Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-17 (section)

=== FAQ 17.1 | Which guidelines, instruments and resources are available for decision makers to recognise climate risks and decide on the best course of action? ===

<div id="h2-26-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

Guidelines, instruments and resources to identify options for managing risks, and support decisions on the most suitable course of actions to take, can be collectively referred to as decision-support frameworks. These can include data services, decision-support tools, processes for making decisions and methods for monitoring and evaluating progress and success. Data services enable the identification, location and timing of risks that could manifest with negative impacts, as well as potential opportunities. Often, these are termed ‘climate services’ and assist with mapping hazards and how they are changing. Decision-support tools range from qualitative approaches to determining overlap of areas of concern with those hazards in the future, to more quantitative and dynamic simulation approaches that enable dynamic stress-testing of adaptation options and strategies to determine if proposed plans for adapting to the future could be successful. An important consideration is whether options for risk management or capitalisation on opportunities will limit options and flexibility for responding to unforeseen events in the future. If these options have a negative effect on other areas of concern, then they could be identified in these planning scenarios as maladaptations, and therefore avoided.

A great challenge for decision makers is how to choose effective options when the future is uncertain. Uncertainty can arise not just in the statistical error of the magnitude of risk but also in the nature and consequence of risk from uncertainty about mechanisms that link areas of concern to hazards, uncertainty in the decision processes themselves and so on. Methods are available to help develop no-regret options, commonly referred to as decision-making under conditions of deep uncertainty’.

Decision-support frameworks are most successful when they are iterative, integrative and consultative. Rather than a single decision be made, and an action taken, there are processes for making the best decision possible, then monitoring progress towards delivering a successful outcome. Given a set of suitable indicators with regular monitoring, decisions can be revised, updated or changed as the future unfolds and foundations for the original decision tested. This is important because climate responses need to be initiated well in advance of them being needed due to the time required to implement suitable responses. These forward-looking approaches allow errors to occur and corrections made before problems arise. They also enable action to be taken without having to wait for the circumstances to arise, which if this were to occur could result in only limited reactions being available and the outcomes then dependent upon recovery from events rather than proactive planning and avoidance of events. Integrated approaches to risk management are available to help manage portfolios of interacting risks, including the potential for compounding and cascading risks when climate-related events arise.

Managing uncertainty with forward-looking processes needs to be more deliberative and oriented towards building trust in a collaborative process. Building relationships through informal, bottom-up processes enables this to occur. Top-down planning processes are important for ensuring that the management of risks and opportunities do not end up with maladaptations and that the approaches are equitable and proportional to that which is needed to manage the risks.

<div id="FAQ 17.2" class="h2-container"></div>

<span id="faq-17.2-what-financing-options-are-available-to-support-adaptation-and-climate-resilience"></span>