ISSN:
1573-1596
Keywords:
adaptation
;
agriculture
;
climate change
;
Kazakhstan
Source:
Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
Topics:
Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering
,
Geography
Notes:
Abstract Agriculture in Kazakhstan is sensitive to climate, and wheat yields could be reduced up to 70% under climate change. With the transition from a socialist economy to a free market economy, decisions are being made now that will affect Kazakhstan's ability to cope with climate change. A team of Kazakh and American researchers examined the cost-effectiveness and barriers to implementations of adaptation options for climate change. Twelve adaptation options that increase flexibility to respond to climate change were identified using a screening matrix. Four options, forecasting pest outbreaks, developing regional centers for preserving genetic diversity of seeds, supporting a transition to a free market, and reducing soil erosion through the use of changed farming practices, were examined. The Adaptation Decision Matrix (ADM) was then applied to estimate benefits using expert judgment (using an arbitrary numerical scale, not monetary values) and benefits estimates were compared to costs to determine cost-effectiveness. The ADM uses subjective measures of how well adaptation options meet policy objectives. Controlling soil erosion was estimated to have the highest benefits, but the high costs of implementation appears to make it relatively cost-ineffective. Supporting a transition to a free market was ranked as the most cost-effective measure, with regional centers second. However, use of different scales to quantify benefits or different weights can result in regional centers being more cost-effective than the transition to a free market. Regional centers was also judged to have fewer barriers to implementation than a transition to a free market. These results will be incorporated in Kazakhstan's National Action Plan. The ADM and other tools are relatively easy to apply, but are quite subjective and difficult to evaluate. The tools can be quite useful by decision makers to analyze advantages and disadvantages between different adaptation options, but should be supplemented with additional, particularly quantitative analysis.
Type of Medium:
Electronic Resource
URL:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1009626526883
Permalink
