GLOBAL FRAMEWORK FOR CLIMATE SERVICES
REPORT OF THE FIRST MEETING OF THE AD HOC TASK TEAM FOR
THE GFCS 2015 – 2018 OPERATIONAL AND RESOURCES PLAN
GENEVA, 27 to 28 April 2015
FINAL
8 July 2015
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
INTRODUCTION
The first meeting of the Task Team on the Operational and Resource Plan for the Global
Framework for Climate Services (GFCS) for the period 2015 – 2018, was opened at 09:00 on
Monday, 27 April, at the headquarters of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), 7 bis,
avenue de la Paix, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland. Members of the Task Team were nominated by the
principal members of the Intergovernmental Board on Climate Services (IBCS), WMO technical
commissions, WMO Regional Centers, and GFCS Partners. The Task Team meeting was
attended by a total of 30 participants, including 6 WMO Member States, 6 partner organizations, 4
representatives of WMO Technical Commissions, and 4 representatives of WMO Regional Climate
Centers (Annex 1).
1. OPENING OF THE SESSION
1.1 The Chair of the Intergovernmental Board on Climate Services (IBCS) Mr. Jens Sunde, and
the WMO Deputy Secretary- General (DSG), Mr. Jeremiah Lengoasa, opened the meeting with
statements to the Task Team.
1.2 Mr. Sunde welcomed participants and reminded members that the mandate of the Task
Team came from the Second Session of the IBCS Management Committee in 2014. The objective
of the Task Team on the Operational and Resource Plan is to work with partners to finalize the
GFCS work plan and extra-budgetary resource plan for the period of 2015-2018 for consideration
by the third IBCS Management Committee meeting in October 2015. The Task Team will therefore
be required to undertake a number of tasks in the coming months.
1.3 Mr. Sunde emphasized that finalization of the Operational and Resource Plan is a new
opportunity to further define the work plan and priorities for GFCS, while being realistic about
implementation. Partner involvement is critical for GFCS implementation and the priority areas.
Partners are encouraged to be involved in the development of the plan, as well as the beneficiary
communities.
1.4 The proposal to include the energy sector as a 5th GFCS priority area is under
consideration, and will be decided upon at the 17th Session of the World Meteorological Congress.
If agreed upon in May 2015, this decision will have bearing on the work of the ORP-TT.
1.5 Mr. Lengoasa welcomed the Members, partners, representatives of WMO Technical
Commissions and WMO Regional Climate Centres. He noted the expanding commitment to the
implementation of the Framework obvious from the Task Team participants, representing WMO
members, WMO Technical Commissions, WMO Regional Climate Centres as well as a range of
GFCS partners. He reminded members, that when the WMO Extraordinary Congress approved the
GFCS Implementation Plan (IP) and project compendium in 2012, GFCS entered into an
implementation phase. In its first two years, much of the focus has been on establishing the
governing bodies and structures. The GFCS is now entering the 6 year implementation phase
where tangible results at country level are expected to be achieved. The work delivered by this
multi-faceted Task Team will drive the success of the GFCS implementation. GFCS, in its goals,
aims to enhance support, particularly in 70 vulnerable countries, noting the difficulty of
implementing activities in some countries due to conflict or periods of reconstruction.
1.6 Mr. Lengoasa emphasized that in the next 6 years GFCS should be focused on clear
translation of Pillars and Exemplars of the Implementation Plan (IP) into actionable and fundable
plans, whereby at the end of the 6 year period the GFCS can show significant progress.
1.7 The GFCS flagship projects already taking place, such as those in Malawi and Tanzania,
are demonstrating proof of concept in how partners can come together and jointly support
nationally prioritized activities. Through these projects the GFCS has already learned a certain
number of valuable lessons about governance needs, and the required process to transition
research products into operations. For example, the GFCS has learned that capacity levels are low
2
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
in many places and that it is critical to follow national consultations with plans and support
mechanisms ready to allow activities to be implemented to address priorities and gaps.
1.8 These projects are important test-beds. The GFCS must set up the infrastructure to fully
transition products available in research mode into operations, through the WMO-led CSIS. WMO
is prepared to commit other resources such as the Global Data Producing and Forecasting System
(GDPFS) to enable this transition until the WMO CSIS or other CSIS efforts are ready. The
decadal forecast is one of these products that could be ready for transitioning at full scale to a
decision-making tool in applicable sectors. This would be an immense gain if it can be effectively
transitioned.
1.9 Another important achievement for GFCS has been the strengthening of partnerships and
creation of Joint Offices to allow closer collaboration with partners and user-communities. For
example, the WHO/WMO Joint Office for Climate and Health; the Joint Office with the Global
Water Partnership and the WFP Climate Service Advisor for food security co-located within WMO.
These mechanisms for implementation and the resource needs of these mechanisms should also
be considered during the deliberations of the Task Team.
2.
ORGANIZATION OF THE MEETING
2.1 Adoption of the agenda
Prior to adopting the agenda, two additional agenda items were proposed. First, the
communication needs for presenting and promoting the work plan to partners and donors, under
agenda item 5 - Next Steps. Secondly, to consider the project compendium, and make it available
with the meeting documents for consideration under agenda item 4.
