Climate Change Report 1

8/8/2019 Climate Change Report 1

1/72

How well prepared is theUK for climate change?

Adaptation Sub-CommitteeSeptember 2010


2/72


3/72

How well prepared is theUK or climate change?

First report o the Adaptation Sub-Committee16 September 2010


4/72

Printed on 100% recycled paper.

to landfill


5/72How well prepared is the UK or climate change? 1

Contents

2 Foreword

3 Acknowledgements

4 The Adaptation Sub-Committee o the Committee on Climate Change

6 Executive Summary

13 Chapter 1: Preparing or a changing climate

21 Chapter 2: What should be happening today to prepare or climate change?32 Chapter 3: Progress in adapting to climate change

54 Chapter 4: The ASCs advice on urther adaptation action and next steps

60 Glossary

62 Re erences


6/722 Adaptation Sub-Committee

Foreword

The overwhelming majority o experts agree that the global climate is changing, and thatmost o this is caused by human activity. I we do nothing to tackle climate change, thereis a signi cant risk that the world will be a much less hospitable place or our children andgrandchildren. The UK has made a legal commitment to two kinds o action. On the one handit is committed to mitigate climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 80%below 1990 levels by 2050. On the other it is legally obliged to plan or the climate changethat is already happening and will continue to accelerate, as a result o past, current and uturegreenhouse gas emissions. This is re erred to as adaptation. Mitigation and adaptation are notalternatives. Both are essential to reduce the risks to uture generations, but the more success ulglobal mitigation e orts are, the less we will have to adapt.

The Adaptation Sub-Committee o the Committee on Climate Change was establishedunder the Climate Change Act 2008. Its role is to provide independent, authoritative, expertadvice to Government on the preparedness o the UK or climate change and to report onprogress. This rst report o the Sub-Committee presents our preliminary assessment o thenations preparedness or climate change. It is based largely on the Government Departmental

Adaptation Plans. Next years report will be able to present a uller assessment based on awider range o in ormation.

In brie , our headline nding is that whilst the UK has started to build capacity or adaptationthrough advice and in ormation to a range o public and private sector organisations, there is

little evidence that this is translating into tangible action on the ground in a systematic way.

We suggest that the priorities or action now are assets or institutions that are sensitive tocurrent climate risks and decisions that have long lasting consequences. These two criteria leadus to identi y ve priority areas or immediate action in preparing or climate change: land useplanning, national in rastructure, natural resources, design and renovation o buildings, andemergency planning. In these areas, i the UK waits, it will be too late to e ectively managethe risks o uture climate change.

Preparing or climate change primarily involves organisations and people at the local level,but central government also has a key role to play. We advise the Government that it shouldbuild on the work o raising awareness, remove barriers and provide stronger signals toenable action. It should also ensure that responsibilities are clearly allocated or the deliveryo adaptation and that the di erent players are cooperating to take adaptation action.

I would like to thank the members o the Committee and the Secretariat or their excellentwork and advice in preparing this report.

Lord John Krebs Kt FRS


7/72


8/72



Pro essor Anne Johnson FMedSciPro essor Anne Johnson trained as a public health doctor and is currentlyDirector o Population Health at University College, London and Pro essor o in ectious disease epidemiology. She was a member o the UCL/LancetCommission report on managing the health e ects o climate change

published in May 2009 and is currently Chair o the Medical Research CouncilPopulation Health Sciences Group.

Pro essor Tim Palmer FRSPro essor Tim Palmer is an expert in climate modelling and the physics o climate science. He pioneered approaches to representing uncertainty inweather and climate orecasts and was lead author o the third assessmentreport o the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He iscurrently Head o the Probability Forecast Division at the European Centre

or Medium Range Weather Forecasts, and Royal Society 2010 AnniversaryResearch Pro essor in climate physics at Ox ord University.

Pro essor Martin Parry OBEPro essor Parry is a visiting Pro essor at Imperial College and was Co-Chair o Working o Group II (Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability) o theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Changes (IPCC) 2007 Assessment Report.He was chairman o the UK Climate Change Impacts Review Group, and acoordinating lead author in the IPCC rst, second and third assessments.

He has worked at the Universities o Ox ord, University College London,Birmingham and University o East Anglia.

Sir Graham Wynne CBEGraham Wynne spent 15 years as a city planner, working on inner cityregeneration, be ore joining the RSPB in 1987. He was Director o Conservationand then Chie Executive o the RSPB rom 1998-2010. He is a member o theNatural Environment PSA Delivery Board, the Foresight Land Use Futures HighLevel Group and is a Council member o BirdLi e International.

Barbara Young, Baroness Young o Old SconeBaroness Young has Chaired the Care Quality Commission (2008-2010) andEnglish Nature (1998-2000). She was Chie Executive o the RSPB (1991-8) ando the Environment Agency (2000-2008). Barbara was Deputy Chair o theBBC (1998-2000) and has worked extensively in the voluntary sector, servingas President o the British Trust or Ornithology, and Vice-President o RSPB,Birdli e International, Flora and Fauna International.



Executive Summary

Key messages

The main ocus in tackling climate change has rightly been on mitigation, addressing thehuman causes o climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. But even with stronginternational action on mitigation, past and present emissions mean that the climate willcontinue to change and the UK will need to respond (adaptation). 1 Adaptation and mitigationare not alternatives, rather they are complementary.

The Adaptation Sub-Committee (ASC) o the Committee on Climate Change was establishedunder the Climate Change Act 2008 to provide independent advice to the UK Governmentand the devolved administrations on the impacts o climate change on the UK and assessGovernment progress in implementing the National Adaptation Programme.

This report provides our rst national assessment o progress on preparing or climate change,based primarily on analysis o central government activity. We will update our assessment as

urther in ormation becomes available, including the Climate Change Risk Assessment and the rst tranche o adaptation reports rom public bodies and in rastructure providers.

Our rst report addresses our questions:

1. What steps should the UK be taking to adapt? Preparing or climate change todaywill reduce the costs and damages o a changing climate and allow UK businesses, thepublic sector, the third sector and individuals to take advantage o potential opportunities.Early action will help make the UK better prepared or todays climate and ensure thatdecisions made today that have long-lasting consequences do not close o options andmake it harder to adapt in the uture. We identi y ve adaptation priorities or the UK land use planning, providing national in rastructure, designing and renovating buildings,managing natural resources, and emergency planning.

2. What progress has been made so ar? The UK has started to build capacity or adaptation,with evidence o growing awareness o the risks and appropriate responses, particularlyin public sector organisations. This compares avourably with progress in other countries,with some examples o good practice in adaptation decision-making. However, rom theevidence reviewed, we conclude that capacity building is not yet systematically translatinginto tangible action on the ground to reduce the UKs vulnerability to climate change.

1 In this report the UK covers UK-wide issues or reserved matters and England only issues or those matters that are devolved.



3. What urther action is required? Action by local authorities, public sector agencies,businesses and individuals will be essential to ensuring that the UK is preparing adequately

or a changing climate. We advise that the Government should work to remove barriers andprovide stronger signals to enable action by others, including:

establishing a process forde ning adaptation outcomes , or example what level o food risk is acceptable;

helping deliver these outcomes by: (i)promoting greater capability and capacity inpriority areas where progress has been slow, and (ii) ensuring decision-makers havepractical tools and in ormation to quanti y key climate risks and manage uncertainties;

ensuring that the new delivery arrangements , or example in land use planning andin rastructure provision, allocate responsibilities or adaptation clearly and provide or su cient cooperation by organisations at landscape or catchment scale; and

considering how upcoming policy re orms can support adaptation, or example in the

White Papers on water, the natural environment and public health, and in any review o building regulations.

4. What will the ASC do to help? In order to ul l our statutory duty, we will monitor the achievement o adaptation outcomes and the delivery o adaptation measures byorganisations, and use this to assess the nations preparedness.

Context

The UKs climate is already changing. Temperatures are 1C higher on average than they werein the 1970s. This warming has been accompanied by more requent heatwaves, more intense

rain all events and rising sea levels. Insured losses rom weather-related events currently costthe UK 1.5 billion each year on average. The 2007 central England summer foods cost theeconomy over 3 billion. Two thousand people died in the UK as a result o the 2003 heatwave,an event that could become the norm by the end o the century.

By planning ahead and taking timely adaptation action, the UK could halve the costs anddamages rom moderate amounts o warming. Forward planning may also allow the UK totake advantage o opportunities, or example developing new products and services or awarmer climate.

At the same time, some o the largest e ects in the UK will result rom climate changeelsewhere in the world. The consequences o these impacts will be transmitted throughglobal trade, resource fows, migration and political networks. The UK will have to prepare

or these as well.

Executive Summary



Executive Summary

What steps should the UK be taking now to adapt?

Early action will help ensure that decisions made today do not close o options and makeit harder to adapt in the uture. Our assessment suggests that the UK should ocus earlyadaptation e orts on decisions: (i) that are sensitive to present-day climate variability andthere ore where preparing or climate change will provide both immediate and uture bene ts;and (ii) that have long-lasting consequences , including decisions about long-lived assets( or example buildings and in rastructure), decisions that may cause irreversible changes ( or example loss o biodiversity), and decisions that may have systemic and ar-reaching e ects( or example developing in one part o the foodplain with knock-on e ects downstream).

A challenge in this whole area is making decisions in the ace o considerable uncertainty.

In applying these criteria, we have identi ed ve priority areas or early action:

1. Taking a strategic approach to land use planning or example to (i) ensure that newbuildings and in rastructure are sited in areas that minimise exposure to food risk, donot increase food risk to others, and do not create a legacy o food de ence or water

supply costs; (ii) manage competing pressures on land urban, natural and agricultural in response to a changing climate; and (iii) enhance green space where e ective in thedesign o towns and cities to help manage sur ace water drainage and cope with risingtemperatures and heatwaves.

2. Providing national in rastructure (energy, water, transport, waste and communications) or example to ensure it can cope with rising temperatures; it is resilient to potentialincreases in certain extreme weather events, such as storms, foods and droughts; and ittakes account o changing patterns o consumer demand in areas such as energy and water use, travel and consumption.

3. Designing and renovating buildings or example to ensure they can cope with risingtemperatures and foods and minimise water use through appropriate use o constructionmaterials and through better design.

4. Managing natural resources sustainably or example by using water more e ciently;improving and extending ecological networks so that species can adapt and move as theclimate changes; and making space or water along rivers and the coast.

5. E ectiveemergency planning or example by making better use o probabilistic weather orecasts to anticipate extreme weather events more e ectively; creating plans that reduceimpact on and ensure continuation o care or the most vulnerable groups in society duringheatwaves and foods; and developing business continuity plans based on high-quality

climate risk in ormation so that businesses can cope better with disruptions to their supplychains during foods and damage to assets rom severe weather.

Taking steps in these priority areas will have wider bene ts. For example ully- unctioningin rastructure, including secure water supplies, and well-designed hospitals and care acilities,are all key to promoting human health and well-being.



Executive Summary

What progress has been made so far?

We have created a ramework to monitor and evaluate progress in the UK on preparing or climate change (see Box ES.1) and applied it to the Government Departmental Adaptation Plans.

We nd that:

The UK has started to build capacity in adaptation, with evidence o growingawareness, particularly in public sector organisations.

The Government has taken steps to provide in ormation and raise awareness o the issuethrough the UK Climate Projections (2009) and UK Climate Impacts Programme, and hasestablished an enabling policy ramework through the Climate Change Act 2008.

Many organisations are on the rst rung (capacity building) o the preparedness ladder.Key sectors now have in place guidance and processes on adaptation.

We nd examples o good practice with some organisations on the second rung,considering their sensitivity to current climate variability and using climate projections

in their decision-making, or example through the planning o water supplies by water companies and Environment Agency management o food risk.

However, rom the evidence reviewed, we conclude that capacity building is not yetsystematically translating into tangible action on the ground. We identi y some keybarriers to action that will not be overcome by capacity building alone:

In some cases, inadequate or insu ciently accurate climate risk in ormation is preventingorganisations rom building a business case or adaptation, or example on sur ace water

fooding risks. While we do not see this as a reason or delaying action, it is important tosupport the development o better climate in ormation.

Market and policy barriers may be preventing businesses and individuals rom takingup sensible low-regrets actions that will increase their resilience to climate today, or example sustainable drainage, water e ciency and property-level food protection.

In many policy areas, adaptation is name-checked. However in practice it is not givensu cient weight in comparison with other shorter-term priorities, or example in landuse planning and some parts o national and local in rastructure.

Some policy areas do not yet explicitly consider the risks rom climate change, includingaspects o building regulations.



Executive Summary

Box ES.1: The three components o the ASC monitoring ramework

Desired adaptation outcomes the top tier represents the results o actions that reducethe costs and damages o climate change and enhance any potential opportunities, or example less damage rom fooding or ewer heat-related deaths.

Decision-makers should monitor and evaluate whether the measures are delivering thedesired adaptation outcome and, where they are not, assess i alternative measures arerequired or i the current objectives are still appropriate under a changing climate.

Delivery o outcomes the rungs o the ladder illustrate increasing levels o adaptationactivity by public sector organisations, businesses and individuals to make the UK better prepared. The rst rung is raising awareness o adaptation and building capacity, thesecond rung is considering climate impacts in a structured way in decision making, andthe third rung is taking concrete actions that directly reduce risk. In essence, the aim isto move up the ladder rom capacity building to making the right decisions and nallyto timely action.

Policy to enable delivery wider government policy will determine to what extentpublic sector organisations, businesses and individuals move up the ladder and takeaction to adapt. We need to understand what barriers to action exist and what can bedone to overcome them, including removing barriers, providing incentives, and helpingthe most vulnerable.

Adaptation outcome

P o l i c y : r e m o v i n g

b a r r i e r s

P o

l i c y : e n c o u r a g

i n g a d a p

t a t i o n

Timely action

Monitoringandevaluation

Current objectives

Decision-making

Capacity



ASCs advice what further action is required?

Action by local authorities, public sector agencies, businesses and individuals will beessential to ensuring that the UK is preparing adequately or a changing climate.

Local authorities should ocus e orts on moving up the ladder to increase their resilience

to current and uture climate. They can do this by building an understanding o their vulnerability to current and uture climate and embedding adaptation into their riskmanagement unctions.

Businesses should take climate change into account for long-lasting decisions and plans toreduce operating costs in the longer-term and pro essional bodies should do the same inthe setting o relevant standards and speci cations. The Adaptation Reporting Power willbe an important mechanism or encouraging and promoting structured decision-makingby key delivery bodies over the next ew years.

The Government has a critical role in making the market work or adaptation and

enabling organisations to move up the adaptation ladder. We advise that the Government,in developing the UKs rst National Adaptation Programme, should take steps to removebarriers and provide stronger signals to enable action, including:

Establishing a process or de ning adaptation outcomes and acceptable levels o risk or the UK. Once outcomes are de ned, decision-makers should evaluate the e ectiveness

o policy in achieving these outcomes.

Consolidate initial progress by (i) promoting greater capacity and capability inpriority areas where progress has been slow, including local authorities, land use planners,the construction industry, and in rastructure managers, and (ii) ensuring decision-makers have practical tools and in ormation to quanti y key climate risks and manageuncertainties in order to help them build a business case or adaptation.

Ensure there is clear responsibility or adaptation allocated under the new deliveryarrangements and mechanisms to ensure cooperation between delivery bodies.This will be particularly important in:

land use planning the Government should consider how the new planning regime,including the National Planning Policy Framework, can ensure su cient cooperation o adaptation at the landscape scale, or example across a catchment area or along a stretcho coastline. The proposed duty to cooperate between local planning authorities will bean important lever;

providing national in rastructure the Government should consider how the newnational consenting regime will transparently account or adaptation and manage thesystemic risks o in rastructure ailure; and

emergency planning the Government should consider whether local authoritiesand other government agencies responsible or emergency planning are collectivelyaccounting or climate risks as part o their duty o competence and leadership roles.

Executive Summary



Executive Summary

Consider how its current programme o policy re orms can enable adaptation,including:

designing and renovating buildings as part o any review o building regulations,the Government should consider whether amendments are required to addressper ormance o buildings in hotter weather, alongside wider actions in the builtenvironment to promote upgrading o the current stock; and

managing natural resources the Government should consider how to drive orwardwater e ciency in the upcoming Water White Paper and review whether deliveryarrangements or biodiversity are su ciently robust to cope with climate change in theupcoming Natural Environment White Paper.

