Agile online platforms and virtual spaces for knowledge-sharing and convening
The Resilience Platform is an online inventory of resilience expertise (organizations, networks, solutions, stories and people) to help design, implement and evaluate the resilience components of development plans, policies and investments. This platform curates proven resilience knowledge, case studies and evidence.
The Resilience Platform is dynamically linked with SEI’s Connectivity Hub through the PLACARD tool – a pilot that is being expanded to partner platforms. The Connectivity Hub is currently dynamically linked various platforms such as WeAdapt, PreventionWeb, etc. to curate knowledge and evidence on Climate Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction. Linking the Resilience Platform to the Connectivity hub brings curated resilience knowledge and evidence to the hub as well.
The coalition is exploring the possibility of creating a virtual space to connect and interact with others to share, build on and amplify insights. The experience of the COVID-19 crisis will be used to ensure grassroots communities are involved and heard, and not “digitally excluded”.
The Climate Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis (CVCA) is an approach developed by CARE to assess community-level vulnerabilities and capacities to climate change. It draws on climate information from both scientific and traditional knowledge sources. Through collecting and analysing this data, CVCA catalyses the identification of necessary actions at the community level to enhance resilience in the face of climate change.
Knowledge Into Use awards winner, Enoch Mwangilwa, shares story about children from the Chongololo and Chipembele Conservation Clubs on how they are making a difference by using art and peer-to-peer climate education to encourage their communities to adopt sustainable practices.
Numerous resilience measurement frameworks for climate programmes have emerged over the past decade to operationalise the concept and aggregate results within and between programmes. Proxies of resilience, including subjective measures using perception data, have been proposed to measure resilience, but there is limited evidence on their validity and use for policy and prac- tice. This article draws on research on the Decentralising Climate Funds project of the Building Resilience and Adaptation to Climate Extremes and Disasters programme, which supports communities in Mali and Senegal to improve climate resilience through locally controlled adap- tation funds. It explores attributes of resilience from this bottom-up perspective to assess its predictors and alignment with food security, as a proxy of well-being. We find different patterns when comparing resilience and the well-being proxy, illustrating that the interplay between the two is still unclear. Results also point to the importance of contextualising resilience, raising impli- cations for aggregating results.
The targets and indicators covered are a mix of what may be described as ‘processes’ and ‘outcomes’. ‘Process’ targets and indicators describe activities that must be undertaken or strengthened to reach more climate-adaptive and resilient societies and ecosystems. Examples of ‘process’ targets and indicators are having adaptation strategies, costed plans and financing in place.
‘Outcome’ targets and indicators describe the state of being demonstrably more climate-adapted, climate- adaptive and/or climate-resilient. An example of an ‘outcome’ targets would be “achieving a 10 per cent reduction in the number of cases of human vector- borne diseases associated with climate change (decadal average) by 2030”.2 There are also targets that are quantifiable and represent at least intermediate outcomes, such as area or proportion of land/sea under effective ecosystem management or restored ecological function (which may have auxiliary species, habitats and ecosystem services indicators associated with them).
Key messages:
1. The focus on end-users for resilience measurement data is growing, be it by policymakers or grassroots communities, but challenges remain in identifying ways in which progress can be tracked and evidence repackaged that is suitable to the audience.
2. When considering resilience measurement approaches, it is important to consider user needs. There is growing recognition that communities are not beneficiaries of resilience interventions, but are in-fact change agents who need data from measurement approaches to make decisions.
3. Mainstream resilience and adaptation measurement approaches continue to be driven by climate risks and impacts more than by questions of equity, justice, and power dynamics that drive the vulnerability of communities. Locally led adaptation (LLA) initiatives necessarily require flexible and robust measurement approaches that help communities navigate change and support communities as actors within complex systems who embrace uncertain futures.
4. Resilience measurement approaches that are driven by impacts and attribution are rigid in measuring indicators for capacities and capitals.
5. Data is essential for effective measurement and more investments need to be made in this regard, ensuring this is relevant for users.
6. The shared principles and priorities identified as a part of the Advancing Resilience Measurement experts meeting in May 2022 on demand-driven resilience, psychosocial resilience and well-being, systems-level resilience and climate adaptation and resilience can act as a guiding framework for articulating measurement approaches for LLA initiatives.
We use traffic log cookies to identify which pages are being used on our website (www.globalresiliencepartnership.org). Cookies help us provide you with a better website, by enabling us to monitor which pages you find useful and which you do not. A cookie in no way gives us access to your computer or any information about you, other than the data you choose to share with us.
