Evaluation of adaptation to water-related risk in the Mekong Delta: A multi-criteria analysis of response decisions

Transcription

1 Evaluation of adaptation to water-related risk in the Mekong Delta: A multi-criteria analysis of response decisions Deltas in Times of Climate Change II, Rotterdam Session: Decision support and risk assessment in Asian deltas 24 September 2014 Dunja Krause, Maria Schwab, Joern Birkmann, Matthias Garschagen* United Nations University Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS) Evaluation of adaptation options/measures: Research gaps & motivation Vietnamese Mekong Delta (VMD) Evaluation of strategies rarely inform decision-making in Vietnam Evaluation practice Evaluation is often underemphasized and too narrow Theory & Concepts Few integrated concepts and theories which could provide a comprehensive frame for such approaches 2 Folie 2 1

2 Adaptatio n intention Avoidant maladaptation Quality criteria Development of evaluation framework Understand risk and vulnerability context Identify existing and potential adaptation strategies (different levels and stakeholders) Identify criteria that determine success/failure of strategies and that need to be considered to ensure sustainability Evaluate selected adaptation strategies based on criteria Compare MCA results with vulnerability implications of selected strategies 3 Folie 3 Conceptual framework for adaptation evaluation Human and/or natural perturbations, stresses, stressors, transformation Risk context (A) Individual decision-making (B) Available means for adaptation Frame of reference Adaptation evaluation (C) Implementation Legend Analytical components Analytical subcomponents Main influences between subcomponents Region/World Place Agent Perception of hazard, vulnerability, opportunity Goal orientation Individual cognition Outcomes Impacts/effects Source: Schwab & Krause, based on ideas of Grothmann & Patt (2005); Werlen (1993) and UNFCCC (2010) 4 Folie 4 2

3 Source: Schwab & Krause Risk and vulnerability context 5 Folie 5 Field research methods Mixed-methods approach Qualitative / semistructured interviews n=85; n=137 Governmental Agencies Quantitative household surveys n=360; n= 312 Household Level Participatory group discussions n=3; n=11 Hamlet Commune District Province Collection of reports and secondary data 6 Folie 6 3

4 Source: Schwab & Krause Identified risk-related response strategies (coping/adapt.) Rural areas (Rice farmers; salinity) % of hh Introduce a third season 94 Increase fertiliser 76 Invest in productive assets 73 Take a loan 66 Buy fertiliser/pesticides on credit 63 Increase the scope of work 58 Change the crop or variety 49 Pump fresh water in the field 44 Sell productive assets 42 Migrate to urban areas 41 Buy food on credit 40 Change crop calendar 30 Produce again/refill 31 Reduce inputs 22 Invest in livestock 19 Take children out of school 16 Seek another job 15 Urban areas Elevate floor of house 73 Elevate supplies 67 Reduce sleep 58 Build private dyke 44 Switch off electricity on flood days 43 Spend savings 40 Block drainage 37 Reconstruct House 34 Ask local government for help 13 Send children away during flood days 13 Join saving group 12 Vocational training programme 8 Move away 12 % of hh Folie 7 Criteria for household-level adaptation decision-making Rural case study Urban case study Key criteria Source of identification Key criteria Source of identification Costs Implementation time Autonomy/ Implementability Income Environment Long-term impact Flexibility Future risk 4 Household group discussions (n=61) / literature review / interviews Cost Longevity Available alternatives Benefit/drawback Livelihood impact Opportunity/threshold Cultural acceptance Knowledge needs Implementation time Institutional requirements Environmental impact Household and expert interviews, literature Household interviews Household interviews literature Literature Literature Literature, household interviews Literature, expert interviews Source: Schwab & Krause Folie 8 4

5 Criteria ratings for house elevation and moving in urban An Lac Ward (n=120) 100,0% Elevation advantage (n=110) Move advantage (n=28) Elevation disadvantages (n=10) Move disadavantages (n=92) 80,0% 60,0% 40,0% 20,0% 0,0% -20,0% -40,0% -60,0% Source: Krause Folie 9 Household flood experience and evaluation of moving (urban case study) % good option not a good option 100,00 93,28 76,52 Household survey An Lac Ward (n=120) 50,00 0,00 6,72 House Elevation 23,48 Moving 10 Folie 10 Source: Krause

6 Average mentionings per household per strategy (n=98) Costs Implementability Implementation time Income Long-term impact Environment Costs Implementability Implementation time Income Long-term impact Environment Criteria-based evaluation across the 18 selected strategies: rural context 0,40 0,20 0,00 Capability-related Outcome-related Capability-related Outcome-related Most important advantages Most important disadvantages Source: Schwab Folie 11 MCA results against the background of vulnerability changes MCA provides a profound basis to assess local priority setting and acceptance of CCA However, good as judged subjectively does not always equal actual vulnerability reduction Rural: Introducing a third rice crop: Positively judged by households, but increased vulnerability substantially Urban: Moving to flood-proof area: negatively judged by households, but positive for long-term risk reduction 12 Folie 12 6

7 Discussion/Conclusion/Outlook 5-step MCA methodology allows to clearly identify key criteria for the judgments about options that otherwise often go unnoticed (e.g. life span of a measure, co-benefits, implementation time) helps to structure and weight these criteria allows to engage with a debate around trade-offs/rifts btw. different subjective criteria different adaptation options different actors groups etc. yet, subjectivity-oriented MCAs needs to be coupled with additional consideration of objective long-term vulnerability effects 13 Folie 13 Relevance and potential contribution (?) Vietnamese Mekong Delta (VMD) identifies locally accepted CCA strategies and the key criteria without neglecting long-term vulnerability implications, thus, motivating action Evaluation practice helps to push for wider application of evaluation in practice through suggesting a strategic and coherent methodology Theory & concepts provides an integrated frame for comprehensive evaluation and adaptation science (risk context, individual decision making, evaluation) 14 Folie 14 7

8 Thank you for your attention! Contact details: 15 Folie 15 8