IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i2p433-d197965.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Insights from Testing a Modified Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathways Approach for Spatial Planning at the Municipal Level

Author

Listed:
  • Christoffer Carstens

    (County Administrative Board of Gävleborg, 802 66 Gävle, Sweden, Royal Institute of Technology, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
    Department of Sustainable Development, Environmental Science and Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Karin Mossberg Sonnek

    (Defence Analysis, Swedish Defence Research Agency, 164 90 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Riitta Räty

    (Defence Analysis, Swedish Defence Research Agency, 164 90 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Per Wikman-Svahn

    (Department of Philosophy and History, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Annika Carlsson-Kanyama

    (Department of Sustainable Development, Environmental Science and Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Jonathan Metzger

    (Division of Urban and Regional Studies, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

Abstract

The Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathways (DAPP) approach has successfully been used to manage uncertainties in large infrastructure projects. However, the viability of the DAPP approach for spatial planning in smaller municipal settings is not clear. This paper examines opportunities and constraints of using adaptive pathways approaches to help small municipalities plan for future sea-level rise. The methodology was based on developing a simplified DAPP-approach, which was tested in a multiple experimental case study of spatial planning projects in three municipalities in Sweden. The results show that the approach promoted vulnerability-based thinking among the end-users and generated new ideas on how to manage the uncertain long-term impacts of future sea-level rise. However, the increased understanding of uncertainties was used to justify static, rather than adaptive, solutions. This somewhat surprising outcome can be explained by perceived legal constraints, lack of experience of adaptive pathways, and unwillingness to prescribe actions that could prove difficult to enforce in the future. More research is needed to further understand at what planning phases dynamic policy pathway approaches work best and how current barriers in legislation, practices, mind-set, organization, and resources can be overcome.

