Ecosystem-Based Disaster Risk Reduction and Adaptation in Practice

Even though ‘green’ options for addressing the impacts of climate change have gained in currency over recent years, they are yet to be fully mainstreamed into development policy and practice. One important reason is the lack of economic evidence as to why investing in ecosystems offers a cost-effective, equitable and sustainable means of securing climate adaptation, disaster risk reduction and other development co-benefits. This chapter presents a conceptual framework for integrating ecosystem values into climate-compatible development planning. Case studies from coastal areas of Kenya and Sri Lanka illustrate how such an approach can be applied in practice to make the economic and business case for ecosystem-based measures. It is argued that, rather than posing ‘grey’ and ‘green’ options as being necessarily in opposition to each other or as mutually incompatible, from an economic perspective both should be seen as being part and parcel of the same basic infrastructure that is required to deliver essential development services in the face of climate change.

Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) is underutilised in assessing Ecosystem-based Disaster Risk Reduction (Eco-DRR) interventions, the protocols used are not always rigourous and the analytical framework is unclear. However, CBAs which follow best practices could be extremely beneficial and helpful to policy makers in establishing priorities for Eco-DRR interventions. A robust and systematic economic analytical approach might be useful, if not necessary, to justify large upfront investments and promote the implementation of this type of risk reduction intervention at an even broader scale. Identifying a common core of best practices for CBA applied to Eco-DRR would also increase comparability between studies, reproducibility of assessments, and facilitate much needed external review. The purpose of this chapter is to (i) outline the fundamental principles and best practices of rigourous cost-benefit analysis (CBA) applied to ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) and (Eco-DRR) interventions; (ii) review existing studies; and – based on this review of past work – (iii) outline the possible areas of improvement to strengthen future CBAs of Eco-DRR projects.

Mangrove forests provide a multitude of ecosystem services, many of which contribute to Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) along tropical coastlines. In the face of rapid deforestation, Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes such as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) has been heralded as a potential avenue for financing conservation, although PES schemes remain in an embryonic state for mangroves. Several challenges must be overcome if mangrove PES is to advance. Firstly, challenges exist in quantifying multiple ecosystem services, especially those that contribute to DRR, such as wave attenuation and the control of coastal erosion. Secondly, the permanence of quantified ecosystem services is a central tenet of PES, but is not guaranteed in the dynamic coastal zone. Mangroves are affected by multiple stressors related to natural hazards and climate change, which are often outside of the control of a PES site manager. This will necessitate Financial Risk Management strategies, which are not commonly used in coastal PES, and introduces a number of management challenges. Finally, and most importantly, PES generally requires the clear identification and pairing of separate service providers and service users, who can potentially overlap in the context of DRR. This chapter reviews and discusses these emerging issues, and proposes potential solutions to contribute to the more effective implementation of mangrove PES. Ultimately however, difficulties in pairing separate and discreet service providers and users may render PES for DRR unfeasible in some settings, and we may need to continue traditional modes of DRR finance such as insurance and donor support.

The aim of the study was to analyse economic costs and benefits of stakeholder-defined adaptation scenarios for the Šumava National Park, the Czech Republic, and to evaluate their impact on the provision of ecosystem services, primarily focusing on ecosystem-based adaptation options which support disaster risk reduction in a broader region. The study utilised an array of approaches, including participatory scenario building, GIS modelling and economic evaluation. Based on a participatory input by local stakeholders, four adaptation scenarios were created, formulating various possibilities of future development in the area as well as potential vulnerabilities and adaptation needs. The scenarios subsequently served as the basis for biophysical modelling of the impacts of adaptation and disaster risk reduction measures on the provision of ecosystem services with the InVEST modelling suite, focusing on climate regulation, water quality and hydropower production. Finally, a cost-benefit analysis was conducted, quantifying management and investment costs of each adaptation scenario, and benefits originating from the provision of previously modelled regulating ecosystem services, together with a supplementary selection of provisioning services. This study serves as an example of combining stakeholder views, biophysical modelling and economic valuation in the cost-benefit analysis of ecosystem-based adaptation and disaster risk reduction, which provides the opportunity to find shared solutions for the adaptation of social-ecological systems to global change.

Organisations and governments around the globe are developing methodologies to cope with increasing numbers of disasters and climate change as well as implementing risk reducing measures across diverse socio-economic and environmental sectors and scales. What is often overlooked and certainly required for comprehensive planning and programming are better tools and approaches that include ecosystems in the equations. Collectively, these mechanisms can help to enhance societies’ abilities to capture the protective benefits of ecosystems for communities facing disaster and climate risks. As illustrated within this chapter, decision support tools and approaches are clearly improving rapidly. Despite these advancements, factors such as resistance to change, the cautious approach by development agencies, governance structure and overlapping jurisdictions, funding, and limited community engagement remain, in many cases, pre-requisites to successful implementation of ecosystem-based solutions. Herein we provide case studies, lessons learned and recommendations from applications of decision support tools and approaches that advance better risk assessments and implementation of ecosystem-based solutions. The case studies featured in this chapter illustrate opportunities that have been enhanced with cutting edge tools, social media and crowdsourcing, cost/benefit comparisons, and scenario planning mechanisms. Undoubtedly, due to the large areas and extent of exposure to natural hazards, ecosystems will increasingly become a critical part of societies’ overall responses to equitably solve issues of disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation.

Ecosystem services can play an important role as measures for disaster risk reduction. At the same time it is important to find out where and how ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction really can make a difference. If we want to find out what will be the effect of alternative risk reduction measures, how ecosystem services can play a role in this context, and how they compare with other types of interventions, then there is a clear role for geo-information. Geographical information, such as obtained from spatial-temporal simulation modelling and spatial multi-criteria evaluation, is used for analyzing and monitoring what could be the effect of alternative development scenarios on the exposure to natural hazards, or of different combinations of engineered, ecosystem-based and other non-structural risk reduction measures. This helps to set management priorities and propose actions for risk reduction and risk-informed spatial planning. With the help of a spatial decision support system, the effect of risk reduction alternatives and their effect on risk reduction – now and in the future – can be analyzed and compared. This can support the selection of ‘best’ alternatives. The recently developed RiskChanges is presented, which is a web-based, open-source spatial decision support tool for the analysis of changing risk to natural hazards. It is envisaged that the use of the RiskChanges will support the provision of relevant geo-information about risk and changes in risk, and thus provides input for structured risk reduction-, disaster response-, and spatial development-planning.

Ecosystem destruction not only incurs large costs for restoration but also increases hydraulic forces on existing flood defence infrastructure. This realisation has made the inclusion of ecosystems and their services into flood defence schemes a rapidly growing field. However, these new solutions require different design, construction and management methods. A close collaboration between engineers, ecologists and experts in public administration is essential for adequate designs. In addition, a mutual understanding of the basic principles of each other’s field of expertise is paramount. This chapter presents some simple approaches for the integration of ecosystem-based measures into coastal engineering projects, which may be of use to experts from a range of fields. Further, it stresses the importance of ecological processes which determine the persistence and health of coastal ecosystems, a point which is rarely emphasised in coastal engineering. The main aim of this chapter is to highlight the role of ecosystem properties for flood defence to stimulate the coastal engineering community in adopting an ecosystem view. In the near future the hope is that greater awareness of ecosystem processes will lead to more sustainable and climate-robust designs. For this, engineers, ecologists and social scientists involved in coastal defence projects need to develop a common language, share the same design concepts and be willing to share the responsibility for these innovative designs.

Rain-fed agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) provides major but highly climate-dependent sources of livelihoods. Recurrent dry spells and droughts can impact SSA’s agro-ecosystems in multiple ways, negatively affecting local social-ecological systems (SES). Droughts not only destroy crops and livestock and degrade natural resources but also impact a large variety of ecosystem services. However, ecosystems can also frequently be powerful agents for drought mitigation and resilient livelihoods. Ecosystem-based approaches mitigate drought impacts while providing multiple co-benefits which contribute to poverty alleviation and sustainable development, food security, biodiversity conservation, carbon sequestration and livelihood resilience. In drought risk management, ecosystem-based solutions have always been important, even if not explicitly acknowledged as such. Based on available literature, this chapter provides an overview of approaches for drought risk reduction in SSA in the context of ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction (Eco-DRR) and ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA). Using selected criteria, the review found many types of approaches, which strengthen functionality of the ecosystem and offer substantial environmental and socio-economic benefits, and thus help to mitigate drought impacts. More information on the limits of these approaches is needed in order to integrate them effectively into Eco-DRR and EbA programmes and complement them with more traditional disaster risk reduction strategies.

The linkages between ecosystem conditions and disaster risk reduction have gained increasing international attention. Despite this growing awareness, national and local decision makers often lack the tools to visualize disaster risk under different ecosystem conditions. As a result, the importance of ecosystems continues to be under-appreciated in decision-making processes related to disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. While spatial models have commonly been applied in both ecological assessments and disaster management, there have been relatively few studies that merge these two applications. This chapter demonstrates applications of the InVEST (Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs) tool in data-deficient countries where the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is currently implementing ecosystem-based field interventions to reduce disaster risk. InVEST software (developed by the Natural Capital Project) provides spatial tools for assessing ecosystems and disaster risk even when limited data is available. The first study presented in this chapter takes into consideration the role of coastal and marine ecosystems in reducing exposure to coastal hazards in a small municipality in the south of Haiti. It provides an example of a qualitative assessment of exposure to storm surges and coastal flooding under different ecosystem management scenarios. The second study examines realistic land use change scenarios such as reforestation and urbanization and their impacts on soil erosion and sedimentation in a river basin in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Through detailed examination of the two case studies, this chapter aims to demonstrate how integrated models such as InVEST could function as decision-support tools for considering ecosystem-based solutions for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. The limitations, challenges and areas for improvement of each model application, as well as implications for local decision-making and awareness-raising, are discussed.

Shallow landslides are natural hazards that can affect human life and infrastructure both directly and indirectly. Such landslides usually involve low-cohesion soil mantles less than a few meters deep. As shown by evidence worldwide, the presence of forests can lead to increased slope stability, due to mechanical and hydrological mechanisms, and therefore significantly reduce the landslide risk in many locations. Therefore, the nationwide project SilvaProtect-CH, which provided data and defined uniform criteria for protection forest delimitation in Switzerland, has also included shallow landslide protection forests. According to the modelling results of SilvaProtect-CH, approximately 27 % of the Swiss protection forests provide a protective function against shallow landslides. To facilitate a quick quantitative evaluation of the slope stabilizing effect of such forests, we developed the tool SlideforNET, which is described in this chapter.

Appreciation of the interplay between societal development, the changes in ecosystem functioning and services, and the creation and transformation of disaster risk is fundamental for the identification of ecosystem-based interventions and options for disaster risk reduction. While the need to integrate ecosystem services and ecosystem management has received increased attention as pathways for reducing disaster risk, little attention has been given to the actual methods and approaches that can enable such integration in practice. This chapter proposes a cluster planning approach for disaster risk reduction planning, building on the understanding of the relationship between landscape-scale drivers of disaster risk and community vulnerability and capacity. Including a cluster scale approach in risk reduction planning, which comprises smaller landscape units of communities facing similar risks, helps bridge administrative and ecological boundaries for reaching effective risk reduction outcomes. In the Mahanadi Delta, a landscape exposed to multiple hazards, applying this approach has helped to delineate three clusters wherein distinct ecosystems-based options for risk reduction can be applied. Embedding administrative planning units within ecological planning units has enabled a more realistic integration of ecosystem services in the context of disaster risk reduction. The cluster approach will be particularly useful for planners responsible for developing risk reduction plans across administrative and ecological boundaries.

In 2011, Japan experienced a huge earthquake followed by a tsunami and a nuclear power accident known as the Great East Japan Earthquake (GEJE). This chapter focuses on impacts of the tsunami and the reconstruction of coastal zones affected by GEJE, with a greater emphasis on sea wall reconstruction. The main question addressed in this chapter is how ecosystems played and are playing a role in GEJE and the reconstruction process from both policy and implementation perspectives. In this respect, it reviews how sea walls, coastal forests, traditional knowledge and protected areas played out during the GEJE. The chapter also provides a review of policy responses after GEJE to promote ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction (Eco-DRR) both at the global as well as national level by the government of Japan. It then reviews reconstruction activities on the ground with a particular focus on coastal areas such as reconstruction of sea walls and coastal forest. Finally, policy-implementation gaps and lessons are discussed from an Eco-DRR point of view based on these practical experiences.

Ecosystem-based approaches have proven effective and efficient in reducing disaster risks while ensuring continued benefits to people from ecosystem services. In this article, a new concept of Ecosystem-based Disaster Risk Reduction (Eco-DRR) for enhancing social-ecological resilience is proposed, based on analysis of several case studies. Field studies in developing countries such as Ghana and Myanmar have shown the benefits of Eco-DRR as implemented by local communities. These projects improve local livelihoods and social-ecological resilience. In Japan, after the massive damage from the 11 March 2011, Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami, ecosystem-based approaches were an important element of the national government’s DRR efforts. Analysis of these cases shows that Eco-DRR is a socially, economically and environmentally sustainable tool for DRR that creates new value for a region. It also shows the importance of multi-stakeholder participation in the process of promoting Eco-DRR. It is likely to become even more important in the future, as a means for addressing the increase in disasters resulting from climate and ecosystem change as well as demographic change. The contribution of Eco-DRR to maintaining and restoring ecosystems is particularly valuable for countries where there is reduced capacity for land management, as currently occurring in Japan due to rapid population decline and aging.

This chapter elaborates on the potential for applying ecosystem-based solutions for urban disaster risk reduction in developing countries, based on the case study of the Kathmandu Valley in Nepal. The high level of mainly informal urbanization in the Kathmandu Valley has led to severe environmental problems and loss of ecosystem services. As a consequence, the livelihoods of the 2.5 million inhabitants in the almost entirely built-up Kathmandu Valley are increasingly at risk, as seen in the aftermath of the 2015 earthquakes that caused widespread damage in the urban area. Combined risks from natural hazards and unsuitable urban planning are likely to be exacerbated by climate change. Due to political instability during the past decades, the poor execution of existing plans and policies as well as the enactment of new ones remain challenging, without real signs for improvement. In addition, the complex governance system involving local, national and international actors is another challenge being faced in this urban agglomeration. Understanding of human-nature interactions, including values attached to natural assets by local communities, is crucial for the development of successful long-term strategies for risk reduction that integrate ecosystem-based solutions.

Greenhouse gas emissions from peat lands are key sources of overall emissions in Indonesia. These emissions are mainly caused by fires and to a lesser extent decomposition of degraded peat lands which have been cleared for either food crop or palm productions. Land clearing has taken place since the colonial times; however, it had accelerated dramatically since the mid-90s, fuelled by palm oil expansion and poorly planned efforts to open peat land for food production.

Fire activity is driven by clearing peat forest lands. Risk of fires increases significantly during drier than normal years, often linked to El Nino phenomena. Once fires are ignited in peat areas, they tend to be submerged, making them difficult to extinguish. This prompts the need for an anticipatory approach to fire management. Such an approach would enact anticipatory risk reduction actions 1–3 months ahead of an anticipated fire outbreak. These actions would be integrated into existing standard operating procedures for fire prevention, while at the same time mainstreaming fire risk reduction into spatial and development planning to address long-term fire vulnerability.

Protected areas are becoming a major land use, approaching 15 % of the Earth’s terrestrial surface and a growing percentage of coastal waters. These sites are popular for visitors, but face many management challenges, including how to adapt to climate change. Often established for biodiversity conservation, scenic beauty, or tourism objectives, protected areas should become a major part of national strategies to address climate change and the disasters that may come in the form of extreme climatic events. Protected areas often contain the ecosystems that are the most effective in storing carbon and make major contributions to adapting to climate change. But these sites need to be managed more effectively, and linking them to the growing public concern about climate change could be one means of doing so. Management approaches that should be supported include establishing protected area complexes that expand their influence to a landscape scale, incorporating climate change issues into protected management at both site and system scales, identify the multiple ecosystem services that protected areas provide as a means of building broader support for them, and many others. Protected areas can also contribute to recovery from extreme hazard events, for example by working with local communities to restore natural vegetation. To date, protected areas have been largely ignored by the Clean Development Mechanism established by the Climate Change Convention. This should change, and protected areas should be recognized for the many contributions they make to climate change mitigation and adaptation, thereby contributing to reducing disaster risks. A relatively simple step would be to incorporate protected area agencies more actively in the preparation of the national reports called for by the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Protected areas should also become eligible for support under the REDD+ programme.

In many developing and emerging tropical and subtropical countries, coastal dune systems (CDS) are under high pressure, which leads to progressive degradation and loss of dune areas. This in turn weakens the protection function against coastal hazards. In this chapter we discuss CDS in three case studies: Thua Thien-Hue province (Central Vietnam), Parangtritis (Java Island, Indonesia), and Ritoque (Central Chile). For these CDS, we assess relevant ecosystem services (ES) with particular regard to protection services as well as the current degradation status through a rapid assessment approach. Moreover, we analyse the legal frameworks for coastal dune management and protection in the case study countries. Main results include indicator sets for assessing ES and the degradation status of CDS, which are transferable to other coastal dune areas. Based on these sets we evaluate and compare the three dune systems and provide policy recommendations for a more efficient regulation and management of CDS.

Whether or not exacerbated by climate change, flood risks are becoming more frequent in the capital city of Nouakchott in Mauritania. Flooding in Nouakchott is due to a combination of both natural factors and human activities. The extreme fragility of the barrier beach that protects the city from the sea, the accelerated exploitation and inadequate infrastructure built along the coast have made this barrier beach highly vulnerable to wave action, exposing the city to a high risk of flooding. Flooding is further exacerbated by rising groundwater levels in several neighborhoods of the city. Cartographic analysis of flood risk indicated that socio-economic impacts associated with floods could be high. In the case of sea water intrusion, up to 30 % of the city could be potentially submerged. This would directly affect nearly 300,000 people and entail high risks of casualties. Associated economic losses due to flooding could be as high as USD 7 billion (Senhoury, Aménagements portuaires et urbanisation accelerée des côtes basses sableuses d’Afrique de l’Ouest dans un contexte de pejoration climatique, cas du littoral de Nouakchott (Mauritanie). Thesis state, University of Dakar, April 29, 2014, 157 pp, 2014).

The following measures based on nature-based approaches are recommended to tackle flood risks in Nouakchott:

Climate change and subsequent processes triggered by climate change demand novel assessments and protection schemes in coastal environments, as frequency and intensity of extreme events as well as mean sea water levels are expected to rise. Most often, conventional coastal engineering approaches are solely built for protection purposes, but often come with negative side-effects to the coastal environment and communities. During the last decade, new concepts in coastal engineering have started emerging. Several technical measures with an ecosystem-based design have been developed and, in some places, already implemented over the last decade. These low-regret measures, for instance green belts, coir fibers and porous submerged structures, reveal their full potential as stand-alone coastal protection or when used in combination with each other. They are believed – and in some cases documented – to be a better alternative or potential complement to conventional “hard” coastal engineering protection. Concrete examples are taken from the densely populated coastal area of Jakarta Utara (North Jakarta) and the National Capital Integrated Coastal Development (NCICD), showing benefits and further opportunities, but also challenges for applied low-regret coastal protection measures and ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction. An assessment of the application potential of three “soft” protection measures is given and discussed.

