Framework Document on Water andClimate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

Appendix | 27

27

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation

Framework Document on Water andClimate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

Copyright © Asia-Pacific Water Forum, 2012
All rights reserved. Published 2012.
Printed in the Philippines.
The views expressed in this Framework Document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and policiesof their respective organizations and of the Asia-Pacific Water Forum (APWF).
APWF encourages printing or copying information exclusively for personal and noncommercial use with proper acknowledgmentof APWF. Users are restricted from reselling, redistributing, or creating derivative works for commercial purposes without theexpress written consent of APWF.
For inquiries, please contact:
Mr. Charles Rodgers
crodgers@adb.org

Contents
Forewordiv
Introduction1
Principle 1 – Usable Knowledge

6

Principle 2 – No Regret Investments

10

Principle 3 – Resilience

14

Principle 4 – Mitigation and Adaptation

17

Principle 5 – Financing

22

iii

Foreword

It gives me great pleasure to contribute the foreword to this framework document on waterand climate change adaptation, specially prepared for the leaders and policy-makers in the
Asia-Pacific region.
This framework is the result of inter-disciplinary and multi sectoral work by a regional steering group, composed of climate scientists, adaptation experts, government officials, civilsociety leaders, and development experts from the Asian Development Bank, World Bankand Japan International Cooperation Agency.
Water security is now recognised as a global security challenge. It has also been recognised that water, food, energy and climate form a nexus. The impact of climate change onwater security is accepted as an important issue. Leaders in our region need access toaccurate information and sound advice on how best to respond to this challenge, throughmitigation and adaptation. This framework document seeks to fulfill this need.
In the coming years, water scarcity will become a pervasive problem in our region. Water
conflicts could occur between the neighbours of a shared river or as a result of the dischargeof untreated used water into rivers or the environment. The situation is also complicated by
the changing weather pattern, resulting in storms and floods. Another complication is therise of sea levels with all its deleterious effects.
When the steering group started its work, the technical literature on climate change adaptation, in the water sector, was relatively sparse and good case studies were hard to find.
Happily, the literature on water and climate change has grown enormously. The steeringgroup’s task is increasingly focused on evaluating and synthesizing this literature and identifying from it the good policies and best practices.

iv

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

The purpose of this framework document is to make these good policies and best practices
available to our leaders and policy-makers. It argues the case that effective adaptationand mitigation must be based upon five principles which should be applied in a concerted
manner and not with a silo approach. We have to progress simultaneously in the following
five areas: useable knowledge, no regret investments, resilience, mitigation and adaptation,and financing.
I commend the framework document to our leaders and policy makers. If we adopt thefive principles, and if we can build partnerships involving the government, the private sector and the civil society, I believe that we will succeed in enhancing the water security of
our region.

Professor Tommy Koh
Chair, Governing Council
Asia-Pacific Water Forumv

ForewordFramework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

Introduction

Recent climate-related catastrophes in Pakistan, the People’s Republic of China, Thailandand elsewhere throughout Asia and the Pacific serve to remind us that the most significant—and harmful—impacts of climate change will be experienced through alterations in thewater cycle (Figure 1). The countries of Asia and the Pacific already struggle with a plethoraof water-related challenges, including flood, drought, seasonal shortages, increasing competition for limited supplies, water pollution, and over-exploitation of groundwater. Climatechange adds another formidable challenge, and although the impacts are currently far fromcertain, they are unlikely to be favorable. Although leaders, decision-makers and water
professionals in the Asia-Pacific region are increasingly aware of the risks posed by climatechange, appropriate responses are not often easily identified.
The countries in the Asia-Pacific region encompass a wide diversity of climatic, environmental and socio-economic conditions, each subject to unique impacts and risks as climatechanges. Arid mid-continental regions are likely to experience increases in the frequency
and severity of floods and droughts; and a decrease in rain-fed agricultural yields. Densely
settled river basins, deltas, and other low-lying areas are at increased risk of flooding, anddeveloping Asia already contains nine of the 10 countries with highest estimated flood
mortality risk.1
Coastal areas are vulnerable to intensified typhoons, storm surges and sea level rise. Over450 million Asians live within the low-elevation coastal zone, including almost 20% of
the region’s urban residents.2 Coastal aquifers are also at risk of salinization due to sea
12

United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR), 2009 Global Assessment Report on
Disaster Risk Reduction.
McGranahan, Balk and Anderson, 2007. The Rising Tide: Assessing the Risks of Climate Change and Human
Settlements in Low Elevation Coastal Zones. Environment and Urbanization 19: 17 – 37. Low elevation coastal
zones are defined as contiguous areas along a coastline with elevation less than 10 meters above sea level.
Population figures refer to 2000.

1

Introduction

Figure 1. Recent climate-related catastrophes including the severe floods
in India, 2005 (upper left) and in Pakistan, 2010 (upper right) and the severe
droughts in Australia, 2006-2007 (lower left) and in Mekong, 2010.

IPCC projections of the increase of floods (upper center) and droughts (lower center) suggests possibility ofrepetition of such events (even more intense) in future due to climate change.

level rise. Over one billion Asians inhabit river basins dependent on glacial and snowpackstorage, and the Himalayas and other regional “water towers” face increasing risks fromglacial outburst floods in the near term; and reduced dry season flows and increasingwater stress in the longer term. Small islands are vulnerable to decreasing water security
as groundwater lenses are diminished by erratic precipitation and sea level rise; and totyphoons, storm surges, and other extreme weather events.
Socio-economic diversity within the region is equally high, with the world’s fastest growing
economies existing alongside its greatest concentrations of poverty. While Asians’ percapita incomes have roughly doubled over the last decade,3 growth has in many instances
3

Source: Asian Development Bank, Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2010, Table 2.2. Within developing
member countries, regional average per capita GDP in current purchasing power parity (PPP) terms was$2490 in 2000, increasing to $5489 in 2009.

2

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

been neither equitable nor sustainable. Diversity in economic development status isreflected in the extreme inequality in water security, as exemplified by access to improved
water supply and sanitation – a key target under the Millennium Development Goals (MDG).
While citizens of Singapore, Japan and other developed Asian economies universallyenjoy high levels of water supply and sanitation, in many other nations only a minority do.
Of 2.6 billion people globally lacking access to improved sanitation, 72% are Asians.4
Those who lack water security (including security from water-related disasters) areoverwhelmingly likely to be poor, to live in geographically isolated, disaster-prone or ecologically degraded locations, and to lack the benefits of effective local government andinfrastructure. It is these communities who will experience the most severe impacts ofclimate change, and who have the greatest susceptibility to harm. And, although access towater and sanitation are increasingly recognized as basic human rights, efforts to translatethese rights into tangible improvements in water services and security for the poor will beencumbered by climate-related risks, and will often require reforms in policies and practices. Asian economies are also struggling to maintain security in food and energy, bothof which are inextricably linked to water. Climate change thus poses a “triple threat” toregional development and security through the water-food-energy nexus.
This document is intended to provide a framework for managing the water-related risks
associated with climate change to leaders and policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific region.
Building on existing documents addressing the global challenges of climate change anddevelopment, including the Nairobi Guiding Principles, we propose a framework within
which priorities for action within Asia and the Pacific can be identified and implemented ina manner that acknowledges the region’s uniqueness and diversity. Action is vital, as there
is a high cost to inaction in the face of climate change.
As we adapt, we must maintain a holistic view of the continuity between climate change
adaptation, environmentally sustainable development and enhanced resilience as development themes that enhance our progress toward the Millennium Development Goals. And indoing so, it is critical to enable end-to-end cooperation among policy-makers, scientists,
engineers, economists, water managers, decision-makers, local communities and otherstakeholders. Indeed, climate change is a profound challenge, but it also presents us with
an opportunity to re-think our strategies and to re-commit our societies to achieving well-

4

WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation, 2010. Progress on Sanitation
and Drinking-Water: 2010 Update.

3

Introduction

being for all in the Asia-Pacific region, making use of accumulated knowledge, developed
capacity of the society as a whole and well-wrought and comprehensive approaches.
The guidance presented here takes the form of a set of general principles that collectively
address the challenges of adaptation. They are based on the shared experience of the
Asia-Pacific Water Forum (APWF) Steering Group on Water and Climate Change.
The Steering Group was established by the Governing Council of the APWF in 2009 andtasked with three key result areas: (i) advising leaders on policies and practices; (ii) guiding
knowledge networking in the region; and (iii) reporting progress annually to the leaders in
the Asia-Pacific region with recommendations for action. The Steering Group comprises
scientists, experts from international organizations, governments, civil society, and development funding agencies including World Bank, Asian Development Bank and the Japan
International Cooperation Agency.
The principles and recommended actions in this framework document are targeted togovernment leaders, policy-makers and practitioners in the Asia-Pacific region. Follow-up
actions by leaders in the region will be monitored and reported to the 2nd Asia-PacificWater Summit, the Asia-Pacific Water Ministers Forum, dialogues under the Ministers for
Water Security Initiative, and other regional conferences where leaders of government, civilsociety and the private sector meet. The principles should be taken together as they arecomplementary and are intended as integral parts of a holistic framework for action. Using
this framework, the risks of a changing climate can be managed in a manner that reflects
the unique climatic, environmental and socio-economic circumstances of each country in
the region. Equally, the framework can be used to address the existing problems of climatic
variability – including floods and droughts – through investments now.

Laying the foundations for action
To lay the foundation for effective adaptation and mitigation efforts in the water sector, theSteering Group advises leaders in the Asia-Pacific region to support and adopt the following general principles and recommended actions in an integrated manner. Five Principles
are articulated. Background information framing each Principle is presented, and two annotated actions are recommended.

4

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

Figure 2. Working with the 5 principles in end-to-end partnerships is necessary.

Collaboration for Results

UsableKnowledge

Financing
Leaders
andPolicy Makers

Scientists

Mitigation and
Adaptation

working in"end-to-end"
partnerships

Community
andCivil Society

WaterManagers

No Regret
Investments

Resilience

5

IntroductionPrinciple 1 - Usable Knowledge“We must support scientists and practitioners to work together and develop
knowledge that leads to effective actions and increased public awareness.”

Our shared understanding
The 4th Assessment Report (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC,
2007) has presented evidence for many climatic trends at global scale that will affect water
security adversely, including (i) increases in high-intensity precipitation events; (ii) increases
in drought-affected areas; (iii) increase in the intensity of tropical cyclones; and (iv) sea
level rise.
The Asia-Pacific region is inherently vulnerable to climate-related hazards, including floods,
landslides, mud flows, droughts, water scarcity and deteriorating water quality. Sea level
rise is a particularly important issue in the Asia-Pacific region with its large deltas andcoastal cities identified as “hotspots” in the AR4. Climate change is now a fundamental
threat in this region.

What remains to be addressed?
There is still a “disconnect” between the knowledge generated by the scientific community
and the specific needs of practitioners such as water managers in river basins and cities.
There is a need to bridge this gap, to re-examine the basic planning methodology, and to
reduce the gestation period from scientific finding to practical implementation. There isa specific need to customize projections of climate change to local conditions, particularly in developing countries. A more effective dialogue is required between scientists andcommunities of practitioners, both to improve the dissemination and communication of
6

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

scientific information as well as to learn from the experiences, knowledge and the needs ofuser communities.
Although there is strong evidence that climate change is occurring, there is still a gap
between the generation of global projections and their effective use in adaptation strategies. The AR4 has clearly documented qualitative changes in extreme hydroclimatic eventsat global scale, but not quantitative changes at regional and river-basin scales. Due to thelarge uncertainty which is inherent in model projections of future climate and regional andlocal hydrology, model-based projection results cannot be used directly for infrastructure
design adaptation.

What are the next steps?
Climate change knowledge must be formulated as a “public good,” to be shared throughout
the world. Under this consensus, we should establish a two-way flow of data, informationand knowledge between scientific and socio-economic communities, and across different
administrative levels, including village, district, state, national, and supra-national levels.
We should accelerate cooperative efforts by scientists and practitioners to improve theuse of climate projections, and to quantify and reduce the uncertainty for sound decisionmaking, balanced planning and implementation.
We can apply the 5 principles simultaneously in the community, country, regional, andglobal arenas for action (Figure 3).

Action 1.1	Develop data infrastructure and networking for sharing data,
information and knowledge to support decision-making and toraise public awareness••

Develop hard- and soft data infrastructure supporting inter-operability, data standards
and methods of quality control and validation, and protocols for institutional collaboration.
Increase the availability of historical observation data, to support the calibration andvalidation of model-generated climate projections, and to support local/regional
impact assessments.

7

Principle 1 – Usable Knowledge

•
•

•
•

Develop and share knowledge bases of local-level data, information and best practices
for directed action.
Encourage scientists to “translate” their findings into a language understandable bydecision-makers, planners and other non-scientists; and encourage decision-makers andother non-specialists to increase their scientific literacy with respect to climate change.
Promote the networking of educational institutes, especially the higher education
sector, to share research and data related to climate change and its impacts.
Facilitate regional demonstration activities in existing international frameworks, suchas the Global Framework for Climate Services (GFCS) developed by the World Climate
Conference-3, 2009 and the Asian Water Cycle Initiative (AWCI) by the Group on Earth
Observations (GEO), 2005.

Action 1.2 	Accelerate scientific efforts to improve the use of climate
projections for countries, river basins and cities as well as toquantify and reduce the related uncertainty
Improving projections
•

•
•
•

Invest on improving use of climate projection capabilities, including impact model
developments such as improved flood simulation models, GCM/RCM parameterizations and downscaling.
Improve the resolution of GCMs, the representation of cloud microphysics and topography, and then the simulation capability of high-intensity precipitation events.
Improve the coupling of atmospheric and land surface processes including theirheterogeneity and bio-geochemical cycles.
Improve hydrological models to address the large diversity of the natural andsocio-economical conditions in the Asia-Pacific region.

Quantifying uncertainty•••

Improve the collection, archiving and analysis of historical instrument records withparticular emphasis on identifying and extending relatively complete, long-term hydrologic datasets for improving the performance of models at basin scale.
Develop and improve the metrics used to evaluate the skill of GCMs (RCMs).
Increase the use of analysis based on multi-model and multi-projection ensembles.

8

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

•Reduce uncertainty in the statistical inference of risks of hydrologic extremes – a specificchallenge here is to develop robust alternatives to currently used frequency analysis
methods based on the stationarity assumption.

Figure 3. Applying the 5 principles simultaneously in multiple arenas for action
will lead to success.

Arenas for Action

GlobalAsia-PacificCountryCommunity
No Regret
Investments
UsableKnowledge
Financing

Resilience
Mitigation
and Adaptation9

Principle 1 – Usable Knowledge

Principle 2 – No Regret Investments“We must identify and implement approaches that improve water security
over a wide range of potential conditions, including current climate variability.”

Start action today
We must build a society that can respond to continual, but uncertain changes.
The sustainable development of water resources is unfinished business with respect toadapting to a changing climate, and to utilizing developing technologies for climate projection and adaptation.
An “adaptation deficit” already exists under contemporary climate conditions. In particular,
extreme events – floods, droughts, and tropical storms – are not new, and many countries
currently struggle to address such events, and to manage the resultant disasters. If we can
improve our capacity to cope with these present problems, we shall be better equipped todeal with possible future increases in their severity and frequency.
Considering uncertainty, we should start now with “no-regrets”, and “low-regrets” investments, which yield benefits at minimal or low cost even in the absence of climate change.
We should take integrated approaches consisting of structural and non-structural measures. Flood management should encompass floodplain management, land use regulation,
spatial planning, early warning, community-based activities, and risk financing, in addition
to conventional structural measures. It is unrealistic to address increasing flood hazards
under a changing climate by continually raising levee heights to confine floods inside river
channels - people must learn to live with floods. Drought management should encompass
monitoring networks, contingency planning, and community education in addition to relief
activities. Policy responses to drought should focus on water-, food- and energy security.

10

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

The impacts and implications of climate change on the water cycle, water use, and waterrelated disasters will be complex, multidimensional and uncertain. It is necessary to assess
comprehensively the likely changes in hazards and risks, covering political, socioeconomic as well as natural scientific aspects, for which there is high uncertainty. Outputs
from global general circulation models (GCM) have the potential to provide a basis foradaptation planning, particularly when suitably downscaled and coupled with models ofcatchment hydrology.
Disaster risks reflect the magnitude and frequency of the hazard, the exposure and vulnerability of the population, and their adaptive capacity. The vulnerability of a society increases
due to phenomena such as unplanned urbanization, which concentrates the populationin cities and drives the poor to settle in riverbeds and on steep or unstable slopes. We
should emphasize reducing the vulnerabilities of society and increasing their coping (adaptive) capacity, while mitigating existing hazards, such as through construction of levees toreduce flood inundation.

What remains to be addressed?
Risk management, involving communities and various organizations, should be adopted
as the main adaptation policy. How to assess risk under uncertain future conditions iscurrently an unresolved issue, and practical methods should be developed based on
projections of extreme events.
While infrastructure is a vital element of adaptation measures, infrastructure planning
methods must be fundamentally revised. As design of structural measures relies heavily on
analysis of historical conditions (e.g., flood frequency analysis), climate change and uncertainty can undermine the performance of physical infrastructure, and high capital investment requirements create the risk of misallocation of capital if or when actual conditions fail
to coincide with projections.
Committing to no-regret investments now, in synergy with the other 4 principles, will
ensure that socio-economic benefits will keep accruing over time as adaptation takes hold(Figure 4).

11

Principle 2 – No Regret Investments

What are the next steps?
We must start identifying, planning, and implementing adaptation actions on the ground;and improve adaptation planning methods. To implement the appropriate mix of structuraland non-structural measures, multi-sectoral approaches are required.

Action 2.1	Plan for incremental adaptation actions in tandem withimproving climate projections
Planning adaptation actions
•
•
•

•

•
•

Mainstream adaptation in the national development planning cycle.
Manage disaster risks with focus on society’s vulnerabilities.
Conduct comprehensive, credible assessment of basin-wide potential under current
conditions for water resources development through watershed development, groundwater recharge, and local water systems.
Incrementally develop and frequently adjust adaptation actions through use of enhanced
instrumental records, updated projections, emerging technologies, and monitoring andevaluating of these actions.
Limit, to the extent possible, the scope of critical decisions to a lead time of 20–30 years,
over which uncertainty is both relatively low and, to an extent, quantifiable.
Study and document the circumstances and existing coping strategies of communities
and societies from which lessons can be learned and utilized for adaptation actions.

Improving planning methods of adaptation••

Establish risk assessment methods based on outputs of high-resolution GCMs andmulti-model ensembles; and improve downscaling methods.
Develop planning methods to identify robust infrastructure designs, which may bejustified even if they are not “no-regret.”

12

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

Action 2.2	Use an appropriate mix of structural and non-structural measures
•
•
•

•

•

Expand beyond engineering-oriented approaches to those that integrate structural andnon-structural measures in various sectors.
Strengthen governing mechanisms involving a wide range of stakeholders at river
basin level.
Link flood risk management to the livelihoods of riparian communities - “living withfloods”, and urban storm water management, including rainwater harvesting, use of
wetlands, use of modular structures to treat waste water.
Focus on urban water planning and management through measures including
harnessing local sources and treatment and reuse of wastewater, as they reduce thedependence on external sources.
Improve mechanisms for groundwater management in the context of integrated water
resources management (IWRM), including sustaining existing recharge systems,
creating new ones, and promoting legally enforced community groundwater regulation.

Figure 4. No-regret investments now will ensure socio-economic benefits later on.

Investments for Benefits
Socio-Economic Benefits
No-Regret Investments
Mitigation and Adaptation
Risks

Usable Knowledge
Uncertainty

Resilience
Vulnerability

Take Action Now!

Time

13

Principle 2 – No Regret Investments

Principle 3 - Resilience“We must build societies’ capacity to develop communities’ resilience in theface of a changing climate.”

