Report of exchange team

visit to Nairobi and Arusha

23 February – 4 March 2011
Executive Summary

It is clear that climate science holds information vital for more effective humanitarian and development
planning and there is widespread recognition of the need to enable policymakers to make better use of this
emerging scientific learning. Awareness of the importance of increasing understanding and appropriate
application of climate information is much more advanced in Kenya than the UK. Not only is East Africa
experiencing ongoing climate variability, but policymakers are concerned about inappropriate use of
significant climate change adaptation funding when this becomes available.

The exchange approach has been received as timely by regional, governmental and non-governmental
representatives, with significant interest in participating in and enabling the continuation and extension of the
initiative. Funded by the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the principal activities within this initial
exchange visit comprised: hosting a one-day discussion with partners in Nairobi, participating in the Greater
Horn of Africa Regional Climate Outlook Forum in Arusha, providing a joint exchange presentation within the
following ICPAC-coordinated Climate Change Adaptation for Policymakers workshop, and undertaking a
number of one-to-one meetings with those engaged in complementary work.

Partners welcomed the exchange presentation of approaches for promoting more effective dialogue. Amongst
the approaches employed during this visit were: ‘participatory downscaling’, ‘decision making employing
probabilistic forecasting’, and small-group discussion on ‘good’ and ‘bad’ use of climate information. There is
considerable appetite for developing and employing such dialogue approaches for supporting more effective
communication and application of climate information. The full report includes annexes and links to the
science policy approaches employed, as well as listing freely-accessible climate information resources.

Activities undertaken to initiate discussion on the exchange approach focused on the need for increased
emphasis on supporting end users’ understanding of the probabilistic nature of climate information and
contextualising climate information within specific humanitarian and development decision making
processes and activities. More specifically, discussions highlighted the importance of:

• Recognising that both climate scientists and humanitarian and development end users benefit from
enhanced dialogue. It is clear that climate information has tremendous potential to reduce human
vulnerability and strengthen humanitarian and development planning. Initiatives to develop ‘blended’
forecasts, bringing together the indigenous knowledge of farmers and rainmakers with climate
science, have, for example, made clear that indigenous forecasting techniques encompass
observability and replicability, enabling similar methods of testing to ‘modern’ climate science. There
is also considerable scope for exploring how the extensive networks of humanitarian and development
end users could support NMHS in collecting observation data.
• The importance of more clearly defining the range of humanitarian and development end users1 of
climate information and ensuring sustained access to climate science expertise to assist in
interpreting and effectively applying the information. It seems that most of the current efforts to

1
This report employs the term ‘humanitarian and development end users’ to encompass the range of bodies with
responsibilities to address current and future human vulnerabilities, including policy and decisionmakers working at
community, district, national, regional and international levels.

2
 make better use of climate information are aimed at enhancing governmental capacities. Yet
humanitarian and development non-governmental organisations and community leaders, bodies and
networks are also both end users and intermediaries of climate information. Enhancing the capacity of
such paraclimate scientists as agricultural extension workers, humanitarian and development staff,
and community and religious leaders could significantly strengthen more effective use of climate
information.
• Undertaking a systematic review of the most effective format, media, channels and timing for
dissemination of climate information. It is clear such a review will need to be context specific, given
the complexity of emerging scientific understanding and the wide range of humanitarian and
development end users.
• Strengthening capacity to develop appropriate use of climate information, including identifying
relevant ‘no regret’2 options
• Coordinating efforts for developing online networks for pooling and disseminating climate
information. While there are a significant number of initiatives to develop user interface platforms, it
is not yet clear how end users will be involved in ensuring that these provide services and information
relevant to their climate information needs.
• Developing more relevant metrics to capture the multi-dimensional benefits of promoting more
effective use of climate information, to increase the priority which government policymakers afford
this issue.

Next steps

HFP will be continuing discussion with interested partners to develop extended exchange work and the most
appropriate focus and format for this approach. As immediate follow up:

1. Christian Community Services is hosting a one-day workshop in March in its Mount Kenya East
districton ‘Promoting dialogue between climate scientists and humanitarian and development
policymakers and community ‘end users’, at which the Kenya Meteorological Department will be
presenting and participating.
2. HFP will disseminate the report of the exchange team visit to Nairobi and Arusha to all participants,
exchange partners and interested partners. The presentations provided at both forum have been
disseminated and posted on the HFP website at: www.humanitarianfutures.org
3. A number of bodies have indicated their interest in discussing potential support for exchange work in
Kenya and other countries in Africa and HFP will explore this further.
4. Learning from the visit will directly inform the next climate science humanitarian policy working group,
due to be hosted by the UK Met Office Hadley Centre in May 2011, as well as HFP’s wider efforts to
support more effective science-humanitarian policy dialogue.

2
‘No regret’ options are those which, while undertaken to reduce vulnerability to a specific event, such as a seasonal
forecast or potential conflict, will bring benefit to communities at risk, whether or not the event actually takes place.

3
Index

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Exchange visit activities

2.1 One day workshop in Nairobi

2.2 Participating in and presenting at the ICPAC/WB GFDDR Climate Change Adaptation for
Policymakers workshop in Arusha

2.3 One-to-one meetings with those involved in complementary activities

3.0 Current state of the climate science humanitarian policy dialogue

4.0 Key issuesraised

5.0 Follow up and next steps

Annexes

1. 25 February 2011 Agenda

2. 25 February 2011 Participants

3. Participatory downscaling

4. Some sources of climate information identified by partnering climate scientists from University
of Liverpool

5. Questionnaire for participating climate scientists

6. Questionnaire for participating humanitarian and development end users of climate information

7. Findings from the questionnaires

8. Workshop programmes for 27th GHARCOF and Climate Change Adaptation for Policy Makers
workshop, Arusha

9. Draft Agenda for CCS one day workshop on ‘Promoting dialogue between climate scientists and
humanitarian and development policymakers and community ‘end users’

4
Acronyms

AAP UNDP Africa Adaptation Programme

CCS Christian Community Services

FEWS NET Famine Early Warning Systems Network

GHARCOF Greater Horn of African Regional Climate Outlook Forum

HFP Humanitarian Futures Programme

KMD Kenya Meteorological Department

ICPAC IGAD Climate Predictions and Applications Centre

IGAD Inter-Governmental Authority on Development

NMHS National Meteorological and Hydrological Services

RCOF Regional Climate Outlook Forum

5
1.0 Introduction

The Humanitarian Futures Programme (HFP), based at King’s College, London, seeks to develop the capacities
of those with humanitarian responsibilities to better prepare for future crises and believes that there are
important ways in which science and technology can strengthen the prevention, preparedness and response
capacities of these organisations.

Since 2009, HFP has been supporting a two-way exchange between climate scientists from the UK Met Office
Hadley Centre and the universities of London, Liverpool, Oxford and Sussex and humanitarian and
development policymakers from the international NGOs CAFOD, Christian Aid and Oxfam GB. The exchange
has also initiated a climate science humanitarian policy working group which brings in a much wider group of
scientists and policymakers. The working groups have been co-hosted with a range of organisations engaged in
complementary initiatives, with the next in May due to be hosted by the UK Met Office Hadley Centre.

The UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office funded this initial exchange visit to Nairobi and Arusha to introduce
the approach to partners, gauge interest in promoting more effective climate science-humanitarian policy
dialogue and develop the focus and format for the proposed demonstration study which exchange partners
are keen to undertake in Kenya.

1.1 The exchange team

Climate scientists from the universities of Liverpool3 and Sussex4 supported exchange activities in Nairobi and
Arusha, developing audience-specific presentations, creating new dialogue approaches and facilitating
exchange activities. Partners of Christian Aid, the Directors of Christian Community Services in Nakuru and
Mount Kenya East participated in the Nairobi workshop and joined the team travelling on to Arusha, playing a
lead role in a joint exchange presentation within the ICPAC-led Climate Change and Adaptation for Policy
Makers workshop. HFP’s Futures Group Manager and Programme Intern coordinated the visit, facilitated the
Nairobi workshop and took part in the joint exchange presentation in Arusha.

2.0 Activities

The principal activities within this initial exchange visit comprised:

2.1 Hosting a one-day workshop with partners in Nairobi on 25 February 2011

The Nairobi workshop included an introduction to the exchange approach, presentations by climate scientists
from the universities of Liverpool and Sussex partnering the exchange before engaging participants in a series
of dialogue activities5. The meeting was attended by scientists from the KMD, Kisumu University and the UK
Met Office Hadley Centre, and policymakers from a range of UN agencies (UNESCO, FAO, WFP), donor
agencies (DFID Kenya, IDRC), international and national NGOs (CAFOD, World Vision, IRC, IFRC Regional Office,
GOAL, CARE International, CARE Kenya, Christian Community Services) and networks (Climate Change Working
Group and Arid Lands Integrated Network), and researchers (Open University and Stockholm Environment

3
Dr Cyril Caminde, University of Liverpool.
4
Dr Dominic Kniveton, University of Sussex.
5
The agenda for the 25 February 2011 meeting is included in Annex 1.

6
Institute Regional Development Consultancy Group)6. All the presentations and approaches presented within
this workshop are available on the HFP website (www.humanitarianfutures.org).

Partnering climate scientists outlined some of the potential benefits and uncertainties within existing climate
information, noting that climate modelling encompasses uncertainties within initial conditions, models and
scenarios. Participants then sampled three dialogue approaches: ‘participatory downscaling’, ‘decision making
employing probabilistic forecasting’, and small-group discussion identifying examples of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ use
of climate information and the issues underlying these specific applications.

Participatory Sharing case

Card game
downscaling studies

Science-policy dialogue

A. ‘Participatory Downscaling’7, developed by Dominic Kniveton, University of Sussex, one of the climate
scientists partnering the exchange. This tools supports end users to ‘take ownership’ of uncertainty, by
translating uncertainty into risk at temporal and geographic scales relevant to humanitarian and
development end users. Employing an event history methodology, participants review personal
experiences and memories of weather during pre-identified, recent economic, political or cultural
events. The group then assess how well participants’ memories match with recorded climate
observations. In a further step, personal experiences and recorded observations can then also be
reviewed against seasonal forecasts for the specific event periods, if these are available.

The approach quickly highlighted the differences in local experience of climate information reported at
national level. In some areas local experience agreed with seasonal reporting, in others not.
Participants’ recall of past rainfall and drought varied widely. A number recalled weather in relation to
other events or impact at the time in question – such as requests for humanitarian aid or major
advocacy campaigns - rather than in relation to the weather itself. Given that many of the participants
were urban-based and from a wide range of backgrounds, it will be interesting to see how this
approach differs when undertaken amongst those whose livelihoods are specifically dependent on
climate variability.

6
A full list of participants is included in Annex 2.
7
A note on participatory downscaling is included within Annex 3.

7
 Participatory Downscaling, Dominic Kniveton, University of Sussex

UNCERTAINTY RISK

Translating to
Forecast uncertainty Downscaling in relevant Choosing appropriate
time and space information responses
700 200

650

180
600

550
160

Total wet season rainfall

Length of wet season

500

total
450 140
length

400

120
350

300
100

250

200 80

79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Yea r

Policy/user contribution

Scientific contribution

B. ‘Weather or Not’ designed by PETLab Parsons School for Design and the Red Cross/Red Crescent
Climate Centre8 , this game is designed to support more effective humanitarian and development
decision making employing probabilistic forecasting. Participants form teams, each with a
humanitarian director who has to decide whether to take action based on a series of probabilistic
forecasts for an extreme weather events (in the workshop, the forecast was for serious flooding). The
directorship is maintained when action matches outcome, but moves through the team when action
does not match the outcome. The game highlights the need to develop agreed thresholds for acting
on forecasts, as well as the credibility and organisational resource issues at stake in employing climate
information.

Participants enjoyed the game and noted that pride in not losing the directorship was a good
substitute for an organisation’s desire for a good reputation in acting appropriately. Two of the three
groups realised their threshold for “acting” was a flood risk prediction of 50%, whilst one group
decided their threshold was 60%.

C. Identifying examples of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ use of climate information

Participants were asked to provide examples of good and bad use of information. The ensuing
discussion of what made these examples ‘good’ or ‘bad’ clearly demonstrated the many connections
and levels of ongoing dialogue required to ensure that climate information effectively informs specific
decision making contexts.

8
‘Weather or Not: A game of forecasts and actions’, Pablo Suarez, designed by PETLab Parsons School for Design and Red
Cross/Red Crescent Climate Centre. Available at http://petlab.parsons.edu/redCrossSite/games.html

8
 The usefulness of this process was, for example, apparent in discussing humanitarian activities
developed following the forecast of El Nino rains in 2009. Kenya Red Cross provided seeds enabling a
bumper harvest in a formerly food-insecure region, while WFP prepositioned relief in flood prone
areas. The observations and action matched the forecast. However, while the rains were also heavy in
the south Rift Valley, the rains all came together. While the forecast was accurate, it did not provide
information on the seasonal distribution. The differences experienced locally highlighted how seasonal
forecasts can be used for ‘no regret actions’9 within national level contingency planning, but how
difficult it is to use this information effectively at geographical scales of direct relevance to local NGOs
and communities.

