Adapting to change: Time for climate resilience and a new adaptation strategy. EPC Issue Paper 5 March 2020

The dramatic effects of climate change are being felt across the European continent and the world. Considering how sluggish and unsuccessful the world has been in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the impacts will become long-lasting scars. Even implementing radical climate mitigation now would be insufficient in addressing the economic, societal and environmental implications of climate change, which are expected to only intensify in the years to come. This means climate mitigation must go hand in hand with the adaptation efforts recognised in the Paris Agreement. And although the damages of climate change are usually localised and adaptation measures often depend on local specificities, given the interconnections between ecosystems, people and economies in a globalised world there are strong reasons for European Union (EU) member states to join forces, pool risk and cooperate across borders. Sharing information, good practices, experiences and resources to strengthen resilience and enhance adaptive capacity makes sense economically, environmentally and socially. The European Commission’s 2013 Adaptation Strategy is the first attempt to set EU-wide adaptation and climate resilience and could be considered novel in that it tried to mainstream adaptation goals into relevant legislation, instruments and funds. It was not very proactive, however. It also lacked long-term perspective, failed to put the adaptation file high on the political agenda, was under resourced, and suffered from knowledge gaps and silo thinking. The Commission’s European Green Deal proposal, which has been presented as a major step forward to the goal of Europe becoming the world’s first climate-neutral continent, suggests that the Commission will adopt a new EU strategy on adaptation to climate within the first two years of its mandate (2020-2021). In light of the risks climate change poses to ecosystems, societies and the economy (through inter alia the vulnerability of the supply chain to climate change and its potential failure to provide services to consumers), adaptation should take a prominent role alongside mitigation in the EU’s political climate agenda. Respecting the division of treaty competences, there are important areas where EU-wide action and support could foster the continent’s resilience to climate change. The European Policy Centre (EPC) project “Building a climate-resilient Europe”, which has culminated in this Issue Paper, has identified the following: (i) the ability to convert science-based knowledge into preventive action and responsible behaviour, thus filling the information gap; (ii) the need to close the protection gap through better risk management and risk sharing; (iii) the necessity to adopt nature-based infrastructural solutions widely and tackle the grey infrastructure bias; and (iv) the need to address the funding and investment gap. This Issue Paper aims to help inform the upcoming EU Adaptation Strategy and, by extension, strengthen the EU’s resilience to climate change. To that end, the authors make a call for the EU to mainstream adaptation and shift its focus from reacting to disasters to a more proactive approach that prioritises prevention, risk reduction and resilience building. In doing so, the EU must ensure fairness and distributive justice while striving for climate change mitigation and protecting the environment and biodiversity. To succeed, the new EU Adaptation Strategy will need to address specific challenges related to the information, protection, funding and investment gaps; and the grey infrastructure bias. To tackle and address those challenges, this Paper proposes 17 solutions outlined in Table 1 (see page 6)

ANDROID: An Inter-disciplinary Academic Network that Promotes Co-operation and Innovation among European Higher Education to Increase Society's Resilience to Disasters

Using knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels is one of five priorities for action (PFA) that were identified in the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA). The responsibility for such capacity building resides largely with educators such as higher education institutes, but the complexity of resilience poses a number of challenges. This paper describes ANDROID, an EU funded international partnership of higher education institutes and key actors in disaster resilience, which has been formed to develop innovative European education. ANDROID is based on an inter-disciplinary consortium of partners that comprises scientists from applied, human, social and natural disciplines. ANDROID set out to achieve this aim through a series of inter-linked projects, identified as work packages and led by a sub-group of international partners. This paper describes these projects and highlights key outputs achieved to date: an inter-disciplinary doctoral school; a survey capturing and sharing innovative approaches to inter-disciplinary working; a survey of European education to map teaching and research programmes in disaster resilience; a survey analysing the capacity of European public administrators to address disaster risk; emerging research and teaching concerns in disaster resilience; and, open educational resources

Building Disaster Resilience within the Emirati Energy Sector through a Comprehensive Strategic Mitigation Plan

Disasters, both natural and man-made, have been occurring with increasing frequency and effect in recent decades in many countries around the world. Such threats have been shown to result in a loss of life, property and income and all of which have an impact on the country’s socio-economic structure and geo-political positioning. The UAE is steadily adapting its policies and practices to manage any potential disaster, whether natural or man-made. However, evidently the UAE is exposed and vulnerable to tectonic activity from a number of sources and yet there is little in the form of seismic detection, protection, resistance or design for some of the newest and tallest structures in the world. The paper highlights the importance of the strategic mitigation planning for disaster resilience within the Emirati Energy sector. It discusses the issue of disaster globally and then specifically with regards to the UAE, forming a critical analysis on crisis and its management. A broad literature review of the problems readily associated within the discourse is undertaken so that the definition, classification and the application of the disaster and its management cycle are appropriately contextualised in regards to the Emirati problem. The window of opportunity that the UAE has for improvement is emphasised by the findings of this paper

Comparative analysis of spring flood risk reduction measures in Alaska, United States and the Sakha Republic, Russia

Thesis (Ph.D.) University of Alaska Fairbanks, 2017River ice thaw and breakup are an annual springtime phenomena in the North. Depending on regional weather patterns and river morphology, breakups can result in catastrophic floods in exposed and vulnerable communities. Breakup flood risk is especially high in rural and remote northern communities, where flood relief and recovery are complicated by unique geographical and climatological features, and limited physical and communication infrastructure. Proactive spring flood management would significantly minimize the adverse impacts of spring floods. Proactive flood management entails flood risk reduction through advances in ice jam and flood prevention, forecasting and mitigation, and community preparedness. With the goal to identify best practices in spring flood risk reduction, I conducted a comparative case study between two flood-prone communities, Galena in Alaska, United States and Edeytsy in the Sakha Republic, Russia. Within a week from each other, Galena and Edeytsy sustained major floods in May 2013. Methods included focus groups with the representatives from flood managing agencies, surveys of families impacted by the 2013 floods, observations on site, and archival review. Comparative parameters of the study included natural and human causes of spring floods, effectiveness of spring flood mitigation and preparedness strategies, and the role of interagency communication and cooperation in flood risk reduction. The analysis revealed that spring flood risk in Galena and Edeytsy results from complex interactions among a series of natural processes and human actions that generate conditions of hazard, exposure, and vulnerability. Therefore, flood risk in Galena and Edeytsy can be reduced by managing conditions of ice-jam floods, and decreasing exposure and vulnerability of the at-risk populations. Implementing the Pressure and Release model to analyze the vulnerability progression of Edeytsy and Galena points to common root causes at the two research sites, including colonial heritage, unequal distribution of resources and power, top-down governance, and limited inclusion of local communities in the decision-making process. To construct an appropriate flood risk reduction framework it is important to establish a dialogue among the diverse stakeholders on potential solutions, arriving at a range of top-down and bottom-up initiatives and in conjunction selecting the appropriate strategies. Both communities have progressed in terms of greater awareness of the hazard, reduction in vulnerabilities, and a shift to more reliance on shelter-in-place. However, in neither community have needed improvements in levee protection been completed. Dialogue between outside authorities and the community begins earlier and is more intensive for Edeytsy, perhaps accounting for Edeytsy's more favorable rating of risk management and response than Galena's

Vulnerability reduction of infrastructure reconstruction projects

Various infrastructure segments of numerous countries have been repeatedly subjected to natural and man-made disasters. The potential reason of damaging infrastructure facilities and their services is resultant disaster risks due to natural or man-made hazards connect with vulnerable infrastructure facilities and vulnerable communities. The simplest way to prevent or mitigate disaster losses is addressing vulnerabilities. The main study based on which this paper was compiled aimed at exploring and investigating the vulnerabilities of infrastructures and communities benefited from infrastructures and possible solutions to overcome them. This paper presents the literature review conducted on vulnerabilities of infrastructures and empirical evidence collated on best possible DRR strategies to overcome such vulnerabilities of infrastructures. The main study was conducted using case study strategy and the expert interviews. This paper is entirely based on the data collated from the expert interviews conducted in Sri Lanka and United Kingdom. The expert interviews discovered various DRR strategies to overcome the vulnerabilities of the infrastructure project

Review of Quantitative Methods for Supply Chain Resilience Analysis

Supply chain resilience (SCR) manifests when the network is capable to withstand, adapt, and recover from disruptions to meet customer demand and ensure performance. This paper conceptualizes and comprehensively presents a systematic review of the recent literature on quantitative modeling the SCR while distinctively pertaining it to the original concept of resilience capacity. Decision-makers and researchers can benefit from our survey since it introduces a structured analysis and recommendations as to which quantitative methods can be used at different levels of capacity resilience. Finally, the gaps and limitations of existing SCR literature are identified and future research opportunities are suggested

Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation: Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

This Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX) has been jointly coordinated by Working Groups I (WGI) and II (WGII) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The report focuses on the relationship between climate change and extreme weather and climate events, the impacts of such events, and the strategies to manage the associated risks. The IPCC was jointly established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), in particular to assess in a comprehensive, objective, and transparent manner all the relevant scientific, technical, and socioeconomic information to contribute in understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, the potential impacts, and the adaptation and mitigation options. Beginning in 1990, the IPCC has produced a series of Assessment Reports, Special Reports, Technical Papers, methodologies, and other key documents which have since become the standard references for policymakers and scientists.This Special Report, in particular, contributes to frame the challenge of dealing with extreme weather and climate events as an issue in decisionmaking under uncertainty, analyzing response in the context of risk management. The report consists of nine chapters, covering risk management; observed and projected changes in extreme weather and climate events; exposure and vulnerability to as well as losses resulting from such events; adaptation options from the local to the international scale; the role of sustainable development in modulating risks; and insights from specific case studies

Valuing adaptation under rapid change

AbstractThe methods used to plan adaptation to climate change have been heavily influenced by scientific narratives of gradual change and economic narratives of marginal adjustments to that change. An investigation of the theoretical aspects of how the climate changes suggests that scientific narratives of climate change are socially constructed, biasing scientific narratives to descriptions of gradual as opposed rapid, non-linear change. Evidence of widespread step changes in recent climate records and in model projections of future climate is being overlooked because of this. Step-wise climate change has the potential to produce rapid increases in extreme events that can cross institutional, geographical and sectoral domains.Likewise, orthodox economics is not well suited to the deep uncertainty faced under climate change, requiring a multi-faceted approach to adaptation. The presence of tangible and intangible values range across five adaptation clusters: goods; services; capital assets and infrastructure; social assets and infrastructure; and natural assets and infrastructure. Standard economic methods have difficulty in giving adequate weight to the different types of values across these clusters. They also do not account well for the inter-connectedness of impacts and subsequent responses between agents in the economy. As a result, many highly-valued aspects of human and environmental capital are being overlooked.Recent extreme events are already pressuring areas of public policy, and national strategies for emergency response and disaster risk reduction are being developed as a consequence. However, the potential for an escalation of total damage costs due to rapid change requires a coordinated approach at the institutional level, involving all levels of government, the private sector and civil society.One of the largest risks of maladaptation is the potential for un-owned risks, as risks propagate across domains and responsibility for their management is poorly allocated between public and private interests, and between the roles of the individual and civil society. Economic strategies developed by the disaster community for disaster response and risk reduction provide a base to work from, but many gaps remain.We have developed a framework for valuing adaptation that has the following aspects: the valuation of impacts thus estimating values at risk, the evaluation of different adaptation options and strategies based on cost, and the valuation of benefits expressed as a combination of the benefits of avoided damages and a range of institutional values such as equity, justice, sustainability and profit.The choice of economic methods and tools used to assess adaptation depends largely on the ability to constrain uncertainty around problems (predictive uncertainty) and solutions (outcome uncertainty). Orthodox methods can be used where both are constrained, portfolio methodologies where problems are constrained and robust methodologies where solutions are constrained. Where both are unconstrained, process-based methods utilising innovation methods and adaptive management are most suitable. All methods should involve stakeholders where possible.Innovative processes methods that enable transformation will be required in some circumstances, to allow institutions, sectors and communities to prepare for anticipated major change.Please cite this report as: Jones, RN, Young, CK, Handmer, J, Keating, A, Mekala, GD, Sheehan, P 2013 Valuing adaptation under rapid change, National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, Gold Coast, pp. 192.The methods used to plan adaptation to climate change have been heavily influenced by scientific narratives of gradual change and economic narratives of marginal adjustments to that change. An investigation of the theoretical aspects of how the climate changes suggests that scientific narratives of climate change are socially constructed, biasing scientific narratives to descriptions of gradual as opposed rapid, non-linear change. Evidence of widespread step changes in recent climate records and in model projections of future climate is being overlooked because of this. Step-wise climate change has the potential to produce rapid increases in extreme events that can cross institutional, geographical and sectoral domains.Likewise, orthodox economics is not well suited to the deep uncertainty faced under climate change, requiring a multi-faceted approach to adaptation. The presence of tangible and intangible values range across five adaptation clusters: goods; services; capital assets and infrastructure; social assets and infrastructure; and natural assets and infrastructure. Standard economic methods have difficulty in giving adequate weight to the different types of values across these clusters. They also do not account well for the inter-connectedness of impacts and subsequent responses between agents in the economy. As a result, many highly-valued aspects of human and environmental capital are being overlooked.Recent extreme events are already pressuring areas of public policy, and national strategies for emergency response and disaster risk reduction are being developed as a consequence. However, the potential for an escalation of total damage costs due to rapid change requires a coordinated approach at the institutional level, involving all levels of government, the private sector and civil society.One of the largest risks of maladaptation is the potential for un-owned risks, as risks propagate across domains and responsibility for their management is poorly allocated between public and private interests, and between the roles of the individual and civil society. Economic strategies developed by the disaster community for disaster response and risk reduction provide a base to work from, but many gaps remain.We have developed a framework for valuing adaptation that has the following aspects: the valuation of impacts thus estimating values at risk, the evaluation of different adaptation options and strategies based on cost, and the valuation of benefits expressed as a combination of the benefits of avoided damages and a range of institutional values such as equity, justice, sustainability and profit.The choice of economic methods and tools used to assess adaptation depends largely on the ability to constrain uncertainty around problems (predictive uncertainty) and solutions (outcome uncertainty). Orthodox methods can be used where both are constrained, portfolio methodologies where problems are constrained and robust methodologies where solutions are constrained. Where both are unconstrained, process-based methods utilising innovation methods and adaptive management are most suitable. All methods should involve stakeholders where possible.Innovative processes methods that enable transformation will be required in some circumstances, to allow institutions, sectors and communities to prepare for anticipated major change

