Suchergebnisse

Although participatory approaches are becoming more widespread, to date vulnerability assessments have largely been conducted by technocrats and have paid little attention to underlying causes of vulnerability, such as inequality and biased governance systems. Participatory assessments that recognise the social roots of vulnerability, however, are critical in helping individuals and institutions rethink their understanding of and responses to climate change impacts. This paper interrogates the contribution of Oxfam's Vulnerability and Risk Assessment methodology to enabling transformation at both personal and institutional levels. Three Vulnerability and Risk Assessment exercises were conducted in Malawi, Botswana and Namibia by one or more of the authors in 2015 and 2016. Reflecting on these workshops, we explore the contribution that a process like the Vulnerability and Risk Assessment may bring to transformation. We conclude that these types of inclusive and representative participatory approaches can shift narratives and power dynamics, allow marginal voices to be heard, build cross–scalar relationships and enable the co-creation of solutions. Such approaches can play a key role in moving towards transformational thinking and action, especially in relation to climate change adaptation.

Drawing from the proceedings of an expert workshop with academics, researchers, government and NGO participants working in diverse countries in southern Africa and beyond, this paper reviews the discourse on resilience, both conceptually and in practice. We highlight opportunities to develop and apply more situated, equity-sensitive and context-relevant understanding of resilience, particularly in the water sector. To pursue more just and resilient water futures in highly unequal and water stressed regions, we propose that researchers and practitioners (1) place greater emphasis on the transformative potential of resilience, (2) broaden the social dimensions of resilience to account more fully for intangible and other social factors, (3) engage critically with the decision-making processes and practices of building resilience, (4) contribute to the development of indicators and guidelines for building just and resilient water futures, (5) strengthen the role of situated knowledges, (6) critically engage with scale and boundaries in complex adaptive systems, and (7) strengthen the policy-science-civil society interface. ; Science, Faculty of ; Non UBC ; Resources, Environment and Sustainability (IRES), Institute for ; Reviewed ; Faculty ; Researcher ; Graduate

In this paper we review current approaches and recent advances in research on climate impacts and adaptation in South Africa. South Africa has a well-developed earth system science research program that underpins the climate change scenarios developed for the southern African region. Established research on the biophysical impacts of climate change on key sectors (water, agriculture, and biodiversity) integrates the climate change scenarios but further research is needed in a number of areas, such as the climate impacts on cities and the built environment. National government has developed a National Climate Change Response White Paper, but this has yet to translate into policy that mainstreams adaptation in everyday practice and longer-term planning in all spheres and levels of government. A national process to scope long-term adaptation scenarios is underway, focusing on cross-sectoral linkages in adaptation responses at a national level. Adaptation responses are emerging in certain sectors. Some notable city-scale and project-based adaptation responses have been implemented, but institutional challenges persist. In addition, a number of knowledge gaps remain in relation to the biophysical and socio-economic impacts of climate change. A particular need is to develop South Africa's capacity to undertake integrated assessments of climate change that can support climate-resilient development planning.

Resilience building has become a growing policy agenda, particularlyfor urban risk management. While much of the resilience agenda has been shapedby policies and discourses from the global North, its applicability for cities of theglobal South, particularly African cities, has not been sufficiently assessed. Focusingon rights of urban citizens as the object to be made resilient, rather than physicaland ecological infrastructures, may help to address many of the root causes thatcharacterize the unacceptable risks that urban residents face on a daily basis.Linked to this idea, we discuss four entry points for grounding a rights and justiceorientation for urban resilience. First, notions of resilience must move away fromnarrow, financially oriented risk analyses. Second, opportunities must be createdfor "negotiated resilience", to allow for attention to processes that support thesegoals, as well as for the integration of diverse interests. Third, achieving resiliencein ways that do justice to the local realities of diverse urban contexts necessitatestaking into account endogenous, locally situated processes, knowledges andnorms. And finally, urban resilience needs to be placed within the context of globalsystems, providing an opportunity for African contributions to help reimagine therole that cities might play in these global financial, political and science processes

'We have kicked the can down the road once again – but we are running out of road.' – Rachel Kyte, Dean of Fletcher School at Tufts University. We, in our capacities as scientists, economists, governance and policy specialists, are shifting from warnings to guidance for action before there is no more 'road.' The science is clear and irrefutable; humanity is in advanced ecological overshoot. Our over exploitation of resources exceeds ecosystems'capacity to provide them or to absorb our waste. Society has failed to meet clearly stated goals of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Civilization faces an epochal crossroads, but with potentially much better, wiser outcomes if we act now. What are the concrete and transformative actions by which we can turn away from the abyss? In this paper we forcefully recommend priority actions and resource allocation to avert the worst of the climate and nature emergencies, two of the most pressing symptoms of overshoot, and lead society into a future of greater wellbeing and wisdom. Humanity has begun the social, economic, political and technological initiatives needed for this transformation. Now, massive upscaling and acceleration of these actions and collaborations are essential before irreversible tipping points are crossed in the coming decade. We still can overcome significant societal, political and economic barriers of our own making. Previously, we identified six core areas for urgent global action – energy, pollutants, nature, food systems, population stabilization and economic goals. Here we identify an indicative, systemic and time-limited framework for priority actions for policy, planning and management at multiple scales from household to global. We broadly follow the 'Reduce-Remove-Repair' approach to rapid action. To guide decision makers, planners, managers, and budgeters, we cite some of the many experiments, mechanisms and resources in order to facilitate rapid global adoption of effective solutions. Our biggest challenges are not technical, but social, economic, political and behavioral. To have hope of success, we must accelerate collaborative actions across scales, in different cultures and governance systems, while maintaining adequate social, economic and political stability. Effective and timely actions are still achievable on many, though not all fronts. Such change will mean the difference for billions of children and adults, hundreds of thousands of species, health of many ecosystems, and will determine our common future.