CLIMATE CHANGE
RISK MANAGEMENT
CLIMATE READY
E S T J ARIES
CRE Adaptation Projects and
the Risk Management Process
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and its partners in the National Estuary Program (NEP)
have collaborated on 20 Climate Ready Estuaries (CRE) adaptation projects in the program's first
three years, from 2008-2010. As CRE builds a critical mass of project success stories, opportunities
are arising to do more than collect and relate anecdotes about individual projects. The program has
the chance to synthesize stories about climate adaptation.
This section of the Climate Ready Estuaries 2011 Progress Report examines how CRE projects illustrate
and support the risk management paradigm for climate change adaptation. Collectively, the NEP
partners demonstrate how risk management can be successfully applied to address environmental
challenges in our country's coastal areas.
Risk management
Climate change will pose a range of challenges to the nation's coasts. Some of the challenges will be
new, while other ongoing problems will be exacerbated by climate changes. All areas will: (1) face a
unique set of impacts, (2) assess consequences differently, and (3) have distinctive resources that can
be brought to bear on the problems. Due to the sheer variety of potential place-based challenges
and responses, the federal Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force (in its October 2010
Progress Report), as well as the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change, and the National Research Council, have all recently described adaptation to
climate change impacts as a problem that is suited to a risk management approach.
Risk management is a process that helps an organization minimize the risks that may keep it from
reaching its goals. Risk management also guides decision making by systematically leading an
organization to determine what risks are important and need to be addressed.
Risk management is particularly useful in planning for climate change. The likelihood and timing of
future climate changes cannot be precisely known. Further, the types and severity of impacts cannot
be exactly defined. This does not mean that organizations should walk away from an impossible
problem: it means they should take prudent steps to avoid or minimize risks associated with unwanted
outcomes.
-------
Risk management framework
The leading risk management guidance
documents recommend a sequence of
activities similar to the one described in the
ISO 31000 standards on risk management.1'2
These steps are outlined here and described
in subsequent sections of this report.
A cookie cutter approach for addressing
climate change that will work everywhere
does not exist. This is why a risk management
approach that lets organizations work within
their own contexts to identify and address
the risks that affect their own goals is such a
useful tool.
1 ISO (2009). Risk Management—Principles and
Guidelines. ISO 31000:2009 (E).
2 I EC/ISO (2009). Risk Management—Risk Assessment
Techniques. EC/ISO 31010.
The Risk Management Framework
from ISO 31000
Communication and consultation
Establishing the context
5.4 Risk assessment
Risk identification
Risk analysis
'Risk evaluation
5.5 Risk treatment
'Selection of risk treatment options
'Preparing and implementing risk
treatment plans
5.6 Monitoring and review
CRE projects and risk management
Every area along the U.S. coast has different characteristics, and the NEP partners vary in important
respects. Each NEP has tackled the piece of the climate change adaptation puzzle that it has believed
to be appropriate for its current situation. In early meetings with NEP partners, two of the lessons that
were distilled were to start small and to move forward with the data available. So CRE projects have
short circuited the risk management guidance in ISO 31000 (page 17) that explains, "The aim... is to
generate a comprehensive list of risks based on those events that might create, enhance, prevent,
degrade, accelerate or delay the achievement of objectives...." and "Comprehensive identification is
critical...."
Many NEPs have targeted their efforts on specific, known problems instead of looking across
the universe of possible threats. Although a few projects have looked broadly at a suite of local
climate risks, no one CRE partner has taken a risk management process from start to finish. A high
proportion of CRE projects match with the early steps of the risk management process: stakeholder
communications, establishing contexts, and risk identification are well represented.
The following sections present examples from CRE's first 20 projects to illustrate the steps of the
risk management framework. While the 20 projects all are illustrative of one or more steps, the
following sections highlight aspects of projects that are particularly good examples of the step under
discussion. Using a tenet of geographical analysis that space might serve as a surrogate for time,
projects at separate NEPs collectively demonstrate how risk management could support a program
of coastal climate change adaptation.
2 CLIMATE CHANGE RISK MANAGEMENT
-------
Communication and consultation
This step is intended to communicate why a vulnerability assessment is necessary, what the process will
be like, and what to expect going forward. Involving internal and external stakeholders will ensure that
their concerns, interests, perceptions, and views are considered in subsequent risk management steps.
Consulting with them helps to build understanding and support for the subsequent steps.
Establishing the context
Every organization exists in a cultural, political, financial, regulatory, and ecological situation. Every
organization also has a reason for being (i.e., its mission) and has goals that it pursues. The internal and
external context in which climate impacts will act helps set the scope for the risk management process.
Many CRE partners are working to increase communication and education about climate change
impacts and adaptation among stakeholders and establish the context in which they will move
forward. Various contexts call for different approaches. Some NEP projects work directly with the
general public, while others are oriented to key stakeholders.
Communicating with the public
• The Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Program (APNEP), in partnership with the Albemarle-
Pamlico Conservation and Communities Collaborative (AP3C), hosted seven public listening
sessions to hear residents' concerns about sea level rise and population growth, elicit their ideas
about solutions, and provide recommendations to improve outreach and education projects. In
February 2009, APNEP and AP3C produced a report, "Public Listening Sessions: Sea Level Rise
and Population Growth in North Carolina," describing the design, findings, and recommendations
from the sessions. Following the public listening sessions, APNEP identified key audiences with
whom to follow up. These included underprivileged communities, local officials, schools, and
coastal communities. Additionally, the public listening sessions identified the need for more detailed
information and discussion of sea level rise.
• The Long Island Sound Study NEP, in partnership with ICLEI and the city of Groton, Connecticut,
held three stakeholder workshops in 2010 to discuss local climate change vulnerability and options
for improving resilience. The first workshop focused on potential climate change impacts, while
later sessions focused on developing, prioritizing, and modeling the costs of a suite of adaptation
options. The city of Groton will use a report summarizing workshop outcomes to begin
implementing adaptation strategies and to develop an adaptation plan.
• In collaboration with the Jacques Cousteau National Estuarine Research Reserve (New Jersey), the
Barnegat Bay Partnership held a conference, "Preparing Your Community in the Face of Climate
Change," in April 2010 to assess local stakeholder knowledge and support for climate change
action. Additional public listening sessions and a stakeholder survey were used to further gauge
regional knowledge, attitudes, and interest in local issues related to climate change.
Program directors and key stakeholders
• The Casco Bay Estuary Partnership developed a climate change stakeholder outreach plan that
integrated ecosystem resilience into broader messages about climate change. Since many Maine
-------
organizations and agencies are engaged in efforts to encourage local decision-makers to
incorporate climate change into their day-to-day decisions and long-term planning, CBEP chose to
focus its efforts on adaptation outreach. Through consultation with stakeholders, CBEP identified
two key audiences for targeted outreach efforts: the land conservation community and the water
resources and water infrastructure community.
In an effort to incorporate climate change considerations into its Comprehensive Conservation
and Management Plan, the Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership (LCREP) coordinated with
its Estuary Partnership Science Work Group and Board of Directors throughout the process. The
focus was on identifying existing actions that address impacts of climate change, actions that can
be modified to address climate change, and additional necessary actions. In June 2011, LCREP
hosted the 5th annual Science to Policy Summit: Climate Change—Adapting Our Actions, at which
stakeholders discussed potential adaptations for the lower Columbia River region.
Risk identification
Risk identification is the process of identifying what might affect the ability of an organization to achieve
its goals. ISO 31000 says, "The aim of this step is to generate a comprehensive list of risks based on
those events that might create, enhance, prevent, degrade, accelerate or delay the achievement of
objectives."
CRE partners have approached the step of risk identification in a variety of ways. Some have
commissioned or performed broad assessments of how climate change may affect their watersheds.
As explained earlier, a few have focused on smaller slices of the spectrum, such as particular
ecosystems or hazards. Others have looked at climate change in the context of the other frameworks
in which they operate.
Broad assessment
• The Casco Bay Estuary Partnership published a report in December 2009, "Climate Change in the
Casco Bay Watershed: Past, Present, and Future," which looked at historic and projected trends for
eight indicators in the Casco Bay watershed. To generate future projections, simulated temperature
and precipitation data from four climate models were fitted to local, long-term weather observations.
• The Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program conducted a broad vulnerability assessment for
its seven-county southwest Florida study area which contributed to the development of a set of
climate change indicators.
• The Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Program conducted a broad assessment of its
vulnerabilities and research needs. The assessment was informed by a series of public listening
sessions, and the results were published in a September 2010 report titled "Climate Ready
Estuaries: A Blueprint for Change."
Particular ecosystems
• The Massachusetts Bays Program and the San Francisco Estuary Program worked in partnership
with the EPA Office of Research and Development to use expert elicitation as a methodology for
4 CLIMATE CHANGE RISK MANAGEMENT
-------
identifying climate change-related risks. In these pilot studies, two groups of experts focused on
key ecosystem processes related to sediment retention in mudflats and salt marshes. In the San
Francisco Bay system, the experts focused on ecological interactions of wading shorebirds and
their food sources. In Massachusetts, they focused on nesting habitat for salt marsh sparrows.
The experts were guided through a series of questions to help identify key processes and their
interrelationships. Different pathways were analyzed to identify where major shifts might be likely
in order to determine how the systems are sensitive to climate changes.
• The Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission identified the Ballona Wetlands as an area of
particular concern regarding climate change impacts. The commission is using downscaled climate
scenarios in a watershed hydrology model to assess the impacts of changes in temperature,
precipitation, and sea level.
Particular hazards
• The Sarasota Bay Estuary Program (SBEP) is focusing specifically on sea level rise and its
potential impacts to Sarasota and Manatee Counties. SBEP developed and launched a sea level
rise visualization tool (http://www.sarasotabay.org/slr-web-map), which allows users to see how
different magnitudes of sea level rise affect their communities. SBEP has conducted focus groups
with its Citizens Advisory Committee, Technical Advisory Committee, Management Board, and
Policy Board, as well as Sarasota County and Manatee County staff and citizens, to test and
introduce the sea level rise Web visualization tool.
• The Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership focused its initial vulnerability assessment efforts on
inland flooding, specifically the potential impact of increased stormwater runoff and flooding on
stormwater drainage systems in the Oyster River watershed. Under-road culverts were of particular
interest.
Using existing frameworks
• The Puget Sound Partnership applied an existing methodology for developing indicators of
ecosystem health to the context of climate change. An additional set of indicators specific to
climate change and Puget Sound is ready to be recommended for incorporation into the regional
monitoring network.
• The Tampa Bay Estuary Program focused on identifying climate change risks to the restoration of
coastal habitat, which is one of the key goals of the NEP. A toolkit of recommendations and options
drawn from local experience will help to ensure the success of future habitat restoration projects.
Risk analysis
Risk analysis is the process of understanding a risk, which includes identifying causes of the risk, assessing
the likelihood (probability) of it occurring, and assessing the consequences if it were to occur. Risk analysis
is essential to making decisions about which risks will become organizational priorities.
As potential problems have been identified, NEPs have taken various approaches to assessing their
severity. Some have turned to monitoring to detect whether climate impacts are starting to affect
their systems. Others have consulted scientists and other experts to evaluate specific threats, or they
have used GIS and related modeling to assess the magnitude of important climate risks.
5
-------
Using monitoring
• The Sentinel Monitoring for Climate Change in Long Island Sound initiative was developed to
show how Long Island Sound is changing and provide scientists and managers with a way to
determine appropriate adaptation strategies for these impacts. In summer 2011, the Long Island
Sound Study NEP released an updated report, "Sentinel Monitoring for Climate Change in the
Long Island Sound Estuarine and Coastal Ecosystems of New York and Connecticut," and launched
a website that provides additional information on the new climate change early warning system
(http://longislandsoundstudy.net/research-monitoring/sentinel-monitoring/).
Using experts
• Following the risk identification process described previously, the expert elicitation process with the
Massachusetts Bays Program and the San Francisco Estuary Program continued to link process
variables to management actions that could reduce the negative impacts of climate change. Experts
in various fields based their judgments on the body of scientific evidence using information ranging
from direct experimental evidence to theoretical insights.
• The Partnership for the Delaware Estuary has engaged experts throughout its tri-state region to
conduct an assessment of the vulnerabilities and adaptation options for three key resources: tidal
wetlands, drinking water, and bivalve shellfish. The case studies will help guide adaptation options
in the region and were published in a May 2010 report, "Climate Change and the Delaware Estuary:
Three Case Studies in Vulnerability and Adaptation Planning."
Using models
• As part of the Oyster River Culvert Analysis Project described above in the Risk Identification
section, the Piscataqua River Estuaries Partnership (PREP) used a Geographic Information System
(GIS) watershed model to analyze how specific culverts would perform in several climate change
and land use scenarios. PREP ranked individual culverts according to vulnerability and safety issues
in order to provide decision makers with a prioritized schedule for planning culvert upgrades.
• The Partnership for the Delaware Estuary released a report in March 2010, "Application of
Ecological and Economic Models of the Impacts of Sea Level Rise to the Delaware Estuary." This
study utilized a modeling approach coupling the Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (SLAMM) and
Habitat Equivalency Analysis (HEA) to estimate gains and losses of different marsh types under
a variety of sea level rise scenarios and to project how the changing landscape would affect the
provisioning of ecosystem services.
• The Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program conducted a vulnerability assessment of
the city of Satellite Beach, Florida, using a GIS platform to construct a three dimensional model
of the city. Land elevation was added to the base map using LiDAR topographic data and aerial
photographs. The assessment identified critical assets in Satellite Beach that would be vulnerable
to different sea level rise scenarios. The Indian River Lagoon NEP also specifically assessed the
vulnerability of wetlands to sea level rise by using SLAMM. The NEP and consultants employed
a methodology similar to one used previously by the Partnership for the Delaware Estuary. This
information is being used to identify priorities for habitat restoration and conservation.
6 CLIMATE CHANGE RISK MANAGEMENT
-------
Risk evaluation
This is the process of cross-referencing the risk assessment with the organization's context to decide
which risks are of concern, and then to prioritize problems. Decisions about whether or not risks need
further action are outcomes of this step.
Earlier this report pointed out that NEPs tend to start with risks about which they were already
concerned. In essence, they have already performed a risk evaluation, and they know they will
continue to work on issues that are important in their context. When more comprehensive risk
identification is available and many risks have been found to be worthy of attention, then a
prioritization of further action is needed.
• The Charlotte Harbor Estuary Program (CHNEP) used stakeholder judgment to rank multiple
risks. A survey was developed to determine which risks were of highest priority for stakeholders.
The survey results and subcommittee helped narrow the list of candidate indicators to 18. Then
CHNEP's Management Conference approved a final set of five indicators: changes to precipitation
trend/patterns (including extreme precipitation), sea level rise, water temperature, phenology, and
habitat migration.
Selection of risk treatment options
After risks are evaluated in the prior step, some will have been assigned for further action. This
step—the development of an adaptation plan—is the process of selecting strategies that will be
used to avoid risks or lessen their impact.
Preparing and implementing risk treatment plans
This is the step where an adaptation plan will be put into action. Risks will be mitigated or
adaptations to unavoidable impacts will be implemented.
Most CRE partners are working on projects that correspond to steps earlier in the risk management
process. As they continue to assess climate change in their watersheds, more NEPs will reach the
step of deciding that they have an opportunity or a need to respond.
• The Partnership for the Delaware Estuary (PDE) focused on three risk areas from the beginning and
intended to address adaptation measures for them regardless of other potential risks, so they did not
engage in the previous risk evaluation step. PDE used expert consultation to determine
adaptation options. As described in the June 2010 report, "Climate Change and the Delaware
Estuary: Three Case Studies in Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Planning," scientists and
managers with expertise in each of the case study areas identified and ranked their concerns and
recommended adaptation options, which are leading to follow-on work.
• In some instances, the work that NEPs did in their CRE projects has led their stakeholders to
continue the adaptation process. Punta Gorda, Florida, developed a climate change adaptation
plan for the city through its partnership with the Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program. The
Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership has worked with government groups in their watershed
to address the problems that were raised through its Oyster River Culvert Study.
-------
Climate Ready Estuaries Partners, 2008-2011
Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Program
Barnegat Bay Partnership
Casco Bay Estuary Partnership
Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program
Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program
Long Island Sound Study
Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership
Massachusetts Bays Program
Morro Bay National Estuary Program
Narragansett Bay Estuary Program
New York-New Jersey Harbor Estuary Program
Partnership for the Delaware Estuary
Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership
Puget Sound Partnership
San Francisco Estuary Partnership
Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission
Sarasota Bay Estuary Program
Tampa Bay Estuary Program
Tillamook Estuaries Partnership
Office of Water
EPA-842-R-13-003
December 2012
e Climate Ready Estuaries 2011 Progress Report
------- |