2.8.3. Examples from countries

Evaluating the implementation of a
national adaptation strategy
Finland

Purpose: The inter-ministerial Coordination Group for
Climate Change Adaptation, chaired by the Ministry of Agriculture and

Forestry was responsible for the evaluation of the Finnish National Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change (2005). The evaluation of the Strategy’s implementation (2012/2013) assessed the level of adaptation in 15 sectors and produced recommendations for the Strategy’s revision.

Approach: The evaluation looked at the progress of adaptation measures that had been proposed in the Strategy. The evaluation assessed the adaptation level of sectors using a 5-step indicator. The indicator measures: recognition of adaptation needs, level of adaptation research, launch of adaptation measures, and cooperation with other sectors. The evaluation used information from: a self-assessment by sectors, questionnaires and interviews of sector experts, a stakeholder workshop and results from research projects. The evaluation also provided an overview of some cross-sectoral measures (such as early warning systems and communication), adaptation at regional and local levels, EU adaptation policy and the results from recent adaptation research.

Challenges addressed:

• Inter-ministerial Coordination Group to address the communication and capacity issues between relevant national institutions
• Multiple opportunities to use the ‘learning’ from the process
• Mid-term review (2009) and full review (2013) allowed for adjustments during the strategy period and recommendations at the end to feed into the new strategy
• Horizontal coordination so that sector views were taken into consideration
• Broad participation of stakeholders involved in the process
• A 5-step process provided a range of process and outcome-based measures to assess the level of adaptation in the 15 sectors.
• Approach included an overview of cross-sectoral and local measures demonstrating vertical coordination and a recognition of interdependencies and cross-sectoral elements that are not covered by sectors. 

Further details are available at: Evaluation of the 2005 National Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change (2013), Report of the Coordination Group for Adaptation, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Working Group report 2013:5 (in Finnish). 

Monitoring, reporting and evaluating the implementation of a national adaptation strategy
Lithuania

Purpose: The Strategy for National Climate Change Management Policy for 2013 – 2050 was adopted in November 2012. The strategy sets the strategic goals of both - Lithuania’s climate change adaptation and mitigation policies. Every two years, the Government of the Republic of Lithuania prepares a report on the implementation of the Strategy to the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania. 

Approach: In order to ensure the implementation of the Strategy the Inter-institutional Action Plan for the goals and objectives (2013-2020) was approved in April 2013. Following the approval of the strategic planning methodology, the Plan is prepared for a three year period and is updated annually. The progress of the implementation of the Strategy is evaluated by a set of criteria established in the Plan.

In addition, ministries and other governmental institutions are obliged to integrate the goals and objectives set out in the Strategy, to establish implementation measures and to ensure close inter-institutional cooperation while developing the strategies, their implementation plans and programmes of individual sectors of the economy.

State and municipal institutions provide the Ministry of Environment with the information about the progress by submitting annual activity reports. These institutions also report on planned measures that could be included in the Plan.

Challenges addressed:

• The criteria used to measure progress are quantitative.
• The outcomes of the MRE scheme will feed into further development of the Plan (2013-2016) and the update of the Strategy for the National Climate Change Management Policy. 

The following short-term measures are included in the Inter-institutional Action Plan:

• Studies to assess vulnerability and opportunities and propose effective adaptation measures and indicators will be conducted for the individual sectors (spatial planning, transport, energy, waste, industry, agriculture, fisheries, forestry, tourism and others);
• Evaluation of the vulnerability and risks for different regions of Lithuania (2016).

Further details:

http://www.am.lt/VI/files/File/Klimato%20kaita/Lankstinukas_Klimato_kaita_ENG.pdf

Evaluation of a specific policy – the Adaptation Reporting Power
UK

Purpose: The Climate Change Act (2008) gives the UK government the authority to ask public and private sector organisations to report under the Adaptation Reporting Power (ARP). Organisations responsible for key services and infrastructure can be asked to assess the risk of climate change on their work and describe how they will address these risks. The first ARP process (2012) targeted 91 organisations responsible for national infrastructure. The Adaptation Sub-Committee (ASC) evaluated this first ARP report.

Approach: The ASC assessed the ARP policy against three principles to ensure that it made a positive contribution to the national adaptation effort: usefulness, robustness; and cost-effectiveness.

Under ‘usefulness’ the ASC recommended that the ARP should encourage reporting organisations to identify and address their risks, particularly those who previously had a low awareness of adaptation. The outputs from the ARP report should also help to inform the Government’s adaptation policy. Under ‘robustness’ the ASC proposed that the reports should be based on quantitative assessments of risk and there should be a clear quality assurance process in place.

Under ‘cost-effectiveness’ the ASC recommended that the ARP should produce useful, low-cost reports, focussing on adaptation priorities, but avoiding duplication with existing regulatory requirements.

The key stakeholders (the reporting organisations) were given the opportunity for tailored support, they attended a stakeholder conference, and participated in discussions on sector-level assessments. They were also invited to comment on the ARP process and how it might be improved.

Challenges addressed:

• Stakeholders actively involved in the process through support, workshops and conferences to enable two-way discussion.
• Outcomes (recommendations) were considered when developing the second ARP (2014).
• Qualitative and quantitative elements of the policy were assessed to ensure that both the finance and contextual aspects of implementing the policy were considered.
• An independent body (ASC) carried out the assessment to ensure transparency and publicise the lessons learned from a trusted source.

Further details are available at: http://www.oecd.org/env/cc/National%20level%20ME%20in%20the%20United%20Kingdom.pdf

http://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/letter-advice-on-the-strategy-for-the-second-round-adaptation-reporting-power-5-november-2012/

Evaluating preparedness for a future climate
UK

Purpose: The 2008 Climate Change Act introduced a framework for independent scrutiny of the government’s adaptation programme. It included the establishment of the Adaptation Sub-Committee (ASC) of the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), an independent body created to fulfil a number of statutory responsibilities. One of these is to “assess the preparedness of the UK to meet climate change risks and opportunities”.

Approach: The ASC developed a monitoring and evaluation Framework based on the “adaptation preparedness ladder” which has three components - desired adaptation outcomes, policy to enable delivery and delivery of outcomes. The current approach is based on lessons learned to date and this process of learning is likely to continue in the future. The ASC’s annual reports have focussed on different risks e.g. flooding, water scarcity and ecosystem services/managing the land. (ASC 2012) The annual assessments are intended to facilitate mid-course corrections to adaptation priorities, but they do not directly assess the cost-effectiveness of the UK government’s national adaptation programme.

The ASC has developed adaptation indicators organised under key themes. Figure 21 illustrates those indicators for flooding and includes information relating to the current trend for that indicator (increasing, decreasing or no significant trend) and the implication of the trend. Each headline indicator is underpinned by quantifiable data.  Some of these indicators can be considered as proxy process indicators e.g. ‘planning applications approved by local authorities despite Environment Agency objections’.

Challenges addressed:

• The assessment was carried out by an independent body.
• The framework covers the horizontal, vertical, cross-sectoral, other (e.g. interdependencies, emergency, and security) and unexpected aspects.
• The indicators used to measure progress are quantitative (where a baseline and data is available) qualitative and process (to ensure the context is understood).
• The process is continuous and encourages ‘learning’ with different aspects covered in the annual reports to allow regular adjustment to both the approach and the measures.
• The outcomes of the evaluations have, and will continue to feed into the development of the National Adaptation Programme (NAP 2013).

Further details are available at: ASC 2012 (http://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/climate-change-is-the-uk-preparing-for-flooding-and-water-scarcity-3rd-progress-report-2012 ),

NAP 2013 (https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/adapting-to-climate-change/supporting-pages/national-adaptation-programme ). Adaptation Indicators (http://www.theccc.org.uk/charts-data/adaptation-indicators)

Development of Indicators
Austria

Purpose: An M&E scheme is currently being developed by the Ministry of Environment to review the implementation of the national adaptation strategy (NAS) and the National Action Plan (NAP). The scheme will also generate further knowledge on trends of climate change effects and learn which adaptation inventions are working. The NAS and NAP will be further developed based on the progress report and new scientific knowledge.

Approach: The M&E scheme links to the 132 adaptation actions (across 14 sectors) identified in the NAP. The scheme aims to provide sufficient information to monitor implementation activities, while keeping it manageable in terms of effort. The scheme combines two different approaches.

i) Self-assessment: a stakeholder survey on the adaptation actions will be carried out.

ii) Data related criteria-catalogue: an “indicator-based approach” with collection of qualitative and quantitative data.

The criteria catalogue started with an in-depth literature review and the identification of interfaces with existing (adaptation) monitoring systems (Austrian and EU). Preliminary suggestions for a set of criteria (for each sector) were identified and discussed with experts and within a stakeholder workshop. The Austrian framework is designed as a “learning system” to be flexible, iterative and open for new developments.

Challenges addressed:

• Stakeholders are actively involved in the process (workshops to enable two-way discussion) and will be involved in the future through a self-assessment survey. 
• Existing (adaptation) monitoring systems were used
• The criteria selected to measure progress are both quantitative and qualitative
• The framework encourages ‘learning’ and is flexible.