AnalysisWeathering climate change: some simple rules to guide adaptation decisions
Introduction
It is common to distinguish between two basic responses to climate change: mitigation and adaptation. Trade-offs between the costs of mitigation, the costs of adaptation and the impacts of the enhanced greenhouse effect not covered by either mitigation or adaptation guide the choice between policy strategies for climate change. Both mitigation and adaptation pose significant analytical and policy challenges, yet the respective discussions have evolved at a different pace so far. The study of mitigation measures is well under way and the analysis is continuously refined (cf. Hourcade et al., 1996, Watson et al., 1996). Understanding is likely to increase further now that measures are starting to be implemented.1 Adaptation options, in contrast, have been the subject of much fewer studies.
Adaptation has mainly been studied in the context of impact analysis, where some understanding of society's adaptive potential is needed to better understand the consequences of unabated climate change (see Smith et al., 1996 and Tol et al., 1998 for surveys). Knowledge about climate change impacts and vulnerability is accumulating, although progress is hampered by the complexity of the problem and the lack of empirical material. Pearce et al. (1996) and Watson et al. (1996) survey the impacts and vulnerability literature which typically assumes little or no adaptation. The adaptation-specific literature has identified an increasing number of adaptation options (see Office of Technology Assessment, 1993 Smit, 1993, also Watson et al., 1996) and methods for their assessment are being developed (e.g. Carter et al., 1994, Smith and Quan Chu, 1994, Fankhauser, 1996, US Country Studies Program, 1996, Mendelsohn and Bennett, 1997, Smith et al., 1997, Yohe and Neumann, 1997). While policy issues have been touched upon by some authors (e.g. Magalheas, 1996, Callaway et al., 1997, Downing et al., 1997, Frederick, 1997, Frederick et al., 1997, Major and Frederick, 1997, Smith, 1997), a thorough discussion of strategic policy issues has been lacking so far, leaving the field to unproven assertions and commonplace statements.
In this paper, we try to substantiate or repudiate some of these statements. Starting from first principles, the paper develops some basic rules of how adaptation could be designed to be efficient—so that the negative effects of climate change are minimised (and positive effects maximised). A wide variety of adaptation options has been put forward, with mostly differing characteristics. The paper starts with a classification of available options, and discusses how the different types of measures interact (Section 2).
One often heard statement is that, with a significant change in climate not expected for at least another two decades, there is no need for immediate adaptation. In Section 3, we discuss this point of view and analyse the optimal timing of adaptation measures. We argue that for long-lived investments, and investments sensitive to rapidly changing climate parameters (primarily extreme weather), climate change needs to be accounted for already in today's investment decisions, especially since weather extremes could be noticed much earlier than changes in mean climate (e.g. Katz and Brown, 1992). Weather-sensitive, long-lived investments particularly comprise infrastructure for water management. Forest plantations, (rail)roads and buildings are also long-lived, and may be vulnerable to changing weather conditions. Arguably, development plans (e.g. for cities), laws and regulations (e.g. for water allocation), and knowlegde bases (e.g. agricultural RD&D), although less tangible, are also long-lived and sensitive to changes in weather regimes.
The paper then goes on to discuss how investment decisions could account for a potential change in climate or weather parameters during the lifetime of a project. We argue that, given the prevailing uncertainty, the best way to account for potential climate change would be to increase the flexibility of systems to function under a wider range of climatic conditions, as well as their robustness to withstand more severe climatic shocks (Section 4). The same basic principles also hold for planning, as we briefly discuss in Section 5.
Another often heard assertion is that adaptation will be largely autonomous and will not require advance strategic policy intervention. We argue that, while individuals can certainly be expected to make adaptations to climate change, it is not certain that they will have the incentive, resources, knowledge and skills to adjust appropriately. Successful adaptation to a large extent depends on three elements: timely recognition of the need to adapt, an incentive to adapt, and ability to adapt. Timely recognition requires access to reliable and detailed information, and the ability to process such information. Section 6 deals with these issues and the role of research and monitoring. Proper incentives and an environment that allows economic agents to adjust are areas in which governments typically have a large stake. Section 7 discusses the role of government in climate change adaptation. It also discusses which tasks need to be carried out by the public sectors, and which can be safely left to individual agents.
The analysis makes clear that, while the impact of climate change on a regional scale remains uncertain, and the increase in mean temperature expected over the next few decades may be relatively modest, it would be shortsighted to postpone adaptive actions until impacts are better understood or more strongly felt. The paper therefore concludes with a series of anticipatory adaptation measures that could be considered now.
The paper is analytical rather than empirical. Worked examples of decision analysis about adaptation can be found in Smith et al. (1998). Historical perspectives on adaptation can be found in Lamb (1982), Langen and Tol (1996) and Wigley et al. (1981). Adaptation studies focusing on the recent past and current situation include Downing et al. (1997), Miller et al. (1997) and Smit et al. (1997). Adaptation to weather variability, particularly weather-related natural disasters, has a long tradition of study (see, for example, Alexander, 1993, Burton et al., 1993).
Section snippets
Types of adaptation
To better understand the diversity of adaptation measures and to be able to develop a framework of analysis, it is useful to classify adaptive responses and to distinguish different generic types of adaptation.
The timing of adaptation measures
It is assumed by some that specific measures to adapt to climate change will not be necessary for several decades (e.g. Goklany, 1995).3 While this may apply to some specific types, or perhaps even the majority of investments, the question remains as to how the optimal date of implementation should be determined in general.
Adjustments in the capital stock
In a majority of cases, adaptation will probably not involve investments in climate change-specific structures, but the replacement of one type of capital by another. How does the possibility of future climate change affect investment decisions?
Planning
The previous sections focus on physical investments. The same arguments made above essentially also hold for long-term plans, such as those of coastal zone development, drought contingency or sustainable development. These plans need to take account of the fact that weather, and hence crop yield or tourist flows, may well differ in the future.
Like long-term investments, plans can be adjusted to make the outcome more robust to climate change, and to increase the flexibility of systems. For
Research
Another important instrument of anticipatory adaptation is research and the dissemination of information. Research can improve adaptation by providing more reliable information about climate change and its impacts, but also by developing and testing improved adaptation options and technologies.
The information needs for adaptation may require a different orientation of current knowledge, which is applicable to a wide variety of climates but at the same time assumes climate to be constant instead
The role of government
Some authors, most prominently Mendelsohn (1997), have argued in favour of autonomous adaptation as the most efficient way to mitigate the impact of climate change. There can be no question that individuals will undertake every effort to adapt to climate change. However, they will do so within the confines of the informational, budgetary and other constraints they face. For autonomous adaptation to be effective, and to avoid maladaptation, certain preconditions therefore have to be met.
Conclusions
This paper discusses elements of an optimal strategy to climate change. Given the long time-span and the great uncertainty, the intuitively optimal current adaptation policy may be to enhance the flexibility or robustness particularly of long-term, quasi-irreversible investments (e.g. long-lasting infrastructure) and to intensify information and its use. Partly, these are no-regret measures.
More specifically, our analysis points to the following types of anticipatory adaptation policies that
References (48)
The early medieval warm epoch and its sequel
Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol.
(1965)Setting priorities for adapting to climate change
Global Environ. Change
(1997)The damage costs of climate change: towards a dynamic representation
Ecol. Econ.
(1996)Natural Disasters
(1993)- et al.
The Environment as Hazard
(1993) - et al.
Adaptation Costs: A Framework and Methods, Draft
(1997) - et al.
IPCC Technical Guidelines for Assessing Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations
(1994) - et al.
Climate Change and Extreme Events-Altered Risk, Socio-economic Impacts and Policy Responses
(1996) - et al.
Adapting to climate change in Africa
Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Global Change
(1997) The potential costs of climate change adaptation
Adapting to climate impacts on the supply and demand for water
Climat. Change
Water resources planning principles and evaluation criteria for climate change: summary and conclusions
Climat. Change
Strategies to enhance adaptability: technological change, sustainable growth and free trade
Climat. Change
Trends in high-frequency climate variability in the twentieth century
Nature
Indices of climate change for the United States
Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc.
Extreme events in a changing climate
Climat. Change
Large increases in flood magnitude in response to modest changes in climate
Nature
Estimation of impact of climate change on the peak discharge probability of the river Rhine
Climat. Change
A concise history of riverine floods and flood management in the Dutch Rhine delta
Farm programs and climate change
Climat. Change
Adapting to climate variations in developing regions: a planning framework
Water resources planning and climate change assessment methods
Climat. Change
Cited by (353)
Mapping risk factors to climate change impacts using traditional ecological knowledge to support adaptation planning with a Native American Tribe in Louisiana
2022, Journal of Environmental ManagementThe role of climate adaptation readiness in economic growth and climate change relationship: An analysis of the output/income and productivity/institution channels
2021, Journal of Environmental ManagementFarmer's perception and factors determining the adaptation decisions to cope with climate change: An evidence from rural India
2021, Environmental and Sustainability IndicatorsFarm households' perception of weather change and flood adaptations in northern Pakistan
2021, Ecological EconomicsThe drivers associated with Murray-Darling Basin irrigators’ future farm adaptation strategies
2021, Journal of Rural StudiesAdaptation, spatial effects, and targeting: Evidence from Africa and Asia
2021, World DevelopmentCitation Excerpt :These five categories of adaptive capacity capture key variables that have been used to analyze farm-level adaptation/technology adoption decisions (Di Falco, 2014; Zilberman, Zhao, & Heiman, 2012; Foster & Rosenzweig, 2010; Feder et al., 1985). The categories also capture the resources, capital, and institutions that are crucial determinants of farmers’ ability to adapt (Yohe & Tol, 2002; Fankhauser, Smith, & Tol, 1999). Appendix C offers a review of the literature focusing on empirical relationships between elements of adaptive capacity and adaptation.