IPCC Report.pdf - Adam Curry

National Systems for Managing the Risks from Climate Extremes and DisastersChapter 6early warning systems (Pulwarty et al., 2004; Basher, 2006, UNISDR,2010). National governments can also interact with regional andinternational governments and agencies to strengthen early warningcapacities and to ensure that warnings and related responses are directedtoward the most vulnerable populations (Basher, 2006; UNISDR, 2010).At the same time, national governments can also play an important rolein supporting regions and sub-national governments in developingoperational and local response capabilities (Basher, 2006; UNISDR,2010; see Section 6.5.4). In Japan and the Mekong region, for example,in addition to using an early warning system based on extensive floodmodeling exercise, the emergency basin-level management relies on theflood mitigation capacity of paddy fields (Masumoto et al., 2006, 2008).6.5.2. Reducing Climate-Related Disaster RiskNational climate-related disaster risk reduction activities include abroad range of options that vary from safe infrastructure and buildingcodes to those aimed to enhance and protect natural ecosystems,support human development and even ‘build back better’ following adisaster. Each of these strategies can prove minimally effective inisolation but highly effective in combination. These and other differentoptions, along with their limitations (e.g. lack of information andunderstanding, human resource capacity, scientific requirements,financing) are addressed in the following subsections, noting how riskreduction measures are increasingly being considered as good practicesto promote adaptation to climate change.6.5.2.1. Applying Technologicaland Infrastructure-Based ApproachesClimate change has the potential to directly and indirectly impact thesafety of existing infrastructure and to alter engineering and maintenancepractices, and will require changes in building codes and standardswhere they exist (Bourrelier et al., 2000; Füssel, 2007; Wilby, 2007; Auld,2008b; Stevens, 2008; Hallegatte, 2009). The changing climate also hasthe potential regionally to increase premature deterioration andweathering impacts on the built environment, exacerbating vulnerabilitiesto climate extremes and disasters and negatively impacting the expectedand useful life spans of structures (Auld, 2008b; Larsen et al., 2008;Stewart et al., 2011). As noted in Case Study 9.2.8, people living withun-adapted and inadequate infrastructure and housing will be more atrisk from climate change.With projected increases in the magnitude and/or frequency of someextreme events in many regions (see Chapter 3), small increases in climateextremes above thresholds or regional infrastructure ‘tipping points’have the potential to result in large increases in damages to all forms ofexisting infrastructure nationally and to increase disaster risks (Coleman,2002; Munich Re, 2005; Auld, 2008b; Larsen et al., 2008; Kwadijk et al.,2010; Mastrandrea et al., 2010). Since infrastructure systems, such asbuildings, water supply, flood control, and transportation networksoften function as a whole or not at all, an extreme event that exceedsan infrastructure design or ‘tipping point’ can sometimes result inwidespread failure and a potential disaster (Ruth and Coelho, 2007;Haasnoot et al., 2009). For example, a break in a water main, dike, orbridge can impact other systems and sectors and render the regionalsystem incapable of providing needed services (Ruth and Coelho, 2007).These infrastructure thresholds or adaptation ‘tipping points’ becomeimportant when considering sensitivities to climate change andadaptation and disaster risk reduction options for the future (seeSection 6.6.1 for further discussion on thresholds and management ofclimate change uncertainties). Infrastructure thresholds refer here to thecritical climate conditions where acceptable technical, economic, spatial,or societal limits are exceeded and the current built environment systemis no longer “future climate proof” (i.e., it fails, requiring proactiveadaptation actions and changes in infrastructure codes, standards, andmanagement processes) (Auld, 2008b; Haasnoot et al., 2009; Kwadijk etal., 2010; Mastrandrea et al., 2010).The need to address the risk of climate extremes and disasters in thebuilt environment and urban areas, particularly for low- and middleincomecountries, is one that is not always fully appreciated by manynational governments and development and disaster specialists(Rossetto, 2007; Moser and Satterthwaite, 2008). Low- and middleincomecountries, which account for close to three-quarters of theworld’s urban populations, are at greatest risk from extreme events andalso have far less capacity than do high-income countries, largely due tobacklogs in protective infrastructure and services and limitations in urbangovernment (Satterthwaite et al., 2007; Moser and Satterthwaite, 2008).Rapid growth and expansion in urban areas, particularly in developingcountries, can outpace infrastructure development and lead to a lack ofinfrastructure services for housing, sewer systems, effective transportation,and emergency response and increased vulnerability to weather andclimate extremes (Satterthwaite et al., 2007; Birkmann et al., 2011).These impacts from the changing climate will be particularly severe forpopulations living in poor-quality housing on illegally occupied land,where there is little incentive for investments in more resilient buildingsor infrastructure and service provision (Freeman and Warner, 2001;Satterthwaite et al., 2007; Birkmann et al., 2011). Case Study 9.2.8provides further discussion on the best adaptation and risk managementpractices for cities and their built environment.An inevitable result of potentially increased damages to infrastructurewill be a dramatic increase in the national resources needed to restoreinfrastructure and assist the poor affected by damaged infrastructure(Freeman and Warner, 2001). A study by the Australian Academy ofTechnological Sciences and Engineering concluded that national retrofitmeasures will be needed to safeguard existing infrastructure in Australiaand new adaptation approaches and national codes and standards willbe required for construction of new infrastructure (Stevens, 2008).Recommendations reported from this study call for research to fill gapson the future climate risks, comprehensive risk assessments for existingcritical climate-sensitive infrastructure, development of information andsupporting tools (e.g., non-stationary extreme value analysis methods)366