Interacting risks

The second CCRA (CCRA2) was published in 2017 and was supported by a comprehensive Evidence Report from the Adaptation Sub-Committee (ASC). Defra and the devolved administrations are in the process of drafting updated national adaptation programmes in response to the risks and opportunities set out in the report.

The third CCRA will be published by the government in January 2022, and Defra have asked the ASC to produce an accompanying Evidence Report by summer 2021.To inform this Evidence Report the ASC are commissioning six research projects, funded by Defra, the devolved administrations and the research councils. The ASC has been engaging with relevant stakeholders (e.g. researchers, funders, academies) with a view of addressing key evidence gaps from the CCRA2 report on a variety of timescales. The scientific literature is also being reviewed to identify work that may already exist in these areas.

Effective adaptation cannot be undertaken without careful consideration of the cross-cutting nature of risks, and trade-offs or synergies between adaptation activities. Unless cross-cutting issues are considered, actions could be ineffective, sub-optimal in terms of their costs and benefits, or lead to unintended consequences. Climate change risks act together to impact upon natural capital, water security, food security, wellbeing, economic prosperity and ultimately global security. For example water security risks interact strongly with those affecting the natural environment (mainly through soil condition and biodiversity). How water is managed in the future will have implications for agricultural production, public health and wellbeing, natural capital and infrastructure service provision. Understanding how risks interact is also critical for assessing the overall costs and benefits of policy intervention. This understanding enables policy makers to understand how to achieve desired outcomes at least cost and avoid unintended consequences. The first CCRA undertook a detailed and systematic mapping exercise to identify how particular risks create cascading impacts across different sectors. For example, a flood can cause direct damages to buildings, but also have knock-on effects on people's mental health, on business continuity and on supply chains. Identifying cascading effects between the natural environment, built environment and infrastructure was identified as a key evidence gap in CCRA2. The current evidence on interacting risks was considered in the chapter for the 2016 Evidence Report on cross-cutting issues. The work here highlighted that there are significant evidence gaps in our understanding of what the most important types of interactions are. This research project will provide a much more detailed assessment, systematically assessing the links and cascading effects between the different sectors in specific locations by using latest systems models and considering societal interactions.

** See Specification for more detail ***