1 / 17

Thomas E. Downing SEI Oxford Office

What makes a GREAT research project? (Personal reflections on a vulnerability/adaptation science ). Thomas E. Downing SEI Oxford Office. Nature-society integration Uncertainty and integrated assessment A human dimensions working group. Nature-society integration.

mblackburn
Télécharger la présentation

Thomas E. Downing SEI Oxford Office

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What makes a GREAT research project?(Personal reflections on a vulnerability/adaptation science) Thomas E. Downing SEI Oxford Office

  2. Nature-society integration • Uncertainty and integrated assessment • A human dimensions working group

  3. Nature-society integration • Millenium development goals • Mult-agent modelling

  4. Millennium Development Goals

  5. Do the impacts of climate change mean MDGs are more difficult to achieve? • Can adaptation to climate change help achieve the MDGs? • Does climate mitigation affect the MDGs?

  6. Linking driving forces, institutions and stakeholders Drivers of change Thematic networks Stakeholders Warning and operational responses Signal events 1 Marketisation 2 Regulation and mitigation Naturisation 3 Rescaling decisions 4 Land use and economic development Inclusion/exclusion n Integration Climate change

  7. Why a stakeholder approach? • Model discourses • Can we predict human-environment interactions over the next decade and beyond? • What are formal (quantitative) models for? • How can formal models support stakeholder insight? • Expanding the range of model approaches • Mulit-criteria • Multi-agent • Tolerable windows • Risk and probabilistic scenarios • Coping ranges for representative stakeholders/activities • Interactive vulnerability mapping

  8. Uncertainty and integrated assessment • How can we evaluate uncertainty in integrated assessment? • NUSAP • What are the local concern? • Framing risk using the IPCC ‘reasons for concern” • Do global/downscaled scenarios frame local conditions of adaptive capacity? • Compare alternative approaches

  9. Location of uncertainty • Input data • Parameters • Technical model structure • Conceptual model sruct. /assumptions • Indicators • Problem framing • System boundary • Socio-political and institutional context

  10. NUSAP • A protocol for evaluating integrated assessments • Both models and stakeholder participation • Based on the implications of post-normal science • Notational system for evaluating models: • Numerical • Unit • Spread • Assessment • Pedigree • University of Utrecht: www.nusap.net

  11. IPCC Fire Poker I Risks to Unique and Threatened Systems II Risks from Extreme Climate Events III Distribution of Impacts IV Aggregate Impacts V Risks from Future Large-Scale Discontinuities WHAT ARE THE REASONS FOR CONCERN FOR LOCAL/REGIONAL STAKEHOLDERS? HOW GREAT ARE THE RISKS FOR THOSE CONCERNS?

  12. How well does SRES capture local adaptive capacity? • Macro driving forces are not directly related to local vulnerability • Optimistic boundary conditions: • In the SRES scenario with the lowest rate of per capita growth, developing countries are as rich in 2050 as OECD countries are now • Some SRES population projections are now unrealistic

  13. A human dimensions group • Exchanges of ideas, models, training material, students • Possible project extensions • Multi-agent modelling • Links to climate outlooks • Representation in IHDP and other international forums

More Related