Climate Risk Assessment and Adaptation Planning †Free Samples

Question: Discuss about the Climate Risk Assessment and Adaptation Planning. Answer: Introduction: This paper entails the strategies employed to accomplish the risk adaptation and risk assessment organization for the Melbourne Town, Australia. The risk management outline is provided in accordance with the AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009. Additionally, the study presents an evaluation framework for risk assessment. The evaluation framework is based on the Risk management structure of Melbourne city(Office, 2005). The town encourages a risk management methodology that is flexible. At such, it approves the framework modification to enable it fit in the context of decision-making. The project consultants in conjunction with the Climate Change Working Group and Risk Management worked to develop an evaluation framework to evaluate the risk of climate to the town. Primarily, the resultant context is based on the current risk organization of Melbourne city, whereas the modification validation, where constructed, are shown. Risk management refers to the method of analysing and defining risks to ease resultant decision to be made pertaining the necessary strategies with an aim of reducing risks(Health and Safety Executive, 2015). The framework for Risk Assessment used in this plan is the one endorsed by the Australian Regime. The Department of Climate Change of Australia, formerly referred to as The Australian Greenhouse Office (AGO) s publication, provides methodology to carry out climate change risk assessment and adaptation planning based on the Paris Climate Agreement. On this framework, as shown in the table below, there are five key phases: Setting the context Risks identification Risk analysis Risk evaluation Risk treatment Phases in Assessment of Risks Based on Paris Framework Stage Details Setting the Context Describing the scope of assessment and the defining of the organization or the business to be assessed. Clarification of the business objectives. Identifying stakeholders and their concerns and objectives Establishing the criteria for success Development of the key element Establishing pertinent assessment scenarios for climate change Risks Identification Describing and highlighting how climate change affect organizational key elements. Risk Analysis Evaluation of the government controls, reactions, and management in each risk situation. Evaluation of each risk effects against the objectives and success measures of the organization. Form an informed judgement concerning the likeliness of each highlighted consequence. Determining the risk level to Determine the organizational level of risks for each scenarios of the climate change applied in the analysis. Stage (Phase) Details Risk Evaluation Reestablishment of the judgements and other estimates. Highlighting risks based on their severity level. Highlighting inconsequential risks that can be put aside and which may make the management to lose focus. Screening out risks which require a more detailed evaluation. Identification of necessary options to adapt or manage the risks and their impacts. Risk Choose an option which is best and selection of the ideal options for future plans. The predominantly duty of risk assessment framework is to facilitate a defendable and systematic approach to risk management and adaptation. These approach is centered on the treatment of organizational risk(Aalst, 2004). The link between organization risk and climate change is depicted in the following figure: The climate change effects on an organization can be noted and treated through working by the consequences chains. It is significant to understand that the outcome is a tactical assessment of risk and adaptation plan, which is undersigned to give treatment recommendations that are spatially(Aalst, 2004). The stages of the framework for risk assessment are shown below: These part of the risk management determines the scope and the boundaries of the assessment, the framework of evaluation, and identifies the engagement strategy of the shareholders. The main activities achieved within this part comprises the following: The scope of assessment The Assessment Objectives Definition of likelihood scales Identification of the main elements Selection of relevant scenarios for climate change to be assessed Comprehensive identification of stakeholders The terminologies pertaining to risk assessment have also been identified to enhance an understanding of the language applied in this plan(Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, 2017). This step output directs the other subsequent stages of this risk management plan. These guidelines are done through evaluation framework. Terminology Definitions Success Criteria The objectives and goals of a business Consequence Scales Describes the level of consequence to an organization of a climate change risk, should it occur Likelihood The chances of an event occurring Risk Priority The priority level associated with each combination of an impact And its likelihood The project focusses on topographical extent to the town of Melbourne. The project assessment assessed the dangers of climate change as a result of major climate variables change. The examination was a tactical assessment of climate risk to Melbourne city. A two-step methodology was recommended by (Office, 2005)to allow attempts to focus towards important issues. The first evaluation referred to as first pass quickly identifies and reviews risks, then plans for the treatment, then administers the treatment to the risk. The second stage, verifies if there is need for additional information to ascertain if the treatment is necessary and the type of treatment to be applied, as shown in the figure below The CCAWG took into consideration the series of climate change situations and the existing evaluation aim was to help in selecting A1FI 50th Percentile (2070) and A1B 50 th Percentile (2030). A1FI 50th Percentile (2070) Scenario was selected as the most suitable practice by local governments(Korsak, 2016). Other local governments that have applied A1FI 2070 include; EMRC, Murchison and WESROC. Establishment of evaluation framework for risk assessment application involves: Definition of the organization objectives; Establishment of measures of success against which the objectives of the organizations can be assessed. Definition of possibility measures. To achieve a transparent and consistent approach to risk evaluation, matrix evaluation is needed for every element. The elements of framework used in the present assessment adhere to the Melbourne Citys risk management structure (2011) and are illustrated in Figure above. The vision of Melbourne city is to provide responsive environmental friendly services to its people. The city, strives to improve and preserve its lifestyle and environment at the present and in the future(Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, 2017). The core values of Melbourne city are: respect, diversity, integrity, accountability and community participation. Measures of success are basically an outline of the long-term objectives of an organization (Office, 2005). Melbourne city success criteria are as follows; To attain strategic performance goals. Guarantee good public governance and administration. Sustainability and enhancement of natural environment Protection to existing community The four success standards were summarized under climate change risk evaluation into six broad success criteria; Service provision Property Financial (Costs and revenue) Environment People (Health safety) Community Lifestyle Social Value The success criteria were later modified. The changes include: Legislation was summarized under service provision of service Property damage was viewed as an important aspect of climate change and stood under the lone category. Environment and Financial continued to be consistent across all frameworks. People capture both broader community and the council staff. There was an addition of Community lifestyle and Social Value elements that had not been capture in the initial framework. Risk Management in Melbourne City follows a flexible standard, where there is modification of likelihood and consequence evaluation scales(Aalst, 2004). This is important because it ensures the changes are appropriate in relation to the assessment framework. This flexible measures makes sure that the parties involved can use suitable scales. Risk is usually demonstrated in terms of: Occurrence of an event; and Possibility of the consequence. A five-point scale in Table 3 is used to measure the likelihood consequence. Melbourne City Likelihood scale Level Description certain There is chances of happening regularly or its occurrence is certain. A clear opportunity already apparent, which can easily be achieved Likely Occurrence is noticeable or is likely to occur. An opportunity that has been explored and may be achievable Possible May occur or happens occasionally. Potential identified opportunity Unlikely Is not likely to happen or happens frequently. Opportunity that is not likely to happen. Rare Only occurs in exceptional situations. Opportunity that is very unlikely to happen. Key elements are responsible for providing a framework that helps in the identification of risk through splitting issues into various areas of emphasis and connect them to climate situations (AGO 2007). Key elements in this assessment were areas that were regarded to be risky. These include: Built environment Natural environment Emergency Management Recreation Community Business operations in the town were allocated key element actions. The process of assessing risk and adaptation plans were conducted with categorical emphasis on outcome integration with the current processes and systems in the City(Health and Safety Executive, 2015). The city comprises of 20 personal business operations all working under five Directorates as shown in the figure below: Directorates and business operations in Melbourne City LList Details 1 Chief Executve Officer Executive service b. Support from the government and support. 2. Designing and Development Regeneration of the urban and financial development. b. Planning of the city c. Approval d. Compliance and health 3. Infrastructure setting a. Engineering planning b. Engineering Processes c. and Reserves and Reserves d. Fleet and waste management e. Operations for building the city 4. Corporate a. Financial b. Corporate information and data services c. Management of Assets d. Human capital 5. Community Programs a. Library service. b. Marketing and communication services. c. Leisure and recreational Services d. Community programs e. Security of the community Furthermore, there was consideration of a spatial prioritization of risks. The city conducted a preliminary review of the spatial information that was available to update the risk assessment that was carried out during the Framework phase. The process entailed the distribution of the gathered information to all the members of CCWAG for population and deliberations with staff. With extensive deliberations with staff and Project Manager in all business operations, it was noted that there was existence of limited spatial information that was compatible to the spatial information system of the city(Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, 2017). Therefore, it was important to integrate this information with the future risk evaluation since that kind of information will be a useful resource, although this task was far beyond the existing assessment scope. A different method was used and hotspots risks were discovered during the risk evaluation attracting the participants to study th e area. The discovered hotspots will influence the adaptive measures implementation. By utilizing the spatial information system of the city, hotspots will be combined into useful spatial sections in relation to the decision framework. CCAWG was initiated to run the activities of risk assessment and adaptation planning. The CCAWG representatives are staff from Business Sections with experience or play a role in responding and managing climate risks The stakeholders objectives were to affirm the risk assessment outputs, and enhance awareness and ownership. During a full-day workshop with members of CCAWG there was implementation of stage (ii) to (iv) of the risk assessment. The members of CCAWG were split into two groups, the first group covered risks relating to the built environment and emergency management; the second group handled risks associated with natural environment, community and recreation. Both groups completed the following: Risk identification Risk analysis Risk evaluation Risk Treatment Risks Identification Risk identification entails reviewing effects of climate change and risks associated to the city. CCAWG, conducted the initial risks identification and drafted the outcomes using an Internal Discussion Paper that was prepared by Melbourne City. The gathered information was summarized into two sections, the first one was, impact and adaptation summary sheets and the second was the draft risk and adaptation register. These tools were implemented during the risk assessment practicum to establish the possible climate change risks that may accrue to the operations of local government This stage entails the establishment the repercussions of the occurrence of risk and the probability that the repercussions will occur(Young, 2016). Workshop members applied the evaluation matrixes described during the Set the Framework stage to examine the risks. Detailed discussions were conducted to allocate a consequence and possibility rating for every risk. Consequence was established through the assessment of effects of anticipated climate change on success measures or the objectives of the organization Council. The consequence scale Table 5 was used by the participants in the to allocate a range of consequence to every risk that was identified(Aalst, 2004). The consequence scales the initially established was based on was Risk Management Framework of the Citys, which was revised to summarize operational and strategic risks. The probability of the occurrence of consequence was established in relation to the understanding of the occurrence history and related effects along with the management plans put in place to control the risk (Table 7). A five-point scale that ranged from Almost Certain to Rare in Table 3 was used to ascertain likelihood(Young, 2016). In order to establish the current controls, the workshop participants examined the Summary Sheets and took into consideration a range of basic management measures such as: Management structures and systems Reporting Delegations Periodic reviews or audit plans Insurance Policies Training Procedures Contract conditions Design specifications Testing/Supervision Quality assurance/Monitoring Segregation of duties Rating the Control Effectiveness of Melbourne City Risk Prioritization To determine the level of risk prioritization for every climate change risk, identified, the evaluation of likelihood and consequence has been shown in Risk Matrix above. The risk prioritization outputs offer guidance on the relevance of treating the risk identified, and an entire method to treat the risk(Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, 2017). The outline shown below the management actions and acceptability for each risk. Generally, instant treatment need to be conducted on extreme and high priority risks. Whereas, moderate and low priority risks can be set aside and be treated later. Management Responses and Action to levels of Risk/ Opportunity Risk Level Acceptability Management Action if the opportunity should be followed LOW Tolerated with the Risk is tolerable. Controlled proven, routine procedures/ current controls processes and be aware of changes to the type of risks Consideration should be put in place, opportunity to be pursued VERY LOW Tolerated with the Not likely to require resources allocation current controls Risks Evaluation After the prioritization of risk, the assigned risk levels were evaluated to enhance consistency. Basically the evaluation of risks phase entails the combination of likelihood and consequence reviewing to re-assess estimates and judgements to enhance consistency throughout the analysis. The ultimate output was the rating of the prioritized risks for the identified risks. According to the results of evaluation and analysis, there was need for risk treatment to the identified risk, leading to the last step which is Risk Treatment, Risk Framework. Adaptation planning was embraced amid the risk appraisal workshop. This enhanced a conclusion to-end assessment of risks. The computerized Risk Management Template adopted by the Melbourne City encouraged this procedure(Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, 2017). Members were given directions to finish the adaptation planning, and thought starter adaptation choices were introduced in the Summary Sheets. Following the activities of adaptation measures to every risk, members re-assessed the risk need for 2030 and 2070, showing how much the alternatives treated the observed risk. While it is perceived that treatments will change after some time, adaptation planning and risk proceeds, the re-appraisal of risk at both time spans featured the potential requirement for extra measures in the more drawn out term(Young, 2016). Members in Workshop Group 2 discovered rating residual risk hard, given the intrinsic vulnerability in the adequacy of various versatile steps in treating the risk and the vulnerability in the expected level of progress. By and large, the hazard was marginally diminished or kept up, given that the activities would be executed in the short-term to control what might be a long lasting risk. Whereas residual risk valuable when considering the adequacy of activities to treat impending risk, it shows the utility of this task is decreased while reviewing the viability of prompt activities on future risks(Korsak, 2016). The certainty of viability must be expanded through observing and assessing activities to inform future versatile planning. This should remain the core interest. In the course of, the Set the Context meeting, the CCAWG viewed evaluative criteria as used in adaptation planning as shown in Table 9 and time spans for execution allocate adaptive activities as illustrated in Table 10. The criteria were allocated estimations of 1, 3 and 5 to upgrade separation amongst low and high boundaries to adaptive activity. The outcome was Clim ate Change Risk and Adaptation Register, containing the required rating of all risk and adaptation activities to treat high and outrageous priority risks. The register determined the role of execution and foreseen implementation timeframes. A meeting was conducted at the completion of the climate change risk assessment and adaptation-planning workshop to investigate the methods that could be integrated in the operational processes of the City. The selected mainstream, outcome integration ensured that the measures for adapting climate changes are formulated in the Citys current management processes(Korsak, 2016). This help in the reduction of effort duplication and ensured a coordinated methodology to climate risk management around the city. Participants were required to examine how the identified actions could be integrated into the business unit current operations and future planning frameworks. Discussion was conducted to identify departmental connections that could be useful in risk selection. The debate was based on the following question: What actions/task are required to take place in order to facilitate the execution of this risk management? What are the possible barriers in the integration process? How can those shortcomings be dealt with? The results were a preliminary approaches list for integration, which was then analysed and developed as an element of the adaptation approach. References Aalst, M. v., 2004. Mainstreaming Climate Risk Management into Development Planning, Utrecht: Utrecht University. Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, 2017. Climate Services and Safety Nets. [Online] Available at: https://ccafs.cgiar.org/flagships/climate-services-and-safety-nets [Accessed 29 8 2017]. Health and Safety Executive, 2015. Risk assessment, s.l.: s.n. Korsak, D. W., 2016. Planning for Enhanced Climate Risks: Aperspective from Military, Columbia: Columbia Law School. Office, A. G., 2005. Australias Fourth National Communication on Climate Change, Melbourne: Australian Greenhouse Office. Young, A. F., 2016. Adaptation actions for integrated climate risk management into urban planning: a new framework from urban typologies to build resilience capacity in Santos (SP). Open Access, 3(12), pp. 1-14.