IPCC_Managing Risks of Extreme Events.pdf - Climate Access

Case StudiesChapter 99.1. IntroductionIn this chapter, case studies are used as examples of how to gain a betterunderstanding of the risks posed by extreme weather and climate-relatedevents while identifying lessons and best practices from past responsesto such occurrences. Using the information in Chapters 1 to 8, it waspossible to focus on particular examples to reflect the needs of thewhole Special Report. The chosen case studies are illustrative of animportant range of disaster risk reduction, disaster risk management,and climate change adaptation issues. They are grouped to examinerepresentative types of extreme events, vulnerable regions, andmethodological approaches.For the extreme event examples, the first two case studies pertain toextreme temperature with moisture deficiencies: the European heat wavesof 2003 and 2006 and response to disaster induced by hot weather andwildfires in Australia. Managing the adverse consequences of drought isthe third case study, with the focus on Syrian droughts. The combinationof drought and cold is examined through two recent dzud disasters inMongolia, 1999-2002 and 2009-2010. Tropical cyclones in Bangladesh,Myanmar, and Mesoamerica are used as examples of how a differencecan be made via enabling policies and responsive institutions forcommunity action. The next case study shifts the geographical focus tofloods in Mozambique in 2000 and 2007. The last of the extreme eventscase studies is about disastrous epidemic disease, using the case of cholerain Zimbabwe, as the example.The case studies chosen to reflect a few vulnerable regions all demonstratehow a changing climate provides significant concerns for people,societies, and their infrastructure. The case of Mumbai is used as anexample of a coastal megacity and its risks. Small island developingstates have special challenges for adaptation, with the Republic of theMarshall Islands being the case study focus. Cold climate vulnerabilities,particularly the infrastructure in Canada’s northern regions, provide thefinal vulnerable region case study.Following examples of extreme events and vulnerable regions, thischapter presents case study examination of four types of methodologiesor approaches to DRR and CCA. Early warning systems provide theopportunity for adaptive responses to reduce impacts. Effective legislationto provide multi-level governance is another way of reducing impacts.The case study on risk transfer examines the role of insurance and otherinstruments in developing countries. The final case study is on education,training, and public awareness initiatives. This selection provides a goodbasis of information and serves as an indicator of the resources neededfor future DRR and CCA. Additionally, it allows good practices to beidentified and lessons to be extracted.The case studies provide the opportunity for connecting with commonelements across the other chapters. Each case study is presented in aconsistent way to enable better comparison of approaches. After anintroduction, authors provide background to the event, vulnerable region,or methodology. Then the description of the events, vulnerability, orstrategy is given as appropriate. Next is the discussion of interventions,followed by the outcomes and/or consequences. Each case studyconcludes with a discussion of lessons identified. These case studiesrelate to the key messages of the Summary for Policymakers and also tothe Hyogo Framework for Action Priorities (see Table 9-1).Case studies are widely used in many disciplines including health care(Keen and Packwood, 1995; McWhinney, 2001), social science (Flyvbjerg,2004), engineering, and education (Verschuren, 2003). In addition, casestudies have been found to be useful in previous IPCC AssessmentReports, including the 2007 Working Group II report (Parry et al., 2007).Case studies offer records of innovative or good practices. Specificproblems or issues experienced can be documented as well as the actionstaken to overcome these. Case studies can validate our understandingand encourage re-evaluation and learning. It is apparent that (i) casestudies capture the complexity of disaster risk and disaster situations;(ii) case studies appeal to a broad audience; and (iii) case studies shouldbe fully utilized to provide lessons identified for DRR and DRM foradaptation to climate change (Grynszpan et al., 2011). Several projectshave identified lessons from case studies (Kulling et al., 2010). TheForensic Investigation of Disaster (Burton, 2011; FORIN, 2011) Project ofthe Integrated Research on Disaster Risk (ICSU, 2008) program hasdeveloped a methodology and template for future case study investigationsto provide a basis for future policy analysis and literature for assessments.The FORIN template lays out the elements: (a) critical cause analysis; (b)meta-analysis; (c) longitudinal analysis; and (d) scenarios of disasters.Case studies included in this chapter have been extracted from a varietyof literature sources from many disciplines. As a result, an integratedapproach examining scientific, social, health, and economic aspects ofdisasters was used where appropriate and included different spatial andtemporal scales, as needed. The specialized insights they provide can beuseful in evaluating some current disaster response practices.This chapter addresses events whose impacts were felt in manydimensions. A single event can produce effects that are felt on local,regional, national, and international levels. These effects could havebeen the direct result of the event itself, from the response to the event,or through indirect impacts such as a reduction in food production or adecrease in available resources. In addition to the spatial scales, thischapter also addresses temporal scales, which vary widely in bothevent-related impacts and responses. However, the way effects are feltis additionally influenced by social, health, and economic factors. Theresilience of a society and its economic capacity to allay the impact ofa disaster and cope with the after effects has significant ramificationsfor the community concerned (UNISDR, 2008a). Developing countries withfewer resources, experts, equipment, and infrastructure have been shownto be particularly at risk (see Chapter 5). Developed nations are usuallybetter equipped with technical, financial, and institutional support to enablebetter adaptive planning including preventive measures and/or quick andeffective responses (Gagnon-Lebrun and Agrawala, 2006). However, theystill remain at risk of high-impact events, as exemplified by the Europeanheat wave of 2003 and by Hurricane Katrina (Parry et al., 2007).490