* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download 10584_2014_1078_MOESM1_ESM
Climate change denial wikipedia , lookup
General circulation model wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Hotspot Ecosystem Research and Man's Impact On European Seas wikipedia , lookup
Climate sensitivity wikipedia , lookup
Global warming wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup
Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate resilience wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change wikipedia , lookup
Physical impacts of climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Saskatchewan wikipedia , lookup
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
SUPPLMENTAL MATERIALS INDEX A. SUMMARY OF PREDICTOR VARIABLES 2 Table 1: National predictors of adaptation 2 B. CODEBOOK FOR ADAPTATION INITIATIVES INDEX (AII) C. ADAPTIVE CAPACITY PREDICTOR VARIABLES — CODEBOOK AND SELECTION 4 22 Table 1: Potential predictors of adaptive capacity and adaptation identified in the literature 22 Table 2: Categories or elements of adaptive capacity used to guide variable selection and analysis 26 Table 3: Summary of 22 predictor variables long-listed for analysis. 27 D. MAPS OF KEY VARIABLES Figure 1: Maps showing Adaptation Initiatives Index (AII), and Good governance (CPI) 30 30 E. COLINEARITY OF GDP AND POPULATION SIZE Figure 2: Scatterplot showing collinearity (or covariation) between GDP (log) and Population size (log) for countries in the dataset 1 SUPPLMENTAL MATERIALS A: SUMMARY OF PREDICTOR VARIABLES Exposure Table 1: National predictors of adaptation. Variables selected for final inclusion in multivariate modeling are highlighted. A description of the variable selection process is provided in Supplemental Materials C. Indicator Description Global Climate Risk Index Index analyzes to what extent countries have been affected by the impacts of losses due to extreme weather events (mortality and financial losses). Exposure to extreme events has been hypothesized as an important stimulant for public and political support for climate adaptation. High scores reflect nations most impacted. Data were available for 111 countries from GermanWatch. Proportion of the population living within 100 km of the coast was included to investigate the impact of high biophysical exposure to coastal risks on adaptation. Data were available from the Centre for International Earth Sciences Information Network for all countries. Coastal exposure (% population, within 100 km of the coast) Information & skills Technology Economic resources Population Population density GDP GDP per capita Internet users (per 100 people) Mobile cellular subscriptions (per 100 people) Public perception of climate change risks Public awareness of climate change Literacy rate Public expenditure on education as % GDP Environmental Sustainability Index: Treaty Component (72) Good governance (Corruption Perceptions Index) Institutions Civil liberties Political rights Government effectiveness Voice and accountability Political stability Referenc e Year 19902008 2000 Population was tested to determine whether a statistically significant relationship is found between country size and adaptation. This is based on previous research 15,16 on primarily high-income countries indicating that large countries are more likely to be high adaptors. Data were available for all countries (except the Cook Islands) from the World Bank World Development Indicators. Density based on people per sq km of land area. GDP and GDP/capita were selected to measure whether there is a statistically significant relationship between total country income or per capita income and measured adaptation. Economic growth may affect adaptation through sensitivity to risk and adaptive capacity, impacting countries abilities to absorb climate stress30, and has been associated with adaptation in Annex-I nations15. Data were available for all countries (except the Cook Islands) from the World Bank World Development Indicators. Selected as a systematically collected proxy of technological capacity and infrastructure within a country. Internet use reflects the extent of social networks and access to information. Data were available for 114 countries from the World Bank. Subscriptions per 100 people. Selected as a systematically collected proxy of technological capacity and infrastructure within a country. Mobile phone use reflects the extent of social networks and connectivity. Data were available for 114 countries from the World Bank. 2008 Used as a proxy for public attitudes on climate change to assess whether there is a relationship between perceived levels of risk from climate change and adaptation action at the national level. Data derived from a global survey about perceived personal threats from climate change. Individuals who responded positively that they knew a great deal or something about climate change (awareness) were asked whether they feel there is a very or somewhat serious personal threat from climate change (perception). Percentages are reported of individuals who answered positively. Data available for 85 countries, missing India, Small Island States, and some countries in Eastern Europe and Africa. HDI national literacy rate estimates (>15yrs). Included as a proxy of national educational attainment and opportunities. Education is hypothesized to reflect capacity for adaptation because of its relation to human capital. Data were available from all countries except the Cook Islands. Greater educational expenditure may imply greater commitment to education and development of human capital, facilitating adaptive capacity within a population. Data available for 85 countries, missing Small Island States, India, and some countries in Latin America, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Source: UNESCO The Environmental Sustainability Index creates a participation score ranging from 0 (no participation) to 1 (full participation), based on the level of participation in the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol, Vienna Convention and the accompanying environmental treaties. Points are allocated based on signature, accession, ratification without signature, ratification with signature, acceptance, approval, or succession. Previous research on primarily highincome countries15 found the ESI was statistically associated with adaptation outcomes in the health sector. Data were available for 99 countries. Source: Yale Centre for Environmental Law and Policy Data were available from the 2008 Corruption Perceptions Index from Transparency International. The CPI measures perceptions of corruption in the public sector. Used as a proxy measure of the quality of national institutional governance. Scores were available for all countries except Liechtenstein and range from 0 (highly corrupt) to 10 (no corruption). Data were available from 110 countries. An evaluation by Freedom House of the national progress on freedom of expression and belief, associational and organizational rights, rule of law, and personal autonomy and individual rights. Used as a proxy measure of the quality of national institutional governance. Scores range from 1 (most free) to 7 (least free). Data were available from all countries except the Cook Islands. An evaluation by Freedom House of political rights in a nation, based on electoral process, political pluralism and participation, and functioning of government. Scores range from 1 (high) to 7 (low). Used as a proxy measure of the quality of national institutional governance. Data were available from all countries except the Cook Islands. World bank assessment of government effectiveness based on the quality of public and civil services, the degree of independence from political pressures, the quality of policy formulation and implementation, and the credibility of government commitment policy commitments. Used as a proxy measure of the quality of national institutional governance. Scores range from ~-2.5 to +2.5 based on deviation from the average. Data were available from 113 countries. World Bank estimate of perceptions of the extent to which a country's citizens are able to participate in selecting their government, as well as freedom of expression, freedom of association, and a free media. Used as a proxy measure of the quality of national institutional governance. Scores range from ~-2.5 to +2.5 based on deviation from the average. Data were available from all countries except the Cook Islands. World Bank estimate of political stability based on perceptions of the likelihood that the government will be destabilized or overthrown by unconstitutional or violent means. Used as a proxy measure of the quality of 2007/200 8 2008 2008 2008 19992007 2008 2004 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2 Rule of law Environmental Performance Index (EPI) Equity Inequality (Gini) national institutional governance. Scores range from ~-2.5 to +2.5 based on deviation from the average. Data were available from all countries except the Cook Islands. World Bank estimate of the extent to which agents have confidence in and abide by the rules of society, including property rights, police, the courts, and crime. Used as a proxy measure of the quality of national institutional governance. Scores range from ~-2.5 to +2.5 based on deviation from the average. Data were available from all countries except the Cook Islands. The EPI reflects a country’s achievement towards its policy targets, and integrates policy measures using 25 indicators in 10 environmental policy categories. Previous research on primarily high-income countries15 found the EPI was statistically associated with adaptation outcomes in the health sector. EPI ranges from 1-100; with higher scores implying that nations have made more progress in meeting predefined targets. Source: Yale Centre for Environmental Law and Policy. Data available for 2010 for 108 countries, but reflect input data from earlier years. Measures the distribution of income among individuals within a country, ranging from 0 (complete equality) to 100 (complete inequality). We hypothesized that countries with higher equity would be better able to adapt to climate risks. Data were available from the HDI for 85 countries, and exclude a number of large countries in western and northern Europe (e.g. UK, France, Denmark), Japan, Australia, NZ, Small Island States, Saudi Arabia, and IAE. Variable excluded from multivariate analyses due to low sample size and no bivariate association with AII. 2008 2010 2008 3 SUPPLMENTAL MATERIALS B: CODEBOOK FOR ADAPTATION INITIATIVES INDEX (AII) As per Lesnikowski et al.(In press-b) DATA SOURCE The vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation chapter of the National Communications was selected as the data source for this project because to our knowledge it is the only standardized data source available for a large number of countries across high, medium, and low income countries. Because national governments self-report progress on treaty implementation to the FCCC Secretariat, the information presented about vulnerability response and adaptation is here considered representative of government priorities and commitments. Although these documents cannot be interpreted as complete inventories of adaptation in each country, they do indicate the nature and depth of adaptation efforts. Owing to the principal of common but differentiated responsibility enshrined in the FCCC, reporting obligations differ between Annex I and non-Annex I parties in terms of timeline and content. The following text summarizes the reporting guidelines for Annex I parties concerning vulnerability assessment, impacts, and adaptation: A national communication shall include information on the expected impacts of climate change and a outline of the action taken to implement Article 4.1(b) and (e) with regard to adaptation. Parties are encouraged to use the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Technical Guidelines for Assessing Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Handbook on Methods for Climate Change Impacts Assessment and Adaptation Strategies. Parties may refer, inter alia, to integrated plans for coastal zone management, water resources and agriculture. Parties may also report on specific results of scientific research in the field of vulnerability assessment and adaptation. Annex I parties submit National Communications at the discretion of the COP every 4-5 years; the most recent NC was the fifth report, submitted by 1 January 2010. All Annex I reports are then subject to an in-depth review that assesses the parties progress on implementation of its treaty commitments. Non-Annex I parties submit their first NC within three years of the entry into force of the convention for that party, or as financial resources become available. The Global Environmental Facility functions as a financial support body for non-Annex I parties working toward submitting their National Communications. COP11 (2005) set a timeline for the submission of the second, and in some cases of some countries the third, communication. The following text summarizes the reporting guidelines for non-Annex I parties: 30. Non-Annex I Parties may use appropriate methodologies and guidelines they consider better able to reflect their national situation for assessing their vulnerability and adaptation to climate change, provided that these methodologies and guidelines are consistent, transparent and well documented. 31. Non-Annex I Parties are encouraged to use, for the evaluation of adaptation strategies and measures, appropriate methodologies they consider better able to reflect their national situation, provided that these methodologies are consistent, transparent and well documented. 32. Non-Annex I Parties are encouraged to provide information on the scope of their vulnerability and adaptation assessment, including identification of vulnerable areas that are most critical. 33. Non-Annex I Parties are encouraged to include a description of approaches, methodologies and tools used, including scenarios for the assessment of impacts of, and vulnerability and adaptation to, climate change, as well as any uncertainties inherent in these methodologies. 34. Non-Annex I Parties are encouraged to provide information on their vulnerability to the impacts of, and their adaptation to, climate change in key vulnerable areas. Information should include key findings, and direct and indirect effects arising from climate change, allowing for an integrated analysis of the country’s vulnerability to climate change. 4 35. Non-Annex I Parties are encouraged to provide information on and, to the extent possible, an evaluation of, strategies and measures for adapting to climate change, in key areas, including those which are of the highest priority. 36. Where relevant, Parties may report on the use of policy frameworks, such as national adaptation programmes, plans and policies for developing and implementing adaptation strategies and measures. Only countries that submitted National Communications between 2008 and July 1 2012 have been included in the sample. The most recent Annex I NC (the fifth) was submitted over a period of two years between 2008 and 2009; non-Annex I countries were selected to fit this time frame. Only the chapter on vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation will be used, unless the reader is specifically directed to adaptation-relevant information in other chapters. SAMPLE The follow 117 countries are included in this analysis: Albania, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, *Australia, *Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, *Belarus, *Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, *Bulgaria, Burundi, *Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, *Croatia, *Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, *Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, *Estonia, *Finland, *France, Gabon, Georgia, *Germany, Ghana, *Greece, Guinea Bissau, *Hungary, *Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, *Ireland, Israel, *Italy, Jamaica, *Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, *Latvia, *Lebanon, *Liechtenstein, *Lithuania, *Luxembourg, Macedonia, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova,*Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Namibia, *Netherlands, *New Zealand, Niger, *Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, *Poland , *Portugal, Qatar, *Romania, *Russia, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, *Slovakia, *Slovenia, South Africa, *Spain, Swaziland, *Sweden, *Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Tonga, Turkmenistan, *Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, *United Kingdom, *United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vietnam. *Annex I group DATA ORGANIZATION AND ANALYSIS Data collected from the NC will be contained in a Microsoft Access database. Discrete forms will organize data by individual action according to: i) country, ii) communication number, iii) reporting year, iv) entry title, v) vulnerability, vi) level(s) of action, vii) type(s) of action. The result of this is a database in which a discrete entry (meaning a discrete row) constitutes a discrete action. In other words, 50 rows indicate 50 actions on climate change. A single action (or row) may thus constitute more than one type of action, or address more than one kind of vulnerability. In the case of some countries, the report might discuss at length (for example) the findings of a single assessment. Regardless of how much detail is provided, however, this would be entered into the database as a single action. The benefit of this approach is that the range of vulnerabilities and kinds of action being addressed and implemented will be documented. The drawback is that action entries will not capture how much emphasis is being taken on particular kind of risk; a single entry may capture three vulnerabilities, but will not be able to identify which vulnerability (or vulnerabilities) is considered particularly critical. CODEBOOK: Inclusion criteria To qualify for inclusion in the dataset, information must meet three criteria. 1. Relevancy: Actions must be concerned with impacts of climatic changes, not impacts of general climate processes (including carbon sequestration or release) or weather, introductory or background statements, 5 methodological descriptions, or sectoral trends. The FCCC defines climate change as “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.” This differs from the IPCC definition of climate change, which “refers to any change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity.” For this purposes of this study, the FCCC definition will be used. Actions must be concerned with adapting to climate change, not mitigating future climate change (i.e. emissions reduction). This study uses the IPCC definition of adaptation, “actual adjustments, or changes in decision environments, which might ultimately enhance resilience or reduce vulnerability observed or expected changes in climate.” Actions can be concerned with the effect of climate change on any type of system (human, marine, terrestrial, or riparian) and any type of vulnerability associated with a changing climate. Both positive and negative impacts of climate change will be included in the dataset. Where climate change is not specifically identified as a component of risk, only include the action if it can be reasonably inferred that climate change is taken into account. Exclude general monitoring of temperature, precipitation, extreme events, etc unless climate change is a clearly related. 2. Minimum level of information: Information in the NC must allow the coder to identify the Level of Action at which the initiative is occurring (groundwork, adaptation), and the Type of Action that the initiative constitutes (climate change scenario, impact / vulnerability assessment, adaptation research, stakeholder networking, conceptual tool, policy recommendation, legislation, departmental development, public awareness / outreach, surveillance / monitoring, infrastructure development / technology, resource transfer / financial mechanism). All other indicators can be marked indeterminate or none if the information is unclear or not provided, but the action must be classified according to level and type to be included in the dataset. Note: Actions discussed in more than one part of the report should only be entered once. Be careful not to double enter information on the same actions. Note: Policy recommendations are frequently embedded within descriptions of other actions, particularly impaction or vulnerability assessments or adaptation research. Pay close attention to where recommendations are made and enter them separately. 3. Country involvement: Actions must be conducted either exclusively through the reporting country, or in cooperation with the reporting country. Include actions that are specific to certain regions (e.g. southern Africa, central Europe). Exclude descriptions of biomes (e.g. alpine) as they can apply in many regions around the world. Identification of initiatives carried out by other countries will be excluded. In the case of initiatives implemented by non-government actors, the action must be conducted within the reporting country. General discusses about global climate change (e.g. global temperature change) should be excluded. References to previous National Communications should be excluded. 