Climate Change: Resilience based approaches

Ram Ganesh Kamatham
24 min readJun 26, 2021


The key action to be taken by the international community against climate-change induced extreme weather events is building resilience. Central to this effort are advances in resilience thinking and methods to achieve it.

In this essay, aspects of resilience are evaluated from a trans-disciplinary perspective. Various interdependencies at play suggest that effective resilience solutions are contextual and require engagement across international, national and local community-based actors. They require integration of humanitarian and developmental goals and must involve all sections of society. Strategies such as build back better (BBB) and the creation of adaptive capacity within vulnerable communities are significant steps.

Implementation of resilience requires coherence across existing mechanisms, such as the 2015 Paris Agreement, the Sendai Framework and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Well-designed solutions integrate technology and the community, as well as green and grey infrastructure. The global transition towards clean energy and a green economy is of central importance given the macro-trend of urbanisation, and continued dependence on fossil fuels. The undervalued role of ecological approaches, social memory, and information management, towards disaster mitigation is also elaborated.

Finally, sources of cognitive dissonance, such as climate-change denial and outdated industrial-age models based on the “human mastery over nature” are challenged and refuted.

The magnitude of the challenge

In September 2017, hurricanes Harvey and Irma devastated several islands in the Caribbean and parts of the southern United States. Two weeks later Hurricane Maria unleashed more destruction. Overall, the 2017 Atlantic hurricane season caused an estimated damage of about US$200 billion, with significant loss of life and property. In light of these catastrophes the United Nations Secretary-General and the President of the General Assembly convened a meeting for affected member states[1].

The meeting was also an opportunity to highlight the role of climate change in extreme weather events, the urgent need for the promotion of resilient communities and the importance of the “humanitarian-development nexus” in order for communities to reduce risk and vulnerability to future threats from disasters.

The increasing incidence and intensity of hurricanes is one among several climate change risks associated with global warming[2]. Increase in surface and ocean temperatures have far reaching consequences for the future of humanity. These include rise in sea levels that will impact coastal communities, volatility in rainfall which will impact crop cultivation, and an increase in the acidity of seawater which will affect marine life. Second order effects such as mass migration, declining biodiversity, cascading market failures, political and social destabilisation in a nuclear-armed world, add a troubling dimension to the problem. While some of these might be low-probability high impact risks, overall, it is incontrovertible that climate change is an existential threat[3] facing the planet today.

Long-term mitigation of the worst effects of rising temperatures requires a shift towards sustainable development practices. Human activity or anthropogenic contributions towards global warming are well documented. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is now three decades old, and early reports on greenhouse gas emissions[4] remain prescient. The current consensus, widely held by scientists, is that emission of greenhouse gases particularly carbon dioxide is responsible for increase in the global mean temperatures. This process commenced with the Industrial Revolution, and energy generated by fossil fuels such as coal, petroleum and natural gas[5]. The present and most urgent goal articulated by the IPCC is preventing the increase of global temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

Resilience as a central paradigm

Resilience is the ability of a system to adapt to change. It is the capacity of the system to self-organise, withstand shocks, such as an extreme weather event or other disturbances, to recover, and use the event to catalyse renewal and innovation[6]. Early-warning systems and technical infrastructure, robust community-centric financial services, a sensitivity to emergent or novel practices that produce beneficial effects, and a keen awareness of ecological balance, are some of the different factors that contribute to the creation of resilience.

In the context of extreme weather events and resilience building, it is essential to realise that problem-solving must be based on a social-ecological system, one that consists of both human and natural elements coupled through dynamic interactions[7]. There is no standard solution universally applicable. Systems are necessarily local and contextual and have different but interdependent dimensions, as discussion of various cases will demonstrate.

Socioeconomic resilience and building back better

One significant approach quite popular amongst development agencies is the bolstering of socioeconomic resilience. This is evident in the idea of building back better (BBB), relevant in societies going through post-disaster recovery and reconstruction[8]. A feature of this approach to resilience is a keen awareness that disaster disproportionately affects the poor. They tend to suffer far greater losses in relative terms to wealthier people, and have less access to support to rebuild their lives and recover their livelihoods.

In a recent World Bank study, consumption losses experienced by impact on well-being was estimated at about US$520 billion a year[9]. This study is noteworthy since it used a new model that went beyond considerations of asset losses alone (such as damaged buildings, infrastructure or equipment). While asset loss has been the traditional metric, this model included three additional factors that considered loss of a population’s well-being. These were hazard (probability of an adverse event), exposure (assets and population in the affected area) and asset vulnerability (the fraction of the asset lost by a disaster)[10]. Socioeconomic resilience was based on the ratio of asset losses to well-being losses. This new model presented a far grimmer measure of potential losses, but also highlighted the greater risks to low-income countries and their ability to recover. It also promoted the idea that BBB could greatly reduce potential risks or future losses in a more holistic manner.

Building back better occurs at the end of a three-phase process, post-disaster.[11] The first responders are typically humanitarian actors who provide immediate relief. The second phase attempts restoration of basic services or critical infrastructure, such as power grids, or transport systems. The third phase attempts to rebuild and recover lost assets, typically involving insurance, special loans, or financial aid. The fourth step is BBB. Here resilient recovery is the main focus of return to normalcy.

BBB is aimed at stronger, faster and more inclusive resilience measures[12]. One aspect of building back stronger requires reconstructed buildings to withstand shocks for a 50-year period. For example, when the Caribbean island of Dominica was struck by Hurricane Maria in 2017, 70–80% of housing on the island was either damaged or destroyed. A World Bank supported housing reconstruction project focused on resilient building practices to rebuild in a manner that will reduce risk arising from future extreme weather events. A US$40 million project will develop an information management system, develop processes to identify beneficiaries deserving aid, and create technical assistance centres to train local building contractors and artisans[13].

Building back faster, considers income losses due to collapsed infrastructure and the consequent impact on well-being. Longer recovery periods will cause losses to accrue (for example personal savings may be used to tide over a short period, but prolonged loss of livelihood will have a greater negative impact), and so quicker implementation of recovery processes bolsters overall resilience. A pre-negotiated disaster contingency fund is one example of how to implement faster recovery processes.

Building back more inclusively is noteworthy because it seeks to provide recovery across a population irrespective of income levels. For example, when Fiji was struck by tropical cyclone Winston, asset losses amounted to US$1.4 billion. An existing social protection system was already in place, and so by scaling disbursement, beneficiaries were able to receive a total of US$5 million within a month of the disaster. These included some 22,804 households covered under a poverty protection scheme, 17,782 pensioners who received additional funds, as well as 3,313 families covered under a child protection scheme[14].

Socioeconomic resilience has several limitations. The test cases for many of the BBB initiatives are small island countries, although Nepal, Turkey and Indonesia are notable exceptions. Building back more inclusively may not work in large countries, or produce the same degree of resilience returns in high-income countries. Additionally, too much focus on financial risk-aversion in a climate-change induced disaster could cause insurance companies to shirk their social responsibility. They could calculate that due to the increased risk of climate-related disasters, they are justified in increasing their premiums (which is already happening in hurricane-prone Florida), which could in turn make insurance unaffordable for middle and low-income groups.[15]

Lastly, despite a more nuanced assessment of losses, there is a tendency to overstate the financial dimension and under deliver holistic resilience at the on-ground level. For example, financing on housing reconstruction efforts can trigger short term economic activity and recovery in an affected area, but there tends to be much less attention paid to ecological dimensions. The role of mangroves, coral reefs, or reforestation referred to as “green infrastructure”, which act as natural barriers to storm effects or flooding, tends to be under developed in project designs, when compared to grey infrastructure like concrete buildings, storm barriers, embankments and so on[16]. Even worse, this green infrastructure is also pulled into an insurance regime[17] which may look attractive in the short-term, but is unsustainable and destructive in the long term.

