Daan Boezeman

Participation under a spell of instrumentalization? Reflections on action research in an entrenched climate adaptation policy process

The article discusses action research in a Dutch intergovernmental project group DV2050. That group was to assess the effects of climate change and soil subsidence on the regional water system and to propose adaptive policies to increase regional water safety. In this study, we draw a parallel between the stakeholder participation trajectory of DV2050 and our collaborative learning trajectory within the DV2050 project. In the academic literature, both participatory policy-making and action research are advocated for instrumental, normative and quality reasons. In our case, both trajectories took place in an entrenched context, i.e. a strongly institutionalized environment in which the involved governments compete for competencies. Despite broader ambitions stated at the beginning of these trajectories, we explain that both became instrumentalized by actors involved, narrowing their scope. Instrumentalization was influenced by powerful interests, a strongly institutionalized science–policy interface and the pressure of imminent decision-making.

Solidarity in water management

Adaptation to climate change can be an inclusive and collective, rather than an individual effort. The choice for collective arrangements is tied to a call for solidarity. We distinguish between one-sided (assisting community members in need) and two-sided solidarity (furthering a common interest) and between voluntary and compulsory solidarity. We assess the strength of solidarity as a basis for adaptation measures in six Dutch water management case studies. Traditionally, Dutch water management is characterized by compulsory two-sided solidarity at the water board level. Since the French times, the state is involved through compulsory national solidarity contributions to avoid societal disruption by major floods. In so far as this furthers a common interest, the contributions qualify as two-sided solidarity, but if it is considered assistance to flood-prone areas, they also qualify as one-sided solidarity. Although the Delta Programme explicitly continues on this path, our case studies show that solidarity continues to play an important role in Dutch water management in the process of adapting to a changing climate, but that an undifferentiated call for solidarity will likely result in debates over who should pay what and why. Such discussions can lead to cancellation or postponement of adaptation measures, which are not considered to be in the common interest or result in an increased reliance on local solidarity.

Heated debates: the transformation of urban warming into an object of governance in the Netherlands

In the Netherlands climate adaptation policies and measures have been dominated by a strong water-centered discourse. However, the heat waves of 2003 and 2006 raised political and public awareness for adaptation to warmer temperatures. These events triggered the reification of a new object: urban warming. In this chapter, we use EGT to analyze the (re-)emergence and (de-)stabilization of new objects within governance and we follow them during distinct moments of transformation. We observed four moments of transformation of the object from science into governance, and will illustrate these transformations in two cities in the Netherlands: Arnhem and Rotterdam. Both cities jump on the bandwagon of climate change adaptation, introducing urban warming as an object of urban governance, while putting emphasis on different techniques of object stabilization. We show the transforming effects of attempts to objectify objects through connecting them to scientific discourses, and the destabilizing effects of these attempts. Stabilizing primarily through institutionalization risked stabilizing an object no-one cares to adapt to. While urban warming was quickly naturalized as a matter of fact in both cases, establishing it as a stable matter of concern proved far harder. Constructing the object into a legitimate concern for urban planning, public health or social policy affected the solidification and codification, transforming it into a multiple object.

De transformatie van kennis voor klimaatadaptatie

Wetenschappelijke kennis speelt een cruciale, maar problematische rol in het vaststellen van klimaatrisico’s en dus in klimaatadaptatie. Dat roept de vraag op hoe kennisclaims voor adaptatiebeleid worden gemaakt. In dit artikel staan de productie van gezaghebbende en relevante kennisclaims in de tweede Deltacommissie, regionaal waterbeheer en hitte in steden centraal. Beargumenteerd wordt dat het gangbare vraag-en-aanbodmodel van de wetenschapper die pakketjes toepasbare kennis produceert die de beleidsmaker gebruikt, niet opgaat. De studie laat zien hoe het ‘wicked’ probleem klimaatverandering getemd en hanteerbaar wordt gemaakt in adaptatie. In dat proces transformeert kennis over klimaatverandering. Het artikel biedt een begrippenapparaat om transformatie te analyseren. Transformatie heeft een januskop. Terwijl transformatie klimaatverandering lokale betekenis geeft om concrete adaptieve acties mogelijk te maken, leidt het ook tot blindheden voor klimaatrisico’s. Transformaties worden beinvloed door de doelen en instituties in beleidsvelden. Om de problemen van blindheid en cognitieve padafhankelijkheid het hoofd te bieden, is meer institutionele verandering nodig dan waar de huidige benadering van kennisco-creatie en meekoppelen voor staat.