2.2 Working arrangements
The meeting worked from 9:00 to 12:30 and from 14:00 to 17:00. Thirty minute breaks were held in
the mornings and afternoons.
3.
BACKGROUND TO THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OBJECTIVES OF THE TASK TEAM
3.1
Background to the establishment of the Task Team
3.1.1 Mr Filipe Lúcio, Director of the GFCS Office, provided the Task Team members a
background to the establishment of the Task Team on Operational and Resource Plan for the
GFCS for the period 2015 – 2018 to set the context for their work.
3.1.2 Discussion arose around the compendium of projects, with members noting it as a valuable
but underutilized document that remains somewhat separate from the Implementation Plan.
Consideration of the compendium was noted as key to the finalization of the Operational and
Resource Plan. Members agreed a review is warranted as compendium activities may be outdated
since its development in 2012. Clarifications noted that the GFCS Office plans to update the
compendium for the Third Meeting of the Intergovernmental Board on Climate Services in 2018
and that this Task Team could provide recommendations towards this update to ensure
consistency with the Operational and Resource Plan.
3.2
Purpose and Terms of References (ToR) of the Task Team
3.2.1 The meeting discussed the purpose of the Task Team and refined the Terms of Reference
(Annex 1) introducing several amendments seen necessary to effectively address the objectives
for the establishment of the Task Team. The agreed ToRs are as follows:
3.2.2 The current mandate of the ORP-TT (TT-ORP/INF.2) is to prepare and present a finalized
Operational and Resource Plan to the 3rd meeting of the IBCS Management Committee by October
2015. In revisiting the ORP-TT Terms of Reference, members raised a range of longer-term
operational and resource related needs that highlighted the potential relevance and value to
consider an extension of the mandate of this TT beyond its originally envisioned mandate.
3
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
3.2.3 A collective decision was made to amend the ToR to include the following item (g) rather than
appropriate new responsibilities that extend beyond the current time-mandate of the group. This
would allow the Task Team to make recommendations to the IBCS Management Committee on
the long-term role of this Task Team as follows:
 Make recommendations to revise and amend the compendium of GFCS-related
projects and activities at global, regional and national levels.
 Link the Operational and Resource Plan with the Sendai Framework, UNFCCC
Adaptation Agenda, the post-2015 development agenda, and other climate
sensitive policy processes which could benefit from climate services.
 “Provide recommendations on emerging priorities and gaps to inform annual
revisions in the operational work plan as needed.”
 “Provide recommendations on technical capacity needs for the implementation
of the operational and resource plan
 Provide recommendations on the communication and outreach of the
Operational and Resource Plan”
3.3
Work done on the 2015-2018 Operational and Resource Plan of the GFCS for the
period 2015-2018
3.3.1
Mr Filipe Lúcio provided a historical account of work done to develop the GFCS
Implementation Plan, including the inter-linkages of the five annexes and four sectoral exemplars.
He explained that the current compendium of projects summarizes key activities of the nine IP
documents into 40 projects and proposals for a total cost of 140 million CHF over 10 years. Each
project ranges in cost from 100,000 to 40 million CHF.
3.3.2
The draft Operational and Resource Plan for the GFCS for the period 2015 – 2018 (Doc.
7/IBCS-2) identifies 43 priority projects structured in accordance with the five Pillars, and draws
from activities described in the Compendium. Members noted that the mechanisms for
coordination and resources required to coordinate were inadequately reflected in the draft
Operational and Resource Plan considered by IBCS-2. Task Team members also debated on the
most appropriate approach for presenting the work plan (around the priorities areas or pillars).
3.3.3
Reference was made to a decision made at the Second Meeting of the Partners Advisory
Committee (PAC-2) in March 2014 to focus on demonstrating the value of partner’s collaboration in
six countries (Dominica, Bhutan, Papua New Guinea, Burkina Faso, United Republic of Tanzania,
Moldova). In these countries partners would work together to expand the proof of concept of GFCS
implementation. However, these focus countries do not limit GFCS implementation elsewhere.
Coordination at Global, Regional and National Levels: Status and Needs
3.3.4
It was noted that the coordination function of GFCS is highly valuable to show partners the
added value and what the Framework can do for them [the UIP] as a mobilizing platform at global
and regional levels.
3.3.5
Mr Filipe Lúcio summarized how the GFCS Office is addressing activities related to
coordination needs. A first step was taken at the Partners Coordination meeting in October 2014
which collected information on the type and scale of climate services activities occurring in 16
countries. Secondly, the recently formed and expanding PAC has agreed to assume increased
coordination function for GFCS. Thirdly, with World Bank PAC membership, GFCS is working to
link the World Bank information platform to the GFCS project database, which will provide
enhanced information on current climate service investments.
3.3.6
GFCS has the potential to play a coordinating role between recipients and donors of
climate service investments. It was noted that the volume of resources being invested in Disaster
Risk Reduction, Climate Resilience, Climate Risk Management and other agendas that share
common goals with GFCS is high and increasing. However, it should be recognized that only a
small portion would be directly coordinated through GFCS and its existing structures. Existing
GFCS activities generally fall into three tiers – direct GFCS coordination, indirect GFCS
4
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
coordination, and no coordination. There was consensus that the types of activities that should be
prominent in the Operational and Resource Plan are coordination and action plans at country level,
which can help bring coherence to the volume of resources being made by various actors.
Strategic level thinking is required in the Operational and Resource Plan to allow GFCS to guide
and influence the other investment decisions.
GFCS Operational and Management Capacity: Status and Needs
3.3.7
In relation to the 2015-2018 Draft Operational and Resource Plan, Mr. Mizutani’s of WMO
Finance provided a presentation on the existing and proposed budget. Subsequent discussion
highlighted the insufficient management and operational capability of the Secretariat to manage the
estimated volume of funds required for implementation of GFCS activities, the Compendium of
activities and other related efforts.
3.3.8
The Task Team discussed the Administrative and Financial Management capacity of the
GFCS Office. This discussion focused on the needs for reinforced operational capabilities of the
WMO Secretariat including the GFCS Office, if the Operational and Resource Plan is to be
implemented successfully. Mr. Muzutani pointed out to the large scale of the 2016 funding gap and
emphasized the importance for resource mobilization if implementation is to advance as planned.
He noted that the proposed GFCS implementation of projects valued at over 50 million CHF is
ambitious and will require specific capacity to be built up to implement at this scale. For example,
staff costs to develop detailed project documents of the planned activities are not available today.
WMO Regular budget is limited and, within the current resources, WMO will not have resources to
provide staff and services required to develop and supervise GFCS related projects at the scale of
50 million CHF per annum. He emphasized that both extra-budgetary resources and general
purpose contributions would be required to develop the infrastructure to develop and supervise the
projects.
3.3.9
Additionally, at present the GFCS is heavily dependent on the WMO infrastructure to
implement GFCS activities. A concern was raised that to-date the GFCS has been notably drawing
upon WMO Secretariat capacity for project management, and potentially deviating human
resources from WMO core programming. Since 2013, the WMO DRA department has taken on the
burden of managing two important projects (NOR2 and CAD) so that the activities are coordinated
under the GFCS.
3.3.10 Mr. Lúcio clarified that GFCS related resources should be registered under the GFCS
budget. Resources would subsequently be redistributed to the appropriate WMO programs who
would implement specific activities for which they would provide the appropriate accounting and
reporting. This would allow a better capture of resources being channelled to support the GFCS.
3.3.11 This situation points to the need for dedicated GFCS resources for project management
and coordination, and warrants exploration of other potential coordination and management
support mechanisms.
3.3.12 Mr. Mizutani raised the additional point that most funds in the GFCS Trust Fund are
earmarked for specific activities, and have subsequently restricted GFCS Office growth and other
foundational capacity development.
Resource Needs and Mobilization: Status and Needs
3.3.13 Resource requirements exist for both in-kind contributions (including human resource
secondments), as well as general purpose voluntary contributions that are more flexible and can
address gaps. Although there have been some general resources contributed by Members, most
interest has emerged around the priority areas. There is a need to also invest in pillars.
Additionally, the impact of reduced extra budgetary contributions on the GFCS Office’s capacity
and activities were mentioned.
3.3.14 Human resource requirements for successful GFCS implementation were considered in
relation to the draft Operational and Resource Plan. Priority needs recognized include a dedicated
5
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
budget officer to support accounting needs in the event that resources increase, adequate
administrative support for travel and operations, and project officers to support project
development and implementation. A suggestion made was for GFCS to consider the UNDP project
development model, whereby funds from the project are used to cover a project development
phase, planning, monitoring and evaluation, which require intensive documentation.
3.3.15 Mr. Lúcio highlighted that a minimum of 2.5 million USD is required to maintain the GFCS
Office and step up resource mobilization. He referred to the fact the HLT originally estimated the
GFCS would need resources in the order of 250 million USD per year to be effective.
3.3.16 In light of the GFCS requirements and funding gaps, modalities for resource mobilization
became a key point of discussion. The role of the PAC members and other donor agencies were
recognized as critical to advocating and raising necessary resources for the implementation of
GFCS activities. To achieve partner support in resource mobilization efforts, Members noted it
would be important for GFCS to articulate the added value and benefits of GFCS for the major
donors and partners. Examples of ongoing efforts by the GFCS Office were provided, such as
discussing a Memorandum of Understanding with the World Bank to leverage increased
investment for National Meteorological and Hydrological Services and resilience building actions.
3.3.17 Members pointed out that a large proportion of bilateral and multilateral funds are
allocated directly to countries and regions. Therefore, the regional and national scale GFCS
infrastructure would also need to help to access regional funding opportunities.
Considerations for Informing the ORP Development
3.3.18 The Task Team´s work to finalize the Operational and Resource Plan must make the
appropriate provisions to enable the operational management and GFCS activities to be
undertaken. The Task Team suggested a series of steps to be taken in finalizing the Operational
and Resource Plan to: a) fully account for management and coordination costs where required; b)
prioritize Operational and Resource Plan included activities through the application of clear criteria;
and c) explore acceptable implementation modalities (burden sharing) across GFCS partners,
including WMO members and entities, and partners.
3.3.19 A few proposed implementation modalities were discussed. At the regional level, entities
exist in some areas that can be built on, and we must accommodate the various structures and
levels of capacity. At the national level, Partners would be encouraged to take on management
responsibilities. In Malawi and Tanzania lessons are being learned on how to develop national
frameworks to reduce redundancies, mostly through coordination happening at global level. This
coordination needs to be happening at national level. The Frameworks for Coordination at National
Level is the vision of how to bring partners and donors together, ideally building on existing
coordination mechanisms rather than creating new and competing entities.
