1 / 7

IAV: challenges and future steps

IAV: challenges and future steps. Workshop on Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (IAV) Community Coordination January 8-9, 2009 NCAR. Paty Romero Lankao. Outline. How to Go beyond RH & connect IAV (local) with WG1/ESM, WG3 (global)?

tamanna-darshan
Download Presentation

IAV: challenges and future steps

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. IAV: challenges and future steps Workshop on Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (IAV) Community Coordination January 8-9, 2009 NCAR Paty Romero Lankao

  2. Outline How to • Go beyond RH & connect IAV (local) with WG1/ESM, WG3 (global)? • Make the best of a diverse IAV community? • Deal with North-South divide, research gap? Wilhelmi (2007)

  3. Pros & Cons of Risk Hazard (RH) • Well represented in IPCC • Emphasizes exposure, mostly to climate hazards • Relatively “simple”, fits with WG2 and WG3 approaches • Vulnerability as outcome of relatively linear analysis • Does not capture complexity & dynamics of vulnerability, adaptive capacity & adaptation Sources: Hibbard et al (2007), Turner et al (2003),

  4. Implications of multi-scale nature of climate drivers and impacts • Selected scale can frame investigation and shape results • Selection of a single scale can frame a project to narrowly • Detailed scale Information contains more variance, but turns modeling more difficult • Full learning hence requires attention to a variety of scales & real collaboration between WG1, WG2 & WG1 Source: Wilbanks (2002)

  5. Diverse approaches A fully complex reality Highly fragmentary Competing paradigms Fewer data Results attached to particular approaches Difficult to generalize Lineages of vulnerability research • Make research-resultscompatible & comparable • Use quantitativetools (build bridges with ESM and WGII) & combine them with qualitative tools • Identify prototypic causal loops • Do not forget importance of context, multi-scales, and innovative concepts, frameworks (e.g. responsive capacity) • Include other communities (e.g., development, urban designers)

  6. North-South divide, research gap • Initiatives to foster research and participation (IPCC, AIACC). Yet constraints persist: • a) Financial and institutionalcapacity • b) data, state of the art • c) language barriers Source Rozensweig and Casassa et al 2007. Locations of significant changes in observations of physical systems (e.g. snow & ice) and biological systems (terrestrial, marine & freshwater), are shown together with surface air temperature changes over the period 1970 to 2004 • North dominates agenda • Agendabiases, emphasis in • certain regions • themes (mitigation) • dimensions (physical, cost-analysis) Source: De Sherbinin et al. (2007). The hazard risk of each city represents a cumulative score based on risk of cyclones, flooding, landslides & drought

  7. Thank you !

More Related