Michael D. Mastrandrea

Prioritizing climate change adaptation needs for food security in 2030

Investments aimed at improving agricultural adaptation to climate change inevitably favor some crops and regions over others. An analysis of climate risks for crops in 12 food-insecure regions was conducted to identify adaptation priorities, based on statistical crop models and climate projections for 2030 from 20 general circulation models. Results indicate South Asia and Southern Africa as two regions that, without sufficient adaptation measures, will likely suffer negative impacts on several crops that are important to large food-insecure human populations. We also find that uncertainties vary widely by crop, and therefore priorities will depend on the risk attitudes of investment institutions.

Assessing dangerous climate change through an update of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “reasons for concern”

Article 2 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [United Nations (1992) http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf. Accessed February 9, 2009] commits signatory nations to stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that “would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference (DAI) with the climate system.” In an effort to provide some insight into impacts of climate change that might be considered DAI, authors of the Third Assessment Report (TAR) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) identified 5 “reasons for concern” (RFCs). Relationships between various impacts reflected in each RFC and increases in global mean temperature (GMT) were portrayed in what has come to be called the “burning embers diagram.” In presenting the “embers” in the TAR, IPCC authors did not assess whether any single RFC was more important than any other; nor did they conclude what level of impacts or what atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases would constitute DAI, a value judgment that would be policy prescriptive. Here, we describe revisions of the sensitivities of the RFCs to increases in GMT and a more thorough understanding of the concept of vulnerability that has evolved over the past 8 years. This is based on our expert judgment about new findings in the growing literature since the publication of the TAR in 2001, including literature that was assessed in the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), as well as additional research published since AR4. Compared with results reported in the TAR, smaller increases in GMT are now estimated to lead to significant or substantial consequences in the framework of the 5 “reasons for concern.”

Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation: Special report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change

This Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX) has been jointly coordinated by Working Groups I (WGI) and II (WGII) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The report focuses on the relationship between climate change and extreme weather and climate events, the impacts of such events, and the strategies to manage the associated risks. This Special Report, in particular, contributes to frame the challenge of dealing with extreme weather and climate events as an issue in decision making under uncertainty, analyzing response in the context of risk management. The report consists of nine chapters, covering risk management; observed and projected changes in extreme weather and climate events; exposure and vulnerability to as well as losses resulting from such events; adaptation options from the local to the international scale; the role of sustainable development in modulating risks; and insights from specific case studies. (LN)

Changes in impacts of climate extremes: human systems and ecosystems

Chapter 3 evaluates observed and projected changes in the frequency, intensity, spatial extent, and duration of extreme weather and climate events. This physical basis provides a picture of climate change and extreme events. But it does not by itself indicate the impacts experienced by humans or ecosystems. For example, for some sectors and groups of people, severe impacts may result from relatively minor weather and climate events. To understand impacts triggered by weather and climate events, the exposure and vulnerability of humans and ecological systems need to be examined. The emphasis of this chapter is on negative impacts, in line with this reports focus on managing the risks of extreme events and disasters. Weather and climate events, however, can and often do have positive impacts for some people and ecosystems. In this chapter, two different types of impacts on human and ecological systems are examined: (i) impacts of extreme weather and climate events; and (ii) extreme impacts triggered by less-than-extreme weather or climate events (in combination with non-climatic factors, such as high exposure and/or vulnerability). Where data are available, impacts are examined from sectoral and regional perspectives. Throughout this chapter, the term climate extremes will be used to refer in brief to extreme weather and extreme climate events as defined in the Glossary and discussed more extensively in Section 3.1.2.

Integrated assessment of abrupt climatic changes

One of the most controversial conclusions to emerge from many of the first generation of integrated assessment models (IAMs) of climate policy was the perceived economic optimality of negligible near-term abatement of greenhouse gases.Typically, such studies were conducted using smoothly varying climate change scenarios or impact responses. Abrupt changes observed in the climatic record and documented in current models could substantially alter the stringency of economically optimal IAM policies. Such abrupt climatic changes-or consequent impacts-would be less foreseeable and provide less time to adapt, and thus would have far greater economic or environmental impacts than gradual warming.We extend conventional, smooth IAM analysis by coupling a climate model capable of one type of abrupt change to a well-established energy-economy model (DICE).We compare the DICE optimal policy using the standard climate sub-model to our version that allows for abrupt change-and consequent enhanced climate damage-through changes in the strength (and possible collapse) of the North Atlantic thermohaline circulation (THC). We confirm the potential significance of abrupt climate change to economically optimal IAM policies, thus calling into question all previous work neglecting such possibilities-at the least for the wide ranges of relevant social and climate system parameters we consider. In addition, we obtain an emergent property of our coupled social-natural system model: optimal policies that do consider abrupt changes may, under relatively low discount rates, calculate emission control levels sufficient to avoid significant abrupt change, whereas optimalpolicies disregarding abrupt change would not prevent this non-linear event. However, there is a threshold indiscount rate above which the present value of future damages is so low that even very large enhanced damages in the 22nd century, when a significant abrupt change such as a THC collapse would be most likely to occur, do not increase optimal control levels sufficiently to prevent such a collapse. Thus, any models not accounting for potential abrupt non-linear behavior and its interaction with the discounting formulation are likely to miss an important set of possibilities relevant to the climate policy debate.

Tolerance adaptation and precipitation changes complicate latitudinal patterns of climate change impacts.

Global patterns of biodiversity and comparisons between tropical and temperate ecosystems have pervaded ecology from its inception. However, the urgency in understanding these global patterns has been accentuated by the threat of rapid climate change. We apply an adaptive model of environmental tolerance evolution to global climate data and climate change model projections to examine the relative impacts of climate change on different regions of the globe. Our results project more adverse impacts of warming on tropical populations due to environmental tolerance adaptation to conditions of low interannual variability in temperature. When applied to present variability and future forecasts of precipitation data, the tolerance adaptation model found large reductions in fitness predicted for populations in high-latitude northern hemisphere regions, although some tropical regions had comparable reductions in fitness. We formulated an evolutionary regional climate change index (ERCCI) to additionally incorporate the predicted changes in the interannual variability of temperature and precipitation. Based on this index, we suggest that the magnitude of climate change impacts could be much more heterogeneous across latitude than previously thought. Specifically, tropical regions are likely to be just as affected as temperate regions and, in some regions under some circumstances, possibly more so.

Emergent Risks and Key Vulnerabilities

This chapter assesses climate-related risks in the context of Article 2 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). {Box 19.1} Such risks arise from the interaction of the evolving exposure and vulnerability of human, socioeconomic, and biological systems with changing physical characteristics of the climate system. {19.2} Alternative development paths influence risk by changing the likelihood of climatic events and trends (through their effects on greenhouse gases (GHGs) and other emissions) and by altering vulnerability and exposure. {19.2.4, Figure 19-1, Box 19-2}.

Climate change in California: scenarios and approaches for adaptation

Even with aggressive global action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the climate will continue to change for decades due to previous emissions and the inertia in biogeophysical and social systems. Therefore, as a complement to mitigation actions, society must also focus on enhancing its capacity to adapt to the unavoidable impacts of climate change that we are already experiencing and will continue to experience over the next few decades. Resource managers, regional planners, and government agencies need to consider climate risks in their planning. We provide an overview of climate change scenarios for California and suggestions on the use of climate projections in state and regional planning efforts in the future.

The benefits of climate change mitigation in integrated assessment models: the role of the carbon cycle and climate component

Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) are an important tool to compare the costs and benefits of different climate policies. Recently, attention has been given to the effect of different discounting methods and damage estimates on the results of IAMs. One aspect to which little attention has been paid is how the representation of the climate system may affect the estimated benefits of mitigation action. In that respect, we analyse several well-known IAMs, including the newest versions of FUND, DICE and PAGE. Given the role of IAMs in integrating information from different disciplines, they should ideally represent both best estimates and the ranges of anticipated climate system and carbon cycle behaviour (as e.g. synthesised in the IPCC Assessment reports). We show that in the longer term, beyond 2100, most IAM parameterisations of the carbon cycle imply lower CO2 concentrations compared to a model that captures IPCC AR4 knowledge more closely, e.g. the carbon-cycle climate model MAGICC6. With regard to the climate component, some IAMs lead to much lower benefits of mitigation than MAGICC6. The most important reason for the underestimation of the benefits of mitigation is the failure in capturing climate dynamics correctly, which implies this could be a potential development area to focus on.

Understanding and responding to danger from climate change: the role of key risks in the IPCC AR5

The IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) identifies key risks in a changing climate to inform judgments about danger from climate change and to empower responses. In this article, we introduce the innovations and implications of its approach, which extends analysis across sectors and regions, and consider relevance for future research and assessment. Across key risks in the AR5, we analyze the changing risk levels and potential for risk reduction over the next few decades, an era with some further committed warming, and in the second half of the 21st century and beyond, a longer-term era of climate options determined by the ambition of global mitigation. The key risk assessment underpins the IPCC’s conclusion that increasing magnitudes of warming increase the likelihood of severe, pervasive, and irreversible impacts. Here, we emphasize central challenges in understanding and communicating risks. These features include the importance of complex interactions in shaping risks, the need for rigorous expert judgment in evaluating risks, and the centrality of values, perceptions, and goals in determining both risks and responses.