“DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED ADAPTATION(EBA) IN LAO PDR AND VIETNAM” Raji Dhital, EBA regional project manager, WWF-GMP.
Post on 27-Dec-2015
214 Views
Preview:
Transcript
“DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED ADAPTATION(EBA) IN
LAO PDR AND VIETNAM”
Raji Dhital,EBA regional project manager, WWF-GMP
ECOSYSTEM BASED ADAPTATION
Ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) is the use of biodiversity and ecosystem services as part of an overall adaptation strategy to help people to adapt to the adverse effects of climate change.
Exploitation/ protection of ecosystem
Ecosystem services (provisioning, regulating,
cultural services)
Exploitation/ protection of ecosystem
Ecosystem services (provisioning, regulating,
cultural services)
System under steady state
System subjected to increased/ decreased development risks
System subjected to increased/ decreased climate risks
Nexus
Development
Ecosystem
Development
Ecosystem
Nexus
ECOSYSTEM BASED ADAPTATION
Ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) is the use of biodiversity and ecosystem services as part of an overall adaptation strategy to help people to adapt to the adverse effects of climate change.
RATIONALE FOR AN OPERATIONAL GUIDANCE
• Adaptation to Climate Change increasingly recognized in development agenda in the GMS countries
• Planned and likely investments on adaptation ( including investment on infrastructure-such as dykes, channels for water diversion ) could benefit from linkages with the ecosystems
• A need for operationalizing the concept of EbA in a locally accessible way
• A need for better understanding of the effectiveness of EBA, and include it in policy and planning processes
• WB supported study in partnerships with the governments of Laos and Vietnam
PROJECT’S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Accelerate the adoption of EbA strategies in Laos and Vietnam, and throughout the rest of the GMS.
Specific Objectives1. Develop and customize operational ‘framework’
for undertaking EbA2. Promote EbA strategy through case studies and
policy recommendations and analyze its cost-effectiveness
3. Promote mainstreaming of EBA in policies and planning processes
goal!!
GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR THE FRAMEWORK
Linking to development- minimizing risk and adapting is NOT enough.
Adopt a system perspective: Coupled socio-ecological system
Adaptation is possible despite uncertainties and lack of information on different complexities
Include perception at the core of the assessment framework
Bottom up designs and top down/parallel transfer of knowledge and experiences ( e.g. spatial analysis, CEA)
Piloting at local level
KEY CONCEPTS
• Inclusive of communities ecosystem and their interaction
• Units of analysis where possible
Social ecological system
• A function of exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity
• Current and future Vulnerability
• Capacity to bounce back to the original state after damage
• A subset of adaptive capacityResilience
• Ways to assess the vulnerability of communities and ecosystems
Vulnerability Assessment
These concepts have been applied on the basis of:- Adaptation of communities vs. ecosystems- Simple and practical vs. ideal
FRAMEWORK: FOCUS ON SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM
Steps Ecosystem lens Tools
1. Objectives and context setting
System representation- communities and ecosystem
Secondary data collection; Stakeholder consultation
2. Vulnerability assessment – current and potential risks and impacts
Risks and Impact assessment of communities AND ecosystems-socio ecological systems
PRA tools: seasonal calendar ,timeline, Focus group discussionGIS mapping and modeling
3. Prioritization of Adaptation measures
Value of natural capital recognized ( Qualitative); Integrated approach
Stakeholder consultationMulticriteria analysisCost effectiveness analysis
4. Implementation & monitoring5. Mainstreaming
CUSTOMIZATION AND FIELD TESTING IN BEN TRE (MEKONG DELTA) AND CHAMPASAK
EBA Framework
Relevance?
Clarity?
