CLIMATE RISK AND ASSESSMENT TOOLS:

MAKING SENSE OF A CROWDED FIELD

Anne Hammill (IISD)

Tom Tanner (IDS)

October 12, 2010

Study approach

Methodology

Documentary review

40 interviews with tool developers and users

Survey of developing country government officials

representing potential tool users

Context

Climate risks to poverty reduction

Growing range of adaptation tools; maturity

Starting point: Other stocktakes

Project and programme not sector or national focus

Limited economic costing

Large differences in levels of stakeholder engagement

Points of departure:

Limited understanding of

User perspectives

Potential for harmonisation

Tanner and Guenther 2007; Klein et al 2007; Gigli and Agrawala 2007; Olhoff and Schaer 2010

Terminology No single definition of „Climate risk management‟

“Tools”: documents, computer programmes, websites that

help undertake part of risk screening / assessment process

Screening & assessment as part of climate risk management

Tools Typology

• Here we focus on Type 2 tools

Linking tools with decision-making steps

Project

Identification

Project

appraisal

Project

design

Project

implementation

Monitoring

& Evaluation

Project

cycle

steps

Raising awareness

Identifying current and future vulnerabilities and

climate risks

Identifying adaptation measures

Evaluating and selecting

adaptation options

Evaluating “success” of adaptation

Adaptation

decision-

making

steps

Climate info Vulnerability / poverty / development information

DATA & INFORMATION PROVISON TOOLS

Marketing Tool sharing Feedback, refinement

KNOWLEDGE SHARING TOOLS / PLATFORMS

Communication Screening Assessment Analysis Evaluation Integration M&E

PROCESS TOOLS

CRM /

climate

adaptation

tools

Tools analysed here Tool name Description

DO

NO

R T

OO

LS

Asian Development

Bank Draft Risk Screening Tool Screening tool

GTZ Climate Proofing for Development Screening and assessment tool

USAID Guidance Manual Screening and assessment tool

DANIDA Climate Change Screening Studies

Screening tool

DFID Strategic Programme Review Assessment process

NG

O T

OO

LS

Tearfund Tearfund Assessment tool

CARE Climate vulnerability and capacity analysis Assessment tool

IISD, IUCN, SEI, IC

CRiSTAL Assessment tool

Christian Aid Adaptation Toolkit Assessment tool

Acknowledges multiple tools and initiatives in these agencies

Tool development

• Motivations (common) • Development threatened by climate change

• Disconnect between external and internal work

• NGOs: Demand from field staff & local partners, social justice

• Donors: Top-down policy commitments, fiduciary risk management

• Development process • Six months to one year

• Driven by headquarters with input from field offices and partners

• Collaborative and iterative

• Drawing from… • NGOs: PRA tools

• Donors: Risk management procedures for EIA/SIA

• Organizational change

Tools: Problem framing

Framing: Relevance to organisational goals, objectives,

priorities (E.g. USAID, CA)

Starting point of analysis: Climate impacts (across

multiple time horizons)

Not vulnerability

Direction of impact always climate development

Some look at development adaptive capacity

Project/programming cycle

Tool users‟ profile

Background or training

Some already understood the basics of CC before using

the tool

Most users had environment / NRM background not

generalists

Tool users‟ profile (2)

• Roles and responsibilities

• Actual basically matches intended, although with donor

tools have more consultants than originally envisaged

Experience of tool use

Types of users identified: Training, incentives, resources available.

Voluntary No formal training, aware of tool through own professional

networks, Internet, reference documents. Use tool on ad-

hoc, as-needed basis.

Trained and

ready

Received training, ready and willing to apply tool as

needed. May do it without prompting or support. May seek

out funding opportunities.

Applying as part

of project

Usually trained, required to use tool as part of project – i.e.

tool elaboration and application are discrete project

activities with associated budget lines.

Applying as part

of job

description

Usually trained, staff or consultants, hired to apply tool in

designing and managing development strategies. Hired to

use the tool(s).

Mandatory

Trained, tools applied as part of mandatory agency policy.

Role of partners

• Not driving the process (at this point in time)

• Directly involved • Part of the screening or assessment team

• Consulted for input • Met departments, universities

• Communities (observations and experiences, risk management options)

• Local governments, districts (planning processes)

• National governments

• Trained to carry on the process (training of trainers)

Use of climate information

Outsource the climate analysis

• Hire consultants, experts

Use pre-fabricated climate information

products

• Draw from ready-made climate change summaries (projections, impacts), and adaptation options that accompany tool

Rely more heavily on local observations and experiences

• Seek out some information (e.g. NAPA), extract general conclusions

• Research and emphasise community observations and experiences

• Growing emphasis on developing informed consumers of climate

information (what, where, who)

• Disconnect between Type 1 and Type 2 tool users

Reported benefits of tool application

Top 3 reported benefits:

Design of climate-resilient development strategies

Awareness-raising with partners / colleagues

Capacity building

Empowerment (e.g. better understanding of CC science)

Demonstrated action on climate change

Common limitations

How to address multiple stressors

Moving from assessment to implementation to M&E

Dealing with strategic programming

Assessing budget support

Partner engagement

Stronger among NGOs (training, support,

Donor engagement limited or a secondary concern

Implications for climate risk management beyond aid

Usually very limited capacity among government partners

Harmonisation opportunities Strong rationale for multiple tool development

Common climate /vulnerability information sites or summaries?

Common skeleton for elements of process?

Screening criteria

Checklists for risk assessment, risk management analysis, options evaluation

Cost benefit / effectiveness analysis

Approaches to strategic climate risk management

Partner-oriented

Portfolio-wide

Sector / budget support

Common M&E framework