Timothy F. Smith

Adaptation opportunities, constraints, and limits

Since the IPCCs Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), demand for knowledge regarding the planning and implementation of adaptation as a strategy for climate risk management has increased significantly (Preston et al., 2011a; Park et al., 2012). This chapter assesses recent literature on the opportunities that create enabling conditions for adaptation as well as the ancillary benefits that may arise from adaptive responses. It also assesses the literature on biophysical and socioeconomic constraints on adaptation and the potential for such constraints to pose limits to adaptation. Given the available evidence of observed and anticipated limits to adaptation, the chapter also discusses the ethical implications of adaptation limits and the literature on system transformational adaptation as a response to adaptation limits. To facilitate this assessment, this chapter provides an explicit framework for conceptualizing opportunities, constraints, and limits (Section 16.2). In this framework, the core concepts including definitions of adaptation, vulnerability, and adaptive capacity are consistent with those used previously in the AR4 (Adger et al., 2007). However, the material in this chapter should be considered in conjunction with that of complementary WGII AR5 chapters. These include Chapter 14 (Adaptation Needs and Options), Chapter 15 (Adaptation Planning and Implementation), and Chapter 17 (Economics of Adaptation). Material from other WGII AR5 chapters is also relevant to informing adaptation opportunities, constraints, and limits, particularly Chapter 2 (Foundations for Decision Making) and Chapter 19 (Emergent Risks and Key Vulnerabilities). This chapter also synthesizes relevant material from each of the sectoral and regional chapters (Section 16.5). To enhance its policy relevance, this chapter takes as its entry point the perspective of actors as they consider adaptation response strategies over near, medium, and longer terms (Eisenack and Stecker, 2012; Dow et al., 2013a,b). Actors may be individuals, communities, organizations, corporations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), governmental agencies, or other entities responding to real or perceived climate-related stresses or opportunities as they pursue their objectives (Patt and Schroter, 2008; Blennow and Persson, 2009; Frank et al., 2011).

The Australian Experience

The past focus of climate change action in Australia was dominated by mitigation initiatives and these remain a critical and urgent issue. However, the global imperative for planning and action to adapt to likely climate change impacts articulated by the scientific community has now been adopted as a key imperative for governments, industries, and communities alike. While it is often difficult to separate climate change adaptation initiatives from existing risk management or sustainability initiatives, over recent years there has been clear identification of new climate change adaptation policies and programs. These initiatives range from local-scale planning to reduce vulnerability, to national research programs such as the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility and the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) Climate Adaptation Flagship. The Australian Government has also created a Department of Climate Change to coordinate and support activities at the national level. One of the key challenges that remains is mainstreaming the understanding of vulnerability to climate change impacts and associated adaptation initiatives, across and within sectors. For example, the emphasis of research and action has been based on assessments of exposure, with only a limited number of past research projects focused on the understanding of sensitivity and adaptive capacity. Furthermore, climate change adaptation is usually framed within an economic rationalist paradigm, rather than a quality of life paradigm, and consequently there are challenges and potential paradoxes associated with achieving overriding goals such as short-term economic growth. Nevertheless, Australia continues to build upon existing mitigation and risk management initiatives and has now embraced a range of policies, strategies, and promising actions to enhance climate change adaptation.

Adaptation or Manipulation? Unpacking Climate Change Response Strategies

Adaptation is a key feature of sustainable social-ecological systems. As societies traverse various temporal and spatial scales, they are exposed to differing contexts and precursors for adaptation. A cursory view of the response to these differing contexts and precursors suggests the particular ability of persistent societies to adapt to changing circumstances. Yet a closer examination into the meaning of adaptation and its relationship to concepts of resilience, vulnerability, and sustainability illustrates that, in many cases, societies actually manipulate their social-ecological contexts rather than adapt to them. It could be argued that manipulative behaviors are a subset of a broader suite of adaptive behaviors; however, this paper suggests that manipulative behaviors have fundamentally different intentions and outcomes. Specifically, adaptive behaviors are respectful of the intrinsic integrity of social-ecological systems and change is directed toward internal or self-regulating modification. By way of contrast, manipulative behaviors tend to disregard the integrity of social-ecological systems and focus on external change or manipulating the broader system with the aim of making self-regulation unnecessary. It is argued that adaptive behaviors represent long-term strategies for building resilience, whereas manipulative behaviors represent short-term strategies with uncertain consequences for resilience, vulnerability, and the sustainability of social-ecological systems. Of greatest significance; however, is that manipulative strategies have the potential to avoid authentic experiences of system dynamics, obscure valuable learning opportunities, create adverse path dependencies, and lessen the likelihood of effective adaptation in future contexts.

Bayesian belief modeling of climate change impacts for informing regional adaptation options

A sequential approach to combining two established modeling techniques (systems thinking and Bayesian Belief Networks; BBNs) was developed and applied to climate change adaptation research within the South East Queensland Climate Adaptation Research Initiative (SEQ-CARI). Six participatory workshops involving 66 stakeholders based within SEQ produced six system conceptualizations and 22 alpha-level BBNs. The outcomes of the initial systems modeling exercise successfully allowed the selection of critical determinants of key response variables for in depth analysis within more homogeneous, sector-based groups of participants. Using two cases, this article focuses on the processes and methodological issues relating to the use of the BBN modeling technique when the data are based on expert opinion. The study expected to find both generic and specific determinants of adaptive capacity based on the perceptions of the stakeholders involved. While generic determinants were found (e.g. funding and awareness levels), sensitivity analysis identified the importance of pragmatic, context-based determinants, which also had methodological implications. The article raises questions about the most appropriate scale at which the methodology applied can be used to identify useful generic determinants of adaptive capacity when, at the scale used, the most useful determinants were sector-specific. Comparisons between individual BBN conditional probabilities identified diverging and converging beliefs, and that the sensitivity of response variables to direct descendant nodes was not always perceived consistently. It was often the accompanying narrative that provided important contextual information that explained observed differences, highlighting the benefits of using critical narrative with modeling tools.

Interrogating resilience: toward a typology to improve its operationalization

In the context of accelerated global change, the concept of resilience, with its roots in ecological theory and complex adaptive systems, has emerged as the favored framework for understanding and responding to the dynamics of change. Its transfer from ecological to social contexts, however, has led to the concept being interpreted in multiple ways across numerous disciplines causing significant challenges for its practical application. The aim of this paper is to improve conceptual clarity within resilience thinking so that resilience can be interpreted and articulated in ways that enhance its utility and explanatory power, not only theoretically but also operationally. We argue that the current confusion and ambiguity within resilience thinking is problematic for operationalizing the concept within policy making. To achieve our aim, we interrogate resilience interpretations used within a number of academic and practice domains in the forefront of contending with the disruptive and sometimes catastrophic effects of global change (primarily due to climate change) on ecological and human-nature systems. We demonstrate evolution and convergence among disciplines in the interpretations and theoretical underpinnings of resilience and in engagement with cross-scale considerations. From our analysis, we identify core conceptual elements to be considered in policy responses if resilience is to fulfill its potential in improving decision making for change. We offer an original classification of resilience definitions in current use and a typology of resilience interpretations. We conclude that resilience thinking must be open to alternative traditions and interpretations if it is to become a theoretically and operationally powerful paradigm.

Building adaptive capacity in South East Queensland, Australia

The effectiveness of various adaptation options is dependent on the capacity to plan, design and implement them. Understanding the determinants of adaptive capacity is, therefore, crucial for effective responses to climate change. This paper offers an assessment of adaptive capacity across a range of sectors in South East Queensland, Australia. The paper has four parts, including (1) an overview of adaptive capacity, in particular as a learning process; (2) a description of the various methods used to determine adaptive capacity; (3) a synthesis of the determinants of adaptive capacity; and (4) the identification of mechanisms to build adaptive capacity in the region. We conclude that the major issue impacting adaptive capacity is not the availability of physical resources but the dominant social, political and institutional culture of the region.

