From Climate Science to Adaptation Decision-Making · 2015-01-30 · – E.g. 2°C, 1m sea level...

From Climate Science to Adaptation Decision-Making

CLIMATE ADAPTATION FLAGSHIP

Mark Stafford SmithScience Director, CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship

Canberra Study Tour, 17th September 2013

1. Brief introduction, & about the Climate Adaptation Flagship

2. General issues in thinking about adaptation to climate change

3. Linking modelling to user (policy and management) needs in adaptation

Where I am going...

management) needs in adaptation

4. Some examples of modelling impacts in different sectors

5. Modelling adaptation benefits

6. Who should care about adapting?

Darwin

Alice Springs

Geraldton 2 sites

Atherton

Townsville2 sites

Rockhampton

Toowoomba

Gatton

Myall Vale

Narrabri

Mopra

ParkesNewcastle

Armidale2 sites

Perth

Murchison

Cairns

Who we are

Brisbane6 sites

Bribie Island

People

Divisions

Locations

Flagships

6500

13

58

11

CSIRO: positive impact |3 |

62% of our people hold

university degrees

2000 doctorates

500 masters

With our university

partners, we develop

650 postgraduate

research students

Top 1% of global research

institutions in 14 of 22 research

fields

Top 0.1% in 4 research fields

Parkes

Griffith

Belmont

Geelong

HobartSandy Bay

Wodonga

Newcastle

Perth3 sites

AdelaideAdelaide2 sites Sydney 5 sites

CanberraCanberra 7 sites

Irymple

Melbourne 5 sites

Werribee 2 sites

Flagships

Budget

11

$1B+

Global connections: publications


• International foundations

• Leading scientific institutions

• Over 700 research activities

• Foreign governments

• Small to large companies

• Multi-nationals

We work with

partners in over

80 countries

100+

50-99

2-49

No. joint publications

Nil

What we do: our distinct role

We provide

scientific

responses to

We take a

collaborative

approach to

Our research

Flagships

promote radical

Large scale Mission directedMultidisciplinary

CSIRO: positive impact | 5 |

responses to

major national

and global

challenges

approach to

scientific

research and

delivery

promote radical

innovation to

reshape

industries

DIGITAL PRODUCTIVITY AND SERVICES

ENERGY TRANSFORMEDBIOSECURITY

National Research Flagships

CLIMATE ADAPTATION


WEALTH FROM OCEANS

FOOD FUTURES

SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

MINERALS DOWN UNDERFUTURE MANUFACTURING

PREVENTATIVE HEALTH

WATER FOR A HEALTHY COUNTRY

DIGITAL PRODUCTIVITY AND SERVICES

ENERGY TRANSFORMEDBIOSECURITY

National Research Flagships

CLIMATE ADAPTATION


WEALTH FROM OCEANS

FOOD FUTURES

SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

MINERALS DOWN UNDERFUTURE MANUFACTURING

PREVENTATIVE HEALTH

WATER FOR A HEALTHY COUNTRY

To equip policy makers, industries and communities with practical and

effective adaptation options to climate change and variability and,

Climate Adaptation Flagship Goal

climate change and variability and, in doing so, create in the national

interest $3 billion per annum in net benefits by 2030.

Research strategy delivers to sectoral clients

~150 full time equivalents across ~300 staff membersOperating since 2008, now ~$40m/y budget, ~35% external

(Water issues in Water for Healthy Country Flagship)

Mark HowdenCraig JamesXiaoming Wang

Kevin Hennessy

Adaptation science: three perspectives, all

needed Adaptation information and decision-making

Evaluation, adaptationpathways, future scenarios,

risk management modes, etc

Adaptation options and technologiesCultivars, materials,

farming systems, urbanplanning, etc

Adaptive behaviours

and institutionsBehaviours, incentives,

barriers, adaptive capacity,vulnerabilities, etc

International activities

CLIMATE ADAPTATION

~20% of our activities, in partnership with other countries and AusAID, ACIAR




Where I am going...





