From Climate Science to Adaptation Decision-Making Mark Stafford - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

From Climate Science to Adaptation Decision-Making

CLIMATE ADAPTATION FLAGSHIP

Mark Stafford Smith

Science 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 Townsville

2 sites

Rockhampton Toowoomba Gatton Myall Vale Narrabri Mopra Parkes Newcastle Armidale

2 sites

Perth

Murchison Cairns

Who we are

Brisbane

6 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 Hobart Sandy Bay Wodonga Newcastle

Perth

3 sites

Adelaide Adelaide

2 sites

Sydney 5 sites Canberra Canberra 7 sites

Irymple

Melbourne 5 sites

Werribee 2 sites

Flagships Budget 11 $1B+

Global connections: publications

CSIRO: positive impact | 4 |

• 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 directed Multidisciplinary

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 TRANSFORMED BIOSECURITY

National Research Flagships

CLIMATE ADAPTATION

CSIRO: positive impact | 6 |

WEALTH FROM OCEANS FOOD FUTURES SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE MINERALS DOWN UNDER FUTURE MANUFACTURING PREVENTATIVE HEALTH WATER FOR A HEALTHY COUNTRY

DIGITAL PRODUCTIVITY AND SERVICES ENERGY TRANSFORMED BIOSECURITY

National Research Flagships

CLIMATE ADAPTATION

CSIRO: positive impact | 7 |

WEALTH FROM OCEANS FOOD FUTURES SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE MINERALS DOWN UNDER FUTURE 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 members Operating since 2008, now ~$40m/y budget, ~35% external (Water issues in Water for Healthy Country Flagship) Mark Howden Craig James Xiaoming Wang Kevin Hennessy

Adaptation science: three perspectives, all needed

Adaptation information and decision-making

Evaluation, adaptation pathways, future scenarios, risk management modes, etc

Adaptation

• ptions and

technologies

Cultivars, materials, farming systems, urban planning, etc

Adaptive behaviours and institutions

Behaviours, incentives, barriers, adaptive capacity, vulnerabilities, etc

International activities

CLIMATE ADAPTATION

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

• 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?

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

• f 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

ean Global Warming (°C)

Three scenarios for the future Recovery

1 1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090

Year Me

MEP2030 A1FI-GaR MEP2010 (Overshoot)

Incremental adaptation to changes

• f reasonable

certainty possible Adaptation must increasingly manage the 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 decisions must account for how long 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

Adaptive landscape, boundaries less certain

a b c d e 1 1 1 3 2

Adaptive space Maladaptive space

1 1 2 2 3 3

Adaptive & maladaptive spaces

Wise et al., GEC forthcoming

less certain further into the future

f g h 2 2 2 3 2 2 2

Maladaptive space

Current decision point

3

Dead-ends that can be re-assessed over time (or

• ther 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

• f morbidity events due to continuing rise in

temperature with declining health Mainly vulnerability responses

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 resilience responses Mixed responses Thresholds where health (+/- in conjunction with better building standards, etc) is sufficiently good that full dependence

• n a/c as primary response can end

Transformational adaptation

Climate change-ready crops Transformation from landuse

• r distribution change

New products such as ecosystem services

fit from tation

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 Benefit adapta

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

Adaptive landscape, affected by changing climate but also other

a c d e f g h 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 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 and

• ther actors’

responses

b h i j 2 2 6 7 8 8

Maladaptive space Change in biophysical variables over time

• D. Institutional

preparedness

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
• 6. Approaches to adaptation planning
• 7. Knowledge, Values, Rules – choosing techniques for evaluation
• f 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

• ptions are

there? Which adaptation

• ptions 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 felt

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

• 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?

• 1. Is there an impact worth worrying

about?

• 2. Are there adaptation options available?
• 3. Is it worth implementing an adaptation
• ption?
• 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 overheated caused $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%

• f all post-1980s houses in the worst

affected areas experienced significant roof damage, although more than 12%

• f the pre-1980s housing inspected

had significant roof damage.” Cyclone Tracy, Darwin, 1974 had significant roof damage.”

• 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?

National environmental change datasets

(e.g. GDMs of novel environment projections for 2070)

Ferrier et al. 2012

Taking a national, all-hazards view

N A

Extreme Wind

N A

Extreme Rainfall Heat

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 Billions

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

nefit by 2100 (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 eventuate)

up to $8.3 bn (if cyclones shift southwards by 2100).

• Delaying change in standards rapidly reduces NPV
• 1000

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070

Calendar Year to Implement Adaptation Average NPV of Benefit

Stewart & Wang, Climate Adaptation Flagship, 2011

React or anticipate? Adapting our infrastructure

Net 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 $4-6bn React to current hazard Anticipate future hazard React to current $2bn $4-6bn hazard Anticipate future $1-2bn $2-4bn hazard + 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

• 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?

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

Diversity

• f policy /

context- setting actions tional scale Global National/ sector Sub-national/ sub-sector

State Local Govt Household/ business

• Infrastructure for increased disaster response

…

• Specific local planning amendments
• Specific local infrastructure

…

• Proactive individual preparations for change
• Transformative considerations

…

Diversity

• f adaptation

actions Organisatio 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 Smith

Science Director mark.staffordsmith@csiro.au – +61 408 852 082

Systematising a decision-centred approach…

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?