Stakeholder Engagement to Increase Adaptive Capacity

Technical Paper 2

Stakeholder engagement to increase adaptive capacity

Cecilia Conde and Kate Lonsdale

Abstract

This paper describes the benefits of stakeholder involvement to enhance adaptive capacity in climate change and climate variability studies. For this purpose, some participatory techniques are described. The key questions are: why and how should stakeholders be involved in the process?’ How can they make the process of enhancing adaptive capacity sustainable?

1. Introduction

Adaptation is a process by which strategies to moderate, cope or even take advantage of the consequences of climatic events are enhanced, developed and implemented. Adaptation occurs through decisions made between individuals, groups and organisations and their networks. All these groups need to be brought together if we are to understand how these decisions are made and to identify the most appropriate forms of adaptation. Understanding the history of such adaptation and decision-making processes is fundamental to characterizing current and possible future vulnerability. This process can culminate in the implementation of adaptation policies and in the formation of an “adaptation community”, that provides the momentum to keep the process going into the future.

The term “stakeholder” in climate change studies refers to policy makers, scientists, administrators, managers in the economic sectors most at risk, including both public and private enterprises and community members, who will act together to develop a joint understanding of the issues and create solutions to preserve and enhance their adaptive capacity. The definition used here is “Stakeholders are those who have an interest in a particular decision, either as individuals or as representatives of a group. This includes people who influence a decision, or can influence it, as well as those affected by it” Hemmati, M. (2002).

The purpose of this technical paper is to give guidance on why and how to design a stakeholder involvement strategy. Although previous research in climate change has tended to focus on direct climate change impact approaches, the Adaptation Policy Framework (APF) sees stakeholders as fundamental to the process of adaptation as it is they who will sustain the process of enhancing adaptive capacity and become part of the “adaptation community”. Each of the five stages of the APF involves stakeholders in a number of ways, and in this technical paper we suggest an overall strategy and techniques that might be suitable for engaging stakeholders at each of these stages. Not all the identified stakeholders will participate in all the stages, but, since adaptation is not a linear process, they might enter into the process again at a later stage.

2.Why Engage Stakeholders?

Through listening to the views and experience of the other people involved in the process, stakeholders can build a shared understanding of the issues. Priority areas for action emerge that take account of everyone’s perceptions. This process builds mutual understanding and trust between the groups and individuals involved and is empowering as solutions are worked out jointly. If each participant is seen as having a valid view of what is happening and what needs to be done to solve the problem, this process can encourage longer-term capacity building by developing pathways for coordinated action that can continue into the future.

In Box 1 an example of the importance of stakeholders’ involvement in climate studies and of their possible role in the different steps of the research, can be seen.

Box 1a. Mexico Study Case (1997 – 1998), first year

For projects that focus on developing adaptation policies to climate, stakeholder involvement is crucial, as it is they who “have the current and past experience of vulnerability and adaptation to climate variability and extremes” (Project: Capacity Building for Stage II Adaptation to Climate Change in Central America, Mexico and Cuba). Together they can assess the viability of adaptive measures, as they are able to “integrate” the social, economic and cultural context in order to perform that evaluation. They possess the local, historical and traditional knowledge related to the climate and the environment. The research community acts as a bridge between the stakeholders that provide scientific or factual information and those that provide local knowledge and experience.

Box 2

The consequences of climate change for developing countries described in IPCC Third Assessment Report, (IPCC; WGII, 2001) suggest that the social and material costs will be enormous if nothing is done in advance to raise awareness and encourage people to work together to find solutions.

3.Stakeholder approaches

There are a vast number of approaches to stakeholder engagement. The choice of which to use depends on the complexity of the issues to be discussed and the purpose of the engagement, both of which will be determined in the initial stages of the project. There is no ‘one size fits all’ formula but a number of tools and techniques that can be applied to suit a given situation.

Stakeholder engagement approaches vary from very passive interactions, where the stakeholders are little more than recipients of information, to ‘self mobilisation’, where the stakeholders themselves initiate and design the process. The level of participation used can be illustrated using the analogy of a ladder or steps (an example is given in figure 1). Engagement closer to self-mobilisation is not necessarily ‘better’ because it is more participatory as different levels of participation are appropriate for different stages of the project and given the experience of the research team. However, it is important that the stakeholders understand how they are being involved, how the information they provide will be used and whether they have any power to influence decisions.

It is also important to consider the scope of the issues you are asking the stakeholders to participate in. An engagement process may be given considerable significance but stakeholders may only be asked to consider a small range of issues (Thomas, 1996). When designing the engagement you need to consider the scale and significance of the issues under consideration, the stage at which the engagement is occurring in terms of the policy making process, what decisions have already been taken and what positions are already fixed. It may be that the engagement, though very participatory in itself, is not effective because the scope is too constrained and there is no opportunity for developing creative solutions.

4.The Team Structure

It is envisaged that for the type of climate change projects described in the APF the team of people that will initiate and lead the stakeholder identification and involvement will be made up of one or more team leaders, preferably with experience of climate change projects. The group should include individuals with experience of vulnerability and adaptation (V & A), climate and socio-economic research. This inter-disciplinary team should also include a facilitator who, with the team’s guidance, will design and run the stakeholder process. The facilitator has a key role in the stakeholder engagement process (see Box 4).

Box 4

1. A Stakeholder Strategy

The next part of the paper suggests a strategy for stakeholder engagement in the APF. The strategy is based on the five steps outlined in technical paper one. The team should review several participatory techniques, and at each step of the process decide which they feel comfortable using. The facilitator can offer advice as to which would be appropriate for a given task. (Examples in Annex 1).

Step 1. The scope of the project

Who is involved?

The scope will be determined by the project team (see point 4 above). This project team will propose the region and/or sector of research, based on the results of previous national studies and on the advice and needs of decision makers and regional experts. The results of this first stage should be made widely available to regional NGOs and other interested groups for comments. This helps to ensure transparency and build trust in the process.

Process for Step 1

In Step 1 the project team performs a brief review of the current national policies for climate change (i.e. UNFCCC National Communications), for development and for the environment as a way to identify national priorities and the institutions which would be engaged in the project. As most developing countries are signatures to other multilateral environmental agreements (e.g. conventions on biodiversity and desertification) these must also be taken into account in the project design as climate change adaptation policies should be integrated with those efforts. From this review process, the project team can start to build up a directory of national experts and decision makers who are already working in this area and who could assist the project. It is also useful also to identify the international agencies and projects (governmental or NGOs) whose work is related to adaptation and who could be a source of information and support. National government agencies related to climate change, environment and development should be encouraged to read and comment on these initial reports. It is important to include these people at an early stage of the project. Being familiar with the project from the beginning means that they are more likely to take note of the conclusions at the end of the project.

The stakeholders have direct but different interests in the predicted climate impacts and vulnerability assessments (some examples of the diverse interests of the different stakeholder groups are given in Table 1). They also have an important role to play in the development of adaptation policies.

Table 1. Example of potential stakeholders, their influence (international, national, regional or local) and their access to human and material resources (after Y. Aguilar, 2001).

Stakeholders / Interests
Global Environmental Facility (GEF) / to develop internal technical expertise on adaptation, through the implementation of an adaptation project based on an innovative methodological approach
to develop internal financing criteria and procedures on adaptation programs
National government and ministries (e.g. agriculture, health, environment, education);
Early warning systems and disaster prevention institutions / to honour international agreements and participate in international negotiations on regional programs
to implement sectoral policies, programs and plans
to improve local human development
to build capacity and develop effective mechanisms to solve local problems
to reduce the risk of local, climate related damage
Local governments / to solve local problems
to develop local capacity
to finance local plans and programs
to strengthen institutions
to prevent climate damage and disasters
National/regional research centres and universities / to contribute to solving national and regional climate problems affecting vulnerable human systems and ecosystems
to build permanent national and regional capacity in climate change
to develop national and regional approaches with a developing country perspective to address climate change
Local environmental/
development NGOs / to facilitate the organization of local people and identify action to fulfill local needs.
to finance local development programs and projects.
to develop technical and financial capacity
to strengthen local institutions
Local communities/people affected by climate risks and damages / to increase or preserve incomes
to improve or preserve health, education and housing
to improve or preserve land and aquatic productivity
to decrease local vulnerability to climatic risks
to improve or preserve adaptive capacity to climatic risks.

Many countries have already undertaken what are called the first generation impact, vulnerability and adaptation (V&A) studies. In addition to this, some countries have undertaken more in depth projects aimed at preventing or ameliorating climate impacts and risks. This new generation of V&A studies has three new aspects: the development of a more stakeholder or “bottom–up” approach and more profound multi-sectoral and socio economic analysis. This paper describes the first of these issues. Together, the three of them aim to support the integration of adaptation into other environmental and development policies.

• Step 2. Assessing current vulnerability

Who is involved?

Everyone who is affected by the foreseen impacts as well as those who have a role in influencing decisions about access to resources required for adaptation.

Process in Step 2:

Adaptation to climate change is a complex issue and it is important to start by developing a common understanding amongst the stakeholders of what is meant by the words used so that shared definitions can be developed and the scope of the issues can be identified. For example, the meaning of the words ‘vulnerability’, ‘adaptation’, ‘coping range’ and ‘climatic hazard’ should be discussed and agreed. Having this shared understanding is the first step to finding realistic solutions and building capacity.

Stakeholders should have the opportunity to talk about their previous experience of adaptation and the coping strategies they have used in the past. Try to identify areas of common ground between stakeholders, especially between those who have traditionally held opposing views. This process makes explicit the different perceptions and values of the stakeholders but focuses on common concerns which helps in the identification of priority areas for action. Allowing time to develop this shared understanding helps to create space for decision-making and management that is based on consensus rather than compromise or conflict. This information can be acquired during meetings, focus groups or workshops, where a number of different techniques (diagrams, tables, flow charts, etc) are used to obtain information. (Information about “conceptual models”, which can be used at this stage, is given in TP4). Good examples (Box 5) of how to engage stakeholders at a community level to obtain this information and how this has been done can be found in several case studies. The team should identify those developed in their region, as well as any they might have participated in previous studies.

Access to and presentation of information is an important part of levelling out power differences between the stakeholders. This is difficult as scientists may be reluctant to present their work in a manner they perceive to be an oversimplification of reality and other stakeholders may feel alienated and disengage from the process if information is not given at an appropriate level for them, without the use of complex theories and jargon. A local level process may need to be preceded by an awareness raising campaign to engage people and give them a clearer understanding of what may happen and how it might affect them or the group which they represent.

Box 5. Jos Plateau Environmental Resources Development Programme: Project Identification Using Rapid Rural Appraisal

As in the Nigeria case study, historical climate data also has to be obtained (e.g. climatic variables, frequency or intensity of extreme events and documentation on the immediate impacts). Stakeholders can also document the measures or strategies they have used in the past or usually use to cope with those events. This provides a collective understanding of how the various social, economic and environmental systems might behave under different climatic conditions (Figure 2, TP4).

The question of who participates at this stage is determined by the methods used to identify stakeholders. The stakeholders identified by the project team in Step 1 could be asked to suggest other stakeholders who are then in turn asked who they consider to be stakeholders until no more are identified. In addition to having the power to influence the adaptation process or being part of a group that will be directly affected by a predicted climatic impact, identified stakeholders must also be willing to participate in the process.

In many cases, the stakeholders involved are just the ‘usual suspects’ such as government and NGO representatives, local dignitaries, businessmen and academics. Such people are familiar and comfortable with the existing structures and ways of working, confident in voicing their opinions and unlikely to ‘rock the boat’. It is important to move beyond this ‘easy’ group and reach those who rarely contribute either through lack of confidence or lack of opportunity, particularly if they are highly vulnerable, for example representatives of local women’s, fishermen’s or farmer’s groups or groups of people with disabilities, young people or old people. Such groups might require more effort or support to engage as these people may not be able to attend meetings at certain times, they may distrust the process or feel uncomfortable in voicing their opinions or embarrassed about their lack of knowledge or education. Their involvement in the process is fundamental as they will play a key role in adapting to the impacts and have a rich experience and much knowledge about what kind of adaptation is practical.

Once the basic information has been collected and summarized it is possible identify the links between climate and the chosen regions and/or sectors in relation to the socioeconomic situation and the current state of vulnerability. A report containing a summary of the stakeholder discussions and this initial analysis can then be presented back to all the stakeholders that have been involved in the process up to this stage to enable them to check that it is a fair account. Indicators and models that relate climate events, the socioeconomic context and the impacts of climatic hazards can then be identified, tested and agreed either using the data in the report or with the stakeholders themselves. These can then be used to evaluate future vulnerability.

• Step 3. Assessing future vulnerability.

Who is involved?

The same stakeholders as in Step 2.

Process in Step 3

For this step the project team must have a brief but clear description of climate change projections, the socio-economic future scenarios related to these projections and a brief review of previous impact studies done by the team in Step 2. Stakeholders involved in the policy making process and in decision making in the relevant sector (see Table 1) will decide the relevant planning horizons for the chosen region/sectors (see TP5).