Mitigation and adaptation strategies have historically been, and continue to be, developed separately. The climate is already changing and integration of adaptation and mitigation in policy and practice is now urgently needed

Howarth, Candice

Robinson, Elizabeth J. Z.

English

LSE Research Online

Effective climate action must integrate climate adaptation and mitigation  1  2 Candice Howarth*, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, 3 London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.  4  5 Elizabeth J.Z. Robinson, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the 6 Environment, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.  7  8 * Corresponding author: c.howarth@lse.ac.uk  9  10  11 Mitigation and adaptation strategies have historically been, and continue to be, 12 developed separately. The climate is already changing and integration of adaptation 13 and mitigation in policy and practice is now urgently needed. 14  15 Climate actions at the international, national, regional and local levels, have historically been 16 driven by efforts to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, with adaptation often lagging. 17 But global temperatures in 2023 already increased by 1.35°C above the 1850-1900 pre-18 industrial average [1] with no signs of slowing down, as efforts to speedily and ambitiously 19 reduce GHG emissions have failed [2]. Even if global ambitions for net zero by 2050 are 20 achieved, the world will continue to warm, weather extremes will continue to worsen, and 21 adaptation will be required to protect people from the worst impacts of the changing climate. 22 Separating mitigation and adaptation actions could lead to imbalanced development and 23 slow progress on effective climate action.  24  25 Moreover, adaptation and mitigation designed and implemented in isolation is not cost-26 effective, does not reflect their multidimensionality and complexity, can lead to a range of 27 social barriers, and can even result in maladaptation and unintended consequences. This 28 could contribute to a range of inefficiencies occurring alongside policy incoherence. For 29 example, afforestation projects designed for carbon sequestration could increase water 30 demand, making it harder to adapt to changing precipitation patterns and undermining local 31 water scarcity adaptation efforts. Similarly, rapid investment in solar or onshore wind could 32 result in habitat disruption and reduce ecosystem resilience. Combined action on mitigation 33 and adaptation is necessary to deal more effectively with the impacts of the warming planet.  34  35 Challenges in uniting adaptation and mitigation 36  37 It is logical to consider adaptation and mitigation side by side. However, historically and 38 institutionally, uniting them has faced many challenges. Firstly, mitigation has been 39 prioritised over adaptation in international governance. When the United Nations Framework 40 Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was established, it had a strong focus on 41 mitigation [3], as the impacts of climate change hadn’t manifested substantially, and the 42 need to adapt was not as prominent. Mitigation action has thus driven global efforts to tackle 43 climate change. However, these efforts are insufficient to achieve net zero targets [4], and 44 climate impacts are projected to become increasingly severe [5], necessitating urgent action 45 for greater and accelerated adaptation. 46  47 Secondly, national climate action lacks coherence. In the United Kingdom (UK), for example, 48 adaptation and mitigation are the responsibility of separate government departments: 49 mitigation falls under the remit of the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero 50 (DESNZ), and adaptation is covered by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural 51 Affairs (Defra). This is also true in other countries and cascades down to the regional and 52 local scales [6] in the prioritisation and allocation of resources for adaptation and mitigation, 53 with teams within the same local authority often working in siloes. Further, institutional 54 memory is often short, with experts remaining in post for short periods of time and then 55 taking with them their knowledge and insights on potential integration with other policy areas.  56  57 Thirdly, climate action is prioritised differently in different countries. Many lower-income 58 countries, such as Ethiopia, Burkina Faso, and Bangladesh, currently have very low 59 emissions yet are among the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. For these 60 countries the challenge is the urgent need for reducing poverty, improving prosperity, and 61 increasing adaptation and resilience to climate change, along pathways that are compatible 62 with global net zero aims. For example, Kenya, a lower-middle income country, has a 63 National Climate Action Plan that focuses on low carbon climate resilient development and 64 prioritises adaptation. In contrast, higher-income countries such as the UK submit Nationally 65 Determined Contributions which primarily focus on emissions reduction, but also address 66 adaptation measures. Similarly, the US’s Inflation Reduction Act prioritizes tackling climate 67 change through emissions reduction and clean energy initiatives. 68  69 Fourthly, mechanisms for monitoring, supporting and financing mitigation differ from those 70 for adaptation. There are clear global and national targets for mitigation, that prioritise the 71 reduction of GHG emissions across scales. In contrast, there are no clear targets for 72 adaptation, which tends to be location-specific and dependent on the type and severity of 73 climate impact, available data, vulnerability of the affected system, and other contextual 74 factors. Financing adaptation also tends to be challenging, because it involves investing in 75 counterfactual situations, which carry greater uncertainty. Although adaptation finance 76 presents numerous opportunities, a gap remains between conceptual ideas and 77 demonstrable solutions with positive impacts [7].  78  79 Integration is possible 80  81 The complex nature of adaptation and mitigation approaches, rather than being seen as 82 challenges, could provide opportunities for integrated approaches to climate action that 83 address both simultaneously. These approaches include addressing knowledge gaps, 84 limiting siloed work on climate action, enhancing co-benefits of climate action and minimising 85 unintended consequences, and enabling climate-resilient economic growth.  86  87 Some options for tackling climate change already integrate adaptation and mitigation and 88 offer co-benefits. For instance, investment in urban green spaces (e.g. green roofs, urban 89 trees), offers the potential triple dividend of carbon sequestration, cooling, and improved 90 biodiversity. Similarly, protecting and enhancing mangroves (e.g. coastal protection through 91 tree planting and dune establishment), provides “blue carbon” mitigation benefits, protection 92 from storm surges, stabilises coastlines, and improves protection of marine species 93 biodiversity [8]. Also, adopting more balanced low-carbon diets combined with climate smart 94 agriculture (including regenerative agriculture [9], no-till farming, climate resilient crop 95 varieties, agroforestry, and reduced-methane livestock farming) could not only decrease 96 GHG emissions from food systems but also increasing the climate resilience of food 97 production and security.  98  99 Moreover, integration of adaptation and mitigation actions helps mitigate potential conflicts 100 between the two. Heat risk and overheating is a growing issue globally with a range of 101 countries including India [10] and UK [11] reportedly unprepared for projected future 102 increases in temperature extremes. To adapt to the ambient temperature, many countries 103 have utilised energy-intensive cooling technologies (for example air conditioning), but these 104 technologies can lead to increased emissions and increase local ambient heat [12], further 105 increasing overheating [13]. Policies have traditionally focused on insulating buildings to 106 keep them warm in the winter whilst reducing electricity demand; if these measures are 107 installed properly, with adequate ventilation, they can indeed help to reduce the risk of 108 overheating while simultaneously reducing energy costs.  109  110 Accelerating better integration  111  112 Integrating adaptation and mitigation can accelerate climate action in a fair way that has 113 multiple co-benefits and mitigate potential trade-offs. Actions need to go beyond adaptation 114 and mitigation framings and aim for broader policy integration beyond climate, including 115 nature-based solutions and climate-resilient agriculture, sustainable land use planning, 116 renewable energy solutions, infrastructure that is both resilient to climate impacts and low 117 carbon by design, and community-based and –led approaches. We highlight principles that 118 have the potential to accelerate the necessary changes (Figure 1). 119  120 Figure 1 – Principles for integrating climate adaptation and mitigation 121  122  123  124 An approach that integrates adaptation and mitigation thus has considerable potential to 125 accelerate efforts to tackle climate change, by addressing the complex and multifaceted 126 aspects of the climate crisis, and recognising explicitly interconnections between adaptation 127 and mitigation efforts. In so doing, this approach will optimize resource and skills allocation 128 and use, promote policy coherence, address social equity, and foster innovation, all of which 129 are crucial to build a low carbon world that is resilient to the impacts of climate change we 130 are increasingly going to face. 131  132  133 Acknowledgments 134  135 This work was supported by the UK Economic and Social Research Council through the 136 Place-Based Climate Action Network (P-CAN) (Ref. ES/S008381/1). 137 Contributions 138  139 Both authors conceived the work, drafted the manuscript, and edited and approved the final 140 version. 141  142 Competing interests 143  144 The authors declare no competing interests. 145  146  147 References  148  149 1. NOAA (2024) Climate Change: Global Temperature  https://www.climate.gov/news-150 features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-151 temperature#:~:text=2023%20was%20the%20warmest%20year,average%20(1850%152 2D1900).  153 2. IPCC (2022) Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of 154 Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of 155 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Slade, A. 156 Al Khourdajie, R. van Diemen, D. McCollum, M. Pathak, S. Some, P. Vyas, R. 157 Fradera, M. Belkacemi, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, J. Malley (ed.)). Cambridge 158 University Press. 159 3. Hall, N., & Persson, Å. European Journal of International Relations, 24(3), 540-566 160 (2018). 161 4. UNFCCC (2022) Nationally determined contributions under the Paris Agreement. 162 Synthesis report by the secretariat 163 5. Tollefson, J. (2021). IPCC climate report: Earth is warmer than it’s been in 125,000 164 years. Nature Publishing Group UK. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02179-1 165 6. Howarth C, Brogan J, Curran B, Duncan M, Fankhauser S, Gouldson A, Owen A, 166 Stuart-Watt A (2023) Enabling Place-Based Climate Action in the UK: The PCAN 167 Experience. A report by the Place-based Climate Action Network (PCAN), UK. 168 7. Fankhauser, S., Britz, K., Dickie, I., England, K., Howarth, C., Ranger, N. (2023) 169 Case studies in adaptation finance. Climate Change Committee, UK. 170 8. Kolka, R.K., Murdiyarso, D., Kauffman, J.B. and Birdsey, R.A.,. Wetlands Ecology 171 and Management, 24, 107-112(2016).  172 9. Newton, P., Civita, N., Frankel-Goldwater, L., Bartel, K. and Johns, C., Frontiers in 173 Sustainable Food Systems, 4, 194. (2020) 174 10. Pillai, A.V. and Dalal, T. (2023). How is India adapting to heatwaves?: An assessment 175 of heat action plans with insights for transformative climate action. CPR report. 176 11. Howarth, C., Armstrong, A., McLoughlin, N., Murtagh, E., Stuart-Watt, A. (2023) 177 Responding to the 2022 UK heatwaves: an analysis. LSE GRI Policy Brief 178 12.   Salamanca, F., M. Georgescu, A. Mahalov, M. Moustaoui, and M. Wang. J. 179 Geophys. Res. Atmos., 119, 5949–5965, (2014). 180 13.    Andrijevic, M., Schleussner, CF., Crespo Cuaresma, J. et al. Nat. Clim. Chang. 13, 181 778–787 (2023). 182 

Effective climate action must integrate climate adaptation and mitigation

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/122434/1/Effective_climate_action_must_integrate_climate_adaptation_and_mitigation_.pdf

Effective climate action must integrate climate adaptation and mitigation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online