Collective action problems and governance barriers to sea-level rise adaptation in San Francisco Bay

AbstractThis paper translates Ostrom’s “diagnostic approach” for social-ecological systems to identify the collective action problems and core governance barriers for sea-level rise adaptation in the San Francisco Bay Area. The diagnostic approach considers variables related to the resource system, the resource units, the users, and the governance system. Coupled ecological-infrastructure models identify two core collective action problems: vulnerability interdependency and adaptation interdependency. Qualitative social science case study methods identify the key structural governance and behavioral barriers to cooperation and ongoing activities to address them. The diagnostic approach is potentially applicable to any coastal regions that are vulnerable to sea-level rise and also other climate adaptation issues where vulnerability and adaptation interdependencies require overcoming governance challenges to collective action.

Download Full-text

Design as Play: Sea-Level Rise Planning Board Game

New Instrumentalities ◽

10.35483/acsa.intl.2018.39 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Gabriel Kaprielian ◽

Keyword(s):

Sea Level Rise ◽

Sea Level ◽

San Francisco ◽

San Francisco Bay ◽

Local Governance ◽

Bay Area ◽

Planning And Design ◽

Urban Edge ◽

Urban Planning And Design ◽

Sea Level Rise Adaptation

The waterfront along the San Francisco Bay is facing a growing threat from sea-level rise. Over the years, the Bay Area has seen a large portion of the historic wetlands filled or leveled off for residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. According to current sea level rise projections, water will once again reclaim the bay lands that have been filled. The issues presented by sea level rise along the urban edge of the San Francisco Bay involve a complex series of challenges including: regional versus local governance, built versus natural environment, vulnerable local and regional infrastructure, diverging interests with diverse stakeholders, and population growth. With each possible future scenario come multiple outcomes with winners and losers. How can the best policy and design be selected and tested? How will distinct communities learn about different options and strategies for adaptation and be empowered to act? By creating and playing a sea level rise adaptation “game,” student were able to explore these different scenarios and inform future urban planning and design decisions.

Download Full-text

Adapting to sea level rise: Emerging governance issues in the San Francisco Bay Region

10.31230/osf.io/mjkcu ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Pedro J. Pinto ◽

G. Mathias Kondolf ◽

Pun Lok Raymond Wong

Keyword(s):

Sea Level Rise ◽

Sea Level ◽

San Francisco ◽

Urban Areas ◽

Path Dependence ◽

Large Scale ◽

San Francisco Bay ◽

Metropolitan Region ◽

Environmental Benefit ◽

Formidable Challenge

San Francisco Bay, the largest estuary on the Pacific Coast of North America, is heavily encroached by a metropolitan region with over 7 million inhabitants. Urban development and infrastructure, much of which built over landfill and at the cost of former baylands, were placed at very low elevations. Sea-level rise (SLR) poses a formidable challenge to these highly exposed urban areas and already stressed natural systems. “Green”, or ecosystem-based, adaptation is already on the way around the Bay. Large scale wetland restoration projects have already been concluded, and further action now often requires articulation with the reinforcement of flood defense structures, given the level of urban encroachment. While levee setback, or removal, would provide greater environmental benefit, the need to protect urban areas and infrastructure has led to the trial of ingenious solutions for promoting wetland resilience while upgrading the level of protection granted by levees.We analyzed the Bay’s environmental governance and planning structure, through direct observation, interviews with stakeholders, and study of planning documents and projects. We present two cases where actual implementation of SLR adaptation has led, or may lead to, the need to revise standards & practices or to make uneasy choices between conflicting public interests.Among the region’s stakeholders, there is an increasing awareness of the risks related to SLR, but the institutional arrangements are complex, and communication between the different public agencies/departments is not always as streamlined as it could be. Some agencies and departments need to adapt their procedures in order to remove institutional barriers to adaptation, but path dependence is an obstacle. There is evidence that more frank and regular communication between public actors is needed. It also emphasizes the benefits of a coordination of efforts and strategies, something that was eroded in the transition from government-led policies to a new paradigm of local-based adaptive governance.

Download Full-text