Transcript Capacity Building for Climate Change:

Capacity Building for Climate
Change: A Risk Management
Approach
Milind Kandlikar
Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability
University of British Columbia
Ambuj Sagar
John F. Kennedy School of Government
Harvard University
Risks from Climate : Why should we
care?
• Impacts will be felt in all sectors, esp. on natural resources (Water,
Agriculture, Forests and Coastal zones)
• The magnitude of impacts is likely to be substantial, and in some
cases, catastrophic:
– Climate variability (especially extreme events) will be the primary
driver.
– 2002 Monsoon failures in India may result in ~1% GDP loss.
– Recurring floods in Bangladesh (~5% of GDP).
– Hurricane Mitch (‘99) “set Honduras economic development back 20
years” (~75% of GDP).
• Adaptation will involve coping with climate shifts and variability in
the context of several factors that influence vulnerability.
Increasing Vulnerability from Weather Risks
Magnitude of Weather Impacts
Source: Benito Muller, Presentation at SB16
Climate Vulnerability and Development:
Common concerns
Average Mortality per Disaster
1200
Deaths per Event
Per-Capita Weather Impacts
1000
800
600
Series1
400
200
0
LHD
MHD
HHD
Human Development
Source: Benito Muller, Presentation at SB16
Source: World Disasters Report 2001
Risks from Climate Variability to the
Economy
• Business and increased uncertainty
do not mix well.
• Increased climate variability will
impact long-run growth since
resources will be needed to hedge
against climate related economic
uncertainty.
• Impacts:
– Agriculture and Natural Resources
– Financial sectors (Insurance and
Banking)
– Knock-on effect on other sectors
Global Weather Related
Losses in US $ Billion
1960
1965
1970
30
Total Economic
Loss
25
20
Average loss per
Decade
Insured Loss
Mean Insured
Loss per Decade
15
10
5
0
1975
1980
1985
1990
Risks from Climate Change: A
Historical Perspective
“The picture’s pretty bleak,
gentleman. The world’s
climates are changing, the
mammals are taking over and
we all have a brain about the
size of a walnut.”
The task is difficult but
humans are more intelligent
(and so, we hope, are our
political leaders).
Source: Gary Larson
Source: Stockholm Environmental Institute
Many different factors can make you more or less vulnerable to
climate variability
Coping with Climate Variability: A
Risk Perspective
Climate Variability
Coping Strategies
Science and Assessment
Before the fact:
Preparedness
Science of Climate
Climate only one input!
Useful knowledge
Design of local strategies
Broad Sector Studies
Decision making
under uncertainty
Incorporation into
practice
Training & policy shift
After the fact:
Relief
Disaster Relief
Management
Current Barriers
New Technologies and
Political ‘will’
Science and Assessments:
From Global to Local and Back
• Scientific knowledge:
– data, models, ‘facts’
• Difficulty:
– Uncertainty increases with
decreasing scale
Uncertainty
– influences “on the ground”
decisions
– prediction, economic value
Predictability
• Usable knowledge:
• Capacity building challenge:
– learning to extract useful local
info. in the face of uncertainty
– Not merely an academic exercise,
continuous interaction with the
“real” world.
Local
Regional
Scale
Global
Being prepared for climate change : If adaptation
is the answer, what is the question?
• Climate is one input among
many:
– goal is to reduce impact on economy
and society (human development)
• Multiple stressors
– Increased climate variability
– Change in local vulnerability over
time due to other factors
– Changes in operating “regimes”
• Multiple Stakeholders
– Added complexity and coordination
– Recognition that stakes vary
– The poorest take the biggest hit
Climate
Other
Stressors
Policy &
Politics
Capacity Building (I): Knowledge
Generation and Integration
• Knowledge Generation
– Knowledge about the climatic system (e.g., regional models)
– Ability to convert “raw” scientific data into useful predictive
information (e.g., probability of rainfall failure)
• Knowledge Integration
– Ability to integrate predictive climate information with other sector
information and local knowledge. Easier said than done!
– Ability to integrate disparate existing capacities. Find the experts.
– Scientists and analysts to learn region specific needs, and develop/
modify assessments in response. Two-way street.
– Public (Bureaucrats, NGOs) and private sector needs to be
intimately involved so facilitate feedback to analysts.
Capacity Building (II): Preparedness
and Response
• Whose capacity?
–
–
–
–
–
The entire “system”:
Knowledge generators (Scientists)
Mediators (NGOs, bureaucrats, markets)
End users (people, banks, private sector)
Infrastructure (road, rail, telecom)
• What does it require?
– Credible and Appropriate Knowledge
– Institutional adjustment
– Financial considerations
• Linking knowledge to action.
– Top-down and bottom up flows
Capacity Building: Three Core
Challenges
• Building Effective Knowledge
Generation Systems
– A system that moves information from
top-down to bottom up and vice-versa.
– Is credible with users
– That links with other efforts.
Capacity
Capacity
• Meeting Financial Considerations
– Who pays? Who calls the shots?
– How is the money spent?
Financing
• Enabling Institutional
Transformations
– Bridging existing gaps within and among
institutions.
– Making existing institutions more porous
– Building new institutions
Knowledge
systems
Institutional
Transformation
Some Lessons from Disaster
Mitigation Efforts (Red Cross)
• No coherent risk reduction “community”: professionals trying to
mitigate impacts are fragmented along institutional boundaries.
• Risk reduction cannot be viewed as a technical problem with
technical solutions. It is also a matter of enacting and enforcing laws,
building and maintaining accountable institutions, and producing
environment of mutual trust between government and the population.
an
• Community-based approaches lead to more accurate definition of
problems and solutions, because they draw on local expertise in living with
disasters. Communities at risk must trust those delivering the warnings.
• Vulnerability and capacity assessment (VCA) can provide
participants with greater awareness of their own potentialities. “Instead of seeing
themselves as victims, people tell themselves that they can influence what
happens.” So VCA is a capacity-building tool as well as a diagnostic measure.
Capacity Building Institution for
Climate Change: Some do’s and don’ts
• The scope of the Center must be framed in broad terms - else
a lot of narrowly focused capacity could be developed. Not very useful for
concerns about economy and human security.
• S&T capacity for knowledge generation is only one aspect of
the picture. It is critical that capacity building address how this knowledge
is used, and how feedback is incorporated.
• Do not reinvent the wheel. Many organizations tend to begin from
scratch when there is no need to. Leverage and build connections to existing
capacity.
• Research “success stories” before embarking on mission: Are
there other organizations that have been successful in similar missions?
(CGIAR Centers? IRI? Red Cross? WHO efforts? )
Capacity Building Institution for
Climate Change: Some do’s and don’ts
• Appropriate representation and participation is needed :
– those with understanding of local issues as well as various
stakeholders (especially most vulnerable)
– expert communities - suitable balance of S&T, social science,
public/private (knowledge generation) as well as implementation.
Need to think about entrenched interests!
• Convince Northern institutions to cede monopoly
position. Otherwise growth of center may be stunted because of
difficulty in attracting talented people, finances, etc.
– Global perspective often only on paper (e.g., IHDP)