Adapt or dieThe stakes of adaptation

Session 10

Mitigation and adaptation, two facets of the same problem Initial focus on mitigation, increased attention

paid to adaptation Key issue: balance between mitigation and

adaptation Both concerned with equity and fairness, though

equity is more discussed with regard to mitigation.

Not the same goal: Mitigation is about avoiding what would be impossible to

manage Adaptation is about managing what is impossible to avoid

Adaptation is concerned with costs, mitigation might bring some benefits as well

The costs of climate change Adaptation is also about a trade-off between the

costs of mitigation and of adaptation.

How to estimate the costs of the impacts of climate change? Difficult task:

Irreversibility Difficulty to measure the costs of some impacts Variety of the impacts Futurity: discount rate

Costs usually expressed as social costs of carbon (SCC), reported to the present through the discount rate. In 2005, SCC were estimated at $43/carbon ton, i.e. $12/CO2 ton.

Discount rate Rate used to calculate current price of future costs.

Four reasons justify the discounting of future costs: Natural preference for the present. Consumption levels will be higher in the future, thus the

marginal utility of consumption will be lower. Future consumption levels are uncertain. Technology is expected to make mitigation cheaper in the

future.

Usually, this rate is between 5-10%, but it is widely admitted that it has to be lower (1-4%) if the costs are irreversible.

Radical difference: a cost of $1 Mio in 100 years will be evaluated at $20,000 with a rate of 4%, and $500 with a rate of 8%.

Controversy Stern uses a discount rate close to 0%. Ethical argument, rebutted by some economists Especially Nordhaus, who applies a 3% discount rate:

costs are divided by 2 on a 25-year period.

Arrow: Critics of the Stern Review don’t think serious action to limit CO2 emissions is justified, because there remains substantial uncertainty about the extent of the costs of global climate change, and because these costs will be incurred far in the future. However, I believe that Stern’s fundamental conclusion is justified: we are much better off reducing CO2 emissions substantially than risking the consequences of failing to act, even if, unlike Stern, one heavily discounts uncertainty and the future.

The rationale for adaptation

Used to be (and still is) considered as an option that should follow (and could possibly undermine) mitigation.

Justified because some of climate impacts are already under way, while others are unavoidable.

Bargaining chip in the negotiation process.

Considered by some as the most efficient way to fight climate change, especially after the failure of Copenhagen.

What is it? Mitigation aims at avoiding unmanageable

events, while adaptation aims at managing unavoidable events.

IPCC definition:‘The adjustment of natural or human systems in the face of a new or changing environment’

Key concept: flexibility. Ex ante: Anticipation Ex post: Resilience

Adaptation should be conceived as a process rather than as a stable state.

Can take place at various levels: states, communities, households.

Vulnerability and adaptive capacity Two sides of a same coin.

Both are often reduced to: The level of development – Economic determinism The geographical exposure – Environmental

determinism

Other components include: Spatial organization Social cohesion Economic diversification Political and institutional organization

Adaptation in the climate talks Adaptation provides mostly local benefits >

makes it harder to justify collective action.

Recognised on the same basis as mitigation since Marakkech (2001) and New Dehli (2002)

Nairobi Work Program (2006)

Poznan (2008): Adaptation Fund

Can it still be used as a bargaining chip after Copenhagen?

Role of adaptation in reducing the damages

Different needs In developed countries, adaptation will be

required to reduce the costs and disruption caused by climate change, particularly from extreme weather events like storms, floods and heatwaves.

In the developing world, development itself is key to adaptation.

Overall goal: reduce vulnerability Role of information and education Role of governments

Is adaptation the new name of development? Adaptation remains difficult to define

Just an adjustment to change? Adaptation as a process

Depends highly on regional and local impacts, which are still difficult to predict

Development is key to adaptation Adaptation policies implemented by development

agencies But development can also lead to mal-adaptation

And adaptation has some specificities Key issue: funding vehicles

Funding How much does it cost?

Depends on the discount rate UNDP 2007: 86 bn US$ / year OAU 2009: 67 bn US$ / year for Africa

How is it funded? Least Advanced Countries Fund (re NAPAs) -

UNFCCC Special Climate Change Fund – UNFCCC Adaptation Fund – KP Copenhagen Green Climate Fund

Funding (ct’d) After Copenhagen:

Fast-start scheme: 10 Bio $ yearly on the 2010-2012, funded mostly by EU and Japan

This amount has not been delivered Goal: 100 Bio $ / year from 2012 onwards. Pledges to the Green Climate Fund are still

insufficient.

Issue of additionality Additional funding provided by development

agencies

How will it be spent? Three issues:

Who will control the use of the money? Is the money the payment of a debt or a voluntary

contribution? What kind of projects will be funded?

Is it possible to distinguish adaptation projects from development projects?

Where does adaptation start? Who’s getting the money?

Who’s the most vulnerable? Does the state need to channel all the funding?

At the end of the day, should we apply a perspective a retributive justice or of distributive justice?

Defining vulnerability How tricky can it be? A simple example:

Affected population (% of

the total population)

Affected population (absolute numbers)

Territory at risk (in km2)

Maldives 100 400 000 298

Tuvalu 100 11 000 26

Bangladesh 14 26 000 000 10 800

Egypt 12 12 000 000 2 100

Vietnam 9,6 10 000 000 25 000

India 5 60 000 000 n.d.

Fairness in adaptation

How to identify the countries that are the most vulnerable?

Article 4.8 of UNFCCC acknowledges a particular vulnerability for:

Small-island countries Countries with low-lying coastal areas Countries with arid and semi-arid areas, or forested areas Countries with areas prone to natural disasters Countries with areas liable to drought and desertification Countries with areas of high urban atmospheric pollution Countries with areas with fragile ecosystems Countries whose economies are highly dependent on fossile

fuels Land-locked and transit countries

Some possible adaptation projectsIn the UNFCCC negotiation text

FCCC/CP/2010/2, 10 February 2010

Some possible adaptation projectsIn NAPAs

Domains Examples of projects

HealthProtection of children and pregnant women against malaria (Benin)

Food securitySecuritization of cereal production through new irrigation systems in the provinces of dOudalan and Namentenga (Burkina Faso)

InfrastructuresRehabilitation of multiple-use canals in the district of Banteay Meas (Cambodia)

Coastal zones Promotionof fish culture (Gambia)

InsuranceLocal insurance programs for harvest in case of drought (Ethiopia)

Early warning systems and DRR

Upgrading of meteorological services(Kiribati)

Ecosystems Artificial lowering of lake Thorthomi (Bhutan)

EducationMaisntreaming of climate change in secondary schools curricula (Bangladesh)

Tourism Reinforcement of island protection (Maldives)Energy Development of hydro-energetic micro-stations (Burundi)

WaterConstruction of water reservoirs for communities of Grande-Anse (Haïti)

Resettlement in the name of adaptation Some of the most vulnerable zones are also

amongst the most densely populated. Some governments have already started moving

populations in prevision of future climate change impacts.

Examples: China – ‘Environmental Migration’ program in Inner

Mongolia Aimed at fighting against desertification Resettled nomadic pastoralists in towns and villages Nomadic pastoralists were considered as part of the problem

Vietnam – Flooded communities Resettling of villages in the Mekong delta Actually increased the vulnerability of communities

Three taboos of adaptation

In adaptation funding, what is the share justified only by climate change? Micro-insurance schemes against droughts

On which basis will the funding be allocated? On a first-come, first-served basis? Equity

criteria?

Assistance or compensation?

Want more?