Adaptive Governance

Author(s):  
Ronald D. Brunner ◽  
Amanda H. Lynch

Adaptive governance is defined by a focus on decentralized decision-making structures and procedurally rational policy, supported by intensive natural and social science. Decentralized decision-making structures allow a large, complex problem like global climate change to be factored into many smaller problems, each more tractable for policy and scientific purposes. Many smaller problems can be addressed separately and concurrently by smaller communities. Procedurally rational policy in each community is an adaptation to profound uncertainties, inherent in complex systems and cognitive constraints, that limit predictability. Hence planning to meet projected targets and timetables is secondary to continuing appraisal of incremental steps toward long-term goals: What has and hasn’t worked compared to a historical baseline, and why? Each step in such trial-and-error processes depends on politics to balance, if not integrate, the interests of multiple participants to advance their common interest—the point of governance in a free society. Intensive science recognizes that each community is unique because the interests, interactions, and environmental responses of its participants are multiple and coevolve. Hence, inquiry focuses on case studies of particular contexts considered comprehensively and in some detail.Varieties of adaptive governance emerged in response to the limitations of scientific management, the dominant pattern of governance in the 20th century. In scientific management, central authorities sought technically rational policies supported by predictive science to rise above politics and thereby realize policy goals more efficiently from the top down. This approach was manifest in the framing of climate change as an “irreducibly global” problem in the years around 1990. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established to assess science for the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The parties negotiated the Kyoto Protocol that attempted to prescribe legally binding targets and timetables for national reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. But progress under the protocol fell far short of realizing the ultimate objective in Article 1 of the UNFCCC, “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference in the climate system.” As concentrations continued to increase, the COP recognized the limitations of this approach in Copenhagen in 2009 and authorized nationally determined contributions to greenhouse gas reductions in the Paris Agreement in 2015.Adaptive governance is a promising but underutilized approach to advancing common interests in response to climate impacts. The interests affected by climate, and their relative priorities, differ from one community to the next, but typically they include protecting life and limb, property and prosperity, other human artifacts, and ecosystem services, while minimizing costs. Adaptive governance is promising because some communities have made significant progress in reducing their losses and vulnerability to climate impacts in the course of advancing their common interests. In doing so, they provide field-tested models for similar communities to consider. Policies that have worked anywhere in a network tend to be diffused for possible adaptation elsewhere in that network. Policies that have worked consistently intensify and justify collective action from the bottom up to reallocate supporting resources from the top down. Researchers can help realize the potential of adaptive governance on larger scales by recognizing it as a complementary approach in climate policy—not a substitute for scientific management, the historical baseline.

2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-232
Author(s):  
Sibylle Kabisch ◽  
Ronjon Chakrabarti ◽  
Till Wolf ◽  
Wilhelm Kiewitt ◽  
Ty Gorman ◽  
...  

With regional variations, climate change has a significant impact on water quality deterioration and scarcity, which are serious challenges in developing countries and emerging economies. Often, effective projects to improve water management in the light of climate change are difficult to develop because of the complex interrelations between direct and indirect climate impacts and local perceptions of vulnerabilities and needs. Adaptation projects can be developed through a combination of participatory, bottom-up needs assessments and top-down analyses. Climate change impact chains can help to display the causal chain of climate signals and resulting impacts and thereby establish a system map as a basis for stakeholder discussions. This article aims to develop specific climate change impact chains for the water management sector in rural coastal India that combine bottom-up and top-down perspectives. Case studies from Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, India, provide a basis for the impact chains developed. Bottom-up data were gathered through a vulnerability and needs assessment in 18 villages complemented with top-down research data. The article is divided into four steps: (1) system of interest; (2) data on climate change signals; (3) climate change impacts based on top-down as well as bottom-up information; (4) specific impact chains complemented by initial climate change adaptation options.


2021 ◽  
pp. 162-178
Author(s):  
Cynthia Rayner ◽  
François Bonnici

This book asks a rather simple but bold question: “How do organizations create systemic social change?” This question is growing in importance, becoming part of the strategic conversation for all types of organizations, not just those specifically focused on social change. Business leaders, politicians, educators, employees, and parents are grappling with the realization that complex social change can rapidly impact their everyday lives. As frustration at the slow pace of change grows, and the world’s wicked problems—such as inequality, climate change and racial justice—proliferate, people are increasingly recognizing that we need to find ways to tackle the root causes of these issues rather than just addressing the symptoms. In the face of these challenges, it is easy to default to our more traditional views of leadership and problem-solving, which celebrate an us-versus-them mentality, top-down decision-making, and aggressive power stances. Systems work—with its focus on the process of change including our day-to-day actions and relationships—may feel counterintuitive in this rapidly emerging future. Yet, as the authors’ research has shown, the future is demanding a different kind of leadership, one that emphasizes the ways we work as much as the outcomes we pursue.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (13) ◽  
pp. 3599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lane ◽  
Murdock ◽  
Genskow ◽  
Betz ◽  
Chatrchyan

Climate change impacts on agriculture have been intensifying in the Northeastern and Midwestern United States. Few empirical studies have considered how dairy farmers and/or their advisors are interpreting and responding to climate impacts, risks, and opportunities in these regions. This study investigates dairy farmer and advisor views and decisions related to climate change using data from seven farmer and advisor focus groups conducted in New York and Wisconsin. The study examined how farmers and advisors perceived climate impacts on dairy farms, the practices they are adopting, and how perceived risks and vulnerability affect farmers’ decision making related to adaptation strategies. Although dairy farmers articulated concern regarding climate impacts, other business pressures, such as profitability, market conditions, government regulations, and labor availability were often more critical issues that affected their decision making. Personal experience with extreme weather and seasonal changes affected decision making. The findings from this study provide improved understanding of farmers’ needs and priorities, which can help guide land-grant researchers, Extension, and policymakers in their efforts to develop and coordinate a comprehensive strategy to address climate change impacts on dairy in the Northeast and the Midwest US.


Author(s):  
Robin Leichenko

Economic geographers have made important contributions to the understanding of many facets of climate change, yet the field has had relatively limited engagement with the study of climate impacts, vulnerabilities, and adaptation. Instead, most work on the economic consequences of climate disruption is being done by researchers in other disciplines or in other subfields of geography. This chapter argues that broad recognition of humanity’s role in shaping Earth’s planetary systems, combined with new hope and opportunity engendered by the 2015 Paris Agreement on reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, present a pivotal moment for economic geographers to take a more central role in the study of climate change and in broader, interdisciplinary conversations about the meaning and implications of the Anthropocene.


Author(s):  
H. Damon Matthews ◽  
Susan Solomon ◽  
Raymond Pierrehumbert

The primary objective of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations at a level that will avoid dangerous climate impacts. However, greenhouse gas concentration stabilization is an awkward framework within which to assess dangerous climate change on account of the significant lag between a given concentration level and the eventual equilibrium temperature change. By contrast, recent research has shown that global temperature change can be well described by a given cumulative carbon emissions budget. Here, we propose that cumulative carbon emissions represent an alternative framework that is applicable both as a tool for climate mitigation as well as for the assessment of potential climate impacts. We show first that both atmospheric CO 2 concentration at a given year and the associated temperature change are generally associated with a unique cumulative carbon emissions budget that is largely independent of the emissions scenario. The rate of global temperature change can therefore be related to first order to the rate of increase of cumulative carbon emissions. However, transient warming over the next century will also be strongly affected by emissions of shorter lived forcing agents such as aerosols and methane. Non-CO 2 emissions therefore contribute to uncertainty in the cumulative carbon budget associated with near-term temperature targets, and may suggest the need for a mitigation approach that considers separately short- and long-lived gas emissions. By contrast, long-term temperature change remains primarily associated with total cumulative carbon emissions owing to the much longer atmospheric residence time of CO 2 relative to other major climate forcing agents.


2019 ◽  
pp. 165-180
Author(s):  
Sara Hughes

This concluding chapter highlights the book's major findings and explores the remaining challenges and tradeoffs inherent in today's locally led climate change agenda. While the cities have made demonstrable progress on reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, they are now facing the challenge of scaling up their efforts as new targets for 2030 loom. The chapter then discusses ways the cities can and are using the governing strategies to do this: by building participatory decision-making institutions, building capacity for climate “smart” governance, and expanding and stabilizing the coalition for climate change mitigation. However, the need for a “big tent” approach to climate change mitigation to make the citywide changes necessary for reducing GHG emissions 80 percent increases the complexity of interests and challenges of coordination. The scope of a viable urban climate change coalition may ultimately set the limits of a locally led mitigation agenda.


Author(s):  
Hill and

Once regarded as a threat in the distant future, the impacts of climate change are now daily new stories. The introduction defines resilience and argues that resilience is urgently needed in the United States and other places to enable communities to cope with the climate impacts they are already experiencing, as well as with future impacts. Building resilience is not a substitute for reducing greenhouse gas emissons, but it can blunt some of the worst impacts, save lives, and protect the most vulnerable in society. Insufficient progress in cutting emissions has made the resilience imperative all the more urgent. The introduction, lastly, explains the authors’ motivations for writing the book and provides an overview of ten lessons essential for advancing climate resilience.


2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 311-319 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda H. Lynch ◽  
Ronald D. Brunner

Abstract Adaptive governance is a pattern that began to emerge from conflicts over natural resources in the American West a few decades ago. This was a pragmatic response to the emerging evidence that effective control was dispersed among multiple authorities and interest groups, that efficiency was only one of the many goals to be reconciled in policy decision processes, and that science itself was politically contested. Climate change as a policy problem exhibits many of these same features and has similarly led to gridlock in international and national forums. But humankind is not without guidance in securing the protection of life, limb, and livelihood in the face of environmental distress, particularly with regard to the challenge of adaptation. One effective analogy can be drawn to adaptations in the face of large climate variability such as El Niño. This paper compares adaptive governance with the tradition of scientific management in the international climate change regime, and it explores an example of adaptive governance in responding to the effects of a severe El Niño event in the Pacific islands. This event illustrates some of the specific kinds of human choices that will be made by those who are concerned about climate change as a policy problem. The basic choice is not scientific management or adaptive governance but continuing with business as usual or opening the frame to a wider range of possibilities.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 197-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Lane ◽  
Allison Chatrchyan ◽  
Daniel Tobin ◽  
Kaila Thorn ◽  
Shorna Allred ◽  
...  

AbstractClimate change impacts on agriculture have been intensifying in the Northeastern United States. In order to encourage the adoption of climate change adaptation and mitigation practices by farmers, it is critical to understand their perspectives on the risks they face and actions they are taking. However, very few empirical studies have considered how farmers are interpreting and responding to climate impacts, risks and opportunities in the Northeast. This study investigates farmer views and decisions related to climate change using data from six farmer focus groups conducted across New York and Pennsylvania. The study examined how farmers perceived climate impacts on their farms, the practices they are willing to adopt, and how perceived risks and vulnerability affect farmers’ decision-making related to adaptation and mitigation strategies. Although farmers articulated concern regarding climate impacts, they also made clear that other business pressures, such as profitability, market conditions, labor availability or government regulations were often more critical issues that affected their decision-making. Decisions about adopting climate change adaptation and mitigation practices vary widely, and personal experience with extreme weather and changing seasons affected decision-making. The findings from this study provide improved understanding of farmers’ needs and priorities, which can help guide land-grant researchers, extension and policymakers in their efforts to develop and coordinate a comprehensive strategy to address climate change impacts on agriculture in the Northeast.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document