appendix a liturature review

1 APPENDIX A: Climate Change Vulnerability Literature Review Purpose The purpose of this discussion is to review the existing literature surrounding climate change adaptation and vulnerability with a focus on built infrastructure. It will examine the evolution of the term vulnerability and explore current thought surrounding methods for conducting climate change vulnerability assessments. The review will identify how successful adaptation strategies are created, and how these vulnerability assessments and adaptation strategies can inform the Dalhousie University Climate Change Plan. Dalhousie’s climate plan, includes mitigation and adaptation strategies. Mitigative actions on their own will not sufficiently address the changes in climate that are already underway. Adaptive strategies are necessary for a campus that is on the coast and vulnerable to an increasing frequency of extreme weather events. These events not only interrupt the day-to-day functioning of the university, they cost money, and often have adverse health and safety implications. Effective adaptation strategies are integral to ensuring the ability to continue with university life in the face of increasing climate hazards. Summary There are two primary strategies in the face of a changing climate, mitigation and adaptation. This review focuses on climate change related adaptation and vulnerability. Typically before adaptation strategies can be developed and implemented the vulnerability of the system in question must be assessed. Initially the concept of vulnerability was based in two distinct areas of study (Fussel, 2005). The first of which was the human geography approach, used to describe the vulnerability of a system to adverse effects of a hazard (Fussel, 2005). The second approach was based in human ecology, seeking to understand who was vulnerable and why (Adger, 2006; Fussel, 2005). As climate change research developed it integrated both understandings of vulnerability into its approach (Fussel, 2005). Methods for conducting vulnerability assessments vary between sources, however most agree about an important first step. At the start of the process it is necessary to structure the assessment, in terms of understanding definitions, agreeing on desired outputs and recognizing any values associated with the system. Another common step in vulnerability assessments is assessing future vulnerabilities of the system in question. This can be difficult due to high levels of uncertainty, even with the use of climate scenario modelling data projections. Once an assessment method is chosen, vulnerabilities to climate change from various perspectives can be examined. The range of vulnerabilities can vary dramatically from human health vulnerabilities (potential for increased heat disorders or vector-borne diseases) to built infrastructure vulnerabilities (potential for increased moisture damage to buildings or interruptions in electrical power generation) (Berry et al., 2008; Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, 2008). The ultimate purpose of identifying and assessing vulnerabilities is for the creation of adaptation strategies that address them. These strategies must be as diverse as the vulnerabilities they address, and can have a short, mid, or long-term focus. From a built infrastructure perspective adaptation strategies can range from the use of existing “green infrastructure” to the installation of protective wind cladding (Gill et al., 2007; Auld et al., 2007). It is worth noting that even if a effective adaptation strategy is developed there often remain barriers to its implementation (Lynch et al., 2008). One of largest of these barriers is the frequent classification of climate change as a special interest and therefore limiting its integration into routine decision making (Lynch et al., 2008). A second significant barrier is the misconception that climate change adaptations are solely the domain of natural scientists, with no place for social science knowledge (Lynch et al., 2008). In developing adaptation strategies for the Dalhousie 2 campus, the aim is to effectively identify vulnerabilities and set forth adaptation actions that overcome these barriers to successful implementation. Definitions Adaptation- “Adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities. Various types of adaptation can be distinguished, including anticipatory, autonomous and planned adaptation: (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2007a, p.869) Anticipatory adaptation – Adaptation that takes place before impacts of climate change are observed. Also referred to as proactive adaptation. (IPCC, 2007a, p.869) Autonomous adaptation – Adaptation that does not constitute a conscious response to climatic stimuli but is triggered by ecological changes in natural systems and by market or welfare changes in human systems. Also referred to as spontaneous adaptation. (IPCC, 2007a, p.869) Planned adaptation – Adaptation that is the result of a deliberate policy decision, based on an awareness that conditions have changed or are about to change and that action is required to return to, maintain, or achieve a desired state.” (IPCC, 2007a, p.869) Adaptive capacity - “The ability of a system to adjust to climate change (including climate variability and extremes) to moderate potential damages, to take advantage of opportunities, or to cope with the consequences.” (IPCC, 2007a, p.869) Critical infrastructure - Critical infrastructure is defined in Canada as “those physical and information technology facilities, networks, and assets whose disruption or destruction would have serious impact on the health, safety, security, and economic well-being of Canadians or on the effective functioning of governments in Canada” (Grenier, 2001 in Auld, MacIver, & Klaassen, 2006) Exposure - “The amount of a factor to which a group or individual was exposed; sometimes contrasted with dose (the quantity of material entering an exposed person). Dose is not the same as exposure. (McMichael et al., 2003 as cited in Berry et al., 2008, p.468) Extreme weather event - “An event that is rare within its statistical reference distribution at a particular place. Definitions of ‘rare’ vary, but an extreme weather event would normally be as rare as or rarer than the 10th or 90th percentile. By definition, the characteristics of what is called ‘extreme weather’ may vary from place to place. Extreme weather events may typically include floods and droughts.” (IPCC, 2007a, p.875) Mitigation - “An anthropogenic intervention to reduce the anthropogenic forcing of the climate system; it includes strategies to reduce greenhouse gas sources and emissions and enhancing greenhouse gas sinks.” (IPCC, 2007a, p.878) Resilience - “The ability of a social or ecological system to absorb disturbances while retaining the same basic structure and ways of functioning, the capacity for self-organisation, and the capacity to adapt to stress and change.” (IPCC, 2007a, p.880) 3 Risk – “Risk refers to the uncertainty that surrounds future events and outcomes. It is the level of exposure to uncertainties that an organization must understand and effectively manage. Risk is the expression of the likelihood of a future event occurring as well as its potential to influence the achievement of an organization’s objectives.” (Health Canada, 2005 as cited in Berry et al., 2008, p.476) Sensitivity - “Sensitivity is the degree to which a system is affected, either adversely or beneficially, by climate variability or change. The effect may be direct (e.g., a change in crop yield in response to a change in the mean, range or variability of temperature) or indirect (e.g., damages caused by an increase in the frequency of coastal flooding due to sea-level rise).” (IPCC, 2007a, p.881) Vulnerability - “Vulnerability is the degree to which a system is susceptible to, and unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes. Vulnerability is a function of the character, magnitude, and rate of climate change and variation to which a system is exposed, its sensitivity, and its adaptive capacity.” (IPCC, 2007a, p.883) Method Peer-reviewed literature pertaining to “climate change”, “vulnerability” and/or “adaptation” was searched for in the Web of Science database, using the three keywords identified above. To narrow down the search results, sources were selected that focused on a broader characterization of the concepts of adaptation or vulnerability. Additionally publications on assessing vulnerability, especially assessing the vulnerability of infrastructure, were selected from the pool of general search results. As the purpose of this literature review is to inform methods for a vulnerability assessment and develop adaptation strategies for the Dalhousie campus, sources were selected for their relevance to campus infrastructure. This purposeful selection meant excluding sources that were specifically focused on one region (i.e. Canadian arctic) or vulnerable population (i.e. developing nations). Since climate change adaptation is a fairly rapidly emerging field, literature was also chosen for its temporal relevance. Selections were restricted to publications dated within the last five years. It should also be noted limited snowball sampling was conducted with these same parameters in mind. The references of selected sources were scanned for any other relevant articles. Grey literature was consulted as an additional source of potential articles to be included in the literature review. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report on Climate Change, Working Group II Report "Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability", was selected as a source because it is an authority in the climate change field. Other grey literature sources were focused on a national and regional level. Publications at the federal, provincial and municipal levels of government were reviewed. Sources were obtained either through traditional research methods or materials were sent or referred from government and community representatives. Additionally a report published by the Public Infrastructure Engineering Vulnerability Committee (PIEVC) was selected for its relevance in assessing the vulnerability of built infrastructure on campus. As previously mentioned, while climate change adaptation and vulnerability is interdisciplinary and multi-faceted, literature that focused on vulnerabilities to built/public infrastructure was purposely selected and reviewed. Introduction As of 2007, in their most recent report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change confirmed climate change is occurring as a result of human activities (IPCC, 2007b). Anthropogenic burning of fossil fuels contributes to climate change directly by emitting the potent greenhouse gas (GHG), carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) (IPCC, 2007b). The consequences of the changing climate have been globally acknowledged as areas of concern, with two main avenues of response: mitigation and adaptation 4 (Fussel & Klein, 2006). However, most climate change research currently focuses on mitigation strategies, as opposed to those that are adaptive. Mitigation most commonly refers to changes in anthropogenic behaviours/practices to reduce the degree of climate change (Fussel, 2005). Adaptation strategies seek to reduce the severity of adverse impacts of climate change on vulnerable communities or infrastructure (Fussel, 2005). It is worth noting that adaptation strategies are nearly always focused on reducing the impact of climate change on human systems, whether built or social. 1) Evolution of climate change vulnerability It is only recently that the term vulnerability has been used to describe the severity of potential climate change impacts on human systems. Much of the current understanding of the vulnerability concept is rooted in human geography and human ecology research (Adger, 2006). As thoroughly described in Adger (2006) these two schools of research initially informed differing views on the meaning and usage of the vulnerability concept (Adger, 2006). Throughout the natural science literature vulnerability is often used in a descriptive sense, as it applies to potential adverse impacts from a hazard (e.g. an extreme weather event) (Fussel, 2005). Social scientists however, are more likely to use the term vulnerability in an explanatory manner to explain a particular social example (e.g. the socio-economics of a community) (Fussel, 2005). Over time three primary research frameworks emerged from these understandings of vulnerability, as characterized by Fussel (2005). The first of which is the risk-hazard approach, used most often in technical research (Fussel, 2005). This approach assesses the level of risk to the system being considered as a result of exposure to a hazard (Fussel, 2005). In a risk-hazard approach, the system whose vulnerability is being assessed is usually a physical one (e.g. built infrastructure) (Fussel, 2005). The second research framework is the social constructivist approach, with a focus on who is most vulnerable and why (Fussel, 2005). A social constructivist approach is most frequently found in the poverty and development literature (Fussel, 2005). Vulnerability in this framework is often understood as socio- economic vulnerability, and the associated ability or capacity to respond to a hazard or stressor (Fussel, 2005). The final, and most currently prevalent, research framework is the hazard-of-place approach (Fussel, 2005). Typically found in the climate change literature this framework understands vulnerability as an integration of exposure to a natural hazard, and adaptive capacity of the system in question (Fussel, 2005). Working with this integrated understanding of vulnerability, this review will explore current methods for its assessment. 2) Current perspectives on conducting vulnerability assessments Before any successful adaptation strategy can be developed, the vulnerabilities of the system under review must be elucidated, usually through a vulnerability assessment. The type of vulnerability assessment can differ dramatically depending on the framework being used and the value sets held by the assessor (Lynch et al., 2008). Four main approaches are cited by Lynch et al. (2008): the hazards, natural hazards or risk approach; the vulnerability approach; the adaptive capacity or resiliency approach; and the policy approach. A hazards, natural hazards or risk approach assesses vulnerability in terms of biophysical changes to a system (Lynch et al., 2008). The vulnerability approach assesses vulnerability in terms of the values at risk to the hazard (Lynch et al., 2008). Assessing vulnerability with a focus on the availability of resources or the ability to cope with change to a biophysical system is an adaptive capacity/resiliency approach (Lynch et al., 2008). The final approach, policy-based, assesses how vulnerable a policy is to climate change impacts (Lynch et al., 2008). While all four approaches ultimately assess the vulnerability of a system, the values, assumptions and characterizations associated with each framework can result in different final outcomes. 5 Similarly, Fussel & Klein (2006) characterize climate change related assessments into four general types. Impact assessments were generally some of the earlier assessments conducted, evaluating the effects/impacts of climate change scenarios on a system without addressing adaptation (Fussel & Klein, 2006). More recently used are first generation vulnerability assessments, assessing the social effects of climate change impacts and beginning to consider adaptation (Fussel & Klein, 2006). Second generation vulnerability assessments, while not as widespread focus on providing reasonable assessments of vulnerability and suggesting feasible adaptation strategies (Fussel & Klein, 2006). The final adaptation policy assessment is conducted to make specific recommendations to planners and policy-writers for the development and implementation of adaptation policy (Fussel & Klein, 2006). This introduction to two different characterizations of assessments illustrates the diversity in assessment frameworks. Perhaps it also hints at the importance of understanding whether the system is starting in a vulnerable state, if it is something that will be encountered as part of the assessment process, or if it is an outcome of the process, prior to conducting an assessment (Fussel & Klein, 2006). Once underlying values have also been identified and an assessment framework has been selected the method of assessment must be considered. There are many variations in methodology when assessing the vulnerability of a system. Likely the most widely acknowledged authority in climate change research; the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change sets forth a seven-step method for vulnerability assessment (Carter et al., 2007). Classified as an impact assessment the IPCC recommends 1) defining the problem; 2) selecting a method; 3) testing the method and sensitivity; 4) selecting scenarios; 5) assessing biophysical and socio-economic impacts; 6) assessing autonomous adjustments; and 7) evaluating adaptation strategies (Carter et al., 2007). While the targeted IPCC assessor is likely a policy-maker with the federal government working on adaptation policy, the IPCC assessment method makes no mention of the feasibility of adaptation strategies or their implementation. Closer to home, the Canadian Climate Impacts and Adaptation Research Network (C-CIARN) provides municipalities with a five-step vulnerability assessment method in order to develop adaptation strategies for infrastructure (C-CIARN, 2006). Municipalities should 1) engage affected parties and decision makers; 2) assess current vulnerability using past experiences to understand critical thresholds and adaptive capacity; 3) estimate future conditions using climate scenarios that take into account environmental and socio-economic conditions; 4) use these scenarios to estimate future vulnerabilities and identify potential adaptation strategies; and 5) make decisions about which strategies to implement and how (C-CIARN, 2006). At the municipal level emphasis is placed on the necessity of forming partnerships and engaging with stakeholders to develop a full understanding of vulnerability to climate change impacts. Additionally research stresses the importance of continually integrating climate change vulnerability knowledge into regional planning and decision-making (C-CIARN, 2006). For a health perspective on methods for assessing climate change vulnerability, Health Canada has used a seven step guide (Berry, McBean, & Seguin, 2008). 1) Determine the scope of the assessment; 2) describe current distribution of climate-sensitive disorders; 3) identify current strategies/policies to decrease the number of climate-sensitive disorders; 4) review potential health impacts of climate change; 5) use future climate change scenarios to estimate future health impacts; 6) create an assessment report; 7) identify gaps and adaptation strategies to address them to further reduce health impacts, then evaluate the adaptation strategies (Berry et al., 2008). To provide a policy approach to vulnerability assessment, consider Downing and Patwardhan’s (2005) activities for conducting a vulnerability assessment. 1) Structure the assessment, with stakeholders 6 agreeing on definitions, frameworks and objectives; 2) next identify vulnerable groups and any assessment barriers; 3) assess current vulnerability of the selected system by examining climate hazards, socio-economic conditions and any existing adaptation strategies; 4) assess future vulnerability through case studies, discussions with experts or thought experiments; 5) finally integrate the assessment results with adaptation policy (Downing & Patwardhan, 2005). Although the assessment methods above are for very different sectors it is interesting to note their similarities. The majority state the need to define the scope of the assessment, making sure definitions and frameworks are understood and agreed upon. Many aim to achieve this level of understanding by engaging stakeholders and those who will be most affected by the impacts of climate change. Doing so ensures an assessment that is informed by both expert and experiential knowledge of both the biophysical and social systems (Lindley et al., 2006; Lynch et al., 2008). The methods also encouraged the use of climate scenarios to reduce uncertainty in estimating future vulnerability. While all of the approaches concluded their vulnerability assessment with a consideration of adaptation strategies, only Health Canada’s guideline included an evaluation of their strategies. Perhaps a crucial and so far missing step to each of these assessment methods is the need for a self-assessment. Assessors must continually evaluate their own methods of vulnerability assessment for relevance, effectiveness, and unacknowledged assumptions. 3) Examples of currently identified vulnerable infrastructure, populations, and sectors With an appreciation for how vulnerabilities are assessed this review will now describe what some of these vulnerabilities are. The system being evaluated in a climate change vulnerability assessment can be a community, an institution, or a place (Downing & Patwardhan, 2005). Since it has the potential to encompass elements such as built infrastructure, livelihoods, the natural environment, and human health, the suite of associated vulnerabilities is extremely diverse. Following their first vulnerability assessment, the Public Infrastructure Engineering Vulnerability Committee (PIEVC) provides a Canada-wide perspective on the vulnerabilities of four categories of public infrastructure (Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, 2008). The first of these categories was water resource infrastructure, where the potential impacts of climate change could cause changes in flow of melt-fed water bodies, increase water pollution as a result of increased water temperature, and decrease water availability and drought (Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, 2008). Additionally, hydroelectric energy converting devices may be impacted by changes in water level, causing interruptions to electrical power (Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, 2008). Stormwater and wastewater systems, the next category examined, were vulnerable to flooding from both sea level rise and storm surges, as well as intense precipitation events (Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, 2008). Roads and bridges were jointly considered by the committee (Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, 2008). Roads are by far the most heavily invested in type of public infrastructure (Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, 2008). They are also quite vulnerable to climate change, likely being affected by things like thermal cracking, frost heaves, shorter freezing seasons, more freeze-thaw cycles, and higher in-use temperatures (Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, 2008). The final category of infrastructure examined were buildings, which were found to be vulnerable to topography, wind exposure, precipitation, air temperature and sun (Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, 2008). The authors observe that since buildings are often the centre of support networks, their vulnerability can have a profound impact on things like sewers, electrical, water, or communication systems (Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, 2008). The report stresses the interconnectedness of infrastructure and also the need for a more specific understanding of at what point infrastructure functioning becomes a failure, improved infrastructure design, and more 7 informative future climate change projections (Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, 2008). Overall the report provides an assessment of vulnerability that is very much based on the physical system, with little consideration of the social science, socio-economic perspective. Health Canada’s vulnerability assessment, based on the adaptive capacity of vulnerable populations, results in a more human-focused set of vulnerabilities. Climate change is expected to impact the health of vulnerable populations such as seniors, children, those with underlying health conditions, or low socio-economic status, or Aboriginal peoples (Berry et al., 2008). These populations are vulnerable as they may have lower levels of mobility, less choice of where to live, inadequate infrastructure, or the need for steady medical care (Berry et al., 2008). In terms of health impacts from climate change things like increased air pollution or extreme heat can have an effect on individuals with respiratory difficulties (Lamy & Bouchet, 2008). A potential increase in heat and precipitation especially, might cause an increase in cases of water-, vector- and rodent-borne diseases (Charron et al., 2008). Climate change vulnerabilities with a more regional focus can be examined for Atlantic Canada (Vasseur & Catto, 2007). With the climate projected to be warmer and wetter overall, with drier summers, ten areas have the potential to be affected: terrestrial ecosystems, the coastal zone, marine ecosystems and fisheries, water, forestry operations, agriculture, transportation, energy, tourism, and communities (Vasseur & Catto, 2007). Current species in terrestrial ecosystems are vulnerable to changes in climate that will affect their habitats, likely triggering a change in species composition (Vasseur & Catto, 2007). Coastal zones are not only an extensive geographical area in Atlantic Canada, but a large part of cultural identity and tourism (Vasseur & Catto, 2007). With rising sea levels, flooding, and increased erosion, the coastal zone will be vulnerable to a changing climate (Vasseur & Catto, 2007). Similarly fisheries and marine ecosystems will be impacted by things such as increasing ocean temperatures, changing species populations, as well as changes in ocean currents and salinity levels (Vasseur & Catto, 2007). Industries such as forestry and agriculture may be impacted by changes in the length of the growing season, and more frequent or severe extreme weather events (Vasseur & Catto, 2007). Extreme weather, along with more freeze-thaw cycles, will likely have negative consequences for transportation and energy infrastructure in Atlantic Canada (Vasseur & Catto, 2007). Roads may need to be repaired more often, and transmission lines restored as a result of extreme weather events (Vasseur & Catto, 2007). Energy security may also be impacted by climate change, as global demand rises for a fossil fuel supply that is being rapidly depleted (Vasseur & Catto, 2007). To gain an even more local understanding of climate change vulnerabilities, the Halifax Regional Municipality’s (HRM) Climate Change Risk Management Strategy can be considered (HRM, 2007). As determined by a climate change vulnerability assessment, there are eight main areas that will be affected by climate change (HRM, 2007). The coastal zone is vulnerable to thing such as sea level rise, shoreline erosion, and ecosystem disruption from storm surges (HRM, 2007). Communities and infrastructure are another area that will be vulnerable to climate change in ways similar to those mentioned in the PIEVC report above, increased road cracking, more frequent flooding of low lying roads and land, loss of tourism due to changing sea levels, and increased building insurance costs (HRM, 2007). A third impacted area is water resources, where there could be increased variability in rainfall and municipal water levels, or in water supply, which could affect hydroelectric power (HRM, 2007). The potential effects on human health are quite similar to those mentioned previously, for example the increase in extreme heat could exacerbate air pollution causing more respiratory disorders (HRM, 2007). Fishers and marine resources would be vulnerable to the changing marine habitat and the distribution of fish populations (HRM, 2007). Forestry practices may be vulnerable to things like increased variability in harvesting practices, or changes in pest populations (HRM, 2007). Climate change would likely affect 8 agriculture the same way, affecting temperatures, precipitation levels and growing season (HRM, 2007). The last and most general category is the environment, with wildlife populations or specific ecosystems that may be vulnerable to the changing climate (HRM, 2007). For an industry perspective of climate change vulnerability consider examples from the energy, forestry, and small to medium sized enterprise sectors. The Canadian energy sector is concerned with the effects of climate change on energy infrastructure, energy consumption patterns and electrical power generation (Government of Canada, 2009). Transmission lines, for example are vulnerable to wind events and extreme weather events like ice storms (Government of Canada, 2009). Additionally many types of power generation require water (e.g. hydroelectricity, oil and gas, thermal), the availability of which may be impacted by climate change (Government of Canada, 2009). The practices of the forestry industry are most vulnerable to the increasing climate variability (Johnston & Williamson, 2007). Changing precipitation levels and temperatures will likely affect tree growth and tree species distribution, which has the potential to be adversary or beneficial for various parts of the industry (Johnston & Williamson, 2007). In the business sector, the vulnerabilities of small and medium sized organizations are primarily associated with the loss of financial capital (Canadian Chamber of Commerce, 2006). More specifically extreme weather may impact supply chain operations, cause increased insurance costs or prevent employees from getting to work (Canadian Chamber of Commerce, 2006). 4) Current examples of adaptation strategies for infrastructure As outlined in quite a few of the vulnerability assessment methods, once vulnerabilities have been identified, agreed upon, and “measured” as best as possible, adaptation strategies for their reduction can be developed. The current themes in adaptation strategy development and implementation will be explored through specific examples of adaptations for built infrastructure. In a report conducted for Environment Canada Auld et al. (2006) focus on infrastructure adaptation options, presented in a concise hierarchy of adaptation solutions (Auld et al., 2006). The first step to adaptation is implementing “no regrets” solutions. (Auld et al., 2006). Usually these no-regrets adaptations address short-term vulnerability and benefit a system whether or not climate change occurs, for example updating the climatic values used for building design (Auld et al., 2006). Next the authors state the need for more adaptation research to decrease uncertainties (Auld et al., 2006). Their third and final step is the implementation of adaptation strategies to address longer term vulnerability to climate change (Auld et al., 2006). Long-term strategies may include things such as relocating a geographically at risk community or physical infrastructure (Auld et al., 2006). When deciding which strategies to implement first it can be useful to understand if there are any key vulnerabilities in a system. In the case of Canadian infrastructure, critical infrastructure is defined as “those physical and information technology facilities, networks, and assets whose disruption or destruction would have serious impact on the health, safety, security, and economic well-being of Canadians or on the effective functioning of governments in Canada” (Auld et al., 2006, p.7). Critical infrastructure often aids with communication, power supply/generation/distribution or housing, suggesting strategies to address vulnerabilities of these sectors should be a first priority in infrastructure adaptation plans (Auld et al., 2006). To continue with an infrastructure theme, increased building weathering as a result of climate change increases building vulnerability to premature failure (Auld et al., 2007). Increased freeze-thaw cycles, higher temperatures, variations in precipitation and an increased amount of ultraviolet (UV) radiation cause some of the most adverse impacts (i.e. damages from moisture, more rain penetration, or 9 increased corrosion) (Auld et al., 2007). With an understanding of these vulnerabilities adaptation options were presented in two main categories, those that provide moisture control and those that consider changing solar radiation patterns (Auld et al., 2007). Adaptations to keep water out of buildings are deflection of rainwater, effective drainage (especially from roofs), fast drying techniques once water has penetrated a building, and using durable materials that are resistant to water damage (Auld et al., 2007). In terms of solar radiation, the UV-B rays are particularly damaging to synthetic materials such as plastic and natural materials, such as wood (Auld et al., 2007). Adaptation strategies to reduce material