The early experiences of local climate change adaptation in Norwegian compared with that of local environmental policy, Local Agenda 21 and local climate change mitigation

Norwegian experiences on local environmental policy, Local Agenda 21 (LA21), local climate change mitigation (CCM) and local climate change adaptation (CCA) are compared in this article. One conclusion is that local CCA lacks the normative impetus for local action that LA21 and local CCM have had, thus making it harder to include CCA in serious policy-making at the local level of governance. Another conclusion is that local CCA like mainstream local environmental policy, but unlike that of LA21 and local CCM, is exclusively framed in a local context. By focusing only on the local effects of climate change taking place locally, and not looking into possible local effects of climate change taking place elsewhere, climate change vulnerability assessments in rich countries like Norway tend to conclude on far less dramatic consequences than what is up in the general climate change debate. This way of framing climate change vulnerabilities may prove to be counterproductive for the purpose of gaining support for climate change adaptation, as well as mitigation policies.

[1]  A. Mol Environmental Deinstitutionalization in Russia , 2009 .

[2]  Paul Ekins,et al.  Critical Review of the Application of the UKCIP Socio-Economic Scenarios (SES): Lessons Learnt and Future Directions , 2008 .

[3]  H. Westskog,et al.  Overcoming Barriers to Climate Change Adaptation—A Question of Multilevel Governance? , 2010 .

[4]  H. D. Coninck,et al.  Widening the scope of policies to address climate change: directions for mainstreaming , 2007 .

[5]  H. Bulkeley Down to Earth: Local government and greenhouse policy in Australia , 2000 .

[6]  T. Carter,et al.  Europe adapts to climate change: comparing national adaptation strategies , 2010 .

[7]  Carlo Aall,et al.  The Scope of Action for Local Climate Policy: The Case of Norway , 2007, Global Environmental Politics.

[8]  John Pendlebury,et al.  Place, identity and local politics: analysing partnership initiatives , 2003 .

[9]  Paul A. Sabatier,et al.  Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: a Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis , 1986, Journal of Public Policy.

[10]  A. Madanipour,et al.  Place, identity and local politics: analysing initiatives in deliberative governance , 2003 .

[11]  Eivind Hovden,et al.  Environmental policy integration: towards an analytical framework , 2003 .

[12]  Lars Otto Naess,et al.  Institutional adaptation to climate change: Flood responses at the municipal level in Norway , 2005 .

[13]  C. Aall,et al.  Data and processes linking vulnerability assessment to adaptation decision-making on climate change in Norway , 2006 .

[14]  Markku Wilenius,et al.  Defining alternative national-scale socio-economic and technological futures up to 2100: SRES scenarios for the case of Finland , 2004 .

[15]  G. Lindseth The Cities for Climate Protection Campaign (CCPC) and the framing of Local Climate Policy , 2004 .

[16]  Meinrad Bürer,et al.  Sustainable Communities in Europe , 2003 .