Key Vulnerabilities and Risks from Climate Change: An Analysis of Indicators and Dangers, Lecture notes of Biology

Download Key Vulnerabilities and Risks from Climate Change: An Analysis of Indicators and Dangers and more Lecture notes Biology in PDF only on Docsity! CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite - Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review 1 IPCC WGII Fourth Assessment Report — Draft for Government and Expert Review 2 3 Chapter 19 - Assessing Key Vulnerabilities and the Risk from Climate Change 4 5 6 Coordinating Lead Authors: 7 _ A. Patwardhan (India), S. Semenov (Russia), S. Schnieder (USA) 8 9 Lead Authors: 10 ‘I. Burton (Canada), C. Magadza (Zimbabwe), M. Oppenheimer (USA), B.Pittock (Australia), 11 A. Rahman (Bangladesh), J. Smith (USA), A. Suarez (Cuba), F. Yamin (UK) 12 13 Contributing Authors: 14 — J. Corfee-Morlot (France), A. Finkel (USA), M. Fuessel (Germany), K. Keller (Germany), Dena 15 | MacMynowski (USA), M. Mastrandrea (USA), A Todorov (Bulgaria) 16 17 Review Editors: 18 — R. Sukumar (India), J. Zillman (Australia) 19 20 21 Contents 22 23 Executive Summary 2 24 25 19.1 Introduction 5 26 19.1.1 Purpose, Scope and Structure of Chapter 5 27 19.1.2 Conceptual Framework for the Identification and Assessment of Key Vulnerabilities 6 28 29 19.2 Criteria for Selecting” Key” Vulnerabilities 8 30 31 19.3 Identification and Assessment of Key Vulnerabilities 11 32 19.3.1. Introduction to Tables 19.1 and 19.2 11 33 19.3.2 Market Systems 21 34 19.3.3. Societal Systems 22 35 19.3.4 Ecosystems and Biodiversity 24 36 19.3.5 Geophysical Systems 25 37 19.3.6 Extreme events 27 38 19.3.7 Update on Reasons for Concern 28 39 40 19.4 Assessment of Response Strategies to Avoid Key Vulnerabilities 30 41 19.4.1. Adaptation 31 42 19.4.2. Mitigation 33 43 19.4.3. Synthesis 4l 44 19.4.4 Priorities for Research 42 45 46 References 43 Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 1 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite - Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review SOMmIDNARWNe BYRRESRRSSRIZGESKS 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 4l 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Executive Summary Key vulnerabilities to climate change are risks from climate change that merit particular attention by policy-makers. The identification of key vulnerabilities is intended to provide guidance for identifying levels and rates of climate change that, in the terminology of UNFCCC Article 2, could potentially be considered “dangerous” by different sets of decision-makers. Ultimately, the definition of “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” (DAT) cannot be based on scientific arguments alone, but must incorporate value judgments and therefore be made through a political process informed by the state of scientific knowledge. No single metric can adequately describe the diversity of key vulnerabilities, nor determine their ranking. The purpose of this chapter is to apply the concept of “key vulnerabilities” in the context of risks from climate change, and to provide an assessment of: ¢ interpretations of the concept in the literature, and criteria for identifying key vulnerabilities; ¢ specific risks related to climate-sensitive physical, biological, and social systems (as reported in WGI and WGII Chapters 3-16) that could be identified as key vulnerabilities; and ¢ adaptation and mitigation response strategies aimed at avoiding key vulnerabilities. This chapter identifies seven criteria for assessing and defining key vulnerabilities: * magnitude * timing * persistence and reversibility ¢ likelihood and confidence * potential for adaptation ¢ distribution ¢ “importance” of the vulnerable system Some key vulnerabilities are associated with “systemic thresholds” in either the climate system, the socio-economic system, or coupled socio-natural systems. Other key vulnerabilities are associated with “normative thresholds” that are related to smoothly-varying impacts of climate change deemed unacceptable by certain decision-makers. Key vulnerabilities are found in many climate-sensitive systems, including food production, health, water resources, coastal systems, global biogeochemical cycles, ice sheets, modes of oceanic and atmospheric circulation, ecosystems and biodiversity. General conclusions include: * Observed climate change to 2006 has been associated with some impacts that can be considered key vulnerabilities. Among these are incre: in human mortality, loss of glaciers, and increases in extreme events such as intense tropical cyclones. ¢ Global mean temperature changes of up to 2°C above ~1990 will exacerbate current key vulnerabilities and trigger others (high confidence), such as reduced food security in many low- latitude nations (medium confidence). ¢ Global mean temperature changes of 2 to 4 C above ~1990 will result in an increasing number of key vulnerabilities at all scales (high confidence), such as widespread loss of biodiversity and triggering of widespread deglaciation of major ice sheets. ¢ Global mean temperature changes greater than 4°C above ~1990 will lead to major increases in vulnerability (very high confidence), exceeding the adaptive capacity of many systems. ¢ Regions that are already at high risk from current climate variability are more likely to be adversely affected by anthropogenic climate change in the near future due to projected increases in the magnitude and frequency of already-damaging extreme events. Planned adaptation can significantly reduce many potentially dangerous impacts of climate change Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 2 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite - Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 12 13 14 15S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 4l 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 19.1 Introduction 19.1.1 Purpose, Scope and Structure of Chapter Since the TAR, policymakers and the scientific community have increasingly turned their attention to which impacts might be considered “dangerous”, whether these are related to critical thresholds or levels of climate change that can be identified, and what response strategies may avoid such impacts. The identification of “key vulnerabilities” here is intended to provide guidance for identifying levels and rates of climate change that, in the terminology of UNFCCC Article 2 (see Box 19.1), may be considered “dangerous” by relevant decision-makers. Ultimately, the definition of “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” must incorporate value judgments concerning the unacceptability of a range of risks through a political process that is informed by scientific knowledge. The purpose of this chapter is two-fold. First, it synthesizes information from Working Group I and Chapters 3-16 of this Report to assist policymakers in evaluating the risks inherent from varying levels of climate change. Accordingly, the analytic emphasis of this chapter is on people and systems that may be adversely affected by climate change, particularly where these impacts could have serious and/or irreversible consequences. Since a detailed description of climate impacts in all sectors and regions is beyond the scope of this chapter, readers are encouraged to turn to the executive summaries of the sectoral and regional chapter of this Report for a fuller accounting. Moreover, IPCC Plenary determined the remit of this chapter be focused on shedding light on key vulnerabilities and climate change risks, rather than assessing the literature for all the positive and negative impacts generated by climate change or attempting a normative trade-off analysis among and between human and natural systems. (The term “normative” is used in this chapter to refer to a process or statement that inherently involves subjective value judgements or beliefs.) Weighing the benefits of avoiding such climate-induced risks versus the costs of mitigation or adaptation, as well as the distribution of such costs and benefits (i.e., equity implications of such trade-offs), is beyond the charge to and scope of this chapter. However, the integrated assessment literature briefly summarized at the end does move toward that normative framework, though many more examples of that literature can be obtained in this Report in Chapter 20 and in Working Group III AR4. Furthermore, our focus is not to compare the value of marginal effects of climate change to the value of overall socio-economic developments paths, but rather we expect that individual decision makers will decide for themselves the extent to which they see merit in comparing marginal climatic costs or benefits to the scale of overall economic development pathways. Second, the chapter provides an assessment of literature bearing on the contributions that various response strategies, such as stabilisation and mitigation/adaptation options, could make to avoiding or reducing risks. Finally, the chapter identifies research priorities for addressing current knowledge gaps. The remainder of Section 19.1 presents the conceptual framework and the criteria used in this chapter to identify and assess key vulnerabilities from climate change. Section 19.3 presents selected vulnerabilities that could be considered “key” based on these criteria. As far as possible, key vulnerabilities are linked to specific levels of global mean temperature increase (above 1990-2000 levels; see Box 19.2). The link between key vulnerabilities and global mean temperatures is germane to assessing what can be considered “dangerous” climate change under Article 2 of the UNFCCC. Due to space limitations, Section 19.2 cannot provide an exhaustive list of key vulnerabilities. Those selected here represent the authors’ collective judgements, based on the criteria presented in Section 19.2, from a vast array of possible candidates suggested in the literature. Section 19.4 draws on the literature addressing the linkages between key vulnerabilities and strategies to avoid them by Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 5 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite - Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review SOMmIDNAERWHe RRARA RA ROKKWHYKHKWWWNYNYNHNONNHNNNNE ER SP ee Re SS&GESSESSLYRAR SBE SBRZYRRREBRBLYSSRIABDESHO 48 49 50 51 adaptation (Section 19.4.1) and mitigation (Section 19.4.2). Section 19.5 suggests research priorities for the natural and social sciences that may help provide relevant knowledge for assessing key vulnerabilities of climate change. BOX 19.1: UNFCCC Article 2 “The ultimate objective of this Convention and any related legal instruments that the Conference of the Parties may adopt is to achieve, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention, stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. This stabilization level should be achieved within a time frame sufficient ¢ to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, ¢ to ensure that food production is not threatened, and ¢ to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.” Box 19:.2 Reference for Temperature Thresholds When comparing potential temperature thresholds and stabilization levels, care must be taken to maintain consistency in metrics. Thresholds for global mean temperature change have been variously presented as changes with respect to: pre-industrial temperatures; the average temperature level of the 1961-1990 period; or with respect to “current” temperatures, usually anchored within the 1990- 2000 period. The best estimate for the increase above pre-industrial levels in the 1961-1990 period and in the 1990-2000 “current” period are 0.3°C and 0.6°C, respectively (Folland er al., 2001). Therefore, to illustrate this via a specific example, limiting global mean temperature change to, say, 2°C above pre-industrial levels corresponds to a 1.4°C increase above 1990-2000 levels, and perhaps only 1.3°C above 2006 levels. Climate impact studies often assess changes in response to regional temperature change, which can differ significantly from changes in global mean temperature. In most land areas, regional warming is larger than global warming (see WGI Chapter 11) Unless specified otherwise, this chapter refers to global mean temperature change above 1990-2000 “current” levels, which reflects the most common metric used in the literature on key vulnerabilities. 19.1.2 Conceptual Framework for the Identification and Assessment of Key Vulnerabilities 19.1.2.1 Meaning of “key vulnerability” The various research communities involved in climate change research conceptualize the term “vulnerability” in many different ways (Fiissel, 2005; WGII Chapter 17). In the TAR, the vulnerability of a system to climate change was characterized as being comprised of three factors: exposure to climatic stimuli, sensitivity to these stimuli, and adaptive capacity (Glossary, WG II TAR). Other scholars use the term “vulnerability” more specifically to describe properties of a system or community that make them susceptible to a range of hazards. In accordance with the pertinent literature, the term “key vulnerability” is used here broadly in the context of potentially severe impacts of climate change that merit particular attention by policy makers because they endanger the lives or well-being of people or other valued attributes of climate- sensitive systems. The term “key vulnerability” may refer to the vulnerable system itself (e.g., low- lying islands or coastal cities), the impact to this system (e.g., flooding of coastal cities and Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 6 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite - Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review SOMmIDNARWNe RRARA RAR ROKKWHYWBHKHBWNNNNNNHNNNNE ERP eee eee SSEGESBESSLYRARSORASBRZYRREBRESSEIRTDESHSS 48 49 50 51 agricultural lands or forced migration), or the mechanism causing these impacts (e.g., disintegration of West Antarctic Ice Sheet). Key vulnerabilities are found in many social, economic, biological and geophysical systems. Studies of the risks from climate change have provided various tabulations of key indicators, vulnerabilities, or dangers (Smith et al., 2001; Corfee-Morlot and Héhne, 2003; Oppenheimer and Petsonk, 2003, 2005; Hare, 2003; Leemans and Eickhout, 2004; Hitz and Smith, 2004; ECF, 2004; DEFRA, 2005). 19.1.2.2 Scientific Assessment and Value Judgements The assessment of key vulnerabilities involves substantial scientific uncertainties as well as value judgements. It requires consideration of important non-climatic developments that affect adaptive capacity, of the response of biophysical and socio-economic systems to changes in climatic and non- climatic conditions over time, of the potential for effective adaptation across regions, sectors and social groupings, and of value judgments about the acceptability of potential risks as well as of potential adaptation and mitigation measures. Therefore, scientists and analysts need to provide a “traceable account” (Moss and Schneider, 2000) of all relevant assumptions. Scientific analysis can inform policy processes but choices about which vulnerabilities are “key” and preferences for policies appropriate for addressing them necessarily involve value judgements. The IPCC has repeatedly emphasized this point, for instance in the Synthesis Report of its Third Assessment Report: “Natural, technical and social nces can provide essential information and evidence needed for decision-making on what constitutes ‘dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.’ At the same time, such decisions are value judgments determined through socio- political processes, taking into account considerations such as development, equity, and sustainability, as well as uncertainties and risk.” (TAR, p. 2). While value judgements are necessarily subjective, they may be informed by ethical, moral, or religious arguments (e.g., MacIntyre, 1981; Forum on Religion and Ecology, 2004). 19.1.2.3 Article 2 UNFCCC Article 2 of the UNFCCC leaves the definition of “dangerous” flexible, thereby allowing different interpretations and reinterpretations of what is dangerous (Oppenheimer, 2005; Leiserowitz, 2005). The question of which impacts might constitute “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” (DAI) in terms of Article 2 has attracted much attention only recently, and the literature still remains relatively sparse (Oppenheimer and Petsonk 2005). Operationalising Article 2 requires, first, a scientific analysis of what impacts are expected for different level of greenhouse gas concentrations or climate change. Second, it requires a normative evaluation of which impacts are significant enough to constitute, individually or in combination, DAI. This assessment is informed by the magnitude of climate impacts as well as by their distribution across regions, sectors, population groups, and time (e.g., Mastrandrea and Schneider, 2005; Yamin et al., 2005; Corfee-Morlot et al., 2005). The social, cultural, and ethical dimensions of DAI have drawn increasing attention recently (Jamieson 1992, 1996; Rayner and Malone, 1998; Gupta et al., 2003; Adger, 2001; Gardiner, 2005). The specific references in Article 2 to natural ecosystems, food production, and sustainable development provide some guidance as to which impacts may be considered in the definition of DAI. Operationalisation of Article 2 is necessarily a dynamic process because the establishment of a specific level of greenhouse gas concentrations as “dangerous” may be modified based on changes in scientific knowledge, social values, and political priorities. One target that has received considerable attention in the literature is to limit global mean temperature increase to 2°C over pre-industrial levels (about 1.3°C above 2006 levels). This goal was first adopted by the Council of the European Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 7 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite - Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review SOMmIDNARWNe RRARA RAR ROKKWHYWBHKHBWNNNNNNHNNNNE ERP eee eee SSEGESBESSLYRARSORASBRZYRREBRESSEIRTDESHSS 48 49 50 51 lead to numerous impacts on natural and social systems (see WG II Chapter 1), some of which may be considered “key”. Persistence and reversibility A harmful impact is more likely to be considered “key” if it is persistent, or even irreversible. Examples of impacts that could become “key” due to persistence include emergence of regions with near-permanent drought conditions (e.g. in semi-arid and arid regions in Africa; Nyong, 2005) and areas subject to intensified cycles of extreme flooding that were previously regarded as “one-off” events (e.g., in parts of the Indian sub-continent; Lal, 2002). Examples of climate impacts that are irreversible, at least on the time scales of many generations of humans, include shifts in regional or global biogeochemical cycles (AR 4 WGI Ch 7; Rial et al., 2004), the loss of major ice sheets (Oppenheimer 1998; Gregory ef al., 2004); the breakdown of the thermohaline ocean circulation (AR4 WGI Ch 10; Stocker and Schmittner 1997; Rahmstorf and Zickfeld, 2005), the extinction of species (Thomas et al., 2004, Lovejoy and Hannah, 2005), certain land cover changes (Cowling et al., 2004), and the loss of unique cultures (Barnett and Adger, 2003). Examples of loss of unique cultures include small island nations at risk of flooding from sea-level rise (Chapter 16) or the Inuit people of the North American Arctic (Chapter 15) having to cope with the receding of sea-ice that is central to their socio-cultural environment. Likelihood and confidence In the assessment of key vulnerabilities, two components of uncertainty need to be distinguished: likelihood and confidence (Moss and Schneider, 2000). In an expert elicitation of subjective probabilities of aggregate economic impacts (Nordhaus, 1994), of uncertain parameters of the climate system (Morgan and Keith, 1995; Morgan et al., 2006) or of certain large-scale climate events (Arnell et al., 2005), the likelihood can be framed as the central value of the probability distribution, whereas the confidence is reflected primarily by its spread (the lesser the spread, the higher the confidence). An impact with a high likelihood is more apt to be seen as “key” than an impact of similar magnitude but with a lower likelihood of occurrence. Other things being equal, the more risk- averse a stakeholder is, the more attention will be given to impacts whose likelihood can only be determined with low confidence compared to similar impacts with high confidence in the likelihood estimates, since low confidence implies a less well-bounded characterization of potentially severe risks. On the other hand, a risk-prone stakeholder would likely have an opposite view. Potential for adaptation To assess potential harm caused by climate change, the ability of individuals, groups, societies and nature to adapt to or ameliorate adverse impacts must be considered (see Section 19.3.1 and WGII Chapter 17). The lower the availability and feasibility of effective adaptations, the more likely such impacts would be characterized as “key vulnerabilities”. The potential for adaptation to ameliorate the impacts of climate change differs between and within regions and sectors (e.g., O’Brien et al., 2004). While there is often considerable scope for adaptation in agriculture and in some other highly managed sectors, there is much less scope for adaptation to some impacts of sea-level rise, and there are no realistic options for preserving endemic species in areas that become climatically unsuitable (see Chapter 17). Adaptation ‘ssments need to consider not only the technical feasibility of certain adaptations but also the availability of required resources, the costs and side effects of adaptation, the knowledge about those adaptations, their timeliness, the incentives for the adaptation actors to actually implement them, and their compatibility with individual or cultural preferences. For the sake of making a clear distinction, the adaptation literature can be largely separated into two groups: one with a more favourable view of the potential for adaptation of social systems to climate change, and an opposite group that expresses less favourable views, stressing the limits to adaptation in dealing with large climate changes and the social, financial and technical obstacles that might Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 10 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite - Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review SOMmIDNARWNe RRARA RAR ROKKWHYWBHKHBWNNNNNNHNNNNE ERP eee eee SSEGESBESSLYRARSORASBRZYRREBRESSEIRTDESHSS 48 49 50 51 inhibit the actual implementation of many adaptation options (see, e.g., the debate about the Ricardian climate change impacts methodology in Mendelsohn et al., 1994; Cline, 1996; Mendelsohn and Nordhaus, 1996; Kaufmann, 1998; Hanemann, 2000; Polsky. and Easterling, 2001; Polsky, 2004; Schlenker et al., 2005). This chapter reports the range of views in the literature on adaptive capacity relevant for the assessment of key vulnerabilities, and notes that these very different views contribute to the large uncertainty that accompanies assessments of many key vulnerabilities. Distribution The distribution of climate impacts across regions and population groups raises important equity issues (see Section 19,1.2.3). In particular, the adverse impacts of current and future climate change and the benefits from past and current greenhouse gas emissions are very unequally distributed (Miiller, 2002). Based on fairness arguments, decision-makers may therefore be more likely to consider impacts as “key” if they affect regions or population groups whose past and current contribution to anthropogenic climate change was small compared to groups with a more greenhouse gas-intense lifestyle, particularly if the relative severity of potential impacts, and ability to adapt to them, were greater for those who contributed less to the problem. Importance of the vulnerable system A salient though subjective criterion for the identification of “key vulnerabilities” is the importance of the vulnerable system or system property. Some factors are widely recognized as indicating the importance of a system. The transformation of an existing natural ecosystem, for instance, is more likely to be regarded as important if that ecosystem is the unique habitat of many endemic species or contains endangered charismatic species. If the livelihoods of people depend crucially on the functioning of a natural system, this system may be regarded as more important than a similar system in an isolated area (e.g., a mountain snow pack system with large downstream use of the melt water versus an equally large snow pack system with only a small population downstream using the melt water). However, any assessment of importance will also include normative criteria. For instance, some nature-centric stakeholders may see ecosystems as valuable in their own right while those with more anthropocentric views may judge importance primarily based on their provision of goods and services to humans. Moreover, aggregating various metrics to measure the value of such goods and services involves a normative analysis. 19.3 Identification and Assessment of Key Vulnerabilities This section discusses what the authors have identified as possible key vulnerabilities based on the criteria specified in the Introduction and Section 19.2, and on the literature on impacts that may be considered potentially “dangerous” in the sense of Article 2. The key vulnerabilities identified in this section are, as noted earlier, meant to be an illustrative, not comprehensive list. Section 19.3.1 introduces key vulnerabilities, organizing them by reasons for concern as well as by type of system, ie., market, social, ecological, or geophysical. The following sections discuss some of the key vulnerabilities by type of system. 19.3.1. Introduction to Tables 19.1 and 19.2 Tables 19.1 and 19.2 give short summaries of some vulnerabilities, which in the judgement of the authors of this chapter, in the light of earlier chapters of Working Groups | and 2, may be considered “key” according to the criteria set out above in 19.2. Some candidates for key vulnerabilities are set out in Table 19.1 under the classification of the five “reasons for concern” presented in the Third Assessment Report, WG2, Chapter 19. These key vulnerabilities are listed with cross-references to Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 11 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite - Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review SOMmIDNARWNe SRRESSE earlier chapters. The main criteria for listing the particular impacted sectors, systems or regions as key vulnerabilities are given in column 2, while column 3 briefly dis es, where known, critical levels of global warming the timing of impacts and the confidence in statements. The table is not a complete list, and some entries could be sub-divided on a more regional or specific basis. In Table 19.2 a more detailed list of key vulnerabilities is given, with an attempt to describe, as quantitatively as possible from the literature, how the impacts vary by global mean temperature increase above 1990 levels (with the author’s confidence estimates attached). This mainly refers to the long-term increase in temperature. Where known, the table presents information regarding dependence of effects on rates of warming, duration of the changes, exposure to the stresses and adaptation taking into account uncertainties regarding socio-economic development. However, only in a few cases does the literature address duration of warming and its consequences. As entries in both tables are necessarily short, reference should be made to relevant chapters and to the accompanying text in this chapter for more detailed information, including additional caveats where applicable Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 12 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite — Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review Key Vulnerability (Cross- references) Criteria for “key” Remarks on critical level, timings and confidence Antarctic Ice Sheet (WGI, Ch.10) °C. Potential for ten or more metres SLR over several centuries to millennium above 2.5-5 °C. likely this century. WAIS disintegration more uncertain, with models of new mechanisms not yet available. Because of long time frame, adaptation potential uncertain, but may require massive relocation of coastal populations and loss of coastal ecosystems. Biospheric positive feedbacks (WGI, Ch.7, 10 and WGII Ch.4) Climate change reduces the efficiency of the Earth system to absorb anthropogenic carbon dioxide due to a reduction of land carbon uptake, leading to accelerated global warming. Some observations suggest process may be starting now, e.g., permafrost melting, and observed biospheric sources of CO2 under drought and fire conditions. Methane stores destabilised (WGI, Ch.?, WGII Ch.4).) Large stores of methane could be released by permafrost melting or destabilisation of hydrates on sea floor, leading to accelerated global warming. Permafrost already melting. Sea floor hydrates destabilised by warming at ocean depth but stabilised by SLR. Which effect dominates may vary by region. Magnitude and timing highly uncertain. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 15 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite - Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review Table 19.2: Table of selected key vulnerabilities for which there are reasonable estimates of magnitude of impacts triggered at specified levels of global mean warming. This list is not ordered by priority or severity but by category of system either affected or which causes vulnerability. The categories range from economic systems, for which adaptation potential is greatest, to geophysical systems, which typically have least adaptive capacity. Extreme events are a class of causes of vulnerability, and for these adaptation applies to the affected systems, which are largely socio-economic. Entries are necessarily brief to limit the size of the table, so further details, caveats and supporting evidence should be sought in the accompanying text, cross-references and in the primary scientific studies referenced in this and other chapters of the AR4. In many cases climate change impacts are marginal or synergistic on top of other existing and often increasing stresses. Selected <2°C above 1990 2-4°C above 1990 >4°C above 1990 Remarks: KVs: (confidence) (confidence) (confidence) [rate information, duration, exposure] Market Systems Food Reduced low-latitude Global production peaks Further declines in global | High adaptive potential, unevenly distributed, Supply production (low and begins to decline (low production (low to realization of potential uncertain. confidence). Potential for | confidence) medium confidence) increased global production (low confidence) Infrastructure) Some increased damages | Rapidly increasing damages | Further rapid increases in | Adaptation generally possible with anticipation, but likely as design criteria are damages (high retrofitting particularly expensive. Adaptation costs exceeded (high confidence) | confidence) include increased energy demand. Faster rates of change can greatly increase costs. Net Market | Net market impacts plus | Net market impacts could Projected to be net losses | It is difficult to account for all market sector costs, the Impacts or minus a few percent of | peak or continue to decline | with increasing losses at | consequences of development, and actual GDP (low confidence). with increasing losses in higher temperatures implementation of adaptation. Developing countries developing countries (low (medium confidence) likely to have greater confidence) percent losses Social Systems Water Many regions already Many regions presently only | Many regions are Many adaptations available in low stressed regions Supply stressed, especially in mildly stressed experience _| severely stressed, such as improved water use efficiency and use of Mediterranean type increased stress (high requiring extreme water pricing. More costly adaptations include climates, reach critical confidence). Those regions | adaptations such as out irrigation and desalinization. These have levels (high confidence) | include areas fed by snow or | migration. (medium environmental and energy costs. glacier melt that lose confidence) Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 16 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite — Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review Selected <2°C above 1990 2-4°C above 1990 >4°C above 1990 Remarks: KVs: (confidence) (confidence) (confidence) [rate information, duration, exposure] storage capacity. Coastal Storm surge, wave Adverse effects increase and | Many communities Adaptation requires foresight, large expenditures of Resources erosion and salinisation | adaptation becomes more become too expensive to | money and energy, and can include losses of amenity affect many low-lying expensive and less protect, with out and natural ecosystems. For large sea level rises communities but many of | satisfactory (e.g., need for migration necessary (~metres) large populations will need to move. them can adapt (high retreat or abandonment) (medium to high confidence). confidence). Health Climate change Increasing health risks, Further increased health | Aggregate health impacts likely to increase increasing morbidity and | resulting from such factors | risks in many regions incrementally with increasing climate change. mortality due to as malnutrition, infectious (medium confidence). Thresholds will appear at local scales due to unique malnutrition, diarrhoeal diseases, air pollution, and characteristics of population vulnerability, disease diseases, malaria, heat weather disasters, unless transmission, and other factors. Climate change will waves, and floods. (low _| effective adaptation increase the pressures on disease control activities. to medium confidence) measures are implemented Status of public health infrastructure and disease (medium confidence). control activities are critical. (Medium-high confidence). High- Glacial melt is causing Further loss of glaciers and | Widespread impacts on Loss of glacier storage will reduce ability to even out Mountain flooding in some areas, shifts in ecosystems; most communities (high | seasonal flows and droughts, leading to water supply Communities| shifts in ecosystems and __| increased flooding e.g., in confidence). Many areas | insecurity. Glacier lake outburst floods are an water security problems | Himalayas (medium to will lose their mountain _| increasing issue (see Asia chapter) due to decreased storage. | confidence) glaciers. Indigenous, | Many of these Communities in low-lying Many of these Adaptation is difficult in these communities without poor or communities are already | coastal and arid areas are communities may need to | large outside support. isolated stressed. Climate change | especially threatened (high | be abandoned (medium communities | and sea level rise adds confidence) confidence). significantly to other stresses (medium confidence). It is possible, but It is very difficult to project cross-border crises such Cross- speculative, that extreme | Higher magnitudes of Higher magnitudes of as migration. Many factors such as governance, Border events such as droughts | climate change more likely | climate change even development and adaptation, will play a critical role. Issues and floods, inundation of | to contribute to cross-border | more likely to contribute_| Climate change is likely to increase the potential for Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 17 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite — Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review Selected <2°C above 1990 2-4°C above 1990 >4°C above 1990 Remarks: KVs: (confidence) (confidence) (confidence) [rate information, duration, exposure] confidence) surface temperatures and ocean circulation (Anthes et al., BAMS in press) Flooding Increases in flash Increased flooding in many | Large river flooding in Flooding may be exacerbated by loss of forest cover flooding occur in many regions due to greater northern North America | from episodic drought and fire, with changes in river regions due to increased | increase in winter rainfall and Eurasia becomes characteristics due to large sediment loadings and rainfall intensity*[WG1 | exacerbated by loss of frequent, especially in bank erosion. Adaptation capacity varies, but will 3.8], particularly in large | winter snow storage. winter (high confidence). | involve costs. Impacts could involve much damage basins in mid and high Greater risk of dam burst in and dislocation, especially if the rate of change is latitudes (medium glacial mountain lakes (high large. confidence). confidence). Heat Increased heat stress and | Frequency of heat waves Frequency of hot days Most mortality from heat waves can be substantially heat waves, especially in | (according to current will be much greater, avoided by adaptation. However, adaptation via early continental areas (very classification) will increase | with many locations warning systems, provision of cooling offset high confidence) rapidly, causing increased untenable without infrastructure, and other measures will impose costs mortality (high confidence). | changes in infrastructure | and increase energy demand. and other adaptations . Drought Increasing frequency and | Intensity of droughts will Conditions expected to Droughts are already increasing and expected to intensity of drought in continue to increase (high be more extreme (high increase in severity and frequency with additional mid-latitude continental | confidence). confidence) warming. Loss of winter snow and glacier storage will areas[*WG 1 3.3] (high exacerbate problem. Thresholds and adaptive capacity confidence) vary widely. Fire Increased fire frequency | Frequency and intensity Conditions expected to Decreased precipitation will likely increase frequency and intensity in many areas, particularly arid and semi-arid areas (high confidence). likely to be greater (high confidence) be more extreme (high confidence) of fires. In arid climates, fire frequency can increase even with increased precipitation with large enough warming. In particular, it can increase biomass, thus resulting in larger fires. Fire fighting capacity can be stepped up, but extreme conditions can overwhelm most fire-fighting efforts. *Some observational evidence, see WG-1 **Marginal changes on top of baseline changes Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 20 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review SOMmIDNARWNe BRA RR RRA RRWWWWKWWWWWWNYNNNNNNNNNE ER RR eR RR CHIUDARHBNETOBHBADAAREWHN KE SOBA DANUKRWN KE SCOCMIDURWNHE 19.3.2 Market Systems Market systems are those by which interactions are primarily, but not exclusively, economic. They often involve provision and sale of goods and services in formal or informal markets. They are often considered to be an important component of sustainable development. 19.3.2.1 Agriculture Agricultural impacts are probably the largest among all market system impacts from climate change. Ensuring that food production is not threatened is an explicit criterion of UNFCCC Article 2. Chapter 5 notes with high confidence that agricultural systems will be affected differently depending on location and type of crop. In general, low-latitude areas are most at risk because of potential reductions in grain yields combined with fewer financial and technological resources to adapt to climate change (see Chapter 5). In spite of this, there is low confidence that global agricultural production could increase up to 2.5 to 3.5°C of warming (approximately above 1990). Beyond 2°C, yields of many crops in temperate regions are projected to decline (low confidence). So, beyond that level of warming, marginal global production may decline because of climate change. With higher increases in GMT, the marginal decline continues. Part of the reason there is low confidence in this finding is that most studies on global agriculture have not yet incorporated a number of critical factors, including changes in extreme events or spread of pests and disease (Climate Risk Management Limited, 2005; Rosenzweig et al., 2002; Hallegate et al., forthcoming). In addition, they have not considered development of specific practices or technologies to aid adaptation. Adaptation at the farm level and through market adjustments could play a significant role to limit the adverse impacts of climate change (Callaway, 2004). 19.3.2.2 Other Sectors Other market systems could also be affected by climate change. These include livestock, forestry, and fisheries industries, which could be directly affected as climate affects the quality and extent of rangeland for animals, soil and other growing conditions for trees, and freshwater aquatic and marine ecosystems for fish. Other sectors are also sensitive to climate change. These include energy, construction, insurance, tourism and recreation. The aggregate effect of climate change on many of these sectors has received little attention in the literature and remains highly uncertain. Some may see shifts in expenditures, some may see contraction, and some could see net expansions. Yet, for some sectors, such as insurance, the impacts of climate change may well be negative [see Chapter 7]. The major reinsurance companies are at risk from very large claims from catastrophic losses in events such as Hurricane Katrina, which has been the most costly event (both natural and human induced) for the insurance industry ever (Munich Re 2006). The adaptive response of the industry is likely to be a reduction in the share of risk they will accept (primary insurance companies will be able to pass on less risk to reinsurers), and the raising of premiums (Mills, 2005). Other sectors such as tourism and recreation may also see substantial shifts (e.g., reduction in ski season, loss of some ski areas, shifts in tourism because of changes in climate and extreme events). Global net energy demand is likely to change (Tol, 2002b) eventually increase as air conditioning demand increases sufficiently to eventually overcome the energy savings from lower heating demands (low confidence). What global average temperature is associated with minimum energy demand (and thus above it would have a net increase in energy demand) is uncertain (Hitz and Smith, 2004). Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 21 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 19.3.2.3 Aggregate Market Impacts Estimating total economic impacts from climate change is highly uncertain. Total economic impacts may be in the range of a few percent of global product (see Chapter 20). While it is possible that gross world product could increase up to about 2°C warming, largely because of estimated direct CO2 effects on agriculture, whether global world product increases or decreases is highly uncertain. Above this level of warming, most studies indicate that gross world product could decrease. For example, Tol (2002a) estimates net positive global market impacts at 1°C when weighting by economic output, but finds net negative impacts when weighting by population. Nordhaus (2006) uses geographical weighted output and finds more negative economic impacts than previous studies, although still in the range of a few percent of gross world product. How to value impacts in various metrics other than market systems (e.g., losses in human life, species lost, distributional inequity, etc.) is deeply normative and limits the confidence that can be assessed for analyses of aggregate impacts (see 19.1.2). 19.3.2.4 Distribution of Impacts The global figures mask substantial variation at the national or local scale. Even if gross world product were to change just a few percent, national economies could be reduced by relatively larger amounts. All studies with regional detail show Africa, for example, with climate damages on the order of several percent of GDP at 2°C increase in GMT or even lower levels of warming. (see Chapter 7). 19.3.3. Societal Systems Societal systems exist to secure the health and well-being of humans and society by meeting fundamental needs such as the provision food and water as well as essential services such as education, housing and health care. The type and level of such goods and services a person or group receives varies from society to society depending on the level of resources available and the effectiveness of legal and political systems. Formal institutions such as states and regulated markets tend to underpin provision of basic goods and social services in the developed world, informal social institutions, such as families and community groups, tend to dominate or may be the only service providers in much of the developing world, particularly in rural areas or areas subject to conflict. The resulting differences in type and level of provisions of basic goods and social services means there is no single threshold beyond which it is clear that most or all societal systems are vulnerable to climate change. There are, instead, a myriad of thresholds, specific to particular groups, systems at specific timeframes beyond which they can be vulnerable to variability and to climate change. These differences in vulnerability are a function of a number of factors. Exposure is one key factor. For example, communities in low lying areas are more exposed to sea level rise or storm surges. A second key factor affecting vulnerability is the capacity of social systems to adapt to their environment, including coping with the threats it may pose and taking advantage of beneficial changes. Smit et al. (2001) identified a number of determinants of adaptive capacity, including such factors as wealth, societal organization, and access to technology (see also Yohe and Tol, 2002). These attributes differentiate vulnerability to climate change across societies facing similar exposure. For example, Nicholls (2004) and Nicholls and Tol (in press) find that level of development and population growth are very important factors affecting vulnerability to sea level rise. However, comparisons across countries or continents can mask differentiation of vulnerability at finer scales. For example, the specific vulnerabilities of communities with climate related risks, such as the elderly and the poor, are typically much higher than for the population as a whole. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 22 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 19.3.5.1. Global biogeochemical cycles The sensitivity of the carbon cycle to increased CO) concentrations and climate change, is a key vulnerability (AR4 WGI section 7.1.4) because it may lead to positive feedbacks that act to increase atmospheric CO? concentrations, driven by a combination of reduced Net Primary Productivity and increased CO, soil respiration under a warmer climate (AR4 WGI section 7.2.2.1.4; Matthews et al., 2005; White et al.1999; Cramer et al., 2001). An intercomparison of ten climate models with a representation of the land and ocean carbon cycle (see WG1 Chapter 7; WG1 Ch.10.4.1) show that by the end of the 21st century, additional CO, varies between 20 ppm and 200 ppm for the two extreme models, with most of the models projecting additional CO2 between 50 and 100 ppm (Friedjingstein er al., 2006). This additional CO, leads to radiative forcing ranging between 0.1 and 1.3 Wm ~ and hence an additional warming ranging between 0.1 and 1.5°C. A similar range results from estimating the effect including forcing from aerosol and non-CO2 GHGs. These feedbacks would significantly decrease the cumulative emissions corresponding to a given CO2 stabilization level. At the regional level (see AR4 WGII ChX), important aspects include the role of fire in transient response and possible abrupt land cover transitions from forest to grassland or grassland to semi-arid conditions (Claussen et al.1999; Eastman et al., 2001; Rial et al.2004; Cowling et al., 2004). A larger warming, particularly beyond 3°C, would cause more adverse impacts. Warming of permafrost and marine sediments may destabilize methane gas hydrates in some regions (AR 4 WGI section 7.2.2.2.8), as may have occurred during the Paleocene thermal maximum (Dickens, 2001, Archer and Buffet 2005). A rising eustatic (global) contribution to sea level would tend to stabilise hydrates. One study (Harvey and Huang, JGR 1995) reports that methane releases may increase very long-term future temperature by 10-25% over a range of scenarios. Most studies also point to increased methane emissions from wetlands in a warmer, wetter climate (WGI 7.4.1.2). Increasing ocean acidity due to increasing atmospheric concentrations of CO (AR4 WGI section 7.2.2.2.3; Sabine et al.2004; Royal Society 2005) may reduce biocalcification of marine organisms corals (Hughes et al., 2003; Feely et al.2004). Reduction in CaCO; production could result in ifts in species composition and major ecological impacts (e.g., Turley et al., 2006 DEFRA). Destruction of wide areas of bottom and sediment fauna and indirect effects on the marine food chain (Liu and Millero, 2002) also may result. 19.3.5.2 Deglaciation of West Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets The potential for partial or complete deglaciation of the Greenland and the West Antarctic ice sheets (WAIS) and associated sea level rise (Alley et al., 2005; Vaughan, 2006), have been analyzed specifically in the context of key vulnerabilities and Article 2 (Oppenheimer and Alley 2005; O’ Neill and Oppenheimer 2002; Hansen, 2005) and scenarios for future warming (Huybrechts and de Wolde, 1999; Gregory et al., 2004; Gregory and Huybrechts 2006). Deglaciation is a key vulnerability because eventual sea level rise could reach 7m and ~5m from Greenland and WAIS, respectively (for a total of ~12m if both completely disintegrated), with wide-ranging consequences (Schneider and Chen, 1980; Revelle, 1983, Atlantis, 2005; Vaughan 2006) and would not be reversible except on very long timescales if at all (WGI AR4 10.7.4.3 and 10.7.4.4). The ability to adapt would depend crucially on the rate of deglaciation. Estimates of this rate range from rapid (several centuries, sea level rise up to 1m/century) to slow (a few millennia; see also AR4 IPCC WGI sections 4.7.4, 6.4.3.3, 10.7.4.3, 10.7.4.4, Vaughan and Spouge, 2002). Deglaciation may be triggered centuries before the resulting sea level rise becomes comparable to that from other sources (Oppenheimer, 1998). Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 25 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 The threshold for deglaciation is estimated at 4.5+/- 1.8 °C local warming relative to preindustrial (2.3+/-1.6°C global warming above present day) for Greenland (WGI AR4 Ch.10.7.4.3). Models indicate that warming would initially cause the Antarctic ice sheet as a whole to gain mass owing to increased accumulation of snowfall. Scenarios of deglaciation suppose that this effect would be outweighed by accelerated dynamical discharge of ice following weakening or collapse of ice shelves and melting at the base of the ice where it enters the ocean. Recent observation of unpredicted, rapid local acceleration and consequent loss of mass from both ice sheets (Alley et al.2005) underscores the inadequacy of existing models of the relevant processes, particularly for WAIS (AR4 WGI section 4.7.4; AR4 WGI 10.6.4.2, 10.7.4.4; Payne and Vieli, 2005). Based on output of one AOGCM and using surface ablation of ice shelves as an indicator of ice sheet vulnerability, a global warming limit of 4 °C has been proposed beyond which WAIS may experience large scale deglaciation (Oppenheimer and Alley, 2004, 2005). Consideration of a wider range of models indicates ice shelves are unlikely to become vulnerable for less than 5°C (WGIAR4 ch. 10..7.4.4) global warming. However, paleoclimatic evidence (AR4WGI.Ch.6.X) suggests 1-2°C global warming as a limit beyond which both ice sheets may be vulnerable to at least partial deglaciation causing sea level rise of at least 4-6 meters.(IPCC AR4 WGI Ch. 6.4.3; Overpeck et al., 2006; Otto-Bliesner et al.2006; Hansen, 2005; Oppenheimer and Alley, 2004, 2005). 19.3.5.3 Possible Changes in North Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (MOC) The sensitivity of the North Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (cf. WGICh10 for a discussion of the relationship to the thermohaline circulation) is regarded as a key vulnerability due to the potential for large and abrupt regional impacts (Alley et al. 2003; O'Neill and Oppenheimer 2002; Mastrandrea and Schneider, 2002; Rahmstorf and Zickfeld 2005; Tol, 1998, Keller et al., 2000, Rahmstorf et al., 2003, Higgins and Schneider, 2005). Potential impacts associated with MOC changes include reduced warming or absolute cooling of northern high latitude areas near Greenland and NW Europe, a warming of southern hemisphere high latitudes, tropical drying (Vellinga and Wood 2002, Wood et al., 2003), as well as changes in marine ecosystems productivity (Schmittner, 2005), terrestrial vegetation (Higgins and Vellinga 2004), oceanic CO2 uptake (Sarmiento and Le Quéré 1996), oceanic oxygen concentrations (Matear and Hirst 2003), and shifts in fisheries (Keller et al., 2000, Link and Tol 2003). Paleo-analogues and model simulations (AR 4 WGI chapter 10) suggest that the MOC might react abruptly and with an irreversible hysteresis response, once a certain forcing threshold is crossed. Estimates of the forcing threshold that would trigger large-scale and persistent changes in the North Atlantic MOC are speculative. Published estimates range from approximately 2 °C to more than 5 oC (cf. Rahmstorf and Zickfeld, 2005, Keller er al., 2006, WGICh10.X). Adaptation to MOC related impacts would be difficult if the impacts occur abruptly (e.g., on a decadal time scale). Overall, there is moderate confidence in predictions of a MOC slowdown during the 21" century, but less confidence in the scale of climate change that would cause full shutdown. 19.3.5.4 Modes of Climate Variability (ENSO, Monsoons, NAO, AO and AAO) Sensitivity of modes of climate is a key vulnerability because such modes dominate years-to-decades regional climate variability, and adaptation to variability remains challenging in many regions (AR4WGIIChs X,Y, WG1Ch10). For example, anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions may have already affected El Nifio Southern Oscillation (ENSO) properties (AR4 WGI section 10.x, Timmermann et al. 1999; Fedorov and Philander 2000). ENSO shifts would affect agriculture (Cane etal., 1994, Legler et al.O'Brien 1999), infectious diseases (Rodo et al. 2002), water supply, flooding, and droughts (Cole et al., 2002; Kuhnel and Coates 2000), wildfires (Swetnam and Betancourt 1990), tropical cyclones (Pielke and Landsea 1999, Emanuel, 2005), fisheries (Lehodey et al. 1997), carbon sinks (Bacastow et al. 1980), and the North Atlantic MOC (Latif et al. 2000). Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 26 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Predictions are marked by many uncertainties (Fedorov and Philander 2000, Cane 2005), including (i) whether the ENSO changes would be abrupt and characterized by a hysteresis response, (ii) the directions of the shift, and (iii) level of warming when triggered. The North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) and the Annular Mode in both the northern and southern hemispheres (aka Arctic Oscillation, AO, and the Antarctic Oscillation, AAO, AR 4 WGI Ch 10, Hartmann et al., 2000; Thompson and Wallace, 2000; Fyfe et al., 1999; Kushner et al., 2001; Cai et al., 2003; Gillett et al., 2003; Kuzmina et al.2005) may be affected by greenhouse forcing and ozone depletion. Such changes would affect surface pressure patterns, storm tracks and rainfall distributions in the mid- to high-latitudes of both hemispheres, with potentially serious impacts on regional water supplies, agriculture, wind speeds and extreme events. Implications are potentially severe for water resources and storminess in Australia, New Zealand, Southern Africa, Argentina and Chile, southern Europe and possibly parts of the US, where Mediterranean-type climates prevail. Relation of current forcing to observed changes in these modes is uncertain; such trends have been simulated in models without forcing (Cai et al., in press). Summer monsoons would be expected to intensify and winter monsoons weaken in this century due to relative warming of land versus sea surface (AR4WGII ChX) but other factors may alter this pattern. Model simulations tend to indicate a general increase of summer precipitation over East and South Asia IPCC FAR WGI section 10.4.2.2; Meehl and Arblaster 2003) but decreases in some locations. Asian summer monsoon may have already intensified (Anderson et al.2002). Confidence of projections of specific monsoonal changes is only low to medium. 19.3.6 Extreme events As discussed in WGI Chapter x, various extreme events are expected to change in magnitude and/or frequency and location with global warming. In some cases significant trends have been observed in recent decades. The most likely changes are an increase in the number hot days, or in days exceeding various threshold temperatures, and decreases in the number of cold days including particularly frosts. These will affect human comfort and health, and natural ecosystems and crops. Extended warmer periods will also increase water demand and evaporative losses, increasing the intensity and duration of droughts, assuming no increases in precipitation. Precipitation is generally predicted in climate models to increase in high latitudes and to decrease in some mid-latitude regions (see model agreement maps in WGI, Chapter x). These changes, together with a general intensification of rainfall events, are expected to increase the frequency of flash floods and large-area floods in many regions, especially at high latitudes. This will be exacerbated, or at least seasonally modified in some locations, by earlier melting of snowpacks and melting of glaciers. Regions of constant or reduced precipitation will experience more frequent and intense droughts, notably in Mediterranean type climates and in mid-latitude continental interiors. The increased frequency and intensity of droughts in fuel-rich areas is projected to lead to increases in wild fire frequency and intensity, with impacts on natural ecosystems and human settlements. This may lead to overall releases of stored carbon from the biosphere. Tropical cyclones (including hurricanes and typhoons), are also expected to become more intense with sea surface temperature increases, with model simulations predicting increases by mid-century. However, some data reanalyses suggest that tropical cyclone intensities have increased far more rapidly. (see WG Ch X, Emanuel 2005, and Webster et al.2005). Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 27 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 rise in sea level (e.g., Overpeck et al., 2006), are not accounted for in aggregate damage estimates. In addition, current literature is limited in accounting for economic opportunities that can be created by climate change. On balance, the current generation of aggregate estimates in the literature could understate the actual costs of climate change. In summary, there is now lower confidence in most assessments of aggregate effects than in the TAR, in particular there is greater uncertainty in estimates that show aggregated benefits from climate change below a few degrees of warming. The literature also includes analysis of aggregate impacts of climate change other than monetary effects. Parry et al. (1999) found that climate change could adversely affect hundreds of millions of people through increased risk of coastal flooding, reduction in water supplies, increased risk of malnutrition, and increased risk of exposure to disease. All of these impacts would directly affect human health. The "Global Burden of Disease study" estimated that the climate change that has occurred since 1990 has increased mortality, and projected climate change will increase future disease burdens even with adaptation (McMichael et al., 2004) 5. Large-Scale Singularities. The TAR concluded that there is low to medium confidence that a rapid warming over 3°C would trigger large-scale singularities in the climate system, such as changes in climate variability (e.g., ENSO changes), breakdown of the thermohaline circulation (THC—or equivalently, meridional overturning circulation, MOC), deglaciation of the WAIS, and climate-biosphere-carbon cycle feedbacks. However, determining the trigger points and timing of large-scale singularities was seen as difficult because of the many complex interactions of the climate system. Since the TAR, the literature indicates that thresholds for deglaciation of West Antarctica may be lower. Partial deglaciation of both WAIS and the Greenland ice sheet leading to global sea level rise of ~4-6m could begin with global warming of ~1-2C above 1990 levels (WGI Ch 6.X, Ch 10.7.4.4). While there is no consensus yet, some studies (Oppenheimer and Alley, 2004, 2005; WGI Ch.10.7.4.4) indicate that a 2 to 4-5°C global warming above current levels could lead to large scale WAIS deglaciation (medium confidence). As a result, rates of sea level rise up to 1m/century may occur (WGI Ch6.4.3.3; 10.7.4.4; Overpeck et al.2006). The literature on thresholds for triggering a slowdown of MOC or net biogenic feedbacks is consistent with the TAR, but still is not reporting high confidence conclusions. 19.4 Assessment of Response Strategies to Avoid Key Vulnerabilities Section 19.3 identified global, sectoral, and regional key vulnerabilities associated with different levels of global or regional climate change. This section reviews the literature addressing the linkages between key vulnerabilities and response strategies to avoid them. The principal response strategies to the risks posed by anthropogenic climate change are mitigation of climate change and adaptation to climate change. These two strategies are often portrayed as having largely different foci in terms of their characteristic spatial and temporal scales. This section is structured as follows. Section 19.4.1 briefly reviews the literature on the role of adaptation to avoid key vulnerabilities. This section complements the assessment of the potential for adaptation included in the discussion of key vulnerabilities in Table 19.1. As discussed in Section 19.2, the relative lack of feasible adaptations has been an important criterion for the selection in the selection of key vulnerabilities in the first place. Section 19.4.2 this reviews the literature that specif- ically addresses the avoidance of key vulnerabilities or DAI through mitigation of climate change. Section 19.4.3 synthesizes the knowledge about avoiding key vulnerabilities of climate change. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 30 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Given the integrating nature of this section at the interface between climate change impacts and vulnerabilities, mitigation, and adaptation, there are important links with other chapters of the IPCC AR4. Most importantly, WG II Ch. 17 discusses the role of adaptation to climate change; WG II Ch. 18 and WG III Ch. 2.6.3 and Ch. 3.5 discuss the links between mitigation and adaptation; WG III Ch. 1.5 and Ch. 2.3 discuss the characteristics of the challenge and the decision-making problem around responding to global climate change, respectively; WG II Ch. 2.2.3 and WG III Ch. 2.4 discuss methods to address uncertainties in this context; WG III Ch. 3.3 and Ch 3.6 discuss climate change mitigation from a long-term and a short-term perspective, respectively; and WG II Ch 2.3.4 discusses methods of evaluating impacts associated with mitigation scenarios. 19.4.1. Adaptation 19.4.1.1 Adaptation as a Response Strategy. How much can be achieved by (proactive) adaptation? As evidence of the current impacts of climate change mounts (Chapter 1), and at the current rate of progress towards the stabilization of the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gasses (Working Group IID), it is becoming more vital to understand the potential and limitations of adaptation to reduce impacts and to prevent the emergence of more key vulnerabilities. In some instances there are claims on the optimistic side that much can be achieved by adaptation (Goklany, 2003, Ausubel (no date)). In other cases the prospects seem much worse, (Pittock 2006). The scientific literature on these questions is still relatively small compared with mitigation, and the conclusions are necessarily speculative in many cases. It is clear, however, that there is no simple comprehensive response to the adaptation question, and that the answer is very nuanced and is likely to become more so as new research results come in. In agriculture, for example, previous IPCC assessments have generally concluded that in the near to medium term aggregate world food production is not threatened (IPCC 1996, IPCC 2001). However considerable regional variation in impacts and adaptive capacity suggests that severe impacts and food scarcities could occur in some regions especially in low latitudes and may already be evident as seen in recurrent drought and food shortages in Africa. (World Food Programme 200x). In global terms agriculture has been extremely resilient and world food production has expanded rapidly to keep pace with world population growth. Even where shortages have occurred the reasons are rarely to be found in an absolute lack of food but are more due to lack of purchasing power and failures of the distribution system (Sen 1981). Attention to adaptation in agriculture has tended to focus on specific measures at the farm level, and some progress in being made in the incorporation of climate risks into agricultural practices. On the other hand the processes of globalization and technological change are placing adaptation more in the hands of agri-business, national policy makers, and the international political economy including such factors as prices, tariffs and subsidies, and the terms of international trade. (Apuuli et al. 2002; Burton and Lim 2005). The record of past success in agriculture is mirrored in other sectors, and in many regions it is evident that climate variability falls largely within the coping range (Jones 2001). One possible exception is in the case of extreme events where losses (both insurance and uninsured (Munich Re. 2006) have been rising sharply. In such ‘s adaptation has not been so successful despite major improvements in understanding the risks and in forecasts and warnings. (White, Burton and Kates 2001). One reason is the decline in local concern and thus reduced propensity to adopt proactive adaptation measures as the memory of specific disaster events fades. Related to this lack of Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 31 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 appreciation of possible risks is that governments and communities can still be taken by surprise when extreme events occur even though scientific evidence of their potential occurrence is widely available. Hurricane Katrina of 2005, the European heat wave of 2003, and many other similar events have caused more damage and loss of life due to a lack of sufficient adaptation. So while the overall record of adaptation to climate change and variability in the recent past (200 years) has been successful overall, there is evidence of an adaptation deficit, especially in relation to extreme events. (Burton 2004, Burton and May 2004; Hallegate et al. 2006). It is clear that in the future there is considerable capacity and potential for adaptation provided that existing and developing scientific understandings and technology and know-how can be effectively applied. It might be expected that the slower the rate of climate change the more likely adaptation is to be successful. For example, even a major rise in sea level might be accommodated and adjusted to by human societies if it happens very slowly over many centuries (Nicholls et al. forthcoming). On the other hand slow incremental change might still involve considerable costs and people might not be strongly enough motivated to take precautionary action and bear the costs without some more dramatic stimulus. It sometimes takes a disaster or a near-disaster to get people moving (cite: PRUDENCE, UK Foresight studies). Paradoxically therefore the full array of human adaptation potential is not likely to be brought to bear if one takes into account the market and institutional barriers to adaptation. In terms of the key vulnerabilities identified in Tables 19.1 and 19.2 it is clear that adaptation potential is greater the more the system is under human management and control. Thus major geophysical vulnerabilities leave little room for adaptation. Fortunately these vulnerabilities are likely to unfold relatively slowly. There is somewhat greater adaptive capacity in biological systems but it is still very limited. Biodiversity and ecosystems are likely to be impacted at a much faster rate than geophysical systems without a commensurately larger adaptive capacity. It seems likely therefore that the greatest impacts than cannot be effectively adapted to in the near to medium terms will be in biological systems. As we move into human social systems and market systems adaptive capacity at the technical level increases dramatically. However the understanding of impacts, adaptive capacity, and the costs of adaptation is weaker and the uncertainties higher. This is especially the case for synergistic or cross cutting impacts. Considered in isolation the prospects for agricultural adaptation may appear to be good. When related impacts in water regimes, droughts and floods, pests infestations and plant diseases, human health, the reliability of infrastructure, as well as other non-climate related stresses are taken into account the picture is less clear. The bottom line on the basis of the rudimentary levels of present understanding is that for market and social systems there is considerable adaptation potential at least in theory, but the costs are potentially large and largely unknown and unequally distributed, as is also our adaptation potential. For biological and geophysical systems the adaptation potential is much less and because impacts on the biological systems are on a more rapid time scale the growth new key vulnerabilities is more likely to occur in biological systems. This does not mean that social and market systems are immune. They too depend on biological systems even if less directly and as the world of ecosystems is impacted by mounting stress from climate change then follow-on (second order) effects on human health, safety, livelihoods and prosperity could be considerable. 19.4.2. Mitigation 19.4.2.1 Uncertainties in the assessment of response strategies Climate change assessments and the development of response strategies are hampered by multiple uncertainties and unknowns (see WG II Ch. 2.2.3 and WG III Ch. 2.4). The most relevant sources of Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 32 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review DAnNskwWwne 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 emissions (time frame and consideration of non-CO2 gases) and their shape. Scenario shape (or the distribution of emissions across time) is of particular relevance to the consideration of key vulnerabilities, as it influences transient temperature change (see e.g., Schneider and Mastrandrea, 2005; Meinshausen, 2005; O’Neill and Oppenheimer, 2004). Some studies focus on the key radiative Table 19.3: Methods to identify climate policies to avoid DAI Method Description Optimizing | Based on strategy? pre- defined targets? Scenario analysis, Analyze the implications for temperature No No analysis of increase or DAI of specific concentration stabilization targets stabilization levels, concentration pathways, or e ion scenarios. “Guardrail” analysis Derive ranges of emissions that are compatible | No Yes with predefined constraints on temperature increase, intolerable climate impacts, and/or unacceptable mitigation costs. Cost-benefit analysis | Include representations of key vulnerabilities Yes No or including key or DAT in a cost-optimizing integrated partly vulnerabilities and assessment framework. DAI Cost-effectiveness Identify cost-minimizing emission pathways Yes Yes analysis that are consistent with pre-defined constraints for GHG concentrations, climate change, or climate impacts. forcing agent CO2, while others include additional gases and aerosols in their analysis. Two main categories can be distinguished in regard to shape: (a) stabilization scenarios, which imply monotonically increasing concentrations from current levels up to a final asymptotic stabilization concentration (e.g., Enting et al., 1994; Schimel er al., 1996; Wigley et al., 1996; Morita et al., 2000; Swart et al., 2002; O’ Neill and Oppenheimer, 2004). (b) peaking scenarios, which imply a peaking concentration with subsequent lowering of concentrations. While such a peaking is a necessity for the exploration of stabilization levels close to or below current concentration levels (see e.g., Enting etal. 1994; Wigley et al. 1996), a number of studies also design scenarios with a temporary exceedance of higher stabilization levels on multi decadal timescales with so-called “overshoot trajectories" (Kheshgi., 2004; O’ Neill and Oppenheimer, 2004; Wigley, 2004; Izrael and Semenov, 2005; Kheshgi et al., 2005; Meinshausen et al., 2005). Several recent studies have specifically focused on the analysis of stabilization scenarios and thresholds for specific key vulnerabilities or thresholds for DAI. O’ Neill and Oppenheimer (2002) related several stabilization scenarios approaching 450, 550, and 650 ppm atmospheric CO2 concentrations to targets for temperature increase associated with specific key vulnerabilities based on temperature projections from the TAR. They concluded that none of these scenarios will prevent widespread coral reef bleaching in 2100 (assumed to occur for 1°C increase above current levels); only the 450 ppm CO; stabilization scenario is “likely” to avoid MOC collapse (assumed to occur for 3°C increase in global mean temperatures in 100 years) and may also avert deglaciation of West Antarctica. A consistent, and intuitively obvious, conclusion from these studies is that the likelihood of exceeding thresholds for specific key vulnerabilities or DAI increases with higher stabilization levels for GHG concentrations (very high confidence). Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 35 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 To quantify this conclusion, some studies present a probabilistic approach to assessing the risk of exceeding temperature thresholds for DAI under various stabilization scenarios, including overshoot and peaking scenarios (Hare and Meinshausen, 2005; Schneider and Mastrandrea, 2005; Knutti et al., 2005). These studies generate probability distributions for future global mean temperature increase based on probabilistic quantifications of the uncertainty in climate sensitivity and other climate parameters. The relationship between stabilization concentration and equilibrium temperature increase is dependent on the climate sensitivity. Figure 19.2, for instance, depicts the likelihood of exceeding an equilibrium temperature threshold of 2°C above preindustrial levels based on a range of published probability distributions for climate sensitivity. A threshold of 2°C above preindustrial levels is exemplary of the choice of many authors for their analysis of DAI (see WG III Ch. 1.2.2). To render eventual exceedence of this exemplary threshold "unlikely" (<33% chance), the CO>- equivalent stabilization level must be below 400ppm for the majority of considered climate sensitivity uncertainty distributions (range 350 and 470ppm). To make exceedence "very unlikely" in equilibrium (<10% chance), the level must be even lower given the current knowledge on the uncertainty of climate sensitivity. Wigley (2004) combines probability distributions for climate sensitivity (solid line in Figure 19.2) and non-CO} forcing with a definition for DAI (3° C) to construct probability distributions for the CO; stabilization level required to avoid DAI. As demonstrated in his study, these probability distributions reflect only one set of assumptions possible in such an analysis, and other assumptions could significantly affect the results. Under this assumption set, the median stabilization level for atmospheric CO? concentrations is 536 ppm, and there is a 17% chance that the stabilization level necessary to avoid DAI is below current atmospheric CO; levels, as the system is not currently in equilibrium. Of course, different assumptions would change these results. Significant differences in environmental impacts are anticipated between GHG concentration stabilization trajectories that allow overshoot of the stabilization concentration versus those that do not, as well as those with a fast versus slow approach to stabilization, even when they lead to the same final concentration. Schneider and Mastrandrea (2005) compared the probability distributions of temperature change induced by specific overshoot and non-overshoot scenarios stabilizing at 500 ppm CO equivalent, based on published probability distributions representing uncertainty in climate sensitivity. They found that, from 2000-2200, the overshoot scenario increased the probability of temporary or sustained exceedence of a 2°C above preindustrial threshold by 70% (from 45% to 77%), as shown in Figure 19.3a. They also defined two metrics, Maximum Exceedence Amplitude (MEA) and Degree Years (DY) to characterize emissions pathways and their associated temperature profiles by the maximum and cumulative magnitude of overshoot of any given temperature threshold, as shown for an illustrative scenario in Figure 19.3b. Their numerical estimates using a simple modelling framework can best be interpreted by comparing the relative magnitude of results rather than the model-dependent specific quantities. However, studies addressing this complexity consistently find that, compared to non-overshoot stabilization scenarios, scenarios overshooting the final target before stabilization induce higher transient temperature increases, which increase the risk of temporary or permanent exceedence of thresholds for key vulnerabilities or DAI (high confidence) (Hammit 1999; O’ Neill and Oppenheimer, 2004; Hare and Meinshausen, 2005; Schneider and Mastrandrea, 2005). This result suggests that the use of an equilibrium stabilization concentration alone is an insufficient indicator by which to evaluate exceedence of thresholds for specific key vulnerabilities or DAI, and that dynamic approaches that properly incorporate sources of uncertainty in the climate system should be part of the analysis tool kit. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 36 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHIDNARWNHeE 10 il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 4l 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Radiative forcing (Wim?) 1.23 1.os 262 B14 2.65 412 ae AD $21 gg O09 rere —— 80% = 7O% “ 3 50% ES 2 3 4% 28 3 a + 5 30%} : : : > & >. — Aironos and sehlesinger (2001) with sl aser forcing 3 8 = 20% ~ Fotest et al-(2002) . Uniform prtors = 2 5 5 2 9 tr Pode) . 8 3 10 , Wight ond Raper 2001) - IPCC lognotmal . 8 = 0% ‘ 4 ‘ 4 ‘ ‘ i se £ 5oO)06U400060C 450 U0. | USSO)0 CO G0D G50) F700) 750 * 003 equivalence stabilization level Figure 19.2: Probability of exceeding an equilibrium global warming of 2°C above preindustrial (corresponding to 1.4°C above 1990 levels). Source: Hare and Meinshausen (2005) A family of simple stabilization scenarios was proposed in (Semenov, 2004). Each scenario was characterized by the starting date for the implementation of emission reduction program and specific reduction rate, i.e. a factor by which the global CO2 emission should be cut each year. The trade-off for the date and the rate preventing GMT increase above the pre-industrial level by 3°C on average over 2000-3000 was considered (later dates required higher rates); the minimal reduction rate was estimated at 0.3% to be applied since 2012. A controversial alternative approach to stabilizing the Earth's climate is “geoengineering”, in which deliberate modification to the Earth’s radiative budget would be undertaken to offset greenhouse gas forcing. For example, Izrael (2005) suggested that 1-2°C cooling can be achieved via injection of sulphate aerosols into the lower stratosphere, echoing similar suggestions published since 1974. Nearly all such proposals are usually described by their authors as researchable topics, with very few adherents in the literature favouring near-term implementation of any such schemes, given the uncertain side effects and potentially divisive nature of any deliberate climate system intervention undertaken by a limited number of parties (National Academy of Sciences, 1991). 19.4.2.4 Guardrail analysis Guardrail analysis comprises two types of inverse analysis that first define targets for climate change or climate impacts to be avoided and then determine the range of emissions that are compatible with these targets: tolerable windows approach (Toth, 2003) and safe landing analysis (Swart er al., 1998). The tolerable windows approach allows the assessment of the implications of multiple competing climate policy goals on the mid-term and long-term range of permissible greenhouse gas emissions. It has initially been applied to several normative thresholds for climate impacts, which are analyzed together with socio-economic constraints that aim at excluding unacceptable mitigation policies. Toth et al. (2002) analyze the interplay between thresholds for the global transformation of ecosystems, regional mitigation costs, and the timing of mitigation. They show that following a business-as-usual Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 37 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 probabilistic thresholds for DAI based on the IPCC “reasons for concern.” Since these “reasons” include non-market metrics, this analysis mitigates to some extent the concerns about market system only aggregations discussed in Section 19.3. They developed relationships between the level of mitigation efforts and the probability of exceeding thresholds for DAI, and demonstrated with this simple cost-benefit model that the establishment of climate mitigation policies can significantly reduce the probability of exceeding DAI thresholds (high confidence) unless high discount rates are used. As in other such simple modelling studies, the authors again caution against taking the model- dependent numerical results literally. Other researchers have also implemented probabilistic treatments of uncertainty in integrated assessment modelling (e.g., Hope, 2005). 19.4.2.6 Cost-effectiveness analysis Cost-effectiveness analysis involves determining cost-minimizing policy strategies that are compatible with pre-defined probabilistic or deterministic constraints on future climate change or its impacts. Such scenarios have proven to be valuable for exploring the tradeoffs between climate change impacts and the cost of emissions mitigation needed to achieve stabilization (e.g., Wigley et al., 1996; Azar, 1998), although the cost-effective balance is of course dependent on assumptions about such factors as technological development and time discounting. This method has been applied to limit the risk of potentially abrupt changes such as an MOC collapse (Keller et al., 2000, Keller et al., 2004). The reductions in greenhouse gas emissions determined by cost-effectiveness analyses incorporating such constraints are much larger than the ones typically suggested by many earlier cost-benefit analyses. One reason is that most early cost-benefit analyses do not consider the key vulnerabilites underlying such constraints in their damage functions. In addition, cost-benefit analysis assumes perfect substitutability between all costs and benefits of a policy strategy whereas the hard constraints in a cost-effectiveness analysis can be interpreted as infinite costs or no substitutability from the perspective of cost-benefit analysis. Some cost-effectiveness analyses have explored sequential decision strategies in combination with the avoidance of key vulnerabilities or thresholds for global temperature change. These strategies allow for the resolution of key uncertainties in the future through additional observations and/or improved modelling. The quantitative results of these analyses cannot carry high confidence as most studies represent uncertain parameters by two to three discrete values only and/or employ rather arbitrary assumptions about learning (e.g., Hammitt et al., 1992; Keller et al., 2004, Yohe et al., 2004). However, there is a general consensus that “moderate” abatement of GHG emissions in the near term is a robust strategy across a wide range of possible stabilization targets that prevents substantial adjustment costs later (e.g., Yohe et al. 2004). Hence, these authors argue that the scientific uncertainty cannot by itself be used as a justification for doing nothing today to mitigate potential climate damages. 19.4.3. Synthesis The studies reviewed in this section diverge widely in their methodological approach, in the sophistication with which uncertainties are considered in physical, biological and social systems, and in how closely they approach an explicit examination of key vulnerabilities or DAI. The level of model sophistication varies from simple carbon cycle and climate models to highly aggregated integrated sment models to comprehensive integrated assessment frameworks incorporating emissions, technologies, mitigation, climate change, and impacts. Some frameworks incorporate approximations of vulnerability but none contains a well-established representation of adaptation processes in the global context. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 40 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 It is not possible to draw a simple summary from the diverse set of studies reviewed in this section. Nor can conclusions from the literature for individual “reasons for concern” be equated with a single threshold for DAI. The following conclusions from literature since the TAR, however, are more robust: 1. Response strategies considered in literature aim at preventing climate change-caused damage to particular key elements and processes in the Earth's system and socio-economic system. "Key" means (see Section 19.2) that they are sensitive to climate change, have limited adaptation potential, and could be used by policy-makers in designing DAI-preventing policy (the latter property involves a value judgement). 2. Acconstant long-term increase in equilibrium global mean surface temperature above the pre- industrial equilibrium (recalculated to an increase above 1990 levels, as needed) is considered in the literature in a majority of cases, whereas the transient temperature changes are much less frequently considered in literature. Many studies provided global mean temperature thresholds which would lead sooner or later to a specific key vulnerability, i.e. to disruption/shutdown of a vulnerable process. Such thresholds are not known precisely, and are characterized in literature by a range of values (or occasionally by probability functions). 3. Assessments of whether emission pathways/GHG concentration profiles exceed given temperature thresholds are characterized by high uncertainty. Therefore, deterministic studies alone cannot provide sufficient information for a full analysis of response strategies, and probabilistic approaches should be considered. Risk analyses suggest that some large-scale singularities can no longer be avoided with high confidence, given historical climate change and the inertia of the climate system (Wigley, 2004; Wigley, 2005; Rahmstorf and Zickfeld, 2005). 4. Computer modelling using different analytical methods and PDFs for equilibrium climate sensitivity indicates a high confidence that CO) stabilization levels above 450 ppm could produce global mean warming in excess of 2°C above 1990 levels, though the likelihood of this exceedence depends on the assumed probability distribution for climate sensitivity (WG1 CHX; O’Neill and Oppenheimer, 2002; O'Neill and Oppenheimer, 2004; Hare and Meinshausen, 2005; Schneider and Mastrandrea, 2005). 5. A stabilization program for emission reduction implemented in the near term has been shown in the literature to have a significant effect on the concentration and temperature profiles over the decades ahead. Later initialization of stabilization efforts has been shown to require higher rates of reduction if they are to avoid given levels of DAI (Semenov, 2004). Substantial delay (several decades or more) makes achievement of the lower range of stabilization targets (e.g., 500ppm CO2-equivalent and lower) infeasible, except via overshoot scenarios. 19.4.4 Priorities for Research As noted throughout this chapter, there many uncertainties in virtually all phases of the analyses reported in the literature. This implies the necessity of a vigorous research agenda on many aspects of the key vulnerabilities questions. In brief, research efforts are needed on: ¢ identifying various thresholds in the socio-natural system, so that various DAI levels can be better characterized for various sectors and regions, ¢ exploring which vulnerabilities imply irreversible effects (e.g., species extinction, large Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 41 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review SOMmIDNARWNe RONS glacier/ice sheet collapses) searching for examples of successful adaptation and exploring if these can serve as models for adaptive capacity for climate change scenarios of various degrees of warming, examining the gap between adaptive potential and actual implementation of adaptive actions, and how to narrow that gap, determination of pdfs and cdfs for various system thresholds, and implementing these in various decision analytic tools to examine the DAI implications of alternative policy choices, assessing attitudes of both lay and expert communities towards risk that might help in the valuation of various metrics of impacts, and their clear communication to decision makers, examining how different groups might perceive systemic thresholds versus social determinations of what constitutes “unacceptable” impacts, studying the potential for and risks of various geoengineering proposals, exploring attitudes about the relative valuations of different metrics of impacts, and their relationships to sustainable development. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 42 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 CO2 upset the current balance?, Science 278, 1582 (1997). Broome, John. 1992. Counting the Cost of Global Warming. Isle of Harris, UK: White Horse Press. Brovkin V., Bendtsen J., Claussen M., Ganopolski A., Kubatzki C., Petoukhov V. and A. Andreev, 2002: Carbon cycle, vegetation, and climate dynamics in the Holocene: Experiments with the CLIMBER-2 model. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, Vol. 16, No. 4, 1139, doi: 10.1029/2001GB001662, 86-1 - 86-20. Brovkin V., Bendtsen J., Claussen M., Ganopolski A., Kubatzki C., Petoukhov V. and A. Andreev, 2002: Carbon cycle, vegetation, and climate dynamics in the Holocene: Experiments with the CLIMBER-2 model. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, Vol. 16, No. 4, 1139, doi: 10.1029/2001GB001662, 86-1 - 86-20. Bruckner, T., K. Zickfeld, 2005: Low Risk Emissions Corridors for Safeguarding the Atlantic Thermohaline Circulation, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change (accepted). Bunyavanich S, Landrigan CP, McMichael AJ, Epstein PR. The impact of climate change on child health (review). Ambul Pediatr. 2003;3:44—52. Burton, I. 2004. “Climate Change and the Adaptation Deficit.” Occasional Paper No. 1. Adaptation and Impacts Research Group, Meteorological Service of Canada. Downsview, Canada. Burton, I. and B, Lim, 2005 “Achieving Adequate Adaptation in Agriculture” Climate Change, 70. 191-200. Burton, I. and E.May. 2004. “The Adaptation Deficit in Water Resource Management” Climate Change and Development. IDS Bulletin Vol. 35 No. 3 2004. Burton, I., Huq, S., Lim, B., Pilifosova, O. and Schipper, E.L. (2002) From impact a sment to adaptation priorities: the shaping of adaptation policy. Climate Policy 2, 145-159. Cai, W., Shi, G. and Li, Y., in press: Multidecadal fluctuations of winter rainfall over southwest Western Australia simulated in the CSIRO Mark 3 coupled model. Cai, W., Whetton, P.H. and Karoly, D.J., 2003: The response of the Antarctic Oscillation to increasing and stabilized atmospheric CO2. Journal of Climate, 16, 1525-1538. Caldeira et al., Climate sensitivity uncertainty and the need for energy without CO2 emission, Science 299:2052, 2003 Callaway, J. M. 2004. “The Benefits and Costs of Adapting to Climate Variability and Change.” In: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. The Benefits of Climte Change Policies: Campbell, I.D. and Campbell, C., 2000: Late Holocene vegetation and fire history at the southern boreal forest margin in Alberta, Canada. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 164, 263-280. Campbell-Lendrum, D., A. Pruss-Ustun, et al. (2003). How much disease could climate change cause? Climate Change and Health: Risks and Responses. A. McMichael, D. Campbell- Lendrum, C. Corvalan et al. Geneva, WHO/WMO/UNEP. Canals, A.C., A. Calafat, et al., Uncovering the footprint of former ice streams in Antarctica. EOS 84, 97-108 (2003). Cane, M. A. (2005). "The evolution of El Nino, past and future." Earth and Planetary Science Letters 230(3-4): 227-240. Cane, M.A., G. Eshel, and R.W. Buckland, Forecasting Zimbabwean maize yield using eastern equatorial pacific s rface temperature, Nature, 370 (6486), 204-205, 1994. Cary, G.J., 2002: Importance of climate change for fire regimes in Australia. In: Bradstock R.A., Williams, J.E. and M.A. Gill (eds.), Flammable Australia: The Fire Regimes and Biodiversity of a Continent. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (UK), pp.26-44. Chagnon, S.A. (1999), Impacts of 1997-98 El Nifio— Chambers, R. (1989) Vulnerability, coping and policy. IDS Bulletin 20(2), 147. Chen, C. C., B. A. McCarl, and R. M. Adams. 2001. Economic implications of potential ENSO frequency and strength shifts. Climatic Change 49 (1-2):147-159. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 45 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Chipanshi, A.C., R. Chanda and O. Totolo, 2003: Vulnerability Assessment of the Maize Production and Sorghum Crops to Climate Change in Botswana. Climate Change 61: 339-360. Chua, K. B., W. J. Bellini, et al. (2000). "Nipah virus: a recently emergent deadly paramyxovirus." Science 288(5470): 1432-5. Church, J. A. and J. M. Gregory, 2001. "Changes in Sea Level". In J. T. Houghton, L. G. M. Filho, B. A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg, and K. Maskell (Eds.), Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Claussen, M., Kubatzki, C., Brovkin, V., Ganopolski, A., Hoelzmann, P., Pachur, H.J., 1999: Simulation of an abrupt change in Saharan vegetation at the end of the mid-Holocene. Geophys. Res. Letters, 24 (No. 14), 2037-2040. Climate Change 1994: 1995. Radiative forcing of climate change and an evaluation of the IPCC IS92 emission scenarios. Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, 339 pp. Climate Change 1995: 1996a. The science of climate change. Contribution of Working Group I to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change. (Houghton J. T., Meira Filho L. G., Callander B. A. et al., editors). Cambridge University Press, 572 pp. Climate Risk Management Limited. 2005. The Financial Risks of Climate Change. Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom: Climate Risk Management Limited. 125 pp. Climate Risk Management Limited. 2005. The Financial Risks of Climate Change. Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom: Climate Risk Management Limited. 125 pp. Cline, W.R., 1996. The Impact of Global Warming on Agriculture: Comment. American Economic Review, 86(5): 1309-1311. Cohen, G.A. 1989. On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice. Ethics 99, 906-44. Cole, J. E., J. T. Overpeck, and E. R. Cook. 2002. Multiyear La Nina events and persistent drought in the contiguous United States. Geophysical Research Letters 29 (13). Cole, J.E., J.T. Overpeck, and E.R. Cook, Multiyear La Nina events and persistent drought in the contiguous United States, Geophysical Research Letters, 29 (13), 2002. Confalonieri, U. (2003). "Climate variability, vulnerability and health in Brazil." Terra Livre 19- 1(20): 193-204. Corfee-Morlot, J. and S. Agrawala, 2004: Overview. Chapter | in The Benefits of Climate Change Policies — Analytical and Framework Issues. OECD, Paris. Corfee-Morlot, J. et al. 2005 (GEC article) Corfee-Morlot, J., N. Héhne: Climate change: long-term targets and short-term commitments. Global Environmental Change 13:277-293, 2003 Costello, C. J., R. M. Adams, and S. Polasky. 1998. The value of El Nifio forecasts in the management of salmon: a stochastic dynamic assessment. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80 (4):765-777. Cowling, S.A., R. A. Betts, P.M. Cox, V.J. Ettwein, C.D. Jones, M.A. Maslin, S. A. Spall (2004). Contrasting simulated past and future responses of the Amazonian forest to atmospheric change, Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 359, 539 — 547. Cox P.M., Betts R.A., Collins M., Harris C., Huntingford C., Jones C.D., 2004: Amazon dieback under 27 climate-carbon cycle projections for the 21st century. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 78, 137- 28 156. 29 Cox, P.M., R.A. Betts, C.D. Jones, S.A. Spall, and I.J. Totterdell, 2000: Acceleration of global warming due 25 to carbon-cycle feedbacks in a coupled climate model. Nature, 408(6809), 184-187. 26 Cramer W., Bondeau A, Woodward FI, Prentice IC, Betts RA, Brovkin V, Cox PM, Fisher V, Foley JA, 2001. Cramer, W. and 16 co-authors. 2001. “Global response of terrestrial ecosystem structure and function to COz and climate change: results from six dynamic global vegetation models.” Global Change Biology. 7:357-373. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 46 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Crisp, Roger. 2003. Equality, Priority and Compassion. Ethics 113, 745-763. Cubasch, U. et al., in Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, J. T. Houghton et al., Eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2001), pp. 525-582. Cuffet, K.M. and Marshall, S.J. 2000. Substantial contribution to sea-level rise during the last interglacial from the Greenland ice sheet. Nature 404: 591-594, D.C. Hall , R.J. Behl (in press): Integrating economic analysis and the science of climate instability. Ecological Economics (in press) Daniels, Norman. 1985. Just Health Care. Cambridge. Darwin, Roy, Marinos Tsigas, Jan Lewandrowski, and Anton Raneses [1995]. World Agriculture and Climate Change, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Economic Report No. 703, June. Dasgupta, P.: Human Well-Being and the Natural Environment. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001 de Siqueira Otavio Joao Wachholz, Silvio Steinmetz, Mauro Fernando Ferreira, Andréia Castro Costa e Marcos Anténio Wozniak (2000). Mudangas climaticas projetadas através dos modelos giss e reflexos na producao agricola brasileira. Revista Brasileira de Agrometeorologia, Santa Maria, v. 8, n. 2, p. 311-320, 2000. DEFRA (2005). Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change, UK Department of Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, Feb 1-3, Exeter, UK. Available at http://www.stabilisation2005.com Dennis, C., 2002: Nature, 415, 947, Reef under threat from 'bleaching' outbreak. Dessai, S. & M. Hulme: Does climate policy need probabilities? Working Paper No. 34, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Norwich, UK, 2003 Dessai, S. et al. Defining and experiencing dangerous climate change, Climatic Change 64, 11 (2004). Devereaux, S., and Edwards, J., Climate Change and Food Security, IDS Bulletin, Volume 35, number 3. July 2004. DFID, 2004, Climate Change and Poverty, Making Development Resilient to Climate Change. Dickens, G.R., 2001: Modeling the global carbon cycle with gas hydrate capacitor: Significance for the latest Paleocene thermal maximum. In: Natural Gas Hydrates: Occurrence, Distribution, and Detection [C.K. Paull, and W.P. Dillon (eds.)]. Geophysical Monograph 124, American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 19-38. DIW Berlin: Politikberatung kompakt 13 Dobson, Andrew. 1998. Justice and the Environment. Oxford. Doll, P. and S. Siebert. 2002. Global modeling of irrigation water requirements. Water Resources Research. 38 (4): Art. No. 1037. Done, T.J., Whetton, P., Jones, R., et al., 2003: Global Climate Change and Coral Bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Final Report to the State of Queensland Greenhouse Taskforce through the Department of Natural Resources and Mines. Donner, S.D., C. J. Kucharik, and M. Oppenheimer, 2004,The influence of climate on in-stream removal of nitrogen, Geophys. Res. Letters, 31, L20509, oi:10.1029/2004GL020477. Dourson, Michael L. and J.F. Stara, 1983. “Regulatory History and Experimental Support of Uncertainty (Safety) Factors,” Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 3(3), pp. 224-38. Driver, Julia. 2005. Ideal Decision-Making and the Green Virtues. In Walter Sinnott-Armstrong and R.B. Howarth (eds.). Global Warming: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Cambridge. Dworkin, Ronald. 2000. Sovereign Virtue. Harvard. E. Kriegler, T. Bruckner, 2004: Sensitivity Analysis of Emissions Corridors for the 21st Century, Climatic Change 66, 345-387 Easterling et al., Climate extremes: observations, modelling, and impacts, Science 289:2068, 2000 Easterling et al, Coping with Global Climate change: The Role of Adaptation in the United States, Pew Centre, June 2004, available www.pewclimate.org. [also has good reference in bibliography Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 47 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Discussion Paper 40, The Australia Institute, 2001 (available at www.tai.org.au). Hammitt, James K. and A.I. Shlyakhter, 1999. “The Expected Value of Information and the Probability of Surprise,” Risk Analysis, 19(1), pp. 135-52. Hammitt, James K., Robert J. Lempert, and Michael E. Schlesinger, “A Sequential-Decision Strategy for Abating Climate Change,” Nature, May 28, 1992, 357, 315—318. Hanemann, W.M., 2000. Adaptation and its Measurement: An Editorial Comment. Climatic Change, 45: 571-581.; Kaufmann, R., 1998. Commentary: The Impact of Climate Change on US Agriculture: A Response to Mendelsohn et al. (1994). Ecological Economics, 26: 113-119 Hanna, E., P. Huybrechts, and T.L. Mote, 2002: Surface mass balance of the Greenland ice sheet from climate-1 analysis data and accumulation/runoff models. Annals of Glaciology, 35, 67- 72. Hansen, J. (and 14 co-authors). 2005. “Earth’s Energy Imbalance: Confirmation and Implications.” Science 308: 1431-1435. Hansen, J., 2005: A slippery slope: How much global warming constitutes “dangerous anthropogenic interference?’”. Climatic Change 68:269-279 Hansen, J.: 2004, Defusing the Global Warming Time Bomb, Sci. Amer., 290, 68-77 Hare, B. and Meinshausen, M., 2005: How much warming are we committed to and how much can be avoided? Accepted by Climatic Change Hare, W. 2003. “Assessment of Knowledge on Impacts of Climate Change — Contribution to the Specification of Art. 2 of the UNFCCC.” Berlin: Wissen Hartmann D.L., J.M. Wallace, V. Limpasuvan, D.W.J. Thompson and J.R. Holton, 2000: Can ozone depletion and global warming interact to produce rapid climate change? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States, 97, 1412-1417. Hausman, Daniel M. and McPherson, Michael S. 1996. Economic Analysis and Moral Philosophy. Cambridge University Press. Hay, S.I., C. A. Guerra, et al. (2005). "Urbanization, malaria transmission and disease burden in Africa." Nature Reviews Microbiology 3(1): 81-90. Hay, S.I., G. D. Shanks, et al. (2005). "Climate variability and malaria epidemics in the highlands of East Africa." Trends in Parasitology 21(2): 52-53. Helton, J. C., D. E. Burmaster: Guest editorial: Treatment of aleatory and epistemic uncertainty in performance assessments for complex systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 54:91-94, 1996 Higgins, P. A. T., and M. Vellinga. 2004. Ecosystem responses to abrupt climate change: Teleconnections, scale and the hydrological cycle. Climatic Change 64 (1-2):127-142. Higgins, P. A. T., M. D. Mastrandrea, and S. H. Schneider. 2002: “Dynamics of Climate and Ecosystem Coupling: Abrupt Changes and Multiple Equilibria,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (Series B-Biological Sciences) 357: 647-655. Higgins, P.A.T., Schneider, S.H. 2005. Long-term potential ecosystem responses to greenhouse gas- induced thermohaline circulation collapse. Global Change Biology 11, 699. Hijioka, Y., Takahashi, K., Matsuoka, Y., and Harasawa, H., 2002. Impact of global warming on waterborne diseases. Journal of Japan Society on Water Environment 25,647-652. Hitz, S. and J. B. Smith. 2004. “Estimating Global Impacts from Climate Change” Global Environmental Change 14(3):201-218. Hitz, S. and Smith J., 2004: Estimating Global Impacts from Climate Change. Chapter 2 in The Benefits of Climate Change Policies — Analytical and Framework Issues. OECD, Paris Hoegh-Guldberg, O., Climate change, coral bleaching and the future of the world’s coral reefs, Marine and Freshwater Research 50, 839-866 (1999). Hoegh-Guldberg, O., Jones, R.J, et al., 2002: Is coral bleaching really adaptive? Nature, 415, 601- 602. Houghton, J.T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D. J., Noguer, M., van der Linden, P. J., Dai, X., Maskell, K. and Johnson, C. A., 2001: Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Intergovernmental Panel Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 50 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 on Climate Change, Geneva. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, USA, 881 pp. Howarth, Richard. 1997. Sustainability as Opportunity. Land Economics 73.4, 569-579. Hsee, C. K., & Rottenstreich, Y. (2004). Music, pandas, and muggers: On the affective psychology of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133 (1), 23-30. Hughes, T. P., et al., Climate change, human impacts, and the resilience of coral reefs, Science 301, 929-933, 2003. Hug, S., A.Rahman, M.Konate, Y.Sokona and H.Reid, Mainstreaming Adaptation to Climate Change in Least Developed Countries, ITED, April 2003. From IED. Huybrechts, P., de Wolde, J., 1999. The dynamic response of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets to multiple-century climatic warming. Journal of Climate 12, 2169-2188. Huybrects, P., 2004: Antarctica: modelling, in: Bamber. J.L. and A.J. Payne (eds.): Mass balance of the cryosphere: observations and modelling of contemporary and future changes, Cambridge University Press (Cambridge), 491-523. IISD, 2003, Livelihoods and Climate Change: combining disaster risk reduction, natural resource management and climate change adaptation in a new approach to the reduction of vulnerability and poverty, A conceptual framework paper prepared by the task Force on Climate Change, Vulnerable Communities and Adaptation. www. iisd.org Ingham & Ulph, Uncertainty, Irreversibility, Precaution, and the Social Cost of Carbon, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 37, Oct 2003 Institut de Veille Sanitaire (2003): Impact sanitaire de la vague chalaire d’aout 2003 en France. Bilans et perspectives. Available at http://www.invs.sante.fr/publications/2003/bilan-chaleur- 1103 International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent (2004): World Disasters Report. Available at http://www. ifrc.org/publicat/wdr2004/chapter2.asp Introduction in Mehta. L., Leach, M., Scoones, I., (eds) 2001, ‘Environmental governance in an uncertain world’, IDS Bulletin Vol 32 No 4. Brighton: IDS Introduction, in Newell, P., 1999, ‘Globalisation and the governance of the environment’, IDS Bulletin Vol 30 No 3. Brighton: IDS IPCC 1996. Climate Change 1995. Impacts, Adaptation, and Mitigation of Climate Change: Scientific-Technical Analyses. Report of Working Group II. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. See especially Reilly J. et. al. “Agriculture in a Changing Climate: Impacts and Adaptations. Pp.427-467 IPCC 2001. Climate Change 2001. Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Report of Working Group II. Cambridge university press, Cambridge, UK. Izrael Yu. A. 2005. Efficient ways for keeping climate at the present level - the main aim of the climate problem solution. Meteorology and Hydrology. N10, p. 5 -9 (in Russian) Izrael Yu. A. and S.M. Semenov, 2005: Calculations of a change in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere for some stabilization scenarios of global emissions using a model of minimal complexity. Russian Meteorology and Hydrology, N 1, pp. 1-8. Izrael Yu. A., Semenov S. M.: 2003. Example calculation of critical limits for greenhouse gas content in the atmosphere using a minimal simulation model of the greenhouse effect. Doklady Earth Sciences (English Translation of Doklady Akademii nauk, vol. 390, Nos 1-4, May-June 2003), Volume 390, Number 4, p. 611-614. Izrael, Yu.A., 2004: On the concept of dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system and capacities of the biosphere. Meteorology and Hydrology, N 4, pp. 30-37. (in Russian). J.C. Helton and W.L. Overkamp, 2004: Special issue on “Alternative Representations of Epistemic Uncertainty”. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 85 (1-3) Jacoby, H. D.: Informing climate policy given incommensurable benefits estimates. Global Environmental Change 14:287-297, 2004 Jamieson, D. 1996. Ethics and intentional climate change. Climatic Change 33:323-336. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 51 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Jamieson, Dale. 1992. Ethics, Public Policy and Global Warming. Science, Technology and Human Values 17:139-153. Reprinted in Jamieson 2002. Jamieson, Dale. 2002. Morality’s Progress. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jamieson, Dale. 2005. Adaptation, Mitigation and Justice. In Walter Sinnott-Armstrong and R.B. Howarth (eds.). Global Warming: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Cambridge. Johnston, 1987: Suppression of earthquakes by large continental glaciers. Nature, 330, 467-469. Jones, C.D., McConnell C.L., Coleman K., Cox P.M. , Falloon P., Jenkinson D.S., Powlson D.S., 2005: The sensitivity of projected soil carbon storage under climate change to the representation of soil carbon dynamics. Global Change Biology, in press. Jones, Peter G., Philip K. Thornton., 2003. The potential impacts of climate change on maize production in Africa and Latin America in 2055. Global Environmental Change 13 (2003) 51- 59. Jones, R. (2004) Managing climate change risks OECD Workshop on the Benefits of Climate Policy: Improving Information for Policy Makers Jones, R.N. 2001. “An environmental risk assessment/management framework for climate change impact assessments” Natural Hazards, 23. 197-230 Jones, P.G., and P. K. Thornton. 2003. “The potential impacts of climate change on maize production in Africa and Latin America in 2055.” Global Environmental Change. 13:51-59. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A., (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds) (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. New York: Cambridge University Pre: Katz, R. W.: Techniques for estimating uncertainty in climate change scenarios and impact studies. Climate Research 20:167-185, 2002 Keating, B. and McGuire, W., 2004; Instability and structural failure at volcanic ocean islands and the climate change dimension. Advances in Geophysics, 47, 175-270. Keller, K., BM Bolker, DF Bradford: Uncertain climate thresholds and optimal economic growth. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 48:723-741, 2004 Keller, K., K. Tan, F. M. M. Morel, and D. F. Bradford. 2000. Preserving the ocean circulation: Implications for climate policy. Climatic Change 47 (1-2):17-43. Keller, K., Yohe, G., and Schlesinger, Managing the Risks of Climate Thresholds: Uncertainties and Information Needs, submitted to Climatic Change. Keller, Tan, Morel, Bradford, Preserving the Ocean Circulation: Implications for Climate Policy, Climatic Change 47, 17-43 (2000). Kelly, D.L. and Kolstad, C.D. (1999). Bayesian learning, growth, and pollution, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 23, 491-518. Kemfert, C. and K, Schumacher Costs of Inaction and Costs of Action in Climate Protection: Assessment of Costs of Inaction or Delayed Action of Climate Protection and Climate Change Kennedy, D., D. Holloway, E. Weinthal, W. Falcon, P. Ehrlich, R. Naylor, M. May, S.H. Schneider, S. Fetter, and J.-S. Choi, 1998: “Environmental Quality and Regional Conflict,” A report to the Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict. Carnegie Corporation, New York, 72 pp. Kenny GJ, Warrick RA, Campbell BD, Sims GC, Camilleri M, Jamieson PD, Mitchell ND, 2000. Investigating climate change impacts and thresholds: an application of the CLIMPACTS integrated assessment model for New Zealand agriculture. Climate Change 46:91-113 8 Kheshgi H.S. Evasion of CO2 injected into the ocean in the context of CO2 stabilization. Energy 29 (2004) 1479-1486. Kheshgi H.S., Jain A.K. Projecting future climate change: Implications of carbon cycle model intercomparisons. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, vol. 17, No. 2, 1047, doi: 10.1029/2001GB001842, 2003. p. 16-1 - 16-17. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 52 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 537-543. Magrin, G.O., M. I. Travasso. 2002. An Integrated Climate Change Assessment from Argentina (Chapter 10) In: Effects of Climate Change and Variability on Agricultural Production Systems. Otto Doering III; J.C.Randolph; J.Southworth and R.A.Pfeifer (Eds). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston. pp193-219. Manning, M., M. Petit: A Concept Paper for the AR4 Cross Cutting Theme: Uncertainties and Risk. IPCC, 2004 Marshall, G.J., 2003: Trends in the Southern Annular Mode from observations and reanalyses. Journal of Climate, 16, 4134-4143. Martens, P., Kovats, R.S., Nijhof, S., de Vries, P., Livermore, M.T.J., Bradley, D.J., Cox, J., and McMichael, A.J., 1999. Climate change and future populations at risk of malaria. Global Environmental Change 9,S89-S 107. Martin, D., D. Belanger, P. Gosselin, J. Brazeau, C. Furgal., and S. Dery, 2005: Climate change, drinking water, and human health in Nunavik: Adaptation Strategies. Final report submitted to the Canadian Climate Change Action Fund, Natural Resources Canada. CHUL Research Institute, Ste-Foy, Quebec. Martin, P.H. and Lefebvre, M.G., 1995. Malaria and climate: Sensitivity of malaria potential transmission to climate. Ambio 24,200-207. Maslin, Mark. 2004. "Ecological versus climatic thresholds." Science 306:2197-8. Mastrandrea, M. D., and S. H. Schneider. 2004. Probabilistic integrated assessment of "dangerous" climate change. Science 304 (5670):571-575. Mastrandrea, M.D. and Schneider, S.H. Climate Policy 1, 2001. Integrated Assessment of Abrupt Climatic Changes. Matear, R. J., and A. C. Hirst. 2003. Long-term changes in dissolved oxygen concentrations in the oceans caused by protracted global warming. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 17 (4):doi: 10.1029/2002GB001997. Matsui, Y. (2002) “Some Aspects of the Principle of ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities”, in International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 2, 151-171. Matthews, H. D., A. J. Weaver, K. J. Meissner 2005, Terrestrial Carbon Cycle Dynamics under Recent and Future Climate Change, J. Clim 18, 1609-1627. McInnes, K.L., R. Suppiah, P.H. Whetton, K.J. Hennessy and R.N. Jones, 2002: Climate change in South Australia. Report on assessment of climate change, impacts and possible adaptation strategies relevant to South Australia. CSIRO Atmospheric Research, Aspendale, Victoria. McMichael, A., D. Campbell-Lendrum, S. Kovats, S$. Edwards, P. Wilkinson, T. Wilson, R. Nicholls, S. Hales, F. Tanser, D. LeSueur, M. Schlesinger, and N. Andronova. 2004. Climate Change. In: M. Ezzati, A. Lopez, A. Rodgers and C. Murray (Editors), Comparative Quantification of Health Risks: Global and Regional Burden of Disease due to Selected Major Risk Factors. World Health Organization, Geneva. McMichael, A.J., Campbell-Lendrum, D, Kovats, R.S., Edwards, S., Wilkinson, P, Edmonds, N, Nicholls, N., Hales, S., Tanser, F.C., Le Sueur, D., Schlesinger, M, Andronova, N., 2004: Climate Change. In Comparative Quantification of Health Risks: Global and Regional Burden of Disease due to Selected Major Risk Factors. Vol 2; Ezzati, M., Lopez, A.D., Rogers, A., Murray, C.J. (eds) WHO, Geneva; Ch 20. McPherson HG, Salinger MJ (2000) Investigating climate change impacts and thresholds: Meehl, G.A., and J.M. Arblaster, 2003: Mechanisms for projected future changes in south Asian monsoon precipitation. Climate Dynamics, 21, 659-675. Meinshausen, M., B. Hare, T. M. L. Wigley, D. van Vuuren, M. G. J. den Elzen, R. Swart, 2005: Multi-gas emission pathways to meet climate targets. Accepted by Climatic Change. Meinshausen, M.: 2005 (forthcoming), 'What does a 2°C target mean for greenhouse gas concentrations? - A brief analysis based on multi-gas emission pathways and several climate sensitivity uncertainty estimates. ' in Schellnhuber, J.S., Cramer, W., Nakicenovic,N., Wigley, Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 55 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 T.M.L. and Yohe, G. (eds.), Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Mendelsohn, R. and Nordhaus, W., 1996. The Impact of Global Warming on Agriculture: Reply. American Economic Review, 86(5): 1312-1315 Mendelsohn, R., Dinar, A., Dalfelt, A., 2000: Climate Change Impacts on African Agriculture, World Bank Report. The World Bank. Mendelsohn, R., Nordhaus, W. and Shaw, D., 1994. The Impact of Global Warming on Agriculture: A Ricardian Analysis. American Economic Review, 84(4): 753-771 Mercer, J.H., West Antarctic ice sheet and CO2 greenhouse effect, Nature 271, 321-325 (1978). Metz, B., M. Berk, M. den Elzen, B. de Vries, D. van Vuuren, Towards an equitable global climate change regime: compatibility with Article 2 of the Climate Change Convention and the link with sustainable development, Climate Policy 84:1 (2002). Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 200S5a. Living Beyond Our Means: Natural Assets and Human Well-Being (Statement of the MA Board) 2005 www.MAweb.org. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005b. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) Synthesis Report. www.MAweb.org Mills. E/ (2005): “Insurance in a Climate of Change.” Science, : 1040-1044 Morgan, M. G., D. W. Keith: Subjective Judgements by Climate Experts. Environmental Science & Technology 29:468A-476A, 1995 Morgan, M. Granger and Max Henrion, 1990. Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis. Cambridge University Press. Morgenstern, Richard D., W. Harrington, and P. Nelson, 2000. “On the Accuracy of Regulatory Cost Estimates,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 19(2), pp. 297-322. Morita, T., Nakicenovic, N. and Robinson, J.: 2000, ‘Overview of mitigation scenarios for global climate stabilization based on new IPCC emission scenarios (SRES)', Environmental Economics and Policy Studies 3, 65-88. Moss, R. H.: Avoiding ‘dangerous’ interference in the climate system. The roles of values, science and policy. Global Environmental Change 5:3-6, 1995 Moss, R.H. and S.H. Schneider, 2000: “Uncertainties in the IPCC TAR: Recommendations to Lead Authors for More Consistent Assessment and Reporting", Guidance Papers on the Cross Cutting Issues of the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC, ed. R. Pachauri, T. Taniguchi, and K. Tanaka. Geneva, Switzerland: World Meteorological Organization, 33-51. Muir-Wood, 2000: Deglaciation seismotectonics: a principal influence on intraplate seismogenesis at high latitudes. Quaternary Science Reviews, 19, 1399-1411. Munich Re. 2006. Topics-Geo — Annual Review: Natural Catastrophes 2005. 56 pp. [available from Munchener Ruckversicherungs Gesellschaft, Konigstrasse 107, 80802 Munchen, Germany. www.munichre.com/publications/302-04772_en.pdf.] Murphy et al., Quantification of modelling uncertainties in a large ensemble of climate change simulations, Nature 430:768, 2004 Myer, G.A. and J.L. Pierce, 2003: Climatic controls on fire-induced sediment pulses in Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho. Forest Ecology and Management, 178, 89-104. Myers, N. and Kent, J, Environmental Exodus. An Emergent Crisis in the Global Arena, Washington, DC. Climate Institute. Myers, N., R.A. Mittermeier, C.G. Mittermeier, G.A.B. da Fonseca, and J. Kent. 2000. “Boidiversity hotspots for conservation priorities.” Nature 403: 853-858. Narain, Optimal response under endogenous abrupt climate change risk: experiments with the DICE model, paper presented at IEA Meeting Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Abrupt Climate Change: Positive Options and Robust Policy. Narayan, D., R. Chambers, M. K. Shah and P. Petesch [eds.]: Voices of the Poor: Crying Out for Change. Oxford University Press, New York, 2000 National Academy of Sciences, 1991; The Policy Implications of the Greenhouse Effect; National Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 56 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Academies Press, Washington DC National Research Council, 1994. Science and Judgment in Risk Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press (see esp. Chapter 9—“Variability’”’) National Research Council, 1995. Technical Bases for Yucca Mountain Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. New, M., M. Hulme: Representing uncertainty in climate change scenarios: a Monte-Carlo approach. Integrated Assessment 1:203-213, 2000 Nicholls et al. forthcoming Nicholls, R. J. 2004. “Coastal flooding and wetland loss in the 21° century: changes under the SRES climate and socio-economic scenarios.” Global Environmental Change. 14: 69-86. Nicholls, R. J. and R. S. J. Tol. (In Press). “Impacts and Response to Sea Level Rise: A Global Analysis of the SRES Scenarios Over the 21“ Century.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A. Sea-Level Rise volume Niemeyer, S., J. Petts, and K. Hobson, Rapid Climate Change and Society: Assessing Responses and Thresholds, Risk Analysis, Vol. 25, No. 6, 2005 DOK: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.0069 1.x. Nisbet, The potential for geological surprise in the coupled atmosphere-ocean-cryosphere-biosphere system, paper presented at IEA Meeting Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Abrupt Climate Change: Positive Options and Robust Policy. Nordhaus, W. 2006. “Geography and Macroeconomics: New Data and New Findings.” New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University. Nordhaus, W. D. 1994. Managing the global commons: The economics of climate change: The MIT press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Nordhaus, W.D.: Expert opinion on climatic change, American Scientist 82 (1994) 45-52. Nordhaus, William D., and J. Boyer. 2000. Warming the world: Economic models of global warming: MIT Press. Norton, Bryan. 1998. Ecology and Opportunity: Intergenerational Equity and Sustainable Options. In Andrew Dobson ed., Fairness and Futurity. Oxford University Press, 118-150. Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, State and Utopia. Basic Books. Nussbaum, Martha. 2000. Women and Human Development. Cambridge University Press. Nyong, A., Impacts of Climate change in the Tropics: The African Experience, Keynote Presentation at Exeter Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change Symposium, 1-3 February, 2005, p.9. O’Brien, Karen et.al. Whats in a word? Conflicting Interpretations of vulnerability in climate change research, CICERO working paper 04, www.cicero.org — has very good recent literature section O’Brien, K.L., Sygna, L. and J.E. Haugen. 2004. Resilient of Vulnerable? A Multi-Scale Assessment of Climate Impacts and Vulnerability in Norway. Climatic Change 64: 193-225. O'Neill, B. C., and M. Oppenheimer. 2002. Climate change - dangerous climate impacts and the Kyoto protocol. Science 296 (5575):1971-1972. O'Neill, B.C. and M. Oppenheimer, 2004. Climate Change Impacts Sensitive to Path to Stabilization. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 101, 16,411-16,416. OECD (2003). Development and Climate Change in Nepal: Focus on Water Resources and Hydropower. Document COM/ENV/EPOC/DCD/DAC(2003) I/FINAL. OECD Environment Directorate. Paris, France, 2003 OECD 2005, Bridge Over Troubled Waters: Linking Climate Change and Development, Paris. Office of Management and Budget, U.S., 2003. Circular A-4: Regulatory Analysis. Executive Office of the President, September 17, 2003, 48 pp. Okrent, David, 1998. “Comment: Pigford, Shrader-Frechette & the NRC Report on Yucca Mountain,” RISK: Health, Safety & Environment, 9, pp. 1-6. Oppenheimer and Alley citations. Oppenheimer, M. (2005). Defining Dangerous Anthropogenic Interference: The Role of Science, the Limits of Science, Risk Analysis, in press. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 57 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 United States of America 99 (20):12901-12906. Rogers, P, 2004, Climate Change and Security, IDS Bulletin, Volume 35, number 3, July 2004. Root, T. L., J. T. Price, K. R. Hall, S. H. Schneider, C. Rosenzweig, and J. A. Pounds. 2003. “Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals and plants.” Nature 421: 57-60. Root, T.L., J.T. Price, K.R. Hall, S.H. Schneider, C. Rosenzweig, and J. A. Pounds, 2003: ““Fingerprints' of Global Warming on Animals and Plants," Nature 421: 57-60. Rosenzweig, C. and Iglesias, A. (eds.), 1994. Implications of Climate Change for International Agriculture: Crop Modeling Study. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 230-B-94-003. Rosenzweig, C., F. N. Tubiello, R. Goldberg, E. Mills, and J. Bloomfield. 2002. “Increased crop damage in the US from excess precipitation under climate change.” Global Environmental Change 12:197-202. Rosenzweig, C., F. N. Tubiello, R. Goldberg, E. Mills, and J. Bloomfield. 2002. “Increased crop damage in the US from excess precipitation under climate change.” Global Environmental Change 12:197-202. Rothman, D.: Measuring Environmental Values and Environmental Impacts: Going from the Local to the Global. Climatic Change 44:351-376, 2000 Rotmans, J., M. B. A. van Asselt: Uncertainty in integrated assessmemt modelling: A labyrinthic path. Integrated Assessment 2:43-55, 2001 Rottenstreich, Y., & Hsee, C. K. (2001). Money, kisses, and electric shocks: On the affective psychology of risk. Psychological Science, 12 (3), 185-190. Royal Society, Ocean Acidification due to increasing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide, London, 2005 (http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/document.asp?tip=0&id=3249) Ruosteenoja, K., T.R. Carter, K. Jylha and H. Tuomenvirta, 2003: Future climate in world regions: an intercomparison of model-based projections for the new IPCC emissions scenarios. The Finnish Environment 644, Finnish Environment Institute, 83 pp. Sadler B.S., Mauger G.W. and Stokes R.A., 1988: The water resource implications of a drying climate in south-west Western Australia. In: Pearman (ed.) Greenhouse: Planning for Climate Change, pp 296-301. CSIRO 1988. ISBN 0 643 04863 4. Sadler, B., 2003: Informed adaptation to a changed climate state: is south-western Australia a national canary? Proceedings, Living With Climate Change Conference, Canberra, 19 December 2002. National Academies Forum, Canberra. Sadler, B.S. (ed.), 2002: Climate variability and change in south west Western Australia. Indian Ocean Climate Initiative, 43 pp. available at www.ioci.org.au Sagoff, Mark. 1988. The Economy of the Earth. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Sarmiento, J. L., and C. Le Quéré. 1996. Oceanic carbon dioxide uptake in a model of century-scale global warming. Science 274:1346-1350. Sauber, J.M. and Molnia, B.F., 2004: Glacier ice mass fluctuations and fault instability in tectonically active Southern Alaska. Global and Planetary Change, 42, 279-293. Scambos, T. A., J. A. Bohlander, C. A. Shuman, and P. Skvarca (2004), Glacier acceleration and thinning after ice shelf collapse in the Larsen B embayment, Antarctica, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L18402, doi:10.1029/2004GL020670. Scambos, T., C. Hulbe, and M. Fahnestock (2003), Climate-induced ice shelf disintegration in the Antarctic Peninsula, in Antarctic Peninsula Climate Variability: Historical and Paleoenvironmental Perspectives, Antarct. Res. Ser., vol. 79, edited by E. Domack et al., pp. 79 — 92, AGU, Washington, D.C. Schaeffer, M., F. M. Selten, J. D. Opsteegh, and H. Goosse. 2002. Intrinsic limits to predictability of abrupt regional climate change in IPCC SRES scenarios. Geophysical Research Letters 29 (16). Schir, C., and Jendritzky, G. 2004. Climate change: hot news from summer 2003. Nature 432(7017):559-60. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 60 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Schiir, C., P. L. Vidale, D. Liithi, C. Frei, C. Haberli, M. A. Liniger, and C. Appenzeller. 2004. “The role of increasing temperature variability in European summer heatwaves.” Nature. 427: 332- 336. Schiir, C., P. L. Vidale, D. Liithi, C. Frei, C. Haberli, M. A. Liniger, and C. Appenzeller. 2004. “The role of increasing temperature variability in European summer heatwaves.” Nature. 427: 332- 336. Scherer, R.P., A. Aldahan, S. Tulaczyk, G. Possnert, H. Engelhardt, B. Kamb, Pleistocene collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet, Science 281, 82-85 (1998). Schimel, D., Alves, D., Enting, I., Heimann, M., Joos, F., Raynaud, M., Derwent, R., Ehhalt, D., Fraser, P., Sanhueza, E., Zhou, X., Jonas, P., Charlson, R., Rodhe, H., Sadasivan, S., Shine, K.P., Fouquart, Y., Ramaswamy, V., Solomon, S., Srinivasan, J., Albritton, D.L., Isaksen, I., Lal, M., Wuebbles, D.J., 1996. Radiative forcing of climate change. In: Houghton, J.T., Meiro Filho, L.G., Callander, B.A., Harris, N., Kattenberg, A., Maskell, K. (Eds.), Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change — Contribution of Working Group I to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 65— 131. Schlenker, W., Hanemann, W. M., Fisher, A. C. (2005): "Will U.S. Agriculture Really Benefit from Global Warming? Accounting for Irrigation in the Hedonic Approach," American Economic Review, 95(1):395-406 Schlesinger, W. H. and J. Lichter. 2001. “ Limited carbon storage in soil and litter of experimental forest plots under increased atmospheric CO2.” Nature 411: 466-469. Schmidtz, David. 2001. A Place for Cost-Benefit Anal Nous-Supplement 11: 148-171. Schmittner, A. M., “Decline of the marine ecosystems caused by a reduction in the Atlantic overturning circulation.”, Nature 434: 628-633, 2005. Schneider, S. H. (2001): “What is 'Dangerous' Climate Change?” Nature, 411: 17-19. Schneider, S. H. (2002) Can we estimate the likelihood of climatic changes at 2100? Climatic Change 52, 441-451. Schneider, S. H. (2003): “Abrupt Non-Linear Climate Change, Irreversibility and Surprise", OECD Workshop on the Benefits of Climate Policy: Improving Information for Policy Makers, Working Party on Global and Structural Policies, 32 pp. Available online at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/9/59/2482280.pdf Schneider, S. H., B. L. Turner II, H. Morehouse Garriga: Imaginable surprise in global change science. Journal of Risk Research 1:165-185, 1998 Schneider, S. H., Kuntz-Duriseti, K. and Azar, C. (2000):Costing non-linearities, surprises,and irreversible events. Pacific-Asian Journal of Energy 10, 81-106. Schneider, S. H.: Abrupt non-linear climate change, irreversibility and surprise. Global Environmental Change 14:245-258, 2004. Schneider, S.H. and C. Azar, 2001: ““‘Are Uncertainties in Climate and Energy Systems a Justification for Stronger Near-term Mitigation Policies?” Proceedings of the Pew Center Workshop on The Timing of Climate Change Policies, ed. E. Erlich, 85-136. Washington D.C., 11-12 October 2001. Schneider, S.H. and R. S. Chen (1980). Carbon-Dioxide warming and coastline flooding — physical factors and climatic impact, Annual Reviews of Energy 5, 107-140. Schneider, S.H., and Mastrandrea, M.D. (2005) Probabilistic Assessment of “Dangerous” Climate Change and Emissions Scenarios. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, in press. Schroter et.al. Modeling the vulnerability of eco-social systems to global change: Human Adaptive capacity to changes in ecosystems service provisions, October 2003, ATEAM EU-funded project results Scott, D., G. McBoyle, and B. Mills. 2003. Climate change and the skiing industry in southern Ontario (Canada): exploring the importance of snowmaking as a technical adaptation. Climate Research 23: 171-181. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 61 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Semenov S. M., Gelver E. S., Yasyukevich V. V. 2002: Temperature conditions for Development of two species of malaria pathogens in the vector organism in Russia in the 20th century. Doklady Biological Sciences. Volume 387, November-December 2002, p. 523-528 Translated from Doklady Akademii Nauk, Vol. 387, No. 1, 2002, 131-136. Semenov S. M.: 2004. Modeling of anthropogenic perturbation of the global CO2 cycle. Doklady Earth Sciences (English Translation of Doklady Akademii nauk, vol. 398, No 6,), Volume XXX, Number 8, p. XXX-XXX. Semenov S.M and Gel’ ver E.S., 2003: Climatic changes in the total annual precipitation and frequency of measured precipitation over the territory of Russia and adjacent countries in the 20th century. Doklady Earth Sciences. Geophysics. Vol. 393a, No 9, pp. 1338-1341. Translated from Doklady Akademii Nauk, Vol. 393, No. 6, 2003, pp. 818-821. Semenov S.M., 2004: Greenhouse gases and present climate of the Earth. Moscow, Publishing center "Meteorology and Hydrology", 175 pp. (in Russian) Semenov S.M., Koukhta B.A., Gel’ ver E.S. Nonlinearity of climate-driven changes in phenological dates in woody plants. Doklady Biological Sciences, Vol. 396, 2004, pp. 221-223. Translated from Doklady Akademii Nauk, Vol. 396, No. 3, 2004, pp. 427-429. Sen, Amartya. 1999, Development as Freedom. Oxford University Press. Sen, A. K. 1981 Poverty and Famines. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK. Shepherd, A., D. Wingham, A. Payne, and P. Skvarca, 2003: Larsen ice shelf has progressively thinned. Science, 302, 856-859. Shiklomanov A.L, Shiklomanov I.A., Rahmstorf S., 2002: Increasing River Discharge to the Arctic Ocean. Science, vol. 298, 13 DECEMBER 2002, www.sciencemag.org Shrader-Frechette, Kristin, 1992. “Risk Estimation and Expert Judgment: The Case of Yucca Mountain,” RISK: Health, Safety & Environment, 3, pp. 283-302. Shrader-Frechette, Kristin, 1996. “Nuclear Waste: The Academy and Million- Year Estimates.” Quarterly Review of Biology, 71(3), pp. 381-385. Shue, Henry. 1999a. Bequeathing Hazards: Security Rights and Property Rights of Future Humans. In Global Environmental Economics: Equity and the Limits to Markets, eds. M. Dore and T. Mount, pp. 38-53. Oxford: Blackwell. Shue, Henry. 1999b. Global Environment and International Inequality. International Affairs 75: 531- 545 Shue, Henry. 2001. Climate. In A Companion to Environmental Philosophy, ed. Dale Jamieson, pp. 449-459. Oxford: Blackwell. Shue, Henry. 2004. A Legacy of Danger: The Kyoto Protocol and Future Generations’. In Globalisation and Equality, eds. Keith Horton and Haig Patapan. Routledge. Shukla et al., Climate Change and India, vulnerability assessment and adaptation, 2003 Siegenthaler U., Joos F. Use of a simple model for studying oceanic tracer distributions and the global carbon cycle, Tellus, Ser. B, 44, 186-207, 1992. Silverman, D. 1997. Introducing Qualitative Research. Pgs 1-7 in Qualitative Research: Theory, Method, and Practice (D. Silverman, Ed.). Sage Publications, London. Silverman, D. 2001. Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text, and Interaction. Sage Publications, London. Simon, Herbert. 1955. A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics 69: 99-118. Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter. 2005. Individual Responsibility for Global Warming. In Walter Sinnott- Armstrong and R.B. Howarth (eds.). Global Warming: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (forthcoming). Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280-285. Slovic, P. (2000): The perception of risk. London, Sterling, VA : Earthscan Publications. Slovic, P. Flynn, J., & Layman, M. (1991). Perceived risk, trust, and politics of nuclear waste. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 62 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 the IPCC Expert Meeting on the Science to Address UNFCCC Article 2 including Key Vulnerabilities. 18-20 May 2004, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Toth, F.L. (ed.): Special Issue Integrated Assessment of Climate Protection Strategies. Climatic Change 56(1-2), 2003 Toth, F.L., T. Bruckner, H.-M. Fiissel, M. Leimbach, G. Petschel-Held, H.-J. Schellnhuber: Exploring Options for Global Climate Policy: A New Analytical Framework. Environment 44(5):22-34, 2002 Toth, F.L., T. Bruckner, H.-M. Fiissel, M. Leimbach, G. Petschel-Held: Integrated assessment of long-term climate polici art 1 - Model presentation. Climatic Change 56(1):37-56, 2003a Toth, F.L., T. Bruckner, H.-M. Fiissel, M. Leimbach, G. Petschel-Held: Integrated assessment of long-term climate policies: Part 2 - Model results and uncertainty analysis. Climatic Change 56(1):57-72, 2003b Traxler, Martino. 2002. Fair Chore Division for Climate Change. Social Theory and Practice 28, 101- 43. Turley, C. J. Blackford, S. Widdicombe, D. Lowe, F. Gilbert and P. Nightingale (2005), Reviewing the Impact of Increased Atmospheric CO2 on Oceanic pH and the Marine Ecosystem, presented at Symposium on Avoding Dangeros Climate Change, UK Department of Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, Feb 1-3, Exeter, UK. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, January 2004, Neil Adger.et. al, New Indicators of Vulnerability and adaptive capacity. Tyndall Technical Report 7 and Tyndall Working Paper 38. www.tyndall.ac.uk. Good but very dense to read. UK Foresight studies UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.1992. UNDP Adaptation Framework & all background technical papers. Available from ITED and UNDP website. www.undp.org/gef/ UNFCCC secretariat document on methods/tool appraoches to adaptation/vulnerability, November 2004 van Lieshout, M., Koavates, R.S., Livermore, M.T.J. and Martens, P. 2004. Climate change and malaria: analysis of the SRES climate and socio-economic scenarios. Global Environmental Change 14, 87-99. van Minnen, J. G., J. Onigkeit, J. Alcamo, Critical climate change as an approach to assess climate change impacts in Europe: development and application, Environmental Science & Policy 5:335, 2002 Vaughan, D.G. (2005) How Does the Antarctic Ice Sheet Affect Sea Level Rise? Science 308, 1877- 1878. Vaughan, D.G., 2006: West Antarctic Ice Sheet collapse - the fall and rise of a paradigm. Clim. Change, in press Vaughan, D.G., J.R. Spouge, Risk estimation of collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, Climatic Change 52, 65-91 (2002). Vellinga, M., and R. A. Wood. 2002. Global climatic impacts of a collapse of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation. Climatic Change 54 (3):251-267. Visser M.E. & L.J.M. Holleman 2001. Warmer springs disrupt the synchrony of oak and winter moth phenology. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268: 289-294. Vogel, C. “Seven Fat Years and Seven Lean Years? Climate Change and Agriculture in Africa”. DS Bulletin, Volume 36 No. 2 June 2005 Vordsmarty, C.J., Green P., Salisbury J., Lammers R. (2000): Global water resources: Vulnerability from climate change and population growth. Science 289: 284-288. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 65 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review CHOIDNARWNHR 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Wallner, A., M. Hunziker, and F. Kienast. 2003. Do natural science experiments influence public attitudes towards environmental problems? Global Environmental Change - Human and Policy Dimensions 13: 185-194. Washington, R., et. al. , African Climate Report, Report Commission by the UK Government to Review African Climate science, policy and options for action, DEFRA. Watson, R. T. and the Core Writing Team (eds.). 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, Il, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. New York: Cambridge University Press. Weber, E. (2005). Experience-Based and Description-based Perceptions of Long-Term Risk: Why Global Warming Does Not Scare Us (Yet), Climatic Change, submitted. Webster, M., Forest, C., Reilly, J., Babiker, M., Kicklighter, D., Mayer, M., Prinn, R. Sarofim, M. Sokolov,, A. Stone, P. and Wang, C.: Uncertainty analysis of climate change and policy response, Climatic Change 61, 295-320 (2003). Webster, P. J., G. J. Holland, J. A. Curry, and H.-R. Chang. 2005. “Changes in Tropical Cyclone Number, Duration, and Intensity ina Warming Environment.” Science 309: 1844-1846. White, G.F., Kates, R.W., and Burton, I. 2001. “Knowing Better and Losing Even More: the use of knowledge in hazards management’. Environmental Hazards. 3. 81-92 Whitehead, A. 2002. Tracking livelihood change: theoretical, methodological, and empirical perspectives from North-East Ghana. Journal of Southern African Studies 28: 575-598. Whitlock, C., Shafer, S.L. and J. Marlon, 2003: The role of climate and vegetation change in shaping past and future fire regimes in the northwestern US and the implications for ecosystem management. Forest Ecology and Management, 178, 5-21. Wiener, Jonathan B., 1998. “Managing the Iatrogenic Risks of Risk Management,” RISK: Health, Safety & Environment, 9, pp. 39-82. Wigley, T. M. L, Richels, R. and Edmonds, J., Economic and environmental choices in the stabilization of atmospheric CO2 concentration, Nature 379, 242 (1996). Wigley, T. M. L. 2004. Choosing a stabilization target for CO2. Climatic Change 67:1-11. Wigley, T. M. L. and S. C. B. Raper, Interpretation of High Projections for Global-Mean Warming, Science 293, pp. 451-4, (2001). Wigley, T.M.L, 2005. The Climate Change Commitment, Science 307, pp. 1766-1769. Wigley, T.M.L., Richels, R. and Edmonds, J.: submitted, 'Overshoot Pathways to CO2 stabilization in a multi-gas context’, in Schlesinger, M.E. and Weyant, J.P. (eds.), Human Induced Climate Change: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Yamin et al., 2005 Exeter volume. Williams, A.J., D.J. Karoly and N. Tapper, 2001: The sensitivity of Australian fire danger to climate change. Climatic Change, 49, 171-191. Williams, S. E., Bolitho, E. E., Fox, S. (2003): Climate change in Australian tropical rainforests: an impending environmental catastrophe. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 270:1887-1892 Wisner, B., P. Blaikie, T. Cannon, and I. Davis. 2004. At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability and Disasters, 2nd edition. London: Routledge. Wood, R.A., M. Vellinga, and R. Thorpe, Global warming and thermohaline circulation stability, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series a-Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences, 361 (1810), 1961-1974, 2003. World Food Programme 200x Wright, E. L. & J. D. Erickson, Incorporating catastrophes into integrated assessment: science, impacts, and adaptation, Climatic Change 57:265, 2003 Wright, W.J. and Jones, D.A., 2003: Long-term rainfall decline in southern Australia. Proceedings National Drought Forum — Science for Drought, 15-16 April 2003, Brisbane. Wu, P.; Johnston, P.; Lambeck, K., 1999. Postglacial rebound and fault instability in Fennoscandia. Geophysical Journal International, 139, pp. 657-670 Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 66 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities CONFIDENTIAL: Do Not Cite —- Do Not Quote IPCC WGII AR4 - Draft for Government and Expert Review SOMmIDNARWNe YDAMNRWNE Wynne, B.: Uncertainty and environmental learning: Reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm. Global Environmental Change 2:111-127, 1992 Yohe, G. and R.S.J. Tol, (2002), “Indicators for social and economic coping capacity - moving toward a working definition of adaptive capacity”, Global Environmental Change, 12, 25-40. Yohe, G., Andronova, N., and M. Schlesinger (2004). To Hedge or Not Against an Uncertain Climate Future?, Science 306, 416-417 [DOI: 10.1126/science.1101170]. Zeng, X.-D., S.S.P. Shen, X. Zeng, and R.E. Dickinson, 2004: Multiple equilibrium states and the abrupt transitions in a dynamical system of soil water interacting with vegetation. Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, LOSSO1, doi:10.1029/2003GL018910. Zickfeld, K, and T. Bruckner. 2003. Reducing the Risk of Abrupt Climate Change: Emissions Corridors Preserving the Atlantic Thermohaline Circulation. Integrated Assessment 4:106- 115. Ziervogel, G., and T. Downing. 2004. Stakeholder networks: improving seasonal climate forecasts. Climatic Change 65: 73-101. Zwally, H. J., W. Abdalati, T. Herring, K. Larson, J. Saba, and K. Steffen, Surface melt-induced acceleration of Greenland ice-sheet flow, Science, 297, 218— 222, 2002. Deadline for submission of comments: 21 July 2006 67 of 67 Chapter 19 —- Key Vulnerabilities