Advertisement

Universal Metrics to Compare the Effectiveness of Climate Change Adaptation Projects

  • Martin Stadelmann
  • Axel Michaelowa
  • Sonja Butzengeiger-Geyer
  • Michel Köhler
Living reference work entry

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Adaptation Climate change Effectiveness Metrics DALYs Adaptation Fund Green Climate Fund 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation for funding and participants of the Colorado Conference on Earth System Governance and the 2011 Climate Economics and Law Conference in Berne for comments and suggestions. This paper represents the views of the authors but not necessarily the ones of the institutions and persons acknowledged here.

References

  1. Adaptation Fund (2013) Adaptation fund trust fund financial report prepared by the Trustee as of September 30, 2013, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  2. Adger WN, Agrawala S, Mirza MMQ, Conde C, O’Brien K, Pulhin J, Pulwarty R, Smit B, Takahashi K (2007) Assessment of adaptation practices, options, constraints and capacity. In: Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, Van der Linden PJ, Hanson CE (eds) Climate change 2007. Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York, pp 717–743Google Scholar
  3. AFB (2010) Operational policies and guidelines for parties to access resources from the Adaptation Fund. Annex I: strategic priorities, policies and guidelines of the Adaptation Fund adopted by the CMP. Adaptation Fund Board Secretariat, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  4. AFB (2011) Project and programme proposals. Adaptation Fund Board secretariat. http://adaptation-fund.org/projectprogrammeproposals. Accessed 25 Feb 2011
  5. Agrawala S, Fankhauser S (2008) Economic aspects of adaption to climate change. Costs, benefits and policy instruments. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, ParisGoogle Scholar
  6. Aldy JE, Viscusi WK (2008) Adjusting the value of a statistical life for age and cohort effects. Rev Econ Stat 90(3):573–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baca M (2010) Call for a pilot program for market-based adaptation funding. N Y Univ J Int Law Polit 42:1337–1381Google Scholar
  8. Barnett J, O’Neill S (2010) Maladaptation. Glob Environ Chang 20(2):211–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bockstael NE, Freeman AM (2005) Welfare theory and evaluation. In: Mäler K-G, Vincent JR (eds) Handbook of environmental economics, vol 2, 1st edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 517–570Google Scholar
  10. Butzengeiger S, Michaelowa A, Köhler M, Stadelmann M (2011) Policy instruments for climate change adaptation – lessons from mitigation and preconditions for introduction of market mechanisms for adaptation. Paper presented at the Colorado conference on earth system governance: crossing boundaries and building bridges, Colorado State University, 17–20 May 2011Google Scholar
  11. Detsky A, Naglie G (1990) A clinician’s guide to cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med 113:147–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ECAWG (2009) Shaping climate resilient development. A framework for decision making. A report of the Economics of Climate Adaptation Working Group. ClimateWorks Foundation, Global Environment Facility, European Commission, McKinsey & Company, The Rockefeller Foundation, Standard Chartered Bank and Swiss Re, San Francisco/Washington, DC/BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  13. Fankhauser S, Tol R (1998) The value of human life in global warming impacts – a comment. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 3:87–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fankhauser S, Tol R, Pearce D (1998) Extensions and alternatives to climate change impact valuation: on the critique of IPCC Working Group III’s impact estimates. Environ Dev Econ 3:59–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fearnside P (1998) The value of human life in global warming impacts. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 3:83–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. GEF (2008) Background and elements for a GEF monitoring and evaluation framework on adaptation. Lessons from GEF Climate Change Adaptation projects. GEF Evaluation Office in Cooperation with the GEF Adaptation Task Force. LDCF/SCCF council meeting, 25 Apr 2008. Global Environment Facility, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  17. Hallegatte S, Lecocq F, de Perthuis C (2011) Designing climate change adaptation policies. An economic framework, vol 5568, Policy research working paper series. World Bank, Washington, DCCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. HBS/ODI (2011) Climate funds. Heinrich Böll Stiftung North America/Oversea Development Institute. http://www.climatefundsupdate.org/listing. Accessed 26 Feb 2011
  19. Hinkel J (2008) Comparing possible outcomes or describing social learning? Presentation hold at the “expert consultation on adaptation metrics”, 17–18 Apr 2008, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  20. IGES, World Bank (2008) Expert consultation on adaptation metrics. Tokyo, 17–18 Apr 2008. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies & World Bank, Hayama/Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  21. Klein R (2009) Identifying countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change: an academic or a political challenge? Carbon Clim Law Rev 3:284–291Google Scholar
  22. Michaelowa A (2005) Determination of baselines and additionality for the CDM: a crucial element of credibility of the climate regime. In: Yamin F (ed). Climate Change and carbon markets. A handbook of emission reduction mechanisms, Earthscan, London, pp 289–304Google Scholar
  23. Moench M, Fajber E, Dixit A, Caspari E, Pokhrel A (2009) Catalyzing climate and disaster resilience. Processes for identifying tangible and economically robust strategies. Final report of the risk to resilience study. Institute for Social and Environmental Transition, KathmanduGoogle Scholar
  24. Nakhooda S, Fransen T, Kuramochi T, Alice Caravani A, Prizzon A, Shimizu N, Tilley H, Halimanjaya A, Welham B (2013) Mobilising international climate finance: lessons from the fast-start finance period. Overseas Development Institute, World Resources Institute, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies &, Open Climate Network, London/Washington, DC/HayamaGoogle Scholar
  25. Noble I (2008) Why adaptation metrics? Presentation hold at the “expert consultation on adaptation metrics”, 17–18 Apr 2008, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  26. Parry M, Arnell N, Berry P, Dodman D, Fankhauser S, Hope C, Kovats S, Nicholls R (2009) Assessing the costs of adaptation to climate change. A review of the UNFCCC and other recent estimates. International Institute for Environment and Development, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Schönthaler K, von Andrian-Werburg S, Wulfert K, Luthardt V, Kreinsen B, Schultz-Sternberg R, Hommel R (2010) Establishment of an indicator concept for the German strategy on adaptation to climate change. German Federal Environment Agency, DessauGoogle Scholar
  28. Schultz K (2012) Financing climate adaptation with a credit mechanism: initial considerations. Clim Pol 12(2):187–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (2007) Climate change 2007. The physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Tol R (1997) The social cost controversy – a personal appraisal. In: Sors A, Liberatore S, Funtowicz S, Hourcade J, Fellous J (eds) Proceedings of the international symposium “Prospects for integrated environmental assessment: lessons learnt from the case of climate change”. Brussels, pp 35–40Google Scholar
  31. UNFCCC (1992) United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, BonnGoogle Scholar
  32. UNFCCC (2010a) Potential costs and benefits of adaptation options: a review of existing literature. Technical paper. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, BonnGoogle Scholar
  33. UNFCCC (2010b) Synthesis report on efforts undertaken to monitor and evaluate the implementation of adaptation projects, policies and programmes and the costs and effectiveness of completed projects, policies and programmes, and views on lessons learned, good practices, gaps and needs United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, BonnGoogle Scholar
  34. UNFCCC (2011) Fast-start finance. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. http://unfccc.int/cooperation_support/financial_mechanism/fast_start_finance/items/5646.php. Accessed 1 June 2011
  35. Viscusi WK, Aldy JE (2003) The value of a statistical life: a critical review of market estimates throughout the world. J Risk Uncertain 27(1):5–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Viscusi WK, Gayer T (2003) Quantifying and valuing environmental health risks. In: Mäler K-G, Vincent JR (eds) Handbook of environmental economics, vol 2, 1st edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1029–1103Google Scholar
  37. VROM (2011) Fast start finance. Contributing countries. Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM). http://www.faststartfinance.org/content/contributing-countries. Accessed 1 June 2011
  38. WHO (2010a) Disability weights, discounting and age weighting of DALYs. World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/daly_disability_weight/en/index.html. Accessed 16 Oct 2010
  39. WHO (2010b) Global burden of disease. World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/en/. Accessed 16 Oct 2010
  40. World Bank (1993) World development report 1993: investing in health. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. World Bank (2010) Economics of Adaptation to Climate Change Study (EACC). A synthesis report. Final consultation draft. World Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  42. World Bank (2011) GDP per capita (current US$). World Bank. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD. Accessed 28 Apr 2011

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Stadelmann
    • 1
  • Axel Michaelowa
    • 2
    • 3
  • Sonja Butzengeiger-Geyer
    • 3
  • Michel Köhler
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Climate Policy InitiativeVeneziaItaly
  2. 2.Center for Comparative and International StudiesUniversity of ZurichZürichSwitzerland
  3. 3.Perspectives GmbHHamburgGermany
  4. 4.Climate Advisory Network the GreenwerkHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations