Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
LEARNING TO ADAPT: Re-thinking Monitoring &
Evaluation of Climate Change Adaptation – Implications For
Practice
Paula Silva Villanueva SEA Change CoP Annual Members Meeting 9th November 2011
Outline
Setting the context:
M&E at the interface of CCA, DRR and Development
M&E challenges in the context of climate change and disasters: implications for M&E practice
Re-thinking M&E approaches and practice for Adaptation : the ADAPT Principles & its implications for practice
An example: The climate smart disaster risk management approach
M&E at the interface of DRR, Adaptation and Development
Increasing calls for integration of DRR and CCA in development
Need to go beyond “business as usual” in DRR and development practice. But what about M&E? gap in current debates
Similarities of CCA, DRR and Development cannot only provide useful insights for the development of M&E frameworks for adaptation but for fostering the integration of these three domains of work
…
In order to foster integrated approaches, M&E frameworks need to reflect the multi-dimensional nature of adaptation and disaster risk reduction and its contribution to developmental outcomes.
M&E Challenges in the context of climate change and disasters: implications for practice
Context Implications for M&E
Lack of conceptual clarity LEARNING
Different types of adaptation DIVERSECONTEXT SPECIFIC
Tracking “moving” targets – success when nothing happens?, adaptive capacity and vulnerability as dynamic variables
CONTINUOUS
Long-time frames LONG TERM
Adaptation as a decision-making process at different scales
PROCESS basedCAPTURE DETERMINANTS of decision-making & ACTIONPARTICIPATORY across SCALES
Avoiding maladaptation short term vs long term, distribution of vulnerability, trade-offs:
INTEGRATED FRAMEWORKS that reflect holistic understanding of adaptation and DRR and the need for strong feedback loops
Dealing with Uncertainty Beyond climatic predictions, interdependencies – FLEXIBLE AND DYNAMIC
“What” to measure?
M&E methodologies
Focus on Measurement Assumption
Input-output-outcome evaluation
Effectiveness Elements of adaptive capacity/risk are pre-determined and evaluated against a set of indicators
Increase adaptive capacity will lead to reduced vulnerability Risk is probabilistically determined and known
Process-based evaluation
Evaluation of Behavioral change
Economic evaluations
Efficiency Benefits of adaptation is measured in terms of economic loss
Rational decision makingThe ability to establish a baseline and projected benefits and losses
But….need to acknowledge the context within which we work
We don’t know what we don’t know!
Outputs are too limited, outcomes too unpredictable
Complex dynamics and interdependencies across sectors and scales
M&E beyond business as usual. “Technical challenges” for M&E in a changing climate can be reduced through a clear focus on the purpose of M&E : LEARNING
RE-THINKING M&E APPROACHES AND PRACTICE FOR ADAPTATION:
The ADAPT Principles
The ADAPT principles for M&E of CCA, DRR and Development
Adaptive learning and management: recognizes experience-based learning and need to deal with uncertainty
Dynamic baselines. Recognizes changing conditions of adaptive capacity and vulnerability and provides real-time feedback
Active understanding. Recognizes differing values and interests
Participatory – recognizes adaptation as a context-specific process and the need for triangulation of information and decision-making
Thorough – avoiding maladaptation, evaluating trade-offs. Recognizes multiple stressors and processes across scales
Implications of The ADAPT principles in practice:
1. Re-thinking the purpose and role of M&E
2. Strengthening feedback loops in Programme/policy management cycles
3. Integrating a boarder set of indicators
4. Methodologies that account for uncertainty, trade-offs and potential maladaptation
M&E as an iterative approach that emphasizes learning, flexibility, enhances capacity to deal with uncertainty and provides spaces for discussion and negotiation
Where the purpose of M&E is to promote and support learning, knowledge promotion, inform decision-making/management and support innovation.
1. Role and Purpose of M&E
To support Robust and flexible
planning
To support Robust and flexible
planning
To identify Synergies and trade-offs
To identify Synergies and trade-offs
To measure Progress towards integration
in practice
To measure Progress towards integration
in practice
To understand / learn
factors that enable or constraint action
To understand / learn
factors that enable or constraint action
It is not about quantity of indicators but quality of indicators used. Indicators must reflect multiple interacting processes, stressors and
dimensions of decision making beyond programme/project deadlines and “target” areas.
Process-based indicators Outcome-based indicators
2. Beyond “what to measure” – towards why & how
3. Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation as cyclical events – strengthening feedback loops and learning by doing
Self-assessment & planning
Self-assessment & planning
Monitoring Monitoring
Evaluation Evaluation
It is impossible to plan for all eventualities. A successful program is one that assesses and adapts to changing situations, based on thoughtful reflection. Planning is done based on the best knowledge available, and the program uses monitoring and evaluation as reflective tools to assess change and choose appropriate actions.
AN EXAMPLE
Planning, Monitoring And Evaluation Of Climate Change Adaptation, Disaster Risk Management And Development Integration Processes
THE CLIMATE SMART DISASTER RISK MANAGEMNT APPROACH
Background: The Strengthening Climate Resilience programme
Initiative Funded by DFID and lead by IDS, PLAN and Christian Aid 2009-2011
Iterative development & Co-creation of an integrated approach of disaster risk management, climate change adaptation and development:
Total of 14 consultations in 12 countries Over 500 disaster, climate and development policy makers and practitioners involved from over 100 organisations Live editing sessions Ideas based on sharing good practices
Validation in complex environments: Three detailed case studies looking at applying the ideas in
practice – Sri Lanka, Orissa, Mekong River Commission
CHARACTERISTICS specifically designed to
support policy and programme planners to assess progress towards the integration of climate change adaptation, disaster risk reduction and development work
integrated set of outcome and process based indicators that consider environmental, disaster, climate change and developmental domains of decision-making.
The CSDRM approach and methodology
CHARACTERISTICS….
PM&E process to: Support self-
assessment and, programme/policy planning and ex-ante decision making
Identification of entry points and integration pathways
Monitor and evaluate synergies, co-benefits and trade-offs
PM&E cycle: Where are we now? Where to we need to
be? Are we moving
towards integration? What has change,
how and why?
Monitoring is the continuous assessment of the integration pathways chosen and its environment. The monitoring process aims at understanding synergies and trade-offs of integration efforts; and to closely monitor climate variability and changes in baseline information.
Actors/Power dynamics
Mandates
Capacity
Structures
Economic-political context/policies
Socio-cultural perspectives and perceptions
Resources
Taking into account contextand scale
PM&E is dynamic in nature, the relationship between those sub-elements is neither fixed nor linear - Central focus of on-going analysis.
Beyond indicators – monitoring guiding questions
Power Dynamics : How has the external context - the historical, cultural, political and institutional environment, and the constraints and opportunities they create - influenced the implementation of CSDRM? How have outsiders/power dynamics influenced the process of change? Stakeholders – (cognitive/behavioural factors): What has been the influence of stakeholders such as beneficiaries, suppliers and supporters, and their different interests, expectations, modes of behaviour, cultural beliefs, resources, interrelationships and intensity of involvement? Internal features and key resources: What are the patterns of internal features such as formal and informal roles, structures, resources, culture, strategies and values, and what influence have they had at both the organizational and multi-organizational levels?
Emerging Lessons & Final Thoughts
Implementing the CSDRM process can prove a more intensive and complex assessment than traditional planning processes – are we ready?
Tool overload within organizations – but it does it translate to an overarching approach?
Scale matters. Different type of interest, agendas translates into different types of information required at different levels. M&E has the potential to open spaces for discussion and negotiation across scales
Embracing complexity an uncertainty vs guidance and simplification – where to compromise??
At the heart of the CSDRM and the ADAPT principles lies organizational change. ‘They are not a quick fix, but a longer-term vision. PM&E a potential entry point to foster organizational change
