Review of Guidelines for Enhanced Country Ownership and Country Drivenness

The report reviews the GCF's country ownership framework, finding that while National Designated Authorities (NDAs) are recognized as leaders, they often lack the capacity for inclusive stakeholder coordination and monitoring and evaluation (M&E). It highlights the importance of Country Programmes (CPs) and the role of Direct Access Entities (DAEs), while noting challenges in private sector engagement and long proposal approval timelines. Drawing on best practices from organizations like the Global Fund (GFATM) and the Global Partnership for Education (GPE), the report recommends establishing formal country coordination platforms, accelerating DAE accreditation, and improving accountability through mandatory sharing of Annual Progress Reports (APRs) with NDAs.

• Country Programme (CP) development is a critical process for country ownership, as it allows NDAs to align GCF investments with national climate strategies and guide Accredited Entities (AEs) on proposal development.
• National Designated Authorities (NDAs) generally lack the capacity to maintain inclusive, regular coordination platforms, with most consultation meetings occurring on an ad-hoc basis specifically to respond to funding proposals.
• There is a significant gap in project accountability and oversight, as many Accredited Entities—particularly private sector AEs—do not share Annual Progress Reports (APRs) with NDAs, and most NDAs lack the M&E capacity to monitor portfolios.
• The accreditation process for Direct Access Entities (DAEs) is perceived as too long and complex, which limits the participation of national organizations and increases reliance on International Accredited Entities (IAEs).
• Private sector engagement with NDAs is suboptimal because private sector organizations often have little incentive to engage with national authorities and prefer direct interaction with the GCF.
• The GCF's proposal approval process is described as long and complicated, which can lead to a misalignment between approved projects and the priorities of new governments that may come into power during the delay.
• Structured Dialogues (SDs) are highly valued by stakeholders for improving the understanding of GCF policies, programming priorities, and facilitating networking.
• Best practices from other international organizations, such as GFATM, GPE, and GFF, demonstrate that formal, multi-stakeholder coordination mechanisms with clear Terms of Reference (TOR) and dedicated secretariats effectively enhance country ownership and oversight.

APA

Green Climate Fund (2021). Review of Guidelines for Enhanced Country Ownership and Country Drivenness. https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/document/gcf-b30-inf11-add03.pdf

Chicago

Green Climate Fund. Review of Guidelines for Enhanced Country Ownership and Country Drivenness. 2021. https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/document/gcf-b30-inf11-add03.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Green Climate Fund |title=Review of Guidelines for Enhanced Country Ownership and Country Drivenness |date=13 September 2021 |url=https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/document/gcf-b30-inf11-add03.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{greenclimatefund2021review, author = {{Green Climate Fund}}, title = {{Review of Guidelines for Enhanced Country Ownership and Country Drivenness}}, institution = {Green Climate Fund}, year = {2021}, month = sep, url = {https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/document/gcf-b30-inf11-add03.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }