The apparent mismatch between countries receiving Adaptation-related Climate Change Financing (ACCF) and those most vulnerable to climate change is a concern which is the motivation for this research. This paper examines the determining factors of receiving ACCF for sub-Saharan African countries and finds that the recipient policy and an existing aid relationship are significant determinants of funding. ACCF therefore appears to be contingent on democratic characteristics of the recipient and prevailing a donor-recipient relationship, with vulnerability not being a factor. Our research draws a parallel between ACCF and traditional, bilateral aid allocation, and stresses the importance of accurate climate finance allocation practices. In the lead up to the climate negotiations in Paris at the end of 2015, this quote seems particularly fitting. Climate change negotiations have long been stalled by the idea that compelling countries to cut their greenhouse gas emissions would be the death knell to their economies, all the while overlooking the idea that future economic prosperity will be contingent on the actions we take now to mitigate future effects of climate change and to adapt to its current effects. The latter is particularly relevant to lower income countries who have contributed the least to greenhouse gas emissions, but are disproportionately impacted by climate change through a limited capacity to adapt to its effects.Adaptation-related climate change financing is therefore pivotal for lower income countries. The apparent mismatch between countries receiving adaptation-related climate change financing and those most vulnerable to climate change is a concern. This concern is the motivation for this research.
Background: South Africa has pioneered national evaluation systems (NESs) along with Canada, Mexico, Colombia, Chile, Uganda and Benin. South Africa’s National Evaluation Policy Framework (NEPF) was approved by Cabinet in November 2011. An evaluation of the NES started in September 2016.Objectives: The purpose of the evaluation was to assess whether the NES had had an impact on the programmes and policies evaluated, the departments involved and other key stakeholders; and to determine how the system needs to be strengthened.Method: The evaluation used a theory-based approach, including international benchmarking, five national and four provincial case studies, 112 key informant interviews, a survey with 86 responses and a cost-benefit analysis of a sample of evaluations.Results: Since 2011, 67 national evaluations have been completed or are underway within the NES, covering over $10 billion of government expenditure. Seven of South Africa’s nine provinces have provincial evaluation plans and 68 of 155 national and provincial departments have departmental evaluation plans. Hence, the system has spread widely but there are issues of quality and the time it takes to do evaluations. It was difficult to assess use but from the case studies it did appear that instrumental and process use were widespread. There appears to be a high return on evaluations of between R7 and R10 per rand invested.Conclusion: The NES evaluation recommendations on strengthening the system ranged from legislation to strengthen the mandate, greater resources for the NES, strengthening capacity development, communication and the tracking of use.
Inland fisheries play a critical role in the ecology of the Okavango Delta, but their conservation is particularly complex. For nearly a decade, communities, conservancies, policy makers, and partner organisations have worked to establish fish reserves across the Kavango and Zambezi. Guidelines on the establishment of fish reserves have been developed to delineate the process through which these protected areas are established, and a structured learning process has unpacked knowledge held by different stakeholders to better understand the opportunities and limitations of fish reserves and to subsequently revise these guidelines. This article aims to share these lessons and to contribute to the debate on the most effective institutional arrangements for this unique space of conservation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.