Search

• There is a clear need to shift to intentional transformative adaptation (ITA). • ITA can be achieved through incremental and transformative actions. • Central to ITA are issues of social change and power imbalances. • Participants in six case studies could overcome some challenges to implementing ITA. • Enabling change requires pluralism, knowledge contestation, and re-politicisation. Human actions have driven earth systems close to irreversible and profound change. The need to shift towards intentional transformative adaptation (ITA) is clear. Using case studies from the Transformative Adaptation Research Alliance (TARA), we explore ITA as a way of thinking and acting that is transformative in concept and objectives, but achieved through a mix of incremental and transformative co-production processes that ultimately lead to the social-ecological system being transformed. Central to ITA are social and political issues of how individuals and collectives address environmental and social change and deal with power imbalances. ITA approaches are claimed to help overcome adaptation challenges, including: 1) re-framing human-nature relationships; 2) dealing with uncertainty; 3) engendering empowerment and agency and 4) addressing conflicting values and interests. However, it is unclear if these approaches work in practice. We examined six adaptation case studies in which participants used processes of: 1) co-producing visions of the future; 2) re-framing values, rules and knowledge to shift decision contexts for adaptation and 3) implementing actions using theories of change and adaptation pathways. We assessed the extent to which participants could use these processes to address their adaptation challenges. We found evidence of many positive achievements towards the implementation of ITA, but also examples where processes were not working, such as communities having difficulties in finding ways to work co-operatively. Different processes will be needed to address these issues, such as promoting pluralism, knowledge contestation, and deliberative re-politicisation of the adaptation agenda to shift power imbalances and enable change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ecosystems can sustain social adaptation to environmental change by protecting people from climate change effects and providing options for sustaining material and non-material benefits as ecological structure and functions transform. Along adaptation pathways, people navigate the trade-offs between different ecosystem contributions to adaptation, or adaptation services (AS), and can enhance their synergies and co-benefits as environmental change unfolds. Understanding trade-offs and co-benefits of AS is therefore essential to support social adaptation and requires analysing how people co-produce AS. We analysed co-production along the three steps of the ecosystem cascade: (i) ecosystem management; (ii) mobilization; and (iii) appropriation, social access and appreciation. Using five exemplary case studies across socio-ecosystems and continents, we show how five broad mechanisms already active for current ecosystem services can enhance co-benefits and minimize trade-offs between AS: (1) traditional and multi-functional land/sea management targeting ecological resilience; (2) pro-active management for ecosystem transformation; (3) co-production of novel services in landscapes without compromising other services; (4) collective governance of all co-production steps; and (5) feedbacks from appropriation, appreciation of and social access to main AS. We conclude that knowledge and recognition of co-production mechanisms will enable pro-active management and governance for collective adaptation to ecosystem transformation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]