Topic: adaptation

The U.S. Contribution to Fast-Start Finance: FY12 Update

Sarah Parsons — Tue, 23 Apr 2013 14:06:17 -0400

Summary

As part of the international climate negotiations, developed country governments committed to provide developing countries with “new and additional resources, including forestry and investments through international institutions, approaching $30 billion in the period 2010-2012 with balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation.” This fact sheet considers U.S. efforts to provide “fast-start finance” (FSF) over the full three-year period, drawing primarily from program data presented in the State Department’s report series, “Meeting the Fast Start Commitment.” The fact sheet is part of a series of analyses on FSF contributions, and updates a May 2012 working paper quantifying total U.S. contributions to the global FSF commitment.

Over the FSF period, the United States has reported roughly $7.5 billion, or about 20% of the global self-reported total flows of FSF. Notable attributes of the U.S. FSF contribution include:

The levels of finance fluctuated over the three-year period, with the largest volume in FY11. This is related to variations in spending on the part of key agencies such as the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) and the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC).
Over the three-year period, a significant share of the U.S. portfolio supported clean energy in Asia. OPIC and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) played key roles in administering finance, and finance was channeled via a combination of grants and loans, guarantees, and insurance.

Transparency has improved in FY12 reporting, but there is room for further improvement. In addition to implementing the new international reporting requirements adopted at Doha, the following actions would help support verification of aggregate figures, as well as coordination and accountability:

Publishing a detailed, disaggregated, annual list of projects and programs;
Using the Foreign Assistance Dashboard as a platform for sharing information;
Aligning reporting under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) with reporting to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD); and
Continuing to work with other countries and multilateral institutions to strengthen and harmonize reporting systems.

ADVISORY: WRI's Stories to Watch 2013

James Anderson — Thu, 20 Dec 2012 14:03:26 -0500

WRI will host its 10th annual Stories to Watch event on Tuesday, January 15, 2013, at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. Dr. Andrew Steer, WRI’s President & CEO, will present insights into the big environmental and international development trends and events that will affect people and the planet in 2013.

Topics will likely include: What will the Obama Administration do to address climate and energy? How will China’s new leadership advance its goal of “ecological progress”? What countries will emerge on the forefront of sustainability? And, how will financial constraints impact businesses seeking to shift to a more sustainable pathway?

A continental breakfast will be served.

WHAT
World Resources Institute’s Stories to Watch 2013

WHO
Dr. Andrew Steer, President & CEO, World Resources Institute.

Dr. Steer is a leading expert on economic development and environmental issues. He has three decades of experience working on international development and on the front lines in Asia and Africa, and at a senior level in international policy roles.

WHERE
National Press Club
Holeman Lounge
529 14th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20045

CALL-IN INFO
USA (Toll Free): (866) 803-2143
International (Toll): + 1 (210) 795-1098

Access code: “WRI”

WHEN
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
9:00 - 10:30 a.m. ET

Use #STW2013 on Twitter.

RSVP required to press@wri.org

Sea-Level Rise and its Impact on Florida

Sarah Parsons — Tue, 04 Dec 2012 12:22:26 -0500

It is well-established that global warming has resulted in global sea-level rise. Since 1870, average global sea level has risen by about 8 inches. As the climate has become increasingly warmer, the annual rate of sea-level rise has accelerated. Average annual sea-level rise between 1993 and 2011 was 78 percent higher than between 1961 and 1993.

Four county governments in Southeast Florida, in response to impacts of sea-level rise, established the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact in January 2010. The purpose of this agreement between the county governments of Broward, Miami-Dade, Monroe, and Palm Beach Counties – which have a combined population of 5.6 million — is to develop mitigation and adaptation strategies through joint efforts and to actively inform critical policymaking and government funding decisions at the state and federal levels.

Summary of Developed Country ‘Fast-Start’ Climate Finance Pledges

Maggie Barron — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 15:41:50 -0500

OpenClimateNetwork.org

Visit openclimatenetwork.org for the latest analysis, project info, expert perspectives, and more.

Reiterating a pledge made in Copenhagen in 2009, the Cancun Agreements of December 2010 formally commit developed countries to collectively provide resources “approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010 - 2012” to support developing countries’ climate efforts. This so-called “fast-start” finance will help developing countries, particularly the poorest and most vulnerable, mitigate (reduce) their greenhouse gas emissions, and adapt and cope with the effects of climate change. These pledges also present an opportunity to build trust between developed and developing countries in the international climate arena, in turn fostering progress towards a comprehensive post-2012 international climate agreement.

WRI has synthesized available information on countries’ pledges and measures they have taken to make the pledged resources available to developing countries. The accompanying table sets out both the amounts and the mechanisms by which funding would be delivered. WRI has also looked at how countries indicate whether their pledges will provide “new and additional” funds compared to what they provide as official development assistance. In-depth analysis on a subset of countries’ fast-start finance contributions is available separately.

This table will be continuously updated as more information becomes available.

Q&A on this Analysis

(Updated on November 26, 2012)

Have developed countries met their fast-start finance pledge?

Based on our research, as of November 26, 2012, 23 developed countries and the European Commission have publicly announced their individual fast-start finance pledges, in addition to the European Union’s collective pledge. These pledges total USD 33.92 billion. While this represents a significant step in the right direction, the extent to which these pledges are consistent with internationally agreed principles for fast-start finance is unclear. The Cancun Agreements mandate that fast-start funds have a “balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation,” be “new and additional,” be “prioritized for the most vulnerable developing countries, such as the least developed countries, small island developing States and Africa,” and include “forestry and investments through international institutions.” Because the details of this mandate have not been defined, it is not clear that developed countries’ fast-start finance contributions fulfill these criteria.

Finally, ensuring that pledges are actually delivered will be essential. According to reported information of the pledged funds, USD 28.06 billion has been requested and/or budgeted by the executive bodies of the countries during the fast-start period. In some cases, the legislative bodies have also approved these requests. The actual delivery and implementation of the finance, however, can be complicated to track, and is generally not documented in countries’ fast-start finance reports.

Do the funds have a “balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation”?

Countries often specify the general objective that their fast-start funds will support. For example, of the USD 1.58 billion mobilized for fast-start by Germany in 2010 and 2011, 48 percent will support mitigation, 28 percent will support adaptation, 21 percent will support REDD+, and 3 percent will support multipurpose activities. In its 2010 fast-start finance report, Germany highlighted the challenges of identifying suitable adaptation projects as the reason for this, and recognized the need to adjust the allocation of funds across the three areas of mitigation, adaptation and REDD+. In the case of both Japan and the United States, a large majority of fast-start finance supports mitigation objectives. The grant-based portion of their contributions, however, gives more balanced consideration to adaptation. Several countries involved in the Interim REDD+ Partnership — a process created parallel to the UNFCCC to ensure effective and sustainable REDD+ (reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation) actions over the next few years — have also specified that at least 20 percent of their funds will support REDD+. However, there is no agreed-upon definition among countries of what constitutes a “balanced allocation.”

Are the pledged funds “new and additional”?

“New” funding represents an increase relative to pledges or allocations from previous years. A number of pledges include restated or renamed commitments already made in the past. For example, Japan’s Hatoyama Initiative is a restructuring of the previously announced Japanese Cool Earth Partnership, with some new resources included in the Initiative. Countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States are counting previous commitments to the Climate Investment Funds (CIFs) as part of their fast-start finance pledge. The United States also counts its annual contribution to the Montreal Protocol Fund, a long-standing commitment that dates back more than two decades.

Funds that are “additional” ensure that their delivery does not result in the diversion of funds from other important development objectives. In other words, climate mitigation and adaptation funds should be additional to development aid. Parties to the UNFCCC have not yet achieved consensus on a clear and specific definition of ‘additionality’ that can be applied uniformly to developed country financial pledges. As a result, countries have proposed a variety of methods for defining the additionality of their fast-start finance.

Do the pledges include “investments through international institutions”?

Countries are channeling investments through a mix of multilateral, bilateral, and public-private institutions. Several countries, including Japan and the United States, are channeling a considerable amount of their funds through export credit agencies and other public-private channels. The Climate Investment Funds(CIFs) and the Global Environment Facility (GEF) are the primary multilateral institutions of choice through which other funds will be channeled. The governance of the funds has implications for the effectiveness and perceived legitimacy of the overall climate finance architecture. Developing countries generally prefer that institutions governing finance ensure developing country ownership of funded activities and prioritize funding for climate vulnerable countries. Developed countries tend to emphasize the need to minimize bureaucratic costs and ensure the effective use of resources.

