Upload
ingrid-le-ru
View
176
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Downscaling the “Reasons for Concerns” to the Local
Government Level as a Prerequisite for Tailored Adaptation
and Disaster Risk Reduction – A Case Study from Austria
“Our Common Future Under Climate Change” Conference
Paris, 8 July 2015
1 alpS Centre for Climate Change Adaptation, 2 Zentralanstalt für Meteorologie und Geodynamik 3 Österreichische Agentur für Ernährungssicherheit, 4 Umweltbundesamt GmbH 5 Österreichisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, 6 Bundesforschungszentrum für Wald 7 Interfakultärer Fachbereich Geoinformatik - Z_GIS, 8 International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Angela Michiko Hama1, Ivonne Anders2, Andreas Baumgarten3, Helene Berthold3, Paul Dobesberger1, Brigitte Eder1, Astrid Felderer4, Oliver
Fritz5, Robert Jandl6, Markus Keuschnig1, Stefan Kienberger7, Markus Leitner4, Žiga Malek8, Reinhard Mechler8, Ina Meyer5, Ivo Offenthaler4,
Andreas Schaffhauser2, Franz Sinabell5, Raphael Spiekermann7
ARISE-Projekt
Goal and Objectives
Developing a decision support system for climate-sensitive iterative risk
management as a key adaptation approach
Identifying and bridging the gaps between global CCA and DRR frameworks,
research and policy and national, subnational as well as local risk management,
adaptation needs and requirements
Downscaling IPCC’s “Burning Embers - Reasons for Concern” to the local level
(LBE) with respect to hazard types and sectors including a consideration of key
risk drivers
Supporting the building of resilience and adaptation capacities at the local level
via an LBE-integrated, iterative risk management approach
2
ARISE-Projekt
Background – IPCC’s Reasons for Concern
Source: IPCC AR5, SPM 3
Background – from global to local
First application of global Burning Embers
concept at the local government level
Study site: City of Lienz, East Tyrol, Austria
4
Source: Z_GIS/ARISE; IPPC AR5 SPM
ARISE-Projekt
Approach (I)
Blended approach of top-down and
bottom-up as well as model-driven
and participatory methodologies
Co-creation of knowledge and co-
design of tools and measures
5
ARISE-Projekt
Approach (II)
• Identification of risk drivers
• Local and national knowledge base
• Gap analysis
Prerequisites
Framework Development
• Downscaling climate scenarios
• Co-designing socio-economic scenarios
• Participatory LBE-generation
Framework Application
Integration RM
Implemen- tation
• Evaluation of LBEs and integration in RM
• Co-designing risk-based adaptation measures
• Selection and implementation of pilot measures; testing of tool
• Results analysis and finalization of LBE concept
• M&E strategy
• Definition of framework
• Adaptation of Burning Embers
• Development of methodology
6
ARISE-Projekt
First Results – Qualitative Expert Interviews
More than 80% of respondents believe that the climate and hazard situation
have changed
Perceived increase of heavy precipitation events and mass movements
Perceived increase in temperature extremes and heat waves
More tailored awareness raising and outreach required as well as better
scenarios
7 Copyright: City of Lienz
First Results – Downscaled Climate Scenarios – A1B (I)
Mean temperature + 1.6 – 2.8°C
Summer days (tmax > 25 °C) 0 – +10 days
Hot days (tmax > 30 °C) 0 – +1.3 days
Frost days (tmin < 0 °C) - 45 – - 22 days
Temperature
Annual precipitation -200mm – + 100mm
Heavy precipitation days
(precipitation >= 30mm)
- 2.5 - + 2.7 days
Precipitation
Changes until mid-century
(reference period 1981-2010)
8
ARISE-Projekt
First Results – Downscaled Climate Scenarios (II)
Hot Days
Lienz
Hot Days 1981/2010
Mean no.of days/year with tmax>= 30°C
9
ARISE-Projekt
First Results – Downscaled Climate Scenarios (III)
Lienz
Precipitation > 30mm 1981/2010
Mean no. of days/year with precip >30mm
Mean no. of events/year
10
ARISE-Projekt
First Results – Socio-Economic Scenarios (I)
11
First Results – Socio-Economic Scenarios (II)
12
“Matching” Stakeholder Scenarios and Shared Socio-Economic Pathways
Source: WIFO/ARISE
SSP1 – Sustainability
Taking the Green Road
Participatory
Scenarios Lienz
"Boom"
"Stagnation"
Shared Socio-Economic
Pathways (SSP, IPCC) –
Narrative
SSP3 – Regional Rivalry
A Rocky Road
Sustainability Business-as-Usual
First Results – Socio-Economic Scenarios – Infrastructure
& Natural Hazards
13
Infrastructure facilities essential for functionality of economy and society
SUSTAINABILITY
Preventive, pro-active risk management
Sustainable energy supply, decentralized
energy provision concepts based on
renewables
Supra-regional water supply and
wastewater systems
Sustainable mobility concepts and offers
based on multi-modality and “on
demand” offers
Population to remain stable on the whole
Infrastructure facilities to be maintained
and improved in terms of quality
BUSINESS-AS-USUAL
Re-active natural hazard and risk
management, high costs
Spatial planned insufficiently focused on
future (developments), high follow-up
costs
High maintenance efforts of
infrastructure, not financially viable due
to shrinking population
ARISE-Projekt
Current and Next Steps
Application of LBE-Framework
Risk analysis of current state including system and sectoral relevance as well
as confidence levels – local expert-based
Risk analysis of future state including system and sectoral relevance as well
as confidence – local expert-based and study/scientific expert-based
Generation of LBEs per risk type and specific risk
Integration in municipal risk management operations and strategies
Desk review of climate-sensitive risk management measures/risk-based
adaptation measures and development of risk information tool
Design and test runs of customized measures for top risks in collaboration
with local decision-makers
14
ARISE-Projekt
Challenges
Communicating the concept
Dealing with uncertainty
Mainstreaming of DRR into all parts of
administration
Delineating the system boundaries
“Reasons for Concern” more than
aggregated individual risks
15
Thank you.
This project is funded by ‘The Climate and Energy Fund of the Austrian Federal Government’ within the framework of the
‘Austrian Climate Research Programme’