1. Mandate: CMA 1 invited the AC and the LEG, in collaboration with the SCF, and relevant experts to contribute to the technical work [of reviewing the adequacy and effectiveness of adaptation and support] by continuing to compile existing methodologies.1
2. Background: In accordance with the mandate, the AC and the LEG, in collaboration with the SCF, have compiled existing methodologies, alongside lessons learned, gaps and challenges identified through their application at different levels, based on submissions and desk top studies. They also established a joint working group to advise the three bodies on the further work regarding the mandate. As part of their work, the three bodies and their joint working group considered the purpose, principles and scope of the global review, its overall context and potential sources of information. They also took into account additional considerations and proposals for conducting the global review as expressed by Parties and other stakeholders under the technical dialogues of the global stocktake, the work programme on the global goal on adaptation and in other recent discussions.
The findings of this work have been summarized into a reference paper which also outlines opportunities and potential actions in working towards a more systematic global review over time.
3. Objectives: The objectives of the event are as follows:
- Present the lessons learned, challenges and opportunities in reviewing the adequacy and effectiveness of adaptation and support identified through the work of the AC and the LEG, in collaboration with the SCF, as outlined above
- Discuss the practical implications of these findings for the national and global levels and potential ways forward towards a more systematic global review
4. Draft agenda (90 min)
|
Time
|
Focus
|
Speaker
|
|
10 min
|
Welcome and introduction
- Welcome
- Background and objectives of the event
|
Thinley Namgyel
Bhutan / UAE
|
|
15 min
|
Experiences in reviewing adequacy and effectiveness of adaptation and support - Presentation of the findings of the work undertaken by the AC/LEG/SCF
|
- Representatives of the AC/LEG/SCF
Britta Horstmann
Adaptation Committee (AC)
-
Hana Hamadallah -
Least Developed Countries Expert Group (LEG)
-
Gabriela Blatter -
Standing Committee on Finance (SCF)
|
|
60 min
|
Potential ways forward: what are the practical implications for reviewing adequacy and effectiveness of adaptation and support at different levels?
|
Targeted inputs, followed by open discussion
Jean-Philippe Bardolo -
Adaptation Focal Point of Burkina Faso
-
Natasha Farrington -
Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
-
Gareth Zahir-Bill -
Deputy Director of the Division of Portfolio Management of the Green Climate Fund
-
Srilata Kammila -
Head of Climate Change Adaptation, Bureau for Policy and Programme Support of UNDP for the perspective of international technical support organizations
-
Alexandre K. Magnan
Senior Research Fellow "Adaptation to climate and ocean change", Institute for sustainable development and international relations
|
|
5 min
|
Wrap-up
- Summary of key take-aways of the event
|
Facilitator
|
5. Expected Outcomes
The presentations and discussions at the event are expected to:
- Contribute towards a better understanding of how a more systematic global review of the adequacy and effectiveness of adaptation and support could look like;
- Substantiate the potential areas of further action outlined in the AC/LEG/SCF’s reference paper and/or generate additional ideas for further action;
- Underline the potential role of the AC/LEG/SCF in undertaking some of these actions;
- Raise interest by other stakeholders to participate in or implement these actions.
6. Summary
During their discussion participants of the event reflected on issues that could contribute towards a more systematic review of the adequacy and effectiveness of adaptation and support in future global stocktakes (GSTs) and outlined some related challenges.
Participants agreed that a more consistent way of collecting data and reporting on adaptation processes at different levels would be desirable, considering that higher-level assessments of adequacy and effectiveness require drawing data and information from different sources and levels (triangulation). They emphasized the key role that the national level could play in this regard, e.g. in terms of ensuring that data collection and reporting processes at the sub-national level are aligned with the process of formulating and implementing national adaptation plans (NAPs) while also accounting for synergies with other processes such as the sustainable development goals. The need for providers of support to ensure coherence and complementarity between their monitoring and reporting requirements was underlined. While calling for more consistency in the data collection and reporting processes, participants duly acknowledged the context-specific nature of adaptation and the challenges associated with any form of standardization.
The discussion also touched upon the high value of effective monitoring, evaluation, learning and reporting systems in more general terms, characteristics of possible GST indicators/metrics for adaptation, the potential roles of statistical offices, academia, experts and other stakeholders in contributing towards a coherent understanding of adaptation on the ground, and the importance of ownership and accountability of adaptation actions and their effects.
In going forward, participants acknowledged the key role that future iterations of the GST can play in offering a platform for sharing lessons and monitoring adaptation outcomes over time.