Météo-France - 2009
This is an interview of Stephane Hallegatte, a researcher in environmental economics and climate sciences for Météo-France and the Centre International de Recherche sur l’Environnement et le Développement (CIRED). He co-authored groups I and II of the IPCC 4th assessment report (French inter-ministerial working group on the assessment of climate change impacts). His research includes:
- Economic consequences of natural disasters
- Assessment of economic impacts due to climate change
- Development of public and private strategies to adapt to climate change
In order to reduce climate change impacts in the future, we have to change today our modes of production and consumption – our socio-economic structures. One important characteristic of our climate system is it’s inertia, that is, it takes a long time from when something happens to when we see the total consequences. Climate change must be addressed today locally for a global benefit. Planet Action supports projects actively engaged in mitigating and adapting to the new climate conditions.
The scientific consensus is that climate is warming, and that this increase is due to human activities. Over this century, temperatures will keep rising, even though the amplitude of this warming and its consequences are still largely uncertain.
Socio-economic systems have been created and designed as a function of the climate they operate within. For instance, a North African city does not look like a Northern European city: urbanism, architecture, economic activities, and lifestyles are different. Of course, many other parameters play important roles; culture is essential. But climate is also a driver. With a changing climate, socio-economic systems will have to adapt. But even though social changes can be very fast, socio-economic systems are also very inert in some aspects (buildings, infrastructures, etc.). The question is therefore: will socio-economic systems be able to change rapidly enough to ‘follow’ the change in climate conditions? To do so, the key will be anticipation in the most inert sectors: where future climate changes will be anticipated and taken into account in a proactive way, impacts will be much lower than where adaptation is reactive only.
Why mitigation policies engaged at a local level (reforestation, sustainable agricultural practices...) are crucial to make adaptation much easier?
From an economic point of view, mitigation and adaptation are the two sides of the same coin, and they cannot be designed separately. Mitigation actions have to take into account adaptation: new buildings should consume less energy, and be less vulnerable to higher temperatures. And adaptation actions have to take into account mitigation: adaptation to high temperature should not be based on energy-consuming air conditioning only.
By donating imagery and GIS technologies, Planet Action makes a link between scientists and stakeholders (NGO's, farmers, local authorities...), but also aims to raise awareness and educate the public about Climate Change : do you think it's an efficient
The key for adaptation in inert sectors will be the anticipation of future changes: modifying our urbanism and buildings can easily (and cheaply) be done over a century; it cannot be done over a few years, when impacts will be actually felt. But anticipation requires information and awareness… So, any action that promotes climate education reduces future climate vulnerability and allows to compensate for socio-economic inertia. This is especially true for ‘small’ actors that cannot dedicate large resources to research, information gathering and prospective.