At the European Climate Change Adaptation Conference 2019, ClimateXChange convened a workshop session looking at the practical use of scenario planning in climate change adaptation. This blog is a summary of the discussion amongst participants. A paper written by the session presenters is published in Environmental Science & Policy
What is scenario planning?
Planning for uncertain futures is a major challenge for policy and decision-makers in climate change adaptation. The range of unknowns includes future emissions, climate change impacts, and socio-economic conditions. Creating a range of scenarios is one way to consider uncertain futures in their adaptation planning.
Scenario planning is an approach for:
- structured thinking about future uncertainty;
- describing futures that could be by looking at a combination of drivers; and
- helping societies better plan for these possible development.
How scenario planning works
Scenario planning is a way to test and compare a range of alternative options against multiple possible futures.
The scenarios can be created by experts using date for different drives, e.g. projections for population growth, climate change, food production, technology etc, or developing the scenarios can be part of the stakeholder process by drawing on their lived experience and insights. Scenarios created by the participants in the process are usually local or regional.
Many scenario planning processes combine high level data driven scenarios created by experts with local knowledge and perspectives.
Benefits and strengths of scenario planning
Scenario planning is particularly useful in relation to climate change because it allows different groups like communities, academics, local and national government, agencies or businesses, to look at possible futures together. They all bring different and relevant knowledge and expertise to inform the discussion from different angles, such as climate, economic development, demographics, local history etc.
It can work at different geographical scales – local, national and global, in different contexts, and looking at short or longer term timelines. Shorter time horizons work best at the local scale, while longer term scenarios are more suited to the national and global scale.
Fig 1: The most useful aspects of scenario planning
Scenarios are particularly useful to:
- frame discussion about new problems;
- bring in a range of stakeholders to share and broaden knowledge and learning;
- explore drivers for change; and
- explore solutions.
In discussing a scenario the participants can either focus on how to respond to the different drivers for change, like population growth, and their impact. Or they can consider how these potential responses fit with existing practices.
Using scenarios
As scenario planning processes involve significant resources, primarily in gathering participants and data/information, it is important to maximise their value.
Rather than being a stand-alone tool, scenarios work better as part of a wider process.
Re-visiting scenarios, for example every 5 years, as part of a planning cycle is one way to encourage feedback loops and build learning.
Scenarios can also work well with an adaptation pathways approach[i], where future decision-makers have flexibility to make use of their increased knowledge of how climate change impacts are playing out and better climate projections.
Used flexibly and iteratively scenarios can therefore help identify no and low-regret adaptation options.
What scenarios are not well suited to
Individual scenarios are not well suited to identifying specific adaptation options or actions.
They can support decisions by identifying possible options, but not in assessing which option to choose.
They are also static – each scenario representing only one point in time – and so unable to take account of unexpected changes, such as extreme weather events, new regulations or political decisions.
Fig 2: Scenario planning limitations and weaknesses
[i] See https://coastadapt.com.au/pathways-approach for an overview of the adaptation pathway approach
What is the role of small countries and regions in taking climate action? As international climate experts gathered in Edinburgh at the start of April, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and ClimateXChange held a panel discussion with some of those at the forefront of efforts to tackle climate change at a city, region and country level from across the world.
To share lessons at the sub-national level an auditorium with standing room only heard from a panel with representatives from California (USA), Kampala (Uganda), Gujarat (India), Westphalia (Germany) and Scotland:
- Leon Clarke, Leader, Integrated Human Earth Systems Science program, University of Maryland/Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL): Implications of city and state climate action in the US
- Shuaib Lwasa, Associate Professor, Makerere University/World Resource Institute: Climate action underway in Kampala and drawing out links between climate adaptation and mitigation in the context of a rapidly growing city.
- Catriona Patterson, Chair of Scotland’s 2050 Climate Group: Talking about how the 2050 Climate Group equip young people with the skills, knowledge and opportunities to take action on climate change
- Minal Pathak, Senior Scientist, IPCC WG III Technical Support Unit, Ahmedabad University: Ground-breaking work on climate action in Gujurat
- Manfred Fischedick, Vice President, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy: Climate action in North-Rhine Westphalia including work underway to transition from coal
- Katherine White, Head of International, Strategy and Projects Unit Decarbonisation Division, The Scottish Government: Scotland’s approach to domestic climate change action and the value the Scottish Government places on international collaboration to share our experiences with, and learn from, others.
The event was chaired by Professor Dave Reay, Chair in Carbon Management & Education at the University of Edinburgh, and Professor Jim Skea, Co-Chair of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Listen to the recording to hear about US states taking action autonomously from the national level; how in Kampala the green agenda is a key driver for employment, infrastructure developments and urban greening; and that Gujarat and Westphalia share challenges on reducing the dependency on coal – both seeing results and achieving social development in the process.
From Scotland we heard about international cooperation’s role in enabling and inspiring small countries to reduce their emissions, and the role of young people in shaping the agenda and creating the solutions.
During the 90 minute debate panelists also covered the role of targets, the importance of bottom-up action, how to make the transition just, and how climate scientists feel about flying to participate in meetings.
Read more about the IPCC’s meeting in Edinburgh
Read media coverage of the meeting:
Climate change: What next for saving the planet? (BBC)
World seems ambivalent about swift action on climate change – IPCC chair (Scotsman)
The question of the academic value of delivering scientific evidence and advice to the Scottish Government was a key reason for gathering the CXC Post-Doctoral Research Fellows – our only full-time research staff – to a recent networking day. On the agenda was a visit from our Scottish Government customer, a presentation of the importance of research impact for future funding and a workshop on how to write better for a non-scientific audience. It was a packed day.
Making better use of publicly funded research in policy development, and a frustration with the silos within which policy development and research operated, were key reasons to establish ClimateXChange in 2011.
At the core of everything we do is academically robust and brilliant science – new knowledge co-produced with policy makers at the relevant time, in an accessible format and with expert judgement and recommendations within a practical policy context. Sometimes for maximum impact we need to be able to distil years of academic research to as little as three bullet points. This is a skill in itself.
During the time CXC has been operating we saw the Research Excellence Framework (REF) 2014 introduced, placing a monetary value on demonstrating impact both in terms of reach and significance. We know that CXC projects do this as a matter of course.
But it is not about laying more data or academic papers in front of policy makers. We have had a relentless focus on delivering a research and analysis service that meets the needs of the end user – the policy teams and public agencies – to demonstrate the value of embedding academic analysis in their work, and on building a network of researchers willing and interested in engaging with policy.
Read more about how we do it in our recent report The ClimateXChange Centre of Expertise – A knowledge exchange model for research, policy and practice
London offered a strong wind and heavy showers following the launch of the Committee on Climate Change’s assessment of the risk from climate change to the UK’s society, economy and environment. It seemed an apt comment on the content of the report – climate change poses real risks to the UK, and the need for action is urgent. For the UK climate change is likely to lead to periods of too much or too little water, increasing average and extreme temperatures, and sea level rise. That will change the everyday life of each one of us.
The UK Climate Change Risk Assessment Evidence Report is a 2000 page publication documenting the impacts climate change is having and will have under even the most conservative emission scenarios. The eight chapters are written by leading academics, consultants and other experts in the public and private sectors and civil society representing organisations across the UK.
The full report has had input from workshops in all the UK administrations and been subject to two rounds of review by stakeholders, technical peer reviewers and other organisations. Separate summaries are published for England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales to assess local variations and inform adaptation planning by the UK and the devolved governments.
Urgent need for action
The risks set out are not new, and we have ways to deal with them. However, we know that the risks will compound each other and we need to act long before we know the full extent of how our climate will change. We are facing an urgency of action – practical and in terms of research – rather than an urgency of risk. The Committee says the top risks are characterised by the need for additional, co-ordinated steps to be taken within the next five years if we are to adapt our society and our economy. Failing to take this action will substantially increase the cost of dealing with the impacts when they arise. So what does the report say? The report considers the urgency of further action to tackle current and future risks, and realise opportunities, arising for the UK from climate change.
Almost 60 individual risks and opportunities have been assessed as part of the process. At a UK level the Committee identifies six top risks:
- Flooding and coastal change risks to communities, businesses and infrastructure
- Risks to health, well-being and productivity from high temperatures
- Risk of shortages in the public water supply, and for agriculture, energy generation and industry
- Risks to natural capital, including terrestrial, coastal, marine and freshwater ecosystems, soils and biodiversity
- Risks to domestic and international food production and trade
- New and emerging pests and diseases, and invasive non-native species, aff¬ecting people, plants and animals
The risks in Scotland
Scotland has relatively lower temperatures and higher levels of precipitation than other regions of the UK. Our population lives spread over a large area. This means the adaptation challenges are different from those for example in the South of England. However, the Committee found limited Scotland specific data on many of the issues the report covers.
What we do know is that Scotland is very important in providing carbon sequestration: At 15% of land cover, Scotland has the highest proportion of woodland area in the UK with over 1.2 million ha. As a result, over half (55%) of the 15 million tonnes of CO2 sequestered by UK forests is in Scotland.
We also know that the risk of river and surface water flooding is expected to rise, as patterns of rainfall become more intense. For western areas of Scotland in particular this could mean significant increases in heavy winter rainfall.
One issue that makes comparisons or even whole UK-assessments complicated is the difference in how the administrations assess flood risk. Flood Risk Management Strategies in Scotland are based on a suite of flood hazard and risk information. This suite includes high probability (1 in 10-year), medium probability (1 in 200-year) and low probability (1 in 1000-year) flood scenarios in addition to a consideration of the impacts of climate change. The 1 in 75- year return period used in the CCRA2 due to its UK-wide suitability is not included in the Scottish flood hazard suite.
The report says that there is a need to develop consistent indicators of infrastructure network resilience to flood risk across all critical national infrastructure sectors. This will help to create the right institutional conditions for adaption. Consistent indicators of resilience will allow for improvements to be measured over time, so enabling better decisions in the near future, especially in relation to longer-term major risks, i.e. to build early interventions within an iterative adaptive management framework.
Scotland is home to unique flora and fauna. The report describes a range of actions that would help different species, habitats and ecosystem functions to meet adaptation objectives. How this toolbox is to be used is a further challenge – there are knowledge gaps, cost limitations, long lead-in and lag time effects, incompatible objectives and unexpected outcomes within wider environmental change. The Evidence report suggests Scotland should develop a process of clear prioritisation, perhaps based around the ecosystem functions and services deemed to be of most value.
The report also points out that, unlike the rest of the UK, Scotland has a statutory Land Use Strategy (LUS). This has established a series of principles and proposals for sustainable land use that explicitly account for the changing suitability of land for agricultural and forestry production. It is expected that land use planning will continue to protect prime agricultural land from development.
The Committee suggests that Scotland should take further action to improve the condition of degraded soils, restore peat habitats, better protect soils from damaging practices and encourage the wider uptake of soil conservation. Measures to reduce erosion (e.g. cover crops) or the impacts of erosion (e.g. buffer strips) could be targeted better towards vulnerable locations. Long-term monitoring of soil health, in terms of soil organic carbon levels, erosion rates and soil biota is also needed, particularly of carbon-rich soils. This monitoring should be linked to different land management strategies to address knowledge gaps of the magnitude of this risk and its geographical variations. This will have a range of co- benefits for managing a wide range of climate and non-climate related risks and avoid lock-in to a pathway where the UK’s most fertile and carbon-rich soils are lost at some point in the future.
Priorities for ClimateXChange
ClimateXChange welcomes these recommendations. They fit with our programme of soil and peatland research. We work closely with stakeholders across agriculture, forestry and planning to reduce the risk from all the issues raised in the UKCCRA2 in relation to our land and soil.
ClimateXChange Manager Ragne Low was involved in the early stages of scoping chapter 8, which considers crosscutting issues and interdependencies. Her involvement was around ensuring appropriate representation of Scotland as a Devolved Administration and as a distinctive set of geographies for climate risk. CXC as a whole has also been central in collating evidence and advice to the ASC to reflect Scotland’s particular characteristics in terms of climate change risks. Key to this was CXC’s development of the first national set of indicators of climate change adaptation in Scotland. We hope these can be used over time to track progress, and that we will also be able to address the data needs that both our work and the CCRA2 Evidence Report highlight.
CXC is working in the area of infrastructure resilience, working with the National Centre for Resilience, infrastructure operators and responsible authorities. We will collaborate to build on our existing indicators suite to ensure it is as useful as possible in addressing the issues thrown up by the Evidence Report. We will continue our support for Scottish policy makers on emerging areas like expanding our knowledge about the risks from climate change to offshore renewable energy generation – this is a bigger issue in Scotland than in the rest of the UK.
CXC is already engaged both in the CCRA2 process and in the research-policy issues the Evidence Report raises. It is clear that this Evidence Report will set the agenda for tackling climate change over the next five years, and beyond. Key to that will be further research in the areas highlighted in the Report, in particular in Chapter 5 which deals with people and the built environment. There are significant knowledge gaps about the impacts of climate change on people, and our health and wellbeing in particular. CXC stands ready to take action to fill these knowledge gaps.
The first UK climate change risk assessment was published in 2012. Whilst the list of risks today is largely the same, the 2016 Evidence Report gives us new knowledge about the actions that are required to address those risks both at a UK and a devolved level. However, this is a high level report. Adaptation is an inherently local and context specific process – depending for example on the topography, industry, infrastructure and regulatory and governance structures locally. The Adaptation Sub-Committee will publish a separate independent assessment of progress towards implementing the objectives, proposals and policies in the Scottish Climate Change Adaptation Programme (SCCAP) in September 2016.