Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
ClimateKG
Search
Search
English
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
IPCC:AR6/SROCC/Chapter-6
(section)
IPCC
Discussion
English
Read
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
In other projects
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== 6.3.2 Impacts === <div id="section-6-3-2impacts-block-1"></div> As shown in previous assessments, increasing exposure is a major driver of increased cyclone risk (wind damages), as well as flood risk associated with cyclone rainfall and surge, besides possible changes in hazard intensities from anthropogenic climate change (Handmer et al., 2012 <sup>[[#fn:r273|273]]</sup> ; Arent et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r274|274]]</sup> ). Changes in TC trajectories are potentially a major source of increased risk, as the degree of vulnerability is typically much higher in locations that were previously not exposed to the hazard (Noy, 2016). Typhoon Haiyanβs move to the south of the usual trajectories of TCs in the western North Pacific basin (Yonson et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r275|275]]</sup> ) made the evacuation more difficult as people were less willing to heed storm surge warnings they received. Abrupt changes in impacts therefore are not only determined by changes in cyclone hazard, but also by the sensitivity or tipping points that are crossed in terms of flooding for instance, that can be driven by SLR but also by changes in local exposure. The frequency of nuisance flooding along the US east coast is expected to accelerate further in the future (Sweet and Park, 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r276|276]]</sup> ). The loss of coral reef cover and mangrove forests have also been shown to increase damages from storm surge events (e.g., Beck et al., 2018). Cyclones also affect marine life, habitats and fishing. There is some evidence that fish may evacuate storm areas or be redistributed by storm waves and currents (FAO, 2018; Sainsbury et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r277|277]]</sup> ). Other examples of damage to fisheries from cyclones and storm surges can be found in FAO (2018: Chapter V, Table 1). With regard to property losses, according to most projections, increasing losses from more intense cyclones are not offset by a possible reduction in frequency (Handmer et al., 2012 <sup>[[#fn:r278|278]]</sup> ). While the relation between aggregate damages and frequency may be linear, the relationship between intensity and damages is most probably highly nonlinear; with research suggesting a 10% increase in wind speed associated with a 30β40% increase in damages (e.g., Strobl, 2012). Although it is clear that direct damages from cyclones could increase, investigations into the economic impact of past cyclone events is less common, as these are much more difficult to identify. Examples of such work include Strobl (2012) <sup>[[#fn:r279|279]]</sup> on hurricane impacts in the Caribbean, Haque and Jahan (2016) on TC Sidr in Bangladesh, Jakobsen (2012) on Hurricane Mitch in Nicaragua, and Taupo and Noy (2017) on TC Pam in Tuvalu. The relation between changes in TCs and property losses is complex, and there are indications that wind shear changes may have larger impact than changes in global temperatures (Wang and Toumi, 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r280|280]]</sup> ). With regard to loss of life, total fatalities and mortality from cyclone-related coastal flooding is globally declining, probably as a result of improved forecasting and evacuation, although in some low-income countries mortality is still high (Paul, 2009 <sup>[[#fn:r281|281]]</sup> ; Lumbroso et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r282|282]]</sup> ; Bouwer and Jonkman, 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r283|283]]</sup> ). A global analysis finds that despite adaptation efforts, further SLR could increase storm surge mortality in many parts of the developing world (Lloyd et al., 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r284|284]]</sup> ). An assessment of future changes in coastal impacts based on direct downscaling of indicators of flooding such as total water level and number of hours per year with breakwater overtopping over a given threshold for port operability is provided by Camus et al. (2017) <sup>[[#fn:r285|285]]</sup> . These indicators are multivariable and include the combined effect of SLR, storm surge, astronomical tide and waves. Regional projected wave climate is downscaled from global multi-model projections from 30 CMIP5 model realisations. For example, projections by 2100 under the RCP8.5 scenario show a spatial variability along the coast of Chile with port operability loss between 600β800 h yr β1 and around 200 h yr β1 relative to present (1979β2005) conditions. Although wave changes are included in projected overtopping distributions, future changes of operability are mainly due to the SLR contribution. <span id="risk-management-and-adaptation"></span>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to ClimateKG may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
ClimateKG:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
IPCC:AR6/SROCC/Chapter-6
(section)
Add languages
Add topic