Co-implement
Step 6: Evaluate solutions
By the end of this step, you will decide whether each solution should be adapted by returning to Step 3 or 4, or advanced toward scaling and broader implementation (adopted).
Here you evaluate the impact from the experimentation, considering ecological, social, economic, and governance outcomes. You assess the feasibility, viability and the possibility of scaling the solution.
This step allows you to decide if the solution needs further refinement, whether it should return to earlier steps for adjustment, or whether it is ready to move toward implementation.
N
Evaluate the solutions’ impact and whether they help address the identified challenges in the system
Evaluating against predefined indicators from Step 4 ensures that assessment is systematic, comparable, and aligned with the goals of your living lab.
Make sure you …
Assess the ecological, social, and economic indicators outlined in your implementation plan. Review whether the solution achieved expected outcomes, had any unintended effects, or needs adjustments. Consider to adjust the indicators based on what you have learned during testing if needed.
Understanding whether the solutions adequately met the challenges helps identify gaps and learning opportunities. If they did not, returning to earlier steps allows you to integrate new insights and strengthen the solutions so they better respond to the system’s needs.
Make sure you …
Are honest with yourselves. Is your solution working as is? Return to Step 3 to revisit which solutions are needed or Step 4 to refine the solution design using insights gained during testing, if needed. Understand that going back to and adapting is not a sign of failure, but that you are succeeding in learning testing. Continue with the next steps in the evaluation process if you are satisfied.
O
Evaluate the feasibility and potential for scaling out each solution
Socio-ecological
Understanding socio-ecological fit helps ensure solutions remain effective and meaningful across different contexts, and are open to being replicated elsewhere.
Make sure you …
Explore whether the design elements tailored to meet ecological conditions, social contexts, governance structures, and resource needs allow for replication elsewhere.
Community readiness
Evaluating community readiness helps identify potential social, cultural, or institutional factors that may enable or limit whether others can implement the same solution. Understanding these factors supports more realistic expectations about scalability and helps avoid assuming that solutions will work equally well in all contexts.
Make sure you …
Reflect on which elements of community readiness might enable or hinder uptake of the solution elsewhere, such as awareness, acceptance, leadership support, local capacities, or reliance on external facilitation. Use tools such as the Community Readiness Assessment Tool to think through where adaptations, additional support, or preparatory steps might be needed to successfully adopt or apply the solution.
Assessing whether a solution aligns with relevant environmental and climate policy targets helps determine its legitimacy, scalability, and long‑term support. Solutions that contribute to existing regional, national, or international policy goals are more likely to be adopted, funded, and embedded in practice.
This assessment also helps identify where adjustments to policy, funding, or governance may be needed to enable wider implementation. It provides an opportunity to position the solution within ongoing policy processes and to understand how it can contribute to broader socio‑ecological objectives.
Consider to …
Review how the solution contributes to relevant policy targets and expected outcomes at different levels (regional, national, and international), and assess whether it supports or complements existing strategies and plans. Reflect on potential barriers related to policy frameworks, funding structures, or governance arrangements that could limit implementation or scaling, and identify what changes or adaptations might be needed to address these. Also consider how the solution could be integrated into existing plans, programmes, or decision‑making processes, and how it can align with ongoing efforts rather than operating in parallel.
Ecological Economic value
Nature-based solutions often create significant environmental and social value, while their costs are typically more visible and immediate. This creates an imbalance that can make effective solutions appear less viable than they actually are.
An ecological economic perspective helps bring these dimensions together, supporting more informed decisions about implementation, prioritisation, and scaling.
The level of analysis should be adapted to data availability and project maturity. Consider to look into Environmental Economics if you feel Ecological Economic does not cover your context.
Make sure you …
Consider both ecological outcomes and economic implications, reflecting not only on costs but also on benefits that are not directly monetised, such as ecosystem services and avoided risks. Take into account indirect and enabling value, including improved decision‑making, learning effects, or reduced uncertainty over time. Recognise that costs and benefits may be distributed unevenly across different actors, and focus your assessment on insights that are most relevant for decision‑making rather than on analytical precision or technical complexity.
Different approaches can be used depending on data availability and project maturity. The goal is to select a level of analysis that is proportionate to your context and supports decision-making.
