Exploring the Scope of Public and Private Responsibilities for Climate Adaptation

Abstract

Although in practice the division of responsibilities in adaptation to climate change is often not explicitly decided upon, governments appear to be primary actors in adaptation planning. However, literature suggests that the governance of adaptation requires roles for both public and private actors so that responsibilities can be shared and all of society's resources can be fully exploited. Active involvement of all societal actors might overcome problems of inefficiency and raise the legitimacy of adaptation action. This article presents a framework that enables the characterization and explanation of existing governance arrangements in terms of responsibility divisions among public and/or private actors, and that facilitates the search for alternative responsibility divisions and their associated advantages and disadvantages. The framework is illustrated with an example of a governance arrangement for green roofs as an adaptation measure for storm water retention in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. The merit of the framework is that it promotes the conscious deliberation of considerations in the public–private divide, taking into account some specific challenges to the governance of climate adaptation. It may, therefore, support well-informed decisions on responsibility divisions in climate adaptation by local governments.

Keywords:

• climate adaptation
• responsibilities
• public–private divide

Acknowledgements

This research is funded by the Dutch Knowledge for Climate Research Program (http://knowledgeforclimate.climateresearchnetherlands.nl). The authors thank Clare Barnes and Tina Newstead for the English language check, and the referees for their helpful comments.

Notes

Literature suggests there are many other factors of relevance to adaptation such as sense of urgency, availability of resources, political will, etc. (for an overview, see Runhaar et al., in press). However, these are cited to act as stimulus or barrier to agenda setting and adaptation action rather than directly influencing the public–private divide.

According to Peter (2010) consent is one source of political legitimacy. Another source of legitimacy is obtained through traditional interest representation by democratically elected people. A more legal interpretation resembles the rule of the law, one of our juridical considerations. An overview of the various interpretations of legitimacy is given by Bekkers and Edwards (2007).

The same law also places responsibilities on property owners for the adequate processing of rainwater on their property, as long as this can be ‘reasonably’ expected from them. Since this version of the law is relatively new, jurisprudence still needs to be built on how these responsibilities of municipalities and property owners translate into practice.

Flood safety issues stemming from sea level rise and increased river discharge levels face equal uncertainties, but the risks in terms of material and immaterial damage are substantially higher. In this case controversies might be high, for instance regarding the levels of residual flood risk stakeholders are willing to accept.