Executive Summary

Increasing global interconnectivity, population, and economic growth, and the mutual interdependence of economic and ecological systems, can serve both to reduce vulnerability and to amplify disaster risks (high confidence). Global development pathways are becoming a more important factor in the management of vulnerability and disaster risk. [7.2.1]

The international community has accumulated substantial experience in providing help for disasters and risk management in the context of localized and short-term events associated with climate variability and extremes. Experience in disaster risk management includes both bottom-up and top-down approaches, but most often has developed from disasters considered first as local issues, then at the national level, and only at the international level where needs exceed national capacity, especially in terms of humanitarian assistance and capacity building. [7.2.4]

There are two main mechanisms at the international level that are purpose-built and dedicated to disaster risk management and climate change adaptation. These are the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in particular in its adaptation components. This chapter focuses on these two bodies while recognizing that there are many others that have an international role to play. Page limitations require a selective approach and a comprehensive assessment of all relevant bodies is impractical. The UNISDR and the UNFCCC are very different institutions with different mandates and scope and objectives, and with varying strengths and capacities (high confidence).

Introduction

The policy-oriented framing of the question about how much anthropogenic climate change the Earth's societies and ecosystems could endure is at least 20 years old. International conferences in Villach (Austria) in 1985 and 1987, and especially the one in Bellagio (Italy) in 1987, involved both scientists and policymakers in contemplating climate change and proposed that long-term environmental targets, such as the rates of global mean temperature increase or sea-level rise, should be used in policymaking (WCP, 1988). Referring to observed historical values, it was recommended to keep the rate of temperature increase below 0.1 °C per decade, based primarily on the estimated rate of ecological adaptation. This seemingly arbitrary proposition is rather specific compared with the riddle implied in the formulation of Article 2 about the ultimate objective of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Article 2 of the UNFCCC frames the requirement for long-term climate policy in terms of an environmental objective “to prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” This calls for “inverse approaches” that provide information about possible emission strategies with respect to externally specified environmental targets. Early attempts by Working Group I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 1994a) and by Wigley et al. (1996) depict emission paths with respect to given CO2concentration targets.

Introduction: why venture capital?

In the long run, a sustainability transition will require major shifts in our socio-economic activities. As an example, consider the challenge that climate change issues pose for Europe. An effective European climate policy ultimately needs to achieve drastic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. In order to keep the risk of major disruptions of human and natural systems moderate, global emissions would need to be below current levels in the long term (see Wigley, Richels, and Edmonds 1996). But population and per capita emissions in developing countries will continue to rise significantly for some time to come. The EU and other developed regions have a special responsibility to lead the way in reducing global emissions, not only because of their economic ability to initiate change, but also because their per capita emissions and cumulative historical emissions far exceed those of developing countries.

The IA Focus Group research discussed in the preceding chapters has shown that many citizens across Europe see scenarios of significantly lower energy use and greenhouse gas emissions as desirable (see also Kasemir et al. 2000). But how could such a future be realized? The feasibility of such scenarios depends on interacting patterns of lifestyle changes and technological changes. One option to induce technological change toward low-carbon products and processes is to make them more competitive by putting a tax burden on carbon emissions. This would not necessarily lead to welfare losses.