UNIDO Climate Adaptation and Industrial Resilience Forum 2026
Agencies, Funds & Programmes
Date: 19 February 2026
Language: English
Transcript: https://transcripts.un.org/ar/asset/k1l/k1lafstjd4?lang=en
Transcripts available through this tool are created by using automatic speech recognition and are not official records nor official documents of the United Nations. Official records and official documents are available on the Official Document System of the United Nations.

---

Speaker 1 [11:54]:

Hello, everyone.


Moderator · Hilda [12:24]:

Can I call everyone's attention, please? Can we all please wrap up our discussions and take our seats as we begin the next session?

Thank you.

All right. Attention, everyone. Last call to please wrap up your discussions and take a seat.

As we get ready for the next session. Thank you very much. Welcome back from the very lively pathway sessions that took place earlier. I hope you all managed to get your hands a little dirty and really get into the details of how we bring these high-level policy policies, high-level commitments to life on the ground. So for our next session, we will be digging a bit deeper into what exactly was discussed in these pathways and what are the outputs and outcomes. Hopefully, this session will shed further light on how we can tangibly go forward. So can I please call to the stage our moderator for the Pathways Insights: Translating Needs into Action, Double Tap on Action, Mr. Paul Mitchell, Principal Researcher, Locally Led Adaptation and Climate Finance Access, International Institute for Environment and Development, IIED.

Please.

Welcome on stage.


Speaker 3 [15:43]:

And for the mic, you don't have to do anything, just start speaking and it will come.


Moderator · Hilda [15:52]:

Can I also call up the speakers, Special Rapporteur for Pathway 1, Ms. Noorunnahar Additional Secretary, Minister of Environment, Forests and Climate Change for Bangladesh. Our second speaker, Special Rapporteur Pathway 2, Ms. Tawonga Mbale-Luka, Director, Environmental Affairs Department, EAD, Ministry of Natural Resources and Climate Change, and GCF NDA for Malawi. Finally, Special Rapporteur for Pathway 3, Ms. Mapakamile Chingwa, Principal Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forestry, and GEF political focal point for Lesotho. Please join me in giving our speakers a round of applause.


Speaker 5 [17:29]:

Test, test.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [17:30]:

Okay, I'm gonna hold this very carefully so that I'm not breaking anything else. I hope you enjoyed lunch. I found this morning really fascinating. I wasn't here yesterday, unfortunately, so I feel like I'm starting way behind everybody else. So my name is Paul. I work for the International Institute for Environment and Development, leading some of our work around locally led adaptation. and climate finance access more broadly. And I wanted to start, just before we jump into all of the incredible things that were discussed in that last session, with just a little bit of an experiment. I know you just had lunch, so if, like me, you may be feeling a little bit sluggish, I thought we could think a bit about climate finance. And as you know, it's kind of slippery, right? Like, it's hard to get hold of. You have to be a bit agile. And I wondered if everyone could stand up. Just for a minute. Yeah, you can stand too, everybody. All right, everyone standing? So I think sometimes you have to start from the ground, right? And you have to find those local experiences that you're going to try and pull into climate finance. So maybe we can all reach down— please don't hit your head on the table— and pull up those local experiences. All right, we're going to do this together. We're going to reach down and we're going to pull up some local experiences. Stretching downwards as low as you can to the lowest appropriate level. Okay, all right. And then we're going to push them upwards, right, to the financiers.

So we're going to push up towards the sky.

Everybody push up. Okay. And then sometimes though, you know, it's in unexpected places. So maybe it's behind you. So maybe you need to reach around to the left. See if you can grab it.


Speaker 7 [19:07]:

Oh, it's not there.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [19:08]:

Whoa, it's around the right. Reach to the right. Okay, can we get it? Okay, grab it. And then we're going to grab that finance one more time from the roof, and we're going to put it down where it belongs, all the way at the local level.

All right.

Okay, I'm done. So that's it. You all know how to access climate finance now, right? Basically, you just have to be a gymnast. Okay, so we are going to hear From our esteemed panel, somehow, I don't know how you're going to do it, but summarize all of the rich discussions that were in those 3 pathways. I spent about half an hour in each room just kind of lurking in the corner. And I feel like I just scratched the surface, and I'm really excited to hear everything that came out and how you can summarize it. So, we'll jump straight in. You've got 10 minutes each, I think, to summarize those really long and rich conversations. and then we will build from there. Start with Pathway 1.


Bangladesh · Additional Secretary · Noorunnahar [20:10]:

Thank you.

I had a very interesting discussion in our group. First, I want to thank all the presenters, the distinguished presenters. I want to mention the names. From the States, we had Mr. Pioré. From the MIC, we had Ms. Amita Chatterjee. From the LDC group, we had Mr. Shahrka Samuels, Sana, and they gave their insights regarding our pathway questions, which we— you all know. And so now I'd like to summarize what we learned. So it's, it's a common points from all the discussions from each of the presenters. So, um, where's the slides? If I can— if someone can share the slides. And we had many points, and for all the— I And where's the— no slides? Okay. So, yeah, so the interesting thing is that we could find commonalities, and although there were some diverging ideas, but there were many things that stood out as common that we can take out from this session regarding the climate change adaptation. for industrial resilience. So if the slide comes up, I just can summarize.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [21:34]:

I think I've got a copy of it here if you want to.


Bangladesh · Additional Secretary · Noorunnahar [21:44]:

Yeah, yeah, there it is. No, no, that's number 2. Yeah, so I can use this one. Yeah, so I think you can all see on the screen First is that what are the priority needs? I can't see from here. We found 4 particular needs. The priority needs we found that the infrastructure, especially the ports and greening of the infrastructures for the communications, that's the roads, So those are the priority needs that we need to green our infrastructures and for adaptation through innovation and look at the cold chain aspect of the fisheries industry and the industrial parks that we have in each of the countries and agriculture system as a whole. And another thing, but very important as well, data science, the climate science, we need that. To support the climate adaptation and innovative solutions. Without the science getting into these, all these systems, the science should give information, policy directives to these systems so that we can have a higher level of climate adaptation, find out more innovative solutions. So that is the number one. Priority need. Another one was about the value chain. We found that through the extreme events, when there's a disaster, the value chain gets disrupted. We need to know how to restore the value at the end of the value chain and what is produced at the value chain. For example, we have the agriculture SMEs, or MSMEs with— we need to look at the entire value chain. And also the water stress was another common issue that came out. It's always an issue because of the climate change. Our water will be more scarce. The drought is increasing. So water stress is a very important area that we need to we can focus on. And of course, technical assistance with— that should be based on grants. That should be a priority. And we need to change our mindset to really have a transformative adaptation, not just a very incremental. And in the investment, we know we need investment to have our economic growth, but for the investment, we need to increase the private So those were the priority needs from our pathway. And then to achieve these, what are the structural constraints? One of the constraints was, of course, the disaster that we have, the climate disasters like sea level rise. So we need the knowledge and we need to know how to plan and also have the decision-making that includes these disasters in the decision-making of the government and also the private sector. So those are the constraints, whether we have the data knowledge but it's not getting fed into the decision-making system. Another constraint was the limited capacity, which we all know about. There's always capacity constraints in many places, including market market areas. So we need to also reduce the policy gap in this area. With the limited resources, that is also constrained. It's not just manpower, financial as well, and know how to reduce the financial barriers to reach our community. Of course, private capital, the amount needed for this climate adaptation innovation is one of the constraints. Another one is the lack of— we talked about the NBS, the nature-based solution, in this forum, but we need to know the valuation when this knowledge is used in the various infrastructure projects, engineering projects. We really need to measure the value, the economic benefit of such innovative systems. And so that, we think, is a constraint that came out. And so the projects alone— another interesting structural constraint was it cannot be standalone projects, or that is too micro-level. We need to look at the entirety of the system. And connect the results of the projects to the macro-level situation. So connect the micro to the macro, not just focus on the standalone projects. So what would be the high-level shifts that we need? It would be designing projects, programs, not just from top-down, down approach, but also from the community, because it should be community-driven. And also, we need to know how to connect with the communities, all these solutions that— like here, we will find a lot of solutions, new ideas, but whether they are going to really impact the communities, those producing communities, That kind of shift is needed. Also, loans, in the financial loans that we have, it must also commit to the communities as well at the micro level. We need data on the loans that we can give to the communities and what kind of transformational innovation we can achieve. In this area. So that kind of shift I think we are missing, we found in all the speakers. And another one is the linkage in the documentation, policy documentation. We have the NAP and the NDCs, but we need to have more smooth linkages between these policies, the documentation, because we have NDC chapter in the NAP and we have an adaptation chapter in the NDC. So we have targets and the governments are fulfilling these targets. So we need a kind of smoother linkages so that we really can implement these targets and goals. And so what will be the entry points? We found that the first entry point could be legislation in many countries. So one example was cited, a legislation for water to be a mandatory— collection of water to be mandatory, so legislation can help that. Of course, communities know how to collect, but it's not enough. So there was an example cited that the rainy season gives so much water, but it gets wasted, and when it's the dry season, there's no sufficient water for the drinking purpose, so a lot of time is spent on the collection of the water and that loses the time for the children or for the women. So legislation can help to make the government or the private sector come up with technology to collect the water such as rainwater harvesting. And also capacity building, we need right away for both the public sector institutions, departments, and also the private sectors that are working here as incubator, accelerator, and innovators. So that is one of the important action points. And another one is how to access— how to achieve our resource efficiency and the circular economy and also add the aspect of resilience using the NBS, the nature-based solutions. Circular economy and NBS are quite— are very important area where we can work on. Using these solutions, not just using the solution, how we can upscale them, how we can improve them. We have many examples that are working, but we cannot sit still. Still. So we, we think that our speakers gave the idea that we need to work on these solutions, improve them. And for example, we, we have very common nature-based solutions like floating farms and so on. So these can be improved, and so the innovators can work on these ideas, so how it can be upscaled. So what about the financing What kind of signals can we expect? Of course, the credit systems, including microcredit system, need to be robust and we have to have the proper financial incentives and produce some more guidelines and the green loans have a good taxonomy because we talk about the green finance, but that needs to be clear and that's what came out. Define the financial entry points for the solution receivers who are producing the solution for the climate adaptation. Another one is that we need the direct finance. It's very important, direct finance, adding with the technical assistance for the producers that are producing in the SMEs, mainly on the agriculture. And that are really suffering from the extreme weather. For example, we had a nice example from a farmer doing the cashew nuts, producing cashew nuts, and how they can be helped with direct access to finance. That's very important— direct access to finance. Of course, private investment, we need to see that it is increasing, although their profit based or have profit motive, they need to work on the area of adaptation. So those kind of policy changes we need to see. So we are thinking that from this, our speakers' remarks, what could be the priority action? So it's increase the direct private investment to local communities because Although the solutions we can produce, the innovations, whatever we can do, it has to be really catered to the communities. Not just top-down, bottom-up, and not just the public investment, the government investment. I think more stress should be on the private investment. I think that should be our number one priority action. So if I have missed something out, I can request my friend colleague, Matthias, if you can add— if you want to add anything. Thank you.


Speaker 12 [33:23]:

Hi.


Bangladesh · Additional Secretary · Noorunnahar [33:24]:

Thank you.


Matthias [33:24]:

No, I think you covered all.


Bangladesh · Additional Secretary · Noorunnahar [33:26]:

Thank you. Thank you very much. And again, thank you for giving this opportunity. And thanks to the speakers and the moderator of the Pathway 1. And I hope it's been helpful. Maybe, sir, you can add more from the audience.


Speaker 16 [33:39]:

Thank you.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [33:40]:

Thank you. There's a huge amount there. It's an amazing amount to have covered and a lot of specificity. Maybe, if I may, just one follow-up question for you or for anyone who was in the group. The priority action of increasing direct private investment to local communities, I think, clearly a priority, but I'm wondering if you were able to dig under the surface a little bit of how to make that happen, if you had any conversations or any examples came up of practical experiences of where that's occurred.


Bangladesh · Additional Secretary · Noorunnahar [34:21]:

Yes, for example, the financial institutions, non-banking institutions, in many countries I think all the countries, they have different models, and so the government can work with them and find out the right model so that— or introduce some policies so that these financial institutions can work with the community, how they can give out the loans. Both financial institutions and non-banking institutions, I think there were examples there, so the thing is the government has to work with them. Otherwise, we don't think they will come up with the ideas themselves. So government has to have a policy on this area in that country, and maybe here UNIDO can help in this area of policy development, how to really work on the private investment, how to increase the private investment. Thank you. Through the financial institutions. So first, develop some policy areas, what we have and what's not working and what can work. For example, I think from the participants from Zambia, I think they gave a very nice example where it was working for the producers, for the farmers. Yes. So, I think we need some policies from the government.


Speaker 19 [35:51]:

Yes.

Thank you.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [35:53]:

Thank you so much. Sorry to put you on the spot with that hard question. So, hopefully, we'll have some time towards the end for Q&A. So, hold your thoughts. And I'm particularly interested in the intersections between these pathways. So, once we've seen all of these presentations, maybe we can reflect together a little bit on where the common points are that we can look to take forward. So, maybe over to Pathway 2, on locally led approaches.


Malawi · Director, Environmental Affairs Department; GCF NDA · Tawonga Mbale-Luka [36:23]:

Okay, thank you very much. I was in Pathway 2, inclusive and locally led adaptation. So first, just to say that we had very interesting and rich discussions in the group, looking at how best we can achieve inclusive and locally-led adaptation. And then just to go straight to the point on the issue of the constraints, what came out really from the discussions was that adaptation, locally-led adaptation, is really constrained by not including local priorities. That means the involvement of the local people, the communities, and then the national systems and financing mechanisms, which don't really speak to each other. They are not connecting. The communities, the people, the MSEs, SMEs have needs, but then those needs do not translate into policy or action at the national level. Then added to that is the issue of the financing, financing to improve the initiatives, financing to grow the initiatives and the like. We also— what came out as apparent was really the fact that Communities understand their risks, mostly when you go there, even when you consult, they know what their issues are, what their problems are, and most times they also know the solutions or have their own solutions, but then those solutions are not integrated into part of the design of programs or projects that are being implemented. So this was really an issue that was coming out. I think we had examples where somebody said that, you know, the government will go and consult them, they will just ask them what are the challenges that you are facing, but it ends there. Then they will design a program just based on the challenges they've had, but so they— yeah, to come up with solutions to the challenges, but the solutions may not be fit for the communities or for the programs that are being implemented. So it creates a problem. And then the other issue was the issue of outdated policies and complex financial requirements which prevent implementation. To access finance, at the local level, but even internationally, is also a big challenge. For example, in my country, at the local level, for communities or MSMEs to access finance, the interest rates are very high and prohibitive, and even the process itself is very complex, let alone the international finance. These These were challenges that we outlined in terms of constraining locally-led adaptation. Then why it is not scaling up, what came up was really also in terms of planning and designing, designing for projects and not programs or integrated systems that can continue, because a project will have a a lifespan, 5 years, 3 years, and then thereafter what happens? Because the system hasn't been designed to continue even after the project phases out. This was also seen as a problem for not scaling. Then another issue was to do with pilots. Pilots exist, exist in the various countries and with proven results, but then how to upscale those is the challenge. Just an example from Malawi, where we have, you know, like from the GEF, they would do this pilot program for 5 years, and then next year it's another pilot program in a different area, but then how upscale those proven results? So this was also a challenge in terms of scaling up. Then also, the lack of clear institutional pathways. I think this also speaks to the issue of sustainability. How do you grow those initiatives so that they're institutionalized and become part or integrated into program planning and implementation? Implementation. So that, that was really the issue in terms of scaling. I think this issue kept on coming up— inadequate and ineffective consultations. So they are not adequate, but even where they are happening, they are not really meaningful. They are really being done to tick the box, and then you say, okay, these ones were consulted, but in effect it's not translating or influencing the final decision insofar as that issue or program or initiative is concerned. Then the issue of what would shift the system, the aspect of local actors being part of the process to co-design, to finance and deliver solutions within national frameworks. So what really came out here was that they should not be isolated incidents or ways of operating, but, you know, this needs to be something that becomes standard to ensure that, you know, those affected are also part of the process of designing and coming up with solutions on the things that affect them. To do that as well requires a lot of capacity building, because we'd also note that there are some programs or projects where most of the financing is going maybe to the district, like in my country. Most of the partners are now putting most of the money in the district councils, but they don't have the capacity, the councils, the local councils, don't have the capacity. So even if you put in money there, but they don't have the capacity to really implement what they are supposed to, then you also have a challenge, but also capacities to access more financing. So how can we work with, you know, the local authorities, the local governments, to increase their capacity for them to also be able to to access finance for programs, projects, for innovation. So that needs to actually happen. Then we also learned— I think we had somebody from— oh, no.


Speaker 22 [43:51]:

Yes.


Malawi · Director, Environmental Affairs Department; GCF NDA · Tawonga Mbale-Luka [43:52]:

I think the other thing that also came up was really just generally supporting the decentralization processes within the countries so that these are not— they should become the standard, the norm, because that's where the climate action is happening, at the local level. Then we also looked at actionable entry points.


Speaker 24 [44:23]:

Points.


Malawi · Director, Environmental Affairs Department; GCF NDA · Tawonga Mbale-Luka [44:24]:

So there, I think we really touched on issues of integrating local priorities into national plans, industrial strategies, and investment frameworks so that these are nested within the policy and legal frameworks, and also piloting localized finance and risk instruments tailored to specific climate hazards and regions. Those were really the the entry points. I think the other things I've talked about— high-leverage shifts, moving from consultation to co-designing with those affected, aligning policies, national policies, with finance and market incentives to scale up locally proven solutions— that means to— yeah, the pilots, I think, are also coming in there. What kind of support is required? We looked at issues of strengthening planning systems, strengthening designing systems, and then integrated type of planning and programming, not only projects, but programs, systems that can outlive a project cycle that can go beyond that and building sustainability. We also said that there's need for technical assistance, for policy alignment, flexible finance accessible, and making finance accessible to local actors. I think here we are saying, then what role can UNIDO play? This is where they can come in to help support with technical assistance, technical support that we could strengthen these systems that really speak to or allow inclusive and locally led actions. We also discussed the issue of having platforms that link governments to communities and also to markets, so developing those vehicles that will support that type of engagement. We also had discussions around standards and partnerships that can help to bridge public and private sectors, actors, to accelerate adoption and scale. That is in terms of the support that could be required. Yeah, I think basically that's what we said. And then just generally, in terms of the pathway synthesis, it's like adaptation succeeds locally generally, but stalls when national systems are not designed to include and enable it. So basically, we need to have systems that actually take into account locally led adaptations, the local knowledge that is there, and then integrate that with the science, with the technical knowledge, so that we are delivering something that has ownership and also can be sustained over time and can grow and upscale. Thank you very much.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [47:50]:

Thank you. So again, I hope you'll agree, a really fantastic summary of a very rich and deep conversation. One follow-up from me. You mentioned a few times this issue around consultation and participation and moving away from tick box exercises. And I think we all kind of know how you get there, right? Like, in terms of project proponents or designers internationally or nationally, It's much easier if you don't consult, right? You can come up with a beautiful design if you don't talk to anybody. How do we change those incentives and make it actually feel that it's worthwhile to do so? Did that come up in that conversation?


Malawi · Director, Environmental Affairs Department; GCF NDA · Tawonga Mbale-Luka [48:37]:

Yes, I think there was quite a lot of discussion around that, really, to ensure that that consultation is meaningful. because otherwise you design something that becomes a white elephant, and then though it's beautiful, but it's not being used, you know, because it's not— it hasn't taken into account what the needs are of the local people, the sensitivities, sometimes cultural sensitivities, not taken into account. So, It could be a good project or program, but then it's not responding or answering to that. So we talked about really having meaningful consultations, and we also said that UNIDO could also help through the projects, like using those as vehicles to demonstrate how that can work through some of the projects that they're working with the countries where they have government because I think what was really coming out was that governments don't really take into account or consult CSOs. We had quite a number of CSOs in our group, and they really said no, they don't. If they do, they will even send them just a questionnaire, can you fill this questionnaire? Or it's even online, and they don't have— some don't even have access to internet. It's really just done, and then they'll tick the box, we've done it, but then the how— how does that translate into meaningful action, meaningful decisions, and meaningful outcomes in the final adaptation programs or initiatives?


Speaker 28 [50:17]:

Yes, thank you.

Thank you.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [50:20]:

It's hard, right? Okay, so we're running low on time, I think, so we'll shift straight across to Pathway 3. and then hold those questions. Hopefully we'll have a few minutes towards the end. I think your slide should come up in a second, hopefully. Yeah, perfect.


Lesotho · Principal Secretary · Mapakamile Chingwa [50:43]:

Thank you so much, um, Mr. Moderator, and thank you for the opportunity given to represent our Pathway 3 group. The Pathway group was dealing with the climate intelligence for industrial resilience, which of course was debated much from the perspective of LDCs and CIDs. It transpired, or the debate or the interactions pointed out a lot of issues, inclusive of being LDCs and CIDs. Perspective of the special circumstances. However, we identified the needs and prioritized that we have to translate data in actionable decision-ready intelligence. By strengthening our infrastructure. Infrastructure is not only material infrastructure, but infrastructure would be coupled or aligned with capacity building. It will be soft and hard infrastructure so that if The data is not available. There will be no basis for decision-making. However, for industries to have appetite for climate issues, this data. Has to be translated into information that is predictable, that is credible, that is affordable. To the policymakers, it will be predictable, it will be credible, so that They only not provide the services, but also they have to sell to the businesses to understand why they can invest in climate issues. So we are saying if we build capacity. We build hard infrastructure and soft. Soft meaning we empower from the grassroots even to the service providers and the policymakers to understand the language. And then we came to understand that Because there are other constraints that are structural, we said this data should be accessible. I'll always give an easy example of Lesotho. I would rather be a bit biased in that geographically we are not able to access data from other areas of the country. We have installed automatic weather stations while in other countries you may not even find those weather stations, but they do not cover the whole country.


Speaker 31 [55:19]:

Why?


Lesotho · Principal Secretary · Mapakamile Chingwa [55:19]:

Because of the geographical structure. Other places are not accessible. Therefore, we are saying, for us to get this data, We have to invest. We have to have financial and physical capacity. Why? Because we are saying, like I'm saying, I'll always give examples of my country. For now, we are saying if we can have 8 to 10 rudders, we can only be able to to get the information from all the country that says then that then by then we can be able to say do we have the capacity then for analytic capacity if we are able to access the whole country but for the fact that we cannot even cover the country we cannot talk of analyzing the data that we are not able to access. So we are saying it should be accessible. And then we looked at the shifts. We looked at the institutional reforms, that the institutional arrangements that we have as government may be acute enough to disrupt the information flow in that the climate, the issue, the subject of climate change is being housed or mandated through many ministries. We are many stakeholders. Like, if I give an example, I'll always give an example. You'll find that maybe meteorological services is another ministry. In another ministry, there's climate unit, there's that. Yes. There's that. There's disaster management somewhere. There is. So it depends on who does, who does not, when and how. So we are saying the shift that we must look at is institutional reforms so that we have maybe Clear mandates and rules around the systems. Both top-down and bottom-up approaches should be used together.


Speaker 33 [58:23]:

Why?


Lesotho · Principal Secretary · Mapakamile Chingwa [58:24]:

We are going back to saying we are working with the communities. We must incorporate the traditional knowledge and skills so that when we reform, they be part of the reforms so that these decisions should be based on what they own as the beneficiaries. We also looked at the actionable entry points that for us to succeed, we have Ghana as our— we have Ghana as our case study. Ghana says, are in a process of putting up a center of excellence for— as a climate hub. Yes. This hub will be the source or the one, the entry of all information on climate. Why? Because the many institutions that are dealing with climate, the hub will be responsible responsible for everything that talks about climate change and its issues. So they are promising that the hub will serve their country and the region. So we took that case study as a benchmark for all of us that Also, we can bank on public-private co-ownership of climate intelligence business models. That one was shared by Ghana and WMO on shipping case that they have. It also gave us a better understanding of how we can co-own the data Although it was, although we banked on the model that Ghana is talking about, because they are saying even if other institutions have data, but it is not accessible to other members. So it is best for us to put a center of excellence so that every stakeholder, whoever You know where to get the data and credible validated data that you know that it is the real data that we have to use. We also looked at the financial needs signal that we need to have standardized distribution, but this. Distribution also should take into account different levels, should be domesticated to different cases as per se, because as countries, as communities, as regions, we face different— we might have similar problems or constraints, but they are specifically— they should be specifically tailored to respond to their specific areas. So domestication is most advisable that we conceptualize towards domesticating whatever we want to do. And then we said our priority action would be address the need for the local data, especially in the LDCs and CIDs, to bring on board those who need it the most, which are the farmers and rural processors, to shift from survival to competitiveness. If I give another I would say, for us, I said start small and grow bigger. With the association that I talked about for herders, for them to access information, each member of the association is given a cell phone and a small radio.


Speaker 35 [1:03:25]:

Yes.


Lesotho · Principal Secretary · Mapakamile Chingwa [1:03:27]:

The information that is being disseminated, these guys listen to their radios and use their cell phones. It has really helped us so much that we are replicating the model to the other areas adjacent to where we are, and through that, you find all the messages on climate change being disseminated by those headers. So we are saying, let us domesticate our means so that the people or the target for the— let us domesticate for targeted groups, So that they own what you are talking about, and once they understand, they will own it and disseminate the better, even more better than you can do. Then maybe if you you think it from the perspective of a national program, but if you do it that way, for us it has really worked. For us because we are saying for them to understand the climate language and the restoration of their rangelands. I said I come from a rangeland country and we are hit by degradation, but we said for them to understand and to improve their livelihoods. Lesotho in the world ranks number 2 in mohair production and ranks number 4 in wool production. So it says to us we definitely have to improve the rangelands, restore the wetlands, restore, regenerate, restore and regenerate their rangelands so that indirectly their livelihoods become improved, because once the rangelands are improved, it says their wool and mohair fiber is improved, therefore their lives would be improved. Thank you so much.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [1:05:51]:

Thank you.

So once again, an amazing summary, I think, of a really rich conversation, and that example, I think, speaks actually to things that came up in every one of those pathways. So it's a really neat way to end. We are running behind time, but do we have time for one or two?


Speaker 38 [1:06:11]:

Yeah.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [1:06:11]:

Yeah? Okay. So we can take perhaps 2 statements from the floor if anybody has anything burning that they would like to say, particularly focusing on those points of intersection between these 3 pathways. No pressure.


Speaker 40 [1:06:26]:

Yes.


India · Amrita [1:06:26]:

Hi. Yes, I was in the last panel discussion, and my name is Amrita. I am from India, representing civil society organization that is South Asian Forum for Environment. And I truly congratulate the House that we started the day asking how do we bring transformation. That was the question of the day, and we boiled down to a point where, as you have rightly mentioned, that how the intersection between the pathways can be achieved. So yes, I think the answers are lying in our concerns and actions. However, what we say is that sometimes we say there are gaps. There could be gap at the industrial level or policy level or the integration gap. Maybe we say that sometimes we try to reduce the noise and there are definite barriers. Now, why they are— say, considering I've spent 2 decades in this development sector and I've seen that definitely data lack of— it's, it's not that we have lack of data, there is no dearth of data, but we do not have access to data. And the accessibility to data, the community, the grassroots information, the policymakers do not have access to that. Maybe sometimes we do not have the capacity built to handle this amount of data, and when this precise information are missing while we are designing or planning an intervention or investment, then definitely there are confluence of interest or there can be a conflict of interest. But to overcome such barriers, again, a precise integration of data is extremely important. Important, and I strongly recommend to the policymakers, stakeholders who are present here, including the CSO partners, to take it very seriously so that I can— since we are again entering into the AI age, maybe the AI experts can have not success stories, beyond success stories, the precise data, the precise challenges, the problems. If we can have access to that through our CIN, Climate information network, and maybe our AI can help in the forthcoming days. That's one. And second, what I again repeat and stress on, that, that this— to bridge this gap, to reduce the noise, it's always the semi-pilot scale. Semi-pilot interventions are extremely important. Yes, we had someone saying that Nature-based solutions are coming up very well, and we have examples of float farming. My organization received several international awards for that. But again, the upside of the financial planning, that lacks clarity when we talk about nature-based solutions. But again, we can reduce the noise or this barrier by having, you know, a semi-pilot scale implemented, and per unit that can be calculated, you know, when we are crafting with, with the larger scale or maybe at the industrial scale. So from the innovation lab to semi-pilot scale to the industrial scale, so we have to bridge that gap. So that's my way of thinking of the intersection to this pathway.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [1:09:52]:

Thank you.


India · Amrita [1:09:53]:

Thank you so much.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [1:09:54]:

Thank you very much. Then we have one from Zambia, and I think that's where we'll have to close.


Zambia [1:10:06]:

Thank you, moderator, for giving me the floor. I think I would like to come from the angle of financing, the barrier of financing, overcoming the barrier of financing. I think our Rapporteur did make reference to it to say we did have a conversation around that aspect. From what we've discussed so far, I think one of the things, if it's going to be my key takeaways, is to say that adaptation financing will require us to be brave. I think that point was raised in the morning, and brave in the sense that science is already clear. That we need to finance adaptation, but it's the actual economics, that's where the link is. Return on investment for the private sector to be motivated to invest into adaptation projects. So what Zambia, we've done is we've gone a step further deliberately and put in place certain metrics. So we've come up with a strategic framework for the green taxonomy, that defines what a green investment project looks like. So that then, with that clear understanding, then we've anchored that into the central bank, who is the regulator of the financial institution, has come up with a statutory instrument for green loan guidelines. So we've got a taxonomy this side, and there's guidelines decide. What that now has done is created an ecosystem for the financial sector to be able to channel their capital of investment into these particular projects or support the project developers as they're developing these projects, whether it's nature-based, nature-centered— not nature-based, but nature-centered projects— other, other, other projects that are green in nature. But the challenge from there that we saw is what the rapporteur from Malawi mentioned: the cost of capital in Africa is too high. So even if you're going to do a nature-centered project, when borrowing the money from the commercial banks is about 35% 34, 20, between 25 to 34% interest rate, and then your project is not anywhere closer to give you that return. They are looking for concessional financing, and the Green Loan guidelines together with the taxonomy then enables us to say, okay, if you are lending and this project meets these requirements, can you consider giving them a concessional loan. So that is what has really helped us to, or is helping us to, try and overcome that barrier of financing for some of these green projects as well as the nature-based centered projects. But the angle of having to access the concessional financing for the lenders to own land, I think that is a bit of Um, a challenge that we're currently facing. We did pilot with some funds from FCDO, the Foreign Commonwealth Development Office. They put up about £6 million, which then they put through a financial institution to on-lend to SMEs implementing projects. You can imagine the— I think that was in 2020, 2024— no, 2023, when the lending rates were about 34% for local currency, we— the financial institutions were able to only lend at 10%. When the lending rate was about 12% for USD, they were able to lend at 3%, only because they had this concessional capital. So therefore, then this projects were able to be implemented. So replicating that and making that capital accessible for the financial institutions who already have this fiduciary standard that they follow, I think it's just a question of sitting down with financial institutions that are willing to take this path and then ensure that the funds are not coming commingled with their commercial capital. We have a solution. It's just we need to be brave.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [1:14:36]:

Thank you.

Thank you so much. I think there's 2 really good examples to wrap up on there, one quite local and thinking about pathways to scale, and another that's at the national level. I'm going to take your forbearance for one more minute, and here's where I wish I'd said no to moderating this session. I'm going to try and summarize just really quickly. I have 5 points to make for you to consider as we move into the rest of the afternoon. What I'm taking away from this across the 3 pathways are, most importantly, I think relationships are key at all levels, but they require systems to facilitate them, and sometimes there are gaps there. That localization is key, but it needs to be linked to national, but also regional and global systems and agendas. That information and knowledge are critical, but access and utility are currently inequitable, extremely inequitable. That incentives need to be effectively structured to mobilize different kinds of actors towards this common goal that we're carving out, and that's where I think the bravery comes in to some degree. Then last but not least, as always, access to finance is a critical piece of the puzzle and probably the biggest challenge. Thank you so much. Could we have a round of applause for our rapporteurs and our speakers from the floor?


Speaker 47 [1:15:55]:

Thank you.


Moderator · Hilda [1:15:57]:

Thank you so much, Paul, for that. Thank you for the stretch as well at the beginning. We all needed that. We all needed to loosen up a little, so really appreciate that. So as we go on to the penultimate session of the day, second last session of the day, um, I'm kind of, you know, starting to recognize a trend in many of our discussions, a trend of we need more projects, we need more data, we, we need a critical mass of bankable and predictable projects to signal to private sector that climate adaptation is a worthwhile investment. But at the same time, we need the finances and investments to create those projects, to get that critical critical mass. So it's a bit of a chicken and the egg dilemma, and how do we reconcile this? How do we solve this? So thank you so much for the delegate from Zambia for going into more detail and getting super tangible in very clearly conveying an example that can be adopted by many of us in the room. And it's actually the perfect segue for our next session. And I don't know about all of you, but for me, when I think of transformation and bravery, what I really need is a step-by-step playbook, a blueprint on how I can practically make that happen. And so for the next session, that is exactly what we are going to do. We are going to take the insights from the pathways, and our moderator and speakers are going to break down step by step a blueprint on how we can make this happen. So I am happy to bring to the stage our moderator, Ms. Anya Onisko, Senior External Relations Officer, GEF Division of Funding Partner Relations, Directorate of Global Partnerships at UNIDO. And our speakers, Mr. Paul Watkiss, who is joining online, lead author of the UNEP Adaptation Gap Report.


Speaker 49 [1:18:13]:

Recording in progress.


Moderator · Hilda [1:18:15]:

There we go, he's ready. Second speaker, Mr. Frank Agri.


Speaker 51 [1:18:22]:

Right now? Right.


Moderator · Hilda [1:18:24]:

Okay, so Frank is on standby, on his way.


Speaker 53 [1:18:28]:

way.


Moderator · Hilda [1:18:28]:

Next speaker, Mr. Paul Mitchell, Principal— oh, Paul, once again, welcome back. Are you going to do another stretch for us? And Ms. Eleonora Gatti from UNIDO, who we also know very well, Head of Climate Technology and Innovation Unit here at UNIDO, and Ms. Yvonne Loko, Head, Agro-Innovation and Bioeconomy Unit, Division of Agribusiness and Infrastructure Development, Directorate of SDG Innovation and Economic Transformation at UNIDO. All right, please join me in giving our speakers a round of applause.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:19:19]:

Thank you. And you are departing, right? After that? Okay, so we'll still say goodbye to you. Now, Paul, it's a very difficult act to lead your— after your moderation. So I'm turning to you to see if we can do another stretching exercise.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [1:19:50]:

Oh, another stretching exercise.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:19:51]:

I heard a lot about bravery, and I think bravery relates to being superheroes, right? We're all superheroes here trying to understand how we are going to solve this issue of moving from fragmentation to transformational innovation. So let's all stand up again, and sorry, Paul, for Paul Watkins, you're online. Feel free to stand up with us and let's all take the star superhero shape. We will make it somehow. Okay.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [1:20:26]:

Right?


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:20:27]:

Feel free to embrace that feeling and we'll try to help you along the way. So we've heard a lot of stories throughout the day, yesterday, Thank you. We heard a lot of marvelous and amazing stories just now from the pathway discussions, right? And I think the point of this discussion today is how do we take stock of these stories and how do we transform them into new ways of acting on those stories, building on them? So let's think of how, you know, we will compile all the stories into a paper, into a compendium, but if we were to write the next chapter, the next volume of this book, where would we want to go? So really, the whole practical question here is how do we move forward? How do we operationalize transformational adaptation, right? We have Paul Watkitts back online with us, and I'd like to turn back to him. him to walk us through, on the basis of your findings, Paul, where do you see that emerging from the UNEP Adaptation Gap Report? How can we get towards transformational industrial adaptation? Over to you, Paul.


UNEP · Lead author · Paul Watkiss [1:21:46]:

Thank you very much. Just to check you can hear me okay?


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:21:49]:

Yes, go ahead.


UNEP · Lead author · Paul Watkiss [1:21:50]:

That's great. And my sincere apologies I can't be there. I mean, I— it sounds like a really interesting forum, but with the exercises it also seems like it's interesting as well. Sincere apologies. But what I would like to do is just— we've done a lot of work on these issues over the last decade or so on the adaptation finance gap work, just to maybe put a couple of reflections there that maybe help in terms of some of the blueprints and the pathways. Now, I was going to try and share some slides.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:22:19]:

If that's not possible, I can talk about it, but just We do have slides for Paul in the slide deck if we can—


UNEP · Lead author · Paul Watkiss [1:22:26]:

I've only got 4 slides, I think. It was just kind of— sometimes it's easier to communicate these things with a figure.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:22:34]:

Just bear with us one moment. Can you flip to the first slide? Okay, um, this should be it, Paul. Does that— we, we did change the sort of the background of it to fit the theme, uh, the visual identity. Does this look like your content? Can you see it?


UNEP · Lead author · Paul Watkiss [1:23:04]:

I can't see it, but I'm just gonna guess.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:23:06]:

Maybe feel free to, to share.


UNEP · Lead author · Paul Watkiss [1:23:08]:

So yeah, um, if I can go to the slide that starts with the adaptation finance gap.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:23:15]:

Exactly, we are there.

Go ahead.


UNEP · Lead author · Paul Watkiss [1:23:17]:

Okay, I mean, this is just very quick. I know Henry talked to you yesterday. I think it's just important to highlight that we do have a big gap. We think that for developing countries alone, we probably, to address climate risks, need something of the order of $300 billion a year, certainly by the time we get to 2030 and going forwards. And if we compare that to international public adaptation finance flows, it's only currently around $30 billion. That's still a large amount, but you can see we've got a tenfold gap. And so even if we hit the trebling, what we are all aware of is we have to do something different to try and get from $30 to $300. And there's almost certainly an enormous role for industry and the private sector to help us to do that. If I go to the next slide, please. One of the issues though in looking at those numbers is it's really important to recognize they involve a large number of different types of adaptation that will have different types of opportunities and commercial opportunity for the private sector. And we sort of use this spectrum as a real simplification, but just to highlight that on the left-hand side there are some adaptation options which typically involve public goods and public benefits and have low or no market return, where we're not going to see so much private sector interest, social protection programs or even major flood protection. And on the right-hand side, there'll be some areas where there are existing markets already starting to develop and where there are private costs and private benefits and there are opportunities for commercial return, and we can help those markets develop, such as air conditioning, those types of things. But really, and I think the key thing where we want to try and scale up is the bit in the middle, and the bit in the middle is a mixture of joint costs and joint benefits. It's where there's market failures, that's where there's below-market returns, and we have the opportunities to help de-risk things, and that's where the public and the private sector can really work together, and that's really where I see the strongest role for UNIDO in going forward. Going to the next slide, and that's—


Speaker 71 [1:25:25]:

I'm sorry.


UNEP · Lead author · Paul Watkiss [1:25:26]:

I'm not giving you a presentation, I'm just trying to get these comments on so I can reflect them in the discussion. When we are looking at the private sector, and the private sector is enormously varied, it ranges from micro-organizations right up to large multilaterals, but there's always going to be an issue in terms of why the private sector is going to act on adaptation. It's important, again, to recognize that there will be different types of intervention, and that we will need to stimulate that in different ways to try and get the maximum action possible. So quite often private sector companies will look to address their own adaptation needs. It could be making their assets more resilient or addressing supply chains. They'll need certain issues and support to help them do that and certain disclosure and information. In the middle, we know there's going to be an emerging market for adaptation goods and services. That will be both for the private sector to support public sector adaptation, but also for the real economy as well. Again, what we want to try and do is see how we can stimulate and get the innovation that the private sector can offer. Finally, and I'm sure you've had these discussions as well, we shouldn't forget the private financial sector and the really critical role that there is in helping to finance this. Again, that requires a different type of perspective and perhaps different types of support. Next slide is just to say, if this was easy, we would have done it already. I really absolutely support the ambition that you have today. At the same time, I think it's important to recognize that we're 25 or so years into adaptation and adaptation finance flows, and we've not made as much progress as we would have liked. So there's systemic barriers here that we're going to have to overcome, and you can see that just by looking at the numbers. The numbers for mitigation are now really amazing. CPI tracked $2 trillion of climate mitigation finance flows in 2023, which is the latest year that we have. 2/3 of it was private. I mean, that's just amazing and such a huge increase over the last decade. Adaptation is the opposite— tiny amounts in relative terms dominated by public, and we sort of have to recognize that there's lots of barriers to adaptation that we're going to have to overcome. So in terms of your pathways, you know, we're going to have to think about what we do and segmentation of the markets. We have this issue that economic returns are much higher than financial returns. We've got to try and generate cash flows from primarily avoided losses, and we need to recognize that a lot of adaptation has a very sort of messy, complicated nature to it. So it's not going to be simple, but if we set back, it's also not going to happen autonomously. And just to finish, I mean, I just wanted to highlight that, you know, I think there's lots of things that we can do. I mean, I haven't been able to join all the Pathway discussions, but here's a few reflections. We certainly need to bring the private sector into the adaptation policy landscape, and much more strongly into NAPs and NDCs. I think we are starting now on the public side to push forward strategic programming with adaptation investment plans, and I think they are also bringing in the private sector. I think that's a really important entry point. So that allows you to move to a programmatic scale and away from individual projects. One great lesson from that is this is all about benefits. You really need to capture and move from a qualitative landscape into a quantitative analysis that says what are the actual benefits and who might those benefits accrue to and look at the financial opportunities. And then just to start out, lots of opportunities, but we will need to create the conditions and the incentives for the private sector to act. This isn't going to happen with laissez-faire economics. You're going to have to be interventionist, information disclosure, active support for innovative financial models definitely will involve policy and regulation. Just one final thing, and I'm sure you've discussed this, but we're a little bit concerned that quite often some of the models that are appearing for the private sector address the financing gap but not the funding gap. There's an issue of equity, and we have to be very careful in generating new markets and looking at new financial products that we're not simply passing all the costs back to the most vulnerable in developing countries. If this just becomes a way of transferring costs to those who can least afford it, we haven't really succeeded. What we have to try and do is look where there's value generation that actually improves welfare and livelihoods and doesn't unburden those who are most vulnerable. That's a really challenging issue, but something that we really should have first and foremost as we go forward.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:30:17]:

Thank you.

Thank you, Paul. A round of applause to you for very pertinent points. And maybe just to build on that, a quick follow-up. So, I'm not sure if you were listening in to the previous session, but if not, you would have heard that many of our participants through the pathways identified a lot of gaps that currently exist locally and nationally in terms of us being able to address climate adaptation at scale. So, if UNIDO were to charter its way forward in this area, from your perspective, where would be the focus of our actions? I mean, we've talked about it in preparation for the session. You do know that UNIDO's main intervention on the ground with countries is through local entrepreneurs, through MSMEs. So, there are— apart from working with communities, we work a lot along value chains with small and medium enterprises. So, from your perspective, what would be the highest catalytic impact, and where should UNIDO really look at engaging most? Is it policy design? Is it institutional capacity Are we talking about innovative investment structuring, which would be anchored into climate intelligence? And we talked a lot about in the previous session the fact that data is sometimes there, but it's sporadic. It's not always available at scale. It's not always available to the whole national spectrum of. regions and administrations. So how would we, as UNIDO, where would we best position ourselves in that landscape from your perspective? Thank you.


UNEP · Lead author · Paul Watkiss [1:32:10]:

Fantastic question. You know, the answer is you have to do all of it, that there's no silver bullet, sadly. If there had been, we'd have probably found it already. And I guess one of the issues is trying to do this in a coordinated manner. So you do have to look at information, which is a really big gap and is extremely challenging, particularly for anticipatory adaptation. There's no doubt about that. You certainly need to have— and especially if you're working with SMEs and looking across the value chains, you're going to need to act to de-risk innovative adaptation. There's some really interesting things you can do with adaptation accelerators and early support, particularly for SMEs. For slightly larger organizations, a lot of interest in blended finance. I think these are really important, but working across value chains certainly is going to be— and taking a strategic approach is important. But we're also finding that there's a really critical role for policy in terms of the enabling environment for the private sector, but also just everything from standards to trying to get this this integrated international development and down cascaded through to local development, there's just a large number of things to do. So one of the ways, I think, maybe is not to look for silver bullets, but to look to doing and acting across that, but also trying to bring people together in a more coordinated approach. There is this fragmentation, and so that requires coordination amongst governments, governments, and that's governments right from national through to local, and local working with multiple stakeholders. I think it also requires coordination amongst the development partners, which isn't always there. I think that can be— sometimes we can not be honest about that, but you need to have a much more coordinated approach supporting things, avoiding duplication, and looking at the division of labor to try and take this forward. But, you know, I'm sort of optimistic. I do think, you know, we shouldn't pretend that this is going to be easy, but we can't get away from the fact that it's absolutely essential. So, sorry, no magic answer, but absolutely supportive of the initiatives and all that you're proposing.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:34:30]:

Well, thank you. That's great. It actually evokes a lot of the principles that are now being embedded into the strategies of some of the vertical funds that we work with. We have Jason here from the JEF Secretariat somewhere, but this whole idea of whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach is very at the core and center of the JEF9 planning and strategy. As you have seen here in the forum, we've tried to really civil society. We brought CSOs, NGOs. We are working across ministries many times. And so, that brings me to the next Paul on our panel. Paul Mitchell, back over to you. So, if we scale back to the local level, right, we talked about it in the previous session, but going back to the idea of working locally, with communities on local— locally led industrial adaptation. How do we make that transformative? So how do we bring all these players together in one place, and what would that look in practice? How do we connect communities, MSMEs, and civil society in, in a scenario where they're actually driving the transformation transformation together. So think of them as co-architects that can help shape the resilient value chains.

Over to you.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [1:36:01]:

Just a small question then. So apologies for being on stage again twice in a row. That's, that's a bit rude, I think.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:36:07]:

That's, that's on us. Sorry.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [1:36:09]:

That's fine. And here's also where, again, I feel, uh, sad that I said yes to the spot, because this is— it's a really difficult question. Um, uh, so a few perhaps scattered thoughts. So, for locally-led adaptation, we have a set of principles now that have been developed by a wide range of actors and institution types at all levels across a number of years and were launched in 2021, the 8 Principles for Locally Led Adaptation. And I think they provide us with a really useful set of guidelines and guardrails models for how we might think about taking adaptation forward in a different way. For those who aren't familiar with them, happy to talk your ear off in the coffee break, assuming we get one, about what they are. But they're around devolving decision-making, around focusing on equity, around thinking about finance and structures in flexible and predictable ways, about different ways of collaborating and partnerships. And when you bring them all together, they actually show us a really strong pathway forward. And I think, you know, I need to say, to caveat this by saying that not everything needs to be locally led, right? Absolutely not. But everything needs to be locally engaged and locally involved. I think that's really, really critical. What we've seen, though, to date, in terms of the uptake take and the implementation of projects and ideas coming out of these principles, building on years, of course, of community-based adaptation, community-based disaster risk reduction, and other forms of engagement over time, is that it has really stuck in that same kind of donor-recipient model to some degree, right? We see bilateral donors particularly, but also some of the multilateral climate funds working through intermediaries who work with local partners, local organizations to develop locally led projects. But they're often small-scale, reasonably short duration, stuck in that perennial pilot phase, and are still kind of beholden to the largesse of the financiers, right? Even if we're trying to mix that model up, there's still some equity issues there, particularly around power decision-making. The other element we're seeing with LLA— I'm going to start using LLA instead of locally-led adaptation because it will save us about 12 minutes. The other thing we see with LLA is coming at it from a different perspective, and this is largely through multilateral development banks who have national government as their locus of operation, so working to, for example, integrate climate risk and adaptation from an LLA perspective into large-scale national decentralization programs. So again, these are, these are interesting approaches. They're, they're coming at it from a different level and a different scale, utilizing national systems, but it's still kind of variations of a theme that we've seen many times before. And then we're also seeing, I guess, a third category that mixes these two things up a little bit here and there. In both cases, though, resource flows are constrained, they're small, they tend to be short-scale, and they're not getting us to where we need to be. I think that then that couples with something else that's happening anyway, so people and communities, businesses of all sizes, they're not waiting on us to get our act together and to come up with perfect mechanisms that flow resources effectively. They're doing this stuff anyway.

way, right?

So, you know, I mean, Paul Watkins showed some slides there around flows of finance. What those slides don't capture, and what it's really hard to capture, is household-level investments. We know that people are spending their own hard-earned resources to undertake adaptation because they have no choice but to do so. One of the tricks there, though— and sorry, businesses are also doing this, right? They're investing in their own resilience, but it's very disconnected and it's very piecemeal. And I know in the last session that I said, you know, to some degree we need to kind of let 1,000 adaptation flowers bloom, but there are some risks inherent in that. And one of them is when we think about the constraints around flows of information and access to data and understanding of risk is that some of these autonomous adaptation adaptation actions that are being implemented by people, by communities, and by businesses will result in maladaptation in the longer term, because often we don't know what we don't know. And so finding ways to bridge those gaps is really important. And I think this is probably a classic market failure, and it's a place that there's a clear role for government and for intergovernmental organizations to step in and fill these gaps, to think about systemically rolling out climate literacy and education at all levels, and then tailoring that into accessible, available, and utilizable climate information that works across different scales and is targeted at different actors. One of the speakers in the last session from the floor was talking about AI. I mean, we're kind of in this world now where we can either have AI make, you know, funny videos, or we can actually put it to use to do some large data crunching and provide us with actionable actionable insights that are hopefully not, you know, hallucinated. So, I think the key thing here is that communities, businesses, people are adapting already, but we need to give them better tools and better systems through which to do so. Maybe just kind of a last point around what does good look like then? Like, where do we go?


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:41:48]:

Yeah, I was going to ask as a follow-up, right? So, do you have a viable example example, to maybe a model that you have seen throughout your practice that you could point us to where we could take those locally led ideas, adaptation priorities that are defined by locally led communities, social— CSOs, sorry, civil society organizations. I mean, we were talking last evening with— I'm looking at our representatives from the CSO sector and trying to understand how do you viably engage from that level with the large private sector, you know, representatives and make sure that as you do that, you're not being misused, so to say, as a community, right? You're not sort of lending your flag to them just in this corporate social responsibility way, but you're actually jointly working together. So has there been sort of an indication from your end that would point us in the direction where UNIDO could work with local communities, with the civil society, to connect them to the government in the sense that we would then look to really embed the locally-led needs and priorities into the industrial policymaking, right? So our idea here is to really collect insight on how can we embed into the industrial policy actions viable actions on adaptation, right? And what would that look like in your opinion?


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [1:43:28]:

Opinions are tricky, right? And I think there are lots and lots of really good examples, and the tricky thing is finding a way to bring all of it together so that we've got a coherent pool of ideas that we can draw on.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:43:41]:

Right.


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [1:43:41]:

One of the pitfalls, I think, that we tend to fall into around locally led adaptation is that we don't want to systematize it because it inherently is bespoke, right? Everything is contextual. But I think we probably— I was chatting with someone earlier at lunch about this idea of kind of Perfect being the enemy of the good. We're in a situation now where we have no choice but to rapidly move forward as quickly as we can and just get stuff happening. Being too purist about it, about systems and processes and ensuring that we're moving carefully, is likely to result in less progress than perhaps if we become a little bit more pragmatic and try and meet each other halfway. And so I think there are emerging examples. We have some great examples of the kind of pure approach to locally-led adaptation, but it's very difficult to scale without kind of very strong and effective and altruistic intermediation. And there's roles there, I think, for an organization like UNIDO to play, to be an honest broker between different stakeholders, because you don't have skin in the game in the same way, right, as you may have from other actors. So, I think that's critically important. And then I think we also have some more emerging practice at the other end. And I need to learn a new lexicon because I keep talking about pure LLA and dirty LLA, but I feel like dirty is the wrong word for it, but pragmatic LLA, right? And so, working through national systems, working with large corporations or philanthropies, to find ways to drag them across to doing things that are more locally led and kind of make it seem like it's their idea can, I think, help us to really unlock some of that financing at scale. I think, as Paul was saying, one of the things that we need to think about is that messy middle. We all have the acronym PPP, right, the public-private partnerships, and they have quite a checkered history. Some have worked incredibly well and others haven't. And I think my key thing probably is that we need to add another P, at the risk of making it kind of a horrible acronym, but we want to see private-public participatory partnerships with communities as the real locus of this, right? So every person who runs a business is also a member of a community. Every government official is part of a community, and so in finding ways that we can connect all 3 of them together, get those policy settings and that enabling environment right, push the incentives so that private sector sees a reason to invest beyond a profit motive, I think is really important. Lower the bar as far as we can, initially at least, and then think about kind of a ratcheting mechanism. So the Paris Agreement has a ratcheting mechanism for mitigation. We don't have one for adaptation, but perhaps we should. We make it easy to start, kind of hook you on some like low-cost finance that doesn't have a lot of barriers associated with it. And if you do something quite good with that, maybe there's some more that can come, but it comes with a few more conditions around participation, around engagement, around co-creation. And we keep kind of raising the bar over time, and before you know it, we end up with industrial chains and investors that are accidentally doing LLA, and that gets us to where we need to go, even if we're not starting from that pure perspective.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:47:07]:

Interesting. Yeah, we've seen that happen in the biodiversity world, by the way. So, under the Global Biodiversity Framework and the related fund that is now part of the Jeff Trust Fund family, we do have an aspirational target on ensuring that, I think, around 35% of the financing goes towards local actors, right? So, I think that's something that could be brought into the adaptation world as an example. Okay, great. So, maybe then, since we're missing the country aspect here, but I think the beauty of today has been that we have really ideated together as countries. I'll go next. I'll local first, and then I'll come back to the messy middle, if that's okay, Leonora. So, I'm going to turn to our head of the UNIDO Agro-Innovations and Bioeconomy Unit, Yvonne. And Yvonne, you work a lot at the local level with the agro-value chains, with the manufacturers, with processors of agricultural products, right?


UNIDO · Head, Agro-Innovation and Bioeconomy Unit · Yvonne Loko [1:48:16]:

Yes.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:48:17]:

But looking forward and writing the next chapter of your work at UNIDO in that space, if UNIDO were serious about transformational adaptation, so from your perspective, what would that mean in terms of really redesigning the climate vulnerable value chain end to end, right? So we're looking at from production post-harvest, reducing food loss to access to markets? How would you see that?


UNIDO · Head, Agro-Innovation and Bioeconomy Unit · Yvonne Loko [1:48:49]:

Okay, thank you very much, and good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I haven't been very active so far, but I hope that I can spend some more time this afternoon. Certainly, as you did start off, adaptation is essential to build resilience and of ecosystems as well as people. And this, as you said, is particularly important in the agriculture and the food systems sector, which a lot of the key upstream actors are the ones who are most vulnerable to the impact of climate change. And so for any value chain, the exposure to the downstream impact obviously can disrupt the entire upstream value chain. And we are seeing, of course, that this sector is important for, for most multilateral donors as well as bilateral donors. So I'll first go into a bit in terms of the structural transformation to bring that argument to the end-to-end. So traditionally what we do in terms terms of agribusiness development is actually to target this structural transformation. And these are— but ideally, these require sort of large-scale investments for this to work, also high-impact solutions, and they would usually materialize over time. But over time, In the past, we've sort of had these fragmented approaches or interventions, and this is something that we're looking to change. In the recent years, when we talk in agro about structural transformation or the interventions we have along the value chain, typically what we would do would be bringing in technical assistance that addresses the needs from all through the value chain. So building capacities at institutional level, supporting the private sector access to finance, innovative approaches to access to finance, and then also policy level, which Paul was talking a bit about this. So because we need to have an enabling environment to ensure that this sort of transformation occurs. So now coming to the point on redesigning the value chain to capture adaptation, certainly, and I've heard this, we've heard it over and over, co-creation is important. So designing the adaptation approach with all the key actors, and certainly with the local community, but we shouldn't forget the researchers and the scientists are sitting in the labs with a lot of knowledge, and someone was talking about how to pilot this for entrepreneurs and private sector to take this up. And also very important to bring financial institutions in, so at both the local level and perhaps even large scale. Then another important aspect we should remember is that end-to-end value chain resilience building needs coordination across sectors. It is not just about, let's say, the agricultural sector, but there is water which is important, there is energy which is important— water, energy for production, for processing, as well as household use when you talk about the vulnerable communities. And there should also be that coordination, not just across the sectors, but also across regions. So if we take, for instance, a typical example, the livestock sector, the livestock sector could have maybe 3 main value chains. You're talking dairy value chain, you're talking milk, you're talking meat, then you have leather and wool. And this is a sector that's also extremely vulnerable. So if you take, for instance, the cattle belt in East Africa, it's made up of extremely vulnerable people. So what can we do in situations like this to build resilience whilst at the same time ensuring this— I mean, resilience across the value chain and ensuring competitiveness of the industries? Maybe an example I could talk about, which an approach we have been using in the agribusiness space in terms of bringing about structural transformation, is the approach of, let's say, the integrated agro-industrial parks. We sing this hymn a lot, but it moves away from what would be your traditional industrial park in that we are talking about bringing in the industrial hub in a closer proximity to your production area, and for that matter, could be maybe these more vulnerable areas. But then there is a need, obviously, for industry that the right infrastructure is there. So with the access, the financing coming in to have the key infrastructure in the industry, and then this person and hubs are not just sitting there in isolation, but are linked now to the communities that most need to be supported to build their resilience. And then we do this through what we call agricultural transformation centers. So these serve as hubs where the farmers or the rural communities could bring in commodities and also providing services. So you could hook onto this to be able to bring in this technology solutions to build resilience at the upstream level. And then this comes in through to the industries because at the end of the day, the firms that are in the farm, as we were saying, how could we make the value chain more resilient if there is a disruption in the supply of raw materials that does affect what you're going to have on the market. If the quality of products that are coming to the supply to the firms is low because, let's say, they did not— there wasn't adequate storage, it affects food safety issues. So we address— we can bring in these normal approaches within the climate resilience approach. If I was giving the example again of the leather or the livestock, In the more vulnerable semi-arid lands, what we could be looking at is a model whereby you have these aggregation centers or aggregation hubs that could be along the belt, where the pastorals, the more vulnerable people, can from time to time as they move across have access to services. This could be veterinary services. They could be also feed emergency services. Again, bringing in technologies for early warning systems that could say, so there is a drought, but you could get your feed for your animal at this point, because when there is drought and areas are dry, of course, they cannot pasture their animals. At the same time, they could also serve, or these centers could also serve as collection centers where you could aggregate and collect milk. You could also have your state-of-the-art abattoirs where you could, you know, slaughter the animals. And then these now easily, or within a short time, get to the factories in these hubs. Then so you're adding value to this the value chains and also the actors, all the actors. Again, in terms of the technical assistance that UNIDO will bring, it's also not just building the capacity of, let's say, the firms, but then also capacity at government level, at institutional level to provide the services, and very importantly, government policy that will create that enabling environment for this change and resilience to occur. I'll stop here. And then maybe if you have more follow-up questions or so, then we can—


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [1:57:40]:

Yeah, definitely. I think there is a lot of follow-up questions and you may have listened in to the discussion yesterday, but there was also a lot of discussion about, you know, how do you you start work on the basis of intelligence, like climate intelligence, right? And I think that's key also to be integrating that aspect into the supply chain work we do in the agricultural sector, right? Early warning systems have been done across countries by agencies like UNDP and FAO, and we definitely want to, as Paul Watkins was saying, we don't want to be sort of crowding that space, but we want to learn how we can complement that space, right? And how can we take the data that is being collected by WMO? And Daniel Kahl was in the room yesterday. I don't know if he's still around, but— and then really transform it into actionable climate intelligence that can help sectors, various value chains within in the agrospace to make viable investment decisions, right? And so, and that can bring you to the need for food storage. We used— we do that as Unido, but we brand it as food safety, right? We look at it from the point of view of food quality, food safety, reducing post-harvest loss. But now we should link cooling solutions to the potential potential to actually create more sort of robust and resilient value chains in the agro space. So, I think this integration you talked about is very much key. And of course, all of that does not happen without innovation. So, I'm turning to Eleonora here, who is the— you've experienced her already yesterday as a moderator. She's heading the Climate Technology and Innovation Unit at UNIDO. And so, Eleonora, coming to innovation, if UNIDO were to build an innovation-to-scale pathway, what essential components would that require? What would really move us from pilots? And we've done a lot of pilots on innovation. We have done that in the mitigation space. We are now doing doing it with PARS in the adaptation space. But as we also heard from previous panelists, these are still fragmented pilots, right? So, how do we actually bring them together and create broader bankable programs? Over to you.


UNIDO · Head, Climate Technology and Innovation Unit · Eleonora Gatti [2:00:16]:

Yes, thank you so much, Anja. And I think— hello, everyone. A lot has been said. It's one of the last panels of the forum. So, allow me to pick up also some of the insights that were shared in these days. So first of all, UNIDO— and I'm relatively new to UNIDO, so I'm also coming with a fresh perspective— so UNIDO brings a distinctive advantage to the adaptation challenge, and in particular, it's our ability to bridge tech innovation as well as all the other types of innovation and inclusive industrial development and investment. And that's why we have named the 3 themes of this forum innovation, inclusion, and investment. Secondly, at UNIDO, we accelerate climate-resilient industrial transformation through these 3 levers of impact. So from the innovation perspective, we work on the emerging deployment and scale of solutions. From the inclusion perspective, we apply the principle of the LLA principles that we have heard today in 2 ways. So we are on one side sourcing innovations that have been locally developed and they are nationally owned. And the second way, when there is a tech transfer, we ensure the tech transfer is fair and is equitable and brings prosperity to the local community using the LLA principles. And then thirdly, from the investment perspective, we translate adaptation priorities into investable action by strengthening the finance chain from public financing to private financing. And in all of these If we had to probably summarize it in one simple term, UNIDO is aiming to be the system orchestrator to bring all the pieces of the puzzle and of the innovations together to really ensure that we are turning resilience into an opportunity for prosperity, but also bringing justice. To the fore. So, in terms of looking specifically at one example, we have heard yesterday during the high-level opening that UNIDO is about to start the implementation of the Program for Climate Adaptation and Resilience, PARC, at the global level as well as in 6 countries together with Evolve unit. And the reason why this program is so innovative and is also the largest funded by JEF so far is because it's bringing together the pillars that are needed to create a transformational change for innovation. So first of all, it's looking at the enabling policy environment. And really bringing the needs and the asks of the innovators on the ground to the policymaker. And that is the added value that institutions like UNIDO can bring to the fore. Every time I travel, and in the past 15 years of work with several UN agencies, the one constant request from innovators on the ground is to be better connected with the policymakers because they all struggle with that connection for that when it comes to scaling their solutions. So that is the first piece of the puzzle, really bringing that connection so that the policy environment is the most conducive possible. And it really comes from a point of human-centered design as well that is specifically relevant for the global adaptation agenda. And in fact, it was mentioned also several times in the outcome documents from COP30. Then secondly, the second pillar of PARS, which is also the second pillar of the puzzle to navigate, you know, the messy middle, as you're calling it, Anja, is to support the deployment of innovative solutions on the ground. Through several iterations of the cycle. What I have witnessed in the, in the past 15 years of work in this space is that a lot of the innovators are constantly iterating the cycle of innovation from ideation to deployment to refinement throughout the lifecycle of their solutions. So, you know, order to ensure that successful deployment and then scale, they need to be supported at each phase of the cycle with a very tailored approach. And therefore, it's important not to bundle together all the innovators that might be tackling the same problem, but it's important to allow them to receive the very tailored technical assistance for the phase where they are at, because the needs will be very different. There will be support on strengthening their business model at times, and there will be support on understanding the regulations when it comes to transfer of their solutions to another country. So the tailored support for their cycle is very important. And then thirdly, is also one of the pillars of PARS. It's about moving the innovators and their, and their solutions from, uh, to the next level of financing. So that's why, uh, with the PARS program, we're aiming to create a successful cohort of solutions that can be— they can graduate from the grant funding that will be receiving from the program to concessional loans and other types of funding that will be co-developed in partnerships with national banks, so that their solution again can be enabled to scale further. And then lastly, it's about working on a strong coordination and knowledge management between Because a lot of the innovators, their only pathway to scale is potentially regional or, you know, beyond their, their national boundaries. So they will need to be helped in terms of ensuring that their business model not only withstands the national circumstances but can also withstand the competitive environment outside the national boundaries. And to achieve that, UNIDO, as a system orchestrator, will bring together cohort of countries to facilitate the exchange and to make the conducive policy and financial environment as conducive as possible at the national level as well as the, as the regional level. So to sum it up, these 4 pillars of conducive and enabling policy environment, supporting the development and deployment with targeted support for every stage of the cycle, the graduation of the innovators through the financial cycle from grant to concessional loans, as well as the fostering of the coordination and knowledge so that their solution can be deployed across boundary. It's a really important puzzle to support the— as much as possible, the innovation to scale and to be connected to the industries, the national industries, to achieve inclusive and equitable industrial development.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [2:08:21]:

Okay.

Well, thank you for that comprehensive response. So, we have about 5 minutes to go before the end of the session. And actually, we're catching up on time, and I know coffee is coming, so I don't want to go over time. And so let me just ask the audience to start with a round of applause for the excellent panel and the insightful interventions. And then you are not off the hook, audience. So I think we have a Slido slide coming up. And I would like to spend the last few minutes to actually, you know, feel free to take the floor, but also if you just want to provide any comments, final insights on this, on this sort of theme of where does UNIDO write its storybook next and how do we actually— what is the table of contents, you know, so to say, for our service models going forward. We will be happy to also collect your ideas through this tool. But I'm looking to the audience to see if we have any hands up to follow up on any of the points that have been raised. I know there's also academia in the room. We've spoken— Cambridge University is here, and you were just telling me during the break. Sorry to put you on the spot, but to connect to Eleonora's discussion on innovation, how you also managed to do it within your environment, maybe you could share a bit with the participants here of how that works in the UK and how we could take lessons learned out of there and into developing countries, because I think that one point that Eleonora evoked this constant iteration and need to try and, you know, try again and then see what works, what doesn't, what are the lessons, what are the failures. Ultimately, a lot of the times we look at failure as something negative, but actually failure is a part, a big part of success, right? We cannot succeed if we don't stumble. So any insights from your perspective? Sorry, I didn't prepare you for that question, but—


 [2:10:44]:

That's okay.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [2:10:44]:

I just felt like maybe we can—


 [2:10:46]:

So we're a part of the University of Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership, and a lot of our work is with— is on international policy as well as European policy, and we work with major industries in transition. And the work we do with startups generally is helping to connect those into to those industries to give them the solutions that they need, from bio-based materials all the way through to climate mitigation or adaptation solutions. The thing that really strikes me, because a lot of our corporate partners are international, working internationally, and they often do want to procure local solutions in their local value chains, but at the level of principles, some of the problems are the same. So we talked a lot about water resilience earlier, and the brilliant example in South Africa was really quite striking. But actually, even in Cambridge in the UK, we've got extreme water stress, and it's the most unequal city in the country, believe it or not. So we have got these kind of wider issues around development, but water is too cheap. And so you're in a water-stressed area, but there's no business case to save water, not really. But some of the solutions are the same around recycling water, to what nature does. It requires some new technology, but not breakthrough technology. It needs probably new financial models and new innovation models, and the thing we were talking about in the break was actually there's a lot of proprietary innovation which helps, but doesn't scale as much as we might need, and I think there is a much greater need for multi-stakeholder, pre-competitive innovation platforms And that is where, when we have a common set of assumptions, a common set of data, and we can be looking at pilots through a range of different lenses and proving them in more than one context, where we can all agree that those are then meeting technical success factors, financial success factors, and making them more readily emulatable or scalable in other contexts. Context. I use the example of living labs, where you digitise a system, whether it's a farm or a property, so that everyone can agree the performance from a pilot and whether it succeeded or not, including investors, including users of the system or solution. I think it's really worthwhile thinking about how we can pair those systems, and I think there are learnings that the level of principles which are extrapolatable and applicable in different contexts. So it's not only about technical transfer or expertise transfer, but also learning loops that create bigger learning loops.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [2:13:28]:

Thank you. Thanks for that. Any reactions to that from the panelists or the audience? Any thoughts, ideas you may wish to—


Speaker 94 [2:13:38]:

no?


IIED · Principal Researcher · Paul Mitchell [2:13:41]:

Maybe just quickly, I think it's a really good example, right, particularly of Cambridge. You know, it's a bastion of knowledge and, you know, one of the kind of cradles of industrialization that is facing exactly the same kind of problem that we kind of, from a white Western perspective, think happens over there. And so I think finding ways to bridge these gaps of knowledge and experience experience is really important. More and more, as, as the climate crisis becomes less discriminant and there's only so much money that can be spent in very wealthy places to put up walls and barriers and, and, and kind of protect, uh, wealthy, uh, citizens from, from impacts, and that ultimately the— these kind of fancy places in the world are going to to learn from the, the kind of local, uh, necessary responses that have been happening for, for decades in other places. And so it's really nice to have that, that kind of, uh, I think dialectic already occurring, and, and intentionally so.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [2:14:46]:

Yeah, yeah, definitely. And we heard that also from one of our panelists yesterday. The Austrian participant had similar issues she was describing here locally, but But yeah, I think this whole idea of learning, gathering knowledge, and I think that's also the beauty of some of the programmatic approaches going forward, meaning structuring UNIDO's programming not just in singular projects, but really working with partners like the JEF to come up with programs that are regional or global in their intervention logic that actually allow us to then collect, as you were saying, Eleonora, lessons from different countries and bring them to the global level and share across. We do have another question here on Slido. I've been trying to read it. I'm not entirely sure I'm getting the key point in the question. So how does work interlink between local companies to add value and exchange services instead of focusing on a single type of companies? Yvonne, would you like to take that? Maybe you seem to—


UNIDO · Head, Agro-Innovation and Bioeconomy Unit · Yvonne Loko [2:16:00]:

Yeah, so typically UNIDO doesn't work by individual companies, right? So if we have a program that is going into a particular country on a value chain, we work with associations most of the time. So we, with the sector ministry or ministries, and then the private sector associations— occasionally we would have some interventions that may have, um, as a partner, as a key partner, let's say a multinational company. But the work on the ground usually will work through the associations. And so So more than several or most of the private sectors would be able to be part of the program, and then whatever intervention we're doing or capacities we are building would be across.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [2:16:55]:

Great, thanks. I think just coming to react also and give an example where we do work with a single company. For instance, we work a lot in the coffee sector with Illy Caffè, right? But what we call that— Paul, you called it the 4 Ps. We have a PPDP approach. So we don't have the 4 Ps, we have the D, but actually the 4th P should also be part of it. So we call it private-public-private development partnerships, right? So in context where we are cooperating with the private sector like Illy Caffè. We want to make sure that that's done. UNIDO comes in as a neutral broker, of course, as Paul Watkins said, and we do bring in then the Italian cooperation and the grant financing from the country that is providing private sector engagement to actually balance it out, right? So it's not just all profit-oriented and profit-driven, and the participatory approach is there, but it hasn't been really highlighted. So, I think that's a really great idea on how to update our model on that. I will just take one last question from Slido, and I'm happy to then ensure that discussion happens around the other questions that are popping up all of a sudden. So, one question was, what other sectors are we planning to take adaptation into. We've talked a lot about agriculture solutions and water, but we do have— Yvonne, one of our first adaptation projects was in the leather tannery industry, and that did link to water. But maybe if you want to speak to that a bit, and then I think For the rest of the questions, we'd be happy to address them during the coffee break. So what other sectors would we look at to bring adaptation solutions to?


UNIDO · Head, Agro-Innovation and Bioeconomy Unit · Yvonne Loko [2:19:02]:

I wish Alois was still in the room. Sorry, I said I wish Alois was still in the room because, yeah, I think you measured— you mentioned the leather, but I would also argue that the leather is actually coming from—


Speaker 100 [2:19:16]:

It's agro—


UNIDO · Head, Agro-Innovation and Bioeconomy Unit · Yvonne Loko [2:19:19]:

I mean, the whole thing is the adaptation on the most vulnerable sectors are the sectors that are based on natural resources. So it must be really old, or I don't know. I'm really struggling to think of which other industrial sectors are not agricultural or water-related. I'm really struggling. someone could.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [2:19:41]:

Eleonora?


UNIDO · Head, Climate Technology and Innovation Unit · Eleonora Gatti [2:19:43]:

I think probably, I mean, in parts we also have the pillar of energy as it relates to the key industrial sectors. But I think the way probably to look at this question is, for all the programming that we do in adaptation, we always start with the priorities of our member states, right? So in the national adaptation plans, or if the National Adaptation Plan is not yet available, in other key strategies at the national level, there will be sectors that have been identified as the most at risk, but also the most strategic for economic growth. So I think the beauty of UNIDO is that we could act, you know, in any sector when it comes to climate adaptation, as long as it is a priority for for the country. So if one of you has got a sector in mind in your country and would like to get technical support from UNIDO, please do come and talk to us because we don't have that strict sectorial approach, but I would say that we are respecting the priorities of the country when it comes to climate adaptation as well as all the other work. that, that we do. But just to— I mean, we're also looking— just to give you examples, I mean, we're looking more and more at cooling. And I saw that there was a question also on, on passive cooling. I think it's— I mean, the approach that we're looking at is always to have a balance between, you know, more advanced and breakthrough solutions that can be deployed in a fair way. Because, for example, in cooling, I mean, recently we had also conversation, you know, with one of the largest industrial associations in India, and they were telling us that a lot of the technology that they're using in cooling is being imported, right? So there is a real issue of, of, of prosperity for, for the, for those entrepreneurs that are working in India in the, in the cooling sector. So this is where solutions that that are more local and more, quote unquote, frugal could bring that prosperity, such as passive cooling, so that it's looking at more holistically at the cooling space, for example. And I think, as Anya, as you mentioned, we're also looking more and more at nature-centric solutions. We learned today from UNFCCC rather than nature-based solutions.


Speaker 104 [2:22:11]:

Yes.


UNIDO · Head, Climate Technology and Innovation Unit · Eleonora Gatti [2:22:12]:

So nature-centric solutions that are key again for the main industrial sectors of our UNIDO member states. And I think those will again change quite dramatically depending on what are the key industrial sectors. So, so that would be how I invite the audience to think this question.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [2:22:36]:

Yeah, thanks. Yeah, thanks. And just maybe to complement on question which talks about industrial parks. We also talked about it in Pathway 1, right? So we do work already with eco-industrial parks on bringing in nature-centric solutions into that space. We have examples across the globe in countries like Peru on integrating nature-based, nature-centric solutions and nature-centric infrastructure. So, say, into already existing infrastructure. So I think in general, industrial infrastructure resilience building will be key also going forward. And of course, that has to be linked to the issue of how do we create incentives for those larger industries to actually build in resilience into their investment. And that brings us back to the whole issue of climate intelligence, right? If we can capture data and use it in a way that we would actually create actionable intelligence for sectors that are investing into their businesses, right, into the future of their businesses, and looking at business continuity plans, resilience building should become a part of that. But I think, you know, there it's also about revenue streams and how far that is a viable business model for such industries. And a lot of that may be then covered in the next and last panel of today. So, I will leave it to them. But I just wanted to highlight some key takeaways from this very rich discussion. So, we We started with Paul Watkins concluding that we do need a more coordinated approach, right? So, we've talked about it throughout the days. We need to work in a more coordinated manner locally, at the level of the governments, but also within the development space. Right now, we are all facing resource constraints, and so we need to learn to complement each other better. As you, Paul, mentioned, I think we need to be not only locally led, but locally involved. So, the whole participatory angle comes in there, and that needs to be key in going forward for UNIDO in our programming. Integration is key, right? Integration across sectors, as you mentioned, Yvonne. So, we need to look at the nexus issue and where do we connect water, food, energy, resilience building, and then UNIDO can really act in that space as an honest broker, trying to create platforms, trying to create global spaces where a lot of this can be ideated and created jointly with the private sector entities so that we are actually not giving in to the interests of one or the other. So I think I think with that we have a very great book to write, and next time we meet in 2 years, hopefully we'll have many more new stories to tell. Thank you all, and you are now released to your well-deserved coffee, but I'll hand it over to the MC. Thank you.


Moderator · Hilda [2:25:57]:

Thank you, thank you so much. So, failure, the messy middle, and Dirty LLA. This is what I'm talking about. This is— we are making some progress. So the realities on the ground indeed are very complex. It's not easy. So it's clear that we are getting down to the details, exactly where we need to be during day 2, second last session, getting our hands dirty. So thank you so much. for the panelists for articulating this complexity and giving us some ideas, and at some point, some more questions. It's also increasingly clear that there is not necessarily a blueprint, and there are blueprints still to be created. So, this is where we can be brave and creative in trying to instill some of this dirty LLA. So before I let you go, another reminder of the exhibition. So who has been up to the 7th floor? All right, I see some hands. This is good. So I invite the rest of you. I know some of you have traveled very far. Please do go up to the 7th floor where there is an exhibition on locally led adaptation in action.


Speaker 108 [2:27:21]:

Thank you.


Moderator · Hilda [2:27:22]:

I will now release you for the coffee break, and we will be back here at 4:40?


Speaker 110 [2:27:29]:

4:40, yes?


Moderator · Hilda [2:27:31]:

For the last session.


Speaker 112 [2:27:32]:

Yes. Okay, great.


Moderator · Hilda [2:27:34]:

Thank you.


Speaker 114 [2:37:50]:

Recording in progress.


Moderator · Hilda [2:37:54]:

Yes.


Speaker 116 [2:38:00]:

Where are we?

If I speak, we're online, right?

Yes.

Yeah.

Where are we?

Just press pause because we were late, so we informed him that we—

Yes, I also informed him as well. I was very worried.

It's too late, of course. He is based in Korea.

Yeah, I will probably do some after, and then so we also have some slideshow after, and after the session, and on here, and here, yes, there are slides here.

Exactly.

So just so you know, like I told you, click on the house from the side.

It's for the last speaker, for the third one. So the first 2 don't need anything.

For the third one, when I will go to YOLO, that's his.

Okay, so maybe you should move them now.

I mean, now when it's introduced, yes, I always have to go down.

Yes.

Will somebody say change the slide?

I heard the camera.

Will somebody announce to change the slides?

What's that?

Will somebody announce whether to change the slides or no?

Yes, he will see it.

He will see it for sure.

I'm pretty sure he will actually go into slide number 1, uh, number 2, more in pink.

Exactly.

Exactly.

No, he will.

He will say.

But at least I don't have to do any exercise.

Well, maybe now they're expecting it.

No, no, no.

Okay, give me some stretches.

Paul raised the bar.

I mean, actually, I'm wondering if you were saying it must be because I wasn't here tonight.

I was thinking like, okay, this is responsible.

Yes.

Yeah, maybe there is something tomorrow.

Victor is doing a daily thing.

I don't know because, you know, I think it's all that sort of excessive.

So, but like something tomorrow, so I mean, I can do it tomorrow if you come.

When?

I'll let you know.

I'll let you know.

By 6, I should have the stuff. Okay, I'll let you— I mean, you can write to me.

You can write to me.

Yeah.


Moderator · Hilda [2:45:41]:

Hello and welcome back. Can I please ask everyone to conclude their discussions and take a seat as we kick off the last session of the Forum?


Speaker 118 [2:46:02]:

Okay.


Moderator · Hilda [2:46:04]:

So before I welcome my speakers to the stage. I just wanted to firstly thank you, thank UNIDO for putting this forum on, the inaugural Climate Adaptation and Industrial Resilience Forum. Thank you all to the participants for your active participation, for pushing back, for challenging us, for being brave, for questioning ways of thinking. It's been super fruitful and super insightful. Before I welcome the speakers, I also want to personally thank UNIDO and the participants, as I will be running to catch my flight, but I leave you in the very safe hands of my UNIDO colleagues. It's been such a pleasure to hear from you, to chat with you during the lunch breaks, to take the lift with some of you. I've learned a lot, and I truly hope that we can stay in touch. If you're ever in Switzerland, please drop me a line. So with that, if we could just give UNIDO and the organizing team one more round of applause. Thank you, UNIDO, for putting this together, helping us reach navigate quite tricky topics. With that, we move on to our last session. Our speakers in this session are hopefully going to bring us home and really put a mark on the 2-day forum, make sense of all of this, and of course, we need to end on finance. The next session, Financing Pathways for Industrial Resilience. Again, similar to the last session, super tangible. How do we make this actionable on the ground? What are some, you know, potent examples that are adoptable at scale? So, it is my pleasure to welcome to the stage, firstly, our moderator, Ms. Olga Gordiev. I hope I pronounced that right, External Relations Officer, Division of Funding Partner Relations, Directorate of Global Partnerships and External Relations at UNIDO. And my speakers, Mr. Jason Spenceley, once again to the stage, Senior Climate Specialist at the GEF, Mr. Andrew Hollander, Climate Change Analyst, Programming and Innovation Unit at the Adaptation Fund, the AF. Joining us online, I hope you can hear us, Mr. Euan Low, Climate Lead, East and Southern Africa, for the Green Climate Fund, GCF. Please join me in giving the last speakers of the


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [2:49:13]:

Thank you so much, Hilda.

No, thank you so much, and welcome everyone to what is not only our final session, but I would argue the most consequential one of the forum, hopefully. And I hope we don't have to do any exercises because you just get your coffee. Coffee break. So I actually hope you will be very active because it's the last chance for you to speak, to ask questions, and actually finish it with some next steps, right? So, dear friends, dear colleagues, Excellencies, our partners, this afternoon is the moment of truth, right? So today in the morning, we asked very hard questions. Are adaptation frameworks actually transforming industrial systems or merely climate-proofing them, right? And we also talked about the changes that are happening on the ground, whether they are at the pace of the science or the communities, and they are following, coping with the demand, right? We also heard yesterday from Paul Watkins, as well as today from some of the speakers about the private sector investments. Why do they invest? There are only 4 reasons for that, that was told, right? To reduce risk, to capture new markets, to comply with regulations, and because finance increasingly rewards resilience. But one of the questions left is whether our current system actually enables this investment at the scale required. For me personally, what I heard across all the speakers during these 2 days, what actually stayed in my head was that our biggest barrier is not a shortage of ideas, it is the translation gap, right? So the space between high-level diplomacy and real investable projects remains far too wide. So today, this topic that we are discussing, this session, the last one, is to move beyond why and focus squarely on how. So we will try to answer some of the questions today on how do we turn rising risks in what Jason called rightly yesterday undeniable opportunities. We will also talk about the capital and whether it's there following the ambitions, because transformation is not defined just by policy declarations, right? It is defined by investment decisions. How do we design project pipelines that are credible for climate funds? We have GEF, we have GCF online, we have Adaptation Fund, and simultaneously legible and investable for private capital. And probably foremost, how do we mobilize this finance without actually compromising equity? Shifting responsibility or allowing markets to capture value at the expense of vulnerable. I think all those points were actually covered during these last 2 days. So, it's some sort of a repetition, but it's actually— there is a beauty in that because it gives our 3 speakers an opportunity to leave the powerful messages that we can work on as an organization. Thank you. With that, I think I took Thank you. My first question would be to actually Jason, and before going into that, I was thinking, let me introduce properly Jason, right? He is our senior climate specialist with the Global Environmental Facility, in which capacity he manages a portfolio of over $600 million in climate adaptation resilience investment in over 50 developing and emerging economies, right? At the Jav, he also manages programs to— that's what you wrote— catalyze innovation and private sector investment in climate adaptation. With that, my question to you. Adaptation is clearly becoming a business with a real commercial case. However, we also today heard the remarks from the LDC chair that, the LDC, that's not a business. Mitigation, yes, but not the adaptation. However, my question is from the Jeff perspective, where is the true commercial upside in making industrial systems climate resilient? Crucially, obviously, here is how do we ensure this opportunity does not bypass the most vulnerable? That scarce public finance is used where markets won't go, and what the private sector does not capture, and that the private sector does not capture all the upside while leaving the risk on public shoulders. It's a huge question.


Speaker 121 [2:54:04]:

Good.

Yes, right.


GEF · Senior Climate Specialist · Jason Spenceley [2:54:08]:

Okay, thank you.


Speaker 123 [2:54:10]:

Good.


GEF · Senior Climate Specialist · Jason Spenceley [2:54:10]:

Last session of these action-packed 2 days. This has been, for me personally, as a reflection, incredibly enriching 2 days. So we're grateful that the Multilateral Climate Fund session comes at the end. Sometimes they put us up together at the beginning. So thank you for being at the end. They're very merciful. And it's really always a pleasure when Jeff and the Adaptation Fund and the Green Climate Fund can speak together on a panel, because we have— we're in this together. One mantra that I want to start with: we need to be more accessible. We're in the middle of a climate crisis that's increasing. The adaptation finance gap is increasing, and collectively we need to be more accessible and we need to be faster. We also need to be more coherent and complementary together, so it's good that you bring us up on stages together, and it's a key focus area of our work. The LDs— that's just first to state the obvious. The Least Developed Countries Group chair is very right. Adaptation and resilience, especially in LDCs, and I would say in all countries, is fundamental. It's fundamental for people's livelihoods, for people's life, and for national economies. The Least Developed Countries Fund under the GEF, 100% of the funds are grants. To be very clear, 100% by mandate, this is a fund that is purely grant. That's the mandate, and it continues that way, and it will continue that way. There is a— that's fundamental. At the same time, as countries— when we're thinking about the opportunity for finance, there's a risk factor for climate adaptation. Every country, every household, every company is dealing with the material financial— the material risk to the sustainability of their company, of their country. There's the risk factors. There's also the potential for scaling investment, the potential, yes, business opportunity, especially as we said yesterday, especially if you're in the the field of providing adaptation goods and services to others. It's— these are tragically— it's a growth industry. Big but. The reality is that investment is being made where there's ability to pay. So, for example, if you're— the upscale of cooling is taking places with populations that can pay for the cooling services or for the irrigation services. And we have an opportunity also to blend public finance to catalyze private investment, to de-risk and catalyze private investment, especially for the most vulnerable, for least developed countries, and Small Island Developing States in adaptation and resilience. This is a major— this is an increasing focus of multilateral climate finance to meet this $1.3 trillion ambition and to address the growing adaptation finance gap. And increased options and models for doing so. blended finance instruments, microfinance, financial inclusion, insurance products, fields that are supported across the Green Climate Fund and the GEF and the Adaptation Fund. We'll also be talking about our complementarity in this space. One of the key areas that we see as GEF is piloting and supporting new models for investing in adaptation goods and services that can be scaled up from others. The Challenge Programme for Adaptation Innovation, a number of projects that are here represented that have been presenting are supported through this model, often in partnership with UNIDO, to create new models for investing in adaptation and resilience that can be scaled up, including by Green Climate Fund and by Adaptation Fund, an area where we're increasingly— most importantly, by the private sector. So this increased private capital, the big opportunity, is flowing to the most vulnerable. I'm going to pause there. Thank you for having the 3 of us up together on stage.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [2:59:21]:

But can I follow up with one more question that came out from what you just mentioned? First of all, thank you for bringing it back to us on this collective accessibility of the vertical funds and also coherence and complementarity. We will be touching upon this a little bit later in our discussion today, but you mentioned that business is there where there is ability to pay. Coming up from there, I'm just wondering, would you have some tips for the SMEs? What really do they need in order to access any of the opportunities, like for example, GEF is offering through its implementing agencies?


GEF · Senior Climate Specialist · Jason Spenceley [3:00:02]:

Well, I think when we— in the exchanges over the last couple of days, when we hear from enterprises, they'll often say, I welcome the technical assistance, I welcome the training, I welcome strengthening my business model. What I really need is capital. What I really need is some investment to grow. And what I don't want— what I often hear is, what I don't want to do is to have that capital at too high of an interest rate, at unfair and unjust terms that's going to drive me into debt. So what I want is help to get capital at fair, just rates, fair, just terms. We also We hear this from micro-enterprises a lot, and so one powerful strategy that we find is to use precious public resources to make capital more accessible for smallholder farmers, for micro-enterprises, to empower them to transition to climate-resilient solutions without going into debt— interest rate buydowns, preferential terms, below-market terms— also from a sustainability perspective, so that they are in control of their own investments for resilience.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:01:33]:

Thank you.

Thank you so much for that, Jason. We talked about the SMEs. The point is well taken. And if we will bring it back to the industries, right? So what makes industrial systems an underexploited adaptation frontier from your perspective? What makes industrial systems more underexploited?


GEF · Senior Climate Specialist · Jason Spenceley [3:02:03]:

Industrial systems have strong motivations to be resilient, and industrial systems, um, by nature can be innovative, can provide capital, and their incentives are clear. Their incentives are their own resilience to climate impacts, so the risk factor, and the ability to, um, to, to grow, to provide new goods services to others, um, and for investors to invest in them. And so if we can catalyze the innovation and the capital of industrial systems and focus it on adaptation and resilience, and focus it on adaptation and resilience, then, then, then, then we can be moving towards addressing this massive financing, this massive financing gap. Things like— it gets into the nitty-gritty— investment taxonomies that really articulate, and then policies— the gentleman from Zambia— policies behind those investment taxonomies, so we're rewarding investment of the private sector, not for the private sector, of the private sector, for locally led adaptation, for resilient activities. Then we're starting to transform industrial systems that benefit people.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:03:26]:

Thank you so much. Thank you so much for that. So that was some important points that you just mentioned. Andrew, we're coming back to you, right? We're coming to you. So just to bring that Andrew is a climate change analyst for the Programming and Innovation Unit at the Adaptation Fund, and his primary focus is actually on strengthening the Fund's portfolio of locally-led adaptation, LLA— that's what we are using now, all here in the room, LLA— and innovation projects programs. Andrew, my question to you is as follows: what does it take to de-risk private sector investment locally? We're going into the community level. How can, for example, GCF readiness work together with Adaptation Fund to make those pipelines investable?


AF · Climate Change Analyst · Andrew Hollander [3:04:19]:

Thank you, Olga, and good afternoon, everyone. Let me maybe just briefly start by introducing the Adaptation Fund for those who might not be familiar with us. So we're a bit smaller than the GEF or the GCF, but we occupy a specific niche and role in the adaptation finance landscape. So we were set up to finance concrete climate adaptation projects in developing countries. We exclusively operate with grants, which is something our country partners really appreciate, and we have a strong track record of direct access and working with local actors. Might not support otherwise. And what we hope we can do with that is, through our successful projects, we can show to others, whether that's the private sector, that these models and approaches can work. And then those projects that might be less successful, we can hopefully generate some useful learning experiences for the community. Let me take the example of of the Adaptation Fund Climate Innovation Accelerator Program, what we call AFCIA. So this is a small grants aggregator program that we operate through a number of our partners, including UNIDO. We can distribute grants of up to $250,000 to local organizations who are demonstrating innovative solutions at a local level. There's a streamlined application application process, and it allows for non-accredited entities to our fund access our finance. So to date, we have provided almost 70 different grants, and this can stimulate the local economies, create these positive ripple effects. To use one example, the UNDP-implemented AFSEA program, which just concluded in its first phase. Of the organizations that they supported, 59% of those are now generating revenue, and a number of others have been able to secure additional finance. So what we're trying to do here is move away from grant dependence towards more sustainable business models. And coming back to the last point that you mentioned on GCF readiness. So this is a sizable and very well-financed capacity building program. As climate funds, we have— so the Adaptation Fund has capacity building modalities, the GEF has capacity building modalities, I think the Climate Adaptation Innovation Learning Project, and I'm sure other modalities as well, but none of us work in a vacuum. So when we're building capacities within countries to access finance, that can benefit all of the funds. And for GCF readiness, we can find it particularly valuable if— and what they often do is they are trying to support and strengthen institutions within countries, whether that's the designated authorities, so all adaptation projects are country-driven and endorsed by the respective designated authority. GCF Readiness also can create or work on supporting a more conducive policy environment through helping finance the development of national adaptation plans, and that creates a stronger foundation for all of us to implement adaptation projects in those countries. So clearly, there is room for for us to build and complement each other.

I'll stop there.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:08:36]:

Thank you so much. There was a lot of interesting points you actually mentioned, but let me pick on some of them as follow-up questions, right? You talked about UNIDO working in partnership with the Adaptation Fund, so I actually wanted to pick up on your thoughts around what do you wish implementing partners like UNIDO did differently to bring you more credible, bankable innovation proposals using this sustainable model that you also just mentioned? Thank you.


AF · Climate Change Analyst · Andrew Hollander [3:09:07]:

So, I mean, I'll talk in general across our entire pipeline, but when we receive proposals, there are always certain areas that maybe need some extra consideration. Firstly, at the Adaptation Fund, when we receive proposals, we want to see that a project is demonstrating strong adaptation rationale, and that is essentially the adaptation context of a project, what sets it apart from a typical development project. Similarly, we don't want to receive proposals that are mitigation projects with adaptation co-benefits. We want adaptation to be the core of the intervention. Secondly, we want to receive proposals that are catered to the specific funding window that they are applying to. So we have locally led adaptation funding windows. If you're trying to implement a local adaptation project with us, we want to see how you're going to operationalize the 8 principles of local led adaptation? How are you going to devolve access and finance to the lowest appropriate level? Similarly, with our innovation funding windows, I mean, as the name suggests, we want to see how is that a particularly innovative project. And the third point that I'll mention is we want project proponents to comprehensively consider sustainability of impact. Yesterday in the morning, UNIDO announced 2 adaptation fund-supported programs that will be implemented by UNIDO, and what's particularly good about these is they're really focusing on trying to ensure interventions are scalable and sustainable. So one program focused on Kenya and Uganda supports women and youth-led adaptation businesses. It does that through grants and also tailored business support on the one side, and then on the other side, also working with banks and financial institutions to see how they can consider better investing in adaptation. So what's particularly good about this program is that it will support vulnerable groups to develop adaptation solutions that are innovative and sustainable beyond just the project lifetime.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:11:30]:

Thank you so much, and thank you actually for unpacking in such a digestible way what are you looking into when you see those adaptation projects reaching the Secretariat. That actually was, from my perspective, was a very digestible way from where I sit and looking and working with the Adaptation Fund. Probably one more additional provocative question from my side to you, Andrew, back. In the world of TIDES funding, and we discussed it during the Jeffrey Plan, it is discussed in general, taking into consideration the world today, where would you say, just one statement, Andrew, adaptation funds create the biggest catalytic effect in your opinion? Union, compared to the 3 other funds, if you may?


AF · Climate Change Analyst · Andrew Hollander [3:12:26]:

Am I able to expand beyond just a statement?


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:12:30]:

Yes.


AF · Climate Change Analyst · Andrew Hollander [3:12:31]:

I want to maybe flesh this out a little bit. So, over the last couple of days, we have been talking a lot about the adaptation finance gap, the increasing needs. I think the figure that's been used a lot is to developing countries by 2035 are going to need more than $300 billion per year. So at the Adaptation Fund, when we're talking amongst colleagues, we're often thinking about how can we maximize impact for each dollar provided. And one way that the Adaptation Fund can be particularly catalytic is when its projects are used as blueprints for being scaled up. So at least to date, at least 30 Adaptation Fund projects or programs have been scaled up on some level. That can be either through another multilateral climate fund, such as the Green Climate Fund, taken on and financed by another partner. IFAD has done a few of those. We can also, as the Adaptation Fund, scale up our own projects. We have a variety of different funding windows ranging from a few hundred thousand all the way up to $30 million. So there are opportunities to scale between our funding windows. And I'll give one recent example in the innovation space. So we provided $215,000 to support a UNEP CTCN project in Burundi, and this involved the use of a simple portable barrier made out of rubber that has the dual effect of protecting communities from floods, acting as a dam, while also storing water for droughts to help farmers cope with extreme weather. And now we're looking at how we can scale up that successful pilot project with $5 million to implement that across multiple sites in Burundi. So to sum up, in answer to your question, by laying the foundation for scaling, the Adaptation Fund can amplify its impact.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:14:51]:

Thank you so much, and thank you for the concrete examples. I think it's always nice to bring the words into the context to actually show what is being already done and what is planned. Euan, to you, you are online. I see you just like— all right, you are back online with us. Let me first introduce you, and we will start that Dr. Lowe is the Green Climate Fund's climate lead for East and Southern Africa. He has taken a leading role in aligning strategic economic commercial and financial interests to bring transformational infrastructure projects into implementation, which include urban planning, transport, power, water, industrial facilities. Those who were with us during the first session, you recall we were talking about the transformational infrastructure in our first session today. His current focus is on how climate financing can be mainstreamed to de-risk transformational transactions for a just and equitable transition. So I have a question for you, Johan. You argue, and I like that argument a lot, you know, that the real opportunity is not single projects, but transforming entire industrial value chains, right? So what makes a value chain mature for commercial investment, and how can GCF and concessional finance unlock that at scale?


GCF · Climate Lead · Euan Low [3:16:28]:

Thank you very much, Olga, and good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you very much for the opportunity to join this forum today, and a huge thank you to Jason and Andrew also for earlier remarks and helping to frame the conversation so well. Can I ask, could you go to a second slide, which I'll use in my response? I'd like to start by framing the whole adaptation conversation. The Neanderthals did not adapt. They went extinct. Businesses that do not adapt go bankrupt, they go bust. Adaptation is for winners, and everybody in the room is focused on adaptation. You're all part of the winners. And I think that's really important. We cannot afford to sit still. As governments, as economies, as business, as financiers, adaptation is the only way. And it's mainstream. That's the key point I want to bring here, is this a mainstream mindset. Climate is only one more risk in evolution, in building a resilient business. But it is a significant risk. And the challenge we have to do is work together to build a narrative to help the governments, the stakeholders, the businesses, the communities recognize we need to make this shift. The work that the Adaptation Fund is doing, I think, is essential. Central because they're showing the opportunity of new solutions that can create new social and economic value. And what we need to be doing is working on a virtuous value cycle where, if I refer to the diagram that is on the slide, starting in the left hand in green is thinking about how do create climate-resilient socioeconomic value chains that give a just transition to resilient livelihoods. Across most of the developing world, we have young populations of excellent internationally quality graduates hungry for new jobs in new economies. They don't want to be going back into the farming, back into traditional manufacturing. They want to be part of new economies. And also people coming out of school with good qualifications looking to be again part of new economies. And over the last couple of days, we've heard a lot of these type of economies being discussed. Green economies in terms of food value There is a huge arbitrage opportunity in food value chains across Africa. Typically, 30-40% of food gets wasted. But there's upside as well on that. If you can bring food through a value chain, process or store, so that you can sell not at the bottom of a market when everybody else around you is selling the same products, but process them or store them so that you can sell when the market's at the top of the market, there's a huge upside. There's a huge arbitrage opportunity in that space. The circular economies in terms of how we manage our waste materials has a lot of space for opportunity and opportunity for arbitrage. Our healthcare system, we have so many lost productive days in emerging countries that have a direct impact on the economic productivity of the country. I can go on and on through these different types of economies, but the point is we need to create these value chains not just of one piece of the economy, but of a value chain in a landscape. If we can do that, we can start to create opportunity to capture value, whether that's through sales, fees, taxes, savings, or carbon revenues as we look at Article 6. When you can show there's a revenue, you can attract finance. And what is really important to this conversation is how we attract the $300 billion per year that Olga was referring to, plus, plus. It's a lot more that really is needed in this space. And the role for the climate funds especially is to be at the bottom of that capital stack you see on the bottom right-hand corner. I emphasize And using the Adaptation Fund, the GCF, other funds to be catalytic in de-risking how we change the perception of those mainstream financiers to put the capital in to actually then drive those economic activities. In the center of this, as Andrew very nicely articulated is the opportunity to use the capacity building. The GCF has a very significant budget of around $4 million per year— sorry, $4 million per country over a 4-year period that can help in that capacity building. That is intended for supporting not just GCF but the the adaptation fund, orientated projects in countries to put in place institutional arrangements that make this transition much faster and much more possible. But monies are limited. We do need to concentrate on landscapes and value chains in those landscapes so that we're beginning to prove the model, build confidence accelerate, and so that we can then see the capital that's been raised from this to be recycled for reinvestment. So I pause there and thank you for the opportunity.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:23:44]:

Thank you so much for all those points raised. I think that's quite important. But let me pick up on one you mentioned. You were talking about arbitrage opportunity, and you were actually mentioning the food value chains, right? My question would be, any other tips, most obvious, that the country are still— countries are still not tapping into when we talk about arbitrary opportunities in industrial systems? Anything else that comes to mind, apart from all those others you mentioned as well, that might be more also applicable to UNIDO?


GCF · Climate Lead · Euan Low [3:24:19]:

Yes.

Another one that's— so I would say the food value chain is applicable to UNIDO too, because a key part of creating value is to be having small, medium-sized enterprises, larger enterprises involved in whether it's logistics or food processing, food storage, food drying. There's a lot of technology and technology transfer in the food value chain. And it brings value right the way back to the hardest to reach, most climate vulnerable, because they're having that more stable income even in times of difficulty. So a really important space that we really need to work hard on. But another really low-hanging opportunity to me is the circular economy in waste management that we have many countries that are importing their raw materials, and that's an outflow from their economy. And yet they have very significant waste management challenges, a very significant population scavenging, collecting waste from these waste flows. And to put in place, we material recycling facilities that create formal employment for these scavengers and then give an opportunity to recycle these materials back into the circular economy is absolutely low-hanging fruit. We typically spend around $30 to move waste to a landfill site. Managing a proper landfill site Typically costs at least $30 to $50, although in many countries we don't even have real landfill sites. So that's maybe $60 per ton. Yet if you capture the plastic from waste, scavenged plastic once aggregated is worth around $150. Would you rather spend $60 per ton to dispose of waste or capture and sell $150 per ton of recovered plastic. If you then process that plastic, it's worth around $1,000 per ton. If you can prove that that plastic has no child labor and is fully recycled, The fast-moving goods companies, the Coca-Colas, Procter Gambles, will pay a premium. They'll pay $1,100 per tonne. That is a huge arbitrage opportunity.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:27:10]:

Thank you for that. The only thought that comes now quickly to my mind that I really hope that our colleagues from UNIDO, from the circular economy unit, is actually with us, and if not, are listening on this online, because that's some important points you just mentioned that we can actually look into. One more follow-up question for you, Euan. When it comes to UNIDO, right, if you had to give UNIDO one honest recommendation to get more projects approved by the board, what would it be?


GCF · Climate Lead · Euan Low [3:27:46]:

And always I'm sure there's a lot of people smiling in the room. I think the key that I really want to share here is we really need to have— UNIDO has got a great network, a great presence, great access to the right kind of technologies. And I think you're in an incredible position to really catalyze bringing the chambers of commerce and the financiers in each of your countries together and curate and manage that conversation on how do we, in a landscape, think about how we build that value chain that has that resiliency and adaptation to be able to target markets. And a big opportunity just now that we really need to be mindful of, because if we don't, we're going to become like the Neanderthals, we're going to become extinct, is those businesses that are selling into Europe in the likes of steel and other hard-to-abate spaces are now going to be affected by the carbon border adjustment mechanism that the EU has brought in. They're going to find it harder to sell into that market, but that's an arbitrage opportunity. So businesses that are in that, that are working in that value chain should be coming together through chambers of commerce, through their financiers, catalyzed with UNIDO to say, how do we work together to capture that adaptation opportunity? It's the classic show me the money and then be very clear how can the adaptation fund, the GCF, and Sif, Geoff, how can we be bringing our resources to be catalytic where we are confident we're going to get to that outcome? If we can do that, it's much easier for us to go back to our contributors and say, hey, this is working, please put much more resource into us because we're being an effective catalyst. for the stakeholders in the room. Thank you.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:30:25]:

Thank you for that. Thank you for the points mentioned, and also thanks again for bringing back the point of the funds being at the bottom of capital stock during this intervention as well. That is well taken. I think that's one of the key takeaways, at least for this session, for me today. That said, I have a round of questions for our 3 speakers, a very short one, just more provocative to each of you. And the one we will start with you, Jason, back to you. The one I have is, if you had to advise an industrial minister tomorrow, what's the single smartest investment they could make to de-risk private capital?


GEF · Senior Climate Specialist · Jason Spenceley [3:31:18]:

We need to reward adaptation and resilience and align policies with investment in adaptation and resilience. I was very inspired from the gentleman from Tanzania about an hour and a half ago. where he spoke about identifying adaptation and resilience investments and building that into policies so that investment in adaptation and resilience are rewarded. These are called investment taxonomies, and building into green investment taxonomies the incentives to reward instead of punish Adaptation and resilience, and by extension, by the way, nature and ecosystem resilience activities. So that— and this is a very strategic use of public resources, grant-based resources, to catalyze industrial systems and align private investment with adaptation and resilience, a key piece. I'd also like to just very quickly pick up on something that Euan said that I thought was very insightful. We need to mainstream our adaptation and resilience within broader systems and within industrial systems. And this forum over the last 2 days has been an excellent example of that, looking at people in the audience. Psychosocial dimensions of adaptation shared by our colleague from Saint And fundamental to mainstreaming health systems for adaptation and resilience standards. I'm looking at a colleague from ISO into adaptation and resilience systems, or WOCU, World Council of Credit Unions, building into credit unions work on adaptation and resilience. This is the sort of ecosystem. industrial systems we need behind really making adaptation and resilience fundamental to health of people and health of national economies, and something that our ministers need to champion. Thank you.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:33:39]:

Thank you for that. I hope we still have the country representatives in the room with us. I hope you heard the advice from the gentleman from the Global Environment Facility on the question. Eun, I will actually go now back to you and then leave my last question to Andrew. You mentioned the $300 billion, right? So we assume the finance will flow, right? But we all know that the NCEQD is unlikely to hit this target, and adaptation finance is far off. So any ideas what happens when the money does not come? I understand that the funds are, again, back to your point, needs to be seen as at the bottom. But still, any advice on the Plan B for industry? If we still— we don't have this bottom funding as well, right?


GCF · Climate Lead · Euan Low [3:34:37]:

I think first of all, there is no Plan B. If you follow a Plan B, you're going to be like the Neanderthals. You're going to become extinct or a bankrupt business or a defunct economy. But Plan A is the only plan we have. We need to, as Jason just said, we need to embrace adaptation. innovation and resiliency. And it simply makes good business sense. But the challenge, I do think there is a very real challenge for both governments and businesses that there is risk in embracing this change. And yet there is also risk if we follow the status quo. So we really need to look into, for businesses and economies, how— what is the risk profile of business as usual versus making the change? And I'm very confident when we do that and we see the arbitrage opportunities in looking at adaptation, that those who adapt will be winners. The more that we can capture good narratives and show that this transition, a just and equitable transition, is actually working, the more we will move money. Not just the money from the funds, but also domestic money, because a big challenge that we have in many emerging markets is capital flight, that the local economies do not see the opportunity to invest locally. They see safer, more stable returns. If I'm a family wealth company, a family wealth office in Nigeria or Tanzania or somewhere such like that, I've got a big chunk of money that I've got to invest and be confident I'm going to get a return. I'm going to go to the emerged— the developed markets because I'm confident of a stable return. We need to change that perception. We need to build local domestic pension funds, insurance funds, savings facilities, local cooperatives. And the more— as people were talking earlier around locally-led adaptation— the more we have local cooperatives and microfinancing in that financing stack, the more we're making local financing available at affordable rates. That's where the real solution will come from. That's where the big volumes of money will come. But we need to really start really getting down that track of using our collective resources to demonstrate and prove that that can work and use our monies to de-risk those first transactions. Thank you.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:37:54]:

Thank you for that. And let me pick up on that last point, the collective resources, and go to Andrew with the question. If the 3 funds had to design one coherent financing pathway, collective resources for industrial resilience, what would each fund bring to the table? What is the ideal sequence? Jeff, Adaptation Fund, GCF, if it even exists, from inclusive ideas, innovation, investment, scale?


AF · Climate Change Analyst · Andrew Hollander [3:38:28]:

Thank you. And, I mean, let me start by saying I agree also with what some of my colleagues said. As funds, we also need to show our contributors that we are coherent and we build on each other. I mean, as multilateral climate funds, we already do. We have a complementarity and coherence initiative, and so we do work on things like streamlined accreditation processes, results tracking, and as you were mentioning, there are a lot of potential pathways for programmatic sequencing and scaling up. So, there are a lot of different pathways. As Ewan was also saying before, this across the funds is not the whole picture, but if I would just focus on across the funds at the moment. If we're talking about a theoretical pathway, and I'll use the example of adaptation innovation, you might have the Adaptation Fund on the first level providing grants for a specific intervention. We could focus on early-stage piloting, testing, and importantly generating evidence. If that was successful, If successful, the GEF could come in and provide larger funding size, maybe some co-financing. One thing that the GEF are very good at is working with governments to embed interventions into national systems. And then on the third level, the Green Climate Fund, even larger funding size, co-financing, the ability to work with a range of different financial instruments. perhaps even including some cross-cutting mitigation components, but what I've tried to illustrate is you're going from early stage up to what a lot of people would say transformative scale. This was a theoretical example. My colleagues here might have differing opinions on where each fund has their comparative advantage, But the main point is that there are a range of different potential pathways to program across the funds. I mean, in that example, the Adaptation Fund and the GEF could have swapped around. The GCF could have even come first with its readiness program rather than coming in last. But maybe one final thought to try and tie it all together, and this I think was alluded to in the previous session as well. Is UNIDO is in a unique position in that it's one of the few entities that is active with all of the funds. So this could present an opportunity for UNIDO to act as a connector between the funds through forums like this, but also in navigating these pathways and exploring different permutations for bringing interventions to scale.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:41:31]:

I have a lot of paper with me here. No, but thanks a lot for that point. Actually, that was not the question I planned, and I actually want to open the floor for the audience for any questions. And if you can share this QR code for the audience that they can post the questions, that we can take some of them, that would be great. But I was just thinking, you just mentioned one thing that comes to my mind. So, what are the next steps then in sidelines of this forum for UNIDO? What would you see we do next with such kind of events and forums? What was missing in this one that we can bring for the next? for the next one that we will be organizing. Does anyone from you want to take from your experience? I'm not asking Jeroen because he's online. He was not with us for the 2 days, though he participated in some of the sessions. But I think I address this question straightforward to you, Jason and Andrew. You were with us. Any thoughts?


GEF · Senior Climate Specialist · Jason Spenceley [3:42:43]:

I'm really curious.

What people in the audience are going to say. I'm also conscious at the end of time. But so, we're mainstreaming here. We're mainstreaming within industrial systems. We're mainstreaming even broader adaptation and resilience. Maybe this forum can continue to mainstream further. Indigenous peoples and local community representatives would greatly enrich the conversation for very obvious reasons.


Speaker 151 [3:43:11]:

Thank you.


GEF · Senior Climate Specialist · Jason Spenceley [3:43:13]:

What about more private sector? What about in-country financial institutions? We're talking about credit at just, fair terms. What about banks? Do they need to be hearing about their offering to farmers and to micro-enterprises? Multilateral development banks, do they need to be part of this this conversation with UNIDO and partners. We're in building mode, so step by step, but we're running a marathon, and I'm excited about the potential to continue to diversify this conversation.


AF · Climate Change Analyst · Andrew Hollander [3:44:00]:

I mean, I won't spend much time. I mean, firstly, Let me thank UNIDO for putting on this forum. I think we do have a great mix of people in the room, and I really have appreciated the focus going forward. I mean, the ecosystem, if we're talking about scaling as well, it can always be expanded. We need to make sure that we have representatives speaking from the local level and then all the way to bringing in the private sector, the multilateral development banks, and making sure we have that catalytic capital as well. But I just want to really thank UNIDO for putting on this forum.

Thanks.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:44:41]:

Thank you so much. I think you both actually already started responding to one of the first questions that we can see on the screen from the audience: which financing partners, for example, can UNIDO bring, connect with, not just in this forum, but actually when it comes to the programming and pipelining. Maybe you can elaborate on that a little bit as well. Anyone would like to take the floor? Yes, please go ahead, Euan.


GCF · Climate Lead · Euan Low [3:45:10]:

I see 3 questions on the screen and I'm going to just try to weave all 3 together in an answer. in the cement sector.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:45:21]:

Right.


GCF · Climate Lead · Euan Low [3:45:22]:

So we all know the cement sector is one of the hardest to abate and really challenging to really move that sector away from being such a heavy emitter. Part of the problem for the cement sector is in many countries it's effectively a family-owned conglomerate or a state-owned enterprise. Size conglomerate on making, um, uh, on a commodity business making a marginal profit. And so it's very difficult to raise finance if you're a cement company. You largely end up raising corporate debt against your balance sheet or against the family holdings or the conglomerate's holdings, or as a or the enterprise against the government balance sheet. And when you're trying to then say, hey, you need to invest in making green cement, well, first of all, there's not much in the way of green cement that's been developed and proven in the international markets. And secondly, the technologies that do— are available for reducing the carbon footprint are expensive and need to be imported. But there's increments that can be done in small steps. We can move to switching out typically 15% of the coal that goes into a cement kiln can be easily replaced with refuse-derived fuel. That's the waste that is collected from municipalities after you've done all the recycling and sorting and you're left with a residual. That is a calorific equivalent of brown coal and can be brought into a cement kiln up to about 15% replacement. That is a relatively low amount of investment to get, again, both in economic and municipal side for local governments because they're diverting waste away from their landfill, but also it's replacing the amount of coal and it's creating a different value chain. So I'm back onto value chains and I'm looking at arbitrage, but I'm also looking at financing. There's an opportunity in that for the funds to be provided catalytic financing to help prove that solution can work. What can UNIDO do in that space is do the technology transfer and be the curator to bring the key people together in the room and see in that ecosystem the, the value chain and the arbitrage opportunity. There are examples like that in every single industrial sector.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:48:23]:

Thank you for that example. Mindful of time, I'm just wondering whether each of you would still want to answer one of the questions. That's fine, Andrew. It's up to you if you would wish. We will anyway make sure we will respond afterwards to all the questions.


AF · Climate Change Analyst · Andrew Hollander [3:48:37]:

I'll try and just very quickly—

I saw—

I mean, there's a lot of questions coming in. That's great to see. I saw one. I don't think it's there now, but talking about how to allow align with national financing strategies. I mean, as the Adaptation Fund, all our projects are country-driven. We are— we have a range of different funding windows that suit each country's national context and their strategic vision. One thing that I've liked in particular to see over the last few years is— so, certain countries have been like creating these climate finance dedicated units where they can coordinate across ministries, but the point I want to make is that that's really helpful to everyone by having coordination mechanism within a country and then a coherent climate finance strategy that everyone can then get on board with, with countries leading the way and then also providing clarity and coherence for the private sector to come through as well.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:49:40]:

Thanks.

Thank you so much, and thank you for the audience for all those questions. It's actually lovely to see there is such an interest and so many questions popping out. But mindful of time, first things first, let's give a big round of applause to my speakers today. I'm so happy for them to close this forum. I'll try to do my best to sum up But I'll do it from my perspective. I don't want to repeat everything that was discussed and mentioned before. The main points, the main points for me that I was thinking about was there is no Plan B. That was one point I wanted to mention. There is a range of different pathways and 3 funds we have today with us are not the full picture. There is other players. Exactly. There are other players that we need on board, bring on board into our pipeline and our projects, also to bring here to continue the discussion that we actually just started. And there is a lot to discuss and probably to ideate all together how to do it, how to answer this question of ambition and lacking of the funding and finance, how to not forget the justice, how to use the scarce public resources in the best possible way. And probably the final point is the coherence, cooperation, collaboration of the funds we have, also leveraging on that as well. Thank you so much for this session.


Speaker 161 [3:51:08]:

Thank you.


UNIDO · External Relations Officer · Olga Gordiev [3:51:09]:

Thanks.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [3:51:34]:

Okay, so Hilda is not here, and I am not Hilda, and I cannot replace her eloquence, but we will release you in a matter of 5 minutes. It's just to part on you a few words, parting words, as we say goodbyes before the— after such a fruitful discussion, right? So Alois is here. Alois, do you want to sit, stand? I think standing is more energetic at this point. Let's stand up. Grab a microphone.


UNIDO · Alois [3:52:07]:

Okay.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [3:52:07]:

So I'll just go through key takeaways that I have been noting down, and they will not be exhaustive. You've heard that we are moving forward with this idea of transformative adaptation. And as we all heard, it's collective before it's technical, right? So we need communities, we need SMEs, we need industries to move together forward on local solutions, And we need those to shape national strategies. Number 2, the central challenge is moving from strategy to action, right? So, how do we do that? We have to do that again together. Top-down approaches alone are not enough anymore. We need to do transformation, and that requires the middle ground. where governments, local communities, actors, industries come together. We just heard about financing, right? And financing adaptation, as we know, requires new logic. But as we move into financing, and I'm looking at our LDC chair, let's not forget adaptation funding, right? Let's ensure that adaptation remains just and that those in most need do get access to grant financing. And then as we innovate on how to scale that, let's create new revenue streams, as Ewan just told us, to attract financing, to unlock financing from private capital, and to ensure affordability. Innovation must extend beyond technology. And there we talked about in many of the pathways today, how do we innovate? We can innovate in the financial sector, but we also need to innovate by going back to the roots, right? We need indigenous knowledge in some contexts. We need nature-centered solutions, locally driven solutions, and we need to learn to experiment on iterative cycles, right? So let's not be of failing. Let's try to be innovative and experiment and see what new models we can come up with. And finally, climate intelligence. I think that's the big catalyst that hasn't been explored yet and that needs to drive us forward. We need to use that as a catalyst that promotes fairness and leads us to scale. Scale. So, with all of those ideas, and you've been seeing that we have been recording sessions, we've taken notes, we will be putting together a paper, and we will be looking to hear from you to get more inputs. From countries, we look forward to hearing from you on how we can best address your needs. From partners and industry, we look forward to bringing in solutions that you can offer into the work that we hope to do in the next 2 years. And by the time we meet next time, we hope we will be leapfrogging and we will have leapfrogged into a new space that we can then all discuss and learn from. Okay, so with that, over to you, Alois.


UNIDO · Alois [3:55:31]:

Thank you, Anya.

And I have 3 words to share with Thank you, thank you, and thank you.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [3:55:44]:

A round of applause for that.


UNIDO · Alois [3:55:50]:

This has been the greatest learning opportunity for us. When we started talking about climate adaptation 3 or 4 years ago, It was a strange subject, especially the role of industry, the private sector— I mean, the role of industry in adaptation. We were bold. We started a few new projects. We started to think, even design from an industry perspective. How do you justify the role of industry and how do you mainstream climate adaptation and resilience into industrial development? I want to appreciate you for all the time you have spent with us, for the splendid and inspiring ideas you have shared with us. As somebody who works in the innovation space, I'm forever inspired by all the ideas, all the innovations that we are working on— innovations in terms of policies, technologies, relationships, partnerships. This is what informs transformational change. This is what informs systemic change. So thank you once again. In my culture, we have a saying that goes like, if you want to go far, go alone. If you want to go fast, go alone. But if you want to go far, go together. So in this Year of the Horse, let us together ride the Chinese horse on fire so that we can collectively integrate climate adaptation and resilience in all our efforts to promote inclusive and sustainable industrial development. Thank you.


Speaker 169 [3:57:44]:

Thank you.


UNIDO · Alois [3:57:44]:

Thank you. And thank you.


UNIDO · Senior External Relations Officer · Anya Onisko [3:57:58]:

Thank you. You know the building by now. If you haven't done so, please go by the 7th floor to see the exhibition. And if you need any further help, our team is still in the back and outside. So please do let us know if you have any questions or— thank you.