2.8.2. Findings from the self-assessment survey

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.

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).

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.

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).

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

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

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).

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

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.