LEARNING TO ADAPT: Re-thinking Monitoring & Evaluation of Climate Change Adaptation – Implications For Practice Pau

1. LEARNING TO ADAPT: Re-thinking Monitoring & Evaluation of Climate Change Adaptation – Implications For PracticePaula Silva Villanueva SEA Change CoP Annual Members Meeting 9th November 2011

2. 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

3. 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

4. … • 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.

5. M&E Challenges in the context of climate change and disasters: implications for practice

6. “What” to measure?

7. 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

8. RE-THINKING M&E APPROACHES AND PRACTICE FOR ADAPTATION: The ADAPT Principles

9. 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

10. 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

11. 1. Role and Purpose of M&E • 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.

12. 2. Beyond “what to measure” – towards why & how Outcome-based indicators To support Robust and flexible planning Process-based indicators • To identify • Synergies and trade-offs • To understand / learn • factors that enable or constraint action • To measure • Progress towards integration in practice • 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.

13. 3. Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation as cyclical events – strengthening feedback loops and learning by doing • 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. Self-assessment & planning Evaluation Monitoring

14. AN EXAMPLEPlanning, Monitoring And Evaluation Of Climate Change Adaptation, Disaster Risk Management And Development Integration Processes THE CLIMATE SMART DISASTER RISK MANAGEMNT APPROACH

15. 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

16. The CSDRM approach and methodology 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.

17. 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?

18. 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.

19. Actors/Power dynamics Taking into account contextand scale Economic-political context/policies PM&E is dynamic in nature, the relationship between those sub-elements is neither fixed nor linear - Central focus of on-going analysis. Socio-cultural perspectives and perceptions Mandates Capacity Structures Resources

20. 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?

21. 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

22. THANK YOU!FOR MORE INFORMATIONVISIT: WWW.CSDRM.ORG Paula Silva Villanueva p.silvavillanueva@gmail.com