How to Strengthen Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Systems for Adaptation

In the face of escalating climate change impacts, the need for robust monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) systems for adaptation has become more crucial than ever. MEL systems encompass a range of activities, processes, and tools that help countries track, assess, and improve their adaptation actions, ensuring they are effective and responsive to evolving climate challenges. These systems provide a structured approach to gathering data, assessing the success of adaptation measures, and integrating these findings into policy and practice.

Understanding whether adaptation efforts are effectively reducing vulnerability, enhancing resilience, and boosting adaptive capacities is vital for informed planning and decision making. MEL also involves assessing how these actions work and for whom, ensuring that adaptation efforts meet their intended goals.

The need for MEL systems for adaptation is not new, but the uptake over the past decade has been slow. With the establishment of the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) in 2015 and the recent UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience (UAE FGCR) at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 28) in 2023, there is a heightened emphasis on developing strong national MEL systems to support the assessment of collective progress on adaptation. For example, the UAE FGCR has set a clear target for the development and implementation of MEL systems by 2030. National MEL systems play an essential role in providing the data and evidence needed to track and evaluate progress at the global level.

Ultimately, national MEL systems are about ensuring we do better adaptation, faster, based on evidence—to avoid maladaptation—both nationally and globally.

How are different countries tackling the challenges of developing and implementing MEL systems for adaptation?

The report National Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Systems for Climate Change Adaptation: A Comparative Analysis of Nine Countries shows the individual journeys of nine countries, along with a comparison of their different statuses and approaches used, and an analysis of key trends in MEL systems over the past decade to inform countries in their respective efforts on MEL for adaptation. It dives into the journeys and in-depth profiles of how these nine countries across the globe have developed their MEL systems: Canada, France, Kenya, Namibia, Peru, Somalia, Tonga, the United Kingdom, and Vietnam. It is crucial to better understand the current state of national MEL systems so we can build on existing structures and lessons learned, which can inform and strengthen the operationalization of the UAE FGCR.

The study found that all nine countries had partially functional MEL systems for adaptation. In fact, all countries built on existing systems and processes to build their MEL for adaptation. It also shows that there has been significant progress in the status of MEL systems, as described in an equivalent study in 2014. More countries have woven MEL into their national adaptation plan (NAP) processes and are actively using these systems to track and report on their adaptation actions—like Namibia and Somalia. Other countries, like Kenya and the United Kingdom, have established a legal framework to guide the establishment and operationalization of their MEL systems.

The report finds that while monitoring and reporting are prevalent, evaluation and learning are less so. Still, four of the countries reviewed (Tonga, Kenya, France and the United Kingdom) have produced monitoring progress reports or evaluations that have informed a subsequent cycle of policies and plans.

One challenge that remains is the consideration of gender equality and social inclusion (GESI). While most countries reviewed actively recognize the importance of GESI in adaptation planning and MEL, only Kenya and Vietnam have GESI-specific indicators within their MEL systems. There is still work to be done to ensure these considerations are effectively integrated and operationalized.

The report also outlines six key recommendations for countries to consider in order to strengthen their national MEL systems for adaptation. These recommendations are relevant for a diverse range of actors, including state and non-state actors supporting MEL systems for adaptation within countries and stakeholders engaging in discussions on the UAE FGCR.

First, countries should design MEL systems that serve various purposes, including tracking NAP implementation and international reporting. Systems should integrate different data collection methods and policy processes and focus on national progress reporting rather than solely meeting international obligations. This will ensure that MEL systems comprehensively assess adaptation outcomes and impacts.

Second, MEL systems should build on existing structures. Countries should start by assessing existing processes and structures, identifying capacity needs for adaptation tracking, and aligning MEL systems with other sectors, like agriculture, water, and health, and with international reporting obligations. This approach harnesses existing resources and avoids additional reporting burdens, ensuring alignment between national, sub-national, and sectoral scales.

Third, effective MEL systems require more than just indicators. Countries can support data collection and learning with institutional structures, resources, and mixed methods, including qualitative evaluations. Evaluations identify gaps and facilitate stakeholder engagement, capturing diverse perspectives and providing insights that quantitative indicators alone cannot.

GESI considerations should also be integrated into MEL systems. This will enable countries to capture nuanced social dimensions and qualitative data to effectively address vulnerable groups’ needs. Engaging specific ministries, agencies, and non-governmental organizations working on GESI issues in developing MEL systems will ensure comprehensive and inclusive adaptation strategies.

Another recommendation from the report is for countries to prioritize learning as part of their MEL and ensure that MEL systems lead to adjustments in adaptation efforts by using insights from evaluations and progress reports to inform future planning and decision making. Countries like Kenya, France, and the United Kingdom demonstrate how learning from MEL systems can guide subsequent adaptation cycles, enhancing the effectiveness of climate responses.

Finally, countries should leverage global processes. Using frameworks like the UAE FGCR to strengthen national and sub-national MEL systems will ensure coherence between local priorities and global commitments, helping countries set or review targets. Aligned national and global MEL systems drive more ambitious and effective actions by producing information that integrates global assessment insights into national adaptation processes.

Robust MEL systems are crucial for effective climate adaptation. They provide the data and insights needed to assess the impacts of adaptation strategies, identify best practices, and ensure accountability. As the impacts of climate change continue to escalate, the importance of these systems will only grow. By leveraging existing national MEL systems and fostering global collaboration, we can build a more resilient future, achieve the goals set by the GGA and UAE FGCR, and ensure that adaptation efforts are effective for the most vulnerable.