Managing the Risk of Global Climate Catastrophe: An Uncertainty Analysis

Despite much scientific progress over many decades, the nature of global climate change remains highly uncertain, and the possibility of global climate catastrophe is one of the main concerns in public debates about global climate change. In this paper, we present a model which incorporates the risk of climate catastrophe in an analysis of greenhouse gas abatement strategy. In this model, the timing and severity of climate catastrophe are treated probabilistically. The impacts of key uncertainties on optimal policy are analyzed, and the expected values of additional information that reduces the uncertainty associated with the world economy, carbon cycle, climate change, and climate damage are estimated.     

Uncertainties in the Link Between Global Climate Change and Predicted Health Risks from Pollution: Hexachlorobenzene (HCB) Case Study Using a Fugacity Model

Industrial societies have altered the earth's environment in ways that could have important, long-term ecological, economic, and health implications. In this paper, we examine the extent to which uncertainty about global climate change could impact the precision of predictions of secondary outcomes such as health impacts of pollution. Using a model that links global climate change with predictions of chemical exposure and human health risk in the Western region of the United States of America (U.S.), we define parameter variabilities and uncertainties and we characterize the resulting outcome variance. As a case study, we consider the public health consequences from releases of hexachlorobenzene (HCB), a ubiquitous multimedia pollutant. By constructing a matrix that links global environmental change both directly and indirectly to potential human-health effects attributable to HCB released into air, soil, and water, we define critical parameter variances in the health risk estimation process. We employ a combined uncertainty/sensitivity analysis to investigate how HCB releases are affected by increasing atmospheric temperature and the accompanying climate alterations that are anticipated. We examine how such uncertainty impacts both the expected magnitude and calculational precision of potential human exposures and health effects. This assessment reveals that uncertain temperature increases of up to 5°C have little impact on either the magnitude or precision of the public-health consequences estimated under existing climate variations for HCB released into air and water in the Western region of the U.S.     

Floods and Climate Change: Interactions and Impacts

Whether the floods experienced during the last decade in Germany and in other European countries are triggered or worsened by human activities has been the subject of a great deal of debate. Possible anthropogenic activities leading to increased flood risk include river regulation measures, intensified land use and forestry, and emissions of greenhouse gases causing a change in the global climate. This article discusses the latter by reviewing the existing knowledge on the subject. First, the relevance, capabilities, and limitations of climate models for the simulation and analysis of flood risk under aspects of the anthropogenic climate change are described. Special consideration is given here to differences between the "typical" spatial scale of climate models and hydrological flood models. Second, observations of trends in climate variables relevant for river flooding issues are summarized. Special emphasis is put on the Rhine and other German catchment areas. Third, the possibilities of modeling the different parts of the "cascade of flood risk" are summarized, introducing the special features of meteorological, hydrological, and river hydraulic models.     

Spatially Representing Vulnerability to Extreme Rain Events Using Midwestern Farmers’ Objective and Perceived Attributes of Adaptive Capacity

Potential climate‐change‐related impacts to agriculture in the upper Midwest pose serious economic and ecological risks to the U.S. and the global economy. On a local level, farmers are at the forefront of responding to the impacts of climate change. Hence, it is important to understand how farmers and their farm operations may be more or less vulnerable to changes in the climate. A vulnerability index is a tool commonly used by researchers and practitioners to represent the geographical distribution of vulnerability in response to global change. Most vulnerability assessments measure objective adaptive capacity using secondary data collected by governmental agencies. However, other scholarship on human behavior has noted that sociocultural and cognitive factors, such as risk perceptions and perceived capacity, are consequential for modulating people's actual vulnerability. Thus, traditional assessments can potentially overlook people's subjective perceptions of changes in climate and extreme weather events and the extent to which people feel prepared to take necessary steps to cope with and respond to the negative effects of climate change. This article addresses this knowledge gap by: (1) incorporating perceived adaptive capacity into a vulnerability assessment; (2) using spatial smoothing to aggregate individual‐level vulnerabilities to the county level; and (3) evaluating the relationships among different dimensions of adaptive capacity to examine whether perceived capacity should be integrated into vulnerability assessments. The result suggests that vulnerability assessments that rely only on objective measures might miss important sociocognitive dimensions of capacity. Vulnerability indices and maps presented in this article can inform engagement strategies for improving environmental sustainability in the region.     

Climate Change Risk Perception and Communication: Addressing a Critical Moment?

Climate change is an increasingly salient issue for societies and policy‐makers worldwide. It now raises fundamental interdisciplinary issues of risk and uncertainty analysis and communication. The growing scientific consensus over the anthropogenic causes of climate change appears to sit at odds with the increasing use of risk discourses in policy: for example, to aid in climate adaptation decision making. All of this points to a need for a fundamental revision of our conceptualization of what it is to do climate risk communication. This Special Collection comprises seven papers stimulated by a workshop on “Climate Risk Perceptions and Communication” held at Cumberland Lodge Windsor in 2010. Topics addressed include climate uncertainties, images and the media, communication and public engagement, uncertainty transfer in climate communication, the role of emotions, localization of hazard impacts, and longitudinal analyses of climate perceptions. Climate change risk perceptions and communication work is critical for future climate policy and decisions.     

Safe Climate, Sound Business

Increasingly, global environmental trends such as climate change are impacting human and ecological health and the ability of business to operate. Business needs to act now to limit greenhouse gases and prepare for changes already underway. Business can play a significant part in providing solutions that are profitable for society and business. A select group of leadership companies are already demonstrating this.The best strategy for business to prepare for a future with more pressing environmental problems and stricter regulations is to be bold and proactive. Partnerships with external organizations are key to helping companies succeed at creating value through sustainable development strategies. The World Resources Institute's Safe Climate, Sound Business Initiative seeks to engage corporate partners in actively developing and implementing solutions to climate change. Through projects such as the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative and the Green Power Market Development Group, companies are improving profitability even as they lead the trend towards sustainability and address climate change.     

Personal Efficacy, the Information Environment, and Attitudes Toward Global Warming and Climate Change in the United States

Despite the growing scientific consensus about the risks of global warming and climate change, the mass media frequently portray the subject as one of great scientific controversy and debate. And yet previous studies of the mass public's subjective assessments of the risks of global warming and climate change have not sufficiently examined public informedness, public confidence in climate scientists, and the role of personal efficacy in affecting global warming outcomes. By examining the results of a survey on an original and representative sample of Americans, we find that these three forces—informedness, confidence in scientists, and personal efficacy—are related in interesting and unexpected ways, and exert significant influence on risk assessments of global warming and climate change. In particular, more informed respondents both feel less personally responsible for global warming, and also show less concern for global warming. We also find that confidence in scientists has unexpected effects: respondents with high confidence in scientists feel less responsible for global warming, and also show less concern for global warming. These results have substantial implications for the interaction between scientists and the public in general, and for the public discussion of global warming and climate change in particular.     

Perception of Climate Risk among Rural Farmers in Vietnam: Consistency within Households and with the Empirical Record

Rural farmers in Vietnamese communes perceive climate risk and potential impacts on livelihood within a complex context that may influence individual and household decisions. In a primary survey of 1,145 residents of the Thach Ha district of Ha Tinh province, we gathered data regarding perception about stability in climate, potential risks to livelihood, demographic characteristics, orientation toward risk, and interest in expanding economic activity. Temporal analysis of meteorological and economic indicator data forms an empirical basis for comparison with human perception. We ask the basic question: Are rural farmers’ perceptions of climate consistent with the historical record and reproducible within households? We find that respondents do perceive climate anomalies, with some anchoring on recent extreme events as revealed by climate observational data, and further that spouses disproportionately share perceptions relative to randomly simulated pairings. To put climate‐related risk perception in a larger context, we examine patterns across a range of risks to livelihood faced by farmers (livestock disease, pests, markets, health), using dimension reduction techniques. We find that our respondents distinguish among potential causes of low economic productivity, with substantial emphasis on climate‐related impacts. They do not express uniform concern across risks, but rather average patterns reveal common modes and distinguish climate concern. Still, among those expressing concern about climate‐related risks to livelihood we do not find an association with expressed intention to pursue changes in economic activity as a risk management response.     

Projections of Future Extreme Weather Losses Under Changes in Climate and Exposure

Many attempts are made to assess future changes in extreme weather events due to anthropogenic climate change, but few studies have estimated the potential change in economic losses from such events. Projecting losses is more complex as it requires insight into the change in the weather hazard but also into exposure and vulnerability of assets. This article discusses the issues involved as well as a framework for projecting future losses, and provides an overview of some state‐of‐the‐art projections. Estimates of changes in losses from cyclones and floods are given, and particular attention is paid to the different approaches and assumptions. All projections show increases in extreme weather losses due to climate change. Flood losses are generally projected to increase more rapidly than losses from tropical and extra‐tropical cyclones. However, for the period until the year 2040, the contribution from increasing exposure and value of capital at risk to future losses is likely to be equal or larger than the contribution from anthropogenic climate change. Given the fact that the occurrence of loss events also varies over time due to natural climate variability, the signal from anthropogenic climate change is likely to be lost among the other causes for changes in risk, at least during the period until 2040. More efforts are needed to arrive at a comprehensive approach that includes quantification of changes in hazard, exposure, and vulnerability, as well as adaptation effects.     

An Evaluation of the Treatment of Risk and Uncertainties in the IPCC Reports on Climate Change

Few global threats rival global climate change in scale and potential consequence. The principal international authority assessing climate risk is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Through repeated assessments the IPCC has devoted considerable effort and interdisciplinary competence to articulating a common characterization of climate risk and uncertainties. We have reviewed the assessment and its foundation for the Fifth Assessment Reports published in 2013 and 2014, in particular the guidance note for lead authors of the fifth IPCC assessment report on consistent treatment of uncertainties. Our analysis shows that the work carried out by the ICPP is short of providing a theoretically and conceptually convincing foundation on the treatment of risk and uncertainties. The main reasons for our assessment are: (i) the concept of risk is given a too narrow definition (a function of consequences and probability/likelihood); and (ii) the reports lack precision in delineating their concepts and methods. The goal of this article is to contribute to improving the handling of uncertainty and risk in future IPCC studies, thereby obtaining a more theoretically substantiated characterization as well as enhanced scientific quality for risk analysis in this area. Several suggestions for how to improve the risk and uncertainty treatment are provided.     

An Integrated Approach for Assessing the Impact of Large-Scale Future Floods on a Highway Transport System

The negative impact of climate change continues to escalate flood risk. Floods directly and indirectly damage highway systems and disturb the socioeconomic order. In this study, we propose an integrated approach to quantitatively assess how floods impact the functioning of a highway system. The approach has three parts: (1) a multi-agent simulation model to represent traffic, heterogeneous user demand, and route choice in a highway network; (2) a flood simulator using future runoff scenarios generated from five global climate models, three representative concentration pathways (RCPs), and the CaMa-Flood model; and (3) an impact analyzer, which superimposes the simulated floods on the highway traffic simulation system, and quantifies the flood impact on a highway system based on car following model. This approach is illustrated with a case study of the Chinese highway network. The results show that (i) for different global climate models, the associated flood damage to a highway system is not linearly correlated with the forcing levels of RCPs, or with future years; (ii) floods in different years have variable impacts on regional connectivity; and (iii) extreme flood impacts can cause huge damages in highway networks; that is, in 2030, the estimated 84.5% of routes between provinces cannot be completed when the highway system is disturbed by a future major flood. These results have critical implications for transport sector policies and can be used to guide highway design and infrastructure protection. The approach can be extended to analyze other networks with spatial vulnerability, and it is an effective quantitative tool for reducing systemic disaster risk.     

Simulating Behavioral Influences on Community Flood Risk under Future Climate Scenarios

Flood risk is a function of both climate and human behavior, including individual and societal actions. For this reason, there is a need to incorporate both human and climatic components in models of flood risk. This study simulates behavioral influences on the evolution of community flood risk under different future climate scenarios using an agent-based model (ABM). The objective is to understand better the ways, sometimes unexpected, that human behavior, stochastic floods, and community interventions interact to influence the evolution of flood risk. One historic climate scenario and three future climate scenarios are simulated using a case study location in Fargo, North Dakota. Individual agents can mitigate flood risk via household mitigation or by moving, based on decision rules that consider risk perception and coping perception. The community can mitigate or disseminate information to reduce flood risk. Results show that agent behavior and community action have a significant impact on the evolution of flood risk under different climate scenarios. In all scenarios, individual and community action generally result in a decline in damages over time. In a lower flood risk scenario, the decline is primarily due to agent mitigation, while in a high flood risk scenario, community mitigation and agent relocation are primary drivers of the decline. Adaptive behaviors offset some of the increase in flood risk associated with climate change, and under an extreme climate scenario, our model indicates that many agents relocate.     

Improving Causal Inferences in Risk Analysis

Recent headlines and scientific articles projecting significant human health benefits from changes in exposures too often depend on unvalidated subjective expert judgments and modeling assumptions, especially about the causal interpretation of statistical associations. Some of these assessments are demonstrably biased toward false positives and inflated effects estimates. More objective, data‐driven methods of causal analysis are available to risk analysts. These can help to reduce bias and increase the credibility and realism of health effects risk assessments and causal claims. For example, quasi‐experimental designs and analysis allow alternative (noncausal) explanations for associations to be tested, and refuted if appropriate. Panel data studies examine empirical relations between changes in hypothesized causes and effects. Intervention and change‐point analyses identify effects (e.g., significant changes in health effects time series) and estimate their sizes. Granger causality tests, conditional independence tests, and counterfactual causality models test whether a hypothesized cause helps to predict its presumed effects, and quantify exposure‐specific contributions to response rates in differently exposed groups, even in the presence of confounders. Causal graph models let causal mechanistic hypotheses be tested and refined using biomarker data. These methods can potentially revolutionize the study of exposure‐induced health effects, helping to overcome pervasive false‐positive biases and move the health risk assessment scientific community toward more accurate assessments of the impacts of exposures and interventions on public health.     

The Development of Risk Analysis: A Personal Perspective

This article reflects on my experiences observing and participating in the development of risk analysis for environmental and health hazards since the 1970s with emphasis on its critical role in informing decisions with potentially high consequences, even for very low probability events once ignored or simply viewed as “acts of God.” I discuss how modern society wants to protect itself from hazards with limited or no immediate historical precedent such that prediction and protective actions must depend on models that offer varying degrees of reliability. I believe that we must invest in understanding risks and risk models to ensure health in the future and protect ourselves from large challenges, including climate change, whether anthropogenic or otherwise, terrorism, and perhaps even cosmic change.     

Consortium for Atlantic Regional Assessment: Information Tools for Community Adaptation to Changes in Climate or Land Use

To inform local and regional decisions about protecting short-term and long-term quality of life, the Consortium for Atlantic Regional Assessment (CARA) provides data and tools (for the northeastern United States) that can help decision makers understand how outcomes of their decisions could be affected by potential changes in both climate and land use. On an interactive, user-friendly website, CARA has amassed data on climate (historical records and future projections for seven global climate models), land cover, and socioeconomic and environmental variables, along with tools to help decision makers tailor the data for their own decision types and locations. CARA Advisory Council stakeholders help identify what information and tools stakeholders would find most useful and how to present these; they also provide in-depth feedback for subregion case studies. General lessons include: (1) decision makers want detailed local projections for periods short enough to account for extreme events, in contrast to the broader spatial and temporal observations and projections that are available or consistent at a regional level; (2) stakeholders will not use such a website unless it is visually appealing and easy to find the information they want; (3) some stakeholders need background while others want to go immediately to data, and some want maps while others want text or tables. This article also compares what has been learned across case studies of Cape May County, New Jersey, Cape Cod, Massachusetts, and Hampton Roads, Virginia, relating specifically to sea-level rise. Lessons include: (1) groups can be affected differently by physical dangers compared with economic dangers; (2) decisions will differ according to decision makers' preferences about waiting and risk tolerance; (3) future scenarios and maps can help assess the impacts of dangers to emergency evacuation routes, homes, and infrastructure, and the natural environment; (4) residents' and decision makers' perceptions are affected by information about potential local impacts from global climate change.     

A Data‐Driven Approach to Assessing Supply Inadequacy Risks Due to Climate‐Induced Shifts in Electricity Demand

The U.S. electric power system is increasingly vulnerable to the adverse impacts of extreme climate events. Supply inadequacy risk can result from climate‐induced shifts in electricity demand and/or damaged physical assets due to hydro‐meteorological hazards and climate change. In this article, we focus on the risks associated with the unanticipated climate‐induced demand shifts and propose a data‐driven approach to identify risk factors that render the electricity sector vulnerable in the face of future climate variability and change. More specifically, we have leveraged advanced supervised learning theory to identify the key predictors of climate‐sensitive demand in the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors. Our analysis indicates that variations in mean dew point temperature is the common major risk factor across all the three sectors. We have also conducted a statistical sensitivity analysis to assess the variability in the projected demand as a function of the key climate risk factor. We then propose the use of scenario‐based heat maps as a tool to communicate the inadequacy risks to stakeholders and decisionmakers. While we use the state of Ohio as a case study, our proposed approach is equally applicable to all other states.     

A Probabilistic Analysis of Surface Water Flood Risk in London

Flooding in urban areas during heavy rainfall, often characterized by short duration and high‐intensity events, is known as “surface water flooding.” Analyzing surface water flood risk is complex as it requires understanding of biophysical and human factors, such as the localized scale and nature of heavy precipitation events, characteristics of the urban area affected (including detailed topography and drainage networks), and the spatial distribution of economic and social vulnerability. Climate change is recognized as having the potential to enhance the intensity and frequency of heavy rainfall events. This study develops a methodology to link high spatial resolution probabilistic projections of hourly precipitation with detailed surface water flood depth maps and characterization of urban vulnerability to estimate surface water flood risk. It incorporates probabilistic information on the range of uncertainties in future precipitation in a changing climate. The method is applied to a case study of Greater London and highlights that both the frequency and spatial extent of surface water flood events are set to increase under future climate change. The expected annual damage from surface water flooding is estimated to be to be £171 million, £343 million, and £390 million/year under the baseline, 2030 high, and 2050 high climate change scenarios, respectively.     

Better Negative than Positive? Evidence of a Bias for Negative Information about Possible Health Dangers

Do the results of a scientific study influence confidence in the study's validity and the magnitude of change in the resulting perceived danger of the health risk investigated? Findings from the three investigations reported here indicate that scientific results that confirm a danger (negative results) do affect confidence in a study's validity and resulting risk assessments differently than results indicating low risk (positive results). Findings of Study 1 revealed that research results indicating a health risk were more trusted than results indicating little health risk. This effect was independent of the credibility of the information source. Study 2 demonstrated that confidence in research results increased with an increasing indication of health risk. Study 3 showed that people have more confidence in the results of animal tests on a food additive indicating negative human health effects than in animal tests indicating that a food additive is harmless. The findings have important practical implications. The observed asymmetry between positive and negative research results may be one reason that people are afraid of many of the hazards they are faced with in modern society.     

The Interplay Between Knowledge,Perceived Efficacy,and Concern About Global Warming and Climate Change: A One‐Year Longitudinal Study

If the long‐term goal of limiting warming to less than 2°C is to be achieved, rapid and sustained reductions of greenhouse gas emissions are required. These reductions will demand political leadership and widespread public support for action on global warming and climate change. Public knowledge, level of concern, and perceived personal efficacy, in positively affecting these issues are key variables in understanding public support for mitigation action. Previous research has documented some contradictory associations between knowledge, personal efficacy, and concern about global warming and climate change, but these cross‐sectional findings limit inferences about temporal stability and direction of influence. This study examines the relationships between these three variables over a one‐year period and three waves with national data from New Zealand. Results showed a positive association between the variables, and the pattern of findings was stable and consistent across the three data points. More importantly, results indicate that concern mediates the influence of knowledge on personal efficacy. Knowing more about global warming and climate change increases overall concern about the risks of these issues, and this increased concern leads to greater perceived efficacy and responsibility to help solving them. Implications for risk communication are discussed.     

Equity, Efficiency, Uncertainty, and the Mitigation of Global Climate Change

Policies to mitigate potential damages from global climate change impose costs on the current generation to provide benefits to future generations. This article examines how comparisons among three stylized policies-business-as-usual, mitigation of climate change, and compensation for climate damages-depend on social preferences with respect to risk and intertemporal equity. Also examined is the opportunity-cost criterion, which asserts that mitigation should not be chosen if its net present value is smaller than that of business-as-usual. Analysis reveals that the discount factor used to evaluate whether mitigation satisfies this criterion depends on preferences regarding risk and intertemporal inequality of consumption, and on the risk of the compensation policy. Risk aversion favors mitigation over business-as-usual. If society is neutral to inequality, risk aversion disfavors compensation, but if society is inequality averse, the effect of risk aversion on preferences between compensation and business-as-usual is ambiguous. Inequality aversion tends to favor business-as-usual over both alternative policies provided that, roughly speaking, the anticipated future improvements in welfare exceed the anticipated climate damages.