Turning risk assessment and adaptation policy priorities into meaningful interventions and governance processes

Brown, Kathryn; DiMauro, Manuela; Johns, D. Michael; Holmes, Gemma; Thompson, David B.; Russell, Andrew; Style, David

doi:10.1098/rsta.2017.0303

Cited by 13 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 2 publications

(4 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…impacts occurring after adaptation) at a societally acceptable level. This method was an advance on UKCCRA2012, which only used risk magnitude for prioritization [7]. Priorities were assessed based upon: (i) current risk levels, including existing adaptation actions; (ii) future risk levels, including existing adaptation actions; and (iii) the added benefits from additional actions being taken to address risk in the next 5 years as a matter of 'urgency'.…”

Section: Uk Climate Change Risk Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing climate change risks to the natural environment to facilitate cross-sectoral adaptation policy

Brown

2018

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change policy requires prioritization of adaptation actions across many diverse issues. The policy agenda for the natural environment includes not only biodiversity, soils and water, but also associated human benefits through agriculture, forestry, water resources, hazard alleviation, climate regulation and amenity value. To address this broad agenda, the use of comparative risk assessment is investigated with reference to statutory requirements of the UK Climate Change Risk Assessment. Risk prioritization was defined by current adaptation progress relative to risk magnitude and implementation lead times. Use of an ecosystem approach provided insights into risk interactions, but challenges remain in quantifying ecosystem services. For all risks, indirect effects and potential systemic risks were identified from land-use change, responding to both climate and socio-economic drivers, and causing increased competition for land and water resources. Adaptation strategies enhancing natural ecosystem resilience can buffer risks and sustain ecosystem services but require improved cross-sectoral coordination and recognition of dynamic change. To facilitate this, risk assessments need to be reflexive and explicitly assess decision outcomes contingent on their riskiness and adaptability, including required levels of human intervention, influence of uncertainty and ethical dimensions. More national-scale information is also required on adaptation occurring in practice and its efficacy in moderating risks.This article is part of the theme issue 'Advances in risk assessment for climate change adaptation policy'.

show abstract

Section: Uk Climate Change Risk Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing climate change risks to the natural environment to facilitate cross-sectoral adaptation policy

Brown

2018

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…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.…”

Section: Future Directions For Risk Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even in situations where data are available and presented to decision-makers, as in the Cork example provided by McDermott & Surminski [41], it is important to understand the underlying assumptions and limitations of a risk assessment. This requires transparency and close engagement between those who conduct the risk assessment and those who commission or use it [42].…”

Section: Future Directions For Risk Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The concluding commentary from Brown et al [42] is written from the perspective of the Climate Change Committee, which oversees the UKCCRA and provides independent guidance to the UK government on policy development. The authors describe how the UKCCRA has acted as a primer for research and knowledge exchange across the science-policy interface, and outline how the utilization of the risk assessment could be improved further.…”

Section: Overview Of Contributing Articlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advances in risk assessment for climate change adaptation policy

Adger

Brown

Surminski

2018

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A.

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For most countries, national adaptation policy exists in the absence of large-scale assessments of how people are actually adapting. Developed nations are increasingly focusing on climate risk mapping (Brown et al, 2018), but lack in-depth information about actual adaptation practice. The latter would enable adaptation gaps to be identified, and a more accurate analysis of the costs and benefits of specific adaptation practices (Tompkins et al, 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Documenting the state of adaptation for the global stocktake of the Paris Agreement

Tompkins

Vincent

Nicholls

et al. 2018

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Article 7, paragraph 14 of the Paris Agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change commits Parties to create a five yearly assessment of observed adaptation to track progress and enable appropriate future commitments through the Nationally Determined Contributions and National Adaptation Plans. No large‐scale study exists that shows the types of adaptation, the spatial distribution of types of adaptation, and the numbers of people engaging in that adaptation. To address this gap, and to feed into debates about the modalities for the global stocktake, in this paper we propose a new “stocktaking” approach to document the spectrum and prevalence of observed adaptation over large scales. The four‐step stocktaking approach focuses on: (a) obtaining consensus on the objectives of adaptation; (b) agreeing the sources of evidence; (c) agreeing the search method; and (d) categorizing the adaptations. By focusing on documenting rather than evaluating adaptation, the simple approach avoids some of the adaptation heuristic traps. With guidance to countries on how to operationalize, this approach could improve the transparency of adaptation data collection and analysis, ensure comparability of findings across space and time, and inform the Adaptation Communications (Article 7.10)—a prerequisite to strengthening future ambition commitments within the Paris Agreement. This article is categorized under: Policy and Governance > International Policy Framework Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change > Institutions for Adaptation

show abstract

Turning risk assessment and adaptation policy priorities into meaningful interventions and governance processes

Cited by 13 publications

References 2 publications

Assessing climate change risks to the natural environment to facilitate cross-sectoral adaptation policy

Assessing climate change risks to the natural environment to facilitate cross-sectoral adaptation policy

Advances in risk assessment for climate change adaptation policy

Documenting the state of adaptation for the global stocktake of the Paris Agreement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About