Our shared understanding
The Asia-Pacific region is home to almost 60% of the worlds’ population; and over 750 millionof the global poor and vulnerable.55 While climate change is a global phenomenon with
regional political, economic and physical impacts and implications, resilience – likevulnerability – is local, and needs to be built locally, taking into consideration the regional
geographical and economic diversities. However, it is often institutions at the national levelthat control resources and have the primary responsibility for allocating and prioritizingthem. There is a need for improved governance systems and increased capacity coupledwith the necessary policy reforms that allow local stakeholders to take steps to increase
their resilience and sustainably manage their resources. It is also important to balance
decision-making systems which engender an infrastructure building approach with natural,
human systems which include environmental, societal, political and economic aspects inthe solution.

What remains to be addressed?
While scientists continue their research, develop more accurate climate projections, andincrease their understanding of the extent and consequences of climate challenges, rigorous policies, embodying sound strategies and pragmatic actions need to be devised to5

Asian Development Bank (2012): Basic Statistics 2012; and World Bank (2012) World Development Indicators.

14

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

strengthen the resilience of these most vulnerable people. Resources must be made available to implement such activities at the local level, to support mutually agreed-upon policies.
These policies, accompanying strategies and action plans need to be well articulated andshared with all stakeholders. What are they? Are there examples of effective measuresthat have already been implemented and can be shared across the region, reducing thetime required to devise and pilot new action plans at local levels? How can newly available
knowledge be made accessible rapidly?
In order to enhance resilience there is also a need to re-examine existing processes suchas river basin management; to see how they can be more effectively implemented over along planning horizon and in feasible increments such as re-packaging the long planninghorizons into shorter periods, in smaller watersheds and with local communities.

What are the next steps?
Societal decision-making under conventional circumstances involves the allocation of
scarce resources, guided by available technology and criteria of economic efficiency.
Achieving societal consensus presents a challenge, since the decisions are likely to involve
tradeoffs; e.g., reduced personal consumption in order to preserve ecological functions.
These decisions will be complicated by the uncertainty of climate change. There is a needto build a robust local governance system and local capacities that can enable effective
decision-making in a participatory manner. Building local resilience will require knowledgeof downscaled climate change projections of the impact within the specific watershed andon the different sectors, as well as other relevant local information.

Action 3.1 	Strengthen the adaptation capacities of water managers,
communities, and of society as a whole••

Identify the gaps in the current governance structure and the adaptive capacity ofcommunities, and develop systems for filling these gaps.
Focus on capacity development programs and strengthening, including the localizing of climate projections and impact assessment. A local governance structurethat will support the transfer of information to communities must be in place. These
capacity development programs will require financing that can be sourced through orfrom national levels.

15

Principle 3 – Resilience••

Identify, utilize and adapt local methods, solutions and material, suited to local conditions. Some of these may already be available and in use while others may need to be
identified.
Build networks between local communities and experts to facilitate efficient sharing of
information and best practices

Action 3.2
•

•
•

•

•

Improve community-based water risk management capacities

Take up holistic and integrated land and water management planning as a comprehensive risk management strategy. The plan should be developed and implemented witha participatory approach involving all stakeholders. This includes adaptation planningand implementation encompassing communities at village/watershed level, through the
sub-basin to river basin management organizations, to the national level.
Study and understand institutional structures, their capacities and the skills needed forcommunity-based risk management.
Strengthen the capacity of academia, governmental institutions, communities andother stakeholders to collectively support community climate risk management efforts
as communities typically face limitations in many areas, including budget, technology,
and human resources.
Share knowledge, experience and success stories on adaptation measures in waterrisk management emerging from community-based projects. A scaling up and disseminating of these practices should be established. Such best practices should include
those that address sea level rise, flood mitigation, cropping calendars and agricultural
practices, and related. Since these practices must ultimately be implemented at the
local level, guidelines for tailoring them to particular local circumstances must be developed. A useful approach may be to produce simple booklets, instructional materials
and directives, translated into local languages.
Develop risk management approaches based on agricultural diversification. Many
vulnerable local communities are involved in agricultural activities. Agricultural production is particularly sensitive to changes in hydro-climatic conditions, including
temperature, water balance, and the occurrence of extreme events. Risk management
approaches based on agricultural diversification can help build resilience to changes inthese conditions, for example through development of drought and/or salinity resistantcrops, altered cropping patterns and rotations, and so on.

16

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

Principle 4 – Mitigation and Adaptation“We must adopt optimal combinations of measures.”

Mitigation and adaptation must go hand-in-handGiven the uncertainties of climate change, a diverse set of measures, encompassing both
mitigation and adaptation, is needed to deal effectively with it. As the set of climatic, hydrologic, social, cultural, economic and political circumstances varies across regions, thesemeasures will also need to be customized to the local conditions.
Water resources management provides opportunities for investments that deliver both mitigation and adaptation benefits. For example, multi-purpose water infrastructure can deliverclean hydropower (mitigation) as well as irrigation services and flood and drought protection (adaptation). Similarly, investments in watershed management can enhance carbon
sequestration (mitigation), reduce floods and help manage soil moisture and groundwater
recharge (adaptation.) Such measures can also be designed as pro-poor development, tocreate alternative livelihood opportunities (direct employment, timber and non-timber forest products, fisheries) and to build social capital (user groups and community consultation
and representation committees), making them sound investments across a range of criteria.

Adaptation must be addressed in a broad development context
Adaptation, in particular, must be addressed in a broad development context, recognizing climate change as an added challenge to reducing poverty, hunger, disease and environmental degradation. Hence, adaptation should not be seen as something “new andseparate”; it must be considered an integral part of sustainable development. Synergies
between climate change adaptation and the achievement of the Millennium Development

17

Goals must be identified, and adaptation measures must be effectively integrated into thenational economy and development and sector plans.

IWRM is a suitable approach to adaptation
Adaptation efforts must take account of the changes to the hydrologic cycle in river andlake basins (and their groundwater aquifers) in a holistic manner. IWRM is therefore a suitable approach to adaptation. IWRM is the adaptive management process by which economic, social and environmental benefits of water resources among a range of water uses
and users are increased and balanced in river basins. Adaptation in cities will therefore takeplace in the broader context of the IWRM process in the basin in which the city is located.
Climate change and increased climate variability impact primarily through water and biological processes with implications for land use, including the coastal zone. Recognizing thefundamental importance of land and water linkages for livelihoods, food security, shelter,ecosystem services and economic growth, efficient and coordinated management of land
and water resources is essential for building resilience to the impacts of climate change.
The importance of the IWRM approach to adaptation was recognized by the IPCC in the
Third Assessment, where it is stated that ”it can be expected that the paradigm of IWRM
will be increasingly followed around the world... which will move water, as a resource and ahabitat, into the centre of policy making. This is likely to decrease the vulnerability of freshwater systems to climate change.”
Managing water in an increasingly uncertain world, due to climate and other drivers ofchange, calls for risk management approaches. IWRM concepts, approaches and guidelines need to be further developed to address risks at all levels, from the community throughthe basin and national to the regional levels.
Climate change impacts all sectors of society, mainly through the land and water system, and calls for both horizontal and vertical integration of management approaches.
The use of water by different sectors (agriculture, energy, domestic, industry etc.), and theway in which these uses affect each other, require cross-sectoral IWRM approaches, notleast to address adaptation (horizontal integration). Similarly, in the river basin context,
IWRM bridges from the community/watershed level through the basin, across boundaries
within and between countries (vertical integration). Although “land and water integration”

18

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

is inherent in the IWRM concept, the importance of this linkage needs to be stressed in
adaptation planning.

Action 4.1 	Promote IWRM in river basins as the appropriate process
for planning and investments
•

•
•

•

•

•

•

Recognize the river basin as the logical framework within which hydrologic and environmental processes are quantified, and hence as the fundamental geographical setting for
IWRM and adaptation planning. River basins may be defined at many levels, from local
watersheds to transboundary basins extending over several countries or states (e.g.
Mekong, Indus). IWRM should extend to the entire river basin, as one integrated unit, inorder to achieve optimal operation policies.
Ensure cross-sectoral dialogue on adaptation planning at both national and river basin
levels, including government and relevant stakeholder groups
Promote adaptation dialogue and consensus building by coordinating across different
geographical zones, including upstream and downstream zones, inundation and nonflooding areas, areas of groundwater recharge and use, and urbanized and agriculturalareas; and across different priorities including flood control, water utilization, and environmental conservation. This requires an understanding of the respective adaptationneeds of each zone.
Strengthen institutions for land and water management for effective adaptation andmitigation actions, building on the principles of participation of civil society, genderequality, subsidiarity and decentralisation.
Develop different approaches for effective adaptation for land and water within acomprehensive, integrated framework, where bottom-up meets top-down—fromcommunity based adaptation in the villages to the basin, national and regional/transboundary levels.
Develop a comprehensive information base for effective IWRM, including information
on important hydrologic, hydraulic and environmental processes (e.g. river discharge,snow- and ice-melt rates, groundwater levels, infiltration, evapotranspiration, sediment-, nutrient- and heavy metal loads etc.). Improved hydro-climate system modelingcapabilities are required in order to provide this information, and to link river basin planning and management processes to climate projections.
Ensure that IWRM policies and plans reflect both historical records and future (projected) hydro-climatic conditions.

19

Principle 4 – Mitigation and Adaptation

Examples of Climate Change Adaptation Actions as part of the IWRM
Process In River Basins
•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•

Develop flood and eco-sensitive zoning plans
Strengthen water (use) rights systems for water scarce and drought prone areas
Develop accurate and transparent water accounting and monitoring systems
Increase focus on water demand management, including the “3R” approach: Reuse,
Recycling and Recharge
Increase storage capacity, including surface (constructing new dam storage, upgrading
existing facilities), groundwater recharge (rainwater harvesting), while maintaining and utilizing the natural storage capacity of ecosystems to the maximum possible extent
Increase use of new and emerging technologies in water scarce and drought prone areas,e.g. membrane filtration
Focus on watershed management as a resilience building approach to adaptation
Introduce economic instruments such as Payment for Environmental Services (PES)
in order to maintain healthy ecosystems that contribute to climate change resilience

Action 4.2 	Promote synergies in the planning and implementation ofadaptation and mitigation measures
•

•

•

•

Pursue low-energy water development and low-water-consumption energy development (measured e.g. through energy footprints for water, and water footprints forenergy). Energy production (primarily cooling of thermoelectric generation) accounts forthe majority of water abstractions in the US and Europe (35–50% of all abstractions),
thus making energy production very vulnerable to increased variability and to changes
in the hydrological regime, including changes in water temperature.
Examine the water-energy synergy in the context of multi-purpose water infrastructure,
which provides e.g., hydropower generation, flood control, irrigation and/or domestic
water supply.
Promote land and water management activities which at the same time contribute toadaptation through watershed management, and to mitigation (CO2 removal) throughcarbon sequestration (“re-carbonizing the landscape” as the World Bank expresses it).
Co-ordinate mitigation and adaptation efforts by sharing knowledge between the humanand natural systems, including water, energy, health, agriculture, and ecosystems, andby promoting inter-operability of knowledge and management systems for success-

20

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region•

ful joint implementation. This will require coordination between different agencies andinstitutions, and a convergence of mitigation and adaptation programs and activities.
Document and disseminate effective (“best”) mitigation and adaptation practices
already developed and utilized within the region. Many of these examples will be locallygenerated, and many of these will be cost-effective as community-level practitioners
are skilled in using locally available resources and innovations.

21

Principle 4 – Mitigation and Adaptation

Principle 5 – Financing“We must increase dedicated climate financing substantially.”

The costs of inaction“There are risks and costs to a program of action. But they are far less than the long-range
risks and costs of comfortable inaction.” -John F. Kennedy
The likely costs of adaptation to climate change are high: the World Bank (2009) recently
estimated the costs of climate change adaptation in developing countries at between$75 Billion and $100 Billion per year by 2050, assuming a world that is 2oC warmer. Estimatesfrom other recent studies by the UNFCCC, UNDP and others are broadly consistent. ADB
has estimated the adaptation costs in developing Asia and the Pacific at $28 Billion per
year. These are large numbers, but the costs of inaction are higher still. ADB (2009) calculated that without effective adaptation, climate change could result in reductions of close
to 7% in GDP in Southeast Asia, and the Stern Report (2006) has produced comparable
estimates (5%) of global GDP impacts.
Resources currently available for adaptation fall far short of these needs. Although postCoP15 pledges to the Green Climate Fund over the 2010-2012 period approach $ 30 billion,
these funds must target both mitigation and adaptation globally, and not all funds pledged
have yet been deposited. Further, estimates of adaptation requirements often fail to accountfor the “adaptation deficit”: the additional resources required to achieve an acceptable levelof water security under current climate variability.

22

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

Challenges in assessing and financing climatechange adaptation
Estimates of adaptation funding needs cover an order of magnitude, and must be viewed
as uncertain at best. In addition, the politics of adaptation finance are often contentious:
developing countries argue that since they have contributed little to the emissions responsible for anthropogenic warming, they should not have to bear the costs of adaptation.
They expect developed countries to provide grant financing as a matter of climate justice.
On the donor side, it is not always clear if contributions to climate investment funds represent “new” resources, or if they are simply a re-labelling of previously committed development assistance. There are also relatively few good estimates of the specific needs and/or
impacts by sector and by region.
There is also a mismatch in scales between the global and regional estimates cited above,and the more detailed, targeted estimates that will be required to guide national and local
adaptation investment planning and policy-making. Our capacity to provide economic
assessment of specific adaptation options is also currently constrained by deep uncertainty around the future conditions under which investments will be expected to perform.
Uncertainty is not limited to climate and water systems, but extends, for example, to availability and prices of other key resources (including energy); and range of technology choices.
Currently, climate adaptation finance embodies a “top-down”, perspective emphasizing
internationally negotiated agreements, protocols and funding vehicles. By contrast, “adaptation is local,” and effective strategies for adaptation finance cannot be formulated without
the explicit input and participation of the communities most likely to be affected adversely
by climate change. The right balance must be struck between centralised and decentralised solutions.

What are the next steps?
Two broad priorities stand out: first, the need to improve our understanding of the likely
costs of climate change impacts in the water sector and in closely linked sectors including
agriculture, energy and health; and the costs and benefits of specific adaptation options at
a level of detail that supports effective planning and implementation. Without this informa-

23

Principle 5 – Financing

tion, we risk a serious misallocation of adaptation resources. Second, we must mobilize tosecure the necessary funding, and we must ensure that it is utilized efficiently, transparently
and democratically.

Action 5.1	Conduct economic impact assessments for various
adaptation options
•

•

•

•

•

6

Improve assessment methods to reflect the fundamental uncertainty in climate andhydrologic projections, and to allow the evaluation/identification of robust solutions thatare effective across a range of scenarios, as distinct from “optimal” solutions developed
under a specific set of assumptions.
Develop economic impact assessments of proposed climate disaster risk-reducing
measures, reflecting the often enormous costs of disaster relief financing and the longterm negative impacts on economic growth of such disasters where resilience is low.6
In developing, presenting and utilizing economic impact assessments, emphasizestudies that examine current, quantifiable risks (e.g., flood and drought), where you
can demonstrate benefits from investments. If economic impact assessment focuses
exclusively on future, hypothetical risks associated with climate change, the cascadeof uncertainty (in both climatic and non-climatic factors including prices and technology) can call into question the soundness of conclusions, and lessons drawn. Identify,
document and share good contemporary studies that provide guidance with respect tofuture conditions.
Apply economic assessments comprehensively in the context of IWRM processes inriver basins and cities, encompassing the life cycles of infrastructure, emphasizing
adaptation for water security in the long term, and recognizing the public goods generated by many water sector investments.
Use the concept of a “triple bottom line” to optimize economic performance, social
equity and environmental sustainability in a balanced manner and thereby increasewater security through the process of IWRM.

The IPCC AR4 projects more frequent heavy precipitation events, an increase in the area affected by drought,
and more intense tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) associated with global warming. Post-disaster
relief expenditures are often large relative to investments in climate disaster risk reduction.

24

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

Action 5.2	Mobilize significant investments today (e.g., 1% of GDP) toprevent greater damages later (e.g., 5%) as advised by the
Stern report
•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Establish national and sub-national “road maps” to guide financing priorities and strategies, prioritizing the interests of the most vulnerable, and recognizing and supporting
climate change adaptation as an important dimension of the IWRM process.
International/multi-lateral funding must be focused on the creation of public goods. For
example, develop funding arrangements that enable adaptation on a basin-wide scale,across boundaries within and between countries.
Ensure that new (e.g., Green Climate Fund) funding streams for adaptation arechanneled through existing institutions that have proven to be effective; and directedsufficiently toward the water sector. As countries increasingly seek direct access tomultilateral climate funds through National Implementing Entities (NIE), care should
be taken to ensure that funding for water sector adaptation activities is channeled toeffective agencies at central, river basin and local levels.
Maintain flexibility by avoiding financing arrangements for special purposes and narrowinterests; and align adaptation financing with disaster risk reduction and overall development objectives.
Demonstrate the commonality of purpose between building climate resilience and overall development activities, so that the (much larger) funding streams currently available
in national development budgets can be made available for climate change adaptation.
Inform, support and assist decision-makers and other parties in developing countries in
preparing applications for grants, loans and technical assistance to gain access to theincreasing funding opportunities anticipated post COP15.
Provide financial and technical support for R&D of promising (but unproven) mitigation
and adaptation technologies early in the development cycle (note: we currently tend tofinance proven technologies) –and be prepared to take some risks in their application.
Promote investment in existing infrastructure (including knowledge infrastructure) thatgenerates benefits today as well as potential additional benefits under climate change.
For example, encourage international funding for collaborative climate research.
Identify opportunities for Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) to leverage private investments and innovations, particularly when it makes advanced technologies or practices
available in developing economies and offers opportunities for leapfrogging. When utilizing PPPs to address climate adaptation, ensure that there is transparency, public
oversight and participation in the allocation and administration of funds.

25

Principle 5 – Financing

•••Partner with the private sector locally to facilitate the financing of adaptation-oriented
infrastructure and services, particularly where local firms have limited access to capital.
Provide start-up financing and technical assistance to introduce and to increase thecoverage of disaster insurance pools (household, agricultural, other).
Finance long-term capacity building for adaptation as part of IWRM processes in river
basins and cities, including education and water governance institutions.

“To address this issue, we commit to support urgent actions to mainstream
adaptation into broader development strategies and encourage developing
countries themselves to integrate adaptation into their development policies. The early start of activities under the UNFCCC Adaptation Fund shouldmake an important contribution in this respect. We call on the multilateraldevelopment banks and other development agencies to support countries
in this endeavor.” - Leaders Declaration, 2008 G8 Hokkaido-Tokyo Summit

26

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation
For Leaders and Policy-makers in the Asia-Pacific Region

Appendix | 27

Steering Group on Water and Climate Change
The Steering Group on Water and Climate Change was established by the Governing
Council of the Asia-Pacific Water Forum in June 2009 and tasked with three key result
areas: (i) advising leaders on policies and practices; (ii) guiding knowledge networking in
the region; and (iii) reporting progress annually to the leaders in the Asia-Pacific region
with recommendations for action. The Steering Group comprises scientists, experts
from international organizations, governments, civil society, and development funding
agencies including World Bank, Asian Development Bank and the Japan International
Cooperation Agency.
Contacts:

Toshio Koike (Chair) 		

tkoike@hydra.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp

		Wouter Lincklaen Arriens (Co-chair)
Salmah Zakaria (Co-chair)wlincklaenarriens@adb.org
drsalmahz@gmail.com

Members:
Scientists		

Toshio Koike, University of Tokyo
M. Levent Kavvas, University of California
Deg-Hyo Bae, Sejong University
Jiang Tong, National Climate Center, People’s Republicof China
Harry Hendon, Centre for Australian Weather andClimate Research

Adaptation Experts		

Srikantha Herath, United Nations University
Torkil Jønch-Clausen, DHI Group
Salmah Zakaria, UN-ESCAP

Regional Advisers 		Sunita Nadhamuni, Arghyam Foundation (through 2011)
Tan Gee Paw, PUB Singapore
Karma Chhopel, National Environment Commission,
BhutanDevelopment Experts 		

Claudia Sadoff, World Bank
Mikio Ishiwatari, JICA (through 2011)
Kimio Takeya, JICA (from 2012)
Wouter Lincklaen Arriens, Asian Development Bank

Technical Adviser		Charles Rodgers, Asian Development Bank
27

Framework Document on Water and Climate Change Adaptation