evidoria

What works in Kiribati

All catalogues

7
evaluated practices
50/100
average quality score
0%
strong evidence, of 5 assessed

Quality scores are 0–100 rubric scores; “strong evidence” reflects study design; adoptions count documented replications elsewhere. Know more

Evidence snapshot for Kiribati

Drawn from: Kiribati Digital Connectivity — East Micronesia Cable & Domestic Network Expansion · Global Fishing Watch — AI-Powered Satellite Tracking Catches Illegal Fishing in Kiribati's Phoenix Islands Protected Area · Kiribati's Women's Practice Parliament: Slow, Steady Gains in the Maneaba After Two Decades · Phoenix Islands Protected Area — Reverse Fishing Licence Trust Fund · Phoenix Islands Protected Area Conservation Trust — Avoided-Cost Marine Payment for Ecosystem Services (Kiribati)

Generated from this place's cited practices only. Always check the linked sources.

Strengths & weaknesses vs peers

Strengths

Evaluation evidence +55 pts 100 here · 45 average

Transparency, fairness & accountability +46 pts 100 here · 54 average

Transferability / replicability +30 pts 89 here · 59 average

Documented learning +26 pts 100 here · 74 average

Curator validation +26 pts 100 here · 74 average

Multi-stakeholder collaboration +24 pts 100 here · 76 average

Demonstrated reach +24 pts 100 here · 76 average

Sustainability (ongoing) +11 pts 89 here · 78 average

Achievement / evidence +9 pts 100 here · 91 average

Gender-mainstreaming embedding +9 pts 100 here · 91 average

Weaknesses

Innovation level -16 pts 47 here · 63 average

Carbon — sequestration / storage, evidenced -20 pts 11 here · 31 average

Governance, certification & transferability -23 pts 42 here · 64 average

Water & soil — retention, infiltration, erosion control -28 pts 22 here · 50 average

Inclusiveness / equity -42 pts 0 here · 42 average

Efficiency -44 pts 0 here · 44 average

Effectiveness -77 pts 0 here · 77 average

Impact on gender equality -80 pts 0 here · 80 average

Evaluated outcomes -84 pts 0 here · 84 average

Score profile vs peers

Evaluation evidence
100 · 45
Transparency, fairness & accountability
100 · 54
Transferability / replicability
89 · 59
Documented learning
100 · 74
Curator validation
100 · 74
Multi-stakeholder collaboration
100 · 76
Demonstrated reach
100 · 76
Sustainability (ongoing)
89 · 78
Achievement / evidence
100 · 91
Gender-mainstreaming embedding
100 · 91
Evidence of impact / measured public value
67 · 59
Scalability beyond pilot
67 · 64
Biodiversity — conservation / improvement, evidenced
44 · 51
Fire resilience — risk reduction, evidenced
0 · 7
Innovation level
47 · 63
Carbon — sequestration / storage, evidenced
11 · 31
Governance, certification & transferability
42 · 64
Water & soil — retention, infiltration, erosion control
22 · 50
Inclusiveness / equity
0 · 42
Efficiency
0 · 44
Effectiveness
0 · 77
Impact on gender equality
0 · 80
Evaluated outcomes
0 · 84

Coloured bar: Kiribati. Grey bar: peer average across the corpus. Both on a common 0–100 scale.

Points compare this place's average on each dimension with the average across all evaluated places, on a common 0–100 scale. Know more

Top good practices here

Kiribati Digital Connectivity — East Micronesia Cable & Domestic Network Expansion · 92

Global Fishing Watch — AI-Powered Satellite Tracking Catches Illegal Fishing in Kiribati's Phoenix Islands Protected Area · 73

PSDI's Companies, Insolvency & Business Names Acts — Modernising Kiribati's Business Law · 62

Kiribati's Women's Practice Parliament: Slow, Steady Gains in the Maneaba After Two Decades · 52

Kiribati Adaptation Program — Community Mangrove Replanting Across Six Islands · 40

Phoenix Islands Protected Area — Reverse Fishing Licence Trust Fund · 20

Phoenix Islands Protected Area Conservation Trust — Avoided-Cost Marine Payment for Ecosystem Services (Kiribati) · 13

Each number is the practice's overall 0–100 quality score against its catalogue's rubric. Know more

Cities with evaluated practice

Where the documented practice in Kiribati concentrates — each city has its own evidence profile.

Recommended to adopt or replicate

Transferable practices from elsewhere that address this place's gaps.

Ciudad Mujer — El Salvador's Integrated Women's Services Programme · fit 100/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Already adopted in 3 other places

SASA! Community Mobilisation Programme against Intimate Partner Violence — Uganda · fit 100/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Already adopted in 4 other places

Digital Green — Video-Mediated Agricultural Extension · fit 100/100

  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Kartu Prakerja – National Digital Skills and Financial Inclusion Programme · fit 100/100

  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Rwanda's Land Tenure Regularization Programme — Titling Land in Women's Names · fit 90/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Sweden's Barnahus (Children's House) — Multidisciplinary One-Stop Centres for Child Victims of Sexual Abuse and Violence · fit 90/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Already adopted in 6 other places

Stadtidee Aarau — Switzerland's First City-Wide Participatory Budget Using the Method of Equal Shares · fit 90/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Copenhagen Business Hub (Erhvervshus Hovedstaden) · fit 90/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Fit estimates how well a practice matches this place, 0 (poor) to 100 (excellent); the list is ordered to favour practices that address this place's gaps. Know more