Editing IPCC:AR6/SROCC/Chapter-1 (section)

== CCB.2 Key Concepts of Risk, Adaptation, Resilience and Transformation ==

<div id="article-1-5risk-and-impacts-related-to-ocean-and-cryosphere-change-block-1"></div>

'''Authors''' : Matthias Garschagen (Germany), Carolina Adler (Switzerland/Australia), Susie Crate (USA), Hélène Jacot Des Combes (Fiji/France), Bruce Glavovic (New Zealand/South Africa), Sherilee Harper (Canada), Elisabeth Holland (Fiji/USA), Gary Kofinas (USA), Sean O’Donoghue (South Africa), Ben Orlove (USA), Zita Sebesvari (Hungary/Germany), Martin Sommerkorn (Norway/Germany)

This box introduces key concepts used in the Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC) in relation to risk, adaptation, resilience, and transformation. Building on an assessment of the current literature, it provides a conceptual framing for the report and for the assessments within its chapters. Full definitions of key terms are provided in the SROCC Annex I: Glossary.

'''Risk and adaptation'''

SROCC considers risk from climate change-related effects on the ocean and cryosphere as the result of the interaction between: (1) environmental hazards triggered by climate change, (2) exposure of humans, infrastructure and ecosystems to those hazards, and (3) systems’ vulnerabilities. ''Risk'' refers to the potential for adverse consequences, and ''impacts'' refer to materialised effects of climate change. Next to assessing risk and impacts specifically resulting from climate change-related effects on the ocean, coast and cryosphere, SROCC is also concerned with the options to reduce climate-related risk.<br />

Beyond mitigation, adaptation is a key avenue to reduce risk (Section 1.6). Adaptation can also include exploiting new opportunities; however, this box focuses on risk, and thus, the latter is not discussed in detail here. Adaptation efforts link into the causal fabric of risk by reducing existing and future vulnerability, exposure, and/or (where possible) hazards (Figure CB2.1). Addressing the different risk components (hazards, exposure and vulnerability) involves assessing and selecting options for policy and action. Such decision-making entails evaluation of the effectiveness, efficiency, efficacy and acceptance of actions. Adaptation responses are more effective when they promote resilience to climate change, consider plausible futures and unexpected events, strengthen essential or desired characteristics as well as values of the responding system and/or make adjustments to avoid unsustainable pathways ( ''high agreement'' , ''medium evidence'' ; Section 2.3; Box 2.4; 4.4.4; 4.4.5).

<div id="article-1-5risk-and-impacts-related-to-ocean-and-cryosphere-change-block-2"></div>

<span id="figure-cb2.1"></span>
<!-- START IMG -->
<!-- IMG TITLE -->
'''Figure CB2.1'''

<span id="figure-cb2.1-there-are-options-for-risk-reduction-through-adaptation.-adaptation-can-reduce-risk-by-addressing-one-or-more-of-the-three-risk-factors-vulnerability-exposure-andor-hazard.-the-reduction-of-vulnerability-exposure-andor-hazard-potential-can-be-achieved-through-different-policy-and-action-choices-over-time-until-limits-to-adaptation-might-be-reached."></span>
<!-- IMG CAPTION -->
'''Figure CB2.1 | There are options for risk reduction through adaptation. Adaptation can reduce risk by addressing one or more of the three risk factors: vulnerability, exposure, and/or hazard. The reduction of vulnerability, exposure, and/or hazard potential can be achieved through different policy and action choices over time until limits to adaptation might be reached. […]'''
<!-- IMG FILE -->
[[File:94b04351483e95b40f4d90d6457750d7 IPCC-SROCC-CB_2_1.jpg]]

Figure CB2.1 | There are options for risk reduction through adaptation. Adaptation can reduce risk by addressing one or more of the three risk factors: vulnerability, exposure, and/or hazard. The reduction of vulnerability, exposure, and/or hazard potential can be achieved through different policy and action choices over time until limits to adaptation might be reached. The figure builds on the conceptual framework of risk used in the IPCC 5th Assessment Report (AR5) (Oppenheimer et al., 2014).

<!-- END IMG -->
<div id="article-1-5risk-and-impacts-related-to-ocean-and-cryosphere-change-block-3"></div>

Adaptation requires adaptive capacity, which for human systems includes assets (financial, physical, and/or ecological), capital (social and institutional), knowledge and technical know-how (Klein et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r151|151]]</sup> ). The extent of adaptive capacity determines adaptation potential, but does not necessarily translate into effective adaptation if awareness of the need to act, the willingness to act and/or the cooperation needed to act is lacking ( ''high confidence'' ; Sections 2.3; Box 2.4; 4.3.2.6.3; 5.5.2.4).

There are limits to adaptation, which include, for example, physical, ecological, technological, economic, political, institutional, psychological and/or socio-cultural aspects ( ''medium evidence, high agreement'' ) (Dow et al., 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r152|152]]</sup> ; Barnett et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r153|153]]</sup> ; Klein et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r154|154]]</sup> ). For example, the ability to adapt to sea level rise depends, in part, on the elevation of the low-lying islands and coasts in question, but also on the capacity to successfully negotiate protection or relocation measures socially and politically (Cross-Chapter Box 9, also see Section 6.4.3 for a wider overview). Limits to adaptation are sometimes considered as something different from barriers to adaptation. Barriers can in principle be overcome if adaptive capacity is available (e.g., where funding is made available), even though overcoming barriers is often hard in reality, particularly for resource-poor communities and countries ( ''high confidence'' ; Section 4.4.3). Limits to adaptation are reached when adaptation no longer allows an actor or ecosystem to secure valued objectives or key functions from intolerable risks (Section 4.4.2; Dow et al., 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r155|155]]</sup> ). Defining tolerable risks and key system functions is, therefore, of central importance for the assessment of limits to adaptation.

Residual risks (i.e., the risk that endures following adaptation and risk reduction efforts) remain even where adaptation is possible ( ''very high confidence'' ; Chapters 2-6; Section 6.3.2; Table 6.2). Residual risks have bearing on the emerging debate about loss and damage (Huq et al., 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r156|156]]</sup> ; Warner and van der Geest, 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r157|157]]</sup> ; Boyd et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r158|158]]</sup> ; Djalante et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r159|159]]</sup> ; Mechler et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r160|160]]</sup> ; Roy et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r161|161]]</sup> ). This report addresses loss and damage in relation to slow onset processes, including ocean changes (Section 5.4.2.3), sea level rise (Section 4.3), and glacier retreat (Section 2.3.6), and polar cryosphere changes (Section 3.4.3.3.4), as well as rapid onset hazards such as tropical cyclones (Chapter 6). The assessment encompasses non-economic losses, including the impacts on intrinsic and spiritual attributes with which high mountain societies value their landscapes (Section 2.3.5); the interconnected relationship with, and reliance upon, the land, water and ice for culture, livelihoods and wellbeing in the Arctic (Section 3.4.3.3); and cultural heritage and displacement addressed in the Cross-Chapter Box on low-lying islands and coasts (Cross-Chapter Box 9; Burkett, 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r162|162]]</sup> ; Markham et al., 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r163|163]]</sup> ; Tschakert et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r164|164]]</sup> ; Huggel et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r165|165]]</sup> ).

'''Building resilience'''

Addressing climate change-related risk, impacts (including extreme events and shocks) and trade-offs together with shaping the trajectories of social and ecological systems is facilitated by considering resilience (Biggs et al., 2012 <sup>[[#fn:r166|166]]</sup> ; Quinlan et al., 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r167|167]]</sup> ). In SROCC, resilience is understood as the capacity of interconnected social, economic and ecological systems to cope with disturbances by reorganising in ways that maintain their essential function, structure, and identity (Walker et al., 2004 <sup>[[#fn:r168|168]]</sup> ). Resilience may be considered as a positive attribute of a system and an aspirational goal when it contributes to the capacity for adaptation and learning without changing the structure, function, and identity of the system (Walker et al., 2004 <sup>[[#fn:r169|169]]</sup> ; Steiner, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r170|170]]</sup> ). Alternately, resilience may be used descriptively as a system property that is neither good nor bad (Walker et al., 2004 <sup>[[#fn:r171|171]]</sup> ; Chapin et al., 2009 <sup>[[#fn:r172|172]]</sup> ; Weichselgartner and Kelman, 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r173|173]]</sup> ). For example, a system can be highly resilient in keeping its unfavoured attributes, such as poverty or institutional rigidity (Carpenter and Brock, 2008 <sup>[[#fn:r174|174]]</sup> ). Critics of the resilience concept warn that the application of resilience to social systems is problematic when the responsibility for resilience building is shifted onto the shoulders of vulnerable and resource-poor populations (e.g., Chandler, 2013; Reid, 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r175|175]]</sup> ; Rigg and Oven, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r176|176]]</sup> ; Tierney, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r177|177]]</sup> ; Olsson et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r178|178]]</sup> ).

Applying the concept of resilience in mitigation and adaptation planning builds the capacity of a social-ecological system to navigate anticipated changes and unexpected events (Biggs et al., 2012 <sup>[[#fn:r179|179]]</sup> ; Varma et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r180|180]]</sup> ; Sud et al., 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r181|181]]</sup> ). Resilience also emphasises social-ecological system dynamics, including the possibility of crossing critical thresholds and experiencing a regime shift (i.e., state change). Seven general strategies for building social-ecological resilience have been identified (Figure CB2.2; Ostrom, 2010 <sup>[[#fn:r182|182]]</sup> ; Biggs et al., 2012 <sup>[[#fn:r183|183]]</sup> ; Quinlan et al., 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r184|184]]</sup> ). The concept of resilience also allows analysts, accessors of risk and decision makers to recognise how climate-change related risks often cannot be fully avoided or alleviated despite adaptation. For SROCC, this is especially relevant along low-lying coasts, high mountain areas and the polar regions ( ''medium evidence, high agreement'' ; Sections 2.3; 2.4; 3.5, 6.8, 6.9).

<div id="article-1-5risk-and-impacts-related-to-ocean-and-cryosphere-change-block-4"></div>

<span id="figure-cb2.2"></span>
<!-- START IMG -->
<!-- IMG TITLE -->
'''Figure CB2.2'''

<span id="figure-cb2.2-general-strategies-for-enhancing-social-ecological-resilience-to-support-climate-resilient-pathways-have-been-identified.-the-seven-strategies-are-adapted-from-synthesis-papers-by-biggs-et-al.-2012-and-quinlan-et-al.-2016-the-illustration-of-the-climate-resilient-development-pathway-crdp-builds-on-figure-spm9-in-the-ipcc-5th-assessment-report-ar5-ipcc-2014."></span>
<!-- IMG CAPTION -->
'''Figure CB2.2 | General strategies for enhancing social-ecological resilience to support climate-resilient pathways have been identified. The seven strategies are adapted from synthesis papers by Biggs et al. (2012) and Quinlan et al. (2016), the illustration of the climate-resilient development pathway (CRDP) builds on Figure SPM9 in the IPCC 5th Assessment Report (AR5) (IPCC, 2014).'''
<!-- IMG FILE -->
[[File:0b474733cb9d516e43ea7d37ecb0b285 IPCC-SROCC-CB_2_2.jpg]]

Figure CB2.2 | General strategies for enhancing social-ecological resilience to support climate-resilient pathways have been identified. The seven strategies are adapted from synthesis papers by Biggs et al. (2012) and Quinlan et al. (2016), the illustration of the climate-resilient development pathway (CRDP) builds on Figure SPM9 in the IPCC 5th Assessment Report (AR5) (IPCC, 2014).

<!-- END IMG -->
<div id="article-1-5risk-and-impacts-related-to-ocean-and-cryosphere-change-block-5"></div>

Many efforts are underway to apply resilience thinking in assessments, management practices, policy making and the day-to-day practices of affected sectors and local communities. For example, leaders of the Pacific small island developing states use the Framework for Resilient Development in the Pacific, which integrates climate change and disaster risk management (Pacific Community, 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r185|185]]</sup> ; Cross-Chapter Box 9). In the Philippines, a new framework has been developed to conduct full inventories of actual and projected loss and damage due to climate change and associated disasters such as from cyclones. Creating such an inventory is difficult due to the disconnect between tools for climate change assessment and those for post disaster assessment (Florano, 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r189|189]]</sup> ). In Arctic Alaska, evaluative frameworks are being applied to determine needs, responsibilities, and alternative actions associated with coastal village relocations (Bronen, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r190|190]]</sup> ; Cross-Chapter Box 9). In all these initiatives, resilience is a key consideration for enabling CRDPs.

'''Climate-resilient development pathways (CRDPs)'''

CRDPs are a relatively new concept to describe climate change mitigation and adaptation trajectories that strengthen sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty and reduce inequalities while promoting fair and cross-scalar adaptation to, and resilience in, a changing climate (Kainuma et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r191|191]]</sup> ; Roy et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r192|192]]</sup> ). CRDPs are increasingly being explored as an approach for combining scientific assessments, stakeholder participation, and forward-looking development planning, acknowledging that pursuing CRDP is not only a technical challenge of risk management but also a social and political process (Roy et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r193|193]]</sup> ). Adaptive decision-making over time is key to CRDPs (Haasnoot et al., 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r194|194]]</sup> ; Wise et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r195|195]]</sup> ; Fazey et al., 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r196|196]]</sup> ; Ramm et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r197|197]]</sup> ; Bloemen et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r198|198]]</sup> ; Lawrence et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r199|199]]</sup> ). CRDPs accommodate both the interacting cultural, social, and ecosystem factors that influence multi-stakeholder decision making processes, and the overall sustainability of adaptation measures.

Adequate climate change mitigation and adaptation allows for opportunities for sustainable development pathways and the options for resilience building. CRDPs involve series of mitigation and adaptation choices over time, balancing short-term and long-term goals and accommodating newly available knowledge (Denton et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r200|200]]</sup> ). The CRDPs approach has been successfully used, for example, in urban, remote and disadvantaged communities, and can showcase the potential to counter maladaptive choices (e.g., Barnett et al., 2014; Butler et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r202|202]]</sup> ; Maru et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r203|203]]</sup> ). CRDPs aim to establish narratives of hope and opportunity that can extend beyond risk reduction and coping (Amundsen et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r203|203]]</sup> ). Although climate change impacts on the ocean and cryosphere elicit many emotions, including fear, anger, despair and apathy (Cunsolo Willox et al., 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r204|204]]</sup> ; Cunsolo and Landman, 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r205|205]]</sup> ; Cunsolo and Ellis, 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r206|206]]</sup> ), narratives of hope are critical in provoking motivation, creative thinking and behavioural changes in response to climate change (Myers et al., 2012 <sup>[[#fn:r207|207]]</sup> ; Smith and Leiserowitz, 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r208|208]]</sup> ; Feldman and Hart, 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r209|209]]</sup> ; Feldman and Hart, 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r210|210]]</sup> ; Prescott and Logan, 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r211|211]]</sup> ; Section 1.8.3).

Much of the adaptation and resilience literature published since AR5 highlights the need for transformations that enable effective climate change mitigation (most notably, to decarbonise the economy) (Riahi et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r212|212]]</sup> ), and support adaptation (e.g., Pelling et al., 2015; Few et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r213|213]]</sup> ). Transformation becomes particularly relevant when existing mitigation and adaptation practices cannot reduce risks and impacts to an acceptable level. Transformative adaptation, therefore, involves fundamental modifications of policies, policy making processes, institutions, human behaviour and cultural values (Pelling et al., 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r214|214]]</sup> ; Solecki et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r215|215]]</sup> ). Successful transformation requires attention to conditions that allow for such changes, including timing (e.g., windows of opportunity), social readiness (e.g., some level of willingness) and resources to act (e.g., trust, human skill and financial resources; Kofinas et al., 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r216|216]]</sup> ; Moore et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r217|217]]</sup> ). Examples related to SROCC include shifting from a paradigm of protection reliant on seawalls to living with saltwater as a response to coastal flooding in rural areas (Renaud et al., 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r218|218]]</sup> ) or involving fundamental risk management changes in coastal megacities, including retreat (Solecki et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r219|219]]</sup> ). Transformation in changing ocean and cryosphere contexts can be fostered by transdisciplinary collaboration between actors in science, government, the private sector, civil society and affected communities (Padmanabhan, 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r220|220]]</sup> ; Cross-Chapter Box 3 in Chapter 1; Cross-Chapter Box 4 in Chapter 1).

<span id="hazards-and-opportunities-for-natural-systems-ecosystems-and-human-systems"></span>
=== 1.5.1 Hazards and Opportunities for Natural Systems, Ecosystems, and Human Systems ===

<div id="section-1-5-1-hazards-and-opportunities-for-natural-systems-ecosystems-and-human-systems-block-1"></div>

Hazards faced by marine and coastal organisms, and the ecosystem services they provide are generally dependent on future greenhouse gas emission pathways, with moderate likelihood under a low-emission future, but high to very high likelihood under higher emission scenarios ( ''very high confidence'' ) (Mora et al., 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r221|221]]</sup> ; Gattuso et al., 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r222|222]]</sup> ). Hazards to marine ecosystems assessed in AR5 (IPCC, 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r223|223]]</sup> ) included degradation of coral reefs ( ''high confidence'' ), ocean deoxygenation ( ''medium confidence'' ) and ocean acidification ( ''high confidence'' ). Shifts in the ranges of plankton and fish were identified with ''high confidence'' regionally, but with uncertain trends globally. SROCC provides more evidence for global shifts in the distribution of marine organisms, and in how the phenology of animals is responding to ocean change (Sections 3.2.3, 5.2). The signature of climate change is now detected in almost all marine ecosystems. Similar trends of changing habitat due to climate change are reported for the cryosphere (Sections 2.2, 3.4.3.2). The risk of irreversible loss of many marine and coastal ecosystems increases with global warming, especially at 2°C or more ( ''high confidence'' ; IPCC, 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r224|224]]</sup> ). Risk also increases for habitat displacements, both poleward (Section 3.2.4) and to greater ocean depths (Section 5.2.4), or habitat reductions, such as that caused by glacier retreat (Section 2.2.3).

Changes in the ocean and cryosphere bring hazards that affect the health, wellbeing, safety and security of populations in coastal, mountain and polar environments (Section 2.3.5, 3.4.3, 4.3.2). Some impacts are direct, such as sea level rise or coastal erosion that can displace coastal residents (4.3.2.3, 4.4.2.6, Box 4.1) . Other effects are indirect; for example, rising ocean temperatures have led to increases in maximum wind speed and rainfall rates in tropical cyclones (Section 6.3), creating hazards with severe consequences for natural and human systems (Sections 4.3, 6.2, 6.3, 6.8). The multiple category 4 and 5 Atlantic hurricanes in 2017 caused the loss of over 3300 lives and more than 350 billion USD in economic damages (Cross-Chapter Box 9; Andrade et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r225|225]]</sup> ; Murakami et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r226|226]]</sup> ; NOAA, 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r227|227]]</sup> ). In mountain regions, glacial lake outburst floods have caused severe impacts on lives, livelihoods and infrastructure that often extend beyond the directly affected areas (Section 2.3.2 and 6.2.2). Some hazards related to ocean and cryosphere change involve abrupt and irreversible changes (Section 1.3), which generate sometimes unpredictable risks, and multiple hazards can coincide to greatly elevate the total risk (Section 6.8.2). For example, combinations of thawing permafrost, sea level rise, loss of sea ice, ocean surface waves and extreme weather events (Thomson and Rogers, 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r228|228]]</sup> ; Ford et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r229|229]]</sup> ) have damaged Arctic infrastructure (e.g., buildings, roads) (AMAP, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r230|230]]</sup> ; AMAP, 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r231|231]]</sup> ), impacted reindeer husbandry livelihoods for Sami and other Arctic Indigenous peoples and impeded access to hunting grounds, other communities and travel routes fundamental to the livelihoods, food security and wellbeing of Inuit and other Northern cultures (Section 3.4.3). In some Arctic regions, tipping points may have already been reached such that adaptive practices can no longer work (Section 3.5).