A perception analysis is an important approach for developing adequate sensitization activities and increasing the participation of local populations in ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction (Eco-DRR) and ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA). These concepts have great potential in the study area, the mountain region of Rio de Janeiro state, where a disaster in 2011 showed once more that landslides, mudslides and floods are recurrent. Although degradation of the natural ecosystems is one of the main reasons for the high vulnerability of the local population, ecosystem-based measures to reduce disaster risks and to adapt to climate change are still uncommon. Valuing the benefits of nature through community-based adaptation measures is one promising approach to reduce landscape and ecosystem degradation and vulnerability, but a high level of community awareness is needed to generate their active participation in protecting and restoring ecosystems. To analyze the degree of awareness and the reasons for the barriers to participation, a perception analysis was conducted based on collected quantitative and qualitative data. Results show that people (a) have a high perception of their vulnerability, but (b) have poor knowledge about the relation between risks and ecosystem services, (c) do not feel responsible for participating, and (d) do not see possibilities for a better engagement in disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. We conclude that these three gaps (b, c and d) need to be addressed as a main component of a sensitization concept for Eco-DRR and EbA in the region.

Forest ecosystem services are significant for local communities, especially for mountain communities dependent on natural resources. This chapter examines the contribution of forests to local communities dwelling at various elevations (from 1400 to 2800 m.a.s.l.) in Upper Kedarnath Valley of Garhwal, India. It is based on a study which provides an overview of common fodder extraction practices in the region and their impact on disaster risk. The research pointed to exceptional variations in temperature, snowfall and rainfall intensity that were reported in the past three decades. According to local communities, during this period deforestation and forest degradation were the result of land conversion, construction of hydropower dams, and increased biomass extraction particularly for firewood and fodder production as well as extraction of forest products. Extreme climate events and disasters are closely linked to these forest cover changes. The research showed that livestock per household, individuals per household involved in fodder harvesting, and the altitude of the village are important factors affecting forest health, or forest degradation patterns, respectively. The study provides an overview of impact of climate variabilities and forest degradation on local communities. Fodder banks are discussed as a nature-based (or ecosystem-based) solution that can address forest degradation in the Indian Himalayan Region and neighboring mountain countries. The approach is based on the principles of ‘community and ecosystem management’ to provide an alternative for fodder resources to local communities. Efforts from this practical experience reflect the need of proactive planning to enhance adaptive capacities of mountain communities in India and South Asia in general. This study is intended to enable more effective targeting of forest management interventions to reconcile the goals of poverty reduction and forest conservation.

Rural communities have long been using ecosystems to sustain their livelihoods, especially in times of disasters when forests act as safety nets and natural buffers. However, it is less clear how climate variability influences changes in land uses, and their implications for human well-being. We examined how forests and trees can reduce human vulnerability by affecting the three components of vulnerability: exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. A total of 24 focus group discussions and 256 household surveys were conducted in two smallholder-dominated rural landscapes in Indonesia, which were affected by floods, drought and disease outbreaks. Our results suggest that forests and trees are important in supporting community resilience and decreasing their vulnerabilities to climate-related stresses in different ways. The role of trees varied according to the type of ecosystem service, whether provisioning or regulating, in relation to the phase of the climatic hazard, either in the pre-disaster phase or in the post-disaster recovery phase. It is therefore important to distinguish between these elements when analyzing people’s responses to climatic variability in order to fully capture the contribution of forests and trees to reducing people’s vulnerability. Landscape spatial characteristics, environmental degradation and community awareness of climate variability are crucial because if their linkages are recognized, local people can actively manage natural resources to increase their resilience. Interventions related to forests and trees should take into consideration these aspects to make ecosystem services a valuable option for an integrated strategy to reduce disaster risks and climate-related vulnerabilities.

This chapter seeks to articulate future directions in the field of Eco-DRR/CCA, in the context of the new post-2015 sustainable development agenda. It synthesises the experiences featured in this book and highlights the key challenges and opportunities in advancing Eco-DRR/CCA approaches. Four main themes are discussed: demonstrating the economic evidence of Eco-DRR/CCA; decision-making tools for Eco-DRR/CCA; innovative institutional arrangements and policies for mainstreaming Eco-DRR/CCA; and research gaps. The major global policy agreements in 2015 are examined for their relevance in promoting Eco-DRR/CCA implementation in countries. Finally, the authors reflect on a new agenda for Eco-DRR/CCA and outline some of the key elements required to significantly advance and scale-up Eco-DRR/CCA implementation globally.