Quality Control for Environmental Policy Appraisal Tools: An Empirical Investigation of Relations Between Quality,Quality Control and Effectiveness

The spectre of regulatory reform carried out in a range of Western countries has generated concern amongst parts of the environmental policy community. Quality and effectiveness are said to be at stake, but empirically there is a dearth of data on the relationship between provisions for quality control and the effects on quality and effectiveness. This research addresses this lacuna by analysing the effects of different quality control provisions in the Netherlands and Denmark for a globally institutionalized environmental appraisal tool—Environmental Assessment (EA). Extensive technical provisions for quality control in the Netherlands have led to it being described as the ‘Rolls Royce’ of EA systems, while in Denmark the polity is expected to take charge of quality control. The effects of quality control are investigated through surveys and in-depth interviews with actors centrally engaged with EA implementation. The results show that quality control provisions are poorly related to the perceived quality and effectiveness of EA. Only the appropriateness of the scope of EA reports is perceived to be strongly related to quality control provisions. The findings are relevant for environmental policy communities concerned with quality control systems and effectiveness of policy appraisal tools and policy-makers contemplating regulatory reforms.     

Prepared for climate change? A method for the ex-ante assessment of formal responsibilities for climate adaptation in specific sectors

Climate change-related risks encompass an intensification of extreme weather events, such as fluvial and pluvial flooding, droughts, storms, and heat stress. A transparent and comprehensive division of responsibilities is a necessary—but not the only—precondition for being prepared for climate change. In this paper, we present, and preliminarily test, a method for the ex-ante assessment of the division of public and private responsibilities for climate adaptation in terms of comprehensiveness, transparency, legitimacy, and effectiveness. This method proofs particularly suited for the assessment of adaptation responsibilities in combination with a sectoral approach. It helps identifying a number of shortcomings in divisions of responsibilities for climate adaptation. We conclude that this method is useful as a diagnostic tool for identifying the expected climate change preparedness level, and recommend to combine this with ex-post analyses of real-life cases of extreme events in order to assess the actual preparedness for climate change. Besides the scientific purpose of providing a generally applicable assessment method, with this method, we also intend to assist policy-makers in developing and implementing adaptation plans at various levels.     

Legitimate adaptive flood risk governance beyond the dikes: the cases of Hamburg,Helsinki and Rotterdam

It has recently been recommended that a shift from traditional flood prevention to more adaptive strategies is made, focusing on the reduction in and recovery from flood impacts as a means to improve resilience to climate impacts. This shift has had implications for the public–private divide in adaptive flood risk governance. In an urban context, it means that private actors such as developers and residents come into play, necessitating governance arrangements which cross the public–private divide. The division of responsibilities for water safety between the public and private sectors affects the way legitimacy is gained for these arrangements and raises new legitimacy issues. The paper offers an analysis of public and private responsibilities in adaptive flood risk governance arrangements, as well as of the legitimacy of the arrangements in the light of the public–private divide. A comparative case study is presented for three urban regeneration projects in un-embanked areas in Hamburg, Germany, Helsinki, Finland, and Rotterdam, the Netherlands, where adaptive strategies have been applied. The results show that network arrangements with joint public–private responsibilities use direct forms of participation and deliberation, but that these do not necessarily lead to more legitimate arrangements in the eyes of stakeholders as is often suggested in the literature. Both network and more public hierarchical arrangements can be perceived as quite legitimate under certain conditions.     

Understanding the use of science in decision-making on cockle fisheries and gas mining in the Dutch Wadden Sea: Putting the science–policy interface in a wider perspective

The use of science to inform and underpin decision-making on natural resources is not self-evident as stakeholders often use science in a selective and strategic way. Scientific analyses of science utilisation often focus on how the science–policy interface is organised and from this perspective provide recommendations to scientists about how they can increase their contribution to decision-making. Yet in this paper we argue that a wider perspective on the science–policy interface, in particular by analysing the roles and interactions of actors other than those directly involved, provides both additional explanations and new points of application for strategies aimed at enhancing science utilisation. We illustrate our claim by means of an analysis of decision-making on cockle fisheries and gas mining in the Dutch Wadden Sea between the 1990s and 2004. For many years, scientific studies addressing the ecological effects of these activities were not used to meaningfully contribute to decision-making. In 2004 this situation changed radically. Explanations include the role of intermediaries between scientists, stakeholders and decision-makers and new legislation. Scientists could enhance the chances of knowledge utilisation both by creating a more open science–policy interface and by reframing the policy problems at issue.     

Mainstreaming climate adaptation into urban planning: overcoming barriers, seizing opportunities and evaluating the results in two Dutch case studies

With cities facing climate change, climate adaptation is necessary to reduce risks such as heat stress and flooding and maintain the goals of sustainable urban development. In climate change literature, the focus has been on developing a new dedicated policy domain for climate adaptation. Yet, empirical evidence shows that in practice actors are searching for solutions that not only serve climate adaptation, but integrate the adaptation objective in existing policy domains (e.g., urban planning, water management, public health). The integration of adaptation in other policy domains, also called “mainstreaming climate adaptation,” can stimulate the effectiveness of policy making through combining objectives, increase efficient use of human and financial resources and ensure long-term sustainable investments. A better understanding of the process of mainstreaming is, however, lacking. The article introduces a conceptual model for mainstreaming climate adaptation to enhance our understanding of the concept as well as the barriers and opportunities that influence these integration processes and to explore strategies for overcoming barriers and creating opportunities. Two Dutch case studies—related to urban planning—are used to illustrate the value of the model. The cases demonstrate the dynamic process of mainstreaming and raise discussion of the appropriate criteria for evaluating mainstreaming in relation to the aims of climate adaptation. The paper concludes with an exploration of specific strategies to facilitate the mainstreaming of adaptation in existing and new policy domains.     

Mainstreaming climate adaptation: taking stock about “what works” from empirical research worldwide

Adaptation to a changing climate is unavoidable. Mainstreaming climate adaptation objectives into existing policies, as opposed to developing dedicated adaptation policy, is widely advocated for public action. However, knowledge on what makes mainstreaming effective is scarce and fragmented. Against this background, this paper takes stock of peer-reviewed empirical analyses of climate adaptation mainstreaming, in order to assess current achievements and identify the critical factors that render mainstreaming effective. The results show that although in most cases adaptation policy outputs are identified, only in a minority of cases this translates into policy outcomes. This “implementation gap” is most strongly seen in developing countries. However, when it comes to the effectiveness of outcomes, we found no difference across countries. We conclude that more explicit definitions and unified frameworks for adaptation mainstreaming research are required to allow for future research syntheses and well-informed policy recommendations.