CLIMATE RISK AND ASSESSMENT TOOLS: MAKING SENSE OF A CROWDED FIELD

Transcription

1 CLIMATE RISK AND ASSESSMENT TOOLS: MAKING SENSE OF A CROWDED FIELD Anne Hammill (IISD) Tom Tanner (IDS) October 12, 2010

2 Study approach Methodology Documentary review 40 interviews with tool developers and users Survey of developing country government officials representing potential tool users Context Climate risks to poverty reduction Growing range of adaptation tools; maturity

3 Starting point: Other stocktakes Project and programme not sector or national focus Limited economic costing Large differences in levels of stakeholder engagement Points of departure: Limited understanding of User perspectives Potential for harmonisation Tanner and Guenther 2007; Klein et al 2007; Gigli and Agrawala 2007; Olhoff and Schaer 2010

4 Terminology No single definition of Climate risk management Tools : documents, computer programmes, websites that help undertake part of risk screening / assessment process Screening & assessment as part of climate risk management

5 Tools Typology Here we focus on Type 2 tools

6 Linking tools with decision-making steps Project Identification Project appraisal Project design Project implementation Monitoring & Evaluation Project cycle steps Raising awareness Identifying current and future vulnerabilities and climate risks Identifying adaptation measures Evaluating and selecting adaptation options Evaluating success of adaptation Adaptation decisionmaking steps Communication Screening Assessment Analysis Evaluation Integration M&E PROCESS TOOLS Climate info Vulnerability / poverty / development information DATA & INFORMATION PROVISON TOOLS Marketing Tool sharing Feedback, refinement CRM / climate adaptation tools KNOWLEDGE SHARING TOOLS / PLATFORMS

7 NGO TOOLS DONOR TOOLS Tools analysed here Asian Development Bank Tool name Draft Risk Screening Tool Description Screening tool GTZ Climate Proofing for Development Screening and assessment tool USAID Guidance Manual Screening and assessment tool DANIDA Climate Change Screening Studies Screening tool DFID Strategic Programme Review Assessment process Tearfund Tearfund Assessment tool CARE Climate vulnerability and capacity analysis Assessment tool IISD, IUCN, SEI, IC CRiSTAL Assessment tool Christian Aid Adaptation Toolkit Assessment tool Acknowledges multiple tools and initiatives in these agencies

8 Tool development Motivations (common) Development threatened by climate change Disconnect between external and internal work NGOs: Demand from field staff & local partners, social justice Donors: Top-down policy commitments, fiduciary risk management Development process Six months to one year Driven by headquarters with input from field offices and partners Collaborative and iterative Drawing from NGOs: PRA tools Donors: Risk management procedures for EIA/SIA Organizational change

9 Tools: Problem framing Framing: Relevance to organisational goals, objectives, priorities (E.g. USAID, CA) Starting point of analysis: Climate impacts (across multiple time horizons) Not vulnerability Direction of impact always climate development Some look at development adaptive capacity Project/programming cycle

10 Tool users profile Background or training Some already understood the basics of CC before using the tool Most users had environment / NRM background not generalists

11 Tool users profile (2) Roles and responsibilities Actual basically matches intended, although with donor tools have more consultants than originally envisaged

12 Experience of tool use Types of users identified: Training, incentives, resources available. Voluntary Trained and ready Applying as part of project Applying as part of job description Mandatory No formal training, aware of tool through own professional networks, Internet, reference documents. Use tool on adhoc, as-needed basis. Received training, ready and willing to apply tool as needed. May do it without prompting or support. May seek out funding opportunities. Usually trained, required to use tool as part of project i.e. tool elaboration and application are discrete project activities with associated budget lines. Usually trained, staff or consultants, hired to apply tool in designing and managing development strategies. Hired to use the tool(s). Trained, tools applied as part of mandatory agency policy.

13 Role of partners Not driving the process (at this point in time) Directly involved Part of the screening or assessment team Consulted for input Met departments, universities Communities (observations and experiences, risk management options) Local governments, districts (planning processes) National governments Trained to carry on the process (training of trainers)

14 Use of climate information Outsource the climate analysis Hire consultants, experts Use pre-fabricated climate information products Draw from readymade climate change summaries (projections, impacts), and adaptation options that accompany tool Rely more heavily on local observations and experiences Seek out some information (e.g. NAPA), extract general conclusions Research and emphasise community observations and experiences Growing emphasis on developing informed consumers of climate information (what, where, who) Disconnect between Type 1 and Type 2 tool users

15 Reported benefits of tool application Top 3 reported benefits: Design of climate-resilient development strategies Awareness-raising with partners / colleagues Capacity building Empowerment (e.g. better understanding of CC science) Demonstrated action on climate change

16 Common limitations How to address multiple stressors Moving from assessment to implementation to M&E Dealing with strategic programming Assessing budget support Partner engagement Stronger among NGOs (training, support, Donor engagement limited or a secondary concern Implications for climate risk management beyond aid Usually very limited capacity among government partners

17 Harmonisation opportunities Strong rationale for multiple tool development Common climate /vulnerability information sites or summaries? Common skeleton for elements of process? Screening criteria Checklists for risk assessment, risk management analysis, options evaluation Cost benefit / effectiveness analysis Approaches to strategic climate risk management Partner-oriented Portfolio-wide Sector / budget support Common M&E framework