If there is no way of compensating for the inadequacy of national-level action the answer to the ‘what happens’ question is that people will will suffer more than they otherwise need to and in all probablility there will be increasing risk of violent conflict, presaging a further increase in human suffering.

So the question then becomes, how might it be possible to compensate for lack of proper action at the national level? NGOs (both local and international), private companies and inter-governmental organisations at both regional level (such as ASEAN in Southeast Asia, ECOWAS in West Africa) and global (primarily the UN) are the potential sources for both filling in where the national state’s action is inadequate and nudging the state to be more effective. The work that is required of this triangle of actors (inter-governmental, private sector and voluntary sector) is a combination of implementation, training, funding and advocacy. Each has a different role to play and the combination will pan out differently in different contexts.

Rather than go into detail at this point let me underline the key point: there are alternatives if the state cannot or will not step up. Even in fragile, war-torn states, there is something that can be done. Only in the most extreme circumstances – such as Iraq, though not all of it and not for the whole time since the occupation began, and Afghanistan, though again only in parts – is action for adaptation so dangerous as to be wholly impossible.

And as long as there an authentic invitation to international actors to support local action, and as long as the outsiders do act in support and not in substitution of the local actors, then I do not think the spectre of coercive intervention raises its head.

Even if we get the necessary climate funding through international agreement at Copenhagen, there is still the challenge of distributing that funding in an equitable, fair and timely manner, so it remains just one piece of the puzzle.

In your Nepalese floods example, you highlight the difficulty that the government has in generating preparedness; and your solution is to develop greater capacity and build trust. Granted, this is a major part of the solution, but what about the role of other actors in increasing resilience? If we need to respect complexity, then our responses must also be complex and integrate non-government agents (e.g. private sector, or indeed international NGOs based in Stockwell ) .

What are the risks of and for non-government actors? How do you ensure coherence? How do you stimulate constructive non-government action?

Sorry, a bit of a train-of-thought response and a barrage of questions – feel free to pick-and-mix in response!