Paving the Way for Climate-Resilient Infrastructure - UN CC:Learn

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 4: A ‘No-Regrets’ Risk-Based Approach to Climate Proofing Public InfrastructureObjectiveD E F I N I T I O NClimate changeadaptationThe adjustment in natural orhuman systems in responseto actual or expected climatestimuli or their effects, whichmoderates harm or exploitsbeneficial opportunities.Source: UNISDR (2009a)The Ministry of Public Works (MOP) and Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (MARN) realizethat El Salvador faces many risks related to climate variability and change and extreme weather events,as well as possible volcanic eruptions. Public infrastructure including roads, bridges, ports and airports,energy generation and delivery systems, drainage systems, water collection, storage, delivery and wastesystems, schools, hospitals and public buildings are at risk from natural disasters and climate change.MOP and MARN requested support from UNDP to provide a strategic framework for decision-makingprocesses for climate proofing infrastructure. The strategic framework should incorporate long-termclimate change adaptation (CCA) as well as more immediate disaster risk management (DRM) into policiesfor the planning, design, construction (including retrofitting and reconstruction), operation and maintenanceof public infrastructure.The objective of this background paper is to highlight for planners and policy makers the key issuesinvolved with climate proofing public infrastructure. ‘Climate proofing’ refers to actions that make infrastructuremore resilient and resistant to anticipated scenarios of long-term climate change, as well as therisks associated with geological hazards and climate variability and extremes. This paper outlines criticalconcepts and decision-making processes for planning new investments in public infrastructure. Similarconcepts and decision-making processes apply for retrofitting existing infrastructure and reconstructionof damaged infrastructure.Approach2See for example, Mora and Kepi, 2006;Benson and Twigg 2007; Center forScience in the Earth System, 2007;Genivar, 2007; USAID, 2007; Bitting andKloss, 2008; Center for Science in theEarth System, 2008; GFDRR, 2008; IILEI,2008; USDOT, 2008; Ribeiro et al., 2009;Singh, 2009; GFDRR, 2009; UNDP, 2009b;UNDP, 2009c; UNISDR, 2009c; World Bank,2009a; GFDRR, 2010a; GFDRR, 2010b.3According to findings from a recent WorldBank study tour (World Bank, 2007),national and municipal approaches todisaster risk reduction and preventionshould be multisectoral and holistic,using a balanced mix of hardware (e.g.retrofitting of schools and bridges,resettlement of high-risk informalsettlements) and software. Softwareincludes risk assessment tools (e.g.microzonation, structural survey ofschools and other life-line infrastructures);risk financing tools (e.g. risk insurance);socioeconomic programmes(resettlement of persons from high riskareas); infrastructure works (canalization,drainage pipes, terracing, retrofittingof infrastructure such as schools andhospitals); and urban planning (e.g.land-use planning). In addition, due tothe broad scope and resources gap inimplementing such a comprehensive riskreduction and prevention programme,the government at the national and locallevel should involve many players acrosscivil society, including the private sector,NGOs, academia and citizens in general.Climate proofing investments in public infrastructure should be considered within the broader context ofterritorial development that mainstreams and integrates CCA and DRM. Natural disasters often are characterizedas local problems, but their impacts and costs can cross jurisdictions, and can become problemsat municipal, state or national levels. Conversely, hazards and vulnerabilities in distant places can have animportant impact on local hazards and vulnerabilities.The focus on planning and planning processes for climate proofing public infrastructure is relevantbecause all investments in public infrastructure are subject to planning processes at the community, local,subnational and national levels. 2 The most critical decisions on the potential uses and beneficiaries ofinfrastructure and the precise siting of public infrastructure require a broad perspective and involve manystakeholders. A wide range of development agencies is increasingly advocating a holistic multisectoral,multi-institutional national and subnational approach to CCA and DRM for climate proofing. 3Although a local approach to climate proofing is key, there is an important leadership role for nationalinstitutions, especially in the acquisition and harmonization of hazard data, and setting and enforcingcodes and standards. The guidance and expertise of national institutions must be integrated into localactivities to become effective. For instance, even when excellent hazard maps exist, they are seldom usedby agencies other than the national disaster management agency. Even when these maps are used in landzoning policy, or if advanced meteorological or seismic information is used to create better building codesand standards, enforcement is often a problem (van Aalst and Burton, 2004; Benson and Twigg, 2007).18Paving the Way for Climate-Resilient Infrastructure: Conference Proceedings
PART IChapter 4: A ‘No-Regrets’ Risk-Based Approach to Climate Proofing Public InfrastructureIncorporating climate proofing into projects may be viewed as a cost, but there are potential benefits fromimproving planning processes and implementation of plans including monitoring and evaluation (M&E)systems (e.g. greater accountability and less corruption, improved maintenance). ‘Win-win’ scenarios arepossible through climate proofing. This is particularly true because many of the costs associated withclimate proofing public infrastructure are actually no-regrets investments (AsDB, 2005). On the otherhand, there might be tangible incremental costs associated with improving resilience to natural disastersand climate change, especially for retrofitting. 4The no-regrets investments in climate proofing, including planning processes and capacity building,can generate positive economic, social and environmental social benefits regardless of whether climatechange and natural disasters occur (Mani et al., 2008; Heltberg et al., 2009). The no-regrets approach isconsistent with the UNDP’s ‘climate risk management’ approach (UNDP, 2009a) and the United NationsFramework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) ‘precautionary principle’ approach (UNFCCC, 1992).The underlying approach for decision-making for climate proofing is to deal with present and futureclimate risks, and avoid high-risk investments that might lead to catastrophic losses. The actions associatedwith climate proofing include investments in materials and equipment, reforms in policies andinstitutions (including building codes and standards), and improvements in capacity to manage hazardsand potential risks associated with climate change and natural disasters, including early warning systems(EWS) and emergency response (UNISDR, 2008, 2009a; UNOCHA, 2009).In many ways, climate proofing infrastructure is not a new concept. Engineers have historically taken intoaccount information on various hazards and potential impacts for in the design, construction, use, andmaintenance of public infrastructure. However, given climatic uncertainties (particularly at a local scale), 5current design codes and standards might not be applicable in the future. This has implications for bothnew and existing infrastructure. Increased awareness about natural disasters and climate change, andincluding potential economic, social and environmental losses, provides a new vantage point to reviewand improve the processes and technologies used for climate proofing.According to UNISDR (2008), CCA and DRM must be “made a formal part of development processes andbudgets and programmed into relevant sector projects, for example in the design of settlements, infrastructure,coastal zone development, forest use, etc., in order to achieve sustainable land management,avoid hazardous areas, and to ensure the security of critical infrastructure such as hospitals, schools andcommunications facilities.” There are lessons to be learned from Latin America and other parts of theworld (e.g. Vergara, 2005; Red Cross International, 2006; Benson and Twigg, 2007; Leslie, 2008; Mansilla,2008; Christopolos et al., 2009; World Bank, 2009c; GFDRR, 2009a, 2009b, 2010a, 2010b; UNISDR, 2010).D E F I N I T I O NDisaster riskmanagementThe systematic processof using administrativedirectives, organizations,and operational skills andcapacities to implementstrategies, policies andimproved coping capacitiesin order to lessen the adverseimpacts of hazards and thepossibility of disaster.In this paper, disaster riskmanagement (DRM) refersto both DRM and disasterrisk reduction.Source: UNISDR (2009a)4Retrofitting is the reinforcement orupgrading of existing structures tobecome more resistant and resilientto the damaging effects of hazards.Retrofitting requires consideration of thedesign and function of the structure, thestresses that the structure may be subjectto from particular hazards or hazardscenarios, and the practicality and costsof different retrofitting options. Examplesinclude adding bracing to stiffen walls,reinforcing pillars, adding steel tiesbetween walls and roofs, installingshutters on windows, and improving theprotection of important facilities andequipment (ISDR, 2009a).5A major problem is the lack ofdownscalable climate data for localhazard modeling.Paving the Way for Climate-Resilient Infrastructure: Conference Proceedings 19
Page 1 and 2: United Nations Development Programm
Page 3: Paving the Way forClimate-Resilient
Page 6 and 7: Chapter 8Figure 8.1: The Feedback-R
Page 8 and 9: ForewordMr. Gerson MartínezAccordi
Page 10: AcknowledgementsThese Proceedings a
Page 13 and 14: Adapting infrastructure to the risk
Page 15 and 16: Pradeep Kurukulasuriya, UNDP/GEF, b
Page 17 and 18: Finally, Stephen Gold’s presentat
Page 19 and 20: Chapter 1Chapter 2Chapter 3Chapter
Page 21 and 22: PART IChapter 1: IntroductionIntrod
Page 23 and 24: Paving the Way for Climate-Resilien
Page 25 and 26: PART IChapter 2: Workshop ContextWo
Page 27 and 28: PART IChapter 2: Workshop ContextFu
Page 29 and 30: PART IChapter 3: Workshop Objective
Page 32 and 33: Chapter 3: Workshop Objective and S
Page 34 and 35: 16Paving the Way for Climate-Resili
Page 38 and 39: Chapter 4: A ‘No-Regrets’ Risk-
Page 70 and 71: PART II:TECHNICAL PRESENTATIONS52Pa
Page 72 and 73: Chapter 5: What a Country Should Th
Page 82 and 83: Chapter 6: Internalization of Clima
Page 84 and 85: Chapter 6: Internalization of Clima
Page 86 and 87:
Chapter 6: Internalization of Clima
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Chapter 7: A Framework for Risk Ass
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Chapter 8: Probabilistic Risk Model
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Chapter 9: An Economic Framework fo
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Chapter 10: Supporting El Salvador
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
128Paving the Way for Climate-Resil
Page 148:
United Nations Development Programm
show all

Paving the Way for Climate-Resilient Infrastructure - UN CC:Learn

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?