Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
learning aspects of the adaptive outcomes). It highlights the challenge touched upon
in Sect. 6.5 about how to effectively communicate uncertainty for action, and the
issue of understanding at which point actors have enough information to start acting
upon it. This is a major issue for the both the climate change adaptation as well as
the broader mitigation debate.
Finally, while significant developments have been made in understanding
adaptive capacity and factors that determine its presence since the 2001 IPCC deter-
minants, a heavier focus has been placed on categorical (vulnerability, resilience,
adaptive capacity, coping, etc.) rather than analytical (criteria, determinants, indica-
tors, etc.) definitions. Perhaps due to the interdisciplinary nature of research on
adaptive capacity, the body of work on adaptation related fields has concentrated on
clarity around defining the different terms and concepts in this field, but perhaps less
on ensuring conceptual clarity in terms of determinants, indicators, and criteria,
whose use are often undefined within the literature.
However, there has been a significant and growing body of work on environmen-
tal, sustainability and ecological management criteria in different fields of the politi-
cal, social and bio-physical sciences (OECD 1997 ; Slocombe 1998 ) , on which the
adaptation and adaptive capacity community could not only draw, but also strive for
a better level of convergence and consistency in analytical definitions. However, in
the quest for more measurable criteria of adaptive capacity indicators, the impor-
tance of context should continue to be prioritised. Researchers should ensure that in
searching for broader analytical clarity and applicability in the development of indi-
cators and measurable criteria of adaptive capacity, the nuance of specific contexts
and priorities is not lost.
16.4
Contributions and Ways Forward
The outcomes of analysis and development of a multi-level framework for navigat-
ing the core tensions in adaptive capacity generate a framing that pays closer atten-
tion to the challenges inherent in policy construction across the complex spatial and
temporal scales within which climate impacts will unfold. For instance, mobilising
adaptive capacity to respond to variability at the local level also requires a longer
term commitment to preparing for shocks and uncertainties at higher levels of gov-
ernance. Couching these challenges in terms of the scales of governance and change
across which they play out, can break down seemingly insurmountable challenges
to more manageable and addressable issues as presented in Chap. 13 (Figs. 13.1 and
13.2 ) .
Other studies (Tompkins and Adger 2004, 2005 ) have established the different
forms of adaptation, as being both proactive (planning for future climate change,
developing adaptive capacity) and reactive (autonomous reaction to events, mobilis-
ing adaptive capacity). Furthermore, evidence suggests that the ability to respond
and absorb shocks reactively depends also on the proactive development of strate-
gies and plans that not only enhance the resilience of the SES but that can be
Search WWH ::




Custom Search