Suchergebnisse

Climate change impacts for the Anthroposphere are significant and it is very likely that these impacts are leading to structural damages as well as enhanced threats to human health. Particularly, the poor, elderly and chronically ill will suffer from the higher frequency and magnitude of summer heat waves. A varying potential for the spread of yet non-endemic infectious diseases is very likely, as well as an increased potential for the (further) extension of allergenic plant and animal species. Climate change will very likely trigger increased migration from developing and newly industrialized countries to Europe. To which extent this will lead to more immigration to Austria will depend on policies at the EU- and national levels. The economic impacts of climate change in Austria will very likely produce both winners and losers. However, more precise assessments of the economic impacts are currently only available for certain sectors. The agriculture and electricity production sectors show very moderate GDP-alterations directly in their sectors as well as downstream. The tourism sector is very likely to exhibit stronger changes within the sector and also with other up- and downstream sectors (e.g., energy supply and gastronomy). Within the sector a shift is expected from winter to summer tourism as well as regionally from the west (dominated by winter tourism) to the east with seasonally more diversified tourism. The natural hazard- and weather-related damages observed during the last 30 years depend only to a certain extent on higher frequency and magnitude of extreme weather events. A large share of the damage increase is related to growing wealth and higher assets of the population. The most damaging events have been floods followed by avalanches, while the largest human casualties have been induced by heat waves. Regulations and planning standards (e.g., building-regulation and spatial planning) play a fundamental role in hazard control and disaster risk reduction. Settlement areas in Austria will very likely be most affected by more intense heat waves, while some regions will be further burdened by constraints in drinking water supply. Traffic infrastructures in Austria are very vulnerable to mass movements and flooding, triggered by heavy precipitation events, which are expected to increase in the future. To which extent frequency and magnitude of such events may increase remains uncertain. Instead, the challenge for energy infrastructures in a warmer and during summer potentially dryer Austria is very likely to be substantial. Higher energy demand during heat waves corresponds with supply constraints (due to less effective cooling water supply), while the threat for power distribution networks because of flash-overs will be particularly high especially during thunder storms at the end of summer heat waves and droughts when cooling demand is at peak.

Climate change impacts for the Anthroposphere are significant and it is very likely that these impacts are leading to structural damages as well as enhanced threats to human health. Particularly, the poor, elderly and chronically ill will suffer from the higher frequency and magnitude of summer heat waves. A varying potential for the spread of yet non-endemic infectious diseases is very likely, as well as an increased potential for the (further) extension of allergenic plant and animal species. Climate change will very likely trigger increased migration from developing and newly industrialized countries to Europe. To which extent this will lead to more immigration to Austria will depend on policies at the EU- and national levels. The economic impacts of climate change in Austria will very likely produce both winners and losers. However, more precise assessments of the economic impacts are currently only available for certain sectors. The agriculture and electricity production sectors show very moderate GDP-alterations directly in their sectors as well as downstream. The tourism sector is very likely to exhibit stronger changes within the sector and also with other up- and downstream sectors (e.g., energy supply and gastronomy). Within the sector a shift is expected from winter to summer tourism as well as regionally from the west (dominated by winter tourism) to the east with seasonally more diversified tourism. The natural hazard- and weather-related damages observed during the last 30 years depend only to a certain extent on higher frequency and magnitude of extreme weather events. A large share of the damage increase is related to growing wealth and higher assets of the population. The most damaging events have been floods followed by avalanches, while the largest human casualties have been induced by heat waves. Regulations and planning standards (e.g., building-regulation and spatial planning) play a fundamental role in hazard control and disaster risk reduction. Settlement areas in Austria will very likely be most affected by more intense heat waves, while some regions will be further burdened by constraints in drinking water supply. Traffic infrastructures in Austria are very vulnerable to mass movements and flooding, triggered by heavy precipitation events, which are expected to increase in the future. To which extent frequency and magnitude of such events may increase remains uncertain. Instead, the challenge for energy infrastructures in a warmer and during summer potentially dryer Austria is very likely to be substantial. Higher energy demand during heat waves corresponds with supply constraints (due to less effective cooling water supply), while the threat for power distribution networks because of flash-overs will be particularly high especially during thunder storms at the end of summer heat waves and droughts when cooling demand is at peak.

This chapter focuses on the needs and opportunities as well as the constraints and barriers with respect to mitigation and adaptation to climate change. While the chapter concentrates mainly on Austria, information is provided on the global and EU level to the extent they are relevant for Austria. Section 1.1 discusses the targets already specified for mitigation at the global level, as well as technologies that are already available or are emerging with the potential to meet the challenges and associated costs. In particular, the progress achieved by IPCC and UNFCCC bodies, as well as EU policies and national scale policies and measures are reviewed. Section 1.2, on adaptation to climate change, addresses the different concepts developed at the international scale, reviews progress on the EU and Austrian national adaptation strategy, and characterizes the different types of adaptation relevant over short, medium and long term timescales. The costs of inaction are also addressed. Again, progress achieved by IPCC and UNFCCC bodies, as well as EU policies (green and white papers, etc.) and national scale policies and measures (national adaptation strategy) will be reviewed. This includes the progress made on adaptation planning, implementation, and integration in vulnerable sectors. Section 1.3 highlights the synergies and trade-offs that may emerge among adaptation and mitigation and hence explains the importance of a holistic approach. This also includes a discussion of mainstreaming of mitigation and adaptation into other policy areas. Section 1.4 identifies the barriers for mitigation and adaptation, including obstacles at the individual, social, political and economic levels. Moreover, barriers of insufficient knowledge and uncertainties are addressed. Finally, approaches for overcoming these barriers are summarized and needs for future research are highlighted.

This chapter focuses on the needs and opportunities as well as the constraints and barriers with respect to mitigation and adaptation to climate change. While the chapter concentrates mainly on Austria, information is provided on the global and EU level to the extent they are relevant for Austria. Section 1.1 discusses the targets already specified for mitigation at the global level, as well as technologies that are already available or are emerging with the potential to meet the challenges and associated costs. In particular, the progress achieved by IPCC and UNFCCC bodies, as well as EU policies and national scale policies and measures are reviewed. Section 1.2, on adaptation to climate change, addresses the different concepts developed at the international scale, reviews progress on the EU and Austrian national adaptation strategy, and characterizes the different types of adaptation relevant over short, medium and long term timescales. The costs of inaction are also addressed. Again, progress achieved by IPCC and UNFCCC bodies, as well as EU policies (green and white papers, etc.) and national scale policies and measures (national adaptation strategy) will be reviewed. This includes the progress made on adaptation planning, implementation, and integration in vulnerable sectors. Section 1.3 highlights the synergies and trade-offs that may emerge among adaptation and mitigation and hence explains the importance of a holistic approach. This also includes a discussion of mainstreaming of mitigation and adaptation into other policy areas. Section 1.4 identifies the barriers for mitigation and adaptation, including obstacles at the individual, social, political and economic levels. Moreover, barriers of insufficient knowledge and uncertainties are addressed. Finally, approaches for overcoming these barriers are summarized and needs for future research are highlighted.

There is little doubt that the currently observed patterns of climate change are predominantly caused by human activity (Volume 1, Chapter 1). This chapter addresses the challenge of stabilizing climate change at 2 degrees C and particularly focuses on the questions which mitigation and adaptation measures in Austria can contribute to achieve this goal. Additionally, a number of desirable co-benefits pertaining to socio-ecological transformation leading towards limiting climate change are analysed. In the Copenhagen Accord (UNFCC) and in the EU-Ruling, a goal of limiting the rise of global average temperature to +2 degrees C compared to pre-industrial times has been deemed as necessary to limit dangerous anthropogenic climate change impacts, despite calls from scientists to consider a +1.5 degrees C target. It is an internationally accepted target supported by a broad number of supporters, including industrialized and developing countries as well as non-state actors. Without actions towards reducing emissions, significant negative impacts on the socio-economic conditions in Austria can be expected. This derives an important obligation to undertake necessary mitigation measures in Austria. Mitigation and adaptation measures are necessary, but by themselves provide insufficient conditions for sustainable development. Achievement of the 2 degrees C target requires a focus on climate friendly technologies, as well as behavioural - and institutional change. In particular, the activities of energy provision and consumption, industrial processes and agriculture deserve attention: in 2012, the energy sector activities caused 74.6% of GHG emissions (with one third originating from road transport), industrial processes caused 13.6%, and agriculture triggered 9.4% of emissions, (excluding emission effects of forest cover expansion, cf. Anderl et al., 2014). The corresponding figures for 2010 are: energy sector 75.9%, industrial processes: 12.7%, agriculture: 8.8% (Anderl et al., 2014). To stabilize the climate, the climate impact criteria have to be integrated in all decisions regarding investment, production, politics and consumption, in order to reduce the risk of irreversible changes. At the same time, the social- and economic framing conditions must be respected. Measures to address climate change have to be integrated into the broader criteria of sustainability. Discussions of climate protection measures are typically reduced to additional costs and undesirable changes. Thereby the manifold potential co-benefits of such measures, for example with respect to quality of life, health, employment, rural development, environmental protection, security of supply, and international trade balances are mostly ignored. Integrating these criteria and effects into the analysis is required for being able to display the full spectrum of options for addressing climate change.

