Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) System of Climate Financing in Indonesia : Moving Beyond Traditional M&E Mindset

Umi Hanik[1]

SEA Change* Panelist on Climate Change Mitigation M&E Panel Session for the Second Evaluation Conclave in Kathmandu, Nepal 26 February-1 March 2013 held by the Community of Evaluators (CoE) in South Asia and the Community of Evaluators Nepal (CoE-Nepal)[2]

The Government of Indonesia (GOI) seriously cope the climate change issue into the national strategy by having a cross-sectoral program mentioned in the National Medium Term Development Plan (RPJMN) 2010-2014. The GoI has also defined set of a target to reduce GHG emissions by 26% up to 41% by 2020. Complement to the RPJMN, the GoI developed the Indonesia Climate Change Sectoral Roadmap (ICCSR) and a National Action Plan for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction (RAN-GRK) with the enactment of Presidential Regulation (No. 61/2011). Annual investment has been added ranging from US$ 4.5 to 5 billion (Bappenas, July 2008).

With additional investment indicates above and to be able to address the above agendas, the GoI will require harmonized efforts from all stakeholders, coordinating technical strengths and the development priorities with all contributing parties.  

The issuance of the Minister of National Development Planning/Chairman of the National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS) Decree No. 44/M.PPN/HK/09/2009 and Presidential Regulation No.80/2011 on trust funds is an open door to embrace aid management outlining the importance role of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E).

Such regulations ensure that climate change programs and the funding would sustainable and will effectively be managed. With aid effectiveness, climate financing management in Indonesia is expected to be more aligned and harmonized; increase GoI ownership with national management; accommodating result-based management; mutual accountability and transparent between donors and the GoI which are inline with the principles of the Jakarta Commitment (2008)[3] as an effort to make aid more effective.

National agenda on climate change has been identified; climate financing and its management have been set up; possible indicators and target for the climate performance has been proposed. Current discussion endorse that both climate substance and project management (including the financial aspect) are equally important to be measured. Therefore, the mandatory bodies need a platform for M&E for the performance measurement.

However, despite of the good news above, fear and debate arise on how to measure the contribution of mandatory bodies to achieve the outcome. Argumentation arise mostly come from the trust fund body who will play significant role in the future.  The argumentation outlining fear of risks when they fail to achieve the outcome. Limitation of the resources and main functions to play such big role make them unconfidence. Questions on how they will measure the emission, what is the tools, technique, etc also emerged. The past discussion thought the M&E tasks will limited on financial and project management while measuring climate mitigation and adaptation performance are beyond their coverage.

Modern M&E taught us that M&E should applied to both management and program (results based-M&E). Kusek (2004, p.23) said that M&E is a powerful public management tool that can be used to improve the way governments and organizations achieve results. Just as governments need financial, human resource, and accountability systems, governments also need good performance feedback systems.

M&E that includes the collection and analysis of essential data to understand the magnitude of indicators, monitor its trends, assess its impact and outcomes of interventions put in place to mitigate it and to support decision-making to improve the national or local response to that condition understand as crucial. It will allows the government to see target set and evidence as crucial to steer, motivate, sustain, measure, report on progress and plan again based on evidence and thus M&E should be designed beyond financial and project management.

Climate M&E system shall beyond the measurement technique and engineering process and Indonesia is willing to have such M&E system. I am an M&E specialist and also founding members of Indonesian Development Evaluation Community (InDEC) with mission to contribute for the better M&E culture in Indonesia, in the regions, and international level; believe that by having the opportunity to share the process and challenge of what I had and knew so far, exchange knowledge and experience, enrich of what we already have in Indonesia and added the value of what we have done so far is a bless. 

---

[1] M&E Professional, currently working under the project of PNPM Generasi (National Program for Community Empowerment in Rural Areas A Healthy and Bright Generation) the World Bank. Founding members and Chair for Department of Advocacy and Networking of Indonesian Development Evaluation Community (InDEC). An active member of South East Asia Community of Practice for Monitoring & Evaluation of Climate Change Intervensions (SEA Change CoP). A member of European Evaluation Society (EES). Board of members of the Asia-Pacific Evaluation Association (APEA).

[2] The panelist is actively participate in the national/international effort on research and developing climate M&E system in Indonesia through several projects i.e “Developing M&E System for the ICCTF (Indonesia Climate Change Trust Fund) with support of ICCTF-PREP UNDP. Lead author for the initial development of “Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) system of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions in Indonesia” with support of PAKLIM-GIZ Jakarta. Co-writer for the “Gap Analysis Report for Indonesia: Measurement, Reporting, Verification of GHG Inventory and RAN-GRK, RAD-GRK mitigation actions (NAMA)” support by EUMRVCB-GIZ. Contributor writer for the Dissertation research “The Evolution of Domestic Measurement, Reporting, and Verification Systems in Developing Countries” wrote by Rebecca Jane Campbell, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK   

*) SEA Change is an Asian Community of Practice on the monitoring and evaluation of climate change interventions

[3] Jakarta Commitment is an adoption at national concept of Paris Declaration Principles. The commitment is held between the GoI and development partners towards development effectiveness, to adopt the principles of aid effectiveness to Indonesia's country context. The Jakarta Commitment is based on the spirit of mutual respect, support and accountability. It represents a shared recognition between the Government and development partners to enhance the effectiveness of external financing in Indonesia. It enjoins upon the Government and development partners to make available appropriate resources, knowledge and capacity to implement the Jakarta Commitment.