Next steps for the ASC

In order to ul l our statutory duty, we will monitor the achievement o adaptationoutcomes and the delivery o adaptation measures by organisations, and assess thenations preparedness. Key tasks will include:

exploring approaches to measuring changes in current climate vulnerability to monitor howthe UKs vulnerability is changing over time;

analysing progress in capacity building and decision-making in priority areas, using evidence rom application o the Treasury Green Book supplementary guidance, the AdaptationReporting Power reports, the land use planning system and elsewhere; and

assessing approaches to identi ying low-regrets actions that we would expect to see coming orward in the near uture.

In 2011, we will provide a urther assessment o preparedness against this more detailedmonitoring ramework, together with ormal advice on the Climate Change Risk Assessment, as required in the Climate Change Act 2008.



Chapter 1: Preparing or a changing climate

1.1 Adaptation is an important part of the UKs response toclimate change

Climate change is the most signi cant environmental threat acing the world today.There is overwhelming scienti c evidence the climate is already changing and itis very likely that most o the warming is attributable to human activities. Climatechange is caused by the release o carbon dioxide (CO 2) and other greenhouse gases intothe atmosphere. Since 1900, over 1.7 trillion tonnes o CO 2 have been emitted as a result o burning ossil uels, changes in land use and other human activities, 2 increasing atmosphericconcentrations rom pre-industrial levels o around 280 parts per million to nearly 390 partsper million today. 3

A range o observations and modelling studies strongly suggest the climate systemis warming in response to the increase o greenhouse gases in the atmosphere: 4

global average temperatures have increased by about 0.8C since pre-industrial times, and the ten warmest years on record so ar have occurred since 1995;

atmospheric humidity, sea level and ocean heat content have all increased; and

Arctic sea ice, northern snow cover and glaciers have decreased.

Scientists have been unable to explain these changes by natural actors alone. 5

Extreme weather events such as those in Russia, Pakistan and China this year areconsistent with evidence that the climate is changing, and remind us just how vulnerablesociety is to changes in the climate:

the oods in Pakistan have affected approximately 14 million people and at least 1,600 havedied as a result;

ooding and landslides in China have killed more than 1,100 people and caused tens ofbillions o dollars worth o damage across the country; and

the record heatwave in Russia may have already taken 15,000 lives and cost the economy$15 billion as wild res and drought devastate the country.

2 Global Carbon Project http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/ [Accessed Aug ust 2010].3 NOAA/ESRL http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends [Accessed Augus t 2010].4 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007).5 Stott et al. (2010).



Chapter 1

Even i the most ambitious global mitigation targets are achieved, the world has a 50%chance o warming by 2 oC or more by the end o the century (see Box 1.1). 6 So ar themain ocus in tackling climate change has rightly been on mitigation, addressing the causeso climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Mitigation is crucial or avoidingsome o the greatest risks in the long term, which the Committee on Climate Change explicitly

recognised when it recommended the UKs 80% target or 2050. However, it is likely to takeseveral decades be ore there is a major reduction in global emissions. Even i all emissionswere to stop now, which is o course not easible, the Earth is very likely to warm by a urther 0.5 1 oC over the coming decades in response to historic and current emissions due to theinertia o the climate system. 7

Adaptation involves responding to the unavoidable consequences o climate change, towhich the world is already committed (higher temperatures, changing rain all patterns,altered seasons, and more extreme weather events). The rate o climate change is unlikeanything that has been experienced in recent millennia. Global mean temperature increasesbeyond 2 oC would lead to major potential impacts, and the ability o many human and natural

systems to adapt may be exceeded beyond 4o

C.8

6 Global mean temperature is re erred to throughout this report and is used as an approximate index o the scale o climate change. This measure is an averageover both space and time; however warming doe s not occur evenly across the planet. Warming tends to be greater over land and at higher latitudes. Allglobal temperatures are given relative to pre-industr ial levels.

7 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007), Synthesis Repor t, Figure 3.1. and Meehl et al. (2005).8 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007), Working G roup II, Chapter 19.



Preparing or a changing climate

Box 1.1: Risks as a unction o global mean temperature, illustrating the need or bothmitigation and adaptation to tackle climate change

Global temperature above 1850-1899 (C)

HEALTH

1 2 3 4 5

COASTS

FOOD

WATER

ECO-

SYSTEMS

a) Need to adapt to b) May needto adapt to

c) Can avoid through mitigation

Hundreds of millions more exposed to water stress

Increasing risk of global species extinctions

Yields fall in tropics;rise at higher latitudes

Yields fall inmost areas

Millions more exposed to flooding

Increasing burden from disease and extreme weather

i

i

Projected risks as a unction o global mean temperature increases, with solid lines showingthe possible range o temperature increases by 2100 under strong mitigation:

(a) Global temperatures are already 0.8C above pre-industrial levels. Even i the worldsucceeds in e orts to curb emissions, with emissions peaking within the next decade andthen reducing year-on-year at 3 4% or the rest o the century, global temperaturesstill have a 50% chance o rising to just above 2C by 2100 ( rst solid line). This strongmitigation scenario corresponds to a halving o global emissions by 2050, and orms thebasis o the UKs 80% long-term target. Under this scenario, the likelihood o reaching4C is less than 1%.

(b) Under this strong mitigation scenario, global temperatures still have a 10% chance o reaching as high as 2.9C (second solid line).

(c) Under a scenario without any mitigation, it is 90% likely that temperatures will rise

above 3.2C ( rst dashed line) and 10% likely they could reach 5.5C by 2100 (seconddashed line). This scenario corresponds to the UK Climate Projections 2009 (UKCP09)climate scenario discussed later in this chapter.

Source: chart simpli ed rom Technical Summary Table 3 in IPCC Working Group II Fourth Assessment Report, 2007. Scenario andtemperature data rom Committee on Climate Change (2008).



Chapter 1

1.2 What does climate change mean for the UK?

The UKs climate is already changing. Average annual temperatures have risen by about1C in central England since the 1970s, and by 0.8 oC in Scotland and Northern Ireland sinceabout 1980. While annual average rain all has changed little, there are signs o a trend towardsdrier summers and wetter winters with heavier rain all events. Sea levels around the UK haverisen by around 1mm per year during the 20th century. 9 The seasons now arrive on average11 days earlier than in the 1970s. 10 There is increasing evidence o species expanding their range northwards and onto higher ground. 11 In UK coastal waters, some sh distributions havemoved northwards over the past 30 years by distances ranging rom around 50 to 400km. 12

All parts o the UK the economy, society and environment are a ected by the climate.Impacts rom extreme food events are particularly vivid (see Table 1.1) and insured claims romweather and subsidence currently average almost 1.5 billion each year in the UK. 13 Extreme heatcan also have dramatic impacts as seen during the 2003 heatwave, when there were 2,000 excessdeaths in the UK and thousands more deaths across Europe. 14 More moderate fuctuations inweather can bring bene ts, or instance tourism income increased by an estimated 300 millionduring the hot summer o 1995. 15

9 Jenkins et al. (2009).10 Thackeray et al. (2010).

11 Hopkins et al. (2007).12 Marine Climate Change Impacts Par tnership (2010).13 Data rom Association o British Insurers (provided in 2010) averages to 1,469 million per year rom 1988 to 2009 expressed in 200 9 values. Includes

subsidence and weather-related claims (storms and foods).14 Johnson et al. (2005a).15 Agnew and Palutiko (2006).


21/72



Chapter 1

The UK Climate Projections 2009 (UKCP09) provide in ormation about the potentialchanges to the climate throughout this century. The UKCP09 illustration below providessome examples o projected seasonal and annual changes in the UK by the 2080s under aparticular emissions scenario (see Box 1.1 scenario (c)) :

All areas of the UK show warming, with parts of southern England possibly experiencing a rise in temperature o up to 4.2C (with a very likely range o 2.2 6.8C) in summer.The Scottish islands show least warming (around 2.5C, or very likely 1.2 4.1C in summer).

Annual rainfall shows no clear change, however western areas may experience an increaseo around 33% (very likely 9 70%) in winter. In summer, southern England could see adecrease o around 40% (very likely 6 65%).

Sea level rise is likely to range from around 25cm near Edinburgh and Belfast to around40cm near London and Cardi , although much higher values cannot be ruled out i theGreenland and West Antarctic ice sheets start to melt.

Consistent with these changes in average climate, it is very likely that there will be an increasein the requency and severity o extreme weather events, such as heavy rain all, droughts andheatwaves. There is evidence to suggest that extremely wet winters in the UK could be up to

ve times more likely over the next 100 years, 24 and that the extreme heatwave experiencedacross Europe in 2003 is likely to become the norm by the end o the century. 25

While the scale o climate change over the next ew decades has already been set by pastand present day emissions, mitigation e orts will have a much larger impact on the scaleo climate change later in the century, with estimates ranging rom around 2C under astrong mitigation scenario up to and beyond 5.5C without any mitigation (see Box 1.1). This uncertainty is even larger at the regional level, particularly or changes in some climatevariables such as rain all. Decisions that are sensitive to the climate or that have long-lastingconsequences should take this uncertainty into consideration, and ensure that adaptationmeasures are robust to a range o possible uture climates or fexible such that options can beadjusted as more in ormation about the climate becomes available. These types o decisionsand options are discussed in more detail in Chapter 2.

All regions 26 o the UK will experience a mixture o positive and negative impacts romclimate change (see Table 1.2); however the scale o the impacts will vary refectingregional di erences in climate change and vulnerability. Some regions will be a ectedmore than others, and certain eatures within regions such as foodplains, estuaries, largeurban areas will ace particular challenges. For example, London and South East England areparticularly vulnerable to water scarcity, given that water availability and demand are already

nely balanced and summer rain all is predicted to reduce. Other regions such as South WestEngland could potentially bene t through increased tourism. 27 The UK Climate Change Risk

Assessment will assess the impacts o climate change or all regions o the UK.

24 Palmer and Raisanen (2002).25 Stott et al. (2004).26 Regions re er to the nine English regions and the Devolved Administrations.27 West and Gawith (2005).



Preparing or a changing climate

Table 1.2: Potential impacts o climate change in the UK

Adverse impacts expected most widely include: an increase in the risk of ooding and erosion pressure on drainage systems possible winter storm damage

habitat loss summer water shortages and low stream ows increased subsidence risk in subsidence prone areas increased demand for summer cooling increasing thermal discomfort in buildings increases in health problems heat-related illness and

incidence o respiratory problems reduced quality and yields of some crops due to heat

stress, drought, disease and pests

Commonly perceived bene ts include: less winter transport disruption reduced demand for winter heating less cold-related illness

increase yields of some crops

Opportunities are anticipated: agricultural and horticultural diversi cation increased tourism a shift to more outdoor-oriented lifestyles

(improve well-being)

Source: Table adapted rom West and Gawith (2005).

Some o the largest e ects in the UK will result rom climate change elsewhere in the

world. Low-latitude, less-developed regions o the world are generally at greatest risk, due toa combination o high exposure (concentrations o people and development in high risk areas)and a lower ability to adapt. 28 Without adaptation, declining crop yields, especially in A rica,are likely to leave hundreds o millions without the ability to produce or purchase su cient

ood.29 Even within the EU, countries around the Mediterranean basin are at risk o drasticallyreduced water supply and increased deserti cation. Rising sea levels will mean that the homeso tens to hundreds o millions o people are likely to be a ected by coastal fooding. 30

The consequences o these impacts will be transmitted through global trade, resourcefows, migration and political networks. 31

Approximately half the food consumed and two-thirds of the fuel used in the UK isimported. Producing and transporting ood and other products uses considerable amountso water and energy, o ten in places where water demand exceeds the supply this indirect,international water demand accounts or two thirds o the UKs total water demand. Water stress abroad would reduce the resilience o these supply chains. 32

Agricultural output will be affected by extreme weather events; however technologicaladvances may help to o set some o the adverse impacts. 33 Global ood prices couldsubstantially increase in response to yield reductions in the main cereal-exporting regionso the world which could have implications or the UK. 34 The 2010 heatwave and associateddrought in Russia has caused grain output to all by one-third, leading the country toen orce a ban on grain exports. As a result global wheat prices have risen by 70% causingconcern in countries across the Middle East, North A rica and Europe who import wheat

rom Russia.35

28 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007), Working G roup II, Chapter 19.29 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007), Working Group II, Chapter 5.

30 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007), Working Group II, Chapter 6.31 The Government Foresight team are working w ith government departments to under stand the implications o international climate change or the UK.32 Royal Academy o Engineering (2010); Hoekstra et al. (2009).33 Forthcoming Foresight report on Global Food and Farming Futures (October 2010).34 Parry et al. (2009).35 Reuters http://www.reuters.com/assets/print?aid=USTRE67B3XT20100812 (Accessed 12 August 2010).



Chapter 1

UK businesses have interests and assets in a number of regions and markets overseaswhich are exposed to climate impacts. For example UK manu acturing product chains arebecoming highly complex and global in nature, increasing their vulnerability to climatechange. Financial markets in the UK are also particularly vulnerable as London is home toone o the largest nancial and insurance markets in the world. The UK insurance market

contributes 8 billion a year to UK overseas earnings and the industry held 795 billionworth o assets globally in 2000. 36

Population migration may result from diminishing water and food supply brought aboutby increased variability in rain all patterns, loss o productive agricultural land to droughtor fooding rom sea level rise. 37

1.3. Adaptation can reduce the costs of climate change

The consequences o not adapting both globally and in the UK are potentially great,leading to larger costs urther down the line and the risk o irreversible damage.

There is limited quantitative evidence on the costs and bene ts o adaptation at the globaland country levels. A recent study suggests that adaptation measures may reduce damages

rom climate change by roughly hal or moderate amounts o warming. 38 For example, theEnvironment Agency estimates the bene t o current investment in food de ences can be atleast ve times the cost. 39

In addition, well-designed adaptation could also contribute to the delivery o otherobjectives. For example reducing emissions o greenhouse gases, improving well-beingand public health, protecting biodiversity and meeting the long-term in rastructure needso the UK.

Even so, there are limits to the level o climate change to which human and naturalsystems can adapt. At signi cantly higher global temperatures (beyond 2C) the costs o adaptation are likely to rise sharply and the residual damages are likely to remain large either because natural systems have reached a limit beyond which they can no longer adapt or because adaptation is prohibitively expensive. 40 Adaptation and mitigation are there ore bothintegral to the UKs climate change strategy.

36 Watkiss et al. (2009).37 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007), Working G roup II, Chapter 7.38 Economics o Adaptation Working Group. (2009) demonst rated that adaptation in 8 case studies could reduce the expected losses incurred in 2030 by

40-68%. Under severe climate change scenarios.39 House o Commons Environmental Audit Committee , Lord Smith, Witness Ev idence pp. 86 (2010).40 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007), Working G roup II, Chapter 19.



Chapter 2: What should behappening today to prepare

or climate change?

2.1 Introduction

The Adaptation Sub-Committee (ASC) has a role to assess the UKs progress onadaptation. Under the Climate Change Act 2008 the ASC has a statutory obligation to provide

independent advice on adaptation and an assessment o the Governments progress towardsimplementing the National Adaptation Programme (NAP), which is to be laid be ore Parliamenta ter the publication o the rst Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA) in 2012.

In order to ul l this duty, we have begun to develop a ramework or assessing the UKsper ormance in adapting to climate change. This chapter describes the priority areas whereearly action is required, presents the key challenges associated with measuring success andintroduces the ASCs ramework.

2.2 Where should adaptation start today?

In a well-adapting society, risks are identi ed and managed in sectors that are highlysensitive to weather and climate change in the short-term, and fexible and robust optionsare implemented (where appropriate) in areas that will be a ected by climate change over the medium to long-term. Preparing or climate change today will reduce the costs anddamages o a changing climate and allow UK businesses, the public sector, the third sector and individuals to take advantage o potential opportunities.

