Please find below the
Finalist Evaluation
Judges'' comments
Thank you for participating in the 2015 Climate CoLab Other Developing Countries' Climate Action Plan contest, and for the time you spent in creating your entry.
The Judges have strongly considered your proposal, and have chosen to not advance it as a Finalist for this contest.
We, the Judges and contest Fellows, are truly grateful for your contribution to the Climate CoLab and for your commitment to address climate change.
We encourage you to keep developing your work and to submit it into future contests, which will open in the fall and winter of 2016. In the meantime, you can keep developing your work by transferring it to the Regional Climate Action Plan Workspace (http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1302801); here you can re-open it, make edits, and add collaborators. You can do so by logging into your account, opening your proposal, selecting the Admin tab, and clicking “Copy proposal”. Once the 2016 contests open, you can use this same feature to move your proposal to an open contest.
We very much hope you will stay involved in the Climate CoLab community. Please support and comment on other proposals on the platform and continue to submit your ideas into our contests.
If you have questions, please contact the Climate CoLab staff at admin@climatecolab.org
Keep up the great work. And thank you again for being a part of this mission to harness the world’s collective efforts to develop and share innovative climate change solutions.
All the best,
2015 Climate CoLab Judges
Additional comments from the Judges:
Comment 1:
Overall good proposal. It will be good to drill a step down to explain how the data collected and shared will contribute towards the implementation of the plans described.
Comment 2:
Few dimensions in the proposal are novel. Event though it addresses several dimensions, it is not clear as the means to achieve the different purposes. Concerning its feasibility, I particularly like the ability to point the key challenges, although these are general and since the plans for the distinct sectors are not sufficiently clear it is not possible to assess the ability to cope with the obstacles. Also, the costs' estimates could be more informative.
Comment 3:
The proposal covers different sectors in the Jordanian economy and aims at designing a crosscutting multi-sectoral cost-effective strategy to fight climate change in Jordan, and manage the risks and effects of climate change; it is therefore a combination of mitigation and adaptation actions. It is not however clear from the proposal how the sub-proposals by sector fit together, and how they interact; the proposal is therefore not assessing the benefits of a holistic approach. Most sectoral sub-proposals have been drawn from existing projects in Jordan or derived from the implementation of Jordan’s energy, agriculture and climate policies. So there is no evidence of novelty. In the transport sector, a proposal from the 2014 Transport Climate CoLab contest is suggested. However it is centered on the large-scale use of electric vehicles and the installation of a vehicle charging system. In Jordan, electricity is currently largely produced from fossil fuels, therefore a switch to electric vehicles without a concomitant large scale switch to renewables in the power sector would not contribute to GHG emission reduction, on the contrary. The power sector being the largest contributor to CO2 emissions, priority should be given to mitigation in that sector, through large scale development of wind and solar (which is actually currently taking place at a fast pace). The most innovative part of the proposal is for adaptation: the use of ICT to set up an early warning system for droughts to be used by farmers. The main objective is to create an automated system that collects data from the data acquisition weather stations and builds a data base providing up-to-date statistical information to researchers and decision makers. The project will also help initiate and sustain a technology transfer program on irrigation to maximize water use efficiency. However this part of the proposal is not fully developed and is ignored in the assessment of costs and benefits. In the area of waste management, the sub-proposal has some potential and was selected as finalist. However more explanation is needed on the costs and benefits, and the impact on GHG reduction. The cross-cutting dimension is also not clear. Is energy from waste also part of the plan? The proposal does acknowledge the need for education, awareness raising, training and capacity building as a major cross-cutting issue. However no specific action is proposed. Although the proposal fits most of the criteria for its category, it does not include activity at multiple geographic levels.
Additional comments from the Fellows:
The proposal covers different sectors in the Jordanian economy that require action, that is, energy, transportation, industrial, building sector, land and agriculture and waste management sectors and the author has integrated different sub-proposals that cover these sectors.
The Transport sub-proposal involves an outreach program to encourage people to use electric vehicles. It is however doubtful whether this would significantly reduce GHG emissions in Jordan if the electricity is largely produced from fossil fuel. Maybe the author should start from electricity production from renewable energy.
The Waste Management sub-proposal proposes buying waste from households and selling to recycling companies. Though the proposal would fit well in the Jordanian context, more research and explanation on funding, awareness raising/capacity building on waste separation and recycling and how the proposal can be contextualized to meet the Jordanian context.
The Energy Sector sub-proposal is a plan to bring cities to energy independence through carbon neutrality, energy neutrality and energy cost neutrality. The judges’ view of this plan was that it is already an existing scheme in Europe and therefore it lacked novelty. The question is whether the same exists in Jordan and if not, how can it be contextualized for Jordan’s situation.
The Land Use and Agriculture and the industrial sector sub-proposals have been drawn from existing projects in Jordan. Considering that these are from existing projects, and the author does not suggest how to improve the existing projects, this also lacks novelty.
It is not however clear from the proposal how the sub-proposals fit together. I however commend the author for addressing the need for capacity building and a tool for climate information management. For any proposal/project to be successful, these two issues are key.
0comments
Share conversation:
Share via:
No comments have been posted.
