Optional, not always needed

Scope and review

The processes in Element 1 can lay the foundation for deeper discussions of shared challenges, goals, governance, data and information needs in Element 2.

This element follows an unstructured approach (which can be adapted for decision makers or communities) to explore issues that are not focussed on direct climate risks or impacts alone.

Back to introduction

Next element (demo link)

Scope

Integrate

Co-design

Co-explore

Questions

1. What local organizations and initiatives are already working on issues of climate resilience and related issues? Are there partnership opportunities? ±Partnership development

2. Who can provide climate (and non-climate) information? Which actors may be intermediaries or boundary partners to collaborate with in the co-production process (they may have been working in the region a long time, and created strong relationships with stakeholders which will enable better uptake and embedding of any processes)? Note that intermediaries may not be self-identifying in many contexts. What expertise can they provide? ±Partnership development

3. Which organizations, institutions or departments provide the relevant sectoral expertise and experience needed?

4. What gaps in skills or expertise may need to be filled through additional partnerships?

5. What are the greatest challenges within the decision context that do not allow safe living conditions or a good quality of life? What is the ‘lived experience’?

6. What are the socio-economic challenges in the region, (including factors beyond the control of decision-makers) e.g. that affect access to or management of particular resources?

7. What is the current use of climate information – what relevant climate services or reports are available with regards to other risks and impacts (disaster, environmental, social etc.)?

8. Which groups are impacted on the ground (e.g. at community level) and can provide representative voice(s)?

9. What are the different communities and activities at risk? How does vulnerability differ amongst groups and activities? Why are they vulnerable? Be open to sources of vulnerability that are not necessarily related to climate. E.g., related to dynamic social vulnerability.

10. Where are the most vulnerable areas and why are they vulnerable? Be open to vulnerability that is not necessarily related to climate. E.g., related to ecosystem services.

11. If there are other types of vulnerability (e.g. socio-economic) that are not necessarily related to climate, what drives this vulnerability?

12. Do climate or weather events and impacts affect/exacerbate these vulnerabilities, and if so, in what way?

13. Is there any risk of exacerbated vulnerability here or elsewhere, due to compound or cascading risks?

14. What language is used by different actors to describe the same concepts e.g., related to risk, vulnerability, resilience etc.? Can less technical (or local) language be used? How do these terms translate into the day-to-day work of actors? Can a shared understanding of different terms and their usage be reached? ±Communication