Adaptation

Content Page from Previous Semesters - For Reference Only

This last section of the module focuses on adaptation to climate change. You are already familiar with the definition. So, let’s look some of the ethical issues behind adaptation discussions.

First, let’s take a look at another vulnerability map, assuming the same climate scenario of 5.5º warming, this time including enhanced adaptive capacity. Clearly, the degree of vulnerability would decline in all countries. What determines adaptive capacity? Economic wealth, human capital, access to resources, social capital (social networks, ties, norms), infrastructure, experience with risk(s), technologies, and perceptions of risks (cognitive factors). The question is, how do we achieve enhanced adaptive capacity and, more importantly, who is going to pay for it?

Global Distribution of Vulnerability to Climate Change.

Credit: Yohe, G., E. Malone, A. Brenkert, M. Schlesinger, H. Meij, X. Xing, and D. Lee. 2006. “A Synthetic Assessment of the Global Distribution of Vulnerability to Climate Change from the IPCC Perspective that Reflects Exposure and Adaptive Capacity.” Palisades, New York: CIESIN (Center for International Earth Science Information Network), Columbia University. http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/mva/ccv/ [April 2010]

Second, do you think industrialized countries that have benefited from almost free emissions to develop and enhance their own lifestyles are in any way obligated to help developing countries to adapt to climate change?

The short and clear answer is yes! Already in 1992 in the UNFCCC, Article 4.4 requires industrialized countries to assist “particularly vulnerable developing countries” in meeting costs of adaptation. Yet, it took almost 10 years and many heated debates in the international climate change negotiations to launch the Adaptation Fund, in 2001. Key documents to the fund were adopted in 2008.

The Adaptation Fund

The Adaptation Fund (AF) receives its money from a 2% share/levy in the proceeds from the CDM (from sale of CERs). In other words, the fund is self-financed through the carbon market. It has quite innovative features including a principle of ownership by developing countries, meaning that, for the first time in history of the international carbon regime, countries most affected can participate more fully in decision-making. Also, direct access of funds by developing countries in currently negotiated.

However, some key challenges remain, as illustrated in the graphic.

Adaptation Fund.

Credit: Petra Tschakert.

How much money is in the Adaptation Fund?

By 2010, there should be roughly $150 million. By 2012, the AF is likely to contain at least $500 million, but probably more around $ 2-3 billion. However, the amount needed seems to be much higher. A recent World Bank report (30 Sept 2009) “Economics of Adaptation to Climate Change”, funded by the Netherlands, Switzerland and the UK, estimates that $75-100 billion/year will be needed until 2050, assuming a 2º warmer world. The International Institute for Environment and development (IIED) estimates that $200-300 billion/year will be necessary to fund adaptation.

What are the allocation criteria for the funds?

That’s a really tricky ethical question. For one, there are rather incompatible principles of distributive justice: Some claim that priority should be given to countries with large potential damages (proportionality rule). Others argue that we should start where adaptation is cheap (classical utilitarianism). Still others favor a priority view under which the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDSs) should be the first to have access to adaptation funds.

Moreover, there are no clear rules yet (only criteria) for the parameters that should be used to establish the allocation of resources. Those put forward by the Adaptation Fund Board include: level of vulnerability, level of adverse impacts, level of urgency and risk arising from delay, balanced and equitable access to fund, lessons learned captured, if possible securing co-benefits, maximizing multi-sectoral and cross-sectoral benefits, and adaptive capacity to adverse effects of climate change.

What are the major ethical obligations?

Is the responsibility to provide money for adaptation a matter of justice (compensation for past and current injustice) or a humanitarian duty (supporting adaptation to prevent deprivation of basic human needs)?

How should historic responsibility be considered in assigning adaptation responsibility given?

This is another tricky question. Some say that developed nations that have contributed most to recent increases atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations have a responsibility to pay. Others argue that other countries that are often classified as developing countries but arguably already or soon will exceed their fair share of safe greenhouse gas emissions, such as China and India, should also pay. Some state that at the core of the debate on historic responsibility is a certain level of awareness that emissions from certain territories where putting people and ecological systems at risk.

Todd Stern, chief US Climate Change Negotiator, for instance, said at COP 15 in Copenhagen:

"I actually completely reject the notion of a debt or reparations or anything of the like," Stern said. "Let's just be mindful of the fact for most of the 200 years since the Industrial Revolution, people were blissfully ignorant of the fact that emissions cause the greenhouse effect. It's a relatively recent phenomenon. It's the wrong way to look at this. We absolutely recognize our historical role in putting emissions in the atmosphere that are there now. But the sense of guilt or culpability or reparations, I categorically reject that."

Who decides?

The Adaptation Fund Board holds the ultimate decision-making power. It constitutes a refreshing governance and management structure including 16 members (+ 16 alternates) representing UN regional groups (Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America+Caribbean, Western Europe+others) LDCs, SIDSs, Annex 1 and Non-Annex 1 countries. Overall, it is a majority representation from developing countries.

Where should adaptation funding go?

Right now, there is a consensus that the money should go to nations and their selected accredited entities.

Grading Criteria

You will be graded on the quality of your participation. See the grading rubric for specifics on how this assignment will be graded.