 Concepts
•  Vulnerability
•  Adaptation
•  Governance
 Case
study
•  Coastal and inland flooding in CoCT
 Concluding
thoughts

What is vulnerability?


Susceptibility to loss
Shocks and stresses impact negatively
  Who/what is vulnerable?
  livelihoods, communities, sectors,
ecosystems, regions

Vulnerability is dynamic


Over space and time
Concatenation of stresses
Even when exposed to the same event,
impacts will vary, depending on the
person’s capacity to cope: that is, to
withstand and recover from the impact of
that event. So if your exposure to a hazard
is high, your vulnerability may be low if
you have high capacity to cope (and vice
versa).
Sharma et al. (2000)
  Understood
by assessing the
interaction of:

Exposure to hazard/shock/stress

Sensitivity to impact

Capacity to cope and adapt
Exposure unit
Stresses/threats
Consequences
Responses
•  Demographic
group:
- Women
- Elderly
•  Scale:
- Individual
- Household
- Community
•  Economic group:
-Livelihood
-Sector
•  Ecosystem
•  Climate trends
& hazards
•  Natural hazards
•  Environmental
hazards
•  Health &
disease
•  Socio-economic
risks
•  Political &
regulatory risks
•  Loss of life
•  Loss of assets
•  Loss of
livelihood
•  Psychological
stress
•  Social stress
•  Social capital
•  Operational
System
Multiple stresses
Multiple attributes
Adaptive capacity
•  Strategic
•  Policy/
regulatory
TIME:
Season/Decade….Trends/forecasts…scenarios
Source: Adapted from Downing, no date


Adjustments in natural and human systems in response
to a new or changing environment, including climate
conditions specifically, to limit potential damages and
harness new opportunities
It is distinguished from ‘coping’
Source: Tiempo 77, adapted from CARE Climate Vulnerability and Capacity Handbook, 2009
  Changing
CT:
characteristics of climate hazards in
•  increasing temps (monthly max, min and annual average)
•  reduction in rainfall; increasing evaporation
•  more frequent and stronger SE winds
  Impact on various social groups
•  Different levels of heat stress, access to clean water,
property damage, mobility, employment opportunities,
cost of living, etc.
•  The relative health of ecosystems is part of the answer but
there are other factors also at play
 Smart adaptation decisions
•  Assess the nature and extent of risks
•  Consider other changes that affect how climate
hazards are experienced
Well
adapted
Adapting
well
Dynamic, iterative & ongoing
processes of change based
on adjustments & learningby-doing
The network of institutional sites where people
work collectively to shape and manage the
course of events under investigation
  Involves
identifying ‘nodes’ and characterising
them according to:
•  their mentalities;
•  the methods / technologies they use to exert influence;
•  the resources they mobilise;
•  the way they are structured to perform their functions
  A
governance lens helps identity
•  Who (across all sectors in society not just government) is
intentionally intervening in the city in managing a
particular risk
•  How that effects vulnerability
  Need
to engage a range of actors
•  Critical when planning adaptation strategies & measures
•  To make strategies workable over and above just being
technically robust
 At
the conceptual level can you see any
value in and points of entry for
integrating / linking the ecosystem
services and vulnerability frameworks?
Case study
Opportunities for strengthening governance around
managing flood risks to support climate change
adaptation
Collaborating organisations
• University of Cape Town: African Centre for Cities;
• Department of Environmental & Geographical Science; Geomatics &
African Security & Justice Programme
• Stockholm Environment Institute
• City of Cape Town, ERM Department.
•  Funded by IDRC/DFID
•  January 2010 – June 2013
Cape Town Coast
and the Polar Ice
Sheet Melt Scenario
8 meters
Source: Anton Cartwright
Engagement with key City of Cape Town
departments involved in flood risk management
  Disaster Risk Management
  Development Services
  Informal Settlements
  Roads and Storm Water
  City Health
  Fire and Rescue
  Traffic services
Results from Phase I



Flooding in informal settlements is hard to manage
•  settlement on inappropriate land for historic reasons
•  in-situ upgrading hard
•  relocating is necessary but a lack of available, suitable
land and it is a politically sensitive process
Risk sharing is a key part of managing flood risk
•  City can only manage a certain portion of risk
•  Communities in Cape Town expect the City to manage
more risk than they do
Challenges around community participation
•  There is recognition by city officials that local actors need
to be more involved in planning and responding to flood
risk but hard to achieve in practice
Emerging results from Phase II
What is the nature of the problem of flooding in
Cape Town?
Current approaches to flood risk management
Emerging results from Phase II
What measures to tackle flood risks are
currently prioritised within your department?
Technical responses to
reduce flood risk
1 Dept
3 Depts
2 Depts
Emerging results from Phase II
Are current approaches/measures to manage
flood risk sufficient?
 Effective
response to flooding needs to
•  Factor in different ways of framing the problem
•  Provide forums for learning and co-production
of knowledge
 Governance
is key part of understanding
vulnerability
•  Helps to focus on priority areas for adaptation
 Need
to work with complexity in both the
biophysical and social systems
 Adding
the vulnerability and governance
lenses helps foreground difficult
questions around:
•  Who has access to and uses a given ESS?
•  How are the benefits of ESSs distributed?
•  Who is excluded from the decision-making and
management of ecosystems?
Thank you
gina@csag.uct.ac.za ; anna.taylor@uct.ac.za
Photographs
SEI: Sean Wilson, seanwilson.co.za
Mapping of local risks