Why is fast-start finance “prioritized for the most vulnerable developing countries, such as the least developed countries, small island developing States, and Africa”?

Countries under the Convention recognize that developing countries are highly vulnerable to climate change impacts because they have fewer resources to adapt to the effects of climate change, which can include increased droughts and floods, rising sea levels, and greater uncertainty in the agricultural sector. Least developed countries (LDCs) and small island developing States (SIDS) in particular are recognized as needing special consideration due to their extreme vulnerability. For these reasons, developed countries have pledged to prioritize fast start funds for the “most vulnerable countries.” Several countries are channeling their fast start finance through the Least Developed Countries Fund or the Adaptation Fund, many are channeling finance directly to SIDS and LDCs, and Australia in particular states that it will channel about one third of its fast-start finance to SIDS and about one quarter to LDCs.

What types of financial instruments are countries using?

There are several different types of financial instruments countries are using to deliver their fast-start finance, including grants, loans, equity, loan guarantees, insurance, and private investments. Many countries have provided some information on the type of financial instruments used. For example, the US reported providing USD 4.7 billion in grants through Congressional appropriations, USD 2.7 billion in development finance and export credits, which mostly take the form of concessional loans. Norway reports that all of its fast-start finance will be grants. Meanwhile, Japan’s fast-start finance includes grants and loans that meet ODA standards, finance in the form of ‘other official flows’, and may also count leveraged private finance, though this is ambiguous. However, reporting on the type of financial instrument used is neither comprehensive nor consistent. For example, little information is reported on the concessionality of the loans when used.

What are the next steps to ensure clarity on the delivery of climate finance pledges in the future?

The UNFCCC system for developed countries to report on the delivery of climate finance faces several challenges, which limit the utility of available data. For example, countries currently use multiple methods for reporting and often provided insufficient information even where requested. To address this, the Cancun Agreements mandate more frequent reporting by developed countries using an enhanced common reporting format.

While these enhanced reporting provisions will be essential for successful tracking of developed country climate financial flows, they will not be ready in time to provide guidance for reporting on the short-term, fast-start finance. In the meantime, the Cancun Agreements invited developed country Parties to submit information to the UNFCCC secretariat, for compilation, on the resources provided to fulfill their fast-start finance commitment by May 2011, 2012, and 2013. Nine developed countries and the EU submitted their reports on or around the most recent May 2012 deadline. While the Cancun Agreements include reporting provisions for fast-start finance, it does not provide guidance on what these reports should include, resulting in reported information that is neither fully comparable, transparent, nor complete, as is demonstrated by the gaps in information in WRI’s fast-start table, the Open Climate Network’s fast-start finance assessments, and in a report by IIED assessing the transparency of the May 2011 fast-start finance reports. The UNFCCC secretariat hosts a fast-start finance module on its finance portal that enhances the comparability of the reports but it remains limited to information provided by developed country Parties. It also does not capture information available on the faststartfinance.org website or on individual donor or recipient websites, or other sources such as NGOs, the private sector or multilateral development banks.

To build trust with developing country counterparts, developed countries should improve their fast-start finance reporting in the future, for example, by including more comprehensive, comparable and transparent information on the following seven elements in their annual fast-start finance reports: scale, method for determining that the money is “new and additional,” channeling institutions, objective, geographic distribution, status of the pledge, and type of financial instrument.

Athena Ballesteros, Emily Chessin, Kirsten Stasio, and Remi Moncel contributed to earlier versions of this Q&A.

STATEMENT: World Bank "Raises Alarm" of a 4 Degree Hotter World

Michael Oko — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 19:51:06 -0500

The World Bank Group just released a groundbreaking new report on climate change, called Turn Down the Heat, which offers a vivid assessment of what 4 degrees Celsius of global temperature rise would mean for the world.

Following is a statement by Andrew Steer, President, World Resources Institute:

“This report should awaken world leaders out of their slumber on climate change. A 4 degree temperature rise would bring unimaginable costs to people and society. We must take the necessary actions now to stay within 2 degrees or lower of warming.

“The differences between 2 degrees and 4 degrees temperature rise are stark. It took little more than four degrees of cooling to create the Ice Age, so imagine the havoc 4 degrees of warming would create. While the impacts would be uneven around the globe, vulnerable countries and poor people would be hardest hit. Communities already facing economic hardship would face longer droughts and more intense monsoons that disrupt food supply, more diseases associated with warmer temperatures and more pests, and greater water scarcity.

