Search

Recent changes in the global agro–food–energy system, driven in part by consumption trends and climate change mitigation efforts, have led to renewed interest in investment in agriculture and a rush to acquire land among investors. The broader socio-economic and ecological impacts of these land use changes are not always clear and many assessments focus mainly on short-term effects at the local level, without relating them to the wider agrarian and socio-economic transformations that are now underway. Against this backdrop, the objective of the Belmont Forum supported AFGROLAND project is to analyze how large-scale investments in land and agriculture impact on natural resources, poverty, food security, rural economies and local policies in African countries. The project focuses on 3 countries that are, according to a decreasing level of experience in terms of large scale agricultural investments: Kenya, Mozambique and Madagascar. Based on political sciences, economy, sociology, geography and agronomy analytical grid, it adopts a mixed methods approach coupling GIS data, qualitative interviews and quantitative data production (households survey) to conduct within- and cross-country analyses of these dynamics of agricultural investments. The project comprises 3 main components. It tries to understand what drivers and rules of the game pull, push or regulate agricultural investments at the global and at the national level. It also deciphers the investors' strategies and studies how their business models evolve (or not) in relation to global drivers and national/local governance. It then evaluates how these agricultural investments impact on natural resources (soil, water and vegetation), poverty as well as food security at the national, local and household levels. By taking a cross-country comparative approach, looking at three country cases in the South-Eastern sub-region of Africa, we shed light on differences in the national contexts that reshape the influence of international drivers and shape the concrete outcomes and impact of these agricultural investments. Preliminary results of the project suggest that although the international drivers at work are the same, the outcomes at local levels in terms of land use change, ecological impacts, food security and livelihoods differ significantly due to differences in national policy frameworks, land tenure rights, business climate, resource endowments and path-dependencies regarding investment and business practices. In our presentation, we discuss those differences in terms of the business models applied, the success and failures of investments, as well as their impacts at local level, considering the three dimension of sustainable development. The presentation will contribute to a better understanding of how national contexts mediate the impacts of distant drivers on local-level land system outcomes. Furthermore, these results contribute to a better understanding of the multi-scale impacts of global agro-food-energy system changes, allowing for the identification of leverage points for managing sustainability trade-offs and synergies in the global land rush.

During the military regime of the past decades, the Myanmar government decided to become independent on palm oil imports. As a consequence, more than 700,000 ha of land in Tanintharyi Region in Southern Myanmar had been put under oil palm concessions, sometimes regardless of the population and their livelihoods. With the election of the recent government in 2015, the new Tanintharyi Chief Minister announced to redistribute the legally occupied but still unused oil palm lands to the local population. As a result, a multi-stakeholder platform has been established in 2016 to review the concessions. This research accompanies this platform asking: «How does social learning take place in the multi-stakeholder plat-form (dimensions of social learning)? And what framing conditions and outputs foster or hinder the social lear-ning process?»

Governance of food systems is a poorly understood determinant of food security. Much scholarship on food systems governance is non-empirical, while existing research is often case study-based and theoretically and methodologically incommensurable. This frustrates aggregation of evidence and generalisation. We undertook a systematic review of methods used in food systems governance research with a view to identifying a core set of indicators for future research. We gathered literature through a structured consultation and sampling from recent reviews. Indicators were identified and classified according to the levels and sectors they investigate. We found a concentration of indicators in food production at local to national levels and a sparseness in distribution and consumption. Unsurprisingly, many indicators of institutional structure were found, while agency-related indicators are moderately represented. We call for piloting and validation of these indicators and for methodological development to fill gaps identified. These efforts are expected to support a more consolidated future evidence base and eventual meta-analysis.

This study adopts Ostrom’s Social-Ecological Systems (SES) framework in empirical fieldwork to explain how local forestry institutions affect forest ecosystems and social equity in the community of Mawlyngbna in North-East India. Data was collected through 26 semi-structured interviews, participatory timeline development, policy documents, direct observation, periodicals, transect walks, and a concurrent forest-ecological study in the village. Results show that Mawlyngbna's forests provide important sources of livelihood benefits for the villagers. However, ecological disturbance and diversity varies among the different forest ownership types and forest-based livelihood benefits are inequitably distributed. Based on a bounded rationality approach, our analysis proposes a set of causal mechanisms that trace these observed social-ecological outcomes to the attributes of the resource system, resource units, actors and governance system. We analyse opportunities and constraints of interactions between the village, regional, and state levels. We discuss how Ostrom’s design principles for community-based resource governance inform the explanation of robustness but have a blind spot in explaining social equity. We report experiences made using the SES framework in empirical fieldwork. We conclude that mapping cross-level interactions in the SES framework needs conceptual refinement and that explaining social equity of forest governance needs theoretical advances.

Institutions are one of the decisive factors for climate adaptation. Nevertheless, current understanding of the institutions-adaptation-nexus is fragmented across the scientific community; is often theoretically ad-hoc or eclectic and at times contradictory. Moreover, knowledge claims are typically raised either for specific cases or overly generic, whereas a diagnostic method may be most effective for cross-case learning about institutional deficits and success factors in climate adaptation. This study develops an institutional diagnostics approach to climate adaptation by means of a systematic meta-analysis of 52 studies comprising 120 cases from Europe. The results show that maladaptation, adaptation barriers and limits are rooted in institutional deficits that can be depicted as archetypical patterns of institutional attributes. Moreover, the results reveal success factors that enabled actors to prevent, alleviate or overcome specific institutional deficits in climate adaptation. Based on this, a set of diagnostic questions is provided for future in-depth institutional analyses of adaptation. Enhancing our capacities to diagnose causes of maladaptation, adaptation barriers and limits is crucial so as to device governance arrangements that match the features of specific adaptation problems.

Economics has a key role to play for understanding vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. However, economic approaches to climate adaptation are rarely articulated and discussed at a framework level. This article first reviews and critically assesses welfare economics approaches to climate adaptation and, secondly, develops a novel institutional economics approach to climate adaptation. Concepts and tools of welfare economics have contributed to assessments of benefits and costs of adaptation; outlined strategies for adaptation; identified responsibilities of the public sector and described policy instruments for adaptation. However, the neoclassical framing of collective action based on the concept of market failure seems too narrow to do analytical justice to the multitude of governance challenges associated with adaptation. Adaptation economics seems underequipped with analytical tools to study the role of institutions for climate adaptation. Therefore, an institutional economics approach to climate adaptation is developed and illustrated. This approach contributes to integrated economic analyses of climate adaptation in three major ways: First, by broadening the scope of climate adaptation economics; second, by delivering a diagnostic framework of climate adaptation that enables the analyst to explain adaptation processes in a systematic manner, synthesizes findings from a large number of research efforts, places particular research questions, governance problems and results in a broader context, and can guide the design of theoretical and empirical inquiries of climate adaptation; third, by offering research strategies and methods for developing generalisable and valid insights in the face of pronounced heterogeneity and diversity of climate adaptation.

This study examines by which design properties international cooperation can effectively facilitate specific climate adaptation processes at the local level. First, a qualitative meta-analysis of empirical evidence from 23 cases is conducted to identify archetypal patterns of barriers and change factors for climate adaptation in urban squatter settlements and in municipal public sectors in low- and middleincome countries. Second, five modes of international cooperation for climate adaptation are characterized based on UNFCCC documents, process observation and literature review. Third, these results are combined to derive testable propositions about how selected design properties of international cooperation can facilitate local efforts to overcome barriers to urban adaptation in lowand middle-income countries. Findings indicate, first, that a major step to tackle adaptation barriers in squatter settlements is improvements of the status of urban poor in the public sector. Second, national or regional centres of competence are means to foster endogenous dynamics in municipal public sectors. Third, national adaptation policies are arrangements to enable and incentivise municipal adaptation. Fourth, flexible indicators of adaptation benefits are instruments to target international decision making and monitoring systems to local needs. It is finally discussed how these insights and methods can be used to advance the study of international cooperation, barriers and success factors for climate change adaptation.

Adaptation to the consequences of climate change has attracted increasing interest as a necessary complement to greenhouse gas mitigation. Economic approaches to climate adaptation are rarely articulated and discussed explicitly despite many benefits of such a framework-level discourse. Therefore, this article investigates how climate adaptation is framed and approached in economics and attempts to contribute to the development of economic frameworks of climate adaptation. First, the paper identifies and critically reviews four major strands of current adaptation economics: estimation of adaptation benefits and costs, strategies for adaptation, the role of markets and governments, and policy instruments for adaptation. While having their merits, serious methodical difficulties prevail. Moreover, the applied neoclassical framing seems too narrow to capture the plethora of governance challenges and normative criteria revealed in adaptation policy discourses and in the multidisciplinary adaptation literature. The second part of this article outlines an institutional economics approach to climate adaptation that addresses caveats in the current state-of-the-art and offers additional concepts to study climate adaptation. Moreover, promising methods and strategies for adaptation research are presented and future research directions suggested. Finally, the paper assesses the normative foundations of climate adaptation economics and their implications for positive adaptation research.

It has been well established that institutions are decisive for the capacity of society to adapt to climate change. But it is largely subject of debate, how in detail institutions in interaction with the available resources and the characteristics of the actors involved foster or impede the adaptive capacity in multi-level governance systems. Therefore, synthesizing the diverse findings of empirical case studies on this question in a methodologically coherent and integrative manner may provide theoretical foundations for answers on how to organize enhanced adaptive capacity to climate change within and across governance levels.

Background: Current literature about climate change adaptation provides a broad range of factors influencing the adaptive capacity. Furthermore, a frequent tenor is that “scale matters”. However, the effects of institutional interplay across governance levels on adaptive capacity and the effects of the interaction of institutions with other variables such as technology and information remain largely subject of debate. Therefore synthesizing the diverse findings of empirical studies in a methodologically coherent and integrative manner may provide theoretical foundations for answers on how to organize enhanced adaptive capacity within and across governance levels. Method: 1\. Against this background we develop a comprehensive multi-tier framework of variables that systematically influence adaptive capacity. This is done by adopting the conceptual groundwork of the Institutional Analysis and Development framework (Ostrom 1990; Ostrom/Gardner/Walker 1994; Ostrom 2005) and with special focus on cross-level variable interactions. 2\. We apply this framework of variables to the case of urban areas and conduct a model-centered meta-analysis of empirical studies in order to identify patterns in which urban adaptive capacity is determined by institutional interplay and variable interactions within and across governance levels. Results: The main results are: 1\. The study provides a comprehensive and coherent multi-tier framework of variables determining adaptive capacity. 2\. The analysis of urban adaptive capacity indicates that the level of urban adaptive capacity is attributable to the congruence of multiple variables. 3\. Specific patterns of conjoint causation are identified for financial, informational, and institutional multi-level-interactions of determinants of urban adaptive capacity. Conclusions: This multi-tier framework seems to be very promising for a better understanding of adaptive capacity and thereby for influencing vulnerability to climate change. It provides a meaningful background for future studies and may foster cumulative research on adaptive capacity. Moreover, it offers a tool for further investigations of level- and cross-level-dynamics.

Archetypes are increasingly used as a methodological approach to understand recurrent patterns in variables and processes that shape the sustainability of social-ecological systems. The rapid growth and diversification of archetype analyses has generated variations, inconsistencies, and confusion about the meanings, potential, and limitations of archetypes. Based on a systematic review, a survey, and a workshop series, we provide a consolidated perspective on the core features and diverse meanings of archetype analysis in sustainability research, the motivations behind it, and its policy relevance. We identify three core features of archetype analysis: recurrent patterns, multiple models, and intermediate abstraction. Two gradients help to apprehend the variety of meanings of archetype analysis that sustainability researchers have developed: (1) understanding archetypes as building blocks or as case typologies and (2) using archetypes for pattern recognition, diagnosis, or scenario development. We demonstrate how archetype analysis has been used to synthesize results from case studies, bridge the gap between global narratives and local realities, foster methodological interplay, and transfer knowledge about sustainability strategies across cases. We also critically examine the potential and limitations of archetype analysis in supporting evidence-based policy making through context-sensitive generalizations with case-level empirical validity. Finally, we identify future priorities, with a view to leveraging the full potential of archetype analysis for supporting sustainable development.