Tools for Integrating Climate Change ADAPTATION and Disaster Reduction into Development

1
Tools for Integrating Climate Change ADAPTATION
and Disaster Reduction into Development

• Thomas Tanner (Institute of Development Studies,
  UK)
• Anne Hammill (International Institute for
  Sustainable Development, Geneva)
• EADI/DSA Conference September 20th 2011

2
Positionality
3
Context

• Risks to poverty reduction
• Responses
• New programmes
• New policy and organisational change
• Development on risk management tools

See Hammill and Tanner 2011 Mitchell and Tanner
2006 Wilby and Vaughan 2010
4
Rationale

• Tool overload!
• Our focus on
• User perspectives
• Implications for harmonisation
• Process guidance tools

See stock-takes at Tanner and Guenther 2007
Klein et al 2007 Gigli and Agrawala 2007
Olhoff and Schaer 2010 Ecofys/IDS 2011
5
Method

• Sample of 10 tools in bilateral agencies and NGOs
• Interviews with 50 tool developers and users

Agency Tool name
DONOR TOOLS Asian Development Bank Draft Risk Screening Tool
DONOR TOOLS GTZ Climate Proofing for Development
DONOR TOOLS USAID Guidance Manual
DONOR TOOLS DANIDA Climate Change Screening Studies
DONOR TOOLS DFID Strategic Programme Review
NGO TOOLS Tearfund Tearfund
NGO TOOLS CARE Climate vulnerability and capacity analysis
NGO TOOLS IISD, IUCN, SEI, IC CRiSTAL
NGO TOOLS Christian Aid Adaptation Toolkit
6
Linking tools with decision-making steps
Climate info Vulnerability / poverty
/ development information DATA INFORMATION
PROVISON TOOLS
Marketing ? Tool sharing ?
Feedback, refinement KNOWLEDGE SHARING TOOLS
/ PLATFORMS
7
Tool conceptual approaches
8
What role for partners
9
Assessing tools 4 Organisational change

• Awareness-raising a key reported benefit
• Tools to provide agency to take action
• Association with others to work on the issue
• Demonstrated action on climate change

After Ballard 2007
10
Limitations

• Awareness and association is partial
• Partner engagement is varied
• Embedding tools in donor management systems only
• Capacity gaps in government
• Action failures
• Failure to address multiple stressors
  (integration)
• Dealing with strategic risks
• Assessing budget support
• How to learn from implementation / ME

11
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 ME framework

12
Organisational change

• Most agencies characterised by efficient
  management

Source Adapted from Ballard 2007
Response Description
Core business focused Organisations with a short term focus
Stakeholder responsive Managers will respond but not proactive. May be a tick box exercise.
Efficient management Managers recognise that the issue needs to be managed systematically, rather than occasionally. CC is usually delegated to someone lower down the organisation senior managers may think theyve cracked it.
Strategic experimentation Bridge from operations to strategy. Projects used to make breakthroughs in practice and understanding, but strategic decisions remain unaffected.
Strategic resilience Organisation becomes more able to put in place programmes to ensure its resilience in what is likely to be a very different and fast-changing future.
The champion organisation Organisations choose to go further and seek to lead wider social change to slow and reverse climate change itself.
13
Critique

• Of climate risk management
• Tools as a fix
• Technical / managerial solution
• Climate science less helpful than robust decision
  making (Wilby 2011)
• Of incremental change
• Adaptation as tweaks and incremental change
• Response as stability not transformation
• Of organisational change strategy in tools-led
  approach
• Offers potential to showcase without embedding
  change
• Limited use within organisation pigeon-holed

14
Thank you
15
Experience of tool use
Types of users identified Training, incentives, resources available. 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.
Ad hoc use
Trained and willing
Written into project
Written into job
Tool use is policy
16
Use of climate information

• Growing emphasis on developing informed consumers
  of climate information (what, where, who)
• Disconnect between Type 1 and Type 2 tool users

17
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

More assessment?
What is the problem?
What are our options?
What shall we do?
Sources Mitchell and Tanner 2006 Klein et al
2007 Wilby and Vaughan 2010
18
Tool development

• Motivations
• Development threatened by climate change
• Disconnect between advocacy and internal actions
• NGOs Demand from field staff local partners,
  social justice
• Donors Top-down policy commitments, fiduciary
  risk management
• Development process
• Driven by headquarters (with input from field
  offices / partners)
• Collaborative and iterative
• Organisational change as part of development
• Drawing from
• NGOs PRA tools
• Donors Risk management procedures for EIA/SIA