We
know
climate
change
is
happening,
but
it’s
uncertain
as
to
how
the
impacts
will
play
out,
to
what
extent,
where,
affecting
whom.
In
the
sixth
chapter of Navigating
Uncertainty:
Radical
Rethinking
for
a
Turbulent
World,
I
again
look
at
models
and
how
they
act
to
mutually
construct
a
particular
set
of
global
policy
responses,
often
ignoring
the
challenges
on
the
ground.
From
the
promise
of
prediction
to
the
realities
on
the
ground
As
the
chapter
notes,
“Climate
change
is
perhaps
the
most
challenging
source
of
uncertainty
faced
by
humanity
today….
Climate
events
can
upset
stabilised
knowledge
about
economies
and
financial
systems;
new
technological
innovations
that
facilitate
transitions
to
low-carbon
economies
carry
with
them
many
uncertainties
and
so
regulatory
challenges;
extreme
climate-induced
shocks
can
test
any
critical
infrastructure
and
those
trying
to
generate
reliable
supply
of
critical
services;
climate
change
can
result
in
transformations
of
environments
that
entail
the
emergence
of
pandemic
zoonoses
and
disasters
and
emergencies
are
frequently
made
worse
by
climate
change,
as
droughts
or
floods
for
example
become
more
extreme.
Climate
change
therefore
impinges
on
all
facets
of
life,
generating
new
uncertainties,
even
if
we
are
now
certain
that
change
is
accelerating.
Yet
different
people
–
from
UN
officials
to
climate
modellers
to
fishers
and
farmers…
experience
climate
change
in
very
different
ways.”
The
chapter
asks
how
can
the
global
science
of
climate
change
prediction
and
scenario
development
connect
with
the
highly
uncertain
local
conditions
faced
on
the
ground?
The
chapter
moves
from
the
IPCC
process
aiming
at
‘scientific
consensus’
to
the
UK
Met
Office
that
produces
elaborate
predictive
climate
models
to
the
collaborative
approaches
to
global
circulation
modelling
before
shifting
to
two
places
on
the
front-lines
of
climate
change
–
the
Sundarbans
in
India/Bangladesh
and
dryland
farming
areas
of
southern
Zimbabwe.
Here
responses
to
climate
change
have
to
contend
with
uncertainties
–
even
the
increasingly
sophisticated
downscaled
models
are
no
use
day-to-day.
Zimbabwean
farmers
and
Indian
delta
dwellers
know
full
well
that
climate
change
is
happening,
but
they
need
to
adapt
to
survive.
Despite
improvements
in
climate
modelling,
uncertainties
remain.
A
more
circumspect,
humble
approach
to
modelling
is
needed.
As Andrea
Saltelli
and
colleagues argue,
“Mathematical
models
are
a
great
way
to
explore
questions.
They
are
also
a
dangerous
way
to
assert
answers.”
Instead,
they
argue,
modelling
needs
to
be
aware
of
the
assumptions
that
are
in-built,
avoid
the
hubris
of
assuming
that
models
are
right,
be
attentive
to
models’
framings,
be
aware
of
the
unknowns
and
think
about
the
consequences.
There
is
a
need
therefore
to
establish
“new
social
norms
such
that
modellers
are
not
permitted
to
project
more
certainty
than
their
models
deserve,
and
politicians
are
not
allowed
to
offload
accountability
to
models
of
their
choosing.”
This
is
a
key
lesson
from
the
book,
whether
around
pandemics,
disasters
or
climate
change.
The
politics
of
climate
adaptation
Today,
there
are
many
projects
aiming
to
address
climate
change,
climate-smart,
climate-proofed,
climate-resilient
are
all
the
buzzwords
of
contemporary
development.
But,
as
the
chapter
explains,
“The
problem
is
that
once
again
such
projects
aim
to
‘fix’
something
through
a
technical-managerial
intervention,
aiming
to
return
to
stability
in
the
face
of
variability
or
reducing
‘vulnerability’
to
climate
change.
Rather,
climate
adaptation
–
as
the
term
suggests
–
is
more
about
living
with
uncertainties
and
working
with
inevitable
variability
in
a
warming
world,
at
the
same
time
as
transforming
the
conditions
that
give
rise
to
vulnerabilities
in
the
first
place.
The
trouble
is
that
adaptation
for
some
means
isolating
yourself
from
climate
change
–
moving
away
from
a
flood
plain,
buying
expensive
insurance,
installing
more
air
conditioning
–
while
for
others
it
means
coping
and
suffering
under
increasingly
harsh
conditions
with
limited
means….
Climate
change
thus
also
intersects
with
wider
class,
race,
gender
and
other
politics.”
This
suggests
questions
of
climate
justice.
As
the
chapter
shows,
for
many,
“climate
cannot
be
separated
off
from
wider
demands
for
land
reclamation,
asset
redistribution
and
wider
agrarian
reform,
alongside
addressing
questions
of
‘loss
and
damage’
caused
by
climate
change.
Articulating
climate
change
debates
with
wider
considerations
of
justice
is
therefore
essential….
not
all
uncertainties
are
the
same
for
all
people,
as
they
emerge
from
the
particular
dynamics
of
capitalism
and
its
uneven
spatial
and
temporal
impacts….
Accepting
that
climate
change
and
capitalism,
and
so
questions
of
justice
and
redistribution,
are
intimately
bound
up
is
essential
and
reminds
us
that
uncertainties
are
not
evenly
distributed,
and
a
neoliberal
resort
to
individualised
‘flexible
coping’
through
market
mechanisms
is
wholly
inadequate.
Addressing
the
fundamental,
underlying
causes
of
climate
change
remain
urgent
and
must
not
be
lost
sight
of.”
Co-constructing
responses
to
climate
change
Following
Sheila
Jasanoff,
I
ask:
“How,
at
the
levels
of
community,
polity,
space
and
time,
will
scientists’
impersonal
knowledge
of
the
climate
be
synchronized
with
the
mundane
rhythms
of
lived
lives
and
the
specificities
of
human
experience?
A
global
consensus
on
the
meaning
and
urgency
of
climate
change
cannot
arise
on
the
basis
of
expert
consensus
alone.”
In
addition
to
climate
models,
there
is
a
need
for
“bottom-up
adaptation
assessments,
collaborative
modelling
approaches,
participatory
scenario
development,
plural
methodological
approaches,
such
as
combining
arts
approaches
with
scientific
assessments,
and
appreciative
inquiry
of
complex
problems
can
therefore
all
be
part
of
a
reimagined
science
for
climate
change.
This
requires
different
types
of
expertise,
including
more
hybrid,
cross-disciplinary
capacities,
the
ability
to
facilitate
and
integrate
alongside
knowledge
brokers
and
connecting
modelling
and
science
‘from
above’
with
the
local
context,”
as
Lyla
Mehta
and
colleagues
argue.
To
tackle
climate
change
effectively
there
therefore
needs
to
be
a
greater
commitment
to
what
Jasanoff
calls
‘co-construction’
–
where
modellers
and
local
people
on
the
front-lines
interact
to
define
problems
and
solutions
together.
As
the
chapter
concludes,
“addressing
global
climate
change
means
engaging
with
how
people
living
with
climate-related
uncertainties
–
and
that
means
everyone,
the
world
over.
It
thus
means
making
responses
more
real,
tangible
and
urgent
than
a
generic,
impersonal
risk-based
science
can
ever
do.”
This
series
of
blogs
gives
a
taste
of
the
different
chapters,
but
you
will
have
to
read
the
book
to
get
the
full
picture,
as
well
as
all
the
case
study
details,
the
references
and
footnotes!
You
can
buy
the
book
(or
download
it
for
free)
through
this
link: Navigating
Uncertainty:
Radical
Rethinking
for
a
Turbulent
World
(politybooks.com).
It
comes
out
in
the
US
tomorrow!
Do
come
along
to
the
remaining
launches
in
October
in
Zurich
(today!),
Bern,
Geneva
and
Paris,
see BOOK:
Navigating
Uncertainty
–
Pastoralism,
Uncertainty
and
Resilience
–
PASTRES (or
listen
to
the
recording
from
the
IDS
event
here: Navigating
uncertainty:
Radical
rethinking
for
a
turbulent
World
–
Institute
of
Development
Studies
(ids.ac.uk)).
Post
published
in:
Agriculture
