Search

The increasing impact of natural disasters over recent decades has been well documented, especially the direct economic losses and losses that were insured. Claims are made by some that climate change has caused more losses, but others assert that increasing exposure due to population and economic growth has been a much more important driver. Ambiguity exists today, because the causal link between climate change and disaster losses has not been addressed in a systematic manner by major scientific assessments. Here, the author presents a review and analysis of recent quantitative studies on past increases in weather disaster losses and the role of anthropogenic climate change. Analyses show that, although economic losses from weather-related hazards have increased, anthropogenic climate change so far did not have a significant impact on losses from natural disasters. The observed loss increase is caused primarily by increasing exposure and value of capital at risk. This finding is of direct importance for studies on impacts from extreme weather and for disaster policy. Studies that project future losses may give a better indication of the potential impact of climate change on disaster losses and needs for adaptation than the analysis of historical losses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Damages from weather related disasters are projected to increase, due to a combination of increasing exposure of people and assets, and expected changes in the global climate. Only few studies have assessed in detail the potential range of losses in the future and the factors contributing to the projected increase. Here we estimate future potential damage from river flooding, and analyse the relative role of land-use, asset value increase and climate change on these losses, for a case study area in The Netherlands. Projections of future socioeconomic change (land-use change and increase in the value of assets) are used in combination with flood scenarios, projections of flooding probabilities, and a simple damage model. It is found that due to socioeconomic change, annual expected losses may increase by between 35 and 172% by the year 2040, compared to the baseline situation in the year 2000. If no additional measures are taken to reduce flood probabilities or consequences, climate change may lead to an increase in expected losses of between 46 and 201%. A combination of climate and socioeconomic change may increase expected losses by between 96 and 719%. Asset value increase has a large role, as it may lead to a doubling of losses. The use of single loss estimates may lead to underestimation of the impact of extremely high losses. We therefore also present loss–probability curves for future risks, in order to assess the increase of the most extreme potential loss events. Our approach thus allows a more detailed and comprehensive assessment than previous studies that could also be applied in other study areas to generate flood risk projections. Adaptation through flood prevention measures according to currently planned strategies would counterbalance the increase in expected annual losses due to climate change under all scenarios. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the topic of financing adaptation in future climate change policies. A major question is whether adaptation in developing countries should be financed under the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), or whether funding should come from other sources. We present an overview of financial resources and propose the employment of a two-track approach: one track that attempts to secure climate change adaptation funding under the UNFCCC; and a second track that improves mainstreaming of climate risk management in development efforts. Developed countries would need to demonstrate much greater commitment to the funding of adaptation measures if the UNFCCC were to cover a substantial part of the costs. The mainstreaming of climate change adaptation could follow a risk management path, particularly in relation to disaster risk reduction. ‘Climate-proofing’ of development projects that currently do not consider climate and weather risks could improve their sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

No Abstract available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature on the costing of mitigation measures for reducing impacts of natural hazards is rather fragmented. This paper provides a concise overview of the current state of knowledge in Europe on the costing of mitigation measures for the reduction of natural hazard risks (droughts, floods, storms and induced coastal hazards as well as alpine hazards) and identifies knowledge gaps and related research recommendations. Furthermore, it provides a taxonomy of related mitigation options, classifying them into nine categories: (1) management plans, land-use planning, and climate adaptation; (2) hazard modification; (3) infrastructure; (4) mitigation measures (stricto sensu); (5) communication in advance of events; (6) monitoring and early warning systems; (7) emergency response and evacuation; (8) financial incentives; and (9) risk transfer (including insurance). It is found that the costing of mitigation measures in European and in other countries has almost exclusively focused on estimating direct costs. A cost assessment framework that addresses a range of costs, possibly informed by multiple stakeholders, would provide more accurate estimates and could provide better guidance to decision makers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]