The rapid screening process focuses on selecting the most promising and realistic finance solutions and excluding those that are not. It seeks the solutions that bear the highest potential for implementation and the largest impact. The BIOFIN team can run a rapid screening and/or implement it during a workshop. The input to the screening is the list of finance solutions (existing and potential) from Step 6.3. Each solution can be scored on a scale of 0 to 4 (0 being worst, 4 being best as shown in Table 6.1) against three criteria:
The significance and scale of the biodiversity impact can be judged in different ways, e.g. by its urgency, the presence of key biodiversity areas or endangered species, and the value of ecosystem services.8
The potential scale and sustainability of the resources that can be leveraged, i.e. how much? for how long? and how stable?
A general assessment of the technical, social, and political feasibility of the proposed solution.
The above criteria can be adapted slightly to suit the country context, but this might imply more time and costs. For example, the likelihood of success could be expanded by scoring technical, social, and political feasibility separately.
Table 6.1: Rapid Screening Criteria and Scoring Guidance
Impact on biodiversity
Likelihood of success
If there is uncertainty about whether a solution should be retained, then it is usually better to retain it for further analysis rather than risk losing a potentially viable solution. A cut-off score can be set to produce a desired number of solutions for the next level of screening (see Figures 6.2 and 6.3). The desired number of solutions that make it through the preliminary screening should reflect the capacity of the BIOFIN team, associated experts and stakeholders to conduct the detailed prioritization (Step 6.4B). Figure 6.3 shows analysis from the BIOFIN data tool capturing the application of screening criteria in South Africa.
Figure 6.3: Example of Screening Criteria in the BIOFIN Data Tool