Post on 04-Jun-2020
transcript
Building Blocks of a Climate Risk Management
Framework
Reinhard Mechler, Thomas Schinko (IIASA, Vienna)
Ashish Chaturvedi (GIZ India)
• Climate-related losses and damages have increased dramatically over the past few decades
• Multiple drivers of increase in risk:
• Socioeconomic development
• Climate variability and climate change
• Vulnerability
• Most recent climate projections indicate
• a significant increase in the frequency and/or intensity of extreme weather events as well as
• severe slow-onset climate-related changes (e.g. sea-level rise).
Point of departure
• Urgent need to develop and implement effective climate risk analysis and management approaches
• Current debate shows: vulnerable communities in hot-spot countries need to be better equipped to manage climate-relate risks
• A broad climate risk analytical approach helps to operationalize decision-support at scale local, national and int’l and provides a framework for detecting and evaluating significant risks
Point of departure
• A number of approaches already exist but fall short of meeting the information needs of policy-makers and local governments.
• Develop a Climate Risk Management framework to assess and determine response to climate-risks at the national as well as the state level dealing with large scale climate vulnerabilities as well as residual risks
Scope and Aim
• Responding to climate-related risks involves decision making in a changing world, with continuing uncertainty
• Iterative risk management is a useful framework for decision making in complex situations characterized by large potential consequences, persistent uncertainties, long timeframes, potential for learning, and multiple climatic and non-climatic influences changing over time.
(Iterative) Climate risk management as dominant framework
IPCC, 2014
6 step climate risk analytical framework
Transformative adjustment/risk
management
Fundamental adjustment/risk
management
Step 1:
Step 2:
Step 3:
Step 4:
Step 5:
Step 6:
Incremental adjustment/risk
management
Evaluate risk tolerance and
limits – Conduct risk
segregation into acceptable,
tolerable and intolerable
Identify risk – Conduct a
qualitative and quantitative
risk assessment
Develop context specific
methodology to assess
impacts for the system of
interest
Identify system of interest
(sector, region) – Conduct
hotspot and capacity
analysis
Identify and assess feasible
options to avert, minimize and
address potential climate-
related loss and damage
Status quo – Assess the
information needs and
objectives of the overall
CRM framework
Step 1 – Define Status Quo
Step 2 – Identify System of Interest
Step 3 – Develop Context Specific Methodology
Product Purpose Resource commitment
Time commitment
Expertise required
Application
Informational, impact-focused study
Provide a broad overview of past losses and damages
+ Person- weeks Empirical skills, statistics
Himachal Pradesh analysis:
understanding hazards and
changes
Backward-looking risk-based analysis (broad-scenarios using what is available-more practical)
Overview of past and future risks building on reported loss and damage
++ Person-months
Risk management, economics,
statistics
Tamil Nadu analysis:
identifying observed impacts
Forward-looking risk-based analysis incl. climate scenarios (new scenario information and generation, attribution assessment, more scientific)
Detail forward-looking scenario-based risk analysis building on hazard, exposure and vulnerability analyses
+++ Person-months up to person-year
Risk management, economics, statistics, climate
scenarios
Tamil Nadu analysis:scenario
projections of future risks
Step 4 – Identify Risks
Figure: Expected urban damage due to riverine flood risk in India (in % of GDP) in 2030 for
different combinations of RCPs and SSPs, compared to 2010. The range of the results
always represents the min-max range over 5 different GCMs. Source: GLOFRIS (2017)
Step 4 ctd. – Impact chains: Tamil Nadu
adelphi and GIZ (2015)
Step 5 – Evaluate Risk Tolerance and Limits
Figure: Risk tolerance for Tamil Nadu as evaluated from household responses
Step 6 – Identify Feasible Options
Today
High
Moderate
Low
RIS
K
Farmers keep land uncultivated and seek alternative livelihoods Salt tolerant high yielding varieties of paddy seeds Fertilizers (mixed with gypsum) Building up of new pond, Renovation of tank and reservoirs. Sea dyke/bund Increasing height of field bunds Desalinization of land Created sand bund with urea bag filled with mud. Constructed overhead water tank
Fundamental
Transformative
Incremental
Bas
elin
e r
isk
Figure: Rrisk and options space in Tamil Nadu as identified from household responses (farm level)
• Synergistically informs Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) and policy and actions that deal with residual risk.
• Interventions comprise of:
• Incremental (standard DRR and CCA interventions directly addressing specific risks, e.g., raising dikes),
• Fundamental (non-standard interventions in the system of interest, e.g., opening floodplains instead of dike) and
• Transformative (interventions focused on building resilience e.g., voluntary migration from floodplains to cities to provide alternative livelihoods).
• Align top-down insight from expert-based methods with bottom-up information on households' and communities' risks gathered through participatory processes.
Conclusions
Thank you for your attention!
For further details, please contact
Ashish Chaturvedi
Ashish.Chaturvedi@giz.de