Evaluation of Denmark’s Climate Change Funding to Developing
Countries
Overview of the Findings
DIIS Seminar Copenhagen 30 September 2015
2
Purpose of the Evaluation
Core evaluation question:
• What is the impact of the Danish climate change funding on mitigation of and adaptation to the consequences of climate change in developing countries?
Two subsidiary tasks:
• Identify the transformations and contributions of Danish climate-change funding to global climate change policies and financing; and
• Provide lessons from this support to inform the shape and scope of future interventions and the Climate Envelope as a whole.
Level of Support & How it was Spent
Portfolio primary focus approx. DKK 3
billion
Implementing partner sample –
DKK 1.2 billion
3
4
Results from the Interventions
5
Global Agenda, Poverty & Social Inclusion
• Successful influence on global climate change policies
Capacity building for poorer countries at global negotiations
• Stronger voice for vulnerable groups
• Poverty focus thru’ broadly based approaches
6
Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
• Builds on Danish expertise and experience
• Strong focus on policy influence and modelling
• Working in middle-income countries provides lower risk inputs for low-income countries
• Some successes in attracting private sector investment partners
7
Portfolio-level Findings
8
Overall Portfolio
• Good relevance and alignment with Danish and partner aims and priorities
• Very wide range of themes, modalities and geography
• Intense pressure to spend post Bali 2007
• Limited experience captured on what does/does not work
• Tendency to be opportunistic
9
Portfolio Management
• Similar issues to those of other donors
• Complex institutional framework
• Diverse guidance documentation
• Annual budgeting
• Limited lesson learning
• Good use of energy expertise but limited “Danish Identity”
10
Conclusions and Lessons
• Uncertainty in 2008, hence “research”
• Negative results are not failures
• Need to consolidate, be more strategic and enhance cross-portfolio coherence
11
Recommendations
1. Develop Climate Envelope strategy
2. Improve Climate Envelope structure
3. Strengthen M&E and feedback system
4. Maximise funding leverage
5. Strengthen policy influence and cross-portfolio coherence
12
Points for Discussion
• Climate Change cuts across institutional structures in donor and partner countries
• Middle-income cf. Low income partners
• Policy “balloon” detached from reality?
• Objectives, safeguards and multiple voices?
• Decision making by consensus or opting out?
• Cost-effective evaluation approaches?
• Difficulties of tracing climate finance
13
That’s All Folks!!