Many countries are or have been formulating their adaptation strategies. And every country puts its own accents. Most of the countries re-create regional climate models, derived from the IPCC-scenarios. In the strategies the same issues are raised:

shifting nature through higher temperatures, the need for alternative crops in agriculture, the attention for surpluses of water or droughts and risk management. The differences between strategies are on the specific geographical situation and the involvement and cooperation between government, science and stakeholders. In some cases the government is the central steering unit and produces its own documents, while in other countries a strong cooperative process is chosen with a strong position of scientific research and stakeholder involvement. It seems that a cooperative approach in combination with a small and selective central steering committee of scientists and policymakers could be the best way to success. Most strategies are not putting a lot of effort in communication. It seems that first of all the content is to be researched extensively, before communication can start. No strategy starts with a chapter on how to get the message across.

Finally, the spatial challenge remains. In almost no strategy the field of spatial planning is a central mean to realise the adaptation strategy. This is a bit strange, because most of the thematic issues and sectors described in the strategies are spatially or do have spatial impact. The other way around, the spatial conditions can be created in order to facilitate or realise the adaptation measures.

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment