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

47

3. Local and regional perspectives on adaptation

Coordinating lead author : Monica Tennberg Lead authors : Brigt Dale, Elena Klyuchnikova, Annette Löf, Vladimir Masloboev, Annette Scheepstra Contributing authors : Asta Kietäväinen, Päivi Naskali, Arja Rautio

needs in the region, despite considerable uncertainties (see Chapters 4 and 6). The problem is that the knowledge may be limited in terms of issues and areas covered,andmay be difficult to compare anduse.This chapter focuses on two issues: howmuch is known about local and regional perspectives on adaptation issues, and how to enhance knowledge production and better communicate existing knowledge.Knowledge,as expressed here, is based on ideas typical in social sciences: that knowledge is socially constructed,that it is situated in time and space,and that it is developed for a specific purpose.Based on a pragmatist view of knowledge, everyone has knowledge about changes and their impacts in terms of facts, values, meanings, skills, and practical and technical knowledge. But to create effective, timely and responsible adaptation governance requires co-production of knowledge in which different knowledge producers, keepers and users communicate with each other (see Chapter 9). In the Barents area, such processes are only just starting. After a brief introduction,this chapter discusses co-production of knowledge and its challenges at the local level (Section 3.2) and regional level (Section 3.3), followed by observations on the science-policy interface (Section 3.4) and gaps in knowledge (Section 3.5). Although the focus of this chapter is local and regional perspectives of change, impacts and adaptation in the Barents area in general, many of the examples used here concern climate change adaptation. This reflects current trends in research. According to Ford and Furgal (2009), research has only recently begun to conceptualize the complexities of the human–environment interactions that shape vulnerability to a changing climate.The starting point for this chapter is the idea that knowledge is essential for the governance of adaptation: it frames the issues, relations and agencies to be governed. Production of knowledge through projects, assessments, workshops and panels is an important feature of adaptation governance (Bauer et al., 2011). Governance incorporates vertical interplay between levels (e.g. municipal, county, national) as well as horizontal interplay between different hierarchies, networks and markets. Non-state actors who often have valuable knowledge of local or sectoral issues, may play a crucial role in implementing adaptation policies and measures (Bauer et al., 2011). In addition to adaptation strategies, plans and programs at the national level, adaptation may be advanced locally by municipalities and other non-state actors, as well as at the county/regional level in cross-border cooperation. The role of researchers, decision-makers and stakeholders may be informative, consultative or interactional. Knowledge and power are closely connected in adaptation governance, but as concluded by Vink et al. (2013) in a review of literature concerning knowledge and power in climate-related adaptation governance, the form of these connections is not yet clear (“ ambiguously understood ”). Adaptation is seen mainly as a complex system of regulatory frameworks and technical

3.1 Introduction Comprehensive, relevant and usable knowledge is a basic requirement for the development of adaptation actions. For the Barents area (see Chapter 1 for a definition of ‘Barents area’), the main issue is not a lack of knowledge, because there is a vast amount of knowledge on the changes, impacts, and adaptation • • Establishing region-specific ‘communities of practice’ involving many types of knowledge producer, user and keeper, is amore interactional approach to adaptation governance than the traditional, informative and consultative approaches used to date . Incorporating Russian actors in these networks will ensure better coverage of sub-regions and bring in new, so far mostly neglected stakeholders. Key messages • • Owing to its complexity it is a challenge to represent the many diverse local and regional perspectives on issues, opportunities and concerns about change in the Barents area . Rather than generating a simple, coherent overview, examples are used to illustrate the range of perspectives present. • • Research on local and regional perspectives takes three forms: community studies, indigenous knowledge and stakeholder approaches . The current state of knowledge in and about the region is mostly based on information from particular economic sectors, nationally-organized research, and economically-defined stakeholders. There is a lack of region-specific information on adaptation issues for different age groups, for gender and for other social groupings, including those in non-traditional, urban contexts. • • Community-based studies in the Nordic countries have identified a widespread lack of engagement in the development of adaptation governance, for climate change as well as for other long-term concerns . For many stakeholders, this is partly due to a lack of capacity to participate in and influence adaptation discussions. Stakeholder research currently focuses on extractive industries, and on traditional and industrial land-use practices with a bias towards male-dominated livelihoods. • • There is currently no regionally-constructed knowledge base for adaptation in the Barents area . Framing issues in regional terms is difficult. Developing new types of partnership and network would help in the development of regionally-based knowledge.The present assessment is a step in this direction.