Advertisement

Policy Sciences

, Volume 51, Issue 2, pp 231–247 | Cite as

“Pioneers but not guinea pigs”: experimenting with climate change adaptation in French coastal areas

  • Nicolas RocleEmail author
  • Denis Salles
Research Article

Abstract

Uncertainty surrounding climate change has encouraged policy makers to engage in flexible and exploratory policies and forms of policy making. The article examines the potential of experimentation in devising coastal adaptation policies, taking into account its political dimensions. We analysed a multi-level experiment, funded by the French Ministry for the Environment from 2012 to 2015, where coastal municipalities volunteered to simulate the implementation of planned retreat as an adaptation strategy. Using insights from discursive institutionalism, we tracked developments throughout the experiment period. We highlight a combined process of governance experiment, allowing social innovation at local and regional scales, and a more strategic tool for the state, governing and steering local coastal policy with new instruments. We shed light on a particular policy entrepreneur (a public organization dealing with coastal management) playing at the intersection of these two forms, and in the interplay of policy scales. Although the experiment contributed to the innovation of legal and economic instruments and produced policy feedbacks in local planning and governance, learning capacities of the multi-scale architecture are still moderate to make planned retreat a reality in the near future. The conclusion considers performative and interpretive effects of policy experiments as further research questions to explore.

Keywords

Climate change adaptation Policy experimentation Discursive institutionalism Policy entrepreneur Boundary work 

Notes

Acknowledgements

For their helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper, the authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers as well as the participants of the INOGOV workshop held in March 2015 at the Finnish Environment Institute in Helsinki, Finland. The study has been carried out as part of the Cluster of Excellence COTE (Programme of the French National Research Agency, ANR-10-LABX-45) and funded by the Aquitaine Regional Council (PERMALA project, Grant no 201212004004).