IPCC 2007: 1.1-6.4°C? – probably not any more

Observed changes in Australia

Mean temps. +0.9°C since 1950

Heatwaves #days >90th percentile: up 40% since 1980

Mean rainfall Up in N, down in W and S / E since 1950

Heavy rainfall # days >30mm: down in S & E, up in N since 1950

Fire weather FFDI up at 16 of 38 sites 1973-2010

Sea level Rising 2.8-3.2mm/y since 1993

IPCC (2007) Summary for Policy Makers (Fig.SPM.5)

2°C: 2065±10y

Sea level Rising 2.8-3.2mm/y since 1993

< °C global warming >

Australia: vulnerable among OECD nations

(a) Qualitatively different levels of impact, vulnerabilities and

adaptation needs at 4°C compared to 2°C

(b) Proactive adaptation needed

IPCC (2007) (Fig.11.4: Australia)

(b) Proactive adaptation needed to plan for stabilising at 2°C are very different to those needed

for 2°C heading for 4°C+

Could be disempowering…

Managing the risk from diverging possible futures

Recovery

Stabilisation

Runaway

1

2

3

4

5

6

Mea

n G

loba

l War

min

g (°

C)

Three scenarios for the future

Recovery

0

1

1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090

Year

Mea

n G

loba

l War

min

g (

MEP2030A1FI-GaRMEP2010 (Overshoot)

Incremental adaptation to changes

of reasonablecertainty possible

Adaptation must increasingly managethe risk of divergent possible futures, and

need for transformation

Stafford Smith et al 2011, Phil.Trans.Roy.Soc. 369

Working towards adaptation planning

It all seems disempoweringly complex...

�Getting past impacts, vulnerability and adaptive capacity assessments, to adaptation decision pathways

– Not all decisions are the same

– Not all aspects of the future are equally uncertain

– There are systematic – There are systematic approaches!

Problem or solution-centred??

� NB Problems with indices

AGO 2006

Two indices for Pacific Islands

Top-down:EVI - Environmental Vulnerability Index

Participatory:SLA - Sustainable

Park et al . (2012). Environmental Science and Policy 15, 23-37.

SLA - Sustainable Livelihoods Analysis

Problem or solution-centred??

Willows & Connell 2003 UKCIP

AGO 2006

Adaptation timing and priorities

Today’s decisionsmust account for howlong their effects will be felt

Stafford Smith et al, PhilTransRoySoc 2011 (after Jones & McInnes 2004)

Sea level rise: 1m within 2080-2170

Uncertainty?Direction and magnitude ~sure, timing uncertain

• Temperature to at least 2°C, sea level rise to >1m,

non-polar ice sheet loss

Direction sure, magnitude uncertain

2150 2200 2250 2300

Direction sure, magnitude uncertain

• Atmospheric CO2, ocean acidification,

temperature extremes, total rainfall in some

regions, bushfire weather, rainfall extremes

Even direction uncertain

• Regional rainfall in some regions, cyclones, etc

Managing risk

Hallegatte (2009) Global Environmental Change 29: 240-7

(i) selecting ‘no-regret’ strategies that yield benefits even in absence of climate change (e.g. better disaster preparedness, ‘CAR’ principles))

(ii) favouring reversible and flexible options (e.g. real options, delaying development)

(iii) buying ‘safety margins’ in new investments (e.g. heavier dam foundations)

(iv) promoting soft adaptation strategies, including [a] long-term [perspective] (e.g. social networks, insurance, water demand reduction)

(v) reducing decision time horizons (e.g. shorter lifetime buildings)

Dessai & van de Sluijs (2007)

• 11 frameworks for decision-making; 12 tools for assessing uncertainty

Ranger et al. (2010)

• ‘Adaptation in the UK: a decision making process’

� Classify in terms of decision types and future change risks faced

1. Short lifetime decisions• Mainly adapt incrementally, watch out for thresholds

2. Long lifetime decisions (where most risk falls to government)1. Monotonic, ~certain to occur, timing unsure– E.g. 2°C, 1m sea level rise, more hot periods, more extremes, more CO2

– Plan for these, look for no regrets actions, use precautionary principle

2. Direction sure but extent unsure

Systematising responses

2. Direction sure but extent unsure– E.g. drying SW Australia and reduced water flows, fire risk in many areas

– Use risk management, ‘soft adaptations’ to delay expensive decisions (but prepare for these), ‘real options’ analysis

3. Even direction of response unsure– Robust decision-making, risk hedging against alternative futures, etc

3. And plan adaptation pathways, with critical decision-points• May include no action options, but deliberatively!

Stafford Smith et al, PhilTransRoySoc 2010

The ‘classic’ adaptation pathway concept

Adaptivelandscape,boundaries less certain

a b cd

e

11

1

3

2

Adaptive space

Maladaptive space

11

22

33

Adaptive & maladaptive spaces

Wise et al ., GEC forthcoming

less certain further into the future

f gh

22

2

3

222

Maladaptive space

Current decision

point

3

Dead-ends that can be

re-assessed over time (or

other indicators, e.g. SLR)

Decision points and

alternative pathways

Flexible decision pathways: Thames Estuary

Lowe et al, UK Met Office 2009

Recent formalisations of pathways

Haasnoot et al ., GEC 2013

Resilience and vulnerability responses in remote settlements

More a/c

No changes

Better buildings+a/c

Eventually overwhelmed by increasing frequency of morbidity events due to continuing rise in temperature with declining health

Mainly vulnerabilityresponses

Now Frequency of heatwaves Future

~1-2x per yr 5-6x per yr??

