21.03.2013 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Chapter 4<br />

4.84<br />

4.85<br />

However, aside from coastal erosion and flood protection, we have seen little evidence of<br />

public debate about the changes we may see as a result of adaptation decisions. It is important,<br />

particularly with the publication of the 2009 UK <strong>Climate</strong> Projections (UKCP09), that efforts<br />

are made by government, community leaders, business, the voluntary sec<strong>to</strong>r and conservation<br />

organisations <strong>to</strong> identify the issues, dilemmas and choices, so that as adaptation takes place there<br />

is a reduced likelihood of reactionary responses from individuals and organisations. The scale at<br />

which engagement takes place is important and in many cases will need <strong>to</strong> be local, but often in<br />

a regional context – again, the TE2100 project (Box 3E) is a good example. The Commission<br />

also notes that, of the engagement that is taking place, much of it is related <strong>to</strong> flood and coastal<br />

erosion risk management issues. Although biodiversity in the UK is likely <strong>to</strong> undergo significant<br />

changes that may require different or additional areas of land for habitat protection, this does not<br />

yet seem <strong>to</strong> be a subject for extensive discussion.<br />

Public engagement is important for a range of reasons. We are familiar with the idea, for example,<br />

that only an engaged and informed public will encourage or <strong>to</strong>lerate some of the difficult choices<br />

required for the mitigation of climate change. But the same applies <strong>to</strong> adaptation, for example<br />

with respect <strong>to</strong> communities facing coastal erosion (a longstanding problem which is likely <strong>to</strong> be<br />

exacerbated by climate change). A decision-making process which those affected perceive <strong>to</strong> be<br />

open and fair can go a long way <strong>to</strong> enhancing <strong>to</strong>lerance and even acceptance of outcomes. 42<br />

Co-ordination between ac<strong>to</strong>rs<br />

4.86 Co-ordination between ac<strong>to</strong>rs is crucial for building adaptive capacity. But as discussed earlier, the<br />

sheer number of ac<strong>to</strong>rs and the complexity of potential relationships between them means that<br />

co-ordination is a challenge. Co-ordination can take different forms depending on the ‘mode’ of<br />

governance. This can be: a hierarchical mode, in which co-ordination of different ac<strong>to</strong>rs is ensured<br />

through formal regulations, command and control; a market mode, where the price mechanism<br />

of the market ensures co-ordination; or a network mode of governance, where co-ordination is a<br />

result of debating and bargaining. 43 Different mixes of governance modes will impact on the way<br />

that institutions communicate and co-ordinate with one another.<br />

4.87<br />

During our visit <strong>to</strong> the Netherlands, it was apparent that Dutch management of flood risk is based<br />

on a system with different levels of governance, from the state through <strong>to</strong> local and municipal<br />

areas. A range of ac<strong>to</strong>rs share responsibility for ensuring that the flood defences work as a complete<br />

system. The ‘hot-spot’ approach described in Box 4F is an example from the Netherlands of a way<br />

of including multiple stakeholders in the decision-making process.<br />

BOX 4F THE HOT-SPOT APPROACH: AN EXAMPLE FROM THE NETHERLANDS<br />

Water management in the Netherlands is paid for through taxes at the state and water-board<br />

levels. The Rijk (national Government) is responsible for strategic flood defence, including sea<br />

defences. There are then 12 Provincies (regional governments), who are asked <strong>to</strong> deliver regional<br />

plans on behalf of Government, and 26 Waterschaps (water-boards) who are responsible for<br />

water quality and quantity. Because the risk of flooding is recognised at all levels of government<br />

and society, there is a national level of awareness and often intense debate about the issues.<br />

One method taken by the Dutch <strong>to</strong> deal with the many stakeholders involved in making<br />

adaptation decisions about flood risk is <strong>to</strong> take a ‘hot-spot’ approach. This is time consuming<br />

and involves extensive and intensive discussions, but it recognises that different places have<br />

different levels of risk and require different solutions. For instance, the actions that need <strong>to</strong><br />

be taken <strong>to</strong> protect Schiphol airport are very different <strong>to</strong> those required <strong>to</strong> prevent Rotterdam<br />

86

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!