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/WGII/Chapter-8
(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!
==== 8.4.1.1 Exposure and Vulnerability under Different Scenarios and Alternative Development Pathways ==== <div id="h3-20-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div> At the international and national level, the SSPs ( [[#O’Neill--2017a|O’Neill et al., 2017a]] ) have been developed to outline various development pathways, associated emissions and levels of warming, but also different possible development profiles (i.e., levels of economic growth, poverty, inequality, demographic change, etc.) that are highly relevant for adaptation. Studies using the SSPs to understand multidimensional poverty are few but growing, and underscore that the impacts of climate change on poverty are extremely sensitive to different levels of warming ( [[#Byers--2018|Byers et al., 2018]] ). Multi-sector risks approximately double between 1.5°C and 2°C global mean temperature (GMT) change, and double again in a +3°C world. Comparing a +1.5°C world pursuing sustainable development (SSP1) to a high-poverty and high-inequality +3°C world (SSP3), [[#Byers--2018|Byers et al. (2018)]] project substantial increases in populations exposed to drought, water stress, heat stress and habitat degradation (see in detail [[#Byers--2018|Byers et al., 2018]] ). While in a +1.5°C world exposed populations increase by 7–17%, the increase within a +3°C plus world is 27–51% ( [[#Byers--2018|Byers et al., 2018]] ; [[#Frame--2018|Frame et al., 2018]] ). Populations in Asia and Africa account for more than 80% of the global population exposed to these phenomena, and within South Asia and the Sahel, up to 90% of populations are exposed. Scenario tools help us to understand the burden of increasing multidimensional poverty, and potential for poverty traps, if mitigation and adaptation measures are not taken rapidly and effectively implemented. At the national and sub-national levels, studies on development and risk scenarios capture specific challenges, for example, urban growth, demographic change, human health and ageing (e.g., [[#Dong--2015|Dong et al., 2015]] ; [[#Chapman--2019|Chapman et al., 2019]] ). In this regard, local scenarios of human vulnerability can inform future strategies for adapting to hazards such as heatwaves in cities under different socioeconomic development strategies. These scenario approaches allow us to focus on changes in climatic and societal conditions as well as urban transformations. This provides a more comprehensive basis for defining adaptation goals (see [[#Fekete--2019|Fekete, 2019]] ; [[#Birkmann--2021b|Birkmann et al., 2021b]] ). Costs and benefits of different adaptation measures can be assessed against different future scenarios of climatic and societal change. Contrasting with ‘top-down’ SSP scenarios, ( [[#Berkhout--2014|Berkhout et al., 2014]] ) outline how mesoscale and ‘bottom-up’ scenarios have been developed to inform spatial planning, for example, in the Netherlands. Increasing computational power has opened possibilities for large-scale ‘bottom-up’ simulations of people’s livelihoods in the context of evolving climate change impacts, such as the migration decisions of farmers facing drought in Mexico over the coming century (Bell et al., 2019) and livelihood decisions of people facing coastal flooding in Bangladesh to the year 2100 ( [[#Bell--2021|Bell et al., 2021]] ). Such ‘bottom-up’ scenarios can generate projections about future outcomes, inform mapping and assess future vulnerability, with special emphasis on livelihoods of the poor. Researchers conclude that results of respective scenarios that aim to inform adaptation and risk reduction policies in the context of climate change have to match the frames of the stakeholder ( [[#Berkhout--2014|Berkhout et al., 2014]] ; [[#Conway--2019|Conway et al., 2019]] ). Scenarios that assess potential future vulnerabilities and future capacities for adaptation require more attention, since many approaches for projecting future climate risk still largely overlook non-climatic drivers that determine future vulnerability and exposure ( [[#Windfeld--2019|Windfeld et al., 2019]] ). <div id="8.4.2" class="h2-container"></div> <span id="the-influence-of-future-climate-change-impacts-on-future-response-capacities"></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/WGII/Chapter-8
(section)
Add languages
Add topic