Guidelines to Climate Mitigation Evaluations

Berlin-based renewable energy policy expert and former program officer at the Global Environment Facility, Christine Wörlen has detailed out clear guidelines to help those evaluating climate mitigation interventions at local, national, sectoral or global levels.

Titled “Guidelines to Climate Mitigation Evaluation” the 64 paged document was commissioned by Climate-Eval online community of practice as part of ongoing efforts to facilitate the evaluation of climate change and development around the world.

Drawing from close to 500 documents contained in climate-Eval’s online repository and with inputs from members of the community of practice, Christine examined measurement issues challenging evaluators of climate mitigation notably: systems boundaries, leakages, additionality, co-financing and other forms of joint influencing.

She goes beyond the indicators for evaluating climate mitigation proposed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and The Development Assistance Committee (DAC), arguing that any ambitious evaluation would look beyond these set of indicators. These indicators include relevance, aid effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability.

In addition, the guidelines address barriers that may be hindering the kind of transformation that we seek in climate mitigation interventions such as ignorance, lack of motivation, lack of expertize, lack of assess to mitigation options, lack of affordability, and lack of cost effectiveness at the level of consumers, local financiers and policy makers. These systemic barriers have to be seriously considered in designing interventions if we must achieve the desired transformation, she argues. This is what she refers to as moving from The Theory of No Change (TONC) to the Theory of Action.

Add comment

Plain text

  • Allowed HTML tags: <p> <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Latest Blogs

What is Safe Monitoring and Evaluation Practice in the 21st Century?

Monitoring and evaluation practice can do harm. It can harm:

the environment by prioritizing economic gain over species that have no voice
people who are invisible to us when we are in a position of power
by asking for...

The GEF and Cleantech: Evaluating Efforts to Build an Innovation Ecosystem

Global factors such as technological advances, lowered costs, available capital, consumer demand and climate change have been encouraging the development and deployment of clean technologies as part of low...

Recent FAO evaluation highlights the role of GEF in programmes addressing integrated natural resource management for sustainable food and agriculture systems

In November 2018, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has released an evaluation of its contributions to integrated natural resource management for sustainable agriculture.

CIF Evaluation & Learning: What Are We Learning About the Big Issues in Climate Finance?

The scale and urgency of the climate crisis demands rapid action to prevent a range of consequences – from increased droughts and floods to huge economic losses and more extreme natural disasters.  

All major climate funds and...

Rethinking resilience, adaptation and transformation in a time of change

“How the world deals with large and serious problems is almost certainly going to shape our collective future” is the second line – and a promising start – in this edited Springer volume titled...