D2: Juggling Numbers and Intensive Debates: How to Select Appropriate Adaptation Measures

This post is part of our live blog series from the Resilient Cities 2015 congress. For more live blogs, please click here.

Feasibility gets 10 points, vulnerable population and ecosystem conservation 8, and evaluation and feedback 5: this was the outcome of a 15 minutes debate, which − in reality − would probably have lasted a day.

This prioritization of criteria reflects step 5 in the Methodology for Identifying and Prioritizing Climate Change Adaptation Measures – a decision-making tool for selecting adaptation measures based on multi-criteria and cost-benefit analysis for better resource allocation, which was developed by GIZ Mexico.

“This methodology takes you in a structured way through decision-making processes, is transparent and helps you not to forget about qualitative information of stakeholders in the process.” (Andrea Kuhlmann, GIZ Mexico)

A short video on the importance of adaptation measures was shown in the beginning of the workshop, followed by a brief introduction to the loss and damage debate and to approaches to disaster and climate risk management in urban areas.

In the second part, Camilo de la Garza and Sofía Muñoz Alarcón from GIZ Mexico explained the seven steps of the tool. The participants of the workshop got involved in an engaged debate when it came to evaluating measures such as relocation or the construction of natural barriers for a flood-prone coastal city according to the previously prioritized criteria. In a real decision-making process, this tool can be applied by using up to 25 measures, various criteria and a large and complex Excel sheet. It results in a cost-benefit analysis.

Even though this workshop just gave a brief glimpse into the Methodology for Identifying and Prioritizing Climate Change Adaptation Measures, it became obvious that decision-making involving various stakeholder groups can be supported by such a tool but will never ever be easy.