Adaptation options: prioritization and implementation

The WWF is run at a local level by the following offices...

Zimbabwe

There are many management actions that can reduce the vulnerability of coastal ecosystems and biodiversity to the impacts of climate change.

Prioritizing

There are many theoretically possible adaptation measures but some of these options may not be feasible or desirable for your project objectives or in your area. Some critical questions to ask are:

1) Will this be effective? How effective would this measure be in achieving the overall aim of reducing vulnerability to climate change?

2) Is this technically feasible? Does the technology and/ or expertise exist to carry out this measure? Could this measure be implemented at a local or, in some cases, national scale?

3) Is this financially/logistically feasible? Are there sufficient resources available to carry out this measure? How much would it cost to implement this measure and who would pay?

4) Are there any risks associated with this option? Could there be any detrimental impacts on sea turtles, the ecosystem, local communities etc.? Might the results of implementing this measure be unacceptable?

5) Considering all the previous criteria, is this a practical option to put into place now and would you recommend it?

Although subjective, this is a quick way of determining what the feasible options are at the moment.

A simple way of prioritizing options is to use a screening matrix. Involve partners and anyone who would be involved in implementation in reviewing the possible options. There are many other ways of prioritizing among options. Some approaches, such as Cost-Benefit Analysis and Multi-Criteria Analysis consider the costs and benefits of a range of adaptation measures under different climate scenarios. Another option is ranking, where each strategy is ranked according to its feasibility, costs and benefits.