Page - 522 - in Loss and Damage from Climate Change - Concepts, Methods and Policy Options

522 M.vandenHombergandC.McQuistan Box22.2Riskmanagementand limitsapproachtoL&D The riskmanagement perspective classifies risks as either acceptable (no additional action required), tolerable (action required considering costs andother constraints) or intolerable (action required irrespectiveof constraints). Itmakes clear that, once stan- dard adaptation in the formofDRR,CCAordevelopment is no longer feasible in the intolerable space, transformative or curative action is required (Mechler andSchinko 2016).Thelimits toadaptationperspectivefocusesonsoftandhardlimits toadaptation (Klein et al. 2014; Dow et al. 2013). A cross-cutting distinction is betweenwhether theoption represents incremental, fundamentalor transformativeadjustment (Schinko andMechler 2017).Kates et al. (2012) distinguishbetween incremental and transfor- mationaladaptation.Theformeraims to improveefficiencywithinexisting technolog- ical, governance andvalue systems,whereas transformative adjustmentsmay involve changes in some of the fundamental attributes of those systems. Kates et al. (2012) consider three groups of transformative actions, i.e. those adopted at a much larger scaleor intensity, those thatare trulynewtoaparticular regionorresourcesystem,and those that transform places and shift locations. Schinko andMechler (2017) use the connotation “transformative” to denote a profound change in riskmanagement going beyondtraditionaladaptationmeasures,whereasKatesetal. (2012),with“transforma- tional adaptation”, refer to an innovative approach of adaptation and include shifting locations,which is strictly speakingno longeradaptation. Considerable groups of vulnerable peoplewho live in highly exposed and risk- proneplaces andwho lack thecapacity to adapt havealready reachedeither soft or hard adaptation limits (van derGeest andWarner 2015).Apart fromaccepting the limitandcorrespondingescalatinglosses,onecanundertakecurativeor transforma- tivemeasures, asweexplain also inBox22.2on riskmanagement. In the example of Alaskan villages, a transformativemeasure would be to relocate residents and economic activity away fromhigh risk and increasingly unproductive areas—even thoughthisisdeemedpoliticallyimpossible,giventheestimatedcostsofuptoUS$1 millionper person (Huntington et al. 2012;Klein et al. 2014). If no transformative action is taken,onlycurativemeasures remainasa last resort.This involves redress and rehabilitationmechanisms,when climate change canbe established as the key driver, for example, displacement and involuntarymigration. Clusters of technologies can be distinguished that are beneficial for multiple actions.Disaster riskmanagement, suchasEWS, and structural/physical technolo- gies, suchasecosystemmanagement, serveonlyadaptationpurposes.Geographical informationmanagement and applications are instrumental both in the adaptation and“beyondadaptation”phase, for example for spatial or land-useplanning.Tech- nologies for poverty alleviation and livelihood security are clearly distinct. As an example, for livelihood security in the adaptation phase, one can diversify liveli- hoodsbychangingagriculturalpractices toones that cancopewithclimatechange, whereasfor“beyondadaptation”onemustfindalternativelivelihoodsandshift from agriculture to, forexampleservices. In thiscase, there isnolongerastrongrelation- shipbetween the livelihoodandnaturalhazards.