Page - (000061) - in Evaluating Climate Change Action for Sustainable Development

impact evaluations should be “based on a thorough analysis of an intervention’s theory of change”2 as theremaybe other links in the causal chains that should be testedor takenintoaccount.Adoptingthenewtechnologyisachangeofbehaviour, but it could potentially lead to unintended consequences which may lead to an overall increaseofgreenhousegasemissions, if energyuse increasesoverall.Other changes in the context maymake a specific behaviour change redundant, as for example where newmarkets emerge and take over functions that are donemore efficiently through new technology. However, the focus remains on checking for evidence of the behaviour change, as this is the causal mechanism that can be checked in a traditional impact evaluation. Let us explore whether a deeper understandingof the theoryof changewould lead to different andnewquestions. Letus takea typicalmitigation interventionasanexample: the introductionofa new technology that would lower greenhouse gas emissions. The Hilly Hydel project in India was a typical project funded by theGlobal Environment Facility and the Government of India, supported through UNDP, which took place from 1995 to2003.Thishasbeenaparticularlywell evaluatedproject (seeRatnaReddy etal.2006). Itwas theobjectofacasestudyforamajorGEFstudyonlocalbenefits generated throughsupport forglobalbenefits (GEFEO2006),hasanend-of-project evaluation including a counterfactual impact assessment (Ittyerah et al. 2005) and was further studied for theGEF impact evaluationofmitigationprojects inemerg- ingeconomies(GEFIEO2013).Fora totalamountof$14.6millionthisproject led to the introduction of small hydroelectrical power plants in hilly regions in India, mostly in remote villages without access to the main grid. The reduction of greenhousegas emissionswas supposed tobeachieved throughusing a renewable sourceofenergy(hydropower)andreducingtheneedforwoodasasourcefor fuel, thus leading to a secondary but important benefit: reduced deforestation. The out- puts of the project were a national strategy andmaster plan for hydro electrical power generation, 20 stand-alone small hydel power generating water mills, upgradingof 100existingwatermills to incorporate powergeneration and institu- tional andhumancapacities to ensure sustainability. In general these outputswere achievedorsurpassed–upgradingofnoless than143watermills tookplace.All in all this led to direct greenhouse gas emission reductions of 1900 tonsCO2 equiv- alent per year. If the potential for installation of these small-scale hydroelectric watermillswouldbe fulfilled throughout India, the total amount of reductions per yearwouldcalculateas4million tonsCO2peryear (GEFIEO2013, table24p.70). Thetheoryofchangeof theproject focusedonintroducingatechnologythatwas new for the villages in the hilly areas, that would lead to a source of energy that wouldbemore reliable andwould lead toahalt todeforestationbecauseof energy needs, reduced greenhouse gas emissions as a result and given its benefits, would convincevillages to invest in this kindof technology.Thiswould lead to achange in themarket for rural energy inhilly areas,wherehydroelectricitywould take the 2SeeFromInfluence to Impact. 3ie strategy2014–2016, p. 2, foundat http://www.3ieimpact.org/ media/filer_public/2014/09/07/3ie_strategy_summary_final_rgb.pdf, onSeptember 4, 2015. 3 Mainstreaming ImpactEvidence inClimateChange andSustainableDevelopment 41