1. Evaluation activities of the Climate Services Partnership April 8, 2013 Geneva, Switzerland Catherine Vaughan International Research Institute for Climate & Society Climate Services Partnership Secretariat cvaughan@iri.columbia.edu

2. Climate Services Partnership • Informal, interdisciplinary partnership (+200 members) working to improve development and provision of climate services worldwide • Created 2011 at first International Conference on Climate Services (ICCS 1), in NY • Engaged in a range of collaborative activities on evaluation, guidance, training, etc. (Economic Evaluation Working Group) • Looking forward to ICCS 3, December 4-6 in Jamaica

3. CSP case studies • More than 30 case studies from a range of partners, in 10 sectors, from regions around the world • Case study template developed jointly with the GFCS • Case study analysis revealed information on best practice in climate service provision • Lessons learned re: the collection of useful information on the climate services themselves

4. CSP evaluations • Two large-scale evaluations of agrometeorological projects (India, Mali) • Science assessment, institutional assessment, field assessment (awareness, use, skill, communication) • Informative; time and resource intensive

5. “Mid-level” assessments • Develop a methodology to assess climate services at relatively modest levels of investment • Provide information for operational and investment decisions, provide guidance for the development of future services

6. Expert workshop, March 11 & 12 (I) • Challenges to evaluation (stochasticity; information is leaky; hard to identify information “use;” hard to characterize the benefits of climate services) • Conceptual framework to consider metrics for evaluation: • Problem identification and the decision-making context • Characteristics, tailoring and dissemination of the climate information • Governance, process and structure of the service • Economic value of the service

7. Expert workshop, March 11 & 12 (II) • What kind of assessment are we looking for? • How might evaluations differ depending on the services in question? • What kinds of information will we consider adequate?

8. Methodological guidelines • Aim of the evaluation • Underlying hypothesis of the service • Supply of information • Demand for information • Engagement between users and providers • Identifying best practices

9. Next steps • ~5 evaluations in developing countries • ~5 evaluation in developed countries • Analysis to reveal good practices and strategies that might be transferred to different contexts • Analysis to reveal best practice regarding evaluation • Summary and synthesis at ICCS 3, in December

10. Questions? Suggestions? Climate Services Partnership www.climate-services.org Catherine Vaughan cvaughan@iri.columbia.edu