You are here: Home / Toolbox / Details

---

Toolbox home References 9 short descriptions

Initial frameworks used proxy indicators to describe adaptive capacity that were largely based on assets and capitals e.g. relating to poverty and marginalisation and distribution of wealth and income (Brooks et al., 2005). They were useful in helping understand and compare resources available to a nation (or a community or a household) to respond to the consequences of a changing climate but they offered little insight on capacity which requires a more dynamic understanding of processes and functions. The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Working Group II report concurs stating: ‘There is some evidence that national-level indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity are used by climate change negotiators, practitioners, and decision makers in determining policies and allocating priorities for funding and interventions. However, few studies have been globally comprehensive, and the literature lacks consensus on the usefulness of indicators of generic adaptive capacity and the robustness of the results’.

Understanding how adaptive capacity can be built and supported thus requires an understanding of the complexity of the system and how it changes including decision-making processes, policy development, organisational culture and innovation and risk perception. This requires moving away from looking at what a system has that enables it to adapt, to recognising what a system does to enable it to adapt (WRI, 2009).

Adaptive capacity is affected by multiple processes of change. Understanding the dynamic distribution of adaptive capacity within and across societies is challenging and a constraint to the effectiveness of adaptation strategies. For example, adaptation interventions designed to improve changing economic and social conditions may increase vulnerability to climate change, and climate change related adaptation interventions may increase vulnerability to
other changes.

Policymaking is an important tool for capacity building as the policy environment plays a major role in determining whether or not adaptive measures are undertaken Policy may serve to encourage adaptation or undermine it, and certain policies may be maladaptive, leading to activities that reduce adaptive capacity or increase vulnerability (Adger, ).

A number of frameworks are available to assess adaptive capacity at different scales (national, local and organisational). Some of these frameworks are suitable for use at more than one of these levels. They each offer guidance on how to measure and assess aspects of adaptive capacity and some of the challenges associated with this.

---

Exemplary methods and tools

Frameworks of national adaptive capacity
Name	Description	References
National Adaptive Capacity Framework, World Resources Institute	A tool to help governments bring institutional capacity development into their national adaptation planning processes by systematically assessing institutional strengths and weaknesses that may help or hinder adaptation. Identifies a fundamental set of national level functions that all countries will need to perform if they are to be adapting effectively over time. The five key functions are identified as: assessment, prioritization, coordination, information management, and climate risk management. The tool can be used for monitoring and baseline setting, catalysing action and filling capacity gaps, and to gather and synthesise resources. Can be used at national and sectoral scales. The pilot projects show it can be tailored to suit different starting points and approaches to planning and evaluation	http://www.wri.org/project/ vulnerability-and-adaptation/ nacframework
PACT: Performance Acceleration through Capacity Transformations, Alexander Ballard Ltd	A framework tool for diagnosis, assessment, monitoring and evaluation at multiple scales - team, organisation sector, network, nation. 'Reviewing the Dutch Government's National Adaptation Strategy 'the PACT approach was inspirational in the way it could so rapidly provide a clearly structured analysis of our complex adaptation programme' Senior Manager in the Netherlands Climate Adaptation Programme. The standard expert-based assessment process provides customised reports that supports progress from assessing the status of current work programmes to planning improvements.	http://www.pact.co/home
Rethinking support for adaptive capacity to climate change: The role of development interventions.	The Africa Climate Change Resilience Alliance (ACCRA) is an alliance of five development partners: Oxfam GB, the Overseas Development Institute, Save the Children, World Vision International and Care International. It was established in 2009 with the aim of understanding how development interventions can contribute to adaptive capacity at the community and household level, and to inform the design and implementation of development planning by governments and non-governmental development partners to support adaptive capacity for climate change and other development pressures. This paper is based on an analysis of three country studies conducted by national research teams in eight research sites in Ethiopia, Uganda and Mozambique for ACCRA. It describes the Local Adaptive Capacity (LAC) framework developed for this project, its application during the research, and the evidence found about the impact of development interventions on the adaptive capacity of people and communities	http://community.eldis.org/.5a35bbfb/ ACCRA%20Rethinking%20 Support%20Report%20Final.pdf
Climate Learning Ladder	The climate learning ladder offers a way to structure policy analysis, support reflection and identify critical decisions to support climate adaptation at various scales - local regional and national. Building capacity to cope with climate change goes beyond providing information on climate impacts to policy makers. It is a multi-step social process in which individuals and organizations need to learn how to: (1) manage different framings of the issues at stake while raising awareness of climate risks and opportunities, (2) understand different motives for, and generate incentives or sanctions to ensure, action, (3) develop feasible options and resources for individual and collective transformation and collaboration and (4) institutionalize new rights, responsibilities and feedback learning processes for climate adaptation in the long term. These four dimensions are presented as a hypothetical ‘ladder’ of conditions that the authors propose are crucial for adaptive climate capacity building. For each step a series of research questions and policy arenas that need to be considered in order to successfully develop climate learning capacities in the long term. ‘Unlearning’, or ‘moving down the climate ladder’, may also occur wherever agents and institutions lose the knowledge and capacities acquired over time to cope with climate risks.	This tool is the result of the reflexive learning process that occurred while developing innovative appraisal methods in the Alxa League of Inner Mongolia, China, and in the Guadiana river basin in the European Union. For more information go to: http://www.tea.ac.cn/upfile/ 20101213155918-0.pdf
Frameworks of local level adaptive capacity
Name	Description	References
Rethinking support for adaptive capacity to climate change: The role of development interventions.	This paper is based on an analysis of three country studies conducted by national research teams in eight research sites in Ethiopia, Uganda and Mozambique for ACCRA. Although the focus is on the Local Adaptive Capacity (LAC) framework developed for this project, reflections on it application during the research, and the evidence found about the impact of development interventions on the adaptive capacity of people and communities has national implications for the management and governance of this work.	http://community.eldis.org/.5a35bbfb/ ACCRA%20Rethinking%20Support %20Report%20Final.pdf
From the Roots Up - Strengthening Organisational Capacity through Guided Self Assessment	This field guide providing principle and techniques for self-assessment exercises that aim to strengthen organisational capacity in key areas including: representative decision making; communication systems; collaboration with other groups; negotiation for services; identification and prioritization of problems; implementation of activities; lobbying for local interests; clarity of vision and purpose; systems for raising revenue; mobilizing human capital; and monitoring and evaluation.	http://rmportal.net/library/content/ tools/biodiversity-conservationtools/ putting-conservation-incontext-cd/ capacity-building-andorganizational- developmentresources/ Excerpts-From-the-Roots-Up- Strengthening-Organizational- Capacity-through- Guided-Self-Assessment
Towards a characterisation of adaptive capacity: a framework for analysing adaptive capacity at the local level	The framework presented here has many similarities with others, giving attention to processes, rather than snapshot pictures of a system at a single point in time. Aimed at people want to understand how internal and external factors change local adaptive capacity, to make it easier for users to see and to reflect on important dimensions that might otherwise be neglected.	http://www.odi.org.uk/ resources/docs/6353.pdf
The RAPID Context- Evidence-Links framework	the uptake of research-based evidence in policy processes. ODI has used this framework extensively in its research and advisory work, including: to analyse four major policy events: the adoption of PRSPs; the development of an ethical charter by humanitarian agencies; animal health policies in Kenya; the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach; in a study of research-policy interaction in HIV/AIDS in developing countries; in evaluations of the impact of internal policy papers on bilateral donor policy; in workshops and seminars with researchers, practitioners and policymakers in Botswana, Morocco, India, Moldova, Kenya, UK and USA. Information on various projects, publications and lessons, available at: www.odi.org.uk/rapid	http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/ details.asp?id=159&title=bridging- research-policy-internationaldevelopment- analytical-practicalframework
Sustainable Livelihoods Framework and asset pentagon	A framework for identifying financial and other assets required for a sustainable livelihood. Developed from a paper by Robert Chambers and Gordon Conway in 1992 who defined a sustainable livelihood as comprising: the capabilities, assets (stores, resources, claims and access) and activities required for a means of living; a livelihood is sustainable which can cope with and recover from stress and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, and provide sustainable livelihood opportunities for the next generation; and which  contributes net benefits to other livelihoods at the local and global levels and in the short and long-term. It was adopted by the UK Department for International Development (DfID) in the late 1990s. The 'asset pentagon' can be used to identify and enhance capability; improve equity by building capabilities, assets and access and increase social sustainability by reducing external stress and shocks and providing safety nets.	Sustainable livelihoods approach for assessing community resilience to climate change: case studies from Sudan http://www.aiaccproject.org/ working_papers/Working%20Papers/ AIACC_WP_No017.pdf Sustainable Livelihoods in the Context of Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change Impacts in Tanzania: A Case Study of Kilimanjaro Region http://www.nlcap.net/fileadmin/NCAP/ Countries/Tanzania/032135.070212. TAN.CON-02.Output9.SLA_framework_ Kilimanjaro.pdf For further information go to: http://www.eldis.org/vfile/upload/1/ document/0901/section2.pdf