Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 17
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction
A
daptation to climate change requires attention now because impacts are
already being felt across the United States and further impacts are unavoid-
able, regardless of how immediately and stringently greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions are limited (IPCC, 2007a; USGCRP, 2009). Adaptation to climate variability is
nothing new to humanity, but it now seems very likely that climate conditions by the
later part of the 21st century will move outside the range of past human experiences
(IPCC, 2007b; Solomon et al., 2009). Therefore, historical records and past experience
are becoming incomplete guides for the future, and adaptation to climate change
needs to become a high national priority. Either we adapt by mobilizing to reduce sen-
sitivities to climate change and to increase coping capacities now, or we will adapt by
accepting and living with impacts that are likely in many cases to disrupt our lives and
livelihoods. The questions are how, where, and when to adapt—and whether in some
cases, if climate change is relatively severe, we may face limits on our ability to avoid
painful impacts by adapting.
ADAPTATION: KEy QuESTIONS, CHALLENgES, AND OPPORTuNITIES
Why Consider Adaptation Now?
Society and nature have always adjusted to climate variability and weather extremes,
but climate change is moving climate conditions outside the range of past human
experiences (IPCC, 2007b; Solomon et al., 2009). While previous experience in coping
with climate variability or extremes can provide some valuable lessons for adapting
to climate change, there are important differences between coping with variability
and planning for climate change. Climate change has the potential to bring about
abrupt changes that push the climate system across thresholds, creating novel condi-
tions (Lenton et al., 2008). Likewise, thresholds in ecosystems (Adger et al., 2009; CCSP,
2009a) and human systems could be crossed, potentially overwhelming their adaptive
capacity.
The prospect that the climate system, ecosystems, or human systems may experience
significant transitions to new states renders our previous experience an incomplete
guide for future adaptation. For example, it is unclear whether managing natural
ecosystems for resilience (i.e., assisting ecosystems to return to a previous natural
OCR for page 18
A D A P T I N G T O T H E I M PA C T S O F C L I M AT E C H A N G E
state after a disturbance) will remain a valid approach under future climate conditions,
because ecosystems might cross thresholds into new steady states (West et al., 2009).
Thus, managing certain ecosystems toward a new “natural” state might be a more
viable strategy. Because of the potential for crossing such thresholds, adaptation to
climate change begins with building adaptive capacities, frameworks, and institutional
structures that can cope with future conditions that are beyond past experience.
Adaptation requires maintaining a long-term perspective because there are consider-
able uncertainties in estimating the nature, timing, and magnitude of climate impacts.
This uncertainty involves the trajectory of future emissions and resulting changes
in the mean climate conditions and the range of climate variability as well as other
factors. Translating information at a global scale to local and regional scales can also
contribute to uncertainty. Thus, precise predictions of many climate impacts are not
available, despite the fact that the probability of some impacts is relatively high (e.g.,
loss of snowpack in the West and an ice-free Arctic in the summer). Adaptation to
climate change calls for a new paradigm for considering a range of possible future
climate conditions and associated changes in human systems and ecosystems, and
for managing risks by recognizing prospects for departures from historical condi-
tions, trends, and variation. This does not mean waiting until uncertainties have been
reduced to consider adaptation actions, because there is a real risk that impacts could
emerge too rapidly or too powerfully for delayed adaptations to reduce major disrup-
tions to human and natural systems. Mobilizing now to increase the nation’s adaptive
capacity can be viewed as an insurance policy against an uncertain future. (See Box 1.1
for definitions of key terms used in this report.)
What Are the Risks?
Across the vast area of the United States and islands located within U.S. territory, many
regions, sectors, populations, or resources exhibit vulnerabilities to climate variations
and change (Figure 1.1). A recent report of the U.S. Global Change Research Program
(USGCRP) highlights the range of climate change impacts on the United States (2009).
Areas of particular concern include low-lying coastlines, especially coastal areas of
the Southeast that are susceptible to hurricanes, sea level rise, saltwater intrusion, and
land subsidence; the West, where water supplies are largely dependent on snowpack,
particularly those with little storage relative to annual flow; inner cities in the Midwest
and Northeast, where many residents do not have access to air conditioning; natural
ecosystems and native villages in northern Alaska that are subject to rapid changes
in temperature, thawing of permafrost, and loss of sea ice; and Western forests that
are susceptible to wildfire and bark beetle infestation. In the absence of adaptation,
OCR for page 19
Introduction
bOx 1.1
Definitions of Key Terms
Adapt, Adaptation: Adjustment in natural or human systems to a new or changing environment
that exploits beneficial opportunities or moderates negative effects.
Adaptive Capacity: The ability of a system to adjust to climate change (including climate vari-
ability and extremes) to moderate potential damages, to take advantage of opportunities, or to
cope with the consequences.
Resilience: A capability to anticipate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from significant multi-
hazard threats with minimum damage to social well-being, the economy, and the environment.
Risk: A combination of the magnitude of the potential consequence(s) of climate change impact(s)
and the likelihood that the consequence(s) will occur.
vulnerability: The degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to cope with, adverse
effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes. Vulnerability is a function of
the character, magnitude, and rate of climate variation to which a system is exposed, its sensitivity,
and its adaptive capacity.
FIguRE 1.1 An illustration of the range of climate change impacts across the United States. SOURCE:
International Mapping Associates.
OCR for page 20
A D A P T I N G T O T H E I M PA C T S O F C L I M AT E C H A N G E
the risks of negative consequences that could accompany these types of impacts are
heightened.
How Can We Adapt?
Because impacts of and vulnerabilities to climate change vary greatly across regions
and sectors, adaptation decisions are fundamentally place-based, occurring at mul-
tiple scales, from that of the individual household or firm, to cities, regions, states,
tribes, corporations, and economic sectors, to the level of the federal government and
agencies within it that manage land and other resources. Considering the range, and
in some instances the severity of climate change risks, it seems clear that capacities
currently available for adaptation at the local and state levels are inadequate to ad-
dress risks to health, well-being, property, and ecosystem services in many regions of
the United States. While some localities and states have attempted to formulate adap-
tation strategies, they often lack the information, resources, and decision-making tools
to pursue these plans. Meanwhile, there is a growing recognition that a new collabora-
tive national effort is needed in support of adaptation across all scales, nationally and
internationally (GAO, 2009a; NRC, 2009a,b).
Choices regarding how and when to adapt vary greatly. Adaptation could involve an
immediate mobilization to reduce vulnerability to climate change and increase adap-
tive capacity. Or adaptation could take the form of accepting, responding to, and living
with impacts that could in many cases be disruptive of our lives and livelihoods. De-
veloping a framework for selecting among these types of adaptation options is critical
given that, in different locations or for different sectors, the same strategy may pro-
duce very different results. This report identifies a number of choices that are available
and outlines a method for selecting options based on a risk-management approach.
Adaptation to climate change can be categorized as “autonomous” or “planned.”
Autonomous adaptations are actions taken voluntarily by decision makers (such as
farmers or city leaders) whose risk management is motivated by information, market
signals, co-benefits, and other factors. Planned adaptations are interventions by gov-
ernments to address needs judged unlikely to be met by autonomous actions—often
adaptations larger in scale and/or resource requirements. The public sector plays
important roles in both cases. Governments support autonomous adaptation by
providing information, shaping market conditions through taxes and other policies
(along with their own market decisions), and helping to enlarge portfolios of technol-
ogies and other alternatives for decentralized actions. Governments can also act more
0
OCR for page 21
Introduction
directly by developing plans and strategies, providing resources, and undertaking
projects (such as infrastructure development).
What Are the Challenges and Opportunities?
Research on how to adapt to the many changes in the climate system has lagged be-
hind efforts to identify policies to limit GHG emissions for many reasons, including the
perception that efforts to adapt might reduce the commitment to limiting GHGs and
result in more challenges in the long term. One consequence has been that adapta-
tion actions have not been widely considered, and knowledge about climate change
adaptation has been incompletely developed.
Reluctance to invest in adaptation research and actions is partly due to the fact that
climate change is a slow-onset, multigenerational problem while decision makers tend
to focus on short-term concerns and benefits. There is considerable empirical evidence
suggesting that when individuals and businesses plan for the future, they do not fully
weigh the long-term benefits of investing in loss-reduction measures, especially if
there is only a small likelihood of reaping financial returns. The upfront costs of these
protective measures loom disproportionately high relative to delayed expected ben-
efits over time, especially given discount rates that are usually applied to most public
and private investment. However, the tendency for people to focus on the short run
and to ignore low-probability events below their threshold level of concern can have
severe long-run consequences (Kunreuther and Michel-Kerjan, 2009).
Because climate conditions by the later part of the 21st century will likely be outside
the range of past human experiences, it is difficult to make decisions now about the
full range of anticipated climate change impacts in 2050 or 2100. Policy makers will
need to select options that are flexible enough not to inadvertently preclude other
options that may be needed or become available in the future (Adger et al., 2009).
An additional challenge is that climate change impacts are rarely the key drivers of
vulnerability. Other factors determining vulnerability include existing inequalities,
demographics, land use and economic changes, dwindling nonrenewable resources,
public health, and institutional and technological change (IPCC, 2007a). Developing
proactive strategies and planning processes that consider multiple perspectives, mul-
tiple stressors, multiple time horizons related to intergenerational equity issues, and
multiple competing interests is a complex challenge, calling for broad collaborations
and partnerships.
Despite these and other challenges, adaptation activities can produce many benefits
that support other social objectives, such as sustainable development, public health,
OCR for page 22
A D A P T I N G T O T H E I M PA C T S O F C L I M AT E C H A N G E
economic competitiveness, national security, and international cooperation. Risk man-
agement for climate change impacts often helps to address other stresses on human
and natural systems as well, and attention to climate change adaptation aims and
strategies can be a catalyst for increased attention to relatively long-term sustainabil-
ity objectives and choices.
SCOPE AND PuRPOSE OF THE REPORT
This study and the overall America’s Climate Choices suite of activities respond to a
request by the U.S. Congress for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) to execute an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to establish
a committee that will “investigate and study the serious and sweeping issues relat-
ing to global climate change and make recommendations regarding what steps must
be taken and what strategies must be adopted in response to global climate change,
including the science and technology challenges thereof.” This panel was charged to
describe, analyze, and assess actions and strategies to reduce vulnerability, increase
adaptive capacity, improve resilience, and promote successful adaptation to climate
change in different regions, sectors, systems, and populations across the nation. The
panel’s report draws on a wide range of sources and case studies to identify lessons
learned from past experiences, promising current approaches, and potential new
directions.
The challenges of this panel’s assignment to “provide advice about what to do about
adaptation” in the United States are numerous. The panel chose to provide a “menu” il-
lustrating the long list of options available for consideration in adaptation planning for
specific sectors. It uses the concept of risk management, broadly construed, to frame
the process of planning and selecting approaches to climate change adaptation. The
panel has outlined a number of principles for developing an adaptation strategy that
addresses issues within the boundaries of the United States as well as in the interna-
tional context. The decision to select a risk-management framework reflects an emerg-
ing scientific consensus that the United States will not be able to eliminate all risks
associated with climate change; however, if the nation prioritizes activities well, it will
be possible to minimize negative impacts and maximize the opportunities associated
with climate change. The decision also reflects the panel’s perspective that the needed
actions involve limiting risks in the broadest sense—including risks associated with
current and future political, economic, social, and environmental realities.
OCR for page 23
Introduction
PRINCIPLES TO guIDE CLIMATE CHANgE ADAPTATION
This report views and discusses adaptation through the lens of long-term sustain-
ability and emphasizes cross-sectoral integration and an inclusive approach, because
adaptation choices are linked directly to choices about limiting GHG and sustainable
use of resources. It also recognizes the inevitability of tradeoffs and value judgments
associated with all adaptation choices (Adger et al., 2009; Anderies et al., 2004; Tainter,
2003). For example, it is a fact that climate change “involves harm to some—now and
in the future—on the basis of gain to others (in the past, present and future)” (Adger et
al., 2009). Therefore, adaptation choices and decisions require both a scientific assess-
ment of impacts and socioeconomic vulnerabilities and an assessment of their sensi-
tivity to values and political decisions.
In preparing for its assignment, the panel recognized that its assessments and conclu-
sions would be shaped by the values that its members brought to the group process.
It chooses, therefore, to explicitly state the principles that guided the panel’s work and
to offer them as a possible set of criteria by which adaptation plans, policies, and adap-
tation options might be evaluated by others:
1. In making adaptation decisions, focus not only on optimizing conditions for the
current generation, but also look several generations ahead and consider ways
to reduce risk over time. Some adaptation decisions must be taken today,
but planning needs to focus toward the future, when the risks from climate
change will be greatest. It follows that we must guard against the possibility
that current actions could actually exacerbate either exposure or sensitivity of
future generations to these growing risks.
2. Account for the impacts of adaptation decisions on natural and social systems
as well as on individuals, firms, government institutions, and infrastructure. For
example, energy infrastructure, production processes, ecosystems, and emer-
gency response capacity have complex and multiple interrelated components,
yet their capacity to function needs to be protected and/or enhanced in the
context of adaptation. The mechanisms established for ongoing evaluation of
progress need to include assessments of effects on such synergistic systems.
3. Recognize that ecosystem structure and functioning are particularly vulnerable
to climate change and need consideration in adaptation decisions. While human
systems can use advanced technology and mobility to adapt, some ecosystem
components are relatively limited in their ability to adapt to rapid rates of
change. The intimate dependence of humans on the vital services provided by
natural ecosystems needs to be recognized.
OCR for page 24
A D A P T I N G T O T H E I M PA C T S O F C L I M AT E C H A N G E
4. Evaluate solutions from a perspective of sustainability so that social, economic,
and environmental ramifications of proposed strategies and actions are explicitly
recognized. Adaptation decisions should be integrated into the broader con-
text of sustainable development.
5. Acknowledge equity and justice in adaptation decisions; there is a need to priori
tize helping those with a higher degree of vulnerability to become more resilient.
The capacity to adapt is a critical feature of the nation’s ability to respond
to climate change. There are vulnerable populations and ecosystems in the
nation, and their welfare is considered a high priority in adaptation actions.
Likewise, while considering international investments, reducing risk and vul-
nerability in other countries is considered a high priority.
6. There is a need to identify the potential impacts of proposed adaptation options
on all affected parties. It is important to consider the expected costs and ben-
efits from adaptation programs to those who are affected by them, including
the potential for unintended consequences.
7. Develop a portfolio approach for addressing adaptation problems, including a
suite of technology and socialbehavioraleconomic options. The same underly-
ing reality that speaks to the need for diversification in the financial sector
applies to climate change response strategies.
8. Develop methods of evaluation so that the risk of inactions can be compared with
the risk of proposed actions. The implications of proposed actions for public
policy need to be recognized and explored so that decision makers can clearly
see tradeoffs expressed not only in terms of costs and benefits but also in
terms of short- and long-term risks.
9. Recognize the international implications of U.S. adaptation and emissionsreduc
tion efforts, as well as the impacts on the United States of decisions made by other
countries. The success of U.S. adaptation and mitigation efforts is in large part
dependent on cooperative efforts across the globe.
ORgANIzATION OF THE REPORT
Identifying adaptation options and strategies to respond to climate change requires
an understanding of anticipated changes in temperature and other climate variables
and how these will in turn affect economic sectors and natural and human systems. In
Chapter 2, the panel explores the impacts of projected changes in temperature and
precipitation on natural resources, infrastructure, human health, and the environment.
The chapter also identifies the scientific challenges that remain in assessing climate
change impacts and vulnerabilities for adaptation.
OCR for page 25
Introduction
Chapter 3 addresses the panel’s charge to identify short-term options for adapting to
climate change at different government levels and in different sectors by examining
ongoing domestic and international adaptation activities for lessons learned. A menu
of options for adapting to climate variability and other stressors is provided for par-
ticular decision needs in various sectors: ecosystems, agriculture and forestry, water,
health, transportation, energy, and coastal regions. Furthermore, the chapter empha-
sizes the importance of comprehensive strategies to address multiple stresses, to
increase the efficient use of adaptation resources, and to avoid inadvertent maladap-
tive actions.
In Chapter 4, the report highlights impediments to adaptation and an approach to
overcoming these challenges. The approach involves an adaptive risk-management
framework combining a portfolio of adaptation and emissions-reduction strategies,
all of which should include provisions for learning by doing. The report draws on the
example of New York City’s adaptation efforts to illustrate how to develop an action-
oriented adaptation strategy, principles for developing an adaptation plan, methods
for selecting adaptation options, and tools and decision makers necessary for imple-
menting an adaptation plan. Research needs to expand on adaptation opportunities
are also identified.
Chapter 5 addresses the panel’s charge to identify long-term strategies and oppor-
tunities to adapt to climate change. It demonstrates that effective adaptation will
require the development of the capacity to adapt, which includes not only infrastruc-
ture and other investments but also more flexible institutions and investments in
both adaptation processes and research on adaptation processes and outcomes. The
chapter discusses the current lack of institutional capacity to build and implement an
effective national adaptation effort, even to support the most vulnerable regions and
sectors (those that are affected most immediately and severely by climate change).
Because the nation lacks experience in and knowledge about how to adapt to rapid
changes in the climate system, the chapter describes how adaptation capacity can be
optimized through ongoing assessments of vulnerability and of the effectiveness of
alternative adaptation options. Finally, Chapter 5 identifies the role of various decision
makers at local, state, and federal government levels, as well as in the private sector, in
building adaptive capacity and implementing climate change adaptation.
Chapter 6 focuses on the opportunities and rationale for considering adaptation
within the international context. U.S. relationships with other countries will be affected
in numerous ways by choices made in regards to addressing national and interna-
tional resilience to climate change and supporting adaptation in especially vulner-
able areas. At a fundamental level, the decisions made by individual governments are
OCR for page 26
A D A P T I N G T O T H E I M PA C T S O F C L I M AT E C H A N G E
linked to impacts in other countries, through effects on the climate system, the global
economy, and multiple other ways. The chapter concludes by highlighting the benefits
of integrating climate change adaptation objectives into a range of foreign policy,
development assistance, and capacity-building efforts, to improve the nation’s ability
to influence a broader range of outcomes, including economic and national security
considerations.
Chapter 7 discusses the need for focused science and technology improvements to
support adaptation activities, including evaluation of both gradual climate change
and potential abrupt tipping points. It further elaborates on major challenges for
adaptation research, including an improved understanding of human behavior affect-
ing adaptation measures and how climate change adaptation relates to questions of
sustainability. The chapter identifies a number of sector-specific adaptation options
that would benefit from science and technology advances.
Chapter 8 provides a summary of the panel’s conclusions and recommendations. The
chapter emphasizes a need for broad-based national collaboration in planning and
implementing adaptation actions, and it examines opportunities for near-term ac-
tions that would enhance the nation’s adaptive capacity. This has profound meaning
for both the near term and the long term. In the near term, America’s choices will be
focused mainly on adaptation actions that reduce risks from climate change impacts
while at the same time helping to meet other needs, such as reducing risks from
climate variability or reducing threats that could undermine near-term economic and
social development. The emphasis will be on how climate change adaptation offers
co-benefits as it reduces vulnerabilities related to ecosystem stress, water resource
management, community resilience, human health, energy security, and other social
concerns. This report identifies a wide variety of possible adaptation actions, some
of which represent relatively low net costs to decision makers in many locations and
sectors and have the potential for co-benefits (Chapter 3), along with strategies for
identifying and assessing such possible actions (Chapter 4) and opportunities for in-
stitutional partnerships as the nation seeks to work together in its response to climate
change impacts (Chapter 5).
In the longer term, America’s choices will be focused mainly on three needs: (1) en-
suring the development of adaptive institutions that continually consider further
actions to cope with longer-term impacts and vulnerabilities, and also ensuring that
these institutions are supported by systems that monitor emerging climate condi-
tions and their effects and provide feedback about experiences with climate change
adaptation (Chapters 4 and 5); (2) enlarging our range of choices by strengthening the
science and technology that open new options for action and significantly improve
OCR for page 27
Introduction
our knowledge of their benefits, costs, potentials, and possible limits (Chapter 7); and
(3) sharing the responsibility for supporting adaptation to climate change impacts
in other areas of the world that are not capable of adapting on their own (Chapter 6).
Through the pursuit of these near- and long-term adaptations, America can minimize
harm and take advantage of opportunities that may result from a changing environ-
ment while sustaining human welfare and ecological integrity.
OCR for page 28