“The World Bank is to be congratulated for raising the alarm on this issue. By doing so they are aligning themselves with the majority of scientific opinion on climate change. It’s worth noting that the World Bank is a financial institution and not prone toward exaggeration. This report, therefore, must not be shrugged off. The World Bank itself can do more to raise ambition through its own financing, including by directing the great bulk of its energy investments toward scaling up renewable energy and energy efficiency. Further, the World Bank can channel more resources toward more projects that will enhance innovation and sustainability, as well as climate resilience.

“As negotiators head to Doha for the climate talks, they must bring a greater sense of urgency and purpose to these negotiations. A 4 degree warmer world can be prevented, but this will require greater leadership and imagination than has been shown to date. All negotiators should re-commit to keep the world within 2 degrees of warming. But we need more than UN negotiators to respond.

“Climate change is one of the great challenges of our generation, and we need to bring the full capacity of governments, businesses, multi-lateral institutions, and civil society to confront these challenges. Around the world, there are numerous examples of how the problem could be solved at low-cost and with high returns. We have no more excuses for inaction.

“The alarm bell on global warming is ringing. Let’s hope world leaders are listening.”

–

Dr. Steer previously worked as the World Bank Group’s Special Envoy for Climate Change.

ADVISORY: Press Teleconference on Doha Climate Talks

Michael Oko — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 17:32:07 -0500

Full audio recording of WRI’s press call below:

With the U.S. elections just completed and the Doha climate talks fast approaching, this is an important moment to consider where progress can be made on international action to address climate change. The recent Hurricane Sandy, along with other extreme weather and climate events, has delivered a powerful wake-up call about the urgency of shifting to a low-carbon trajectory.

Listen to the audio recording of WRI’s press call here:

On Tuesday, November 13, leading experts from the World Resources Institute will participate in a press teleconference to discuss the state of play and key topics in Doha, including how to move forward with an ambitious climate agreement, the role of the U.S. and other countries in the international negotiations, how to accelerate climate finance, and more.

WHAT
Press teleconference on the UNFCCC climate negotiations in Doha, Qatar (COP18)

WHO
Dr. Andrew Steer, President, WRI

Jennifer Morgan, Director, Climate and Energy Program, WRI

Clifford Polycarp, Senior Associate, Institutions & Governance Program, WRI

WHEN
Tuesday, November 13, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. EST (DC)//14:00 GMT (London)

Media: Call-in 10 minutes prior to the start time

DIAL-IN
+(888) 566-6569 (Toll Free, U.S. only); or

+(517) 308-9326 (U.S. and International)

Access code: WRI

COP 18: Doha

Kevin Lustig — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 09:09:59 -0400

WRI Experts at COP 18

WRI Events at COP 18

COP 18 Commentary

From November 26 to December 7, 2012, the United Nations will host the 18th Conference of the Parties (COP) in Qatar.

WRI experts will be in attendance at this latest meeting under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to help inform the talks. Here, you can find a variety of materials from the World Resources Institute that shed light on key areas of international climate policy.

WRI Resources for COP 18

Case Study: Applying Information for Adapting the Agriculture Sector in Bundelkhand, India

Sarah Parsons — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 16:25:44 -0400

This case study examines two projects implemented by Development Alternatives to highlight the multiplicity of data sources involved in adaptation decision making, provide an analysis of how information was used, and explore the challenges associated with information use for adaptation decision making in the agricultural sector.

This case study is part of a series under the World Resources Institute project, Information for Climate Adaptation in South Asia: Identifying User Needs. Each of the case studies in this set explores an aspect of information use in adaptation decision making. The goals of this series are two-fold:

Provide insights into how information (such as climate projections, stakeholder interviews, and environmental monitoring) can be used to support adaptation decisions; and
Guide investments by national governments and their development partners in information systems that can inform decision making around risks related to climate change.

This case study series was supported by the UK Department for International Development. Case study authors used the same framework of guiding questions for their research, which consisted of literature reviews and interviews.

