Recap on field experience – participatory exercise 15 minutes Split into two groups from yesterday Recap on observations One representative from each group provide summary 30 minutes Carrousel format with 3 stations covering questions provided in advance of field trip: 1.What are the adaptation needs at both sites? - Rob 2.What do the communities (at both sites) regard as no-regret measures and why were they selected? - Caroline 3.How do the no-regrets measures relate to the components of vulnerability: exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity? - Ed 3 groups (see next slide) 7 minutes at each station only adding new ideas, not revisiting input already covered by previous group 3 minute feedback from station facilitators

3 Groups Group 1Group 2Group 3 Daniela (2)Marko (1)Felice (2) Philip (1)Ali (2)Dan (2) Moon (2)Paul M (1)Gauri (2) Rajendra (2)Anu (1)Vijaya (2) Barbara (1)Madhav (2)Babu (1) Richard (1)Henry (2)Edith (1) James (1)Doris (2)Laura (1) Pablo (2)Silvia (1)Sophie (1) Irene (1)Paul N (2)

Overview of Climate Change Vulnerability and Impact Assessment (VIA) Guidance to date Robert Munroe, Nathalie Doswald

Overview  VIA process – outputs to inputs and inputs to outputs  VIA guidance - Purpose - Comments on 1 st draft - Overview of 2 nd draft - Next steps

Guidance on rapid assessment of ecosystem services + inputs into consultant reports Provided guidance document  What are the essential and desirable ecosystem services for people in the project area and downstream?  Which locations supply these ecosystem services?  What are the current management practices which influence these ecosystem services?  Can the current supply of ecosystem services meet likely future demand? Informed identification of essential and desirable ecosystem services reports How does this relate to the VIA process? Informed step 2 and 3 of VIA guidance

Guidance on documenting and identifying EBA options + inputs into consultant reports Provided criteria for searching for EbA good practice/existing measures  Founded on a vulnerability assessment  Focused on human adaptation  Has components of an adaptation project Informed reports on EbA good practice and current capacities How does this relate to the VIA process? Reports inform scope of VIAs (© Zenon Gomel Apaza)

Mapping workshop Where adaptation activities are needed and what EbA activities are feasible where  Develop a common conceptual framework for mapping vulnerability and EbA options and suitable/available areas, including process steps and useful data sources  Discussions on how to include participatory input and what characteristics of adaptive capacity it is possible to map  Trialled existing tools to facilitate VIA/EbA spatial analysis How does this relate to the VIA process? Conceptual framework informed VIA guidance Example, following the steps developed for steps 2/3 of VIA guidance, identifying what climate variables limit or determine key aspects of ecosystem functioning, was discussed

Inputs into VIA methods documents produced by consultants Review reports identifying VIA methods used in-country, and outlining sources of useful information Review reports outlining VIA methodology How does this relate to the VIA process? Inputs informed focus of VIA guidance

WCMC inputs summary WCMC INPUT INTO VIA PROCESSNepalUgandaPeru Guidance on rapid assessment of ecosystem services + inputs into consultant reports√√√ Guidance on documenting and identifying EBA options+ inputs into consultant reports√√ √ (via Scientific Adviser) VIA & EBA mapping√√ Inputs into VIA methods document produced by consultants√√√ Inputs into VIA proposal by consultants√√ No because only seen when contract finalised VIA exchange session* in country (*WCMC and VIA team presentations) √√ Workshop on information needs for mapping vulnerability and potential for EbA measures √ Reviewing VIA team reports Not yet √√

VIA guidance Purpose/approach  Consistent structure with other vulnerability assessments: scope, context, current vulnerability, future vulnerability  Not a technical field manual  Not how to choose/undertake EbA interventions  Coupled human-environment /socio-ecological system  ecosystem services  Vulnerability ∫ impact (exposure, sensitivity), adaptive capacity  Indicator-based but links to modelling, participatory, ‘analytical narrative’ (qualitative) approaches VulnerabilityExposureSensitivity Adaptive capacity Impact Resilience

VIA guidance  Simple steps to integrate ecosystem considerations −Key questions −Process with guidance −Other useful materials −Outputs −Fictitious case study Summary of comments  Too ecosystem orientated  Build on capitals/assets concepts of SLF  Hypothetical case = useful

Steps 0. Identify and gather resources 0.1 Multi-sectoral team 0.2 Data availability 0.3 Capacity and resources 1. Define the VIA scope 1.1 Initial scope 1.2 Background desk-based research 1.3 Development/adaptation vision 1.4 Final scope 2. Understand the context 2.1 Define livelihoods with stakeholders 2.2 Identify relevant ecosystem services used by different groups within the study area 2.3 Identify what ecosystems supply which services 2.4 Historic profile of the socio-ecological system 2.5 Institutional background to ecosystem governance 3. Assess current vulnerability 3.1 Identify indicators Exposure Sensitivity Adaptive capacity 3.2 Assessing current vulnerability Combining indicators Weighting indicators Putting it all together 3.3 Analysis and interpretation 4. Assess future vulnerability 4.1 Relationship between current and future vulnerability 4.2 Scenarios Climate change scenarios Development scenarios 4.3 Assess future vulnerability 5. Next steps 5.1 Validate assessment results with participatory workshop 5.2 Communicating results 5.3 Moving to adaptation option implementation steps (information on adaptation options, weightings, scenario analysis)

Step 2 – Understand the context  Societal group lists; Principle livelihoods  Link to capitals (natural, physical, social, human, financial)/ecosystem services;  Link to ecosystem  Status and trends in ecosystem services  Historical profile of socio-ecological system –Hazards and interaction with ecosystem services –What ecosystem services were used to cope/adapt  Mapping the relationship between institutions/organisations/groups and ecosystem service management (inform sensitivity and adaptive capacity indicators)

Step 3 – assessing current vulnerability  Linking exposure to climatic variables that affect the supply of ecosystem services  Understanding the current state of the ecosystem(s) associated with the ecosystem services categorised as important and the climatic parameters of ecosystem service (structure, interactions and processes) – sensitivity  Adaptive capacity linked to ecosystems –What factors enable change, moderate damage, help take advantage of opportunities (including existence of/access to assets/capital)?  Combining indicators (numerical and analytical narrative)

Step 4 – assessing future vulnerability  Work with step 3 indicators  Use climate change projections to inform climate change scenarios to adjust/add to exposure indicators –how are critical climate variables likely to change and what and where would be the impact of change on ecosystem services?  Development scenarios to adjust/add to sensitivity and adaptive capacity indicators  Introduce risk (probability) considerations

Next steps  Finalise 2 nd draft  Integrate lessons learnt from national processes  Programme participant review and peer-review (interest from UK Adaptation Sub-Committee)  Add to useful material/reference lists (suggestions welcome!) Nepal UgandaPeru

Challenges with guidance  Finding consistent steps between vulnerability assessment methodologies  Many different vulnerability assessment approaches  Balance top-down prescriptions with country own preferences  Simplicity v technical complexity  Written without practical application experience GIZ 2013: “More important than selecting one conceptual approach over another is being clear and upfront about it in the analysis, i.e. reflecting on how the chosen approach shapes the results.” (Comparative analysis of climate change vulnerability assessments: Lessons from Tunisia and Indonesia)  Pioneering – integrating ecosystem considerations beyond impact of climate change on natural resources  Socio-ecological balance  Moving beyond species to ecosystem services

Country VIA presentations  VIA methodology/process  How they have adapted their methodology/process using advice from UNEP-WCMC or from other means  What the results will look like and what the methodology/process can/cannot achieve  Preliminary results  What the preliminary results could mean for adaptation/EbA  How the preliminary results relate to initial participatory assessment that informed the no-regrets measures

Benefits and Limitations of Vulnerability Assessment Approaches – Participatory Exercise 1 hour Carousel format with 3 stations: 1.Nepal’s approach 2.Peru’s approach 3.Uganda’s approach Discuss the benefits and limitations of each country’s vulnerability assessment approach, particularly focusing on how ecosystem considerations have been incorporated Same 3 groups as this morning’s exercise 2 facilitators at each station (country coordinator and RAM, PB, Pablo) 10 minutes at each station 5 minutes feedback from each pair of facilitators