towards a climate impact monitoring indicators, archetypes and success factors for action

[email protected]/~kropp/Singapore, July 14th 2008 1

Towards a Climate Impact MonitoringIndicators, archetypes and success

factors for action

Jürgen P. KroppPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Reserach

Budapest, Sept. 4-5th 2008

http://www.pik-potsdam.de/

[email protected]/~kropp/Singapore, July 14th 2008

Hierarchy of Adaptation „Strategies & Concepts“

1. Global/Supranational

2. National

KomPassKompetenzzentrum Klimafolgen und Anpassung

3. Regional/Local: ? – issue of ongoing researchChallenge: Strengthening efficiency of institutions,e.g. by adequate facilitation/capacities, but how....

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIESBrussels, 29.6.2007

COM(2007) 354 final

GREEN PAPERFROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN

PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Climate change: building adaptive capacity of local and regional authorities

Chamber ofthe Regions


induced,intensified

Portugal 2003

Tuvalu 2005

UK/Norfolk 2007

Randa/Switzerland 1991> 8 Mio. to.

?- safe environments -

Question: fight againstor living with CC?

Difficulties:• Insufficient knowledge•Organisational problems•Capacity problems•Problem of scales

Understanding:Information, Awareness,

Communication,Vulnerability,Risk,Preparedness

No action?


Necessary Preconditions for “successful” Adaptation

Distinguish between adaptation and adaptive capacity!

1. Systems knowledge2. Problem awareness3. Adequate instruments4. Success measures (time?, which metric)

Indicators measuring only a state are not sufficient!


Stimulus: StormExposed unit:Forest sectorsIndicators:Tree types, slope, rel. stormintensity/frequency

Sectoral Vulnerability North-Rhine Westphalia/Germany (1999)

Source: Kropp et al. 2006, Climatic Change

Actual Damage2007 afterCyclone Kyrill

Nothing happens


Awareness/knowledge is a necessary, but not sufficient precondition for adequate action!

Drowning New Orleans

by Mark FischettiScientific American (October 1, 2001)

The boxes are stacked eight feet high and line the walls of the large, windowless room. Inside them are new body bags, 10,000 in all. If a big, slow-moving hurricane crossed the Gulf of Mexico on the right track, it would drive a sea surge that would drown New Orleans under twenty feet of water. "As the water recedes", says Walter Maestri, a local emergency management director, "we expect to find a lot of dead bodies".

New Orleans is a disaster waiting to happen. The city lies below sea level, in a bowl bordered by levees that fend off Lake Pontchartrain to the north and the Mississippi River to the south and west. And because of a damning confluence of factors, the city is sinking further, putting it at increasing flood risk after even minor storms. The low-lying Mississippi Delta, which buffers the city from the gulf, is also rapidly disappearing. A year from now another 25 to 30 square miles of delta marsh - an area the size of Manhattan - will have vanished. An acre disappears every 24 minutes. Each loss gives a storm surge a clearer path to wash over the delta and pour into the bowl, trapping one million people inside and another million in surrounding communities. Extensive evacuation would be impossible because the surging water would cut off the few escape routes. Scientists at Louisiana State University (LSU), who have modeled hundreds of possible storm tracks on advanced computers...................


Risk prone area below 1m

Tourism, Water & Sea-level rise: Saidia

Large scale tourism

bad practice: Why developing countries often follow the same pattern:

• Economy first vs. Sustainability first

Quelle: Tekken & Kropp 2008


„Umweltlimits“ für Saidia/Moulouya

1961-1990 1976-2005 2005 2050ff 383mm 350mm 245mm -100mm

2005 available: Fresh water (~16 mm = 7% of prec.) 880 * 106 m3/Jgroundwater (partly salinised) 450 * 106 m3/Jactual: 1330 * 106 m3/J

Demand (* 106 m3) 2005 2015Population (potable water) ~2.4. Mio ~2.5 Mio.

96 100 (+3.8%)

“economy first”golf courses: 1.9ha/hole; 9,000 m3/yr/ha210ha: 1.9 400ha: 3.6 (+88%)1 tourist ~ 6-800 l/d 0.5 (?) 2.6 (+420%)irrigated land 6,500m3/ha/J 150 103: 975 180 103: 1170 (+20%)Industry 80 117

(+46%)

in 2015 163 bn l/yr below sust. level

Source: Tekken & Kropp 2008


EU Development ProgrammeDeveloping Policies and Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change for the Baltic Sea Region (ASTRA,

finished 2007)

• 38 Partners from 7 European countries• Most of them administrative bodies,

management authorities, etc.• 15 case study areas were situated in Estonia,

Finland, Germany, Lithuania, Lativa and Poland

Are we ready for adaptation?


Some results from systematic examinations

• Problem awareness is primarily framed by potential impacts in the case study regions, little explicit knowledge on policy responses, exposure units are only described in a very vague or general way.

• Climate change is still not a priority on the local or regional level, and lack of financial resources hinders adaptation.

• Many constraining institutional arrangements are seen as informal. They have the form of complaints about “soft factors” as missing knowledge and citizens’ awareness, inadequate education, political inaction and bad coordination of diverse institutions.

• Problems are more found on the local scale, while enabling institutions and actors are seen on higher levels. It is likely that there is a shift of responsibilities to higher institutional scales (mitigation?).

• Most existing climate change policies are related to• Natural hazards (event related)• National greenhouse gas mitigation strategies

• Although some responses advert at local interactions between actors influencing implementation of adaptation policies, there is little strategic knowledge on who supports or constrains adaptation to climate change.

Eisenack/Tekken/Kropp (2007): Coastline Report


Management of or Adaptation to risks need knowledge about mechanisms!

….but how to analyse entangled dynamics of socio-ecological systems?

….how to integrate policy on an acceptable level of abstraction?

…how to assess efficiency of management options?


Adaptation Functionalsand Archetypes

• Challenges– modelling adaptation– entangeled impacts, exposure units and responses – but need for

transfer of adaptation strategies– aggregation of damages and adaptations on spatial and institutional

scales• Approaches on an intermediate level of abstraction

– archetypes of adaptation (including action dimension)– adaptation functionals („classes“)

Dxf :functions Damage

aa ffA :sfunctional Adaptation


ASTRA: Preliminary ArchetypesArchetype Policy recommendationsCompensation dilemma: erosion of planning standards in high risk areas, investor-driven particular interests, ad-hoc compensation schemes after desasters

Mandatory building and planning codes enforced from higher institutional levels, clear rules for liabilities

Shifting responsibilities: complaints about public awareness and other institutions, call for higher institutional levels

Confront different stakeholders, initiate joint commitees, awareness campaigns, resources form higher levels

Water supply: changed hydrological cycle, privatisation, closing of wells, old infrastructure

Keep community control, consider CC in infrastructure redevelopment


Qualitative and Quantitative Methods

Archetype XYZ

Case A Case B Case C Case …

idiographic

local maps

global maps

),,(),(),(

zyxhzzygyyxfx

mathematicalmodels

causal loopdiagrams

((M+ x y))((U- y z) (0 max))((MULT x y z))

qualitative models

0111…

1001Case B

1000Case A

boolean analysis

participatory

2mcE theories

scenarios

games

cf. Kropp & Scheffran 2007

Data driven models


Research Themes

• Theoretical development – Aggregation and scale issues (adaptation

functionals, archetypes of adaptation)– Measuring adaptation and adaptedness– Assessment and use of transparent, science-

based vulnerability indicators – Basic questions (e.g. terminology, necessity of

policy action and anticipation)


Faces of Vulnerability: Useful for comparison

Disaster Management Community

Climate Change Community

Development Community

Spatial scale

local individual

Challenges & Views

Disaster „mitigation“Robust InfrastructureEvent oriented view

Long-term climate development & protectionExposed units and their capacities

Socio-economic constraintsMillenium Development GoalsCurrent Livelihoodconditions

Global/regional

Climate Change


Vulnerability, subjective but good for comparison

Prepared for UN Sigma Xi 2006


Top Down: National Policy

Bottom up: Local Experience

Science & Stakeholderinteraction

„Institutional efficiency!“


Construction of Archetypes

• Is a social process• Style of description based on common

methodological ground• Discourse on shape and priority of patterns• Quality control by process documentation,

achivement of (external) objectives, case studies, available theories, validation of archetypes

• Needs refinement and operationalization• Possible with different methods


„Semi-formalised elements“ of Adaptation Measures constructing archetypes

Time scaleDuration (fixed/open)Temporal scopeStream of costs & benefits

Actors & TypeNormative orientationInstitutional levelIndividualNGO

Purpose & FormSpatial scaleStructural, legal, financial,...Retreat, prevent, restore

PerformanceCostsEfficiencyImplementability

SocietyVulnerabilityTarget impactsChanges of socio-economics

Mid-term goal: shared problem solving competence (adaptation wizard)

How adaptation occursEffect on policyInvolved goods/propertiesAdaptive controlArea of interventionRegulatory instrument

Experiences

BaWüNRW-I/II


Hypothesis: To similar problems can be responded by similar solutions!

Questions:

How vague or concrete are existing measures defined?

Are typical adaptations composed of different measures, or are they simple building blocks?

Are there established classifications that help to distinguish or to generate measures?

What kind of activities are considered to be an adaptation?

.....let us start with the discussions


Towards a Global Climate Impact & Adaptation Information System

Combining:

Scenarios, ImpactsInfrastructure, Solutions

Information aboutadaptation experiences,costs (via Geo-Tags),etc.

Source: PIK/Kropp & Costa (2008) Kropp & Daschkeit (2008)


PIK’S VIRTUAL VEGETATION VISUALISER

towards a climate impact monitoring indicators, archetypes and success factors for action

Documents

new orleans

regions climate change

adaptation concepts

sufficient preconditions

adequate action

adaptive capacity of

european parliament

european communitiesbrussels