WhiteCAP_Plan_01SEPT..

Northern Climate ExChange WhiteCAP Draft Plan
anticipated only a small proportion would be of priority, therefore two levels of risk
assessment were conducted to establish where community vulnerability was greatest
(Figure 2.2). The first level of risk assessment, or tier one, was carried out by the
Whitehorse Technical and Local Advisory Committees in May and June 2010
respectively. The committees examined the results of the community input session and
prioritized the broad sectors that had emerged from that meeting based on the severity
of anticipated impacts, the likelihood of the impact occurring, and the adaptive capacity
of the community to respond to that impact. The results of each meeting were similar.
The five priority sectors were determined to be natural hazards, infrastructure,
environment, food security, and energy security.
In the second tier of risk assessment the project team evaluated each specific impact
from the priority sectors. The same criteria of likelihood, severity and adaptive capacity
were used to assess risk on an impact by impact basis. For those impacts that are
considered opportunities the assessment process was the same, however we
considered the strength of the opportunity rather than the severity of the risk.
2.3 Limitations of the Whitehorse Adaptation Plan
The Whitehorse adaptation plan makes recommendations to increase the resilience of
Whitehorse based on the assessment of climate change vulnerability. The plan was
developed through a rigorous process which emphasized local knowledge and its
integration with scientific information. However, given the broad nature of the
assessment, the plan is necessarily limited by the availability and quality of data, the
complexity of the community and our emphasis on qualitative information.
Climate change will have a universal impact on the North, affecting almost every facet of
the land and the people who live on it. Assessing this complex system is challenging and
uncertainty is a significant component of climate change research (Malone and Brenkert,
2008). Uncertainty arises from a number of sources, especially the lack of readily
available regional data to support or reject assumptions. While the Whitehorse
adaptation planning process was designed to manage uncertainty to the greatest degree
possible, data gaps do exist. Therefore, the Whitehorse adaptation plan should be
revisited regularly as new information emerges and the uncertainty associated with
adaptation planning is reduced.
The Whitehorse region is also remarkably complex. As will be described in the next
section, the area is composed of extensive infrastructure, a number of interrelated
governing bodies, and a relatively diverse population and economy. This complexity has
been challenging to appraise given the broad nature of the adaptation plan. Extreme or
special cases characterized by a high level of uncertainty have been especially
challenging to evaluate. Such cases include a population explosion beyond that
indicated by current trends (or conversely a population decline), exceptional disaster
situations, and/or regime shifts at an unprecedented rate of change. Our
recommendations have been developed based on the information that could be
gathered and supported by local, professional and academic technical expertise and
knowledge. It should also be noted that an increase in community resilience through the
timely implementation of adaptation strategies will address some or all of the
vulnerabilities associated with unprecedented and/or extreme events.
7