Editing IPCC:AR6/SRCCL/Chapter-7 (section)

=== 7.1.2 Treatment of key terms in the chapter ===

<div id="section-7-1-2-treatment-of-key-terms-in-the-chapter-block-1"></div>

While the term '''risk''' continues to be subject to a growing number of definitions in different disciplines and sectors, this chapter takes as a starting point the definition used in the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (SR15) (IPCC 2018a <sup>[[#fn:r31|31]]</sup> ), which reflects definitions used by both Working Group II and Working Group III in the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5): “The potential for adverse consequences where something of value is at stake and where the occurrence and degree of an outcome is uncertain” (Allwood et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r32|32]]</sup> ; Oppenheimer et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r33|33]]</sup> ). The SR15 definition further specifies: “In the context of the assessment of climate impacts, the term risk is often used to refer to the potential for adverse consequences of a climate-related hazard, or of adaptation or mitigation responses to such a hazard, on lives, livelihoods, health and well-being, ecosystems and species, economic, social and cultural assets, services (including ecosystem services), and infrastructure.” In SR15, as in the IPCC SREX and AR5 WGII, risk is conceptualised as resulting from the interaction of vulnerability (of the affected system), its exposure over time (to a hazard), as well as the (climate-related) impact and the likelihood of its occurrence (AR5 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r34|34]]</sup> ; IPCC 2018a, 2012). In the context of SRCCL, risk must also be seen as including risks to the implementation of responses to land–climate challenges from economic, political and governance factors. Climate and land risks must be seen in relation to human values and objectives (Denton et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r35|35]]</sup> ). Risk is closely associated with concepts of vulnerability and resilience, which are themselves subject to differing definitions across different knowledge communities.

Risks examined in this chapter arise from more than one of the major land–climate–society challenges (desertification, land degradation, and food insecurity), or partly stem from mitigation or adaptation actions, or cascade across different sectors or geographical locations. They could thus be seen as examples of '''emergent risks''' : “aris[ing] from the interaction of phenomena in a complex system” (Oppenheimer et al. 2014, p.1052). Stranded assets in the coal sector due to proliferation of renewable energy and government response could be examples of emergent risks (Saluja and Singh 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r36|36]]</sup> ; Marcacci 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r37|37]]</sup> ). Additionally, the absence of an explicit goal for conserving freshwater ecosystems and ecosystem services in SDGs (in contrast to a goal – ‘life below water’ – exclusively for marine biodiversity) is related to its trade-offs with energy and irrigation goals, thus posing a substantive risk (Nilsson et al. 2016b <sup>[[#fn:r38|38]]</sup> ; Vörösmarty et al. 2010 <sup>[[#fn:r39|39]]</sup> ).

'''Governance''' is not previously well defined in IPCC reports, but is used here to include all of the processes, structures, rules and traditions that govern, which may be undertaken by actors including governments, markets, organisations, or families (Bevir 2011 <sup>[[#fn:r40|40]]</sup> ), with particular reference to the multitude of actors operating in respect of land–climate interactions. Such definitions of governance allow for it to be decoupled from the more familiar concept of government and studied in the context of complex human–environment relations and environmental and resource regimes (Young 2017a <sup>[[#fn:r41|41]]</sup> ). Governance involves the interactions among formal and informal institutions through which people articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights, meet their legal obligations, and mediate their differences (UNDP 1997 <sup>[[#fn:r42|42]]</sup> ).

<span id="roadmap-to-the-chapter"></span>