Context barriers capacity
Lessons from field
Review/revise
EXPERIENCES FROM THE FIELD
• Step 1: Context setting:• Set a social ecological system-
• Agriculture, wetland, forest catchments and their dependent communities in and near BeunKiatNong wetland
• Coastal stretch in Ben Tre• Boundary determined by administrative boundary- wetland site
and
• Set a preliminary objective(?)• Adaptation objective vs. project objective
• Establish a multi-disciplinary tool• Skillsets needed
• Workplan
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
• Assess current and future risks from climate and non climate pressures
• Future scenarios to identify future threatsLaoLivelihood:Agriculture and livestocksNTFP collectionFishingHuntingLocal businesses• MAJOR THREATS:
• Floods and droughts/ dry spellls
• Less rain in dry season and intensive rain in wet season
VietnamLivelihood:• Agriculture ( Rice)• Fruits• Livestock• Fisheries and aquaculture (shrimp,
cockles, etc.)• MAJOR THREATS• Storms, droughts, unseasonal
rain, reduced precipitation
PARTICIPATORY SCORING THE EFFECTS OF NATURAL HAZARDS ON THE ECOSYSTEM (-2 - +2)
Hazards Mangrove Sand dune Intertidal area
Coastal sand
dunes
Estuarine water
Brackish water ponds
Fresh water, crop
Storm -2/-2/-1 -1/-2/0 -2/-1/0 -1/-2/0 -1/-1/0 -2/-1/-1 -/-2/-
Tornado -1/-1/-1 0/-1/-1 0/0/0 0/0/0 0/0/0 0/0/0 -/-1/-
High tide/ sea level rise
-1/+2/-1 -2/-2/-2 0/-1/0 0/-1/0 -1/-2/-1 -2/-2/-2 -/-2/-
Reduced precipitation
0/0/0 -1/-2/-1 0/0/0 0/-2/0 0/0/0 -1/-1/-1 -/-2/-
Unseasonal rain
0/0/0 -2/-1/-2 0/0/0 0/-1/0 0/0/0 -1/+1/-1 -/-1/-
Increase in temp.
0/-1/0 -1/-2/-1 -1/-1/-1 -1/-2/-1 0/-1/0 -1/-1/-1 -/-2/-
Drought (prolonged)
-1/-1/-1 -2/-2/-2 -2/2/-2 -2/-2/-2 -1/-1/-1 -2/-1/-2 -/-2/-
ANALYZING FUTURE VULNERABILITY
• Different ways-• Directly look at vulnerability such as coastal vulnerability
using models (Ben Tre)• Requires data, maps, expertise
• Create scenarios in a participatory way through stakeholder discussion-based on projected risks (climate and non climate)• Allows to better gauze at percieved threats
• Floods more intense and more frequent• Droughts more severe• Affected: Agriculture, NTFP’s etc.
VULNERABILITY RANKING-EXAMPLE
Future: Three Scenarios Developed in Ben Tre
Business as usual Intense industrial growth
Biodiversity conservation
Change in Salinity intrusion,Inundation,Settlement near the coastline
16
Coastal Vulnerability- risk index
WeightingVery low Low Moderate High Very high
1 2 3 4 5
GeomorphologyRocky; high cliffs; fiord;
fiard
Medium cliff;
indented coast
Low cliff; glacial drift; alluvial plain
Cobble beach;
estuary; lagoon; bluff
Barrier beach;
sand beach; mud flat;
delta
Topographical> 90th
Percentile > 75th
PercentileAverage value
< 25th Percentile
< 10th Percentile
Natural ecosystem
Coral reef; mangrove;
coastal forest
High dune; marsh
Low dune; oyster reef
Seagrass; kelp
No habitat
Changes level sea
Net decrease ±1 Net rise
Wind Exposure < 10th
Percentile < 25th
PercentileAverage value
> 75th Percentile
> 90th Percentile
Wave Exposure< 10th
Percentile < 25th
PercentileAverage value
> 75th Percentile
> 90th Percentile
Surge Potential No exposure < 25th
PercentileAverage value
> 75th Percentile
> 90th Percentile
Coastal Vulnerability: Results
Model waves and coastal erosion
NATURAL HABITAT
(mangrove: species,
structure, properties)DEM
Structural materials
coast
Wave height
distance
Tide
Wind: direction,
speed
Example of management actions- land point 1
Current
Erosion 5.53 m3, Movement 175.0 m
BAU
Erosion 12.99 m3, Movement 583.0 m
Conservation
Erosion 0 m3, Movement 0 m
Development
Erosion 22.78 m3, Movement 766.0 m
Landpoint 1 Landpoint 2 Landpoint 3 Landpoint 4 Landpoint 5 Landpoint 6 Landpoint 784.00%
86.00%
88.00%
90.00%
92.00%
94.00%
96.00%
98.00% Baseline 2010 Business as Usual Scenario Development Scenario
Conservation Scenario
Percentage of wave height reduced under different scenario
In an average under conservation scenario 92-95%, the wave heights were reduced by and under development scenario by 80-95%. Landpoint 7: Sea dike behind mangrove near the Co Chien river mouth
EXPERIENCES FROM FIELD
Future assessments are not easy• Subjectivity and human error in analysis
• Involves subjective ranking - limited by who ranks• and/or GIS models- concerns with assumptions and
accuracy
• Lack of data and mapsBUT• Future assessments are just one way to guide
actions• Indicative of trend- what, who and where• Adaptation deficit ( why are current challenges not being
met) also plays a big role
1. Adjustments in land use to allow for better maintenance of ecosystem services
2. Management and sustainable use of freshwater resources
3. Conservation and restoration of natural habitats4. Conservation of biodiversity hotspots5. Rehabilitation and protection of fisheries
resources6. Climate smart farming practices7. Early Warning System
IDENTIFYING AND PRIORITIZING ADAPTATION OPTIONS (LAO)
MULTI-CRITERIA ANALYSIS
CRITERIA
• Effectiveness: Will it achieve each adaptation objective?
• Cost: How cost effective will it be?
• Feasibility: How realistic will it be to carry out?
• Attractiveness: How attractive is it for public and private funding?
• Capacity: How well does it fit with current capacity?
ADAPTATION OPTIONS
Improved Wetland Management (26.32)
Improved Forest Management (25.42)
Raising Awareness of CC impacts (24.86) Enhanced Agricultural Extension (24.74)
Improved Integrated Socio-economic Development Planning (24.46)
Improved NTFP Management (23.54)
………. etc.
COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS- EXAMPLE IN LAO
• Effectiveness: Number of years in 10 in which food supply is not disrupted for more than 5 days in any village due to Climate related events.
• Involved calculation of effectiveness measure; financial costs; financial cost effectiveness ratio; other economic costs/benefits; total costs, total cost effectiveness ratio
TOTAL COST EFFECTIVENESS RATIO:- Agricultural extension: 1 ( economic costs also included costs of
degradation of forests and wetlands)- Improved forest management: -592- Improved wetland management: -1526
CEA – EXAMPLE FROM VIETNAM
Hard or engineered solution: Construction and upgrade of sea dikes in Thanh Phu, Ba Tri, and Binh Đai district..
Ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA): Reforestation and conservation of coastal forests with a total forest area of 5.100 ha (existing forest: 3897 ha and planting of new forest: 1.203 ha).
Effectiveness: number of people saved from floods
Low Risk Scenario:
Average cost per person saved from flood: Sea dike systems :138.8 Mill VND/person.
Ecosystem based adaptation with coastal forest ecosystems : 1.7 mill VND/person.
High risk scenario
55%, 17%, and 5% cost saving by using EbA with sea dyke for Ba Tri, Binh Dai and Thanh Phu district- total saving about 11%
LESSONS TO FINALIZE THE FRAMEWORK
• Simple and practical vs. ideal• Layers of the the ”target-users”-
who are sub national policy makers as opposed who actually conduct VA and prepares project?
• Adaptation objectives should be determined in consultation with multiple stakeholders after VA.
• Difficulties in assessing impacts to ecosystem- actions must be taken despite some uncertainties
• Flexibility in scale, data availability
EVIDENCE AND LESSONS FOR PLANNERS
• EbA provides nature-based solutions to reduce vulnerability even under high climate risks.
• EbA can indeed be cost effective.• EbA provide multiple benefits to communities• EbA can NOT be excluded from overall strategy to
address the future risks, even though it may have to be supplemented by other measures.
• Mainstream and act at different scales- but ensure local levels are prioritized first.
POLICY AND PLANNING CONTEXT
Regional
National
Sub national
• DONRE, DARD,DPI
• PONRE, DONRE, PAFO
top related