Universal metrics to compare the effectiveness of climate change adaptation projects

Adaptation to climate change is increasingly supported through international financing. In contrast to mitigation, where the effectiveness of policy action can be measured through the metric "tonnes of CO2 equivalent reduced", no universally accepted metric for assessment of adaptation effectiveness exists. Without such a metric, adaptation finance vehicles such as the Adaptation Fund under the Kyoto Protocol encounter challenges when trying to compare the adaptive effect of ongoing or proposed projects in order to achieve an efficient allocation of their funds. The first experiences with adaptation funding show a tendency to use intermediate outcome indicators but no final impact metrics, similar to the state-of-art in development funding. This might lead to a backlash against adaptation funding by electorates in the North if the funding cannot show clear results. We assess two possible candidates for generic adaptation effectiveness metrics: 1) wealth saved from destruction through climate change impacts, and 2) disability-adjusted life years saved (DALYs), which are widely used in public health policy analysis. Apart from those two metrics we propose to use no-harm assessments in the environmental and cultural field. We discuss uncertainties encountered in applying these metrics, including the uncertain link between commonly reported outcome indicators and our metrics for saved wealth and health. The two metrics are tested by assessing five adaptation project proposals. Finally, we line out some ideas to handle these uncertainties, e.g. the use of regularly updated sectoral methodologies and agreed climate and economic models

Market mechanisms for adaptation to climate change: lessons from mitigation and a pathway to implementation

Adaptation to climate change impacts can be proactive or reactive. Adaptation can have the character of a private good, a club good or a public good depending on the nature of the action. Thus underprovision of adaptation is likely if left to private initiative, and public policy instruments are required that incentivize adaptation. Such instruments should be as efficient as possible, and in other policy fields market-based mechanisms have been used to maximize efficiency. So far however, there is almost no experience with adaptation taxes, tradable project-based offsets or tradable allowances, whereas climate change mitigation has been a field where such instruments have been widely applied during the last two decades. While generally, market-based instruments for mitigation can be seen as successful, several key lessons have been learned. Pilot phases are important to test an instrument and to correct design flaws. Distortions by lobbies can lead to adverse distributional effects. Regulatory uncertainty reduces the efficiency gains.-Transaction costs can form a significant barrier.- Monitoring and independent verification are key to prevent fraud. These lessons should be taken into account in the design of market mechanisms for adaptation, and we derive requirements for that. Finally, we discuss a concrete pathway to establishing market mechanisms for adaptation and define priorities for further research and possible pilot implementation, differentiating by types of adaptation

Evaluation of the activities of the foundation ”Future of the Carbon Market“

The report evaluates the foundation “Future for the Carbon Market”, focusing on three different aspects: the foundation’s general concept and strategy, its supported projects / activities, and an outlook on the three remaining years in its lifecycle. The German foundation has the objective to support programmatic approaches in international carbon markets through acquisition of emission credits (CERs) under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), as well as through consultancy and promotional activities for programmatic activities. The review concludes an overall positive evaluation of the foundation’s strategic mission and vision and highlights the pros and cons of the utilized approach of upfront payment against future carbon revenues, including its potential application under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement

Universal Metrics to Compare the Effectiveness of Climate Change Adaptation Projects

Adaptation to climate change is increasingly supported through international financing. In contrast to mitigation, where the effectiveness of policy action can be measured through the metric “tonnes of CO2 equivalent reduced,” no universally accepted metric for assessment of adaptation effectiveness exists. Without such a metric, adaptation finance vehicles such as the Adaptation Fund or the Green Climate Fund encounter challenges when trying to compare the adaptive effect of projects in order to achieve an efficient allocation of their funds. First experiences with adaptation funding show a tendency to avoid final impact metrics. This might lead to a backlash against adaptation funding by electorates in industrialized countries if adaptation funding cannot show clear results. This report assesses two possible candidates for generic adaptation effectiveness metrics: (1) wealth saved from climate change impacts and (2) disability-adjusted life years saved (DALYs), which are widely used in public health policy analysis. Apart it is proposed to use no-harm assessments to evaluate environmental and cultural impacts of adaptation projects. The authors discuss uncertainties encountered in applying these metrics, including the uncertain link between commonly reported intermediate indicators and our metrics and ideas to handle such, e.g., the use of regularly updated methodologies and agreed climate and economic models

Making Life Better: A Whole System Strategic Framework for Public Health 2013-2023 (PDF 11MB)

"Making Life Better" is the public health strategy for Northern Ireland 2013-2023. It is designed to provide direction for policies and actions to improve the health and wellbeing of people in Northern Ireland and to reduce inequalities in health