B 120 - svar på spørgsmål 1, om oversendelse af referat fra Udenrigsministeriets bevillingskomité, som der henvises til i Altingets artikel ”Strid om klimamillioner fortsætter”, fra handels- og udviklingsministeren

UDENRIGSMINISTERIET Dato 2. juni 2014
Spørgsmål fra Udenrigsudvalget til
udviklingsministeren af 2. juni 2014.
URU B120 – spørgsmål 1.
B 120
Forslag til folketingsbeslutning om opfordring til at trække aktstykke 96 af 19.
maj 2014 om tilsagn om dansk støtte til Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI)
tilbage.
Af Frank Aaen (EL) og Trine Mach (SF) m.fl.
Spørgsmål 1
”Vil ministeren oversende det referat fra Udenrigsministeriets bevillingskomité,
som der henvises til i Altingets artikel ”Strid om klimamillioner fortsætter” fra
den 28. maj 2014? Og vil ministeren i forlængelse heraf kommentere Altingets
artikel og herunder kommentere komitémedlem Christian Balslev-Olesens udtalelse
om, at "Det er usædvanligt, at vi på den måde får en politisk udmelding
om, at man vil give en ny bevilling til et konkret projekt, hvorefter vi skal behandle
den. Jeg har ikke oplevet noget lignende i det halvandet år, jeg har
siddet i komitéen?”
Svar:
Referat fra mødet i Udenrigsministeriets Eksterne Bevillingskomite den 13. maj 2014 vedhæftes
til Udvalgets orientering. Referater fra Bevillingskomiteen udarbejdes på engelsk, idet der er et
ikke-dansktalende medlem af Komiteen. Pga. den store offentlige opmærksomhed vedr. GGGI
har Udenrigsministeriet valgt at udarbejde et relativt detaljeret referat fra denne del af
drøftelsen.
Artiklen i Altinget den 27. maj kommer ind på en række forhold. Bl.a. stilles der spørgsmål ved,
hvorvidt Danmark for tre år siden burde have afholdt sig fra at støtte etableringen af GGGI.
Det er et faktum, at vi i 2011 besluttede at engagere os, og derfor har vi i dag et særligt ansvar
for organisationens udvikling. Vi engagerede os, fordi vi mente, at GGGI havde et potentiale til
at gøre en forskel. De faglige rapporter, som netop er blevet udarbejdet om GGGI, bekræfter,
at GGGI arbejder på en anden måde end andre organisationer og af udviklingslande betragtes
som anderledes end andre samarbejdspartnere. Den koreanske baggrund bliver opfattet positivt
i mange af landene, og GGGI har formået at vinde tillid hos regeringerne på højt niveau,
hvilket er meget vigtigt for at sikre, at regeringerne tager arbejdet med grøn vækst til sig. Derfor
mener regeringen stadig i dag, at GGGI kan gøre en forskel i forhold til at udbrede grøn og
bæredygtig vækst og imødegå klimaforandringer.
Jeg er ikke enig med Christian Balslev-Olesens udmelding om, at der har været tale om en
usædvanlig procedure vedr. GGGI, jævnfør artiklen i Altinget. Bevillingskomiteens opgave er at
foretage en udviklingsfaglig vurdering af de bevillingsoplæg, som jo oftest er udarbejdet på
baggrund af en politisk prioritering, jævnfør bl.a. den direkte hjemmel på de årlige finanslove.
Udenrigsudvalget 2013-14
B 120 endeligt svar på spørgsmål 1
Offentligt
Komiteens opgave er ikke en politisk stillingtagen til fordelingen af bistandsmidlerne, men
faglig rådgivning til ministeren.
Komiteen har mulighed for at afvise bevillinger, hvis oplæggene ikke er tilstrækkeligt
velfunderede – en mulighed komiteen tidligere har benyttet sig af, fx i juni 2013, hvor komiteen
ønskede yderligere faglig analyse og dokumentation vedr. et projekt i Ghana, før projektet
kunne godkendes. Da Komiteen behandlede GGGI i maj i år, indstillede Komiteen imidlertid
enstemmigt bevillingen til min godkendelse med en række anbefalinger i den forbindelse.


Minutes from External Grant Committee Meeting on 13 May 2014
Present:
External Members: Helle Munk Ravnborg, Senior Researcher, Danish Institute for
International Studies
Henrik Secher Marcussen, Professor, Roskilde University
Alison Evans, Independent Development and Evaluation Expert
Christian Balslev-Olesen, Regional Representative, DanChurchAid
Internal Members: Martin Bille Hermann, State Secretary for Development Policy
(Chair)
Morten Jespersen, Under-Secretary for Global Development and
Cooperation
Michael Starbæk Christensen, Under-Secretary for Global Politics
and Security
MFA: Tove Degnbol, Head of Department for Technical Advisory
Services (observer)
Nathalia Feinberg, Head of Department for Development Policy
and Global Cooperation (observer)
Mette Brink Madsen, Department for Quality Assurance of
Development Cooperation (note taker)
Agenda item no. 2: Ambassador Hanne Fugl Eskjær, Head of Cooperation Mogens
Strunge Larsen, Senior Programme Officer Arifur Rahman Siddiqui
and Programme Officer Tasmim Zahid Anwar.
Agenda item no. 3 and 4 Head of Representation Winnie Estrup Petersen, Programme
Coordinator Henrik Westerby and Programme Officer Boubacar
Gamatie
Agenda item no. 5 Head of Department Kaare Baarslev and Head of Section Maria
Ulff-Møller
Agenda item no. 6, 7 and 8 Head of Department Morten Elkjær, Special Adviser Jakob Rogild
Jakobsen, Special Adviser Christoffer Berthelsen and Head of
Section Anders Rømer Skøtt
Ministry of Climate, Energy
and Building: Head of Department Rasmus Abildgaard Kristensen and Head of
Section Caroline Kronberg Jensen
Danish Energy Agency: Special Adviser Ulla Blatt Bentsen and Head of Section Assar
Qureshi
Udenrigsudvalget 2013-14
B 120 endeligt svar på spørgsmål 1
Offentligt
2
Agenda item no. 1: Announcements from the Chair
There were no announcements from the Chair.
General recommendations regarding agenda items 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8
Recognising that the international climate architecture is still unfolding and the need to test
different mechanisms and approaches, the Committee recommended that the concerned
Ministries take steps to prepare a strategy/strategic framework which could guide the use of the
Climate Envelope, including guidance on e.g. focus, modalities, etc.
Agenda item no. 2: Bangladesh - Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation
Programme
50.0 million DKK
(Embassy Dhaka)
Summary:
Bangladesh is extremely vulnerable to climate change and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s
impact assessment from 2001 identified Bangladesh as one of the most susceptible countries to climate change.
The Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Programme has been designed based upon lesson learned from
the Climate Change Adaptation Pilot Project 2013-14 and as part of the preparation for Denmark’s planned
support to a Green Growth Programme from 2016-2012. The Programme is focused on climate change
adaptation as well as on mitigation issues. The adaptation part is focused on construction of climate resilient
rural infrastructure in the Southern part of Bangladesh. The mitigation part will promote waste-to-energy from
poultry manure and raise awareness on energy efficiency, to stimulate the market for energy efficiency in
industries. A key strategic consideration for this project is to gain experience with new partners and sectorial
actors, to pilot innovative approaches and to initiate policy dialogue.
The External Grant Committee recommended the grant proposal for approval by the minister.
The Committee recognised that it was a pilot programme and underlined the importance of
differentiating between adaptation measures and mitigation measures. Given the piloting
nature, it was furthermore important to clearly define the programme activities and to
document thoroughly the outcome with a view to possible adjustments.
The Committee emphasised the importance of reflecting achievable outputs and outcomes in a
realistic risk matrix as well as of establishing a clear understanding of the underlying theory of
change.
The Committee enquired about the contribution from the Climate Change and Adaptation
Project to climate proofing. The rural roads and other infrastructure which will be climate
proofed by poor women workers were all strategically located in areas which are extremely
3
vulnerable to climatic hazards and climate change. The improvements will make it possible for
the vulnerable population to reach cyclone shelters also in times of flooding.
Regarding the justification for the selection of implementing partners it was noted that the
ongoing partnership with Local Government Engineering Department (LGED) had been
successful. With the current focus on climate change the continued partnership was innovative
and highly relevant for the country programme. As regards the mitigation engagements, IFC
had been selected as partner based upon its concrete experience in the biogas sector and
expertise in facilitating private sector development.
Questions were raised concerning the choice of Nordic Chamber of Commerce and Industries
(NCCI) as key partner. The Committee expressed its concern about the lack of alignment in the
Energy Efficiency Engagement and underlined the importance of exploring linkages between
the NCCI and relevant institutions of the Government of Bangladesh.
The Committee concluded by emphasising that when piloting it was particularly important that
lessons were drawn and documented as early as possible as well as continuously. Finally, the
Committee asked to revisit this programme within a year’s time not least to have a presentation
of lessons learned.
Agenda item no. 3: Niger - Employment Generation and Green Growth in the
Agricultural Sector
195.0 million DKK
(Repr. Niamey)
Summary:
Building on the experience and results of the current phase of the agricultural sector programme and the strategic
directions of Nigerien and Danish development policies, the proposed programme promotes improved private
sector led sustainable economic growth and job creation, based on agricultural value chains. The programme
consists of two engagements. Within value chains of production systems in the regions of Zinder and Diffa, the
first engagement aims to increase agricultural production and link this to markets by: 1) promoting support
services for farmers; 2) promoting green technologies; 3) developing the growth and competitiveness potential of
specific areas; and 4) supporting sector coordination. This engagement will be delegated to the Swiss Cooperation.
The second engagement aims to increase the development of agro-food business in certain value chains by: 1)
promoting support services for enterprises; and 2) promoting green technologies. In addition, this engagement will
help improve the business climate overall as well as specifically for the value chains. This engagement will be
delegated to the World Bank (Competitiveness and Growth Support Project).
The External Grant Committee recommended the proposal for approval by the minister,
noting that programming and planning had been done under difficult circumstances given the
fact that Denmark is about to close its representation in Niger.
The Committee acknowledged the continued importance of Danish engagement in Niger and
noted the strong case for investment in employment generation in agriculture and agro-
4
processing, which were underdeveloped sectors. The dual focus on support to producers and
other actors at the local level and support to policy development and capacity building of
national level institutions was appreciated, while the growth potential in the agricultural sector
and the rationale behind the choice of specific value chains to be supported were discussed. It
was confirmed that the Danish programme supported agricultural value chains only and would
not engage in extractive industries/uranium. The sustainability of the programme was
questioned, but there was agreement that the integrated value chain approach per se and the
anchoring of activities in existing and well-established national partner institutions would
support sustainability. It was noted that the programme had a rather modest focus on “green
growth” with only one output focusing on this issue.
The Committee expressed its concern over the difficulties foreseen in terms of effective
programme management and maintaining close policy dialogue with the Nigerien authorities as
a consequence of the decision to transfer the management of the programme to the Danish
embassy in Ouagadougou from August 2014. On this basis, the Committee found the
delegation of responsibility for the management of the Danish programme to respectively the
World Bank and Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation justified, while noting that there
were few like-minded and more obvious donors in Niger, to whom responsibility could be
delegated.
The Committee further recognised that the delegated partnerships to be established required
considerable flexibility. However, it was underlined that key Danish principles and priorities
should still be upheld in the context of the partnerships. The Human Rights Based Approach
was mentioned as a specific example, where delegation to the World Bank offered
opportunities for Denmark to influence the modalities.
Regarding the results framework, its realism, internal coherence and usefulness as a tool for
reporting was discussed. It was concluded that the indicator matrix should be reviewed during
inception with a view to a possible reduction in the number of indicators, which would
facilitate reporting and enable focussed discussion. Also, targets should be reviewed to make
sure that they were realistic, while the key assumptions and risks linking investments to results
could be made more explicit.
Agenda item no. 4: Niger - Support to Stability and Democracy
50.0 million DKK
(Repr. Niamey)
Summary:
In Niger the confidence crisis between state and society is growing, religious awakening undermine democratic
values, and the human rights of particularly women are under strong pressure. In 2013, Denmark initiated a
regional programme for stabilisation in the Sahel covering Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger. The present
programme complements the regional programme by focussing on the roles of parliament and media in
consolidating democracy, and by supporting the empowerment of women and youth as well as the defence of their
human rights, especially as they relate to health and population issues.
