Climate Forum East: Regional CVA Workshop Batumi, July 8th-9th 2013

(inter)national experiences

1

Martin König Environment Agency Austria Department for Environmental Impact Assessment and Climate Change

National Adaptation Plans and Strategies

Focus

2

Some critical climate change features in Georgia (from

NC2/UNFCCC)

Starting up: adaptation modes and classifications to consider

Guidance for the adaptation process

UN guidelines for setting up national adaptation plans and processes in

developing countries

EU adaptation strategy/guidelines

Austrian tools and adaptation process

Potential criteria for a prioritization of adaptation measures

National examples of integrative adaptation approaches in

some ‘frontrunner’ industrialized countries

(with some Austrian bias)

How to integrate CSOs? Working in partnerships

The vulnerability-adaptation link or: What is a CVA report good for?

3

Highlights most climate exposed/sensitive parts of society, economy and natural environment

Vulnerability hot spots may be indicated as regions, sectors, ecosystems or most affected people

Show trends, current situation and projections (climate as well as socio-economic scenarios!) that have led/lead/will likely lead to (additional) climate damages/altering vulnerability

Climate damages may be indicated in monetary terms for some (market) values and might be translated into monetary terms in some other cases (note that deciders like monetary information), but qualitative descriptions of damages are OK

CVA reports provide essential policy decision support on where to put emphasis for the adaptation process

T and P 2100 Change in Georgia (taken from Georgian NC2/UNFCCC)

4

Seasonal precipitation and temperature change

Delta T and P projections for four SRES scenarios in Georgis W/E

Some striking vulnerabilities and pot. impacts in Georgia (taken Georgian from NC2/UNFCCC)

5

More extreme events? At least some hints from trends…

Years with extreme mudflow activity in Tskenistskali river basin

Number of annual storm events in Dedoplistskaro

Klimawandel und Extremereignisse

© Münchner Rück (2013): Jahresrückblick Naturkatastrophen 2012

Extreme events matter

Klimawandel und Extremereignisse

But note: damages = events x exposure of values

© Münchner Rück (2013): Jahresrückblick Naturkatastrophen 2012

…because damage costs are already significant!

Intermediate key messages

10

Look at gradual (slow onset) trends as well as extreme

(sudden onset) events

If climate models deliver high range of future extreme

event frequencies/amplitudes, work with simple ‘if, then-

scenarios’ to depict potential vulnerability in certain

sectors/regions

If you want to assess potential future vulnerability

quantitatively, you need to take socio-economic

development (i.e. demographic, land-use, technological

change and economic growth/values at risk) into account

Framing the adaptation concept, simplified wording

Exposure: A certain region/a certain sector/a company is

exposed to (the changes of) climate parameters

Sensitivity: A certain region/a certain sector/a company is

threatened/shows sensitivity towards (the changes of) climate

parameters

Climate Impacts = Exposure + Sensitivity

Vulnerability = Climate Impacts +/- Adaptive Capacity

exposure

pot. climate impacts

sensitivity

Climate change = anthropo-

genic +

natural forcing

mitigation

adaptive capacity

vulnerability

adaptation

grey green Soft & fiscal

regional sectoral micro-scale

reactive or responsive

proactive or anticipating

determines

determines determines

determines

determines/reduces determines/reduces

graphically:

planned autonomous

König 2011, amended after Isoard et al. 2009

IPCC SREX report 2012, amended

Disaster risk and climate change

Exposure depends on socio-economic dev. pathways (e.g. land-use, demography, technology and growth)!

Adaptation and the policy cycle

Horrocks et al. 2006 after EEA 2007 (amended)

CVAs

core NAS objectives

policy action

based upon new scientific results

Note: This wheel keeps on turning!

UN NAP guidance

UN LDC expert group (2012)

EU guidelines on the adaptation process

EU(COM) (2013)

CVA

NAS

prep

are

imp

lem

en

tati

on

18

Create the basis for adaptation

Identify problems and find solutions

Implement actions and evaluate

F actory for A daptation M easures O perated by U sers at various S cales

Prutsch, A., Felderer, A., Balas, M., König, M., Clar, C. & R. Steurer (2013)

Intermediate key messages

19

Regard CVAs as key starting point for the national adaptation process

CVAs will have to undergo revisions, the whole process is a cycle, but revisions will be much less resource-iintensive once you have a basis

Quality of NAS and NAP is very much determined by quality of CVA – it is important to address knowledge gaps, socio-economic factors of vulnerability and uncertainty

The CVAs should not already name and evaluate adaptation options as this is part of the NAS process

Link up with policy makers as early as possible

20

Austrian NAS Process

Overall aim

to reduce anticipated negative impacts of climate change on Austria's

society, economy and nature

to use positive effects of climate change and allow synergies

to provide an overall framework in which adaptation should take place

Process

sectoral and iterative approach

close collaboration with science

(research programmes ACRP and StartClim)

broad stakeholder involvement to support the development of the NAS

21

Responsibilities and involvement

Provinces Kyoto Forum

Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry,

Environment and Water Management

Environment Agency Austria

AustroClim

Coordination unit

Wider research community

Consultation and Cooperation CSOs/NGOs

Other Ministries

Interest Groups

Building blocks for the Austrian NAS -1

22

Review of already ongoing adaptation activities (2008)

Starting basis for the national database on practice examples and research

activities

available at www.klimawandelanpassung.at/datenbank, continuously up-

dated

CVA for all activity areas (2008, 2010)

Assessing current and future vulnerability to climate change in Austria

Sectoral approach

Consideration of existing regional climate models, literature review and

expert judgments, qualitative and descriptive work

First evaluation of vulnerability (current/2020/2050)

BUT: Further assessments in more detail are necessary!

Building blocks for the Austrian NAS -2

23

Sectoral expert studies to identify first recommended adaptation options

Undertaken by AustroClim (Institute of Social Ecology, University of Natural Resources

and Applied Life Sciences, Environment Agency Austria)

14 Sectors yet covered: agriculture, forestry, water, energy, tourism (2008);

protection against natural hazards, building and housing, health,

transport infrastructure, natural ecosystems/biodiversity (2010)

economy, urban areas, spatial planning, disaster management/DRR (2011)

“Mini”workshops with selected experts per sector

Serve as a basis for further discussion in the participatory process

Mile stones: Policy Paper

Takes up results from expert studies and participatory process

Equates to the gradual development of the NAS

Undergoes formal consultation and is used for political approval

Workshops BMLFUW

Information, presentation and discussion with stakeholders on NAS progress

24

‚final‘ result: national adaptation strategy to frame national adaptation

agriculture

forestry

water

tourism

energy

building and housing

natural hazard protection

ecosystems & biodiversity

traffic infrastructure

health

catastrophe management

private economy, industry and retail

spatial planning

Cities and urban green

Activities for setting up the NAS

CVA

132 options to act on adaptation in 14 sectors

Structure of actions description

– title

– goal

– relevance

– Interaction with other sectors

– Existing instruments for implementation

– State of implementation

– Recommended further steps

– Potential resource needs

– Potential conflicts

– Responsible actors

– Time horizon

Participation process to support the development of the NAS

Environment Agency Austria carried out the participation process in close cooperation

with responsible Ministry (Steering group)

Objectives:

Raise awareness about climate change in general and the need for adaptation

Improve the NAS quality through involving relevant stakeholders and benefit

from their specific expertise and practical experience

Provide a platform to discuss conflicts and develop balanced solutions

Foster transparent decision-making (note: this is time- and nerve-consuming!)

Enhance the acceptance through jointly developed and backed results

Facilitate the implementation of the final NAS

Financed by Duration

Climate- and Energy Fund Austria

1.phase: January 2009 – September 2010 2.phase: October 2010 – December 2011

Involving the “organised public” and parliament decision

26

84 institutions have so far been actively involved in the

participation process:

Federal and provincial ministries

Interest groups (e.g. Chambers of labor/agriculture…)

CSOs (e.g. Red cross) and NGOs

The Austrian Adaptation Strategy

was decided by the national

parliament in Autumn 2012

Provincial adaptation processes

have started

Adaptation pathways might look very different

Grey adaptation: invasive and/or energy

intensive technical and construction measures

aiming mainly at the protection of

infrastructures or people

Green adaptation: measures aiming at raising

the resilience of ecosystems and their services

Soft adaptation: non-invasive spatial planning

measures and measures to enhance

knowledge transfer/raising adaptive capacity

Fiscal adaptation: Measures aiming at saving

critical resources/protect values by adaptation

(e.g. water or public/private infrastructures)

by introducing measures like payment for

ecosystem services (PES) or risk transfer

mechanisms (e.g. insurances)

21

101

5 5

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

nu

mb

er o

f m

easu

res

category

Distribution of measures

in Austrian NAS

gre

en m

easure

s

fiscal m

easure

s

gre

y/t

echnic

al m

easure

s

soft

measure

s

Informing the general public - Website

28

New Website www.klimawandelanpassung.at

with information on:

Climate change in

Austria

Adaptation to CC

Austrian activities

towards a NAS

Participation Process

Database

29

Informing the general public - Database

Providing

good-practice

examples

Search function for

sectors,

governance level,

spatial patterns

and

research vs.

practical examples

Involving the general public - Online survey

30

Online Survey via Website

open from August until

November 2009 for every

(Austrian) citizen

Intention to obtain a picture of

public notion and opinion on

climate change and adaptation

Mix between multiple choice and

blank text fields

Announcement via different

newsletters and websites

31

Newsletter

Intermediate key messages -1: Important factors for a successful process

Political and public awareness for the need of adapting to the

impacts of climate change as a 2nd pillar of CC policy (1st pillar

mitigation of GHG emission)

Careful planning of the process for the development of a NAS

Participative process from the start, involving science, different

ministries, regional and local representatives, stakeholders, civil

society… (participation process)

Start-off by reviewing already ongoing adaptation

activities in Austria, especially research and good

practice examples + assessment of vulnerabilities

Stepwise, sectoral and iterative approach, develop-

ment of the NAS in stages (2 Policy Papers – June 09

+ Oct 10; draft of final NAS Feb 12), continuously

broadening the scope of the NAS

Intermediate key messages -2: Challenges for implementing a NAS

Conflicting interests between different groupings/different

administrative levels (Federation vs „Länder“)

Interlinkages between adaptation sectors/activities and between

adaptation and mitigation

Broad political commitment on all levels

Question of costs: Costs of damage due to climate change vs costs of

adaptation measures? Who pays? (also for research)

Scientific knowledge gaps

regular reviews of NAS necessary

(„living document“)

How to address uncertainty?

Some key questions for the CVA/NAS process

1. Which sectors/regions are most vulnerable?

2. Which parts of economy are most sensitive?

3. Which ecosystems might collapse/have low resilience under changing

climate regimes?

4. Which meteorological extreme events cause major damages/losses? How

is their trend/projection?

5. Which gradual shifts do we have to adapt to?

6. Are there any opportunities due to climate change we should make use of?

7. What is the range of uncertainty we have to face?

-----------

1. Which conflicts among stakeholders/sectoral interests are already visible?

2. Which mainstreaming potential with sectoral policies can already be

detected?

3. How can the suggested adaptation measures be prioritized?

Possible criteria for the prioritization of adaptation measures -1 Importance:

Capability to reduce/prevent significant or irreversible damages

and/or to protect many people?

Urgency:

Massive damages already occurring (adaptation deficit)? Long-

term measures with long handling time until measure becomes

effective?

Robustness and Flexibility:

Does the measure reflect the range of uncertainty and is it ‘no-

regret’, if the climate change is not the expected one? Might the

measure be adapted, revised or made undone at low cost?

Possible criteria for the prioritization of adaptation measures -2 Synergies and conflicts with other political goals:

Capability to reduce or at least not raise GHG emissions? Cross-

sectoral synergies/conflicts? Does the measure support other

political goals such as biodiversity or social justice?

Environmental Impacts:

Does the measure help to raise resilience of ecosystem services?

Is the measure invasive for ecosystems and their services?

Social Impacts:

Does the measure help to allocate risks in a fair manner? Is it

capable to bring advantages for broad parts of society? Does the

measure tackle threats for old, chronically sick and poor people?

Possible criteria for the prioritization of adaptation measures -3 Economic reasonability:

Does the measure support the general government to get

along with their long-term fiscal goals? How is the return of

investment/long-term CBA? Is the measure cost-effective?

Feasibility:

Is the measure politically opportune? Is it accepted by the

aggrieved parties? Is the measure easy to implement (not too

many political scales/parties involved)? How about its

mainstreaming potential?

The SALDO* Tool

* stands for: the Social costs of Adaptation: approaches for an evaLuation of aDaptation Options

Intermediate key messages

39

Some priorization criteria might already help to shape the

CVA structure

As mentioned yesterday: criteria for sector selection would

be good

This does not necessarily have to follow ‘objective’ criteria,

but can also include preferences, knowledge available,...

...but it should be written down, how sectoral composition

was decided

EU Adaptation Strategy

The general aim

To enhance the preparedness and capacity to respond to

the impacts of climatic change at EU, Member State,

regional and local levels

The basis

Commission White Paper (2009)

• 4 pillar action plan: knowledge base, mainstreaming,

international cooperation, policy instruments

• 33 long-term actions

• implementation from 2009-2012.

The objectives

(1) Knowledge Improve and widen the knowledge base and identify gaps

Further the understanding of vulnerabilities and adaptation options

Facilitate knowledge use and exchange

(2) Policy and markets Mainstream adaptation into policies at EU level, including revision of

legislation to include climate adaptation

Identify potential adaptation actions to make markets work more efficiently

(3) Cooperation and facilitation Facilitate cooperation with and between Member States, regions, cities and

other relevant stakeholders

Provide guidelines for adaptation

Roadmap

March 2013

Adoption of the STRATEGY

Background studies Consultations Cooperation with

Commission services

Impact Assessment to IA Board

START January 2012

EU Adaptation Strategy

Online public consultation May 21 to August 20 2012:

http://ec.europa.eu/clima/consultations/0015/index_en.htm

Intermediate key messages

43

EAS can help framing NAS, but

EAS can never be a substitutioin for NAS

Guidelines for setting up NAS are valuable

GO-ADAPT

Core objective: How do OECD countries meet the challenges

that adaptation governance brings about?

Challenges can be grouped in four categories:

1. Horizontal integration across different sectors

2. Vertical integration across policy scales (local-

regional/provincial-national-(EU-global))

3. (traditional) knowledge integration/uncertainties/scientific

evidence and confidence

4. Participation of the people concerned and affected

Results from project Go-adapt

Goal: Overview about governance approaches for climate change

adaptation in selected countries

10 OECD countries: ‘adaptation frontrunners’

Document analysis: scientific papers, policy documents, government

reports and internet documentation + semi-structured interviews with

administrative staff (state-of-the-art: 2010)

Political frame AU

National Climate Change Adaptation Framework (2007-2012/14)

AT Österreichische Anpassungsstrategie (2012)

CA National Climate Change Adaptation Framework (2005)

ES National Plan for Adaptation, including Working Programme I (2006) and II (2009)

DE Deutsche Anpassungsstrategie (2008), Aktionsplan (2011)

DK Danish Strategy for Adaptation to a Changing Climate (2008)

FI National Adaptation Strategy (2005)

NL

National adaptation strategy ‘Make room for Climate’ (2007)

Delta programme (2009) Delta Act (2012)

NO Klimatilpasning I Norge (2008)

UK

Climate Change Act (2008) Adapting to Climate Change: A framework

for Action (2008) National Adaptation Programme (expected

in 2013)

NAS

All NAS are framing documents

Majority has a soft, non-binding and advising character

Follow-up: work programmes, action plans, sectoral programmes, monitoring and evaluation

Legal frame

Only in NL and UK legally binding

UK: Climate Change Act 2008

NL: Delta Act

Responsibilities AU Government Department for Climate Change

AT Bundesministerium für Landwirtschaft,

Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasser

CA Natural Resources Canada, Environment

Canada

ES Ministry of Environment, Land and Sea,

Spanish Office on Climate Change (OECC)

DE Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz

und Reaktorsicherheit

DK Ministry for Climate Change

FI Ministry of Forestry and Agriculture

NL

Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water

Management (initially: Ministry of Housing,

Spatial Planning and the Environment*)

NO Ministry of Environment

UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural

Affairs (DEFRA)

Responsibilities are different:

in 6 countries – adaptation and mitigation policies in the same ministry

in 4 countries – adaptation and mitigation policies in different ministries

operational support from other public entities (e.g. EPAs)

Adaptation as coordination effort

NAS act as catalysts for the adaptation processes

‚traditional‘ governance approaches:

Strategies (NAS, mitigation, other strategies tackling climate change

adaptation)

Boards (inter-ministerial, federal-provincial, advisory boards/consulting

bodies

Consultations (classical stakeholder consultations)

New governance approaches:

Transdisciplinar (research) programmes (i.e. cooperation of scientists,

planners, decision makers and practicionners on project basis)

partnerships

„Adaptation opens new ways of cooperation“

What are partnerships and what is expected from establishing them?

partnership =

Permanent connection of transdisciplinary (science, policy, society)

stakeholders

Cooperation and CSO/NGO steering in a broadly defined field of work

(such as adaptation)

Often in geographic boundary/regional co-operations

CFE should be regarded as partnership and ‚give birth‘ to regionally

focussed (transdisciplinar) adaptation initiatives that might neglect

adminstrative borders

expectations

Reaction towards limited governmental problem solution capacity for

complex challenges effective, inclusive and legitimate

Innovative solutions and policies

Examples for regional partnerships

GB: Regional Climate Change

Partnerships (RCCP)

Canada: Regional Adaptation

Collaboratives (RAC)

Since 1999

Initiative for regional administrative units from UKCIP; support from Defra (since 2008) = bottom-up

11 partnerships

Goal: analysis and consulting for regional impacts and adaptation options

Broad thematic focus (tourism, planning, water, private companies/industry, etc.)

2009 - 2012

Intiated through RAC-Program of NRCAN = top-down

6 partnerships

Goal: cooperation to establish regional adaptation planning and decision support

Thematic focus on water management

Bauer, A., Feichtinger, J. & R. Steurer (2012)

Strengths and challenges of regional partnerships strengths

Addresses horizontal and

vertical fragmentation of

competences

Plenty of actors get involved

Flexibility

Reacts to local requirements

Strategically at

regional/national level

Mutual trust among key

actors

challenges

Inclusion of the non-interested

Sustainable engagement

Connection to national scale

Different background of the partners with regard to knowledge, resources, interests and activities

Common language

Lacking awareness for adaptation

Finances/Ressources

Intermediate key messages and Q

Regional partnerships for CCIVA are important

coordination mechanisms for actors within and

among policy scales

Regional partnerships might boost innovation and

diffusion of adaptation policies and -measures

NGOs/CSOs play a vital role in steering these

partnerships and could act as information

broker/translator, mediator, moderator

How is the chance for regional partnerships across

borders in CFE countries?

Summarizing recommendations -1

Plan adaptation as (cyclical) process along the policy cycle and make use of EU/UN guidance

Take care to integrate the adaptation process vertically (policy scales from local to supranational), horizontally (across partaking/impacted) sectors and transdisciplinary (policy makers, practitioners, companies, affected people and multi-disciplinar research teams)

Consider regional (meaning sub-national as well as cross-border) partnerships in which to integrate CSOs/NGOs as potential leaders as well as governance at all policy scales

Summarizing recommendations -2

Urge your government as well as other funders (private funding organisations, donators,…) to accompany the adaptation process with an applied (transdisciplinar) research programme as well as with fundamental research (e.g. for climate and economic modelling)

Once the adaptation process gets started, seek for ‘windows of opportunity’ to mainstream adaptation in other policy domains, look for synergies and make sure adaptation process does not become a singular/stand-alone/one-shot exercise

Aim at an integrative process and involve all relevant institutions and players (note that this complicates the process and might lead to some compromises, but is essential for political commitment for the NAS)

Summarizing recommendations -3

Link up with international processes and showcase your national adaptation process and efforts

Take care for awareness raising in your country, collaborate closely with the media and aim at roadshows and public consultations

Disseminate results adequately to different target groups/social milieus. Note for example that heat-stressed elderly people might not use the internet and that dissemination material should be tailor-made to at least the most important social milieus in your country

Try to get an overview of the damages/costs of weather events in your country, project costs by applying climate damage triggers projection to cost-relevant impact chains (climate scenarios) and socio-economic scenarios. Note: This helps to get high-level political commitment

References

Bauer, A., Feichtinger, J. & R. Steurer (2012): The Governance of Climate Change Adaptation in 10 OECD Countries: Challenges and Approaches. Journal of Environmental Polocy & Planning.

Bednar-Friedl, B., Koland, O., König, M., Raab, J. (2011): The Social Costs of Adaptation: Approaches to an Evaluation of Adaptation Options. (Publication in German).

EU(COM) (2013): An EU strategy on adaptation to climate change.

ETC/ACC (2010): Guiding principles for adaptation to climate change in Europe. Technical paper 2010/6.

Prutsch, A., Felderer, A., Balas, M., König, M., Clar, C. & R. Steurer (2013): Methods and tools for adaptation to climate change. Environment Agency Austria, Vienna. (Publication in German).

Pringle, P. (2011): AdaptME: Adaptation monitoring and evaluation toolkit. UKCIP, Oxford, UK.

UKCIP (2010): The UKCIP Adaptation Wizard V 3.0, UKCIP, Oxford

UN LDC expert group (2012): National Adaptation Plans

58

Umweltbundesamt www.umweltbundesamt.at

CFE Regional CVA workshop Batumi/Georgia ■ Jul 8-9 2013

Contact & Information

Dipl.-Geogr. Martin König

+43 1 31304 5961

martin.koenig@umweltbundesamt.at

www.klimawandelanpassung.at

Dr. Klaus Radunsky

+43 1 31304 5534

klaus.radunsky@umweltbundesamt.at

59

Umweltbundesamt www.umweltbundesamt.at/klima

CFE Regional CVA workshop Batumi/Georgia ■ Jul 8-9 2013