Table of contents

2.8.2. Findings from the self-assessment survey

The purpose of this table is to illustrate the response rates to the four questions related to MRE within the self-assessment survey.

Question from self-assessment survey
(including the question number)
Number of countries answering this question (including % on total number)
What are your plans for integrating new information and insights into existing adaptation policies? Answers related to MRE only. (Q29) 10/29 (34 %)
In my country, monitoring, reporting and evaluation work for adaptation policies are ‘not planned’, ‘planned’, under development’ or ‘currently being implemented’. (Q30) 29/29 (100 %)
The three tables below allow you to identify the stakeholders involved and the format of their involvement for the development (1st table), implementation (2nd table) and monitoring and evaluation (3rd table) phases of the adaptation process. Answers related to 3rd Table on MRE only. (Q40) 3rd table: 13/29 (45 %)
What are the next steps your country is planning? Please provide information on the following issues and the related timing (addressing both national and sub-national levels): Monitoring, reporting and evaluation. (Q42) 23/29 (79 %)

comments (0)

Five countries are currently implementing either a monitoring, a reporting or an evaluation (MRE) scheme and these countries are Denmark, Finland, France, Lithuania` and the UK

The current status and progress of monitoring, reporting and evaluation schemes in European countries is shown in Figure 2.20 and Table 2.12.

comments (0)

The self-assessment survey reveals that the five countries that are currently implementing either a monitoring, a reporting or an evaluation (MRE) scheme are Denmark, Finland, France, Lithuania and the UK. Three countries are implementing monitoring schemes (France, Lithuania and the UK) while four countries are implementing reporting schemes (Denmark, France, Lithuania and the UK). Finally figure 25 shows that three countries are implementing an evaluation scheme (Finland, Lithuania and the UK).

comments (2)

When comparing the responses to question 12 about the stage of the policy process with the status of the MRE there is a good relationship. Countries that are in the early stages of the adaptation policy process (up to Decision) are also in the early stages (either ‘not planned’ or ‘planned’) of their MRE schemes. Those countries that are implementing an MRE scheme (5) are in the more advanced stages of the policy process.

comments (0)

Figure 2.20 Current status of monitoring, reporting and evaluation schemes for European countries (n=28)

comments (0)

Table 2.12 Current status of monitoring, reporting and evaluation schemes for European countries in response to the self-assessment survey (Question 30)

Status of MRE

Monitoring

Reporting

Evaluation

Not planned

Czech Republic

Greece

Italy

Liechtenstein

 

Czech Republic

Greece

Italy

Liechtenstein

 

Czech Republic

Greece

Italy

Liechtenstein

Romania

Slovenia

Planned

Cyprus

Denmark

Estonia

Finland

Hungary

Ireland

Latvia

The Netherlands

Poland

Portugal

Romania

Slovenia

Sweden

Turkey

Austria

Cyprus

Estonia

Finland

Germany

Hungary

Ireland

Latvia

The Netherlands

Poland

Portugal

Romania

Slovenia

Sweden

Turkey

Belgium

Cyprus

Estonia

Germany

Hungary

Ireland

Latvia

The Netherlands

Poland

Portugal

Sweden

Turkey

Under development

Austria

Belgium

Germany

Malta

Norway

Slovakia

Spain

Switzerland

Belgium

Malta

Norway

Slovakia

Spain

Switzerland

Austria

Denmark

France

Malta

Norway

Slovakia

Spain

Switzerland

Currently being implemented

France

Lithuania

UK

Denmark

Lithuania

France

UK

Finland

Lithuania

UK

comments (9)

Eight additional countries are working on MRE schemes and 12 are planning to do so in the future

Figure 2.20 shows that the largest number of countries, nearly a half, have stated that they are ‘planning’ M or R or E schemes and Table 2.12 provides the list of countries that are planning a scheme. The second largest number of countries (just over a quarter) have MRE schemes ‘under development’. A quarter of countries have stated that they are ‘not planning’ a monitoring or reporting or evaluation scheme.