The best feature of this kind of resilience thinking remains the important linkage between effective disaster recovery and vulnerability due to poverty. It also demonstrates how to effectively link humanitarian and developmental approaches in post-disaster settings.

Biocultural resilience

Another contemporary approach towards resilience, is biocultural resilience, an approach that seeks to engage local value systems and creativity in developing contextual solutions, while retaining an ecological focus[18]. This approach recognises that cultural and biological diversity are interrelated, as evinced in the 2016 Ishikawa Declaration[19], among others.

Biocultural resilience highlights the fact that indigenous communities, sometimes in remote regions are at extreme levels of risk and vulnerability to extreme weather events or disasters[20]. However, there is a curious exception to this narrative worth recounting. In the aftermath of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, it was found that the Onge and Jarawa tribal populations living on the Andaman Islands experienced no casualties because they had fled to higher ground. This was despite significant loss of life in more densely populated parts of the archipelago affected by the intense earthquake and the 10m tsunami that followed. Anthropologists working in the region after the incident, attributed the low incidence of casualties to local folklore within the community that functioned as the equivalent of an emergency evacuation protocol. The community minimised casualties when they retreated from the beaches immediately after experiencing the initial earthquake tremors[21].

Creating adaptive capacities within coastal communities is another example of biocultural resilience. Fishing communities have already begun to feel the effects of climate change. For example, changes in the rainfall pattern in the Atauro and Batugade sub-districts of Timor-Leste have affected crop cycles and hence the fishers’ ability to go to sea[22]. Sardine populations, which makes up the bulk of the catch in this area, are sensitive to high rainfall and the resultant run-off from nutrient rich river water into coastal areas. An NGO network engaged the local community to develop adaptive strategies to reduced incomes caused by weather variability (sudden dip in rainfall during the May-June period) and poor catches. This particular initiative was part of a larger intervention involving two coastal and three inland-systems. The developmental aims here were spread across five domains. These were creation of emergency reserves or community assets to be drawn on in times of need, flexibility to change strategies, enabling collective action, recognising change, and developing agency within the community to decide response strategies on their own terms[23].

Lack of biocultural sensitivity can have catastrophic consequences. Developmental agendas pursued in the absence of community involvement and a consultative process can produce horrible first and second order effects. For example, in Mali, climate-change induced variations in already erratic rainfall (alternating heavy periods of rainfall and severe drought) destroyed traditional grazing areas. As a result, nomadic pastoralists moved their animals into cultivated land near the valleys. This put the herders into resource conflict with farmers[24]. State priorities tended towards farmers and agricultural expansion, and the economic model of the state as well as resource allocation by international donors, neglected pastoralists and the need for pastures[25] in favour of high-yield cultivation. The result, was a rise in violent extremism amongst pastoralists, leading to violent conflict in 2012. This is of course a crude summary. There are other complex issues and geopolitical factors behind the conflict in Mali, which require broader study and context to understand.

What this case does illustrate though, is that second order effects of climate change leading to social unrest, are not so far-fetched. It also shows the value of knowing local practices beyond broad utilitarian conceptions, such as the significance of a physical location, or a particular relationship with an animal or plant, gender sensitivities or gender related division of labour. These insights go a long way when framing problems and attempting solution designs.

The role of memory in social resilience

An under-appreciated aspect of resilience comes from social memory and narratives of disaster recovery that have remained in community consciousness. The attitudes and character of a population during and after a crisis, can significantly shape the outcomes in the next instance of crisis, or even inspire another community or nation to bounce back. For example, the Hyogo Prefectural Art Museum in Kobe was built as a symbol of rebirth after the 1995 earthquake, and the architect’s aim was to signify the “spiritual reconstruction of a people though art”[26]. Build back better as a strategy, found traction after the reconstruction efforts in Aceh in Indonesia post-tsunami in 2004. An eight-year period of total urban regeneration costing about US$7 billion and involving a multi-donor relief fund has totally transformed the area[27]. This spirit of renewal, can also be fostered between countries during humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) missions or during reconstruction support. At the very least, small scale narratives of overcoming adversity together, can improve bilateral relations. In the best case, they can supplement regional solidarities and the planning of integrated disaster risk reduction strategies via regional organisations. For example, a 2017 regional strategy for disaster risk management was routed through the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), which has seven countries with very high risk of exposure to natural hazards and several small island developing states[28].

Implementation: Making resilience a reality

No discussion of contemporary global resilience building efforts can be complete without referencing the 2015 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction[29]. The seven targets and four priority areas of this seminal agreement set a clear direction for states to develop capacities to evaluate disaster risk, bolster risk governance and disaster management, invest in resilience and enhance recovery. The framework also harmonises with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) particularly the goals of ending poverty (SDG 1), creating sustainable cities (SDG 11) and combating climate change (SDG 13). This integration helps national governments plan effective cross-cutting strategies, based on common indicators[30]. For example, state responsibility in reducing disaster related loss (casualties, missing persons and directly affected persons per 100,000 populations) impinges on all three SDGs stated above.

There is no shortage of human ingenuity or technocratic solutions to climate-related disaster risks. However, in the light of the theme and discussions presented so far, a few salient actions are discussed on how to move resilience from concept to reality.

Transition to clean energy

The pivot to clean and renewable energy is the most significant way to boost global urban resilience and trigger a variety of beneficial effects. Countries are negotiating this energy transition, though progress in 2018–2019 was halting given poor improvement in efforts towards environmental sustainability, and mixed progress in the areas of economic growth and development[31]. The World Economic Forum’s report on energy transition is not reassuring, with 2019 showing the lowest year-on-year increase in global preparedness in the last 5 years[32]. Interestingly, one of the indicators in the measurement of transition readiness is human capital and consumer participation, measured by the availability of jobs opportunities in low-carbon industries and education quality in management of these new systems. Globally, this scored the lowest, in relation to five other factors that involved the existing energy system, capital, infrastructure, governance and the regulatory environment[33].

Civil society has a major role to play here. Decarbonising will involve job-loss in some sectors. The ability to create alternative opportunities and develop appropriate skills in renewable energy, is low at present. One way of interpreting this data is to say that capital and assets are likely to move quicker than people, mindsets and attitudes. It remains to be seen how each country negotiates this transition in an equitable manner.

While the macro-outlook is bleak, many smaller positive developments are underway in various parts of the world. Emerging technologies such as hydrogen powered cars and buses, or electric vehicles will have significant cumulative effects on resource use, air quality in cities and quality of life[34]. Distributed power generation and floating solar panels are another exciting new development. Solar power plants have a low carbon footprint, and those on water bodies are 16% more efficient than land-based systems[35]. Some portable solar systems can even be rolled out like a carpet, specifically designed for fast deployment during disaster relief[36]. These portable systems can be set up to provide essential services like water purification, or power to mobile clinics.

Progress in solar and electric vehicles are good signs, but along with advances in efficient lighting, and digitalisation technologies in energy, they are the only 4 out 38 clean-energy technologies that are on track to meet global targets, based on the available data[37].

Strategic information management

Public information plays a key role in resilience building, right from education and awareness of risks, through to influencing post-recovery perceptions. Proper sharing of information also signals an important shift away from vulnerability-centric attitudes, to those of proactive empowerment within communities. Media in varied forms, such as social media, or mobile based peer-to-peer networks present excellent means of information dissemination — before, during and after, an extreme weather event. For example, in places where tourism is a key source of revenue, proper information management can aid return to normalcy.

One way of thinking about this is through business continuity planning, but this approach tends to be limited to organisational assets and activities, and under-appreciates the larger social context. When Typhoon Jebi hit Kansai in 2018, the international airport was reopened within three days, which was an outstanding achievement. However, news networks remained fixated with the disaster for 10 weeks affecting business operations[38]. The drowning out of small success stories by a media oriented towards a victimhood-mindset is a common phenomenon in hyper-connected societies.

Proper public information strategies can impede vicious cycles, such as sensationalist media coverage of disaster that increases hysteria, and promote virtuous cycles, such as building confidence by demonstrating apt responses. While media management as a stand-alone activity without adequate capacity is untenable, good crisis communications and a recovery-mindset can go a long way in boosting confidence, and creating beneficial public attitudes.

The role of research in investigating interdependencies

Future resilience initiatives must attempt to further combine technological and community-based approaches to disaster, and to integrate early detection with contingency plans. This is especially true for emerging technology-based systems (AI and robotics, improved remote sensing, big data driven early warning systems and response management, new forms of simulations and modelling, and so on) to make the last mile connection to those communities most at risk.

Communities in developed countries with aging critical infrastructure as well developing countries with limited critical infrastructure protection are equally vulnerable to extreme weather effects. For example, a research study is underway to develop resilience strategies in island communities using Puerto Rico as a test case, and the experiences post Hurricane Maria[39]. Puerto Rico lost 80% of its electrical transmission lines and the entire island lost power after being hit by a Category-4 hurricane in September 2017. In the United States the average age of dams and embankments is over 50 years old. Knock-on-effects due to water surges or debris flow may have negative consequences on these aging systems[40]. Research in resilience systems must seek to increase awareness of how interdependencies across multiple domains contribute to the various infrastructure and social failures, and aid in the creation of improved risk assessments and well-designed solutions.

The importance of climate attribution studies

Resilience building efforts require the right public attitudes to succeed. However, there are some entrenched paradigms that can create cognitive dissonance and impair progress. Climate change is sometimes referred to as a wicked problem, one that is difficult to tackle because of uncertainty over conceptual fundamentals, and differences on how to frame the issue itself. The absence of a clear linear causal link between global warming and extreme weather events is often cited by critics, sometimes as scepticism, but also as denial.

Naturally occurring extreme weather events and those caused by climate change and human activity are difficult to distinguish. Highly visible impacts felt in one location, for example the polar vortex which resulted in record low temperatures in the Chicago area in early 2019, may not easily be linked to human activity or global warming. In other instances, for example the 2014 floods in Jakarta, the links between the disaster, human activity and extreme weather are stronger[41].

Natural variability in the weather can make a clear distinction challenging but an evidence based, case-to-case approach, is one way towards greater conceptual clarity. A recent study by the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS) makes the same point[42]. The research involved about 120 scientists in 10 countries who identified extreme weather events that took place in 2017. The research covered 17 cases of extreme weather across six continents and two oceans, and included heat waves involving both land and sea, flooding, and drought.

Though short of a truly comprehensive analysis, 70% of the 146 research findings that were published were able to identify a substantial link between an extreme weather event and climate change, while the remaining 30% did not. For example, one study determined that a heat wave and an early onset of summer in South Korea in 2017 was found to be linked with anthropogenic contributions[43], while another study found that record setting “fire weather conditions” in February 2017 and associated risks of wildfires in Eastern Australia was found to have no discernible link to human activity[44].

Another associated study of 260 extreme weather events evaluated by 234 individual scientific papers arrived at a similar conclusion and estimation, with 68% of all events “made more likely or more severe by human-caused climate change”[45].

A decade earlier the emphasis was on continental-scale measurement[46], but with this new regional approach the data is more sensitive to specific contexts. What this means is that researchers are now isolating and studying particular events, sometimes with localised effects. Attribution studies which use a case-to-case approach provide granular information for policy makers to evaluate.

Attribution studies are an important resource on which to base policy decisions and formulate effective responses. These studies are able to eliminate a degree of uncertainty regarding extreme weather events. They also establish stronger scientific links between global, regional and local effects, so that there is greater co-ordination of effort. For example, El Niño cycles are likely to get more erratic, and the linkage to the severity of wildfires in California is clearer[47]. The next step is to plan and implement an appropriate resilience-based response.

Attribution studies are a good rebuttal to those who might argue that disasters are an immutable fact of life with no clear links whatsoever to human activity. They also play a role in tackling the cognitive dissonance that might occur when facts challenge existing belief systems and norms. In the absence of a causal link, it is better not to create confusion through misattribution. Where there is a causal link that can be determined, it is important to provide evidence to dispel doubt, refute climate change denial and spur remedial action.

“Human mastery over nature” is a relic of the industrial era

Contemporary reliance on fossil fuels constitutes one of the largest obstacles towards reducing carbon emissions. At present the largest source remains the energy sector (49%), though transportation (20%) and manufacturing (20%) also result in sizable emissions[48]. Emissions were integral to the process of industrialisation, where release of pollutants or by-products into the environment was the historic norm.

An important positive trend that has occurred recently indicates that humanity has been able to decouple the relationship between economic growth and carbon emissions[49], indicative of the first few steps towards a green economy. There is also a long overdue recognition that climate change is actually an instance of market failure[50]. Carbon emissions occur as a result of economically valuable activity such as generating energy or other industrial processes. However, those conducting the activities have passed the adverse effects of emissions and by-products onto other parties. This historic norm has actually been penalising future generations, or in the terminology of economics, disregarding the negative externality. The polluter pays principle[51], that is gaining traction is an example of how to correct this historic omission. In the best instance, this takes the form of well-planned carbon taxation. In more contentious cases, it takes the form of public legal actions against polluters.[52]

Cross-cutting policy interventions to stimulate clean technology and disincentivise polluting ones across a variety of sectors are the best course of action in the coming decade. Carbon capture, utilisation and storage[53] is one interim method to reduce industrial emissions. It goes without saying, that countries must stay the course towards agreed targets and their nationally determined contributions (NDCs) decided as part of the Paris Agreement in 2015, and statesmen must manage the worst effects of geostrategic competition or economic inertia that might impede progress.

The goal of bringing global temperature levels down to pre-industrial (1850–1900) levels should also prompt us to abandon ideas that create a harsh separation between the environment and human activity. Resource scarcity-paradigms can only take us so far. A truly radical shift would be for us to acknowledge that mastery over nature was relevant to a particular moment in humanity’s social evolution, popular during the late nineteenth and mid-twentieth century. That moment has now passed.

The emergence of newer integrated fields of study such as resilience science, ethnoecology and those that engage complexity in systems, indicate that humanity is beginning to re-integrate presently disparate fields of knowledge to tackle problems, without repeating past mistakes. These new disciplines draw from both biological and social sciences, while meaningfully integrating knowledge systems of indigenous peoples as well as mainstream scientific approaches[54]. The problem-solving mindset that is taking root here, considers people as an integral part of the biosphere, of earth, water and air. Humanity is thus intrinsic, and not external to the biosphere[55].

In the post-industrial age, 66% of the world’s population[56] will be urban. At present more than half the world already lives in cities, and by 2030 the world will have 41 mega-cities with populations of 10 million or more. Many of these will be in coastal areas. Integrating sustainable and resilient planning (green building policies and zoning, efficient power consumption, effective water management, disaster resilient systems) into contemporary processes of urbanisation is essential as we move forward.

What we can leave behind us on this journey, are outdated ideas that have caused immense damage to the planet and have endangered the well-being of future generations.

There is no panacea.

Yet the future is not written and the genius of humanity will find a way.

Reference Notes

[1] Guterres, António, and Lajčák, Morislav. “Concept Note: High-Level Meeting on Hurricane Irma.” UN HQ New York, September 18, 2017.

