Community-based Adaptation Project A Guide to the Vulnerability Reduction Assessment Presented by Andrew Crane-Droesch Project Coordinator UNDP Community-Based Adaptation Project © 2009 UNDP. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. Proprietary and Confidential. Not For Distribution Without Prior Written Permission.

1 11 Outcome 1: Local Level Key Project Outcomes Enhanced adaptive capacity allows communities to reduce their vulnerability to adverse impacts of future climate change driven risks –Community-level capacity building and awareness-raising on climate change –Portfolio of 8-20 adaptation projects per country, in 10 countries Outcome 2: National Level National policies and programmes promote replication of best practices derived from CBA projects –Dissemination/promotion of lessons learned at the national level –Involvement of policymakers in CBA projects and processes Outcome 3: Global Level Cooperation among member countries promotes innovation in adaptation to climate change including variability –Transboundary learning, based on best practices identified by communities –Lessons learned on CBA transmitted to global stakeholders, including GEF-secretariat

2 2 Monitoring Climate Change Adaptation First, definitions: IPCC TAR “…adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, that moderates harm and exploits beneficial opportunities.” UNDP Adaptation Policy Framework Adaptation is a process by which individuals, communities, and countries seek to cope with the consequences of climate change, including variability. How do we practically measure the progress of community initiatives in facilitating an adjustment or process?

3 3 What is the VRA? The Vulnerability Reduction Assessment The VRA is a form of Participatory Impact Assessment with the following aims: –To measure community perceptions of climate change risk and adaptive capacity –To assist with project development/management and to use M&E to make projects responsive to community priorities –To measure impact vis à vis long-term climate change adaptation, not just one-off impact on present development challenges –To capture qualitative information for development of knowledge products and adaptive project management –To form a system of common-unit indicators which can be aggregated across a diverse portfolio of CBA projects

4 4 How does the VRA Work? The VRA is composed of four indicators, based on the UNDP Adaptation Policy Framework approach. These four indicators become four questions – tailored to the community and posed in community meetings before, during and after project implementation. VRA meetings yield quantitative and qualitative data: –Useful in aggregating and assessing programmatic impact –Useful in guiding project design and management –Useful in capturing lessons learned

5 5 The VRA in theory APF StepVRA Indicator VRA Question In these examples, we consider the case of a community facing increasing drought risks Assessing current vulnerability 1. Vulnerability of livelihood/welfare to existing climate change and/or climate variability. Example: What happens when there is drought? How does this affect you and your community? Assessing future climate risks 2. Vulnerability of livelihood/welfare to developing climate change risks. Example: What would happen if drought was twice as frequent? How would this affect you and your community? Formulating an adaptation strategy 3. Magnitude of barriers (institutional, policy, technological, financial, etc) barriers to adaptation. Example: What stands in the way of adapting to increasing drought? What means do you or your community have to manage events occurring more frequently? Continuing the adaptation process 4. Ability and willingness of the community to sustain the project intervention Example: Rate your confidence that the (project activity) will continue after the project period.

6 6 How does the VRA work in Practice? Question written across the top What happens when there is drought? What effects does it have on your livelihood? The H-form exercise begins by writing the question across the top of the sheet of paper. The facilitator will then facilitate a discussion on the topic with the community. Negative Responses and Challenges Positive Responses and Mitigating Factors 1.During the last 30 years, no one has been at ease because of drought. They have lost a lot during this time. Agriculture no longer permits them support themselves. One participant called the situation a “moral wound”. 2.Today, one must plant 3 hectares to get same production of field crops as one hectare planted 30 years ago. Often, there simply isn’t enough food. 3.Today, animals are no longer a means of storing savings. (Female response) 4.There has been a lot population movement out of the area due to drought. Some people aren’t even sure where members of their extended families have gone. Children often leave villages and don’t return. 5.There are a lot of orphans and it’s difficult to feed them all. (Female response) 6.They know it’s not a good idea to harvest too much firewood, but many do it anyway because they need the revenue generated by selling fuelwood. 1.Some new wells have been dug in the area, but it is not enough. 2.Rainfall is not as low as it has been, but it falls more erratically. 1.Re-establish livestock herds. This would improve livelihoods and have cultural significance. 2.Create jobs for young people to improve household revenue and stabilise society (i.e. reduce rural exodus). 3.There must be diversification of out of rain-fed agriculture to reduce suffering. Animal raising and counter cycle agriculture (i.e. market gardening) are possible diversification strategies. (Female response) 4.Build grain banks, fertilizer banks, and animal feed banks to improve food security for both people and animals. This will help traditional livelihood activities. 2.8 The facilitator then takes notes based on the community discussions on the sides of the H- form. These are divided into three categories of comments. Ways of Improving the Situation As the discussion is concluded, the facilitator polls the community for a numerical score for the question, using the textual guides as appropriate. This may be done via show of hands, symbols, or another appropriate method. A simple average of the scores yields the value for this particular VRA indicator.

7 7

8 8

9 9

Calculating the final VRA score The VRA Score for one meeting is comprised of the scores for each of the questions, averaged By the end of the project, VRA should be higher, reflecting improved adaptive capacity. This permits comparison of diverse project initiatives across a global portfolio. IndicatorScore 1. Vulnerability to existing climate hazards 3 2. Vulnerability to projected climate change risks 2 3. Magnitude of barriers to adaptation 4 4. Sustainability of the project intervention 5 Final VRA Score3.5 VRA meetings are held 3 times over the course of the project: At the beginning Once or twice over the course of implementation At the end of the project

What are the methodological issues? Lessons learned from implementation A purposive sampling approach: individual projects should define the composition of the local stakeholder body in advance, ensuring that all stakeholder groups (gender, livelihood, etc) are represented. These groups must be roughly identical from meeting to meeting for results to be valid. Communication and rapport is critical. Particularly where climate impacts have involved serious losses or mortality, sensitivity and tact are critical. The process should be kept short, and H-forms should be prepared in advance. This will maintain meeting flow and participant interest. Flexibility is critical. Within the framework of the methodology, flexibility and creativity are critical in tailoring the process to the target community.

12 The full working paper can be found on the CBA project website Thank You! 12