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-11
(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
ClimateKG item
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!
====== Challenges and solutions ====== <div id="h4-7-siblings" class="h4-siblings"></div> '''The ambition, scope and progress of the adaptation process have increased across governments, non-government organisations, businesses and communities (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' This process includes vulnerability and risk assessments, identification of strategies and options, planning, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and review. Initiatives include legislated institutional frameworks for risk assessment and national adaptation planning and monitoring in New Zealand, a National Recovery and Resilience Agency and National Disaster Risk Reuction Framework in Australia, deployment of new national guidance, decision tools, collaborative governance approaches and the introduction of climate risk and disclosure regimes for the private sector. The focus, however, has been on adaptation planning, rather than on implementation. {11.5.1, 11.7.1.1, Box 11.6, Table 11.15a, Table 11.15b, Table 11.17} '''Adaptation progress is uneven, due to gaps, barriers and limits to adaptation and adaptive capacity deficits (''' '''''very high confidence''''' ''').''' Progress in adaptation planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation is lagging. Barriers include lack of consistent policy direction, competing objectives, divergent risk perceptions and values, knowledge constraints, inconsistent information, fear of litigation, up-front costs and lack of engagement, trust and resources. Adaptation limits are being approached for some species and ecosystems. Adaptive capacity to address the barriers and limits can be built through greater engagement with groups and communities to build trust and social legitimacy through the inclusion of diverse values, including those of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and Tangata Whenua Māori. {11.4, 11.5, 11.6, 11.7, 11.8, Table 11.4, Table 11.5, Table 11.6, Table 11.16, Box 11.2} '''A range of incremental and transformative adaptation options and pathways is available as long as enablers are in place to implement them (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' Key enablers for effective adaptation include shifting from reactive to anticipatory planning, integration and coordination across levels of government and sectors, inclusive and collaborative institutional arrangements, government leadership, policy alignment, nationally consistent and accessible information and decision-support tools, along with adaptation funding and finance, and robust, consistent and strategic policy commitment. Over 75% of people in Australia and New Zealand agree that climate change is occurring and over 60% believe climate change is caused by humans, giving climate adaptation and mitigation action further social legitimacy. {11.7.3, Table 11.17} '''New knowledge on system complexity, managing uncertainty and how to shift from reactive to adaptive implementation is critical for accelerating adaptation (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' Priorities include a greater understanding of impacts on natural system dynamics; the exposure and vulnerability of different groups within society, including Indigenous Peoples; the relationship between mitigation and adaptation; the effectiveness and feasibility of different adaptation options; the social transitions needed for transformative adaptation; and the enablers for new knowledge to better inform decision-making (e.g., monitoring data repositories, risk and vulnerability assessments, robust planning approaches, sharing adaptation knowledge and practice). {11.7.3.3} '''Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and Tangata Whenua Māori can enhance effective adaptation''' t '''hrough the passing down of knowledge about climate change planning that promotes collective action and mutual support across the region (''' '''''high confidence''''' ''').''' Supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and Tangata Whenua Māori institutions, knowledge and values enable self-determination and create opportunities to develop adaptation responses to climate change. Actively upholding the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Māori interests under the Treaty of Waitangi at all levels of government enables intergenerational approaches for effective adaptation. {11.3, 11.4, 11.6, 11.7.3; Cross-Chapter Box INDIG in Chapter 18} '''A step change in adaptation is needed to match the rising risks and to support climate resilient development (''' '''''very high confidence''''' ''').''' Current adaptation is largely incremental and reactive. A shift to transformative and proactive adaptation can contribute to climate resilient development. The scale and scope of cascading, compounding and aggregate impacts require new, larger-scale and timely adaptation. Monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of adaptation progress and continual adjustment is critical. The transition to climate resilient development pathways can generate major co-benefits, but complex interactions between objectives can create trade-offs. {11.7, 11.8.1, 11.8.2} '''Delay in implementing adaptation and emission reductions will impede climate resilient development, resulting in more costly climate impacts and greater scale of adjustments''' '''(''' '''''very high confidence''''' ''')''' . The region faces an extremely challenging future. Reducing the risks would require significant and rapid emission reductions to keep global warming to 1.5°C–2.0°C, as well as robust and timely adaptation. The projected warming under current global emissions reduction policies would leave many of the region’s human and natural systems at very high risk and beyond adaptation limits. {11.8, Table 11.1, Table 11.14, Figure 11.6} <div id="11.1" class="h1-container"></div> <span id="introduction"></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-11
(section)
Add languages
Add topic