5
The External Grant Committee recommended the proposal for approval by the minister.
The Committee took note of the explanation on the geopolitical situation in sub-Saharan west-
Africa and recognised the importance of a programme focussing on stabilisation and anti-
radicalisation in Niger. The contributions of the individual engagements (support to parliament,
media, gender and women’s human rights and civil society) towards these ends were discussed
and found pertinent, notably as regards the focus on religious issues. Also, the linkages and
complementarities with the Danish regional programme for stabilisation in the Sahel were
outlined and discussed.
The Committee questioned whether the applied definition of stabilisation by the programme
corresponded to conventional definitions and found that the programme title did not
adequately reflect the content of the programme, particularly as regards the extensive focus on
gender issues. Consequently, it was recommended to reconsider the title of the programme.
The Committee noted that the programme based on the decision to close the Niamey
representation had undergone important design changes in order to make it manageable for the
embassy in Ouagadougou. Consequently, some of the internal coherence and synergies between
relevant activities in the development engagements of the programme had been weakened. The
Committee found that though the programme presented itself as a package of projects this was
acceptable given the circumstances.
Agenda item no. 5: Global Green Growth Institute
90.0 million DKK
(3GF Secretariat)
Summary:
The Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI) is an international organisation dedicated to global
transformation to “green growth”. Denmark has supported GGGI since 2011. The grant of DKK 90 million
(2014-16) will allow Denmark a seat in GGGI’s Council. In the development and implementation of GGGI’s
future Strategic Plan (2015-2020), Denmark’s priorities will be: 1) Development of a focused and realistic
strategic plan with a concrete results framework; 2) Poverty orientation; 3) Inclusiveness; 4) Consolidation of
GGGI’s activities; 5) Integration of GGGI’s three work streams; 6) An organisational structure that is fit for
its purpose; 7) Implementation of financial and administrative policies, rules and procedures of international
standards; 8) Influence at the global level.
Given the political decision to support GGGI with a 3-year grant of DKK 90 million, the
External Grant Committee recommended the grant proposal for approval by the minister,
while stressing the need for clear benchmarks, a close assessment of progress and the new
strategic plan once it has been finalised. Concern was expressed over the financing of the grant
from the poverty frame of the Climate Envelope, and it was emphasised that Denmark should
work to implement all the recommendations from the appraisal. The Committee asked to get
an opportunity to assess the progress and the new strategic plan of GGGI in the first half of
6
2015 prior to the payment of the second Danish instalment.
The Committee appreciated the solid and honest documentation providing a sound basis for
the Committee’s assessment and review of the new appropriation to GGGI. The Committee
agreed that the appraisal constituted a solid and thorough basis on which to base Denmark’s
further engagement in GGGI.
The Committee appreciated the Danish priority areas for the cooperation as described in the
grant proposal, but was doubtful as to whether all these priorities could be achieved. It was
noted that compromises would have to be made since not all donors and Council members
agreed on the different aspects of GGGI’s strategic direction. Doubts were raised about the
provision of a three-year grant, and the Committee proposed to consider a one-year grant until
the new strategic plan had been finalised. It was underlined that a three-year grant required
clear benchmarks and red lines that should be set as a prerequisite for each annual
disbursement.
GGGI had been established by South Korea to promote the Korean definition of green
growth, focusing on Economy and Climate – leaving out the social and poverty aspects.
Poverty orientation was important from a Danish perspective, although attempts should not be
made to turn GGGI into something it was not. Given the lack of poverty orientation by
GGGI, concern was expressed regarding the decision to fund 50 pct. of the grant over the
poverty frame (of the Climate Envelope).
The Committee recognised that GGGI had come a long way over the past couple of years, but
stressed that the Global Green Growth Institute was not a unique actor in the international
architecture, and it was argued that GGGI’s main comparative advantage was its role as a trusted
advisor to governments at high level, its governance structure and its South Korean base. The
Committee saw a general need for a mapping exercise on Denmark’s strategic intent regarding
the Climate Envelope, and where GGGI and other international and regional partner
organisations fitted in. As a general rule, new institutions should not be established if existing
institutions could perform the same tasks. Furthermore, the Committee stressed that it was key
that all recommendations from the appraisal were implemented. The Committee appreciated
the proposal to second a strategy advisor with a focus on operationalisation of the poverty
orientation of GGGI’s work.
In conclusion, it was decided to evaluate the progress of the organisation before the second
instalment (in 2015), focusing on the strategic plan and implementation of appraisal
recommendations as well as on whether further poverty reduction had been included.
7
Agenda item no. 6: Support to UNEP Risoe Centre’s Energy and Climate Collaboration
(URC) and the Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) Energy Efficiency Hub
85.0 million DKK
(Department for Green Growth)
Summary:
This grant consists of a core contribution to UNEP Risoe Centre’s Energy and Climate Collaboration and
support to the Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) Energy Efficiency Hub located in the UN-City in
Copenhagen. The two interventions are key contributions to UNEP’s Medium Term Strategy, 2014-17 and
Programme of Work, addressing Climate Change and a priority to leverage the best science for the
transformation towards renewable energy, energy efficiency and emission reductions. UNEP Risoe Centre and
the Energy Efficiency Hub will at the global level help enable ambitious global sustainable development goals on
energy as part of the post 2015 agenda as well as the closing of a global climate deal in Paris in 2015 under the
auspices of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and at a local level bring
workable solutions to climate and energy challenges in developing countries.
The External Grant Committee recommended the grant proposal for approval by the minister,
and recommended that possibilities to evaluate the work of and support to UNEP Risoe
should be explored.
The Committee recognised the important work carried out by UNEP Risoe Centre for Energy
and Climate. Furthermore, it recognised its legitimacy due to its setting in the UN family. The
move to the UN-City in Copenhagen was found useful with a view to increase the
collaboration with other partners.
It was explained that the core funding provided to the Centre was supplemented with external
financial contributions up to a total yearly budget for the Centre of approximately USD 10
million. Furthermore, the Committee was informed that efforts to secure additional external
financial resources for the SE4ALL Energy Efficiency Hub were proceeding well with
promising signals from at least two additional potential donors. The Committee acknowledged
the potential key role of the SE4ALL Energy Efficiency Hub in the context of the monitoring
of progress of the coming global post-2015 agenda, not only in terms of general energy
efficiency improvements but also in terms of energy nexus issues including energy use in other
sectors such as agriculture and industry.
The Committee underlined the need to avoid duplication of efforts, in particular in relation to
the Low Carbon Transition Unit established in the Danish Energy Agency. The Committee
noted as a concern that the UNEP Risoe Centre had not yet been able to establish an
appropriate model to measure results and outcomes. It was explained that baselines would be
established during the coming months to be able to better document the outcomes. The
Committee recommended that an external evaluation of UNEP Risoe Centre should be
undertaken.
Finally, it was noted that it was the intention to include future core contributions to UNEP
Risoe Centre in the general contributions to UNEP.
8
Agenda item no. 7: Global Climate Partnership Fund
25.0 million DKK
(Department for Green Growth)
Summary:
At the UN Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) in Copenhagen in 2009 (COP15), the developed countries committed to mobilise USD 100
billion a year by 2020 to address the needs of the developing countries in the context of meaningful mitigation
actions and transparency on implementation. Private capital will be pivotal in this regard and there is an
international demand for new and innovative mechanisms that can mobilise private capital. As a part of the
Danish endeavours to mobilise the needed climate finance and investments, a new contribution to the Global
Climate Partnership Fund (GCPF) of DKK 25 million is proposed within the framework of the Danish
Climate Envelope 2014. GCPF is a German initiative that aims to mobilise private investment capital for
climate financing which is considered an integral part of the international efforts to keep the average rise in global
temperature below 2 degrees compared to pre-industrial levels.
Noting the experimental nature of the grant and the institution, the External Grant Committee
recommended the grant proposal for approval by the minister.
The Committee recognised the importance of climate finance and the efforts of the Global
Climate Partnership Fund (GCPF) in mobilising private and public capital into climate
financing as a means to enabling meaningful mitigation actions.
The Committee questioned the added value of a reacquisition of shares in the Fund and
whether it could provide an ample learning opportunity for Denmark. Especially the innovative
framework for the Fund that generates low-risk yields for private and institutional investors
which can prove useful for future climate finance endeavours was mentioned. The reacquisition
of shares could also mobilise private capital that could be channelled via partner lending
institutions and used for building capacity and learning at the local and country level.
Although satisfied with the outlined general indicators, the Committee stressed that further
detail at project/country level could prove crucial to future evaluations of impact and
efficiency. The Committee also raised concerns with respect to the level of transparency and
the choice of Luxembourg as location for the GCPF. Regarding location it was explained that
the construction with three different categories of shares in the GCPF Luxembourg offered the
necessary legislation. Given the complexities of a possible exit from GCPF (transfer of Danish
C-shares), Danish involvement in GCPF should contribute to pursuing objectives such as
transparency and the importance of applying international standards like the United Nations
Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights that can increase the global reach of GCPF
was stressed.
In conclusion, it was stressed that Denmark should actively engage in the GCPF and work to
ensure the transparency, application of international guidelines and to work constructively
towards the formulation of lessons learned from the engagement in GCPF.
9
Agenda item no. 8: Support to the Danish Energy Agency’s Low Carbon Transition
Unit and China-Cooperation 2014-2016
22.76 million DKK
(Department for Green Growth)
Summary:
The objective of the allocation to the Danish Energy Agency (DEA) is to assist developing countries with
transition to low carbon economies and preparing to enter into a new global climate agreement. The outcome of
the allocation to DEA’s LCTU and China-cooperation is defined as: Emerging economies (with focus on
China, Mexico, RSA and Vietnam) are further enabled in reaching ambitious climate and energy goals through
knowledge sharing and support within planning, regulation and implementation of energy efficiency and
renewable energy policy in an Agency-to-Agency cooperation between Ministry of Climate, Energy and Building
(MCEB)/DEA and corresponding climate and energy authorities.
The External Grant Committee emphasised the critical need to ensure that efforts were
demand-driven, and recommended the grant proposal for approval by the minister on the
condition that improvements were done on a number of points.
The Committee recognised that DEA – as a Government agency – possessed special and
valuable knowledge and competences with respect to the formulation and implementation of
e.g. energy policy regulation, but concerns were raised as to the comparative advantage of the
services provided by the LCTU (as described in the documentation).
The Committee called for further elaboration of the Theory of Change as it was not possible to
clearly understand the thinking behind the programme. Furthermore, information on lessons
learned from the previous phase and an elaboration of the budget including further details were
called for.
The Committee underlined the fundamental need to ensure that activities are demand driven
and highlighted that this was not sufficiently documented in the proposal. The Committee
emphasised that while it recognised that building relations with counterpart agencies was a
gradual process, country ownership was central and activities would only be successful if
underpinned and driven by political will in partner countries. The Committee stressed the
importance of maintaining flexibility to meet demand and to shift activities if needed. The
Committee recommended that the LCTU during programme implementation should clearly
describe the modalities used in order to ensure the demand driven nature of the activities – and
work concertedly to avoid a supply-driven TA-approach.
The Committee added a number of specific remarks regarding the indicators, which did not
sufficiently describe or measure the added value of the LCTU. The Committee found that the
indicators needed further elaboration focusing more on output and outcome than merely on
input. It was strongly recommended that the technical assistance should be as tangible as
possible.
10
Agenda item no. 9. AOB.
No points were raised.


Udenrigsministeriet
Folketingets Udenrigsudvalg
Bilag Journalnummer Kontor Dato
2 82.C.71.a 3GF 3. juni 2014
Vedlagt fremsendes svar på Udenrigsudvalgets spørgsmål 1 vedr. B 120
af 2. juni til handels- og udviklingsministeren.
Mogens Jensen
Asiatisk Plads 2
DK-1448 København K
Telefon +45 33 92 00 00
Telefax +45 32 54 05 33
E-mail: um@um.dk
http://um.dk
Girokonto 3 00 18 06
Udenrigsudvalget 2013-14
B 120 endeligt svar på spørgsmål 1
Offentligt