Socio-economic trends and climate change adaptation: the case of South East Queensland

The effectiveness of climate change responses is influenced by the adaptive capacity of communities within regions over spatial and temporal scales. While climate change projections are commonly used to set policy and management responses, they are not always coupled with socio-economic projections over the same time periods. This article explores the interplay between socio-economic characteristics and their potential implications for regional vulnerability and adaptive capacity. Population growth presents one of the biggest challenges for the South East Queensland region (SEQ) of Australia. Indigenous people, the aged, lone person households and single parent families show marked increases relative to other population segments. The literature suggests that these groups are more vulnerable to the risks associated with climate change. Population growth will not only increase the number of vulnerable groups, but also the demand for land, goods and services, including energy, infrastructure and ecosystem services. However, such data need to be integrated with context-specific data to account for spatial and temporal variations (or differences) in the adaptive capacity of communities.

Toward a new conceptualization of household adaptive capacity to climate change: applying a risk governance lens

Increasing evidence highlights the importance of context-specific understanding of the impacts of climate change and the need to move beyond generalized assumptions regarding the nature and utility of adaptive capacity in facilitating adaptation. The household level of impact and response is an under-researched context, despite influential decisions affecting local and system vulnerability being made at this scale. Assessments of household adaptive capacity currently assess the influences of adaptive capacity or the influences on adaptive capacity in isolation. We argue that comprehensive assessments need to examine these influences in combination to capture a dynamic and integrated view of households that better reflects their positioning and role(s) in broader social- political contexts. To transition assessments away from examining households as discrete units to recognizing their role within a larger governance context, we outline four themes focused on: (1) analysis of governance contexts, (2) determination of adaptive capacity sources, (3) assessment of cross-scalar trade-offs, and (4) integrated goal setting to facilitate boundary critiques. By considering these themes, the relationships between capacities and actions are highlighted, and the simultaneous outcomes of adaptive choices at individual and broader system scales can be evaluated. We argue that such boundary critique has the potential to yield a more comprehensive assessment of adaptive capacity focused upon cross-scalar influences and impacts.

Perspectives on the Art of Facilitation: A Delphi Study of Natural Resource Management Facilitators

The new regional arrangements for natural resource management (NRM) in Australia have been built upon a premise of community-based management, reflecting the increase in participatory approaches and citizen involvement within NRM. Given this increase there is still a paucity of literature regarding the field of facilitation for researchers and practitioners currently working within participatory frameworks in NRM. A Delphi survey technique was used to conduct an Australia-wide study on NRM facilitation. The study highlighted that NRM facilitators often preformed a multiplicity of potentially conflicting roles (e.g. facilitator and change agent). Many challenges were also identified by study participants, such as institutional dysfunction and overloading community volunteers. However, a number of facilitation strategies were also identified, such as stakeholder mapping and capacity audits, as a means to combat the challenges. While the facilitation challenges were framed within the context of NRM, the stra...

Facilitating Multi-sector Dialogue for Natural Resource Management: Examples of Rural Governance in Two Queensland Regions

Abstract The definitions and interpretations of rurality and rural governance in Australia are being expanded through the current natural resource management (NRM) regional arrangements. Part of these expanding definitions is the notion of inclusive NRM decision-making in rural communities through multi-sector dialogue (e.g. between primary producers, local government, conservation, Indigenous and other community interests). Drawing on triangulated case study data collected over a 12-month period using multiple methods, this paper examines the functioning of multi-sector dialogue in two rural Queensland regional NRM bodies. Although subject to the same stakeholder representation, NRM plan and regional investment strategy accreditation requirements, the two organisations differed markedly in their philosophies and approaches towards multi-sector dialogue. Comparing the two approaches, the authors highlight the innovative solutions that each offers for more inclusive rural governance. Suggestions for improving multi-sector dialogue at the regional scale include strengthening the role of regional group’s collectives to provide for greater knowledge exchange between groups. Regional bodies also need to be encouraged, through collective forums, to access education and training programs that promote the adoption of innovations for facilitating sustainable NRM practices.