Papers

Emergency Management Impacts Fact Sheet

 Climate Change Impacts Fact Sheet - Emergency Managment  

Impact of Extreme Weather Events and Climate Change on Surf Life Saving Services - Summary Report

  • May 2011
  • Coastal Zone Managment Pty Ltd

 This is the second of two reports produced for the project : Impact of Extreme Weather Events and Climate Change on Surf Life Saving Services. The sumamry report provides an overview of eh project with a focus on presenting the recommended strategies to reduce vulnerability to the impacts of climate change and extreme weather events. More information is in the full report.

Impact of Extreme Weather Events and Climate Change on Surf Life Saving Services - Full Report

  • May 2011
  • Coastal Zone Managment Pty Ltd

 This report presents a Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap for Surf Life Saving Australia (SLSA). The objective of the project  was to assess the range of risks climate change might pose to SLSA, review available strategies to address identified risks and to develop a program of works to implement the identifiesed strategies. The program of works is encapsulated within the Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap. The roadmap is an important first step for SLSA in preparing an integrated response to the impacts of climate change.

The Critical Decade

  • May 2011
  • Climate Change Commission

 This update reveiws what the science indicates about the need to act on climate change and the risks of a changing climate to Australia

Public Risk Perceptions, Understandings and Responses to Climate Change in Australia & Great Britain

  • April 2011
  • Dr Joseph Reser, Griffith University Nick pdgeon, Alexa Spence, Graham Bradley, A. Ian Glendon, Michelle Ellul

 Public Risk Perceptions, Understandings andResponses to Climate Change inAustralia and Great Britain-
Interim Report
Joseph P. Reser, Nick Pidgeon, Alexa Spence, Graham Bradley, A. Ian Glendon and Michelle Ellul

Summary statement
This interim report provides an initial look at the national survey findings of a collaborative
and cross-national research project by Griffith University (Australia) and Cardiff University
(Wales) examining public risk perceptions, understandings and responses to the threat and
unfolding impacts of climate change in Australia and Great Britain. Each of these surveys, in
addition to shared questions and objectives, had additional and differing objectives, with the
Australian survey also examining public perceptions, experience, and responses to natural
disasters, and the British survey examining energy policies and futures in the United
Kingdom. The Australian national survey was undertaken between 6 June and 6 July of 2010
and involved a geographically and demographically stratified national sample of 3096
respondents. The British survey was undertaken between 6 January and 26 March, 2010 and
involved a representative quota sample of 1822 respondents residing in England, Scotland
and Wales. This interim report addresses common findings relating to these two interlinked
surveys, and in addition provides some additional and preliminary information regarding the
Australia-specific questions and findings from the Australian survey exercise. These surveys
are distinctive in their cross-national comparative collaboration, in their in-depth nature, in
their focus on underlying public understandings and psychological responses to climate
change, and in their shared objective of documenting and monitoring important psychological
and social changes and impacts in the human landscape relating to global climate change.


 

Integrating disaster risk reductionand climate change adaptation: key challenges-scales, knowledge a

  • May 2010
  • Jorn Birkmann, Korinna von Teichman

 

Abstract

Statistical data shows that the increase in disasters due to natural hazards over the past 20 years has, for the most part, been caused by meteorological and hydrological events. This increase has been largely assigned to climate change [Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED), 2010, http://www.emdat.belDatabaselTrends/trends.html], that is, with climate-related hazards being major triggers for the majorityof disasters. Consequently. there is obvious concern about how a changing climate will exacerbate the situation in the future (McBean and Ajibade in Curr Opin Environ Sustain1:179-186, 2009). However, the attribution of a single hazard event or specific losses to climate change is still difficult, if not impossible, due to the complexity of factors that generate disaster losses. Disaster risk is a product of the interaction of the hazard (event) and the vulnerability conditions of the society or elements exposed. As a result, the need for a systematic linkage between disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA) to advance sustainable development, and finally human security is being discussed within the ongoing climate change negotiations as well as within the disaster risk community, for example, in the framework of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change special report on 'Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation'. However, crucial differences between DRR and CCA exist that have widely limited or hampered their integration in practice. A review of existing literature on the topic and current national and local adaptation strategies, as well as 38 expert interviews conducted between April and May 2009, have led the authors to hypothesise that most of these differences and challenges can be categorised with respect to different spatial and temporal scales, the knowledge base, and norm systems. This paper examines the reasons for the practical barriers when linking CCA and DRR according to these three aspects. Finally, we outline recommendations and measures that need to be adopted in order to overcome existing barriers. In addition, quality criteria are formulated that should be applied in order to constantly monitor and evaluate adaptation strategies designed to simultaneously meet DRR requirements and vice versa.

Communicating Uncertainty Via Probabilities: The Case of Weather Forecasts

Capturing uncertainty through numerical probabilistic statements is orthodoxy in risk science—and most of science and technology. There are a wide range of views on the utility of such statements for risk communication, and they are often seen as being central to the failure to generate common understanding about risks between science and non-scientists. The extent to which probability statements are understood is unclear. If such statements are misunderstood by many, what alternatives might communicate uncertainty better? These questions are examined in the context of daily weather forecasts. The probabilities used in such statements concern daily events experienced by everyone, unlike the extremely small probabilities about unfamiliar events often used in risk communication. If people do not understand weather forecasts, there is little hope that statements about unfamiliar events using unfamiliar language will be understood. Some jurisdictions use numerical probabilistic statements on the likelihood of precipitation, and a variety of qualitative or categorical forecasts are also used. Drawing on a range of sources including public surveys conducted by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, the paper examines public understanding of probabilities and public and specialist understanding of verbal categorical forecast terms. The majority of those surveyed have basic understanding about probabilities as used in weather forecasts, but significant groups do not. However, there was limited agreement among forecasters on what the probabilistic statements meant. Similarly, there was limited shared meaning between forecasters and the public on the verbal forecast expression examined.