ENVIRONMENT
and services now, and in the future?
What design standards are you using?
I am aware that some data in existing
standards on environmental conditions,
such as snow loading and wind loading,
are out of date.”
Although the standard is not a design
code, it may impact structural design
eurocodes in due course. He said that
he has begun work with European
standardisation body CEN-CENELEC on
guidelines to update some infrastructure
codes for future weather conditions.
On that issue, he points out: “If
you’re an organisation, or a client, or a
consultant, it is very worth taking the time
to look at the national annexes in the
eurocodes to work out their applicability
to the lifecycle of whatever is being
designed…you can make them more
resilient in future by developing your own
weather and climate criteria.” He cites
as an example the Energy Networks
Association’s Engineering Technical
Report (ETR) 138 on ood resilience
for electrical substations (www.is.gd/
inirod). Another example is that Network
Rail’s bridge foundations standard was
modi ed to include additional terms about
scour resistance, to mitigate the risks of
increased levels of ooding (www.is.gd/
jedona). In summary: “Organisations can
develop their own future standards while
we wait for eurocodes and structural
standards to catch up.”
The standard brings in new
perspectives: long-term timelines of up
to 50 years, and connectivity. Equally,
its own timeline for implementation,
which includes detailed monitoring and
AROUND THE NATIONS: LOCAL GUIDES TO CLIMATE RESPONSE
An in uential UK body is the Committee on Climate Change. Its progress report to Parliament in
June 2019 (www.is.gd/acunak) was pessimistic. It argues most businesses remain unprepared. In
particular, it contends: “England is still not prepared for even a 2°C rise in global temperature, let
alone more extreme levels of warming.”
The Welsh government completed a consultation on a draft Climate Change Adaptation Plan in
2019, publishing a response in June (www.is.gd/lipake)
In September, Northern Ireland published its second adaptation programme covering 2019-
2024. It includes a chapter about non-governmental work on climate adaptation: www.is.gd/zuloki
Since 2011, the Scottish government has nanced an entire climate adaptation organisation
to offer resources and information for organisations there. For example, in May 2019 Adaptation
Scotland published guidance for government agencies (www.is.gd/atoroh). In February 2018, it
published a guide for business (www.is.gd/eminer)
evaluation stages, is not intended to be
short: “This is a journey,” quips Dora.
The standard also encourages
‘systemic’ thinking, in which those
dependencies that are vulnerable
to climate change are identi ed and
analysed. He says: “One of the things that
I see all of the time in planning is that we
tend to focus in silos on own activities,
products and services. But these are
impacted by our suppliers, for example of
energy or transport.” For example, those
who are responsible for an industrial
process that requires electricity might
contact their supplier to understand how
resilient that electricity supply really is;
and what actions they would take if it
were to fail.
Finally, it encourages organisations to
use consistent language and approaches
in adapting to climate change. Doing
so will enable them to benchmark their
efforts against best practice in this
emerging eld.
The standard meets Sustainable
Development Goal 13.1 produced by the
2016 Paris Accord on Climate Change:
“Strengthen resilience and adaptive
capacity to climate-related hazards and
natural disasters in all countries”
(www.is.gd/oradap).
And it shares some of the culture
of similar global work on resilience of
infrastructure, such as the World Bank’s
June 2019 report, Lifelines: The Resilient
Infrastructure Opportunity, which Dora
mentioned in the webinar (www.is.gd/
uhujus). Lead author of that report,
Stephane Hallegatte, contends: “It is
cheaper and easier to build resilience if
we look beyond individual assets, like
bridges or electric poles, and understand
the vulnerabilities of systems and users.
By doing so, entire systems can be better
designed and with greater exibility so
that damages are localised and do not
spread through entire networks, crippling
economies at large.”
Snapvision/stock.adobe.com
Defi nitions Interested Parties
Preplanning
Capacity
Adaption planning
The Plan
Implementation
Monitoring &
Evaluation
Impacts
Risk Assessment
Vulnerability Assessment
Principles,
requirements,
guidelines
ISO 14090
Scope
(coverage)
Systems thinking
www.ied.org.uk 15
© John Dora Consulting Limited
Communication
Decision making
/
/
/
/acunak)
/lipake)
/zuloki
/atoroh)
/eminer)
/oradap)
/stock.adobe.com
/www.ied.org.uk