Extreme Weather: Impacts, Challenges and Adaptations

R e p o r t o n t h e

Symposium on Extreme Weather:Impacts, Challenges and Adaptations

Ottawa, OntarioApril 23- 24, 2014

The Canadian Climate Forum

The Canadian Climate Forum is a non-governmental agency dedicated to improving

understanding of weather and climate in the Earth system. It collaborates with partner

agencies and individuals to accelerate the uptake and use of weather and climate

knowledge to serve the needs of society and the economy.

Acknowledgments

The Canadian Climate Forum acknowledges and warmly thanks the sponsors of the

Symposium, in particular, the Pacifi c Institute for Climate Solutions, the Embassy of

France and the Insurance Bureau of Canada. The Forum also acknowledges the many

participating organizations and individuals who made in-kind contributions both to the

organization of the event and its successful outcome. Special thanks to Bob Sandford for

his work on this report.

AMBASSADE DE FRANCE AU CANADAService pour la science et la technologie

Canadian Climate Forum

55 Laurier Avenue East, Offi ce 10148, Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5 CANADA Phone: 613 238-2223

www.climateforum.ca

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 2

Sommaire 7

Introduction 12

Information session on IPCC reports and their

relevance to Canada 14

Keynote Address 19

Summaries of sessions

• Regional Impacts 21

• Health 29

• Science 35

• Adaptations 39

• Insurance 50

• Emergency Management & Preparedness 52

• Global Implications 55

Discussion 57

Conclusions 58

Appendices

• Agenda 60

• Biographical Notes on Speakers 64

• Text of the keynote address by Scott Vaughan 75

• List of delegates 83

EXTREME WEATHER: IMPACT S, CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS

CANADIAN CLIMATE FORUM

Executive Summary

Extreme weather events don’t just damage property. They disrupt lives, impact

economies and alter and stress ecosystems. Extreme events also have health, insurance

and liability impacts. We are likely to see 2˚C to 5˚C of warming over this century,

and North America will not be immune to the effects. Adaptation and mitigation are

therefore necessary.

On April 23-24, 2014 the Canadian Climate Forum brought together experts from

several sectors to examine the incidence, impacts and challenges posed by extreme

weather events; the challenges it raises - and how we can prepare for, or adapt to

it, to minimize its often devastating effects. The symposium looked at changing

global conditions, the effects of extreme weather on Canadian society, emergency

management and adaptive measures. It also considered emerging needs.

The symposium was timely, as 2013 and 2014 have been years of costly and

disruptive weather for many Canadians.

A WORLD IN TRANSITION

The recently published Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth

Assessment Report offers a number of warnings. Sea level rise is expected to

affect hundreds of millions of people living in coastal areas. Higher carbon dioxide

concentrations are altering the chemistry of oceans many times faster than what occurs

naturally, which, in combination with over-fishing, will reduce fish stocks. This, in addition

to growing populations, will require a 70% increase in food production during the

century.


2 | CANADIAN CLIMATE FORUM

There will also be significant impacts on water. For each 1˚C temperature increase

there will be a 20% decrease in the amount of fresh water available to a significant part

of the global population. Warming will also cause the hydrological cycle to intensify.

The frequency, intensity and duration of extreme weather events are already increasing.

THE IMPACTS OF EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS

Fresh water is both a mediator and a transmitter of climate change effects. Liquid

water, water vapour, snow and ice transmit climate change impacts across the country

and across ecological and political boundaries. We have begun to witness floods and

droughts in the same basin in the same year. Drought represents a great concern in a

changing climate especially as it relates to, and impacts, food security.

There are more of us, and greater prosperity, which is making extreme events more

costly. Extreme weather events also cover larger areas and persist longer, making

recovery slower and more costly.

CLIMATE CHANGE EFFECTS ON HUMAN HEALTH

Climate change has been identified as the single greatest threat to human health in the

21st century. With a projected warming of 2˚C to 5˚C we should expect mortalities to

rise. The urban heat island effect has already become a major public health issue, even

in Canada; and vulnerable groups include a wide range of individuals.

Having alert systems in place is one thing; actually dealing with extreme situations is

another. In prolonged emergencies, ethical questions can revolve around who should be

rescued first.


CANADIAN CLIMATE FORUM | 3

THE SCIENCE

March 2014 represented the 349th consecutive month with above average

temperatures. A warmer atmosphere holds more moisture to energize and fuel extreme

weather events. This will make wet places wetter while increasing evaporation generally

which will make dry places drier. Arctic sea ice is disappearing and the Arctic is

warming two to three times faster than the rest of the world. The loss of Arctic sea ice

and the reduction of the extent and duration of snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere

are reducing the temperature gradient between the pole and the tropics. This is

affecting the behaviour of the jet stream in the Northern Hemisphere. As the jet stream

slows and its trajectory widens, weather patterns persist, prolonging very wet or cold or

hot, dry conditions.

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

More attention needs to be paid to areas in which people find themselves repeatedly

in harm’s way. Risks can be reduced by better communications; by discouraging

development and activities that increase risk and by the appropriate sharing of risks

between jurisdictions and governments. A renewed focus on community resilience and

sustainability is needed. Greater adaptive capacity also has to be developed at local

and regional levels. Building codes have to be altered, land-use plans improved and

professional engineering and architectural practice must be informed by measures and

standards that incorporate projected conditions.



ADAPTATION

We can build more resilient homes if we use science as a foundation for action. Builders

in Canada are testing and sharing new ideas and slowly enshrining them in building

codes and standards. Effective adaptation strategies include inter-governmental

collaboration; stakeholder engagement, especially with professionals in planning and

engineering; on-going assessment of risk; strategic action and the ‘mainstreaming’ of

adaptive behaviours. Of critical importance are updated plans, more accurate flood

maps tied to better zoning, funding support for municipal adaptation efforts and

stronger central leadership.

THE GLOBAL BUSINESS IMPLICATIONS OF EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS

The risks to business globally associated with extreme weather events are real and

can directly affect reputation, bottom line and enterprise value. The business case

for investing in climate resilience is evident. In an increasingly competitive global

environment, nations that invest most effectively in preparing for weather and climate

threats will have an important competitive, economic advantage and a competitive edge

in emerging opportunities.

In Canada climate-related risks will affect all economic sectors. Extreme weather and

disaster liability could affect debt reduction efforts and figure in future elections.



CONCLUSIONS

The problems associated with extreme weather events are expected to multiply.

The effects of more frequent, intense and longer-duration events such as floods

and droughts will have increasing impacts on personal safety, property damage,

infrastructure renewal, the reliability of transportation and energy distribution, the cost

of insurance, public and private liability, mental and physical health and well-being,

economic productivity and social and political stability.

Canadians will all have to adapt. Individuals will need to focus on personal

preparedness; communities on resilience and sustainability; regions on planning

and adaptation; and governments on public education, communication, disaster

mitigation, better links to emerging science; and proactive support for adaptation

measures. Professions like engineering, architecture and urban planning will have to

incorporate different, forward-looking parameters into the design and function of our

built environment. New levels of emergency preparedness and management will have to

be conceived. Businesses will have to incorporate investments in climate resilience into

their strategic planning; and national governments will have to invest in both adaptation

and mitigation, to retain competitive advantage in a world that is about to become very

different from the one we used to know.





Sommaire

Les événements météorologiques extrêmes ne causent pas uniquement des dommages

matériels. Ils perturbent la vie des gens, affectent l’économie et agressent et modifient

les écosystèmes. Ils ont également des répercussions relatives à la santé, aux assurances

et à la responsabilité. Au cours du présent siècle, nous assisterons probablement à

une augmentation des températures de 2 à 5˚C, et l’Amérique du Nord ne sera pas

épargnée. Des mesures d’atténuation et d’adaptation doivent donc être prises.

Les 23 et 24 avril 2014, le Forum canadien du climat a réuni des spécialistes de

plusieurs secteurs pour examiner la fréquence et les répercussions des événements

météorologiques extrêmes ainsi que les enjeux connexes, plus précisément les défis qu’ils

présentent et les mesures à prendre pour se préparer ou s’adapter afin de limiter leurs

effets souvent dévastateurs. Les discussions ont porté sur le changement des conditions

à l’échelle mondiale, les effets des conditions météorologiques extrêmes sur la société

canadienne, la gestion des situations d’urgence et les mesures d’adaptation. Les

nouveaux besoins ont également été abordés. Le symposium tombait à point nommé :

des événements météorologiques perturbateurs et coûteux ont affecté de nombreux

Canadiens en 2013 et 2014.

UN MONDE EN TRANSITION

Le cinquième rapport d’évaluation du Groupe d’experts intergouvernemental sur

l’évolution du climat (GIEC) publié récemment tire plusieurs sonnettes d’alarme. Des

centaines de millions d’habitants de zones côtières devraient être touchés par l’élévation

du niveau de la mer. Les concentrations plus élevées de dioxyde de carbone modifient

les caractéristiques chimiques des océans beaucoup plus rapidement qu’en conditions

normales, entraînant, en contexte de surpêche, une réduction des populations de

poissons. Or, la croissance démographique imposera dans ce contexte d’accroître de

70 % la production de nourriture au cours du siècle.



Des répercussions importantes sont aussi attendues sur les ressources en eau. Chaque degré

Celsius d’augmentation de la température s’accompagne d’une diminution de 20 % de la

quantité d’eau douce à laquelle a accès une partie importante de la population mondiale.

Le réchauffement entraîne également l’intensification du cycle hydrologique. Déjà, la

fréquence, l’intensité et la durée des événements météorologiques extrêmes sont en hausse.

RÉPERCUSSIONS DES ÉVÉNEMENTS MÉTÉOROLOGIQUES EXTRÊMES

L’eau douce intervient à la fois dans la médiation et la transmission des effets des

changements climatiques. L’eau, qu’elle soit à l’état liquide, gazeux (vapeur) ou solide

(neige et glace), transmet ces effets à l’échelle du pays et au-delà des frontières écologiques

et politiques. On a commencé à observer des inondations et des sécheresses sévissant

dans un même bassin au cours d’une même année. La sécheresse est un important sujet de

préoccupation dans un climat changeant, en particulier ses conséquences pour la sécurité

alimentaire.

Comme nous sommes plus nombreux et plus prospères, les événements météorologiques

extrêmes sont plus coûteux. Ils sont aussi d’une ampleur et durée plus grandes, et le

rétablissement est donc plus lent et plus dispendieux.

EFFETS DES CHANGEMENTS CLIMATIQUES SUR LA SANTÉ HUMAINE

Le changement du climat est considéré comme la plus importante menace pour la santé

humaine au 21e siècle. Le réchauffement prévu de 2 à 5˚C devrait accroître la mortalité.

L’effet « îlot de chaleur urbain » suscite déjà des préoccupations sérieuses pour la santé

humaine, même au Canada, et les groupes vulnérables comprennent un large éventail de

personnes.

Disposer de systèmes d’alerte est une chose; c’en est une autre que de réagir aux situations

extrêmes dans la réalité. Lors de situations d’urgence prolongées, des questions éthiques

peuvent se poser concernant la priorité à accorder au cours des opérations de sauvetage.



LA SCIENCE

Mars 2014 a été le 349e mois consécutif où la température a été supérieure à la

moyenne. Une atmosphère plus chaude retient davantage l’humidité qui énergise

et alimente les phénomènes météorologiques extrêmes. Cela a pour effet de rendre

plus humides les endroits qui le sont déjà et, en augmentant l’évaporation de façon

générale, d’assécher davantage les endroits déjà secs. Dans l’Arctique, qui se réchauffe

de deux à trois fois plus vite que le reste de la planète, la glace de mer disparaît. La

perte de la glace arctique et la réduction de la surface et de la durée d’enneigement

dans l’hémisphère Nord entraînent une diminution du gradient de température entre

le pôle et les tropiques qui a des répercussions sur le comportement du courant-jet

dans l’hémisphère. Plus celui-ci ralentit et s’élargit, plus les conditions météorologiques

persistent, ce qui prolonge les périodes de temps très humide ou très froid ou encore de

temps chaud et sec.

PRÉPARATION AUX SITUATIONS D’URGENCE

Une plus grande attention doit être portée aux endroits où des personnes, de façon

répétée, se retrouvent en danger. Il est possible de réduire les risques en améliorant les

communications, en décourageant le développement et les activités qui augmentent le

risque et en veillant à un partage approprié des risques entre les autorités responsables

et les gouvernements. La résilience et la viabilité des collectivités doivent faire l’objet

d’une attention renouvelée. Il faut également développer davantage la capacité

d’adaptation aux échelles locale et régionale. Les codes du bâtiment doivent être

modifiés, les plans d’aménagement du territoire doivent être améliorés, et les pratiques

dans les domaines de l’ingénierie et de l’architecture doivent être encadrées par des

mesures et des normes qui tiennent compte des conditions prévues.



ADAPTATION

Il est possible de bâtir des habitations plus résistantes en s’appuyant sur la science.

Des constructeurs canadiens mettent à l’épreuve et partagent de nouvelles idées et

ils les intègrent lentement dans les codes et les normes du bâtiment. Les stratégies

efficaces pour l’adaptation comprennent la collaboration intergouvernementale,

la mobilisation des parties intéressées (ingénieurs et planificateurs en particulier),

l’évaluation régulière des risques, la prise de mesures stratégiques et l’intégration des

comportements d’adaptation. Une extrême importance doit être accordée à la mise

à jour des plans, à la cartographie plus précise des zones inondables (combinée à

une révision du zonage), au financement d’initiatives d’adaptation municipales et au

développement d’un leadership central plus fort.

THE GLOBAL BUSINESS IMPLICATIONS OF EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS

Les risques que présentent à l’échelle mondiale les événements météorologiques

extrêmes pour les entreprises sont réels; ils peuvent toucher leur réputation, leur

rentabilité et leur valeur. La rentabilité des investissements pour améliorer la résilience

climatique est évidente. Dans un environnement mondial de plus en plus concurrentiel,

les pays qui investissent plus efficacement pour se préparer aux menaces liées à la

météo ou au climat disposeront d’un avantage économique et concurrentiel important

et seront plus aptes à saisir les nouvelles opportunités.

Au Canada, les risques reliés au climat touchent tous les secteurs économiques.

La responsabilité en cas d’événements météorologiques extrêmes et de catastrophes

pourrait compromettre les efforts de réduction de la dette et devenir un enjeu électoral.



CONCLUSIONS

Les problèmes associés aux événements météorologiques extrêmes vont

vraisemblablement se multiplier. La fréquence, l’intensité et la durée accrues

d’événements tels que les sécheresses et les inondations auront des répercussions

de plus en plus importantes à de nombreux égards : sécurité personnelle, dommages

matériels, renouvellement des infrastructures, fiabilité des transports et de la

distribution de l’énergie, coût d’assurance, responsabilité publique et privée, santé et

bien-être mental et physique, productivité économique et stabilité sociale et politique.

Les Canadiens devront tous s’adapter. Ils devront individuellement veiller à leur

préparation; les collectivités devront se préoccuper de leur résilience et de leur

viabilité; les régions devront porter attention à la planification et à l’adaptation; et

les gouvernements devront accorder un intérêt particulier à l’éducation du public,

aux communications, à l’atténuation des catastrophes, à l’intégration des avancées

scientifiques et au soutien proactif des efforts d’adaptation. Les ingénieurs, les

architectes et les urbanistes devront inclure différents paramètres prospectifs dans

la conception et le fonctionnement de notre environnement bâti. Il faudra concevoir

de nouveaux niveaux de préparation et de gestion pour les situations d’urgence. Les

entreprises devront prévoir dans leur planification stratégique des investissements pour

améliorer la résilience climatique. Enfin, les gouvernements nationaux devront investir à

la fois dans l’adaptation et l’atténuation pour conserver un avantage concurrentiel dans

un monde en voie de se transformer radicalement.

Introduction

On April 23 and 24, 2014 the Canadian Climate Forum held a symposium on the theme

Extreme Weather: Impacts, Challenges and Adaptations. The event was held

at Ottawa’s Fairmont Chateau Laurier Hotel.

Representatives of several sectors examined the incidence and impact of severe weather

and provided insights into extreme events and the economic, infrastructural and health

challenges they raise. Participants discussed measures to develop resilience and to

safeguard people and businesses.

The Symposium was preceded by an information session for the public and the

media, held at the University of Ottawa. Panelists presented key findings from the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report on the

state of the world’s climate, and implications for Canada.

The Symposium brought together experts from a range of fields, as well as stakeholders,

the public and media, to consider the incidence and severity of extreme weather and

its impacts on resources and the economy, on the health sector, on built infrastructure

and on cities and regions. Speakers included scientists, agency executives, policy and

decision makers from the public and private sectors. Presentations and discussions

provided insights into extreme events and addressed the economic, infrastructural and

health challenges they raise. Participants also discussed measures to develop resilience

and to safeguard communities and businesses.



Speakers included:• Scott Vaughan, President & CEO, International Institute for Sustainable

Development • Bob Sandford, EPCOR Chair of the Canadian Partnership Initiative in support of the UN Water for Life Decade • John Pomeroy, Canada Research Chair, Water Resources & Climate Change, Univ. Saskatchewan • David Phillips, Senior Climatologist, Environment Canada • Jennifer Francis, Research Professor, Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences, Rutgers University • Francis Zwiers, Director, Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium • Ron Stewart, Professor, Department of Environment and Geography, University of Manitoba • Peter Berry, Senior Policy Analyst, Climate Change and Health Office, Health Canada • Iqbal Kalsi, Manager, London-Middlesex Health Unit • Emmanuelle Cadot, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Montpellier, France • Sheri Fink, New York Times; author of Five Days at Memorial, (life and death at a New Orleans hospital in the wake of Hurricane Katrina) • Don Lemmen, Manager, Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Division, Natural Resources Canada • Paul Kovacs, Executive Director, Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction • Jacinthe Clavet-Gaumont, Coordinator, Energy Research Group, Ouranos, Quebec • Deborah Harford, Executive Director, Adaptation to Climate Change Team, Simon Fraser University • Chris White, Vice-President, Insurance Bureau of Canada • Michel Girard, Vice-president, Standards Council of Canada • Ernest MacGillivray, Executive Director, Emergency Services, New Brunswick • Barney Owens, Director - Response, Office of the Fire Marshal & Emergency Management, Ontario • David Greenall, Senior Manager, ERS/Sustainability, Deloitte



Information session on IPCC Reports and their Relevance to Canada

On April 22, 2014 the Canadian Climate Forum hosted a special session for the public

and the media, to present and explain the significance to Canada of recently released

reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The reports were

part of the agency’s Fifth Assessment Report on the State of the World’s Climate and

included summary reports on:

• The Physical Science Basis (released October 2013)

• Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (released March 2014); and

• Mitigation of Climate Change (released April 2014).





The IPCC information session, held at the University of Ottawa, was moderated by

Gordon McBean (Western University), who summarized the October 2013 report

on the Science of Climate Change. Panelists included Debra Davidson (University of

Alberta); Paul Kovacs (Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction); Mike Brklacich

(Carleton University) and Erik Haites (Margaree Consultants Inc.), all of whom had

been involved in the preparation of the IPCC reports. Sixty members of the public and

the press attended.

Panelists: Erik Haites, Debra Davidson, Mike Brklacich and Gordon McBean



Key science findings show that warming of the global climate system is now unequivocal

and that some observed changes are unprecedented. They also make it clear that it is

extremely likely that humans have been the dominant cause of this, at least since the

mid 20th century. The warming has important implications for North America both in

the Arctic, which is warming much faster than the rest of the globe, and in other parts

of the country. Climate stresses that carry risk, such as those related to severe heat

waves, heavy precipitation and declining snowpack, and that affect our health, economy

and security will increase in frequency or severity. Extreme events and sea level rise are

already having an impact on the North American economy. Stresses on water resources

will increase, affecting crop yields.

Much of North America’s infrastructure is vulnerable to extreme events and investments are required to reduce current risks and manage future ones.

Globally, emissions are continuing to rise, driven by fossil fuel use. To stabilize

atmospheric concentrations, emissions must drop drastically; for example, to limit

warming to 2˚C, net zero emissions must be achieved by the end of the century.

Delaying reductions will increase the difficulty and costs.

There is consensus at the international level on the seriousness of climate change

and the urgent need to adapt to it. Aggressive adaptations are needed, to avoid

catastrophic impacts, though some vulnerable groups will still face intolerable losses.

As one speaker noted, however, there are limits to adaptation; hence it is essential that

greenhouse gas emissions be reduced if we are to reduce the rate and magnitude of

future climate change.

In Canada, serious attention is required at top levels of government; policies at

federal, provincial, regional and municipal levels must also be coordinated to assess

vulnerability more accurately—and for the development of adaptation strategies to



protect people and their property, critical infrastructure, economic vitality, and social and

political stability. Success at a larger scale requires global agreement and national policies

on reducing emissions from specific sources; it requires a global shift to energy efficiency

and ‘renewables’, as well as reconciliation of ideological issues that slow progress. Many

countries have already implemented policies: internationally, nations are attempting to

negotiate a (post-Kyoto) global agreement by 2015 to take effect in 2020.

The session outlined advancements in our understanding of climate change and

demonstrated consensus over risks associated with the failure to adapt to these changes—

underscoring the importance of the symposium and its outcomes.



Key Points

• Global emissions continue to rise driven by fossil fuel use

• To stabilize atmospheric concentration global emissions need to fall to zero

• To limit warming to 2°C, net zero emissions must be acheived between 2050

and 2100

• Delaying reductions increases the difficulty and cost

• Requires global shift to energy efficiency and renewables

• Some positive signs despite counterproductive policies

• Success needs global agreement and national policies

Symposium Sessions

In his opening remarks, Symposium Chair Gordon McBean reminded participants

that extreme weather events don’t just damage property but disrupt lives and alter and

stress ecosystems. Extreme events therefore have environmental, health and insurance

impacts. McBean noted that the world is likely to see 2˚C to 5˚C warming over this

century, and that North America will not be immune. Adaptation and mitigation are

therefore necessary. For this we need leadership, new programs and best practices,

McBean said.

He then introduced the former Canadian Federal Commissioner for Environment and

Sustainable Development, Scott Vaughan, who gave the symposium’s keynote address.



Keynote Address

Vaughan began by highlighting what the IPCC reports had to say about extreme events,

about chronic events affecting our oceans, freshwater and food security, and about

steps being taken to integrate climate vulnerability assessments with risk assessments.

He referred to IPCC’s 2012 special report on extreme weather events, which overlaid

climate change effects on existing vulnerability, a concept which leaders in the insurance

industry have understood for years.

In a powerful and comprehensive

assessment of world conditions,

Vaughan noted three main

warnings from the recent IPCC Fifth

Assessment Report. Sea level rise

is expected to affect hundreds of

millions of people. Higher carbon

levels in the oceans are altering the

chemistry of the oceans a million

times faster than has been observed

before. Over time this will halve

tropical fish catches which will

have huge impacts on global food

security. Vaughan noted that for each 1˚C temperature increase there will be a 20%

decrease in the availability of fresh water for a significant part of the global population.

This, in addition to growing populations, will require a 70% increase in food production

during the century. Innovative adaptation is beginning but serious challenges remain,

particularly in developing countries.

Gordon McBean with Scott Vaughan at the podium



In the last 36 years, he said, temperatures have steadily risen. The frequency, intensity

and duration of extreme weather events is increasing. Heavy rains and droughts are

occurring more frequently. Reported claims for flood damages alone have risen from

an average of $7 billion a year globally to over $24 billion in 2011. Incremental, linear

approaches to adaptation are not enough now and will not be enough in the future.

Risks are clearly rising in Canada, he noted, but we are not moving as quickly as we

should to deal with climate change effects. The need to replace much of our aging and

inadequate infrastructure must be seen as an opportunity to adapt. Vaughan urged

Canadians to look to federal leadership beyond the excellent work presently being

done by Environment Canada, Public Safety Canada, Health Canada and Natural

Resources Canada in efforts to link risk assessment and risk management. There is a

need to ‘mainstream’ meaningful adaptation approaches within all federal government

departments. There is also a need for a better understanding of cumulative risks; and

more work needs to be done to make these risks known within established engineering

practice.

Vaughan noted that there are climate tipping points beyond which sustainable

development will no longer be possible for some. We need national leadership and

coordination on disaster risk reduction, adaptation and mitigation, he said. We need

deep cuts in carbon dioxide emissions. This, he said, was not a question of science, but

of arithmetic. If we withdraw the subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, the arithmetic will

change. Vaughan also commented obliquely on Canada’s role in addressing climate

risks. If we do not work with the international community to reduce climate effects,

we will face a much larger adaptation challenge in the future. Vaughan concluded by

exhorting action: “We have got to get moving.”

See Appendix A for Scott Vaughan’s full remarks.



Summaries of sessions

Session One: Impacts of Extreme Weather Events

The ‘Impacts’ session was opened by Bob Sandford who examined the math, and

aftermath of catastrophic flooding events in Calgary and southern Alberta in June of 2013,

and in Toronto less than three weeks later. Sandford began by drawing the attention of

participants to the contents of a report prepared by Dr. John Pomeroy for Environment

Canada 18 years ago (1996), which warned of changes in hydrology that would likely

increase the potential for flooding, particularly on the Canadian prairies. In that report Dr.

Pomeroy observed that fresh water is both a mediator and a transmitter of climate change

effects. Water, Pomeroy wrote, should be viewed not just as a substance but as a flow of

mass, energy and biochemical constituents through and between ecosystems and between

the land surface and the atmosphere. Liquid water, water vapour, snow and ice, he said,

transmit climate change impacts across the country and across ecological and political

boundaries. That, Sandford argued, appears to be exactly what is happening.

Sandford then provided an hour by hour synopsis

of what occurred in hydrologic terms during the

June 2013 flooding in Alberta and compared these

events with similar flooding disasters that occurred

in July 2013 in Toronto, August 2013 in Russia and

in Colorado in September 2013. Focusing back on

Alberta, he pointed out that the flood was not the

‘one in several centuries’ event many claimed, but

well within what has been experience in the recent

past which demonstrated that Alberta was not prepared for the hydro-climatic variability

that exists today let alone what might be projected in the future as the composition of the

Earth’s atmosphere continues to change in the direction of being able to transport more

water vapour, capable of fueling ever larger flooding events. Canada’s hydrology appears



to be changing, Sandford said. We can expect flood events to be increasingly expensive

socially, economically and politically. Sandford then offered five lessons from the flood.

• The loss of hydrologic stationarity could very well be a societal game-changer.

Simply managing water in ways that are useful to us at a local scale will no longer

be enough. We have to be alert to changes locally, certainly, but we now also

have to keep an eye on changes in the larger global hydrological cycle and where

possible, try to manage and adapt to them. This is a huge concept – a societal game

changer – and it is going to take time to get our heads around the concept not just

environmentally, but economically.

• What we have seen is what we are going to get. Predicted rises in temperatures

of between 2˚C and 5˚C would result in further amplification of the hydrological

cycle by 15% to 40% percent or more. This game change is not going to go away.

Because of our fur trade and colonial history many Canadian towns and cities are

located on flood plains in river valleys. According to a recent survey, some 20% of

Canadians believe they live on or near what they describe as a flood plain. Defending

or evacuating these areas would be very expensive.

• The new normal is that there is no new normal. Unless we want our future to continue

to be a moving target, sooner or later we will have to confront the fact that we are

rapidly altering the composition of our planet’s atmosphere with significant effects on

hydrology – a subject not many want to talk about seriously, even after the disastrous

flooding of 2013.

• Engineering solutions are going to be necessary, but they are not going to be enough.

We cannot ignore the local value of natural ecosystem processes. In order to retain

even partial rein over the hydrological cycle we have to enlist all the help nature can

provide. We gain that by protecting and restoring critical aquatic ecosystem function

locally, by and reversing land and soil degradation wherever we can.



• The watershed basin is the minimum unit at which water must be managed. This

should be perceived as good news. There is great power in realizing that we can do a

great deal for our way of life and perhaps sustain our prosperity by taking care of our

watersheds. This suggests that it is at the local level – where we live – that we have the

most power to affect change and to act most effectively to serve the common good,

now and in the future.

Sandford concluded by noting that this was not the time to throw our hands up in despair.

The sky is not falling. The world is not coming to an end. We do, however, owe it to those

who have suffered so much from last year’s flooding to start getting it right for the next

time– for there will be a next time – and a time after that. The problems hydro-climatic

change is bringing in its wake are not going away. Public awareness of water issues is on

the rise. There is room to move and we should get moving while that room still exists.

John Pomeroy described the basin in which the flooding in Alberta had occurred. High

stream flows, he said, are natural in mountain headwaters. In this context, the notion of

flooding is a human construct. Pomeroy then showed the synoptic meteorology associated

with the storm that had brought on the flood. He talked about the Weather Prediction

Reanalysis and demonstrated that it wasn’t a wrong weather forecast that affected flood

prediction. Rainfall measurements are only part of flood prediction. In circumstances such

as those that created the Alberta flood, only part of the total precipitation was rainfall.

A great deal of the runoff was caused by warm rain falling on and melting the remaining

winter snow pack.

Pomeroy observed that snowpacks in the Alberta Rockies were below normal in early May

2013. That changed, however, with snowfalls at high altitudes later in the month. Rapid

snowmelt contributed significantly to streamflow which overwhelmed the capacity of

already saturated soils to absorb more water.



He then went on to describe the research that he and his University of Saskatchewan

team were undertaking at Marmot Creek in the Kananaskis region of the Alberta

foothills—at the epicenter of the storm that initiated catastrophic flooding downstream

in the City of Calgary. He graphically illustrated how stream gauges were overwhelmed

and then washed away by torrents created by persistent rainfall and rapid snowmelt

on already saturated mountain soils. The potential loss of instrumentation, Pomeroy

explained, is one of the reasons models are so important.

Pomeroy went on to note his research had demonstrated that return periods for flood

events of the magnitude that occurred in Alberta in June 2013 were about 1 in 32 years

at Banff and 1 in 45 years in Calgary. He noted, however, that the floods of record

in the past were not caused by the same kinds of storms. Climate change has made

the circumstances in which such storms occur different in this region. Pomeroy then

demonstrated that the region is experiencing warmer winters, with less low elevation

snow and a greater percentage of total precipitation falling as rain.

We now have a warmer, drier system throughout the region in which these big storms

occur. This, Pomeroy concluded, is why we are witnessing floods and droughts in the

same basin in the same year.



Conclusions

• Rainfallinthe2013Floodwasoflongdurationandlargeextent,but was not extraordinarily intense.• Soilmoisturestorageinthemountainsheldbacksomerainfallfrom forming flood waters.• Snowmeltoverfrozensoilsduringtherainfallcontributedan additional 30% to precipitation delivery to high elevations in the Kananaskis Valley.• Streamflowgenerationmechanismschangewithfloodmagnitude. • Smaller peak annual flows from the Upper Bow River

• Large floods come from the Front Ranges and Foothills,

• It is inappropriate to mix flow generation mechanisms in return period

calculations!

• TheCanadianRockiesFloodof2013wasbig,butnotextraordinary, and was likely neither the flood of a century, nor the flood of a lifetime.• Weneedtousebetterhydologicalmodelsforfloodprediction.

Drought is another expression of extreme weather. Ronald Stewart talked about

coping with dryness in the context of Manitoba and the Canadian Prairies. After defining

drought, He described its devastating historical impact on the economy of Canada

over time. He then went on to illustrate the many factors that influence the occurrence,

depth and persistence of drought, and demonstrated how wet and dry periods have

historically oscillated in Manitoba. This, Stewart explained, was reflected in crop

insurance. There were farms in Manitoba, he explained, that qualified for crop insurance

for flood relief and drought damage in the same basin in the same year. Stewart then

went on to identify drought indicators and parameters of drought preparedness.



He showed how different regions have different susceptibility to drought and introduced

the basic principles behind the proposed surface water management strategy for

Manitoba. He then explained how changes in Manitoba Hydro’s operations can help

mitigate drought impacts in that province.

Stewart described drought effects on specific crops. Longer term droughts, Stewart

warned, have to be seen as possible. He then went on to describe the challenges

associated with predicting where and when droughts will take place. Dr. Stewart

concluded by noting, once again, that drought represents a great concern in a changing

climate especially as it relates to, and impacts, food security.

Comments Regarding Future Drought

• By the 2030s expanded water supply capacity will be needed as we never know

which year a drought will occur.

• More water storage should be spread over the landscape, e.g. small dams,

restoration and protection of wetlands.

• Manitoba Hydro will continue to increase its installed hydro capacity which will

enable it to provide additional, more consistent output of electricity.

• Long term droughts need to be considered, especially in the context of climate

change. Governments should be planning for a worst case scenario.

• Long term public education is needed to encourage drought proofing and good

water management.

Over lunch, renowned Environment Canada Meteorologist David Phillips regaled

symposium participants with stories about how he chooses his highly celebrated and

publicized annual Canadian Weather Events of the Year. Phillips explained that he bases

this wildly popular annual summary of weather disasters in Canada on three criteria



which include where the event occurred, what happened and the nature of the public

response.

He explained that the world has changed over the 20 years during which he has been

offering this annual summary. There are more of us, and greater prosperity, he said, and

that is making extreme events more costly. Our landscapes have been re-engineered and

there is greater urbanization. Even without climate change, he said, these changes make

us more vulnerable to extreme weather events.

Alberta, Phillips reported, has been particularly hard hit, qualifying as having

experienced the 1st, 4th and 5th most severe weather events on his long-term list.

Alberta is not the only region, however, that has been affected. Disasters with insured

losses of over $1 billion have occurred every year for the past five years in Canada.

Governments and CEO’s should be concerned, Phillips pointed out, as extreme events

are and will affect many important societal and economic performance measures.

Phillips also pointed out that extreme weather events appear to cluster around one

another in time and place. We are not experiencing new weather, he said – there are still

tornadoes, hailstorms and hurricanes – but they appear to be statistically larger, more

frequent and more intense. In addition to more frequent heavy rainfall events, there

also appears to be a clear trend towards higher winds. Extreme weather events also

cover larger areas and persist longer, making recovery slower and more costly. Weather,

Phillips added, also appears to be more complex than in the past. Storms that would

have been top stories 20 years ago barely rank today, in part because the duration

of extreme weather events is increasing. We are not just breaking weather records,

he quipped, we are clobbering them. It is not the weather that we see looking out the

window that is necessarily changing, but the antecedent conditions such as the rainfall

or snowfall intensity and soil saturation that may intensify that weather.



Environment Canada

Perhaps the biggest weather-related change, Phillips observed, is the concentration of

the full effect of extreme weather events on major urban areas. The loss of green spaces

in cities, he noted, is clearly contributing to the intensity of such events. The variability of

weather conditions is increasing, Phillips said, but so is variability in any given season. “We

are experiencing the best times and the worst times, all at once,” Phillips observed. “We

are witnessing the wettest and driest conditions in the same region in the same season.”

In conclusion, Phillips noted that weather disasters are in a growth phase. Changes in

these conditions have not slowed. Things can clearly get worse. You cannot logically argue

it is not happening. If you change the weather, you change the climate, he said. These

trends are not going to go away. “We need to reduce the threat of disaster by preparing

for it.”

Number of Summer Severe WeatherEvents on the Prairies by Year

1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0



Session Two: Climate Change Effects on Human Health

The first session in the afternoon explored the health impacts of extreme events.

Iqbal Kalsi addressed the issue of urban versus rural consequences of extreme weather

events as they related to public health. He reminded the audience that climate change

is the biggest public health threat of the 21st century. Canadians, Kalsi noted, should

expect greater health impacts as a result of heat waves, with significant associated

economic costs. With a projected warming of 2˚C to 5˚C we should expect mortalities

to rise.



Kalsi then focused on extreme weather events involving the Middlesex-London Health

Unit where he is responsible for the Health Hazards Prevention and Management

Section, which includes climate change effects. Within the area encompassed by this

Health Unit, Kalsi explained, winters are warming and summers are warmer. The

frequency of 1 in 100 year, 1 in 200 year and 1 in 500 year floods is increasing, with

commensurate public health impacts. There has also been a dramatic increase in

tornadoes. In addition the urban heat island effect is also becoming a public health

issue for the Health Unit. A trend toward higher nighttime temperatures has been

observed. Kalsi demonstrated how these effects will become more pronounced right

across Canada.

Groups vulnerable to these effects include older adults, infants and young children,

farmers and occupational groups actively exposed to the effects, as well as the

physically active and those with chronic illnesses. The Health Unit is working with local

municipalities to expand the area of the tree canopy to reduce the effects of warming,

but such projects take time.

Constraints to implementing programs that reduce the health effects of climate change

are many, Kalsi noted, but begin with financial resources. The next steps for his Health

Unit, he explained, will begin with collaboration with stakeholders and current and

potential public and private sector partners, with the goal of working together to create

sustainable, healthy communities.



Emmanuelle Cadot had come from France to talk about the experience of France and

the lessons learned from the heat waves that occurred in Europe in 2003 and 2006.

Cadot noted that 2003 was the warmest year ever recorded in Europe. It is estimated

that in France alone there were 14,802 excess deaths of which 1,254 were in Paris— a

190% increase over to the reference years of 2000 to 2002.

She described risk factors associated with age, sex, marital status, level of physical

activity, state of health and ethnicity. She then outlined CHALEX, the French strategy for

information dissemination, prevention and mobilization against elevated temperature-

related climate risks, which includes a national alert system for heat waves that clearly

outlines health risks. The adaptation measures developed in France proved to be highly

effective during the 2006 heat wave and provide lessons for Canada.



Peter Berry of Health Canada’s Climate Change and Health Office talked about current

climate-related impacts on public health in Canada and the preparations that were

required to prepare for further changes. He began by drawing attention to a number of

heat and other extreme weather events around the world and outlining the human health

hazards they posed. These included heat waves, wildfires, under-nutrition due to decreases

in food production, food and water shortages, vector-borne diseases and mental health

and violence concerns. Berry then went on to talk about increases in the transmission

of Lyme Disease in Canada and health impacts associated with the Toronto ice storm

of 2013.



Citing what has been done elsewhere, Berry outlined what we can do to prepare for

climate change effects on public health in Canada. National Public Health Plans with

respect to climate change, he noted, exist in other countries. After demonstrating how

preparedness had dramatically reduced mortality from floods in Bangladesh, Berry

outlined how emergency measures can be aided by clear adaptation strategies in

Canada.

Berry outlined a number of specific concerns, including the impacts of warming

conditions on northern Canadians, climate- related spread of infectious diseases and

health impacts associated with extreme heat. Steps forward include heat and health

messaging to support increased adaptation measures by individuals; filling knowledge

gaps in health-related climate science; identifying factors that increase the vulnerability

of individuals and society; and the development of ‘alert’ protocols similar to those

being developed in France, which will be made available to communities across Canada.

In conclusion Berry noted that Health Care Facility Resiliency Tools have been developed

that include facilitator presentations; health care facility resiliency checklists and best

practices.

The final presentation in the health session was made on the morning of the second

day of the symposium. It was made by Skype by Sheri Fink a Pulitzer Prize winning

journalist who described the desperate situation at a hospital in New Orleans in the

wake of Hurricane Katrina (2005). In introducing her book, Five Days at Memorial, Fink

asked participants of the symposium to consider the impacts of extreme weather events

on the most vulnerable in society and on the individuals who are entrusted to serve

them. She invited participants to give particular attention to whether in such extreme

circumstances as those created by Hurricane Katrina, it was possible to adhere to

established moral values - or if certain extreme weather events, made it necessary to

abandon them.



In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, sections of New

Orleans were uninhabitable for weeks. The hospital

medical centre which Fink studied was an island in

the centre of the flood zone. When the power went out

in the city, back-up generators could not keep the air

conditioning functioning and still be relied upon to supply

light. The vulnerability of those in the hospital increased

as hot summer temperatures returned after the storm

passed. Helicopters could only take one or two of the 2000

people that needed to be evacuated, at a time. The ethical

question became who to evacuate first. Do you take the

young because they have a long life ahead of them, or

those who because of fragility or age need immediate

help, without which they will die? When boats finally started to arrive at the hospital’s

emergency ramp the question became who do you rescue first? Another ethical question

arose when people arrived at the hospital hoping for medical help or refuge. There were

also issues with medical staff who had their own health problems. What do you do when

needs outstrip resources? How do you prioritize who lives and who dies? Hurricane

Katrina, Fink explained, made it clear that such ethical issues need to be considered in

advance.

The situation deteriorated at Memorial Hospital when as feared the back-up generators

failed and the power went out throughout the centre. The question then arose as

to whether some patients should be put out of their misery. While that debate was

considered patients began dying. In the aftermath, some doctors and nurses were

charged with murder. Ethics and legality, however, rely on intentionality and in the

case of Memorial Hospital, health workers were not intentionally hastening death but

relieving discomfort.



The moral issues that arise in the aftermath of extreme weather events, Fink explained,

are similar to those that arise in war zones. As in times of war there were examples of

great heroism. Local volunteers arrived in air-boats to evacuate patients. Health workers

evacuated premature babies under their shirts because incubators wouldn’t fit on

helicopters. As in war, Fink concluded, we can’t know what we should have done. We can

only know what we would have liked to do.

Better triage, fuller disaster plans and more adaptive preparation are necessary if we

are to be able to deal with more frequent, increasingly powerful extreme weather events.

In concluding her powerful presentation, Sheri Fink pointed to a critical need for political

will in recognizing that we are all fragile and vulnerable to the increasing threat of

extreme weather events.

Session Three: The Science

Session three examined specific aspects of the science behind our understanding of

extreme weather events. Jennifer Francis broadened the scope of the discussion by

linking change in climate in the Arctic with extreme weather events at mid-latitudes.

She provided a smorgasbord of wacky weather events from all over the world before

asking what these events had in common. All of them, she said, are related to persistent

weather events. The question this begs is whether human-caused climate change is

playing a role. Francis answered this by explaining that we have put ourselves in a

serious predicament by significantly changing the concentration of carbon dioxide in

the atmosphere. March 2014, she noted, represented the 349th consecutive month with

above average global temperatures. This meant that if you are presently 29 years old or

younger, you live in a climate regime different from the one experienced by your parents.

A warmer atmosphere, she explained, will provide more moisture to energize and fuel

extreme weather events. This will make wet places wetter while increasing evaporation

generally, which will make dry places drier.



Arctic sea ice is now a mere shadow of its former self. There has been a 75% decrease

in sea ice volume in the past 35 years; and much of what remains is “rotten” or slushy.

The year 2012 marked a spectacular loss of Arctic sea ice, which allowed heat to warm

the Arctic Ocean which in turn melted more ice. This feedback, she explained, is why the

Arctic is warming two to three times faster than the rest of the world. The loss of Arctic

sea ice and the reduction of the extent and duration of snow cover in the Northern

Hemisphere are reducing the temperature gradient between the pole and the tropics.

This reduction in the temperature difference has begun to affect the behaviour of the jet

stream in the Northern Hemisphere.

As Arctic air warms, it expands and begins to spill down toward the mid-latitudes.

This thicker air turns to the right as the Earth spins and creates the jet stream.

The influence of warmer Arctic air causes the west winds created by the jet stream to

become weaker. Francis explained this with a tongue-twister: weaker westerly winds

are wavier. It is the waviness of the jet stream that affects weather at mid-latitudes.

As the jet stream slows and the amplitude of its waves increases and broadens, weather

patterns ‘stall’. They persist longer and do things we don’t expect.

When we look at extreme weather events such as heat waves, heavy snowfalls and

long-duration rainfall events we see very large jet stream waves. This, Francis explained,

appears to be particularly evident in the North Atlantic in October and December.

Francis showed the jet stream patterns for a number of extreme weather events

including extended drought in parts of the United States and the bitter winter experience

by those living in eastern Canada during the winter of 2013-2014. Each was associated

with large waves in the jet stream.



Dr. Francis concluded by noting again that the loss of Arctic sea ice appears to slow the

west wind causing the Northern Hemisphere jet stream to move more slowly and to

become ‘wavier’. The larger jet stream waves persist longer in one place contributing

to more extreme weather events. The good news, she said, is that this understanding

presents an opportunity to demonstrate how human activity is impacting weather

patterns in the Northern Hemisphere.



Francis Zwiers of the Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium weighed in on the question

of whether precipitation events had in fact become demonstrably more extreme. Zwiers

noted there was a strong body of evidence that supported warming temperatures but

less clear evidence supporting changes in precipitation patterns.

He drew attention to the locations of some 8,376 weather stations around the world

that had been collecting data for 20 years of more. Of these some 8.5% showed

significant measurable increases in rainfall, while 2.2% showed significant decreases.

Some 64% of these locations showed a correlation between mean temperature and

precipitation in accordance with the Clausius-Clapyron Relation which decrees that the

Earth’s atmosphere will hold 7% more, or less, water vapour for every degree Celsius of

warming or cooling.

Zwiers went on to demonstrate how computations of potential increases or decreases

in precipitation are made within the climate modelling process. The results of this

modelling to date suggest there is an intensification occurring in precipitation in

Canada. What were previously one in 20 year rainfall events appear to be occurring

every 15 years. Zwiers noted that 25% of the probability of such events may be

attributable to human influence. He predicted that what are now one in 20 year rainfall

events could become one in six year events by the end of the century. He concluded

by saying that data limitations continue to hinder clear detection of the climate signal

with respect to changes in precipitation. Observed changes, however, do fall within

the expectations of the Clausius-Clapyron Relation. Formal detection and attribution

of human impacts, Zwiers cautioned, remain a challenge.



Summary Discussion

• Globally,modelsimulatedchangesinprecipitationextremes follow C-C • Formaldetectionandattributionofchangeinprecipitation extremes remains a challenge - Emerging global scale signal

- There is not a lot of spacial structure to exploit

- Regionally, natural variation dominates

- Methods remain a challenge

• Projectionsindicatefurtherintensification - A current 20-year event becomes a 15 -, 12 - or 6 - year event under RCP2.6,

RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 respectively

Session Four: Adaptation

In Session Four the focus turned toward strategies for adapting to extreme weather

events in Canada. In the fi rst presentation Paul Kovacs of the Institute for Catastrophic

Loss Reduction talked about adapting Canadian homes, to prevent damage from

intense rainfall and severe winds. Our homes, he said, are our most valuable asset.

We build good homes in Canada. How, he asked, can we sustain that success?



Kovacs noted that innovative builders in Canada are testing and sharing new ideas

and slowly enshrining them in building codes and standards. When attempting to bring

new approaches to protecting existing homes, however, there has been considerable

resistance. Many Canadian homes, he noted, are vulnerable to floods and severe winds.

Based on insurance claims, it is clear also that severe weather is becoming more common.

Insurance claims related to wind and water damage are now greater than claims for

damage caused by fire. As a result, Kovacs noted, insurance companies are adopting

a new business model.



Several factors are increasing risk. These include population growth in areas of risk,

aging infrastructure in many parts of the country and the increase in lavishly finished

basements which may be subject to flooding. Precipitation is also increasing. These

issues were put before builders by the Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction. This

led to a program that empowers homeowners to consider their own risk through the

use of a risk-assessment tool and through readily available risk reduction advice,

particularly related to basement flooding.



The Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction has also created its own research lab

and storm simulator. Research conducted with this simulator has led to adaptation

strategies that cost pennies but can save thousands of dollars in damage in the event of

high winds or potential flooding. The Institute has also partnered with local governments

and the media through which it celebrates local municipal leadership by recognizing

progressive jurisdictions and telling their stories.

Kovacs concluded his presentation by observing that we build good homes in Canada,

but many are vulnerable. The increase in insurance damage claims, he said, is as much

a result of an increase in vulnerability as it is to an increase in actual storms. We can

build more resilient homes, he observed, if we use science as a foundation for action.

Progress, however, remains slow.

Deborah Harford of Simon Fraser University’s Adaptation to Climate Change Team

began her presentation by summarizing the climate change impacts to which urban

areas needed to adapt. She then described the effects of the loss of relative hydrologic

stationarity on health, insurance and other important sectors of the Canadian economy.

Adaptation, she pointed out, is complicated by urbanization and by the aging of

critical infrastructure. Sea level rise is an additional problem for coastal cities such as

metropolitan Vancouver. Harford then went on to describe the international Coastal

Cities at Risk Project and its five research themes: social vulnerability, health risks,

economic exposure, physical hazards and organizational and governance challenges.



Cities, Harford pointed out, are undertaking adaptation projects without provincial

support. This, she said, has to change. Regional cooperation will ultimately be required to

ensure that one jurisdiction isn’t undertaking action at the expense of its neighbours.

• Globalclimatedisruption - More extremes

• Warmerwetterwinters - More water falling as rain, not snow/ice - Timing of water availability changing

• Atmosphericrivers/precipevents - Sudden heavy rain events - Potential for extreme snowfall - Water running off rather than recharging

- Increased risk of landslides

• Increasedriskofsea/riverflooding - Made worse by mal-adaptive urban planning - Potential for poor water quality

• Longer,hotter,dryersummers - Potential for ectreme heat events - Potential for extended drought/wildfire - Potential for poor water quality



The next steps in achieving meaningful adaptation strategies in coastal cities like Vancouver

include intergovernmental collaboration; stakeholder engagement, especially with professionals in

planning and engineering; on-going assessment of current and future risk; strategic action and the

mainstreaming of adaptive behaviours. Harford concluded with a summary of adaptation needs,

goals—and barriers. She stressed the importance of updated plans, maps and zoning, of support

for municipal adaptation efforts and for central leadership.

Resultofclimatechangesplusadditionalinfluences:

Loss of stationarity• Historical data obsolete

• Engineering and building standards no longer correct

(e.g. IDF curves)

• Ability to project conditions based on experience not reliable

• Extreme weather of magnitudes we cannot foresee

• Levels of damage beyond our experience

• Impacts on health, insurance, real estate, hydro, tourism, etc

• Food, water, energy and biodiversity: nexus of insecurity



Extreme weather damage is predicted to increase:

• Canada’s physical infrastructure aging; many structures and facilities approaching or have exceeded their normal service life.• Over 80% of Canadians living in urban areas of 10,000 or more.• Small increase in the magnitude or intensity of extreme weather events could bring about a major increase in damage to critical infrastructure systems, e.g. - Transportation - Water treatment and distribution systems - Energy generation and transmission

- Communications



The next speaker in this session was Don Lemmen of Natural Resources Canada, who

talked about adaptation planning in Canada. Lemmen explained why planning mattered

and asked rhetorically if extreme weather events shouldn’t be used as a wake-up call

for advancing adaptation. Noting that risks will affect all economic sectors, Lemmen

pointed out the need to link climate adaptation to disaster risk management, more

completely. These risks, Lemmen observed, include immediate effects such as flooding,

heat waves, wildfire and droughts but also include slow onset changes such as sea level

rise, glacier retreat, permafrost thaw, ocean acidification and ecosystem changes.

Lemmen observed that adaptation is occurring in Canada and that examples of

progress abound. Most progress, he noted was at the municipal level which suggests

a need for engagement and support from higher levels of government.

Take-home Messages

• Risks associated with climate extremes are a concern to virtually all economic

sectors in Canada

• Much of adaptation planning in Canada has been triggered by impacts of climate

extremes

• There is a need to strengthen the linkages, including institutional linkages, between

climate change adaptation and disaster risk management

• The recovery phase following natural disasters provides opportunity for

implementing adaptation measures

• Keys include advance preparation and collaboration

Natural ResourcesCanada

Ressources naturellesCanada



Lemmen went on to describe current and emerging drivers of adaptation which include

concerns related to national reputation, access to international markets and matters

related to regulatory compliance. He outlined challenges and key regional risks to which

extreme events contribute and demonstrated how adaptation can reduce these risks.

Increased exposure of people and assets has been the major cause of the increase in

disaster risk. We need to be prepared, he said, and cooperation is necessary if not critical.

Barriers to cooperation have to be identified in advance so that they can be overcome

when extreme weather events become disasters. What practical steps, he asked, can

be taken now to strengthen the linkages between the climate change adaptation and

disaster risk reductions communities? Finally he suggested that immediately following

a natural disaster is a good time to advance adaptation strategies.

Session Four continued with a presentation by Jacinthe Clavet-Gaumont of Ouranos

in Montreal, on the influence of climate change on extremes affecting the hydro-electric

sector in Quebec. Clavet-Gaumont began by explaining that 97% of the electricity in

Quebec is generated by hydro, which makes reliable distribution highly vulnerable to

extreme events. She demonstrated what happened in terms of adaptation following the

Saguenay flood of 1996 and the Great Ice Storm of 1998. A process was put in place to

identify vulnerabilities and opportunities; to develop scenarios and to analyze impacts

of climate change on targeted activities with the goal of developing and implementing

adaptation strategies.

The development of climate scenarios required downscaling of global models to regional

levels, and down to local hydrological models. These models project a 10% increase in the

volume of spring flooding in Quebec. The models also anticipate that the maximum flood

in the most severe of probable meteorological conditions is expected to increase by 28%

by 2080.





In summary, Clavet-Gaumont offered three main conclusions of note: Hydro Quebec

operations are vulnerable to hydro-climatic extremes; hydro power generation and

distribution systems are vulnerable to climate change and; therefore, adaptation is

required.

The fi nal presentation in Session Four on adaptation was offered by Michel Girard of

the Standards Council of Canada, who talked about the use of standards as vital tools

for adaptation. Girard introduced participants to the Joint Declaration on Conservation

of 1908 which more than a century ago concerned itself with many of the environmental

issues we face today. In the same way that the Joint Declaration functioned in the

early decades of the 20th century, the Standards Council of Canada works today to

mainstream adaptation through appropriate standards and to verify competence in the

achievement of those standards. Girard then explained how such standards are being

developed in Canada and globally.

Next Steps

• SCC to continue dialogue with governments and industry

• Exploration of additional areas of interest to adaptation to enhance resilience of

critical infrastructure in the North

• Capacity building and stakeholder outreach

• Development of companion certifi cation programs for new standards

Standards Experts. Accreditation Solutions





Standards and codes are now being developed through the Northern Infrastructure

Standards Initiative (NISI) to increase adaptation capacity in order to reduce climate

change impacts and disaster risks. For infrastructure, these standards include those for

design, installation and maintenance of thermo-siphons to keep permafrost from melting;

changing standards for snow loads on roofs; management of effects of permafrost

degradation on existing buildings; and community drainage plans that take into account

the possibility of more extreme weather events.

NISI Priority Areas

Standards Experts. Accreditation Solutions



Girard also described joint US-Canada initiatives on standards for technologies such

as balloon-type, ball- shaped backwater valves to reduce basement flooding. He then

described international standardization initiatives and outlined next steps in the

exploration of areas of adaptation interest.

Session Five: Impacts and Adaptation in the Insurance Sector

Session Five dealt with the impacts and challenges that extreme events pose to the

insurance industry. Chris White of the Insurance Bureau of Canada spoke on the

financial impacts of extreme weather events on the property and casualty sector of the

insurance industry.

Noting that the sector is strong and competitive, White outlined the economic

contribution of the industry. He noted, however, that more extreme weather events

posed a challenge to the entire insurance sector. The average basement flood claim

in Canada, White

noted, is $50,000. The

recent devastation in

Calgary, he said, was

not just dramatic but

traumatic. White then

expressed the concern

that another major flood

could unbalance the

federal budget possibly

impacting the outcome

of the next election.

DFAA: Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements



In response the growing risk associated with extreme weather events, the Insurance

Bureau of Canada has developed the Municipal Risk Assessment Tool (MRAT) which it

is piloting in the cities of Coquitlam, British Columbia; Fredericton, New Brunswick; and

Hamilton, Ontario.

The Insurance Bureau of Canada has also done a study on earthquake vulnerability.

Canada, White observed, is the only country in the world with earthquake vulnerability

on both coasts. The report observed that Canadians are not aware or financially

prepared for an earthquake of any significant magnitude. The total economic costs

of a major earthquake on the heavily populated west coast of Canada are, however,

projected to be over $74 Billion – a figure that includes direct damage to buildings

and their contents, business interruption costs and indirect impacts on the economy.

This, White noted, is equivalent to about 4% of Canada’s GDP and over 35% of BC’s

GDP. To put the amount in perspective, that estimate is also roughly equivalent to the

combined output of BC’s Agriculture, Forestry, Mining, Construction, Manufacturing,

Retail, Scientific Services and Transportation sectors. Insured losses, he noted, would be

much less, totaling $20B and would be largely concentrated in the commercial sector

which could afford and had the foresight to buy earthquake insurance.

White reported that the total economic costs of a major earthquake in Quebec were

projected to be over $60 Billion. This, White noted, is equivalent to 3% of Canada’s

GDP and almost 17% of Quebec’s GDP. To put the amount in perspective, it is roughly

equivalent to the combined output of Quebec’s construction and manufacturing

sectors. Insured losses were projected to cover only $12 Billion and are almost entirely

concentrated in the commercial and industrial sectors, as would be expected given that

only 4% of the residents of Quebec have earthquake insurance.



White concluded by stating that individuals have to do more to protect themselves and

their property from extreme weather events. Businesses have to do more, and so do

governments. White’s final observation was that extreme weather events and disaster

liability are likely to figure largely in the next federal election and many elections

thereafter.

Session Six: Emergency Management and Preparedness

Session Six of the symposium focused on how well prepared Canada and communities are

prepared for extreme weather events. The first presenter was Ernest MacGillivray, the

Executive Director of Emergency Services for the Province of New Brunswick. As he was

dealing with a flood disaster and could not leave the province, he participated by Skype.

MacGillivray’s presentation dealt with where governments currently stood with respect to

extreme weather crises. He noted that in an emergency, disaster services are often seen

as independent from government. Such services are becoming ever more important in the

face of more frequent extreme events. MacGillivray observed that more attention needed

to be paid to areas in which people find themselves repeatedly in harm’s way. Risks, he

argued, could be reduced by better disclosure; by discouraging development and activities

that increase risk; and by the appropriate sharing of risks between jurisdictions and

governments. This, he noted, will require the rebalancing of public and private risk.

MacGillivray described a roadmap for reducing the risk posed by extreme weather

events. This included investments in assessment; fuller disclosure; better public education;

and enhanced management of risk, leading to better control of the outcomes of

weather-related disasters. The reason Canadians were not following this roadmap, in

MacGillivray’s estimation, was largely a consequence of public denial of climate issues.



Governments, he said, don’t generally lead; they follow. He pointed out that costs

associated with disaster relief are already factored into government budgets. Evidence

is required to change government direction. That evidence has to prove clearly, that

societal and government risks are increasing as a result of more frequent and intense

extreme weather events. The Federal government, recently budgeted $200 million

over five years starting in 2015, for a National Disaster Mitigation program that will

be administered by Public Works Canada. MacGillivray left it to the participants at the

symposium to decide for themselves whether this level of funding was adequate.

He then explained how flood disaster mitigation is advancing in New Brunswick.

He pointed to a new flood monitoring and alert system and a damage assessment

program aimed at helping flood victims almost immediately after a flooding event;

but, he said, governments can’t do what is necessary on their own. What was

needed now was an alignment of the work that needed to be done. This alignment

includes the implementation of a disaster risk reduction strategy; the development

of permanence measures related to that strategy and regular reports to the New

Brunswick government. MacGillivray also noted that there was a need for a new focus

on community resilience and sustainability. Great adaptive capacity has to be developed

at local and regional levels. Building codes have to be altered, land-use plans improved

and professional engineering and architectural practice informed by new emergency

measures standards.

In conclusion MacGillivray offered that what we all need to do now is understand the

risks; learn from each other; and work to educate government officials and the public

so as better to inform policy and practice related to the growing public safety risk of

extreme weather events.



The next presentation was by Barney Owens,

the Director of Response in the Office of the Fire

Marshal and Emergency Management for the

Province of Ontario. Owens began by talking about

the December 2013 ice storm in Ontario and

showing the effects of the storm, noting that at its

peak a million people were without power. In such

circumstances, Owens explained, coordination of

public communication is central to ensuring public

safety.

Hydro utilities throughout the affected region

immediately all required a share of deployable

field resources. As in the case of Hurricane Katrina,

hospital back-up

generators proved

to be inadequate to

the needs and had to

be augmented with

additional units. Small

communities, Owens

noted, proved more

resilient during the

disaster, especially in

terms of people helping

each other.

Barney Owens



Owens also commented that public expectations range from: from ‘it won’t affect

me’; to ‘the government will immediately come to my aid’. One can’t count on either;

hence personal preparedness is important. As an example, when the power is out, ATM

machines do not work; in forest fires, cell phone towers burn. He noted the importance

of working with the media for frequent, accurate communications, as social media can

contribute to a loss of control of messaging.

Owens observed that the ice storm affirmed the realization in Ontario that a new

emergency measures operations regime is going to be necessary to deal with a

changed climate. As a result of the ice storm, Ontario learned more about vulnerable

populations and where they exist; that warming centres were critical in such events

and that problems with demographics and language can become serious issues in a

disaster. There was also a realization that there will never be enough money to do all the

necessary planning. Planning must span multiple jurisdictions and cover both immediate

response, and the recovery period. Key elements in managing emergencies include:

promoting personal preparedness; sticking to the plan; applying past recommendations;

promoting public/private partnerships; education and awareness and having generating

capacity where needed.

Session Seven: The Global Implications of Extreme Weather Events

The final session of the symposium focused on the global implications of extreme

weather events. David Greenall who leads Deloitte’s global climate adaptation and

resilience practice, began his presentation by talking about private sector resilience

to extreme weather events. Greenall noted that there were real risks to business

from extreme weather events and that these risks may impact enterprise value. Heat

waves, for example, may affect business cash flow because of lost sales, compromised

competitiveness, degradation of critical infrastructure that impacts supply chain

reliability and increased insurance costs.

2

3

4

5

6



He then talked about how different responses to extreme weather events can make

a difference to both reputation and the bottom line. He gave the example of how the

operation of New Jersey Transit compared to that of the MTA (New York Metropolitan

Transportation Authority) during Hurricane Sandy in October 2012. The storm knocked

out power to over 8.5 million people and damage was estimated at $65 billion. In one

case, trains were vulnerable and became unusable; in the other, a risk assessment led to

operational changes. Fleet vehicles were moved out of harm’s way. Service recovery was

fast and financial losses limited. Greenall also illustrated what happened in Thailand

in 2011 when floods interrupted global supply chains; and in Toronto during flooding

in July of 2013.

The business case for investing in climate resilience is evident...

Reduces unwanted exposure and the likelihood of adverse risks with catastrophic

consequences

Reduces losses and loss volatility

Frees up risk capacity for higher return activities

Improves business process efficiency and effectiveness that leads to cost savings

and competitive advantages

Better addresses growing concerns from regulators, investors, analysts and

rating agencies

Creates decision-support frameworks and processes to better equip management

to make more informed decisions

1



Greenall explained that Deloitte helps businesses see their profitability through the lens

of climate risks. Within this context, large data sets are used to model potential threats.

Deloitte, however, has encountered, barriers to such assessments. Many businesses

argue that extreme weather is nothing new or that assessments are unnecessary,

as such analyses can be done in-house by the company’s own engineers. Businesses

are also wary of investments in extreme weather event preparedness because the

investment will be lost if threats don’t materialize. Businesses, Greenall explained, need

climate and hydrological projections at high resolution. They need to understand direct

and indirect impacts and the need for adaptation plans.

He went on to quote a 2013 statement by the American Meteorological Society

that predicted that in an increasingly competitive global environment, nations that

invest most effectively in clarifying weather and climate risks will have an important

competitive economic advantage. He also quoted Christine Lagarde, head of the

International Monetary Fund, who said in 2013 that “unless we take action on climate

change, future generations will be roasted, toasted, fried and grilled.“

In concluding, Greenall mentioned an International Finance Corporation report:

Enabling Environment for Private Sector Adaptation. The report reviews actions that

have significant potential for enabling private sector adaptation and the promotion of

climate-resilient development.

Discussion

Adaptation and resilience were recurrent themes in the discussion. Adaptation must

take projected conditions into account and be made as simple as possible. Construction,

rebuilding after a disaster and renewal of infrastructure must be geared to long term

need. The adaptation community must be involved in rebuilding efforts, as well as

engineers and others. Local governments need support from other levels of government;

particularly since coping with some extreme events is beyond the capacity of local

authorities.



It was suggested that greater attention be paid to ensuring the participation of First Nations

in future events, and to their experience in adapting to adverse weather conditions. Private

sector partners should also be more involved, particularly for their role in mitigation. Finally,

moral and ethical considerations need to inform business practices.

Several key issues emerged:

1. Need for public education, including tools to assist the public in spurring action from

their elected representatives.

2. Shareholder value is impacted by extreme conditions; hence shareholders need to

push for adaptation and mitigation measures.

3. Leadership is key. Canadians must speak up collectively to stimulate political will to

deal with weather and climate related crises.

4. Social and health mapping is required for identification of vulnerable populations;

planning of resources, and other purposes.

5. The enormity of potential future extreme events can overwhelm people, but the

Symposium demonstrated that adaptation and mitigation are very possible.

6. Communication is essential and should be at all levels, from community papers,

though conventional to social media. The Canadian Climate Forum could assist

in preparing materials for this. It could also strengthen interconnectivity among

agencies and be a springboard for working with partner agencies on future such events.

7. Transformative adaptation is required, rather than an incremental approach–

e.g. policy change that encourages consideration of future climate scenarios by

groups such as farmers; reinforcement of building codes in vulnerable areas; green

infrastructure; nature-based solutions (e.g. reforestation); natural barriers.

Conclusions

The Symposium benefitted from having diverse voices from the natural, social and health

sciences; and from the academic, public and private sectors. The personal and professional

experiences of the delegates demonstrated their commitment to adapting to, mitigating

and managing extreme events, for public safety, loss reduction, building of resilience and



ultimately, to strengthen Canada’s economy. Common goals in adaptation are to save

lives and money. It was also recognized that extreme events stimulate creative adaptation.

On the negative side, the cost of federal disaster assistance can affect deficit reduction

efforts and other federal strategies. Emergency Management requires coordination

among agencies; and training.

The Symposium ended with a discussion of challenges, as well as adaptations aimed

at reducing risk and losses; crisis prevention and recovery; and the need for proactive

measures, to adapt to extreme events.

Key measures

• Think comprehensively. Plan the location of emergency equipment such as generators.

• Consider a national ‘Emergency Fund’

• Take account of the National Disaster Mitigation Strategy that has recently been

approved

• Engage major stakeholders. Encourage the public to speak collectively, to

influence them

• Improve infrastructure. Build to last and ensure climate projections are taken

into account

• Do things that reduce risk; discourage things that increase it (e.g. limit disaster

assistance if authorities allow rebuilding in flood zones)

• Focus on community resilience and sustainability. Build capacity at the

local/regional level

• Educate. Promote personal preparedness

• See the media as a partner for getting correct messages out

• Do social and health mapping to identify vulnerable populations. This is also valuable

for planning of resources.

• Celebrate success.



SymposiumExtreme Weather: Impacts, challenges

and adaptations

Wednesday April 23 - Thursday April 242014 Adam Room, Fairmont Chateau Laurier Hotel, Ottawa

A G E N D A

Wednesday April 23, 2014

09:00 Welcome and overview: Gordon McBean, Symposium Chair

09:20 Keynote AddressScott Vaughan, President and CEO, International Institute for

Sustainable Development

The challenge of extreme events and their impact

09:50 Session1:RegionalImpactsandVulnerabilities• BobSandford, EPCOR Chair of the Canadian Partnership Initiative in

support of the UN Water for Life Decade:

Extreme events in Alberta: Math and Aftermath

Appendix 1




10:20 Break

10:50 Session 1 continued….

• John Pomeroy, Director, Centre for Hydrology, University of

Saskatchewan From extreme weather to extreme hydrology: the Canadian Rockies Flood of June 2013 • RonStewart, University of Manitoba: Coping with Dryness Discussion

12:00 Lunch

12:30 Luncheon speaker David Phillips, Senior Climatologist, Environment Canada

Changing Nature of Weather Extremes in Canada

13:15 Session 2: Health Impacts • Iqbal Kalsi, London-Middlesex Health Unit: Urban vs. Rural Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Challenges in Middlesex London • Emmanuelle Cadot, IRD, France: Heatwaves - impacts and adaptations (France) • Peter Berry, Health Canada: Climate Extremes and Human Health: Adaptation to Protect Canadians Discussion

14:30 Session 3: The Science Risk patterns; future change in Canada/N. America

• Jennifer Francis, Rutgers University

Influences of Rapid Arctic Warming on Extreme events • Francis Zwiers, Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium

Have Extreme Precipitation Events Become More Extreme? Discussion




15:30 Break

15: 50 Session 4: Adaptations• Paul Kovacs, ICLR: Adapting Canadian homes to prevent damage from

intense rainfall and severe wind• Deb Harford, ACCT, Simon Fraser University: Urban impacts and

AdaptationsDiscussion

16:50 Wrap-up of Day 1

17:00-19:00

Reception

Thursday April 24, 2014

09:00 • Sheri Fink, New York Times

Five Days at Memorial: Life and Death in a Storm-Ravaged Hospital. (By Skype)

09:40 Session 4 continued….• Don Lemmen, NRCan

Canada in a Changing Climate: Assessing Drivers of AdaptationDiscussion

10:10 Break

10:40 Session 4 continued…. • Jacinthe Clavet-Gaumont, Ouranos

The influence of climate change on extremes affecting the hydro-electric sector/Hydro Quebec • Michel Girard, V-P, Standards Council of Canada

Standards as Vital Tools for AdaptationDiscussion



AdaptationsThursday April 24, 2014

11:40 Session 5: Impacts and Challenges in the Insurance Sector • Chris White, Vice-president, Insurance Bureau of Canada

Financial impact of extreme environmental events – the insurance sector

12:10 Lunch

13:10 Session 6: Emergency Management and Preparedness • Ernest MacGillivray, Exec. Director, Emergency Services, N.B.

Managing the challenges of severe weather events (By Skype) • Barney Owens, Director – Response, Office of the Fire Marshal &

Emergency Management, Ontario

December 2013 Ice Storm in Ontario Discussion

14:10 Session 7: Global implications • David Greenall, Sr. Manager, ERS/Sustainability, Deloitte

Private Sector Resilience to Extreme Weather Events

14:40 Discussion : Challenges and Adaptations • Reducing disaster risk and losses

• Crisis prevention and recovery. Emergency preparedness

• Proactive vs. reactive adaptation

• Best practices in adaptation

• Decision-making in an unpredictable environment.

• Ongoing needs

Final discussion and wrap-up

15:10 Conclusions – opportunities for Canada

15:30 End of Symposium



Appendix 2: Speakers

Gordon McBean

Professor Gordon McBean is the Chair of the Board

of Directors of the Canadian Climate Forum, and

is based at the Institute for Catastrophic Loss

Reduction, at Western University. He was Assistant

Deputy Minister at Environment Canada, from 1994

to 2000. He has been a lead author for IPCC reports

in 1990, 1995, 2007 and 2012. In September 2014

he will take up the position of President of the International Council for Science.

Dr. McBean is a Member of the Order of Canada and of the Order of Ontario (2008);

and is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada.

Scott Vaughan

Scott Vaughan became President and Chief Executive Officer of the International

Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) in April 2013. Prior to joining IISD, he

served as Canada’s Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development for

five years; and before that, was Director of the Department of Sustainable Development

at the Organization of American States (OAS) in Washington, D.C. He has also been

a Visiting Scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; the Head of

Economics at the NAFTA Environment Commission; and Counsellor at the World Trade

Organization (WTO) in Geneva. In addition he has held various positions with the

United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). He holds post-graduate degrees from

the London School of Economics, the University of Edinburgh and Dalhousie University.

Bob Sandford

Bob Sandford is the EPCOR Chair of the Canadian Partnership Initiative in support

of the United Nations Water for Life Decade. He also an associate of the Centre for

Hydrology which is part of the Global Water Institute at the University of Saskatchewan;

and a Fellow of the Biogeoscience Institute at the University of Calgary. Mr. Sandford



has published a number of high-profile books on water including Cold Matters: The State

& Fate of Canada’s Snow and Ice (2012). His sixth book on water, Saving Lake Winnipeg

was published in 2013. Bob lives in Canmore, Alberta.

John Pomeroy

John Pomeroy holds the Canada Research Chair in

Water Resources and Climate Change (Tier I). He is

Director of the Centre for Hydrology at the University

of Saskatchewan and which operates the Coldwater

Laboratory, in Kananaskis, Alberta. He is a Theme

Lead of the NSERC Changing Cold Regions Network.

Dr. Pomeroy is a Fellow of the American Geophysical

Union and the Royal Geographical Society, the current

Past President of the International Commission

on Snow and Ice Hydrology, and an Honorary Professor with the University of Calgary

Biogeoscience Institute, the University of Aberystwyth, Wales and the Chinese Academy

of Sciences.

Ron Stewart

Ron Stewart is a professor in the Department of Environment and Geography at the

University of Manitoba and until recently, Department Head. He holds a PhD in physics

from the University of Toronto. He has been a senior scientist at Environment Canada;

he subsequently moved to McGill as professor in the Department of Atmospheric and

Oceanic Sciences, and eventually to the University of Manitoba. His research focuses

on extreme winter and summer weather, precipitation and regional climate. He has

led numerous Canadian and international research activities addressing these issues,

including the Drought Research Initiative (DRI). Dr. Stewart has been a member of the

international GEWEX (Global Water and Energy Cycle Experiment) Scientific Steering

Committee and has led global initiatives on regional climate within the World Climate

Research Programme. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada.



David Phillips

Dave Phillips has been with Environment Canada’s weather service for over 40 years;

and holds the position of Senior Climatologist. His activities focus on Canada’s climate

and on promoting awareness and understanding of weather and climate in Canada. He

has published on the climate of Canada; has entries in The Canadian Encyclopedia, and

seven books, including two best sellers: The Day Niagara Falls Ran Dry and Blame It On

The Weather. Dave Phillips is the originator and author of the Canadian Weather Trivia

Calendar, now in its 27th year. For nearly ten years he wrote the Weather-wise column

in the Canadian Geographic magazine. David frequently appears on national radio and

television as a commentator on weather and climate matters.

He holds several honours including the Order of Canada, the Patterson Medal for

Distinguished Service to Meteorology in Canada, the Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee

Medal; and (twice), the Public Service Merit Award. He is a fellow of the Royal Canadian

Geographical Society and the Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society.

Iqbal Kalsi

Iqbal Kalsi is a Manager at the Middlesex-London Health Unit, where he is responsible

for the Health Hazards Prevention and Management Section (which includes Climate

Change and Health, Toxicology, Risk Assessment, Air Quality, Remediation and

Reclamation); Vector –Borne Diseases programs, andEmergency Response. He has been

Project Manager of an important PCB (Polychlorinated Biphenyl) Blood Study in London,

in collaboration with the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, in Atlanta .



Emmanuelle Cadot

Mme Cadot conducts research at the Institut de

recherche pour le développement (IRD), a French

research organization conducting research,

training and innovation, for social, economic and

cultural development. It focuses on the relationship

between humans and the environment in Africa,

the Mediterranean, Latin America, Asia and the

former French tropical territories. Mme Cadot has

conducted research in a number of areas related

to public health and epidemiology, both in France

and in sub-Saharan Africa. Her work has included

studies of factors influencing mortality in the

heatwaves that have affected France over the past

decade. Mme Cadot holds a Doctoral degree in

Human, regional and economic geography.

Peter Berry

Dr. Peter Berry is a Senior Policy Analyst in Health Canada’s Climate Change and Health

Office, in the Safe Environments Programme at Health Canada. He has also worked at

the Environmental Health Directorate of Health Canada, as a Policy Analyst. He holds

a doctorate in International Relations from the University of Toronto. Dr. Berry is a

lead author for the Health Chapter of the Government of Canada Climate Impacts and

Adaptation Assessment, which will be released shortly. He is also a contributing author

to new climate change and health vulnerability assessment guidelines developed by the

World Health Organization.



