The Adaptation Policy Paradox: the Implementation Deficit of Policies Framed as Climate Change Adaptation

Abstract

ABSTRACT. The implementation of adaptation policies suffers from barriers and limits; even though adaptation is now set on the political agendas of developed and developing countries, surprisingly few examples of concrete policy realizations are found in comparative assessments. We investigate how the framings of adaptation as a policy problem can relate to tractability issues in implementation. We distinguish three framings of adaptation: climate change adaptation (CCA), climate variability adaptation (CVA), and vulnerability-centered adaptation (VCA) that imply conflicting interpretations of the collective problem to be solved and the goals to be attained through policy solutions. Through the methodology of comparative case studies, we conduct an empirical analysis of three implementation processes in India and Switzerland, and examine how adaptation framings translate into formal policy design and concrete policy realizations. We find that, regardless of the adaptive capacity of the country where implementation takes place, the CCA framing meets more tractability issues than the VCA framing. Therefore, we discuss the paradox that the innovative and additional CCA types of policies, advocated by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), are more likely to face a deficit in implementation according to our analysis.

Structuring Climate Adaptation through Multiple Perspectives: Framework and Case Study on Flood Risk Management

“…Problem framing-by conceptualising the problem based on multiple perspectives-enables better understanding of the adaptation policies, gives them meaning, renders them manageable and helps in the choice of polices that are implementable [48,49]. There are a number of adaptation problem framings such as adaptation to climate change, adaptation to climate variability and vulnerability centred adaptation [8,22]. Although there could be a common understanding at a national level about the suitability of a particular climate adaptation framing, differences frequently persist at regional and local levels among the various actors in implementing consequent adaptation policies [7][8][9].…”

“…The type of adaptation measures selected depend upon how the adaptation problem is framed using framings such as adapting to climate change or adapting to climate variability or vulnerability centred adaptation [8]. For example, adapting to the changing climate might lead to future risk reduction measures such as an increase in dike heights [42,55], whereas, adaptation to climate variation might lead to risk recovery measures such as insurance and post disaster relief assistance [56] or a vulnerability centred adaptation might encourage enabling low income groups to cope with floods [57], (e.g., resettlement of vulnerable populations [58]).…”

“…There are a number of adaptation problem framings such as adaptation to climate change, adaptation to climate variability and vulnerability centred adaptation [8,22]. Although there could be a common understanding at a national level about the suitability of a particular climate adaptation framing, differences frequently persist at regional and local levels among the various actors in implementing consequent adaptation policies [7][8][9].…”

“…In The Netherlands, adaptation based on flexibility and learning-although appreciated from a planning perspective-is seen to be less credible and without clarity by the general public and many stakeholders, resulting in resistance to implementation [9]. Regardless of the adaptive capacity of the country, climate change adaptation has serious implementation issues [8,9]. Lack of managerial flexibility in implementation is also often attributed to the "command and control" nature of the policies that govern the implementation of adaptation measures [7] and can also be the result of protectionism, or failures to cooperate, between constituent parts of the same organization [10].…”

“…However, these planning mechanisms are difficult to implement as prevailing practices are not sufficiently flexible [7]. Dupuis and Knoepfel [8] in reviewing the climate change adaptation plans and their subsequent implementation in Switzerland and India, state that, in-spite of the decision makers' desire for framing adaptation policies, they encounter difficulties in implementing adaptation practices. In The Netherlands, adaptation based on flexibility and learning-although appreciated from a planning perspective-is seen to be less credible and without clarity by the general public and many stakeholders, resulting in resistance to implementation [9].…”