4 results
Contributors
-
- By W. Neil Adger, Jeroen Aerts, Armando Apan, Jessica Ayers, Jon Barnett, Juan F. Barrera, Simon P. J. Batterbury, Linda C. Botterill, Sarah Boulter, Edwin Castellanos, Declan Conway, Gustavo Cruz-Bello, W. Priyan, S. Dias, Markus G. Donat, Stephen Dovers, Thomas E. Downing, Hallie Eakin, C. J. Fotheringham, Andrew W. Garcia, Marisa C. Goulden, Daniela Guitart, John Handmer, Katharine Haynes, Sam S. L. Hettiarachchi, Saleemul Huq, Jiang Tong, David John Karoly, Jon E. Keeley, Diane Keogh, David King, Zbigniew W. Kundzewicz, Timothy M. Kusky, Karine Laaidi, Alain Le Tertre, Gregor C. Leckebusch, Matthew Mason, David M. Mills, Helda Morales, Michael J. Mortimore, Colette Mortreux, Karen O’Brien, Jean Palutikof, Mathilde Pascal, Bimal K. Paul, Munshi K. Rahman, William D. Snook, Su Buda, Alexandra D. Syphard, Melanie Thomas, Madeleine C. Thomson, Uwe Ulbrich, Pier Vellinga, George Walker, Joshua Whittaker
- Edited by Sarah Boulter, Griffith University, Queensland, Jean Palutikof, Griffith University, Queensland, David John Karoly, University of Melbourne, Daniela Guitart, Griffith University, Queensland
-
- Book:
- Natural Disasters and Adaptation to Climate Change
- Published online:
- 05 October 2013
- Print publication:
- 14 October 2013, pp ix-xii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Chapter 4 - Changes in Impacts of Climate Extremes: Human Systems and Ecosystems
- from Section III
-
- By John Handmer, Yasushi Honda, Zbigniew W. Kundzewicz, Nigel Arnell, Gerardo Benito, Jerry Hatfield, Ismail Fadl Mohamed, Pascal Peduzzi, Shaohong Wu, Boris Sherstyukov, Kiyoshi Takahashi, Zheng Yan, Sebastian Vicuna, Avelino Suarez, Amjad Abdulla, Laurens M. Bouwer, John Campbell, Masahiro Hashizume, Fred Hattermann, Robert Heilmayr, Adriana Keating, Monique Ladds, Katharine J. Mach, Michael D. Mastrandrea, Reinhard Mechler, Carlos Nobre, Apurva Sanghi, James Screen, Joel Smith, Adonis Velegrakis, Walter Vergara, Anya M. Waite, Jason Westrich, Joshua Whittaker, Yin Yunhe, Hiroya Yamano
- Edited by Christopher B. Field, Vicente Barros, Thomas F. Stocker, Qin Dahe
-
- Book:
- Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation
- Published online:
- 05 August 2012
- Print publication:
- 28 May 2012, pp 231-290
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Executive Summary
Extreme impacts can result from extreme weather and climate events, but can also occur without extreme events. This chapter examines two broad categories of impacts on human and ecological systems, both of which are influenced by changes in climate, vulnerability, and exposure: first, the chapter primarily focuses on impacts that result from extreme weather and climate events, and second, it also considers extreme impacts that are triggered by less-than-extreme weather or climate events. These two categories of impacts are examined across sectors, systems, and regions. Extreme events can have positive as well as negative impacts on ecosystems and human activities.
