Point of Departure and Key Concepts Article Swipe
YOU?
·
· 2023
· Open Access
·
· DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844.003
· OA: W4382362865
The IPCC Working Group II contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report addresses the challenges of climate action in the context of sustainable development with a particular focus on climate change impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. This chapter frames the point of departure and key concepts building on the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (IPCC, 2014a, b), the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (IPCC, 2018b), the Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC) (IPCC, 2019b), and the Special Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL) (IPCC, 2019a); as well as the WGI contributions to the Sixth Assessment Report (IPCC, 2021a) and complements the contribution of the WGIII Sixth Assessment Report, which will be published after this report (IPCC, 2022). \n \nSince IPCC AR5, human influence on the Earth’s climate has become unequivocal, increasingly apparent and widespread, reflected in both the growing scientific literature and in the perception and experiences of people worldwide (high confidence). Current changes in the climate system and those expected in the future will increasingly have significant and deleterious impacts on human and natural systems. The impacts of climate change and extreme weather events have adversely affected, or caused the loss of ecosystems including terrestrial, freshwater, ocean and coastal ecosystems, including tropical coral reefs; reduced food security; contributed to migration and displacement; damaged livelihoods, health and security of people; and increased inequality. Climate change impacts are concurrent and interact with other significant societal changes that have become more salient since AR5, including a growing and urbanising global population; significant inequality and demands for social justice; rapid technological change; continuing poverty, land and water degradation, biodiversity loss; food insecurity; and a global pandemic. {1.1.1; 1.3; Cross-Working Group Box ATTRIBUTION in Chapter 1} \n \nSince AR5, climate action has grown in salience worldwide across all levels of government as well as among non-governmental organisations, small and large enterprises, and citizens (high confidence). At the international level the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), along with other targets and frameworks, such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Aichi targets, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda for finance and the New Urban Agenda, provide overarching goals and policy context. These agreements also provide policy goals used by this IPCC Report to assess climate action across all levels of society. {1.1.2; 1.4.1; 1.4.3} \n \nIPCC’s assessments have grown and changed substantially over the last three decades. Compared to earlier IPCC assessments, this report emphasises a common risk-solution framing across all three Working Groups. This report focuses on solutions for risk reduction and adaptation; provides more integration across the natural and social sciences; applies a more comprehensive risk framework; assesses adaptation directly in the context of sectoral or regional risks; engages with different forms of knowledge, including Indigenous knowledge and local knowledge; and includes an increasing focus on equity and justice. {1.1.4; 1.4.2; Cross-Chapter Box ADAPT in Chapter 1} \n \nAdaptation plays a key role in reducing risks and vulnerability from climate change. Implementing adaptation and mitigation actions together with the SDGs helps to exploit synergies, reduce trade-offs and makes all three more effective. From a risk perspective, limiting atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations reduces climate-related hazards while adaptation and sustainable development reduce exposure and vulnerability to those hazards. Adaptation facilitates development, which is increasingly hindered by impacts and risks from climate change. Development facilitates adaptation by expanding the resources and capacity to reduce climate risks and vulnerability. {1.1.3; 1.5.1; 1.5.3} \n \nThe concepts of risk and risk management have become increasingly central to climate change literature, research, practice and decision making (medium confidence). Risk, defined as the potential for adverse consequences for human and ecological systems, recognising the diversity of values and objectives associated with such systems, provides a framework for understanding the increasingly severe, interconnected and often irreversible impacts of climate change; how these impacts differentially affect different regions, sectors and populations; how to allocate resources best to manage the resulting risks and how to evaluate the responses that reduce residual risks for current and future generations, economies and ecosystems. {1.2.1; 1.3.1; 1.4.2} \n \nThe concepts of adaptation, vulnerability, resilience and risk provide overlapping, alternative entry points for the climate change challenge (high confidence). Vulnerability is a component of risk, but also an important focus independently, improving understanding of the differential impacts of climate change on people of different gender, race, wealth, social status and other attributes. Vulnerability also provides an important link between climate adaptation and disaster risk reduction. Resilience, which can refer to either a process or outcome, encompasses not just the concept of maintaining essential function, identity and structure, but also maintaining a capacity for transformation. Such transformations bring forth questions of justice, power and politics. {1.2.1; 1.4.1} \n \nRisks from climate change differ through space and time and cascade across and within regions and systems. The total risk in any location may thus differ from the sum of individual risks if these interactions, as well as risks from responses themselves, are not considered (high confidence). The risks of climate change responses include the possibility of mitigation or adaptation responses not achieving their intended objectives or having trade-offs or adverse side effects for other societal objectives. Another core area of complexity in climate risk is the behaviour of systems, which includes multiple stressors unfolding together, cascading or compounding interactions within and across sectors and regions, and nonlinear responses and the potential for surprises. All of this is crucial for effective decision making and decision-support methods. The key risks assessed in this report become important in interaction with the cultures, values, ethics, identities, experiences and knowledge systems of affected communities and societies. {1.3.1} \n \nIncreasingly, impacts are detected and attributed to the changing climate. Improved understanding of deep history (palaeoclimate and biotic responses) suggests that past climate changes have already caused substantial ecological, evolutionary and socioeconomic impacts (high confidence). Many recent impacts are not detected, due to a shortage of monitoring and robust attribution analysis (high confidence). Detection and attribution assessments inform risk assessment by demonstrating the sensitivity of a system to climate change, and they can inform loss and damage estimates including those involved in potential climate litigation cases. Robust detection and attribution methods now exist and play a significant role in increasing awareness and willingness to act among decision makers and the general population. {1.3.2.1; Cross-Working Group Box ATTRIBUTION in Chapter 1; Cross-Chapter Box PALEO in Chapter 1} \n \nNarratives play an important role in communicating climate risks and motivating solutions. A narrative describes a chronological chain of events, often with a premise and conclusions. In the AR6, as in previous IPCC assessments, climate change scenarios and related narratives (also called storylines) are central in the analysis, synthesis and communication of climate change impacts and of adaptation and mitigation responses. AR6 employs narratives to describe the assumptions, evolution and driving forces for the representative concentration pathways (RCPs) and shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs) and links these to global warming levels (GWLs) as a complement to RCPs and SSPs for framing impacts (Cross-Chapter Box CLIMATE in Chapter 1). Narratives can also be enablers of transformation by communicating societal goals and the actions needed to achieve them {1.2.2; 1.3.3; 1.5.2} \n \nAR6 highlights adaptation solutions and the extent to which they are successful and adequate at reducing climate risk, increasing resilience and pursuing other climate-related societal goals. For adaptation, a solution is defined as an option which is effective, feasible and conforms to principles of justice. Effectiveness refers to the extent to which an action is anticipated or is observed to reduce climate-related risk. Feasibility refers to the extent to which a measure is considered possible and desirable in a particular context. A successful action is one observed to be effective, feasible and just. Adequacy refers to a set of solutions that together are sufficient to avoid dangerous, intolerable, or severe climate risks. {1.4} \n \nIndigenous knowledge and local knowledge (IK and LK) can provide important understanding for acting effectively on climate risk and can help diversify knowledge that may enrich adaptation policy and practice (high confidence) . Indigenous Peoples have been faced with adaptation challenges for centuries and have developed strategies for resilience in changing environments that can enrich and strengthen current and future adaptation efforts. Valuing IK and LK is also important for recognition, a key component of climate justice. {1.3.2.3} \n \nAR6 highlights three principles of climate justice: distributive justice, procedura
