Mainstreaming adaptation systemically includes climate risk and adaptation considerations in decision-making and planning processes.
‘Meeting adaptation needs is a prerequisite for sustainable development as by definition, it requires long-term resilience’ (OECD 2019, The Only Way Forward). For sustainable development, adaptation goals and activities thus need to be proactively mainstreamed in all areas of decision-making and planning as well as across all sectors.
A new EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change: Fostering mainstreaming at the EU level
The approach:
The European Union (EU) has developed and adopted an EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change in spring 2013. One of its three objectives was to mainstream adaptation into policies, strategies and programmes at the EU level.
Scope and entry points:
The development process built on the White Paper ‘Adapting to climate change: Towards a European Framework for Action’ (COM(2009) 147 final) adopted on 1 April 2009. This Paper already placed a strong focus on mainstreaming adaptation and forsaw the development of a comprehensive EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change by 2013.
How it works:
The general objective of mainstreaming adaptation into policies at the EU level, including the legislation to include climate adaptation, are operationalized through several mainstreaming strategies. Including:
One approach to support mainstreaming is the online platform Climate-ADAPT, which aims to facilitate exchange and knowledge . For each sector with relevance to adaptation, the platform provides:
New EU strategy on adaptation:
Building on this 2013 EU Adaptation strategy, in February 2021 the EU has proposed its new strategy on adaptation to climate change which increases ambition and expands to cover new areas and priorities.
Recognizing how the EU and the global community are currently underprepared for the increasing intensity, frequency and pervasiveness of climate change impacts, especially as emissions continue to rise, the European Commission reiterates that adaption is a crucial component of the global response to climate change. In this sense, the new EU Adaptation Strategy is supposed to pave the way for a higher ambition on climate resilience.
Aiming for more systematic adaptation, the Commission will thus continue to actively mainstream climate resilience considerations in all relevant policy fields applicable to both the public and the private sectors. Mainstreaming will extend beyond sectors targeted in the 2013 EU Adaptation Strategy, which included agriculture, infrastructure and insurance. It will support the further development and, most importantly, implementation of adaptation strategies and plans at all levels of governance.
Conclusions for future application:
References:
Web-based information:
European Commission Website on Adaptation to Climate Change
EU White Paper: Adapting to climate change: Towards a European framework for action (COM(2009) 147)
Download PDF
EU knowledge platform Climate-ADAPT
Reference person:
Ms Rosario Bento Pais, Head of Unit, Adaptation to Climate Change, DG CLIMA, European Commission, B-1049 BRUSSELS
Integrating adaptation options into watershed development planning: Employing the climate proofing tool of GIZ
The tool:
‘Climate Proofing for Development’ is a methodological tool to incorporate the concerns surrounding climate change and variability into development planning. It enables planners and decision makers to identify risks posed by current and future climatic changes, to pinpoint opportunities resulting from climate change and to make use of co-benefits of resilience building measures.
Under the Indo-German project ‘Climate Change Adaptation in Rural Areas of India (CCA RAI)’, this tool was applied to the Watershed Development Programmes of the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD). Two pilot projects were conducted in the Dindigul district of Tamil Nadu, and the Udaipur district of Rajasthan.
Scope and entry points:
The Watershed Development Programme involves soil and moisture conservation activities in a drainage basin or catchment area with the aim of improving the standard of living of the people by improving the environment. NABARD manages a vast watershed development portfolio, spread across various states of India .The Watershed Development Fund Programme (WDF) and the Indo-German Watershed Development Programme (IGWDP) are the two main programmes of NABARD which look at conservation, regeneration and judicious utilization of natural resources through incorporating soil and water conservation measures, crop management strategies and other farm and non-farm activities to develop community assets and resources for sustainable rural development.
NABARD requested GIZ to assist them in piloting climate proofing in two watersheds of the Dindigul district in Tamil Nadu under the WDF and two watersheds of the Udaipur district in Rajasthan under the IGWDP.
Through the application of the climate proofing tool, the impacts of climate change on soil, agriculture, forests, pastureland, livestock and communities within the four watersheds were studied. Following this analysis, treatment measures for implementation were identified which can increase the resilience of the watershed and build adaptive capacities of the communities. Where found necessary, typical watershed development measures were customized according to the climate change analysis and incorporated in the final implementation plan. Watersheds thus become resilient to current and future climatic changes.
How it works:
This tool is participatory in nature and involves a combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches. The process can be broadly classified as follows:
Specifics of application:
Conclusions for future application:
References:
Resource person:
The approach:
The Centre for Climate Risk and Opportunity Management (CCROM) introduced a comprehensive approach for mainstreaming Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) and Climate Change Mitigation (CCM) within the framework of Water Resources Management at catchment level. It was piloted for the Citarum River watershed in West Java, Indonesia.
Scope and entry points:
The core of the whole process is to integrate CCA and CCM options into catchment management and local development planning. In doing so, the approach supports a resilient and less carbon intensive development strategy in the catchment area. It was conducted as part of the Integrated Citarum Water Resources Management Investment Programme (supported by the Asian Development Bank, ADB) that began in 2010 and is projected for 15 years.
How it works:
The approach can be divided into three parts (Figure 1). Part 1 covers the identification of adaptation options based on vulnerability and risk analyses. Part 2 focuses on the integration of adaptation and mitigation options into regional water resources management development plans, followed by the process of Part 3 for monitoring and evaluating implementation. Part 1 starts with projections/scenarios for future development of climate parameters, water resources availability and land-use patterns. The latter influence future water availability. Risk analysis considers the probability and impacts of harmful events such as floods, drought/water scarcity and hydro-power scarcity. The impacts of these events are represented by vulnerability indices, determined using a vulnerability assessment that is conducted at the village and household levels. The combination of vulnerability and risk analyses allows for the identification of areas to be prioritized for adaptation actions. Part 1 results in a strategic framework of CCA and CCM options.
Part 2 connects adaptation options as defined in Part 1 with inputs from local stakeholders within a multi-party process. It includes exploration of actions already pursued by local communities and might result in the re-orientation and prioritization of actions. Final results will be synergized with and integrated into local development policies and the local medium-term development plan (RPJMP).
Part 3 organizes the implementation and assesses whether the actions reduce vulnerability and carbon intensity of the societal system in the catchment area as intended. The evaluation of vulnerability changes (vulnerability index) might require new vulnerability assessments.
Specifics of application:
Conclusions for future application:
Reference persons for further information:
Mr Haneda Sri Mulyanto, Climate Change Vulnerability Division, Ministry of Environment. Jl. D.I. Panjaitan Kav. 24 Building A, 6th Floor, Jakarta Timur 13140, Indonesia. Email: haneda.moei@gmail.com
Prof. Rizaldi Boer, Head of Centre for Climate Risk and Opportunity Management, Bogor Agricultural University (CCROM-IPB), Kampus IPB Baranangsiang, Jl. Raya Padjajaran Bogor 16143, Indonesia. Email: rizaldiboer@gmail.com
For more information please see the website of the programme “Institutional Strengthening for Integrated Water Resources Management”.
The approach:
Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is a tool for comparing the costs and benefits of a project or measure in monetary terms and so help improve the allocation of public resources. This is relevant for decision-making, since budget constraints do not allow all institutions or individuals to implement all actions proposed. In the past few years CBA has been increasingly discussed as a tool for evaluating adaptation projects and measures.
Scope and entry points:
In its recent climate change law as well as its National Climate Change Strategy, the Mexican Government expressed the need to mitigate and adapt to climate change. As adaptation is identified as a priority at the national and subnational levels, there is a need to develop tools to assist in decision-making processes. As the lead organization in the sector, the Mexican Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT) is working together with the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) in developing and piloting a methodology for prioritizing climate change adaptation measures using multi-criteria analyses (MCAs) and CBAs within three pilot sectors: irrigated agriculture, water, and forests within natural protected areas. The MCA is used for a pre-selection of adaptation measures. Measures that are deemed suitable based on the MCA are scrutinized in more detail in the CBA (see this method brief on the MCA methodology used in Mexico).
How it works:
CBA compares the costs and benefits of an adaptation measure or project expressed in monetary terms. This comparison can demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of an adaptation investment for decision-makers.
When conducting a CBA, one must first agree on the adaptation objective and establish whether it can be quantified in monetary terms (e.g. reduced rehabilitation costs in case of flooding). Defining an adaptation objective helps determine what exactly is being evaluated and the information needed to obtain the results. This adaptation objective cannot be determined decoupled from its context; it should be defined based on the relevant climate change impacts identified as well as the vulnerability in the region under study, which form the basis of the design of an adaptation measure.
After defining the objective, it is essential to define the baseline scenario that will help to evaluate the costs and benefits of adaptation without taking action compared to the costs and benefits of implementing an adaptation project or action. Both costs and benefits should be assessed as being either direct or indirect. Benefits should also include avoided damages and co-benefits of the actions to be evaluated. One of the most important challenges of CBAs is obtaining a quantifiable measure of intangible costs and benefits. These can be evaluated and quantified through non-market-based approaches (e.g. contingent valuation, etc.).
Aggregating costs and benefits allows computing the net present value (NPV), which is the difference between costs and benefits considering the present value of money to be determined. The final NPV gives decision-makers an indicator as to which project(s) can be more effective for each dollar invested. A higher NPV indicates a more effective project, while a negative NPV suggests ineffectiveness and should lead to the project being rejected based on economic valuation. For more details on the CBA methodology see Economic approaches for assessing climate change adaptation options under uncertainty.
In the described application of the CBA in Mexico, the benefits and costs were listed and systematized, while simultaneously selecting a baseline scenario (i.e. the costs and benefits of not adapting to climate change). The data was validated by the experts at the respective ministries. All of the assumptions on, for instance, discount rates, time horizons, investments, taxes, etc. are also stated in a final document, so as to make the analysis clear and transparent.
All data was collected in an Excel-tool showing the NPV and other results clearly arranged for the decision makers. The tool allows carrying out a sensitivity analysis by changing the parameters (interest rate, estimated costs, estimated benefits, etc.). Finally, the final worksheet will contain an application to perform a Monte Carlo analysis to assess risk and estimate intervals for different scenarios.
Specifics of application:
Potential for replication:
The challenges identified in performing a CBA for climate change adaptation are:
Sources:
GIZ (2007): Economic Approaches to Climate Change Adaptation and their Role in Project Prioritisation and Appraisal. Eschborn.
Contacts:
For additional information or material: Camilo de la Garza, Advisor, Environment and Climate Change Policy, camilo.dlgarza@giz.de
Gloria Cuevas, Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT), gloria.cuevas@semarnat.gob.mx
José Alberto Lara, consultant in developing the methodology, jose.lara@uia.mx
Supporting the National Adaptation Plan (NAP) process in Tanzania.
Tanzania is highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Important sectors of the economy including agriculture and energy are already affected by, amongst others, increasing droughts, changing precipitation patterns and flooding. One of the steps taken by the government of Tanzania to prepare for these climate impacts is the National Climate Adaptation Plan (NAP) process. The NAP process was introduced through the UN climate change negotiations with the objectives to reduce vulnerability to climate change and facilitate the integration of adaptation into policies, programs and development planning. Tanzania is being supported by GIZ on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and co-funded by USAID, to implement a participatory NAP process. The main partner is the Vice President’s Office – Division of Environment, which is coordinating the topic of climate change.
Climate Proofing of the Agriculture, Forestry and Livestock Production System at the Saouef Farm.
The method:
The Climate Proofing (CP) methodology used for the Saouef farm in Zaghouan, Tunisia, is adapted from the Climate Proofing approach developed by GIZ. It is a systematic analysis of risks caused by climate change and for suggesting appropriate adaptation measures. It was implemented in 2011 in order to take account of the climate change dimension when planning farm activities (dedicated to sheep breeding and to fodder seed production).
Scope and entry points:
The overall aim was to apply the method at local level (project, action plan). The entry point for integrating adaptation measures into the farm management plan was the revision of the farm management plan that mainly focuses on agriculture, forestry and livestock production systems. The method was implemented at the request of the Office de l’Elevage et des Pâturages (OEP) in October 2011. The resulting model can be replicated in similar regions.
How it works:
The method was implemented with OEP officials and farm managers within a training/action workshop, during which the methodology and tools were presented and practically applied to the situation of the farm. This covered the first two stages of CP (see figure below), which were simplified in order to facilitate their use. The process has been partly completed for a limited number of exposure units.
Step 1: Superficial screening/filtering
The screening involved the two following sub-steps:
Step 2: Detailed analysis
The analysis of biophysical and socioeconomic impacts of climate trends was carried out for three priority EUs with regards to farm productions (stock breeding and production of fodder, cactus and alfalfa).
Climate stimulus:
Biophysical impacts:
Socioeconomic impacts:
Risk analysis:
Current capacities to manage risks:
(Additional) CCA alternatives:
Source: Preliminary analysis for the exposure units: alfalfa seeds production (extracts)
The relevance of these effects on planning has been assessed while taking into account the probability that such effects would occur and the importance of their impacts on EU targets.
Step 3 and 4: adaptation alternatives and integration into the plan
Steps 3 (analysis of adaptation options) and 4 (integration in the management plan) were only carried out for the most relevant effects. An action plan was developed within the context of the workshop so as to finalize the CP application, while proceeding with training/action.
Specifics of application:
Conclusions for future applications:
Reference persons and further information:
Documents:
Reference persons: