Climate Change Adaptation

1. Climate Change Adaptation Dr. Lesley Breitner-Czuma CIM Integrated Expert, CAREC Programme Climate Change & Sustainable Energy

2. CARECRegional Environmental Center for Central Asia • A key partner in environmental protection & sustainable development in RK & CA • Founded 2001 by 5 CA states, UNDP, EC • Mission: Promote multi-stakeholder cooperation in addressing environmental problems in Central Asia at the local, national and regional levels. • 6 Departments • Environmental Policy and Management • Water Initiatives • Civil Society • Education for Sustainable Development • Information & Capacity Building • Climate Change & Sustainable Energy • www.carecnet.org

3. What is “Climate Change”? • Warming of the average temperature & change in the nature of weather (extremes) • Global warming assumed to be anthropogenic, caused by GHG & CO2* • Average global temperature increase of 0.74 °C in last 100 yrs • Consensus: to prevent catastrophic consequences, CC must be limited such that global warming does not exceed 2 °C • Evidence of effects of Climate Change: • Glacial, polar melting, permafrost thawing • Ice core analysis (CO2 concentration, temperature vs. sea levels) • Sea level changes • Pollen analysis (changes in plant communities: CC) • Changed vegetation • Dendroclimatology (дендроклиматология) • Insect population (reflects climate conditions)

4. Further Consequences of CC (generally) Trends with increasing temperature (0 - 5°C): • Extreme weather events • hurricanes, floods, drought, heat waves, wildfires • Water • ↑ moist tropics & high altitudes • ↓ mid-latitudes & semi-arid low latitudes • Ecosystems • 30% of species risk extinction (starting at 1.5°C ↑) • Species range shifts • Food • ↓ cereal productivity in low latitudes • ↑ cereal productivity in mid-/ high latitudes • Coasts • Flooding & storms • Loss of coastal wetlands (to 30% if ≥ 3°C↑) • Health • ↑ malnutrition, diarrheal, cardio-respiratory, infectious disease • ↑ morbidity & mortality from heat waves, droughts, floods • Change in disease vectors IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) 2007; • Working Group II (WGII): Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability(projections of world CC & A. priorities)

5. The Political Discussion • Warming not beyond 2 °C --- How (what framework)?¹ • emissions reductions obligations • technol. transfer poor - rich • Kyoto Protocol to UNFCCC² is aimed at fighting global warming. • It obligates industrialized countries to reduce GHG • below the level of 1990 by 2012 (KZ an exception)³ • it provides flexible mechanisms to achieve this • COP-13 Bali(2007) addressing Post-Kyoto • Concern of the emerging countries that GHG reduction obligations could slow their economic growth • NAMA’s & NAPA’s – National Plans for Adaptation & Mitigation • Adaptation & Mitigation foreseen in UNFCCC convention text • Failure of COP 15 (emerging countries & economic growth) • Copenhagen Accord - Need for NAMA’s & NAPA’s recognized • Post-Kyoto (2012): No consensus yet, but 5 priorities: • Assist poorest/ most vulnerable to adapt to the impacts of CC; • Ambitious emission reduction targets for industrialized countries; • NAMA’s by developing countries, with the necessary support; • Scaled-up financial & technological resources to help the developing world to adapt and to mitigate; • Equitable governance structure to manage and deploy that support. • NWP - Nairobi Work Program (on Impacts, Vulnerability & Adaptation to CC) – A RESOURCE!

6. What is “Adaptation”? • Addressing impacts resulting from the warming which is already unavoidable due to past emissions • Adaptive capacity = ability to • adjust to CC (incl. climate variability & extremes) • moderate potential damages, • take advantage of opportunities, or to cope with the consequences • reduce vulnerability • (susceptibility to/ inability to cope w/ adverse effects of CC) • Assumption of this presentation:There is a need for a National Adaptation Plan for RK • Especially LDC’s will be affected & must adjust • (develop “NAPA’s” – requirement of UNFCCC)

7. Adaptation & MitigationTogether • Mitigation: Reduction of GHG emissions & their removal from the atmosphere (e.g. sinks) • Together: Mutual reinforcement: • All CC cannot be mitigated/ prevented, but w/out prevention, adaptation will be impossible • Adaptation & Mitigation must be done together (one is not enough; complimentary) • Examples in comparison: • Adaptation: Increasing irrigation efficiency to conserve water, planting shrubs to reduce soil erosion from wind • Mitigation: Preventing emissions by using RES/ EE, sequestration by reforestation

8. Development & Adaptation • Combine Development & Adaptation! • The poorest nations will be hit hardest by CC.¹ • Adaptation & Mitigation are tied to rest of economy! • In spite of ratifying UNFCCC & KP (committing to GHG reduction), RK has not yet adopted an integrated LCD or Adaptation strategy. Not included in: • “Strategic Development Plan for Kazakhstan up to 2020” • “Program of Accelerated Industrial-innovative Development of Kazakhstan from 2010-2014” • “Green Growth” Program from 2010-2014”. • UNDP project underway on integrating CC issues into strategic planning of RK

9. Adaptation Policy Must be Planned • UNFCCC foresees NAPA’s for LDC’s & mitigation for all parties • Priorities for adaptation must be defined & vary regionally/ situationally • What criteria exist for choosing / prioritizing? • Cost-Benefit-Analysis (only partially applicable) • Adaptation will incur costs (harder to calculate than mitigation)… • Prioritizing actions: For adaptation, costs are not completely clear, CC- variables • Working groups (subsidiary bodies of UNFCCC) have developed recommendations, but they must applied locally (pilot projects can help) … • 2 UNDP projects in RK (guidelines) • One on promoting development of national A. policy (& integration into strategic planning) • One on Community Based Adaptation

10. Awareness of Adaptation in RK -Capacity Building Needed* • Lack of state policy on Adaptation & Mitigation • Strategic documents & development plans of RK must take A. to CC into account • Lack of experience in preparation of strategic documents reflecting • Low carbon development • Inter-sectoral coordination/ coop. • Analysis of impact of CC/ benefits of A. • international commitments UNFCCC/ KP • Especially high-level decision makers & industrialists lack awareness/ understanding of CC impacts & benefits of A. • Lack of capacity of officials to identify social, financial, economic consequences of CC • Thus lack of ability to respond with adaptation & mitigation measures

11. Further Barriers/ Gaps (RK) • Insufficient knowledge of decision-makers on commitments under KP • Need for sectoral strategies to reduce GHG • Identify priorities & opportunities for low-carbon development & create an overriding, integrated strategy • MEP responsible for implementation of KP = working in isolation although cross-sectoral coordination (state & private sector) necessary • Lack of experience by gov’t officials & MEP in international negotiations – i.e. for a Post-Kyoto standpoint (relevant for development) • Lack of data/ analysis to identify opportunities/ priorities for low carbon development & GHG reduction (local actors don’t know how/where GHG reduction potential is greatest) • GHG intensive industry (oil & gas, power & energy sector) needs to analyze potential for action, identify priority projects (green growth investment) & initiate modernization re CC • Lack of information available in local language

12. Adaptation Priority Areas in CA, Generally Adverse effects and impacts of CC on Central Asia regionally include: • Temperature increase • Variation in precipitation • Increased aridity • Changed agro-climatic zones (effecting biomass supply for growing human and livestock populations) • Reduced energy capacity potential from HPP • Extreme weather events • Increased droughts, floods, mud flows/ mudslides & glacier retreat. There is a need for • a post-Kyoto joint position in CA on adaptation & mitigation • a systematic strategy to address CC • coordination/ cooperation w/ other countries in the region (esp. where overlaps & interdependencies – e.g. water – exist)

13. Trends & Risks – Climate Change in KZ: • 1936-2005: Ave. temp. increase c. 0.31°C/ 10 yr. Decrease in frost days, increase in hot weather everywhere. • Increase in annual precipitation in most regionsBy 2085, precipitation shift north (= semi-arid), growth of arid zone elsewhere. • Increased extreme weather conditions (floods, droughts, mudslides, glacier retreat) • S/E mountains: Glacier melting, ave. 0.8% p.a.& ice stock by 1% p.a. (2nd half of past century). Intense reduction of glaciers predicted w/ CC. • CONSEQUENCES for: water, agricultural, energy and public health sectors. • Coordinated, strategic adaptation to CC necessary! Otherwise: • considerable economic losses • humanitarian stresses • environmental degradation

14. Main Risks Related to CC in RK* Vulnerability assessment for RK is underway by UNDP (to be completed by year end), but some main areas are clear: Land & water management are key to adaptation. Main areas where CC will have effect & adaptation can help: • Agriculture • Grain production • Pastures • Sheep-breeding • The water sector • Forestry • Energy • Population health.

15. Prioritize Most Important Projects (RK) • UNDP is planning on creating a list of priority projects on adaptation*. • Preliminary priorities for A. have already been identified by the 2nd National Communication of RK to UNFCCC. • 8 working groups have been formed, which will create a priority list (basis for adaptation projects & a National Adaptation Plan) in October. These are: - Agriculture and land use, - Institutional patterns and insurance, - Water resources and climate change adaptation of coastal areas - (Sea of Aral, Caspian Sea, lake Balkhash), - Forestry and biodiversity, tourism, unique nature monuments, - Cities, local communities and health, - Emergency situations and early warning systems, - Energy, industry, and transport, - Education and science.

16. NAPA’s not just for LDC’s! • Even if UNFCCC only obligates industrial countries to mitigation, adaptation must in fact accompany it for it to be effective. • LDC’s are obligated to adaptation because they will be hit hardest by CC & must be prepared. • Although RK is not an LDC, it fulfills 6 out of 9 criteria which UNFCCC defines as particular vulnerability/ priorities necessitating response to CC. RK is: • Arid/semi-arid • Liable to drought/ desertification • Has high urban atmospheric pollution • Includes fragile, mountainous ecosystems • Dependent on income generated from fossil fuels • Land-locked. • The message of this presentation: Argument for developing a National Adaptation Plan for RK • Decision-makers must understand the impact of CC & the importance & benefits of adaptation as an instrument to combat CC & develop effective policy accordingly

17. What CAREC is Doing in this Vein* • Project: “The Copenhagen Negotiations: Central Asia’s Perspective for a Post 2012 Agreement” • Interdependence of CA countries re CC* & development • Common position on key CC priority areas for all of CA • Negotiation basis, to strengthen their voice at COP 15 • Identified need to design Napas (national & regional), to assess • Vulnerability • financial needs • coordination between CA countries • Idea for a multilateral (convention) adaptation fund • Est. region. consultative mechanism to represent all post-KP issues • The conclusions are still relevant for the next COP in Cancun in Nov/Dec. • Project: „Promoting Adaption and Mitigation Strategies on Climate Change in Central Asia” • Trainings • On negotiation procedure (& reviewing implications of NAMA’s/ NAPA’s for economy & other policy areas) • On how to develop NAMA & NAPA strategies

18. Funding for Adaptation (of LDC’s) under UNFCCC Adaptation comes with costs (not adapting will cost even more). UNFCCC obliges LDC to adaptation, thus, it also foresees financial assistance: http://unfccc.int/adaptation/items/4159.php • GEF (Global Environment Facility) Trust Fund • Support for vulnerability & adaptation assessments for national communications • LDCF (Least Developed Countries Fund) • Assists LDC’s prepare & implement NAPA’s • SCCF (Special Climate Change Fund) • Finances projects relating to adaptation; technology transfer and capacity building • AF (Adaptation Fund) under KP • To finance concrete adaptation projects and programs in developing countries • From CER’s from CDM

19. Key Ideas/ Conclusions ! • Adaptation & Mitigation together to address Climate Change (CC) • Adaptation essential to prepare vulnerable sectors to handle CC • RK has special needs which make Adaptation especially important • RK must develop a NAPA (National Action Plan) in its own interest • Tie Adaptation to development strategies • Decision makers in RK must understand the effects of Climate Change & benefits of Adaptation to address it • Adaptation is tied to costs which are hard to quantify, but damage from no Adaptation will be even more expensive • Priority Adaptation measures must be identified (UNDP & CAREC are working on this to assist decision makers in RK) • Next steps: Possibility to use resources of UNDP & CAREC to • Receive training on developing adaptation plans (nationally & in coordination with CA). = CAREC • Learn about identified vulnerabilities, adaptation priorities, pilot projects. = UNDP

20. Contacts