DOCSLIB.ORG

Risk Management and Decision-Making in Relation SPM7 to Sustainable Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Risk Management and Decision-Making in Relation SPM7 to Sustainable Development Risk management and decision-making in relation SPM7 to sustainable development Coordinating Lead Authors: Margot Hurlbert (Canada), Jagdish Krishnaswamy (India) Lead Authors: Edouard Davin (France/Switzerland), Francis X. Johnson (Sweden), Carlos Fernando Mena (Ecuador), John Morton (United Kingdom), Soojeong Myeong (The Republic of Korea), David Viner (United Kingdom), Koko Warner (The United States of America), Anita Wreford (New Zealand), Sumaya Zakieldeen (Sudan), Zinta Zommers (Latvia) Contributing Authors: Rob Bailis (The United States of America), Brigitte Baptiste (Colombia), Kerry Bowman (Canada), Edward Byers (Austria/Brazil), Katherine Calvin (The United States of America), Rocio Diaz-Chavez (Mexico), Jason Evans (Australia), Amber Fletcher (Canada), James Ford (United Kingdom), Sean Patrick Grant (The United States of America), Darshini Mahadevia (India), Yousef Manialawy (Canada), Pamela McElwee (The United States of America), Minal Pathak (India), Julian Quan (United Kingdom), Balaji Rajagopalan (The United States of America), Alan Renwick (New Zealand), Jorge E. Rodríguez-Morales (Peru), Charlotte Streck (Germany), Wim Thiery (Belgium), Alan Warner (Barbados) Review Editors: Regina Rodrigues (Brazil), B.L. Turner II (The United States of America) Chapter Scientist: Thobekile Zikhali (Zimbabwe) This chapter should be cited as: Hurlbert, M., J. Krishnaswamy, E. Davin, F.X. Johnson, C.F. Mena, J. Morton, S. Myeong, D. Viner, K. Warner, A. Wreford, S. Zakieldeen, Z. Zommers, 2019: Risk Management and Decision making in Relation to Sustainable Development. In: Climate Change and Land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, E. Calvo Buendia, V. Masson-Delmotte, H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, P. Zhai, R. Slade, S. Connors, R. van Diemen, M. Ferrat, E. Haughey, S. Luz, S. Neogi, M. Pathak, J. Petzold, J. Portugal Pereira, P. Vyas, E. Huntley, K. Kissick, M. Belkacemi, J. Malley, (eds.)]. In press. 673 Chapter 7 Risk management and decision-making in relation to sustainable development Table of contents Executive summary ..................................................................................... 675 Cross-Chapter Box 11 | Gender in inclusive approaches to climate change, land 7.1 Introduction and relation to other chapters .............. 677 and sustainable development ................................................ 717 7.1.1 Findings of previous IPCC assessments 7.5 Decision-making for climate change and land ......... 719 and reports ............................................................................... 677 7.5.1 Formal and informal decision-making .................... 720 Box 7.1: Relevant findings of recent IPCC reports 678 7.5.2 Decision-making, timing, risk, and uncertainty ... 720 7.1.2 Treatment of key terms in the chapter .................. 679 7.5.3 Best practices of decision-making toward 7.1.3 Roadmap to the chapter .................................................. 679 sustainable land management (SLM) ...................... 723 7.2 Climate-related risks for land-based 7.5.4 Adaptive management ..................................................... 723 human systems and ecosystems .......................................... 680 7.5.5 Performance indicators ..................................................... 725 7.2.1 Assessing risk ........................................................................ 680 7.5.6 Maximising synergies and 7.2.2 Risks to land systems arising from climate change 680 minimising trade-offs ........................................................ 725 Cross-Chapter Box 9 | Climate and land pathways .... 727 7.2.3 Risks arising from responses to climate change ... 686 7.2.4 Risks arising from hazard, exposure Case study: Green energy: Biodiversity conservation vs global environment targets? .......... 735 and vulnerability ................................................................... 688 7.3 Consequences of climate – land change for human 7.6 Governance: Governing the land–climate interface 736 well-being and sustainable development .................... 690 7.6.1 Institutions building adaptive 7.3.1 What is at stake for food security? ........................... 690 and mitigative capacity .................................................... 736 7.3.2 Risks to where and how people live: Livelihood 7.6.2 Integration – Levels, modes and scale systems and migration ..................................................... 690 of governance for sustainable development ........ 737 7.3.3 Risks to humans from disrupted Case study: Governance: Biofuels and bioenergy ... 738 ecosystems and species ................................................... 691 Cross-Chapter Box 12 | Traditional biomass use: 7.3.4 Risks to communities and infrastructure ............... 691 Land, climate and development implications ........... 740 Cross-Chapter Box 10 | Economic dimensions 7.6.3 Adaptive climate governance of climate change and land ...................................................... 692 responding to uncertainty .............................................. 742 Box 7.2: Adaptive governance and interlinkages 7.4 Policy instruments for land and climate ........................ 695 of food, fibre, water, energy and land ............................. 743 7.4.1 Multi-level policy instruments ...................................... 695 7.6.4 Participation ............................................................................ 745 7.4.2 Policies for food security and social protection 696 Cross-Chapter Box 13 | Indigenous and local 7.4.3 Policies responding to climate-related extremes 699 knowledge (ILK) ................................................................................. 746 7.4.4 Policies responding to greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes 701 7.6.5 Land tenure .............................................................................. 749 Case study: Including agriculture in the 7.6.6 Institutional dimensions New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) .......... 703 of adaptive governance ................................................... 753 7.4.5 Policies responding to desertification and 7.6.7 Inclusive governance for degradation – Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN) 705 sustainable development ................................................ 754 7.4.6 Policies responding to land degradation ................ 706 7.7 Key uncertainties and knowledge gaps ......................... 754 Case study: Forest conservation instruments: ................................................................. REDD+ in the Amazon and India ............................................ 709 Frequently Asked Questions 755 7.4.7 Economic and financial instruments FAQ 7.1: How can indigenous knowledge and for adaptation, mitigation, and land ........................ 711 local knowledge inform land-based mitigation 7.4.8 Enabling effective policy instruments – and adaptation options? .............................................................. 755 policy portfolio coherence .............................................. 713 FAQ 7.2: What are the main barriers to and opportunities for land-based 7 7.4.9 Barriers to implementing policy responses .......... 714 responses to climate change? ................................................... 756 References .............................................................................................................. 757 674 Risk management and decision-making in relation to sustainable development Chapter 7 Executive summary mitigation. SSP3 has the opposite characteristics. Under SSP1, only a small fraction of the dryland population (around 3% at 3°C for the Increases in global mean surface temperature are projected year 2050) will be exposed and vulnerable to water stress. However to result in continued permafrost degradation and under SSP3, around 20% of dryland populations (for the year 2050) coastal degradation (high confidence), increased wildfire, will be exposed and vulnerable to water stress by 1.5°C and 24% by decreased crop yields in low latitudes, decreased food 3°C. Similarly under SSP1, at 1.5°C, 2 million people are expected to stability, decreased water availability, vegetation loss be exposed and vulnerable to crop yield change. Over 20 million are (medium confidence), decreased access to food and increased exposed and vulnerable to crop yield change in SSP3, increasing to soil erosion (low confidence). There is high agreement and 854 million people at 3°C (low confidence). Livelihoods deteriorate as high evidence that increases in global mean temperature will a result of these impacts, livelihood migration is accelerated, and strife result in continued increase in global vegetation loss, coastal and conflict is worsened (medium confidence). {Cross-Chapter Box 9 in degradation, as well as decreased crop yields in low latitudes, Chapters 6 and 7, 7.2.2, 7.3.2, Table 7.1, Figure 7.2} decreased food stability, decreased access to food and nutrition, and medium confidence in continued permafrost Land-based adaptation and mitigation responses pose risks degradation and water scarcity in drylands. Impacts are already associated with the effectiveness and potential adverse side- observed across all components (high confidence). Some processes effects of measures chosen (medium confidence). Adverse may experience irreversible impacts at lower levels of warming than side-effects
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pdfs/Poweroutages.Pdf
    Disclaimer This document was prepared by an ad hoc scientific group as a general record of discussions during the workshop and associated meetings. The document captures the main points and highlights of these discussions and includes brief summaries of presentations and work group sessions. It is not a complete record of all details discussed. Statements represent the views of the authors and not of any U.S. federal agency. Understanding Dynamics and Resilience in Complex Interdependent Systems Prospects for a Multi-Model Framework and Community of Practice Richard H. Moss1, Karen Fisher-Vanden2, Alison Delgado1, Scott Backhaus3, Christopher L. Barrett4, Budhendra Bhaduri5, Ian P. Kraucunas1, Patrick M. Reed6, Jennie S. Rice7, Ian Sue Wing8, Claudia Tebaldi9 1 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 2 Pennsylvania State University 3 Los Alamos National Laboratory 4 Virginia Tech 5 Oak Ridge National Laboratory 6 Cornell University 7 Smarter Decisions, LLC 8 Boston University 9 National Center for Atmospheric Research December 2016 Report of a workshop held under the auspices of the U.S. Global Change Research Program Interagency Group on Integrative Modeling with support from the U.S. Department of Energy Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the Interagency Coordinating Group members for their guidance and valuable feedback throughout the report development process. We are especially grateful to Bob Vallario and Gary Geernaert at the U.S. Department of Energy for their leadership and support. We extend sincere gratitude to Jim McFarland and Jia Li at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Linda Langner at the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Charles Covel and Marilee Orr at the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 7: Risk Management and Decision Making in Relation
    Final Government Distribution Chapter 7 IPCC SRCCL 1 Chapter 7: Risk management and decision making in relation to 2 sustainable development 3 4 Coordinating Lead Authors: Margot Hurlbert (Canada), Jagdish Krishnaswamy (India) 5 Lead Authors: Edouard Davin (France/Switzerland), Francis X. Johnson (Sweden), Carlos Fernando 6 Mena (Ecuador), John Morton (United Kingdom), Soojeong Myeong (Republic of Korea), David Viner 7 (United Kingdom), Koko Warner (United States of America), Anita Wreford (New Zealand), Sumaya 8 Zakieldeen (Sudan), Zinta Zommers (Latvia) 9 Contributing Authors: Rob Bailis (United States of America), Brigitte Baptiste (Colombia), Kerry 10 Bowman (Canada), Edward Byers (Austria/Brazil), Katherine Calvin (United States of America), Rocio 11 Diaz-Chavez (Mexico), Jason Evans (Australia), Amber Fletcher (Canada), James Ford (United 12 Kingdom), Sean Patrick Grant (United States of America), Darshini Mahadevia (India), Yousef 13 Manialawy (Canada), Pam McElwee (United States of America), Minal Pathak (India), Julian Quan 14 (United Kingdom), Balaji Rajagopalan (United States of America), Alan Renwick (New Zealand), 15 Jorge E. Rodríguez-Morales (Peru), Charlotte Streck (Germany), Wim Thiery (Belgium), Alan Warner 16 (Barbados) 17 Review Editors: Regina Rodrigues (Brazil), B.L. Turner II (United States of America) 18 Chapter Scientist: Thobekile Zikhali (Zimbabwe) 19 Date of Draft: 28/04/2019 20 Subject to Copy-editing Do Not Cite, Quote or Distribute 7-1 Total pages: 233 Final Government Distribution Chapter 7 IPCC SRCCL 1 Table of Contents 2 Chapter 7: Risk management and decision making in relation to sustainable development ............. 1 3 7.1. Executive summary ................................................................................................. 4 4 7.2. Introduction and Relation to Other Chapters ................................................................ 9 5 7.2.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioenergy for Climate Change Mitigation: Scale and Sustainability
    Received: 6 December 2020 | Revised: 11 April 2021 | Accepted: 23 April 2021 DOI: 10.1111/gcbb.12863 RESEARCH REVIEW Bioenergy for climate change mitigation: Scale and sustainability Katherine Calvin1 | Annette Cowie2 | Göran Berndes3 | Almut Arneth4,5 | Francesco Cherubini6 | Joana Portugal- Pereira7,8 | Giacomo Grassi9 | Jo House10 | Francis X. Johnson11 | Alexander Popp12 | Mark Rounsevell4,13 | Raphael Slade8 | Pete Smith14 1Joint Global Change Research Institute, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, College Park, MD, USA 2NSW Department of Primary Industries/University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia 3Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden 4Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research/Atmospheric Environmental Research (IMK- IFU), Garmisch- Partenkirchen, Germany 5Department of Geo- ecology (IFGG), Karlsruhe, Germany 6Industrial Ecology Program, Department of Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway 7Energy Planning Program, Graduate School of Engineering, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 8Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London, UK 9Joint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy 10Cabot Institute, Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK 11Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden 12Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association, Potsdam, Germany 13School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK 14Institute of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK Correspondence Katherine Calvin, Joint Global Change Abstract Research Institute, Pacific Northwest Many global climate change mitigation pathways presented in IPCC assessment re- National Laboratory, College Park, MD, ports rely heavily on the deployment of bioenergy, often used in conjunction with USA.
