ECN Scenario Approach PresentationECN: Severn Estuary

IMCORE SCENARIOS TRAINING WORKSHOP

Budapest Room, Hilton Conference CentreAmsterdam Airport Schiphol

Tuesday 2 February 2010

1. Main theme & approach

• Capacity-building & enhanced governance of climate change adaptation around the Severn Estuary

2. Context: the Severn ECN Work Programme

2. Severn ECN Aims & Objectives

Aims:• To inform the development of climate change adaptation on the

Severn Estuary• To encourage joint working and improved interaction between

scientists and policy makers

Objectives:• To enhance the science base on climate change for application within

the overall management system of the Severn Estuary • To stocktake corporate responses to climate change• To evaluate the policy needs for climate change information and data

on the Severn Estuary • To explore mechanisms for enhancing science-policy integration on

climate change on the estuary at estuary and local levels • To increase awareness of climate change impacts and adaptation

options • To create guidelines for the development of adaptation options for the

Severn Estuary

2. ECN Work

Severn issues and challenges

2. Key issues and challenges

• (Spatial) development needs and increased flood/coastal erosion risks associated with climate change & sea level rise

– Need to see how spatial development ‘needs’ (including development allocations) can be accommodated given climate change (flood risk; storm surges etc.)

– Need to understand pan-estuary and wider socio-economic context • & how this is or is not dealt with by current policy documents (SMPII; RBMP; LPA; LA)

– Critical infrastructure issues associated with climate change & sea level rise• Much of Severn Estuary infrastructure is of national and regional as well as local

importance

• Lack of clarity over climate change, its impact & significance

2. Key issues and challenges

• Institutional & governance issues– Complex policy landscape – overlapping / conflicting?

• England / Wales; multiple local government policies• SMP (to 100yrs); WFD; regional/national spatial plans

– Science needs & inputs to ‘policy’ variable – Extent to which ‘policy’ influences practice– Engagement with climate change adaptation variable – SEP’s role still emerging (State of Estuary aspirations)

Tewkesbury

Borough Council

Tewkesbury

Borough Council

Scenario Options under consideration

Or –

HOW do we ADD VALUE?

Use scenarios to help resolve issues?

3. Issues ? Some scenario possibilities

• Issue: Understanding of pan-estuary and wider socio-economic context for spatial development Ø Exploratory scenario to explore possible socio-economic futures

(1)• Issue: How development / critical infrastructure ‘needs’

can be accommodated in the context of climate change• Exploratory scenario to explore how these needs might be

addressed (2)• Issue: lack of clarity over climate change, its impact &

significance Ø To understand climate change - Predictive scenarios

(UKCP09/SECRRAG/EA data) to visualise climate change (for selected sites) (3)

Ø To understand climate change impacts - Coupling/Integrated assessment of SRES (1) & predictive scenarios (3) (for selected sites) (4)

3. Issues ? Some scenario possibilities

• Institutional & governance issuesØ To encourage joint working / collaboration Ø Exploratory scenario to explore possible futures for joint working

(for specific sectors/sites?) (5)Ø To define ‘vision’ for estuary joint working & collaboration for

climate change – use Normative Scenario (6) Ø To encourage better science-policy integrationØ Exploratory scenario to explore possible science-policy futures (for

spatial development planning) (7)Ø To define ‘vision’ for better science – policy integration – in context

of spatial development planning – use backcasting & Normative Scenario (8)

Ø To improve engagement of policy makers with climate changeØ Could be achieved by involvement of policy makers in the

development of many of the above scenario possibilities Ø Schools’ use of scenarios to improve understanding of future policy

makers (9)

3. Summary: Scenario options under consideration

1) Exploratory scenario to explore possible socio-economic futures 2) Exploratory scenario to explore development needs v climate change 3) Predictive scenarios (UKCP09/SECRRAG/EA data) to visualise climate

change (for selected sites) 4) Coupling/Integrated assessment of SRES (1) & predictive scenarios

(3) (for selected sites) 5) Exploratory scenario to explore possible futures for joint working (for

specific sectors/sites?) 6) To define ‘vision’ for estuary joint working & collaboration for

climate change – use Normative Scenario 7) Exploratory scenario to explore possible science-policy futures (for

spatial development planning) 8) To define ‘vision’ for better science – policy integration – in context

of spatial development planning – use backcasting & Normative Scenario

9) Educational development of scenarios

Option 1: socio-economic futures for the Severn Estuary

• Purpose: – to help understand wider socio-economic processes and their likely impacts on the Severn

Estuary, particularly land use development – To help understand context for specific case study sites – to identify future land use changes and possible implications for climate/flood risk– To test / add value to existing plans (spatial plans; SMPII) – could feed into State of Estuary (SEP) initiative

• Scale: – whole estuary– Develop more detailed scenarios for ‘spatial development’ as defined in town and country

planning legislation and/or critical infrastructure

• Types of scenarios / approach: – SRES downscaling / use of existing Welsh/South West socio-economic work – desk study– Supplement with interviews with selected planners/economists etc.– Take results of desk study – validate at estuary-wide workshop

• Who is involved:– Spatial planners; regional and local economic development personnel; academics

• Issues:– Time, resources and MACE skill base– CAN WE DO A ROUGH AND READY VERSION based on existing sources?– Can this be incorporated in to State of Estuary report (& funding?)– Should this recommended as part of adaptation guidelines?

Option 2: development needs & climate change

• Purpose: – to explore the ways in which spatial development needs can be accommodated in the

context of climate change• Include physical on-ground adaptation approaches

– To increase awareness of spatial planners of climate change and possible adaptation responses

– To encourage pan-estuary collaboration and learning

• Scale: – whole estuary– Focus on a specific type or types of development?

• Types of scenarios / approach: – Exploratory scenario – following interviews with selected planners; investigation of case

studies

• Who is involved:– Spatial planners; regional and local economic development personnel; academics

• Issues:– How to link / relate to planners’ workshop (June)– Timing issues if build on case studies

Option 3: climate change projections for the Severn

• Purpose: – to improve clarity of climate change projections for the Severn – to illustrate variations/uncertainties / impacts associated with various climate change

projections– Test SMPII policy options?–

• Scale:– Selected case study sites only– Only focus on climate change parameters (identified from planners’ concerns via

interviews/planning documents)

• Types of scenarios: – Predictive scenarios – illustrate variations/uncertainties

• Who is involved:– MACE staff; SECCRAG; Bristol Uni?; EA?

• Issues:– Links to visualisation (GIS); how to visualise certain parameters?– Builds on case study research – time frame?– EA existing sources– Useful resource for education pack

Option 4: predicting climate change impacts

• Purpose: – to build up an understanding of secondary climate change impacts (based on case

study sites only)– To demonstrate these impacts to potential policy makers (school children) to facilitate

engagement in climate change

• Scale:– for selected case study sites only– for specific climate change parameters only– Highlight particularly ‘vulnerable’ communities / developments

• Types of scenarios: Ø Coupling/Integrated assessment of SRES (1) & predictive scenarios (3) (for selected

sites) (4)– on option 1 results (coupling – & test existing plans - quantitative indicators)

• Who is involved:– MACE staff; SECCRAG; EA?

• Issues:– Links to visualisation (GIS)– Identifying vulnerability indicators – Timing to be useful as demonstration material – Useful resource for education pack

Option 5: enhancement of joint working

• Purpose: – to explore possible futures for joint working

• To facilitate dialogue between policy makers at various scales • To develop a wider estuary consciousness

• Scale:– Estuary-wide– Sector / administrative level focus (suggest joint working between planners at local,

estuary and regional scale)– Focus on range of planning processes/documents (estuary; local authority)

• Types of scenarios: – Planners’ review & case study sites identify

• drivers/issues associated with joint working • Planning processes & levels to focus on

– Exploratory scenarios to be developed

• Who is involved:– Planners associated with relevant local, regional and estuary-wide planning processes

• Issues: – Timing with respect to building on planners’ review and case study sites– Opportunities to 5th scenario – the vision for joint working out of this? (option 6)

Option 6: vision for joint working

• Purpose: – To define ‘vision’ for estuary joint working & collaboration for climate change

• To facilitate dialogue between policy makers at various scales • To develop a wider estuary consciousness • To inform development of adaptation strategy guidelines• To inform principles for SEP (review of Strategy document)

• Scale:– Estuary-wide– Focus on same planning processes & levels as option 5

• Types of scenarios: – Planners’ review & case study sites identify

• drivers/issues associated with joint working • Planning processes & levels to focus on

– Normative scenario to be developed – use backcasting?

• Who is involved:– Planners associated with relevant local, regional and estuary-wide planning processes

• Issues: – Builds / dependent on Option 5 – Timing– Can this be IMCORE Workshop 3 activity?

Option 7: enhancement of science-policy interface

• Purpose: – to explore possible science-policy futures

• To facilitate dialogue between policy makers and scientists • To increase policy makers knowledge of possible science inputs and scientists comprehension of policy

needs • Scale:

– Estuary-wide– Focus on local authority ‘policy’ documents/plans & selected climate change science

inputs/needs for these

• Types of scenarios: – Planners’ review & case study sites identify

• drivers/issues associated with science-policy interface / science input • Climate change science inputs/needs to focus on

– Exploratory scenarios to be developed

• Who is involved:– Planners associated with relevant local planning processes– Relevant ‘science’ providers (mediators and translators)

• Issues: – Builds on SECCRAG (COREPOINT and IMCORE)– Timing with respect to building on planners’ review and case study sites– SECCRAG3? / joint workshop with Option 5?

Option 8: vision for joint working between scientists & policy makers

• Purpose: – To define ‘vision’ for better science – policy integration –

• To facilitate dialogue between scientists & policy makers • To inform development of adaptation strategy guidelines• To inform principles for SEP (review of Strategy document)

• Scale:– Estuary-wide– Focus on same planning processes & levels as option 7

• Types of scenarios: – Informed by SECCRAG, Option 7, Planners’ review & case study sites– Normative Scenario – use backcasting

• Who is involved:– Planners associated with relevant local planning processes– Relevant ‘science’ providers (mediators and translators)

• Issues: – Builds / dependent on Option 7– Timing– Can this be IMCORE Workshop 3 activity?– Can it be a joint workshop with Option 6?

Option 9: developing childrens’ capacity

• Use scenarios as an educative tool associated with development of education pack– Twin schools on either side of the estuary?– See dossier

The Severn ECN Way forward

3. Way forward – preparatory scoping tasks

– Discussions: • Scenarios TWG• With Glamorgan Uni• With SEP (subset)• With ‘critical friend’ (CMRC)

– Further research into options / SWOT analysis?• Factors to consider:

– Existing knowledge/capital– Former studies; research– Resources – Human / technical (futures/engagement)– Data/information (input) / data processing / visualisation– Time & Cost– Stakeholder context – Complexity & variability– Previous experience with stakeholders (level of engagement/trust etc.)– Other – interlinkages between options (win-win situations)

– Testing scenarios – ICM module workshops/exercise

Key questions

• Help!• Your thoughts & views?

• BallingerRC@Cf.ac.uk