D4.2 Conceptual framework for unpacking the causal mechanisms between climate change, climate service information, and socioeconomic behaviour

ThisprojecthasreceivedfundingfromtheEuropeanUnion’sHorizon2020researchand innovationprogrammeundergrantagreementNo101037293              DeliverableD4.2 Conceptualframeworkforunpackingthecausalmechanisms betweenclimatechange,climateserviceinformation,andsocio‐ economicbehaviour   July2023 ThisprojecthasreceivedfundingfromtheEuropeanUnion’sHorizon2020researchand innovationprogrammeundergrantagreementNo101037293    InnovatingClimateservicesthroughIntegratingScientificandlocalKnowledge            DeliverableTitle:Preliminaryreportoncausalmechanismsbetweenclimatechange,climate serviceinformation,andsocio‐economicbehaviour Author(s):LotteMuller,RiccardoBiella,NikolettaRoperoSzymanska,LuciaDeStefano, NuriaHernandez‐MoraZapata,SumiranRastogi,GiulianoDiBaldassarre, MaurizioMazzoleni ContributingAuthors(s):[InsertContributingauthors] Date[InsertDate] Suggestedcitation: Availability:☒PU:Thisreportispublic[Pleaseselect] ☐CO:Confidential,onlyformembersoftheconsortium(includingthe CommissionServices)  DocumentRevisions: AuthorRevisionDate LotteMuller,RiccardoBiella,Nikoletta RoperoSzymanska,LuciaDeStefano, NuriaHernandez‐MoraZapata,Giuliano DiBaldassarre,MaurizioMazzoleni Firstdraft16‐06‐2023 MichaWernerReviseddraft25‐06‐2023 LotteMuller,RiccardoBiella,Nikoletta RoperoSzymanska,LuciaDeStefano, NuriaHernandez‐MoraZapata,Sumiran Rastogi,GiulianoDiBaldassarre,Maurizio Mazzoleni Finalversion24‐07‐2023  D4.2–Conceptualframeworkforcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices 1 ExecutiveSummary ClimateServices(CS)areusefultoolstoreducetheimpactofnaturalhazards,suchasdroughts.Whilethe benefitsofCShavebeenwidelyexplored,itisstillunclearhowtheirintroductioncanleadtofeedbacks betweenhumanadaptationandclimate‐relatedevents,andpotentiallygenerateunexpecteddynamics, includingtheemergenceofundesiredrisksorunintendedconsequences. Thisreporthighlightstheimportanceofunderstanding,representing,andquantifyingthefeedbackbetween CSandhumanadaptationintheLLs.Individualschangetheirperceptionsandbehavioursovertimebasedon theavailabilityofCSandtheinformationprovided.Thesechangesdependonindividualand/orsocialnorms, attitudes,riskpreferences,andheuristicsthatareoftenneglectedinclimate‐relatedmodelling. Inthisreport,weprovidenewinsightsabouttheinterplaybetweenclimateandhumansystemsmediatedby thewayinwhichsocietiesrespondtotheavailabilityofCS.First,weestablishaconceptualframeworkfor exploringthefeedbacksbetweenCS,humanbehaviour,andclimate‐relatedevents.Then,weapplythe frameworkandco‐develop,togetherwithlocalstakeholders,anumberofsystemarchetypesforthedifferent livinglabs(LL)oftheI‐CISKproject.Thisallowsinferringcomplexsystembehaviours,suchastheconsequences ofunequalaccesstoCS.  D4.2–Conceptualframeworkforcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices 2 TableofContents  1Introduction.................................................................................................................................................1 2Conceptualframeworkincludingthelinksbetweenclimateservices,humanbehaviour,anddecision‐ making.................................................................................................................................................................3 2.1ConceptualisingClimateServices........................................................................................................3 2.2ConceptualisingHumanBehaviour.....................................................................................................3 2.3ConceptualisingClimateRisks.............................................................................................................5 2.4ConnectingClimateServices,Human,andClimateRisk.....................................................................7 3SystemarchetypesforrepresentingCS‐Humandynamics.......................................................................10 4ApplicationoftheconceptualframeworksforthedifferentLivingLabs..................................................11 4.1ApplicationoftheCS‐Behaviour‐Riskconceptualframework..........................................................11 4.1.1SpainLLCSUser:Farmers..........................................................................................................11 4.1.2RijnlandLLCSUser:Rijnlandwaterauthority...........................................................................13 4.2ApplicationoftheSystemArchetypes..............................................................................................15 4.2.1Driftinggoals(a.k.aerodinggoals)............................................................................................17 4.2.2Band‐aidsolutions(a.k.a.Shiftingtheburden).........................................................................18 4.2.3Successtothesuccessful...........................................................................................................19 5Conclusions................................................................................................................................................21       D4.2–Conceptualframeworkforcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices 3 ListofFigures  Figure1:A.RepresentationofthelinkbetweenCS,decisionmaking,andactions;B.Systemdynamicmodel quantifyingtheinterplaysbetweencompetitorsoverlimitedresourceswhileclimatechangeimpactsthemby shrinkingthetotalresourcepool.........................................................................................................................1 Figure2:MoHubFrameworkdevelopedbySchlüteretal.(2017).....................................................................4 Figure3.OriginalIPCC‘riskpropeller’(a)andcurrentversionincludingtheroleofresponsesinmodulatingthe determinantsofrisk(AraBegumetal.,2022)....................................................................................................6 Figure4:ConceptualframeworkdevelopedinICISKtorepresenttheinterplaysbetweenCS,human,actions, implementationofadaptationactions,andclimaterisk.ComponentsinUser0boxareinspiredbytheMoHub frameworkdevelopedbySchlüteretal.(2017).ElementRiskhasbeeninspiredbyIPCC(2012),andtheyellow feedbacklinesbyWensetal.(2019)...................................................................................................................7 Figure5.Erodinggoals,adaptedforI‐CISKLLs..................................................................................................15 Figure6.BandaidsolutionsadaptedfortheSpanishLL...................................................................................16 Figure7.Successtothesuccessful,adaptedforDutchLL................................................................................17   D4.2–Conceptualframeworkforcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices 4 ListofTables  Table1.SpainLLfarmerpreliminaryapplicationtothedevelopedconceptualframework............................11 Table2.Rijnlandwaterauthoritypreliminaryapplicationtothedevelopedconceptualframework.............12 Table3.TheDisplacementSeries(Verdringingsreeks).Thisisasetofruleswherebythewaterauthorities determinetheorderinwhichstakeholdersgetallocatedfreshwater.Category1willreceivewaterfirst, category4last.Withincategory1and2thereisahierarchy(bullet1hasahigherprioritythan2).Within category3and4thereisnohierarchy,meaningthisisuptothediscretionofthewaterauthoritytoallocate. ...........................................................................................................................................................................14 [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 1 1 Introduction ClimateServices(CS)areusefultoolstoreducetheimpactofnaturalhazards,suchasdroughts.Whilethe benefitsofCShavebeenwidelyexplored,itisstillunclearhowtheirintroductioncanleadtofeedbacks betweenhumanadaptationandclimate‐relatedevents,andgenerateunexpecteddynamics,includingthe emergenceofundesiredrisksandunintendedconsequences. Inthiscontext,therehasbeenanumberofstudiesassessingtheinfluenceofhumanbehaviouronthe implementationofdifferentadaptationactions(Haeretal.,2017;Mazzolenietal.,2021).However,a systematicreviewtoexplorehowusersrespondtoCShasnotbeenperformed.Existingliteratureisscattered, andunconnected. Thereisamultitudeofgeneralbehaviouraltheoriesfrompsychologyandeconomicsthathavebeen developedandimplementedoverlastyears.Thesetheoriesdifferwidelyinhowtheyassumethatindividuals perceiverisk,andconsequentlymakedecisionsbasedonrisksandthecomplexitythereof(Figure1A).An exampleofarationalbehaviouraltheoryisexpectedutilitytheory,whereanagentchoosesbetweenrisky optionsbycomparingexpectedutilityvalues.I‐CISKcouldmakeuseoftherichnessofexistingbehavioural theoriestobetterrepresentfeedbackmechanismsthaniscurrentlythecaseandusethemwithinmodelling frameworks.However,howthesetheoriesareintegratedalsodependsonmodellingmethods. Schlüteretal.