Urban Flood Response Planning: Building Urban Resilience in Calgary and Toronto

Flooding is an increasing environmental concern for many Canadian cities. There is increasing awareness of climate change and its impacts on precipitation behavior and flooding in urban areas. Knowledge gaps were identified in the literature concerning urban flood response planning, uncertainty and preparedness planning. This study examines and compares urban flood response measures and resilience building for natural disasters in the Cities of Toronto and Calgary. Non-structural measures for flood risk reduction that include policies, decision-making and community engagement were examined by conducting a literature review and semi-structured interviews of individuals from six groups: provincial government, municipal government, conservation authority, private sector, academics and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). A total of twenty-eight recruited participants from the two cities provided information on a wide range of experiences of flood management practices related to vulnerabilities, uncertainties and possible conflict in flood response planning. The literature review explored different flood response measures such as planning, emergency management, and post-flood recovery, and examined how cities can build resilience to natural disasters. Background literature was used to assess flood response measures in Toronto and Calgary. The data show that Toronto and Calgary are quite distinct cities and have specified commonalities and differences in flood response measures. Common resilience planning priorities in Toronto and Calgary to urban floods included reducing flood impacts, mitigating climate change, implementing adaptation strategies to cope with future flooding, by developing preparedness kits for homes, building partnerships among organizations to share expertise; and building networks among community members to enhance emergency response, updating flood maps and creating more permeable surfaces. Differences of flood planning strategies indicated that Toronto has effective policies and has a conservation authority that works closely with the provincial and municipal government regulating preventive flood hazard strategies to ensure long-term sustainable and resilient building to help alleviate future flood impacts. Case study results indicated that Calgary does not have this type of regulating agency and flood protection policies, which have resulted in prolonged developments in flood hazardous zones increasing exposure to flood risks. Interview results noted flood management practices in Calgary focus more on structural flood response measures and that there needs to be less reliance on infrastructure. Therefore, research findings recommend effective policy development, collaborative planning, education and awareness programs for citizens to acknowledge the seriousness of flood impacts and to encourage the necessary behavioral changes to enhance pre-disaster and preparedness planning