Governing risk society: Increasing local adaptive capacity by planning and learning networks

Comparing Germany, Norway and Sweden, we find that the two latter seem to have a similar structure at national level: Several agencies operate within their sector, and one agency has a coordinating role. However, they lack the inter-departmental working groups established in Germany. This indicates a rather fragmented national responsibility in Norway and Sweden. Secondly, the role of the regional level differ. Swedish regional authorities seem to have a stronger responsibility than their Norwegian and German counterparts. However, also the German planning regions (114) have an important role, as they are formulating the legally binding regional plans. Thirdly, all the countries have placed a lot of responsibility on the municipalities. Even if the municipalities have the responsibility and authority (plan) over this complex task, the question is if they have relevant competence to integrate adaptation concern in planning. In Norway, the most offensive and vulnerable municipalities have recruited geologists (among them Bergen). But few municipalities have the resources needed to do the same. For all countries, integrating climate change-adaptation concerns in regional and local planning is considered to be crucial for developing climate robust local communities. In a survey to all Norwegian municipalities, we find that over half of the municipalities report that they have integrated climate change concerns in their most important planning instrument. We find, however, a significant difference between small and larger municipalities (over/under 20 000). Small municipalities lack relevant competence to provide and interpret climate relevant knowledge themselves, and are dependent upon supervision from regional and national actors. However, the responsibility for producing relevant knowledge (regional and local downscaling of climate change consequences) for local planning is diffuse, unclear and lack resources. The responsibility for guiding municipalities are also diffuse, and is distributed between national agencies, regional state offices (the County governor, NVE) and the county municipalities. As a consequence, both self-organized and national initiated networks are important boundary-arenas in all three countries. Here, climate-knowledge-producers, knowledge managers and -users meet, and knowledge about the consequences of climate change on nature and built environment is translated into regional and local strategies and policies. However, elected politicians are often not present, which hinder political ownership and commitment. Studying different networks, we find that the ones with a narrow scope on climate adaptation are most successful. Interdisciplinary and multi-level networks should be aimed for, and the members should be in positions that allows them to introduce and affect the organization with the acquired knowledge. Organizational qualities are tied to how to make a good «boundary space»; creating trust and an "in-group-understanding". This is created over time with coordination, continuity and leadership. Anchoring of knowledge in the organizations requires a good system understanding; of where and how to work strategically to make the new ideas «stick» and be converted to action. In a literature study on the potential of insurance to foster climate change and flood risk adaptation. Most common seem easy to implement activities around education of how to reduce losses. If larger investments are required such as for structural adaptation measures, the measure is beneficial when insurers can establish a long-relationship with their policy-holders and have a high market penetration. This is often only the case in monopoly insurance systems, but not in private insurance markets. Except from the NFIP in the US, there seem to be no fixed routines how to integrate flood risk prevention in the daily insurance business and even there only a very limited number of adaptation options is considered. Risk-based premiums and deductibles, as suggested by many scholars, are difficult to implement in practice as it would require detailed information down to single-property level. The study illuminates how insurance companies in different insurance systems actually contribute to flood risk protection measures undertaken by municipalities or insurance holders. In countries with public monopoly insurers, any investments in risk reducing measures, which lower the losses of insured assets in case of a flood, will directly pay-off for an insurer. These investments can be direct investments in protection measures, but might also include information. In Switzerland the natural hazard insurance is organized on cantonal level, and 19 out of 26 have a public monopoly insurance solution, while in 7 private insurers offer natural hazard insurance. The public insurers are proactive in co-financing municipal protection measures, and so are private insurance companies. Thus, there seems to be a spill-over effect.

The project GOVRISK takes the increased level of natural hazard risk caused by climate change as its point of departure, and addresses the translation- and coordination challenges of climate change adaptation. It focuses on how local government that has e xperienced increasing levels of flood and landslide risk and hazards due to climate changes handles these risks and asks: How can planning and learning networks increase local climate adaptive capacity dealing with the effects of climate change on floodin g and landslides? This will be answered by casestudies at local level in Norway, Sweden and Germany, surveys to relevant regional authorities in Norway, a casestudy of a multi-level pilot network of climate adaptation and a juridical study. GOVRISK has an explicit multi-level approach, trying to analyze the dynamics of how national legal, financial and institutional instruments in Norway, Sweden and Germany hinder or stimulate local climate change adaptation. The project is structured in WPs, partly follo wing the risk management circle. The circle illustrates the importance of having a holistic approach to handling risk caused by climate change, and to integrate these concerns in all phases. GOVRISK will study how and what climate relevant knowledge that is channeled into policy- and planning processes, how it is translated into local context, if it is politicized and how these factors influence climate adaptation strategies and measures related to flooding and landslides. GOVRISK also focuses on how lea rning networks can function as arenas for interpretation and contribute to a comprehensive and active approach. In addition, GOVRISK studies how planning can be used to increase cross-sector, multi-level coordination of climate adaptation efforts of publi c sector (and private) actors.