2.2 Participating in the Greater Horn of Africa Regional Climate Outlook Forum (GHARCOF) on
28 February in Arusha, and providing a joint exchange partner presentation within the
following ICPAC/WB GFDDR Climate Change Adaptation for Policymakers workshop, 1-4
March 2011.

Coordinated by ICPAC, the GHARCOF and following workshop brought together NMHS from across the
region, with a range of end users from the sectors of agriculture, water, disaster risk reduction,
development and academics undertaking related research.

The joint exchange partner presentation to the Arusha workshop provided a synthesis of the principal
elements of the exchange, including: the need for dialogue to enable more effective use of climate
science, deepening humanitarian and development end users’10 understanding about the uncertainties
within climate science, promoting climate scientists’ understanding about the climate information
requirements of humanitarian and development end users’, and its relevance to a wide range of
activities - including post-election violence relief work and peace-building, agricultural activities and
marketing of produce -, and identifying and trialling innovative approaches to promoting improved
understanding and application of climate science.

2.3 Holding a number of one-to-one meetings with those engaged in complementary work.

Individual meetings were held with

• Members of the UNDP Africa Adaptation Programme (AAP) and associated consultants. In
Kenya, AAP is currently supporting the Government in mainstreaming climate change and
science across government ministries. The exchange also met with team members engaged in
AAP work within West Africa.
• The CEO and Director of Africa Harvest, an organisation which seeks to strengthen Kenyan
farmers’ capacities, including through the use of genetically modified crops. It is running a pilot
project with meteorological expertise directly informing farming practice, and has undertaken

9
‘No regret’ options are those which, while undertaken to reduce vulnerability to a specific event, such as a seasonal
forecast or potential conflict, will bring benefit to communities at risk, whether or not the event actually takes place.
10
This report employs the term ‘humanitarian and development end users’ to encompass the range of bodies with
responsibilities to address current and future human vulnerabilities, including policy and decisionmakers working at
community, district, national, regional and international levels.

9
 specific research on the forms of communication most appropriate for strengthening farmers’
understanding of new scientific and technological learning.
• The Food Security Advisor, for the Regional Office of the International Federation of the Red
Cross and Red Crescent Societies.
• Dr Samuel Mwangi, Kenya Meteorological Department, to discuss the potential for furthering
the climate science-humanitarian policy dialogue, and formulating an opportunity for
immediate follow up.

3.0 Current state of the climate science humanitarian policy dialogue

Awareness of the importance of increasing understanding about climate information amongst humanitarian
and development end users is much more advanced in Kenya and the East Africa region than in the UK. Not
only is East Africa experiencing ongoing climate variability, but policymakers are concerned about the potential
for inappropriate use of climate change adaptation funding when this becomes available.

There was widespread welcome for the exchange approach to bridge the continuing gap between researchers
and end users of climate information in Africa. A number of participants at the Nairobi workshop specifically
raised their willingness to host future exchange meetings, and others are keen to explore how they might
directly engage in proposed exchange demonstration work in Kenya. Senior NMHs officials in Arusha were also
extremely welcoming of the exchange approach, with a wide variety of requests for further information on this
work.

Box of participants’ opinions on the workshop:

“It was the first time that I was in a space in which scientists, development partners and some implementers
were convened in the same space to talk about climate change. It was refreshing to hear the different
perspectives and to know more about the work of some actors, especially the Kenya Meteorological
Department... It was eye opening to hear about the serious work that they are doing, trying to strengthen their
links to the effect of climate change on human lives. It was also good to hear from people not based in Africa.”

“The workshop was very useful as it opened dialogue between climate science and local indigenous knowledge.
The workshop facilitated the creation of a strong future network of climate scientists and
Development/Humanitarian agencies.”

“The workshop was indeed useful for me on two levels. One, coming from a science background, it was good
for me to know what are some of the issues that users have and what scientists can do about it. This is
important for my work’…in an international NGO… ‘because it involves bridging the gap between the two.
Second, it was interesting to know some of the ways that others (in development) have made use of climate
information and their experiences.”

Participants in the Nairobi workshop were requested to complete a questionnaire, with different versions for
both climate scientists and humanitarian and development policymakers. Ten humanitarian and development
policymakers questionnaires and five climate science questionnaires were completed. The questionnaires and
synthesised findings gathered through these are included in Annexes 4-6.

Amongst the findings gathered through the questionnaire and reviewed through subsequent discussion:

10
 • All humanitarian and development organisations said that climate information was integral or
significant to their decision making11, with many noting that its importance is increasing.
• All climate scientists thought community organisations understood climate information poorly.
• Climate science expertise and climate science policy fora are not readily accessible to national NGOs
and community groups working outside Nairobi. Half of NGOs said they used the KDM ‘frequently’ as
a source of climate information, and all these NGOs were international rather than national or
community-based. While there are a range of humanitarian and development fora which employ
climate information – amongst which the Kenya Climate Change working group, national and regional
Food Security Groups and a Drought network - nevertheless participants still recognised the need for
enhanced direct climate science humanitarian and development policymaker dialogue.
• All humanitarian and development organisations said that increased links with scientists would
improve their work.
• All scientists said that a greater dialogue with ‘end users‘ would cause them to work more to meet
end users’ needs. One said “there is definitely sufficient capacity to provide tailor-made products”.

4.0 Key issues raised

More effective use of climate information through two-way dialogue: Proposals from Kenya exchange
meeting 25th February 2011

1. Converting information into knowledge

2. Helping humanitarian and development end
users ‘own’ uncertainty
3. Identifying relevant and trusted channels of
dialogue
4. Support the development of appropriate no
regrets options
5. Evaluate relevant use of climate information
and assess its economic value

As previously, exchange activities highlighted that the usefulness of climate information depends on more
than its ‘skill’12. While forecasting exhibits varying levels of skill in different regions and across different
timescales, vital to its effective use remain:
• Increased emphasis on supporting end users’ understanding of the probabilistic nature of the
climate information. While there are significant efforts to enhance climate science13, there remains

11
This coincides with findings drawn from the Organisational Self-Assessment Tool which HFP developed to enable
organisations to assess their current capacities to deal with future crises. Undertaken with 260 policymakers from across
international, regional, national governmental and non-governmental organisations, climate change was ranked as the
third greatest driver of future crises.
12
Climate scientists use the term ‘skill’ to denote the capacity of models to match observations.
13
For example, the Met Office has reported positive results of work within its joint Climate Science Research Partnership
with the UK Department for International Development, with higher horizontal model resolution improving rainfall
teleconnections. They are proposing to assess the feasibility of forecasting the date at which 30% of the local seasonal
total is received.
11
 the need to enable end users to themselves take ownership of the uncertainties within current climate
science in order that they can appropriately apply the information within specific decision making
contexts. Climate science provides evidence, not proof. Efforts to support enhanced understanding of
the probabilistic nature of climate science need to demonstrate tangible benefits from better use of
climate information and avoid heightening disregard of climate science as completely uncertain14.

• Contextualising climate information within specific humanitarian and development decision making
processes and activities. It is clear that climate science holds information which can significantly
enhance humanitarian and development planning, amongst which the accelerated rate of new
diseases and decrease in soil moisture brought about by increasing temperatures. There are also
important efforts to support better use of seasonal forecasts within malaria prevention and
information on water scarcity within diarrhoea control programmes.

But climate information is just one piece of information required to inform humanitarian and
development decision makers. Rather than asking end users what climate information they want, two-
way exchange seeks to enable humanitarian and development end users to develop the understanding
required to ask relevant questions of climate scientists regarding the kinds of climate information
required for specific decision making contexts. It is widely recognised that Africa is a global leader in
developing the potential of the RCOF to support more effective use of climate information. The
GHARCOF has established an important model for cross-disciplinary discussion of seasonal forecasts
amongst a range of end users, which could be further developed and transferred for RCOF in other
regions and, indeed, for other sector-specific science policy meetings. Moreover there are moves to
develop the concept of the National Climate Outlook Forum.

• Recognising that both climate scientists and humanitarian and development end users benefit from
enhanced dialogue. There are a number of initiatives to develop ‘blended’ forecasts, bringing together
the indigenous knowledge of farmers and rainmakers with climate science.15 Such work has made
clear that community and indigenous forecasting techniques encompass observability and replicability,
enabling similar methods of testing to ‘modern’ climate science. Moreover, engagement with
indigenous approaches enables efforts for strengthening understanding of climate science to be based
on existing capacities and work through established opinion leaders.While recognising that it would
require standardising acceptable monitoring and reporting procedures, there is also considerable
scope for exploring how the extensive networks of humanitarian and development end users could
support NMHS in collecting observation data. If NMHS in return provided reporting to those end users
who undertook data collection, such an arrangement could have significant reciprocal benefits.

14
One pilot to promote increased understanding of climate science uncertainty employed the game of darts. This
reportedly led participants to perceive climate information as completely random. On the other hand, the ‘Weather or
not’ forecasting game builds in understanding of the need to establish organisational and community thresholds for
action, together with the range of consequences resulting from each decision taken (including loss of organisational and
personal credibility and wastage of human and material resources).
15
A number of initiatives in this area have been undertaken by amongst others: Christian Aid; the University of Nairobi
within the Makueni project in southeastern Kenya http://www.csti.or.ke/html/project1.htm; and KMD and ICPAC work
with the Nganyi community in Western Kenya, funded within the IDRC/DFID Climate Change Adaptation in Africa
programme.
12
 • More clearly defining the range of humanitarian and development end users of climate information
and ensuring sustained access to climate science expertise to assist in interpreting and effectively
applying the information. It seems that most of the current efforts to make better use of climate
information are aimed at enhancing governmental capacities. Yet humanitarian and development non-
governmental organisations are also both end users and intermediaries of climate information. There
is tremendous scope to consider enhancing the capacity of such paraclimate scientists, as agricultural
extension workers, humanitarian and development staff, and community and religious leaders. In this
regard, it is also notable that ICPAC is to establish in-house disaster management expertise.

As is the situation in many countries particularly vulnerable to climate variability and change, the Red
Cross has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with KMD. It does not appear to be sufficiently
recognised that there are a plethora of other humanitarian and development end users who also need
access to relevant climate information, many of whom have significant direct reach with vulnerable
communities.

• Accessing and ownership of information. Those areas most at risk of climate variability and change
overlap with those areas where there is least observation data. Observation networks in Africa remain
eight times below the minimum levels recommended by WMO. Moreover maintenance and
calibration of equipment remains under resourced and often inappropriate for harsh environments.
There also remain issues over ensuring the standardisation of data collection and reporting, as well as
issues about the ownership of climate data. These exist both between NMHS and regional centres, and
between regional centres and international climate institutions.

Climate scientists participating in the exchange discussions stressed the need for humanitarian and
development end users to consult a wide range of sources, rather than relying on one source. While
end users report having to pay for data from national meteorological departments, much of the
relevant data is freely available. It is rather a question of knowing where to look for relevant data16.
There is a need to identify those online and ‘actual’ networks through which relevant information
can best be pooled and disseminated. There are various user interface platforms proposed or under
development, including by WMO, the ECA Africa Climate Policy Centre, ICPAC (supported by
Microsoft), and UN AAP. WMO has also established a High Level Task Force on ‘Climate Services for
the most vulnerable’. It is not yet clear how end users will be involved in ensuring that these platforms
and initiatives provide services and information relevant to their climate information needs.

• Providing the information in accessible formats and using relevant media. Efforts are underway to
increase dissemination of information through relevant media, including via local language radio and
mobile phone. Access to climate information remains uneven, with the most vulnerable having limited
access to TV. A number of humanitarian and development end users mentioned FEWS NET as
providing materials in a readily understandable format. Climate scientists partnering the exchange
repeatedly cautioned the need to understand the levels of uncertainty on which climate information is
based. There is a need to systematically review the most effective forms of communication given the
complexity of emerging scientific understanding and the wide range of humanitarian and development
end users(see also Box below on ‘Formats for communication’) .

16
A list of potential sources was provided by University of Liverpool in the 25 February 2011 Nairobi meeting and is
included in Annex 4.

13
 • Disseminating the information through trusted channels. Participants in the Nairobi meeting
identified faith-based organisations as well-placed to host regular climate science policy dialogue. They
are both widely respected and have extensive coverage. The need to engage youth was also
repeatedly stressed, as was the need to engage community opinion shapers.

• Timely provision of information. The value of forecasts decays quickly. If they are to maintain their
value, forecasts must be disseminated swiftly and regularly updated. If not, people are being informed
by outdated information.

• Strengthening capacity to develop appropriate use of climate information, including identifying

relevant ‘no regret’ options which will be of benefit to vulnerable communities. Participatory
downscaling provides one approach through which to review and analyse past activities informed by
climate information, identify those responses which proved most effective, and so develop mental
models which can support effective employment of forecasts within future decision making.

• Evaluating the benefits of useful application of climate science, bearing in mind that ‘usefulness’
encompasses the components of improved understanding, communication, decision making and
application outlined above.

Discussion repeatedly highlighted the importance of developing more relevant economic metrics to
capture the multi-dimensional benefits of promoting more effective use of climate information, to
increase the priority which government policymakers afford this issue. The politicisation of climate
change and the continued responsive nature of governmental engagement have highlighted the need
to promote effective leadership on climate change.

While the close correlation between GDP and climate has already been clearly demonstrated, there
remains a need to undertake more comprehensive cost benefit analysis, such as the costs of animal
health associated with climate variability, appropriate marketing and storage of agricultural produce
and avoidance of humanitarian response. There are significant efforts underway in this area17.
However, to be relevant, such metrics will need to encompass consideration of the different levels of
dialogue required to make climate science ‘useful’.

• The kinds of climate information required to better support humanitarian and development end
users. Participants in the Nairobi workshop considered temporal distribution of rainfall through
seasons the most important type of climate information. This finding concurs with those from the
consultation process undertaken by the joint DFID/Met Office Climate Science Research Partnership.
The types of information considered next most important by those participating in the exchange
February workshop were split between spatial downscaling and extreme weather warnings.

17
See for example ‘Prevention Pays’,
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTSDNET/0,,contentMDK:22764469~menuPK:64885113~pagePK:
7278667~piPK:64911824~theSitePK:5929282,00.html

14
 Although recognising the uncertainties inherent within emerging climate science, end users are
interested in learning about current scientific understanding of future trends. Participants in the
Nairobi workshop specifically requested a country seamless (across timescales) synthesis of climate
information18.

Box on formats for communication

Discussion repeatedly highlighted the need to make information available through relevant channels. Mobile
phones are particularly important, with more extensive reach than TV or internet. Participants welcomed the
potential of games to promote understanding, particularly among the youth.

Posters may not be a useful tool for communicating with community end users. One partner mentioned the
inappropriateness of a poster on malaria control, where people did not recognise the mosquito as portrayed
as larger than life on the poster. They wondered what this large insect was.

A number of humanitarian and development end users mentioned FEWSNET as providing materials in a readily
understandable format, including translating climate trends into ‘hotspots’ requiring particular monitoring. Yet
climate scientists also cautioned the need to unpick the information within such trends analysis19.

5.0 Follow up and next steps

Immediate follow up to this initial exchange visit includes:

• CCS hosting a one day workshop on ‘Supporting humanitarian and development end users effective
use of climate science’. KMD has expressed its willingness to take part in this20.

• Focusing the next climate science humanitarian policy working group in the UK on learning from
exchange discussions in to Kenya. HFP will seek to ensure that a number of key partners of the
proposed demonstration study work in Kenya are able to take part in this forum, whether remotely or
in person.

On the basis of learning developed through this exchange visit, HFP will revise the proposal for undertaking
exchange demonstration studies and submit this to a range of potential donors.

The exchange has been invited to participate in the Conference on Climate Science Communication, taking
place in Uganda in August 2011

HFP will also develop a webpage to facilitate access to the wide range of materials being gathered during its
activities, and to share the presentations made within the various exchange meetings to date. It is proposed
that this data will be shared with and transferred to the most appropriate of the user interfaces currently in
development.

18
Part of this country level analysis is available through the UNDP climate change country profiles, http://country-
profiles.geog.ox.ac.uk/index.html?country=Kenya&d1=Reports
19
Given the uncertainties within the science, some of information from which trends are developed (such as on
temperature) may be of greater certainty than other elements (such as rainfall).
20
The proposed agenda is included in Annex 7.

15
More broadly, HFP will seek to identify and share relevant learning from across these exchange activities to
inform its efforts to support more effective science-humanitarian policy dialogue on issues of future
vulnerability.

For further information, please contact:

Emma Visman
Humanitarian Futures Programme

King’s College, London

Email: emma.1.visman@kcl.ac.uk

Tel: + 442078487149

16
 Annex 1: Agenda

Venue: All Africa Conference of Churches (AACC) Guest House & Conference
Centre, Waiyaki Way
Date: 10.00-17.00, Friday 25 February 2011

10.00-10.30 Tea/ Coffee

Introduction

10.30-11.00 Introduction to the exchange

Employing climate information in Kenya

11.00-12.30 Reviewing the current situation of climate science policy dialogue in Kenya and the wider
region: Key successes, concerns and barriers
12.30-13.00 Lunch

Strengthening dialogue between climate scientists and humanitarian and developmen policymakers and the partners and
communities with whom they work

13.00-13.30 Exploring approaches which best support effective dialogue

Presentation and a forecasting card game

13.30-14.30 Exploring the potential benefits and important uncertainties within existing climate
information
Sources and uncertainties in climate information
Dr Cyril Caminade, University of Liverpool

14.30-16.00 Contextualising climate information for different levels of humanitarian and development
decision making
Dr Dominic Kniveton, University of Sussex
(Tea during this session)

16.00-17.00 Identification of key issues for addressing within the proposed expanded demonstration
study in Kenya and to inform exchange presentations within the Arusha meetings

17
 Annex 2: Participants of 25/2 Nairobi workshop

Name Organisation Email

Andrew Githeko Kenya Medical Research Institute githeko@yahoo.com
Andrew Omale IFRC Andrew.omale@ifrc.org
Basra Ali Regional Development Consulting Basraali.mohammed@gmail.com
Group, Stockholm Environment Institute
Bruno Lima University of Barcelona n/a
Conor Phillips Goal cd@goalkenya.org
Cyril Caminade Liverpool University cyril.caminade00@gmail.com
David Obongo FAO REOA David.obongo@fao.org
Dominic Kniveton Sussex University kafw3@sussex.ac.uk
Elvin Nyukuri Open University e.nyukuri@open.ac.uk
Emma Bowa CARE Kenya emmabowa@care.or.ke
Emma Visman Humanitarian Futures Programme emma.1.visman@kcl.ac.uk
Erasmo Buonomo Met Office Hadley Centre erasmo.buonomo@metoffice.gov.uk
Felix Musonye IRC Nairobi hr@kenya.theirc.org
Franklin Opija UONBI fopija@unobi.ac.ke
Irene Mjeri UNESCO Regional Programme of iremwa@gmail.com
Education for Emergencies (PEER)
James Nganga WFP James.nganga@wfp.org
James Nguo ALIN jnguo@alin.net
Joseck Kinyua Ngai CSMKE ngaikg@yahoo.com
Josephine Ngaira Maseno University ngaira06@yahoo.co.uk
Justus Kinyua ACK Christian Community Services Jsts_kinyua@yahoo.com
Nakuru
Kiflemariam IFRC kiflemarian.kidanemarian@ifrc.org
Kidanemarian
Lucy Pearson Humanitarian Futures Programme lucy.pearson@kcl.ac.uk
Maurine Ambani CARE International kamaurine@googlemail.com
Obed Koringo Kenya Climate Change working group kioli@greenafricafoundation.org
Peter McGeachie CAFOD pmcgeachie@cafod.or.ke
Samuel Mwangi Kenyan Met Office mwangi@meteo.go.ke
Virinder Sharma DFID v-sharma@dfid.gov.uk

