Search

INCENTIVE is a 3-year European project aiming to demonstrate the potential of citizen science (CS) through the co-creation, establishment and assessment of Citizen Science Hubs (CSHs) in four European universities: University of Twente (NL); Autonomous University of Barcelona (ES); Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (GR); Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (LT). Among one of its first actions, a Co-Creation Workshop was organized to engage with the stakeholders of each RPFO aiming to co-define the pivotal aspects of the governance and operation of the prospective CSHs. The current report presents its approach and the outcomes.

Ever since the Kyoto protocol became effective (1997), national governments have been delegating climate policies to local governments. In the Netherlands, national climate policy has been effective since 1999 while targeting at a multi-governmental approach. In 2010, a survey found that local climate policies have been adopted by the vast majority of local governments throughout the country. Therefore, obviously, the national government claims that their local climate policy diffusion programs have been successful. This is, however, not the case. Whereas climate mitigation strategies have indeed been adopted widely (Hoppe and Coenen, 2011), this cannot be said for the adoption of adaptation strategies as this varies strongly across the country (Van den Berg and Coenen, 2012). Moreover, the intensity of the implementation of local climate policy varies strongly. In practice, local authorities often lack expertise and neglect local stakeholders in the formulation of climate policy goals, which leads to unrealistic goal-setting (Hoppe, 2013; Van Bueren and Steenhuisen, 2013). This paper analyses the development and current status of local climate policy practices in the Netherlands, and addresses both the mitigation and adaptation lines. Additionally, attention is paid to coupling these two strategies.

Although the importance of local government is often emphasized when it comes to climate change adaptation, empirical data reveal that local efforts have been rather limited. Why does one observe this paradoxical situation? This article presents empirical data gathered through a questionnaire (n=70) and case studies (n=13) demonstrating that resistance within Dutch municipalities prevents organisational adaptation despite there being strong external forces for change. We offer two explanations for this observation. Firstly, we have observed a strongly divided approach to climate change adaptation where each of the involved sub-units (i.e. policy domains) has its own perception of climate change, and of the preferred ‘solution’ to tackle the related problems. Secondly, we have sensed a general feeling that adaptation is not really a local responsibility. In this perspective, the concept of climate change is associated with a far-off future, distant in time and space. We conclude that actions by regional and national governments are needed to enable municipalities to look beyond their local and sectoral partitions.

In dit rapport worden de resultaten geanalyseerd van een onderzoek dat medio 2010 is uitgevoerd onder de Overijsselse gemeenten. Doel van dit onderzoek was inzicht te krijgen in het klimaatbeleid dat gevoerd wordt door de gemeenten in Overijssel, en daarbij vooral te focussen op de rol van water in dit beleid. Voor het onderzoek is een vragenlijst ingevuld door 70 gemeentelijke medewerkers bij ruimtelijke ordening (RO), milieu en water van de 25 Overijsselse gemeenten. De resultaten van deze kwantitatieve inventarisatie zijn in een eerdere fase gepresenteerd in het rapport Klimaatbeleid bij Overijsselse gemeenten: Resultaten van een kwantitatieve inventarisatie.

Dit rapport is opgesteld voor het project 'Local climate preparedness in municipalities: an analysis of municipal climate mitigation, adaptation and disaster management strategies ini the Dutch province of Overijssel, particular in relation with water management and new urban extension areas' dat gefinancieerd wordt door het waterschap Groot Salland. Dit project maakt deel uit van het INTERREG IVB-project WAVE. Binnen WAVE werken de waterschappen Groot Salland en Regge en Dinkel samen met partners uit Frankrijk, Engeland, Duitsland en België aan de realisatie van klimaatbestendig regionaal waterbeheer.8 september 2011

This report explains the outcomes of the research project Analysing local climate vulnerability and local adaptation strategies which was carried out from 2005 up till 2009 at the Twente Centre for Studies in Technology and Sustainable Development (CSTM), University of Twente. This project is funded within the research programme Vulnerability, Adaptation and Mitigation (VAM) from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). The role of local government is crucial for preparing society for climate change impacts. Yet there are relatively few systemic studies of local community initiatives to improve adaptation capacities. The current study presents an analytic scheme for assessing Dutch municipalities in the context of multilevel governance. The scheme focuses on: (1) historical experience with flooding impacts, and (2) the probability/risk of new climate change impacts. Controlling for size and type of community (rural/urban), the study presents interview-based data for nine case studies. We can conclude that adaptation to climate change at the local level is a complex policy issue, depending on many external and internal factors. We have tried to gain insights into these factors by investigating the role and the institutional capacity of municipalities in the Netherlands. We have distinguished local ‘firebrands’ of significant importance. The presence of a local administrator (alderman) on environmental affairs from the national Green Party is related crucial to the promotion of climate-related initiatives. We also found that the more ‘willing’ cases were active in all sorts of networks. This varied from EU projects to urban networks and inter-municipal cooperation. Interviewees actively confirmed that these networks played a key role, as they enable the local actors to exchange knowledge and best practices, and to share the costs of research and trial projects. Within such stimulating networks, local actors are more motivated to explore climate-adaptation efforts that would otherwise be too ambitious (resource-demanding) for a single municipality. The urban cases proved almost all (3 out of 4) to be active climate mitigation frontrunners. They generally consider climate change adaptation as a new dimension of climate policy. However, while mitigation now has become an urgent issue, the challenge of specific adaptation initiatives is new and combined with many uncertainties. In nearly every case, there was little sense of urgency in relation to either vulnerability or preparedness. Despite the complex nature of the problem, interviewees in the mitigation frontrunner cases express their belief that the problem of climate change adaptation will gradually ‘settle’ into a more commonly accepted issue. Local conditions proved to be most decisive in our study of local adaptation strategies. The study reveals that the local situation exerts a significant impact on the climate change problem. It makes clear that all cases have their own particular situation that is determinative for the effects of climate change impacts. For instance, while the cases with high risk and experience are ‘used’ to preparing themselves for climatic events, the urban case without increased risk or any experience appeared to be similarly involved in climate change adaptation without any clear threat. The factors risk and experience did not prove as decisive as anticipated.

This chapter provides a local perspective to adaptation strategies by investigating the effect of institutional capacity on local initiatives within a multi-government context. It focuses on the first research question: what is the current and projected role for local-level government within a multi-level governance model for climate adaptation? Climate change also involves an increase of climatic disasters and extreme weather events. Climate change mitigation is one of the motivations for the joint mitigation project, but adaptation has no separate role. Local-level preparedness for climate change impacts in the Netherlands is influenced by many internal and external factors. The chapter also focuses on the local-level civil preparedness more thoroughly by describing the role for local government within a multilevel governance model for climate adaptation. It addresses the second principal research question: how far does institutional capacity influence the possibilities and limitations for developing local adaptation strategies, and how can this capacity be expanded?

Being a delta, one third of the Dutch territory consists of flood-prone areas. This article discusses how the local civil protection system in the Netherlands responds to increasing climate change-induced flooding risks in terms of risk perception and action. Case studies on three Safety Regions are used to better understand the relation between climate change risk and changes in civil protection systems and practices. Data is presented that suggest that a minimum level of climate change risk awareness is present and that proactive action from the civil protection system is exceptional.

The local government level is considered to be crucial in preparing society for climate change impact. Yet little is known about why local authorities do or do not take action to adapt their community for climate change impacts. In order to implement effective adaptation policy, the motivations for local climate adaptation need to be examined. This paper explores these motivations in Dutch communities by comparing nine urban and rural cases. To be able to draw general conclusions, cases are selected on „projected risk‟ and „extreme weather event experience‟. Motivations for local climate adaptation appear much more determined by local institutional factors such as a green party aldermen or innovative network membership then projected risk or extreme weather event experience. This could be explained by the empiric data showing diffuse channels of climate change knowledge into the local government level and limited capacity to translate this knowledge into genuine adaptation strategies