Case Study: Information Use in Nepal's National Adaptation Programme of Action

Sarah Parsons — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 16:14:36 -0400

Nepal is passing through a turbulent period of transition, reorganizing its internal political boundaries, establishing a federal structure, and changing the very nature of the national government. Since 2008, Nepal’s priorities have been dominated by these political imperatives, a post-conflict peace process, and attempts to integrate Maoist ex-insurgents into the national mainstream. This dynamic presents numerous challenges for the government in seeking to meet the country’s development and environmental needs. Climate change adds extra stress to these needs in the form of heightened weather variability, extreme events, and other impacts on the country’s natural and social systems.

Provide insights into how information (such as climate projections, stakeholder interviews, and environmental monitoring) can be used to support adaptation decisions; and
Guide investments by national governments and their development partners in information systems that can inform decision making around risks related to climate change.

Case Study: Communicating Modeled Information for Adaptation Decision Making

Sarah Parsons — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 15:30:27 -0400

The HighNoon project, which began in 2009, set out to assess the impact Himalayan glacier retreat and expected changes in the Indian summer monsoon on the distribution of water resources in Northern India. The project’s aim was “to recommend appropriate and efficient response strategies to enable adaptation to hydrological extreme events.” The project used information from scenarios generated by regional climate and hydrological models and integrated it with stakeholder perspectives to identify and prioritize adaptation strategies. This case study examines the HighNoon project in order to explore how adaptation-relevant information can best be packaged and disseminated to different users and audiences at the state, district, and block levels.

This case study is part of a series that fall under the World Resources Institute project, Information for Climate Adaptation in South Asia: Identifying User Needs. Each of the case studies in this set explores an aspect of information use in adaptation decision making. The goals of this series are two-fold:

Provide insights into how information (such as climate projections, stakeholder interviews, and environmental monitoring) can be used to support adaptation decisions; and
Guide investments by national governments and their development partners in information systems that can inform decision making around risks related to climate change.

Information for Climate Change Adaptation: Lessons and Needs in South Asia

Sarah Parsons — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:21:39 -0400

Ideally, adaptation information will be tailored to meet the needs of individual information users. However, in many cases, information is supply-driven, shaped in large part by the interests of researchers and the limited data available to them. In these cases, it’s oftentimes challenging for users to access, understand, and apply the information available to them. To support effective adaptation over the long term, improved systems for producing, managing, using, disseminating, and learning from information in South Asia are needed. Significant new capacities will likely need to be developed to meet these needs.

This paper served as background for a South Asian regional workshop, which brought together adaptation information users and producers, as well as climate change experts. The workshop aimed to inform likely new investments in the information base for climate adaptation. Convened by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and Development Alternatives, with support from the UK Department for International Development, the workshop intended to identify:

priorities for information investment,
opportunities for improving information use, and
mechanisms for deepening dialogue between information users and producers in the region.

This paper aimed to support progress toward these workshop objectives by:

identifying barriers to effective information production, access, and application in the South Asian region;
posing a practical vocabulary for characterizing relevant information types;
articulating a concise set of uses for adaptation information; and
raising a set of critical issues around which to frame workshop discussions.

The paper draws on desk and interview research conducted by WRI from November 2011 through February 2012, as well as feedback obtained from a roundtable event held on the margins of the UNFCCC Conference of Parties-17 in Durban, South Africa.

National Adaptive Capacity Framework

Kevin Lustig — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:39:10 -0400

Ready or Not: Assessing National Institutional Capacity for Climate Change Adaptation

This report introduces the National Adaptive Capacity (NAC) framework and describes three pilot assessments in Bolivia, Ireland, and Nepal.

Read the Report
Q&A with the Authors

Effective institutions are at the heart of our ability to respond to growing climate risks. Governments and other national-level institutions can play a critical role in increasing society’s capacity to adjust (i.e., “adaptive capacity”) as conditions shift and new climate change knowledge emerges.

The National Adaptive Capacity (NAC) framework evaluates national institutions’ performance of key functions critical to adaptation and provides a practical approach for planning through the identification of specific gaps in capacity that can be filled through investment and action.

Use the framework

The NAC framework can be used to identify opportunities and priorities for building adaptive capacity and implementing key activities. After a period of time, it can be used again to evaluate progress. Planners, evaluators, and civil society advocates may find it useful in their adaptation efforts.

Use the tools here to begin applying the NAC framework in your country:

NAC Framework: Pilot Draft (PDF, 175 Kb)
Context Worksheet (Word File, 44 Kb)
Answer Worksheet (Excel, 112 Kb)

Read the report

Ready or Not, our report on the pilot applications of the NAC framework in Bolivia, Ireland, and Nepal, suggests that the framework is useful across a range of countries and that it can be tailored to specific country contexts. The pilots used the NAC framework:

as a tool for monitoring and baseline setting;
as a tool to catalyze action and fill key capacity gaps;
as a tool to gather and synthesize resources.

