institutions already with relevant mandates can realize ‘rooting’ of such measures
inside the institutions.
13.6 Contextual Conditions
Presented above was a series of M-O sequences without taking the contextual
conditions into consideration. Such M-O only sequence, if used as it is, presents a
deterministic view. Under such view, an underlying mechanism in generating
above-mentioned IOs, namely the essence of programme theory, is believed to
function everywhere, anytime, regardless of varying contexts. However, realist
approach pays closer attention to the contextual conditions that necessarily allow
such mechanism to function. In order to identify the contextual conditions, one
needs first pay attention to those incidences where the identified theory of change
did not work, i.e. those that have generated negative IOs. A general tendency
amongst many meta-analyses of evaluation reports is to report what has worked
in the effort to present so-called “best practices” by paying close attention to
successful interventions and their programme theories. That approach risks missing
lessons from failed interventions or strategies that may have worked only under
specific conditions. The section below presents the findings about contextual
conditions that have enabled (and not) a certain theory of change to work.
13.6.1 Context for Relevance
Almost all the evaluative remarks pertaining to the relevance criterion reported
positive outcomes. But when focusing on those few incidences that were reported to
have yielded slightly negative IOs, one can unearth the contextual conditions that
may have helped this theory of change to trigger more successful IOs. In the case of
Mozambique, even though there had been close coordination and working relationship with the national and local governments, relevance at a sub-national level was
not considered high. In this case, local CCA priorities may not have been identified
by the local governments and local partners. Similarly, in Turkey, because of abrupt
insertion of carbon-footprint offsetting activities as part of CCA vulnerability
reduction (though it is essentially for climate change mitigation), the relevance
level of this programme was not evaluated to be high.
From those incidences, one can hypothesize another contextual condition that
may have allowed a theory of change (in this case in generating positive IOs for
securing a high level of relevance) to work, i.e. that host government and line
ministries have identified national and sectoral CCA priorities, or fully internalized
the programme objectives specifically targeting adaptation. A set of identified
CMO configurations for relevance criterion is shown in Table 13.3.
13 What Do Evaluations Tell Us About Climate Change Adaptation? Meta-analysis. . .
245
inside the institutions.
13.6 Contextual Conditions
Presented above was a series of M-O sequences without taking the contextual
conditions into consideration. Such M-O only sequence, if used as it is, presents a
deterministic view. Under such view, an underlying mechanism in generating
above-mentioned IOs, namely the essence of programme theory, is believed to
function everywhere, anytime, regardless of varying contexts. However, realist
approach pays closer attention to the contextual conditions that necessarily allow
such mechanism to function. In order to identify the contextual conditions, one
needs first pay attention to those incidences where the identified theory of change
did not work, i.e. those that have generated negative IOs. A general tendency
amongst many meta-analyses of evaluation reports is to report what has worked
in the effort to present so-called “best practices” by paying close attention to
successful interventions and their programme theories. That approach risks missing
lessons from failed interventions or strategies that may have worked only under
specific conditions. The section below presents the findings about contextual
conditions that have enabled (and not) a certain theory of change to work.
13.6.1 Context for Relevance
Almost all the evaluative remarks pertaining to the relevance criterion reported
positive outcomes. But when focusing on those few incidences that were reported to
have yielded slightly negative IOs, one can unearth the contextual conditions that
may have helped this theory of change to trigger more successful IOs. In the case of
Mozambique, even though there had been close coordination and working relationship with the national and local governments, relevance at a sub-national level was
not considered high. In this case, local CCA priorities may not have been identified
by the local governments and local partners. Similarly, in Turkey, because of abrupt
insertion of carbon-footprint offsetting activities as part of CCA vulnerability
reduction (though it is essentially for climate change mitigation), the relevance
level of this programme was not evaluated to be high.
From those incidences, one can hypothesize another contextual condition that
may have allowed a theory of change (in this case in generating positive IOs for
securing a high level of relevance) to work, i.e. that host government and line
ministries have identified national and sectoral CCA priorities, or fully internalized
the programme objectives specifically targeting adaptation. A set of identified
CMO configurations for relevance criterion is shown in Table 13.3.
13 What Do Evaluations Tell Us About Climate Change Adaptation? Meta-analysis. . .
245