Climate Change Adaptation briefing
updated October 2009
Adaptive Capacity
Practical measures which anticipate or react to the impact of climate change are described as "adaptation”. The increasing familiarity of this term betrays our failure to prevent global warming and that its consequences are unavoidable and imminent.
Adaptation is no panacea; desert cannot be turned into pasture, nor can we do more than fend off the power of rising tides. A global damage limitation exercise can succeed only alongside effective mitigation which contains climate change within the boundaries of adaptive capacity.
Unfortunately, adaptive capacity is a measure which exposes global inequality at its most extreme. In adapting to the digital revolution of recent decades, the highly educated, healthy and skilled workforces in industrialised countries have an impressive track record. And these countries are already committing to defensive projects in anticipation of more extreme hurricanes, floods and rising sea levels. Price tags of hundreds of millions of dollars are no disincentive.
By contrast, about one sixth of the world’s population is absorbed in the daily scramble for household essentials, in countries which lack resources to provide basic health and education. To inject an urgent need for drought-resistant crop varieties, or soil, forest and water conservation measures into such environments is a formidable task. Yet the greatest and most immediate need for adaptation will centre on these poorest countries because they are located in less temperate zones which are most susceptible to a changing climate.
Adaptive capacity is limited by lack of information as well as poverty. Poor village communities will have a good understanding of climate variability but not in a context of permanent change. Journalism in developing countries has had difficulty in recognising the importance of global warming. Governments too will be handicapped by inadequate knowledge – scientific climate models in Africa cannot remotely match those available in Europe, some of which offer predictions at 25 km² resolution.
Adaptation and Development
The pragmatic answer is to approach adaptation and development as two sides of the same coin. Successful poverty reduction programmes will reduce vulnerability to change. In priority to major infrastructure projects, adaptation should first downsize to build on existing community experience in reacting to a variable climate.
A shared platform will reduce the risk of initiatives working against each other. For example, shrimp farming in Southeast Asia has created new livelihoods but, in clearing mangrove plantations, has exposed the coastline to rising sea levels.
This common sense approach is reflected in the UN-funded National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) which have been prepared by most countries within the Least Developed Country (LDC) classification. They largely focus on areas already identified in development programmes, portraying climate change as additional pressure on the existing causes of poverty.
Recognising the lessons of poverty reduction projects, international aid agencies are promoting the concept of community-based adaptation which encourages a sense of ownership amongst the beneficiaries.
Disaster Risk
Disaster risk management is a component of adaptation, especially in the context of extreme weather events. Disaster projects feature in many of the NAPAs. The shelters and early warning systems constructed in the deltas of Bangladesh have already proved their worth in saving lives.
Although it is difficult to establish a direct causal link between natural disasters and climate change, the increase in their frequency – doubling over the last two decades - is consistent with scientific predictions. A report published by the Global Humanitarian Forum in 2009 suggests that 99% of the casualties occur in developing countries.
Financing Adaptation
This grassroots approach to adaptation creates immense difficulty in separating out its costs from those of existing development goals. The UN Human Development Report for 2007 priced adaptation in developing countries at $86 billion pa, almost as much as the entire current global aid budget. The more recent World Development Report 2010 acknowledges the difficulty in the calculations but reaches a similar conclusion.
Disagreement over pricing is more than matched by the lack of consensus on suitable funding mechanisms. The flagship UN Adaptation Fund, authorised at the Bali climate conference in 2007, is to be financed by a 2% levy on transactions within the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). This is the Kyoto Protocol initiative for transferring energy technologies to developing countries but the CDM is the subject of much criticism and lacks critical mass.
Several multilateral and bilateral climate funding initiatives supplement the Adaptation Fund. Nonetheless the World Bank calculates total global adaptation funding for 2008-2012 at “less than $1 billion pa”, a tiny fraction of the need. The UK alone enjoys an annual budget of more than this amount for managing the risk of flooding and coastal erosion.
Poor countries therefore have no choice but to grapple with the bureaucracy and variable governance of multiple funds of inadequate amount. Not a single NAPA has been supported. Adaptation has entered the language of development but remains a fringe activity.
It is little surprise that developing countries are reframing their approach to climate change in terms of rights and compensation. African governments preparing for Copenhagen have issued a declaration that “Africa is seeking reparations from developed countries because it produces less than 4% green house gases while their effect on the climate could mortgage the future of the continent.”
Practical measures which anticipate or react to the impact of climate change are described as "adaptation”. The increasing familiarity of this term betrays our failure to prevent global warming and that its consequences are unavoidable and imminent.
|
| Guinea-Bissau depends on cashew nuts © IRIN News |
Unfortunately, adaptive capacity is a measure which exposes global inequality at its most extreme. In adapting to the digital revolution of recent decades, the highly educated, healthy and skilled workforces in industrialised countries have an impressive track record. And these countries are already committing to defensive projects in anticipation of more extreme hurricanes, floods and rising sea levels. Price tags of hundreds of millions of dollars are no disincentive.
By contrast, about one sixth of the world’s population is absorbed in the daily scramble for household essentials, in countries which lack resources to provide basic health and education. To inject an urgent need for drought-resistant crop varieties, or soil, forest and water conservation measures into such environments is a formidable task. Yet the greatest and most immediate need for adaptation will centre on these poorest countries because they are located in less temperate zones which are most susceptible to a changing climate.
Adaptive capacity is limited by lack of information as well as poverty. Poor village communities will have a good understanding of climate variability but not in a context of permanent change. Journalism in developing countries has had difficulty in recognising the importance of global warming. Governments too will be handicapped by inadequate knowledge – scientific climate models in Africa cannot remotely match those available in Europe, some of which offer predictions at 25 km² resolution.
Adaptation and Development
|
| Eritrean farmers in Tsorona, Debub province © IRIN News |
A shared platform will reduce the risk of initiatives working against each other. For example, shrimp farming in Southeast Asia has created new livelihoods but, in clearing mangrove plantations, has exposed the coastline to rising sea levels.
This common sense approach is reflected in the UN-funded National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) which have been prepared by most countries within the Least Developed Country (LDC) classification. They largely focus on areas already identified in development programmes, portraying climate change as additional pressure on the existing causes of poverty.
Recognising the lessons of poverty reduction projects, international aid agencies are promoting the concept of community-based adaptation which encourages a sense of ownership amongst the beneficiaries.
Disaster Risk
Disaster risk management is a component of adaptation, especially in the context of extreme weather events. Disaster projects feature in many of the NAPAs. The shelters and early warning systems constructed in the deltas of Bangladesh have already proved their worth in saving lives.
Although it is difficult to establish a direct causal link between natural disasters and climate change, the increase in their frequency – doubling over the last two decades - is consistent with scientific predictions. A report published by the Global Humanitarian Forum in 2009 suggests that 99% of the casualties occur in developing countries.
Financing Adaptation
|
| Water intensive cotton in Mali © Oxfam Great Britain |
Disagreement over pricing is more than matched by the lack of consensus on suitable funding mechanisms. The flagship UN Adaptation Fund, authorised at the Bali climate conference in 2007, is to be financed by a 2% levy on transactions within the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). This is the Kyoto Protocol initiative for transferring energy technologies to developing countries but the CDM is the subject of much criticism and lacks critical mass.
Several multilateral and bilateral climate funding initiatives supplement the Adaptation Fund. Nonetheless the World Bank calculates total global adaptation funding for 2008-2012 at “less than $1 billion pa”, a tiny fraction of the need. The UK alone enjoys an annual budget of more than this amount for managing the risk of flooding and coastal erosion.
Poor countries therefore have no choice but to grapple with the bureaucracy and variable governance of multiple funds of inadequate amount. Not a single NAPA has been supported. Adaptation has entered the language of development but remains a fringe activity.
It is little surprise that developing countries are reframing their approach to climate change in terms of rights and compensation. African governments preparing for Copenhagen have issued a declaration that “Africa is seeking reparations from developed countries because it produces less than 4% green house gases while their effect on the climate could mortgage the future of the continent.”
more background and useful links:
OneWorld Climate Change Guide
Climate Change: Country Briefings
The Kyoto Protocol
OneWorld Climate Change Guide
Climate Change: Country Briefings
The Kyoto Protocol
Help us to complete OneWorld Guides
Many important development issues are missing from our range of Guides. OneWorld wants to fill these gaps as part of our efforts to improve understanding of the issues faced by developing countries. We receive no funding for the production of our educational resources. Every small contribution helps!
Many important development issues are missing from our range of Guides. OneWorld wants to fill these gaps as part of our efforts to improve understanding of the issues faced by developing countries. We receive no funding for the production of our educational resources. Every small contribution helps!
|
Printable version
top of the page