IPCC Report.pdf - Adam Curry

Chapter 8Toward a Sustainable and Resilient Future(where the knowledge of women, children, or the elderly may not berecognized), within communities (where divisions among social groupsmay hinder learning), or within nations (where marginalized groups maynot be heard, and where social division and political power influencethe development and adaptation agenda). Disaster periods are frequentlythe times when the development visions and aspirations for the futureof those most affected are not recognized. This reflects a widespreadlimitation on the quality and comprehensiveness of local participationin disaster risk reduction and its integration into everyday developmentplanning. Instead, the humanitarian imperative, limited-term reconstructionbudgets, and an understandable desire for rapid action over deliberationmeans that too often international social movements and humanitariannongovernmental organizations, government agencies, and local relieforganizations impose their own values and visions, often with the bestof intentions. It is also important to recognize the potential for somepeople or groups to prevent sustainable decisions by employing theirveto power or lobbying against reforms or regulations based on shorttermpolitical or economic interests (Klein, 2007). The distribution ofpower in society and who has the responsibility or right to shape thefuture through decisionmaking today is thus significant, and includesthe role of international as well as national and local actors. Within theinternational humanitarian community, efforts such as the SphereStandards and the Humanitarian Accountability Partnership are stepstoward addressing this challenge.Actions to reduce disaster risk and responses to climate changeinvariably involve tradeoffs with other societal goals, and conflictsrelated to different values and visions for the future. Innovative andsuccessful solutions that combine multiple perspectives, differingworldviews, and contrasting ways of organizing social relations have beendescribed by Verweij et al. (2006) as ‘clumsy solutions.’ Such solutions,they argue, depend on institutions in which all perspectives are heardand responded to, and where the quality of interactions among competingviewpoints foster creative alternatives. Drawing on the developmentethics literature, St. Clair (2010) notes that when conflict and broadbaseddebate arise, alternatives often flourish and many potentialspaces for action can be created, tapping into people’s innovation andcapacity to cope, adapt, and build resilience. Pelling (2010a) stressesthe importance of social learning for transitional or transformationaladaptation, and points out that it requires a high level of trust, awillingness to experiment and accept the possibility of failure inprocesses of learning and innovation, transparency of values, and activeengagement of civil society. Committing to such a learning process is,as Tschakert and Dietrich (2010, p. 17) argue, preferable to alternativesbecause “learning by shock is neither an empowering nor an ethicallydefensible pathway.”The conjuncture of hazard and vulnerability, realized through disasters,forces coping and adaptation on individuals and society. Climate changeand ongoing development place more people and assets at risk.Noteworthy progress in disaster risk management has been made,especially through the action of early warning on reducing mortality,but underlying vulnerability remains high (as indicated by increasingnumbers of people affected and economic losses from disaster) anddemographic and economic development trends continue to raise thestakes and present a choice: risk can be denied or faced, and adaptationcan be forced or chosen. A reduction in the disaster risks associatedwith climate and weather extremes is therefore a question of politicalchoice that involves addressing issues of equity, rights, and participationat all levels.ReferencesA digital library of non-journal-based literature cited in this chapter thatmay not be readily available to the public has been compiled as part ofthe IPCC review and drafting process, and can be accessed via either theIPCC Secretariat or IPCC Working Group II web sites.AAG, 2003: Global Change and Local Places: Estimating, Understanding, andReducing Greenhouse Gases. Association of American Geographers, CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge, UK, 290 pp.Adger, W.N., 1996: Approaches to Vulnerability to Climate Change. CSERGE WorkingPaper #GEC 96-05, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK, 66 pp.Adger, W.N., 2000: Social and ecological resilience: are they related? Progress inHuman Geography, 24(3), 347-364.Adger, W.N., 2003: Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climatechange. Economic Geography, 79(4), 387-404.Adger, W.N., 2004: The right to keep cold. Environment and Planning A, 36(10),1711-1715.Adger, W.N., S. Huq, K. Brown, D. Conway, and M. Hulme, 2003: Adaptation toclimate change in the developing world. Progress in Development Studies, 3(3),179-195.Adger, W.N., T.P. Hughes, C. Folke, S.R. Carpenter, and J. Rockstrom, 2005: Socialecologicalresilience to coastal disasters. Science, 309, 1036-1039.Adger,W.N., S. Agrawala, M.M.Q. Mirza, C. Conde, K. O’Brien, J. Pulhin, R. Pulwarty,B. Smit, and K. Takahashi, 2007: Assessment of adaptation practices, options,constraints and capacity. In: Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation andVulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Reportof the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Parry, M.L., O.F. Canziani,J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson (eds.)], Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge, UK, pp. 717-743.Adger, W.N., J. Barnett, and H. Ellemor, 2010: Unique and valued places. In: ClimateChange Science and Policy [Schneider, S. H., A. Rosencranz, M. Mastrandrea,and K. Kuntz-Duriseti (eds.)]. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp. 131-138.Adger, W.N., K. Brown, D. Nelson, F. Berkes, H. Eakin, C. Folke, K. Galvin, L.Gunderson, M. Goulden, K. O’Brien, J. Ruitenbeek, and E. Tompkins, 2011:Resilience implications of policy responses to climate change. WIRES ClimateChange, doi:10.1002/WCC.133.Adly, E. and T. Ahmed, 2009: Water and food security in the river Nile basin:Perspectives of the government and NGOs in Egypt. In: Facing GlobalEnvironmental Change: Environmental, Human, Energy, Food, Health and WaterSecurity Concepts [Brauch, H.G., N.C. Behera, P. Kameri-Mbote, J. Grin, Ú.Oswald Spring, B. Chourou, C. Mesjasz, and H. Krummenacher (eds.)]. Springer,Berlin, Germany, pp. 645-654.Agarwal, B., 1991: Social security and the family: Coping with seasonality andcalamity in rural India. In: Social Security in Developing Countries [Ahmad, E., J.Dreze, J. Hills, and A. Sen (eds.)]. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK, pp. 171-244.Agrawala, S. (ed.), 2005: Bridge over Troubled Waters: Linking Climate Change andDevelopment. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris,France, 153 pp.471