Coastal adaptation through urban land reclamation: Exploring the distributional effects

Land reclamation and urban redevelopment is currently underway in coastal regions around the world, as urbanization continues rapidly, and high-value coastal urban land becomes more scarce. Yet coastal hazards will also continue to increase due to sea-level rise, and building flood risk reduction measures into such land reclamation projects appears to be low cost compared to the potential benefits generated. Moreover, land reclamation in high-value urban areas that incorporates such adaptation can generate substantial revenue attractive to governments, particularly in developing countries, which struggle to finance coastal adaptation measures. Yet revenue generation in these projects depends on including some degree of high-value and high-priced developments, giving rise to potential distributional effects. This paper surveys three current coastal urban redevelopment projects incorporating flood risk reduction in the Maldives, Germany and Nigeria, illustrating different modes of urban development projects and the distributional effects that can arise for each of these. The paper explores the equity implications of such projects that arise in planning processes and in implementation. The examples illustrate that inequalities can arise through incentives for corruption, budget imperatives leading to developments that result in gentrification, and shifting of physical risks on to neighboring communities. Finally, I reflect on policy and project design instruments that can address these inequalities, and draw out implications for future research to ensure sustainable and inclusive development of coastal cities in the context of sea-level rise

Institutional analysis in climate change adaptation research : A systematic literature review

Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu MdM-2015-0552Appropriate institutions are essential for climate change adaptation. Yet diverse approaches to institutional analysis are available, encompassing different ontological and epistemological assumptions, and thus yielding insights on very different aspects of institutions in adaptation. Therefore, efforts to expand knowledge in this domain can be usefully informed by an assessment of approaches to institutional analysis in the adaptation literature, which is to date lacking. We address this gap by conducting a systematic review of the adaptation literature addressing institutions. Our review characterises approaches to institutional analysis by identifying methodological choices and the philosophy of science underpinning them. We then analyze the distribution of approaches to institutional analysis across different adaptation situations, contextualizing our results within methodological debates in adaptation research regarding the appropriateness of positivist, interpretative, or post-normal approaches. We find that institutional analysis of adaptation is now engaging with 'how' and 'why' questions, beyond descriptive questions that characterise the adaptation 'barriers' literature, that diverse philosophies of science drive methodological choice, and that post-normal approaches, e.g. co-design approaches, hardly address institutions. We conclude that support for interpretative approaches, and for institutional analysis in post-normal approaches is needed. The latter is important for adaptation planning processes in developing countries under the UNFCCC

A typology for analysing mitigation and adaptation win-win strategies

A sustainability transition in line with achieving global climate goals requires the implementation of win-win strategies (WWS), i.e. socioeconomic activities that enable economic gains while simultaneously contributing to climate change mitigation or adaptation measures. Such strategies are discussed in a variety of scientific communities, such as sustainability science, industrial ecology and symbiosis and circular economy. However, existing analyses of win-win strategies tend to take a systems perspective, while paying less attention to the specific actors and activities, or their interconnections, which are implicated in win-win strategies. Moreover, they hardly address adaptation WWS. To address these gaps and support the identification and enhancement of WWS for entrepreneurs and policy-makers, we propose a typology of WWS based on the concept of a value-consumption chain, which typically connects several producers with at least one consumer of a good or service. A consideration of these connections allows an evaluation of economic effects in a meso-economic perspective. We distinguish 34 different types of WWS of companies, households and the state, for which 23 real-world examples are identified. Further, contrary to prevailing views on the lack of a business case for adaptation, we do identify real-world adaptation WWS, though they remain underrepresented compared with mitigation WWS. Our typology can be used as an entry point for transdisciplinary research integrating assessment of individual transformative socioeconomic activities and highly aggregated approaches assessing, e.g. the macro-economic effects of WWS.Horizon 2020 Framework Programme ()Peer Reviewe

Multilevel governance of coastal flood risk reduction : a public finance perspective

