Preliminary research work from the EcoADAPT project


Published on

The importance of working at the science-society interface for adaptation to climate change in local territories of Latin America: case studies in Bolivia, Chile & Argentina

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Preliminary research work from the EcoADAPT project

  1. 1. The importance of working at the science-society interface for adaptation to climate change in local territories of Latin America: case studies in Bolivia, Chile & Argentina Presenter: Monica Coll Besa (Stockholm Environment Institute –SEI Oxford) Contributing authors: Vignola, R. (CATIE), Devisscher, T. (SEI Oxford), Leclerc, G. (CIRAD)
  2. 2. The EcoADAPT project • Water resources & natural resources management to ensure current & future water availability (quantity & quality) for local development • Building adaptation strategies that are technically and socially robust
  3. 3. EcoADAPT partners
  4. 4. Local development contexts under a changing climate • Chemical and biological water pollution (Argentina) • Unsustainable use of NR mgmt & deforestation (Argentina) • Water scarcity & limited availability during dry periods (Bolivia, Argentina) • Poor distribution channels (Bolivia) • Poor planning, inadequate use of the soil in the watershed (Bolivia) • Poor water quality (Bolivia) • Conflicts with different water users; hidroelectric generation (Chile) • Water privatisation & lack of legal recognition (Chile)
  5. 5. EcoADAPT approach: • Co-construction of knowledge & research • The rol of ecosystems to provide water services for the local development under a changing climate • CSOs & scientists partnerships • Build a shared understanding of the problems • Strengthen collaboration among different actors • Strengthen collective adaptive capacity Building bottom-up processes through action- research for water resources governance Adaptation understood as a socio-institutional process that requires technical and socially robust strategies (IPCC, 2012)
  6. 6. Understand the socio-institutional context through participatory social network mapping to build adaptation strategies that are socially and technically robust by working at the science-society interface • Identification of key actors and agents of change • Understanding the relationships and possible interventions to improve collaboration among actors • Identification of barriers and strengths to build adaptation strategies helps to understand the socio-institutional landscape in a structured way (formal/informal) • Importance of social and technical validation through the actors Preliminary impacts from the socio-institutional component
  7. 7. Participatory social network mapping (based on Schiffer, 2010) Semi-structured and group interviews Feedback workshops Participant observation Analysis of barriers & strengths (based on Moser & Ekstrom, 2010) Analysis of policies & systematization of learning processes INPUTS OUTPUTS • Identification of participants • Preliminary analysis • Identification of key actors • Guiding questions • Identification of participants • Facilitation guide • Policies, regulations • Key informants identified • Information validated • Agents of change identified • Local perceptions • Different perspectives • Key actors identified • Different network flows • Analysis of political context & implications in the territory Methodology (I)
  8. 8. Methodology (II): Participatory Social Network Mapping In FOCUS GROUPS (public, private, communities): • Key actors • Bridging actors • Agents of change • Network topology • Actor attributes (perceptions of influence & power in the network, scale, & actors’ objectives) Types of flows: • Information & knowledge flows • Capacity building flows • Planning & management flows • Extreme events flows BARRIERS & SYNERGIES in the SOCIO-INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT
  9. 9. Common socio-institutional barriers in the 3 LA countries: • Lack of clarity in roles & vision of public institutions • Lack of inter-institutional coordination • Top-down approach to governance • Limited technical studies available Main differences in the 3 LA countries: • Legal vacuum affecting water access; growing public debate on water resources (Chile) • Strong influence of deforestation in the water cycle, cultural value of water (Bolivia) • Weak co-management of water resources in key areas; monitoring system in place (Argentina) FINDINGS: Overview of socio-institutional landscape
  10. 10. FINDINGS (I): Perceived common socio-institutional barriers Perceived level of constraint: green: low; blue: medium; red: high Non-compliance of norms and laws SystemicSituational Diagnostic Planning Management Poor knowledge of climate change impacts on water resources Limited access and low dissemination of available data Educational & attitudinal barriers, cultural beliefs and values Fatigue in participatory processes Lack of and inefficient monitoring systems Top-down approach Inter-institutional coordination Poor systematization of social memory in relation to water resources Poor spatial notion of the watershed and fragmented vision of the problem Poor organizational capacity at the community level
  11. 11. FINDINGS (II): Perceived common socio-institutional strengths SystemicSituational Diagnostic Planning Management Existing perception of climate change and related impacts in the territory Positive expectation for local forest conservation Interest and trained personnel in key sectors Existence of supporting legislation and control of the water usage Well trained human resources Incidence, commitment and actions Recognition of ecological signals in relation to risk (environmental awareness) Existing national conservation programs Model Forests connected to international networks Continuity as institutions (Model Forest –Argentina) Private sector support Perceived level of fragility: green: low; blue: medium; red: high
  12. 12. • Strengthening capacity of CSOs • Conflict prevention in relation to NR mgmt • Trust-building, empowerment, ownership & sustainability • Barriers to adaptation revealed/negotiated through SNA • Opportunity to expand networks across scales & actor types • Time is key for an action-research project • Common challenges: instability of personnel, funding, multiple projects to manage, etc. • Water resources as the ‘new agenda’; new dialogue between water users (Chile) • Strengthening capacity of a watershed committee (Bolivia) • Opportunity for better positioning with other actors (Argentina) Emerging transformations/innovations so far
  13. 13. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS?? Contacts: Monica Coll Besa: Raffaele Vignola:, Tahia Devisscher:, Grégoire Leclerc: