Resource Mobilizationin SNG and SNO

Facts, trends & prospects

Background

Less ODA around the world in general but:

International and regional donors are reorganizing their funding priorities

Donors targeting Near East region to support its political and social stabilization.

New opportunities to strengthen partnerships with potential donors

FAO should take advantage of this new context to expand its resource base

Gaps in funding? Need for Resource Mobilization Strategy

In SNO, USD 13 million mobilized in 2008/09, down to under USD 5 million in last biennium. Why? SNO: Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria

In SNG, USD 5.5 million mobilized in 2008/09, up to just under USD 10 million in last biennium. USD 26 million already mobilized this year thanks mainly to Saudi UTFs. SNG: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates,

Yemen

RM Trends in SNG

SNG: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen

ODA to the sub-region from OECD members averages around USD 100 million with spikes in 2000, 2004, 2008 and the most significant spike in 2009, caused

by several large contributions to Yemen, most of which came from UAE

Delivery by SNG Office(Emergency and Non-Emergency, 2008-2011)

Oman

Saud

i Ara

bia

UAE

Yem

enSN

G

Oman

Saud

i Ara

bia

UAE

Yem

enSN

G

Oman

Saud

i Ara

bia

UAE

Yem

enSN

G

Oman

Saud

i Ara

bia

UAE

Yem

enSN

G

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

10,805,410 11,549,065 12,736,516 11,653,983

Emer-gency Assis-tance

2008 2009 2010 2011

Delivery

(U

SD

000)

Out-of-scale Out-of-scaleOut-of-scale Out-of-scale

SNG’s TOP 10 Resource PartnersSpending in FAO-related Sectors

(Source: ADAM (OECD) 2006-2010)

1. United Arab Emirates

2. World Bank

3. EU

4. Germany

5. Netherlands

6. USA

7. Arab Fund for Economical and Social Development

8. IFAD

9. UK

10. Japan

FAO (Source: FPMIS, 2006-2012)

1. Saudi Arabia (UTF)

2. United Arab Emirates*

3. TCP

4. UNOCHA

5. Multi-donor (i.e. IFAD, OPEC Fund, Islamic Development Bank, etc.)

6. Sweden

7. Japan

8. Australia

9. Oman (UTF)

10. European Union

Most Funded Agriculture Subsectors IN SNG From 2006-2010

RM TRENDS IN SNO

SNO: Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria

ODA from OECD members in SNO averages around USD 1 billion with a spike of USD 2 billion in 2002, this is substantially higher than in SNG.

Delivery by SNO Office(Emergency and Non-Emergency, 2008-2011)

Egyp

tIra

nIra

q

Jord

an

Leba

nonSy

ria SNO

Egyp

tIra

nIra

q

Jord

an

Leba

nonSy

ria SNO

Egyp

tIra

nIra

q

Jord

an

Leba

nonSy

ria SNO

Egyp

tIra

nIra

q

Jord

an

Leba

nonSy

ria SNO

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

16,000,000

Emer-gency Assis-tanceTechnical Coopera-tion

2008 2009 2010 2011

Delivery

(U

SD

000)

SNO’s TOP 10 Resource PartnersSpending in FAO-Related Sectors (from

ADAM (OECD) 2006 - 2010)

1. USA

2. EU institutions

3. Germany

4. IBRD

5. Italy

6. Japan

7. Islamic Development Bank

8. France

9. GEF

10. Australia

FAO (from FPMIS: 2006 - 2012)

1. CHF - The Common Fund for Humanitarian Action in Sudan

2. Multi-donor (EU (97%))

3. UN Development Group Office (DGO) Service & Support UNDG/EXECCOM Secretariat

4. USA

5. European Union

6. Canada

7. Italy

8. UNOCHA

9. Spain

10. African Development Bank

Most Funded Agriculture Subsectors IN SNG From 2006-2010

How can an RM strategy help FAO improve?

Main impact of RM strategy for RNE:

Adequate, more predictable and sustainable voluntary contributions which fully support

achievement of FAO’s objectives at the global, regional, sub-regional and country

levels

Main Outcomes of RM strategy for RNE Proposed outcomes for RM strategy for RNE include:

Consolidation, diversification and expansion of FAO’s resource partnerships in the Region

Strengthened awareness among partners and member countries about FAO’s comparative advantage through effective communication

Ensure that resources are effectively managed for results to report them internally (to governing bodies) and externally (to partners and donors).

Communication Challenges for RNE Internally: Develop better quality advocacy tools (concept notes, project

proposals, brochures, presentations, websites) Improve communications between FAO HQ, Regional, Subregional

and Country offices

Externally, to strengthen communication with potential partners:

Planned attendance in international meetings and technical visits Organize more donor meetings and donor round tables Expand dissemination of information on FAO’s strategic thinking Improve visibility of FAO and gain trust of resource partners by

better promoting FAO success stories and comparative advantage (videos, regional website, stories, press releases, presentations)

Internal RM Challenges and Opportunities

Establish RM taskforce at RNE

Establish RM strategies for short term and long term action based on the CPF and RPF

Gathering information (donor activities) to identify opportunities

Effective use of resources and proper monitoring and reporting on progress

Improve internal capacities through comprehensive training

External RM Challenges and Opportunities

Improve contacts through regularized visits and which are key in the RNE region (Gulf region) -High level visibility

Focus on local, regional, decentralized partners

Broaden partnership through new innovative funding sources (RNE Trust Fund)

RM prospects: A Regional Trust Fund for the Near East A Multi Donor Trust Fund

Effective mechanism to pool resources

Broad range of stakeholders

Focuses on Regional Priorities CPFs, RPFs

Allows the implementation of the needed interventions at a national, sub regional and regional level

Promotes regional coordination creating common responsibilities and shared achievements.

Regional Trust Fund for the Near East: RM Strategy

Voluntary contributions by member countries Other donor agencies Other countries supporting the Region’s needs

Involves: Multi-modal funding options Multilateral or bilateral funding

Advantages of a Regional Trust Fund Demand-driven

Timely response to calls for support by member countries

Coordination and harmonization of interventions

Can address Trans-boundary regional challenges:

Food security (Yemen and Syria) cross border population movement

Animal and food diseases (FMD in Egypt, Libya, Palestine, Kuwait)

Thank you!