Facilitating cross-sectoral assessments of local climate change vulnerability

Figures & data

Table 1. Stakeholder dialogues, themes and empirical material (cf. Glaas 2013).

Phase/stakeholder dialogue	Themes of exercises	Empirical material
Start-up		Individual interviews with officials (6) Research application
A	Scanning perceived climate-related risks	Dialogue transcripts
	Selecting relevant development areas
		Individual interviews with officials (6) and researchers (4)
		Group interviews with researchers (2)
B	Assessing exposure to climate change and identify knowledge needed for effective management	Dialogue transcripts
	Assessing exposure to socioeconomic change and identify knowledge needed for effective management
	Identifying factors influencing local adaptive capacity
		Individual interviews with officials (6) Group interviews with researchers (2)
C	Overlay of sensitive locations	Dialogue transcripts
	Identifying measures to increase adaptive capacity	Evaluations
	Identifying key stakeholders for local vulnerability management
		Group interviews with researchers (2)
D	Identifying the sectors, activities and groups most vulnerable to climate change effects	Dialogue transcripts
		Evaluations
	Conclusions regarding actions needed to reduce local climate change vulnerability
		Group interviews with researchers (2)

Table 2. Success conditions for joint knowledge production (Hegger et al. 2012, p. 61).

Success conditions
1. Broadest possible actor coalition within existing limits
2. Shared understanding of goals and problem definitions
3. Recognition of stakeholder perspectives
4. Organised reflection on division of tasks among participating actors
5. Roles of researchers and their knowledge are clear
6. Presence of innovations in reward structures
7. Presence of specific resources, such as boundary objects, facilities, organisational forms and competences

Table 3. Evaluation criteria derived from the success conditions of Hegger et al. (2012).

Success condition	Evaluation criteria
1. Participants	Do/did participants have the relevant competences needed to fulfil project aims?
	Can/could all participants voice their opinions?
2. Project goals	Can/could participants influence project goals?
	Are/were the project goals achievable within the project?
4. and 5. Roles	Is/was information and communication sufficiently transparent?
	Are/were the research structure flexible?
3. and 7. Interaction	Do/did materials create common visual representations of issues or places?
	Do/did portrayals create a common space for discussions?
6. Reward structures	Not relevant to this application

Glaas E. 2013. Reconstructing Noah’s Ark: integration of climate change adaptation into Swedish public policy [doctoral dissertation]. Linköping: Linköping University.

 Google Scholar

Hegger D, Lamers M, Van Zeijl-Rozema A, Dieperink C. 2012. Conceptualising joint knowledge production in regional climate change adaptation projects: success conditions and levers for action. Environ Sci Policy. 18:52–65. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2012.01.002

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar