Advertisement

Regional Environmental Change

, Volume 18, Issue 6, pp 1801–1813 | Cite as

Assessing climate change adaptation strategies—the case of drought and heat wave in the French nuclear sector

  • Jyri Hanski
  • Tony Rosqvist
  • Douglas Crawford-Brown
Original Article

Abstract

Nuclear energy is a very important component of overall power supply in France. If the effects of future extreme weather events or climate shifts are not addressed, energy systems will be highly vulnerable to extreme weather events or shifts in weather patterns, such as changes in precipitation. Because of the deep uncertainties involved in climate projections and response strategies, any strategy implementation should perform adequately regardless of which scenario actually materialises. In this paper, we analyse the effects of drought and heat wave in the French nuclear energy sector using the Strategy Robustness Visualisation Method. The key feature of the method is the modelling of uncertainty of the quantitative indicators by (min, max) values plotted on radar plots such that each strategy option’s performance can be visually inspected for robustness. The method can be utilised as a “module” of its own in different uncertainty management approaches. Based on the case study, the presented adaptation strategies “Maintaining industrial production and final demand” and “Smart grid infrastructure” were more robust than the “No planned or automatic adaptation”.

Keywords

Climate change Adaptation Strategy assessment French Nuclear energy 

Notes

Funding information

The research presented in this paper was funded by the EU Framework 7 project Tool-support policy-development for regional adaptation (ToPDAd) (www.topdad.eu).

References

  1. Aaheim A, Crawford-Brown D, Axhausen KW, Ciari F, Stahel A, Perrels A, Nurmi V, Pilli-Sihvola K, Meyer B, Prettenthaler F, Richter V, Purwanto AJ, Heyndrickx C, Osborn T, Wallace C, Warren R, Jantunen J, Molarius R, Nokkala M (2013) Sector-level adaptation challenges in the literature. ToPDAd deliverable 1.1. Available: http://www.topdad.eu/upl/files/98434. Accessed December 2015
  2. Alcamo J (2001) Scenarios as tools for international environmental assessments. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen. Environmental Issues Report. Experts Corner Report. Prospects and Scenarios No. 5. Available: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/environmental_issue_report_2001_24. Accessed 2 March 2018
  3. Berkhout F, Bouwer L, Bayer J, Bouzid M, Cabeza M, Hanger S, Hof A, Hunter P, Meller L, Patt A, Pfluger B, Rayner T, Reichardt K, van Teeffelen A (2013) EEuropean responses to climate change: deep emissions reductions and main-streaming of mitigation and adaptation. RESPONSES project policy Brief No. D9. Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), VU University Amsterdam, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  4. Berkhout F, van den Hurk B, Bessembinder J, de Boer J, Bregman B, van Drunen M (2014) Framing climate uncertainty: socio-economic and climate scenarios in vulnerability and adaptation assessments. Reg Environ Chang 14:879–893.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0519-2 Google Scholar
  5. Cooke RM (1991) Experts in uncertainty—opinion and subjective probability in science. Oxford University Press, New York ISBN-10: 0195064658Google Scholar
  6. Crawford-Brown D, Syddall M, Guan D, Hall J, Li J, Jenkins K, Beaven R (2013) Vulnerability of London’s economy to climate change: sensitivity to production loss. J Environ Prot 4:548–563.  https://doi.org/10.4236/jep.2013.46064 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. European Commission (2013) Adapting infrastructure to climate change. Commission Staff Working Document, SWD 137. Available: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/adaptation/what/docs/swd_2013_137_en.pdf. Accessed December 2015
  8. Fritsch O (2017) Integrated and adaptive water resources management: exploring public participation in the UK. Reg Environ Chang 17:1933–1944.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-0973-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hamilton MC, Thekdi SA, Jenicek EM, Harmon RS, Goodsite ME, Case MP, Karvetski CW, Lambert JH (2013) Case studies of scenario analysis for adaptive management of natural resource and infrastructure systems. Environ Syst Decis 33:89–103.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-012-9424-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hanski J, Rosqvist T (2016) A method for visualisation of uncertainty and robustness in complex longterm decisions. In: Walls L, Revie M, Bedford T (eds) Risk, Reliability and Safety: Innovating Theory and Practice, CRC Press, p 2929–2936.  https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315374987-44 Google Scholar
  11. Hanski J, Rosqvist T, Crawford-Brown D (2015) ToPDAd deliverable D4.3—demonstration description—visualisation of robust adaptation strategies. Available: http://www.topdad.eu/publications. Accessed Oct 2015
  12. Harjanne A, Nurmi V, Perrels A,Votsis A, Osborn T, Melvin T, Wallace C (2014) ToPDAd deliverable D2.1—climate hazard and impact scenarios. Available: http://www.topdad.eu/publications. Accessed October 2015
  13. Hinkel J, Bisaro A (2014) Methodological choices in solution-oriented adaptation research: a diagnostic framework. Reg Environ Chang.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-014-0682-0
  14. Kasprzyk JR, Nataraj S, Reed PM, Lempert RJ (2013) Many objective robust decision making for complex environmental systems undergoing change. Environ Model Softw 42:55–71.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.12.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lempert RJ, Groves DG (2010) Identifying and evaluating robust adaptive policy responses to climate change for water management agencies in the American west. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 77(6):960–974.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.04.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lempert RJ, Groves DG, Popper SW, Bankes SC (2006) A general, analytic method for generating robust strategies and narrative scenarios. Manag Sci 52(4):514–528.  https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0472 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Li J, Crawford-Brown D, Syddall M, Guan D (2013) Modeling imbalanced economic recovery following a natural disaster using input–output analysis. Risk Anal 33:1908–1923.  https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Maier HR, Guillaume JHA, van Delden H, Riddell GA, Haasnoot M, Kwakkel JH (2016) An uncertain future, deep uncertainty, scenarios, robustness and adaptation: how do they fit together? Environ Model Softw 81:154–164.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.03.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McAllister RRJ, McCrea R, Lubell MN (2014) Policy networks, stakeholder interactions and climate adaptation in the region of South East Queensland, Australia. Reg Environ Chang 14:527–539.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0489-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Miller KA, Belton V (2014) Water resource management and climate change adaptation: a holistic and multiple criteria perspective. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 19(3):289–308.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-013-9537-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Montibeller G, Franco A (2010) Multi-criteria decision analysis for strategic decision making. Chapter 2. In: Zopounidis C, Pardalos PM (eds) Handbook of multicriteria analysis, applied optimization 103. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92828-7_2 Google Scholar
  22. OFGEM (2011) Adaptation to climate change. Report to DEFRA, Office of the Gas and Electricity Markets. LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Perrels A, Prettenthaler F, Kortschak D, Heyndrickx C, Ciari F, Boesch P, Kiviluoma J, Azevedo M, Ekholm T, Crawford-Brown D, Thompson A (2015). ToPDAd deliverable D2.4. Available: http://www.topdad.eu/publications. Accessed 13 April 2016
  24. Pielke RA, Sarewitz D (2005) Bringing society back into the climate debate. Popul Environ 26:255–268.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-005-1877-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Porthin M, Rosqvist T, Perrels A, Molarius R (2013) Multi-criteria decision analysis in adaptation decision-making: a flood case study in Finland. Reg Environ Chang 13(6):1171–1180.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0423-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Refsgaard JC, van der Sluijs JP, Højberg AL, Vanrolleghem PA (2007) Uncertainty in the environmental modelling process—a framework and guidance. Environ Model Softw 22(11):1543–1556.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2007.02.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schmidt VA, Radaelli CM (2004) Policy change and discourse in Europe: conceptual and methodological issues. West Eur Polit 27:183–210.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0140238042000214874 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Scrieciu SŞ, Belton V, Chalabi Z, Mechler R, Puig D (2014) Advancing methodological thinking and practice for development-compatible climate policy planning. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 19(3):261–288.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-013-9538-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Skjong R, Wentworth B (2001) Expert judgement and risk perception. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference Stavanger, Norway, June 17-22, 2001. ISBN 1-880653-51-6Google Scholar
  30. Swart R, Biesbroek R, Binnerup S, Carter TR, Cowan C, Henrichs T, Loquen S, Mela H, Morecroft M, Reese M, Rey D (2009) Europe adapts to climate change: comparing national adaptation strategies. Partnership for European Research PEER Report 1Google Scholar
  31. Thissen W, Kwakkel J, Mens M, van der Sluijs J, Stemberger S, Wardekker A, Wildschut D (2017) Dealing with uncertainties in fresh water supply: experiences in the Netherlands. Water Resour Manag 31:703–725.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-015-1198-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. van der Heijden K (1996) Scenarios: the art of strategic conversation. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. van der Sluijs JP, Craye M, Funtowicz S, Kloprogge P, Ravetz J, Risbey J (2005) Combining quantitative and qualitative measures of uncertainty in model based environmental assessment: the NUSAP System. Risk Anal 25(2):481e492.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00604.x Google Scholar
  34. Whateley S, Steinschneider S, Brown C (2014) A climate change range-based method for estimating robustness for water resources supply. Water Resour Res 50:8944–8961.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2014WR015956 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd.TampereFinland
  2. 2.Cambridge Centre for Climate Change Mitigation Research Department of Land EconomyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations