Technical Policy Briefing Notes - 6
Multi-Criteria Analysis
The Application to Adaptation
Policy Briefs
Multi-Criteria Analysis
The Application to Adaptation
Multi
Criteria Analysis has high relevance for adaptation. The criteria can
be included to consider the different aspects of uncertainty as well as
other elements of good adaptation. As example, previous adaptation MCAs
have considered criteria of robustness, low/no regret characteristics
or flexibility, as well as co-benefits and synergies with mitigation.
The approach also allows analysis with qualitative information, which is particularly useful given there are often data gaps in climate change adaptation, and/or because there is often a need to consider additional aspects such as the acceptability, equity or environmental or social performance of options which are difficult to quantify.
Applications of MCA to adaptation use some form of climate change information. In more qualitative studies, this can use climate model information to build up indications of the future impacts of climate change, e.g. in terms of changes in temperature, weather extremes, runoff and sea level rise. Similarly the performance of different adaptation options against these risks can be assessed (i.e. scored). An example of this qualitative type of approach is included in the case study (Van Ierland et al. 2007), which provides an example of the additional characteristics that can be included for adaptation, i.e. importance, urgency, no regret characteristics, co-benefits and mitigation synergies.
It is also possible to undertake MCA in a more qualitative climate scenario framework, using climate model projections and analysis of options (e.g. costs, effectiveness, performance against wider criteria). An example of this approach was undertaken within the Thames Estuary 2100 (TE2100, EA, 2009) project, which looked at future flood defences for London using various sea level rise scenarios. This study used a multi-criteria analysis to complement a formal economic cost-benefit analysis. The MCA was used to consider the data collected as part of the Strategic Environmental Assessment and included the heritage, recreation and habitat sensitivity criteria, as well as landscape character and capacity assessments, alongside costs and benefits within a Multi Criteria Analysis (scoring & weighting).
However, MCA does have some limitations in relation to climate change uncertainty, in that it tends to work with individual scenarios, against which options are assessed. It is more difficult to incorporate the different elements of current and future climate risks (the time dimension), and to include climate change uncertainty (as well as analysing how the benefits of different adaptation options vary against different scenarios), unless multiple runs of the MCA are conducted. The inclusion of criteria for how options perform against uncertainty can be included to address this, but this makes the consideration of uncertainty very qualitative.
The approach also allows analysis with qualitative information, which is particularly useful given there are often data gaps in climate change adaptation, and/or because there is often a need to consider additional aspects such as the acceptability, equity or environmental or social performance of options which are difficult to quantify.
Applications of MCA to adaptation use some form of climate change information. In more qualitative studies, this can use climate model information to build up indications of the future impacts of climate change, e.g. in terms of changes in temperature, weather extremes, runoff and sea level rise. Similarly the performance of different adaptation options against these risks can be assessed (i.e. scored). An example of this qualitative type of approach is included in the case study (Van Ierland et al. 2007), which provides an example of the additional characteristics that can be included for adaptation, i.e. importance, urgency, no regret characteristics, co-benefits and mitigation synergies.
It is also possible to undertake MCA in a more qualitative climate scenario framework, using climate model projections and analysis of options (e.g. costs, effectiveness, performance against wider criteria). An example of this approach was undertaken within the Thames Estuary 2100 (TE2100, EA, 2009) project, which looked at future flood defences for London using various sea level rise scenarios. This study used a multi-criteria analysis to complement a formal economic cost-benefit analysis. The MCA was used to consider the data collected as part of the Strategic Environmental Assessment and included the heritage, recreation and habitat sensitivity criteria, as well as landscape character and capacity assessments, alongside costs and benefits within a Multi Criteria Analysis (scoring & weighting).
However, MCA does have some limitations in relation to climate change uncertainty, in that it tends to work with individual scenarios, against which options are assessed. It is more difficult to incorporate the different elements of current and future climate risks (the time dimension), and to include climate change uncertainty (as well as analysing how the benefits of different adaptation options vary against different scenarios), unless multiple runs of the MCA are conducted. The inclusion of criteria for how options perform against uncertainty can be included to address this, but this makes the consideration of uncertainty very qualitative.
download this briefing note