Incorporating Climate Change Adaptation into Catchment Managment
Contents
1. Catchment Relevance This component describes the relevance of the NRM actions to be assessed using categories such as e Currently Implemented CI e Not Yet Implemented NYI Climate change adaptation potential This component is further split into three parts First it considers whether the NRM action being assessed offers a climate change adaptation benefit Next this benefit is assessed under different climate change scenarios Once this is known the potential for maladaptation unintended consequences is considered The assessment of this component can be based on expert opinion or quantitative modelling The assessment of each action considers only the climate change adaptation benefit not the overall environmental social economic desirability of the action Climate change adaptation benefit The climate change adaptation potential is established by considering how each action either reduces vulnerability to existing stressors and or increases resilience to climatic changes For example inland water bodies are affected by habitat fragmentation river regulation rising salinity erosion biodiversity loss and decreasing water quality as well as e Considered amp Rejected CR Information for this can be gathered through expert knowledge stakeholder interviews and or review of relevant documents climate change impacts Kingsford 2011 Non climate stressors affecting terrestrial ecosystems includ2. Economic Environmental Very Dry Social Economic PE a ET a ee a IET a a a ET a ee a ss ES aa IO a E S T Part 2 Using the CAF A FINAL WORD The CAF is designed to help catchment and other natural resource managers systematically assess the risks costs and benefits of different adaptation actions to identify low risk no regret measures It has been developed in a project that promoted an ecosystem based approach to climate change adaptation Often one particular measure is perceived to be the answer for adaptation The value of this framework is in helping decision makers consider whether it has perverse impacts that have not been considered to ask whether an intervention that may work in the next decade could later fail with a changing climate and whether there are better alternatives There are no quantitative answers only better informed qualitative judgements This framework is thus not designed to find the winning action Rather it should be used to identify suites of complementary actions that together are practical and spread risk The CAF is fairly flexible and it is not method dependent We have highlighted a number of methods that could be used with each component The specific criteria used in each component can also be adapted to suit your institution s needs However the robustness of the results obtained will depend on how well individual
3. MacKinnon K et al Eds 2010 Natural solutions Protected areas helping people cope with climate change New York USA IUCN WCPA TNC UNDP WCS The World Bank and WWF Gitay H Finlayson M amp Davidson N 2011 A Framework for assessing the vulnerability of wetlands to climate change Gland Switzerland Ramsar Technical Report No 5 Ramsar Convention Secretariat Gross C Pittock J Finlayson M amp Geddes M C 2011 Limits to Adaptation Climate Change Adaptation in the Coorong Murray Mouth and Lakes Alexandrina and Albert Canberra Final report to the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility Hulme P E 2005 Adapting to climate change is there scope for ecological management fa Eh 1 ourna Ap a Ecolog a a e a References IPCC 2007a Summary for Policymakers In M L Parry O F Canziani J P Palutikof P J van der Linden amp C E Hanson Eds Climate Change 2007 Impacts Adaptation and Vulnerability Contribution of Working Group Il to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge Cambridge University Press IPCC 2007b Technical Summary In M L Parry O F Canziani J P Palutikof P J van der Linden amp C E Hanson Eds Climate Change 2007 Impacts Adaptation and Vulnerability Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge
4. Cambridge University Press IPCC 2012 Summary for Policymakers In C B Field V Barros T F Stocker D Qin D J Dokken K L Ebi M D Mastrandrea K J Mach G K Plattner S K Allen M Tignor amp P M Midgley Eds Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation pp 1 19 Cambridge UK and New York NY USA A Special Report of Working Groups and Il of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge University Press Kingsford R 2011 Conservation management of rivers and wetlands under climate change a synthesis Marine and Freshwater Research 62 217 222 Lindenmayer D B Steffen W Burbidge A A Hughes L Kitching R L Musgrave W et al 2010 Conservation strategies in response to rapid climate change Australia as a case study Biological Conservation 143 1587 1593 Mackey B G Watson J E M Hope G Gilmore S 2008 Climate change biodiversity conservation and the role of protected areas An Australian perspective Biodiversity 9 3 4 11 18 McAlpine C A Syktus J Ryan J G Deo R C McKeon G M McGowan H A et al 2009 A continent under stress interactions feedbacks and risks associated with impact of modified land cover on Australia s climate Global Change Biology 15 2206 2223 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005 Ecosystems and human well being wetlands and water synthesis Washi
5. actual or expected climate and its effects in order to moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities In natural systems it is the process of adjustment to actual climate and its effects IPCC 2012 p 3 Adaptation actions are of better quality and more likely to be implemented when developed through a participatory process with key stakeholders Given the different knowledge bases and varying understanding of adaptation concepts a lot of preparation is essential To enable participants to exchange information and examine the options associated with adaptation measures we substantial preparation of background information followed by a two day workshop process Maladaptation Refers to actions that seek to avoid or reduce vulnerability to climate change but end up increasing it in other systems sectors or social groups Barnett amp O Neill 2010 Mal adaptation does not just refer to unsuccessful adaptation which implies that an action did not have the desired effect but to actions that may have had the desired effect and also produced unintended consequences Barnett et al 2011 Vulnerability Vulnerability is the propensity or predisposition to be adversely affected IPCC 2012 p 3 It has a social and a biophysical dimension The biophysical dimension focuses on exposure to hazards in terms of damage that occurs Gitay Finlayson amp Davidson 2011 while the social dimension is concern
6. ed with social risks and capacities to absorb pressure There are three elements to vulnerability exposure sensitivity and adaptive capacity Bates et al 2010 These elements are usually attributed to biophysical systems but can apply to social systems as well Vulnerability is mediated by resilience Williams Shoo Isaac Hoffmann Langham 2008 Part 1 Background amp Key Concepts Resilience Denotes the ability of a system and its component parts to anticipate absorb accommodate or recover from the effects of a hazardous event in a timely and efficient manner including through ensuring the preservation restoration or improvement of its essential basic structures and functions IPCC 2012 p 3 Across many different disciplines building resilience into both human and ecological systems is thought to What constitutes climate change adaptation In general adaptation responses can either reduce vulnerability by insulating against harsh conditions or increase resilience and or adaptive capacity by modifying patterns of production and consumption to better suit the climate Patt 2009 p 81 Adaptation requires flexible institutional and policy interventions across multiple sectors and jurisdictions Dovers amp Hezri 2010 Accor ding to the IPCC 2007a adaptation respon ses can be e Technological e g dams amp weirs e Behavioural e g altered food and recreational choices e
7. pollution from upstream dams Bond Lake 2008 Therefore ideally the restoration of riparian vegetation freshwater habitat connectivity provision of environmental flows and the management of exotic species should be implemented together see the example in Table 8 This component is qualitative Many compatibility issues will be revealed through discussions of the prior components Suggested methods include expert knowledge literature review focus groups and or semi structured interviews Part 2 Using the CAF Table 8 Compatibility examples of aquatic ecosystem NRM actions CCA Actions Compatibility Will enhance effects of Restoration of Riparian Vegetation Freshwater Habitat Connectivity Conservation of More Resilient Habitats amp Geomorphic Restoration 2 Environmental Works Measures Assists efficient implementation of Environmental Flows Will enhance effects of Freshwater Habitat Connectivity Conservation of More Resilient Habitats Conservation of Gaining Reaches Geomorphic Restoration Will enhance effects of Geomorphic Restoration Must be done with Management of Exotic Species 6 Conservation of More Resilient F E y Habitats Must be done with Management of Exotic Species 7 Conservation of Gaining Reaches Must be done with Management of Exotic Species 8 Geomorphic Restoration Must be done Management of Exotic Species 9 Management of Exotic Species Will enhance effects of all othe
8. PLAN incl CCA CAF process Figure 4 Where the CAF fits in the adaptive planning process Part 2 Using the CAF THE CAF IN DETAIL The CAF is divided into seven components In explained with examples and suggested this section each part is individually methods for information gathering 1 Catchment relevance Establishes specific projects that are either undertaken or considered by the managing body Specifying actual projects or programs allows the evaluation to be more practical 2 Climate change adaptation This part is further divided into three parts 1 Consideration of whether the NRM action contributes to reducing non climate change stressors or to increasing resilience to climate change shocks 2 Assessment of the effectiveness of NRM actions under different climate change scenarios 3 Consideration of the potential for maladaptation unintended consequences 3 Ecosystem services benefits Looks at the ecosystem benefits provided by the NRM actions The ecosystem based approach to climate change adaptation highlights the need to have healthy functioning ecosystems to build resilience to climate change impacts sequester carbon in itself a climate change mitigation strategy attenuate natural disasters and meet other human needs 4 Compatibility Highlights how the actions interact with one another This aspect is qualitative but assessments can include listing actions th
9. Research Project e Bush Stone Curlew Conservation Figure 2 Where the CAF fits in NRM planning from the Murray CMA Part 2 Using the CAF HOW TO CARRY OUT THE CAF PROCESS Assessing NRM actions for their climate change adaptation potential requires significant preparation This section goes through a step by step process detailing what you need to do to complete a CAF 1 PARTICIPANTS Key stakeholders identified amp familiarised with CCA CAF goals amp process Identification 4 DATA ON NRM ACTIONS Initial data gathered on NRM actions put in Information Gathering Communication Figure 3 Steps of the CAF process Stage 1 Identification The first step is to work out what is going to be assessed by whom and what methods will be used to gather the necessary data Participants The identification of key stakeholders is the starting point Questions to consider when doing this include e Who will actually do the assessment assessment Figure 3 shows seven steps of the CAF process summarised under four headings of identification information gathering communication and the actual assessment These are examined below 3 METHODS Methods for assessment identified amp agreed on 2 ACTIONS NRM actions identified defined amp agreed on by key stakeholders 5 DATA FOR ASSESSMENT Initial data gathered to assess NRM actions using the CCA CAF 6 FEEDBACK Initial
10. data gathered communicated to key stakeholders 7 CCA CAF ASSESSMENT Final assessment completed by key stakeholders using the CCA CAF This could be simply the planning management team responsible for program planning Alternatively key stakeholders could also include project officers community representatives or NGO partners e Who is going to provide information for the assessment As a rule the more informants the better If the assessment is to be done by a small group of people it would be wise to look for more Part 2 Using the CAF knowledge and expertise from outside of the group As the CAF includes consideration of ecological economic and social costs benefits and risks we encourage consultation with key stakeholders representing these from across the area of interest e To whom will the assessment be communicated Ideally the CAF should be included in the broader planning process NRM Actions Deciding on actions to assess is a crucial step requiring liaison with and guidance from key stakeholders NRM actions must be well defined and explained in the context of the catchment or bioregion in order to enable assessment People can t asses what they don t understand Methods The CAF is not method specific the choice of methods will depend on available time budget information sources and expertise The CAF in detail section offers suggestions of a range of possible methods
11. ecosystem Table 10 Possible socio economic outcomes Positives Negatives Y Benefits for recreational fishing x Possibility of flooding infrastructure crops Action 1 yA E x Landholders lose access to parts of their v Reactivation of soil moisture property Y More control amp ability to water isolated wetlands x Potentially detrimental for native fish and Action 2 Y Building of infrastructure provides recreational fishing local economic benefits x Responsibility for maintenance and Action y Benefits for recreational fishin pie ction enerits go g replacement falls on individual landholders v Green spaces provided a psychological positive for communities during droughts Action 4 Y Economic benefits feed for stock assistance with drought proofing and increasing carrying capacity of the land Part 2 Using the CAF Risk Assessment This component looks at the likelihood Consequence is shown below The and consequences of the adaptation following tables explain the Consequences action failing A risk assessment matrix and Likelihood classifications as they consistent with Australian Standard relate to natural environment adapted AS4360 on Risk Management where risk from Umwelt 2009 is the sum of Likelihood and Table 11 Matrix for undertaking a risk assessment of NRM actions Maximum Reasonable Consequence 3 Moderate Likelihood of the Consequence 1 Insi
12. in terrestrial ecosystems as listed below Aquatic ecosystems Environmental flows releases of water for environmental purposes Environmental works amp measures structures designed to pool water on floodplains Thermal pollution control devices to mitigate cold water pollution from dams Freshwater habitat connectivity fish passage and removal of in stream obstructions The final report of that project can be found at http www nccarf edu au publications low risk Ses Restoration of riparian vegetation fencing off riparian areas and revegetation with natives Conservation of more resilient landscapes prioritising relatively undisturbed more biodiverse areas Conservation of gaining reaches areas where ground water flows into surface water Geomorphic restoration re snagging removal of sand slugs and control of erosion Management of exotic species removal or containment of non native flora and fauna Terrestrial ecosystems e Habitat connectivity Rehabilitation of refugia and habitats with favourable aspects Rehabilitation of large habitats e Reduction of overgrazing The above list is not exhaustive and other NRM actions could be assessed by the CAF such as managed aquifer recharge captive breeding programs or management of plantation forestry ye RS EF er ee lt gt eee r p x ied q Part 1 Background amp Key Concepts Useful
13. Managerial e g promoting different farm practices and e Policy based e g regulation planning and Specific adaptation strategies described in the climate change literature Bates et al 2010 Hulme 2005 Lindenmayer et al 2010 Pittock Hansen amp Abell 2008 include e Maintaining effective monitoring and adaptive management programs e Incorporating climate change into current management practices e Reducing the threats and impacts arising from climate adaptation initiatives in other sectors e Reducing tackling non climate stress ses on freshwater resources and ecosystems be the optimal way to deal with future surprises or unknowable risks Tompkins amp Adger 2003 Resilience is thus a goal or aspiration for management of ecosystems as well as an attribute of the system itself It can be investigated at different levels such as individual community organisation or eco system Boon Cottrell King Stevenson amp Millar 2011 However resilience is a complex idea as a resilient system is not necessarily a desirable one Nelson 2010 e Protecting intact habitats which act as refugia including those designated as protected areas and those which are not e Ensuring appropriate connectivity between freshwater ecosystems e Preserving genetic stock including the relocation of endangered species and captive breeding programs e Reducing emissions and ensuring carbon capture while t
14. Y Institute o Land n NCCARF Water and Socie EZ National ational Charles Sturt University ty University dh Cli mate a m Aaaa research for a sustainable future Incorporating Climate Change Adaptation into Catchment Managment A User Guide Report No 76 Ah Anna Lukasiewicz C Max Finlayson Jamie Pittock Acknowledgement This work was carried out with financial support from the Australian Government Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency and the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility The views expressed herein are not necessarily the views of the Commonwealth or NCCARF and neither the Commonwealth nor NCCARF accept responsibility for information or advice contained herein The role of NCCARF is to lead the research community in a national interdisciplinary effort to generate the information needed by decision makers in government business and in vulnerable sectors and communities to manage the risk of climate change impacts Contact authors Dr Anna Lukasiewicz Institute for Land Water amp Society Charles Sturt University Email alukasiewicz csu edu au Prof CM Finlayson Institute for Land Water amp Society Charles Sturt University Email mfinlayson csu edu au Correspondence PO Box 789 Albury NSW 2640 Australia Dr Jamie Pittock Fenner School of Environment and Society The Australian National University Email Jamie Pittock anu edu au Correspondence The Australian N
15. an be projected Part 2 Using the CAF Potential for maladaptation Literature on climate change adaptation identifies six types of maladaptation Barnett amp O Neill 2010 e Increasing emissions o Adaptation is maladaptive if actions end up contributing to climate change For example the increased use of energy intensive air conditioners in response to the health impacts of heat waves e Disproportionate burden on the most vulnerable o Adaptation actions are maladaptive if in meeting the needs of one sector or group they increase the vulnerability of those most at risk like minority groups or low income households or shift the consequences to another sector or group o Vulnerable ecological communities and species should also be considered in this context e High opportunity costs o Approaches may be maladaptive if their economic social or environ mental costs are higher relative to alternatives e Reducing incentive to adapt o If adaptation actions reduce incen tives to adapt for example by encouraging unnecessary depen dence on others stimulating rent seeking behaviour or penalising early actors then such actions are maladaptive e Path dependency o Large infrastructural developments commit capital and institutions to trajectories that are difficult to change in the future thus decreasing flexibility to respond to unforeseen changes in climatic environmental economic and socia
16. at 1 must be done together to gain the greatest positive effect 2 will positively enhance the effects of others 3 will negatively affect the effects of others 5 Constraints to implementation Constraints can either prevent or limit the adoption of individual adaptation actions These can be physical financial social and institutional 6 Socio economic considerations Assesses the positive and negative socio economic implications of individual projects 7 Risk of failure Looks at the risk probability x consequence of the action failing to achieve its goals under different climate change scenarios While similar to the assessment of action effectiveness under different climate change scenarios the risk of failure considers not just the bio physical risks but the added institutional or socio economic risks that may be overlooked in assessments Part 2 Using the CAF An example of the CAF is presented in Table 3 The example is hypothetical designed to show how the different components work to highlight the overall desirability or otherwise of different actions While it may be of limited value at first glance the process of assessing each individual component of the CAF has proved to be of enormous assistance to CMA personnel Each component of the CAF has its own table and Table 3 is a summary of all of them Part 2 Using the CCA CAF Table 3 A Hypothetical CAF Catchmen
17. ational University Canberra ACT 0200 Australia Contents BREA CRA a O O E eea TE O cls SRM E tit eens 5 How tous GU E A O o a 5 BACKGROUND M e e a A E ss 00 e a MMMM a sine cont eea e a 7 Usefulness and applieabilaty of the CAR Me a ici e e r e e e a 8 BOELY COIN CE TiS 52 E E E O E a nc 8 Mitigation A E A O 8 Adaptation ME aa cr E Md cl Ma Id E A 8 da Er E e MM A E e lt lt a mee Me aus eee 8 A E NORM o A E a 8 AM A A e E E OS E A MO 9 What constitutes climatico o a 9 Climate change interactions with non climate Stressors oooocooccccnoncccoonccononcnnnnnnnnnanccnnnncnnnnos 10 Ecosystem BascedrAdaptationi 22 aie e e e tage sac T e Mic E E 10 ABOUWTHE CART I M e a ot E E E cates aa tae AMM cE e E aaa 11 Whatasthe CAF aan a a R REY LN x NE eee eee ree 11 WHOIS A e A 11 When should it be used in the planning process ssseesssessesseesseesseesseerseerssseesseessensseeeseee 11 Atwhatiscaleshould thisitoolbeused tan es Pee a ae o e aee 11 HOWTO CARRYOUWLHE CAF PROCESS cet na iri Ea E Geers TE OR 13 Sage O oaa E E E AEE E E o A AE o A E o A E E 13 Stage moco cia O O IO e A A n 15 Stage 5 lt CominUnMiCabOmee e ot e ES e a ee a e a 16 stage As SESENTA E ss 16 THRSAR N DERAS cs E A R q A aces A e PE vs ee E N 17 Catchment Relevance tad carece eRe to o Aes ao Me dl Beene eee q 2il Climate change adaptation potential ME Ap a Mee ons ce a AE a 21 Chmatsichanes adaptationm
18. atural or near natural ecosystems Y Y x Y a Priority species and ecosystems Y Y x Y Ae Ecological connectivity Threatened species habitats and Y v Y y ecosystems Science and education values Y Y Y E Cultural heritage and identity Y Y Y E Contemporary cultural significance 3 Aesthetic and sense of place values Y Y Y 8 Part 2 Using the CAF Y Potentially directly beneficial x Potentially directly detrimental Unknown impact No direct impact Compatibility The CAF aims to identify a suite of no regrets low risk NRM actions that increase ecosystem resilience to climate change impacts and reduce ecosystem vulnerability to non climate stressors It is not the intention of the CAF to pick out one or two winners rather the intention is to assess and identify the adaptation potential of a suite of complementary actions This component allows the exploration of interactions between different actions For example for habitat restoration to achieve its desired goals connectivity between different parts of the environment may also be needed and sufficiently high environmental flows provided to enable native aquatic biota to colonise restored sites At the same time invasive species must be prevented from dominating restored habitats and the restoration must provide refuge habitats to counteract other pressures affecting the larger landscape such as thermal
