Integration for greater impact

Innovation in integrated programming has been seen as a key vehicle for transformational change. Integrated programming has supported institutional innovations that link policy, finance, and multisectoral actors. Challenges to innovation include limited financial incentives and gaps in integrated program learning mechanisms. GEF-8 integrated program child projects have a medium-level risk profile for innovation: moving forward, this may need to be adjusted to the higher-risk ambitions set in the recent GEF risk appetite statement (GEF 2024b).

Integrated programming has sought to promote system-level innovation that were difficult to achieve through stand-alone projects. The GGP piloted market-based mechanisms to control deforestation in commodity supply chain development, promoting public-private partnerships and developing tools such as the Soy Toolkit (Brazil, Paraguay) and the RESPOND online tool, which offers companies standards for assessing environmental and social risks. The Sustainable Cities IAP in China introduced integrated land use and transit-oriented development planning aligned with targets for low-carbon urban mobility. Under the RFS IAP, the Kenya project (GEF ID 9139) supported the creation of a water fund and a payment for ecosystem services mechanism, which bridged conservation financing and water security. Ethiopia’s RFS project (GEF ID 9135) deployed farmer field schools, integrated with climate information services, enabling adaptive management of agro-ecological systems.

However, several limitations are associated with the innovation opportunities of integrated programming:

• Innovations were often underdocumented.
• Integrated programs rarely included dedicated learning mechanisms to incubate, refine, and scale new ideas.
• The pressure to meet tight preparation and project cycle timelines could potentially discourage risk-taking, participatory design, and the incubation of new ideas, which often require time for proof of concept and small-scale piloting.

Under GEF-8, integrated program child projects exhibit a medium level of innovation risk. The GEF risk appetite statement sets higher ambitions for innovation, aiming for a high-risk profile. As shown in figure 6.6, GEF-8 integrated program child projects generally have a higher innovation risk than stand-alone projects. However, the distribution of these ratings confirms that integrated program child projects remain at a medium innovation risk level, below the high-risk threshold targeted in the risk appetite statement. These findings align with broader evaluation evidence indicating a moderate risk-taking approach in integrated programming. Going forward, satisfying the GEF’s appetite for higher innovation risk may require a shift toward greater risk tolerance.