Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
meaningful and robust sets of choices for decsion makers. This is a crucial step towards
more tangible and applicable methods for improving the adaptive capacity of water
institutions and governance regimes.
Building adaptive capacity, by cultivating or contributing to the presence of its
determinants in an SES, improves the ability of systems to be become resilient to
surprises and longer term changes by shaping positive responses, even transforma-
tion or transition to a better state if this is required. The determinants of adaptive
capacity listed above lay the foundations for a number of different features and
principles, which are seen as useful indications of a systems' adaptive capacity. It is
these indicators and principles that shall be discussed in this chapter. The following
discussion builds on the body of research detailed earlier in this chapter, discussing
the challenges in developing governance and institutional indicators to characterise
and assess adaptive capacity, and thus presenting a synthesis of the current state of
indicators and determinants of adaptive capacity.
The assessment of adaptive capacity is inextricably linked with that of adaptation.
While the assessment of adaptation actions tend to be addressed within a framework of
whether the outcome of such actions are equitable, effective and legitimate, there are
also significant questions not just about how we adapt , but rather whether we can
adapt . The concept of adaptive capacity is used as a point of departure to determine
measurable indicators that 'could sustain comparable analyses of the relative vulnera-
bilities of different systems located across the globe and subject to a diverse set of
stresses that lie beyond their control' (Yohe and Tol 2002 , p 25). Such indices can be
either qualitatively or quantitatively based, generated through formulaic or discursive
data, but are critical for the management of risk in relation to climate change impacts.
Engle and Lemos ( 2010 , p 3) note that 'decision makers are interested in identifying
and nurturing specific system characteristics that will increase adaptive capacity and
resilience'. The identification of determinants and indicators of adaptive capacity
provide a broad suite of characteristics, among which governance and institutional
processes are deemed particularly important for the development of adaptive capacity,
reduction of vulnerability and prevention of overt and lasting damage from climate
change (Brooks et al. 2005 ; Nelson et al. 2007 ). Previous studies of adaptation to
climatic events have also highlighted the importance of institutional and governance
aspects (Brooks et al. 2005 ; Engle and Lemos 2010 ; Hurlbert 2008 ) .
As has been discussed in earlier sections of this chapter, a number of theoretical
discourses have developed, such as adaptive management, adaptive co-management,
and adaptive governance, in the quest for resilience in the face of uncertainty and climate
change, and that take up the concept of adaptive capacity. Adaptive governance is seen
to meet the call for dealing with increased uncertainty and change, arising from the
'growing number of failures among current approaches and increasing vulnerability
of social-ecological systems' (Olsson et al. 2006 , p 1). Along with the field of adaptive
management, the concepts of learning by doing, social learning and scenario planning
have become popular as a means of operationalising the need for flexibility and better
integration of social and ecological factors. These approaches are seen as a response
to the challenge of 'creating governance structures that are flexible and robust in the
face of uncertainties and inevitable surprises' (Twin2Go 2010 , p 3).
Search WWH ::




Custom Search