Suggested Citation

  • Christoffer Carstens & Karin Mossberg Sonnek & Riitta Räty & Per Wikman-Svahn & Annika Carlsson-Kanyama & Jonathan Metzger, 2019. "Insights from Testing a Modified Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathways Approach for Spatial Planning at the Municipal Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:433-:d:197965
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/2/433/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/2/433/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Warren E. Walker & Marjolijn Haasnoot & Jan H. Kwakkel, 2013. "Adapt or Perish: A Review of Planning Approaches for Adaptation under Deep Uncertainty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-25, March.
    2. Lawrence, Judy & Haasnoot, Marjolijn, 2017. "What it took to catalyse uptake of dynamic adaptive pathways planning to address climate change uncertainty," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 47-57.
    3. Marjolijn Haasnoot & Hans Middelkoop & Astrid Offermans & Eelco Beek & Willem Deursen, 2012. "Exploring pathways for sustainable water management in river deltas in a changing environment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 795-819, December.
    4. Annika Carlsson Kanyama & Per Wikman‐Svahn & Karin Mossberg Sonnek, 2019. "“We want to know where the line is”: comparing current planning for future sea-level rise with three core principles of robust decision support approaches," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(8), pages 1339-1358, July.
    5. J. Barnett & S. Graham & C. Mortreux & R. Fincher & E. Waters & A. Hurlimann, 2014. "A local coastal adaptation pathway," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(12), pages 1103-1108, December.
    6. Bosomworth, Karyn & Leith, Peat & Harwood, Andrew & Wallis, Phillip J., 2017. "What’s the problem in adaptation pathways planning? The potential of a diagnostic problem-structuring approach," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 23-28.
    7. Jan Kwakkel & Marjolijn Haasnoot & Warren Walker, 2015. "Developing dynamic adaptive policy pathways: a computer-assisted approach for developing adaptive strategies for a deeply uncertain world," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 132(3), pages 373-386, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vizinho, André & Avelar, David & Fonseca, Ana Lúcia & Carvalho, Silvia & Sucena-Paiva, Leonor & Pinho, Pedro & Nunes, Alice & Branquinho, Cristina & Vasconcelos, Ana Cátia & Santos, Filipe Duarte & Ro, 2021. "Framing the application of Adaptation Pathways for agroforestry in Mediterranean drylands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    2. Judy Lawrence & Robert Bell & Adolf Stroombergen, 2019. "A Hybrid Process to Address Uncertainty and Changing Climate Risk in Coastal Areas Using Dynamic Adaptive Pathways Planning, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis & Real Options Analysis: A New Zealand App," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    3. Sierra C. Woodruff, 2016. "Planning for an unknowable future: uncertainty in climate change adaptation planning," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 139(3), pages 445-459, December.
    4. Pieter Bloemen & Tim Reeder & Chris Zevenbergen & Jeroen Rijke & Ashley Kingsborough, 2018. "Lessons learned from applying adaptation pathways in flood risk management and challenges for the further development of this approach," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 1083-1108, October.
    5. Meng Meng & Marcin Dabrowski & Dominic Stead, 2020. "Enhancing Flood Resilience and Climate Adaptation: The State of the Art and New Directions for Spatial Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-23, September.
    6. Mohanasundar Radhakrishnan & Hong Quan Nguyen & Berry Gersonius & Assela Pathirana & Ky Quang Vinh & Richard M. Ashley & Chris Zevenbergen, 2018. "Coping capacities for improving adaptation pathways for flood protection in Can Tho, Vietnam," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 29-41, July.
    7. Stanton, Muriel C. Bonjean & Roelich, Katy, 2021. "Decision making under deep uncertainties: A review of the applicability of methods in practice," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    8. Moallemi, Enayat A. & Elsawah, Sondoss & Ryan, Michael J., 2020. "Robust decision making and Epoch–Era analysis: A comparison of two robustness frameworks for decision-making under uncertainty," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    9. Yujin Jeong & Hyejin Jang & Byungun Yoon, 2021. "Developing a risk-adaptive technology roadmap using a Bayesian network and topic modeling under deep uncertainty," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 3697-3722, May.
    10. Maddalen Mendizabal & Nieves Peña & Hans Hooyberghs & Griet Lambrechts & Joel Sepúlveda & Saioa Zorita, 2021. "Lessons Learned from Applying Adaptation Pathways in Heatwave Risk Management in Antwerp and Key Challenges for Further Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-23, October.
    11. Bethany Robinson & Jonathan D. Herman, 2019. "A framework for testing dynamic classification of vulnerable scenarios in ensemble water supply projections," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 431-448, March.
    12. Marjolijn Haasnoot & Maaike Aalst & Julie Rozenberg & Kathleen Dominique & John Matthews & Laurens M. Bouwer & Jarl Kind & N. LeRoy Poff, 2020. "Investments under non-stationarity: economic evaluation of adaptation pathways," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 161(3), pages 451-463, August.
    13. Luciano Raso & Jan Kwakkel & Jos Timmermans, 2019. "Assessing the Capacity of Adaptive Policy Pathways to Adapt on Time by Mapping Trigger Values to Their Outcomes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-16, March.
    14. Fluixá-Sanmartín, Javier & Escuder-Bueno, Ignacio & Morales-Torres, Adrián & Castillo-Rodríguez, Jesica Tamara, 2020. "Comprehensive decision-making approach for managing time dependent dam risks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    15. Babaeian, Fariba & Delavar, Majid & Morid, Saeed & Srinivasan, Raghavan, 2021. "Robust climate change adaptation pathways in agricultural water management," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 252(C).
    16. Nicholas A. Cradock-Henry & Bob Frame & Benjamin L. Preston & Andy Reisinger & Dale S. Rothman, 2018. "Dynamic adaptive pathways in downscaled climate change scenarios," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 333-341, October.
    17. Matteo Giuliani & Andrea Castelletti, 2016. "Is robustness really robust? How different definitions of robustness impact decision-making under climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 409-424, April.
    18. Tina Comes & Bartel Van de Walle & Luk Van Wassenhove, 2020. "The Coordination‐Information Bubble in Humanitarian Response: Theoretical Foundations and Empirical Investigations," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(11), pages 2484-2507, November.
    19. Jan H. Kwakkel, 2019. "A generalized many‐objective optimization approach for scenario discovery," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(2), June.
    20. Mauricio Sánchez-Silva & Jack W. Baker, 2024. "Dynamic Infrastructure Systems: advancing sustainable urbanization and climate change," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 489-499, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:433-:d:197965. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.