Authors acknowledge funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under Grant 642018 (GREEN‐WIN project) and funding from the project INSeaPTION as part of ERA4CS, an ERA‐NET initiated by JPI Climate, and funded by BMBF (DE), MINECO (ES), NWO (NL), and ANR (FR) with co-funding by the European Union (Grant 690462).Coastal flood risk reduction (CFRR) presents a significant public funding challenge, due to its high upfront costs and long-term benefits, and this challenge will increase with future sea-level rise. The funding challenge necessarily involves multiple levels of government, due to the regional nature of CFRR public goods involved. Yet there has been little research comparing such multilevel arrangements across countries, and in particular exploring the performance of public funding arrangements for providing coastal flood risk reduction. We address this gap, applying fiscal federalism to develop a multilevel governance analysis of public decision-making and fiscal authorities for CFRR in the Netherlands, Germany, the UK and Australia. For each country, we locate key decision-making and fiscal authorities in multilevel governance arrangements, and analyse their alignment with the benefits of CFRR measures (spillovers). We find diverse coastal flood risk governance arrangements ranging from highly centralised (NL), mixed arrangements, involving regional centralisation (Germany) or partial devolvement (UK), to full decentralisation (AUS). Further, we find that in accordance with fiscal federalism, multilevel coastal flood risk governance arrangements are generally reflective of the distribution of the benefits across different levels of government, with some exceptions (Germany and UK). Finally, exploring the outlook of current arrangements under sea-level rise, we find that major fiscal redistributions may be put under pressure by rising costs likely under SLR and future coastal development. This is particularly the case for those systems which operate under hazard-based, as opposed to risk-based, coastal protection policies. Further, we find that both fully and moderately decentralised arrangements may require greater central support for alternative measures, such as retreat, in light of growing financial burdens on local governments.PostprintPeer reviewe

Institutions in the climate adaptation literature : a systematic literature review through the lens of the Institutional Analysis and Development framework

Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu MdM-2015-0552Analyses of climate adaptation seldom rely on the conceptual toolbox of institutional economics. Yet articles addressing institutions make up a large portion of the climate adaptation literature. With a wealth of institutionally relevant knowledge in the adaptation literature, organizing such knowledge in institutionally meaningful ways can advance the present understanding of the link between institutions and adaptation. Knowing which aspects of this link are well researched, and where in contrast research gaps lie, can provide guidance to institutional economists interested in adaptation. We contribute to this through a systematic review of the adaptation literature, assessing the consideration adaptation scholars give to different elements of the Institutional Analysis and Development framework. Results show a strong focus on collective choice and on adaptation by public actors, with an emphasis on rules in use, social interactions and, to a lesser extent, attributes of the community. Research gaps rather encompass operational and constitutional choice, private adaptation, physical interactions and biophysical conditions

Global Climate Services: A Typology of Global Decisions Influenced by Climate Risk

Climate services are ideally co-developed by scientists and stakeholders working together to identify decisions and user needs. Yet, while climate services have been developed at regional to local scales, relatively little attention has been paid to the global scale. Global climate services involve decisions that rely on climate information from many locations in different world regions, and are increasingly salient. Increasing interconnections in the global financial system and supply chains expose private companies and financial institutions to climate risk in multiple locations in different world regions. Further, multilateral decisions on greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, disaster risk finance or international migration should make use of global scale climate risk assessments. In order to advance global climate service development, we present a typology of decisions relying on global (i.e., non-local) climate risk information. We illustrate each decision type through examples of current practice from the coastal domain drawn from the literature and stakeholder interviews. We identify 8 types of decisions making use of global climate information. At a top-level, we distinguish between “multilateral climate policy decisions,” and “portfolio decisions involving multiple locations.” Multilateral climate policy decisions regard either “mitigation targets” or “multilateral adaptation” decisions. Portfolio decisions regard either “choice of location” or “choice of financial asset” decisions. Choice of location decisions can be further distinguished as to whether they involve “direct climate risks,” “supply chain risks” or “financial network risks.” Our survey of examples shows that global climate service development is more advanced for portfolio decisions taken by companies with experience in climate risk assessment, i.e., (re-)insurers, whereas many multilateral climate policy decisions are at an earlier stage of decision-making. Our typology thus provides an entry-point for global climate service development by pointing to promising research directions for supporting global (non-local) decisions that account for climate risks.Peer Reviewe

Living with sea-level rise in North-West Europe: Science-policy challenges across scales

Sea-level rise (SLR) confronts coastal societies and stakeholders with increasing hazards and coastal risks with large uncertainties associated to these changes. Adaptation to SLR requires societal and policy decision-making to consider these changing risks, which are in turn defined by socio-economic development objectives and the local societal context. Here, we review some of the key challenges facing governments, stakeholders and scientists in adapting to SLR, and key aspects of successful adaptation, by exploring different approaches to SLR and coastal adaptation planning in three western European countries, the Netherlands, Germany and the United Kingdom. Several common challenges of SLR adaptation emerge across the different settings, including the inherent uncertainty regarding future conditions, the significant social and socio-economic consequences, the consideration and distribution of (residual) risk over communities, and the long legacy of present-day decisions that affect future risk and management options supporting future generations. These challenges are addressed differently in the three countries, e.g. in the governance level at which adaptation is initiated, although common elements also emerge. One common emerging element is adaptive pathways planning, which entails dynamic decision-making that breaks uncertain decisions into manageable elements or steps over time, while keeping options for the future. Another common element is the development of effective local science-policy interfaces, as engagement of local decision-makers and citizens is essential to manage conflicting interests. Lastly, we find that social and communication sciences have great potential to support effective science-policy interfaces, e.g. though identifying societal tipping points. Yet, in decisions on SLR adaptation, insights from these fields are rarely used to date. We conclude that supporting science-policy interactions for adaptation decision-making at relevant (inter)national to local scales through tailored multi-disciplinary scientific assessments is an important way forward for SLR adaptation in Europe

Co-creating a coastal climate service to prioritise investments in erosion prevention and sea-level rise adaptation in the Maldives

While the prioritisation of scarce resources for climate adaptation is becoming a priority for low and middle income countries, the climate service literature addressing adaptation prioritisation decisions is scarce. This paper contributes to filling this gap by presenting a co-creation process carried out in the Maldives among representatives of government, civil society and researchers. Together, we identified the need to improve a ranking method currently used by the Maldivian government to prioritise islands for investments in erosion prevention. As a solution we developed a layered index. The first layer of this index captures the objective dimension of the problem through an erosion hazard subindex, using the three variables wave energy, reef health and reef flat minimum width. The second layer captures the normative dimension through a multi-criteria analysis using the erosion hazard subindex as one criterion next to other stakeholder selected criteria such as critical infrastructure, economic activity, per capita income and the potential to house additional people that resettle from riskier places as sea-level rise progresses. Results of this new ranking method show that socioeconomic criteria were considered more important by the stakeholders than the biophysical criterion of erosion hazard. Among the top-ranked islands are many regional centres but also less populous islands that have a large potential to house additional people. Lessons learnt from the co-creation process highlight the importance of assembling interdisciplinarity teams, fostering mutual learning among project participants, and designing research projects that do not prescribe upfront the exact problems to be addressed and methods to be applied.The work of this paper has been funded through the Projects INSeaPTION and PROTECT. INSeaPTION is part of ERA4CS, an ERA-NET initiated by JPI Climate, and funded by FORMAS (SE), BMBF (DE), BMWFW (AT), IFD (DK), MINECO (ES), ANR (FR) with co-funding by the European Union (Grant 690462). PROTECT is funded under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 869304.Peer reviewe

Introduction to the special issue on adapting institutions to climate change

Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu MdM-2015-0552This article introduces the special issue on climate adaptation and institutions. Economic accounts of climate adaptation have stressed its collective action nature and the limitations of standard economic approaches to the matter. Governance accounts, on their part, have shown that adaptation does not always happen when it is expected. Against this background, institutional economics has the potential to shed light on those societal processes and collective mechanisms leading to and shaping adaptation (or the absence of it). The selection of articles contributing to this special issue shows that climate adaptation can indeed be explored successfully through institutional economics, and that doing so fits well within the institutional economics agenda. Some recommendations for future research are provided at the end