We have used two broad criteria to identi y the priority areas where adaptation measuresare required now to put the UK on the path to becoming a well-adapting society (seeBox 2.1 or descriptions o these priority areas): 41

1. Climate-sensitive decisions decision-makers should identi y and manage risks in areaswith a high sensitivity to the weather and climate in the short-term. Adaptation in these areaswill provide immediate bene ts, increase the resilience to current and uture climate andreduce the risk o potentially long-lasting damage. This is particularly relevant or managingnatural resources as a number o ecosystems such as peatlands and reshwater habitats arealready showing signs o increased vulnerability to the climate, and emergency planning or extreme weather events such as foods, droughts and heatwaves.

41 Based on work by Ranger et al. (2010) (commissioned by the Adaptation Sub- Committee) building on existing research by HM Treasury (2003), and West andGawith (2005).



Chapter 2

2. Decisions with long-lasting consequences should not close o options and make it harder to adapt in the uture. These include:

Long asset li e. The climate experienced by assets built today will be signi cantlydi erent in uture decades. The UK can no longer rely on historic weather and climatetrends to in orm planning and design. Allowing or uture climate in the provisiono national in rastructure and the design o buildings, and incorporating fexibilityto cope with uncertainty is likely to be less costly and easier than retro tting assetsin the uture.

Irreversible impacts. This is a particular concern when managing natural resources .For example, many habitats and ecosystems cannot be reintroduced once they are lost.

Systemic consequences. Some climate hazards, in particular extreme events, mayhave disproportionate, ar-reaching or multiple e ects on the economy and society.Understanding o the potential or these systemic consequences is very limited, buttheir possibility means that they merit particular attention. Additionally, the e ects o

climate change can result in conficts and synergies between sectors or activities. Inmaking adaptation decisions it is important to recognise the broad-scale and long-termconsequences o these decisions. Failure to recognise these interactions can result inmaladaptation, or example building coastal de ences without recognising that this couldincrease food risk on neighbouring coasts. 42 This is important or land use planning and the provision o national in rastructure . When making decisions about land use,it will be important to avoid development in areas that will lock uture generations intoa development path that increases vulnerability to climate change or that will be verycostly to maintain or reverse.

Table 2.1: Characteristics o adaptation decisions in priority areas

Climate-sensitivedecisions

Long-lasting decisions

Long assetli e

Irreversibleimpacts

Systemicconsequences

Land use planning X X X X

Providing national in rastructure X X X

Designing and renovating buildings X X

Managing natural resources X X X

Emergency planning X X

42 Dawson et al (2009).



What should be happening today to prepare or climate change?

Box 2.1: De nitions o the priority areas and possible adaptation measures that couldbe taken in each area

Land use planning. Determining where new domestic and commercial properties(e.g. housing and business developments), national in rastructure (e.g. power plants and

substations) and green space (e.g. parks) are located. Possible adaptation measures thatcould be taken in this area include:

locating new long-lived assets (buildings and in rastructure) in areas that minimiseexposure to food risk, do not increase food risk to others, and do not create a legacyo food de ence or unmanageable water supply costs and pressures;

managing competing pressures on land domestic, commercial and agricultural in response to potential impacts o climate change; and

including and enhancing green space (where it is e ective) in the design o urbanlandscapes to help manage sur ace water drainage sustainably and cope with rising

temperatures compounded by the urban heat island e ect.

Providing national in rastructure. How signi cant pieces o in rastructure in the energy,transport, communication, water and waste sectors are planned and built. This includesboth public and private in rastructure. It includes the design o roads, railways and power lines, and whether regional water networks are interconnected. Possible adaptationmeasures that could be taken in this area include:

ensuring in rastructure is resilient to potential increases in extreme weather eventssuch as storms, foods and high temperatures;

ensuring investment decisions take account o changing patterns o consumer demand, as a result o climate change, in areas such as energy and water use, traveland consumption; and

building in fexibility so that in rastructure systems can be modi ed in the uturewithout incurring excessive cost.



Box 2.1: De nitions o the priority areas and possible adaptation measures that couldbe taken in each area

Designing and renovating buildings. How new domestic, commercial and public sector buildings estates are planned and built, and the methods and materials used to renovate

existing buildings. Possible adaptation measures that could be taken in this area include: ensuring food damaged buildings are repaired to standards that improve their

resilience to uture foods;

improving the water e ciency o plumbing and appliances;

incorporating sustainable drainage systems into new developments; and

ensuring buildings can cope with rising temperatures through the use o di erentconstruction materials and ventilation systems that do not increase carbon emissions.

Managing natural resources. Management o ecosystems, habitats, agriculture, land,seas and natural resources such as water. Possible adaptation measures that could betaken in this area include:

increasing ecological resilience through habitat creation, protection and restoration,and by establishing ecological networks;

implementing measures that allow or natural changes in rivers and coasts; and

increasing water e ciency, including demand management, and building acilities or water re-use, where appropriate.

Emergency planning. A process o risk management that mitigates and plans or the

potential and actual consequences o natural disasters (such as foods) and man-madehazards (such as industrial accidents). Possible adaptation measures that could be takenin this area include:

ensuring business continuity management accounts or severe disruptions to thesupply chain during foods and storms;

creating plans that ensure e ective social care and reduce the impacts on vulnerablegroups, and ensuring healthcare is su cient during heatwaves and foods; and

making better use o probabilistic weather orecasts to anticipate extreme weather events more e ectively and improve preparedness.

Taking steps in these priority areas will have wider bene ts. For example, a ully- unctioningin rastructure, including secure water supplies, and well-designed hospitals and care acilitiesare all key to promoting human health and well-being.

Chapter 2



2.3 The challenges of measuring success

Monitoring and evaluating success ul adaptation is a challenge or several reasons:

Uncertainty about uture climate. The UKs adaptation strategy will have to anticipate arange o uture climates. 43 While there is overwhelming evidence that the world is warming

and will continue to warm urther, there are uncertainties surrounding the scale, timingand nature o how the climate might change. These arise in part rom uncertainty in utureemissions and in part rom the chaotic nature in which the climate system behaves, whichbecomes increasingly more unpredictable at the regional level. Uncertainty also arisesbecause climate models cannot simulate the real world with complete accuracy. Theseuncertainties make it di cult to know what uture climate to adapt to.

Timing. Adaptation involves taking de nite actions today to reduce possible damages andcapture uture bene ts. Many adaptation actions will have immediate bene ts, but their ullbene ts may not be realised until sometime in the uture.

Adaptation is context speci c. Unlike mitigation, where every unit o carbon has the samecost regardless o where it is emitted, the optimal adaptation response is context speci c,depending on who is adapting, where in the country, and how they weigh up other actorsin their decisions. This makes it di cult to determine in advance what success ul adaptationwill look like.

2.4 The ASCs approach to measuring progress

We have developed a simple ramework to measure, evaluate and monitor how well theUK is preparing or climate change ( see Figures 2.1a and 2.1b ). 44 The ramework comprisesthree elements desired outcomes rom adapting, a ladder o key activities in delivering

adaptation outcomes, and policy to enable delivery:

Desired adaptation outcomes. The ladder leads to the achievement o desired adaptationoutcomes, which are essentially the result o actions that reduce the costs and damages

rom climate change in the UK and enhance any potential opportunities. Decision-makersneed to understand how their current objectives are likely to be a ected by the currentclimate and uture climate scenarios. This will help to de ne the adaptation outcome andidenti y measures required to deliver it. For example, i your current objective is improvingpublic health, then your adaptation outcome may be to reduce heat-related illness, or atleast not let the number o people su ering rom heat-related illness increase.

Decision-makers should monitor and evaluate whether the measures are delivering thedesired adaptation outcome and, where they are not, assess i alternative measures arerequired or i the current objectives are still appropriate under a changing climate.

43 Lempert and Collins (2007).44 West and Gawith (2005).




Chapter 2

Delivery o adaptation outcomes. The rungs o the ladder indicate increasing levelso adaptation activity by public sector organisations, businesses and individuals:

build adaptive capacity , to increase the capability o individuals, groups or organisations to understand what climate change means or them and how theymight need to respond;

this enables them to adopt a structured decision-making approach that involvesidenti ying and setting outcomes or adapting to climate change, and that explicitlyincorporates the impacts o climate change and their uncertainties into key decisions;and

then take tangible action that reduces risk and vulnerability.

