1. (What role for gray literature, diverse languages, subjective and qualitative research, etc.) Karen OBrien, Department of Sociology and Human Geography University of Oslo, Norway Karen.obrien@sosgeo.uio.no

2. How can the SREX report embrace diverse languages, types of knowledge, and perspectives to provide a truly global assessment on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation?

3. IPCC initially skeptical to SREX; Is there enough of a scientific literature on this topic? Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs commissioned a report and bibliography (hundreds of examples of articles, books, reports, including substantil number of articles from peer-reviewed literature) SREX approved at 30th Session of IPCC in April, 2009.

4. One of the objectives of SREX is to assess efforts undertaken worldwide by Governments and communities to promote and implement disaster risk reduction, sustainable development, and environmental risk management. A systematic review would also enable Governments to identify those existing practices that should be strengthened because they provide important synergies.

5. Most literature cited in IPCC reports is in English Other languages can be assessed, but this places the responsibility on those who can access and read the literature.

6. Post-normal science Action research Post-modern critiques of rational science (for example, critiques of cost-benefit analysis)

7. Traditional or indigenous knowledge; Cultural interpretations of change; Practical knowledge (gray literature).

8. How do we include literature on the meaning and significance of DRR and CCA for individual and collective beliefs, values and worldviews? Where do ethical and philosophical arguments fit in? How are indirect and long-term costs taken into account in the literature?

9. Discussion questions: 1. What are the most important literature sources for understanding DRR and CCA in Asia? (sources, languages, etc.)? 2. How can success stories and failures that are based on experiences be brought into the report? 3. Can best practices be identified by the existing literature, or is there a need for a new literature?