Adaptation Actions for a Changing Arctic: Perspectives from the Barents Area

238

Adaptation Actions for a Changing Arctic: Perspectives from the Barents Area

Adaptation governance is ultimately about implementation, and this chapter shows the multifaceted interlinkages between the various dimensions with respect to adaptation processes, and the complexities involved in activating adaption strategies. Several conditions are required for successful adaptation. In fisheries management, for example, a combination of science, regulation and enforcement are necessary for addressing adaptive measures (Harsem and Hoel, 2013). To date, adaptation has been integrated into Swedish national government structure to a relatively small degree, which has meant adaptation options at the municipal level have often been voluntary and thus gained lower priority thanmandatory actions (Keskitalo, 2013; IPCC, 2014a; Andersson et al., 2015; see also Swedish Ministry of Environment and Energy, 2015). In Finland, implementation of programs, plans and strategies are more advanced in some fields than others. The aim of the 2022 implementation plan is that adaptation will be included as a standard practice in the planning and activities for different sectors and actors. This means that they will apply the tools needed to assess and manage climate risk; and research and development, education and communication will increase societal adaptive capacity, advance development of new innovative solutions and increase general awareness of issues related to climate change adaptation (Finnish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, 2014). For effective governance, there needs to be a clear distribution of responsibility for adaptation at different levels. At the Norwegian national level, a reallocation of responsibility for adaptation has taken place at the directorate level. The directorate responsible for adaptation was transferred from the Directorate for Civil Protection to the Environment Agency, which already has responsibility for mitigation. This has created a unclear allocation of responsibility for climate change adaptation between the two directorates, which has taken some time to resolve. Because adaptation is context-specific, the sub-national levels are also important for adaptation governance, and Norway is considered to have adaptation governance potential at the regional level that is yet to be realized (Hanssen et al., 2013; Dannevig and Aall, 2015). Giving the counties a stronger role in adaptation increases the potential for a more holistic approach.This is because the counties have a territorial focus, while the national ministries follow a sectoral approach (Hanssen et al., 2013). In Sweden, the future structure of climate change adaptation is currently being re-assessed, especially with regard to funding at the different levels and in clarifying the distribution of responsibilities among multiple actors (Andersson et al., 2015; Swedish Ministry of Environment and Energy, 2015). InRussia,as part of the decentralization reformafter the collapse of the Soviet Union many competences and responsibilities have been transferred from the federal level to the regional level. Implementation of climate and environmental policies are the joint responsibility of the federal authorities, and authorities of the federation subjects and their municipalities. Specific adaptive governance responsibilities of the regional authorities include developing legislation by federation subjects that addresses climate change; elaboration and realization of

from one Arctic state to another is a useful tool for developing adaptive governance (see Chapter 10). In the Barents Region, cooperation on adaptation has been an important way of enabling the development of adaptation strategies at the regional level.The effectiveness of social learning in the Barents area from joint regional programs is greater than unilateral efforts in the other northern regions of Russia (Nikitina, 2013). For example, the initiative to develop an integrated climate change adaptation strategy for Northwest Russia relies on active adaptation partnerships with the BEAC and Nordic partners. Dissemination of adaptive governance tools in Murmansk, the Archangelsk oblasts, the NAO, and the Karelia and Komi republics, is an example of a recent Russian activity as a result of the BEAC collaboration in the development of the climate strategy. A regional climate strategy, as well as local plans are both being developed for the Barents regions of Russia. Most multi-national initiatives involve a wide variety of partners. They include governments, indigenous peoples organizations,civil society organizations,multinational research networks and academic or research groups, and industry. Regional governments and local authorities usually play an important role in these projects. Some large-scale projects receive government funding as well as funding from other national and international research sources and international non-governmental organizations, such as WWF (Arctic Council, 2013a). One example of an effective partnership is that between Finland,Norway,Sweden and Russia (Archangelsk and Murmansk oblasts, Karelia) addressing climate change and water resources management. The aim of the project is to develop an integrated strategy on climate change adaptation in Northwest Russia, based on experience in the Arctic countries. In addition to new regional collaboration, cooperation is often already in place between border municipalities, such as that between Haparanda in Sweden and Tornio in Finland on water risk management (e.g. Keskitalo et al., 2013). Whether adaptation decisions address immediate or long-term strategies, they often depend on how adaptation is organized (Rauken et al., 2014). In municipalities where the approach is holistic and horizontal coordination is promoted, more long-term decisions are made, whereas a single department approach to adaptationwork ensures more short-term solutions (Rauken et al., 2014). In the Barents Region there are international policy and regulatory frameworks that affect the governance of adaptation; one example is the EU climate policy, which applies to Finland and Sweden (bothEUcountries),and to a lesser degree toNorway (amember of the European EconomicArea).These frameworks include the EUAdaptation Strategy,the EUFloods Directive and the EUWater Framework Directive.As Table 9.1 shows,all three countries have adopted adaptation legislation with implications for the actions of various actors. Hence, legislation is a tool for governing adaptation. For example, the Norwegian Planning and Building Act requires local governments to include risk of landslides and floods in their spatial planning.Tools designed to assist in this effort are the floodmaps produced by theNorwegian Water and Energy directorate, which include climate change projections, and the tables for sea-level rise and increase in storm surge produced by the Norwegian Directorate for Civil Protection,andmore recently theNorwegianMappingAuthority.