Reviewed models and scenarios

Process

Reviewed models and scenarios: Hazard, exposure, vulnerability

In IPCC AR6 Working Group II, climate risk results from interactions between hazards and a system’s exposure and vulnerability, and responses can add risk.

1. 01 Drivers

   1. 01HazardDataset · Incident responderThe potential occurrence of a natural or human-induced physical event or trend that may harm people, property, services or ecosystems.
   2. 02ExposureDataset · Incident responderThe presence of people, livelihoods, species, ecosystems, infrastructure or assets in places and settings that could be adversely affected.
   3. 03SensitivityDataset · Incident responderThe degree to which a system or species is affected, either adversely or beneficially, by climate variability or change.
   4. 04Capacity to cope and adaptDataset · Incident responderThe ability of systems, institutions, humans and other organisms to adjust to damage, take opportunities or respond to consequences.

2. 02 Assessment

   1. 05Risk from responsesComponent · Incident responderRisks from climate responses arise when responses miss their objectives, or from trade-offs or negative side effects.
   2. 06VulnerabilityComponent · Incident responderThe propensity or predisposition to be adversely affected. It includes sensitivity to harm and lack of capacity to cope and adapt.
   3. 07RiskModel · Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous SystemsRisk results from dynamic interactions between hazards and the system’s exposure and vulnerability. Each may be uncertain and change.

3. 03 Response

   1. 08Risk management and responseStep · Incident responderRisk management is plans, actions, strategies or policies that reduce the likelihood or size of adverse consequences.
   2. 09Residual riskRecord · Incident responderThe climate impact risk that remains after adaptation and mitigation efforts. Adaptation can redistribute risk between areas and groups.

4. 04 Decision

   1. 10Decision by the responsible partyDecision · Incident responderThe framing names no single decision maker. Decisions on responses rest with the responsible party under its own rules.

Outline of an external standard or method, from its public sources. It describes what the framework says, not a record of any run. It does not show that Nexus or any partner performs, certifies or approves a step. A gate is a step of the method, never a Nexus approval.