Adaptation Discourses and Modes of Governance in Swiss Alpine Regions Alexander Widmer & Christian Hirschi Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March 2012

Introduction  Adaptation only very recently in industrialized countries  Most have now developed a NAS  Switzerland NAS (part 1): March 2 nd 2012  Implementation and compulsory measures are rare; mostly:  assessment reports  strategic considerations  initiation and report of research activities  Subnational adaptation activities (despite the lack of NAS)  E.g. six regional adaptation strategies in Switzerland, and some by larger cities 23 March 20122Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March 2012

The Swiss context (1/2)  1989: Interdepartmental working group  1994: Two reports on climate change addressing mitigation and adaptation:  Impacts expected on forestry, agriculture, water, natural hazards, health, migration and winter tourism  Impacts are mainly expected in mountain regions  No further measures outlined  1996: OcCC (Advisory Body on Climate Change)  Scientific, coordinative, and consultative mandate  Summaries of the IPCC reports, specific reports on heavy precipitation (1998), heavy droughts (2002), extreme events (2003), heat waves (2005), impacts on socio-economic sectors (2007) 3Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

The Swiss context (2/2)  2009: Decision of the Swiss Federal Council (nat. government)  to asses climate risks and to develop a NAS  interdepartmental working group and sectoral working groups are established  2012: On March 2 nd the first part (goals, challenges, fields of activity) of the Swiss NAS was approved by the Federal Council  2013: Part 2 (specific measures and action plan) is scheduled for late Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Regional adaptation measures  Regional differences with respect to ecological, economic, and social conditions: adaptation as a policy to be implemented on the regional level.  Questions of multi-level governance: interplay and role of different levels in adaptation policy  Despite the absence of a NAS some adaptation activities on the regional level in Switzerland 5Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Research questions  What climate adaptation measures have been discussed or adapted in Swiss mountain regions over the period ?  What developments put the issue of climate change on the political agenda of the relevant political bodies in the regions?  What are the predominant modes of governance in those adaptation activities and how do they differ from traditional approaches to mitigate negative environmental impacts on society in those regions? 6Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Database on adaptation activities in the Swiss alpine regions  Context: MOUNTLAND project  Focus on mountain areas  Three regions: Grisons, Vaud, and Valais  Different ecosystem services and land-use patterns but also different political-institutional settings  Varying sensibilities to changing climate conditions 7Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Regional (cantonal) adaptation activities  Every activity explicitly aiming at adjustments in natural or human systems  In response to actual or expected climate stimuli or their effects  To moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities  Initiated by cantonal public authorities as such as cantonal governments, public administrations, and legislative bodies (parliaments) 8Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Variables (1)  Policy process related variables:  durability (permanent, temporary)  policy level (strategy, program, project, measure, instrument)  current status in the policy process (problem definition, agenda-setting, formulation, decision-making, implementation)  Sectors and goals  addressed sector(s)  scope and policy goals: bear losses, share losses, modify threat, prevent effects, change use, change location, research, encourage behavioral change (IPCC 2001). 9Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Variables (2)  Actors:  political body in charge (cantonal government, administration, parliament)  final legally binging responsibility (cantonal government, administration, parliament, citizens)  main target population (civil society, economy/industry, scientific community, international actors, federation, communities, cantonal government, cantonal parliament, cantonal courts, residual category)  Policy instruments applied  Instrument (information, subsidies, taxes…) (Howlett et al. 1995)  State involvement (voluntary, mixed, compulsory)  Present a selection of our results 10Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Agenda setting 11Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Policy sectors (overall) 12Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Policy sectors (cantons) 13Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Adaptation activities in the three cantons 14Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Level of state involvement 15Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Actors (1): Addressees of adaptation activities 16Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Actors (2): Political body in charge 17Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Actors (3): Final responsibility 18Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Discussion (1)  Agenda setting  Climate change adaptation on the national agenda only very recently  Mountain regions versed in adapting to changing climate conditions  Adaptation is in particularly challenging where behavioral change is needed and no technical solutions are at hand 19Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Discussion (2)  Modes of governance  Adaptation activities are dominated by ‘soft’, information-based activities.  The dominance of mixed mode of state-involvement might be misleading as it concentrates on research mandates or information provision rather than cooperative and participative activities connected to a networked mode of political steering.  This is also reflected in the very limited involvement of stakeholders so far. 20Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Conclusion  Some adaptation activities have been integrated in areas such as natural hazard which are traditionally dominated by the administration.  The new national adaptation strategy will set an important framework also for cantonal adaptation activities and is likely to impact future ‘modes of governance’. 21Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012

Thank you for your attention! Acknowledgments: Supported by the Competence Center Environment and Sustainability of the ETH domain. 22Symposium “The Governance of Adaptation”, Amsterdam, 22/23 March March 2012