Post on 13-Mar-2016
description
Water Security and Economic Growth: an imperative for climate change adaptation
Casey Brown, PhD, PE University of Massachusetts hydrosystems.ecs.umass.edu
Oxford Water Security Conference
18 April 2012
Introduction
• Water security is necessary for economic growth
• Achieving water security requires managing risk
• The relevant climate risk in most cases is variability
• A major risk of climate change to growth is uncertainty leading to inaction
Per Capita GDP vs Latitude
(Sachs, 2001)
Rainfall Variability and GDP
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
GDP and Rainfall Variability
Mean Annual Rainfall
Monthly Rainfall Variability
Bubble Size = GDP per capita
(Blue = low interannual variability of rainfall)
Rainfall Variability and GDP
GDP and Rainfall Variability
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Mean Annual Rainfall
Monthly Rainfall Variability
Bubble Size = GDP per capita
(Blue = low interannual variability of rainfall)
Wealthy nations share a small
window of favorable climate
(low variability; moderate rainfall)
Hydroclimate risk to economic
growth
in sub-Saharan Africa
Casey Brown · Robyn Meeks ·
Kenneth Hunu · Winston Yu
Climactic Change 2011
• Hydroclimate variability is the dominant and negative climate effect on economic growth
• 10% increase in drought area causes a 40% reduction in annual growth in SSA
• Globally, 10% increase in drought area causes a 30% reduction in annual growth
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001
GDP per Capita ($)
GDP per cap
Adjust GDP per cap
Linear (GDP per cap)
Linear (Adjust GDP percap)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001
GDP per Capita ($)
GDP per cap
Linear (GDP per cap)
Status Quo Growth Growth with 10% reduction in drought effect
Storage, Institutions and GDP
-200%
-150%
-100%
-50%
0%
50%
100%
150%
200%
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
Quality of Institutions
SSI S
tora
ge
“we can spend megabucks on climate research … and still not answer the questions”
Fiering and Matalas (1990)
Assessing and Managing Climate Risk
“The past ain’t what it used to be” Yogi Berra
International Upper Great Lakes Study
Multiple Objectives:
• Ecosystem • Navigation • Recreation • Hydroelectricity Production • Coastal real estate
11
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
-30 -28 -26 -24 -22 -20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Nu
mb
er
of
Mo
de
ls
NBS %Change
NBS %Change Superior Histogram BaseCase
Climate Change Projections of Net Basin Supply - Lake Superior, 2050
12
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
Mean NBS (% Change)
NB
S S
tandard
Devia
tion (
% C
hange)
Superior Mean Annual NBS vs Standard Deviation for 50k Year Stochastic Set for 30 year Windows
Legend
Upper C
Lower C
13
Lake Superior
Mean Climate Change
Var
iab
ility
Risk Discovery: Hazards as a Function of Climate Change
14
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Perc
ent
Change A
nnual N
BS
Sta
ndard
Devia
tion
P77A
P77B
PPreg
PreProject
Nat64
P129
55MR49
Bal26
Bal26S
Nat64D
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 200
0.5Lakes Michigan-Huron Lines of Equal Zone C Expected Value Compared to Distribution of Mean NBS
Percent Change Mean NBS
Rela
tive F
requency
Stochastic
All GCM
Climate Informed Risks – linking to Climate Information
15
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 10
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
P77A
P77B
PPreg
PProj
Nat64
P129
55MR49
Bal26Bal26S
Nat64D
Expecte
d V
alu
e o
f Less t
hen o
r equal H
isto
ric Z
one C
Usin
g G
CM
Clim
ate
Expected Value of Less then or equal Historic Zone C Using Stochastic Climate
Comparison of Plan Expected Value on Lake Superior Using Stochastic versus GCM ClimateRegulation Plan Performance: Stationarity vs Climate Change
Robustness under Climate Change Projections
Ro
bu
stn
ess
un
de
r St
atio
nar
ity
• 100 Million people
• 9 basin countries
• 7 among lowest 20 HDI scores
• Investment plan of $8 billion over next 20 years
• Potential of the Basin:
• Irrigation: only 0.5 M of 2.5 M hectares
• Power: 6,000 GWh/yr of 30,000 GWh/yr
• Transport: 600 km of 3,000 km navigation transport
Shared Development Vision for the Niger Basin
Giannini et al., 2007
System Model Shows only Decreases of 10% or more cause impacts
Climate Risks and Adaptation in the Indus Basin
(Work in Progress)
Winston Yu and Ethan Yang April 9, 2012
- 3 major multi-purpose storage reservoirs, 19 barrages
- 12 inter-river link canals
- 43 major irrigation canal commands (covering over 14 million hectares)
- Over 120,000 watercourses
- Total length of the canals is about 60,000 km
Indus River Basin
-4000000
-3000000
-2000000
-1000000
0
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
5000000
y1 y6 y11 y16 y21 y26 y31 y36 y41 y46 y1 y6 y11 y16 y21 y26 y31 y36 y41 y46
mill
ion
RS
years
Economic Production
CC Scenarios Baseline
With Optimal Allocation With Inter-Provincial Agreement
Indus River Basin – Static Accord vs Economic Allocation
Conclusion
• In many developing countries, we know water security is not achieved and we show it impedes economic growth
• Achieving water security requires managing variability, and the challenge is greatest in the climate of the poorest countries
• Adaptation should focus on the known and current risks
• Uncertainty related to climate change need not impede to investment
• Typical global water assessments assume static/linear human response; need to account for water security (institutions, infrastructure, etc.)
Thanks! Questions: cbrown@ecs.umass.edu