Search

Small islands are highly dependent on their natural endowments. Because of this dependency, they are more vulnerable to climate change. This paper builds on the assumption that a better understanding of the meaning of climate change in specific local contexts (from localized perspectives) opens up possibilities for climate change adaptations. Based on literature reviews, semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions and forum theatre performances, the paper provides various perceptions of climate change effects from KaNyaka Island in Mozambique. It endeavors to further build the case for the integration of everyday-life experiences and observations of environmental processes in developing collective responses to climate change. The study does so by looking at the way island inhabitants, who are particularly vulnerable to climate change, perceive this phenomenon. The paper argues that the KaNyaka residents are part of local ecologies in which physical and spiritual worlds are entangled in everyday life. It also avers that for a better understanding and response to the adverse effects of climate change on the island, scientists at large must approach local communities as co-producers of knowledge. This relational approach allows the incorporation of worldviews that have been key in sustaining enfolding relationships between people and local ecology. It concludes that this approach opens the possibility of adaptation to climate change as an embedded socio-environmental phenomenon.

The challenges for society presented by climate change are complex and demanding. This paper focuses on one particular resource of utmost necessity and vulnerability to climate change: namely, the provisioning of safe drinking water. From a critical perspective on the role of expertise in risk debates, this paper looks at how Swedish experts understand risk to drinking water in a climate change scenario and how they reason about challenges to risk management and adaptation strategies. The empirical material derives from ten in-depth semi-structured interviews with experts, employed both at government agencies and at universities, and with disciplinary backgrounds in a variety of fields (water engineering, planning, geology and environmental chemistry). The experts understand risk factors affecting both drinking water quality and availability as complex and systemically interrelated. A lack of political saliency of drinking water as a public service is identified as an obstacle to the development of robust adaptation strategies. Another area of concern relates to the geographical, organizational and institutional boundaries (regulatory, political and epistemological) between the plethora of public actors with partly overlapping and sometimes unclear responsibilities for the provisioning of safe drinking water. The study concludes that climate change adaptation regarding drinking water provisioning will require a new integration of the knowledge of systemic risk relations, in combination with more efficient agency collaboration based on a clear demarcation of responsibility between actors.

The world has responded to climate change phenomenon through two broad response mechanisms (mitigation and adaptation strategies) with the aim of moderating the adverse effects of climate change and/or to exploit any arising beneficial opportunities. The paper aims to examine the trend in climate parameters, farmers’ perception of climate change, constraints faced in production and to identify the strategies (if any) that farmers have adopted to cope with the effects of changing climate. A one-way analysis of variance, percentage analysis and Garrett ranking technique were applied to a set of primary data collected from 150 randomly sampled farmers with the aid of questionnaires in three purposively selected provinces through the months of June to August 2015. The analytical results of obtained recent weather data revealed that the climate parameters have significantly changed over time and these were substantiated by farmers’ experiences. The farmers are engaging in various climate-response strategies, among which, the planting of drought-tolerant varieties is most common. Therefore, it is important to enhance farmers’ access to improved drought-tolerant seeds and efficient irrigation systems. Also observed, is that the lack of awareness of insurance products and inability to afford insurance premiums were the principal reasons majority of the farmers did not have insurance. These present a need to strengthen insurance adoption among farmers through various supporting programmes that may include premium subsidies and media outreach. The paper under one platform provides evidence of changing climate, farmers’ responses towards mitigating perceived adverse effects of the changed climate, and South Africa’s national policy on adaptation and mitigation.

Climate change imposes risks on assets, systems and operations of enterprises in the electricity sector, whose management of climate risk is becoming increasingly important. This paper proposes a methodological structure to support the identification, analysis and assessment of climatic risks in thermoelectric power plants, integrating concepts from the IPCC (AR5) methodological structure, the ISO 31000 risk management and the principles of adaptation to climate changes proposed by ISO 14090. Five plants in the coastal zone of the Northeast Region of Brazil are studied, with the indication of strategic climatic and non-climatic stressors, criteria of significance for determining hazards, exposure, vulnerability, and risk. Aspects of design, operation, maintenance and performance are investigated based on assumptions for climate sensitive plants components. It is stressed the need of combining observed data and numerical models’ data for correct assessing future climate projections. However, climate risk must be reassessed on a regular basis at decadal intervals, in order to absorb ongoing changes in climate and to make decisions which favor resilient options.

