The footprint of COVID-19 on carbon emissions and future work at IIASA

By Greg Davies-Jones, 2020 IIASA Science Communication Fellow

Greg Davies-Jones finds out how COVID-19 has lightened the carbon footprint of IIASA and uncovers how the institute plans to integrate climate protection and sustainability into everyday research activities.

The impact of COVID-19 has been profound and pervasive, infiltrating deeply into many spheres of society. IIASA has not escaped the clutches of the pandemic either: The phrase ‘unprecedented times’ has become just as commonplace here at the institute as it has across the globe. Despite the overt and all too evident adverse consequences of COVID-19, there is a significant, albeit only temporary, positive aspect of a lockdown existence, namely a reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.

At IIASA, the principal decline in CO2 emissions has been due to the drop-off in business travel. With individual mobility heavily restricted, travel arising out of research activities, meetings, and conferences has dropped to almost zero. To fill the void, the virtual world is rapidly becoming the everyday reality: Zoom calls, Skype meetings, audio hiccups, video glitches, and the occasional gallivanting toddler have fast become the norm in this new working world.

Schloss Laxenburg | ©IIASA

In the years to come, when the COVID-19 cobwebs are finally blown away (hopefully), might this new working world become more commonplace? A hybrid between the pre-COVID-19 and post COVID-19 worlds perhaps? One thing is certain: The continuation of business-as-usual will be catastrophic environmentally. A recent climate poll documented in The Guardian found despairingly that people are planning to drive and, in some cases, even fly more in the future than before the coronavirus pandemic. The dangerous inference that could be drawn from this is that, rather than merely a disconnect between individual actions and outcomes, there are conscious choices being made that are increasingly recognized as being highly inimical to the continued existence of most life forms on this planet.

Given the global shock to the economy, cost will also be a key factor influencing decisions in the post COVID-19 world. Virtual conferencing is pre-eminently a cheaper alternative. Although not a perfect substitute for in-person meetings – it does come with advantages (e.g., lower resource requirements and better accessibility) as well as disadvantages (e.g., lacking informal exchanges).

“Another aspect is inclusivity  ̶  virtual conferencing affords people the opportunity to engage with relative ease (provided they have a sound internet connection), irrespective of their geographical location,” explains IIASA researcher Caroline Zimm.

Fellow researcher, Benigna Boza-Kiss, continues: “The virtual working world can be fruitful and effective, but we must be more strategic in how it is organized. Structured meetings with specific objectives planned in advance will allow for ineffectual activity and call-times, which similarly generate emissions, to be reduced.”

Notwithstanding these positives of a virtual working environment, there are some apprehensions, particularly regarding the impossibility of virtual platforms to meaningfully replicate certain types of social interactions, including those that occur outside structured sessions at conferences. Conversations beside the coffee machine, chinwags in the corridor, or even the post-work evening revelry – all such serendipitous moments and gainful interaction are considered invaluable in providing the ‘complete’ conference experience. Yet, the virtual world can offer other distinct advantages.

“In video calls and online conferencing platforms, it is not as daunting to ‘raise a hand’ or contact someone more senior. I have found that some people actually speak up more (often using the chat function) than they would in a physical conference setting. This means a shift in the networking dynamic and perhaps even greater inclusivity,” says Zimm.

The lightening of the carbon footprint of IIASA research ventures will likely be short-lived unless we make fundamental changes over the long-term. As the time window in which we can effectively act on climate change inexorably closes, it is imperative that we do more to attain the universal climate goals written into the Paris Agreement.

In light of this challenge, and considering the work of IIASA as a leader in environmental and sustainability studies, it feels appropriate to ask: Should the prevailing ethos of environmental institutes and practitioners therein openly acknowledge and embrace the responsibility to act as role models in reducing negative environmental impact? Put bluntly, should it be incumbent upon them to ‘walk the talk’? Are people more likely to respond to organizations and researchers that practice what they preach?

Many environmental institutes and researchers, at least nominally, would agree, but this purported espousal must be underpinned by concrete action. In 2019, IIASA joined forces with Climate Alliance Austria – an organization focusing on awareness-raising projects and activities to promote knowledge on climate issues and sustainable development. The IIASA-Climate Alliance mandate is to integrate climate protection and sustainability into everyday research.

To advance this philosophy, IIASA has formed an internal Environment Committee that focuses on nurturing more environmentally friendly processes and activities at the institute. To this end, the committee has organized an evaluation and is elaborating a strategy that includes developing Green Event Guidelines, powering IIASA with certified green electricity, and encouraging individual action with a ‘Bike to Work’ scheme.

For the most part however, these are all fledgling initiatives that require cultivation, top level support and leadership to ensure success. Moreover, these initiatives necessitate additional targeted and hard-hitting emission-mitigation strategies to avoid frustratingly commonplace ‘greenwashing’ and ensure decisive, positive internal climate action. More stringent measures, such as the institute’s proposed stricter sustainable procurement and travel policies, will arguably make a powerful and lasting contribution to this over-arching aim of “reconfiguring” IIASA as an employer that is doing all it can to implement and facilitate sustainable working practices for its entire workforce.

Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the Nexus blog, nor of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

Matching human movement to climate change

By Greg Davies-Jones, 2020 IIASA Science Communication Fellow

Greg Davies-Jones sits down with 2020 IIASA Young Scientists Summer Program (YSSP) participant Lisa Thalheimer to discuss how attribution science can play a leading role in addressing disaster displacement.

We live in the era of the greatest human movement in recorded history – there are more people on the move today than at any other point in our past. Despite the common misconception that most migrants cross borders, a lot of migration actually occurs internally. According to the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center, a staggering 72% of internal migration is linked to displacement due to natural hazards or extreme weather.

Pinpointing the finer details of how human mobility might evolve remains a complex undertaking. Contemporary migratory movements reflect the complex patterns of social and economic globalization – they flow in all directions and affect all countries in one way or another. It is clear that given the rising global average temperatures, natural hazards and extreme weather events will increase in frequency, intensity, and duration, adversely effecting many parts of the globe. A better understanding of how human-induced climate change influences disaster displacement will undoubtedly be essential in addressing future human mobility and informing the debate on climate and migration policies.

Figure: Climate-related displacement on an axis of forced to voluntary human mobility. Thalheimer (2020)

 

The focus of 2020 YSSP participant Lisa Thalheimer’s research is on internal displacement in East Africa, in particular, Somalia. As part of her YSSP project, Thalheimer hopes to determine whether, and to what extent, human-induced climate change altered the likelihood of extreme weather-related displacement in Somalia by conflating econometric methods and Probabilistic Event Attribution (PEA).

“Econometrics is essentially the application of statistical methods to quantify impacts and PEA is a way of examining to what extent extreme weather events can be linked with past man-made emissions. By combining the two methods we hope to quantify the ramifications of extreme weather and displacement in East Africa,” she explains.

This is no mean feat, as PEA itself is a relatively new science and many challenges still exist in the field of event attribution  ̶  a field of research concerned with the process by which the causes of behavior and events can be explained. In this instance, the idea was to study each extreme weather event individually to determine if human-induced climate change may have added to the intensity or likelihood of the event occurring. PEA is a growing science within this field and relies on the availability of long-term meteorological observations and the reliability of climate model simulations. In terms of migration and the accompanying econometric methods, the complexity of this work is mainly in data capturing.

“The difficulty with migration data capturing is at the start – before you can capture anything, you must ascertain how the data is defined, as different countries define mobility in different ways. For instance, it could be time – where did you live one year ago as opposed to five years ago? That’s the first complexity. Then you must work out who collects data on who – in Europe, we have fundamental freedom of movement within the EU, so unless you file for residency, your movement is not recorded. Another complexity is because we want to see if climate change is part of the driver  ̶  directly or indirectly. We need to know not just where people are now, but where they have been and where they came from, so we can match the climate with their movements. All of this highlights how difficult it is to carry out this type of analysis,” Thalheimer adds.

In Somalia, the team relied on previously collected forced migration data, for example, from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). These UNHCR datasets collected in Somalia were comprehensive and included not only origin and destination information but also a categorization of the primary reason for the displacement.

© Aleksandr Frolov | Dreamstime.com

The investigation homed in on one extreme weather case study in the region: The April 2020 heavy rainfall in Southern Ethiopia, which led to several severe flooding events in South Somalia. In this particular case, however, no appreciable connection could be made between human-induced climate change and the resultant displacement. Despite this somewhat chastening outcome, the achievement of this study is not proving a definitive attributable link between human-induced climate change and the April 2020 rainfall, but rather the construction of the adjustable attribution framework presented that can be applied directly to other events and displacement contexts.

As previously mentioned, there are, however, limitations to this novel methodology, especially in regions like Somalia that lack exhaustive observational weather and displacement data. According to Thalheimer, exploring ways of effectively applying this framework in countries vulnerable to climate change will be particularly important going forward.

“Event attribution studies do not usually form the basis of climate migration analysis, disaster risk reduction, or adaptation strategies. Yet, to respond appropriately to these impacts and affected populations, we must develop a comprehensive and detailed understanding of the nature of these impacts, as well as knowledge on how these might evolve over time. Event attribution is a tool we can employ to do this,” she concludes.

Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the Nexus blog, nor of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

A vision for a stronger IIASA

By Greg Davies-Jones, 2020 IIASA Science Communication Fellow

Greg Davies-Jones delves into the topic of Capacity Development at IIASA and what the institute hopes to achieve in the coming years.

Capacity development is an essential process in any ambitious organization. This is no different at IIASA. As an institute widely recognized for its global, non-partisan, policy-orientated research, it strives to stay ahead of the curve. IIASA prides itself on the diversity of its staff, while also remaining mindful of a variety of other, equally critical aspects such as organizational capability, impact, and influence. Given the magnitude of today’s global challenges, allied with the diversity of modern research, systems thinking has never had greater value, nor greater potential. Now more than ever, IIASA is needed.

© Crazy Media | Dreamstime.com

Leading the charge is Fabian Wagner, Dean of Capacity Development and Academic Training (CDAT) – a role that he fulfills in tandem with his responsibilities as a senior researcher in the IIASA Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases Program.

“A priority for IIASA is nurturing the next generation of system analysts. This does not mean we are aiming for a particular number over a given period but rather it’s about making sure our research has maximum impact and being more strategic with how we deliver external expertise – streamlining CDAT helps that,” explains Wagner. “It’s similar to how we look at effectively using aid money – you don’t give to provide superficial solutions, you facilitate the actions needed to help people permanently solve problems. At IIASA this means if your country needs three people to carry out some technical assessment and our three people are busy, we can offer our tools and expertise to help you train three of your own people to carry out the analysis.”

An initiative at the forefront of broadening participation in systems analysis is the institute’s flagship Young Scientists Summer Program (YSSP). This program, alongside the numerous IIASA postdoc opportunities, is a major building block for capacity development at the institute.

Every summer, a diverse mix of early-career scientists assemble at an 18th-century castle in Laxenburg, just outside Vienna, Austria – the institute’s headquarters – to spend three months working on a range of topics derived from and complementary to ongoing research being carried out as part of the IIASA research agenda. In parallel with the research endeavors, a program of activities and events ensure that YSSP participants spend the summer months being not solely scientifically stimulated, but professionally and culturally as well: Extending their professional networks; discovering Vienna’s cultural treasure-trove, and making a heap of new friends along the way. This interaction between IIASA and YSSP participants forms the beginning of a valued relationship that has the potential to facilitate further research, collaboration, and indeed positive action in the years to come.

© Christoph Liebentritt | IIASA

IIASA aims to expand its portfolio for early-career professionals beyond the YSSP and post-doc initiatives. In the coming years, the institute hopes to add a range of internships and fellowships to complement the current early-career opportunities: ” To really make bigger changes in the world, we need to broaden and deepen the understanding of systems science and also expand our networks,” affirms Wagner.

Wagner says that capacity development at the institute will lead to greater external value. An illustration of how this would serve as a catalyst for valuable, trans-national impact is the scope for increased interaction with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

“Globally, there is a raft of organizations offering foundational courses on the SDGs and how to achieve them. IIASA, likewise, contributes to this endeavor, not only to offer a basic understanding of the SDGs but specifically to delve into what the synergies and tradeoffs may be. Enhancing capability and developing strategic outlets to provide such outreach programs at the institute will boost external value and drive international impact,” Wagner adds.

Coupled with this fresh outlook on capacity development, IIASA recently finalized its plans for a new strategy that will ensure it continues to uphold its directive to provide independent, science-based insights to underscore systems capable of addressing global challenges over the next decade. This roadmap for the future of systems analysis at IIASA will run in tandem with capacity development. Driving both forward concurrently will, of course, require some give and take.

“This will likely result in a broader mandate at IIASA, which means more people engaging in capacity development activities and thus potentially proportionately fewer hours spent on research but, crucially, it will ensure our research has real impact. Notwithstanding, this does not necessarily mean that it is always a zero-sum game but rather a chance to create new opportunities elsewhere. Our people have different skills and are driven to engage in different activities. It is therefore about harnessing those skills and that drive and employing those attributes in the most suitable context. Ultimately, it is about creating more opportunities – that is how I see my role – as a new opportunity to create new opportunities,” concludes Wagner.

Applications for the 2021 YSSP are now open, apply here

Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the Nexus blog, nor of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.