Maru et al ., GEC forthcoming

Better health

Better health+buildings

Better health+buildings+a/c

[‘buildings’ = better building standards + retrofitting]

Not enough in the interim

Not enough in the interim

Mainly resilienceresponses

Mixed responses

Thresholds where health (+/- in conjunction with better building standards, etc) is sufficiently good that full dependenceon a/c as primary response can end

Transformational adaptation

Climate change-ready crops

Transformation from landuseor distribution change

New products such as ecosystem services

Ben

efit

from

ad

apta

tion

Howden et al, Greenhouse 2010, 2010

Varieties, planting times, spacing

Stubble, water, nutrient and canopy management etc

Climate-sensitive precision-agric

Diversification and risk management

Climate change

Ben

efit

from

ad

apta

tion

Cycles of incremental and transformative adaptation

Park et al ., GEC 2012

Systematising a decision-centred approach…

1. Not all decisions (& lifetimes) are equal

2. Not all threats are equal, nor equally uncertain

3. There are many approaches to managing risk

4. Adaptation will not be a once-off action >> adaptation pathways

5. Cycles of incremental and more transformative responses

�How to put all this together for planning?

�Evaluating whether adaptation is worthwhile...

“Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathways”

More detailed I.V.Assessment, for specific decision/climate variables

‘Simple’ I.V. Assessment,against future trends

Haasnoot et al ., GEC 2013

climate variables

Values

(individuals and groups)

values

Gorddard et al. (under review)

Adaptation Services | R Wise et al.

responses

Rules

(society, government, markets)

Knowledge

(understanding of the biophysical world)

knowledge rules

responses

KVR

KVR

KVR

1. Clear values and future risk profiles

• Simple cost:benefits analyses, can be top-down study

2. Clear values but risk profiles uncertain

• Real options with possible value of delay; can be fairly top-down

3. Values and risk profiles uncertain

• Economic analysis flawed, need adaptive management/governance

Assessing options, and related processes

KVR

• Economic analysis flawed, need adaptive management/governance approaches, possibly MCAs; engagement processes essential

4. Values and risks uncertain, and institutions in contention

• Analysis not yet possible, engagement and conflict resolution needed first

Russ Wise, Russell Gorddard, Tim Capon

Complex social-ecological systems

Values and even legitimacy of institutions profoundly contested

e.g. Coastal retreat

Gorddard, Wise et al . 2011

The latest adaptation pathway concept

Adaptivelandscape,affected bychanging climate butalso other

a c de

f gh

1 11

1

1

3

3

22

2

5

6

Maladaptive space

Adaptive space

C. Path dependency

B. Transformative cycles

A. ‘Classic’ adaptation pathways

Wise et al ., GEC forthcoming

also other drivers andother actors’ responses

b

h

i

j

2

26

7

88

Maladaptive space

Change in biophysical variables over time

D. Institutional preparedness


1. Not all decisions (& lifetimes) are equal

2. Not all threats are equal, nor equally uncertain

3. There are many approaches to managing risk

4. Adaptation will not be a once-off action >> adaptation pathways

5. Cycles of incremental and more transformative responses

6. Approaches to adaptation planning

7. Knowledge, Values, Rules – choosing techniques for evaluation of adaptation decisions in different contexts

� Emerging typologies of what to do, where/when etc

• Typologies of adaptation actors, actions, etc

Approaches in practice

• Diversity (cf. GCMs!), but some consistent characteristics

Willows & Connell 2003 UKCIP Haasnoot et al 2012 GEC

Meinke et al 2009 COSUST

Adaptation risk management standard AS/NZS ISO31000:2009

Approaches in practice

• Diversity (cf. GCMs!), but some consistent characteristics

• Decision/solutions-oriented

• Iterative

• Attentive to near-term decisions

� avoiding maladaptation / closing options in face of uncertainty

• With engagement

� level required determined by Knowledge-Values-Rules limitations� level required determined by Knowledge-Values-Rules limitations

• Different levels of decision making

• National/regional adaptation planning

• Prioritising within a specific sector, business, local government

• Analysing options for a specific decision

� etc

Eyre Peninsula Integrated Climate Change Agreement

Plan, implement,

monitor, review cycle

Objectives What

decisions

matter

today?

Adaptation plan

with preferred

pathways

Implement,

monitor, reassess

until next decision

point

General climate

etc drivers

Which may

be affected

by climate

change?

What

adaptation

options are

there?

Which

adaptation

options are

preferred?

pathways

Today’s decisions and their lifetimes

for the Eyre Peninsula regional planning process

Today’s decisions and their lifetimes

for the Eyre Peninsula regional planning process

Today’s decisions

must account for how

long their effects will be feltStafford Smith et al, PhilTransRoySoc 2011 (after Jones & McInnes 2004)(For EPICCA)




Where I am going...





1. Is there an impact worth worrying about?

2. Are there adaptation options available?

3. Is it worth implementing an adaptation option?

• If so, when?

Questions that decision-makers should ask

• If so, when?

4. Who should worry about adapting?

• Is it the role of government?

Systemic impacts of extreme events

Heatwaves

• Heatwaves in our southern cities are becoming more common and more intense events, with both chronic and acute impacts.

• Eg. SE Australia heatwave, 28-30th Jan 2009

– 374 premature deaths in SE Australia + morbidity

– Power blackouts to >500k buildings – one outage caused $70M load shed in 5h; Basslink overheatedcaused $70M load shed in 5h; Basslink overheated

– Transport disruptions (24% of Melbourne trains cancelled; $5M in fines)

– Damage to transport infrastructure

– Damage to fruit and vegetable growers; est. $10M’s

– Loss of economic activity: >$800M

• The frequency of such events is likely to at least triple in southern Australia by 2070

Queensland floods and cyclones 2010-11

Extreme events and productivity

Unexpected high-intensity rain and other weather affects transport, energy and mining infrastructure

Intensities expected to increase in many areas

Ensham Mine, Queensland, 2008• Production stopped for over a year• $millions in damage and costs

Yallourn, Victoria, 2007: • Excessive rainfall caused a massive landslip and flooding

• Caused serious power supply issues for Victoria

Pilbara, WA, 2006, 2009:• Cyclones in 2006 and excessive rain in 2009 closed the iron ore mines

Adaptation: cyclone building standards

Cyclone Yasi, 2011“JCU’s report shows that less than 3%of all post-1980s houses in the worst affected areas experienced significant roof damage, although more than 12%

of the pre-1980s housing inspected had significant roof damage.”

Cyclone Tracy, Darwin, 1974

had significant roof damage.”




Where I am going...





National environmental change datasets(e.g. GDMs of novel environment projections for 2070)

Ferrier et al. 2012

Taking a national, all-hazards view

WA

NT

QLD

SA

NSW

VIC

TAS

ACT

NA200 0 200 400 600

Kilometres

Wind [m/s]ARI 1000

12 - 3030.1 - 3535.1 - 4040.1 - 4545.1 - 5050.1 - 5555.1 - 6060.1 - 6565.1 - 7070.1 - 7575.1 - 8080.1 - 8585.1 - 9090.1 - 9595.1 - 100

Extreme Wind

WA

NT

QLD

SA

NSW

VIC

TAS

ACT

NA200 0 200 400 600

Kilometres

Rainfall (mm) ARI 20000 - 300301 - 600601 - 900901 - 1,2001,201 - 1,5001,501 - 1,8001,801 - 2,1002,101 - 2,4002,401 - 2,7002,701 - 3,0003,001 - 3,3003,301 - 3,6003,601 - 3,9003,901 - 4,2004,201 - 4,500

Extreme Rainfall

Heat

WA

NT

QLD

SA

NSW

VIC

TAS

ACT

FFDIARI 2000

Fire Danger

Baynes et al, Climate Adaptation Flagship , 2012

Total infrastructure value exposed and damage costs for inundation, flooding and bushfires, base case

$500

$600

$700

$800

Total Structural Value Exposed ($billion)

Coastal Inundation$10

$12

$14

$16

$18

Bil

lio

ns

Total cost of damage at 2006 $bn, Net

Present Value

2050

2100

Population and Infrastructure Exposure to Climate Change Impacts | Tim Baynes

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

Current 2050 2100

Coastal Inundation

Inland Flood

Bushfire

$-

$2

$4

$6

$8

$10

Bushfire Flood Inundation

Specific decisions: Areas Prone to Extreme Wind Events in Queensland

Adaptation Timing and Benefit

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Av

era

ge

NP

V o

f B

en

efi

t b

y 2

10

0 (

m$

) No change in winds

"Moderate Change"

"Significant Change"

"Southward Shift"

Key attributes

• No regrets (value even if no climate change)

• Robust (value for all scenarios)

• Act early (rapid decline in value over time)

• Proactive collective action (else delay)

Vulnerable to extreme wind hazard, especially if cyclones move south

Change Brisbane’s wind loading standards today?• NPV = $0.7 bn (if no changes in wind extremes event uate)

up to $8.3 bn (if cyclones shift southwards by 2100 ).• Delaying change in standards rapidly reduces NPV-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070

Calendar Year to Implement Adaptation

Av

era

ge

NP

V o

f B

en

efi

t b

y 2

10

0 (

m$

)

Stewart & Wang, Climate Adaptation Flagship , 2011

React or anticipate? Adapting our infrastructureNet national impacts of coastal inundation on residential buildings Direct impact costs of adaptation, Present Value (2.5% DR, 2010$)

2050 2099

No response

React to current

Net national impacts of coastal inundation on residential buildings Direct impact costs of adaptation, Present Value (2.5% DR, 2010$)

2050 2099

No response $3bn (±1bn) $9bn (±2bn)

React to current $2bn $4-6bnReact to currenthazard

Anticipate futurehazard

React to current $2bn $4-6bnhazard

Anticipate future $1-2bn $2-4bnhazard

+ Other hazards, other buildings/infrastructure, indirect costs?

Wang et al, Climate Adaptation Flagship , 2013 – preliminary results

Payoffs:

Accommodate: ~$20 NPV benefit for every $1 spent

Protect: $6-$42 NPV benefit for every $1 spent




Where I am going...





Adaptation options at different institutional scales

International

National

State

• Refugee agreements/nationality standards• Water sharing/alternatives…• Non-maladaptive major infrastructure• National research coordination…• Framework of legal certainty• Infrastructure for increased disaster response

Diversityof policy /

context-setting actions

Org

an

isati

on

al s

cale

Global

National/sector

Sub-national/sub-sectorState

Local Govt

Household/business

• Infrastructure for increased disaster response…• Specific local planning amendments• Specific local infrastructure…• Proactive individual preparations for change• Transformative considerations…

Diversityof adaptationactions

Org

an

isati

on

al s

cale

Sub-national/sub-sector

Local

Household/business

1. Supply chains

• ~13% primary energy used in water supply system [US figures]

– major concern for water utilities

• Mining – despite major disruptions, evidence our industry is lagging behind

– ‘climate adaptation action’ - 40% (Canada) vs. 10% (Australia) vs. 45% LGAs (Australia)

2. Scheduling issues in mobilising capital investment

Is anyone managing the integrated risks?

Road length (km)

exposed to coastal

inundation

2. Scheduling issues in mobilising capital investment

• Sydney Water’s $30bn assets

• E.g. roads

3. Coincident events

• Same place, multiple times; same time, multiple places; same budget cycle

Baynes et al, Climate Adaptation Flagship , 2012

1. Adaptation modelling should be in the service of decision-making

• Needs a decision-centred rather than a problem-oriented framing, with appropriate engagement with stakeholders

2. Impacts and vulnerability modelling can then be focused on particular decisions

• Support the development of adaptation pathways that reduce the risks in decision-making under uncertainty

Conclusions

decision-making under uncertainty

3. Initial studies for some sectors show significant net present benefits of acting early with respect to some risks

• Integrated/emergent risk issues (costs and benefits) may be a key driver for government action

• A useful focus for modelling as governments work out whether they should be acting

CLIMATE ADAPTATION FLAGSHIP

Mark Stafford SmithScience Director

[email protected] – +61 408 852 082


Not all decisions are equal

• Decision lifetimes really matter, for how decisions intersect with climate change

Not all threats are equal, nor equally uncertain

• Some aspects of climate change are far more certain than others

There are many approaches to managing risk

• Use what’s appropriate to the form of climate and other uncertainty• Use what’s appropriate to the form of climate and other uncertainty

Adaptation will not be a once-off action

• Adaptation pathways, with review points, related to climate and other updates

Don’t just assess impacts and vulnerability more precisely!!

� But how to identify and select options?

Date post:	26-May-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

From Climate Science to Adaptation Decision-Making · 2015-01-30 · – E.g. 2°C, 1m sea level...

Documents