Does Transformational Adaptation Require a Transformation of Climate Services?

Abstract

Cities, regions and countries are increasingly adapting to climate change. Adaptation approaches often build on disaster management activities to deal with climate extremes and make improvements to already existing systems to prepare for climate change, e.g., through water engineering or cooling existing buildings. But ideally, adaptation strategies aim also at tackling the root causes of climate risks through broader sustainable development pathways. Such transformational approaches, however, are still in their infancy. In this perspective paper we argue that there is a lack of guidance to support policy-makers to develop transformational adaptation strategies. There is a need and opportunity to develop climate services that support transformational adaptation. We explore how climate services can support transformational adaptation, drawing from literature, practical experience and illustrative examples. We identify four knowledge requirements: (1) system knowledge to identify the root causes and solutions; (2) inspirational and cross-disciplinary knowledge to develop a long-term vision; (3) a clear climate message and guiding principles to mainstream the vision; and (4) design principles that are connected to the priorities and interests of the stakeholders. We conclude that developing climate services for transformational adaptation involves a delicate process of simplifying and aggregating climate knowledge, as well as integrating it with knowledge about the physical, economic and social systems of cities and regions. This means that climate service providers need to widen their scope and skills, and collaborate with experts in the fields urban planning, landscape architecture, ecology, health, and sociology.

Evaluating Capability of Green Stormwater Infrastructure on Large Properties toward Adaptive Flood Mitigation: The HLCA+C Methodology

“…The methodology evaluates and classifies the FMC of large properties in a catchment under different climate change scenarios for long-term adaptation planning of coastal city flood mitigation. While there are other types of methodologies for assessing FMC in catchments, including those that are hydrology-based, MCAbased, and GIS-based, none meets all three methodological criteria needed for effective flood mitigation planning: to identify the FMC of a property to reduce catchment runoff volumes [25,26], to determine changes in FMC on properties with climate change [26][27][28], and to compare their FMC based on their specific biophysical characteristics [25][26][27][28]. The HLCA+C methodology is designed to meet all three.…”

“…This will allow planners to prioritise properties for GSI networks and develop adaptive GSI implementation approaches through time. However, there is no existing methodology that meets three key methodological requirements: (1) to identify the FMC of a property to mitigate catchment runoff volume [25,26], (2) to assess this capability under future climate conditions [26][27][28]; and (3) to compare the capabilities of properties toward the development of adaptive flood mitigation through time [25][26][27][28].…”

Quality Assessment in Co-developing Climate Services in Norway and the Netherlands

“…The selection of cases targeted novel experimental approaches to this co-development. They highlighted the widening interpretation in such co-development processes of what climate services are, and how they are developed [see e.g., Boon et al (2021)]. The Klimathon in Bergen is an example of the widening interpretation of what a climate service is; less focused on tools and data and more on engagement and reflection between actors involved in climate adaptation.…”

The Kake Climate Partnership: Implementing a knowledge co-production framework to provide climate services in Southeast Alaska

“…To use climate services to support truly transformational adaptation Boon et al (2021) argue that climate service providers need to widen their scope and skills. In this study, the role of the university researcher shifted from focusing on personal research interests to focusing on supporting local needs and priorities.…”