Kochi, India Case Study of Climate Adaptation to Floods: Ranking Local Government Investment Options

Abstract Climate adaptation is uniquely linked to location, making it predominantly a local government and community responsibility. Despite the obligation to act, local governments are hindered by the absence of applicable guides to adaptation decision-making, especially adaptation to extreme events. In this paper, we describe a framework for prioritising adaptation options that could be locally implemented and illustrate it with a study of flooding in Kochi: a city in southern India. Unlike many demand driven, economics based studies, our new framework also incorporates non-economic dimensions of the extremes and potential adaptation options. Local knowledge is used to tackle data gaps and uncertainty related to extreme events: local experts select adaptation options that offer additional benefits besides those related to climate change. These co-benefits aid decision making under uncertainty by giving weight to community priorities. The Indian case study reveals that, risk evaluation and reduction need to be locally contextualised based on resources available, immediate community requirements, planning periods and local expert knowledge. Although there will be residual damage even after implementing selected options, we argue that, climate response will be most likely to be accepted when it also supports pressing needs.

[1]  Harry H. Panjer,et al.  Recursive Evaluation of a Family of Compound Distributions , 1981, ASTIN Bulletin.

[2]  M. Hulme,et al.  Assessing the robustness of adaptation decisions to climate change uncertainties: A case study on water resources management in the East of England , 2007 .

[3]  R. O'Neill,et al.  The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital , 1997, Nature.

[4]  J. Berger Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis , 1988 .

[5]  A. Dash,et al.  Climate change and threat of vector-borne diseases in India: are we prepared? , 2010, Parasitology Research.

[6]  P. V. Shevchenko,et al.  The Structural Modelling of Operational Risk Via Bayesian Inference: Combining Loss Data with Expert Opinions , 2006, 0904.1067.

[7]  S. Solomon The Physical Science Basis : Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , 2007 .

[8]  G. B. Pant,et al.  High-resolution climate change scenarios for India for the 21st century , 2006 .

[9]  Alois Gisler,et al.  A Course in Credibility Theory and its Applications , 2005 .

[10]  Donald G. Saari,et al.  Which is better: the Condorcet or Borda winner? , 2006, Soc. Choice Welf..

[11]  K. Krishnakumar,et al.  Rainfall trends in twentieth century over Kerala, India , 2009 .

[12]  K. D. Bruin,et al.  Adapting to climate change in The Netherlands: an inventory of climate adaptation options and ranking of alternatives , 2009 .

[13]  J. Bergh Safe climate policy is affordable—12 reasons , 2010 .

[14]  Arnoldo Frigessi,et al.  Practical Extreme Value Modelling of Hydrological Floods and Droughts: A Case Study , 2004 .

[15]  Tarah Wright,et al.  Giving “teeth” to an environmental policy: a Delphi Study at Dalhousie University , 2006 .

[16]  N. Stern The Economics of Climate Change: Implications of Climate Change for Development , 2007 .

[17]  T. Wilbanks,et al.  Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , 2007 .

[18]  R. Garnaut,et al.  The Garnaut Climate Change Review: final report. , 2008 .

[19]  Gwo-Jen Hwang,et al.  A Delphi-based approach to developing expert systems with the cooperation of multiple experts , 2007, Expert Systems with Applications.

[20]  Milind Kandlikar,et al.  Climate impacts of air quality policy: switching to a natural gas-fueled public transportation system in New Delhi. , 2008, Environmental science & technology.

[21]  J. A. Wardekker,et al.  Frame-based guide to situated decision-making on climate change , 2009 .

[22]  A. Meyer Economics Of Climate Change , 1995, Nature.

[23]  Richard S. J. Tol,et al.  The Stern Review: A deconstruction , 2009 .

[24]  J. Quiggin Stern and his critics on discounting and climate change: an editorial essay , 2008 .

[25]  Stephane Hallegatte,et al.  Strategies to adapt to an uncertain climate change , 2008 .

[26]  J. Palutikof,et al.  Climate change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Summary for Policymakers. , 2007 .

[27]  M. Weitzman A Review of The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change , 2007 .

[28]  A. Degaetano,et al.  “2100? It Doesn't Keep Me Up at Night!”: Lessons for the Next Generation of Climate Assessments , 2011 .

[29]  Pavel V. Shevchenko,et al.  Modelling Operational Risk Using Bayesian Inference , 2011 .

[30]  J Kangas,et al.  Empirical study on voting power in participatory forest planning. , 2008, Journal of environmental management.

[31]  J. Palutikof,et al.  Climate change 2007 : impacts, adaptation and vulnerability , 2001 .

[32]  Anu Simon,et al.  Spatial variability and rainfall characteristics of Kerala , 2004 .

[33]  Abraham Kaplan,et al.  The Prediction of Social and Technological Events , 1950 .

[34]  David B. Dunson,et al.  Bayesian Data Analysis , 2010 .

[35]  Corinne Le Quéré,et al.  Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis , 2013 .