Poverty

---

Regional consultation on climate change and poverty exposes gaps that need to be plugged

 

A regional consultation on climate change and poverty, conducted by Fundación Futuro Latinoamericano (FFLA), assessed priorities, capabilities and research gaps, knowledge requirements of relevant stakeholders, and the state of existing capacity in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Even though each sub-region within LAC has its own specific concerns, a number of shared knowledge gaps and research needs were identified:

1. Adaptation to climate change was given a priority focus. All adaptation efforts should be built on existing knowledge accumulated by vulnerable communities from their experience of adapting to climate variability.

2. There is a need to estimate the potential economic impact of climate change and the costs associated to adaptation options (including the choice of inaction).

3. Climate change scenarios need to be downscaled if they are to be useful to local communities. Priority was given to creating early warning systems for vulnerable communities.

4. Integrated maps of economic, social and environmental vulnerability have been repeatedly mentioned as a short-term priority. Since collaboration between countries should be the rule, common criteria should be used to allow comparison across countries and regions.

5. Sector specific research on agriculture, health, fisheries, tourism and urban areas is a paramount. Four key cross-cutting issues for all sub-regions have been identified: food security, water management, ecosystem resilience, and governance.

6. A new methodological approach to research needs to be adopted. Beneficiaries and decision-makers need to be included right from the outset. An interdisciplinary approach is considered essential. Special effort is required to strengthen the capacity of those that do not yet have a strong presence in the climate debate such as economists.

In addition, the report also describes examples of practical adaptation needs and institutional capacity requirements along with details of areas of high vulnerability to global warming and key stakeholders to engage with for future research programmes.

The findings suggest that bottlenecks in the promotion, availability and use of information in LAC pose a serious risk to investing in new research programmes and funding organizations should take note. Existing knowledge has so far not been used adequately to guide governments, the private sector and civil society and communities in their path towards adaptation.

The consultation process has resulted in a broad formulation of stakeholder concerns in the region, which now needs to be combined with some of the scientific evidence and especially with institutional responses, to chart future actions on adaptation to climate change.

FFLA believes that priority should be given to research initiatives with high replication potential, namely: a) research on sectors and cross-cutting issues of common concern to all sub-regions and b) research initiatives to downscale climate scenarios, map vulnerabilities, and assess costs of climate change impacts and adaptation. Ensuring the early engagement of communities and/or decision-makers in the research process is also crucial.

Limitations of the consultation process

Brazilian organizations actively participated in the Southern Cone and the Andean sub-regional consultations. However, the process was not able to fully assess the research needs of Brazilian stakeholders and it is suggested that this gap be filled through a dedicated country consultation.

Participants felt it would have been useful to have representatives from Ministries of industry, finance and energy. But climate change continues to be perceived as the responsibility of environmental ministries and other governmental agencies do not currently feel responsible.

The importance of local authorities was raised in all meetings and, although they were considered a relevant stakeholder, not much effort was made to prioritize their participation.

The reluctance of the private sector to take an active part in the consultations also exposes a missing link.

The energy sector was not present and all meetings underlined the importance of their voices in the debate. While the energy sector has been somewhat reluctant to believe in climate change and has even argued that the uncertainties in climate change projections are too high, this may now be changing.

Agro-industry was also highlighted as an important sector in national economies in Mesoamerica, Andean and the Southern Cone, yet its response to the climate change challenge is unarticulated and dependent on a limited number of individual actions.

The FFLA consultation is an extremely useful tool and should be disseminated widely within LAC and elsewhere to foster increased dialogue between organizations working on these topics and policy-makers who could benefit from greater collaboration and sharing best practices. The private sector, which appears to be out of step with the current momentum, should also make greater effort to get involved in the conversation.

June 5, 2009 | More on Adaptation, Civil Society, Food Security | FFLA, Poverty | Comment