Search

Recent research has increasingly focussed on whether long-term policies for adaptation to climate change are robust given uncertainties about future climate change, technological advances and alternative socio-economic development pathways. The aim of this study was to examine whether adaptation responses are 'robust', by looking at whether they reduce vulnerability to climate and socio-economic changes for a selection of ecosystem services across scenarios and two spatial scales: Europe (EU27 plus Norway and Switzerland) and a case study in Scotland. Outputs of the CLIMSAVE Integrated Assessment Platform (IAP) for multiple land-based sectors were used to test whether clusters of adaptation options referred to as policy archetypes reduced vulnerability to climate and socio-economic change for ecosystem service indicators related to biodiversity, flooding, water exploitation, land use diversity, land use intensity and food provision. The results show that the People-based Adaptation archetype is the most robust. This is because it reduces vulnerability by increasing coping capacity (people learn and build networks) and not only by reducing the impacts of climate and socio-economic change. By allowing comparative levels of vulnerability to be explored across sectors and scenarios, the CLIMSAVE approach provides a flexible tool for decision-makers and other stakeholders to increase understanding of which mixes of adaptation measures are robust responses to climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Addressing climate change vulnerability requires an understanding of both the level of climate impacts and the capacity of the exposed population to cope. This study developed a methodology for allowing users to explore vulnerability to changes in ecosystem services as a result of climatic and socio-economic changes. It focuses on the vulnerability of Europe across multiple sectors by combining the outputs of a regional integrated assessment (IA) model, the CLIMSAVE IA Platform, with maps of coping capacity based on the five capitals approach. The presented methodology enables stakeholder-derived socio-economic futures to be represented within a quantitative integrated modelling framework in a way that changes spatially and temporally with the socio-economic storyline. Vulnerability was mapped for six key ecosystem services in 40 combined climate and socio-economic scenarios. The analysis shows that, whilst the north and west of Europe are generally better placed to cope with climate impacts than the south and east, coping could be improved in all areas. Furthermore, whilst the lack of coping capacity in dystopian scenarios often leads to greater vulnerability, there are complex interactions between sectors that lead to patterns of vulnerability that vary spatially, with scenario and by sector even within the more utopian futures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]