Policy responses for adaptation to climate change
Occurrence of cyclones has increased in the Bangladesh coastal areas due to climate change.
Policy options for meeting the challenges of climate change are basically divided into policies for mitigation and adaptation. Policy responses for mitigation intend to reduce the greenhouse gases (GHGs) in order to avoid the anthropogenic causes of climate change. On the other hand, adaptation policies are necessary to cope with the adverse impacts, which will occur despite the best efforts to mitigate the causes. The very nature of climate change exacerbates the inequities in terms of contribution to the causes and the sufferings from the consequences. Causal liability shifts the burden to the industrialised countries to take entire responsibility for mitigation and adaptation. In terms of mitigation, aggregated emission limits should be set by the developed countries to avoid dangerous climate change and from the adaptation perspective, the developed countries should take entire responsibility of responding to the climate vulnerability and to prevent further deterioration. Therefore, pro-active and re-active policy interventions are required for the response. In terms of re-active policy, developed countries should act to correct the past wrongful behavior under the principles of corrective justice since they are responsible for causing the vulnerability. Against this backdrop, required technological and financial resources for adaptation should be provided, based on proportional contribution to climate change and respective capacity of the states. Least developed countries, which are the most vulnerable, should utilise the support available from global community and also the domestic resources through adopting appropriate policy frameworks to protect their own citizens. Therefore, it becomes realistic to speculate the policy responses for adaptation of the least developed countries like Bangladesh. Hence, policy responses for adaptation to climate change is to be considered as priority issue to prepare for the bracing. However, climate change is an issue that is inherently global in nature, and the dynamics of the climate system are globally integrated. Therefore, an integrated international policy framework is needed to ensure the coordinated efforts. To date the international climate change regime is designed to respond to mitigation and adaptation requirements adopting two international treaties -- the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) or the Convention and 1997 Kyoto Protocol along with institutional frameworks developed there under. Article 3 of the Convention provided the basic principles that include equity, common but differentiated responsibility, respective capacity, precautionary principle, special consideration to vulnerable parties and sustainable development. These principles provided the ethical and legal grounds for advancing and forming the future climate governance regime. However, the existing climate policies are basically focused on mitigation, and adaptation has only recently been given priority equal to mitigation. Cancun Decisions [COP 16] prioritised adaptation with same degree of mitigation. Instead of mitigation framework, strengthening the adaptation mechanisms under Cancun Decisions, however, raises concerns over failure in stabilisation of GHGs concentrations. Worth mentioning, a number of provisions in the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol address adaptation, taking into account the reality of mitigation as a means of real solution to climate change. However, ongoing climate negotiations are moving towards designing the architecture of climate governance regime for the post 2012 period and hence it is worthy to examine the existing mechanisms' response to adaptation and to look at the scope and challenges for future policy frameworks. Initially, it is quite important to understand the critical aspects of the term adaptation and its related terminologies within context of definitions available. IPCC Third Assessment Report defines adaptation as "adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities. Various types of adaptation can be distinguished, including anticipatory and reactive adaptation, private and public adaptation, and autonomous and planned adaptation." However, this definition remains away from suggesting the institutionalised responsive measures. So, adaptation along with the terminologies of vulnerability and resilience require to be defined clearly within UNFCCC. Existing frameworks lack the institutionalised approaches on adaptation measures to climate vulnerability and proactive measures for resilience to potential impacts. Therefore, adaptation policy frameworks will be reactionary and anticipatory. Reactionary measures are taken after the impacts of climate change occur, whereas anticipatory is planning ahead. However, climate impacts relate to complex and wide-ranging issues and involve decisions that affect social, environmental and economic issues. Therefore, prior to taking adaptation measures, it requires macro and micro level assessment of needs and existing knowledge and capacity. Overall, the response to adaptation requires good governance, strong institutional arrangements and capacity with financial and technological supports. The chronological linkage at the international, regional, national and local levels is the pre-requisite to ensure coordinated and effective response to climate change. Institutional arrangement with the compliance and monitoring mechanisms from local to global level is the big challenge for framing adaptation policy. In the national context, macro level measures include poverty reduction, improved infrastructure, healthcare, awareness and education and the micro level measures such as building dams against sea level rise, water purification and agricultural changes demand the integrated and coordinated efforts. Moreover, regional issues, for instance transboundary water, requires special policy frameworks bilaterally or regionally and then on the global policy frameworks which would coordinate all the measures taken from local to global level for adaptation. Climate induced migration/displacement and associated socio-economic disruptions also go far beyond territorial limits and capacity, which is one of the biggest challenges since it relates to loss of homes, livelihoods and culture. Therefore, the coordination and integration among the international, regional, national and local level institutions can provide an effective adaptation policy framework. Cancun Decisions called for the new or strengthened mechanisms for mitigation and adaptation including required finance and technology transfer. As such, committees are suggested to be formed on adaptation, finance and technology transfer to work and adopt an instrument in COP 17. Parties are invited to enhance action on adaptation taking into account the specific national and regional development priorities, objectives and circumstances assessing the impact, vulnerability, including the financial needs, as well as economic, social and environmental evaluation of adaptation options. Work programme suggested for climate risk insurance facility to address impacts associated with severe weather events and the rehabilitation measures associated with slow onset events. The very little context on migration found in the Cancun Decisions is also to be decided in COP 17. In terms of adaptation to slow onset events including climate induced migration, and disaster risk reduction as sudden onset issue, policy approaches should be anticipatory to reduce loss and damage along with reactionary approaches on rehabilitation measures with insurance, compensation and other related mechanisms. Climate change impact and vulnerability bring up the serious legal question of liability for the damage caused, based on proportional contribution to climate change. Loss and damage involved with climate change and related mechanisms are suggested into Cancun Decision, however, to be adopted in COP 18. But the assessment of loss and damage related to climate change and compensation mechanisms demand separate approaches, which is important and integral part of adaptation frameworks. On the other hand, the efforts taken by Bangladesh, as a least developed country, are appreciated by global community since it has completed NAPA in 2005 and adopted Strategy and Action Plan, 2008 along with financial mechanisms including trust fund and resilience fund. The Trust Fund formed with domestic resources is already providing finance for implementing some of the projects without adopting legal framework with appropriate institutional arrangements. It is strongly suggested that, prior to taking broader initiatives, to assess the causes and consequences of climate impacts and the existing capacity of intuitions from micro to macro level, there should be adopted a broader policy framework on climate change, particularly on adaptation in Bangladesh.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments