Climate Change Frames in Public Health and Water Resource Management: Towards Intersectoral Climate Change Adaptation

Part of the Climate Change Management book series (CCM)


Effective and appropriate climate change adaptation requires a greater understanding and appreciation of the diverse ways in which the issue of climate change is constructed and understood. The ways in which an issue is framed should not be overlooked in interdisciplinary and intersectoral efforts given that implicit and divergent frames often impede the processes of knowledge integration and collaboration and therefore, can hinder adaptation processes. This study used frame analysis to identify and summarize the climate change frames in public health and water resource management texts. Five frames emerged from the analysis of the public health texts: Preventing direct and indirect health impacts, promoting health and sustainability, climate change as a complex problem, strengthening the evidence base, and health equity in a changing climate. Three frames emerged from the analysis of water resource management texts: planning and decision-making under uncertainty, managing multiple drivers of water insecurity, and understanding impacts on complex systems. Drawing on insights from this work, we assert that the notion of frames and the process of frame-reflection are useful tools to foster integration and intersectoral collaboration and an opportunity to foster enabling conditions for climate change adaptation.


Climate change Adaptation Framing Public health Water resource management Interdisciplinary Intersectoral collaboration 


  1. Adger WN (2003) Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climate change. Econ Geogr 79:387–404. doi: 10.1111/j.1944-8287.2003.tb00220.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barsugli J, Vogel J, Kaatz L (2012) Two faces of uncertainty: climate science and water utility planning methods. J Water Resour Plan Manag 138(5):389–395. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000188 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benford RD, Snow DA (2000) Framing processes and social movements: an overview and assessment. Annu Rev Sociol 26(1):611–639. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blöschl G, Montanari A (2010) Climate change impacts—throwing the dice? Hydrol Process 24(3):374–381. doi: 10.1002/hyp.7574 Google Scholar
  5. Blöschl G, Ardoin-Bardin S, Bonell M (2007) At what scales do climate variability and land cover change impact on flooding and low flows? Hydrol Process 21(9):1241–1247. doi: 10.1002/hyp.6669 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown VA, Harris JA, Russell J (eds) (2010) Tackling wicked problems through the transdisciplinary imagination. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Burton I (2004) Climate change and the adaptation deficit. In: Schipper E, Burton I (eds) Earthscan reader on adaptation to climate change. Earthscan, London, pp 88–95Google Scholar
  8. Campbell-Lendrum D, Corvalán C, Neira M (2007) Global climate change: implications for international public health policy. Bull World Health Organ 85(3):235–237. doi: 10.2471/BLT.06.039503 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Connor G, Gallopin G, Hellmuth M, Rast W (2009) Climate change and possible futures. World water development report—water in a changing world. UNESCO, Geneva, pp 68–76Google Scholar
  10. Cornell S (2010) Brokering interdisciplinarity cross the physical and social sciences. In: Bhaskar R (ed) Interdisciplinarity and climate change: transforming knowledge and practice for our global future. Routledge, New York, NY, pp 116–134Google Scholar
  11. De Boer J, Wardekker JA, van der Sluijs JP (2010) Frame-based guide to situated decision-making on climate change. Glob Environ Change 20(3):502–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dessai S, Browne A, Harou JJ (2013) Introduction to the special issue on “adaptation and resilience of water systems to an uncertain changing climate.” Water Resour Manage 27:943–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dewulf A (2013) Contrasting frames in policy debates on climate change adaptation. WIREs Clim Change 4:321–330. doi: 10.1002/wcc.277 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dewulf A, Francois G, Pahl-Wostl C (2007) A framing approach to cross-disciplinary research collaboration: experiences from a large-scale research project on adaptive water management. Ecol Soc 12(2):14.
  15. Dupuis J, Knoepfel P (2013) The adaptation policy paradox: the implementation deficit of policies framed as climate change adaptation. Ecol Soc 18(4):31. doi: 10.5751/ES-05965-180431 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Entman R (1993) Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. J Commun 43(4):51–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Field C, Barros V, Dokken D (2014) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Volume I: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Forastiere F (2010) Climate change and health: a challenge for epidemiology and public health. Int J Public Health 55(2):83–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Frumkin H, Hess J, Luber G, Malilay J, McGeehin M (2008) Climate change: the public health response. Am J Public Health 98(3):435–445. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.119362 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gober P (2013) Getting outside the water box: the need for new approaches to water planning and policy. Water Resour Manag 27(4):955–957. doi: 10.1007/s11269-012-0222-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gray B (2003) Framing in environmental disputes. In: Lewicki R, Gray B, Elliot M (eds) Making sense of intractable environmental conflicts: concepts and cases. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 11–34Google Scholar
  22. GWP (2009) Perspectives on water and climate change adaptation: introduction, summaries and key messages. GWP, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  23. Hajer M (1995) The politics of environmental discourse: ecological modernization and the policy process. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  24. Hrynkow S (2008) Climate change and health research: time for teamwork. Environ Health Perspect 116(11):A470. doi: 10.1289/ehp.12150 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Huttenen S, Hilden M (2013) Framing the controversial: geoengineering in academic literature. Sci Commun 36(1):3–29. doi: 10.1177/0963662513475966 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. International Water Association (2012) Climate change and the water industry: practical responses and action. Report No.: 10. Co-operative programme on water and climate. International Water Association, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Jensen G (2009) Taking the reins of the white horse of climate change. J Epidemiol Community Health 63(4):269–270. doi: 10.1136/jech.2008.083691 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kiang K, Graham S, Farrant B (2013) Climate change, child health and the role of the paediatric profession in under-resourced settings. Trop Med Int Health 18(9):1053–1056. doi: 10.1111/tmi.12153 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kiem A, Austin E (2013) Disconnect between science and end-users as a barrier to climate change adaptation. Climate Res 58:29–41. doi: 10.3354/cr01181 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kolb D (1984) Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  31. Künzli N, Kaiser R, Medina S et al (2000) Public-health impact of outdoor and traffic-related air pollution: a European assessment. Lancet 356(9232):795–801. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02653-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McMichael AJ, Wilcox B (2009) Climate change, human health, and integrative research: a transformative imperative. Ecohealth 6(2):163–164. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1007887107 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Moser S, Jeffress Williams S, Boesch D (2012) Wicked challenges at land’s end: managing coastal vulnerability under climate change. Annu Rev Environ Resour 37:51–78. doi: 10.1146/annurev-environ-021611-135158 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Neira M, Bertollini R, Campbell-Lendrum D, Heymann D (2008) The year 2008: a breakthrough year for health protection from climate change? Am J Prev Med 35:424–425. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.08.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. O’Brien K, Eriksen S, Nygaard L, Schjolden A (2007) Why different interpretations of vulnerability matter in climate change discourses. Clim Pol 7(1):73–88. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2007.9685639 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pahl-Wostl C (2006) The importance of social learning in restoring the multifunctionality of rivers and floodplains. Ecol Soc 11(1):10.
  37. Parkes M, Charron D, Sánchez A (2012) Better together: field-building networks at the frontiers of ecohealth research. In: Charron D (ed) Ecohealth research in practice: innovative applications of an ecosystem approach to health. International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, pp 231–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Porter K, Hulme M (2013) The emergence of the geoengineering debate in the UK print media: a frame analysis. Geogr J 179(9):342–355. doi: 10.1111/geoj.12003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rogers P (2008) Coping with global warming and climate change. J Water Resour Plan Manag 134(3):203–204. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2008)134:3(203) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rolfe G, Freshwater D, Jasper M (2001) Critical reflection for nursing and the helping professions: a user’s guide. Palgrave, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  41. Schön D, Rein M (1994) Frame reflection: toward the resolution of intractable policy controversies. Basic Books, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  42. Singh J (2012) Why human health and health ethics must be central to climate change deliberations. PLoS Med 9(6):e1001229. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001229 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Stott R (2012) Contraction and convergence: the best possible solution to the twin problems of climate change and inequity. BMJ 344:e1765–e1765. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e1765 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sweet M (2011) Action on climate change requires strong leadership from the health sector. Health Promot J Austr 22(4):415–417Google Scholar
  45. Tesch R (1990) Qualitative research: analysis types and software tools. Routledge, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  46. Van Gorp B, Vercruysse T (2012) Frames and counter-frames giving meaning to dementia: a framing analysis of media content. Soc Sci Med 74(8):1274–1281. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.12.045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Verloo M, Maloutas M (2005) Differences in the framing of gender inequality as a policy problem across Europe. Greek Re Soc Res 117(B1):3–10Google Scholar
  48. Walpole S, Rasanathan K, Campbell-Lendrum D (2009) Natural and unnatural synergies: climate change policy and health equity. Bull World Health Organ 87(10):799–801. doi: 10.2471/BLT.09.067116 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Warren F, Lemmen D (eds) (2014) Canada in a changing climate: sector perspectives on impacts and adaptation. Government of Canada, Ottawa. Accessed 27 Feb 2015
  50. Wise R, Fazey I, Stafford Smith M, Park E, Eakin C, Campbell B (2013) Reconceptualising adaptation to climate change as part of pathways of change and response. Glob Environ Chang 28:325–336. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.12.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Health SciencesLakehead UniversityThunder BayCanada
  2. 2.School of Health SciencesUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaPrince GeorgeCanada
  3. 3.School of Public Health and Health SystemsUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  4. 4.Department of Earth SciencesSimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada
  5. 5.Faculty of Health SciencesSimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada

Personalised recommendations