Why a handbook on disaster risk reduction (DRR) including climate change adaptation (CCA)? Part of the answer lies in the definitions and application of these terms.
DRR Includes CCA
According to the 2014 glossary of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), CCA is âThe process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects. In human systems, adaptation seeks to moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities. In natural systems, human intervention may facilitate adjustment to expected climate and its effectsâ (http://ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/WGIIAR5-Glossary_FGD.pdf). In simple terms, it is about dealing with climate.
The key word is âadjustmentâ, noting that âadaptationâ is, in effect, defined as âadjustingâ. In fact, âadjustmentâ is the term that the disasters field used for several decades prior to climate change being accepted as a global issue. Not all languages differentiate between âadaptâ and âadjustâ, making it difficult to explain the difference, especially for policies and on-the-ground action. The forms of action that CCA suggests are sensible: reducing harm from any potential hazards which manifest as the climate changes while taking advantage of emergent opportunities.
Examples are dealing with floods, storms, landslides, and droughts to avoid disasters occurring; having reliable water and food supplies; ensuring healthy ecosystems; and developing overall livelihood strategies that are suitable under a wide range of climatic conditions. These activities are basic development and sustainability processes. No activities new or exclusive to climate change are enacted, instead focusing on needed development approaches. CCA, as a standalone approach to dealing with climate processes, therefore reasserts well-known and long-accepted development priorities.
DRR is defined by the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR, formerly the secretariat of the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction) as âThe concept and practice of reducing disaster risks through systematic efforts to analyse and manage the causal factors of disastersâ (http://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/terminology). This definition is a bit circular, in that âdisaster risk reductionâ is defined as âreducing disaster riskâ, plus many terms such as âriskâ, âdisasterâ, and âdisaster riskâ can be and have been deconstructed and critiqued. On the positive side, this definition incorporates theory and practice, links to understanding and acting, and highlights the importance of root causes to avoid problems in the first place.
The definitions of DRR and CCA make it evident that they have numerous similarities. Despite much debate and separation, there should never be any construction of DRR and CCA as being opposites, as opposing one another, or as precluding each other. Instead, to a large degree, DRRâs definition embraces the elements of CCAâs definition, generalising it beyond climate and making it more straightforward. DRRâs inclusion of CCA can be examined further to highlight differences between them (Table 1.1).
For factor 1 in Table 1.1 (hazards), CCA, by definition, deals with only climate and hence with only climate-related environmental hazards. Examples are too much or too little precipitation, fog, storms, and wind. Some environmental hazards such as wildfires and landslides can be climate-driven, climate-influenced, or with limited connection to climate. Some biological and geological environmental hazards â such as epidemics, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and tsunamis â have links to climate, and on occasion influence or are influenced by climate, but are generally considered to be comparatively separate from climate change. One notable exception is climate changeâs influence on many disease vectors, such as by expanding their geographic ranges, speeding up their life cycles, or increasing precipitation intensity which washes away vector eggs and larvae. Climate influencers other than climate change, which can also substantially influence environmental hazards, include the El Niño-Southern Oscillation cycle, the North Atlantic Oscillation, and the Indian Ocean Dipole.
While CCA is about changes to the climate, DRR by definition deals with all environmental hazards and environmental hazard influencers, including climate and its trends, changes, variabilities, and cycles. All the environmental hazards mentioned in the previous paragraph â and all the environmental hazards and hazard influencers connected with climate change â are considered by DRR. Consequently, in terms of hazards considered, factor 1 in Table 1.1 (hazards) shows that DRR deals with the hazards relevant to CCA and many more.
Consequently, factor 2 in Table 1.1 (timescale) emerges. Because DRR deals with all hazards, by definition, DRR must deal with all timescales, by definition, from sudden-onset hazards such as earthquakes through to decades-long trends in climate. DRR actions also encompass all time-scales, from learning the basics of first aid which can be achieved in a few hours to formulating, promulgating, and enforcing design, building, and planning codes which could require decades. Whether short-term or long-term, DRR covers environmental hazards, hazard influencers, and actions to deal with those hazards across all timescales.
Conversely, CCA by definition tackles climate, which means long-term interests. Climate, by the IPCCâs definition (http://ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/WGIIAR5-Glossary_FGD.pdf), is the long-term average of weather parameters (e.g., air temperature, wind speed and direction, and precipitation volume and rate) usually over a period of thirty years. Therefore, CCA considers dealing with long-term influences, usually seeking long-term actions. Short-term phenomena and responses are not typically the first priority of CCA.
Table 1.1 Comparing DRR and CCA
| Factor | DRR | CCA |
|
| 1. Hazards | All hazards | Only climate-related hazards |
| 2. Timescale | Long and short term | Long term |
| 3. Societyâenvironment interactions | Society â â environment | Environment â society |
Since CCA covers the long-term while DRR covers all timescales, factor 2 in Table 1.1 (time-scale) demonstrates that DRR deals with the timescales relevant to CCA and much more.
Factor 3 in Table 1.1 (societyâenvironment interactions) illustrates the final potential divergence between CCA and DRR: societyâenvironment interactions. DRRâs definition explicitly states that its purpose is to address âthe causal factors of disastersâ. Implicit is that, irrespective of the origin of the root causes, they will be addressed, whether from society, from the environment, or from their interaction. The key is to make decisions that avoid disasters manifesting in the first place or that reduce disaster impacts.
In contrast, CCA aims for society to react âto actual or expected climate and its effectsâ (see the IPCC definition above). That is, await climatic stimuli or changes, or analyses about climatic stimuli or changes, and respond to this phenomenon, actual or expected. CCA is waiting for the environment to change, or to have expectations of the environment changing, and then human systems respond.
The approaches of both CCA and DRR are needed. We do not and cannot know exactly what the environment will do, so it is sometimes appropriate to wait, to run models, to project outcomes, and to estimate consequences in order to react to that information, as per CCA. DRR also involves these elements, which is often integrated into disaster preparedness and emergency planning, as well as being foundational for many aspects of damage mitigation and disaster prevention. DRR, however, does more than respond to actual or expected environmental stimuli, deliberately setting out to reduce or eliminate risks from environmental hazards and hazard influencers based on societal needs, not just on what the environment does or is expected to do. As such, factor 3 (societyâenvironment interactions) illustrates that DRR encompasses CCAâs activities and covers much more than CCA.
Climate change mitigation, to some extent, seeks to reduce or eliminate risks due to climate change by stopping climate change from happening â or, at least, by reducing the ensuing changes to the climate and environment. Climate change mitigation has been deliberately separated from CCA to a large degree by, more or less, setting up climate change mitigation and CCA as different fields with different institutions, different vocabularies, and different strategies. The origins of this separation are obscure, especially given that many were advocating for keeping them joined as the IPCC was being founded.
Three key factors of the DRR and CCA definitions are examined in Table 1.1, demonstrating that, in each case, DRR does what CCA does â and much more. Consequently, DRR encompasses CCA meaning that CCA sits as a subset within DRR.
Not accepting that DRR includes CCA could lead to problems, such as successfully adapting to climate change while increasing disaster risk. Consider a school that is built in a location outside the expected floodplain under climate change, demonstrating CCA (as well as DRR for floods). The school might also be built with its own renewable energy systems for local electricity generation alongside natural ventilation reducing the need for electricity; that is, implementing climate change mitigation. If the school is built without fire-resistance measures, and could be in a seismic zone without earthquake-resistance measures, then CCA has been achieved without DRR.
Conversely, if a school is meant to be disaster-resistant, then all hazards will be addressed. It will have fire-resistance measures, earthquake-resistance measures, and will be built outside the expected floodplain under climate change. DRR is achieved and, by consequence, CCA is achieved. DRR also means maintaining essential services after an environmental hazard appears. Reduced electricity demand and local electricity generation can assist in maintaining electricity needs by not relying on external sources. Implementing DRR for a school could also mean having its own renewable energy systems for local electricity generation alongside natural ventilation design.
In summary, pursuing CCA or climate change mitigation does not inevitably yield full DRR. Pursuing DRR, by definition, means implementing all CCA measures that are needed and often many climate change mitigation measures. Based on basic definitions from IPCC and UNISDR, DRR includes CCA.
CCAâs Separation
Despite the importance of working together and joining forces to achieve a safer world, the definitions of DRR and CCA are often ignored in order to seek separation of climate change from wider development contexts. The view of climate change as being a separate issue is epitomised by the separate UN processes for it. IPCC seeks government member consensus on the synthesis and assessment of the state of climate change science. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) seeks international regimes to address climate change, originally focused on climate change mitigation but now increasingly addressing CCA. Neither institution is well connected to DRR.
Attempts at linking climate change to wider processes such as DRR are made. IPCC commissions special reports on targeted topics. In 2012, a Special Report was published entitled âManaging the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX)â. The idea was to bring together DRR and CCA concepts to seek a melding of the ideas. The result was an expostulation of CCAâs views of DRR without providing equal balance to DRRâs views of CCA. Vocabulary, citations, and approaches from CCA dominated, with the reportâs ethos etching in the DRRâCCA separation by claiming some differences, rather than using basic definitions and all literature to explain how CCA sits within DRR.
UNFCCC accords, most notably the widely covered Paris Agreement from December 2015, often acknowledge the existence of DRR and its international processes, but rarely engage directly with them. Part of the reason is the legalities. UN processes for DRR and CCA are entirely divorced, with the CCA regime aiming for legally binding international treaties whereas DRR seeks voluntary agreements. Merging them would encroach on so much established territory and would threaten so many vested interests within the UN system and national governments, that from a practical perspective, it would be unlikely to succeed even if the suggestion were discussed at the highest levels. The DRR agreements place climate change increasingly high on the DRR agenda, emphasising the jurisdiction of UNFCCC over climate change related processes.
The slow takeover by climate change of DRR and other development concerns while enshrining the separation has three main consequences. First, CCA can be a distraction from root causes and wider concerns. The earlier example of the school illustrates. If climate change dominates, then new schools might be built for only CCA rather than for wider DRR and development. It makes much more sense to consider development including DRR so that CCA is automatically included, rather than being distracted by CCA so that other needed efforts fall by the wayside.
Additionally, focusing on only long-ter...