Small island developing states (SIDS) are recognized as being among the most vulnerable countries to climate change—many are highly exposed and sensitive to, inter alia, sea-level rise and increased intensity storms, yet often lack the human and financial resources needed for successful and/or effective adaptation. The international community has responded to SIDS’ precarious situation, in part, by establishing a suite of multilateral funding mechanisms to help finance costly adaptation projects and programs. However, to date, there has been a mismatch between the level of international climate finance mobilized and the scale of adaptation that is needed in SIDS. This paper reviews the relevant academic and policy literatures to provide a system-wide diagnosis of the institutional and conceptual problems plaguing adaptation-specific multilateral climate funds, which are often addressed in isolation. We show that, following the establishment of the Global Environment Facility, many multilateral climate funds have been rife with administrative issues, creating barriers to access for particularly vulnerable countries. The funding that SIDS do receive is often insufficient to meet the costs of adaptation, and funding allocations are demonstrably skewed amongst SIDS and amongst types of adaptation projects and programs funded. In concluding, we propose reorienting multilateral adaptation finance towards resilience as a means of improving the governance of international adaptation finance and increasing access for SIDS and other particularly vulnerable countries.

Global drought risk assessments have been conducted with the objective of highlighting the regions or countries most at risk, and their outcomes are deemed useful to inform decisions on the implementation of risk reduction, transfer, financing, and adaptation strategies. However, by virtue of the scale of the assessment, some countries and regions experiencing negative impacts of droughts may not appear in “high” risk categories in global comparisons. This limits and potentially biases the ability of decision-makers, regional organisations, or funding mechanisms to recognise which countries under their purview should be targeted for assistance. This paper addresses this gap by comparing the outcomes of global and regional drought risk assessments for different clusters of countries of particular relevance to international climate and disaster risk policy. Results show that 50 countries changed the risk category to “high” or “very high” in their clusters compared to a lower risk category at the global level, due to the renormalisation of raw indicator values with different ranges for each cluster. The findings highlight the importance of analysing risk at multiple spatial scales to ensure no country is “left behind” in global risk and adaptation finance decisions.

This paper presents a consistent series of policy-relevant indicators of changing climate hazards and resources for the UK, spanning the health, transport, energy, agriculture, flood and water sectors and based on UKCP18 climate projections. In the absence of explicit adaptation, risks will increase across the whole of the UK, but at different rates and from different starting values in different regions. The likelihood of heat extremes affecting health, the road and rail network and crop growth will increase very markedly. Agricultural and hydrological drought risks increase across the UK, as does wildfire danger. River flood risk increases particularly in the north and west. Demand for cooling energy will increase, but demand for heating energy will decline. Crop growing degree days will increase, benefiting the production of perennial crops. In general, the risks associated with high temperature extremes will increase the most in warmer southern and eastern England, but the rate of increase from a lower base may be greater further north and west. Reducing emissions reduces risks in the long term but has little effect over the next two or three decades.The results provide evidence to support the development of national and local climate and resilience policy. Measures to enhance resilience are needed alongside policies to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. Resilience policy should recognise the variability in change in risk across the UK, and therefore different local priorities. Explicit choices need to be made about ‘worst case’ emissions scenarios as they can influence strongly estimated changes in risk: the increase in risk with RCP8.5 can be considerably higher than with a pathway reaching 4 °C by 2100.

Wastewater systems provide a critical service to society, and their vulnerability to the impacts of climate change. places the health and sanitation of many communities at risk. The impacts of climate change on wastewater systems are numerous and can lead to wide ranging implications over changing timescales. This paper considers the significance of the impacts and implications, how they will be distributed across different groups, how they will manifest in different contexts and locations, and conclude by proposing a range of guiding principles for local government decision makers.The research firstly considered direct climate-related impacts on a range of wastewater system elements (including reticulated wastewater systems, on-site wastewater systems and treatment plants), in both urban and peri-urban settings in New Zealand. The impacts identified for each aspect of the wastewater network were found to fit within three broad impact themes; nuisance flooding spills and odour, water quality deterioration due to increased uncontrolled discharges and damage to infrastructure.The research shows that the immediate and long-term implications resulting from these impacts are likely to be experienced widely across the social, cultural, environmental and economic domains. Examples include loss and damage to assets - leading to disruption to communities, water quality deterioration with consequential social, environmental, economic and cultural effects, public health risks, and economic costs related to damages, foregone production and insurance. Cultural implications are of particular importance in a New Zealand context, given the strong connection of Māori to the environment and water.

Although the need for agriculture to adapt to climate change is well established, there is relatively little research within a UK context that explores how the risks associated with climate change are perceived at the farm level, nor how farmers are adapting their businesses to improve resilience in the context of climate change. Based on 31 in-depth, qualitative interviews (15 with farmers and 16 with stakeholders including advisors, consultants and industry representatives) this paper begins to address this gap by exploring experiences, attitudes and responses to extreme weather and climate change. The results point to a mixed picture of resilience to climate risks. All interviewees had experienced or witnessed negative impacts from extreme weather events in recent years but concern was expressed that too few farm businesses are taking sufficient action to increase their business resilience to extreme weather and climate change. Many farmers interviewed for this research did not perceive adaptation to be a priority and viewed the risks as either too uncertain and/or too long-term to warrant any significant investment of time or money at present when many are preoccupied with short-term profitability and business survival. We identified a range of issues and barriers that are constraining improved resilience across the industry, including some lack of awareness about the type and cost-effectiveness of potential adaptation options. Nevertheless, we also found evidence of positive actions being taken by many, whether in direct response to climate change/extreme weather or as a result of other drivers such as soil health, policy and legislation, cost reduction, productivity and changing consumer demands. Our findings reveal a number of actions that can help enable adaption at the farm level including improved industry collaboration, farmer-to-farmer learning, and the need for tools and support that take into account the specificities of different farming systems and that can be easily tailored or interpreted to help farmers understand what climate change means for their particular farm and, crucially, what they can do to increase their resilience to both extreme weather and longer term climate risks.

In recent years, federal land management agencies in the United States have been tasked to consider climate change vulnerability and adaptation in their planning. Ecological vulnerability approaches have been the dominant framework, but these approaches have significant limitations for fully understanding vulnerability in complex social-ecological systems in and around multiple-use public lands. In this paper, we describe the context of United States federal public lands management with an emphasis on the Bureau of Land Management to highlight this unique decision-making context. We then assess the strengths and weaknesses of an ecological vulnerability approach for informing decision-making. Next, we review social vulnerability methods in the context of public lands to demonstrate what these approaches can contribute to our understanding of vulnerability, as well as their strengths and weaknesses. Finally, we suggest some key design principles for integrated social-ecological vulnerability assessments considering the context of public lands management, the limits of ecological vulnerability assessment, and existing approaches to social vulnerability assessment. We argue for the necessity of including social vulnerability in a more integrated social-ecological approach in order to better inform climate change adaptation.

There are numerous challenges to mobilising high quality knowledge in support of climate adaptation. Urgent adaptive action often has to be taken on the basis of imperfect information, with the risk of maladaptive consequences. These issues of knowledge quality can be particularly acute in vulnerable developing countries like Bangladesh, where there can be less capacity for producing and using climate knowledge. This paper argues that climate change adaptation in places like Bangladesh would benefit from a more self-conscious critical review of the knowledge systems mobilised in support of action, and suggests that ‘knowledge quality assessment’ (KQA) tools can structure this review. It presents a desktop assessment of information used for climate change adaptation projects in Sylhet Division in Bangladesh, steered by the six themes of the ‘Guidance for Uncertainty Assessment and Communication’ KQA tool. The assessment found important differences in approaches to mobilising knowledge, particularly between governmental and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). It demonstrated that problem framing has an impact on project success; projects that adopt a narrow techno-scientific framing can lead to significant adverse side effects. Recognising this some projects are engaging stakeholders in framing adaptation. It found a lack of national policy Guidance on the use of indicators or appraisal of uncertainty, seeing government agencies fall back on their risk-based calculations, and NGOs attempt to identify indicators and uncertainties via community engagement, with mixed success. Moreover, the adaptation knowledge base is relatively disintegrated, despite tentative steps toward its consolidation and appraisal, potentially related to on-going friction impeding vertical communication within government, and horizontal communication between government, NGOs and stakeholders. This all suggests that the Bangladeshi practices at the adaptation science-policy interface can benefit from reflection on KQA criteria; reflection that could concretely be encouraged through revision of the national policy framework.

Over the last several decades, natural disasters in the United States have become more numerous and costly. Climate change threatens to further exacerbate this trend by increasing both the severity and duration of many natural hazards, ultimately leading to even greater costs in both human life and monetary resources. To prepare for these changes, a handful of local communities have integrated climate change into their Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) approved hazard mitigation plans. This paper analyzes 30 U.S. local hazard mitigation plans against a conceptual framework for how climate change could be integrated into the requirements specified in the FEMA Plan Review Crosswalk, a checklist used by FEMA to evaluate and approve local hazard mitigation plans. Results show that the majority (23/35) of communities are openly discussing how climate change could affect or already is affecting the occurrence of natural hazards. Additionally, over half also include hazard mitigation actions that are designed to be viable in a climate-altered future. These actions, however, represent only a small portion of the total actions proposed in the plans and are generally focused on researching, planning, and capacity building. In addition, few communities include a formal commitment to adapting to climate change or include clear mechanisms for integrating new climate information as it become available into plan revisions. In general, results from this analysis show that there is little consistency in how communities are integrating climate change into hazard planning. These findings point to both the nascence of this practice and the opportunity to develop more formalized guidance that can steer communities towards holistic integration of climate change into hazards planning.

The paper presents a quantitative assessment of mid-term (2021–2050) climate change impacts on and potential adaptation options for selected crops in Greece that are of importance in terms of their share in national agricultural production and gross value added. Central points in the assessment are the monetary evaluation of impacts and the cost-benefit analysis of adaptation options. To address local variability in current and future climate conditions, analysis is spatially disaggregated into geographical regions using as an input downscaled results from climatic models. For some crops (cereals, vegetables, pulses, grapevines), changes in future agricultural yields are assessed by means of agronomic simulation models, while for the rest crops changes are assessed through regression models. The expected effects on crop yields of a number of potential adaptation options are also investigated through the same models, and the costs and benefits of these options are also quantitatively assessed. The findings indicate that climate change may create winners and losers depending on their agricultural activity and location, while adaptation can mitigate adverse effects of climate change under cost-effective terms.

This study is an attempt to use group information collected on climate change from farmers in eastern Uttar Pradesh, India to address a key question related to climate change policy: How to encourage farmers to adapt to climate change? First, we investigate farmers’ perception of and adaptation to climate change using content analysis and group information. The findings are then compared with climatic and agriculture information collected through secondary sources. Results suggest that though farmers are aware of long-term changes in climatic factors (temperature and rainfall, for example), they are unable to identify these changes as climate change. Farmers are also aware of risks generated by climate variability and extreme climatic events. However, farmers are not taking concrete steps in dealing with perceived climatic changes, although we find out that farmers are changing their agricultural and farming practices. These included changing sowing and harvesting timing, cultivation of crops of short duration varieties, inter-cropping, changing cropping pattern, investment in irrigation, and agroforestry. Note that these changes may be considered as passive response or adaptation strategies to climate change. Perhaps farmers are implicitly taking initiatives to adapt climate change. Finally, the paper suggests some policy interventions to scale up adaptation to climate change in Indian agriculture.

Organizations and institutions managing built heritage have to make use of increasingly detailed, elaborate and complex climate change impact assessments. It is a challenge to determine how, when and by whom climate predictions should be translated into risk estimates usable for decision-making. In this paper results from the Climate for Culture project are used to study how heritage decision-makers interpret future indoor climate-related risks to Swedish churches. Different sets of risk maps were presented to ten engineers, ten building conservators and five experts on indoor climate related risks. Interviews were used to understand how the interviewees made sense of the presented information and if they associated it with a perceived need for adaptation. The results show that the risks were interpreted and assessed largely dependent on their pre-understanding and familiarity with the individual risks. The magnitude of change and the lack of uncertainty estimates were subordinate to the overall impression of the information as being credible and salient. The major conclusion is that the dissemination of risk information, also from projects which at the outset have aimed at producing knowledge relevant for end-users, should be both customized and tested in collaborative efforts by stakeholders and scientists.