IPCC_Managing Risks of Extreme Events.pdf - Climate Access

Managing the Risks: International Level and Integration across ScalesChapter 7Early warning systems (as an example of a public good) can depend onregional and international cooperation to make more efficient use ofclimate data through its exchange. In the field of meteorology, manyyears of discussion under the auspices of the World MeteorologicalOrganization (WMO) have led to formal agreements on the types ofdata that are routinely exchanged (WMO, 1995; Basher, 2006). Thereare similar levels of agreement in other hazard fields, for instance,sharing resources and expertise in managing floods at the river basinscale. As another example of enhanced efficiency through internationalcooperation, many Caribbean countries have formed a catastropheinsurance pool to reduce reinsurance premiums (see Sections 6.3.3 and7.4, and Case Study 9.2.13).7.2.3. Shared ResponsibilityIt is not only efficiency claims that can be invoked to justify internationalinterventions, but also considerations of shared responsibility andsolidarity, especially with those least able to cope with the impacts ofextreme events and changes in them due to climate change. Thissubsection makes reference to selected principles found in the currentliterature on adaptation to weather-related extremes; there is noattempt to comprehensively assess the moral and ethical literature onthis topic.In the words of the Millennium Declaration that was adopted by 189nations in September 2000:“We recognize that, in addition to ourseparate responsibilities to our individual societies, we have a collectiveresponsibility to uphold the principles of human dignity, equality andequity at the global level. Global challenges must be managed in a waythat distributes the costs and burdens fairly in accordance with basicprinciples of equity and social justice. Those who suffer or who benefitleast deserve help from those who benefit most” (UNGA, 2000).In the poorest countries, people have a higher burden in terms of loss oflife per event and loss of their assets relative to their income. Based onhistorical loss data from Munich Re, average fatalities for major disasterevents have been approximately 40 times higher in low-income ascompared to high-income countries (groupings according to the WorldBank), and direct asset losses as a percentage of gross national incomehave averaged three times greater (Barnett et al., 2008; Linnerooth-Bayer et al., 2010). Changes in frequency, magnitude, and spatial coverageof some climate extremes (see Table 3-1) can result in losses that exceedthe capability of many individual countries to manage the risk(Rodriguez et al., 2009). Many have concluded that without significantinternational assistance the most vulnerable countries will have difficultyin adapting to changes in extreme events and their impacts due to climatechange, as well as other impacts of climate change (Agrawala andFankhauser, 2008; Agrawala and van Aalst, 2008; Klein and Persson,2008; Klein and Möhner, 2009; Gupta and van de Grijp, 2010; Gupta etal., 2010; World Bank, 2010a). Shared responsibility can take the formof ex-ante interventions to reduce vulnerability and poverty, as well asex-post disaster response and assistance.Weather extremes constrain progress toward meeting the MDGs asexpressed in the Millennium Declaration, especially the goal of eradicatingextreme poverty and hunger (UNDP, 2002; Mirza, 2003; Watkins, 2007;UNISDR, 2009a), which can be interpreted as a direct raison d’être forinternational intervention in risk management (UNISDR, 2005b;Heltberg et al., 2008). Barrett et al. (2007) have shown that ex-ante riskmanagement strategies on the part of the poor commonly sacrificeexpected gains, such as investing in improved seed, to reduce risk ofsuffering catastrophic loss, a situation perpetuating the ‘poverty trap.’The poor can be subject to multiple exposures from climate changeand other stresses like geophysical hazards and changing economicconditions (e.g., fluctuating exchange rates) leading to vulnerability toeven moderate hazard events (O’Brien and Leichenko, 2000).Shared responsibility and common human concern have been articulatedmost effectively with regard to post-disaster humanitarian assistance,and the Millennium Declaration gives specific mention to ‘natural’disasters in this context. Section VI (Protecting the Vulnerable) states: “Wewill spare no effort to ensure that children and all civilian populationsthat suffer disproportionately the consequences of natural disasters …are given every assistance and protection so that they can resume normallife as soon as possible.” With growing globalization the principle ofshared responsibility is further enhanced as offers of disaster relief mayprovide nations access to new spheres of influence both politically andin terms of new business opportunities. Governments can piggyback ahumanitarian effort on top of a for-profit operation involving privatecompanies (Dunfee and Hess, 2000).Disasters can overwhelm the coping mechanisms of nations, in whichcase international relief and assistance, as a form of solidarity, arerequired as a matter of saving lives. Humanitarian assistance willremain essential, but emphasizing disaster response strategies at theexpense of proactive integrated approaches to disaster risk reductioncan have the effect of perpetuating vulnerability (UNDP, 2002; Bhatt,2007). For this reason, the DRR and CCA communities are placing greatemphasis on pre-disaster investment and planning to redress this balanceand reduce overall costs of disaster management (Kreimer and Arnold,2000; Linnerooth-Bayer et al., 2005). These efforts include encouragingthe humanitarian community to become a stronger advocate of DRRand CCA.Beyond a sense of common human concern, it can be argued thatcountries contributing most to climate change have an obligation topay to reduce or compensate losses. This is the principle underlying the‘polluter pays principle.’ In addition, it can be claimed that countrieshave a ‘principled’ obligation to support those who are most vulnerableand who have made a limited contribution to the creation of the climatechange problem. This is the claim underlying the expression of ‘commonbut differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities’ (CBDR),which has emerged as one principle of international environmental law(De Lucia, 2007) and has been explicitly formulated in the context ofthe 1992 Rio Earth Summit (and subsequently in the Preamble andArticle 3 of the UNFCCC). “In view of the different contributions to global400