The climate change risk management matrix - Neill Cliffe
•Download as PPT, PDF•
1 like•526 views
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (18)
Viewers also liked
Similar to The climate change risk management matrix - Neill Cliffe
Similar to The climate change risk management matrix - Neill Cliffe (20)
More from Climate Change Research Strategy for Primary Industries
More from Climate Change Research Strategy for Primary Industries (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
The climate change risk management matrix - Neill Cliffe
- 1. The Climate Change Risk Management Matrix – Theory to practice through engagement Neil Cliffe, David Cobon & Grant Stone CCRSPI Conference February 2011
- 5. Impact Matrix for a Fish Habitat Mapping Project… Potential to have poleward expansion and increase in diversity; fish diversity has potential to increase with increased habitat mosaic Food chain complexity (+VE) Fish species (+VE) ∑ + VE (Medium Impact) (likely / moderate) Species composition (+VE) Higher diversity ∑ +VE (High Impact) (major / almost certain) Poleward (+VE) increased distribution ∑ +VE (Medium Impact) (almost certain /moderate) Sea Temperature Reduced distribution & diversity landward due to current constraints and lack of planning and of buffers; fish diversity to be reduced due to reduced habitat mosaic Food chain complexity (-VE) Fish species (-VE) ∑ - VE (Medium Impact) (likely / moderate) Species composition (-VE) ∑ -VE (High Impact) (major / almost certain) Landward - if no restrictions (+-VE) Landward – where constraints (-VE) ∑ -VE (Medium Impact) (almost certain /moderate) Sea level rise Impact Impact Impact Impact Climate Variable Overall Onshore / estuarine productivity Marine plant community structure Marine Plant movement Management Issue
- 7. Adaptation and Vulnerability Matrix for the Exotic Tropical Fruit Industry… Plant protective shelter belts to reduce storm impact, plant early-maturing varieties Impact: High impact Adaptive capacity: Low Vulnerability: High vulnerability Increased storm intensity – same total rainfall Medium - High Confidence Apply plant protection products to ↓sunburn; monitor soil moisture to avoid plant stress, modify/establish micro-irrigation system; prune to↑ leaf cover Impact: Medium impact Adaptive capacity: Medium Vul nerability : Moderate vulnerability Higher maximum temperature High Confidence Manage plantings for optimal densities at maturity, Supplement/fertilise to support increased growth No vulnerability Higher minimum temperature High Confidence Product Yield Organisation Element -> Climate Variable ↓
Editor's Notes
- Thanks for the opportunity to share our experience using a climate risk management matrix approach in collaboration with primary industries in Queensland and elsewhere. This work is funded through state agencies DEEDI and DERM and the Queensland Government’s Q2 Coasts and Country funding. I’d like to acknowledge my colleagues David and Grant, but particularly David Cobon, who is in the audience today, and who was the lead author of a paper in the Rangelands Journal in 2009 which describes in detail the risk management methodology we are using in our engagement work. In the next few minutes I propose to provide some background and context to our work, outline some examples, and then to focus on key learnings we have distilled from our activities and comment on future work.
- Firstly though, an artist’s impression of our project team. Grant Stone and David Cobon on the left, June Brundell (new to our team) on the right and thats me looking remarkably like Keanu Reeves in the middle… This poster resembles a screen dump from a movie trailer, does anyone know which movie? Yes the Matrix movie. Action packed, thought provoking etc. Our climate risk matrix probably isn’t as exciting as the movie, but we are trying to make it so…
- So some context… Within our project we are engaging with Queensland primary industries on three levels. We have run and completed 5 peak industry body briefings for the grazing, cropping, horticulture, fishing and intensive industries (dairy, pigs, poultry etc.). We have begun regional briefings targeting NRM bodies, of which there are 14 in Queensland, and other industry and community groups. We have begun interacting with extension projects and running workshops with farmers at the enterprise level to expose them to this ‘risk management’ approach. At all levels we are collaborating with industry to begin: Identifying climate change impacts, risks and opportunities Identifying possible adaptation responses Analysing vulnerability to climate change impacts Identifying gaps in knowledge Developing partnerships with industry groups to customise information and processes for their needs. And importantly, challenging stakeholders to develop action plans to move forward In terms of partnerships we are only going where energy and enthusiasm exists to work in this space.
- So some quick examples of the output produced from our engagement activities to date. This is a small portion of a matrix derived from our interaction with the dairy industry in South East Queensland. It outlines the interaction between an organisational element, in this case Milk yield and quality with the climate change variable More days over 35 degrees. In a logical structured process the interaction, positive or negative is described, and Likelihood and Consequence levels assigned to provide an Impact level. So the impacts here of more days over 35 degrees on milk yield and quality are decrease in milk yield and decline in milk fat and protein, both negative as an interaction. The Likelihood assigned by this group was almost certain and the Consequence, Major, resulting in a High impact category. Then, possible Adaptation responses were described, in this case provision of shade, diet modification and reduction in walking distance. If the impact is negative, as in this case, an Adaptive capacity level is assigned to assign a Vulnerability category for that element. In this case the adaptive capacity is deemed to be high and the Vulnerability category is therefore Moderate. Within the workshop process this information is developed through a process of small group discussion utilising the expert knowledge existing in the group.
- As an another example of work completed by a team after their initial briefing, a fish habitat research team independently developed a customised matrix relevant to their project. They added columns and rows of information to their matrix which provided summaries of information that was relevant to their circumstances. The entire matrix, including adaptation options, they developed is too large to present here but includes the 3 management issues listed here and multiple climate variables with their subsequent impact interactions and adaptation actions, which appear in a separate table.
- In his evaluation of the usefulness of the matrix approach the team leader has indicated that “The adaptation actions have helped to structure the advice/liaison/opportunities our group will have with key stakeholders in the fishing industry and local government who we will be interacting with in our project”. Other team member quotes included: “ I found the process of developing the matrix valuable as it helped to clarify what the vulnerability of fish habitats and fisheries are to the likely impacts of climate change predictions…” “ The matrix also helped to concisely present the adaptation actions that will be necessary to maintain or enhance fisheries production into the future…” These are examples of many comments that give us some confidence that the approach is useful in capturing and analysing information to support the needs of some of our target groups.
- Finally an example of an Adaptation and Vulnerability matrix developed for the exotic tropical fruit industry last year. The industry feature here is Product yield interacting with temperature climate variables and storm intensity. The different colours of orange indicate confidence levels in the predictions. The different shades of pink highlight different degrees of vulnerability. Moderate vulnerability is indicated for higher maximum temperature. Perhaps in a nod to Cyclone Yasi, in this case, the highest vulnerability is indicated in relation to increased storm intensity, where for these crops there is deemed to be low adaptive capacity and high impact.
- I’d like to pause for a moment here and get some idea on your experience with this type of risk management approach. Put your hands up if… You are familiar with risk matrix approaches in general, familiar in terms of aware of the process of identifying, analysing, evaluating and treating risks? Have you heard of the Australian and New Zealand Risk Management Standard? Are you familiar with the Rangelands Journal article which discusses this risk matrix approach? Have you participated in any risk management workshop which takes you through a structured process to discuss and analyse risks and opportunities? Have you used a risk matrix approach to analyse climate change risk and to consider adaptation responses? If you have participated in any risk management workshop, I’d love to catch up with you later to pick your brains on the engagement and facilitation processes used. Advantages, disadvantages, and alternative approaches etc.
- So, moving on to our key learnings… 1. Know your audience and customise information accordingly. Before each of the peak industry body briefings, draft example matrices were drawn up with a key participant to provide an example of relevance for each particular audience. In essence as part of this approach we were marketing the concept that a risk management approach could have value. Even if information in the draft matrix isn’t absolutely correct, it gives participants a starting point for discussion and understanding of the process. Pre meetings with key research and extension staff have been critical in shaping what is presented to audiences at any level. Focussing on a region and an industry in a region, allows participants to discuss impacts and adaptations within a context they can relate to. Additionally, using appropriate language to move from a perspective of ‘global climate change’ to that of ‘better managing climate variability’ and ‘recognition and understanding of changing local weather patterns’ is more meaningful when engaging with people. Discussion of timescale is also important, with projections for 2030 more relevant for industry management horizons than 2050 or 2070. Our evaluation shows that temperature impacted industries such as the horticulture industry have been more interested in the approach and developing their own vulnerability assessments, than rainfall impacted industries such as the extensive grazing industry. This may be due to concerns in the horticulture industry at approaching temperature thresholds for certain crops, more certainty in the projections for temperature compared to rainfall and greater adaptive capacity in the grazing industry to deal with climate extremes.
- 4. We think that capacity building is important to provide ownership of the process. Our activities have not focussed as an outcome on producing a final matrix for each industry as a product. Rather the focus has been on building capacity within people in the collaborating organisations to take the process, customise it for their circumstances and run with it. When we have been there it has been to further assist and facilitate around the edges to nudge them along the road. 5. It’s a cliché I suppose, but the journey is probably as important as the destination. The discussion in small groups that occurs during the process of completing a matrix guided by the stepwise approach, provides a framework which can assist people to drill down and understand impacts and possible adaptation responses. This discussion may be the most valuable part of the process from an individual’s perspective and we intend to explore this in our project evaluation. 6. At regional briefings we have found many people representing a business or enterprise wanting the ‘answer’, rather than the ‘process’ that was used to obtain the answer. This may stem from greater emphasis (at the business level as opposed to the regional, industry, state or national level) being placed on shorter term concerns such as legislative imposts, crop and herd management or marketing issues, rather than impacts of climate change. However, adopting this ‘cut through’ approach to provide an answer runs the risk of missing important information that only the operators of businesses have the knowledge to provide.
- To date we have had most success collaborating with the horticulture, aquaculture, fisheries, and dairy industries at a strategic level. This work is continuing with some interest outside Queensland. Some of our stakeholder groups, for example the flower, turf and nursery industries have indicated interest in pursuing further activity but do not currently have resources to commit to undertake the work. At regional and enterprise levels we are still trialling and evaluating the best approaches to use. This approach has included developing a climate risk matrix workbook and draft electronic workbook that participants can use to take them through the process in a group situation or independently, from defining the context of their situation to developing an action plan to implement. We are keen to collaborate within and beyond the boundaries of our state where energy and interest exists as we want to refine and develop this process further to improve it for Queensland primary industries. Thanks for listening…