| 1. |
- Benzie, Magnus, et al.
(författare)
-
Governing borderless climate risks: moving beyond the territorial framing of adaptation
- 2019
-
Ingår i: International Environmental Agreements. - : SPRINGER. - 1567-9764 .- 1573-1553. ; 19:4-5, s. 369-393
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Despite the increasing relevance of cross-border flows of goods, capital and people in shaping risks and opportunities today, we still live in a bordered world, where the nation state plays a key role in planning and governance. Yet, climate change impacts will not be contained within country borders, meaning that climate change adaptation governance should also consider borderless climate risks that cascade through the international system, in relatively simple or highly complex ways. In this paper, we demonstrate how the notion of borderless climate risks challenges the dominant territorial framing of adaptation and its problem structure. To advance knowledge, we ask: why has a territorial framing and the national and sub-national scales dominated adaptation governance? How do borderless climate risks challenge this framing and what are possible governance responses? We draw on constructivist international relations theory and propose that the epistemic community that developed to interpret climate change adaptation for decision-makers had certain features (e.g. strong environmental sciences foundation, reliance on place-based case study research) that established and subsequently reinforced the territorial framing. This framing was then reinforced by an international norm that adaptation was primarily a national or local responsibility, which has paradoxically also informed calls for international responsibility for funding adaptation. We conclude by identifying types of governance responses at three different scales-national and bilateral; transnational; international and regional-and invite more systematic evaluation by the IR community.
|
|
| 2. |
- Benzie, Magnus
(författare)
-
Social Justice and Adaptation in the UK
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Symposium: The Governance of Adaptation, 22-23 March 2012, Amsterdam, Netherlands. ; , s. 37-
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 3. |
- Hedlund, Johanna, et al.
(författare)
-
Quantifying transnational climate impact exposure : New perspectives on the global distribution of climate risk
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Global Environmental Change. - : Elsevier BV. - 0959-3780 .- 1872-9495. ; 52, s. 75-85
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Indicators used in climate change adaptation planning are largely based on estimates of national or local climate vulnerability. However, classic vulnerability indices do not consider cross-border effects and global interconnections. We attempt to reconcile this need for a broader perspective by developing a global index of exposure to transnational climate impacts, which we define as impacts that are transferred via flows between countries. The index integrates traditional climate vulnerability indicators with spatially-explicit teleconnections between specific countries and constitutes a first approximation of the distribution of such exposure globally. Our results indicate that even though climate risks emerging from within a country's borders are highly correlated with economic development and geography, the distribution of exposure to transnational climate impacts provides a much more complex picture of global vulnerabilities, which neither geography, nor economic development alone can explain sufficiently. This highlights the need to take a cross-scale and multidimensional perspective of climate risk. In order to support more robust adaptation planning, risk assessments should consider both transboundary and far-reaching teleconnected interdependencies between countries.
|
|
| 4. |
- Ringsmuth, Andrew K., et al.
(författare)
-
Lessons from COVID-19 for managing transboundary climate risks and building resilience
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Climate Risk Management. - : Elsevier. - 2212-0963. ; 35
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- COVID-19 has revealed how challenging it is to manage global, systemic and compounding crises. Like COVID-19, climate change impacts, and maladaptive responses to them, have potential to disrupt societies at multiple scales via networks of trade, finance, mobility and communication, and to impact hardest on the most vulnerable. However, these complex systems can also facilitate resilience if managed effectively. This review aims to distil lessons related to the transboundary management of systemic risks from the COVID-19 experience, to inform climate change policy and resilience building. Evidence from diverse fields is synthesised to illustrate the nature of systemic risks and our evolving understanding of resilience. We describe research methods that aim to capture systemic complexity to inform better management practices and increase resil-ience to crises. Finally, we recommend specific, practical actions for improving transboundary climate risk management and resilience building. These include mapping the direct, cross-border and cross-sectoral impacts of potential climate extremes, adopting adaptive risk management strategies that embrace heterogenous decision-making and uncertainty, and taking a broader approach to resilience which elevates human wellbeing, including societal and ecological resilience.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Watkiss, Paul, et al.
(författare)
-
The complementarity and comparability of climate change adaptation and mitigation
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1757-7780 .- 1757-7799. ; 6:6, s. 541-557
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Both mitigation and adaptation can reduce the risks of climate change. This study reviews the complementarity and comparability between the two, looking first at the global level and then at the national-to-local domain. At the global level, the review finds differing definitions and viewpoints exist in the literature. Much of the economic literature reports that global mitigation and adaptation are substitutes (in economic terms). In contrast, the scientific literature considers them to be complementary (in policy terms), as they address different risks that vary temporally and spatially. The degree of complementarity and comparability therefore depends on the perspective taken, although there is a policy space where the two can overlap. However, the governance, institutional, and policy-based literature identifies that even if a global mitigation and adaptation mix could be defined, it would be highly contentious and extremely difficult to deliver in practice. The review then considers the complementarity and comparability of mitigation and adaptation at the national-to-local domain, in national policy and at sector level. The review finds there is greater potential for complementarity at this scale, although possible conflicts can also exist. However, the institutional, governance, and policy literature identifies a number of barriers to practical implementation, and as a result, complementary mitigation and adaptation action is unlikely to happen autonomously. Finally, the lessons from the review are drawn together to highlight policy relevant issues and identify research gaps. WIREs Clim Change 2015, 6:541–557. doi: 10.1002/wcc.368This article is categorized under: * Integrated Assessment of Climate Change > Methods of Integrated Assessment of Climate Change * The Carbon Economy and Climate Mitigation > Benefits of Mitigation * Climate and Development > Sustainability and Human Well-Being
|
|
