Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/TS (section)

=== Maladaptation ===

<div id="h3-23-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

'''TS.D.3 Evidence of maladaptation is increasing in some sectors and systems, highlighting how inappropriate responses to climate change create long-term lock-in of vulnerability, exposure and risks that are difficult and costly to change (''' '''''very high confidence''''' ''') and exacerbate existing inequalities for Indigenous Peoples and vulnerable groups, impeding achievement of SDGs, increasing adaptation needs and shrinking the solution space (''' '''''high confidence''''' '''). Decreasing maladaptation requires attention to justice and a shift in enabling conditions towards those that enable timely adjustments for avoiding or minimising damage and for seizing opportunities (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''')''' '''''.''''' (Figure TS.11a) { 1.2.1, 1.3.1, 1.4.2, 2.6, Box 2.2, 3.6.3, Box 4.3, Box 4.5, 4.6.8, 4.7.1, Figure 4.29, 5.6.3, 5.13.4, 8.4.5, 8.2.1, 8.3.3, 8.4.5, 8.6.1, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.11, Box 9.8, Box 9.9, Box 11.6, 12.5.3, 12.5.7, 13.3, 13.4, 13.5, 13.11.3, 14.5.9, 15.5.1, 15.6.5, 16.3.2, 17.5.1, [https://www.ipcc.ch/chapter/ts#CCP2.3.2 CCP2.3.2] , [https://www.ipcc.ch/chapter/ts#CCP2.3.6 CCP2.3.6] , CCB DEEP, CCB NATURAL, CCB SLR, CWGB BIOECONOMY }

<div id="_idContainer035" class="Figure"></div>

[[File:d1a83070fcbe6a997d4612e966ff8c2d IPCC_AR6_WGII_Figure_TS_011a.png]] [[File:59b38ff81cd02557d72b3d6e933ccc4a IPCC_AR6_WGII_Figure_TS_011b.png]]

'''Figure TS.11 |''' '''(a)''' Climate responses and adaptation options, organized by System Transitions and Representative Key Risks (RKRs), are assessed for their multidimensional feasibility at global scale, in the near term and up to 1. 5° C global warming. As literature above 1.5°C is limited, feasibility at higher levels of warming may change, which is currently not possible to assess robustly. Climate responses and adaptation options at global scale are drawn from a set of options assessed in AR6 that have robust evidence across the feasibility dimensions. This figure shows the six feasibility dimensions (economic, technological, institutional, social, environmental and geophysical) that are used to calculate the potential feasibility of climate responses and adaptation options, along with their synergies with mitigation. For potential feasibility and feasibility dimensions, the figure shows high, medium, or low feasibility. Synergies with mitigation are identified as high, medium, and low. Insufficient evidence is denoted by a dash. { CCB FEASIB, Table SMCCB FEASIB.1.1, SR1.5 4.SM.4.3 } '''(b)''' Climate responses and adaptation options, organized by System Transitions and Representative Key Risks, are assessed at global scale for their likely ability to reduce risks for ecosystems and social groups at risk, as well as their relation with the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Climate responses and adaptation options are assessed for observed benefits (+) to ecosystems and their services, ethnic groups, gender equity, and low-income groups, or observed dis-benefits (-) for these systems and groups. Where there is highly diverging evidence of benefits/ dis-benefits across the scientific literature, e.g., based on differences between regions, it is shown as not clear or mixed (•). Insufficient evidence is shown by a dash. The relation with the SDGs is assessed as having benefits (+), dis-benefits (-) or not clear or mixed (•) based on the impacts of the climate response and adaptation option on each SDG. Areas not coloured indicate there is no evidence of a relation or no interaction with the respective SDG. The climate responses and adaptation options are drawn from two assessments. For comparability of climate responses and adaptation options see Table SM17.5. { 17.2, 17.5, CCB FEASIB }

'''TS.D.3.1 Maladaptation has been observed across many regions''' '''and systems and occurs for many reasons, including inadeq''' '''uate knowledge and short-term, fragmented, single-sect''' '''or a''' '''nd/o''' '''r non-inclusive governance planning and implementation (''' '''''high confidence''''' '''). Policy decisions that ignore the risks of''' '''adverse effects can be maladaptive by worsening the impacts''' '''of a''' '''nd vulnerabilities to climate change (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''')''' '''''.''''' Examp les in clude in coastal systems (e.g., sea walls that enable further expos ure t hrough intensification of developments in low-lying coastal area s), ur ban areas (e.g., inflexible infrastructure in cities and settlements th at c annot be adjusted easily or affordably for increased heavy rainfal l), agriculture (e.g., the use of high cost irrigation in areas that are projected to have more intense drought conditions), forestry (e.g., planting of unsuitable trees species which displace Indigenous Peoples and ot her for est-dependent communities ) and human settlements (e.g., strand ed as sets and stranded vulnerable communities that cannot afford to shi ft a way or adapt and require an increase in social safety nets) ( ''hi'' ''gh'' ''confidence'' ) ''.'' { Box 2.2, 2.6.6, 2.6.5, 3.6.3, Box 4.3, Box 4.5, 4.7.1, Figure 4.29, 4.6.8, 5, 5.13.4, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.11, Box 9.8, Box 9.9, Box 11.5, Box 11.6, 13.2, 13.3, 13.3.1, 13.4, 13.4.2, 13.5.1, 14.5.9, 15.5.1, 15.5.4, 15.5.5, 16.3.2, [https://www.ipcc.ch/chapter/ts#CCP2.4 CCP2.4] , CCB DEEP, CCB FEASIB, CCB SLR }

'''TS.D.3.2 Indigenous Peoples and disadvantaged groups, such as low-income households and ethnic minorities, are especially adversely affected by maladaptation, which often deprives them of food and livelihoods and reinforces and entrenches existing inequalities (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' Rights-based approaches to adaptation, participatory methodologies and inclusion of local and Indigenous knowledge, combined with informed consent, deliver mechanisms to avoid these pitfalls ( ''medium confidence'' ). Adaptation solutions benefit from engagement with Indigenous and marginalised groups, solve past equity and justice issues and offer novel approaches ( ''medium confidence'' ). Indigenous knowledge is a powerful tool to assess interlinked ecosystem functions across terrestrial, marine and freshwater systems, bypassing siloed approaches and sectoral problems ( ''high confidence'' ). Lastly, engagement with Indigenous knowledge and marginalised groups often offers an intergenerational context for adaptation solutions needed to avoid maladaptation ( ''high confidence'' ). { 2.6.5, 4.6.9, 8.4, 8.4.5, 5.12.8, 5.13.4, 11.4.1, 11.4.2, 12.5.8, 13.8.1, Box 13.2, 14.4, 14.5.9, 5.13.5, 15.6.5, 18.2.4, [https://www.ipcc.ch/chapter/ts#CCP5.4.2 CCP5.4.2] , Box [https://www.ipcc.ch/chapter/ts#CCP7.1 CCP7.1] }

'''TS.D.3.3 Reliance on hard protection against sea level rise can lead to development intensification, which compounds risk and locks in exposure of people and assets as socioeconomic and governance barriers and technical limits are reached.''' Avoiding maladaptive responses to sea level rise depends on immediate mitigation and application of adaptive planning that sets out near-term, low-regret actions while keeping open options to account for ongoing committed sea level rise ( ''very high confidence'' ). Such forward-looking adaptive pathway planning and iterative risk management can address the current path dependencies that lead to maladaptation and can enable timely adaptation alignment with long implementation lead times, as well as addressing uncertainty about rate and magnitude of local sea level rise, and ensuring that adaptation will be more effective ( ''medium confidence'' ) ''.'' As sea level rise advances, only avoidance and relocation will eliminate coastal risks ( ''high confidence'' ). Other measures only delay impacts for a time, increasing residual risk, perpetuating risk and creating ongoing legacy effects and inevitable property and ecosystem losses ( ''high confidence'' ). While relocation may in the near term appear socially unacceptable, economically inefficient or technically infeasible, it may become the only feasible option as protection costs become unaffordable and technical limits are reached ( ''medium confidence'' ). { 3.4.2, 3.5.5, 3.6.3, 11.7.3, Box 11.6, 12.5.7, 12.5.8, 13.10, 15.3.4, 15.5.1, 15.5.2, 15.5.3, [https://www.ipcc.ch/chapter/ts#CCP2.2 CCP2.2.3] , CCP4, CCB DEEP, CCB SLR }

'''TS.D.3.4 Maladaptation can be reduced using the principles of recognitional, procedural and distributional justice in decision-making, responsibly evaluating who is regarded as vulnerable and at risk, who is part of decision-making, who is the beneficiary of adaptation measures and integrated and flexible governance mechanisms that account for long-term goals (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' Examples include selecting native and appropriate species in habitat restoration, monitoring key social and environmental indicators for adaptation progress, embedding strong monitoring and evaluation processes, considering measures of efficiency and social welfare, and social and political drivers and power relationships. Integrated approaches, such as the water–energy–food nexus and inter-regional considerations of risks can reduce the risk of maladaptation, building on existing adaptation strategies, increasing community participation and consultation, integration of Indigenous knowledge and local knowledge, focusing on the most vulnerable small-scale producers, anticipating risks of maladaptation in decision-making for long-lived activities, including infrastructure decisions, and the impact of trade-offs and co-benefits ( ''high confidence'' ). (Figure TS.11a) { 2.6.5, 2.6.6, 2.6.7, 4.7.6, 4.8, Box 4.8, 5.9.2, Table 5.21, 5.9.2, 5.9.4, 5.13.3, 5.14.2, 5.13.3, 6.2.7, 7.4.2, 8.2.2, 8.3.3, 8.10, 10.6.3, 11.4, 11.5, 11.7.12, 15.5.4, Figure 15.7, 17.5.1, 17.5.2, 17.6, [https://www.ipcc.ch/chapter/ts#CCP1.3 CCP1.3] , [https://www.ipcc.ch/chapter/ts#CCP5.4.2 CCP5.4.2] , [https://www.ipcc.ch/chapter/ts#CCP5.4.2 CCP5.4.2] , CCB INTEREG, CCB NATURAL }

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

<span id="strengthening-the-biosphere"></span>