(2017)developedaframeworkformappingandcomparingbehaviouraltheoriesinthe modellingofsocial‐ecologicalsystems.Thisframeworkconsiderssocial‐ecologicalsystempromptsandhow peopleprocessinformation.However,itdoesnotconnecttoresultingbehaviouralactions.Schlüteretal. (2017)isalsonottailoredtoCSandadaptation/mitigationbehaviour.Wensetal.(2019)describeaframework toextendtraditionalriskmodellingtoincludetwo‐wayfeedbacksbetweenadaptationanddroughtexposure, vulnerabilityandhazard.VanValkengoedandSteg(2019)reportameta‐analysisoffactorsofadaptive behaviour,neglectingtheconnectiontoCSandhowpeoplerespondtothis.Meijeretal.(2021)conducteda reviewanalysistoassesswhatmethods,theoriesandconceptshavebeenusedforthequantificationofhuman responsestochangesinwateravailability.ThisisnottailoredtoCS,buttoaneventandwithafocusonhow behaviourisquantified,whichdoesnotalwaysalignwithactualbehaviouralresponses. Modellingtheinteractionsbetweenthephysicalandthesocialsystemsisadifficulttaskriddledwith uncertainties,complexity,andunexpecteddynamics.Overtheyearsmanyapproacheshavebeendeveloped inordertomodelthecomplexityofthehuman‐watersystem.Someoftheseapproachesinductivelytryto generateaconceptualmodelstartingfromtheobservationsofthestateofthesystem,suchasinthecaseof participatorysystemdynamicmodelling.Others,likesystemarchetypes,trytodeductivelyinferspecific systembehavioursontospecificsystemmodels(Elsawahetal.,2017).Systemarchetypesconceptualize differentemergentbehaviourofthesystemandspecificchallengesanddynamicsacrosstemporalorspatial scale.Figure1Bshowsanexampleinwhichtwocompetitorsarecompetingoverlimitedresourceswhile climatechangeimpactsthembyshrinkingthetotalresourcepool.Bothcompetitorscarryoutadaptation measures.Inrecentyears,newapproachessuchasagent‐basedmodellingtriedtomodelthesystembased onabductivereasoning(Schlüteretal.,2017).Thiswasdonebymixinggeneralizedtheoriesofhuman‐ behaviourandbottomupmodelling(Schlüteretal.,2017).Despitethelatestmodellingadvances,lackin modelsrepresentingtheCS‐humandynamicsremains. Thisreportaimstoidentifythefeedbackmechanismsbetweenclimatechange,CSdata,socio‐economic behaviour,andadaptationmeasuresthatcangeneratedynamicspreventingorfacilitatingresilientpathways inthelivinglabs(LL)oftheI‐CISKproject.Thisworkisexpectedtopavethewayfortheimplementationofa modellingframeworkwithinthedifferentLLsinordertoformalizehumanresponsestoclimatechangeand CSinformationbyalsobuildinguponresultsfromWP1andWP2.   [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 2   Figure1:A.RepresentationofthelinkbetweenCS,decisionmaking,andactions;B.Systemdynamicmodel quantifyingtheinterplaysbetweencompetitorsoverlimitedresourceswhileclimatechangeimpactsthemby shrinkingthetotalresourcepool.      [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 3 2 Conceptualframeworkincludingthelinksbetweenclimateservices, humanbehaviour,anddecision‐making Inthissection,wefirstproposethemainframeworkandthendescribehowitcanbeappliedinthedifferent LL.WithinI‐CISK,thisframeworkwillbealsobasedonthesocio‐economicbehavioursidentifiedinWP2.The expectedoutcomeofthistaskisaframeworktocharacterizethecompetinghypothesesonthefeedbacks betweenclimateandadaptationactionsinthedifferentLLdefinedinWP1.Todevelopaconceptual frameworkincludingthelinksbetweenCS,humanbehaviour,andclimaterisk,itiscrucialtoconsidereach individuallytoisolatekeyfeaturesorcharacteristicswhichwillbeincludedintheframework.Withan understandingofeachoftheingredients,theycanbelinkedtocreateaconceptualframeworkofCS,human behaviour,andclimaterisk.  2.1 ConceptualisingClimateServices ItisimportanttohighlightkeycharacteristicsofCSintheircurrentforminordertocreateaframeworkthat capturesthedynamicsgeneratedbyfeedbacksbetweenclimatechange,CS,socioeconomicbehaviour,and adaptationmeasures.AccordingtoBessembinderetal.