This comparative analysis of climate change vulnerability assessments (VAs) draws lessons from Tunisia and Indonesia to inform future VA planning and implementation. Central to shaping adaptation decisions, VAs provide the basis for both human and ecological harm mitigation measures. This analysis uses a framework that looks at four components of VAs (framing, process, inputs and outputs) in each of the two case studies, highlighting similarities and differences before drawing lessons and making recommendations.After providing a thorough background to climate change vulnerability assessments, including the analytical framework used in the study, the report examines VAs of agro-ecological systems in Tunisia and of the city of Tarakan in Indonesia. The four components of each VA are extensively documented. Broken down by VA component, recommendations include the following.

Framing: It is important to include clear working definitions of key concepts such as ‘vulnerability’, and to consider the facilitation of study replication and data comparability at an early stage.
Inputs: Be aware of the quality of the data selected for use and communicate a minimum standard.
Outputs: Participants should understand that VA results are rarely new and transformative; dealing with current and short- to medium-term trends, results often reinforce the case for prioritising familiar measures that may have been considered but unimplemented.
Process: Politics is an unavoidable factor in all components of VAs and must be considered to ensure successful policy uptake.
Resources: Co-ordination measures must be adequately resourced and budgeted for in realistic estimates of time and money.
Monitoring and evaluation: It is important to document the process and provide feedback to stakeholders.