Institutions and policy processes: the means to the ends of adaptation

Abstract

Institutions and institutional change are mentioned often but rarely specified in discussions of climate adaptation. Policy change is proposed, but the detail of policy processes less often discussed. Adaptation to increased climate change and variability will require policy interventions to change behaviors across multiple sectors, requiring policy processes constrained or enabled by institutional settings. Detailed discussion of how to redesign policy processes and institutions are especially rare at the crucial jurisdictional scales of national and sub-national policy and planning. We review coverage of policy and institutions in the adaptation literature and clarify key issues by drawing on the domains of public policy, institutional change, and sustainable development. The distinction between, but close dependencies among, institutions, institutional systems, organizations, policy processes, policy instruments, and management are emphasized. We propose that the climate policy literature has rapidly become large enough that a tendency of self-referencing has developed, and that insights can be gained from other areas. Within existing parameters of law, politics, and governance, options are identified that could embed considerations of climate adaptation into policy processes and institutional systems, with focus on enabling cross-sectoral policy integration ('mainstreaming'), decision making under conditions of uncertainty, vertical ('cross-scale') policy coordination, issues of capacity and devolution, and policy evaluation and learning. The value of seeking lessons from past policy interventions and from cognate policy sectors is explored .

A comprehensive review of climate adaptation in the United States: more than before, but less than needed

“…Similarly, diversifying material sourcing in the private sector can reduce the risk of supply chain disruption (CDP 2011;Vose et al 2012). Additionally, an increasing movement toward mainstreaming climate adaptation concerns into existing processes means that discerning unique climate adaptation activities will be a challenge (Dovers and Hezri 2010;Lackstrom et al 2012). An example of local adaptation implementation is Seattle Public Utilities' RainWatch-an early warning precipitation forecasting tool used for drainage operations (CEQ 2011a) (more examples can be found in Fig.…”

“…Because adaptation is inherently place-and time-specific, a detailed understanding of institutional interworkings and dynamics is critical to moving adaptation strategies forward. Information gathered from areas outside of the traditional climate studies can be researched for relevance to various adaptation processes (Dovers and Hezri 2010;Skaggs et al 2012).…”

From barriers to limits to climate change adaptation: path dependency and the speed of change

“…In Australia at least, adaptation therefore seems to be constrained by the same factors that constrain effective governance on many policy issues, including natural resource management. In this http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss3/art5/ sense, barriers to adaptation stem from the very nature of governance institutions, which is unsurprising because institutions are by definition enduring forms of social organization that do not easily change (see Dovers and Hezri 2010).…”

Adapting to climate change through local municipal planning: barriers and challenges

“…While the interest in local adaptation planning and policy highlights the relevance of local government for adaptation, its ultimate role with respect to practical implementation of policies and measures is dependent upon other actors within the governance network Boydell 2010;Dovers and Hezri 2010). This raises questions regarding the extent to which the mantra that 'adaptation is local' truly applies when examined through the lens of governance.…”