    [Show full text]
  • 27. Mitigation
    Government Review Draft Third NCA Chapter 27 – Mitigation (v. 22 November 2013) 1 27. Mitigation 2 Coordinating Lead Authors 3 Henry D. Jacoby, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 4 Anthony C. Janetos, Boston University 5 6 Lead Authors 7 Richard Birdsey, U.S. Forest Service 8 James Buizer, University of Arizona 9 Katherine Calvin, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, University of Maryland 10 Francisco de la Chesnaye, Electric Power Research Institute 11 David Schimel, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory 12 Ian Sue Wing, Boston University 13 14 Contributing Authors 15 Reid Detchon, United Nations Foundation 16 Jae Edmonds, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, University of Maryland 17 Lynn Russell, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego 18 Jason West, University of North Carolina 19 Key Messages 20 1. Carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere by natural processes at a rate that 21 is roughly half of the current rate of emissions from human activities. Therefore, 22 mitigation efforts that only stabilize global emissions will not reduce atmospheric 23 concentrations of carbon dioxide, but will only limit their rate of increase. The same 24 is true for other long-lived greenhouse gases. 25 2. To meet the lower emissions scenario (B1) used in this assessment, global mitigation 26 actions would need to limit global carbon dioxide emissions to a peak of around 44 27 billion tons per year within the next 25 years and decline thereafter. In 2011, global 28 emissions were around 34 billion tons, and have been rising by about 0.9 billion tons 29 per year for the past decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5°C in the Context of Sustainable Development
    Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5°C in the Context 2 of Sustainable Development Coordinating Lead Authors: Joeri Rogelj (Belgium/Austria), Drew Shindell (USA), Kejun Jiang (China) Lead Authors: Solomone Fifita (Fiji), Piers Forster (UK), Veronika Ginzburg (Russia), Collins Handa (Kenya), Haroon Kheshgi (USA), Shigeki Kobayashi (Japan), Elmar Kriegler (Germany), Luis Mundaca (Sweden/Chile), Roland Séférian (France), Maria Virginia Vilariño (Argentina) Contributing Authors: Katherine Calvin (USA), Joana Correia de Oliveira de Portugal Pereira (UK/Portugal), Oreane Edelenbosch (Netherlands/Italy), Johannes Emmerling (Italy/Germany), Sabine Fuss (Germany), Thomas Gasser (Austria/France), Nathan Gillett (Canada), Chenmin He (China), Edgar Hertwich (USA/Austria), Lena Höglund-Isaksson (Austria/Sweden), Daniel Huppmann (Austria), Gunnar Luderer (Germany), Anil Markandya (Spain/UK), David L. McCollum (USA/Austria), Malte Meinshausen (Australia/Germany), Richard Millar (UK), Alexander Popp (Germany), Pallav Purohit (Austria/India), Keywan Riahi (Austria), Aurélien Ribes (France), Harry Saunders (Canada/USA), Christina Schädel (USA/Switzerland), Chris Smith (UK), Pete Smith (UK), Evelina Trutnevyte (Switzerland/Lithuania), Yang Xiu (China), Wenji Zhou (Austria/China), Kirsten Zickfeld (Canada/Germany) Chapter Scientist: Daniel Huppmann (Austria), Chris Smith (UK) Review Editors: Greg Flato (Canada), Jan Fuglestvedt (Norway), Rachid Mrabet (Morocco), Roberto Schaeffer (Brazil) This chapter should be cited as: Rogelj, J., D. Shindell, K. Jiang,
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 27 Mitigation
    Climate Change Impacts in the United States CHAPTER 27 MITIGATION Convening Lead Authors Henry D. Jacoby, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Anthony C. Janetos, Boston University Lead Authors Richard Birdsey, U.S. Forest Service James Buizer, University of Arizona Katherine Calvin, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, University of Maryland Francisco de la Chesnaye, Electric Power Research Institute David Schimel, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Ian Sue Wing, Boston University Contributing Authors Reid Detchon, United Nations Foundation Jae Edmonds, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, University of Maryland Lynn Russell, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego Jason West, University of North Carolina Recommended Citation for Chapter Jacoby, H. D., A. C. Janetos, R. Birdsey, J. Buizer, K. Calvin, F. de la Chesnaye, D. Schimel, I. Sue Wing, R. Detchon, J. Edmonds, L. Russell, and J. West, 2014: Ch. 27: Mitigation. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program, 648-669. doi:10.7930/J0C8276J. On the Web: http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/response-strategies/mitigation INFORMATION DRAWN FROM THIS CHAPTER IS INCLUDED IN THE HIGHLIGHTS REPORT AND IS IDENTIFIED BY THIS ICON 648 27 MITIGATION KEY MESSAGES 1. Carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere by natural processes at a rate that is roughly half of the current rate of emissions from human activities. Therefore, mitigation efforts that only stabilize global emissions will not reduce atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, but will only limit their rate of increase. The same is true for other long-lived greenhouse gases.
    [Show full text]