37
3.6 Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience
Adaptation refers to the adjustments in environmental, social and economic systems in response to
actual or expected climatic stimuli and the effects or impacts from these (McCarthy, 2001). Adaptation
involves changes in processes, practices, and structures to moderate potential damages or benefits
associated with climate change (Smit, 2003). In the context of climate change, several definitions of
adaptation are found in climate change literature, such as the following example:
Adaptation is the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects. In human systems, adaptation seeks to moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities. In natural systems, human intervention may
facilitate adjustment to expected climate and its effects. (IPCC, 2014b, p. 40).
Adaptation to climate change necessarily includes the adaptation to variability. Variability requires
that adaptation include both the process of adapting as well as the condition being adapted to.
Variability is evident in autonomous and spontaneous adaptation; it is argued that human and natural
systems will, to some extent, adapt autonomously, and that planned adaptation can supplement autonomous adaptation. However, ‘options and incentives are greater for adaptation of human systems than
for adaptation to protect natural systems’ (IPCC, 2001, pp. 6–8). In unmanaged natural systems,
adaptation is reactive and is the means by which species and communities respond to changed conditions. In consideration of predicted accelerated climate changes, it is a recognised concern that many
species will not be able to adapt to fast-changing environments (IPCC, 2012). Planned adaptation
within managed ecosystems could be a possible solution for the changing future. The patterns of
nature need to be considered in any process, implemented or managed by humans, so as to achieve
sustainable outcomes. Unfortunately, this is not the case in the current practice of climate change risk
assessments and adaption planning. The dominant approach for planned adaption is the ‘risk management adaptation’ approach.
Planned anticipatory adaptation based on the risk management approach is aimed at reducing a
system’s vulnerability by diminishing risk or improving adaptive capacity. Numerous reasons have
been given for pursuing planned adaptation, and it can yield benefits regardless of the uncertainty and
nature of climate change (Ali, 1999). Planned adaptation initiatives are regarded not as a substitute to
the mitigation of climate change, but as a necessary strategy to manage its impacts. Risk assessment
and adaption planning is best undertaken as a participative exercise that engages the community and
draws on their knowledge of the ‘system’ (human systems) under consideration. Risk is usually
defined as the effect of uncertainty on objectives (AGO, 2006). Thus, risk frameworks are developed
to support planning and decision-making in the context of such uncertainty and the objectives to be
achieved. Given the long-term nature of climate change and the considerable uncertainty about the
timing and severity of some potential impacts, it is important that maladaptation does not occur, and
actions are taken to avoid ‘over or under responses’ to adaptation (GORCC, 2012). This is known as
the ‘precautionary approach’ to climate change adaptation (IPCC, 2007a).
Unfortunately, human adaptation considerations, including the use of the precautionary approach,
are self-centred, and adaptation or mitigation considerations are framed and structured for human
benefit only (Berke, 1995; Munasinghe, 2000; Campbell et al., 2009). A holistic integrated adaptation
discourse, where ecosystems and human systems are in equilibrium, needs to be addressed. As argued
by John Tillman Lyle in Design for Human Ecosystems (1991), we as humans are an inherent part of
these ecological systems, and can enhance or destroy them (Lyle, 1991). Recognizing Lyle’s argument, it is then important for humans as part of the ecological system to align our design and planning
decisions with the inherent qualities of the natural system we belong to. In this alignment, to achieve
persistence is to regenerate, and to be adaptable is to constantly acknowledge change and amend our
built environment in parallel with the changing natural environment. This is further supported by the
approach taken in the application of A Pattern Language (Alexander et al., 1977) to the development
3.6 Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience
3.6 Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience
Adaptation refers to the adjustments in environmental, social and economic systems in response to
actual or expected climatic stimuli and the effects or impacts from these (McCarthy, 2001). Adaptation
involves changes in processes, practices, and structures to moderate potential damages or benefits
associated with climate change (Smit, 2003). In the context of climate change, several definitions of
adaptation are found in climate change literature, such as the following example:
Adaptation is the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects. In human systems, adaptation seeks to moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities. In natural systems, human intervention may
facilitate adjustment to expected climate and its effects. (IPCC, 2014b, p. 40).
Adaptation to climate change necessarily includes the adaptation to variability. Variability requires
that adaptation include both the process of adapting as well as the condition being adapted to.
Variability is evident in autonomous and spontaneous adaptation; it is argued that human and natural
systems will, to some extent, adapt autonomously, and that planned adaptation can supplement autonomous adaptation. However, ‘options and incentives are greater for adaptation of human systems than
for adaptation to protect natural systems’ (IPCC, 2001, pp. 6–8). In unmanaged natural systems,
adaptation is reactive and is the means by which species and communities respond to changed conditions. In consideration of predicted accelerated climate changes, it is a recognised concern that many
species will not be able to adapt to fast-changing environments (IPCC, 2012). Planned adaptation
within managed ecosystems could be a possible solution for the changing future. The patterns of
nature need to be considered in any process, implemented or managed by humans, so as to achieve
sustainable outcomes. Unfortunately, this is not the case in the current practice of climate change risk
assessments and adaption planning. The dominant approach for planned adaption is the ‘risk management adaptation’ approach.
Planned anticipatory adaptation based on the risk management approach is aimed at reducing a
system’s vulnerability by diminishing risk or improving adaptive capacity. Numerous reasons have
been given for pursuing planned adaptation, and it can yield benefits regardless of the uncertainty and
nature of climate change (Ali, 1999). Planned adaptation initiatives are regarded not as a substitute to
the mitigation of climate change, but as a necessary strategy to manage its impacts. Risk assessment
and adaption planning is best undertaken as a participative exercise that engages the community and
draws on their knowledge of the ‘system’ (human systems) under consideration. Risk is usually
defined as the effect of uncertainty on objectives (AGO, 2006). Thus, risk frameworks are developed
to support planning and decision-making in the context of such uncertainty and the objectives to be
achieved. Given the long-term nature of climate change and the considerable uncertainty about the
timing and severity of some potential impacts, it is important that maladaptation does not occur, and
actions are taken to avoid ‘over or under responses’ to adaptation (GORCC, 2012). This is known as
the ‘precautionary approach’ to climate change adaptation (IPCC, 2007a).
Unfortunately, human adaptation considerations, including the use of the precautionary approach,
are self-centred, and adaptation or mitigation considerations are framed and structured for human
benefit only (Berke, 1995; Munasinghe, 2000; Campbell et al., 2009). A holistic integrated adaptation
discourse, where ecosystems and human systems are in equilibrium, needs to be addressed. As argued
by John Tillman Lyle in Design for Human Ecosystems (1991), we as humans are an inherent part of
these ecological systems, and can enhance or destroy them (Lyle, 1991). Recognizing Lyle’s argument, it is then important for humans as part of the ecological system to align our design and planning
decisions with the inherent qualities of the natural system we belong to. In this alignment, to achieve
persistence is to regenerate, and to be adaptable is to constantly acknowledge change and amend our
built environment in parallel with the changing natural environment. This is further supported by the
approach taken in the application of A Pattern Language (Alexander et al., 1977) to the development
3.6 Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience