biophysical outcomes from adaptation activities has been the most controversial
aspect of monitoring and evaluating adaptation. Because adaptation takes place
in an economic development context, adaptation metrics should not be defined in
isolation from changes in farmers’ behavior. Otherwise, there is a high risk of
measuring development indicators rather than adaptation indicators. Knowing
domains where adaptation-relevant behavioral changes have been initiated and
maintained would be helpful for evaluators to trace adaptation components in
development outcomes, and reduce risks of confounding adaptation and development effects.
14.4 Needs for Incorporating Behavioral Theory into
Adaptation M&E Approaches
Several authors Olivier et al. (2012) and Bours et al. (2013) have recognized the
need for modifying conventional M&E approaches to meet the needs of climate
change adaptation programs. They advocate a greater results-orientation in climate
change adaptation interventions. However, there have been minor differences
between most attempts to do so and conventional interventions. This may be
because designing adaptation projects and appropriate M&E systems requires
robust understanding of both adaptation to climate change (Olivier et al. 2012)
and behavioral theory. In fact, the differences between adaptation-related and
development outcomes will depend on whether new patterns of behaviors, actions,
activities and relationships have been initiated and maintained by stakeholders,
including smallholder farmers, policy-makers, researchers and agricultural extension officers.
It appears important to mainstream behavioral theory into results-based monitoring and evaluation of adaptation, because adaptation comes through various
domains of behavioral changes. Behavioral theory is compatible with any existing
tools, frameworks and approaches used in adaptation intervention programs and the
associated M&E. In addition to assisting project managers to refine existing M&E
frameworks, the application of behavioral theory will contribute to strengthening
communities’ ownership of the biophysical changes induced by adaptation actions.
Results of this research are consistent with conclusions by Gifford et al. (2011) that
behavior science is crucial for confronting the complex challenges posed by climate
change. Knowledge of human behavior, cognitions, and psychological adaptation
can also help the integration of derived adaptation-relevant indicators with those
produced by researchers in related social and natural science disciplines.
Three major conclusions can be drawn from this research. First, an adaptation
process leads to behavioral changes of the beneficiaries. These changes span
various domains of community life, which may go beyond adoption of technologies
in the targeted sector. They may or may not be adaptation-relevant, but all must be
addressed to strengthen adaptation capacities or avoid mal-adaptation. Secondly,
14 Adaptation Processes in Agriculture and Food Security: Insights from. . .
265
aspect of monitoring and evaluating adaptation. Because adaptation takes place
in an economic development context, adaptation metrics should not be defined in
isolation from changes in farmers’ behavior. Otherwise, there is a high risk of
measuring development indicators rather than adaptation indicators. Knowing
domains where adaptation-relevant behavioral changes have been initiated and
maintained would be helpful for evaluators to trace adaptation components in
development outcomes, and reduce risks of confounding adaptation and development effects.
14.4 Needs for Incorporating Behavioral Theory into
Adaptation M&E Approaches
Several authors Olivier et al. (2012) and Bours et al. (2013) have recognized the
need for modifying conventional M&E approaches to meet the needs of climate
change adaptation programs. They advocate a greater results-orientation in climate
change adaptation interventions. However, there have been minor differences
between most attempts to do so and conventional interventions. This may be
because designing adaptation projects and appropriate M&E systems requires
robust understanding of both adaptation to climate change (Olivier et al. 2012)
and behavioral theory. In fact, the differences between adaptation-related and
development outcomes will depend on whether new patterns of behaviors, actions,
activities and relationships have been initiated and maintained by stakeholders,
including smallholder farmers, policy-makers, researchers and agricultural extension officers.
It appears important to mainstream behavioral theory into results-based monitoring and evaluation of adaptation, because adaptation comes through various
domains of behavioral changes. Behavioral theory is compatible with any existing
tools, frameworks and approaches used in adaptation intervention programs and the
associated M&E. In addition to assisting project managers to refine existing M&E
frameworks, the application of behavioral theory will contribute to strengthening
communities’ ownership of the biophysical changes induced by adaptation actions.
Results of this research are consistent with conclusions by Gifford et al. (2011) that
behavior science is crucial for confronting the complex challenges posed by climate
change. Knowledge of human behavior, cognitions, and psychological adaptation
can also help the integration of derived adaptation-relevant indicators with those
produced by researchers in related social and natural science disciplines.
Three major conclusions can be drawn from this research. First, an adaptation
process leads to behavioral changes of the beneficiaries. These changes span
various domains of community life, which may go beyond adoption of technologies
in the targeted sector. They may or may not be adaptation-relevant, but all must be
addressed to strengthen adaptation capacities or avoid mal-adaptation. Secondly,
14 Adaptation Processes in Agriculture and Food Security: Insights from. . .
265