scholarly journals Adapting flood management to climate change: comparing policy frames and governance practices in the Low Countries

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Crabbé ◽  
Mark Wiering ◽  
Duncan Liefferink

Belgium and the Netherlands together form the Low Countries. Empirical research in Flanders (the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium) and the Netherlands proves that there are substantive differences in the organization of governance processes regarding flood management in response to climate change. This article answers the question of how Flanders and the Netherlands, confronted with universal challenges and dilemmas in the governance of adaptation to climate change – integration versus differentiation (multi-sector versus sector-based governance), the problem of scaling (multi-level governance) and the division of public and private responsibilities (multi-actor governance) – are designing and structuring their approaches. More specifically, we look at how differences in the framing of climate adaptation can explain why organizational practices differ. For this purpose, a distinction is made between diagnostic framing (what is the problem?), prognostic framing (what could be possible solutions?) and action framing (how to act?). By referring to existing policy frames, the article explains recent policy choices on climate change adaptation in flood management.

Climate Law ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 559-581 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter P.J. Driessen ◽  
Helena F.M.W. van Rijswick

Adaptation to climate change is a complex process of societal change and should be studied as such. Attention to issues of climate adaptation has increased considerably over the past few years. Until now, less attention has been paid to questions concerning normative issues of societal change. In this paper we will address three important questions on the normative level: (a) What kind of legal and policy principles should public and private actors take to heart when formulating and implementing adaptation measures? (b) Which societal interests should be protected by a climate-adaptation policy and in what order? (c) To what extent are governments responsible for adaptation to climate change and what are the responsibilities to be borne by private parties and citizens? We will treat these questions from a mix of legal, administrative, and economic perspectives. We conclude with some recommendations on how to deal with these normative aspects in policy-making processes.


2013 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 315-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Carina H. Keskitalo ◽  
Gregor Vulturius ◽  
Peter Scholten

2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 452-470 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pier Vellinga ◽  
Natasha Marinova ◽  
Jantsje M Van Loon-Steensma

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre-Antoine Versini ◽  
Daniel Schertzer ◽  
Mathilde Loury

<p>Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) appear as some relevant alternatives to mitigate the consequences of climate change. For this reason, they are promoted for the implementation of the national plan for adaptation to climate change (PNACC) in France, in line with the Paris Agreement, the strategy of the European Union for adaptation to climate change and the French national strategy for biodiversity.</p><p>Nevertheless, this ambitious goal of democratizing NBS poses some institutional and technical challenges because many obstacles remain to their implementation. Overcoming these shortcomings is the objective of the LIFE integrated project called ARTISAN (Achieving Resiliency by Triggering Implementation of nature-based Solutions for climate Adaptation at a National scale). Coordinated by the French Biodiversity Office (OFB), its consortium regroups several local authorities, technical, research and education institutes.</p><p>For this purpose, ARTISAN is creating a framework promoting the implementation of NBS by improving scientific and technical knowledge about them, then by developing and disseminating relevant tools for project leaders (for the design, sizing, implementation and evaluation of ecosystem performance).</p><p>To demonstrate that NBS can respond to a diversity of climatic, ecological and institutional contexts, 10 pilot sites will be monitored in metropolitan and overseas France. The concerned issues are for example the reduction of urban heat island by the de-waterproofing of the public space, the limitation of the impact of cyclonic episodes on the urbanized coastline overseas by promoting the restoration of the mangrove, and the decrease of agricultural water stress during the low flow period by the hydromorphological restoration of wetlands. These pilot sites will serve to develop, improve and validate operational tools, methods and trainings devoted to practitioners.</p>


Author(s):  
Rod J. Snowdon ◽  
Benjamin Wittkop ◽  
Tsu-Wei Chen ◽  
Andreas Stahl

AbstractMajor global crops in high-yielding, temperate cropping regions are facing increasing threats from the impact of climate change, particularly from drought and heat at critical developmental timepoints during the crop lifecycle. Research to address this concern is frequently focused on attempts to identify exotic genetic diversity showing pronounced stress tolerance or avoidance, to elucidate and introgress the responsible genetic factors or to discover underlying genes as a basis for targeted genetic modification. Although such approaches are occasionally successful in imparting a positive effect on performance in specific stress environments, for example through modulation of root depth, major-gene modifications of plant architecture or function tend to be highly context-dependent. In contrast, long-term genetic gain through conventional breeding has incrementally increased yields of modern crops through accumulation of beneficial, small-effect variants which also confer yield stability via stress adaptation. Here we reflect on retrospective breeding progress in major crops and the impact of long-term, conventional breeding on climate adaptation and yield stability under abiotic stress constraints. Looking forward, we outline how new approaches might complement conventional breeding to maintain and accelerate breeding progress, despite the challenges of climate change, as a prerequisite to sustainable future crop productivity.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 899-921 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nithya Natarajan ◽  
Katherine Brickell ◽  
Laurie Parsons

An emerging body of work has critiqued the concept of climate adaptation, highlighting the structural constraints impeding marginalised communities across the Global South from being able to adapt. This article builds on such work through analysis of debt-bonded brick workers in Cambodia, formerly small farmers. It argues that the detrimental impacts of climate change experienced by farmers-turned-workers across the rural – urban divide is due to their precarity. In doing so, this article draws on a conceptualisation of precarity which recognises it as emerging from the specific political economy of Cambodia, and as something that is neither new, nor confined to conditions of labour alone. As such, in looking to precarity as a means of conceptualising the relations of power which shape impacts of climate change, we advance a ‘climate precarity’ lens as a means of understanding how adaptation to climate change is an issue of power, rooted in a specific geographical context, and mobile over the rural–urban divide.


2020 ◽  
pp. 107808741991082
Author(s):  
Linda Shi

Planners and activists are identifying ways to promote equitable adaptation that counter climate injustice. This article explores how this progressive turn in adaptation compares with past progressive movements. I argue urban progressive politics have cyclical tendencies toward liberalism and radicalism, and that the evolution of planning for climate adaptation mirrors these waves. I review 10 recent guidance documents that recommend strategies for enhancing racially just adaptation. I then assess how these recommendations advance the three pillars of progressive reforms: redistribution, expansion of democracy, and structural reform. I find that proposed strategies for racially just resilience are a welcome advance from mainstream, unjust resilience planning. However, history suggests that the focus on procedural justice for oppressed communities seen in recent discourse may limit their scope and durability. I conclude with suggestions for areas where climate activists and scholars can expand given emerging political space for ambitious thinking under a Green New Deal.


2009 ◽  
Vol 95 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 23-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. de Bruin ◽  
R. B. Dellink ◽  
A. Ruijs ◽  
L. Bolwidt ◽  
A. van Buuren ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document