EGS 3021F: Vulnerability to Environmental Change Gina Ziervogel (gina@csag.uct.ac.za) December 2011 This work by Gina Ziervogel is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. An aggregate measure of human welfare that integrates environmental, social, economic and political exposure to a range of harmful perturbations. (Bohle et al. 1994) How do we develop a consensual definition vulnerability? How do we measure vulnerability? The context should drive the choice of methodology and methods ▪ decision goals, analytical teams, priority vulnerabilities User orientation ▪ An array of methods is essential: the most useful tools are those that fit the decision framework of the endusers Scale of analysis important in selection of methods ▪ e.g. appropriate indicators, availability of data Questions on scope Possible answers Who is the vulnerability assessment for? Local stakeholders Other researchers Regional authorities National authorities What is the time frame for the issues to be addressed? Current issue, decision scheduled Current planning horizon, 5-15 years Long-term future, 30-100 years What is the policy result? Operational guidelines Project design Strategic plans Awareness What hazards and stresses are systems exposed to? e.g., economic risks (income loss, debt), natural hazards Who/ what are the exposure units? e.g., social groups, ecosystems, regions Where are the vulnerable located? When are people/systems vulnerable? What are the specific reasons for their vulnerability? e.g., dependence on particular resources, reliance on certain subsidies, social marginalisation How resilient are the exposure units to current stresses? – institutional capacity, absorption capacity of ecosystems, diversity of income sources • What would be the consequences of exposure to stresses? – loss of assets, loss of livelihood, unemployment, loss of life? • What has been the impact of historical episodes or comparable events? • What indicators capture current and future vulnerability under the proposed scenarios? • What potential responses can be pursued to reduce vulnerability? – operational, strategic, policy/regulatory – scale • Impact assessments Strategic environmental assessments Livelihoods based analysis Consultations From Expert judgement, Focus groups & Stakeholder consultation Past trends and future scenarios work Scenario analysis Evaluation of existing development frameworks Establish new data needed Agent-based simulation modeling Bayesian analysis Brainstorming Checklists/multiple attributes Cognitive Mapping Cost-effectiveness/Costbenefit/Expected Value Cost Impact Analysis Decision conferencing Decision/probability trees Delphi technique Environmental assessment/ Strategic Environmental Assessment Expert judgment Focus groups Indicators/mapping Influence diagrams/mapping tools Multi-criterion analysis Ranking/dominance analysis/pairwise comparisons Risk analysis Role-play Scenario analysis Stakeholder consultation Stakeholder thematic networks Vulnerability Profiles Wealth ranking (Downing and Ziervogel, 2004) 1. 2. 3. 4. Scope assessment Decide on initial VA questions Establish existing data Choose appropriate tools to obtain necessary data Buzz group: What is the aim of scoping the assessment? Agent-based simulation modeling Bayesian analysis Brainstorming Checklists/multiple attributes Cognitive Mapping Cost-effectiveness/Costbenefit/Expected Value Cost Impact Analysis Decision conferencing Decision/probability trees Delphi technique Environmental assessment/ Strategic Environmental Assessment Expert judgment Focus groups Indicators/mapping Influence diagrams/mapping tools Multi-criterion analysis Ranking/dominance analysis/pairwise comparisons Risk analysis Role-play Scenario analysis Stakeholder consultation Stakeholder thematic networks Vulnerability Profiles Wealth ranking (Downing and Ziervogel, 2004) Livelihood vulnerability Qualitative methods Quantitative methods Indicators and mapping Agent-based modelling Scenarios (Downing and Ziervogel, 2004) What is a livelihood? Set of activities Assets Access Improve or continue existence Assets Human Social Financial Physical Natural Improve or continue existence Sustainable Livelihoods: The capability of people to make a living and improve their quality of life without jeopardizing the livelihood options of others. Sustainability implies: Ability to cope with and recover from stresses and shocks Economic effectiveness and social equity Ecological integrity Resilience to shocks (Rennie and Singh, 1996) An analysis of livelihoods helps VA users to: Identify the most vulnerable groups and individuals at a community or regional scale