Disrupting path dependency: Making room for Indigenous knowledge in river management

Scholars frequently identify how path dependency serves to constrain the process of climate adaptation and is a key feature of maladaptation. Most studies, however, centre on theoretical, rather than empirical-based discussions of what path dependency is, how it occurs, and what factors assist in breaking path dependency. This paper provides a case study for the creation, maintenance, and attempts to break path dependency within the management of rivers in the Rangitāiki Plains of Aotearoa New Zealand from the 1890s until 2017. We deploy a historical institutionalist theorising on path dependency and institutional arrangements, while also incorporating ideas from indigenous and postcolonial scholarship, which extends current understandings of the factors that contribute towards path dependency at a local level. Through archival research, we demonstrate how successive generations of government policies and actions directed with a specific goal and underpinned by the hegemonic social values created a profoundly path dependent system of managing rivers and flood events. Increased flood vulnerability is one of the direct consequences of the plethora of freshwater engineering interventions which were (and are still) undertaken on the Rangitāiki Plains over the last century. The foundation of this path dependency, we argue, resides with the processes of indigenous dispossession and the marginalisation of Māori values from environmental governance and policy. Efforts to break path dependency, therefore, involve the formal recognition of Māori governance, values, and knowledge within policies, and the translation of Māori values into tangible actions that seek to destabilise Western command-and control approaches to flood risk management.     

Critical adaptation to hurricanes in the Mexican Caribbean: Development visions, governance structures, and coping strategies

The need to tackle climate hazards and development efforts simultaneously is widely acknowledged. However, the possibility of alternative visions of development is seldom contemplated. Instead, adaptation research usually assumes monolithic claims about development constructed from the status quo of global capitalism. This paper outlines a critical approach to adaptation and explores the interplay between visions of development, governance structures, and strategies to cope with hurricanes in the Mexican Caribbean, a region at the ‘front line’ of both globalization and climatic extreme phenomena. Critical adaptation formulates the experiencing of hazards as essentially political and tied to contingent development paths, which may eventually become hegemonic. Over a hundred semi-structured and open interviews were held in Cancun, Mahahual, Playa del Carmen, and Tulum including academics, businesspeople, bureaucrats, journalists, non-governmental organizations and tourism workers in order to characterize development visions in the Mexican Caribbean. Findings show a prevalent hegemonic vision supporting mass tourism growth which encourages hurricane coping strategies based on effective evacuation and attracting investments for rapid economic recovery. The actual implementation of this vision increases social inequalities, degrades ecosystems, and amplifies overall exposure to extreme events. Mass tourism is enforced by undemocratic governance structures sustained by a coalition of government and tourism corporations (a government-capital bloc in Gramsci's sense). Some weak signs of counter-hegemony were identified in Playa del Carmen, Tulum and Mahahual. These isolated episodes of resistance might have triggered alternative coping strategies despite having little effect in altering the overall course of development. Further critical research is needed to unveil the socio-political foundations of development visions and their influence on capacities to cope with climatic extreme events.     

Adaptive environmental governance of changing social-ecological systems: Empirical insights from the Okavango Delta,Botswana

Adaptive management and related fields have theorized new governance strategies that embrace complexity and are able to respond effectively to changing and unpredictable biophysical dynamics. However, this body of work pays inadequate attention to important on-the-ground realities, including feasibility of implementation and the power dynamics embedded in multi-scalar systems of environmental governance. This paper presents findings from a research project on challenges to adaptive management in the variable wetland ecosystem of the Okavango Delta, Botswana. Many residents of this rural region rely on transitional agricultural practices, shifting between dryland and floodplain farming in response to dynamic precipitation and flooding patterns. Higher than average floods in 2009–2011 inundated many floodplain fields past the point of production, causing farmers to shift to the dryland for multiplem seasons. At the same time, the highly centralized Government of Botswana began to implement stricter regulations over floodplain resources, which stemmed in part from a new adaptive management plan developed for the region. As a result, many farmers felt pressured by the government to abandon transitional livelihood practices and to shift permanently to dryland agriculture even though many preferred to continue floodplain farming. This loss of a responsive livelihood strategy will likely result in decreased long-term adaptive capacity for many residents. Drawing on these findings, this paper advances the argument that if adaptive management is to become a viable option for communities in changing environments, more attention must be given to the role of unequal power relations in multi-scalar systems of environmental governance.     

What happens after climate change adaptation projects end: A community-based approach to ex-post assessment of adaptation projects

Over the last decade, hundreds of climate change adaptation projects have been funded and implemented. Despite the importance of these first-generation adaptation projects for establishing funders and implementors’ “best practices,” very little is known about how early adaptation projects have endured, to what ends, and for whom. In this article, I propose a community-based methodology for ex-post assessment of climate change adaptation projects. This methodology contributes to recognitional justice by asking the individuals and collectives tasked with sustaining adaptation initiatives to define adaptation success and what criteria for success should be assessed. I apply this subjective assessment approach in 10 communities across Ecuador that participated in an internationally funded adaptation project that concluded in 2015. My analysis draws together participatory mapping, walking interviews with local leaders, participant observation, and surveys with former project participants. The results highlight that even adaptation projects that were deemed highly successful at their closure have uncertain futures. I find that the sustainability mechanisms that were envisioned by project implementors have not functioned, and communities are shouldering the burden of reviving failing adaptation interventions. These findings highlight that the current model of episodic funding for climate change adaptation projects and evaluation processes needs to be revisited to acknowledge the long-term challenges faced by communities. This analysis also calls attention to the importance of ex-post assessment for adaptation projects and the potential of subjective assessment approaches for building more ontological and epistemological pluralism in understandings of successful climate change adaptation.