From Climate Science to Adaptation Decision-Making Mark Stafford - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

From Climate Science to Adaptation Decision-Making Mark Stafford Smith Science Director, CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship CLIMATE ADAPTATION FLAGSHIP Canberra Study Tour, 17 th September 2013

Where I am going... 1. Brief introduction, & about the Climate Adaptation Flagship 2. General issues in thinking about adaptation to climate change 3. Linking modelling to user (policy and management) needs in adaptation management) needs in adaptation 4. Some examples of modelling impacts in different sectors 5. Modelling adaptation benefits 6. Who should care about adapting?

Who we are Darwin Cairns Atherton People 6500 Townsville 2 sites Alice Springs Divisions 13 Rockhampton Bribie Island Locations 58 Murchison Toowoomba Brisbane Gatton 6 sites Myall Vale Armidale Geraldton 2 sites Narrabri 2 sites Flagships Flagships 11 11 Mopra Newcastle Newcastle Parkes Parkes Perth Perth Adelaide Adelaide Griffith 3 sites Irymple Sydney 5 sites 2 sites Canberra 7 sites Canberra Wodonga Budget $1B+ Werribee 2 sites Belmont Melbourne 5 sites Geelong Hobart Sandy Bay Top 1% of global research 62% of our people hold With our university institutions in 14 of 22 research university degrees partners, we develop fields 2000 doctorates 650 postgraduate Top 0.1% in 4 research fields 500 masters research students CSIRO: positive impact | 3 |

Global connections: publications No. joint publications 100+ 50-99 2-49 Nil We work with • Foreign governments • International foundations partners in over • Small to large companies • Leading scientific institutions 80 countries • Multi-nationals • Over 700 research activities CSIRO: positive impact | 4 |

What we do: our distinct role Large scale Multidisciplinary Mission directed We provide Our research We take a scientific Flagships collaborative responses to responses to promote radical promote radical approach to approach to major national innovation to scientific and global reshape research and challenges industries delivery CSIRO: positive impact | 5 |

National Research Flagships BIOSECURITY CLIMATE ADAPTATION DIGITAL PRODUCTIVITY ENERGY TRANSFORMED AND SERVICES FOOD FUTURES FUTURE MINERALS DOWN UNDER PREVENTATIVE HEALTH MANUFACTURING SUSTAINABLE WATER FOR A WEALTH FROM OCEANS AGRICULTURE HEALTHY COUNTRY CSIRO: positive impact | 6 |

National Research Flagships BIOSECURITY CLIMATE ADAPTATION DIGITAL PRODUCTIVITY ENERGY TRANSFORMED AND SERVICES FOOD FUTURES FUTURE MINERALS DOWN UNDER PREVENTATIVE HEALTH MANUFACTURING SUSTAINABLE WATER FOR A WEALTH FROM OCEANS AGRICULTURE HEALTHY COUNTRY CSIRO: positive impact | 7 |

Climate Adaptation Flagship Goal To equip policy makers, industries and communities with practical and effective adaptation options to climate change and variability and, climate change and variability and, in doing so, create in the national interest $3 billion per annum in net benefits by 2030.

Research strategy delivers to sectoral clients Xiaoming Wang Craig James Mark Howden Kevin Hennessy ~150 full time equivalents across ~300 staff members Operating since 2008, now ~$40m/y budget, ~35% external (Water issues in Water for Healthy Country Flagship )

Adaptation science: three perspectives, all needed Adaptation information and decision-making Evaluation, adaptation pathways, future scenarios, risk management modes, etc Adaptive Adaptation behaviours options and and institutions technologies Behaviours, incentives, Cultivars, materials, barriers, adaptive capacity, farming systems, urban vulnerabilities, etc planning, etc

International activities ~20% of our activities, in partnership with other countries and AusAID, ACIAR CLIMATE ADAPTATION

Where I am going... 1. Brief introduction, & about the Climate Adaptation Flagship 2. General issues in thinking about adaptation to climate change 3. Linking modelling to user (policy and management) needs in adaptation management) needs in adaptation 4. Some examples of modelling impacts in different sectors 5. Modelling adaptation benefits 6. Who should care about adapting?

IPCC 2007: 1.1-6.4 ° C? – probably not any more Observed changes in Australia Mean temps. +0.9°C since 1950 #days >90 th percentile: up 40% since 1980 Heatwaves Mean rainfall Up in N, down in W and S / E since 1950 Heavy rainfall # days >30mm: down in S & E, up in N since 1950 Fire weather FFDI up at 16 of 38 sites 1973-2010 Sea level Sea level Rising 2.8-3.2mm/y since 1993 Rising 2.8-3.2mm/y since 1993 2°C: 2065±10y IPCC (2007) Summary for Policy Makers (Fig.SPM.5)

Australia: vulnerable among OECD nations < °C global warming > (a) Qualitatively different levels of impact, vulnerabilities and adaptation needs at 4°C compared to 2°C (b) Proactive adaptation needed (b) Proactive adaptation needed to plan for stabilising at 2°C are very different to those needed for 2°C heading for 4°C+ Could be disempowering… IPCC (2007) (Fig.11.4: Australia)

Managing the risk from diverging possible futures 6 ean Global Warming (°C) Three scenarios for the future Runaway 5 4 Stabilisation 3 2 Recovery Recovery Me 1 1 0 MEP2030 1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090 A1FI-GaR MEP2010 (Overshoot) Year Incremental Adaptation must adaptation increasingly manage to changes the risk of divergent of reasonable possible futures, and certainty possible need for transformation Stafford Smith et al 2011, Phil.Trans.Roy.Soc. 369

Working towards adaptation planning It all seems disempoweringly complex... � Getting past impacts, vulnerability and adaptive capacity assessments, to adaptation decision pathways – Not all decisions are the same – Not all aspects of the future are equally uncertain – There are systematic – There are systematic approaches!

Problem or solution-centred?? � NB Problems with indices AGO 2006

Two indices for Pacific Islands Top-down: EVI - Environmental Vulnerability Index Participatory: SLA - Sustainable SLA - Sustainable Livelihoods Analysis Park et al . (2012). Environmental Science and Policy 15, 23-37.

Problem or solution-centred?? Willows & Connell 2003 UKCIP AGO 2006

Adaptation timing and priorities Today’s decisions must account for how long their effects will be felt Stafford Smith et al, PhilTransRoySoc 2011 (after Jones & McInnes 2004)

Sea level rise: 1m within 2080-2170 Uncertainty? Direction and magnitude ~sure, timing uncertain • Temperature to at least 2°C, sea level rise to >1m, non-polar ice sheet loss Direction sure, magnitude uncertain Direction sure, magnitude uncertain • Atmospheric CO2, ocean acidification, temperature extremes, total rainfall in some regions, bushfire weather, rainfall extremes Even direction uncertain • Regional rainfall in some regions, cyclones, etc 2150 2200 2250 2300

Managing risk Hallegatte (2009) Global Environmental Change 29 : 240-7 (i) selecting ‘no-regret’ strategies that yield benefits even in absence of climate change ( e.g. better disaster preparedness, ‘CAR’ principles) ) (ii) favouring reversible and flexible options ( e.g. real options, delaying development ) (iii) buying ‘safety margins’ in new investments ( e.g. heavier dam foundations ) (iv) promoting soft adaptation strategies, including [a] long-term [perspective] ( e.g. social networks, insurance, water demand reduction ) (v) reducing decision time horizons ( e.g. shorter lifetime buildings ) Dessai & van de Sluijs (2007) • 11 frameworks for decision-making; 12 tools for assessing uncertainty Ranger et al . (2010) • ‘ Adaptation in the UK: a decision making process ’ � Classify in terms of decision types and future change risks faced

Systematising responses 1. Short lifetime decisions • Mainly adapt incrementally, watch out for thresholds 2. Long lifetime decisions (where most risk falls to government) 1. Monotonic, ~certain to occur, timing unsure – E.g. 2°C, 1m sea level rise, more hot periods, more extremes, more CO2 – Plan for these, look for no regrets actions, use precautionary principle 2. Direction sure but extent unsure 2. Direction sure but extent unsure – E.g. drying SW Australia and reduced water flows, fire risk in many areas – Use risk management, ‘soft adaptations’ to delay expensive decisions (but prepare for these), ‘real options’ analysis 3. Even direction of response unsure – Robust decision-making, risk hedging against alternative futures, etc 3. And plan adaptation pathways, with critical decision-points • May include no action options, but deliberatively! Stafford Smith et al, PhilTransRoySoc 2010

The ‘classic’ adaptation pathway concept Adaptive & maladaptive spaces Maladaptive space 3 3 3 Adaptive Adaptive space landscape, d 1 c 1 a b 1 boundaries 1 e 1 less certain less certain 2 2 2 2 2 2 f further into 2 g 2 2 Decision points and h the future alternative pathways 3 3 Maladaptive space Current decision point Dead-ends that can be re-assessed over time (or other indicators, e.g. SLR) Wise et al ., GEC forthcoming

Flexible decision pathways: Thames Estuary Lowe et al, UK Met Office 2009

Recent formalisations of pathways Haasnoot et al ., GEC 2013