Read the report for more information.

Learn more

The NAC framework is built on a wealth of experience developed by WRI and our partners during past work on helping countries assess their readiness to adapt.

Take a look at some of the work that has informed the development of the NAC:

Vulnerability and Adaptation: Finance

Kevin Lustig — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:36:02 -0400

Our work focuses on building the capacity of national governments to manage and channel scarce funds to those who need them most – and on building the capacity of civil society organizations to hold governments accountable for this spending. We also explore how to improve the ability of governments to mobilize domestic funding sources, and use innovative financial instruments to support adaptation initiatives.

Project: Adaptation Finance Accountability Initiative

Climate finance for developing countries to adapt to climate change and strengthen climate resilience has increased in recent years in the form of both international commitments and domestic spending. But there are significant questions about the implementation of these funds:

How much adaptation finance is actually available within developing countries?
How is it being directed and used and by whom?
Is it reaching the local level? Are the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable being met and do they have a say in how the finance is used?

To address these essential issues, Oxfam, the Overseas Development Institute, and the World Resources Institute – together with civil society groups in developing countries – are launching the Adaptation Finance Accountability Initiative. The initiative’s purpose is to examine how climate adaptation and resilience finance is delivered at the local level, pilot new tracking and monitoring tools to improve finance transparency, and press for strengthened accountability for adaptation and resilience finance.

Building on ongoing work at national, regional and global levels to monitor and strengthen accountability for adaptation finance, the initiative will initially focus on Nepal, the Philippines, Uganda, and Zambia in collaboration with civil society groups there. We will also work collaboratively at the regional and global level to share civil society lessons of adaptation finance monitoring and advocate for increased transparency and accountability, including with international institutions and donors.

Together we will:

Develop tools to enable civil society and other stakeholders to track and monitor adaptation finance flows from a multitude of sources down to the local level.
Identify institutional constraints to the effective delivery of climate finance to poor and vulnerable groups, and opportunities to empower local civil society to overcome these constraints.
Support national and local civil society capacity to advocate for improved transparency, coherence and alignment of climate finance, and increased accountability to citizens for the use of this finance.
Develop opportunities for South to South learning by enabling civil society groups across a number of Asian and African countries to share insights, exchange experiences, and jointly develop advocacy strategies.
Distill lessons from piloting monitoring tools and advocacy to improve transparency and accountability in climate finance delivery
Influence global efforts to mobilize and manage climate finance, including the oversight under the UNFCCC, the operationalization of the Green Climate Fund, and bilateral institutions delivering climate finance.

Vulnerability and Adaptation: Information

Kevin Lustig — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:30:03 -0400

What information can best support effective decision-making under climate uncertainty? How should information be “packaged” so that governments and citizens can use it effectively? WRI is working to improve the information base for innovative decision-making strategies within a context of climatic uncertainty. Our work ensures that decision-makers – from small-scale farmers, to city mayors, to national-level ministers – have the information they need to take action against climate risks.

Project: Adapting to Climate Uncertainty in South Asia

Key Resources

Case Study: Applying Information for Agricultural Adaptation in India
Case Study: Communicating Modeled Information for Adaptation in India
Case Study: Information Use in Nepal’s NAPA
Working Paper: Information for Climate Change Adaptation: Lessons and Needs in South Asia
Information for Adaptation Regional Workshop Materials

Governments, business and citizens in South Asia all need access to good information to make wise decisions in a changing climate. However, the uncertainty of climate change impacts, the complex drivers of vulnerability, and the multiple time scales of climate impacts all make the information needs for adaptation unclear. As countries in South Asia move forward with adaptation planning, sound policy-making will require improvements in both, information availability and decision-making practice.

Vulnerability and Adaptation: Institutions

Kevin Lustig — Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:47:11 -0400

There is a need for change in the structure and function of many national institutions if policies are to address the decision-making challenges posed by climate change, and to meet the needs of poor and vulnerable populations. WRI works to strengthen key institutions – such as an agriculture ministry, river basin authority, or village development committee – so that vulnerability and adaptation is integrated into core planning and programming.