paradox of climate interventions that make a local difference but do not seem to
impact at the global level.
Seven comprehensive evaluations will be assessed and the evidence they present
of the discrepancy between micro and macro impact will be judged. The first four
were presented at the 2nd International Conference on Evaluating Climate Change
and Development; the last three were added as they emerged in the same year and
complement the picture:
1. The Fifth Overall Performance Study of the Global Environment Facility,
undertaken by the Independent Evaluation Office of the GEF;
2. The Independent Evaluation of the Climate Investment Funds, undertaken by
ICF International on behalf of the five independent evaluation departments of the
multilateral development banks;
3. The evaluation of climate change support in the Inter-American Development
Bank, conducted by the Office of Evaluation and Oversight of the IDB;
4. The evaluation of the effectiveness of Swiss International Cooperation in climate change, conducted by a consortium led by Gaia Consulting Oy for the
Swiss Agency for Development and the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs;
5. The real-time evaluation of initiatives of the Asian Development Bank to
support access to climate finance, implemented by the Independent Evaluation
Department of the ADB;
6. The real-time evaluation of Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative
(NICFI), undertaken by a consortium led by LTS International;
7. The external evaluation of the UN-REDD programme (Reducing Emissions
from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries).
Furthermore, we will also include the older but still highly relevant climate
change evaluations of the Independent Evaluation Group of the World Bank (World
Bank/IEG 2009, 2010, 2012), as well as the Fourth Overall Performance Study of
the Global Environment Facility (GEF/EO 2010), the precursor to OPS5.
2.2 The Micro-Macro Paradox: Successful Climate Action
But No Global Impact?
The micro-macro paradox of successful environmental interventions was raised by
one of the authors in a keynote address at the Second Global Assembly of the
International Development Evaluation Association in Amman, Jordan, on 14 April
2011 (van den Berg 2011). The argument is that a sizeable proportion of interventions were demonstrated to have direct and long-term impact in the sense of
achieving lasting success in for example reducing greenhouse gas emissions from
a specific source, but they have made no impact on global environmental trends,
that have continued their downward slide. This is the case for climate change, for
the historical loss of biodiversity that is now increasingly seen as a human caused
2 Action on Climate Change: What Does It Mean and Where Does It Lead To?
15
impact at the global level.
Seven comprehensive evaluations will be assessed and the evidence they present
of the discrepancy between micro and macro impact will be judged. The first four
were presented at the 2nd International Conference on Evaluating Climate Change
and Development; the last three were added as they emerged in the same year and
complement the picture:
1. The Fifth Overall Performance Study of the Global Environment Facility,
undertaken by the Independent Evaluation Office of the GEF;
2. The Independent Evaluation of the Climate Investment Funds, undertaken by
ICF International on behalf of the five independent evaluation departments of the
multilateral development banks;
3. The evaluation of climate change support in the Inter-American Development
Bank, conducted by the Office of Evaluation and Oversight of the IDB;
4. The evaluation of the effectiveness of Swiss International Cooperation in climate change, conducted by a consortium led by Gaia Consulting Oy for the
Swiss Agency for Development and the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs;
5. The real-time evaluation of initiatives of the Asian Development Bank to
support access to climate finance, implemented by the Independent Evaluation
Department of the ADB;
6. The real-time evaluation of Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative
(NICFI), undertaken by a consortium led by LTS International;
7. The external evaluation of the UN-REDD programme (Reducing Emissions
from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries).
Furthermore, we will also include the older but still highly relevant climate
change evaluations of the Independent Evaluation Group of the World Bank (World
Bank/IEG 2009, 2010, 2012), as well as the Fourth Overall Performance Study of
the Global Environment Facility (GEF/EO 2010), the precursor to OPS5.
2.2 The Micro-Macro Paradox: Successful Climate Action
But No Global Impact?
The micro-macro paradox of successful environmental interventions was raised by
one of the authors in a keynote address at the Second Global Assembly of the
International Development Evaluation Association in Amman, Jordan, on 14 April
2011 (van den Berg 2011). The argument is that a sizeable proportion of interventions were demonstrated to have direct and long-term impact in the sense of
achieving lasting success in for example reducing greenhouse gas emissions from
a specific source, but they have made no impact on global environmental trends,
that have continued their downward slide. This is the case for climate change, for
the historical loss of biodiversity that is now increasingly seen as a human caused
2 Action on Climate Change: What Does It Mean and Where Does It Lead To?
15