CRPR talk on UK NAS and Dawlish case study

On Tuesday 2 December 2014, Duncan Russel and I gave a presentation in our CRPR discussion series, introducing the BASE project to our colleagues. And presenting our findings so far on the role of the UK National Adaptation Strategy (NAS), and the challenges in climate change adaptation at the South Devon Coast around Dawlish. Because of time constraints, we decided to focus on the Dawlish case. Hopefully we can go more in depth into the Dartmoor case study next time.

One of the diagrams that shows the complexity of the setting at the South Devon Coast around Dawlish, is the figure below. We interviewed the actors as depicted below, and asked them: “Who do you think is the key decision making actor about climate change adaptation at the South Devon Coast around Dawlish?” The diagram below visualises all the different answers we received to that question:

We intend to make similar diagrams or visualisations of the answers we received to questions around perception of sufficient availability of knowledge, perception of whether sufficient actions are currently in place, and if not, what would be needed, and what the main barriers and enablers are, and why, according to the interviewees.

After the presentation, we received various feedbacks from the audience. Dawlish happened to be in the news the same week. DEFRA’s flood minister Dan Rogerson indicated that alternatives to the current line should be considered (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-30292756). In the Western Morning News, a businessman prominent in the Southwest region expressed his frustration that national government did not want to consider a fast and resilient line to connect to Plymouth (http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Government-s-handling-Westcountry-mainline/story-25445267-detail/story.html). And indeed, Prime Minister Mr. Cameron has indicated earlier (on 7 November 2014) that alternatives should be reconsidered, after Network rail had dismissed alternative routes:  “Mr Cameron told the WMN an extra line had not been ruled out despite Network Rail’s report questioning its value for money.” (http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Prime-Minister-fears-South-West-8220-reliant-8221/story-24330645-detail/story.html#ixzz3MFStMvrX). A news item yesterday (17 Dec 2014) further confirmed the national government will investigate options for alternative lines (http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/PM-says-7bn-South-West-rail-plan-taken-forward/story-25728881-detail/story.html). Although it remains unclear how enhancing the current line along Dawlish will be investigated and eventually decided upon, and how a possible alternative will be assessed.

A colleague from the business school who attended our CRPR session, mentioned that at an event about “Better Connected! A business led review of the Strategic Connectivity requirements for the South West” (on 3 Dec 2014), there was some discussion about how local enterprises could consolidate the fragmented perspectives on the future of the railway line, and connectivity of the Southwest. Another prominent regional businessman (Jim French) had presented at that event, stressing that a long term strategic vision is needed for the Southwest region, and that resilience, speed and capacity should be enhanced for road, rail and broadband. Although it did not immediately propose something about how such a long term strategic vision should be developed. Considering the fragmented and scattered setting around decision making regarding climate change adaptation at Dawlish, it is not entirely clear which government or governmental bodies could or should develop such a long term strategic vision for the Southwest.

Another colleague, from the politics department, indicated that our work on the Dawlish case study may link up to other research in the politics department around responsibility and lack of responsibility of arms-length agencies. In that research, accountability (i.e. capacity to explain and justify decisions) of executive (arms length) agencies in the UK to government and to citizens is being analysed. And it may also associate to recent research form the politics department around confusion over who/which agency is responsible, and whether eventually central government is held responsible by the public, even when certain services are outsourced and contracted out to a private company.

ECCA session on real world experiences with participation

I’m happy to announce the following session below at the ECCA conference 12-14 May 2015 in Copenhagen is now open for submissions.

The ECCA conference intends to be a “platform for researchers, policy makers, and businesses to share new research results, novel policy developments, and practical implementation experiences regarding climate change impacts and adaptation, as well as highlight opportunities for business innovations aimed at supporting the transition to low carbon societies.”

You are very welcome to submit your reflections on and understandings of experiences with public participation in science-policy projects for climate change adaptation, to the session below.

Please feel free to forward this announcement to those who may be interested.

***

ECCA Conference 12-14 May 2015 Copenhagen

Session Cluster: 7. Social science and participation 

Session Title: VI. Real world experiences with public participation in science-policy projects for climate change adaptation

Increasingly, scientists and policymakers are teaming up to study and address climate change adaptation. Moreover, members of the public and local stakeholders groups are increasingly considered as important participants in policymaking processes for climate change adaptation. In academic discussion about public participation in science-policy projects for climate change adaptation, some take up the role as advocates of public participation and actively aim to promote and organise public participation in such a project. While other researchers rather prefer to study and understand public participation in policymaking projects for climate change adaptation, from an observatory point of view.

However, in academic debate, not much is known or understood yet about actual experiences and challenges that may be encountered in dealing or aiming for public participation in science-policy projects for climate change adaptation. For example what if the ‘public’ is so heterogeneous it cannot be summarised as one group, includes groups which are in conflict with each other, or who are not interested in participating? Does it work under all circumstances? Are there settings in which public participation maybe more suitable than others in addressing climate change adaptation? Does public participation necessarily lead to better adaptation policy outcomes? What is the role of the scientist in this? What are the real world experiences with public participation in science-policy projects for climate change adaptation?

This session provides a platform to share experiences with and reflections on public participation in science-policy projects for climate change adaptation. These could be for example experiences that may be interesting to other projects; that may include lessons learned about how to deal with certain struggles; that may include sharing yet unresolved issues (which are relevant to be aware of when dealing with public participation in science-policy projects for climate change adaptation); and, reflections on the role of the scientist involved in this. We invite scientists, policymakers and practitioners to share their experiences with and reflections on public participation in science-policy projects for climate change adaptation.

Expected format and length

¼ day, aiming for 3-4 speakers of 15 minute presentations, brief moment for clarification after each talk, then at least 20-25 min plenary discussion after talks.

Expected outcome

Gain more knowledge and insight into real world experiences with public participation in science-policy projects for climate change adaptation.

Planning to involve?

We invite scientists, policymakers and practitioners to share their experiences on with public participation in science-policy projects for climate change adaptation.

How to submit?

Go to: http://www.ecca2015.eu/abstract-submission

Deadline for submissions is 1 February 2015

Questions about session?

Contact Roos den Uyl at: r.m.den-uyl@exeter.ac.uk