Objectives Targets & Indicators for Adaptation to Climate Change

A presentation to the expert meeting on climate change vulnerability and adaptation indicators, 3-4 September 2008

Regional Environmental Centre for Central and Eastern Europe,2000 Szentendre, Ady Endre út 9-11,

Gerry MetcalfKnowledge Transfer ManagerUKCIPUK Climate Impacts Programme

presentation themes

Introduction

• UKCIP

• overview

Objectives, Targets and Indicators at National/Regional Scale

• Objectives set by an organisation’s aims and purposes

• Limitations

Performance Indicator for Local Authorities in England

• NI188

• Guidance Notes

• Structure, Content, Principles

Targets at Project Scale

• Some suggestions for further support

The UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP)

Set up by UK Government in 1997

based at University of Oxford

mostly Defra-funded

15 people now

20+ people soon

current work-programme to 2011

works through:

partnerships and programmes

capacity building

stakeholder-led research

Mission:

To help organisations assess how they might be affected by climate change, so that they can prepare for its impacts.

UKCIP is a ‘boundary organisation’

UKCIP facilitates relationships between three groups of key actors

UKCIP

UKCIP tools portfolio

BRAIN

LCLIP

overview

Defra (UK Government) has tasked UKCIP to explore

• Targets and Indicators at a national scale

• Build upon AEAT study of December 2005

UKCIP (or at least most individuals at UKCIP)

• Struggle to see the potential of this approach

However, there are some parts of UKCIP decision-making sequence at which

• Objectives, Targets and Indicators are indicated and appropriate

Three examples of how UKCIP has embraced these concepts

• Strategic Objectives

• Performance Indicators

• Targets at project scale

Descriptive rather than analytical. No clear conclusions

(strategic) objectives at a national scale

Strategic Objectives

• Achieve the aims of the organisation eg Strategic Plan

• In the face of changing weather and climate

• Can exploit opportunities as well as managing threats

• Can be monitored in terms of: business continuity, service delivery

Examples

• Chinese Regional Adaptation Strategy (Food? Income? Community cohesion?)

• Local Authority Community Strategy (Systemic, Resilience)

Commentary

• Is aspirational but may not be achievable

• Sets a clear mission without the need for elaborate decisions at the outset

• Can use exiting performance indicators against which adaptation plans can be tested

performance indicator for local authorities

New Performance Framework for Local Authorities

• Includes a voluntary Performance Indicator on ‘Adaptation’ (NI 188)

• One of a very few PIs that are ‘process based’

• Sets out 5 Levels of achievement, partial achievement in the early stages

• Targets agreed for completion of specified levels at the end of Years 1, 2, 3

Advantages

• Sets out a pathway which others can follow (or vary) in due course

• Remains strategic in order to build a ‘well adapting’ local authority

• Includes ‘Building Adaptive Capacity’ as well as ‘Delivering Adaptation Actions’

• Responds to pragmatic non-sequential progress through project management plan

Needs

• Clear examples of tools, methods, etc to define elements of achievement

• Self-assessment tool as well as a top-down audit using thesame framework.

Key elements of achievement for levels in NI188

1.Taking a

leadership role

2. Engaging partners

3. Assessing current

vulnerability

4. Assessing future risk

5. Developing Adaptation Approach & Strategy

6. Completin

g Adaptation Action Plan

7. Implementi

ng Adaptation

Actions

8. Monitoring

/ review and

feedback

Level 0

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Partial achievement Comprehensive achievement

UKCIP tools portfolio

BRAIN

LCLIP

Targets and indicators at a project scale

Benefits

• Not just desirable, but a necessary part of decision-making at project scale

• What are we trying to achieve? How might it be achieved?

• At what cost? Over what time period?

Issues

• Some targets will derive from absolute specifications?

• But even some apparent absolutes must ultimately be negotiable?

• Involves concepts of ‘risk’ and ‘probability’.

• Number of days over which a school must close each summer in 2050s?

• Extent of protection to City of London in the face of specified surge in sea-level?

Monitoring

• Some targets may be set for the long term.

• If these are quantified it should be possible to monitor interim progress

Targets: max number of school closure days

Topic

• School classrooms become unusable inside at 31o C outside

Type of Target

• specify the maximum number of days/summer that the school has to close

Reasons for target

• Seemingly health and safety but actually reputational/political

Absolute Target or Pragmatic Target?

• Zero days of closure per summer or 3 days of closure per summer?

Evidence needed

• Number of days where temperature exceeds 31o C outside (Weather Generator)

• Technical adaptation responses and associated costs

Informed Target Setting

• We will seek no more than 5 days closure in the projected summers of 2020s

summary and conclusions

Strategic Objectives

• Doubts about application at a national scale

• Particularly if intending to be ‘outcome based’

• Important though to set overall criteria for adaptation

‘Outcome Based’ or ‘Process Based’

• ‘Outcomes’ not realistic through multiple: time, place, receptors, weather-variables

• ‘Process’ more realistic but not fashionable and dependent on well known and well-specified elements of stages in the process

Targets

• OK at project scale. Can this approach be developed for more strategic planning?

• Should a target driven approach be developed at all?

• Some serious problems experienced in UK with target-driven approaches in other policy areas.

www.ukcip.org.uk