Climate  resilience  in  the  eastern  Himalayas:  Integrated  approaches  to  assessing  vulnerability  and  developing  adaptation  strategies  

Ryan  Bartlett  and  Sarah  Freeman  World  Wildlife  Fund-­‐US  

Introduction  As   climate   change   adaptation   has   become   an   increasingly   critical   global   imperative,   a  number   of   climate   change   vulnerability   assessment   (CCVA)   frameworks,   methodologies,  and   decision   support   tools   have   emerged   for   various   audiences,   from   conservation   to  development  and  disaster  risk  reduction.  These  have,  however,  been  limited  in  their  utility  for   adaptation   practitioners   for   various   reasons:   requirements   for   robust   data   and   high  technical  capacity;  overly  broad  or  fine  geographic  scales  at  the  national  or  highly  localized  levels;   and  a   limited   focus  on   community   vulnerability   instead  of   the   larger   system   level  vulnerabilities  that  act  as  drivers  of  risk  for  both  humans  and  wildlife.    

In  this  context,  WWF  is  developing  its  own  CCVA  framework  tailored  to  the  unique  socio-­‐environmental   conservation   objectives   of   its   priority   landscapes.   This   approach,  Flowing  Forward  (FF),  provides  a  flexible  framework  for  determining  climate  change  vulnerability  and   identifying  adaptation  strategies  across  highly  diverse   landscapes.   It   is  an   integrated  approach,  emphasizing  the  role  that  both  natural  and  sustainably  managed  systems  play  in  building  resilience  in  social-­‐ecological  systems.  It  was  born  out  of  a  need  for  a  VA  approach  to  conservation  planning  that  balances  conservation  and  biodiversity  objectives  with  local  livelihood  needs  and  tackles  two  critical  challenges  in  remote  land-­‐-­‐  and  sea-­‐scapes:  a  lack  of  sufficient  climate  data  and  a  broad  diversity  of  stakeholders  and  conservation  objectives.  Flowing   Forward   was   thus   developed   to   synthesize   information   from   multiple,   diverse  sources   and   is   based  on   consensus  building   to  promote   robust   adaptation  decisions   that  increase  options  in  the  face  of  uncertainty.  

Using  the  example  application  of  the  FF  framework  in  the  unique  high  mountain  Chitwan-­‐Annapurna  Landscape  (CHAL)  of  the  Gandaki  River  Basin  in  the  Nepali  Eastern  Himalayas,  this   paper   briefly   highlights   how   stakeholder   and   participatory   approaches   at   multiple  levels   can   generate   knowledge   to   fill   key   information   gaps   and   build   consensus   on   both  climate  risk  and  adaptation  actions.      

Flowing  Forward  Originally  developed  for  the  World  Bank  as  policy  guidance  targeted  at  the  water  resource  management   sector   (Quesne,   et   al.,   2010),   FF   has   since   evolved   through   multiple  applications  in  landscapes  in  Coastal  East  Africa,  the  Mekong,  and  the  Eastern  Himalayas  to  

Glacial Flooding & Disaster Risk ManagementKnowledge Exchange and Field Training

July 11-24, 2013 in Huaraz, PeruHighMountains.org/workshop/peru-2013

a  more  integrated,  comprehensive  assessment  framework  at  the  landscape  scale.  It  has  two  main   components:   the   assessment   framework   and   the   process   through   which   the  framework   is   implemented.   The   framework   is   an   outline   of   the   basic   components   of   the  entire  assessment,  while  the  process  details  the  steps  involved  in  determining  vulnerability  and   eventually   adaptation   interventions   from   raw   information   on   climate,   development  and  resilience  of  the  system  being  analyzed.  To  use  an  analogy,  the  assessment  framework  is   the   skeletal   base   for   the  muscles   and   tissues   of   the   process.   A   basic   schematic   of   the  framework  is  outlined  in  Figure  1.      

 Figure  1.  Schematic  of  the  steps  in  the  Flowing  Forward  assessment  framework.  The  orange  and  green  boxes  are  highlighted  as  each  box  represents  multiple  steps.    There  are  four  major  stages  of  the  process,  each  with  their  own  distinct  objectives:    

1) Assessment  Inception:  definition  of  study  objectives,  the  spatial  and  temporal  scope  and  identification  of  key  stakeholders  

2) Background   Research:   collection   of   existing   information   and   generation   of   new  knowledge  as  necessary,   including  a   literature  review  highlighting  converging  and  diverging   information,   analysis   of   existing   hydrometeorological   data,   and  assessment  of  community  perceptions  of  climate  change  and  vulnerability.  

3) Stakeholder  Workshop:  dissemination  of  synthesized  information,  determination  of  and  consensus  building  on  priority  vulnerabilities,  and  development  of  adaptation  interventions.  

4) Follow   Up:   communication   of   the   output   of   stakeholder   workshop   to   decision  makers  and  communities.  

 The   next   section   briefly   summarizes   this   process   for   the   Gandaki,   highlighting   the  particular  importance  of  stakeholder  contributions  throughout.      Applying  Flowing  Forward  to  the  Gandaki  Basin  Located   in   the   central   region   of   Nepal’s   Eastern   Himalayas,   the   Chitwan   Annapurna  Landscape   (CHAL)   was   developed   to   provide   greater   north-­‐south   connectivity   across  multiple   renown   conservation   areas   and   national   parks   in   central   Nepal.   It   contains   the  entirety   of   the   Gandaki   Basin,   stretching   across   a   vast   region   of   varied   topography,  climates,   and   ecosystems.   Home   to   rich   biodiversity   and   ecosystem   services   that   are  increasingly   important   to   both   local   livelihoods   and   the   larger   national   economy,   it   is   a  landscape  of  growing  national  importance,  facing  numerous,  increasing  threats  from  rapid  economic  development  that  will  only  be  augmented  with  climate  change.  

 The   VA   is   part   of   a   large   USAID   funded   collaborative   conservation   and   development  program,   Hariyo   Ban,   integrating   climate   change   adaptation,   reduced   environmental  degradation   and   deforestation   (REDD),   and   sustainable   livelihoods   development   in   this  landscape.   In   the   context   of   these   dual   conservation   and   sustainable   development  objectives,  the  assessment  demanded  an  integrated  approach  measuring  both  human  and  natural  system  vulnerabilities  and  the   interactions  between  the  two.  As  a  result,   the  core  building   blocks   of   the   Flowing   Forward   framework-­‐-­‐analysis   units   and   sub-­‐units—explicitly  needed  to  include  both  human  and  natural  systems.      The   first   key   component   of   the   FF   framework,   units   and   sub-­‐units   were   developed   by  WWF-­‐US  staff  in  conjunction  with  WWF-­‐Nepal  experts  on  the  ecosystems  and  biodiversity  of   the   landscape   and   program   partners   from   CARE,   experts   on   livelihoods   and  development.   However,   as   with   all   components   of   the   framework,   these   were   further  defined  and  refined  by  key  stakeholders  in  the  basin  during  the  first  analysis  session  of  the  participatory  workshop.        

 In   FF,   units   act   as   the   larger   political   or   ecoregional   divisions   for   the   landscape,   both  geographically  and  thematically,  and  sub-­‐units  are  the  actual  systems  whose  vulnerabilities  are   analyzed   in   the   framework.   In   the   Gandaki,   units   represent   the   standard   horizontal  altitudinal   ecoregion   gradients   of   the   Nepali   Himalayas   that   delineate   very   different  climates   and   ecosystems—the   High   Himalaya,   High   Mountains,   Middle   Mountains,   and  Churia   Range/Siwalik   Hills   (see   Figure   2).   Sub-­‐units   are   then   those   systems   that  geographically  specific  to  each  ecoregion,  e.g.  Alpine  Forests  in  the  High  Himalaya  or  rural  settlements  in  the  Middle  Mountains.  These  are  then  analyzed  by  stakeholders  during  the  participatory  workshop  to  determine  and  prioritize  vulnerability,  and  develop  adaptation  actions.                                            

Figure 2. The unit divisions of the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape (CHAL), which approximates the Gandaki Basin, based on altitudinal gradients that run east-west across Nepal

 Stakeholder  engagement  in  the  Gandaki  Basin  VA  Stakeholder   engagement   was   achieved   through   various   activities:   direct   community  engagement  through  the  CARE  developed  Community  Vulnerability  and  Capacity  Analysis  (CVCAs)  tools  used  to  develop  Community  Adaptation  Plans  (CAPs)  at  the  local   level;  and  inclusion   of   technical   experts   and   decision   makers   in   the   preparation   and   synthesis   of  information  both  in  the  background  research  stage  of  the  process  and  the  final  stakeholder  workshop  which  brought  together  decision-­‐makers,  communities  and  technical  experts.      Community  Climate  Vulnerability  Assessments  The   Flowing   Forward   process   connects   these   community   level   CAPs   into   a   regional  assessment   of   climate   vulnerability.   These   community   assessments   also   provide   crucial  information   for   the   vulnerability   assessment   process   particularly   where   data   is   scarce.  Specifically,   there  are   six   specific   areas  where   this   information   is  used   to   inform  various  steps   of   the   vulnerability   analysis   process.   Error!   Reference   source   not   found.Error!  Reference  source  not  found.  provides  a  brief  overview  of  the  main  areas  of  information  gathered   from   communities   and   where   they   are   included   in   the   overall   FF   analysis  framework.      Table  1  Community  input  into  the  Flowing  Forward  Analysis  Framework.  

     In  Nepal,  there  is  already  strong  community  level  participation  in  the  adaptation  process,  which   helped   facilitate   the   inclusion   of   communities   in   the   VA   process   in   the   CHAL.  Recently,   there  has  been  an  emphasis  on   the   impacts  of   climate  change  on  diverse  social  groups,   resource   availability   and   distribution,   community   access   to   public   services   and  general   issues   of   equity.   In   2012,   the   National   Framework   on   Local   Adaptation   Plan   for  Action   provided   a   broader   framing   for   community   level   adaptation   planning   and  implementation  through  Community  Adaptation  Plans  (CAPs).  

 Within   this   context,   the   Hariyo   Ban   program   conducted   community   vulnerability  assessment  and  adaptation  planning  exercises  in  six  different  sites  in  the  CHAL  from  2011  to  2012.  These  sites  were  selected  to  be  representative  of  different  ecological  zones  of  the  landscape   (i.e.   high   mountains,   middle   hills   and   low   lands).   The   outputs   of   these  community   assessments   were   then   used   to   inform   the   larger   stakeholder   workshop  through  presentations,  workshop  exercises,  and  through  the  direct  engagement  of  some  of  the  community  representatives   in   the  workshop   itself.  The   final  outputs  of   the   landscape  

Climate  Scenarios

Development  Scenarios

Climate-­‐Development  

Impacts

Impact  Severity  Rating

Institutions Policies Data

1Community  resource  use/  livelihoods  patterns * * * * * *

2Change  over  time  in  resource  base  and  underlying  reasons * * * * * *

3Perceived/  experienced  climate  'hazards'/events  &  climate  patterns  &  and   * * * * * *

4Impacts  of  the  above  on  livelihoods  and  resource  use * * * * *

5Existing  coping  strategies/  adaptive  capacity * * * * * *

6Perceived  needs  to  enhance  adaptive  capacity * * * *

Six  Ke

y  Que

stions  from

 Co

mmun

ity  VAs

Determine  Exposure Social  Adaptive  CapacityFlowing  Forward  Analysis  Framework  Steps

Determine  Resilience

Identify  Analysis  Units

VulnerabilityAdaptation  Planning

level   assessment   are   now   in   the   process   of   being   fed   back   into   ongoing   community  adaptation  planning  and  implementation.    Background  Information  Generation  and  Synthesis  Gathering  and  generating  background  information  to  inform  the  vulnerability  assessment  process  is  another  critical  point  of  involvement  for  stakeholders  and  partners  from  the  landscape.  This  step  begins  with  an  evaluation  of  information  assets  and  gaps,  including  trends  in  climate  (temperature  and  precipitation),  economic  development,  basic  information  on  ecosystems  and  infrastructure  in  the  landscape,  and  trends  in  socioeconomics  and  demographics.  Relevant  experts  in  these  areas  are  then  engaged  to  fill  these  gaps.    In  the  case  of  the  ChAL,  additional  studies  were  conducted  on  infrastructure  development,  modeled  projections  of  vegetation  and  habitat  change  due  to  climate  change,  and  a  summary  report  of  the  community  VAs  conducted  in  the  landscape  by  CARE,  as  mentioned  in  the  previous  section.  The  individuals  involved  in  these  studies  were  included  in  subsequent  work  and  meetings  leading  up  to  and  during  the  stakeholder  workshop.  Additionally,  brief  presentations  were  made  during  the  workshop  itself  to  communicate  these  studies,  thus  allowing  room  for  feedback  during  the  workshop,  which  was  also  crucial  for  validating  the  approach  and  information  being  used  in  the  assessment.    The  treatment  of  climate  data  in  the  VA  process  deserves  specific  mention  due  to  both  its  centrality  in  the  process  and  its  often  contentious  nature.  WWF  staff  analyzed  existing  peer-­‐reviewed  studies  on  climate  in  the  basin  to  determine  consensus  and  divergence  in  the  literature  on  key  climate  trends  (i.e.  precipitation  and  temperature).  Due  to  the  uncertainty  around  climate  projections,  this  was  complemented  by  a  rapid  review  of  primary  data  on  precipitation  and  temperature  trends  and  compared  with  both  the  literature  and  community  perceptions  collected  during  the  community  VA  process.  Then,  the  areas  of  confluence  between  the  three  sources  of  information  were  emphasized  in  the  climate  scenarios  developed  in  the  workshop.  Areas  of  divergence  were  used  to  determine  where  robust  adaptation  actions  that  expand  options  under  a  variety  of  futures  should  emphasized  during  the  adaptation  planning  exercises  of  the  stakeholder  workshop.  

 Stakeholder  Workshop  The  core  of  the  FF  assessment  process,  the  participatory  stakeholder  workshop  is  the  key  venue   for   engagement   with   community   leaders,   decision-­‐makers,   scientists,   NGOs,   and  other   important   actors   in   the   landscape.   While   considerable   analysis   is   done   prior,  including   the   identification   of   analysis   units,   filling   information   gaps,   and   direct  engagement   with   local   communities   through   the   CVCAs,   it   is   designed   to   feed   into   the  workshop   where   stakeholders   rapidly   assess   vulnerabilities   and   prioritize   adaptation  actions.      Stakeholder  participants  in  the  Nepal  workshop  included  representatives  from  Hariyo  Ban  program   partners  WWF-­‐Nepal,   CARE,   the   Nepali   National   Trust   for   the   Conservation   of  Nature   (NTNC),   and   the   Federation   of   Community   Forestry   Users   of   Nepal   (FECOFUN);  various   government   institutions   including   the   Departments   of   Forestry,   Irrigation,   and  Agriculture,  District  and  Village  Development  Committees;  and  local  NGOs.  Divided  by  area  of  expertise   into  six  separate  thematic  breakout  groups  based  on  units  and  different  sub-­‐

unit   types   (forests,   freshwater,   sub-­‐catchments,   agriculture,   infrastructure,   and   species),  workshop   participants   moved   through   the   FF   framework,   rating   sub-­‐units   according   to  factors  that  measure  exposure,  sensitivity,  and  adaptive  capacity.1  Facilitated  by  WWF  and  partner  program  staff,  these  breakout  groups  discussed  and  rated  each  sub-­‐unit  on  a  scale  of  1-­‐5  (5  being  the  most  vulnerable)  for  each  factor,  including  brief  explanations  as  to  why  the  rating  was  chosen.  These  scores  were  then  calculated  to  determine  final  vulnerability  rankings  to  allow  for  simple  prioritization  in  developing  adaptation  actions.      After   re-­‐evaluating   and   revising   these   rankings   as   part   of   the   prioritization   process,  participants  then  developed  adaptation  actions  to  address  either  the  most  resilient  or  most  vulnerable   systems   (depending   on   their   management   priorities),   outlining   rough  geographic  areas   to   focus   the  work,  potential  partners   to   involve,  synergies  with  existing  efforts,   and     timelines.   WWF   and   Hariyo   Ban   program   staff   are   now   in   the   process   of  integrating   these   recommended   actions   into   work   plans   for   the   coming   years   of   the  program.      Conclusions  The   Flowing   Forward   CCVA   process   takes   a   unique,   integrated   approach   in   adaptation  planning     by   triangulating   information   from   multiple   sources,   including   peer-­‐reviewed  science,  and  most   importantly,  direct  stakeholder   input.  The  entire   framework   is  directly  dependent   on,   and   guided   by,   stakeholders   who   provide   critical   inputs   throughout   the  process.  Most  critically,  they  help  determine  and  prioritize  the  key  system-­‐level  drivers  of  vulnerability  and  propose  adaptation   interventions   that  guide  WWF  and  partner  work   in  future  years  of  the  program.  This  helps  build  capacity  and  create  ownership  for  those  with  the  largest  stake  in  successful,  long-­‐term  adaptation.          Works  Cited  Quesne,  T.  L.,  Matthews,  J.  H.,  Heyden,  C.  V.,  Wickel,  A.,  Wilby,  R.,  Hartmann,  J.,  et  al.  (2010).  Freshwater   Ecosystem   Adaptation   to   Climate   Change   in  Water   Resource  Management   and  Biodiversity  Conservation.  WWF.  The  World  Bank.    

                                                                                                                         1 Based on extensive reviews of the vulnerability assessment literature, these have been developed and continually honed by WWF-US over the multiple applications of Flowing Forward in Africa and Asia. A forthcoming guidance manual details in much greater detail their origins and the rationale behind their development.