IPCC Report.pdf - Adam Curry

Chapter 5Managing the Risks from Climate Extremes at the Local Level(e.g., assessment of foreign aid needs; cost-benefit analysis of protectioninvestments; World Bank, 2010). Depending on the purpose, spatial andconceptual gaps exist depending on the inclusion of loss-only data or acombination of loss and gain estimates as well as the calculation ofnon-market losses.Similarly, there is some ambiguity about impact and adaptation coststhat affect local-level economic analyses. The lack of consensus onphysical impacts of climate change and adaptive capacity (see Section4.5) is one issue. Another is the discount rate (Heal, 1997; Tol, 2003;Nordhaus, 2007; Stern, 2007; Weitzman, 2007) and the evaluation ofnon-market costs, especially the value of biodiversity or cultural heritage(Pearce and Moran, 1994), the latter contributing some uncertaintyabout local impact and adaptation costs. Finally, the possibility of lowprobabilityhigh-consequence climate change is not fully included inmost analyses (Stern, 2007; Weitzman, 2007; Lonsdale et al., 2008;Nicholls et al., 2008).5.5.3. Limits to Local AdaptationLocal adaptation is set within larger spatial and temporal scales (Adgeret al., 2005), which influence the range of actors involved and the typesof potential barriers to the adaptation process (Moser and Ekstrom,2010; see Sections 6.3 and 7.6). At the local scale, limits and barriers tolocal adaptation generally fall into three interconnected categories:ecological and physical; human informational related to knowledge,technology, economics, and finances; and psychological, behavioral,and socio-cultural barriers (ICIMOD, 2009; Adger et al., 2010). The socialand cultural limits to adaptation are not well researched, with littleattention within the climate change literature devoted to this thus far.Lack of access to information by local people has restricted improvementsin knowledge, understanding, and skills – needed elements in helpinglocalities undertake improved measures to protect themselves againstdisasters and climate change impacts (Agrawal et al., 2008). Theinformation gap is particularly evident in many developing countries withlimited capacity to collect, analyze, and use scientific data on mortalityand demographic trends as well as evolving environmental conditions(IDRC, 2002; Carraro et al., 2003; NRC, 2007). Based on Fischer et al.(2002), closing the information gap is critical to reducing climatechange-related threats to rural livelihoods and food security in Africa.Lack of capacities and skills, particularly for women, also has beenidentified as a limiting factor for effective local adaptation actions(Osman-Elasha et al., 2006). For example, localities in areas prone toclimate extremes such as frequent drought have developed certaincoping responses that assist them in surviving harsh conditions. Overtime, such coping responses proved inadequate due to the magnitude ofthe problem (Ziervogel et al., 2006). For example, in Mali, one initiativeinvolves empowering women and giving them the skills to diversifytheir livelihoods, thus linking environmental management, disasterrisk reduction, and the position of women as key resource managers(UNISDR and UNOCHA, 2008).In financial terms, microfinance services typically do not reach thepoorest and most vulnerable groups at local levels who have urgent andimmediate needs to be addressed (Amin et al., 2001; Helms, 2006). Theability of a community to ensure equitable access and entitlement to keyresources and assets is a key factor in building local adaptive capacity.In developed countries, household decisions regarding disaster riskreduction and adaptation are often guided by factors other than cost.For example, Kunreuther et al. (2009) found that most individualsunderestimate the risk and do not make cost-benefit tradeoffs in theirdecisions to purchase hazard insurance and/or have adequate coverage.They also found empirical evidence to suggest that the hazard insurancepurchase decision was driven not only by the need to protect assets, butalso to reduce anxiety, satisfy mortgage requirements, and socialnorms. For other types of disaster mitigation activities, households doFAQ 5.4 | What are the limits to adaptation at the local level?Traditionally, local risk management strategies focused only on short-term climatic events without considering the long-term trajectoriespresented by a changing climate. Although reacting to climate extreme events and their impacts is important, it is more crucial now tofocus on building the resilience of communities, cities, and sectors in order to ameliorate the impacts of future climatic changes. Therange and choice of actions that can be taken at the levels of individual or households are often event-specific and time-dependent.They are also constrained by location, adequate infrastructure, socioeconomic characteristics, and access to disaster risk information. Forexample, the increased urban vulnerability due to urbanization and rising population exacerbates disaster risk by the lack of investmentin infrastructure as well as poor environmental management, and can have spillover effects to rural areas.The obstacles to information transfer and communications are diverse, ranging from limitations in modeling the climate system toprocedural, institutional, and cognitive barriers in receiving or understanding climatic information and advance warnings and the capacityand willingness of decisionmakers to modify action. Within many rural communities, low bandwidth and poor computing infrastructurepose serious constraints to risk message receipt. Such gaps are evident in developed as well as lesser-developed regions. Constraintsexist in locally-organized collective action because of the difficulties of building effective coalitions with other organizations.319