Page 15 - Module_3

This is a SEO version of Module_3. Click here to view full version

« Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page »
15
FAO/UNEP/UN-Energy Bioenergy Decision Support Tool -
MODULE 3: Implementation and Operation
the standing and relevance of particular actors and stakeholders.
Therefore the energy baseline is as much about process as it is
about specifc results.
Monitoring, Measurement, Reporting
and Evaluation
Monitoring, Measurement, Reporting and Evaluation can help
ensure that national policies are meeting national objectives
and that they are able to improve the effective delivery of public
policies; it provides a tool to help ensure that governments
can track the progress of policies and that promises are being
delivered to stakeholders. MMRE systems provide feedback
mechanisms that are particularly important for bioenergy strategy
and policy objectives, due to the dynamic and evolving nature
of bioenergy deployment options. MMRE offers a systematic
process that governments can also use to measure their
achievements and feed information back onto ongoing processes.
MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Monitoring and evaluation assessments are conducted at
different points during the program or policy cycle. Although
both processes complement each other, monitoring systems
can provide an indication and feedback on where a program/
policy is relative to its expected accomplishments and objectives;
whereas evaluation systems provides information on why or how
a program/policy has not met expected outcomes, or why or how
it has been successful.
There are a variety of policy analysis models that can evaluate
the progress and interventions of various policies for decision-
makers, but they differ depending on the intended outcome
or indicator. For example, if an overall national strategy is to
harness bioenergy for the purposes of rural development, different
evaluation methods can assess new job creation and economic
development impacts. Whereas, if a national policy focuses on
the use of bioenergy to contribute to national GHG targets, then
an M&E system might continually measure GHG emissions from
that intervention. Monitoring and evaluation processes should be
undertaken by the appropriate government oversight bodies if it is
through a formal evaluation process, or in some cases third party
auditors if requested. It is important to include multiple indicators
in monitoring, since the combined effects, including synergies
and conficts, can be often signifcant in the case of bioenergy
development.
MEASUREMENT AND PERFORMANCE
Whereas monitoring can be qualitative or quantitative,
measurement often implies quantitative tracking of progress
based on specifc benchmarks and indicators. Designing some
quantitative performance measures at policy and programme
levels is important for bioenergy, as it makes for more concrete
implementation and provides some sense of progress.
Measurement is particularly needed to address conformance
to technical or sustainability standards and for international
policy processes, especially for GHG reductions. Under the
agreements reached by the UNFCCC and given in the Bali Action
Plan, mitigation actions should be “measurable, reportable and
verifable.” The concept and the agreement relate to not only
mitigation efforts themselves, but also to fnancing, technology
transfer and capacity-building (South Centre, 2008). Similar
principles can be applied to bioenergy programmes and used in
the evaluation process.
EVALUATING BIOENERGY POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
MMMRE can be applied at different levels, based on different
protocols. Monitoring can be defned as a feedback function
that “uses systematic collection of data on specifed indicators to
provide management and the main stakeholders of an ongoing
development intervention with indications of the extent of
progress and achievement of objectives and progress and use of
Baseline Data
Demand: unit energy consumption, end-use efficiencies
Supply: technology options, market shares, infrastructure
Biomass Resource: spatial location of forest and agriculture areas, type and
location of processing industries
External Assumptions
Social: population trends, household size, cultural factors
Economic: economic growth, inflation, trade, import tariffs
Natural Resources: food needs, use by other sectors, conservation
Structural Parameters
Techno-economic: operating vs. purchase costs, learning curves
Socio-economic: interest rates, product option preferences
Infrastructure constraints: availability, access, location
Scenario Definition or Modelling Options
Reference Case: baseline data + assumptions and parameters
Climate mitigation and adaptation constraints or targets
Resource constraints: forest or conservation goals
Energy access case: specification of energy access targets
Figure 6: Progression for
developing baseline and defning
alternative scenarios or models
NOTE: Examples only – data,
parameters, assumptions and
scenario defnitions are decided by
User