IWC4 – Peer-to-Peer Assist Clinics

Clinic 7: Climate Change Adaptation

Climate change adaptation was a popular topic, indicating high demand for information and support on the issue among IW projects. With about 25 people attending, the group was split into two. Outputs from both discussions are summarised.

What was discussed?

Participants identified challenges posed by climate change. There was interest in both how best to respond to current or future climate change impacts and in how to integrate climate change into project designs, assessments and management.

Impacts raised included:

· what are effective responses to saline intrusion of groundwater – eg in Tanzania?

· how to plan for and support community coping strategies for more frequent floods and droughts – eg in Zambia?

· how to adapt to increased glacier melt and eventual decline of glacier runoff – eg. in the Andes and Hindu Kush-Himal?

· how to assess vulnerability and what sectors have the highest priority – eg. in the Caucasus?

· how to manage conflicts between agriculture, fisheries and livestock herder driven by drastic decline in rainfall – eg. in the Lake Chad basin?

· how to manage impacts on fisheries such as shifts in species distributions and changes in abundance – eg. in the Benguela LME

GEF and project issues raised were:

· NAPAs are done at national level, but adaptation is best implemented at basin and community levels, and for IW action plans need to be trans-boundary. There is often a mismatch in priorities and NAPAs can be inadequate for use in basin assessments and action plans. As a result, requirements to include adaptation in IW projects end up as ad hoc actions. GEF projects therefore need support and access to tools for use in vulnerability assessments.

· Information and data on climate change impacts is never good enough. Uncertainty increases as scale diminishes. How do we cope with uncertainty?

· How do we access experience and information from other basins, LMEs or countries?

· What is the role of GEF funding in adaptation? A lot of adaptation will be done by local people – eg. changes in farming systems to better cope with drought. The role of GEF is then as an enabler of adaptive capacity (knowledge, technology, finance, policy, institutions…). Also though, some adaptation will take place at larger scales and involve direct intervention by governments in building infrastructure, or moving populations. The role of GEF might then be to mitigate environmental impacts.

· Restriction of GEF to funding of incremental global benefits may be a constraint in many circumstances. Benefits of adaptation will often be very local, so what is eligible and what is not?

· Increased frequency of floods and droughts and sea-level rise mean demands for new infrastructure will grow – eg. more storage is needed. GEF has a role to play in making sure new infrastructure is designed and operated to minimise environmental impacts. Also, assessments of infrastructure needs must have a broad view of infrastructure – eg. lakes, aquifers, wetlands and the condition of the basin. Thus, some investment will be in restoration and management of ecosystems goods and services in river basins.

· Mitigation is dealt with by Kyoto. Adaptation needs to be raised to the same level, with a global framework for enabling and resourcing adaptation.

Any consensus?

· We must adapt to increasing frequency and amplitude of extreme events, including floods, droughts, sea-level rise and sea temperature increase and fluctuations.

· Need to raise the priority of adaptation, make it equal in urgency to mitigation

· Adaptation best planned and implemented at basin (LME) and community levels

· Infrastructure planning and investment needs to integrate multiple-use management of basins and ecosystem goods and services.

· Capacity building in adaptation and knowledge sharing are urgent priorities for GEF projects.

Anyone’s problems solved?

Recommendations

· Policymakers need to know what other countries and basins are doing. Therefore an adaptation clearing house is needed, set up perhaps as a satellite of IW:LEARN, for knowledge sharing on:

o eg. adaptation strategies, key sectors for national studies/assessments of reslience capacity

o types of technologies, including infrastructure and agricultural practices that are being tried

o types of risk management approaches, including security funds, insurance schemes, new infrastructure specifications

o information from private sector and universities

· Capacity building is needed in GEF projects and among partners. Priorities are 1. assessment of vulnerability and effective adaptation strategies and 2. risk management and planning with uncertainty.

· Demands for development of hard infrastructure as an adaptation response to climate change impacts on water will grow louder – and probably soon. Through IW projects, GEF should ensure that needs assessments incorporate ecosystems goods and services (lakes, aquifers, wetlands, floodplains, mangroves…) and investment in ecosystem restoration or management is used as an option where appropriate.

Personal Follow-Up Actions

Converted with Word to HTML.