Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-14 (section)

=== 14.7.1 Overview of Observed Adaptation in North America ===

<div id="h2-21-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

Climate adaptation efforts have increased across all North American regions and sectors ( ''high confidence'' ). Support for, and implementation of, adaptation policies, plans and measures have not been equal across the public and private sectors, regions or varying levels of governance ( ''high confidence'' ) (Table 14.7). To date, reactive (coping-based) and incremental adaptations have helped North Americans avoid greater damages from observed climate impacts ( ''medium confidence'' ). There is increasing agreement that worsening impacts and expanding risk conditions may exceed current adaptation capacities by mid-century under high-emissions scenarios (RCP8.5) ( ''medium confidence'' ).

'''Table 14.7 |''' Simplified example for transitioning from incremental to transformative adaptation approaches to support future climate-resilient sustainable development

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!
! colspan="2"| Adaptation approaches

!
! Mitigation

! colspan="2"| Feasibility dimensions

|-
! Hazard

! Response

! Incremental

! Transformational

! Evidence/agreement

! Co-benefits

! Barriers

! Enablers

|-
| Extreme storms causing severe flooding and erosion

| Integrated ecosystem and watershed management

| Restoration of stream corridors to incorporate environmental flows; continuing to build hardened surfaces and stream diversions in urban areas to accommodate infrequent, yet extreme, storm events

| Restoration of streambanks and beds to stabilise and slow flows; use of drought-tolerant plantings and shade trees to reduce evaporation rates; incorporation of pervious surfaces in urban settings in combination with designating wide buffer area within floodplains to accommodate increased frequency of extreme events; integration of equity and justice considerations

| ''Medium''

| Conservation of soil and increased opportunity for carbon sequestration

| Sectors working in silos, inadequate financing, inability to identify shared goals (EC, INST, SOC, GEO)

| Development of a coordinated suite of adaptation efforts, co-produced among stakeholders and across sectors (INST, SOC, ENV, TEC)

|}

Notes:

This table is modified from the IPCC SR1.5 adaptation feasibility assessment for Land and Ecosystem Transitions ( [[#IPCC--2018|IPCC, 2018]] ). Feasibility dimensions (can be barriers and/or enablers) are as follows: Economic (EC), Technological (TEC), Institutional (INST), Sociocultural (SOC), Environmental/Ecological (ENV) or Geophysical (GEO) (Chapter 16).

<div id="14.7.1.1" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="individuals-and-households"></span>
==== 14.7.1.1 Individuals and Households ====

<div id="h3-35-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

Across North America, individuals and households have taken action to reduce climate-influenced risks ( ''high confidence'' ) ''.'' These autonomous adaptations comprise the majority of the observed responses in the peer-reviewed literature (Berrang-Ford and et al., 2021). The increased use of cooling systems (which could be maladaptive unless there are innovations) ( [[#14.5.5.3|Section 14.5.5.3]] ; [[#Barreca--2016|Barreca et al., 2016]] ), creating defensible space around homes in wildfire-prone areas (see Box 14.2), and the modification or redesign of housing structures along coasts ( [[#Koerth--2017|Koerth et al., 2017]] ), are important household responses to existing risks. Although these actions have played a role in reducing risks, the capacity to undertake such actions is not uniform across individuals in North America and has exacerbated existing social inequities, especially in coastal areas ( [[#Keenan--2018|Keenan et al., 2018]] ; [[#de%20Koning--2020|de Koning and Filatova, 2020]] ). Additionally, these adaptation activities often are taken without consideration of the impact on mitigation efforts ( [[#Kates--2012|Kates et al., 2012]] ; [[#Fedele--2019|Fedele et al., 2019]] ; [[#Shi--2021|Shi and Moser, 2021]] ).

<div id="14.7.1.2" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="local-and-subnational-governments"></span>
==== 14.7.1.2 Local and Subnational Governments ====

<div id="h3-36-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

The majority of local jurisdictions in North America have undertaken some level of adaptation. These efforts largely have focused on planning and less on implementation ( ''high confidence'' ). Some subnational governments, namely states and provinces, have engaged in advanced adaptation planning efforts ( ''high confidence'' ). Indigenous Peoples in North America have undertaken substantial activities ( [[#14.4|Section 14.4]] ; see Box 14.1).

