Petteri Niemi

The ability of Nordic countries to adapt to climate change: assessing adaptive capacity at the regional level

Adaptation to the impacts of climate change has become a concern in the Nordic countries. Regional responses to climate change impacts are considered to be crucial since they are likely to target specific vulnerabilities with concrete and feasible adaptation measures. The ability of the region to respond to climate change is determined to a large extent by its adaptive capacity that consists of economic, social and political capacity, as well as infrastructure and technological potential. This paper assesses the generic adaptive capacity of Nordic regions by using a set of indicators that reflect five determinants of adaptive capacity. The results of the assessments are presented in maps that illustrate that Nordic regions have high capacity but there are also significant differences between and within countries. Finally, this article also discusses arguments for and against the use of these kinds of assessments in policy-making, and the implications of this for the Nordic countries.

Defensive routines in land use policy steering in Finnish urban regions

Land use planning practices in different municipalities and urban regions in Finland vary substantially, as do attitudes towards land ownership and land use policy. Consequently, inter-municipal cooperation in strategic land use planning is often weak, despite central government efforts such as the introduction of the PARAS Act in 2007, which exhorts municipalities in the urban regions to consolidate or cooperate. However, governmental steering has been vague on most sensitive and pragmatic land use policy issues such as planning and policy tools to control dispersed development patterns leading to urban sprawl. This article examines the challenges of consistent steering of land use practices by presenting observations from follow-up studies of five Finnish urban regions, all in the first stage of implementing the PARAS Act. The analysis reveals that mixed messages and defensive routines are preventing effective political debate on core issues. These defences are fostered by the vagueness of central government policy. Since these core issues have not been brought up in the legislation, they are now being tackled – or ignored – at the local level in an unpredictable manner.