Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Methodology: Institutional Analysis and Adaptive Governance

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Adaptive Governance of Disaster

Part of the book series: Water Governance - Concepts, Methods, and Practice ((WGCMP))

  • 935 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter sets out the methodology; it operationalizes the theoretical framework and explains how the research was conducted. This research is qualitative, deductive, emerging comparative case study research, shaped by my experience in climate change adaptation research and participation in several research projects involving Latin American and Canadian researchers (see Sect. 1.6). The methodology is a combination of the multi-level institutional method adapted from Young et al. (2005), together with four additions (see Sect. 3.2).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Power is key in understanding the dynamics of institutions; it is also a cross-cutting theme of the ESGP informing the multi level institutional analysis (see Sect. 3.2). Power is the ability to achieve one’s aims in the face of opposition from others (Egan and Chorbajian 2005). Working together with others is a form of power. It is also the capacity for acting in such a manner as to control others’ responses (Dahl 1956) determined by the resources possessed and issues to be decided (Held 1987). Power is non-hierarchical and competitive (ibid.) and may be held by one entity, or is dispersed among many (Egan and Chorbajian 2005).

  2. 2.

    Policy instruments are used by state or non-state actors in order to influence behaviour and affect a certain response (Anderson 2010: 242). Policy instruments “are designed to cause people to do things, refrain from doing things, or continue doing things they would otherwise not do” (Anderson 2010: 242).

References

  • Adger WN (2000) Social and ecological resilience: are they related? Prog Hum Geogr 24:347–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison EH, Ellis F (2001) The livelihoods approach and management of small-scale fisheries. Mar Policy 25:377–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson JE (2010) Public policymaking: an introduction. Cengage Learning, Hampshire

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris C (1999) On organizational learning. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin R, Cave M, Lodge M (2011) Understanding regulation: theory, strategy and practice, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bebbington A (1999) Capitals and capabilities: a framework for analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World Dev 27(12):2021–2044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bemelmans-Videc M, Rist L, Vedung RC (eds) (1998) Carrots, sticks, and sermons: policy instruments and their evaluation. Transaction Publisher, Inc, New Brunswick, p 30

    Google Scholar 

  • Biermann, F., Betwill, M.M., Gupta, J., Norichika K., Lebel, L., Liverman, D., Schropeder, H., Siebenhuner, B., with contributions from Conca, K., da Costa Ferreira, L., Bharat, D., Tay, S., Zondervan R. (2009). Earth system governance: people, places and the planet. Science and implementation plan of the Earth system governance project. Earth System Governance Report 1. IHDP Report 20. The Earth System Governance Project, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  • Botterill LC, Chapman B (2009) A revenue contingent loan instrument for agricultural credit with particular reference to drought relief. Aust J Lab Econ 12(2):181–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruns BR, Meinzen-Dick R (1995) Frameworks for water rights: an overview of institutional options. In: Bruns BR, Ringler C, Meinzen-Dick R (eds) Water rights reform; lessons for institutional design. International Food Policy Research Unit, Washington DC. (ISBN 0896297497) available at www.loc.gov/catdir/toc/ecip062/2005030412.html. Accessed 3 July 2015

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl R (1956) A preface to democratic theory. Chicago University Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • de Haan L, Zoomer A (2005) Exploring the frontier of livelihoods research. Dev Chang 36(1):27–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Haan LJ (2000) Globalization, localization and sustainable livelihood. Eur Soc Rural Sociol 40(3):339–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egan D, Chorbajian LA (2005) Power, a critical reader. Pearson, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabricius C, Cundhill G (2014) Learning in adaptive management: insights from published practice. Ecol Soc 19(1):29–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrido A, Gomez-Ramos A (2009) Risk management instruments supporting drought planning and policy. In: Iglesias A, Cancelliere A, White D, Garrote L, Cubillo F (eds) Coping with drought risk in agriculture and water supply systems, drought management and policy development in the Mediterranuean. Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaeser E (2001) The formation of social capital. Isuma 2(1):34–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Gootaert C, Narayan D, Veronica NJ, Woolcock M (2004) Measuring social capital. An integrated questionnaire. World Bank Working Paper No. 18

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta J et al (2010) The adaptive capacity wheel; a method to assess the inherent characteristics of institutions to enable the adaptive capacity of society. Environ Sci Pol 13:459–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta J, ven der Grijp N, Kuik O (eds) (2013) Climate change, forests and REDD: lessons for institutional design. Routledge Publishers

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta J, Bergsma E, Termeer CJAM, Biesbroek GR, van den Brink M, Jong P, Klostermann JEM, Meijerink S, Nooteboom (2014). The adaptive capacity of institutions in the spatial planning, water, agriculture and nature sectors in the Netherlands. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, pp 1–21. doi:10.1007/s11027-014-9630-z

  • Gupta J, Bersgsma E, Termeer CJAM, Biesbroek GR, van den Brink M, Jong P, Klostermann JEM, Meijerink S, Nooteboom S (2015) The adaptive capacity of institutions in the spatial planning, water, agriculture, and nature sectors in the Netherlands. Mitig Adapt Strategy Glob Change. doi:10.1007/s11027-014-9630-z

  • Held D (1987) Models of democracy. Stanford University Press, Standford

    Google Scholar 

  • Henstra D (2015). The tools of climate adaptation policy: analysing instruments and instrument selection. Climate Policy. doi:10.1080/14693062.2015.1015946

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2001) Climate change 2001: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability technical summary, a report of working group II of the intergovernmental panel on climate change 2001. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, WMO and UNEP, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Khajuria A, Ravindranath NH (2012) Climate change vulnerability assessment: approaches dpsir framework and vulnerability index. J Earth Sci Clim Chang 3(1):1–6

    Google Scholar 

  • Klostermann J, Bergsma E, Gupta J, Jong P (2010) Applying the adaptive capacity wheel on the background document of the content analysis. ICI2 Institutions for Adaptation, Working Document 5. IVM Institute for Environmental Studies. Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Leach M, Mearns R, Scoones I (1999) Environmental entitlements: dynamics and institutions in community-based Natral resource management. World Dev 27(2):225–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McManus P (2009) Environmental Regulation. Elsevier Ltd., Australia

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Moser S (2009) Governance and the art of overcoming barriers to adaptation. 3:31–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Moser C, Satterthwaite D (2008) Towards pro-poor adaptation to climate change in the urban centres of low-and middle-income countries. Climate change and cities discussion paper 3. In: Climate change and cities discussion paper 3. Washington, DC, Global Urban Research Centre, IIED

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson GC, Bennett E, Berhe AA, Cassman K, DeFries RT, Dobermann A, Dobson A, Janetos A, Levy M, Marco D, Nakicenovic N, O’Neill B, Norgaard R, Petschel-Held G, Ojima D, Pingali P, Watson R, Zurek M (2006) Anthropogenic drivers of ecosystem change: an overview. Ecol Soc 11(2):29. Available at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art29/. Accessed 13 Apirl 2015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (1994) Managing the environment: the role of economic instruments. OECD, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Plummer R (2009) The adaptive co-management process: an initial synthesis of representative models and influential variables. Ecol Soc 14(2):24. Available at: url http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art24/. Accessed 13 Apr 2015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollner J (2012) Financial and fiscal instruments for catastrophe risk management addressing losses from flood hazards in Central Europe. The World Bank, Washington DC

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Portes A (1998) Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annu Rev Sociol 24(1):1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera J (2002) Assessing the voluntary environmental initiative in the developing world: the Costa Rican certification for sustainable tourism. Policy Sci 35:333–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavins RN (2003) Experience with market-based environmental policy instruments. In: Mäler KG, Vincent J (eds) Handbook of environmental economics. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 355–435

    Google Scholar 

  • Sterner T (2003) Policy instruments for environmental and natural resources mangement. Resources for the Future Press, co-published with World Bank and Swedish International Development cooperation Agency (Sida), Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • UNCCD (2013) Background document. The economics of desertification, land degradation and drought: methodologies and analysis for decision-making. Prepared for 2nd scientific conference, April 9–12, 2013 Bonn, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank (1997) Five years after Rio: innovations in environmental policy. Environmentally sustainable development studies and monograph series, no. 18. World Bank, Washington, DC, p 6

    Google Scholar 

  • Young OR et al. (2005) Science plan. Environmental change. International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change (IHDP), Bonn

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Johnson-Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy, University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada

    Margot A. Hurlbert

Authors
  1. Margot A. Hurlbert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hurlbert, M.A. (2018). Methodology: Institutional Analysis and Adaptive Governance. In: Adaptive Governance of Disaster. Water Governance - Concepts, Methods, and Practice. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57801-9_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation