Imagine a situation where you and your vehicle are all set for a perfect smooth drive but you have no clue of your destination? Most probably, you will not able to even start your journey. Now just flip the situation where you are intending to go, you have drawn a map and have full realization of travel requirements but you have neither a car nor the fuel to translate your travel plan into actuality.
Super-typhoon Haiyan (known locally as Yolanda) tore through the Philippines exactly one year ago, devastating thousands of lives and leaving millions of people homeless. It was the strongest typhoon to make landfall ever recorded, causing a storm surge that ripped through coastal neighbourhoods and agricultural lands across much of central Philippines. The international humanitarian community responded quickly and most generously to the humanitarian needs in the wake of Haiyan. While the scale of the disaster was in many ways unprecedented, Asia is already the most disaster-prone region in the world, and worryingly, the impacts of these disasters are growing. In the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment, scientists foresaw, with high confidence, that "extreme climate events will have an increasing impact on human health, security, livelihoods, and poverty, with the type and magnitude of impact varying across Asia.
A number of contributors provided valuable input during the preparation of this report. We would like to thank the Sindh Coastal Development Authority, the District Government of Badin, NDMA, PDMA Sindh, Laar Humanitarian and Development Program, and the Global Change Impact Studies Center. Our Colleagues at Oxfam Novib provided wonderful support by facilitating overall coordination and management during the process. We sincerely thank all the men and women that spared their time and participated in the community group discussions in different areas of Badin.
Disaster risk reduction is the preparation and application of policies, strategies and practices to minimize vulnerabilities and hence disaster risk throughout society. It is the concept and practice of reducing disaster risks through systematic efforts to analyze and manage the causal factors of disasters, including through reduced exposure to hazards, lessened vulnerability of people and property, wise management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse events.
This Article outlines a role that human rights organizations in the United States and elsewhere can play in linking environmentally irresponsible conduct by governments and corporations to the violation of basic human rights. In addition, this Article identifies rights-based remedies for those violations. The goal is neither to assert a new right to a clean (or cooler) environment nor to prescribe specific climate change policies to governments or others. However, climate change and related environmental decisions made by governmental and corporate authorities must now take into account both procedural and substantive human rights and the impact of those decisions on the world’s poor. For the same reason, organizations committed to overcoming poverty, defending the environment, and protecting human rights should revise their tendency to view challenges, in developing nations and elsewhere, through a single lens and should pursue, either together or on parallel paths, an integrated vision of justice that takes into account economic equity, human rights, and respect for the natural and urban environment. Many U.S. human rights organizations have also ignored or treated as background the growing numbers of people living or dying in extreme poverty in the developing world. Yet climate change is certain to exacerbate the severe environmental and economic conditions already faced by billions of people. These conditions contribute to widespread violations of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights that are the central concern of human rights organizations.
Climate change has been described as the biggest global health threat of the 21st century. World population is projected to reach 9.1 billion by 2050, with most of this growth in developing countries. While the principal cause of climate change is high consumption in the developed countries, its impact will be greatest on people in the developing world. Climate change and population can be linked through adaptation (reducing vulnerability to the adverse effects of climate change) and, more controversially, through mitigation (reducing the greenhouse gases that cause climate change). The contribution of low-income, high-fertility countries to global carbon emissions has been negligible to date, but is increasing with the economic development that they need to reduce poverty. Rapid population growth endangers human development, provision of basic services and poverty eradication and weakens the capacity of poor communities to adapt to climate change. Significant mass migration is likely to occur in response to climate change and should be regarded as a legitimate response to the effects of climate change. Linking population dynamics with climate change is a sensitive issue, but family planning programmes that respect and protect human rights can bring a remarkable range of benefits. Population dynamics have not been integrated systematically into climate change science. The contribution of population growth, migration, urbanization, ageing and household composition to mitigation and adaptation programmes needs urgent investigation.
The discussions about adaptation finance have mostly been about process: how money should be raised and how adaptation spending should be governed and monitored. This paper seeks to move the focus of the debate back towards the substance of adaptation by asking what “good adaptation” in developing countries would look like. We argue that the best use of funds in the short term may be for “soft”, or less tangible developmental activities that increase adaptive capacity. Building a minimum level of adaptive capacity everywhere is central to efficient, effective and equitable adaptation and yields immediate benefits irrespective of future climate regimes. We discuss a number of operational challenges in delivering this kind of adaptation, including a preoccupation with additional – which makes the integration of adaptation and development harder – and a preference for “concrete” and more readily visible adaptation projects. We leave open the question of whether and how the adaptation regime that is emerging from the Cancun Agreements will be able to deliver wise adaptation decisions, but our analysis recognizes that further institutional development is required.
The Climate Vulnerability Index (CVI) is based on a framework which incorporates a wide range of issues. It is a holistic methodology for water resources evaluation in keeping with the sustainable livelihoods approach used by many donor organisations to evaluate development progress. The scores of the index range on a scale of 0 to 100, with the total being generated as a weighted average of six major components. Each of the components is also scored from 0 to 100. Values representing the CVI components in the present are determined on the basis of quantitative and qualitative data, and potential future changes are assessed using scenarios of climate and other forms of global change.
In March 2010 Fonterra released the results of an 18-month study into the carbon footprint of its major dairy ingredient and consumer products. Fonterra’s work was part funded by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, and was undertaken by the University of New South Wales, SCION and AgResearch.
This paper shows the extent to which people in Funafuti – the main island of Tuvalu – are intending to migrate in response to climate change. It presents evidence collected from Funafuti to challenge the widely held assumption that climate change is, will, or should result in large-scale migration from Tuvalu. It shows that for most people climate change is not a reason for concern, let alone a reason to migrate, and that would-be migrants do not cite climate change as a reason to leave. People in Funafuti wish to remain living in Funafuti for reasons of lifestyle, culture and identity. Concerns about the impacts of climate change are not currently a significant driver of migration from Funafuti, and do not appear to be a significant influence on those who intend to migrate in the future.