Transcript CGE TRAINING MATERIALS VULNERABILITY AND ADAPTATION ASSESSMENT CHAPTER 9 Integration, Mainstreaming, Monitoring and Evaluation.

CGE TRAINING MATERIALS VULNERABILITY AND ADAPTATION
ASSESSMENT
CHAPTER 9
Integration, Mainstreaming, Monitoring and
Evaluation
Chapter Objectives and Expectations
• Having read this presentation, in conjunction with the related
handbook, the reader should:
a) Recognize the relevance of options for integration both across,
and within the sectors in the framework of the vulnerability and
adaption (V&A) assessment,
b) Differentiate between cross-sectoral and multisectoral
integration and their importance in linking related sectors and
various multi-economic sectors.
c) Be able use methods of ranking sectoral priorites and for
assessing interdependencies of adaptation options.
2
Outline
• Integration of results
a) Cross-sector and multisector integration
b) Setting priorities (V&A action)
• Mainstreaming
a) National/subnational scale
b) Sectoral policies – development priorities
• Monitoring and evaluation
Why is Integration Important?
• Impacts do not happen in isolation:
a) Impacts in one sector can adversely or positively
affect another
b) Some sectors are affected directly and indirectly
c) Others just indirectly
d) Sometimes a change in one sector can offset the
effect of climate change in another sector
• In addition, integration is necessary for ranking V&A
options.
Main Types of Integration of Results
• Integrating impact assessment outcomes:
a) Cross-sector integration:
• Link related sectors
b) Multisector:
• Economy or system wide
• Integrated assessment models
• Economic models
• Integrating adaptation assessment outcomes.
Climate Scenarios to Integration
Dry summer spell illustration: When, and which action is needed on which
timescale: in 10 or 50 years?
Hydrological Run of Data of Rivers as Integrator Proxis (2 stations: Rhine River)
INTEGRATING IMPACT
ASSESSMENT
National Circumstances – Need for Integration
Illustration from Switzerland: snow and glacier melt and flooding - events that
are often interdependent.
CROSS-SECTOR INTEGRATION
Cross-Sector Integration
• In the initial national communications there were challenges in
drawing cross-sectoral linkages between sectors more so when
there is too much focus on sector by sector analysis.
• Linkages of climate change vulnerabilities across sectors are now
better understood:
a) For example the linkages between agricultural impacts, water
and health in rural communities –
• sectoral assessments are increasingly seeking to address
such cross-sectoral issues.
• The second national communication of Malaysia states that:
• “Using a sector dependence approach wherein mutual
reliance amongst sectors is considered, all sectors are found
to be directly dependent on water resources, energy and the
public health sectors.”
Cross-Sector Integration
• Qualitative:
a) Identify links between sectors and highlight the
direction of impacts
• Rely on the application of expert judgement:
a) Can be undertaken by the national
communications project team, or through an
extended process using a broader group of
stakeholders.
• The use of a wide range of stake holders from more
than one or two sectors leads to multi-sectoral
integration.
Cross-Sector Integration
Integration of Adaptation and Mitigation
(Source: adapted, from ICIMOD, 2011)
Cross-Sector Integration: Linking Model Results
Flow Chart of Model Sequencing
(Source: World Bank, 2010)
MULTI-SECTORIAL
INTEGRATION
Multi-sector Integration
•
Should be as comprehensive as possible, covering as
many affected sectors, regions and populations as
possible.
•
A clear understanding of how society as a whole might
be affected by climate change:
a) Breadth of impacts
b) Severity of impacts.
•
Two common approaches:
a) Economic impacts as common currency (based for
example on general equilibrium economic models)
b) Qualitative prioritization.
Multi Sector-Integration Simple approach-Matrix/ranking
“It is expected that climate change impacts and vulnerabilities will not occur in isolation. Non- climate factors, linkages
between sectors, as for instance the link between glaciers and GLOFs and water resources and energy production and the
subsequent impacts on agriculture and human health and settlements should also be taken into consideration” Bhutan SNC
Multi Sector-Integration Using outputs of models
Multi-sector Integration-Complex
• Involves the use of Regional/National Economic Models
• A quantitative way to examine climate change market
impacts throughout an economy:
a) Problem with non-market impacts
• These are often macro-economic models or general
equilibrium models
• Extensive data is required
• Expensive modelling
• Complex in nature
• The Communication of assumptions can be a
challenge.
Sector-by-sector Approach
• The information generated is for each specific sector:
a) Limited by the lack of information within sectors
b) There is a problem of how to integrate across
multiple end points:
• Impacts may be measured with different metrics
• There is a need to account for many sectors
• One drawback of this approach is that it does not
capture sectoral interactions.
Sector-by-sector Example: Estimates of Damages for India
Sector
Damage
($ billions)
Agriculture
–53.2
Forestry
+0.1
Energy
–21.9
Water
–1.2
Coastal Resources
–0.1
Sector-by-sector Example: Estimates of Damages for Switzerland
Estimations for damages
Switzerland 2050/2010:
Domestic impacts and traderelated impacts on Swiss
economy (% of GDP)
Requires e.g. General
Equilibrium Model (GEM) and a
variety of impact studies. Policy
significance rather low, output
only as good as input
Relative Vulnerability Ranking
Relative Vulnerability
Table 5.5. Nepal ranking
Resource/ranking
Water resources (flooding)
Certainty of
impact
High
Timing of
impact
High
Severity of
impact
High
Importance of
resource
High
Agriculture
Human health
Biodiversity
Medium-low
Low
Low
Medium-low
Medium
?
Medium
?
?
High
High
Medium-high
Land-use planning can Visualize Areas at Risk:
Flooding risk map (red=avoid settlements) indicates where in settlements evacuation or special
protection measures are required (example Visp Valais Switzerland)
(Source: Kanton Wallis, 2011)
Adaptation Options in River Flooding Prevention (Example: Rhone Switzerland)
The river flood protection measure selected, is a function of the
objective of protection: Hard structures are used where the protection
of established settlements is the objective of protection: soft measures
are used where possible.
Qualitatively Identifying Linkages: At a minimum
• Qualitatively identify linkages and possible direction of
impacts:
a) If crops can be examined and not the water supply,
then identify how change in water supply could
affect agricultural production
b) Examine as appropriate, livelihoods not single
crops. It is easier to move crops to other climate
zones than to move people
INTEGRATING ADAPTATION
ASSESSMENT
Integrating Adaptation
• Setting priorities across vulnerabilities is important, as it
is used to identify adaptation priorities
• A variety of tools are available:
a) Screening tools
b) Multi-criteria assessment
c) Cost-benefit analysis.
• Consider adaptation capacity planning as part of
integration.
Process is as Important as Outcome
• This is an expression of values, and is not a purely
analytic exercise
• Include stakeholders and policy makers
• Whether you use the qualitative or quantitative
approach, the most important thing is JUST DO IT!
• The following are tools that can be useful in setting
priorities
Adaptation Prioritization (South Africa)
Screening Analysis: Crop advisory scheme (Antigua and Barbuda
Multicriteria Assessment
Options
Effectiveness
Feasibility
Cost
Score
A
3
2
2
7
B
2
4
4
10
C
5
1
3
9
National Adaptation Capacity Assessment
(Source: WRI, 2012)
Adaptation Decision Matrix for Agriculture in Kazakhstan
Objective
Objective
Objective
#1:
Objective
#3:
Objective #4:
#5:
Food
#2:
Maximize Sustainable
Protect
Security
Exports Production
Agricult.
Env.
Measures Scenario:
Current
Policy
Pest
Forecast
Regional
Centers
Rules for
Free
Market
Soil
Erosion
2
3
5
2
3
1
4
Score
Current
4.00
0.70
1.00
2.00
4.00
4.00
4.50
4
74.9
GFDL
1.00
0.50
0.50
1.00
2.00
3.00
3.00
1
32.5
+3; 0%
1.5
0.7
0.5
1.5
3
3
3
2
43.9
+2; +20%
3.5
1
1
2.5
4
4
4
3.5
73
Current
5
2
3
3
4.5
4.5
4.5
4
96
GFDL
2
1.5
0.7
1.5
2
3.3
3
1.1
43.9
+3; 0%
2.5
1.5
0.7
2
3
3.3
3
2.1
54.9
+2; +20%
4.5
2
1.5
3.5
4
4.3
4
3.6
87.8
5
1.5
2
2.5
4
4
5
4
87.5
GFDL
1.00
1.00
0.50
1.00
2.00
3.00
5
1
35.5
+3; 0%
1.5
1
0.5
1.5
3
3
5
2
46.5
+2; +20%
3.5
1.5
1
2.5
4
4
5
3.5
75
5
3
3.5
3
4
4
4.5
4
97
GFDL
1.3
1.1
0.8
2.5
2.5
3.5
3
1.3
47.3
+3; 0%
2
1.1
1
3
3.5
3.5
3
2.3
59.9
4.5
1.7
2
4.5
4.5
4.5
4
3.9
96.5
Current
Current
+2; +20%
Reduce
5
Objective
#6:
Prevent
Objective
Objective
Desertifi- #7: Genetic
#8:
cation
Diversity Employment
Current
5
3
5
5
5
5
4.5
4
116.5
GFDL
2.5
1.5
1.5
3
4
3.5
3
1.2
61.3
+3; 0%
3.2
1.5
1.5
3.5
4.5
3.7
3
2.2
72.9
+2; +20%
4.3
2
2.2
4.5
5
5
4
3.8
98.8
Cost-Benefit Analysis
• Estimate all benefits and costs in a common metric
to determine whether benefits > costs
• Monetary values often used
• Difficulty: what to do about non-market benefits or
uncertainties
• Difficulty: requires much data and analysis.
Cost-Benefit Analysis Example: Sea Walls in Kiribati
Net Present Value Calculation for Constructing Sea Walls Today for Case Study Islands
(3% rate of discount)
Present Value
of Damages
Present Value
of Seawalls
Built in 2001
Net Present
Value
(PV damages
minus PV costs)
A$13.9 million
A$6.6 million
A$0.97 million
A$5.7 million
A$5.6 million
A$2.67 million
A$1.13 million
A$1.5 million
Monetized Portion
of Damages
(2025 BG & SS)
Buariki-Naa
Bikenibeau
Land Area
How many people protected against which risk? Any dam can break!
What to Use
(Source: UNDP/GEF Adaptation Policy Framework, 2004)
Exercise:
Prioritize key insights from the sectoral training chapters
• What is/are your key point (s) from the sectoral
sessions water resources, health, agriculture, coastal
resources?
• Which conclusions do you draw for priorities on
adaptation capacity development and adaptation
action in your country?
Conclusions
• Integration is important to at least identify related
impacts:
a) Analysis of cross-sectoral effects is desirable
because there can be surprises
• Integration can also be useful for examining total
vulnerability and moving from ranking vulnerabilities to
ranking of priorities in adaptation action.
MAINSTREAMING CLIMATE
CHANGE
Mainstreaming
“Process of integrating climate concerns and
adaptation responses into relevant policies,
plans, programs, and projects at the national,
sub-national, and local scales”
[USAID, 2009]
Approach
• Find entry points:
a) Identify links between climate change and national
development priorities
• Mainstream into policy processes:
a) National development plans
• Implementation challenge:
a) Ensuring that it is mainstreamed into budgets and
financing
b) Implementation and monitoring.
Mainstreaming
• A process – not an output
• Enabling elements:
a) Staff and financial resources
b) Leadership
c) Skills and knowledge
d) Time.
Mainstreaming Examples: Kiribati
• Kiribati is currently mainstreaming climate
change into the national development plan and
ministerial operational plans but:
a) Enabling elements limited
b) Long-term commitment will deliver
progress.
Conclusion
• Mainstreaming provides a mechanism to ensure
climate change is considered as part of
development
• Cross-scale integration is required, to project to
national scale
• Mainstreaming should be seen as a process –
not a product.
MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
• This is a performance assessment tool to:
a) Improve future programmes and projects through
feedback of lessons learned;
b) Provide a basis for accountability, including the
provision of information to the public;
c) Inform policy and practice
d) To test assumptions and create opportunities for
learning.
Evaluation framework
• Incorporates:
a) Activities
b) Inputs
c) Outputs
d) Outcomes
• Baselines and indicators to monitor progress.
Evaluation Plan
• Roles and responsibilities:
a) Who will monitor
b) Who will evaluate?
• What data will be collected:
a) Align to indicators
• Timeline for evaluation:
a) Reporting needs
b) Decision-making entry points.
Conducting Evaluation
• Internal:
a) Up-skilling
b) Direct knowledge transfusion
• External:
a) Independent
b) Transparent
c) Accountable.
Benefits
Type of Activity
Motivation
Benefits
Place-based
plan or
programme
-
-
-
Planned/regular review
Special request from
government
Unanticipated (e.g. result
of natural disaster)
National/regiona
l policy
-
Planned/regular review
Special request from
government
Unanticipated (e.g. result
of natural disaster)
-
Communicate performance
Adjust design of adaptation measures
Adjust implementation strategy
Identify and implement emergency
measures
Compile lessons learned
Replicate plan or programme
Communicate performance
Guide design and implementation of new
policies and adaptation measures
Identify and implement emergency
measures
Compile lessons learned
Challenges
• Monitoring performance of adaptation can be
challenging:
a) Defining what is successful adaptation
b) Defining and evaluating success against moving
baselines
c) Determining time for evaluation
d) Determining contribution
e) Identifying conclusive indicators.
Successful M&E
• Factors that can lead to success:
a) Clear objective(s);
b) An understanding of how baseline data will be
collected;
c) Identification of key participants in the M&E
process, their needs and roles;
d) Provision for learning, reflection and feedback into
decision-making;
e) Assurance of adequate resources (financial and
human).
Conclusion
• M&E enables:
a) Adaptive management approach
b) Transparent reporting
c) Continual learning.