According to this investigation published by the Sustainability Research Institute (University of Leeds), there is a lack of evidence of either policy or practice of triple wins – adaptation, mitigation and development – significantly limits the capacity of donors to identify, monitor or evaluate them.
The purpose of this paper is to assess evidence of triple wins on the ground, and the feasibility of triple wins that do not generate negative impacts. It describes the theoretical linkages that exist between adaptation, mitigation and development, as well as the trade-offs and synergies that might exist between them. Using four developing country studies, the authors make a simple assessment of the extent of climate compatible development policy in practice through the lens of ‘no-regrets’, ‘low regrets’ and ‘with regrets’ decision making. This paper highlights three important conclusions:

the simplified depiction of triple-wins ignores the reality that policies designed to create triple wins can generate a number of negative impacts at the same time as producing the triple wins
a significant research gap that must be addressed is how the multiple benefits from adaptation, mitigation and development can be evaluated in a way that takes into account both the spatial and temporal costs and benefits that may accrue
development-facing initiatives appear to have the potential to deliver co-benefits, however for triple-wins to be generated, it appears that coastal policies and projects developed need to be initiated with a clear adaptation or a mitigation purpose.

The authors recommend a more strategic assessment of the distributional and financial implications of triple wins policies.