Adaptation Task Navigator
Types of adaptation situation
Adaptation situations are diverse. Before being able to decide which tasks are critical to be carried out and which methods are applicable it is necessary to characterise the adaptation situation along a number of dimensions. This section will introduce the relevant characteristics. Chapter 2 will then describe how tasks and methods are selected according to these characteristics.
Here, we limit ourselves to adaptation in the form of human action (i.e. "adjustments in human systems"). Hence, adaptation involves actors that expect, perceive or experience climate impacts and interact at different levels of decision making. The actors' interactions are shaped by the properties of the biophysical as well as institutional setting in which the interaction takes place. We will call the actors and the setting that are relevant the adaptation situation (AS). An adaptation situation of alpine ski resorts, for example, may be described as follows: Alpine ski resorts owners are faced with declining profitability, part of which is caused by less snowfall. There are technical solutions (artificial snowmaking) but they come with environmental costs and may not be sufficient under further temperature rises.
On a general level two types of adaptation situations may be distinguished.
Private adaptation situations are those in which private actors such as individuals (e.g., farmers, coastal dwellers), households, communities, firms and organisations take action in their own interest. Private actors may also be organisational or group actors, such as community-based organisations or co-operatives. Private actors take adaptation action if they perceive to be affected by climate threat or if they perceive a benefit from this action.
Public adaptation situations are those in which a public actor takes action with a fiduciary duty to the public interest. Stated more generally, a public actor is anyone acting in a group or collective interest, and trying to influence or co-ordinate the actions of that group. Public actors are, for example, local authorities, government ministries, public water boards, etc. However, a public actor may also be a co-operative, or a community-based organisation.
A public actor may take physical action, that is act upon the physical environment that the vulnerable individuals are situated in. An example would be to build infrastructure such as a dike to protect vulnerable actors from flooding.
A public actor may also take influencing action, that is try to influence the vulnerable actors so they adapt themselves. Various ways of influencing the vulnerable actors are possible. First, the public actor may provide information to raise the awareness of the vulnerable actors. An example would be a government that launches a campaign to raise the awareness of people settling in high risk areas such as flood-plains or steep hills prone to land-slides. Second, the public actor may provide economic incentives to influence the vulnerable actors to take actions they would otherwise find not attractive. Finally, the public actor may pass regulations. Examples would be building standards or compulsory insurance coverage.
Two further types of adaptation situations may be distinguished. Advocates acting on behalf of interest groups (environmental organizations, industry associations, etc.) take action to influence private actors and public actors. Another type of actor would be decision or policy supporters, which aim at supporting a private or public actor in making an adaptation decision. Acknowledging that these two types of actors may play an important role in AS, we disregard these here in favour of focusing on methodological aspects of both private and public adaptation. An AS may be further characterised according to a number of variables. Below we list variables relevant for the purpose of this guideline. Note that variables are only included in so far that they are relevant for identifying which task needs to be carried out and which method is appropriate. Variables that do not have any indication on these choice are ignored.
Note that these characteristics are used to describe the cases discussed in Chapter 4 (sections 4.1 and 4.2).
Finally, a word of caution should be mentioned regarding how definitive an analyst can be in characterising an adaptation situation. In both research and decision making, the challenge of drawing boundaries around a system of interest is ever present, and often cannot be completely resolved. Selecting, for examples, which options to consider in a decision is often a normative choice depending on the needs or framing of the decision maker. This guidance cannot hope to provide a panacea solution for issues of this kind. Rather, the guidance can assist to make explicit the characteristics which should be considered in vulnerability, impacts and adaptation, and outline the fact that normative choices must be made by readers selecting and applying the methods contained in this guidance.
An overview of the relevant characteristics is given in the remainder of this section; the indication they have on identifying critical VIA tasks and methods is discussed in Chapter 2.
Climate hazard and knowledge thereof
An AS may be differentiated according the types of climate hazards involved. Table 1-1 lists the relevant variables used in this guideline.
Table 1-1: Characteristics of the climate hazard.
| Characteristic | Description | Value | Indication on critical tasks and appropriate methods |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Are risks due to current climate variability? | Yes/no (i.e. extreme event,slow-onset) | If extreme events are considered, decisions may take into account current climate. |
| Observed trend | Has a past trend been observed? | Unknown, not knowable, clear direction, no direction. | If a past trend has been observed, then it is easier to motivate the affected actors to adapt. If the trend is unknown, collecting data is indicated. |
| Future impacts | Given a scenario, can I compute impacts (or outcomes)? | Yes/no | If future impacts (or outcomes) can be computed, decision making methods on future outcomes are appropriate. |
| CC is dominant risk factor | CC is considered to be a major driver only if it is important relative to the other drivers involved. | Yes/no | If CC is not the major driver, analysing climate change impacts is not a priority, focus on the other drivers or on factors that are internal to the AS. |
Characteristics of the vulnerable/affected actor
When a public actor aims to influence a vulnerable actor, it is important to understand how the vulnerable actor perceives the AS and what her concerns, interests and capacities are. Table 1-2 summarises some of the relevant characteristics and their indication on what tasks need to be carried out.
Table 1-2: Characteristics of the affected actors.
| Characteristic | Description | Values | Indication on critical tasks and appropriate methods |
|---|---|---|---|
| Heterogeneity | Degree difference in socioeconomic characteristics between relevant actors. | High/low | If degree of difference is high, options which require collective action may be difficult. |
| Group size | Size of group affected by impacts and taking adaptive action. | Small/large | If group size is small, collective action options may be more easily taken. |
| Damage experienced | Have actors suffered damage due to extreme weather events ? | Yes/no | If yes, it is necessary to focus on current risks. |
| Awareness of current risks | Actors perception of risks from current variability and extremes. | High/low | If low, risk communication and awareness raising are indicated. |
| Potential capacity | Actors ability to take adaptation action, includes financial, human, and social capital. | High/low | If low, incentives may be considered to influence adaptation |
| Actual capacity | Actors actual capacity to act in situation, given possible cognitive and institutional barriers. | High/low | If actors have low actual capacity, institutional or behavioural analysis to identify cognitive and institutional barriers to action are indicated. |
Adaptation options
A further important set of criteria for choosing appropriate tasks and methods, in particular for choosing appropriate decision making methods, is related to characteristics of the set of adaptation options available.
Table 1-2: Characteristics of the adaptation options.
| Characteristic | Description | Values | Indication on critical tasks and appropriate methods |
|---|---|---|---|
| Relative costs | Investment costs relative to actors annual income and capital stock | High/low | If costs are high, the ability to experiment and learn (through ex-post evaluation) may be reduced. |
| Investment horizon | Time interval over which outcomes attributes can be attributed to an option and must be considered. | Short/long | If the horizon is long, then it is desirable to assess impacts, or include impacts in decision making. |
| Flexibility | Degree to which option can be adjusted, or changed. Institutional options tend to be more flexible than physical options. | Yes/No | If option can be adjusted easily, than adaptive management may be appropriate. |
| Conflict | Degree to which individual preferences and social welfare are in conflict | High/low | If conflict is high, then institutional analysis may be necessary. |
| Complexity | Number and degree of interdependency of variables that determine outcomes. | High/low | If the complexity is high, it is necessary to conduct detailed case studies and/or build models in order to understand and predict action-outcome linkages. If low, decision making can be made without expert knowledge. |