works, under what circumstances and for whom. Evidence-based analysis of past
experiences and ongoing innovations is likely to shed light on how we might
enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of actions at various levels and achieve
win-win situations and multiple benefits, such as reducing risk and increasing
resilience.
Evaluation makes a judgement of the value or worth of the evaluand – the
subject of evaluation – be it a policy, strategy, programme, project or any other
type of intervention. It can take several forms. It can be formative, looking into the
ways an intervention is implemented in order to identify ways in which the
intervention and its performance could be improved. It can be summative to
determine the extent to which the intervention has achieved its anticipated desired
results. An evaluation can also be prospective, assessing the likely outcomes of
proposed interventions a priori (Morra Imas and Rist 2009). A category of summative evaluations is impact evaluation that looks into whether the programme or
intervention has contributed in a measurable way to a larger longer term goal (such
as transforming national policy or the market towards a more climate friendly
directions) than just the direct outputs and outcome of the intervention itself. An
impact evaluation can use a range of approaches and methodologies that are
rigorous (Stern et al. 2012). It has been argued that it is important to distinguish
between the ‘direct’ and ‘final or ultimate’ impact of interventions (van den Berg
2013). As we address issues critical to climate change, we must ensure that
interventions make a difference and help to significantly increase mitigation or
adaptation or both while also ensuring sustainable development, or be able to
identify and measure trade-offs.
In this context, a special challenge is posed by the private sector and civil society
initiatives on impact investing, corporate responsibility and sustainable development, as well as civic initiatives and social enterprise. The role of evaluation in
these relatively new areas of work is not yet established, which is why they have
been identified as the ‘New Frontiers for Evaluation’, an initiative of the Centre for
Development Impact in the UK.
14 A Wilton Park conference in July 2015 discussed
the potential role of evaluation in various initiatives, calling for a gap analysis of
what has been evaluated and where methods and capacity need to be developed.
15
Much of this is relevant for climate change to inform investments in green technologies and transitions towards sustainable resource use in business practices. We
also need to take stock of what we know to start, operationalize and manage climate
smart enterprises. Evaluation can play a very important role in measuring effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and longer term impact.
Evaluating climate change can be challenging primarily because climate change
is a global good (Puri and Dhody 2016). Other challenges include the fact that
climate change programmes are frequently multi-sector, multi-objective complex
programmes that aim to affect not just environment but also poverty, livelihoods,
14 See http://www.cdimpact.org/projects/new-frontiers-evaluation
15 See https://www.wiltonpark.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP1411-Report.pdf
6
J.I. Uitto et al.
experiences and ongoing innovations is likely to shed light on how we might
enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of actions at various levels and achieve
win-win situations and multiple benefits, such as reducing risk and increasing
resilience.
Evaluation makes a judgement of the value or worth of the evaluand – the
subject of evaluation – be it a policy, strategy, programme, project or any other
type of intervention. It can take several forms. It can be formative, looking into the
ways an intervention is implemented in order to identify ways in which the
intervention and its performance could be improved. It can be summative to
determine the extent to which the intervention has achieved its anticipated desired
results. An evaluation can also be prospective, assessing the likely outcomes of
proposed interventions a priori (Morra Imas and Rist 2009). A category of summative evaluations is impact evaluation that looks into whether the programme or
intervention has contributed in a measurable way to a larger longer term goal (such
as transforming national policy or the market towards a more climate friendly
directions) than just the direct outputs and outcome of the intervention itself. An
impact evaluation can use a range of approaches and methodologies that are
rigorous (Stern et al. 2012). It has been argued that it is important to distinguish
between the ‘direct’ and ‘final or ultimate’ impact of interventions (van den Berg
2013). As we address issues critical to climate change, we must ensure that
interventions make a difference and help to significantly increase mitigation or
adaptation or both while also ensuring sustainable development, or be able to
identify and measure trade-offs.
In this context, a special challenge is posed by the private sector and civil society
initiatives on impact investing, corporate responsibility and sustainable development, as well as civic initiatives and social enterprise. The role of evaluation in
these relatively new areas of work is not yet established, which is why they have
been identified as the ‘New Frontiers for Evaluation’, an initiative of the Centre for
Development Impact in the UK.
14 A Wilton Park conference in July 2015 discussed
the potential role of evaluation in various initiatives, calling for a gap analysis of
what has been evaluated and where methods and capacity need to be developed.
15
Much of this is relevant for climate change to inform investments in green technologies and transitions towards sustainable resource use in business practices. We
also need to take stock of what we know to start, operationalize and manage climate
smart enterprises. Evaluation can play a very important role in measuring effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and longer term impact.
Evaluating climate change can be challenging primarily because climate change
is a global good (Puri and Dhody 2016). Other challenges include the fact that
climate change programmes are frequently multi-sector, multi-objective complex
programmes that aim to affect not just environment but also poverty, livelihoods,
14 See http://www.cdimpact.org/projects/new-frontiers-evaluation
15 See https://www.wiltonpark.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP1411-Report.pdf
6
J.I. Uitto et al.