Since each M&E approach can be implemented in a variety of ways, the descriptions are based on a general application and cannot take every possible variation
into account. Corresponding to its nature as decision support tool, the Adaptation
M&E Navigator has to maintain a balance between level of detail and concise, easy
to grasp information. Hence, it cannot provide comprehensive detail on how to
carry out any of the listed M&E approaches. For the latter purpose the template
includes links to practical examples, guidance and further resources that users can
refer to. Thus, the Adaptation M&E Navigator equips decision makers and their
technical advisors with an overview of relevant approaches and information to
support the selection of an M&E approach.
The core of the Adaptation M&E Navigator is provided in Table 18.2 which
connects specific purposes to relevant M&E approaches and shows their rating on the
five criteria. In the online version of the Adaptation M&E Navigator, colour codes
are applied to facilitate a quick interpretation of the ratings. Tables 18.3 and 18.4
Table 18.2 The adaptation M&E navigator: matching specific M&E purposes to relevant M&E
approaches
# Specific purpose
M&E approach
General purpose
Focus on
processes or
outcomes
Complexity
Subjectivity
Experience
1
Monitoring the integration of
adaptation into planning
(mainstreaming)
Qualitative assessment based on
interviews
Learning
P
L-M
H
M
Quantitative or qualitative indicators
Management,
Accountability
P
L-M
L-M
M
2
Monitoring the implementation of
adaptation programmes, projects or
actions
Defining and monitoring activities
and outputs
Management,
Accountability
P
L
L
H
3
Monitoring the implementation of
the National Adaptation Plan
process
Defining and monitoring milestones
in the NAP process
Management,
Accountability
P
L
L-M
L
4
Tracking adaptation activities at
national or sub-national level
Database of adaptation activities
Management,
Knowledge sharing
P
L-M
M a
L-M
5
Assessing the
results of
adaptation
projects or
actions
On an ongoing or
repeated basis
Qualitative assessment involving
beneficiaries
Learning, Management
P/O
L-M
H
M
Theory of change with adaptationspecific indicators
Management,
Accountability
P/O
M
L-M
M
Repeated vulnerability assessments
See specific purpose #7
At a certain point
in time, typically
after completion
Impact evaluation
Learning, Accountability
O
H
L
L
Assessing avoided economic losses
and health benefits
Accountability
O
H
L
L
6
Assessing the results of a
programme or portfolio of
adaptation projects
Project-specific indicators informing
a synthesis of portfolio results
Accountability
P/O
M
M
L
Common (core) indicators for every
project to enable aggregation
Accountability
P/O
M
L-M
M
7
Assessing whether vulnerability has
been reduced as a result of
adaptation programmes, projects or
actions
Measuring vulnerability with
indicators as part of a results-based
monitoring system
Management,
Accountability
O
M
L-M
M
Repeated
vulnerability
assessments
Simple
Accountability
O
L
H
M-H
Data intensive
Learning, Accountability
O
M-H
L-M
L
8
Assessing progress towards
adaptation goals, targets or intended
outcomes at national level
Qualitative assessment without
indicators
Learning, Management,
Knowledge-sharing
P/O
L-M
M-H
L
Indicatorbased
assessment
Trend indicators
Management
P/O
M
L
L-M
Based on assumptions
about how activities
lead to outcomes
Management,
Accountability
P/O
M-H
L-M
L-M
9
Assessing resilience to climate
change at national level
Indicator-based assessments
Management
O
M
L-M
L-M
Household level questions as part of
national census surveys
Management
O
M-H
H
L
Explanation: L = Low, L-M = Low to Medium, M = Medium, M-H = Medium to High, H = High; P = Process, O = Outcome, P/O = Process and/or Outcome
a
The subjectivity lies in the decision what to count as “adaptation”, i.e. what to include in the
database of adaptation projects
334
T. Leiter