Search

Policymakers and scientists regard emerging circular initiatives as levers for transformations towards more sustainable food systems. However, it remains unclear how to determine the extent to which circular initiatives have transformative potential. That is, can these initiatives foster a transformation as a result of how they currently bring circularity into practice? In the transformation literature, the characteristics of transformative initiatives are conceptualised in a generic and abstract way. To address this gap, we develop a heuristic of five characteristics for potentially transformative circular agriculture initiatives, which we illustrate with examples of existing initiatives. The heuristic builds on the 'small wins' and circular agriculture literature. Initiatives that hold transformative potential contribute to circular agriculture principles with outcomes that are concrete, in-depth and both technological and social in nature. Additionally, these initiatives faced barriers and overcame them. The heuristic enables policymakers, who call for circular solutions, to identify truly transformative circular initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The transition towards a circular bioeconomy (CBE) in the European Union is not without contestation. In particular, research has highlighted potential trade-offs of the large-scale production of bio-resources, for instance with environmental quality goals. To date, however, it remains underexplored in the CBE literature how controversies develop throughout a transition process. To address this gap, this paper explores where controversies are situated in a transition, how they change throughout, and how they influence the transition process. First, we suggest that controversies can be situated on and between different system layers within a transition. Second, we offer an explanation of how controversies evolve, as actors confirm, integrate, disintegrate and polarize underlying storylines. Third, these controversies can have both productive and unproductive outcomes while they unfold throughout a transition. We illustrate this understanding with the example of biorefineries as CBE key technology and discuss a research agenda on controversies in sustainability transitions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To tackle malnutrition more effectively, Sub-Saharan African governments have developed overarching, integrative policy strategies over the past decade. Despite their popularity, little is known about their follow-up and ultimately their success (or failure). Consequently, tracking the progress of such political commitment has gained global importance. Various studies provide insights into changes in nutrition-related policies. Nevertheless, it is generally acknowledged that we have limited understanding of how nutrition concerns are explicitly addressed in policies of different ministries. This study uses a novel policy integration perspective to investigate the extent to which eight ministries in Uganda integrated nutrition concerns across their policy outputs between 2001 and 2017. The approach used assumes nutrition policy integration is a dynamic process occurring in different policy dimensions. We performed a qualitative content analysis to assess 103 policy outputs for changes in subsystems involved, policy goals, and instruments used. Overall, we found a shift towards increased integrated government action on nutrition over time. The 2011–2015 analysis period was a critical juncture where increased integration of nutrition was observed in all policy integration dimensions across all ministries. However, considerable variations in actor networks, goals, and instruments exist across sectors and over time. The sustainability of nutrition integration efforts remains contentious, because of which continuous monitoring will be essential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Feeding the world is not only a complex technical matter, but also a demanding governance issue. As food security has all the characteristics of a wicked problem (variety of problem definitions, conflicting interests, interconnectedness across scales, inherent uncertainties), conventional governance arrangements do not seem to work. New ways of concerted actions are introduced to better link global challenges with local practices. One example of this is the Global Agenda for Sustainable Livestock: a partnership of public, private, social, and civil society actors, committed to the sustainable development of the livestock sector. It aims to enhance shared understanding of sustainability and its underlying development issues and to build consensus on the path towards sustainable food security through dialogue, consultation, and joint analyses. This article analyses the Agenda as a new type of governance arrangement to enhance food security. It relies on a theoretical framework that consists of five governance capabilities, which are considered crucial for coping with wicked problems: reflexivity, resilience, responsiveness, revitalisation, and rescaling. The aim of this paper is threefold: 1) to assess the Agenda and learn from that; 2) to evaluate the capabilities framework as a tool to assess governance arrangements; and 3) to reflect on the potentials of new governance arrangements to deal with food security. The article illustrates how the governance capabilities framework can be used as a tool to analyse the multi-stakeholder platform for enhancing food security. It concludes that the Agenda successfully encompasses many elements of these capabilities although improvements are possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Barriers to adaptation have become an important concept in scientific and political discussions in the governance of climate change adaptation. Over the past years, these discussions have been dominated by one analytical lens in examining barriers and proposing ways to overcome them: the problem solving lens. In this paper, we aim to demonstrate theoretically and empirically that the choice of analytical lens influences how barriers to adaptation are constructed and the intervention strategies proposed. Drawing from recent governance literature, we explore the rationale of three dominant philosophies in the study of governance: the optimist, the realist, and the pessimist philosophy. Next, we demonstrate how these philosophies are operationalized and guide scientific inquiry on barriers to adaptation through four empirically rooted analytical lenses: i) governance as problem solving, ii) governance as competing values and interests, iii) governance as institutional interaction, and iv) governance as dealing with structural constraints. We investigate the Dutch government's Spatial Adaptation to Climate Change programme through each of the four lenses. We discuss how each analytical lens frames barriers in a specific way, identifies different causes of barriers, leads to competing interpretations of key events, and presents other types of interventions to overcome barriers. We conclude that it is necessary to increase analytical variety in order to critically engage in theoretical debates about barriers and to empower policy practitioners in their search for successful intervention strategies to implement adaptation measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of barriers is increasingly used to describe the obstacles that hinder the planning and implementation of climate change adaptation. The growing literature on barriers to adaptation reveals not only commonly reported barriers, but also conflicting evidence, and few explanations of why barriers exist and change. There is thus a need for research that focuses on the interdependencies between barriers and considers the dynamic ways in which barriers develop and persist. Such research, which would be actor-centred and comparative, would help to explain barriers to adaptation and provide insights into how to overcome them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is generally acknowledged that adapting low-lying, flood-prone deltas to the projected impacts of climate change is of great importance. Deltas are densely populated and often subject to high risk. Climate-proof planning is, however, not only a new but also a highly complex task that poses problems for existing institutional and administrative structures, which are the product of times in which climate issues were of little importance. This paper assesses the capacity of the historically grown Dutch planning institutions to promote climate-proof planning for flood-prone areas. The Adaptive Capacity Wheel provides the methodological framework. The analysis focuses on two planning projects in the west of the Netherlands: the Zuidplas Polder project at the regional level and the Westergouwe project at the local level. It is shown that the planning institutions involved in these projects enable climate-proof planning, but to a limited extent. They face five institutional weaknesses that may cause risks on the long term. To climate-proof urban developments in flood-prone areas, it is necessary to break through the strong path-dependent development of planning institutions and to build in more flexibility in existing rules and procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considerable barriers can emerge in developing and implementing climate change adaptation strategies. Understanding the nature of barriers to adaptation is important so as to find strategic ways of dealing with them. However, our current understanding is limited and highly fragmented across the academic community. This paper aims to bring some conceptual convergence in these debates by applying a systematic review method to assess the current state of knowledge on barriers to adaptation in the peer-reviewed literature. The review results show that: (1) Barriers to adaptation have hardly been defined in the literature and no clear indicators exist so as to identify and assess them systematically. (2) An impressive number of barriers have been reported, but the list of possible barriers is seemingly endless. (3) The most frequently reported barriers relate to the institutional and social dimensions of adaptation. (4) Barriers are identified as configurations of climate and non-climate factors and conditions that emerge from the actor, the governance system, or the system of concern. (5) Barriers are mainly studied in developed countries with a strong focus on water-related domains. (6) The majority of studies on barriers use small-n inductive case approaches while comparative studies across different contexts are limited. (7) Although interventions to overcome barriers are recommended by most studies, empirical studies on interventions are scarce. We present further conceptual clarification and a more precise definition of barriers to adaptation. We conclude that future research should go beyond asking the questions 'if' and 'which' barriers to adaptation exist and begin asking 'how' and 'why' barriers emerge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A reply by the authors to a letter to the editor about their article "Opening up the black box of adaptation decision-making" is presented.