Global adaptation governance: An emerging but contested domain

Abstract

Adaptation to climate change has steadily risen on global policy agendas and entered a new era with the 2015 Paris Agreement, which established a global goal on adaptation. While this goal responds to calls to strengthen global governance of adaptation, it has not yet been operationalized. Further, few studies take stock of current global adaptation governance to inform the implementation of the goal. Against this background this review asks: To what extent is there global governance of climate change adaptation? Can it be characterized as a strong domain of global governance? In what ways is it contested? Global adaptation governance is defined here as occurring when state and non‐state actors in the global (including transnational) sphere authoritatively and intentionally shape the actions of constituents towards climate change adaptation as a public goal. Although empirical evidence is scant, it is proposed here that global adaptation governance is indeed emerging. Yet, its further strengthening appears contested. First, measurement of progress towards adaptation as a public goal at the global level is severely challenged by the ambiguity of adaptation and the lack of distinct metrics. Second, the lack of a clear global‐level problem‐framing, or recognition of adaptation as a global public good, has meant limited legitimacy of global governance initiatives. A consequence of contestation is that governance forms and functions used so far have not been authoritative in how they seek to shape actions. The review concludes by identifying research needs for advancing science and policy on adaptation. This article is categorized under: Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance

Transnationalization of climate adaptation by regional governments and the RegionsAdapt initiative

“…The bottom-up approach established by the Paris Agreement consolidated a new picture of climate governance: subnational actors and national governments are to ‘share the burden’ of climate action (Chan et al , 2015), and adaptation is not only to take place locally, but also transnationally (Persson, 2019). The analysis of the RegionsAdapt initiative based on its scope, institutionalization and functions suggests that transnational adaptation governance not only incentivizes the promotion of adaptation measures on the ground, but also contributes to the process of tracking the progress of such action.…”

“…Moreover, the Paris Agreement explicitly established the need to “establish a global goal on adaptation” (UNFCCC, 2015, Article 7.1). Recognizing that defining global adaptation goals entails overcoming technical, scientific and political barriers (Magnan & Ribera, 2016), scholars have been calling for enhanced global adaptation governance (Bierman & Boas, 2010; Persson, 2019).…”

“…But while Dzebo and Stripple (2015) provide a first insight into the types of transnational adaptation projects initiated by national governments, instances of adaptation occurring at the local and regional level are not included in their analysis. Moreover, since their study, several new transnational initiatives have been launched or have gained momentum (Persson, 2019).…”

“…The development of adaptation policies and action in particular has traditionally been framed as a local problem, falling largely under the responsibility of regional governments and local communities (Climate Chance & Comité 21, 2019, p. 33). However, in recent years, and particularly since the 2015 Paris Agreement established a global goal on adaptation, adaptation has risen on the global policy agenda (Persson, 2019). At the same time, scholars have begun to observe that the framing of adaptation as a local problem is insufficient.…”

Adaptation and Carbon Removal

“…23 It only became an equal pillar to mitigation as part of a ''framework'' in 2007 and beyond. 24,25 Adaptation referred to a collection of practices, technologies, programs, or policies implemented to reduce the impact of climate hazards. Critiques of this politically neutral concept of adaptation have discussed how it can exclude the possibility of non-adaptation from consideration and how it can obscure causality and naturalize the problem, placing the risk within climate rather than society.…”