Policy to support delivery. The wider government policy ramework will partly determinehow ar and how quickly public sector organisations, businesses and individuals move upthe ladder. Policy-makers need to understand the market ailures and other barriers that

may prevent adaptation taking place, and identi y the range o instruments to stimulateand incentivise organisations, businesses and individuals to adapt.

Figure 2.1a: The adaptation preparedness ladder

Adaptation outcome

P o

l i c y : r e m o v i n g

b a r r i e r s

P o l i c y : e n c o u r a g

i n g a d a p

t a t i o n

Timely action


Current objectives

Decision-making

Capacity




Figure 2.1b: The adaptation preparedness ladder applied to the orestry sector


Increased climate resilienceof forests

I n c e n

t i v e s a n

d r e g u

l a t i o n

t o e n a b

l e

a p p r o p r i a t e a c

t i o n

b y

t h e

i n d u s t r y

R e m o v a l o

f b a r r i e r s

t o a c

t i o n

Planting trees more suitedto future climate

Sustainable forests and forestry industry

Options appraisal using appropriatedecision-making processes

Current climate risks to forests understood

The ollowing section discusses the components o the ladder in more detail.

2.4.1 Outcomes

The ultimate goal o adaptation is to reduce the costs and damages rom climate changeand enhance the opportunities. Costs and bene ts can be expressed as conventionaleconomic metrics (e.g. monetary damage rom fooding), quality o li e measures (e.g. number o people a ected by drought), or environmental measures (e.g. species lost).

To determine i the UK is making progress on adaptation it is rst necessary to assess i

the desired adaptation outcomes are being achieved. In principle this could be done with arange o metrics or key activities and variables, as was proposed in 1999 and again in 2004. 45 This proposal will be revisited once the rst Climate Change Risk Assessment is complete,and should remain the long-term aim (see Chapter 4). In the interim, we will assess progressat each rung o the preparedness ladder and evaluate the e ectiveness o policy in enablingprogression up the ladder. This will provide a use ul indicator o movement towards theultimate outcome and a good understanding o the actors driving changes in risk over time.

45 Review o UK Climate Change Indicators. June 2003 (Revised Jan 2004) Department or Environment Food and Rural A airs.

Outcome



Chapter 2

2.4.2. Delivery of outcomes

CapacityBuilding adaptive capacity is an important rst step. This will ensure that public sector organisations, businesses and individuals have the knowledge and skills to take sensible

decisions, which will ultimately lead to sensible adaptation actions. The complex nature ande ects o climate change mean that organisations will need additional capacity to prepare.

Decision-makers within organisations will need to ensure that they have adequate resourcesto enable them to adapt by: 46

gathering evidence on the impacts o climate change and adaptation options to aid inmaking decisions under uncertainty and understanding how climate change will a ectcurrent objectives. For example, a better understanding o the direct and indirect impactso current and uture climate change on health;

monitoring climate change impacts and examining previous decisions to learn lessons rom

past experiences and to understand current vulnerability. For instance, businesses couldanalyse their success in coping with previous foods and heatwaves; and

building partnerships with external organisations to enhance the development andimplementation o adaptation actions, in order to maximise the bene ts o adaptationand avoid undesirable side-e ects. This could involve ensuring that procurement partnersconsider adaptation and working across local government to coordinate adaptation thinking.

There is also a need to ensure that people have the capability to adapt by:

in orming and training sta and individuals about climate change, adaptation and howto develop suitable responses. Examples include advising property owners o the increasein food risk that they ace due to climate change, teaching sta how to use climateprojections, and ensuring that pro essional guidance embodies appropriate re erenceto climate change; and

building strong leadership by ensuring there are sta with speci c responsibility or adaptation who can infuence others within the organisation.

Decision-making Adaptation requires some oresight about the uture impacts o climate change. Uncertaintycan pose problems or taking sensible adaptation decisions, but the problem is notinsurmountable. Following a structured decision-making process allows the decision-maker to balance uture climate risks and uncertainties against other pressures (Box 2.2), key to thiswill be the use o appropriate decision-making tools. This will help build the business case or whether or not adaptation is required.

46 Developed using Lonsdale et al. (2010) (UKCIP project commissioned by the Adaptation Sub-Committee), HM Treasury (2009) and National Audit O ce (2009).

Capacity

Decision-making




Box 2.2: Decision-making process 47

A structured approach to making adaptation decisions should incorporate the ollowing steps:

set out what the decision-maker is aiming to achieve;

assess the vulnerability of the objective(s) to current climate and future climate scenarios;and

set out and evaluate possible adaptation options to address the risks.

In many cases, low-regrets options that provide immediate bene ts today and are notsensitive to precise climate change predictions will be available. These can be implementedimmediately without having to proceed urther in the decision-making process. There aretwo broad categories o low-regrets options:

Measures that reduce current climate vulnerability . These provide immediate bene tsby protecting against current weather damage, while increasing resilience to utureclimate change. For example, setting back food de ences in sparsely populated estuariescan help to reduce current food risk while providing room or estuaries to adapt toincreased sea level.

Measures with co-bene ts or measures to manage non-climate risks. Some measures,as well as being e ective orms o adaptation, can also yield bene ts with respect toother objectives. For example, water conservation can reduce the amount o energy usedin water treatment and domestic water heating.

Where investments are signi cant and cover a long timescale, a more ormal policy appraisalwill have to be carried out to evaluate and compare individual adaptation options .

As a result o the uncertainty about uture impacts, it is particularly important to consider: Robust options which broaden the coping range rom the start. For example, where the

capacity o a water storage system is increased in anticipation o drier conditions.

Flexible options and strategies which allow or possible mid-li etime adjustments asmore in ormation about climate becomes available. For example, the Thames Barrier adaptation plan can be modi ed in uture to enable it to cope with sea level rise until theend o the century i required. 48

The decision-making process should be periodically reviewed and repeated to take intoaccount reductions in uncertainty about climate change impacts and newly available

response options.

47 48

47 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1994), Ranger et al. (2010).48 Environment Agency (2009a).



Chapter 2

Timely actionUltimately, in order to change the physical resilience or vulnerability o a system, it isimportant that timely, tangible actions are taken. This is distinct rom the provision o in ormation or legislation, both o which aid progress but do not change the physical stateo the system.

The decision-making process described in the previous section will result in actions thatreduce current climate vulnerability, provide co-bene ts or build in robustness to a rangeo uture climate scenarios. Examples include improving the water e ciency o agricultureand incorporating green spaces into urban landscapes. However, action does not have tobe immediate to be timely. Timely action might build in fexibility or uture adaptation,

or example preventing building on land that may in uture be needed or new reservoirsor food de ences.

2.4.3. Policy to enable delivery

Adaptation will more o ten than not be undertaken by local authorities, communities,businesses and individuals. However, central government policies will be required to:

ensure relevant organisations have the knowledge, skills and incentives to adapt, such as adequate climate in ormation, price and regulatory incentives and accountability;

remove barriers to effective adaptation, such as short term thinking, insuf cient price signalsand obstructive regulations (Box 2.3), in order to incentivise action;

ensure there is a clear allocation of responsibility for adaptation and suf cient cooperationamong actors or measures that require coordination, or example across a catchment areaor between emergency services; and

protect those most vulnerable to climate change and limit the uneven distribution of climatechange impacts across regional and social scales.

Timelyaction

Policy




Box 2.3: Examples o adaptation barriers and policy instruments

Barriers Behavioural barriers may delay complex decisions particularly an issue or adaptation

due to the uncertainty over uture climate.

Market ailure because o in ormation ailures, externalities and the public-goodcharacteristics o some adaptation measures.

Institutional and regulatory barriers may directly constrain action or indirectly a ectadaption. Existing barriers which have been designed to achieve speci c objectives maynonetheless have an indirect impact on adaptation, or example agricultural policies cana ect the resilience o the natural environment.

Financial constraints , especially where adaptation options involve up ront costs, mayprevent adaptation rom taking place. Individuals and business may not be able to a ordthese options, even i they make economic sense in the long term.

Policy instruments Direct regulation can help overcome in ormation ailures and ensure certain types o

actions are undertaken, or example, hosepipe restrictions can help ease water shortagesin times o drought.

Market-based measures such as price, licenses and property rights can create incentives or businesses and individuals to adapt.

Research and monitoring programmes can incentivise research on climate change risksand adaptation technologies, which are likely to be underprovided by the private sector.

In ormation provision and public engagement on climate change risks and adaptationoptions can encourage organisations, businesses and individuals to adapt.

Source: Cimato and Mullan (2010).

The progress that the UK has made in adapting to climate change will be assessed in the nextchapter by analysing the Government Departmental Adaptation Plans, with a particular ocuson the ve priority areas that have been outlined in this chapter.



Chapter 3: Progress in adaptingto climate change

This chapter uses the preparedness ladder described in Chapter 2 to begin to assess theUKs progress in adapting to climate change. 49 It draws predominantly on the GovernmentsDepartmental Adaptation Plans. These set out how departments are assessing and managingthe risks rom climate change to their policies, programmes and estates. 50 The analysis ocuseson those areas identi ed as being a priority or early action in Chapter 2 land use planning,providing national in rastructure, designing and renovating buildings, managing naturalresources, and emergency planning. Some limited analysis o adaptation occurring outside

central government has also been conducted where possible. Annex 3.1 summarises adaptationoccurring in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland because the Departmental Adaptation Plansonly cover England and reserved matters.

In line with the preparedness ladder, we present key ndings on progress in the ollowingsections:

1) desired adaptation outcomes.

2) delivering outcomes:

a) capacity and capability;

b) decision-making; and

c) timely actions.

3) policy to enable delivery.

This report provides our rst national assessment o the UKs progress on preparing or climatechange. It will be updated as urther in ormation becomes available, including the ClimateChange Risk Assessment and the rst tranche o reports rom public bodies and in rastructureproviders, as required by the Climate Change Act. Box 3.1 summarises our ndings.

49 The UK re ers to England and reserved matters within the devolved authorities in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.50 All 16 central Government departments published Depart mental Adaptation Plans on 31 March 2010. Discussions were also conducted with o cials rom

a number o key departments to enhance our understanding o their plans including Departments or Environment Food and Rural A airs (DEFRA),Energy and Climate Change (DECC), Communities and Local Government (CLG), Health (DH), Treasury (HMT), Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) andthe Cabinet O ce (CO).


37/72



3.1 Desired adaptation outcome

The Departmental Adaptation Plans evaluated how the previous Governments policyobjectives could be a ected by climate change. Most plans set out a range o policies,programmes and initiatives that were either in place or being planned to respond to theimplications o climate change on their objectives.

However, there is little evidence o any departments setting desired adaptation outcomesor any process or evaluating the e ectiveness o their plans, policies and programmes.This is a critical stage o the adaptation process. In the absence o desired adaptationoutcomes, it is di cult to determine the e ectiveness o the adaptation plans.

Setting desired adaptation outcomes requires a good understanding o climate risk andavailable adaptation measures. Departments do not yet generally have this in ormation.They anticipate that it will be provided by the orthcoming Climate Change Risk Assessmentand Adaptation Economic Assessment. 51

3.2 Delivering adaptation outcomes

This section assesses progress toward delivering adaptation outcomes across the rungso the preparedness ladder capacity, decision-making and timely action.

Adaptation activity in the UK has been underway or over a decade. Previous studieson UK adaptation identi ed greater progress in building capacity and raising awareness thandelivering action, starting with the Climate Change Impacts Review Group reports in 1991and 1996, 52 and more recently with reviews by the UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP)and the Tyndall Centre. 53 Activity has been dominated by government- unded initiatives,principally climate change impact research. Sectors dependent on large, climate-sensitive

in rastructure (food de ence and water supply) have made most e ort to identi y possibleclimate impacts and adaptation options.

The UKs approach to adaptation compares avourably with progress in other countries.The UK is the only country to have established a legal ramework or adaptation, which requiresthe Government to undertake regular risk assessments and prepare a National AdaptationProgramme. Within Europe the UK is one o only three countries to have established a ormalmonitoring and review system or adaptation. 54 The UKs climate projections are among themost advanced in the world and the ormation o a statutory advisory committee that coversboth adaptation and mitigation is unique. However, these institutional arrangements do nottell us how well prepared the UK is or climate change.

According to a recent survey only 6% o organisations are comprehensively assessingcurrent and uture climate risks and taking active steps to manage them, althoughmore have started to think about these issues (see Figure 3.1). This suggests that capacitybuilding has increased awareness o adaptation, but this has not yet translated into signi cantaction. Our analysis o the UKs preparedness corroborates this nding.

51 http://www.de ra.gov.uk/environment/climate/adaptation/ccra/index.htm52 Climate Change Impacts Review Group (1996).53 West and Gawith (2005), Tompkins et al. (2010).54 Swart et al. (2009).

Outcome

Chapter 3



Progress in adapting to climate change

Figure 3.1: How organisations are thinking about the risks and opportunities presentedby a changing climate.

100%

0%

Comprehensively assessing present and future threats within risk management, actingon priorities and monitoring progress

2%

10%

13%

26%

24%

19%

4%

Comprehensively assessing present and future threats within risk management andacting on priorities

Looked at present and future threats(acting on priorities)

Looked at present and future threats(thought about what to do)

Started to look at it

Plan to in the future

Not at all

Dont know

2%

Source: De ra (2010a).Note: This gure is based on a De ra survey o 633 organisations, comprised o : 460 rom businesses, 75 rom local government,25 rom the health sector, 25 rom the third sector and 48 rom educational institutions. The survey included predominantlylarger businesses (>10 employees) or whom climate change is more likely to be an issue. The question asked was: Which o thesestatements best describes how much your business/organisation has thought about the kinds o risks or opportunities a changingclimate could present?

3.2a Delivering adaptation outcomes capacityThe Governments approach to adaptation has had some success at building adaptivecapacity by providing in ormation on climate impacts, developing tools to assist decision-making and establishing a range o networks and partnerships. The Government setup the Adapting to Climate Change Programme in 2007. This unds the UK Climate ImpactsProgramme, which works to build capacity across the public, private and third sectors. 55 The UK Climate Projections provide in ormation on the range o possible climate utures. 56

More recently, the Government has required a range o organisations and institutions toset out how they are considering the risks rom climate change. This not only helps to raiseawareness o climate risks and adaptation measures, but also provides organisations with thelegitimacy to consider climate change alongside other drivers. The current ramework coversmany priority organisations:

government departments through Departmental Adaptation Plans;

local authorities under National Indicator 188 (NI 188);57 and

bodies with functions of a public nature or statutory undertakers (such as water or energycompanies and regulators) under the statutory Adaptation Reporting Power. 58

55 http://www.ukcip.org.uk56 http://ukclimateprojections.de ra.gov.uk57 NI 188 is a sel -assessed p rocess-based indicator that measures progress on assessing climate risks and incorporating appropriate action into local authority

strategic planning. The uture o this per ormance ramework is currently under review.58 See http://www.de ra.gov.uk/environment/climate/legislation/reporting.htm

Capacity



A number o other organisations have been asked to voluntarily consider adaptation intheir work. 59

We ound some progress in building adaptive capacity, with evidence o growingawareness in public and private sector organisations. However, it is not clear that this issu cient to enable these organisations to adapt.

Adaptive capacity in central governmentCentral governments sel -assessment or the Environmental Audit Committee in 2009showed many departments were beginning to think about adaptation. 60 The levelachieved was broadly in line with the scale o the challenge aced by these departments. For instance, capacity was reported to be higher in departments where climate change is likely toa ect many policy objectives directly ( or example Communities and Local Government andDe ra). Capacity is generally lower in departments where climate impacts are likely to be lesssigni cant, or example the Ministry o Justice where the direct e ects o climate change willprimarily be elt on its estates (see Figure 3.2).

Figure 3.2: Central governments adaptive capacity, scored by sel assessment or theEnvironmental Audit Committee in 2009. Departments were asked to score themselvesagainst ve levels o progress or each o the ve themes (Leadership, Policy andStrategy, People, Partnerships and Processes). The maximum possible score was 25.Asterisks indicate departments with lead ( *) or partial (*) responsibility in high priorityareas (see Annex 3.2 or details).

