Overview of the Town of Canmore’s 2016 Risk Assessment

Projected warming for Canmore, AB. (ClimateData.ca, 2021)

Canada is warming more and faster compared to the global average, especially in the Winter months (IPCC, 2021). Changes in average temperature, changes in precipitation cycles and increased likelihood of extreme weather events are all realities cities and towns should consider in planning. The Town of Canmore had a risk assessment done in 2016 where the following risks that required priority action were identified: forest fires, Bow river flooding, creek flooding, stormwater system overwhelmed, extreme wind, water shortage supplies, heavy snowfall and freeze-thaw cycles (Town of Canmore, 2016). Along with the priority risk,  the following three priority opportunities were identified: extended summer recreation and construction seasons along with an increase in winter tourism (Town of Canmore, 2016). 

The Resilience Assessment for the Town of Canmore was curated by All One Sky Foundation, utilizing the Climate Resilience Express approach which provides a framework for facilitating climate change adaptation in smaller jurisdictions in Alberta. The climate change adaptation and resilience plan for the Town of Canmore utilized the International Organization for Standardization’s  (ISO) 31000, Risk Management- Principles and Guidelines framework. This planning tool delineates a four step process involving defining the context, assessing risks and opportunities, formulating actions and implementation (Town of Canmore, 2016, p.5). 

During  the process it was discovered that the Town of Canmore already had several adaptive actions in place reducing vulnerability to flooding. Through stakeholder consultation and engagement a number of impacts were generated. Several previously experienced weather events and incidents were also described, these included forest fires, mountain pine beetle infestations, glacier recession, changing of freeze-thaw cycles and longer growing seasons (Town of Canmore, 2016). After identifying plausible impacts, participants rated the perceived severity of impacts and considered what mechanisms or infrastructure was in place to address these concerns. For example, forest fires were initially identified as a moderate-high risk, but were moved to high consequence after the various extremely detrimental consequences were discussed (Town of Canmore, 2016). Meanwhile, heat stress on vulnerable populations was lowered from moderate consequence to low-moderate consequence as Canmore is well adept to handle heat waves and associated health concerns (Town of Canmore, 2016). In order to further consider Canmore’s vulnerability to the priority actions, several broad categories were identified to determine the level of risk. The categories included: research and monitoring, early warning systems, hazard information provisioning, awareness, operations, bylaws and plans, technologies, infrastructure and economic instruments (Town of Canmore, 2016). Once the list of risks are scoped out, they are categorized based on cost of action, timeframe, and which department or group would champion the action (Town of Canmore, 2016). This creates a type of shopping list for the town Council to look over and make an informed decision on which items to pursue based on the overall risk and capacity to address it.

Risk assessments should ideally be done every 5- 7 years (CCME, 2021). As the Town of Canmore completed this one in 2016, with the stakeholder consultation being done in 2015 they are due to revisit this topic and complete another risk assessment. 

References

CCME. (2021). Guidance on Good Practices in Climate Change Risk Assessment. 

IPCC. (2021): Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M. I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. In Press.

Town of Canmore. (2016). Town of Canmore Climate Change Adaptation Background Report and Resilience Plan. All One Sky Foundation. Zukiwsky, J., Boyd, R., Reasoner, M. & Stark,C.https://canmore.ca/residents/stewardship-of-the-environment/climate-change-adaptation-plan/climate-change-and-adaptation-plan

The Road to Resilience

Building community resilience is a mechanism of climate adaptation. But what does that mean? How do we build adaptive capacity in a community- and hope it increases resilience for when climate change impacts occur?

The Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment define resilience as “the capacity of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to adapt by resisting or changing in order to reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure”(CCME, 2021). This definition relates well to the built environment and infrastructure that we rely on. However I am partial to the way Christine Nieves recounts her personal experience of resilience, and shares the importance of the underlying community bonds that are not as easily recognized, but prevailed in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico. In her TED talk she describes the resentment she had had for Puerto Rico after growing up experiencing the limitations that its colonial heritage had left the island void of opportunity for her (Why Community Is Our Best Chance for Survival—a Lesson Post-Hurricane Maria, 2019). However after the storm, her community rose to the occasion and created opportunities and purpose which were not evident before. Similarly, many Indigenous peoples have substantial adaptive capacity based on intergenerational lived place based experience (Whitney et al., 2020). There is importance in tying in cultural heritage and generational knowledge to community groups and networks in the effort to strengthen social adaptation. Especially knowledge or practices that may be divergent from colonial practices that have inherently reduced social bonds. 

Moser (2019) in a meta-analysis of interpretations of resilience poses the question of if it is necessary to experience adversity prior to fostering resilience, or if it can be initiated proactively? Articulating how to create meaningful, captivating and motivating discussions on climate change action in Alberta has been compelling. Our groups prototype has evolved to include multiple components to facilitate connection, with the goal of having local, and achievable proactive climate adaptation outcomes. We have created a framework for a facilitation package to be used in workshops or at community events to help identify links between local climate hazards and the places people care deeply about. Place attachment can be a beneficial tool in building community adaptive capacity (Beery et al., 2021). This idea branched from many conversations, including the interviews our group conducted but one overarching theme was that the prototype should at its core remain hopeful. This was emphasized as our group was extremely cognizant of the risk of accidentally fostering apathy within participants. 

The predominant risk I associate with the design thinking challenge and prototype development, is that it simply will not be effective enough in its outcomes- and that there may not yet be enough space for people to understand the risks of climate change for them before they experience them first hand. There are inherent limitations in our approach in terms of our positionally as a group, the resources we have to put towards the project, and who we are able to account for to provide diversity and representation as “[t]ackling resilience challenges like climate change will require collaboration from a wide range of disciplines and practitioners”(Moser, 2019). Collaboration and sharing of knowledge, and stories in particular is integral to our approach as storytelling is an effective way to engage people, and connect them to one another (Bayer & Hettinger, 2019). As Christine Nieves exemplified, stepping up and reiterating hope in the face of a disaster can set a ripple effect and encourage others to contribute however they can to their community.

Adaptations are manifestations of adaptive capacity.” (Smit & Wandel, 2006)

References

Bayer, S., & Hettinger, A. (2019). Storytelling: A Natural Tool to Weave the Threads of Science and Community Together. The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 100(2), e01542. https://doi.org/10.1002/bes2.1542

Beery, T. et al (2021). Community Climate Conversations: Engaging and Empowering Local Action in a Changing World. Retrieved from: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/joe/vol57/iss6/24/

Moser, S. C., Meerow, S., Arnott, J., & Jack-Scott, E. (2019). The turbulent world of resilience: Interpretations and themes for transdisciplinary dialogClimatic Change, 153, 21-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2358-0.

Smit, B., & Wandel, J. (2006). Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerabilityGlobal Environmental Change, 16, 282–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.03.008.

Whitney, C. K., Frid, A., Edgar, B. K., Walkus, J., Siwallace, P., Siwallace, I. L., & Ban, N. C. (2020). “Like the plains people losing the buffalo”: Perceptions of climate change impacts, fisheries management, and adaptation actions by Indigenous peoples in coastal British Columbia, CanadaEcology and Society, 25(4), 1–17. 

Why community is our best chance for survival—a lesson post-Hurricane Maria. (2019, October 8). YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBddgaPzHIQ