A recent examination of national adaptation policy papers in Africa reveals that the majority do not provide thorough and coherent information. But the writers also unearth powerful illustrations of well-thought-out programs that might serve as models for future climate negotiations.
For African countries, adapting to the effects of climate change is a top policy concern, particularly for vital industries like agriculture. The African Development Bank claims that the continent only gets $30 billion a year for adaptation to climate change. $277 billion is required.
The capacity to assess national adaptation progress in Africa and to direct adaptation expenditures where they are most needed is hampered by inadequate information on national adaptation strategies. Improving the policies’ breadth, coherence, and strength provides a direct route to building a functional, nationally-led infrastructure for monitoring adaptation.
These are the results of recent research conducted by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Wageningen University and Research, The Alliance of Bioversity, and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture. The study was published in Nature Climate Change today.
To ascertain if they were sufficient to serve as a foundation for monitoring adaptation at the national level, the authors examined 15 National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and 53 African Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Three criteria were used to assess them: the quality or robustness of the indicators; the coverage of important information on adaptation; and the consistency of the information being monitored.
They discovered that the majority of NAPs and NDCs in Africa only provide a small portion of the data required for monitoring adaptation. For example, information on all essential elements of adaptation, such as risk and impact assessment, planning, implementation, monitoring, evaluation, and learning, was only covered by eight NAPs and four NDCs.
However, the writers pointed out a few noteworthy initiatives to provide sufficient details. For instance, whilst Angola, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Sierra Leone, Burundi, and Uganda had produced strong NDCs, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Liberia, Madagascar, Togo, and South Africa had prepared moderately strong NAPs. The effectiveness of adaptation plans varies greatly throughout nations and policy categories (NDCs vs NAPs, for example).
The United Arab Emirates (UAE)–Belém Work Program, which was approved at the 28th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP28), aims to create indicators for the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) and is anticipated to direct national assessments and strengthen capacities for tracking adaptation.
The same authors contend that earlier technical dialogues, such as the Glasgow-Sharm el-Sheikh work program on the global goal of adaptation, have placed too much emphasis on developing globally relevant indicators, glaringly ignoring the role of current national policy processes for tracking adaptation progress, particularly for African nations, in an accompanying policy brief that was also published today by Nature Climate Change. Using data from NDCs and NAPs, the 60th UNFCCC Subsidiary Bodies (SB60) recently made a resolution that opens the door to building on national priorities.
The authors provide policy suggestions for the continuing collaboration program between the UAE and Belém, emphasizing the necessity for strong indicators that take into account the goals set out in national policies as well as climate risks and adaptation requirements. Because of its responsibility to assess the NAP technical requirements, the Least Developed Countries Expert Group (LEG) has a significant impact on speeding the development of efficient tracking systems.
“Our study shows that existing adaptation policies can provide important groundwork for developing meaningful, context-fit national adaptation tracking systems,” said Andreea Nowak, Research Team Lead on Climate Action at The Alliance of Bioversity and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture, during the launch of the Nature Climate Change article.
But to do this, they need to provide thorough, reliable, and consistent information on the what, why, how, and so forth of adaptation. There is a lot of impetus to make sure that the new NDCs, which are due in 2025, and NAPs, which are due in 2030, have enough foundational information to support efficient adaptation monitoring systems.
“Country-driven monitoring strategies are essential for conducting a thorough evaluation of the Global Goal on Adaptation’s progress. Our findings indicate that, in terms of monitoring climate adaptation in Africa, we don’t have to start from scratch.
“Some African countries have extremely strong examples of NDCs that work, and others may build on those successes with help from continental partners like the African Group of Negotiators Expert Support and international partners via UNFCCC procedures.
“As scientists committed to creating societal impact, it is our role to continue to support governments in their efforts to develop and implement robust, science-informed policy processes, which can pave the way towards effective adaptation.”