Transcript Climate Change Adaptation and Policy Innovation Subsidiarity, Diversity and Redundancy Amanda H. Lynch Institute for the Study of Environment and Society Brown University ISES.

Climate Change Adaptation and
Policy Innovation
Subsidiarity, Diversity and Redundancy
Amanda H. Lynch
Institute for the Study of Environment and Society
Brown University
ISES
Policy Reform Models
Reform of environmental policy and
decisions is most likely to fail when a
threat to a power or value position is
perceived.
 When this occurs, the credibility,
admissibility, or domain of scientific
knowledge is often called into question
 One model to explore this dynamic is
the theory of diffusion of innovation.

Rogers, E.M. (1995) Diffusion of Innovations, 4th ed. Free Press, New York
Diffusion of Innovation
Who innovates?
 What promotes innovation?
 What determines diffusion?
 How do these processes manifest in
centralized and decentralized decision
making structures?

Centralized and Decentralized Decisions
Centralized
Decentralized
Innovation utilizes primarily expert
sources. Consultation often pro
forma.
Innovation relies on practitioners in
regional government, communities and
industry.
Diffusion occurs as a uniform package. Diffusion occurs through adoption
and adaptation.
Primary advantage:
Access to formal power, including
sanctions and resources, can ensure
robust environmental outcomes.
Allocative efficiency of resources is
enhanced by rich detail in cost/benefit
analysis.
Examples
• Wetland restoration in Yellow
River Delta
• Colorado River Basin and “The
Law of the River”
• Great Lakes Water Quality
Agreement
• EU health care and education
EU environmental regulation
Case Analysis: Murray-Darling R. Basin
Australia’s three longest rivers
 14% of Australian land area, across 4
states and 1 territory
 Red gum forests, grass plains, intensive
agriculture, small towns
 52% of Australia’s water consumption
 41% Australia’s gross national
agricultural product
 35 endangered birds, 16 endangered
mammals, 20 mammals already extinct

“Law of the River”
“Murray-Darling Basin Authority”
Objective of Study
“Principle 7:The best available knowledge (including scientific,
local and cultural knowledge), evidence and analysis should be
used where practicable to ensure credibility, transparency and
usefulness of monitoring and evaluation findings” (MurrayDarling Basin Authority, 2012, p.147).
We implemented a survey framework using Qmethodology to develop empirical evidence of the the
sources and processes of policy innovation and diffusion
concerning water allocations during drought and risk
management during flood.
Lynch A.H., C.E. Adler and N.C. Howard 2014: Policy Diffusion in Arid Basin Water
Management in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia: A Q Method Approach.
Regional Environmental Change. (to appear)
Participant Perspectives
1. Benign Command and Control
Promotes protecting the river though
government regulation.
 Supports the Commonwealth water buyback
scheme to underpin environmental flows.
 Strong focus on allowing bank over-topping as a
natural environmental renewal process.
 Seeks exercise of formal power through
government regulation and enforcement.

“YES!! The abuse & overuse must stop. Sadly, most people
won't until they HAVE to.”
2. Supported Industry Innovation
Promotes government assistance for local
practitioner innovation.
 Concerned about flexibility of water allocation
programs as region oscillates between drought
and flood.
 Places the policy question in the context of
national food security and viability of export
industry.

“You can’t be GREEN if you are in the RED.”
3. Culture and Community
Promotes legitimate engagement with long time
residents, including Indigenous Traditional
Owners in co-management agreements.
 Community sustainability outweighs broader
economic and environmental outcomes.
 Innovation arises through shared experience.
 Mistrust of government and science.

“The Murray-Darling Basin Plan will only focus on
economic relief for the most tax protected people in the
world FARMERS”
Is there any common ground?

Scientific and federal government expert contributions to the
development of policy, which has been the hallmark of the
Murray-Darling Basin planning process, does not enjoy strong
support in the community or in industry.

There is an implicit understanding across all respondents that
government will ultimately be the final determinant of policy,
BUT

Successful diffusion of water policy innovation is not likely to
be achieved using the present strategies (“invite, inform,
ignore”)
While policy innovations are being generated, the diffusion of
policy is still sufficiently contested that it remains an open
question as to whether the Plan will survive judicial scrutiny.
What have we learned?
The centralized approach to water governance and other
environmental management problems has advantages in
access to expert knowledge, formal power and resources,
but disadvantages in access to local knowledge of
dynamically evolving conditions.
We know that:
 ongoing prosperity and wellbeing depend on increasing
the resilience of this system.
 uncertainty can be addressed as long as policy
innovations don’t “bet the farm.”
 context matters – geophysical, ecological, social,
economic…
What have we learned?
Diversity, rather than efficiency, is a goal value of
decentralized systems. I argue that in the Murray-Darling
Basin, and in most contexts affected by the impacts of
climate change, this goal is key.
Just as biodiversity can be evolutionary “money in the
bank”, the flexibility, redundancy and diversity of
decentralized systems have an “innovation dividend”: a
reserve of creative potential that enhances resilience in
the face of future shocks.