mickwitzepa_nfwf2008short

8/14/2019 MickwitzEPA_NFWF2008Short

1/27

Impl icati ons of Cl imateChangefor Eval uation

Per MickwitzFinnish Environment Institute (SYKE)

Environmental Evaluators NetworkingForum

13.6.2008


2/27

Structure of the presentation

Categorization of the implications of climate

change on evaluation

European and Finnish examples of the different

implication categories

Implications of climate change from an evaluationmethodology perspective


3/27

Implications of climate change for

evaluation

1. Implications through evaluation of climateprograms and policies

3. Implications of climate change on the evaluationof "non-climate" programs and policies.

a) implications through changes of the climate;b) implications due to interactions with climate programs

and policies (both mitigation and adaptation);

c) implications because other policies and programs, e.g.traffic or agricultural programs, integrate climate aims.


4/27

1. Implications through evaluation of

climate programs and policies (1/3)

Program and policy evaluation has not yet been a centralissue in climate policy monitoring of emissions, verification of emission reductions of

CDM projects, assessing additionality have been much more

central IPCCs 4th assessment talks about evaluation, but at a verygeneral level

The evaluation community (e.g. AEA, EES), on the otherhand, has not yet discussed issues related to climatechange a lot.

Some recent exceptions, Alexandria conference & ADAM

The role of evaluation will increase, when the end of thecommitment period of the Kyoto protocol (2008-12) isapproaching and when targets are becoming morestringent (e.g. EU 20 20 to 2020)


5/27


climate programs and policies (2/3)

The need for evaluation will be very different for:

Programs and policies directed at activities/sectors covered byemission trading

Other programs and policies

In the case of activities covered by emission tradingschemes

Evaluation is not required to establish impacts oreffectiveness in reducing greenhouse gas emissions

Evaluation largely about costs Side-effects (air, biodiversity; development) Distribution of costs and side-effects (geographic, industries,

income groups )


6/27


climate programs and policies (3/3)Sectors not covered by emission trading: transport

The EU 20 20 by 2020

proposal includes legally-

binding reduction target in

sectors not covered by theEU ETS for 2020 compared

to 2005:

Finland -16 %


7/27



0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1990 1995 2000 2005

milliontCO2

The EU 20 20 by 2020




to 2005:

Finland -16 %

Implication: CO2 emissions

from transport have to bereduced substantially

From 1990 + 8.7 %

From 1995 +16.1 %


8/27



The EU 20 20 by 2020




to 2005:

Finland -16 %

Implication: CO2 emissions

from transport have to bereduced substantially

0

10 000

20 000

30 000

40 000

50 000

60 000

70 000

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Developme nt of public and passanger car tr ansport

Million person kilometres

Passenger cars

Public transport


9/27



Examples of explanations:

The share of public transport

has gone down

Urbane structure haschanged, e.g. people

commute longer distances to

work


10/27



Policies and programs:

EU legislation on CO2 from new

cars

National fuel taxation CO2 based taxation of cars

Review of income tax rebate for

commuting to work

Promoting eco-driving

Urban planning (shopping malls) All these jointly influence

emissions

Huge need for effectiveness

evaluations

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1990 1995 2000 2005

milliontCO2


11/27

2 a. Implications of climate change on the

evaluation of "non-climate" programs and

policies through changes of the climate

Example: eutrophication of

the Baltic sea due to

nutrient loading

The main Finnish sourceof nutrients is agriculture

63 % of Phosphorus 2004 51 % of Nitrogen 2004

In the Finnish Government

decision-in-principle onWater Protection Policy

Outlines to 2015: goal

- 30% compared to 2001-5


12/27




Many options to reducenutrient loads fromagriculture:

Reduced use of fertilizers

Changed use of fertilizers Wetlands & buffer zones Reduced farming on steep

fields close to waters

Changed crops Programs and policies

Education Support conditions Fertilizer tax proposal Wetland agreements


13/27




The Winter 2007-8 was thewarmest ever recorded in Finland

Hardly no snow or frost Huge effects on run-offs of

nutrients from fields

Should be considered inevaluations

Confounding factor Attribution

Should be taken into accountwhen planning evaluations

Programs and policies Education Support conditions Fertilizer tax proposal wetland agreements

Only artificial snow on the ski track


14/27




Long term climate change

expected to have much larger

impacts on the temperature

on rainfall than last winter

and thus on farming practices

A fixed indicator approach

(too common in Europe)

misleading

Implications on program

theories (even science basedpart) & on results chains

Sensitivity of a program or

policy under climate change

as an evaluation criteria


15/27

2 b. Implications of climate change on the


policies due to interactions with climate

programs and policies Example bio-energy

The EU 20 20 by 2020

proposal based on 20 %

renewables by 2020, include

specific legally-binding shareof renewables in the final

energy demand by 2020:

Finland 38 %

The European Council

decided on a 10% biofueltarget for transport

In Finland 20 % of all energy

is already bio-energy


16/27





Efforts to preserve forest diversityhave been intensified recently,through increases in the areas offorest under protection, improvementsin the quality of protected forestsachieved though habitat restoration

schemes, and the development ofnatural forest management practicesfor commercially managed forests.

without further measures thenumbers of forest species becomingthreatened or extinct in Finland will goon rising in the near future. With

regard to the structural features ofnatural forests, it is particularlyimportant for the sake of biodiversityto increase the amounts of decayingwood in the forests.


17/27









Changed practices due to

increased demand of bio-energy: far less residualsare left in the forests, eventhe stubs are removed.


18/27









Changed practices due to

increased demand of bio-energy: far less residualsare left in the forests, eventhe stubs are removed.

Should be consideredin evaluations

Confoundingfactor

AttributionImplications onprogram theories


19/27

2 c. Implications of climate change on the


policies because other policies and programs

integrate climate aims.

Climate integration needs to be evaluated It is

far easier to declare intention to integrate than to

carry it out

We have just finished a study on Mainstreaming Climate Policyfor the Finnish Prime Ministers Office

Mickwitz P. and P. Kivimaa 2007. Evaluating Policy Integration:The Case of Policies for Environmentally Friendlier

Technological Innovations, Evaluation 13 (1), 68-86.

Climate integration will influence the evaluation

of the other aims of the programs and policies


20/27

Implications of climate change from an

evaluation methodology perspective

Side-effects

evaluation

Evaluation criteria

Attribution

Program theory

Data

Uncertainty

The evaluation of climate

programs and policies

requires a strong focus on

side-effects Positive e.g. air emissions Negative e.g. biodiversity Non-environmental e.g.

development, income

distribution, innovations

and technological

development

IPCC 2007 (chapter 11)

Spillover effects


21/27



Side-effects

evaluation

Evaluation criteria

Attribution

Program theory

Data

Uncertainty

IPCC (2007, WG3, 13.1.2) Criteria forpolicy choice:

Environmental effectiveness the extentto which a policy meets its intendedenvironmental objective or realizes

positive environmental outcomes.Cost-effectiveness the extent to whichthe policy can achieve its objectives at aminimum cost to society.

Distributional considerations theincidence or distributionalconsequences of a policy, whichincludes dimensions such as fairness

and equity, although there are others.Institutional feasibility the extent to

which a policy instrument is likely to beviewed as legitimate, gain acceptance,adopted and implemented.

Ex ante & Climate policies


22/27



Side-effects

evaluation

Evaluation criteria

Attribution

Program theory

Data

Uncertainty

Other criteria & non-climate

programs and policies :

Flexibility can the program

cope with changing climate or

changing climate policies?

Climate robustness - will the

program be effective under

different climate scenarios

e.g. protecting a specific habitat

vs. creating ecological corridors Persistence are the impacts

lasting even when the climate

change


23/27



Side-effects

evaluation

Evaluation criteria

Attribution

Program theory

Data

Uncertainty

When attributing impacts to

programs and policies the

contribution of:

Climate change Climate programs and

policies

Climate policy integration

should be considered.


24/27



Side-effects

evaluation

Evaluation criteria

Attribution

Program theory

Data

Uncertainty

Program theories of climate as well

as other programs need to take

into account:

Climate change

Climate policies and programs aswell as the social and economic

processes affected by them

Climate policy integration Requires:

Increased awareness

Utilization of natural sciences(adaptation & impacts)

Utilization of social sciences More research, especially on

social & economic processes


25/27

Implications of climate change for

evaluation: a methods perspective

Side-effects

evaluation

Evaluation criteria

Attribution

Program theory

Data

Uncertainty

Climate change may interrupt

data series no-ice effect

The flood took the samples

Interpretation of data andespecially indicators


26/27



Side-effects

evaluation

Evaluation criteria

Attribution

Program theory

Data

Uncertainty

Many aspects of climate

change are VERY uncertain

Technological development,

social and economicprocesses, attitudes are

among the most uncertain

ones

Thresholds and non-linear

changes are possible

Relying on linear models may

be misleading


27/27

I believe that climate change will have hugeimplications for evaluation.

The huge uncertainties involved will haveimplications for the evaluation processes

unrealistic expectations may influence thelegitimacy of evaluation.

How influential should evaluations be (HansBruyninckx & Jared Hardner)?

mickwitzepa_nfwf2008short

Documents