3.3.20 The meeting was informed that to support regional and national level activities the GFCS
Office has established a partnership with the Norwegian Refugee Council that allow the
deployment of experts at regional and national levels to support implementation of GFCS-related
activities. The first deployment – GFCS Regional Coordinator for the Sahel - took place in August
2014 at the FAO office in Dakar, Senegal.
4.
WORK PROGRAMME OF THE TASK TEAM
4.1
Selection of the Chair of the Task Team
The ORP Task Team selected as Chair, Ms. Meredith Muth of the United States National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Agency (NOAA); and as co-chair, Ms. Joy Shumake-Guillemot of
the WHO-WHO Joint office for Climate and Health, to lead the work of the Task Team.
6
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
4.2
Approval of the Structure of the Task Team
4.2.1
The meeting discussed and agreed on the structure the Task Team needed to conduct its
work, including the expertise required for the conduct of the work of the Task Team according to its
mandate and objectives. Mr Filipe Lúcio highlighted some history of the Operational and Resource
Plan document and items for consideration in structuring the Task Team.
4.2.2
Mr. Sunde reminded the Task Team that there are many audiences for this document
beyond the IBCS Management Committee and WMO, and that the Operational and Resource Plan
is an instrument to help convey the vision of GFCS and help partners and countries and
constituent bodies to fit themselves into GFCS – and see better how the GFCS can improve their
own work.
4.2.3
Reference was made that we should refer back to the Implementation Plan, its Annexes
and Exemplars, to recognize, for example, the criteria of GFCS projects to be considered and other
expected outcomes such as the need to deliver on the four User Interface Platform functions of
feedback, dialog, outreach, and evaluation.
4.2.4
Members agreed to revisit the structure of the Task Teams following consensus on the
Operational and Resource Plan Draft Outline.
4.3 Approval of the approach to develop the work plan
4.3.1
The Task Team discussed how the Operational and Resource Plan should be reframed in
order to orient the GFCS toward maximized impacts in the coming 6 years. Members strongly
agreed that the Task Team should be pragmatic in approaching the Operational and Resource
Plan, and keep in mind the ‘last mile’ where climate information is applied by users, particularly
vulnerable contexts where climate services matter most. Therefore the User Interface Platform
should be a central driving force for GFCS implementation, in reaching and responding to user
communities.
4.3.2
To inform the balance of meeting both high level global needs and national level priorities,
it is important that the ultimate actions of this Task Team are translatable at the local level.
4.3.3
Based on discussions, the Task Team agreed that the Operational and Resource Plan
should include a brief ‘Justification and Relevance’ section, in order to improve the accessibility of
the Operational and Resource Plan to a range of readers. This section would include elements
such as:
 Scope and Purpose of Operational and Resource Plan - to emphasize the role of
the Operational and Resource Plan as a guide towards greatest impact of GFCS
investment. It would also make reference to the process for identification of projects
in Implementation Plan, and the existing Annexes and Exemplars.
 Relevance - . to describe what are climate services, why they are needed and what
impact they can have on communities and economies
 Linkage to other efforts – to describe how GFCS can enhance and support the
effective implementation of global and national emerging priorities such as Sendai,
Sustainable Development Goals, UNFCCC, National Adaptation Planning, etc., and
note the rapid expansion of key GFCS related activities to support specific activities
within these agendas (e.g. Multi-hazard Early Warning Systems).
 GFCS value - to describe the added value of GFCS, reference to what would
happen without GFCS, and provide examples of successful GFCS efforts and
lessons learned to inform efforts over the next four years.
 GFCS as an enabler - to describe how GFCS helps support implementation of
others (national met services, partners, etc.) and recognizes the role of many
actors.
 Leveraging - GFCS will seek opportunities to leverage existing and new financing
streams (i.e. Adaptation funds, Green Climate Fund)
7
TT-ORP First Meeting Report

Capacity building - to address the disproportional capacity for providing climate
service at national levels (emphasis on Least Developed Countries)
4.3.4
The Task Team agreed to organize the Operational and Resource Plan in response to the
following issues and needs raised:
 To link all proposed activities to expected and measurable outcomes
 To structure the Operational and Resource Plan in a way that makes GFCS activities
accessible and welcoming to engagement of the priority sectors and actors.
 To elevate the user requirements as a starting point for building end to end service
capabilities, and for establishing the supporting mechanisms to link and facilitate
climate service delivery at National, Regional, and Global Levels.
 To put national priorities first, supported by technical, regional, and global efforts
 To articulate the added value and linkages of the GFCS to climate sensitive policy
agendas
4.3.5
Several partners highlighted the need for multi-sectoral coordination.
4.3.6
Discussion reflected on how to improve GFCSs ability to help position and anchor
climate information within programming in other sectors. Climate information is not seen as a main
driver in these processes. Reference was made to the Exemplars, where some user needs and
required support have already been expressed. In response to this concern, it was agreed to focus
on activities that facilitate the creation of platforms that strengthens the provision and increased
use of climate information within priority areas.