18
 Annex 3: Participatory downscaling
Introduction

Climate information is inherently uncertain due to the chaotic nature of the atmosphere, inaccuracies in
models and different potential future atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases and aerosols. Over
time the relative contribution of each of these uncertainties changes such that for short term and seasonal
forecasts the major uncertainty arises from the chaotic nature of the atmosphere and model inaccuracies.
While for longer term projections the major uncertainties emanate from the range of possible emission
scenarios and model inaccuracies. Importantly for humanitarian and development agencies an added source
of uncertainty arises due to the difference in the scales at which climate data is provided (such as national and
regional and seasonal or annual) and that which it is used (such as local and sub-seasonal). The result of these
scale changes are that the state of the atmosphere cannot be relied to be the same at the location of use and
that which for which it is supplied. A number of scientific techniques exist to translate the information at one
scale to higher ones and are collectively know as downscaling. Techniques based on regression relationships
derived with past observed data are known as statistical downscaling whilst the use of high resolution climate
models is known as dynamical downscaling. Unfortunately statistical downscaling is limited by observed data
availability and dynamical downscaling by a lack of boundary data at the local resolution and model
inaccuracies.

In addition to these uncertainties humanitarian and development users of climate information are often
presented with data not of the type that is required for their needs. For example seasonal forecasts
concentrate on rainfall totals rather than information of importance for crop production and food security
such as the start, end and length of the wet season. In the main this difference results from problems of
climate models resolving the atmosphere at daily time scales although recent research efforts are planning to
address this mismatch in information type. However even if these efforts are successful (which is unclear at
present)there is the unresolved problem of inherent uncertainty in climate information arising from the
chaotic nature of the atmosphere.

To users on the ground of climate information scientific uncertainties present significant risks to life and costs
through livelihood and emergency preparedness actions and inaction. One possibility to improve the utility of
climate information for humanitarian and development needs lies in the integration of local and scientific
knowledge . Recent attempts to do this have resulted in blended forecasts based on …. (ADD) Here we
present a complimentary technique that rather than trying to improve on inherently uncertain scientific
forecasts uses local knowledge to downscale climate information in time, space and information type to a
range of outcomes and risks that can be acted upon appropriately. In doing so this process is hoped to extend
the ownership of climatic uncertainty to the wider climate-policy-user community. In turn a sharing of
ownership of uncertainty is proposed to lead to more collaborative knowledge production and the
development of emergent solutions to climate related livelihood stresses and shocks.

Aim

The formal aim of participatory downscaling is to aid and improve the use of climate information by
humanitarian and development actors through the promotion of science-policy-user dialogue leading to the
integration of local and scientific knowledge. Specific objectives of the approach include:
19
 (a) To develop a shared understanding of the uncertainties in climate information and the impact of these
uncertainties on humanitarian and development risk management decisions
(b) Construct a dynamically evolving local capacity to translate national and regional climate information
to a range of climatic outcomes at local spatial and higher temporal scales.
(c) Feedback information of the scale relationships of climate to aid the provision of climate forecasts by
meteorological service providers.

Methodology

The approach is based around a simple event history technique. Starting with a time series of observed rainfall
data a sample of years are selected that represent different climatic conditions. In Figure 1 a time series of
rainfall from Kenya are shown. Also highlighted are years identified in Table 1 as flood and drought events.

Figure 1: Annual and wet season rainfall averaged over the whole of Kenya from 1990 to 2006. Wet events
are identified by blue arrows and drought events by red arrows.

160

140

120

100
Mean monthly rainfall (mm)

Annual
80 MAM
OND

60

40

20

0
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year

20
Table 1: Floods and drought incidences in Kenya

21
For each event one or two non climate culturally, politically or economically important events should be
selected to provide a mental trigger to participants of the year of the event being refered to. Examples from
the Kenyan data are shown in Figure 2. These events were chosen by a non– national for a group of
development and humanitarian stakeholders and would have benefitted from tailoring to local contexts by
someone with a more in-depth knowledge of Kenyan culture

Figure 2: Sample of non climatic events

• 2004 October -
• 2009 August - Visiting Kenyan ecologist
US Secretary of State Wangari Maathai wins
Hillary Clinton the Nobel Peace
criticises Kenya for Prize.
failing to investigate
the deadly violence
after the 2007 • Controversy over jail
election. conditions amid
intense media
• Man bites snake in coverage of inmate
Kenyan tree tussle deaths at Meru jail in
the east

• 2002 November - • December 97 - Moi

Terror attack on wins further term
Israeli-owned hotel
near Mombasa kills
10 Kenyans and
injures three Israelis. • Embassy bomb –
• Kibaki victory - August 98 attack on
December - Elections. US embassy in
Mwai Kibaki wins a Nairobi killed 224,
landslide victory injured 4,500

For each climatic event, starting with the most recent, and without revealing the climatic conditions that year,
participants should be asked to discuss whether the location in which they were in that year experienced a
wet, dry or average rainy season, whether the start of the wet season was late, early on time and whether
there were significant breaks in the rains. The choice of climatic variables should be varied according to user
needs. The range of experiences for each year should then be collated and years which were climatically
similar grouped together (e.g. all above, below or average rainy years) and a discussion held of the
humanitarian and development outcomes of different events in the same category. If available, seasonal
forecasts for chosen events should also be presented to elaborate on the use and limitations of forecast data.

It should be noted for downscaling of longer term forecasts or projections the relationships of the atmosphere
between scales might change and input is required by climate scientists in the discussion to explain how

22
changes in the climate might affect local events. For example it is recognized in climate change science that
future climates are likely to include more intense rainfall events than currently experienced. As such the
process requires constant updating both to improve collective knowledge and to account for changing climatic
conditions.

23
Annex 4: Some sources of climate information identified by partnering Liverpool
climate scientists

Seasonal forecasts sources

• Forecasting the next season

• IRI (The International Research Institute for climate and society, USA)
• http://portal.iri.columbia.edu/portal/server.pt?open=512&objID=944&Pa
geID=0&cached=true&mode=2&userID=2
• CPC (Climate Prediction Center, USA)
• http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/african_desk/
• UKMO (UK Met Office)
• http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/science/specialist/seasonal/probability/glo
b_seas_prob.html
• ECMWF (European Centre for Medium range Weather Forecasts, UK)
• http://www.ecmwf.int/products/forecasts/d/charts/seasonal/forecast/se
asonal_range_forecast/
• GFS - CFS (NCEP Coupled Forecast System, USA)
• http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/people/wwang/cfs_fcst/

Decadal forecasts sources

• Forecasting the next 10 years (usefull time scale for NGO & planners)

• ENSEMBLES stream2 decadal forecasts

• http://ensembles.ecmwf.int/download/ensembles/stream2/decadal/

• Next IPCC exercise (CMIP5 data, decadal forecasts)

• http://cmip-pcmdi.llnl.gov/cmip5/data_portal.html?submenuheader=3

• UKMO (UK Met Office)

24
 Climate scenario sources
• Forecasting the next century

• ENSEMBLES Regional Climate Models

• http://ensemblesrt3.dmi.dk/

• Next IPCC exercise (CMIP5 data)

• http://cmip-pcmdi.llnl.gov/cmip5/data_portal.html?submenuheader=3

• CORDEX Regional Climate Models

• http://wcrp.ipsl.jussieu.fr/RCD_CORDEX.html

• Information: IPCC reports & UNDP climate change country profile:

• http://country-
profiles.geog.ox.ac.uk/index.html?country=Kenya&d1=Reports

25
 Annex 5: Questionnaire
For Climate Scientists
This questionnaire will be used to inform the development of the proposed extended exchange work in Kenya,
and will remain anonymous. A report of this meeting and the findings of this questionnaire will be distributed
to all participants shortly.

1. How do you make your climate information publically available?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. In what forms do you report your climate information?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. How often do you have direct contact with these kinds of humanitarian and development
organisations?
Never Sometimes Frequently

Community-based NGOs
National NGOs
International NGOs
International/UN agency
Regional organization
Government department
Other: please specify
…………………………………………………..

4. How well do you think that these humanitarian and development organisations understand climate
information?

Poorly Adequately Well Very Well

Community-based NGOs
National NGOs
International NGOs
International/UN agency
Regional organization
Government department
Other: please specify
…………………………………………………..

26
 5. What do you think is the most valued feature of climate information to humanitarian and
development organisations?

Spatial downscaling to more localised level

Temporal distributions of rainfall through season

(onset, duration, dry spells, monthly forecasts)

Extreme weather warnings

Multi-annual to decadal prediction

6. How well do you understand and interpret information/requests from humanitarian and
development organisations?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. Would a greater dialogue with end users lead you to target your work more to their needs and
develop climate information more relevant to their decision making processes?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. What types of forum might be preferable for enhancing this dialogue? And who do you think may be
best placed to coordinate and host this?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. What measures could be put in place to ensure that scientific findings are better utilised by users in
their decision-making processes?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

27
 Annex 6: Questionnaire
For Humanitarian and Development policy makers
This questionnaire will be used to inform the development of the proposed extended exchange work in Kenya,
and will remain anonymous. A report of this meeting and the findings of this questionnaire will be distributed
to all participants shortly.

1. How would you define the organisation with which you work?
Community-based NGO
National NGO
International NGO
Government department
Other

2. To what extent is climate information used to help inform your organisation’s decision-making?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. What sources of climate information do you use?

Never Sometimes Frequently

National Meteorological Department

Regional organisations (e.g. ICPAC)
International organisations (e.e UNDP, Hadley Centre)
Science journals and reports, such as IPCC
Government reports
NGO reports
Famine Early Warning System Network (FEWS NET)
National media
Local media
Internal organization documents
Other - please specify:
………………………………………………………………..

4. How easily available is climate information made to you?

(For example, do you have to pay for it, is it available on the internet and do you have easy access to
the internet?)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Never Sometimes Frequently

5. How often do you consult climate scientists/climate institutions?

28
 6. Is there knowledge sharing and dissemination of climate information between users? And at what
level (e.g. local, national)?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. Do you think increased links with climate scientists would support your work?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. What types of forum would be preferable for enhancing this dialogue? And who do you think may
be best placed to coordinate and host this?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. How easy and relevant do you and your colleagues find climate information to understand and use
within your work? Difficult Moderate Easy
Very Easy

10. a) What is the most important kind of climate information used by your organisation?

Spatial downscaling to more localised level

Temporal distributions of rainfall through season

(onset, duration, dry spells, monthly forecasts)

Extreme weather warnings

Multi-annual to decadal prediction

b) How well do you think each of these types of information are covered within the climate
information sources which you currently use?
Poor Adequate Good Excellent
Spatial downscaling to more localised level

Temporal distributions of rainfall through season

(onset, duration, dry spells, monthly forecasts)

Extreme weather warnings

Multi-annual to decadal prediction

11. If you could have information specifically tailored towards your needs, what would form would
this take?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
29
 Annex 7-Part 1: Data from questionnaires for Climate Scientists

1. How make 2. Form of 3. Frequency of direct contact: N= never; S= sometimes; F= frequently 4. Perception of understanding: P= poorly; A= adequately; W= well; V= very 5. Perception of Important 6. Understanding of 7. better 8. Preferable Forum and 9. Measures:
climate info info: any well feature: S= Spatial; T= H&D info: P= poorly; dialogue lead who should coordinate any
available: any comments Community National International International Regional Govt Other Community National International International Regional Govt Other temporal rainfall; E= A= adequately; W= to targetting comments
comments NGO NGO NGO agency Org. dep. NGO NGO NGO agency Org. dep. extreme; M= multiannual well; V= very well needs: Y/N Forum Who
Media, press Print and F F S S S F P W A W A W E V Y Sector levels Regular
conferences, electronic seminars for
and form users and
government their opinion
ministries leaders
Television, print and S S S S S F P A A A A W T A Y Provincial Radio
radio, and electornic meteorologis broadcasts
website ts with simple
updates language
Journal formal F S F F F S P A V V W A T Y Stakeholder Government Involve local
publications, publicatio meetings and sector media and
websites, tv, ns and oral specific fliers
and presentati NGOs
newsapers ons

Scientific Prose in N N F F N F W V V T and S W Y Web-based Must have

publications, journals consistent
data and online dialogue
distribution
centres
Press Seasonal S F F F S F F- P A A A A A T V Y
releases, govt climate media
ministries, forecasts
conferences
 Annex 7 – Part 2: Data from questionnaires for Humanitarian and Development Organisations

