Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The relationship between adaptation and mitigation in managing climate change risks: a regional response from North Central Victoria, Australia

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This two-part paper considers the complementarity between adaptation and mitigation in managing the risks associated with the enhanced greenhouse effect. Part one reviews the application of risk management methods to climate change assessments. Formal investigations of the enhanced greenhouse effect have produced three generations of risk assessment. The first led to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), First Assessment Report and subsequent drafting of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The second investigated the impacts of unmitigated climate change in the Second and Third IPCC Assessment Reports. The third generation, currently underway, is investigating how risk management options can be prioritised and implemented. Mitigation and adaptation have two main areas of complementarity. Firstly, they each manage different components of future climate-related risk. Mitigation reduces the number and magnitude of potential climate hazards, reducing the most severe changes first. Adaptation increases the ability to cope with climate hazards by reducing system sensitivity or by reducing the consequent level of harm. Secondly, they manage risks at different extremes of the potential range of future climate change. Adaptation works best with changes of lesser magnitude at the lower end of the potential range. Where there is sufficient adaptive capacity, adaptation improves the ability of a system to cope with increasingly larger changes over time. By moving from uncontrolled emissions towards stabilisation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, mitigation limits the upper part of the range. Different activities have various blends of adaptive and mitigative capacity. In some cases, high sensitivity and low adaptive capacity may lead to large residual climate risks; in other cases, a large adaptive capacity may mean that residual risks are small or non-existent. Mitigative and adaptive capacity do not share the same scale: adaptive capacity is expressed locally, whereas mitigative capacity is different for each activity and location but needs to be aggregated at the global scale to properly assess its potential benefits in reducing climate hazards. This can be seen as a demand for mitigation, which can be exercised at the local scale through exercising mitigative capacity. Part two of the paper deals with the situation where regional bodies aim to maximise the benefits of managing climate risks by integrating adaptation and mitigation measures at their various scales of operation. In north central Victoria, Australia, adaptation and mitigation are being jointly managed by a greenhouse consortium and a catchment management authority. Several related studies investigating large-scale revegetation are used to show how climate change impacts and sequestration measures affect soil, salt and carbon fluxes in the landscape. These studies show that trade-offs between these interactions will have to be carefully managed to maximise their relative benefits. The paper concludes that when managing climate change risks, there are many instances where adaptation and mitigation can be integrated at the operational level. However, significant gaps between our understanding of the benefits of adaptation and mitigation between local and global scales remain. Some of these may be addressed by matching demands for mitigation (for activities and locations where adaptive capacity will be exceeded) with the ability to supply that demand through localised mitigative capacity by means of globally integrated mechanisms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adger WN (2001) Scales of governance and environmental justice for adaptation and mitigation of climate change. J Int Develop 13:921–931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • AGO, MDB (2001) The contribution of mid to low rainfall forestry and agroforestry to greenhouse and natural resource management outcomes. Australian Greenhouse Office and the Murray Darling Basin, Canberra

  • AS/NZS (2004) Risk management, Australian/New Zealand standard for risk management, AS/NZS, vol. 4360. Standards Australia, Canberra

  • Beare S, Heaney A (2002) Climate change and water resources in the Murray Darling Basin, Australia; impacts and adaptation. ABARE Conference Paper 02.11, p 33. Available from www.abareconomics.com <http://www.abareconomics.com>

  • Beer T (1997) Strategic Risk Management: a case study of climate change. World Resour Rev 9:151–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer T (2003) Environmental risk and sustainability. In: Beer T, Ismail-Zadeh A (eds) Risk science and sustainability: science for reduction of risk and sustainable development for society. NATO Science Series. Series II, Mathematics, Physics, and Chemistry 112. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp 39–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks N, Adger N (2005) Assessing and enhancing adaptive capacity, In: Lim B, Spanger-Siegfried E, Burton I, Malone E, Huq S (eds) Adaptation policy frameworks for climate change: developing strategies, policies and measures. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York, pp 165–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton I (1994) Deconstructing adaptation ... and reconstructing. Delta 5:14–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Callaway J (2004) Adaptation benefits and costs: are they important in the global policy picture and how can we estimate them? Global Environ Change 14:273–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conde C, Lonsdale K (2005) Engaging Stakeholders in the Adaptation Process. In: Lim B, Spanger-Siegfried E, Burton I, Malone E, Huq S (eds) Adaptation policy frameworks for climate change: developing strategies, policies and measures. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York, pp 47–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Corfee-Morlot J, Agrawala S (2004) The benefits of climate policy. Global Environ Change Vol 14:197–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corfee-Morlot J, Höhne N (2003) Climate change: long-term targets and short-term commitments. Global Environ Change 13:277–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CSIRO (2001) Climate change projections for Australia. CSIRO Atmospheric Research, Australia, p 8

  • CVGA (2004) Zero net emissions by 2020: leading by example. unpublished business plan. Central Victorian Greenhouse Alliance, Bendigo Australia

  • Dang HH, Michaelowa A, Tuan DD (2003) Synergy of adaptation and mitigation strategies in the context of sustainable development: the case of Vietnam. Climate Policy 3:S81–S96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis DL, Krupnick A, McGlynn (2000) Ancillary benefits and costs of mitigation: an overview, OECD Paper prepared for the Workshop on Assessing the Ancillary Benefits and Costs of GHG Mitigation Strategies held on 27–29 March 2000, OECD, Paris

  • Dessai S, Hulme M (2003) Does climate policy need probabilities? Tyndall centre working paper no. 34. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Norwich UK, p 42

  • Dettmann P (2004) City of Greater Bendigo case study. In Growing trees for geenhouse sinks in north central Victoria, an investment guide for landholders and purchasers. Central Victorian Greenhouse Alliance, Bendigo

  • Dowling T, Dawes WR, Evans R, Dyson P, Walker GR (2004) Prioritising upland catchments in the Murray–Darling Basin with respect to salinity benefits from afforestation. CSIRO Land and Water Technical Report 15/04, CSIRO, Canberra

  • Evans R, Gilfedder G, Austin J (2004) Application of the biophysical capacity to change (BC2C) model to the Little River (NSW). CSIRO Land and Water Technical Report 15/04, CSIRO, Canberra

  • Gibbons P, Boak M (2002) The value of paddock trees for regional conservation in an agricultural landscape. Ecol Manage Restor 3:205–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gitay, H, Brown S, Easterling W, Jallow B (2001) Ecosystems and their goods and services. In: McCarthy JJ, Canziani OF, Leary NA, Dokken DJ, White KS (eds) Climate change 2001: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 235–342

  • Herron N, Davis R, Jones R (2002) The effects of large-scale afforestation and climate change on water allocation in the Macquarie River Catchment, NSW, Australia. J Environ Manage 65:369–381

    Google Scholar 

  • Herron N, Davis R, Dawes W, Evans R (2003) Modelling the impacts of strategic tree plantings on salt loads and flows in the Macquarie River Catchment, NSW, Australia. J Environ Manage 68:37–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoegh-Guldberg O (2004) Coral reefs in a century of rapid environmental change. Symbiosis 37:1–31

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2001) Climate change 2001: synthesis report. In: Watson RT, Albritton DL, Barker T, Bashmakov IA, Canziani O, Christ R, Cubasch U, Davidson O, Gitay H, Griggs D, Houghton J, House J, Kundzewicz Z, Lal M, Leary N, Magadza C, McCarthy JJ, Mitchell JFB, Moreira JR, Munasinghe M, Noble I, Pachauri R, Pittock AB, Prather M, Richels RG, Robinson JB, Sathaye J, Schneider SH, Scholes R, Stocker T, Sundararaman N, Swart R, Taniguchi T, Zhou D (eds) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 397

  • Jones RN (2001) An environmental risk assessment/management framework for climate change. Natural Hazards 23:197–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones RN (2003) Managing the risk of climate change. Paper prepared for the OECD Project on the Benefits of Climate Policy. 12–13 December 2002, Paris, ENV/EPOC/GSP(2003)22/FINAL

  • Jones RN (2004a) Incorporating agency into climate change risk assessments—an editorial comment. Climatic Change 67:13–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones R (2004b) Managing climate change risks. In: Corfee Morlot J, Agrawala S (eds) The benefits of climate change policies: analytical and framework issues. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, pp 251–297

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones RN, Page CM (2001) Assessing the risk of climate change on the water resources of the Macquarie River Catchment. In: Ghassemi F, Whetton P, Little R, Littleboy M (eds) Integrating models for natural resources management across disciplines, issues and scales (Part 2), Modsim 2001. International Congress on Modelling and Simulation, Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand, Canberra, pp 673–678

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones RN, Boer R (2005) Assessing current climate risks. In: Lim B, Spanger-Siegfried E, Burton I, Malone E, Huq S (eds) Adaptation policy frameworks for climate change: developing strategies, policies and measures. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York, pp 91–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones RN, Chiew FHS, Boughton WB, Zhang L (2006) Estimating the sensitivity of mean annual runoff to climate change using selected hydrological models. Adv Water Resour 29:1419–1429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane S, Shogren JF (2000) Linking adaptation and mitigation in climate change policy, Climatic Change 45:75–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarty LS, Power M (2000) Approaches to developing risk management objectives: an analysis of international strategies. Environ Sci Policy 3:311–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan MG, Fischhoff B, Bostrom A, Atman CJ (2001) Risk communication: a mental models approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 366

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan MG, Keith D (1995) Subjective judgments by climate experts. Environ Sci Technol 29(10):468–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mastrandrea MD, Schneider SH (2004) Probabilistic integrated assessment of “dangerous” climate change. Science 304:571–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakiçenovic N, Swart R (eds) (2000) Emissions scenarios: special report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, p 570

    Google Scholar 

  • Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council (2004) National action plan for salinity and water quality: annual report 2002–03. Departments of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and the Environment and Heritage, Canberra, p 227

  • NCCMA (2003) North central regional catchment strategy, 2003–2007. NCCMA, Huntly Australia, <http://www.nccma.vic.gov.au>

  • Nordhaus WD, Boyer J (2000) Warming the world: economic models of global warming. MIT Press, Cambridge, USA

  • Patt A, Dessai S (2004) Communicating uncertainty: lessons learned and suggestions for climate change assessment. Comptes Redus Geosci 337:425–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patwardhan A, Schneider SH, Semenov SM (2003) Assessing the science to address UNFCCC Article 2: a concept paper relating to cross cutting theme number four. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva, p 13, <http://www.ipcc.ch/activity/cct3.pdf>

  • Petschel-Held G, Bruckner T, Schellnhuber HJ, Toth F, Hasselmann K (1999) The tolerable windows approach: theoretical and methodological foundations. Climatic Change 31:301–331

    Google Scholar 

  • Pepper W, Leggett J, Swart R, Wasson J, Edmonds J, Mintzer I (1992) Emission scenarios for the ipcc, an update, assumptions, methodology and results. Prepared for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group I, p 115

  • Pielke RA Jr (1998) Rethinking the role of adaptation in climate policy. Global Environ Change 8:159–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power M, McCarty LS (1998) A comparative analysis of environmental risk assessment/risk management frameworks. Environ Sci Technol 32:224A–231A

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power M, McCarty LS (2002) Trends in the development of ecological risk assessment and management frameworks. Human Ecol Risk Assessment 8:7–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers M (2002) The energy footprint for north central Victoria: an initial step toward addressing climate change. LaTrobe University, Bendigo, p 12

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider SH (2002). Can we estimate the likelihood of climatic changes at 2100? Climatic Change 52:441–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smit B, Burton I, Klein RJT, Street R (1999) The science of adaptation: a framework for assessment. Mitigation Adaptation Strat Global Change 4:199–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith JB, Schellnhuber J-J, Mirza MMQ (2001) Vulnerability to climate change and reason for concern: a synthesis. In: McCarthy JJ, Canziani OF, Leary NA, Dokken DJ, White KS (eds) Climate change 2001: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 913–967

  • Swart R, Mitchell J, Morita T, Raper S (2002) Stabilisation scenarios for climate impact assessment. Global Environ Change 12:155–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tol RSJ (2003) Adaptation and mitigation: trade-offs in substance and methods, Working paper FNU-33. Centre for Marine and Climate Research, Hamburg University, Hamburg <http://www.uni-hamburg.de/Wiss/FB/15/Sustainability/essen.pdf>

  • Turnpenny J, Haxeltine A, Lorenzoni I, O’Riordan T, Jones M (2005) Mapping actors involved in climate change policy networks in the UK. Tyndall Centre Working Paper 66. Tyndall Centre, University of East Anglia, Norwich UK

  • UNDP (2005) Adaptation policy frameworks for climate change: developing strategies, policies and measures. In: Lim B, Spanger-Siegfried E, Burton I, Malone E, Huq S (eds) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York, p 266

  • Webster MD, Forest CE, Reilly J, Babiker M, Kicklighter D, Mayer M, Prinn R, Sarofim M, Sokolov AP, Stone P, Wang C (2003) Uncertainty analysis of climate change and policy responses. Climatic Change 61:295–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheaton EE, MacIver DC (1999) A framework and key questions for adapting to climate variability and change. Mitigation Adaptation Strat 4:215–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whetton PH, Suppiah R, McInnes KL, Hennessy KJ, Jones RN (2002) Climate change in Victoria: high resolution regional assessment of climate change impacts. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne, p 44

  • Wigley TML (2004a) Choosing a stabilisation target for CO2. Climatic Change 67:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigley TML (2004b) Modelling climate change under no-policy and policy emissions pathways. In: Corfee Morlot J, Agrawala S (eds) The benefits of climate change policies: analytical and framework issues. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, pp 221–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Wigley TML, Raper SCB (2001) Interpretation of high projections for global mean warming. Science 293:451–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilbanks TJ, Kates RW (1999) Global change in local places: how scale matters. Climatic Change 43:601–628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willows RI, Connell RK (eds) (2003) Climate adaptation: risk, uncertainty and decision-making. UKCIP Technical Report. UKCIP, Oxford. <http://www.ukcip.org.uk/risk_uncert/risk_uncert.html>

  • Yohe GW (2001) Mitigative capacity—the mirror image of adaptive capacity on the emissions side. Climatic Change 49:247–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yohe GW (2003) More trouble for cost-benefit analysis. Climatic Change 56:235–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yohe G, Toth FL (2000) Adaptation and the guardrail approach to tolerable climate change. Climatic Change 45:103–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L, Austin J, Dawes W, Hairsine P, Durack P, Jones RN (2005) Implications of climate change for natural resources management: a preliminary assessment of the impact of climate change on catchment salt and water balances for selected catchments in Victoria. CSIRO Report to the Australian Greenhouse Office, CSIRO, Canberra

  • Zhang L, Dawes WR, Walker GR (2001) The response of mean annual evapotranspiration to vegetation changes at catchment scale. Water Resour Res 37:701–708

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to members of the Central Victoria Greenhouse Alliance and the North Central Catchment Management Authority for their efforts in producing strategic plans for their respective organisations. Paul Durack prepared some data for one of the case studies. The Australian Greenhouse Office and the Greenhouse Unit of the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment funded some of the case study research. La Trobe University provided logistical support for a number of meetings attended by the authors. Ben Preston and two anonymous reviewers provided valuable comments that greatly improved the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, PMB1 Aspendale, Victoria, 3195, Australia

    Roger N. Jones

  2. Greenhouse Balanced, 2149 Burke & Wills Track, Kyneton, Victoria, 3444, Australia

    Paul Dettmann

  3. North Central Catchment Management Authority, Huntly, Victoria, 3551, Australia

    Geoff Park

  4. Centre for Sustainable Regional Communities, La Trobe University Bendigo, Victoria, 3552, Australia

    Maureen Rogers

  5. 37 Goldsmith Street, Maryborough, Victoria, 3465, Australia

    Terry White

Authors
  1. Roger N. Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul Dettmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Geoff Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maureen Rogers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Terry White
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roger N. Jones.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jones, R.N., Dettmann, P., Park, G. et al. The relationship between adaptation and mitigation in managing climate change risks: a regional response from North Central Victoria, Australia. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 12, 685–712 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-007-9094-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-007-9094-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation