1. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Taking uncertainty on board in decision making The example of adaptation to climate change

2. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Risk = Probability x Consequence Lay attitudes involve more than just ‘risk’ Severity and Nature of Consequences Cultural Orientations (there is no single ‘public’) Social Amplification Effects Trust in Risk Managers / Science Attitudes to risk and uncertainty

3. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Nederland Later Major anticipated problem areas Sea level River runoff Groundwater pressure

4. Adaptation under what uncertainty? Planned adaptation –to single scenario of anticipated climate impacts (KNMI 2000 scenario) no uncertainty –to single scenario of anticipated climate impacts + to variability statistical uncertainty (without epistemic unc.) –to range of scenario’s of anticipated climate impacts (KNMI 2006 scenario’s) scenario uncertainty –to range of scenario’s of anticipated climate impacts + imaginable climate surprises (MNP Nederland Later) scenario uncertainty + recognized ignorance

5. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Decision-making frameworks Top down approaches –Prevention Principle –IPCC approach –Risk approaches Bottom up approaches –Precautionary Principle –Engineering safety margin –Anticipating design –Resilience –Adaptive management –Human development approaches Mixed approaches –Adaptation Policy Framework –Robust decision making

6. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht IPCC seven step approach: 1)Define problem (study area, sectors, etc.); 2)Select method of assessment most appropriate to the problems; 3)Test methods/conduct sensitivity analysis; 4)Select and apply climate change scenarios; 5)Assess biophysical and socio-economic impacts; 6)Assess autonomous adjustments; 7)Evaluate adaptation strategies. (Carter et al. 1994, Parry and Carter 1998)

7. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Risk approach (UK-CIP) Eight stages decision framework: 1.Identify problem and objectives 2.Establish decision-making criteria 3.Assess risk 4.Identify options 5.Appraise options 6.Make decision 7.Implement decision 8.Monitor, evaluate and review. Flexible characteristics: -cricular -Feedback and iteration -Stages 3, 4 and 5 are tiered. (identify, screen, prioritise and evaluate before more detailed risk assessments and options appraisals are required.) “The risk assessment endpoints should help the decision-maker define levels of risk (probabilities and consequences or impacts) that are acceptable, tolerable or unacceptable”

8. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht No regrets Favour adaptation strategies which will yield benefits (for other, less uncertain, policy concerns) regardless of whether or not climate impacts will occur.

9. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Precautionary Principle “When human activities may lead to morally unacceptable harm that is scientifically plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that harm. Morally unacceptable harm refers to harm to humans or the environment that is threatening to human life or health, or serious and effectively irreversible, or inequitable to present or future generations, or imposed without adequate consideration of the human rights of those affected. The judgment of plausibility should be grounded in scientific analysis. Analysis should be ongoing so that chosen actions are subject to review. Uncertainty may apply to, but need not be limited to, causality or the bounds of the possible harm. Actions are interventions that are undertaken before harm occurs that seek to avoid or diminish the harm. Actions should be chosen that are proportional to the seriousness of the potential harm, with consideration of their positive and negative consequences, and with an assessment of the moral implications of both action and inaction. The choice of action should be the result of a participatory process. ” (UNESCO COMEST 2005)

10. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Engineering Safety Factor / Conservative Design

11. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Long term surprise scenario margin (e.g. Greenland, WAIS) Engineering safety margin Stronger foundation than needed under most plausible scenarios Flexibility to build higher dike later “Anticipating design”

12. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Adaptive management Iterative feedback and learning based approach Management as experiment Emphasis in process and continuous learning (trial and error, small step->evaluate->adjust) Flexibility, flexibility, flexibility! Especially useful in small scale systems May fail in case of surprises and discontinuities in system response (if past experience from which you learned is not a key to the future)

13. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Resilience If uncertainties about climate change are large, one can still know how the resilience of social-ecological systems can be enhanced Resilience is the capacity of a system to tolerate disturbance without collapsing into a qualitatively different, usually undesired, state www.resalliance.org Principles: Homeostasis Omnivory High flux Flatness Buffering Redundancy

14. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Robust decision-making Models are used as exploratory tools instead of prediction Uncertainty ranges to be explored can be informed by the current state of scientific knowledge Adaptation decisions are assessed against climate change uncertainties until a robust strategy (least sensitive to uncertainties) is identified

15. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Problem: Dimensioning of water supply system Additional water required (Ml/d) to maintain levels of service in 2030 under different demand scenarios as a function of regional climate response uncertainty Robustness exploration (Dessai, 2005)

16. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht decision making under uncertainty frameworks Statistical uncertainty Scenario uncertainty Recognized ignorance & surprises IPCC approach+++-- Risk approaches+++-- Engineering safety margin++  - Anticipating design++++ Resilience  +++ Adaptive management++--- Prevention Principle++  -- Precautionary Principle+++ Human development approaches  ++ Adaptation Policy Framework+++ Robust decision making++++ Synthesis

17. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Uncertainty assessment methodsStatistical uncertainty Scenario uncertainty Recognized ignorance & surprises Scenario analysis ("surprise-free")  ++- Expert elicitation+++ Sensitivity analysis+  Monte Carlo++-- Probabilistic multi model ensemble++  + Bayesian methods++-  NUSAP / Pedigree analysis++++ Fuzzy sets / imprecise probabilities+  + Stakeholder involvement  ++ Quality Assurance / Quality Checklists++++ Extended peer review (review by stakeholders)  +++ Wild cards / surprise scenarios-+++ Synthesis

18. Copernicus Institute Universiteit Utrecht Synthesis