Whether Our Levers Are Long Enough and the Fulcrum Strong?

Exploring the Soft Underbelly of Adaptation Decisions and Actions

Susanne C. Moser, Ph.D.

National Center for Atmospheric ResearchBoulder, CO USA

Living with Climate Change: Are There Limits to Adaptation? • London • February7-8. 2008

A Quick Lesson in Physics

Give me a lever long enough,and a fulcrum on which to place

it, and I shall move the world.

Archimedes(287 BC – c. 212 BC)

Principles:

- A lever helps to move a big object (placed near a pivot point) by exerting

only a small force (applied from a longer distance from the pivot point). - The longer the lever, the smaller the force needed to move an object of a given weight.

- The fulcrum is what focuses and multiplies the force applied to the object

that is to be moved.

Overview of Presentation

The case for moving beyond “adaptive capacity” Governance: Definition and key questions A decision-centered, diagnostic approach to

governance The choice of where we (plan to) adapt The institutions and players involved The influences on adaptation decisions Living with the aftermath of our choices

Conclusions Coda: Ethical imperative for scientists

Need for a Critical Examination of Our True Ability to Adapt Concern with the fast pace of climate change, specter of abrupt climatic

shifts

Persistent and growing gap between rich and poor, in any country

High societal vulnerability to climate extremes even in developed countries

System lags in social systems

Impatience with the rather slow response of national and local governments

to climate change impacts to date

Critique of the almost exclusive emphasis on adaptive capacity while

neglecting the question of use and realization in actual adaptation actions

The Levers: Determinants of Adaptive Capacity Economic resources Technology Information, knowledge and skills Infrastructure Institutions Equitable access to the above

(Commonly, variable across space, time, sectors, and social groupings)

(e.g., Smit, Pilifosova, et al. 2001; Yohe and Tol 2002; Adger et al. 2007)

The Fulcrum: What is Governance? = The set of decisions, actors, processes,

institutional structures and mechanisms (incl. decision authority and underlying norms) involved in determining a course of action.

More than institutional analysis More than “government” – i.e., not restricted to

public-sector actors, but all actors involved Dialectic tension between structure and agency Decisions and decision-makers are central

The Fulcrum: Governance as the Support on Which the Levers TurnSome Guiding Questions for Theme 3:

In what ways do governance structures and processes matter in principle for the enhancement or realization of adaptive capacity?

To what extent are governance structures and processes in any specific instance in place, functional, and effective in supporting the use of economic, technological, policy, and informational levers one could apply to affect change?

When and how do governance structures enable and channel adaptive actions, when do they delay or render them ineffective?

When do these structures and processes function as (mutable) barriers or even as de facto (non-negotiable) limits to adaptation?

Politics, Economy

Culture, Science

Community

Sector

Companies

Agencies

Stakeholders

Decision-makers

Decisions

Decision-Centered Diagnostic Approach In which arena are adaptation

decisions to be made?

Who initiates or holds responsibility for developing adaptation options? Who has (potentially) decision-making and implementation authority?

What influences adaptation decisions?

What are the outcomes of a decision, once made, and how do the decision-makers and affected stakeholders live with them?

The Adaptation Arena

In which arena are adaptation decisions to be made?

Who initiates or holds responsibility for developing adaptation options? Who has (potentially) decision-making and implementation authority?

What influences adaptation decisions?

What are the outcomes of a decision, once made, and how do the decision-makers and affected stakeholders live with them?

Adaptation Arenas: Why this and not that?

Societal values

social norms and

expectationsenabling legislation

management responsibility

research programs

selective valuation of

some aspects of our lives

prevailing economic

goals and priorities

political attention/

maneuvering/silencing

presence/absence of leader or champion

occurrenceof focusing/distracting

event

publicdiscourse/

civic mobilization

relative importance via science,

assessments

research funding

disciplinarystove-piping,blind spots available

technical expertise

status of scientific

knowledge

range of parties

interested, partaking

competingknowledge

claims

perceived“solutions”

stage in evolution of issue domain

political, social, scientific contextof adaptation governance

Initiation, Planning, Implementation In which arena are adaptation

decisions to be made?

Who initiates or holds responsibility for developing adaptation options? Who has (potentially) decision-making and implementation authority?

What influences adaptation decisions?

What are the outcomes of a decision, once made, and how do the decision-makers and affected stakeholders live with them?

Decision-making entity

Individual decision-makers

Interactions among decision-makers

Initiation, Planning, Implementation:A. The decision-making entities Which government agency/ies

or private-sector entity/ies? At which level(s) of

governance? How is this level of decision-

making linked to other levels, sectors, communities, and constituents?

General mandates and authority?

Scale of decision impact? Laws, rules and regulations

that guide, constrain decisions? Do they allow, enable, support or hinder adaptation actions?

Accountability for decisions? Financial resources available

for adaptation planning and implementation?

Specific mandate to engage in adaptation planning and action?

Level of support from leadership, staff, and constituents?

Historic experience with the entity’s/ies’ functionality and accountability?

Action space within which decision-makers can maneuver

Initiation, Planning, Implementation:B. Individual decision-makers Mission and mandate Authorities and duties Job description Accountability Requirement to consider climate

change “Soft” factors

professional identity personal ambition work ethic

Resource availability, access, and rights or entitlements

Sense of entitlement, capacity, and empowerment

Perception of climate change as “extra” or “integral”

Perception of climate change as a priority

Perceptions of vulnerability, capacity to affect the problem

Ability to balance attention to climate change with other priorities and responsibilities

Perceived flexibility/constraints ontaking action on climate change

Initiation, Planning, Implementation:C. Interactions among decision-makers

Initiation of adaptation planning process?

Leadership? Elite/exclusive or

broad/inclusive decision process?

Identification of relevant participants?

Collaboration among neighboring decision-makers?

Collaboration across scale? Collaboration across

management sectors? Engagement of stakeholders? Resource access?

Authorities, responsibilities of involved actors?

Complementary or contradictory missions and goals?

Formal and informal “rules of engagement”?

Novelty of interaction, historical legacies?

Quality, form, frequency of communication and interaction?

Effectiveness, expediency of communication & interaction;

trust building; information sharing; collective learning;

power struggles; inequities

Influences on Adaptation Decisions In which arena are adaptation

decisions to be made?

Who initiates or holds responsibility for developing adaptation options? Who has (potentially) decision-making and implementation authority?

What influences adaptation decisions?

What are the outcomes of a decision, once made, and how do the decision-makers and affected stakeholders live with them?

Personal values, beliefs, attitudes, and capabilities

Decision-support resources

The “solutions” options

Influences on Adaptation Decisions:A. Values, beliefs, attitudes, capabilities

Awareness, concern with climate change science and impacts?

Underlying, general environmental values and perceptions?

Knowledge and understanding of the issues involved?

Ability and inclination to acquire necessary information and knowledge, learn, use information in decision-making?

Personal interests, ambitions, and goals, duties and obligations vis-à-vis work?

Perceived power and capacity, role at work, in society, vis-à-vis posterity?

Social norms and expectations, peer pressures, peer support?

Knowledge/Information

MotivationResistance/

BarriersAdaptation

Action

Ad

ap

ted

fro

m M

ose

r &

Dill

ing

(2

00

7)

Motivation to lead, participate; capacity, willingness, and incentives

to engage

Influences on Adaptation Decisions:B. Decision-support resources Access to critical

information, tools, and knowledge Understand the problem,

causation, future trends Develop and critically

assess response options Monitor impacts for

adaptive management More than information... Sensitivity of decision to

various uncertainties

Useful scale and format to easily integrate into existing decision processes

Timing of delivery Contested knowledge? Periodic review of state of

knowledge? Willingness and capacity

to learnDecision support can motivate;

Lack thereof can present hurdle, but not absolute limit to adaptation.

Influences on Adaptation Decisions:C. The “solutions” options Perceived or real barriers to

action The options Feasibility of

implementation Effectiveness “Collateral”: Expected

impacts of different choices The primacy of

technological “solutions” Availability Accessibility Affordability Advisability Acceptability

The 5 A’s of technological responsesmay constitute mutable barriers or

de facto limits to adaptation.

So

urc

e:

htt

p:/

/ww

w.e

cob

oo

t.n

l/

Adaptation Outcomes

In which arena are adaptation decisions to be made?

Who initiates or holds responsibility for developing adaptation options? Who has (potentially) decision-making and implementation authority?

What influences adaptation decisions?

What are the outcomes of a decision, once made, and how do the decision-makers and affected stakeholders live with them?

Adaptation Outcomes:Mechanisms for Adaptive Management Mechanisms to trace the

impacts of adaptation choices? near-term, longer-term environmental, differential social

impacts Institutional mechanisms to

revisit previous adaptation choices?

Social/political mechanisms to address social justice concerns, power imbalances?

Definition and measurement of effectiveness? According to whom?

Weighting and comparison of differential outcomes?

Adjudication among different goals, embedded values?

Reversibility of adaptation actions and (non)actions?

Flexibility (socially, institutionally, politically) to respond and correct prior actions?

Ethical obligations and legal (financial) liabilities to future generations, people and companies elsewhere?

Forums for the expression of public discontent and redress? Mechanisms for “just” compensation?

Democratic ideals vs. reality may well undermine implementation, learning.

Managing social discontents.

Conclusions: How Strong A Fulcrum?

Only as strong as these allow: Political, social, cultural, economic, scientific context Institutional context Interpersonal relationships Decision-maker aspirations and capacities Decision support Availability and feasibility of “solutions” Monitoring, evaluation, adaptive management

options, and mechanisms for social redress

Coda: The Ethical Imperative

Knowing what I do, there would be no future peace for me if I kept silent. Rachel Carson, 1958

Thank you!

Contact:

smoser@ucar.edu

More information:

http://www.isse.ucar.edu/moser/

http://www.isse.ucar.edu/moser/california/

http://www.isse.ucar.edu/communication/