Sheri Fink

Sheri Fink is a journalist who covers health, medicine and science; and recently

joined the New York Times as a staff reporter. In 2010 she won the Pulitzer Prize for

Investigative Reporting, “for a story that chronicles the urgent life-and-death decisions

made by one hospital’s exhausted doctors when they were cut off by the floodwaters of

Hurricane Katrina.” Dr. Fink holds a Doctorate in Neuroscience; and a medical degree

from Stanford. She has been involved in humanitarian aid work in disaster and war

zones (Kosovo, Haiti, Iraq, Bosnia, Macedonia and Mozambique) with the International

Medical Corps.

Fink is a senior fellow with the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative and has been a staff

reporter at ProPublica in New York. Her articles have appeared in the New York Times,

Discover and Scientific American.

Jennifer Francis

Jennifer Francis is a research professor at Rutgers University’s Institute of Marine

and Coastal Sciences, in New Jersey. Her research focuses on climate change in the

Arctic, and she has published over 40 scientific papers on the topic. She is particularly

interested in the effect of Arctic warming on the jet stream, and how this has

contributed to abnormal weather patterns such as unusually long winters, recent floods

in Colorado and the unusually cold conditions across much of the southern United

States earlier this year. Dr. Francis holds a PhD in atmospheric sciences from

the University of Washington.



Francis Zwiers

Francis Zwiers is the President and CEO of the

Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium (PCIC) based

at the University of Victoria. PCIC is a not-for-

profit corporation that provides practical, science-

based information for stakeholders and policy

makers, in a range of areas. He was previously at

Environment Canada where he was director of the

department’s Climate Research Division. He has

also led Environment Canada’s climate modelling

research laboratory: the Canadian Centre for Climate

Modelling and Analysis (CCCma). Dr. Zwiers is an

expert in applying statistical methods to climate variability and change and is an elected

member of IPCC’s bureau for its fifth global climate assessment.

Paul Kovacs

Paul Kovacs is the founder and Executive Director of the Institute for Catastrophic Loss

Reduction, based at Western University; and the CEO of the Property and Casualty

Insurance Compensation Corporation. He is a contributing author to the reports of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the world’s leading forum for the study

of climate issues. An authority on insurance and climate change, Paul is committed

to disaster resilience and adaptation to climate extremes. He has authored numerous

reports on reducing the risk of loss from natural disasters, and is a popular commentator

on insurance, disaster safety and economic policy.

Kovacs has worked in private industry, the public sector and academia. He Co-Chairs

the Infrastructure and Housing Working Group of Canada’s Adaptation Platform; and

Co-Chairs the Science and Technology Working Group of Canada’s Platform on Disaster

Risk Reduction.



Deb Harford

As executive director for and co-founder of Simon Fraser University’s ‘Adaptation to

Climate Change Team’ (ACT), Deborah Harford is responsible for development of the

initiative’s vision and its partnerships with the public and private sectors, as well as

overall direction of the program. She oversees and co-ordinates the development of

ACT’s leading policy recommendations for effective adaptation strategies at all levels of

government, as well as communication of the program’s outcomes.

Through Deborah’s efforts, ACT has created networks between local, national and

international climate change research practitioners, NGOs, industry representatives, all

levels of government, First Nations groups and local communities. Deborah’s work with

ACT has gained her national recognition as a resource for those seeking information on

climate change adaptation and practical coping skills.

Don Lemmen

Don Lemmen is the manager of Research and Science Assessment at the Climate

Change Impacts and Adaptation Division of Natural Resources Canada. Since 1999

he has helped manage the development and implementation of national programs on

adaptation for the Government of Canada. Don led development of Canada’s 2008

national assessment of climate change impacts and adaptation, including serving as a

lead author and lead scientific editor. He is also a negotiator and technical expert

on adaptation for Canadian delegations to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. His current

responsibilities include leading an assessment of the implications of climate change for

Canada’s coastal communities, infrastructure and ecosystems, to be completed in 2015.



Jacinthe Clavet-Gaumont

Jacinthe Clavet-Gaumont is the coordinator of the

energy research group at OURANOS, the Quebec

research consortium on regional climatology and

adaptation to climate change. Her work involves a

study of extreme flows in the Cote-Nord region of

Quebec, with a view to quantifying projected change in

extreme flows. A graduate of the Université du Quebec

in Montreal, Jacinthe was awarded the 2012 Peter

Zwack prize for her Master’s thesis, which focused

on the regional frequency analysis of spring floods in

Quebec.

Michel Girard

As Vice-President of the Standards Council of Canada’s Policy and Stakeholder Relations

branch, Dr. Girard oversees the Council’s stakeholder engagement initiatives, analysis of

standardization issues, and development of key policies. He has a wealth of experience in

standardization and environmental management. Mr. Girard has been Director of Climate

Change Services at the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) where he managed CSA’s

Ottawa office and played a leading role in developing CSA’s climate change policy. Prior

to joining CSA, he was Director of International Affairs in the Climate Change Bureau at

Environment Canada, where he helped negotiate the rules governing the Kyoto Protocol.

Mr. Girard holds a Ph.D. in History from the University of Ottawa.



Chris White

Chris White has over 20 years of experience in

public and government relations, and in planning

strategic communications, in both the public and

private sectors. Prior to joining the Insurance Bureau

of Canada, he worked as Chief of Staff for five

federal cabinet ministers. His executive positions

in the private sector have included Vice-President,

Government Relations and Public Affairs and Vice-President, Government Relations

in the auto and finance industries. Mr. White joined IBC in 2011 as Vice-President,

Federal Affairs. He oversees the daily operations of IBC’s office in Ottawa and directs

the Property and Casualty industry’s strategic and government relations efforts in

the nation’s capital. Mr. White holds a master’s degree in political science from the

University of Windsor and a graduate diploma in international development from the

University of Ottawa. He is active with Special Olympics.

Ernest MacGillivray

Ernie MacGillivray is a Senior Executive Officer with the New Brunswick Department of

Public Safety, where he runs their management consulting branch. Ernie is also currently

working on a government wide initiative to improve public sector leadership and

management practices.

Ernie has served previously as Executive Director Emergency Services, as Director of the

New Brunswick Emergency Measures Organization, and has for two decades has been

part of the transformation of emergency management in Canada. He still plays a role

in emergency management, as an advisor to Canada’s Safety & Security Program, and

also serves as Co-President of the Canadian Risk and Hazards Network.



Barney Owens

Barney Owens is the Director of Response in the Office of the Fire Marshal and Emergency

Management (OFMEM) in the Government of Ontario: Community Safety Division,

Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services (MCSCS). His career in the

Ontario Public Service spans 34 years. Barney has worked in the Emergency Management

field for over 20 years, and has been involved in the response to provincial emergencies,

including the 2013 Ice Storm, the 1998 Eastern Ontario Ice Storm, the Power Blackout, the

Peterborough and James Bay Coastal flooding, the Forest Fires of 2011 and 2012, as well

as numerous other responses.

In 1998, Barney received the Amethyst Award for his involvement in the response to

the Eastern Ontario Ice Storm and is also a recipient of the Ovation Award 2007 in the

category of partnerships for his leadership in the development of a ministry Pandemic

Plan. In 2011 Barney received the Ovation Award again for his leadership in the

Ministry’s United Way Campaign.

David Greenall

David Greenall is a Senior Manager with Deloitte

Sustainability. He leads Deloitte’s global climate

adaptation and resilience practice, working with

governments, multi-lateral institutions and business to

address the risks of extreme weather and a changing

climate. Prior to joining Deloitte he was the Principal

Researcher – Energy, Environment and Transportation

Policy at The Conference Board, where he launched the

Carbon Disclosure Project Canada and Leaders’ Round

Table on Climate Change Adaptation initiatives.



Mike Brklacich

Mike Brklacich is a Professor in the Department of Geography and Environmental

Studies at Carleton University, and Chaired that department for several years. Prior to

joining Carleton he was a research scientist with Agriculture Canada. His teaching and

research reflects his long-term interest in interdisciplinary approaches for assessing

human-environment relationships.

Dr. Brklacich is a Review Editor of the chapter in the report of the IPCC’s Working Group

II, dealing with “Emergent Risks and Key Vulnerabilities”.

Erik Haites

Erik Haites is the founder and president of Margaree Consultants Inc. in Toronto, which

for almost 20 years has provided consulting services on environmental economics.

Prior to founding Margaree he held senior positions with a number of other companies.

Dr. Haites is an expert in the areas of Environmental Economics and Energy, notably,

greenhouse gas emissions and emissions trading, as well as energy efficiently. He holds

a doctorate in Economics from Purdue University.

He is a Lead Author on the IPCC’s latest Assessment Report; specifically in the chapter

on Cross-cutting Investment and Finance Issues, of the report of Working Group III,

entitled: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate change.

Debra Davidson

Debra Davidson is an Associate Professor of Environmental Sociology at the University

of Alberta. Her research there focuses on social responses to climate change,

particularly community-level vulnerability and adaptation. She is currently working

on the social dimension of climate change vulnerability; urban agriculture and food

security; and historical impacts of natural resource extraction. Dr Davidson is a lead

Author on the North American chapter of the report of the IPCC Working Group II, on

Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability.



Appendix 3: The Challenge of Extreme Events and their Impacts

Scott Vaughan

Ottawa, ON, April 23, 2014

Thank you and congratulations to Gordon McBean for steady and impressive leadership.

Gordon is one of those Canadian treasures for his determination and deep commitment to

link credible, robust science with public policy.

I wanted to set the stage for this morning’s discussions by highlighting three main areas.

First, what the IPCC reports say about extreme climate events. Second, what the IPCC says

about longer-term, chronic climate-related events that will affect our oceans, freshwater

abundance and food security systems. And third, steps that are being taken to integrate

climate vulnerability assessments into risk assessments, and the efforts to mainstream

resilience within the natural disaster risk community. I wanted to conclude with a brief

comment on the climate mitigation agenda and the urgent need to formulate a plan for the

2015 global agenda.

Let me begin with the IPCC, and its 2012 special report on managing the risks of extreme

weather events. The IPCC report of two years ago plays a useful role not only in unpacking

trends in extreme weather events and being clear about the level of scientific certainty

related to observations, but also in linking those events to human risk exposure and

vulnerability. This is a critical linkage, something that leaders in the insurance sector have

underscored for years. For my colleagues at IISD, who are working with countries around

the world, this underscores the need to look at extreme weather events within a sustainable

development lens that connects environmental, social and economic factors.

The IPCC special report notes that there has been a change in the frequency, intensity,

spatial extent, duration and timing of extreme weather events. The risks have steadily



increased since then. The 2012 report notes that there have been a higher percentage

of hotter days in recent years; the World Resources Institute notes more bluntly

that each of the last 36 years has exceeded global average temperatures. The IPCC

observes with a medium degree of certainty that there has been an increase in heavy

precipitation and associated flooding in certain regions and some increases in drought

frequency associated with climate change. I know Paul Kovacs will discuss this today,

but the direct economic losses from these events have risen dramatically, as measured

by insurance claims. Reported claims for flood damages alone increased from an

average of $7 billion per year globally in the 1980s to over $24 billion in 2011. In the

Canadian context, the Insurance Bureau of Canada reported that the ice storm in

southern Ontario and eastern Canada in December 2013 resulted in $200 million in

insured losses, for a total year- end severe weather insured loss of $3.2 billion, which

is the highest in Canadian history. Yet when Nicholas Stern made the suggestion

that insurance coverage be increased to between 1–2 per cent of global GDP, he was

attacked fiercely as a radical extremist.

There are unfortunately many examples of what this means. Let me illustrate with one

country, Brazil, and one year, 2005. In 2005, Brazil’s southeastern region was hit with

the first-ever recorded tropical cyclone. No cyclone had ever been recorded reaching

landfall along Brazil’s coast until then. Over 1,000 homes were destroyed. Another

40,000 were damaged. Most agricultural produce was severely damaged or destroyed,

including more than three quarters of the banana crops, 40 per cent of rice crops.

In total, there was more than $350 million in damages.

The same year—2005—Brazil also experienced a devastating drought in the upper

Amazon basin, the most severe in 100 years. The Amazon River reached its lowest

recorded levels in 25 years. Lower water levels in turn saw large fish kills, high rates

of forest fires and human health impacts from water-borne diseases linked to lower

water levels and higher concentration of water contaminants, as well as respiratory

diseases from forest fires—all compounded by pre-existing poverty levels in the region.



The causes of both events are complex, but illustrate the key finding that extreme events

are happening more frequently, where they haven’t happened before, with devastating

impacts on human communities—especially the poor—and from an economic risk

perspective.

In the case of the Amazon drought, the 2005 episode illustrates a key warning of the

latest IPCC report: In a global analysis of simulated stream-flows (1948–2004), about one

third of the top 200 rivers (including the Congo, Mississippi and Uruguay rivers) showed

significant trends in discharge; 45 recorded decreases and only 19 recorded increases.

Decreasing trends in low and mid latitudes are consistent with recent drying and

warming in Western Canada and the United States. While there is no single explanation

for these twin events, they were both triggered in part by warmer mid-Atlantic surface

temperatures recorded that year—the SST effect.

