1. Results and outcomes of the COP22 Adaptation Metrics Conference

2. Presentation of COP22 Scientific Committee
Pillar of the COP22 Steering Commitee, with more than 50 experts from research, administration and teaching institutions related to environment and over 20 executives of the financial sector
Several tasks attributed :
Technical background for negotiation issues
Contribution to the elaboration of various initiatives of the Marrakesh Partnership for Global Climate Action
Elaboration of a global financial roadmap
Analysis and selection of events and projects to be labelized
Organization of several workshops and conferences

3. The idea of a conference on Adaptation Metrics
Adaptation receives barely 6% of global climate finance and 17% of public climate finance
Adaptation is crucial for LDC and particularly vulnerable countries
Even if financial resources are scarce, the little that exists struggles to get mobilized
Difficulty to quantify adaptation is the reason given for non mobilization of finance
There are many metrics used around the world, and the conference should bring them together to support aggregation towards the global adaptation goal
The aim of the conference is to agree on criteria and indicators suitable for assessing adaptation projects and help deploy climate finance for adaptation

4. The program of the Conference
The conference, which took place on 27 September 2016 in Skhirat, Morocco,has been articulated around 4 main
panels, each with a specific approach:
PANEL 1: Adaptation metrics for the financial sector: opportunities and challenges
Presentations of the tools used by Multilateral Development Banks and other Financial Institutions
PANEL 2: Measuring Adaptation through its impact on resilience
Presentation of projects developing metrics based on impact on resilience
PANEL 3: A sectorial approach
Discussion about the metrics used in different specific sectors
PANEL 4: Linking adaptation metrics with SDG metrics
The point of view of international agencies implementing adaptation projects with a SDG approach

5. The program of the Conference

6. PANEL 4: Linking adaptation metrics with SDG metrics
The participants, representing UN or European bodies, all agreed that Adaptation and SDGs are already
being integrated, with a large number of indicators (for adaptation) included in the SDGs.
A debate opened on how to separate the calculation of adaptation finance and development finance
and two approaches were discussed :
o Top down (concentrating on how funding is spent in adaptation and not for development)
o Bottom up (focusing on how resilience knowledge is enhanced and adaptive capacity increased)
Participants called to reinforce the linkages with Disaster Risk Reduction Approaches.
A recommandation was to contribute to the representation of health and climate linkages within the
monitoring of the Sustainable Development Goals on climate change and health, as well as the SDGs relating
to other health determinants, including energy, water and sanitation, nutrition, and cities and communities.
Adaptation and development approaches and metrics often do simply overlap.

7. PANEL 2: Measuring Adaptation through its impact on resilience
Many different approaches to measure impact on resilience were presented:
Repeated Vulnerability Assessments before and after the implementation of the project
Saved Health/Saved Wealth (GiZ)
the Vulnerability Reduction Credit (the Higher Foundation)
The project PRISE (Pathway to Resilience in Semi Arid Economies) with an innovative value chain approach
The GCCA+ index (ranking countries according to CC risks and capacities to meet those risks)
The Adaptation Preparedness Scoreboard (from the Climate-ADAPT Adaptation Assessment in Europe).
The ND-Gain Index (from the University of Notre Dame, based on 45 indicators)
The Climate Resilient Development Index (JRC of EU, based on 32 indicators)
Since many indexes and calculation methods were presented, difficult to compare in their approaches and aims, participants
expressed concerns over the likelihood of developing a single and universal metric for adaptation through impact on resilience.
They highlighted how the success of adaptation was context specific.

8. PANEL 3: A sectorial approach
The contributions focused about mainly 2 sectors : Water and Agriculture,
which are the mostly quoted sectors in both INDCs and NAPAs.
• A participant focused on the importance of the specificities of urban vulnerabilities
and importance of urban planning.
Several Participants insisted on the importance of data definition in order to develop metrics.
A participant insisted on the importance of cross-feeding data.
A participant noted that Adaptation was included in 82% of the INDCs; and 61% of them have plans/strategies.
It was agreed upon that the sectorial approach allows to match national with regional strategies.
• A participant indicated that 34 INDCs included quantitative adaptation targets mostly in forestry, water and agriculture.
Sectorial metrics are a proven approach, but are limited by the fact that they only match one sector at the time.

9. PANEL 1: Adaptation metrics for the financial sector:
Opportunities and challenges
The financial sector proposed different approaches in measuring metrics:
Project-specific taking into account the specific context of the project
Sector-specific allowing for comparison and aggregation within the sector
Across sector metrics (Example : 5 Core Indicators = Number of beneficiaries (direct & indirect) / Number of early warning systems developed / Assets produced, developed, improved, or strengthened / Increased income, or avoided decrease in income / Natural habitats protected or rehabilitated)• Na
One common indicator is the number of people made resilient, which was criticized for being dependent of the scope of project and not having an exact definition
Need to stimulate the development of comprehensive set of Metrics aimed to plan, design, implement and report on adaptation, based on Common principles:
agreed on by major actors including:
Major Financial International Institutions, development banks and multilateral agencies,
Key financial markets actors (rating agencies, insurance, pension funds, asset managers,…),
Academia and the scientific community,
and taking into account the key criteria for projects to be reported as adaptation finance:
Intent to improve climate resilience = Clear differentiation between climate adaptation and development project;
Set out a context of climate vulnerability (climate data, exposure and sensitivity);
Link project activities to the context of climate vulnerability reflecting only direct contributions to climate resilience (e.g.,socio-economic conditions and geographical location), .

10. RESULTS and OUTCOMES
A 16 pages comprehensive synthesis of the outcomes and conclusions of the Conference has
been submitted by Morocco to the Secretary of the United Nations Frame Convention on
Climate Changes, and is available to consult online.
Comparing the three proposed approaches however, it appears that :
1) Adaptation goals and SDG goals are highly overlapping and difficult to segregate;
2) Impact on resilience is very difficult to quantify on a unified metric, an depends heavily on
the context;
3) The sectorial approach offers the possibility of concrete indicators but these are sector
specific.
The Moroccan Presidency developed a Climate Finance Pathways that focuses on three axes
Promote positive fiscal and budgetary policies
Deepen private sector involvement
Increase finance available for Adaptation