(2019),thecommonelementsofCSarethatthese: I. involveprovisionofclimateinformationforsomeformofdecisionmaking,includingpolicy‐making,be ittosupportadaptation,mitigation,ordisasterriskmanagement; II. aredrivenbytheneedsofusers,includingdecision‐makers,indicatedbyterminologysuchasuseful, ofvalue,customised,tailored,co‐developedorco‐produced;and III. involvedisseminationorguidancefortheuseofscience‐basedclimateinformation.Such informationcanincludeclimatedataorknowledgebasedonclimatedata. CScandifferintermsofsectors,themes,regions,purposes,timehorizons,datasources,levelofprocessing ofclimatedata,backgroundknowledgeandtypeofCSproviders(Bessembinderetal.,(2019).  2.2 ConceptualisingHumanBehaviour Asmentioned,therearemultitudesofgeneralbehaviouraltheoriesfrompsychologyandeconomics,which couldbeincludedinthemodellingoffeedbackmechanisms.Aconceptualframeworkwouldbenefitfrom ensuringsufficientscopeanddetailtobeabletoincludeavarietyofcustomisabletheories.Forinstance, theoriesdifferwidelyintheirassumptionsonhowindividualsperceiveriskandmakedecisionsbasedonrisks. AnexampleistheExpectedUtilitytheory,whereanindividualchoosesbetweenriskyoptionsbycomparing expectedutilityvalues.Boundedlyrationaltheoriesincluderelaxingassumptionsfromrationalbehavioural theories,forinstance,byallowingthelikelihoodsusedtocalculateexpectedutilitytobesubjective(Subjective ExpectedUtilitytheory).Yet,thistypeofbehaviouraltheoryremainsveryrestrictive,asitdoesnotallowfor cognitiveheuristics(TverskyandKahneman,1992).Prospecttheory,forexample,positsthatpeoplevalue lossesdifferentlytogains. Alternativetheoriesfocusingonhowindividualsbehaveunderstressfulsituationshaveoriginatedfrom psychologyandothersocialsciences.Forinstance,theTheoryofPlannedBehaviour,wherebehavioural decisionsareinfluencedbytheindividual’sattitude,subjectivesocialnormsandperceivedcontroloverthe situation(Ajzen,2011).AnotherfrequentlycitedtheoryisProtectionMotivationTheory,whereagents intentionstoadaptdependonthreatsandcopingappraisals(Rogers,1975).Behaviouraltheoriesalsovaryin [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 10 3 SystemarchetypesforrepresentingCS‐Humandynamics Systemarchetypes,whichwereoriginallyproposedinSenge'sbookTheFifthDiscipline(1990),aresimple modelsthatcapturespecificemergentsystembehavioursthroughseriesofpairedfeedbackloops(Mirchiet al.,2012;Wolstenholme,2003).Althoughsystemarchetypesweredevelopedindependentlyfromsystem dynamics,theirsimilaritieshaveledthemtobecomeoneofthemostcommonlyusedconceptualtoolsforthis typeofmodelling(Elsawahetal.,2017).Duetotheirsimplicity,archetypesserveasaconvenientstartingpoint forconceptualizingcomplexsystems(Elsawahetal.,2017).Theirintuitivenessandsimplicityalsomakethem anidealtoolforparticipatorymodelling,asthedynamicsreproducedbyarchetypeshelptobridgethegap betweenusersandmodellersastheyaregenerallyrecognizabletothegeneralpublic(Elsawahetal.,2017). Examplesofsuchdynamicsare;“thetragedyofthecommons”,”limitstogrowth”,“successofthesuccessful”, and“fixesthatbackfire”(Mirchietal.,2012;Moallemietal.,2022).Thecomplexbehavioursofsystem archetypesarisesfromthepresenceofreinforcingandbalancingfeedbackloops(Mirchietal.,2012).A reinforcingfeedbackcanexplainwhytheeffectsofanactionmightspiraloutofcontrolinthelong‐term,while inabalancingfeedbackdifferentprocessesoractionstrytobringconditionsintoequilibrium(Forrester,1994; Sterman,2001).AnexampleoftheuseofsystemarchetypestoconceptualizecomplexbehavioursisMoallemi etal.(2022),wherearchetypesareutilizedtohighlightchallengesarisingfromcomplexemergentbehaviours inthecontextofSustainableDevelopmentGoals(SDGs),examiningsynergiesandtrade‐offs.Similarly,Biella etal.(2022)presentaconceptualmodelbasedonthesuccessofthesuccessfularchetype,demonstratinghow thecompetitionbetweentwouserswithlimitedresourcesunderclimatechangecanleadtoascenariowhere theinitiallymoresuccessfulcompetitorgainsprogressivelygreateradvantages.  InI‐CISK,systemarchetypeswereusedtoinitiatetheconceptualizationprocessthatwillleadtothemodelling ofthecomplexinteractionsbetweenCSandadaptation.Tothisend,theteamofWP4designedasurvey intendedforLLleadersandtheircollaborators.Thepurposeofthissurveywastoidentifydynamicswithinthe LLsthatcouldbeassociatedwithspecificsystemarchetypes.Thesurveyquestionswereformulatedbasedon anextensiveliteraturereviewthatfocusedonthechallengesencounteredinthedevelopmentandutilization ofCS.Atotalof16responseswerecollectedfromparticipantsrepresentingallLLs,andweresubsequently analysedbytheWP4team.Basedontheanalysisoftheseresults,themostrelevantarchetypeswere identified.Thishasledtotheidentificationofgeneralizeddynamicsthatwerecommonlyobservedacross multipleLLsandcouldbereconductedtothosehighlightedintheexistingliteratureonCS.TheLLleaderswere theninvitedtoassessthefindingsofthesurvey.Atthetimeofwriting,thisevaluationprocessisstillongoing.   [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 11 4 ApplicationoftheconceptualframeworksforthedifferentLivingLabs AsetofempiricalexplanatorymodelshavebeendefinedforselectedLLs,andwillbeusedasoneofthemain inputsforTask4.2whichaimsatassessingthelong‐termclimate‐humanfeedbacksandtheirinfluenceat differentspatialscales.  4.1 ApplicationoftheCS‐Behaviour‐Riskconceptualframework Intheprevioussection,wedescribethedevelopedconceptualframeworkforCS,humanbehaviourand climaterisk,however,thishasbeenatheoreticaldiscussion.Inthissection,weaimtodemonstratethe applicabilitythroughpreliminarycasestudydemonstrationsoftheconceptualframework.Itisimportantto notethattheobservationsdiscussedinthissectionarebasedoninteractionswiththeI‐CISKLLstakeholders directly,andissubjecttochangeastheprojectprogressesandaswedevelopadeeperunderstandingofthe workingsoftheLL.Wehaveselectedtwopreliminarycasestudiestohighlightdifferentaspectsofhowthe conceptualframeworkworks.First,weapplytheframeworktotheLLinSpaintodemonstratehowthisworks withCSusersfromaspecificsector,namelyagriculture.Second,weapplytheframeworktotheCSuser Rijnlandwaterauthority(HoogheemraadschapvanRijnland)intheLLintheNetherlandstodemonstratethat theconceptualframeworkcanbeappliedtoCSatadifferentscale.Thesedemonstrationsareintendedasa startingpointforI‐CISKTask4.2 4.1.1 SpainLLCSUser:Farmers HerewedemonstratethattheconceptualframeworkshowninFigure4canbeappliedtolivestock/feed farmers.OtherrelevantCSusersinthiscontextareotherlivestock/feedfarmerswhomayhavedifferent (combinationsof)livestock,reflectedintheframeworkasUser1/User2.Theseotherlivestock/feedfarmers arerelevantasthereismuchcommunicationbetweenfarmersandtheyinteract/overlapintheuseofthe sameagroforestryextensivegrazingsystem. Table1.SpainLLfarmerpreliminaryapplicationtothedevelopedconceptualframework. FrameworkElementPreliminaryobservationsfromLLSpain PerceptionTheyrelyontheirownperceptionofprecipitation/waterlevelaswellas usingtheirsocialnetworkextensivelytoshareinformation. EvaluationThereare15‐dayweatherforecastsavailable,butfarmersdonotfullytrust forecastsandpredictions(beyond24‐48hours),sothesearenot consideredwithagreatweight. Theyplacemorevalueintheirownexperienceoftheenvironment StateGoals/Needs: ‐ Conservationofthegeneticlineageofthelivestock(family heirloom) ‐ Conservationofthefamilyfarmandtradition ‐ Conservationofthetraditionallandscapeandofhelmoaks. Values: ‐ Thelineageoftheirlivestockisconsideredafarmer’sheritage. [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 12 Knowledge: ‐ Pastexperiences ‐ Traditionalknowledge ‐ Livestockmarketprices Assets: ‐ Stockingrate ‐ Wateravailability ‐ Pastureandacornsavailability/production(rainfalland temperaturedependant) ‐ Sizeandnumberoffarms–largersizedfarmsortheavailability (throughownershiporrental)ofdifferentfarmsallowsforthe movementofthecattleamongfieldswhenpastureisscarcedue todrought. ‐ Financialassets–whichfacilitatesor(lackof)hinderspurchaseof additionalfeed. Perceivedbehavioural options ‐ Managementofthestockingrate ‐ Buy/buildwaterstorageinfrastructure ‐ Buyadditionalfeed ‐ Purchasewater(tanktrucks) ‐ Adaptbarnsandshelterstomanageheatwaves ‐ Rotatepastureuse ‐ Rentadditionalpastures/accesstodehesa1fieldsintimesof “montanera”(acornproduction) ‐ Blockstreamstoretainwater SelectionSatisficing2selectionmethodsarepresent;optionsareevaluateduntila behaviourisfoundthatisexpectedtosatisfy. Theyalsotrytouseasmanyoptionsaspossibletolimitdamageduring droughts,however,thebehaviouraloptionstakenalsodependsonthe droughtduration.  TheselectedbehaviourwillbechosentominimisetheDroughtRiskcomponent.Selectingbehaviourtoreduce droughtRiskmightalsofeedbackintowhattypeofinformationtheCSrelay.CurrentCSavailabletofarmers intheregionare15‐dayforecasts,droughtindicatorreportsandmeteorologicalinformationwhichcanbe accessedonline.Otherfarmerinfluences(representedintheformoftheOthercomponent)inthiscasecould bepoliciesliketheEUCommonAgriculturalPolicy(CAP),whichsupportsfarmersbybuyingupstockduring timesofdrought.Thewaterauthoritycanalsoinfluencefarmersbymeansof,forexample,groundwater policiesandchangesinwaterallocationfromwatersupplyreservoirs.  1Dehesa:TypeofagroforestrysystemthatisfoundmainlyinsouthwesternSpainandPortugalcharacterizedbyopen woodlandpasturewhereholmoakand/orcorkoaktreesaregrownalongsidegrassesandothervegetation.Dehesas primarilyfocusontheproductionofnon‐timberforestproductssuchaswildgame,mushrooms,honey,cork,and firewood.Dehesascanbeprivateorcommunalproperty 2Adecision‐makingstrategyorcognitiveheuristicthatentailssearchingthroughtheavailablealternativesuntilan acceptabilitythresholdismet. [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 13 4.1.2 RijnlandLLCSUser:Rijnlandwaterauthority HerewedemonstratethattheconceptualframeworkshowninFigure4canbeappliedalsotoorganisations suchasthewaterauthorityRijnland(HoogheemraadschapvanRijnland).OtherUsers(depictedasUser1and User2intheconceptualframework)canbeconsideredrelevantneighbouringwaterauthoritiesintermsof waterprovision(e.g.Delftland,SchielandendeKrimpenerwaardandStichtseRijnlanden,Ministryof InfrastructureandWaterManagement,Rijkswaterstaat).Itisimportanttonotethatthereisalsothe possibilitytomakedistinctionsorspecificspatiotemporalapplications;heretherehavebeendistinctions madebetweenthetemporalscaleofPerceivedBehaviouralOptionsasforRijnlandwaterauthoritythereare occasionswhenachoiceneedtobemadebetweenshorttermandlong‐termsolutions. Table2.Rijnlandwaterauthoritypreliminaryapplicationtothedevelopedconceptualframework. FrameworkElementPreliminaryobservationsfromLLRijnland PerceptionExplicitlymonitorwaterlevelandsalinity.Thismeanstheyalsohave ‘perfect’memorythroughtheuseofhistoricaldata.However,their perceptionislimitedtospecificmeasuringlocationsofsalinity/waterlevel, meaningtheirperceptionisbounded. Theyperceivetheotherwaterauthorityactions,butnotalwaysthe stakeholdersactions.Theydonotknowtheamountofwaterthatis withdrawnfromtheriver. EvaluationRijnlandmakesuseofhistoricaldata,andmakesdetailedrecordsforthe purposesofanalysisforeffectiveness,butalsofortransparency(e.g. demonstrateimpartialdecisionmaking) StateGoals/Needs: ‐ Provisionofsufficientwaterallocatedinthemostappropriateway (minimiselongtermdamages,whileremainingimpartial). Values: ‐ AllocatewateraccordingtotheVerdringingsreeks(setspriorityof allocationtodifferentusestominimiselongtermdamages). ‐ Treatallstakeholderswithineachcategoryfairly. Knowledge: ‐ Pastexperiencesofwaterallocationduringdroughts. ‐ Expertknowledgeofthewatersystem. Assets: ‐ Limitedtimetotakephysicallyimplementadaptationactions ‐ Decision‐supportsystems ‐ Expertknowledge ‐ Limitedfinancialresources ‐ Limitedwatermanagementinfrastructure(e.g.waterpumping stations) Duringseverenationaldroughts,limitedmandatetomakedecisions. [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 14 PerceivedBehavioural Options Duringdrought: ‐ Closesluicegatestoretainwater. ‐ Implementmeasurestoretainwaterlevel(e.g.turnonspecific waterpumps). ‐ Negotiateformorewaterfromneighbouringwaterauthorities. ‐ Advisestakeholders(e.g.farmers)toreducingwaterusage. ‐ Demonstratewaterneedstonationalcommitteetoallocatescarce water(LandelijkeCoordinatiecommissieWaterverdeling). ‐ Checkingdykestability/safety. ‐ Installemergencyequipment(e.gpumpequipment) Notduringdrought/longterm: ‐ Buildbetterwaterinfrastructure. ‐ Investinbettermeasuringsystems. ‐ Makebindingagreementsforwaterallocations. ‐ Runbettermodellingscenarios. SelectionIfselectionisaboutmodelledsituations: Enactstrategieswhichhavebeenoptimisedbymodellingscenariospriorto drought. Ifselectionisaboutnotmodelledsituations: BoundedlyrationalbyoptimisingusingVerdringingsreeksinthefaceof limitedknowledgeandmoreimportantlytime. Thesedecisionsaremadebasedonexpertknowledgeandresultsare recordedindetail.             [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 15 BehavioursthatRijnlandenactshavebeencarefullyselectedviaseveralmodellingexercisesandoptimisation processestomanageallthecomponentsshownofRisk.Maingoalsaretoallocatewaterinsuchawaythat minimaldamageoccurs.Thishasbeenoperationalisedintoadisplacementseries(Verdringingsreeks),shown inTable2 Table3.TheDisplacementSeries(Verdringingsreeks).Thisisasetofruleswherebythewaterauthorities prioritisetheorderwithwhichstakeholdersareallocatedfreshwater.Category1receiveswaterfirst,category 4last.Withincategory1and2thereisalsoahierarchy(bullet1hasahigherprioritythan2).Withincategory 3and4thereisnohierarchy,meaningthisisuptothediscretionofthewaterauthoritytoallocate. Category1: Safetyandpreventionof irreversibledamage Category2: Utilities Category3: Small‐scalehigh‐quality use Category4: Otherinterests(economic consideration,alsoforna‐ ture) 1. Stabilityofflood defences 2. Soilsubsidence andcompaction 3. Nature(irreversi‐ bledamages, overwisecat.4) 1. Drinkingwater supply(toguaran‐ teesupply,other‐ wisecat4.) 2. Energysupply (whenthereisa dangertosupply, otherwisecat.4) • Temporaryirri‐ gationcapital intensivecrops • Processwater • Shipping • Agriculture • Nature(onlyifno • irreversibledam‐ ageoccurs) • Industry • Waterrecreation • Fishing  ResultingBehaviourtendstobeavariantoftheperceivedbehaviouraloptions.Thebehavioursandmeasures enactedbyRijnlandwaterauthorityduringdroughtstendstoonlyberecognizedbystakeholdersinvolved, althoughtheirchoicesaremadepublicviatheirwebsiteandthesummerdroughtmonitor(Zomermonitor) thatRijnlandwaterauthoritydevelop(HoogheemraadschapvanRijnland,2022).Forexample,ifthereisno watershortage(drinkingwatercompaniesremainunaffectedbythedrought),thenthegeneralpublictends tobeunawarethattherearewatersupplyproblems.Thisisincontrasttothedroughtmanagementmeasures implementedinforexampledroughtmanagementplanninginSpain,wherepubliccommunicationisoneof thefirstmeasurestaken. ActionstakenbyRijnlandaffecttheriskstheyaretryingtomanage,andinturnaffectClimateEvents(e.g. consecutivefloodsafterdroughtperiods),theCStheyareusing(addingmoremeasuringstationsformore detaileddata),andtheOtherframeworkelementinthiscaserepresentsvariousaffectedstakeholders(inthe ICISKLLweexploreimpactsontourismandtheagriculturesector). OneofthechallengesforRijnlandisanticipatingunknownrisks,astheycannotbemodelledandoptimised foretc…Inthesesituations,theyperceivethosesituationsthroughthelensofanexperiment.Thisentails makingsmalladjustmentsandrecordingtheresultssuchthatafterthedroughttheseadjustmentscanbe thoroughlyanalysedtoassesstheireffectiveness.  4.2 ApplicationoftheSystemArchetypes AsurveywasdevelopedtosupporttheconceptualizationofsystemarchetypesforthevariousLLs.Thesurvey wasstructuredonthequestionsclasses“whatarethegoals”(questions1‐3),“whatisthefocus”(questions 4‐6),and“whobenefits”(questions7‐9): 1. WhatarethemaingoalsoftheclimateservicesconnectedtoI‐CISKandhowrelevantaretheyforthe project? [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 16 2. Howlikelyaretheytoreachthesaidgoals? 3. Havethegoalsremainedthesamesincethebeginningoftheprocess? 4. DotheclimateservicesdevelopedthroughI‐CISKaddresschallengesatthefollowingtimescales? 5. DotheclimateservicesdevelopedthroughI‐CISKaddresstherootcausesoftheproblemsidentifiedin theLLordotheyfocusonimmediatechallenges? 6. AretheclimateservicesdevelopedthroughI‐CISKaimedatfosteringtransformationinthefollowing sectors? 7. CantheclimateservicesdeliveredthroughI‐CISKbenefitacertaingroupattheexpensesofanother? 8. CantheclimateservicesdevelopedthroughI‐CISKbeusedtoreduceanexistingsituationof socio/economicinequityintheLL? 9. Whatarethemainlimitationstotheuptake,use,andsuccessoftheclimateservicesconnectedtoI‐CISK intheLL? Theresultsofthesurveyinvolving16I‐CISKLLleadersfromtheall7LLsarebrieflyreportedbelow.Itis importanttonotethatthisanalysisisstillpreliminary.  1.WhatarethemaingoalsoftheclimateservicesconnectedtoI‐CISKandhowrelevantarethey?  4.DotheclimateservicesdevelopedthroughI‐CISKaddresschallengesatthefollowingtimescales?  7.CantheclimateservicesdeliveredthroughI‐CISKbenefitacertaingroupattheexpensesofanother? [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 17  Figure5.Partoftheresultsfromthesurvey.Upperpanelreferstoquestion1,middlepaneltoquestion4,while lowerpaneltoquestion7.Thevaluesinthebarchartsrepresentthenumberofresponsesreceived.  Basedontheresultsofthesurvey,differentpossibleusesofsystemarchetypeswereidentified.Inparticular, threemainoneswereexploredmoreindepthastheyarerelevantformostLLs.Driftinggoals,band‐aid solutionsandsuccesstothesuccessful.  4.2.1 Driftinggoals(a.k.aerodinggoals) Inthisarchetype,goalsareprogressivelyloweredinordertoreachthem.However,thiscomesattheexpense oftheoveralloutcome. InthecaseofI‐CISK,itemergedhowthepressuretodeliverafunctioningCSwithinthetimeframeofthe projectisregardedasthemostimportantobjective.However,theprioritizationofthisobjectivecomesatthe expenseofotherobjectivessuchascustomization,stakeholderrepresentation,andinclusionoflocal knowledge.Nonetheless,literatureshowshowthesehaveapositiveimpactontheusabilityoftheservice, meaningthattheprioritizationofdeliveringaCSmightcomeattheexpensesofitsusability.Thiswasobserved inseveralLLs,yetitisstillintheevaluationphase.Thearchetypeexemplifyingthisdynamicischaracterized bytwopairedbalancingloops(Figure6). [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 18  Figure6.Erodinggoals,adaptedforI‐CISKLLs FortheLesothoLLwhiletheuseroftheCSsistheDisasterManagementAuthority(DMA),theultimatebenefits shouldbeforthefarmersandwhilethemainlimitationtotheusebytheDMAisthecommunicationbetween agencies,thefarmers'mainchallengeisthelackofadaptivecapacityevenwhenprovidedwithinformation. Nevertheless,therepresentationoffarmersislimited.ThiscouldleadtoasituationwheretheCSsaretailored toforusebytheDMA,yetthisonlyhavelimitedeffectsontheoverallusabilityoftheclimateinformation.For theGeorgiaandItalyLLs,thepressuretodeliverafunctioningCScouldleadadownplaytheimportanceof customization,localknowledgeandco‐creation,leadingtoalessusableCSoverall.  4.2.2 Band‐aidsolutions(a.k.a.Shiftingtheburden) Aproblemsymptomisaddressedbyashort‐termandafundamentalsolution.Theshort‐termsolution producesimmediateresultsattheexpenseofthemorefundamentalone. CShavethepotentialtobothpreserveunsustainablesystemsorfacilitatetransformation.Forinstance,when short‐termfocusedtheymayenhancetheresilienceofsustainableagriculturalpracticesbutcouldbackfire andleadtoincreaseddamageonthelong‐term.Conversely,CScanalsoprovidetheessentiallong‐term perspectiveneededtoinitiateandguidesystemictransformations.ThisexampleshowshowdifferentCScan competewithoneanotherandinsomecaseleadtomaladaptiveoutcomes. InthecontextoftheSpanishLL,ithasbeenobservedthatmilkproductionhasemergedasalucrativesource oflivelihood.Althoughmilkproductioncurrentlyofferseconomicadvantages,italsorequiressignificant resources,particularlyintermsofwaterusageandalsointermsofgroundwaterpollutionfrommanure. Conversely,thetraditionalagro‐ecologicallandscapeknownasthe"dehesa"presentsamoreresilientoption inthelongterm.Furthermore,whilemilkproductionismoresusceptibletotheimpactsofclimatechange,it couldpotentiallybenefitfromCStoshoreitsassets.Paradoxically,thiscouldexacerbatethechallengesin [D4.2–Conceptualframeworkcausalmechanismsbetweenhuman,climatechange,andclimateservices] 19 preservingthedehesasystem,duetodecreasingwaterquality(usedasdrinkingwaterforothercattle)andas theincentivestotransitiontomilkproductionincrease.Long‐termCScaninsteadserveasguideforclimate changeadaptationandbeinstrumentalinavoidingmaladaptiveoutcomes.Thisexampleshowsthetensions thatcanarisebetweendifferentCSasthesefavourdifferentadaptiveoutcomes.Figure7illustratesthecase oftheSpanishLL.  Figure7.BandaidsolutionsadaptedfortheSpanishLL  4.2.3 Successtothesuccessful Insituationswhere,multipleactorsarecompetingforlimitedresources,themostsuccessfulcompetitorstend toreceiveadisproportionatelylargershareoftheresources,withnegativeconsequencesontheotheractors involved. TheimpactofCSoninequalitycanvarydependingontheaccessibilityandrepresentationofinterests.To mitigatethepotentialforinequality,itisessentialtoengageinco‐creationprocessesthatensurethe representationofallstakeholders'interests.Thisinclusiveapproachhelpsreducetheriskofcreatingor perpetuatingdisparitiesinaccessingandbenefitingfromCS.InthecaseofI‐CISK,basedonpreliminary assessments,couldbeobservedintheRijnlandLL,wherethestakeholdersinvolvedinthedevelopmentofCS todatehavebeenmostlyrepresentativesoftheagriculturalsector,whiletherecreationistsectorshavebeen largelyunrepresented.WithintheI‐CISKproject,therecreationistshavebeenexplicitlyincludedindiscussions andtheco‐creationofCS,assuchimprovingtheirrepresentationwithinwatermanagement.Thiscanprevent inthelongtermtothecreationofservicesthatonlybenefittheagriculturalsector,whootherwisecould progressivelyreducetheaccesstothesharedresourcesfortherecreationists(Figure8).