Consider using …
Feasibility assessment helps determine whether a solution can realistically be implemented and sustained in practice, particularly in early‑stage situations or contexts where data is limited but decisions still need to be made. This approach focuses on whether the financial, institutional, and governance conditions required for implementation are in place, rather than on detailed valuation of outcomes. It is especially useful for identifying constraints, risks, and funding needs that may affect the viability of a solution.
Make sure you …
Identify the main cost components and funding needs associated with the solution, assess who is expected to pay and who is likely to benefit, and consider whether there are gaps between costs and available funding. Take into account institutional capacity, governance arrangements, and other contextual factors that may enable or constrain implementation, and use this assessment to judge whether the solution is feasible under current conditions or would require adaptation.
BASIC:
Identify the main costs and benefits and highlight key risks that could affect implementation.
INTERMEDIATE:
Map actors in relation to costs and benefits and identify potential funding gaps.
ADVANCED:
Use a structured feasibility matrix, conduct risk analysis and scenario-based assessment, and outline a preliminary financing strategy.
Cost-effectiveness analysis helps comparing solutions with similar objectives, particularly when benefits are difficult to express in monetary terms or when optimising a solution. Cost‑effectiveness analysis helps assess which solutions achieve a given environmental or climate outcome using the least amount of resources. It is useful in situations where benefits such as biodiversity gains, ecosystem restoration, or risk reduction are difficult to express in monetary terms. By focusing on outcomes rather than monetised benefits, this approach supports comparison between alternative interventions or design options, as well as optimisation within a single solution (for example by adjusting scale, design, or implementation strategy).
Make sure you …
Clearly define the main objective the solution is intended to achieve, estimate the costs required to reach that outcome, and compare relevant alternatives or design options where applicable. Take into account that costs and performance may vary across contexts or locations, and use the analysis to identify which options deliver the greatest impact relative to the resources invested.
BASIC:
Define the objective, estimate the main costs, and make a simple comparison between options.
INTERMEDIATE:
Calculate cost per unit of outcome (for example €/ton CO₂ or €/hectare restored) and compare alternatives more systematically.
ADVANCED:
Model outcomes under different scenarios and use sensitivity analysis to explore how results change under uncertainty.
Cost‑benefit analysis helps assess whether the overall benefits of a solution justify its costs from a societal perspective. It is most useful when sufficient data is available and impacts can be monetised to consider a broader range of effects, including environmental and social impacts that extend beyond the immediate scope of implementation. By comparing costs and benefits over time, this approach supports decisions about whether a solution creates net value for society as a whole.
Make sure you …
Identify all relevant costs associated with the solution, including investment, operation, coordination, and monitoring, and consider benefits alongside them, including non‑market benefits such as ecosystem services. Take into account long‑term and indirect effects, such as avoided damages or reduced future risks, and reflect on how costs and benefits are distributed across different stakeholders when interpreting the results.
BASIC:
List the main costs and benefits, define the timeframe considered, and compare them qualitatively.
INTERMEDIATE:
Estimate key costs and benefits in monetary terms where possible, include avoided costs, and apply simple discounting.
ADVANCED:
Conduct a full cost‑benefit analysis using discounted cash‑flow methods, sensitivity analysis, and, non‑market valuation approaches (e.g. SCC).
P
Plan for long-term viability and scalability
Long‑term viability ensures that solutions remain functional, supported, and maintained beyond the living lab period. Some solutions, particularly nature‑based solutions, require ongoing management and care to deliver their expected outcomes over time. It is therefore important to ensure that the necessary resources and responsibilities for long‑term maintenance are in place.
Make sure you …
Evaluate long‑term resource needs, partnerships, risks, and sustainability measures, and identify how responsibilities, funding, and capacities needed to maintain the solution can be secured over time.
Downloads
Scaling out is crucial for driving transformative change, as it enables solutions to be replicated through adaptation and applied to address similar challenges elsewhere, in different socio-ecological contexts.
Make sure you …
Ensure that others can effectively understand and potentially tailor the solutions to suit their specific needs and environments. Consider developing a protocol or blueprint for your solutions. You can use this provided template as a basis to create a blueprint.
Downloads