external resource persons (professional! 5and
experts from communities) need to be invited to the proposed project
location to discuss and share their own experiences or even project
persons who feel the need to visit and learn better about the
projects. When an organization needs to do participatory rural
appraisals, baseline study or surveys in a location they have not
already worked in or in an existing project area where a new project
is to be taken up. When a new technique or technology is desired to be
pilot tested, before it is adopted or needs to be replicated over a
greater area etc. When special training I orientation programmes are
required to help build capacities in communities and organizations to
enable them to take on a full SGP project. It is expected that full
SGP projects would result from the Planning Grants in most cases,
unless the results are such that a project is not desirable.
-
Detailed monitoring
mechanism with well-defined impact indicators needs to be strengthened
further for effective guidance to the program.
-
A databank to meet
enquiries of the funded organisations and projects needs to be
developed.
