Posts
We've spent far too much time thinking about the
global causes of climate change, and not nearly enough worrying about the local
impacts that climate change is already having on coastal communities. The
distinction is important. Most of the people pushing for reductions in
greenhouse gas emissions are environmentalists or experts worried about future
generations. But there is a very immediate constituency – the people being hit
with higher costs for insurance, water and electricity, and those facing
substantial property losses or a drop in business income today because of
increased flooding and water shortages. People who live in a coastal community
or on a river nearly anywhere in the world are a lot more worried about what's
happening right now, than what might happen to future generations
if we don't limit greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S., China, India and
elsewhere. Climate change means too much water or not enough water in the
wrong place at the wrong time! It means deadly heat waves. It means radical
changes in natural places, animal and plant life and the onset of new
diseases.
Our new book, Managing Climate Risks in
Coastal Communities: Readiness, Engagement and Adaptation (by Lawrence
Susskind, Danya Rumore, Carri Hulet and Patrick Field) is about to be published
by Anthem Press. It tells the story of four coastal communities trying to take climate
change-related risks seriously. What they are doing -- and what we have helped
them learn from their efforts -- can help other cities and towns fast-forward
the adoption of climate risk management measures that everyone agrees on. Here's
what these four communities in New England have done:
1. WHAT WE DID:
The “we” in this story is the New England Climate Adaptation Project
(NECAP), a partnership based at the MIT Science Impact Collaborative and the
not-for-profit Consensus Building Institute. Our close partners included the
National Estuarian Research Reserve System, the University of New Hampshire,
and four New England coastal communities. We prepared four Stakeholder
Assessments—one for each partner town in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New
Hampshire and Maine. These involved interviews with several dozen officials,
activists, business leaders and scientists. The scientists on our team prepared
a local climate change forecast (estimating likely temperature, precipitation
and sea level changes in the near term, mid-term and long-term) using downscaled regional
climate models and long-term data from local meteorological measuring stations.
With all this information in hand, we developed tailored role-play simulation
(RPSs). These are "serious games" that ask participants to imagine
that they are working in a community a lot like their own, trying to figure out
what to do about possible climate risks. We organized several workshops in each
of our four partner communities at which more than 100 - 150 people played the
games in each place. Workshops were co-sponsored by a wide range of local environmental,
business and public service organizations. The press attended. We
used social media to generate as much interest as we could.
2. WHAT WE WANTED TO LEARN: We wanted to know if this approach to
enhancing community readiness to address climate-related risks works. Does it
give people a better understanding of the problems they face, the options open
to them, the reasons that experts and locals think differently about what is
happening and what ought to be done, and the costs of taking different actions? Does this approach to public engagement build
capacity and political momentum? Does it change anyone's mind? Does it legitimize the search for immediate
"no regrets" actions as far as public spending is concerned?
Does it help the community see why adaptation is a local (not a state or
a federal) problem? To answer these
questions, we used independent town-wide polling to establish a base line of
public attitudes about climate change before and after the workshops, surveying
more than 500 people. We held intensive debriefings with all participants at
the end of each workshop. We interviewed almost 25% of the participants 4 - 6
weeks later to see what they remembered. We did statistical analyses of
the results across demographic groups within each community, between those who
participated in workshops and those who didn't, and then compared the four communities
in the four states. We prepared detailed Case Studies summarizing what we
learned in each town. In the book, we summarize all of our findings.
3. RESULTS: A simple, but tailored one-hour game with
a 30-minute debriefing can change minds
with regard to the importance of climate change, the nature of climate risks, and
the need for local action. People
from almost all groups (except those so convinced that climate change is not a
problem that they refused to participate) learned about the science involved, increased their sense
that local governments need to act
and became more optimistic that people
in their community could and should act together to manage climate risks. Public
officials and staff felt more empowered to take action in their respective
spheres (public works, emergency response, health services, etc.) after seeing people’s
hearts and minds change at the workshops.
4. WHAT COMMUNITIES CAN DO. Communities facing climate change-related
risks have a few different options: they can do nothing and
hope for the best. They can invest in emergency preparedness so they are better able to respond and
recover from crises. They can "retreat" from the most
vulnerable areas. They can try to defend themselves by building protective infrastructure and adopting
new policies, such as land use regulations and building codes. They can mix and match elements of each
of these strategies. Whatever they decide, they will need widespread
support because it will take public and private cooperation and a continuous,
not a one shot, effort to bring all but one of these options to fruition.
Individual landowners, businesses, environmental activists, public agencies and
taxpayer groups will have to work together.
5. WHAT WE LEARNED: Above all, communities must
enhance their level of readiness if they expect to address climate risks. They
will have to provide opportunities for widespread public involvement in
something other than a few "town hall" meetings at which pre-packaged
information is handed out and people are lectured at. They will have toh help
taxpayers understand that there are "no regrets” moves they can make to reduce
climate risks while simultaneously accomplishing other important objectives at
the same time. For example, using this year's open space preservation money to
create natural barriers along the shore can provide storm protection for
private property owners, reduce saltwater intrusion into freshwater wetlands
(protecting underground water supplies), armor waste disposal and electricity
infrastructure, and minimize flood risks.
6. OUR TAKEAWAY:
The sooner the U.S. shifts its focus to reducing local vulnerability to climate
risks (so that everyone can see what the costs are going to be year after year
as climate change accelerates), the sooner there will be more of a political
constituency that wants to get at the source of the problem. So, unlike many who
worry that any talk of adaptation detracts from global efforts to push for
mitigation (i.e. reduction in greenhouse gases), we take just the opposite
view. We think the political pressure for mitigation is not strong enough
to push for a global action plan or new US laws because people don’t recognize
the costs to them today. Now is the time to highlight what it’s going to take
to help vast numbers of coastal and riverine communities all over the world avoid
paying immense costs just to survive in the years ahead. When they see
what it really costs to manage climate risks, we believe they will care much
more about the underlying cause, and quickly become the missing constituency
needed to push for global emissions reducing policies.
6. WHAT CAN YOU DO? Get your community to play
the serious games we have developed (or look for a range of local partners that
will help adapt the games to your local conditions). Do a simple, anonymous
assessment to understand what everyone's real views are at present on issues of
climate change (you might be surprised!). Use our before-and-after
surveys to document the shifts that occur once people start attending workshops
and playing the right games. Get local officials and community activists
to be the first to play the games and talk about what the results suggest for
your community. Involve the local media in reporting the story. Adopt a
consensus building approach to formulating a collective risk management plan
for the community. Don't wait for extensive state or federal direction -- it's
probably not coming anytime soon. Emphasize the search for no-regret options --
things you can do right away that are good for multiple reasons AND will reduce
your community's vulnerability to sudden climate change.
You can order our book
from Amazon. You can learn more at scienceimpact.mit.edu.