Spiders by Slidesgo - an introduction to arachnids
Hans Portner
1. Fifth Assessment Report (AR5)
and its implication to Vietnam
H.O Pörtner, Co-Chair WGII AR6
AR5 WGII CLA CH. 6, Ocean Systems,
Ocean products in TS and SPM, CC-Boxes,
Synthesis Report
2. • RCP emission scenarios of global mean temperature change (relative
to 1986-2005)
IPCC AR5 WGI Chp12
RCP6.0
RCP4.5
3. Paris COP 21
November /
December 2015
”...holding the
increase in the
global average
temperature to well
below 2°C above
pre-industrial levels
and to pursue
efforts to limit the
temperature
increase to 1.5°C
above pre-industrial
levels.”
Leading to the COP21
Agreement:
Heads of delegations
4. EMISSIONS
and Land-use Change
IMPACTS
(Severity)
…. the risk concept of IPCC WGII, liaising to WGI and WGIII approaches
…. linking to Article 2, UNFCCC
Defining and comparing Long-Term Global Goals (LTGG) in AR5 and beyond?
FEEDBACKS FEEDBACKS
LEVEL
Opportunities
MOTIVATION
5. Risk Level with
Current Adaptation
Risk Level
Very
Low Med
Very
High
4°C
2°C
Present
Long Term
(2080-2100)
Near Term (2030-2040)
Potential for
Additional Adaptation to
Reduce Risk
Risk Level with
High Adaptation
≈ 1.5°C ?
…. should be complemented by
Potential for Mitigation to Reduce Risk
Climate change….causing risks
….which were assessed in AR5, with open questions for AR6:
1.5°C not fully covered and compared
(key risks are those relevant to article 2, UNFCCC:
“avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system”)
6. provide a perspective on risks
…in relation to global mean temperatures
Based on WGII Box SPM 1 Figure 1
“Burning ember diagrams“
O‘Neill et al., 2016
7. Risk assessment: Reasons for concernLTGG
0.8
2
1.5
4
°C A role for natural and
human systems to guide
the setting of long-term
global goals (LTGG,
relative to preindustrial),
considering levels of risk
0.8°C
1.5°C
2°C
4°C
LTGG
Level of
additional
risk due to
climate
change
...comparing 1.5 and 2°C,
identifying... Key risks of impacts
Avoided impacts
UNFCCC Structured Expert Dialogue,
2013 -2015:
9. WGII, Table TS.4, SYR Table 2.3
...includes effects of
redistributed precipitation,
heat and drought events
Food security constrained:
>1.5°C: high risk of more severe impacts after 2050
>1.5°C
Crop yields
increasingly
declining with
climate change
10. • Climate change impacts on temperature and precipitation will
affect food production and food security, with a generally negative
impact on crop production however outcomes will be regionally
diverse.
• Warming temperatures have increased the risks of heat stress to
rice plants in certain months of the year
• Sea level rise threatens coastal and deltaic rice production areas
• 1m sea level rise would submerge 7% of Vietnam’s agricultural land
• Negative impacts on rice crops would exacerbate rural poverty
• Impacts in Vietnam : Crop and rice production
11. CHANGE IN MAXIMUM CATCH POTENTIAL (2051-2060 COMPARED TO 2001-2010, SRES A1B, 2°C warming of global surface T
0.7°C warmer Sea Surface T)
<50% -21 – 50% -6 – 20% -1 – 5% No data 0 – 4% 5 – 19% 20 – 49% 50 – 100% >100%
WGII, 6-14, SPM.6, SYR 2.6
2051-60: displaced and reduced fish and invertebrate biodiversity
Food security constrained: ....Fisheries 2°C
12. Constraints on fisheries in Vietnam by 2050
Decreased
fisheries
production and
export of
fishmeal
economic losses
VIETNAM
13. Warm water coral reefs
Vulnerable AND unique:
Observations:
Loss of live coral cover
due to various drivers
WGII Box CC-CR
Great Barrier Reef
0.8°C
2016
EXAMPLE
Verons 2009
14. (Unacceptable)
Consequences for
Sustainable (Economic)
Development
Increasingly unevenly distributed risks, esp.
due to impacts on crop yields and water
availability, as well as increasing inequalities
Shifts from transient to chronic poverty
(social marginalization & food insecurity)
Elderly, children, the socially marginalized,
and outdoor workers (farmers, construction,
women securing water and firewood)
disproportionally at risk from heat stress
2°C
2°C
IPCC WGII, SED 2014
15. IS NECESSARY AND IS
OCCURRING
…but without
mitigation adaptation
will not be sufficient.
ADAPTATION
16. Climate change risks will depend on
emission changes by 2050, but also
on climate sensitivity and post-2050
action.
1.5°C
2°C~
~
SYR SPM10, 2014
17. However, more needs to be done:
- Strengthen the UNFCCC process.
- enhance and exploit the science
basis of solution options:
- Conservation
- Matching adaptation and ambitious
mitigation
- Sustainable development
A common response even
among those who know...!?
A sense of urgency:
Overcoming societal inertia and inaction in transformation....
Zero click brings on legend animation, first click brings on Af/Eur/As/Aus, second click brings on the others, third click brings on all
Key risks are potentially severe impacts relevant to Article 2 of the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change, which refers to “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” Risks are considered key due to high hazard or high vulnerability of societies
and systems exposed, or both. Identification of key risks was based on expert judgment using the
following specific criteria: large magnitude, high probability, or irreversibility of impacts; timing
of impacts; persistent vulnerability or exposure contributing to risks; or limited potential to
reduce risks through adaptation or mitigation. Key risks are integrated into five complementary
and overarching reasons for concern (RFCs) in Assessment Box SPM.1.
For each key risk, risk levels were assessed for three timeframes. For the present, risk levels
were estimated for current adaptation and a hypothetical highly adapted state, identifying where
current adaptation deficits exist. For two future timeframes, risk levels were estimated for a continuation of current adaptation and for a highly adapted state, representing the potential for
and limits to adaptation.
The risk levels integrate probability and consequence over the widest possible range of potential
outcomes, based on available literature. These potential outcomes result from the interaction of
climate-related hazards, vulnerability, and exposure. Each risk level reflects total risk from
climatic and non-climatic factors. Key risks and risk levels vary across regions and over time,
given differing socioeconomic development pathways, vulnerability and exposure to hazards,
adaptive capacity, and risk perceptions. Risk levels are not necessarily comparable, especially
across regions, because the assessment considers potential impacts and adaptation in different
physical, biological, and human systems across diverse contexts. This assessment of risks
acknowledges the importance of differences in values and objectives in interpretation of the
assessed risk levels.
Assessment Box SPM.2 Table 1: Key regional risks from climate change and the potential for
reducing risks through adaptation and mitigation. Each key risk is characterized as very low to
very high for three timeframes: the present, near-term (here, assessed over 2030-2040), and
longer-term (here, assessed over 2080-2100). In the near-term, projected levels of global mean
temperature increase do not diverge substantially for different emission scenarios. For the
longer-term, risk levels are presented for two scenarios of global mean temperature increase (2°C
and 4°C above preindustrial levels). These scenarios illustrate the potential for mitigation and
adaptation to reduce the risks related to climate change. Climate-related drivers of impacts are
indicated by icons.
(E) Summary of estimated impacts of observed climate changes on yields over
1960–2013 for four major crops in temperate and tropical regions, with the number of data points analyzed given within parentheses for each category
Climate change impacts on regional ecosystems and relevant national fisheries by 2050. Data shown are absolute and relative differences between future A1B ‘‘business
as usual’’ and Present Day Control scenarios for (A) mid-layer depth temperature (8C); (B) primary production (%); (C) National marine fisheries production (%) and, (D)
fishmeal supply by the 12 top producers (VTN = Vietnam, US = United States, THA = Thailand, SA = South Africa, NOR = Norway, MOR = Morocco, JPN = Japan, ICE = Iceland,
DEN = Denmark, Peru, Chile and China). For the latter, circle size is estimated absolute fishmeal production (Mt).
Another example is flood protection in the Netherlands, which combines infrastructure, like the Maeslant barrier in Rotterdam, with land use policies that prevent development in some areas so that inhabited areas are protected because flood waters have somewhere else to go. A key feature of the Netherlands approach is thinking broadly about how best to transform current systems, changing aspects that no longer work well given sea level rise and other coastal risks, instead of only pursuing incremental changes.