1. Type of organisation: 2. What extent CI 3. Sources of climate info: N= never; S = sometimes; F= frequently 4. Ease of 5. Frequency of 6. Knowledge 7. Would 8. Preferable forum and 9. Ease of 10a. Important info: S= 10b. How well covered: P= poor; 11. Tailored
(Community, National, used in decision access: consultation: sharing + what incresed links who should coordinate understanding and spatial downscaling; T= A= adequate; G= good; E= form: any
International, Government, making: any Comments on N= never; S= level: Y/N + support work: use: V= very easy; E= temporal rinfall; E= excellent comments
Other) comments price, internet sometimes; F= local/national Y/N easy; M= moderate; extreme; M=
N. Meteor. Regional International Journals Gov reports NGO reportsFEWS N. Media Local media Internal org doc. Other access etc frequently etc Forum Who D= difficult multiannual S T E M
I Increasingly. S S F F F F F F F S S- Internet F Y - minimal, Y meetings OCHA M T and S P P G P More specific
Used in UNOCHA national more spatil, medium
environment Kanya frequent forecasting,
strategy and forum than every and more
policy 1/4 year donor support
alongside
I Considerably F S S S F F F S S F Internet S Y - local, Y Virtual Universities M T, E and M P G G A Specific to area
regional and networks and type of
national impact e.g.
food security
I Very important F F F F F F F F Through F Y - local, Y At all M T and S P G E P
partnerships regional and levels:
and internet national global,
regional,
local
I Significant F F F S S S F Internet and S Y - at all levels Y M T and E A A A
mailing lists but strongest
at national
C Dependent on it S N S F S S F F F F- National S Y - local Y regular E S and E G A G P Locally specific
Indegeno media stakeholder to ecological
us meetings zones
knowledg
e
I Significant F F F F F F F S F Internet S Y - all levels Y Higher M T and E P G G P Quanitifed
learning disaster risks
institutions
C Often S N S F F S F Accessable to F Y - local Y Faith based E T and M G E P G
educated but organisatio
not rural ns
people
I F N S F S S F S S F Internet S Y - all levels Y E S and M A G G E
I Always S N S N F S S S S S S Y - limited Y M T A A P A
C Increasingly N S S F S S S S S Internet S Y Y regular M T and S G A P A
meetings
with all end
users
 Annex 8: The 27th Greater Horn of Africa Climate Outlook Forum (GHACOF 27):
28 February 2011, Snowcrest, Arusha, Tanzania
Programme: Day 1: Monday 28 February 2011

Time Activity Facilitator

8.00-09.00 Registration ICPAC
09:00-10:00 Session 1: Opening Ceremony for RCOF and climate change workshop (Minister in Chair: Prof. Ogallo
charge of Meteorology (Tanzania), Chief executives of IGAD and EAC)

10.00-10:30 Tea/Coffee Break

11.00-13.00 Session 2: Lessons and GHACOF experiences Chair:

• Climate risk Reducing and forum perspectives in (Prof. Laban Ogallo,
ICPAC)_ 15 Mins
• World wide RCOFs and WMO World Climate Applications & Services (Dr
Rupa Kolli, WMO) - 15 Mins
• Regional Disaster risk reduction applications (Mr Martin Owor)
• Agriculture and food security risk reduction Application (Ms Hakuza)
• Water resources and Hydropower energy Sector applications (Mr Kizzy)
• Conflict early warning and regional security (CEWARN)
• Economics of climate related Hazards in the Greater Horn of Africa (Prof
W. Ochoro and G. Mugah)
• Gender and Community based climate information needs (Dr Maria
Onyango)
o (10 minutes for each of the sectors)
• Discussion

12.00-13.00 Lunch
14.00-16.00 Session 3: Review of the state of the climate system Chair:

• Challenges in Communication and dissemination of the Climate outlooks

early warning information (Patrick Luganda)
• Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) modelling activities in the
region (KMA)
• State of the global climate (IRI)
• UK Met Office MAM Climate Outlook (Dr A. Colman)
• Progress with the CSRP project and GPC products (Dr Richard Graham,
UKMO)
• Recent climate anomalies over southern Africa (SADC/DMC)
• Presentation of Draft GHACOF 27 consensus climate outlook (ICPAC)
• Draft Regional Food security outlook (FEWSNET)
- Discussions
16.00-16.30 Coffee/Tea Break

Session 4: National reviews Chair:

• Key Note speech: Mr Gullet Abbas, Kenya Red Cross

• Develop strategies for utilization of GHACOF 27 consensus climate outlook

and lessons from COF 26
17:30 Adjourn
32
 Annex 9: One day workshop hosted by Christian Community Services
‘Promoting dialogue between climate scientists and humanitarian and
development policymakers and community ‘end users’

One day workshop hosted by Christian Community Services

Christian Community Services Mount Kenya East (CCSMKE) supports a wide range of community-based projects which
require climate information. CCSMKE is a partner of Christian Aid, which has been participating in an exchange between
climate scientists and humanitarian and development policy makers ongoing since 2009. The exchange has been keen to
bring the exchange approach to partners particularly vulnerable to future climate variability and change, and initiated
discussion on this approach with partners in Nairobi and Arusha in February/March 2011.
CCS participated in the Nairobi workshop and in a joint presentation of exchange members to the GHARCOF and following
ICPAC/World Bank Climate Change Adaptation for Policymakers workshop in Arusha.
KMD participated in the Nairobi workshop, and is interested in considering potential channels for continuing this climate
science-humanitarian and development policy maker dialogue.
CCS, KMD and HFP discussed the potential for holding a one-day workshop to enable immediate continuation of the
dialogue and to continue to discuss options for longer-term, sustained, two-way dialogue.

Aims of the one-day meeting:

1. To support understanding of the types of climate information available, the certainties and uncertainties within
this.
2. To discuss effective and ineffective use of climate information.
3. To enable more effective use of different types of climate information within the work of participants.
4. To identify the types and formats of climate information that may be most useful to humanitarian, development
and community end users.
Participants: Kenya Meteorological Department, Ministry of Agriculture agricultural extension workers, CCS senior staff,
agricultural extension workers and Disaster Risk Reduction team members, senior clergy, chiefs and community leaders.
Outputs: Workshop report for participants including an action plan, filming parts of the discussion, developing a jointly
agreed summary to share with journalists.

33
Draft agenda

0900-1000 Introductions

1000-1030 Introduction to the exchange and need for dialogue

Christian Community Services

1030-1200 Types of climate information available, and explanation of the certainty and uncertainty within these

Presentation by KMD

1200-1230 Forecasting game using seasonal forecast/short term forecast

Facilitated by CCS

1230-1300 Lunch

1300-1400 Event histories and participatory down-scaling

Facilitated by CCS

1400-1500 Examples of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ use of climate information

Small group discussion

1500-1530 Report back from small group discussion to plenary

1530-1600 Conclusions and next steps for continuing the dialogue

Draft budget KShs

Overnight accommodation for KMD staff x 2 @1500pp 3,000

Travel and food for KMD staff x 2 @ 6000pp 12,000

Overnight accommodation for CCS staff x 2 3,000

Travel and food for CCS staff x 2 15,000

Travel, day return transport for 10 participants 20,000

Overnight accommodation x 10 participants 15,000

Travel and food for 10 participants 60,000

Workshop, hire of venue and AV 10,000

Refreshments for 25 people 22,500

Workshop materials 5,000

Total KShs165,500
34