Upload
jeffrey-ward
View
214
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Taking uncertainty on board in decision making
The example of adaptation to climate change
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Risk = Probability x Consequence
Lay attitudes involve more than just ‘risk’
• Severity and Nature of Consequences• Cultural Orientations (there is no single ‘public’)• Social Amplification Effects• Trust in Risk Managers / Science
Attitudes to risk and uncertainty
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Nederland Later
Major anticipated problem areas•Sea level•River runoff•Groundwater pressure
hotspothotspothotspothotspot
Adaptation under what uncertainty?• Planned adaptation
– to single scenario of anticipated climate impacts (KNMI 2000 scenario)no uncertainty
– to single scenario of anticipated climate impacts + to variabilitystatistical uncertainty (without epistemic unc.)
– to range of scenario’s of anticipated climate impacts (KNMI 2006 scenario’s)scenario uncertainty
– to range of scenario’s of anticipated climate impacts + imaginable climate surprises (MNP Nederland Later)scenario uncertainty + recognized ignorance
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Decision-making frameworks• Top down approaches
– Prevention Principle– IPCC approach– Risk approaches
• Bottom up approaches– Precautionary Principle– Engineering safety margin– Anticipating design– Resilience– Adaptive management– Human development approaches
• Mixed approaches– Adaptation Policy Framework– Robust decision making
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
IPCC seven step approach:1) Define problem (study area, sectors, etc.);2) Select method of assessment most appropriate to the
problems;3) Test methods/conduct sensitivity analysis;4) Select and apply climate change scenarios;5) Assess biophysical and socio-economic impacts;6) Assess autonomous adjustments;7) Evaluate adaptation strategies.
(Carter et al. 1994, Parry and Carter 1998)
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Risk approach (UK-CIP)Eight stages decision framework:1. Identify problem and objectives2. Establish decision-making criteria3. Assess risk4. Identify options5. Appraise options6. Make decision7. Implement decision8. Monitor, evaluate and review.
Flexible characteristics:- cricular- Feedback and iteration- Stages 3, 4 and 5 are tiered. (identify, screen, prioritise and
evaluate before more detailed risk assessments and options appraisals are required.)
“The risk assessment endpoints should help the decision-maker define levels of risk (probabilities and consequences or impacts) that are acceptable, tolerable or unacceptable”
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
No regrets
• Favour adaptation strategies which will yield benefits (for other, less uncertain, policy concerns) regardless of whether or not climate impacts will occur.
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Precautionary Principle“When human activities may lead to morally unacceptable harm
that is scientifically plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that harm.
Morally unacceptable harm refers to harm to humans or the environment that is• threatening to human life or health, or• serious and effectively irreversible, or• inequitable to present or future generations, or• imposed without adequate consideration of the human rights of those affected.The judgment of plausibility should be grounded in scientific analysis. Analysis should
be ongoing so that chosen actions are subject to review.Uncertainty may apply to, but need not be limited to, causality or the bounds of the
possible harm.Actions are interventions that are undertaken before harm occurs that seek to avoid or
diminish the harm. Actions should be chosen that are proportional to the seriousness of the potential harm, with consideration of their positive and negative consequences, and with an assessment of the moral implications of both action and inaction. The choice of action should be the result of a participatory process. ”
(UNESCO COMEST 2005)
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Engineering Safety Factor / Conservative Design
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Long term surprise scenario margin(e.g. Greenland, WAIS)
Engineering safety margin
Stronger foundation thanneeded under most plausiblescenarios
Flexibility to build higher dike later
“Anticipating design”
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Adaptive management• Iterative feedback and learning based approach• Management as experiment• Emphasis in process and continuous learning
(trial and error, small step->evaluate->adjust)• Flexibility, flexibility, flexibility!
• Especially useful in small scale systems• May fail in case of surprises and discontinuities
in system response (if past experience from which you learned is not a key to the future)
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Resilience
• If uncertainties about climate change are large, one can still know how the resilience of social-ecological systems can be enhanced
• Resilience is the capacity of a system to tolerate disturbance without collapsing into a qualitatively different, usually undesired, state
www.resalliance.org
Principles:
•Homeostasis
•Omnivory
•High flux
•Flatness
•Buffering
•Redundancy
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Robust decision-making• Models are used as exploratory tools
instead of prediction• Uncertainty ranges to be explored can
be informed by the current state of scientific knowledge
• Adaptation decisions are assessed against climate change uncertainties until a robust strategy (least sensitive to uncertainties) is identified
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Problem: Dimensioning of water supply system
Additional water required (Ml/d) to maintain levels of service in 2030 under different demand scenarios as a function of regional climate response uncertainty
Robustness exploration (Dessai, 2005)
25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50
-50
-25
0
25
50
Summer precipitation change (%)
Climate impacts uncertainty (%)
AWS
-75--50 -50--25 -25-0 0-25 25-50 50-75 75-100
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
decision making under uncertainty frameworks
Statistical uncertainty
Scenario uncertainty
Recognized ignorance
& surprises
IPCC approach + ++ --
Risk approaches ++ + --
Engineering safety margin ++ -
Anticipating design ++ + +
Resilience + ++
Adaptive management ++ - --
Prevention Principle ++ --
Precautionary Principle + ++ ++
Human development approaches + +
Adaptation Policy Framework + + +
Robust decision making + ++ +
Synthesis
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Uncertainty assessment methods Statistical uncertainty
Scenario uncertainty
Recognized ignorance &
surprises
Scenario analysis ("surprise-free") ++ -
Expert elicitation + + +
Sensitivity analysis +
Monte Carlo ++ - -
Probabilistic multi model ensemble ++ +
Bayesian methods ++ -
NUSAP / Pedigree analysis + + ++
Fuzzy sets / imprecise probabilities + +
Stakeholder involvement + +
Quality Assurance / Quality Checklists + + ++
Extended peer review (review by stakeholders) + ++
Wild cards / surprise scenarios - + ++
Synthesis
Copernicus Institute
Universiteit Utrecht
Synthesis