IPCC_Managing Risks of Extreme Events.pdf - Climate Access

Chapter 5Managing the Risks from Climate Extremes at the Local LevelHowever, the full integration of hazard exposure and social vulnerabilityinto a comprehensive vulnerability assessment for the local area or regionof concern is often lacking for many places. Part of this is a function ofthe bifurcation of the science inputs (e.g., natural scientists providemost of the relevant data and models for exposure assessments whilesocial scientists provide the inputs for the populations at risk). It alsorelates to the difficulties of working across disciplinary or knowledgeboundaries.The development of methodologies and metrics for climate adaptationassessments is emerging and mostly derivative of the methodologiesemployed in vulnerability assessments noted above. For example, someare extensions or modifications of community vulnerability assessmentmethodologies and employ community participatory approaches suchas those used by World Vision (Greene, n.d.), the Red Cross (van Aalst etal., 2008), and others. Still others begin with livelihood or risk assessmentframeworks and use a wide range of techniques including multi-criteriadecision analyses (Eakin and Bojorquez-Tapia, 2008); index construction(Vescovi et al., 2009); segmentation and regional to global comparisons(Torresan et al., 2008); and scenarios (Wilby et al., 2009).5.6.2. Community-Based AdaptationCommunity-based adaptation (CBA) empowers communities to decidehow they want to prepare for climate risks and coordinate communityaction to achieve adaptation to climate change (Ebi, 2008). Part of thisentails community risk assessment for climate change adaptation thatassesses the hazards, vulnerabilities, and capacities of the community(van Aalst et al., 2008), which has also been called community-baseddisaster preparedness among other names. The intention is to fosteractive participation in collecting information that is rooted in thecommunities and enables affected people to participate in their ownassessment of risk and identify responses than can enhance resilienceby strengthening social-institutional measures including social relations(Allen, 2006; Patiño and Gauthier, 2009). In assessing short- and longtermrisks, the needs of vulnerable groups are often excluded (Douglaset al., 2009). The tools for engaging vulnerable groups in the processinclude transect walks and risk maps that capture the climate-relatedhazards and risks and storylines about possible future climate changeimpacts (Ebi, 2008; van Aalst et al., 2008; Patiño and Gauthier, 2009),although these tools often require input from participants external tothe community who have long-term climate information.The challenges in using community-based adaptation approachesinclude the challenge of scaling up information (Burton et al., 2007), thefact that it is resource-intensive (van Aalst et al., 2008), and recognizingthat disempowerment occurs when local stories are distorted or notvalued sufficiently (Allen, 2006). The integration of climate changeinformation increases this challenge as it introduces an additional layerof uncertainty and may conflict with the principle of keeping CBA simple.There is little evidence that secondary data on climate change hasbeen used in CBA, partly because of the challenge of limited access todownscaled climate change scenarios relevant at the local level (Ziervogeland Zermoglio, 2009) and because of the uncertainty of projections.Examples of community-based approaches illustrate some of theprocesses involved. In northern Bangladesh, a flooding adaptation projecthelped to establish early warning committees within villages that linkedto organizations outside the community, with which they did not usuallyinteract and that had historically blocked collective action and resourcedistribution (Ensor and Berger, 2009). Through this revised governancestructure, the building of small roads, digging culverts, and plantingtrees to alleviate flood impacts was facilitated. In Portland, Oregon,another project involved a range of actors to reduce the impact of urbanheat islands through engaging neighborhoods and linking them toexperts to install green roofs, urban vegetation, and fountains that ledto an increased sense of ownership in the improvements (Ebi, 2008). Inthe Philippines, the community-based approach enabled a deeperunderstanding of locally specific vulnerability than in previous disastermanagement contexts (Allen, 2006). While individually important, thesecommunity-based approaches should be viewed as part of a widersystem that recognizes the drivers at multiple scales, including themunicipalities and national levels.CBA responses provide increased participation and recognition of thelocal context, which is important when adapting to climate change (seeBox 5-7). The need for coordinated collective action was seen inKampala, where land cover change and changing climate are increasingthe frequency and severity of urban flooding and existing responseactivities are uncoordinated and consist of clearing drainage channels(Douglas et al., 2009). However, residents felt more could be done toadapt to frequent flooding, including increasing awareness of roles andresponsibilities in averting floods, improving the drainage system,improving garbage and solid waste disposal, strengthening the buildinginspection unit, and enforcing bylaws on the construction of houses andsanitation facilities. Similarly, in Accra, residents felt that municipal lawson planning and urban design need to be enforced, suggesting thatstrong links are needed between community responses and municipalresponses (Douglas et al., 2009).5.6.3. Risk Sharing and Transfer at the Local LevelRisk transfer and risk sharing are pre-disaster financing arrangementsthat shift economic risk from one party to another and are more fullydiscussed in Chapter 2, Section 7.4.4, and Case Study 9.2.13. Informalrisk sharing practices are common and important for post-disaster reliefand reconstruction. In the absence of more formal mechanisms likeinsurance, those incurring losses may employ diverse non-insurancefinancial coping strategies, such as relying on the solidarity of internationalaid, remittances, selling and pawning fungible assets, and borrowing frommoneylenders. Traditional livestock loans are one example (Oba, 2001).At-risk individuals in low-income countries rely extensively on reciprocalexchange, kinship ties, and community self-help. For example, women inhigh-risk areas often engage in innovative ways to access post-disaster321