Climate Science in Support of Adaptation

Decisions under the UNFCCC

Xianfu Lu

Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust

Adaptation Decisions

6-7 February 2014

Georgia Tech Campus, Atlanta, USA

In the next 20 minutes or so…

1. Discussions on adaptation related issues under the Convention

2. Key climate science questions that need to be addressed to facilitate these discussions

3. Gaps, challenges and opportunities in addressing these questions

Conference of the Parties (COP)/CMP

Convention Bodies:

• Ad-hoc working group on Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP)

• Adaptation Committee

• Executive Committee of the Warsaw mechanism for loss and damage

• SCF, TEC, LEG, CGE

Kyoto Protocol Bodies:

Compliance committee

CDM-EB

JISC

Adaptation Fund Board (AFB)

SBSTA SBI The SecretariatFinancial mechanism (GEF, GCF) and other arrangements (LDCF, SCCF and the AF)

1. Adaptation under the UNFCCC: the “machinery”

Bureau

Permanent Subsidiary Bodies

1. Adaptation under the UNFCCC: multiple forums

1. Adaptation under the UNFCCC: three core areas

Global (policy) Responses

(National) Implementation

Means of Implementation

(finance, technology and capacity development)

• Approaches to address loss and damage associated with climate change impacts;

• 2013-2015 Review;

• Global adaptation goal as part of the 2015 agreement (?)

• National Adaptation Programme of Actions (NAPAs), National Adaptation Plans (NAPs);

• National communication (NCs)

• Various financial arrangements: LDCF, SCCF, AF, GCF;

• Technology mechanism (TEC, CTCN), Technology needs assessments (TNAs);

• Expert groups and committees: AC, CGE, LEG, loss and damage executive committee;

• Knowledge management: Nairobi work programme

1. Adaptation under the UNFCCC: three core areas

2. Key science questions: at global policy level

• Climate science critically important in informing the scale of “risk” hence the level of action required to achieve the ultimate goal of the Convention: to avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.

• Deliberations on global policy related issues under the FCCC call for climate science questions to be addressed.

• Two examples: the 2013-2015 review; approaches to address loss and damage

No Strengthento 1.5°C?

(Q1a)

Progresstowards 2°Cadequate?

(Q2)

Yes

No

Yes

Take appropriate

action for 2°C

Implementation of action

7 years

No

The best available scientific knowledge

Observed impacts of climate change

An assessment of the overall aggregate effect of the steps taken by Parties in order to achieve the ultimate objective of the Convention

Consideration of strengthening the long-term global goal, referencing various matters presented by the science, including in relation to temperature rise of 1.5 °C

Technical assessment

IPCC

Information from Parties

Reports from UN agencies and other

international organizations

Scientific information on the observed

impacts

Information gathering and compilation

Yes

Take appropriate action for

1.5°C

Past+

future

201520142013

2°Cadequate?

(Q1)

Preparation of the synthesis reports

2. Key science questions: the 2013-2015 review

F. Vladu (2013)

2. Key science questions: the 2013-2015 review

To address review question No.1 (Is the 2oC warming as a long-term global goal adequate?), a wide range of (secondary) scientific questions need to be addressed:

• What, if any, are the critical thresholds within our food production, ecological and socio-economic systems?

• What are the impacts of a 2oC global warming, in different locations, sectors and social groups, and following a range of possible socio-economic pathways?

• What are the implications of these impacts, in terms of critical thresholds being exceeded?

• …

2. Key science questions: approaches to address loss and damage

The Warsaw international mechanism for loss and damage associated with climate change impacts

• What are the impacts/losses, in economic and non-economic terms, of slow onset and extreme climate events?

• How do these impacts interact with other socio-economic drivers of vulnerability?

• How do these impacts interact with patterns of migration, displacement and human mobility?

• What are the potential approaches to address these impacts?

• …

2. Key science questions: at global policy level

But, even if we have perfect answers to all those questions, the ultimate answer to the review question,

and the decisions on means to address loss and damage inevitably entail value judgment and

political/diplomatic resolution, and would go beyond the methods and insights of climate science.

• Adequate for whom and by what criteria (i.e. the acceptable level of impacts/risks)?

• Adequate for what kind of future world (other socio-economic, in addition to climatic, conditions also matter)?

• …

• Which actions should be considered as addressing loss and damage hence eligible for dedicated support?

• How much of the adverse effects from climate change within a country should be addressed as loss and damage (as opposed to adaptation/climate-resilient development/disaster risk reduction)?

• …

2. Key science questions: at national, subnational and sectoral levels

They are asked by policy makers, development and adaptation practitioners, businesses and communities.

Assess impact

and risks

Plan for adaptation

Implement adaptation policies and

measures

Monitoring and

evaluation

• What has been the recent trend in climate-induced risks and impacts?

• What is to come and how serious is it?

• …

• Whether, if at all, and what needs to be done now, at what cost?

• What needs to be done in the medium-long term and at what cost?

• …

• Are we doing the right things?

• Are they being done in the right way?

• What could be improved?

• …

• Are all the relevant stakeholder engaged

• Are all the required resources (information/data, institutions, expertise,

regulatory frameworks etc) in place?

• …

3. Gaps, challenges and opportunities: scientists vs policy makers

3. Gaps, challenges and opportunities: “lost in translation”

“Are we OK with a 2oC warmer climate or shall we try to limit it to 1.5oC instead?”

“For increases in global mean temperature of less than 1-3°C above 1990 levels, some impacts are projected to produce benefits in some places and some sectors, and produce costs in other places and other sectors.”

How can the work of us scientists contribute towards the implementation of the UNFCCC?

“ (The COP) Acknowledges the further work to advance the understanding of and expertise on loss and damage, which includes, inter alia, the following:

a. Enhancing the understanding of:

• The risk of slow onset events, and approaches to address them;

• Non-economic losses and damages;

• …”

Packaging the science messages in negotiator-friendly language

Framing the science needs in actionable terms

3. Gaps, challenges and opportunities: “doors opening”

Increasing attention attached to the engagement of stakeholders, including those supporting the UNFCCC process.

Science commuting Policy process

UNFCCC process science community

• Research dialogue (every year during June session in Bonn);

• Structured Expert Dialogue (SED) of the 2013-2015 review (twice a year);

• The Nairobi work programme (ongoing engagement as partner organizations);

• …

3. Gaps, challenges and opportunities: “doors opening”

Thank you!