Publication - Independent report

Climate Justice Fund evaluation: final report

Published: 21 December 2021
Directorate: Energy and Climate Change Directorate
Topic: Environment and climate change
ISBN: 9781802018592

Full report of the independent evaluation of the Climate Justice Fund's work to date, drawing on the experiences of those who have implemented or been directly supported by the Fund.

Supporting documents

Footnotes

1. The OECD-DAC Quality Standards for Development Evaluation were developed through international consensus to improve the quality of international development evaluations. The guidelines support best practice evaluations at each stage of evaluation design and implementation. The OECD-DAC Network on Development Evaluation defines the following six evaluation criteria: Relevance (is the intervention doing the right things?); Coherence (how well does the intervention fit?); Efficiency (how well are resources being used?); Effectiveness (is the intervention achieving its objectives?); Impact (what difference does the intervention make?); and Sustainability (will the benefits last?).

2. A qualitative evaluation methodology based on asking participants about the most significant changes that have taken place in different areas of their lives, over a specified period, which was used to assess intervention impacts and their theory of change.

3. Deutsch, M. 'Justice and Conflict,' in Deutsch, M; Coleman, T. and Marcus, C. eds (2011). The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice. John Wiley & Sons. See also, Newell, P; Srivastava, S; Naess, L.O; Contreras, G. and Price, R. (2020). Working Paper 540: Towards Transformative Climate Justice: Key Challenges and Future Directions for Research. International Development Research Centre (IDRC).

4. The order (and therefore numbering) of the evaluation question has been revised since the Inception Report.

5. Climate change and social justice: an evidence review.

6. Climate Justice.

7. The OECD-DAC Quality Standards for Development Evaluation were developed through international consensus to improve the quality of international development evaluations. The guidelines support best practice evaluations at each stage of evaluation design and implementation. The OECD-DAC Network on Development Evaluation defines the following six evaluation criteria: Relevance (is the intervention doing the right things?); Coherence (how well does the intervention fit?); Efficiency (how well are resources being used?); Effectiveness (is the intervention achieving its objectives?); Impact (what difference does the intervention make?); and Sustainability (will the benefits last?).

8. A qualitative evaluation methodology based on asking participants about the most significant changes that have taken place in different areas of their lives, over a specified period, which was used to assess intervention impacts and their theory of change.

9. Mary Robinson Foundation Climate Justice 2010-2019.

10. Deutsch, M. 'Justice and Conflict,' in Deutsch, M; Coleman, T. and Marcus, C. eds (2011). The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice. John Wiley & Sons. See also, Newell, P; Srivastava, S; Naess, L.O; Contreras, G. and Price, R. (2020). Working Paper 540: Towards Transformative Climate Justice: Key Challenges and Future Directions for Research. International Development Research Centre (IDRC).

11. World Bank (n.d.). Malawi Climate Change Country Summary.

12. Warnatzsch, and Reay, D. (2018). 'Temperature and precipitation change in Malawi: evaluation of CORDEX-Africa climate simulations for climate change impact assessments and adaptation planning.' Science of the Total Environment 654 (2019) 378-392

13. Lovell, E. (2021). Gender Equality, Social Inclusion and Resilience in Malawi, part of the BRACC Hub. Discussion paper.

14. Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2019). Climate Change Profile: Rwanda.

15. USAID (n.d.). Climate Change Risk profile: Rwanda. Fact Sheet.

16. USAID (n.d.). Climate Change Risk Profile: Zambia Fact Sheet.

17. World Bank (n.d.). Zambia Climate Change Summary.

18. The order (and therefore numbering) of the evaluation question has been revised since the Inception Report.

19. Project documentation for Round 1 was insufficient to review project outcomes. Also note that only CJIF projects that were spoken to are included in this analysis as the documentation Scottish Government receives on these projects was insufficient to evaluate them (full documentation was requested and provided for the in-depth project reviews).

20. Note that, given the timing of the online moderated platform after the fieldwork had been completed and one week before submission of the final report, these benefits have not been verified by the evaluators.

21. Coffee Wastewater Treatment Research Report (2020).

22. Which countries are most threatened by and vulnerable to climate change?.

23. Eckstein,D; Künzel, V. and Schäfer, L. (2021). Briefing Paper: Global Climate Risk Index 2021 - Who Suffers Most from Extreme Weather Events? Weather-Related Loss Events in 2019 and 2000-2019. German Watch.

24. The first Climate Justice Summit took place in the Hague in 2000.

25. Mary Robinson Foundation Climate Justice 2010-2019.

26. Joseph Rowntree Foundation Evidence Review.

27. IEEP Background paper.

28. Mary Robinson Foundation, Glasgow CCCJ, CJF (USA), Climate Justice Programme.

29. Mary Robinson Foundation, Glasgow CCCJ, Ford Foundation, CJF (USA).

30. Climate Justice Alliance, SURDNA.

31. Glasgow CCCJ, Recommended by IIED.

32. CJRF.

33. CJRF.

34. CJRF.

35. Mary Robinson Foundation, Glasgow CCCJ, CJRF.

36. Glasgow CCCJ.

37. CJRF, IFSW, Climate Justice Alliance, SURDNA, Climate Justice Programme, Environmental Justice Foundation.

38. Climate Justice Programme, Climate Justice Fund (US).

39. Currently, Climate Justice Resilience Fund; Ford Foundation; Climate Justice Fund (US); Environmental Justice Foundation; Climate Justice Alliance, Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Historically, Mary Robinson Foundation also funded climate justice work.

40. Morton Deutsch, "Justice and Conflict," in The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice, Morton Deutsch, Peter T. Coleman, Eric C. Marcus, eds. (John Wiley & Sons, 2011)

41. IIED briefing.

42. Mary Robinson Foundation Climate Justice 2010-2019.

43. CJRF, Glasgow CCCJ.

44. CJF USA, Climate Justice Programme.

45. CJRF, IFSW, Climate Justice Alliance, Climate Justice Programme, CJF USA.

46. CJF USA, Climate Justice Alliance, SURDNA.

47. CJRF, Glasgow CCCJ.

48. CJRF, SURDNA.

49. Mary Robinson Foundation, Ford Foundation.

50. Mary Robinson Foundation, CJRF, Ford Foundation, Climate Justice Programme.

51. Mary Robinson Foundation, Climate Justice Alliance, Glasgow CCCJ.

52. Mary Robinson Foundation, Climate Justice Alliance, Ford Foundation.