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

263

Chapter 10 · Synthesis

10.3.1.2 Holistic understanding A key message throughout all chapters is that adaptation planning needs to be cross-sectoral and to adopt a holistic approach. However, most adaptation work in the Barents area has been characterized by a sectoral approach (as noted above and Chapter 9). Processes for creating a holistic understanding are also relevant for identifying influences that may not be immediately apparent when a challenge is viewed from a narrow perspective.A shared holistic understanding is often a prerequisite for conflict resolution. Holistic approaches that also enable social learning can facilitate awareness about how current ways of framing a challenge may limit the attention needed to linkages across sectors, cumulative effects and connections between global and local processes. This is illustrated by studies in Norwegianmunicipalities where those that coordinated adaptation in a holistic and horizontal manner promoted long-term decisions, while those that followed a more sectorial approach often resulted in shorter- term measures (Rauken et al., 2015). Restructuring institutions to allow for holistic adaptation planning and the implementation of concrete adaptation actions has been forwarded as a long-term priority to strengthen adaptive capacity (Chapter 9). Co-management and ecosystem-based approaches to natural resources are being tested in several places, which could contribute to a holistic outlook. For example, co-management of national parks in northern Norway has been found to strengthen the adaptive capacity of resources users (Risvoll et al., 2014). 10.3.1.3 Conflict resolution Participatory approaches and deliberation of adaptation options often reveal preferences for adaptation outcomes. Sometimes a transformative change may be more feasible than adapting within the current system (Chapter 8). Participation as such must therefore be distinguished from the actual ability of different groups to influence decision-making, highlighting the recognition that conflicting interests and asymmetric power relations are embedded in all adaptation processes. Chapter 3 underscores the need for establishing better cooperation and communication between different knowledge producers and decision-makers.Such improved communication can be seen as an essential element of conflict resolution mechanisms that are needed for negotiating between actors with diverging priorities. There can also be trade-offs between adaptation measures taken at different scales (Pelling, 2010). Strengthening adaptive capacity in one areamay alsoweaken adaptive capacity in others. For example, although extractive industries can be a way for a municipality to secure jobs and tax revenue, the same activities may affect access to land that other resource users and sectors such as reindeer husbandry need in order to adapt. Another example is provided by fishers in northern Norway that land their catch in new communities due to the northward shift in commercial fish species. Although this brings new income to some municipalities, it also reduces income from fisheries resources elsewhere (Chapter 9). Cross-sectoral and holistic adaptationplanning is better equipped to foresee trade-offs and to minimize conflicts.In addition todevelopingprocesses that ensure communication across scales, there is a need for mechanisms

Chapter 3 suggests that social networks stretching over several communities of practice or institutions can function as meeting points for different knowledge producers and keepers (Wenger, 1998; Wenger et al., 2002). Adaptation to climate change can be described as a ‘wicked’ problem (Rittel and Webber, 1973). Typical of wicked problems is that they defy simple definitions and explanations, have many possible solutions, and assessing the effectiveness of suggested solutions is difficult. The larger context of social change within which climate change takes place makes the ‘wickedness’ even more apparent.While new knowledge can contribute to society’s ability to address a wicked problem, there is a need to overcome the tendency for knowledge communities to focus only on one sector at a time. Instead a cross-sectoral focus (Chapter 9) is increasingly and clearly called for when addressing wicked problems (for example agriculture, transport and finance sectors are involved when farmers develop adaptation strategies). In addition, there is a need for multidisciplinary networks and partnerships of knowledge producers and keepers as well as for ‘knowledge brokers’ as translators of knowledge between different fields of society, especially between research and policy-making communities (specifically highlighted in Chapter 3). Chapter 3 emphasizes the importance of extending knowledge networks to include decision-makers such as regional and local politicians with formal capacity to take adaptation decisions. Major efforts have indeed been made to find new ways of producing knowledge that can serve as starting points for such networks. For example, social networks have often been established around specific issues, such as water management. There is also a need to recognize some of the limitations of networking, including issues of decision-making power, where not everyone has an equal voice and access to resources. Another limitation relates to‘problem definition’within which such discussions often take place and where basic assumptions are not open for discussion.Moreover,many efforts to produce new knowledge and to involve societal actors are run as time- limited projects with poor integration into policy processes and practical planning at the municipal level. The challenge of creating long-term engagement is further hampered by the fact that other mandatory tasks have higher priority for municipalities. Engagement with the business sector faces similar challenges. Despite the shortcomings, opportunities to share knowledge, experience and priorities have the potential to enable social learning. An important component of such processes is collective negotiations, where participants conjointly negotiate understandings of their particular situation, which can enable a commonunderstanding of the problem,or at least an appreciation of different ways of seeing the issues at hand. Visionary and scenario workshops (mentioned in Chapter 3, explored in- depth in Chapter 5) can also function as arenas for sharing experience and knowledge that enable social learning and can build collaborations and networks.Participatory approaches that can bring together stakeholders and knowledge are essential for broader proactive adaptation initiatives.The process of discussing what current and future changes might mean for sectors, livelihoods and communities is itself a means of generating and strengthening adaptive capacity (Chapters 8 and 9).