19. bene tit e m e e A coat Ne a 2A Adaptation effectiveness under different climate change scenarios oocoococcccnoccccnoncninnnos 22 Boteatialiformaladaplationc a rea Tota a EN os as Re ee lee 24 Ecosystem ServicesMeneflts gt e ete syncs kanes Tot e ION ssaneslesn ac ce Gs 25 Compatibility E ce coke Reet e E cd A es O O a N 24 Constraints totimplementaion aki e E de a ds 28 SOCIO ECONOMIC ilcoMe a a E AI qa As 30 AS O E e IC A MA ae 31 AEINAL WORD 1 E A E NL ae 33 REEERENG E S W TA N A ee A a T E T A co 34 List of Tables Table 1 Possible data gathering methods appropriate for different parts of the CAF 14 Table 2 Advantages and disadvantages of proposed methods for CAF ceeeeeeeeseeeeeteeees 15 able 3 AskivypotheticaliG Ame 0 0 o ninos iki Une os a hoc etic Me anos os O 19 lable4CCAsBbtential oneachNRM achon ppt ica oc eee eee eto 22 Table 5 Assessing the effectiveness of NRM actions under different climate change PEO TS CULOIS ae A E TEA E A A O Posiecag E 23 Table 6 Maladaptation potential of the NRM acti0OWS coococcoccccnoncnononcnononcnnnnncnonononnnnnccnnnncnnns P5 Table 7 The potential for positive and negative impacts of NRM actions on ecosystem SETVICES N pe a A ere roe P A Je A I a a AE E RA a a cn A ea 26 Table 8 Compatibility examples of aquatic ecosystem NRM actions cocooccccocccononcninancninnncc ns 28 Table 9 Extent of cconstraints to the implementat
20. e land clearing leading to the loss and fragmentation of core habitats and migration corridors unsustainable land use activities leading to habitat degradation especially over grazing and logging water diversions changed fire regimes invasive weed species and animal pests Mackey et al 2008 Table 4 shows several criteria that can be used to determine the adaptation potential of actions through reviewing climate change literature consultations with experts and a technical workshop These criteria include both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems and can be modified depending on the assessment For example it may not be necessary to consider whether NRM actions for an aquatic ecosystem mitigate the impacts of changed fire regimes The table indicates the presence and desirability of impacts for each action gt C T E eee O SS a a Part 2 Using the CAF Table 4 CCA Potential of each NRM action Climate change adaptation benefit Action 1 Action 2 Action 3 Action 4 S Conserves or restores past or yi y Y 7 existing habitat refugia ere g9 Mitigates impact of changed A hydrological regimes e g x Y o n decreased flows E 5 Reduces sediment influxes Y Y Y 55 oge a7 z 3 3 2 Mitigates impacts of changed fire gt gt e regimes gE a 5 3 hrevents or reduces invasion by f E 7 z exotic species ac Conserves or enables access to Y y A fut
21. ecially where it involves project partners whose expertise is being relied on in the assessment A separate workshop can be used for the assessment in addition to the use of workshops in the information gathering stage This workshop should be scheduled well after the information gathered has been communicated to workshop participants so they have adequate time to digest this and prepare for the assessment Background information should be presented on the first day to ensure that all participants are familiar with the assumptions and concepts behind the CAF This could include e Overview of climate change adaptation concepts such as resilience and vulnerability EVALUATE MONITOR IMPLEMENT with iterative feedback between all steps While communication is ongoing there must be a decisive stage where information is passed on to the stakeholders who will be doing the assessment e Explanation of the ecosystem based approach to climate change adaptation e Introduction of the NRM actions to be assessed e Overview of how the information was gathered The actual assessment can be undertaken in either one or two days broken up into the seven components used in the CAF see The CAF in Detail These four stages of the CAF process should be considered as part of adaptive planning Figure 4 illustrates how the CAF can be incorporated into planning and where lessons learned can be integrated into subsequent plans
22. ed but still hold important socio economic values Supporting services Can include non material benefits such as cultural diversity spiritual and religious values knowledge systems educational values inspiration aesthetic values social relations sense of space cultural heritage values and recreation and ecotourism Cultural services ee eg EE Part 2 Using the CAF Table 7 The potential for positive and negative impacts of NRM actions on ecosystem services Spiritual inspirational and religious values Ecosystem Services Action 1 Action2 Action 3 Action 4 Drinking water for humans and or livestock Y Y 8 Food for livestock Y 5 Food for humans Wood reed fibre and peat Y Y Y 2 Medicinal products Y Y Y Other products and resources including Y Y 7 Ni genetic material Groundwater replenishment Y Water purification waste treatment or 7 Ey dilution Biological control agents for pests disease Y 3 Flood control flood storage Y Y 5 Coastal shoreline and river bank A y7 j 2 stabilisation and storm protection Local climate regulation buffering change Y a Carbon storage sequestration Y Y Y Erosion control Y Y Air quality maintenance Y Y Pollination Y Y Y Y Nutrient cycling Y Y Y Primary productivity Y Y Y E he a G stabilisation and soil rs y gt 3 Systemic consequence ecological surprise Y Y x N
23. eir impacts Data for assessment Table 1 provides an overview of possible methods for gathering information in different parts of the CAF These methods have disadvantages and advantages as summarised in Table 2 A common assertion in the climate change adaptation literature is that while there are national and continental projections there is little appropriately scaled information of climate change impacts that could aid in the planning process Aldous et al 2011 Patt 2009 When asked to consider the effectiveness of actions under different climate change scenarios managers struggle to apply predictions of water and planners may catchment scale availability and temperature increases to specific sub systems within the catchment The lack of information about climate change scenarios at a local scale can be a constraint in the assessment process Table 2 Advantages and disadvantages of proposed methods for CAF Description Advantages Disadvantages Reliance on the professional Expert Does not take much time or May offer limited range of knowledge of E knowledge expense insights planners managers Reading of relevant E Sought after information ma Document E 8 Does not take much time or 8 3 Y policy planning documents to not be available in the analysis A Es expense gain specific information documents Requires familiarity with Literature Reading of academic Does not take much time o
24. ertaken by natural resource managers already contribute to building ecosystem resilience and counteracting negative impacts of climate change however these contributions remain largely unrecognised Through the CAF managers discuss identify and assess these contributions against other criteria such as How to use this Guide the potential for climate change adaptation other co benefits implementation constraints and risks of failure The CAF as a process based tool helps to explore and assess management actions as such the process and conversations involved are as valuable as the identification of management actions The CAF is divided into seven parts that are explored discussed and ultimately assessed The results of each assessment are summarised in a table format The CAF offers a holistic look at the feasibility of different NRM actions as options for climate change adaptation Its aim is to highlight those actions that present the maximum benefits along with the least risk We hope that you find this useful in preparing effective adaptation strategies and would welcome your feedback This document is divided into two main parts Figure 1 Figure 1 Structure of this User Guide BACKGROUND KEY CONCEPTS ABOUT THE CAF HOW TO CARRY OUT THE CAF PROCESS THE CAF IN DETAIL Part 1 is more theoretical and contains two sections that explain the origins of the CAF Background and briefl
25. es of action failure can incorporate risk of failure under different climate change scenarios and or differentiate between social economic and environmental risks For example the failure of an environmental flow to achieve a desired result may have only a low or medium consequence and likelihood of occurrence giving it a relatively low risk rating but the economic damage may be quite high and the social backlash could make future watering more difficult or costly The risk assessment can be based on qualitative analysis of interviews and or focus groups surveys with key stakeholders or it can be decided on at the assessment workshop Table 14 is an example where both climate change scenarios and socio economic as well as environmental risks are specified This is a more complicated version of the risk assessment that can be simplified by either removing the environmental social and economic sub divisions or by removing the climate change scenarios The environmental social and economic categorisations have been removed from the hypothetical CAF presented in Table 3 It must be noted that if the complicated version is used then the social and economic description of consequences would be different to those presented in Table 12 which focuses on environmental consequences Table 14 Risk Assessment of the different NRM actions Environmental Economic Environmental Moderate Economic Environmental
26. for each part of the framework and these are briefly summarised in the table below Data gathering methods should be established well ahead of the information gathering stage since time intensive data collection methods such as semi structured interviews with key stakeholders or modelling of impacts under various climate change scenarios must be undertaken well before the actual assessment and the results made available to all participants prior to the assessment Table 1 Possible data gathering methods appropriate for different parts of the CAF F Expert Document Literature Stakeholder erates Scenario knowledge analysis review interviews Workshop modelling Catchment A Y y ey Relevance CCA Potential Y Y Y Y Y Effectiveness nder E y F Y y different projections Maladaptation Y Y Y Y Ecosystem Benefits Y Y Y Y Y Compatibility Y Y Y Y Socio Economic y 7 A Outcomes Implementation A Y constraints Risks Y Y Y Y Part 2 Using the CAF Stage 2 Information gathering Data on NRM Actions NRM actions to be considered in the CAF should be developed with key stakeholders to draw on their expertise and to develop a common understanding of the actions being assessed For example what is meant by reforestation and how does this differ from afforestation Whichever actions are chosen participants must be given enough information to visualise both the actions and th
27. gnificant 2 Minor 5 Catastrophic 4 Major A Almost certain B Likely C Occasionally D Unlikely E Rare The following two tables explain the Consequences and Likelihood classifications Table 12 Explanation of the consequences classification 1 Insignificant Limited damage to minimal area of low significance Minor effects on biological or physical environment Minor short 2 Minor 3 w n 2 medium term damage to small area of limited significance Moderate effects on biological or physical environment air 3 Moderate water but not affecting ecosystem function Moderate short medium term widespread impacts Serious environmental effects with some impairment of 4 Major ecosystem function Relatively widespread medium long term impacts Very serious environmental effects with impairment of 5 Catastrophic ecosystem function Long term widespread effects on significant environment Table 13 Explanation of the likelihood classification A Almost certain Consequence is expected to occur in most circumstances B Likely Consequence will probably occur in most circumstances C Occasionally Consequence should occur at some time D Unlikely Consequence could occur at some time E Rare Consequence may occur in exceptional circumstances Part 2 Using the CAF A risk assessment looking at the consequenc
28. his is actually a mitigation strategy it does buy time for adaptation e Preparing for major natural disturbances A refuge is defined as a place of shelter protection or safety while refugia are areas where special environmental circumstances have enabled a species or a community of species to survive despite extinction in surrounding areas Belski amp Williams 2012 Refugia thus protect biodiversity during extreme events such as floods and droughts Steffen 2009 4 Ser Part 1 Background amp Key Concepts Climate change interactions with non climate stressors Numerous models about climate change impacts on different geographical regions have been run in many countries However in most cases climate change is impacting on heavily altered and degraded ecosystems rather than natural healthy ones Hence in terms of biodiversity climate change is yet another stressor interacting with and deepening existing problems Lindenmayer et al 2010 In the case of the southern Murray Darling Basin the interactions between existing stressors and climate change are explained by McAlpine et al 2009 who noted that extensive clearing of native vegetation is likely to have contributed to a hotter and drier climate and exacerbated the El Ni o effect in south east Australia which then put pressure on governments to allocate diminishing water resources between consumptive and environmental uses Pittoc
29. ils the four main stages of the CAF process which culminate in the actual CAF assessment We envision that the results of this assessment will be incorporated into program planning and then be evaluated through an existing institutional evaluation processes It is thus vital that the assumptions and reasoning behind the assessment are documented along with the assessment results to enable the CAF to be used as part of adaptive planning ment will need to take account of administrative boundaries There are a number of guidelines as to what constitutes a bioregion and ecological communities For example the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation EPBC Act 1999 directs Australian NRM towards the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia which provides nationally established and supported delineations of the continent into 89 bioregions and 419 subregions Commonwealth of Australia 2013a Other gt e eS Part 2 Using the CAF types of bioregions include World Heritage defined areas such as the Great Barrier Reef Southwestern Tasmania or the Wet Tropics NRM regions administrative regions Australia is divided into 54 NRM regions Commonwealth of Australia 2013b governed by regional NRM bodies variously called Catchment Management Authorities THE MURRAY CATCHMENT Programs A wide range of programs are undertaken by the Murray CMA to protect support and enha
30. ion of NRM actiONS ocoonoccccnonccinoccconancn ns 29 Mable 10 Bessible sociozecanomic O OE Se occ e eee eee toc ee 30 Table 11 Matrix for undertaking a risk assessment of NRM actions ccococcccnocccononcninnncninnncn ns 31 Table 12 Explanation of the consequences classifiCati0N oocoonoocccnonccnnonccnnoncconancconnncnonnncn ns 31 Table 13 Explanation of the likelihood classification ooooooonnoncccnonccononccnnnncnononcconancnnnnncnnns 31 Table 14 Risk Assessment of the different NRM acti0DS ooooccconcccnoncnononcnononannnancninnnccnnnncnnns 32 List of Figures Figure gt Stmeturesot this User Guido de e aae e N as IO cl ee 5 Figure 2 Where the CAF fits in NRM planning from the Murray CMA cooocccnnccccconcccnoncnn ns 12 Figures Steps omihe MAD process Sac eet A o O o sacan a 13 Figure 4 Where the CAF fits in the adaptive planning process ococooccccnonccononcnononcnnnnncconnan ns 16 PREFACE This Guide provides step by step instructions for an assessment of the potential for climate change adaptation of natural resource management NRM actions This assessment uses a Catchment Assessment Framework CAF a process based tool that highlights how natural resource managers can incorporate climate change adaptation into their everyday management and planning activities The CAF enables a qualitative assessment of different adaptation options to better inform decision making Many activities und
31. k Hansen and Abell 2008 argue that the existing non climate change related stresses and impacts from Ecosystem Based Adaptation Ecosystem based adaptation EBA aims for the maintenance of healthy resilient ecosystems that can adapt to climatic changes Preserving and enhancing eco systems enables society to better adapt to the unknown impacts of climate change and provides multiple co benefits for climate change mitigation protection of livelihoods and poverty alleviation Munang et al 2013 In EBA strategies to deal with climate change impacts include the maintenance and restoration of natural ecosystems protection of vital ecosystem services reduction of land and water degradation by controlling invasive maladaptive policies will outweigh the negative impacts of climate change in the medium term Kingsford 2011 shares this view stating that the effects of river regulation remain the greatest threat to freshwater ecosystems in the foreseeable future It is thus clear that climate change adaptation must take account of non climate change related stresses in order to avoid maladaptation The CAF was developed to consider low risk actions that provided the most benefit to climate change adaptation by a either directly addressing or at least not increasing existing stresses b implementing no regrets measures and c _ intervening with complementary measures that have different risks and so spread the o
32. l conditions e Increasing existing stressors o Adding further stress to already degraded ecosystems reduces their adaptive capacity to deal with climate change impacts For example actions like promoting plantations for carbon sequestration may lead to reduced water availability downstream which may place further stress on already degraded water ecosystems Apart from considering climate change adaptation benefits and effectiveness managers must also consider mal adaptation This can be assessed using expert judgment focus groups or more quantitative knowledge There is no need to extend the potential for maladaptation across different climate change pro jections since maladaptive potential does not change The ranking in Table 6 represent the magnitude of impacts for different actions Part 2 Using the CAF Table 6 Maladaptation potential of the NRM actions Ecosystem Services Benefits This analysis can be based on information from stakeholder interviews or a review of technical reports It is based on the concept of ecosystem services described in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2003 and by Reid Piko et al 2010 for the Murray Darling Basin Table 7 shows influence the importance of different ecosystem services The types of ecosystem services identified are explained and listed below The listing of ecosystem services can be modified dependi
33. methods such as interviews or modelling are applied in each case At the conclusion of the assessment the user will have e An assessment of the climate change potential including the maladaptive potential of different NRM actions e Consideration of ecosystem services socio economic impacts constraints and risks of these NRM actions to complement the assessment of their climate change potential This will ideally lead to a comprehensive suite of NRM actions that address specific conservation goals as well as form part of a broader climate change adaptation strategy that can then be evaluated and updated during subsequent planning cycles References REFERENCES Aldous A Fitzsimons J Richter B amp Bach L 2011 Droughts floods and freshwater ecosystems evaluating climate change impacts and developing adaptation strategies Marine and Freshwater Research 62 223 231 Arnell N W amp Charlton M B 2009 Adapting to the effects of climate change on water supply reliability In W N Adger K L O Brien amp I Lorenzoni Eds Adapting to climate change Thresholds values governance pp 42 53 Cambridge Cambridge l University Press Barnett J Dovers S Hatfield Dodds S McDonald J Nelson R amp Waller S 2011 National Climate Change Adaptation Research Plan Social Economic and Institutional Dimensions Gold Coast QLD National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facilit
34. mplexity MEDIUM Institutional Knowledge Responsibility HIGH HIGH Part 2 Using the CAF Legend for Table 9 NEG Constraint is negligible It exists but does not prevent implementation of action MEDIUM Constraint preventing the action from being fully or largely realised HIGH Constraint significantly preventing uptake among a majority of stakeholders UNKNOWN The extent of the constraint cannot be accurately gauged Constraint not applicable to the action or not mentioned Socio Economic Outcomes This component summarises the socio how issues can be summarised economic outcomes of the actions This qualitatively The specific examples of can be done through qualitative analysis issues in Table 11 are those that came up of interviews focus groups or surveys in completed workshops The positive and with key stakeholders Ideally this data is negative issues are summarised with ticks all gathered in the preparation stage and and crosses for the sake of brevity in the presented to the project partners for final assessment Table 3 esas AS E See Bl This component identifies the social and Saune piclerts anal grounded economic trade offs of the different lg analysis g y abg en actions As such it is useful to identify pe ipinan Ta qu analysis to hie cite nnu a Te al Mish ON either gain or lose access or benefits of projects Table 10 shows an example of Al the
35. nagers in defining strategic interventions i e program planning It should be used after the goals and management objectives have been set As the tool is holistic and strategic it is not so useful for specific and detailed operational and project planning at a local level Figure 2 is an extract from a flyer produced by the Murray CMA showing where the CAF should be applied in the CMA s planning structure At what scale should this tool be used CAF was developed to assist catchment level management but could be adapted to apply at any scale to any adaptation challenge In this Guide we have focussed on adaptation in NRM at regional sub national scales How the CAF is applied will largely depend on the level that the NRM planner or manager works at We suggest two possibilities Ecological communities bioregions We suggest a focus on ecological communities as an appropriate scale however manage must be done in order to get to the assessment stage This Guide explains both the process next section and the tool the CAF in detail The CAF is expressed as a series of tables that summarises discussions around seven key components useful tool Potential end users include catchment management authorities CMAs or NRM boards government water environment or conservation agencies or authorities as well as local government and community based or non governmental organisations How to use the CAF process deta
36. nce natural resources These are vlivered through several main themes CCA CAF applied at program level bdiversity protecting and restoring native egetation and animals Water improving river health and water quality Land improving the condition and health of soils Community supporting Aboriginal cultural heritage and community participation in natural resource management activities that fulfil through projects The Murray CMA supports a range of projects Councils and NRM Boards These regions are different but complementary to the bioregions and _ sub bioregions identified above CAF Activities by regional NRM bodies may be specifically directed at ecological communities that have been identified as endangered or threatened or may be directed towards subsystems or sub catchments of larger regions NRM actions management program goals implemented WN MANAGEMENT including e Incentives for landholders and community groups in the areas of biodiversity Aboriginal culture and heritage soil health and erosion control e Public lands biodiversity grants Community grants e School programs Threatened Grassy Woodland Project Booroolong amp Corroboree Frog projects Edward Wakool Project Individual projects may use similar NRM actions Murray Seedbank Services Soil Carbon
37. ness and applicability of the CAF The CAF is not method dependent In the NCCARF project the assessment included a review of published and unpublished documents and reference to expert opinion However it also lends itself to more quantitative assessments including model ling and Bayesian Network Analysis As an assessment and planning tool it can be as detailed as managers need it to be Although developed for a project that focused on freshwater biodiversity the CAF can be used to assess NRM actions undertaken in marine or terrestrial biodiversity conser vation or other NRM activities KEY CONCEPTS This section explains the key terms used throughout this Guide as they pertain to climate change Concepts such as resilience and vulnerability have multiple definitions in both social and biophysical disciplines Similarly resilience and adaptive capacity are described differently by some authors and used interchangeably by others Because the literature is fragmented and confusing the definitions provided here are broad and general Mitigation Describes any action to prevent reduce or slow climate change Tompkins amp Adger 2003 by reducing greenhouse gas sources and emissions or enhancing greenhouse gas sinks Barnett et al 2011 Adaptation Refers to the actions that people take in response to projected or actual climate change IPCC 2007b p 27 In human systems this is the process of adjustment to