[2] Kerry A. Emanuel. “Climate Science and Climate Risk: A Primer.” Massachusetts Institute of Technology, October 2016.

[3] John Mecklin, ed. “2019 Doomsday Clock Statement.” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Chicago, January 24, 2019.

[4] Frederick M. Bernthal. “Policymakers Summary of the Response Strategies Working Group of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), June 5, 1990.

[5] Fatih Birol. “World Energy Outlook 2018.” Interactive Data Visualisation. International Energy Agency, Paris, November 13, 2018.

[6] Sturle Hauge Simonsen et. al. “Applying Resilience Thinking: Seven Principles for Building Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems.” Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm Univeristy, 2014.

[7] Ibid.,18

[8] Margareta Wahlström. “Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030.” Sendai, Japan: United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, March 18, 2015, p.21

[9] Brian Walsh, Jun Rentschler, and Stéphane Hallegatte. “Building Back Better : Achieving Resilience through Stronger, Faster, and More Inclusive Post-Disaster Reconstruction.” Washington, DC.: World Bank, 2018.

[10] Ibid., 6

[11] Ibid., 13

[12] Ibid., 2

[13] Yohannes Kesete. “Supporting Resilient Reconstruction in Dominica — Building Back Better for a Resilient Future.” Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery, February 6, 2019.

[14] Brian Walsh, Jun Rentschler, and Stéphane Hallegatte. “Building Back Better: Achieving Resilience through Stronger, Faster, and More Inclusive Post-Disaster Reconstruction.” Washington, DC.: World Bank, 2018, p. 32

[15] Arthur Neslen. “Insurance Could Become Unaffordable, Due to Climate Change.” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Chicago, March 22, 2019.

[16] Greg Browder et al. “Integrating Green and Grey: Creating Next Generation Infrastructure.” World Resources Institute, March 2019.

[17] Emma Farge. “Insurance Turns to Coral Reefs and Mangroves as Ocean Risks Surge.” Reuters, May 14, 2018.

[18] Dr. Eleanor Sterling. “Biocultural Approaches to Resilience Across Scales.” American Museum of Natural History, 2008.

[19] UNESCO-SCBD Joint Programme. “2016 Ishikawa Declaration on Biocultural Diversity.” Nanao City, Ishikawa Prefecture, Japan: Asian Conference on Biocultural Diversity, October 27, 2016.

[20] Jonathan Fowler. “Indigenous Peoples Are Key Players in Disaster Risk Reduction.” UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, March 7, 2017.

[21] Subir Bhaumik. “Tsunami Folklore ‘Saved Islanders.” BBC News, January 20, 2005.

[22] Matthew Roscher et el. “Building Adaptive Capacity to Climate Change; Approaches Applied in Five Diverse Fisheries Settings.” WorldFish, Penang, Malaysia, 2018. Page 10

[23] Ibid., 4

[24] Gustavo de Carvalho, and Jonathan Rozen. “Climate Change and Conflict: How Mali Can Grow More Resilient.” Institute for Security Studies, May 30, 2016.

[25] Tor A Benjaminsen. “What’s behind Mali Livestock Herders Joining Jihadist Groups.” The Conversation, November 13, 2018.

[26] Arielle Busetto. “Lest We Forget, Japan Shares Lessons from Disasters at the Kansai Resilience Forum.” Japan Forward, March 7, 2019.

[27] Multi Donor Fund for Aceh and Nias. “Indonesia: A Reconstruction Chapter Ends Eight Years after the Tsunami.” World Bank, December 26, 2012.

[28] Community of Latin American and Caribbean States — CELAC. “Regional Strategy for Disaster Risk Management in the Agriculture Sector and Food and Nutrition Security in Latin America and the Caribbean (2018–2030).” El Salvador: FAO and UNISDR, 2018.

[29] Margareta Wahlström. “Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030.” Sendai, Japan: United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, March 18, 2015.

[30]The Sendai Framework and the SDGs.” United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, n.d.

[31] Steve Dahlke, and Morgan Bazilian. “How Do We Design an Inclusive Energy Transition?” World Economic Forum, March 25, 2019.

[32] Roberto Bocca. “Fostering Effective Energy Transition 2019 Edition.” Geneva: World Economic Forum, March 2019.

[33] Ibid., 10

[34] Megan Geuss. “There Are More than 2 Million Electric Vehicles on the Road around the World.” Ars Technica, December 6, 2017.

[35] Douglas Broom. “How Japan Became the World Leader in Floating Solar Power.” World Economic Forum, March 22, 2019.

[36] Tessa Love. “Solar Power Is Being Used as Disaster Relief. Here’s How.” World Economic Forum, May 14, 2018.

[37] Fatih Birol. “Tracking Clean Energy Progress Informing Energy Sector Transformations.” Interactive Data Visualisation. International Energy Agency, Paris, 2017.

[38] Arielle Busetto. “Lest We Forget, Japan Shares Lessons from Disasters at the Kansai Resilience Forum.” Japan Forward, March 7, 2019.

[39] National Science Foundation (NSF). “Enhancing Resilience of Island Communities (ERIC).” NSF, January 2019.

[40] Farshid Vahedifard, and Amir AghaKouchak. “The Risk of ‘Cascading’ Natural Disasters Is on the Rise.” The Conversation, October 22, 2018.

[41] Yara van Holten. “The Impacts of Global Climate Change in Indonesia: Jakarta as a Case Study.” I am pro world Foundation, November 2015.

[42] Rachel Thomas-Medwid. “Heatwaves, Droughts and Floods among Recent Weather Extremes Linked to Climate Change.” Washington, DC.: Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS), December 10, 2018.

[43] Seung-Ki Min et al. “Anthropogenic Contribution to the 2017 Earliest Summer Onset in South Korea.” Phoang South Korea: Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS), December 10, 2018.

[44] Pandora Hope et el. “On Determining the Impact of Increasing Atmospheric CO2 on the Record Fire Weather in Eastern Australia in February 2017.” Melbourne, Australia: Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS), December 10, 2018.

[45] Carbon Brief. “This Map Shows How Climate Change Affects Extreme Weather around the World.” Interactive Data Visualisation. World Economic Forum, March 14, 2019.

[46] Rachel Thomas-Medwid. “Heatwaves, Droughts and Floods among Recent Weather Extremes Linked to Climate Change.” Washington, DC.: Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS), December 10, 2018, p3.

[47] John Abraham. “Global Warming Is Intensifying El Niño Weather.” The Guardian, August 29, 2018.

[48] World Bank. “Carbon Dioxide (CO₂) Emissions by Sector or Source, World.” International Energy Agency, Paris, 2014.

[49] Roman Vavrek, and Jana Chovancova. “Decoupling of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Economic Growth in V4 Countries.” Science Direct, 2016.

[50] Duncan Clark. “Why Do Economists Describe Climate Change as a Market Failure?” The Guardian, May 21, 2012.

[51] Duncan Clark. “What Is the ‘polluter Pays’ Principle?” The Guardian, July 2, 2012.

[52] Jonathan Watts. “Shell Threatened with Legal Action over Climate Change Contributions.” The Guardian, April 4, 2018.

[53] Fatih Birol. “Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage A Critical Tool in the Climate Energy Toolbox.” Interactive Data Visualisation. International Energy Agency, Paris, January 2019.

[54] Gleb Raygorodetsky. “Biocultural Resilience for Systems Change.” UNU-IAS Traditional Knowledge Initiative, December 7, 2012.

[55] Sturle Hauge Simonsen et. al. “Applying Resilience Thinking: Seven Principles for Building Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems.” Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm Univeristy, 2014, p3.

[56] United Nations. “World’s Population Increasingly Urban with More than Half Living in Urban Areas.” UN DESA Population Division, July 10, 2014.