Should we or shouldn’t we? The proposed marriage of the three

tribes, a tale of tentative romance and much domestic

dispute

Three tribes

The prize

Climate finance!

Better lives for the ‘client” (poor and vulnerable people), whom they all shared

The ‘client’ faced many, many risks

Climate, weather, poverty, conflict, economic shocks, disease, ….

Climate risks were the mandate of the CCA tribeWeather risks were the mandate of the DRR tribeThe SP tribe couldn’t quite decide if their mandate

was poverty or economic risks

Let’s try it!

SP, DRR and CCA all married and the three of them went off on a honeymoon at a posh Ethiopian

resort called PSNP

Upon return from honeymoonA fight broke out !

Whose risks mattered the most?

They also all talked different languages and couldn’t agree on what should be the new family language

The house was too small to fit all the risks, and they argued bitterly which to keep:

ClimateDisastersLocal infrastructurePovertyhungerConflicts

They sought counselingCounseling was time consuming. Which framework

should be used for the counseling?– Hazard maps– Livelihoods frameworks– PRA/RRA– Poverty and vulnerability profile– Community vulnerability profile– No regrets– Low regrets– Early warning systems– Climate projections– Seasonal weather forecasts

Guess what! They couldn’t agree

• The counselor patiently let them argue• No one wanted to give up their own language

and frameworks which they seemed to love more dearly than they loved the new marriage

What should be put in the center of the house?

The tribes’ own programs, or

The vulnerable people (remember the ‘client’, the reason they came together in the first

place!), or

State and peace building

They talked about the things the others did they didn’t care much for

Climate information (use it or don’t use it)

We need to build adaptive capacity (but how do you do it?)

CCTs don’t help CCA!

…..the other tribes had many flaws and these flaws were hard to accept

The counselor asked them, why did you marry?

• Deliver resources to the ‘client’ (the same target group they thought they shared, although doubts arose if they really did share ‘client’)

• Help ‘client’ adapt and become resilient• This was good news, and they even forgot to

argue about the meaning of ‘resilient’!

A solution!?

Agree to an ‘open marriage’ – appreciate ‘overlaps’ but also allow separate spheres

It got even better!

Someone proposed, if we explore our ‘overlaps’ we can find synergies and grow our circles and

we are all better off

On the hunting trip for synergies

• They set out to explore the promised land of overlaps and synergies

• Alas, this led to ……

The Impasse of the Color Coded Cards!

• The counselor thought that using blue, red, and yellow cards the overlaps could be detected and the circles could grow– Blue cards were for making Planning babies– Yellow cards were to be used for making

Implementation babies– Green cards were to be used for making

Monitoring babies

Another fight broke out!

Are the color-coded off-spring really new or just old babies on new bottles?

“you are not taking CC into account!”, shouted the CCA tribe angrily

“It’s the same as Integrated Rural Development”, insisted one tribe Elder, who had seen many color coded cards in his long life

“you are just giving handouts!”, said the development tribe. But now the SP tribe had enough and decided to get even. “Uncertainty is not new!”, they replied

Then they got tired and shared an intimate moment

They started to share their uncertainties as a way to get closer

But even that didn’t last long as they couldn’t agree on what uncertainty meant:

Uncertain climates, orUncertainty about adaptive capacity

That was when the SP tripe sniped about the superiority of their own no-regrets framework

Tired of fighting, a truce took holdThe tribes realized the fighting over fusing the circles

wasn’t worth it (it had “high transaction costs” in the jargon of the SP

tribe)

But they agreed to collaborate whenever it makes sense-For example when the ‘client’ faces food insecurity and

weather risks are important

They also agreed to share data which was a dear possession to all of them

But what happened to the babies?

With the wise counselor as midwife, many blue, red, and yellow inter-tribal babies were now delivered

We present to you, the planning, implementation, and evaluation babies!

Challenges involved in planning, implementing & evaluating SP, DRR & CCA under uncertainty

Balancing learning & accountability

Driven by the political economy of donors

Justifying action on low probability but severe risks

Planning & evaluating in uncertain contexts and for uncertain outcomes

How to invest in achieving greater clarity?

Routes challenges to achieve surviving & thriving

Maintaining the central purpose as reducing poor& excluded peoples risks

Understanding the incentive structures that the poor & excluded respond to

Interventions being accountable to the poor & excluded

Addressing peoples basic needs and issues of sustainability

Programming with weak risk information

Need to assess the added value of SP/ DRR/ CCA integration in terms of better addressing peoples risks

How best to make these assessments?

Hegemony of IE

Process indicators of risk mgt & output indicators for development results

Can SP be used as a broad, inclusive starting point for integrating DRR & CCA?

Convergence around data needs

Identify no regrets & co-benefits

Human centric approach

Shared objectives across SP, DRR & CCA – that aim at significant improvements in human resilience

What can agencies do to enable people to survive, thrive and adapt?

SP

CCADRR

Messy contexts & uncertaintySteps to incorporation context specific

Widening circles through incorporation

Group 3 Recommendations – planning, implementing & evaluating SP/ DRR/ CCA in uncertainty

Premises for recommendations• A human-centric approach needs to be

maintained and peoples perceptions of vulnerability, risk and adaptation actions should guide processes

• Integration of SP, DRR & CCA may be to burdensome while incorporation is desirable

• Incorporation needs to be within national systems, country driven and on-budget to be sustainable

Group 3 Recommendations – planning, implementing & evaluating SP/ DRR/ CCA in uncertainty

Planning• Plan together – across govt departments, sectors,

scales, stakeholders• Enable bottom-up driven planning• Share tools & data for planning & risk assessment

and develop common analysis• Plan for flexibility and scalability• Starting point for incorporation/ integration

depends on what thematic area is strongest in each country context

Group 3 Recommendations – planning, implementing & evaluating SP/ DRR/ CCA in uncertainty

Implementation• Budgets and incentives need to be in place for

incorporation/ integration• Devolved/ decentralised (local admin of

resources), shock responsive, chronic poverty conscious, involve formal and informal institutions

• Capacity development & awareness of the thematic areas to enable joined up working

• Risk and insurance concepts & instruments incorporated

Group 3 Recommendations – planning, implementing & evaluating SP/ DRR/ CCA in uncertainty

Evaluation [there are various M&E for CC initiatives]• CC impacts need explicitly included and estimated in

terms of human development outcomes• Realistic expectations of impact achievements against

duration of intervention• Design shared of common baselines, datasets &

analysis methods• Develop adaptive capacity measurement procedures

that encompass human development outcomes• Identify successful adaptation in the face of CC effects

– use of development without CC effects as counterfactual

A stimulating group

Many thanks