A systems framework for national assessment of climate risks to infrastructure

Abstract

Extreme weather causes substantial adverse socio-economic impacts by damaging and disrupting the infrastructure services that underpin modern society. Globally, $2.5tn a year is spent on infrastructure which is typically designed to last decades, over which period projected changes in the climate will modify infrastructure performance. A systems approach has been developed to assess risks across all infrastructure sectors to guide national policy making and adaptation investment. The method analyses diverse evidence of climate risks and adaptation actions, to assess the urgency and extent of adaptation required. Application to the UK shows that despite recent adaptation efforts, risks to infrastructure outweigh opportunities. Flooding is the greatest risk to all infrastructure sectors: even if the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 2°C is achieved, the number of users reliant on electricity infrastructure at risk of flooding would double, while a 4°C rise could triple UK flood damage. Other risks are significant, for example 5% and 20% of river catchments would be unable to meet water demand with 2°C and 4°C global warming respectively. Increased interdependence between infrastructure systems, especially from energy and information and communication technology (ICT), are amplifying risks, but adaptation action is limited by lack of clear responsibilities. A programme to build national capability is urgently required to improve infrastructure risk assessment.This article is part of the theme issue ‘Advances in risk assessment for climate change adaptation policy’.

Six research priorities for cities and climate change

“…These coupled risksand where responsibilities lie -are poorly understood 7 . Outages cascade and lead to shortages of food, cash and fuel, as happened in New York after Hurricane Sandy in 2012.…”

A Probabilistic Risk Assessment of the National Economic Impacts of Regulatory Drought Management on Irrigated Agriculture

“…Our approach overcomes the limitations of previous studies by using probability envelopes, which embrace extremes events and includes a fuller range of climate variability, as previously suggested from a disaster risk management perspective (De Perez et al, ). Furthermore, the probabilistic risk‐based assessment of economic losses in irrigated agriculture can complement the current U.K. national assessment of climate risks (Dawson et al, ), where irrigation is not currently considered as an infrastructure asset under risk.…”

Advances in risk assessment for climate change adaptation policy

“…The inclusion of adaptation action was a specific requirement for UKCCRA2, arguing that after several years of adaptation planning and policy-making it could be expected to see certain changes in adaptive behaviour that would in turn influence risk levels [34,42]. Evidence on adaptation is emerging, as shown for infrastructure [35] and for business and industry [37], but this is mostly in a descriptive anecdotal rather than quantifiable or comparable form. Stakeholder engagement in the risk assessment process to generate at least anecdotal evidence and to collect views on adaptive capacity and barriers to action are important steps that can be taken in the absence of comprehensive adaptation data, but it limits the policy conclusions that can be drawn.…”

“…In this theme issue, there are a range of new perspectives on how to assess these interdependencies and interactions, [35], the business-function framework for risks to industry and business applied by Surminski et al [37], and the risk transmission framing in Challinor et al [38] showcase methodological advances. However, they all also conclude that further interdisciplinary advances in integrated assessment approaches that link dynamic biophysical and socio-economic components of risk exposure and vulnerability are required (see also [44]).…”

“…Dawson et al [35] evaluate climate risks across UK infrastructure sectors through a systems approach. They find that the understanding of risks to individual infrastructure sectors has improved, but is still lagging for risks from interconnectivities and interdependencies.…”