There is little doubt that the currently observed patterns of climate change are predominantly caused by human activity (Volume 1, Chapter 1). This chapter addresses the challenge of stabilizing climate change at 2 degrees C and particularly focuses on the questions which mitigation and adaptation measures in Austria can contribute to achieve this goal. Additionally, a number of desirable co-benefits pertaining to socio-ecological transformation leading towards limiting climate change are analysed. In the Copenhagen Accord (UNFCC) and in the EU-Ruling, a goal of limiting the rise of global average temperature to +2 degrees C compared to pre-industrial times has been deemed as necessary to limit dangerous anthropogenic climate change impacts, despite calls from scientists to consider a +1.5 degrees C target. It is an internationally accepted target supported by a broad number of supporters, including industrialized and developing countries as well as non-state actors. Without actions towards reducing emissions, significant negative impacts on the socio-economic conditions in Austria can be expected. This derives an important obligation to undertake necessary mitigation measures in Austria. Mitigation and adaptation measures are necessary, but by themselves provide insufficient conditions for sustainable development. Achievement of the 2 degrees C target requires a focus on climate friendly technologies, as well as behavioural - and institutional change. In particular, the activities of energy provision and consumption, industrial processes and agriculture deserve attention: in 2012, the energy sector activities caused 74.6% of GHG emissions (with one third originating from road transport), industrial processes caused 13.6%, and agriculture triggered 9.4% of emissions, (excluding emission effects of forest cover expansion, cf. Anderl et al., 2014). The corresponding figures for 2010 are: energy sector 75.9%, industrial processes: 12.7%, agriculture: 8.8% (Anderl et al., 2014). To stabilize the climate, the climate impact criteria have to be integrated in all decisions regarding investment, production, politics and consumption, in order to reduce the risk of irreversible changes. At the same time, the social- and economic framing conditions must be respected. Measures to address climate change have to be integrated into the broader criteria of sustainability. Discussions of climate protection measures are typically reduced to additional costs and undesirable changes. Thereby the manifold potential co-benefits of such measures, for example with respect to quality of life, health, employment, rural development, environmental protection, security of supply, and international trade balances are mostly ignored. Integrating these criteria and effects into the analysis is required for being able to display the full spectrum of options for addressing climate change.

Increasingly, roles and responsibilities of the public sector in flood risk management are receiving attention in research and policy. Part of the debate suggests that allocating risk to the private sector increases efficiency as it promotes individual adaptation, thereby reducing the impact if a disaster occurs. In this paper, we analyse the macroeconomic effects as risk-averse investors take flood risk into account in their investment decisions. Our case study is the large Rotterdam area in the Netherlands. Using a spatial computable general equilibium model, we find that the decrease in investments in risky areas leads to a reduction in capital and production in the large Rotterdam area leading to a reduction in potential monetary disaster losses, but not to a reduction in population. The reallocation of risk reduces the long-term impacts from a flood on government tax revenues, but it also leads to welfare losses among households residing in risky regions.

Increasingly, roles and responsibilities of the public sector in flood risk management are receiving attention in research and policy. Part of the debate suggests that allocating risk to the private sector increases efficiency as it promotes individual adaptation, thereby reducing the impact if a disaster occurs. In this paper, we analyse the macroeconomic effects as risk-averse investors take flood risk into account in their investment decisions. Our case study is the large Rotterdam area in the Netherlands. Using a spatial computable general equilibium model, we find that the decrease in investments in risky areas leads to a reduction in capital and production in the large Rotterdam area leading to a reduction in potential monetary disaster losses, but not to a reduction in population. The reallocation of risk reduces the long-term impacts from a flood on government tax revenues, but it also leads to welfare losses among households residing in risky regions.

This paper, part of IDMC's thematic series "The ripple effect: Economic impacts of internal displacement", estimates the fiscal gap that governments of countries affected by internal displacement may face because of future displacement crises. In 2018, IDMC partnered with the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) to produce the first assessments of the economic impacts of internal displacement. The methodology used for this new paper build upon IIASA's previous work on Catastrophe Simulation modelling and on IDMC's estimates of the economic impacts of internal displacement and model displacement risk in the context of sudden-onset disasters and Disaster Displacement Risk Model. One of the main objectives of this research is to inform budget and development plans by anticipating contingent liabilities associated with internal displacement.

This paper, part of IDMC's thematic series "The ripple effect: Economic impacts of internal displacement", estimates the fiscal gap that governments of countries affected by internal displacement may face because of future displacement crises. In 2018, IDMC partnered with the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) to produce the first assessments of the economic impacts of internal displacement. The methodology used for this new paper build upon IIASA's previous work on Catastrophe Simulation modelling and on IDMC's estimates of the economic impacts of internal displacement and model displacement risk in the context of sudden-onset disasters and Disaster Displacement Risk Model. One of the main objectives of this research is to inform budget and development plans by anticipating contingent liabilities associated with internal displacement.

Peru has experienced a long history of disasters linked to the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO), including during the global El Niño events of 1982–83 and 1997–98. This history has contributed to progress in ENSO forecasting and preparation, as well as broader development of the country's disaster risk management (DRM) capacities. Despite such advances, in early 2017 Peru was devastated by a localized "coastal El Niño" event. This study examines why the 2017 event proved so catastrophic, especially given Peru's substantial preparations for the 2015-16 global El Niño a year earlier. To address this question, the analysis applies a disaster forensics approach grounded in the interdisciplinary lens of political ecology. Drawing upon historical and institutional analysis and stakeholder interviews, the study describes how the geophysical characteristics of El Niño events interact with the extensive exposure and vulnerability of Peru's population and infrastructure to produce high levels of disaster risk. The study then examines the contemporary institutional context for DRM in Peru and describes recent measures to address El Niño-related risks specifically. While acknowledging challenges to DRM linked to El Nino's geophysical attributes, the analysis locates crucial root causes of Peru's recent El Niño disasters in socio-political and institutional characteristics—including centralization, sectoral division, and corruption—and describes how these factors undermine efforts to develop more integrated and robust DRM capacities. The analysis concludes with recommendations for conducting forensic studies of the political ecology of disaster in other contexts.

Peru has experienced a long history of disasters linked to the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO), including during the global El Niño events of 1982–83 and 1997–98. This history has contributed to progress in ENSO forecasting and preparation, as well as broader development of the country's disaster risk management (DRM) capacities. Despite such advances, in early 2017 Peru was devastated by a localized "coastal El Niño" event. This study examines why the 2017 event proved so catastrophic, especially given Peru's substantial preparations for the 2015-16 global El Niño a year earlier. To address this question, the analysis applies a disaster forensics approach grounded in the interdisciplinary lens of political ecology. Drawing upon historical and institutional analysis and stakeholder interviews, the study describes how the geophysical characteristics of El Niño events interact with the extensive exposure and vulnerability of Peru's population and infrastructure to produce high levels of disaster risk. The study then examines the contemporary institutional context for DRM in Peru and describes recent measures to address El Niño-related risks specifically. While acknowledging challenges to DRM linked to El Nino's geophysical attributes, the analysis locates crucial root causes of Peru's recent El Niño disasters in socio-political and institutional characteristics—including centralization, sectoral division, and corruption—and describes how these factors undermine efforts to develop more integrated and robust DRM capacities. The analysis concludes with recommendations for conducting forensic studies of the political ecology of disaster in other contexts.

This paper examines recent experience with insurance and other risk-financing instruments in developing countries, informed by experience in developed countries, to provide insights on the effectiveness of insurance for reducing economic insecurity. Insurance and other risk financing strategies are viewed in the overall context of risk management, including the prevention of losses as well as financing the recovery process through risk pooling and transfer strategies. Specific examples of public-private insurance programs for households/businesses, farms and governments are described, including their limitations, especially in light of recent post-Katrina experience in the US. By examining the costs, benefits and risks of public-private risk-financing programs, insights are provided on the effectiveness of insurance as a mechanism for providing economic security to vulnerable communities and governments.