Skip navigation

Please find below the judging results for your proposal.

Finalist Evaluation

Judges'' comments


Proposal: Adapting the Indigenous approach to Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Contest: Exploring Synergistic Solutions for Sustainable Development Thank you for your contest entry. Thank you for your contest entry. We appreciate your willingness to share your ideas and also the time and effort you put into developing a proposal and submitting it to the contest. We have reviewed your proposal and found that it contained intriguing elements; however, have chosen not to advance it to the next round of competition. We encourage you to keep developing your idea. Transfer your proposal to a Workspace to re-open it, make edits, add collaborators, and even submit it into a future contest. You can do so by logging into your account, opening your proposal, selecting the Admin tab, and clicking “Move proposal.” We welcome you to stay involved in the Climate CoLab community: support and comment on proposals that have been named Finalists, and vote during the public voting period to help select the contest’s Popular Choice Winner. Climate CoLab will be opening more contests throughout the year and you are welcome to submit your proposal to those contests as well. Keep up the great work. We hope that by working together, we all can create solutions that wouldn’t otherwise be possible. Sincerely, Contest Fellows If there are additional comments from the Judges & Fellows, they will be included below.



Semi-Finalist Evaluation

Judges'' ratings


Novelty:
Feasibility:
Impact:
Presentation:

Judges'' comments


Judge 1: The authors have clearly articulated an important problem with reaching local and indigenous groups with plans for climate change mitigation and adaptation and have (partially) proposed an exciting, interesting solution that is low-cost and potentially very motivating. However, the proposal is not completed. There is no information about budget; geographical area of interest; details about how this plan would be carried out or how information would be shared between communities and global stewards. I have therefore rated feasibility low, not because I don't think the project is feasible, but because the authors have left me to guess at how they will carry out this project, and therefore also at the feasibility.

Judge 2: The main objective is of critical importance to successfully addressing both CC mitigation and adaptation globally. However, the proposal is poorly written and presented, verbose and repetitive in problem statement outline but lacking in crucial details as to how it will be implemented, costs, expected impacts etc. It is worth requesting a re-submission, but the proponents need to address the failings and provide evidence that they understand and are able to successfully implement the actions they outline. it is not just a lack of engaging with civil society which has led to previous failure in this field, but a lack of understanding how to engage! This includes, cultural, political, financial, language, context, geography, attribution, incentives, etc, etc.

0comments
Share conversation: Share via:
No comments have been posted.