S c o r e o

f c a p a c

i t y

t o a s s e s s a n

d m a n a g e

c l i m a t e c h a n g e r i s k s

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0 CLG DIUSDefra DECC DfT CO DH BIS HMT DCMS DCSF DWP MoJ HO MoD

Departments with responsibility in

* Land use planning* Providing national infrastructure

* Designing and renovating buildings

* Managing natural resources* Emergency planning

Department

Department acronyms: Communities and Local Government = CLG, Department or Environment, Food and Rural A airs = De ra,Department o Energy and Climate Change = DECC, Department or Transport = D T, Cabinet O ce = CO, Department o H ealth= DH, Department or Business, Innovation and Skills = BIS, HM Treasury = HMT, Department or Culture, Media and Sports =DCMS, Department or Children, Schools and Families = DCSF, Department or Work and Pensions = DWP, Ministry o Justice =MoJ, Home O ce = HO, Ministry o De ence = MoD, Department or Innovation, Universities and Skills = DIUS. The Department

or International Development and the Foreign and Commonwealth O ce were not included in this assessment.

Source: National Audit O ce (2009).

59 For instance, the D T Departmental Adaptation Plan outlines how local authorities are encouraged to consider climate change in Transport Plans (see p26).60 National Audit O ce (2009). It is possible that departments have developed additional capacity since this evidence was collected (the report was published

in July 2009).

Chapter 3



However, in some key departments with policy responsibility in priority areas capacityis o ten limited to small, dedicated teams. While these teams are attempting to engage their wider department on adaptation, this is unlikely to be su cient to ensure that climate changeis ully embedded in all adaptation relevant policies. For instance, HM Treasury will need toestablish that spending decisions in priority areas take current and uture risks rom climate

change into account. Similarly, the Department o Healths sel -assessment o their adaptivecapacity is relatively low considering the signi cant risk that extreme weather events pose topublic health and well-being.

A number o adaptation plans noted the possible importance o overseas impactso climate change on their policy responsibilities. For instance, the Foreign andCommonwealth O ce noted that climate change could exacerbate confict overseas. TheDepartment o Energy and Climate Change suggested that climate change could have indirectconsequences on security o energy supply. 61 A Government Foresight project is studyingthe risks to the UK presented by climate change elsewhere in the world through a Foresightproject. 62 The Department or International Development and the Foreign and Commonwealth

O ce also described a number o projects in their adaptation plans that aim to assistdeveloping countries in reducing their vulnerability to climate change. As climate change maylead to signi cant international policy conficts and dilemmas, which are likely to a ect the UK,this issue will warrant urther consideration and analysis by policy-makers.

Few departments demonstrated evidence o learning rom other countries. The UKcould bene t rom the experience o other countries who are also developing adaptationplans or who already live with conditions similar to those projected to occur in the UK under climate change scenarios. 63

Adaptive capacity in local government

Local authorities have a key role in addressing climate change impacts. Their responsibilities include many priorities or early adaptation action delivering land useplanning, providing local in rastructure, implementing building control, managing green spaceand coordinating emergency planning. 64 For instance, local authorities are responsible or 98%o the road network in England and Wales. 65

Over the last ew years local authorities have started to adapt with some exampleso good practice, 66 but overall capacity remains low. In 2005 there was little evidencethat local government was adapting to climate change. 67 Since then, National Indicator 188(NI 188) has been introduced to assess local authority preparedness (see Figure 3.3). By 2008 2009 (the rst year o reporting) just over hal o authorities were at Level Zero (Getting

Started) with 6% o authorities at Level 2 (Comprehensive Risk Assessment). Capacity hadgrown by 2010, with 45% o authorities at Level 2. However, only 7% reported that theyhad a plan to reduce climate risks (Level 3), and none had started to implement their plans(Level 4). This lack o tangible adaptation action is discussed urther in Section 3.2c.

61 Foreign and Commonwealth O ce (2010) Department o Energy and Climate Change (2010).

62 http://www. oresight.gov.uk/OurWork/ActiveProjects/climatechange/climatechangeprojecthome.asp63 Biesbroek et al. (2010).64 House o Commons Environmental Aud it Committee (2010 p.28-29).65 Cabinet O ce (2010).66 Local Government Association (2010 p12-14).67 Tompkins et al. (2010).

Progress in adapting to climate change



There is already evidence that local authorities lack su cient capacity in priorityadaptation areas. For example, a number o studies suggest the complexity o adapting mayexceed the current capability and capacity o planners and planning departments. 68,69

Figure 3.3: Percentage o local authorities at di erent stages o NI 188 rom 2008-2010.

The data presented includes results rom county councils and unitary authorities.

Level

%

0:Gettingstarted

10

20

30

40

50

60

1: Publiccommitmentand impactsassessment

2:Comprehensiverisk assessment

3:Comprehensive

action plan

20089

4:Implementation,monitoring and

continuousreview

200910

Source: Communities and Local Government data hub.

Adaptive capacity in key delivery bodiesTo date there has been no comprehensive evaluation o whether there is su cientadaptive capacity in delivery bodies (i.e. public sector agencies, regulators and businesses)working in priority areas. While the evidence available suggests capacity is improving it stillappears insu cient or many organisations to take adaptation decisions (see Section 3.2b).

In the business sector, survey data suggests that capacity is low. For example, anassessment o 350 FTSE-listed companies ound that in general adaptation is an unexploredcorporate issue, even though 87% believed they were exposed to climate change risk. 70 The FTSE 350 survey concluded that the water sector is ahead o other sectors (see alsoSection 3.2b). A survey o environmental managers cited the biggest barriers to progressas lack o resources, lack o engagement and lack o understanding o the nature and riskso climate change. 71

In the natural environment sector, there are various capacity building programmeseither in place or being developed. For example, Natural England is advising armers andland managers on measures that deliver adaptation bene ts or biodiversity.

68 The Town and Country Planning Association (2009a, b) reviewed six previous studies and conducted a work shop with 29 planners to in orm a Royal

Commission on Environmental Pollution report on adaptation (RCEP, 2009). The Town and Country Planning Association (2009a, p 4) concluded that,the complexities o implementing adaptation across stakeholders rom di erent sectors, parallel strategies and plans, and organisational structures andhierarchies in the context o signi cant planning re orms have surpassed the capability and capacity o planners and planning departments.

69 Communities and Local Government (2010).70 Acclimatise (2009). This report analysed in ormation disclosed to the Carbon Disclosure Project by FTSE 350 companies on adaptation.71 Institute o Environmental Managers and Assessment (2009).

Chapter 3



There is an increasing recognition that pro essional bodies can play an important rolein providing their members with the capacity to adapt. There are some examples o e ortsto raise adaptive capacity targeting these bodies:

The Institute of Civil Engineers conducted a review of skills for ood risk management.72 Climate change was one o the main motivations or the review. Since then the Environment

Agency has taken a lead in encouraging civil engineering degrees to encompass food risk;

UKCIP has worked with other professional groups to develop the knowledge and skillsrequired to evaluate climate change risks and opportunities and instigate adaptive action; 73 and

The National Farmers Union and the Country Land and Business Association have beenworking together to raise awareness o climate change impacts and opportunities or agriculture through the Farming Futures initiative. In a recent survey, 80% o armersthought the climate was changing, 70% believed these changes o ered them advantages,and 50% elt they presented some threats. 74

It will be important to maintain this momentum and broaden e orts to other priorityareas. For instance, in the health and social care sector, a recent survey ound that over 50%o organisations had only just begun or had not even started to look at the threats o currentand uture climate. 75

3.2b Delivering outcomes decision-making

This section examines whether climate change is being incorporated systematicallyinto decision-making in priority areas. Chapter 2 laid out a structured approach to makingadaptation decisions in the ace o uncertainty, which involves the ollowing key steps:

1. Set out what outcome is desired (see also section 3.1).

2. Assess the vulnerability o this outcome to current and uture climate scenarios.

3. Determine what adaptation measures are available. Implement low-regrets options thatreduce current vulnerability or deliver co-bene ts. Evaluate and compare other adaptationoptions using ormal policy appraisal.

First we assess central government decision-making by reviewing how climate change risks areincorporated into Departmental Adaptation Plans and policies in priority areas. Then we briefyexamine how government policy infuences adaptation decisions made by delivery bodies in

priority areas o land use planning, providing national in rastructure, designing and renovatingbuildings, managing natural resources, and emergency planning.

Decision-making in central governmen

Documents

Climate Change Report 1