Authors:
- Christina Seybolt (Social Impact)
- Sara Carlson (USAID)
- Rob Cohen (USAID)
Cross-sectoral programs present a unique opportunity to address the multi-dimensional nature of the climate crisis. Their goal is to advance sustainable development through investments in climate change, biodiversity conservation, agriculture, health, governance, and other sectors—tackling many of the root causes of the climate crisis. USAID’s Social Impact supported Health, Ecosystems, and Agriculture for Resilient, Thriving Societies (HEARTH) initiative aims to do just that by implementing development solutions that advance the sustainable conservation of threatened landscapes and the well-being and prosperity of communities through partnerships with the private sector.
The Role of Cross-Sectoral Programs in Sustainable Development
Measuring the effectiveness of cross-sectoral programs can be challenging. Counterfactual impact evaluation methods, which include randomized control trials and other methods such as matching and synthetic controls, can shed light on what works, what doesn’t, and under what conditions. However, although impact evaluation is well established in fields such as health and education, it is still relatively rare in climate change programming. To date, few climate programs embed counterfactual methods into their activity design or implementation, resulting in programs that are implemented repeatedly without harnessing potential learning opportunities.
Aerial view of Kafue National Park with river, savanna, and forest areas. Credit: HPE via Adobe Stock
The Importance of Continuous Learning and Adaptation
We must continuously learn and adapt to improve program effectiveness to address the climate crisis successfully. Occasionally, programs do not achieve their intended objectives or, worse, have unintended negative consequences. Take, for instance, the prevailing theory that increasing agricultural productivity can reduce deforestation by producing more crops with fewer resources. Recent evidence finds that in regions where it’s more cost-effective to expand production by utilizing land rather than other resources, increased yields can lead to higher deforestation rates using more land relative to other inputs.
Overcoming Evaluation Challenges with HEARTH’s Approach
While conducting rigorous impact evaluations for cross-sectoral programs presents challenges—ranging from long time horizons for priority outcomes to clustered interventions and large spatial scales—it is possible to adapt evaluation designs to overcome these challenges.
HEARTH is demonstrating how to surpass these obstacles by conducting impact evaluations and supporting robust monitoring systems across its portfolio. In line with the HEARTH Learning Agenda, this support will help answer important learning questions at the core of HEARTH’s theory of change regarding under what conditions cross-sectoral programming improves the well-being and prosperity of communities, changes conservation attitudes and behaviors, reduces threats to biodiversity and carbon-rich ecosystems, and ultimately leads to sustained benefits for humans and nature.
Case Study: Zambia’s Eastern Kafue Nature Alliance (EKNA) Activity
This process includes conducting evaluation feasibility assessments, which explore in detail the evaluation design challenges and solutions for each USAID activity. For example, HEARTH is conducting a mixed-methods evaluation of Zambia’s Eastern Kafue Nature Alliance (EKNA) Activity. The team has uncovered crucial linkages for addressing the climate crisis from baseline data. For example, over one-third of farmers self-reported clearing an average of one hectare of virgin land in the past 12 months. Importantly, the same proportion plan on clearing the same amount of land in the next year.
When the farmers were asked why they were clearing land, they stated that their primary motivation was growing crops to feed their families. This suggests that reducing land clearing and the resulting greenhouse gas emissions while households struggle to meet their basic needs will be challenging. Findings of low dietary diversity among women and high food insecurity across the project area further emphasized this. These findings highlight the importance of addressing food security before expecting behavior change around deforestation in this context. They also highlight the importance of considering the complete needs of communities, which might be missed when only approaching a development challenge from a single sector.
The Power of Cross-Sectoral Programming
Cross-sectoral programming can be a powerful way to address the climate crisis. More rigorous evaluations will ensure we learn which approaches are most effective. The development community can overcome challenges to successful and effective cross-sectoral climate programs by embracing collaboration, complexity, and flexibility.
This blog was originally posted on Climatelinks and can be found here.
