Search

In this paper, we assess the quality of state-of-the-art regional climate information intended to support climate adaptation decision-making. We use the UK Climate Projections 2018 as an example of such information. Their probabilistic, global, and regional land projections exemplify some of the key methodologies that are at the forefront of constructing regional climate information for decision support in adapting to a changing climate. We assess the quality of the evidence and the methodology used to support their statements about future regional climate along six quality dimensions: transparency; theory; independence, number, and comprehensiveness of evidence; and historical empirical adequacy. The assessment produced two major insights. First, a major issue that taints the quality of UKCP18 is the lack of transparency, which is particularly problematic since the information is directed towards non-expert users who would need to develop technical skills to evaluate the quality and epistemic reliability of this information. Second, the probabilistic projections are of lower quality than the global projections because the former lack both transparency and a theory underpinning the method used to produce quantified uncertainty estimates about future climate. The assessment also shows how different dimensions are satisfied depending on the evidence used, the methodology chosen to analyze the evidence, and the type of statements that are constructed in the different strands of UKCP18. This research highlights the importance of knowledge quality assessment of regional climate information that intends to support climate change adaptation decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to understand why climate information is produced differently from country to country. To do this, we critically examined and compared the social and scientific values that shaped the production of three national climate scenarios in the Netherlands, Switzerland and the UK. A comparative analysis of documentary materials and expert interviews linked to the climate scenarios was performed. Our findings reveal a new typology of use-inspired research in climate science for decision-making: (i) innovators, where the advancement of science is the main objective; (ii) consolidators, where knowledge exchanges and networks are prioritised; and (iii) collaborators, where the needs of users are put first and foremost. These different values over what constitutes 'good' science for decision-making are mirrored in the way users were involved in the production process: (i) elicitation, where scientists have privileged decision-making power; (ii) representation, where multiple organisations mediate on behalf of individual users; and (iii) participation, where a multitude of users interact with scientists in an equal partnership. These differences help explain why climate knowledge gains its credibility and legitimacy differently even when the information itself might not be judged as salient and usable. If the push to deliberately co-produce climate knowledge is not sensitive to the national civic epistemology at play in each country, scientist-user interactions may fail to deliver more 'usable' climate information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Integrated water resources management (IWRM) assumes coherence between cognate aspects of water governance at the river basin scale, for example water quality, energy production and agriculture objectives. But critics argue that IWRM is often less 'integrated' in practice, raising concerns over inter-sectoral coherence between implementing institutions. One increasingly significant aspect of IWRM is adaptation to climate change-related risks, including threats from flooding, which are particularly salient in England. Although multiple institutional mechanisms exist for flood risk management (FRM), their coherence remains a critical question for national adaptation. This paper therefore (1) maps the multi-level institutional frameworks determining both IWRM and FRM in England; (2) examines their interaction via various inter-institutional coordinating mechanisms; and (3) assesses the degree of coherence. The analysis suggests that cognate EU strategic objectives for flood risk assessment demonstrate relatively high vertical and horizontal coherence with river basin planning. However, there is less coherence with flood risk requirements for land-use planning and national flood protection objectives. Overall, this complex governance arrangement actually demonstrates de-coherence over time due to ongoing institutional fragmentation. Recommendations for increasing IWRM coherence in England or re-coherence based on greater spatial planning and coordination of water-use and land-use strategies are proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many countries are exploring alternative strategies to counter rising flood risk as there is concern at the extra burden that such increasing risk will bring. The aim of this paper is to explore the nature of these burdens and outline responses in the United Kingdom (UK) where both the government and the private flood insurers have new policies and proposals. Our method is to collate the extensive existing authoritative data and information-from government and the insurance industry-about the risks that are being experienced and the related policy responses. The results show that these seek to concentrate somewhat more the financial burden of, respectively, flood risk management costs and insurance provisions on to those who are at risk and away from the general taxpayer and those who pay insurance premiums. Other countries may well learn from these developments. The pre-existing cross-subsidies are being reduced, and in this way, it is hoped that extra resources for risk management investment will be forthcoming (from local contributions from at-risk communities) and flood insurance will remain affordable, available and commercially viable. A key conclusion here is that it appears that any increase in flood frequency and severity in the UK appears likely to affect the financially deprived communities to a greater extent than others, not least because they are less likely to insure. Government arrangements to prioritise their contribution to risk reduction towards these financially deprived communities are signs that this regressive effect of floods is real and serious and those arrangements are to be welcomed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To understand how climate adaptation planning and decision-making will progress, a better understanding is needed as to which organisations are expected to take on key responsibilities. Methodological challenges have impeded efforts to identify and track adaptation actors beyond the coarse scale of nation states. Yet, for effective adaptation to succeed, who do national governments need to engage, support and encourage? Using the UK as a case study, we conducted a systematic review of official government documents on climate adaptation, between 2006 and 2015, to understand which