Beyond output tracking: Applying the IUCN NbS Standard for MEL and adaptive learning

_{Mangrove monitoring by Hô-üt Association, a Kiwa Initiative grantee under IUCN. © Association Ho ut.}

I recently attended the IUCN Academy Professional Certificate on Nature-based Solutions (NbS), which was highly relevant to my current role in Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL). The course was practical and applied, combining online sessions, individual exercises, group work, and assignments. For me, the course was not an introduction to NbS; rather, it helped refine my understanding of how NbS quality can be assessed, monitored, improved, and used for learning.

The course reinforced for me that MEL for NbS cannot be limited to just tracking outputs such as areas identified for restoration, seedlings planted, trainings delivered, or people reached. These indicators are important, but they only tell part of the story. A credible NbS intervention also needs to demonstrate that it responds to societal challenges, generates biodiversity benefits, supports inclusive governance, manages trade-offs, considers economic feasibility, addresses safeguards, and contributes to long-term sustainability. This means that MEL systems for NbS must assess both delivery and the quality and robustness of design and implementation.

The course also reinforced the importance of systems thinking and complexity-aware MEL for NbS. NbS interventions are not isolated activities; a restoration site, agroecological intervention, watershed activity, or coastal protection measure is connected to wider land-use practices, community livelihoods, market incentives, climate risks, institutional arrangements, and ecosystem processes. In the Kiwa Initiative’s context, this is especially relevant because grantees work across diverse island settings where ecological conditions, community priorities, institutional capacity, and external shocks can shape outcomes in different ways. MEL therefore needs to examine not only whether activities were completed, but also how different parts of the system interact, influence results, and generate intended or unintended effects.

In this regard, the IUCN Global Standard for NbS and the Self-Assessment Tool (SAT) are especially useful. The SAT can complement the Kiwa MEL system by acting as a structured quality-assurance and learning tool. While the logframe helps track progress against agreed indicators, the SAT helps assess whether an intervention is aligned with the broader principles of good NbS practice. It can support reflection on whether projects are designed at an appropriate scale, whether wider system linkages are understood, and whether risks, assumptions, trade-offs, and unintended effects are being monitored over time. This also links directly with adaptive management. SAT findings should not be treated as a one-time score or compliance result, but as part of a learning cycle: assessing project quality, identifying gaps, discussing findings with grantees, adjusting implementation, and monitoring whether improvements are taking place. Used in this way, the SAT can help shift MEL from reporting progress only to supporting continuous improvement, learning, and evidence-based decision-making.

In my current role, I see the SAT as a practical tool for strengthening both grantee support and portfolio learning. At the grants level, it can help grantees reflect on their NbS interventions in a structured way, identify areas where design or implementation can be improved, and recognise where stronger evidence or documentation is needed. At portfolio level, applying the SAT across grantees can help IUCN identify common capacity gaps, recurring implementation challenges, and examples of stronger practice across countries. These insights can make technical support more targeted and informed.

Another important takeaway is that the SAT can also strengthen the design of future NbS projects supported by IUCN Oceania Regional Office. By integrating the core quality dimensions of the IUCN Global Standard for NbS from the design stage, future Theories of Change, results frameworks, logframes, and MEL systems can be made more robust, realistic, and aligned with the minimum requirements of credible NbS. This does not mean adding unnecessary reporting burden for grantees, but ensuring that future projects include a balanced set of indicators that capture delivery, quality, systems linkages, safeguards, sustainability, and learning.

At the same time, applying the SAT with grantees may bring practical challenges. Many Kiwa grantees are small, locally based organisations with limited technical, financial, and documentation capacity. Some may find it difficult to assess complex areas such as social, ecological, and economic system linkages; cost-benefit considerations; unintended ecological impacts; risks and assumptions; and formal evidence requirements. Since the SAT is based on self-assessment, there may also be a risk of over-scoring, under-scoring, or reluctance to report weaknesses openly. A related learning question for me is how well the SAT captures the realities of small and locally based organisations, especially when they have strong community engagement and meaningful field-level results but limited formal documentation to demonstrate the quality of their work. 

Overall, the course strengthened my understanding that MEL for NbS must combine standards, systems thinking, evidence, and adaptive learning. The SAT provides a useful common framework for assessing NbS quality across projects, but its real value lies in how the findings are used. For the Kiwa Initiative, this means using SAT not as a judgement tool, but as a practical mechanism to support reflection, improve project quality, strengthen grantee capacity, and generate portfolio-level learning. Applied in this way, SAT can help ensure that NbS projects are not only implemented and reported, but continuously improved to deliver stronger outcomes for people, nature, and climate resilience.

To learn how to apply the second edition of the standard in your work/project, click HERE

_____________________

^{Tariq Ahmad is IUCN Oceania's Monitoring, Evaluation, Reporting and Learning (MERL) Officer.}