Climate resilience in the eastern Himalayas: Integrated approaches to assessing vulnerability and developing adapta5on strategies July 14, 2013
Ryan Bartle3, Sarah Freeman
Flowing Forward: the WWF CCVA Approach • 2010 World Bank report: guiding principles for adaptaFon in the water sector • Evolved to more structured approach via applicaFons in Coastal East Africa, the Mekong Basin, Eastern Himalayas • Assesses climate change vulnerability of human and ecological systems at the landscape/river basin scale
• Directly reliant on stakeholder parFcipaFon • “TriangulaFon”: peer-‐reviewed science, community and expert parFcipatory assessment • Main objecFve: prioriFze vulnerabiliFes and develop adaptaFon acFons
The Flowing Forward Framework Resilience IdenFfy Analysis Units
Vulnerability Exposure (Impact Severity)
Adapta9on Planning Social Adap9ve Capacity
Climate Scenarios
InformaFon
Climate-‐ Development Policies Impacts Development Scenarios InsFtuFons
Social Exposure Adap9ve (Impact Severity) Capacity
General Process 1. IdenFficaFon of data and informaFon gaps 2. Data and informaFon collecFon and analysis (including community surveys) 3. Vulnerability and AdaptaFon Workshop 4. Final Outputs 5. Follow up
The Chitwan-‐Annapurna Landscape (CHAL)/Gandaki Basin
The Chitwan-‐Annapurna Landscape (CHAL)/ Gandaki Basin • North-‐south connecFvity between internaFonally renown naFonal parks and conservaFon areas • Extremely diverse sub-‐climates and ecosystems – Globally significant and endangered biodiversity
• Rapid economic growth enhancing livelihoods, development pressures on ecosystem services • Rapid infrastructure development creaFng new pressures • Climate changes already evident: seasonality, phenology, variability, extreme events
Analysis Units Human and natural systems within ecoregional gradients • Human – Infrastructure: naFonal and district roads, hydropower – urban and rural se3lements, – agro-‐ecosystems
• Natural – Forests, wetlands, rivers, cryosphere, target species
Stakeholder Driven VA Process • Through three key components of framework: – Community-‐level VA and adaptaFon planning – InformaFon collecFon and synthesis – ParFcipatory stakeholder workshop
Community VA and AdaptaFon Planning ConsultaFons • CVCAs in 6 ecologically representaFve sites • MulFfold objecFves • MulFple stages of engagement (i.e. assessment,
representaFon at the stakeholder workshop and follow up meeFngs)
Data and InformaFon CollecFon and Analysis – Studies commissioned and consultants, academics included as stakeholders in subsequent process – Climate informa9on derived from literature, trend analyses and community percepFons and validated during workshop
2050 Scenario:
(G. J. Thapa, E. Wikramanayake, J.Forrest, 2013) 37 35 33 31 29 27 25 1970
1975
1980
1985
y = 0.0273x -‐ 21.333 R² = 0.06874
June Linear (June)
1990
1995
y = 0.0275x -‐ 22.575 R² = 0.09493
July Linear (July)
2000
2005
2010
y = 0.028x -‐ 23.268 R² = 0.1023
August Linear (August)
ParFcipatory Workshop • Diverse mix of key stakeholders in the landscape – Program partners: development, conservaFon NGOs – Relevant government departments: IrrigaFon, Forestry, Agriculture, Local Development – Local governments: District and Village Development Commi3ees – Community representaFves from across the landscape – Private sector: hydropower companies Resilience IdenFfy Analysis Units
Exposure (Impact Severity)
Vulnerability
Social Adap9ve Capacity
Adapta9on Planning
Results • Not just what is most vulnerable/resilient but why – the SeF sub-‐catchment:
• high exposure to climate-‐development impacts (sand-‐ gravel mining, increasing flow variability); limited inherent resilience (connecFvity, funcFonal redundancy)
– Sub-‐tropical broadleaf forests:
• High exposure to climate-‐development impacts (deforestaFon from increasing human encroachment, producFvity declines); limited inherent resilience (fragmentaFon)
– Rural se3lements:
• High exposure to climate-‐development impacts (poor infrastructure planning + increasing severity of extreme events); limited inherent resilience (isolated from naFonal infrastructure)
Conclusions • The integrated Flowing Forward approach is valuable for mulFple reasons: – HolisFc basin-‐wide approach: glacier to terminus – SensiFzaFon and capacity building on climate issues for relevant decision-‐making stakeholders and communiFes – Aids “buy-‐in” of local communiFes and leaders to the adaptaFon process – Consensus building around priority adaptaFon acFons – Stakeholder driven planning for subsequent years of program
Thank you