Climate change impacts on the ocean and cryosphere can also present opportunities, in at least the near- and medium-term. For example, in Nepal warming of high mountain environments and accelerated melting of snow and ice have extended the growing season and crop yields in some regions (Section 2.3; Gaire et al., 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r232|232]]</sup> ; Merrey et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r233|233]]</sup> ), while tourism and shipping has increased in the Arctic with loss of sea ice (Section 3.2.4). Moreover, rising ocean temperatures redistribute the global fish population, allowing new fishing opportunities while reducing some established fisheries (Bell et al., 2011 <sup>[[#fn:r234|234]]</sup> ; Fenichel et al., 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r235|235]]</sup> ; Section 5.4). To gain from new opportunities, while also avoiding or mitigating new or increasing hazards, it is necessary to be aware of trade-offs between risks and benefits to understand who is and is not benefiting. For example, opportunities can involve trade-offs with mitigation and/or SDGs (Section 3.5.2), and the balance of economic costs and benefits may differ substantially between the near-term and long-term future (Section 5.4.2.2).

<span id="exposure-of-natural-systems-ecosystems-and-human-systems"></span>
=== 1.5.2 Exposure of Natural Systems, Ecosystems, and Human Systems ===

<div id="section-1-5-2-exposure-of-natural-systems-ecosystems-and-human-systems-block-1"></div>

Exposure to hazards in cryosphere systems occur in the immediate vicinity of cryosphere components, and at regional to global scales where cryosphere changes link to other natural systems. For example, decreasing Arctic sea ice increases exposure for organisms that depend upon habitats provided by sea ice, but also has far-reaching impacts through the resulting direct albedo feedback and amplification of Arctic climate warming (e.g., Pistone et al., 2014) that then locally increases surface melting of the Greenland ice sheet (Liu et al., 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r236|236]]</sup> ; Stroeve et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r237|237]]</sup> ). Additionally, ice loss from ice sheets contribute to the global-scale exposure of sea level rise, and more local-scale modifications and losses of coastal habitats and ecosystems (Sections 3.2.3 and 4.3.3.5). Interactions within and between natural systems also influence the spatial reach of risks associated with cryosphere change. Permafrost degradation, for example, interacts with ecosystems and climate on various spatial and temporal scales, and feedbacks from these interactions range from local impacts on topography, hydrology and biology, to global-scale impacts via biogeochemical cycling (e.g., methane release) on climate (Sections 2.2, 2.3, 3.4; Kokelj et al., 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r238|238]]</sup> ; Grosse et al., 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r239|239]]</sup> ).

Exposure to climate change risk exists for virtually all coastal organisms, habitats and ecosystems (Section 5.2), through processes such as inundation and salinisation (Section 4.3), ocean acidification and deoxygenation (Sections 3.2.3, 5.2.3), increasing marine heatwaves (Section 6.4.1.2), and increases in harmful algal blooms and invasive species (Glibert et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r240|240]]</sup> ; Gobler et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r241|241]]</sup> ; Townhill et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r242|242]]</sup> ; Box 5.3). Aggregate impacts of multiple drivers are dramatically altering ecosystem structure and function in the coastal and open ocean (Boyd et al., 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r243|243]]</sup> ; Deutsch et al., 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r244|244]]</sup> ; Przeslawski et al., 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r245|245]]</sup> ), such as coral reefs under increasing pressure from both rising ocean temperature and acidification (Section 5.3.4). Increasing exposure to climate change hazards in open ocean natural systems includes ocean acidification (O’Neill et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r246|246]]</sup> ; Section 5.2.3), changes in ocean ventilation, deoxygenation (Shepherd et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r247|247]]</sup> ; Breitburg et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r248|248]]</sup> ; Section 5.2.2.4), increased cyclone and flood risk (Section 6.3.3) and an increase in extreme El Niño and La Niña events (Section. 6.5.1). Heat content is rapidly increasing within the ocean (Section 5.2.2) and marine heat waves are becoming more frequent across the world ocean (Section 6.4.1).

People who live close to the ocean and/or cryosphere, or depend directly on their resources for livelihoods, are particularly exposed to climate change impacts and hazards ( ''very high confidence'' ) (Barange et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r249|249]]</sup> ; Romero-Lankao et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r250|250]]</sup> ; AMAP, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r251|251]]</sup> ). These exposures can result in infrastructure damage and failure (Sections 2.3.1.3, 3.4.3, 3.5., 4.3.2), loss of habitability (Sections 2.3.7, 3.4.3, 3.5, 4.3.3), changes in air quality (Section 6.5.2), proliferation of disease vectors (Sections 3.4.3.2.2, 5.4.2.1.1), increased morbidity and mortality due to injury, infectious disease, heat stress, and mental health and wellness challenges (Section 3.4.3.3), compromised food and water security (Sections 2.3.1, 3.4.3.3, 4.3.3.6, 5.4.2.1, 6.8.4), degradation of ecosystem services (Sections 2.3.1.2, 2.3.3.4, 4.3.3, 5.4.1, 6.4.2.3), economic and non-economic impacts due to reduced production and social network system disruption (Section 2.3.7), conflict (Sections 2.3.1.14, 3.5) and widespread human migration (Sections 2.3.7, 4.4.3.5; Oppenheimer et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r252|252]]</sup> ; van Ruijven et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r253|253]]</sup> ; AMAP, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r254|254]]</sup> ; Cunsolo and Ellis, 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r255|255]]</sup> ).

This report documents how people residing in coastal and cryosphere regions are already exposed to climate change hazards, and which of these hazards are projected to increase in the future. For example, mountain communities have been exposed to increased rockfall, rock avalanches and landslides due to permafrost degradation and glacier shrinkage, and to changes in snow avalanche type and seasonal timing (Section 2.3.1). Cryosphere changes that can impact water availability in mountain regions and for downstream populations (Sections 2.3.1, 2.3.4, 2.3.5) have implications for drinking water, irrigation, livestock grazing, hydropower production and tourism (Section 2.3). Some declining mountain glaciers hold sacred and symbolic meanings for local communities who will experience spiritual losses (Section 2.3.4, 2.3.5, and 2.3.6). Exposures to extreme warming, and continued sea ice and permafrost loss in the Arctic, challenge Indigenous communities with close interdependent relationships of economy, lifestyles, cultural identity, self-sufficiency, Indigenous knowledge, health and wellbeing with the Arctic cryosphere (Section 3.4.3, 3.5).

The population living in low elevation coastal zones (land less than 10 m above sea level) is projected to increase to more than one billion by 2050 (Section 4.3.2.2). These people and communities are particularly exposed to future sea level rise, rising ocean temperature (including marine heat waves; Section 6.4), enhanced coastal erosion, increasing wind, wave height, storm intensity and ocean acidification (Section 4.3.4). These exposures bring associated risks for livelihoods linked to fisheries, tourism and trade, as well as loss of life, damaged assets, and disruption of basic services including safe water supplies, sanitation, energy and transportation networks (Chapters 4, 5, and 6; Cross-Chapter Box 9).

<span id="vulnerabilities-in-natural-systems-ecosystems-and-human-systems"></span>
=== 1.5.3 Vulnerabilities in Natural Systems, Ecosystems, and Human Systems ===

<div id="section-1-5-3-vulnerabilities-in-natural-systems-ecosystems-and-human-systems-block-1"></div>

Direct and indirect risks to natural systems are influenced by vulnerability to climate change as well as deterioration of ecosystem services. For example, about half of species assessed on the northeast United States continental shelf exhibited high to very high climate vulnerability due to temperature preferences and changes in habitat space (Hare et al., 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r256|256]]</sup> ), with corresponding northward range shifts for many species (Kleisner et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r257|257]]</sup> ) and increased vulnerability for organisms or ecosystems unable to migrate or evolve at the rate required to adapt to ocean and cryosphere changes (Miller et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r258|258]]</sup> ). Non-climatic pressures also magnify the vulnerability of ocean and cryosphere ecosystems to climate-related changes, such as overfishing, coastal development, and pollution, including plastic pollution (Halpern et al., 2008 <sup>[[#fn:r259|259]]</sup> ; Halpern et al., 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r260|260]]</sup> ; IPBES, 2018a <sup>[[#fn:r261|261]]</sup> ; IPBES, 2018b <sup>[[#fn:r262|262]]</sup> ; IPBES, 2018c <sup>[[#fn:r263|263]]</sup> ; IPBES, 2018d <sup>[[#fn:r264|264]]</sup> ). Conventional (fossil fuel-based) plastics produced in 2015 accounted for 3.8% of global CO 2 emissions and could reach up to 15% by 2050 (Zheng and Suh, 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r265|265]]</sup> ).

The vulnerability of mountain, Arctic and coastal communities is affected by social, political, historical, cultural, economic, institutional, environmental, geographical and/or demographic factors such as gender, age, race, class, caste, Indigeneity and disability (Thomas et al., 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r266|266]]</sup> ; Sections 2.3.6 and 3.5; Cross-Chapter Box 9). Disparities and inequities in such factors may result in social exclusion, inequalities and non-climatic challenges to health and wellbeing, economic development and basic human rights (Adger et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r267|267]]</sup> ; Olsson et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r268|268]]</sup> ; Smith et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r269|269]]</sup> ). Those less advantaged often also have reduced access to and control over the social, financial, technological and environmental resources that are required for adaptation and transformation (Oppenheimer et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r270|270]]</sup> ; AMAP, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r271|271]]</sup> ), thus limiting options for coping and adapting to change (Hijioka et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r272|272]]</sup> ). However, even populations with greater wealth and privilege can be vulnerable to some climate change risks (Cardona et al., 2012 <sup>[[#fn:r273|273]]</sup> ; Smith et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r274|274]]</sup> ), especially if sources of wealth and wellbeing depend upon established infrastructure that is poorly suited to ocean or cryosphere change.

Institutions and governance can shape vulnerability and adaptive capacity, and it can be challenging for weak governance structures to respond effectively to extreme or persistent climate change hazards (Sections 6.4 and 6.9; Cross-Chapter Box 3 in Chapter 1; Berrang-Ford et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r275|275]]</sup> ; Hijioka et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r276|276]]</sup> ). Furthermore, populations can be negatively impacted by inappropriate climate change mitigation and/or adaptation policies, particularly ones that further marginalise their knowledge, culture, values and livelihoods (Field et al., 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r277|277]]</sup> ; Cross-Chapter Box 4 in Chapter 1).

Vulnerability is not static in place and time, nor homogeneously experienced. The vulnerabilities of individuals, groups, and populations to climate change is dynamic and diverse, and reflects changing societal and environmental conditions (Thomas et al., 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r278|278]]</sup> ). SROCC examines vulnerability following the conceptual definition presented in Cross-Chapter Box 2 in Chapter 1, and vulnerability in human systems is treated in relative rather than absolute terms.

<span id="addressing-the-causes-and-consequences-of-climate-change-for-the-ocean-and-cryosphere"></span>