vulnerability from the likely increasing amounts of solar radiation include using plastics with a different chemical composition, or installing surface protection over natural materials (Auld et al., 2007). Before effective adaptation strategies can be developed, such as the examples previously mentioned, it is important to remember some key characteristics of built infrastructure. Infrastructure generally has a long lifetime, meaning the existing infrastructure is built to a patchwork of varying climate standards and therefore has varying levels of vulnerability to climate change (Auld & MacIver, 2007). Adding to the vulnerability is the aging nature of infrastructure that often has not been adequately maintained (Auld & MacIver, 2007). Furthermore, if existing infrastructure is geographically vulnerable its location often cannot be changed since it is required near the communities it serves (Auld & MacIver, 2007). It will be important to take these attributes into consideration whenever adaptation strategies are drafted. A final quite novel approach is introduced through a UK based study that investigates the use of “green infrastructure” as an adaptation strategy in urban areas (Gill et al., 2007). Green infrastructure is “an interconnected network of green space that conserves natural ecosystem values and functions, and provides associated benefits to human populations” (Gill et al., 2007, p.116). Generally green infrastructure aids in moderating urban surface temperatures, or managing storm or waste water (Gill et al., 2007). Green infrastructure can exist in patches, corridors, or matrices, each formation with its own associated benefits (Gill et al., 2007). A matrix for example has a high infiltration capacity for water runoff, while a corridor is more effective as a flood storage tool (Gill et al., 2007). This article provides a fresh perspective on adaptation strategies and provokes the question, what constitutes an adaptation strategy? Despite the increasing quantity of climate change adaptation strategies being implemented, there are a number of barriers to their success, including a limited understanding of long-term effectiveness. The inherent uncertainty involved with predicting future climate scenarios is likely a key factor in lack of understanding. An additional barrier to successful adaptation is the assumption that adaptation is solely the domain of natural scientists (Lynch et al., 2008). While this may have been the case early in the study of climate change vulnerability, the current literature clearly demonstrates the need for an integrated, natural and social science, approach. Another barrier related to misconceptions is the tendency for climate change to be classified as a special interest, causing it to be left out of all areas of decision-making (Lynch et al., 2008). A final barrier is the predominance of unknown unknowns or “you don’t know what you don’t know”, in climate change research, making it difficult to fully understand future vulnerabilities and the interactions of different stressors (Lynch et al., 2008). There are a few strategies to move forward in the face of relatively large unknowns, the first of which is implementing more short-term focused “no regrets” strategies. Another approach is the necessity of integrating a “feedback loop” to continually evaluate the strength of vulnerability assessment methods, and newly implemented adaptation strategies. Conclusions and Possible implications for Dalhousie In order to develop a successful adaptation plan an understanding of the concept of vulnerability, methods for conducting vulnerability assessments, how to identify areas of vulnerability, and how to 10 develop adaptation options, are required. While each concept is important likely the most critical one is taking the time to thoroughly structure the process by identifying desired outcomes, defining any commonly used terms, and understanding pre-existing values. Starting with a clearly understood condition will make it much easier to negotiate the complexities associated with assessing vulnerability to climate change. Although both the grey and peer-reviewed literature were informative regarding concept meanings, framework characterizations, and limited case studies it generally was written at a broad-overview level. Especially in regards to developing an adaptation strategy for the Dalhousie campus, the literature that was reviewed detailed vulnerabilities well, however that same level of detail was absent for adaptation strategies. Ultimately more research will be required, perhaps through personal communications, to determine a specific set of adaptation actions to reduce campus vulnerability to climate change. References Adger, N.W. (2006). Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16, 268-281. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.006 Auld, H., Klaassen, J., & Comer, N. (2007). Weathering of building infrastructure and the changing climate: adaptation options. Retrieved from Adaptation and Impacts Research Division Environment Canada: http://www.ec.gc.ca/Publications/default.asp?lang=En&xml=C35FAE12- 0531-46F3-9378-BDF10096234D Auld, H., MacIver, D., & Klaassen, J. (2006). Adaptation options for infrastructure under changing climate conditions. Retrieved from http://pyr.hazards.ca/Docs/images/Adaptation_Options_for_Infrastructure-1568988254.pdf Auld, H., & MacIver, D. (2007). Changing weather patterns, uncertainty and infrastructure risks: emerging adaptation requirements. Retrieved from Adaptation and Impacts Research Division Environment Canada: http://www.ec.gc.ca/Publications/default.asp?lang=En&xml=6544796D- 66EB-4A64-B2E7-88A8911D0439 Berry, P., McBean, G., & Seguin, J. (2008). Chapter 3: vulnerabilities to natural hazards and extreme weather. In J. Seguin (Ed.), Human health in a changing climate: a Canadian assessment of vulnerabilities and adaptive capacity (pp. 45-111). Ottawa: Health Canada. Canadian Chamber of Commerce. (2006). A guide to climate change for small- to medium-sized enterprises. How to plan for climate change, reduce operating costs and develop new business opportunities. Retrieved from Pollution Probe: http://www.pollutionprobe.org/Publications/Primers.htm Canadian Climate Impacts and Adaptation Research. (2006). Adapting to climate change, an introduction for Canadian municipalities. Retrieved from Canadian Climate Impacts and Adaptation Research: http://www.c-ciarn.ca/adapting_e.html [...]... Ogden, N., & Schuster, C.J (2008) Chapter 5: the impacts of climate change on water-, food-, vector- and rodent-borne diseases In J Seguin (Ed.), Human health in a changing climate: a Canadian assessment of vulnerabilities and adaptive capacity (pp 45-111) Ottawa: Health Canada Downing, T.E., & Patwardhan, A (2005) Assessing vulnerability for climate adaptation (Technical Paper 3) Retrieved from http://fly.undp.org/gef/documents/publications/apf-technical-paper03.pdf... climate change risk management strategy Retrieved from Halifax Regional Municipality: http://www.halifax.ca/climate/documents/ClimateChangeRiskManagementStrategyforHRMDec ember2007.pdf Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (200 7a) Appendix I: glossary In Parry, M.L., Canziani, O.F., Palutikof, J.P., van der Linden, P.J., & Hanson, C.E (Eds.) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability... http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessmentreport/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-faqs.pdf Johnston, M., & Williamson, T (2007) A framework for assessing climate change vulnerability of the Canadian forest sector The Forestry Chronicle, 83(3), 358-361 Lamy, S., & Bouchet, V (2008) Chapter 4: air quality, climate change and health In J Seguin (Ed.), Human health in a changing climate: a Canadian assessment of vulnerabilities and adaptive capacity... facilitating interdisciplinarity in climate change adaptation research American Meteorological Society, 169-179 doi: 10.1175/BAMS-89-2-169 Vasseur, L., & Catto, N (2007) Chapter 4: Atlantic Canada In D.S Lemmen, F.J Warren, J Lacroix, and E Bush (Eds.), From impacts to adaptation: Canada in a changing climate 2007 (pp.119-170) Ottawa: Government of Canada ... Ottawa: Health Canada Lindley, S.J., Handley, J.F., Theuray, N., Peet, E., & McEvoy, D (2006) Adaptation strategies for climate change in the urban environment: assessing climate change related risk in UK urban areas Journal of Risk Research, 9(5), 543-568 DOI: 10.1080/13669870600798020 Lynch, A. H., Tryhorn, L., & Abramson, R (2008) Working at the boundary facilitating interdisciplinarity in climate... S.E., Handley, J.F., Ennos, A. R., & Pauleit, S (2007) Adapting cities for climate change: the role of the green infrastructure Built Environment 33(1), 115-133 Government of Canada (2009) Climate change adaptation in the Canadian energy sector Retrieved from Policy Research Initiative: http://www.policyresearch.gc.ca/page.asp?pagenm=20090004_toc Halifax Regional Municipality (2007) ClimateSMART climate...11 Canadian Council of Professional Engineers (2008) Adapting to climate change, Canada’s first national engineering vulnerability assessment of public infrastructure, April 2008 Retrieved from Public Infrastructure Engineering Vulnerability Committee: http://www.pievc.ca/e/Adapting_to_climate_Change_Report_Final.pdf Carter, T.R., Jones, R.N., Lu, X., Bhadwal, S., Conde, C Mearns, L.O Zurek,... http://fly.undp.org/gef/documents/publications/apf-technical-paper03.pdf Fussel, H.M (2005) Vulnerability in climate change research: a comprehensive conceptual framework In Breslauer symposium, University of California international and area studies UC Berkeley Fussel, H.M., & Klein, R.J.T (2006) Climate change vulnerability assessments: an evolution of conceptual thinking Climatic Change, 75, 301-329 DOI: 10.1007/s10584-006-0329-3... (2007) Chapter 2, new assessment methods and the characterisation of future conditions In Parry, M.L., Canziani, O.F., Palutikof, J.P., van der Linden, P.J., & Hanson, C.E (Eds.) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp.133-171) Charron, D., Fleury, M., Robbin Lindsay,... fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp.869-883) 12 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007b) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis In Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K.B., Tignor, M., Miller, H.L (Eds) Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change . solar radiation, the UV-B rays are particularly damaging to synthetic materials such as plastic and natural materials, such as wood (Auld et al., 2007). Adaptation strategies to reduce material. diseases. In J. Seguin (Ed.), Human health in a changing climate: a Canadian assessment of vulnerabilities and adaptive capacity (pp. 45-111). Ottawa: Health Canada. Downing, T.E., & Patwardhan,. and Adaptation Research. (2006). Adapting to climate change, an introduction for Canadian municipalities. Retrieved from Canadian Climate Impacts and Adaptation Research: http://www.c-ciarn.ca/adapting_e.html