Enabler 2

Overview

Our second enabler relates to governance processes and our capacity to respond. Whilst the first enabler was about the destination we are aiming for with our adaptation actions, this one is more to do with the pathway we follow to get there. In other words, it is all about the processes, both formal – for example enforcement by state agencies in line with policy frameworks, and informal – civil society networks, advocacy and community mechanisms for enforcement – that will take us on the journey to a climate-resilient society.

  What does this enabler involve?

1. Governance structures and consensual decision making inform adaptation pathways at all levels: our governance structures must support consensual decision-making to inform adaptation pathways at all levels. We need approaches that identify and encourage synergies between different groups of people, such as ministries, government agencies, community organisations, and project funders. It also means that local people and organisations can meaningfully participate in knowledge and experience sharing, for instance through place-based partnerships and decentralised local planning processes.
2. Fostering innovation and learning: We need an environment that fosters innovation and experimentation, giving us the space and resources to try out new approaches to adaptation and to ‘learn by doing.’ This entails learning from what has worked (and what hasn’t) to foster a shared understanding on what works to increase resilience and reduce climate vulnerability.
3. Capacity, knowledge and experience sharing is driven by local realities: Our knowledge-sharing must be driven by local realities. Wherever possible, our adaptation capacity development should be driven by and based upon local issues and local responses, so that local lived experience and knowledge can validate and enhance existing evidence at both local and national levels.
4. Maximizing financing, resourcing and assets: We require access to long-term and self-sustaining funding, resources and tools to allow long-term and meaningful development of people’s skills and capabilities for embedding climate change adaptation within broader initiatives for wellbeing, poverty alleviation, community development and other aspects of public life. This funding might draw on alternative sources beyond central government, such as green bonds and crowdfunding. Looking for synergies with other social and environmental issues can help us to make the most of limited resources.

 What drives this enabler forward?

1. Our policies and programmes, starting from national government level, support collaboration and actively encourage different groups of people to continue to collaborate long-term.
2. Gender-responsive and age-sensitive adaptation action requires institutional understanding and ways of working that build up from considering gender and intergenerational equality in policies and legislation, towards outcomes that actively empower people and transform what people can do across gender and age.
3. We have approaches and tools both online and face to face – such as forums, dialogues and web platforms – that enable us to share and learn from our experiences of what works and what doesn’t. Global networks can support this innovation and learning, and can link different localities as well as national governments.
4. Telling our adaptation story in a way that makes the case for action can help us to get buy-in for our plans and overcome resource constraints.
5. Overwhelming support at all levels of society and government for the multiple benefits that can come from integrating adaptation across sectors and aspects that affect daily life.

 What might inhibit this enabler from being realised?

1. Resistance to expanding or enabling diversity in cooperation and governance, and a lack of support for partnerships.
2. Climate change adaptation is treated as a technical area that is not integrated with other sectors and aspects that affect daily life.
3. Excessive influence from the private sector on power and resources, or research that focuses too much on narrow academic and scientific benefits rather than application and sharing expertise.
4. Knowledge gaps within different levels of government, and across civil society. If we have too many opportunities for learning and knowledge sharing, there is also a danger of ‘information overload’.
5. When it comes to financing, it might be hard to get our political leaders to think longer-term, or to have the appetite to tackle contentious issues related to climate change adaptation.