comments (0)

It is evident from the self-assessment survey results that the status of MRE in Europe is not very advanced. This is not especially surprising as many countries are at an early stage of implementing their strategies. There is also the tendency for MRE to be considered later in the adaptation policy cycle, especially if MRE is related to the implementation of a specific strategy.

comments (0)

Stakeholder involvement in the monitoring and evaluation stage is limited

Stakeholders can range from the agencies that set the objectives to the parties that are the intended recipients of the intervention. Stakeholder involvement is therefore a critical part of a monitoring and evaluation scheme.

comments (0)

Figure 2.15 in Key Topic 5 shows that stakeholder involvement in the monitoring and evaluation stage has so far been limited. Ten out of the 13 countries who answered this question are developing or implementing their MRE schemes. The general public have the lowest level of involvement with mainly information given. The private sector is slightly more involved as there has been consultation in a few countries. Scientists and interest groups are actively involved. Deeper involvement (such as sharing the decision-making power) in monitoring and evaluation is restricted to government officials at national or sub-national level, i.e. those more likely to have a direct input to key adaptation decisions.

comments (0)

Countries have stated in the self-assessment survey that they are considering MRE schemes for a range of purposes. These vary from evaluating the preparedness of a country to evaluating a specific policy measure.

MRE has been planned or implemented for different purposes and for differing objectives. In some countries the purpose relates to the evaluation of a national strategy, while in another it may relate to a specific policy measure or a broader purpose that may have implications for the strategy/policy. These are demonstrated in section 2.8.3 with the following examples:

  • Finland and Austria are evaluating the implementation of their national adaptation strategy,
  • The UK has evaluated preparedness for a future climate, and with the Adaptation Reporting Power also evaluated a specific policy measure.

comments (0)

Countries are using a variety of approaches for their MRE schemes, for example a review by an independent body and self-assessment by sectors

The self-assessment survey results indicate that a number of different approaches have been considered (Table 2.13). These include, for example:

  • The use of periodic monitoring reports, working groups with the main stakeholders, sectoral reviews and taking into account the requirements of the European Commission’s Adaptation Preparedness Scoreboard (e.g. Spain).
  • The regional authorities are tasked with developing regional action plans to monitor adaptation work at the local level (e.g. Sweden)
  • A review by an independent body (e.g. UK)
  • Self-assessment by sectors (e.g. Austria and Finland).

comments (0)

The self-assessment survey asked countries to assess the status of their monitoring, reporting and evaluation processes separately (using the categories ‘planned‘, ‘not planned‘, ‘under development ‘and ‘currently being implemented’). The results show that in 21 out of 30 (70%) countries the M, R and E elements have reached are at the same level of development, suggesting some degree of coordination in terms of planning and progress. However, in some countries these elements are at different levels and this is demonstrated in Table 8 which is colour-coded according to progress.

comments (0)

Table 2.13 illustrates that in cases where progress is ‘uneven’ across M, R and E elements, there is no clear pattern across Europe. For example, Finland is further advanced in terms of evaluation compared to monitoring while Germany is the reverse. Denmark is planning monitoring, has implemented reporting and has an evaluation scheme is under development.

comments (0)

Ten countries out of 22 have stated in the self-assessment survey that they have already developed or are developing MRE indicators on climate impacts, risks and adaptation

The ten countries with or developing MRE indicators include Austria, Belgium, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, Norway, Switzerland and the UK (Table 2.13).

comments (2)

There are a number of challenges with developing indicators for adaptation and these challenges are discussed further in section 2.8.4.

comments (0)

Table 2.13 List of countries comments on their next steps for MRE and their respective category as described in the self-assessment survey.The category that they considered themselves to be at for monitoring, reporting and evaluation separately is indicated by the background colour to the squares. Blank squares indicate that no text was provided

Legend

Not Planned Under development
Planned   Currently being implemented

 

