iav: challenges and future steps

7
IAV: challenges and future steps Workshop on Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (IAV) Community Coordination January 8-9, 2009 NCAR Paty Romero Lankao

Upload: tamanna-darshan

Post on 02-Jan-2016

31 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

IAV: challenges and future steps. Workshop on Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (IAV) Community Coordination January 8-9, 2009 NCAR. Paty Romero Lankao. Outline. How to Go beyond RH & connect IAV (local) with WG1/ESM, WG3 (global)? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: IAV: challenges and future steps

IAV: challenges and future steps

Workshop on Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and

Vulnerability (IAV) Community Coordination January 8-9, 2009

NCAR

Paty Romero Lankao

Page 2: IAV: challenges and future steps

Outline

How to

• Go beyond RH & connect IAV (local) with WG1/ESM, WG3 (global)?

• Make the best of a diverse IAV community?

• Deal with North-South divide, research gap?

Wilhelmi (2007)

Page 3: IAV: challenges and future steps

Pros & Cons of Risk Hazard (RH)

• Well represented in IPCC

• Emphasizes exposure, mostly to climate hazards

• Relatively “simple”, fits with WG2 and WG3 approaches

• Vulnerability as outcome of relatively linear analysis

• Does not capture complexity & dynamics of vulnerability, adaptive capacity & adaptation

Sources: Hibbard et al (2007), Turner et al (2003),

Page 4: IAV: challenges and future steps

Implications of multi-scale nature of climate drivers and impacts

• Selected scale can frame investigation and shape results

• Selection of a single scale can frame a project to narrowly

• Detailed scale Information contains more variance, but turns modeling more difficult

• Full learning hence requires attention to a variety of scales & real collaboration between WG1, WG2 & WG1

Source: Wilbanks (2002)

Page 5: IAV: challenges and future steps

Lineages of vulnerability research– Diverse approaches

– A fully complex reality

– Highly fragmentary

– Competing paradigms

– Fewer data

– Results attached to particular approaches

– Difficult to generalize

•Make research-results compatible & comparable

•Use quantitative tools (build bridges with ESM and WGII) & combine them with qualitative tools

•Identify prototypic causal loops

•Do not forget importance of context, multi-scales, and innovative concepts, frameworks (e.g. responsive capacity)

•Include other communities (e.g., development, urban designers)

Page 6: IAV: challenges and future steps

North-South divide, research gap

Source Rozensweig and Casassa et al 2007. Locations of significant changes in observations of physical systems (e.g. snow & ice) and biological systems (terrestrial, marine & freshwater), are shown together with surface air temperature changes over the period 1970 to 2004

-Initiatives to foster research and participation (IPCC, AIACC). Yet constraints persist:

a) Financial and institutional capacity

b) data, state of the art

c) language barriers

Source: De Sherbinin et al. (2007). The hazard risk of each city represents a cumulative score based on risk of cyclones, flooding, landslides & drought

- North dominates agenda

- Agenda biases, emphasis in

-certain regions

-themes (mitigation)

-dimensions (physical, cost-analysis)

Page 7: IAV: challenges and future steps

Thank you !