We can check our proposed adaptation measures against these criteria:
There are two “Effectiveness” cards: one for the climate, which is obvious as it deals with “climate-related risks” .The other for biodiversity, because any measure that destroys biodiversity also increases climate-related risks.
Careful, this is “effective” in the IPCC meaning: not just here and now, but over the long term and without shifting to another component of the risk.
There are three types of inequality related to climate change: 1) contribution to the hazard; 2) exposure to the hazard; 3) vulnerability to the hazard. Overall, the people who have contributed the least are the most exposed and the most vulnerable in both ways. An adaptation measure must not reinforce these inequalities (e.g. by shifting the risk onto the most vulnerable). In case of increasing inequalities, it could slow down or even block the ecological transition.
Health and well-being improvements are co-benefits to look for. Negative impacts are to be avoided. A measure that is detrimental to well-being is to be rejected, because it misses the main objective of the fight against climate change: preserving human health (and that of ecosystems, without which human health is impossible).
Climate and biodiversity are two planetary limits. There are 7 others, including in particular the use of water. Check the other information about planetary boundaries, or take part in a Planetary Boundaries Fresco workshop.
Six factors (or families of limits) to be studied: 1) geophysical; 2) environmental (already partly covered by biodiversity and other planetary limits); 3) technical and technological; 4) economic and financial; 5) socio-cultural (acceptability); 6) legal.
Note: The way in which the measure is implemented may or may not make it “fair and equitable”.
Here are some terms from the IPCC glossary that we cover in the workshop, plus some simplification by Climate Clarity.
In human systems, the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects, in order to moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities. In natural systems, the process of adjustment to actual climate and its effects; human intervention may facilitate adjustment to expected climate and its effects.
Remember that adaptation is acting to reduce the consequences of the threat. It aims to provide benefits that can be local and immediate.
The point at which an actor’s objectives (or system needs) cannot be secured from intolerable risks through adaptive actions.
The presence of people; livelihoods; species or ecosystems; environmental functions, services, and resources; infrastructure; or economic, social, or cultural assets in places and settings that could be adversely affected.
In this report, feasibility refers to the potential for a mitigation or adaptation option to be implemented. Factors influencing feasibility are context-dependent, temporally dynamic and may vary between different groups and actors. Feasibility depends on geophysical, environmental-ecological, technological, economic, socio-cultural and institutional factors that enable or constrain the implementation of an option. The feasibility of options may change when different options are combined, and increase when enabling conditions are strengthened.
The potential occurrence of a natural or human-induced physical event or trend that may cause loss of life, injury, or other health impacts, as well as damage and loss to property, infrastructure, livelihoods, service provision, ecosystems and environmental resources.
The consequences of realised risks on natural and human systems, where risks result from the interactions of climate-related hazards (including extreme weather/climate events), exposure, and vulnerability. Impacts generally refer to effects on lives, livelihoods, health and well-being, ecosystems and species, economic, social and cultural assets, services (including ecosystem services), and infrastructure. Impacts may be referred to as consequences or outcomes, and can be adverse or beneficial.
A human intervention to reduce emissions or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases.
The potential for adverse consequences for human or ecological systems, recognising the diversity of values and objectives associated with such systems. In the context of climate change, risks can arise from potential impacts of climate change as well as human responses to climate change. Relevant adverse consequences include those on lives, livelihoods, health and well-being, economic, social and cultural assets and investments, infrastructure, services (including ecosystem services), ecosystems and species.
In the context of climate change impacts, risks result from dynamic interactions between climate-related hazards with the exposure and vulnerability of the affected human or ecological system to the hazards. Hazards, exposure and vulnerability may each be subject to uncertainty in terms of magnitude and likelihood of occurrence, and each may change over time and space due to socio-economic changes and human decision-making.
In the context of climate change responses, risks result from the potential for such responses not achieving the intended objective(s), or from potential trade-offs with, or negative side-effects on, other societal objectives, such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Risks can arise, for example, from uncertainty in implementation, effectiveness or outcomes of climate policy, climate-related investments, technology development or adoption, and system transitions.
The planetary boundaries outline the safe limits of pressure that humans can apply on 9 key processes which maintain a stable and resilient Earth.
The diagram below outlines their boundaries.
Each has a defined “safe operating space” in green. There are 3 in this zone.
Crossing out of the safe operating space means the planetary boundary is transgressed, shown in the orange/red. Each of the 6 boundaries that have been crossed means there is existential risk.
The heating of Earth, caused by increased greenhouse gasses. This causes an increase in global temperatures and alters climate patterns.
The introduction of novel entities includes synthetic chemicals and substances (e.g. microplastics, endocrine disruptors, organic pollutants), anthropogenically mobilised radioactive materials (e.g. nuclear waste, nuclear weapons) and more.
The ozone layer protects life on Earth from harmful ultraviolet radiation (UV). The thinning of the ozone layer in the upper atmosphere, primarily due to human-made chemicals, allows more harmful UV radiation to reach Earth’s surface.
The rise in airborne particles from human activities influences the climate by altering temperature and rain patterns.
The oceans acidify as they absorb CO2 from the air. CO2 released by human activities. This process harms calcifying organisms, impacting marine ecosystems, and reduces the ocean’s efficiency in acting as a carbon sink.
Human extraction, spraying, release and waste of nutrients, fertilisers, and sewages change how abundant key nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorous are. This affects cycles which are crucial for supporting life and maintaining ecosystems.
Disturbing the water cycles of water in bodies of water (blue water) and water in ecosystems (green water) affects natural systems.
For example: deforestation and urbanisation, reduces natural functions like carbon sequestration, moisture recycling, and habitats for wildlife, all crucial for Earth system health.
Living organisms and ecosystems regulate the planet’s cycles of water, greenhouse gases, nutrients and more. They are losing diversity, extent and health.
Contact Climate Clarity to organise this adaptation or planetary boundaries workshop for your organisation.
