Suraje Dessai

Does climate adaptation policy need probabilities

Abstract Estimating the likelihood of future climate change has become a priority objective within the research community. This is the case because of the advancement of science, because of user demand and because of the central role played by climate prediction in guiding adaptation policy. But are probabilities what climate policy really needs? This article reviews three key questions: (1) Why might we (not) need probabilities of climate change? (2) What are the problems in estimating probabilities? (3) How are researchers estimating probabilities? These questions are analysed within the context of adaptation to climate change. Overall, we conclude that the jury is still out on whether probabilities are useful for climate adaptation policy. The answer is highly context dependent and thus is a function of the goals and motivation of the policy analysis, the unit of analysis, timescale and the training of the analyst. Probability assessment in the context of climate change is always subjective, conditional and provisional. There are various problems in estimating the probability of future climate change, but reflexive human behaviour (i.e. actions explicitly influenced by information) is largely intractable in the context of prediction. Nonetheless, there is considerable scope to develop novel methodologies that combine conditional probabilities with scenarios and which are relevant for climate decision-making.

Does tomorrow ever come? Disaster narrative and public perceptions of climate change

The film The Day After Tomorrow depicts the abrupt and catastrophic transformation of the Earth’s climate into a new ice age, playing upon the uncertainty surrounding a possible North Atlantic thermohaline circulation (Gulf Stream) shutdown. This paper investigates the impact of the film on people’s perception of climate change through a survey of filmgoers in the UK. Analysis focuses on four issues: the likelihood of extreme impacts; concern over climate change versus other global problems; motivation to take action; and responsibility for the problem of climate change. It finds that seeing the film, at least in the short term, changed people’s attitudes; viewers were significantly more concerned about climate change, and about other environmental risks. However, while the film increased anxiety about environmental risks, viewers experienced difficulty in distinguishing science fact from dramatized science fiction. Their belief in the likelihood of extreme events as a result of climate change was actually reduced. Following the film, many viewers expressed strong motivation to act on climate change. However, although the film may have sensitized viewers and motivated them to act, the public do not have information on what action they can take to mitigate climate change.

Do we need better predictions to adapt to a changing climate

Many scientists have called for a substantial new investment in climate modeling to increase the accuracy, precision, and reliability of climate predictions. Such investments are often justified by asserting that failure to improve predictions will prevent society from adapting successfully to changing climate. This Forum questions these claims, suggests limits to predictability, and argues that society can (and indeed must) make effective adaptation decisions in the absence of accurate and precise climate predictions.

Challenges in using probabilistic climate change information for impact assessments: an example from the water sector

Climate change impacts and adaptation assessments have traditionally adopted a scenario-based approach, which precludes an assessment of the relative risks of particular adaptation options. Probabilistic impact assessments, especially if based on a thorough analysis of the uncertainty in an impact forecast system, enable adoption of a risk-based assessment framework. However, probabilistic impacts information is conditional and will change over time. We explore the implications of a probabilistic end-to-end risk-based framework for climate impacts assessment, using the example of water resources in the Thames River, UK. We show that a probabilistic approach provides more informative results that enable the potential risk of impacts to be quantified, but that details of the risks are dependent on the approach used in the analysis.

Hell and High Water: Practice-Relevant Adaptation Science

Adaptation requires science that analyzes decisions, identifies vulnerabilities, improves foresight, and develops options. Informing the extensive preparations needed to manage climate risks, avoid damages, and realize emerging opportunities is a grand challenge for climate change science. U.S. President Obama underscored the need for this research when he made climate preparedness a pillar of his climate policy. Adaptation improves preparedness and is one of two broad and increasingly important strategies (along with mitigation) for climate risk management. Adaptation is required in virtually all sectors of the economy and regions of the globe, for both built and natural systems (1).

Climate services for society: origins, institutional arrangements, and design elements for an evaluation framework

Climate services involve the generation, provision, and contextualization of information and knowledge derived from climate research for decision making at all levels of society. These services are mainly targeted at informing adaptation to climate variability and change, widely recognized as an important challenge for sustainable development. This paper reviews the development of climate services, beginning with a historical overview, a short summary of improvements in climate information, and a description of the recent surge of interest in climate service development including, for example, the Global Framework for Climate Services, implemented by the World Meteorological Organization in October 2012. It also reviews institutional arrangements of selected emerging climate services across local, national, regional, and international scales. By synthesizing existing literature, the paper proposes four design elements of a climate services evaluation framework. These design elements include: problem identification and the decision-making context; the characteristics, tailoring, and dissemination of the climate information; the governance and structure of the service, including the process by which it is developed; and the socioeconomic value of the service. The design elements are intended to serve as a guide to organize future work regarding the evaluation of when and whether climate services are more or less successful. The paper concludes by identifying future research questions regarding the institutional arrangements that support climate services and nascent efforts to evaluate them.

Adapting to Climate Change: Climate prediction: a limit to adaptation?

Introduction Projections of future climate and its impacts on society and the environment have been crucial for the emergence of climate change as a global problem for public policy and decision-making. Climate projections are based on a variety of scenarios, models and simulations which contain a number of embedded assumptions. Central to much of the discussion surrounding adaptation to climate change is the claim – explicit or implicit – that decision-makers need accurate, and increasingly precise, assessments of the future impacts of climate change in order to adapt successfully. According to Fussel (2007), ‘the effectiveness of pro-active adaptation to climate change often depends on the accuracy of regional climate and impact projections, which are subject to substantial uncertainty’. Similarly, Gagnon-Lebrun and Agrawala (2006) note that the level of certainty associated with climate change and impact projections is often key to determining the extent to which such information can be used to formulate appropriate adaptation responses. If true, these claims place a high premium on accurate and precise climate predictions at a range of geographical and temporal scales. But is effective adaptation tied to the ability of the scientific enterprise to predict future climate with accuracy and precision? This chapter addresses this important question by investigating whether or not the lack of accurate climate predictions represents a limit – or perceived limit – to adaptation.

Is Weather Event Attribution Necessary for Adaptation Funding

The new science of weather event attribution is unlikely to make useful contributions to adaptation funding decisions. International funds created largely for funding climate adaptation programs and projects in developing countries were first legally established through the seventh session of the Conference of the Parties (COP-7) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) held in 2001 at Marrakesh. In 2009, at COP-15 in Copenhagen, delegates “took note” of a pledge from developed countries to commit U.S.

Usable Science? The U.K. Climate Projections 2009 and Decision Support for Adaptation Planning

30 billion for the period 2010–2012, ramping up to

Public perception of drought and climate change in southeast England.

100 billion per annum by 2020, to support a mixture of climate adaptation and mitigation activities in developing countries. International adaptation finance has therefore been, and continues to be, a significant political issue for the FCCC and for international institutions, such as the World Bank, the Global Environment Facility, and regional development banks (1). Yet governance arrangements and allocation principles for these climate adaptation funds remain both underdeveloped and politically contested (2, 3). A Green Climate Fund for disbursing such funds was established at COP-16 in Cancún, and a Transitional Committee is currently developing operational documents for the fund to be adopted at COP-17 in Durban, South Africa, later this year.