gef_goldberg_14apr1994-40a7c8f6ba2bab4c.pdf

This document is a testimony provided by Donald Goldberg of the Center for International Environmental Law on April 14, 1994, to the United States House of Representatives Subcommittee on International Development, Finance, Trade and Monetary Policy. Writing on behalf of a coalition of environmental NGOs, Goldberg outlines six recommendations to ensure the Global Environment Facility (GEF) achieves its mission of helping developing countries address global environmental problems as it moves beyond its pilot phase.

• The coalition recommends approving the requested $400 million for the GEF, provided that Fiscal Year 1993 conditions are reinstated and FY 1995 funds are withheld until the Treasury confirms these conditions are met. These conditions include the public availability of documentary information on GEF and "associated projects" (World Bank projects linked to GEF investments), meaningful consultation with local citizens in recipient countries, contributor country oversight of individual projects via the Council, and the full participation of NGOs in all project cycle phases, including observer status at Council meetings.
• The GEF must improve its efficiency in leveraging funds by establishing strict definitions and criteria for "associated projects" and requiring that all projects by implementing agencies remain consistent with GEF objectives.
• The GEF Secretariat must be independent to avoid being "captured" by the World Bank, which administered 65% of project funding during the pilot phase. An independent Secretariat would review projects from various agencies to ensure they align with GEF policies and the climate and biodiversity conventions.
• The Conference of the Parties for the biodiversity and climate conventions should define the GEF's policies, eligibility criteria, and program priorities. Until these are established, the GEF should avoid new initiatives and instead focus on existing requirements, such as national strategies, capacity building, and funding for developing country experts in the IPCC's Second Assessment.
• The GEF and the United States need a clear strategy for international waters that defines the scope of fresh and marine waters, clarifies the meaning of "global benefits," and identifies links to biodiversity and regional seas agreements.
• Enhanced oversight mechanisms are required, specifically bringing GEF/World Bank projects under the jurisdiction of the Independent Inspection Panel and creating a similar procedure for non-World Bank projects. The testimony also suggests an international administrative procedures act modeled after the U.S. APA and a permanent mechanism for applying lessons learned.

APA

Center for International Environmental Law (n.d.). gef_goldberg_14apr1994-40a7c8f6ba2bab4c.pdf. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/GEF_Goldberg_14Apr1994.pdf

Chicago

Center for International Environmental Law. gef_goldberg_14apr1994-40a7c8f6ba2bab4c.pdf. n.d. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/GEF_Goldberg_14Apr1994.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=gef_goldberg_14apr1994-40a7c8f6ba2bab4c.pdf |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/GEF_Goldberg_14Apr1994.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{centerforinternationalenvironmentallawndgefgoldberg14apr199440a7c8f6ba2bab4cpdf, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{gef\_goldberg\_14apr1994-40a7c8f6ba2bab4c.pdf}}, publisher = {Center for International Environmental Law}, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/GEF_Goldberg_14Apr1994.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }