Good Practice Study on Principles for Indicator Development, Selection, and Use in Climate Change Adaptation Monitoring and Evaluation

The Independent Evaluation Office of the Global Environment Facility (GEF IEO) has undertaken - on behalf of the Climate-Eval community of practice - a Good Practice Study on Indicator Development, Selection and Use Principles for Climate Change Adaptation M&E. This study identifies and addresses key challenges concerning M&E for CCA. It does so by documenting good practices and good practice principles on the development, selection, and use of indicators used in the M&E of adaptation interventions.

The study also emphasizes the importance of evaluative evidence supporting adaptation-related policymaking. Lessons learned and findings from evaluations can inform the direction of future policies. To capitalize on that opportunity, the report provides principles that can serve as guidance for both policymakers and evaluators in moving in a common and mutually supportive direction; one that maximizes collaborative evidence-based policy development.

One of the main conclusions of the study is that there is no single set of universal or standard adaptation indicators. Providing examples of indicators that can be useful in adaptation programming will not contribute to advancing the field. Thus, good practice principles for selecting, developing, and using CCA indicators have been proposed.

Another conclusion is that the direct link between indicators and their role in evidence-based policy making in adaptation is a thin one. There are few or no examples of adaptation policy making that has been guided by indicators per se. The data from indicators are channeled into the overall knowledge base that is needed to inform policy making. Additionally, there is a practice gap in using evaluative evidence to inform climate change adaptation policy making.

We hope this study will enrich the conversation on what constitutes ‘good’ indicators for adaptation, and will give practitioners a better understanding of how to develop and use indicator sets within the complexity and dynamism that is inherent to climate change adaptation.

Add comment

Plain text

  • Allowed HTML tags: <p> <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Comments

Looking forward to hearing

Looking forward to hearing more at the webinar on the 30th!

Good morning Carl! Are there

Dbours's picture

Good morning Carl! Are there specific element of the report, chapters or topics you would want us to give more attention in the webinar? Thanks for letting us know! Best, Dennis

I'd appreciate if the webinar

I'd appreciate if the webinar covered the process of comparing CCA M&amp;E frameworks and discussed whether, despite there being no single set of CCA indicators, a minimal set could be produced

Who is the target audience

Who is the target audience for this study? Is the target audience decision-makers (i.e. government bodies creating policies for the business and civil sectors)? or Influencers? (such as grass-roots groups) or individual members within a community who are neither decision makers nor influencers?

Hi David! As it indicates in

Dbours's picture

Hi David! As it indicates in the report's introduction; This study is intended for a wide audience of M&amp;E professionals, development and Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) practitioners, and academics. The findings and good practice principles on the development, selection, and use of indicators also have applications extending well beyond the CCA field.
Given the focus as well how evaluative evidence should inform policy making, this includes policy makers and influencers at the governmental as well as private sector level.

Thank you very much Dennis.

Thank you very much Dennis. This will be very important materials.

Thank you Dennis, I think

Thank you Dennis, I think that many programs have started integrating GCC in their activities. Much more to learn about GCC. Last week, I participated in a training about Global Climate Change &amp; Development that was impressive how important it is to integrate climate change in the program cycle. Organized by USAID.

Thank you Dennis for sharing

Thank you Dennis for sharing this excellent and interesting work,which is logically structured and well presented.I would like to see more emphasis on integrating gender in indicator sets, and give examples and experiences from the field.

It’s hard if not next to

It’s hard if not next to impossible to pinpoint which exact indicator or group of indicators that is or are the single most important indicators in relation to effectively monitoring the progress of an intervention that was specifically designed to increase community adoption on climate change that have various adverse impacts on agricultural products whereby such negative impacts also affect farmers earning decent incomes as well the overall performance of local economies to do well. Such projects/programs mostly have had predesigned desired objectives, outcomes and impacts of increasing community resilience to droughts and floods. No doubt that droughts and floods have adverse impacts on livelihoods that rely on agriculturally produced products, however in order to adequately address variables that mostly cause floods and droughts must be singled out and hence this is the challenge for most projects/programs. It has been a challenge mainly because such interventions do not take accounts the local and available knowledge and hence continually and somewhat stubbornly keeps falling to account indigenous local knowledge.
My opinion is we need to close the gap between theory and practices on many development related issues, in this case through capacitating local farmers with enhanced farming technologies while systematizing local knowledge would seem on the right direction. On this regard the question of how to systemize available local knowledge and then apply to the modified local knowledge at all project cycles is that major missing element that could effectively provides information feeding system that in return allows producing enhanced local knowledge management systems. I intend to say more on this. However for now and as far the discussion is on enhancing farmer resilience, I think the focus ought to be devoted on innovative methods geared towards enhancing farmer local knowledge. Thank you.

Dear Mohamed. I do thank you

Dbours's picture

Dear Mohamed. I do thank you for your wonderfully elaborate and thoughtful response! Yes, I completely agree with the need to enhance the uptake of local knowledge. A very good point.

Dear Dennis, thank you for

Dear Dennis, thank you for the prompt response. In line with this, I also think enhanced local knowledge will certainly help reduce the “cascade of uncertainties” of precisely mentioned on chapter 2 of the study but to also suggest further, I am very much inclined if possible that additionally measuring the specific social capital of communities in relation to counterfactual analysis could possibly add some values in the process of reducing such uncertainties as well could additionally serve as further risk mitigation. This is because negative social integration damages social cohesiveness as our context shows and hence measuring the social capital within communities and between cohabiting communities that experienced protracted violent conflict seems indispensible as never before. Thank you.

I so agree with what you are

Dbours's picture

I so agree with what you are saying there. I have found in reviewing evaluations of the LDCF and SCCF (two climate adaptation funds) that 1. local participation leads the the use of locally appropriate technologies, resulting in a higher level of project sustainability in the long term, and 2. that such an approach also leads to a higher adoption rate of innovations from outside - probably because these are being reviewed with a local lens.
I will certainly touch upon the local aspect in the webinar we will host to present the report and findings, and include some of the comments made here by you. Thank you!

Dear Dennis, thank you once

Dear Dennis, thank you once again for I do appreciate your great efforts. As I go through the document without hesitation and reservations now until June 30th, I will contribute as much I can. However, genuine local lenses matters greatly and with such guidance by you and your colleagues. I do appreciate your efforts for this could prove to be a practical experience in the process of closing the inherent gap of theory and practice through effectively articulating theories of change, particularly strengthening community resilience against the offshoots of climate changes. Thank you for providing such wonderful opportunity.

A timely post for Resilient

A timely post for Resilient South in Adelaide. Thank you Dennis.

Excelent material. I think

Excelent material. I think civil society organizations need to understand and properly manage sound indicators to monitor their governments' Mitigation and Adaptation plans and programmes.

Thank you Ricardo! And I

Dbours's picture

Thank you Ricardo! And I completely agree. (Evaluative) evidence from both monitoring and evaluation provides a solid foundation for constructive feedback and criticism. Equally important as developing their own evaluative work in M&amp;E is developing a good understanding of, and analytic skills for interpreting the work of others in this field.

Recent Studies

Good Practice Study on Principles for Indicator Development, Selection, and Use in Climate Change Adaptation Monitoring and Evaluation

The Independent Evaluation Office of the Global Environment Facility (GEF IEO) has undertaken - on behalf of Climate-Eval - a Good Practice Study on Indicator Development, Selection and Use Principles for Climate Change Adaptation M&E. This...

Scoping Study on Evaluation of Natural Resource Management Interventions linked to Climate Change

The Scoping Study on Evaluation on Natural Resource Management (NRM) Interventions linked to climate change was carried out by the Independent Evaluation Office of the Global Environment Facility (GEF IEO) on behalf of the Climate-Eval community...

Guidelines to Climate Mitigation Evaluations

These guidelines for climate mitigation evaluations are intended to clarify some of the persistent evaluation and measurement issues associated with climate mitigation interventions. This paper is a contribution towards solving some of the...