Evaluation that counts: A review of climate change adaptation indicators & metrics using lessons from effective evaluation and science-practice interaction |
| |
| Institution: | 1. School of Natural Resources and Environment, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States;2. Aspen Global Change Institute, Basalt, CO, United States;3. Susanne Moser Research & Consulting, Santa Cruz, CA, United States;4. Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford, CA, United States;5. School of Social Ecology, University of California, Irvine, CA, United States;6. Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve, United States;1. Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland;2. Department of Real Estate, Planning and Geoinformatics, Aalto University, Finland;3. Department of Thematic Studies – Environmental Change and the Center for Climate Science and Policy Research, Linköping University, Sweden;1. Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative (ND-GAIN), University of Notre Dame, South Bend, 46617 IN, United States;2. Notre Dame Initiative for Global Development (NDIGD), University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, 46556 IN, United States;3. Institute on the Environment, University of Minnesota, 1954 Buford Ave, St. Paul, 55108 Minneapolis, MN, United States;1. Climate Change Science Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, United States;2. Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, United States;3. Centre for Urban Research, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University, Australia;4. School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia;1. National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, 4222, Australia;2. Cities Research Institute, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, 4222, Australia;3. Department of Business Strategy and Innovation, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, 4222, Australia;1. University of Washington Climate Impacts Group, 3737 Brooklyn Avenue NE, Box 355674, Seattle, WA 98195, USA;2. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (6207A), Washington, DC 20460, USA;3. Abt Associates, 2755 Canyon Boulevard, Suite 3-101, Boulder, CO 80302, USA;4. JMHP LLC, 4883 Dakota Boulevard, Boulder, CO 80304, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Amid growing effort to move towards implementation of climate change adaptation, serious interest is emerging about how to use indicators and metrics (I&M) to evaluate adaptation success. Cities are among the leading experimenters developing I&M, but many other entities also view I&M as a tool for providing clarity and accountability about the goals and progress of adaptation. The current landscape of this work is scattered: I&M examples, frameworks, and guidance documents reflect motivations, contexts, and approaches as diverse as the field of adaptation itself. This study systematically surveys the “growth industry” of I&M, including a special focus on I&M approaches developed for cities anywhere and by US cities in particular. We classify these I&M efforts into four domains: those developed in academia, by program sponsors, boundary organizations, and on-the-ground implementers. With attention to theory on (program) evaluation and on science-practice interaction, we reveal a broad range of I&M evaluation purposes and collaboration practices. We conclude that evaluation of adaptation progress and effectiveness – if it is to usefully inform the work of cities or other implementers – would benefit from greater attention to the best practices and guidance offered in the related, but largely still separate, fields of evaluation and science-practice interaction. |
| |
| Keywords: | Climate change adaptation Indicators and metrics Evaluation Urban Science usability Science-practice interaction |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