Economic losses from weather- and climate-related disasters have increased, but with large spatial and interannual variability (high confidence, based on high agreement, medium evidence). Global weather- and climate-related disaster losses reported over the last few decades reflect mainly monetized direct damages to assets, and are unequally distributed. Estimates of annual losses have ranged since 1980 from a few US$ billion to above 200 billion (in 2010 dollars), with the highest value for 2005 (the year of Hurricane Katrina). In the period 2000 to 2008, Asia experienced the highest number of weather- and climate-related disasters. The Americas suffered the most economic loss, accounting for the highest proportion (54.6%) of total loss, followed by Asia (27.5%) and Europe (15.9%). Africa accounted for only 0.6% of global economic losses. Loss estimates are lower bound estimates because many impacts, such as loss of human lives, cultural heritage, and ecosystem services, are difficult to value and monetize, and thus they are poorly reflected in estimates of losses. [4.5.1, 4.5.3.3, 4.5.4.1]
Summary for Policymakers
- from Section II
-
- By Simon K. Allen, Vicente Barros, Ian Burton, Diarmid Campbell-Lendrum, Omar-Dario Cardona, Susan L. Cutter, O. Pauline Dube, Kristie L. Ebi, Christopher B. Field, John W. Handmer, Padma N. Lal, Allan Lavell, Katharine J. Mach, Michael D. Mastrandrea, Gordon A. McBean, Reinhard Mechler, Tom Mitchell, Neville Nicholls, Karen L. O'Brien, Taikan Oki, Michael Oppenheimer, Mark Pelling, Gian-Kasper Plattner, Roger S. Pulwarty, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Thomas F. Stocker, Maarten K. van Aalst, Carolina S. Vera, Thomas J. Wilbanks
- Edited by Christopher B. Field, Vicente Barros, Thomas F. Stocker, Qin Dahe
-
- Book:
- Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation
- Published online:
- 05 August 2012
- Print publication:
- 28 May 2012, pp 3-22
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Context
This Summary for Policymakers presents key findings from the Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX). The SREX approaches the topic by assessing the scientific literature on issues that range from the relationship between climate change and extreme weather and climate events (‘climate extremes’) to the implications of these events for society and sustainable development. The assessment concerns the interaction of climatic, environmental, and human factors that can lead to impacts and disasters, options for managing the risks posed by impacts and disasters, and the important role that non-climatic factors play in determining impacts. Box SPM.1 defines concepts central to the SREX.
The character and severity of impacts from climate extremes depend not only on the extremes themselves but also on exposure and vulnerability. In this report, adverse impacts are considered disasters when they produce widespread damage and cause severe alterations in the normal functioning of communities or societies. Climate extremes, exposure, and vulnerability are influenced by a wide range of factors, including anthropogenic climate change, natural climate variability, and socioeconomic development (Figure SPM.1). Disaster risk management and adaptation to climate change focus on reducing exposure and vulnerability and increasing resilience to the potential adverse impacts of climate extremes, even though risks cannot fully be eliminated (Figure SPM.2). Although mitigation of climate change is not the focus of this report, adaptation and mitigation can complement each other and together can significantly reduce the risks of climate change. [SYR AR4, 5.3]
Contradictions in Sustainability
- Stephen R. Dovers, John W. Handmer
-
- Journal:
- Environmental Conservation / Volume 20 / Issue 3 / Autumn 1993
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 24 August 2009, pp. 217-222
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Issues of environment and development are increasingly being analysed within the framework offered by sustainability and sustainable development. This article explores a number of deep-seated contradictions and tensions that exist within these concepts at least as they are currently construed. It is noted that these contradictions are often glossed over in intellectual and policy debates, but are nonetheless profound and should be made explicit.
The contradictions identified and discussed in the paper are as follows:
–the paradox of technology (cause or cure?);
–uncertainty and decision-making (humility or arrogance in the face of ignorance?);
–intergenerational and intragenerational equity (a politically impossible trade-off?);
–economic growth versus ecological limits (is ‘sustainable development’ an oxymoron?);
–the reconciliation of individual and collective interests, applying both to individuals in their society, and nation states in the international community;
–the potential conflict between the diversity of democracy and purposeful action;
–differing kinds of resilience in the face of change (resistance, marginal change, and adaptability); and
–the question of whether or not optimization is anti-sustainability.
In conclusion we ask what the implications of this labyrinth of contradictions are for moving towards a sustainable state. Are these contradictions too profound and thus insurmountable, or does Homo sapiens' apparently innate ability to live with contradiction and logical inconsistency offer a way out?