Written by Federica Viganò

The international workshop on The Social dimension of Adaptation to Climate Change –jointly organized by ICCG, CMCC and FEEM – held on the 18th- 19th February at Palazzo Querini Stampalia in Venice, must be highlighted as a special circumstance in which a variety of speakers, ranging from very different disciplines and backgrounds, debated and interacted in a fruitful atmosphere on the topic of social adaptation.

There was something new in this workshop: first of all the social dimension of adaptation, which recalled a large number of participants who actively discussed in a rich Q&A session with the speakers. This is one of the first international workshop tackling this perspective and giving room to an emerging strand of studies on adaptation based on the concept of adaptive capacity, a property connected with the human behavior and the cognitive capability of individuals.

The second novelty was the composition of the panel: the spectrum of disciplines addressing adaptation A picture from the Workshop on Social Adaptation to Climate Changeissues was enriched by the presence of engaged researcher and experts coming from different fields: from sociology, economics, psychology, archeology, communication system dynamics and demography.

In recent years, in parallel with the predominant impact studies approach, a social science oriented approach has emerged. This approach, focused on investigating political, economic and social conditions making societies more vulnerable and susceptible to damage coming from environmental stresses, is more adapt to investigate aspects connected with social system dynamics and individuals’ behavior.

Referring to the IPCC definition of adaptive capacity, this is “the ability or potential of a system to respond successfully to climate variability and change, and includes adjustments in both behavior and in resources and technologies” [IPCCWG2Ch 17]. The workshop contributes to underline the importance of the behavioral change and to identify factors affecting the capability of communities and individuals to adapt to climate change: people’s capacity to adapt is determined by societal and individual assets – encompassing quality and quantity of knowledge, labor, financial capital, and relational networks – and by affordable services – transport, access to credit, market conditions, recovery systems.

The success of adaptation will largely A picture from the Workshop Adaptation to Climate Changedepend on the extent to which individuals and societies will be willing to accept change and to adopt styles of life and behaviors that reduce social-environmental vulnerabilities by improving adaptive capacities and resilience.

The workshop opened with a fascinating presentation by Brian Fagan, archeologist and author of the book “The great warming”. Fagan presented the question of climate in an historical perspective: how climate transformed and destroyed human societies during the so called Medieval Warm Period, the case of the Maya and of the Chimu civilizations. The lesson from the past reinforces the conviction that there is no direct correlation between historical changes in human society and ancient climate change. Rather, it is the economic, political, and social consequences of climate change that have changed the course of the past.

The workshop has contributed to recall the attention on the relevance of the neglected “soft factors”, by considering cultural habits, attitudes of people and the social context as crucial determinants of the capacity to adapt to changed climate conditions (I. Lorenzoni and C. High).

The second session explored complementary issues to adaptation and recalled the attention at the level of what societies and policy makers can do: the role of microfinance institutions as an effective additional delivery channel for the global funds to operationalise adaptation among the poor. Yet so far it has been almost entirely absent in climate change discussions (S. Agrawala).

A brief history of adaptation to climate change has been presented by Ian Burton, whose work includes optimal strategies to mainstream adaptation practices in all development activities. Burton also addressed the future of adaptation after the COP15 at Copenhagen. Funding of adaptation measures in Developing Countries has been promised by major economies leaders in Copenhagen, but there are significant risks that the funds will not appear and the promises will not be met. Burton’s presentation stimulated a debate on the optimal allocation of the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund between mitigation and adaptation actions.

The large city scale has been analysed through two big opposites – Copenhagen and Mumbai – showing that vulnerabilities are not only due to physical assets but also to the social and economic resilience of the cities (S. Hallegatte).

F.Carlssohn presentation at the WorkshopIn the last session, focused on the capacity learning and the use of new technology, it was clearly emerging the importance to address adaptation responses not only through top down planning approach – by the state or the international community – but to define adaptation strategies based upon the understanding of the capacity of communities to have agency and capability to adapt (M. Van Aalst, R. Heltberg, N. Kaur, F. Carlssohn).
The plurality of cases and empirical evidences lead to consider the relevance of the social vulnerability studies, mostly bottom-up oriented, rather than the impact studies more focused on the physical manifestations of climate change. In order to understand which factors promote or hamper the adaptive capacity of different regions and communities, the social setting requires a deep analysis, especially in the South.

The workshop brought to evidence the complexity of adaptation by clarifying the existing link between adaptation and poverty. Even if vulnerability to climate is not the same of poverty and marginalization, these last factors are often a strong constraint for social groups and individuals when coping with long term adaptation strategies. This last point leads to consider that current vulnerabilities, more than future impacts, should be in the focus of the policies and that adaptation could not be separated from the development processes. (Lutz, Heltberg)

The concluding remarks of the workshop labeled adaptation to climate change in an interesting new fashion: adaptation has emerged as a social justice issue and a question of morality.

Read more

• the web page of the International Workshop The Social Dimension of Adaptation to Climate Change (Venice, February 18th – 19th, 2010) with keynote speakers’ papers and presentations, the event’s agenda and summary;
• from Climate Science&Policy (the CMCC digital magazine), a video interview with  Brian Fagan: Discovering The Great Warming: Lessons from The Ancient Earth;
• from Climate Science&Policy (the CMCC digital magazine), a video interview with Shardul Agrawala: Microfinance and Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change