limate change
poses a serious risk to lives and livelihoods, particularly for the
world’s poorest and most vulnerable communities. With a high-dependence
on climate sensitive economic sectors such as agriculture, fisheries,
livestock and forestry; the consequences of climate change in India
threaten to affect food security, water security and energy access, all
of which are crucial for lifting our marginalised out of extreme
poverty.
A multi-stakeholder engagement on a sustained basis,
starting at the community, sub-national, national and regional level is
required to arrive at a consensus on the principles, content and metrics
of what is to be done. With the declaration of the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs), year 2015 has already set the tone for
transforming the development paradigm. In the run up to the climate
change negotiations in COP 21 in Paris this December, it also provides a
big opportunity for a collective global course of action on climate
change. Putting out its Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs)
for climate change actions, India has once again reiterated that
addressing climate change concerns and ensuring low carbon development
is a priority for the growing economy.
Climate change is a complex policy issue with major
implications in terms of finance. The problem is more severe for
developing countries like India, which would be one of the hardest hit
by climate change, given its need to finance developmental issues like
poverty eradication, food security, providing clean drinking water,
sanitation etc. The scale and magnitude of the financial support
required by developing countries to enhance their adaptation actions are
a matter of intense debate in the multilateral negotiations under the
UNFCCC. India’s expenditure on programmes with critical adaptation
components has increased from 1.45% of GDP in 2000-01 to 2.82% during
2009-101. In addition to several national and state policies
which offer adaptation and mitigation co-benefits, National and State
Action Plans on Climate Change provide a framework for integrating
climate change concerns in various sectors.
The expected benefits of mainstreaming adaptation
into the planning process include avoided policy conflicts, reduced
risks and vulnerability, greater efficiency compared with managing
adaptation separately and leveraging the much larger financial flows in
sectors affected by climate risks than the amounts available for
financing adaptation separately. While mainstreaming of climate change
adaptation in policy happens at the institutional level, mainstreaming
at the programme/ scheme level needs to be preceded by plans that help
communities better adapt to those climate change related vulnerabilities
and challenges. This involves identifying sector-specific
vulnerabilities of the communities and the region, capacity building of
communities, capacity development of institutions facilitating the
planning/implementation process, integration of those concerns in the
plans for the scheme/ sector and a mechanism that ensures that
activities are undertaken as per the prepared plans during
implementation.
Another larger question that needs debate is also the
overall planning process in the country within which adaptive planning
needs to be embedded. With issues like lack of local participation in
the planning process, lack of convergence among stakeholders,
scheme-based responses to village needs, multiplicity of plans
(village/district plans, plans for flagships, departmental plans) which
do not necessarily dovetail into one another, ‘transmission losses’
of local priorities at each step towards aggregation of the plans and
the limited capacities of mentoring institutions and functionaries at
the local level; any step towards adaptive planning needs to factor in
these limitations of the current planning process. q