asia pacific adaptation network (apan) › sites › default › files › event... · asia pacific...

Asia Pacific Adaptation Network (APAN)IGES Regional Centre, 604 SG Tower6th Floor 161/1 Soi Mahadlek Luang 3Rajdamri Road, Patumwan, Bangkok 10330, ThailandTel.: +66-2-6518797Fax: +66-2-6518798Email: [email protected]: http://www.asiapacificadapt.net

Asian Development Bank (ADB)ADB Headquarters, Manila6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550, PhilippinesTel.: +632-632 4444Fax: +632-636 2444Website: www.adb.org

Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA)College, Los BañosLaguna 4031, PhilippinesTel.: (+63 49) 536-2361; 536-2363; 536-2365 to 67; 536-2290Fax: (+63 49) 536-7097; 536-2283Email: [email protected]: www.searca.org; www.climatechange.searca.org

ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI-SEA)Southeast Asia SecretariatUnits 3 & 4, The Manila Observatory Building,Ateneo de Manila University, Loyola Heights,Quezon City 1108 PhilippinesTel.: +632-261 3912Fax: +632-426 0851Website: seas.iclei.org

Copyright © 2015 IGES, ADB, SEARCA, ICLEI. __________________________________________________________________

This publication may be produced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. We would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this report as a source.

Although every effort is made to ensure objectivity and balance, the publication of research results or translation does not imply IGES, ADB, SEARCA and ICLEI’s endorsement or acquiescence with its conclusions or endorsement of IGES, ADB, SEARCA and ICLEI’s financers.

IGES, ADB, SEARCA and ICLEI maintain a position of neutrality at all times on issues concerning public policy. Hence, conclusions that are reached in IGES, ADB, SEARCA and ICLEI’s publications should be understood to be those of the authors and not attributed to staff members, officers, directors, trustees, funders, or IGES, ADB, SEARCA and ICLEI.

__________________________________________________________________

Cover photo by: Robert John CabagnotDocumentation: Jhorace Engay

Workshop Proceedings

Climate Risk Management in Planning and Investment Projects

9-10 February 2015, ADB Headquarters, Manila, Philippines

Executive Summary vi

Background vii

Opening Program viii

Session 1: Climate Risk Management Approach 2

Session 2: Use of Evidence 4

Session Discussion 4

Session 3: Adaptation Planning 6


Interactive Session 1: Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment 9

Group Case Studies 9

Session 4: Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment in Practice 12

Promoting Climate-Resilient Agriculture in Koh Kong and Mondulkiri Provinces in Cambodia

12

Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment: Central Mekong Delta Connectivity Project

13

Building Urban Climate Change Resilience: An Overview of the ACCCRN Process

14

Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment in the Philippine Agriculture Sector through the Ecotown Framework as Demonstrated in Upper Marikina River

15


Session 5: Financing Climate Change Adaptation 17

Sources of Financing for Climate Change Adaptation: Mobilising the Private Sector

17

Interactive Session 2: Concept Note for Adaptation Financing 19

Session 6: Needs and Next Steps 23

Workshop Evaluation 25

Pre-workshop Evaluation 25

Post-workshop Evaluation 26

Annexes 34

Annex 1: Workshop Schedule 35

Annex 2: Directory of Participants 39

Workshop ProceedingsClimate Risk Management in Planning and Investment Projects

Table of Contents

ACCCRN Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network

ADB Asian Development Bank

APAN Asia Pacific Adaptation Network

BCA Benefit-Cost Analysis

BCC Biodiversity Conservation Corridors

CEA Cost Effectiveness Analysis

CRM Climate Risk Management

CRS Climate Resilience Strategy

CRVA Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment

FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation

GCF Green Climate Fund

GCM General Circulation Models

ICLEI ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability

IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development

LDC Least Developed Countries

MCA Multi-Criteria Analysis

MOEJ Ministry of the Environment of Japan

NCCAP National Climate Change Action Plan

NIE National Implementing Entity

NPV Net Present Value

RDM Robust Decision-Making

RPC Representative Concentration Pathways

SEARCA Southeast Asia Regional Center for Graduate Studies and Research in Agriculture

SID Small Island Developing State

SIDA Swedish International Cooperation Development Agency

UMRBPL Upper Marikina River Basin Protected Landscape

UN United Nations

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

UNOSD United Nations Office of Sustainable Development

USAID United States Agency for International Development

WHO World Health Organization


Acronyms

vi Executive Summary

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Asia Pacific Adaptation Network (APAN), the Asian Development Bank (ADB), ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability, the Ministry of Environment – Japan (MOEJ) and the Southeast Asia Regional Center for Graduate Studies and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA) co-organised the workshop on “Climate Risk Management in Planning and Investment Projects” on 9-10 February 2015 in Manila, Philippines.

The event was attended by 45 participants from Southeast Asia composed of government officials involved in planning, financing and implementing public investment projects. The workshop aimed to build the capacity of government officials on how to assess climate risk including the theory, economics, as well as securing and managing finance for incorporating climate risk in planning vis-a-vis strengthen understanding of climate change risks and approaches to climate risk management in sector planning and investment projects.

The two-day training provided participants with a better understanding on specific climate change management concerns, such as:

1. Climate Risk Management Approaches2. Climate Data Utilisation for Impact and Vulnerability Assessment3. Economic and Technical Analysis in Adaptation Assessment and Planning4. Financial Architecture on Climate Change Adaptation Initiatives in Partnership with the Private Sector

Case studies on addressing climate change risks in investment projects were also presented to illustrate the challenges that climate change presents to specific investment projects, how these risks have been addressed in practice and to share the lessons learned.

The workshop also provided an opportunity for the participants to share their experiences in addressing climate risks in development planning and investment projects. It had two interactive sessions to stimulate hands-on learning. For the interactive sessions, the participants were divided into three sector-based groups: transport, urban, and agriculture. During the first session, each group was given a specific project case to screen for climate risks and asked to identify potential adaptation measures to be included in a project design. In the second session, the participants developed a mock concept note for adaptation financing application.

This training is the first in a series of sub regional training on climate risk management in planning and investment projects. This training for Southeast Asian countries included participants from: Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, and Viet Nam and it is set to be conducted for the same profile of stakeholders to the rest of the countries and sub regions of Asia and the Pacific in the succeeding months.


OPENING PROGRAMWelcome RemarksThe training workshop was opened by Dr. Indira Simbolon, the Officer in Charge of the Environment and Safeguards Division of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). She welcomed with pleasure all the participants from the Southeast Asian countries, partners and colleagues. She gave appreciation to the series of successful efforts that the Asia Pacific Climate Change Adaptation Network (APAN) has been doing so far together with its partners in demonstrating the importance of sharing development challenges in a changing climate and the value of disseminating knowledge on emerging solutions for adaptation.

The Asia-Pacific region houses a large number of poor and climate change vulnerable population but the speaker believes that the region is positioned to generate solutions that can support a transition towards a resilient green economy. She stressed that the countries will only be able to address their development and poverty reduction priorities by increasing resilience to climate change impacts and disasters as well as reducing pollution, promoting cleaner and more efficient energy, better managing natural capital, creating liveable cities and increasing water and food security.

Dr. Simbolon recognised that the Asian countries have already started to move towards a green economy but there is still a major work to finish for the sustainable development agenda. This training workshop then, is an important step towards increasing the understanding of APAN, the ADB and other partners on addressing the impacts of climate change and to move towards a more sustainable development path in the region. The module to be used in this particular activity is hoped to be replicated in other sub regions. Dr. Simbolon then highlighted the vital part of the participants to assess the feasibility of the module to scope future training activities in the Asia-Pacific region. In like manner, APAN’s Regional Hub Coordinator and the UNEP Asia-Pacific Regional Climate Change Coordinator, Dr. Puja Sawhney echoed the importance of the workshop as previously stressed out by Dr. Simbolon. She reiterated that the participants’ feedback is vital as this will give the APAN and its partners a concrete idea on how to further improve the module and have the same workshop done in other parts of Asia.

Dr. Sawhney also gave her warm welcome remarks and started off by briefly introducing the history of APAN. APAN was set up in 2009, a network under the United Nations Environment Program – Global Adaptation Network and is primarily supported by the Ministry of Environment Japan (MOEJ), Asian Development Bank (ADB), the Swedish International Cooperation Development Agency (SIDA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and more partners and institutions. This is the first network that was set up in Asia-Pacific, and other networks have been established in other parts of the world.

There has already been a lot of interests on climate change adaptation and Dr. Sawhney believes that the participants of the training workshop also came in as well because of the same concern about what is happening in the environment and to learn more about the impacts and risks that confronts the region. She expressed the challenge in catering varying needs of these countries but topics on climate finance, risks management and planning and on how to execute these things are the common questions. This then, is the rationale why the training workshop on risk management and planning was organized and it is the first of its kind.

She urged the active participation of all the delegates and encouraged a meaningful discussion regarding the various topics that are to be presented.

Opening Program vii


Background

The workshop was designed to strengthen understanding of climate change risks and approaches to climate risk management in sector planning and investment projects.

The participants were expected to learn and discuss the following:

1. nature of climate change risks to investment projects; 2. tools for climate risk screening; 3. approaches for climate risk and vulnerability assessment, including technical and economic

evaluation of adaptation options; and 4. options for adaptation financing.

Case studies were presented to illustrate the challenges that climate change poses to specific investment projects, and how these risks have been addressed in practice and lessons learned.

The workshop was offered through the capacity building program of the Asia Pacific Adaptation Network (APAN) in collaboration with by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) together with Ministry of the Environment of Japan (MOEJ), ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI) and the Southeast Asia Regional Center for Graduate Studies and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA).

It was designed to meet the needs of officials involved in planning, financing and implementing public investment projects with a focus on sectoral ministries including transport, energy, agriculture, and urban development, and cross-sectoral ministries such as finance, and planning. This initial training session was offered to participants from the following Southeast Asian countries: Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand, Viet Nam and Timor Leste.

The workshop was attended by 23 participants from Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Philippines, and Vietnam, and other experts. APAN partners, resource persons and other experts also participated (Annex 2).

viii Rationale and Methodology


Climate RiskManagement

Photo by: Zul Khalid

Session on Climate Risk ManagementClimate Risk Management for a Resilient Asia Pacific

Dr. Cinzia Losenno - ADB

Risk management is a process aimed at realising the potential opportunities whilst managing adverse effects. The decision-making process requires integrated consideration of different aspects such as: financial, social, environmental, regulatory, reputational, political, and the climate variability and change. As such, Climate Risk Management (CRM) is defined as:

“a process for incorporating knowledge and information about climate-related events, trends, forecasts and projections into decision making to increase or maintain benefits and reduce potential harm or losses. It is a multidisciplinary activity that calls for an integrated consideration of socioeconomic and environmental issues.” 1

The necessary elements to manage climate risks involve climate risk screening, climate change risk and vulnerability assessment (CRVA), identification of adaptation options, technical and economic evaluation of adaptation options, and monitoring and reporting.

The CRVA Framework (shown in Figure 1) answers three (3) questions:

1. What are the climate change threats?2. Which components of the project are vulnerable to these threats?3. What are the adaptation options technically and economically feasible?

There are three kinds of decisions: (1) invest now, (2) be ready and invest later if needed, and (3) do not do anything and invest later if needed. These decisions are made by considering important determinants such as the probability that adaptation investment will be needed and the degree of flexibility of project design. But a good reminder however was posed – that it is not always necessary to act now, but is important to assess now. The CRM work would need the technical experts to support climate risk screening and assessment, financial resources to conduct assessments and documenting experiences, and the tools and guidance materials for consistent and systematic screening assessment. Partnerships such as with the APAN, USAID ADAPT-Asia and many others are crucial to mobilize resources, leverage knowledge, disseminate best practices and meet unique vulnerabilities across the region.

In terms of knowledge and capacity inputs, local climate information/community perceptions and high resolution projections, and technical support from institutions are needed to come up with a holistic and effective management package.

1 Source: Editorial, Climate Risk Management 1 (2014)

Figure 1. The Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Framework

2 Session on Climate Risk Management


Use of Evidence

Photo by: Fahreza Ahmad

Session on Use of EvidenceClimate Risk Assessment: Use of Evidence including Historical Data, Climate Change Projections and Sectoral Impact Models

Dr. Charles Rodgers - ADB

The two paradigms of CRM were coined as “Predict-then-Act” and the second one is “Seek Robust Solutions”. The first paradigm is an option for the CRM practitioners to figure out best-guess future and design the best policy they can for that future. The second paradigm is an option to identify greatest vulnerabilities across full range of futures and identify the suite of interventions that perform reasonably well across this range.

The General Circulation Models (GCM) and projections are indispensable tools for anticipating and preparing for future climatic and hydrologic conditions. GCMs are global in scope, physics-based, internally consistent, and evaluated against historical data and has a spatial resolution that is continually improving. However, GCM outputs are not “data” and cannot be used in the same way as historical data in the design process. There are many processes (e.g., high intensity rainfall) that are not well simulated by GCMs and GCM outputs are fundamentally uncertain.

Additionally, climate is not the only source of uncertainty that must be considered in project-level risk management. There are other sources of uncertainties and in addressing these, strategies such as robust, adaptive and precautionary strategies can be utilised. It is also important to understand that here is no “best way” to develop and use climate data projections in CRM. The project team has to find a balance among credibility, detail and feasibility in choosing the options available. The utilisation of projections data in decision support, determine the significance and treatment of uncertainty. The “Predict-then-Act” approaches can be relatively fragile in the face of uncertainty while robust decision-making approaches, by contrast, can make positive use of climate uncertainty in exploring, identifying, climate-resilient plans and designs.

Climate Change Impact Assessment for Preparing National Adaptation Plan in Japan

Dr. Takuya Nomoto - MOEJ

The MOEJ established an Expert Committee on Climate Change Impact Assessment in 2013 to conduct extensive surveys and rigorous review of related literature. After the surveys, the committee came up with a draft in January this year which is now currently undergoing review and subject for comments from the public.

This document will be developed and finalized in cooperation with the relevant ministries in Japan. They are looking forward to come up with the National Action Plan which will serve as a government-wide integrated strategy and hopeful to have this released during the summer season of 2015. And from their experience and success in conducting impact assessments, the Japanese government is willing to support the conduct of the same activities for the national and local action plans of the developing countries in Asia. Currently, the MOEJ is establishing a consortium on impact assessment. Through this, Japanese and other experts from other countries will be dispatched to extend the needed training support by the developing Asian countries.

Session DiscussionRelevant discussion points include inquiry on the type of support that the MOEJ is planning to extend to the developing countries. Dr. Nomoto clarified that this will have to be discussed with the each host country depending on their needs.

Meanwhile, Dr. Rodger’s presentation was remarked as technically challenging, therefore, the speaker was asked on where the set of expertise can be found and if they are not available in the country, what are the ways on which they can be sourced. Dr. Rodgers cited the national agencies that are primarily responsible for the different climate data, the universities and specialised institutes. These groups have significant expertise and are being engaged from time to time.

Dr. Puja Sawhney, the session moderator, also shared existing examples on adaptation assessments such as ADB and the World Bank.

4 Session on Use of Evidence


Adaptation Planning

Photo by: Aung Kyaw Tun (Patheingyi)

Session on Adaptation Planning Adaptation Assessment and Planning: Identification of Options and Technical Feasibility

Dr. Charles Rodgers - ADB

The four (4) steps to conduct adaptation assessment are (1) to identify all potential adaptation options, (2) conduct consultation, (3) conduct technical and economic analysis, and (4) prioritise and select adaptation options. The goal of the adaptation assessment is to identify and prioritise the most appropriate and cost-effective adaptation measures to incorporate into the project.

There is a range of adaptation approaches that are often available for any given project, encompassing both “hard” (engineering and technology-based) and “soft” (biological, management, social, and policy) options. In many project settings, hard and soft approaches can be complimentary. In addition, the stakeholders have a large role to play in determining the criteria by which options are selected. Therefore, it is important to conduct consultations to ensure that any adaptation option or intervention chosen is acceptable to the community, who are in most cases the intended beneficiaries of the project. In doing this, the community ownership of the project and the likely success of interventions are guaranteed.

Adaptation options must be scientifically sound, socially beneficial, and economically viable. The five approaches to consider in selecting adaptation options are: Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA), Cost Effectiveness Analysis (CEA), Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA), Robust Decision-Making (RDM) and Expert Judgment. And when the impact assessment establishes that future conditions are highly uncertain, the adaptation strategies that can best manage uncertainty must be given priority. These are:

1. No-regrets Strategies – those that generate net benefits independent of how, or whether climate change occurs (but benefits must be greater under climate change)

2. Low-regrets Strategies – those for which climate change readiness can be introduced at low costs

3. Win-win Strategies (co-benefits) – those which provide net benefits in other areas or sectors while also reducing vulnerability to climate change.

4. Robust strategies – those that can be demonstrated to perform acceptably under a wider range of conditions (e.g. less specialisation, more diversification)

Implementers should also be wise in employing adaptation options. As was previously mentioned, it is not always necessary to act right away, although it is important to assess immediately.

To note, APAN is currently in the process of preparing a report regarding the different gaps and needs for technologies in four sectors – agriculture, water, coastal management and disaster risk reduction. These are the technologies which have originated within the Asia Pacific region except for Japan as technologies for Japan related to the four sectors are already available in the AOAB technology database.

Adaptation Assessment: Economic Analysis of Adaptation Measures

Dr. Benoit Laplante - ADB

The session provided an overview of the economics of adaptation, the role of economic analysis at the project level, economic analysis of ADB projects, cost of climate change vs. the benefit of adaptation, CBA and cost-effectiveness analysis, possible outcomes of the economic analysis, and the CBA in a context of risk and uncertainty.