Emphasize the links between policy decisions and household level activities Focus not just on incomes, but also relations, institutions, access and control of resources Identify the sensitivity of different livelihoods to stresses, and assess their vulnerabilities and strengths Captures lessons on how to build community resilience Qualitative Participatory Semi-structured Interviews Quantitative Surveys Indicators Mapping (Downing and Ziervogel, 2004) Participatory approaches Village mapping Seasonal calendars Matrices Pair-wise ranking Venn diagrams Time line Wealth ranking Semi-structured questions Focus groups Role-play methods Oral histories (Downing and Ziervogel, 2004) 2003 Jan Feb Maart April Mei Junie Julie Wat onthou jy oor verskillende aspekte van die weer? Warm en droog Geen Reen Ryp en Winderig Ryp en Droog Donderweer Reen Droog Koel weer Baie Ryp en koud Goeie reen val Droog Watter impakte het die weer gehad? (B.V. Boerdery, inkomstes, water, werk-geleenthede, vee, plae, parasiete) Water het Probleme Gegee Hoe het julle aangepas met hierdie weer toestande? water aangery na kampe en eie gedrink Werk (sp?) geleenthede Is swak Geen reen Vir maand Miggies in Het baie Die tee. peste Inkomste swak Deur geen werk Water het As reen val Begin bykom Help dit vir Veld het goed Die plae by gekom Skade by Lammer oeste Geen melk (sp?) ooie kan nie plant nie Kan begin Saai steeds water aangery bemark tee later melk vir lammers gee lammers gekoop melk laat tee twee dae lpv(sp?) een dae le gedurende gewag en gebid (sp?) (Archer et al, 2008) (Archer et al, 2008) A cognitive model that captures diverse nature of the problem Useful tool when: different stakeholders have different perceptions of the problem the options for addressing a problem are unclear (Downing and Ziervogel, 2004) 1) 2) 3) 4) State the problem Brainstorm assumptions and solutions Group emerging concepts Re-illustrate the concepts so they form a conceptual model 5) Go back to participants 6) Formal cognitive model (Downing and Ziervogel, 2004) By Emma Archer To creatively remove people from their usual roles and assumptions by involving them as a group in analytic thinking and assessment (Downing and Ziervogel, 2004) Open-ended story/ written case description Describe the setting for the action Participants asked to act out potential scenarios Record Tape/video Participant feedback Observer descriptions/notes (Downing and Ziervogel, 2004) By Gina Ziervogel By Gina Ziervogel (Ziervogel, 2004) Role-play enabled the question to be ‘experienced’ Lessons for seasonal forecast dissemination Prefer receiving information from person Above-normal forecast helpful Resources not necessary to respond (Ziervogel, 2004) Qualitative narratives of individuals’ histories and strategies Focus: Individual perception Past stress and response Used to suggest indicators Method Can use semi-structured interview or participatory methods to inform Multi-stakeholder view of past (Downing and Ziervogel, 2004) General questions about perception of past rangeland quality Use timeline Line with 4 ticks Anchoring events Add: Stones represent best and worst harvest 1980 1990 Great-grandmother died 2000 Mozambique floods 2010 AGENT BASED MODEL OUTPUT *** TICK 189 *** person-2 (female) DIED AT AGE 62 OF AIDS was head of household-1 person-2 had 10 friends; person-2 had 29 relatives in 5 households (including own) person-7 (male, 36) becomes new head of household-1 burialSociety-0 pays out 360.0 Rand to household-1 for the death of its member person2 By Gina Ziervogel Scenario presented for feedback at village workshop: Hilda dies of AIDS (62, HH head) Funeral cost (R4000); Burial society (R360); Honest becomes HHH (36) By Gina Ziervogel By Gina Ziervogel By Gina Ziervogel Stratifications of groups within a community as understood by community members Categories ▪ Money, availability/access to resources, health, labour ▪ Poor, average, better-off ▪ Represented by colours, symbols, numbers Establish categories Community members place themselves/ key members place households Consultation possible Indicators Quantitative evaluation of livelihood assets Indices By Gina Ziervogel Q1 Age Q2 Gender Q5 Relationship to household head Q3 Q7 Q8 household size tot. No. of fam fed in household for the ave. month. no. of months that the household feeds itself from farming. 27M HH 3 3 4 47F wife 7 7 3 63M HH 11 10 6 51F wife 8 7 3 61M HH 10 9 5 76F HH 2 1 3 44M HH 8 7 2 62F wife 6 6 4 73M HH 8 3 3 3 class volunteers (actors) 1 student ‘in distress’ with injured hand 1 friend 1 emergency personnel Scene 1: Student is panicky about accident, goes to friend for help, who tries to call for help Scene 2: Student injures hand and is calm about it.. How likely are the following sources of fire to cause accidents Example from Class practical 2009 Metrics “A system or standard of measurement; a criterion or set of criteria stated in quantifiable terms” (Oxford English Dictionary) Metrics important when questioning future states Education; health Identify thresholds Doesn’t capture cause Indicators and mapping Indicator: single measure of a characteristic Index: composite measure of several indicators or indices. Purpose Capture spatial variation in vulnerability Used for guiding decision-making prioritising intervention (Miller et al. 2005) Caution complex nature of vulnerability difficulty in capturing diversity and sensitivity Reflect explicit conceptual framework of vulnerability Can’t compare indicators that assess different temporal and spatial scales Units of measurement are often inconsistent (Miller et al. 2005) First identify appropriate indicators in regards to the conceptual framework Indicators are then transformed into standard scores for mapping • Can use aggregate measures (e.g., food security index might use crop yield, income, and nutrition measures) • Explore indicator database structure What is the range of values? Are there critical thresholds for vulnerability? Are indicators correlated with each other? (Miller et al. 2005) Who are the most vulnerable groups and what shapes their vulnerability in the face of climate variability and change? What shapes the exposure to and ability of certain groups to rebound from drought hazards? How does institutional capacity influence the capacity of the affected individuals and households to cope with/adapt to droughts and reduce vulnerability? Will adaptive capacities change in the future? If so, how? (http://www.aiaccproject.org/) Project in Nigeria and Mali: Research Design Rapid Rural Assessment to: Identify major livelihood systems Identify vulnerability indicators, Assign weights to indicators. Methods Preliminary Survey Focus Group Discussion (http://www.aiaccproject.org/) Index Value Measured/Calculated as Range Average 1 Acreage under cultivation 1 Hectares/consumer units 0.1 -2.8 0.6 2 Dependency ratio 1 Labour units/consumer units (inverted) 0.3 – 0.8 0.5 3 Livestock ownership 1 Tropical Livestock Units/consumer units 0.0 – 8.2 3.7 4 Gender of Household Head 1 Value given to sex of household head 1.0 – 2.0 1.8 5 Livelihood diversification 1 Weighted number of non-agricultural income generating activities/consumer units 0.0 - 2.4 0.7 6 Annual cash income 1 In 1000 Naira/consumer units 2.5 – 9.7 4.2 7 Drought Preparedness 1 Value given to use of drought resistant crops and livestock and receives drought related information and advise 0.0 – 2.0 1.1 8 Educational background of the household head 0.5 Value given to highest school level attained by the head of the household 0.0 -4.0 1.8 9 Land tenure situation 0.5 Value given to land tenure situation 1.0 – 3.0 2.5 10 Type of house 0.5 Value given to type of house lived in 1.0 -3.0 1.80 11 Self-sufficiency in food production 0.5 Number of years surplus foodstuffs were sold minus number of years foodstuffs were bought in the past 10 years 0.0 -20.0 11.2 12 Family and Social Networks 0.5 Value given to strength of family and social networks. 1.0 – 4.0 2.25 13 Quality of household 0.5 Number of able persons/ number of disabled and or sick persons in the household (inverted) 1.5 – 12.0 7.6 Overall Vulnerability 10 Sum of (index scores * index value) 235.1 to 833.9 472.1 Indicators Risk of drought Participatory mapping Risk of acute drought Risk of flood Risk of flood and drought Risk of flood and acute drought LEGEND Infrastructure, Population and Poor People at Risk by Municipios Top 10 10 -25 25 - 60 60 - 291 T.E. Downing Human Development Index http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/hdi/ HDI Class Missing (10) Low (45) Medium (22) High (100) (HDI website 2009) http://soils.usda.gov/use/worldsoils/mapindex/desert.html Global index of ‘progress towards environmental sustainability’ 142 countries Twenty ‘core’ indicators 5 categories: environmental systems, environmental stresses, human vulnerability to environmental risks, a society's institutional capacity to respond to environmental threats, and a nation's stewardship of the shared resources of the global common core indicators composed of multiple indicators, based on the best available quantitative data. (http://www.ciesin.org/indicators/ESI/) http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/wdc/downloads/maps/sustainability/Environmental_Sustainability_Index/2005_ESI_Scores_by_Country.jpg The EPI focuses on two overarching environmental objectives: reducing environmental stresses to human health; promoting ecosystem vitality and sound natural resource management. Objectives gauged using 25 performance indicators tracked in six well-established policy categories, which are then combined to create a final score. (http://epi.yale.edu) (http://epi.yale.edu) (http://epi.yale.edu) • ‘Hotspot’ analysis is an example of integrated VA – three key areas of information: – environmental stresses; – vulnerability of people & ecosystems to stresses; – and impacts on ecosystem services – “Hotspot” is a geographically delineated area where there is a convergence of threats, vulnerability and impacts (Mathur, 2005) (www.biodiversityhotspots.org) Biodiversity hotspots Norman Myers pioneered in late 80s Must meet two strict criteria: contain at least 1,500 species of vascular plants (> 0.5 percent of the world’s total) as endemics, and it has to have lost at least 70 percent of its original habitat. (Myers et al, 2000) Cape Floristic Kingdom Hotspot Original Extent: 78.555 km2 Hotspot Vegetation Remaining: 15.711 km2 Evergreen fire-dependent shrublands characterize the landscape of the Cape Floristic Region, one of the world's five Mediterranean hotspots. Home to the greatest non-tropical concentration of higher plant species in the world, the region is the only hotspot that encompasses an entire floral kingdom, and holds five of South Africa’s 12 endemic plant families and 160 endemic genera. The geometric tortoise, the Cape sugar-bird, and a number of antelope species are characteristic of the Cape Floristic hotspot. (www.biodiversityhotspots.org) Succulent Karoo Hotspot Original Extent: 102,691km2 Hotspot Vegetation Remaining: 29,780km2 (www.biodiversityhotspots.org) Integrated VA of areas at risk from key infrastructure developments • Phase 1 developed as part of the SEI Strategic Environmental Framework for the Greater Mekong Sub-region: – integrates analytical, participatory, and policy-oriented processes – combines multiple indicators of poverty and environmental stress – developed a GIS-P application to integrate expert knowledge to identify ‘hotspots’ (Mathur, 2005) Mekong ‘Hotspots’* Phase 2 produced: • tools for integration of expert knowledge • participatory risk assessment processes • illustrations of development choices, challenges, and potential impacts • develop an early warning monitoring and management system * Based on study undertaken by Mathur, 2005 Different livelihood groups are subject to different stresses Need to understand what they stresses and impacts are in order to target development Unemployment Village A Health Facilities GDPpc Village B Roads Maize Consumption Infant Mortality Maize Production HIV Vulnerability Profile, Delanta Dawunt, Ethiopia Low income crop (V High) HH Size 1.1 Types of dairy 0.9 Middle income crop (High) Crop/dairy (Mod) Male laborers Isolated, middle income crop (Mod) High income dairy (Mod) 0.7 Livestock holdings Total Income 0.5 0.3 0.1 Road Access -0.1 Total Expenditure Mid Altitude Crops sales price in bad year Crop land Food Aid Grazing land • • • Represent actors as software agents Multi-level vulnerability Emergence from interactions Agent: self-contained programme that can control its own actions, based on it perceptions of its operating environment ABM enables construction of models using a bottom-up approach new forms of vulnerability evolve as a result of the local micro-level interactions between agents Enables evaluation of response to multiple stressors ABM of farmers’ use of seasonal forecasts Assessed under different conditions for different types of agents Based on empirical fieldwork Enables experimentation Variations in type of information Explore which strategies reduce vulnerability (Bharwani et al, 2005) (Bharwani et al, 2005) (Bharwani et al, 2005) HH income Current situationWithout new miningWith new miningPoorR1,000R2,000R3,000professionalR10,000R10,000 R15,000RichR20,000 - 45,000R20,000 - 45,000R50,000 – R80,000 HH monthly income Poor Current Without new With new situation mining (+ 20 yrs) mining (+ 20 yrs) R1,000 R2,000 R3,000 Professional R10,000 Rich R10,000 R20,000 - R20,000 45,000 45,000 R15,000 R50,000 80,000 Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJ8leCy7Qvc Resilience: How is scenario planning useful? Garry Peterson The profit Jeremiah His prophecies of extreme warning went largely unheeded by the people of Israel Utopia Visualisation of desirable futures http://www.flickr.com/photos/aeon/2776979282/ The limits of prediction Complex socio-environmental processes Surprise and the kinks of history The nature of scenarios Vision of a future time Sufficiently beyond the present to not be inherently predictable Internally consistent Plausible relationships between elements, multiple attributes Semi-quantitative Associated with indicators or supported by formal models Policy-relevant not policy-prescriptive Scenarios are plausible and often simplified descriptions of how the future may develop, based on a coherent and internally consistent set of assumptions about key driving forces and relationships. (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, http://www.maweb.org/documents/document.327.aspx.pdf ) Visions and back-casting Model simulation and probability Worst case Stakeholder-led/interactive Role playing, gaming Venetian visions (Ulysses) Climate change IPCC Long term mitigation scenarios (DEAT) South African food security scenarios CURRENT DRIVING FORCES VISIONS Scenarios Narratives DEMOGRAPHIC ECONOMIC IDENTIFICATION BREAKING POINTS TRANSPORTATION GOVERNANCE CULTURAL (Funtowicz and Pereira, 1999) Tonight I’ll tell you about 4 cities Marco Polo tells Kublai Kan… (Funtowicz and Pereira, 1999) Tourism has trickled to a small fraction Living conditions have deteriorated… Air and water pollution significantly affect human and ecosystem health Traditional activities close down Building Decay Emigration increases A ‘new Venice’ in the mainland is created to preserve the cultural heritage Gotham City (Funtowicz and Pereira, 1999) Venice became a cultural park and a museum city: one of the 4 most important tourist destinations of the world Venice is a stage where the whole population acts in a gigantic performance Corporations dominate economy and city life Carnival takes place 4 times a year Venezia Inc. Floods and high tides become tourist attractions (Funtowicz and Pereira, 1999) Desired future state Evaluating goals Assumptions Current path Interventions needed to reach desired future (Funtowicz and Pereira, 1999) Based on: Socio-economic scenarios of the future Greenhouse gas emissions ▪ atmospheric concentrations Global climate models A2 – local economic growth, high pop growth, low technological change A1B – High economic growth, low pop growth, efficient technology B1 – Sustainable development, low pop growth, high economic growth (http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-3.html, IPCC) Projections of Future Changes in Climate (http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html, IPCC) There is now higher confidence in projected patterns of warming and other regional-scale features, including changes in wind patterns, precipitation, and some aspects of extremes and of ice. Growth without constraint Required by Science Current emissions quadruple by 2050 (from 440Mt – 1600/year) Current emissions reduced by 30 – 40% by 2050 Fuel consumption grows 5 fold Joint international efforts to reduce emissions Energy production remains mainly coal with more nuclear New technologies taken up in SA at earlier and larger scale (including hydrogen-based transport and increased awareness of use) (http://www.environment.gov.za/HotIssues/2008/LTMS/LTMS.html DEAT, 2007) (http://www.environment.gov.za/HotIssues/2008/LTMS/LTMS.html DEAT, 2007) Start Now 300 Scale Up Industrial efficiency Use the Market Industrial efficiency Escalating CO2 tax 300 150 150 -R 34 0 450 Nuclear, extended 300 150 R 52 0 150 0 300 150 R 20 Renewables, extended 300 150 R 18 0 150 0 Synfuels CCS 23 Mt 300 -R 1,131 0 R 92 R 125 -People-oriented measures Biofuel subsidy 300 0 -Identify resources Subsidy for renewables 300 150 Passenger modal shift 150 R 42 0 Nuclear 300 -New technology 600 -R 34 0 Renewables 300 Reach for the Goal 150 150 0 300 R 54 R 697 0 - Transition to low carbon economy Improved vehicle efficiency Electric vehicles in GWC grid 300 300 150 0 -R 269 150 0 R 607 300 150 0 SWH subsidy -R 208 (http://www.environment.gov.za/HotIssues/2008/LTMS/LTMS.html DEAT, 2007) 94 A. Misselhorn, S. Drimie, C. Schwabe M. O’Donovan, M. Faber, S.Hendriks, J. Kirsten, P. Kuzwayo, P. Laubscher, S. Lemke, E. Maunder, R. Swart, R. Verduijn, C. Walsch, A. Whiteford, G. Ziervogel Food Availability, Access, Stability, Utilization > 40% of people in South Africa are food insecure 50% of people are poor Affordability of food main problem in SA – food prices Chronic malnutrition – nearly 20% of children 1-3yrs HIV/AIDS - nearly 19% of population (Misselhorn et al, 2006) Economic growth Social Security: high dependence on social transfers Infrastructure and services o Critical for economic growth and to improve livelihood capabilities (Misselhorn et al, 2006) Extreme inequality and poverty persist: unequal food access Poor human capital significant feature of food insecurity (HIV) (Misselhorn et al, 2006) MULTIPLE CONSTRAINT HIV/AIDS Human capacity Credit access Land access Access to agricultural inputs Poor extension & support POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITIES Increases livelihood options Buffer against absolute poverty or hunger for poor Supplements incomes Dietary diversity options (Misselhorn et al, 2006) 1. Integrated POVERTY REDUCTION strategy: a) Pro-poor economic growth b) Comprehensive social protection 2. Encourage AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT and allied non- farm enterprises to promote the livelihoods of those on the periphery of the formal economy 3. Alter and strengthen INSTITUTIONAL arrangements of the IFSS 4. Establish a well coordinated and well managed food security MONITORING, EVALUATION and INFORMATION system (Misselhorn et al, 2006) BETTER CROSS CUTTING POTENTIALITIES Strengthening IFSS INSTITUTIONAL & POLICY SCENARIOS OF.. THE LOCAL FOOD SECURITY ‘SYSTEM’ Reduced livelihoods capabilities and choices “Business as usual” CROSS CUTTING STRESSORS 2007 FOOD SECURITY Improved livelihoods capabilities and choices WORSE 2019 (Misselhorn et al, 2006) (Downing and Ziervogel, 2004) (Downing and Ziervogel, 2004) • Plethora of local studies of vulnerability – key lessons on the reduction of vulnerability – link with macro-scale analyses (hotspots - livelihood analysis) • Scale linkages – between local manifestations of vulnerability and risk construction at more macro scales (trade relations, basin-wide environmental change, national policy) • Complexity associated with consideration of interaction between multiple risks – economic shocks, socio-economic change, environmental risks Scenarios Indicators and mapping Participatory livelihood methods Between the 2(3) of you, each choose 1 method – describe to the other the strengths and weaknesses of your chosen approach Archer, E.R.M., Oettlé, N.M., Louw, R, Tadross, M.A. 2008. Farming on the Edge' in arid western South Africa: adapting to climate change in marginal environments. Geography. 93. 98-107. Bharwani, S., Bithell, M., Downing, T.E., New, M., Washington, R and Ziervogel, G. 2005. Multi-agent modelling of climate outlooks and food security on a community garden scheme in Limpopo, South Africa. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. Bohle, H. G., Downing, T. E. and Watts, M. J. 1994.Climate change and social vulnerability: Toward a sociology and geography of food insecurity. Global Environmental Change, 4(1): 37-48 Chopra, K., Leemans, R., Kumar, P., and Simons, H. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Policy responses, Volume 3. Findings of the Responses of Working Group of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Washington, Covelo, London: Island Press. Can be accessed at http://www.maweb.org/documents/document.327.aspx.pdf) Downing and Ziervogel, 2004. Toolkit for Vulnerability and Adaptation Training. Stockholm Environment Institute. Funtowicz, S.O. and Pereira, A. G. 1999. Visions report: Venice 2050. Joint Research Centre. Ispra, Italy Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC), 2007. Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K.B., Tignor, M. and Miller H.L. (Eds), Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, USA: Cambridge University Press. (accessed at http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html) Mathur, V. 2005. High Risk Regions: Poverty and Vulnerability Briefing Note, SEI www.vulnerabilitynet.org Miller, F. Downing, T. , Ziervogel,F. , Mathur, V. and Lindskog, E.2005. Vulnerability Assessment: an overview of approaches and methods. WTO and Environmental Protection Session on Sustainability Impact Assessment and National Impacts.Sept 2005 Misselhorn et al, 2006. Achieving Food Security in South Africa: Characteristics, Stressors & Recommendations to 2019. Report for the South African Government. Myers, N., R. A. Mittermeier, C. G. Mittermeier, G. A. B. da Fonseca, and J. Kent. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853-858 Pereira, A.G. 2002. Venice and Visions. Presentation at Trieste AIACC workshop Rennie, J. and N. Singh. 1996. Participatory research for sustainable livelihoods: a guidebook for field projects. Ottawa: IISD. Ziervogel, G. 2004. 'Targeting seasonal climate forecasts for integration into household level decisions: the case of smallholder farmers in Lesotho', The Geographical Journal. 170.1. 621. Oxford English Dictionary (www.oed.com) All web links were checked in November 2011 Acknowledgements: Some slide material from Tom E. Downing