Table of contents

2.8.1. Monitoring, reporting and evaluation (MRE): what does this include?

This topic will focus on the monitoring, reporting and evaluation (MRE) of national adaptation interventions. Within this topic the term national adaptation interventions includes preparing a country for climate change, developing and implementing national strategies, action plans and specific policies. The topic will describe the status of MRE in European countries from the results of the self-assessment survey, the purposes and approaches that countries are using and from a number of examples how the challenges for adaptation MRE are being addressed. The key terms for MRE are provided in the box below.

comments (0)

Definitions of key terms

National adaptation interventions include preparing a country for climate change, developing and implementing national strategies, action plans and specific policies.

Monitoring: to keep track of progress made in implementing an adaptation intervention by using systematic collection of data on specified indicators and reviewing the measure in relation to its objectives and inputs, including financial resources.

Reporting: to provide information about what is happening in relation to adaptation. Reporting is mostly co-ordinated with either a monitoring or evaluation scheme and reported internally (within an organisation or country). Reporting can also be an external, explicit requirement related to international procedures, for example the National Communications of the UNFCCC or the revised Monitoring Mechanism Regulation (MMR) of the European Union.

Evaluation: A systematic and objective determination of the effectiveness of an adaptation intervention in the light of its objectives. It is also a judgement of the measures relevance, efficiency, equity and overall utility. There are many different types of evaluation. An ex-ante or mid-term eval­uation focuses on ways of improving a project or programme while it is still happening. In contrast, an ex-post evalu­ation seeks to judge the overall effectiveness of an intervention, usually after a project or programme has been completed.

Indicators to measure progress of an adaptation intervention: An indicator provides evidence that a certain condition exists or certain results have or have not been achieved and can be either quantitative or qualitative. Two distinct types of indicators can be used:

  • a process-based approach seeks to define the key stages in a process that would lead to the best choice of result (process indicators), without specifying that result at the outset and
  • an outcome-based approach seeks to define an explicit outcome, or result, of the adaptation action (outcome indicators).

These are composite definitions informed by the following sources: AdaptME (Pringle 2011); EC, 2011; UNFCCC, 2010; OECD DAC Glossary.

For further definitions see the Glossary in Chapter 4.

comments (0)

Why monitoring, reporting and evaluation matters

MRE is a critical part of the adaptation process. The combination of the long timescales associated with climate change, and inherent uncertainties (e.g. in terms of our understanding of future climate change and societal responses) makes it essential that we monitor, report and evaluate how well we are adapting. In addition, we are still at a relatively early stage in implementing adaptation policies and measures, therefore it is critical that we understand and learn which adaptation actions work (or not), in what contexts and why.

comments (0)

MRE of adaptation interventions is important because countries need to decide whether their intervention is effective (reducing the risks without introducing bad effects), efficient (the long-term benefits of adaptation actions should outweigh the costs), and equitable (the effects and costs of the activity on different groups should be taken into account). It is essential to aim for continual improvement: by learning lessons about the process of planning, implementing and measuring adaptation, future adaptation interventions can be more effective, efficient and equitable.

comments (0)

MRE is also seen as a critical part of the EU Adaptation Strategy (EC, 2013) and is covered in the guidelines for formulating adaptation strategies (EC, 2013a; 2013b). In addition, the way that the European Commission will assess the status of adaptation in the EU will be via Member State’s reporting (e.g. Monitoring Mechanism Regulation) and an adaptation preparedness scoreboard including indicators for measuring Member States' level of readiness.

comments (0)

Five reasons why measuring progress for adaptation is difficult

Measurement of progress for an adaptation intervention is often carried out using indicators. An indicator provides evidence that a certain condition exists or certain results have or have not been achieved and can be either quantitative or qualitative. In the context of climate adaptation, indicators are typically designed around three broad categories a) indicators of impacts, b) indicators of risks and c) indicators of adaptation action.

comments (0)

There are a number of reasons why MRE for adaptation is difficult and thus the development of indicators including:

  • Adaptation is not an outcome in its own right; in order to assess adaptation progress, proxies for measuring ‘reduced vulnerability’ or ‘increased resilience’ will often be required (Bours et al., 2014).
  • Adaptation is context specific, a characteristic which must be reflected in the indicators used. This can make it harder to develop meaningful indicators over a large geographical area or across many sectors.
  • Long timeframes. Climate change will unfold over many years; adaptation is often not an outcome that will be achieved within a normal programme cycle, typically 3-5 years.
  • Uncertainty – about the scale, timing and spatial nature of how the climate might change (ASC, 2011) and how society might respond makes it challenging to define good adaptation. Thus indicators of flexibility can be valuable as well. 
  • Adaptation has no prescribed target – there is no single metric (ASC, 2011), unlike climate change mitigation which can be quantified in terms, for example, of tons of carbon. This means that gathering a set of indicators together that provide a comprehensive picture is challenging.

comments (0)

Given these challenges, it can often be difficult to develop outcome indicators for adaptation. Thus outcome indicators can be combined with process indicators which measure progress towards the achievement of an outcome (e.g. the number of municipalities with adaptation action plans).

comments (0)

Developing a coherent set of indicators should be an iterative process (ASC, 2011) which takes into account the availability and robustness of data. Indicators should not be considered as a short cut to a deeper understanding of climate adaptation as they cannot reflect all the dimensions of adaptation planning and implementation (Bours et al., 2014).

comments (0)