IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v157y2019i3d10.1007_s10584-019-02579-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When can decision analysis improve climate adaptation planning? Two procedures to match analysis approaches with adaptation problems

Author

Listed:
  • Rui Shi

    (Johns Hopkins University)

  • Benjamin F. Hobbs

    (Johns Hopkins University)

  • Huai Jiang

    (Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc.)

Abstract

Climate adaptation decisions are difficult because the future climate is deeply uncertain. Combined with uncertainties concerning the cost, lifetime, and effectiveness of adaptation measures, this implies that the net benefits of alternative adaptation strategies are ambiguous. On one hand, a simple analysis that disregards uncertainty might lead to near-term choices that are later regretted if future circumstances differ from those assumed. On the other hand, careful uncertainty-based decision analyses can be costly in personnel and time and might not make a difference. This paper considers two questions adaptation managers might ask. First, what type of analysis is most appropriate for a particular adaptation decision? We answer this question by proposing a six-step screening procedure to compare the usefulness of predict-then-act analysis, multi-scenario analysis without adaptive options, and multi-scenario analysis incorporating adaptive options. A tutorial application is presented using decision trees. However, this procedure may be cumbersome if managers face several adaptation problems simultaneously. Hence, a second question is how can managers quickly identify problems that would benefit most from thorough decision analysis? To address this question, we propose a procedure that ranks multiple adaptation problems in terms of the necessity and value of comprehensive analysis. Analysis can then emphasize the highest-ranking problems. This procedure is illustrated by a ranking of adaptation problems in the Chesapeake Bay region. The two complementary procedures proposed here can help managers focus analytical efforts where they will be most useful.

Suggested Citation

  • Rui Shi & Benjamin F. Hobbs & Huai Jiang, 2019. "When can decision analysis improve climate adaptation planning? Two procedures to match analysis approaches with adaptation problems," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 611-630, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:157:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02579-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-019-02579-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-019-02579-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-019-02579-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michelle Woodward & Zoran Kapelan & Ben Gouldby, 2014. "Adaptive Flood Risk Management Under Climate Change Uncertainty Using Real Options and Optimization," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(1), pages 75-92, January.
    2. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, October.
    3. Matthew Sturm & Michael A. Goldstein & Henry Huntington & Thomas A. Douglas, 2017. "Using an option pricing approach to evaluate strategic decisions in a rapidly changing climate: Black–Scholes and climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 437-449, February.
    4. Berry Gersonius & Richard Ashley & Assela Pathirana & Chris Zevenbergen, 2013. "Climate change uncertainty: building flexibility into water and flood risk infrastructure," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 411-423, January.
    5. Paul Watkiss & Alistair Hunt & William Blyth & Jillian Dyszynski, 2015. "The use of new economic decision support tools for adaptation assessment: A review of methods and applications, towards guidance on applicability," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 132(3), pages 401-416, October.
    6. Alexander M. R. Bakker & Domitille Louchard & Klaus Keller, 2017. "Sources and implications of deep uncertainties surrounding sea-level projections," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 339-347, February.
    7. W Neil Adger & Jon Barnett, 2009. "Four Reasons for Concern about Adaptation to Climate Change," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(12), pages 2800-2805, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Coughlan de Perez, Erin & Stephens, Elisabeth & van Aalst, Maarten & Bazo, Juan & Fournier-Tombs, Eleonore & Funk, Sebastian & Hess, Jeremy J. & Ranger, Nicola & Lowe, Rachel, 2022. "Epidemiological versus meteorological forecasts: Best practice for linking models to policymaking," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 521-526.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Graeme Guthrie, 2019. "Real options analysis of climate-change adaptation: investment flexibility and extreme weather events," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 231-253, September.
    2. Haixing Liu & Yuntao Wang & Chi Zhang & Albert S. Chen & Guangtao Fu, 2018. "Assessing real options in urban surface water flood risk management under climate change," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 94(1), pages 1-18, October.
    3. Chi Truong & Matteo Malavasi & Han Li & Stefan Trueck & Pavel V. Shevchenko, 2024. "Optimal dynamic climate adaptation pathways: a case study of New York City," Papers 2402.02745, arXiv.org.
    4. Lee, Sangjun & Zhao, Jinhua, 2021. "Adaptation to climate change: Extreme events versus gradual changes," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    5. Julie Shortridge & Seth Guikema & Ben Zaitchik, 2017. "Robust decision making in data scarce contexts: addressing data and model limitations for infrastructure planning under transient climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 323-337, January.
    6. Charles Sims & Sarah Null & Josue Medellin-Azuara, 2017. "Hurry up or wait: The effect of climate change and variability on the timing of private adaptation," Working Papers 2017-04, University of Tennessee, Department of Economics.
    7. Thomas David Pol & Jochen Hinkel, 2019. "Uncertainty representations of mean sea-level change: a telephone game?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 393-411, March.
    8. G. Guthrie, 2021. "Adapting to Rising Sea Levels: How Short-Term Responses Complement Long-Term Investment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(4), pages 635-668, April.
    9. Olga Špačková & Daniel Straub, 2015. "Cost‐Benefit Analysis for Optimization of Risk Protection Under Budget Constraints," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(5), pages 941-959, May.
    10. KARRI PASANEN & MIKKO KURTTILA & JOUNI PYKÄlÄINEN & JYRKI KANGAS & PEKKA LESKINEN, 2005. "Mesta — Non-Industrial Private Forest Owners' Decision-Support Environment For The Evaluation Of Alternative Forest Plans Over The Internet," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(04), pages 601-620.
    11. Samuel Asumadu Sarkodie & Maruf Yakubu Ahmed & Phebe Asantewaa Owusu, 2022. "Global adaptation readiness and income mitigate sectoral climate change vulnerabilities," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, December.
    12. Gerd Gigerenzer, 1997. "Bounded Rationality: Models of Fast and Frugal Inference," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 133(II), pages 201-218, June.
    13. Shuang Liu & Kirsten Maclean & Cathy Robinson, 2019. "A cost-effective framework to prioritise stakeholder participation options," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(3), pages 221-241, November.
    14. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    15. Xueke Li & Amanda H. Lynch, 2023. "New insights into projected Arctic sea road: operational risks, economic values, and policy implications," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(4), pages 1-16, April.
    16. Chorus, Caspar & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Sobhani, Anae & Szép, Teodóra, 2021. "Obfuscation maximization-based decision-making: Theory, methodology and first empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 28-44.
    17. Perrels, Adriaan & Molarius, Riitta & Porthin, Markus & Rosqvist, Tony, 2008. "Testing a Flood Protection Case by Means of a Group Decision Support System," Discussion Papers 449, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    18. Ahrens, Heinz & Kantelhardt, Jochen, 2007. "Integrating Ecological And Economic Aspects In Land Use Concepts: Some Conclusions From A Regional Land Use Concept For Bayerisches Donauried," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7986, Agricultural Economics Society.
    19. Baudry, Gino & Delrue, Florian & Legrand, Jack & Pruvost, Jérémy & Vallée, Thomas, 2017. "The challenge of measuring biofuel sustainability: A stakeholder-driven approach applied to the French case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 933-947.
    20. Kyeongseok Kim & Ji-Sung Kim, 2018. "Economic Assessment of Flood Control Facilities under Climate Uncertainty: A Case of Nakdong River, South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-17, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:157:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02579-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.