6 Peer reviewed / grey literature should be included in the database only if the content of the document is specifically about that country. If necessary, check article titles in the NC references. If references are not clearly related to climate change studies then exclude them. General articles about climate change impacts or adaptation should be eliminated as background information. CODEBOOK: Note on titling entries Entries should be consistently titled so that the name of the initiative is clear. The name of the initiative may include the name of a program, study, document, regulation, project, conference , tool etc. In cases where there is no clear initiative title, the type of action and /or vulnerability and / or sector can be substituted for the name of the program (e.g.: Infrastructure development and technology: Floods; Impact and vulnerability assessment: Food safety and security). When entering policy recommendations, use the following format: Policy recommendation: Type of action recommended In the case of peer reviewed or grey literature, the name of the document can be used in the name of the entry (e.g. Climate change impacts on water quality in Egypt); if title is unavailable then the author’s names can be used instead. In many cases, the sections concerning impacts and vulnerability discuss risk factors without citing external sources. Sometimes this is because the only impact and vulnerability assessment reported by a country is an assessment conducted for the purpose of submitting the National Communication. It may also be difficult to identify which source information was obtained from if it is discussed multiple times and / or consistent referencing is not followed. In cases where it is not evident where the information was obtained from, create a single entry for the National Communicated itself and include all miscellaneous information therein. Select all relevant options for each indicator. This will ensure that the information is captured in the results analysis. Use the following format for the entry title: First / second / third / fourth / fifth National Communication: Country name CODEBOOK: Indicators Indicators 1 to 4 are intended to provide basic information on the reporting timeline and Annex I and II participation. Only on option will be selected per indicator. In cases where a communication was submitted in one year and updated in another (e.g. submitted 2008, updated or edited 2010), select the most recent (updated) year (e.g. 2010). A text box will be provided under Indicator 4 (Entry title) where all text from the National Communication used to code the action should be copied and pasted. 1. Country Open field 2. One Communication Two number Three Four Five 3. Reporting year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 4. Entry title Open field (+ text box) Indicator 5 addresses the question “what are we adapting to.” The options listed under this indicator are derived from the description of vulnerabilities summarized by the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change 7 in the Fourth Assessment Report. The vulnerabilities capture six broad categories of impacts: biodiversity, hydrological systems, agriculture, coastal settlements, health, and economy. They include both human and natural systems, and each can impact different sectors in varying ways. For example, drought may affect the agricultural sector in terms of crop productivity, but can also impact human health in terms of public safety and transmission of water-borne illness. Vulnerabilities can be inter-connected; for example, precipitation alone can affect agricultural productivity, or it can affect agricultural productivity through changing patterns of flooding, drought, or run-off. This indicator is not mutually exclusive. In cases where multiple vulnerabilities are addressed through one groundwork or adaptation action, select all relevant vulnerabilities. This will ensure that a single row corresponds to a discrete action (e.g. 100 rows indicates 100 actions). 5. Vulnerability Not mutually exclusive Sea level rise Frozen ground Rainfall Runoff Water quality and quantity Floods Drought Storms Wildfires Erosion / land slides Desertification Food quality and Coastal inundation, saline intrusion. Not defined as a single, extreme event (e.g. flooding or storms), but rather a creeping effect of climate change along coastal areas Changes in snow cover and / or permafrost, glacial retreat. Increase in daily precipitation. Can be linked to flooding, drought, water safety and security. NOT precipitation measured in climate change scenarios. Level of moisture not absorbed by vegetation. Can be linked to food safety and security. Affected by changes in precipitation / drought / extreme weather (e.g. floods). Increase of contamination in drinking and recreational water supply. Including salt water inundation of fresh water sources, irrigation for crops, and water management. Caused by heavy rains, sea level rise. Public safety hazard, increases risk of water-borne contamination and infrastructure damage, population displacement. Caused by decrease in precipitation / land-use changes. Decrease in food security and water security. More frequent and violent thunderstorms, winter storms, tropical storms (hurricanes, cyclones), high winds, and storm surges. Public safety hazard, population displacement. Caused by elevated heat and dry conditions. Public safety hazard, air quality, population displacement. Mudslides, avalanches, rock slides, debris flows. Public safety hazard, population displacement. Land degradation in arid, semi-arid, or dry areas. Affected by changes in precipitation /drought. 8 quantity Increase in food-borne contamination, decrease in food availability. Includes crops, livestock / animal husbandry, and fisheries. Infectious disease Changes in transmission patterns of rodent and vector-borne diseases. Air quality Air pollution, including higher levels of ground-level ozone, airborne dust, particulates, increased production of pollens and spores by plants. Eye, nose, throat irritation; exacerbated asthma or allergy symptoms; chronic pulmonary disease or respiratory conditions; increased risk of certain cancers. Extreme heat More frequent and severe heat waves. Heatrelated illness and deaths; respiratory and cardiovascular disorders. Extreme cold More frequent and severe cold conditions. Hypothermia and cold-related deaths; respiratory and cardiovascular disorders. Mental health Psychological impacts resulting from climate change stress. Human health (general) Physical health and well-being affected by climatic changes. Includes respiratory disease. Marine ecosystem health Loss of species, migration, spread of pests and wildlife disease in salt water bodies. Including coral bleaching and ocean acidification, sea surface temperatures, sea-ice biomes, and changes in oceanic currents. Freshwater ecosystem Loss of species, migration, spread of pests and health disease, hydrological systems, and river shifting. Terrestrial ecosystem Loss of species, migration, spread of pests and health disease. Including forest system health, wetlands, bogs, peatlands, NPP (not carbon sequestration), and general terms like biodiversity. Economic Loss of profitability or viability, or increased costs in private sectors due to climatic change. Includes insurance, tourism, agriculture, forestry, etc. Electricity / Loss of power and / or communication due to telecommunications extreme weather. Displacement / conflict Mass population displacement, violence resulting from resource scarcity or population movement Traditional lifestyles Loss of cultural traditions, methods of acquiring and using natural resources Other (Description field) Vulnerabilities not captured among the options above. Includes general references to “extreme weather events” and “climate change” in cases 9 Indeterminate where vulnerabilities are not specified. Includes UV radiation. Program described, vulnerability(ies) addressed not specified. Variable 6 address the question “how are we adapting.” It distinguishes actions by two levels: groundwork and adaptation. These levels were developed for this systematic analysis to define a difference between scoping and preparatory actions, and full adaptation responses. The adaptation category draws on the IPCC definition of adaptation as “actual adjustments, or changes in decision environments, which might ultimately enhance resilience or reduce vulnerability observed or expected changes in climate.” This analysis goes beyond this definition, however to separate actions that have a tangible impact on government services and community functioning (adaptation), and actions that establish the knowledge base and decision-making structures to design and implement adaptation (groundwork). The categories are not mutually exclusive in the sense that a single action can constitute both groundwork and adaptation (e.g. a government program has an adaptation research department as well as a public awareness department). This will ensure that a single row corresponds to a discrete action (e.g. 100 rows indicates 100 actions). Example: National Climate Change Program, country Z Research program on developing heat response systems, information campaigns through TV advertising o Level of Action: Groundwork; Adaptation 6. Level(s) of Action Not mutually exclusive Groundwork Steps taken to prepare for and inform adaptation responses. Includes climate / impact and vulnerability / adaptation research, stakeholder organization and decision-making, determination of goals and priorities, and recommendations for action. Adaptation Steps taken to increase resilience of communities to vulnerabilities associated with climate change. Tangibly alters the delivery of government services. Includes legislation action, departmental organization, awareness programs, monitoring systems, public and private infrastructure, financial or technical support, and performance reviews assessing adaptation effectiveness. Variable 7 addresses the question “how are we adapting.” It lists types of groundwork and adaptation actions that constitute responses to vulnerability. The separation between groundwork and adaptation action is similar to the distinction made in Tompkins et al 2010 between “building adaptive capacity” and “implementation actions,” but to our knowledge previous adaptation analyses have not created specific categories of steps necessary to prepare for and inform adaptation and the tangible initiatives that actually increase human resilience. The typology of groundwork action (climate change scenarios, impact / vulnerability assessments, adaptation research, stakeholder networking, conceptual tools, and policy recommendations) was developed based on the type of actions reported in the National Communications. The range of preparatory actions discussed in the NC have been organized into these six categories and tested against three NC (Jordan, Bhutan, and Australia) to ensure that the options capture all kinds of actions discussed. 