Multilevel governance and Coproduction in urban Flood-risk management - Climate Change Adaptation and Development: Transforming Paradigms and Practices - page 131

September 2012; interview 4 June 2013 with official in Disaster Management
Office, PMO). Such 'political patronage' also shows the ambivalence of the
government in dealing with informality: administrators seek to move people;
politicians engage to protect them.
discussion
Lack of integration of adaptation and climate-risk
management
Climate change adaptation - narrowly defined - remains a fairly nascent agenda
and is not well integrated in planning and governance at the municipal or
community levels in Dar es Salaam. Adaptation is addressed only indirectly in
the draft city Master Plan; however, it may become a more integrated element in
municipal governance thanks to the recent interaction with CLUVA researchers
on a new city Climate action plan (Kombe et al. 2013). Basically, disaster-
risk management is a national and regional state-anchored agenda, and the
municipalities are little involved in disaster preparedness or direct coordination
of emergency responses. Flood-risk management interfaces with all the sectors
discussed in this study. Given the many public and private actors involved, it has
remained a fragmented agenda as regards municipal provision and regulation. As
a policy area, flood-risk management has several institutional homes and is not
well defined or coordinated at municipal levels in planning and development.
The city has - often in concert with state agencies - executed a set of smaller
(incremental) adaptation activities and projects on climate change. But these
initiatives have only to a very limited degree involved the provision of long-
term adaptation programmes, or substantive investments or active attempts
at regulating local action and enabling active involvement of residents or the
private sector towards transformative action.
Complex interaction of institutional, inancial and political
factors
A complex combination of institutional and other factors places particular
constraints on effective city and sub-city level climate-risk governance in
Dar es Salaam. We argue that barriers to the provisioning of services and
enabling of participation can be found in the historically centralized location
of responsibilities for urban development with state agencies and ineffective
multilevel governance, with limited devolution to local authorities, lack of
financial resources, weak commitment to participation, and other political
factors that undermine coproduction. Additional related factors include the
complexities of the multi-layered city government, lack of clarity in division of
roles between (regional) state bodies and the municipal agencies, lack of relevant
institutional 'homes' for adaptation with city authorities, ambivalence in the