Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-13 (section)

=== 13.11.3 Adaptation, Transformation and Sustainable Development Goals ===

<div id="h2-36-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

The implementation of far-reaching and rapid systemic changes, including both adaptation and mitigation options ( [[#de%20Coninck--2018|de Coninck et al., 2018]] ), remains less researched in societal systems than natural ones (Salomaa, 2020) that enhance multi-level governance and institutional capabilities, and enables lifestyle and behavioural change as well as technology innovation. Adaptation responses across European regions and sectors are more often incremental than transformative ( ''medium confidence'' ), with possible exceptions including water-related examples in, for example, the Netherlands ( [[#13.2.2|Section 13.2.2]] ) and some cities (see Box 13.3). Transformative options may be better able to exploit new opportunities and co-benefits (see Box 13.3; Cross-Chapter Box HEALTH in Chapter 7; [[#EEA--2019a|EEA, 2019a]] ). Transitions towards more adaptive and climate-resilient systems are often the result of responses to crises which create windows of opportunity for systemic changes (Chapter 18; [[#Johannessen--2019|Johannessen et al., 2019]] ). This includes extreme weather events, financial crises, for example in Malmö ( [[#Anderson--2014|Anderson, 2014]] ; [[#Isaksson--2018|Isaksson and Heikkinen, 2018]] ), and the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g., Milan), all of which have disrupted the status quo and accelerated innovation and implementation (e.g., Milan; see Box 13.3; Cross-Chapter Box COVID in Chapter 7).

Considerable barriers exist that prevent system transitions from taking place in Europe, including institutional and behavioural lock-ins such as administrative routines, certain types of legislation and dominant paradigms of problem solving ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Johannessen--2019|Johannessen et al., 2019]] ; [[#Roberts--2019|Roberts and Geels, 2019]] ). For example, near-term and sectoral decision-making constrains transformative options for water-related risks ( [[#13.2|Section 13.2]] ). Breaking through these lock-ins requires substantive (i.e., political) will, (un)learning of practices, resources, and evidence of what works. Trade-offs exist between the depth, scope and pace of change in transitioning from one system to another, suggesting that designing system transformations is a delicate balancing act ( [[#Termeer--2017|Termeer et al., 2017]] ). Aspiring in-depth and comprehensive transformational changes might create a consensus framework to which to aspire, but it might not offer concrete perspectives to act on the ground. Taking small steps and quick wins offer an alternative pathway ( [[#Termeer--2018|Termeer and Dewulf, 2018]] ).

Adaptation responses can also be understood in terms of their trade-offs and synergies with SDGs ( [[#Papadimitriou--2019|Papadimitriou et al., 2019]] ; [[#Bogdanovich--2020|Bogdanovich and Lipka, 2020]] ). In terms of synergies, analysis of the Russian NAP found that successful completion of the NAP’s first phase could lead to significant progress towards 15 of the 17 goals ( [[#Bogdanovich--2020|Bogdanovich and Lipka, 2020]] ). European water adaptation (e.g., flood protection) can similarly support freshwater provision; and water-secured environments support socioeconomic growth ( [[#Sadoff--2015|Sadoff et al., 2015]] ) since people and assets tend to accumulate in areas protected from flooding and supplied with water, reducing the incentive for autonomous adaptation ( [[#de%20Moel--2011|de Moel et al., 2011]] ; [[#Hartmann--2016|Hartmann and Spit, 2016]] ; [[#Di%20Baldassarre--2018|Di Baldassarre et al., 2018]] ). In health, behavioural measures to reduce mental health impacts (e.g., gardening, active travel) can have broader health benefits (SDG 3) as well as help reduce emissions ( [[#13.7|Section 13.7]] ; SDGs 7 and 13). Conversely, growing use of air conditioning for humans and livestock represents a potential trade-off between adaptation and mitigation (Sections 13.5–13.7, 13.10). As noted in [[#13.8|Section 13.8]] , addressing poverty (SDG 1)–including energy poverty (SDG 7) and hunger (SDG 2); and addressing inequalities (SDG 10), including gender inequality (SDG 5)–improves resilience to climate impacts for those groups that are disproportionately affected (women, low-income and marginalised groups). Also, more inclusive and fair decision making can enhance resilience (SDG 16; [[#13.4|Section 13.4.4]] ), although adaptation measures may also lead to resource conflicts (SDG 16; [[#13.7|Section 13.7]] ). Climate adaptation, particularly NbS, also supports ecosystem health (SDGs 14 and 15) ( [[#Dzebo--2019|Dzebo et al., 2019]] ).

Economic trade-offs appear to be more common across adaptation strategies, for example, reduced employment arising from land-use-change measures ( [[#Papadimitriou--2019|Papadimitriou et al., 2019]] ). There are also trade-offs between large-scale mitigation measures (e.g., wind farms) and adaptation options that rely on ecosystem services (e.g., water regulation) (Sections 13.3–13.4); and conversely, some adaptation options (e.g., air conditioning) may negatively impact mitigation. Figure 13.36 summarises the synergies between adaptation and SDGs as identified by 167 European cities in 2019; particularly prominent are reported biodiversity and health benefits most often arising from societal (e.g., informational) and structural (e.g., technological and/or engineering) measures. Beyond the urban context, biodiversity co-benefits from agroecology are also recognised ( [[#13.5|Section 13.5]] ). Sustainable behaviour-change measures have been found to be particularly ''likely'' to lead to synergies with SDGs ( [[#Papadimitriou--2019|Papadimitriou et al., 2019]] ).

<div id="_idContainer109" class="Figure"></div>

[[File:95cdd0d202b325c8a66e491978de20dd IPCC_AR6_WGII_Figure_13_036.png]]

'''Figure 13.36 |''' '''Co-benefits for SDGs from adaptation actions.''' Shown is how European cities have assessed the sustainability co-benefits of taking adaptation actions. Data were extracted from the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) database using the 2019 dataset; of the 861 European cities submitting data, 167 provided data on their adaptation actions, and these data are shown here ( [[#CDP--2019|CDP, 2019]] ). The CDP categories of climate hazards were re-categorised into WGI Climate Impact Drivers (e.g., cold spell, heavy precipitation); CDP adaptation actions were re-classified into AR5 adaptation options (‘social’, ‘structural’ and ‘institutional’; ‘other’ includes actions falling outside these AR5 categories); and CDP co-benefits were re-categorised as SDGs. The upper panel shows that all SDGs except one (SDG 17) were identified as a co-benefit of adaptation, although more environmental co-benefits were identified than social or economic ones. The lower left panel shows that societal actions were most common, followed by structural, then institutional. Informational measures were particularly common. The lower right panel shows how many actions were taken by different European cities.

<div id="frequently-asked-questions" class="h1-container"></div>