4.3.7
The Task Team brainstormed to identify other high impact activities and roles which
allow the GFCS to add-value to the climate service space. These include the following: build
awareness; identify climate service demands; create policy space within national structures; foster
mechanisms to collectively provide feedback to investors, providers, and the WMO climate service
community; play a harmonizing role for climate service programming and investments. Members
agreed these functions are reflected in the expected role of effective platforms, and therefore the
User Interface Platforms should be further developed and empowered via the Operational and
Resource Plan.
4.3.8
In conclusion, participants strongly agreed that the Operational and Resource Plan
should orient GFCS over the next 6 years to maximize it coordination and value-adding activities
that are unique GFCS, rather than summarize an agglomeration of relevant small projects or
activities that are more appropriate to be led by other entities.
Approach to develop the work plan, including deliverables with milestones
4.3.9
Revised Operational and Resource Plan Outline. The Task Team, following an active
discussion, agreed upon a new Operational and Resource Plan outline that includes seven
sections (Full outline included in Annex 2). Specific deliverables by drafting teams in accordance
with the outline below:
Section 1: Relevance and Justification for GFCS Operational and Resource Plan
Section 2: Expected Outcomes and Guidance to Implementation
Section 3: Investing in the architecture for user engagement and service delivery
(Mechanisms)
Section 4: Applying climate services to decision making in the four priority areas
(Exemplars)
Section 5: Enhancing Core Technical Capabilities for User-Driven Climate Services
(Pillars)
Section 6: Emerging needs/opportunities
Section 7: Resource requirements
8
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
Task Team Approach to finalize the Operational and Resource Plan for consideration by the
Management Committee
4.3.10 The Task Team agreed on the following approach: Five drafting teams were formed to
provide inputs to each section of the Operational and Resource Plan, addressing diverse
components of the GFCS (Annex 3). The Chair and Co-Chair are responsible for consolidating and
sharing the document with the Secretariat and appropriate parties. Drafting teams responsible for
activities related to the Pillars and Exemplars, will likely require additional consultation with their
constituents to agree upon priorities, and will be independently responsible for seeking appropriate
input. If the topic of ‘Energy’ is approved by the 17th Session of the World Meteorological Congress
as a 5th priority sector, the Task Team will also be responsible to take appropriate steps to ensure
new activities and needs are reflected in the Operational and Resource Plan.
4.3.11 The Task Team agreed that the drafting groups will be required to revisit and reprioritize
the compendium of GFCS projects and activities. Guidance was provided to teams that they
should review activities in existing documents, such as the annexes, exemplars, and Compendium;
identify key gaps to achieving the GFCS outcomes and objectives. Propose existing, new, or
consolidated activities and appropriately update the short activity descriptions for each project;
Identify implementation mechanism (existing or proposed); identify ongoing and funded activities
versus potential projects which require resource mobilization; note estimated costs if available.
4.3.12 The Task Team identified specific steps required, and agreed to the following schedule
and responsibilities leading up to the Third Meeting of the IBCS Management Committee in
October 2015.
Deadline
Deliverable
June 30, 2015
Drafting teams complete sections and share with ORP TT-Chairs and GFCS
Office
July 30, 2015
ORP TT- Chairs share consolidated draft document with ORP-TT, M&E TT,
WMO bodies and PAC for input, including request for WMO Resources
Mobilization office and GFCS Office to develop Resource Requirement section.
August 7, 2015
Input received from TT, PAC, WMO bodies
August 14 , 2015
ORP TT- Chairs consolidate and finalize inputs, with further discussion with
WMO Resources and M&E TT, as required
September 18, 2015
ORP Work Plan Draft completed for translation
October 19-23, 2015
ORP Work Plan presented to IBCS Management Committee
5.
Additional Steps and Considerations
5.1 Identification of the steps in the work of the Task Team prior to the 3rd meeting of the
Management Committee
Communication of the Work Plan
5.1.1 The need to communicate the Operational and Resource Plan and GFCS to diverse
audiences was widely acknowledged by the Task Team. The Operational and Resource Plan is an
important instrument for communicating GFCS expected impacts and engagement needs, and
could also be used to provide guidance to donors on what the priorities should be in order to
ensure that gaps in implementation do not result. It should therefore be accessible and
understandable to IBCS members, partners, stakeholders, and donors. Proposed communication
products included:
9
TT-ORP First Meeting Report


1-2 page Executive Summary of the Operational and Resource Plan as a gateway
for policy makers and donors, accompanied with a more detailed but easy to read
full Operational and Resource Plan
Active outreach and sharing of the Operational and Resource Plan through various
means, including through WMO regional infrastructure, to support communication to
existing and potential donors
5.1.2 The Task Team also considered additional mechanisms for enhancing work plan
communication as follows:
 Advocacy by the WMO Communications and Public Affairs Office
 Request the IBCS Management Committee members and WMO Permanent
Representatives to represent GFCS
 Increase visibility and accessibility of compendium on GFCS website
 Recruit a dedicated communication and outreach officer under the GFCS Office
5.1.3 The Task Team, under section 3.3 for GFCS Office Support, specifically recommended the
Operational and Resource Plan to detail the required resources to cover the refinement of the
GFCS Communication Plan and staffing costs for a dedicated Communications Officer in the
GFCS Office, so that the GFCS Office has the capacity to effectively communicate the
achievements and needs of GFCS.
Alignment with plans of other GFCS entities and Task Teams
5.1.4 The Task Team highlighted the need to align the Operational and Resource Plan with the
work plans of other GFCS entities, such as the PAC and the Task Team for Monitoring and
Evaluation. Lessons learned during the few years of implementation of the GFCS should be
considered in the development of the Operational and Resource Plan.
5.1.5 Members noted that some reflection is needed on how to align the Operational and
Resource Plan with the PAC work plan and the 6 country focus it identified. Criteria for selecting
the countries include: Commitment of the country to successful GFCS implementation; where
many partners have the opportunity to work together; existing capacity gaps; broad categorical
representation of needs in LDCs, SIDS, Landlocked, Arid, Mountainous regions, etc.
5.1.6 In ensuring connectivity with the Monitoring and Evaluation Task Team, close coordination
will be required between the two GFCS Task Teams. The resource requirements for GFCS
Monitoring and Evaluation should be fully accounted for in the Operational and Resource Plan; and
the Monitoring and Evaluation of Operational and Resource Plan outcomes should be informed by
the Monitoring and Evaluation Task Team.
5.1.7 Members agreed that lessons learned during the first two years of GFCS implementation
could be valuable to inform the Operational and Resource Plan programming for phase two (20152018) and to advocate for future programming opportunities to address needs. The GFCS Office
noted they are considering developing a paper to capture GFCS and climate service contributions
to Sustainable Development and Adaptation, which may address some of these needs for sharing
lessons.
6. CLOSURE OF THE MEETING
The meeting closed on Tuesday, 28 April 2015 at 16:15. The following day, the Chair presented
the Operational and Resource Plan Task Team outcomes to the Monitoring and Evaluation Task
Team which met 29-30 April 2015.
---------
10
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
Global Framework
(GFCS)
for
Climate
Services
AD-HOC TASK TEAM ON OPERATIONAL AND
RESOURCE PLAN FOR THE GFCS FOR THE
PERIOD 2015 - 2018
FIRST SESSION
GENEVA, 27 – 28 April 2015
TT-ORP/INF.2
Submitted by:
Secretariat
Date:
9.IV.2015
Original Language:
English
Status:
Terms of reference for an ad-hoc working group on budget and
operational and resources plan for the GFCS for the period 2015 – 2018
Introduction
With the view to effectively implement the Global Framework for Climate Services (GFCS), and
Pursuant to Resolution 47 (Cg-XVI) – Response to the Report of the High-level Taskforce for the
Global Framework for Climate Services, Resolution 48 (Cg- XVI) – Implementation of the Global
Framework for Climate Services, Resolution 1 (Cg-Ext.(2012)) – Implementation of the Global
Framework for Climate Services, Resolution 2 (IBCS-1) - Implementation Plan of the GFCS, and
Resolution 8 (IBCS-1) – Resources Mobilization, Resolution 5 (IBCS-1) – Compendium of projects
under the Global Framework for Climate Services and Resolution 7/1 (IBCS-2) – GFCS Budget for
2015 and Operational and Resource Plan for the period 2016-2018, the Management Committee
has been requested to further refine and prioritize, in consultation with the Partner Advisory
Committee (PAC), the GFCS Operational and Resource Plan at the first meeting of the
Management Committee in 2015.
At its second meeting, the Management Committee requested the establishment of an Ad-Hoc
Working Group to finalize the budget and operational plan for the GFCS for the period 2015-2018.
Scope of the work
The Ad-Hoc Working Group on budget and operational plan for the GFCS for the period 2015-2018
will support the Management Committee in implementing Resolution 7/1 (IBCS-2). It will be
responsible for further refining, prioritizing and finalizing the budget and operational plan for the
GFCS for the period 2015-2018. The Ad-Hoc Working Group shall:
(a)
Analyse and provide guidance on GFCS priorities for 2015-2018 to enable successful
implementation of GFCS Implementation Plan, Annexes and Compendium of Projects as
approved at the First Session of the IBCS (IBCS-1);
(b)
Review and refine the GFCS budget 2015 and operational and resource plan 2016-2018 as
contained in Doc. 7 (IBCS-2);
(c)
Prepare a revised GFCS budget and operational and resource plan 2015-2018 document
for consideration by the next session of the Management Committee of IBCS (2015);
(d)
Provide advice on possible funding streams and mechanisms for accessing funds to
support the implementation of GFCS operational plan 2015-2018;
(e)
Consult with the Partner Advisory Committee in this process;
(f)
Take into consideration the outcomes of the World Meteorological Congress (Cg-17) in this
process.
The Ad-Hoc Working Group will define its working modalities immediately after it is constituted.
11
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
GFCS TASK TEAM ON OPERATIONAL AND RESOURCE PLAN 2015-2018
FIRST MEETING
(Geneva, Switzerland, 27-28 April 2015)
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
United Kingdom
Member countries
Ms Jane WARDLE
China
International Relations
Met Office
Ms Mingmei LI
FitzRoy Road, Exeter
Deputy Director-General
Devon, EX1 3PB
International Cooperation Department
United Kingdom
China Meteorological Administration
Tel: +44 1392 886807
46 Zhongguancun Nandajie
Email: jane.wardle@metoffice.gov.uk
Haidian District
Beijing 10008
United States of America
China
Dr Meredith MUTH
Tel: +86 10 684 061 46
Cell.: +86 13 681 15 8369
International Program Manager
Email: lmm@cma.gov.cn
Climate Programme Office
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Norway
Administration (NOAA)
1305 East-West Highway
Dr Jens SUNDE
Silver Spring, MD 18130
Chair
United States of America
Intergovernmental Board on Climate Services
Tel.: +434 825 41 69
Norwegian Meteorological Institute
Email: meredith.f.muth@noaa.gov
P.O. Box 43, Blindern
Organizations
Oslo
Norway
Tel.: +47 22 96 31 55
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the
Cell: +47 900 76 307
United Nations (FAO)
Email: jenss@met.no
Mr André ALVES DOS REIS
Russian Federation
Intern
FAO
Dr Alexander ZAYTSEV
Ch Edouard-Tavan 5
Chief Expert
1206 Geneva
Main Geophysical Observatory
Switzerland
Karbyshev Street 7
Tel.: +41 78 879 82 19
194021 St Petersburg
Email: aalvesdosreis@unog.ch
Russian Federation
Tel.: +7 812 297 43 90
United Nations Development Programme
Email: a.zaitsev@main.mgo.rssi.ru
(UNDP)
Switzerland
Mr Stefan SIGRIST
Scientific Officer
International Affairs Division
MeteoSwiss, Operation Center 1
P.O. Box 257
8058 Zürich-Airport
Switzerland
Tel.: +41 58 460 97 45
Cell: +41 79 702 76 25
Email: Stefan.Sigrist@meteoswiss.ch
Mr Patrick GREMILLET
Partnership Advisor
UNDP
Climate Change and Disaster Risk Reduction
Bureau for Policy and Programme Support
11-13 Chemin des Anémones
1219 Châtelaine, Geneva
Switzerland
Tel.: +41 22 917 88 32
Cell: +41 79 137 44 99
Email: patrick.gremillet@undp.org
12
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
Mr Matthew McKINNON
Specialist Climate Change
UNDP
Palais des Nations
1211 Geneva
Switzerland
Tel. : +41 22 917 85 40
Email: matthew.mckinnon@undp.org
United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP)
Dr Hartwig KREMER
Chief Scientific Assessment Branch
Division of Early Warning and Assessment
UNEP
P.O. Box 30552 – 00100
Nairobi
Kenya
Tel.: +254 715 823 920
Email: hartwig.kremer@unep.org
Email: katiuscia.fara@wfp.org
Regional Climate Centers
The African Centre of Meteorological
Application for Development (ACMAD)
Mr Alhassane Adama DIALLO
Director General
ACMAD
55, Avenue des Ministères PL 6
BP 13184
Niamey
Niger
Tel : +227 2073 4992
Cell: +227 94 11 98 10
Email: dgacmad@acmad.org,
a2diyalo04@yahoo.fr
Centro International para la Investigación del
Fenómeno de El Niño (CIIFEN)
World Health Organization (WHO)
Dr Joy SHUMAKE-GUILLEMOT
Officer-in-Charge
WMO/WHO Climate and Health Office
World Meteorological Organization
7 bis Avenue de la Paix
P.O. Box 2300
1211 Geneva 2
Switzerland
Tel.: + 41 22 730 81 70
Email: jshumake-guillemot@wmo.int
Mr Rodney MARTINEZ
Scientific Coordinator
CIIFEN
Escobedo 1204 y 9 de Otubre
P.O. Box 09014237
Guayaquil
Ecuador
Tel.: +593 425 147 70
Cell: +593 994 721 232
Email: r.martinez@ciifen.org
United Nations International Strategy for
Disaster Reduction (UNISDR)
IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications
Centre (ICPAC)
Mr John HARDING
UNISDR
Palais des Nations 10
1211 Geneva
Switzerland
Email: harding@un.org
Professor Laban OGALLO
Director Representative
ICPAC
P.O. BOX 10304
Nairobi 00100
Kenya
Tel.: +254 203 514 426
Cell: +254 722 526 809
Email: logallo@icpac.net
World Food Programme (WFP)
Dr Katiuscia FARA
Climate Services Advisor
WFP
World Meteorological Organization (WMO)
7 bis, avenue de la Paix
Case postale 2300
CH-1211 Genève 2
Switzerland
Cell.:+41 79 122 97 42
13
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
WMO Technical Commissions
Mr Stuart GOLDSTRAW
Commission for Basic Systems
Head
Operational Meteorology
UK Met Office
FitzRoy Road
Exeter
Devon EX1 3PB
United Kingdom
Tel.: +44 1392 885 603
Cell: +44 7785 372 591
Email: stuart.goldstraw@metoffice.gov.uk
Mr Roger PULWARTY
Commission for Climatology
Director
National Integrated Drought Information
System
NOAA Climate Program Office
325 Broadway
Boulder, CO 80305-3328
United States of America
Tel: +1 303 497 4425
Cell.:+1 301 466 21 85
Email: roger.pulwarty@noaa.gov
Dr Jan DANHELKA
Commission for Hydrology
Deputy-Director
Czech Hydrometeorological Institute (CHMI)
Na Sabatce 2050/17
14306 Praha
Czech Republic
Tel: +420 244 03 23 00
Cell: +420 724 108 009
Email: Danhelka@chmi.cz
Dr Vasily SMOLYANITSKY
WMO-IOC Joint Technical Commission for
Oceanography and Marine Meteorology
Head of Laboratory
Roshydromet Arctic and Antarctic Research
Institute (AARI)
Bering str., 38
St Petersburg
Russian Federation
Tel: +7 812 337 31 49
Cell: +7 951 6544196
Email: vms@aari.ru
WMO Secretariat Staff
7 bis Avenue de la Paix, 1211 Geneva 2
Mr Jerry LENGOASA
Tel: +41 22 730 82 30
Email: jlengoasa@wmo.int
Mr Filipe LÚCIO
Tel: +41 22 730 8579
Email: flucio@wmo.int
Mr Peiliang SHI
Tel. : +41 22 730 82 19
Email: pshi@wmo.int
Mr Lars Peter RIISHOJGAARD
Tel.: +41 22 730 81 93
Email: lriishojgaard@wmo.int
Mr. Tomiji MIZUTANI
Tel.: +41 22 730 84 63
Email: tmizutani@wmo.int
Dr Maxx DILLEY
Tel: +41 22 730 83 69
Email: mdilley@wmo.int
Dr Veronica GRASSO
Tel: +41 22 730 83 00
Email: vgrasso@wmo.int
Mr Zhiqiang GONG
Tel: +41 22 730 81 09
Email: zgong@wmo.int
Ms Ji-Eun SEO
Tel: +41 22 730 83 74
Email: jseo@wmo.int
Mr João RAPOSO
Tel: +41 22 730 81 39
Email: jraposo@wmo.int
14
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
Annex 2 – TT Proposed Outline of GFCS ORP
Section 1: Relevance and Justification for GFCS ORP
Section 2: Expected Outcomes and Guidance to Implementation
2.1 GFCS Goals (as per Implementation Plan)
2.2 ORP Objectives and Outcomes
2.3 Criteria: for GFCS project criteria, ORP inclusion criteria, contributing activity criteria
2.4 Implementation Mechanisms
Section 3: Investing in the architecture for user engagement and service delivery
These activities serve to strengthen and help build sustainable foundation/architecture for effective
user-driven climate service development and delivery at the regional and national level (intro
paragraph on importance of user interface platform/two way user engagement). These activities
should refer to the functions of a UIP (provision of feedback, dialogue, outreach, evaluation) and
serve to promote multi-sectoral integration at global, regional, and national levels
3.1 Strengthening national and local mechanisms
Developing national frameworks, NCOFs, national consultations, country level projects,
coordination structures, building awareness and demand, policy, ensuring technical guidance
and expertise being channeled to national level.
3.2 Strengthening regional mechanisms RCOFs, regional consultations, RCCs, technical
networks, RA activities, etc.
3.3 Strengthening global mechanisms
Secretariat functions and activities for coordination, dialog, outreach, monitoring) e.g., MOUs
with World Bank) Coordination of global centers and structures
Section 4: Applying climate services to decision making in the four priority areas
This set of proposed activities support the four priority areas to ensure coordination and technical
advisory services support the sector to access and use climate services effectively through
integration of sector needs and GFCS pillars.
4.1 Agriculture and Food Security
4.2 Health
4.3 Water
4.4 DRR
4.5 Energy – pending Cg-XVII approval
Section 5: Enhancing Core Technical Capabilities for User-Driven Climate Services
This set of proposed activities focus on the coordination, guidance, and technical advisory services
for each pillar, emphasizing the unique role of these activities that are not being met through other
mechanisms or institutions, but are necessary for the achievement of national level user-focused
goals.
5.1 CAP – noting cross-cutting capacity needs
5.2 OBS
5.3 RES
5.4 CSIS
Section 6: Emerging needs/opportunities
This section captures emerging issues and recommendations to the Management Committee to
take future action.
Section 7: Resource requirements
7.1 Linkages with the current stream of resources and funding mechanisms
7.2 Activities Summary
7.3 Secretariat Support Summary
7.4 Governance Summary
15
TT-ORP First Meeting Report
Annex 3 - TT-ORP DRAFTING TEAMS
Section 1 – Justification
Filipe LUCIO*
Maxx DILLEY*
Stefan SIGRIST
Roger PULWARTY
Ji-Eun SEO
Section 2 – Outcomes and Guidance
Tamara AVELLAN*
Hartwig KREMER
John HARDING
T. Mizutani
Section 3 – Architecture
Jane WARDLE*
Rodney MARTINEZ
Laban OGALLO
Alhassane DIALLO
Mingmei LI
Section 4 – User-Applications - Exemplars
Joy SHUMAKE*
John HARDING
Katiuscia FARA
Maxx DILLEY
Andre ALVES DOS RIOS
Jan DANHELKA
Section 5 – Core Capabilities – Pillars
*Maxx DILLEY
Rodney MARTINEZ
Vasily SMOLZANITSKY
Commission Representatives
Alexander ZAYTSEV
Roger PULWARTY
Stuart GOLDSTRAW
Mingmei LI
Section 7 –
Tomiji MIZUTANI
Tamara AVELLAN
__________
16