References

  1. Abel, N., Gorddard, R., Harman, B., Leitch, A., Langridge, J., Ryan, A., et al. (2011). Sea level rise, coastal development and planned retreat: analytical framework, governance principles and an Australian case study. Environmental Science and Policy, 14(3), 279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armitage, D., Berkes, F., & Doubleday, N. (Eds.). (2007). Adaptive co-management: Collaboration, learning and multi-level governance. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
  3. Armitage, D., Marschke, M., & Plummer, R. (2008). Adaptive co-management and the paradox of learning. Global Environmental Change, 18, 86–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Béal, V., & Pinson, G. (2015). From the governance of sustainability to the management of climate change: Reshaping urban policies and central–local relations in France. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 17(3), 402–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bérard, Y. (2011). The making of climate change policy: Expertise, interplay of scales and territorialization in the case of France. Cahiers du Centre Emile Durkheim - Working Papers, 10, 1–28.Google Scholar
  6. Bergeron, H., Castel, P., & Nouguez, E. (2013). Éléments pour une sociologie de l’entrepreneur-frontière. Revue française de sociologie, 54(2), 263–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brunner, R. D., Steelman, T. A., Coe-Juell, L., Cromley, C. M., Edwards, C. M., & Tucker, D. W. (2005). Adaptive governance: Integrating science, policy, and decision making. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bulkeley, H., & Castán Broto, V. (2012). Government by experiment? Global cities and the governing of climate change. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 38(3), 361–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cash, D. W., Adger, W. N., Berkes, F., Garden, P., Lebel, L., Olsson, P., et al. (2006). Scale and cross-scale dynamics: Governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecology and Society, 11(2), 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Celliers, L., Rosendo, S., Coetzee, I., & Daniels, G. (2013). Pathways of integrated coastal management from national policy to local implementation: Enabling climate change adaptation. Marine Policy, 39, 72–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cloutier, G., Joerin, F., Dubois, C., Labarthe, M., Legay, C., & Viens, D. (2015). Planning adaptation based on local actors’ knowledge and participation: A climate governance experiment. Climate Policy, 15(4), 458–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cooper, J. A. G., & McKenna, J. (2008). Social justice in coastal erosion management: The temporal and spatial dimensions. Geoforum, 39, 294–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Curato, N., & Böker, M. (2016). Linking mini-publics to the deliberative system: A research agenda. Policy Sciences, 49(2), 173–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DATAR, (2010). Rapport complémentaire sur la mise en œuvre de la GIZC, France.Google Scholar
  15. Driessen, P., Leroy, P., & van Vierssen, W. (Eds.). (2010). From climate change to social change: Perspectives on science-policy interactions. Utrecht: International Books.Google Scholar
  16. Epstein, R. (2013). La rénovation urbaine. Démolition-reconstruction de l’Etat. Paris: Presses de Science Po.Google Scholar
  17. European Union (2004). Living with coastal erosion in Europe: Sediment and Space for Sustainability. Part 1, Major findings and Policy Recommendations of the EUROSION project. Directorate General Environment.Google Scholar
  18. Folke, C., Hahn, T., Olsson, P., & Norberg, J. (2005). Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 30, 441–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. GIP Littoral Aquitain (2009). Plan de développement durable du littoral aquitain 20072020.Google Scholar
  20. Hoffman, M. J. (2011). Climate governance at the crossroads: Experimenting with a global response after Kyoto. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Howlett, M. (2014). Why are policy innovations rare and so often negative? Blame avoidance and problem denial in climate change policy-making. Global Environmental Change, 29, 395–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Huitema, D., & Meijerink, S. (2010). Realizing water transitions. The role of policy entrepreneurs in water policy change. Ecology and Society, 15(2), 26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Huitema, D., Mostert, E., Egas, W., Moellenkamp, S., Pahl-Wostl, C., & Yalcin, R. (2009). Adaptive water governance: Assessing the institutional prescriptions of adaptive (co)management from a governance perspective and defining a research agenda. Ecology and Society, 14(1), 26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jordan, A. J., & Huitema, D. (2014). Policy innovation in a changing climate: Sources, patterns and effects. Global Environmental Change, 29, 387–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jordan, A. J., Huitema, D., Hildén, M., van Asselt, H., Rayner, T. J., Schoenefeld, J. J., et al. (2015). Emergence of polycentric climate governance and its future prospects. Nature Climate Change, 5(11), 977–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jordan, A., & Matt, E. (2014). Designing policies that intentionally stick: Policy feedback in a changing climate. Policy Sciences, 47(3), 227–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Keskitalo, C. (Ed.). (2010). Developing adaptation policy and practice in Europe: Multi-level governance of climate change. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  29. Laurent, B. (2011). Technologies of democracy: Experiments and demonstrations. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(4), 649–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. MEDDE. (2012). Stratégie nationale de gestion intégrée du trait de côte. Vers la relocalisation des activités et des biens. Paris: French Ministry for Sustainable Development and Energy.Google Scholar
  31. MEDDE. (2013). Evaluation à mi-parcours du Plan national d’adaptation au changement climatique (PNACC). Paris: French Ministry for Sustainable Development and Energy.Google Scholar
  32. MEDDTL. (2011). Plan national d’adaptation au changement climatique 2011–2015. Paris: French Ministry for Sustainable Development, Transport and Housing.Google Scholar
  33. Mermet, L., & Salles, D. (Eds.). (2015). Environnement: la concertation apprivoisée, contestée, dépassée?. Louvain-La-Neuve: De Boeck Supérieur.Google Scholar
  34. Nair, S., & Howlett, M. (2016). Meaning and power in the design and development of policy experiments. Futures, 76, 67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nicholson-Cole, S., & O’Riordan, T. (2009). Adaptive governance for a changing coastline: Science, policy and publics in search of a sustainable future. In N. W. Adger, I. Lorenzoni, & K. O’Brien (Eds.), Adapting to climate change. Thresholds, values, governance (pp. 368–383). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Olsson, P., Gunderson, L. H., Carpenter, S. R., Ryan, P., Lebel, L., Folke, C., et al. (2006). Shooting the rapids. Navigating transitions to adaptive governance of social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 11(1), 18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Parker, K. A. (1996). Pragmatism and environmental thought. In A. Light & E. Katz (Eds.), Environmental pragmatism (pp. 21–37). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Rocle, N. (2015). Gouverner l’adaptation au changement climatique sur (et par) les territoires. L’exemple des littoraux aquitain et martiniquais. Natures Sciences Sociétés, 23(3), 244–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sabel, C. F., & Zeitlin, J. (2012). Experimentalist Governance. In D. Levi-Faur (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of governance (pp. 169–183). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Salles, D. (2011). Responsibility based environmental governance. S.A.P.I.EN.S, 4(1), 1–7.Google Scholar
  41. Sanderson, I. (2002). Evaluation, policy learning and evidence-based policy making. Public Administration, 80(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schmidt, V. A. (2008). Discursive institutionalism: The explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 303–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schmidt, V. A. (2010). Taking ideas and discourses seriously: Explaining change through discursive institutionalism as the fourth ‘new institutionalism’. European Political Science Review, 2(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schmidt, V. A. (2013). Democracy and legitimacy in the European Union revisited: Input, output and ‘throughput’. Political Studies, 61(1), 2–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shackley, S., & Wynne, B. (1996). Representing uncertainty in global climate change science and policy: Boundary-ordering devices and authority. Science, Technology and Human Values, 21(3), 275–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. SOGREAH (2011). Stratégie de gestion du trait de côte en Aquitaine. Façade océanique. Site test Lacanau - Rapport no 1711979R1, GIP Littoral Aquitain.Google Scholar
  47. Termeer, C., Dewulf, A., Rijswick, H., Van Buuren, A., Huitema, D., Meijerink, S., et al. (2011). The regional governance of climate adaptation: A framework for developing legitimate, effective, and resilient governance arrangements. Climate Law, 2, 159–179.Google Scholar
  48. Urwin, K., & Jordan, A. (2008). Does public policy support or undermine climate change adaptation? Exploring policy interplay across different scales of governance. Global Environmental Change, 18(1), 180–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Voß, J., & Bornemann, B. (2011). The politics of reflexive governance: Challenges for designing adaptive management and transition management. Ecology and Society, 16(2), 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wong, P. P., Losada, I. J., Gattuso, J. P., Hinkel, J., Khattabi, A., McInnes, K. L., et al. (2014). Coastal systems and low-lying areas. In C. B. Field, V. R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, et al. (Eds.), Climate change 2014: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: Global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp. 361–409). Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IrsteaUR ETBXCestas Cedex 2France

Personalised recommendations