Enhancing IAV Community Cooperation: Strategies for Integrative Research and Coordination

1. Some thoughts on IAV community co-operation Timothy Carter Finnish Environment Institute, SYKE Research Programme for Global Change

2. Who are we in IAV? • Empiricists • Observed impacts (long-term/extreme events); observed adaptation (reactive and anticipatory; to averages/extremes; maladaptation) • Impact modellers • Disciplinary/process focus (and ESMs); disciplinary/applied focus; inter-disciplinary/applied focus; integrated assessment; global to local • Experimentalists • Gas enrichment; controlled climate; materials; land use management • Vulnerability assessors • Mapping indices/indicators; local (household) to global • Adaptation researchers • Adaptation processes; adaptation practices; management for adaptation and mitigation; development of analytical methods, tools and metrics • Adaptation policy analysts • Governance; coherence; integration; mitigation/adaptation; implementation • Well, that's just some of us!

3. Quite a diversity

4. What is the function of an IAV network? • To represent IAV interests in developing new scenarios? • To promote initiatives for IAV research co-ordination? • To develop structures for an international IAV research programme? • To link IAV to the wider, non-climate change research community? • Several or all of the above?

5. Network to represent IAV interests developing new scenarios • Original motivating force behind this initiative • Main issues: • Representing IAV needs in discussions about the new scenarios • Providing a reference point/organisation for interacting with the climate modelling and integrated assessment modelling communities • Ensuring that new scenarios are delivered that are appropriate and timely for IAV analysis and can be distributed to those researchers who require them – relationship to TGICA • 2007 scenarios questionnaire to IPCC WG II LAs (response rate 15/39) – all supported new scenarios; stressed need for regional information and scenario "relevance" for stakeholders • Need for IAV co-ordination raised in Nordwijkerhout, Sep 2007 • EC meeting on AR5 new scenarios, Brussels, Sep 2008 • European research projects would benefit from co-ordination of scenario development, interpretation and guidance (e.g. including this network) • But, unsuccessful request for supplementary EC funding for this meeting

6. Network to promote initiatives for IAV research co-ordination • Co-ordinate IAV research efforts, for example: • Basic research – process studies, empirical analysis, model development • Impact/adaptation model intercomparison studies (viz. IGBP/GCTE, 1990s) • Common issues (e.g. irreversibility; thresholds; costing; high impact events) • Collection and collation of new information and studies on observed impacts/adaptations (incl. limits to adaptation, relationships to mitigation) • Provision of models, tools, data and scenarios • Development of guidance for IAV practitioners • Workshops and conferences to exchange information and design new collaborative research • Organisation of training courses, mentorships, workshops, targeting e.g. young researchers, developing country researchers, policy makers, planners • Enable more coherent and effective communication with other research communities and stakeholder groups? • Probably requires international steering and regional/sectoral representatives • Overlaps with IPCC TGICA (Task Group on Data and Scenario Support for Impacts and Climate Analysis)?

7. Network to develop structures for an international IAV research programme • Develop a structure for the international co-ordination and funding of IAV research comparable to WCRP and focused on climate change as distinct from related programmes? • Attempt to re-invigorate UNEP's World Climate Impacts and Responses Programme (WCIRP) • Other options: WMO leadership; researchers' consortium; nationally-led initiatives (e.g. UK DfID) • Other related initiatives, e.g. WCC3 Conference (Geneva, Sep 2009), will establish a world climate information network • Earlier programmes: Country Studies; AIACC • Funding: ideally by governments

8. Network to link IAV to the wider, non-climate change research community • Forge links to research communities outside the mainstream climate change research community (e.g. social vulnerability, sustainable development, governance, disaster management, natural hazards)? • Liaise with various user communities and stakeholders to co-ordinate effective IAV assessment and exchange tools, best practices, data and scenarios

9. Three final observations • A network should be research/science – based • Basic and applied/synthetic research – is there a bias? • A single network may not serve all of our needs