EXPERT REVIEW DRAFT IPCC SREX Chapter 9 Do Not Cite, Quote, Or
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EXPERT REVIEW DRAFT IPCC SREX Chapter 9 1 Chapter 9. Case Studies 2 3 Coordinating Lead Authors 4 Gordon McBean (Canada), Virginia Murray (UK), Mihir Bhatt (India) 5 6 Lead Authors 7 Sergey Borshch (Russian Federation), Tae Sung Cheong (South Korea), Wadid Fawzy Erian (Egypt), Silvia Llosa 8 (Peru), Farrokh Nadim (Norway), Arona Ngari (Cook Islands), Mario Nunez (Argentina), Ravsal Oyun (Mongolia), 9 Avelino G. Suarez (Cuba) 10 11 Note: Also see authors and contributing authors for each case study. 12 13 14 Contents 15 16 9.1. Introduction 17 9.1.1. Description of Case Studies Approach in General 18 9.1.2. Case Study Analyses: Lessons Identified and Learned – Good and Bad Practices 19 20 9.2. Methodological Approach 21 9.2.1. Case Studies 22 9.2.2. Literature: Papers, Reports, Grey Literature 23 9.2.3. Relationship between Extreme Climate-Related Events and Climate Change 24 9.2.4. Scale 25 26 9.3. Case Studies 27 9.3.1. Extreme Events 28 – Case Study 9.1. Tropical Cyclones 29 – Case Study 9.2. Urban Heat Waves, Vulnerability and Resilience 30 – Case Study 9.3. Drought and Famine in Ethiopia in the Years 1999-2000 31 – Case Study 9.4. Sand and Dust Storms 32 – Case Study 9.5. Floods 33 – Case Study 9.6. Drought, Heat Wave, and Black Saturday Bushfires in Victoria 34 – Case Study 9.7. Dzud of 2009-2010 in Mongolia 35 – Case Study 9.8. Disastrous Epidemic Disease: The Case of Cholera 36 9.3.2. Vulnerable Regions and Populations 37 – Case Study 9.9. Vulnerable Coastal and Mega Cities 38 – Case Study 9.10. Small Island Developing States 39 – Case Study 9.11. Vulnerable Regions: The Arctic 40 – Case Study 9.12. Least Developed Countries and Fragile States 41 9.3.3. Management Approaches 42 – Case Study 9.13. Risk Transfer – the Role of Insurance and Other Economic Approaches to Risk 43 Sharing 44 – Case Study 9.14. Disaster Risk Reduction Education, Training, and Public Awareness to promote 45 Adaptation 46 – Case Study 9.15. Multi-Level Institutional Governance 47 – Case Study 9.16. Disaster Risk Reduction Legislation as a Basis for Effective Adaptation 48 – Case Study 9.17. Hard and Soft Defense in Coastal Zones Adaptation 49 – Case Study 9.18. Linking Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation – Cyclones in 50 Bangladesh 51 – Case Study 9.19. Early Warning Systems 52 53 9.4. Synthesis of Lessons Learned from Case Studies 54 Do Not Cite, Quote, or Distribute 1 26 July 2010 EXPERT REVIEW DRAFT IPCC SREX Chapter 9 1 9.1. Introduction 2 3 9.1.1. Description of Case Studies Approach in General 4 5 This section seeks to convey the value of case studies in identifying lessons and good practices from past 6 responses—in this case to extreme climate-related events. Case studies are widely used in many disciplines 7 including health care (Keen and Packwood, 1995; McWhinney, 2001) and social science (Flyjberg, 2004), 8 especially in political science, anthropology, comparative sociology and education (Verschuren, 2003). It is reported 9 that case studies are the most popular research method used by industrial marketing researchers (Easton, 2010). In 10 addition case studies have been found to be useful in previous Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 11 Assessment Reports including the 2007 report (Parry et al., 2007). 12 13 Case studies are often perceived to be among the most interesting articles to read (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007) 14 possibly because they challenge readers’ assumptions and have practical implications; interesting reading in turn 15 produces a higher degree of learning (Bartunek et al., 2006). Case studies have been defined as ‘research situations 16 where the number of variables of interest far outstrips the number of data points’ (Yin, 1994). Keen and Packwood 17 consider that case study evaluations are valuable where broad, complex questions have to be addressed in complex 18 circumstances often using multiple methods. They go on to state that the case study is a way of thinking about 19 complex situations which takes the conditions into account but is nevertheless rigorous and facilitates informed 20 judgments about success or failure (Keen and Packwood, 1995). 21 22 Indeed case studies seek to study phenomena in their real life context, not independent of context, and offer an 23 opportunity to report an event from the ‘ground’ or from the ‘front line’. Thus case studies are suitable for studying 24 highly complex phenomena (Nyame-Asiamah and Patel, 2009) and analyzing extreme events allowing lessons to be 25 identified and good and bad practices to be determined. For example many everyday decisions by health care 26 professionals are qualitative rather than quantitative (Keen and Packwood, 1995) but directing them to the best 27 evidence such as the Cochrane Collaboration for these decisions may reduce poor decision making (Jadad and 28 Hanes, 1998). 29 30 Case studies can be records of innovative or good practice. Specific problems or issues experienced can be 31 documented as well as the actions taken to overcome problems. Case studies validate our understanding or can 32 encourage their re-evaluation. Often they are used where there have been limited solutions found to a particular 33 problem and can identify success/failure factors in DRR1 and adaptation. Case studies generally report factual 34 information as well as opinions (good and bad). Their strengths include: 35 • Provide real examples 36 • Encourage replication 37 • Are generally practical in nature 38 • Provide innovative ideas (Twigg, 2001). 39 Therefore case studies should use concrete examples of disasters types; share prevention and preparedness 40 methodologies and subsequent response and recovery actions because they provide useful insights into the practical 41 application of prevention and risk reduction measures. 42 43 [INSERT FOOTNOTE 1 HERE: New South Wales Australia Department of Environment, Climate Change, and 44 Water. Characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses - Case studies web site 45 <http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/community/edproject/section404.htm>.] 46 47 48 9.1.2. Case Study Analyses: Lessons Identified and Learned – Good and Bad Practices 49 50 Good storytelling or case studies are useful as a first step to explain issues but good theory is fundamentally the 51 result of rigorous methodology and comparative multi-case logic (Eisenhardt, 1989). By describing the 52 interpretation of cases studies, Leiberson demonstrated that they need rigorous justification of assumptions to guard 53 against possible distortions (Lieberson, 1991). Most case study research points to the preparations for such research 54 not to the benefit obtained from using case studies to illustrate issues identified by studies. Do Not Cite, Quote, or Distribute 2 26 July 2010 EXPERT REVIEW DRAFT IPCC SREX Chapter 9 1 2 Case studies must be methodologically rigorous and include external validation. Fundamental quality measures will 3 improve their reliability (Gibbert et al., 2008). Verschuren reported that case study design should include 4 observation of patterns in a diachronic (over time) manner, represent a strategic sample, and is labour intensive, 5 open ended and iterative. Bozeman and Klein reported that policy evaluators and other social scientists often 6 approach case studies with considerable wariness (Bozeman and Klein, 1999). They stated that case studies if 7 properly deployed for heuristic purposes should be based on the explicit examination of the event with critical 8 assessment to determine if the data is unique or illustrative of the wider dataset. Yin has documented the desired 9 characteristics of case studies and recommended that sources of evidence be focused in an operational framework 10 (Yin, 1999). 11 12 Woodside, using industrial marketing techniques, points to the principal criticisms of case study research studies. 13 These include needing to fulfill generality of findings, achieving accuracy of process actions and outcomes, and 14 capturing complexity of nuances and conditions in order to achieve clarity in processes involving decisions and 15 organizational outcomes (Woodside, 2010). 16 17 A comparative study of real-life cases is then a way to check fact whether our understanding of a problem or 18 solution (based on theory) is correct in reality and in various settings. 19 20 21 9.2. Methodological Approach 22 23 9.2.1. Case Studies 24 25 This chapter seeks to gain a better understanding of the threat posed by extreme climate-related events, while 26 identifying lessons and best practices from past responses to such occurrences. To achieve these goals, several 27 events, vulnerable regions and management approaches were identified and examined to gain a better understanding 28 of the threats that extreme events pose and the most successful prevention and response measures. Specifically, case 29 studies examining specific extreme events were: cyclones; urban heat waves; sandstorms; floods; drought, drought- 30 heat-fires complex events; cold spells; and epidemics. Case studies focusing on vulnerable regions included: coastal 31 and mega-cities; small island developing states (SIDS); Arctic regions; and least developed countries and fragile 32 states. The third grouping looked at management approaches: risk transfer; public education and awareness; 33 institutional approaches-multi-level governance; legislative approaches; hard and soft engineering in coastal zones; 34 linking disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA) practices; and early warning systems. 35 This selection created a good basis of information and served as an indicator of the resources needed for future 36 disaster risk reduction. Additionally, it allows good and bad practices to be determined and lessons to be extracted. 37 38 As Margareta Wahlström asserts, “the real tragedy (of disasters) is that many of these deaths can be avoided” 39 (Wahlström, 2009). To that end, the analysis of case studies is essential to the Special Report on Extreme Events and 40 Disasters: Managing the Risks, due to the lessons they provide about best and worst practices, which will contribute 41 to future disaster risk reductions.