organisations are identified as key to future adaptation efforts and tracked the extent to which these organisations changed over time. Our unique longitudinal dataset found a very large number of organisations (n = 568). These organisations varied in size (small-medium enterprises to large multinationals), type (public, private and not-for-profit), sector (e.g. water, energy, transport and health), scale (local, national and international), and roles and responsibilities (policymaking, decision-making, knowledge production, retail). Importantly, our findings reveal a mismatch between official government policies that repeatedly call on private organisations to drive adaptation, on the one hand, and a clear dominance of the public sector on the other hand. Yet, the capacity of organisations to fulfil the roles and responsibilities assigned to them, particularly in the public sector, is diminishing. Unless addressed, climate adaptation actions could be assigned to those either unable, or unwilling, to implement them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK is already experiencing the impacts of climate change and these are expected to increase in scale and severity in the coming decades. Preparing for impacts by undertaking adaptive actions can potentially reduce the level of harm. In the UK, the government's adaptation program aims to develop a "climate-ready society." However, achieving broad public engagement in adaptation presents a significant communications challenge. Here, we aimed to understand how UK residents use and interpret the terms "climate change impacts" and "climate change adaptation." We conducted a secondary analysis of 22 interviews with UK residents, who were recruited for their diverse climate change views. The interviewees expressed a lack of clarity around expected climate change impacts, which did not prevent them from saying that they were already experiencing the effects of a changing climate. Further, threats to cultural norms and values were perceived as serious and emotionally charged. Adaptation was often conflated with mitigation, and responsibility for adaptation was contested. We discuss the implications of our findings for developing more useful public communication about climate change adaptation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adaptation to climate change, particularly flood risks, may come to pose large challenges in the future and will require cooperation among a range of stakeholders. However, there presently exists little research especially on the integration of the private sector in adaptation. In particular, recently developed state programs for adaptation have so far been focused on the public sector. Insurance providers may have much to contribute as they offer other parts of society services to appropriately identify, assess and reduce the financial impacts of climate change-induced risks. This study aims to explore how the institutional distribution of responsibility for flood risk is being renegotiated within the UK, Germany and Netherlands. Examining how the insurance industry and the public sector can coordinate their actions to promote climate change adaptation, the study discusses how layered natural hazard insurance systems may result from attempts to deal with increasing risks due to increasing incidences of extreme events and climate change. It illustrates that concerns over the risks from extreme natural events have prompted re-assessments of the current systems, with insurance requiring long-term legislative frameworks that defines the objectives and responsibilities of insurers and the different political authorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is now widely accepted that climate change is happening and that future changes will impact on many aspects of society, including agriculture. To maintain food supplies, the agricultural industry must address climate change adaptation. Key to this is the attitudes of those within the industry likely to have responsibility for adapting. This study investigated stakeholder attitudes towards adaptation to climate change in the livestock industry. Findings reveal four attitudinal groups. First, there is a 'farmer-focused group' that has a positive attitude about the ability of livestock farmers to adapt to climate change, but that also has the opinion that they will need additional support to adapt. Second, there is an 'incentive for enterprise, anti-GM (genetic modification) group' with an attitudinal position stressing that the government should have a role in implementing regulations and providing finance. This group has a negative attitude towards GM technology and does not think it will be the answer to climate change. Third, there is an 'information and education group' whose attitude is that the provision of information is crucial for ensuring that the livestock industry adapts. Fourth, there is a 'pro-technology group' who have a positive attitude towards GM technology and who are therefore willing to embrace it as the route to adaptation. Three of these four groups favour soft adaptations that maintain flexibility within the system, and only the fourth is of the opinion that adaptive capacity is not an issue and that the industry is ready to implement hard adaptations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Formal planning for climate change adaptation is emerging rapidly at a range of geo-political scales. This first generation of adaptation plans provides useful information regarding how institutions are framing the issue of adaptation and the range of processes that are recognized as being part of an adaptation response. To better understand adaptation planning among developed nations, a set of 57 adaptation plans from Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States was evaluated against a suite of 19 planning processes identified from existing guidance instruments for adaptation planning. Total scores among evaluated plans ranged from 16% of the maximum possible score to 61%, with an average of 37%. These results suggest adaptation plans are largely under-developed. Critical weaknesses in adaptation planning are related to limited consideration for non-climatic factors as well as neglect for issues of adaptive capacity including entitlements to various forms of capital needed for effective adaptation. Such gaps in planning suggest there are opportunities for institutions to make better use of existing guidance for adaptation planning and the need to consider the broader governance context in which adaptation will occur. In addition, the adaptation options prescribed by adaptation plans reflect a preferential bias toward low-risk capacity-building (72% of identified options) over the delivery of specific actions to reduce vulnerability. To the extent these findings are representative of the state of developed nation adaptation planning, there appear to be significant deficiencies in climate change preparedness, even among those nations often assumed to have the greatest adaptive capacity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]