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-12
(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!
==== 12.5.7.3 Adaptation Options ==== <div id="h3-59-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div> Effective adaptation can be achieved by addressing pre-existing development deficits, particularly the needs and priorities of informal settlements and economies ( [[#Revi--2014|Revi et al., 2014]] ; [[#UN-Habitat--2018|UN-Habitat, 2018]] ). There is urgency in making sure that social systems are better able to respond to climate-related risks and increase their adaptive capacity ( [[#Lemos--2016|Lemos et al., 2016]] ), focusing on path dependency, lock-ins and poor specific needs ( [[#Leal%20Filho--2021|Leal Filho et al., 2021]] ). The linkages between climate adaptation and poverty are not clearly addressed at the national level ( [[#Kalikoski--2018|Kalikoski et al., 2018]] ). A revision of some NDCs presented by CSA countries ( https://unfccc.int ) shows that NDCs are developed with almost no connection to poverty and livelihoods. Exceptions include Bolivia, whose NDC developed the ‘good life’ concept as an alternative development pathway, supporting sustainable livelihoods as a means to eradicate poverty. Honduras asserts that climate action should improve living conditions. Peru defined a poverty and vulnerability reduction approach. Finally, El Salvador conditioned its NDCs to macroeconomic stability, economic growth and poverty reduction. A sustainable development approach permeates the proposed actions for sectors such as energy, agriculture, transport, water and forestry. Adaptive capacity is linked to addressing climate-related risks (specific capacity) and structural deficits (generic capacity) and synergies, and a strategic balance between both is necessary ( [[#Eakin--2014|Eakin et al., 2014]] ; [[#Lemos--2016|Lemos et al., 2016]] ). Adaptation institutional context can undermine one form of capacity with repercussions for the other compromising overall adaptation and sustainable development ( [[#Eakin--2014|Eakin et al., 2014]] ). The literature assessing the effectiveness of pro-poor or community-based adaptation practices and livelihood options continues to be weak, though such practices and options are being increasingly documented, as in AR5 ( [[#Magrin--2014|Magrin et al., 2014]] ). A great variety of measures and financial instruments are being applied to strengthen and protect livelihoods and assets: collective insurance schemes, micro-credit, financial instruments for transferring risks, agricultural insurance and PES ( [[#Dávila--2016|Dávila, 2016]] ; [[#Hardoy--2016|Hardoy and Velásquez, 2016]] ; [[#Lemos--2016|Lemos et al., 2016]] ; [[#Porras--2016|Porras et al., 2016]] ; [[#Kalikoski--2018|Kalikoski et al., 2018]] ). Small-scale household businesses in poor neighbourhoods develop adaptation strategies to keep operations going, showing how household-level adaptation strategies are multi-purpose ( [[#Stein--2018|Stein et al., 2018]] ; [[#Stein--2019|Stein, 2019]] ). There are emerging interinstitutional communities of practice whose aim is to share practices and lessons learned ( [[#ECLAC--2013|ECLAC, 2013]] , 2015, 2019a). There is also increasing evidence of human mobility associated with climate change and disaster risk ( [[#IOM--2021|IOM, 2021]] ) and the adoption of sustainable tourism, diversification of livelihood strategies, climate forecasts, appropriate construction techniques, neighbourhood layout, integral urban upgrading initiatives, territorial and urban planning, regulatory frameworks, water harvesting and NbS ( [[#Stein--2014|Stein and Moser, 2014]] ; [[#Hardoy--2016|Hardoy and Mastrangelo, 2016]] ; [[#Almeida--2018|Almeida et al., 2018]] ; [[#Barbier--2018a|Barbier and Hochard, 2018a]] ; [[#Desmaison--2018|Desmaison et al., 2018]] ; [[#Satterthwaite--2018|Satterthwaite et al., 2018]] , 2020; [[#Villafuerte--2018|Villafuerte et al., 2018]] ; [[#Hidalgo--2020|Hidalgo, 2020]] ). Mostly, socioeconomical and sociopolitical factors show that safety and continuity measures are critical enablers of adaptation. At the municipal level, a study in CA highlighted that adaptive capacity in rural areas is associated with the satisfaction of basic needs (safe drinking water, school, quality dwelling, gender parity index), access to resources for innovation and action (road density, economically active population with non-agricultural employment and rural demographic dependency ratio) and access to credit and technical support ( [[#Bouroncle--2017|Bouroncle et al., 2017]] ). CSA adaptation initiatives to reduce poverty, improve livelihoods and achieve sustainable development in scale and scope, from planned and collective interventions to autonomous and individual actions. Many of them are bottom-up, community-led initiatives together with civil society organisations; others are government-led, including local governments, or a combination of them ( [[#McNamara--2017|McNamara and Buggy, 2017]] ; [[#Berrang-Ford--2021|Berrang-Ford et al., 2021]] ). Vulnerable groups are a focus to achieve equity at planning and as a target including mainly rural low-income, Indigenous Peoples and women and migrants in most references. Responses detected were focused on behavioural and cultural followed by ecosystem-based responses, institutional, and technological/infrastructural responses. Out of 55 articles analysed from CSA ( [[#Berrang-Ford--2021|Berrang-Ford et al., 2021]] ) about poverty, equity and adaptation options, half covered adaptation planning and early implementation, but only 2% could show evidence of risk reduction associated with adaptation efforts. Tensions and conflicts may result from differing perceptions and knowledge of vulnerabilities and risk, which can hinder the acceptance of adaptation measures or the implementation of stronger adaptive or preventive actions ( [[#Miranda%20Sara--2016|Miranda Sara et al., 2016]] ). There is a need to better understand complex interactions and community responses to climate change in the Amazonian and Andean regions. Climate-change hotspot impacts have shown that poverty reduction measures alone were not enough to improve adaptive capacity because people will not necessarily invest in their enhancement ( [[#Pinho--2014|Pinho et al., 2014]] ; [[#Filho--2016|Filho et al., 2016]] ; [[#Nelson--2016|Nelson et al., 2016]] ; [[#Lapola--2018|Lapola et al., 2018]] ; [[#Zavaleta--2018|Zavaleta et al., 2018]] ). Current adaptation strategies and methods may be neglecting cultural values, even eroding them, in the Peruvian Andes, indicating that success of adaptation practices is tied to deep cultural values ( [[#Walshe--2016|Walshe and Argumedo, 2016]] ). Limits to adaptation include access to land, territory and resources ( [[#Mesclier--2015|Mesclier et al., 2015]] ), poor labour opportunities coupled with knowledge gaps, weak multi-actor coordination, and lack of effective policies and supportive frameworks ( [[#Berrang-Ford--2021|Berrang-Ford et al., 2021]] ). Low participation of women in income-earning opportunities contrasts with their role in unpaid activities ( [[#ECLAC--2019b|ECLAC, 2019b]] ). Despite the progress that has been made, gender differences in labour markets remain an unjustifiable form of inequality ( [[#OIT--2019|OIT, 2019]] ), and women easily fall back on the informal labour market during crisis situations, such as those generated by climate events ( [[#Collodi--2020|Collodi et al., 2020]] ). Participatory processes are leveraging adaptation measures throughout CSA; they contribute to the prioritisation of specific adaptation measures as well as the strengthening of local capacities. Results of participatory processes show how climate adaptation needs to be part of larger transformation processes to that have vulnerable communities at the center and reduce vulnerability drivers ( [[#Stein--2015|Stein and Moser, 2015]] ; [[#Stein--2018|Stein et al., 2018]] ; [[#Stein--2019|Stein, 2019]] ). Stronger national policies interlinking poverty and inequality reduction to adaptation considering the coupled human-environmental systems to comprehend poor and vulnerable groups’ capacity to adapt are urgently needed. <div id="12.5.8" class="h2-container"></div> <span id="cross-cutting-issues-in-the-human-dimension"></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-12
(section)
Add languages
Add topic