Economic analysis provides a systematic means to identify, quantify, and wherever possible, monetize all impacts of a project or policy (including their environmental impacts), and present these impacts as economic (or social) costs and social benefits. Its role is to provide information to the decision-maker about the costs and benefits of the project or the policy. Financial analysis is for the investor’s best interest while economic analysis is for the welfare of an entire society.

6 Session on Adaptation Planning


ADB projects undergo economic and financial analysis but not all go through the latter. Financial analysis is only done when the project generates revenues. The criteria is that the net present value (NPV) of the project must be positive upon using a 12% discount rate. The NPV of an investment project was defined as the present value of the project’s benefits minus the present value of the project’s costs.

The cost of climate change is by how much the NPV of the project is reduced as a result of climate change. The benefit of adaptation is the easing of the costs of the impacts that are expected to be caused by climate change. With adaptation, some of the impacts of climate change can be mitigated, but generally not all. Those that are not mitigated are called residual damages. Adaptation measures should be selected to the extent that they allow the NPV of the project, inclusive of the cost of adaptation, to increase. When adaptation is required whether by a national law or rules and standards, cost-effectiveness analysis is done. The conduct of CBA in the context of risk and uncertainty involves sensitivity and probabilistic analysis and scenario construction.

As a whole, the economic analysis of an investment project is a multi-disciplinary exercise which requires inputs of multiple experts and which is conducted in the midst of uncertainty.

Session DiscussionA question was posed whether a project that has a very high net present value (NPV) and social value but is not environmentally friendly should be given clearance or not. The question was addressed by Dr. Laplante, who mentioned that the project’s impact to the environment is included in the economic analysis. Values to the environment should be considered in the economic analysis as also all possible impacts to the society and environment which are transformed to advantages or disadvantages, costs or benefits.

Sharing of experiences from different countries on their planning and adaptation initiatives was also opened during the discussion.

This session was followed by the first part of the interactive session.

Session on Adaptation Planning 7


Interactive Session 1

Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment

Interactive Session 1 - Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment 9

In this session, the participants were divided into three sector-based groups: agriculture, transport, and urban. Each group was given a particular case study to screen for climate risks and to identify potential adaptation measures that can be incorporated in the project design.

The questions to be addressed in the group exercise included:

1. Please describe briefly the type of climate risks to which the project may be exposed in the future. In particular, which specific components or aspects of the project could be most seriously affected (e.g., structures, materials, location)?

2. What type of climate change information would be useful to assess in greater details and more precision the nature of the climate risks which the project may be exposed to?

3. In the absence of any form of adaptation, please describe briefly how you would estimate the possible impacts of climate change on the costs and benefits of the project.

4. Please describe briefly what could be the nature of the possible adaptation (climate-proofing) measures for the project. Which information would be useful to identify these options?

5. Please describe how your team would recommend to undertake the technical and economic assessment of these possible adaptation (climate-proofing) measures.

6. In addition to the technical and economic assessment of the possible adaptation measures, which other factors should the government consider in deciding whether or not and how much to invest in adaptation? How might uncertainty about projected climate impact government’s decisions about investing in adaptation?

7. Are there any relevant stakeholders that the government should consult in making decisions whether to go ahead with adaptation investment?

Group Case Studies The case study for the Transport group focused on rural roads improvement.

Rural Roads Improvement Project

A project is being proposed to rehabilitate approximately 500 kilometres (km) of rural roads in five provinces of a Southeast Asian country. A key objective of the project is to provide a safer rural road network, with all-year access to markets and other social services. Without any consideration of adaptation to climate change, the project cost (in present value terms) is estimated to reach $80 million, and the project net present value is estimated to be $25 million, with an internal rate of return of 13.8%.

The project is located in a mountainous area of the country prone to both flooding and landslides. In recent years, meteorological data show that both the frequency and the intensity of precipitation have increased. This has resulted in an increasing number of landslides and floods which have damaged the existing road, and prevented travel along the road for an increasing number of days. Over the course of the last 10 years, damages to the road have been estimated to reach approximately USD10 million per year on average.

Available climate change projections until 2050 show a continuation of the recent trend for these 5 provinces: more frequent and more intense precipitation events. Expectations are that this may lead to more landslides and more flood events.


The Urban case study focused on urban infrastructure systems.

The Agriculture case study focused on improving the rice value chain services.

Secondary Cities Development Project

A project is proposed to upgrade the urban infrastructure systems in 3 secondary cities of a Southeast Asian country. These cities were recognized as rapidly urbanizing areas with high development potential. The project involves upgrading flood control and drainage works and solid waste disposal practices as wells as rehabilitating water supply systems. Without any consideration of adaptation to climate change, the project cost (in present value terms) is estimated to reach $120 million, and the project net present value is estimated to be $40 million, with an internal rate of return of 14%.

These cities are located in low-lying coastal delta plains and are highly exposed to sea-level rise and storm-surges. They are also critically vulnerable to the additional impacts from riverine flooding driven by the projected increasing intensity of extreme rainfall events.

Climate change projections until 2050 in the area indicate more frequent precipitation. By 2050, sea level is projected to rise by 20 centimetres. Furthermore, the region is expected to experience more intense (stronger) cyclones and higher storm surges, although changes in frequency are less evident.

Improving Rice Value Chain Infrastructure and Support Services

A project is proposed to improve the rice value chain in 3 major rice-producing provinces of a Southeast Asian country. The project involves (i) rehabilitation of irrigation systems (to improve reliability of water delivery and increase productivity and cropping intensities); (ii) construction of paddy drying and storage facilities (to accommodate paddy supplies at peak periods after harvest to ensure better quality for processing and retained added value); (iii) construction of seed cleaning, drying, grading and storage facilities (to increase the availability of quality rice seed). Without any consideration of adaptation to climate change, the project cost (in present value terms) is estimated to reach $50 million, and the project net present value is estimated to be $20 million, with an internal rate of return of 16%.

However, climate change has increased the number of extreme climate events such as floods and droughts in the country. In the coastal regions, the impacts of sea level rise and saltwater intrusion are expected to be severe by 2050. Loss in paddy output due to climate change is projected to be significant -- 70% due to the occurrence of floods, 20% due to droughts, and 10% due to other reasons such as pest and diseases.

10 Interactive Session 1 - Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment


Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment in Practice

Photo by: Kyaw Kyaw Winn

Session on Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment in PracticeOn Day 2, there were four sessions on Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment in Practice, Financing Climate Change Adaptation, Interactive Session: Concept note for Adaptation Financing and the Closing Session: Needs and Next Steps.

This session included four country presentations.

Promoting Climate-Resilient Agriculture in Koh Kong and Mondulkiri Provinces in Cambodia

Dr. Thuy Trang Dang

The outcomes of the desk-based research on climate projections and the field-based vulnerability assessment in the water sector in two of the provinces in Cambodia were presented. The combined results of the two assessments helped identify the most effective CCA options and priorities in the context of an ongoing Biodiversity Conservation Corridors Project.

The methodology used for climate projections included:

1. Latest greenhouse gases and aerosols scenarios

Two emissions scenarios were considered: RCP 4.5 (lower greenhouse gas concentrations) and RCP 8.5 (higher greenhouse gas concentrations)

2. Inputs from latest global climate simulations based upon these scenarios

3. Downscaling: Regional high–resolution (10 km) climate models

The climate variables and indices considered were:

1. Temperature changes (seasonal and annual maximum, minimum and mean)

2. Rainfall changes (mean seasonal and annual)

3. Droughts (for 3, 6 and 12 months using number of hot days, and duration and frequency of heat waves)

4. Extreme rainfall, consecutive wet and dry days (average annual maximum one day rainfall; five consecutive day rainfall; mean number of consecutive wet days and consecutive dry days)

5. Sea level changes (for Koh Kong only)

The table below outlines the main findings of the climate projections for the provinces of Koh Kong and Mondulkiri, Cambodia.

Participatory consultations, focus group discussions, key informant interviews, secondary data collection and household surveys were the approaches used for the assessment based on which adaptation options needs were formulated. In all, ten adaptation capacities were identified. Interventions were selected based on the following:

1. Improved climate resilience in the most vulnerable Biodiversity Conservation Corridor (BCC) communes;

2. Support to BCC objectives;

3. Feasibility of implementation within BCC implementing structure;

4. High priority for communities;

5. Potential for scaling up alignment with national and local development strategies; and

6. Avoiding duplication of activities financed in other projects.

12 Session on Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment in Practice


Session on Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment in Practice 13

Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment: Central Mekong DeltaConnectivity Project

Dr. Tarek Ketelsen – ICEM

The project was intended to enhance the regional connectivity of the Delta rice bowl to the regional economy. As all key hydro-meteorological design variables are changing such as the sea levels, flood water levels, river discharges, precipitation intensity, and average and peak temperatures the Climate Risk Vulnerability Assessment (CRVA) was intended to integrate changing and future risk profile into the design, operations, and maintenance of the infrastructure.

The main findings of the study include:

1. P1% floodplain water level will increase by 0.6m over 100-year design life.

2. Navigation clearance should not be significantly affected by the P5% water level in the future.

3. Maximum daily temperature by 2050 is projected to increase by an average of 2.3°C, with 15-45% increase in the proportion of an average year > 35°C.

4. Scour/Erosion potential: Left-bank of the Cao Lanh bridge site will see a significant increase in bed and bank velocities during large flood events.

5. Climate change impact on road embankments represents the critical issue requiring adaptation response.

• 0.1m above existing free board

6. The impacts are

• Erosion of road embankments and scour of road foundations;

• Water logging of road foundations, pore pressure induced collapse and road subsidence; and

• Reduced macro-stability of infrastructure associated increase in maintenance effort.

Through this project, it was realised that the integration of the CRVA should be considered as early as in the investment planning process. Linkages should also be established between the design and the CRVA team and the scope of the CRVA should not be proscribed at the outset. Some climate change issues are non-obvious and only emerge as the study unfolds. Above all, there should be a wider integrated approach to resilience that considers the infrastructure investment in its surrounding environment.


Building Urban Climate Change Resilience: An Overview of the ACCCRN Process

Ms. Catherine Diomampo – ICLEI SEA

The presentation provided a brief background about ICLEI, the ICLEI Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN) Process, Climate Risk and Vulnerability in the ACCCRN process and some key points from the Philippine experience.

The ICLEI ACCCRN Process is a streamlined and replicable method that cities can implement without the need for much external support. The process benefits the cities to know potential risks and vulnerabilities, better manage climate change impacts, knowledge exchange with other cities and technical partners, develop climate resilience strategy (CRS), and integrate the CRS into urban planning and the implementation processes.

In the Philippines, resiliency initiatives are done simultaneously at the national and sub-national level, however, it was observed that the efforts are fragmented for the lack of proper coordination. At present, ICLEI is helping the local government units in creating their own local climate change action plans and trying to integrate this to the development plans of the localities.

The selection of sites is usually determined through the expressions of interests that ICLEI received from the cities as a response to the call of interests that they have sent to all the cities in the country. They operate in cities who have expressed political will to do the project and this includes co-financing responsibility on the part of the local government unit.

14 Session on Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment in Practice

Figure 2. ICLEI-ACCCRN Climate Change and Vulnerability Assessment Process


Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment in the Philippine Agriculture Sector through the Ecotown Framework as Demonstrated in Upper Marikina River

Dr. Nicomedes D. Briones - UPLB/SEARCA

An introduction of the Philippine agricultural sector, the CRVA of the agricultural sector in Upper Marikina River Basin Protected Landscape (UMRBPL), the Ecotown project in the said area and the CRVA process conducted and lessons learned from the Project were presented.

The Philippine agriculture sector shares 14% of the gross domestic product of the country and currently employs 13 million workers or 32% of the labour force – in light of the fact that the country is ranked the highest in the world in terms of vulnerability to tropical cyclones and third in terms of the population’s exposure to floods and droughts.

The Upper Marikina River Basin Protected Landscape is a newly declared protected area under the category of protected landscape in November 2011- ‘Climate Resilience and Green Growth in the UMRBPL–Demonstrating the Ecotown Framework’ as specified in the National Climate Change Action Plan of the Climate Change Commission of the Philippines. The project’s objective is to enhance the natural resource base of UMRBPL that would complement the Ecotown’s objective which is to develop economically prosperous and climate-resilient communities. The CRVA was conducted for water, forest, agriculture, social and transport sectors. As a result, the following adaptation measures to address Climate Change impacts for the LGUs to adapt in UMRBPL were proposed: (1) reforestation, (2) construction of check dams, and (3) charcoal briquetting.

The CRVA of the agriculture sector was seen as necessary to be integrated with those of the other sectors for a holistic watershed approach. In terms of project support, the consultative method of involving the stakeholders and the community encouraged the participation and support of all the people within the protected landscape. The adaptation measures have already been institutionalised in the local development plans of the cities within the protected area and no problems encountered so far in terms of the co-financing agreements.

Session DiscussionThe lessons learnt and new knowledge and skills generated from the conduct of the above mentioned projects of ICLEI and ADB are packaged into knowledge products that are disseminated through their respective websites and publications. Process documentation is also done by the two.

This session was facilitated by Dr. Mariliza Ticsay, Unit Head, Knowledge Resources - Knowledge Management Department, and Focal Person of the Regional Thematic Node for Agriculture, SEARCA.

Session on Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment in Practice 15


16

Financing Climate Change Adaptation

Photo by: Do Huu Tuan

Session on Financing Climate Change Adaptation

Sources of Financing for Climate Change Adaptation: Mobilising the Private Sector

Dr. Puja Sawhney – APAN

The question is not about the shortage of fund, rather the lack of capacity, specifically the lack of technical capability and competence in governments to implement funded projects efficiently and effectively. There is a need to innovate and go an extra mile with regards to the creativity in building new revenue streams such as payment for ecosystem services, debt for climate swaps or private sector investment in environmental goods and services.

Currently there have been a lot of funds from multiple sources that are dedicated to adaptation in the Asia Pacific region funds managed by the national governments and by multilateral institutions, with the newest source being the Green Climate Fund (GCF). The GCF was adopted as a financial mechanism under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) in 2011 and aims to make an ambitious contribution to attaining the mitigation and adaptation goals of the international community. It is expected to become the main multilateral financing mechanism in the future for climate actions in the developing countries. There will be a direct access to this fund through the National Implementing Entity (NIE) accreditation and the Designated National Authority (DNA). The underlying question with this new trend is, “How will the private sector be engaged”?

The private sector can provide the government and implementers with potential solutions. There are many ways for governments to mobilise the private sector’s interest in adaptation. This can be through tax penalties and concessions, green procurement, public-private partnerships in adaptation projects, insurance of public assets against climate change damage, issuance of climate change bonds, climate change index in the stock exchange and subsidies for investment in adaptation measures. Ultimately, communicating the urgent need to adapt is the key to engage them in this work, together with establishing good partnership relationships for longer period of collaboration.

As an added value, engaging the private sector can result in the development of new knowledge and skills through research and development cooperation as well as the generation of new technologies to confront climate risks.

Mr. Octavio Peralta, the Secretary General of the Association of Development Financing Institutions in Asia and the Pacific served as the moderator for this session.

Session on Financing Climate Change Adaptation 17


18

Interactive Session 2

Concept Note for Adaptation Financing

In the second interactive session, the participants were requested to prepare a skeleton project proposal or concept note for potential adaptation financing based on the climate risks and adaptation measures that they have identified during the first interactive session.

The output of the groups are shown in the tables below.

Project Title Integrated Urban and Coastal ResilienceFunding Agency Green Climate Fund, Adaptation FundImplementing Agency Ministry of Public WorksRationale/Objectives • Better Water Quality

• Better Sanitation System• Enhanced Public Health• Proper Waste Management• Prevention of Storm Surges

Business Cases • City remains attractive to the Private Sector• City remains a Tourism Destination• Growth of natural resources is sustained and

balanced• Safe society and habitat• Healthy labour force (in line with MDG/

SDG)Expected Outputs • Rainwater harvesting installed

• Pilot waste-energy project done• Dyke construction completed• Mangrove restoration • Zoning plan adopted• Sanitation and drainage system in place

Expected Outcomes • Year round reliable water supply• Good land usage, air and water quality

improved• Reduction in flood exposure• Sustainable alternative source of potable

waterStakeholders/Beneficiaries • Humans (2 million) and lands (hectares ++)Financial Requirement for Adaptation $150 Million

Interactive Session 2 - Concept Note for Adaptation Financing 19



The output of the groups are shown in the succeeding tables.

Project Title Climate Proofing Rural Road Improvement ProjectFunding Agency Adaptation FundImplementing Agency Department of Transportation/Public Works and

HighwaysArea Central Philippines – Leyte, Cebu, Bohol, Masbate

Scope (assumption) Rehabilitation of 500-kilometer roads in five provinces

General Objective To build climate resilient road infrastructureExpected Outcomes • Stable and functional watershed - stabilized

embankments (rip rapping)• Better economy • Savings

Expected Outputs Climate resilient roadsStakeholders/Beneficiaries • Rural communities

• Business groups • Tourists

Particulars I. CRVA design II. Implementation and Monitoring and Evaluation

Timetable12 months24 months

Total Project Amount $88 Million

Financial Requirement for Adaptation $8 Million

• Civil works $5 Million• Equipment $0.7 Million• CRVA Consultants $0.7 Million• Capacity Building $0.8 Million• Contingencies $0.8 Million

Measurable Indicator A 2-kilometer climate resilient road by Year 1

20 Interactive Session 2 - Concept Note for Adaptation Financing



The output of the groups are shown in the succeeding tables.

Project Title Improving Rice Value Chains Infrastructure Support in Lao PDR

Implementing Agency Ministry of AgricultureLong-term Goals • Food security (self-sufficient production)

• Rice exportationObjectives • Rehabilitate irrigation systems

• Construct paddy drying/storage• Construct seed production facilities

Expected Outputs • Reduced loss in paddy output due to climate change by 50%

• Climate resilient irrigation systems; postharvest and seed quality preservation facilities

Expected Outcomes • Increased incomes of target beneficiaries (10%); 15% by mid-term

• Create jobs in rural areas• Increased paddy production by 20%

Stakeholders/Beneficiaries • At least 5000 farming households in Savannakhet Province

• Rice traders, seed producers, millers, drying facility operators, farmer organizations

Costs of the project activities that the Agriculture group intends to for the rice infrastructure support in Lao PDR.

Project Activities Time frame CostPre-implementation activities(Irrigation, Postharvest, Seed quality, Feasibility study, Consultations, Risk vulnerability analysis, EIA)

First 6 months $30 Million

Engineering/Civil Works (modifications of irrigation system)

Construction of post-harvest facilities

Construction of seed quality facilities (seed bank)

7th to 24th month $16 Million

Capacity building of users and managers

3 months onward $2 Million

TOTAL Adaptation Costs $48 Million

Interactive Session 2 - Concept Note for Adaptation Financing 21


22

Needs and Next Steps

Photo by: Myo Min Kywe

Closing Session: Needs and Next Steps

Dr. Cinzia Losenno requested a representative from each of the countries to share their quick feedback about the workshop. The participants agreed that the information they gained is very useful in their current line of work and expressed their willingness to share the learnings with their colleagues. It was also mentioned that the workshop is rather short. Therefore, the participants expressed their hope to be invited to similar future workshops. There was also a suggestion to mainstream CCA knowledge and skills to the younger generation (elementary and secondary level) so that they will learn how to cope at an early stage. Additionally, the workshop organisers were requested to come up with capability building workshops especially on preparing sound project proposals acceptable to the funding institutions and agencies.

Dr. Puja Sawhney informed the group that APAN is currently conducting such capability building workshops. However, since the network uses a bottom-up approach, it has to receive requests from the countries or sub regions regarding their capacity needs. One way that this is being facilitated is through the evaluation forms that are conducted at the activities/events that they are organising.

Dr. Sawhney closed the event by thanking all the participants for attending the workshop. She informed the group that they will receive updates on upcoming workshops, updates on climate change risks, adaptation and mitigation through the APAN newsletter.

Closing Session: Needs and Next Steps 23


24

Workshop Evaluation

Pre-Workshop EvaluationThe pre-workshop evaluation sought to gather the level of competencies and expectations of the participants regarding the topics that are to be tackled during the workshop. The evaluation is based on the inputs received from 25 participants.

Part 1: Self-Assessment

This portion sought to evaluate the level of competencies of each participant in terms of their awareness, knowledge, understanding and ability to identify climate change risks and utilise approaches to climate risk management in sector planning and investment projects.

Most of the participants were not that aware, knowledgeable, and can rarely understand climate risk management in sector planning and investment projects. They also have little ability to identify and utilise approaches to CRM. Therefore, majority stated that the training topics are highly beneficial/relevant to them.

Part 2: Participants’ Expectations

Of the 25 respondents, 80% stated they expect to gain more knowledge and understanding on climate risks and CRM management frameworks and to be equipped in dealing with it in sector planning and investment projects. The rest said that they want to learn from the case studies and site-specific adaptation practices and CRVA methodologies and techniques as well as to easily identify the different climate risks and the sectors affected. One participant also expected to learn about the existing financial opportunities for adaptation projects.

Figure 3. The participants’ level of knowledge, understanding, skills based on each of the issues, challenges and approaches to climate risk management and sector planning and investment projects before the workshop



Part 3: Participants Profile

Majority of the participants were national government officials. The figure below shows the detailed affiliations of the workshop participants.

Post-Workshop EvaluationThe post-workshop evaluation sought to measure the effectiveness of the workshop in increasing the participants’ knowledge, skills and/or competencies regarding climate risk management in planning and investment projects. There were 25 respondents for this evaluation composed of the same participants who accomplished the workshop pre-evaluation form.

Part 1: Self-Assessment

Results show that there is a significant improvement in the level of knowledge and skills of the participants on the four assessed competencies. An average of 50% participants said their level of knowledge, understanding, awareness and ability to identify risks and utilise approaches to CRM was moderately increased, 22% indicated high increase, 24% average, and 4% indicated rare improvement. The graph below illustrates the results.

Figure 4. Affiliation of the Participants

Figure 5. The participants’ level of knowledge, understanding, skills based on each of the issues, challenges, and approaches to climate risk management and sector planning and investment projects after the workshop

26 Workshop Evaluation


Part 2: Event Feedback

A. Session Topics/Objectives

Results obtained from the participants’ rating to the individual sessions of the workshops yielded similar data. In summary, the information in Figure 6 shows that the objectives were perceived by the participants as mostly to fully clear and relevant. An average of 82% of the participants said that the workshop was mostly to fully successful in meeting the training objectives.

B. Content of the Training Workshop

More than majority (88%) of the participants said that the content of the training is highly relevant to their job. Furthermore, 96% expressed that they will likely utilise the information they have acquired from the said event. Figure 7 below illustrates the results of the participant’s perception on the content of the workshop.

Figure 6. The participants’ feedback on the clarity and relevance of the training objectives and the workshop’s success in meeting these objectives (data in percentage)

Figure 7. The participants’ perception on the content of the workshop (data in percentage)



Most of the participants found Economic Analysis and Financing Adaptation Options as very informative, inspiring, and have high potentials in helping them with their current work. Meanwhile, other presentations such as the Climate Risk Management, Identification of Options and Technical Feasibility, and the case study on Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment in the Agriculture Sector were also appreciated for the information shared. Some participants also noted that the Practical/Interactive sessions also helped them to practice and apply immediately the lessons that they have learned during the workshop. The rest stated that all presentations were relevant to them especially in the sectors that they are assigned in their respective countries.

When asked about how much of the content were new to them, 28% (highest percentage) stated that everything is new to them, while 4% said that there is nothing new in the presentations. The pie chart below (Figure 8) details the participants’ response.

An average of six (6) participants listed the presentations that were new to them (graph below):

Figure 8. The participants’ rating on how much of the training workshop were new to them

Figure 9. The participants’ rating on the specific presentations that were new/not so new to them



Part 3: Methodology

This part assessed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the methodology used during the workshop. The highest percentage with an average of 68% said that the methodology used for both the introductory and case study presentations were effective and appropriate. Figure 10 shows complete the results.

Part 4: Delivery

With regards to the facilitators’ information delivery, response to the needs of the participants, and the relevance of summary discussions, an average of 68% claimed that the communication and presentation of information and the response to the participants’ questions and learning needs were mostly effective. Likewise, they appreciated having hands on involvement during the discussions and interactive sessions. Figure 11 shows the detailed results of the responses.

Figure 10. The participants’ feedback on the effectiveness and appropriateness of the methodology used during the training workshop (data in percentage)

Figure 11. The participants’ rating on the delivery of information and response to their needs during the conduct of the training (data in percentage)



Part 5: Intent to Use

The likelihood of usage of the information acquired by the participants on Climate Risk Management was also assessed. Thirteen (13 = 52%) out of the 25 respondents stated that they will mostly use it while seven (7 = 28%) of them said they will definitely (extremely) use what they have learned in their respective workplaces. Figure 12 illustrates the results.

The participants were also asked about challenges and obstacles they foresee in applying the information, knowledge and skills that they have acquired in the workshop. Figure 13 shows that 40%, expressed that challenges and obstacles are expected as they practice CRM approaches in their respective workplaces.

Figure 12. Participants’ intent to use the information acquired from the event

Figure 9. Participants’ response as to whether they will encounter challenges and obstacles in applying what they have learned in the workshop



The 12 participants who stated ‘Yes’ have listed down (table below) the specific challenges/obstacles that they see in the implementation of CRM practices and on what they think APAN and its partners can help in overcoming these problems.

Challenges/obstaclesin applying information/knowledge/skills acquired in

the workshop

Different ways that APAN (and its partners)can assist in addressing such challenges

Financial problems By issuing research grants to individual researchersWant to learn more about making an investment project and to do economic analysis

APAN to organise another workshop about these topics

Difficulty in gathering data in the forestry sector If APAN/ADB can help in establishing climate change baseline data on forest-related topics

Deeper understanding on adaptation assessment Another workshop on this to further gain technical skillsOn how to encourage decision-makers to incorporate CRVA in preparing project designs

APAN to conduct workshops also to ministries/institu-tions that are responsible in executing projects

Willingness of politicians to climate change activities in the real practice

No answer

Support from the local government SocialisationCapacity and awareness Provide training on awareness raising activityAvailability of data and the awareness of people in the rural areas

Organise more training workshops and do more case studies

If assigned to a new work No answer

Part 6: Event Structure and Logistics

On schedule matters, majority (52%) of the participants said that they were mostly given time to share and network with other participants during the duration of the workshop while an average of 12% said that they are partially to not sure about the allotment of time for sharing and networking. Figure 14 shows the detailed response.

Figure 14. Participants’ feedback on the time allocated for sharing and networking during the workshop



Furthermore, 56% stated that the overall length of the event is adequate while 36% stated it was too short. Some participants suggested that three (3) days would have been ample time for the workshop. Suggestions to lengthen the time especially for very technical topics was expressed. The case discussions during the interactive sessions were also suggested to be longer for producing better outputs. Figure 15 shows the breakdown of results.

Part 7: Overall Satisfaction Rating

The participants’ satisfaction about the workshop and the possibility of them recommending it to a colleague yielded the same results – mostly to extremely, with mostly as having the highest percentage.

It was noted that the workshop was well organised, very informative and useful to the participants’ current field of work. They have learned new skills especially for Cambodian delegates who said that climate change is new to them. Indonesia also expressed the importance of the event for them.

For the other topics that were deemed useful by the participants to further develop their knowledge, skills, and competencies, economic analysis in CRVA was identified. Financial architecture and analysis for the efficiency of the project and the measurement of climate change. Emergency response in case of disaster was also suggested as well as GIS modelling, including the overarching topic on poverty reduction.

The participants also made suggestions for further improvement of the workshop. This included the engagement of the private sector as the workshop is related to project investments. Furthermore, there was suggestion for more cases to be discussed as well as the inclusion of field trips to enhance exposure to the case studies. Regarding the format, it was suggested that the presentation templates should be standardised and hand-outs of the said presentations be provided for easier reference and recall.

Figure 15. Participants’ feedback on the overall length of the workshop

Figure 16. Participants’ overall satisfaction with the workshop and their intent to recommend the same event to their colleagues



Part 8: Participants’ Demographics

The were 21 participants who said that it was their first time to attend a workshop organised by APAN while six (6) said, they have previously attended APAN events before including Chiang Rai Sub-regional Conference in December 2013 and some unspecified events attended in Malaysia, Manila and in Indonesia.

Figures 17 and 18 show the gender and age group of the participants, respectively.

Figure 17. Gender of the Participants

Figure 18. Participants’ age group



Annexes

Annex 1: Workshop Schedule

Annex 1 - Workshop Schedule 35


36 Annex 1 - Workshop Schedule


Annex 1. Workshop Schedule

Annex 1 - Workshop Schedule 37Annex 1 - Workshop Schedule 37


38 Annex 1 - Workshop Schedule


Annex 2: Directory of Participants

Annex 2 - Directory of Participants 39


40 Annex 2 - Directory of Participants


44 Annex 2 - Directory of Participants44 Annex 2 - Directory of Participants


46 Annex 2 - Directory of Participants46 Annex 2 - Directory of Participants46 Annex 2 - Directory of Participants


asia pacific adaptation network (apan) › sites › default › files › event... · asia pacific...

Documents