Austria Developing a monitoring tool for the assessment/evaluation of the defined fields of activity. The first Implementation Report will be published by the end of 2014. Future reporting is planned on a three-year cycle. Developing an evaluation tool for the assessment/evaluation of the defined fields of activity.
Belgium Indicators are being developed by the different federal and regional entities. A study commissioned by the Flemish Region will point out indicators for climate adaptation (e.g. heat island effect).   
Czech Republic M&R&E should be taken into account in the action plan
Finland As a part of revision to improve methodology and system to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the  strategy
France Mid-term review at the end of the year (report published January 2014)
Germany Currently indicators in order to establish a monitoring system on climate impacts and adaptation are developed
Hungary As part of the development of adaptation strategy, the elaboration of methods for monitoring/evaluation is under way
Ireland Future work under the EPA’s Climate Change Research Programme will take account of the need for adaptation indicators to assist in monitoring and reviewing of plans as well as allowing for comparison across plans
Lithuania During the period of 2014-2016 to conduct studies for the individual sectors (spatial planning, transport, energy, waste, industry, agriculture, fisheries, forestry, tourism and others) regarding the vulnerability to climate change and the opportunities to adapt, to propose the most effective adaptation measures and indicators.  State and municipal institutions engaged in the implementation of the activities will provide the Ministry of Environment with information about the progress in implementing the Strategy and its Action plan by submitting annual activity reports.
Malta It is recognised that the development of a monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) framework for adaptation will be crucial to feed into the review of the NAS. In this regard, the Climate Change Division within the MRA has been tasked, inter-alia, with the responsibility for monitoring and reporting of the relevant commitments, which is indeed on-going.
Norway Preliminary process established, through coordination of government action at national level and some other initiatives. Will be addressed more comprehensively in the coming years
Spain The Third Monitoring Report of the PNACC was published in December 2013, at the same time as the adoption of the Third Program of Work. This Third Work Programme includes monitoring and evaluation aspects by means of periodic monitoring reports, progress evaluation in Working Groups with main stakeholders and sectoral reviews. It also follows, participates and considers the EC progress in the design of the scoreboard.
Sweden>

In 2013, the regional authorities were given the task to develop regional actions plans and to monitor adaptation work at the local level. This work will include risk- or vulnerability assessments where needed.

As part of the work to review the risk and vulnerability assessment and to look at options for future adaptation work, we are also investigating the need for MRE activities.

Switzerland Setting up an M&E system: determination/ collection of indicators - first controlling/evaluation of implementation and effectiveness of the strategy in order to get valuable input for the revision of the strategy and action plan.
United Kingdom Adaptation Sub-Committee have statutory duty to report on implementation of NAP under Climate Change Act. They are developing indicators through which to do this. Also need to include related efforts by Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales.

comments (2)

Countries are planning to use the information from their monitoring and evaluation schemes to update either their national strategy or action plan.

A number of countries have commented on how they plan to use the results from their MRE scheme (Table 2.14).

comments (0)

Table 2.14 List of countries’ comments on integrating new information and insights into existing adaptation policies

Country

Comment

Austria

M&E scheme currently being developed to review the implementation of the NAS/NAP, generate knowledge on trends of climate change effects and learn what is working and what is not.

France

An action plan expected (legal framework under progress) every 5 years and a mid-term review.

The

Netherlands

The plan is to integrate new information and insights into the national strategy.

Portugal

New information and methodological concepts will be evaluated and considered for integration into existing policies.

Poland

Progress in implementation of the adaptation policies will be monitored and periodically new measures will be added.

Ireland

The National Adaptation Framework provides that that proposed sectoral and local adaptation plans should be reviewed every 5 years and build upon experience gained, new research and new policy on adaptation.

comments (0)

Table 2.14 shows that these six countries are planning to use the information from their monitoring and evaluation schemes to revise either their national strategy or action plan.  In their response, Ireland referred to the integration of new insights and information in sectoral and local adaptation plans, highlighting how adaptation planning can include experience gained from both vertical (local) and horizontal (sectoral) coordination. It is valuable to consider the evaluation from both top-down and bottom-up perspectives.

comments (0)