Objectives Targets & Indicators for Adaptation to Climate Change
A presentation to the expert meeting on climate change vulnerability and adaptation indicators, 3-4 September 2008
Regional Environmental Centre for Central and Eastern Europe,2000 Szentendre, Ady Endre út 9-11,
Gerry MetcalfKnowledge Transfer ManagerUKCIPUK Climate Impacts Programme
presentation themes
Introduction
• UKCIP
• overview
Objectives, Targets and Indicators at National/Regional Scale
• Objectives set by an organisation’s aims and purposes
• Limitations
Performance Indicator for Local Authorities in England
• NI188
• Guidance Notes
• Structure, Content, Principles
Targets at Project Scale
• Some suggestions for further support
The UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP)
Set up by UK Government in 1997
based at University of Oxford
mostly Defra-funded
15 people now
20+ people soon
current work-programme to 2011
works through:
partnerships and programmes
capacity building
stakeholder-led research
Mission:
To help organisations assess how they might be affected by climate change, so that they can prepare for its impacts.
UKCIP is a ‘boundary organisation’
UKCIP facilitates relationships between three groups of key actors
UKCIP
UKCIP tools portfolio
BRAIN
LCLIP
overview
Defra (UK Government) has tasked UKCIP to explore
• Targets and Indicators at a national scale
• Build upon AEAT study of December 2005
UKCIP (or at least most individuals at UKCIP)
• Struggle to see the potential of this approach
However, there are some parts of UKCIP decision-making sequence at which
• Objectives, Targets and Indicators are indicated and appropriate
Three examples of how UKCIP has embraced these concepts
• Strategic Objectives
• Performance Indicators
• Targets at project scale
Descriptive rather than analytical. No clear conclusions
(strategic) objectives at a national scale
Strategic Objectives
• Achieve the aims of the organisation eg Strategic Plan
• In the face of changing weather and climate
• Can exploit opportunities as well as managing threats
• Can be monitored in terms of: business continuity, service delivery
Examples
• Chinese Regional Adaptation Strategy (Food? Income? Community cohesion?)
• Local Authority Community Strategy (Systemic, Resilience)
Commentary
• Is aspirational but may not be achievable
• Sets a clear mission without the need for elaborate decisions at the outset
• Can use exiting performance indicators against which adaptation plans can be tested
performance indicator for local authorities
New Performance Framework for Local Authorities
• Includes a voluntary Performance Indicator on ‘Adaptation’ (NI 188)
• One of a very few PIs that are ‘process based’
• Sets out 5 Levels of achievement, partial achievement in the early stages
• Targets agreed for completion of specified levels at the end of Years 1, 2, 3
Advantages
• Sets out a pathway which others can follow (or vary) in due course
• Remains strategic in order to build a ‘well adapting’ local authority
• Includes ‘Building Adaptive Capacity’ as well as ‘Delivering Adaptation Actions’
• Responds to pragmatic non-sequential progress through project management plan
Needs
• Clear examples of tools, methods, etc to define elements of achievement
• Self-assessment tool as well as a top-down audit using thesame framework.
Key elements of achievement for levels in NI188
1.Taking a
leadership role
2. Engaging partners
3. Assessing current
vulnerability
4. Assessing future risk
5. Developing Adaptation Approach & Strategy
6. Completin
g Adaptation Action Plan
7. Implementi
ng Adaptation
Actions
8. Monitoring
/ review and
feedback
Level 0
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Partial achievement Comprehensive achievement
UKCIP tools portfolio
BRAIN
LCLIP
Targets and indicators at a project scale
Benefits
• Not just desirable, but a necessary part of decision-making at project scale
• What are we trying to achieve? How might it be achieved?
• At what cost? Over what time period?
Issues
• Some targets will derive from absolute specifications?
• But even some apparent absolutes must ultimately be negotiable?
• Involves concepts of ‘risk’ and ‘probability’.
• Number of days over which a school must close each summer in 2050s?
• Extent of protection to City of London in the face of specified surge in sea-level?
Monitoring
• Some targets may be set for the long term.
• If these are quantified it should be possible to monitor interim progress
Targets: max number of school closure days
Topic
• School classrooms become unusable inside at 31o C outside
Type of Target
• specify the maximum number of days/summer that the school has to close
Reasons for target
• Seemingly health and safety but actually reputational/political
Absolute Target or Pragmatic Target?
• Zero days of closure per summer or 3 days of closure per summer?
Evidence needed
• Number of days where temperature exceeds 31o C outside (Weather Generator)
• Technical adaptation responses and associated costs
Informed Target Setting
• We will seek no more than 5 days closure in the projected summers of 2020s
summary and conclusions
Strategic Objectives
• Doubts about application at a national scale
• Particularly if intending to be ‘outcome based’
• Important though to set overall criteria for adaptation
‘Outcome Based’ or ‘Process Based’
• ‘Outcomes’ not realistic through multiple: time, place, receptors, weather-variables
• ‘Process’ more realistic but not fashionable and dependent on well known and well-specified elements of stages in the process
Targets
• OK at project scale. Can this approach be developed for more strategic planning?
• Should a target driven approach be developed at all?
• Some serious problems experienced in UK with target-driven approaches in other policy areas.
www.ukcip.org.uk