10 The adaptation component of this indicator encompasses categories of adaptation types identified in the IPCC AR4 (physical, technological, investment, regulatory, market- market actions are excluded given that the focus of this analysis is on public-driven adaptation) and is based on the typology of possible adaptation measures to manage health risks summarized in the Canadian Assessment of Vulnerabilities and Adaptive Capacity. This typology was amended to fit adaptations outside the health sector as well. The category “medical interventions” has been replaced with financial support and resource /information transfers, and department development has been added to reflect the kinds of responses reported in the NC. Categories are not mutually exclusive; select as many types of action as describes a single response described in the report. This will ensure that a single row corresponds to a discrete action (e.g. 100 rows indicates 100 actions). Example: National Climate Change Program, country Research program on developing heat response systems, information campaigns through TV advertising o Level of Action: Groundwork; Adaptation o Type of Action: Adaptation research; Public awareness / outreach Because policy recommendations can vary considerably in terms of specificity and frequently are repeated several times with slight modifications or overlap with other sectors, only one entry per type of action recommended should be entered for each country. For example, Germany may recommend various infrastructure developments throughout the NC to deal with flood management or extreme storms. Only one entry for infrastructure should be made however, with all relevant vulnerabilities and sectors selected. This will avoid the repeated addition of identical or similar entries for policy recommendations. Germany’s list of policy recommendations would appear like this in the database: Groundwork: Policy Recommendation: Infrastructure development / technology o Vulnerabilities: floods, storms o Sectors: emergency management, spatial planning Groundwork: Policy Recommendation: Regulation o Vulnerabilities: heat, floods, disease, fires, water o Sectors: health, spatial planning, forestry, water Groundwork: Policy Recommendation: Conceptual tool o Vulnerabilities: Sea-level rise, heat, drought, terrestrial ecosystems o Sectors: Spatial planning, environment, health, agriculture This approach is not intended to provide a detailed list of individual policy recommendations; this would be impossible since often they are reiterated throughout reports with varying levels of detail. Instead it will allow us to look at gaps in adaptation action and see if countries have at least progressed on recommending action to close those gaps. 7. Type(s) of Groundwork Climate Change Predictions based on global or regional level action Scenario climate models and emissions scenarios on Action Not mutually global or regional climatic change. exclusive Typically expressed as change in air temperature and precipitation. Impact / Study of vulnerabilities and / or response Vulnerability capacity within national or local context. Assessment May also include adaptation research. Includes scenarios or modeling programs created to inform adaptation. May include research about climate change indicators. 11 Adaptation Research Adaptation level action Study of response options based on vulnerability context. May include impact /vulnerability assessments. Includes R&D for adaptation. Conceptual Tool Modeling programs or tools (including data sets, tools created for other purposes but applied to adaptation studies), databases of information, strategic guidelines, plans, frameworks, policy documents that guide adaptation policy. Not legally binding- sets goals, objectives, and priorities. Including vague statements and concepts (e.g. flood risk management, drought strategy). Stakeholder Networking, information sharing, idea Networking sharing among decision-makers, researchers, civil society, and / or the public. Includes meetings, workshops, and conferences. Policy Actions described by report authors as Recommendations something that “should be done.” (from the NC) Recommendations are not connected with a policy document and no indication is given that these recommendations have been implemented. Note the type of action that the recommendation is addressing in the title of the entry. E.g.: Groundwork: Policy Recommendation: Infrastructure development and technology. Organizational Creation of government agencies, Development departments, working groups, or ministries with mandates that address climate change issues. Includes increasing capacity of existing groups to address climate change. Implies allocation of government funding. Regulation Binding regulations, rules, guidelines, laws, or statutes. Passed through legislative bodies or executive powers. Includes regulations on operating procedures for agriculture, public utilities, health care, etc. Includes modification of existing regulations. Public Awareness General information campaigns to educate / Outreach communities about the impacts of climate change and sources of particular community vulnerability. Also includes early warning systems that inform communities of extreme events and provide information on proper individual 12 Surveillance / Monitoring Infrastructure / Technology / Innovation Resource Transfer / Financial Mechanisms Review or household response. E.g. heat wave warning systems, storm warning systems. These warning systems may (and probably will) include surveillance and monitoring systems that inform authorities about when the public should be notified about elevated risk (e.g. weather stations that monitor and predict temperatures, used in heat warning systems). Systems for registering vulnerable populations and tracking weather patterns. Monitoring systems may be used in conjunction with public awareness and outreach programs to notify the public when elevated risks are detected (e.g. heat watch warning systems). Building and construction, infrastructure projects (e.g. roads, airports, railways), public works maintenance (e.g. sewage systems, water treatment), crop technology (e.g. seed varieties, irrigation projects), and conservation. Funding for autonomous adaptation and research, actions at other jurisdiction levels (e.g. local initiatives), technology / information transfers (including support for domestic autonomous adaptation and international development / aid). Not just a description of how much money the government spends. Evaluation of how well integrated climate change perspectives are in existing programs, measure, etc. Makes recommendations for how climate change can be better mainstreamed. Other (Description field) N/A Further Description of Variable 5 The categories available in variable 5 were developed based on the findings of Working Group 2 of the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. The IPCC organizes its discussion of impacts and vulnerabilities by sector and by region. The summary tables provided below reflect this approach. The tables present information provided in two boxes within the Technical Summary, individually identifying future impacts and vulnerabilities. The first box identifies impacts and vulnerabilities by sector, and the second box identifies impacts and vulnerabilities by region. The grey column in each table indicates how the impacts and vulnerabilities identified by the IPCC are coded in variable 5. 13 Note: Mental health is not distinguished from general human health in the IPCC vulnerability summary, but is specifically addressed frequently enough in the National Communications to warrant its own category. Box TS.5 Main projected impacts for systems and sectors. Taken from Fourth Assessment Report, Technical Summary. Grey indicates vulnerability categories used in the database. IPCC: System, sector Freshwater resources and their management Ecosystems IPCC: Description of vulnerability Decrease in water volumes in glaciers and snow cover, reduced water availability Increase in runoff and water availability in higher latitudes, decrease in mid-latitudes and dry tropics Increase in drought areas, increase in precipitation and flood risks Categories of vulnerabilities Frozen ground Water quality / quantity Runoff Water quality / quantity Drought Rainfall Floods Increased flood hazards in river basins Floods Decrease in water resources in semi-arid areas Water quality / quantity Increase in people living in water stressed river Water quality / quantity basins Sea level rise increasing salinisation of Sea level rise groundwater and estuaries, decrease in fresh Water quality / quantity water availability Decreased groundwater recharge in water Water quality / quantity stressed areas Higher water temperatures, increased Water quality / quantity precipitation, and longer periods of low flows Rainfall will increase water pollution Uncertain quantity projections of precipitation, Water quality / quantity river flows, and water levels Rainfall Compromised functioning of water Water quality / quantity infrastructure / water management Negative impacts on freshwater systems Water quality / quantity outweigh benefits Changing runoff patterns, affected by increase Runoff precipitation variability and shifting water Rainfall supply / quality and flood risks Water quality / quantity Ecological impacts, species extinction, and Terrestrial ecosystem major biome changes in: tundra, boreal forest, health mountain and Mediterranean-type ecosystems, Marine ecosystem health mangroves, salt marshes, coral reefs, sea-ice Freshwater ecosystem biomes. health Initial positive impacts in NPP in savannas and Fire species-poor deserts, contingent on sustained Extreme events (Other) CO2 fertilization and only moderate change in Drought fire and extreme events (drought) CO2 excluded (as component of climate 14 NPP increases in high latitudes (migration of woody plants), NPP decline in lower latitudes (ocean, land) Carbon sequestration by taiga expansion may be offset by albedo changes, wildfire, forest loss, methane losses Tropical sequestration dependant on land-use change, likely dominated by cc by 2100 in drier regions Amazon forests, China’s taiga, Siberian/Canadian tundra changing, tropical forests may experience severe biodiversity loss Low-productivity zones in sub-tropical oceans like to expand, productive polar sea-ice biomes likely to contract Polar species dependent on sea-ice biome likely to experience habitat degradation and losses Loss of coral to bleaching Accelerated release of carbon from carbon stocks (peatlands, tundra, permafrost, soil) Food, fibre and forest products Intensification / expansion of wildfires Greater rainfall variability likely to affect inland / coastal wetland species Surface ocean pH likely to decrease, impairing shell/exoskeleton formation Increase cereal crop / pasture yields in mid and high-latitudes, decreased yields in seasonally dry and tropical regions Increased in people at risk of hunger marginally Increased frequency / severity of extreme climate events, increased risk of fire, pests, disease outbreak Smallholder and subsistence farmers, pastoralists, artisanal fisherfolk at risk of localized impacts Global food production likely to increase to 3C, then likely to decrease Forestry production only likely to change moderately, production will shift to highlatitude regions Local extinction of particular fish species Food and forestry trade projected to increase, system, not an impact) Terrestrial ecosystem health Marine ecosystem health Excluded (as components of climate system, not impacts) Excluded (as components of climate system, not impacts) Terrestrial ecosystem health Marine ecosystem health Marine ecosystem health Marine ecosystem health Excluded (as components of climate system, not impacts) Fires Freshwater ecosystem health Marine ecosystem health Food quality / quantity Food quality / quantity Food quality / quantity Fires Food quality / quantity Food quality / quantity Food quality / quantity Food quality / quantity Marine ecosystem health Freshwater ecosystem health Food quality / quantity 15 greater dependence on food-import in developing countries Lower response rate of forests to elevated CO2 Coastal systems and low-lying areas Industry, settlement and society Health Increased coastal exposure to cc and sea level rise Increased coral bleaching and mortality, harm to mangroves and salt marshes due to sea level rise Increase sea surface temperatures (SST) resulting in more coral bleaching and mortality Loss of coastal wetlands, salt marshes, and mangroves to sea level rise Increased ocean acidification Greater risks of coastal flooding due to sea level rise and increased storm activity Potential impact can be reduced by adaptation Key human vulnerabilities in low-lying coastal systems (deltas, coastal urban areas, small islands) Greatest increase in vulnerability likely to be in the South, South-East, East-Asia, urbanized coastal locations, small-island regions Committed to some degree of sea level rise beyond 2100 because of inertia in the system Benefits / costs vary widely by location and scale Vulnerability greater in coastal / riverine areas, and areas with economies closely linked to climate-sensitive resources Economic impacts will rise with increased extreme weather activity Poor communities and households particularly vulnerable due to limited resource access Economic costs of extreme weather require effective economic and financial risk management Likely to increase equity concerns and pressure on government capacity Urban water systems vulnerability to sea level rise and reduced water availability Increased food insecurity leading to malnutrition, hunger Coastal flooding resulting in larger mortality Increase in heat-related mortality Changing risks patterns of malaria Excluded (as component of climate system, not impacts) Sea level rise Marine ecosystem health Sea level rise Marine ecosystem health Sea level rise Marine ecosystem health Marine ecosystem health Floods Sea level rise Storms No impact No impact No impact Sea level rise No impact No impact (sector description) Economic Extreme weather events (Other) No impact (vulnerable groups description) Economic No impact Sea level rise Water quality / quantity Food quality / quantity Floods Extreme heat Infectious disease 16 Northward expansion of certain vector-borne disease (e.g lyme disease, tick-borne encephalitis) Increase in burden of diarrhoeal disease Increase in ozone-related mortality / cardiovascular disease mortality with increases in air pollution concentrations Increased risk of dengue Reduction in cold-related deaths greater than increase in heat-related deaths Infectious disease Food quality / quantity Water quality / quantity Air quality Infectious disease Extreme cold Extreme heat Box TS.6 The main projected impacts for regions. Taken from Fourth Assessment Report, Technical Summary. Grey indicates vulnerability categories used in the database. IPCC: IPCC: Description of vulnerability Categories of vulnerabilities Region Africa Stresses likely to be greatest where they coFood quality / quantity occur with multiple stresses (e.g. poor access to (Health a sector in this case) resources, food insecurity, poor health systems) Increase in arid and semi-arid land Desertification Declining agricultural yields due to drought and Food quality / quantity land degradation, especially in marginal areas Drought (mixed rain-fed, semi-arid systems) Desertification Water stress, runoff increase in East Africa Water quality / quantity (possibly floods), decrease in runoff and drought Runoff in other areas Floods Drought Changes in freshwater NPP affecting food Food quality / quantity supplies, possible reduction in fish yields Species migration, range changes, extinction Terrestrial ecosystem health Degradation of mangroves and coral reefs Marine ecosystem health Sea level rise affecting coastal communities Sea level rise Asia Loss of mangroves to sea level rise, loss of Sea level rise cultivated land to salt marshes Increased risk of flooding in coastal and Floods megadelta regions Tibetan Plateau glacier disappearance Frozen ground Decay of Himalayan glaciers Frozen ground Loss of Asian coral reefs Marine ecosystem health Increase in population affected by water stress Water quality / quantity Availability of freshwater in India will drop, Water quality / quantity increased rain and flash floods resulting in greater proportion of runoff and reduced proportion of groundwater access Risk of hunger high as crop yields increase in Food quality / quantity East and South-East Asia but decrease in Central and South Asia Increased demand for agricultural irrigation in Food quality / quantity (water 17 Australia, New Zealand Europe arid and semi-arid regions Increased frequency of forest fires in northern Asia Most vulnerable sectors are natural ecosystems, water security, coastal communities Altered ecosystems (invasive species, habitat loss, ecosystem damage): Great Barrier Reef, rain forests, alpine areas Increase water security problems, decline in runoff and river flows in Murray Darling Basin Coastal development at risk from sea level rise and storms Increased wildfires risk Risks to infrastructure from extreme weather events (frequently exceeded design criteria) Increased energy demand in summer, risk of black-outs due to increased temperature Decline in agricultural and forestry production due to drought and fire; initial benefits in New Zealand due to increased precipitation Growth rates of economically important plantation crops expected to increase Increase in heat-related mortality for elderly individuals Increased risk of extreme winter precipitation in UK / northern Europe Increase in annual runoff in northern Europe, decrease in southern Europe Increase in river-basin area categorized as severely water-stressed Increase in people living in water-stressed watersheds Increase in number of people affected by coastal flooding Decline in hydropower potential, strong regional variability Vulnerability of European flora to extinction Increased crop production in northern Europe, decreased production in southern Europe Increase in forested areas in northern Europe, decrease in southern Europe, changes in distribution of tree species increase in forest fire risk in southern Europe Amphibian and reptile species likely to expand range if dispersal range is unlimited Disappearance of small Alpine glaciers, reduced volume in large glaciers Changing summer tourism trends in the for agricultural production) Fires No impact Marine ecosystem health Terrestrial ecosystem health Water quality / quantity Runoff Sea level rise Storms Fires Extreme weather events (Other) Electricity Extreme heat Food quality / quantity Drought Fire Rainfall Economic Extreme heat Storms Runoff Water quality / quantity Water quality / quantity Floods Electricity Terrestrial ecosystem health Food quality / quantity Terrestrial ecosystem health Fires Terrestrial ecosystem health Frozen ground Economic 18 Mediterranean and north Unlikely shutdown of Meridional Overturning Circulation but would have huge impact on crops, cold-related death, winter transport, economic centers, population migration Latin America North America Disappearance of inter-tropical glaciers, reduced water availability and hydropower generation Reductions in rainfall leading to severe water shortages Increase in people suffering from inadequate water supplies Sea level rise and weather extremes like to affect low-lying areas, buildings and tourism, coastal morphology, mangroves, availability of drinking water Sea surface temperature increases harming coral reefs and fish stocks Decrease in soil water leading to replacement of tropical forest with savannas and semi-arid with arid vegetation Increased frequency and intensity of hurricanes in Caribbean Basin Rice yields expected to decline, soybean yields likely to increase Number of additional people at risk of hunger likely to increase Cattle productivity likely to decline Adaptation initiatives being implemented in fisheries and agricultural sectors, early warning flood systems being set up New institute to mitigate / prevent impacts from natural hazards Increased destructiveness of coastal storms and storm surges will increases losses associated with sea level rise Sea level rise and tidal surges / flooding will affect of coastal infrastructure and transportation Severe heatwaves will increase in magnitude in cities where they already occur Daily average ozone levels projected to increase in eastern US, especially in most polluted cities Decreases in snow pack in western mountains, increase in snow melt, winter rain events, flooding Increased demand for water, decrease in water supplies Marine ecosystem health Food quality / quantity Extreme cold Economic Migration / conflict Frozen ground Water quality / quantity Electricity Rainfall Water quality / quantity Water quality / quantity Sea level rise Marine ecosystem health Water quality / quantity Marine ecosystem health Desertification Storms Food quality / quantity Food quality / quantity Food quality / quantity Food quality / quantity Floods Extreme weather events (Other) Storms Sea level rise Sea level rise Storms Floods Extreme heat Air quality Frozen ground Rainfall Floods Water quality / quantity 19 Increased forest production, but greater sensitivity to drought, storms, insects Polar Regions Increased aggregate crop yields, but big regional variation Impacts on forest through pests, diseases, and fire Increased coastal wetlands loss due to sea level rise, decrease in salt-marsh biodiversity Impacts of climate change likely to be worst for specific groups / regions like indigenous, the poor, elderly in cities, those dependent on narrow resource bases Need to invest in adaptation based on projected future conditions, not past experience Reductions in sea-ice extent, near complete loss of summer sea ice Reduced thickness / extent of Arctic glaciers and ice caps, Greenland ice sheet, Antarctica Peninsula glaciers and ice sheet Decrease in northern permafrost Increase in coastal erosion, changes to groundwater drainage systems and ecosystem disruption due to permafrost melting Spread of forest and tundra, loss of tundra and polar desert Decrease in habitat for migratory birds and mammals (seals, polar bears), changes in species abundance and distribution Encroachment of alien species Reductions in lake and river ice cover, affecting under-ice habitations, ice-jamming / flooding Freshwater warming leading to reductions in fish stocks, productivity / distribution of aquatic species Impacts on infrastructure and traditional indigenous ways of life Increase in agricultural and forestry productivity, some benefits and disadvantages to traditional ways of life Increase in large-scale forest fires and insect outbreaks Reduced winter mortality, cardiovascular / respiratory deaths Increased wildlife vulnerability to pests and diseases like tick-borne encephalitis Increase in frequency / severity of Arctic flooding, erosion, drought, permafrost destruction, public health, water supply, Terrestrial ecosystem health Drought Storms Food quality / quantity Terrestrial ecosystem health Fire Sea level rise Marine ecosystem health No impact No impact Frozen ground Terrestrial ecosystems Frozen ground Frozen ground Terrestrial ecosystem health Erosion Frozen ground Terrestrial ecosystem health Terrestrial ecosystem health Marine ecosystem health Terrestrial ecosystem health Terrestrial ecosystem health Freshwater ecosystem health Traditional lifestyles Traditional lifestyles Fires Terrestrial ecosystem health Extreme cold Infectious disease Floods Erosion Drought 20 infrastructure Small Islands Changes in frequency /type/timing of precipitation increasing contaminant loading in freshwater systems Adaptation already occurring through resource and wildlife management schemes / behavior Sea level rise and increase sea surface temperature will accelerate erosion and harm mangroves and coral reef. Will also have an effect on desirability as tourist destinations Port facilities likely to face damage and flooding due to sea level rise and cyclone intensity Coastal airports likely to be at risk of inundation, flooding, and damage from erosion Arctic islands face accelerated erosion due to permafrost warming and loss of ground ice Reduction in rainfall likely to reduce size of freshwater lens Increase agricultural economic costs Invasion of alien species likely to occur in mid and high latitude islands causing losses to biodiversity Increase in disease outbreaks due to vectors and increasing temperature / decreasing water availability, as economically harmful Negative effect on tourism sector, need for desalinization treatments to offset water shortages Adaptation options likely to be limited and very costly Adaptation can also be achieved with co-benefits for sustainable development Health Water quality / quantity Rainfall Freshwater ecosystem health No impact Sea level rise Marine ecosystem health Erosion Economic Sea level rise Floods Storms Sea level rise Floods Erosion Erosion Frozen ground Water quality / quantity Economic Terrestrial ecosystem health Marine ecosystem health Infectious disease Water quality / quantity Economic Economic Water quality / quantity No impact No impact 21 SUPPLIMENTAL MATERIALS C: ADAPTIVE CAPACITY PREDICTOR VARIABLES — CODEBOOK AND SELECTION Methods We identify variables theorized as predictors of adaptive capacity or adaptation. Variables were selected based on canvassing the literature on adaptive capacity and vulnerability. While our project examines adaptation actions, it is appropriate to examine literature on adaptive capacity and vulnerability. First, adaptive capacity is closely related to adaptation, as adaptive capacity represents potential adaptation (Adger et al., 2004). Second, vulnerability as defined by the IPCC includes exposure to climate threats, sensitivity to climate impacts, and adaptive capacity. The exposure and sensitivity components capture whether a country will have to actually adapt to climate change, and therefore influences adaptation outcomes. Finally, predictors of adaptive capacity and vulnerability are linked. The IPCC definition of vulnerability includes adaptive capacity; Brooks et al. (2005) subsumed the two categories in their analysis. We also briefly examined literature on barriers to translating adaptive capacity into adaptation outcomes (Burton et al., 2004a), which documents similar predictor variables. Variables were relatively saturated. A list of preliminary variables identified from the literature is summarized in Table 1. Table 1: Potential predictors of adaptive capacity and adaptation identified in the literature Variable Selected references (Burton et al., 2004b) Location/urbanisation o Rural population density (Gbetibouo et al., 2010) o Growth in urban pop’s (Adger and Vincent, 2005) o Pop migration (Burton et al., 2004b) o Rural population (Adger et al., 2004) (Lesnikowski et al., In press-a, Population size Yohe and Tol, 2002, Burton et al., 2004b) (Downing et al., 2001, Brooks et Resource pressure - population density al., 2005, Burton et al., 2004b) (Burton et al., 2004b) Age structure (Adger and Vincent, 2005), Dependency ratio (Downing et al., 2001) (Downing et al., 2001) Completed fertility1 (Burton et al., 2004b) Monetary policies o Market participation – free trade agreements (Burton et al., 2004b) o Access to markets (Bowen et al., 2012) o Market participation – extent of participation in domestic and (Burton et al., 2004b) international markets o Global interconnectivity – trade balance (Adger and Vincent, 2005) o Savings and investment, public and private investment (Burton et al., 2004b) o Savings and investment, household savings (Williamson et al., 2012, Burton et al., 2004b) o Savings and investment, genuine savings (van den Bergh, 2009) o Economic autonomy – debt repayments % GNI averaged over (Brooks et al., 2005) decade o Macroeconomic stability, access to capital, competitive markets, (Bowen et al., 2012) firm performance o o Risk spreading through insurance, trade, safety nets, and economic (Goklany, 2007) diversification (Lesnikowski et al., In press-a, State support for health and education 1 The number of children born per woman to a cohort of women by the end of their childbearing years. 22 o o % budget for social infrastructure (schools and hospitals)) Health expenditure per capita USD PPP o Public health expenditure % GDP o Education expenditure % GNP, % gov’t expenditure Marginalization o Rate of poverty and extreme poverty o Human Poverty Index Collective responsibility, underlying social welfare function – Inequality – Gini National wealth o GDP per capita – USD PPP o o o Size of economy – total GDP GNI total PPP Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW) o AKA Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) o Sustainable Net Benefit Index (SNBI) Other composites o Human Development Index (HDI) o Borda rankings Agriculture o Share of agric GDP (Gbetibouo) o Dependence on agriculture – agricultural employees % total pop, rural pop % total, agricultural employees % male pop, agricultural employees % female pop (Brooks) o Agricultural self-sufficiency – agricultural production index o Cereal yield (Goklany) / cereal production per capita o Animal protein consumption per capita Environmental quality (UNDP, Engle and Lemos2) o o Extent of natural resources o o o o Expansion/abandonment of agricultural lands, soil degradation or desertification Land degradation index Protected land area % Forest change rate %/year o % forest cover o o Unpopulated land area Land managed %, fertilizer consumption, SO2 emissions per land area Brooks et al., 2005, Burton et al., 2004b) (Burton et al., 2004b) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Goklany, 2007) (Adger and Vincent, 2005) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Adger and Vincent, 2005, Kelly and Adger, 2000, Burton et al., 2004b) (van den Bergh, 2009) (Yohe and Tol, 2002, Kelly and Adger, 2000) (Yohe and Tol, 2002, Goklany, 2007, Burton et al., 2004b) (Lesnikowski et al., In press-a) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Adger et al., 2004, van den Bergh, 2009) (Adger et al., 2004, van den Bergh, 2009) (van den Bergh, 2009) (Adger et al., 2004, van den Bergh, 2009) (van den Bergh, 2009) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Downing et al., 2001) (Downing et al., 2001) (Burton et al., 2004b, Bowen et al., 2012) (Burton et al., 2004b) (Gbetibouo et al., 2010) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Brooks et al., 2005, Burton et al., 2004b) (Burton et al., 2004b, Brooks et al., 2005) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Downing et al., 2001) 23 Water quality and quantity (UNDP) o Sustainability of water resources – groundwater recharge per capita, water resources per capita o Dependence on natural resources sensitive to water stress and water availability – % rural pop o Water Poverty Index (WPI) Other composites o Index of Human Insecurity, Environmental Vulnerability Index, Environmental Sustainability Index, Environmental Performance Index Institutions of global governance – environmental treaty participation Domestic envr governance – World Economic Forum Survey Commitment to GHG mitigation – Carbon emission reductions Governance o Political / civil liberties Influence on political process - Civil liberties, political rights Political freedom - Human Freedom Index & Political Freedom Index Freedom of expression Protection for minorities and minority viewpoints o Effectiveness Ability to deliver services – Government effectiveness Effectiveness of policies – control of corruption Global corruption index Perception of corruption Honest governments o Stability Conflict – internal refugees (1000s) scale by pop Willingness to invest in adaptation – political stability Willingness to invest in adaptation – rule of law (Brooks et al., 2005) (Adger and Vincent, 2005) (Adger et al., 2004) (Adger et al., 2004) (Lesnikowski et al., In press-a) (Lesnikowski et al., In press-a) (Lesnikowski et al., In press-a) (Yohe and Tol, 2002) (van den Bergh, 2009) (Engle and Lemos, 2010) (Goklany, 2007) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Adger and Vincent, 2005) (Lesnikowski et al., In press-a) (Goklany, 2007) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Brooks et al., 2005, Goklany, 2007) o Decision-making processes Participatory decision making – Voice and accountability Institutions Institutions to fairly enforce rules of trade Education – entitlement to information o Literacy rate o Proficiency levels on envr sci performance scale Access to information and knowledge o Familiarity with existing data on climate change, available data on climate change, climate change expertise o Communication and public awareness o Knowledge development, technical assistance, local research Social capital o Share of farmers in farm org’s – proxy for social networks o State-CSO relations Cognitive barriers (AR4): attitudes to risk (Brooks et al., 2005) (Tompkins and Adger, 2005, Gupta et al., 2010) (Goklany, 2007) (Burton et al., 2004b, Gbetibouo et al., 2010, Brooks et al., 2005) (Yohe and Tol, 2002) (Goklany, 2007) (Amundsen et al., 2010) (Burton et al., 2004b) (Burton et al., 2004b) (Gbetibouo et al., 2010, Williamson et al., 2012, Engle and Lemos, 2010) (Gbetibouo et al., 2010) (Engle and Lemos, 2010) (Tompkins and Adger, 2005) 24 o Individual risk perception o Public perception of cc risk Public values Health o General health – Life expectancy at birth o o Burden of ill health – disability adjusted life expectancy Infant mortality o o Removal of economically active pop – HIV prevalence % adults Population with access to sanitation o o Healthcare availability – Maternal mortality per 100,000 Access to safe water Commitment to rural comm’s – rural pop w/o access to safe water % o Food security General food availability– food production index (annual change averaged over certain years) Nutritional status – Calorific intake Access to nutrition – food price index (annual change averaged over certain years) Hunger – food supplies per capita Malnutrition Social networks and access to information –Internet users Technology o Fuel used by households (e.g., firewood) o Housing with electricity o Presence of modern farming methods Irrigation rate Telephones per 1000 pop Mobile cellular subscriptions (per 100 people) o Early warning systems Infrastructure o Roads Isolation of rural communities – roads (km, scaled by land area with 99% of pop) o Rail and air transport, electricity generation, communication, dams, buildings o Infrastructure index R&D o Commitment and resources for research – R&D investment % GNP o R&D expenditures o Capacity to undertake research and understand issues – scientists and engineers in R&D per million pop o Endogenous technological development Technology transfer Frequency of past events o (Engle and Lemos, 2010) (Lesnikowski et al., In press-a) (Burch, 2010) (Burton et al., 2004b, Gbetibouo et al., 2010) (Yohe and Tol, 2002, Goklany, 2007) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Burton et al., 2004b, Goklany, 2007) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Downing et al., 2001, Brooks et al., 2005, Goklany, 2007, Engle and Lemos, 2010) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Downing et al., 2001, Goklany, 2007, Engle and Lemos, 2010) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Burton et al., 2004b) (Burton et al., 2004b, Brooks et al., 2005) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Goklany, 2007) (Goklany, 2007) (Burton et al., 2004b) (Burton et al., 2004b) (Burton et al., 2004b) (Burton et al., 2004b, Gbetibouo et al., 2010) (Adger and Vincent, 2005) (Engle and Lemos, 2010) (Burton et al., 2004b) (Burton et al., 2004b) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Burton et al., 2004b, Engle and Lemos, 2010) (Gbetibouo et al., 2010) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Goklany, 2007) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Burton et al., 2004b) (Engle and Lemos, 2010) (Gbetibouo et al., 2010) 25 Coastal risk – km coastline (scale by land area with 99% of pop) Coastal risk – pop w/i 100km of coastline % o Flood prone pop Climate mortality risk - # people killed by climate-related disasters per decade as % of national pop Vulnerability to natural hazards o Number people killed by nat disasters 1990-2000 in each country, normalized with size of pop in 1995 (middle of decade) o Number people affected (not killed), normalized with pop o Material damage in USD, normalized with GDP Disasters Risk Index (Brooks et al., 2005) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Downing et al., 2001) (Brooks et al., 2005) (Yohe and Tol, 2002) (Yohe and Tol, 2002) (Yohe and Tol, 2002) (Yohe and Tol, 2002) (Adger et al., 2004) A long-list of 22 predictor variables was selected based on 1) depth of support in the literature, with emphasis on empirically analyzed variables, 2) appropriateness to national-level inference, and 3) availability of data. In selection, we were guided by the goal of comparing broad theoretical components of adaptive capacity based on Smit and Pilifosova (2003): Economic resources, Technology, Information & Skills, Social Infrastructure, Institutions, and Equity, summarized in Table 2. We also include a category for Exposure to reflect predominantly geographic and biophysical attributes affecting risk exposure. We thus aimed to identify variables reflecting these adaptation components that would be measurable and comparable at the national level. As such, we excluded composite vulnerability or development variables such as the Human Development Index (HDI) or the GAIN climate vulnerability index since these measures aggregate several conceptual processes and preclude comparison and consideration of the different determinants of adaptive capacity. Mitigation was excluded as related but not relevant to processes of adaptation. For multiple variables proxying similar processes, we selected the variables with the strongest theoretical or empirical plausible impact on adaptation. We were unable to identify plausible predictor variables reflecting social infrastructure that were appropriately measured at the national level. Social infrastructure processes are likely to occur at scales below the national-level or through mechanisms that are not well tracked using systematically standardized quantitative measures. The final long-list of 22 variables selected for preliminary analysis is listed in Table 3. Table 2: Categories or elements of adaptive capacity used to guide variable selection and analysis Description from Smit and Pilifosova (2003) Elements of adaptive capacity Economic It is widely accepted that wealthy nations are better prepared to bear the costs of adaptation resources to climate change impacts and risks than poorer nations, through economic assets, capital resources, and financial wealth. It is also recognized that poverty is directly related to vulnerability. Although poverty should not be considered synonymous with vulnerability, it is an indicator of the ability to cope. Technology Lack of technology has the potential to seriously impede a nation's ability to implement adaptation options by limiting the range of possible responses. Many of the adaptive strategies identified as possible in the management of climate change directly or indirectly involve technology (e.g., warning systems, protective structures, crop breeding and irrigation, settlement and relocation or redesign, flood control measures). Information & Lack of trained and skilled personnel can limit a nation's ability to implement adaptation Skills options. In general, countries with higher levels of stores of human knowledge are considered to have greater adaptive capacity than developing nations and those in transition. Illiteracy as well as poverty may be key determinants of low adaptive capacity, implying that it is important to ensure that systems are in place for the dissemination of climate change and adaptation information nationally and regionally and that there are forums for discussion and innovation of adaptation strategies at various levels. Social Some researchers regard the adaptive capacity of a system as a function of availability of and 26 infrastructure Institutions Equity access to resources by decision makers, as well as vulnerable subsectors of a population. For example, the Philippine island of Mindanao uses hydroelectric power to generate more than 90% of its electricity, which in turn supports local development and industry. During El Niño, drought conditions resulted in suspension of production by the hydroelectric plant and severely increased the economic vulnerability of the region. In the coastal area of Hong Kong, the capacity to adapt to the risk of typhoons differs for existing urban areas and for new coastal land reclamation. For existing urban areas, there is no possibility of retreat or accommodation, although during urban renewal the formation level of the ground could be raised, thereby decreasing the vulnerability of settlements. In general, countries with well-developed social institutions are considered to have greater adaptive capacity than those with less effective institutional arrangements—commonly, developing nations and those in transition. The role of inadequate institutional support is frequently cited in the literature as a hindrance to adaptation. It is generally held that established institutions in developed countries not only facilitate management of contemporary climate-related risks but also provide an institutional capacity to help deal with risks associated with future climate change. It is frequently argued that adaptive capacity will be greater if social institutions and arrangements governing the allocation of power and access to resources within a community, nation, or the globe assure that access to resources is equitably distributed. The extent to which nations or communities are "entitled" to draw on resources greatly influences their adaptive capacity and their ability to cope. Some people regard the adaptive capacity of a system as a function not only of the availability of resources but of access to those resources by decision makers and vulnerable subsectors of a population. Table 3: Summary of 22 predictor variables long-listed for analysis, including results of bivariate analyses with our Adaptation Initiatives Index (AII). Variables highlighted in grey were selected for final inclusion in multivariate modeling. Justifications for variable inclusion/exclusion are provided. N. countries Mean (Std Dev) Correlation with Adaptation Score (probability) Retained? Comments -0.20 (0.03) Log likelihood in univariate glm model (outcome: Adaptation Score) -318.67 Global Climate Risk Index 111 88.6 (36.8) Y Significant negative correlation Coastal exposure (% population, within 100 km of the coast) 116 49.7 (39.3) 0.24 (0.01) -336.67 Y Significant positive correlation Population (log) Population density (log) 115 115 15.8 (1.9) 4.2 (1.5) 0.22 (0.02) -0.02 (0.81) -334.30 -337.13 Y N No correlation; absolute population retained GDP (log) GDP per capita (log) 115 115 24.7 (2.2) 8.9 (1.6) 0.31 (<0.01) 0.18 (0.06) -331.23 -335.32 Y N Internet users (per 100 people) Mobile cellular subscriptions (per 100 people) Public perception of climate change risks 114 36 (28) 0.29 (<0.01) -326.55 Y Significant positive correlation 114 86 (38) 0.19 (0.04) -329.52 N Significant positive correlation, but highly collinear with internet users (0.73, p<0.01); internet users retained 85 50 (18) 0.31 (<0.01) -245.46 Y Significant positive correlation In fo r m ati on & ski lls Technol ogy Economic resources Exposure Indicator Significant positive correlation Significant positive correlation Marginal correlation; collinear with GDP (0.52, p<0.01); absolute GDP retained 27 Institutions Equity Public awareness of climate change 85 68 (23) 0.25 (0.02) -246.98 N Significant positive correlation, but highly collinear with perceptions of climate change risks (0.72, p<0.01); public perception of risks retained Literacy rate 115 89 (16) 0.18 (0.06) -335.36 Y Public expenditure on education as % GDP 85 4.75 (1.39) 0.17 (0.13) -247.52 N Significant positive correlation; transformed into binary variable to account for negative skewing. No significant correlation or association Environmental Sustainability Index: Treaty Component (72) Good governance (Corruption Perceptions Index) 99 0.71 (0.18) 0.42 (<0.01) -276.26 Y Significant positive correlation; correlations with other institutional variables below 0.70 110 4.6 (2.2) 0.44 (<0.01) -307.40 Y Civil liberties 115 2.8 -0.33 (<0.01) -330.57 N Political rights 115 3.0 -0.41 (<0.01) -326.78 N Government effectiveness 113 0.25 (0.98) 0.44 (<0.01) -317.18 N Voice and accountability 115 0.15 (1.0) 0.37 (<0.01) -328.48 N Significant positive correlation; highly collinear with all institutional variables; retained as the institutional variable with the lowest GLM log likelihood association with Adaptation Score and high & consistent collinearity across institutional variables Significant positive correlation, but highly collinear with all institutional variables; Corruption Perceptions Index retained Significant positive correlation, but highly collinear with all institutional variables; Corruption Perceptions Index retained Significant positive correlation, but highly collinear with all institutional variables; collinearity with Corruption Perceptions Index 0.95. Significant positive correlation, but highly collinear with all institutional variables; Corruption Perceptions Index retained Political stability 115 0.14 (0.84) 0.20 (0.03) -334.74 N Rule of law 115 0.21 (1.00) 0.39 (<0.01) -327.75 N Environmental Performance Index (EPI) Inequality (Gini) 108 61.5 (12.4) 0.20 (0.04) -311.47 Y 85 39.7 (8.3) 0.08 (0.43) -247.32 N Significant positive correlation, but highly collinear with all institutional variables; Corruption Perceptions Index retained Significant positive correlation, but highly collinear with all institutional variables; Corruption Perceptions Index retained Significant positive correlation; correlations with other institutional variables below 0.70 No significant correlation or association; Many countries missing from data Many of our potential predictor variables were collinear, essentially reflecting similar proxies of national development or wealth. We thus identified a reduced set of variables (shaded grey in Table 3, above) for use in multivariate regression using bivariate analyses comparing all predictor variables with AII. Variables significantly correlated with adaptation at p<0.10 were considered for retention. Pairs of variables within adaptive capacity categories that were strongly correlated with each other (Pearson correlation: p>0.7) were considered for elimination where the more significant variable (lowest log likelihood) was retained. All variables were checked for linear relationships with the outcome (AII) and transformed where appropriate. Variables retained for multivariate regression are highlighted in Table 1. A summary of metrics and justifications for variable selection is provided in the Supplemental Materials. References Adger, WN, Brooks, N, Bentham, G, Agnew, M and Eriksen, S (2004) New indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity. East Anglia, UK: Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research Adger, WN and Vincent, K (2005) Uncertainty in adaptive capacity. Comptes Rendus Geoscience 337: 399-410 Amundsen, H, Berglund, F and Westskog, H (2010) Overcoming barriers to climate change adaptation a question of multilevel governance? Environment and Planning C-Government and Policy 28: 276-289 Bowen, A, Cochrane, S and Fankhauser, S (2012) Climate change, adaptation and economic growth. Climatic Change 113: 95-106 Brooks, N, Adger, WN and Kelly, PM (2005) The determinants of vulnerability and adaptive capacity at the national level and the implications for adaptation. Global Environmental Change-Human and Policy Dimensions 15: 151-163 28 Burch, S (2010) Transforming barriers into enablers of action on climate change: Insights from three municipal case studies in British Columbia, Canada. Global Environmental Change-Human and Policy Dimensions 20: 287-297 Burton, I, Malone, E, Huq, S, Lim, B and Spanger-Siegfried, E (2004a) Adaptation policy frameworks for climate change: developing strategies, policies and measures. In Programme, UND (ed). Cambridge, UK Burton, I, Malone, E, Huq, S, Lim, Be and Spanger-Siegfried, Ee (2004b) Adaptation policy frameworks for climate change: developing strategies, policies and measures. In programme, UND (ed). Cambridge, UK Downing, TE, Butterfield, R, Cohen, S, Huq, S, Moss, R, Rahman, A, Sokona, Y and Stephen, L (2001) Vulnerability Indices: Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation. UNEP Policy Series. Nairobi, Kenya: UNEP Engle, NL and Lemos, MC (2010) Unpacking governance: Building adaptive capacity to climate change of river basins in Brazil. Global Environmental Change-Human and Policy Dimensions 20: 4-13 Gbetibouo, GA, Ringler, C and Hassan, R (2010) Vulnerability of the South African farming sector to climate change and variability: An indicator approach. Natural Resources Forum 34: 175-187 Goklany, IM (2007) Integrated strategies to reduce vulnerability and advance adaptation, mitigation, and sustainable development. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 12: 775-786 Gupta, J, Termeer, C, Klostermann, J, Meijerink, S, van den Brink, M, Jong, P, Nooteboom, S and Bergsma, E (2010) The Adaptive Capacity Wheel: a method to assess the inherent characteristics of institutions to enable the adaptive capacity of society. Environmental Science & Policy 13: 459-471 Kelly, PM and Adger, WN (2000) Theory and practice in assessing vulnerability to climate change and facilitating adaptation. Climatic Change 47: 325-352 Lesnikowski, A, Ford, J, Berrang-Ford, L, Barrera, M, Berry, P, Henderson, J and Heymann, S (In press-a) National-level factors affecting likelihood to adapt to the health effects of climate change. Global Environmental Change Lesnikowski, A, Ford, JD, Berrang-Ford, L, Barrera, M and Heymann, SJ (In press-b) How are we adapting to climate change? A global assessment of the state of adaptation. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change Smit, B and Pilifosova, O (2003) From adaptation to adaptive capacity and vulnerability reduction. In Smith, J, Klein, RJT and Huq, S (eds) Climate change, adaptive capacity, and development. (pp 356). London: Imperial College Press Tompkins, EL and Adger, WN (2005) Defining response capacity to enhance climate change policy. Environmental Science & Policy 8: 562-571 van den Bergh, J (2009) The GDP paradox. Journal of Economic Psychology 30: 117-135 Williamson, T, Hesseln, H and Johnston, M (2012) Adaptive capacity deficits and adaptive capacity of economic systems in climate change vulnerability assessment. Forest Policy and Economics 15: 160166 Yohe, G and Tol, RSJ (2002) Indicators for social and economic coping capacity - moving toward a working definition of adaptive capacity. Global Environmental Change-Human and Policy Dimensions 12: 25-40 29 SUPPLMENTAL MATERIALS D: MAPS OF KEY VARIABLES A) B) Figure 1: Maps showing a) Adaptation Initiatives Index (AII), and b) Good governance (CPI), for nations included in dataset. AII scores range zero to a maximum of 19. CPI values range from a minimum of zero (high corruption) to a maximum of 10 (low corruption). 30 SUPPLMENTAL MATERIALS E: COLINEARITY OF GDP AND POPULATION SIZE 26 24 22 Monaco Liechtenstein Japan Germany FranceKingdom United Italy Russia Brazil Spain Canada Mexico Australia Korea, South (Rep) Netherlands Poland Indonesia BelgiumSaudi Switzerland Sweden Arabia Norway Austria Denmark Greece Iran Argentina United Arab Emirates Finland South Thailand Africa Ireland Portugal Colombia Czech Republic Malaysia Israel Romania Chile Ukraine Algeria Egypt Singapore Hungary Kazakhstan New Zealand Peru Qatar Slovakia Angola MoroccoVietnam CroatiaBelarus LuxembourgSlovenia Bulgaria Syria Republic LithuaniaAzerbaijan Dominican Latvia Uruguay Lebanon Costa &Rica Ghana Uzbekistan Serbia Montenegro Estonia Panama Cote dÍIvoire Jordan Bahrain Turkmenistan Bosnia and Herzegovina Iceland Paraguay Bolivia Gabon Jamaica Senegal Albania Georgia Congo (Republic) Armenia Congo (Dem Republic) Macedonia Mauritius Madagascar Namibia Mali Malta Benin Moldova Mongolia Niger Kyrgyzstan Tajikistan Rwanda Malawi Mauritania Togo Swaziland India San Marino Burundi Cape Verde Antigua andBelize Barbuda Saint Lucia Bhutan Guinea Bissau Samoa Tonga 20 logGDP 28 30 United States 10 12 14 16 logpop 18 20 Figure 2: Scatterplot showing collinearity (or covariation) between GDP (log) and Population size (log) for countries in the dataset. GDP and population size are highly collinear (Pearson’s Correlation Co-efficient = 0.73, p<0.01). 31