Many cities across North America have undertaken adaptation planning ( [[#14.5|Section 14.5]] ; [[#Hughes--2015|Hughes, 2015]] ; [[#Reich--2016|Reich et al., 2016]] ; [[#Moser--2017|Moser et al., 2017]] ; Auditors General, 2018; [[#McMillan--2019|McMillan et al., 2019]] ) with some financing adaptation implementation, for example, in the case of SLR (see Box 14.4). Adaptation actions commonly implemented in cities include climate-informed building codes, enacting energy conservation measures, modifying zoning and increasing green infrastructure ( [[#14.5.5.3|Section 14.5.5.3]] ; see Box 14.7; [[#Binder--2015|Binder et al., 2015]] ; [[#Maxwell--2018a|Maxwell et al., 2018a]] ; [[#Moss--2019|Moss et al., 2019]] ; [[#Brown--2021|Brown et al., 2021]] ). The majority of cities have formed practitioner networks to share information ( [[#ICLEI%20Canada--2016|ICLEI Canada, 2016]] ; [[#Vogel--2016|Vogel et al., 2016]] ; C40 Cities, 2018) and supporting learning and collaboration through regional collaborations that include utility managers and the private sector ( [[#Fünfgeld--2015|Fünfgeld, 2015]] ; [[#Moser--2017|Moser et al., 2017]] ).

In Canada, the Map of Adaptation Actions 10 [[#footnote-015|6]] presents over 200 adaptation case studies addressing a variety of climate-related impacts ( [[#Warren--2021|Warren and Lulham, 2021]] ). The City of Saskatoon, in developing its Climate Action Plan (which includes a Corporate Climate Adaptation Strategy), engaged with local businesses, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), residents and experts to identify potential risks (and benefits) requiring action ( [[#City%20of%20Saskatoon--2019|City of Saskatoon, 2019]] ). Similarly, the City of Surrey specifically used community outreach programmes to develop its Coastal Flood Adaptation Strategy (CFAS) through a value-based planning approach ( [[#City%20of%20Surrey--2019|City of Surrey, 2019]] ). Municipal asset management, local services and community well-being were key considerations for the City of Selkirk, Manitoba, when developing an adaptation strategy as well as ensuring a budgeting process that supports implementation ( [[#City%20of%20Selkirk--2019|City of Selkirk, 2019]] ). As of 2019, 8 of 13 Canadian provinces and territories have high-level climate adaptation strategies. The scope of these efforts vary by jurisdiction as a review conducted by federal and provincial auditors in Canada identified several deficiencies related to a lack of detailed implementation plans, obligated funding and specific timelines (Auditors General, 2018).

Progress in Mexico on adaptation implementation at the local level has been extensive ( [[#INECC%20and%20Semarnat--2018|INECC and Semarnat, 2018]] ). Activities include executing programmes for relocating infrastructure in high-risk zones in priority tourist sites, incorporating adaptation criteria in public investment projects that involve construction and infrastructure management, water management, application of climate adaptation norms for the construction of tourist buildings in coastal zones, and improving the security of key water, communication and transportation infrastructure (Sections 14.5.5, 14.5.7, 14.5.8). Additionally, local capacity and protocol to respond to extreme weather events as a function of climate change have been integrated more regularly into community-based hazard mitigation plans. States and municipalities in Mexico must have climate policies that are consistent with the guidelines of national strategies ( [[#14.7.1|Section 14.7.1.5]] ) and state-level programmes on climate change, in addition to other state and municipal laws. As a result, these entities have developed and implemented early warning systems designed to protect the population from climate-related risks, such as strong storms and hurricanes ( [[#INECC%20and%20Semarnat--2018|INECC and Semarnat, 2018]] ).

Implementation of adaptation initiatives and specific actions in US cities has increased in the approximately 5 years between the 3rd US National Climate Assessment (NCA3) ( [[#Melillo--2014|Melillo et al., 2014]] ) and the 4th Assessment (NCA4), and adaptation responses have been observed widely ( [[#Lempert--2018|Lempert et al., 2018]] ). ICLEI-USA provides numerous resources for adaptation planning and implementation for cities, Indigenous Peoples and Regional Governments 11 . [[#footnote-014|7]] The Georgetown Center for Climate maintains a comprehensive resource for tracking adaptation progress for States 12 . [[#footnote-013|8]] As of 2021, 18 US states have completed climate adaptation plans, and six states have plans underway as of the time of this report ( [[#Georgetown%20Climate%20Center--2021|Georgetown Climate Center, 2021]] ). California, in particular, has adopted sustained climate assessment to allow for more rapid iterations on adaptation planning ( [[#Bedsworth--2018|Bedsworth et al., 2018]] ; [[#Miao--2019|Miao, 2019]] ). Across all US states, however, adaptation activities do not have readily accessible budgets, such that levels of funding cannot be assessed directly (Gilmore and St. Clair, 2018).

<div id="14.7.1.3" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="national-and-multi-national-governance"></span>
==== 14.7.1.3 National and Multi-National Governance ====

<div id="h3-37-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

The federal government of each North American country has developed policies and actions that promote climate adaptation (Figure 14.12). Recognising the cultural, economic and social networks that span North America, the federal governments have also committed to engagement on adaptation and resilience across borders and through cooperation on domestic adaptation efforts (The [[#White%20House--2016|White House, 2016]] ). Each country also outlines their respective adaptation efforts through submissions under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, including their nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement. The federal governments also support adaptation efforts in other countries through international climate negotiations as well as related agreements, such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and efforts to support the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

<div id="_idContainer078" class="Figure"></div>

[[File:959bc582ac1bbf42133637c80b7fdc3a IPCC_AR6_WGII_Figure_14_012.png]]

'''Figure 14.12 |''' '''Conceptual diagram of the key elements for expanding the adaptation solution space and implementing climate resilient development (Chapter 18).''' Adapted from [[#Shi--2021|Shi and Moser (2021)]] .

Mexico’s 2020 update to its first NDC communicated extensive adaptation efforts ( [[#Government%20of%20Mexico--2020|Government of Mexico, 2020]] ). The measures outlined in this document highlight the importance of co-benefits for adaptation efforts as they relate to the SDGs and to support mitigation commitments. Ecosystem-based solutions and NbS (see Box 14.7) are the basis for much of the synergies between adaptation and mitigation efforts. These plans are supported by domestic legislation through the General Law on Climate Change, which includes the Climate Change Adaptation Process (CCAP). The CCAP provides a holistic systems approach for identifying instruments and institutional arrangements for adaptation implementation ( [[#Semarnat%20and%20INECC--2015|Semarnat and INECC, 2015]] ; [[#INECC%20and%20Semarnat--2018|INECC and Semarnat, 2018]] ). This approach includes guidance for planning (e.g., the Climate Change Mid-Century Strategy, the Special Climate Change Program 2014–2018) and formalises its adaptation commitments to the Paris Agreement.

In Canada, the Federal Adaptation Policy Framework ( [[#Government%20of%20Canada--2011|Government of Canada, 2011]] ) guides domestic action to develop adaptation knowledge, build adaptive capacity, and mainstream adaptation into federal policy, in support of the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change ( [[#Government%20of%20Canada--2016|Government of Canada, 2016]] ), which included specific adaptation measures and investments to build resilience. In August 2021, the government initiated a National Adaptation Strategy with development anticipated through 2022. Additionally, the government facilitates efforts and funds research, capacity building and information sharing across sectors and among government departments ( [[#Government%20of%20Canada--2021a|Government of Canada, 2021a]] ). The Canadian Centre for Climate Services provides access to climate data, tools and information 13 . [[#footnote-012|9]] In Canada’s revised NDC, near-term commitments to protecting land and oceans, and efforts related to sustainable and resilient energy systems, are highlighted as examples of co-benefits between climate-change adaptation and mitigation ( [[#Government%20of%20Canada--2021b|Government of Canada, 2021b]] ).

The USA has experienced substantial revisions to its climate policy and its international engagement since AR5 with implications still unclear ( [[#Bomberg--2021|Bomberg, 2021]] ). Since AR5 and until early 2020, many congressionally mandated federal efforts ( [[#Beavers--2016|Beavers et al., 2016]] ; [[#Parris--2016|Parris et al., 2016]] ; [[#Rockman--2016|Rockman et al., 2016]] ; [[#Caffrey--2018|Caffrey and Hoffman, 2018]] ) faced programmatic challenges, but most continued to provide research and capacity development to support adaptation implementation across the USA. Importantly, the US government sustained the national climate assessments ( [[#Lempert--2018|Lempert et al., 2018]] ). Recently, the administration has re-engaged with the Paris Agreement and the USA has submitted an NDC (Government of the United States of America, 2021); however, adaptation was not directly addressed. Subsequent Executive orders mandate adaptation planning at the federal level (e.g., USEO 13754; USEO 14008). As of the time of this report, the US climate policy landscape is rapidly evolving, including major legislative initiatives (e.g., Green New Deal) ( [[#Boyle--2021|Boyle et al., 2021]] ).

<div id="14.7.1.4" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="private-sector-including-companies-ngos-professional-organisations-academic-institutions-and-communities-of-practice"></span>
==== 14.7.1.4 Private Sector, Including Companies, NGOs, Professional Organisations, Academic Institutions and Communities of Practice ====

<div id="h3-38-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

The private sector comprises a diverse set of actors who influence, interact with and support adaptation efforts, generally through shared governance with the public sector. The weight of evidence points to the benefits of these collaborations and the importance of voluntary code-making and self-regulation ( [[IPCC:Wg2:Chapter:Chapter-17#17.4.2|Section 17.4.2.1.6]] ). In North America, NGOs and professional organisations have been important agents of change in the adaptation field ( [[#Bennett--2017|Bennett and Grannis, 2017]] ; [[#Stults--2017|Stults and Meerow, 2017]] ). Efforts have included supporting community-based resilience, network building, Internet-based guidance and resources, case studies, workshops and other services to support adaptation action (e.g., vulnerability assessments, scenario-based planning).

Market and financial mechanisms have provided important buffering capacity against climate shocks in North America. Insurance products are being developed to meet emerging climate risks, especially related to availability and pricing of flood insurance in Canada ( [[#Thistlethwaite--2017|Thistlethwaite, 2017]] ; [[#Davies--2020|Davies, 2020]] ) and the USA ( [[#Kousky--2021|Kousky et al., 2021]] ). Some existing US flood insurance products provided through joint public and private arrangements has led to rebuilding in flood-prone locations ( [[#Zellmer--2016|Zellmer and Klein, 2016]] ). The price of these products may limit their uptake in low-income neighbourhoods ( [[#Cannon--2020|Cannon et al., 2020]] ).

Professional organisations have participated in the development and adoption of measures to integrate climate resilience into the built environment. This includes new designs, guidelines, codes, standards and specifications, in addition to infrastructure inventories that incorporate evaluation of vulnerabilities and identification of priority at-risk areas ( [[#Amec%20Foster%20Wheeler%20and%20Credit%20Valley%20Conservation--2017|Amec Foster Wheeler and Credit Valley Conservation, 2017]] ; [[#ASCE--2018a|ASCE, 2018a]] ). These efforts are supported by provincial/state and federal initiatives (e.g., Canada’s Climate Lens (Infrastructure Canada, 2018), and California’s Climate-Safe Infrastructure Working Group ( [[#Climate-Safe%20Infrastructure%20Working%20Group--2018|Climate-Safe Infrastructure Working Group, 2018]] )). Infrastructure Canada has undertaken Canada-wide initiatives to improve infrastructure resilience to climate change 14 . [[#footnote-011|10]] The Standards Council of Canada (SCC) established the Northern Infrastructure Standardization Initiative 15 [[#footnote-010|11]] engaging stakeholders, including Indigenous Peoples, to develop standards specific for addressing climate-change impacts on northern infrastructure design, planning and management, and community development ( [[#Standards%20Council%20of%20Canada--2020|Standards Council of Canada, 2020]] ).

Professional organisations in the USA (e.g., National Medical Association, American Institute of Architects, Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, Water Utility Climate Alliance, American Society of Adaptation Professionals) have engaged with their members particularly through training about urban adaptation ( [[#Stults--2017|Stults and Meerow, 2017]] ). The private sector and citizens ( [[#Klein--2018|Klein et al., 2018]] ) have been involved in the management of increasing flood risk, such as the adoption of property-level flood protection ( [[#Thistlethwaite--2018|Thistlethwaite and Henstra, 2018]] ; [[#Valois--2019|Valois et al., 2019]] ), implementing FireSmart Canada and Firewise USA guidance (see Box 14.2). In Canada, Engineers Canada developed the PIEVC Protocol to provide guidance for professionals in engineering and geoscience 16 . [[#footnote-009|12]]

Research-based institutions have accelerated the development of Internet-based tools for visualising and exploring climate information, in addition to furthering the scholarship on adaptation. In the USA, joint university, foundation and government programmes have contributed to advancing the field with products such as oceanographic and fishery climate forecasting tools ( [[#14.5.2|Section 14.5.2]] ), in addition to methods for evaluating water resource plans under uncertainty about future mean and extreme conditions ( [[#ASCE--2018a|ASCE, 2018a]] ; [[#Ray--2020|Ray et al., 2020]] ). Some regional research centres focus on stakeholder engagement in addition to research; these include the National and Regional Climate Adaptation Science Center Network of the US Geological Survey 17 , [[#footnote-008|13]] the US Department of Agriculture’s Climate Hub Network 18 [[#footnote-007|14]] and the Climate Program Office of NOAA 19 [[#footnote-006|15]] which includes the Regional Integrated Science Assessment Network 20 [[#footnote-005|16]] to support delivery of climate services. So-called networks of networks, consisting of NGOs as well as state and city government programmes, have provided an alternative to federal support. For example, the Science for Adaptation Network was formed subsequent to dismantling the federal advisory group to the US National Climate Assessment ( [[#Moss--2019|Moss et al., 2019]] ).

<div id="14.7.2" class="h2-container"></div>

<span id="the-solution-space"></span>