38. ng on catchment characteristics and needs of the assessment E Disproportionate High Reducing Increasing Increasing 7 4 Path a e burden on the most opportunity incentive to existing emissions dependency vulnerable costs adapt stressors Action 1 UNKNOWN NEG NEG MEDIUM Action 2 HIGH HIGH HIGH UNKNOWN MEDIUM Action 3 MEDIUM NEG UNKNOWN NEG NEG Action 4 NEG MEDIUM MEDIUM UNKNOWN HIGH HIGH Legend for Table 6 NEG Negligible maladaptive potential MEDIUM Medium maladaptive potential HIGH High maladaptive potential UNKNOWN Maladaptive potential is unknown how different adaptation options may ji Provide or produce goods such as food fibre fuel genetic resources biochemicals natural medicines and pharmaceuticals ornamental resources and fresh water Provisioning services Include benefits gained from regulation of ecosystems such as air quality regulation climate regulation water regulation erosion regulation water purification and waste treatment disease regulation pest regulation pollination and natural hazard regulation Regulating services These underpin the other services and include soil formation photosynthesis primary production nutrient cycling and water cycling Also include criteria such as natural or near natural ecosystems which can be used to judge the degree of change of l the rest of the environment and priority species and ecosystems which may not be ecologically threatened or endanger
39. ngton DC USA World Resources Institute Munang R Thiaw l Alverson K Mumba M Liu J amp Rivington M 2013 Climate change and Ecosystem based Adaptation a new pragmatic approach to buffering climate change impacts Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5 1 67 71 Murray CMA n d The Murray Catchment Murray Catchment Managmenet Authority Retrieved 6 August 2013 from http murray cma nsw gov au images stories Printed material CCK Brochure pdf Nelson D R 2010 Adaptation and resilience responding to a changing climate Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change 2 1 113 120 Patt A G 2009 Learning to crawl how to use seasonal climate forecasts to build adaptive capacity In W N Adger K L O Brien amp I Lorenzoni Eds Adapting to climate change Thresholds values governance pp 79 95 Cambridge Cambridge University Press Pittock J Hansen L J amp Abell R 2008 Running dry Freshwater biodiversity protected areas and climate change Biodiversity 9 3 amp 4 30 39 References Reid Piko C Crase L Horwitz P Butcher R 2010 Ecosystem Services and Productive Base for the Basin Plan Canberra A report prepared for the Murray Darling Basin Authority by The Murray Darling Freshwater Research Centre MDFRC Publication 06 2010 Steffen W 2009 Climate Change 2009 Faster Change 8 More Serious Risks Canberra Department
40. of Climate Change The World Bank 2009 Convenient Solutions to an Inconvenient Truth Ecosystem based Approaches to Climate Change Washington Environment Department The World Bank Tompkins E L amp Adger W N 2003 Building resilience to climate change through adaptive management of natural resources UK Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research Working Paper 27 Umwelt Pty Ltd 2009 Preliminary Environmental Assessment Proposed Ammonium Nitrate Emulsion Production Facility and Continued Operation of Orica Mining Services Technology Park Richmond Vale NSW Toronto NSW Umwelt Environmental Consultants on behalf of Orica Australia Pty Ltd Williams S E Shoo L P Isaac J Hoffmann A A Langham G 2008 Toward an integrated framework for assessing the vulnerability of species to climate change PLoS Biology 6 2621 2626 research for a sustainable future Institute for Land Water and Society PO Box 789 Elizabeth Mitchell Drive Albury NSW 2640 Australia Tel 61 2 6051 9992 Fax 61 2 6051 9992 Email iiws csu edu au www csu edu au research ilws
41. outcomes fast enough to get desired benefits from environmental flow releases for waterbird breeding events The ranking in Table 9 represent the is still constrained by social and economic magnitude of impacts for different actions circumstances without indicating whether it is desirable bes seres compl dies positive or negative These rankings can A A A oF Al CE at o LS adaptation options Funding has been Broups mor eres quantitative a sunvevs identified as a major constraint for most and or a review of relevant literature The ns o e ati anA constraints do not necessarily prevent the E prominent example of a socio political adoption fo an qstjon Pubimey liaitaite constraint for those options that required A lr Er the cooperation of private landholders E a ol The list of examples for the four types of example incentives to undertake riparian A i implementation constraints is not reforestation are regularly utilised in the E exhaustive catchments but the scale of their uptake Table 9 Extent of cconstraints to the implementation of NRM actions Constraints Action 1 Action 2 Action 3 Action 4 Infrastructure NEG NEG HIGH Physical Natural NEG NEG Financial Funding HIGH HIGH HIGH told valussa MEDIUM UNKNOWN HIGH attitudes amp self identity o E HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH Socio political capability Community attitudes MEDIUM MEDIUM HIGH nooner UNKNOWN HIGH circumstances Co
42. r academic literature review literature expense Specific local information may not be available Stakeholder interviews Interviews with key stakeholder representatives Provides wealth of information from key stakeholder representatives May take considerable time and effort to plan conduct and analyse interview data requires interviewing skills Focus group facilitation of a group meeting Provides wealth of information from key May take considerable time and effort to organise focus Worksho to elicit information A groups P stakeholder representatives Requires facilitation skills The building of a range of Requites considerable future scenarios incorporating Provides detailed illustrative knowledge amp expertise to Scenario future climatic projections information at an appropriate develop models modelling demographic or other level to enable fruitful Requires specific local level economic data to discuss impacts of proposed actions discussions information that may not be readily available Part 2 Using the CAF Stage 3 Communication Communication between those carrying out the CAF assessment and identified key stakeholders is an ongoing necessity Although Figure 3 which explains the CAF process is structured hierarchically for clarity it is part of an adaptive management context Stage 4 Assessment The actual assessment may take several days esp
43. r actions 1 Environmental Flows 3 Thermal Pollution Control 4 Restoration of Riparian Vegetation 5 Freshwater Habitat Connectivity Constraints to implementation ranking Constraints to implementation of climate change adaptation are divided into four categories in the literature Arnell amp Charlton 2009 e Physical Either in terms of Constrains performance of the action infrastructure or natural for instance will all migratory fish use conditions a fish ladder e Financial Cost amp funding Refers not only to absolute cost of the action but also to ability of the implementing organisation to fund the action in the future for instance operating and maintenance costs of environmental works e Social Includes community and Reactions and attitudes of government attitudes landholder personality and the landholder s economic circumstances that may prevent them from adopting the actions stakeholders affected parties and pressure groups to each adaptation action for instance the risk of a new government changing an adaptation policy measure Part 2 Using the CAF e Institutional Refers to complexity no of Institutional factors within the different entities involved implementing organisation regulatory knowledge whether agencies or market constraints for the action have the skills data etc amp for instance can the managing responsibility accountability agencies concerned make decisions for
44. t Name Catchment Relevance 3 s ar Currently Considered amp j Not Yet Extent to which the action exists in the catchment Not Applicable Implemented Rejected Implemented Climate change adaptation potential Reducing vulnerability caused by non climate Climate change change stressors adaptation benefit Increasing resilience to climatic shocks changes Current conditions Effectiveness Wet under changing climate change scenarios Dry Moderate Very Dry Increasing emissions NEGLIGIBLE Disproportionate burden on most vulnerable UNKNOWN MEDIUM MEDIUM High opportunity costs NEGLIGIBLE NEGLIGIBLE MEDIUM Potential for maladaptation Reducing incentive to adapt NEGLIGIBLE UNKNOWN UNKNOWN Path dependency UNKNOWN NEGLIGIBLE HIGH Increasing existing stressors MEDIUM MEDIUM NEGLIGIBLE HIGH Part 2 Using the CCA CAF Provisioning Ecosystem Services Regulating Benefit Supporting Cultural Must be done with Actions 2 amp 3 Actions 1 amp 2 Compatibility Will positively enhance Actions 1 amp 4 Will negatively affect CIA Physical NEGLIGIBLE NEGLIGIBLE HIGH Constraints to Financial HIGH HIGH implementation Socio political MEDIUM UNKNOWN Institutional HIGH HIGH vv ai a eg SK a arse xx x x Wet Moderate Risk Assessment Dry Part 2 Using the CAF
45. te threshold by assessing the effectiveness of adaptation measures against a range of possible climate change scenarios as well as a constantly changing climate and extreme variability not just the average conditions The magnitude and desirability of impacts for different actions are shown in Table 5 where a traffic light approach has been used to categorise each action under the four climate change projections and current conditions This is a similar approach to that used by Gross et al 2011 in their study of climate change adaptation limits in the Coorong and Lower Lakes Table 5 Assessing the effectiveness of NRM actions under different climate change projections Legend for Table 5 An action such as environmental works Not effective or redundant and measures for wetland conservation will thus be rated likely to be effective and beneficial green if it meets the criteria established in Table 4 However the same action may be rated as less Amber or not red effective under a different climate change projection Likely to be effective and beneficial Less effective or with lower benefits Not currently implemented or applicable For example infrastructure to water a floodplain forest may work in the next few decades but then fail if there is too little water to operate it regularly beyond that If the action is not currently implemented its effectiveness under different climate change scenarios c
46. ure habitat 0 E Extends habitat connectivity and A migration paths for biota n 9 Mitigates changes in water Y A 5 volumes Q T z E Mitigates changes in water E 5 3 Y temperature O Fi Mitigates changes in the timing of A y g water flows E Mitigates changes in air A gt A bo temperature 5 Mitigates carbon emissions Y Y ra Improves genetic diversity Y Preserving genetic stock Y Y Y Y Legend for Table 4 Y Potentially directly beneficial x Potentially directly detrimental Unknown impact No direct impact Adaptation effectiveness under different climate change scenarios Once the climate change adaptation potential of NRM actions has been established natural resource managers need to consider how their effectiveness would be affected by climate change expert judgment as a method but some form of modelling of the various scenarios would provide a more quantitative and comprehensive assessment This is where scenario building can be used and this can AC J ed o basi ex Y Part 2 Using the CAF budget and information availability allows Regardless of detail some time must be taken to consider what these scenarios could mean for the catchment and the ecosystem in question The reason for considering different climate change scenarios is to avoid adaptation e g infrastructure measures that fail past a overly narrow possible clima
47. verall risk No regrets measurements are those where implementation will result in ecosystem benefit regardless of future climate change Hallegatte 2009 alien species and the management of habitats to ensure plant genetic diversity The World Bank 2009 In 2008 the IUCN proposed protected areas as one of the solutions to climate change Dudley et al 2010 and the World Bank 2009 stressed that natural systems not only provide goods and ecosystem services but also are a proven and cost effective protection against climate change impacts EBA is the underlying philosophy behind the CAF which highlights the benefits of climate change adaptation and ecological resilience of NRM actions Part 2 Using the CAF ABOUT THE CAF What is the CAF The CAF is a process based deliberative tool that is used to assess the climate change adaptation potential of NRM actions and by so doing allows the incorporation of climate change adaptation into NRM planning It contains a series of preparatory steps that Who is it for CAF is aimed at NRM managers and planners at a regional catchment scale and anyone who is interested in the practical application of the principles that govern climate change adaptation We envision that NRM planners and managers from NRM bodies as well as planners within state and Commonwealth environmental departments will find it a When should it be used in the planning process CAF assists ma
48. y Barnett J amp O Neill S 2010 Editorial Maladaptation Global Environmental Change 20 211 213 Bates B Bunn S Baker P J Cox M Hopkins A Humphreys B et al 2010 National l Climate Change Adaptation Research Plan Freshwater Biodiversity Gold Coast QLD National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility Belski J M amp Williams D R 2012 Introduction from the New Editors in Chief 2012 2015 Society 8 Natural Resources 25 1 1 2 Bond N R amp Lake P S 2008 Local habitat restoration in streams Constraints on the effectiveness of restoration for stream biota Ecological Management amp Restoration 4 3 193 198 Boon H J Cottrell A King D Stevenson R B amp Millar J 2011 Bronfenbrenner s l bioecological theory for modelling community resilience to natural disasters Natural Hazards published online Commonwealth of Australia 2013a Australia s bioregions IBRA Retrieved 6th August 2013 from http www environment gov au parks nrs science bioregion framework ibra Commonwealth of Australia 2013b NRM regions Retrieved 6th August 2013 from http www nrm gov au about nrm regions index html Dovers S R Hezri A A 2010 Institutions and policy processes The means to the ends l of adaptation Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change 1 2 212 231 Dudley N Stolton S Belokurov A Krueger L Lopoukhine N
49. y introduces the key underlying concepts used in the development of the Guide Key Concepts Part 2 is the practical part containing three sections that explain how to use the CAF About the CAF briefly explains the aims of the CAF identifies the audience and explains how and when the CAF should be used Exactly how to carry out the CAF process is explained in the next two sections How to carry out the CAF process outlines the steps necessary for implementing the CAF with summaries of what needs to be done in each of the identified stages The CAF in detail explains the seven components of the CAF how they work and how to assess them Part 1 Background amp Key Concepts BACKGROUND The Catchment Assessment Framework CAF was developed through the Identifying low risk climate change mitigation and adaptation in catchment management while avoiding unintended consequences project funded by the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility NCCARF The aim of the project was to synthesise overarching lessons for mitigation and adaption that would apply to southern Australian rivers The project also developed and tested the CAF in four southern Australian catchments the Murray the Goulburn Broken the Lachlan and the North East The framework was used to assess the climate change adaptation potential of nine natural resource management NRM actions in aquatic ecosystems and four
Download Pdf Manuals
Related Search