Search

• Infrastructure replacement decisions restructure environments, landscapes and water systems. • Replacements come with locational and functional decisions for the long-term. • Adequate strategies need to consider system, network, location and object level choices. • Adaptive options for replacements are closed and opened through interaction of different levels. By building infrastructure, planners want to exert control over the environment for the sake of society. Due to uncertainty and complexity, such control is always limited and can become contested. Based on a case study of replacing a pumping station, we show how planners can understand the replacement of infrastructure and what informs adequate replacement strategies amid uncertainty. The paper argues that the concepts (un)control and (re)structuring help understand replacements in the context of infrastructure planning. Infrastructure replacements are interventions on different levels which restructure existing systems, asset networks, local areas and assets themselves. Necessary information for developing a replacement strategy, exerted control or uncontrol, possible innovations and restructuring effects differ among these levels. We conclude that planners need to be cognizant that infrastructure replacements, no matter how large or small, restructure both environments and social institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adaptation pathways are developed to design adaptive policies to handle climate change uncertainty. Use of this tool varies across planning practices and adaptation challenges and adjusting the tool to particular practices can foster its adequate use. To gain insight into the use of adaptation pathways, we compared four initiatives (one each in Portugal and the Czech Republic and two in the Netherlands) with regard to design choices made. We found six design choices which need to be considered when adjusting adaptation pathways. Design choices about the geographic scale, inclusion of sectors, the generation and delineation of adaptation options, specification of possible pathways, the related performance metrics and the type of assessment are interdependent, but they are also influenced by contextual aspects. Analysis of the institutional diversity, planning culture and framing shows that the use of adaptation pathways is flexible enough to be adjusted for diverging planning practices. However, the tool is best suited to deliver local adaptation solutions, and adequate use depends on consensus about the adaptation problem, setting objective thresholds and determining uncertainty about future change. We conclude that understanding the customised use of tools for local planning practices is essential for adaptive policy design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]