115 Key challenges in collecting and compiling indicators include a lack of data for many indicators, and secondly, where data is available it is lacking for 2020, a key year to assessing progress. In many cases, data Chapter 6: Challenges and lessons 47 series, other than the indicators reported as part of ADER, ended halfway through the period, for example in 2017 or 2018. This is because of the time required to collect and compile data nationally and then internationally. Complicating matters further, measuring GHG emissions and emissions reductions, is complex, and assessing adaptation and resilience is equally if not more complex. Measuring mitigation and adaptation is challenging enough for organizations that have a single economic activity, but given the breadth of activities and projects the Bank supports, measuring mitigation and adaptation across the portfolio of Bank projects and activities is incredibly challenging. A process of continuous improvement is required, including a mix of both simple and complex assessment tools each of which can be applied, according to what is practical and required. Lastly, not all challenges can be addressed directly by the Bank. Some challenges are areas of interest, such as climate change and global warming levels. The Bank can influence GHG emissions and project design, for example, with RMCs and other partners. However, the Bank has greatest control with its own processes, levels of capacity, and the projects it engages with. As such, many of the recommendations made in the next chapter address the enabling environment and RMF Levels 3 and 4. Recommendations The Bank’s CCAP2 and related activities have generated a wealth of experiences, challenges, and lessons. This chapter synthesizes challenges and lessons into a series of recommendations. While previous sections and chapters have been organized according to the CCAP pillars, the recommendations below are organized thematically, in consideration that the evaluation does not pre-suppose future action plans, climate strategies, or policies will necessarily follow current CCAP pillars. From the evaluation of CCAP2, a series of recommendations are made. These recommendations address: the climate change pillars; the need for evidence-driven policies, strategies, and plans; atmospheric GHG removals; the RMF levels addressed by action plans and strategies; the need for theories of change; considering new financial approaches; guidance documents and tools; monitoring, evaluation, and reporting; annual reports; internal capacity; external capacity; knowledge generation and sharing; communication; limiting climate change physical risks; limiting transitions risks; and increased focus on sustainable development, green growth included. Climate change pillars It is recommended that the current CCAP pillars be retained as they match the Bank’s RMF levels well while also providing a comprehensive framework for organizing climate change activities and reporting. Evidence-driven policies, strategies, and plans When considering climate-resilient and low-carbon development, it is important to be aware of the breadth of project options that the Bank can engage in, including any missed opportunities under the CCAP2. Fortunately, the IPCC assessments and related literature such as Project Drawdown address adaptation and mitigation options. Future CCAPs should periodically and comprehensively refer to IPCC assessments and related literature that provide comprehensive lists for adaptation, mitigation, and related approaches and activities. This can help with the identification of priority areas. Special attention should be paid to the potential of climate actions for development benefits while enhancing climate resilience and limiting atmospheric concentrations of GHGs. The recent publication of the Sixth Assessment Report provides an opportunity to identify new adaptation and mitigation opportunities for RMCs, private sector investors, and civil society. Atmospheric CO2 removals Given that atmospheric carbon dioxide removals appear increasingly necessary to fulfil the Paris Agreement, the Bank should explore opportunities with RMCs and others, including land use– related options as well as technologybased options for removals. RMF levels addressed by action plans and strategies Future action plans should focus on RMF Levels 3 and 4 as these are within the control of the Bank, while a climate change strategy should focus on RMF Level 2 while also addressing RMF Level 1. Level 1 addresses the ultimate outcomes that the Bank is striving for (i.e., climate-resilient low carbon development). Level 2 engages projects and activities that the Bank can directly influence. Consider new financial approaches and models Given the scale of climate change challenges — for instance, when it Key lessons and recommendations
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NzQ1NTk=