So let me turn briefly to the most recent IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, and begin with

oceans. There are three main warnings from the report: first, the high probability of

rising sea levels, by as much as half a metre by the end of the century, putting at risk

tens of millions of people living in lower-level coastal cities and communities. Second, the

changes already underway in oceanic acidification: increased levels of carbon are literally

changing the chemistry of the planet’s oceans, at a rate millions of times faster than

observed at any time. Studies are now showing that average warmer temperatures and

altered chemistry may already be changing marine ecosystem patterns, from shrinking

average fish sizes for some species to changing predator interactions. Third, the impacts

of climate change on fish populations more broadly. The IPCC notes that there may be

gains in some northern fish productivity, but this will be offset by a significant decline in

tropical fisheries yields by as much as 50 per cent. Today, over one billion people rely on

fish as their main source of protein. The projected decrease in tropical fish populations

is thus alarming in terms of putting increased pressure on global food security. The

other big impact of climate change on food security is of course changes in average

precipitation. The IPCC warns that for every one degree of warming, it is expected that



there will be a corresponding decrease in renewable water resources by at least 20 per

cent for a significant proportion of the global population. At the same time, it notes that

by the end of this century what we currently call a 100-year flood event is expected to

increase three-fold.

The amount of available renewable surface water and groundwater resources is

expected to be reduced dramatically in most dry subtropical regions. This will further

compound water scarcity and water trade- offs among different users—such as industry,

households, farming and energy—while the combined effects of altered stream flow

regimes, average river water levels, and extent and timing of inundation. Precipitation

extremes will thus have a clear impact on food security, from prolonged drought to

soil erosion and changes in stream sediment loads. A warmer climate may affect soil

moisture, litter cover and biomass production. When you couple these trends with global

population growth, we are now facing an urgent need to dramatically transform food

production in the coming decade.

We have already witnessed unprecedented crop failures in Australia, China, the United

States and elsewhere. The FAO now warns that the combined impacts of climate

change, population growth and other factors will require a 70 per cent increase in

food productivity in the coming decade. The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report projects a

decline in net agricultural productivity in major North American crops by the end of the

21st century in the absence of adaptation efforts, due to higher temperatures, lower

precipitation and more frequent extreme events.

So let me turn briefly to adaptation efforts, which is based on efforts from my colleagues

at IISD, who work with national governments and local communities around the world,

across Canada and in developing countries. The first is that extreme events create space

for innovative adaptation. It is clear from a few of the examples I have just listed that

climate change is not a recipe for business as usual or incremental steps. Efforts are

needed for businesses, households and governments to take precautionary steps. This is



easy to say, but questions about the precise impact of climate change make longer-term

resilience investments very difficult for any community or company. To take one example,

we know from experience that infrastructure in Canada’s North is already bearing the

signs of climate change: melting permafrost, buckling roads and pipelines, and cracking

foundations that are driving up a range of others costs. A short-term fix is to replace that

infrastructure and maintain what you can. Moving to a longer-term assessment and doing

infrastructure planning takes policy leadership.

A concept that does show signs of hope is the foothold resilience has taken in the climate

adaptation field. Ten years ago, experts in disaster risk reduction management and

climate adaptation were oddly working in largely isolated fields. That is not the case

today. There are synergies that still need to be examined in bringing these two fields

together. It looks good on paper, but more needs to be done in coordinated planning IPCC

5th Assessment Report. Here in Canada, for example, synergies not only with Environment

Canada and others—as we reported in my previous job as doing useful work—but also

with Public Safety Canada, Public Health Agency, and Finance Canada need to be forged

to begin assessing longer-term risks. I’m really pleased that NRCAN will be updating

its 2008 From Impacts to Adaptation, which Don Lemmen will discuss tomorrow, and I

sincerely hope that the public roll-out of this report will be ambitious, sustained and used

as a vehicle to reach city, provincial and federal disaster management agencies.

There are two aspects to mainstream resilience: how to link risk assessment with risk

management and the development of indicators capable of showing key information

points.

One of the challenges in this is not only to scale up resilience efforts, moving from

slow, incremental steps to what is being called transformative adaptation. We are not

very good at thinking about cumulative risks any more than we are good at assessing

cumulative impacts of complex project proposals like the Northern Gateway. Given

the warnings about food security and challenge set out by the FAO, one example of

transformative change is to alter current public policy tools like farm income support for



increasingly vulnerable, water-intensive crops to farming practices that take into account

long-term climate scenarios. The same holds true for a range of other areas, from

building codes to no-go zoning planning.

One area that is gaining ground is green infrastructure and nature-based solutions to

some elements of climate risk. There is now more attention focused on natural barriers,

from reforestation to address soil erosion and slope stabilization, to mangrove planting

and sand-dune stabilization to create natural and more resilience barriers. There is

potential here, but what is missing are again clear indicators in order to do standard

qualitative and even quantitative assessments.

Before turning briefly to the mitigation side and ending, I wanted to mention the

importance of research more broadly, beyond the effectiveness of natural barriers.

There has obviously been a huge increase in scientific research around climate change.

Yet the IPCC notes that of the disciplines we would look to first in some of the steps I

have mentioned this morning, like linking risk or vulnerability assessments with on- the-

ground risk management options—such as engineering—have seen the least increase in

peer- reviewed journal articles. The IPCC reports that literature published on the topic

of “climate change” has increased in most scientific fields, but has not has not changed

appreciably over the past four decades in engineering journals.

To address the complex climate change problem, we will need solutions from all experts.

I wanted to close with a word on mitigation. Twenty years ago, the worst case scenario

in discussing climate change was an increase between 0.5 to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Today

the world is losing on its commitment to cap average global atmospheric carbon part

per million at 450 and an average temperature increase of 2 degrees Celsius. The IPCC

is now running scenarios from 3 to over 5 degrees Celsius.



Just as we need to think about transformative rather than incremental approaches to

adaptation, we need to put in place transformative changes to energy systems. Climate

change debates are not about science. The science is now clear, and it tells us that we

need anywhere from a 40 per cent to over 60 per cent decrease in greenhouse gas

emissions in the near term, and net zero emissions must be achieved between 2050

and 2100 to keep under the 2 degree Celsius cap. This is therefore not a matter of more

analysis, but simple arithmetic: what steps are needed to cap emissions and keep within a

simple concept we all understand? How to have a balanced carbon budget?

The simple challenge is to make clean energy—from renewables, from convention with

carbon capture and storage—cheaper than dirty energy. One place to begin is ending the

$500 billion to $600 billion each year globally that governments spend on fossil subsidies,

and finding ways—through fiscal policies, public procurement, clear policy direction for oil

and gas regulations—to ramp up clean energy.

International action to address climate change is a crucial part of the solution. We could

spend all day criticizing the UNFCCC and speculating about the likelihood of success

for the COP meeting in Paris in 2015. Yet this needs to succeed and Canada has very

little time in putting together its formal position going into the Paris COP. My colleagues

work closely with provinces and they, with industry, are increasingly anxious that there is

little open, transparent consultation about Canada’s 2015 strategy. It will likely look very

different from the top-down Kyoto Protocol. But the international community needs an

international system that spurs bottom-up and top-down action, that is able to count up

and compare national actions through strong levels of ambitions for climate finance both

for mitigation and adaptation, and that has in place coherent monitoring, reporting and

verification systems.



There are climate change tipping points beyond which it will no longer be possible for

some systems to achieve sustainable development. More mitigation in the near term

can reduce the need for adaptation in the future. There are strategies that we can

pursue now that will put us onto climate-resilient pathways while also helping to improve

livelihoods, social and economic well-being, and environmental integrity. We are already

seeing the impacts of climate change and the science is clear on what we will continue

to see. We need national leadership and coordination on disaster risk reduction,

adaptation and mitigation; and if we do not work with the international community on

mitigation, then we will have a much larger task for adaptation in the future.

Thank you again for inviting me and I wish you all the best in your deliberations over the

next two days.



Bancroft, DouglasEarth Observations

Beckett, DianeOttawa

Beckwith, PaulGeography, University of Ottawa

Benkert, BronwynYukon College

Bennett, John Sierra Club Canada Foundation

Berry, PeterHealth Canada

Binkley AlexFreelance Reporter

Blair, GrahamHabitatSeven

Bleau, Nathalie

Boeckh, JanetMontreal

Boulton, WayneRWDI Air Inc.

Brandum, SusanGreen Communities & Rideau Environmental Action League (RAIN!)

Brklacich, MichaelCarleton University

Bruce, JamesOttawa

Cadot, EmmanuelleInstitut de recherche pour le développementMontpellier, France

Casselman, DanielFederation of Canadian Municipalities

Chandler, JaninaEnvironment Canada

Chaput, MichelleDoctoral candidate, Geography

Choquette, Hon. Francois, M.P., Ottawa

Church, GailCanadian Climate Forum

Church, IanWhitehorse, YukonBoard of Directors, Canadian Climate Forum

Christie, Peter Kingston

Clavet-Gaumont, JacintheOuranos, Montreal

Cobb, PaulMirarco

Conway, DawnCanadian Climate Forum

Cookson-Hills, PippaUniversity of Alberta

Davidson, DebraUniversity of Alberta

Douglas, AllanDirector, Ontario Centre for Climate Impacts & Adaptation Resources

Dorgeville, MarcOttawa

Fenech, Adam University of Prince Edward Island

Fink, SheriJournalist, New York Times

Francis, JenniferRutgers University

Gajewski, Konrad University of Ottawa

Girard, MichelStandards Council of Canada

Greenall, DavidDeloitte, Sustainability

Harford, DebAdaptation to Climate Change Team (ACT)Simon Fraser University

Harris, MelissaClimate Change & EnergyInternat’l Institute for Sustainable Development

Henstra, Dan Waterloo

Herring, Richard Habitat Seven

Hoefer, CarlRotman Institute of Philosophy, Western University

Hoffman, PerryManaging EditorCanadian Green Tech

Kaknevicius, ArianaCanadian Geographic

Kalsi, IqbalMiddlesex-London Health Unit

Kovacs, PaulInstitute for Catastrophic Loss ReductionWestern University

Kulkarni, Tanuja Federal S&T Community Secretariat, Environment Canada

Ladd, Matthew Ottawa

Lemmen, DonNatural Resources Canada

Levasseur, DavidQuebec

Appendix 4: Symposium Delegates and Speakers



Levasseur, MauriceUniversité Laval Board of Directors, Canadian Climate Forum

Levine, TamaraToronto

Liu, Jinliang (John) Toronto

Luloff, MatthewOffice of the Hon. John McKay P.C., MP

Mackwani, Zeenat Ottawa

Martel, PatriciaToronto

MacGillivray, ErnestEmergency Services Branch, New Brunswick

McBean, GordonChair, Canadian Climate Forum, Western University

McKay, Robin Agriculture & Agrifood Canada

McMillan, AnnOttawa Michaud, ChristianGatineau

Mills, JohnTorontoBoard of Directors, Canadian Climate Forum

Mitchell, Carrie Waterloo

Moogk-Soulis, CarolWaterloo

Morand, Annette Sudbury

Myers, ErinClimate Change & Health Adaptation in the North, First Nations & Inuit Health Branch, Health Canada

Mysak, LawrenceMcGill UniversityBoard of Directors, Canadian Climate Forum

O’Hagan, PeterHamilton

Owens, BarneyOffice of the Fire Marshall & EmergencyManagement in Ontario

Palko, KathyOttawa

Pedersen, TomPacific Institute for Climate Solutions (PICS), VictoriaBoard of Directors, Canadian Climate Forum

Phillips, DavidEnvironment Canada

Plecash, ChrisThe Hill Times

Pomeroy, JohnUniversity of Saskatchewan

Princz, D.2577 Yarmouth CresOttawa Ontario K1V 6J9

Raikes, JonathanLondon

Richard, JacquelineOntario Centre for Climate Impacts and Adaptation Resources

Rodgers, CarolineToronto

Roy, PhilippeMontréal

Rycerz, AmandaHabitat Seven

Samms. JamesFredericton

Sanford, BobEPCOR Chair

Soulis, RicUniversity of Waterloo

Sparling, ErikRisk Sciences International, Ottawa

Stephenson, AlexandraMarkham

Stevenson, Ben M.Agriculture & Agrifood Canada

Stewart, RonUniversity of Manitoba

Szoler, DianeLondon, Ontario

Turner, MichelleOttawa

Urquizo, NattyRWDI AIR Inc.

Van Dijken, RobertWhitehorse

Vaughan, ScottInternational Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)

Vigneault, Frederic R. Gatineau

Vogel, Brennan London

Walker, AnitaAADNC

White, ChrisInsurance Bureau of Canada

Wong, CarissaOttawa

55 Laurier Ave. E., Suite 10148, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5

Telephone: 613-238-2223

www.climateforum.ca

Documents

Extreme Weather: Impacts, Challenges and Adaptations