Climate change impact in coastal areas of
the Rio de la Plata River
Actions for prevention and adaptation
Methodological approach
The participatory approach in the construction of knowledge
Local stakeholder training through their participation in the
project
Caso
Daño sufrido por las viviendas (u$s)
Una vez cada
dos años
Una vez cada
diez años
Valor
esperado
Sin cambio climático 605.426 726.512 490.395
Con cambio climático 726.512 968.682 617.535
Daño incremental 121.085 242.171 127.140
Incremento porcentual del daño 20% 33% 26%
Municipal level, preparing a technical diagnosis and
identified the main areas at risk using multi criteria
analysis
Community level, risk perception, adaptation
practices and validating the technical information.
Different scale of cities and access to local authorities is
the opportunity to test different approaches within
the project
Small cities in URU: size of study area is smaller, less
stakeholders involved, easier and more direct
communication but less autonomy from higher
government levels.
Big cities in ARG: bigger in size, less direct
communication (vertical organization) but greater
autonomy for decision making process.
• URU: Undergoing an institutional re-design, which
includes a more holistic approaches and work at
multiple levels. Changes contemplate the active
participation of citizens in the drafting of plans.
• ARG: The process is at an earlier stage. There has not
been important changes in the institutional structure
or the legal framework to support CC adaptation
cross – cutting areas and sectors.
Different CCA national approaches and stages
DR and CC planning is still seen as a responsibility of
the environmental offices only, plans and actions
from different offices (drainage and public space
maintenance, housing, etc) that might increase
vulnerability and risk followed without regarding CC
adaptation.
Norms and plans in all levels lack of strategies and
action regarding CC adaptation.
Institutional barriers opportunitiesfor CBA
DR and CC management structures within local
governments: are not integrated into local
development planning. Lack of technical capacities,
there is still a traditional emergency response
approach. Lack of financial resources assign to deal
with DR , much less to start planning for CCA.
Opportunity for raising awareness over the links
between urban and infrastructure planning,
emergency management, housing, etc., and over the
role played by different stakeholders.
Institutional barriers opportunities for CBA
Institutional barriers opportunities for CBA
Difficulties to learn from failures: old land use
regulations, urban plans and poverty reduction
policies. It seems not easy to accept that the current
risks in cities are consequence in part of institutional
wrong decisions, or lack of decisions, and is attribute
them to the informal use of land or the informal and
spontaneous adaptations actions of the community.
Opportunity to improve and renew urban planning and
poverty alleviation policies from a community base
and more integrated approach.
Tensions between scientific information and the
information needed for local management : types of
information generated not what local managers
need, language used is also inappropriate, difficult to
share information between different disciplines and
stakeholders.
Community can force the generation of clear and
practical information and can multiply the ways of
spreading it, opening different options to enable
more effective actions in cities.
Institutional barriers opportunities for CBA
Sensibility regarding the information of the future
and not certain climate data. Politicians do not
inform over probable flood risk areas. Real – state
pressure, and unresolved current needs limits the
decision making process and in consequence the
local government response.
The damaged community involvement can drive
decision maker actions and awareness the rest of the
community for starting adaptation.
Institutional barriers opportunities for CBA
Thank you

Climate change impact in coastal areas of the Rio de la Plata River, Actions for prevention and adaptation

  • 1.
    Climate change impactin coastal areas of the Rio de la Plata River Actions for prevention and adaptation
  • 2.
    Methodological approach The participatoryapproach in the construction of knowledge Local stakeholder training through their participation in the project
  • 3.
    Caso Daño sufrido porlas viviendas (u$s) Una vez cada dos años Una vez cada diez años Valor esperado Sin cambio climático 605.426 726.512 490.395 Con cambio climático 726.512 968.682 617.535 Daño incremental 121.085 242.171 127.140 Incremento porcentual del daño 20% 33% 26% Municipal level, preparing a technical diagnosis and identified the main areas at risk using multi criteria analysis
  • 4.
    Community level, riskperception, adaptation practices and validating the technical information.
  • 5.
    Different scale ofcities and access to local authorities is the opportunity to test different approaches within the project Small cities in URU: size of study area is smaller, less stakeholders involved, easier and more direct communication but less autonomy from higher government levels. Big cities in ARG: bigger in size, less direct communication (vertical organization) but greater autonomy for decision making process.
  • 6.
    • URU: Undergoingan institutional re-design, which includes a more holistic approaches and work at multiple levels. Changes contemplate the active participation of citizens in the drafting of plans. • ARG: The process is at an earlier stage. There has not been important changes in the institutional structure or the legal framework to support CC adaptation cross – cutting areas and sectors. Different CCA national approaches and stages
  • 7.
    DR and CCplanning is still seen as a responsibility of the environmental offices only, plans and actions from different offices (drainage and public space maintenance, housing, etc) that might increase vulnerability and risk followed without regarding CC adaptation. Norms and plans in all levels lack of strategies and action regarding CC adaptation. Institutional barriers opportunitiesfor CBA
  • 8.
    DR and CCmanagement structures within local governments: are not integrated into local development planning. Lack of technical capacities, there is still a traditional emergency response approach. Lack of financial resources assign to deal with DR , much less to start planning for CCA. Opportunity for raising awareness over the links between urban and infrastructure planning, emergency management, housing, etc., and over the role played by different stakeholders. Institutional barriers opportunities for CBA
  • 9.
    Institutional barriers opportunitiesfor CBA Difficulties to learn from failures: old land use regulations, urban plans and poverty reduction policies. It seems not easy to accept that the current risks in cities are consequence in part of institutional wrong decisions, or lack of decisions, and is attribute them to the informal use of land or the informal and spontaneous adaptations actions of the community. Opportunity to improve and renew urban planning and poverty alleviation policies from a community base and more integrated approach.
  • 10.
    Tensions between scientificinformation and the information needed for local management : types of information generated not what local managers need, language used is also inappropriate, difficult to share information between different disciplines and stakeholders. Community can force the generation of clear and practical information and can multiply the ways of spreading it, opening different options to enable more effective actions in cities. Institutional barriers opportunities for CBA
  • 11.
    Sensibility regarding theinformation of the future and not certain climate data. Politicians do not inform over probable flood risk areas. Real – state pressure, and unresolved current needs limits the decision making process and in consequence the local government response. The damaged community involvement can drive decision maker actions and awareness the rest of the community for starting adaptation. Institutional barriers opportunities for CBA
  • 12.