From Policy Document to Implementation: Organizational Routines as Possible Barriers to Mainstreaming Climate Adaptation

This paper aims to understand the role of organizational routines as possible barriers to the mainstreaming of climate adaptation at the implementation stage. While the mainstreaming of climate adaptation into policy documents is relatively easy, the implementation of these policies seems to be more problematic. Barriers to climate adaptation often occur during this stage as the implementation of the policies is generally undertaken by other actors than the policy-makers. These actors act based on organizational routines. As organizational routines aim to provide stability, they tend to be reaffirmative. Reorganizing the resources and practices of these actors to initiate mainstreaming then proves difficult. Consequently, the routines could prevent change that might be necessary to address new policy objectives such as climate adaptation. An analytical framework consisting of four self-reinforcing mechanisms is used to understand and explain why and how organizational routines can hamper the mainstreaming of climate adaptation during implementation. A case study is used to illustrate organizational routines as possible barriers. The paper concludes by stating that to optimize the possibilities of mainstreaming climate adaptation, a change in routines is necessary. In order to stimulate change in organizational routines, the focus should be on reflecting on existing routines, legitimacy building and learning.     

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.     

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.