Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
First Generation Vulnerability Assessments: What can/should they do? 25 July 2012 Prof. Burkhard von Rabenau, Ph.D. GIZ Environmentally and Climate-Friendly Urban Development in Da Nang (ECUD) Motivation Da Nang Vulnerability Assessments • PEMSEA (2004) focused on Disaster Risks • DaCRISS, JICA (2007-2010) focused on Urban Strategy • ACCCRN, Rockefeller (2008-2010) CC Adaptation • City/CCCO, Da Nang PC (2011) CC Adaptation Based on existing experience • How should small communities prepare CC assessment? • How can they do so w/o assistance? • What parts of Da Nang methodology should be adopted, what discarded? • What should the objectives be of a 1st Generation Assessment? • For action planning, what should be done now, what should be postponed for later? Key Messages First Generation Assessments Principal purpose is Mobilization and Start-up. There are many iterations to come. Major concrete decisions come only after mainstreaming Climate change adaptation is one of many objectives, must be balanced against others of equal importance Replication with lesser resources is possible Often CC Assessments do both too much and too little Limit objectives to awareness, exploration, work program Use existing regional CC rather than own forecasts Be incomplete, limit analysis to priority hazards Avoid detail not later used Cooperate with others Focus on plausibility and story line, quantify later Use indicators rather than abstract concepts Use disaster risk and DRR as starting point, is already familiar Urban Vulnerability/Risk Assessment (Illustrative Only) A Vulnerabilities Primary CC Factors General Impacts Climate Change Trends 40 Yr Climate Change • Sea Level Rise 30cm • Temperature Increase 2Deg C • Avg Precipitation up • Seasonality more pronounced Assets Human, ManExposure Assumptions Made, Natural 40 Year Exposure Changes • Population doubles • Income pc triples • Direction of land devlpt unchanged Increased Storm • Current regulations Frequency & Severity • Current DRR level • Type of Hazard Increased flooding (area, depth) Rising drought condition • Continued flood plain settlement • Warning system improving w time • Awareness rising • Water demand doubles in 40 years • No conservation policies • No new reservoirs • No groundwater protection • Rising Land Erosion, No protection of land Saline Intrusion No sea walls No change in Income Quality of Life Risk Indicator (Intensive Form) Risk Today Current Risk in 40 YearsAdaptive Capacity • Increased energy consumption due to rising temps • Loss of land, infrastr • Loss of factories • Livestock loss • Fishing vessel loss Capacity to decide weak • Data base weak • Hazards models none • Planning/coordton weak • Governance (regulation &enforcement ltd • Finance for CC limited • Policy framework Willingness to decide weak • Wrong incentive structure Adaptation Options Immediate Priorities Upgrading Governance and Knowledge Base • Data base dvlpt • Planning, coordination • Participatory methods • Scientific know-how Awareness Raising Infrastructure Hardening Mainstreaming • Rationalize decisions • Use objective ctiteria • Data base dvlpt • Awareness raising • Mainstream into SEDP • Adjust Master Plan • Project risk assessment • M&E • Worker days lost • Earnings lost • Labor income lost • Crops damage (has) • Livestock loss vessel • Loss of land, infrastr •• Fishing Work days lostloss • Damage to buildings • Business Earnings • Damage lost • Labor income lost • Crops damage • # lives lost/100,000 Loss High • # housing units Prob Low damaged/100,000 Risk Medium Loss High Prob Medium Risk High • Strengthen codes • Offer finance • Upgrade preparedness • Codes • Enforcement • Project CC risk assessment • # lives lost/100,000 Loss High • # housing units Prob Low damaged/100,000 Risk Medium • Avg # of days housiing units are flooded pa Loss High Prob Medium Risk High • Data collection • Flood modeling • Drainage modeling •M& E • Master Plan Review • Infrastructure project review • Loss of agric/forest land • Loss of city trees • Crop loss • Output loss • Rising cost of production • Reduced quality of life • Customer days of water curtailment per 100,000 Loss low Prob Low Risk Low Loss Medium Prob Medium Risk Medium • Alter flood plain dvlpt • Resettlement • Build Reservoirs, Dikes • Integrated river mgmt • Elevate infrastructure • Improved drainage • Modeling • Upgrade preparedness • Change building codes to reduce water consumption • Construct reservoirs • Shadow price water • Incentives to conserve • Curtailment planning • Water management system • Loss of land (has) • Land productivity decline • Loss of wells • Relocation of water intake • Loss of income • Loss of production • Loss of water • • Loss of land (has equivalent, of value in VND) Loss low Prob Low Risk Low Loss Medium Prob High Risk Medium Land Erosion • Abandon eroding land • Reforestation • Mangrove preservation • Dune fortification • Reduced beach urbanization Salinity Intrusion • Adjust crop type • Reduce well abstraction • Build sea gates • Price Well Water • Monitor wells • Monitor salinity • Monitor erosion • Map data • Prepare salinity model • Adjust building codes for water conservation • Indicator preparation •M& E Climate Change and Its Impacts Scenario Analysis (exists) Use MoNRE Regional scenarios: Sea level rise, change in temperature and rainfall Variations from regional average too small to matter Identify secondary/tertiary hazards Type of hazards Flooding, inundation: area, depth, frequency, location Saline intrusion: area, impact Storms, tai Source of Information Use data from DRR action plans/Flood Committee Identify Historical Disasters Mostly exists for major disasters Use ‘Climate Plus Approach’ – current hazards + things will get worse • Rely on current situation as starting point • Limited exposure forecasts, vulnerability horizon non-specific • Uses capacity experience with recent disasters Exposure Analysis Cause/Effect Exposure determines vulnerability and risk Reverse also holds: risk changes how people behave Time Horizon Identical to climate change scenario In Climate Plus Approach say city & income grow or say double in 20-40 years In Full Approach specify time, say t = 0, 20, 40 years Key elements Base the elements on indicators used in vulnerability analysis and the need of the risk analysis Scale: Population, employment Unit Values: Income, assets (relate value land, life GDP pc) Land Use: Direction of growth relative to hazards, density Policies: Conservation policies, building regulations Vulnerability Assessment Cause Effect Depend on two scenarios: Hazards and Exposure Vulnerabilities can impact policies and hence exposure Types Capital Cost ($): Human, Man-made, Natural resources (Loss of housing, infrastructure, forests, land, quality of land etc) Current Operating Losses ($/unit time): Loss of wages, output, productivity, etc) Vulnerability Descriptors Scoring: Abstract, difficult to give meaning, difficult to aggregate Verbal explanation: Intuitive, concrete, Indicators: Can be quantified; can be in intensive form • Loss of life (in VND) due to storms per 100,000 population • Income loss from flooding as % of monthly GDP • Hectares of land lost (in has or VND) due to erosion Risk Assessment: Qualitative Illustrative Risk Analysis: Current Vulnerability Unit Value High Low High Low Exposure, # of Units High High Low Low Impact High Medium Medium Low High High High High Likelihood Low Low Low Low High High Medium Medium Risk Medium Medium Low Low High High Medium Risk Medium Medium Low Illustrative Risk Analysis: 20-40 Years from now Vulnerability Unit Value High Low High Exposure, # of Units High High Low Impact High Medium Medium High High High Likelihood Low Low Low Risk Analysis: Quantitative Illustration Loss of Life From exposure analysis: Population 1,000,000; income pc pa $1,000 From vulnerability analysis annual loss of life per 100,000 population: 0.5 Value of life: 100 times annual income (based on people’s own risk behavior and revealed preferences) Current annual risk: $1,000x100x 0.5 x 1,000,000/100,000 = $500,000 Future annual risk (40 years hence): • • Population 2m, income pc pa $3,000, future loss per 100,000 is 0.6 Annual Expected Loss: $3,000 x 100 x 0.6 x 2,000,000/100,000 = $ 3,600,000 Present Value, Discount Rate 5%; Horizon 40 years; PWF Loss of Land (due to salinity, erosion, sea level rise) Exposure analysis: Avg value of eroding land $10,000/ha; $30,000/ha in 40 yrs Vulnerability analysis annual loss of land: 6 hectares now, 10 has in 40 years Current annual risk: $10,000 x 6 = $60,000 Future annual risk (40 years hence): $30,000 x 10 = $300,000 Present Value, Discount Rate 5%; Horizon 40 years; PWF Adaptive Capacity Da Nang Typology Differentiated by type of hazard and type of capacity. Seems too detailed and not sufficiently intuitive (i) Regulations, policies; (ii) Capacity Building (iii) Promotion, education; (iv) Scientific research; (v) Construction, infrastructure; (vi) Tree planting Modifications Add capacities: • • • • Governance Planning and coordination capacity Finance Willingness to act Many capacities cross hazard, no need to evaluate by hazard Strategic Options For each hazard review Instruments for protection, preparedness, coping, recovery Policies, regulations to modify behavior Direct interventions through infrastructure, risk management Adaptive capacity (knowledge systems, planning, governance, management, resources) Example Drought Supply Side Instruments Reservoir construction, evaporation control, water storage systems Water management Demand Side Instruments Price, shadow pricing for resource value Regulation of indirect demand: Appliances and Fixtures, landscaping Building codes Incentives, penalties, fees, surcharges Curtailment, rationing Short-Term Actions Reasons for Postponement of Immediate Action Impact of Discounting: Benefits are far in the future, cost is now Uncertainty declines Productivity gains from technical change available to postponement Idle capacity cost offsets economies of scale Reasons for Immediate Action Long gestation period No regrets Irreversibility, foreclosure of opportunities Gains from economies of scale exceed idle capacity cost Focus on building adaptive capacity Knowledge systems • • • Data and indicator development, monitoring and evaluation, data management Building scientific capacity Preparation of models, what if questions Planning, management and governance systems Resources and Finance THANK YOU