Twenty-eighth Report Adapting Institutions to Climate Change Cm ...

4.25
4.26
4.27
Another way of considering the problem is to ask what is required to build flexibility into policy
outcomes over the longer timescales that adaptation to climate change may demand. In other
words, is it possible to avoid lock-in to actions over long time frames? The Thames Estuary 2100
project (Box 3E) is one example of a decision process that has sought to prioritise flexibility to
encourage short-term engagement within the context of a long-term but inherently flexible plan of
action. Such an approach may not be suitable in every case, but it shows what can be done when
the stakes are considered to be sufficiently high.
Given the local characteristics of adaptation to climate change, the most important policy tool is
the planning system, which typically considers change and impacts over 20-30-year periods. In
theory, planning policy is sufficiently flexible to build climate change adaptation into development
planning. However, we heard concerns that most local authorities place transport and housing
priorities higher on the agenda than climate change. The aim should be to create processes which
are responsive and sustainable under changing climatic conditions, but planners cautioned against
making adaptation to climate change more important than other considerations. Instead, planners
we heard from thought that there was a need for adaptive capacity to become a routine consideration
within, not additional to, other key non-climate policy areas. 9
Infrastructure lock-in, which can result in stranded assets and reduce an organisation’s ability
to respond flexibly to changing climate, is another example of path dependency. In the Anglian
region, the Commission heard from Anglian Water about how they are trying to reduce the
danger of infrastructure lock-in by moving away from large pumps controlling water over larger
areas to more, but smaller, local pumps controlling smaller catchments, creating a modular
approach which enhances their ability to deal with unpredictable flooding and reduces the impact
of localised power cuts.
EQUITY AND EFFICIENCY
4.28 The fourth challenge is managing potential tensions between equity and efficiency. ‘Equity’
has many (often contending) definitions but broadly refers to perceptions of fairness between
different people. Efficiency is the relationship between objectives (outputs) and the resources
used to achieve them (inputs). Efficiency improves when the achievement of a given objective uses
fewer resources than previously, and this is central to many organisations’ objectives. Least-cost
(efficient) outcomes may be inequitable because the efficiency calculation does not consider the
distribution of costs and benefits of the outcome to different parties. The emphasis placed on
these will vary from institution to institution, and indeed from person to person, depending on
their values, objectives and priorities.
Equity
4.29 The Commission received a considerable body of evidence on the importance of involving
stakeholders – in particular, local communities – in developing adaptation responses and ensuring
that issues of both distributional and governance equity are taken into consideration. In the cases
of the Manhood Peninsula in West Sussex10 and the village of Happisburgh in Norfolk, 11 both
of which are areas facing increasing coastal erosion driven at least in part by climate change, the
distributional effects of abandoning coastal defences were not considered sufficiently, and the
proposed abandonment of the defences led to major difficulties in implementing changes, and a
deep feeling of unfairness in the affected communities. Fairness has many dimensions, and whilst
distributional issues loom large, processes of decision making that are perceived to be fair by those
affected (listening to and taking proper account of their concerns, for example) are also a crucial
part of adaptation to climate change. We return to this below.
71
Chapter 4