1. 16-2-2014
CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Geography of Developing Countries
Professors Chris Kesteloot & Jean Poessen
KU Leuven
Karina Azar, Ida Carlsson, Céline Hélias, Svongwa Nemadire, Xiang Yang

2. Geography of Developing Countries
Azar, Carlsson, Hélias, Nemadire, Yang
Task N° 1: Climate Change Adaptation and Development
Climate change has received increased attention worldwide, being considered as a risk to
sustainable development. A way to mitigate this risk is through adaptation to climate change,
which is defined as “adjustments in ecological, social, or economic systems in response to actual
or expected climatic stimuli and their effects or impacts”1. Throughout the two articles we were
able to establish a link of how adaptation can reduce negative impacts and enhance positive
impacts of climate change (current or anticipated ones). During the analysis of the readings, we
found that this phenomenon is not only seen with a negative perspective: adaptation used to be
seen as a way to predict the future risks of climate change, whereas now it is also seen as an
opportunity that affected areas can take advantage of. Nevertheless, being climate change an
environmental concept per se, the articles were mainly focused on the social impact of climate
change, leaving behind the evident effect of it on the environment.
“Adaptation to Climate Change in the Context of Sustainable Development and Equity”, by Smit
et al.
Different types of adaptation to climate change can be distinguished; however we would like to
highlight the autonomous and the planned types of adaptation. It is necessary to stress that they
both depend on the context of the region that is implementing this strategy. The first type
(autonomous) tends to be reactive and is normally implemented by private entities. On the other
hand, planned adaptation is implemented by public entities. However, if there is a weak
institutional/Governmental system in the local region where planned adaptation arises, the long
term results won’t be successful.
Possible adaptation measures in different areas can be challenging as well, as they are context and
region dependent. This means that there is no ‘one size fits all’ adaptation measure. The authors
also suggest that little effort is put on the interaction between development projects and
adaptation to climate change. However, the Klein et al article appears in 2007 (6 years after the
Smit et al) as a formal initiative for linking these two dimensions. We will refer to this in the
second part of this paper.
A negative point to address is that the approach of the article is mostly top down: from
Governments or development agencies to the grassroots and not the other way round. However,
during the Klein et al article, the authors agree that “adaptation is primarily a local process”2, but
this is not further developed during their research. Nevertheless, none of the articles mention the
awareness of the local community, which could be necessary to have a bottom-up approach. For
example, the local community could work jointly with the Government to implement adaptation
related projects.
1
B. Smit, O. Pilifosova, 2001. Adaptation to Climate Change in the Context of Sustainable Development and Equity, page
881
2
Klein et al, page 27
1

3. Geography of Developing Countries
Azar, Carlsson, Hélias, Nemadire, Yang
Some models have shown that in certain circumstances adaptation can have a positive impact on
agriculture. Even if climate change effects are shown up in the food sector, for example, with
adaptation it would be possible to contribute to the increase of the food production.
“Portfolio Screening to Support the Mainstreaming of Adaptation to Climate Change into
Development Assistance”, by Klein et al.
Climate change adaptation should occur together with sustainable development processes, but
linking these two can be problematic taking into consideration that they are both very broad and
‘fuzzy’ concepts. Poverty reduction as a way for adaption may increase the vulnerability of people
to climate change. It can be seen that in the implementation of adaptation projects some
differences could arise between poverty and vulnerability reduction. This is because some
projects can target the first issues, but when implementing them, they can have side effects to
another part of the population or environment. For example, building a road to increase
connectivity in an isolated region could have a negative pollution or erosion impact on a sea
located right next to it.3
It is necessary to highlight the differences between the traditional perspective of adaptation, and
the new mainstream. On this article we found that traditional views on adaptation tend to be too
focused on technological improvements, while attention to socio-economic and local factors
should be more important for development projects to succeed. The conventional methods were
under the responsibility of Governments; whereas in the new mainstream we can see how private
or international cooperation agencies also play an important role on it.
The authors show examples of six development and cooperation agencies which incorporated new
portfolio screenings. However, they were performed independently of one another, without
looking at the same factors. This makes the result difficult to generalize, without establishing some
common ground of how to evaluate and define approaches towards a mainstreaming of
adaptation in various development projects.
To conclude, we found that the Smit et al article brings concepts and a general vision to
adaptation to climate change and development. On the other hand, the one by Klein et al
supports these concepts with examples of agencies implementing development programs in
adaptation. Both articles are presented with a top-down approach, where the two ideas that were
linked (adaptation to climate change and sustainable development) tend to be very broad
concepts.
3
Example taken from Klein et al, page 28
2