1. Organizational issues: didn’t talk about existing organizations – identify these and not re-invent the wheel; Identify across scales: global, regional, local institutes – Identify organizations with regard to function: identify a discrete set to let the form follow the function: standardizing impact and adaptation scenarios – training, capacity building, new generation of scholars; Common functions: intercomparisons; observations and models; what are the possible proposals and relevant agencies What is the common purpose for IAV: support decisionmaking? Also need to ensure scientific credibility. Need to communicate to ‘outside’. What does IAV as a community want to communicate? At the moment, centrally organized around IPCC. Self-organization suggests something beyond this. What are the organizational nucleii for IAV? What are the links to scenario development process – related to intercomparisons – can provide information for the management of uncertainty for decision makers Develop links to large international communities through international conferences (e.g., Copenhagen, WCC3, etc). Need to identify and elucidate issues related to e.g., multiple stresses, etc and defining adaptation and what is the purpose of an adaptation analysis – for building resilience, sustainable futures? Same for vulnerability: vulnerable for whom, what time frame, what scale – a template of framework for individual groups to map into. Social communities beginning to map into larger frameworks and meta-concepts. Priorities to development of network – until the community can organize itself for collective action – a necessary energy into network development, unlikely to be successful. A network needs a goal – a good goal would be to organize a conference – a conference around the organizational nucleii Martin and initiative with UNEP; to provide a mean of organizational climate change research on impacts, adaptation, etc. What is happening already What does IAV want to do How do they want to implement

2. This group is moving towards an organizational network that is beyond academic; what are the anchors for IAV – consideration of a much different model than currently exists. Something appropriate for IAV than what the physical modeling communities have developed. There are already organic processes of networks who are gradually coalescing around a shared group of goals and priorities. E.g., a network around least developed countries that are generated from within the LDCs. More about linking the growing networks that can crystallize. This meeting is coming up with some organizational ideas that can be distributed to beginning network (50) This group IS ‘centered’ about climate change and IPCC, need to tie into that strongly. Need a structure that both accommodates bottom-up and internationally relevant. What do we know about existing networks? The email list generated since Aspen, is a start. A start towards defining organizational nucleii: Tim’s slide and Group V’s slide. On the one hand, IPCC and the other, cuommunity at large – what are the connections to, say, WGI – is there something that would be a pressing issue for AR5 that IAV can make an immediate contribution to WGI? Need a self-identification – what are the needs? We don’t have, at any scale, a systematic way to assemble available information – what is a multi-model mean for food production, water availability, local scale climate – a LOT of progress can be made for this community to move forward. This is one aspect, but to assess vulnerability – additional paradigms are needed. This is Chris’ point – for the people that are doing mitigation planning – they need this kind of information.

3. Process and generation of knowledge for IAV as criteria for an Organizational Nucleii that cross scales from local, regional to global HOW DOES THIS FIT TOGETHER and/or PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK FOR AN IAV NETWORK? 1.Impacts and adaptation assessment: Harmonized multi-scale impact assessments: model and tool development for assessments as well as those that do assessments – also considers aggregation issues (e.g., emergent properties and non-linear issues) 2.Investigation of risk uncertainty and decision making 3.Storyline and scenario development, their application, communication (within the community) and distribution at a range of scales. 4.Adaptation: past, present and future 1.Adaptive management, measuring and monitoring :a research question 2.Assessment of adaptation interventions; 3.Community based adaptation and sustainable livliehoods 4.limits to adaptation 5.Processes interacting with vulnerability: 1.Institutions and governance; decisions, decision-making and decision support 2.Demographic processes: migration and mobility 3.Intercomparison of vulnerability assessments; what are the common frameworks? 4.Political and economic processes (socio-political) in development pathways: e.g., failed states, non-states, stumbling states 6.Costing and valuation: monetary and non-monetary and social 7.Observations of changes and historical human/environmental interactions: instrumental, proxy, narrative: Detection and attribution of impacts from anthropogenic causes: Need for observatory applications – historical, anthropological, cropping, etc; 8.INTEGRATION of impacts, adaptation and vulnerability 1.Interactions with mitigation of climate change 2.Regional integration 9.Extreme events, thresholds, key vulnerabilities

4. Proposal: Focus on three time scales: – Network Development – Amsterdam – AR5 – Long-term IAV A component of an implementation strategy to give the community an idea of how to proceed, including: identification of user communities, working group II constituency – what does WGII do, what are the strengths MEA, RA-> joint activities and proposals to push the agenda forward 3-5 categories at a functional level; Infrasctructures Training, capacity building Research and organizational agenda

5. What does IAV need – organizational focii: What are the things that this community does NOT have that are needed for a fundamental breakthrough? What does another community (e.g., IPCC) need from this community that it is not fundamentally getting? – leads to (9) priority areas – Mechanisms for implementation: – Broad community development – International conference For IAV, what is a breakthrough? to xxxx adaptation to climate change What is the client for this workshop? If the clients for this workshop is IPCC, then the specific clients are the countries themselves; should tie into e.g., Nairobi work program. Are we representing the research committee or IPCC, or??

6. Overarching Questions: How much adaptation are we committed to (do we require) (from a national point of view – frames IPCC as the client) Fits into an RCP/parallel process for storyline and scenario development framework – more short term – relevant to climate change and kinds of adaptation 6 What are the likely climate impacts taking into account adaptation? What are the unavoidable impacts? What are the likely impacts for a range of scenarios? 8 – E.g., Impact studies have not been performed for a sufficient number of scenarios – Adaptation needs to sit in the center of the process – it’s not linear, but it’s – What are the impacts when vulnerability is taken into account? Who is vulnerable – where, when and who is capable? 6 What are the interactions between mitigation and adaptation? Where do they overlap, feedback and where are they (are they?) mutually exclusive? 3

7. Charge to groups: 1. Frame the question 2.Pose research questions 3.Instructions to other communities: what we NEED from other groups 4.Propose strategy for implementation with regard to proposals, interaction with other communities, etc.