Transgressive adaptation for climate change – what may it take? Coleen Vogel Global Change and...
-
Upload
scott-bennett -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Transgressive adaptation for climate change – what may it take? Coleen Vogel Global Change and...
Transgressive adaptation for climate change – what may it take?
Coleen VogelGlobal Change and Sustainability Research Institute
University of the Witwatersrand
VULNERABILITY AND EXPOSURE
SOCIOECONOMICPROCESSESSocioeconomic
Pathways
Adaptation and Mitigation
Actions
Governance
CLIMATE
NaturalVariability
AnthropogenicClimate Change
RISKHazards
Exposure
Vulnerability
IMPACTS
EMISSIONSand Land-use
Change
2
4
3
5
6
1
0
Glo
bal
Tem
pera
ture
(°C
)
IPCC Projections2100 AD
N.H
. Tem
pera
ture
(°C
)
0
0.5
1
-0.5
1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Adaptation -Sustainability
Survival
Incremental and transformative adaptation
• Incremental adaptation
• Transformational adaptation
• Transgressive change
Example of what may be required? (source Winkler, 2007
GHG emissions
·t
Emissions growing
Must peak and decline in 2-3 decades
Tools exist to get to low-carbon society
Cost of action = small % of GDP, off-set by co-benefits
Cost of inaction?
Incremental and transformational adaptation
• Incremental = maintaining existing activities and building on existing technologies– reactive and proactive– local scale– maintain existing objectives
• Transformational = major changes in enterprises, land use and human and social capital– mostly proactive and strategic– cross-scale – fundamentally re-assess objectives• Strong relation to scale – to maintain functioning at one scale (e.g.
farm sector or coastal community) may require transformation at the next scale down (e.g. move farms or shoreline buildings)
Managing the risk from diverging possible futures
Recovery
Stabilisation
Runaway
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090Year
Mea
n Gl
obal
War
min
g (°
C)
MEP2030A1FI-GaRMEP2010 (Overshoot)
Three scenarios for the future
Incremental adaptation to changes
of reasonablecertainty possible
Adaptation must increasingly managethe risk of divergent possible futures, and
need for transformation
Stafford Smith et al 2011, Phil.Trans.Roy.Soc. 369
Transformational adaptation
Howden et al, Greenhouse 2010, 2010
Varieties, planting times, spacing
Stubble, water, nutrient and canopy management etc
Climate change-ready crops
Climate-sensitive precision-agric
Diversification and risk management
Transformation from landuseor distribution change
New products such as ecosystem services
Climate change
Ben
efit
from
ad
apta
tion
Incre
asing
comple
xity,
cost,
risk
and leadtime
Cycles of incremental and transformative adaptation
Park et al., GEC 2012
The ‘classic’ adaptation pathway concept
Wise et al., GEC forthcoming
Adaptivelandscape,boundaries less certain further into the future
a b cd
f gh
e
1 11
3
22
2
3
Adaptive space
Maladaptive space
11
222
Maladaptive space
Current decision
point
3
3
3
Dead-ends that can be re-assessed over time (or other indicators, e.g. SLR)
Adaptive & maladaptive spaces
Decision points and alternative pathways
The latest adaptation pathway concept
Wise et al., GEC forthcoming
Adaptivelandscape,affected bychanging climate butalso other drivers andother actors’ responses
a
b
c de
f gh
i
j
1 1 11
1
3
3
22
22
5
6 7
88
Maladaptive space
Maladaptive space
Adaptive space
Change in biophysical variables over time
C. Path dependency
D. Institutional preparedness
B. Transformative cyclesA. ‘Classic’ adaptation pathways
Other possible interventions:Transgressive change
Transformative change
• Knowledge that is made of facts and content not enough!
• Need to explore ‘interior’ views and ‘exterior’ views in knowledge production
• Blindspots, values, how one comes to see something not just made up of ‘facts’!
Integral approaches Twenty-five major dimensions of climate change (after Esbjorn-Hargens, 2010).
19
Experiential Values, beliefs, attitudes, mental models, frames Need to make climate change a tangible experience Need representations of climate change that engage multiple audiences Focus on positive messages Motivate using existing interior structures (translation) Motivate by facilitating interior development (transformation)
Behavioral Observe current behaviors
• Carbon footprinting• Direct and indirect emissions
Identify desired (target) behaviors• Potential to bring about desired change• Feasibility
Behavior categories (e.g. environmental activism, non-activist public sphere, private-sphere environmentalism, other – Stern, 2000)
Cultural Need validation from identity groups Supportive groups help individuals to initiate and maintain new behaviors (e.g. Eco Teams, Transition Towns, CRAGs) Social movements and activist cultures (e.g. Climate Action Groups, Climate Camps) Cultural change – symbols, media, discourse Supportive change agent cultures Cultural barriers – custom, myths Dialogue with participants
Systemic Systems help or hinder target behaviors Hierarchy of preferential behaviors Diffusion of innovations – different strategies for early adopters vs mainstream Feedback systems to support learning Persuasive technology and choice architecture Information is important but not sufficient Financial incentives and penalties Supportive legal, political and social context
Transdisciplinarity
• Knowledge made up of scientific, social and experiential.
• When seeking a solution to a problem ‘science alone may not be enough’
• Mode 1 and Mode 2 knowledge production key to distinguish.
Faculteit der Aard- en Levenswetenschappen21
Transdisciplinarity:“a new form of learning and problem solving involving cooperation among different parts of society AND academia in order to meet complex challenges of society” (Julie Klein et al., 2001)
8
Discipline
Discipline
Discipline
Discipline
Discipline
Discipline
Discipline
Non-academic environment
Mono-disciplinary
Multi-disciplinary
Inter-disciplinary Trans-
disciplinary
Discipline
Discipline
Discipline
Climate Information and Planning
1. Knowledge about climate change science and climate variability.
2. Use of such knowledge - the roles of scientists, policy makers, practitioners, civic society and ‘brokers’ in research, adaptation and planning.
Policy & decision-making
Climate Change
research
Fig 2: After Bradshaw and Borchers, 2000
Policy & decision-making
Climate Change
research
Policy & decision-making
Climate Change
research
Policy & decision-making
Climate Change
research ?Fig 4: After Bradshaw and Borchers, 2000
Beliefs, values, well being• Climate change discussions often proceed from a plurality of
viewpoints (different belief systems simultaneously held by different stakeholders) (O'Brien et al, 2010b). Belief systems therefore determine consensus/dis-sensus regarding our future in the changing climate.
• Belief systems influence our perception of climate change and motivates our behavior towards nature.
• Changes in belief systems can be linked to fundamental changes in the ways that we deal with climate change.
• (Source: Dr Loubser).
Current research on the relationship between beliefs and climate change:
• The Climate Beliefs project is part of the SANCOOP bilateral co-operation between South Africa and Norway, funded by the NRF and RCN.
• This project aims to find out how the causality between the impacts and drivers of climate change challenge belief systems, by studying the flexibility of environmental beliefs in rural communities in North West Province, South Africa.
• Dr. Ananka Loubser (NWU) and Prof. Karen O'Brien (UiO) mapped the beliefs by using semi-structured interviews and Q methodology.
• Flexibility was tested by introducing contradictory statements offering both indigenous and scientific explanations for climate change.
• Preliminary results show belief system plasticity: belief systems provide stable points of reference to make sense of the world, but at the same time they need to adapt to changes in the external environment, so that more flexible belief systems lead to more proactive responses to climate variability and change.
• These findings may lead to a flexibility indicator with implications for climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction.
Field work: Climate Beliefs project: Jouberton, NW Province, SA
A participant in the study sorts community-derived belief statements in a Q sorting grid (likert scaling). The results are analyzed statistically (Q factor analysis) to determine the interrelationships between the beliefs.
References:LOUBSER, A.; 2012. Changes in epistemic frameworks: random or constrained? Koers, 2012 77(2): Art #425.LOUBSER, R.A; 2013. Tracing some consensus regarding pre-scientific frameworks in philosophy of science. Acta Academica, 2013 45(2): 1-26.O’BRIEN, K; HOCHACHKA, G; 2010a. Integral adaptation to climate change. Journal of Integral Theory and Practice, 5(1): 89-102.O’BRIEN, K; WOLF, J; 2010b. A values-based approach to vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change. ISSN 1757-7780. 1(2): 242-253.
Well being – FLOW project (Ziervogel et al., UCT)
• A transdisciplinary research and action project
• Building a “Commons Transition” platform (Michel Bauwens - http://p2pfoundation.net)
– Youth development program – FLOW ambassadors– Community currency– Support municipal adaptation strategies – A poverty and inequality reduction strategy
Piketberg, Bergrivier municaplity,
Western Cape
Kokstad, Kwazulu
Natal
Build individual adaptive capacity
Build community adaptive capacity
ADAPTIVE AND GENERATIVE CAPACITY IS INCREASED IN LOCAL
COMMUNITIES
Awareness of and connection to life support
systems is increased
Self-determination
and social cohesion is increased
Localised economic
exchange is increased
Adv. Hanlie Linde (Bergrivier Municipal Manager):
“I have been doing social development for 20 years and I can tell you this is the first program I have seen that can really constitute wellbeing in a community” https://youtu.be/_yy59H8t3x4
FLOW integrated in municipal planning for 2015- Youth development strategy- Local Economic Development strategy
Messy reality needing variety of engagement processes (courtesy J. Colvin)
Multiple stakeholders and stakeholdings
Controversy of knowledge claims
Complexity of ecological – societal
relationshipsUncertainty about current
state and predictions
Recognising the ‘messiness’ and complexity of situations:
Approaches
• Social learning• Focus on belief systems and human well being• Transformative and incremental options• ‘Active’ links to global efforts e.g. SDGs• May require movements – e.g. food
sovereignty, food security etc. including global efforts e.g. Future Earth.
Acknowledgements
• Various inputs e.g. IPCC scientists• Dr Mark Stafford Smith, CSIRO, Australia• Dr Gina Ziervogel, CSAG, UCT• Dr Ananka Loubser, University of
Potchefstroom