Vulnerability and Climate Risk

Assessment for prioritizing village for

adaptation: Case Study in Citarum River
Basin
By
Rizaldi Boer, Adi Rakhman, A. Faqih and
Juan Pulhin
TA ADB 7189 INO – Package E
CITARUM AS NATIONAL PRIORITY RIVER

• Biggest and longest

river in West Java: 269
km, covering 11
administrative areas
• 3 Cascade Reservoirs:
Total vol. 6,147 Mil m3
• Electricity Output:
1,400 MW
• Irrigation Source:
420,000 ha
• 80% Source of Water
Supply for Capital City
(Jakarta)
 COMPLEXITY OF WATERSHED ISSUES
MANGROVE DROUGHT

Kerawang
District
Bekasi District
Bekasi City

Climate Change will worse the

Purwakarta
District  Vulnerability and
situation Cimahi City
climate risk assessment is required
Bandung Bandung City
to ensure effective
Barat District
adaptation 
Bandungwill be
Vulnerable system
District
significantly affected by the climate
change
AQUA FLOOD
CULTURE

SEDIMENTATION POLLUTION
Photo Source: various
 Objectives
• To assess the vulnerability of villages
in CRB to potential impact of climate
changes and level of climate risk of
the villages
• The results of analysis is required for
– identifying which villages are most
vulnerable to climate change;
– determining what factors causing them
vulnerable whether they are more
sensitive, more exposed, or have a low
adaptive capacity; and
– Identifying what actions can be taken to
reduce this vulnerability.
 The Concept of Vulnerability
• Vulnerability can be defined as
– The degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to
cope with adverse effects of climate change, including climate
variability and extremes (IPCC, 2007).
– It is a function of the character, magnitude and rate of climate
variation to which a system is exposed, its sensitivity and its
adaptive capacity” (IPCC 2007)
• A system said becoming more vulnerable when
– Its sensitivity and level of exposure to stresses (climate
change) increase and
– Its capacities and opportunities to adapt to climate change
diminishes
• Vulnerability will determine level of consequence (magnitude
impact) of climate change on the system
 Vulnerability is function of exposure,
sensitivity and adaptive capacity
• Exposure (IPCC, 2014) indicates the presence of people, livelihoods,
species or ecosystems, environmental functions, services, and resources,
infrastructure, or economic, social, or cultural assets in places and settings
that could be adversely affected by climate change
• Sensitivity is the degree to which systems respond to the changes
(Jacqueline Balston & Associations, 2012). It represents internal condition
of a system which shows level of reaction of the system to a change.
– A system that has a large reaction to a change in the climate is called
high sensitive to climate change.
– Thus systems that can endure significant changes in climate would be
considered to have a low sensitivity
• Adaptive capacity is the ability of a system to adjust to climate change
(including climate variability and extremes) to moderate potential
damages, to take advantage of opportunities, or to cope with the
consequences (IPCC, 2007)
 Methodology

wi = weight of Indicator-i
SEU & ACI =  wi*Ii Ii = normalized indicator-i
 Categorizing village vulnerability Using Quadrant
Method
To assess relative position of village (as example) based on vulnerability index. Quadrant method
categorizes the vulnerability of village based on the position of the village in the quadrant (based
on the Exposure and Sensitivity Index, SEI; and Adaptive Capacity Index, ACI). If SEI and IKA value
in Quadrant 5, we can define the village has narrow coping range or very vulnerable

SEI High

Very Quadrant Quadrant

Quite vulnerable
Vulnerable 5 2

ACI Low Quadrant ACI High

3
(Medium)

Vulnerable Quadrant Quadrant Less or

4 1 not vulnerable

SEI Low Boer et al., 2014

 Climate Risk
• Jones et al (2004) defines Climate Risk is a function of
Probability of climate hazard and Vulnerability
• When probability of a vulnerable system to be exposed
to a particular hazards is high, we can say that the
system has high risk to that hazard  potential impact
will be very high
 Results

60
2005
50 2011
40 1,167

Village (%)
Villages
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5
Type

The overall vulnerability profile of the villages improved from 2005 to 2011. Very
vulnerable village decreased from 45 to 17 villages. This is attributed to improved access
to electricity. However, most villages experienced difficulties in accessing clean drinking
water. Wells dried up, particularly in the upper and middle part of the CRB, and some
households sourced their water from springs instead during the dry season.
 Probability of rainfall causing flood & Drought
• Frequency of flood
1.00
may increase in the
0.83 future almost in all
0.66 villages located either
0.50
0.33
in the upper, middle
0.17 and lower CRB.
0.00 Similarly also for
drought.
• Without improvement
1.00 of the vulnerability, the
0.83
level of climate risk of
0.66
many villages will
0.50
increase in the future.
0.33
• The magnitude of
0.17
change of extreme
0.00
climate events depend
on emission scenarios
 Level of Climate
Risk of Villages in
CRB (Floods)
• Most villages fall under the
risk categories of low to
medium under current
climate conditions
• The future level of flood
risk of most villages will
increase irrespective of
the emission scenarios
from low-medium to
medium-high, if there is
no change in vulnerability.
• The level of flood risk
continues to increase until
the end of the century.
The change is significant,
particularly for scenarios
RCP4.5 and RCP8.5
 Level of Climate
Risk of Villages in
CRB (Drought)
• The level of drought
risk for most villages
in the CRB is
categorized between
low and medium
under current climate
conditions
• Drought risk will also
increase in the future
compare to present
conditions, mostly
from medium to
medium-high for all
emission scenarios.
• It will continue to
increase until the end
of the century
 Prioritizing Village for Adaptation
Current Future
Urgency of Number of
climate Climate Notes
Adaptation villages
risk Risk

M-H, H, M-H, H, Climate risk at present is between 24 (Flood)

Immediate VH VH Medium to High, High or Very High and
action (1-5 in the future it may remain Medium to 27 (Drought)
years) High or increase to High or to Very High
or remains High or Very High

M M-H, H, Climate risk at present is Medium and in 436 (Flood)

Short-term
VH the future it will increase to Medium to
(5-10 years) 490 (Drought)
High or to High or to Very High

Medium M M Climate risk at present is Medium and in 15 (Flood)

Term (10-20 the future remain medium
years) 534 (Drought)

L-M L-M, M, M- Climate risk at present is Medium in the 441 (Flood)

Long Term
H, H, VH future it remains Medium or increases to
(10-25 60 (Drought)
Medium to High or to High or to very
years)
high

VL, L VL, L, L-M, Climate risk at present is between Low 57 (Flood)

Very Long- M, M-H, H, and Low to Medium and in the future it
Term (>25 VH remains Low to Medium or increases to 50 (Drought)
years) Medium, or to Medium to High, or to
High or to Very High
 Priority Villages - Number of Villages
based on Urgency for Adaptation

Long Term Ac on (>25 years) 328

336

Long Term Ac on (10-25 years) 346

366

Medium Term Ac on (10-20 years) 360

321

Short Term Ac on (5-10 years) 112

123
Drought
Immediate Ac on (1-5 years) 21
21 Flood

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

 Villages that Need Immediate Adaptation Actions
Flood Drought
District/City Sub-District Villages
Current Future Current Future
Bandung Dayeuhkolot Sukapura H VH H VH
District Baleendah Andir H VH H VH
Babakan Ciparay Cirangrang H VH H H
Bandung Kulon Cigondewah Kaler M-H H M-H H
Cijerah M-H H M-H H
Bandung City Cibiru Pasir Biru M-H H M-H H
Antapani Antapani Kidul M-H H M-H H
Cibeunying Kidul Sukapada M-H H M-H M-H
Rancasari Mekarjaya M-H H M-H H
Tanjung Rasa M-H H M-H H
Bogor District Tanjung Sari
Buana Jaya M-H H M-H M-H
Parongpong Sariwangi M-H M-H M-H M-H
Bandung
Rongga Cibitung M-H M-H M-H M-H
Barat District
Cihampelas Citapen H H H H
 Villages that Need Immediate Adaptation Actions

Cipayung H VH H H
Bekasi Cikarang Timur
Labansari H VH H VH
District
Kedungwaringin Bojongsari H VH H H
Pebayuran Karangsegar H VH H H
Bojongpicung Hegarmanah H VH H VH
Cianjur Campaka Mulya Sukasirna M-H H MH H
District Cikalongkulon Mekar Sari H VH H H
Sukanagara Sukalaksana H VH H H
Sukaresmi Kawungluwuk H VH H H
Karawang Pakisjaya Telukbuyung H VH H H
District Ciampel Parung Mulya M-H M-H M-H M-H
Bojong Sindangpanon M-H H M-H H
Purwakarta
Tegal Waru Galumpit H VH H H
 Conclusion
• There was an improvement of villages condition in
term of their vulnerability from 2005 to 2011
• If there is no change in vulnerability, the future level of
climate risk of most villages will increase irrespective of
the emission scenarios from low-medium to medium-
high
• The level of climate risk continues to increase until the
end of the century. The change is significant,
particularly for scenarios RCP4.5 and RCP8.5
• It is very important for local governments to plan and
implement development programs that take into
account the increasing vulnerability and climate risks.
• There are 25 villages require immediate adaptation
actions to reduce their vulnerability to drought and/or
flood.