Twenty-eighth Report Adapting Institutions to Climate Change Cm ...

5.11
A number of our recommendations are addressed to the Adaptation Sub-Committee, established
by the Climate Change Act 2008. These are summarised at the end of the chapter (5.81). We
recognise that the Sub-Committee – and the equivalent body in Scotland if one is established –
will need to determine the extent to which it is equipped to perform effectively the tasks which
we identify; if they fall outside the remit of the Sub-Committee it will be for the Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the Devolved Administrations to decide who
should take responsibility for addressing the Commission’s recommendations.
THE POLICY FRAMEWORK
5.12
Our first series of recommendations is aimed at ensuring that adaptation is embedded in policy
making and investment appraisal, that all public bodies have a duty to advance adaptation, and
that monitoring arrangements are in place to ensure accountability.
POLICY APPRAISAL
5.13 Organisations need to examine both their current and future policies and programmes, to assess
whether they will be suitable and appropriate for a future in which the climate will be more extreme
and variable. Organisations will also need to consider whether their policies and programmes will
make it more or less difficult for adaptation to take place, or will increase our vulnerability to
climate change. We propose that institutions should adopt an ‘adaptation test’. This should apply
not only to the legislative, policy, regulatory or administrative decisions made by public bodies,
but also in the private sector where important infrastructure or services are at stake, and could
apply more widely as part of good practice for any business. The Commission recommends
that an ‘adaptation test’ appropriate to the circumstances be integrated into public and
private decision making. The objective of this test should be to reduce exposure to the
risk of damage through climate change; to develop the capacity to cope with unavoidable
damages; and to encourage organisations to take advantage of new opportunities. i
5.14
For public bodies, the adaptation test should be integrated into existing frameworks for policy
development and impact assessment, required by both the European and national procedures. A
test should also apply to individual projects as well as policies and plans. It should include consideration
of alternatives from a climate resilience perspective.
INVESTMENT APPRAISAL
5.15 Decisions on what policy or programme to pursue will often require an investment appraisal if
financial investment is involved, usually in the form of a cost–benefit analysis. Organisations need
to be aware of the limitations of orthodox cost–benefit analysis in appraising investment (outlined
in 4.36-4.42). In particular, cost–benefit analysis cannot deal with multiple objectives and does
not explicitly take account of ethical problems which arise when valuing over long timescales and
when discounting methodologies are applied. In these circumstances, the use of multi-criteria
analytical approaches has advantages, particularly when open to public and stakeholder input.
These approaches can help capture the complexity of projects, including those involving novel
technologies or approaches, and can assist in managing some of the intergenerational equity issues
associated with discounting the impacts of current behaviour on future generations.
i The three objectives suggested for an adaptation test reflect a typology set out in the Third Assessment Report of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Available at: http://www.ipcc.ch.
97
Chapter 5